» Did you know about the TPP?
Posted May 5, 2012. By duke_Qa
http://www.huffingto...ml?ref=politics
I sure didn't, and it certainly is relevant for us westerners(mostly). It stands for "Trans-Pacific Partnership Free Trade Agreement", and is basically a bunch of pacific nations organizing free trade agreements between themselves.
The problem isn't that they are going about creating trade agreements, but that they are being as opaque as humanly possible about it. These sort of agreements make or break nations, and here we sit not knowing anything about them.
Here are some examples what this TPP is about(probably some good things about it too, but one step forward and two back is usually negative):
I'm glad we are living in times where you can find this sort of information online. If I wrote about this sort of stuff in the 70s I'd probably be put on a list and hear clicking sounds on my phone. Safety in numbers and ease of access I guess
3 Comments
http://www.huffingto...ml?ref=politics
I sure didn't, and it certainly is relevant for us westerners(mostly). It stands for "Trans-Pacific Partnership Free Trade Agreement", and is basically a bunch of pacific nations organizing free trade agreements between themselves.
Quote
(TPP) is being negotiated as a nine country FTA between the U.S., Australia, Brunei Darussalam, Chile, Malaysia, New Zealand, Peru, Singapore and Vietnam. Canada, Japan and Mexico are all expected to join talks, and many see more Pacific Rim countries including China and Russia eventually signing on. With floundering WTO talks, the TPP could very well establish U.S. trade policy for the next generation, yet all talks are happening behind closed doors and public influence has been increasingly suppressed.
The problem isn't that they are going about creating trade agreements, but that they are being as opaque as humanly possible about it. These sort of agreements make or break nations, and here we sit not knowing anything about them.
Here are some examples what this TPP is about(probably some good things about it too, but one step forward and two back is usually negative):
Quote
Secret No. 1: The TPP is covertly attacking the same internet freedom rights that spurred online protests over ACTA and SOPA.
No. 2: The TPP would make it more enticing for corporations to offshore jobs by opening our market to Vietnamese labor, which has significantly lower average wages than China.
No. 3: The TPP could be a death sentence to patients with AIDS, tuberculosis, and other treatable diseases around the world.
No. 4: The TPP would ban capital controls and impose limits on financial regulation, including post-recession checks on firm size and risky investments.
No. 5: Americans hate FTAs! Recent polls have found more than twice as many Americans think FTAs hurt than help, and 69 percent of Americans think they cost jobs, which they do.
No. 2: The TPP would make it more enticing for corporations to offshore jobs by opening our market to Vietnamese labor, which has significantly lower average wages than China.
No. 3: The TPP could be a death sentence to patients with AIDS, tuberculosis, and other treatable diseases around the world.
No. 4: The TPP would ban capital controls and impose limits on financial regulation, including post-recession checks on firm size and risky investments.
No. 5: Americans hate FTAs! Recent polls have found more than twice as many Americans think FTAs hurt than help, and 69 percent of Americans think they cost jobs, which they do.
I'm glad we are living in times where you can find this sort of information online. If I wrote about this sort of stuff in the 70s I'd probably be put on a list and hear clicking sounds on my phone. Safety in numbers and ease of access I guess
3 Comments
» The river of steel
Posted March 26, 2012. By duke_Qa
As this article mentions, there is a river of steel over the Mexican border from the USA, a flow of semi-automatic weaponry that are killing people in much greater numbers than other conflicts around the world.
To be honest, it is quite surprising to me that this isn't more mainstream news than it is.
In the period of 2008-2011, 2000 Palestinians were killed in conflict between Israel/Palestine.
The Libyan revolution cost around 15 000 - 25 000 lives.
The official numbers of Syrian deaths are around 10 000 in a year.
In Mexico, the number for the last five years is around 40 000 - 55 000. That is pretty brutal IMO. And the worst part of it is that its because American weapon-producers are making good money on these weapons being sold to Mexicans.
If I was a Marketing guy, I'd make a poster of an Mexican hitman pointing an American assault rifle in your face with the text "This is where your 'rights to carry arms' will get you" under it. Or "Sponsored by your friendly local NRA affiliates" or "Made in America" or "This guy bought this gun off your kid" or "Trade: Americans get drugs, Mexicans get guns: Who will be the better shooter? Probably not you".
Anyway, I thought this was a bit of an interesting tidbit of information. If its purely corporate interest or indirectly caused by war on drugs I don't know, but it is certainly a symptom of something that is not right.
6 Comments
As this article mentions, there is a river of steel over the Mexican border from the USA, a flow of semi-automatic weaponry that are killing people in much greater numbers than other conflicts around the world.
To be honest, it is quite surprising to me that this isn't more mainstream news than it is.
In the period of 2008-2011, 2000 Palestinians were killed in conflict between Israel/Palestine.
The Libyan revolution cost around 15 000 - 25 000 lives.
The official numbers of Syrian deaths are around 10 000 in a year.
In Mexico, the number for the last five years is around 40 000 - 55 000. That is pretty brutal IMO. And the worst part of it is that its because American weapon-producers are making good money on these weapons being sold to Mexicans.
If I was a Marketing guy, I'd make a poster of an Mexican hitman pointing an American assault rifle in your face with the text "This is where your 'rights to carry arms' will get you" under it. Or "Sponsored by your friendly local NRA affiliates" or "Made in America" or "This guy bought this gun off your kid" or "Trade: Americans get drugs, Mexicans get guns: Who will be the better shooter? Probably not you".
Anyway, I thought this was a bit of an interesting tidbit of information. If its purely corporate interest or indirectly caused by war on drugs I don't know, but it is certainly a symptom of something that is not right.
6 Comments
» The game of bureaucracy
Posted March 11, 2012. By duke_Qa
So, since this is pretty local news that no english newspaper has taken interest in, but a very fascinating story about abuse of tax-payer money and ideology-before-law, I'd thought I'd try to explain it.
It is the tale of the rise and fall of SOS-Racism, a group that was seen as a positive anti-racism organization since 1985 up until the mid 00s. They organized school conferences where they talked about racism and handed out bumper-stickers and whatnot. They were a presence hen I was in school and I guess they did some good back then.
But in 2006, as one of the major newspapers in Norway started digging into their paperwork and leaders, they discovered that practically the entire leadership of this organization were from the communist-leninist-marxist group "Tjen Folket"/Serve the people(a group that goes for the "revolution for communism" ideology, about one step away from physical terrorism I'd say). And not only that, they claimed that the number of members SOS had were inflated, which is a bit of a legal problem since organizations get funding depending on the amount of members they have.
After a few more years of back-and-forth and the bureaucracy finally starting to investigate SOS-racism. In 2010 the government funding were withdrawn and the government now demands that they pay back the money(g-translated) that they've gotten on false premises, about two million dollars. They had to calculate the member numbers themselves by double-checking the names in three major cities, finding that over half of the members were not real and many of the real ones couldn't apply(1-year olds and the likes).
One of the former inner circle members of SOS racism/Tjen folket went public to a newspaper recently(g-translated), where he spoke specifically about what happened when the law came down upon them. The moment the judge demanded that they hand over their paperwork, they went into scorched earth mode, burning and destroying (forged) membership papers. They took out as much money as they could from organization accounts, filled up bags and briefcases and hid them where the government couldn't find it.
Right now, the public have, at best, given up on SOS-racism. Some of the TF communist leaders in SOS racism are rebooting a new organization called "New SOS Racism". But I have extreme doubts that this is nothing more than another attempt at starting the scam once more or to whitewash the money they've stolen from the government through donations.
But this isn't all, because today something even more fascinating has come up in the news: Norwegian Defense League, an extreme right-wing group closely related to English Defense League, was practically built from the ground up by the same communists leadership that control SOS racism, from "Tjen Folket".
Imagine, Anti-racists joining a extreme right-wing anti-Muslim group, creating and building a false enemy that would increase their membership numbers. NDL have commented that they've removed these inflitrators, but if that is the case the biggest irony is that "anti-racists" have created the very thing they're there to destroy. No light without darkness it would seem.
So, TLDR: Local anti-racism group created in 1985, hijacked late 90s by Communists/leninist/marxist revolutionary organization named "Tjen Folket"/serve the people. TF starts inflating the membership numbers of SOS racism to get more money from the government, having at a point 50 000 members in a nation of 5 million. "Pretty high number for such a specific non-political organization", the media and eventually the government thought , which then promptly started investigating around 2006. in 2010 the government demanded their money back for the last 5-6 years and all the paperwork for membership: SOS racism's(TF communist) leadership started burning documents and taking the money out of the banks in cash for a rainy day. Since then, the backlash and cleanup has been roilin along, discovering such horrors such as these communists actually sponsoring racist organizations such as NDL, so they'd have an enemy to give them more relevance.
Pretty nice conspiracy I'd say, and the main reason I'm sharing this is because it shows us what people can do within the rules if they feel their cause is "just". This is just some minor group of clever people knowing the tricks of the bureaucracy. Imagine all the corrupt things being done by other larger organizations around the world: Lobbyism for unnecessary tax loopholes, government support to oil-business in the US. All of these are typic examples of the manipulation we allow people to get away with.
0 Comments
So, since this is pretty local news that no english newspaper has taken interest in, but a very fascinating story about abuse of tax-payer money and ideology-before-law, I'd thought I'd try to explain it.
It is the tale of the rise and fall of SOS-Racism, a group that was seen as a positive anti-racism organization since 1985 up until the mid 00s. They organized school conferences where they talked about racism and handed out bumper-stickers and whatnot. They were a presence hen I was in school and I guess they did some good back then.
But in 2006, as one of the major newspapers in Norway started digging into their paperwork and leaders, they discovered that practically the entire leadership of this organization were from the communist-leninist-marxist group "Tjen Folket"/Serve the people(a group that goes for the "revolution for communism" ideology, about one step away from physical terrorism I'd say). And not only that, they claimed that the number of members SOS had were inflated, which is a bit of a legal problem since organizations get funding depending on the amount of members they have.
After a few more years of back-and-forth and the bureaucracy finally starting to investigate SOS-racism. In 2010 the government funding were withdrawn and the government now demands that they pay back the money(g-translated) that they've gotten on false premises, about two million dollars. They had to calculate the member numbers themselves by double-checking the names in three major cities, finding that over half of the members were not real and many of the real ones couldn't apply(1-year olds and the likes).
One of the former inner circle members of SOS racism/Tjen folket went public to a newspaper recently(g-translated), where he spoke specifically about what happened when the law came down upon them. The moment the judge demanded that they hand over their paperwork, they went into scorched earth mode, burning and destroying (forged) membership papers. They took out as much money as they could from organization accounts, filled up bags and briefcases and hid them where the government couldn't find it.
Right now, the public have, at best, given up on SOS-racism. Some of the TF communist leaders in SOS racism are rebooting a new organization called "New SOS Racism". But I have extreme doubts that this is nothing more than another attempt at starting the scam once more or to whitewash the money they've stolen from the government through donations.
But this isn't all, because today something even more fascinating has come up in the news: Norwegian Defense League, an extreme right-wing group closely related to English Defense League, was practically built from the ground up by the same communists leadership that control SOS racism, from "Tjen Folket".
Imagine, Anti-racists joining a extreme right-wing anti-Muslim group, creating and building a false enemy that would increase their membership numbers. NDL have commented that they've removed these inflitrators, but if that is the case the biggest irony is that "anti-racists" have created the very thing they're there to destroy. No light without darkness it would seem.
So, TLDR: Local anti-racism group created in 1985, hijacked late 90s by Communists/leninist/marxist revolutionary organization named "Tjen Folket"/serve the people. TF starts inflating the membership numbers of SOS racism to get more money from the government, having at a point 50 000 members in a nation of 5 million. "Pretty high number for such a specific non-political organization", the media and eventually the government thought , which then promptly started investigating around 2006. in 2010 the government demanded their money back for the last 5-6 years and all the paperwork for membership: SOS racism's(TF communist) leadership started burning documents and taking the money out of the banks in cash for a rainy day. Since then, the backlash and cleanup has been roilin along, discovering such horrors such as these communists actually sponsoring racist organizations such as NDL, so they'd have an enemy to give them more relevance.
Pretty nice conspiracy I'd say, and the main reason I'm sharing this is because it shows us what people can do within the rules if they feel their cause is "just". This is just some minor group of clever people knowing the tricks of the bureaucracy. Imagine all the corrupt things being done by other larger organizations around the world: Lobbyism for unnecessary tax loopholes, government support to oil-business in the US. All of these are typic examples of the manipulation we allow people to get away with.
0 Comments
» British plan to privatize police
Posted March 3, 2012. By duke_Qa
Well, someone didn't read their compulsory dose of future dystopia fiction, and went ahead and came up with an idea for privatized police.
I just can't say how bad this looks. a private police force would be a corporation's wet dream. "Drug-dealers? meh, I got this factory-prison I need to fill with pirates and dissenters, they are much easier to put to work and it gets me cash from the RIAA and the gang."
4 Comments
Well, someone didn't read their compulsory dose of future dystopia fiction, and went ahead and came up with an idea for privatized police.
Quote
The programme has the potential to become the main vehicle for outsourcing police services in England and Wales. It has been pioneered by the West Midlands chief constable, Chris Sims, and Mark Rowley, who has just moved to the Metropolitan police from the post of Surrey chief constable. The pair lead on these matters for the Association of Chief Police Officers.
The breathtaking list of policing activities up for grabs includes investigating crimes, detaining suspects, developing cases, responding to and investigating incidents, supporting victims and witnesses, managing high-risk individuals, patrolling neighbourhoods, managing intelligence, managing engagement with the public, as well as more traditional back-office functions, such as managing forensics, providing legal services, managing the vehicle fleet, finance and human resources.
The breathtaking list of policing activities up for grabs includes investigating crimes, detaining suspects, developing cases, responding to and investigating incidents, supporting victims and witnesses, managing high-risk individuals, patrolling neighbourhoods, managing intelligence, managing engagement with the public, as well as more traditional back-office functions, such as managing forensics, providing legal services, managing the vehicle fleet, finance and human resources.
I just can't say how bad this looks. a private police force would be a corporation's wet dream. "Drug-dealers? meh, I got this factory-prison I need to fill with pirates and dissenters, they are much easier to put to work and it gets me cash from the RIAA and the gang."
4 Comments
» Difference between right wing and conservative
Posted February 16, 2012. By duke_Qa
This is an article written by the same guy that left the GOP and gave us an inside look at that system. Its named "the right wing Id unzipped", and it defines pretty well the difference between a conservative and a right-winger.
I specifically liked this quote that defined the fundamentalists way of life, which account for 40% of the GOP.
Another good one on fascism:
I guess this answers why the right-wingers has a much easier time bringing the guns to the battle. It also points out some of our biggest problems with maintaining a functioning democracy instead of having it collapse into a "fascist"/authoritarian regime. People like being pawns... up to the point it gets them killed in a war for Europe.
Oh well, I thought this was an interesting read. Not because of the American angle on it, but because it shows us what many right-wingers actually think and how they act.
0 Comments
This is an article written by the same guy that left the GOP and gave us an inside look at that system. Its named "the right wing Id unzipped", and it defines pretty well the difference between a conservative and a right-winger.
I specifically liked this quote that defined the fundamentalists way of life, which account for 40% of the GOP.
Quote
[indent]They are highly submissive to established authority, aggressive in the name of that authority and conventional to the point of insisting everyone should behave as their authorities decide. They are fearful and self-righteous and have a lot of hostility in them that they readily direct toward various out-groups. They are easily incited, easily led, rather un-inclined to think for themselves, largely impervious to facts and reason and rely instead on social support to maintain their beliefs. They bring strong loyalty to their in-groups, have thick-walled, highly compartmentalized minds, use a lot of double standards in their judgments, are surprisingly unprincipled at times and are often hypocrites.
[/indent]There are tens of millions of Americans who, although personally lacking the self-confidence, ambition and leadership qualities of authoritarian dominators like Gingrich or Sarah Palin, nevertheless empower the latter to achieve their goals while finding psychological fulfillment in subordination to a cause. Altemeyer describes these persons as authoritarian followers. They are socially rigid, highly conventional and strongly intolerant personalities, who, absent any self-directed goals, seek achievement and satisfaction by losing themselves in a movement greater than themselves. One finds them overrepresented in reactionary political movements, fundamentalist sects and leader cults like scientology. They are the people who responded on cue when Bush's press secretary said after the 9/11 attacks that people had better "watch what they say;" or who approved of illegal surveillance because "if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear;" or who, after months of news stories saying that no weapons of mass destruction had been found in Iraq, nevertheless believed the weapons were found.
[/indent]There are tens of millions of Americans who, although personally lacking the self-confidence, ambition and leadership qualities of authoritarian dominators like Gingrich or Sarah Palin, nevertheless empower the latter to achieve their goals while finding psychological fulfillment in subordination to a cause. Altemeyer describes these persons as authoritarian followers. They are socially rigid, highly conventional and strongly intolerant personalities, who, absent any self-directed goals, seek achievement and satisfaction by losing themselves in a movement greater than themselves. One finds them overrepresented in reactionary political movements, fundamentalist sects and leader cults like scientology. They are the people who responded on cue when Bush's press secretary said after the 9/11 attacks that people had better "watch what they say;" or who approved of illegal surveillance because "if you have nothing to hide, you have nothing to fear;" or who, after months of news stories saying that no weapons of mass destruction had been found in Iraq, nevertheless believed the weapons were found.
Another good one on fascism:
Quote
Fascist mentality is the mentality of the subjugated "little man" who craves authority and rebels against it at the same time. It is not by accident that all fascist dictators stem from the milieu of the little reactionary man. The captains of industry and the feudal militarist make use of this social fact for their own purposes. A mechanistic authoritarian civilization only reaps, in the form of fascism, from the little, suppressed man what for hundreds of years it has sown in the masses of little, suppressed individuals in the form of mysticism, top-sergeant mentality and automatism.
I guess this answers why the right-wingers has a much easier time bringing the guns to the battle. It also points out some of our biggest problems with maintaining a functioning democracy instead of having it collapse into a "fascist"/authoritarian regime. People like being pawns... up to the point it gets them killed in a war for Europe.
Oh well, I thought this was an interesting read. Not because of the American angle on it, but because it shows us what many right-wingers actually think and how they act.
0 Comments
» Obama taking a stand on taxes?
Posted February 14, 2012. By duke_Qa
I personally think its about time that the democrats stopped compromising and started pulling back, so the news that Obama is going for higher taxes on the rich and funding more infrastructure sounds good to me. We've been seeing the signs for a while though, so it shouldn't be a surprise for many that it happens now. It is more a campaign trick than a real budget, as the chances of it being passed right off the bat are minimal.
Hopefully this will turn the focus back on economic politics instead of red herrings like gay marriage, abortion, immigration and all the other things that makes "conservatives" froth around the mouth.
25 Comments
Quote
Barack Obama has set out the battles lines over the economy in this year's presidential election by proposing a budget that favours stimulus spending over austerity, and commits to the increasingly popular demand to raise taxes on the rich.
The president laid out $4tn in cuts to the deficit over the next decade as he seeks to reassure the large number of swing voters and conservative Democrats that he is serious about reining in government spending – a primary source of attack by Republican presidential contenders.
But, in a speech in Virginia in support of the proposals on Monday, Obama said a fresh wave of cuts should be delayed until the economy is in better shape to absorb them. In the meantime he proposes new investment in education, jobs and infrastructure, in part paid for by cuts to military spending with the end of the war in Iraq.
"The main idea in the budget is this: at a time when our economy is growing and creating jobs at a faster clip, we've got to do everything in our power to keep this recovery on track. Part of our job is to bring down our deficit and if Congress adopts this budget then along with the cuts we've already made then we'll be able to reduce out deficit by $4tn by the year 2022," he said. "By reducing our deficit in the long term, what that allows us to do is to invest in the things that will help grow our economy right now. We can't cut back on those things that are important for us to grow. We can't just cut our way in to growth."
The president laid out $4tn in cuts to the deficit over the next decade as he seeks to reassure the large number of swing voters and conservative Democrats that he is serious about reining in government spending – a primary source of attack by Republican presidential contenders.
But, in a speech in Virginia in support of the proposals on Monday, Obama said a fresh wave of cuts should be delayed until the economy is in better shape to absorb them. In the meantime he proposes new investment in education, jobs and infrastructure, in part paid for by cuts to military spending with the end of the war in Iraq.
"The main idea in the budget is this: at a time when our economy is growing and creating jobs at a faster clip, we've got to do everything in our power to keep this recovery on track. Part of our job is to bring down our deficit and if Congress adopts this budget then along with the cuts we've already made then we'll be able to reduce out deficit by $4tn by the year 2022," he said. "By reducing our deficit in the long term, what that allows us to do is to invest in the things that will help grow our economy right now. We can't cut back on those things that are important for us to grow. We can't just cut our way in to growth."
I personally think its about time that the democrats stopped compromising and started pulling back, so the news that Obama is going for higher taxes on the rich and funding more infrastructure sounds good to me. We've been seeing the signs for a while though, so it shouldn't be a surprise for many that it happens now. It is more a campaign trick than a real budget, as the chances of it being passed right off the bat are minimal.
Hopefully this will turn the focus back on economic politics instead of red herrings like gay marriage, abortion, immigration and all the other things that makes "conservatives" froth around the mouth.
25 Comments
» [GNP]China's Growing Fascism
Posted February 6, 2012. By duke_Qa
Figured this is relevant for the games nations playeth: The continuing expansion of Fascism combined with capitalism in China.
Based primarily on the this Truthout article:
So, Chinese fascism combined with a high-functioning economy is not only going to be a big problem for us in case of war, it will be a bigger problem in case of prolonged peace, because the efficiency of such a system will indirectly and directly taint our own rich and powerful to compete. Either out of greed for equal opportunity of money, or out of fear and avarice in an attempt to avoid marginalization, bankruptcy and being directly bought up.
If we were to battle fascism today, I dunno if we'd have the politicians or willpower to actually do it.
10 Comments
Figured this is relevant for the games nations playeth: The continuing expansion of Fascism combined with capitalism in China.
Based primarily on the this Truthout article:
Quote
There was a time when China was referred to as a society which was Communist or Post-Communist; today, the terms Authoritarian Capitalist or Capitalist with Asian/Chinese Characteristics are more common. However, there is a new term that appears to be increasingly applicable to the operation of the Chinese state and its impact on the lives of Chinese people and, above all, the education of Chinese youth born in the 1990s. It is increasingly clear that China is the most powerful, mature and internationally accepted fascist state in global history and its status as such should cause us all a great deal of concern.
[...]
While Chinese rarely express an open desire for imperialist expansion, an ideological sense of the inevitability of such expansion is a hidden part of national political consciousness. Rather than being self-admitted expansionists, Chinese expansion is instead expressed by characterizing foreign nations as "part of China" which must one day be reconquered and brought into the fold of the motherland to redress the historic injustices of foreign domination by restoring territorial integrity. The fact that these Asian nations are not part of the People's Republic of China (PRC), as they are supposed to be, is yet further ammunition for a sense of national grievance and humiliation. Press university students on the matter and one will quite easily be told that not only Taiwan and Tibet, but Mongolia, the Koreas, much or all of South-East Asia, Japan and most of the Philippines are somehow "part of China." The argument relies on obscure racial and cultural connections that somehow make these independent nations part of a larger Han empire that - while never having existed in the past as a national entity and, even on a cultural level, has no basis in linguistic and genetic links - must one day be re-established for Chinese dignity and territorial integrity.
[...]
If the Chinese fascist regime is permitted by the international community to continue its rise to prominence, then the consequences will be borne by the people of democratic nations and we have already seen the early stages of this global trend. A powerful fascist state of such maturity and size in the world will increasingly come to determine political debate in nominally democratic countries as the economic advantages of such a regime draws more and more financial resources away from less "efficient" political systems. If China continues to be able to use its fascist state apparatus to attract investment at the cost of liberal democratic nations, then the characteristics of these nations will tend toward increasing fascism in an imitative defensive response. This trend is already far advanced and if it remains unchecked by the active engagement and protest of constituent peoples in the form of actively entrenching our essential social and political norms of individual rights and egalitarian application of the rule of law, then we will witness the slow erosion of the democratic freedoms that were fought for nearly 70 years ago. It is no longer adequate to harp on about "human rights." The necessity of economically isolating regimes which fail to meet certain normative political and legal standards is of paramount importance to the long-term survival of the idea of pluralist government which protects a measure of individual freedom.
[...]
While Chinese rarely express an open desire for imperialist expansion, an ideological sense of the inevitability of such expansion is a hidden part of national political consciousness. Rather than being self-admitted expansionists, Chinese expansion is instead expressed by characterizing foreign nations as "part of China" which must one day be reconquered and brought into the fold of the motherland to redress the historic injustices of foreign domination by restoring territorial integrity. The fact that these Asian nations are not part of the People's Republic of China (PRC), as they are supposed to be, is yet further ammunition for a sense of national grievance and humiliation. Press university students on the matter and one will quite easily be told that not only Taiwan and Tibet, but Mongolia, the Koreas, much or all of South-East Asia, Japan and most of the Philippines are somehow "part of China." The argument relies on obscure racial and cultural connections that somehow make these independent nations part of a larger Han empire that - while never having existed in the past as a national entity and, even on a cultural level, has no basis in linguistic and genetic links - must one day be re-established for Chinese dignity and territorial integrity.
[...]
If the Chinese fascist regime is permitted by the international community to continue its rise to prominence, then the consequences will be borne by the people of democratic nations and we have already seen the early stages of this global trend. A powerful fascist state of such maturity and size in the world will increasingly come to determine political debate in nominally democratic countries as the economic advantages of such a regime draws more and more financial resources away from less "efficient" political systems. If China continues to be able to use its fascist state apparatus to attract investment at the cost of liberal democratic nations, then the characteristics of these nations will tend toward increasing fascism in an imitative defensive response. This trend is already far advanced and if it remains unchecked by the active engagement and protest of constituent peoples in the form of actively entrenching our essential social and political norms of individual rights and egalitarian application of the rule of law, then we will witness the slow erosion of the democratic freedoms that were fought for nearly 70 years ago. It is no longer adequate to harp on about "human rights." The necessity of economically isolating regimes which fail to meet certain normative political and legal standards is of paramount importance to the long-term survival of the idea of pluralist government which protects a measure of individual freedom.
So, Chinese fascism combined with a high-functioning economy is not only going to be a big problem for us in case of war, it will be a bigger problem in case of prolonged peace, because the efficiency of such a system will indirectly and directly taint our own rich and powerful to compete. Either out of greed for equal opportunity of money, or out of fear and avarice in an attempt to avoid marginalization, bankruptcy and being directly bought up.
If we were to battle fascism today, I dunno if we'd have the politicians or willpower to actually do it.
10 Comments
» [GNP]The inevitable war on Iran?
Posted February 3, 2012. By duke_Qa
This article is more critical of Obama than the topic itself, but I figure its good for a quick summary of today's situation.
For me, these days I get a feeling that I had the winter of 2002-spring of 2003, before the invasion of Iraq started. There are too many signs in both media and in major western powers, that our elected and unelected leaders are actively interested in provoking a war with Iran.
I guess this could be motivated by 2-3 major groups, which might overlap:
1. The military industrial complex of the USA and western Europe, who see their cash-flow drying out as we leave Iraq and start removing our forces from Afghanistan. Both directly through weapon sales, and indirectly through mercenary companies, who lose jobs the western businesses they protect bail out.
2. The western power-people with ties to rich Saudis, who are none too pleased about the massive influx of power we indirectly gave Iran as we neutralized Iraq.
3. neo-conservative American politicians with no scruples, who would love nothing more than to force a democratic peace-oriented president, into a war that could ruin his re-election chances.
"Starting a new war to make money on military sales which siphons cash from the taxpayers to our pockets? Check... Make Saudi friends happy and more willing to throw stolen oil and money after you? Check... Force President into war that will annihilate his re-election chances and get us a president we control 100%? CHECK".
I think that pretty much sums up my opinion on the topic. I was planning to write something more, but I think I've hit all the points that needs hitting... and my soul died a little as I wrote this, and its lunch.
12 Comments
This article is more critical of Obama than the topic itself, but I figure its good for a quick summary of today's situation.
For me, these days I get a feeling that I had the winter of 2002-spring of 2003, before the invasion of Iraq started. There are too many signs in both media and in major western powers, that our elected and unelected leaders are actively interested in provoking a war with Iran.
I guess this could be motivated by 2-3 major groups, which might overlap:
1. The military industrial complex of the USA and western Europe, who see their cash-flow drying out as we leave Iraq and start removing our forces from Afghanistan. Both directly through weapon sales, and indirectly through mercenary companies, who lose jobs the western businesses they protect bail out.
2. The western power-people with ties to rich Saudis, who are none too pleased about the massive influx of power we indirectly gave Iran as we neutralized Iraq.
3. neo-conservative American politicians with no scruples, who would love nothing more than to force a democratic peace-oriented president, into a war that could ruin his re-election chances.
"Starting a new war to make money on military sales which siphons cash from the taxpayers to our pockets? Check... Make Saudi friends happy and more willing to throw stolen oil and money after you? Check... Force President into war that will annihilate his re-election chances and get us a president we control 100%? CHECK".
I think that pretty much sums up my opinion on the topic. I was planning to write something more, but I think I've hit all the points that needs hitting... and my soul died a little as I wrote this, and its lunch.
12 Comments
» Spider-goats, the future of civilization
Posted January 15, 2012. By duke_Qa
Thought this article was hilarious enough to bring up here. Synthetic biology and the rise of 'spider-goats'. synthetic biology sounds better than genetic manipulation too, so that's a good thing imo
To sum it up, they took the genes from silk-producing spiders that creates silk, and put it into the milk producing genes of a goat. Separate the proteins and you have home-made silk without the icky spiders.
It also brings up the topic of bio-bricks, which is the growing field of putting different genes into components which can easily be mixed and matched to create new lifeforms that produce different products. 9th-graders have been able to use this to make glowing bacteria within an hour, and I suspect there are better articles out there about the use of it.
Also, it has been used to create bacteria that produce biodiesel, which is fancy enough in its own right. although environmental organizations are worried that this will reduce the amount of farmland for food... Well, if we ignore the fact that poor people will be the victim of such land-grabs, Mankind needs a good excuse to stop its breeders. And finding a solution to the energy crisis at the cost of a certain percentage of farmland sounds to me as a small price to pay to avoid the apocalypse. Most nations should be interested in becoming independent of oil, and if people are able to create synthetic bacterias that replace fossile fuel, we would be in a much better position than we currently are, food or not.
13 Comments
Thought this article was hilarious enough to bring up here. Synthetic biology and the rise of 'spider-goats'. synthetic biology sounds better than genetic manipulation too, so that's a good thing imo
To sum it up, they took the genes from silk-producing spiders that creates silk, and put it into the milk producing genes of a goat. Separate the proteins and you have home-made silk without the icky spiders.
It also brings up the topic of bio-bricks, which is the growing field of putting different genes into components which can easily be mixed and matched to create new lifeforms that produce different products. 9th-graders have been able to use this to make glowing bacteria within an hour, and I suspect there are better articles out there about the use of it.
Also, it has been used to create bacteria that produce biodiesel, which is fancy enough in its own right. although environmental organizations are worried that this will reduce the amount of farmland for food... Well, if we ignore the fact that poor people will be the victim of such land-grabs, Mankind needs a good excuse to stop its breeders. And finding a solution to the energy crisis at the cost of a certain percentage of farmland sounds to me as a small price to pay to avoid the apocalypse. Most nations should be interested in becoming independent of oil, and if people are able to create synthetic bacterias that replace fossile fuel, we would be in a much better position than we currently are, food or not.
13 Comments
» Not government size, but who it's for
Posted December 20, 2011. By duke_Qa
Pretty much defines the troubles of our times this one:
And so on and so forth. This is the real problem we are facing. Governments are meant to help the people, not the rich and powerful. We've had millennia of rich and powerful people running the show. Going around saying government is the problem isn't the answer. Going around saying "The government" is the problem might be closer to the truth: The ones in charge these days are not the ones we want to have in charge. Hopefully the picture will change as elections come around.
5 Comments
Pretty much defines the troubles of our times this one:
Quote
The defining political issue of 2012 won't be the government's size. It will be who government is for.
Americans have never much liked government. After all, the nation was conceived in a revolution against government.
But the surge of cynicism now engulfing America isn't about government's size. It's the growing perception that government isn't working for average people. It's for big business, Wall Street, and the very rich instead.
In a recent Pew Foundation poll, 77 percent of respondents said too much power is in the hands of a few rich people and corporations.
That's understandable. To take a few examples:
-- Wall Street got bailed out but homeowners caught in the fierce downdraft caused by the Street's excesses have got almost nothing.
-- Big agribusiness continues to rake in hundreds of billions in price supports and ethanol subsidies. Big pharma gets extended patent protection that drives up everyone's drug prices. Big oil gets its own federal subsidy. But small businesses on the Main Streets of America are barely making it.
-- American Airlines uses bankruptcy to ward off debtors and renegotiate labor contracts. Donald Trump's businesses go bankrupt without impinging on Trump's own personal fortune. But the law won't allow you to use personal bankruptcy to renegotiate your home mortgage.
-- If you run a giant bank that defrauds millions of small investors of their life savings, the bank might pay a small fine but you won't go to prison. Not a single top Wall Street executive has been prosecuted for Wall Street's mega-fraud. But if you sell an ounce of marijuana you could be put away for a long time.
Not a day goes by without Republicans decrying the budget deficit. But the biggest single reason for the yawning deficit is big money's corruption of Washington. And it's not just corporate welfare.
One of the deficit's biggest drivers -- Medicare -- would be lower if Medicare could use its bargaining leverage to get drug companies to reduce their prices. Why hasn't it happened? Big Pharma won't allow it.
Medicare's administrative costs are only 3 percent, far below the 10 percent average administrative costs of private insurers. So why not tame rising healthcare costs for all Americans by allowing any family to opt in? That was the idea behind the "public option." Health insurers stopped it in its tracks.
The other big budgetary expense is national defense. America spends more on our military than do China, Russia, Britain, France, Japan, and Germany combined. The basic defense budget (the portion unrelated to the costs of fighting wars) keeps growing, now about 25 percent higher than it was a decade ago, adjusted for inflation.
[...]
Americans have never much liked government. After all, the nation was conceived in a revolution against government.
But the surge of cynicism now engulfing America isn't about government's size. It's the growing perception that government isn't working for average people. It's for big business, Wall Street, and the very rich instead.
In a recent Pew Foundation poll, 77 percent of respondents said too much power is in the hands of a few rich people and corporations.
That's understandable. To take a few examples:
-- Wall Street got bailed out but homeowners caught in the fierce downdraft caused by the Street's excesses have got almost nothing.
-- Big agribusiness continues to rake in hundreds of billions in price supports and ethanol subsidies. Big pharma gets extended patent protection that drives up everyone's drug prices. Big oil gets its own federal subsidy. But small businesses on the Main Streets of America are barely making it.
-- American Airlines uses bankruptcy to ward off debtors and renegotiate labor contracts. Donald Trump's businesses go bankrupt without impinging on Trump's own personal fortune. But the law won't allow you to use personal bankruptcy to renegotiate your home mortgage.
-- If you run a giant bank that defrauds millions of small investors of their life savings, the bank might pay a small fine but you won't go to prison. Not a single top Wall Street executive has been prosecuted for Wall Street's mega-fraud. But if you sell an ounce of marijuana you could be put away for a long time.
Not a day goes by without Republicans decrying the budget deficit. But the biggest single reason for the yawning deficit is big money's corruption of Washington. And it's not just corporate welfare.
One of the deficit's biggest drivers -- Medicare -- would be lower if Medicare could use its bargaining leverage to get drug companies to reduce their prices. Why hasn't it happened? Big Pharma won't allow it.
Medicare's administrative costs are only 3 percent, far below the 10 percent average administrative costs of private insurers. So why not tame rising healthcare costs for all Americans by allowing any family to opt in? That was the idea behind the "public option." Health insurers stopped it in its tracks.
The other big budgetary expense is national defense. America spends more on our military than do China, Russia, Britain, France, Japan, and Germany combined. The basic defense budget (the portion unrelated to the costs of fighting wars) keeps growing, now about 25 percent higher than it was a decade ago, adjusted for inflation.
[...]
And so on and so forth. This is the real problem we are facing. Governments are meant to help the people, not the rich and powerful. We've had millennia of rich and powerful people running the show. Going around saying government is the problem isn't the answer. Going around saying "The government" is the problem might be closer to the truth: The ones in charge these days are not the ones we want to have in charge. Hopefully the picture will change as elections come around.
5 Comments