To Quote Samuel Taylor Coleridge…

'Water! Water! Everywhere; And not a drop to drink' Comment on London water supply during reappearance of cholera in 1848 and 1849. Cartoon from Punch , London, 1849, with a mis-quote from Coleridge Rhyme of the Ancient Mariner . Wood engraving Content © 2010 Newscom All rights reserved.

Water conservation is perhaps one of the most important challenges humanity faces in the coming century, but it is still one that is overlooked and taken for granted by those fortunate enough to have regular access to the benefits of a clean water supply. Clean drinking water, indoor pluming, bottled mineral water, (flavored or otherwise), year-round green lawns, swimming pools, corporate farms in the desert, artificial lakes, diverted rivers, hydraulic electric plants–these are the luxuries of the rich, of which almost everyone is in America and Europe is in comparison to rest of the world. The many ways modern, developed societies use water truly displays our ignorance, arrogance, and sheer non-appreciation for this most important of resources, which has led to a growing GLOBAL water crisis.

There is always someone who quips, “The Earth is around 70% water, how can we be having a water crisis?” Yes, there is a huge about of water on our planet, but only about 3% is fresh water, most of which is frozen in polar icecaps, leaving less than 1% easily, (depending on if you have the technology), accessible for human consumption. And consume it do we ever. Over 70% of human water usage is dedicated to agriculture, of which nearly half is wasted through inefficient irrigation, evaporation, etc. In order to maintain these wasteful practices, (something which America and China are particularly culpable), we divert rivers and drain lakes and wetlands–thus destroying valuable ecosystems. And whatever water we don’t use, we pollute with sewage and chemical runoff from our farms, factories, and very homes.

The global south has born the brunt of the water crisis, particularly in Africa and the Middle East where booming populations mixed with depleted traditional water sources, (such as underground aquifers, lakes, and rivers), have created a state of increased tension which has only exacerbated various conflicts. Unfortunately, in the rush for these countries to develop, they have adopted many of the water practices and suggestion of the global north, which, to be quite frank, is a terrible model for sustainable water use.

It it important to realize that water shortages affect the global north as well where the struggle over water rights have increased dramatically over the last 50 years. Think about the droughts which afflicted much of the western US between 1999 and 2004, or the water shortages which hit Los Angeles in 2009. Just the past Sunday this article came out regarding the water quality of Norman Oklahoma’s own Lake Thunderbird, which revealed that the city’s principle water source  has already been classified as a Sensitive Water Supply by the state.

Dr. Baxter Vieux, a civil engineering and environmental science professor at the University of Oklahoma, said the need to keep a pretty lawn is a big problem for the lake’s water quality. “There’s a culprit,” Vieux said. “And we’re all a little bit guilty.”

Vieux said residents and others dump about 20 tons of fertilizer in Lake Thunderbird each year. He said the fertilizer in run-off water causes algae to grow at an alarming rate, causing the lake’s water quality to drop and creating an environment where fish and other animals may not be able to get as much oxygen as they need.

But it’s not just Norman and its residents who are the problem. Several other cities, including Oklahoma City, lie within Lake Thunderbird’s watershed. Vieux said urban development in the Lake Thunderbird watershed is expected to double by 2030 as sprawl creeps into the outer limits of Norman, Midwest City and Oklahoma City. He said all the added impervious surfaces — things like concrete that don’t allow water to soak in — will cause the lake’s water quality to decrease further.

Those are some of the facts and figures human water habits, but what does it mean in terms of the quality of life, social justice, development and world politics? In regards to water issues in the global south many development organizations like to fund well-drilling projects, seeing it as a relatively cheap, quick, and simple way to provide easily accessible water to rural communities. Some of the benefits of well-drilling projects are the freeing up of time for village women, (who would otherwise spend a majority of their day fetching water), having a clean source of drinking water, (which cuts down on disease), and having a steady water source for irrigation of fields, (which results in better crops, more food and money). Sounds perfect, right?

Unfortunately there is a down side. For example, in Yemen development organizations drilled wells in villages and for local agriculture around the country. As this article points out, by encouraging well drilling for farming and western style crop irrigation instead of the traditional rainwater irrigation, Yemen has now exhausted its underground aquifers and, as a result, its drinking water supply. Similar situations have occurred around the world, where by becoming dependent on man-made water works, (such as wells, dams, artificial canals, etc), communities neglect traditional water conservation practices in favor of a quick, easy source.

The problem is that having this easy source of water also allow communities and agricultural practices to expand beyond the natural limits of the ecosystem.But what happens when the well-pump breaks, the river becomes polluted, the lake shrinks, or the aquifers run dry? Suddenly communities are faced with drought, disease, famine, (if they depend on sustenance agriculture), and a host of other problems. In urban areas the major problems become water rationing and increasing water prices–which then raises a human rights question. Should people have to pay for clean water? After all, we can not survive without water so is it ethical for companies, cities, governments, etc., to charge people for it and to deny water to other communities in need? It is these issues which lie at the heart of various water disputes, such as those between Oklahoma and Texas, Israel, Jordan and Lebanon, and the Central Asian states.

We, as a global community, need to start addressing water management seriously. Water conservation in the global north is pitifully low, while water sources in the global south are insufficient for their current needs–at least when using current day practices. Water management is a huge issue which extends into environmental conservation, human rights, security studies, meteorology, politics, global trade, agricultural practices, scientific development, even religion, (for example the Indus river is sacred for many Hindu religious traditions). Water literally affects every single living thing on this planet every day and it can not and should not be ignored.

It certainly gives you something to think about next time you have a drink….

A Call to Action for Justice in Haiti (and beyond)

Now that the metaphorical dust is settling on the disaster that has befallen Haiti, it is the time to begin remembering what we are already forgetting. Distracted by the commentary and wrangling surrounding the State of the Union Address, we’ve lost track of the tragedy of an estimated 150,000 dead (the U.N. confirming 111,481 based on bodies recovered as of January 24). While there is no doubt that we should acknowledge the economic problems here in our country, it would be a failure of nerve and moral courage to shift our focus inward upon ourselves on account of an arbitrary requirement that the President “shall from time to time give to Congress information of the State of the Union.” (Article II, Section 3, U.S. Constitution)

Photo by Joe Raedle/Getty Images

I’ve previously written concerning the real nature of Haiti’s “curse” and Christian responsibility in the wake of this disaster, but it’s time for us to move beyond talk and take action. For everyone who has already become involved, sending recovery kits and making financial contributions, I thank you and commend your actions. However, as Richard Kim points out, our charity simply isn’t good enough:

But it’s also time to stop having a conversation about charity and start having a conversation about justice–about recovery, responsibility and fairness. What the world should be pondering instead is: What is Haiti owed?

Haiti’s vulnerability to natural disasters, its food shortages, poverty, deforestation and lack of infrastructure, are not accidental. To say that it is the poorest nation in the Western hemisphere is to miss the point; Haiti was made poor–by France, the United States, Great Britain, other Western powers and by the IMF and the World Bank.

Our culpability in the repeated failures of the economy and government in Haiti are apparent with only a basic historical knowledge of the country’s two centuries as an independent republic. Oppressive foreign aid programs, including loans that have lined the pockets of corrupt dictators (a fact we conveniently ignored for the sake of “national interest”), continued to keep Haiti politically and economically impoverished. Now it appears that our political leaders and bureaucrats are prepared to repeat the same failed policies in the wake of the earthquake. Kim explains how the International Monetary Fund intends to take a business-as-usual approach to the plight of Haiti:

Now, in its attempts to help Haiti, the IMF is pursuing the same kinds of policies that made Haiti a geography of precariousness even before the quake. To great fanfare, the IMF announced a new $100 million loan to Haiti on Thursday. In one crucial way, the loan is a good thing; Haiti is in dire straits and needs a massive cash infusion. But the new loan was made through the IMF’s extended credit facility, to which Haiti already has $165 million in debt. Debt relief activists tell me that these loans came with conditions, including raising prices for electricity, refusing pay increases to all public employees except those making minimum wage and keeping inflation low. They say that the new loans would impose these same conditions. In other words, in the face of this latest tragedy, the IMF is still using crisis and debt as leverage to compel neoliberal reforms.

Seeing the failure of these policies prior to the full force of nature’s destructive power, it is a sign of poor judgment to think that taking the same direction will have any positive effect on Haiti. Yet, every bit as deplorable is the fact that it’s a sign of complete moral and ethical failure on our part as citizens of the developing world to continue to ignore the real plight of our neighbors as we profit from their misfortune. It is time for each of us become agents of ethics and work to bring about change.

Right now Congresswomen Maxine Waters (D -CA) and Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL) are circulating a letter that will be presented to Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner urging him to use the full leverage of the U.S. government to bring about debt cancellation on the part of the IMF and other international agencies carrying outstanding loans to Haiti. Currently over 50 members of Congress have agreed to sign this letter, but you can help by urging your own representative to sign as well. With the help of the Jubilee USA Network, an outreach of over 75 religious denominations and communities seeking debt relief the underdeveloped nations, you can send an email to your representative urging her/him to join the petition. While you’re at it, you can also visit here to sign a citizens petition that Jubilee USA will present to Secretary Geithner urging him to support debt cancellation for Haiti. The deadline for this is February 2, so please consider responding to this action quickly.

And regardless of deadlines, you can offer your voice in support of H.R. 4405, the Jubilee Act for Responsible Lending and Expanded Debt Cancellation of 2009. Sponsored by Congresswoman Waters, this bill is an effort to build on the earlier success of H.R. 2634, which was filed in the previous congress, and passed the House of Representatives before becoming bogged down in the Senate. (Avelino Maestas offers a more in depth look at these bills at Huffington Post.) H.R. 4405 has been introduced and currently awaits consideration in the House Committee on Financial Services. You can help spur this bill to the floor by writing letters or sending emails to committee chair Congressman Barney Frank (D-MA) and ranking member Congressman Spencer Bachus (R-AL), as well as other members of the committee.

————

It’s time to change the way we behave as citizens of the wealthier minority within or world, and as a nation with a history that is checkered at best. I’ve made my case for our responsibility to Haiti based on how that checkered past has harmed Haiti over the years. And while I will be the first to admit that we can’t be held individually responsible for the racism and imperialism of our country’s past, we can become responsible from this moment forward for our country’s just, peaceful, and equitable policies toward our neighbors beyond our borders. I can’t encourage you enough to join with me in making a difference for our nation and our world.

Haiti and the “Curse”

In the midst of the storm surrounding Pat Robertson and his comments about the “curse” upon Haiti, we might have missed the other imposition of the language of “curse” on that country.  In a statement on Thursday afternoon, French President Nicolas Sarkozy called for an international conference on the question of reconstruction aid for Haiti after associating the plight of country with a more ambiguous curse:

From this catastrophe, which follows so many others, we should make sure that it is a chance to get Haiti once and for all out of the curse it seems to have been stuck with for such a long time.

If not Pat Robertson’s absurd theological stretches, then what exactly is this “curse” that haunts Haiti?  While Sarkozy’s statement almost comes across sounding like an innocuous little raincloud that hovers over this unassuming island republic, the reality is much more devastating.  To better understand the structural problems that have plagued Haiti, a brief history lesson is in order.  This commentary at the Center for International Policy sheds some light on the early history of the republic:

Economic Justice in Haiti Requires Debt Restitution  |  CIP Americas Program

Haiti won its independence from France in 1804, through a bloody 12-year war, becoming the second independent country in the Americas and the only nation in history born of a successful slave revolt. But world powers forced Haiti to pay a second price for entrance into the international community. They refused to recognize Haiti’s independence, while French warships remained off its coasts, threatening to invade and reinstitute slavery.

After 21 years of resisting, Haiti capitulated to France‘s terms: in exchange for diplomatic recognition, Haiti’s government agreed to compensate French plantation owners for their loss of “property,” including the freed slaves; compensation to be paid with a loan from a designated French bank. The debt was ten times Haiti’s total 1825 revenue and twice what the United States paid France in 1803 for the Louisiana Purchase, which contained seventy-four times more land.

The debt was a crushing burden on Haiti’s economy. The government was forced to redirect all economic activity to repay it. A huge percentage of government revenues—80% in some years—went to debt service, at the expense of investment in education, healthcare, and infrastructure. The tax code and other laws channeled private and public enterprise to export crops such as tropical hardwoods and sugar, which brought in foreign currency for the bank but left the mountainsides barren, the soil depleted, and the population hungry.

While this may allow those of us in the United States to savor the irony of Sarkozy’s statement given France’s role in the economic crippling of the fledgling nation, we would be well reminded of our own interference in the affairs of foreign nations; especially those in the Caribbean which have often been considered playthings in our own private “U.S. lake.”  The Haiti Action Committee reminds us of our own complicity in the destruction of the early Haitian economy:

The United States led a worldwide boycott against Haiti and refused to recognize the new nation until 1864, fearing that its freedom would pose a danger to the U.S. system of slavery.

Instead of playing linguistic games that offhandedly attribute Haiti’s woes to some ambiguous “curse,” it’s time for us living in economically powerful nations to own our role in putting the hex on this underdeveloped and economically declining nation.*  While Sarkozy’s intentions, along with the rest of the industrialized world, are no doubt for the good, the time for addressing the real issue is long overdue.  We are quick to be the saviors of the disaster-ridden, rushing in with our recovery and relief money, but we never pause for a moment to consider how our history of plundering underdeveloped nations has exacerbated the present crisis.  And for all of our hurry to be the heroes today, tomorrow we will forget this sad affair, never addressing the ongoing systemic imperialism and economic oppression that will continue to leave Haiti ripe for the next disaster.  After all, it’s just Haiti’s “curse” …

* According to the CIA World Factbook 80% of Haitians live in poverty, with over half of the population in abject poverty.

A Reverse Reformation?

Analysis…

The Vatican announced yesterday that it would accomodate Anglicans wishing to join the Catholic Church.  For instance, Anglican priests who had married, could become married Catholic priests, a practice forbidden to traditional Catholic priests.  Also, Anglicans could keep their “elements of distinctive Anglican spiritual and liturgical patrimony.”  The Anglican Communion has been somewhat unstable while debating and discussing issues of human sexuality, thus creating an opportunity for Catholics to allow conservative Anglicans into the Catholic Church without fully assimilating.

Get Religion |  Yet, please note, that this discussion of Anglo-Catholics fleeing to Rome — once again — is not essentially rooted in the ordination of one noncelibate gay bishop in the micro-tiny Diocese of New Hampshire here in the American colonies.  After all, Father William Oddie was writing his trailblazing book “The Roman Option” in the mid-1990s. It is also interesting to note that a major theme in that book is behind-the-scenes opposition on the Catholic left to the creation of an Anglican home within Catholicism in England. You see, liberal Catholics — those seeking the ordination of women, in particular — did not want the wrong kind of Anglicans swimming the Tiber. That’s a story worth watching, now that Benedict XVI has opened a gate for the Anglo-Catholic refugees.

The Anchoress  | This is very big. If this reconnection is well-facilitated, we may see the entire African arm of the Church of England (which is currently its most vibrantly-growing branch) cross the Tiber, and that will be a very interesting development, especially as Catholics are exposed to the Anglican-use liturgy, which will remind many of everything they loved about the Latin mass, but in the glorious language of the Anglican liturgy. This may accelerate the already-growing movement within the Catholic church to correct some of the liturgical excesses and errors we’ve seen in the last 40 years.  As I said earlier, as secularism and evangelical atheism gain in influence and power, we may well see the a new unity among Christians, ut unum sint, (that they all may be one).

America Magazine |  The most important point to stress is that the Vatican is responding to a request from others who wish to join the Catholic Church. They are not merely going out to pick some low-hanging Anglican fruit or, as Cardinal Walter Kasper put it, “We are not fishing in the Anglican lake.” There are members of the Anglican Church who have come to question the catholicity of their communion, and like John Henry Newman before them, their questioning is leading them to turn to Rome.

The Telegraph |  This from a good source in Rome: apparently both Lambeth Palace and elements in the Vatican’s Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity were “implacably opposed” to Pope Benedict XVI’s dramatic new arrangements for Anglicans. The source also reports speculation that Archbishop Rowan Williams put pressure on Vatican ecumenists to stop the Apostolic Constitution being issued.

Change.org |  If you’re an Anglican and you don’t like women priests, gay bishops, or same-sex couples infiltrating your church, Pope Benedict XVI has a message for you: try becoming Catholic! Hey, it comes with free wine once a week, and support for all the anti-gay ballot measures you can muster.

Episcopal Life Online |  In a statement from the Episcopal Church, Bishop Christopher Epting, ecumenical and interfaith officer, said that the announcement “reflects what the Roman Catholic Church, through its acceptance of Anglican rite parishes, has been doing for some years more informally … We are in dialogue with the archbishop’s office and will, in the coming days, continue to explore the full implications of this in our ecumenical relations.”

News & Analysis …

Morehouse Men Don’t Wear Dresses – Womanist Musings

We have invested a lot into the male/ female binary and many feel threatened when the line is even slightly blurred. As part of its appropriate attire policy, Morehouse has banned wearing of women’s clothes, makeup, high heels and purses.  It seems that Morehouse men are expected to send a very specific message to the world about what exactly Black masculinity entails.

Drop-Kick Me Jesus – Spiritual Politics

For the past six years, the cheerleaders at Lakeview-Fort Oglethorpe High School in the northwest corner of Georgia had taken to displaying Bible verses on banners such as the above, through which their football team would burst onto the field. Then, last month, the banners were banned on advice of counsel, after a local woman wrote to the school superintendent to suggest that they might provoke a lawsuit.

NPR Sort of Hates “Black Music” – Racialicious

Rosen argues that music of black origin usually selected by NPR: (1) tend to be either from obscure or dead artistes black people don’t listen to (2) are restricted based on genre, and (3) heavily influenced by the majority white and male (with beards and guitars) NPR audience.

Nicaragua Journal | ‘Dirty Water of Imperialism’

The degree to which Nicaragua in the 1990s was obliged to yield its economic sovereignty to the international lending and donor community was brought home to met he day after the 1996 general election by an observer group, of which I was a member, with an individual heading one of those institutions in Nicaragua. When asked what he thought of the results of that election, he responded that either outcome would have been the same to him, since neither Aléman nor Ortega would have had many options concerning how to run the economy. After elaborating on that point, he then confided that his institution had an economic plan for Nicaragua and that he had arranged President-elect Aléman to come to his — the international bureaucrat’s — office to see it.

Thomas W. Walker, Nicaragua: Living in the Shadow of the Eagle

By Barbara Schwartz
Editorial Director
The Xenia Institute

Leave the United States and order a Coke, and you’ll probably find that it has a different taste. I drank one Coca-Cola during my eight days in Nicaragua, at a small restaurant (actually, it was a table set up on the front porch of a woman’s home in a Managua neighborhood), and enjoyed the taste of Coke made not with high fructose corn syrup but cane sugar.

I’m not much of a soda drinker; under normal circumstances I drink water. But in a place where most of the water is not readily drinkable, when you realize that the 20-oz. bottle of water you bought at the corner store has to last until your next trip to the store, which is three miles away and you’ll have to walk to get there, and it’s got to serve for everything — from quenching your thirst to brushing your teeth — you hunt around for other options. I ended up drinking a lot of Toña, one of two beers made in Nicaragua.

A pulperia in Chacraseca. Photo by Lynne Bradley

The pulperias — the small locally run corner stores — were stocked with both Coke and Pepsi, but I didn’t have the heart to drink one anyway. If you walk into a cantina and order one of these drinks, I was told, you don’t order them by name; you ask for some “dirty water of imperialism,” a reference to the political and economic hegemony the U.S. holds over the Western hemisphere and a good portion of the world.

In Nicaragua, the economic divide between the U.S. and the two-thirds world is palpable. Nicaragua is a country of stark economic division, with one of the highest degrees of income disparity in the world. It is the second-poorest country in the Western Hemisphere (after Haiti, according to the BBC), with the majority of its people living on less than $1 a day. In rural areas, electric service is spotty; if there’s running water, it’s not necessarily potable. The house we helped build, in the most rural sector of Chacraseca, was built with concrete blocks and included a concrete floor, but when you consider that the family had been living in a tiny shelter cobbled together out of salvaged tin tied to branches taken from the forest, that tiny concrete house seems almost palatial.

Rural road in Chacraseca. Photo by Lynne Bradley

Our small group of builders reached that site every day after about a half-mile hike up a dirty path; the road, if you could call it that, was too bad — filled with deep ruts and sharp volcanic stones — for our van to make it all the way. Carts pulled by donkeys or oxen, however, didn’t have too much trouble.

A phrase I heard quite a bit during and after my experience in Nicaragua, especially by people who have made the journey themselves, is, “We may have material wealth, but they are rich in community.” But this division isn’t a natural one that keeps the U.S. on one side and Nicaragua on the other; it didn’t just shake out that way through a Guns, Germs and Steel history. Among other things, it’s national external debt, and it’s global economics.

Nicaragua’s external debt currently stands at about $6 million, reduced in the last few years from about $6 billions dollars after the nation entered the World Bank’s Highly Indebted Poor Countries program that canceled 80% of Nicaragua’s debt. This works out to about $1,000 for every person in Nicaragua. That original debt, though exacerbated by the civil war and environmental disasters like hurricanes and volcanic eruptions and from Nicaragua’s inability to pay the interest on those loans, came from bond payments, bank bankruptcies and structural adjustment programs imposed by the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund. Witness for Peace says Nicaragua spends about 25% of its annual budget on paying its external debt. Health care and education get 14% and 11%, respectively. So the money that could go to into social programs that might help end the cycle of poverty instead go into debt repayment,

There is plenty of argument about whether global economic programs such as the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund are helpful or harmful to the economies of countries in the two-thirds world. Structural adjustment programs, for example, provide money for needed national projects such as road and dam projects, but they come with conditions such as deregulation of prices and currency, the privatization of state industries and the elimination of trade barriers. Essentially, the country is required to take part in the neoliberal market system that rewards lending institutions and wealthier governments that lend the money, at the expense of the nation’s poor.

Vincent A. Gallagher, in his book The True Cost of Low Prices: The Violence of Globalization, details the downward economic spirals that indebted countries experience under these programs. For example:

The social impact of IMF-sponsored devaluation is usually brutal and immediate. Overnight the prices of food, drugs, fuel, public services and many other products increase sometimes 30 to 50 percent. In poor countries high school students, taxi drivers and people with no formal education come to realize that prices rise after the visits by IMF representatives are reported in the newspapers. Many people in the United States have no idea how the system works. Poor people know all about it because of the way it impacts their lives. The prices of everything go up. …

Increases in the cost of transportation can be devastating. For example workers living in a poor area may take three buses to get to work. With devaluation, transportation costs can go up five cents for each bus fare. So the cost to get to the job and back can go up thirty cents a day or more. If the workers were already living on less than a dollar a day, as over 1 billion people do, the devaluation can push them over the edge. It may now be better for them to go to the local garbage dump to collect paper, bottles, metal and plastic to sell for recycling. They may be able to find food at the dump.

During my brief visit to Nicaragua this summer, the exchange rate was 20 cordobas for each U.S. dollar. The $50 U.S. that I exchanged in Managua lasted the entire eight days, dribbling out of my pocket usually less than a dollar at a time. A souvenir magnet I would have paid $5 for in the U.S. cost me a quarter (which I paid with a U.S. coin; all my cordobas were in 50s and 100s, and the vendor couldn’t make change). And the Coke, the “dirty water of the imperialism”? About 18 cordobas, or a little less than a buck. As was the bottled (and clean, safe-to-drink) water, as was the beer.

So think about this: If you’re making about $2 a day, are you going to be able to fork over nearly 50% of that for a clean drink? Or will you take your chances with the contaminated well that may end up giving you cancer, diarrhea or a host of other health problems?

I’m not an economist; I can barely balance my own checkbook, and when I was in Nicaragua I never could get the hang of the exchange rate. My heart would jump at seeing the menu price for ice cream at 60 cordobas. I had the same experience in Nogales, México, on a BorderLinks experience, trying to plan a dinner for eight on a maquiladora salary and realizing that a gallon of milk would probably deplete most of what I had. Everyone talks about how cheap it is to go to Latin America; our houses are filled with stuff manufactured by factories or food grown in Latin America that we love because they’re so cheap and help us meet our personal budgets with ease. But that’s only because the dollar goes horrifically further than cordoba, the peso, the sole. But if everything you buy is based on the dollar, and all you get is 20 cordobas a day, how will you feed your family? For the first time in my life, I felt too wealthy. I was able to spend my cordobas like water and came home with just a few coins in my pocket because I wanted to make sure it stayed in the country and benefited someone there. But I didn’t feel blessed, I felt like something was terribly wrong with the world, and I was on the wrong side of that divide.

I can’t discount that the development programs by the IMF and World Bank have provided helped Nicaragua by providing some improvement of infrastructure and creation of new markets, new imports and investment. There is much more to this story that I have recounted and attempted to critique here, and I know that I will probably always lack the background to really understand the intricacies of global economics. So I have to fall back on my experience, and I know what I saw. And I can’t see how a system that takes away funds from health care and education and infrastructure, a system that’s geared toward bringing revenue to the investors at the expense of the people in the country being invested in, is one that I can give my blessing.

It’s colonialism in an economic form, imperialism through investment. And I really have to ask myself if I want to be on the side of the empire. It’s reframed my view of Coke and Pepsi and a number of things I take for granted. It’s not necessarily the products, but what they stand for — the hegemony of the neoliberal market and the toll it takes on two-thirds of the world.

Sexual Politics, the Law and the Roman Polanski Arrest

Analysis …

Photo from FP Passport

Director Roman Polanski, best-known in the U.S. as the Oscar award-winning director of The Pianist and the classic horror film Rosemary’s Baby was arrested last weekend in Switzerland on a U.S. arrest warrant. In 1977, Polanski was charged with having unlawful sex with a 13-year-old girl; Polanski jumped bail and fled the country the following year after spending several weeks in a U.S. jail. He has lived outside of the U.S. since then.

Bloggers, world leaders and Hollywood moguls have wondered why authorities have chosen to arrest Polanski, who is 76, at this time. Some observers have noted that Polanski’s case highlights the gray areas of U.S. attitudes both about sex and due process.

Michael Wolff @The Huffington Post |  “Prosecutors are the scariest people in a democracy because they can have you arrested and put in jail. They can do this essentially at will, if arresting you suits their purposes. Alternatively, they can not arrest you if that suits their purposes. One reason prosecutors can function at such a level of virtually no accountability is because, while almost all other public servants have terrible press, law enforcement agencies have always used their muscle to maintain good press (there is even a further point about, specifically, the LA prosecutor’s office and its relationship to the prosecutor’s image in television and movies).”

The League of Ordinary Gentlemen |  “I think Polanski is a brilliant filmmaker and a world-class cretin. I’m disgusted by what he did. But I also have great reservations about how we can try him and maintain a full grasp on due process and rights of the accused. The physical evidence is in bad condition;the police who ran his case are mostly dead; the key witnesses are unlikely to cooperate, including the victim; and most importantly, and most concerning, for a democratic society, is that the judge and the prosecuting attorney conspired during the case. That’s a really, really big deal, and contra this piece from Salon, it’s a big deal no matter whether the prosecutors in LA think it’s a big deal or not. That sort of thing absolutely can’t happen in a nation of laws. Can’t.”

Feministe |  “If you believe arresting people and making them stand trial is worth anything, why the objection? Why the international outcry and circulation of petitions and raging French government officials? Because seriously, the message I’m hearing is, if you have enough money and celebrity friends, if you’re talented enough, if you’re charming enough, everyone thinks that you should just be left alone to rape underage girls and how dare anyone call you on it or even suggest that you have to stand trial like anyone else. And the same news media that pruriently reports the horrible details of similar crimes done by non-famous people will back you up on it. This, my friends, is what a rape culture looks like.”

FP Passport |  “Polanski’s case is perhaps not unique in the world of extradition law, but it is provocative. The notion of the Los Angeles DA’s office for 32 years tracking the director’s busy European travel schedule, waiting for an opportunity, whilst he chose to appear at various film festivals via video-conference rather than in person, is fascinating. But beyond the celebrity factor, it’s hard to pin down exactly what seems so incongruous. Is it simply that in a post-9/11 world we’re now accustomed to thinking of “extradition” in connection with national security interests, and clear-and-present danger?”

Anne Applebaum @The Washington Post |  “I am certain there are many who will harrumph that, following this arrest, justice was done at last. But Polanski is 76. To put him on trial or keep him in jail does not serve society in general or his victim in particular. Nor does it prove the doggedness and earnestness of the American legal system. If he weren’t famous, I bet no one would bother with him at all.”

Alas, a Blog |  “Yes, it’s true, if Polanski wasn’t famous, he wouldn’t be in this mess, because he wouldn’t have had access to Jack Nicholson’s house while Jack was out of town. And he wouldn’t have been able to flee to France. And he wouldn’t have been able to live comfortably for 30 years. But hey, the poor guy had to forgo his Oscar! The horror!”

Also in the news … Associated Press publishes internal memo on Polanski arrest instead of the news story.

News …

• The world’s population of carnivores have tripled in the past 30 years (Read more).
• Study shows how video can alter eyewitness memory (Read more).
• FiveThirtyEight takes a look at the study that says Oklahoma high school students are dumb and gets suspicious (Read more).
• Iraq steps up for Iran (Read more).

Nicaragua Journal | Prologue: Sandino’s Hat

“I was struck by the fact that it was Sandino’s hat, and not his face, that had become the most potent icon in Nicaragua. A hatless Sandino would not be instantly recognizable; but that hat no longer needed his presence beneath it to be evocative. In many instances, FSLN graffiti were followed by a schematic drawing of the celebrated headgear, a drawing that looked exactly like an infinity-sign with a conical volcano rising out of it. Infinity and eruptions: the illegitimate boy from Niquinohomo was now a cluster of metaphors. Or, to put it another way, Sandino had become his hat.”

– Salman Rushdie, The Jaguar Smile

By Barbara Schwartz
Editorial Director
The Xenia Institute

Photo by Lynne Bradley

the Sandino Vive (Sandino Lives) exposition, celebrating the 30th anniversary of the Nicaraguan revolution, was ongoing. That same silloutette adorned a much sought-after T-shirt that our trip leader wore; his face is stamped into a 1985 cordoba coin bearing his slogan, “Patria Libre o Morir” (Free Country or Death) that we received as souveniers. And even on the wooden campesino cross that I picked up at the tourist market in Masaya, there was a Christ-figure wearing Sandino’s hat.

I went to Nicaragua in June of this year knowing little more about Nicaragua than what I could remember from my childhood in the 1980s, when news about the Nicaraguan civil war and the U.S.-funded Contra army was featured on the nightly news. I remembered the words Sandinistas and Contras, and recalled that I was never certain which side were the “good” guys, but even then I had a feeling that the media or the president wasn’t being completely honest with me. I knew that liberation theologian Ernesto Cardenal still lived and worked in Nicaragua, I knew that I had too many pieces of cheap clothing in my closet that bore the label “Made in Nicaragua.” This scanty knowledge became the foundation for nearly everything that I learned — and am continuing to learn — about Nicaragua, globalization, and what kind of world I and other justice-seeking people want to have a hand in building.

Community square in Chacraseca. Photo by Lynne Bradley

My trip to Nicaragua took place as part of a summer internship I served with JustHope, a Tulsa-based nonprofit organization that builds relationships between three communities in Nicaragua — Chacraseca, Santa Emilia and LaFlor — and communities across the United States. Part of that internship was taking part in an eight-day partnership trip to Chacraseca, a rural community about three miles southeast of León in western Nicaragua, and a few hours’ drive from the Pacific Ocean and the black sand beaches of Poneloya. About 8,000 people live in Chacraseca, about a third of them under the age 16. The unemployment rate is massive — 95 percent — with the average family income amounting to about $1 U.S. a day.

I took the journey with members of a church from California that worked to build both an elementary school program and a small, cinderblock house for a family in one of Chacraseca’s most rural sectors. While we resembled the dozens of other church groups, whose members sported identical T-shirts spouting their Christian commitments, who had come to Nicaragua that week while on a mission trips, JustHope is not a mission group. Rather, it looks to build relationships based on respect, mutuality and justice between the Nicaraguan and U.S. communities, with learning taking place between both groups. This turned out to be more of a challenge, I think, for us gringos because for us it requires a new way of looking at the world that challenges our comfort with global economics and development, and our U.S. identity as an undisputed world leader. The marks of previous relationships Nicaragua has had with the U.S. is written all over the country, too often in blood or martyrs, the sweat of exploited workers, and tears of grief and anger. Our visit took place just a month before the 30th anniversary of the revolution, and barely a week  before a coup ousted the president of Honduras, Nicaragua’s neighbor to the north, which reminded us that the politics in Latin America, while relatively stable now, still exist on the edge. In the wake of the coup, I nervously watched the news from Latin America and warily eyed President Obama’s reaction, wondering whether the U.S. was involved (it wasn’t), and what effect the coup might have on the entire region (not much so far).

They say that world travel broadens your horizons and changes you. I really hope so, and I hope that change wasn’t just found in my character, the typical reaction in the wake of mission trips. Sure, I probably built some character — living rough for a few days, if you’re lucky, will do that. But more than anything I want that my perspective be changed. It wasn’t just that I slept outside and ate rice and beans (gallo pinto, which is the national dish and quite good, actually) three times a day, but that I have to ask why it was such a big change, and what role am I playing in making the differences between here and there so great? And then, I hope, I work on those answers.

But first, I had to encounter the questions. I asked and received. In Nicaragua, I learned about its history of revolution and freedom, the shaky economics that keep Nicaragua dependent on the crumbs the U.S. and multinational corporations stingily leave behind, and the struggle for clean water and full human rights as Nicaragua works to become an equal partner with the U.S. on the world stage. And finally, I pondered the politics of mission and the message of justice that faith communities profess in a world of inequality. And as I looked around for answers, I kept encountering the ghosts of Sandino, and, of course, his hat.

How Much for a Kidney?

Last week on my drive to work, I heard author Daniel Asa Rose on the Diane Rehm show plugging his book Larry’s Kidney, the tale of his trip to China with his cousin Larry and their quest for an illegal kidney transplant.

Larry was on a waiting list for a kidney and had decided that the daily dialysis was too much to bear, had heard that it was possible to buy a human kidney in China and have it safely transplanted. All of which he did.

I initially was amazed at the the cavlierness with which Rose was talking about flauting international law. Human organ trafficking is illegal in most of the world (also, the U.N. Convention Against Transnational Organized Crime covers the trafficking of humans, and this includes their organs). I was also appalled at the injustice of such “transplant tourism” in which those of with money can harvest the body parts of those without money (or rights; the kidney at Rose’s cousin received came from a Chinese prisoner on death row. Human rights organizations worry that these donations may not be voluntary and that prisoners may be killed in order to sell their organs). It makes me wonder about the value systems in play and whose bodies and lives are valued, the ill person’s or the persons donating, who may be donating out of financial need or strongarm tactics.

The larger crisis, of course, is the lack of organs available for transplant. According to the World Health Organization, its that shortage that has spawned transplant tourism, which occurs in places such as China, Egypt, South Africa, Indonesia and India. In 10% of the need was met in 2005. So I can understand the drive that pushes people like Larry to such extremes in a bid to save his own life. I have sympathy and yet …

This week, Ilya Somin at the Volokh Conspiracy wrote a piece explaining why making the sale and purchase of live human organs legal would benefit everyone in volved, both the patient seeking the organ and the person willing to sell it. For example:

I. Poor People Are Allowed to Take Much Greater Risks for Pay.

If it is somehow wrong to allow poor people to assume these very minor risks in exchange for pay, why should they be allowed to brave vastly greater dangers for money? Military personnel, firefighters, police officers, and others accept far greater risks to life and limb than kidney donors do. And of course they are paid to do so. Should poor people be banned from entering those professions? NFL players, most of whom come from poor backgrounds, risk very serious injuries. On average, they also lose about 2-3 years of life expectancy for every season they play. Yet no one argues that poor people should be banned from professional football. If it is permissible to “exploit” poor people for the sake of providing entertainment to football fans, shouldn’t we be able to do so for the sake of saving thousands of lives?

II. Is Preventing “Exploitation” Important enough to Justify Killing Thousands of People?

As Virginia Postrel explains in this article, some 80,000 lives in the US alone could be saved by legalizing kidney markets. Even if you find the “exploitation” of poor people in organ markets morally repugnant, you have to ask whether following that moral intuition is so important that it justifies sacrificing all those lives. So far, I haven’t seen any argument that even comes close to showing that it is.

…

III. Organ Sales are Actually Good for Poor Donors.

Given the minimal risks of organ donation, it is highly likely that kidney markets will actually benefit poor donors far more than they could conceivably harm them. The logic isn’t complicated. After all, one of the main problems that poor people face is lack of money. Getting, say, $100,000 for a kidney in exchange for accepting a very small health risk is likely to leave a poor donor much better off than he was before. Indeed, I might well accept that deal myself, despite being relatively affluent. Perhaps the existence of poverty is a morally repugnant injustice. If so, we should be extremely reluctant to ban transactions that might help the poor to alleviate it.

If the poor person reasonably believes that the risk is worth it, I don’t see why the government should force her to choose otherwise.

And so on and so forth …

On the one hand, all very reasonable arguments, from market perspective. I mean, why not let poor people with health organs cash in on the wealth by selling what people want to buy?

On the other hand — I have a great difficulty in letting market reasoning run what are supposed to be matters of human care, whether it’s in organ transplants or health care. How do we decide what is the market value of a kidney? Or a life? Again, how would we prevent such an exchange from exploiting either side? I understand that regulating the sale of human organs is supposed to prevent that exploitation — and hey, it would open up the market for any of us to get in on the action, so it wouldn’t just be people in financial need entering into this risky game.

I thought Kevin Drum @Mother Jones made a good argument for wariness in arguments like this:

right now both the law and the taboo against selling organs applies to all organs.  But if we make an exception for kidneys, does that weaken the taboo and make it more likely that markets will develop in other organs?  Obviously it wouldn’t for donations that would kill you, but how about corneas?  You’ve got two of ‘em, after all.  Or maybe a piece of one lung?  Or a chunk of something else.  And then another chunk.  Would venture capitalists start insisting on organ donations from entrepreneurs to prove their seriousness before they put up money of their own?  Could a bank ask a bankruptcy judge to demand a kidney donation in order to pay off a loan?

I’m not generally a big fan of slippery slope arguments, but they do have their place.  History suggests that once the rich and powerful figure out a way to exploit the poor in one way, they’ll pretty quickly start pushing the envelope in related directions as well.  So, yeah, this makes me pretty nervous.

So I don’t know. I certainly can’t say I’m leaning for opening up transplant to legalized sales. In a cases like this, I can only think that the only appropriate currency you could use to get an organ should be love and mutuality, and that should extend not just to the person who needs it, but also the person/people who might be called upon to give it.

Certainly, the U.S. — and indeed, the world! — need to do something about increasing the number of organ donations, whether they’re live or cadaver — in order to meet this crisis. What’s holding us back?

Comments?

Class and Coups edition

AP Photo

The big news that happened over the Independence Day weekend was Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin’s announcement of her pending resignation. Although the timing of the annnouncement, during a holiday weekend where most reporters and bloggers were away from their computers, was a bit off (or spot on, depending on what Palin was after), there still was a good amount of discussion and speculation about her future plans. One interesting thread of discussion on the blogs Monday was generated from a post by New York Times columnist Ross Douthat linking Palin’s popularity with class issues, with several bloggers striking back at the “self-made person” meme and the definitions of class itself.

I’m interested in what you think. Why do you think Palin is resigning? Does it help or hinder any future political plans she might have? And is her popularity a class issue and, if so, what does that say about U.S. politics and policies?

One topic that deserves some attention against the Michael Jackson news onslaught is the ongoing political unrest in Honduras, the job the media is doing covering it and what the U.S. response — not just by the government but also its citizens — should be.

The Democratic Ideal

Balloon Juice |  “For now, let’s put aside the fact that Andrew Jackson was a successful general before running for president and the fact that Harry Truman had served in various public offices for 20 years before becoming president. There are plenty of ordinary Americans who can tell you what papers they read. There are plenty of ordinary Americans who don’t wink their way through job interviews. There are plenty of ordinary Americans who don’t sound like computer-generated speech.

“Nothing annoys me more than the conservative myth that to be an ordinary American you have to be a moron.”

Political Animal |  “This argument is wildly unpersuasive. Indeed, it’s contradicted by very recent events. The Clintons’ daughter was put through the wringer, and both Bill and Hillary have Ivy League backgrounds. Barack Obama’s religious background was “misrepresented” to almost comedic levels, and as Douthat reminds us, he’s a product of Columbia and Harvard. Politicians’ records have been distorted since the days of the Athenian Empire, regardless of one’s class or collegiate background.

“Douthat, in other words, sees classism and misogyny driving the criticism of Palin. He’s mistaken. Not only have others with more impressive backgrounds faced similar scrutiny, but the criticism is actually the result of Palin’s own remarks, beliefs, record, and character.”

The League of Ordinary Gentlemen |  “So why does Ross say it? I imagine it has to do with this strange notion that we have floating in our national consciousness, that there are cultural cues which can somehow trump the financial realities of class. Yes, there are codes that we use to vaguely stratify people that aren’t based entirely on net worth or income. But they only work alongside good old fashioned monetary elitism. Ask anyone from a fallen house of aristocracy or some previously wealthy entrepreneur laid low. The right clothes, an accent and swagger can’t actually make up for not having the coin. It’s a consistent failure of American insight, or an artifact of the hyperactive American imagination, that we suppose that values can outmuscle value.”

The Monkey Cage |  “If you want to make the argument that Palin’s support is based on class, and that “lower class” people have a more favorable view of her, it really really helps if people of different class backgrounds have different opinions of her. And they really really don’t.”

The American Scene |  “What Ross said was that Palin grew up to be a great success story, which is not at all incompatible with her having, and retaining the very evident marks of, her small-town, middle- (note that Ross did not say “lower-”) class, humbly-educated background. Criticizing Palin’s startling lack of policy knowledge and almost total inability to communicate positions effectively is one thing, but calling her “slutty” and mocking her “white trash concupiscence” is quite another, and naturally opens the way for columns like this one: for no unbiased observer can seriously deny that Palin’s class and gender were consistently seized on in the attempts to discredit her, and no one who takes the democratic ideal seriously should look back at that saga without some real concern for the role that class plays in American politics.”

Also check out Sarah Palin (R, Asterik) @FiveThirtyEight and Palin Resigns @Womanist Musings for some very sharp analysis of the Palin Saga.

High Noon in Honduras

AlterNet |  “Video images of the dueling demonstrations show the sharp split in the country. Honduras is the 16th most unequal nation in the world, with the top 10 percent of the population receiving 42 percent of income and the bottom 10 percent controlling only 1.2 percent. This situation feeds a steady stream of migrants to the U.S., and many families now live off money sent home from relatives working there.

“Zelaya draws his support primarily among the poor primarily. Elected as a center-right politician from a wealthy ranching family, Zelaya moved to the left over the course of his four-year term. He especially galled business leaders by raising the minimum wage last December from $157 to $289 dollars a month, except in free trade zones.  The UN notes that 44 percent of the population lives on less than two dollars a day. Unions and campesino organizations belonging to Via Campesina stand strongly behind the president.”

New American Media |  “The Obama Administration has chosen to respond to the crisis in a manner that will signify little to millions watching the bloodshed taking place in Honduras; While nobody in the hemisphere wants the return of the actions of the Bush era, many already believe that the Obama Administration’s inactions mean that the “new” or fundamental “change” Obama promised during his also widely-viewed Summit of the Americas speech last April adds up to little more than this: more militarismo, but with a smile.

“For example, rather than officially declare and denounce the Honduras putsch as a “coup”, which would, among other things, trigger a cutoff of military and other aid, the Obama Administration has instead chosen the symbolic act of suspending joint military operations.”

RaceWire |  “The U.S. cannot lead the world unless it stands firmly with the peoples’ choice, no matter how that might seem to contradict our “interests”. Our solidarity with the Iranian people and their plight for democracy is inseparable with our solidarity with the Honduran crisis. At the end, the people of world will judge the U.S. by their solidarity: she must be either with democracy or against it.”

Eunomia (via Andrew Sullivan)  |  “One of the reasons why I was so skeptical and wary of the pro-Mousavi enthusiasm that automatically sprang up everywhere after June 12 was that it reminded me of the same kind of enthusiastic misunderstanding about foreign affairs that led so many people to be so spectacularly wrong about what was happening and what should be done about it in those other cases. I am still wary of attributing too much significance to the protests, but in the early days of the protests the general Western presumption in favor of a “coup” explanation of what happened in Iran seems to be identical to the early, automatic international acceptance of pro-Zelaya arguments. At this point, the coup label is much more appropriate for Iran than it will ever be for Honduras, and even in Iran it doesn’t fully convey what happened.”

RaceWire |  “In a throwback to the political upheaval and unrest of the 1980s, the democratically elected president of Honduras, Manuel Zelaya, was ousted by the military and flown to Costa Rica on Sunday. Coverage of Iran’s rigged election has dominated the airwaves for weeks, but western MSM has been largely silent about the Honduras coup — strange, since both countries have had long histories of U.S. intervention, and protestors in both countries face lethal force at the hands of a government military with extensive U.S. ties and questionable legitimacy.

“So whose responsibility is it to get the struggles of our southern neighbors in the headlines? Ours, of course.

“Here are five things you can do right now, to get educated and make a difference.”

News for July 2

He’s Good Enough, Smart Enough and Doggone It, People Like Him

Points to those who remember which Al Franken character from whom I’ve paraphrased the title of today’s News & Analysis. Rather, I should say the character created by Sen.-elect Al Franken. Yes, the comedian, former Saturday Night Live star and writer and radio commentator can add politician to his resume. On Tuesday the Minnesota Supreme Court ordered that Franken be certified as the winner of the state’s Senate race. Liberal political writers greeted Franken’s victory with speculation about how Franken will make the shift from pundit to politico, and what his addition means for the power of Senate Democrats. Links include:

FiveThirtyEight |  “I realize that in the era of reality TV, where non-professionals can become television celebrities, maybe celebrities who are political amateurs are just as entitled as anyone to serve in elected office. But I’d much rather have a person who worked her way up through the state legislature and the House run and win a Senate seat, than Al Franken. Oh, and the use of the feminine pronoun in that last sentence was not random: You’ll note that when we talk about celebrity politicians we are almost invariably talking about men.”

The Daily Beast |  “Is there any precedent for a person as cool as Franken becoming a U.S. senator? OK, he looks like a nerd, and he worked like hell not only to educate himself on the issues but to take the entire crazy process of running for office as seriously as is humanly possible. But face it, he was a genuinely funny comedian, and this has never happened before.”

Tapped |  “While there will be plenty of hand-ringing over how Republicans have hurt the state by drawing out a race Minnesotans wanted to be over long ago, nothing has been irreparably damaged by this extended vacancy. It isn’t like Gov. Sanford disappearing for a few days. Executives really do run things. Senators don’t. While it’s unfortunate that senior Minnesota Sen. Amy Klobuchar’s office has had to pick up the slack, the Democrats in the Senate haven’t lost any roll call result through the absence of a Franken vote.”

Political Animal |  “To be sure, Democrats on the Hill are no doubt thrilled to add another member to their caucus. And a 60-vote majority is the largest caucus either party has had in 35 years. Not bad for a party that had 45 senators just a couple of Congresses ago. That said, while this is an impressive milestone for the Democratic Party, it’s hardly a breakthrough that will produce problem-free governing.”

MoJo Blogs |  “The corruption of the filibuster into a routine requirement for 60 votes in the Senate (an arguably unconstitutional evolution, IMHO) combined with the continuing presence of half a dozen non-liberals in the Democratic caucus combined with an almost iron self-discipline within the Republican caucus — well, all that combined means that liberals now have the illusion of control of Congress but not the reality.  In a way, it’s almost the worst of all possible worlds.  Dem vs. Dem is now practically the only narrative that anyone will pay attention to, and since unanimous agreement is the only way for that narrative to play out well, this means it’s almost always going to play out badly.”

• Related link: Inhofe: No Disrespect, But Franken’s a ‘Clown’  |  ThinkProgress

Stand by Me — in Persian and English  |  Alas, a Blog

Every young person I see I wonder, What were you doing three weeks ago? Who were you then? I look for signs of subversion. A girl wears a green headscarf. A kid shifts gears in his Kia Pride with an arm encased in a green cast. What does it mean? Together, in a crowd, the color green added up to something. Alone, spread apart and without context, they are just moments of coincidence.

…

Khoobe, khoobe, bezar begand. Harchi bishtar, baytar. Good, good, let them say it. The more the better. Hamintor khatra siatar mikonand. They’ll only darken the line separating the people from the government. We sit and plot, kitchen revolutionaries at work. It is late and the drink is loosening our tongues. What we need is leadership. What about Mousavi? Poor Mousavi, all alone…If only Khomeini were still around, he would have put all of these guys in their places!, this last bit said by someone who has never accepted the Revolution. At 10 the neighbors start up, Allah Akbar! Allah Akbar! We keep drinking, pressing our hands flat against the table and wondering if maybe they’re letting us thrash around for a few weeks even as the screws tighten…

Still…I’ve written elsewhere that none of this was supposed to happen. It remains true. It is the people, the mellat, that has taken on the most creative and unexpected role in this drama. Their scenario remains the least predictable, and therefore most hopeful, of all of the actors, foreign or Iranian. Iran’s conspirators clearly did not expect the population to show up in such defiant numbers after June 12 and the truth be told, neither did many of us…

Ampersand at Alas, a Blog also recommends a piece by George Friedman at Stratfor Global Intelligence analyzing the elections and ensuing violence. Friedman writes:

The key to understanding the situation in Iran is realizing that the past weeks have seen not an uprising against the regime, but a struggle within the regime. Ahmadinejad is not part of the establishment, but rather has been struggling against it, accusing it of having betrayed the principles of the Islamic Revolution. The post-election unrest in Iran therefore was not a matter of a repressive regime suppressing liberals (as in Prague in 1989), but a struggle between two Islamist factions that are each committed to the regime, but opposed to each other.

The demonstrators certainly included Western-style liberalizing elements, but they also included adherents of senior clerics who wanted to block Ahmadinejad’s re-election. And while Ahmadinejad undoubtedly committed electoral fraud to bulk up his numbers, his ability to commit unlimited fraud was blocked, because very powerful people looking for a chance to bring him down were arrayed against him.

The situation is even more complex because it is not simply a fight between Ahmadinejad and the clerics, but also a fight among the clerical elite regarding perks and privileges — and Ahmadinejad is himself being used within this infighting. The Iranian president’s populism suits the interests of clerics who oppose Rafsanjani; Ahmadinejad is their battering ram. But as Ahmadinejad increases his power, he could turn on his patrons very quickly. In short, the political situation in Iran is extremely volatile, just not for the reason that the media portrayed.

Honduras: The Original Banana Republic  |  GOOD Magazine

GOOD provides a link on the history of Honduras from the Sustainable Foods blog. The U.S. appetite for the Latin American country’s bananas, the article says, created the mechanism that controlled its government during the early years of the 20th century:

Via RandomNonviolence, it’s worth noting that graduates of the School of the Americas are responsible for the weekend coup in Honduras.

While you may want to go to Chavez Code (via Xcroc) for breaking news, I think it’s worth remembering that in Honduras’ bloody, recent history, a direct line can be drawn from banana monoculture, extreme economic inequality and overweening corporate power to torture and political repression. And perhaps more to the point, these tragedies spring from an unstated belief in the right of businesses to profit at the expense of all else, to privatize productivity gains and impose costs and losses on the public.

Also, for those who want to know more about Honduras, check out MoJo Blogs for a quick postcard history and present snapshot of Honduras’ relationship with the U.S., and New American Media for two perspectives — from Tegulcigalpa and Tennessee — on the coup.

Liberté, Égalité, Paternalisme  |  Julian Sanchez

If the premise is that women who wear the burqa are being robbed of their agency and dignity—and that even those who protest that they wish to wear it are victims false consciousness—how is the ban supposed to be enforced? By fining or detaining or otherwise harassing the very women who, on this theory, are the most oppressed? By barring them access to public places, government buildings, maybe even courts and police stations? I suppose you could direct the penalties toward their male relations, but that hardly seems like a good way to reinforce the concept of the equal agency of women.

• Related link: Sarkozy: ‘Eliminate the Burqa’  |  The Czech

Ayn Rand: Don’t Call It a Comeback  |  Salon: How the World Works

To those of us who proudly consider ourselves non-Objectivist heathens, the events of the last two years would seem to be a mighty refutation of some of the core elements of Ayn Randian philosophy — at least as applied to economics. We let the John Galts of Wall Street — the Jimmy Caynes and Sanford Weills and John Thains and Angelo Mozilos — do as they pleased, and they broke the economy. Government listened to those who declared that the pursuit of pure profit should be the ultimate arbiter of the organization of financial markets, and we ended up finding ourselves in the deepest economic contraction of our lifetimes. For anyone with the eyes to see, we were given compelling evidence that greed is not good, and that the single-minded pursuit of making money can be incredibly destructive to the fabric of society.

…

Even Alan Greenspan, a self-avowed disciple of Ayn Rand and true believer in the wisdom of markets, was willing to fess up and tell Congress he “made a mistake.” By any objective consideration, right now, today, the reputation of the businessman standing alone and tall as the hero of a productive society is at its lowest point in at least 40 years.

Which is why my eyes just about popped out of my head when I received an e-mail from FSB Associates a few hours ago, telling me that “now is finally the time to read [Atlas Shrugged].”

Next Page »