Midland Alan 42 Multi

The book Xavier Pipitone and Monica Di Bari (Arianna Editrice) explores the reality of the big supermarket chains in Italy. The first part of the text is a guided tour through the divisions of a center or "district" Commercial Consumer: food, food, technology, DIY and multiplex cinema. A careful analysis of large retail chains such as Ipercoop, Esselunga, Carrefour, Auchan, McDonald's, Mediaworld, Lidl and Ikea, highlights the trade policies, monitoring sales and inappropriate for a responsible consumer sensitive to social, environmental and progressive disappearance of all small businesses di vendita al dettaglio vicino casa. La seconda parte del libro propone delle alternative concrete già sperimentate con successo in Italia: i gruppi di acquisto solidale, i piccoli mercati auto-organizzati, le pratiche lente e gustose del cibo locale. Infine, non mancano consigli pratici e facili da applicare, nella vita di tutti i giorni, per uno stile di vita sobrio, semplice e sostenibile, in una logica di decrescita, con la riduzione dei consumi indotti e superflui al fine di promuovere un’economia in piccola scala e localistica. Una lettura indispensabile per tutti i consumatori, operatori e piccole imprese che quotidianamente si relazionano con la moderna e grande distribuzione organizzata. Per comprendere i retroscena delle grandi catene distributive e venire fuori dal controllo psicologico che la moderna distribuzione esercita sulle nostre scelte di consumo.

How Long Does The Treatment Last For Leukemia?

Recensione: Roberto Esposito, Communitas
Einaudi, Torino 2006, pagg. 163, euro 16,50
Nel film The Village, del regista indiano M. Night Shyamalan, una comunità arcaica vive in pace al suo interno, ma esternamente minacciata da «creature che non si possono nominare». Alla fine del film, si scopre che questa “paura” è stata inventata dagli anziani del villaggio per proibire ai giovani di allontanarsi, in quanto la comunità si trova, in realtà, nel XXI secolo dentro una riserva recintata, protetta, no-fly, out of modernity and progress. In contrast, in resembling the Amish community in the United States there is rumspringa (jumping around), namely the practice of pushing kids, after a strict upbringing, to experience the world "English": women and engines, sex, alcohol and rock'n'roll. As a result, young people will have to decide whether to become American citizens or members of the community: most of them return home. A free choice because "the true freedom - Slavoj Zizek tells us - if the boys would only be informed and educated on all the other alternative [...] the truly free choice is one where I do not choose only between two or more options within a predetermined set of coordinates, but I choose to change this same set of coordinates. " The liberal ideology ever gives new freedom, following the demolition of traditional forms of stability, adopted as opportunities for enhancement of the human personality, but in fact are part of that modernizing process that immunizes the forms of association in general and in particular community life, including the state, to spread the ideology of the person. Hence, it is inevitable to ask whether the concept of person is attributable to all human beings or whether there is "a rebirth - continued Zizek - the old distinction between human rights and citizen's rights? We are on the one hand rights that belong to all members of the human species (to be respected even in the case of homo sacer) and all the other more restricted rights of citizens (those whose status is regulated by law) ?. At this, try to answer Robert Edwards with his latest philosophical research, in the book Third person. Political life and philosophy of the impersonal, published by Einaudi, by which means un'ineffettuabilità rights, including the right to life, with the growing gap between the statement of principle and actual practice. In addition, before the widespread idea that the category of person goes to fill the historical gap, still open between man and citizen, Edwards thinks that the "person" does not wake up at all the applicability of human rights because while it heals the rift opened in 1789 by the French Revolution, on the other hand produces a split between law and life. Consequently, the failure of human rights policy is due to the strengthening of the ideology of the person as opposed to nell'immunitas communitas. In this scenario, is part of the earlier work of Roberto Esposito's book Communitas. Origin and destiny of the community, published by Einaudi, and here the subject of review. The starting point is etymological: communitas is a contraction of the proposition cum con il sostantivo munus, che significa sia dono sia dovere, ovvero un debito di riconoscenza che unisce gli uni nei confronti degli altri. Quindi, un insieme di persone, non unite da specifiche proprietà, ma vincolate da obbligazioni reciproche all’interno di una comunità aperta, rispettosa delle differenze, impropria e unita dal debito del «ti devo qualcosa, ma non mi devi qualcosa». La singolarità di questa idea filosofica consiste nell’origine dell’umanità fatta da legami sociali smembrati, nel tempo, dal processo immunizzante della modernità: immunitas VS communitas. «La comunità – ci spiega il professore Esposito – significa essere consapevoli che non si è individui, che non si è soli. C’è altro dentro e fuori di sé. […] se la comunità ci è appartenuta come la nostra radice più propria, possiamo – e anzi dobbiamo – ritrovarla, o riprodurla, secondo la sua essenza originaria». Il libro è strutturato in cinque capitoli (nonché dall’introduzione Niente in comune e l’appendice Nichilismo e comunità), che corrispondono a cinque grandi filosofi e relativi paradigmi interpretativi: Thomas Hobbes e la paura; Jean-Jacques Rousseau e la colpa; Immanuel Kant e la legge; Martin Heidegger e l’estasi; Georges Bataille e l’esperienza. A questo punto, possiamo agevolmente iniziare un piccolo esperimento mentale immaginando i cinque philosophers, side by side, in discussing the "question of the community." Hobbes: "The companies have large and lasting mutual originated not from the benevolence of men, but by mutual fear [...] men's natural passion for each other are offensive [...] in the position of the gladiators who are betting with their arms and staring each other [...] Overcoming those in front is always happiness. And leave the track, is to die [...] the way that brings a competitor to the attainment of their desire is to kill, subdue, supplant, or repel each other. " Rousseau: "The intolerant Hobbes is the man; intolerance is the war of humanity. The society of intolerance is similar to that of demons: you agree only to worry [...] devour in good conscience. [...] The most beautiful form of existence for us is the one made of relationships and shared, and our true self is not alone in us. " Kant: 'But to point to think, if we thought as it were in community with others, to whom our thoughts to them share with us their? ". Heidegger: "On the basis of this in-the-world" with "the world is always already what I share with others. The world of Being is con-mondo. L’in-essere è un con-essere con gli Altri. L’esser-in-sé intramondano degli Altri è un con-Esserci». Bataille: «considerare come legge il fatto che gli esseri umani non sono uniti se non da lacerazioni o da ferite: tale nozione possiede di per sé una certa forza logica. Se degli elementi si combinano allo scopo di formare un insieme, ciò si avvera facilmente quando ciascuno di loro perde in una lacerazione della sua integrità una parte del proprio essere a vantaggio dell’essere comuniale». Con questi pensatori, il concetto di comunità conosce una nuova linea di riflessione e come spiega Francesco Fistetti, autore di Comunità edito dal Mulino, «incrociando il tema heideggeriano del Mit-sein (To-be) with the dell'être-avec (being with) by Georges Bataille, he deconstructed the metaphysical background of the concept of community and of the terms in which it historically has been associated with (state, sovereignty, people, nation, etc.. ) and at the same time proposed an idea of \u200b\u200bcommunity ontologically understood as a "show" common to each other, where there is by definition-divided, that is constitutively open to the coexistence of the other. [...] By the end of totalitarianism of the twentieth century - continues Fistetti - whose date can be fixed by agreement in 1989, the annus mirabilas the collapse of the communist regimes of Eastern European reflection on the idea of \u200b\u200bcommunity was to learn a new impetus in relation to the processes of globalization [...] takes place in a historical phase of decomposition, dissolution of the foundational categories of political modernity, or at least, the traditional European leviathans hobbessiana of inspiration. " Relentlessly forward the draft immunization of human associations in Thomas Hobbes speaks realistically to isolate the Joint uccidibilità general. " Specifically, the community brings a gift of death that threatens the individual and the original dimension of living together takes over the creation of artificial source to fill "the void of the munus" with an empty most radical state-Leviathan, coinciding with a contract, ie a non-gift and the absence of community relations. Paradoxically, the only possibility of human survival is in the "crime of the community": a waiver to live to survive an irrational sacrificial rite in order to maintain a rational system based on fear, from natural to artificial and primary and secondary education; state of fear to the fear of the state. But today, the Leviathan is made immune from globalization and globalization, or rather by the postmodern liberal globalism. However, Valentina Pazé, author of Communitarianism essay published by Laterza, informs us that the community "Recurs in times of crisis, in response to the earthquake caused by social modernization, denouncing the growing loneliness of individuals, the break up of traditional networks of solidarity, the disappearance of horizons of understanding. [...] The evocation of community and its "spirit", the less real and more "imaginary" as they expand the size of the group comes in every case a powerful symbolic resource, able to strengthen ' collective identity and to serve as an effective vehicle for mobilizing. " In fact, since the eighties, a new movement that appears in the new EU citizens philosophical debate internationally by Amitai Etzioni Stefhen to Goldsmith, Charles Taylor to Alasdair MacIntyre, Michael Walzer by Michel Sandel. A political phenomenon whose origins, in The Dictionary of Utet policy, "must be sought, first, in various forms of critique of modernity and of Enlightenment rationalism that emerged during the century, particularly after the Second World War and, Finally, in the crisis of Marxism and the failure of alternative models of society to the liberal. " [Diorama Literary Review number 285 from September to October 2007]