My Beauty Best Teacher

Chris Blattman writes:
Checks and balances in democratic systems are sources of stability. No one man or woman can rule the state as a fiefdom, and no succession battle can so destroy a nation country.
Africa's strong man syndrome has, some argue, been the key to whatever meager development it has achieved. Witness Yoweri Museveni's Uganda, Paul Kagame's Rwanda, or Ellen Sirleaf's Liberia--both men (and the one woman) pulled their countries back from the brink and on the path to health and wealth.Yet today's Kagame or Sirleaf may be tomorrow's Kibaki or Mugabe--entrenched leaders who refuse to go when their time comes, destroying all they have wrought in the process...[continue reading]

Related articles by Zemanta

• Ugandan president plans for fourth term

Excerpts from George Ayittey's Indigenous African Institutions:

....Indeed, Africa is one of the homes of advanced legal institutions. Perhaps the most famous of these institutions are the courts still found among the Bantu states of the southern third of the continent...Disputes arise in any family or society with regards to property, and African societies were no exception. To resolve these disputes, various mechanisms and institutions were created. However within the traditional African modus operandi, there was an additional unique dimension. Individual attachment to lineages and latent groups of solidarity always carried the potential risk of transforming personal disputes into broader group conflicts...[continue reading]

via Cheetah Index

Dele Olojede makes a clarion call for Freedom of Information in Nigeria:

We have usually preferred to conduct our affairs in the open, in broad daylight. Every significant marker of our existence—births, weddings, deaths—all unfold with extravagant openness, leaving only those which are meant to frighten, or which are forbidden, for the dark.Except of course, in our modern politics.
Here, we exist almost entirely in an area of darkness, where any demand to share information is treated with great suspicion, and our political class regards itself largely as unaccountable to the public.The conduct of our affairs, in the political sphere, can most usefully be likened to a feeding frenzy, where all tiers of government have effectively fallen under the sway of unrestrained men [and the occasional woman.]The public business goes on largely behind closed doors, and the sharing of the most elementary information is viewed with horror...[continue reading]

via NaijaBlog

Have you ever caught this movie on TBS- Behind Enemy Lines, starring Owen Wilson? It's not bad, and it got me thinking- if you make a movie about heroism and the American soldier is a good guy, it makes for a good movie. This movie shows the UN being stupid and pointless (and ultimately corrupt), while the US soldier does the right thing. It's 100% pro-American as a movie.

And how did it do? It made a profit (box office mojo), won a couple awards, had two sequels, and launched Owen Wilson as a star. Why don't more producers make movies like this one?

I found this fun fact about Dukakis on wikipedia- Soon after his loss in the 1988 Presidential election to George Herbert Walker Bush, the so-called 'Massachusetts Miracle' of prosperity also went bust, and Michael Dukakis was little more than a 'lame duck' Governor for his final two years in office. At the close of his tenure, Massachusetts was mired deeply in debt facing a budget shortfall of more than $1.5 billion.

It's interesting- what happens to failed Democratic presidential candidates- do they go on to greatness? Dukakis was touted for his economic vision- turns out it was smoke and mirrors. Mondale was touted for his peace approach- turns out that was naive. Gore was touted for his steadiness- turns out he's a nut. Kerry was touted for his war experience- turns out he wasn't quite the warrior he made himself out to be.

Now Democrats have nominated a smoke-and-mirrors, non-warrior, naive Obama- do you think he'll go eco-nuts if he loses too?

I'm sure a lot of people have already blogged about Obama's speech in Berlin, but there is one line that I would like to talk about. In this speech, he is talking about the challenges that Europe and the United States face today, and to overcome those challenges, here is the solution he provides- he said "Now is the time to join together, through constant cooperation, strong institutions, shared sacrifice, and a global commitment to progress, to meet the challenges of the 21st century."

So, the solution to the problems of the world is to "join together." How exactly does that help anything? I know it's nice to join together, but just the action of joining together does nothing. How about "constant cooperation"? What does that do? You and I can constantly cooperate to juggle, but how exactly does that provide a job to someone?

"Strong institutions"- that should scare you. What exactly does this mean? This means that Obama feels that the problems and challenges the world faces are because people have choices and liberty, and he wants to take that away. He wants to subvert you and make you a slave to the state- to constantly sacrifice your desires and wants so that he and his followers can get what they want. Strong institutions have never led to freedom and liberty or a better world.

And of course, no liberal speech could be complete without the solution to all of our problems- "a commitment to progress." I really feel that those people who are committed to progress are the most likely to threaten our freedoms. Progress- progress towards what exactly?

Here is another line that I like- Obama says "Together, we must forge trade that truly rewards the work that creates wealth." Huh, this sounds an awful lot like some of the stuff the communists said. Truly rewards the work... workers of the world unite! Labor lead us! Down with evil capitalists!

Seriously, I can see why communists, fascists, and terrorists endorse this guy, but the American public would be seriously demented to do so.

Bankele reports on Binyavanga Wainaina's Kwani Litfest:

The 2008 Kwani Lit Fest kicked off on Wednesday night with a talk on How foreign correspondents have formed the literary image of Africa with a panel consisting of Steve Bloomfield (The Independent/Monocle), Binyavanga Wainana (Kwani), Jonathan Ledgard (The Economist) and Mary Anne Fitzgerald (London Times)...[continue reading]

Two articles in the African Executive emphasize the importance of small holders, firstly James Shikwati states:

Our foot soldiers (read- smallholder farmers) have endured myriad onslaughts that have left them numb. First was the attack from 'exotic' crop varieties such as maize, wheat, pawpaws, citrus fruit, and 'sukuma', among others, which reorganized their dietary habits. The demand for indigenous foods dropped and forced them to attempt production of 'exotic' crops. The modern day farmer's definition of hunger may be lack of maize, rice and perhaps wheat....[continue reading]

While William Arap Ruto (Kenya's Agriculture minister) asserts that:

There is need for commercialization of production at this level. This process involves transformation from production for household subsistence to production for the market. Essentially, it implies monetization of the rural economy...[continue reading]

Francisco Noguera at Next Billion writes:

Collier and Ghani/Lockhart emphasize the importance of engaging citizens in tackling the issue of governance in the developing world. Collier calls it "building a mass of informed citizens" without which "politicians will continue to get away with gestures," calling for the help of his techie TED audience to build ways for that to occur.
Ghani and Lockhart, on the other hand, go deep into describing what, in their opinion, should be the key functions developed by the state and a framework to spread this model across the world, acknowledging from the very beginning that "... the common people of failing states have no real stake in the success or failure of their countries" although, thanks to technological advance, "they can now truly become principals in state-building by making an agenda for accountability and transparency concrete".

Emerging powers vie for influence in Africa.
Nigerian curiosity discusses Sovereign Wealth Funds (SWF's).
Stifling entrepreneurs with fees and red tape.
A pertinent study on the The Unfulfilled Promise of African Industrialization.

The Economist reports on a debate between Richard Cockett,June Arunga, Mike Gidney and Tunde Zack-Williams the subject being-Who's keeping Africa Down? Listen here
via PSD Blog

Daniel Philpott reviews Abdullahi Ahmed An-Na’im’s latest book Islam and the Secular State:

He defends a “secular state” that is based on these values and where sharia is not the basis of constitutional law. He makes clear that he is not arguing for the exclusion of religion from politics. Muslims remain free to argue for policies based on their convictions about sharia, but they ought to do so on the basis of secular “civic” reasons and within the framework of a constitutional order based on human rights. Secular, for him, does not mean hostile to religion but rather a differentiation between religion and state. In fact, he seeks an Islamic justification for the secular state.

via 3quarksdaily

Related articles by Zemanta

• An Na'im on A Secular Islamic Politics and State

Chris Abani discusses our "shared humanity" at TED:

Alec Russell reports in FT:

Economists have long argued that formal statistics underestimate activity in the informal sector.Under white rule(in South Africa), townships were ignored by banks partly because they were deemed commercially unviable, partly because of the lawlessness, and partly because it did not occur to most bankers to expand services out of their “comfort zone”, says one executive drily.
Now, however, there is a dual impulse for banks to reassess their old ways: there is growing awareness of the size of the informal economy and the rewards from tapping it; and they also need to fulfil their obligations to the banking charter, which requires banks to make amends for the past, when they catered mainly to whites, by expanding services...[continue reading]

Image via WikipediaThe Times reports on the corruption and excesses of another aid seeking African leader-Omar Bongo:

A mansion worth £15m in one of Paris’s most elegant districts has become the latest of 33 luxury properties bought in France by President Omar Bongo Ondimba of Gabon, the world’s longest-serving leader, and his family, it was alleged last week...[continue reading]

via NaijaBlog

Rebecca Tinsley writes in Standpoint:

We ignore the concerns of African citizens who are incredulous that the rich West lectures them on the need for accountability and transparency, while bolstering their thieving or wasteful rulers with money.
As a community leader in a camp in northern Uganda commented to me last month, We never see the schools or clinics. Your aid buys Mercedes for the Big Men.”
Some recipient governments grasp exactly what donors want to hear, readily agreeing to ‘capacity building’ programmes emphasising increased accountability. They dutifully echo the donor’s jargon, while laughing behind our backs, and flicking through the latest Mercedes catalogue for their new ministerial limousine...[continue reading]

Related articles by Zemanta

• Ugandan president plans for fourth term

Sam Makinda argues that G8 handouts won’t lift us out of poverty.
Fresh Plaza reports that Ghana's non-traditional exports are booming.
Daniel Mayabi asks us to recognize the importance of the informal sector.
World press covers the opening of a solar powered computer center.

Adekunle Theophilus at WhichWayNigeria is incensed with the disdain shown to creative,innovative and inventive types:

A country that showers national honours and millions of naira on footballers and thieves, while allocating pittance for research grants and allowing people like Tanko Zubairu, Ifeanyi Eze, Dele Awojobi, Ezekiel Izeogu etc to waste will always be under the eternal shackles of underdevelopment. The world feels we are a vainglorious and pedestrian nation. The OAU team of Drs Ajayi, Balogun and Akintomide who were working on curative treatment for hypertension and heart failure did not get adequate research grants and had to struggle through their work. Only God knows the state of their work now!. The most unfortunate aspect is that there are hundreds of Tanko Zubairus, Ifeanyi ezes all over Nigeria who are wasting, lost to other countries or are dead due to this lackadaisical attitude towards supporting local science and technology development and Nigeria is worse off for it. We call ourselves giants of Africa and we don’t even have any policy to assist, harness and promote such potential inventors and inventions for national development. No wonder, Nigeria is called a graveyard of talents!...[continue reading]

Ellen Johnson Sirleaf stated in her speech delivered at the Sixth Annual Nelson Mandela Lecture that:

There are today over 20 democracies in sub-Saharan Africa. Consider the transformation – in the space of a generation, democracy in Africa has spread from a very few countries to more than one third of the continent. Some of these are nascent democracies that are still fragile. But for others, the change more clearly prevails. It is hard to predict the future and the change will not be easy or smooth in every country, but never before in world history have so many low income countries become democracies in so short a period of time. Never before has the resolve of African leaders, backed by needed and judiciously used military intervention, ended a rebellion against an elected government in power, as was recently done in the Comoros.
This enormous change engendered by an empowered citizenry has huge implications for Africa and for those few countries that continue to frustrate the will of the people. This New Africa is being built, every day, by the African people – people who reach out across boundaries – real and imagined. They are not waiting for the Renaissance to be determined by states and by governments alone for they know that they are a part of an interconnected world...[continue reading]

via African Loft

Aneel Karnani chimes in on the debate regarding the insufficiency of Microfinance:

My analysis of the macroeconomic data suggests that although microcredit yields some noneconomic benefits, it does not significantly alleviate poverty. Indeed, in some instances microcredit makes life at the bottom of the pyramid worse. Contrary to the hype about microcredit, the best way to eradicate poverty is to create jobs and to increase worker productivity.
To understand why creating jobs, not offering microcredit, is the better solution to alleviating poverty, consider these two alternative scenarios: (1) A microfinancier lends $200 to each of 500 women so that each can buy a sewing machine and set up her own sewing microenterprise, or (2) a traditional financier lends $100,000 to one savvy entrepreneur and helps her set up a garment manufacturing business that employs 500 people. In the first case, the women must make enough money to pay off their usually high-interest loans while competing with each other in exactly the same market niche. Meanwhile the garment manufacturing business can exploit economies of scale and use modern manufacturing processes and organizational techniques to enrich not only its owners, but also its workers. As these scenarios illustrate, a surer way to ending poverty is to create jobs and to increase worker productivity, rather than investing in microfinance...[continue reading]

McCain recently described Barack Obama’s Senate record as “more to the left” than Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont — a self-described socialist. That's true- it is. Obama has the most extreme left voting record of any member of the United States Senate.

So what is the reply from liberals to this comment? On the Ed Schultz show, callers all decided to ignore the content- Obama has a more extreme left voting record than a socialist- and instead called McCain a fascist. The comments on the CNN blog also do that, calling McCain a fascist. I'm guessing that these liberals think that fascism is on the far right, as it is typically taught- but McCain's record is not far right- if anything, is very moderate. So once again, liberals just make up stuff- "McCain is a giant seagull"! It's like they don't need to base it on anything at all!

Incidentally, I think that fascism has been incorrectly put on the far right- I think it is more accurate to put it on the left of the spectrum, and think that the label fits less on McCain than it does on Obama. See Goldberg's book on Liberal Fascism for more.

Oh, and the other comments that I notice are of the variety of "McCain is a name-calling meanie!" So, pointing to a voting record and clearly describing where it can be placed on the standard right to left scale is now name-calling? Is saying the sun is a bright ball of flame name-calling? Look, the ocean is blue- that's name calling! Seriously, saying what something is not name-calling- but calling someone a fascist without any backup to it is. The kettle is calling the pot black! (that is not a racist comment- pots are in fact usually black).

Listening to Sean Hannity show and Ed Schultz show yesterday, I was listening to liberals calling in to talk about the problems facing our nation, and inevitably, most liberals identify the problems facing us today as conspiracies perpetrated by Big Oil, Wall Street, Big Business, etc.

For example, the reason they lose elections is not that they nominated poor candidates- it must be a Republican plot! In fact, it's always a plot. Once you really press a liberal, they always fall back on the fact that the reason why things are not working is that there is some group out there with nefarious ends. It's not the fact that their policies fail, it's always that there is some mysterious group out there trying to screw us over. It's not that their stopping drilling and pushing ethanol down our throats that made gas expensive- it's Big Oil. It's not their easy credit and house for everyone mentality that caused the mortgage racket to collapse- it's Wall Street. It's not their ineffective Middle East peace talks that don't work, it is the Jewish lobby.

To a liberal, there is no cause and effect, there is no reason, there is no logic- there is only some evil mechanisms going on in the background. Listening to liberals call in, some hinted at who might be behind all these bad things... some group of people with connections and money... located in the Middle East and America... these liberals hint about it... someone has to be controlling all these forces... someone... wait a minute... thinking like a liberal now... Jewish people make money, Jewish people got us involved in the Middle East... Jews must be at the root of all problems!

In reality, I was just hoping all these similarities between Obama and 1930's Germany were just in my minds eye, but darn it, every single day new evidence mounts. From powerlineblog and hotair comes this story-Barack Obama delivered a speech on July 2 in which he said:

We cannot continue to rely on our military in order to achieve the national security objectives we've set. We've got to have a civilian national security force that's just as powerful, just as strong, just as well-funded.

The youtube of it is here- look between minute 16 and 17. I think we all should have a contest- "Name that Barak Obama personal quasi-military security force!" Since Stormtroopers and KGB are already taken, how about Changers? Brownshirts? Obama Youth? Email me- I'd love to hear suggestions!

Admittedly, I'm not an expert in 1930's German politics, but I think if it came down to it, I would have voted for Kurt von Schleicher. Why, you wonder, and why would I make such an obscure reference? Someone today asked me why I support McCain. It's not that I like McCain, it's just that I fear Obama- and it's not that I would have liked von Schleicher, it's just that I would have feared his opponent.

Although this probably violates a confidentiality agreement I signed, I thought I'd write today about my recent work on the Michigan Merit Exam, or MME. The MME is the standardized test they use in Michigan, and is given to 11th grade students. It is basically the ACT supplemented by additional science and social studies portions.

The science and social studies portions are put together using teachers, who write the questions and approve the questions. There are several committees of teachers who look over these questions- a Bias Review Committee (which only looks at gender and race bias), a Content Review Committee (decides if the questions are too hard), etc.

What sorts of questions are on the social studies test? Here is a summary of all of the major topics tested in US history on the MME: Vietnam war was bad, Rosa Parks, South Africa sanctions, the Equal Rights Amendment, living constitution, Japanese internment in WWII, and Title IX funding. That's it- no questions about the Revolutionary War, the Civil War, WWI, WWII, the Roaring Twenties, etc. There were a couple New Deal questions... and a couple questions on the Civil Rights era and on the Great Society... a question on JFK, FDR, LBJ, and Truman. No questions on Teddy, Taft, Coolidge, Eisenhower, or Nixon.

What do you notice about these questions? They are all legitimate US history questions, yes, but there is no political balance in them. It is all the things that liberals like to talk about, and none of the things conservatives like to talk about. If you were to teach WWII, you do not have to teach the folly of appeasement, the sacrifice of our troops, the bravery of our soldiers, or any of the famous battles. You would need to teach Japanese internment. If you were to teach Civil Rights, you would not teach that the Republicans passed the major pieces of legislation- you would teach that JFK and LBJ signed them into law. If you taught Vietnam, you would focus on public opinion and opposition to it, and teach nothing else about it.

Based on the questions on the MME test, that every student in Michigan is tested on and that every teacher in Michigan uses to design their curriculum, the only version of social studies is a thoroughly liberal one. Liberal to its very core, with every single facet of the education business seeped in the liberal narrative of the world.

Ironically enough, the average score (before the phony math took over in the Cut Score Setting Committee) was a 28%- the students do so poorly because their minds, even after years and years of indoctrination, reject the liberal narrative as untrue, causing them to get many many answers wrong.

From my experience, conservatives view education as a business- they see education as a service, with customers and providers, with a service that can be improved, resources to be managed, and customers to be responsible too. They seek to increase the role the market plays in education- schools-of-choice and the foundation-grant, for example.

Liberals believe that education is a right, and is given by the government to everyone, equally, and has neither customers to answer to or employees to manage. They see education as just is- a magical hole into which to throw money and expect nothing out of it.

Last week I was down at the Oakland County Board of Commissioners to hear the budget presentation of the Executive, and noticed a couple things. First, I was lucky I was able to go to one of these meetings- usually they hold these meetings when ordinary citizens can't go to them. Don't know why this is- but most people who have day jobs can't go to them. Next, I noticed that the budgeting process is for some reason totally inaccessible to the public- after listening for an hour, I got nothing on it, other than vague ideas. They didn't even give me any graphs or charts or anything- the various government officials got them, but not me, a lowly citizen. It wouldn't have mattered anyways- the budgeting process is a bunch of crap. The government does a poor job of anticipating anything, and so they always seem to be in crisis mode- even an award winning budgeting process like Oakland County (yes, they won some award). Lastly, what's the point of it anyways- they are not going to cut what they say they are going to cut, and the solution to their budgeting woes was to raid their rainy day fun anyways. Here is the write-up from the Oakland Press on it.

Got my newest edition of Entertainment Weekly, and saw that yet another anti-military TV show is out, called Generation Kill. This effort is more focused on the 'human experience' of war- swearing, bitching about superiors, conversations, etc. It still projects the military in a poor light, and does not get into the finer traditions and nobler parts of our military. My prediction- it bombs, just like the rest of these anti-war movies and TV shows that come out.

People on the left are so full of vanity, and it got me thinking- isn't this one of the Seven Deadly Sins? Leftists rarely admit that they are wrong- even when their predictions don't occur, or when their policies result in worsening conditions, or when their ideas result in substantial bad- they never admit they are wrong.

And they are so up front and aggressive about being right, it is almost like they know they are wrong- they are empty inside and unable to withstand any attacks or questioning, so shoot for loudness and shrillness. But leftists think they know how to fix the world- they think they are God, and thus are full of pride and vanity. Myself, I know I'm just a man.

The whole vanity thing ties into the global warming, anti-war, multiculturalism, etc crowd- they almost preen sometimes, showing their loud colors loudly and cockily strutting their stuff for everyone to see. They display their faith with bumper stickers, yard signs, t-shirts, etc.

Vanity is indeed a sin.

John H. Christy reports in Forbes:

The economies of sub-Saharan Africa are in the best shape in several decades. Africa is on track to deliver economic growth of nearly 7% in 2008. Inflation, which measures below 7%, is high by the standards of the developed world, but nowhere near crisis levels. Record oil prices have certainly helped stabilize African economies, but the International Monetary Fund notes that improvements have also been broad-based, attributable to better macroeconomic policies in recent years...[continue reading]

via Cheetah Index

Image via WikipediaDuncan Green writes in the New Statesman:

The secret of Botswana's success lies in politics. The country's elite come from a single dominant ethnic group (the Batswana) whose governance systems, emphasising broad consultation and consensus-building, emerged largely unscathed from colonialism. Botswana's leading human rights activist calls it "gentle authoritarianism". The government broke every rule in the so-called Washington consensus, setting up state-owned companies, nationalising mineral rights and steering the economy via six-year national development plans. "We are a free-market economy that does everything by planning," one local academic told me, laughing.

In the second half of the 20th century, dozens of developing countries emulated Botswana's success and achieved similar growth rates. "Getting the politics right" was key for them all. These countries have built effective states that guarantee the rule of law, ensure a healthy and educated population, control their national territories and create a positive environment for investment, growth and trade. For many, the growth spurt began with the redistribution of land and other assets...[continue reading]

Image via WikipediaA recent report from Cambridge University on the rise of BRIC manufacturers:

“highlights the threat to western business growth from a new breed of companies emerging onto the global stage.”

Quoting Zhang Ruimin, CEO of Haier:

“In the globalisation era, there are two categories of companies. One is the international company, and the other is the one taken over by the former group. There isn’t a third choice.” As a result, further rationalisations within industries are likely with the emerging multinationals often in the role of acquirer, but the targets will include MNCs (or parts of MNCs) as well as national and regional players...[continue reading]

The question then becomes when will we see the African EM manufacturer's join the race?
via Seeking Alpha

Barney Jopson writes in the FT:

The global crisis precipitated by soaring food prices has cast a spotlight on the low productivity of agriculture across Africa - especially when compared with Asia - and the reasons for it.
Country-by-country, the problems come in a variety of constellations. But the essential elements tend to be the same: farmers' difficulty in obtaining fertiliser; patchy access to credit; limited outreach programmes offering technical training; the absence of high-yielding seeds and modern equipment; poor or non-existent irrigation systems; bad transport links; and a lack of information on fair prices.
Yet Nigeria, as in so many other ways, is different. Not because it is not burdened by some or all of these problems. It is. But because they will fade into irrelevance if the country simply runs out of people who are willing to put up with them...[continue reading]

Mozambicans call for creativity in facing the 'Food Crisis'-Global Voices.
A first in Kenyan politics (maybe African) a minister resigns under pressure.
How the African Left provides cover for Mugabe and his cohorts.
A paper on managing Congo's forests sustainably.
In an argument for industrialization Sanjaya Lall asks Is African Industry Competing?

A paper by Amollo Lorraine presented at Changing the Change, explores the possibilities of evolving Jua Kali's into medium sized industries:

The Western concept of industrialisation has met with little success in most African countries. The poor performance of industries has led to the emergence of micro and small scale industries. In Kenya, these micro and small scale industries have been commonly referred to as ‘Jua Kali’ industries. The term ‘Jua Kali’ is Swahili for ‘Hot sun’ referring to the open air working conditions of the entrepreneurs. Most Jua Kali industries start off and remain as informal enterprises as their owners often cannot afford the expensive and rigorous process of registering with the relevant Government bodies. This informality means that the Jua kali businesses have found it hard to access business development services or export markets as compared to the formal and larger industries. (King 1995, 24-30). The Jua Kali entrepreneurs as result remain poor and their businesses small and uncompetitive. Though the Government has recognized the potential of the Jua Kali sector as an employment opportunity for many Kenyans, it has failed to create an enabling and sustainable environment for these micro and small industries to grow...[continue reading]

photo courtesy of practical action

Image via WikipediaIn what seems like a contradiction of the typical leftist stance, anti-globalist's in Mali assert that the food crisis is manufactured:

While the Group of Eight wealthy nations get together in Japan to discuss the food crisis, an African anti-globalist meeting stressed Africans could help themselves by eating local products.An enticing people's market with locally produced rice, mangoes, traditional medicines and African clothes is part of the so-called "poor people's summit" in Katibougou, Mali, held as a counterbalance to the G8 summit...[continue reading]

Related articles by Zemanta

• G8 summit: West told to fulfil its African aid pledge

Writing about The development of an Iron-and Steel-based metallurgical industry over 30 years ago Percy R. Luney stated:

The high-grade, low-cost mineral deposits presently necessary for the production of iron and steel are being exploited and sold to the industrialized countries of the world. The statement that mineral resource supplies are inexhaustible must be questioned in terms of ultimate benefit to be derived from the production of high-cost, low-grade mineral deposits. While the underdeveloped countries of the world are exporting more and receiving less in terms of quantities of mineral materials, stockpiles of recyclable mineral materials are being accumulated in the industrialized world at a rate which exceeds the loss of mineral materials through product export. The total picture must be critically re-evaluated in light of population stabilization in the industrialized nations and population growth in the industrializing African nations. The exportation of mineral resources should become secondary in importance to supplying the mineral raw material needs of an iron- and steel-based metallurgical industry in sub-Sahara Africa.

Its hard to believe that not much has changed in the intervening decades apart from the actors being largely Asian now rather than Western, time has literally stood still.

As I was driving home today, listening to liberal talk radio, someone explained why Obama was the obvious choice for President- because he had extra consciousnesses that normal people don't have. While I use common sense, economic principles, logic, and reasoning, these do not matter, for I am still unconscious. Obama possesses consciousness of the environment and consciousness of the People, and so should be President.

I was intrigued by this idea of consciousness, so did a little search on the internet. The first thing that I found was an article on class consciousness, which was a theory that Marx worked on. Obama does like to separate people into classes and make them fight, so he must be conscious of class warfare- but then, so are most Marxists.

I found a neat article on collective consciousness- apparently all of humanity just needs to sit down and talk with nature or Mother Earth will get us. This also fits with Obama's view of the world, so apparently he also has collective consciousness- but then, so do most environmental communists.

Apparently Obama is also the avatar of the divine consciousness- read this editorial on that.

Personally, this stuff is hard to get a mind around, but smarter people than me recently have blogged on consciousness- for example, after reading this Complete Spenger blog entry, I think Obama has a kindergarten view of consciousness- he sees joining together as the loss of the individual and the loss of other's souls, rather than the increasing of individual and ones uniqueness.

There is no doubting it- Obama is definitely more conscious that I am- I only know myself, but apparently Obama knows everything and everyone! What a joke!

Franklin Cudjoe writes:

If African economies are to sustain their growth and lift millions of citizens out of poverty, as India and China have done, better fiscal discipline and financial governance are essential.
For too long, ordinary Africans have struggled to get ahead because of poor governance, corruption and a general lack of economic freedom; the G8 would only perpetuate these policies with its well-intentioned, yet ill-practiced policies on debt forgiveness. More than 90 percent of external debt of heavily indebted poor countries arises from official loans from creditors such as the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. Much of this debt has already been forgiven and paid for by Western taxpayers...[continue reading]

At TED Global "Botanist Corneille Ewango talks about his work at the Okapi Faunal Reserve in the Congo Basin Forest-- and his heroic work protecting it from poachers, miners and raging civil wars."

Carol Pineau writes in the Washington Post:

It used to be that when the U.S. economy sneezed, the rest of the world caught a cold. Today, with globalization, everybody has a pretty bad flu -- except for Africa, where many of the more than 20 stock markets are reporting gains similar to those of the Nigerian exchange. I've been working on a film exploring Africa's frontier markets for the past couple of years, and the returns I've found can only be described as eye-popping. African markets have outperformed Standard & Poor's 500-stock index and many other indexes over the past decade. I've met people who have doubled and even tripled their investments...[continue reading]

Okay, so Iran fired a couple missiles off, and now I hear Obama's moronic response. I'm not an expert in diplomacy or international affairs, but neither is this guy, so I can criticize him. In fact, my undergrad degree is in International Affairs, and his is in law, so I think I actually am more of an expert than he is! That's kind of sad!

Anyways, his response is 'firm talks' and 'economic incentives' while 'cutting exports.' So, talk to them and give them money- that won't do anything. 'A strong incentive program'- he thinks he can bribe bullies to leave us alone, much like he is trying to bribe the American people into picking him President.

And the whole stuff about cutting exports- if they become dependent on us, then we can control them. Exports create dependency. It's the whole idea of free trade- countries that trade together won't go to war together. China won't go to war with us- we'll quit importing/exporting to them, and their economy will collapse. Economically isolating a country really doesn't work (unless the whole world does).

I was reading this story about how the US just signed a pact to put a missile defense shield in Czech Republic, and my interest was caught by the last third of the article, where it talks about those opposed to the shield and the rally they led. The rally of those opposed to the missile shield were led by Jan Tamas. That was all I had to go on. Do you suppose Mr. Tama is conservative? Liberal? Libertarian?

Turns out he is a socialist. He also seems to be partial to Russia. Hmm... a socialist friendly to Russia doesn't want us to put a missile defense system in Czech Republic? Odd.

Today I was driving home from work, and caught part of the Mitch Albom show. He was interviewing this lady, and I didn't know who it was. She talked over and over about how she was glad she ran, because she helped start the conversation, and she was glad a women or minority ran for President, because it helps start important conversations, and she was glad that a women or minority might be elected because that is the change we need.

For a while, I thought it was Granholm, the Governor of Michigan, who was talking about Hillary Clinton, who she strongly supported, and who was a women and who said "change we need" and who talked about starting the conversation. But it was not Granholm talking about Clinton. It was Michelle Obama.

Michelle Obama was talking about "change we need," about "starting the conversation," and about the importance of a women or minority in office. I was struck by how scripted her conversation and responses sounded, and also how smooth and nice she sounded as she talked about blah and blah. If I was an idiot and only heard pretty sounds, she might have convinced me to vote for her (or her husband). But I'm not, and all I heard was someone thieving from someone else because they know their own ideas are not acceptable to the voting public.

Sometimes I wonder about what I do. Not me personally- I teach conservative values, solid business relevant skills, and liberal education like history and civics. Not openly, of course- I'm not tenured yet, so I can't do any of those things openly or else I'd risk not keeping my job. No, I wonder what the purpose of public education in our society is.

Education does not teach job skills. Even though businesses continue to ask for more courses in job skills, from what I've seen, classes like art, shop, etc are being cut in favor of more foreign language and math. The focuses of classes is not on job skills- rarely do classes draw clear connections between the real world of work and education. And the whole attitude towards business in education is hostile. So it doesn't teach job skills.

Education does not teach a general liberal education. It misses the boat on hitting the basics of writing, reading, and arithmetic. Look at the latest math results- even though our country is by far the richest and most successful, our state-run education industry lags many other nations in performance. The latest reading results also mirror this- our students can't read- and based on what I have seen, I would contend that our scores are inflated, because they can read, but don't understand what they are reading. In social studies it is worse- the Michigan scores mirror the rest of the nation, and in Michigan, only 33% of students meet the basic standards of social studies education, and based on my experience in a standards setting committee, I would contend that the bar is very low even to meet the standards. So students are learning history, civics, math, or reading.

So what does education do? I would contend that now, education is just be a socialization place, a place where students are kept, occupied, and socialized. But if that is the goal, how good is it doing? Probably doing a fair job at indoctrination of liberal ideas. But I'd have to do some research on bullying, school shootings, teen depression, manners, etc to discover how well it's doing on more traditional socialization.

From a recent New York Times article:

The bodies of 28 members of a government-sponsored peace committee were found dumped on a road near the tribal area of South Waziristan on Wednesday, Pakistan officials said. The Pakistani Taliban said the men were killed because they supported the government, according to a Taliban statement made to a local journalist...

The attack on the peace committee sent a particularly chilling message because it was a brutal tactic by Mr. Mehsud’s forces to quash pro-government groups in the region, tribal elders said. The killings appeared to be a direct challenge to the policy of the new Pakistani government to negotiate with militants rather than use military force. Some of the men had been shot; others had their throats slit.

So, the question is, how do you deal with these Pakistani Taliban. Diplomacy, or negotiations as Obama wants? Or kill them, with no hesitation or doubt of mind, as the 'evil' Bush would? Okay, here is a middle road- capture them- but then what? Read them their rights, give them ACLU lawyers, and try to find witnesses to testify against them in a court of law beyond a reasonable doubt of a likely liberal judge?

I know what I would do- under the lawfully affirmed Geneva Conventions, I'd summarily shoot any terrorist, pirate, spy, or un-uniformed person conducting an undeclared war against civilians. In the long run, the world is a better place with that policy.

Here is another "letter to the editor" that I recently sent in:

Like most of Obama’s pledges, he recently went back on his pledge to accept public financing for the general election, and instead spend as much money as he wants to to buy the Presidency. He is the first and only major-party candidate to opt out of the modern era public financing system that was set up to keep elections in this country fair- I guess that is change. For all his talk about being against special interests and fighting against Big Money, his campaign now is going to be flooded with money from special interest groups and others who try to buy influence with him. And with Obama’s past connections in question, that is a scary thought.

Hopefully it will be printed and maybe convince a voter or two to not vote for him. One vote at a time is how it works.

This election is a tough one for a lot of conservatives. They know that Obama is not the candidate for the job, but they don't like what the Republican Party did when it was in power. A lot of conservatives and libertarians want to 'get' the GOP, to punish it for what it did. They want to cut off the nose to spite the face. But I don't think that is the way to go. I read this article once, about a guy who once was a libertarian, and happily voted libertarian, while the Clintons ran the White House. He finally split after 9/11, and now is lost. I tell him- join the GOP and vote for McCain.

As a teacher, I teach my student that the two major parties are simply empty vehicles. Right now, the GOP matches my ideas better, so I'm going to put them in power and advance my way up through the party. That doesn't mean I'm going to vote for 'moderates' or 'liberals'- I work real hard in primaries to knock off the RINO's, and battle with all my might at party conventions. But come general election, I'm not going to let a Democrat win.

Don't lose hope, and don't spite the GOP by electing Obama. 8 years of Democrat rule will not make the world a better place.

Ashraf Ghani and Clare Lockhart write in OpenDemocracy:

Zimbabwe might be entering into an "open moment". After what has turned out to be a presidential election with just one candidate, the situation could swiftly move from the coronation of the incumbent, Robert Mugabe, to a transition beyond him. The accumulating criticism of the unaccountable power and brutality of the regime he leads, particularly (as Roger Southall outlines in openDemocracy) from Zimbabwe's neighbours and Mugabe's erstwhile allies, is creating momentum for a post-Mugabe order: one where Zimbabweans are offered the opportunity of genuine citizenship, where they will become bearers of rights and obligations specified in a stable regime of laws.

Continuing on the subject of conflict resolution we take a look at a comparative study(PDF) authored by Luc Huyse on various traditional approaches:

What role does traditional justice play in dealing with legacies of human rights abuses? How can interpersonal and community-based practices interrelate with state-organised and internationally sponsored forms of retributive justice and truth telling? This International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (International IDEA) report provides a comparative analysis of traditional justice mechanisms in Rwanda, Sierra Leone, Mozambique, Uganda and Burundi. Most of the countries studied combine traditional justice and reconciliation instruments with other transitional justice strategies.-GSRDC

via Pambazuka

The Economist reports on the work of the Centre for Human Dialogue a professional conflict mediator. They were key to Kofi Annan's ability to help resolve the recent Kenyan Crisis:

They provided him with tactical advice on the mediation process, such as when to take the negotiators on “retreat” and how to involve the media. And they also drafted agreements as the two sides spoke during the negotiations, so that at the end of a day an agreed statement could be issued immediately to the press. This gave the mediation the vital momentum that Mr Annan wanted...[continue reading]

Related articles by Zemanta

• Explainer: The Kenyan example

Today I watched a strange movie called Screamers, and after wikipeding it, discovered it was based on a short story by Philp K Dick. So I looked in my bookshelf and began to read one of his books. While reading it, I came across the following passage (slightly modified):

... Their view; it is cosmic. Not of a man here, a child there, but an abstraction: race, land. Not of honorable men but of honor itself, the abstract is real, the action is invisible to them. And I know why. They want to be the agents, not the victims, of history. They identify with God's power and believe they are godlike. That is their basic madness. It is not hubris, not pride; it is the inflation of the ego to its ultimate- confusion between him who worships and that which is worshiped. Man has not eaten God; God has eaten man...

When reading this, I imagined that I was listening to a speech from Barak Obama to a raptured crowd of leftist Democrats. They chant of change, and hope, and unity- but reject changing to new policies and new ideas in order to return to the failed ones of the past, they do not hope but talk of how we have lost and failed and bankrupted, and they do not want to unify but instead crush all who oppose them. They do not value change, hope, and unity- they value the abstract idea of these things. They do not want to be real people in history, they think they personally can change history- Obama himself has said that voting for him will change the history of the world. And not by actually changing anything- again, the abstract idea of being an agent of history is more important than doing anything, just like being a community organizer is more important than actually organizing a community. And we all know Obama's position on God- he thinks people cling to it religion because they're bitter, while he goes to the Wright church of hate. Listening to Obama and seeing his supporters is to watch the world go mad. They do not worship God- they demand to be worshipped.

Oh, the passage in the book though was not referring to Obama, or Democrats, or liberals, or anything like that. The passage from the book was describing the Nazi's and their ideology. Interesting.

Entrepreneurship over hand-outs:

via Mootbx

"...REPACTED’s mission is to define ourselves, shape our experiences, identify our strengths, tackle our challenges and celebrate our successes...it is a community based youth-to-youth organization composed of highly qualified youth and community volunteers encompassing the field of behaviour change communication including theatre for development..."-Repacted
via Global Voices