Sticks and Stones

In the past week cyclone Nargis has pulverized rural Burma with 120 mph winds followed by a 12-foot wave, and while avoiding the junta’s new capital at Naypidaw, it has wreaked havoc across the former capital at Rangoon and the Irrawaddy delta. Millions of people are injured and homeless, and it is estimated that over one hundred thousand are dead. The Burmese junta consistently ranks at the top of the State Department list of human rights abusers, and since 1989 has imprisoned the democratically elected leader Aung San Suu Kyi. It faces international sanction but continues to strengthen its hold on power; by willfully ignoring the desires of the Burmese people.

The United States has so far pledged $3 million in aid and President Bush has offered the services of the U.S. Navy - which proved invaluable during the 2004 Tsunami in Indonesia - to the Burmese junta. This gesture is in stark contrast with the U.S. position on the junta and yet is both sensible and necessary. The junta insists it shall be the sole conduit for aid money, so western requests for oversight and control over how the money is spent are futile. Reducing aid in reaction to the junta’s refusal is both immoral and naive; instead of standing on principle and denying aid, the U.S. must respond to this humanitarian catastrophe with unrestricted aid. By denying aid the U.S. would be guilty of politicizing a humanitarian crisis, and allowing tens of thousands to die. We know the junta in its relentless pursuit of securing a new constitution that will cement its grip on power, has disdainfully ignored its fifty million people. With their own government ignoring their needs, it falls to the U.N., the U.S., and other allies to come to the aid of the Burmese people.

Western nations could argue that the principle of not having diplomatic relations with rogue states like Burma underlines the point that we disapprove of them. Abandoning that principle in this situation could be the beginning of a slippery slope towards pledging unchecked aid to any nation - friend or foe - that declares emergency. Furthermore, it raises the larger question of why not give unrestricted aid to other nations with large numbers of people suffering greatly e.g. Bangladesh and the Democratic Republic of Congo. Sudan, like Burma has hundreds of thousands of poor and homeless people suffering without hope. Those who argue that unlike cyclone Nargis, the Sudanese genocide has been caused by President Bashir’s government are right. However, eighteen years of criminal neglect, crumbling infrastructure, crippling poverty, widespread human rights abuses, and a destroyed economy have been inflicted on the Burmese people by their government. While not genocide, these atrocities are still numerous and deadly.

The argument against sending aid is cruel and inhuman. Burma’s Buddhists value karuna (compassion) and prajna (wisdom) as two tenets of admirable behavior. It is imperative that the U.S. not see this crisis as an opportunity to take a stand against the military dictatorship but understand that at this moment in time politics must be set aside. The compassionate and wise response to the horrific tragedy in Burma is to offer aid in whatever means will minimize the suffering of millions of Burmese people. This may mean abandoning the principle of controlling how aid is spent, it may also mean acquiescing to the junta and not using U.N. airplanes to fly in food supplies. Finally it may mean only channelling aid through India, Thailand, and China. At this point, one week after Nargis struck, we must deliver any aid we can, by whatever means possible, right now.

No Comments

There’s some news coming out of Sticks and Stones today, it really is just an update and sadly, a dire warning: this editorial publication will likely not ramp up production before June 19.

I asked a few of our main contributors to mention a little about where they’ve been, and then I’ll share my news. From Leo, Alex, Martyn, Matthew, Akhil, and James comes the news that A2 level examinations are looming in the near future and all time available will be spent on that. From Hasan, the GCSE exams are taking up his days and nights so he too will be working furiously for those qualifications.

I too am sitting A2 level examinations - those end on June 19, after which I am free to return to blogging full time.

I am working on a video podcast, so that will likely launch at the same time. More on that later.

And like Mallika, I will be studying in the United States this fall. She is in the enviable position of being a freshman at the College of Arts and Sciences at New York University. Washington Square Park and the rest of that wonderful city are her playground.

I will be a first year student of the Class of 2012 at the Walsh School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University, in Washington, D.C..

It would be unkind to not post some content, so the post following this is my op-ed on cyclone Nargis. Other than that I doubt much content will be coming from SaSB before June 19.

Keep us in your RSS feeds and bookmarks, know that we will return in full force, but also know that while examination season swallows us whole, we won’t be firing off politically charged opines.

No Comments

 Indisputably, any citizen of the United States would want politicians that accurately represented them and worked for the benefit of the nation. That said, the qualifications for office are, at best, adequate. Most of the requirements are reasonable standards. Each potential Congress member must be an American citizen for at least nine years and be a resident of the State they represent. Senators must be at least 30 years of age and representatives at least 25. The President must be a natural-born citizen and 35. However these are the only formal qualifications a candidate must have. This is why I suggest the addition of one more requirement: a mandatory IQ test result of at least 120 for every candidate for a governmental office.

At this point you may wonder, why on earth have candidates take IQ tests? Haven’t they proven themselves intelligent and motivated already by running for office? My reasoning is based on the assumption that the majority of the American population is intelligent and capable and therefore would be represented best by intelligent and capable politicians. However the truth of the matter is that quite a few political candidates, past and present, for any office, have substandard intelligence and have slipped through the cracks formed by the scant requirements. Two examples: Former President George H. W. Bush and current President George W. Bush. Daddy Bush has an IQ of 98 and our very own Dubya has an IQ of 91 (Lovenstein Institute Presidential IQ Study). An IQ score of 100 is considered average, with most likely professions being truck drivers, machine operators, farmers and carpenters. Bush Sr. was a Texas representative in 1966 and 1968 before being vice president to Ronald Reagan and then President. Bush Jr. was also a Texas representative, and became Governor of Texas in 1994. Obviously, a mandatory IQ test prior to campaigning would have saved America from the collective bad decision-making of the two Bushes, as neither of them would have made it to Congress at all.

Sure, most political candidates are smart and do their jobs well. Granted, the current requirements are logical and serve the purpose of providing the nation with good lawmakers and civil servants. Nevertheless, the addition of intelligence testing to the existing qualifications would reinforce the standard of politicians and lead to improved decision-making for the people’s benefit. Congress would not be stunted by any stupidity and would work more efficiently. Smarter politicians would also raise the rock-bottom public opinion of the government, and give the multitude of foreign countries that currently hate us, a more realistic impression of the American people. We can only benefit from such an addition, and although intelligence testing may not affect the majority of political candidates, it certainly would minimize the chances of ending up with a president who can’t pronounce the word nuclear.

4 Comments

This is our hope. This is the faith that I go back to the South with. With this faith we will be able to hew out of the mountain of despair a stone of hope. With this faith we will be able to transform the jangling discords of our nation into a beautiful symphony of brotherhood. With this faith we will be able to work together, to pray together, to struggle together, to go to jail together, to stand up for freedom together, knowing that we will be free one day.

This will be the day, this will be the day when all of God’s children will be able to sing with new meaning “My country ’tis of thee, sweet land of liberty, of thee I sing. Land where my father’s died, land of the Pilgrim’s pride, from every mountainside, let freedom ring!”

And if America is to be a great nation, this must become true.

And so let freedom ring from the prodigious hilltops of New Hampshire.

Let freedom ring from the mighty mountains of New York.

Let freedom ring from the heightening Alleghenies of Pennsylvania.

Let freedom ring from the snow-capped Rockies of Colorado.

Let freedom ring from the curvaceous slopes of California.

But not only that; let freedom ring from Stone Mountain of Georgia.

Let freedom ring from Lookout Mountain of Tennessee.

Let freedom ring from every hill and molehill of Mississippi - from every mountainside.

Let freedom ring. And when this happens, and when we allow freedom ring - when we let it ring from every village and every hamlet, from every state and every city, we will be able to speed up that day when all of God’s children - black men and white men, Jews and Gentiles, Protestants and Catholics - will be able to join hands and sing in the words of the old Negro spiritual: “Free at last! Free at last! Thank God Almighty, we are free at last!”

No Comments

Gary Vaynerchuk asked us all to make today Good People Day, which is a wonderful idea. It’s not naive to decide to think about what we appreciate in others, and it isn’t unfair to turn our eyes away from the mainstream media’s flow of death and destruction. Sometimes we should talk about good news, sometimes we should publicly celebrate the people we consider good.

My contribution is to share a story with you - specifically how I got to know the wonderful people at CNET’s Buzz Out Loud podcast. It was mid-2005, the show was pretty new and a few people were beginning to develop what would become a vibrant community. We were in the hundreds, and at the CNET forums learnt about each other, discussed all sorts of issues, and so on. It was a great community and the hosts dropped in often. The forum was one of the places I had to visit everyday; the conversations there were as important to me as my ‘real-life’ conversations.

Late 2006 turned out to be a tough time in my life and the people I had known, but never met, rallied around to provide moral support. These people strewn across the planet came to share kind words with me and show that I mattered to them. That forum has always meant a lot to me, because I have met some amazing people there, people I later met in real life, and others spread all over the world with whom I have started online projects!

What was equally remarkable about the listeners’ community was how much we interacted with the hosts. They didn’t live one step withdrawn, watching from afar at what we said about their opinions and analysis. They participated, which made the whole atmosphere far more conducive to lively conversations, not just responses. Tom, Molly, and Veronica were always in the forum talking to their listeners. It was never a ploy to suggest they cared about the audience, it was real interest in the listeners. Even as the show has grown to the tens, likely hundreds of thousands of listeners it has today, you’ll still see Tom, Molly, and Jason joining in.

There are several thousands of miles east and west from me, here in London, separating us in the Buzz Out Loud community but I know that through my many years of interactions with the Good People involved with the show, I have gained real friends and am better for having known them.

1 Comment