VWC Globalization and Empire Blog

Hietala

2007-02-28T01:06:00.001-05:00

Interesting review of Hietala's Manifest Design

Links and such

2007-02-06T14:56:00.000-05:00

Please post any links or blogs you know that would be relevant to the site. I think it will let you add them yourselves.

William Appleman Williams

2007-02-06T00:33:00.000-05:00

Good job ES, it works,...

Here, a short review of William Appleman William's "Empire as a Way of Life" from JSTOR. Might be helpful.

Non-Binding Resolutions?

2007-02-05T22:07:00.000-05:00

The Senate appears to be doing little in the way of exercising responsible policy on Iraq. While the virtual tie between the parties makes headway difficult, it would seem that the increasing unpopularity and disparity of events on the ground would warrant honest debate.

This is not the case. Instead the debate has once again been reduced to grandiose statements about supporting the troops or not wishing to cause defeat on the ground. If only the Senators saying the President needed support could hear themselves. They sound like little cheerleaders not wanting to admit their heroic team is loosing.

However, blame is plenty. The gang of Senatorial Presidential candidates is using the situation and every other event from taxes to the economy as a grandstand for their own campaigns. The group is always willing to issue their own declaratory statements on what they want instead of focusing the issue at hand. That issue is acting as a Senator.

Furthermore, all these Senators on both sides fail to admit their own accomplice to the war itself. The few who did vote against it in 2003 have all the room in the world to speak against it. The others should not be so keen on merely blaming their decisions on bad intelligence. If it was bad intelligence, then it was also emasculated politicians who did not have the wherewithal to execute oversight.

The blame also rests with the populace. Just like the Senators, doing an about face is hard to accept when the majority seemed quite alright back in 2003. I do not wish to argue that people cannot change their minds. Instead, people must change their minds cognizant of their own prior actions in relation to the event itself. By doing so, the debate can become more than just a blame game and instead focus on questioning what can be done to fix a situation that we started.

If non-binding resolutions are the case, than the American system of divided government does not hold much hope.

The Pirate Bay - The worlds largest BitTorrent tracker

2006-12-10T17:09:00.000-05:00

The Pirate Bay - The worlds largest BitTorrent tracker

To anyone still reading the blog this late in the semester:
This is a site that is both relevant to some of our class discussions and interesting to read. The Pirate Bay is a Sweeden-based site that facilitates file-sharing, and it has a page dedicated to the legal threats it has received and the (often hilarious) responses they have sent back. It's definately worth reading a few since they raise serious issues of extraterritorial jusrisdiction, but are also entertaining to read.

A Question...

2006-12-05T23:30:00.000-05:00

Recent events have brought the question into my mind of what to do to prevent atrocities in foreign states. Iraq is the catalyst for this question. First, despite the motivations of the Bush administration, it should be a positive gain that Sadam is no longer in power. Second, liberals bemoan the plight of people living under the grasp of dictators or oppressive governments, but now find it unpleasant that the removal has resulted in the current strife.
How can we complain about oppressive governments if we do not have the will to deal effectively and decisively? Is it nicer to employ sanctions? One needs only look at the result and harm that sanctions did on Iraq.
That results in two possible solutions. First, give up the fake “we care” attitude and treat governments the same. Open trade and normalize relations in an effort to bring the rouge state into the fold while hopefully opening the society to norms that would resort in political change. This would make sense economically because it would open new markets while saving time from fruitless sanctions that do little but bolster the targeted leader.
The other solution would come from the barrel of the gun. If we take Mao Zaedong’s statement that “Every communist [my case: people in general] must grasp the truth, “Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun”’, then it would follow that just and effective use of force would be a force for change in affected regions. It is hard to say no when cold steel is brought down. Economic sanctions leave room to maneuver while a 5.56mm round leave less room for negotiation. This new use of force would need to be different then our current method. It would need to rely on troops on the ground and a clearly defined rebuilding plan. It is nice to claim that justice exists eternally and needs no force, but we only need to look at what our own society finds necessary to maintain a reasonably just society. I am not endorsing the over-use of force by our police, only the reasoned use against deserving individuals.
This brings me to Dafur. The ads claim diplomacy is the answer. What will bring the government to accountability if they view the AU and UN as emasculated forces, incapable of concrete action? Will nice talk make them resign? What about sanctions if China will not enforce them?
I do not know the answer to these questions. It is illogical to cry about the misdoings in the world if there is no will to act. I understand this is problematic. However, if we are unwilling to act then we should accept the consequences of our inaction and absolve from fruitless political posturing or sanctions that only serve to do more harm to the affected citizens while giving us a warm feeling that ‘We are doing something’ (note: sarcasm). Hopefully there will exist a solution someday. I would like to hear your opinions on the subject. Good Night.

The Wealth of Networks

2006-12-04T14:41:00.000-05:00

Benkler's conclusion is interesting, though I found it to be quite a difficult read. He concludes that although there is a push to use law to enclose the technological sphere and protect information and innovations from being shared freely, it is not likely that "law can unilaterally turn back a trend that combines powerful technological, social, and economical drivers".

I agree with Evan that Benkler's argument does seem to be a bit idealistic and it seems that he believes in a higher level of freedom that what these networks will bring us. I do think that networks are important for communications and bring about a stronger basis for supporting a free market and providing individuals with information.

Wealth of Networks

2006-12-04T14:33:00.000-05:00

I agree with Benkler's belief that the reduced cost of disseminating information creates an environment in which control over information and media are more less centrally controlled than they had previously been. I was interested by the inefficiencies that Benkler sees in proprietary systems as compared to non-proprietary ones. While non-proprietary systems of information on the Internet such as Wikipedia are interesting and certainly have found their niche, I do not believe that this is somehow undermines the well-established proprietary systems. Benkler provides a broader view of the Internet's ability to facilitate change than Goldsmith and Wu, but it did not seem to me that it was necessarily in contradiction with their conclusions. While Goldsmith and Wu warned against the belief that there would be a borderless internet, Benkler warned against discounting the real changes that the Internet has made.

The Wealth of Networks: Blogging

2006-12-04T00:27:00.000-05:00

I liked Benkler's conclusion, but my interest was caught by his elaboration on the common critique of the internet's ability to improve democracy and autonomy at the same time.

Especially interesting is the democracy-part where Benkler points out how mutual pointing and linking are connected ("Here, see for yourself. I think this is interesting"), because this is exactly what we are doing by blogging or what blogging in general is all about: We are contributing to and we are observing the judgments of others to what is interesting and valuable at the same time, in order to create some kind of "interest groups" or to utter criticism when necessary. The platform, a blog, is definitively less hierarchically organized than other parts of the mass-media environment such as tv or newspaper and therfore we can refer to ourselves as non-intellectual lemmings, not following any kind of movements or opions that makes us feel impelled to say certain things.

The idealism of networks

2006-12-03T18:46:00.000-05:00

The excerpt was interesting despite the heavy use of jargon. The argument that networks will provide greater freedom carries weight. It is logical that something far-reaching as the internet will help provide greater awareness because of the ability to connect people seemly across borders and will help foster the sharing of info that was not possible before due to territorial constraints or costs.
However, I do not agree with the assumption that networks will be as productive in creating overall freedom as Benkler suggests. While he notes their limitations, he forgets to see that networks are a tool and that a tool requires implementation. It may be unfair to judge his argument on the current progress of networks thus fair in creating freedom, but it does not seem that their primary purpose has been genuine individual autonomy and freedom unless you consider the ability to listen to ‘free’ music or buy from almost anywhere the growth of personal autonomy proposed by minds such as Voltaire or Kant.
It would also reason that people would have to have an interest in creating freedom. It would stand that there are more postings are the Internet currently on the latest culture item or scandal than on Dafur or global warming.
Furthermore, how can a network exist without engaging the system it lives in? Who will pay or foster greater development? There are certainly those who will work towards progress without pure economic progress, but it seems that this network is rooted in a physical world. The lines of transmission or wireless routers are beings of the physical world in which money is required to create this network that will provide freedom.
I do not want to discount the argument that networks will help to foster freedom. They are a major improvement in greater awareness. However, it seems premature and idealist to claim they will provide the level of freedom argued for by Benkler. Good Night.

The Wealth of Networks

2006-12-03T12:32:00.000-05:00

The conclusion of Benkler's discussion of the position of the internet in modern society is an interesting bookend to Goldsmith and Wu's Who Controls the Internet? While Goldsmith and Wu strongly believe that the internet has and will continue to be controlled by governmental policy, Benkler sees blogging, Wikipedia, and other collaborative social efforts to be ultimately in control of the internet. Benkler believes that "social production," or the efforts of group collaborations, are ultimately more profitable under the new market introduced by the internet. Like Goldsmith and Wu, Benkler acknowledges the role of government control over the internet, realizing that it can impede on the growth of this new sector of the economy, but he seems to think that this is less likely. Benkler is much more optimistic about the democratic future of the internet. He sees the freedoms expanding through these new ecnonomic opportunities.

While the reading was dense at times, his theories are interesting. However, after reading Goldsmith and Wu I am tentative as to the true "freedoms" the internet may hold. While large-scale group collaboration is possible on the internet without restriction (such as through blogs like our very own), I do not think the amazing transformation of "markets and freedoms" that Benkler implies is likely. New freedoms will be established, and the market will adapt to fit this new economic sector (as it already has begun doing), but eventually the internet will suffer the same regulations as all other spheres. The most interesting aspect of Benkler's arguement, in my opinion, was how he considers "social sharing" a form of free transaction. I had never thought of simple daily transactions in this manner before. Such a mindset opens up an entire world of unrealized freedoms, uncontrolled by government regulation. Benkler's implication that expanding this sector of transactions would undoubtedly expand freedoms in general is an interesting connection, but seems overly idealistic.

Benkler vs. Goldsmith & Wu

2006-12-01T21:27:00.000-05:00

The selection from Yochai Benkler’s book The Wealth of Networks: How Social Production Transforms Markets and Freedom seemed to be essentially the counterargument to Goldsmith and Wu’s Who Controls the Internet: Illusions of a Borderless World. Goldsmith and Wu claimed the internet to be necessarily bordered with required national governance to protect honest citizens from those that want to copy and defraud others. Meanwhile, Benkler assumed the “goodness” of all people and took pride in what he considered the greater autonomy, democracy, self-reflection and human connections offered by the networked information economy.

Where Goldsmith and Wu stressed the influence of territory and government interference, Benkler argued that the internet is a source “of information and communication facilities that no one owns or exclusively controls” (465). Benkler also stated that the internet offers “a genuine reorganization of the public sphere” (465) where Goldsmith and Wu emphasized the commonalities between the territorial space and the establishment of the internet. In a similar sub-argument Benkler claimed that the internet is less hierarchically organized and controlled than mass media. This idea was also addressed in Goldsmith and Wu’s work as they discussed the influence of the government hierarchy on the internet.

Finally, Benkler claimed that the internet would most likely bring about a redistribution of wealth and power from the dominant businesses to social groups and individuals. This somewhat utopian ideal was stressed by Goldsmith and Wu as antithetical to the real desires of internet users looking for a safe and secure network. The only statement all of these authors might agree on was that the internet is providing an “opportunity” for change. Benkler advocated taking hold of the opportunity in his work, and Goldsmith and Wu saw change as possible but only through certain restrictions. Overall, Benkler, Goldsmith and Wu all offered interesting perspectives on the future of the internet, but as they almost completely opposed each other; the end results will most likely be a combination of theories.

TNR this week

2006-11-29T14:18:00.000-05:00

The New Republic this week deals with the question of Iraq. I would recommend reading this because it covers a wide range of ideas. Here is a quote from the editors.

"At this point, it seems almost beside the point to say this: The New Republic deeply regrets its early support for this war. The past three years have complicated our idealism and reminded us of the limits of American power and our own wisdom. But, as we pore over the lessons of this misadventure, we do not conclude that our past misjudgments warrant a rush into the cold arms of "realism." Realism, yes; but not "realism." American power may not be capable of transforming ancient cultures or deep hatreds, but that fact does not absolve us of the duty to conduct a foreign policy that takes its moral obligations seriously. As we attempt to undo the damage from a war that we never should have started, our moral obligations will not vanish, and neither will our strategic needs."

XM Radio and Copyright Infringement

2006-11-29T13:33:00.000-05:00

After reading Who Control's the Internet?: Illusions of a Borderless World, by Jack Goldsmith and Tim Wu, I thought about what other forms of technology may be experiencing this same path of creating borders that prevent users from crossing the line between what is legally, morally, or socially acceptable and what is not. The first thing I thought of was the XM Satellite Radio. So I searched for some news articles on the relatively new technology (it has been around for several years now) and found several law suits involving the XM Satellite Radio. Major record labels have filed suits against XM Radio because of copyright infringement. The recording capabilities of the new XM Radio receivers allow users to record save music, similar to how TiVo records on one's television.

So it appears that XM Radio has comparable issues to those of the Internet. There must be some limit to what a user can do with these new technologies so that legal boundaries, such as copyrights, are not crossed.

I do not really understand how this is different from recording music from a normal radio station to a cassette tape, but apparently that is illegal too, unless authorized by RIAA (there is a small subsection about this at the bottom of the article found below).

So what next, ban recordable CDs for recording music?

You can read the article here.

An Answer to All the Financial Issues Behind Globalization

2006-11-29T11:45:00.000-05:00

I a recent International Herald Tribune article, Daniel Altman announced that an economist from UC Berkley has in fact developed the solution to developing an international, stable monetary policy. Widely regarded as one of the main problems involved with globalizations, fluctuating monetary policies between countries is exactly the reason that the IMF and World Bank were created in th 1940s. Andrew Rose, the champion of the plan, has stated that "A combination of floating exchange rates and inflation-targeting is a recipe not just for a stable policy within a country... but also for a stable global monetary system." Interestingly enough, this a reversal of the original basis of the IMF. Where the system under the IMF called for a centralization of monetary policy, Rose believes that the complete decentralization of economic interests will prove most beneficial. In the new system, each country would develop its own monetary policy, indicting their own "goals for the size of the money supply, interest rates, and exchange rates." With the IMF removed from the equation, the 'referee' of the system disappears, but Rose believes that each country will keep their exchange rates logical because it is in their own economic best interest.
While the global economy has been moving away from intervention by the IMF, and the decisions made at the Bretton Woods Convention have not been truly effective since the 70s, Rose still proposes an extreme change from our current understanding of the global economy.

For a more indepth discussion of the economics of it all, check out the article
Altman relates Rose's propositions to both country and global economies, making it especially relative to our discussion of the globalization of economies.

Funkadelics Con't

2006-11-29T11:34:00.000-05:00

Well, as a result of Dan's blog and the enlightening lyrics he included, I did a bit of research on the history of these witty gentlemen.

Here's a excerpt from a PBS website on the history of George Clinton and the Funkadelics:
Spanning half a century, the history of Parliament Funkadelic is as varied in its musical stylings as in the rotating cast of musicians that have graced Parliament, Funkadelic and the collective P-Funk stage. From their early days as a literal barbershop quintet to the rise and fall—and rise again—of the famed Mothership, P-Funk’s five decades and counting also reflect larger changes in fashion, funk and more.
It all began in Newark, New Jersey in the mid-1950s, when George Clinton formed a doo-wop group, with three school chums, called the Parliaments. Later, in Plainfield, New Jersey, Ray Davis, Calvin Simon, Fuzzy Haskins and Grady Thomas replaced the original members and tightened up their harmonies in the barbershop where George did hair. By the 1960s, they had recorded a few pop and R&B songs including the R&B hit, “(I Wanna) Testify,” which reached the charts in 1967. But by the late 1960s, doo-wop had all but lost its cool.
P-Funk concerts were lavish occasions. They brought the glam rock phenomenon of David Bowie and KISS to black music, raising the bar for their contemporaries like Earth, Wind and Fire and Kool and the Gang. From 1975 through 1977, the Mothership Tour featured a giant spaceship that landed onstage with Clinton inside, who would then emerge dressed in an outrageous costume. Later, the Motor Booty Affair featured a host of amphibious characters who could “dance underwater and not get wet.” The collective nature of the band came through in concert, with often nearly 30 people performing on stage at once with extravagant props and outlandish costumes. Several spin-off groups were formed, such as Bootsy’s Rubber Band, the Brides of Funkenstein, Parlet and the Horny Horns. P-Funk even extended their work into the realm of film, with never-released features showcasing an actual Mothership “landing” in New York City’s Times Square.
For a complete history, check out the website...

They certainly were a creative bunch, with album names such as Clones of Dr. Funkenstein andTales of Kidd Funkadelic.

Hooray! No terrorists in Bollywood!

2006-11-29T10:47:00.000-05:00

Bollywood Star Guilty of Arms Possession, but Cleared of Terrorism

By AMELIA GENTLEMAN
Published: November 29, 2006
NEW DELHI, Nov. 28 — Indians were entranced by Sanjay Dutt’s portrayal of a middle-aged mobster in this year’s biggest movie, “Lage Raho Munnabhai.” Whether they will be as enchanted by his conviction Tuesday for real-life arms possession is less certain.
Mr. Dutt, one of Bollywood’s top stars, was playing himself when, looking even more disheveled than usual, he arrived Tuesday for a high-drama courtroom scene in Mumbai to hear the verdict. He was found guilty of illegally possessing weapons, which he was accused of buying from gangsters suspected of planning India’s worst terrorist attack. But he was acquitted of the more serious charges of involvement in the terrorist conspiracy itself.
The case stems from the 1993 bombings in Mumbai, formerly Bombay, in which 257 people were killed. Mr. Dutt faces up to 10 years in prison, but a time for sentencing has not been determined.
“I have not found that he was a terrorist or was destructive,” Judge Pramod Kode said. Later, the judge told Mr. Dutt, “I have said that you are not a terrorist.” ....

Bollywood?

This article from the New York Times caught my eye as we (obviously) have been talking about globalization. The Hollywood-Bollywood comparison was rather interesting...

Through the Michael Jordan book and the borderless internet book, we've been discussing how the spread of American culture affects other countries. We've asked what goals selling our goods and occasionally our celebrities, through film and television, have in other countries. I wonder who started Bollywood and when, whether or not it was American led, or Indian led through the influence of American films.

When ya gotta go....

2006-11-29T00:38:00.000-05:00

I guess when nature calls, there is no choice but to relieve yourself of it. When you are dedicated, you'll go to any lengths to win. For some, that can mean urinating in public, or on themselves. Check this out.

It is amazing what you can find on a topic when you start searching google for wierd stuff. Another thing mentioned in class was the so called "Runner's trots" as many call it. Apparently running for long periods of time causes gastrointestinal problems in some runners. There are even published articles on this topic from journals of medicine.

Funkadelics

2006-11-29T00:18:00.000-05:00

The Funkadelics were mentioned in class the other day, so I went to look up some lyrics. I found some pretty interesting lyrics, and have copied some below. You can find more lyrics here at songlyrics.com

{assorted groans, whispers, wails & moans}
{spoken}
A luscious bitch she is, true
But it's not nice to fool mother nature
The proud mother of god like all ho's

Is jealous of her own shadow
So who is this young Vic Tanny bitch
Who wish to be queen for a day?
Who would sacrifice the great grandsons and daughters
Of her jealous mother
By sucking their brain
Until their ability to think was amputated
By pimping their instincts
Until they were fat, horny and strung-out
In her neurotic attempt to be queen of the universe
Who is this bitch?

Iraq?

2006-11-28T22:57:00.000-05:00

Iraq seems to be getting worse by the day. Hundreds dead on Friday with more certain to come. The Iraq Study Group is working behind the scenes to come up with some solution to save face. John McCain said we should deploy the requisite troops needed to get the job done or find a way out if we do not have the will to do so. Meanwhile the Democrats are discordant in their policy with ABSCAM-participants being put up for election to the majority leader seat in the House due to political debts (Thankfully he lost). What if anything can be done or thought of?

I do not wish to propose any ideas because the ideas are useless unless we first determine what our goals are. The nation may wish to remain uninformed about the true motives or goals of the Iraq war. Whether it is to bolster oil, slow China’s progress, create political diversions at home, or to reshape the Middle East in an attempt to further its efficiency in the world system; the American public does not appear overtly willing to consider these ideas.

It troubles me what the effect of American involvement or withdrawal will be? Will it be better for us to do what is necessary to create some form of stability? While many Americans have now found it beneficial to call for withdrawal, it seems that withdrawal is akin to Vietnamization. Instead of fixing the mess, we appear to be ready to leave. It may be in the American thought to now dissolve ourselves of guilt and instead engage in some form of orientalism and claim it is “their” fault things are not working instead of acknowledging our own guilt. People on both sides who completely failed and emasculated themselves by refusing to question entry or the initial conduct of the war now say “not our fault, not our problem”. Maybe the question should now be, “our fault, how do we fix it so that Iraq works for their benefit and our own”, yes I said our own because it is our mess to clean up and as a realist sympathizer, a benefit to our own state power. Without endorsing Bush we need to be willing to take military, economic, and diplomatic measures necessary to fix the problem. This may be unpleasant but I think it is in our own interest and responsibility to find a solution that works without us leaving a bigger problem then we started with. This may be what our goal should be. Good Night.

Europe as the Future Global Hegemon

2006-11-27T13:04:00.000-05:00

Many of our readings, most obviously the recent book by McCormick, state that America's position as a global hegemon has already peaked, and is facing a great decline in the coming years. In an article from the International Herald Tribune, the opening line reads "Europe is overtaking the United States and Japan in the race to take advantage of the explosion in world trade and investment." This clear statement of growing EU power indicates the formidable future for US hegemony. As established in previous discussions, much of the characteristics required for true global control involve establishing a economic environment that capitalizes on your country's economic strengths and exploits the strengths of other countries. Recently, according to the article, the countries of the EU have come to have a much greater impact on the growing markets in Brazil, Russia, India, China, and other developing countries. In fact, recent reports from Merrill Lynch have identified the "euro zone," 12 countries in Europe, as their preferred market for the past 6 month and the coming year.
While pieces of the hegemonic puzzle are falling into place for Europe, it is important to note that a significant number of European citizens do not support globalization, and instead view it as a threat to the European lifestyle of strong unions and guaranteed employment. If Europe is to emerge as a singular global power, they must reform globalization to meet the needs of their population, or convince them otherwise. Obviously, the rise and fall of global powers is undeniably relevant to our understanding of globalization. I found the article extremely interesting... here is the full text.

Bookstore...

2006-11-27T12:54:00.000-05:00

I went to the bookstore and checked out some of the clothes they got:

Most of the product were made in Guatemala, Mexiko, Vietnam and Phillipines. Only one item was made in the US (IL). Be aware!

"Peace: A 'Divisive' Concept"

2006-11-27T12:23:00.000-05:00

Political activism and expression seems to be experiencing significant scrutiny in recent months. In this age of great political controversy, "architectural control committees" and home owners associations are beginning to impede on these first amendment rights of expression. An article I recently came across from the Houston Chronicle discusses the outlandish expectations of these ridiculous associations. I have never lived in a community with a Home Owners Association or any similar governing body other than the township itself, so such laws are extremely surreal to me. In the case cited in the article entitled "Peace: A 'Divisive' Concept," a Colorado woman placed a christmas wreath on her door that was in the shape of a peace sign. Various neighbors complained that the wreath was against the war with Iraq, and the Home Owners Association ordered that it be removed from her window.
While a sign of peace does not seem deivisive to me, the mere fact that an association can order the removal of any sign from a home owner's yard confuses me. Even if she did mean for the wreath to represent an anti-war message, that too is an opinion that should be respected under the US Constitution. Additionally, I can't help but see such organizations as the "Architectural Control Committee" as Orwellian euphemisms for outlandish control over personal actions.
Even more interestingly, this image of an ideal suburban neighbor full of labradors and white fences is just the American image our society loves to portray. Just as LaFeber explains in Michael Jordan, the capitalist motivation has begun to break down cultural characteristics. The generic, controlled environment that results seems disinteresting to most. As our suburban communities begin to be controlled entirely by such associations, the nondescript lifestyle that results is that same way of life we are selling to other countries.
Overall, I thought this article was a good representation of changes in America that will undoubtedly be processed by globalization and reach into the cultures of foreign nations.
Here's the full article if you're so inclined...

Darwin's Nightmare III

2006-11-27T11:12:00.000-05:00

Indeed, the documentary does a real good job. There are two interesting points that I wanted to add:

Firstly, what I also found quite striking is that the poorest of the poor are really self aware of their situation. During the documentary a Tanzanian security guard points out that he is very aware of the fact that international institutions as the IMF and the World Bank are ran by people from the Western world and that they are not interested in the common good of the Tanzanian people. In addition he says that only education would help to change the negative trend in Tanzania, but is also aware that he does not have the money to allow his children to study and go to school.

Secondly, besides the fact that the Tanzanian people are exploited by the Western world, I found it also interesting, how we employ Russians in order to transport weapons to African ( and even to Afghanistan) and transport fish to Europe. This documentary shows how global capitalism works and how the market is looking in all directions in order to find the cheapest labor (Russians, old Russian cargo-planes, Tanzanians).

Re: Darwin's Nightmare

2006-11-27T10:58:00.000-05:00

I saw the same Darwin's Nightmare documentary that Dan blogged on. The fishing industry in Lake Victoria is not sustainable, and once the fish are gone, the transnational corporations will most likely pull out of the country and leave it to perish. For the moment, fishing is the Tanzania's competitive advantage, but the industry is controlled by companies that have no real interest in the long-term effects for the country. I remember one of the local Tanzanian men saying in an interview that he hopes war breaks out again because war provides a way to make a living. The documentary does a good job illustrating the flaws in the ideology of free trade and its supposedly universal benefits.

The Path to Wealth

2006-11-27T10:46:00.000-05:00

The article I read from New York Times, "Lure of Great Wealth Affects Career Choices", points out how people are choosing Wall Street oriented careers over other careers which provide "useful" services. There are graduate school and medical school graduates who are experts and specialists in their prospective fields but choose the path to wealth through Wall Street. Some qualified medical doctors never even practice medicine because they enter into another career path through Wall Street, perhaps advising people on where to invest their money. The difference is that as a doctor they would only make $100,000 but on Wall Street they could be making upward of several millions.

Dr. Glassman, a graduate of Harvard Medical School, stated:

"I wasn't sure that I was willing to take the risk of spending many years applying for grants and working long hours for the very slim chance of winning at the roulette table and making a significant contribution to the scientific literature".

As a hematology-oncology specialist, Dr. Glassman earned about $150,000 in 1996. He recently changed his career path to management consulting. He never stated how much he now makes on Wall Street or his net worth, however, experts estimate he brings home an annual income in the seven figures and estimate his net worth to be more than $20 million.

So as more people choose to enter Wall Street to find their own path to wealth, what will happen to the fields of academia and scientific research? What about the lawyers who graduate law school but choose to make more money on Wall Street?

John Moon, a managing director of Metalmark Capital, said that, "If Wall Street was not there as an alternative, I would have gone into academia." So, perhaps with more people leaving their specialized fields to enter Wall Street there will be a larger demand for people who wish to enter academia.

LaFeber and Global Capitalism

2006-11-26T22:51:00.000-05:00

After reading LaFeber's book, I thought it would be interesting to see how this book has been recieved by the greater population. I found an article by Franklin Crawford, discussing the release of his book as a "trade book." LaFeber admitted to being a "'sportswriter wannabe,'" which may explain the extensive discussion of Michael Jordan's rise to sports superstar. Additionally, he answers my questions concerning the inclusion of these sections in the following passage from the article:
"In two years or more my students won't know Michael Jordan as a basketball player but as a commercial celebrity, a product," LaFeber said. "So I felt I had to put information in there to show why he was an exceptional athlete."
Logically, LaFeber is assuming that as capitalism takes over culture, Michael Jordan will be come simply a label, and we will lose site of the athletic prowess that drove him to this role as a cultural icon. Additionally, I thought it was interesting that Crawford points out the popularity of this book in the "public mill." While LaFeber did not orginially intend for Michael Jordan and the New Global Capitalism to be of mainstream interest, its popularity could indicate an increased public interest in the growth of capitalist influences. Hopefully, LaFeber has helped some normally apathetic readers realize the influence of global capitalism and the effects of this force on culture.

The article is very interesting.... check it out.

Darwin's Nightmare

2006-11-26T22:09:00.000-05:00

I saw a documentary a couple weeks ago, called "Darwin's Nightmare", that made me aware of some of the problems that have occurred and are occurring in Africa, namely Tanzania. The documentary looks at the poverty, health issues, crime, and the import of weapons to fuel the war in southern Africa (Congo, Rwanda, etc).

The main source of income for the people of Tanzania is now commercial fishing. The introduction of the Nile Perch into Lake Victoria has disrupted the socioeconomic local system, and has forced the country into the world trade system. To exacerbate the situation further, the planes from Europe which were exporting the Nile Perch had also been importing weapons to fuel the war being fought in southern countries of Africa.

I found this film to be a very effective way to open the eyes of the public to these problems occurring in Tanzania. The documentary, although it pointed out problems with poverty and the exploitation of the resources extracted from this area, also brings up health issues that are causing problems. The largest of these health problems is the spread of AIDS. A priest who was interviewed in the film said that the use of condoms was a sin, therefore he is not allowed to recommend that people practice safe sex. So it seems that this issue, though it is able to be prevented, is more related to cultural and religious beliefs. Methods of preventing AIDS are available to the people but are not commonly practiced.

I would recommend seeing this documentary if you have not seen it already. I think this is a great film that relates to globalization. It definitely shows how a country with very few resources has come to be a part of the world system by shipping out several tons of processed meat from the Nile Perch in order to supply many countries in Europe with a food in fairly high demand.

Free Globalization Wristbands!

2006-11-26T21:25:00.000-05:00

I thought my fellow globalization and empire students would like to know that the Adam Smith Institute offers a free wristband that reads "I buy goods from poorer countries" to anyone who e-mails them (them being the institute) at wristband@adamsmith.org with the address to which you would like the band sent. I thought this was hilarious, so I had to make sure that all of you had the opportunity to show your capitalist pride. Of course, there's something inherently anti-capitalistic about giving them away for free...

‘Speculative’ oil pricing hurting economy?

2006-11-26T20:59:00.000-05:00

I know sometimes it seems to me that the oil prices are pretty random, but I came across an article in which the author points out that the Indian government feels the same way (not really that they are random, but that the prices are not controlled by supply and demand.) The Minister of Finance believes that India has lost a percentage point of its annual GDP growth to fluctuation in oil prices that are due to speculation, not changes in supply and demand. He suggested that oil producing and oil consuming countries agree on a range of oil prices in order to stabilize the market. Do you think that this is an attempt to temper the effects of a global market? Would this sort of agreement (assuming one could ever be reached) be helpful, or is it an attempt to find a simple solution to a complex problem?

What about thoses making the shoes

2006-11-20T12:20:00.000-05:00

In his book, "Michael Jordan and the New Global Capitalism, LaFeber focuses on the uproar caused by the killings of young teenagers over their expensive sportswear. While LaFeber is right to denounce the actions of those who resorted to killing over clothing, he only touches on a greater problem that can be easily connected to the problem. That problem was and still is where the shoes were and are being manufactured. If one would simply lift the tongue of their sneakers, and look at the country where the shoe was fabricated. Nine times out of ten the sneaker was made in a sweat shop in a third world country. These sweatshops were a opportunity for the shoe companies to outsource their manufacturing costs thus allowing them to manufacture ten shoes for the same price that they would have to spend making one shoe in the United States. While this is a great business plan and it aids those at the top, those same young kids who were killing for the shoes are not offered an opportunity to work to afford the shoes. The problem is not the price of the shoe or how the shoe was marked, because whether or not th child saw the commercial the allure of owning a pair of Air Jordans would still be there because they would see Jordan, the best basketball player of his time, wearing them. The problem is the fact that the products are manufactured outside the country, possibly taking possible jobs from the parents of the teens killing for the shoes. The problem is still prevalent today. Thousands of American jobs are lost each year due to outsourcing. Yet the blame is put upon the endorcers and advertisers of the product, not those who are taking jobs from people and in turn selling a product that costs a fraction its price to make and still selling the product for the same price. A prime example of how this problem could have been counter acted was devised by other basketball players who created shoes that were a reasonable price, while the shoes were still made with outsourced labor, the price was not raised up so that the shoe maker could profit so heavily.

McCormick Questions

2006-11-19T23:48:00.000-05:00

Chapter 1:
McCormick argues that because the “ins-and-outers” have a wider range of perspectives, they have become dominant in the political sphere because of their unique ability to “see the big picture.” Are such political actors of greater importance than the careerists, or are they more like jacks of all trades and masters of none? (Sorry for the cliché.)

McCormick argues that “since World War II, the number of Americans having nil or minimalist interest in foreign affairs has significantly increased” and that even during the Vietnam-era voters were far less concerned with foreign policy as with domestic issues. Since 9-11 this trend has been changed to some degree (many polls suggested the war was the most important issue on Americans’ minds.) Is this change a reversal of the trend McCormick describes, or is it simply a temporary increase in foreign policy interest that will fade and continue the prior trend?

Chapter 2:
McCormick states the goal of U.S. foreign policy during and after WWI was “global pacification” and the establishment of a “Pax Americana.” Do you believe that this was the goal of American foreign policy, and if so, is that still the case today? How successful has America been in achieving this goal? If it is achievable, is it a goal worth achieving?

McCormick believes that the U.S. was actively working toward hegemony before and during WWII, and that in doing so it used the example set by the British Empire in using “limited means to meet unlimited ends.” Was hegemony always the goal for American foreign policy makers? How and to what extent did American strategy mirror that of the British Empire?

Chapter 3:
McCormick argues that, throughout its history, Russian foreign policy has been torn by contradictory impulses toward isolation and integration with the world. Could the same be said about Americans, or have we always been working toward greater integration with only fleeting thoughts of isolation?

In reference to America’s ability to counter threats from the left, right, and Russia, McCormick says that “Anything was possible if the government and its foreign policy had the public’s blessing of legitimacy. Nothing was possible without it.” Do you think this is an exaggeration of the importance of public approval, or is foreign policy completely impotent if the public sees it as legitimate?

Chapter 4:
McCormick suggests that the Truman Doctrine was essentially a globalization of the Monroe doctrine, America declaring its hegemony, not only in the Americas, but also across the globe. Was this the aim of the Truman doctrine, and if so, how could this be justified among the allies of the US (who were also opposed to the Monroe Doctrine)?

Selling the Marshall Plan domestically required mobilization of its potential supporters as well as disarmament of its potential opponents. Were did the government find support for the plan and what strategies were employed to assure them of the plan’s necessity?

Chapter 5:
How did some countries during the Cold War employ a policy of neutralism, and for what reasons did they do this? What benefits/costs were involved as opposed to a policy of integrationism?

For what reasons did the U.S. choose to intervene in the Suez and Hungarian Crises? Was America’s position of anti-colonialism and self-determination in the Third World consistent with its overall actions and policies, or was it simply a means to an end?

Chapter 6:
What lessons did the United States take from the Cuban Missile Crisis? Was the resulting shift in policy beneficial or not, and why?

McCormick describes Johnson’s shift in foreign policy regarding revolutions in the Western Hemisphere. He moved from Wilson’s distinction between “good revolutions” and “bad revolutions” to a position that “the only good revolution is a dead revolution.” In what ways has this policy changed and/or remained the same? What has been the effect of stick to the devil we know rather than allowing uncertai

Vietnam

2006-11-19T23:23:00.000-05:00

The news regarding Vietnam recently has been interesting. First, a president embroiled in what could become a modern day Vietnam is visiting the site where many in his administration first cut their teeth in power. Cheney, Wolfowitz, Rumsfeld, and many of the senior level generals and Pentagon officials were just getting their start when the Vietnam War occurred. They seemed to have forgotten some of the lessons but have learned some things including manipulating the press, lessening the impact of the death tolls, and stifling opposition as un-patriotic.

What really interests me is the House’s refusal to pass a treaty recognizing Vietnam as a free trade partner. First, many argued against the bill because it furthered the process of free trade. This is unpopular with many because of the perception that it cost jobs. It is also interesting that the legacy of the war was problematic as well. Some republicans argued against it because it would further normalize or integrate a prior enemy while some on the left felt it did not do enough to strengthen labor rights. It strikes me as odd that the party that got into Vietnam full strength is now having qualms about the quality of life for civilians while the party that exited Vietnam is worrying over trade with an old enemy. I also happen to think that both sides will prove inconsequential because Vietnam will still be able to join the WTO and continue its integration into the world system. Good Night.

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/15/business/15trade.html?ex=1321246800&en=712dcc3b4aa071fd&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

McCormick Questions

2006-11-19T16:46:00.000-05:00

McCormick

Chapter 1

What role did ethnic groups play in creating a hegemonic power?

Who are the ins and outers?

Chapter 2

What diplomatic goals did World War II further?

Why were German reparations reduced so drastically?

Chapter 3

In what ways did the U.S. copy British steps to hegemonic power?

How did the Soviets prove to be what McCormick calls the “greatest obstacle to American hegemony” (53)?

Chapter 4

What is the relationship between the Marshal Plan and NATO?

What were the intentions behind the Truman doctrine?

Chapter 5

How did the Korean War influence the Vietnam conflict?

What are some of the causes of the Vietnam War?

Chapter 6

Describe America’s relationship with the world after the Suez crisis.

How did Charles de Gaulle influence French and U.S. relations?

Questions of my own

2006-11-15T14:40:00.000-05:00

Some of these may be observations rather then questions.

1. If Japan played a major part in US involvement in Korea, was it more so out of fear of a threat to the system or a need to preserve further spread of Communism? Did it also seem odd that only a few years after the war that Japan would regain regional hegemony with a few different conditions such as openness to trade?

2. This a broad point. Reading so far has led me to the conclusion that a system must be in play for reasonable stability. If this idea is somewhat recognizable, then would the communist/socialist system have been any less exploitation or did the better system (liberal capitalism) eventually win in the end?

3. It seems as if there was a continuum in US policy from the late 1890's onward throughout the use of the a-bomb and US insistence that Japan be kept from Russian hands or policy. The goal appeared to be an emphasis on liberal economics and adherence to US norms and policy. Is there any truth to this?

4. Schoonover's conclusion makes more sense now with the chapter on post-WWII events. He observed that communist Russia and Vietnam were logical responses to the imperial/neo-imperial policies of the west. Should we view them as such or should we also look at external factors such as the influence of the USSR? Why did they go Communist when Japan, S.Korea, Taiwan, the Malaysia and many other South Asian and Pacific nations went with the liberal world system? Nonetheless it does seem correct that western difficulties with these two nations did rest upon the inherent nature of the world system.

5. Without engaging in majority's simpleton arguement, was it logical for the US to hold back in Korea? If the goal was to further the world system in favor of the US, why would China not merit addition? Or was the restraint due to the internal/external needs of US politicians who realized that long term success was more important and required restraint to matinee domestic support?

6. The delay in peace talks was presented by McCormick as a need to implement NSC-68. Could also be that the delay was imperative for the US to concretely implement the new evolution of the military-industrial complex that was required to support its world system?

7. It seems odd in Germany that the US could quickly turn into a better friend then that of one of its war allies France. While the war was brutal, did the conclusion of it mean that enemies could quickly become friends in a world system were economics were more important than prior conflicts? Also, did US alliance with Germany occurring early on in the Cold War, was the US already seeing an endgame where Germany would be key to toppling the Cold War and in creating a new Europe with a relatively friendly Germany as its core?

8. Was Vietnam really the loss of American hegemony given its current friendly relations and embrace of the world system?

9. Were Japan and Vietnam effects of WWII goals to create a free Asia where liberal economics would rule the day? Or should the be looked at separately? My interest is in how Japan like Germany quickly became the centerpiece of US policy with an understanding that arms and power must be given to preserve the world system to former enemies.

10. I found the suggestion that the Cold War was used to suppress the EEC interesting. A new Europe with a clearly antagonistic French outlook on US would have surely led to an impediment on trade and a reorganization of European relations with the USSR. Is this a correct understanding of US actions that seemed to intesify the conflict?

11. Hegemony v. Intergration. If intergration would bring countires into the world system, is it any better or worse then communist attempts to keep them out. Can intergration be looked as a way for the hegemon to ensure the success of its systerm even if ability declines to prop up the system?

12. Can Israel and its destabilizing actions be looked at as an effect of US need to keep the Middle East non-commuinst/USSr friendly? Could it also be that the Middle East in turmoil is more profitable for the world system if the "Achilles heel" of the world system is oil? Is this one of the reason's the US continues to prop uo Isreale and keep out of its actions?

Discussion Questions for McCormick - Take 2

2006-11-15T13:31:00.000-05:00

Here are some more discussion questions (2 from each chapter) regarding McCormick's America's Half-Century.

Chapter 1

What are the two instances that a single hegemonic power overtook the balance of power in the capitalist world economy and what was the crucial element for the formation of this single hegemonic power in both cases?

What gave the ins-and-outers the advantage over the careerists?

Chapter 2

What strategy did the US employ to minimize casualties, achieve continuous victories, and maintain their wealth during WWII?

What was the significance of the Yalta System and what brought it to a close?

Chapter 3

What was the reason for the US to utilize the atomic bomb twice and with such haste?

How was productionism favorable to the US? What did other nations fear about productionism?

Chapter 4

What were the major concerns of American government and big businesses when the dollar gap impacted the trade between America and Europe?

What were the American responses to the dollar gap and how did they influence this crisis?

Chapter 5

What common goal was the US seeking by entering into the Korean War and Vietnam War?

If Vietnam "had little intrinsic value" according to McCormick, then why did the US play such a large role in the war?

Chapter 6

How did the French stand in the way of American hegemony after the return of French leader de Gaulle?

How did the US deal with peripheral nations that turned from being stable parts of economic internationalism to being uncooperative?

Questions From McCormick

2006-11-15T13:11:00.000-05:00

Ch1.

Since 1945, what two factors does McCormick state as the key aspects in United States policy making?
According to McCormick why is it necessary that a hegemonic power be involved in a worldwide open trade market?

Ch 2.

What are the three developments that aided in the United States replacing Great Britain as the hegemonic power of the world?
In 1945, what country played an important part in causing tensions between the U.S and the USSR, and what caused those tensions?

Ch.3

What was the basis for the Post war American Vision, and how was the vision portrayed?
Who were the “heterogeneous” groups who opposed the Cold War from within the U.S., and what reasons did they provide as their reasoning for dissenting against the War?

Ch. 4

In the first three years of the War, how was the Soviet government run, and for what reasons was it governed in that manner?
In what ways did the Truman Administration confront the problems caused by the crisis involving the American dollar, the Soviet Atom-bomb, and Chinese Revolution?

Ch. 5

According to McCormick, what was the cause of the Korean War?
In 1950, why did the United States back the decolonization of South-east Asia?

Ch. 6

According to McCormick, all-encompassing power itself is not enough to rule the world as a hegemonic power, what else is needed to be a true hegemonic power in the middle of the twentieth century?
During the Eisenhower and Kennedy Administrations, what was the role of the United States in world order, and why was this the belief?

Foreign policy today

2006-11-15T13:05:00.000-05:00

I found an article on foreignpolicy.com by Marcia Pally, a professor at NYU, that directly relates to the material we are covering in McCormick's America's Half-Century.

According to Pally, foreign policy will not change as much as some think, though there may be many changes in the "domestic arena". Pally takes a fairly neutral approach to this article. She looks back to the "exceptional period of U.S. internationalism" which is exactly what we are covering in the text by McCormick.

Pally compares Bush's invasion in Iraq to the US invasions of the past, such as Phillipines, Korea, and Vietnam. She concludes that although the results are dissimilar, the motives are the same. That is, the US looks to maintain a stable periphery in order to have "access to the key resources".

Question

2006-11-13T14:47:00.000-05:00

I enjoyed the book so far.

1. Is world systems an appropriate way to analyze events or do events require analysis on issues other then sole economic imperatives?

2. I agree with others on the question of American hegemony. It seems that while other nations such as China may be on the rise, American hegemony is evolving rather than disappearing after the end of the Cold War. How do we reconcile McCormick argument that since the 1970's hegemony has been on the decline when it seems to have remained strong?

3. I enjoyed the analysis of the domestic sphere reinforcing the notion of hegemony. McCormick was convincing in his argument that much of American popular belief is unsupported by fact. What would it take for Americans or any nation for that matter to look at themselves objectively without merely accepting the beliefs that elites want to propagate?

I also enjoyed reading Julie's response. It was redeeming in its clarity and clarification of beliefs that at first seemed...well somewhat on the verge of political fanaticism. Hopefully moderation and reason will win the day. Good afternoon.

Discussion Questions for McCormick

2006-11-13T14:10:00.000-05:00

I enjoyed reading this first part of McCormick's America's Half-Century more than any of the books we have covered up to now.

The 3 discussion questions I have developed for the reading (Ch 1-4) follow. I was most comfortable with the material in the first chapter, so I focused my discussion questions on that material.

In America's Half-Century, published more than 10 years ago, McCormick raises the question, "Will the United States accept the loss of hegemony, and how will it define its new role in world affairs?". So my question is, has the US lost its hegemony at present, or is the US in the process of losing or regaining hegemony?

Does the US act as the global policeman, and overinvest in military production (a sign of speeding up the decline to a rentier nation and warfare state, according to McCormick)?

How is hegemonic power distributed throughout the world today?

Discussion Questions

2006-11-13T12:45:00.000-05:00

1) In Chapter 1, McCormick states that following WW1 an WW2 hegemonic control occured first under Great Britian and later under the United States. He also implies that the formation of some hegemony, be it Germany or any other Eurpoean nation, was inevitable. In fact, he seems to say that these wars were fought in an effort to avoid hegemony, but actually ended up opening the door for British and US control. Is McCormick over simplifying the WW1 and WW2? Was German hegemony that much of a threat to the international balance of power that war was neccessary (especially if another country was simply going to take over that position)? Did the future hegemons realize that these wars would help them gain global power? McCormick does contend that "hegemony does not simply happen, individuals and group sof people make it happen." How then did the future hegemons ensure their power? (McCormick 5-7)
2) What were the chief obstacles to developing a "Pax Americana" in the 1920s? What prevented Secretary of State Hughes from achieving this goal? Have we ever been close to acheiving such a foreign policy environment since this effort? Could one develop in the future? What political/dipolmatic actions would have to be taken to encourage a Pax Americana? Is such a situation neccessary in today's globalized world? (McCormick 25-28)
3) To what extent do the orginal callings of Truman and the Truman Docterine effect foriegn policy today? Did the actions under these pretenses provide an approved course of governmental action abroad that we continue to use today? Does the logic Truman introduces ring true in today's society? (McCormick 75-78)

Now, Now, Let's Not Get Ahead of Ourselves...

2006-11-13T12:06:00.000-05:00

Apparently Evan and I have much more in common then I think we often realize. My adoration for Pelosi originates from my own interest in moderation and reason. Because the government has held such an overly conservative view throughout Bush's term, and especially in recent years, I see Pelosi's introduction into governmental leadership as a valuable tool toward stability. I too do not associate myself with either party specifically, and find myself voting on issues rather than parties. In fact, I would say that the majority of Americans connect with each party while considering specific issues. In light of this, I see Pelosi and Bush as the bookends to more moderate governmental decisions that will relate better to the greater American population.
Specifically, I beleive some clarification is needed regarding my comments on Pelosi's discipline and steadfast nature. I highlighted these traits because I think it it vital for groundbreaking women to break free of the confines of patriarchal society, to speak their mind and not fear the fact that they are surrounded by stereotypically dominate males. In order for Pelosi to truly open doors for future women politicians then she must embrace any characteristics that place her at an equal level with her colleagues. After all, men in politics are stereotypically established as disciplined and steadfast.
Furthermore, while I think moderation is a wonderful course for the American society and economy, I consider myself an extreme proponent of equality opportunity for women within the government. And while Evan asked we avoid allowing biology to "blind one’s reason," I think that gender representation is an issue in our government that cannot be ignored. We should discuss biology. While I am not wholeheartedly supporting any female who attempts to run for political office, I do think strong politicians, like Pelosi, represent important steps toward a more democratic government. After hundreds of years of societal issues being decided by a slim portion of the population, I believe that any effort to integrate less-represented factions of society into government should be celebrated. Obviously, this support and similar logic follow candidates from any non-white, non-Christian, non-male portion of the population. A prime example of this is Condoleezza Rice. While I do not agree with the Bush administration often, I was happy to hear that she was serving as Secretary of State because she was a woman and African American. Her values and political opinions were not my first reaction, but instead came after the realization that any increase in female African American visibility in government is a positive step forward. I know that this invites criticism, but until the country has a much more representative government I beleive that any gender, race, and class are vital issues in our elections. Acknowledging the lack of representation is the only way to truly begin to solve our problem.

Overall, my adoration for Nancy Pelosi comes from two of my main political views. First, I believe that Pelosi provides a valuable balancing to the conservative presidency. Second, the presence of strong, influential female politicians is a step toward a more representative, democratic government.

McCormick Discussion Q's

2006-11-13T11:19:00.000-05:00

Discussion Questions:

Do you think McCormick proves his assertion that the U.S. waited to end World War II because they were waiting to use the atomic bomb? ("The United States did not want the war to end before it had had a chance to use the atomic bomb" (45).)

Did the U.S. really follow Britain's example in becoming a hegemonic power?

What does McCormick state are the requirements for becoming a hegemonic power? What does he mean when he talks about leadership roles and the public?

McWorld

2006-11-13T11:00:00.000-05:00

4 Oaxaca Youths Attack McDonald’s

By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

Published: November 13, 2006

OAXACA, Mexico, Nov. 12 (AP) — Four youths wearing masks tossed gasoline bombs at a McDonald’s restaurant in the conflict-torn city of Oaxaca on Sunday, the police said.

The restaurant is near the university where leftist protesters set up their headquarters last month after the police drove them out of the city’s main plaza. They had occupied the plaza for five months in an effort to force the resignation of the Oaxaca governor.

On Sunday, security personnel put out the blaze, the police said. The restaurant was closed during the attack, and nobody was hurt, although there was some damage.

Protesters attacked a Burger King restaurant in the same mall with gasoline bombs last week. But leaders of the movement, known as the Oaxaca People’s Assembly, denied that their members were responsible for the attack on Sunday.

McDonald’s was at the center of a conflict here in 2002, when artists and community groups forced the chain to abandon plans to open a franchise in the picturesque colonial main square, saying it would hurt the city’s cultural identity.

Oaxaca’s current conflict started as a teachers’ strike for higher pay. It expanded into a fight to oust Gov. Ulises Ruiz, with the protesters seizing the city center, building barricades, burning buses and seizing radio stations to call for a revolution.

Article

I thought this was interesting in light of our previous discussions about Jihad vs. McWorld...only this time in Mexico! What struck me most was that the Mexicans said that they did not want the McDonalds because it would affect their culture. This is true of the McWorld idea of globalization, but I wonder how long they will be able to keep McWorld from expanding into their own.

Schoonover

2006-11-13T00:53:00.000-05:00

Chapter six, "The War of 1898 in the Pacific Basin" examinies the background and the development of the war. Schoonover spots the need for "...industrial and consumable raw materials, labor, markets for overproduction, investment opportunities, and a stake in the future of selected external areas of resources", as the trigger for the US intervention in the Pacific Basin. For him the whole campaign was a response "...with a set of expansionist policies". While elaborating on the actual development of the different battles, Schoonover points out that the Filipinos were civilized, disciplined, intelligent and organized and partly independent (even under Spanish rule) and therefore showed no desire for American rule and resisted the US army in devastating and bloody skirmishes, which should last for decades. Schoonover gives various examples of Americans who opposed the war (Mark Twain, Henry Adam, Henry Waterson...) and identified it as Social Imperialism. Further, he also shows how other countries, as Germany for example, tried to benefit from the political change by securing their interest in the Pacific Basin. He concludes this chapter by talking about how Americans changed their language ("liberate"="occupy" and "pacify"= "conquer"), in order to change the mindset of the people at home (make them believe that the Filipinos were inferior and needed guidance) and to advance their expancionist policies in the Pacific Basin.

Moderation and Reason, the bedstone of my political beliefs

2006-11-12T20:19:00.000-05:00

I share Julie’s hope for a change with the Democrats regaining control after the 2006 midterms. It seems clear that uni-party government does not lead to reasonable outcomes or honesty. It fosters insulation against differing ideas resulting in mis-management.

Now for the response Julie must have known would result from her clear adoration of Congresswoman and potential House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. It is interesting how the character traits that made some politicians in-competent and foolish are know being heralded as much needed. Bush’s backwater conservatism meets Pelosi’s and other liberal democrat’s inner city idealism and liberalism, six one way and half a dozen the other. Her strict adherence to her beliefs whereas the other side of course was foolhardy.

“Pelosi's democratic track record indicates a strong politician with apparent opinions and values... just the type of woman to open more political doors to females. Pelosi is no pushover, "she demands discipline and loyalty,”

Lets remember for a second 2004, Bush firm on beliefs whereas Kerry was prone to switching. An interesting change. Furthermore, is Pelosi any more at home to run the country that any other overly secure incumbent? My own intuition is that any challenger to her would face an uphill battle just as I am saddened to note that Republican Randy Forbes goes virtually unmatched in my own district. Just a thought to contemplate before one’s adoration turns into blind idol worship. While Pelosi’s gender will make history if she becomes the next speaker, I would certainly hope that biology alone is not enough to blind one’s reason.

However, I do understand Julie’s and others adamant liberal beliefs. I too used to feel secure in knowing that as a liberal I was right and others wrong. It felt good to look down un-approvingly on those “backwood” conservatives. I could articulate everything that was wrong and blame it all on Bush. I eventually reached some cracks in the logic of American liberals. I realized that they were as deciding and righteous as any person on the right. Many looked down on me as an aberration that could not exist within their select circle. My belief in things such as reason, the right of law-abiding citizens to bear arms, the belief that work is not such a bad thing, and that at times we have to reconcile our political beliefs with the economic needs of the nation; these all led me to see that liberals did not have the entire picture. I could not join conservatives either. They looked down on other individual rights such as gay marriage and felt that business deserved a free hand without any safety net. Furthermore, neither could articulate solutions, a real problem when the purpose of government is supposed to serve the people. The only logical conclusion was to become an independent.

Back to now, it is important to note that the Democrats who actually won races were moderate and more understanding of the needs of everyday America. Polticians such as Webb, Tester, or Kaine illustrate what is the future of the Democratic Party. There are two articles in The New Republic I would recommend. One deals with democrats being the party of the people (it highlights the difference between old liberals and new moderates, including the remarkable fact that many old school liberals were not self-made) and the other argues that “gun toting libertarians” will provide the future of the party. Furthermore, if the party wants to grow and possibly win 2008, Pelosi will quickly need to temper her beliefs. On Friday, an aide to Senator McCain announced an exploratory commission to examine his running in 2008. The party had better remember this. My hope is for moderates such as Obama, Edwards, Richardson, Warner, and others to take the helm. The Democratic Leadership Council, of which the party’s greatest hero in recent memory (Clinton) was part of works towards moderation. It also contains many officials who manage to win elections in red states and accomplish things with the Republicans. If the party is to continue, it will be with politicians who understand the needs of the global economy and can mange to balance the needs of the American people with the cold hard economic realities of the 21st century.

One other thing I would like to note. I feel that the unwillingness to compromise is the inability to govern. To govern is to understand all sides of the debate in an attempt to reach a reasonable and productive outcome.

“There is nothing wrong with America that cannot be cured by what is right with America”, Bill Clinton

Russia and the WTO

2006-11-12T00:31:00.000-05:00

It is hard to believe that Russia is still not part of the World Trade Organization, but Bush and Putin have reached an agreement on Russia's entry. I think it says something about the enormous influence that the U.S. has over the WTO that the New York Times considered an agreement with the U.S. the "final big hurdle" for Russia despite objections by other member states. This is a great example of a country negotiating the terms on which it will engage the WTO and choosing to bind itsself to a set of rules that are determined by the organization.
I also thought it was interesting that the article said the WTO "sets the ground rules for globalization. " While the statement is not necessarily false, it implies a much narrower definition of globalization than I have been used to in our class. I think of globalization as something that existed long before the WTO and I am sure that Russia has been participating in globalization without membership in the WTO.

The Real Kazakhstan

2006-11-11T23:18:00.000-05:00

I have seen the Borat movie as well, and it was interesting to learn a little about the real country of Kazakhstan. While I understand why Kazakhstanis would be offended by the movie, but I think the fact that we in the West really do know so little about many countries that have not been in our newspapers is more offensive than the actions of the character (Blogger's spell check does not even recognize Kazakhstan as a word.) After all, the movie is not intended to make fun of Kazakhstan or even to say anything about it at all. The movie makes fun of Americans more than anything (The premise of the movie is a documentary on America, and on some level it does serve that function.) An NPR "Morning Edition" on the movie mentions that the Kazakhstani government has taken out four-page ads in American newspapers in response to the movie. Somehow I do not think these will have much of an effect because, as the movie illustrates, the type of American who would believe that Borat is an accurate representation of Kazakhstan would probably not care to know the truth.
There were times during the movie that I was not sure whether to laugh or to cringe, so I did some of both. The instinct to cringe is due to the fact that there are people who believe the terribly offensive things that Borat says (some of those people are in the movie.)

Jagshemash...

2006-11-08T21:08:00.000-05:00

I remember watching the Borat character in the "Ali G-Show" a couple of years ago and now after Sacha Cohen (the man behind "Borat") dedicated a whole movie to him, the whole world starts talking about this movie or tries to imitate his accent and his jokes.

First of all, I have to admit that I really like this kind of humour, but after having read a couple of articles which talk about the dangers of this movie, I have to admit too that not everyone gets the "real" joke behind Cohen's ballyhoo. I am probably biased, because one of my best friends is actually from Kazakhstan and since the first trailers of this movie were released, he has tried to convince me not to watch it... He keeps asking me me how we (people living in the 21st century) could not be even a little bit informed about Kazakhstan and why we tend to think of the East as an underdeveloped whole with no exceptions??? To be honest I do not have an answer???

This one article that I found from Eric Weiner ("The Real Kazakhkstan") deals with this issue and tries to make people aware of how people could misunderstand the message behind Cohen's humou. Please read it in the for my friend Genya's sake, because he has no problems with Jews at all, does not shoot dogs, does not sleep with his sister, does not believe in Pamela Anderson's virginity, does not listen to Corky Butshek and does not wrestle me all the time... :)

Borat

2006-11-08T10:39:00.000-05:00

A few weeks back our school had free tickets to a preview of the film "Borat: Cultural Learnings of America for Make Benefit Glorious Nation of Kazakhstan". I know several people from the class were able to go see it. So I'm sure this will inspire a couple of you to share your thoughts.

I thought the movie was a brilliant mixture of grotesque humor and social satire, but I can understand how some people might take offense to it. Throughout the movie he constantly jokes about cultural stereotypes, religious beliefs, and social actions. In many cases the real insult of the joke is not even directed at the culture, religion, or people that are at the surface of the joke. Rather, the joke is directed toward the people around him (several of them blatantly racist). For example, many of his jokes involve Jews, but you have to think about the joke with an open mind and realize that he is not making fun of the Jews (he is actually Jewish himself). The review below brings up the question of "Does being Jewish himself make his jokes acceptable?" I guess it is a matter of opinion as well as how you view the direction of the joke.

I'd like to hear some other thoughts about the movie.

Check out the NYTimes movie review for Borat.

Nancy Pelosi, Love of My Life

2006-11-08T10:00:00.000-05:00

Well, as many of you may have guessed, I'm elated with the recent Democratic control of the House, and am even more excited by Pelosi's position as Speaker. Nancy Pelosi now stands as the first woman to be declared Speaker of the House in United States history. This only leaves two political positions unconquered by the female sex, that of President and Vice President. Most European countries have had women leaders for many years now (such as Thatcher's control of England), but in the United States undoubtedly represents a feminist victory.

As icing on my liberal cake, Pelosi's democratic track record indicates a strong politician with apparent opinions and values... just the type of woman to open more political doors to females. Pelosi is no pushover, "she demands discipline and loyalty, two traits that have enabled her to marshal the minority Democrats in the House to win some notable victories. Ms Pelosi, for example, is credited with imposing the discipline that enabled Democrats to defeat George Bush's plan to reform social security," a recent profile reported. Additionally, I am even more excited to witness a few skirmishes between Pelosi and Bush, as it is well known that "their relationship has been marked by mutual disdain." Pelosi has been quoted with numerous negative comments concerning the Bush administration, "He is an incompetent leader. In fact, he is not a leader... He's a person who has no judgment, no experience and no knowledge of the subjects that he has to decide on" she said of Bush in 2004.

While many painted her as a San Francisco liberal during the mudslinging of the 2006 campaign, maybe that is just what we need to fight the down-home, back-country conservativism that is the presidency. I know that my complete support for Pelosi may be inviting censure, but any politically sound, gender aware person must realize the great democratic and feminist victory Pelosi represents... hence my adoration.

A Generation Not Represented (And By Their Own Choice)

2006-11-08T09:36:00.000-05:00

In light of the impending re-count in Virginia, I think it is appropriate to discuss the chronic lack of voter-turn out for citizens 18-22. In an election such as the Senate race in Virginia between Allen and Webb, every vote will count (and be counted again and again, apparently) and be extremely influential in the final decision. Close races seem to be a political trend these days (few have forgotten the fiasco that became of the 2004 Presidental race), and as a result each voter's opinion is becoming increasingly important. Thus, it is generational suicide for our young people to not take part in this (somewhat) democratic process. Candidates and campaign managers alike are well aware that very few citizens between the ages of 18 and 22 vote, and therefore feel no responsibility to adjust their policies to agree with this generation. Issues such as Social Security's forthcoming bankruptcy and the federal deficit will not affect the baby-boomer generation, but will instead find their most extreme influence on this group of non-voters. Congress feels little pressure to handle such problems when those who are most affected seem completely disinterested in the situation at hand.

I know that I am probably preaching to the choir, as I am pretty sure all of you (that are eligible) voted, but if not, I hope the intensely 'down to the wire' nature of politics today encourages you do vote in all future opportunities. Well, I'll get off of my soapbox now, but incase anyone needs more convincing check out these websites:

Top 5 Reasons YOUth Should Vote
Vote-Smart Organization

2006

2006-11-07T22:16:00.000-05:00

First and foremost, I am ashamed of my home state passing the clearly bigoted and unconstituitional implementation of religion on the state. Thankfully though at 10:10 the races still hold hope. I am going to provide some humor tonight to lighten the mood. Afterall, with any senator who can make a man on dog comparison (Santorum) there should be some humor in the air. Here are some fun lyrics along with some photos.

SWEET NEO CON
(M. Jagger/K. Richards)

You call yourself a Christian
I think that you're a hypocrite
You say you are a patriot
I think that you're a crock of shit
And listen, I love gasoline
I drink it every day
But it's getting very pricey
And who is going to pay
How come you're so wrong
My sweet neo con.... Yeah
It's liberty for all
'Cause democracy's our style
Unless you are against us
Then it's prison without trial
But one thing that is certain
Life is good at Haliburton
If you're really so astute
You should invest at Brown & Root.... Yeah
How come you're so wrong
My sweet neo con
If you turn out right
I'll eat my hat tonight
Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah....
It's getting very scary
Yes, I'm frightened out of my wits
There's bombers in my bedroom
Yeah and it's giving me the shits
We must have loads more bases
To protect us from our foes
Who needs these foolish friendships
We're going it alone
How come you're so wrong
My sweet neo con
Where's the money gone
In the Pentagon
Yeah ha ha ha
Yeah, well, well
Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah
Yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah, yeah...
Neo con

This goes deep...

2006-11-07T16:01:00.000-05:00

U2 meets global capitalism... Its my favorite song!!! You have to watch it!!!

One...Bank

Vote !!!

2006-11-06T12:22:00.001-05:00

After having talked briefly about the campaign ads on Slate.com, I checked the site and just wanted to add the link here "The Slimiest Campaign Ads of 2006"

The adds are interesting and very disturbing at the same time, because I have never experienced German campaign acts to be so insulting and simple-minded like these ads. Somehow it is extremely difficult to spot a certain difference in the ads, because both parties use excactly the same methods and techniques... What do you think???

But nevertheless it is extremely important to vote and so far I have met a lot of fellow students who have never voted before and who wont take part in the upcomimg vote...

Schoonover and Bananas

2006-11-06T10:31:00.000-05:00

While exploring the web in search of information and review on Schoonover's War of 1898, I came across an H-Net review of Schoonover and Langley's book Banana Men, which had been previously mentioned in class. I thought this may be of interest as we transition from bananas to Uncle Sam. Additionally, Banana Men has a discussion of the 'core' and 'preiphery' as we discussed earlier in the semester. Here is an excerpt from this section of the review.

Schoonover provides and overview of the concept of social imperialism in the first chapter. Social imperialism describes the relationship between "core" industrial nations and the countries of the less developed "periphery." As core economies of countries like the United States expanded, they sought out foreign markets, investment opportunities and sources of raw materials that would benefit the core. They did this with little or no regard for the consequences to the periphery host country. Indeed, the needs of the core led it to undermine the sovereignty and development of the host in order to meet its own needs. Social imperialism affected not only the economy of the peripheral nation, but its social and political life as well. While core interests might directly use force to create a suitable environment for their needs, they often found it more expedient to operate through a "comprador" elite in the host country, an elite that the core elements often placed, and maintained, in power.

The full review by Steven S. Gillick can be found at http://www.h-net.msu.edu/reviews/showpdf.cgi?path=11197851788881

Mountain Top Removal and Recycling

2006-11-06T09:35:00.000-05:00

After attending the presentation on Mountain Top Removal and seeing the devastating results of this terrible method of obtaining coal, I found myself more aware of the wasted energy around me. I've always been one to shut off the lights when I leave a room and to recycle a can or bottle rather than toss it in the garbage. Sometimes knowing the facts helps to make people more away of the energy they are using. So I've found two sites with some interesting facts about recycling.

http://www.oberlin.edu/recycle/facts.html
This site is organized into specific recycling categories.

http://www.recycle-more.co.uk/nav/page712.aspx
Although I found many of the facts on this second site helpful, I do not like the way they organized the facts. The first fact states that "aluminium is the third most abundant element in the earth's crust and is the earth's second most used metal". Now the people who need to know more about recycling might think, "Well it is the third most abundant metal, so what is the harm in throwing it away?". I think this fact is one of the least important, and should not be listed at the top.

The US, the Philliphines, and the birth of an American legend

2006-11-05T20:00:00.000-05:00

Reading Schoonover this weekend reminded me of a connection to a caliber and firearm that was and is the quietensetialy American pistol. While the .45 has evolved with companies such as Heckler and Koch, Glock (my personal favorite), Kimber, and most recently the Brazilian manufacturer Taurus; the gun is ingrained with the remembrance of its original name, the Colt 1911 Government Issue .45 semi-automatic sidearm.

You are most likely thinking right now that the crazy southerner has gone of his rocker again, but unfortunately for you I have not.

The Colt .45 was developed when the .38 was insufficient to stop Philiphine rebels who were often under the influence of strength altering drugs. Furthermore, US troops found that insurgent warfare required the ability to stop a motivated opponent with the first shot. The Army’s answer was to have Colt firearms develop a new pistol. It was initially issued as a revolver but the soon infamous semi-auto was issued. It served US troops in World Wars, Korea, Vietnam, and with decreasing use in the First Gulf War. In an effort to deal with things such as the Geneva Convention and the international use of the 9x19mm shell; the US switched to the 9mm in 1990.

The .45 is an interesting firearm for our class for two reasons. I am assuming that despite its reliability, effectiveness for self-defense, and enjoyment it provides on the range, you are most likely interested in its historical importance and relevance to class.

First, the weapon can be understood as the evolution of American arms supremacy. Despite the fact that at times the Germans and Japanese may have had better tools for a time, the .45 illustrates the continual growth of American armaments into being the best in the world. The .45 grew with each war to accommodate the needs of a modernizing army.

Second, at the turn of a new century the US has found itself again fighting a highly motivated, rebel force in an occupied country. US troops (especially the special operations) have found the newer, less powerful 9mm insufficient for one-shot effectiveness. They have returned to the .45 to regain a capability lost in attempt for uniformity. Interestingly, the .45’s used the most are the Heckler and Koch (German), Glock (Austrian), Colt (US), and the Kimber (US). Two out of the four are internationally made (however they do come from one of the century’s other great arm manufacturers).
I hope you found this tangent somewhat interesting. Good night.

http://www.m1911.org/history.htm

Benedict Anderson and Imagined Communities

2006-11-05T12:48:00.000-05:00

Dr. Margolies mentioned Benedict Anderson's Imagined Communities in class on Wednesday during our involved discussion of cultural anthropology. I found a few excerpts from Anderson's discussion of imagined communities.

"In an anthropological spirit, then, I propose the following definition of the nation: it is an imagined political community - - and imagined as both inherently limited and sovereign. It is imagined because the members of even the smallest nation will never know most of their fellow-members, meet them, or even hear of them, yet in the minds of each lives the image of their communion... In fact, all communities larger than primordial villages of face-to-face contact (and perhaps even these) are imagined. Communities are to be distinguished, not by their falsity/genuineness, but by the style in which they are imagined...
"The nation is imagined as limited because even the largest of them encompassing perhaps a billion living human beings, has finite, if elastic boundaries, beyond which lie other nations. No nation imagines itself coterminous with mankind. The most messianic nationalists do not dream of a day when all the members of the human race will join their nation in the way that it was possible, in certain epochs, for, say, Christians to dream of a wholly Christian planet.
"It is imagined as sovereign because the concept was born in an age in which Enlightenment and Revolution were destorying the legitamcy of the divinely-ordained, hierarchical dynastic realm. Coming to maturity at a stage of human history when even the most devout adherents of any universal religion were inescapably confronted with the living pluralism of such religions, and the allomorphism between each faith's ontological claims and territorial stretch, nations dream of being free, and, if under God, directly so. The gage and emblem of this freedom is the sovereign state.
"Finally, it is imagined as a community, because, regardless of the actual inequality and exploitation that may prevail in each, the nation is always conceived as a deep, horizontal comradeship. Ultimately it is this fraternity that makes it possible, over the past two centuries, for so many millions of people, not so much to kill, as willingly to die for such limited imaginings." -- Benedict Anderson, Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origins and Spread of Nationalism

Anderson is a professor of International Studies at Cornell University. He coined the phrase "imagined communities" and is considered a "historicist" or "modernist" writing from an anthropological view.

Mountain Top Removal

2006-11-05T11:20:00.000-05:00

The presentation on Thursday concerning mountain top removal in Appalacia was extremely interesting. If anyone missed it, check out this website http://www.appvoices.org/ to learn about the actual process and damage that results. Much of the discussion was also about energy conservation in the home, so I found another website with tips on how to avoid frivilous and expensive energy wasting. There are a few new ones that weren't mentioned in the presentation, so I thought they would be worth posting:

Here are the top ten ways to lower your energy usage:
1. Install low-flow showerheads: Your shower accounts for about 30 - 40 percent of your hot water use. In addition to this, install aerators on your kitchen and bathroom taps. These two measures can reduce your water usage by as much as 50 percent. Finally, you should consider installing a toilet tank dam.
2. Lower your hot water heater to 49 degrees and drain any sediment: Heating cold water is very energy intensive — and also a great place to save energy. Although you need to keep your water heater above 48 degrees C to prevent bacteria from building up, many hot water heaters are set too high. Experts also recommend draining a pint or so of water from your water heater a few times a year to reduce sediment and increase efficiency.
3. Add insulation to your hot-water heater: As long as you’re dealing with your water heater, you might as well add some insulation. Since the standard hot water heater is on all the time, adding extra insulation will save more energy than you think. Most hardware stores sell pre-made insulator “jackets” that can be easily wrapped around one’s water heater. Experts estimate that adding insulation to your water heater and any exposed pipes can knock up to 15 percent off the costs of heating water. Caution: Be sure to read the manufacturer’s instructions before taking this step.
4. Check for and seal any cracks or gaps: Home heating is the single largest use of energy for the average customer. And since experts estimate that all of the tiny gaps and cracks in an older home are roughly equivalent to a one-foot square hole punched in your wall, sealing any cracks or gaps with caulking and weather-stripping can greatly improve energy efficiency. First, you should test your home for air tightness. On a windy day, hold a lit incense stick next to your windows, doors, etc. Observe the smoke to see if a draft is present. After you’ve sealed the gaps, think about adding some insulation to your floor, ceiling or walls — a bit of modern insulation can often work wonders for older houses.
5. Install a programmable thermostat: These wonders of modern technology give you greater control over your home comfort. In winter, set the thermostat to 21 degrees C when you are awake and 17 degrees C when you are asleep. In summer, set the thermostat to 26 degrees C and use a ceiling fan to cool your place. When the temperature outside falls to at least two degrees lower than the temperature inside, you should “vent” your home - that is, open your windows to let cool air in.
6. Replace your incandescent bulbs with compact fluorescent lights: Compact fluorescent light bulbs use only about a third as much electricity as standard incandescents. According to some experts, if you substitute compact fluorescent bulbs for a quarter of the incandescents used in high-use areas, you can cut the amount of electricity you use on lighting by half.
7. Install motion detectors and light dimmers: Outdoor lights that are left on all night can add unnecessary costs to your power bill. Using a bulb or fixture with a motion detector solves the problem. And, while it is preferable to replace your incandescents with fluorescents, in cases where you are unable to do so try installing a light dimmer. This simple device can help you save big on your lighting costs. For example, an incandescent light dimmed by 25 percent can save 10 percent on energy use and extend the life of the bulb.
8. Look for EnerGuide and Energy Star certified appliances: All major electrical appliances sold in Canada must meet minimum energy efficiency standards and are required to display an EnerGuide label. For appliances, an indicator arrow on the left side of the EnerGuide scale means lower operating costs and long-term savings. When shopping for an air conditioner, look for display models with an indicator arrow to the right on the EnerGuide scale. The international Energy Star mark is also a good way to select energy-efficient appliances and office equipment. The Energy Star mark means that the unit meets strict energy conservation standards.
9. Cover your windows: In winter, close your curtains and shades at night; open them during sunny days. Keep windows on the south side of your house clean to maximize solar gain. Plant deciduous trees/plants at the south side of your house so that it shades your house in summer but allows for direct solar heating in winter.
10. Discontinue the use of your second refrigerator. Old beer fridge in the basement? Unplug it and make the trek upstairs to your new, energy-efficient fridge in the kitchen. It will be good for your heart -- and your energy bill.

These are from http://www.electricitychoices.org/tenways.html

Overall, the presentation on mountain top removal was very informative. Very few people realize the effects of the incredible amounts of power used by Americans in daily activities. Even blogging as I am now takes up substantial amounts of energy (keeping the computer and lights on). Hopefully, raising awareness of the astounding amounts of energy we use will help us to conserve energy and develop clean energy sources.

Clifford Geertz - NY Times Article

2006-11-04T13:51:00.000-05:00

Clifford Geertz, Cultural Anthropologist, Is Dead at 80
By ANDREW L. YARROW
Published: November 1, 2006

Clifford Geertz, the eminent cultural anthropologist whose work focused on interpreting the symbols he believed give meaning and order to people’s lives, died on Monday in Philadelphia. He was 80 and lived in Princeton, N.J.
The cause was complications after heart surgery, according to an announcement by the Institute for Advanced Study in Princeton, where he had been on the faculty since 1970.
Best known for his theories of culture and cultural interpretation, Mr. Geertz was considered a founder of interpretive, or symbolic, anthropology. But his influence extended far beyond anthropology to many of the social sciences, and his writing had a literary flair that distinguished him from most theorists and ethnographers.
He won a National Book Critics Circle Award for “Works and Lives: The Anthropologist as Author” (1988), which examined four of his discipline’s forebears: Bronislaw Malinowski, Ruth Benedict, E. E. Evans-Pritchard and Claude Lévi-Strauss.
Drawing on history, psychology, philosophy and literary criticism, Mr. Geertz analyzed and decoded the meanings of rituals, art, belief systems, institutions and other “symbols,” as he defined them.
“Believing with Max Weber that man is an animal suspended in webs of significance he himself has spun, I take culture to be those webs and the analysis of it to be therefore not an experimental science in search of law but an interpretive one in search of meaning,” he wrote in his 1973 book, “The Interpretation of Cultures” (Basic Books). The Times Literary Supplement called the book one of the 100 most important since World War II.
Mr. Geertz also wrote voluminously on his fieldwork in Indonesia and Morocco. In one of his most widely cited essays, “Deep Play: Notes on the Balinese Cockfight,” included in “The Interpretation of Cultures,” he analyzed the kinship and social ties that are constructed, emphasized and maintained in this form of ritual “deep play” as if they were “an assemblage of texts.”
In his writings, Mr. Geertz drew a careful distinction between culture and social structure, differentiating himself from functionalists like Lévi-Strauss, who believed that rituals, institutions and other aspects of a culture could be best understood by the purposes they serve.
Whereas social structure embraces economic, political and social life and its institutional forms, Mr. Geertz said, culture is “a system of meanings embodied in symbols” that provide people with a frame of reference to understand reality and animate their behavior. Culture, he argued, fills the gap between those things that are biological givens for our species and those we need to function in a complex, interdependent and changing world.
In short, in the Geertz formulation, the question to ask about cultural phenomena is not what they do, but what they mean. Mr. Geertz also argued against the idea that one could define the essence of humanity across all cultures.
“The notion that the essence of what it means to be human is most clearly revealed in those features of human culture that are universal rather than in those that are distinctive to this people or that is a prejudice that we are not obliged to share,” he wrote in 1966. “It may be in the cultural particularities of people — in their oddities — that some of the most instructive revelations of what it is to be generically human are to be found.”
Mr. Geertz was also deeply concerned about the anthropologist’s role and the discipline’s methodology. Recognizing the colonialist and Western heritage of anthropology, he believed that it was difficult for anyone from one culture to represent another accurately and meaningfully. He noted that anthropologists were hardly passive, objective observers, but rather individual creators of narratives, with their own voice.
Arguing that ethnographic reality does not exist apart from anthropologists’ written versions of it, he said that cultures and peoples should speak for themselves, with anthropologists learning to “converse with them” and interpret them.
In his book “Local Knowledge: Further Essays in Interpretive Anthropology” (Basic Books, 1983), Mr. Geertz also addressed the question of whether someone from one culture can objectively understand another.
For him, the anthropologist’s task is to use what he called thick description to interpret symbols by observing them in use. Therefore the anthropologist must be both empirically rigorous and a savvy interpreter, akin to a psychoanalyst. In 1972 he wrote that “cultural analysis is (or should be) guessing at meanings, assessing the guesses and drawing explanatory conclusions from the better guesses.”
Mr. Geertz’s elaborate theorizing and his later doubts about the limits of anthropological knowledge left some scholars nonplussed. As Jonathan Benthall, writing in The New Statesman in 1995, said: “He disappoints some colleagues because he comes up with no overarching theories.”

....Around this time, he did the first of a half dozen fieldwork stints in Indonesia, spending 1952 to 1954 in the central Javanese village of Pare. His early work on Indonesia combined aspects of more conventional ethnography and history with concerns about economic and political development in the wake of decolonization.
“The Religion of Java” (1960), his first major work, is an ethnographic description of Javanese religion. “Agricultural Involution” (1963) takes a big-picture view of modernization and economic development in the wake of Indonesian independence, while “Peddlers and Princes” (1963) focuses on development from the more microscopic level of the towns of Modjokuto in Java and Tabanan in Bali. A century of social development in Modjokuto is the subject of “The Social History of an Indonesian Town” (1965).
“Kinship in Bali” (1975), written with his first wife, the anthropologist Hildred Storey, posited “an underlying order in Balinese kinship practices” in the cultural realm of symbols, patterns and ideas, despite differences in practices, or social structure, in different parts of the island.
“Negara: The Theater State in 19th Century Bali” (1981) examined the nature of royal families in tiny pre-colonial south Balinese kingdoms, while challenging the “power-centered tradition of political theory from Machiavelli and Hobbes to Marx.

....After beginning his academic career as a research associate and instructor at Harvard, Mr. Geertz spent two years in California. From 1958 to 1959, he was a fellow at the Center for Advanced Studies in the Behavioral Sciences in Palo Alto; he was later an assistant professor of anthropology at the University of California, Berkeley. From 1960 until 1970, Mr. Geertz taught at the University of Chicago, becoming a full professor in 1964. He joined the Institute for Advanced Study in 1970 as its first Professor of the Social Sciences and from 1978 to ’79 taught at Oxford University.
Because of political turmoil in Indonesia, Mr. Geertz later turned his attention to Morocco, where he began doing fieldwork in the ancient village of Sefrou in 1963, returning five more times over the course of his career.
Profoundly influenced by his fieldwork there, he honed his comparative and historical approach in “Islam Observed” (1968), which the anthropologist Edmund Leach praised as “a highly insightful comparison between Islam as interpreted by Indonesians and Islam interpreted by Moroccans.”
By the end of his career, Mr. Geertz had grown discouraged about the ability of social science to generalize or develop sweeping theories, concluding that circumstances are too different among cultures, across time, and within societies. At the same time, he was heartened by the what he called the deprovincialization of anthropology, as the profession came to embrace ever more Asian, Middle Eastern and other non-Western scholars.
In his 1995 memoir, “After the Fact: Two Countries, Four Decades, One Anthropologist,” Mr. Geertz eloquently meditated on his field work and academic career, concluding that anthropology is “an excellent way, interesting, dismaying, useful and amusing, to expend a life.”

Cultural Anthropology

2006-11-02T16:44:00.000-05:00

Today I went to the book sale and bought William A. Haviland's "Cultural Anthropology" and guess what I found on the first page??? An explanation for anthropology:

"[... ]Anthropology, the study of humankind, seeks to produce useful generalizations about people and their behavior and to arrive at the fullest possible understanding of human diversity. [...] Physical anthropologists study humans as biological organisms, tracing the evolutionary development of the human animal and looking at the biological variations within this species. Cultural anthropologists are concerned with human cultures, or the ways of life in societies. Within the field of cultural anthropologists are archeologists, who seek to explain human behavior by studying matererial objects, usually from past cultures; linguists, who study languages, by which cultures are maintained and passed on to succeeding generations; and ethnologists, who study cultures as they can be experienced and discussed with persons whose culture is to be understood."

UN

2006-11-01T12:39:00.000-05:00

I was curious and had to find out the requirements myself (Sorry, Julie and ES!!!)

"Membership in the United Nations is open to all peace-loving states which accept the obligations of the Charter and, in the judgement of the Organization, are willing and able to carry out these obligations.

The admission of any such State to membership in the United Nations will be effected by a decision of the General Assembly upon the recommendation of the Security Council."

Article 4, Chapter 2, United Nations Charter

How does a new State or Government obtain recognition by the United Nations?
How does a country join the UN as a Member State?

The recognition of a new State or Government is an act that only States and Governments may grant or withhold. It generally implies readiness to assume diplomatic relations. The United Nations is neither a State nor a Government, and therefore does not posses any authority to recognize either a State or a Government. As an organization of independent States, it may admit a new State to its membership or accept the credentials of the representatives of a new Government.

Membership in the Organization, in accordance with Paragraph I of Article 4 of the Charter of the United Nations, "is open to all peace-loving States which accept the obligations contained in the United Nations Charter and, in the judgment of the Organization, are able to carry out these obligations." States are admitted to membership in the United Nations by decision of the General Assembly upon the recommendation of the Security Council. The procedure is briefly as follows:

1. The State submits an application to the Secretary-General and a formal declaration stating that it accepts the obligations under the Charter.

2. The application is considered first by the Security Council. Any recommendation for admission must receive the affirmative votes of nine of the 15 members of the Council, provided that none of its five permanent members - China, France, the Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America - have voted against the application.

3. If the Council recommends admission, the recommendation is presented to the General Assembly for consideration. A two-thirds majority vote is necessary in the Assembly for admission of a new State, and membership becomes effective the date the resolution for admission is adopted.

At each session, the General Assembly considers the credentials of all representatives of Member States participating in that session. During such consideration, which routinely takes place first in the 9-member Credentials Committee but can also arise at other times, the issue can be raised whether a particular representative has been accredited by the Government actually in power. If controverted, this issue is ultimately decided by a majority vote in the Assembly. It should be noted that the normal change of Governments, as through a democratic election, does not raise any issues concerning the credentials of the representative of the State concerned.

Global Force

2006-11-01T10:42:00.000-05:00

P. W. Botha, Defender of Apartheid, Is Dead at 90

"P. W. Botha, the South African leader who struggled vainly to preserve apartheid rule in a tide of domestic racial violence and global condemnation, died yesterday at his home in South Africa. He was 90.

Peter Andrews/Reuters

P. W. Botha, left, and Nelson Mandela, then South Africa’s president, discussing Truth Commission hearings in 1997. Mr. Botha refused to testify before the panel.

His death was reported by The South African Press Association in Cape Town, quoting the security staff at Mr. Botha’s home on the southern Cape coast.

Mr. Botha was a combative, irascible son of a well-to-do Afrikaner farm family who dropped out of college to work for the right-wing National Party, then rose through the ranks of South Africa’s political establishment, gaining a reputation as the “Old Crocodile” for his ability to charm, outwit and crush his opponents.

In 1978, Mr. Botha became prime minister and proceeded to engineer the creation of a new Constitution, one that held out the promise of limited reform of apartheid policies. When the Constitution came into effect in 1984, Mr. Botha became president. “We must adapt or die,” Mr. Botha told his constituents after becoming prime minister.

But the Constitution only roiled the battle over race. Though it allowed Asians and people of mixed race to be represented in a white-controlled Parliament, it continued to exclude the nation’s black majority. Some apartheid laws, like a prohibition on mixed marriages and a requirement that blacks carry special passes, were relaxed. But the measures only fueled the anger of apartheid’s opponents. One opposition leader, Frederik van Zyl Slabbert, said Mr. Botha’s reforms were the political equivalent of rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic."
Article

This article about the apartheid supporter P.W. Botha caught my attention because the headline stated that Botha had held his position against a global front. Therefore, the article seemed to imply that some global force was against apartheid ( I would hope so) and that Botha acted outside of the global schematic. I have not researched much on this subject but it continues to raise questions about global "police" and determining when a country's actions need to be confronted.

On a different note, this past weekend I listened to some of the Lost Boys of Sudan speak about their experiences and what they hoped people would do about the genocide in the Sudan. They spoke a lot about U.N. action being taken as the signal of the start of war with the U.S. in Darfur. Also apparently the U.N. does not include the Sudanese in their voting practices. Perhaps someone else (Julie or Evan maybe?) knows what the requirements are for joining the U.N. Shouldn't more countries be in it if it is going to be representative of a global force?

"Cowboy Nation"

2006-10-31T22:21:00.000-05:00

Robert Kagan’s provocative piece “Cowboy Nation” details what he sees as the desire for empire as war being part of our American blood. He wrote, “The early United States was an expansionist power from the moment the first pilgrim set foot on the continent; and it did not stop expanding—territorially, commercially, culturally, and geopolitically—over the next four centuries. The United States has never been a status quo power; it has always been a revolutionary one, consistently expanding its participation and influence in the world in ever-widening arcs. The impulse to involve us in the affairs of others is neither a modern phenomenon nor a deviation from the American spirit. It is embedded in the American DNA”.

What is interesting about this argument is Kagan emphasis that our liberal (not current political nor IR term, but idea of the individual) tradition leads us to see ourselves as able to spread liberty. Furthermore we as a nation see it or our destiny as listed in the Declaration (Kagan sees it as the defining document of the American mantra) to spread our empire.

I think Kagan needs to emphasize that despite our goals toward liberty, we still act in accordance to what serves us. Currently actions in Africa or other parts of the world could be seen as spreading liberty, but they do little to serve our national interest.

This article is important to our study because it reminds us to examine ourselves without forgetting that our past is not ideal. Furthermore the idea makes both sides examine their roots. The question of doing good is troublesome for us because it can embroil us in conflicts that neither suit us or that we cannot solve. Perhaps the lyrics of a Rolling Stones song have applicability here. Instead of fighting our past, we should have some “sympathy for the devil”.

"Please allow me to introduce myself
Im a man of wealth and taste
Ive been around for a long, long year
Stole many a mans soul and faith
And I was round when jesus christ
Had his moment of doubt and pain
Made damn sure that pilate
Washed his hands and sealed his fate
Pleased to meet you
Hope you guess my name
But whats puzzling you
Is the nature of my game
I stuck around st. petersburg
When I saw it was a time for a change
Killed the czar and his ministers
Anastasia screamed in vain
I rode a tank
Held a generals rank
When the blitzkrieg raged
And the bodies stank
Pleased to meet you
Hope you guess my name, oh yeah
Ah, whats puzzling you
Is the nature of my game, oh yeah
I watched with glee
While your kings and queens
Fought for ten decades
For the gods they made
I shouted out,
Who killed the kennedys?
When after all
It was you and me
Let me please introduce myself
Im a man of wealth and taste
And I laid traps for troubadours
Who get killed before they reached bombay
Pleased to meet you
Hope you guessed my name, oh yeah
But whats puzzling you
Is the nature of my game, oh yeah, get down, baby
Pleased to meet you
Hope you guessed my name, oh yeah
But whats confusing you
Is just the nature of my game
Just as every cop is a criminal
And all the sinners saints
As heads is tails
Just call me lucifer
cause Im in need of some restraint
So if you meet me
Have some courtesy
Have some sympathy, and some taste
Use all your well-learned politesse
Or Ill lay your soul to waste, um yeah
Pleased to meet you
Hope you guessed my name, um yeah
But whats puzzling you
Is the nature of my game, um mean it, get down
Woo, who
Oh yeah, get on down
Oh yeah
Oh yeah!
Tell me baby, whats my name
Tell me honey, can ya guess my name
Tell me baby, whats my name
I tell you one time, youre to blame
Ooo, who
Ooo, who
Ooo, who
Ooo, who, who
Ooo, who, who
Ooo, who, who
Ooo, who, who
Oh, yeah
Whats me name
Tell me, baby, whats my name
Tell me, sweetie, whats my name
Ooo, who, who
Ooo, who, who
Ooo, who, who
Ooo, who, who
Ooo, who, who
Ooo, who, who
Ooo, who, who
Oh, yeah"

Some words of hope

2006-10-30T23:30:00.000-05:00

"A little patience, and we shall see the reign of witches pass over, their spells dissolve, and the people, recovering their true sight, restore their government to its true principles. It is true that in the meantime we are suffering deeply in spirit, and incurring the horrors of a war and long oppressions of enormous public debt. If the game runs sometimes against us at home we must have patience till luck turns, and then we shall have an opportunity of winning back the principles we have lost, for this is a game where principles are at stake."

Thomas Jefferson

The Threat of Blackness, by Dario A. Euraque

2006-10-30T13:27:00.001-05:00

Overall, Euraque uses his essay to discuss the cultural makeup of the Latin American countries involved in the banana trade. He specificallly references Honduras and the complex combination of native, European, and African cultures. The interplay between the native 'indians' of Honduras and the two groups of people that came to inhabit the island with them created a very unique cultural identity that came to fruition (haha no pun intended) as the banana trade in specific regions of Honduras increased drastically.

Euraque stresses that labeling countries such as Honduras as simply "banana repulics" tends to ignore the cultural and economic history of the country itself, as it connects and intertwines with the banana trade. Thus, such a perspective will "delink not only national economic and political history from the banana enclave... but it also delinked national cultural history from the regional processes on the Caribbean North Coast." To prove his point, Euraque uses the example of the 1926 Honduran Congress vote to name the country's currency after Lempira, "the indigenous cheiftain who died fighting the Spainards in the 1530s." While Lempira's actually place in history is not exactly pertinent, more importantly Euraque examines how the use of Lempira as a national icon reflects the cultural identity of the country at the time. Because Lempira was an indigenous hero, his popularity reflects a national connection with those indigenous to the island even though most of the nations population was a unique combination of indigenous, Eurpoean, and African American heritage.

Soon, European and indigenous culture combined to identify a "threat of blackness" embodied by the control of economic development (specifically the banana trade) by a region of the country heavily populated by those of mainly European and indigenous descent. In fact, this region of banana exportation was "heavily reliant on the labor of mulatto and black populations... [who were often] viewed as a 'menace' to the Indian/Spanish national identity promoted in the 1920s." As Lempira rose as a national hero, so did the concept of "Indians domesticated within Indo-Hispanic mestizaje," implying that those of African descent were not capable of this same domestication by the Europeans.

Euraque seeks to remind us that while the banana trade deeply affected the economic stability of the Latin American countries, it also altered the social systems of these nations, orchestrating the development of specific cultural identities dependent upon the time period and progression of the banana trade in a specific time. The 'racialization' of Lempira existed in a cultural environment seeking to create a specific identity that would encourage successful economic policies, especially as related to the banana trade.

"The Macondo of Guatemala": Banana Workers and National Revolutions in Tiquisate, 1944-1954, Cindy Forster

2006-10-30T13:27:00.000-05:00

Forster traces the role of United Fruit workers in the political changes in Guatemala. She argues that the United Fruit banana plantation workers were in a unique position to resist (sucessfully or otherwise) exploitation by the company and government due to the workers ability to organize such large numbers in their union. The revolution, which temporarily established land reform and better wages/conditions for wokers, had a strong poplular base, but could not hope to withstand the U.S. supported invasion and overthrow.

Mark Moberg - Responsible Men and Sharp Yankees

2006-10-30T12:28:00.000-05:00

Essence of the essay:

Moberg discusses the strategies employed by United Fruit to monopolize the banana export industry in British Honduras (known today as Belize) and how these strategies affect the relationship between "the colonial state, traditional elites, and the United Fruit Company. In the essay he traces the history of United Fruit in British Honduras from the time the company was invited to operate early in the 20th century until the time the company abandoned their contract in 1920.

Short summary:

The intentions of United Fruit are made clear in the essay; the company moves in, develops a monopoly, and exploits the land of British Honduras. A contract between United Fruit Company and British Honduras was formed. United Fruit was to produce and export agriculture for 25 years and in return the government would provide the company cheap land and a new railway system for transportation of goods. The company was able to buy land for $1 per acre, whereas private farmers had to pay nearly $8 per acre.

The land was infected with Panama Disease circa 1914 and the disease slowly spread causing most of the land owned by United Fruit to be unsuitable for the growth of banana plants. Shortly after this disaster struck the company pulled out of British Honduras and offered to sell the land back for twice the price at which it was purchased. In the conclusion, Moberg mentions the present situation with the banana export industry in Belize.

One idea that I may look into for a future blog is the outcome of the suit that was initiated by Chiquita (the successor of United Fruit) through WTO. The suit was meant to end the tariff quota system that allowed ACP fruit to export a certain amount of fruit with reduced taxation. If the ruling passes, "United Fruit will have dismantled a banana industry that played a major role in the company's own growth".

North vs South

2006-10-29T20:46:00.000-05:00

Haha... Probably you all need to play some North vs South. Even as a European, I remember playing this action game on the NES ( That was the Nintendo Entertainment System from the late 80s, early 90s). So much fun...

Striffler, "The Logic of the Enclave: United Fruit, Popular Struggle, and Capatalist Transformation in Ecuador"

2006-10-29T20:24:00.000-05:00

Striffler’s chapter focused on the presence and eventual departure of the United Fruit Company from Ecuador during the years 1930’s to 1962. He traced the evolution of the company from having widespread power to that of readjusting due to dissent from local peasants and workers.

From the initial presence of the company, local peasants constantly threatened its property rights. The government was not a reliable source of power for either side. Both were armed and enforced their own rules. Interestingly, the UFC treated its workers relatively well, which virtually eliminated their dissent. The spread of Panama disease required UFC to spread, which was the harbinger of the company having to leave. When it sought new land peasants fought it at every turn making the company acquiesce and grant them tenant rights. Finally in 1962 the company completed its switch to contracts to gain the commodity of bananas, which it so dearly desired.

The interesting point is that while the peasants gained property rights, they did so only to fall under a new institution of native capitalists who were less fair then the UFC. The UFC and others still remained able to gain their products.

I think this is an unfortunate occurrence when people gain rights only to be re-subjected to another, crueler rule. It seems as if the North will leave when it realizes what it can do to maintain its own needs. Furthermore it illustrates that the capitalist world system will find a way to survive no matter who is in charge, which highlights the decline of state/individual sovereignty. Good Night.

One Hundred Years of United Fruit Company Letters

2006-10-29T20:09:00.000-05:00

Phillippe Bourgeois, Professor and Chair of the Department of Anthropology, History and Social Medicine at the University of California, examines the role of the United Fruit Company in his essay "One Hundred Years of United Fruit Company Letters."

Bourgeois defines the United Fruit Company as "a quintessential model for the institutional form of the multinational corporation that has changed the face of the world during the 20th century." By looking at the "discussions, reports, and directives by managers, lawyers, accountants, undercover informants, and lobbyists [...]" from archival documents (1914-1970) , he examines the company's policy towards the banana plantations on the boarder of Costa Rica and Panama.

To achieve his initial idea, he splits his essay in three parts: In the first part, he concentrates on the relationship between the "host-countries" (Costa Rica and Panama) and the United Fruit Company and how the United Fruit Company managed to influence the host-countries' governments. In the second and in the third part, Bourgeois comes up with examples of how the company tried to keep their workers under control and how the company reacted towards possible unionism and occasional uproar.

But all parts do ultimately contribute to Bourgeois' s central topic, this is to say how the multinational corporation (in this case, the United Fruit Company) "has replaced the international corporate form, which had dominated the colonial era through governmental sponsored international trade monopolies."

SVBGA and Contract Farming (286-315)

2006-10-29T11:25:00.000-05:00

In Lawrence S. Grossman’s “St. Vincent Banana Growers Association, Contract Farming, and the Peasantry,” the author claims that the St. Vincent Banana Growers Association (SVBGA) had little power over the peasants and two goals: managing the banana growth as a business and functioning as an institution focused on development.

Before showing the SVBGA as a beneficial organization, Grossman asserts that quality was a main factor in banana sales and introduces the processes of contract farming. Contract farming, according to Grossman, is the process in which farmers are guaranteed the purchase of their crops and assistance in obtaining credit and necessary supplies, so long as they follow the planting and harvesting rules set out by the buyer. The contract farmer’s biggest complaint in this system was that it was the wealthy buyers who set price standards for the crop. However, contract farmers also evaded the system by using chemicals purchased for the buyer’s crop on other sections of land and not following directions or advice given by the buyer. Grossman also discusses the British Windward Islands and their difficulties in raising Banana crops.

The most interesting sections of the essay are toward the end, as Grossman explains the processes of banana harvesting, the setup of the SVBGA, and how the SVBGA gave assistance to its members. The very detailed look at the labor intensive banana growing and harvesting can be seen on page 295. Specific steps and banana jargon point to a growing necessity for more skilled laborers. Grossman calls this the opposite of “deskilling of labor” with increased technology over time. The complexity of the work did not automatically enter a farmer into the SVBGA. Instead, only those selling 62,500 pounds of bananas in the course of a year were given seats as delegates “in their own right.” Five other delegates with 2,500 pounds of bananas can be elected by their district to be able to vote. Although only 6% of voting members in 1992 were delegates in their own right, many small farmers still saw the SVBGA as catering to large plantation owner’s interests. Meanwhile, the government of St. Vincent still holds the power to dismiss the board of directors entirely, should they see fit.

The SVGBA does give aid to those farmers registered with the association. In the chart on page 308, disaster and rehabilitation funds can be seen as just a few of the many efforts made throughout the past twenty-five years. Grossman pushes the point further stating that “the association’s policies have been supportive of small-scale farmers and have been essential in maintaining peasant involvement in the industry” (309). Grossman goes on to assert the considerable autonomy given to peasants claiming that they are not working in a system of “disguised wage labor” (311). Overall, Grossman sees the St. Vincent Banana Grower’s Association as a beneficial organization to large and small farmers alike.

Jefferson's words

2006-10-26T22:48:00.000-05:00

"A morsel of genuine history is a thing so rare as to be always valuable."

"A bill of rights is what the people are entitled to against every government on earth, general or particular, and what no just government should refuse to rest on inference."

"Equal and exact justice to all men...freedom of religion, freedom of the press, freedom of person under the protection of the habeas corpus; and trial by juries impartially selectedÂ—these principles form the bright constellation which has gone before us."

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government"
(Perhaps this should be the mission statement for the VWC 2ndamendment Gun Club)

"Freedom of religion; freedom of the press, and freedom of person under the protection of the habeas corpus, and trial by juries impartially selected. These principles form the bright constellation which has gone before us, and guided our steps through an age of revolution and reformation."

"Peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none."

Thomas Jefferson, Virginian, American, President

I think these words are key to us in our current global state. They provide a basis of which we can re-examine the notion of what it is to be an American. In recent years we have regressed; allowing for the erosion of individual rights, government accountability, and our adherence to the very ideas that founded the nation. I also think we can use these ideas to look at ourselves again as the Progressives did at the turn of their century. By doing so, we could find a way toreconcilee how to live in the ever evolving global world while remaining a nation true to its mission (aka, Declaration,constitutionn, founders). This will require interest from the populace and a return to actually running the government from the politicians. This is my hope for the future. Good night.

Artist/Band: Daniels Charlie
Lyrics for Song: In America

"Well the eagle's been flying slow and the flag's been flying low
And a lot of people are saying that America's fixing to fall
But speaking just for me and some people from Tennessee
We got a thing or two to tell you all
This lady may have stumbled but she ain't never fell
And if the Russians don't believe that they can all go straight to hell
We're gonna put her feet back on the path of righteousness
And then God bless America again

And you never did think that it ever would happen again
In America, did you?
You never did think that we'd ever get together again
Well we damn sure fooled you
We're walking real proud and we're talking real loud again in America
You never did think that it ever would happen again

From the sound up in Long Island out to San Francisco Bay
And ev'ry thing that's in between them is our home
And we may have done a little bit of fighting amongst ourselves
But you outside people best leave us alone
Cause we'll all stick together and you can take that to the bank
That's the cowboys and the hippies and the rebels and the yanks
You just go and lay your head on a Pittsburgh Steeler fan
And I think you're gonna finally understand

And you never did think that it ever would happen again
In America, did you?
You never did think that we'd ever get together again
Well we damn sure fooled you
We're walking real proud and we're talking real loud again in America
You never did think that it ever would happen again"

2006-10-26T22:39:00.000-05:00

I enjoyed reading all the facts that Evan posted about bananas. I have to say something about the following case though:

Brain Power: 200 students at a Twickenham (Middlesex) school were helped through their exams this year by eating bananas at breakfast, break, and lunch in a bid to boost their brain power. Research has shown that the potassium-packed fruit can assist learning by making pupils more alert.

Now consider the fact that,

Research has proven that just two bananas provide enough energy for a strenuous 90-minute workout.

So, between the time of breakfast and lunch, they gave a group of students enough calories (approxmiately 500 calories largely in the form of carbohydrates, or sugars) for more than 2 hours of strenuous activity.

I think I would have a greater sense of alertness too.

It is quite interesting how many uses there are for the banana as well as the peel. I can only think back to the guy in "My Big Fat Greek Wedding" who uses windex as a fix for anything. Bothered by a problem or an ailment? Just rub a banana peel on it.

The South Rises to its defense

2006-10-26T12:22:00.000-05:00

Julie,
Don't get too caught up in your liberal euphoria just yet. The NJ legislature still has to deal with how to make the unions a law. While the court may have required the legislature to take action; the action of a court is not exactly representative of true grassroots action. A judge legislating from the bench cannot represent the true will of a people until the people actually rise up in favor of something. Furthermore, can you answer me as a proud resident of that pantheon of social justice which is New jersey, where at times traffic stops require two policemen because the danger your honest, socially acceptable, peace loving people present; was/is there a widespread movement in your electorate to get your elected officials to do something? Or is this a case of a few interests groups getting their case heard and in the process making an elected body do something?

If I remember correctly, you sometimes tend towards libertarian ideals. You might find the South as accommodating of libertarians as the north, it may be even more so. The idea of having the right to live your life without excessive government intervention is much more prevalent to me living in Virginia then it ever was living in Maryland. Whether it takes the form of 2nd amendment rights, the desire to live outside the urban chaos, or the desire to work hard without a needy government breathing down your neck or taking your hard earned money, the South is full of libertarian ideas. They are worth taking notice because they will only enhance your experience of what it is to be an American citizen and to know what it is to live in the "South" or the land that god blessed (just joking).

"But I ain't askin' nobody for nothin',
If I can't get it on my own.
You don't like the way I'm livin',
You just leave this long-haired country boy alone.
A poor girl wants to marry, And a rich girl wants to flirt.
A rich man goes to college,And a poor man goes to work.
A drunkard wants another drink of wine,And a politician wants a vote.
I don't want much of nothin' at all,But I will take another toke.
'Cos I ain't askin' nobody for nothin',If I can't get it on my own.
If you don't like the way I'm livin',
You just leave this long-haired country boy alone."

I have espoused many ideas and will continue to with things that I may not necessarily agree with (unlimited individualism, etc). However they serve to counter arguments that need to be countered to see the full scope of the issue. Whenever one of us engages in essentializing the other: Dixie v. Yankee, liberal v. Conservative, west v. non, we must remain cognizant that the issue is much more then a simple difference of ideals. Good day.

"Turn it up

Big wheels keep on turning
Carry me home to see my kin
Singing songs about the Southland
I miss Alabamy once again
And I think its a sin, yes...

Sweet Home Alabama
Where the skies are so blue
Sweet Home Alabama
Lord, I'm coming home to you"

Banana spam

2006-10-26T12:18:00.000-05:00

Someone sent this to me a couple weeks ago. Look forward to a cup of Starbucks in the morning and a banana to get your day going. Cheers.

"Never, put your banana in the refrigerator! This is interesting. After reading this, you'll never look at a banana in the same way again.
Bananas contain three natural sugars - sucrose, fructose and glucose combined with fiber. A banana gives an instant, sustained and substantial boost of energy.
Research has proven that just two bananas provide enough energy for a strenuous 90-minute workout. No wonder the banana is the number one fruit with the world's leading athletes.
But energy isn't the only way a banana can help us keep fit.

It can also help overcome or prevent a substantial number of illnesses and conditions, making it a must to add to our daily diet.

Depression: According to a recent survey undertaken by MIND amongst people suffering from depression, many felt much better after eating a banana. This is because bananas contain tryptophan, a type of protein that the body converts into serotonin, known to make you relax, improve your mood and generally make you feel happier.

PMS: Forget the pills - eat a banana. The vitamin B6 it contains regulates blood glucose levels, which can affect your mood.

Anemia: High in iron, bananas can stimulate the production of hemoglobin in the blood and so helps in cases of anemia.

Blood Pressure: This unique tropical fruit is extremely high in potassium yet low in salt, making it perfect to beat blood pressure. So much so, the US Food and Drug Administration has just allowed the banana industry to make off icial claims for the fruit's ability to reduce the risk of blood pressure and stroke.

Brain Power: 200 students at a Twickenham (Middlesex) school were helped through their exams this year by eating bananas at breakfast, break, and lunch in a bid to boost their brain power. Research has shown that the potassium-packed fruit can assist learning by making pupils more alert.

Constipation: High in fiber, including bananas in the diet can help restore normal bowel action, helping to overcome the problem without resorting to laxatives.

Hangovers: One of the quickest ways of curing a hangover is to make a banana milkshake, sweetened with honey. The banana calms the stomach and, with the help of the honey, builds up depleted blood sugar levels, while the milk soothes and re-hydrates your system

Heartburn: Bananas have a natural antacid effect in the body, so if you suffer from heartburn, try eating a banana for soothing relief.

Morning Sickness: Snacking on bananas between meals helps to keep blood sugar levels up and avoid morning sickness.

Mosquito bites: Before reaching for the insect bite cream, try rubbing the affected area with the inside of a banana skin. Many people find it amazingly successful at reducing swelling and irritation.

Nerves: Bananas are high in B vitamins that help calm the nervous system.

Overweight and at work? Studies at the Institute of Psychology in Austria! fo und pressure at wor k leads to gorging on comfort food like chocolate and crisps. Looking at 5,000 hospital patients, researchers found the most obese were more likely to be in high-pressure jobs. The report concluded that, to avoid panic-induced food cravings, we need to control our blood sugar levels by snacking on high carbohydrate foods every two hours to keep levels steady.

Ulcers: The banana is used as the dietary food against intestinal disorders because of its soft texture and smoothness. It is the only r aw fruit that can be eaten without distress in over-chronicler cases. It also neutralizes over-acidity and reduces irritation by coating the lining of the stomach.

Temperature control: Many other cultures see bananas as a "cooling" fruit that can lower both the physical and emotional temperature of expectant mothers. In Thailand , for example, pregnant women eat bananas to ensure their baby is born with a cool temperature.

Seasonal Affective Disorder (SAD): Bananas can help SAD sufferers because they contain the natural mood enhancer tryptophan.

Smoking & Tobacco Use: Bananas can also help people trying to give up smoking. The B6, B12 they contain, as well as the potassium and magnesium found in them, help the body recover from the effects of nicotine withdrawal.

Stress: Potassium is a vital mineral, which helps normalize the heartbeat, sends oxygen to the brain and regulates your body's water balance. When we are stressed, our metabolic rate rises, thereby reducing our pot assium levels. These can be rebalanced with the help of a high-potassium banana snack.

Strokes: According to research in The New England Journal of Medicine, eating bananas as part of a regular diet can cut the risk of death by strokes by as much as 40%!

Warts: Those keen on natural alternatives swear that if you want to kill off a wart, take a piece of banana skin and place it on the wart, with the yellow side out. Carefully hold the skin in place with a plaster or surgical tape!

So, a banana really is a natural remedy for many ills. When you compare it to an apple, it has four times the protein, twice the carbohydrate, three times the phosphorus, five times the vitamin A and iron, and twice the other vitamins and minerals. It is also rich in potassium and is one of the best value foods around So maybe its time to change that well-known phrase so that we say, "A banana a day keeps the doctor away!"

PASS IT ON TO YOUR FRIENDS PS: Bananas must be the reason monkeys are so happy all the time! I will add one here; want a quick shine on our shoes?? Take the INSIDE of the banana skin, and rub directly on the shoe...polish with dry c loth. Amazing fruit!"

Home State Reppin

2006-10-26T08:10:00.000-05:00

Yesterday, the New Jersey Supreme Court voted in favor of Civil Unions between homosexuals. While they did not label the relationship a "marriage," those united via civil union will recieve all the rights of married couples. I found this article in the New York Times explaining the next steps in the NJ Senate and for Gay Rights Advocates. While many oppose the ruling, the Democratically controlled legislature seems open to this label of 'civil unions.'

As far as globalization goes, I think the gradual acceptance of unions between homosexuals in America represents the gradual integration of human rights for all into the global scene. While many European nations already recognize these relationships, America has been somewhat slow in their response to the call for equal rights for homosexuals.

Additionally, I included this article as yet another rebuttle to the North/South arguement we seem to have developed in past blogs... Moreover, I am quite proud of my home state, as this represents a true progression toward increased social acceptance and human rights for all aspects of the population.

Nutritional facts of bananas

2006-10-26T02:16:00.000-05:00

Image location

Discussing the "Banana Wars", by Striffler, made me think back again to my trip this past year to Trinidad. Although cocoa (Theobroma cacao) is the largest export for this island of the Caribbean, within the cocoa plantations one could easily find many banana plants (Musa spp.). I imagine that these fruits were largely for the farmers' own use rather than for profit.

It is interesting though to see how they (they being the Spanish) introduced the banana plant to the island but Trinidad never did take on the status of "Banana Republic". Bananas are an introduced species in Trinidad as well as all of the Caribbean islands. Bananas were actually domesticated somewhere in southeastern Asia. The reason Trinidad never became one of the banana exporting islands is most likely because the trade of bananas did not take off until the 19th century, whereas cocoa was introduced in Trinidad in the 18th century. Thus, the market for cocoa was already established in Trinidad before bananas were recognized as a profitable crop.

So just as a small side on this topic, I decided to throw in a little bit of nutritional information on bananas.

Bananas consist of mainly carbohydrates in the form of sugar. So if you aren't worried about following the Atkin's diet, the next time you need a healthy snack, grab a banana. You can learn more about the nutritional facts of bananas than you ever thought possible, as well as calculate the nutrient amounts per serving of a banana based on the size (weight) of the fruit: check out NutritionData.com for the facts.

Oh, and if you want to keep up with the latest banana news check out The Yummy Banana!

"No tickee, no washee" - ethnic humor or racial slur?

2006-10-25T13:27:00.000-05:00

After hearing the saying, "No tickee, no washee" for the first time a couple weeks ago, I felt a spark of curiousity to delve deeper into the origins and meaning of this controversial saying.

I found several cases arguing the actual connotation of this saying. Does it represent ethnic humor or is it a racial slur attacking a certain perceived stereotype? I found an interesting essay on the general topic of the differences between the two types, but it does not focus on the "No tickee, no washee" saying that I had in mind.

In an article I found on JSTOR, Wolfgang Mieder discusses possible contexts for which the proverb, "No tickee, no washee" could be used. The basis for this discussion is a court case in San Francisco where the proverb was used several times by one scientist towards an Asian-American scientist.

To my surprise, I actually found a short film (listed as a comedy) that was produced in 1915 called "No Tickee, No Washee". Even now, in a newly released film, The Departed, Jack Nicholson has uses a line toward a group of Asians where he is speaking about the payment for good and says, "no tickee, no laundry". I think they may be making more of a joke on the typical American in this case, being that he can't even get the saying straight.

So even today we joke about this old "proverb". I don't see it as being a racist comment unless, like in the court case that Mieder refers to, the proverb is used in a derogatory manner towards a person of Asian ethnicity (in a way to provoke them through verbal abuse).

Territorial Waters In Earlier Times

2006-10-25T13:15:00.000-05:00

I just wanted to add a few things I found about territorial waters to Laura's earlier blog. I thought this information would be useful (from the Columbia Encyclopedia) because it deals with the history of territorial waters (more relative to the time period that Scully references.

Since the 18th cent. coastal states have been held to have jurisdiction over unenclosed waters for 3 nautical mi (3.45 mi/5.55 km) from the low water line, a measure originally derived from the distance of a cannon shot. In the case of a bay up to 24 mi (39 km) wide, a line drawn from one enclosing point to the other marked the outer limit of territorial jurisdiction. A broader zone of jurisdiction to combat smuggling has long been claimed by various states, as by the United States during prohibition.

Merchant ships of all flags have the right of "innocent passage" in a nation's territorial waters; the rights of nonbelligerent foreign warships in this zone, and the extent of the jurisdiction of the coastal nation's courts over ships passing through and incidents in the zone, have long been matters of debate. Fishing and mineral extraction within the zone are entirely within the control of the coastal nation. In the 20th cent., coastal nations progressively widened their claims over offshore waters, especially in the face of competition from foreign fishing fleets and in anticipation of rich oil, gas, and mineral finds on the continental shelf. The UN-sponsored Law of the Sea Treaty, which went into effect in 1994, codified territorial waters of 12 nautical mi (13.8 mi/22.2 km) and an exclusive economic zone of 200 nautical mi (230 mi/370 km). In 1999, U.S. agencies were empowered by presidential proclamation to enforce American law up to 24 miles (39 km) offshore, doubling the previous limit.

Thus, the limits of territorial jurisdiction in the sea have increased dramatically since the 1990s. It is interesting to think that less than 15 years ago the United States only had control over seas up to 3 nautical miles from the water line.

information from: http://www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1E1-waters-t.html

No...That's MY water!

2006-10-25T08:44:00.000-05:00

From the United Nation's website I searched for "territorial waters" and was able to find record of the "Territorial Waters Act No. 1977-26(1)." Within the document, the limits for territorial water boundaries are discussed. From land, the sovereign nation is allowed 12 nautical miles of water and all water found within the country like lakes and rivers etc. Although not listed in this case, if a country could show that it needed more miles of water for the prevention of infringment of that countries customs, illegal immigration or breaches in sanitary laws and regulations an extra 12 miles could be taken. In 1999, Clinton succeeded in expanding the territorial boundaries for the United States from 12 to 24 nautical miles to "help protect and preserve U.S. shores and oceans."

I find it interesting that people can own water as well as land. I was under the naive impression that countries had just left water alone and called it a buffer between lands. Apparently that buffer can be removed bit by bit as the United Nations sees fit.

"Premium-Blend Culture"

2006-10-24T14:50:00.000-05:00

While our discussion of the transforming "McWorld" was extensive, I do not think we ever made it clear exactly how these Western MNC's came to transform the nations to fit Western values and mimick Western culture. In a New York Times article entitled "The Starbucks Aesthetic," Susan Dominus explores the new "premium-blend culture" that Starbucks now advirtises. With the integration of music, movies, and books into the Starbucks social system, Starbucks is slowly creating an entire sub-culture, based around supposedly non-mainstream, cultured, and sophisticated American society. Starbucks now sells and endorses various musicians, authors, and indie-movie makers in an attempt to provide a well-rounded, cultural experience for their customers, "educated [persons], with an average age of 42 and an average income of $90,000."

Undoubtedly, the sale of culture in such a manner will develop into a uniformity that completely contradicts the original intentions of many of these artists. Eventually, the American mainstream will convince themselves that they are deviant and individual, when in fact they are simply falling in with a larger crowd. This version of domestic globalization and assimilation may be precisely what non-Western nations fear. While the article did not consider the effect of such a movement globally, it is important to note the unbelievable presence of Starbucks beyond US borders. If this same cultural conformity carries into the markets of Asia and the Middle East, Western concepts of culture will significantly alter the non-Western values. Many people do not understand why nations resist Western influence with such vigor, but after examining the effects of American MNC's on our own society one may better relate to their logic. The Starbucks conformity is only in its "'early stages for development,'" implying that there are many more Starbucks endorsed products to come. The pre-packaged mutation of culture that Starbucks has introduced to American society provides a threat to individuality both nationally and globally.

300 Million and Counting

2006-10-23T13:27:00.000-05:00

A little less than a week ago, on October 17th 2006, the Census predicted that the US population would reach 300 million. In previous decades, this has been cause for celebration and victory, as America continued to grow. However, the milestone has brought on a must different reaction. In Lester Brown's article in The Globalist last week, entitled "US Population: Is Bigger Always Better?," Brown explains the implications of such a staggering, continued population growth. Much of the negativity surrounding the 300 million Americans comes from recent realizations that each new citizen calls for "a shrinking piece of the resource pie."

While the ever increasing populations of India and China are frequently discussed in Western media and classrooms, rarely do we realize that our own country significantly contributes to this same issue. Incredibly, almost all other industrialized nations have populations which have stabilized or declined recently, but the US continues to increase exponentially. Stabilizing the population is essential to ensure that our natural resources such as water, copper, zinc and oil can support the population. In his article, Brown examines the direct effect of each increased citizen on these precious aspects of our environment.

It is important to realize that population growth is not a problem of just the "Third World," but rather a much larger world issue. Industrialized nations, especially the United States, must acknowledge their part in the dramatic loss of natural resources every day. In order to solve the problem we must globalize it, realizing each nation's role in the issue. Otherwise, we may never find ways of preventing this significant loss of the essential resources provided by the environment.

Panama canal project

2006-10-23T11:42:00.000-05:00

This is partially a follow-up blog from my post on 9-4-06, "Keeping up with modernization".

Panama has finally endorsed the $5.25 billion project to expand the Panama canal by adding a third set of locks that is 40% longer and 60% wider than either of the two previous locks. The project is fully funded by Pamana without any foreign aid.

I think this is a great way for Panama to grow, generating more jobs as well as more income for the country. It is predicted that the canal will generate $6 billion per year, considerably more than the current $1.2 billion per year (a 500% increase). The reason for this is that the locks will be able to support the world's largest vessels. Aside from that the price to use the locks will increase to support the project. The project is planned to be completed by 2014.

This is obviously a huge project. From the article in NY Times it seems that the only problem that may be encountered which casts doubt on the success of the project is the possibility of corruption and embezzlement of funds.

Since the Panama Canal was handed over to Panama by the US in 1999, operations have run smoothly and successfully. The canal is a huge source of pride for Panamanians, and they realize that the expansion of the canal is directly related to the expansion of their nation.

Googled...

2006-10-23T10:56:00.000-05:00

Ever since I have produced blog entries and used the internet as a platform to express my ideas and opinions, I have asked myself, whether these information are not only seen by friends and interested bloggers, but also by "unwanted individuals" (for example advertisers or governmental institutions...).

An article that I found on opendemocracy.net, deals with this idea, but focuses on Google's policy. In Andrew Brown's article, "What does Google know about you" , he examines the Google case, in wich Google was asked (among other companies such as Yahoo or MSN) by the US Department of Justice to hand over information about its clients. Since Google uses "cookies" (..."small files downloaded to a user's computer which make it recognisable to the site."), which "do not expire before 2038", Google is able to save all the information of its clients. Therefore the company is always aware of what you do and has a "identifable record everything your computer asks for".

A record the U.S. government is apparently very interested in, but so does Google. Because Google has already realized the worthiness of its clients' personal information, by selling them to advertisers and co... A conflict between Google and the government is looming, which is ultimately leading to only loser: The client.

Drinking age...

2006-10-23T10:18:00.001-05:00

Laura's initial blog about how the US government tries to manage extraterritorialty in this aspect and just wanted to add what another idea. The idea of extraterritoriality is ultimately linked to foreign US military bases and believe it or not, it is also linked to the drinking age.

"The minimum drinking age on a DoD installation located outside the United States shall be 18 years of age. Higher minimum drinking age will be based on international treaties and agreements and on the local situation as determined by the local installation commander.” (Source)

Which means that someone who is underage in the U.S. and not allowed to drink, would be allowed to consume alholic beverages while serving abroad...

P.S.: By the way, the drinking age in some countries is 0 years!!! (World Drinking Ages)

"Slaughter House Cases"

2006-10-22T22:19:00.000-05:00

The Slaughterhouse cases occurred after the Civil War. Despite the 14th amendment, the Supreme Court maintained the state’s right to regulate citizens over that of the Federal government. Later, the decision lost influence and the dissenting view (it held in favor of the 14th) when the 14th became a way for the federal government to gain further entry into the lives of citizens.

“A citizen of a State is now only a citizen of the United States residing in that State. The fundamental rights, privileges, and immunities which belong to him as a free man and a free citizen, now belong to him as a citizen of the United States, and are not dependent upon his citizenship of any State. The exercise of these rights and privileges, and the degree of enjoyment received from such exercise, are always more or less affected by the condition and the local institutions of the State, or city, or town where he resides. They are thus affected in a State by the wisdom of it slaws. the ability of its officers, the efficiency of its magistrates, the education and morals of its people, and by many other considerations. This is a result, which follows from the constitution of society, and can never be avoided, but in no other way can they be affected by the action of the State, or by the residence of the citizen therein. They do not derive their existence from its legislation, and cannot be destroyed by its power.”

http://www.law.duke.edu/publiclaw/supremecourtonline/editedCases/sla.html

I think the importance of the case’s dissent is its establishment of citizenship as being national first and foremost and then a matter of the states. This is important for extrality because it allows the federal government to exercise power of citizens, wherever they may be so long as there exists some measure to allow for it (treaties, territory such as Puerto Rico). With this power, the Federal hold on citizens becomes supreme since state law is made secondary and it logically follows that if a citizen retains US citizenship abroad, then he/she is clearly (willing or unwillingly) acceptant of the fact that citizenship makes he/she a subject of the US government.

In a global world this interpretation of the 14th constructing citizens under the law as subjects no matter where they reside is important. It gives the government the ability to keep hold on its people abroad and allows for it to ensure that its citizens (for the most part) act accordingly with its wishes. Good Night.

Alcohol Policy

2006-10-22T17:13:00.000-05:00

In light of the recent discussion of how to include "new citizens" from territories into the United States, I came to realize that several distinctions are made between citizens from the territories and those from the actual states. According to Wikipedia, not the best source but one that has an easy to read table, each state has its own set of alcohol policies relating to whether or not the alcohol is controlled by the government and when it can be sold.

Although I already knew the legal drinking age of Virgin Island residents, I had not thought of it in relation to that area's territorial status. In the U.S. Virgin Islands, Puerto Rico, and Guam, the minimum alcohol purchase age is 18. That means that residents of those areas may purchase their alcohol three years before a person living in the contiguous United States. Why does this matter? Maybe it doesn't, but it seems to highlight the ways in which people in the territories and the states are treated differently. If someone lived in Guam, they could purchase alcohol at 18, but on a trip to any of the official States of the United States, that person would be unable to buy it even on their Guam/American citizen pass. The transfer of alcohol ages amongst different countries is understandable, but how can a group of "American citizens" have some rules for all of the official states and different rules for the territories?

Expatriates Today

2006-10-19T08:43:00.000-05:00

In light of our recent discussion concerning expatriates and extraterritorial jurisdiction, I thought this article concerning expatriates in Dubai was an interesting modern approach to expatriates and the cultural conflicts that can arise. This article from the New York Times explores the controversy occuring in this city (and many other Arab areas) during this Ramadan holiday. In Dubai, foreigners cannot claim citizenship, and are therefore considered expatriates. However, only about 250,000 of the 1.2 million residents are citizens, making for an interesting cultural situation. Many consider Dubai "one of the most diverse cities in the Middle East," ecompassing more than 150 nationalities. For decades, Dubai has encouraged tourism as a valuable economic boost and worthwhile venture, but recent debate has questioned this practice.

The cultural conflict recently surfaced when an English-speaking tabloid, 7Days, published a story under the headline "Show Some Respect," reminding the expatriates that this is an Muslim country in which they are visiting. The laws of Dubai often follow Muslim laws, "a man and woman kissing in public can be arrested; one can be ticketed for dress baring too much skin, or for eating or smoking during daylight hours during Ramadan, and altercations with locals can sometimes land expatriates in detention." Often, in such a tourist-driven city, these laws are rarely enforced. However, during this Ramadan, the complete disregard for Muslim rules by Western expatriates has caused significant tension within the city. Media such as 7Days call for an increased level of expatriate awareness and respect during this sacred holiday.

It is interesting to realize that a similar tension occurs between local and visiting cultures today as it has in the past. As Scully explores the relations between China and Western nations from 1844-1942, we see a similar pattern of clashes between Chinese interests and foreign influence. The Chinese also felt pressure from the informal Western imperialism as a result of extraterritoriality. While the modern case does not include this, the West has successfully proved its influence by insisting that the city's established laws do not apply to Western visitors. Additionally, in both cases, the economy plays a large role in the motivation for continued relations between the two cultures. In our increasingly globalized world, many such conflicts have occured, and can be expected as a result of power relationships and increased cultural interaction.

The Northern Rebuttle

2006-10-17T23:11:00.000-05:00

Well I took Evan's test, and since I'm apparently a "Yankee Doodle Dandy beyond question" I figured it was my duty to represent my roots. So here's another origin of yankee and a response to the Doobie brothers.

As reported by wikipedia:
The origins of the term [yankee] are disputed. One theory claims that it originated in the 1760s from an English rendering of the Dutch language "Jan-Kees" (two of the most common given names of the Dutch), a nickname used by Dutch settlers in upstate New York referring to the New Englanders who were migrating to their region. Another theory holds that the term may be derived from a name used by the Native American tribes that allied with the French during the French and Indian wars (1689 to 1763) to refer to English settlers. It is thought that the Native American tribes fighting with the French against the expansion of English settlements north and west from New York into the Upper Hudson River valley, the Ohio river valley, the Eastern Great Lakes, and the southern banks of the St. Lawrence River, began to use the pejorative French term for the English settlers - "L'Anglais" - to describe all non-French white settlers coming into the region. The Native American tribes pronounced the word "yangleez", which is believed to have later been corrupted to "yangeez". The first recorded use of the term by an Englishman to refer to Americans appears in the 1780s, in a letter by Admiral Lord Nelson.

And in light of my New Jersey, Yankee nature, I feel it only appropriate to let the boss speak for himself.

Thunder Road
Bruce Springsteen

The screen door slams Mary's dress waves
Like a vision she dances across the porch
As the radio playsRoy Orbison singing for the lonely
Hey that's me and I want you only
Don't turn me home again
I just can't face myself alone again
Don't run back inside
darling you know just what I'm here for
So you're scared and you're thinking
That maybe we ain't that young anymore
Show a little faith, there's magic in the night
You ain't a beauty, but hey you're alright
Oh and that's alright with me
You can hide `neath your covers
And study your pain
Make crosses from your lovers
Throw roses in the rain
Waste your summer praying in vain
For a savior to rise from these streets
Well now I'm no hero
That's understood
All the redemption I can offer, girl
Is beneath this dirty hood
With a chance to make it good somehow
Hey what else can we do now
Except roll down the window
And let the wind blow back your hair
Well the night's busting open
These two lanes will take us anywhere
We got one last chance to make it real
To trade in these wings on some wheels
Climb in backHeaven's waiting on down the tracks
Oh oh come take my hand
Riding out tonight to case the promised land
Oh oh Thunder Road, oh Thunder Road
oh Thunder Road
Lying out there like a killer in the sun
Hey I know it's late we can make it if we run
Oh Thunder Road, sit tight take hold
Thunder Road
Well I got this guitar
And I learned how to make it talk
And my car's out back
If you're ready to take that long walk
From your front porch to my front seat
The door's open but the ride it ain't free
And I know you're lonely
For words that I ain't spoken
But tonight we'll be free
All the promises'll be broken
There were ghosts in the eyes
Of all the boys you sent away
They haunt this dusty beach road
In the skeleton frames of burned out Chevrolets
They scream your name at night in the street
Your graduation gown lies in rags at their feet
And in the lonely cool before dawn
You hear their engines roaring on
But when you get to the porch they're gone
On the wind, so Mary climb in
It's a town full of losers
And I'm pulling out of here to win.

Additionally, I found a funny site on "You know you're a southerner if..." and my favorite characteristic was you know you're a southerner if your family plans vacations around the various hunting seasons.
:)

It is raining man...

2006-10-17T17:21:00.000-05:00

As the US suffers from environmental problems, so does Germany. Growing environmental problems are a global problem, undoubtable a side-effect of globalization.

As I noticed from Der Spiegel-Online, Germany has to face serious climate change, due to global warming... Thus, the German government comes up with announcing the reduction of carbon dioxide by 40%, because the German Institute for Economics warned the governtment that the losses caused by climate will rise up to 27 trillions.

We will see what the future will bring and how much of their initial ideas will be realized, but nevertheless I found it really interesting how the German government tries to divert its course...

Globalization Prior to Modernization?

2006-10-17T15:05:00.000-05:00

While many of our conversations assume that a country modernizes as it globalizes, this is not always the case with less-developed countries. India represents one of these cases, as the booming economic sector calls for skilled workers, but the school systems provided by the government are often insufficient or incompetant. While the universities continue to "pump out" 400,000 engineers a year, their abilities in the field upon graduation are questionable.

As reported by the NY Times in an article entitled "Skills Gap Hurts Technology Boom in India," the engineers that India depends upon to keep their technology sector in tact. India depends on this area of the economy to help push the nation into the global spotlight. Techonology is often viewed as the Indian ticket to global influence and true development. However, the country has not developed its social system to support such a strong educational performance. Unless India begins to modernize its educational system to meet the needs of its techonological economy, its entire economy may be in jeopardy, and their hopes of modernization will suffer. Instead of over-emphasizing the importance of financial power and growth, India should first care for its own social systems in order to ensure that they can maintain any power they do obtain. The growth of globalization may invite many countries to try to quickly jump into the world of global influence, but if these countries do not properly modernize their nation to maintain this position, then their attempts at globalization will undoubtedly falter.

"Mississippi moon, won't you keep on shinin on me"

2006-10-17T11:40:00.000-05:00

Here is a test to see if your language marks you as a southerner. My score told me I had some of the South in me.
http://www.alphadictionary.com/articles/yankeetest.html

Here is something I found on the root of the word yankee. It was first used by the British to describe colonists around 1756.

http://books.google.com/books?vid=ISBN0618454500&id=cZ88p_bSt1EC&pg=PA327&lpg=PA327&ots=i_ZLpk-VqH&dq=%22root%22+of+the+%22word%22+%27yankee%22&sig=01Do4K7cSdE-F8mxiMT0aeeNaGQ

Here is song by the Doobie Brothers called "Blackwater" for those of you up North. (Just joking)

Well, I built me a raft and shes ready for floatin
Ol mississippi, shes callin my name
Catfish are jumpin
That paddle wheel thumpin
Black water keeps rollin on past just the same

Old black water, keep on rollin
Mississippi moon, wont you keep on shinin on me
Old black water, keep on rollin
Mississippi moon, wont you keep on shinin on me
Old black water, keep on rollin
Mississippi moon, wont you keep on shinin on me
Yeah, keep on shinin your light
Gonna make everything, pretty mama
Gonna make everything all right
And I aint got no worries
cause I aint in no hurry at all

Well, if it rains, I dont care
Dont make no difference to me
Just take that street car thats goin up town
Yeah, Id like to hear some funky dixieland
And dance a honky tonk
And Ill be buyin evrybody drinks all roun

Old black water, keep on rollin
Mississippi moon, wont you keep on shinin on me
Old black water, keep on rollin
Mississippi moon, wont you keep on shinin on me
Old black water, keep on rollin
Mississippi moon, wont you keep on shinin on me
Yeah, keep on shinin your light
Gonna make everything, pretty mama
Gonna make everything all right
And I aint got no worries
cause I aint in no hurry at all

Id like to hear some funky dixieland
Pretty mama come and take me by the hand
By the hand, take me by the hand pretty mama
Come and dance with your daddy all night long
I want to honky tonk, honky tonk, honky tonk
With you all night long

North Korea, my view amongst others

2006-10-17T11:20:00.000-05:00

I think Julie has an interesting point that nations such as N. Korea are directing funding away from social programs in order to develop nuclear weapons. We happen to spend more on defense then any other item in our budget. Despite the rationale of Julie's statement, I think more emphasis should be put upon the fact that the US, UN, and others have failed to find a way to solve the problem. It may very well be that nuclear weapons are the best way for N. Korea to achieve security for itself when it is labeled as an axis of evil. A better way might be for the US to clarify that it has no intentions of removing the current government, but would rather find a solution that promotes security and prosperity for all; even if it means dealing with someone we do not like.
It is also interesting that the US is now a team player, using diplomacy to achieve a peaceful end to the conflict. If America is an empire, it is troubling that it cannot find a quick solution to a problem that has gone on for over a decade. It may very well be that the American Empire cannot sustain itself in the traditional military sense because the country does not have the will to make the human and monetary sacrifice necessary for a Roman type legionaire. Instead the US needs to understand how to use its collateral in the world arena to deal with problems logically instead waiting until they explode and require crisis (which may be what the world order needs to survive). Have a nice day.

2006-10-16T19:44:00.000-05:00

After reflecting back on what we discussed in class today I decided to look further into this "extraterritorial jurisdication". I was curious to see where this has led the judicial system of today, since thus far Scully has only discussed past examples, mainly those dealing with China between 1844 and 1942.

I found an article on a foreign affairs webpage called "The Case for Universal Jurisdiction", written by Kenneth Roth. The article is a counterargument to Henry Kissinger's criticisms of this universal jurisdiction. Roth expresses a strong opposition to Kissinger's view. Roth takes several points that are emphasized by Kissinger and cleverly counters them using specific, impugning examples, based largely on actions taken by the United States in the past.

You can also read part of the Kissinger article that is subjected to Roth's disapproval. At the top of the page is a small summary to get an idea of what it is about (since the entire article is not available).

I thought it was an interesting article and one that I should share. Another related topic I found on the same webpage is a review by Ikenberry of The Pinochet Effect: Transnational Justice in the Age of Human Rights, by Naomi Roht-Arriaza. Unfortunately you have to subscribe to read the full review, however, just this first part had enough to get an idea of what the book is about.

Although I am still trying to fully grasp what Scully says in her book, Bargaining with the State from Afar: American Citizenship in Treaty Port China, I think it helps by understanding a little bit of how her ideas relate to today.

Amerikapolitik

2006-10-16T11:23:00.000-05:00

Found another interesting (sorry folks, this time only in German) article from the German Institute forInternational and Security Affairs that dealt with Germany's position to the US. Peter Rudolf, the writer of this article called "Amerikapoltik", argues that Germany's relation to the US should be characterized by a mix of three stragies:

1. Germany should show unity whenever/whereever German coincide with American interests.

2. Germany should form a counterweight to the US whenever Germany's interests are "endangered". This counterweight should be achieved by using international institutions in order to limit American power and to deprive the US international actions of their legitimicay.

3. Germany should act upon a "conditioned cooperation", which is characterized by certain demands on the US

I argue that Rudolf does not come up with a complete new therory of how Germany/ Europe s hould take influence on the hegemonic power, the US, but he reminds us of our own, inferior position to the US and makes us aware of how we could improve our "ill" foreign relations...

Puerto Rican Citizenship

2006-10-15T16:19:00.000-05:00

This article from the Miami Herald seemed all too appropriate in light of our recent discussions.

U.S. CENSUS
Puerto Ricans deserve to be counted
BY KENNETH D. MCCLINTOCK
Friday October 13th, 2006
America is reaching a demographic milestone, so says the U.S. Census Bureau, which is reporting that there will be 300 million ''Americans'' by the end of the year.
The fact, however, is that this country surpassed that milestone months ago, and the U.S. Census Bureau knows it. Yet, for some reason, our government willingly excludes nearly four million U.S.-born citizens living on U.S. soil, in Puerto Rico, as part of this important count.
It is truly an arbitrary and mind-boggling way to count ''We, The People.'' For some reason, when the 10-year census is completed, our government chooses to exclude Americans residing in Puerto Rico and other U.S. territories from the national total. Yet the census counts people living in Washington, D.C., which isn't a state.
What makes this policy even more inconsistent is that ''resident aliens'' living within the 50 states are counted in the 10-year census. Yet, full-fledged Americans who just happen to live in Puerto Rico are not.

While Puerto Ricans have been US Citizens since 1917, the recent 10-year census count does not reflect a US population which includes citizens residing in US territories. The numerous inconsistencies in our governmental policy toward the territories continues to harm to Puerto Rican population. An accurate census count for Puerto Rico is essential in determining private financial funding and distribution. Being the largest US territory, Puerto Rico deserves this (and all other) rights and priveldges alotted to the US citizens of the mainland. Additionally, the fact that this article was written on Friday reflects the continued lack of US consideration for Puerto Rico.

Puerto Rican Revolt - 1950

2006-10-15T14:17:00.000-05:00

This is the wikipedia version of events... I find it interesting that the Puerto Rican National Guard was called in to aid the people. The fact that a Puerto Rican National Guard even existed is significant to our discussion of territorial boundaries and citizenship rights.

Revolt against the United States

During the mid-1940's various pro-independence groups, such as the Puerto Rican Independence Party, which believed in gaining the island's independence through the electoral process, and the Puerto Rican Nationalist Party, which believed in the concept of armed revolution, existed in Puerto Rico. On October 30, 1950 the nationalists, under the leadership of Dr. Pedro Albizu Campos staged uprisings in the towns of Ponce, Mayagüez, Naranjito, Arecibo, Utuado, San Juan and Jayuya.

Blanca Canales

The most notable of these occurred in Jayuya in what became known as El Grito de Jayuya. Nationalist leader Blanca Canales led the armed nationalists into the town and attacked the police station. A small battle with the police occurred; one officer was killed and three others were wounded before the rest dropped their weapons and surrendered. The nationalists cut the telephone lines and burned the post office. Canales led the group into the town square where the illegal light blue version of the Puerto Rican Flag was raised.^[47] In the town square, Canales gave a speech and declared Puerto Rico a free Republic. The town was held by the nationalists for three days.^[48]

The United States declared martial law in Puerto Rico and sent the Puerto Rico National Guard to attack Jayuya. The town was attacked by air by U.S. bomber planes and artillery. Even though part of the town was destroyed, news of this military action was prevented from spreading outside of Puerto Rico. It was called an incident between Puerto Ricans. The top leaders of the nationalist party were arrested, including Albizu Campos and Blanca Canales, and sent to jail to serve long prison terms. Griselio Torresola was in the United States where, together with fellow nationalist Oscar Collazo, he decided to assassinate President Harry S. Truman. On November 1, 1950, they attacked the Blair House where Torresola and a policeman lost their lives. Oscar Collazo was arrested and sentenced to death. His sentence was later commuted to life imprisonment by President Truman and he eventually received a presidential pardon.^[49]

A Conservative's View (albeit not my own)

2006-10-11T16:15:00.000-05:00

In the March 2004 issue of the American Conservative Magazine, pundit Pat Buchanan wrote an article called "No end to War". In it he details what he sees as the danger of the neocons leading American down a route that would embroil it in endless conflict and ultimately cost it its power. He argues that US ties to Israel, misplaced liberal ideals with a militant twist, and an abandonment of US restraint will end up in defeat.
"The long retreat of American empire has begun" writes Buchanan. I feel this is an interesting statement coming from a man like him regarding the current adminstration's policies. It raises two questions. First, if America is an empire, is its current extension the beginning of the end? Second, are we willing to relinquish our status as the global power/empire?
I think the first answer is problematic. The current situation could help or hinder America's as an empire. In the short run it may end giving it greater power and influence in the Middle East. However we are already seeing the problem of America already becoming over extended with its incursion in Iraq. The question of North Korea and Iran looms heavy but the only recourse we have is through the UN which may in fact be a good thing. If a real threat did present itself (as they sometimes do even tough those of us on the left wish we could wish them away like a bad dream), America as an empire would be hard pressed to do anything without taking drastic measures such as a draft.
The second answer is one that deserves close attention. Buchanan is clearly of the mindset that we should not give up our status as an empire because it ultimately benefits America. On a basic level I agree with him. While it may seem immoral, I would rather the US be the main power broker. I do feel that being an empire and being somewhat morally decent are not incompatible. It would be naive to think that the US empire could create a better world, however it could do some good in areas such as the Sudan or in promoting better business practices in the World Bank and WTO.
Anyhow have a good weekend. Here is a link to the article.

http://www.amconmag.com/3_1_04/print/coverprint.html