A medicine called Panacea became popular since the middle ages. It was used for everything: from pains of childbirth until simple empachos. Soon gave consumers realize that the medication was used to damn the thing, but the most powerful advertising, the word of mouth, had exalted it. The problem is that there is a simple panecea, which are public policies and credit expensive and scarce for their survival for the ills of companies in Mexico. Mexico requires a new breed of entrepreneurs. Some already gestate in incubators at universities, municipalities and Government itself. But it is not enough.

The strength of the economy should be on private initiative. When have you seen a magazine in Texas, for example, live advertising counties and Government?. The multitude of ads, from small boxes to double pages are from companies and individuals. We have a model to follow as the Japanese did when they decided to lavantarse after the bloody second world war. They imitated the best from other countries in ports, airports, companies, shops and are example to follow. Everyone, without exception, we want to improve our quality of life, the well-being of our environment and be proud of the advances in so many niche markets that are there waiting to be conquered. But as the dream is not possible without capital, we must start with small businesses that can be joined together in various clusters of production such as Italy which, for example, is a leader in the manufacturing of office furniture that have conquered the world. Come together in a marketing company and earnings in an equitable manner is distributed.

Or as Germany, where the employer is the majority shareholder with 51 percent of the shares and the rest is divided equally between workers and the Government. It is an impressively powerful economy. Desire there is. Lack capital and leaders that will promote the creation of companies under innovative schemes that are already established abroad. Because while we are the migration of 400 thousand Mexican per year leave us a country without labor, without brains and without hope. Do you, do not think dear reader? Of the box girl Larry Page, co-founder of Google US House next month of December. With a personal fortune estimated by Forbes magazine at $ 18 billion, its most important asset is its youth. Along with Sergey Brin, Larry rose to international fame by launching Google and it is believed that in the immediate term their fortunes of skyrocket by a new vein of gold they found: television advertising on the internet. Another project, the world’s largest digital library is in abeyance by copyright. Meanwhile, young entrepreneurs will end 2013 married coffers flush with billions of dollars and a good part of the future of the internet in your hands. A bearer symptom that you’re entering the golden years is when you do sport and all world tell you what you are doing.

Similarly, we are obliged to be accountable about the incorporation of rationality in the object same (man) that intend to address scientifically. Among those who preceded Jean Gagnepain, was the one who truly emphasized this reality, Marx for whom, as Marx you know, the story was not the fact of the professional historian (of France, of the art historian, you literature, etc.), but the historian that we all. What had he seen in the background Marx? A theory of man, and as the man was defined, in it, by history, it was necessary to also treat it in a way as scientific as possible, elaborating a historical materialism. Only there, the same way as the semiotics and semiotics, played him a trick to Saussure and ridicule to structuralism (including Levi-Strauss) became a new idealism, also Engels and Feuerbach played the same trick to historical materialism of Marx pulling him, as much as they could, near what was soon called pervasive materialismi.e. the dialectical materialism (the same as Marx, old and tired, ended up leaving), and it was that worth for the entire evolution of the cosmos! Put another way, the materialism dialectic, by a process of dialectic and the culture (i.e. man-made), and by nature, reached comprehensive materialism. Briefly, the dialectical materialism overwhelmed Marx, exactly as structuralism overwhelmed to Saussure. In conclusion, I would like to say a word in my relationship with Jean Gagnepain.

In a general way, I would say that the teacher is not that respect, nor with whom have broken: live from him. Put another way, we never respect the teacher because respect is a sign of death. When I speak of Jean Gagnepain, I do exist. But where am I? To the limit, that doesn’t matter. That is not to say that the memory of Jean Gagnepain isn’t, she herself, worthy of the respect that we owe to a human genius, but we cannot serve, or to me, personally, nor to you, through an intermediary, which in the measured in that Digest, where we do our work. No question, in these conditions, the fact to stop a teacher at that time in history: and it would be beautiful and good to annihilate it, to imitate Sartre.

He added that the teacher, if it is master (which no longer exists in France since a long time ago) has nothing to do with the Professor, but on the contrary! Taken into account when the master Albert, in the middle ages: when master Albert argued with Sorbonne, took his things and went and separated from it, i.e. that it is housed in the place that gave its name in Paris: Maubert square. He settled there and taught their courses outdoor, all followed him. He had charisma, caught the attention of crowds, thought, and made it freely. And well, Jean Gagnepain, if they want to see it this way, is the master Albert de la Ciencia man. They understand in these conditions that his thinking could disturb or indignant, especially to the University environment. Better, if this thought, which I will try to convey to them (Yes (you we make the honour to follow us) the invitation to reflect.