Some 10 years ago, it was common be politically correct, or be using euphemisms to try to alleviate or hide the reality. In a way, the euphemism can be interpreted as relativization of reality, almost a lie, which aims to not tell the truth in a comprehensive manner.

In some cases it is acceptable to use this feature, for example to notify the death of someone, or even in literature. However, use this language feature to be politically correct, is hypocrisy.

I am a supporter of pragmatism, which is philosophical doctrine that adopts as a criterion of truth to practical use, identifying the real with the useful. I do not like the half-truths and don’t like persons who say half-truths.

I have strong opinions, but I’m not inflexible, since I’m convinced of the contrary. I will cite some examples of things that I interpret in a pragmatic way, not through idealization. Idealization are nothing more than to live dreaming.

1 - China is composed of 56 nationalities. For there is a process of democratic transition will be require many agreements and, even so, the risk that there will be civil war is huge .Believing that the people can overthrow the Chinese Communist Party without the massacres occurring is an idiocy;

2 - I am in favour of abortion as a practice of birth control of. In “Freaknomics” was made an interesting comparison between districts in the Chicago in that was legalized abortion in 1973 and others neighbourhood where there was not the legalization. The result? The neighbourhood where there was the legalization is one of that there is less crimes, while the neighbourhood that was not the legalization is one of the most violent, with gang drugs. So, to legalize abortion reduces crimes and violence;

3 - Marriage between homosexuals. I am in favour, but tell me which of the major religions accept that? Catholicism? Islam? Judaism? The impression I have is that Buddhism is the most tolerant among the great religions. And there is another aspect, in addition to the religions, how many countries allow the marriage between homosexuals?

4 - Globalization is not a process that began after the end of the Cold War. Believing it is naive. When you search on the Internet, the most common answer refers to the multinational companies and new technologies. But is not limited to this in any way. The more accurate definition of globalization is that it is an economic process and establishing a social integration among the countries and people around the world, allowing individuals and governments to exchange ideas and carrying out financial transactions and trade. When then it would have started? With the Portuguese and Spanish, during the Great Navigation. Of course, in the twentieth century has gained more strength, but tell me something, demonstration that will lose its effectiveness and its strength? It is weaker or stronger? Up to oppose globalization is the same as opposed to gravity.

I believe that these four examples show the kind of person I am. I am not politically correct (hypocritical), I am not a dreamer (as live in a world full of problems). I am a pragmatist, I try to see how things are in fact and not as they should be. I believe that things can change, but historic changes take decades or centuries to come. And not a few mon