|
Main
Cyberspace: the new arena of global interaction is the Internet and we are all netizens now...
With the Beijing Olympics very much round the corner, there's been a real slew of articles recently, reflecting a renewed and critical interest into what's really going on in China.
While the article quoted below really adds little new to the debate (see, for example, my own take on this from some years back) it does provide an insight into the situation: useful for the majority of people who don't yet understand what the conditions are in China.
Also pleasing to see a couple of intelligent opinion-makers such as Jeremy Goldkorn and Isaac Mao (both of whom I knew vaguely during my Living in China days) given a voice.
Behind the Great Firewall | Technology | The Guardian
Hong Bo, who blogs under the name Keso, says the opportunity to speak out online is cherished by a growing band of bloggers and BBS users.
"The Chinese internet has a distinctive character. Its one of the most strictly controlled in the world, but netizens' behaviour still confounds the government's expectations. They ban websites and delete posts, but they haven't got everything under control."
Isaac Mao, a pioneer blogger and researcher, says the number of users is less important than the quality of their online experience, where he says there is a big gap with the United States.
His organisation encourages netizens to connect their real and their virtual lives through blogs and discussions of social issues, including censorship.
"Rulers believe they can build a better system and get others to follow. But even though they want to change the internet, it is part of a globalised world and nobody can afford to build an isolated system.
"I believe the internet will change China more than China changes the internet."
Well, it's that time again - as the year 2007 draws to a close, we look to the future. And one thing is for sure: the primary foci of this weblog, Pakistan and China, were hardly out of the news this year and won't be in 2008 either.
 For China especially, 2008 is the crunch year. The Olympics have acquired a kind of existential significance, and their success or failure have become intertwined with China's contemporary sense of its national identity.
Unfortunately, I can't see the games being the resounding success that the CCP hopes for. Chinese athletes will probably haul in the most medals, but with the enormous pressures upon them there will inevitably be doping scandals. Other athletes will scorn the terrible pollution; tourists will be messed about, pushed, shoved and spat around (most Beijingers will behave admirably, but it'll still be the negatives that get remembered); and journalists will lament the restrictions on free reporting. Few Chinese yet realise how things will be perceived, and it will come as a shock.
Most of all, this most political of sporting events will inevitably be deeply politicised. There will be incidents: medal-winners standing up for Tibet, Taiwanese declarations, perhaps even Uyghur violence. Expect 888 to be a very interesting moment in the definition of the new China.
Turning to Russia, there Putin will remain in control, despite the appointment of a new president in Medvedev - little more than a deputy, really, But I have confidence in Putin: he is not stupid, and will not wish relations with the EU and NATO to deteriorate further. Things were getting silly, what with all this missile defence rubbish, not to mention Litvinenko and Lugovoi, and in 2008 Russia will attempt to repair some of the damage - though not with Britain, who will be the main losers.
Meanwhile, it will be a period of reflection for the EU itself, as the member states attempt to digest the implications of the Lisbon Treaty. Expect at least one ratification to fail.
 There is at least reason to positive about the Middle East. Iraq has calmed in 2007, though of course it's not the end by any stretch of the imagination. We are also thankfully unlikely to see action against Iran either. Bush desperately needs a positive legacy to speak of, so with elections in full swing at home he and his cronies may attempt at least to broker a compromise solution. Does he have what it takes? We shall see.
But there are clearly going to be fireworks in Pakistan. Far too early to tell how things will pan out, but it probably won't be good. This writer is already predicting a Balkanisation of the country: that may be going too far, but with the conflicts in NWFP and Balochistan likely to gain pace as society fractures after the elections then the prospects for stability are low. Great map too - worth examining to see what it suggests about Iran and Iraq and all
It is almost certainly the end of the road for Musharraf, and with Bhutto gone there will be a power vacuum. Power vacuums mean conflict, as we have seen in Iraq. But the West and India have meddled enough in Pakistan - it is up to them.
A lengthy but sobering and informative analysis of the crackdown on the Internet in China, specifically at bloggers in the days leading up to the party conference. It sounds much like the situation has deteriorated dramatically since I was blogging in China myself: at that time the authorities were only just wising up to the dangers of people speaking freely on a forum such as the web, and attempt to control them were limited though sometimes effective. One has to ask what the situation will be this time next year after the Olympics have closed down.
Global Voices Online » China: Blogs ground down as National Congress gears up
Having claimed records of Department of Propaganda officials making statements in public like 'we'd be better off without the internet' spread across the internet, blogs and, at one point, even on a CCTV message board hasn't left much room for benefit of the doubt when one considers just how seriously authorities might actually agree with an utterance like that against the backdrop of other recent events.
In other words, if war were to be declared on bloggers, is the state of today's China's blogsphere what it would look like? Starting this month we've seen blog posts being deleted in places where they almost never used to, comment sections being closed out of fear, and the occasional blogger getting a jab in while they're at it - and outspoken bloggers like Wang Xiaoshan who had comments turned off to begin with now also deleting their own posts with no explanation.
This one's going straight on my blogroll. PostGlobal is a collaboration between The Washington Post and Newsweek that analyses global trends - the fall of America, the rise of China, energy, Islam etc..
In short, it's basically just like my blog, but with flash graphics, real cash backing, plus gurus like Fareed Zakaria on board. The only thing they lack is a decent subeditor, which does let it down a little.
What really caught my eye today was this introduction to 'midrange' trends over the next 36 months. Summary below:
A dramatic global realignment appears to be in progress (and quickening) as the result of several factors:
- The loss of US influence as a result of the Iraq war
- A view across the globe resulting from Abu Ghraib and range of missteps that the US has lost the moral high ground it had enjoyed for decades
- A feeling among global leaders that the US is without a coherent foreign policy strategy...a belief that has started feeding on itself and has emboldened US adversaries
- China's rise, its smooth diplomatic technique, its re-alignment with Russia and its aggressive, clever drive to form new alliances with nations extending from Asia and Africa to South America
- Russia's recent rise combined with Russian President Putin's domestic popularity and his reputation for effectively standing up to the West
- The rise of non-aligned nations emboldened by the inability of the US to effectively use the extraordinary power it possesses
- A view among key global leaders that the US will be bogged down in Iraq for many years (a view heightened by significantly by President Bush's September 13 Iraq speech), thus distracted and unable to respond effectively to key political moves by the range of international players
- A recognition by the international community that the Bush Administration not only hasn't been able to deal effectively with non-state actors (e.g. terror groups like Al Qaeda) but they are holding their own or starting to win
More excellent points culled from the article below.
Continue reading "PostGlobal" »
 In other circumstances, I would cry 'nationalism' but in this case I'm with the Chinese. To have a Starbucks in the middle of the Forbidden City is indeed sacriligious (though in other senses it was an apt symbol of globalization, and was a warm place to take refuge in Beijing's sub-zero temperatures when I visited in January 2004).
Between the lines, there is a subtext here, that of the growing power of civil society via the Internet. Petitioning is in fact an age-old method used by the Chinese masses to address those in authority. It doesn't always work, of course: the Tiananmen protestors tried petitioning before turning to civil disobedience with the bloody consequences that followed. But they did that because the petition was ignored.
And the web offers opportunities for low-key mass protest petitioning like never before. Taking Starbucks out of the Forbidden City is trivial in itself, as were various recent campaigns against dog licensing etc.. But on the other hand, campaigns against dams and pollution etc. which directly impinge upon local and central government jusrisdiction - have been rather successful. My recent paper on EU-China relations (which will be published here in due course) deals with the grass-roots democracy that the 'non-political' protest movement is engendering.
As the web grows in popularity, the authorities may need to come up with ways to deal with this subtle but effective manifestation of people power. It is only a matter of time before web petitions turn to more serious issues, and if the people see they are being ignored then they can more easily join forces via their Internet networks to try something else.
Starbucks faces eviction from the Forbidden City | Special reports | Guardian Unlimited
The trigger was a blog entry posted on Monday by Rui Chenggang, a TV anchorman, who called for a web campaign against the outlet that, he wrote in his blog, "tramples over over Chinese culture".
According to local media, half a million people have signed his online petition and dozens of newspapers have carried prominent stories about the controversy. "The Starbucks was put here six years ago, but back then, we didn't have blogs. This campaign is living proof of the power of the web", said Rui. "The Forbidden City is a symbol of China's cultural heritage. Starbucks in a symbol of lower middle class culture in the west. We need to embrace the world, but we also need to preserve our cultural identity. There is a fine line between globalisation and contamination.
It's easy to forget sometimes just how good the BBC is, but tonight's Newsnight was a timely reminder for me. Three feature stories headed the bill: the first on the dangers of blogging; next on the right of the BBC and others to interview Taliban spokesmen; the last on the church in China. Each of them was linked by a common thread - the right to free expression.
I was critical of Amnesty's initial attempt to tackle the online issue: it didn't seem to understand the issues at stake. However, now it seems they have got it right. The problem is not so much censorship - which we frankly can do nothing about - but the collusion of companies such as Yahoo in providing evidence which leads to the arrest of bloggers and other critical voices.
"Call to Bloggers" to stand up for freedom ahead of world meeting on future of Internet - Amnesty International
Steve Ballinger, part of Amnesty International’s delegation to the IGF, said:
“Freedom of expression online is a right, not a privilege – but it’s a right that needs defending. We’re asking bloggers worldwide to show their solidarity with web users in countries where they can face jail just for criticising the government.
“The Internet Governance Forum needs to know that the online community is bothered about free expression online and willing to stand up for it.”
Amnesty International is calling on governments and companies to ensure that human rights – particularly the rights to freedom of expression, association and the right to privacy – are respected and protected.
Help is, however, at hand via what seems to be an ingenious peer-to-peer solution to disguising your net ID: Freenet. Of course eventually the Great Firewall will cut it off, but the growth of sophistication since the good old days when I and others were desperately trying to use the currently-ruined Anonymouse to get past the CCP is amazing.
BBC NEWS | Have Your Say | Peace Day: Balochistan
Even as I write, I am afraid of that knock on my door.
I am afraid that I may be picked up and lost to the world forever. Since 1945, the people of Balochistan have been waiting for the day when the world will finally wake up to their suffering.
BBC NEWS | UK | Web firms criticised over China
Businesses such as Microsoft, Google and Yahoo blocking some information was "morally unacceptable", the Commons foreign affairs committee said.
The MPs also called on the government to put pressure on China to relax its restrictions on the internet.
Their comments came in a wide-ranging report on east Asia which also attacked China's record on human rights.
Comment is free: A web of deceit
Yet another article that attampts to tackle the issue of Google, Microsoft and Yahoo in China, in reverse order of level of evil complicity.
Check out also my comment.
 Of all companies, Google is now campaigning to preserve net neutrality.
Wasn't this the same Google that acquiesed in creating a search engine to work through Chinese censorship? But then backed away? Its corporate values are a little ambivalent, but perhaps this is a move in the right direction.
Let's not forget, however, that Google is a web company. This is a problem with the Internet - the actual infrastructure which carries the World Wide Web:
Today the Internet is an information highway where anybody no matter how large or small, how traditional or unconventional has equal access. But the phone and cable monopolies, who control almost all Internet access, want the power to choose who gets access to high-speed lanes and whose content gets seen first and fastest. They want to build a two-tiered system and block the on-ramps for those who can't pay.
Creativity, innovation and a free and open marketplace are all at stake in this fight.
 More prescient is a remark by Tim Berners-Lee:
The neutral communications medium is essential to our society. It is the basis of a fair competitive market economy. It is the basis of democracy, by which a community should decide what to do. It is the basis of science, by which humankind should decide what is true. Let us protect the neutrality of the net.
If the American public can't block this bill - and let's face it, none of the rest of us have a look in - then we could all end up in a blocked-off net, just like China.
 Latest on the Google.cn story - Google appears to be rethinking its involvement in China.
Though this is a shame for everyday Chinese Internet users who just want to surf, it could have significant socio-political repercussions.
Could there be any stronger message to the same Internet users that, yes, your government is acting in a way of which Western companies disapprove? And, no, they will not allow you the same freedoms that the rest of the world enjoys?
People don't miss something until it's taken away from them, and if Google were to withdraw then it would be a very bold move. Then again, the Chinese might just vent their frustration at Google, not the CCP, as has done the Western media. We'll see.
Associated Press story via The Guardian below.
Continue reading "Cold Feet in Silicon Valley?" »
So what else is new? Happened all the time while I was there. Hopefully, this will put to rights some of the debate on Google - it's the Party that's censoring, not Google.
However, the fact that Google offers a censored version to replace the service that is blocked does raise some ethical questions. Did the US company know in advance that it would be be blocked - and how permanent will it be?
Reporters Sans Frontiers report below.
Continue reading "Google Blocked in China" »
 With great fanfare and slapping of mutual backs, The Observer and Amnesty International today launched a new campaign against censorship of the Internet - 'Irrepressible.info'.
I'm not totally sure, however, that they understand the situation completely.
Without wishing to pour cold water on this laudable effort, it's important to make a distinction. There are three parties involved - states, companies and individuals - each of which has a different perspective.
Above all, it must be recognised that it is states that censor, torture and imprison, not companies.
I lived in China for a couple of years and was involved in building an English-language bloggers network (livinginchina.com now defunct) so I came into contact with the censorship every day.
It works like this. Aside from sweeping censorship of blogs and personal websites (typepad- and geocities-hosted sites etc. were inaccessible while I was there) the state identifies certain sites or clusters of keywords it doesn't like (BBC's news site is one), and blocks you from accessing them.
So, if you enter 'tibet', for example, into google.com, you'll see results for the Dalai Lama's government in exile and the Free Tibet movement. It's just that if you click on the link, they won't open. You get the good old 'page not found' screen.
I have no particular love for Google, but what the Chinese version (google.cn) does is simply lead you to those sites that you CAN access. It's not doing the censorship itself. It's Cisco Systems, I believe, that actually provided the hardware for the Great Firewall of China.
The result is that many individuals practise self-censorship, in order to avoid their sites being blocked or getting into worse trouble. This saves the state a lot of time effort and money.
Compare this with Yahoo!'s tip offs to the Chinese government about subversive e-mails etc.. Shi Tao and others are not in prison due to censorship - they are incarcerated because they were betrayed by Western companies they didn't think would collude with the Party in this way.
That is the real tragedy of the situation. All I am saying is that you must make the distinction between censorship and active oppression of individuals. Some of this you can influence by lobbying the Western companies involved and actively colluding and I commend it.
Some companies, however, are simply submitting to the restrictions that the state imposes. If anything, google.cn actually helps users find the content that isn't censored by the state.
Finally, there has never been freedom of speech in China and many other places. They are not going to change their whole policy just because The Observer and Amnesty tell them to. Prepare to be blocked.
Leader from The Observer reprinted below.
Continue reading "Altogether Repressible" »
A few select cuttings from this year's Internet report by media freedom organisation Reporters sans Frontiers.
I've actually exercised some self-censorship in cutting the name of a dissident currently under arrest in China from the copy. This is not because I am trying to conceal his identity - it's easy to find out, if you have access to the RSF website - but because search engines, spiders, robots and censorship technology within the Chinese mainland may well find his name and add me to the blocked list. Yes, a little overcautious perhaps, but remember that RSF itself is very very blocked in the PRC.
Read on below - don't say I'm not even-handed.
Continue reading "Annual Internet Report" »
 Clinton's comment on the feasibility of censoring the Internet.
But it is possible, as those of us who used the Internet in China know all too well. Hence this special report from The Economist, reproduced below for non-subscribers.
The report is a useful round-up, but unusually short on analysis. Nevertheless, the stats are interesting:
The numbers of internet-connected computers have more than doubled since the end of 2002, to 45.6m, and internet-users have risen by 75%, to 111m. China now has more internet-users than any country but America, and over half of them have broadband (up from 6.6% at the end of 2002). Users of instant computer-to-computer messaging systems have more than doubled, to 87m. Blogsonline personal diaries, scarcely heard of three years agonow number more than 30m. And search engines receive over 360m requests a day.
The report is correct in remarking that 'the firewall is porous' - that if you have the know-how you can get through it. It also notes the minor successes of bloggers in bringing minor reform; and that Wen Jiabao says that it is worth taking on board the views expressed on the Web.
But the article skirts around what I think is the biggest issue of the Internet in China, something that goes beyond censorship. This is the active complicity of firms such as Yahoo! in informing upon individuals via e-mail and server activity monitoring. These people (there are four known cases) - I will not mention their names, since it will cause any search engine in the PRC to seize up - have a lot to take Yahoo! to issue for.
In my opinion, this is far more serious that Google allowing censorship on Google.cn - it's going to happen anyway. But knocks on the door at two in the morning don't just happen anyway. If we in the West truly do wish to promote change in the PRC, it's Yahoo! we should boycott.
Outside the PRC, you can read what I'm talking about here.
Continue reading "Nailing Jelly to the Wall" »
One to watch from The Guardian - Comment is Free, its new 'uber blog':
...the first collective comment blog by a British newspaper website. It will incorporate all the regular Guardian and Observer main commentators, many blogging for the first time, who will be joined by a host of outside contributors - politicians, academics, writers, scientists, activists and of course existing bloggers to debate, argue and occasionally agree on the issues of the day.
Worth keeping an eye on.
 I'm not quite sure what this means yet - but basically China is introducing some new IP address suffixes to add to .com, .cn and the like.
They will be in Chinese characters, not Roman letters.
In a way that's fair enough. But in another it's not. Not only will it make it easier for the PRC to bypass ICANN ( and probably, therefore, easier to censor the Internet) but it's also a threat to one of the best side effects of the Internet - its role in spreading English.
I'm not saying this for nationalist reasons, though as an Englishman I admit to an interest in English. What I mean is that in this globalised world we need an international language - and it's English. It just is.
Here in Amsterdam I'm surrounded by people of all nationalities - in my block, for example, there are Slovakians, Bulgarians, a Slovenian, a Frenchman, some African people I haven't yet met and the inevitable Brits and Yanks too. Whenever we communicate, it's in English.
I'll always remember a boy in Malawi, who told me that he was a poor fisherman's son. But instead of begging for money, he asked for a book. I gave him an old novel I had, and asked him why. "Because," said the boy, in remarkable English, "if am ever to be anything more than a poor fisherman, I need education. And to get education, you must speak English."
The Internet is the best way to introduce English to China. Whether they like it or not, for 75% of the world's population it's easier to learn English than Chinese. And the more Chinese understand English, the more that they'll understand the world around them.
And the more Chinese who understand the world around them, the better it is for China.
And the better it is for China, the better for everyone else too.
Economist piece below.
Continue reading "All English to Me" »
Something of a continuation of the story below, there's two BBC stories today on multinational Internet firms in China. It seems that there is at least a movement now to enforce firms to be more accountable in their dealings with China and not just to view it as a massive profit zone - which it isn't anyway.
The first story concerns a congressional hearing on net firms complicity in China. Now, there are two sides of the argument. The first, which I discuss in yesterday's post, is that it's the PRC government that censors and not the companies. In the words of Yahoo spokeswoman Mary Osako:
"All US and international firms operating in China face the same dilemma of complying with laws that lack transparency and that can have disturbing consequences inconsistent with our own beliefs."
"The choice in China is not whether to comply with law enforcement demands, it is whether to remain in China."
And that is fair enough. However, when Yahoo actually shops Internet dissidents to the authorities, to face imprisonment without fair trail and possible torture, Yahoo is fully accountable for human rights abuses.
Let's turn to the response, also reprinted below. Now, while the US-led Internet firms are acting in a highly dubious fashion, one only needs to read stuff like this to understand the truth of the matter.
'Government official Liu Zhengrong' has the basic attitude that everyone in the west is stupid and that China is perfect. It's typical of Chinese spokesmen to display these kind of sentiments (see this entry on animal abuse too), which in my view are utterly self defeating. Who, honestly, actually believes them? How idiotic do they think we are?
"After studying internet legislation in the West, I've found we basically have identical legislative objectives and principles," Mr Liu was quoted as telling the state-run China Daily newspaper on Tuesday.
"It is unfair and smacks of double standards when (foreigners) criticise China for deleting illegal and harmful messages, while it is legal for US websites to do so," he said.
Give me strength. I know that things are different between China and the West cos I've been to both places and tried to use the Internet, read the papers and watched the TV. Yes, there are limitations on free speech here, but nothing whatsoever comparable to China. And to suggest that 'no-one has been arrested just for writing online content'...
I'd advise Google, Yahoo and their brethren to read both reports, sit back in a darkened room and think very carefully about what they'll say to Congress.
Continue reading "Defending Censorship American-Style (With Noodles)" »
 It might be something to do with the cultural gulf between Bohemian Beijing and Seedy Shanghai, but this Guardian report took me aback slightly.
It may well be a sign that things have changed even since I left in July 2005 and are changing still. I certainly couldn't find any copies of 'Seven Years in Tibet' in China, though I obtained it with ease in Kathmandhu. I couldn't find any Tiananmen Square photos on Google while in China either.
And this made me chuckle too:
"I guess about 70% of the stuff we have is pirated," said a sales assistant. "The police come from time to time and we close until they've gone. But they come back in private and ask us to give them free DVDs. Then we open again."
Only 70%? Come on! The only place I ever saw a legit DVD on sale was in Carrefour - a French-owned multinational superstore. Everywhere else was hookey, and openly so, flogged by a million Del Boys in a Peckham market the size of a continent.
As a journalist myself, the way Jonathan Watts gets hold of quotes like this one is also, to me, quite mindblowing:
"It is becoming more difficult to block and monitor web traffic so we need to switch to guidance," said an official responsible for internet surveillance. "Strict management didn't work. It is like trying to control a flood. Guiding is more effective than blocking."
Even with an estimated 30,000 internet police, he said it was difficult to monitor bulletin boards. "The technology hasn't reached a level that will allow us to control them. And we must also consider the trend of democratisation, which cannot be stopped," he said. "China is very big. If you want to control such a large country, mere politics is not enough. You must control minds. You need to win the battle for ideas."
Lastly, on Google. Now initially I was very disappointed with Google's foray into the Chinese market with a heavily censored Chinese-language search engine that throws out sanitised search results. But then I read this post by Danwei (itself once a victim of censorship), and realised that Google is simply being realistic.
It is not Google that is censoring the Internet in China - it's the government. You can't get the results on Google.com, so why should you be able to get them on Google.cn? (Don't try it at home, the Internet filters and firewalls only operate on the PRC mainland).
Besides, if Watts' report is correct, the authorities are fighting a losing battle anyway. And that's good news. Ish.
Continue reading "Beating the Censors" »
 Worth noting for a future look - a website run by Toronto's Munk centre for IR that covers all things I'm into, basically.
Here's its rubric about the field it covers:
The Citizen Lab is an interdisciplinary laboratory based at the Munk Centre for International Studies at the University of Toronto, Canada focusing on advanced research and development at the intersection of digital media and world civic politics.
A "hothouse" that brings together social scientists, filmmakers, computer scientists, activists, and artists, the Citizen Lab sponsors projects that explore the cutting-edge of hypermedia technologies and grassroots social movements, civic activism, and democratic change within an emerging planetary polity
Check out also the BBC story below on the Great Firewall of China, something I encountered daily while I was there. However, it's my suspicion that contrary to the article's suggestion, the censors are now able to suppress proxy servers too.
Continue reading "Citizen Lab" »
Switch on the TV or open a newspaper or magazine and what you see or read are events and themes in isolation. Each exists by itself: you watch a programme or read an article and that's it. Nothing more. Over.
 Surf the Internet, on the other hand, and everything is interconnected, part of the overarching phenomenon known as the World Wide Web. And that is a lot more like real life. Things don't happen on their own. They happen for a reason, often a multitude of reasons and they are driven by a host of differing influences.
War, the nineteenth century strategist Karl von Clausewitz once wrote, is a continuation of politics by other means. It is a bold statement of the most simple but the most profound and important of connections. This blog is about war and politics, but more specifically about the inextricable links and parallels between the events we see unfold every day. The things that the papers don't always pick up on, or that the networks don't have time to run.
So, in the true pre-commercial spirit of the Internet, what I aim to write here is not conventional journalism: but maybe journalism by other means.
You can read more about the idea behind this blog on the about page. In summary, my interests are in the global politics that lead to the breakdown of diplomacy and the advent of war, plus the technology and operations of war itself.
And since the events that we know of occur only on this one planet, I also aim to examine the broader contexts of environmental issues - since the depletion of our natural resources and environment are perhaps the biggest single threat that 'the international community' - if such a thing exists - will have to face. If only they would see it.
My personal background is in defence and technology journalism, but in a larger sense I consider myself not a subject of the country I live in but a citizen of the world. In many ways, I am a product of globalisation - born to an Asian father in North America, yet raised in Britain as a European.
I have two passports, Canadian and British, I am entitled to a special 'Person of Indian Origin' permit and for the last couple of years I lived in a country and among a culture quite alien to my own, China. Other than my interests and my general journalistic skills, these are my only qualifications - but that's the beauty of blogging. You don't need to be an expert, just an observer.
My areas of interest are thus these three continents - North America, Europe and Asia - and the relations between them. South America and Africa are not specifically covered (other than under the 'Unrepresented' and perhaps the 'Travel and Miscellany' categories), not because they are unimportant, but in order to keep some kind of focus.
In brief then, I aim to examine the news and events of the day in context, viewing them not in isolation but paying attention to the wheels within wheels that turn to drive the world we live in. As the motto reads, I study war and peace that my sons may study mathematics and philosophy. As a private individual I acknowledge that I don't stand a chance of changing the world, but it's my generation that's got to at least start.
Many thanks for reading, and welcome again to the weblog.
|
|
