Many times I listen to, I read, the manifest insatifaes for if not having something, being able to cite innumerable examples, as the lack of housing of many, food, family, etc. But something contradictory in this exposition came what me to the mind was, therefore, what it is not had we cannot feel lack, the measure that for being unaware of, we could not even conjecturar, what sends to the fact that we need to have some form of knowledge regarding what it afflicts in them, to say that in the same lack and when evidencing such fact, still thus, we will not be suffering with the absence and I go to display because. In the truth what it attacks the being is not the absence or lacks of, but yes the presence of what it afflicts, therefore exactly the lack, will only be able to become gift when sensible, that is, leaving of being lack, what it would send the inversion of the initial direction of the preposition. Thus, it is not the lack of food that afflicts the hungry one, but the presence of the hunger, is not the housing lack that afflicts many without habitation of our society, but yes the presence of intempries daily that they send not the protection to them of a home. For such proposals, it is observed clearly that we deny what afflicts in them in fact and relegates to the field of the abstraction, creating an invisible enemy and consequentemente unimpeachable, being that, if to deal with the real facts, we will be able making use in them to collate our afflictions. Corrupting the reality with a false notion, we also finish in sending to this falseness, we become inside simulacros of a simulated systematization, to more ' ' requintado' ' baudrillardiano style. The citizen that if places outside of the action, is abstained from the sentence and from now on it passes to be seen by the not realistic society as something or it are of the social context, becoming invsvel the manifest reality of the social environment, what it would favor ' ' exclusion of marginalizados' ' , for more redundant than either, since proper ' ' to parte' ' , for also pertecerem to the social environment and being passive of its influence, would be absorbing this imaginary ' ' no-participativo' ' , consolidating in itself the idea of ' ' no-agente' '. Of this form, it is joined chain of causes and consequncias where a priori if it molds a profile, for what it lacks to it, as if the lack or absence was something concrete, favoring a posteriori, the consolidation in the social scope of a marginalizao subject it, transforming it into one ' ' absence-presente' ' that added to others, &#039 would create one; ' against-power aptico' ' , formed for a unit to the edge, equal in its inaquality, what very it can well be defined for what Dostoivski called ' ' plagiarisms mtuos' '..