A Question...

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

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.

The Wealth of Networks: Blogging

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

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.

TNR this week

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

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.

When ya gotta go....

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

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?

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.

Bookstore...

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!

Darwin's Nightmare III

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).

The Path to Wealth

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.

Darwin's Nightmare

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.

Vietnam

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

Questions of my own

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

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?

Foreign policy today

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

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

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?

Schoonover

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

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

Jagshemash...

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

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.

2006

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...

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

One...Bank

Vote !!!

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...

Mountain Top Removal and Recycling

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

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

Cultural Anthropology

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

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.

"Cowboy Nation"

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

"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

Mark Moberg - Responsible Men and Sharp Yankees

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

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"

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

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."

Jefferson's words

"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 selected—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"

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

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

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!"

Nutritional facts of bananas

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?

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).

Panama canal project

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...

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...

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"

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.

It is raining man...

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...

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

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

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.

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

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...

A Conservative's View (albeit not my own)

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