by the meltingpot: Letters-2

Now Reading!

Indeed, what is at work in the recent return of realism is the revenge of geography in the most old-fashioned sense. In the 18th and 19th centuries, before the arrival of political science as an academic specialty, geography was an honored, if not always formalized, discipline in which politics, culture, and economics were often conceived of in reference to the relief map. Thus, in the Victorian and Edwardian eras, mountains and the men who grow out of them were the first order of reality; ideas, however uplifting, were only the second.
And yet, to embrace geography is not to accept it as an implacable force against which humankind is powerless. Rather, it serves to qualify human freedom and choice with a modest acceptance of fate. This is all the more important today, because rather than eliminating the relevance of geography, globalization is reinforcing it. Mass communications and economic integration are weakening many states, exposing a Hobbesian world of small, fractious regions. Within them, local, ethnic, and religious sources of identity are reasserting themselves, and because they are anchored to specific terrains, they are best explained by reference to geography. Like the faults that determine earthquakes, the political future will be defined by conflict and instability with a similar geographic logic. The upheaval spawned by the ongoing economic crisis is increasing the relevance of geography even further, by weakening social orders and other creations of humankind, leaving the natural frontiers of the globe as the only restraint.
So we, too, need to return to the map, and particularly to what I call the “shatter zones” of Eurasia. We need to reclaim those thinkers who knew the landscape best. And we need to update their theories for the revenge of geography in our time.
Here is the link for the whole write up.

Now at 2nd place

My view is that relations between countries in the coming decades are most likely to reflect their cultural commitments, their cultural ties and antagonism with other countries rather than other factors. Quite obviously, power will continue to play a central role in global politics, as it always does. But usually there is something else behind conflicts. In the 18th century in Europe, the issues to a large extent involved questions of monarchy versus the emerging republican movements, first in America and then in France. In the 19th century, it involved states identifying themselves through nationalism. In the 20th century, ideology came to the fore, largely, but not exclusively, as a result of the Russian Revolution. We had fascism, communism and liberal democracy competing with each other. Well, that’s pretty much over. Liberal democracy has come to be accepted, in theory at least, around the world, if not always in practice. So the question really is what will be the central focus of global politics in the coming decades? My argument remains that cultural identities, antagonisms and affiliations will not only play a role, but play a major role in relations between states. The full interview is here.

This is the 3rd

Every citizen in the City of Richardson will be able to access 756 Kbps of internet connectivity for free, from anywhere in the city. They will be able to access the internet from their homes, schools, restaurants and parks using standard wi-fi connections which are now installed on almost every notebook computer. That is almost as fast as many so-called high speed broadband connections that one pays dearly for today, and several times faster than the various hotspots at your local coffee shops. And I should note that the tax-payers of the City of Richardson are not paying one penny for this, and in fact are going to see additional revenues as a benefit. ... At the beginning of this letter, I suggested that this would be one of the fastest worldwide rollouts of a technology ever seen. It was just 20 years ago that the first cellular systems were being built. The rollout for mesh wireless systems is going to make that look slow. There are several reasons I make this assertion. But they all center on the facts that installing mesh systems will be cheaper and easier than any previous system and the economics in both the developed and especially the developing world will be so radically compelling. Throw in the fact the any astute politician will want to be at the front of this parade (They will all want to say, "I was the man who helped bring free internet to everyone!") and the groundwork is laid for rapid deployment. In Richardson and elsewhere, MeshLinx is offering the basic infrastructure for free. This avoids all the time consuming, political budget battles in the cities. When a service is offered for free, much of the mandated competitive process is eliminated. Next is the low cost of installation of the system. As noted above, Richardson is a city of roughly 100,000 people living in 27.4 square miles. It will "only" cost about $2,000,000 today to lay the wireless blanket I mentioned above. It will cost a great deal less in the future, as MeshLinx is building the pods at a pace of 100 a month today. The maximum output of the US pilot assembly line is 500 a month. When the demand exceeds this (and it will in a very short time) discussions have been held to move volume production to China. Of course, the world will need tens of millions of pods. The cost for a pod will be a fraction of today's cost, with that installation number for a city like Richardson soon being half (or less) the cost of today. What does that $1 or 2 million get you? The infrastructure to be an internet connection, telephone, security, entertainment provider and a whole lot more company. As noted, it will get cheaper as the number of pods being made each month rises, thus lowering their costs dramatically. This technology does have scale. The cost of physically putting up a pod is not a large part of the equation, as you simply need to run a power line, attach a few bolts to a mount on the side of a building or light pole and then off to the next point. Think about the 40,000 homes and businesses in Richardson. If and (hopefully) over time when 10% decide to pay $50 a month for 10-20 Mbps high speed internet access you could see a revenue of $2.5 million a year just from internet access. Now add in all the other income possibilities (phone, entertainment, security and don't forget advertising revenue on the free service!). Think about your town or country. What would service like this be worth? If you are a small city that does not have high speed connections available, how many businesses that could bring jobs do not come your way because they need reliable communications for their work and their employees? If you are in a developing country, where internet access is difficult and expensive, it will open whole new vistas. Couple that with the various programs which want to give cheap laptops to kids in poor countries, and you could see significant social progress in a generation. Here is the link.

Friday, July 06, 2007

Letters-2

This letter is in response to Mr Lenneo Haokip’s letter to the editor of 21st June( See my last post—letters-1).

Today’s letter was on the 25th June edition of Sangai Express.

UNLF did not trigger Moreh fissure.

Sir,

We appreciate the positive views and constructive suggestions expressed in this column on 21-06-07 by Mr Lenneo Haokip, former editor of Manmasi. We feel reassured that people like Mr Haokip appreciates UNLF’s revolutionary line of National Liberation Struggle, particularly its basic principle of peaceful co-existence. In fact, we are moved by his genuine patriotic feelings carried in his appeal ‘to the people of Manipur to arise, awake, introspect and come together as one to avoid further balkanization of our tiny-state Manipur into tri-zone viz Kangleipak, Nagalim and Kuki Zalen-Gam’. We are absolutely with him in this endeavour.

However, we are constrained to make some clarifications on being tagged ‘UNLF triggered Moreh Fissures’ having ‘gone awry from their basic principle by playing the communal card in the recent Moreh episode’ in the context of our basic principles of peaceful co-existence and co-development. We feel that the chronology of events that led what Mr Haokip calls the ‘Moreh Mishap’ needs to be recounted here so that our progressive intellectuals like Mr Hakip could be more objective on such sensitive issues.

For some years now, the KNO/KNA, supported and assisted by the Indian security forces, has been carrying on a campaign to intimidate the families of Kukis who have joined UNLF/MPA. KNA even brutally tortured some families.

On 01-06-07, KNA killed ex-MPA No, 1710 Nengneilhing Baite @ Mary Baite, resident of Moreh and married to a Meetei, after being raped and brutally tortured. The reason—working for UNLF/MPA.

On 03-06-07, KNA gunned downed a youth named Roshan, a Meetei. The reason—alleged to be a 2/lt in MPA while HTC/KSO claimed earlier that he was a sergeant in MPA.

On 04-06-07, armed KNA men, encouraged by 24 AR of the SF for working on their agenda of creating communal tension, moved freely in Moreh town and began to terrorise the Meetei community thereby provoking a communal reaction.

The above stated activities of the KNO/KNA crossed the limit of UNLF’s tolerance and decided to act against the SF-KNA conspiracy.

Therefore, on 05-06-07 at 10.00 hrs a Special Strike Force of UNLF/MPA entered Moreh Town and detained six men suspected to be KNA. Four of them were identified to be KNA men who were involved in the killing of President, AMSU Chandel District, Nengheiling Baite @ Mary Baite and Roshan, while the other two were found to be innocent civilian and thus set free. As the Special Strike Force was given specific orders to shoot only KNA men, the four identified KNA were shot on the spot. Moving further, another KNA intelligence man, operating as Auto Driver, was found near the gate of Roshan’s house. He was identified to be involved in the killing of Roshan and thus shot on the spot.

In retaliation to the action taken by the MPA Special Strike Force, the KNO/KNA, according to the agenda set by 24 AR of the SF mowed down 6 Meetei labourers on the one hand and whipped up communal sentiments of the Moreh Kukis by wrongly informing that the UNLF/MPA has killed innocent Kukis.

We would like Mr Haokip to ponder over how KNO/KNA has been helping the SFs, knowingly or unknowingly, to take advantage of our internal contradictions. That the Meeteis did not react communally to KNO/KNA provocations was not by any outside effort but primary because of the maturity of the Meeteis as a community, which has been displayed time and again in recent times.

On UNLF’s vision for an independent and united country, we may reiterate our guiding principle of ‘autonomy at all levels’. According to this basic principle, we conduct ourselves in ethnic areas through traditional local authorities, either ‘Chiefs’ or ‘village councils’ as of now.

The presence of UNLF/MPA in ethnic areas(read Kuki areas as well) is primarily of fighting against the Security Force on the one hand and to spread the message of unity, co-existence and co-development besides extending much needed humanitarian help.

Thus, it is totally wrong and misleading to describe UNLF/MPA presence in ethnic areas as encroachment.

The problem is, our KNO/KNA brothers, instead of trying to understand the humble efforts of the UNLF/MPA, have joined hands with the SF against UNLF/MPA. Working with the SF for other purposes may not be our business. But if that relationship turns against UNLF and our national liberation struggle, we are compelled to take appropriate measures. This is just what has happened in Moreh.

We would like to reassure Mr Haokip that the UNLF has not at all ‘gone awry’ from the firmly committed path of national liberation, peaceful co-existence and co-development. But we need two hands to clap.

In the regards, we would welcome more, if any, from Mr Haokip.

Yours faithfully,
Ksh. Yoheiba,
Senior Publicity Officer,
UNLF.

by the meltingpot

Now Reading!

Now at 2nd place

This is the 3rd