El blog pretende publicar, principalmente, traducciones al español de textos y poemas de Henry David Thoreau y referencias a trabajos sobre dicho autor.
Nature and human life are as various to our several experiences as
our constitutions are various— Who shall say what prospect life offers
to another? Could a greater miracle take place than if we should look
through each other’s eyes for an instant. What I have read of
Rhapodists—of the primitive poets—Argonautic expeditions—the life of
demigods & heroes—Eleusinian mysteries—&c—suggests nothing so
ineffably grand and informing as this would be.
We know not what it is to live in the open air—our lives are domestic
in more senses than we had thought. From the hearth to the field is a
great distance. A man should always speak as if there were no
obstruction not even a mote or a shadow between him & the celestial
bodies. The voices of men sound hoarse and cavernous—tinkling as from
out of the recesses of caves—enough to frighten bats & toads—not
like bells—not like the music of birds, not a natural melody.
Of all the Inhabitants of Concord I know not one that dwells in
nature.— If one were to inhabit her forever he would never meet a man.
This country is not settled nor discovered yet.
Not with tanks, not with treaties, not with declarations of war, but with something far more permanent: the politicisation of sovereign property. When Friedrich Merz announced an “interest-free” €90 billion loan to Ukraine while insisting Russian sovereign assets remain frozen until Moscow “compensates” Kiev, he was not issuing a warning to the Kremlin. He was delivering a notice to the world that Europe’s legal order has become conditional, transactional, and dangerously ideological. That notice will outlive the war, outlast this Commission, and reshape global finance in ways Brussels no longer controls.
This is not a misunderstanding. It is not confusion. It is not excess rhetoric. It is intent.
Brussels does not merely know that outright seizure of Russian sovereign assets is illegal under international law, it has attempted to do it anyway. What stopped it was not law, not conscience, not precedent, but resistance from within: Hungary, Belgium, Slovakia, Malta, Italy, and a growing number of EU members who understand that once sovereign immunity is broken, it is broken for everyone. Ursula von der Leyen made this explicit when she declared she would not leave the table until a “solution” was found. And she didn’t. The solution was not one restraint. It was reconfiguration.
The outcome of the EU summit revealed far more in failure than success. Despite immense political pressure and marathon negotiations, the European Union could not secure unanimous approval to confiscate or directly deploy Russia’s frozen central bank reserves—estimated at roughly €210 billion across the EU, with around €185 billion immobilised at Euroclear in Belgium. Belgium refused to turn Euroclear into a geopolitical weapon. Hungary refused to sign Europe’s financial suicide pact. Others quietly backed them. Blocked from seizure, Brussels pivoted, and not away from the objective, but toward a different, equally radioactive architecture.
Forced into retreat on outright confiscation, the Commission fell back to borrowing: a €90 billion package raised on capital markets, secured against the EU budget with stolen assets as de-facto collateral, and while Russian assets remain frozen indefinitely as leverage. The money is now socialised through European debt; the coercion is externalised through permanent asset immobilisation. This separation is not a compromise. It is a doctrine.
This distinction is existential.
Because while Brussels failed to seize the assets outright, it succeeded in something far more dangerous, it established the principle that sovereign reserves can be frozen indefinitely and politically conditioned without judicial process, treaty settlement, or legal adjudication, even while war financing is laundered through “normal” capital-market borrowing. This is not rule-of-law financing. It is imperial finance, clean on the balance sheet, corrosive in precedent.
Under customary international law, sovereign immunity, particularly for central bank assets, is not ambiguous. It is foundational. The UN Convention on Jurisdictional Immunities of States and Their Property, though not universally ratified, codifies a norm long treated as binding: the property of a foreign central bank is immune from measures of constraint. That norm exists for one reason only, to prevent financial warfare from metastasizing into systemic collapse. Europe is now openly hollowing it out. No court ruling. No reparations treaty. No arbitration award. Just political assertion backed by majority pressure.
The legal fiction is that the assets are merely “frozen.” The reality is that indefinite freezing with political conditions attached, especially when decoupled from judicial process, constitutes expropriation in substance, if not in form. International lawyers recognise this distinction instantly. Markets will too.
Europe has crossed a line it will never uncross.
Not with tanks, not with treaties, not with declarations of war, but with something far more permanent: the politicisation of sovereign property. When Friedrich Merz announced an “interest-free” €90 billion loan to Ukraine while… https://t.co/B3WzRxkbzJpic.twitter.com/xBjrW4orzA
For the first time in the history of the European Union, 24 member states have jointly granted a war loan to a country outside the Union. This is not a technical detail but a qualitative shift. The logic of a loan is clear: whoever lends money wants it back. In this case,… pic.twitter.com/jeBi6A2e29
Make no mistake: Ukraine’s collapse would be a disaster for Hungary. Stability next door matters. Hungary supplies 44% of Ukraine’s electricity and 58% of its gas. Meanwhile, the war weakens Ukraine day by day. Peace is the only thing that can strengthen it. Anyone who truly… pic.twitter.com/PxwEe0iXYL
Pero todos esos fenómenos-paradojas no significan más que "política", y nos enseñan que
la política es la maniobra de lo más por lo menos, del número inmenso
por el número pequeño, de lo real por las imágenes y palabras,-es decir que se trata de una mecánica de modificaciones.
(1944. Sin título, XXIX, 105)
Europa ha terminado su carrera. Ver el mapa del mundo. 1945-1815=130
(1945. Turning Point, XXIX, 798)
PAUL VALÉRY (Cuadernos (1894-1945). Edición de Andrés Sánchez Robayna)
Considering that the jurisdictional immunities of States and their property are generally accepted as a principle of customary international law,
Having in mind the principles of international law embodied in the Charter of the United Nations,
Believing that an international convention on the jurisdictional immunities of States and their property would enhance the rule of law and legal certainty, particularly in dealings of States with natural or juridical persons, and would contribute to the codification and development of international law and the harmonization of practice in this area,
Taking into account developments in State practice with regard to the jurisdictional immunities of States and their property,
Affirming that the rules of customary international law continue to govern matters not regulated by the provisions of the present Convention,
Have agreed as follows:
(...)
Article 5 State immunity A State enjoys immunity, in respect of itself and its property, from the jurisdiction of the courts of another State subject to the provisions of the present Convention.
Article 6 Modalities for giving effect to State immunity 1. A State shall give effect to State immunity under article 5 by refraining from exercising jurisdiction in a proceeding before its courts against another State and to that end shall ensure that its courts determine on their own initiative that the immunity of that other State under article 5 is respected. 2. A proceeding before a court of a State shall be considered to have been instituted against another State if that other State: (a) is named as a party to that proceeding; or (b) is not named as a party to the proceeding but the proceeding in effect seeks to affect the property, rights, interests or activities of that other State.
(...)
Article 18 State immunity from pre-judgment measures of constraint No pre-judgment measures of constraint, such as attachment or arrest, against property of a State may be taken in connection with a proceeding before a court of another State unless and except to the extent that:
(a) the State has expressly consented to the taking of such measures as indicated: (i) by international agreement; (ii) by an arbitration agreement or in a written contract; or (iii) by a declaration before the court or by a written communication after a dispute between the parties has arisen; or (b) the State has allocated or earmarked property for the satisfaction of the claim which is the object of that proceeding.
Article 19 State immunity from post-judgment measures of constraint No post-judgment measures of constraint, such as attachment, arrest or execution, against property of a State may be taken in connection with a proceeding before a court of another State unless and except to the extent that: (a) the State has expressly consented to the taking of such measures as indicated: (i) by international agreement; (ii) by an arbitration agreement or in a written contract; or (iii) by a declaration before the court or by a written communication after a dispute between the parties has arisen; or (b) the State has allocated or earmarked property for the satisfaction of the claim which is the object of that proceeding; or (c) it has been established that the property is specifically in use or intended for use by the State for other than government non-commercial purposes and is in the territory of the State of the forum, provided that post- judgment measures of constraint may only be taken against property that has a connection with the entity against which the proceeding was directed.
(...)
Article 21 Specific categories of property 1. The following categories, in particular, of property of a State shall not be considered as property specifically in use or intended for use by the State for other than government non-commercial purposes under article 19, subparagraph (c): (a) property, including any bank account, which is used or intended for use in the performance of the functions of the diplomatic mission of the State or its consular posts, special missions, missions to international organizations or delegations to organs of international organizations or to international conferences; (b) property of a military character or used or intended for use in the performance of military functions; (c) property of the central bank or other monetary authority of the State; (d) property forming part of the cultural heritage of the State or part of its archives and not placed or intended to be placed on sale; (e) property forming part of an exhibition of objects of scientific, cultural or historical interest and not placed or intended to be placed on sale. 2. Paragraph 1 is without prejudice to article 18 and article 19, subparagraphs (a) and (b).
Artículo 18
Inmunidad del Estado respecto de medidas coercitivas anteriores al fallo
No podrán adoptarse contra bienes de un Estado, en relación con un
proceso ante un tribunal de otro Estado, medidas coercitivas anteriores
al fallo como el embargo y la ejecución, sino en los casos y dentro
de los límites siguientes:
a) cuando el Estado haya consentido expresamente en la adopción de tales medidas, en los términos indicados:
i) por acuerdo internacional;
ii) por un acuerdo de arbitraje en un contrato escrito; o
iii) por una declaración ante el tribunal o por una comunicación escrita
después de haber surgido una controversia entre las partes; o
b) cuando el Estado haya asignado o destinado bienes a la satisfacción de la demanda objeto de ese proceso.
(Fragmento del poema “El héroe” de Henry David Thoreau, traducción Guillermo Ruiz)
Must we still eat
The bread we have spurned
Must we rekindle
The faggots we've burned —
Must we go out
By the poor man's gate
Die by degrees
Not by new fate.
Is then no road
This way my friend
Is there no road
Without any end —
Os gusta? sí? pues seguirá la ronda;
no? por lo mismo! á quien no quiere caldo
taza y media, que Dios me hizo el heraldo
de sus frescas, y así monda y lironda
cantaré á la verdad aunque se esconda
y á fin de cuenta sacaré mi saldo
—aunque bien sé que no de metal gualdo—
al cabo preso de mi recia sonda.
Mientras seguís en vuestra vieja farsa
yo aquí en mis soledades me chapuzo
donde para bregar me ajusto el cincho;
no he menester entrar en la comparsa,
pues sé que cual bichero, así mi chuzo
soldado lleva el gancho junto al pincho.
Las investigaciones judiciales, comenzando por la megacausa de los primeros años noventa sobre lo que se llamó Tangentopoli, sacaron a la luz un sistema de poderes políticos y de poderes económicos ilegales, ocultos, política y económicamente irresponsables, que prosperaron gracias a la inefectividad del derecho y a su larga y sistemática impunidad.Formas incluso relevantes de ilegalidad y corrupción son, ciertamente, ineliminables y, en alguna medida, fisiológicas en toda democracia. Nunca se vivirá en un mundo deónticamente perfecto.Pero, más allá de una cierta medida, la cantidad se convierte en calidad.Cuando la ilegalidad de la política y la Administración pública, según lo acreditaron las investigaciones judiciales de hace treinta años y como perdura en Italia y en tantos otros países, se transforma en sistema de gobierno, lo que hay no son simples fenómenos criminales, sino una profunda lesión de la democracia y del estado de derecho, cuya vigencia real presupone la sumisión a la ley de los poderes públicos, la responsabilidad de sus titulares y la transparencia de sus comportamientos.Lo que emergió fue, pues, la existencia de una suerte de doble estado, es decir, de un infraestado oculto, crecido tras la fachada legal y representativa del estado visible, organizado en centros de poder invisibles con sus propios códigos y sus exacciones parafiscales, destinado a la apropiación privada de la cosa pública y favorecido por el sentido de la normalidad y la convicción de la impunidad.
we can identify a global liquidity cycle with a fairly constant frequency of about 65 months, i.e. five to six years. This has turned out to be quite a robust estimate of the cycle. The current cycle bottomed in October 2022 and has been moving up since.
The global monetary system is bifurcating into two different zones. On one side is the Chinese system, backed by gold, and on the other side is the U.S. system, backed by U.S. Treasuries in a digital wrapper.
From the perspective of currencies, the Swiss franc is solid... The trouble is that it’s too small. The euro, on the other hand, is very problematic, for the simple reason that the fiscal situation in Europe is out of control
The reason is probably U.S. stablecoin, which is basically a digital wrapper around U.S. Treasury Notes. If you are anywhere in the world, there are some attractions in holding a dollar stablecoin, such as anonymity, ease of use, whatever. It clearly frightened some leading figures in the ECB into saying that Europe needs to start defending its monetary system against this, because we could lose control of money. Now, if Europeans see dollar stablecoin as a threat, just imagine the threat this means for China. If your currency is wobbly, if you are inflating it and if you have capital controls, U.S. stablecoin is hugely attractive for your citizens. Beijing can’t allow that.
And that’s why they are backing the renminbi with gold?
Yes. The global monetary system is bifurcating into two different zones. On one side is the Chinese system, backed by gold, and on the other side is the U.S. system, backed by U.S. Treasuries in a digital wrapper. The Chinese are saying ‹trust our gold›. America is saying ‹trust our technology›. This means that the Chinese want the gold price to rise. This is bullish for gold, silver and all precious metals. But this monetary bifurcation, ironically, also means that it’s in America’s interest to try and destabilize the gold price, in order not to benefit China. Vice versa, it’s in China’s interest to disrupt the digital U.S. economy. We are talking about a capital war here.
How will this capital war play out?
I tend to believe in American technology and I hope that America wins. Because I’m in the West and this outcome would selfishly benefit me. But history suggests that China may be in a stronger position because gold always holds its value in the long term. You can’t bet against gold. At the same time, it has never been a winning strategy to bet against the U.S. So we will have to see how it plays out. Rather than the trade war, which is a smoke screen, the real war is a capital war between the U.S. and China. This war is about the control of capital flows, of currency, and ultimately of the global economy.
And we Europeans? Are we just bystanders in this capital war?
Mostly, yes. From the perspective of currencies, the Swiss franc is solid with a great track record. It will survive and people will trust it. The trouble is that it’s too small. The euro, on the other hand, is very problematic, for the simple reason that the fiscal situation in Europe is out of control. Germany is languishing, and France has a huge debt problem. Sterling, meanwhile, is flapping around in the wind, it offers no viable option. Ultimately, European currencies will have to peg in some way, informally, to the dollar. The problem that Europe has, fundamentally, is they don’t have any control over energy supply and they have a welfare state system that is way too generous. There will have to be a reneging of the promises that have been made. Otherwise their debt will spiral out of control.
Michael Howell
Lawmakers from Italy's ruling party have proposed an amendment to the 2026 budget law. Initially it said the central bank's gold belonged to the state, but they have revised that to say it belongs to the Italian people. The ECB last week urged Italy to drop the provision.
Dr. Michael J. Howell is a leading financial advisor with a career
spanning over three decades. He is the founder and CEO of CrossBorder
Capital, established in 1996, and more recently founded GL Indexes, a
London-based investment advisor and quantitative data provider. His
career includes senior roles as Research Director at Salomon Brothers
and Head of Research and board director at Barings. Howell has also
advised the World Bank on capital flows and is the author of influential
books, including Investing in Emerging Markets (World Bank, 1995) and Capital Wars (Palgrave, 2020). He writes the top-ranked Substack newsletter Capital Wars. He holds a Ph.D. in Finance and is a qualified US Supervisory Analyst. Dr. Howell lives in Oxford with his family.
Time, You Are Always The Winner (Samay Timi Sadhaimko Vijeta)
Snatch me up like an eagle
swooping down on a chicken,
wash me away like a flood destroying the fields,
fling me from the door
like my daughter carelessly sweeping out dirt.
In infinite wilds I lead
a solitary life,
just a naming ceremony,
set aside, forgotten;
even in the Ramayana, Lakshman's line
had first to be drawn
before Sita could cross it.[2]
Time, you are always the winner,
I bent my knee before you
like Barbarik faced by compulsion,[3] like King Yayati faced by old age,[4]
I fell prostrate like grandfather Bhishma
before the arrows from your arms.[5]
Touch my defeated existence just once
with your hands of ironwood;
how numb I am,
how hard to grasp, how lifeless
in the presence of your strength and power.
You spread out forever like the seas,
I rippled like the foaming waves,
you blazed up fiercely like a volcano,
I smouldered, slow as a forest fire.
You are power, wholly embodied,
ready to drink even poison,
we follow—my fellows and I a party,
we descend on a wheel of birth and death,
bearing bags full of gifts,
gifts of alcohol and oxygen,
blood and cancer,
tumors and polio.
My grandson will be born
with sleeping pills in his eyes,
his potency already dead,
needing no vasectomy.
Perhaps he will be born as a war,
embracing every cripple,
perhaps he will be born as a void,
to replace the meaningless babble
of revolt, lack of faith, and being.
Perhaps he will even refuse to be born
from a natural mother's womb;
Time, you are always the winner:
revealed like a crazy Bhairava,[6] keep burning like the sun,
keep flowing like a river,
keep rustling like the bamboo leaves.
Upon your victory,
I will let loose the calves from the tethering post,
fling open the doors of grain stores and barns,
hand over my jewels to my daughter-in-law,
and lay out green dung, neatly,
around the tulsi shrine.[7]
So snatch me up like an eagle
swooping down on a chicken,
wash me away like a flood destroying the fields,
and, like my daughter carelessly sweeping out dirt,
sweep me from the threshold with a single stroke,
sweep me from the threshold with a single stroke.
(no date; from Giri 1974)
In "Time, You Are Always the Winner" (Samay Timi Sadhaimko Vijeta
), one of Banira's finest poems, references to Pauranic mythology
mingle with symbols that are unmistakably modern in their description of
the transience of human life. The nature of time and history are common
themes in Banira's poems, and her symbolic representations of time are
often extremely well conceived. Like the dimensionalist poets, she makes
frequent reference to mythological figures but restricts herself to the
Hindu myths of her own tradition.
"... lo que quedaba intacto era quizás el legado más precioso del franciscanismo, con el que Occidente siempre deberá volver a medirse como su tarea indiferible: cómo pensar una forma-de-vida, es decir, una vida humana que se sustraiga por completo a ser capturada por el derecho, y un uso de los cuerpos y del mundo que no se sustancie jamás en una apropiación."
(página 14)
Altissima paupertas es el nombre
que la Regla bulada le da a esta ajenidad respecto del derecho
(Francisco 1, II, p.114), pero el término técnico que en la literatura
franciscana define a la praxis en la que ésta se realiza es usus (simplex usus, usus facti, usus pauper).
(página 174)
(...) hasta la bula Ad conditorem canonis, de 1322, en la que Juan XXII, abrogando la decisión de su predecesor, afirma el carácter inseparable del uso y la propiedad, y le atribuye a la orden la propiedad común de los bienes de los que hace uso (nec ius utendi, nec usus facti, separata a rei proprietate seu domino, possunt constitui vel haberi)
(página 158)
El momento crítico en la historia del franciscanismo es cuando Juan XXII, con la bula Ad conditorem canonis, cuestiona la posibilidad de separar propiedad y uso y, de este modo, anula el propio presupuesto el que se fundaba la paupertas minorita.
La argumentación del Papa, que tenía una indudable competencia in utroque iure, se apoya en la identificación de un ámbito (las cosas consumibles, como la comida, las bebidas, los vestidos y otras por el estilo, esenciales para la vida de los frailes menores) en el cual la separación de la propiedad y el uso es imposible (...) También Tomás, cuya canonización preparaba Juan XXII, había afirmado que en las cosas "cuyo uso coincide con su consumo [...] el uso puede separarse de la cosa misma, pero si se concede a alguien su uso, también se cede la cosa (S. TH,. 2a, 2ae, qu.78, art. 1).
Basada en esta tradición, la bula Ad conditoren canonis afirma que en las cosas consumibles no puede tenerse un ius utendi o un usus facti, si se pretende separarlos de la propiedad de la cosa (...) Y para excluir la sola posibilidad de reivindicar un uso de hecho o un actus utendi sine iure aliquo, la bula niega que tal uso, por cuanto coincide con la destrucción de la cosa (abusus), pueda ser poseído (haberi) o siquiera existir como tal in rerum natura.
Aquí la argumentación de la bula muestra toda su sutileza, no solo jurídica sino también filosófica. El problema, francamente ontológico, es si un uso que consiste sólo en abuso (o sea, solo en una destrucción) puede existir y ser poseído de otro modo que como derecho de propiedad (...)
"Si fuera posible tener tal uso, este debería haberse tenido o antes del acto, o en el acto mismo, o después de haber completado el acto en cuestión.Que esto no es posible resulta del hecho de que aquello que no existe de ninguna manera pueda tenerse"
(...)
Un uso que ya no es posible tener y un abuso que implica siempre un derecho a la propiedad y, por lo tanto, siempre definen, precisamente, el canon del consumo masivo.De este modo, sin embargo, tal vez sin darse cuenta, el pontífice pone al desnudo también la verdadera naturaleza de la propiedad, que se afirma con la máxima intensidad precisamente en el punto en el que coincide con el consumo de la cosa.
(págs 184-186)
(Traducción de Flavia Costa y María Teresa D'Meza)
(No nos parece casual que en "Los Domingos" el eje principal de la acción individual, familiar y social sea la propiedad y las relaciones en torno a ella de todos los afectados. La apropiación, la defensa contra la apropiación o la renuncia a la misma son inevitables. Y la "pobreza" franciscana y/o evangélica imposible. Así lo "estableció" también la bula Ad conditorem canonis.
Ainara aspira con el ardor de la adolescencia a la "pobreza" de la no apropiación frente al mundo, pero su abuela es expropiada por la acción de su padre y ella es desheredada por su tía, que defiende su patrimonio frente al voto de pobreza de la sobrina (que no incluye la propiedad por la orden).
Y el conflicto de "apropiación" llega a los propios individuos como sostén de las familias.
Las "betinas" son otra familia (con su propiedad) y Ainara las elige cuando su familia ha perdido cualquier exigencia para ella.
Lo anterior no tiene por qué significar ningún reduccionismo sociológico o psicológico.El radio de la acción y elección de los individuos no tiene por qué limitarse al mundo social "laico". Es por eso que se constituyeron y perpetuaron las distintas órdenes religiosas y la propia Iglesia.Se reconozca o no su mensaje.
Hay muchos otros aspectos de la película que giran en torno a la "apropiación" y al papel de la mujer.
" Y la vida a nadie se le da en propiedad,
a todos en usufructo"
Lucrecio, De la naturaleza de las cosas, Libro III, verso 971)
Que Dios esté con la madre. Que, como ella llevó a su hijo, lleve también su alma. Que, como su hijo nació, dé vida y forme su propia verdad superior. Que, como ella alimentó y protegió a su hijo, alimente y proteja su vida interior y su independencia. Porque su alma será su parto más doloroso, su hijo más difícil y la hermana más querida de sus otros hijos.
Amén.
El amor nace, con rostro oscuro y atribulado. Cuando la esperanza muere, y en el lugar más inesperado, nace el amor: el amor siempre nace.
God give us rain when we expect sun. Give us music when we expect trouble. Give us tears when we expect breakfast. Give us dreams when we expect a storm. Give us a stray dog when we expect congratulations. God play with us, turn us sideways and around.
Amen.
“I use the word 'God'
conscious of the fact that there are many who may find it objectionable – and
others who may find my casual use of the word too irreverent or shallow. For
all sorts of reasons people can be very touchy about this word; in my view they
seem either too earnest, too proprietorial, too fanatical, too averse, too
phobic... There is however no ultimate authority or definition. The word is
yours or mine to make of it and hold or discard it as we will…"God"
as a sort of shorthand password, an inconclusive folk word, a signpost, a
catalyst, a spark, a stepping stone, a simple makeshift handle ... A simple
robust word used lightly and loosely or as devoutly and deeply as we might feel
– a bridge, and a way to break free from this material world for a moment or
two, a day or two... or for what's left of a lifetime.”
