Buy a tent and set it out there.
Monday, April 30, 2012
Tanay---the next Tagaytay? Check it out!
Buy a tent and set it out there.
Friday, April 13, 2012
North Korea and the world: Facing 21st Century Challenges
North Korea's rocket launch failed and reports say, the national pride was shattered. North Koreans pride themselves for developing a rocket program all by themselves, of course, studying some country's technologies and infusing their own. This country has been affected by decades-old economic sanctions and it continues to survive mainly due to the will of its people and the political tenacity of its government.
Western media have depicted North Korea as an economically struggling country but no signs of massive numbers of North Koreans defecting or thousands or millions of Koreans going to the streets and militating against their government. Western media have pictured a North Korea suffering from famine, yet no North Korean ever went out of their settlements to show the world how pitiful their sufferings are. Of course, major powers want North Korea for themselves, and a country that stands proud of its accomplishments is being perceived as rogue simply because it asserts its independence amidst a world full of slaves and slavish powers.
It is time for the world to reexamine its terms and closely reconsider the meaning of the terms "rogue state". Is a rogue state such when it stands against the interests of principal powers? Is a state considered rogue even if it does not use its military might to oppress nations and only uses it to defend itself against attempts of predation?
Western media have depicted North Korea as an economically struggling country but no signs of massive numbers of North Koreans defecting or thousands or millions of Koreans going to the streets and militating against their government. Western media have pictured a North Korea suffering from famine, yet no North Korean ever went out of their settlements to show the world how pitiful their sufferings are. Of course, major powers want North Korea for themselves, and a country that stands proud of its accomplishments is being perceived as rogue simply because it asserts its independence amidst a world full of slaves and slavish powers.
It is time for the world to reexamine its terms and closely reconsider the meaning of the terms "rogue state". Is a rogue state such when it stands against the interests of principal powers? Is a state considered rogue even if it does not use its military might to oppress nations and only uses it to defend itself against attempts of predation?
American Idol Jessica Sanchez nearly booted out--a repeat of America voting along racist lines?
Many people blame several American voters when avant-garde singer Jessica Sanchez was nearly booted out of the talent show, the "American Idol". Sanchez got the lowest number of votes and was asked to sing for her life before the show's judges stormed the stage and gave her her "save". Meaning, Sanchez still has one more chance to prove to America that she deserves that "save" and "adulation" given to her by the judges.
Sanchez got the lowest number of votes because she wasn't treading enough, and lacked the text votes needed to propel her to a safe spot. Her last performance, a stirring interpretation of an unknown Jazmine Sullivan song " Shuttering", did not create the overwhelming support needed for her to continue her Idol journey. Yes, she sang the song in an excellent way, and the judge Jackson was right when he said that she "slayed it". Yet, even if she did, it did not generate the wow factor that Sanchez need to continue on.
Team Sanchez forgot that Sanchez is fighting doubly hard than other contestants, simply because she and her handlers already alienated her early in the game by always asserting her "minority roots". They should have realized that fact when America voted that Korean crooner out of the show. In American Idol, there is no such thing as a Latino or an Asian vote. That is illusory. Most of those who vote in the show are true blue Americans--mostly whites. Yet, that does not mean that whites vote along racist lines.
Understanding the social composition of America is one step closer to winning American Idol. Contestants like Jessica Sanchez must understand that Americans do appreciate art and do appreciate talent. However, when that talent is claimed by a minority, do we then expect America to make that minority's choice theirs? No. Being a dominant race, Americans would like their idol to be a pure American, not a Fil-Am, or a Mex-Am or a Mex-Pinoy-Am. No. Whoever wins the title must show that he or she is American, period. And being American means respecting racial differences.
By claiming Jessica as the representative of the Filipino people doomed her chances of clinching the title. Team Sanchez forgot that Jessica is competing for the title of "American" Idol, not Pinoy idol, nor "World" idol. When Pinoys always claim Jessica for themselves, they express their own racism and alienates a vast segment of the American public. Instead of helping Jessica, these bravados or expressions of Pinoy pride harms her more than helps her. Meaning, it was not Americans who started this "racist" war but the Pinoys themselves who want to assert themselves in a society which they, obviously, do not own.
Sanchez got the lowest number of votes because she wasn't treading enough, and lacked the text votes needed to propel her to a safe spot. Her last performance, a stirring interpretation of an unknown Jazmine Sullivan song " Shuttering", did not create the overwhelming support needed for her to continue her Idol journey. Yes, she sang the song in an excellent way, and the judge Jackson was right when he said that she "slayed it". Yet, even if she did, it did not generate the wow factor that Sanchez need to continue on.
Team Sanchez forgot that Sanchez is fighting doubly hard than other contestants, simply because she and her handlers already alienated her early in the game by always asserting her "minority roots". They should have realized that fact when America voted that Korean crooner out of the show. In American Idol, there is no such thing as a Latino or an Asian vote. That is illusory. Most of those who vote in the show are true blue Americans--mostly whites. Yet, that does not mean that whites vote along racist lines.
Understanding the social composition of America is one step closer to winning American Idol. Contestants like Jessica Sanchez must understand that Americans do appreciate art and do appreciate talent. However, when that talent is claimed by a minority, do we then expect America to make that minority's choice theirs? No. Being a dominant race, Americans would like their idol to be a pure American, not a Fil-Am, or a Mex-Am or a Mex-Pinoy-Am. No. Whoever wins the title must show that he or she is American, period. And being American means respecting racial differences.
By claiming Jessica as the representative of the Filipino people doomed her chances of clinching the title. Team Sanchez forgot that Jessica is competing for the title of "American" Idol, not Pinoy idol, nor "World" idol. When Pinoys always claim Jessica for themselves, they express their own racism and alienates a vast segment of the American public. Instead of helping Jessica, these bravados or expressions of Pinoy pride harms her more than helps her. Meaning, it was not Americans who started this "racist" war but the Pinoys themselves who want to assert themselves in a society which they, obviously, do not own.
Corporate parasitism in the New Age
The US is in recession. The world, according to former US president Bill Clinton, suffers from an unbreakable gap between the poor and the rich. The rich, which accounts for less than one percent of this world's population, controls more than eighty percent of resources while the rest of humanity suffers in extreme poverty due to lack of access to these resources. Almost every single thing in this world is owned by somebody and that somebody gets his revenue juice from the toils of another.
This has been the state of things since the appearance of capitalism in the late 18th century. Capitalism, by its very nature, creates a lopsided arrangement between those who have capital and those who depend on capital for existence. Those who control capital generate more capital without expending themselves in the process. Their capital produces more capital by investing these into various companies which takes care of the revenues by using their own capital. The capitalist invented the banking system and the "stock market" simply to allow their capital to produce more capital without that capital being directly involved in production. There has been no direct relation between production and capital for the last few centuries because the amount of capital directly infused into production has been lessened with the invention of modern ways of creating wealth without being involved directly into production.
What happens is what I describe as corporate parasitism--when capitalists has ceased to become directly involved or invested themselves in the process of production and produces capital through the use of another's capital. By being divested personally from the process of production, the capitalist loses his ability to understand the human side of the process, thereby assuming the role of a parasite---always salivating for capital without understanding how his capital generates more.
This has been the state of things since the appearance of capitalism in the late 18th century. Capitalism, by its very nature, creates a lopsided arrangement between those who have capital and those who depend on capital for existence. Those who control capital generate more capital without expending themselves in the process. Their capital produces more capital by investing these into various companies which takes care of the revenues by using their own capital. The capitalist invented the banking system and the "stock market" simply to allow their capital to produce more capital without that capital being directly involved in production. There has been no direct relation between production and capital for the last few centuries because the amount of capital directly infused into production has been lessened with the invention of modern ways of creating wealth without being involved directly into production.
What happens is what I describe as corporate parasitism--when capitalists has ceased to become directly involved or invested themselves in the process of production and produces capital through the use of another's capital. By being divested personally from the process of production, the capitalist loses his ability to understand the human side of the process, thereby assuming the role of a parasite---always salivating for capital without understanding how his capital generates more.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)