Vietnames Movies Online

II National Painting Biennial 2010

The Government of the State of Durango Republican City of Gomez Palacio, Dgo., through the Cultural Institute of Durango State and the Municipal Institute of Culture, aiming to strengthen and stimulate artistic creation in Mexico, called a

Second National Painting Biennial

Gómez Palacio 2010

BASES

Participants

is open to all artists of Mexican nationality and aliens with five years of residence in the country, with proof of it.

Applicants should have on your resume at least one solo and two group.

Works and formats

Each artist can participate with a minimum of two and a maximum of three works on two-dimensional format, made from 2008.

Works must not have been submitted to other contests or have been physically or virtually exposed previously.

The subject, the technical approach and the tendency of the works are in the opinion of the authors.

Papers should not contain perishable items that endanger the safety of persons or property.

The format must not exceed 150 cm per side, including the context, to irregular forms shall refer to the same extent.

If of being selected, the work must be submitted ready for display.

Any work that does not comply with the above specifications will be automatically disqualified.

Selection and documents

The organizing committee will appoint a jury selected from the participants, a maximum of 50 works that make up the Second Biennial Exhibition of Painting Gómez Palacio Nacional 2010. The jury will include specialists in the field of visual arts, whose names will be announced in due course. His decision is final.

Participants have a deadline on Tuesday, June 11, 2010, at 14:00 hours, to personally deliver or mail in a sealed envelope and four points, the recording material described below in the following order:

detailed curriculum vitae artist's full name, place and date of birth, address (street, number, colony, office or city, state, zip code, country), telephone, fax, e-mail.

Photocopy of birth certificate and photo ID

artists resident aliens must submit documents substantiating residence of at least five years in Mexico.

Originals or photocopies of invitations, brochures or press releases to verify the achievement of at least one solo and two group

Sheet for each of the works involved: title, art (mixed media to specify), measures in centimeters, year of completion, assessment.

Four photographs printed 5 x 7 inches each work identified by the back with author's name, title, technique, measured in centimeters, date of completion and assessment.

A digital image of each work, in jpg format, 2100 x 1500 pixels, recorded on a CD clearly identified. The title of each digital file should match the title of each work. Recommended care for the quality of the images as they will be used for printing the catalog of the biennial.

A letter of acceptance by participants, which by signing agree to abide strictly to the bases of the contest and the decisions of the jury, which will be final, denying the signature explicitly to any action or claim and as compensation or benefits not specified in these rules.

All registration materials should be sent to the offices of the Institute Municipal de Cultura de Gómez Palacio located in Francisco Zarco Convention Center, Blvd Miguel German and González de la Vega s / n, Gomez Palacio, Durango, CP 35000.

Municipal Institute of Culture in Gómez Palacio to preserve the material record of all participating artists for archival purposes, no material will be returned under any circumstances.

Participants will be notified via phone, fax or e-mail from 21 to 25 June 2010.

Work reception

The deadline for receiving the selected works will be June 28 to July 17, 2010. The place of receipt of the same will be announced in due course to the selected artists.

Each selected work must be submitted ready for display and properly identified with its attached to the backing sheet, indicating name of author, title, technique, year of completion and assessment.

packaging costs, transportation, shipping, return and work insurance and risk borne by the participants. The biennial Gómez Palacio will only be responsible for the preservation and security of the pieces from the time they have been received in good condition at its headquarters.

If the exposure is requested for display at another venue works may not be withdrawn until the end of its tour.

Once the exhibition period, participants will be notified and will have 60 days to withdraw his work at the end of this period, the organizers will decide the fate of the pieces that have not been claimed. The organizers will not be liable in any paperwork or costs involved in the return to work.

Awards and

R. Municipality of Gomez Palacio, Dgo. through the Municipal Institute of Culture, awarded a unique prize, by way of acquisition of $ 75 000.00 (seventy five thousand pesos 00/100 MN) , which will be indivisible. The jury may award the prize if they consider and give honorable mentions, which are being credited by a diploma. The winning work will become part of the collection of the Instituto Municipal de Cultura de Gomez Palacio.

The award ceremony will take place during the inauguration of the Second National Painting Biennial Gomez Palacio, 2010 at the Museum of Modern Art in the city of Gomez Palacio, Dgo. on August 5, 2010.

A catalog with all selected pieces.

Any case not considered in this call will

resolved at the discretion of the organizers and the jury.

For more information go to

Municipal Institute of Culture, Teatro Alberto M.

Alvarado and Francisco Zarco Convention Center, German

Blvd Miguel de la Vega and González s / n, Gomez Palacio, Dgo.

CP 35000 Phone: (871) 750 10 29 750 00 19, 750 in October 2003

http://www.gomezpalacio.gob.mx/Inst_Cultura.htm

HYPERLINK "http:// imcgomezpalacio.blogspot.com / " http://imcgomezpalacio.blogspot.com/

HYPERLINK "mailto:culturagp@gmail.com" culturagp@gmail.com HYPERLINK "mailto:imculturaurbana@gmail.com" imculturaurbana@gmail.com

Funny Freshman Definition

Gómez Palacio Kite Festival in Gomez Palacio "Let's play fly "

Where To Watch Campus Nightmare

Wittgenstein were Stillman Awards 2009 TUESDAY, 10 NOVEMBER 2009




Julio César De León Barbero receiving the award from the hands of Giancarlo Ibárgüen S. Rector, while watching the secretary of the WMU, Ricardo Castillo A.
Photo by Luis Pedro Miron A.

government and social order: an individualistic perspective, is the title of the book which Julio Cesar De León Barbero received the Charles L. Stillman for the best book or treated at the University Francisco Marroquín on November 6, 2009, during a ceremony to honor the distinguished graduates of this university.
Julio Cesar De Leon
Barber is director of the Area of \u200b\u200bPhilosophy at the Henry Hazlitt, the WMU directs the Philosophy Seminar of the CHH.

were also awarded the trustee and exdecano of law, Eduardo Mayor, for his journal article titled The origin and rise of neo-socialist in Latin America, the historian Alejandro Gomez, Jose del Valle trial, a Benthamite in Central America and trustee and former director of the Institute of Political Studies and International Relations, Carroll Rodriguez for his column economic Ojalatería.

Prof. Julio H. Cole, Faculty of Economics, received an honorable mention for his article on Milton Friedman Income Inequity.
Charles L.
Awards Stillman Stillman are delivered by the Governing Board of the UFM, university professors, of any university in the country, they are the authors of the best research and newspaper columns on the philosophy of freedom and the economic analysis of law and politics.

Drinks That Get Rid Of Mucas

The USAC and ProReforma

The writer Adrian Zapata, published in Siglo XXI an article with the title: The USAC and constitutional reforms (27/10/2009) in which he makes reference to representatives of the University of San Carlos presented to the Legislative Committee of Congress in the audience granted to review the draft ProReforma.
Those who evacuated the audience were the Rector Estuardo Galvez and constitutional experts Arturo Sierra and Jorge Mario Garcia Laguardia.
We do not have the presentation by the audience who evacuated but what of that exposure Zapata tells us in his writing.
The first issue that deserves comment is the fact that three other people were taken to express ideas on behalf of all those who are somehow identified with the State University: students and workers. It is wrong to claim that it speaks for all those people (I assume, without driving statistics, which can easily exceed one hundred thousand) and, worse, that all these people say exactly the same views. But ... these are problems generated by a corporate-organizational spirit.
Zapata said that those who spoke at the hearing rejected the draft ProReforma wielding arguments to the effect of a historical, political and legal. Noted
To start a purely formal, seated Zapata: What Congress could not make changes to the Constitution because the ideological part of the same does not permit, in accordance with at the time by the Constituent Assembly. It is said that the project falls into what is called constitutional fraud.
is clear that the process of amendments to the Constitution should culminate corresponding to the popular consultation in which we have had two during the democratic period: 30 January 1994 to May 16, 1997. ProReforma
The project clearly adheres to the provisions of the Constitution and recognizes the need for the partial reform has the support of 2 / 3 of the members of Congress and be ratified in a referendum.
typing the so-called constitutional fraud is to ignore completely what about how ProReforma contains the draft.
Zapata continues to assert the following:
Similarly, pointed out the falsity of the statement poses ProReforma erroneously that violence and poverty will be eliminated by constitutional reform, when they really are a product of socio-economic structural conditions that would require profound changes in the prevailing economic model, characterized by inequality, exclusion, poverty production and concentration of wealth.
Is it indeed the approach ProReforma false? I think not. The authors and project promoters are fully aware of the system or economic model is what causes so much poverty in Guatemala. It is, in any case, a distributed system that has privileges to a few, based on the state protection to certain businesses, companies and individuals, which hampers investment of capital, which makes it extremely tortuous the path to open new businesses and enterprises, which punishes those production. ProReforma
course bearing in mind that this must be transformed, indeed, to be replaced following the example of companies which, in turn, left his place among the poorest countries adopting old principles as the foundation of social life. Remember to Holland, and, more recently, Hong Kong, Singapore and Estonia, etc.
course we need to change this system for another. Another, which does not protect private interests, he provides the existence of monopolies, not to punish force consumers to promote sectional interests.
Now, yes There is a vast difference between vision and the Carlist san ProReforma about crime (please, not violence, is simply crime). And is that the offender is not a product of "structures" that makes him and do what it is and what it does. Structuralism as a method for treating social phenomena eliminates the individual's responsibility for the consequences of their actions. Worse case of a structuralism inspired by Marxism as well known is the self determinism of the Marxist view of history and society.
To ProReforma is clear that crime (violation of the rights of others) should be pursued and punished as an economy or strong, or in a society whose standards of living are high people will cease to exist that violate the rules of coexistence. For this reason ProReforma calls for independence of the judiciary and it is assigned to the justice system the resources it needs to operate as it should operate.
The writer goes on to quote that: From a historical perspective, showed the time lag is to claim individual rights to the point of ignoring the development that they have been inspired by the doctrine of human rights guaranteed to them by a constant depth, making them more social.
also here there is a huge difference to be noted. While the speakers at the Carolina consider a delay to assert individual rights to life, property and freedom, ProReforma considers that the delay in the conditions of life in Guatemala is precisely the emphasis today is on the so-called "rights" social doctrine and in practice both are "rights" against the law.
doctrinally accepted that there can be no rights against the right and that is what are called social rights as to "provide" education, health, sports, art, dining solidarity, housing, money for sending children to school fertilizers, toys, fun, etc., about, you violated the right of others to your property and enjoy what is a product of their work.
But practice shows that the supremacy they have acquired the so-called social rights has led to the stagnation of economies, even those once healthy and prosperous, and not to mention the whirlpool of poverty that engulfs million in the third world. On the contrary, wherever the right to life, liberty and private property remain as the foundation of the legal system may see a capacity to generate wealth truly impressive. On the contrary, social rights have generated in the same United States of America the crisis we all know. Because no it is the cyclical crises of capitalism proposed by Marx but of results generated by the interest of governments to provide cheap housing for everyone. But the matter does not stop there must be added another folly: to grant public money to those who are in serious financial risks. If these false
social rights constitute a development, progress in the field of law should not lead to impoverishment in the stocks or destructive impact on the economy. What would we think, for example, if the field of medical advances are achieved deteriorate the health of the people instead of better? What do we deserve the que los avances en la química se tradujeran en medicamentos menos eficaces? Entonces ¿cómo puede hablarse de avance en la ciencia del derecho cuando los “nuevos” “derechos” sólo empantanan la generación de riqueza?
Las propuestas que se hacen deben ser parte de la solución no parte importante del problema. Afirmo lo anterior porque esa visión historicista del derecho es una herencia que nos ha hecho mucho mal. Califico de visión historicista del derecho a esa tradición jurídica que sostiene que los hombres debe hacerse las leyes que consideren necesarias en conformidad con el momento, con las circunstancias o, como se dice hoy, de acuerdo a la coyuntura.
El articulista también says USAC also recognizes the need to promote a deep and inclusive national debate, about whether or not changes are needed in the Constitution and, if so, which, with the purpose making the best possible way to supreme Status: the common good.
If there is already a previous goal to achieve: the so-called common good, then there really is not any discussion, this is only to discuss the strategy to achieve. To this must be added that bandied common good is indefinable, and always results in the promotion of individual interests, group, class or sector.
The false insistence on debate is evident in the statement of Zapata: The rejection of the proposal and the decision ProReforma promote debate in the terms described, are the substance of the positioning of the USACE.
Not surprisingly, neither the above statement and the attitude behind it. In this land our first dismisses the other and then promotes dialogue, first despises the thought of another and then call a roundtable discussion. In general is what I see, not only on the issue at hand, but about almost everything can be discussed: They hang tags and then attempt to debate. Whenever we forget the ideas, theories, hypotheses and concentrate all the strength to knock down the opponent, in damage and reject it.
Perhaps this attitude disguised folk academia and intelligentsia Bertrand Russell delivered his scathing response to the question "Why in the History of Philosophy makes no mention of Latin America? Russell said, because Latin America has not thought of.
An article last reference to Zapata and ensuring that it ends ... it requires a vision of state.
If changes to the constitution must be done keeping in mind that the State is the promoter of welfare and it is involved in the generation of wealth, whether to have as a goal a welfare state, whether to have an enormous faith and confidence in the state apparatus; ... then there will be changes but the same thing. There will be new but deepening political vices we have today. Innovations will not only the perpetuation and exacerbation of all the calamities that the State has caused it to rain on all Guatemalans. Precisely
ProReforma an essential principle is to maintain separate state society, not only in analysis but as a fact of which depart. The latter based on the different nature of the state and society. For if society is the free and voluntary association of human beings based on the division of labor, the state (or government) is the apparatus of coercion that guarantee the functioning of human cooperation. Another view does not fit. If men themselves try to do what is in the nature of the state, so we'll have is anarchy and "justice" into their own hands. But if the state intends to do what men in cooperation that will be inefficient state monopolies and the welfare state becomes a state tax, a burden rather than a help.
interventionism is the state guie the functions of some aspects of society, and socialism that the state intends to guide them all the functions of society, Marxism argues that all functions of society from becoming state functions. In any case or is confused society with the state or, at worst, the company merges with the state and all men would take decisions by themselves become a matter of government administration.
Guatemala has a history marked by steady state intervention in matters that concern only individual actors. This is reflected in formal education, the psychology of a Guatemalan political parties, training of professionals of all kinds, religious mentality in Catholic and some Protestant areas in the business world: We are unable to have confidence in ourselves, in our initiative, our efforts, our ability to succeed in work and productivity and rest more on what the government can do for us or what the government can give us.
This prevents us from telling the government: Do your part by ensuring the rule of law, administering justice promptly and effectively, protecting our property and our lives, giving us an environment to develop our daily activities, which we'll produce everything we all need to live.
But, of course, there are also those who understood these fundamental principles are dedicated to promoting action and state intervention because they live it, profit from that speech disguised as benevolence ("false philanthropy" Bastiat called it) thinking that they themselves could succeed in a scheme like the one we raised but others can not. This vision of society as divided into capable and incapable, and awkward working, prepared to survive and useless, they can proudly make your life and inept poor devils, is not only false but an insult to the human condition (so called Hannah Arendt) and those that are the subject of populist and demagogic.