Santiago is a sheet. I would recommend activities to this hypothetical tourist if he was with a group, a group who wants to have parties and have good times. In that case, the place it doesn't matter to much: only import the people who they will know, because that people will show them how is Santiago and how is Chile really -and not tourist places that don't teach very and important things.
The thing is, then, to visit places out of Santiago.
Like I said in my last post, Santiago is a very bad city, mainly because it wasn't build with a project: it was build at random. And how there was a social context in that history, the city was finally (above this random) a city of classes: very divided, polar, with a city to poor people and a city to rich people. It is very Ugly, without projection, and even more, without and idea of city! Ugly.
A tourist, instead of Santiago, should visit, for one hand, the south of Chile. That is a really beautiful place. I would recommend specifically Valdivia: go to see the nature, meet very good people, and have a quiet time. There, this hypothetical tourist will know new food, new customs, and a new rate of live, with people not so alienated as Santiago's people.
And a tourist should visit, for other hand, the north of Chile. I think it is not as good as the south, in terms of number of very good places. But the north is really great too, because their few good places are excellent. Traveling over there, it is very relaxing to see, at the same time, so huge places and so quite. I would recommend specifically San Pedro de Atacama, a retired place very relaxing and very beautiful as nature places.
But, if this tourist is looking for places not so quiet, I would recommend, finally, Iquique, because is city with a lot of movement and, mainly, a perfect beach.
lunes, 28 de septiembre de 2009
ALAS CONGRESS
Mm there is a problem with this activity. Let's say we didn't go so much to the Congress. But, ok, let's try it.
The best conference was of Theodonio Do Santos, a Brazilian sociologist (and economist too) that spoke about the world capitalist juncture. He proposes that in studies about capitalism it is necesary to study State: it is instrument to solve the acumulations necesities of the contemporary capitalism, that have to create new forms of adaptations to continue its expansion. The burgueoise, in the "concentrated form of State", develop its mode of domination like that actually. And in that way is solving the financial problems of this period. But now, the problems are exceeding this instrument, wich is getting more and more week. So, the conclution is: there is a estructural problem on the capitalism actually.
Days after, however, the central discussion was: how the capitalism can be now in a estructural problem now, if is in its most hide period of developed? That was a very good answer, but I dont know it very well, so I won't continue explaining it.
Well, out of the Congress subject, the issue was: drink to much beer, eat a lot (less the last day [and the day of my birtdhay]), and to know people from other countries. Doing that, I lean a lot about a important sociology issue: how is the Chilean society. I realized about that Santiago is a city too bad buildt, with poor and few public places, and with a depoliticized society that is (in this period) up start, haughty and rightist. Very bad period, but at least I have denatured it.
The best conference was of Theodonio Do Santos, a Brazilian sociologist (and economist too) that spoke about the world capitalist juncture. He proposes that in studies about capitalism it is necesary to study State: it is instrument to solve the acumulations necesities of the contemporary capitalism, that have to create new forms of adaptations to continue its expansion. The burgueoise, in the "concentrated form of State", develop its mode of domination like that actually. And in that way is solving the financial problems of this period. But now, the problems are exceeding this instrument, wich is getting more and more week. So, the conclution is: there is a estructural problem on the capitalism actually.
Days after, however, the central discussion was: how the capitalism can be now in a estructural problem now, if is in its most hide period of developed? That was a very good answer, but I dont know it very well, so I won't continue explaining it.
Well, out of the Congress subject, the issue was: drink to much beer, eat a lot (less the last day [and the day of my birtdhay]), and to know people from other countries. Doing that, I lean a lot about a important sociology issue: how is the Chilean society. I realized about that Santiago is a city too bad buildt, with poor and few public places, and with a depoliticized society that is (in this period) up start, haughty and rightist. Very bad period, but at least I have denatured it.
Suscribirse a:
Entradas (Atom)