Is THIS real reason Obama’s confronting North Korea?

wndI

JERUSALEM – Is the Obama administration’s military build up in the Pacific part of the president’s so-called pivot-toward-Asia strategy, a move that could demonstrate the biggest shift in world power since World War II?

Specifically, is Washington using the North Korean nuclear standoff as an excuse to shift massive military might to Asia just as China and other powers seek to create a new economic order that would rival the Western-dominated World Bank and International Monetary Fund?

It is difficult for most seasoned observers to explain why Obama is suddenly responding to North Korean aggression when the White House did little in 2008 when North Korea refused to allow United Nations inspectors into its nuclear plants.

The Obama administration also took little action when North Korea in 2009 carried out at least two nuclear tests, one of which is believed to have been the cause of a magnitude 4.7 seismic event.

The White House did not allow the U.S. military any significant response when in 2010 North Korea torpedoed a South Korean navy ship, killing 46 sailors. North Korea then shelled a South Korean island with little U.S. reaction.

Now, purportedly in response to aggressive action by North Korea’s new leader, the White House is sending to Singapore a new class of warship designed to fight in coastal waters.

The Pentagon also announced that it will deploy a missile defense system to the U.S. Pacific territory of Guam to strengthen regional protection against a possible attack. This after the Obama administration largely canceled a similar defense system intended for Europe.

U.S. warplanes, including fighter jets, U-2 spy planes and an A-10 attack jet, were seen flying in South Korea yesterday as part of a massive joint military exercise.

The U.S. says it stands “poised to respond” at the border of North and South Korea, where American troops are on high alert amid possible further Pentagon build-up in the region.

U.S. military ‘rebalance’

Why is the U.S. now responding to North Korea?

Time magazine says the “U.S. pivot toward Asia – and the potential for confrontation with China – became a little more real this week with the arrival of a new class of warship designed to fight in coastal waters.”

That pivot has been declared by the Obama administration itself – a professed strategy of putting a greater focus on the Asia region.

Earlier this week, Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel “made clear the U.S. and the Department of Defense remain committed to the rebalance towards the Asia-Pacific region,” Pentagon spokesman George Little said after a meeting between Hagel and Singapore Prime Minister Lee Hsien Loong.

Hagel told Loong that “in the future there will be even more opportunities for closer collaboration between the US and Singapore,” Little said.

‘New economic world order’

The U.S. military shift comes as the so-called BRICS countries – Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa – seek to create a monetary system to rival and even surpass the West.

While it received little U.S. media attention, last week at its fifth annual summit the BRICS group unveiled what it said was a new development bank aimed at breaking the monopoly held by Western-backed institutions.

The bank would use $50 billion of seed capital shared equally between Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa but would clearly be dominated by China.

Russian President Vladimir Putin gave support for the bank while India’s trade minister said BRICS will “have a defining influence on the global order of this century.”

“It’s done,” said Pravin Gordhan, South African Finance Minister, last Tuesday, adding that “we made very good progress” on the formation of a World Bank-analogue development agency

Iran’s Press TV described the deal this way: “The BRICS bank will present an alternative solution to the Western-dominated global banking system comprised of the Bretton Woods institutions – the World Bank (WB) and International Monetary Fund (IMF).

“The new bank will provide a collective foreign exchange reserve and a fund for financing developmental projects in order to address the needs of emerging and poor economies.”

Press TV reported, “BRICS members say the current global balance of power is unworkable, with institutions such as the WB, the IMF and the United Nations Security Council irrelevant in addressing matters concerning global economics.”

Under the deal, the two largest economies of the emerging power groups, China and Brazil, agreed to remove nearly half of their trade exchanges out of the U.S. dollar zone – a significant blow to the U.S. dollar.

Some in the U.S. are skeptical the BRICS moves will actually work.

Joseph S. Nye, a professor at Harvard University, wrote in The Australian newspaper: “Tellingly, the meeting in Durban failed to produce any details of the structure of the proposed new development bank, suggesting that little progress had been made in the year since the BRICS’ last meeting in New Delhi, where the plan was announced.”

Continued Nye: “In fact, despite a commitment to launch “formal negotiations” to establish the bank, disagreements about the size and shares of the bank’s capital have not been resolved.”

The New American took the other side, arguing the BRICS bank is a step closer toward a world government.

“Aside from a planetary fiat currency and central bank, the erection of a true world government was at the heart of BRICS regimes’ machinations outlined in their final agreement.”

The publication pointed out the BRICS declaration at the end of last week’s summit included, “We reiterate our strong commitment to the United Nations (UN) as the foremost multilateral forum entrusted with bringing about hope, peace, order and sustainable development to the world.”

See a report on the BRICS summit:

The BRICS statement added, “[W]e reaffirmed our commitment to the promotion of international law, multilateralism and the central role of the United Nations.”

BRICS clearly sees a reshaped economic world in which government-run companies play a significant role.

“We acknowledge the important role that State Owned Companies (SOCs) play in the economy and encourage our SOCs to explore ways of cooperation, exchange of information and best practices,” the declaration states.

“As the global economy is being reshaped, we are committed to exploring new models and approaches towards more equitable development and inclusive global growth.”

With additional research by Joshua Klein.

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/04/is-this-why-obamas-responding-to-north-korea/#0vA1fxswZ4KKlO1p.99

Dramatic road rage footage: Two men caught in brawl on Australian road

itnnews

US energy boom could shake global order

 

Visit NBCNews.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

By Richard Engel and Robert Windrem, NBC News

Without fanfare, China passed the United States in December to become the world's leading importer of oil – the first time in nearly 40 years that the U.S. didn’t own that dubious distinction. That same month, North Dakota, Ohio and Pennsylvania together produced 1.5 million barrels of oil a day -- more than Iran exported.

As those data points demonstrate, a dramatic shift is occurring in how energy is being produced and consumed around the world – one that could lead to far-reaching changes in the geopolitical order.

U.S. policy makers, intelligence analysts and other experts are beginning to grapple with the ramifications of such a change, which could bring with it both great benefits for the U.S. and potentially dangerous consequences, including the risk of upheaval in countries and regions heavily dependent on oil exports. 

But many experts say the U.S. would be the big winner, in position to reshape its foreign policy and boost its global influence. 

"People already are looking at the U.S. differently, seeing the U.S. as much more competitive in the world,” said energy analyst and author Dan Yergin, saying that he first noticed the change in the world view of the U.S. at the World Economic Forum in January in Davos, Switzerland.

More on openchannel >>

Recipient of first full-face transplant in US has married

Read >>

Scientists find treatment to kill every kind of cancer tumor

Fox News

Researchers might have found the Holy Grail in the war against cancer, a miracle drug that has killed every kind of cancer tumor it has come in contact with, the New York Post reported.
The drug works by blocking a protein called CD47 that is essentially a "do not eat" signal to the body's immune system, according to Science Magazine.
This protein is produced in healthy blood cells, but researchers at Stanford University found that cancer cells produced an inordinate amount of the protein thus tricking the immune system into not destroying the harmful cells.
With this observation in mind, the researchers built an antibody that blocked cancer's CD47 so that the body's immune system attacked the dangerous cells.
So far, researchers have used the antibody in mice with human breast, ovary, colon, bladder, brain, liver and prostate tumors transplanted into them. In each of the cases the antibody forced the mice's immune system to kill the cancer cells.
Click for more from the New York Post. 

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/health/2013/03/27/scientists-find-treatment-to-kill-every-kind-cancer-tumor/?intcmp=trending#ixzz2P2U4kAem

US Plummets to 18th in New Economic Freedom of the World Rankings

International Liberty

By Dan Mitchell

Wow. I wasn’t surprised to learn that the United States dropped in the new rankings unveiled today in Economic Freedom of the World.

 

But I’m somewhat shocked to learn that we fell from 10th last year all the way down to 18th this year, as can be seen on the chart (click to enlarge).

Last year, the U.S. fell from 7th to 10th, and I though dropping three spots was bad. But falling by eight spots this past year is a stunning decline.

Who would have thought that Scandinavian welfare states such as Denmark and Finland would rank higher than the United States? Or that Ireland, with all its problems, would be above America?

But since I’m not a misery-loves-company guy, I’m happy to see some nations doing well. I’ve previously highlighted the good policies in Hong Kong and Singapore. And I’ve trumpeted the good policies in Switzerland and Australia, as well as Canada, Chile, and Estonia.

So kudos to the leaders in those nations.

 

American politicians, by contrast, deserve scorn. Let’s update the chart I posted when last year’s report was issued.

As you can see, it’s an understatement to say that the United States is heading in the wrong direction. We’re still considerably ahead of interventionist welfare states such as France and Italy, though I’m afraid to think about what the U.S. score will be five years from now.

Here’s what the authors of the report had to say about America’s decline.

The United States, long considered the standard bearer for economic freedom among large industrial nations, has experienced a substantial decline in economic freedom during the past decade. From 1980 to 2000, the United States was generally rated the third freest economy in the world, ranking behind only Hong Kong and Singapore. After increasing steadily during the period from 1980 to 2000, the chainlinked EFW rating of the United States fell from 8.65 in 2000 to 8.21 in 2005 and 7.70 in 2010. The chain-linked ranking of the United States has fallen precipitously from second in 2000 to eighth in 2005 and 19th in 2010 (unadjusted ranking of 18th).

For those interested in why the United States has dropped, the “size of government” score has fallen from 8.65 in 2000 to 7.70 in the latest report. That’s not a surprise since the burden of government spending has exploded during the Bush-Obama years.

But the trade score also dropped significantly over the same period, from 8.78 to 7.65. So the protectionists should be happy, even though the rest of us have less prosperity.

The most dramatic decline, though, was the in the “legal system and property rights” category, where the U.S. plummeted from 9.23 in 2000 down to 7.12 in the new report. We’re not quite Argentina (3.76!), to be sure, but the trend is very troubling.

The United States Ranks 7th in Comprehensive New “Freedom Index”

International Liberty

B y Dan Mitchell

I’ve always been a big fan of Economic Freedom of the World because it provides a balanced and neutral measure of which nations do best in providing free markets and small government.

 

And I like it even when it gives me bad news. It’s somewhat depressing, after all, to read that the United States has dropped from the #3 nation when Bill Clinton left office to the #18 country in the most recent index.

But for all its many positive attributes, Economic Freedom of the World isn’t a comprehensive measure of liberty. That’s why I’m very glad to see that Ian Vasquez and Tanja Stumberger have put together a Freedom Index designed to measure economic and personal liberty.

And since they’re both sensible people, their definition of personal liberty is very sound – i.e., the freedom to be left alone and not harassed, persecuted, or annoyed by government.

Here’s their description of what the Freedom Index is designed to measure.

…we use indicators that are as consistent as possible with the concept of negative liberty: the absence of coercive constraint on the individual. We do not attempt to measure positive freedom…nor do we measure so-called “claim freedoms,” which often become government-imposed attempts at realizing positive freedoms (e.g., the “right” or freedom to a have job or housing). …This index of freedom also does not incorporate measures of democracy or “political freedom.” …Democracy may be more consistent than other forms of government at safeguarding freedom, but it is not freedom, nor does it necessarily guarantee freedom. …We combine economic freedom measures from the Economic Freedom of the World (EFW) index with measures of what we somewhat imprecisely call civil or personal  freedoms. The economic freedom index and the personal freedom index we devise each receive half the weight in the overall index.

Here are some additional details on the personal freedom score.

For the personal freedom sub-index, we use 34 variables covering 123 countries… The index is divided into four categories: 1) Security and  Safety; 2) Freedom of Movement; 3) Freedom of Expression; and 4) Relationship Freedoms. …We have tried to capture the degree to which  people are free to enjoy the major civil liberties—freedom of speech, religion, and association and assembly—in each country in our survey.  In addition, we include indicators of crime and violence, freedom of movement, and legal discrimination against homosexuals.

So how do nations compare with this system?

New Zealand is the nation with the most freedom, followed by the Netherlands and Hong Kong. The United States is #7

By the way, if you’re wondering about places to avoid on your next overseas vacation, Zimbabwe is in last place, followed by Burma and Pakistan.

And if you want to maximize your personal liberty, but aren’t as concerned about economic liberty, the top nations are the Netherlands (9.5), Uruguay (9.4), and Norway/Japan/New Zealand (9.2).

If you want to experiment with a life of very limited personal liberty, your “best” choices are Pakistan (3.1), Zimbabwe (3.2), Sri Lanka (3.4), and Iran (3.6).

3D Print Demo

Pajamasmedia

El Índice de Felicidad Planetaria de Nic Marks

golem

El estadístico Nic Marks pregunta por qué medimos el éxito de una nación por la productividad, en lugar de hacerlo por la felicidad y el bienestar de su pueblo. Presenta el Índice de Felicidad Planetaria, que indica el bienestar nacional en función del uso de recursos (porque una vida feliz no tiene que costar la Tierra). ¿Qué países están mejor ubicados en el IFP? Tal vez te sorprenda.

Our Environmental Catastrophe: Geoengineering and Weather Warfare

seeker401

The environmental movement has developed a single-minded obsession with the supposed effects of carbon dioxide on the global climate. Rather than CO2 gas, however, the technologies that are now being proposed to mitigate this supposed problem might be the real cause of our coming environmental calamity.

http://tv.globalresearch.ca/2013/02/our-environmental-catastrophe-geoengineering-and-weather-warfare

Currency Wars

economy

Miguel Aguirre

There is an interesting book published in 2011, Currency wars by James Rickards, with a shocking subtitle: “The making of the next global crisis”.  Lat week France president told in the European Parliament: “The Euro should not fluctuate according to the mood of the markets” If this is suppose to express a desire for an exchange rate intervention is yet to be seen but certainly there are two views inside the EU. The one expressed by François Hollande and the one supported by Germany that has long opposed any intervention on this issue affirming that eurozone´s top priority must be “strengthening competitiveness , rather than weakening the currency.

The relevant point delivered by Mr. Hollande is that “A monetary zone must have an exchange rate policy, if not it will be subjected to an exchange rate that does not reflect the real state of the economy”.  The euro area is expected to deliver another weak growth this year: around 0%, but the Euro appreciated during the last 12 months against the USD (0, 76 a year ago vs. 0, 74 this month, and a 4% rise this year).

Currency market is by definition an Over the Counter one, hence not regulated.  Should the ECB factor the strength of the Euro or should it take decisions as had been taken in Japan recently, weakening the exchange rate of the yen?

The world is yet to recover from the 2008 crisis and promote exports had been taken as a first priority politic for many countries worldwide.

In the globalized world we live today the main question for Europe is if this trade promotion policy can be taken without currency intervention.

Pulitzer Prize-winner Junot Diaz on the Power of Love

ForaTv

Human Sapienome Project: The 100YSS

Human Sapienome Project, complement to the 100YSS (credit: Photo Wall)

By Martine Rothblatt

Dr. Martine Rothblatt suggests inviting the entire world’s population on-board the 100YSS by uploading, at no cost, their mindfiles — a 1 TB (or less) digital file of an individual’s mannerisms, personality, recollections, feelings, beliefs, attitudes and values — into a central database that will be carried onboard the starship. Presented at the 100 Year Starship (100YSS) 2012 Public Symposium Sept. 13–16, 2012 in Houston.

Daedalus starship (credit: David Hardy)

In 1985 We Are the World, the first-ever multi-platinum single, got tens of millions of people singing “There is a choice we’re making; we’re saving our own lives.” [1]. These words may never apply to a project more meaningfully than to the 100 Year Starship (100YSS), intended to “make the capability of human travel beyond our solar system to another star a reality over the next 100 years.”.

Digital size of a person

Research from several groups show that a digital file of a person’s mannerisms, personality, recollections, feelings, beliefs, attitudes and values can be represented by less than one terabyte (1TB) of structured information [2] [3] [4] [5]. This is because a limited number, n, of human universals, m, yield millions of unique human combinations via (n!)/(m!*(n-m)!).

Add to this a few gigabytes of unique memories and you can account for the billions of diverse human mindsets, notwithstanding a very modest toolkit of building block characteristics.

For example, a megabyte of information about one’s daily experiences amounts to under 20 GB of information in 50 years. That daily megabyte is adequate to handle all of one’s tweets, texts and emails plus some compressed photos, audio and video. Combined with structured answers to personality inventories [5] and socio-cultural contextual information, a TB is ample space to provide a comprehensive digital reflection of your consciousness, known as a “mindfile.” The vast majority of information we store is redundant.

Websites exist that collect video streaming of an individual’s daily interactions. While such video streams can rapidly exceed many terabytes in volume, they far exceed the amount of information needed to accurately reflect a person’s mannerisms, personality, recollections, feelings, beliefs, attitudes and values. Advanced versions of pattern recognition software will be able to abstract from such continuous digital records such information as uniquely contributes to a mindfile. These pattern recognition based-abstracts are unlikely to require more than a TB of storage, especially when intelligently structured.

Digital size of all human mindfiles — the “Human Sapienome”

Digital memory of approximately 10²² bytes, the size of all human mindfiles in aggregate, what should be called the human “sapienome,” will be available within 20 years at less than 1% of the likely weight and cost of the 100 YSS. Ten billion people, times one trillion bytes, yields 10²² bytes.

The Project Daedelus starship, either in its original British Interplanetary Society version or in subsequent self-replicating conceptualizations, had a payload mass of on the order of 500 tons [6]. Orion Starship designs of Freeman Dyson had estimated costs ranging from a tenth 10% to 100% of 1968 US GNP [7].

The past five decades of relatively steady, 18-month doubling rates in constant cost for digital memory is not expected to change over the coming decades, due to economic demand, competition and the availability of three-dimensional traditional and novel computing substrates [8].

Hence, by exponential growth, today’s terabyte of memory will become a giga-terabyte of memory in 45 years. Ten such memory modules would hold a ten billion person human sapienome at that time. Alternatively, a few thousand mega-terabyte modules could contain the human sapienome about 30 years from now.

A terabyte today costs around $100 and weighs about 0.5 kg. These numbers are not significantly different from lesser amounts of memory in years past, and are considered by Ray Kurzweil to remain constant or shrink with exponential growth [8]. Hence, 45 years from now, the mass and cost of the human sapienome on a 100YSS would be insignificant. Even 30 years from now, the mass would be a few thousand pounds and the cost about $1 million. This represents less than 1% of the mass and cost of the starship.

Universal access to information technology needed to create a mindfile is at hand. Already three-fourths of the world’s population has a mobile phone, about one-fourth of which are smartphones capable of full mindfile creation capabilities.

Specialized websites to create mindfiles, such as LifeNaut.com and CyBeRev.org, as well as more generic websites that can also be used to create mindfiles, such as Google+ and Facebook, are free to the public.

Virtually every human being will be able to freely create a mindfile, as smartphone ownership becomes all-but universal over the next decade (with shared access to one for individuals in deep poverty). Hence, there are neither economic nor technological barriers to the creation of a human sapienome.

Activation of mindfiles with consciousness operating system software, or “mindware”

It may well be feasible to activate the individual mindfiles within the sapienome with consciousness operating system software, known as “mindware.” This would enable all participating members of the human race to be digitally present, via software agent extensions of themselves, and interfaced with sensors upon arrival at the 100 YSS destination.

However, even if such mindware activation is not possible, the entire human race can still be conceptually — and in a sense spiritually and philosophically — “present” at the interstellar destination by virtue of their mindfiles being present onboard the starship.

As noted above, dozens (n) of mannerism, personality and feeling types (m) yield many thousands of unique human combinations via (n!)/(m!*(n-m)!).

Once you add to these thousands of personality and worldview templates differential recollections, beliefs, attitudes and values (within the terabyte of mindfile information), there are many billions of unique possible combinations of human psyches, one of which will be a best-match for digitally stored mindfiles of each 100YSS participating biological person.

Mindware best fits one of the “m” compound mannerisms, personality and feeling types to that analyzed from stored mindfiles, and then populates it with the recollections, beliefs, attitudes and values evident from that stored mindfile. These combinations and correlations can be accomplished with software that needs be nowhere near the complexity of synaptic connectivity of the human brain, and yet still appears as true to the original person as to persuade others, and their digital self, that the same personal identity is present, albeit via a digital extension.

In the last century people became accustomed to the notion that electro-acoustic waves via telephony represented a biological original person. In the coming century, an analogous association is likely with digital simulacra of unique conscious minds.

Keep reading on kurzweilai >>

Alain Badiou: The Ontology of Change

egsvideo

Alain Badiou, French philosopher, mathematician and author, talking about the ontology of change. In this lecture, Alain Badiou discusses Aristotle's concept of the prime mover, the rational determination of God, thinking of change by the notions of division and becoming, the subjective structure of knowledge of being, the relationship between multiplicity and change, the localization of being in a world, the possibility of thinking pure multiplicity as such and the relationship between multiplicities in relationship to Aristotle, Nicolas Malebranche, Immanuel Kant, Parmenides, Heraclitus, Democritus and Georg Cantor focusing on the infinite subject, perfection, fidelity, the One, pure multiplicity, atoms, physics, set theory, extensionality, qualitative difference, intensive difference and absolute identity. Public open lecture for the students and faculty of the European Graduate School EGS Media and Communication Studies department program Saas-Fee Switzerland Europe. 2012. Alain Badiou.

Alain Badiou (b. 1937, Rabat, Morocco) holds the Rene Descartes Chair at the European Graduate School. He studied at the École Normale Supérieure, to which he later returned, to become the Chair of the Philosophy Department. Alain Badiou has also taught at the University of Paris VIII (Vincennes-Saint Denis), and continues to do so at the Collège International de Philosophie. Badiou was one of the founding members of the Unified Socialist Party, which was particularly active in the struggle for the decolonization of Algeria. To this day, Badiou remains both a member of the Union des jeunesses communistes de France (marxistes-léninistes), and at the center of L'Organisation Politique, a 'post-party organization' concerned with direct popular intervention in social and political issues.

Trained as a mathematician, Alain Badiou is one of the most original French philosophers today. Influenced by Plato, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel, Jacques Lacan and Gilles Deleuze, he is an outspoken critic of both the analytic as well as the postmodern schools of thoughts. His philosophy seeks to expose and make sense of the potential of radical innovation (revolution, invention, transfiguration) in every situation. He is the author of several successful novels and plays as well as more than a dozen philosophical works, among them in English are Deleuze: The Clamor of Being (1999), Ethics: An Essay on the Understanding of Evil (2000), On Beckett (2003), Being and Event (2005), Number and Numbers (2008), The Meaning of Sarkozy (2008), Logic of Worlds: Being and Event, Volume 2 (2009), Pocket Pantheon: Figures of Postwar Philosophy (2009), Theory of the Subject (2009), The Communist Hypothesis (2010), and Five Lessons on Wagner (2010), The Rebirth of History: Times of Riots and Uprisings (2012) and Philosophy For Militants (2012).

Avital Ronell: The Day Off [forgiveness, drugs, ontic, ontological, friendship, blush,...]

egsvideo

Avital Ronell discusses the concepts of forgiveness, drugs, ontic, ontological, friendship, blush, nausea, otherness, alterity, referring to Heidegger, Holderlin, Levinas, Susan Sontag, Lyotard, Kleist, Nietzsche, Wagner, Derrida, Lacoue-Labarthe, Alfred Hitchcock, Hegel. Free public open lecture for the students and faculty of the European Graduate School EGS Media and Communication Studies Department Program in 2012. EGS, Saas-Fee, Switzerland, Europe, Avital Ronell 2012.

Avital Ronell is Professor of German, comparative literature, and English at New York University, where she directs the Research in Trauma and Violence project. She is a member of the faculty of the European Graduate School, interested in Literary and other discourses, feminism, philosophy, technology and media, psychoanalysis, deconstruction, performance art, and has also written as a literary critic, a feminist, and philosopher.

Avital Ronell was born in Prague to Israeli diplomats and was a performance artist before entering academia. She received a B.A. in 1974 from Middlebury, studied with Jacob Taubes at the Hermeneutic Institute at the Free University of Berlin, received her Ph.D. under the advisement of Stanley Corngold at Princeton University in 1979. Avital Ronell taught at the University of California at Berkeley from 1984-1995 and at New York University from 1995 to the present. She served as Chair of the Department of German from Spring 1997 to Spring 2005. She taught an annual seminar in Literature & Philosophy at NYU with Professor Jacques Derrida and has taught with Professor Helene Cixous at Université of Paris VIII. She regularly teaches at the European Graduate School in Saas-Fee, Switzerland and in Mexico. She was invited by the Humanities Council to offer a seminar at Princeton University in spring 2006.

Avital Ronell has produced English translations of Derrida's work.Her books and works include: The Uber Reader: Selected Works of Avital Ronell Ed. Diane Davis. 2006; 2005 The Test Drive, 2001 Stupidity, 1998 Finitude's Score Essays for the End of the Millennium , 1993 Crack Wars: Literature, Addiction, Mania, 1993 Dictations: On Haunted Writing, 1989 Telephone Book Technology, Schizophrenia, Electric Speech, 1989 The Ear of the Other, trans., Jacques Derrida, and Dictations: On Haunted Writing 1986.

Peter Dziuban: Trying to Measure Awareness

ForaTv

Friedrich Kittler: The Modern World

egsvideo

Friedrich Kittler, German historian and theorist, lecturing on the history of writing. In this lecture he talks about manuscript culture vs printed culture rising out of Gutenberg's innovation, the copyleft culture of the Gutenberg technologies, how the scientific revolution really started with these texts that were printed after the discovery of woodcuts copper plates and paper mills, how the printing press facilitated the transmission of technical knowledge, how the Jesuits entered the Chinese empire of Peking; typecutters, fonts and cryptography, and Leon Battista Alberti, the development of capital letters, the development of common mathematical symbols by Johannes Widmann (the +/- sign), Raphael Bombolli and Gerolamo Cardano (equations), Simon Stevin and the Dutch zero, and François Viète, the harmony of the fifth in tuning systems, how innovations in common mathematical notation and intercultural participation made possible musical innovations, how the end of notation in Latin was the beginning of open-source knowledge, algebraic notation, the need for symbols, Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz and binary arithmetic, 18th century mathematicians and algorithms, Jacques du Vaucanson's digesting duck, Leonard Euler and mechanical sytheses of voices, the 18th century German school system, changes in paper production in material media history, Canadian lumber, semaphores as optical system of signs, optical telegraphy speeding up military communications, invention of the typewriter by Remington, Etienne-Jules Marey's chronophotography, Édouard-Léon Scott de Martinville's first sound recording of Au Claire de la Lune, the effect of these changes on literature of the 19th century, Sir Flinders Petrie, Alan Turing's Turing machine, cryptography, Pearl Harbor, closing remarks on the need to learn program languages to see the limits of language, Assembler programming language, Q&A.
Public open lecture for the students and faculty of the European Graduate School (EGS), Media and Communication Studies department program Saas-Fee Switzerland, Europe. Friedrich Kittler. 2011.

Friedrich Adolf Kittler (1943 -2011) was a post-Structuralist philosopher, as well as historian and theorist of media communications and technology. Kittler studied German Studies, Romance Languages and Philosophy at Albert-Ludwigs-Universität in Freiburg/Breisgau. In 1976, he earned his Ph.D. with a dissertation on Conrad Ferdinand Meyer. His work was heavily influenced by both Michel Foucault and Jacques Lacan. Kittler became a Professor of German at Freiburg in the early eighties. During the decade he held positions as a visiting lecturer and professor at the University of California, in Berkeley and Santa Barbara, and later at the University of Stanford and the University of Basel. In 1984, he completed his Habilitation at the University of Freiburg/Breisgau, and from 1986-1990 headed the DFG's Literature and Media Analysis project in Kassel. Kittler was a Membre associé of the Collège international de philosophie, Paris from 1983-1986. In 1987, Kittler was appointed Professor of Modern German Studies, at Ruhr University and began working as Professor of German at the University of Bochum.

In 1993, he received the media arts prize for theory from the ZKM Karlsruhe (Zentrums für Kunst und Medientechnologie); from 1995 to 1997, he headed a Federal Research Group on Theory and History of Media. Kittler was also a member of the Hermann von Helmholtz Centre for Culture and the Bild Schrift Zahl research group.

In 1996, Friedrich Kittler was recognized as a Distinguished Scholar by Yale University, and in 1997 as Distinguished Visiting Professor by Columbia University.

Cuba in The World's Most Repressive Societies of 2012

freedomhouse.org

Doug Bandow*

This article appeared in American Spectator (Online) on December 31, 2012.

Americans live privileged lives. So do Europeans. And Japanese. As well as the citizens of a handful of other states. We all live in nations that are prosperous and democratic, that enforce the rule of law and protect human rights. Many other people around the world are not so lucky.
Freedom House has released a depressing report, “Worst of the Worst 2012: The World’s Most Repressive Societies.” According to the New York-based organization, “Autocratic rule remains widespread and persistent” even in what is supposed to be a new, enlightened age. Nearly a quarter of the world’s population, more than 1.6 billion people, “live in countries with the worst records of political and civil rights, and these countries have suffered under brutal dictatorships for decades.”

marcmasferrer.typepad.com

The good news is that nothing is forever. Even communism largely disappeared, other than in Cuba and North Korea. China has morphed into something more akin to a fascist system, with much greater personal autonomy than before. Moreover, noted Freedom House, “events in several countries during the last year have raised further prospects for greater freedom.”
Still, today, at least, one-fourth of humanity suffers under severe oppression. These people, observed Freedom House, “have no say in how they are governed and face severe consequences if they try to exercise their most basic rights, such as expressing their views, assembling peacefully, and organizing independently of the state. Citizens who dare to assert their rights in these repressive countries typically suffer harassment and imprisonment, and often are subjected to physical or psychological abuse.”
The Worst of the Worst are a motley crew. Eleven governments and territories are at the bottom, where “political opposition is banned, criticism of the government is met with retribution, and independent organizations are suppressed.” The miscreants: Equatorial Guinea, Eritrea, North Korea, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Tibet, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and Western Sahara.
Another eight rate just a bit higher, but nevertheless “severely suppress opposition political activity, impede independent organizations, and censor or punish criticism of the state.” This depressing group is made up of: Belarus, Burma, Chad, China, Cuba, Laos, Libya, and South Ossetia.
There is no unifying feature of the 19 other than ruthless repression of liberty. In Somalia the oppression occurs in a failed state. In the others brutal dictatorships enforce their will. Explained Freedom House: “The common thread among these countries is an individual or collective dictatorship that rests on a very narrow elite and uses extreme forms of repression to hold on to power.”
Most of the oppressors have been busy for a very long time. “North Korea has stayed at the very bottom of the ratings scale” since the institute began its Freedom in the World survey. Somalia has been at or near the bottom over the same period. Nearly three-quarter of the others have spent more than 25 years on the list.
The ruling elites in these states have proved to be deeply entrenched: “These regimes have endured on average for 37 ½ years without any transfer of power between competing political parties or forces.” Such longevity could be achieved only through repression which “is integral to their survival. These regimes have managed to stay in power for decades by eliminating effective political opposition, severely circumscribing civil society, and silencing their critics.”
The prospects for change remain cloudy. Historically, repression is down. Noted Freedom House: “From a peak of 38 such countries in 1984, the number declined to 15 countries in 2003, and stood at 16 in 2011.” This process was driven by the collapse of communism and move away from authoritarianism in the Third World. Over the last year progress was evident in Burma and Libya, though in both the ultimately outcomes remain in doubt.
On the other hand, there is substantial bad news. China “has committed increased resources to internal security forces, engaged in systematic enforced disappearances of dozens of human rights lawyers and bloggers, and enhanced controls over online social media.” It is even worse in Tibet, where “authorities have continued to restrict basic freedoms and impose harsh security measures.” Cuba responded to the impending visit of Pope Benedict XVI by detaining dissidents. Sudan “launched a harsh crackdown on any sign of dissent.” Worst of all was the brutal attempt by the al-Assad regime to retain power in Syria.
The Freedom House report includes a summary of the 19 countries and territories. In Belarus dictatorial President Alyaksandr Lukashenka responded to public protests over another stolen election with “an extensive crackdown on all forms of dissent.” Prison was meted out even to protesters who stood wordlessly clapping their hands.
Burma was a relative bright spot, with the release of opposition leader Aung San Suu Kyi and other political prisoners, and relaxation of controls over the media. Whether the military is prepared to accept genuine civilian rule, and end its brutal campaigns against ethnic minorities, is as yet unknown.
In Chad fraudulent elections maintained control by the ruling party. Moreover, “Freedom of expression is severely restricted, and self-censorship is common.”
China, the world’s most populous nation with the world’s second largest economy, is regressing. The ruling Communist Party, which just moved through its long-awaited leadership transition, has increased its “efforts to restrict public discussion of political, legal, and human rights issues.” At the same time, Beijing “stalled or even reversed previous reforms related to the rule of law, while security forces resorted to extralegal forms of repression.” The latter included the disappearance of human rights lawyers and bloggers.
Although the Cuban government released some political prisoners in an agreement with the Catholic Church, Havana also detained a number of human rights activists in advance of the Pope’s visit. The government separately has relaxed some economic restrictions.
Equatorial Guinea long has been one of Africa’s most oppressive nations. The country held a fraudulent constitutional referendum. When it hosted the 2011 African Union summit, the government launched a crackdown, with “security forces reportedly detaining hundreds of suspected dissidents,” reported Freedom House.
Eritrea is another state known mostly for its brutal repressiveness. The rulers have never held elections in the almost 20 years since the country’s successful secession. Unfortunately, “The Eritrean government’s suppression of the basic political rights and civil liberties of its citizens continued.” Independent media is not simply restricted; it is banned.
Laos remains a communist throwback in which there is no political or media freedom. Libya, in contrast, improved with the overthrow of Moammar Gaddafi, though the country’s ultimate fate remains to be decided.
North Korea probably is the most repressive, misgoverned nation on earth. So far the death of dictator Kim Jong-il has led to no relaxation of the regime’s totalitarian controls. The only reform might be the issuance of designer hand-cuffs in prison. The North is an issue for more than its own oppressed people because it is developing nuclear weapons and threatening South Korea with war.
Saudi Arabia is a totalitarian Muslim state. Supposedly an important U.S. ally, Riyadh grew more repressive with “new restrictions on the media and public speech as well as the severe treatment of religious minorities, including crackdowns on Shiite Muslim protests.”
Somalia may be the closest example of anarchy on earth today. Noted Freedom House: “The Somali state has in many respects ceased to exist, and there is no governing authority with the ability to protect political rights and civil liberties.”
South Ossetia has declared independence from Georgia but has not implemented democracy. Rather, the outgoing president “jailed and threatened opposition figures and changed legislation to prevent the registration” of opposition candidates.
Sudan has never been a free society. Unfortunately, there was “a surge in arrests of opposition political activists and leaders, the banning of a leading political party, the violent response to public demonstrations in Khartoum and other cities, and a crackdown on the activities of journalists.” The situation could worsen with the potential of conflict after the secession of South Sudan.
Syria saw a significant deterioration with increased government repression and the slide into civil war. Beijing continued to maintain its harsh rule in Tibet. Turkmenistan “took greater repressive measures against human rights activists inside and outside the country.”
Uzbekistan is another Central Asian dictatorship. That nation’s government “suppressed all political opposition and restricted independent business activity.” Moreover, “the few remaining civic activists and critical journalists in the country faced prosecution, hefty fines, and arbitrary detention.”
Western Sahara, the former Spanish colony conquered by Morocco, saw a decline in liberty “due to the inability of civil society groups to form and operate, as well as serious restrictions on property rights and business activity.” Unfortunately, native “Sahrawis continued to be denied basic political, civil, and economic rights.”
It would be comforting to believe that the world was steadily and inevitably moving toward greater liberty. However, while there are moments of great progress—such as the collapse of communism—there also are moments of great despair.
Some day freedom may come to the Worst of the Worst. However, so far repression has proved to be brutally resilient. While the U.S. cannot turn into a crusader state attempting to liberate all these peoples by force, Americans and other people of good will around the world should do what they can to embarrass and challenge regimes which oppress.
-------------------------
* Senior Fellow at the Cato Institute.

Catherine Malabou-The Deconstruction of Biopolitics

egsvideo

The White House on Internet & Telecommunications Treaty

The White House Blog

thephilanews.com

Michael Daniel 

Last Friday, the World Conference on International Telecommunications (WCIT) ended without broad agreement regarding proposed revisions to a major international telecommunications treaty. Why? Because what should have been a limited effort to modernize quarter-century old telecommunications regulations turned into an attempt to legitimize greater state control over the Internet. The United States has consistently opposed such efforts based on core principles:  that the Internet’s social and economic benefits come from the free flow of information and ideas and that the technical innovation enabling this information flow comes from the full engagement of civil society, industry, and governments in the process. 

The United States went to the WCIT prepared to negotiate revisions to a telecommunications treaty, last revised in 1988. These changes would have reflected the realities of the modern world while staying true to the charter of the Conference. Unfortunately, a small number of vocal states at the WCIT which do not endorse the principles of economic opportunity and free expression sought, in proposal after proposal, to instead focus on the Internet. Because of those efforts, the Conference  missed a significant opportunity to encourage economic growth through greater broadband deployment.

In the end, the United States determined that it could not sign the proposed treaty and we were far from alone in our stance. Fifty-four nations in the developed and developing world—including India, Kenya, the Philippines, Colombia, and almost all of Europe—have also chosen not to sign the treaty. Moreover, U.S. industry, Congress, and civil society were united in recognizing the value of a principled decision to protect  the existing multistakeholder governance model of the Internet and not sign a treaty that could have set a dangerous precedent for greater state control of information on the Internet.

We recognize, however, that many states wanted something from this Conference that it did not provide, but could have: increased investment in broadband to connect more people around the world to the digital future. And to those nations, we reaffirm that our Administration is committed to connecting more across the globe to modern technology — and will do so both directly, and in forums positioned to address real needs in a constructive way.

The United States believes that expanded global access to telecommunications services and broadband Internet—combined with an inclusive Internet governance model—remains the best path towards economic growth that benefits everyone. We know that the WCIT was not the last place that those opposed to an inclusive Internet will try to gain legitimacy for their approach. As a result, the U.S. remains committed to upholding our principles in all our international engagements. The Obama Administration looks forward to continued discussions with all parties, from other nations to industry to civil society, on how best to promote the growth of this infrastructure so the world can continue to enjoy the benefits of digital innovation.