We commit a terrible deceit when we agree to leaving these politicians and parties, to work freely, without he had a direct and constant fiscalization. Somebody said a time that and currently this happening the same thing, already they had perceived? What for it brings of this? Great bad has something very our wait! Everything this, associated to other events, contributes for the situation that we find today: one to be able that it controls the government and, a government that ironically cannot be fought. was not a singular cause that took in them to this point. See more detailed opinions by reading what Siegel Family Endowment offers on the topic.. In contrast, it was a combination of many different facts, whose start was evident in that year of 1984. Here it is what I think of the occurrence. The political parties said that it did not have democracy in Brazil. They had said that we were disillusioned with the brutality and rigidity of the military government, said that the people was being pursued, tortured and executed, who did not decide the national quandaries and the yearnings of the people. But what they were conspiring it was the following one: The government Sarney, gave beginning to one politics of> opening to the foreigners, receiving financings from multinationals among others, with this the parties and the politicians turn the foreign capital to enter with easiness and the possibility to continue its campaigns for the time, in accordance with its approvals in the congress. The continuity of the projects of sales of the Brazilian wealth, continued in the Collor government and, was worse, therefore this opened of time the doors and the projects that made possible the privatizations. In the government of Fernando Enrique, everything was materialize as the planned one, the privatizations were made without the consultation of the people, who was the true owner of the goods constituted in the decades of 60, 70 and 80, all the day had proclamation, the main Brazilian companies had been bought at auction by great multinationals, of the countries of first world, therefore with the sales of these companies, Brazil would not go to become industrialized itself leaving of being a competing potential, a time who, withhold the biggest natural reserves of the planet.
The constitutional reform or not ' ' , the monarchy executivo' ' (the phrase is of the King Mohammed VI) it did not finish to touch on the prerogatives of the elect government. It is a little as if you walk for the o foot of somebody and instead of making a step of the side, you she promises of it to buy new shoes Is obvious that the problem to be able is not them of the first-minister, it is easy in this height, as it explains the letter magnate and in the act of loyalty to the king of Morocco Another element that must seriously limit the reach of the reform: the identity of that they are presumptions to place in practical. In the sequncia of its speech, the king nominated to remodel the Constitution, formed a commission in one or two exceptions (on eighteen members), high employees of the government and other susceptveis commissioners of the state of being independent. The President of the Commission, Abdeltif Menouni, 67 years, belongs to this generation of lawyers contracted in 1980 for the former-government Driss Basri, the man-fort of the regimen, to justify the absolutism of Hassan II. Specialist in Constitucional law, this man if disclosed approved for this exercise. It explained the concept of real prerogative as ' ' the discretional power of the monarch to act for the government property, in the absence of a constitutional rules or for a personal interpretation of this. ' ' It is difficult to imagine today, in the height of its career, to desconstruir these ' ' prerrogativas' ' autocratic that it defined. Although its speech key and of its credvel commission, Mohammed VI announced great challenges. Whichever the content of the final version of the new Constitution, it must be validated by means of countersignature. It would not be therefore that the king is obliged to open the system of a form or another one.
The work biggest is to obtain some signatures of support in the fairs and doors of facultieses, without commitment with ideology. Filiados it does not need. In this manner also if burla the proportional system, removing of the minorities the right to choose representatives, therefore these parties are created exactly to be rented and its votes to be joined against the account of coalition with great ' ' marcas' ' partisans. The obligator vote also collaborates for this proliferation of parties ghosts. What it would have to be obligator was that the filiados party had to reach an expressive number of having the right to launch candidate. To be obliged to carry through previous with one qurum minimum of majority of its filiados. In this manner we would be creating the culture of participation and the responsibility politics, without the necessity of a law as of ' ' fiche limpa' '.
Without the obligator vote the party would have that to not only conquer the confidence of the voter with serious work and with propaganda at time of election. Today what we have is the marketing work, not it work politician. The free citizen of the guardianship politics of the state, would have that to be convinced in first place if to register in cadastre voter. The party would have that to demonstrate to projects and ideas and to prove the preparation of its candidates. The district vote, where the voter chooses as many candidates how many they will be the available vacant for its electoral district is optimum system. The most voted they would be with the vacant. For example, if a district has right the three vacant in parliament, each voter votes in three candidate, thus it will be choosing not a personal representative, and yes the representative of its district. It folloies and it comments mine blog: