I find Spivak's comments on different traditions of communism and of the "ethical interruption" compelling and thought-provoking:
Monday, January 17, 2011
Saturday, January 15, 2011
An interview w/ Nandy by Nigam
A nice covering of different issues... i like the point about medicine and traversing different times...
Tuesday, October 19, 2010
Do you know of any similar project?
This sounds like a really cool project. It'd be interesting to learn about other conceptions of justice, liberation, knowledges...
http://waziyatawin.net/commentary/
Waziyatawin is a Dakota writer, teacher, and activist committed to the development of liberation strategies that will support the recovery of Indigenous ways of being, the reclamation of Indigenous homelands, and the eradication of colonial institutions.Waziyatawin comes from the Pezihutazizi Otunwe (Yellow Medicine Village) in southwestern Minnesota. After receiving her Ph.D. in American history from Cornell University in 2000, she earned tenure and an associate professorship in the history department at Arizona State University where she taught for seven years. Waziyatawin currently holds the Indigenous Peoples Research Chair in the Indigenous Governance Program at the University of Victoria in British Columbia. Her interests include projects centering on Indigenous decolonization strategies such as truth-telling and reparative justice, Indigenous women and resistance, the recovery of Indigenous knowledge, and the development of liberation ideology in Indigenous communities.She is the author, editor, or co-editor of five volumes including: Remember This!: Dakota Decolonization and the Eli Taylor Narratives(University of Nebraska Press 2005); Indigenizing the Academy: Transforming Scholarship and Empowering Communities (University of Nebraska Press 2004); For Indigenous Eyes Only: A Decolonization Handbook (School of Advanced Research Press 2005); In the Footsteps of Our Ancestors: The Dakota Commemorative Marches of the 21st Century (Living Justice Press 2006); and, her most recent volume, What Does Justice Look Like? The Struggle for Liberation in Dakota Homeland (Living Justice Press 2008).
Waziyatawin is also the founder and director of Oyate Nipi Kte, a non-profit organization dedicated to the recovery of Dakota traditional knowledge, sustainable ways of being, and Dakota liberation.
Monday, October 11, 2010
a short note on 'columbus day'...
Americans
(by E. Galeano)
Official history has it that Vasco Núñez de Balboa was the first man to see, from a summit in Panama, two oceans at once. Were the natives blind?
Who first gave names to corn and potatoes and tomatoes and chocolate and the mountains and rivers of America? Hernán Cortés? Francisco Pizarro? Were the natives mute?
The Pilgrims of the Mayflower heard Him: God said America was the promised land. Were the natives deaf?
Later on, the grandchildren of the Pilgrims seized the name and everything else. Now they are the Americans. And those us who live in the other Americas, who are we?
(by E. Galeano)
Official history has it that Vasco Núñez de Balboa was the first man to see, from a summit in Panama, two oceans at once. Were the natives blind?
Who first gave names to corn and potatoes and tomatoes and chocolate and the mountains and rivers of America? Hernán Cortés? Francisco Pizarro? Were the natives mute?
The Pilgrims of the Mayflower heard Him: God said America was the promised land. Were the natives deaf?
Later on, the grandchildren of the Pilgrims seized the name and everything else. Now they are the Americans. And those us who live in the other Americas, who are we?
Thursday, September 9, 2010
Amartya Sen - why haven't I read him earlier?!
I just read 2 chapters from "Development as Freedom" from him and for the first time, I actually get excited about economics :-) If you haven't, check him out, and i mean those of you too, skeptics of development and economics in general :D:
Development as Freedom
Pathologies of Power: Health, Human Rights, and the New War on the Poor
Poverty and Famines: An Essay on Entitlement and Deprivation
If you have read him before and either like him or have a critique of him, I'd love to hear!!
Monday, August 16, 2010
A brave song from Hawaii
enjoy her whole poem on youtube:
"1893" Jamaica
...
and I tried my best to forget
but I couldn't
and so I may have lost sight in the tears my ancestors cried
but I'll show you my pride
...
I will chant continuously to show you that I am Hawaiian
I will stand, fight, and chant and never be compliant
because the second I start worshipping the red, white, and blue
pledging allegiance to a nation that turned her eyes red, people white, and hearts blue
is the second I know that the fight is due
...
Sunday, June 27, 2010
politics from Turkey
beyza just told me about this today. 2009: Turkey's PM confronted Israeli killings at the WEF:
Thursday, May 27, 2010
Saturday, March 20, 2010
Correspondence between Gandhi and Tolstoy
I just ran across some letters of correspondence between Gandhi and Leo Tolstoy (the Russian author of War and Peace, among many other great works of literature), and I thought some of you might really appreciate what Tolstoy has to say about Love, Christianity, & the politics of the State:
To Gandhi, Johannesburg, Transvaal, South Africa.
KOCHETY. 7th September 1910.
I received your journal, Indian Opinion, and was glad to see what it says of those who renounce all resistance by force, and I immediately felt a wish to let you know what thoughts its perusal aroused in me.
The longer I live-especially now when I clearly feel the approach of death-the more I feel moved to express what I feel more strongly than anything else, and what in my opinion is of immense importance, namely, what we call the renunciation of all opposition by force, which really simply means the doctrine of the law of love unperverted by sophistries. Love, or in other words the striving of men's souls towards unity and the submissive behaviour to one another that results therefrom, represents the highest and indeed the only law of life, as every man knows and feels in the depths of his heart (and as we see most clearly in children), and knows until he becomes involved in the lying net of worldly thoughts. This law was announced by all the philosophies- Indian as well as Chinese, and Jewish, Greek and Roman. Most clearly, I think, was it announced by Christ, who said explicitly that on it hang all the Law and the Prophets. More than that, foreseeing the distortion that has hindered its recognition and may always hinder it, he specially indicated the danger of a misrepresentation that presents itself to men living by worldly interests- namely, that they may claim a right to defend their interests by force or, as he expressed it, to repay blow by blow and recover stolen property by force, etc., etc. He knew, as all reasonable men must do, that any employment of force is incompatible with love as the highest law of life, and that as soon as the use of force appears permissible even in a single case, the law itself is immediately negatived. The whole of Christian civilization, outwardly so splendid, has grown up on this strange and flagrant- partly intentional but chiefly unconscious-misunderstanding and contradiction. At bottom, however, the law of love is, and can be, no longer valid if defence by force is set up beside it. And if once the law of love is not valid, then there remains no law except the right of might. In that state Christendom has lived for 1,900 years. Certainly men have always let themselves be guided by force as the main principle of their social order. The difference between the Christian and all other nations is only this: that in Christianity the law of love had been more clearly and definitely given than in any other religion, and that its adherents solemnly recognized it. Yet despite this they deemed the use of force to be permissible, and based their lives on violence - so that the life of the Christian nations presents a greater contradiction between what they believe and the principle on which their lives are built: a contradiction between love which should pre scribe the law of conduct, and the employment of force, recognized under various forms-such as governments, courts of justice, and armies, which are accepted as necessary and esteemed. This contradiction increased with the development of the spiritual life of Christianity and in recent years has reached the utmost tension.
The question now is, that we must choose one of two things-either to admit that we recognize no religious ethics at all but let our conduct of life be decided by the right of might; or to demand that all compulsory levying of taxes be discontinued, and all our legal and police institutions, and above all, military institutions, be abolished.
This spring, at a scripture examination in a Moscow girls' school, first their religious teacher and then an archbishop who was also present, questioned the girls on the ten commandments, especially on the sixth. After the commandments had been correctly recited the archbishop sometimes put a question, usually: 'Is it always and in every case forbidden by the law of God to kill?' And the unfortunate girls, misled by their instructor, had to answer and did answer: 'Not always, for it is permissible in war and at executions.' When, however, this customary additional question-whether it is always a sin to kill-was put to one of these unfortunate creatures (what I am telling you is not an anecdote, but actually happened and was told me by an eyewitness) the girl coloured up and answered decidedly and with emotion - 'Always!' And despite all the customary sophistries of the archbishop, she held steadfastly to it-that to kill is under all circumstances forbidden even in the Old Testament, and that Christ has not only forbidden us to kill, but in general to do any harm to our neighbour. The archbishop, for all his majesty and verbal dexterity,was silenced, and victory remained with the girl.
Yes, we may write in the papers of our progress in mastery of the air, of complicated diplomatic relation, of various clubs, of discoveries, of all sorts of alliances, and of so-called works of art, and we can pass lightly over what that girl said. But we cannot completely silence her, for every Christian feels the same, however vaguely he may do so. Socialism, Communism, Anarchism' Salvation Armies, the growth of crime, freedom from toil, the increasingly absurd luxury of the rich and increased misery of the poor, the fearfully rising number of suicides-are all indications of that inner contradiction which must and will be resolved. And, of course, resolved in such a manner that the law of love will be recognized and all reliance on force abandoned. Your work in the Transvaal, which to us seems to be at the end of the earth, is yet in the centre of our interest and supplies the most weighty practical proof, in which the world can now share, and not only the Christian but all the peoples of the world can participate.
I think it will please you to hear that here in Russia, too, a similar movement is rapidly attracting attention, and refusals of military service increase year by year. However small as yet is with you the number of those who renounce all resistance by force, and with us the number of men who refuse any military service-both the one and the other can say: God is with us, and God is mightier than man.
In the confession of Christianity-even a Christianity deformed as is that taught among us-and a simultaneous belief in the necessity of armies and preparations to slaughter on an ever-increasing scale, there is an obvious contradiction that cries to heaven, and that sooner or later, but probably quite soon, must appear in the light of day in its complete nakedness. That, however, will either annihilate the Christian religion, which is indispensable for the maintenance of the State, or it will sweep away the military and all the use of force bound up with it-which the State needs no less. All governments are aware of this contradiction, your British as much as our Russian, and therefore its recognition will be more energetically opposed by the governments than any other activity inimical to the State, as we in Russia have experienced and as is shown by the articles in your magazine. The governments know from what direction the greatest danger threatens them, and are on guard with watchful eyes not merely to preserve their interests but actually to fight for their very existence.
Yours etc., LEO TOLSTOY.
More letters + context can be found here:
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Correspondence_between_Tolstoy_and_Gandhi
Mahatma_Gandhi_Leostoy_Letters_by_B. Srinivasa Murthy
To Gandhi, Johannesburg, Transvaal, South Africa.
KOCHETY. 7th September 1910.
I received your journal, Indian Opinion, and was glad to see what it says of those who renounce all resistance by force, and I immediately felt a wish to let you know what thoughts its perusal aroused in me.
The longer I live-especially now when I clearly feel the approach of death-the more I feel moved to express what I feel more strongly than anything else, and what in my opinion is of immense importance, namely, what we call the renunciation of all opposition by force, which really simply means the doctrine of the law of love unperverted by sophistries. Love, or in other words the striving of men's souls towards unity and the submissive behaviour to one another that results therefrom, represents the highest and indeed the only law of life, as every man knows and feels in the depths of his heart (and as we see most clearly in children), and knows until he becomes involved in the lying net of worldly thoughts. This law was announced by all the philosophies- Indian as well as Chinese, and Jewish, Greek and Roman. Most clearly, I think, was it announced by Christ, who said explicitly that on it hang all the Law and the Prophets. More than that, foreseeing the distortion that has hindered its recognition and may always hinder it, he specially indicated the danger of a misrepresentation that presents itself to men living by worldly interests- namely, that they may claim a right to defend their interests by force or, as he expressed it, to repay blow by blow and recover stolen property by force, etc., etc. He knew, as all reasonable men must do, that any employment of force is incompatible with love as the highest law of life, and that as soon as the use of force appears permissible even in a single case, the law itself is immediately negatived. The whole of Christian civilization, outwardly so splendid, has grown up on this strange and flagrant- partly intentional but chiefly unconscious-misunderstanding and contradiction. At bottom, however, the law of love is, and can be, no longer valid if defence by force is set up beside it. And if once the law of love is not valid, then there remains no law except the right of might. In that state Christendom has lived for 1,900 years. Certainly men have always let themselves be guided by force as the main principle of their social order. The difference between the Christian and all other nations is only this: that in Christianity the law of love had been more clearly and definitely given than in any other religion, and that its adherents solemnly recognized it. Yet despite this they deemed the use of force to be permissible, and based their lives on violence - so that the life of the Christian nations presents a greater contradiction between what they believe and the principle on which their lives are built: a contradiction between love which should pre scribe the law of conduct, and the employment of force, recognized under various forms-such as governments, courts of justice, and armies, which are accepted as necessary and esteemed. This contradiction increased with the development of the spiritual life of Christianity and in recent years has reached the utmost tension.
The question now is, that we must choose one of two things-either to admit that we recognize no religious ethics at all but let our conduct of life be decided by the right of might; or to demand that all compulsory levying of taxes be discontinued, and all our legal and police institutions, and above all, military institutions, be abolished.
This spring, at a scripture examination in a Moscow girls' school, first their religious teacher and then an archbishop who was also present, questioned the girls on the ten commandments, especially on the sixth. After the commandments had been correctly recited the archbishop sometimes put a question, usually: 'Is it always and in every case forbidden by the law of God to kill?' And the unfortunate girls, misled by their instructor, had to answer and did answer: 'Not always, for it is permissible in war and at executions.' When, however, this customary additional question-whether it is always a sin to kill-was put to one of these unfortunate creatures (what I am telling you is not an anecdote, but actually happened and was told me by an eyewitness) the girl coloured up and answered decidedly and with emotion - 'Always!' And despite all the customary sophistries of the archbishop, she held steadfastly to it-that to kill is under all circumstances forbidden even in the Old Testament, and that Christ has not only forbidden us to kill, but in general to do any harm to our neighbour. The archbishop, for all his majesty and verbal dexterity,was silenced, and victory remained with the girl.
Yes, we may write in the papers of our progress in mastery of the air, of complicated diplomatic relation, of various clubs, of discoveries, of all sorts of alliances, and of so-called works of art, and we can pass lightly over what that girl said. But we cannot completely silence her, for every Christian feels the same, however vaguely he may do so. Socialism, Communism, Anarchism' Salvation Armies, the growth of crime, freedom from toil, the increasingly absurd luxury of the rich and increased misery of the poor, the fearfully rising number of suicides-are all indications of that inner contradiction which must and will be resolved. And, of course, resolved in such a manner that the law of love will be recognized and all reliance on force abandoned. Your work in the Transvaal, which to us seems to be at the end of the earth, is yet in the centre of our interest and supplies the most weighty practical proof, in which the world can now share, and not only the Christian but all the peoples of the world can participate.
I think it will please you to hear that here in Russia, too, a similar movement is rapidly attracting attention, and refusals of military service increase year by year. However small as yet is with you the number of those who renounce all resistance by force, and with us the number of men who refuse any military service-both the one and the other can say: God is with us, and God is mightier than man.
In the confession of Christianity-even a Christianity deformed as is that taught among us-and a simultaneous belief in the necessity of armies and preparations to slaughter on an ever-increasing scale, there is an obvious contradiction that cries to heaven, and that sooner or later, but probably quite soon, must appear in the light of day in its complete nakedness. That, however, will either annihilate the Christian religion, which is indispensable for the maintenance of the State, or it will sweep away the military and all the use of force bound up with it-which the State needs no less. All governments are aware of this contradiction, your British as much as our Russian, and therefore its recognition will be more energetically opposed by the governments than any other activity inimical to the State, as we in Russia have experienced and as is shown by the articles in your magazine. The governments know from what direction the greatest danger threatens them, and are on guard with watchful eyes not merely to preserve their interests but actually to fight for their very existence.
Yours etc., LEO TOLSTOY.
More letters + context can be found here:
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Correspondence_between_Tolstoy_and_Gandhi
Mahatma_Gandhi_Leostoy_Letters_by_B. Srinivasa Murthy
Thursday, February 25, 2010
From "The Songs of Hiroshima" (edited by Miyo Ohara)
Blood
While taking down lecture notes,
My head bent intently,
All of a sudden
A drop of blood fell on my pencil,
My nose was bleeding.
Without ceasing,
The flow continued
Coloring the words, turning them red.
Death,
That word that raises its head
From some corner of my heart, awaiting its chance.
Death!
But I do not want to die,
Because of the Atomic-bomb,
I do not want to die without speaking a word.
Is it right that the Bomb, all over the globe,
May drop and take away people’s lives;
May force other wretches such as I
To bear a fate like mine forever
All over the globe?
I do not want to die!
I steal a glance at my arm, under my sleeve…
Death’s spot is not there yet.
Morning
They dream:
A workman dreams, lowering his pickaxe, with sweat in scars from the flash;
A wife dreams, bending over the sewing-machine, in the odor of sedorrhoea reeking from her slipped skin;
A box office girl dreams, her feet curved like a crab’s, hidden in both hands;
A match-seller also dreams, with shattered glass still fast in her neck.
Thus they dream:
Through an element out of pitchblende and carnotite
By means of an everlasting division of energy,
Famished deserts shall be changed into fertile fields;
Bright canals run round the feet of crumbling mountains;
Under the artificial suns, in the waste lands of the Arctic,
Cities and towns shall be built of pure gold.
Thus they dream:
In the shade of trees where working-people take their rest,
That festival flags are waving, and the legends of Hiroshima are told by their tender lips.
Thus they dream:
That those swine in men’s shape
Who know not how to use the power from earth’s center except for slaughter
Survive only in picture books for the little ones;
That the energy of ten million horse power per gram, one thousand times as strong as high-explosive,
Is delivered, out of the Atom, into the hands of the people;
That the rich crop of science
May be conveyed, in peace, among people,
And like bunches of abundant grapes,
Wet with drew,
Be gathered in
At dawn.
Saturday, January 23, 2010
The Human Writes Project
A beautiful combination of poetry, hip hop and fighting for justice! Check the project out and the artists' music pages too:
Omar Offendum
Mark Gonzales
Ragtop
Some songs I've listened to and really liked:
Ragtop "1948"- Get Down for Life & Lyrics: Get Down for Gaza
Mark's Letter to Our Loved Ones
Omar Offendum (USA/Syria) Live at Words Beats Life
Justice Tomorrow, Arab Summit.
Omar Offendum
Mark Gonzales
Ragtop
Some songs I've listened to and really liked:
Ragtop "1948"- Get Down for Life & Lyrics: Get Down for Gaza
Mark's Letter to Our Loved Ones
Omar Offendum (USA/Syria) Live at Words Beats Life
Justice Tomorrow, Arab Summit.
Works related to Colonialism and Sovereignty in Hawai'i
Some books about Hawaii's resistance to colonialism that i'm curious about:
From a Native Daughter: Colonialism and Sovereignty in Hawaii (Revised) (Latitude 20 Books) by Haunani-Kay Trask (Paperback - April 1, 1999)
"Light in the Crevice Never Seen" - Trask's poems
Aloha Betrayed: Native Hawaiian Resistance to American Colonialism (a John Hope Franklin Center Book) by Noenoe K. Silva
Colonizing Hawai'i by Sally Engle Merry (Paperback - Dec 21, 1999)
Hawaiian Blood: Colonialism and the Politics of Sovereignty and Indigeneity (Narrating Native Histories) (Paperback)
~ J. Kehaulani Kauanui (Author)
Please post if anyone knows of any similar work regarding Puerto Rico ;-)
From a Native Daughter: Colonialism and Sovereignty in Hawaii (Revised) (Latitude 20 Books) by Haunani-Kay Trask (Paperback - April 1, 1999)
"Light in the Crevice Never Seen" - Trask's poems
Aloha Betrayed: Native Hawaiian Resistance to American Colonialism (a John Hope Franklin Center Book) by Noenoe K. Silva
Colonizing Hawai'i by Sally Engle Merry (Paperback - Dec 21, 1999)
Hawaiian Blood: Colonialism and the Politics of Sovereignty and Indigeneity (Narrating Native Histories) (Paperback)
~ J. Kehaulani Kauanui (Author)
Please post if anyone knows of any similar work regarding Puerto Rico ;-)
Monday, January 11, 2010
Learning afresh
I really like this article I just read:
Songs of Shared Living
...By contrast, I find consistently that the least privileged Indian men and women — Hindu, Muslim as well as of other faiths — are intuitively far more respectful to the faith of others, even as they are very deeply devout in their own faith. I recall sitting with women from one of the most oppressed Dalit communities in Madhya Pradesh. It is evening, and the call of the azaan is heard. The instinct of the women is to immediately cover their heads, fold their hands and bow in the direction of the mosque. To them there is no question, that a mosque is as worthy of reverence as a temple. It is a lesson that I wish many of my educated friends would learn — or re-learn.
It is this idea of freedom, fraternity and secular democracy, which ordinary Indians intuitively comprehend, and practise. It is a way of life rooted in millennia of lived experience — including of Bhakti and Sufi traditions — which they defend. It is a way of life in which reverence for one's own God or Gods, does in no way exclude, but instead necessarily entails, equal respect or reverence for all other Gods or God. It is this idea of freedom that many Indians are losing as they read books, and accumulate wealth. Central also is the notion of equal citizenship based not on a denial of faith, but equal respect for every faith, including the absence of faith. Freedom in India would not mean a bar on turbans or head scarves in the classroom, as in France. It would be the defence of the right of Sikh boys to wear turbans, and Muslim girls to wear head scarves if they so choose.
....
And we can do this best if we turn to our ordinary working people, to those who have often not had the opportunities of formal education. We need to learn afresh from their deep, wise, unshakeable respect for the beliefs of other people who are different from us in some ways. We need to listen to their voices, to their songs, to their worship and to their irreverence, to their laughter and to the silences of their shared suffering. And then maybe we would learn the most robust defence of freedom in this vast and ancient land.
The last paragraph reminds me of a quote from Achebe:
“Whatever you are is never enough; you must find a way to accept something however small from the other to make you whole and save you from the mortal sin of righteousness.”
Why is it that the formally educated are the ones most likely to be guilty of this mortal sin of righteousness? mmmm....
Songs of Shared Living
...By contrast, I find consistently that the least privileged Indian men and women — Hindu, Muslim as well as of other faiths — are intuitively far more respectful to the faith of others, even as they are very deeply devout in their own faith. I recall sitting with women from one of the most oppressed Dalit communities in Madhya Pradesh. It is evening, and the call of the azaan is heard. The instinct of the women is to immediately cover their heads, fold their hands and bow in the direction of the mosque. To them there is no question, that a mosque is as worthy of reverence as a temple. It is a lesson that I wish many of my educated friends would learn — or re-learn.
It is this idea of freedom, fraternity and secular democracy, which ordinary Indians intuitively comprehend, and practise. It is a way of life rooted in millennia of lived experience — including of Bhakti and Sufi traditions — which they defend. It is a way of life in which reverence for one's own God or Gods, does in no way exclude, but instead necessarily entails, equal respect or reverence for all other Gods or God. It is this idea of freedom that many Indians are losing as they read books, and accumulate wealth. Central also is the notion of equal citizenship based not on a denial of faith, but equal respect for every faith, including the absence of faith. Freedom in India would not mean a bar on turbans or head scarves in the classroom, as in France. It would be the defence of the right of Sikh boys to wear turbans, and Muslim girls to wear head scarves if they so choose.
....
And we can do this best if we turn to our ordinary working people, to those who have often not had the opportunities of formal education. We need to learn afresh from their deep, wise, unshakeable respect for the beliefs of other people who are different from us in some ways. We need to listen to their voices, to their songs, to their worship and to their irreverence, to their laughter and to the silences of their shared suffering. And then maybe we would learn the most robust defence of freedom in this vast and ancient land.
The last paragraph reminds me of a quote from Achebe:
“Whatever you are is never enough; you must find a way to accept something however small from the other to make you whole and save you from the mortal sin of righteousness.”
Why is it that the formally educated are the ones most likely to be guilty of this mortal sin of righteousness? mmmm....
Monday, December 21, 2009
Book club - Narayan (:
heyyyy village!!
Since I was dealing with presentations and papers, I have not been able to get involved the text deeply while writing the following thoughts, just trying to put my notes in sentences (that I had taken while readings. ) If it's not good enough for you to start, just push me with questions lol.
Looking forward to hearing from you guys! wink wink :-) (queen's face)
''It's so interesting for me thinking about some concepts that I have never get deeply involved before. gracias to the village. (:
Well, as a citizen of a country where even you're a citizen you don't have the language of rights, it was so enjoyable for me break the borders of my mind and rethought of citizenship in terms of her conceptualizations.
For the dignity issue, I'm still not sure whetver I get it wrong or not. Is she talking about the transition from the person of the King to an individual? In any way I love rethinking the idea of citizenship and seeing errors of conceptualization in terms of limited understanding taht depends on 'earning', or 'contrubuting' as preconditions of rights. I have a tendecy that it has been soooo much used by states so called -for the sake of the state.
In the issue of more inclusive of women, in a manner that just reading the woman merely over the family or men does not help us to undertstand ongoing problems.however, I'm still not sure how we're gonna deal with this? To illustrate: I'm just thinking one of my aunts, all she is thinking or considering about is my cousins' courses, lifes, their being sick or not as a mother sensitive but I really believe that she does not have any kind of time or will to do sthg excetp this. Politics is understood for her to do sthg bad or corrupted or ridicilous that even if she will came to the point to want to seek her right , she does not believe the system. So my question would be, how we're gonna make her realize her rights and enjoy 'citizenship' in practical life? What makes her get involved the system? There are some answers in the text but I am still looking forward to hear more impressive ones.lol
A here in our classes, while we're taking comparative politics, we have started to have the idea of 'citizenship'. If we're talking about the welfare state , it is always thought that the idea welfare state is most 'progressive' or extensive idea of citizenship in practise . Hımm. But it is also interesting to see the gaps of welfare state, rethinking about right based versus charirty based and the following argument made sense for me : 'Receipt of the welfare is usuallly considered grounds for disrespect, a threat to, rather than a realization of the citizenship.'
For political participation, I believe she's pretty right. Indeed, she's right to say that seeing the concept further, not only participation and representation of marginalized groups but also their getting involved as a wide variety of public institutions in terms of pre-conditions for the possibility of politically active citizens is very crucial. However my concern comes from seeing marginalized groups as homogenous groups. Are we able to classify easily while trying to engage them political life?
Her point about the problem of authority was also languagezation(lol) of 'lack' as usual important and just needed time for solution. Because these type of understanding errors needs more time to transform over generations. lol.
In the third step, I'd honestly tell, I'm pretty far about this. The idea of right to right because you're human ,not you are a citizen, is undoubtly significant for me but in terms of nationally thinking lol, we are still at a point that not even enjoying our rights but trying to talk about our rights that while we're seeking for doing this for citizens properly, non-citizens issue was kinda hard for me to imagine readily or too utopic haha. What about ongoing members and state's owing them? hımmm. In my understanding, conceptualizing this issue in the sense that state's owing them sthg is again problematic and what she had criticised before, because it goes again seeing them through thecontribution base. What about ongoing members who are non 'contributors'? Also may the non citizen/women issue be related topic with care politics? (I mean,you know, politics is thought for normal people. But what if you are in need of care others? Should a baby or an old person treated as a 30years old working man.?Who is actually maintaing the care?) So the idea that right to right because human is acceptable for me. However in practise this issue is very new that with the actualization of globalization, immigration and refugees, bring us so many concepts that we had touched upon yet. ''
Since I was dealing with presentations and papers, I have not been able to get involved the text deeply while writing the following thoughts, just trying to put my notes in sentences (that I had taken while readings. ) If it's not good enough for you to start, just push me with questions lol.
Looking forward to hearing from you guys! wink wink :-) (queen's face)
''It's so interesting for me thinking about some concepts that I have never get deeply involved before. gracias to the village. (:
Well, as a citizen of a country where even you're a citizen you don't have the language of rights, it was so enjoyable for me break the borders of my mind and rethought of citizenship in terms of her conceptualizations.
For the dignity issue, I'm still not sure whetver I get it wrong or not. Is she talking about the transition from the person of the King to an individual? In any way I love rethinking the idea of citizenship and seeing errors of conceptualization in terms of limited understanding taht depends on 'earning', or 'contrubuting' as preconditions of rights. I have a tendecy that it has been soooo much used by states so called -for the sake of the state.
In the issue of more inclusive of women, in a manner that just reading the woman merely over the family or men does not help us to undertstand ongoing problems.however, I'm still not sure how we're gonna deal with this? To illustrate: I'm just thinking one of my aunts, all she is thinking or considering about is my cousins' courses, lifes, their being sick or not as a mother sensitive but I really believe that she does not have any kind of time or will to do sthg excetp this. Politics is understood for her to do sthg bad or corrupted or ridicilous that even if she will came to the point to want to seek her right , she does not believe the system. So my question would be, how we're gonna make her realize her rights and enjoy 'citizenship' in practical life? What makes her get involved the system? There are some answers in the text but I am still looking forward to hear more impressive ones.lol
A here in our classes, while we're taking comparative politics, we have started to have the idea of 'citizenship'. If we're talking about the welfare state , it is always thought that the idea welfare state is most 'progressive' or extensive idea of citizenship in practise . Hımm. But it is also interesting to see the gaps of welfare state, rethinking about right based versus charirty based and the following argument made sense for me : 'Receipt of the welfare is usuallly considered grounds for disrespect, a threat to, rather than a realization of the citizenship.'
For political participation, I believe she's pretty right. Indeed, she's right to say that seeing the concept further, not only participation and representation of marginalized groups but also their getting involved as a wide variety of public institutions in terms of pre-conditions for the possibility of politically active citizens is very crucial. However my concern comes from seeing marginalized groups as homogenous groups. Are we able to classify easily while trying to engage them political life?
Her point about the problem of authority was also languagezation(lol) of 'lack' as usual important and just needed time for solution. Because these type of understanding errors needs more time to transform over generations. lol.
In the third step, I'd honestly tell, I'm pretty far about this. The idea of right to right because you're human ,not you are a citizen, is undoubtly significant for me but in terms of nationally thinking lol, we are still at a point that not even enjoying our rights but trying to talk about our rights that while we're seeking for doing this for citizens properly, non-citizens issue was kinda hard for me to imagine readily or too utopic haha. What about ongoing members and state's owing them? hımmm. In my understanding, conceptualizing this issue in the sense that state's owing them sthg is again problematic and what she had criticised before, because it goes again seeing them through thecontribution base. What about ongoing members who are non 'contributors'? Also may the non citizen/women issue be related topic with care politics? (I mean,you know, politics is thought for normal people. But what if you are in need of care others? Should a baby or an old person treated as a 30years old working man.?Who is actually maintaing the care?) So the idea that right to right because human is acceptable for me. However in practise this issue is very new that with the actualization of globalization, immigration and refugees, bring us so many concepts that we had touched upon yet. ''
Monday, December 14, 2009
Some interesting images
stumbling across this page just now and some images caught my eyes:
The wall reads:
The Myth of
Third World Debt
I hear tell
that the ‘West’ claims
‘Third World’ countries
owe them a debt.
The white people them
They come to our countries
they unleash
upon we
the holocaust of slavery
the evil, parasitic, violent process
them call colonization. What this means is
them rape Mother Africa
took her children to use as donkey
went right inside Mother Africa belly
and steal her resources
send them back home to the ‘west’.
We the Africans,
funded the industrial revolution
with our blood, sweat, and tears and
Life.
What this means is
them rape Mother Africa
took her children to use as donkey
went right inside Mother Africa belly
and steal her resources
send them back home to the ‘west’.
We the Africans,
funded the industrial revolution
with our blood, sweat, and tears and
Life.
So I don’t really understand
what the ‘west’ means
when them talk
‘bout ‘Third world debt’
I believe them have no shame
I know they full of untruth
they lie to themselves constantly
cause truth will kill them fe true.
I ask you to reconsider
who owes whom?
The west owes Africa
a debt so great
them can never
fully repay.
Though we may not say it,
don’t think we do not see it
We are silent
because white men talk too much
all in aid
of hiding the truth.
Third world debt
is a fiction of
white mans imagination.
Nyarai Humba
The wall reads:
The Myth of
Third World Debt
I hear tell
that the ‘West’ claims
‘Third World’ countries
owe them a debt.
The white people them
They come to our countries
they unleash
upon we
the holocaust of slavery
the evil, parasitic, violent process
them call colonization. What this means is
them rape Mother Africa
took her children to use as donkey
went right inside Mother Africa belly
and steal her resources
send them back home to the ‘west’.
We the Africans,
funded the industrial revolution
with our blood, sweat, and tears and
Life.
What this means is
them rape Mother Africa
took her children to use as donkey
went right inside Mother Africa belly
and steal her resources
send them back home to the ‘west’.
We the Africans,
funded the industrial revolution
with our blood, sweat, and tears and
Life.
So I don’t really understand
what the ‘west’ means
when them talk
‘bout ‘Third world debt’
I believe them have no shame
I know they full of untruth
they lie to themselves constantly
cause truth will kill them fe true.
I ask you to reconsider
who owes whom?
The west owes Africa
a debt so great
them can never
fully repay.
Though we may not say it,
don’t think we do not see it
We are silent
because white men talk too much
all in aid
of hiding the truth.
Third world debt
is a fiction of
white mans imagination.
Nyarai Humba
TAINA ASILI y La Banda Rebelde
Vassar just forwarded an email from this cool group so I was looking them up online and find an interesting description of the main singer on youtube:
Taína Asili carries on the tradition of her ancestors, fusing present
and past struggles into one poetic song-voice. She is a puertorriqueña
poet, vocalist, visual artist, mother, teacher and activist, currently
living, teaching and performing in Albany, NY. Her newest artistic work
is with her live band, Taína Asili y La Banda Rebelde, soulful vocals
laid over an infusion of hip hop and Afro-Caribbean sounds. Taína Asili
carries a fire breathing voice of rage and resistance to venues, festivals, conferences and political events across the country. She weaves resistance, anti-colonialist struggle, love, identity, reclamation of the body, ancestral remembrance, and more into a unique vocalization style melding poetry and song.
And I also find this song which makes me think of Zoological Relations...
Their Eyes (feat. Taina Asili)
written by evan greer
evan - guitar, vocals
taina asili - vocals (www.tainaasili.com)
ben lucal - drums
jory leanza-carey - bass (www.broadcastlive.org)
there are animals in cages with no room to turn around
being sent off to the slaughter and sold off by the pound
and there are people locked in prisons
where the outcome's much the same
they get death for their convictions
they get numbers for a name
there are women kept in houses
full of mirrors and TV
forced to fear their drunken fathers
and throw up the things they eat
and the same men who grab them
while they're walking down the street
rip their profits and their pleasure
from the earth beneath our feet
have you ever seen the eyes
of a soul that's occupied?
have you ever had to face
a creature living in a cage?
have you tasted their flesh
or drank their fear?
have you ever seen their eyes?
there are fences high in belfast
where the working class divides
the priests play with politicians
while the poor folks fight and die
and the lower twenty-six you know
are also occupied
by sexism and heroin and neoliberal lies
there are children born at checkpoints
who throw stones against the tanks
they play games amongst the rubble
till the glass in their eyes breaks
and with this concrete wall between them
there's no human face at all
another bus is blown to pieces
as the martyr heeds the call
have you ever seen the eyes
of a soul that's occupied?
do you know what has to die
just to make the things we buy?
do you reap the products of their lives?
have you ever seen their eyes?
can't you see it's all the same?
making profit out of pain
rape and torture are the norm
in prison and factory farms
occupation genocide
out of sight and out of mind
would you still live this life of lies
if you had to look them in the eyes?
have you ever seen their eyes?
Other info:
Award winning vocalist Taina Asili sings the spirit of social change using soulful vocals laid over a unique infusion of Afro-Caribbean, reggae, rock, and hip hop. The band's eclectic style represents the diversity of its band members, who have origins in Puerto Rico, Sicily, Greece, Brazil, Ghana and Spain. Taina has shared the stage with artist such as Ursula Rucker, Sonia Sanchez, Pamela Means, Talib Kweli, and Tyrone Hill of the Sun Ra Arkestra.
info@tainaasili.com
518.817.8617
www.TainaAsili.com
www.Myspace.com/TainaPoet
www.tainaasili.com/Facebook
www.Sonicbids.com/TainaAsili
Taína Asili carries on the tradition of her ancestors, fusing present
and past struggles into one poetic song-voice. She is a puertorriqueña
poet, vocalist, visual artist, mother, teacher and activist, currently
living, teaching and performing in Albany, NY. Her newest artistic work
is with her live band, Taína Asili y La Banda Rebelde, soulful vocals
laid over an infusion of hip hop and Afro-Caribbean sounds. Taína Asili
carries a fire breathing voice of rage and resistance to venues, festivals, conferences and political events across the country. She weaves resistance, anti-colonialist struggle, love, identity, reclamation of the body, ancestral remembrance, and more into a unique vocalization style melding poetry and song.
And I also find this song which makes me think of Zoological Relations...
Their Eyes (feat. Taina Asili)
written by evan greer
evan - guitar, vocals
taina asili - vocals (www.tainaasili.com)
ben lucal - drums
jory leanza-carey - bass (www.broadcastlive.org)
there are animals in cages with no room to turn around
being sent off to the slaughter and sold off by the pound
and there are people locked in prisons
where the outcome's much the same
they get death for their convictions
they get numbers for a name
there are women kept in houses
full of mirrors and TV
forced to fear their drunken fathers
and throw up the things they eat
and the same men who grab them
while they're walking down the street
rip their profits and their pleasure
from the earth beneath our feet
have you ever seen the eyes
of a soul that's occupied?
have you ever had to face
a creature living in a cage?
have you tasted their flesh
or drank their fear?
have you ever seen their eyes?
there are fences high in belfast
where the working class divides
the priests play with politicians
while the poor folks fight and die
and the lower twenty-six you know
are also occupied
by sexism and heroin and neoliberal lies
there are children born at checkpoints
who throw stones against the tanks
they play games amongst the rubble
till the glass in their eyes breaks
and with this concrete wall between them
there's no human face at all
another bus is blown to pieces
as the martyr heeds the call
have you ever seen the eyes
of a soul that's occupied?
do you know what has to die
just to make the things we buy?
do you reap the products of their lives?
have you ever seen their eyes?
can't you see it's all the same?
making profit out of pain
rape and torture are the norm
in prison and factory farms
occupation genocide
out of sight and out of mind
would you still live this life of lies
if you had to look them in the eyes?
have you ever seen their eyes?
Other info:
Award winning vocalist Taina Asili sings the spirit of social change using soulful vocals laid over a unique infusion of Afro-Caribbean, reggae, rock, and hip hop. The band's eclectic style represents the diversity of its band members, who have origins in Puerto Rico, Sicily, Greece, Brazil, Ghana and Spain. Taina has shared the stage with artist such as Ursula Rucker, Sonia Sanchez, Pamela Means, Talib Kweli, and Tyrone Hill of the Sun Ra Arkestra.
info@tainaasili.com
518.817.8617
www.TainaAsili.com
www.Myspace.com/TainaPoet
www.tainaasili.com/Facebook
www.Sonicbids.com/TainaAsili
Friday, December 11, 2009
beautiful songs
Indian Vision - Chirapaq - Native American - Powerful Pride - Sacred Medicine
Cherokee Morning Song
beyzinhaaaaa, you might understand and like this ;-)
native american-tatar-turk song
Cherokee Morning Song
beyzinhaaaaa, you might understand and like this ;-)
native american-tatar-turk song
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)