(Photo: www.fech.cl)
I could have written about the political forces in the making, trends and prospects of these, perhaps above all I want or do not want to Dean Roberto Nahum or on what are the steps for the University Christian Democrats (political group to which I belong since 5 years ago). All this, of so considerable interest (at least for me) I'll leave it aside to focus on the central point that I think about all this: The signal to the country that delivers the most prestigious and influential school of law in Chile.
The truth is that the most important in this shot is just outside, that is the ambition students in making, that is the ambition of the country and that is my ambition. The decision does not represent aspirations of co-government nor the political hash that can be seen among the teachers to see and share power (though some students so they want to watch). The decision represents the legitimate democratic feeling to rethink issues such as domestic participation and democratization of decision error is also a political assessment of the school authorities and the University of Chile. The decision does not, at least for me, the output of a Dean by authoritarian or his staff, the truth is that he is not but that uses the power he inherited, legitimate thing at least Does your shell Lakes did not use the constitution in the same way? Allende Did not he? Did Pinochet?
The decision represents the most noble ambition of the students, getting a strong signal to the country to say that the old conception of power in Chile should disappear, where the logic of authoritarian Pinochet should be wiped off the map, taking to reporting that these were embedded in the deepest of all of us in all the institutions from this nefarious national period and finally the national logic in this fear of instability that everyone, even to our generation that was born in a dictatorship but begins thinking about democracy. Dean is not bad and neither will we. What if we are the product of the social hegemony of peace and tranquility at the expense of freedom, equality and above all the dignity of those who have no power. Then I ask myself Where is it at the University of Chile that one can express these ideas? Could this be possible in a private university? Could this be understood in a party logic?. Do not think so, and if they like it or not, at present the Law School is the spearhead of change to a new model of education, but not only that, it is spearhead the move to a new conception of the participation of the powerless against power, is also the most energetic spirit of those unhappy looking for a profound change in our thinking, but without falling into the end of the lawlessness and the total revolution. I am absolutely aware of the country's future, of what people expect, people expect of us, young people who think the policy but not get bogged down in the current logical that we inherited from the dictatorship, which unfortunately we see embedded in political parties . Therefore
making is not making the law school is the logical decision is the decision of the past and is finally making the future. I could have written about the political forces in the making, trends and prospects of these, perhaps above all I want or do not want to Dean Roberto Nahum or on what are the steps for the University Christian Democrats (political group to which I belong since 5 years ago). All this, of so considerable interest (at least for me) I'll leave it aside to focus on the central point that I think about all this: The signal to the country that delivers the most prestigious and influential school of law in Chile.
The truth is that the most important in this shot is just outside, that is the ambition students in making, that is the ambition of the country and that is my ambition. The decision does not represent aspirations of co-government nor the political hash that can be seen among the teachers to see and share power (though some students so they want to watch). The decision represents the legitimate democratic feeling to rethink issues such as domestic participation and democratization of decision error is also a political assessment of the school authorities and the University of Chile. The decision does not, at least for me, the output of a Dean by authoritarian or his staff, the truth is that he is not but that uses the power he inherited, legitimate thing at least Does your shell Lakes did not use the constitution in the same way? Allende Did not he? Did Pinochet?
The decision represents the most noble ambition of the students, getting a strong signal to the country to say that the old conception of power in Chile should disappear, where the logic of authoritarian Pinochet should be wiped off the map, taking to reporting that these were embedded in the deepest of all of us in all the institutions from this nefarious national period and finally the national logic in this fear of instability that everyone, even to our generation that was born in a dictatorship but begins thinking about democracy. Dean is not bad and neither will we. What if we are the product of the social hegemony of peace and tranquility at the expense of freedom, equality and above all the dignity of those who have no power. Then I ask myself Where is it at the University of Chile that one can express these ideas? Could this be possible in a private university? Could this be understood in a party logic?. Do not think so, and if they like it or not, at present the Law School is the spearhead of change to a new model of education, but not only that, it is spearhead the move to a new conception of the participation of the powerless against power, is also the most energetic spirit of those unhappy looking for a profound change in our thinking, but without falling into the end of the lawlessness and the total revolution. I am absolutely aware of the country's future, of what people expect, people expect of us, young people who think the policy but not get bogged down in the current logical that we inherited from the dictatorship, which unfortunately we see embedded in political parties . Therefore
