Skip to content

Archive

Tag: writer
Daniel Clement Dennett the 71 year old American philosopher, writer and cognitive scientist whose research centers on the philosophy of mind, evolutionary biology and cognitive science has published an extract from his new book in The Guardian titled ‘Daniel Dennett's seven tools for thinking’, revealing some of the lessons life has taught him. “1 USE YOUR MISTAKES - We have all heard the forlorn refrain: "Well, it seemed like a good idea at the time!" This phrase has come to stand for the rueful reflection of an idiot, a sign of stupidity, but in fact we should appreciate it as a pillar of wisdom… 2 RESPECT YOUR OPPONENT - Just how charitable are you supposed to be when criticising the views of an opponent? If there are obvious contradictions in the opponent's case, then you should point them out, forcefully. If there are somewhat hidden contradictions, you should carefully expose them to view – and then dump on them… 3 THE "SURELY" KLAXON - When you're reading or skimming argumentative essays, especially by philosophers, here is a quick trick that may save you much time and effort, especially in this age of simple searching by computer: look for "surely" in the document and check each occurrence. Not always, not even most of the time, but often the word "surely" is as good as a blinking light locating a weak point in the argument… 4 ANSWER RHETORICAL QUESTIONS - Just as you should keep a sharp eye out for "surely", you should develop a sensitivity for rhetorical questions in any argument or polemic. Why? Because, like the use of "surely", they represent an author's eagerness to take a short cut… 5 EMPLOY OCCAM'S RAZOR -  The idea is straightforward: don't concoct a complicated, extravagant theory if you've got a simpler one (containing fewer ingredients, fewer entities) that handles the phenomenon just as well... 6 DON'T WASTE YOUR TIME ON RUBBISH - Sturgeon's law is usually expressed thus: 90% of everything is crap. So 90% of experiments in molecular biology, 90% of poetry, 90% of philosophy books, 90% of peer-reviewed articles in mathematics – and so forth – is crap... 7 BEWARE OF DEEPITIES - A deepity …is a proposition that seems both important and true – and profound – but that achieves this effect by being ambiguous. On one reading, it is manifestly false, but it would be earth-shaking if it were true; on the other reading, it is true but trivial…”  Inspired by Daniel Dennett, The Guardian ow.ly/lMAiz Image source David Orban ow.ly/lMAe3 Revealing lessons life has taught him (June 27 2013)

 

Daniel Clement Dennett the 71 year old American philosopher, writer and cognitive scientist whose research centers on the philosophy of mind, evolutionary biology and cognitive science has published an extract from his new book in The Guardian titled ‘Daniel Dennett’s seven tools for thinking’, revealing some of the lessons life has taught him. “1 USE YOUR MISTAKES – We have all heard the forlorn refrain: “Well, it seemed like a good idea at the time!” This phrase has come to stand for the rueful reflection of an idiot, a sign of stupidity, but in fact we should appreciate it as a pillar of wisdom… 2 RESPECT YOUR OPPONENT – Just how charitable are you supposed to be when criticising the views of an opponent? If there are obvious contradictions in the opponent’s case, then you should point them out, forcefully. If there are somewhat hidden contradictions, you should carefully expose them to view – and then dump on them… 3 THE “SURELY” KLAXON – When you’re reading or skimming argumentative essays, especially by philosophers, here is a quick trick that may save you much time and effort, especially in this age of simple searching by computer: look for “surely” in the document and check each occurrence. Not always, not even most of the time, but often the word “surely” is as good as a blinking light locating a weak point in the argument… 4 ANSWER RHETORICAL QUESTIONS – Just as you should keep a sharp eye out for “surely”, you should develop a sensitivity for rhetorical questions in any argument or polemic. Why? Because, like the use of “surely”, they represent an author’s eagerness to take a short cut… 5 EMPLOY OCCAM’S RAZOR –  The idea is straightforward: don’t concoct a complicated, extravagant theory if you’ve got a simpler one (containing fewer ingredients, fewer entities) that handles the phenomenon just as well… 6 DON’T WASTE YOUR TIME ON RUBBISH – Sturgeon’s law is usually expressed thus: 90% of everything is crap. So 90% of experiments in molecular biology, 90% of poetry, 90% of philosophy books, 90% of peer-reviewed articles in mathematics – and so forth – is crap… 7 BEWARE OF DEEPITIES – A deepity …is a proposition that seems both important and true – and profound – but that achieves this effect by being ambiguous. On one reading, it is manifestly false, but it would be earth-shaking if it were true; on the other reading, it is true but trivial…”

 

Inspired by Daniel Dennett, The Guardian ow.ly/lMAiz Image source David Orban ow.ly/lMAe3

Philip Cary Plait the 48 year old American Astronomer known as ‘The Bad Astronomer’ skeptic, writer and popular science blogger has published an article on Slate titled ‘Why is Our Government Attacking Science?’. In the article Plait states “What the hell is going on with my government? I’m used to attacks on science; they’ve been endemic for years now. Antivaxxers, global warming deniers, creationists, what have you. And I’ve even gotten used to, at some level, egregiously antiscience rhetoric and machinations from government officials. But over the past few days and weeks things seem to have gone to 11. I’m reeling from the absolute unfettered nonsense and sheer manipulation going on by our elected officials, and I’ll be honest: It’s scary. To start, Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas), who is a global warming denier, by the way, is the head of the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology. He has recently decided that the National Science Foundation—a globally respected agency of scientific research and investigation—should no longer use peer review to fund grants. Instead it should essentially get political permission for which research to fund. This is not a joke. Smith wants politics to trump science at the National Science Foundation. This prompted a brilliantly indignant letter from Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-Texas), who calls this idea “destructive” to science. She’s right. What Smith is doing strongly reminds me of Lysenkoism, when the Soviet government suppressed science on genetics and evolution that didn’t toe the party line. In these attacks on the NSF, a few lines of research have been highlighted that sound silly out of context. We’ve seen this before from those on the far right who attack science… Those government officials may be the ones doing all these awful things, but we’re the ones who, in the end, decide if they can even be in the position to make these attacks. And we need to do something about it.”  Inspired by Phil Plait, Slate ow.ly/l5tWE Image source Facebook ow.ly/l5u49 Why is our government attacking science? (June 7 2013)

 

Philip Cary Plait the 48 year old American Astronomer known as ‘The Bad Astronomer’ skeptic, writer and popular science blogger has published an article on Slate titled ‘Why is Our Government Attacking Science?’. In the article Plait states “What the hell is going on with my government? I’m used to attacks on science; they’ve been endemic for years now. Antivaxxers, global warming deniers, creationists, what have you. And I’ve even gotten used to, at some level, egregiously antiscience rhetoric and machinations from government officials. But over the past few days and weeks things seem to have gone to 11. I’m reeling from the absolute unfettered nonsense and sheer manipulation going on by our elected officials, and I’ll be honest: It’s scary. To start, Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas), who is a global warming denier, by the way, is the head of the House Committee on Science, Space, and Technology. He has recently decided that the National Science Foundation—a globally respected agency of scientific research and investigation—should no longer use peer review to fund grants. Instead it should essentially get political permission for which research to fund. This is not a joke. Smith wants politics to trump science at the National Science Foundation. This prompted a brilliantly indignant letter from Rep. Eddie Bernice Johnson (D-Texas), who calls this idea “destructive” to science. She’s right. What Smith is doing strongly reminds me of Lysenkoism, when the Soviet government suppressed science on genetics and evolution that didn’t toe the party line. In these attacks on the NSF, a few lines of research have been highlighted that sound silly out of context. We’ve seen this before from those on the far right who attack science… Those government officials may be the ones doing all these awful things, but we’re the ones who, in the end, decide if they can even be in the position to make these attacks. And we need to do something about it.”

 

Inspired by Phil Plait, Slate ow.ly/l5tWE Image source Facebook ow.ly/l5u49

Daniel Campbell Blight the British writer and curator with a specific interest in the history and theory of photography, and cultural media studies, has published an article in the Guardian titled ‘Writing an artist statement? First ask yourself these four questions’. Blight states “…You can find preposterously complex, jargon-laden artist statements on the websites of galleries and pop-up project spaces all over the English-speaking world. If you don't believe me, join the e-flux mailing list. I regularly visit such exhibition spaces in London and beyond, and read – with total, dulling indifference – the often pompous ramblings of what Alix Rule and David Levine call International Art English. This is a dialect of the privileged; the elite university educated. If you can't write it effectively, you're not part of the art world. If you're already inside but don't understand it, you're not allowed to admit it, or ask for further explanation. This kind of rhetoric relies on everyone participating without question. To speak up would mean dissolving the space between inside and outside: quite literally, the growing boundary between the art world and the rest of society. …The funny thing is, the chat you actually hear at a gallery opening rarely uses this language. …The vocabulary of artspeak is not without meaning, but it has a specific place. Academia is only one part of the art world. My dislike is not for the language of artspeak, more the effect it has on the art industry in its ability to engage with a wider audience. Not to mention what such language does to the reputation of writing in the arts, as well as the wider practice of writing itself. Writing about your work should be an open and compelling activity, not a labyrinthine chore.”  Inspired by Daniel Blight, The Guardian ow.ly/kuGnt Image source Twitter ow.ly/kuFEd Complex jargon-laden artist statements (May 22 2013)

 

Daniel Campbell Blight the British writer and curator with a specific interest in the history and theory of photography, and cultural media studies, has published an article in the Guardian titled ‘Writing an artist statement? First ask yourself these four questions’. Blight states “…You can find preposterously complex, jargon-laden artist statements on the websites of galleries and pop-up project spaces all over the English-speaking world. If you don’t believe me, join the e-flux mailing list. I regularly visit such exhibition spaces in London and beyond, and read – with total, dulling indifference – the often pompous ramblings of what Alix Rule and David Levine call International Art English. This is a dialect of the privileged; the elite university educated. If you can’t write it effectively, you’re not part of the art world. If you’re already inside but don’t understand it, you’re not allowed to admit it, or ask for further explanation. This kind of rhetoric relies on everyone participating without question. To speak up would mean dissolving the space between inside and outside: quite literally, the growing boundary between the art world and the rest of society. …The funny thing is, the chat you actually hear at a gallery opening rarely uses this language. …The vocabulary of artspeak is not without meaning, but it has a specific place. Academia is only one part of the art world. My dislike is not for the language of artspeak, more the effect it has on the art industry in its ability to engage with a wider audience. Not to mention what such language does to the reputation of writing in the arts, as well as the wider practice of writing itself. Writing about your work should be an open and compelling activity, not a labyrinthine chore.”

 

Inspired by Daniel Blight, The Guardian ow.ly/kuGnt Image source Twitter ow.ly/kuFEd

Liz Alderman the American Paris based writer on European economics, finance and business has published an article in the New York Times titled ‘More Children in Greece Are Going Hungry’ in which she states “The Greek economy is in free fall, having shrunk by 20 percent in the past five years. The unemployment rate is more than 27 percent, the highest in Europe, and 6 of 10 job seekers say they have not worked in more than a year. Those dry statistics are reshaping the lives of Greek families with children, more of whom are arriving at schools hungry or underfed, even malnourished, according to private groups and the government itself. Last year, an estimated 10 percent of Greek elementary and middle school students suffered from what public health professionals call “food insecurity,” meaning they faced hunger or the risk of it, said Dr. Athena Linos, a professor at the University of Athens Medical School who also heads a food assistance program at Prolepsis, a nongovernmental public health group that has studied the situation. “When it comes to food insecurity, Greece has now fallen to the level of some African countries,” she said. Unlike those in the United States, Greek schools do not offer subsidized cafeteria lunches. Students bring their own food or buy items from a canteen. The cost has become insurmountable for some families with little or no income. Their troubles have been compounded by new austerity measures demanded by Greece’s creditors, including higher electricity taxes and cuts in subsidies for large families. As a result, parents without work are seeing their savings and benefits rapidly disappear. …A 2012 Unicef report showed that among the poorest Greek households with children, more than 26 percent had an “economically weak diet.” The phenomenon has hit immigrants hardest but is spreading quickly among Greeks in urban areas where one or both parents are effectively permanently unemployed…”  Inspired by Liz Alderman, New York Times ow.ly/kuDf7 Image source Facebook ow.ly/kuDeq Children in Greece Are Going Hungry (May 18 2013)

 

Liz Alderman the American Paris based writer on European economics, finance and business has published an article in the New York Times titled ‘More Children in Greece Are Going Hungry’ in which she states “The Greek economy is in free fall, having shrunk by 20 percent in the past five years. The unemployment rate is more than 27 percent, the highest in Europe, and 6 of 10 job seekers say they have not worked in more than a year. Those dry statistics are reshaping the lives of Greek families with children, more of whom are arriving at schools hungry or underfed, even malnourished, according to private groups and the government itself. Last year, an estimated 10 percent of Greek elementary and middle school students suffered from what public health professionals call “food insecurity,” meaning they faced hunger or the risk of it, said Dr. Athena Linos, a professor at the University of Athens Medical School who also heads a food assistance program at Prolepsis, a nongovernmental public health group that has studied the situation. “When it comes to food insecurity, Greece has now fallen to the level of some African countries,” she said. Unlike those in the United States, Greek schools do not offer subsidized cafeteria lunches. Students bring their own food or buy items from a canteen. The cost has become insurmountable for some families with little or no income. Their troubles have been compounded by new austerity measures demanded by Greece’s creditors, including higher electricity taxes and cuts in subsidies for large families. As a result, parents without work are seeing their savings and benefits rapidly disappear. …A 2012 Unicef report showed that among the poorest Greek households with children, more than 26 percent had an “economically weak diet.” The phenomenon has hit immigrants hardest but is spreading quickly among Greeks in urban areas where one or both parents are effectively permanently unemployed…”

 

Inspired by Liz Alderman, New York Times ow.ly/kuDf7 Image source Facebook ow.ly/kuDeq

Dominique Moisi the 66 year old French political scientist and writer, co-founder and senior advisor of the Paris-based Institut Français des Relations Internationales (IFRI), has published an article on the Project Syndicate titled ‘France’s German Mirror’. Moisi states “…Berlin is a construction site that has managed to transform its multiple pasts into positive energy. …That positive energy contrasts starkly with the decadent beauty of Paris, a city that is on a path of “museification.” Of course, if you can afford to live there, Paris remains a great place to be. But Berlin is a better place to work, even if what you do is very poorly paid. …Thanks to its moderate housing costs, Berlin has not become, like Paris, a ghetto for the rich. Unlike the French, who are handicapped by the high cost of housing, Germans’ purchasing power is more harmoniously distributed, creating more room for household consumption to contribute to economic growth. Germany’s positive energy is, of course, the result of success translated into confidence, which Chancellor Angela Merkel incarnates with strength and simplicity. Merkel has changed profoundly while in office. Five years ago, she did not exude the natural authority that she now possesses. Today, like Pope Francis, she is clearly at ease with herself. Has there been a French president since François Mitterrand who was truly a match for a German chancellor? If France has replaced Germany as “the sick man of Europe,” it is for political reasons, above all: vision, courage, and strength on the northern side of the Rhine, and vacillation, inertia, and weakness on the southern. …France’s current direction is a source of deep concern in Germany, whose evolution should be seen in France as a source of inspiration – an example to be emulated, even if the country must not fall into self-flagellation. …France today can and should learn from Germany.”  Inspired by Dominique Moisi, Project Syndicate ow.ly/jBdO4 Image source Voltairenet ow.ly/jBdJt France can and should learn from Germany (April 24 2013)

 

Dominique Moisi the 66 year old French political scientist and writer, co-founder and senior advisor of the Paris-based Institut Français des Relations Internationales (IFRI), has published an article on the Project Syndicate titled ‘France’s German Mirror’. Moisi states “…Berlin is a construction site that has managed to transform its multiple pasts into positive energy. …That positive energy contrasts starkly with the decadent beauty of Paris, a city that is on a path of “museification.” Of course, if you can afford to live there, Paris remains a great place to be. But Berlin is a better place to work, even if what you do is very poorly paid. …Thanks to its moderate housing costs, Berlin has not become, like Paris, a ghetto for the rich. Unlike the French, who are handicapped by the high cost of housing, Germans’ purchasing power is more harmoniously distributed, creating more room for household consumption to contribute to economic growth. Germany’s positive energy is, of course, the result of success translated into confidence, which Chancellor Angela Merkel incarnates with strength and simplicity. Merkel has changed profoundly while in office. Five years ago, she did not exude the natural authority that she now possesses. Today, like Pope Francis, she is clearly at ease with herself. Has there been a French president since François Mitterrand who was truly a match for a German chancellor? If France has replaced Germany as “the sick man of Europe,” it is for political reasons, above all: vision, courage, and strength on the northern side of the Rhine, and vacillation, inertia, and weakness on the southern. …France’s current direction is a source of deep concern in Germany, whose evolution should be seen in France as a source of inspiration – an example to be emulated, even if the country must not fall into self-flagellation. …France today can and should learn from Germany.”

 

Inspired by Dominique Moisi, Project Syndicate ow.ly/jBdO4 Image source Voltairenet ow.ly/jBdJt

There is no such thing as empty space (April 23 2013) There is no such thing as empty space (April 23 2013)

 

Esther Inglis-Arkell the American physics writer blogging about what makes things explode has published an article on io9 titled ‘There is no such thing as emptiness. There is only quantum foam’. Inglis-Arkell states “According to some scientists, there is no such thing as empty space. What we have instead is called “quantum foam.” We can’t see it, but we just might be able to sense it. The guy who came up with the term “quantum foam” is John Wheeler. In the “shut up and calculate” era of post-World War II era, he pushed both students and the world at large to keep thinking about Einstein’s theory of relativity and its consequences – so you know he was cool. He also had the middle name of Archibald – so you know he knew a thing or two about cool names. And so it’s natural that he used term “quantum foam” to describe one of the more perplexing ideas of physics. The idea comes from the attempts to merge relativistic gravity with quantum mechanics. Gravity, Einstein proved, was a bending of the fabric of spacetime. It also behaves like a field. Place a point far away from the Earth, and it still will be part of the Earth’s gravitational field, but it will be out where the tug of gravity is weak. Place it close to the Earth, and the tug is stronger, and it will fall. Other planets warp spacetime and create their own gravitational tugs. So space isn’t gravity-free, but a vast array of different gravitational tugs through which particles move. Pretty much everywhere that anything is placed, there is a gravitational field that it moves through. …There are ideas on how to “see” this quantum foam. They vary in technique. Some ideas, such as the randomly appearing and disappearing particles, have already been established.  Either way, we have a creamy new way of seeing the universe.”

 

Inspired by Esther Inglis-Arkell, io9 ow.ly/jBdnL Image source Revision3 ow.ly/jBdmi

Jason Lazarus the 37 year old American artist, curator, writer, and Assistant Adjunct Professor has been interviewed by Julia Halperin for Blouin Artinfo in an article titled ‘26 Questions for Semiotically Inclined Photo and OWS Sign Artist’. In the article Lazarus states “The documentation of OWS created more questions than answers — the disparate messages on protest signs resisted clear, linear, or congealing narratives that traditional media rely on to produce content. Re-creating the signs, collaboratively, with the public, allowed a way to not only produce those messages documented widely across time and space en masse, but the process of creating them literally slowed down readings of the phenomenon, producing an experience of heightened awareness of the productive (unresolved) questions that linger in OWS’s wake as well as to the economy of protest (materials, aesthetics, scale, textual play/innuendo/multiple layers of meaning). The project is a kind of reverse-photography, imaging 3D sculptures from flattened images demands a careful, multiple-layered, and active reading. …The project … frames a collective process of becoming where our strain of late capitalism is openly and visibly questioned and criticized as incompatible with our current iteration of democracy. Meanwhile, the capital in the system, like water, continues to fill in the gaps with unending resilience and infinite flexibility. … it’s important to me that the project started as re-created signs that actually occupied public space as part of Occupy USF Tampa, and they have since traveled to alternative exhibition spaces on their way to a museum. They will make their way back to alternative venues and street as well. Political art is optimal when it’s most liquid, able to travel through contexts and paradigms. I’m interested in how this project will change as its referents become distant with time.”   Inspired by Julia Halperin, Blouin Artinfo ow.ly/jAq2p Image source Twitter ow.ly/jAq0S Its referents become distant with time (April 16 2013)

 

Jason Lazarus the 37 year old American artist, curator, writer, and Assistant Adjunct Professor has been interviewed by Julia Halperin for Blouin Artinfo in an article titled ‘26 Questions for Semiotically Inclined Photo and OWS Sign Artist’. In the article Lazarus states “The documentation of OWS created more questions than answers — the disparate messages on protest signs resisted clear, linear, or congealing narratives that traditional media rely on to produce content. Re-creating the signs, collaboratively, with the public, allowed a way to not only produce those messages documented widely across time and space en masse, but the process of creating them literally slowed down readings of the phenomenon, producing an experience of heightened awareness of the productive (unresolved) questions that linger in OWS’s wake as well as to the economy of protest (materials, aesthetics, scale, textual play/innuendo/multiple layers of meaning). The project is a kind of reverse-photography, imaging 3D sculptures from flattened images demands a careful, multiple-layered, and active reading. …The project … frames a collective process of becoming where our strain of late capitalism is openly and visibly questioned and criticized as incompatible with our current iteration of democracy. Meanwhile, the capital in the system, like water, continues to fill in the gaps with unending resilience and infinite flexibility. … it’s important to me that the project started as re-created signs that actually occupied public space as part of Occupy USF Tampa, and they have since traveled to alternative exhibition spaces on their way to a museum. They will make their way back to alternative venues and street as well. Political art is optimal when it’s most liquid, able to travel through contexts and paradigms. I’m interested in how this project will change as its referents become distant with time.”

 

Inspired by Julia Halperin, Blouin Artinfo ow.ly/jAq2p Image source Twitter ow.ly/jAq0S

Bennett Ramberg the American writer, foreign policy consultant and expert on nuclear weapons proliferation, terrorism and international politics, has published an article on Reuters titled ‘Responding to North Korea’ in which he states “Now that Pyongyang has conducted its third nuclear test, the international community must accept what it cannot change: North Korea is a nuclear-arming state. No sanctions, no carrots, no rhetoric, no threat, no military act is likely to change this fact. The question now is how to minimize risks. First, we need to take a deep breath before we leap to any new policy. The impulse to push the North’s nuclear toothpaste back into the tube will remain. But sanctions have repeatedly failed. For reasons known only to itself, China — the one country that can effectively pinch North Korea both economically and politically — continues to provide Pyongyang with energy and foodstuffs. Beijing’s policy will likely continue. …Then there is a China card that Japan and South Korea could manipulate. Through their pundits or politicians, either could declare that the time has come to reconsider non-proliferation vows that could prod Beijing to put the squeeze on the North or risk a nuclear arms race in Northeast Asia. Even talk about the option, however, could exacerbate already simmering tensions if Tokyo were to take the lead. While we can clearly exclude some options — like a U.S. military strike on North Korea’s nuclear sites — the benefits of other solutions remain murky. Rather than rush one way or another, the best course would be for Washington and its allies — following their perfunctory declarations of dismay — to take a deep breath and carefully evaluate options rather than respond compulsively. Pyongyang still has a long way to go before it becomes a credible nuclear threat.”  Inspired by Bennett Ramberg, Reuters ow.ly/j4AKM Image source TamilNet ow.ly/j4Av1 Beijing’s policy will likely continue (April 10 2013)

 

Bennett Ramberg the American writer, foreign policy consultant and expert on nuclear weapons proliferation, terrorism and international politics, has published an article on Reuters titled ‘Responding to North Korea’ in which he states “Now that Pyongyang has conducted its third nuclear test, the international community must accept what it cannot change: North Korea is a nuclear-arming state. No sanctions, no carrots, no rhetoric, no threat, no military act is likely to change this fact. The question now is how to minimize risks. First, we need to take a deep breath before we leap to any new policy. The impulse to push the North’s nuclear toothpaste back into the tube will remain. But sanctions have repeatedly failed. For reasons known only to itself, China — the one country that can effectively pinch North Korea both economically and politically — continues to provide Pyongyang with energy and foodstuffs. Beijing’s policy will likely continue. …Then there is a China card that Japan and South Korea could manipulate. Through their pundits or politicians, either could declare that the time has come to reconsider non-proliferation vows that could prod Beijing to put the squeeze on the North or risk a nuclear arms race in Northeast Asia. Even talk about the option, however, could exacerbate already simmering tensions if Tokyo were to take the lead. While we can clearly exclude some options — like a U.S. military strike on North Korea’s nuclear sites — the benefits of other solutions remain murky. Rather than rush one way or another, the best course would be for Washington and its allies — following their perfunctory declarations of dismay — to take a deep breath and carefully evaluate options rather than respond compulsively. Pyongyang still has a long way to go before it becomes a credible nuclear threat.”

 

Inspired by Bennett Ramberg, Reuters ow.ly/j4AKM Image source TamilNet ow.ly/j4Av1

Jose Graziano da Silva the 63 year old American-born Brazilian agronomist, writer and Director General of the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), has published an article on the IPS News Service titled ‘Guardians of Life and of the Earth’ stating “Around the world, but especially in the planet’s poorest regions, women represent a life force that renews itself daily, sometimes against all odds. Rural women, for instance, make up 43 percent of the agricultural labour force in developing countries. Fighting hunger is something they do every day. They are the faceless enlistees in the most devastating war of our times, one which – paradoxically – is the easiest to win: the war on hunger, that afflicts one in every eight inhabitants of our Earth, some 870 million human beings. …Putting food on a family’s table involves extending a woman’s reach beyond her maternal instincts. It means applying her energy and her life lessons to tilling the land and harvesting crops. …The double and sometimes triple burden of work in the field, at home and in the community is not always recognised, or shared by the men in the households. This frequently makes the empowerment of women more difficult. Paradoxically, everywhere in the world it is women who suffer most from restrictions on access to the legal ownership of land. This in turn limits their access to credit and to the inputs they need to maximise the utmost efforts they put into community wellbeing. Achieving those rights and that access, in order to close the gender gap in the most vulnerable countries’ farming systems, is one of the most important food security policies that governments and international cooperation agencies could ever implement. Making states aware of the core role women play in economic and social development and forging a political consensus to give them the tools and rights that their role demands will be vital steps in the fight against hunger.”  Inspired by Jose Graziano da Silva, IPS News Service ow.ly/j4tLB Image source Renato Araujo ow.ly/j4tIA Guardians of Life and Earth (April 5 2013)

 

Jose Graziano da Silva the 63 year old American-born Brazilian agronomist, writer and Director General of the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), has published an article on the IPS News Service titled ‘Guardians of Life and of the Earth’ stating “Around the world, but especially in the planet’s poorest regions, women represent a life force that renews itself daily, sometimes against all odds. Rural women, for instance, make up 43 percent of the agricultural labour force in developing countries. Fighting hunger is something they do every day. They are the faceless enlistees in the most devastating war of our times, one which – paradoxically – is the easiest to win: the war on hunger, that afflicts one in every eight inhabitants of our Earth, some 870 million human beings. …Putting food on a family’s table involves extending a woman’s reach beyond her maternal instincts. It means applying her energy and her life lessons to tilling the land and harvesting crops. …The double and sometimes triple burden of work in the field, at home and in the community is not always recognised, or shared by the men in the households. This frequently makes the empowerment of women more difficult. Paradoxically, everywhere in the world it is women who suffer most from restrictions on access to the legal ownership of land. This in turn limits their access to credit and to the inputs they need to maximise the utmost efforts they put into community wellbeing. Achieving those rights and that access, in order to close the gender gap in the most vulnerable countries’ farming systems, is one of the most important food security policies that governments and international cooperation agencies could ever implement. Making states aware of the core role women play in economic and social development and forging a political consensus to give them the tools and rights that their role demands will be vital steps in the fight against hunger.”

 

Inspired by Jose Graziano da Silva, IPS News Service ow.ly/j4tLB Image source Renato Araujo ow.ly/j4tIA

Nanjala Nyabola the Kenyan writer and political analyst, is currently a graduate student focusing on the socio-political dimensions of conflict in Africa has published an article on Aljazeera titled ‘International law isn't real' in which she states “Although there is a pseudo-consensus on what the law 'is', it is in fact simply a consensus among elites. It's one of the most common refrains you hear, especially in an American law school, as to why the US has no reason to abide by or participate in international conventions or nascent legal institutions like the international criminal court. The unspoken philosophical implications are: that there is such a thing as "real" law, and that domestic law has somehow achieved that gold standard. After almost two years of grasping the essence of this "realness", swimming upstream against the glib acceptance that Law is, I find myself concluding that there is no such thing as "real" law. Domestic law is no more real than international law and if we allow one, the empty comfort of ascribed "realness", we should be able to extend this comfort to the other. "Real" law is the necessary fiction that consequences must flow from the actions of one against each other, and that the Law as defined by those in power or with money, determines both the infraction and its consequences; yet another tool that those in power have to employ against the powerless. They are able to do this, because even at the most prestigious centres for legal learning and thought, few grapple the meta-question that underpins the entire exercise: namely, what is law? …The onus is on law schools and practitioners to think creatively about how elite consensus on this issue can be created. Ultimately, it comes down to two things: either change the minds of the elite, or change the elite. That is a call to anarchy.”  Inspired by Nanjala Nyabola, Aljazeera ow.ly/iqTxa Image source The Guardian ow.ly/iqTmD International law isn’t real (March 23 2013)

 

Nanjala Nyabola the Kenyan writer and political analyst, is currently a graduate student focusing on the socio-political dimensions of conflict in Africa has published an article on Aljazeera titled ‘International law isn’t real’ in which she states “Although there is a pseudo-consensus on what the law ‘is’, it is in fact simply a consensus among elites. It’s one of the most common refrains you hear, especially in an American law school, as to why the US has no reason to abide by or participate in international conventions or nascent legal institutions like the international criminal court. The unspoken philosophical implications are: that there is such a thing as “real” law, and that domestic law has somehow achieved that gold standard. After almost two years of grasping the essence of this “realness”, swimming upstream against the glib acceptance that Law is, I find myself concluding that there is no such thing as “real” law. Domestic law is no more real than international law and if we allow one, the empty comfort of ascribed “realness”, we should be able to extend this comfort to the other. “Real” law is the necessary fiction that consequences must flow from the actions of one against each other, and that the Law as defined by those in power or with money, determines both the infraction and its consequences; yet another tool that those in power have to employ against the powerless. They are able to do this, because even at the most prestigious centres for legal learning and thought, few grapple the meta-question that underpins the entire exercise: namely, what is law? …The onus is on law schools and practitioners to think creatively about how elite consensus on this issue can be created. Ultimately, it comes down to two things: either change the minds of the elite, or change the elite. That is a call to anarchy.”

 

Inspired by Nanjala Nyabola, Aljazeera ow.ly/iqTxa Image source The Guardian ow.ly/iqTmD

Aleksander Zotin the Russian writer claims there is a difference between “good” corruption and “bad” corruption in an article published on Worldcrunch titled ‘Is There Such A Thing As Good Corruption?’ Zotin states “First of all, the size. A 3% drain on the economy is not the same as a 25% one. But size is far from the only thing that matters. The structure is also important. Good corruption is often a way to grease the wheels of cumbersome regulations, where officials speed up the decision-making process, helping business. Often that means forced political support for regimes that are undertaking painful economic modernization. One of the important signs of “good” corruption is that the money stays in the country, allowing for economic growth. The American political scientist John Nye even calls this the "Switzerland factor." The less that corrupt money leaves the country (often going to Swiss bank accounts), and the more it is reinvested in the home country’s economy, the less damaging the corruption. The aim of good corruption is to create a good investment climate and improve growth in private business. One of the best examples of this good corruption was 20th century South Korea under dictator Park Chung-hee. He often forced large companies to take care of his party’s needs, and rewarded those companies’ loyalty with low-interest loans and business preferences. He used the money to secure his party’s hold on power rather than just for his own personal gain, and nearly all of the money stayed in the country. At the same time, he cracked down on middle-level corruption – investigating large numbers of mid-level officials and thus creating a good investment climate that forced the government to color inside the lines. Although he ruled as a dictator, Park held his government to strict standards, and didn’t use the corruption strictly for personal enrichment.”  Inspired by Aleksander Zotin, Worldcrunch ow.ly/iqQM6 Image source VK ow.ly/iqRmu Such a thing as good corruption (March 22 2013)

 

Aleksander Zotin the Russian writer claims there is a difference between “good” corruption and “bad” corruption in an article published on Worldcrunch titled ‘Is There Such A Thing As Good Corruption?’ Zotin states “First of all, the size. A 3% drain on the economy is not the same as a 25% one. But size is far from the only thing that matters. The structure is also important. Good corruption is often a way to grease the wheels of cumbersome regulations, where officials speed up the decision-making process, helping business. Often that means forced political support for regimes that are undertaking painful economic modernization. One of the important signs of “good” corruption is that the money stays in the country, allowing for economic growth. The American political scientist John Nye even calls this the “Switzerland factor.” The less that corrupt money leaves the country (often going to Swiss bank accounts), and the more it is reinvested in the home country’s economy, the less damaging the corruption. The aim of good corruption is to create a good investment climate and improve growth in private business. One of the best examples of this good corruption was 20th century South Korea under dictator Park Chung-hee. He often forced large companies to take care of his party’s needs, and rewarded those companies’ loyalty with low-interest loans and business preferences. He used the money to secure his party’s hold on power rather than just for his own personal gain, and nearly all of the money stayed in the country. At the same time, he cracked down on middle-level corruption – investigating large numbers of mid-level officials and thus creating a good investment climate that forced the government to color inside the lines. Although he ruled as a dictator, Park held his government to strict standards, and didn’t use the corruption strictly for personal enrichment.”

 

Inspired by Aleksander Zotin, Worldcrunch ow.ly/iqQM6 Image source VK ow.ly/iqRmu

David Runnalls the Canadian writer and environment columnist, former Board member of IUCN-the World Conservation Union, and current Distinguished Fellow with IISD, has published an article in The Globe and Mail titled ‘Roasted, toasted, fried and grilled’: climate-change talk from an unlikely source ‘. Runnalls states “ This past little while has seen some statements from unlikely sources about the critical economic importance of dealing quickly with climate change. President Barack Obama led off the batting with his inaugural address, calling on Americans to take the lead in developing the technologies necessary for the emerging low-carbon economy. He pointed to the drought and Hurricane Sandy as the most recent evidence that our climate is changing for the worse. But the most startling statements came from the heads of those bastions of economic orthodoxy: the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. …[head of the IMF Ms. Lagarde] said: “Unless we take action on climate change, future generations will be roasted, toasted, fried and grilled.” Jim Yong Kim, president of the World Bank, went so far as to insist that climate change be at the top of the Davos agenda, along with finance and growth, “because global warming imperils all of the development gains we have made.” …These statements are not from the head of Greenpeace or from David Suzuki. They come from the heads of the bulwarks of the international financial system. For years, the IMF has resisted straying into the realm of environment and finance, viewing it as a side issue best left to international environmental organizations. And while the World Bank has invested in low-carbon futures and has been active in climate talks, the issue has not been raised to the top of its agenda. Until now. Climate change as the main economic discussion point at the annual meeting of the rich and famous leaders of governments and multinational enterprises?”  Inspired by David Runnalls, The Globe and Mail ow.ly/hMwGA Image source CIGI ow.ly/hMwF2 Roasted, toasted, fried and grilled (February 27 2013)

David Runnalls the Canadian writer and environment columnist, former Board member of IUCN-the World Conservation Union, and current Distinguished Fellow with IISD, has published an article in The Globe and Mail titled ‘Roasted, toasted, fried and grilled’: climate-change talk from an unlikely source ‘. Runnalls states “ This past little while has seen some statements from unlikely sources about the critical economic importance of dealing quickly with climate change. President Barack Obama led off the batting with his inaugural address, calling on Americans to take the lead in developing the technologies necessary for the emerging low-carbon economy. He pointed to the drought and Hurricane Sandy as the most recent evidence that our climate is changing for the worse. But the most startling statements came from the heads of those bastions of economic orthodoxy: the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. …[head of the IMF Ms. Lagarde] said: “Unless we take action on climate change, future generations will be roasted, toasted, fried and grilled.” Jim Yong Kim, president of the World Bank, went so far as to insist that climate change be at the top of the Davos agenda, along with finance and growth, “because global warming imperils all of the development gains we have made.” …These statements are not from the head of Greenpeace or from David Suzuki. They come from the heads of the bulwarks of the international financial system. For years, the IMF has resisted straying into the realm of environment and finance, viewing it as a side issue best left to international environmental organizations. And while the World Bank has invested in low-carbon futures and has been active in climate talks, the issue has not been raised to the top of its agenda. Until now. Climate change as the main economic discussion point at the annual meeting of the rich and famous leaders of governments and multinational enterprises?”

 

Inspired by David Runnalls, The Globe and Mail ow.ly/hMwGA Image source CIGI ow.ly/hMwF2

George Joshua Richard Monbiot the 50 year old British writer known for his environmental and political activism. Initially trained in Zoology, Monibiot joined the BBC Natural History Unit as a radio producer, making natural history and environmental programmes, before working as a current affairs producer and presenter. Working independently as an investigative journalist his activities led to his being made persona non grata in seven countries and being sentenced to life imprisonment in absentia in Indonesia. Monibiot has published an article in The Guardian titled ‘If you think we're done with neoliberalism, think again’, claiming the global application of a fraudulent economic theory brought the west to its knees, yet for those in power, it offers riches. Monbiot states “How they must bleed for us. In 2012, the world's 100 richest people became $241 billion richer. They are now worth $1.9 trillion: just a little less than the entire output of the United Kingdom. This is not the result of chance. The rise in the fortunes of the super-rich is the direct result of policies. Here are a few: the reduction of tax rates and tax enforcement; governments' refusal to recoup a decent share of revenues from minerals and land; the privatisation of public assets and the creation of a toll-booth economy; wage liberalisation and the destruction of collective bargaining. The policies that made the global monarchs so rich are the policies squeezing everyone else. This is not what the theory predicted. …The remarkable growth in the rich nations during the 50s, 60s and 70s was made possible by the destruction of the wealth and power of the elite, as a result of the 1930s depression and the second world war. Their embarrassment gave the other 99% an unprecedented chance to demand redistribution, state spending and social security, all of which stimulated demand. Neoliberalism was an attempt to turn back these reforms. Lavishly funded by millionaires, its advocates were amazingly successful – politically. Economically they flopped.”  Inspired by George Monbiot, The Guardian ow.ly/hfJpW Image source Slim Virgin ow.ly/hfJmS Done with neoliberalism, think again (February 11 2013)

George Joshua Richard Monbiot the 50 year old British writer known for his environmental and political activism. Initially trained in Zoology, Monibiot joined the BBC Natural History Unit as a radio producer, making natural history and environmental programmes, before working as a current affairs producer and presenter. Working independently as an investigative journalist his activities led to his being made persona non grata in seven countries and being sentenced to life imprisonment in absentia in Indonesia. Monibiot has published an article in The Guardian titled ‘If you think we’re done with neoliberalism, think again’, claiming the global application of a fraudulent economic theory brought the west to its knees, yet for those in power, it offers riches. Monbiot states “How they must bleed for us. In 2012, the world’s 100 richest people became $241 billion richer. They are now worth $1.9 trillion: just a little less than the entire output of the United Kingdom. This is not the result of chance. The rise in the fortunes of the super-rich is the direct result of policies. Here are a few: the reduction of tax rates and tax enforcement; governments’ refusal to recoup a decent share of revenues from minerals and land; the privatisation of public assets and the creation of a toll-booth economy; wage liberalisation and the destruction of collective bargaining. The policies that made the global monarchs so rich are the policies squeezing everyone else. This is not what the theory predicted. …The remarkable growth in the rich nations during the 50s, 60s and 70s was made possible by the destruction of the wealth and power of the elite, as a result of the 1930s depression and the second world war. Their embarrassment gave the other 99% an unprecedented chance to demand redistribution, state spending and social security, all of which stimulated demand. Neoliberalism was an attempt to turn back these reforms. Lavishly funded by millionaires, its advocates were amazingly successful – politically. Economically they flopped.”

 

Inspired by George Monbiot, The Guardian ow.ly/hfJpW Image source Slim Virgin ow.ly/hfJmS

Chrystia Freeland the 44 year old Canadian-american writer, journalist and editor of Thomson Reuters Digital has published an article titled ‘Finding economists’ common ground’. Freeland states in the article “This is a tough time for experts. Empowered by the Internet and embittered by the sour economy, many people doubt the wisdom of expert elites. Journalism sometimes casts further doubt by seeking polarized positions that can draw an attention-grabbing debate, or by taking refuge in he-said-she-said accounts to avoid the harder job of figuring out who’s right. Now one tribe of specialists – economists – is striking back. Concerned that the great unwashed have come to see all economic proposals as being equally valid, the University of Chicago Booth School of Business has led an effort to figure out what economists agree on, where they diverge and how certain they are about their views. To do that, the Booth school called on reputable economists to join its panel of experts. Each week, the panelists are asked whether they agree or disagree with a particular economic idea. … they did pick up a clear difference between men and women. “Women,” they wrote, “tend to be more cautious in taking a stance.” For women making their way in the 21st-century world of work, that reticence is mostly a handicap – a willingness to admit to uncertainty is one reason women are paid less and can find it difficult to break through the glass ceiling. For the benefit of the community as a whole, though, more female economists may be needed. The quest for objective economic knowledge is surely a good thing, as is the Booth effort to map where economists agree and where they diverge. But, given how profoundly and unexpectedly the world economy collapsed in 2008, maybe a little more womanly humility about that conventional wisdom would be a good thing, too.”  Inspired by Chrystia Freeland, Reuters ow.ly/gT6KV Image source WEF ow.ly/gT7ka A clear difference between men and women (January 27 2013)

Chrystia Freeland the 44 year old Canadian-american writer, journalist and editor of Thomson Reuters Digital has published an article titled ‘Finding economists’ common ground’. Freeland states in the article “This is a tough time for experts. Empowered by the Internet and embittered by the sour economy, many people doubt the wisdom of expert elites. Journalism sometimes casts further doubt by seeking polarized positions that can draw an attention-grabbing debate, or by taking refuge in he-said-she-said accounts to avoid the harder job of figuring out who’s right. Now one tribe of specialists – economists – is striking back. Concerned that the great unwashed have come to see all economic proposals as being equally valid, the University of Chicago Booth School of Business has led an effort to figure out what economists agree on, where they diverge and how certain they are about their views. To do that, the Booth school called on reputable economists to join its panel of experts. Each week, the panelists are asked whether they agree or disagree with a particular economic idea. … they did pick up a clear difference between men and women. “Women,” they wrote, “tend to be more cautious in taking a stance.” For women making their way in the 21st-century world of work, that reticence is mostly a handicap – a willingness to admit to uncertainty is one reason women are paid less and can find it difficult to break through the glass ceiling. For the benefit of the community as a whole, though, more female economists may be needed. The quest for objective economic knowledge is surely a good thing, as is the Booth effort to map where economists agree and where they diverge. But, given how profoundly and unexpectedly the world economy collapsed in 2008, maybe a little more womanly humility about that conventional wisdom would be a good thing, too.”

 

Inspired by Chrystia Freeland, Reuters ow.ly/gT6KV Image source WEF ow.ly/gT7ka

Alain de Botton the 43 year old Swiss British writer, philosopher, television presenter and entrepreneur who discusses various contemporary subjects and themes, emphasizing philosophy's relevance to everyday life, claims to have launched the first Athiest Church in the UK, in the wake of a comedian led launch on an Atheist church in Canonbury. In an article published by Tom Marshall in the Islington Gazette titled ‘Nation’s first atheist church launches in Canonbury’, Marshall states “A Sunday gathering billed as the nation’s first-ever “atheist church” got off to a flying start this week – despite irking one the UK’s most famous non-believers who says he did it first. There was standing room only as some 200 people descended on the first congregation of the Sunday Assembly, cramming into an ex-church in St Paul’s Road, Canonbury. But writer and philosopher Alain de Botton, who is known as one of the most forthright atheists in the UK and last year published a book titled Religion for Atheists, told the Gazette that his organisation beat them to the punch. Mr de Botton, whose School of Life centre in Bloomsbury hosts Sunday gatherings of atheists, said: “We want to wish the comedians all the very best on their venture, while modestly adding that we have been ploughing this furrow for many years and they shouldn’t therefore claim the idea as their own …We wouldn’t want to start a schism so early on in the movement.” …Attendees enjoyed uplifting talks, readings, music and some time for quiet reflection, as founders and stand-up comedians Sanderson Jones and Pippa Evans led proceedings. Mr Jones said: “We’re huge fans of Alain’s and would love to get him down to talk, if he wants to … So many people turned up and were getting really excited, it was just overwhelming. It seems people just loved the idea and it far surpassed our hopes.”   Inspired by Tom Marshall, Islington Gazette ow.ly/gKBwH Image source Facebook ow.ly/gKBvZ A schism so early on in the movement (January 20 2013)

Alain de Botton the 43 year old Swiss British writer, philosopher, television presenter and entrepreneur who discusses various contemporary subjects and themes, emphasizing philosophy’s relevance to everyday life, claims to have launched the first Athiest Church in the UK, in the wake of a comedian led launch on an Atheist church in Canonbury. In an article published by Tom Marshall in the Islington Gazette titled ‘Nation’s first atheist church launches in Canonbury’, Marshall states “A Sunday gathering billed as the nation’s first-ever “atheist church” got off to a flying start this week – despite irking one the UK’s most famous non-believers who says he did it first. There was standing room only as some 200 people descended on the first congregation of the Sunday Assembly, cramming into an ex-church in St Paul’s Road, Canonbury. But writer and philosopher Alain de Botton, who is known as one of the most forthright atheists in the UK and last year published a book titled Religion for Atheists, told the Gazette that his organisation beat them to the punch. Mr de Botton, whose School of Life centre in Bloomsbury hosts Sunday gatherings of atheists, said: “We want to wish the comedians all the very best on their venture, while modestly adding that we have been ploughing this furrow for many years and they shouldn’t therefore claim the idea as their own …We wouldn’t want to start a schism so early on in the movement.” …Attendees enjoyed uplifting talks, readings, music and some time for quiet reflection, as founders and stand-up comedians Sanderson Jones and Pippa Evans led proceedings. Mr Jones said: “We’re huge fans of Alain’s and would love to get him down to talk, if he wants to … So many people turned up and were getting really excited, it was just overwhelming. It seems people just loved the idea and it far surpassed our hopes.”

 

Inspired by Tom Marshall, Islington Gazette ow.ly/gKBwH Image source Facebook ow.ly/gKBvZ

Lucy Lippard the 75 year old American internationally known writer, art critic, activist and curator among the first writers to recognize the "dematerialization" at work in conceptual art and was an early champion of feminist art has been featured by Chloe Wyma in an article for Blouin Artinfo titled ‘Four Decades After Lucy Lippard's "Six Years," Is Conceptual Art Still Relevant? Wyma states “If you want to understand the stakes of the “dematerialization of the art object,” look no further than the late British artist John Latham’s “Art and Culture,” the entrance piece at “Materializing Six Years: Lucy Lippard and the Emergence of Conceptual Art” at the Brooklyn Museum. The piece mockingly takes its title from mid-century formalist art critic Clement Greenberg’s influential text: An open briefcase reveals a copy of Greenberg’s book, an overdue notice from the library, and vials containing the masticated pulp of its pages. The byproduct of a party where Latham invited guests to chew the pages of Greenberg’s book, the work takes the radical propositions of dematerialization quite literally, turning the bible of formalist art criticism into formless cud. Casting off the cloth of the detached, Greenbergian art critic, Lucy Lippard played a crucial role, not only as a writer, but as curator and collaborator within the diverse artistic activity that’s now catalogued under the rubric of Conceptual Art. As she writes in the forward to the exhibition, Lippard and her circle “invented ways for art to act as an invisible frame for seeing and thinking rather than as an object of delectation or connoisseurship.” In their critique of the art object, they sought to remake the art world as a network of ideas to be shared, rather than a marketplace of objects to be bought and sold.”   Inspired by Chloe Wyma, Blouin Artinfo ow.ly/gGWLj Image source Fluxusa ow.ly/gGWJS Is Conceptual Art still relevant? (January 15 2013)

Lucy Lippard the 75 year old American internationally known writer, art critic, activist and curator among the first writers to recognize the “dematerialization” at work in conceptual art and was an early champion of feminist art has been featured by Chloe Wyma in an article for Blouin Artinfo titled ‘Four Decades After Lucy Lippard’s “Six Years,” Is Conceptual Art Still Relevant? Wyma states “If you want to understand the stakes of the “dematerialization of the art object,” look no further than the late British artist John Latham’s “Art and Culture,” the entrance piece at “Materializing Six Years: Lucy Lippard and the Emergence of Conceptual Art” at the Brooklyn Museum. The piece mockingly takes its title from mid-century formalist art critic Clement Greenberg’s influential text: An open briefcase reveals a copy of Greenberg’s book, an overdue notice from the library, and vials containing the masticated pulp of its pages. The byproduct of a party where Latham invited guests to chew the pages of Greenberg’s book, the work takes the radical propositions of dematerialization quite literally, turning the bible of formalist art criticism into formless cud. Casting off the cloth of the detached, Greenbergian art critic, Lucy Lippard played a crucial role, not only as a writer, but as curator and collaborator within the diverse artistic activity that’s now catalogued under the rubric of Conceptual Art. As she writes in the forward to the exhibition, Lippard and her circle “invented ways for art to act as an invisible frame for seeing and thinking rather than as an object of delectation or connoisseurship.” In their critique of the art object, they sought to remake the art world as a network of ideas to be shared, rather than a marketplace of objects to be bought and sold.”

 

Inspired by Chloe Wyma, Blouin Artinfo ow.ly/gGWLj Image source Fluxusa ow.ly/gGWJS

Mary Louisa Toynbee, known as Polly Toynbee the 65 year old British journalist, writer and President of the British Humanist Association has published an article in The Guardian titled ‘Atheists are better for politics than believers’. Toynbee states “'If you're not religious, for God's sake say so," we implored, and many did. Over a quarter of the population registered as non-believers: more might have done were the census question unambiguous about whether it meant cultural background or personal belief. …Some religions argue they have a God-given right not to be caused offence, to give legal weight to fatwas against those who offend their prophets. But in the rough and tumble of free speech, no one can be protected against feeling offended. …the charge that without God, unbelievers have no moral compass. Hitler and Stalin were atheists, that's where it leads. We can ripost with religious atrocities, Godly genocides or the Inquisition, but that's futile. Wise atheists make no moral claims, seeing good and bad randomly spread among humanity regardless of faith. Humans do have a hardwired moral sense, every child born with an instinct for justice that makes us by nature social animals, not needing revelations from ancient texts. The idea that morality can only be frightened into us artificially, by divine edict, is degrading. …there is enough wonder in the magical realms of human imagination, thought, dream, memory and fantasy where most people reside for much of their waking lives. There is no emotional or spiritual deficiency in rejecting creeds that stunt and infantalise the imagination. Liberated by knowing the here and now is all there is, humanists are optimists, certain that our destiny rests in our own hands. That's why most humanists are natural social democrats, not conservatives.” Inspired by The Guardian ow.ly/gdC1F image source Wikipedia ow.ly/gdBLx Atheists are better for politics than believers (December 24 2012)

Mary Louisa Toynbee, known as Polly Toynbee the 65 year old British journalist, writer and President of the British Humanist Association has published an article in The Guardian titled ‘Atheists are better for politics than believers’. Toynbee states “’If you’re not religious, for God’s sake say so,” we implored, and many did. Over a quarter of the population registered as non-believers: more might have done were the census question unambiguous about whether it meant cultural background or personal belief. …Some religions argue they have a God-given right not to be caused offence, to give legal weight to fatwas against those who offend their prophets. But in the rough and tumble of free speech, no one can be protected against feeling offended. …the charge that without God, unbelievers have no moral compass. Hitler and Stalin were atheists, that’s where it leads. We can ripost with religious atrocities, Godly genocides or the Inquisition, but that’s futile. Wise atheists make no moral claims, seeing good and bad randomly spread among humanity regardless of faith. Humans do have a hardwired moral sense, every child born with an instinct for justice that makes us by nature social animals, not needing revelations from ancient texts. The idea that morality can only be frightened into us artificially, by divine edict, is degrading. …there is enough wonder in the magical realms of human imagination, thought, dream, memory and fantasy where most people reside for much of their waking lives. There is no emotional or spiritual deficiency in rejecting creeds that stunt and infantalise the imagination. Liberated by knowing the here and now is all there is, humanists are optimists, certain that our destiny rests in our own hands. That’s why most humanists are natural social democrats, not conservatives.”

 

Inspired by The Guardian ow.ly/gdC1F image source Wikipedia ow.ly/gdBLx

More settler than the settlers (December 18 2012) More settler than the settlers (December 18 2012)

Jon Elmer the Canadian writer and photojournalist specializing in the Middle East and Canadian foreign and military policy, has published an article on Aljazeera titled ‘”More settler than the settlers”: Canada’s UN policy and Israel’ claiming since Israel’s inception, Canada has been at the forefront in its unwavering support of the Jewish state. Elmer states “Even before Canada officially cast its “no” vote at the United Nations, Palestinians knew which way the Canadian wind would blow. At the gates of Canada’s heavily guarded “embassy” in Ramallah the day before the vote, protesters carried signs of Prime Minister Stephen Harper emblazoned with a dogs snout and the dismissive slogan, “this dog doesn’t hunt”. The next day in New York, Canada joined Israel, the US, the Czech Republic, Panama and four small countries in the Pacific Islands – including Nauru, population 10,000 –  in voting against a General Assembly resolution granting Palestinians Non-Member Observer State status. The final tally was 138 to 9 in favour. Before the vote, analyst Mouin Rabbani aptly characterised the antagonists: “Those openly opposing this vote can easily be counted on the fingers of an amputated hand: Israel; the United States, which is more pro-Israel than Israel itself; Canada, which is more pro-Israel than even the United States.” Indeed, the very next day Canada voted against six more resolutions on Palestinian rights that were adopted, including one on the “peaceful settlement of the question of Palestine” (163-6). Canada opposing resolutions dealing with Palestinian rights is not new, nor is it the effect of a particular government or another. Opposing such resolutions has been a core Canadian diplomatic tactic since the creation of the State of Israel in 1948 – by both Liberal and Conservative governments.”

 

Inspired by Aljazeera ow.ly/g22OM image source WorkingTV ow.ly/g22I7

Oligarchs and dictators are not cool (December 9 2012) Oligarchs and dictators are not cool (December 9 2012)

Sarah Thornton the British Canadian writer and sociologist of culture, writing principally about art, artists and the art market, has detailed a list of the top ten reasons from potentially ‘hundreds’ of reasons for her decision to quit the art market beat. Blouin Artinfo has reprinted two of the reasons, being (A) It enables manipulators to publicize the artists whose prices they spike at auction. Tightknit cabals of dealers and speculative collectors count on the fact that you will report record prices without being able to reveal the collusion behind how they were achieved. …It’s a shame when good artists’ careers are made volatile by speculation.  And (B) Oligarchs and dictators are not cool. I have no problem with rich people. (Some of my best friends are high net worth individuals!) But amongst the biggest spenders in the art market right now are people who have made their money in non-democracies with horrendous human rights records. Their expertise in rising to the top of a corrupt system gives punch to the term “filthy lucre.” However, the astronomical prices paid by these guys do have a positive trickle-down effect. When they buy a Gerhard Richter for $20m, the consignor of the painting will likely re-invest some of their profit in younger art (particularly if they are American and keen to defer capital gains tax). These Russian, Arab and Chinese collectors bring liquidity to the art world and allow more artists, curators and critics to make a living in relation to art.”

 

Inspired by Blouin ArtInfo ow.ly/fKgvH image source ow.ly/fKgrd

You've got about a minute to impress (November 14 2012) You’ve got about a minute to impress (November 14 2012)

Lenny Henry the 54 year old British actor, writer, and comedian has been profiled by Megan Connor for The Guardian in an article titled ‘This Much I Know’. Henry states “If you’re a famous comedian you’ve got about a minute to impress on stage. You get a clap at the beginning and “My mum used to like you!” and then there’s nothing to do but roll your sleeves up. A TV talent show changed my life [Henry won New Faces in 1975 with his impression of Stevie Wonder]. It took me from being a nobody in Dudley, where I was a welder, to being recognised on the street. Nowadays people have to go to Edinburgh for years to get noticed, and that is a shame. Of course there’s Britain’s Got Talent, but I think we need a more regular platform where people can perform in a non-competitive way. …Shakespeare has changed me. I was sad that I never got to grips with him at school, so when I was asked to play Othello it was like someone opening a door to something I’d never been involved with. I can feel him in my veins now. I tend to put things in boxes. I have to do one project at a time now, because I have been a workaholic, and that can lead to a nervous breakdown. …I will always remember a time in the 50s when we lived in a bedsit. There was me in a cot, my sister in a campbed, and my parents in a bed next to me, and I will never forget feeling the heat from a parafin lamp on my face.”

 

Inspired by Megan Conner ow.ly/f5riy image source Facebook ow.ly/f5ran

We struggle every day against our obstacles (November 11 2012) We struggle every day against our obstacles (November 11 2012)

Mohammed Matter ‘Abu Yazan’ the Palestinian political activist, writer and a member of Gaza Youth Breaks out movement, writes “My story is marked by violence, persecution, arrests, abuse and resistance.” Matter has published an article on Aljazeera stating “It has been almost two years now since we wrote our manifesto. We called it a manifesto, but in reality, I’m not sure what it was. Was it a manifesto, or was it a cry for help? Perhaps, an accusation, or even perhaps a demand to the world and to ourselves; a demand for change from the outside and from within. It was before the uprisings began around us, and they have been roaring the last two years in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, Syria and Bahrain. But we had felt like shouting in the dark, and while this raging had brought light into the darkness of the dictatorships around us, the night around us has not thinned even a bit. No, if anything, it has only become darker. … We struggle every day against our obstacles and for our dreams, and you can see that in all the amazing creativity coming out of Gaza, in our art, poems, writing, videos and songs, you can hear it and meet us in the talks we give all over the world. Yes, we wrote a manifesto, and maybe that was just the bright and loud outcry of the beginning of a journey, whose path is hard and tiring, thorny and also often very quiet and dark. But it is always there. So two years later, we say: We will be free. We will live. We will have peace. And we are always out there, fighting our daily struggle, full of the resistance we inherited from a long struggle for Palestine. We live and write and say and sing silent or loud manifestos every day. Just listen to us.”

 

Inspired by Aljazeera ow.ly/eUhfO image source Facebook ow.ly/eUhc9

Property of a commercial oligarchy (October 27 2012) Property of a commercial oligarchy (October 27 2012)

Lewis H. Lapham the 77 year old American writer and editor describes how American democracy became the property of a commercial oligarchy in an article published on Aljazeera titled ‘Feast of fools’. Lapham states “ Forbidden the use of words apt to depress a Q Score or disturb a Gallup poll, the candidates stand as product placements meant to be seen instead of heard, their quality to be inferred from the cost of their manufacture. The sponsors of the event, generous to a fault but careful to remain anonymous, dress it up with the bursting in air of star-spangled photo ops, abundant assortments of multiflavoured sound bites, and the candidates so well-contrived that they can be played for jokes, presented as game-show contestants, or posed as noble knights-at-arms setting forth on vision quests, enduring the trials by klieg light, until on election night they come to judgment before the throne of cameras by whom and for whom they were produced. Best of all, at least from the point of view of the commercial oligarchy paying for both the politicians and the press coverage, the issue is never about the why of who owes what to whom, only about the how much and when, or if, the check is in the mail. No loose talk about what is meant by the word democracy or in what ways it refers to the cherished hope of liberty embodied in the history of a courageous people. The campaigns don’t favour the voters with the gratitude and respect owed to their standing as valuable citizens participant in the making of such a thing as a common good. They stay on message with their parsing of democracy as the ancient Greek name for the American Express card…”

 

Inspired by Aljazeera ow.ly/ezA47 image source 3quarksdaily ow.ly/ezzWd

The culture of corruption (October 19 2012) The culture of corruption (October 19 2012)

Nadine Gordimer the 88 year old South African writer, political activist and recipient of the 1991 Nobel Prize in Literature has spoken to Aljazeera on the ‘The culture of corruption’ and questions what happened to the democracy that Nelson Mandela and other South African leaders ushered in? The Aljazeera article states that “Social unrest these days is part of the fabric of South African life. The promise of what was once called the rainbow nation still to be realised. A different perhaps more ominous chapter has opened in this country – there is widespread public discontent with what is perceived as endemic corruption, and deep disappointment if not anger at the gross inequality that is still so much part of the society. How did it come to this? What happened to the democracy that Nelson Mandela and other great leaders ushered in? …Gordimer who for decades has provided a mirror in which the people of South Africa could view themselves. …She became a member of the African National Congress at a time when the movement was outlawed in South Africa and though many of her works were banned, she never stopped writing, never softened the voices of those entangled in the racist maze that was the system of apartheid. And in the years since the ANC came to power she subjected the new rulers to the same honest and rigorous scrutiny she applied to the white government they replaced. She continues to probe, to reveal truths that many would rather remain hidden. And above all, Nadine Gordimer continues to reject censorship of ideas in any form, her mantra unchanged through decades that a people can only be free if they are free to say what they want.”

 

Inspired by Aljazeera ow.ly/emxad image source Bengt Oberger ow.ly/emx2F

Netizens Reject Cybercrime Act (October 17 2012) Netizens Reject Cybercrime Act (October 17 2012)

Kara Santos the Filipino writer and photographer published an article on IPS News titled ‘Filipino Netizens Reject Cybercrime Act’ claiming “A newly enacted cybercrime law in the Philippines has raised fears that not only online media but also ordinary netizens could be persecuted for exercising their freedom of expression”. Santos states “Media groups have expressed concern that the law poses a threat to press freedom and limits freedom of expression in the country. Bloggers and social media practitioners also point out that the new law allows the government to shut down websites without due process, and makes Internet users liable for simply clicking the ‘like’ button on Facebook or re-tweeting something on Twitter. …the law also broadens the coverage of libel as a content-related offense that can be committed by just about anybody using a computer. …Many Filipinos are disturbed by the fact that the man allegedly responsible for this last-minute change, which lumps online libel with cybersex and child pornography, is notorious for plagiarising blogs, and recently elicited a spate of criticism from active netizens. …investigative journalist and blogger Raissa Robles claims that Senator Vicente Sotto III pushed for the insertion into the law at the eleventh hour “Historically, in the Philippines, it is the rich and the powerful who use libel as a weapon to suppress criticisms about them. Before the Internet came along, it was easier for the rich and the powerful to control criticisms. All they needed to do was buy a stake in newspapers, TV and radio. Or sue them. Now they have realised that the Web is beyond their control.”

 

Inspired by IPS News ow.ly/emsMy image source Facebook ow.ly/emsGS

Spanish public won't accept a financial coup d'etat (October 10 2012) Spanish public won’t accept a financial coup d’etat (October 10 2012)

Katharine Ainger the Barcelona based writer interested in the points where art, creativity, radical democracy and ecological justice intersect, reports in an article for The Guardian titled ‘The Spanish public won’t accept a financial coup d’etat’, claiming that Spain’s government is right to fear the public reaction to this new round of suffering mandated by the financial markets. Ainger states “The attempt by the Spanish “Occupy” movement, the indignados, to surround the Congress in Madrid has been compared by the secretary general of the ruling rightwing People’s party (PP) to an attempted coup. Spanish democracy may indeed be in peril, but the danger is not in the streets. According to the Financial Times, the EU has been in secret talks with the economy minister Luis de Guindos to implement further austerity measures in advance of Spain requesting a full bailout. …The government is right to fear the Spanish public’s reaction to this new round of suffering mandated by the financial markets. … Spain is on the brink of insolvency and under huge pressure to accept a rescue package. In return, the eurozone’s fourth largest economy will have to surrender sovereign and financial control to the IMF, the European commission, and the European Central Bank. …Already many protest signs say: “We can’t take any more.” With a 26% unemployment rate, 22% of Spanish households now live below the poverty line and a further 30% cannot “reach the end of the month”… Loss of sovereignty is fuelling desire for Catalan independence with huge protests. Spanish citizen movements, like those in Greece, Ireland, Portugal, Italy and France have demanded a debt audit, to see who really owes what to whom.”

 

Inspired by The Guardian ow.ly/ebhGS image source Twitter ow.ly/ebhC5

Transformed from a shadowy ex-convict (September 24 2012) Transformed from a shadowy ex-convict (September 24 2012)

Nakoula Basseley Nakoula the 55 year old Egyptian-American Coptic Christian has been named as the writer, producer and distributor of the anti-Islamic film Innocence of Muslims that has inflamed anti-american violence across the middle east and major cities of the west. Ben Piven in an article published on Aljazeera states “After a film insulting the Prophet Muhammad triggered mass protests in Muslim-majority countries across North Africa, the Middle East and elsewhere, Nakoula Basseley Nakoula has been transformed from a shadowy ex-convict into an international man of mystery. Reporters and police began camping out next to the 55-year-old Nakoula’s house outside Los Angeles, as US law enforcement officials confirmed Nakoula’s central role in the notorious anti-Islam video. But questions remain about Nakoula’s exact role in the production of the film, and rumours continue to circulate about the video’s dissemination. …probation officers briefly interviewed – but did not technically arrest – the Coptic Christian resident of southern California who has been on probation since his conviction for financial crimes. As part of his release terms, he was forbidden from using computers or the internet for five years. His probation order also warned Nakoula against using false identities. Nakoula has already admitted uploading the trailer to the internet, which could constitute a violation of the terms of his five-year probation. It was not immediately clear whether Nakoula was the target merely of a probation violation check, a new criminal investigation – or part of the broader investigation into the deaths of US Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans in Libya possibly related to outrage over the video.”

 

Inspired by Ben Piven ow.ly/dP62b image source Nick Stern ow.ly/dP4Po

Why Did Ecuador Grant Asylum to Assange (August 27 2012) Why Did Ecuador Grant Asylum to Assange (August 27 2012)

Kevin Gosztola the American undergraduate writer and filmmaker has posed the question: Why Did Ecuador Grant Asylum to Julian Assange? in an article he published in The Nation magazine. In the article he states “…in the face of rumors that British authorities were considering storming the Ecuadorean embassy in London to arrest Julian Assange, Ecuador’s Foreign Minister, Ricardo Patiño, announced that his country will grant the WikiLeaks founder diplomatic asylum. He declared that his government endorsed the “fears” expressed by Assange that he could face political persecution if sent to Sweden, and that such asylum would protect him from the possibility of being extradited to the United States. …Patiño read from a list of points detailing the foundation for the asylum request by Assange, who he described as “an award-winning communications professional” known “internationally for his struggle for freedom of expression, press freedom and human rights in general.” He cited “strong evidence” that Assange faced possible “retaliation by the country or countries that produced the information,” revealed by Cablegate, noting that such retaliation “may endanger [his] safety, integrity, and even his life.” He said that “given an extradition to the United States of America, Mr. Assange would not have a fair trial, could be tried by special courts or military” and could be the victim of “cruel and degrading” treatment. …if the Swedish government is genuinely concerned over the women who brought forth the allegations against him, it is troubling to see its government continue to refuse to send someone to question Assange in London. It is this refusal that ultimately helped convince Ecuador to grant asylum.”

 

Inspired by The Nation ow.ly/d7cxQ image source Twitter ow.ly/d7d4c

Dangerous triumph of Israel's right wing (August 9 2012) Dangerous triumph of Israel’s right wing (August 9 2012)

Murtaza Hussain the Toronto-based writer and analyst focused on issues related to Middle Eastern politics has published an article on Aljazeera titled ‘The dangerous triumph of Israel’s right wing’ discussing how Israel faces an existential threat from the Netanyahu government’s embrace of settlements in the West Bank. In the article Hussain states “For Israel, a state that has always been tenacious and aggressive in combatting perceived de-legitimisation from abroad, the most dangerous threat to its continued political integrity might today be engineered by its own right-wing government. Recently, the Levy Commission, a blue-ribbon panel of Israeli jurists commissioned by Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu’s government to determine the legal status of the Palestinian West Bank, came back with findings and recommendations that represent a potential sea change in Israeli policy in the ongoing conflict. …The potential consequences of these findings can hardly be overstated. The report asserts that because the occupation and settlement enterprise have continued for decades under successive administrations and are historically unique, they should be de facto recognised as legal, regardless of international opinion. This position maintains that the West Bank is thus not occupied territory but in fact today is a part of Israel proper. …If the findings of the Levy Commission are indeed implemented as many high-ranking officials are presently advocating, it will either mean the end of Israel as a democracy or as the Jewish-majority state envisioned by its founders – two ideals that cannot exist simultaneously against a background of annexation and apartheid. While Israel’s strength facing its neighbours and the world continues to increase, its emboldened and ascendant right-wing may be engineering an existential threat to the country on its own.”

 

Inspired by Aljazeera ow.ly/cEBsi image source Twitter ow.ly/cEC5P

Something’s gone terribly wrong (July 26 2012) Something’s gone terribly wrong (July 26 2012)

Moustafa Bayoumi the Swiss-American award-winning writer and associate professor has published an article in The Nation titled ‘Something’s gone terribly wrong’. In the article Bayoumi states “Every group has its loonies. And yet the idea that American Muslim communities are foul nests of hatred, where dark-skinned men plot Arabic violence while combing one another’s beards, persists. In fact, it’s worse than that. In the past few years, another narrative about American Muslims has come along, which sows a different kind of paranoia. While the old story revolves around security, portraying American Muslims as potential terrorists or terrorist sympathizers, the new narrative operates more along the axis of culture. Simple acts of religious or cultural expression and the straightforward activities of Muslim daily life have become suspicious. …What happens when ordinary life becomes grounds for suspicion without a hint of wrongdoing; when law enforcement premises its work on spying on the quotidian and policing the unremarkable; and when the everyday affairs of American Muslim life can so easily be transformed into nefarious intent? Something has gone terribly wrong for American Muslims when, more than a decade after the terrorist attacks of September 11, anti-Muslim sentiment in the United States continues to grow. …There is a real danger that the same tools that enable today’s Islamophobia will continue to migrate and expand with little or no public outcry. …mission creep is as good a reason as any to pay attention to Islamophobia today – because when the ordinary affairs of the United States include such actions, the stakes are nothing less than extraordinary.”

 

Inspired by The Nation ow.ly/clAsr image source Neville Elder ow.ly/clAcD

Brazil the next cop on the beat in Africa (June 25th 2012) Brazil the next cop on the beat in Africa (June 25th 2012)

Nikolas Kozloff the American writer and Latin American historian has published an article titled ‘Is Brazil the next cop on the beat in Africa? The Pentagon seems to hope so’ in which he argues that ‘any action Brazil takes in Africa should be based on peaceful cooperation and not military escalation’. Kozloff’s article on Aljazeera states “Facing budgetary constrictions and overstretched resources, the Pentagon knows that it cannot effectively patrol the entire globe on its own. …in Rio, Panetta [Pentagon] emphasized Brazil’s long held ties to Africa. Historically, Brazil was the largest destination of the Atlantic Slave Trade, and today a sizable portion of the country’s population is of African descent. …WikiLeaks cables suggest that some within the Brazilian political elite want to redirect Brazilian foreign policy toward Africa …Nevertheless, given all of the controversy about the US role in Africa, Brazil should firmly reject Panetta’s calls for closer military collaboration in the region. This doesn’t mean that Brazil should outright withdraw from Africa, and if anything the WikiLeaks documents serve to highlight the many shortcomings of the South American giant’s foreign policy on the continent. Hopefully, Brazil will become more engaged in Africa in the long-term, not less.”

 

Inspired by Aljazeera ow.ly/bJ7k7 image source Twitter ow.ly/bJ7f3

Larbi Sadiki the Tunisian writer, political scientist and senior lecturer recalls his meeting with Egyptian Aboul Fotouh in 1992 while a fresh doctoral candidate at the Australian National University. The subject of Sadiki’s investigation at the time was notions of democracy in the discourse of four Islamist movements. The Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood (EMB), Tunisia’s Nahda Party (NP), Jordan Islamic Action Front (IAF), and Sudan’s Islamic Front led then by Hassan Al-Turabi. Sadiki states “Of all of the Islamists I met and engaged with in discussion over democracy during that period, coming soon after the Algerian debacle, Aboul Fotouh was amongst the limited number of interlocutors who felt at ease with that concept and the whole notion of good government. Then, the concept was not as yet popular with most Islamists. Not even the creative Rashid Ghannouchi, whom I sat with and interviewed many times for the purpose of my PhD and beyond, had at the time acquired a firm grip on the term. It was largely considered for being a specifically Western concept underpinned by Western values. At the time, ‘democracy’ in Islamist parlance, lacked the scruples and rigour of shura, Islam’s consultative ethos, even though the likes of the innovative Hassan Al-Turabi in Sudan sought a move towards defining a shura-democracy synthesis.”

 

Inspired by Aljazeera ow.ly/bzInt image source Studiahumana ow.ly/bzI9P

Rss Feed Tweeter button Facebook button Technorati button Reddit button Myspace button Linkedin button Delicious button Digg button Flickr button Stumbleupon button Newsvine button Youtube button