I don't think anyone was shocked to find out Obama caved to Israel Lobby pressure in deciding to boycott the international conference on racism (Durban 2) at Geneva Switzerland. What we have seen recently is nothing new. A well orchestrated campaign by Zionists to get Durban boycotted and in the least discredit and tarnish the accomplishments there. It's not surprising Israel would not want to be part of a conference discussing racism, it's not exactly a topic Zionists can defend. We have seen this pattern before. We have seen campaigns in years past where Zionists would target a institution, a treaty, a cause or a conference or a individual. The tactic is to discredit and smear. The objective is to end debate, stop individual or group actions or deny a forum where criticism of Israel can take place. You won't see Israeli's be anymore inclined to attend a conference on banning land mines or banning use of cluster bombs anymore than attending one on racism. Israel operates like a rogue regime, outside the structures and norms of international organizations and treaties. Take out the fact this conference is on the topic of "racism" and let's say it was about "human rights" and of course, what we will see is the same campaign we saw being waged against Durban 1 and 2 or let's say it's about a Nuclear free Middle East? or how about a conference on joining the ICC? or a conference on nations ratifying the NPT treaty? Or a conference on banning torture? Banning home demolitions of civilians by state bulldozers? Banning illegal land grabs? Banning "targeted assassinations"?
The list is too long and so the M.O. of Israel has been to try to kill debates before they start. If that fails, and the issue moves forward to where a "conference" is held to debate it - even go beyond debate but to take action, Zionists work to discredit the effort and then lobby other nations using the reach of Jews worldwide to discredit and boycott it as well.
IF THE SKIES FALL: Middle East Politics and More.
Sunday, April 19, 2009
Saturday, April 11, 2009
Philosophy of Money
Philosophy of Money
Alla Sheptun
asheptun@fa.ru
ABSTRACT: This article is an attempt to sketch a philosophical view of money as a social phenomenon. I show that the way to understand the substance of money is to analyze its meaning as a medium of exchange in connection with its meaning as a purpose of exchange, thereby providing an investigation of its social value. This approach has been used by many of the great philosophers and economists of the past, but not today. Modern economics is a policy oriented theoretical discipline and concentrates its efforts on solving practical tasks. I hope to contribute a philosophical approach to economic research.
bluered.gif (1041 bytes)
Money is a reality, a permanent feature of our everyday lives. It gives our lives a particular rhythm, a particular «charm», a particular perception of the world and our place in it.
Money creates problems when we do not have it, and yet more problems when we do have it. But it is only an illusion that we are in control of our money: in actual fact we do not notice how subtly and intensively it exercises control over us.
Money makes us both master and slave. Our power over money is real only inasmuch as we are able to understand its power over us.
Man has sought to understand the essence of money for many centuries. Philosophers and economists, statesmen, writers, even poets have written about money. (1) Money has been lauded and cursed, it has been dreamed of and disdained. What is money - good or evil? It brings stability and instability and makes people looking for and running away from it. Money is capable of creating and destroying, of uniting and disuniting. It makes people partners and rivals and can influence the fate of individuals and whole nations. But what does money bring - freedom or dependence? People obtain money working hard and playing and spend it with joy and sadness. Man makes money, and money makes man : it forms his way of living and his way of thinking.
Money is capable of invoking the whole range of emotions. If one could bring together everything that has been written about money at various times and by various nations, one would have a gigantic multicolored canvas of human thoughts and feelings, on which bright and dark tones will alternate, but which will nevertheless retain «blank areas» of the unknown.
Money as the object of cognition enter the realm of a special branch of knowledge, economic science, which, like every other science, has its own subject matter, methods of inquiry and pursues its own goals.
Modern economic theory (economics) treats money as a «means of exchange», one designed to facilitate trade, and herein lies its «vital importance». (2) The tasks of economics are to explain how much money an economy needs and what factors influence the fluctuation of money supply and demand. (3) The tasks dictates the methods - predominantly those of quantitative analysis.
The methodology of modern economics is a matter for both philosophers and economists, and is a subject of heated debate. Many authors doubt its effectiveness (4) and object to undue enthusiasm for mathematical methods, which turn economics into a «mathematicized» version of economy. (5) This criticism is basically correct.
Economics, as a science, has practical application and selects methods which will enable to get the goals. Herein lies its strength, caused by its expediency, and its weakness as manifested in the limitations of knowledge. Economics, and monetary economics as its integral part, serve the purpose to substantiate the economic and monetary policy. But considering the importance of the analysis of money flows and market situation we should however agree that it is not enough to unravel the mystery of money and to understand its role in the life of society. For this we need a philosophical approach, we need the methods of intellectual inquiry which will help to embrace the whole picture of money as a social phenomenon. The quantitative analysis should be added with «qualitative» one. And in this sense we have every right to speak of the philosophy of money. (6)
The integral picture of money can be drawn on the basis of analysis of money not just as a means, but also as an end of exchange. As a means of exchange money has helped to develop trade, accelerate and extend the movement of goods and services, and form economic ties in the society. As an end of exchange money has exerted huge influence on the development of man himself, his purposeful activity, his attitude to work. It has altered the value orientation of man and his ideas of moral standards.
The dual role of money as a means and an end of exchange was examined by Aristotle in his writings on the state and served as a theoretical foundation to define the notion of «economy» as the art of acquiring useful goods and of «chrematistics» as the art of getting rich. Aristotle considered the first role of money to be necessary and conforming to the nature, but the second one to be the opposite - unnatural and devoid of any boundaries. (7)
The subsequent course of history has demonstrated that both of these roles of money are essential and expedient and, furthermore, represent the unity of opposites, while their inner contradiction serves as a source of social development. It was from this standpoint that K.Marx analyzed the essence of money and showed how money being an end of exchange can be transforming into capital. (8) It was from this standpoint that G.Simmel emphasized the grate influence of money on the human actions when money becomes an end. (9)
The historic mission of money consist not only in «facilitating trade» and not only in the developing of «market economy», but also in the growing of «economic man» with his peculiar value attitudes - something, what would later be described as the «spirit of capitalism». (10) Money has changed not only «the world of things» and not only the «world of people», but it also has played a definite role in changing man's inner world - his interests, ideals, aspirations and moral criteria. Money has altered the system of humans values, assigning itself a central role as a universal value.
Money is a value, but what does it consist in? It was possible to speak of the real value of money only when money existed in the form of noble metals, in its full-value form. But the transition to other forms of money - coins and notes - with only a nominal value, made money into a token, a sign, a symbol for information. Nevertheless, money remains the highest value, thanks to which it is able to serve as both a means and an end of exchange. Money's value stems not from its material form, but from the content of that social process which money mediates by its circulation and thus makes possible. (11)
Money is a thing, which, irrespective of its material or symbolical form, has its own mode of moving from one person to another and this peculiar mode of moving makes money into a means of social interaction, into a medium of communication. This is the «source of the immense value of money for society». (12)
The mechanism of social interaction by means of money can be summarized as two alternating acts: appropriation and alienation. People living in the society may appropriate the goods only by alienating money and may appropriate money by alienating goods (or labour). This is the social order for redistributing of social values and allocation of resources. What has been mine becomes someone else's and what has been someone else's becomes mine according to the ability to pay. Money serves as a means of universal exchangeability and, thank to this, as a measure of value - «measure of all things». (13)
The continuous alternation of alienation and appropriation makes market pulsation and provides the economic links between producers and consumers, that finally constitutes the economic life of society .
The continuous alternation of alienation and appropriation means a mode of human co-operation and creates the social connections of the economy - a single socio-economic organism based on the mutual dependence of each.
The continuous alternation of alienation and appropriation is the mechanism of social interaction of private interests, is the way how the individuals can realize their aims, desires and dreams - their freedom in making a choice. All these moments of self-realization of personality in exchange (14) constitutes the life of «economic man» with its quantitative and qualitative characteristics.
Money expresses the quantitative definiteness ( limits) of the possible in the actions of people. It measures the quantitative proportions of exchange and ensures that the principle of equivalence work. In this sense it is possible to say that money is «order out of chaos», the order of the «collective game» called the «market» which establishes equal rights for its participants. Money works as a means of the socio-normative regulation of the economic life.
But money also expresses the qualitative infinity ( limitless) of possible in the actions of people. Thanks to its universal value money acts as an unconditional stimulus and a driving motive for all kinds of activity, including the inhumane. It makes all work appealing, even work directed against man, and turns what ought not to be into an object of buying and selling. In this sense money brings «chaos» into the life of society, it shows how private interest can influence on the social order. Being a seduction and a temptation it works as a test of human morality.
Money fills the will of man with material strength, which can be realized through a social mechanism - market, but money remains indifferent to what that will is aimed at. This comes from sphere of reason.
Money conscientiously caters to both the destructive and the constructive actions of man, and is only a means for exercising his will and mind. But in this role money is not passive. It either creates or destroys man himself as a personality, it exerts a strong influence on the building up of his individual system of values and on the alignment of his personal priorities and goals. Everything depends on the correlation between two forces - reason and money interest - in the purposeful activity of people.
Money creates the necessity for a person to rationally substantiate his actions. Here one must agree with G.Simmel, who believed that intellect develops in parallel with the money economy. (15) Moreover, money helps develop the «social intellect» forcing society to control «the free play of market forces».
Money is a social good, «social invention», and society is responsible for its own «child». Just as once, long ago, money was created by social will, now we must use the strength of social reason in order to understand the place and role of money in the life of society and learn to control this «elemental force». This can be achieved by combining the efforts of practically oriented economic science and philosophy striving to cognize the world as a whole ( the universe).
Contemporary economic science can boast great achievements in the development of methods of controlling money flows, but many questions in theory of money remain unanswered. We must look for the essence of money not only in the regularities of market, but also in the regularities of social development. Money is both a product of civilization and an instrument of its further developing. It calls for a philosophical explanation.
The philosophy of money is not empty theorizing. The essence and role of money is a basic theoretical issue, one that has been used to contrast the «planned» and the «market» economies, socialism and capitalism. This is the key factor that determines the limits of freedom and equality of people in a society with the money economy.
The philosophy of money is the mode of the intellectual inquiry of the essence of money as a social phenomenon and its influence on the «world of things», the «world of people» and the «inner world» of the individual.
The philosophy of money can make a certain contribution to educating humanity and help people to remember that «the measure of all things» must always be the man .
Alla Sheptun
asheptun@fa.ru
ABSTRACT: This article is an attempt to sketch a philosophical view of money as a social phenomenon. I show that the way to understand the substance of money is to analyze its meaning as a medium of exchange in connection with its meaning as a purpose of exchange, thereby providing an investigation of its social value. This approach has been used by many of the great philosophers and economists of the past, but not today. Modern economics is a policy oriented theoretical discipline and concentrates its efforts on solving practical tasks. I hope to contribute a philosophical approach to economic research.
bluered.gif (1041 bytes)
Money is a reality, a permanent feature of our everyday lives. It gives our lives a particular rhythm, a particular «charm», a particular perception of the world and our place in it.
Money creates problems when we do not have it, and yet more problems when we do have it. But it is only an illusion that we are in control of our money: in actual fact we do not notice how subtly and intensively it exercises control over us.
Money makes us both master and slave. Our power over money is real only inasmuch as we are able to understand its power over us.
Man has sought to understand the essence of money for many centuries. Philosophers and economists, statesmen, writers, even poets have written about money. (1) Money has been lauded and cursed, it has been dreamed of and disdained. What is money - good or evil? It brings stability and instability and makes people looking for and running away from it. Money is capable of creating and destroying, of uniting and disuniting. It makes people partners and rivals and can influence the fate of individuals and whole nations. But what does money bring - freedom or dependence? People obtain money working hard and playing and spend it with joy and sadness. Man makes money, and money makes man : it forms his way of living and his way of thinking.
Money is capable of invoking the whole range of emotions. If one could bring together everything that has been written about money at various times and by various nations, one would have a gigantic multicolored canvas of human thoughts and feelings, on which bright and dark tones will alternate, but which will nevertheless retain «blank areas» of the unknown.
Money as the object of cognition enter the realm of a special branch of knowledge, economic science, which, like every other science, has its own subject matter, methods of inquiry and pursues its own goals.
Modern economic theory (economics) treats money as a «means of exchange», one designed to facilitate trade, and herein lies its «vital importance». (2) The tasks of economics are to explain how much money an economy needs and what factors influence the fluctuation of money supply and demand. (3) The tasks dictates the methods - predominantly those of quantitative analysis.
The methodology of modern economics is a matter for both philosophers and economists, and is a subject of heated debate. Many authors doubt its effectiveness (4) and object to undue enthusiasm for mathematical methods, which turn economics into a «mathematicized» version of economy. (5) This criticism is basically correct.
Economics, as a science, has practical application and selects methods which will enable to get the goals. Herein lies its strength, caused by its expediency, and its weakness as manifested in the limitations of knowledge. Economics, and monetary economics as its integral part, serve the purpose to substantiate the economic and monetary policy. But considering the importance of the analysis of money flows and market situation we should however agree that it is not enough to unravel the mystery of money and to understand its role in the life of society. For this we need a philosophical approach, we need the methods of intellectual inquiry which will help to embrace the whole picture of money as a social phenomenon. The quantitative analysis should be added with «qualitative» one. And in this sense we have every right to speak of the philosophy of money. (6)
The integral picture of money can be drawn on the basis of analysis of money not just as a means, but also as an end of exchange. As a means of exchange money has helped to develop trade, accelerate and extend the movement of goods and services, and form economic ties in the society. As an end of exchange money has exerted huge influence on the development of man himself, his purposeful activity, his attitude to work. It has altered the value orientation of man and his ideas of moral standards.
The dual role of money as a means and an end of exchange was examined by Aristotle in his writings on the state and served as a theoretical foundation to define the notion of «economy» as the art of acquiring useful goods and of «chrematistics» as the art of getting rich. Aristotle considered the first role of money to be necessary and conforming to the nature, but the second one to be the opposite - unnatural and devoid of any boundaries. (7)
The subsequent course of history has demonstrated that both of these roles of money are essential and expedient and, furthermore, represent the unity of opposites, while their inner contradiction serves as a source of social development. It was from this standpoint that K.Marx analyzed the essence of money and showed how money being an end of exchange can be transforming into capital. (8) It was from this standpoint that G.Simmel emphasized the grate influence of money on the human actions when money becomes an end. (9)
The historic mission of money consist not only in «facilitating trade» and not only in the developing of «market economy», but also in the growing of «economic man» with his peculiar value attitudes - something, what would later be described as the «spirit of capitalism». (10) Money has changed not only «the world of things» and not only the «world of people», but it also has played a definite role in changing man's inner world - his interests, ideals, aspirations and moral criteria. Money has altered the system of humans values, assigning itself a central role as a universal value.
Money is a value, but what does it consist in? It was possible to speak of the real value of money only when money existed in the form of noble metals, in its full-value form. But the transition to other forms of money - coins and notes - with only a nominal value, made money into a token, a sign, a symbol for information. Nevertheless, money remains the highest value, thanks to which it is able to serve as both a means and an end of exchange. Money's value stems not from its material form, but from the content of that social process which money mediates by its circulation and thus makes possible. (11)
Money is a thing, which, irrespective of its material or symbolical form, has its own mode of moving from one person to another and this peculiar mode of moving makes money into a means of social interaction, into a medium of communication. This is the «source of the immense value of money for society». (12)
The mechanism of social interaction by means of money can be summarized as two alternating acts: appropriation and alienation. People living in the society may appropriate the goods only by alienating money and may appropriate money by alienating goods (or labour). This is the social order for redistributing of social values and allocation of resources. What has been mine becomes someone else's and what has been someone else's becomes mine according to the ability to pay. Money serves as a means of universal exchangeability and, thank to this, as a measure of value - «measure of all things». (13)
The continuous alternation of alienation and appropriation makes market pulsation and provides the economic links between producers and consumers, that finally constitutes the economic life of society .
The continuous alternation of alienation and appropriation means a mode of human co-operation and creates the social connections of the economy - a single socio-economic organism based on the mutual dependence of each.
The continuous alternation of alienation and appropriation is the mechanism of social interaction of private interests, is the way how the individuals can realize their aims, desires and dreams - their freedom in making a choice. All these moments of self-realization of personality in exchange (14) constitutes the life of «economic man» with its quantitative and qualitative characteristics.
Money expresses the quantitative definiteness ( limits) of the possible in the actions of people. It measures the quantitative proportions of exchange and ensures that the principle of equivalence work. In this sense it is possible to say that money is «order out of chaos», the order of the «collective game» called the «market» which establishes equal rights for its participants. Money works as a means of the socio-normative regulation of the economic life.
But money also expresses the qualitative infinity ( limitless) of possible in the actions of people. Thanks to its universal value money acts as an unconditional stimulus and a driving motive for all kinds of activity, including the inhumane. It makes all work appealing, even work directed against man, and turns what ought not to be into an object of buying and selling. In this sense money brings «chaos» into the life of society, it shows how private interest can influence on the social order. Being a seduction and a temptation it works as a test of human morality.
Money fills the will of man with material strength, which can be realized through a social mechanism - market, but money remains indifferent to what that will is aimed at. This comes from sphere of reason.
Money conscientiously caters to both the destructive and the constructive actions of man, and is only a means for exercising his will and mind. But in this role money is not passive. It either creates or destroys man himself as a personality, it exerts a strong influence on the building up of his individual system of values and on the alignment of his personal priorities and goals. Everything depends on the correlation between two forces - reason and money interest - in the purposeful activity of people.
Money creates the necessity for a person to rationally substantiate his actions. Here one must agree with G.Simmel, who believed that intellect develops in parallel with the money economy. (15) Moreover, money helps develop the «social intellect» forcing society to control «the free play of market forces».
Money is a social good, «social invention», and society is responsible for its own «child». Just as once, long ago, money was created by social will, now we must use the strength of social reason in order to understand the place and role of money in the life of society and learn to control this «elemental force». This can be achieved by combining the efforts of practically oriented economic science and philosophy striving to cognize the world as a whole ( the universe).
Contemporary economic science can boast great achievements in the development of methods of controlling money flows, but many questions in theory of money remain unanswered. We must look for the essence of money not only in the regularities of market, but also in the regularities of social development. Money is both a product of civilization and an instrument of its further developing. It calls for a philosophical explanation.
The philosophy of money is not empty theorizing. The essence and role of money is a basic theoretical issue, one that has been used to contrast the «planned» and the «market» economies, socialism and capitalism. This is the key factor that determines the limits of freedom and equality of people in a society with the money economy.
The philosophy of money is the mode of the intellectual inquiry of the essence of money as a social phenomenon and its influence on the «world of things», the «world of people» and the «inner world» of the individual.
The philosophy of money can make a certain contribution to educating humanity and help people to remember that «the measure of all things» must always be the man .
Friday, March 27, 2009
Obama 60 days in office
It appears the thundering iceberg crash might have been averted but too early to tell if Obama can continue to steer this over-sized ship from perilous waters. It seems on the economic front, the worst is behind us - or is it? The commercial sector is starting to tumble more rapidly - noticing a spike in foreclosures. I don't think in that area we have seen the worst but overall if one looks at recent moves in technology with the semi-conductor sector indicating a possible resurgence in technology spending? Housing most likely has bottomed. It's important to note the housing crises was limited to certain geographical areas of the country and not all states. The states, mostly Southern states, that didn't see real estate market evaluations go through the roof will be the first to show signs of recovery - their decline wasn't as painful as places like California,Nevada or Arizona - to name a few. Therefore, my view is housing sector will see a robust upswing in new home sales giving the economy a much needed kick start and by the end of 2009 see that reflected in the unemployment rate and GDP.
Now back to Obama, in analyzing his political moves to date, I think the charge by the Republicans that Obama is using "fear" and the "economic crises" to push a hidden agenda of "broad government" and some weren't as charitable and said Obama is "bringing socialism" is interesting. Now where have we heard those words before? Wasn't it democrats who were accusing Bush and Republicans of using "fear" and "war on terror" to expand the domestic and global reach of government - with surveillance and detentions - and so my view is both are right in accusing the other of over reaching. We definitely saw Bush and Cheney use 9-11 to grant them exclusive powers. If Obama is using this playbook in getting his broader economic agenda through Congress - if heaven forbids he does overreach and gets universal health care? How bad will it be if he overreaches and caps CEO salaries? I say let's hope Obama is that smart of a politician to use whatever "stunt" needed to get his agenda - which I happen to agree with in general - although very disappointed with a lot he did - but in the bigger scheme of things I say it would be a greater disappointment if he failed to roll back the Republican deregulation debacle on Wall Street and broader issues of corporate governance.
What we are seeing is politics. The impulse to overreach and use events to rile the masses to favor ones agenda is almost inevitable. Bush used up his political capital post 9-11 on foreign adventures. Let's hope Obama stays on the course that has him overreaching in areas of helping the average person and not just corporations.
Now back to Obama, in analyzing his political moves to date, I think the charge by the Republicans that Obama is using "fear" and the "economic crises" to push a hidden agenda of "broad government" and some weren't as charitable and said Obama is "bringing socialism" is interesting. Now where have we heard those words before? Wasn't it democrats who were accusing Bush and Republicans of using "fear" and "war on terror" to expand the domestic and global reach of government - with surveillance and detentions - and so my view is both are right in accusing the other of over reaching. We definitely saw Bush and Cheney use 9-11 to grant them exclusive powers. If Obama is using this playbook in getting his broader economic agenda through Congress - if heaven forbids he does overreach and gets universal health care? How bad will it be if he overreaches and caps CEO salaries? I say let's hope Obama is that smart of a politician to use whatever "stunt" needed to get his agenda - which I happen to agree with in general - although very disappointed with a lot he did - but in the bigger scheme of things I say it would be a greater disappointment if he failed to roll back the Republican deregulation debacle on Wall Street and broader issues of corporate governance.
What we are seeing is politics. The impulse to overreach and use events to rile the masses to favor ones agenda is almost inevitable. Bush used up his political capital post 9-11 on foreign adventures. Let's hope Obama stays on the course that has him overreaching in areas of helping the average person and not just corporations.
Sunday, March 22, 2009
No justice, No peace
Israeli's are the last people on earth to bemoan the fact their oppressed second class citizens get all riled up once in a while - and after the Gaza slaughter, just be glad the Gazans are Arabs and not eastern Europeans or heaven forbid Russians.
I don't understand what makes Israeli's think they are the only arbiters of when a war starts and ends. Zionists started this conflict and apparently are unable to close the deal.
Who is to blame for such incompetence? It's not like Israel is the only nation with a minority to contend with, all nations have minorities but not all engage in apartheid. Just be lucky the Palestinians are a docile peace loving God fearing people( with plenty of flaws). The Arab-Israeli's and their brothers across the green-line suffered injustices for decades that no other people
would tolerate for a minute. The Gaza slaughter, the genocidal siege and wall are why there is a sci-fi channel.
I don't understand what makes Israeli's think they are the only arbiters of when a war starts and ends. Zionists started this conflict and apparently are unable to close the deal.
Who is to blame for such incompetence? It's not like Israel is the only nation with a minority to contend with, all nations have minorities but not all engage in apartheid. Just be lucky the Palestinians are a docile peace loving God fearing people( with plenty of flaws). The Arab-Israeli's and their brothers across the green-line suffered injustices for decades that no other people
would tolerate for a minute. The Gaza slaughter, the genocidal siege and wall are why there is a sci-fi channel.
Thursday, March 19, 2009
Dominican Republic
I just returned from a trip to Punta Cana in the Dominican Republic. Not sure what I expected but I have to confess I had an amazing time. I wanted to blog about something other than doom and gloom - which sadly is the Palestinian/Israel conflict in a nutshell. As for Punta Cana, it's truly amazing in terms of natural beauty - clearly some of it was man made - but nevertheless, these man made resorts are paradise on earth. It was simply breathtaking to say the least, beautiful beaches, palm trees everywhere and tropical forest-like landscaping throughout - not to mention since these are all inclusive resorts, food and drinks galore at your finger tips. It was very impressive and interesting to note this man made paradise is situated in one of the poorest places on earth - aside from the Dominican Republic being poor, Haiti is right next door. This is the tale of two cities( or two countries) taken to extreme. All the resorts are basically walled off and entry into them is secured by guards. I had the pleasure of staying at the Paradisus Hotel resort (go figure)and the name is not an exaggeration. My wife and I had a wonderful time but while she didn't seem to mind baking in the sun day after day, I must confess after a week of fun in the sun, drinking ( dozens of bars 24/7 and my favorite those in the pool), eating ( 24/7 buffet), fishing, boating and indulging in ridiculous excess, I got tired of it around day 5. So what is a guy to do when he is tired of living in paradise?
I started to think heaven might be boring after all, god knows all the interesting people won't be there. On a more serious note, as it seems being a skeptic is my natural state, but as I was saying about the poverty there, my first thoughts were these resorts are most likely foreign owned. Granted they employ many natives and I'm sure these people employed there are grateful for their jobs and tips that come with it, I still couldn't help but wonder who owned these resorts. How is it such a magnificent place could have such a high level of impoverishment. These questions will not be answered here but it's something I thought about. There are more than economic issues at play, and besides issues of governance, and beyond beautiful natural landscape what other natural resources exist there? The poverty was so glaring on the way to the resorts that it's hard to ignore commenting on it. We didn't venture outside the resort the entire time we were there. I have a friend who is from DR and he told me before leaving about the high crime rate - and all the problems and risks if one ventures out into town on their own. Since I didn't venture out - and besides issues of crime, the reasoning was what was there to see in San Domingo or other cities worth the 4 hour trip from our location in paradise. Therefore, I can't tell anyone if crime is bad or what the Dominican Republic is like, as my stay was limited to staying inside the resort hotel all the time. I did venture to other resorts where they had stores to do some shopping - but this is the first trip I ever went into where I didn't get to travel beyond my hotel. No doubt, I was influenced greatly by what my friend told me about the place and from what I read online. You actually read interesting stuff on this topic on the web. Expats will argue racism is behind the alarmist view of DR. No one likes to be a victim of crime, and when you read of tourists being kidnapped for ransom or worse, not sure it's a black and white matter. Nevertheless, I do have some regret to succumbing to this kind of fear-mongering but then again, we both arrived home safely, not sure if I should dwell on it too much. It is odd to travel to a foreign destination and all you see are mostly Americans. To put it in a different way, it's odd to travel to a country that is black and see only white people(aside from employees there).
Not sure where I'm going with this post, was going to talk about my fishing trip and somehow it got political. Maybe I should stick to politics!
I started to think heaven might be boring after all, god knows all the interesting people won't be there. On a more serious note, as it seems being a skeptic is my natural state, but as I was saying about the poverty there, my first thoughts were these resorts are most likely foreign owned. Granted they employ many natives and I'm sure these people employed there are grateful for their jobs and tips that come with it, I still couldn't help but wonder who owned these resorts. How is it such a magnificent place could have such a high level of impoverishment. These questions will not be answered here but it's something I thought about. There are more than economic issues at play, and besides issues of governance, and beyond beautiful natural landscape what other natural resources exist there? The poverty was so glaring on the way to the resorts that it's hard to ignore commenting on it. We didn't venture outside the resort the entire time we were there. I have a friend who is from DR and he told me before leaving about the high crime rate - and all the problems and risks if one ventures out into town on their own. Since I didn't venture out - and besides issues of crime, the reasoning was what was there to see in San Domingo or other cities worth the 4 hour trip from our location in paradise. Therefore, I can't tell anyone if crime is bad or what the Dominican Republic is like, as my stay was limited to staying inside the resort hotel all the time. I did venture to other resorts where they had stores to do some shopping - but this is the first trip I ever went into where I didn't get to travel beyond my hotel. No doubt, I was influenced greatly by what my friend told me about the place and from what I read online. You actually read interesting stuff on this topic on the web. Expats will argue racism is behind the alarmist view of DR. No one likes to be a victim of crime, and when you read of tourists being kidnapped for ransom or worse, not sure it's a black and white matter. Nevertheless, I do have some regret to succumbing to this kind of fear-mongering but then again, we both arrived home safely, not sure if I should dwell on it too much. It is odd to travel to a foreign destination and all you see are mostly Americans. To put it in a different way, it's odd to travel to a country that is black and see only white people(aside from employees there).
Not sure where I'm going with this post, was going to talk about my fishing trip and somehow it got political. Maybe I should stick to politics!
Wednesday, January 7, 2009
More death and destruction in Gaza
I'm not sure how I can put to words what I feel at the moment. I just saw on Al-Jazeera the horror of dead bodies laying everywhere on the street after Israel bombed a UN school filled with children and innocent civilians. They thought this place would be a safe shelter from the daily bombardment and sadly once again we see the savage cruelty of the Zionist menace that respects no safe haven for anyone. It was a horrific scene of dead babies, women and men - young and old. Blood everywhere and body parts galore filled the street as people wailing and weeping over lost loved ones cried out to the heavens in abject hysteria. I don't know what to say, anger is hardly adequate, deep sadness for sure, horror obviously, but more than that there was a deep gut wrenching sickening feeling that defies explanation. It's as though the world came to an end and time stood still to defy the laws of nature. As my mind raced with nothingness and emotions overwhelmed with numbness, I didn't want to believe what I was seeing. My anger towards the Israeli's seemed to know no bound. What is to be said when such horrific scenes have been occurring with consistent regularity since Israel was created. The list of massacres by the Israeli's against the Palestinians is too long to mention. I can see no answer that leaves Israel intact. This latest brutal war crime makes the case for the total dismantlement of this rogue regime by any means necessary. This kind of butchery and barbarism has gone on for too long and Palestinians have suffered too great. Israel has gone beyond a terrorist state, a pariah state and a rogue regime, Israel is man made disaster waiting to happen. We can no longer ignore the long record of war crimes perpetuated by Zionists. These disasters unfolding before our eyes are man made - the refuge catastrophe that has befallen the Palestinians - their perpetual oppression and torment and everything from starving, imprisoning, terrorizing and slaughtering them seems to pass the kosher test in Zion.
Israel forfeited it's very existence years ago and these ongoing crimes only strengthen the case for it's total dismantlement. There can be no doubt now - not that there ever was in my view - but these latest massacres and daily onslaught makes this an open and shut case that no sane person in good conscience can deny.
Israel forfeited it's very existence years ago and these ongoing crimes only strengthen the case for it's total dismantlement. There can be no doubt now - not that there ever was in my view - but these latest massacres and daily onslaught makes this an open and shut case that no sane person in good conscience can deny.
Friday, January 2, 2009
Kicking the can down the street
It's a new year and sadly not much has changed with developments on ground in Gaza. Israel continues to bomb at will with impunity - and with the worlds deafening silence if not bold complicity in certain parts. I'm of course referring to Egypt,Jordan,Saudi Arabia and the EU. All seem to know their marching orders and no one has disappointed yet. On the political front in America it seems Bush has parroted his routine line of "we support Israel" and basically kicked the can down for Obama to deal with. Rice is not going anywhere to try to bring about a ceasefire. There is no real effort to pressure Israel to do anything and every one is content to watch Palestinians continue to get slaughtered. Obama for his part has remained shockingly silent through all of this - in essence kicking the can back to Bush saying "there is only one President" at a time. This would be comical if not for the fact people are getting killed and slaughtered by an unmerciful blitzkrieg style attack. The Arab world once again has been shamed to levels that should make every Arab with an ounce of dignity cringe at the leadership that exists today. I can't think of anything good to say about Egypt,Jordan or Saudi Arabia - and Syria for that matter. The anger from what I have been able to discern at the street level in these countries appears to be boiling over but not sure how it will manifest itself in the coming days, weeks or months ahead. These regimes are tenacious when it comes to clamping down on descent. Already there are reports Mubarak has been arresting Islamists and other activists who want to demonstrate publicly against Israeli action. In Saudi Arabia, there are similar reports - authorities have been arresting Imams who issued Fatwas against Egypt for not opening the Rafah crossing. In Jordan, head of security has been replaced and government there is clamping down on public protests against Israel by arresting dozens. In Palestine, in Ramallah, Abbas thugs were using batons against marchers who came out to show support for Hamas. The clamp down there and elsewhere in the Arab world is intensifying. I don't know if these efforts by these puppet regimes will succeed but history has not been kind to those who bet on their imminent downfall. As I said, these regimes are ruthless and will tenaciously hold on to power no matter what - and with the help of CIA and Mossad - not sure we can write them off just yet. Having said that, I do believe this time around something different is percolating beneath the surface on the Arab street. It's one thing in the past to be viewed as impotent against Israeli crimes - remain silent as Zionists massacre fellow Arabs and Muslims - but this time around the Arab regimes are viewed as aiding the Zionist enemy, complicit and working hand in hand with the likes of OBL and company (Olmert,Barack and Livni) and this factor does present a new dimension that before wasn't quite crystallized as it is now. Arabs know their leaders are corrupt stooges for imperial powers - doing their bidding - but never before has it been exposed so blatantly as the case with Egypt unwilling to open the Rafah border to aid or to allow Palestiniians out of harms way. This could be the straw that broke the camels back - and I'm hoping that is the case - but only time will tell.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)