Download Free Tensiones Y Conflictos Sobre Derechos De Autor En El Siglo Xxi Book in PDF and EPUB Free Download. You can read online Tensiones Y Conflictos Sobre Derechos De Autor En El Siglo Xxi and write the review.

Los autores muestran por qué este principio se impone hoy día como el término central de la alternativa política para el siglo XXI: anuda la lucha anticapitalista y la ecología política mediante su reivindicación de los “comunes” contra las nuevas formas de apropiación privada y estatal. Además, articula las luchas prácticas con las investigaciones sobre el gobierno colectivo de los recursos naturales o de la información y designa formas democráticas nuevas que aspiran a tomar el relevo de la representación política y del monopolio de los partidos. Esta emergencia de lo común en la acción reclama un trabajo de clarificación en el pensamiento. El sentido actual de lo común se distingue de los numerosos usos que se ha dado a esta noción, ya sean filosóficos, jurídicos o teológicos: bien supremo de la ciudad, universalidad de esencia, propiedad inherente a ciertas cosas, incluso alguna vez el fin perseguido por la creación divina. Pero hay otro hilo que vincula lo común, no a la esencia de los hombres o a la naturaleza de las cosas, sino a la actividad de los hombres mismos: sólo una práctica de puesta en conjunto puede decidir qué es “común”, reservar ciertas cosas al uso común, producir determinadas reglas capaces de obligar a los hombres. En este sentido, lo común reclama una nueva institución de la sociedad por ella misma: una revolución.
This Element analyses the political dynamics of neo-extractivism in Latin America. It discusses the critical concepts of neo-extractivism and the commodity consensus and the various phases of socio-environmental conflict, proposing an eco-territorial approach that uncovers the escalation of extractive violence. It also presents horizontal concepts and debates theories that explore the language of Latin American socio-environmental movements, such as Buen Vivir and Derechos de la Naturaleza. In concluding, it proposes an explanation for the end of the progressive era, analyzing its ambiguities and limitations in the dawn of a new political cycle marked by the strengthening of the political rights.
Abortion and Democracy offers critical analyses of abortion politics in Latin America’s Southern Cone, with lessons and insights of wider significance. Drawing on the region’s recent history of military dictatorship and democratic transition, this edited volume explores how abortion rights demands fit with current democratic agendas. With a focus on Argentina, Chile, and Uruguay, the book’s contributors delve into the complex reality of abortion through the examination of the discourses, strategies, successes, and challenges of abortion rights movements. Assembling a multiplicity of voices and experiences, the contributions illuminate key dimensions of abortion rights struggles: health aspects, litigation efforts, legislative debates, party politics, digital strategies, grassroots mobilization, coalition-building, affective and artistic components, and movement-countermovement dynamics. The book takes an approach that is sensitive to social inequalities and to the transnational aspects of abortion rights struggles in each country. It bridges different scales of analysis, from abortion experiences at the micro level of the clinic or the home to the macro sociopolitical and cultural forces that shape individual lives. This is an important intervention suitable for students and scholars of abortion politics, democracy in Latin America, gender and sexuality, and women’s rights.
This artist's book accompanies the exhibition of a collaborative project by Swiss artist Ursula Biemann and Brazilian architect Paulo Tavares, presented at the Eli and Edythe Broad Art Museum, MSU in August 2014. Forest Law is a dynamic visual-textual engagement with the legal, ecological, cosmological and scientific dimensions of the tropical forest in the Ecuadorian Amazon. A trajectory through a transforming landscape, the book illuminates a series of legal cases and indigenous struggles for the rights of nature, incorporating text fragments, video stills and newly designed maps as well as a selection from legal documents, historical archives and other research material. This publication is coupled with the exhibition catalogue The Land Grant: Forest Law.
A theme that has persisted throughout the history of American corrections is that efforts should be made to reform offenders. In particular, at the beginning of the 1900s, the rehabilitative ideal was enthusiastically trumpeted and helped to direct the renovation of the correctional system (e.g., implementation of indeterminate sentencing, parole, probation, a separate juvenile justice system). For the next seven decades, offender treatment reigned as the dominant correctional philosophy. Then, in the early 1970s, rehabilitation suffered a precipitous reversal of fortune. The larger disruptions in American society in this era prompted a general critique of the “state run” criminal justice system. Rehabilitation was blamed by liberals for allowing the state to act coercively against offenders, and was blamed by conservatives for allowing the state to act leniently toward offenders. In this context, the death knell of rehabilitation was seemingly sounded by Robert Martinson's (1974b) influential “nothing works” essay, which reported that few treatment programs reduced recidivism. This review of evaluation studies gave legitimacy to the antitreatment sentiments of the day; it ostensibly “proved” what everyone “already knew”: Rehabilitation did not work. In the subsequent quarter century, a growing revisionist movement has questioned Martinson's portrayal of the empirical status of the effectiveness of treatment interventions. Through painstaking literature reviews, these revisionist scholars have shown that many correctional treatment programs are effective in decreasing recidivism. More recently, they have undertaken more sophisticated quantitative syntheses of an increasing body of evaluation studies through a technique called “meta-analysis.” These meta-analyses reveal that across evaluation studies, the recidivism rate is, on average, 10 percentage points lower for the treatment group than for the control group. However, this research has also suggested that some correctional interventions have no effect on offender criminality (e.g., punishment-oriented programs), while others achieve substantial reductions in recidivism (i.e., approximately 25 percent). This variation in program success has led to a search for those “principles” that distinguish effective treatment interventions from ineffective ones. There is theoretical and empirical support for the conclusion that the rehabilitation programs that achieve the greatest reductions in recidivism use cognitive-behavioral treatments, target known predictors of crime for change, and intervene mainly with high-risk offenders. “Multisystemic treatment” is a concrete example of an effective program that largely conforms to these principles. In the time ahead, it would appear prudent that correctional policy and practice be “evidence based.” Knowledgeable about the extant research, policymakers would embrace the view that rehabilitation programs, informed by the principles of effective intervention, can “work” to reduce recidivism and thus can help foster public safety. By reaffirming rehabilitation, they would also be pursuing a policy that is consistent with public opinion research showing that Americans continue to believe that offender treatment should be an integral goal of the correctional system.