/image%2F0662944%2F20170313%2Fob_3490fc_poc-grands-reportages-nov-99.jpg)
Nicolás Gómez Dávila: Selección de Escolios a un Texto Implícito
En tiempos aristocráticos lo que tiene valor no tiene precio; en tiempos democráticos lo que no tiene precio no tiene valor.
*
La burguesía, en el marco feudal, se localiza en pequeños centros urbanos donde se estructura y se civiliza.
Al romperse el marco, la burguesía se expande sobre la sociedad entera, inventa el estado nacional, la técnica racionalista, la urbe multitudinaria y anónima, la sociedad industrial, la masificación del hombre y, en fin, el proceso oscilatorio entre el despotismo de la plebe y el despotismo del experto.
*
A ricos y a pobres hoy sólo los diferencia el dinero.
Ficha bibliográfica
Titulo: Selección de Escolios a un Texto Implícito
Edición original: 2004-02-20
Edición en la biblioteca virtual: 2004-02-20
Publicado: Biblioteca Virtual del Banco de la República : link
Creador: Nicolás Gómez Dávila
Notas: Texto tomado de la Antología del ensayo en Colombia. Compilador Oscar Torres Duque.
El Mausoleo Iluminado
Antología del ensayo en Colombia
Biblioteca Familiar Presidencia de la República
© Derechos Reservados de Autor
Selección de Escolios a un Texto Implícito
Nicolás Gómez Dávila
— Disciplina, orden, jerarquía, son valores estéticos.
— El pensamiento moderno surge en los escombros de la noción escolástica de ordo.
La escolástica misma causó el desastre, aplicando una noción originaria del cielo platónico al mundo sub-lunar del aristotelismo.
La noción fracasa en un universo que la noción antagónica de desorden explica mejor.
Bastaba, sin embargo, el dogma del pecado original para que el pensamiento cristiano sólo buscara el orden tras las cosas, así como buscamos las estructuras lógicas detrás de la materia empírica de la psicología.
Ordo es lo que se transparenta en el mundo sin hacer parte de él, como las normas, las estructuras, los valores.
— En tiempos aristocráticos lo que tiene valor no tiene precio; en tiempos democráticos lo que no tiene precio no tiene valor.
— Habiendo resuelto previamente que las formas religiosas no son más que etapas de un progreso, la filosofía de la religión, desde Lessing, limita la religión auténtica al respeto que se tenga por la dirección atribuida a ese supuesto progreso.
A esta solución desabrida se opone el catolicismo, que integra tanto el rito mágico como la contemplación mística, tanto el comportamiento ético como el raciocinio teológico.
El catolicismo es la estructura jerárquica de la historia de las religiones.
— La relatividad de todo valor a una época no implica un relativismo axiológico. El valor es relativo a una época porque sólo esa época lo descubre, pero no porque sólo para ella valga.
Cuando decimos que un valor ha muerto, indicamos meramente que las estructuras históricas que lo hicieron perceptible han perecido. Pero basta que aparezca un historiador afín, para que divise el astro intacto.
— La separación de los poderes es la condición de la libertad.
No la separación formal y frágil de poder ejecutivo, poder legislativo y poder judicial; sino la separación de tres poderes estructurados, concretos y fuertes: el poder monárquico, el poder aristocrático y el poder popular.
— A Homero, poeta de la aristocracia jónica, y a Dante, poeta del ordo medieval, hay que agregar a Shakespeare, "poeta del feudalismo" (según Morley).
La reacción no anda mal de poetas.
— El esteticismo auténtico es una disciplina austera, no un hedonismo vulgar.
Hoffmansthal aprecia bien la distancia que separa a Pater de Wilde.
— Los cánones estéticos nunca fueron más rígidos que en nuestra época.
Recordemos tanto género literario muerto y tanto tema sepultado.
— Sentirnos capaces de leer textos literarios con imparcialidad de profesor es confesar que la literatura dejó de gustarnos.
— La literatura se venga del profano que la frecuenta facilitándole metáforas.
— La historia de los géneros literarios admite explicaciones sociológicas.
La historia de las obras no las admite.
— El escritor nunca sabe qué rango tiene.
Llega cuando mucho a sentir que pertenece al gremio.
— El hombre no se comunica con otro hombre sino cuando el uno escribe en su soledad y el otro lo lee en la suya.
Las conversaciones son o diversión, o estafa, o esgrima.
— Ciertos poetas creen inventar símbolos, cuando sólo manejan un repertorio personal de equivalencias alegóricas.
— La originalidad no es algo que se busque, sino algo que se encuentra.
— La mera novedad se inventa.
La originalidad se elabora espontáneamente a través de la reminiscencia y de la copia.
— El cristianismo nunca enseñó que la historia tuviera finalidad.
Sino fin.
— Lo importante no es creer en Dios, sino que Dios exista.
— El "sentido de la historia" sería insignificante, si nuestra inteligencia lograra entenderlo.
— La historia no tiene el propósito de relatarnos lo que el hombre hace, sino lo que es. La historia no cataloga sus actos, revela sus modos.
La historia no redacta el repertorio de las aventuras humanas, la historia exhibe la esencia de humanidades sucesivas.
— Nada más aventurado que figurarnos saber en qué momento de la historia nos hallamos.
El que presume saberlo se arroga con dogmática insolencia la misión de imponer a los hombres el cumplimiento de su destino.
El historicismo necesitario corona su petulancia con crímenes inútiles.
La historia carece de estructura. El hombre sólo tiene la obligación de acatar ciertas normas, cualquiera que sea el problemático momento de la historia en que se halle.
Todo hombre conoce su deber. Nadie conoce la supuesta tarea de su tiempo.
— La burguesía, en el marco feudal, se localiza en pequeños centros urbanos donde se estructura y se civiliza.
Al romperse el marco, la burguesía se expande sobre la sociedad entera, inventa el estado nacional, la técnica racionalista, la urbe multitudinaria y anónima, la sociedad industrial, la masificación del hombre y, en fin, el proceso oscilatorio entre el despotismo de la plebe y el despotismo del experto.
— Los partidos liberales (girondinos —propietarios franceses del 30 —manufactureros ingleses del 32— demócratas jacksonianos —próceres criollos— etc.) se han distinguido por la bella retórica con que adornan sus propósitos mercantiles.
El marxismo nace, en parte, de una meditación sobre la elocuencia liberal.
— Llámase comunista al que lucha para que el Estado le asegure una existencia burguesa.
— El comunista odia al capitalismo con el complejo de Edipo.
El reaccionario lo mira tan sólo con xenofobia.
— Después de desacreditar la virtud, este siglo logró desacreditar los vicios.
Las perversiones se han vuelto parques suburbanos que frecuentan en familia las muchedumbres domingueras.
— A ricos y a pobres hoy sólo los diferencia el dinero.
— No es la riqueza lo que escandaliza al pobre, sino el enriquecimiento.
— Se puede detestar impunemente a un gran hombre, siempre que no se admire a un mediocre.
— No hay que desesperar del ateo mientras no adore al hombre.
— La erudición no consiste en aducir infinitud de referencias, sino en obligar al lector a sentir que podríamos hacerlo.
— La erudición tiene tres grados: erudición del que sabe lo que dice una enciclopedia, erudición del que la redacta, erudición del que sabe lo que una enciclopedia no sabe decir.
— El filósofo ambiciona uncir bajo el mismo yugo dos tendencias divergentes del espíritu: su fuga hacia el concepto, su avidez de lo concreto.
El grado en que lo logra mide el rango de una filosofía.
— La idea desarrollada en sistema se suicida.
— Lo único que el Yo puede probar es que exista; lo único que puede refutar es que sea Dios.
Cogito ergo sum.
Cogito, ergo non sum Deus.
Sé que soy, y si no sé qué soy, sé qué no soy.
En la segunda de las únicas verdades irrefutables el mundo moderno tropieza contra una refutación letal.
— Para ridiculizar basta citar fuera de contexto.
— El cruce de la relación horizontal amigo-enemigo con la relación vertical superior-inferior configura la estructura política elemental.
Esperar abolir cualquiera de las dos, no solamente es utópico sino además contradictorio.
— El problema de la educación de los educadores es problema que el demócrata olvida en su entusiasmo por la educación de los educandos.
— Las categorías sociológicas facultan para circular por la sociedad sin atender a la individualidad irremplazable de cada hombre.
La sociología es la ideología de nuestra indiferencia con el prójimo.
— El político nunca dice lo que cree cierto, sino lo que juzga eficaz.
— La vulgaridad no es producto popular sino subproducto de prosperidad burguesa.
— El amor es el órgano con que percibimos la inconfundible individualidad de los seres.
— El periodismo fue la cuna de la crítica literaria.
La universidad es su tumba.
— Olvida tus demostraciones.
No escucho tu prédica, sino tu voz.
— Toda proposición universal es falsa.
Menos ésta.
L'Amazonie déboisée pour la culture extensive du soja
Le Brésil est le "poids lourd" de l'Amérique du sud. C'est également un "trou noir" économique et social qui absorbe tout pour le transformer en profit et en argent. La forêt amazonienne est déboisée pour la culture extensive du soja ou pour l'élevage de bovins, dont la viande sera exportée dans les pays voisins, comme le Pérou, où la viande nationale est taxée et la viande importée du Brésil détaxée.
Le Brésil est le géant autour duquel doivent s'intégrer les autres pays du Mercosur, selon le même modèle socio-économico-politique que l'UE.
Soya is killing us, say vegetarian tribe
ITV News report from the Brazilian Amazon on the devastating effects of soya farming on the Enawene Nawe, one of the few Amazonian tribes who eat no red meat.
The Declaration of Arbroath 1320
For as long as but a hundred of us remain alive, never will we on any conditions be brought under English rule. It is not for glory, nor riches, nor honours that we are fighting, but for freedom — for that alone, which no honest man gives up but with life itself.
From The Declaration of Arbroath 1320.
The Declaration of Arbroath 1320
by John Prebble
The Declaration of Arbroath was and has been unequalled in its eloquent plea for the liberty of man. From the darkness of medieval minds it shone a torch upon future struggles which its signatories could not have foreseen or understood.
The author of this noble Latin address is unknown, though it is assumed to have been composed by Bernard de Linton, Abbot of Arbroath and Chancellor of Scotland. Above the seals of eight earls and forty-five barons, it asked for the Pope's dispassionate intervention in the bloody quarrel between the Scots and the English, and so that he might understand the difference between the two its preamble gave him a brief history of the former. The laughable fiction of this is irrelevant. What is important is the passionate sincerity of the men who believed it, who were placing a new and heady nationalism above the feudal obligations that had divided their loyalties less than a quarter of a century before.
In its mixture of defiance and supplication, nonsensical history and noble thought, two things make the Declaration of Arbroath the most important document in Scottish history.
Firstly it set the will and the wishes of the people above the King. Though they were bound to him 'both by law and by his merits' it was so that their freedom might be maintained. If he betrayed them he would be removed and replaced. This remarkable obligation placed upon a feudal monarch by his feudal subjects may be explained in part by the fact that Bruce was still a heather king to many of them, still a wild claimant ruling upon sufferance and success. But the roots of his kingship were Celtic, and a Celtic tradition was here invoked, the memory of the Seven Earls, the Seven Sons of Cruithne the Pict in who, it was believed, had rested the ancient right of tanistry, the elevation of kings by selection. This unique relationship of king and people would influence their history henceforward, and would reach its climax in the Reformation and the century following, when a people's Church would declare and maintain its superiority over earthly crowns.
Secondly, the manifesto affirmed the nation's independence in a way no battle could, and justified it with a truth that is beyond nation and race. Man has a right to freedom and a duty to defend it with his life. The natural qualifications put upon this by a medieval baron are irrelevant, as are the reservations which slave-owning Americans placed upon their declaration of independence. The truth once spoken cannot be checked, the seed once planted controls its own growth, and the liberty which men secure for themselves must be given by them to others, or it will be taken as they took it. Freedom is a hardy plant and must flower in equality and brotherhood.
From The Lion in the North: One Thousand Years of Scotland's History Penguin Books.
The Declaration of Arbroath 1320 — English Translation
To the most Holy Father and Lord in Christ, the Lord John, by divine providence Supreme Pontiff of the Holy Roman and Universal Church, his humble and devout sons Duncan, Earl of Fife, Thomas Randolph, Earl of Moray, Lord of Man and of Annandale, Patrick Dunbar, Earl of March, Malise, Earl of Strathearn, Malcolm, Earl of Lennox, William, Earl of Ross, Magnus, Earl of Caithness and Orkney, and William, Earl of Sutherland; Walter, Steward of Scotland, William Soules, Butler of Scotland, James, Lord of Douglas, Roger Mowbray, David, Lord of Brechin, David Graham, Ingram Umfraville, John Menteith, guardian of the earldom of Menteith, Alexander Fraser, Gilbert Hay, Constable of Scotland, Robert Keith, Marischal of Scotland, Henry St Clair, John Graham, David Lindsay, William Oliphant, Patrick Graham, John Fenton, William Abernethy, David Wemyss, William Mushet, Fergus of Ardrossan, Eustace Maxwell, William Ramsay, William Mowat, Alan Murray, Donald Campbell, John Cameron, Reginald Cheyne, Alexander Seton, Andrew Leslie, and Alexander Straiton, and the other barons and freeholders and the whole community of the realm of Scotland send all manner of filial reverence, with devout kisses of his blessed feet.
Most Holy Father and Lord, we know and from the chronicles and books of the ancients we find that among other famous nations our own, the Scots, has been graced with widespread renown. They journeyed from Greater Scythia by way of the Tyrrhenian Sea and the Pillars of Hercules, and dwelt for a long course of time in Spain among the most savage tribes, but nowhere could they be subdued by any race, however barbarous. Thence they came, twelve hundred years after the people of Israel crossed the Red Sea, to their home in the west where they still live today. The Britons they first drove out, the Picts they utterly destroyed, and, even though very often assailed by the Norwegians, the Danes and the English, they took possession of that home with many victories and untold efforts; and, as the historians of old time bear witness, they have held it free of all bondage ever since. In their kingdom there have reigned one hundred and thirteen kings of their own royal stock, the line unbroken a single foreigner. The high qualities and deserts of these people, were they not otherwise manifest, gain glory enough from this: that the King of kings and Lord of lords, our Lord Jesus Christ, after His Passion and Resurrection, called them, even though settled in the uttermost parts of the earth, almost the first to His most holy faith. Nor would He have them confirmed in that faith by merely anyone but by the first of His Apostles — by calling, though second or third in rank — the most gentle Saint Andrew, the Blessed Peter's brother, and desired him to keep them under his protection as their patron forever.
The Most Holy Fathers your predecessors gave careful heed to these things and bestowed many favours and numerous privileges on this same kingdom and people, as being the special charge of the Blessed Peter's brother. Thus our nation under their protection did indeed live in freedom and peace up to the time when that mighty prince the King of the English, Edward, the father of the one who reigns today, when our kingdom had no head and our people harboured no malice or treachery and were then unused to wars or invasions, came in the guise of a friend and ally to harass them as an enemy. The deeds of cruelty, massacre, violence, pillage, arson, imprisoning prelates, burning down monasteries, robbing and killing monks and nuns, and yet other outrages without number which he committed against our people, sparing neither age nor sex, religion nor rank, no one could describe nor fully imagine unless he had seen them with his own eyes.
But from these countless evils we have been set free, by the help of Him Who though He afflicts yet heals and restores, by our most tireless Prince, King and Lord, the Lord Robert. He, that his people and his heritage might be delivered out of the hands of our enemies, met toil and fatigue, hunger and peril, like another Macabaeus or Joshua and bore them cheerfully. Him, too, divine providence, his right of succession according to or laws and customs which we shall maintain to the death, and the due consent and assent of us all have made our Prince and King. To him, as to the man by whom salvation has been wrought unto our people, we are bound both by law and by his merits that our freedom may be still maintained, and by him, come what may, we mean to stand. Yet if he should give up what he has begun, and agree to make us or our kingdom subject to the King of England or the English, we should exert ourselves at once to drive him out as our enemy and a subverter of his own rights and ours, and make some other man who was well able to defend us our King; for, as long as but a hundred of us remain alive, never will we on any conditions be brought under English rule. It is in truth not for glory, nor riches, nor honours that we are fighting, but for freedom — for that alone, which no honest man gives up but with life itself.
Therefore it is, Reverend Father and Lord, that we beseech your Holiness with our most earnest prayers and suppliant hearts, inasmuch as you will in your sincerity and goodness consider all this, that, since with Him Whose vice-gerent on earth you are there is neither weighing nor distinction of Jew and Greek, Scotsman or Englishman, you will look with the eyes of a father on the troubles and privation brought by the English upon us and upon the Church of God. May it please you to admonish and exhort the King of the English, who ought to be satisfied with what belongs to him since England used once to be enough for seven kings or more, to leave us Scots in peace, who live in this poor little Scotland, beyond which there is no dwelling-place at all, and covet nothing but our own. We are sincerely willing to do anything for him, having regard to our condition, that we can, to win peace for ourselves. This truly concerns you, Holy Father, since you see the savagery of the heathen raging against the Christians, as the sins of Christians have indeed deserved, and the frontiers of Christendom being pressed inward every day; and how much it will tarnish your Holiness's memory if (which God forbid) the Church suffers eclipse or scandal in any branch of it during your time, you must perceive. Then rouse the Christian princes who for false reasons pretend that they cannot go to help of the Holy Land because of wars they have on hand with their neighbours. The real reason that prevents them is that in making war on their smaller neighbours they find quicker profit and weaker resistance. But how cheerfully our Lord the King and we too would go there if the King of the English would leave us in peace, He from Whom nothing is hidden well knows; and we profess and declare it to you as the Vicar of Christ and to all Christendom. But if your Holiness puts too much faith in the tales the English tell and will not give sincere belief to all this, nor refrain from favouring them to our prejudice, then the slaughter of bodies, the perdition of souls, and all the other misfortunes that will follow, inflicted by them on us and by us on them, will, we believe, be surely laid by the Most High to your charge.
To conclude, we are and shall ever be, as far as duty calls us, ready to do your will in all things, as obedient sons to you as His Vicar; and to Him as the Supreme King and Judge we commit the maintenance of our cause, casting our cares upon Him and firmly trusting that He will inspire us with courage and bring our enemies to nought. May the Most High preserve you to his Holy Church in holiness and health and grant you length of days.
Given at the monastery of Arbroath in Scotland on the sixth day of the month of April in the year of grace thirteen hundred and twenty and the fifteenth year of the reign of our King aforesaid.
Endorsed: Letter directed to our Lord the Supreme Pontiff by the community of Scotland.
(Source: link)
i ngä wä o mua: le passé est devant nous et le futur derrière nous
Tête sculptée d'Indien aymara. Oeuvre de Don Lucho, gardien de la maison Kreuzer-Combelles Humala Tasso à Sorata (Bolivie), année 2000. Photo: Pierre-Olivier Combelles.
J'attire l'attention sur l'importance extraordinaire du concept présenté ici, commun à deux langues apparemment très éloignées, le maori (Océanie) et l'aymara (hauts-plateaux de Bolivie et région du lac Titicaca, en Amérique du sud). Langues qui ont néanmoins une ou des origines communes puisque l'essentiel du peuplement de l'Amérique du sud et des pays andins s'est fait par l'Océanie, comme en témoigne la multitude de similitudes culturelles entre ces peuples riverains du Pacifique, sans parler des échanges épisodiques comme en témoigne, par exemple, l'odyssée du souverain inca Tupac Yupanki "Le Resplendissant" vers 1465, découvreur de l'Île de Pâques, des Marquises (Nuku Hiva) et de Mangareva*.
Pour eux, le passé est un héritage vivant que l'on contemple devant soi. Le futur, inconnu, est derrière nous, hors de portée de notre regard.
Ce concept réaliste est à l'opposé du concept idéaliste de "progrès" développé en Occident à partir du XVIIIe siècle, pour lequel le passé est derrière nous (mort, inutile et même dangereux) et le futur devant nous (Le Progrès).
Les Maoris, lâchement décimés par les explorateurs et les colons occidentaux car ils ne combattaient par bravoure qu'avec des armes de poing, comme les Spartiates, tandis que les envahisseurs les tuaient de loin avec leurs armes à feu, les Maoris ont beaucoup à nous apprendre.
C'est pour cette raison, d'ailleurs, que l'étude de la langue et de la culture maories est en pleine expansion parmi les universitaires et les étudiants de Nouvelle Zélande (Aotearoa) et ailleurs dans le monde.
Ayons donc l'humilité et la sagesse de les écouter, car nous avons perdu l'usage du monde.
Je ne crois pas que nous en ayons le choix...
P.O.C.
* Paul Rivet: Les Origines de l'homme américain (1943), pp. 122-127. Thor Heyerdahl: L'expédition du Kin Tiki (1947). José Antonio del Busto Duthurburu: Tupac Yupanki, descubridor de Oceania (Lima, 2006) : link . Jean Hervé Daude: Les Incas à l'île de Pâques (2009).
/http%3A%2F%2Fcdn.brooklynmuseum.org%2Fopencollection%2Fimages%2Fobjects%2Fsize3%2F1995.29.11_SL1.jpg)
"Both Aymara and Mäori refer to the past as the time before us and the future as the time behind us.
In Mäori, the phrase i ngä wä o mua, literally the time before us refers to the idea that tikanga, correct traditions [from tika, correct] are handed to us from the past as part of an unbroken chain which, if we take the time to follow it, will lead us all the way back to the creation. The past is not a mystery, it is something that we can see, whereas the future, which is yet to come, is unpredictable, and as hard to see as something behind us.
In Aymara, qhipa pacha translates as behind time, which to speakers of English seems like the past, but which to the Aymara translates as the future, whereas nayra pacha, front time, refers to the past. In Aymara this understanding of time has even affected the body language of its speakers - Aymara speakers will often gesture forwards when talking about the back and point backwards when talking about the future.
Language is a wonderful thing, it teaches us to open our eyes and enjoy the fact that the world can be seen and described in 6 billion different ways.
Source: The Selchie Warrior link
My name is Johan (Eòghan/Ewan - being Swedish/Scottish (Westrobothnian Saami/ Scottish Gael) is odd sometimes) and I am 24 years of age, though I sometimes ask myself how I managed to spend almost a quarter of a century without ever having reached the point when you're supposed to feel "grown up".
I am a linguist, a teacher of German and English, I claim that I am an amateur photographer and a poet, and a human rights activist, focusing mainly on indigenous peoples human rights.
At the moment I am an MLitt student studying Modern Scottish Writing at the University of Stirling in Scotland. "
Un linguiste écossais-saami (lapon) qui s'intéresse aux relations entre le maori et l'aymara est un cadeau des dieux pour cette nouvelle année 2012 qui s'annonce riche en découvertes et en péripéties. Bonne année 2012 Johan et merci pour votre lumineuse trouvaille linguistique ! P.O.C.
Chief of the Te Atiawa Tribe Wiremu Kingi by Gottfried Lindauer
Na wai taua?
Voyage de Dumont d'Urville: la côte orientale de l'Île du Nord (Nouvelle-Zélande)
The Maori employs the aid of gesture to a considerable extent, and exercises this art in a facile and appropriate manner. In describing any incident he brings hands, arms, body, head, and features into play in his animated description. These gestures are in most cases of a natural and easily understood nature—indeed, they serve to illustrate the narrative. A few call for some knowledge of native usages ere one can understand them. Whether used as an accompaniment to spoken language of intercourse, or to posture dances, these gestures are never awkward or unpleasing to the eye. One sometimes detects in half-breeds something of the stiff, ungraceful limb-movements of our own folk.
So given was the Maori to song and the love of rhythmical sound that he always intoned any recitative form of speech, such as charms. Moreover, this harmonious, ear-pleasing mode of intoning was employed in cases wherein we should never think of using it. Thus, should a travelling party meet a number of strangers, or should a people be attacked by persons they did not recognize, their principal man would call out the inquiry “Na wai taua?” (“From whom are we?”—“sprung” or “descended” understood). This query was not spoken simply, but was intoned. The reply would be delivered in a like manner: “We are from Rangi above and Papa beneath.” Then would follow some explanation as to who the speaker was. (….)
In the mist-laden days of the remote past the ancestors of the Maori left their hidden homeland beneath the setting sun, and fared forth upon the Great Ocean of Kiwa in search of new homes. With sublime courage and self-reliance they forced their way through hordes of hostile peoples, and with grim tenacity held for unknown generations to their quest of the rising sun. They opened up the sea roads athwart the vast Pacific, and lifted many strange stars on far horizons. For century after century they followed the rolling water trails to the lure of Hine-moana, they explored the farthest island groups, they settled and resettled every land that flecks the Many-isled Sea. The Maori has fulfilled the task allotted to him in the scheme of human development; he now steps aside from the old, old path he has trodden for so many centuries. Never again will he feel the leaping rush of his lean prau, never again hear the plaint of distressed outriggers hard buffeted by Hine-moana, or see afar off the loom of new lands where the sky hangs down. Ka to he ra, ka ura he ra! (A sun sets, a sun rises!)
Elsdon Best , The Maori As He Was : A Brief Account of Life as it Was in Pre-European Days. Dominion Museum, 1934, Wellington (N-Z)
/http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nzetc.org%2Fetexts%2FCen01-02Make%2FCen01-02MakeP009a%28h280%29.jpg)
Tawhiao, a Maori chief. G. Lindauer painted this picture, which is in the possession of the Alexander Museum at Wanganui. It gives a good idea of the dignity of the Maori chief. Note the huia feathers in his hair, his greenstone ear pendant, and his whalebone club (kotiate). Source: link
Une vidéo pour comprendre la dette publique
"Mais, comme nous l'avons dit, l'art d'acquérir la richesse est de deux espèces : l'une est sa forme mercantile, et l'autre une dépendance de l'économie domestique ; cette dernière forme est nécessaire et louable, tandis que l'autre repose sur l'échange et donne prise à de justes critiques (car elle n'a rien de naturel, elle est le résultat d'échanges réciproques) : dans ces conditions, ce qu'on déteste avec le plus de raison, c'est la pratique du prêt à intérêt parce que le gain qu'on en retire provient de la monnaie elle-même et ne répond plus à la fin qui a présidé la création. Car la monnaie a été inventée en vue de l'échange, tandis que l'intérêt multiplie la quantité de monnaie elle-même. C'est même là l'origine du mot intérêt (1) : car les êtres engendrés ressemblent à leurs parents, et l'intérêt est une monnaie née d'une monnaie. Par conséquent, cette dernière façon de gagner de l'argent est de toutes la plus contraire à la nature. "
(1) τόχος, signifiant à la fois enfant, petit (partus), et revenu de l'argent (foenus, usura).
Aristote, Politique, Livre I, 10. Traduction par J. Tricot. Bibliothèque des textes philosophiques. Vrin, Paris, 2005.
