Saturday, March 29, 2008

Volkl C10 Pro For Sale

Note to Profile Journal (Argentina) on Cristina Kirchner and rural protests

A SPEECH THAT DIVIDE VICTOR

ARMONY

All political discourse defines an adversary. Not only is appointed, but are also, albeit implicitly, the nature of antagonism. Presidential posts 25 and 27 March have been very illustrative in this regard. The first drew the now famous opposition between the "pickets of abundance" and "pickets of misery and tragedy of the Argentine people." Through a chain associations, the president suggested the link between a minority (which means "return home a few inches), inside (the most profitable sector), pillage (" the cows for them and for others Penitas) , arrogant ("that threaten, not to government but to society with the shortage of food") and recalcitrant against social change ("who insist with the same practices as usual") with the use of violence and the past dictatorial. Cristina Kirchner opened his speech by referring to the match - described by her as "coincidence" but at the same assigning a value "signal" - between the dates of 76 and hit rural protest. If such a parallel might seem eminently excessive and unjust, would be expected at the end of his speech to understand the full extent of presidential reading of the situation. What initially took the form of an understandable call for tolerance and moderation was rapidly, in the words of the head of state, the explicit recognition of a reality that politicians rarely admit publicly: "provided the dispute between the fighting and with generating sectors, ultimately, violence. " That is - without adding too much to what Cristina Kirchner said clearly and directly - that social change necessarily implies a certain level of violence, because "you have to play interests are often very powerful." It would be very difficult to find in the Argentine presidential speech from the democratic transition a similar statement. Moreover, by implying that there are different types of political violence, with varying degrees of legitimacy ("when you have ... a certain economic slack, violence is much more understandable and more untenable"), the president admitted to a field rhetoric that has no parallel since the last government of Juan Domingo Peron. Clearly

that in this context, the message of March 27 in North Park tried to lower the decibels with "a call for dialogue" and "an outstretched hand, as the tone was less combative and more openness. 7 times the president used the word "dialogue" and 6 times the word "dialogue." Moreover, she felt compelled to emphasize its Peronist identity (on which there was too much emphasis above) and argued that "the Peronist never raised the class struggle, Peronism never raised the war between rich and poor." However, the cornerstones of his vision still present: the words "popular" "Distribution" and "interests" are repeated (each between 9 and 11 times) over a speech that draws the antagonism between the cartoon of "Mrs. neighboring parcels where I live" - in unfortunate resonance with D'Elia's comments about "white Barrio Norte" - and sectors to take "action against the people." A computer study allowed us to verify that the term "the people" that Cristina Kirchner used twice in his message of March 27 was never delivered by her husband (in their official statements between 2003 and 2007). It is possible that the political approach is the same as the ex-president, but his rhetoric is considerably more radical.

While as a candidate, Cristina Kirchner had shown a clear affinity with the vocabulary of her husband, already being observed significant changes in the speech since taking office just over a hundred days. Words such as home, work, dignity and self-characteristics of a rhetoric that combined motifs typically Kirchner Peronist with subjective effects of closeness to the "common people" - that was mobilized in 2001 and 2002 - have given way to a lot of terminology more focused on what the head of state called "the model" and the structural issue of "income distribution." Statistical analysis confirmed a number of other very interesting contrasts between the two presidents K on style: for example, Cristina Kirchner used the pronoun "I" more often than Néstor Kirchner and almost never invoke the name of God, as he used to do with her husband regularly. Of course, these data do not indicate more or less self-centeredness or religiosity in one or another of the leaders, but a way to position themselves before the public. In the case of the current president, is a clear desire to assert itself as an independent leader, with free will and decision making: do not ask divine or secular authorities. But this attitude of firmness and independence has a cost because, as you well know women in politics, the risk is shown as a calculator, arrogant and even aggressive. In his reaction to the rural protest, Cristina Kirchner led to the end that position. Some consider that what he said reveals his true thinking. Others judge that his extraordinary strength is mere rhetorical strategy. But in any case the president has helped fuel a conflict discourse that does no good to society in Argentina.

Tuesday, March 18, 2008

Petite North Face Coats

my lecture notes at the symposium on Interculturalism in Quebec

L'interculturel: théorie et pratique

17 mars, 2008

Interculturalism 101: Theory and practice intercultural


Victor Armony


The terms for societal models of integration are much more than just labels to describe the type of government policies in place against immigrants and minorities.
Expressions like "melting pot", "melting pot of races" or "multiculturalism" condense a way of conceiving the unity and difference in society. Beyond the concrete and specific aspects of each model of integration, cultural societies heterogeneous seek to represent, to justify and distinguish their approach.
Therefore, even if it is unclear how the model 'intercultural' Quebec is, in practice, different model of "multicultural" from the rest of Canada, we must take as a starting point for collective debate about the management of cultural diversity in Quebec society.
That does not prevent them from criticizing the accuracy of the term itself, although it is difficult to propose one to replace him. We can say, for example, that the word "interculturalism" leaves heard by the particle "inter" not only an interaction (which would make the difference vis-à-vis the 'multi', which may suggest the pure juxtaposition without common denominator), but also reports on a footing of equality. So when we say "interfaith dialogue", we do not assume that religion occupies a central place and that others should be deployed in a peripheral position.
However, Quebec's minority cultures must "converge" in a common public culture. Certainly, interculturalism "official" calls for "an understanding mutual cultural differences "and" inter-exchange, but the idea of a "focus for collective identity" remains a key element. Not only the French language is the "point of convergence," but one assumes the duty to participate in a "common public culture." In recent debates about Quebec's identity, this culture has been increasingly associated with a series of so-called "core values".
short, a first observation: Québec interculturalism is not one. But it does not matter! The "melting pot" U.S. is not one, either. As I say, these expressions are referred symbolic beyond the mere description of facts. These metaphors such neologisms reveal the desire to fill a gap, creating a new reality, promote a social project.
To analyze a sociological perspective, one must question their function, what they emphasize and also on what they hide. I am not speaking here of hypocrisy or bad faith on the part of those who govern us. I am referring to the fact that any society itself is in the best light possible. (I do not know of any democratic country in the world that presents itself as the champion of the closure, selfishness or recklessness ...)
But we know that Quebec is in a particularly delicate situation. On the one hand it must assert the cultural heritage of its majority French-Canadian origin, while combating the suspicion (usually unjustified in my opinion) of xenophobia and ethnic hatred awakened from many non-Quebec's nationalist project . On the other hand, while declaring ever open its civic and cultural diversity, Quebec must mobilize substantial resources to restrict the choice of immigrants and minorities in terms of identity, including the linguistic.
I do not wear this value judgments in this regard: I note simply that it is sociologically reasonable to see a community seeks to maximize its chances of survival and that this collective maximization happening in Quebec by to compel the strongest possible immigrants and minorities to adopt the French, to identify with the majority culture French-Canadian origin and contribute to the demographic viability of Quebec.
In the context of this particular power, the notion of interculturalism fulfills an ideological function: it evokes the idea of a relationship of solidarity, a constant exchange and mutual recognition between the various groups, rather between individuals, then it tends not to attract attention to the existence of a clear hierarchy between the sociopolitical culture of the majority of French-Canadian origin, closely associated with common public institutions, and other cultures. Because of its relative fragility (as a minority in North America), the dominant culture in Quebec can not rely on "natural course" of the process of acculturation, as occurs in other companies. It must be more openly interventionist.
But the notion of interculturalism also seeks to emphasize the fact that Quebec society is inclusive, but not assimilation, diverse but not fragmented. How not to agree with this proposal? How not to welcome the fact that Quebec society - Public opinion and elites - want to project this image of openness and civility? It is important not to overlook the importance of this type of rhetoric. English Canadians have made multiculturalism the core of their national identity and are proud when their leaders act in accordance with this ideal. This provision has effects quite concrete government action.
If Quebecers begin to define themselves more and more like a corporation "intercultural", they will tend to react positively to the speech that value cultural diversity. As the recent debate over "reasonable accommodation "Showed, we still have before us a long way to go before that Quebecers are really comfortable with those who are different among them.
It would be desirable that the idea of interculturalism, even with its limitations, will become an integral component of any definition of Quebec society.

Tuesday, March 11, 2008

Rubber Like Sticky Cervical Mucus

Symposium open to the public Interculturalism Activity

Symposium

Interculturalism: Theory and Practice by

Presents Studies Association Canadian
the Council of intercultural relations
Quebec and the Canadian Jewish Congress, Quebec Region


March 17, 2008

Hilton Montreal Bonaventure
(The Canopy Room), Place Bonaventure
900, the Gauchetière West, Suite 10750,
Montreal, Quebec

REGISTRATION (FREE): http://www.acs-aec.ca/index.php?option=com_acsreg®id=16&xlang=English


Program


9:00 to 9:15 Welcome

· Dr. Victor Goldbloom, OC President, Canadian Jewish Congress, Quebec Region

9:15 to 10:30 (1) Interculturalism 101: Theory and practice intercultural

· Donald Cuccioletta, University of Quebec Outaouais
· Marie McAndrew, Université de Montréal
· Marc Arnal, Faculté St Jean, University of Alberta
· Annick Germain, National Institute of Scientific Research-Urbanisation, Culture and Society, Director of the Quebec Metropolis Centre - Immigration and Metropolis
· Victor Armony, University of Quebec at Montreal

10:30-10:45 Break

10: 45-12 : 00 (2) Interculturalism and schools

· Rachida Azdouz, Vice Dean, Faculty of Education
Permanente, University of Montreal
· Lloyd McKell, Toronto District School Board (invited)
· Maurice Shalom, Week of shares against racism
· Bergman Fleury, Intercultural Relations Advisor educationand

12: 00 - 14:00 Break for Lunch

14: 15 to 14: 45 (3) Interculturalism - Multicultural? - Presentation of data from a new national survey by the Association for Canadian Studies done by Leger Marketing

· Jack Jedwab, Executive Director, Association for Canadian Studies

14: 45 - 16: 15 (4) Policies Intercultural

· Jennifer Bitz, Canadian Heritage
· Marie-Josee Bonin, Montreal
· Cassandra Fernandes , Diversity Management and Community Engagement Consultant, City of Toronto
· Claire Deronzier, Director. Integration and intercultural relations. Department of Immigration and Cultural Communities

16: 15 - 16:30 (5) Closing Remarks

Rimok · Patricia, Chair, Board of intercultural relations in Quebec

Thursday, March 6, 2008

How Do You Trade Pokemons In Your Computer Mac

Circulo Hispano de Montreal (March 7, 2008) in the Library Conference

Message Sergio De La Cruz: Next meeting of Círculo Hispano de Montreal

Date: Friday 7 March at 24:00
Venue: National Library of Quebec - 475, boul. De Maisonneuve Est, Montréal (Québec) H2L 5C4 in one of the meeting rooms from 2 nd, 3 rd or 4 th floor (the booking of this space can only be done on the same day)

Subject (s): Chair of studies on Mexico Contemporary (UdeM - UNAM) + Brief introduction to the study of political discourse.

Speaker: Dr. Fernando

Sergio Brown states that "the discussion will last between 40 and 45 minutes for questions and answers. For those who are willing and able, we'll go to eat at a restaurant near the end of the conversation."

Information: info@correohispano.ca