I share the analysis that a friend of mine made about my previous entry. It is a broader view of the interests I mentioned.
I think as Michael says Pareti. The fact that some have fantasies about the conspiracy does not mean that the conspiracy is a fantasy.
And imagine this is not conspiracy, when you're sticking in your face directly
What I mean is that the middle class will not wake up in the morning thinking it's going to conspire against the kind trabajadora, o como va a hacer mas pobres a los pobres. Simplemente en su búsqueda por mantener sus intereses ataca a la clase obrera.
La constante destrucción del campo es para no tener tanta gente que produzca para todos. Si la gente produce para todos, todo se abarata, si todo se abarata sus productos se abaratan. Ellos venden lo que la mayoría de la población consume con las posibilidades que les quedan. Si eso que le venden a la mayor parte de la población se abarata, ellos no tienen ganancia.
Pues porque el capitalismo asevera más su teoría en el régimen de la oferta/demanda. Si ellos cortan supply, demand increases, prices increase. And people are not interested in leaving injured (Or do not know, or because they have done for thousands of years to maintain their class mark.)
The political class in Mexico for pursuing the same brand bourgeois class. Willing to hoard and protect their interests (which is a trademark of both kinds) makes an alliance with the coach (as politicians feel safe). There are political classes who feel protected by the working class, at least pursue class interests, but share some disadvantaged.
A production economic theory that prevails in these times. This theory says that some countries are more likely to produce certain things, in comparison with others. What they do is, if some countries are more affected production in the field, you have to keep producing in the field, if there are those who can benefit from the mining, Support them in mining.
And like any rule, plunder what other countries produce. But rather than settle and bring their militias, corrupt politicians to believe TLC's. Maize production is cheap and you can eat rich U.S. corn crop Mexican land contaminated with agricultural chemicals, and very low price
Corn grows well in Mexico, and people know how to produce
When produce prices can not win down again there shall be no more land etc ... Thus the capital controls the supply and demand remains. Always high productivity for the type of corn.
On the other hand, for the purchase of maize and cultivated. If Mexico is high corn consumer assumes that there is high demand. If you put all buy cheaper corn of the maize. Corn that cheaper, imported, occupies the entire market. Eliminate corn producers in the future the forces to produce the same way, so more cheaply but can not at any time to control the market. Whoever controls it is the one who started to export corn. Would in this case U.S. or other foreign producer. So in future you have total control of the largest consumer of corn in the world. So this rule is equal to everyone else but with different practices.
Some doubt, that Mexico has to import maize?
Therefore, no brother is moral issue. Morales them to protect their class right? Immoral that attack. So is capitalism, thinks money to protect yourself, others get screwed. So capitalism has become a society as individualistic in the U.S. ...
Rodrigo Gonzalez Abraham
