Assembly Fashion

Dressed democracy Teodulo Lopez Melendez for talk of dresses will surely go to the Greeks, but specifying that such travel must be made only when referring one to the dresses of democracy. Dresses may be fashionable or demode because, at the end and Cape, the fashionable word got us to French Spanish mode, and this in turn from the latin modus, only that the treacherous language can tell us that fashion is a regulatory mechanism of elections. The rest put dresses to Mrs democracy – were commissioned the so-called ideologies which, even today, manufactured adjectives in series without accepting that they are fashion passes. To pay honor to the origin of the word fashion there is no citing Ives Saint Laurent: over the years I’ve learned that the important thing in a dress is the woman who wears it. There was no quorum, there was no way to take decisions, it was necessary to resort to economic incentives so that citizens blossom. Democracy is in crisis, they exclaimed the more concerned.

This first dispossession of the fashion was there in Athens and who denounced it was nothing less than Aristotle. To decrease the concerns, Aristophanes wrote the Assembly of women where, unceremoniously looks the sensitive issue with eyes of satire. Indeed, Blepiro, Assemblyman, suffers from constipation and has to devote himself to solve it, what makes some live to take advantage of so arduous effort to exercise democracy with other dress. The political act is an act of mobilization of foreign wills with enough efficiency to make affected the packaging, that is, what is fashionable. The philosopher Saint Laurent, the Rationalist way of French thinking, as I quote him, however discovered that the important thing is the woman and not the dress. It is essential to resort to the cynical school when democracy puts the same dress of the dictatorship, without even realising it has are two very different women.