How Long Do It Take Trichomoniasis

IN COFFEE - 3

.

CHAPTER III



Caesar. - So, do we explain tonight how you can live without government?

Jorge. - I'll do what I can. But first let's look a little on what is the state of society today and if it is really necessary to change the constitution. Noting
society we live in, the first phenomena to attract attention of the observer are the misery that afflicts the masses, the uncertainty of tomorrow that weigh more or less over all, the bitter struggle carried out by all against all Conquest of Bread.

Ambrosio. - Sir, you can continue a good while describing the social evils of the field is not lacking. But that is useless and does not show that would be better off putting things backwards. It is not just poverty that afflicts humanity, there are also plagues, earthquakes, cholera ... and would be curious if you would like to make a revolution against these scourges.
Evil is in the nature of things ...

Jorge. - But I want to just show that poverty depends on the current mode of social organization and in a more equitable and more reasonably organized should disappear.
When not know what causes evil and not know how to fix it, patience, but as soon as you discover the remedy is in the interest and duty of all to apply.

Ambrosio. - that is their error, the higher causes misery depends on the will and human laws. The misery depends on the greedy nature that produces insufficient for the need of men.
See animals, which should not accuse the infamous capital or the tyrannical government, not do more than fight for food and often die of hunger.
When no, no. The truth is that we are in the world. If people knew contained and not make children more when I could keep ... Have you read Malthus?

Jorge. - Yes, a little, but if I had not read would be the same. What I know, without having to read it anywhere, is it takes a good hard face, forgive me, to sustain those things.
misery depends on the nature greedy, you say, and yet know there are many uncultivated land.

Ambrosio. - But if there is uncultivated land, not meant to be cultivated, which can produce enough to pay expenses.

Jorge. - You think so? Try
a bit and give it to the farmers and see what they will make gardens. Moreover, is it reasonable you serious? Many lands have been cultivated in the past, when art was in its infancy agricultural and applied chemistry and mechanics to agriculture does not just exist. Do not you know today can be transformed into fertile lands including the rocks? Do not you know agronomists, even the most enthusiastic, have calculated that a territory such as Italy, if cultivated rationally could maintain a population abundance of a hundred million?
The real reason why the land was left uncultivated, and not grown out of more than a small part of what they could give, if you adopt less primitive farming methods, is that the owners have no interest in increasing production. Do not care about the welfare of the people: they produce to sell, know that when prices are much lower and the benefit decreases and may end up being, after all, less than they do when the products are scarce and can be sold at the price they claim.
This occurs not only in regard to agricultural products. In all branches of human activity is the same. For example, in all cities the poor are constrained to live in slums foul, piled up without any concern for hygiene and moral, in conditions where it is impossible to keep clean and live decently. Why is that? Perhaps because the houses are missing? But why not build houses, healthy, comfortable and beautiful in sufficient quantities for everyone?
stones, earth to make bricks, lime, iron, wood, all building materials are abundant, there are many masons, carpenters, architects out of work who just want work. Why so many forces are left idle, which could be used to benefit everyone?
The reason is simple, and that if there were many houses rent decrease. The owners of the houses built, which are the same they would have means to make others, have no desire to see their income decrease for the welfare of the people.

Caesar. - There is truth in what you say, but is mistaken in explaining the painful events that afflict our country.
The cause of bad cultivated or uncultivated land, the cessation of business, general misery, is that our bourgeoisie is not entrepreneurial. The capitalists are fearful and ignorant and do not want or can not develop industries, land owners can not do more than it did their grandparents and, moreover, do not want inconvenience, merchants can not open new markets and government, with his stupid tax and customs policy, instead of encouraging private initiative and stifles the obstacle in his crib. Look at France, England, Germany.

Jorge. - That our bourgeoisie is negligent and ignorant, I doubt not, but its inferiority explains only why is defeated by the bourgeoisie of other countries in the fight to conquer the world market, not in any way explain the why people's misery. And the blind test is that poverty, lack of work and all other social ills exist in countries where the bourgeoisie is more active and intelligent in Italy, even the evils are generally more severe in countries where the industry is more developed, unless the workers have been able to win a better life to the organization, resistance or revolt.
Capitalism is the same everywhere. He needs to live and prosper, a semi-permanent status of famine, it needs to maintain prices and to find hungry always willing to work in any condition.
You see, in fact, that when any country is driven production, is to give farmers the means to consume more, but always to sell in a foreign market. If local consumption increases only when the workers have taken advantage of circumstances to demand a wage increase and have gained the possibility of buying more, but then, when for one reason or another foreign markets for which they work do not buy more, come the crisis, work stops, wages and poverty are reduced once again to wreak havoc. And yet, in the same country the vast majority lacks everything. With reason it would work for their own consumption! But then what would win the capitalists?

Ambrosio. - So you think all the fault of capitalism?

Jorge. - Yes, even more by the fact that some individuals have taken up the land and all instruments of production, workers can impose their will so that, instead of producing to meet the needs of the population, produced for the benefit of employers.
All the reasons I could think of to save the bourgeois privileges are so many errors, or other such lies. Recently you said that the cause of poverty is the shortage of products. In another moment would have said that the warehouses are full, the items can not be sold and that employers can not give work to shed then the product. Here
absurdity of the system: starve because the stores are full and there is no need to grow or, rather, the owners have no need to cultivate the land, the non-working cobblers, however, the shoes are broken because there are too many shoes. .. and so forth.

Ambrosio. - therefore the capitalists that they should die of hunger?

Jorge. - Oh, no! No way. They should just work like everyone else. That will seem a bit harsh, but not create it, when you eat well the work is not harmful. Moreover, it could prove a need and a joy for the body.
But, by the way, tomorrow I have to work and it is too late. Up again.

.

Hotel Info Wedding Template

IN COFFEE - 2

.

Enough said: any resemblance to reality is purely coincidental and blah, blah, blah ...

; ;

                                                   CHAPTER II º



Ambrosio. (Judge) - Listen, Mr. Happy, now that we are among us, all good conservatives. The other night, when I talked with that empty-headed Michael, I did not pry, but is that the way of defending the institutions? It almost looked like you anarchist!

Prospero. - OH, and why?

Ambrosio. - because in essence, you said that all the present organization of society is founded on force, thereby giving reason to those who would destroy it with force. But the supreme principles governing civil society, law, morality, religion, does not count for anything? Prospero

. - Yes, you will always pay lip service to his right. Is a vice that comes from trade. If tomorrow the government decreed, say, collectivism, you condemn advocates of individual property, just as calmly condemning the anarchists today ... and always on behalf of the supreme principles of eternal and immutable.
all a question of names, you say right, I say force, but finally decide what you really are sacrosanct and police is right that is on their side.

Ambrosio. - Come, come, Mr. Happy! It seems impossible how in love you always stifles the fallacy of the conservative instincts. He does not understand what bad effect is to see a person like you, one of the wealthiest in the region, giving ammunition to the worst enemies of order. Believe me: let's play with us, at least in public, and for Rally to defend the institutions, which by the malignity of the times they are experiencing rude shock, and to defend our interests in danger ...

Prospero. - closer ranks well, but if we do not crack measures, if not the doctrinaire liberal just will not walk.

Ambrosio. - Oh, yes, that's true. Harsh laws are needed and severely enforced.
But that is not enough. Force alone is not subject to the people a long time, especially in these times. Must oppose the propaganda of the propaganda, it must persuade the citizens that we are right.

Prospero. - So bad going! My friend, in the common interest I beg you to keep it from propaganda. It is a subversive thing, although the conservatives do, and their propaganda would always beneficial for socialists, anarchists or whatever the hell they call themselves.
is impossible to persuade one who is hungry, that's just not to eat, especially when it is the same that produced the food. While not think, and leave God to bless and the pattern for what little he left, okay. But from the time it begins to reflect upon their situation, it was over: it becomes an enemy that can not be reconciled.
Yes, yes! We must avoid at all costs propaganda, stifling the media with or without the law or against it.

Ambrosio. - Surely, surely!

Prospero. - Prevent any meeting, to dissolve the partnership, put in jail everyone what you think.

Caesar. (Dealer) - Little by little, do not be swayed by passion. Remember that other governments and most propitious times, have adopted the methods you recommended and have precipitated his downfall.

Ambrosio. - Hush, hush, behold, Michael, who is accompanied by an anarchist, who was sentenced last year to six months in prison for subversive manifesto. In fact, just between us, it was completely legal, but what they want, was the criminal intent and, in addition, society must be defended.

Miguel. - Good evening, gentlemen. I present an anarchist friend who wanted to accept the challenge issued last night by Mr. Happy. Prospero

. - What challenges, what challenge? And discussed with friends to pass the time. Therefore, I will explain you what is that anarchy which we could not ever understand anything.

Jorge. (Anarchist) - No office of professor of anarchy and not come to give a course of anarchy, but I can defend my ideas. Moreover here is this gentleman (pointing to Ambrosio ironically) you should know more than me. Has condemned many people to anarchism and as certainly a man of conscience, there will not be made without consideration of the argument.

Caesar. - Come, come, do not turn it into something personal. And since we talk about anarchy, go into the matter.
Look, I recognize that things are going wrong and needs to be remedied. But do not fall into utopias and, above all, avoid violence. Certainly, the government should further worry of workers should provide work to the unemployed, to protect domestic industry, boost trade. But ...

Jorge. - How many things do you do to the poor government! But the government does not want to worry about the interests of workers and understood ...

Caesar. - How, you understand? So far the government has been unable to truly willing and perhaps little to remedy the ills of the country, but tomorrow, more educated ministers and jealous of their work could do what has not been done so far

Jorge. - No, dear sir, not a question of a minister or another. It's a matter of general government: all governments, today like yesterday and tomorrow. The government emanates from the owners, its members are themselves, how could therefore act in the interests of workers? Moreover, the government, even if I wanted, I could not solve the problem, because what determines the nature and causes the tendency of the government. To solve the social question must radically change the whole system, the government is precisely the task of defending.
You speak to give work to the unemployed. But how can the government do that if you do not have a job? Should he do unnecessary work? Who will pay then? Should I produce to supply the needs of the people? But then the owners would not find the way to sell products that encroach on workers, on the contrary, should cease to be owners, as the government in order to make people work, would take away the land and capital are monopolized.
That would be social revolution, the liquidation of all the past, and you know that if it does not do the working poor, the destitute, the government certainly never will. Protect
industry and trade, you say: but the government can, at most, rather than promote to a class of industrialists at the expense of another class, the merchants of a region to the detriment of another. In short: it would not have won anything apart from favoritism, injustice and many more unproductive expenditures. As for a government to protect them all, is absurd, since government will not produce anything and therefore can not do more than relocate the wealth produced by others.

Caesar. - But then? If the government is unwilling or unable to do anything, what remedy is left? Even if you make the revolution will be necessary to form another government, and as you say that all governments are the same, after the revolution stay as before.

Jorge. - You would be right if the revolution that we were a mere change of government. But we want the complete transformation of property regime, the system of production and exchange, and as the government body parasitic, useless and harmful, we do not want in any way. We believe that while a government, ie, a being superimposed on the society and provided the means to impose one's will power, there is no real emancipation, there will be no peace among men.
You know I'm an anarchist, and anarchy means society without government.

Caesar. - But how? A society without government? How can you live like that? Who would make the laws? Who would make them run?

Jorge. - I see that he knows nothing of what we want. To avoid wasting time on digressions, it is necessary to let me explain briefly, but methodically, our program so we can take better advantage of the discussion.



But now it's late start the next day.

.

What To Do For Bang On Knee

"IN COFFEE" by Errico Malatesta

.

In reviewing my notes I find, in a section on readings from Anna and Monica, the few discussions, more philosophical than political, ideological rather than literary, which had by then. We agreed, of course, but not all.
remember that Anna had some pages in French which I read with astonishment. At that time, and despite my commitment, I was a callow ideological, I only moved one thing, the same as Monica: injustice, but she, much younger and seemingly innocent, was more consistent than I, or perhaps the same, but with ideas clearer.
The pages were part of a small play, knocking him brochure: "Dans le café." ________________________________________________________________________________

EN EL CAFÉ

; ; De Errico Malatesta

Excerpted from: http: / www.bibliotecaalbertoghiraldo.blogspot.com/

                                                              CHAPTER I º

Prospero. (Gordo understood in bourgeois political economy and other sciences) - Yes, I know . There are people who suffer from hunger, women in prostitution, children dying from neglect. You always say the same ... You get weary! Let us enjoy our ice cream in peace ... Yes, there are evils in society: hunger, ignorance, war, crime, plague, the devil take you ... but in the end, what matters to you?

Miguel. (Students who maintains contact with socialist and anarchist) - What! And last result? What what do I care? You have a comfortable house, a well-stocked pantry, servants at your command. You keep children in school, sent his wife to the baths, for you all is well. And because you are well, to collapse the world, nothing matters. But, if I had a little heart, yes ...

Prospero. - Enough, enough ... we do not preach now. And, boy, complete with that tone. You think me callous, indifferent to the ills of others. Instead, my heart bleeding, but the heart does not solve the major social problems. The laws of nature are immutable and not with declamations or with an effeminate sentimentality as may be amended. The wise man bows to the facts and enjoy life as best you can without running after foolish dreams.

Miguel. - Ah, is this natural law? ... What if the poor into his head will correct those famous laws of nature? I know people who really little reassuring speeches to the ladies laws.

Prospero. - Yes yes, we know who your friends are. Say my regards to that rabble of socialists and anarchists, with whom both you like to be, for them and for those who engage in the temptation to put his theories into practice evil, we have good soldiers and police optimal.

Miguel. - Oh, if placed between the soldiers and the police, do not speak anymore. It is as if to prove me in error I propose a game of boxing. But if no more arguments than brute force, do not rely on it. Tomorrow you could be weaker, and then?

Prospero. - So? So if you unfortunately happen that there would be a big mess, an explosion of evil passions, damage, looting ... and then return to the old situation. Maybe some poor would become rich, but in addition would not have changed anything, because the world can not be changed. Bring me, bring me some of your anarchist agitators and see how you fix it. Valen to fill you with the head of lies to you that you have empty, but we'll see if they can hold.

Miguel. - Okay, bring a friend who professes socialist principles and anarchists and will assist with pleasure and enjoyment to the discussion. But meanwhile, reason with me, that I have not yet formed an opinion either, but yet I see clearly that as society is organized, is contrary to good sense and the human heart. Come on, you're so fat and flowers a little excitement will do you wrong. It will help your digestion.

Prospero. - Well, that is, we reason. But how much better you to think about studying, instead of throwing judgments about things that concern men more learned and wiser!

You know I have twenty years older than you?

Miguel. - That does not prove that you have studied more, and if I judge by what you usually hear them say, I doubt if much has been studied with profit.

Prospero. - Young man, young man, a little more respect, eh!

Miguel. - Yes, I respect you, but I do not take on face age as I recently opposed the police. The reasons are neither old nor young, they are good or bad, that's all.

Prospero. - Well, well, go ahead. What should you say?

Miguel. - I have to say I do not understand why farmers who plow, sow and harvest have no bread, no wine or meat sufficiency why home builders who do not have a roof over their stand, for how the shoemakers have broken shoes, why, in short, those who work, produce all lack the basic necessities, while those who do nothing useful swim superfluous. I can not understand why there are people who have no bread, when uncultivated land and so many people who would happy if they could grow them, why are there so many unemployed construction workers when so many people are in need of homes, why not have a job many shoemakers, tailors, etc., while the majority of the population lack of shoes, clothes and all things necessary to civilian life Can you tell me what is the natural law that explains and justifies this nonsense?

Prospero. - Nothing is more simple and clear.

not sufficient to produce arms, but you need land, materials, tools, buildings, machinery and media are also required to live in hopes that the product is made and can bring it to market need, in short, capital. Your farmers, your workers have no more than arms, and therefore can not work if not please those who own land and capital. And as we are few in number and have enough time even leaving the land uncultivated and idle capital, while workers are many and are pressed, provided by the immediate need, it happens that they should work when and how we please us and under the conditions we want. And when we do not need work and we estimate that we gain nothing by making them work, are forced to remain idle, even when they have the greatest need of the things that might occur.

Are you happy now? Want me to speak even more clearly?

Miguel. - Yes, that is what is called straight talk, there is nothing to say.

But what right does the land belongs to some? How is that capital is in few hands, and precisely in the hands of those who do not work?

Prospero. - Yes, yes, I know everything you say and I know the reasons more or less poor than others oppose you: the right to property is derived from the improvements made to land, savings through which the worker becomes capitalist, etc. But I like to be frank.

Things, as they are, are the result of historical fact, the product of all the secular human history. The whole life of mankind has been and will always be a continual struggle. Some people did well in it and who went wrong. What I can do? Too bad for some and better for others. Woe to the vanquished! That is the great law of nature against which there is no rebellion possible.

What would you want? What took away what I have to rot in misery after another while he enjoyed my money?

Miguel. - I do not want just that. But think: if the workers, taking advantage of that are many and supported by his theory that life is struggle and that the right derives from the facts, the head metiesen the idea of \u200b\u200bmaking a new "historical fact" , that of take away your land and capital and open a new right?

Prospero. - Eh! True, that might confuse a bit our business.

But ... continue again. Now I have to go to the theater.

.