jueves, 14 de octubre de 2010
I must admit I don´t know nothing about the problem in this moment, that`s the reason I choose this topic, like a way to research about it.So, this problem born with the return of the democracy in Chile, where the mapuches take force and all together decide to fight for their rights, their autonomy and the recuperation of their grounds. For to reach their objectives, they have done many things, for example, they have taken other grounds; they have attacked with fire and arms. Other way have been the taken for thirty four mapuches, they preferred to do a hunger strike. The last month, the president Sebastian Piñera gave a conference in the United Nation where he spoke about the topic saying that the big solution is the Araucania Plan and the “negotiating table”. However, according with the leaders of the mapuche`s movement “The Government don`t have nothing concrete”.Really I think that the Government don`t have intentions of admit the mapuche`s rights, simply they are waiting that mapuches lost forces, hopes and union. Respect of the “negotiating table” is just a big lie, because, according to me, the Government don`t reach a negotiation, but to convince to mapuches. Doesn´t the respect they must receive, because they are the original people of our country, of our earth, of our blood!!! The Government just try to repress it, like an annoying unconscious content, where the negation is necesary to continue living.
Suscribirse a:
Enviar comentarios (Atom)
HI Deborah,
ResponderEliminarYou say "I don´t know anything about this problem", "this problem started, originated" and "the recovery of their land"
DON´T FORGET, NEVER SAY "FOR TO". SAY "TO REACH".
What do you mean by,"Other way have been the taken for thirty four mapuches?"
If you say "the government don´t have nothing concrete" you are using double negation.
And the ggovernment is considered a singular entity.
The last part is also confusing. Could you try rewriting it for me, please?
1 point.
Paula