text:
Reader comments are listed below. Comments are currently closed and new comments are no longer being accepted.
I think the article is good overall, though I find a some doubtful points:
1) What the allies annexed after the war was not Paraguayan territory, it was disputed territory.
2) Saying that Paraguay relied on "17th-century cannon and wooden boats" may offer a wrong idea about its military power. Though it is true that Paraguayan cannon was smoothbore (including pieces casted by themselves at Ybicuy) while the allies had some rifled cannon, that technological transition took place in Europe not before the 19th century. Similarly, Paraguay's wooden vapors were state-of-the-art just some 15 years before the war.
Even though there was a technological gap, Lopez's army was quite formidable for the region when the war broke out. Only some military mistakes prevented them from obtaining crucial victories in its early stages. More precisely, wasting resources on the non-strategic invasion of Mato Grosso, accidentally blowing up a large arsenal there, losing the surprise element at the battle of Riachuelo (with it, a victory there was feasible and it could have meant their control of the Paraná & Paraguay rivers and thus the maintenance of their foreign supplies) and over-extending one of the columns that invaded Argentina.
After those failures, the isolation of Paraguay and arming of the Brazilians enlarged the technological differences. There are several parallels between this war and WW2 in Europe, this being one of them. I mean the axis not being able to match ally production of weapons and supplies after their initial incursions, however bold, failed to attain some key objectives.
3) Pedro's honor was not the main reason for the allies to reject Lopez's conditions for peace after his offensives were pulled back. For different reasons, the high powers in Brazil and Argentina had grounds to feel threatened by Lopez. Objectives like a change of the enemy's regime and the resolution of territorial claims by force were common in these kinds of conflicts. Even in more modern ones; think WW2 in Europe and the Pacific. I don't mean to justify the carnage that followed, but it was a complex matter.
4) Likewise, I think it's too generous towards Lopez to say that 'Honour similarly prevented [him] from abdicating, though perhaps no alternative, self-respecting Paraguayan leader could have surrendered on the secret pact's terms.' When the German incursions into France and Russia were repelled, would the normal next step be that the allies accepted a peace that preserved the Nazi regime and some of their occupations?
Just as with Hitler, there was most probably a psychological pathology in Lopez that is worth considering. Propaganda and a complete grip over their populations were also crucial in both cases.
5) More than the war, it was the autocracy of Francia, Lopez I and Lopez II that wiped out the Paraguayan elite. Many lived in exile in Buenos Aires before the outbreak of the war. They probably played a role in the Argentine involvement.
A biased article - I guess that is what begins to happen when your country (in this case, Brazil) is suddenly considered a "power". Brazilians should and must be proud of its great military achievements in a war in which it was caught off-guard, and remote areas of the nation were attacked, invaded, and pillaged. Some sublime moments of Brazilian history happened in that conflict, including the famous "Retirada da Laguna" (retreat from Laguna).
With our vast, remote, and undefended borders, a poor nation that only had coffee beans and some sugar, tobacco, and cotton as the basis of its economy had to make clear to its neighbors that no attempt of invasion would ever go unchallenged. This lesson, that Brazil was willing to do any sacrifice to defend its rightful borders, served us well in the diplomatic negotiations in the following decades, especially under Rio Branco, and helped our nation be the first to have completely settled borders in the continent. Glória aos Voluntários da Pátria! Glória ao Exército Brasileiro! Glória à Armada Nacional!
Your glory is tainted by the war crimes you have committed! But that is the Brazilian way, I suppose. The occupation in Asuncion was like the "Faxina" paramilitary groups in Sao Paolo, i.e. when they already got they enemies on the floor unarmed they just shoot them. "Cowardice" is something that Brazilian pleasures... This is the Brazilian glory!!! What a glory!!!
Invading Brazil when you are a tiny country is not a good idea.
I'm wondering why the Economist has chosen deliberately not to include any external (British, mainly) influence on the development of this war, judging by who was interested in aborting industrial development in Paraguay (or in South America, full stop) by then. And who sold the guns to be used on the "winner" side of this war. A story that doesn't account for the role of the external powres really falls short of analysis power.
Maybe because responsibility possibly resides with the primary antagonists that engaged in military conflict?
While Spanish America became a huge export market for British textiles, seems like Britain had bigger fish to fry around that time period of 1864-1865, with:
- Concerns over whether the Qing Dynasty will hold together and abide by recently signed treaties
- Consequences of the Danes losing to the German states (Prussia and Austria) after a sharp war over Schleiswig and Holstein
- Adjusting to the defeat of the American south (which the British provided support to) by the Yankees (which mobilized a massive, modern army and sizable navy)
There are probably others.
As for the French, well they had their problems with Mexico.
If you have credible, unbiased sources documenting explicit encouragement of war, or a conspiracy to instigate a war by the British, then please provide links to them.
Yet it is little known outside the region ? Really ?
Maybe is this an hidden 'not anymore British empire" apology ?
Who controlled Brazil, Argentina and Uruguay financially at the time ?
The British could handle competition easily back then......not anymore ! ,-))))
Goldman Sachs today is the Rothschild yesterday !
to the author: congrats.
This the best article I've read in the Economist for a long time.
Being a weekly reader for almost 60 years it reminds me of the high quality of TE articles a long time ago. They did build the reputation of the magazine.
A small disagreement that in no way detracts from what I wrote above.
You say the Paraguay war, as it is called in many places is little known outside the countries involved.
This is a native English speaking point of view.
Cultivated people in many far away countries, and culturally very different, are well aware that it was one of most barbaric events in History.
It is a bit like Holodomor in Ukraine or the terrible famine in Switzerland after the eruption of Mount Tambora in 1816. Cultivated people all over the world have been taught of them although they may not be aware of details.
Wherever schooling is of good quality, particularly in History and Geography, the not properly named Paraguay war is probably better known than the Swiss not man made famine.
Thanks again for spreading knowledge of details of the War of Triple Alliance.
May the world never experience anything like that again.
May the world never experience anything like that again.
Oh but it will. See: Roman sacking of Carthage then Jerusalem, Mongol invasions, Viking invasions, Rape of Nanking, WW II take your pick, Cambodia and Pol Pot, Rhawanda, Chad, etc, etc
But the Liberals just dont get it. Better to live in a man-made ideal world than the REAL one until its thrust upon you.
I wonder if TE accept the local intellectual's analysis of why the Left is weak in Paraguay -
TE: ...the Paraguayan left was far too weak to protect [Lugo]. That too has roots in the war. "Our economy never overcame the deficiencies the war imposed on us," says Jorge Rubiani, an architect and author, "so there was never an industrial structure to generate class consciousness."
The Rubiani guy is obviously a Leftie himself, very typically of the upper-middle-class ilk. His breed is, and really always has been, passionately eager to 'serve' the 'toiling folks' as their 'liberators' and their 'enlightened elite'. This kind of bourgeois well-wishers are not only the main carriers and pushers of this fake ideology, they were also its inventors.
I mean those two Prussians, an industrialist and his Jew hating Jewish jester who spent his idle life as a kept woman, depending entirely on the funds stolen from the workers enslaved by his benefactor.
But members of working class itself never determined the Left's strength and never were the predominant part of its membership.
" I mean those two Prussians, an industrialist and his Jew hating Jewish jester who spent his idle life as a kept woman, depending entirely on the funds stolen from the workers enslaved by his benefactor."
How true. But you must remember that, that benefactor was an (ahem) "angel" to that schmuck parasite who managed to write a manifesto that still holds the overfed and/or feeble minded of the world in thrall; otherwise that schmuck would have had to gain first-hand experience about the life of a real worker in a real factory...
Overfed? Yeah, certainly. But unlike those romantic old times of the Prussian schmuck and his angel, they have now another rich Marxian jester who tells them what to eat and what no to, what to think (but better never do - what for, since he does it for them?) and what to feel... Aw, I forgot his name! Something to do with bloomers it was, or bloomer at the very least. Any suggestions?
That nannying schmuck you have in mind is a bloomin' idiot... Pretty soon people will have to wear a sweater when that bloomin' idiot feels cold... ;-)
I sympathize somewhat with those forced to heed the bloomin' idiot's decrees... but those volunteering as foot soldiers for his ah so humane and progressive crusade are the problem.
Dear TE, what exactly is the value add of this story to the world? I admit to making the mistake of reading this article under the rather vein assumption I would learn something of economic value related to a change that would have some impact on 2013.
Your never-ending war story is beyond useless!
Well, since you did not learn anything from the article, you claim, you will learn something from having posted your little bilious missive. "Vein" is a noun. I am guessing you had "vain" in mind, which is an adjective; and it truly describes you accurately...
If it wasn't for people like you, the economist would have less money to operate...but if it wasn't for people like you, the world would surely be better...but you making everyone's subscription marginally cheaper makes the world better off...
so conflicted, it makes me want to cut my VAINS
Two points:
1) this war might be little known in Europe, but it is highly known in Brazil
2) paraguay waged war; López invaded Mato Grosso in Brazil
Actually, as far as I have learnt about this War, López's troops not only invaded Mato Grosso (a huge interior province whose annexation or invasion would seriously decrease Brazil's territory), but they also looted everything, everywhere they conquered. Not to diminish the massacres that in the end led to Paraguay's population becoming less than half of the pre-war numbers, but it must not be forgotten that ~100,000 people died from the Brazilian, Argentine and Uruguayan sides (I think most of the dead were Brazilian).
Besides, some people have here stated that Paraguay, when it actively launched the war, was already facing the Secret Treaty of the Triple Alliance, but according to what I've read secret negotiations had begun in 1864, when the conflict in Uruguay was already becoming international, and was only really defined and signed by the 3 countries in 1865, when the war had already begun. Am I missing something? Paraguay, let's not forget it, then was no poodle dog surrounded by pit bulls. López only declared war to Brazil and Argentina because, despite his country's isolation and little population, he had by far the most modern, organized and one of the largest armies in the region.
Of course Brazil and Argentina eventually organized and prepared their armies in a hurry and started to win the battles, but it is nonsense to talk of López's Paraguay as if it were today's Paraguay. Then it was a large country with truly expansionist tendencies (in its first opportunity it invaded and even tried to annex Argentine and Brazilian lands), meddling in other countries' affairs just like Brazil and Argentina (defending the other party in Uruguay's civil war wasn't a kind of interference?) and investing a lot in military equipment and personnel, much more than its neighbors. Now imagine what any country in a region will think about its neighbor led by a military dictator that come to invest a lot in its army and eventually invades 2 other countries with which it has political conflicts and differences of interests in a third country - in that case, Uruguay. It is as if all the former allies of a Saddam Hussein or a Muammar Kadafi invaded the US and its European allies when they actively started to help defeat them, starting a world war instead of limiting their reactions to the actual, local confict in Iraq or Libya.
Now, I believe there must be two discussions here (a similar case with US and Japan's Pacific War): one is the "legitimacy" of waging war against Paraguay; and the other is the fairness of the kind of war they chose to make against that country, in which case the undeniable fact is that the Triple Alliance by far exceeded the accepted means of war in order to defeat Paraguay, especially as it eventually seemed to be against the very Paraguayan people instead of the Paraguayan regime.
You said it all! I would have written that myself, wasn't for the fact that I'm writting from a tablet :-)
You made some overstatement on your analysis that are really difficult to find historical evidence. The point that Paraguay had the most modern army is somehow very in the limit of reality. Paraguay had a industry of iron, but at the end of the war Brazilian weapons by far were the most developed in terms of precision and reach. Brazil had a bigger population, although much coward one -it is a fact, e.g. the Duke of Caixias wrote to the Brazilian emperor that, in the battle field, a Paraguayan soldier was valuable as much as twenty of Brazilian soldiers. It was not that Paraguayan army was better trained, they were all peasants, as they still are. The fact that the Paraguayans fought so courageously can be explained by the fact that they really were fighting for they freedom. They knew it what "freedom" was. Brazilian soldiers were slaves, so they really did not have any cause for fighting. This is point also goes against your claim that López was a militar dictator. He was the constitutional President of Paraguay. Paraguayans followed him bravely because their were identified with the defense of the country. If you say this. What you will call Bartolomé Mitre? The General in Chief of the Allies. What you will call Conde D´eu? He handled the worst atrocities of the war, not López... What you will compare Conde D´eu with? It is that right a Brazilian Menguele? Then you say that López meddled on other countries. He did as long as it was a defense of its own country. If Brazil managed to get the power in Uruguay, the next step would have been Paraguay. Paraguay signed a treaty, years before, of mutual defense, because both countries knew the political interest of the two big ones -Argentina and Brazil. Brazil, still in the 1960s arranged an occupation on what it was the 7 falls because they wanted to get the hydroelectric dam there and wanted to exclude Paraguay from its right to the river. So Brazil is the one that always was expantionist.
Well, you yourself say that IN THE END of the war the Brazilian weapons were better than the Paraguayan ones, but it is widely known Paraguay had better equipment and perhaps even larger military personnel than Brazil right at the beginning of the war. The fact Brazil catched up fast was mostly due to extremely costly debts it had to make and which eventually created an economic crisis and maybe, years later, helped the monarchy be abolished. Besides, you are somewhat wrong about your "fighting for freedom" (come on, what freedom under a notoriously authoritarian, perhaps even totalitarian military regime?), while a big part of the Brazilian army consisted of slaves that fought in the hope (promised to them) that they would be freed afterwards, so they somehow also fought "for freedom".
Finally, Brazil had historic interests in Uruguay, partly because it had Portuguese colonies in the 18th century and was for 2 centuries a border zone between Brazilian Gaúchos and Argentines. So, basically, it was very different from Paraguay, where there hadn't been direct Portuguese colonisation nor persistent and everyday contact between Brazilians and Uruguayans in the very undefined borders between the two countries; but only foreign policy and trade interests, and probably Brazil would - as it did - limit itself to try to have as much influence as possible in Paraguay, what is something all the countries try to do with their neighbors. Anyway, there is no legitimate historic approach in this "would've done" or "could've done" argument of yours. As for Brazil's military men, well, they were cruel and unreasonable generals and militaries (all armies tend to be cruel in moments of crude war), and not the representatives of the state, much less the representatives of a militaristic family dynasty. And even if they were, that won't ever erase the fact that López as well as his father were militaristic and proto-totalitarian dictators that, of course, had their good aspects, but were no great democratic and modern leaders. As for your 1960 "arrangement of an occupation", I have no information at that, and as it wasn't done, I think you should at least provide credible links to that.
I don't know, but when you insist that López was a perfectly constitutional and legitimate President of Paraguay, and that Brazilians were "cowards" (perhaps because they were not "sooo" willing to die and fight till the total destruction of their nation, what 90% of Brazilians will really agree with, because no, we really have very little tendency to want ourselves to become heroes only after our death, LOL!) while Paraguayans are such a free and brave nation, combine in my reasoning to lead me to at least suspect you have a lot of nationalism blurring your analysis of all this issue.
Good points here, specially your last paragraph.
I would only risk a "defense" of the Brazilian soldier of his day (full disclosure: I am Brazilian), that most of the Brazilians that fought on this war (from low to surprisingly high military ranks) were ignorant, poorly trained, illiterate people, fighting a war in a foreign country that did not only started the war (at least that is what they have thought) but was willing to fight until the last man, whatever it takes. They had seen (or have been told) of Paraguay's atrocities on the early stages of war in Brazilian soil, and had seen many fellow Brazilians dying in battle (let's not forget that, although Paraguay's casualties were astonishing in percentage of its original population, Brazil's casualties in absolute terms were not neglectable either). If you think, only as an example, how mad an American must have been when he saw 3000 life's lost in 9/11 attacks, you can only wonder how one would react if some other country's soldiers march over you land, kill 164,000 fellow citizens and rape your women.
Also, a large portion of the Brazilian troops was composed of "freed-slaves-to-be" (that is, slaves that would have their freedom as long as they completed their military services), and, as so, had probably lived their whole lives in a culture in which physical abuse, rape and low respect for another human being was almost a fact of life (strong pray on the weak, someone would say).
I guess my point is: it is not fair to judge their acts based on our current "accepted means of war" or even the "accepted means of war" of that time, probably too sophisticated for that part of the world (I can just imagine how nasty, dangerous and "primitive" a war-time, poor Mato Grosso must have been in the 1800s)
Of course, nothing legitimates the war crimes that were committed by anyone, and it is our obligation to condemn it and employ our best efforts so that it would never happen again. However, it is important to recognize all these factors if we are to be honest to our past.
Interesting essay, in combining a presentation of both current events and the unique history of the war of the Triple Alliance.
I am not sure I would say this war was the most traumatic in Latin America though, considering the Mexican revolts and war for independence in the early 19th century, and the Mexican revolution in the early 20th century.
But for South America it was certainly a significant war, along with the Pacific War, which was had Bolivia and Peru fighting Chile.
I am also not sure that Paraquay's efforts in the mid-19th century with importing machinery, developing foundries, etc. could yet be called an industrial revolution. The country certainly punched above the belt in developing an oversized military (in comparison to its neighbors).
And I am surprised Argentina didn't try to take over more of the country after the war; and treat it like a lost province/intendency from 54 years prior.
As for immoral and lascivious behavior, representatives of the Catholic church had been making complaints about the local populations almost as soon as Europeans settled down in South America. I seem to recall long reports sent to the Papacy about Portuguese Brazil, and some harsh castigations of Spanish conquistadors.
Otherwise, how come no details on the post-war gender ratio are given? It seems to represent an extreme gender imbalance in history.
According to the entry on Paraguay in "An Intelligent American's Gude to the Peace": "The Ratio of women to men was 13 to 1" (page 229).
Other sources indicated that "females....constituted three-quarters of the entire population" ("The History Atlas of South America" page 101).
It was good to hear a little about Guarani. I had come across the people/speakers of the language in travels along the border of Argentina and Brazil.
As a side note, Ernst Rohm, the driving force in the creation of the German SA, was briefly an advisor to the Bolivian army in the 1920s. Seems that didn't help Bolivia with Chaco War later on...
'And I am surprised Argentina didn't try to take over more of the country after the war; and treat it like a lost province/intendency from 54 years prior.'
Michael, this observation of yours is spot on. The article misleads a bit on this point too.
To begin with, the author says Lopez I beefed his army 'to deter Paraguay's twitchy neighbours: Argentina considered the country a rebel province until 1852'. That year marks demise of Rosas, who held that belief. But the factions that disputed power after Rosas didn't. Yet, Lopez I began building up the army after 1852.
His reasons were more likely related to his concept of a what a strong nation should be, plus concerns about the possibility of conflict with Brazil due to the northern territorial disputes.
On the other hand, relations with Argentina were good, at least on the surface. This was so even though there were territorial disputes between the countries due to there being insufficient basis for deciding on a 'pre-war border', despite the map embedded in the article referring to such a thing. Power in Argentina was split between 'Federales', led by Urquiza, and liberals led by Mitre, who run the country from 1862 on. Federales were mostly sympathetic with Paraguay, whom they regarded as an ally against Brazilian expansionism, while liberals had enough trouble already securing their power.
That setup explains Lopez's probable reasoning when he invaded Argentina to reach Uruguay, as he was counting on the liberals not daring to confront him. And he may have thought that the enterprise would weaken their government and strengthen Federales who would support his cause and, why not, find a leader in him. What he didn't consider is that he had alienated Urquiza so much that the leader of the Federales backed Mitre against him. This alliance was utmost important in the consolidation of internal power in Argentina after decades of civil wars that followed independence.
Therefore, Mitre's reason to enter war was mostly securing his government and his liberal project. The settlement, by force, of disputed territories was put forward mostly to justify such a costly campaign. Urquiza reasons were more subtle but equally understandable. Supplying the allies offered better rewards than fighting in his own territory to help Lopez, who he didn't trust.
Yet, Argentina wasn't in a position to annex whatever she pretended, which after 1852 was much less than the whole of Paraguay. Some pretensions were abandoned due to Brazilian pressures, as Brazilians did with some of theirs due to Argentine demands. The image amongst the international community was also considered, as was the standing with Paraguayans themselves. So Argentina just kept her stronger claims while submitting other disputed territory to arbitrage with U.S. president Rutherford Hayes, who decided in favor of Paraguay.
Fine points, @Andy, as well as the one you made about Paraguay's military at the beginning of the war.
The fact is López (and his father before him) had possibly built the only well-trained regular army in the region, even if their weapons were somewhat outdated. Brazil and Argentina had to scramble to assemble their own forces, and it took a long time to organize them in real fighting units.
But Brazil had a stronger navy (even though it was better suited to blue waters than to river skirmishes). The Brazilians managed to outmaneuver López in the crucial riverine batttles like Riachuelo, which left the Paraguayans isolated in their little inland fortress country.
You're right about López and Urquiza, the Entre Rios caudillo. López did hope to gain Urquiza's support and considered him a traitor when Urquiza backed Mitre, the Buenos Aires liberal who was Argentina's president.
We cannot forget that Entre Rios (between rivers), Urquiza's province, is the big wdge of land that juts to northeast right between the Paraná and Uruguay rivers — in other words, right between Paraguay and Brazil. With Urquiza on his side, López at the same side joined his forces to his Uruguayan alies and managed to cut Buenos Aires from Brazil.
His plans went badly wrong when Urquiza sided with Mitre and Brazil. Even some Paraguayan accounts of the pre-war political maneuvering saw this, and recognize that the young López was eager to become a first-tier political and military player in the Southern Cone, after years of isolation kept by Francia and López father.
As to Michael Dunne's point about post-war territorial claims, Argentina did try to annex a big chunk of the Chaco region. American arbitrage, as you say, favored Paraguay, and they duly recognized this by naming a Chaco town Villa Hayes.
I congratulate you on being so knowledgeable about this sad war and trying to look beyond the myths and half-truths cultivated by both sides (I'm taking for granted you are a foreigner — if you're not, double congratulations, as it is even more difficult to a South American to keep an unbiased view on this awful historical episode).
Thanks perguntador. I agree with your historical points, but I'm not sure I would say that the myths around this episode were cultivated by both sides, as there's serious historical work by nationals from each of these countries too. I'm not too proud of our average historiography, as there is a lot of widespread work that is not good. But balanced, profound work is not hard to find.
A recent televised debate on the Paraguayan war has come to my mind. It can be found in Youtube by searching for "Guerra del Paraguay - Los historiadores debaten", though it won't be of much use if you have a hard time understanding our quick-spoken variant of Spanish. I was expecting it to be tendentious, as was the documentary that was televised alongside it and is the general programming of the state-owned TV channel during the kirchnerite years. But I was pleasantly surprised. Di Meglio and Sabato, who spoke second and fourth (not counting the introduction), spoke well and were very well balanced if you ask me, even though they tend to share quite different ideologies. There was some space for nationalistic revisionism, via Galasso's participation, but well...
Speaking of Youtube videos, I also recommend "Guerra del Paraguay (Triple Alianza) Documental Cándido López".
Thanks, Andy. I'll take a look at the videos you suggest.
When I talked of myths and half-truths I did not mean to say that there is not good and serious historical work about the war. I meant those jingoistic versions fostered by political interests and military propaganda that became the dominant, "official" view of the war along the years.
They usually serve political factions in each country, of course. I saw this kind of thing both in Brazil and in Paraguay — with opposing views, of course — but I suppose the same happened in Argentina and Uruguay.
This is what poisons the air still today, as we can see in some of the comments to this article. It is a good thing that independent historians are doing serious research. But their work needs to get beyond academic circles, if we want to change the climate of the mainstream debate in our countries about this awful war.
Try an entire governmental region named after U.S. President Hayes. It is called the Departmento de Presidente Hayes with an area of 72,907 km2 (28,150 sq mi). Villa Hayes is the capitol.
We can´t believe in Mercosur. Unfortunately, current leaders in the member coutries have killed the beautifull project of regional integration. While the two main members, Brazil and Argentina live in a permanent commercial war where each one see the others as an enemy and not as a partner, they decide to turn Mercosur an ideological organization with no reals content. In spite of going deeper about integration, commercial policy, tolls, currency, taxes, terrible burocracy, they prefer to wasre time making Mercosur to grow just in numbers, including countries such as Venezuela. This is the victory of dogmatism, populism and demagogy against pragmatism, modernization, progress and real regional integration. Excluding Paraguay from Mercosur is un fair, illegal and a new manifastation of this ideological new way. It´s easy to understand why Chile has been sucessfull looking for another ways out of Mercosur. But Brazil and Argentina leaders prefer Chavez as a partner instead of a serious country such as Chile. I guess the next step will be the integration of Cuba in Mercosur.
Well, being pragmatic totally justifies the inclusion of Venezuela into Mercosul, as that country is the only one of the bloc that has easy access to the Caribbean, is an oil powerhouse and has a significant internal market to the Southern Cone's products, as well as being near the ever more important Amazon region of Brazil. From a pragmatic point of view, it is Venezuela, not Chávez, who enters Mercosul. As for Paraguay, I know by experience it is a fruitless discussion to try to explain that the due process of law (with all its consequences) must be followed besides the litteral application of any rule - even if constitutional, because the due process of law is a constitutional principle, and a fundamental one at that. Anyway, there is not a consensus among lawyers that Paraguay's impeachment was really legal, mostly because of the "fast food" process they invented there which may have had tremendous consequences on a few constitutional rights. So, what a pity if condemnations came from Brazil, Argentina, Uruguay and even, in the OAS, from the right-party government of Chile and basically all Latin American states (wow, these Latin Americans are all a bunch of socialists, aren't they?!). Perhaps all this "it is written in the Constitution" story told and retold by some Paraguayans and their allies resonate in the Anglo-Saxon world, but here in LA we are experienced enough in coups and purposeful impeachments to be able to know when one more disguised coup has happened.
Your arguments to justify the inclusion of Venezuela in Mercosur are the official reasons. They make sense, but we all know they are not true. The real targets are political and ideological, not economic and even less commercial. What´s behind this inclusion is just the argentinean press to bring Venezuela to the block in return to the huge amount of argentinean public debt bought by Venezuela. Chavez has managed that oil exports become almost the only resource for venezuelan economy. And he wastes this richness in two fronts:
1. Home policy, demagogycal assistencialism.
2. Foreign policy, to buy international allies with the oil earnings.
Both of them aren´t sustainable and are driving Venezuela to the desaster.
I firmly support the idea of Mercosur. But it´s not working specially because of the unresolved commercial rivalry between Brazil and Argentina. If Mercosur doesn´t present progress in commercial integration policies, it doesn´t make any sense to bring new members. It is in fact an empty movement with the only political consequence of fighting the Chavez international isolation.
Paraguay is suffering an unfair exclusion because of a legal impeachment. I don´t remember a Brazilian exclusion in the OAS because of the Collor impeachment. However, I don´t find a good idea to bring Solano to the political scenarium. He was the only responsable for the war and I don´t see apropriate to compare his government with the democratic current institutions in Paraguay.
Well, the Collor impeachment only happened after many legal acts of accusation and defense, public sessions, hearing of witnesses and a whole lot of public discussion in the media, streets and elsewhere followed by months of protests and all that. It took months to let him defend himself, let others charge him, and only after all that he was impeached. It was actually an example of what should have happened in Paraguay, and why so many Latin American countries - right-wing or left-wing - were astounded by a process that lasted 24 hours and still dared to call itself "due process of law" with proper right of defense. Come on, I don't know how the Paraguayan law system is, but in most Roman-Germanic law systems with its modern influences of European Enlightenment and Anglo-Saxon Common Law (from which the idea of due process of law derives most directly), the idea that a process involving any person, let alone the most important institutions of the country (and its own stability, possibly), can be decided in 1 day and with little or no public and institutional discussion is bound to be much condemned.
Sorry. Please don't try to side the OAS with less serious organisations in the Americas; unlike Mercosur, Unasur and ALBA countries, the OAS -in the words of its Secretary General, Miguel Insulza, a Chilean socialist)- appreciated "political and judicial normality in Paraguay" and called for no sanctions whatsoever. The childish Mercosur and Unasur on the other hand acted all impulsively upon seeing their "comrade" Lugo leave power after having accepted his own impeachment process, But they lack any credibility for they (Chávez, Dilma, Evo, Cristina, Castro I & II, Mujica) seem to see in Hugo Chávez's Venezuela an "exemplary" version of a democracy... "lacking" in Paraguay... it would have been funny if it weren't true. Colombia and Chile have already backed down from Unasur's block-decision and have formed opinions now more alike those of the OAS: No interruption of democracy appreciated, the Law was executed as in the Constitution, full recognition of new government formed by Lugo's ex vice president. In democratic countries when Congress votes you out on a 110-5 margin, you're out baby. It's political not judicial process that counts for presidents enjoy immunity from judicial processes while in power.
Again, well said Ygor C.S.
You seem to think one has rights only if the process is a judicial one, but Law doesn't follow you, and you also seem to really believe a political judgment is in fact a "do as you will" judgment by the Congress, with few or no requirements and a process that, for the sake of politics and "democratic decision", can be done at any cost and any way. You must understand that modern democracies are not only democracies, period. They are constitutional, rule-of-law democracies, and that changes a lot the whole situation. Anyway, those who think otherwise will hardly change their mind, because they conflate the legitimacy of the process itself with the legitimacy of their will (people's will or not), and thus will be totally sure that what happened was totally legal and legitimate.
Paraguay has no fate in a Mercosur that was never intended to bring prosperity to its people, but rather geopolitical power for Brazil and Argentina. The way they have treated Paraguay, a functioning democracy by all accounts, vs Venezuela, a failed state with a demagogue dictatorship, speaks volumes of the profound disrespect brazilians, argentinians and uruguayans feel for Paraguay.
Paraguay must join the Pacific Alliance with Mexico, Chile, Peru and Colombia, with Costa Rica and other democracies in the region. It is an agreement that respects each county´s national interest and dignity.
I agree. Join Chile and Peru and Colombia. Best thing to do.
Brazil and Argentina are in the hands of leftists parties, which all seek power, not prosperity.
ps. i am from brazil
Just curious, how are relations between Bolivia and Paraguay nowadays?
And is there decent commerce between Bolivia and Chile? Or, are things still clouded by the Pacific War?
I ask because it seems Paraguay now is a victim of geography, and largely embedded between Mercosur countries.
Actually I am surprised Mercosur has held up - I thought Argentina's difficulities back in 2000/2001 and subsequent heterodox policies of the Peronist governments would have stressed the trade arrangement to the limits. Conversely, Brazil (and other South American countries) seem to have benefitted from extra-regional trade, with say trading commodities with China.
Bolivia has just joined Mercosur, just like Venezuela, making it a club of primary goods exporters. But Mercosur has also brought about distorsion in economic growth in the region. Protectionism and commodity dependence. The whole region, Mercosur, is associated with massive exports of soy-beans and other commodities and primary goods, but now with higher value-added products, with a few exceptions, Embraer from Brazil.
No wonder Brazil´s economy expanded at a rate of 1% in 2012, as the commodity fever that drove their growth for ten years is coming to an end, and as African countries enter the competition for primary goods exports.
Chile has just achieved investment grade, AA-, Colombia and Peru are also noticing expansion in their economies as they open up for trade in the world, Mexico is achieving remarkable growth as well and its industrialization process has made the top exporter of manufactured goods in the region.
I couldn't agree with you more. Just let me add that most Uruguayans are ashamed of what our government has done and what our foreign policy has been since 2010.
Mercosur exists only in paper. Argentina is a liability and Brazil's agenda is with the world and rightly so. In Uruguay we tried to follow's Chile's example but since 2005 our governments have been grossly incompetent and naïve in foreign policy.
this is a very indepth article
Stupid conflit, like many others..
The article really hit the nail in the head. Being uruguayan, and having travelled to Paraguay on business and pleasure, I have come to know this part of their history. The Triple Alliance War was literally a war of extermination. There was more to it than the article says. Both Brazil and Argentina were envious of Paraguay's degree of development at the time. It had an industry, some of the first railroads of the region, but made incorrect geopolitical decisions, like having close relations with Napoleon III who provided support. However, as French relations with Britan were stressed, to some degree Britain sided with Brazil, and probably helped seal Paraguay's fate. This is a part of history that has many stories, depending on which side you are. Paraguay is somehow correct in stressing the similarities between then and it's suspension from Mercosur today. This suspension was railroaded by Argentina and Brazil, and they needed Uruguay's approval, which they once again pressured for and obtained. It is the Triple Alliance all over again.
You are SO right, I have read everything that has been written about that war and the Lopez'... and I have to agree with the article 100%, and, I also agree with you that there are many, many more influencing factors to the war in 1865, as nowadays the 'punishment' of Paraguay regarding Mercosur.
When I grew up (Stroessner's era) in school we only learned about 'the heroism and valor of the Mariscal and the Paraguayan people' and we were made to believe that he was the saviour of Paraguay as an independent state. To fully understand history one cannot dismiss the despotic rule of the Dictator Rodriguez de Francia, wo ruled with almost no outside influence from 1814 to 1840.
It is true, the war is little known outside South America, but I guess all history is passed on by the victors!
An interesting and somewhat paradoxical new information is that after Paraguay's suspension from Mercosur its trade with Brazil grew more than in the previous years. So, at least from an economic point of view, it seems the sanctions with the suspension had very little impact at least in the Brazil-Paraguay relations.
You ridiculously FAILED to mention that the so-called impeachment process of Hugo only lasted 24 hours!
Yes. Thats' true. Buy according to Paraguayan law its legal and binding. I might not agree with the time lapse, but its Paraguay's law.
What do you mean, sir, with "little-known" conflict? That part of south american history is overstudied at the Brazilian universities. There is a big roll of highlighted works about it. It can be "little-know" to the european academics only...
What do you mean, sir, with "little-known" conflict? That part of south american history is overstudied at the Brazilian universities. There is a big roll of highlighted works about it. It can be "little-know" to the european academics only...
Hit me on my head. I never knew all this. And told in such exquisite detail and lucidity. After reading this only one thought comes to my mind -
I would love to see Paraguay one day.
Please remember that sometimes the Economist's reports are ONE-sided. There was no mentioning of England's great interest in the war with a view to keeping its intense foreign trade with Argentina and Brazil and not losing it to the then fast industralising nation of Paraguay. The Economist can be an utter DISASTER in its history-based articles. I also remember this other articles, though contemporaneous, in which the journalist was clearly looking down on Brazil's president for giving EU suggestions on the crisis. The journalist ridiculously FAILED to understand that Brazil had had several economic crises and dealt with those in several different ways and that therefore president Dilma's advising was empirical. I could go on and on on quite a few other reports. There days if it's economic news I want, I consult Business Insider. At least, its corps are more reliable.
It is indeed very interesting from a sociological and historical perespective how life in Paraguay was marked with its past closeness with wars. There is also the war against Bolivia. So, although the country has only three neighbours, they fought against four countries. If you sum up the population of these four countries, you will get at least 230 million people, Paraguay has only 6. This is one of the reason why it's one of the poorest countries in the region, and if lags well behind its neighbours.
The way this war and the war of the pacific were never resolved lingers over the current south american geopolitics. It's a pity.
dear Taxidermist,
Besides your thoughtful article, sadly omitting some key actors of the so called "triple alliance war", but for my delight highlighting a beloved artist Cándido López as a vivid testimonial of this tragedy.
I can perceive a coincidental and sudden interest in Paraguay as a topic with so many interesting reviews in the UK conservative media about this beautiful country until now an unfairly forsaken subject banned from the global press in general for ages.
Shall I assume that the provisional Paraguayan government has increased their PR budget in a serious and well articulated attempt to become the newest south american world class tax haven in the very heart of South America? or am I wrong?
The Economist explains: Who would pay a "mansion tax"
The Economist explains
Football and British politics: David Cameron's own goal
Game theory
Britain's election campaign: April 26th: The deafening silence of David...
The week ahead: A very normal affair
Football and politics: David Cameron's own goal
America's Ukrainian mission: Training wheels
Have you listened to The Economist Radio on Facebook?
The Economist Radio is an on-demand social listening platform that allows you to listen, share and recommend The Economist audio content
Test your EQ
Take our weekly news quiz to stay on top of the headlines
Want more from The Economist?
Visit The Economist e-store and you'll find a range of carefully selected products for business and pleasure, Economist books and diaries, and much more


text:
Though this item is long gone, we've curated a few other products that you might also be interested in. Check them out!
This rectangular pedestal table gives a sculptural sense to your dinner presentation, elevating the food as an object of desire. The Skovby SM 35 dining table's unobtrusive and simple lines beautifully conceal an extension leaf within its base for easy use when you have guests around your table. One of the most functional parts of a home, this extending table is little brother to the Skovby SM 36 Rectangular Extending Dining Table. Some assembly required.
Product Weight: 117 lb
Assembly Required:Yes, light assembly required
View Skovby SM35 Table assembly instructions.
Viewing assembly instructions requires Adobe Reader. You can download the latest version of Adobe Reader here.
Standard Shipping Method:Standard curbside shipping is 5% of item subtotal
Service includes delivery of large, heavy and or fragile items. Deliveries are made directly to your curb, front door or main lobby. Standard service does not include placement inside your home or business, unpacking, assembly or debris removal. Deliveries are generally made within 3-10 days from the time your order ships, and occur Monday through Friday. Day and time specific delivery appointments are required, and someone must be present to receive the order. Appointments are generally set between the hours of 12pm-5pm.
Special Services:Inside delivery is available upon request. Please call our sales team at 888-467-6278 for a custom quote
There is a 5-year limited warranty on extension mechanisms, patented extension systems, and fittings.
Skovby's warranty covers products that were manufactured after January 1, 2007. Minor variations will occur between floor samples, swatches, printed illustrations, and items ordered. Skovby's warranty does not cover a product sold "as is" or purchased from any source other than an authorized Skovby retailer. Any product modification will void this warranty. Any product that is exposed to extreme temperatures, humidity, or misuse will not be covered under the warranty. Transportation costs in connection with product repair of defects will not be covered by the warranty.

subset: commoncrawl


text:
Item donations are now being accepted for the upcoming "A Call to Auction" online auction happening April 6-12. Click here for more details. You can also view the complete list of items available here.
The women coffee-producers request your help!
Take a look at the grants available for adoption and call Marilyn Dryke, 800.791.1181, for more information.
Thank you for your donations to the Garth Smith Memorial. Click here to to read more about Garth and to submit your donations to this fund.


text:
The life of a traveling merchant is a lonely one, a fact with which Kraft Lawrence is well acquainted. Wandering from town to town with just his horse, cart, and whatever wares have come his way, the peddler has pretty well settled into his routine - that is, until the night Lawrence finds a wolf goddess asleep in his cart.
Taking the form of a fetching girl with wolf ears and a tail, Holo has wearied of tending to harvests in the countryside and strikes up a bargain with the merchant to lend him the cunning of "Holo the Wisewolf" to increase his profits in exchange for taking her along on his travels.
What kind of businessman could turn down such an offer? Lawrence soon learns, however, that having an ancient goddess as a traveling companion can be a bit of a mixed blessing. Will this wolf girl turn out to be too wild to tame?
Written by Isuna Hasekura.
#107 - What's Hot Pick
This item has customer reviews! See what other people think.
Submit your own review of this item.
People Ordering This Have Also Been Interested In:
See more products people have ordered with this one.
Do you have questions about this item or a correction to the description? Send us some feedback!


text:
Top Definition
Louis Friend is an anagram for IRON SULFIDE which is also known as fool's gold. This name was used in the movie The Silence of the Lambs, as the name Dr Hannibal Lector told the Senator Ruth Martin was Buffalo Bills real name. ( if these names make no scene to you i suggest you read or watch The Silence of the Lambs).
Dr Hannibal Lector; His name is Louis Friend, he was referred to me by my patient Benjamin Raspil.....
Senator; *listening Intently*
Senator; *listening Intently*
автор: greatevil1
19 декабря 2011


text:
Your shopping cart is empty.
Click to Enlarge Image +
The contemporary color and design of this rug can brighten any room. Its neutral colors coordinate with most of our slipcovers. 50% polypropylene/50% modacrylic pile.Rugs are shipped via FedEx. These items cannot be delivered to an APO/FPO or P.O. Box address.
Today: $179.99
No swatches are available for
Select your swatches below


text:
The Introvert/Extrovert Test
Their result for The Introvert/Extrovert Test ...
Introvert Extrovert
Congratulations! You scored ###!
Their Analysis (Vertical line = Average)
They scored 67% on Introvertpints, higher than 58% of your peers.
All possible test results
As an extrovert, you thrive on the company of others and often talk about anything that takes your fancy. Sometimes a little flamboyant, you portray yourself as being a fun, adventurous person and you... Read more
Quietly Extroverted
You love going out and having a good time, be it with a large group of friends or your significant other, however, you don't mind chilling out either. You'd be better off living in the city, but the o... Read more
Introvert Extrovert
You're a quiet person, but not too quiet. You like your own company at times, but don't mind the company of others. Ideally, a few people is better than a lot in most situations. You'd be well suited ... Read more
Very Introverted
You prefer your own company or that of your partner's. You don't have many friends, but the ones you do are the kind that are loyal. You're always misunderstood as being grumpy, but often it's that yo... Read more


text:
Teuton is the largest landholder in British Columbia's famous "Golden Triangle", soon to become one of the world's foremost mining districts. It controls favourable geological extensions both to the north and the south of Pretium Resources' and Seabridge Gold's Brucejack-Snowfield and KSM properties, respectively, home of world class resources of gold and copper. Currently with thirty plus properties, Teuton continues to search for outstanding prospects, particularly in zones of glacial metlback. Teuton was one of the first companies to use the property generator model, which preserves shareholder equity by reducing dilution.
New Gold Discovery – Tuck Zone – 4km south of Pretium's Brucejack Property
August 19, 2014, Vancouver, BC: Teuton Resources Corp. ("Teuton") ("TUO"-TSX-V) ("TFE"-Frankfurt) ("TEUTF"—OTCBB) announces that 2014 prospecting has led to the discovery of an extensive zone of alteration and mineralization located 4km south of Pretium Resource's Brucejack property and on strike with the Valley of the Kings and Bridge gold deposits, the former now the largest undeveloped high-grade gold deposit in the world.
Read News ReleaseThe Golden Triangle lies along a belt of volcanic and sedimentary rocks stretching from Alice Arm north to the Telegraph Creek area, some 250 miles. Past producers include Anyox, the Premier Mine, Granduc and Eskay Creek. Many of these mines were "firsts" in their day. The Premier mine was the greatest dividend-paying gold mine in North America in the 1920's. The Eskay Creek mine was the richest gold and silver bearing VMS deposit in the world.
The region is now beginning to come into its own. The Red Chris mine is beginning commericial production near the town of Iskut while to the west many companies are finding and developing large deposits of porphyry copper-gold. The most famous sub-district is the Sulphurets, host to vast resources of gold and copper currently being explored by Pretium Resources and Seabridge Gold. Pretium's Valley of the Kings deposit is now the largest high-grade gold deposit in the world. Seabridge Gold's Mitchell and Deep Kerr deposits are world-class deposits in their own right. The Mitchell, along with its faulted off upper portion the Snowfield (owned by Pretium), is the second largest undeveloped porphyry copper-gold deposit in the world. The Deep Kerr, recently found by Seabridge and still being developed, is already among the ten largest higher-grade copper-gold deposits in the world.
This region is being helped along by a joint provincial/federal decision to fund construction of a powerline into the heart of the area. This powerline is now almost complete and an extension from it services the Red Chris mine. Eight mineral deposits currently being developed within the Golden Triangle are slated for production within the next five years.
High Property
Teuton's High property borders to the immediate south of Pretium's Brucejack and Seabridge Gold's KSM properties. Very recently a large, gold-bearing altered zone was discovered 4km south of the Pretium property and on line with the Valley of the Kings gold deposit, now the largest, undeveloped high-grade gold deposit in the world. Called the "Tuck", this promising zone is to be drilled during the 2014 field season. There are many similarities in this zone with other gold-bearing zones on the Brucejack property.
The Sulphurets fault, key to many of the Seabridge copper-gold deposits, extends for 8km into the High and adjoining Orion property (also owned by Teuton). Seabridge is exploring the Deep Kerr with 4 drills, some of them aimed at the eastern side of the deposit. Teuton plans to investigate the area southeast of the Deep Kerr (on Teuton ground) for possible porphyry copper-gold mineralization
Tennyson Property
Drilling by Teuton in 2011 disclosed extensive porphyry-style copper-gold mineralization on the Tennyson property, situated 6km west of the end of the Granduc mining road and 40km north of Stewart, BC. The property was optioned to Brigade Resources in 2012, a private Hunter Dickinson company (Hunter Dickinson is a leader in development of porphyry deposits in North America). In 2013, the company sold its remaining interest in the Tennyson to Brigade for $500,000 and $6.5 million in subscription receipts of Brigade. Brigade carried out a 16-hole, multi-million drilling program in 2013 on the Tennyson, expanding the known porphyry occurrence in the northwest area of the Tennyson gossan and finding a second occurrence to the southeast. Brigade subsequently informed Teuton that it did not wish to carry out further work on the prospect. Negotiations are under way which will see a return of the property to Teuton in consideration for Teuton relinquishing the $6.5 million in subscription receipts.
Treaty Creek Property
The Treaty Creek property sits northeast, and along geological trend of, Seabridge Gold's KSM gold-copper property, home to two world-class porphyry copper-gold deposits (the Mitchell and the Deep Kerr) and north of Pretium Gold's Snowfield-Brucejack property. Like the KSM and Snowfield-Brucejack properties, the Treaty Creek property is marked by abundant, large alteration zones (gossans) which can be seen from miles away and are conspicuous because of their bright yellow, orange and red colours. The central Treaty gossan, hosting the Eureka zone, is considered by many to be the largest of its kind in the region.
In 2009, the last year any major work was carried out on the property, Hole #14 into the western portion of the Copper Belle zone returned an intersection grading 241m of 0.80 g/t. A magnetotelluric survey by Quantec Geoscience completed in 2012 disclosed a major anomaly ("Zone A") near the end of this hole, which bottomed in mineralization. There is significant potential in the immediate area for location of a porphyry deposit similar to those currently being developed on the adjoining KSM property.
The property has been under option to third parties several times since first staking in 1984. Teuton has been in litigation with the last optionee, American Creek Resources, for the past three years. Recently, the Supreme Court of British Columbia held that American Creek is entitled to an order that Teuton forthwith transfer to American Creek legal title to TUO's mineral claims known as the Treaty Creek Property and that American Creek will henceforth hold an undivided 49% interest in those mineral claims in trust for Teuton. Teuton has appealed the Court's decision.
Del Norte Property
The Del Norte-Midas property was staked to cover three gold-bearing streams which flow west-east into the White River. Placer streams are relatively rare in the Stewart region but when they occur they are generally associated with major mineral deposits. As an example, Sulphurets Creek is a known placer stream and drains the area hosting the major KSM, Snowfield and Brucejack gold deposits of Seabridge Gold and Pretium Resources (over 70 million ounces of gold in reserves/resources to date). Bitter Creek, another placer stream, drains the Red Mountain gold deposit.
The Del Norte property spans a 12km long, north-south trending expanse covering a northerly-trending contact zone between volcanic and sedimentary rocks related to multiple zones of gold-silver mineralization. Portions of the property are underlain by rocks broadly similar to those hosting the rich, silver-gold Eskay Creek mine 50 miles to the northwest. A large, unexplained EM anomaly flanks the LG vein gold-silver system which has been explored by more than 60 holes.
Sabina Silver completed a $3.5million option agreement in 2007 earning a 50% interest in the property. Since 2007 the property has lain fallow. Teuton recently purchased Sabina's 50% interest and plans to resume exploration during the 2014 field season, particularly around the K zone and LG vein.
Teuton was one of the first companies to adopt what has since become known as the "prospect generator" model. This involves acquiring ground by staking, grooming it, and then optioning it out to third parties. One generally gives 50 to 60% of the property to the optioning party, but this is a calculated trade-off which allows preservation of capital….capital which can then be used to acquire more ground which can in turn be farmed out. Instead of having one or two properties to explore, work which must be financed internally, prospect generators can have interests in multiple properties because the work is carried out and financed by others.
Teuton has been publically listed since 1985. In the intervening 29 years it has diluted its equity to only 60 million shares, a little over 2 million shares a year. Many TSX companies reach 100 million shares in their first 4 to 8 years and then need to be rolled back (reverse split). Teuton has never suffered a rollback.
Create multiple opportunities to find a mine by staking, and then optioning out, properties situated in highly prospective mineralized belts such as the Golden Triangle. Keep administrative costs as low as possible and put the dollars into the ground.
2014 continues to be a challenge for exploration companies—companies are trading at record low prices and capital is difficult to raise. However, in any downturn there is also opportunity. We will focus on our high potential targets in 2014, such as the High, Tennyson and Orion claims, with a view to developing an outstanding drill target.


text:
Men's Nike Satire Mid Canvas Casual Shoes
Buy Online & Pick Up In-Store
Made for the skater who needs both durability and mid-height protection, the Nike Satire Mid Canvas Men?s Shoe is perfect for the hard impacts that define the action-sport lifestyle. A tough autoclave construction and durable canvas upper provide a protective fit that?s essential during a long day of riding, and they let you do it in style. Take to the streets in confidence with this superb shoe, made with a soft Phylon midsole for the cushioning and lightweight fit that keeps you shredding without worry.
- UPPER: Canvas
- MIDSOLE: Phylon midsole and Autoclave
- OUTSOLE: Rubber outsole with internal honeycomb crating and external herringbone traction pattern


text:
Lupus Nephritis
On this page:
- What is lupus nephritis?
- What are the kidneys and what do they do?
- What are the symptoms of lupus nephritis?
- How is lupus nephritis diagnosed?
- How is lupus nephritis treated?
- What are the possible complications of lupus nephritis?
- Eating, Diet, and Nutrition
- Points to Remember
- Hope through Research
- For More Information
- Acknowledgments
What is lupus nephritis?
Lupus nephritis is kidney inflammation caused by systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE or lupus). SLE is an autoimmune disease—a disorder in which the body's immune system attacks the body's own cells and organs. Up to 60 percent of people with SLE are diagnosed with lupus nephritis, which can lead to significant illness and even death.1
What are the kidneys and what do they do?
The kidneys are two bean-shaped organs, each about the size of a fist. They are located just below the rib cage, one on each side of the spine. Every day, the two kidneys filter about 120 to 150 of blood to produce about 1 to 2 quarts of urine, composed of wastes and extra fluid. The urine flows from the kidneys to the bladder through tubes called ureters. The bladder stores urine until releasing it through urination.
What are the symptoms of lupus nephritis?
The symptoms of lupus nephritis may include high blood pressure, foamy urine, and edema—swelling, usually in the legs, feet, or ankles and less often in the hands or face.
Kidney problems often develop at the same time or shortly after lupus symptoms appear and can include
- joint pain or swelling
- muscle pain
- fever with no known cause
- red rashes, often on the face, which are also called butterfly rashes because of their shape
How is lupus nephritis diagnosed?
Lupus nephritis is diagnosed through urine and blood tests and a kidney biopsy:
- Urinalysis. Urinalysis is testing of a urine sample. The urine sample is collected in a special container in a health care provider's office or commercial facility and can be tested in the same location or sent to a lab for analysis. For the test, a nurse or technician places a strip of chemically treated paper, called a dipstick, into the urine. Patches on the dipstick change color when blood or protein is present. A high number of red blood cells or high levels of protein in the urine indicate kidney damage.
- Blood test. A blood test involves drawing blood at a health care provider's office or commercial facility and sending the sample to a lab for analysis. The blood test can show high levels of creatinine, a waste product of normal muscle breakdown excreted by the kidneys, which increases when the kidneys are not functioning well.
- Biopsy. A biopsy is a procedure that involves taking a small piece of kidney tissue for examination with a microscope. The biopsy is performed by a health care provider in a hospital with light sedation and local anesthetic. The health care provider uses imaging techniques such as ultrasound or a computerized tomography scan to guide the biopsy needle into the kidney. The kidney tissue is examined in a lab by a pathologist—a doctor who specializes in diagnosing diseases. The test can confirm a diagnosis of lupus nephritis, determine how far the disease has progressed, and guide treatment. The American College of Rheumatology recommends biopsies for all people with evidence of active lupus nephritis that has not been previously treated.
How is lupus nephritis treated?
Lupus nephritis is treated with medications that suppress the immune system, so it stops attacking and damaging the kidneys. Standard treatment includes a corticosteroid, usually prednisone, to reduce inflammation in the kidneys. An immunosuppressive medication, such as cyclophosphamide or mycophenolate mofetil, is typically used with prednisone. These medications—when taken as prescribed by a health care provider—further decrease the activity of the immune system and block the body's immune cells from attacking the kidneys directly or making antibodies that attack the kidneys. Antibodies are proteins made by the immune system to protect the body from foreign substances such as bacteria or viruses. Hydroxychloroquine, a medication for treating SLE, should also be prescribed or continued for people with lupus nephritis.
People with lupus nephritis that is causing high blood pressure may need to take medications that lower their blood pressure and can also significantly slow the progression of kidney disease. Two types of blood pressure lowering medications, angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors and angiotensin receptor blockers (ARBs), have proven effective in slowing the progression of kidney disease. Many people require two or more medications to control their blood pressure. In addition to an ACE inhibitor or an ARB, a diuretic—a medication that helps the kidneys remove fluid from the body—may be prescribed. Beta blockers, calcium channel blockers, and other blood pressure medications may also be needed.
Blood pressure is written with two numbers separated by a slash, 120/80, and is said as "120 over 80." The top number is called the systolic pressure and represents the pressure as the heart beats and pushes blood through the blood vessels. The bottom number is called the diastolic pressure and represents the pressure as blood vessels relax between heartbeats. High blood pressure is a systolic pressure of 140 or above or a diastolic pressure of 90 or above.2
What are the possible complications of lupus nephritis?
In many cases, treatment is effective in completely or partially controlling lupus nephritis, resulting in few, if any, further complications. However, even with treatment, 10 to 30 percent of people with lupus nephritis develop kidney failure, described as end-stage renal disease when treated with blood-filtering treatments called dialysis or a kidney transplant.3 Scientists cannot predict who will or will not respond to treatment. The most severe form of lupus nephritis is called diffuse proliferative nephritis. With this type of illness, the kidneys are inflamed, many white blood cells invade the kidneys, and kidney cells increase in number, which can cause such severe damage that scars form in the kidneys. Scars are difficult to treat, and kidney function often declines as more scars form. People with suspected lupus nephritis should get diagnosed and treated as early as possible to prevent such chronic, or long lasting, damage.
People with lupus nephritis are at a high risk for cancer, primarily B-cell lymphoma—a type of cancer that begins in the cells of the immune system. They are also at a high risk for heart and blood vessel problems.
Eating, Diet, and Nutrition
Eating, diet, and nutrition have not been shown to play a role in causing or preventing lupus nephritis. People with kidney disease that progresses may need to talk with a health care provider about changes they may need to make to their diet. People with lupus nephritis and high blood pressure may benefit from reducing sodium intake, often from salt. For more information about nutrition in people with kidney disease, see the National Kidney and Urologic Diseases Information Clearinghouse (NKUDIC) fact sheets Nutrition for Early Chronic Kidney Disease in Adults and Nutrition for Advanced Chronic Kidney Disease in Adults at www.kidney.niddk.nih.gov.
Points to Remember
- Lupus nephritis is kidney inflammation caused by systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE or lupus).
- The symptoms of lupus nephritis may include high blood pressure, foamy urine, and edema.
- Lupus nephritis is diagnosed through urine and blood tests and a kidney biopsy.
- Lupus nephritis is treated with medications that suppress the immune system, so it stops attacking and damaging the kidneys. Standard treatment includes a corticosteroid, usually prednisone, to reduce inflammation in the kidneys. An immunosuppressive medication, such as cyclophosphamide or mycophenolate mofetil, is typically used with prednisone.
- People with lupus nephritis that is causing high blood pressure may need to take medications that lower their blood pressure, which can also significantly slow the progression of kidney disease.
- In many cases, treatment is effective in completely or partially controlling lupus nephritis, resulting in few, if any, further complications. However, even with treatment, 10 to 30 percent of people with lupus nephritis develop kidney failure.
Hope through Research
In recent years, researchers have learned a great deal about kidney disease. The National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK) sponsors several programs aimed at better understanding all types of kidney disease, including lupus nephritis.
Abatacept and Cyclophosphamide Combination Therapy for Lupus Nephritis, funded under NIH clinical trial number NCT00774852, compares the addition of the experimental medication abatacept to standard cyclophosphamide therapy with cyclophosphamide therapy alone for treatment of lupus nephritis.
Immune System Related Kidney Disease, funded under NIH clinical trial number NCT00001979, studies patients with autoimmune diseases of the kidney, including lupus nephritis. The goal is to better understand the causes, signs, symptoms, and responses to medication of these diseases.
Clinical trials are research studies involving people. Clinical trials look at safe and effective new ways to prevent, detect, or treat disease. Researchers also use clinical trials to look at other aspects of care, such as improving the quality of life for people with chronic illnesses. To learn more about clinical trials, why they matter, and how to participate, visit the NIH Clinical Research Trials and You website at www.nih.gov/health/clinicaltrials. For information about current studies, visit www.ClinicalTrials.gov.
For More Information
Lupus nephritis is also classified as a glomerular disease. For more information, see the NKUDIC publication Glomerular Diseases at www.kidney.niddk.nih.gov.
The National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases offers the online publications Systemic Lupus Erythematosus and The Many Shades of Lupus (easy-to-read) at www.niams.nih.gov.
More information is also available from
National Institute of Arthritis and Musculoskeletal and Skin Diseases Information Clearinghouse
National Institutes of Health
1 AMS Circle
Bethesda, MD 20892–3675
Phone: 1–877–22–NIAMS (1–877–226–4267) or 301–495–4484
Fax: 301–718–6366
Email: email@example.com
Internet: www.niams.nih.gov
Lupus Foundation of America, Inc.
2000 L Street NW, Suite 410
Washington, D.C. 20036
Phone: 1–800–558–0121 or 202–349–1155
Fax: 202–349–1156
Internet: www.lupus.org
Publications produced by the Clearinghouse are carefully reviewed by both NIDDK scientists and outside experts. This publication was reviewed by Brad Rovin, M.D., The Ohio State University.
You may also find additional information about this topic by visiting MedlinePlus at www.medlineplus.gov.
This publication may contain information about medications and, when taken as prescribed, the conditions they treat. When prepared, this publication included the most current information available. For updates or for questions about any medications, contact the U.S. Food and Drug Administration toll-free at 1–888–INFO–FDA (1–888–463–6332) or visit www.fda.gov. Consult your health care provider for more information.
National Kidney Disease Education Program
3 Kidney Information Way
Bethesda, MD 20892
Phone: 1–866–4–KIDNEY (1–866–454–3639)
Fax: 301–402–8182
Email: firstname.lastname@example.com
Internet: www.nkdep.nih.gov
The National Kidney Disease Education Program (NKDEP) is an initiative of the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, National Institutes of Health, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The NKDEP aims to raise awareness of the seriousness of kidney disease, the importance of testing those at high risk, and the availability of treatment to prevent or slow kidney disease.
National Kidney and Urologic Diseases Information Clearinghouse
3 Information Way
Bethesda, MD 20892–3580
Phone: 1–800–891–5390
Fax: 703–738–4929
Email: email@example.com
Internet: www.kidney.niddk.nih.gov
The National Kidney and Urologic Diseases Information Clearinghouse (NKUDIC) is a service of the National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases (NIDDK). The NIDDK is part of the National Institutes of Health of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Established in 1987, the Clearinghouse provides information about diseases of the kidneys and urologic system to people with kidney and urologic disorders and to their families, health care professionals, and the public. The NKUDIC answers inquiries, develops and distributes publications, and works closely with professional and patient organizations and Government agencies to coordinate resources about kidney and urologic diseases.
This publication is not copyrighted. The Clearinghouse encourages users of this publication to duplicate and distribute as many copies as desired.
NIH Publication No. 14–4622
February 2014
Page last updated April 2, 2014


text:
MELT butter in large saucepan on medium heat. Add onions; cook 4 min. or until crisp-tender, stirring occasionally. Stir in nutmeg; cook 1 min. Add squash, apples and broth; stir. Bring to boil; cover. Simmer on medium-low heat 50 min. or until squash and apples are tender, stirring occasionally.
COOL soup slightly. Add, in batches, to food processor or blender; cover. Process until smooth; return to saucepan. Cook on medium-low heat until heated through, stirring occasionally.
LADLE soup into 8 serving bowls. Add 1 Tbsp. cream cheese spread to each bowl; stir gently to swirl.


text:
Microsoft Word #3
Bluffton Branch
Date & Time:
Friday, February 22, 2013 - 2:00pm – 4:00pm Let an experienced teacher show you the basics of this popular software. Students will learn how to open a document, save, cut/copy/paste within Word, format a paragraph modify fonts, and insert clipart.
Registration required.