Spend More On education, Less On Weapons

                      This post is a summary of three articles. The first with the incomplete title above was published in December 2021 at https://www.ncronline.org/news/vatican/pope-francis-2022-peace-message-spend-more-education-less-weapons. The second was published in December 2021 at  https://www.ncronline.org/news/vatican/pope-francis-2022-peace-message-spend-more-education-less-weapons. The third was published in April 2021 at  https://www.sipri.org/media/press-release/2021/world-military-spending-rises-almost-2-trillion-2020 

                     Pope Francis urged global leaders to spend more money on education and devote fewer resources to weapons in his 2022 World Day of Peace message. "It is high time, then, that governments develop economic policies aimed at inverting the proportion of public funds spent on education and on weaponry," the pope writes in a message released on December 17th. "The pursuit of a process of international disarmament can only prove beneficial for the development of peoples and nations, freeing up financial resources better used for healthcare, schools, and so forth," he continued. In his introduction to the three-page text, the pope laments that despite efforts aimed at fostering the conditions for peace, "the deafening noise of war and conflict is intensifying. The pope continues by offering a grim assessment of the state of world affairs. "Diseases of pandemic proportions are spreading, the effects of climate change and environment degradation are worsening, the tragedy of hunger is increasing, and an economic model based on individualism rather than on solidary sharing continues to prevail," he writes. Francis goes on to argue that education must be viewed as an investment, rather than an expenditure, which he says is vital for promoting integral human development. Such investment, the pope says, "make individuals more free and responsible, and they are essential for the defense and promotion of peace." Greater educational training, he continues, will help facilitate more dignified employment opportunities in the labor market, which he says will also help counter the rise of violence and crime around the globe.                                                                                                                                         Teaching and education are the foundations of a cohesive civil society capable of generating hope, prosperity and progress. Military expenditures, on the other hand, have increased beyond the levels at the end of the cold war and they seem certain to grow. It is my hope that investment in education will also be accompanied by greater efforts to promote the culture of care, which, in the face of social divisions and unresponsive institutions, could become a common language working to break down barriers and build bridges. The Covid-19 pandemic has negatively affected the labour market, which was already facing multiple challenges. In a particular way, the impact of the crisis on the informal economy, which often involves migrant workers, has been devastating. Many of the latter are not even recognized by national legislation. Currently only one third of the world's population of working age enjoys a system of social protection. The answer to this is an expansion of dignified employment opportunities. In light of this, there is a need to promote, welcome and support initiatives that, on all levels, urge companies to respect human rights, raising awareness not only on the part of institutions, but also among consumers. Here, politics is called to play an active role by promoting a fair balance between economic freedom and justice. As we seek to combine our efforts in order to emerge from the pandemic, I renew my thanks to all those who continue to work with generosity in the areas of education, safety and protection of rights.                                                                                                 Total global military expenditure increased 2.6% from 2019, according to new data published by Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI). The five biggest spenders in 2020, which together accounted for 62% of global military expenditure, were the U.S., China, India, Russia and the U.K. Military spending by China grew for the 26th consecutive year. "We can say with some certainty that the pandemic did not have a significant impact on global military in 2020. It remains to be seen whether countries will maintain this level of military spending through a second year of the pandemic." Said Diego Lopes, Researcher with the SIPRI. In 2020 U.S. military expenditure reached an estimated $778 billion, representing an increase of 4.4% over 2019. As the world's largest military spender, the U.S. accounted for 39% of total military spending. China's military expenditure, the second highest in the world, is estimated to have totalled $252 billion in 2020. This represents an increase of 76% over the decade 2011-20. Nearly all members of the NATO saw their military burden rise in 2020. France, for example, the 8th biggest spender globally, passed the 2% of its GDP on its military for the first time since 2009. The U.K. became the 5th largest spender in 2020. The U.K.'s military spending was 2.9% higher than in 2019. Germany increased its spending by 5.2% in 2020, making it the 7th largest spender in 2020. Military expenditure in South America fell by 2.1% to $43.5 billion in 2020. The decrease was largely due to a 3.1% drop in spending by Brazil, the South America's largest military spender.

Human Rights Day - 2021

                 This post is a summary of four articles. The first was published at   https://www.un.org/en/observances/human-rights-day. The second was published at https://www.republicworld.com/world-news/rest-of-the-world-news/human-rights-day-2021-date-theme-significance-famous-quotes-and-all-you-need-to-know.html. The third was published at https://www.ninodelacaridad.com/why-should-we-celebrate-human-rights-day/. The fourth was published at https://humanrightshouse.org/we-stand-for/human-rights-defenders    

                                              This year'sHuman Rights Day theme relates to 'Equality' and Article 1 of the Universal Declaration of Human rights (UDHR) - "All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights." The principles of equality and non-discrimination are at the heart of human rights. Equality is aligned with the 2030 agenda and with the U.N. approach set out in the document. This includes addressing and finding solutions for deep-rooted forms of discrimination that have affected the most vulnerable people in societies. Pervasive inequalities and discrimination are human rights violations and among the greatest global challenges of our time. Addressing them effectively requires measures grounded in human rights, renewed political commitment and participation of all, especially those most affected. We need a new social contract which more fairly shares power and opportunities and sets the foundations of a sustainable human rights-based economy. Human rights have the power to tackle the root causes of conflict and crisis, by addressing grievances, eliminating inequalities and exclusion and allowing people to participate in decision-making that affect their lives. Societies that protect and promote human rights for everyone are more resilient societies and better equipped to weather crises.                                                                                                                                                                                  Every year across the world, Human Rights Day is observed on December 10 to increase awareness about the fact that every person on the planet has fundamental rights. The day is marked to promote the individuals rights. Amid the COVID pandemic crisis, Human Rights Day has become significantly important to urge for erradication of exacerbated poverty, increased inequality, and other societal evils. The U.N. also encourages governments throughout the world to establish equal opportunity for all individuals on this day and to protect their rights. The humanitarian agencies also have the authority to investigate and offer suggestions in cases of human rights breaches. "human rights are not privileged conferred by the government. They are human being's entitled by virtue of their humanity,"  said Mother Teresa.                                                                                                                                                                          Human Rights Day is celebrated every year on December 10th, it was established in 1948, as a way to commemorate that we need to continue striving towards making sure that everyone across the globe is granted fundamental human rights. Now you may be wondering how you can celebrate this day, as it isn't one that we can celebrate in a traditional way. Despite this inability to celebrate it like a normal holiday, there are many ways that we can celebrate this day, such as acknowledge the rights that we have in our country that others may not have, looking at the work that charitable organizations do in our community to help better the lives of others. The next thing that we can do to help celebrate this day is help to make a change. Get involved in a movement, whether it be something small in your community or something larger like participating in a protest for something you care about. Nothing we do on this day has to be large and impacting the entire world, but everything we do has an impact on the world around us, and everything help to promote the celebration on this day.                                                                                                                                                                                                            Human rights defenders work to improve societies and contribute to peace and democracy. They are agents for positive change and development. They are key in protecting against human rights violations. Anyone, regardless of their occupation, can be a human rights defender, they are identified primarily by what they do rather than by their profession. Some human rights defenders are professional, lawyers working on human rights cases, journalists or media workers, etc. Other human rights defenders are not earning revenue from their work in favour of human rights. "I deeply admire the courage and sacrifice of human rights defenders. These individuals and organisations are our eyes and ears and conscience," said U.N. Secretary General Antonio Guterres. Threats, intimidation, attacks, and restrictions against human rights defenders are increasing in many parts of the world. The context is that while the situation has deteriorated for defenders, international standards have been strengthened in recent years. The U.N. adopted, by consensus, a 2017 resolution aimed at celebrating the essential role and work of human rights defenders. These trends are of course connected: The more threats and restrictions, the greater the need for a response from the international community. 

50th Birthday of Julian Assange

                   A little more than 5 months ago, precisely on July 3rd, the founder of Wikileaks completed 50 years-old. This post is a tribute to him. Unfortunately this week we had a bad news about him, he can be extradite to U.S. I am his fan since 2010. Like me, he did an activism for transparency for governments and privacy for individuals. In May 2011, I put in this blog an interview he gave to a Brazilian magazine, you can read it here  https://thepeopleteacher.blogspot.com/2011/10/jump-to-democracy.html. We all have to fight against his prison. His crime was to publish at Wikileaks serious violations of human rights, and corruption evidences, something that we all should do. Instead of prison, he deserves a compensation for his unfair incarceration. This post is a summary of the article published at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Julian_Assange

                    Julian Paul Assange is an Australian editor, publisher and activist who founded Wikileaks in 2006. Wikileaks came to international attention in 2010 when it published a series of leaks provided by U.S. Army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning. These leaks included the Baghdad airstrike collateral murder video (April 2010), the Afghanistan war logs (July 2010), etc. After the 2010 leaks, the U.S. government launched a criminal investigation into Wikileaks. In November 2010, Sweden issued an international arrest warrant for Assange over allegations of sexual misconduct. Assange said the allegationswere a pretext for his extradition from Sweden to the U.S. over his role in the publication of secret American documents. He took refuge in the Embassy of Ecuador in London in June 2012. Swedish prosecutors dropped their investigations in 2019. During the 2016 U.S. election campaign, Wikileaks published confidential Democratic Party emails, showing that the party's national committee favoured Hillary Clinton over her rival Bernie Sanders in the primaries. In April 2019, Assange's asylum was withdrawn following a series of disputes with the Ecuadorian authorities. He was found guilty of breaching the Bail Act and sentenced to 50 weeks in prison. The U.S. government unsealed an indictment against Assange, related to the leaks provided by Manning. Editors from newspapers, including The Washington Post and The New York Times, as well as press freedom organisations, criticised the government's decision, characterising it as an attack on the freedom of the press. On December 2021 Britain's court of Appeal ruled that Assange can be extradited to the U.S. to face the charges. Assange has been confined in Belmarsh prison in London since April 2019. Julian Assange was born in Townsville, Queensland, to Christine Ann Hawkins and John Shipton, a builder. The couple separated before he was born. When he was a year old, his mother married Brett Assange, an actor with whom she ran a small theatre company and whom Julian regards as his father. By the time he reached his mid-teens, he with his mother and a half-brother settled in Melbourne. In 1987, aged 16, Assange began hacking under the name "Mendax". In September 1991, Assange was discovered hacking into the Melbourne terminal of Nortel, a Canadian telecommunications corporation. In December 1996, he pleaded guilty to 24 charges and he was ordered to pay reparations and was released on a good behaviour bond. Assange studied programming, mathematics and physics at University of Melbourne, but did not complete a degree. In 1993, Assange used his computing skills to help the Victoria Police to prosecute individuals responsible for publishing and distributing child pornography. In 1996, he moderated the AUCRYPTO forum, a website "giving advice on computer security" that had 5,000 subscribers. In 1998, he co-founded the company Earthmen Technology. Assange registered the domain Leaks.org in 1999, but didn't do anything with it. He published a patent granted to the N.S.A. in August 1999, for voice-data harvesting technology: "This patent should worry people. Everyone's overseas phone calls are or may soon be tapped, transcribed and archived in the bowels of an unaccountable foreign spy agency." he said. Assange and others established Wikileaks in 2006. From 2007 to 2010 Wikileaks published internet censorship lists, classified media from anonymous sources. These including revelations about drone strikes in Yemen, corruption across the Arab world, extrajudicial executions by Kenyan police, 2008 Tibetan unrest in China, and the Petrogate oil scandal in Peru. The material Wikileaks published between 2006 and 2009 attracted various degrees of international attention, but after it began publishing documents supplied by U.S. Army intelligence analyst Chelsea Manning, Wikileaks became a household name. Also Wikileaks published a quarter of a million U.S. diplomatic cables, known as the "Cablegate" files, in November 2010. The files showed U.S. espionage against U.N. and other world leaders, and exposed corruption in countries throughout the world as documented by U.S. diplomats. Since his arrest in April 2019 in London, after examining Assange, Nils Melzer, from U.N. concluded that  "in addition to physical ailments, Assange showed all symptoms typical for prolonged exposure to psychological torture, including extreme stress, chronic anxiety and intense psychological trauma. In a later interview, Melzer criticised the termination by Ecuador Assange's asylum status and citizenship without any form of due process and he said that the U.S. and U.K. were trying to make an example of Assange. He also accused some journalists of "spreading abusive and distorted narratives." In September 2020, an open letter in support of Assange was sent to Boris Johnson with the signatures of two current heads of state and approximately 160 other politicians. The following month, U.S. Representatives Tulsi Gabbard and Thomas Massie, introduced a resolution opposing the extradition of Assange. In December 2020, German human rights commissioner Barbel Kofler cautioned the U.K. about the need to consider Assange's psysical and mental health before deciding to extradite him. In July 2016, artist and activist Ai Weiwei, musicians Patti smith, Brian Eno, and PJ Harley, scholars Noam Chomsky and Yanis Varoufakis and filmmaker Ken Loach were amongst those attending an event in support of Assange. In January 2021, Australian journalist John Pilger stated that were Assange to be extradited "no journalist who challenge power will be safe."

Policy Priorities to Overcome the Middle-Income Trap in Latin America

            This post is a summary of the book published in September 2017 with the incomplete title above at  https://read.oecd-ilibrary.org/development/no-sympathy-for-the-devil_26b78724-en#page2. The second was published at  https://www.periodicos.unimontes.br/index.php/economiaepoliticaspublicas/article/view/4063/3973

             The middle-income trap, whereby GDP growth slows down once a country approaches an intermediate level of development, is particularly persistent in Latin America. Latin American countries have been unable to reduce significantly the income gap with advanced economies and reach high-income status. The few regional exceptions are Chile and Uruguay. This paper joins a crucial debate on development and policy prioritisation. What is holding back some countries which have been middle-income since the 1950s: weak productivity, high inequality, bad governance? A challenging aspect of growth in emerging markets has been the lack of progress in productivity. The economic literature links the prevalence of growth slowdowns to the difficult of adjusting the economy to the sources of growth that become more important after reaching middle-income levels. Growth in low-income countries arises essentially through labour reallocation from low- to high-productivity activities. On the other hand, arriving at middle-income levels usually requires new engines of economic growth. Economies that are successful in transitioning to these activities have a set of requirements: large pool of skilled labour, favourables rates of investment, a system of national innovation and a macroeconomic and institutional environment conducive to entrepreneurial activity, that are not easy to achieve, much less to co-ordinate. The empirical literature on development coined in the mid-2000s the term "middle-income trap", as developing economies struggle to adjust to new sources of growth after reaching middle-income levels. This "trap" represents a challenging scenario for Latin America. Our results show that countries interested in reaching the high-income range should focus on the following areas: governance (rule of law and political stability), education (quality of secondary education and tertiary education attainment), investment, capabilities, finance (liquidity in the stock market and domestic credit) and taxation.                                                                                                                                                                       A country falls into the middle-income trap by raising its per capita income ( and their labor costs) without, however, increasing proportionally its productivity. When it reaches this stage, production costs become high to compete with low-income countries in markets of intensive hand labor. On the other hand, it does not organize its supply side based on productivity gains, higher added value and higher technological content to compete with more developed countries. Squeezed between these two poles, the economy in question is threatened by stagnation or regression in its level of industrialization. For a poor country to reach the middle-income level is relatively easier than jumping on the stage of middle-income to high-income. To achieve a higher level of income this country should incorporate new skills in its work force, which requires a higher level of qualification, better infrastructure and social cohesion around a national development project. Looking at the experience of countries that have fallen into the trap of middle-income, it appears that Latin America is the region in which this phenomenon manifests itself most dramatically. The lack of competitiveness of the Brazilian economy is not the work of a government, it is a reflection of the structural problems. The poor quality of Brazilian education, it is not only related to lack of investment, which does not cease to be true, but a culture that was created in the midst of unsophisticated production processes, such as large-scale tropical agriculture. Brazil has a percentage well below the OECD average in terms of the amount of people with higher education. The absence of Brazilian companies in segments of greater technological complexity. It is clear that more effort in science and tech education can mean an improvement in the levels of productivity of a country. However, when the effort of management training does not occur simultaneously to a planned development process, the economy tends to waste their human resources. Spending on R&D in Brazil are only 1% of GDP, against 4.4% in Israel, 3.7% in South Korea, 3.6% in Japan and 2.7% in the U.S.A. By now, only 12% of the population between 25 and 34 have a university degree, compared with 63% in Korea, 56% in Japan and 40% in the U.S.A. The percentage of engineers in the total of graduates is only 4%, compared to 23% in Korea. Most public schools in Brazil are poorly equipped and require investments to receive students on a full-time basis. Only 0.6% has science lab and 15% have library and I.T. classroom. Another problem that hampers the competitiveness of Brazilian enterprises is the tax system. The Brazilian tax system is one of the most complicated in the world. A company in Brazil spends on average 2.600 hours per year with tax red tape, against 243 in India and 318 in China. It is not easy to a country become a rich nation. It is difficult to overcome the middle-income trap without great efforts. We can change the future but it is impossible to get rid of the past. To make matters worse the national elites have never had a clear project of independent development of the country, behaving almost always as minority partners from outside interests. To overcome the middle-income trap is necessary a strong industry that produces manufactured innovative products with higher added value, demand better educated workers, and creates better jobs in the industry.     

Brazil's Lost Decade - Part II

               The last decade 2011-2020 was not easy to the Brazilian people. Governments after governments in Brasilia only gave us disappointment. We all Brazilians must fight for a better country because this country has everything to become a prosperous place: one of the largest area of cultivable land of the world, one of the largest potential of renewable energy of the world, one of the 5 biggest  world's productors of: iron ore, niobium, manganese, tantalum, tin, bauxite, one of the most peaceful relationships with others nations of the world (no need to spend money in arms), one of the largest tax revenue of the world (around 33% of GDP, the government has money to spend), the tenth-largest oil-producing country in the world. So, we all should agree that what Brazil need is more investment in education and in projects that can release its potential of development. We know it is not easy to overcome the middle income trap, but we can't accept low GDP growth and Brazil stuck decades in this social and economic situation. This post is a summary of four artcles. The first article was published in May 2017 at file:///C:/Users/User/Downloads/ANDRE-NASSIF-BRAZILIAN-KEYNESIAN-REVIEW-3-1-1st-SEMESTER-2017.pdf. The second was published at     https://www.bloombergquint.com/politics/brazil-risks-a-lost-decade-without-fiscal-reforms-oecd-says. The third was published at https://blogs.iadb.org/ideas-matter/en/another-lost-decade-for-latin-america-and-the-caribbean/. The fourth was published at   https://www.scielo.br/j/rep/a/bdcXKRCLxyR54pRRkQsXjNs/?lang=en

               The Brazilian economic recession was considered the deepest in Brazil's economic history. Between 2015 and 2016, Brazil accumulated a contraction of 7.5% in its real GDP, representing a dramatic accumulated fall in its per capita income of 9.2% in just these two years. It is not surprising that such an economic downturn has severely worsened social indicators in Brazil. The roots of the current Brazilian crisis are associated with both structural and shor-term causes. The main structural cause is related to the premature deindustrialization of the Brazilian economy, from 2005 to 2016, the share of the manufacturing sector in total GDP was reduced from 15.3% to 9.8%. Most brazilians economists agree with the importance of a long-term fiscal adjustment, believing it to be an important instrument not only for restoring confidence, but also for augmenting the room to maneuver so that Brazil's Central Bank can bring high real interest rates to lower levels compatible with international standards. The main pressure on the increase in public sector gross debt in Brazil after 2015 has been coming from the jump in interest rates payments. In an environment of recession, the best option to quickly reduce unemployment rates as well as reactivate private aggregate demand would have been an increase of public investment in infrastructure.                                                                                                                                                                                          With debt levels soaring following the government's pandemic-driven aid package, sustained growth hinges on fiscal adjustments and compliance with public expenditure rules, the OECD warned in an economic survey of Brazil.  Speaking from Paris, OECD Secretary General Angel Gurria, cautioned that the challenge ahead was "spending better, rather than spending more." President Jair Bolsonaro's economic stimulus program is widely credited for saving Brazil from a deeper recession and driving poverty down while the coronavirus raged. But pushed public debt to over 94% of GDP, has left markets on edge as the leader has tried to extend part of the aid. The OECD cited concerns with productivity, efficiency in spending, corruption and rising inequality. The report also called on Brazil to increase efforts to combat deforestation. "Many of Brazil's institutional and policy settings were made for a world that is very different from the challenges of today," the report said.                                                                                                                                   The Covid-19 pandemic has unleashed a health and economic crisis. Countries are providing exceptional support to families and firms. Debt ratios are rising. Getting fiscal policy right and maintaining financial stability will be key to ensuring a return to growth. Indeed, most countries are caught between the objectives of providing relief and maintaining economic recovery, and the need to adjust to halt the rise in debt due to exceptional spending and a fall in revenues. A V-shaped recovery would help, reversing revenue losses. The next years are going to be challenging as countries seek to boost growth and maintain fiscal sustainability. The risks are very real. The war against the virus is not yet won. Getting the fiscal policies right and maintain financial stability will be critical for a health recovery.                                                                                                                                                                               The Brazilian economy has shown low resilience to grow since the 2015-2016 recession. The cumulative decline in the biennium is far from being offset by the 1.1% growth rate observed in 2017 and in 2018. Besides, these disapponting results have a direct impact on the labor market. The year 2018 registered more than 12 million unemployed in the country with increasing precariousness in the creation of new jobs. In this paper, we will argue that in order to understand the difficulty of the recovery of the Brazilian economy one must take into account the process of premature deindustrialization observed in the 1990s and 2000s. The loss of importance of the manufacturing sector in the productive structure has important implications for the economy's aggregate productivity performance, because it limit the positive spillovers of productivity gains from the manufacturing industry throughout the economy. In the absence of these sustained gains, long-term growth is jeopardized. 

Brazil's Lost Decade

                      This post is a summary of the article with the incomplete title above published in August of 2021   https://www.jacobinmag.com/2021/08/brazil-lost-decade-economy-capitalism-neoliberalism-far-right-politics. The second was published in July 2020 at   https://atalayar.com/en/content/brazil-heading-lost-decade. The third was published in May 2019 at  https://www.bbc.com/news/business-48386415

                    In Brazil's worst decade in more than a century, unemployment, precarious and informal work, poverty, and inequality are all on the rise. A recent issue of the Economist magazine dedicated a long special feature to Brazil's economy and it termed its "dismal" performance over last decade. Among the root causes of the country's current predicament, the article argued, was the recent governments' inability to enact adequate neoliberal reform. The diagnosis from a magazine known as a champion of free-market liberalism, is by no means surprising, but does the analysis hold under scrutiny? While, indeed, the last decade in Brazil has seen tragic economic decline, this is by no means due to a lack of neoliberal orthodoxy. The last ten years should be seen as another "lost decade" for the country, the first having occurred in the 1980s. Over the course of the last decade alone, Brazil has experienced two recessions, one from 2014 to 2016, and another beginning in 2020. Between 2011 and 2020, Brazil's GDP grew by an average of just 0.27% a year. Data from 2020 shows that the country's GDP is 6.4% lower than it was in 2014 and its GDP per capita has decreased by 10.8 % in the same period. Brazil is significantly poorer than it was ten years ago. Brazil is de-industrializing at a rapid rate. At its peak in 1985, manufacturing accounted for 36% of GDP. After the blows of the past decade, industrial production is 12.4% lower than it was in 2011. As of 2020, only 11.3% of GDP is derived from the manufacturing sector. The proportion of high and medium-high tech in Brazil's industrial exports has also regressed from 43% in 2000 to only 32% in 2019, the lowest point since 1995. By contrast, exports in general have doubled since 2000, with China as the main buyer. For the most part, it is "agribusiness" that accounts for these exports. Technologically advanced, agribusiness has meant a massive spike in migration from rural to urban areas. Data shows that underemployment has leaped from 14.9% in 2014 to 28.7% in 2020. All this is occurring at a time when Brazil's wealthy are growing richer. Between 2010 and 2019, the annual profits of the four major banks combined more than doubled, jumping from 38.91 to 81.51 billion reais. In the context of such a debilitated economy, progressives in Brazil are in search of a solution. Developmentalists make the case for the "return of the state"; that is, a return of the state's capacity to intervene forcefully in the economy. But despite the good intentions, this argument is often based on diagnoses that understimate some of the deeper causes of the economic situation. Developmentalists of all stripes cab be prone to paying insufficient attention to the structural problems of Brazil's economy: its subordinate position in the international division of labor and production, its chronic shortage of public and private investments, its stagnant productivity and low-skilled labor force.                                                                                                                                                           Brazil, the giant with a bright future that never arrives, will close in 2020 the worst decade in more than a century, after spending seven years trapped in a maze of political and economic crises currently aggravated by the pandemic. The South America giant will have its second "lost decade" in the last 40 years, after that of 1981-1990, despite having huge hydrocarbon reserves and having one of the most thriving agricultural sectors on the planet. A t the beginning of the decade, Brazil, then governed by Lula, aspired to become a world power. Like other emerging countries, the country hardly felt the global crisis of 2008, its economy adavanced by 7.5% in 2010 thanks to the boom in raw materials. Between 2011 and 2013 growth was more moderate, with a real average rate of 3% per year, but in 2014, the economy began to show signs of weakness. The economic meltdown came in 2015 and 2016, when GDP collapsed by 7%, while in the following three years the recovery has been slow and gradual, with growth of about 1% per year. The world, meanwhile, grew between 2011 and 2020 an annual average of nearly 3% thanks to the emerging economies, led by China. Latin America will close 2020 with a average growth rate of 0.4% over the period. "The weak performance of Latin America is linked to the poor performance of Brazil, whose weight in the region's economy has been 34.5% in the decade", said the economist Marcel Balassiano from FGV.                                                                                                                                      In the previous decade, Brazil was lauded, along with India and China, as one of the emerging economies with fast rates of growth that would surpass developed economies by 2050. The economic performance of this decade, however, suggest Brazil does not belong in that league. A crippling two-year recession in 2015 and 2016 saw the country's economy contract by almost 7%. Economic recovery has been sluggish. In 2017 and 2018, the economy grew at a meage pace of 1.1% a year. And there is still more bad news: Brazilian workers are the ones paying the prices. The number of unemployed people has increased from 7.6 million in 2012 to 13.4 million this year. The official unemployment survey shows that 28.3 million people are underutilised, which means they are either not working or working less than they could. Wages are barely keeping up with inflation. Since the beginning of Brazil's recession in 2015, prices have gone up by 25%. So why is Brazil in such a mess in the first place? The main consensus among market analysts, is that the country started spending too much money around 2013. Since then, one of the main thermometers of Brazil's economy has been the fiscal deficit. During the boom years, Brazil had a debt which was 51% the size of its economy. The growing fiscal deficit raised the debt level to 77.1%. The government says that if nothing is done, the country's debt will be the size of its entire economy by 2023.

Democracy and Human Rights: A Pathway to Peace and Development

                                 This post is a summary of the book with the title above published at https://um.fi/documents/35732/48132/democracy_and_human_rights_a_pathway_to_peace_and_development.pdf/0b5b0d3a-a251-92a7-8113-14ca88603d01?t=1560450252015. And an article published at  https://www.weduglobal.org/wcontent/uploads/2016/02/SUU_KYI_CULTURE_OF_PEACE_AS08.pdf

                       The most important and best known document which concerns human rights is the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) of 1948. The declaration has led to the conclusion of a host of international human rights agreements. Its core message is that human rights are inherent to all people and neither the state nor any other can take them away from an individual. The UDHR covers the principal human rights: the civil and political rights and so-called economic, cultural and social rights. Civil rights safeguard all persons their personal sphere of freedom, in which the public authorities may not interfere. Political rights ensure individuals the right of participation in voluntary political and social activities. The principle of the universality and integral nature of human rights was confirmed in the Human Rights World Conference in Vienna in 1993. A number of countries treat their citizens unequally. Freedom of speech, for example, may be restricted or some are prevented from participating in elections. It is typical of undemocratic systems to suppress the activities of NGOs, to restrict the freedom of the press and to conduct unfair elections. It may thus be very hard to exercise one's power of influence in society. Democracy lays a foundation for social stability and equilibrium. Stable and peaceful conditions, for their part, consitute a prerequisite for economic growth and development. Free elections and other democratic ways of action do not, however, as such, guarantee an improving economy. For the developing countries to manage to break out of the poverty trap, more equitable world trade and support from rich nations are required. Elections represent a vital part of the democratisation process of a country. Fair and genuinely elections give citizens the chance to influence the future of their country and area of residence. In the developing countries. outside elections observers are often used to ensure fair elections. The U.N. and its special development agencies represent a significant channel of development cooperation assistance. The promotion of human rights and democracy plays a major role in the operation of the U.N. system. According to the U.N. Development Programme, U.N.D.P., respect for human rights and promotion of good governance are essentially instrumental to development. Respect for individuals' human rights is traditional practice of the E.U., and democracy is an integral part of their decision-making procedures. All framework agreements related to development cooperation made by the E.U. include a statement which requires compliance with the principles of democracy, human rights and good governance. Cooperation can be suspended in case of a grave infringiment of the principles of the statement. The E.U. can also influence the developing countries' human rights policies through trade policy measures, since it is possible to take human rights issues into account when customs relief is granted to the developing countries by the E.U. Such benefits can be cancelled on account of continuing and flagrant human rights violations.                                                                                                                               The question of empowerment is central to both culture and development. It decides who has the means of imposing on a nation or society their view of what constitutes culture and development and who determines what practical measures can be taken. The more totalitarian a system the more power will be concentrated in the hands of the ruling elite and the more culture and development will be used to serve narrow interests. Culture thus is dynamic and broad. But when it is bent to serve narrow interests it become static and its exclusive aspects come to the fore and it assumes coercive overtones. The "national culture" can become a bizarre graft of selected historical incidents and distorted values intended to justify the actions of those in power. Many authoritarian governments wish to appear in the forefront of modern progress but are reluctant to institute genuine change. It is precisely because of the cultural diversity of the world that it is necessary for different nations and peoples to agree on those basic human values which will act as a unifying factor. In fact the values that democracy and human rights seek to promote can be found in many cultures. Human  beings the world over need freedom and security that they may be able to realize their full potential. Support for the desirability of strong government and dictatorship can also be found in all cultures. The desire to dominate and the tendency to adulate the powerful are also common human traits arising out of a desire for security. A nation may choose a system that leaves the protection of the freedom and security of the many dependent on the inclinations of the empowered few; or it may choose institutions and practices that will suffucuently empower individuals and organizations to protect their own freedom and security. The choice will decide how far a nation will progress along the road to human development. Governments must find news ways of enabling their people to participate more in government and allow them much greater influence on the decisions that affect their lives. Unless this is done, the tide of people rising aspirations will inevitably clash with inflexible systems, leading to anarchy. A rapid democratic transition and a strengthening of the institutions of civil society are the only appropriate responses. The basic requirement of a genuine democracy is that the people should be empowered to be able to participate in the governance of their country. Without this democratic institutions will be but empty shells incapable of reflecting the aspirations of the people and unable to withstand the encroachment of authoritarianism.