¡Vente bien! Y muestra tus fuentes…

Si quieres esta concha, déjame ver ese papel (En serio, ¿dónde está el resultado de tu prueba? En versión digital está bien)

As feminists struggling for gender, peace, economic, social and environmental justice, we know there is no single recipe for success but an array of possibilities that can and are making change happen. The menu of options is as diverse as our movements and the communities in which we live and struggle.

Before we dare to present some of the feminist imaginations for another world, here are the principles around which we base our propositions:

1. Self-determined development from the local to the global

We believe there is no one model for all and that everyone has a right to claim and contribute to building another world that is possible, as the World Social Forum motto puts it.

This includes the right to participate in democratic governance and to influence one’s future – politically, economically, socially and culturally.

Economic self-determination gives peoples the ability to take control over their natural resources and use those resources for their own ends or collective use. Furthermore, women’s economic agency is fundamental to mitigating the often cyclical nature of poverty, denial of education, safety, and security.

2. Rights, substantive equality and justice are at the core of the economy

The principle of substantive equality is laid out in the Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) and other international human rights instruments. This principle is fundamental for development and achieving a just economy as it affirms that all human beings are born free and equal.

Non-discrimination is an integral part of the principle of equality that ensures that no one is denied their rights because of factors such as race, gender, language, religion, sexual orientation, gender identity, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property or birth.

The inherent dignity of all persons without distinction must be upheld and respected. While States are responsible for ensuring the use of maximum available resources for the fulfilment of human rights, reclaiming rights and dignity is fundamentally a key space for civil society struggle and  popular mobilization.

3. Just distribution for all, without monopolization (the anti-greed principle)

This principle, exercised through organized efforts to transform unjust institutions, guides the restoration of balance between "participation" (input) and "distribution" (output) when either principle is violated.

It puts limits on monopolistic accumulations of capital and other abuses of property. This concept is founded on an economy model that is based on fairness, and justice.

4. Feminist and cross-movement solidarity is key

In order to make change happen, we need strong and diverse feminist networks. We need movements building solidarity from the personal to the political, from the local to the global and back.

Building collective power through movements helps convert the struggle for human rights, equality and justice into a political force for change that cannot be ignored.

“Only movements can create sustained change at the levels that policy and legislation alone cannot achieve.”

See more on this at Batliwala, S: 2012 “Changing Their World. Concepts and Practices of Women’s Movements” 2nd Edition. AWID

See also

The project

5 Major Threats

Our partners

 جديد

عبر الإنترنت وهجين

كمشارك/ة عبر الإنترنت، يمكنك توجيه النشاطات والتواصل والتحدث مع الآخرين/ الأخريات وتجربة الإبداع والفن والاحتفال بمنتدى جمعية حقوق المرأة في التنمية بشكل مباشر. سيستمتع المشاركون/ات المتصلون/ات عبر الإنترنت ببرنامج غني ومتنوع، بدءًا من ورشات العمل والنقاشات وحتى نشاطات الاستشفاء والعروض الموسيقية. ستركز بعض الأنشطة على التواصل بين المشاركين/ات عبر الإنترنت، وسيكون البعض الآخر هجينًا بالفعل، يركز على الاتصال والتفاعل بين المشاركين/ات عبر الإنترنت وأولئك الموجودين/ات في بانكوك.

Un indice visuel est toujours utile

« La sexualité est fluide, et là mon vagin aussi. »
#FeministFestival #SextLikeAFeminist

Contexto

Las propuestas de decrecimiento cuestionan la premisa de que la economía de los países debe ‘crecer o perecer’ y muestran la falsedad del lugar central que se le otorga al crecimiento medido por un aumento del Producto Bruto Interno (PIB).

Definición

Un modelo de decrecimiento propone un cambio hacia niveles de producción y consumo más bajos y sostenibles. En esencia postula una reducción del sistema económico para dejarle más espacio a la cooperación entre personas y a los ecosistemas humanos.

Esta propuesta incluye:

• Reducir la producción superflua de recursos, energías y emisiones, sobre todo en el Norte (p.ej. las industrias automotriz y militar)
• Redirigir las inversiones hacia los sectores de cuidados, infraestructura social y restauración del ambiente.

Perspectiva feminista

Las perspectivas feministas dentro de la teoría y práctica del decrecimiento sostienen que también es necesario redefinir y revalidar el trabajo no remunerado y remunerado, de cuidados y en el mercado, para superar los estereotipos tradicionales de género así como las brechas laborales y las desigualdades en el ingreso prevalecientes que devalúan el trabajo de cuidado.

Para leer más acerca de esta propuesta:

• En El futuro que queremos: Occupy development Christa Wichterich sostiene que para quebrar la lógica hegemónica del crecimiento sin límites y el rédito rápido para las inversiones, los tres aspectos centrales de un paradigma diferente para el desarrollo deben combinar el cuidado, los bienes comunes y la suficiencia en la producción y el consumo.
• Equitable, Ecological Degrowth: Feminist Contributions [Decrecimiento con equidad y ecológico: Aportes feministas] (en inglés) de Patricia Perkins recomienda desarrollar indicadores alternativos eficaces de bienestar, incluyendo información sobre equidad social y económica así como horas dedicadas al trabajo, para mostrar la importancia del trabajo y los servicios no remunerados para la economía y ofrecer un mecanismo para el reconocimiento de quienes los realizan.
• En español se puede leer Decrecimiento feminista: Reconceptualizar, reestructurar y relocalizar bajo postulados feministas del Grupo de Feminismos de Deszkundea.

Communicating Desire

and Other Embodied Political Praxes

Communicating Desire

Host: We tend to think about communicating desire as something that is limited to the private intimacy of the bedroom and our personal relationships. But can we also think of this kind of communication as a structure, a praxis that informs our work, and how we are, how we do in the world?

Lindiwe
I believe that unfortunately in the past, expressing your sexuality has been limited. You were allowed to express it within the confines of your marriage, which was permitted, there have always been taboo and stigmas attached to expressing it any other way. When it comes to communicating, obviously the fact that certain stigmas are attached to expressing your sexuality or expressing your desire makes it a lot harder to communicate that in the bedroom or intimately with your partner. From my personal experience, I do believe that obviously if I feel more comfortable expressing myself outside of the bedroom on other matters or other topics, it’s easier for me to build that trust, because you understand conflict resolution with that particular person, you understand exactly how to make your communication special towards that particular person. It’s not easy. It’s something that is consistently done throughout whatever your engagement is, whether it’s your relationship or whether it’s casual and just in the moment. But I believe that confidence outside can definitely translate to how you communicate your desire.

Manal
Since childhood, a woman is raised with that, “you’re not allowed to talk about your body, you’re not allowed to talk about your desire,” which puts a heavy responsibility on women, especially girls in their teens when they need to express themselves and talk about these issues. So for me I think this is a big problem. You know, I have been married for more than 25 years, but still, until now, I cannot talk about my desires. I cannot say what I want or what I prefer, because it’s like I’m not allowed to go beyond this line. It’s like haram, despite it being my right. This is the case for all my friends, they just can’t express themselves in the right way.

Louise
Personally, I find that expressing our desires, my desires, however that expression comes in hand, has to do with the other, and the gaze that the other would have on me. So this is also something that we can link to cinema. And the gaze I would have on myself as well: what I think I am as an individual, but also what society expects of me and my sexuality. In the past, I somehow did the analogy between what happens in the bedroom and what happens in the workplace, because there is sometimes this dynamic of power, whether I want it or not. And oftentimes, verbal communication is harder than we think. But when it comes to representation in film, that’s a totally different game. We are very far away from what I guess all of us here would like to see on screen when it comes to just communicating sexual desires inside or outside the bedroom. 

Online and Embodied

Host: We can think about the digital world as embodied: while it might be virtual, it is not less real. And this was made clear in the context of AWID’s feminist realities festival, which took place entirely online. What does it mean then to talk about sexuality, collectively, politically, in online spaces? Do we navigate virtual spaces with our bodies and affects, and in this case, what are the different considerations? What does it do to communication and representation?

Lindiwe
Social media makes you feel community-based. When you express what it is that you want or like, there is someone who’s either going to agree or disagree, but those who do agree make you feel that you belong to a community. So it’s easier to throw it out into the universe, or for others to see, and potentially not get as much judgment. And I say this very loosely because sometimes, depending on what it is that you’re expressing, it either will get you vilified or celebrated. But when it comes to the bedroom, there is an intimacy and almost a vulnerability that is exposing you and different parts of you that is not as easy to give your opinion on. When it comes to expressing your desire, speaking it and saying it and maybe putting a Tweet or a social media post, or even liking and reading other communities that are same-minded is a lot easier than telling your partner, “this is how I want to be pleasured” or “this is how what I want you to do next,” because of the fear of rejection. But not only that, just the vulnerability aspect – allowing yourself to be bare enough to let the other person see into what you are thinking, feeling, and wanting – I think this is where the difference would come in for me personally. I feel it is a lot more community-based on social media, and it’s easier to engage in discourse. Whereas in the bedroom, you don’t want to necessarily kill the moment. But I think that also kind of helps you understand going forward, depending on the relationship with the person, how you would engage thereafter. So I always know that if I try to communicate something and I fail to do so in the moment, I can always try to bring it up outside of that moment and see what the reaction would be so I know how to approach it going forward.

Louise
You know the question in films is, I don’t know if the male gaze is done intentionally or not. Like we don’t really know that. What we know is that the reason why sexuality in general has been so heternormative and focused on penetration and not giving any space for women to actually ask for anything in films, is because most of the people who have been working in this industry and making decisions in terms of, you know, storytelling and editing have been white men. So rape revenge is this very weird film genre that was birthed in the 70s, and half of the story would be that a woman is being raped by one or multiple people, and in the other half, she would get her revenge. So usually she would murder and kill the people who have raped her, and sometimes other people next to them. At the beginning of the birth of this genre and for 30 years at least, those films were written, produced, and directed by men. This is why we also want so much representation. A lot of feminists and pioneers in queer filmmaking also used the act of filming in order to do that and to reclaim their own sexuality. I’m thinking about Barbara Hammer, who’s a feminist and queer pioneer in experimental cinema in the U.S. where she decided to shoot women having sex on 16mm, and by doing so reclaimed a space within the narrative that was exposed in film at that time. And there is also then the question of invisibilization: we know now, because of the internet and sharing knowledge, that women and queer filmmakers have been trying and making films since the beginning of cinema. We only realize it now that we have access to databases and the work of activists and curators and filmmakers.

Resisting Colonization

Host: And this opens up the conversation on the importance of keeping our feminist histories alive. The online worlds have also played a crucial role in documenting protests and resistance. From Sudan to Palestine to Colombia, feminists have taken our screens by storm, challenging the realities of occupation, capitalism, and oppression. So could we speak of communicating desire – the desire for something else – as decolonization?

Manal
Maybe because my village is just 600 residents and the whole village is one family – Tamimi – there are no barriers between men and women. We do everything together. So when we began our non-violent resistance or when we joined the non-violent resistance in Palestine, there was no discussion whether women should participate or not. We took a very important role within the movement here in the village. But when other villages and other places began to join our weekly protests, some men thought that if these women participate or join the protests, they will fight with soldiers so it will be like they’re easy women. There were some men who were not from the village who tried to sexually harass the women. But a strong woman who is able to stand in front of a soldier can also stand against sexual harassment. Sometimes, when other women from other places join our protest, they are shy at first; they don’t want to come closer because there are many men. If you want to join the protest, if you want to be part of the non-violent movement, you have to remove all these restrictions and all these thoughts from your mind. You have to focus on just fighting for your rights. Unfortunately, the Israeli occupation realizes this issue. For example, the first time I was arrested, I wear the hijab so they tried to take it off; they tried to take off my clothes, in front of everybody. There were like 300-400 people and they tried to do it. When they took me to the interrogation, the interrogator said: “we did this because we want to punish other women through you. We know your culture.” So I told him: “I don’t care, I did something that I believe in. Even if you take all my clothes off, everybody knows that Manal is resisting.”

Lindiwe
I think even from a cultural perspective, which is very ironic, if you look at culture in Africa, prior to getting colonized, showing skin wasn’t a problem. Wearing animal skin and/or hides to protect you, that wasn’t an issue and people weren’t as sexualized unless it was within context. But we conditioned ourselves to say, “you should be covered up” and the moment you are not covered up you are exposed, and therefore it will be sexualized. Nudity gets sexualized as opposed to you just being naked; they don’t want a little girl to be seen naked. What kind of society have we conditioned ourselves to be if you’re going to be sexualizing someone who is naked outside of the context of a sexual engagement? But environment definitely plays a big role because your parents and your grannies and your aunts say “no, don’t dress inappropriately,” or “no, that’s too short.” So you hear that at home first, and then the moment you get exposed outside, depending on the environment, whether it’s a Eurocentric or more westernized environment to what you are used to, then you are kind of free to do so. And even then, as much as you are free, there’s still a lot that comes with it in terms of catcalling and people still sexualizing your body. You could be wearing a short skirt, and someone feels they have the right to touch you without your permission. There is so much that is associated with regulating and controlling women’s bodies, and that narrative starts at home. And then you go out into your community and society and the narrative gets perpetuated, and you realize that you get sexualized by society at large too, especially as a person of color.

Resistance as Pleasure

Host: And finally, in what ways can our resistance be more than what we are allowed? Is there a place for pleasure and joy, for us and our communities?

Louise
Finding pleasure as resistance and resistance in pleasure, first for me there is this idea of the guerrilla filmmaking or the action of filming when you’re not supposed to or when someone told you not to, which is the case for a lot of women and queer filmmakers in the world right now. For example, in Lebanon, which is a cinema scene that I know very well, most of the lesbian stories that I’ve seen were shot by students in very short formats with “no production value” as the west would say – meaning with no money, because of the censorship that happens on an institutional level, but also within the family and within the private sphere. I would think that filming whatever, but also filming pleasure and pleasure within lesbian storytelling is an act of resistance in itself. A lot of times, just taking a camera and getting someone to edit and someone to act is extremely hard and requires a lot of political stance.

Lindiwe
I have a rape support group. I’m trying to assist women to reintegrate themselves from a sexual perspective: wanting to be intimate again, wanting to not let their past traumas influence so much how they move forward. It’s not an easy thing, but it’s individual. So I always start with understanding your body. I feel the more you understand and love and are proud of it, the more you are able to allow someone else into that space. I call it sensuality training, where I get them to start seeing themselves as not sexual objects, but as objects of pleasure and desire that can be interchangeable. So you’re worthy of receiving as well as giving. But that’s not only from a psychological point of view; it is physical. When you get out of the shower, you get out of the bath, and you’re putting lotion on your body, look at every part of your body, feel every part of your body, know when there are changes, know your body so well that should you get a new pimple on your knee, you are so aware of it because just a few hours ago it wasn’t there. So things like that where I kind of get people to love themselves from within, so they feel they are worthy of being loved in a safe space, is how I gear them towards claiming their sexuality and their desire.

Manal
You know we began to see women coming from Nablus, from Jerusalem, from Ramallah, even from occupied 48, who have to drive for 3-4 hours just to come to join the protests. After that we tried to go to other places, talk with women, tell them that they don’t have to be shy, that they should just believe in themselves and that there is nothing wrong in what we are doing. You can protect yourself, so where is the wrong in participating or in joining? Once I asked some women, “why are you joining?” And they said, “if the Tamimi women can do it, we can do it also.” To be honest I was very happy to hear this because we were like a model for other women. If I have to stand for my rights, it should be all my rights, not just one or two. We can’t divide rights.

Lxs actores ultra conservadores han desarrollado una serie de discursos en la esfera internacional de los derechos humanos. Utilizan argumentos que manipulan la religión, la cultura, la tradición y la soberanía nacional para minar los derechos relacionados con el género y la sexualidad.

Lxs actores anti-derechos se han alejado cada vez más del lenguaje explícitamente religioso. Vemos que actores regresivxs —que antes tal vez ridiculizaban los conceptos de derechos humanos — ahora los manipulan y cooptan para promover sus propios objetivos.

Protección de la familia

Este discurso emergente y exitoso parece inocuo, pero resulta útil como un tema ‘sombrilla’ bajo el que se cobijan múltiples posiciones patriarcales y anti-derechos. Por eso el tema de la «protección de la familia» resulta un ejemplo clave que muestra la tendencia de lxs actores regresivxs a llevar adelante una incidencia integral e integrada.

El lenguaje de la «protección de la familia» opera desplazando al sujeto de los derechos humanos, reemplazando al individuo por instituciones ya poderosas. También afirma una concepción unitaria, jerárquica y patriarcal de la familia que discrimina a todo formato familiar que esté fuera de estos límites rígidos.

Por último, intenta cambiar el enfoque del reconocimiento y la protección de los derechos de integrantes vulnerables de la familia a la no discriminación, la autonomía y la ausencia de violencia en el contexto de las relaciones familiares.

El derecho a la vida

La Santa Sede y varios grupos de la derecha cristiana buscan apropiarse del derecho a la vida para ponerlo al servicio de su misión contra el aborto. Mezclando el lenguaje de los derechos humanos con la doctrina religiosa conservadora, argumentan que el derecho a la vida, tal como se lo establece en la Declaración Universal de Derechos Humanos y en el Pacto Internacional de Derechos Civiles y Políticos, se aplica a partir del momento de la concepción.

Ningún instrumento universal de derechos humanos apoya ese argumento. Sin embargo, esta es una táctica atractiva para lxs actores anti-derechos, porque el derecho a la vida no puede ser violado bajo ninguna circunstancia y es un estándar legal vinculante.

Derechos sexuales

Lxs actores anti-derechos humanos utilizan una serie de dispositivos retóricos en su campaña para minar los derechos sexuales: sostienen que estos derechos no existen o que son «nuevos derechos»; que causan daño a las niñas, los niños y la sociedad; y/o que se oponen a la cultura, la tradición o las leyes nacionales.

Lxs actores conservadores dedicados a hacer incidencia en la ONU atacan el derecho a una educación sexual integral (ESI) desde varios frentes. Afirman que viola los «derechos parentales»; que perjudica a las niñas y los niños; y que no es educación sino adoctrinamiento ideológico.

También alegan que poderosos grupos de presión les imponen la Educación Sexual Integral a las niñas y los niños, los padres y las Naciones Unidas para beneficiarse de los servicios que estos mismos grupos proporcionan a niñas, niños y jóvenes.

Los intentos de invalidar los derechos relacionados con la orientación sexual y la identidad de género se han multiplicado. Lxs actores ultra conservadores argumentan que aplicar los principios y leyes históricos de derechos humanos a esta temática equivale a crear «nuevos derechos», y proponen un cambio radical en el significado actual de los derechos que resultaría de interpretarlos a la luz de la "cultura" o de las «particularidades nacionales».

Derechos reproductivos

Desde hace muchos años, las organizaciones de la derecha cristiana se movilizan en contra de los derechos reproductivos junto con la Santa Sede y otrxs aliadxs anti-derechos. A menudo argumentan que los derechos reproductivos no son más que una forma de control poblacional impuesto por Occidente sobre los países del Sur Global. Irónicamente, esta afirmación proviene a menudo de actores con sede en Estados Unidos y Europa Occidental, que en su mayoría trabajan activamente para exportar sus discursos y políticas fundamentalistas.

Lxs actores regresivxs también citan argumentos «científicos» de grupos de expertxs ultra conservadores y de fuentes que emplean metodologías de investigación poco sólidas, para sugerir que el aborto causa una serie de efectos secundarios psicológicos, sexuales, físicos y relacionales.

Protección de lxs niñxs y de los derechos parentales

Así como lxs actores anti-derechos buscan construir una nueva categoría de «protección de la familia», también proponen otra:  los «derechos parentales», que tampoco encuentra respaldo en las normas de derechos humanos vigentes. Este discurso paradójicamente intenta utilizar las protecciones de derechos que les corresponden a los niños y las niñas, tal como las expresa la Convención sobre los Derechos del Niño, para fundamentar el derecho de padres y madres  a controlar a sus hijas e hijos y limitar sus derechos.

La violencia contra las mujeres

Cada vez más, lxs actores anti-derechos, están intentando infiltrar y subvertir los estándares y discursos desarrollados por defensoras de derechos humanos, como la violencia contra las mujeres.

En la Comisión de la Condición Jurídica y Social de las Mujeres y en otros escenarios, estos actores insisten en tratar esta forma de violencia como un concepto al que le adosan argumentos anti-derechos reproductivos y otros de cariz patriarcal. Lxs actores ultra conservadores, por ejemplo, han argumentado que las relaciones de pareja no tradicionales ni heteronormativas son un factor de riesgo para la violencia, y enfatizan que los padres son necesarios para proteger a las familias de la violencia.

Género e «ideología de género»

La Santa Sede ha elaborado y sostenido una crítica al género, a la «ideología de género», lxs «radicales del género» y la teoría de género. Lxs actores anti-derechos a menudo leen el término ‘género’ como un código equivalente a ‘derechos LGBTQ’. La derecha religiosa utiliza el género como un concepto transversal que une muchos de sus discursos. Cada vez más, el pánico que generan en torno a este tema se concentra en la identidad de género y en los derechos de las personas trans.

Complementariedad y dignidad humana

Varios actores ultra-conservadores emplean el discurso de la complementariedad de los sexos. Estructuran su retórica en torno a una presunción de diferencia: se supone que los hombres y las mujeres tienen roles diferentes pero complementarios en el matrimonio, la vida familiar, y también en su participación en la vida comunitaria, política y económica.

La referencia a los roles «naturales» tiene por objeto rechazar los derechos humanos universales a la igualdad y la no discriminación. También se utiliza para justificar las violaciones de estos derechos por parte de actores estatales y no estatales, y el incumplimiento de las obligaciones del Estado en cuanto a eliminar los prejuicios y las prácticas basadas en roles estereotipados para hombres o mujeres.

Soberanía nacional y antiimperialismo

Este discurso sugiere que organismos de la ONU o Estados que actúan a través de la ONU atacan injustamente a los gobiernos nacionales. Lo que se intenta aquí es desplazar el sujeto de los derechos humanos de la persona o sector marginado que sufre una violación de sus derechos a una institución poderosa y/o regresiva,  el Estado, para justificar excepciones nacionales a los derechos universales o para apoyar la impunidad estatal.

Libertad religiosa

Lxs actores anti-derechos han adoptado el discurso de la libertad religiosa para justificar violaciones a los derechos humanos. Se refieren a la libertad religiosa de una manera que contradice directamente el propósito de este derecho humano y entra seriamente en conflicto con el principio de la universalidad de los derechos.

Su argumento es que la libertad religiosa se ve amenazada y debilitada por la protección a los derechos humanos, particularmente aquellos relacionados con el género y la sexualidad.

Lo que se proponen instalar es que el derecho a la libertad religiosa tiene por objeto proteger a las propias religiones y no a las personas, que son quienes en verdad tienen la libertad de profesar  o no distintas creencias. Sin embargo, el derecho internacional de los derechos humanos protege a lxs creyentes y no a las creencias, y el derecho a la libertad de religión, pensamiento y conciencia incluye el derecho a no profesar ninguna religión ni creencia así como a cambiar de religión o de creencias.

Derechos culturales y valores tradicionales

El despliegue de referencias a la cultura y la tradición para debilitar los derechos humanos, incluido el derecho a la igualdad, es una táctica común entre lxs actores anti- derechos. Presentan la cultura como algo monolítico, estático e inmutable, y a menudo la oponen a las «normas occidentales».

Las alusiones a la cultura por parte de lxs actores anti-derechos en los debates de política internacional tienen como objetivo debilitar la universalidad de los derechos, defendiendo un relativismo cultural que prevalece sobre las reivindicaciones de derechos o las limita. El uso de los derechos culturales por parte de actores regresivxs se basa en una tergiversación deliberada de la cultura como derecho humano. Los Estados deben velar por que no se utilicen actitudes tradicionales o culturales para justificar violaciones a la igualdad. Las normas de derechos humanos exigen acceso, participación y contribución igualitaria en todos los aspectos de la vida cultural para todas las personas, incluidas las mujeres, las minorías religiosas y raciales y las personas cuya identidad o expresión de género difieren de las normativas.

La subversión del «universal»

En espacios políticos internacionales, lxs actores anti-derechos manipulan cada vez más las referencias a los derechos humanos universales o fundamentales para revertir el significado de la universalidad de los derechos.

En lugar de utilizar el término ‘universal’ para describir todo el conjunto de derechos humanos indivisibles e interrelacionados, lxs actores ultra conservadores lo emplean para delimitar y describir un subconjunto de derechos humanos que ellxs consideran «verdaderamente fundamentales». Todos los otros derechos estarían sujetos a la discreción del Estado, serían derechos 'nuevos' u opcionales. Este discurso resulta especialmente poderoso ya que instala una categoría indefinida - lo «verdaderamente universal» - que queda abierta a interpretaciones cambiantes.

Descargar capítulo

Otros capítulos

• Actores principales de la oposición
• Principales estrategias y tácticas de la oposición
• Impactos principales sobre el sistema internacional de derechos humanos

Descargar capítulo

Otros capítulos

• Actores principales de la oposición
• Principales estrategias y tácticas de la oposición
• Impactos principales sobre el sistema internacional de derechos humanos

Voyager à Bangkok