Philosopher
Those that has the candidacy at risk are that they look for to get away. reason of this, we can say that, even so if it has produced a law to assure honest people in the electoral dispute, we are obliged to attend the festival of judicial thresholds and resources that will favor to the dirty fiche. we, deceived people, what it remains in them? Not to vote? To vote null? To vote in ' ' branco' '? To order everything to broadbeans or the m? To make what? Any that is our position or our decision it not must be based on the principle or a position that searchs the unamimity, nor in an action of mass, but it must be assumed by all. Assumed because who assumes a position it demonstrates to have been capable to develop a critical attitude in relation it. Our decision does not have mere to be unanimous or massiva. ' ' unamimity is burra' ' Nelson said Rodrigues and the masses are manipulable.
As already it said the old K Jasper: ' ' Masses employees are more easy to manipulate when they do not think, but to-somente use of an intelligence of rebanho' '. So manipulable that the same outlaws whom they appear in the lists of ' ' fiche suja' ' they lead them to the slaughter house of the ballot boxes. By means of the vote the voters sign its sentence of death, therefore they delegate its powers. who assumes this power is not the clean ones, but the dirty ones therefore play dirty. thus we come back to the question: how and in who to vote? Sincerely not yet I know. But already I know in who not to vote I go to consult the list! By the way, this can be a criterion: To consult the list, that one officially supplied in the voting cabin, but to another one, that circulated for periodicals, showing who is not in the list and to make the question: how they walk its fiches? Neri de Paula Sheep? Master in Education, Philosopher, Theologian, Historian. He reads more: ; ; ; ;