truth...

"walk as much as you can because buying gaz pays for the war"

Rights and Ownership of Forrests in India

So two things came to mind while I was reading this today that were referred to in our seminar class:
the first is that the "Recognition of Forest Rights Bill 2005, which would give an estimated 40 million people ownership rights to the land they've been using, is expected to pass by the end of the year" . This is one case, where the indigenous people are actually claiming their land rights back from the government. The details were not included, but this must include changing policy in patent restrictions and the transfer of indigenous knowledge in the region.

The second is that the computers, cell phones and televisions donated by Western nations to developing countries are an environmental threat. In some cases, the products are so out-dated that they are usually thrown out and burned in open air sites, releasing harmful chemicals.

Thought it was pretty interesting, seeing that it seemed like such a good idea in class to donate old e-technology. This just highlights that we need something new, or we need to create incentives to change.

the truth about Cambodia

Ever been to Cambodia? Its a beautiful country with beautiful people. The cities are full of life. But they are also full of reminders about what went on their just a couple decdes ago Only once you are there can you really find out the truth about Cambodia. Littering the countryside in Laos and Cambodia are landmines. You visit some lanscapes and you aren't allowed to go for a walk because they are still detonating them. This has an impact on the economy, not to mention the mind, in the countryside.

The US refuses to sign the land mine treaety, banning them in warfare. This fact continues to upset, and righfully so, citizens around the world. When you see a man hobbling around Phnom Penh with only one leg and four children, you start to wonder why the US won't suck it up.

Truth is the casualty. Without the US support, their is major lack of funding in the extraction of land mines in several countries worldwide. Why won't they help? Because the US put most of those land mines down in the first place. And this was morally wrong. If the government does give in and sign the treaty, then it would prove that the international community has the power to sway the US to give up an essential ground weapon. If they were able to achieve this, what else could they do?

The discussion is frustrating.

But, I'm not done with Cambodia.
A little history
- Vietnam War spilled over into Cambodia
- Nixon and Kissinger adminstirations launched numerous air attacks along the borders of Vietnam, killing many Cambodians (not to mention the landmines also).
- In March 1970, there was a CIA backed coup that deposed King NOrodom Sihanouk.
- He was replaced by a pro-Washington man named Lon Nol. The social consequences of this breathed new life into the Khmer Rouge, an extreme communist organization.
- Pol Pot (KR), took power in April 1975
- There was the genocide
- The communist part of the regime was supported by China.

This means that the West denied development AID by the UN in the years after the genocide. The West demonizes and punishes Cambodia and Vietnam for not aligning.
When will they learn better?

Schiller

Herbert Schiller is a media critic and analyzes communication policy in the United States. He explains how the political economy and mass communications are intertwined in such an important way in order to mobilize international support for US global domination and the transnational corporate order post World War 2. The promise of trickle down effects and thorough development in the developing world tend to be discounted in the discourse, though in most cases this is just a claim to be patient with the status quo. Schiller talks about the way the media tends to manage the mind, but focusing on the obvious through repetition and editing, rather than allowing one to make one’s own judgments.

He quotes Joseph Nye saying “ In truth, the 21st century, not the 20th, will turn out to be the period of America’s greatest preeminence. Information is the new coin of the international realm, and the United States is better positioned than any other country multiply the potency of its hard and soft power resources through information”.

He then quotes Rothkopf saying “ It is in the economic and political interests of the United States to ensure that, if the world is moving to a common language, it be English; that, if the world is becoming linked by television, radio and music, the programming be American; and that, if common values are being developed, they be values with which Americans are comfortable…Americans should not deny thee fact that, of all the nations in the history of the world, theirs is the most just, the most tolerant, the most willing to constantly reassess and improve itself, and the best model for the future.”.

How messed up is that? And these are policy makers, people at the top of the American hierarchy! It’s a disgrace…


Works cited:
Schiller, Herbert. "Dominating the Electronic Era: Towards a new century of American imperialism"
source: http://mondediplo.com/1998/09/02schiller