07 March 2019 ~ 57 Comentarios

¿Un sustituto para la democracia representativa?


Suscríbase al canal AQUÍ

57 Responses to “¿Un sustituto para la democracia representativa?”

  1. Víctor López 7 March 2019 at 2:57 pm Permalink

    Con todo respeto a las opiniones vertidas, don Carlos. Probablemente se amplie más el desface que de la realidad hace el gran publico.

    Pienso que no son diferentes formas de pensar que existen, sino una sola “o casi una sola” debido a aquellos dialécticos alemanes y sus fantasticas ocurrencias como la del “materialismo dialéctico”.

    Lo demás son creencias o adaptaciones al medio que hacen las gentes. Si pidiera el parecer en cualquiera de esas opiniones que usted expresa, notará que el 90 por ciento de sus encuestados repetiría el estereotipo de su cultura y luego se quedarían viendolo a usted a los ojos, para descubrir en su expresión si “acertaron”.

    La democracia es una forma de organización social lógica. Es un tema tabú, pero cómo es observable en la historia, sólo las culturas “caucasicas” fueron lógicas y en algunas se desarrolló la democrácia.

    El tema da para mucho más… pero simplificando, creo que los latinoamericanos la tenemos bastante difícil. Cordial saludo

  2. Hector l Ordonez 7 March 2019 at 3:46 pm Permalink

    Este joven inteligente, que me parece con cierta cultura expone su forma de ver las soluciones del Mundo,pero acaso su tesis resolvería los grandes problemas de la gran pobreza que cae sobre los hombros a millones de personas en todo el Mundo? Su exitoso plan por llamarlo así,resolvería la hambruna que acecha a millones de persona en el planeta tierra? Resolvería la Desnutrición de los millones de niños que mueren de hambre? Daría asistencia medica aquellos que la necesitan? No me parece que esa sea la situación senores,ya en parte de lo que este joven refleja como posible éxito a sido un fracaso,Pueden llamarle Neoliberalismo o como quieran llamarle,su tesis no es nada nuevo.Un Gobierno bien pequeno tendría la necesidad de eliminar muchas de sus instituciones que dan servicios Publicos a pobres ,ancianos y otras ayuda que se brindan,los Gobiernos
    pequenos tienden a ser corruptos por que no hay otras instituciones que los supervisen,todo los ciudadanos contribuyen al Estado cuando pagan sus impuestos,no es justo la eliminación de los servicios sociales,cuando el Estado brinda ayuda se llama Distribución de la riqueza.

    • Maximiliano Herrera 8 March 2019 at 4:12 am Permalink

      que monton de idioteces . Podrias ganar un premio por la mas grande cantidad de idioteces jamas dicha en la historia de la humanidad.
      Suiza tiene un gobierno pequenisimo es uno de los paises menos corruptos y mas ricos e eficientes del planeta. Todos los paises liberales estan a la cabeza del ranking de los paises mas prosperos. Asi que dijiste la falsedad del dia, te aconsejo volver al kindergarten a estudiar los basico

      • Hector l Ordonez 8 March 2019 at 6:31 am Permalink

        DE donde obtuviste esa información que Suiza tiene un pequeño Gobierno de tu ignorancia? Que sabes tu de Suiza si no sabes lo que sucede a tu alrededor,menos vas a saber lo que sucede en Suiza,no hagas reír
        Imbecil !.

      • Pablo Ortega. 8 March 2019 at 9:08 am Permalink

        Me parece que el premio de la ignorancia es para usted señor Maximilano,es como dice el señor Ordonez
        si usted desconoce el Mundo que le rodea que puede saber de Suiza,solo especulaciones y nada mas que eso,primero documéntate de los que vayas a escribir y luego después lo hace,igual que ofender al Señor Montaner eso es falta de respeto,acusándolo de cosas que no son verdad,usted presume de su ignorancia
        y los que no lo son.entonces les dice ignorantes. Usted es un caso de risa.

  3. Cubano-Americano 7 March 2019 at 7:47 pm Permalink

    Cada vez mas se necesitan gobiernos pequeños y sobre todo..buenos administradores..y todos los powdered en su Campos..hasta el 4 y 5 poder ( la media y el internet)

  4. Pablo Ortega. 7 March 2019 at 9:19 pm Permalink

    Estoy de acuerdo con el señor Ordonez,Lo contrario seria cuchillos para nuestros cuellos.

  5. Hector l Ordonez 7 March 2019 at 9:38 pm Permalink

    Vamos en camino a una recepción a gran escala,en meses se han perdido millones de trabajos,el deficit se ha duplicado y posiblemente mas también, el sistema de impuestos ,que se ha implementado le ha agregado al deficit 1,5 trillones de dólares,y otro agravante fue el enorme presupuesto que puso la adm Trump,Amazon gano 11,200, millones de dólares pago cero o sea nada,las otras companias pago de taxes cero,el mismo Trump lo dijo ahora somos mas ricos y el que trabaja mas pobre o con menos dinero,lo que ya han preparado o hechos sus taxes se han dado cuenta que no era como decía el presiidente.

    • Hector l Ordonez 7 March 2019 at 9:39 pm Permalink

      el enorme presupuesto para la defensa,no había terminado la frase,Perdon.

      • Maximiliano Herrera 8 March 2019 at 4:16 am Permalink

        el gobierno Trump no tiene NADA de liberal. es totalmente 100% iliberal populista. Ni siquiera cree en el libre mercado y quiere aranceles y guerras comerciales con todo el mundo. Con un gobierno globalista y liberal como el de Clinton, la economia marchaba con el viento en popa. Y aun con su predecesor Ronald Reagan, no importa de verdad el partido, ha habido populistas Dem y populstas Rep y presidentes razonablemente liberales Dem y Rep. El deficit està estallando porque hay mas salidas que ingresos , hasta un neonato aun con el cordon umbelical puesto lo entenderia.
        Eliminar impuestos puede estar bien siempre y cuando se eliminen gastos y eso Trump no lo ha hecho. Solo està haciendo politicas erraticas sin ningun rumbo de nada.

        • Hector l Ordonez 8 March 2019 at 8:27 am Permalink

          No seas imbecil.tu comentas de Suiza ,ni tan siquiera sabes lo que sucede a tu alrededor,el; aumento del presupuesto a sido por el recorte de impuesto de tu socio Trump,cuanto pago Amazon,NADA !cuanto obtuvo en ganancia 11,200,000 millones ,y no solo fue esta compania fueron todas,el recorte a los capitales de familia otro tanto,cuanto se le agrego al deficit? Te lo digo,que vas a saber tu,!se le agrego al deficit 1,5 trillones de dólares,te lo digo por que tu no lo sabes,mas agrégale el enorme presupuesto en defensa,ese es el resultado imbecil de esquina.

  6. Víctor López 7 March 2019 at 9:50 pm Permalink

    Hoy me toca diferir del amigo Héctor. Hay un límite para “el rescate social”, si es que esté existe. Es imposible para unos cuantos ciudadanos aptos, sacar adelante los gigantescos manicomios a cielo abierto, que son los cinturones de miseria de América Latina.

    Es triste decirlo, pero la pobreza económica deriva mayormente de la pobreza mental. Siempre esta presentes el bajo coeficiente intelectual, la esquizofrenia, el alcoholismo u otras muchas patologías. Esos estados solidarios, paternalistas y clientelistas, terminan cerrando todas las oportunidades a los únicos que pueden desarrollarlas y enrumbar el país

    Para mejor ejemplo: el chavismo.

    • Maximiliano Herrera 8 March 2019 at 4:19 am Permalink

      Obvio. Hector solo esta repitiendo las idioteces que han fracasado a lo largo del planeta y de la historia. Es increible como pueda existir gente con un cociente intelectual tan bajo que siglos y millares de experiencias fracasadas no han ensenado nada.
      Creo que ciertas personas como Hector, que demuestran no saber la aritmetica basica que se estudia en el kindergarten, no son una evolucion de los simios sino una involucion de ellos.
      Quiere perpetuar la miseria con las mismas medidas socialstoides que han empobrecido a millardos de seres humanos.

    • Hector l Ordonez 8 March 2019 at 8:31 am Permalink

      Amigo Victor,con todo mi respeto hacia usted,permítame decirle que su base sobre la pobreza no es sustentable,en Maximiliano toda burrada es posible,pero en usted no, Saludos.

    • Pablo Ortega. 8 March 2019 at 9:52 am Permalink

      Señor Victor la esquizofrenia no difiere de clases sociales,un esquizofrénico lo mismo puede ser un rico o como puede ser un pobre,la pobreza genera muchos males en las sociedades que empiezan desde muy temprana edad,como es la delincuencia organizada donde individuos sin escrúpulos se aprovechan de las desventajas de los niños y son utilizables para la venta ilícita de drogas y al final también terminan en consumirlas,los presupuestos para la atención de estos niños apenas existen y cada vez se reducen mas, los presupuestos para la Educación también han sido reducidos,la Educación en gran parte del mundo es precaria
      donde no hay Educación de calidad no podemos esperar que un Estado sea desarrollado,lo opuesto,igual que los servicios médicos ,si usted no tiene los recursos o el dinero para pagarlo,solo tendrá dos caminos esperar la muerte en su casa o morir a las puertas de un Hospital suplicando por asistencia medica,en el ultimo país que estuve que fue Colombia la pobreza a crecido bastante,el desempleo increíble,el alimento de muchos niños subsisten en panela con agua y papel blanco increíble pero cierto,y esto no es mentira es una realidad y no estoy comentando de los países mas pobres los hay mas pobres,Increíble pero cierto ,o serán que gran parte de los ciudadanos sean esquizofrénicos o alcohólicos o es que hay un mal funcionamiento a nivel de Estado ?.

  7. Maximiliano Herrera 8 March 2019 at 4:26 am Permalink

    NO EXISTE un sustituto para la democracia liberal.
    Empero, existe una evlucion de la democracia representativa que es la democracia directa al estilo suizo.
    O podemos mencionar una solucion intermedia que podemos llamar democracia participativa.
    Para llegar al modelo suizo hace falta una cultura civica muy alta ,la mayoria de paises aun democraticos del primer mundo ,probablemente estan siglos atras de Suiza. Solo miren a Italia, pais fallido que ha vuelto al tercer mundo, con la gente mas ignorante y estupida del planeta. O Francia donde los gilets amarillos hablar claramente de guerra civil e instauracion de un regimen militar y matan, destruyen propiedades, queman negocios y carros con total impunidad, mientras que lideres catalanes democraticamente electos, solo por pedir un referendum democratico sobre la independencia (por el principio de la ONU de la autodeterminacion de los pueblos) de manera totalmente pacifica, se arriesgan 25 anyos de carcel por sedicion.
    La misma Europa como vemos està siglos atras de Suiza. Es inutil filosofar sobre el modelo cuando no hay cultura.
    Hay paises como Haiti que han tenido mas de 20 constituciones supuestamente democraticas y mira donde estan, hay paises como Israel y el Reino Unido que siquiera tienen Constitucion.

    • Ramiro Millan 8 March 2019 at 6:08 am Permalink

      Me alegra leer que hay otros que le dan la importancia que se merece a la cultura cívica (o política) de los pueblos.
      Es la cultura cívica de los suizos lo que los hace exitosos así como es la cultura cívica de los latinoamericanos lo que los condena al fracaso no importa si practican más o menos libertad económica (hemos probado de todo los tipos y colores de políticas económicas y acá estamos).
      En Suiza o cualquier otro país del norte de Europa occidental difícilmente varíen los resultados con una u otra forma de gobierno o con más o menos participación del Estado en su economía o con una u otra constitución (siempre y cuando no sean comunistas ya que cuando se anula la iniciativa privada, es decir a la ambición, en la economía, nunca funciona sin importar que cultura exista -“El comunismo y su enemigo imbatible” razonvsinstinto.blogspot.com”-).
      Cuanto más predispuesta está la ciudadanía a cumplir con sus obligaciones civiles, todo es infinitamente más fácil de lograr.
      Fundamentalmente la eficiencia de las instituciones y cuando éstas funcionan como se espera, ya todos saben, todas las políticas son exitosas (económicas, educativas, judiciales, seguridad, etc).
      Por eso insisto una y otra vez: si es tan clara esta realidad ¿Por qué se insiste tanto en priorizar tal o cual política económica, o más o menos participación del Estado, o más o menos distribucionismo de la riqueza, o más o menos centralismo o federalismo, etc, en vez de darle prioridad a lo que realmente decide el éxito o fracaso de los pueblos, me refiero a la cultura cívica?
      Insisto ¿Por qué no se le da la importancia prioritaria que se merece este tema? ¿Por qué los medios, la ciudadanía, los referentes del pensamiento, etc no priorizan ésta cuestión?
      No puedo entenderlo pero sé que algún día cambiará. Cambiará porque no hay opción a que así suceda.
      -“Instinto y cultura, nuestros verdaderos soberanos” “Cultura colectivista vs cultura individualista” razonvsinstinto.blogspot.com-

  8. vicente 8 March 2019 at 5:24 am Permalink

    en America Latina,la democracia representativa no funciona por el modelo extractivista impuesto a estos paises desde la colonizacion española,se forman grupos de poder que monopolizan el Estado y no permiten una redistribucion de la riqueza porque no hay capacidad recaudatoria de modo que los mas ricos paguen mas impuestos.Los ricos latinoamericanos con el dinero que evaden,compran bienes raices en EEUU,esto no se soluciona con recetas liberales.

  9. Víctor López 8 March 2019 at 10:40 am Permalink

    Estimados Héctor y Pablo. Provengo de la pobreza, de la pobreza honrada, con valores que… puedo asegurarles, es la peor de las pobrezas. La esquizofrenia es de base genética, domina en ese lado oscuro de la selección natural. En el de los descartados, done la fea por no tener mejor oportunidad se enreda con el borracho, y con la loca, y con el psicópata……. En una sucesión generacional de nunca acabar. Aunque tengo formación, mis opiniones provienen del campo mismo de la tragedia. Llevo ese “sello” en la frente. En África los negros me caían como moscas pidiéndome ayuda. “Hermano, hermano…”

    Les cuento una anécdota sobre eete asunto. Alla por el año 82 realizaba una exhibición de óleos en San José, Costa Rica. Entro al salon Pepe Figueres y se fue directo a las obras. Se paro frente a cada una, la miraba y volvía a mirarme a mi. Por último me dijo “Lo felicito, a mi la pobreza no tiene que explicarmela”. Me impresionó sobremanera, por quien era aquel hombre y por como pudo descubrir enseguida la intención contenida en la muestra.

    Podriamos hablar días sobre el tema. Que es solo síntoma visible de una tragedia mayor.

    Saludos cordiales.

  10. Cubano-Americano 8 March 2019 at 11:41 am Permalink

    Vivimos en un mundo imperfecto y material donde la democracies representativa es la mejor o menos mala option..cada vez que veo que tratan de “arreglar” y/o perfeccionarla caemos en regimenes populistas izquierdotas que acaba destruyendo generaciones enteras..lo fundamental es la education..Puesto que no somos alemanes ni suizos..y eso es un proceso largo para el ser humano..”NO PODEMOS SALIR DE GUATEMALA..PARA ENTRAR EN GUATAPEOR”

    • Hector l Ordonez 8 March 2019 at 1:11 pm Permalink

      No es nada entendible todo lo escrito por usted,en fin no se sabe a lo que te refiere.y si vives en Guatemala entonces quédate ahí.

  11. Pablo Ortega. 8 March 2019 at 11:44 am Permalink

    Muy cierto Victor y lo felicito por entender todo lo explicado por mi aunque de forma muy sencilla,pero entendible para usted. Saludos,Victor.

  12. Hector l Ordonez 8 March 2019 at 1:18 pm Permalink

    Hace rato que no escribe la Burrita de Healeah o será que esta de luna de miel con el burro de Maximiliano?
    Si es ami les deseo muchas felicidades y que tengan muchos burritos.

    • Pablo Ortega. 8 March 2019 at 1:22 pm Permalink

      Ordones me has echo reir de veras,Estos personajes son Metamorfosis como los del cuento de Frank Kafka.
      aparte de todo son digno de lastima.

    • Danette Noda 8 March 2019 at 4:17 pm Permalink

      cono——- como me estrana
      pero hoy si que esta valiente

      SALUDOS JAJAJAJA

  13. Víctor López 8 March 2019 at 3:21 pm Permalink

    Me has resultado simpático, Pablo. Es más, hasta me has refrescado esa paradoja literaria de que “nadie puede escrbir su propia biografía, pero al mismo tiempo nadie puede dejar de hacerlo” jajaja…

    Pasa así porque al intentar escribirla la matizara irremediablemente, pero tambien en pocos renglones nos dará una imagen de su retrato y tendremos clara idea de quién es.

    No le cambiaste ni una coma a esa escolástica de consumo sobre “educación y pobreza”. Ni por equivocación, Pablo, se te ocurrió incluir la introyeccion y el procesamiento de información, actividades absolutamente de carácter individual.

    La INTROYECCION, Pablo. La forma de introyectar el conocimiento es lo que diferencia al genio del necio. Otras áreas intervienen, como las “áreas comodas” que tienen que ver con los canales de la dopamina y otras hormonas.

    El maestro. Pablo, viene sobrando. Un simple celular lo supera. … y con ventaja. Saludos.

  14. Pablo Ortega. 8 March 2019 at 3:46 pm Permalink

    Saludos Victor Lei esos cuentos de Kafka cuando apenas tenia 12 anos y todavía los tengo fresco en mi memoria, aunque a Kafka nunca lo consideraron un gran escritor pero en algunas de sus cosas yo lo valoro,
    Saludos otra vez.

  15. Víctor López 8 March 2019 at 4:26 pm Permalink

    Jajaja… Kafka. Muy bueno. No puedes salirte del estereotipo Pablo. Nos pasa a casi todos, nos fascina un tema justamente porque para el que no tenemos aptitud, y pronto nos quedamos sin bazas. Como otros cubanos, pasate ahora a repitir eslóganes de la comunida (o del lumpen) porque se te acabo el cuento.

    Para la política y el análisis no tenés habilidad. Saludos

    • Pablo Ortega. 8 March 2019 at 5:51 pm Permalink

      Ante todo soy realista,no creo en los cuentos ni cuando era niño ,lo que pasa cuando tocamos otros temas pasamos a otros,para no ver los principales problemas que aquejan al Mundo,simplemente no nos interesan por que no son los nuestros así de simple,una persona puede tener una buena prosa ,pero nada realista,saludos.

  16. Danette Noda 8 March 2019 at 4:59 pm Permalink

    https://youtu.be/Hv_IRXlCX4o

    esto SON LOGRO DE ROBOILUCION BOLIVARIANA XXI

  17. Víctor López 8 March 2019 at 6:05 pm Permalink

    Cuáles cuentos???? Si te interesara realmente el tema de la pobreza, la educación y política, le habrías entrado con ganas al tema. Tendrías décadas de análisis que disfrutarías exponiendo y comparando.

    Nada de eso pasó Pablo. Simplemente porque no tenés opiniones propias, ni has abordado y desarrollado esos temas. Nos pasa a casi todos como te dije. Nos fascina un área justamente porque tenemos incapacidad para ella y disfrutamos de la forma en el tema. Pero no hay fondo Pablo, es evidente, se te descubre en pocos renglones. No tenes la culpa. Saludos

  18. Pablo Ortega. 8 March 2019 at 6:17 pm Permalink

    Tus opiniones son propias no me hagas reír,sobre la pobreza, la educación y politica no le puedes entrar con ganas,por que de eso nada conoces,eres un Maximiliano que escribes bonito,nada mas que eso.no quiero perder mi tiempo con usted,Gracias ,saludos si lo quiere.

  19. Hector l Ordonez 8 March 2019 at 6:27 pm Permalink

    No pierdas tu tiempo Pablo este es del grupo de los que escriben aquí,me refiero al tal Victor,eso sin quererlo ofenderlo.pero al burro hay que llamarlo burro,si es del grupo de Trump ya lo dice todo,usted le hablo sobre el tema de la pobreza de Colombia y te paso la pagina,no si te diste cuenta !,el era de los pobres honrados o sea su concepto es que los pobres necesariamente no son honrados,pero la honradez también tiene limites,que la pobreza genera muchos males es cierto,este intelectual que escribe muy bien no lo entiende,es un Maximiliano que escribe bien.No pierda su tiempo,que usted no escribe nada propio y lo que el escribe si lo es
    Esta Victorito no quieras tomar de tonto a nadie,que nadie lo es.Este es un Neoliberal disfrazado de la extrema derecha de Miami.No se si viva alli,

  20. Víctor López 8 March 2019 at 8:55 pm Permalink

    Y síiiii… Héctor. La pobreza con sus miserias y tristezas que son lo mismo, tiene muchas caras. Porque hay patología allí. Podriamos abordarlo desde su interior, donde la necesidad fortalece los lazos y el espíritu languidece… andar por esos vericuetos surrealistas desde donde nos observan ojos cargados de estupor por la esquizofrénica. Tratar de entender sus rostros esculpidos a hachazos por la neurosis… caminar (literariamente, claro) como Dante entre los vapores de letrina…

    Te darás cuenta, que no habrá ningún “duelo verbal” con el simpático Pablo. Todavía simula estar presto y hasta con la guardia alta. Me cae bien y los tres sabemos que no habrá “filipica” ya, sería una ingratitud. También sabemos, al menos tu y yo que no es posible en este medio ayudar a un compañero. Pues la “hablada” podría usarse para apalanquear un mayor agravio.

    Este discurso lánguido, carcelario o de fabela, suave y hasta amanerado si se quiere, es el del provocador del bajo mundo y también es patología de la pobreza. Puede comprenderse pero no sustraerse a el. Como dije por ahí se lleva marcado en la frente, en el lenguaje corporal y hasta en la forma de hilvanar las palabras.

    Me caes muy bien Héctor y también vos Pablo. Lo incómodo de mi “cuento” como le llama vos Pablo jajaja, es porque es de factura propia, como dicen “políticamente incorrecto”. Abrazos

    • Ana Castillo 9 March 2019 at 6:16 am Permalink

      Cual es su frustración ,con los esquizofrénicos y los amenerados? O de que presume? Mi abuela hace mucho de eso,yo era bastante pequeña solia decir dime de que presume y te diré de que carece. Y con todo mi respeto hacia de esas dos cosas usted presume.

  21. Víctor López 9 March 2019 at 6:40 am Permalink

    Jajaja cordial saludo Ana. Cómo voy a presumir de desgracias. Hablé de realidades, la esquizofrenia estuvo en casa. Dos abuelos, mamá, una hermana que ya se fue, un hermano que me traje a vivir conmigo, alcoholismo, claro y otros trastornos del mosaico de la pobreza. Tengo que inciar labores ahora. Gracias por tu atención.

  22. Pablo Ortega. 9 March 2019 at 8:11 am Permalink

    Otra metidura de patas de Trump,la reunion o cumbre de E.UU Y Corea del Norte,que propuso Kin Jon Un? El fin de la guerra,el desmantelamiento de bases de misiles de largo alcance,y otras cosas que hubieran sido favorables para bajar la tensión con Corea del Norte,el Presidente no cedió nada a cambio,firmar la paz hubiera sido algo constructivo y posible ,pero este payaso no cedió,el Dictador de Corea no pido la eliminación
    del embargo ,si no un alivio tampoco quiso ceder,que quería el presidente? El desmantelamiento de todos sus misiles,la eliminación de poder producir sus armas atómicas,Eso no seria posible señor Presidente,la única arma de contención de Corea del Norte sin sus cohetes atómicos,que no solo les llegaria a su vecino Corea del sur ,si no también a usted Presidente,Lo mismo paso con Siria motivo de la renuncia del secretario de Defensa
    Mattis,la retirada de Siria permitiría mayor influencia de Rusia e Iran en esa zona,e incluso Mattis dijo que el presidente solo se oye el,y dejar a Siria seria también dejar atrás a los Kurdos que son los que forman ,el frente Democratico de Siria–FDS–aliados a los EE.UU y que el Presidente de Turquia prometio extinguirlos
    Las metiduras de patas de este Presidente son bastantes.

  23. Hector l Ordonez 9 March 2019 at 8:15 am Permalink

    Es cierto el unico medio de contención de Corea del Norte son sus cohetes atómicos ES cierto Pabosi no hace rato ya hubiera desaparecido Corea del norte y su Dictador,ES cierto Pablo.

  24. Hector l Ordonez 9 March 2019 at 9:02 am Permalink

    DEUDA DE LOS ESTADOS UNIDOS ROMPE RCORD BAJO LA ADMINISTRACION DE TRUMP.
    La deuda de los Estados Unidos alcanzo los 22 billones de dólares,una cantidad superior al PIB,un récord histórico, bajo la administración de Trump,algo que no preocupa a los Republicanos,Cuando Trump llego a la Casa Blanca el deficit se situaba en los 19,5 billones de dólares,las rebajas fiscales de la administración de Trump,sobre todo para las Empresas y el aumento de gastos para la defensa,y familias ricas ,aumentaron esa carga al deficit,pero como dijo Trump,Tenia que volver a poner en orden ,antes de preocuparme por los 22 billones del deficit.El Deficit Presupuestario aumento un 17 %hasta 779 mil millones de dólares el ano pasado.
    Vamos bien Trump,esperamos que sea reelecto.

  25. limanzano@outloo. com 9 March 2019 at 8:03 pm Permalink

    Estados Unidos deben salvar a las Américas, si no lo hacen dejaran de ser Estados unidos de América.
    La destrucción del comunismo tocaran las puertas de Estados Unidos: O no lo ven. No subestimen a la miseria, que pueden robarle la creación a los creativos.

  26. limanzano@outloo. com 9 March 2019 at 8:09 pm Permalink

    Estados Unidos deben salvar a las Américas, si no lo hacen dejaran de ser Estados unidos de América.
    La destrucción del comunismo tocaran las puertas de Estados Unidos: O no lo ven. No subestimen a la miseria, que pueden robarle la creación a los creadores.

  27. Cubano-Americano 10 March 2019 at 8:53 am Permalink

    Hector..no es que no sea entendible…es que usted no entiende!!..la proxima vez le bajare dos rayas solo para usted..en el meantime quedese en “GUATAPEOR” con sus “maturbaciones mentales”..

    • Hector l Ordonez 10 March 2019 at 9:29 am Permalink

      Sobre mi comentario ,no es lo que yo expuse por idea mía,sobre el tema de la Deuda,si usted considera que yo miento busque la información y vera que mi comentario no es una mentira señor cubano americano,no es
      una información propias una idea,es la realidad,no me crea a mi busque la información.

  28. Hector l Ordonez 10 March 2019 at 10:01 am Permalink

    Dos anos después,el hombre que se forjo una reputación política como alguien que lo puede todo,,ha perdido los ingredientes esenciales para cerrar acuerdos,–el mas reciente Corea–a perdido la credibilidad y confianza e incluso de los mas cercano a el.Carlos Curbelo Republicano comento que perdió la silla en la cámara Representante debido a la impopularidad de Trump.

  29. Manuel 10 March 2019 at 11:09 am Permalink

    humanity is facing unprecedented revolutions, all our old stories are crumbling, and no new story has so far emerged to replace them.
    How can we prepare ourselves and our children for a world of such unprecedented transformations and radical uncertainties?
    A baby born today will be thirtyone by 2050. If all goes well, that baby will still be around in 2100 and might even be an active citizen of the 22nd century. What should we teach that baby that will help them survive and flourish in the world of 2050 or the 22nd century? What kind of skills will they need in order to get a job, understand what is happening around them, and navigate the maze of life?

    Unfortunately, since nobody knows what the world will look like in 2050 — not to mention 2100 — we don’t know the answer to these questions. Of course, humans have never been able to predict the future with accuracy. But today it is more difficult than ever before because once technology enables us to engineer bodies, brains, and minds, we will no longer be able to be certain about anything — including things that previously seemed fixed and eternal.
    A thousand years ago, in 1018, there were many things people didn’t know about the future, but they were nevertheless convinced that the basic features of human society were not going to change. If you lived in China in 1018, you knew that by 1050 the Song Empire might collapse, the Khitans might invade from the north, and plagues might kill millions. However, it was clear to you that even in 1050 most people would still work as farmers and weavers, rulers would still rely on humans to staff their armies and bureaucracies, men would still dominate women, life expectancy would still be about 40, and the human body would remain exactly the same. For that reason, in 1018 poor Chinese parents taught their children how to plant rice or weave silk; wealthier parents taught their boys how to read the Confucian classics, write calligraphy, or fight on horseback, and they taught their girls to be modest and obedient housewives. It was obvious that these skills would still be needed in 1050.
    To keep up with the world of 2050, you will need to do more than merely invent new ideas and products, but above all, reinvent yourself again and again.
    In contrast, today we have no idea how China or the rest of the world will look in 2050. We don’t know what people will do for a living, we don’t know how armies or bureaucracies will function, and we don’t know what gender relations will be like. Some people will probably live much longer than today, and the human body itself might undergo an unprecedented revolution, thanks to bioengineering and direct brain-to-computer interfaces. Much of what kids learn today will likely be irrelevant by 2050.
    At present, too many schools focus on cramming information into kids’ brains. In the past, this made sense, because information was scarce and even the slow trickle of existing information was repeatedly blocked by censorship. If you lived, say, in a small provincial town in Mexico in 1800, it was difficult for you to know much about the wider world. There was no radio, television, daily newspaper, or public library. Even if you were literate and had access to a private library, there was not much to read other than novels and religious tracts. The Spanish empire heavily censored all texts printed locally and allowed only a dribble of vetted publications to be imported from the outside. Much the same was true if you lived in some provincial town in Russia, India, Turkey, or China. When modern schools came along, teaching every child to read and write and imparting the basic facts of geography, history, and biology, they represented an immense improvement.
    In contrast, in the 21st century, we are flooded with enormous amounts of information, and the censors don’t even try to block it. Instead, they are busy spreading misinformation or distracting us with irrelevancies. If you live in some provincial Mexican town and have a smartphone, you can spend many lifetimes just reading Wikipedia, watching TED Talks, and taking free online courses. No government can hope to conceal all the information it doesn’t like. On the other hand, it is alarmingly easy to inundate the public with conflicting reports and red herrings. People all over the world are but a click away from the latest accounts of the bombardment of Aleppo or melting ice caps in the Arctic, but there are so many contradictory accounts that it is hard to know what to believe. Besides, countless other things are just a click away as well, making it difficult to focus, and when politics or science look too complicated, it is tempting to switch to some funny cat videos, celebrity gossip, or porn.
    In such a world, the last thing a teacher needs to give her pupils is more information. They already have far too much of it. Instead, people need the ability to make sense of information, to tell the difference between what is important and what is unimportant, and, above all, to combine many bits of information into a broad picture of the world.
    In truth, this has been the ideal of Western liberal education for centuries, but up until, now even many Western schools have been rather slack in fulfilling it. Teachers allowed themselves to focus on imparting data while encouraging students “to think for themselves.” Due to their fear of authoritarianism, liberal schools have had a particular horror of grand narratives. They’ve assumed that as long as we give students lots of data and a modicum of freedom, the students will create their own picture of the world, and even if this generation fails to synthesize all the data into a coherent and meaningful story about the world, there will be plenty of time to construct a better synthesis in the future.
    We have now run out of time. The decisions we will make in the next few decades will shape the future of life itself, and we can make these decisions based only on our present worldview. If this generation lacks a comprehensive view of the cosmos, the future of life will be decided at random.
    The Heat Is On
    Besides information, most schools also focus too much on providing students with a set of predetermined skills, such as solving differential equations, writing computer code in C++, identifying chemicals in a test tube, or conversing in Chinese. Yet since we have no idea what the world and the job market will look like in 2050, we don’t really know what particular skills people will need. We might invest a lot of effort teaching kids how to write in C++ or speak Chinese, only to discover that by 2050, artificial intelligence can code software far better than humans and a new Google Translate app will enable you to conduct a conversation in almost flawless Mandarin, Cantonese, or Hakka, even though you only know how to say “Ni hao.”
    So, what should we be teaching? Many pedagogical experts argue that schools should switch to teaching “the four Cs” — critical thinking, communication, collaboration, and creativity. More broadly, they believe, schools should downplay technical skills and emphasize general-purpose life skills. Most important of all will be the ability to deal with change, learn new things, and preserve your mental balance in unfamiliar situations. To keep up with the world of 2050, you will need to do more than merely invent new ideas and products, but above all, reinvent yourself again and again.
    If somebody describes the world of the mid-21st century to you and it doesn’t sound like science fiction, it is certainly false.
    For as the pace of change increases, not just the economy, but the very meaning of “being human” is likely to mutate. Already in 1848, the Communist Manifesto declared that “all that is solid melts into air.” Marx and Engels, however, were thinking mainly about social and economic structures. By 2048, physical and cognitive structures will also melt into air, or into a cloud of data bits.
    In 1848, millions of people were losing their jobs on village farms and going to the big cities to work in factories. But upon reaching the big city, they were unlikely to change their gender or add a sixth sense. And if they found a job in some textile factory, they could expect to remain in that profession for the rest of their working lives.
    By 2048, people might have to cope with migrations to cyberspace, fluid gender identities, and new sensory experiences generated by computer implants. If they find both work and meaning in designing up-to-the-minute fashions for a 3D virtual reality game, within a decade, not just this particular profession, but all jobs demanding this level of artistic creation might be taken over by A.I. So, at age 25, you might introduce yourself on a dating site as “a 25-year-old heterosexual woman who lives in London and works in a fashion shop.” At 35, you might say you are “a gender-nonspecific person undergoing age adjustment, whose neocortical activity takes place mainly in the NewCosmos virtual world, and whose life mission is to go where no fashion designer has gone before.” At 45, both dating and self-definitions are passé. You just wait for an algorithm to find (or create) the perfect match for you. As for drawing meaning from the art of fashion design, you are so irrevocably outclassed by the algorithms that looking at your crowning achievements from the previous decade fills you with embarrassment rather than pride. And you still have many decades of radical change ahead of you.
    Please don’t take this scenario literally. Nobody can predict the specific changes we will witness in the future. Any particular scenario is likely to be far from the truth. If somebody describes the world of the mid-21st century to you and it sounds like science fiction, it is probably false. But then again, if somebody describes the world of the mid-21st century to you and it doesn’t sound like science fiction, it is certainly false. We cannot be sure of the specifics; change itself is the only certainty.
    Such profound change may well transform the basic structure of life, making discontinuity its most salient feature. From time immemorial, life was divided into two complementary parts: a period of learning followed by a period of working. In the first part of life, you accumulated information, developed skills, constructed a worldview, and built a stable identity. Even if at 15 you spent most of your day working in your family’s rice field (rather than in a formal school), the most important thing you were doing was learning: how to cultivate rice, how to conduct negotiations with the greedy rice merchants from the big city, and how to resolve conflicts over land and water with the other villagers. In the second part of life, you relied on your accumulated skills to navigate the world, earn a living, and contribute to society. Of course, even at 50, you continued to learn new things about rice, merchants, and conflicts, but these were just small tweaks to your well-honed abilities.
    By the middle of the 21st century, accelerating change plus longer lifespans will make this traditional model obsolete. Life will come apart at the seams, and there will be less and less continuity between different periods of life. “Who am I?” will be a more urgent and complicated question than ever before.
    This is likely to involve immense levels of stress. Change is almost always stressful, and after a certain age most people just don’t like to do it. When you are 15, your entire life is change. Your body is growing, your mind is developing, your relationships are deepening. Everything is in flux, and everything is new. You are busy inventing yourself. Most teenagers find it frightening, but at the same time, it is also exciting. New vistas are opening before you, and you have an entire world to conquer.
    By the time you are 50, you don’t want change, and most people have given up on conquering the world. Been there, done that, got the T-shirt. You prefer stability. You have invested so much in your skills, your career, your identity, and your worldview that you don’t want to start all over again. The harder you’ve worked on building something, the more difficult it is to let go of it and make room for something new. You might still cherish new experiences and minor adjustments, but most people in their 50s aren’t ready to overhaul the deep structures of their identity and personality.
    There are neurological reasons for this. Though the adult brain is more flexible and volatile than was once thought, it is still less malleable than the teenage brain. Reconnecting neurons and rewiring synapses is hard work. But in the 21st century, you can’t afford stability. If you try to hold on to some stable identity, job, or worldview, you risk being left behind as the world flies by you with a whoosh. Given that life expectancy is likely to increase, you might subsequently have to spend many decades as a clueless fossil. To stay relevant — not just economically but above all socially — you will need the ability to constantly learn and to reinvent yourself, certainly at a young age like 50.
    The best advice I can give a 15-year-old is: don’t rely on the adults too much. Most of them mean well, but they just don’t understand the world.
    As strangeness becomes the new normal, your past experiences, as well as the past experiences of the whole of humanity, will become less reliable guides. Humans as individuals and humankind as a whole will increasingly have to deal with things nobody ever encountered before, such as super-intelligent machines, engineered bodies, algorithms that can manipulate emotions with uncanny precision, rapid man-made climate cataclysms, and the need to change your profession every decade. What is the right thing to do when confronting a completely unprecedented situation? How should you act when you are flooded by enormous amounts of information and there is absolutely no way you can absorb and analyze it all? How do you live in a world where profound uncertainty is not a bug but a feature?
    To survive and flourish in such a world, you will need a lot of mental flexibility and great reserves of emotional balance. You will have to repeatedly let go of some of what you know best, and learn to feel at home with the unknown. Unfortunately, teaching kids to embrace the unknown while maintaining their mental balance is far more difficult than teaching them an equation in physics or the causes of the First World War. You cannot learn resilience by reading a book or listening to a lecture. Teachers themselves usually lack the mental flexibility that the 21st century demands since they themselves are the product of the old educational system.
    The Industrial Revolution has bequeathed us the production-line theory of education. In the middle of town, there is a large concrete building divided into many identical rooms, each room equipped with rows of desks and chairs. At the sound of a bell, you go to one of these rooms together with 30 other kids who were all born the same year as you. Every hour a different grown-up walks in and starts talking. The grown-ups are all paid to do so by the government. One of them tells you about the shape of the earth, another tells you about the human past, and a third tells you about the human body. It is easy to laugh at this model, and almost everybody agrees that no matter its past achievements, it is now bankrupt. But so far we haven’t created a viable alternative. Certainly not a scalable alternative that can be implemented in rural Mexico rather than just in wealthy California suburbs.
    Hacking Humans
    So the best advice I can give a 15-year-old stuck in an outdated school somewhere in Mexico, India, or Alabama is: don’t rely on the adults too much. Most of them mean well, but they just don’t understand the world. In the past, it was a relatively safe bet to follow the adults, because they knew the world quite well, and the world changed slowly. But the 21st century is going to be different. Because of the increasing pace of change, you can never be certain whether what the adults are telling you is timeless wisdom or outdated bias.
    So on what can you rely instead? Perhaps on technology? That’s an even riskier gamble. Technology can help you a lot, but if technology gains too much power over your life, you might become a hostage to its agenda. Thousands of years ago humans invented agriculture, but this technology enriched just a tiny elite while enslaving the majority of humans. Most people found themselves working from sunrise till sunset plucking weeds, carrying water buckets, and harvesting corn under a blazing sun. It could happen to you too.
    Technology isn’t bad. If you know what you want in life, technology can help you get it. But if you don’t know what you want in life, it will be all too easy for technology to shape your aims for you and take control of your life. Especially as technology gets better at understanding humans, you might increasingly find yourself serving it, instead of it serving you. Have you seen those zombies who roam the streets with their faces glued to their smartphones? Do you think they control the technology, or does the technology control them?
    Should you rely on yourself, then? That sounds great on Sesame Street or in an old-fashioned Disney film, but in real life, it doesn’t work so well. Even Disney is coming to realize it. Just like Riley Andersen, most people barely know themselves, and when they try to “listen to themselves” they easily become prey to external manipulations. The voice we hear inside our heads is never trustworthy because it always reflects state propaganda, ideological brainwashing, and commercial advertisements, not to mention biochemical bugs.
    As biotechnology and machine learning improve, it will become easier to manipulate people’s deepest emotions and desires, and it will become more dangerous than ever to just follow your heart. When Coca-Cola, Amazon, Baidu, or the government knows how to pull the strings of your heart and press the buttons of your brain, will you still be able to tell the difference between your self and their marketing experts?
    If you don’t know what you want in life, it will be all too easy for technology to shape your aims for you and take control of your life.
    To succeed at such a daunting task, you will need to work very hard at getting to know your operating system better — to know what you are and what you want from life. This is, of course, the oldest advice in the book: know thyself. For thousands of years, philosophers and prophets have urged people to know themselves. But this advice was never more urgent than in the 21st century, because unlike in the days of Laozi or Socrates, now you have serious competition. Coca-Cola, Amazon, Baidu, and the government are all racing to hack you. Not your smartphone, not your computer, and not your bank account; they are in a race to hack you and your organic operating system. You might have heard that we are living in the era of hacking computers, but that’s not even half the truth. In fact, we are living in the era of hacking humans.
    The algorithms are watching you right now. They are watching where you go, what you buy, who you meet. Soon they will monitor all your steps, all your breaths, all your heartbeats. They are relying on Big Data and machine learning to get to know you better and better. And once these algorithms know you better than you know yourself, they can control and manipulate you, and you won’t be able to do much about it. You will live in the matrix, or in The Truman Show. In the end, it’s a simple empirical matter: if the algorithms indeed understand what’s happening within you better than you understand it yourself, authority will shift to them.
    Of course, you might be perfectly happy ceding all authority to the algorithms and trusting them to decide things for you and for the rest of the world. If so, just relax and enjoy the ride. You don’t need to do anything about it. The algorithms will take care of everything. If, however, you want to retain some control over your personal existence and the future of life, you have to run faster than the algorithms, faster than Amazon and the government, and get to know yourself before they do. To run fast, don’t take much baggage with you. Leave all your illusions behind. They are very heavy.
    NOAH HARARI

  30. Manuel 10 March 2019 at 11:17 am Permalink

    humanity is facing unprecedented revolutions, all our old stories are crumbling, and no new story has so far emerged to replace them.
    How can we prepare ourselves and our children for a world of such unprecedented transformations and radical uncertainties?
    A baby born today will be thirtyone by 2050. If all goes well, that baby will still be around in 2100 and might even be an active citizen of the 22nd century. What should we teach that baby that will help them survive and flourish in the world of 2050 or the 22nd century? What kind of skills will they need in order to get a job, understand what is happening around them, and navigate the maze of life?

    Unfortunately, since nobody knows what the world will look like in 2050 — not to mention 2100 — we don’t know the answer to these questions. Of course, humans have never been able to predict the future with accuracy. But today it is more difficult than ever before because once technology enables us to engineer bodies, brains, and minds, we will no longer be able to be certain about anything — including things that previously seemed fixed and eternal.
    A thousand years ago, in 1019, there were many things people didn’t know about the future, but they were nevertheless convinced that the basic features of human society were not going to change. If you lived in China in 1019, you couldn’t know that by 1050 the Song Empire might collapse, the Khitans might invade from the north, and plagues might kill millions. However, it was clear to you that even in 1050 most people would still work as farmers and weavers, rulers would still rely on humans to staff their armies and bureaucracies, men would still dominate women, life expectancy would still be about 40, and the human body would remain exactly the same. For that reason, in 1018 poor Chinese parents taught their children how to plant rice or weave silk; wealthier parents taught their boys how to read the Confucian classics, write calligraphy, or fight on horseback, and they taught their girls to be modest and obedient housewives. It was obvious that these skills would still be needed in 1050.
    To keep up with the world of 2050, you will need to do more than merely invent new ideas and products, but above all, reinvent yourself again and again.
    In contrast, today we have no idea how China or the rest of the world will look in 2050. We don’t know what people will do for a living, we don’t know how armies or bureaucracies will function, and we don’t know what gender relations will be like. Some people will probably live much longer than today, and the human body itself might undergo an unprecedented revolution, thanks to bioengineering and direct brain-to-computer interfaces. Much of what kids learn today will likely be irrelevant by 2050.
    At present, too many schools focus on cramming information into kids’ brains. In the past, this made sense, because information was scarce and even the slow trickle of existing information was repeatedly blocked by censorship. If you lived, say, in a small provincial town in Mexico in 1800, it was difficult for you to know much about the wider world. There was no radio, television, daily newspaper, or public library. Even if you were literate and had access to a private library, there was not much to read other than novels and religious tracts. The Spanish empire heavily censored all texts printed locally and allowed only a dribble of vetted publications to be imported from the outside. Much the same was true if you lived in some provincial town in Russia, India, Turkey, or China. When modern schools came along, teaching every child to read and write and imparting the basic facts of geography, history, and biology, they represented an immense improvement.
    In contrast, in the 21st century, we are flooded with enormous amounts of information, and the censors don’t even try to block it. Instead, they are busy spreading misinformation or distracting us with irrelevancies. If you live in some provincial Mexican town and have a smartphone, you can spend many lifetimes just reading Wikipedia, watching TED Talks, and taking free online courses. No government can hope to conceal all the information it doesn’t like. On the other hand, it is alarmingly easy to inundate the public with conflicting reports and red herrings. People all over the world are but a click away from the latest accounts of the bombardment of Aleppo or melting ice caps in the Arctic, but there are so many contradictory accounts that it is hard to know what to believe. Besides, countless other things are just a click away as well, making it difficult to focus, and when politics or science look too complicated, it is tempting to switch to some funny cat videos, celebrity gossip, or porn.
    In such a world, the last thing a teacher needs to give her pupils is more information. They already have far too much of it. Instead, people need the ability to make sense of information, to tell the difference between what is important and what is unimportant, and, above all, to combine many bits of information into a broad picture of the world.
    In truth, this has been the ideal of Western liberal education for centuries, but up until, now even many Western schools have been rather slack in fulfilling it. Teachers allowed themselves to focus on imparting data while encouraging students “to think for themselves.” Due to their fear of authoritarianism, liberal schools have had a particular horror of grand narratives. They’ve assumed that as long as we give students lots of data and a modicum of freedom, the students will create their own picture of the world, and even if this generation fails to synthesize all the data into a coherent and meaningful story about the world, there will be plenty of time to construct a better synthesis in the future.
    We have now run out of time. The decisions we will make in the next few decades will shape the future of life itself, and we can make these decisions based only on our present worldview. If this generation lacks a comprehensive view of the cosmos, the future of life will be decided at random.
    The Heat Is On
    Besides information, most schools also focus too much on providing students with a set of predetermined skills, such as solving differential equations, writing computer code in C++, identifying chemicals in a test tube, or conversing in Chinese. Yet since we have no idea what the world and the job market will look like in 2050, we don’t really know what particular skills people will need. We might invest a lot of effort teaching kids how to write in C++ or speak Chinese, only to discover that by 2050, artificial intelligence can code software far better than humans and a new Google Translate app will enable you to conduct a conversation in almost flawless Mandarin, Cantonese, or Hakka, even though you only know how to say “Ni hao.”
    So, what should we be teaching? Many pedagogical experts argue that schools should switch to teaching “the four Cs” — critical thinking, communication, collaboration, and creativity. More broadly, they believe, schools should downplay technical skills and emphasize general-purpose life skills. Most important of all will be the ability to deal with change, learn new things, and preserve your mental balance in unfamiliar situations. To keep up with the world of 2050, you will need to do more than merely invent new ideas and products, but above all, reinvent yourself again and again.
    If somebody describes the world of the mid-21st century to you and it doesn’t sound like science fiction, it is certainly false.
    For as the pace of change increases, not just the economy, but the very meaning of “being human” is likely to mutate. Already in 1848, the Communist Manifesto declared that “all that is solid melts into air.” Marx and Engels, however, were thinking mainly about social and economic structures. By 2048, physical and cognitive structures will also melt into air, or into a cloud of data bits.
    In 1848, millions of people were losing their jobs on village farms and going to the big cities to work in factories. But upon reaching the big city, they were unlikely to change their gender or add a sixth sense. And if they found a job in some textile factory, they could expect to remain in that profession for the rest of their working lives.
    By 2048, people might have to cope with migrations to cyberspace, fluid gender identities, and new sensory experiences generated by computer implants. If they find both work and meaning in designing up-to-the-minute fashions for a 3D virtual reality game, within a decade, not just this particular profession, but all jobs demanding this level of artistic creation might be taken over by A.I. So, at age 25, you might introduce yourself on a dating site as “a 25-year-old heterosexual woman who lives in London and works in a fashion shop.” At 35, you might say you are “a gender-nonspecific person undergoing age adjustment, whose neocortical activity takes place mainly in the NewCosmos virtual world, and whose life mission is to go where no fashion designer has gone before.” At 45, both dating and self-definitions are passé. You just wait for an algorithm to find (or create) the perfect match for you. As for drawing meaning from the art of fashion design, you are so irrevocably outclassed by the algorithms that looking at your crowning achievements from the previous decade fills you with embarrassment rather than pride. And you still have many decades of radical change ahead of you.
    Please don’t take this scenario literally. Nobody can predict the specific changes we will witness in the future. Any particular scenario is likely to be far from the truth. If somebody describes the world of the mid-21st century to you and it sounds like science fiction, it is probably false. But then again, if somebody describes the world of the mid-21st century to you and it doesn’t sound like science fiction, it is certainly false. We cannot be sure of the specifics; change itself is the only certainty.
    Such profound change may well transform the basic structure of life, making discontinuity its most salient feature. From time immemorial, life was divided into two complementary parts: a period of learning followed by a period of working. In the first part of life, you accumulated information, developed skills, constructed a worldview, and built a stable identity. Even if at 15 you spent most of your day working in your family’s rice field (rather than in a formal school), the most important thing you were doing was learning: how to cultivate rice, how to conduct negotiations with the greedy rice merchants from the big city, and how to resolve conflicts over land and water with the other villagers. In the second part of life, you relied on your accumulated skills to navigate the world, earn a living, and contribute to society. Of course, even at 50, you continued to learn new things about rice, merchants, and conflicts, but these were just small tweaks to your well-honed abilities.
    By the middle of the 21st century, accelerating change plus longer lifespans will make this traditional model obsolete. Life will come apart at the seams, and there will be less and less continuity between different periods of life. “Who am I?” will be a more urgent and complicated question than ever before.
    This is likely to involve immense levels of stress. Change is almost always stressful, and after a certain age most people just don’t like to do it. When you are 15, your entire life is change. Your body is growing, your mind is developing, your relationships are deepening. Everything is in flux, and everything is new. You are busy inventing yourself. Most teenagers find it frightening, but at the same time, it is also exciting. New vistas are opening before you, and you have an entire world to conquer.
    By the time you are 50, you don’t want change, and most people have given up on conquering the world. Been there, done that, got the T-shirt. You prefer stability. You have invested so much in your skills, your career, your identity, and your worldview that you don’t want to start all over again. The harder you’ve worked on building something, the more difficult it is to let go of it and make room for something new. You might still cherish new experiences and minor adjustments, but most people in their 50s aren’t ready to overhaul the deep structures of their identity and personality.
    There are neurological reasons for this. Though the adult brain is more flexible and volatile than was once thought, it is still less malleable than the teenage brain. Reconnecting neurons and rewiring synapses is hard work. But in the 21st century, you can’t afford stability. If you try to hold on to some stable identity, job, or worldview, you risk being left behind as the world flies by you with a whoosh. Given that life expectancy is likely to increase, you might subsequently have to spend many decades as a clueless fossil. To stay relevant — not just economically but above all socially — you will need the ability to constantly learn and to reinvent yourself, certainly at a young age like 50.
    The best advice I can give a 15-year-old is: don’t rely on the adults too much. Most of them mean well, but they just don’t understand the world.
    As strangeness becomes the new normal, your past experiences, as well as the past experiences of the whole of humanity, will become less reliable guides. Humans as individuals and humankind as a whole will increasingly have to deal with things nobody ever encountered before, such as super-intelligent machines, engineered bodies, algorithms that can manipulate emotions with uncanny precision, rapid man-made climate cataclysms, and the need to change your profession every decade. What is the right thing to do when confronting a completely unprecedented situation? How should you act when you are flooded by enormous amounts of information and there is absolutely no way you can absorb and analyze it all? How do you live in a world where profound uncertainty is not a bug but a feature?
    To survive and flourish in such a world, you will need a lot of mental flexibility and great reserves of emotional balance. You will have to repeatedly let go of some of what you know best, and learn to feel at home with the unknown. Unfortunately, teaching kids to embrace the unknown while maintaining their mental balance is far more difficult than teaching them an equation in physics or the causes of the First World War. You cannot learn resilience by reading a book or listening to a lecture. Teachers themselves usually lack the mental flexibility that the 21st century demands since they themselves are the product of the old educational system.
    The Industrial Revolution has bequeathed us the production-line theory of education. In the middle of town, there is a large concrete building divided into many identical rooms, each room equipped with rows of desks and chairs. At the sound of a bell, you go to one of these rooms together with 30 other kids who were all born the same year as you. Every hour a different grown-up walks in and starts talking. The grown-ups are all paid to do so by the government. One of them tells you about the shape of the earth, another tells you about the human past, and a third tells you about the human body. It is easy to laugh at this model, and almost everybody agrees that no matter its past achievements, it is now bankrupt. But so far we haven’t created a viable alternative. Certainly not a scalable alternative that can be implemented in rural Mexico rather than just in wealthy California suburbs.
    Hacking Humans
    So the best advice I can give a 15-year-old stuck in an outdated school somewhere in Mexico, India, or Alabama is: don’t rely on the adults too much. Most of them mean well, but they just don’t understand the world. In the past, it was a relatively safe bet to follow the adults, because they knew the world quite well, and the world changed slowly. But the 21st century is going to be different. Because of the increasing pace of change, you can never be certain whether what the adults are telling you is timeless wisdom or outdated bias.
    So on what can you rely instead? Perhaps on technology? That’s an even riskier gamble. Technology can help you a lot, but if technology gains too much power over your life, you might become a hostage to its agenda. Thousands of years ago humans invented agriculture, but this technology enriched just a tiny elite while enslaving the majority of humans. Most people found themselves working from sunrise till sunset plucking weeds, carrying water buckets, and harvesting corn under a blazing sun. It could happen to you too.
    Technology isn’t bad. If you know what you want in life, technology can help you get it. But if you don’t know what you want in life, it will be all too easy for technology to shape your aims for you and take control of your life. Especially as technology gets better at understanding humans, you might increasingly find yourself serving it, instead of it serving you. Have you seen those zombies who roam the streets with their faces glued to their smartphones? Do you think they control the technology, or does the technology control them?
    Should you rely on yourself, then? That sounds great on Sesame Street or in an old-fashioned Disney film, but in real life, it doesn’t work so well. Even Disney is coming to realize it. Just like Riley Andersen, most people barely know themselves, and when they try to “listen to themselves” they easily become prey to external manipulations. The voice we hear inside our heads is never trustworthy because it always reflects state propaganda, ideological brainwashing, and commercial advertisements, not to mention biochemical bugs.
    As biotechnology and machine learning improve, it will become easier to manipulate people’s deepest emotions and desires, and it will become more dangerous than ever to just follow your heart. When Coca-Cola, Amazon, Baidu, or the government knows how to pull the strings of your heart and press the buttons of your brain, will you still be able to tell the difference between your self and their marketing experts?
    If you don’t know what you want in life, it will be all too easy for technology to shape your aims for you and take control of your life.
    To succeed at such a daunting task, you will need to work very hard at getting to know your operating system better — to know what you are and what you want from life. This is, of course, the oldest advice in the book: know thyself. For thousands of years, philosophers and prophets have urged people to know themselves. But this advice was never more urgent than in the 21st century, because unlike in the days of Laozi or Socrates, now you have serious competition. Coca-Cola, Amazon, Baidu, and the government are all racing to hack you. Not your smartphone, not your computer, and not your bank account; they are in a race to hack you and your organic operating system. You might have heard that we are living in the era of hacking computers, but that’s not even half the truth. In fact, we are living in the era of hacking humans.
    The algorithms are watching you right now. They are watching where you go, what you buy, who you meet. Soon they will monitor all your steps, all your breaths, all your heartbeats. They are relying on Big Data and machine learning to get to know you better and better. And once these algorithms know you better than you know yourself, they can control and manipulate you, and you won’t be able to do much about it. You will live in the matrix, or in The Truman Show. In the end, it’s a simple empirical matter: if the algorithms indeed understand what’s happening within you better than you understand it yourself, authority will shift to them.
    Of course, you might be perfectly happy ceding all authority to the algorithms and trusting them to decide things for you and for the rest of the world. If so, just relax and enjoy the ride. You don’t need to do anything about it. The algorithms will take care of everything. If, however, you want to retain some control over your personal existence and the future of life, you have to run faster than the algorithms, faster than Amazon and the government, and get to know yourself before they do. To run fast, don’t take much baggage with you. Leave all your illusions behind. They are very heavy.
    NOAH HARARI

  31. Manuel 10 March 2019 at 11:22 am Permalink

    humanity is facing unprecedented revolutions, all our old stories are crumbling, and no new story has so far emerged to replace them.
    How can we prepare ourselves and our children for a world of such unprecedented transformations and radical uncertainties?
    A baby born today will be thirtyone by 2050. If all goes well, that baby will still be around in 2100 and might even be an active citizen of the 22nd century. What should we teach that baby that will help them survive and flourish in the world of 2050 or the 22nd century? What kind of skills will they need in order to get a job, understand what is happening around them, and navigate the maze of life?

    Unfortunately, since nobody knows what the world will look like in 2050 — not to mention 2100 — we don’t know the answer to these questions. Of course, humans have never been able to predict the future with accuracy. But today it is more difficult than ever before because once technology enables us to engineer bodies, brains, and minds, we will no longer be able to be certain about anything — including things that previously seemed fixed and eternal.
    A thousand years ago, in 1019, there were many things people didn’t know about the future, but they were nevertheless convinced that the basic features of human society were not going to change. If you lived in China in 1019, you couldn’t know that by 1050 the Song Empire might collapse, the Khitans might invade from the north, and plagues might kill millions. However, it was clear to you that even in 1050 most people would still work as farmers and weavers, rulers would still rely on humans to staff their armies and bureaucracies, men would still dominate women, life expectancy would still be about 40, and the human body would remain exactly the same. For that reason, in 1019 poor Chinese parents taught their children how to plant rice or weave silk; wealthier parents taught their boys how to read the Confucian classics, write calligraphy, or fight on horseback, and they taught their girls to be modest and obedient housewives. It was obvious that these skills would still be needed in 1050.
    On the other hand, now in 2019 to keep up with the world of 2050, you will need to do more than merely invent new ideas and products, but above all, reinvent yourself again and again.
    In contrast, today we have no idea how China or the rest of the world will look in 2050. We don’t know what people will do for a living, we don’t know how armies or bureaucracies will function, and we don’t know what gender relations will be like. Some people will probably live much longer than today, and the human body itself might undergo an unprecedented revolution, thanks to bioengineering and direct brain-to-computer interfaces. Much of what kids learn today will likely be irrelevant by 2050.
    At present, too many schools focus on cramming information into kids’ brains. In the past, this made sense, because information was scarce and even the slow trickle of existing information was repeatedly blocked by censorship. If you lived, say, in a small provincial town in Mexico in 1800, it was difficult for you to know much about the wider world. There was no radio, television, daily newspaper, or public library. Even if you were literate and had access to a private library, there was not much to read other than novels and religious tracts. The Spanish empire heavily censored all texts printed locally and allowed only a dribble of vetted publications to be imported from the outside. Much the same was true if you lived in some provincial town in Russia, India, Turkey, or China. When modern schools came along, teaching every child to read and write and imparting the basic facts of geography, history, and biology, they represented an immense improvement.
    In contrast, in the 21st century, we are flooded with enormous amounts of information, and the censors don’t even try to block it. Instead, they are busy spreading misinformation or distracting us with irrelevancies. If you live in some provincial Mexican town and have a smartphone, you can spend many lifetimes just reading Wikipedia, watching TED Talks, and taking free online courses. No government can hope to conceal all the information it doesn’t like. On the other hand, it is alarmingly easy to inundate the public with conflicting reports and red herrings. People all over the world are but a click away from the latest accounts of the bombardment of Aleppo or melting ice caps in the Arctic, but there are so many contradictory accounts that it is hard to know what to believe. Besides, countless other things are just a click away as well, making it difficult to focus, and when politics or science look too complicated, it is tempting to switch to some funny cat videos, celebrity gossip, or porn.
    In such a world, the last thing a teacher needs to give her pupils is more information. They already have far too much of it. Instead, people need the ability to make sense of information, to tell the difference between what is important and what is unimportant, and, above all, to combine many bits of information into a broad picture of the world.
    In truth, this has been the ideal of Western liberal education for centuries, but up until, now even many Western schools have been rather slack in fulfilling it. Teachers allowed themselves to focus on imparting data while encouraging students “to think for themselves.” Due to their fear of authoritarianism, liberal schools have had a particular horror of grand narratives. They’ve assumed that as long as we give students lots of data and a modicum of freedom, the students will create their own picture of the world, and even if this generation fails to synthesize all the data into a coherent and meaningful story about the world, there will be plenty of time to construct a better synthesis in the future.
    We have now run out of time. The decisions we will make in the next few decades will shape the future of life itself, and we can make these decisions based only on our present worldview. If this generation lacks a comprehensive view of the cosmos, the future of life will be decided at random.
    The Heat Is On
    Besides information, most schools also focus too much on providing students with a set of predetermined skills, such as solving differential equations, writing computer code in C++, identifying chemicals in a test tube, or conversing in Chinese. Yet since we have no idea what the world and the job market will look like in 2050, we don’t really know what particular skills people will need. We might invest a lot of effort teaching kids how to write in C++ or speak Chinese, only to discover that by 2050, artificial intelligence can code software far better than humans and a new Google Translate app will enable you to conduct a conversation in almost flawless Mandarin, Cantonese, or Hakka, even though you only know how to say “Ni hao.”
    So, what should we be teaching? Many pedagogical experts argue that schools should switch to teaching “the four Cs” — critical thinking, communication, collaboration, and creativity. More broadly, they believe, schools should downplay technical skills and emphasize general-purpose life skills. Most important of all will be the ability to deal with change, learn new things, and preserve your mental balance in unfamiliar situations. To keep up with the world of 2050, you will need to do more than merely invent new ideas and products, but above all, reinvent yourself again and again.
    If somebody describes the world of the mid-21st century to you and it doesn’t sound like science fiction, it is certainly false.
    For as the pace of change increases, not just the economy, but the very meaning of “being human” is likely to mutate. Already in 1848, the Communist Manifesto declared that “all that is solid melts into air.” Marx and Engels, however, were thinking mainly about social and economic structures. By 2048, physical and cognitive structures will also melt into air, or into a cloud of data bits.
    In 1848, millions of people were losing their jobs on village farms and going to the big cities to work in factories. But upon reaching the big city, they were unlikely to change their gender or add a sixth sense. And if they found a job in some textile factory, they could expect to remain in that profession for the rest of their working lives.
    By 2049, people might have to cope with migrations to cyberspace, fluid gender identities, and new sensory experiences generated by computer implants. If they find both work and meaning in designing up-to-the-minute fashions for a 3D virtual reality game, within a decade, not just this particular profession, but all jobs demanding this level of artistic creation might be taken over by A.I. So, at age 25, you might introduce yourself on a dating site as “a 25-year-old heterosexual woman who lives in London and works in a fashion shop.” At 35, you might say you are “a gender-nonspecific person undergoing age adjustment, whose neocortical activity takes place mainly in the NewCosmos virtual world, and whose life mission is to go where no fashion designer has gone before.” At 45, both dating and self-definitions are passé. You just wait for an algorithm to find (or create) the perfect match for you. As for drawing meaning from the art of fashion design, you are so irrevocably outclassed by the algorithms that looking at your crowning achievements from the previous decade fills you with embarrassment rather than pride. And you still have many decades of radical change ahead of you.
    Please don’t take this scenario literally. Nobody can predict the specific changes we will witness in the future. Any particular scenario is likely to be far from the truth. If somebody describes the world of the mid-21st century to you and it sounds like science fiction, it is probably false. But then again, if somebody describes the world of the mid-21st century to you and it doesn’t sound like science fiction, it is certainly false. We cannot be sure of the specifics; change itself is the only certainty.
    Such profound change may well transform the basic structure of life, making discontinuity its most salient feature. From time immemorial, life was divided into two complementary parts: a period of learning followed by a period of working. In the first part of life, you accumulated information, developed skills, constructed a worldview, and built a stable identity. Even if at 15 you spent most of your day working in your family’s rice field (rather than in a formal school), the most important thing you were doing was learning: how to cultivate rice, how to conduct negotiations with the greedy rice merchants from the big city, and how to resolve conflicts over land and water with the other villagers. In the second part of life, you relied on your accumulated skills to navigate the world, earn a living, and contribute to society. Of course, even at 50, you continued to learn new things about rice, merchants, and conflicts, but these were just small tweaks to your well-honed abilities.
    By the middle of the 21st century, accelerating change plus longer lifespans will make this traditional model obsolete. Life will come apart at the seams, and there will be less and less continuity between different periods of life. “Who am I?” will be a more urgent and complicated question than ever before.
    This is likely to involve immense levels of stress. Change is almost always stressful, and after a certain age most people just don’t like to do it. When you are 15, your entire life is change. Your body is growing, your mind is developing, your relationships are deepening. Everything is in flux, and everything is new. You are busy inventing yourself. Most teenagers find it frightening, but at the same time, it is also exciting. New vistas are opening before you, and you have an entire world to conquer.
    By the time you are 50, you don’t want change, and most people have given up on conquering the world. Been there, done that, got the T-shirt. You prefer stability. You have invested so much in your skills, your career, your identity, and your worldview that you don’t want to start all over again. The harder you’ve worked on building something, the more difficult it is to let go of it and make room for something new. You might still cherish new experiences and minor adjustments, but most people in their 50s aren’t ready to overhaul the deep structures of their identity and personality.
    There are neurological reasons for this. Though the adult brain is more flexible and volatile than was once thought, it is still less malleable than the teenage brain. Reconnecting neurons and rewiring synapses is hard work. But in the 21st century, you can’t afford stability. If you try to hold on to some stable identity, job, or worldview, you risk being left behind as the world flies by you with a whoosh. Given that life expectancy is likely to increase, you might subsequently have to spend many decades as a clueless fossil. To stay relevant — not just economically but above all socially — you will need the ability to constantly learn and to reinvent yourself, certainly at a young age like 50.
    The best advice I can give a 15-year-old is: don’t rely on the adults too much. Most of them mean well, but they just don’t understand the world.
    As strangeness becomes the new normal, your past experiences, as well as the past experiences of the whole of humanity, will become less reliable guides. Humans as individuals and humankind as a whole will increasingly have to deal with things nobody ever encountered before, such as super-intelligent machines, engineered bodies, algorithms that can manipulate emotions with uncanny precision, rapid man-made climate cataclysms, and the need to change your profession every decade. What is the right thing to do when confronting a completely unprecedented situation? How should you act when you are flooded by enormous amounts of information and there is absolutely no way you can absorb and analyze it all? How do you live in a world where profound uncertainty is not a bug but a feature?
    To survive and flourish in such a world, you will need a lot of mental flexibility and great reserves of emotional balance. You will have to repeatedly let go of some of what you know best, and learn to feel at home with the unknown. Unfortunately, teaching kids to embrace the unknown while maintaining their mental balance is far more difficult than teaching them an equation in physics or the causes of the First World War. You cannot learn resilience by reading a book or listening to a lecture. Teachers themselves usually lack the mental flexibility that the 21st century demands since they themselves are the product of the old educational system.
    The Industrial Revolution has bequeathed us the production-line theory of education. In the middle of town, there is a large concrete building divided into many identical rooms, each room equipped with rows of desks and chairs. At the sound of a bell, you go to one of these rooms together with 30 other kids who were all born the same year as you. Every hour a different grown-up walks in and starts talking. The grown-ups are all paid to do so by the government. One of them tells you about the shape of the earth, another tells you about the human past, and a third tells you about the human body. It is easy to laugh at this model, and almost everybody agrees that no matter its past achievements, it is now bankrupt. But so far we haven’t created a viable alternative. Certainly not a scalable alternative that can be implemented in rural Mexico rather than just in wealthy California suburbs.
    Hacking Humans
    So the best advice I can give a 15-year-old stuck in an outdated school somewhere in Mexico, India, or Alabama is: don’t rely on the adults too much. Most of them mean well, but they just don’t understand the world. In the past, it was a relatively safe bet to follow the adults, because they knew the world quite well, and the world changed slowly. But the 21st century is going to be different. Because of the increasing pace of change, you can never be certain whether what the adults are telling you is timeless wisdom or outdated bias.
    So on what can you rely instead? Perhaps on technology? That’s an even riskier gamble. Technology can help you a lot, but if technology gains too much power over your life, you might become a hostage to its agenda. Thousands of years ago humans invented agriculture, but this technology enriched just a tiny elite while enslaving the majority of humans. Most people found themselves working from sunrise till sunset plucking weeds, carrying water buckets, and harvesting corn under a blazing sun. It could happen to you too.
    Technology isn’t bad. If you know what you want in life, technology can help you get it. But if you don’t know what you want in life, it will be all too easy for technology to shape your aims for you and take control of your life. Especially as technology gets better at understanding humans, you might increasingly find yourself serving it, instead of it serving you. Have you seen those zombies who roam the streets with their faces glued to their smartphones? Do you think they control the technology, or does the technology control them?
    Should you rely on yourself, then? That sounds great on Sesame Street or in an old-fashioned Disney film, but in real life, it doesn’t work so well. Even Disney is coming to realize it. Just like Riley Andersen, most people barely know themselves, and when they try to “listen to themselves” they easily become prey to external manipulations. The voice we hear inside our heads is never trustworthy because it always reflects state propaganda, ideological brainwashing, and commercial advertisements, not to mention biochemical bugs.
    As biotechnology and machine learning improve, it will become easier to manipulate people’s deepest emotions and desires, and it will become more dangerous than ever to just follow your heart. When Coca-Cola, Amazon, Baidu, or the government knows how to pull the strings of your heart and press the buttons of your brain, will you still be able to tell the difference between your self and their marketing experts?
    If you don’t know what you want in life, it will be all too easy for technology to shape your aims for you and take control of your life.
    To succeed at such a daunting task, you will need to work very hard at getting to know your operating system better — to know what you are and what you want from life. This is, of course, the oldest advice in the book: know thyself. For thousands of years, philosophers and prophets have urged people to know themselves. But this advice was never more urgent than in the 21st century, because unlike in the days of Laozi or Socrates, now you have serious competition. Coca-Cola, Amazon, Baidu, and the government are all racing to hack you. Not your smartphone, not your computer, and not your bank account; they are in a race to hack you and your organic operating system. You might have heard that we are living in the era of hacking computers, but that’s not even half the truth. In fact, we are living in the era of hacking humans.
    The algorithms are watching you right now. They are watching where you go, what you buy, who you meet. Soon they will monitor all your steps, all your breaths, all your heartbeats. They are relying on Big Data and machine learning to get to know you better and better. And once these algorithms know you better than you know yourself, they can control and manipulate you, and you won’t be able to do much about it. You will live in the matrix, or in The Truman Show. In the end, it’s a simple empirical matter: if the algorithms indeed understand what’s happening within you better than you understand it yourself, authority will shift to them.
    Of course, you might be perfectly happy ceding all authority to the algorithms and trusting them to decide things for you and for the rest of the world. If so, just relax and enjoy the ride. You don’t need to do anything about it. The algorithms will take care of everything. If, however, you want to retain some control over your personal existence and the future of life, you have to run faster than the algorithms, faster than Amazon and the government, and get to know yourself before they do. To run fast, don’t take much baggage with you. Leave all your illusions behind. They are very heavy.
    NOAH HARARI

    • vicente 16 March 2019 at 11:24 am Permalink

      este es un foro para opinar,si quiere escribir una tesis de grado,vaya a la universidad.El individuo comienza a ser ciudadano cuando ingresa a la clase media pero la acumulacion capitalista no permite al 70 por ciento de la poblacion latinoamericana mas que vivir en condiciones de subsistencia,mientras los ricos no pagan impuestos en sus paises y con el dinero evadido adquieren bienes raices en EEUU ,USA es el principal responsable de que no haya clase media en Latinomerica y mejor para los gringos porque todo el capital retorna a ellos.

      • Manuel 16 March 2019 at 4:28 pm Permalink

        ud leyo Las Venas?
        no importa si lo hizo, no le hace falta
        es solo un espejo
        Las Venas para ud seria un espejo

      • Manuel 16 March 2019 at 4:30 pm Permalink

        y lee el final de mi comentario, se hubiera dado cuenta que yo no fue el que escribio todo eso
        el hecho de que ud no vea bien, puede ser lo que determina su vision sesgada y parcial de todo cto le rodea

  32. Víctor López 10 March 2019 at 9:24 pm Permalink

    Qué ganas de hechar a perder el área de comentarios.

    Manuel… Sí, creo que así se llama el grotesco opinador de este espacio. Un blog con los mejores columnistas de habla hispana.


Leave a Reply