Lemon tree project

The palestinian conflict is increbidly complex and the question of who bears the blame is a difficult one to answer.  After the Second World War there was an influx of Jews into the British Mandate of Palestine, and these Jews soon declared and independent state, which provoked a war with the arab inhabitants and many neighboring countries.  In modern times, Palestinian violent resistance has manifested itself through terrorist attacks, and Israel has been accused of using its superior military strength irresponsibly.  These seven poems attempt to provide an insight from the two points of view of the conflict.  The poems are grouped into three groups, the first three are from the point of view of a radical palestinian terrorist, the second from the point of view of an Israeli soldier, and the last describes the situation of their encounter during an armed skirmish.  Each poem is accompanied by a picture to better illustrate the situation. (All images found via Google Image search).

edit: some of the images got cut off, try opening them in separate tabs (assuming the reader uses mozilla firefox or google chrome, this should be easy).

 

Sliver of Salvation

We are forgotten

Lost in pools of pain

Disregarded by greed

And sympathy overlooks

Our humble plight.

 

So we turn to those

Who offer us a glimpse,

A sliver of salvation,

In the eyes of the world

We are evil, but we just survive.

 

Break the chains,

We’ll do wrong if we must,

But we do it for right

And though now you hate us

Soon we’ll be laughing above.

Guns and Gold

Night breaks into dawn

Exploding in red and orange

Like a bomb from the chest

Of our heros who fight

For freedom and glory

In lands claimed by invaders.

 

The flashes of firey light

Spread out across the desert hills,

Breakign a broken people,

Crushing a crushed country,

Raping a raped land,

As the bombs fly back home.

 

So we ride to glory,

Our weapons hidden

In our sophisticated disguise

As our brother die like rats

At the hands of vermin

With guns and gold.

Catalyst

They are the future

They are the past

They are the problem

They are the cause.

 

They came in hordes,

In deadly swarms

Riding from black night

To bring black night to white day.

 

And we stood like the stones

Of our age old homes

Against the spawn of Abraham

We fight for freedom and for glory.

 

Great God take me,

Great God embrace me,

That I may know no fear,

That I mat to my enemy

Bring poison tears.

Safety and Security

The sun shines down

On our torn society

As the charred remains

Of another bus lie

Smoking in the streets.

 

They sent us here

To keep the peace,

To enforce the fearful calm

To defend the hundred hopeful sons

We offer up to God.

 

They say we’re better off,

They thrust upon us blame,

But personally I disagree.

As my city explodes in flames,

We arm ourselves again.

 

And all the technology

In the world can never

Invent security or buy safety,

Can never assemble stability,

And for my country I feel pity.

Our only land

We broke our backs

To build this country,

Now it burns in flames.

 

We hid and we survived

In times of old,

But now we can hid no more.

 

After the terrible twisted

Mind of a maniacal monster

Unleashed a dark curse on us,

We’ve finally come home.

 

Who owns the land?

We’ve kept the age old deed

In our champion book of godly creed.

 

They fought against us

When we only wanted peace,

But now we fight for life.

 

So come and join us here in

This paradox of a paradise

This hellish holy land,

But the only land we’ve ever had.

Final Fatality

They’ve brought forth

Their evil terror legions

Death by strangulation

Or by fire suffocation.

 

And we swear by those

Whom we protect still unborn,

Sons and daughters we hope to never mourn.

We fight because we fear more blood.

 

Blood rains from the scorching sun

Who our pleas does disregard.

So goes the story of a blood-soaked bard

Who from the wreckage flames does run.

 

Tonight we strike.

Tonight we end this for ever more.

If the world thinks us savage,

They know not what we fight for.

War

In the desert sun,

Through burning wreckage

Rides one sodlier pack

As all around the mortars fall.

 

While in the haunting smoke,

A survivor casts away the rubble,

Takes his weapon and turns to fight,

Thrusts himself upon the invader.

 

Battle flows as survivors,

Scared to act alone,

Join the solitary hero

With sticks and stones and fire and pain.

 

Gunfire in all directions,

Laying man and beast to rest

‘Till one on each side remains

No weapons left but bleeding bare hands.

 

The sun burns bare skin,

One dark, one light,

As fist and face collide,

Like knee and feeble stomach,

 

Both fall bleeding, twitching, to the ground.

Economic Sectors and developement

Agriculture and GDP

Industry and GDP

Service and GDP

—

In this post I shall discuss the relationship between the contribution of different economic sectors to a country’s economy, and the wealth of that country, as measured in GDP per capita.  To show this, I have used the graph making tool at gapminder.org to create the three graphs linked to above, each representing a different economic sector in relation to GDP per capita.  I believe that the agriculture and service graphs are the most representative graphs in this case.  In the agriculture graph we can observe a steep decrease in agriculture as we move into areas of higher GDP per capita.  This is shown as we look at the country on the map with the highest GDP per capita in 2002, luxembourg, where agriculture contributed only .64% of the economy.  Conversely, looking at the country with the most contribution form agriculture (76%), we see it is one of the poorest (531$ GDP per capita, inflation adjusted), and the poorest country, the Democratic republic of the congo, (241$ GDP per capita) had a high agricultural sector as well (51%).  On the graph of service and GDP, we clearly see that the more service oriented an economy is, the more money it produces.  These results correspond with the idea of economic developement which holds that countries progress from mainly agricultural economies to industrial ones, to service economies, and that the further along a country is on this progression, the more wealthy it is.

 

These indicators are valid indicators of the developement of countries because of the perspective they give on economies and how they progress through different sectors.  They show us the relative state of developement of agricultural countries in terms of wealth, as well as for the other three economic sectors.  Thus, we see an important factor in determining the developement levels of a country, the eceonomic sectors that mot contribute to rtheir eceonomy.  From these indicators we see that a more developed society is one which focuses on service jobs in its economy.

 

These indicators have some limitations in that we can only look at one sector at a tiem, and it might be more helpful to look at two of them, or all three.  also, GDP per capita may be problematic bewcause in many countries there is a large gap between rich and poor, so the average may not be representative.  One of the unclear things about this graph is whether one of the indicators causes the other, and the effects of a heavily industrial economy on GDP, though we can assume it will unite the trends we have seen in agriculture and services.

Yeah, I’m that cool

I got mentioned in an article!

Linky: http://genocide.change.org/blog/view/drc_deja_vu_1998

That is all.

Obama and Human Rights

Article: http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2008/11/14/us-human-rights-agenda-new-administration

Human Rights Watch has detailed what policies it thinks Barack Obama should take in order to protect human rights when he takes office in January.

They believe that these steps are as follows:

“President-elect Barack Obama will take office at a time when the credibility and effectiveness of the United States in combating human rights abuses abroad has been badly eroded by the US government’s own actions. There is an urgent need to remedy abuses on many fronts, but Human Rights Watch here highlights four crucial initiatives that President-elect Obama should take shortly after assuming office:”

1. Ensure that US counterterrorism actions comply with International Human Rights and Humanitarian Law.
2. Make Human Rights a central pillar of US foreign policy.
3. Rejoin the International Human Rights Commitee.
4. Demonstrate leadership on Human Rights issues at home.

The article goes into further detail about what exactly those steps will entail, and it is a somewhat lengthy list, but I will summarize as best I can.  Step 1 includes measures such as the closure of Guantanamo Bay, real trials for terror suspects, and ending torture.  Step 2 explains that under Obama, the US must not continue to support human rights abuses in allied countries such as Egypt and Pakistan, among others.  Step 3 is pretty self-explanatory, and the article describes exactly how this would be done, as well as some additional steps that must be taken.  Step 4 is in regards to issues such as gay marriage, the death penalty and fixing the justice system against racial disparities, among others.

<b>But what does it mean?</b>

I honestly wish that these steps could be taken, and cariied out with speed, so we could fix the many human rights abuses in the world.  But, from a practical point of view, some of these things are much easier said than done.  The most prominent example is Step 2.  I believe that it poses a major challenge, because most countries with abusive regimes will not react positively to criticism, especially some of the countries named in the article.  What I wonder is can the US really afford to alienate any of the few allies it still has?

This is a very relevant article, seeing as it deals with one of the most important issues in the world, human rights abuses.  It can be argued that Human Rights abuses or the failure to guard Human Rights constitute the base of many of the problems which face our world today.  War, terror, and the abuses themselves are the most prominent examples of this idea.  Barack Obama, and his new Secretary of State, must show leadership and resolve in fixing this important problem.

Lastly, this article is probably written by a liberal, seeing as the author holds liberty and equality and human rights as a fundamental part of society.  The perspective influences little in this case however, because beyond the purpose of writing the article, it bases itself little on ideology and much on pragmatism and concrete steps.

Democratic? Republic of the Congo…

“Rebel leader Laurent Nkunda’s forces and government-backed Mai Mai militias deliberately killed civilians in Kiwanja, North Kivu province, on November 4-5, 2008, Human Rights Watch said today. UN peacekeepers based in the area were apparently unable to protect civilians from attack.”

Human Rights watch reported on the displacement of civilians from this conflict, and the killing of innocents.  In addition, many people are commenting that the UN should send more peacekeepers to DRC to be able to stop the killing of innocents, so that stories like this one will not occur again.  In addition, Human Rights Watch is reporting that refugee camps are being destroyed, and that displaced people are being forced to return, which is a war crime.

“The Congolese army has been supported in some military operations by the local militia known as Mai Mai and another militia known as PARECO, as well as by an armed group led by Rwandan Hutu called the Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda (FDLR). Some FDLR leaders participated in the Rwandan genocide in 1994. ”

The country calls itself the Democratic Republic of the Congo, yet it backs itself with war criminals and participants in genocide.  Some sources also commented that the problems in DRC right now present a challenge for America’s new African Command, and it is symbolic of Africom’s function.  It must fill these “security vacuums.”

On another note, the victory of Barack Obama in the US presidential elections has brought much speculation and theorizing on how he will deal with problems relating to refugees and displaced persons.  Some believe that his plans for Darfur, for example, which are in fact tougher than Bush’s plans, and may involve setting up a no/fly zome over Darfur to limit Sudanese air action, will be much more effective than what has been tried so far.

I think that as a world that is interconnected, refugees are a major issue, as they can move through the globalized world to cause poverty/related problems in other countries, and the fact that refugees are so common is a gross aberration of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, for no human should be forced from his place of residence because he fears for the security of his self and his family, because of tangible threats, wars, violence on his very doorstep.

 

Edit: I just noticed that this post got mentioned in another article: http://genocide.change.org/blog/view/drc_deja_vu_1998

On India and Religion

“In the last two months, radical Hindu nationalist mobs have rioted and attacked Christians in a number of Indian states, claiming that lower-caste Hindus and tribal peoples are being forcibly converted to Christianity. More than 30 people have been killed, and thousands have taken shelter in government camps or in forests. Churches, prayer halls and Christian institutions have been vandalised, and nuns and priests have been attacked and beaten; one nun was stripped naked and gang-raped. It has been described as the most serious violence against the Christian community in India in the last 50 years.”

This quote is from an article in Global Voices.  Now, of course there are other news stories involving refugees, for example, the many who are now in danger in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, or in Burma/Myanmar, or in Western Sahara, or al around the world.  But this particular story (or stories, as it has been mentioned in more than one place),  is what I want to talk about, because, while looking at the many stories drifting in, this news shocked me the most.  The title of the Global Voices article is “India: Attacks on Christians a challenge to the secular state.”  At first, this title sounds like the Indian government is trying to secularize the country, but further investigation shows that it is not like this.  The current conflict was set off with the death of an important Hindu religious official, but religious tensions have been high for a long time.

For years, the Maoist rebel group Naxalites had been fighting state-backed militias, displacing many in the Indian state of Chhattisgarh.  They killed the religious official, or at least claim responsibility for it, but Hindu nationalists believe that he was killed by Christians, and have begun attacking them.  This of course, stemmed from previous tension with the Christian community, who were accused of bribing tribal and low-caste hindus to convert.  Though most Christian organizations deny that they attempt to convert hindus, the group called New Life openly tries to convert them, and “there are television evangelists who attack other religions and present converts from Hinduism.”

Recently, a group of churches in mourning were attacked, because the New Life members had been distributing provocative pamphlets, even though these churches were in no way associated with them other than sharing in the Christian faith.  I decided to write about this issue because I was surprised there were not more people talking about it.  I am not a Christian, in fact  there are many things about Christianity which I do not agree with, and I especially do not like the idea of the Roman Catholic church.  But that is irrelevant.  The religion being prosecuted could be Buddhism, Islam, Judaism, Taoism, Hinduism, Sikhism, Paganism or even Luciferanism for all I care.  What I have a problem with is not that a certain religion is being prosecuted, but that a religion is being prosecuted to begin with.

Any conflict that displaces people, even just one person, is bad.  Really, any conflict in the first place is bad.  But a conflict like this one, where innocent people are being killed and foorced form their homes for their religion, for simply believeing something different, is a terrible crime against humanity.  annd what makes it even worse is that it could just as easily have been the other way around, its not like Christians wont try to kill people of another religion just because its been doen to them.  In fact, it just makes it more likely, its a never ending cycle.  At the risk of sounding like a pessimist, there probably is no solution near, and it seems to me that we havent made nearly the progress we should have since the Universal Declaration of human Rights was signed almost 60 years ago, almost exactly.

Audio file feedback

The audio file feedback, or stream of consciousness, is a very interesting way of providing students with feedback.  I think that while it has some positive aspects, it also has some drawbacks.  One of the htings i liked was that it gives very good feedback.  But, on the other hand, a negative aspect it has is that for some people, it seemed to make them think their essays were much worse than they actually were, because of a prevalence of criticism and suggestions.  I personally, however, like this system.

Modernity at the dawn of the 20th Century

    Humanity can become perfect, but at the same time, it is doomed to imperfection.  This self-contradicting statement is an excellent description of how opinion about humanity achieving perfection was divided at the start of the 21st century.  Many scholars supported the dominant opinion that as man continued to progress in exponential amounts, it could eventually attain perfection.  But, conversely, it also faced much criticism, by very intelligent and prominent figures of society.  Some of these figures included Mahatma Gandhi and Friedrich Engels.  So, some of the best arguments were made in its favor and against it.  By the beginning of the 20th century, the belief that humanity could achieve perfection through continuous progress had reached its greatest height, but at the same time faced some of its greatest detractors.
    The 20th century and the years leading up to it witnessed the pinnacle of the belief in progressive improvement and mankind’s ability to achieve perfection through this continuous improvement.  As early as 1794, this belief began to enjoy great support from academics, as well as a widespread belief from the general populace.  In Jean Antoine Nicholas de Concordet’s The Progress of the Human Mind, a strong case in favor of progress and eventual perfection.  For example, he states that “The organic perfectibility or deterioration of the classes of the vegetable, or species of the animal kingdom, may be regarded as one of the general laws of nature.  This principle extends itself to the human race…”  Thus, he makes the case that humanity can indeed become perfect, by constantly progressing in the arts and sciences.  Nicholas de Concordet goes on to show one example of the exponential growth of progress, posing the question that “Is is not probable that education, by improving these qualities, will have an influence on, will modify and improve this organization itself?”  He is thus arguing that as education educates a new generation, it does not self-perpetuate, but adapts itself.  Nicholas de Concordet was not the only one to make powerful arguments in favor of progress, however.  In an 1851 edition of The Economist, the case for progress and eventual perfection is also made.  The aforemntioned article states its opinion on the matter of progress when it states that “We look upon the Past with respect and affection as a series of steppingstones, to that high and advanced place which we actually hold and form the future we hope for the realization of those dreams, almost of perfectibility, which a comparison of the Past with the Present entitles us to indulge in.”  This statement clearly demonstrates a strong belief that mankind is progressing and will eventually achieve perfection, or almost perfection.  Thus, the shcolars of the beginning of the 20th century, andi n the time leading up to it clearly upheld the belief in improvement and the attainability of near perfection.

    In addition to scholars and academics, many poets and artists also shared this widespread belief.  Walt Whitman was one of these poets, and wrote in his poem Years of the Modern, “Years of the modern! Years of the unperform’d! / You horizon rises, I see it parting away for more august dramas, / I see not America only, not only Liberty’s nation but other nations preparing…”  These lines express Whitman’s belief and support in the new ideologies of modernism, and expresses a belief that the future is better than the past.  Later in the poem, he also wirtes that “Never was average man, his soul, more energetic, more like a God, / Lo, how he urges and urges, leaving the masses no rest.”  These verses show his belief in the great progress man has made, and thus implies that mankind will soon achieve a previously unimagined state.  But, even though so many scholars, poets and average people believed in this principle, some of the greatest opponents to the belief would also emerge during this time.

    While the widespread belief in progressive improvement and eventual perfection was at its peak in this time period, it was also experiencing some of its harshest criticism.  An important part of this belief in progress was the capitalist belief that individuals working for their own ends would advance the ends of the whole.  This belief, as well as the rest of the capitalist theory and of the idea of humanity’s constant improvement, was challenged by Friedrich Engels in Socialism: Utopian and Scientific.  Engels argues that, in regard to the improvement supposedly caused by capitalism, “The new mode of production was, as yet, only at the beggining of its period of ascent…  Nevertheless, even then it was producing crying social abuses – the herding together of a homeless population in the worst quarters of the large towns; the loosening of all traditional moral bonds, of  patriarchal subordination, of family relations; overwork, especially of women and children, to a frightful extent; complete demoralisation of the working class… from stable conditions of existence into insecure ones ones that changed from day to day.”  This statement is expressing the belief that the so called improvement is actually a deterioration of society, and thus, logically mankind is not headed to perfection.  As an addition, probably to explain the fact that there were not more voices speaking against this “false progress,” Engels also says that “Facts more and more strenously gave the lie to the teachings of bourgeeois economy as to the identity of the interests of the capital and labour, as to the universal harmony and universal prosperity that would be the consequence of unbridled capitalism…”  Engels was one of the not-so-common, but quite intelligent and harsh critics of this and other modernist beliefs.

    Another major critic of modernity, and this ideal of modernity, was Mahatma Gandhi.  In his Hind Swaraj, he argues that “A man whilst he is dreaming, believes his dream; he is undecieved only when he is awakened from his sleep.  A man laboring under the bane of civilization is like a dreamign man.  What we usally read are the works of defenders of modern civilization, which undoubtedly claims among its votaries very brilliant and even some very good men.”  Thus, he declares the so-called blessings of the new era to be lies.  He also argues that, because of technological advance so heralded by proponents of modernism and the belief in improvement, “Everything will be done by machinery.  Formerly, when people wanted to fight with one another, they measured between them their bodily strength; now it is possible to take away thousands of lives by one man working behind a gun from a hill.  This is civilization.”  As such he manages to greatly diminish the power of the technological argument.  He further states, regarding the “improved” civilizations that “This civilization is irreligion, and it has taken such a hold on the people in Europe that those who are in it appear to be half-mad.  They lack real physical strength or courage.  They keep up their energy by intoxication.  They can hardly be happy in solitude.  Women, who should be the queens of households, wander in the streets or slave away in factories”  With this statement, Gandhi manages to all but discredit modern civilization as superior.  Later in his writing, Gandhi turns to what he believes a civilization should be, prposing an alternative to the European idea, stating that “Civilization is that mode of conduct which points out to man the path of duty.  Performance of duty and observance of morality are ocnvertible terms.  To observe morality is to attain mastery over our mind and our passions.  So doing, we know ourselves.”  In addition, he further argues against technological advance, calling it an “insatiable hunger” and arguing that it caused more unhappiness than happiness, futher claiming that in past times, “It was not that we did not know how to invent machinery, but our forefathers knew that, if we set our hearts after such things, we would become slaves and lose our moral fibre.  They, therefore, after due deliberation decided that we should only do what we could with out hands and feet.  They saw that our real happiness and health consisted in a proper use of our hands and feet.”  Thus, it can be seen that Gandhi alone has torn holes in this tennant of modernism, along with many other, making him, and also Engels, some of the greatest detractors of the new world view so widely accepted in Europe, America, and much of the world. 

    The belief in constant human improvement and eventual perfection received some of its harshest criticism in the beginning of the 20th century and the years leading up to it, but also enjoyed its greatest support and most widespread belief.  This belief had to endure the strogn criticisms of Mahatma Gandhi and Friedrich Engels, among others.  Yet, at the same time, many intelligent and thoughtful men and women defended this idea, and it enjoyed much support among the masses.  However, around the year 1913, this and the other ideas that constituted modernism would be knocked down, with the outbreak of world War I and the Bolshevik revolution in Russia radically changing the world and its beliefs.  But, before these events, modernism and its tenants would have some of their greatest peaks in influence and belief.  Thus, humanity, doomed to be imperfect, strove for long centuries to attain that which was inevitable.

Reflection on World Events

The first memory I have of caring about world events, really in fact of knowing anything about them, was in the year 2000, when I was about seven years old. To be more specific, it was in the very end of the year 2000, from about October to December. This memory is more of a general memory than anything, but I remember being vaguely aware of the US presidential election, and I remember my mother’s disappointment at the victory of George W. Bush. Being seven years old, and too young to really have my own opinion, I was also disappointed, and thought Bush would be a bad President, even though I knew nothing about him, or really about what a President did. About a year later, I remember being at school (I lived in Greenwich, Connecticut at the time) and hearing about what had happened to the Twin Towers. I also remember how my teacher, who knew my father worked near the World Trade Center, was so relieved when my dad came to pick me up not too much later. although I didn’t quite understand what had happened, from watching my parents, I could tell something serious had happened. Soon after came the war in Afghanistan. I remember my mom wondering why my dad supported Bush (something he admits was a mistake today), even if he couldn’t vote.

I had few other memories related to world events until 2003, when my father lost his job because of the economic troubles in the US at the time, and we moved to Barcelona. Back then I was still only about nine, and though I thought myself to be very mature, well, I obviously wasn’t. I remember “debating” with my friend in fifth grade about whether Gore would have been a good president (I argued he would, which at the time was really the only opinion I had heard from anyone except my dad). During this time in Spain, there were many anti-Iraq War demonstrations and protests, and in hindsight, I think this has affected me greatly, the age where I really began to become interested in politics and world events was quite an controversial one. I think that the final step in bringing me to my current level of interest in world politics was having Mr. rugnetta as a teacher for three years and doing the BFISMUN three times, all of which made for a lot of current events news every day, and essentially gave me the base knowledge and interest that would cause me to do things like study Interntional Relations over the summer.

Who am I, how dare you ask that!

Who am I you ask?  Well, I could not think of anything witty or original to answer  that with, so I present you with this song lyric:

“We passed upon the stairs,
We spoke of was and when
Although I wasnt there
He said I was his friend
Which came as a surprise
I spoke into his eyes — I thought you died alone
A long long time ago

Oh no, not me,
We never lost control,
Youre face to face,
With the man who sold the world

I laughed and shook his hand,
I made my way back home,
I searched for form and land,
Years and years I roamed,
I gazed a gazely stare,
We walked a million hills — I must have died alone,
A long long time ago.

Who knows, not me,
I never lost control,
Youre face, to face,
With the man who sold the world.”

– Nirvana/David Bowie

 

Basically I am a musician, a fencer and a CTYIzen.  THat about sums me up…