Baby Number Seven Billion Will Be Born on October 31
What's Your Number? BBC
1) We've been at "peak oil" for decades apparently...and yet funnily enough,
every time chicken little starts croaking again, our technology manages to find
more oil in more places and more ways to recover it. Oil is not limitless, but
we do have plenty, and we have enough to get us to the point when REAL
alternative energies - rather than liberal pipe dreams - will be viable.
Synthetics and third generation biofuels are the way to go. Oil from Algae,
etc.
2) It seems beyond the realm of comprehension for liberals and
environmentalists that people might WANT to have children. Yes, our birth rate
has fallen. But did it ever occur to any of you that maybe people enjoy having
offspring, and not just the one trophy child?
3) A declining population means an irreversible (as long as population
continues to fall) economic contraction...fewer jobs, less production, a falling
GDP, etc. A falling population is a disaster. Today, most developed areas of the
world have far too few children, not too many.
4) We have the resources, technology, and knowhow to provide for a population
even much larger than today's. There are vast - otherwise habitable - areas of
the globe where there simply aren't any people. Go walk through Montana or the
Dakotas. What we really need is the infrastructure to support the large populations in Africa and Asia...not fewer people.
Read the article CHICAGO TRIBUNE/ 7 Bilion? Hold the celebrations!
<>
It is disappointing that those of us who believe keeping the population at
sustainable levels are now being tarred with the colonial or even racist brush.
Earth's resources are not infinite. Until we develop the technology to colonise
beyond this planet (neo-neo-colonialism?) wouldn't it be better for humankind as
a whole if we grew more trees and fewer people?
Read the article BBC/the world at seven billion
<>
In the early days of Friends of the Earth, circa 1972, we tried to popularise
recycling, use of urban land for growing food crops, energy saving, using
bicycles rather than cars, etc etc. Then as now, we did not dare tackle the
"elephant in the room", which we were quite aware was the runaway growth of
population, from which all the symptoms we were addressing originated. We should
have dared.
Read the article BBC/the world at seven billion
<>
If you look at countries which have reduced their birth rates, it's clear that
you need a combination of factors including:
A secure retirement system so
people don't depend on their children to take care of them
Universal
education so families don't see more children as more workers for the
family
End to religious/cultural value of making "our" group bigger than the
others
- amongst other things
Read the article BBC/the world at seven billion
<>
As David Attenborough and Population Matters say, "Every environmental problem
will be harder - and ultimately impossible - to solve with ever more people."
With a projected population peak 40% above current levels, the future will be a
scary place unless we act now to slow population growth.
Read the article BBC/the world at seven billion
<>
Yes, sometimes, population control has been a political tool - both by
authoritarian rulers and colonising powers. However, it has more often been used
to try improving quality of life. But, population control is just one brick in a
far larger wall. Other factors like mass education, abandonment of violent
sectarianism and tribalism and true democracy are also needed, but all too often
are absent.
Read the article BBC/the world at seven billion
<>
There are still vast amounts of earth's resources that have not yet been used. Those that are being used are often wasted or used in an inefficient manner. As humans, we have always figured out how to provide for ourselves so much so that food production does outpace the population growth
Distributing food is a big problem - enough food is not a problem. Artificially slowing population will only temporarily seem to solve 'overpopulation' concerns.
When there are not enough people to work in the economy to pay for the welfare state, what do we do then? Japan is experiencing this now and we are beginning to see in other parts of Asia and Europe. China's workforce is projected to shrink 21% by the year 2050. America is grappling with future solvency of Medicare and SS.
Mr. Walker's solution will spawn new problems that will need to be solved.
Read the article HUFFINGTON POST/7 Billion and Climbing: The Population Challenge
<>
Some people, notably George Monbiot, argue that western over-consumption is the sole culprit, so criticising expanding population means "blaming the victims". Of course he is right that our self-indulgent lifestyles are grossly inequitable, and must become much more modest – each additional Briton has the carbon footprint of 22 more Malawians, so the 10 million more UK people the ONS projects for 2033 would equate to 220 million more Malawians. But all poor people aspire to become richer; if they succeed, their numbers will matter immensely.
Whilst I totally agree with the above, the rainforests are being depleted as we speak. Rainforests are as we all know their own mini ecosystems yet do not occur in the West. After a certain point of depletion a rainforest will lose its natural ability to provide that mini ecosystem which will seriously impact the surrounding area.
Many in the West are very aware of climate change and how it is linked to our population explosion. We need to concentrate on CO2 emissions but the developing world must address their population explosions too.
More education for women will halp here.
But many barriers stand in the way of educating women worldwide, many barriers.
Read the article GUARDIAN/Why current population growth is costing us the Earth
This issue has been ignominiously overlooked by the Green movement and yet as more and more people accept that only a holistic approach to the current global problems will really offer a long term solution this very issue has to be debated and addressed as seriously as possible.
Our Lord David Attenborough has remarked that during his many travels to just about every corner of this planet he has never seen an environmental problem that wouldn´t be solved more easily if there were less people.
Unfortunately as any demographer knows you cannot refer to overpopulation without referring to resources and therein lies the rub because until the wealthier nations are prepared to live more simply so that others may simply live, population debate will be a non-starter.
New York city consumes in one year the same amount of electricity as the entire population of sub-Saharan Africa (http://www.summitenergy.com/blog/2011/02/energy-and-the-global-poor/)
where natural population increase is highest and from where our minds conjure up the mental images associated with "over-population".
There are huge moral and ethical questions that cannot be avoided if this debate is to go very far.
Read the article GUARDIAN/Why current population growth is costing us the Earth
<>
"Malthusians: do you have any idea what this means for your (current) world-view?"
From what I've read here, those who bash others as "Malthusian" haven't actually bothered to read what Malthus actually said, and instead just argue from a attempted ridicule emotional straw-man of "Malthus said we're in for a dystopia". No he didn't. He argued the more overpopulated we become, the more resources would be diverted to trying to cure it which some would react to by having more babies, etc, which would amplify the problem, which in turn may result in a downward cost vs improvement spiral to the point of stagnation, or at least reduced innovation due to reduced resources. And this is absolutely correct and clearly observed in several countries.
Where are all the technological innovations from Ethiopia or Somalia? There are hardly any. Why? Because as Malthus predicted, all available resources have been swallowed up by over-population induced subsistence social "distress", slowing the rate of progress. Far from being proven wrong, he's already been proven right by the continued ongoing state of Africa. He may not have proven right on a global level, but then he never predicted a global dystopia of all countries being like Somalia / Mad Max, just that "the dangers of population growth would preclude endless progress" in some societies (which they already have). In fact, that's exactly what "the Third World" is a label of...
Here's what he said in his "An Essay on the Principle of Population":-
"The power of population is indefinitely greater than the power in the earth to produce subsistence for man".
This is technically correct as most people can potentially have +6-10 kids, yet the quantity of arable land will not go up anywhere the same rate. This is basic maths and a prediction that's been proven right. If it were wrong, people wouldn't be starving in Africa which better technology obviously hasn't solved or there wouldn't be a need for permanent multi-billion aid packages.
"This constant effort as constantly tends to subject the lower classes of the society to distress and to prevent any great permanent amelioration of their condition" - Chapter 2, p18.
Meaning "The poorest people suffer the most during famines". Which is proven right every day in Sub-Saharan Africa.
"The way in which these effects are produced seems to be this. We will suppose the means of subsistence in any country just equal to the easy support of its inhabitants. The constant effort towards population... increases the number of people before the means of subsistence are increased. The food therefore which before supported seven millions must now be divided among seven millions and a half or eight millions. The poor consequently must live much worse, and many of them be reduced to severe distress"
Sub-Saharan Africa in a nutshell...
"The number of labourers also being above the proportion of the work in the market, the price of labour must tend toward a decrease, while the price of provisions would at the same time tend to rise."
"This is, in fact, a real fall in the price of labour; and, during this period, the condition of the lower classes of the community must be gradually growing worse. But the farmers and capitalists are growing rich from the real cheapness of labour."
Which is exactly the same economic wage deflation effect that over-populated China is having on America and Europe because there's an over-supply of labour, and why we can no longer kick start our economies with a domestic competitive manufacturing industry in non-overpopulated "flat worker supply" countries... Again that's yet another prediction proven correct, and is virtually the current economic crisis of falling real wages in the West due to abnormal "over-competition" from supply-overpopulated countries like China, nailed in one paragraph.
"This is simply wrong: there are vast swathes of Britain which are rather sparsely populated."
Over-population is more than just concreting over every blade of grass and destroying the non-human ecosystem. The UK imports half its food already. If the population doubled, 75-80% of food would have to be imported, the price of food would soar (due to both increased competition and increasing cost of oil-dependent transport). Famines with 90m starving Brits would also occur in the event of a long-term food transportation network failure. Hardly the "sustainability" or "Green" politics most people understand...
For a man who supposedly "didn't predict anything right", Malthus seems to be bang on target with regards to his predictions of modern 1st vs 3rd world wage deflation and resulting economic stagnation, reduced technological progress in 3rd world countries, and the ongoing distressed state of Africa's poor...
Read the article GUARDIAN/Why current population growth is costing us the Earth
<>
Dickens had the population control enthusiasts right:
"Man," said the Ghost , "if man you be in heart, not adamant, forbear that wicked cant [of 'decrease the surplus population'] until you have discovered what the surplus is, and where it is. Will you decide what men shall live, what men shall die? It may be that in the sight of Heaven you are more worthless and less fit to live than millions like this poor man's child. O God! to hear the insect on the leaf pronouncing on the too much life among his hungry brothers in the dust!"
It's amazing that the spirit of Malthus persists: how many times does he have to be wrong? It's also worth remembering how deeply unpleasant he was, blaming the poor for their poverty because of their own fecklessness and opposing any kind of state welfare. A curious hero indeed.
Read the article GUARDIAN/Why current population growth is costing us the Earth
Death of Muammar Gadhafi
Gadhafi dead! At that moment my thoughts go to:
- people dead in bombings of planes, which he ordered (Lockerbie and Tenere)
- Yvonne Joyce Fletcher, British policewoman, murdered by thugs from Libyan embassy in London in 1984
- sergeants Ford and Goins from US Army, as well as Ms Nermin Hannay, a Turkish girl, killed in the bombing of "La Belle" club in West Berlin by Libyan agents
- all people who died in IRA and INLA bombings with explosives offered by Gadhafi
- all people who died in Tchad wars from 1970 to 1990, due to permanent meddling of Libya and even a regular Libyan invasion and occupation
- all victims of internal terror in Libya
May their families find some closure and comfort in the fact that the mad tyrant who murdered their beloved ones has finally fallen!
Read the article NEW YORK TIMES/
Qaddafi Is Dead, Libyan Officials Say
<>
It's nice in some ways that Moammar "spell it any way you want" Qaddafi is gone for good. He was a terrorist in a few ways, and rather deranged, and ruled Libya with an iron fish for too long (I heard "iron fist" and "big fish" too often this morning and so "iron fish" is what I'm going with).
However, anyone who thinks that the bloodshed in Libya has ended, or that democracy will miraculously start there tomorrow, is fooling themselves. All of Ghadafi's tribe will be on the defensive, and many will start waging guerrilla attacks when they can. Other tribal splits may boil over too, and really it wouldn't be all bad if Libya reverted to the three nations it was before being united as Libya.
I just hope that the violence ends before too long, and doesn't spill over Libyan borders. Good luck Libya, there's a light at the end of the tunnel, but you're not in the clear yet I think.
Read the article NEW YORK TIMES/
Qaddafi Is Dead, Libyan Officials Say
<>
So Jibril is going and now the real game starts of carving up power and wealth in the new Libya. Could be be peaceful compromise but a long messy civil war is also a distinct possibility. Or a combination of the two.
So who are the runners and riders?
Misrata obviously. Well-funded by rich merchant families, big chip on shoulder about coming behind Benghazi and Tripoli under Gaddafi, even bigger chip on shoulder about being the Stalingrad of the revolution while Tripoli temained quiet and Benghazi lazed. Experienced and aggressive fighters with a reputation for looiting and ethnic cleansing.
Benghazi obviously. Big chip on shoulder about coming second to Tripolu inder Gaddafi. Scared of coming second again in a new Libya. Wants control of eastern oil back. Reckons it deserves big credit as father of revolution. Jalil is base there. Got the flag of the Banghazi-base kingdom back, wants power back. Loss of Jibril a big blow, and resented in the west.
Zintan obviously. Arabs among Amazigh. Thinks it deserves big credit for liberating Tripoli while Banghazi was doing nothing much. Share ssome similar views to Misrata. possible allies. Holds onto chunks of Tripoli which are possible flashpoint. Beginning to be resented by more westernised inhabitants of Tripoli.
Amazigh obviously. There's a big Amazigh cultural renaissance going on, and these folks won't want ti take second place in the new Libya like they did in the old. Could push for more Amazigh power than coastal Arabs feel happy with. Zuwara, Amazigh port surrounded by Arabs an existing flashpoint.
Islamists/Salafists obviously. Well financed ansd backed and armed by Qatar. Belhaj controls much of Tripoli. Big possibility of flashpoint there v Zintant and seculars. Possible theological conflict with sufis already shown by destruction of tomb shrines.
Gadaffi loyalists. Still significant numbers around particularly in the south and some parts of Tripoli. The Warfalla and Gadhafa tribe, after the way they've suffered in Bani Walid and Sirte are likely recruits to any guerrilla war.
And, of course, like any potential state implosion we have the external forces getting ready to play their part:
Qatar already mentioned.
The US, France and Britain.
Tribal fighters from Chad, Mali and Niger potentially available for a pro-Gadaffi guerilla war in the south.
Read the article GUARDIAN/Muammar Gaddafi is dead, NTC says - live coverage
This wasn't about oil - which was being traded at market rates before the Arab
uprising. In fact, disruption to the supply has caused prices to rise which has
contributed to rising inflation and economic anxiety here in the UK. This was
about helping a people free themselves from an illegitimate leader without
asking more of our own troops to die on foreign soil for someone else's cause.
Job done
Read the article BBC/Muammar Gaddafi killed in Libya
<>
While I won't shed any tears for Gaddafi I find it quite unsatisfying that he
won't stand trial for his alleged 'crimes'. Along with Bin Laden I had hoped to
see a trial and a thorough examining of the evidence against them in connection
with international terrorism. Now sadly we won't have that, instead we'll get
conspiracy theories, myth and allegations. But the facts as ever will remain
elusive
Read the article BBC/Muammar Gaddafi killed in Libya
Debating the Release of Gilad Shalit
WHAT does anyone's politics have to do with anything? How do you know what the
Shalit's political thoughts are? And who cares? What possible does it have with
anything?
Gilad was serving his country, protecting you. It is our
obligation to take whatever measures are necessary to free him.
There's
not a Jew in Israel who doesn't hurt to know that terrorists have to be released
in order to get Gilad back. But if that's what we have to do, so be it.
Their true punishment will come from God. Our job is to release our
captive soldier.
Read the article YNET/Noam Shalit facing bereaved families at the High Court
<>
How tragic that these bereaved families direct their anger and pain at the
Shalits! Would any of them not have done everything the Shalits have done? It is
hypocritical and disingenuous of them to attack the Shalits. Everyone feels for
them. But the Shalits are not the cause of their pain. The Shalits are but
parents, loving, caring parents. As are they. The Shalits are their brother and
sister, NOT their enemies.
Read the article YNET/Noam Shalit facing bereaved families at the High Court
<>
Rare outbreak of common sense...
Hardly. The logic of this 'deal' is that I kill who I like, my friends then kidnap somebody and demand my freedom. If this 'common sense' were applied to other situations then how many other murderers would be walking around freely having been released on the same basis?
This is a victory for terrorism. Perhaps some believe that is a good thing, but most people must surely see this as a very bad day for Israel. Quite clearly Hamas will continue to kidnap Israelis in order to bargain them for killers in jail.
The humanity of freeing Shalit is of course relevant. As human beings anyone would have sympathy with his and his family's situation. But undoubtedly many more Israelis will die as a result of this decision so the moral arguments are not clear cut.
Lets be clear that so long as Hamas is linked to Iran it cannot fulfil anything but a negative role for Palestinians.
Read the article GUARDIAN/Palestinian prisoner swap: Rare outbreak of common sense
<>
While I and many others feel that there was no option but to agree to an exchange in order to return Gilad (and we are assuming that hopefully he is still alive), to call this a rare case of common sense is quite a stretch. It was a tough choice that Israe had to make, and, finally, responsibly did, while keeping some of the worst of the terrorists still under lock and key.
Netanyahu's statement that he had little time to make a decision to agree to a deal may have more to do with fears for Gilad's health than any concern about the unraveling Arab Spring, the signs of which are evaporating more like rain after a hamsin.
Israel and Zahal have made it a sacred duty to return every soldier that might have fallen into enemy hands, no matter what. It is with a heavy heart that most Israelis watch the release of murderers and terrorists, but with a deep feeling of relief that that Gilad's ordeal, and that of his parents, is ending. Kept, apparently, in an underground bunker like something out of the middle ages, the Red Cross doing little or nothing to ensure him the minimal protections civilized nations expect, this had to end.
There are, to be sure, many in Israel whose children or other family members or friends were victims of these terrorists who have mixed feelings, or even reject the idea of freeing these murderers entirely - but it had to be done. There is a real concern it will simply increase the appetite to carry our more kidnappings, let alone further attacks by these released monsters.
To call the exchange a victory of Hamas is to fall in line with their wretched propaganda. What have they really proved? That each of their terrorists is worth 1/1027th of an Israel soldier. This is in line with the claims of victory they make after every defeat they have suffered, while running to complain about Israel in every international forum.
Those who will be released should also remember the fate of Sheikh Yassin, Ahmed Jibril, and others. They will never sleep without wondering if they will awake the next day, and will spend their lives waiting for the tap on the shoulder of the missile from the sky as justice is finally meted out.
Read the article GUARDIAN/Palestinian prisoner swap: Rare outbreak of common sense
Leni & Teacup, your heartbreak for all those supposedly "innocent" Palestinians that will be released in exchange for Shalit is in reality sympathy with convicted terrorists --- ALL of them participated in terrorist operations, and many of them participated in attacks that killed and maimed hundreds of Israelis, mostly civilians. Also included among the objects of your sympathy are people who participated in the October 2000 lynching mob that savagely killed 2 soldiers who had lost their way and had been seized by PA police; to the cheers of crowds, the bodies were then further mutilated:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/969778.stm
And let us not forget: Shalit was snatched in a cross-border raid long after the last Israeli soldier and the last Israeli settler had left Gaza.
As regards operation Cast Lead, of course, of course, Hamas should have the right to rain down thousands of rockets and mortars on Israel's South, where after all the citizens have between 15 and 30 seconds to take cover whenever there is an alarm -- which on some days could be 10, 15, 20 times. I only wish that everyone who thinks Cast Lead wasn't justified would have the chance to live for a few days under these circumstances, preferably with some kids, and perhaps a grandma in a wheelchair to take care of.
The timing of Cast Lead was exclusively due to the fact that Hamas had acquired longer-range rockets (courtesy of Iran) that exposed an additional several hundred thousand Israeli citizens to attacks from Gaza. I live on the outskirts of Tel Aviv, looking south from my balcony, I can see the town that came into the range of Hamas rockets, and was indeed actually hit.
Instead of waiting until Hamas would use these longer-range rockets at a time of their choosing, the Israeli government -- which under international law has a duty to protect its citizens -- decided that it was time to stop absorbing every year thousands of rockets from Gaza and to show Hamas instead that there was a price to be paid for their aggression.
The Palestinian death toll in Cast Lead, i.e. the ratio between militants and civilians killed, was better than anything US and Nato forces have ever achieved in Iraq or Afghanistan.
So yes, I'm fully supportive of Cast Lead, not least because my choice at the time was either to see Bat Yam bombarded indiscriminately, or to see Gaza bombarded by a military force that has the world's best record in avoiding civilian casualties.
No doubt you in my place would have preferred to be bombarded yourself.
Read the article GUARDIAN/Palestinian prisoner swap: Rare outbreak of common sense
<>
Some of the prisoners have been held for 20 years.
as to those known to have taken part in particularly violent incidents - including murder - they as I understand it are to go either to WB to be policed by PA or to other Arab nations.
The question of why now - as opposed to 6 or 18 months ago is relevant. There are no guarantees that there will not be further violent acts from some of those released. Those who were not accused or convicted of violence - who knows after years in prison ?
Those exiled abroad - no guarantee they will stay there particularly with current changes in Arab countries with no certainty about future.
Israel originally offered to lift blockade in exchange for Gilad's return. I don't know if this is part of the deal.
It is not about wanting Israelis to suffer rocket attacks - any more than it is about approving violent behaviour from Israel.
It is about resolution. I was actually expressing concern for both Israelis and Palestinians when I asked you for your thoughts. You are in a better position to understand and assess than i am. Netanyahu is reported as saying he had no choice but to agree - why suddenly has choice been taken from him ?
Why do these threads have to finish up every time like this ? Don't assume enmity where none exists.
Read the article GUARDIAN/Palestinian prisoner swap: Rare outbreak of common sense
<>
As a parent, I am ecstatic that Gilad Shalit is to be freed, and be returned to his family. Already, populists are seeking the blood of Bibi for agreeing to this deal.
The government of Israel should answer Hamas, and critics with a new policy of immediate and vicious retribution upon our enemies should another kidnapping occur, hence, sending a message that kidnappings will not be tolerated, and that the price they pay will be unbearable.
Read the article JERUSALEM POST/Candidly Speaking: Gilad Schalit – the bitter and the sweet
The Archbishop and the Dictator
It's unfortunate British Foreign Office ministers are not similarly forthright in their public statements
The problem is that when they do make such statements, Mugabe simply says "I told you so, they're interfering imperialists"....and the rest of southern africa agrees with him, not to mention the anti-western mob all the way from Venezuela to Iran to the usual suspects at CiF.
All the signs indicate Robert Mugabe and his Zanu-PF gang are gearing up to steal another election. It's important they be stopped.
And what exactly do you suggest we do, when virtually every one of Zimbabwe's neighbours support Mugabe and when Russia and China vetoed the last attempt to impose sanctions at the UN...
Wring our hands some more???
Read the article GUARDIAN/If only UK politicians were as brave as Rowan Williams about Zimbabwe
<>
What I find sad is that UN sanctions on Zimbabwe had nothing to do with his inhuman treatment of dissidents, homosexuals, Christians, etc, (lets not pretend for a minute this principle is applied to Saudi Arabia for example) but because Mugabe ejected white Afrikaner farmers from their land. White farmers, I hasten to add, who in their greed and contempt for black Africans, ejected thousands from their homes
Well, for a start, very few white farmers in Zimbabwe were actually Afrikaaners.
They were mostly of British stock - from emmigrants who went to Rhodesia in large numbers after the war......hence the British interest.
And no, they did not eject thousands from their homes....actually they were responsible for not only providing thousands of jobs (all lost now) but also for feeding not just Zimbabwe but the whole of Southern Africa as well.....and, on top of that, creating a massive cash crop industry in Tobacco and other products that provided huge amounts of cash to the Zim government.
All that is gone now!!! and the Zimbabwean economy has collapsed.
Yes, the patterns of land ownership were screwed up and yes, there was a colonial legacy to sort out......but that didn't happen because Mugabe was too busy shoring up his own quasi Marxist yet Feudalist order to actually care about the economic consequences of his policies.
Read the article GUARDIAN/If only UK politicians were as brave as Rowan Williams about Zimbabwe
Mugabe was exceedingly and needlessly polite to Rev Williams. He showed unnecessary grace to a man that erroneously savaged his rule on Sunday. I believe Mugabe thinks that Williams has some influence with the British government of Cameron. He mistakenly thinks Williams will now go to Downing St and ask for the removal of sanctions on Zimbabwe.
This will not happen! The fight between Zimbabwe and western countries is not due to a misunderstanding. Its a resources and an economic fight which is masked in human rights and governance jargon.
As long as the West continue to see Mugabe and his party as being an impediment to western economic interests in Zimbabwe, they will continue to apply pressure on the country thru whatever means, sanctions included.
In that equation, Rowan Williams is an insignificant part of this play. He cannot change a single thing, the political die against Zimbabwe is set. Neither can he stop Zimbabweans from their current economic revolution.
Mugabe too, cannot do much to aid pro-Williams Anglicans, Zimbabwe's supreme court has already determined that Dr. Kunonga is the rightful leader and administrator of said Anglican properties. Were Mugabe ever to interfere in this legal judgement, he would then truly deserve the epithet of "dictator" that has so far been wrongly applied to him.
All in all, I see this meeting as a waste of presidential capital by Mugabe. Boosting Williams catchet in the UK media with little or nothing to show for Zimbabwe!
Many westerners mistakenly think Mugabe is the problem in Zimbabwe, getting rid of him solves everything. Well, they are very wrong!
Mugabe is just the current leader of an economic idea that will not die with his removal! Black Zimbabweans are determined to take control of their country's economic backbone, with or without Mugabe's leadership.
As the fruits of land reform finally begin to show exciting success after 10 years of disappointment, and as many mining corporations bend to the dictates of the 51% indigenization law, Zimbabweans have tasted blood and will not let up, regardless of what happens to Mugabe!
The western-backed MDC has no power to stand in the way of this economic tsunami!
Mugabe and Williams can waste time drinking tea and eating scones, Zimbabweans are too busy adding fire to the economic train to take notice!
Read the article GUARDIAN/If only UK politicians were as brave as Rowan Williams about Zimbabwe
A Questioning Generation Takes to the Streets in Scorn and Anger
I personally have heard the teaching of "free everything" at Harvard and when I asked if the electricity was free was essentially drowned out of the conversation. The person stating "free everything" had obviously been born into wealth and power in a foreign country, benefited from a world class education but had not been taught the fundamentals of economics. Instead he(yes it was a man) had learned to parrot his social group, perhaps to retain social standing?
It concerned me then and concerns me now. Why can we collectively not develop new economic models and a legitimate distribution of wealth? The 40 hour work week is arbitrary, prices can for too often now have no relation to cost of good produced and the increasing concentration of wealth globally echoes the court of Louis XVI prior to the French Revolution.
Worldwide that type of turmoil is unnecessary but it is possible if the extremely wealthy do not pay attention, quickly build in new and creative change and be willing to actually work for their livings. Will their financial managers even let the message reach them? Self-interest predicts they will not. The same is true for the security interests. Some threats may indeed be real and do need attention but repeating past thinking in the day of bio, telecom and nuclear risks is inappropriate and high risk for us all.
Democracy, real democracy is the only way to build justice and consensus into our world. As long as we are breathing there is hope.
Read the article NEW YORK TIMES/ As Scorn for Vote Grows, Protests Surge Around Globe
<>
Democracy is looking more and more like a sham, but what's the alternative? The last time democracy was so utterly rejected and scorned by so many people was in the 1920's, and that led to the twin totalitarian evils of communism and fascism.
I gotta admit, I have been greatly encouraged by all the global movements for justice, for "Real Democracy" (the name of the Spanish movement this spring), for "Social Justice" (as the Israels chanted), and all the rest. But the level of cynicism is may be too much of a good thing, of course we shouldn't blindly trust our leaders, but if we denigrate all and any potential political leaders, we end up powerless, with a strangely "apolitical political movement." And what do we gain? Nothing.
Here in Chile, a popular slogan of the 5-month long student protest movement has been "El pueblo unido avance sin partido" or "The people united go forward without a (political) party." But how? A poll out today shows that the student demands have a whopping 89% approval. So how on earth can't a democratic system not respond to that?
Read the article NEW YORK TIMES/ As Scorn for Vote Grows, Protests Surge Around Globe
What has coincided with the spread of this disillusionment? The spread of neoliberal policies, that, in effect, place the wealthy and large, international corporations in charge, worldwide.
No state can effectively contest them. Indeed, governments, while nominally democratic, become captives of finance. (See the writings of Simon Johnson, former chief economist of the IMF.) Globalization, with no boundaries related to environmental or labor regulation, frees capital from ability of nation states to control it. If corporations don't like a state's policies, whether regulation of capital or the environment or labor laws protecting workers, financiers threaten to leave and take their capital with them.
400 families in the US now control as much wealth as the bottom 40-50 percent of US citizens. One billionaire in Mexico possesses as much wealth as 150 million Mexicans. The same pattern increasingly applies worldwide. Thus the similarity of the complaints of citizens worldwide.
Read the article NEW YORK TIMES/ As Scorn for Vote Grows, Protests Surge Around Globe
<>
I was there for the civil rights movement. I was there for the anti-war movement. I was there for the women's march on the Pentagon...and then for two decades I got co-opted into believing the system was actually gonna work for me.
Now, I'm almost sixty, unemployed for three years with a husband who just lost his job through an e-mail. Our health insurance is $800 a month, and he gets $160 a week in unemployment.
Well guess what we've got? Time. I stand in solidarity with those on Wall Street and am ashamed that it took this long to bring me back to the essential truth of what this country is about. Unbridled corporate greed.
Read the article NEW YORK TIMES/ As Scorn for Vote Grows, Protests Surge Around Globe
<>
Young voters helped bring President Obama into office, Hoping for Change. No wonder they are disillusioned. The massive TARP bailout did nothing to re-open local stores. Stimulus spending didn’t reach friends who now scramble to pay off college loans or find a minimum wage job.
They watched as Wall Street bankers were awarded huge bonuses, yet no one is prosecuted for stealing their future. Foreclosure signs continue to go up in their neighborhoods and even after passage of the “Affordable Care Act”. When you are unemployed, who can afford a $5,000 deductible? The Fed, Congress, and the White House flap around.
As 25 year-olds with college degrees deliver pizza, they hear about Bernie Madoff, the Koch Brothers, Citizens United, Solyndra, and new laws requiring voter ID cards. Boots dusty from Afghanistan return home to empty manufacturing plants. Why are we surprised when young voters feel pushed aside in a society controlled by privilege and wealth?
This is not the first time young voters have felt this way. In 1932 thousands of the disenfranchised and unemployed veterans demonstrated outside the White House. It required soldiers with fixed bayonets and live ammunition to push them away. As Intel co-founder Andy Grove says, “unemployment is corrosive”.
Either WE come together to restructure the American economy for the benefit of us all, or these young voters will bring it to our attention – in ways the rest of America may not like.
Read the article NEW YORK TIMES/ As Scorn for Vote Grows, Protests Surge Around Globe
