and always remember…
if you cannot find the exact words, fuupahs and brahaaas are handy to express indescribable feelings
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=n-5F_7DwPpo
if falling is imminent, be elegant and creative – you got wiped out anyways
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N8f_dVfpFkw
if you feel lost and hopeless, look for Big Z – he will teach you some skills before “your whale comes in”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N41QJ0VCs68
Merry Christmas, Happy New Year, and lots of Fun and Funny Sessions!
quinta-feira, 23 de dezembro de 2010
domingo, 19 de dezembro de 2010
Political Philosophy: Bentham and Kant
Michael Sandel has taught the course "Justice" for over fourteen thousand Harvard students.
His central question is: "What is the right thing to do?"
He analyzes predicaments in the light of Jeremy Bentham's and Immanuel Kant's lessons.
Bentham is the founder of Utilitarianism. For the 18th English thinker, the right thing to do is to maximize utility, that is, we should balance our pleasure over pain, happiness over suffering. Doing so, we end up maximizing our overall level of happiness. Betham's aphorism summarizes this concept: "The greatest good for the greatest number".
Bentham's Utilitarianism resulted in the moral principle of Consequentialist, which locates morality in the consequence of an act. In other words, moral decisions are swayed by the results of our acts.
Kant, the 18th German philosopher, created a different way to analyze what is the right thing to do when we face moral deadlocks. Categorical is the concept which locates morality in certain duties and rights; in other words, the intrinsic quality and character of our acts matter morally. It cannot be right to kill one person to save another or others.
Bentham's and Kant's political philosophical theories, although essentially different, avoid decision-makers become skeptical and taking for granted that skepticism, or the absence of moral reflection, can be an unscathed way out for human dilemmas.
Either Consequentialism or Categorical philosophies both help decision-makers articulate reasons and principles lying behind judgments. This cognitive task is vital "to awaken the restlessness of reasoning and see where it might lead", concludes Sandel.
http://www.ted.com/speakers/michael_sandel.html
His central question is: "What is the right thing to do?"
He analyzes predicaments in the light of Jeremy Bentham's and Immanuel Kant's lessons.
Bentham is the founder of Utilitarianism. For the 18th English thinker, the right thing to do is to maximize utility, that is, we should balance our pleasure over pain, happiness over suffering. Doing so, we end up maximizing our overall level of happiness. Betham's aphorism summarizes this concept: "The greatest good for the greatest number".
Bentham's Utilitarianism resulted in the moral principle of Consequentialist, which locates morality in the consequence of an act. In other words, moral decisions are swayed by the results of our acts.
Kant, the 18th German philosopher, created a different way to analyze what is the right thing to do when we face moral deadlocks. Categorical is the concept which locates morality in certain duties and rights; in other words, the intrinsic quality and character of our acts matter morally. It cannot be right to kill one person to save another or others.
Bentham's and Kant's political philosophical theories, although essentially different, avoid decision-makers become skeptical and taking for granted that skepticism, or the absence of moral reflection, can be an unscathed way out for human dilemmas.
Either Consequentialism or Categorical philosophies both help decision-makers articulate reasons and principles lying behind judgments. This cognitive task is vital "to awaken the restlessness of reasoning and see where it might lead", concludes Sandel.
http://www.ted.com/speakers/michael_sandel.html
sábado, 18 de dezembro de 2010
Rohter vs Grandy: Diversification vs Specialization in Hawai'i's Economy
This brief analysis is divided into four parts. The first summarizes Ira Rohter’s book “A Green Hawai’i” and Christopher Grandy’s “Hawai’i Becalmed”. The ideas selected from both books were the ones that deal with alternative economic models to the Hawaiian islands. The second part describes the main risk and benefit of the diversification model proposed by Rohter, and the third, the main risk and benefit of Grandy’s specialization approach. In the last part, I present few economic policy suggestions based on the analysis of Rohther’s and Grandy’s main arguments.
Part I – Summaries
Ira Rohter’s “A Green Hawaii” defends the diversification of investments in the Hawaiian islands. The professor of Political Science at the University of Hawaii at Manoa (UHM) states that mass tourism has caused more harm than positive effects on the local economy. Most jobs created were not only low-paid but also the vast majority of profit made ended up outside the islands since corporations not controlled by local entrepreneurs owned mostly of facilities and services in the tourism industry.
Writing in the early nineties, Rohter envisions “A Green Hawaii” by 2010. Economic policies supporting local business are expected to lead this transformation. Hawaiian public leaders are expected to copy and spread policies implemented by Kapolei and Waialua residents, who have decided to take over their future by rejecting the prevalent presence of large corporations on their land. In these districts, according to Rohter, communal decision-making has spread wealth among residents and established an economy less susceptible to systemic international market volatility.
Grandy’s “Hawai’i Becalmed” highlights the importance of specialization for the Hawaiian economy. It is important to note that specialization is a term never used in Grandy’s book but is interpreted in this paper as the author’s confidence in policies that do not prevent market forces from freely operating. For Grandy, it is counterproductive to prevent free market mechanisms from allocating scarce resources in the tourism sector when this industry features competitive advantages over other economic segments. Mass tourism in Hawaii has created jobs and increased tax revenues. Hawaiian residents would not have been enjoying high living standards today if the tourism industry were neglected by policy-makers.
Writing in early 2000s, the professor of Public Administration at UHM advocates a tight budget control. Hawaiian authorities have traditionally paid close attention to public expenses only during economic downturns. At these difficult periods, constituents tend to put more pressure on the government for further mitigation bills. Grandy argues that this reactive institutional behavior has resulted in acts and laws that have obstructed quick responses from private companies to help address looming recessions. This problem is amplified due to the excessive number of complicated and costly regulations. Grandy, in this context, suggests that Hawai’i’s economic growth should rely on an environment in which the private sector can freely and dynamically operates inside and outside state borders.
Part II – Main Risk and Benefit of Diversification
The main risk of diversifying investments is allocating resources in sectors that are not as competitive and productive as other industries. Tourism is the principal reason for economic growth in Hawai’i. Private and public investments in tourism infrastructure, accommodation, and various types of services have been responsible for the high living standards that Hawaiian residents enjoy in comparison with other states in the country. However, if the local government decides to create economic policies aiming the strengthening of other markets, it risks to deviate resources like capital, labor, and land to sectors that would not yield services and products as price-quality competitive as the tourism industry.
The frustrating attempt to build a high technology sector is an example. During the Cayetano administration (1994-2002), the public sector established a pool of tax credits and fiscal incentives for companies that were expected to attract high-paid jobs to the islands. This initiative, however, has not created as many jobs as expected and; in addition, resulted in a series of legislations that proven to be expensive to maintain and to promote rapid responses to moments of financial disequilibrium.
Diversification reduces unsystemic risks. As different sectors employ the workforce, the drawback of depending, for example, on foreign visitors from a single country to inject capital in the economy is minimized at times of economic uncertainty. In addition, a diversified economy tends to suffer less impact from international currencies’ fluctuation and the strengthening of different industries serves as a buffer for the local economy against market forces that are out of control in an increasingly globalized world.
Agriculture creates jobs. When more people work on their land planting and harvesting it not only creates jobs within an economic chain but also expands the local economy by propagating ripple effects throughout the food sector. Seeds, fertilizers, equipment, warehouses, wholesalers, and so on, are few businesses that greatly benefit from the multiplier effect of investments in foundation enterprises like agriculture.
Part III – Main Risk and Benefit of Specialization
The main risk of Hawai’i specializing itself in the tourism industry is wielding little control over the economy at times of international crisis. Hawai’i’s tourism industry depends heavily on overseas income. If for any reason tourists stop flying, the economy rapidly shrinks. Also, Hawai’i’s local authorities can do little to change the mood of travelers convincing them to board on planes, as September 11th 2001 exemplifies. In this context, local administrators of tourism destinations tend to function at the automatic mode while dealing with international markets ups and downs. They accelerate when visitors come and slow down when tourists sharply stop landing.
The economic crisis that hit Japan in the 80s and 90s demonstrate how much Hawai’i’s economy can be badly affected by the decline of tourist inflow. Hawai’i’s greatest economic slump happened between 1990 and 1997. The reason for this downturn was the sharp decline of Japanese tourists’ arrivals. As Japan’s economy struggled so did the Hawaiian. The result of this recession was high unemployment rates and inumerous social complaints.
The main benefit of specializing the local economy is the opportunity cost of tapping into the competitive advantage that Hawai’i presents in the tourism industry. It also makes easier and less expensive for legislators to come up with regulations that strengthen this sector. As more companies perceive local market rules as straightforward and inexpensive, more investments are made, better products and services derive from competition, and more jobs are created.
The tourism industry has been the main economic force in Hawaii since 1960s. When John Burns ruled the state from 1962 to 1974, he noticed that Hawai’i had unmatchable tourism advantages in comparison with other destinations in Asia and the US. Thus, this industry started receiving most of the attention from his and next cabinets, which largely helped the State’s economic growth from 1960’s onwards. Also, unemployment rates were kept as one of the lowest in the country. Honolulu, for example, still features one of the best quality of life nationwide and is recognized as one of the most liveable cities in the world.
Part IV – Analysis and Policy Suggestions
Hawai’i needs diversification in specialization. Tourism should continue driving the economy as the main source of capital attraction to and job creation in the islands. However, Hawai’i cannot target only the markets of Japan and the United States. China, South Korea, Europe, and Canada are economies that Hawaiian leaders should spend more time and money on elaborating marketing strategies and customer service training for visitors from these countries.
Hawaii also needs more local entrepreneurs investing in and managing the tourism sector. To address this, the state could provide special training – but not conditions – to residents. As more people who live in the islands invest their resources in tourism products and services, the economy is likely to become more competitive and diversified, more attractions are created, and more capital end up being reinvested in the islands. This initiative could also turn into a useful tool to reinvigorate environmental and cultural aspects of the islands.
Local leaders are requested to invest more in infrastructure. Traffic congestion, for example, is one of the main problems on Oahu nowadays. This problem not only affects a large part of residents but also the perception that tourists have about the main island of Hawaii. The investments in infrastructure, however, cannot be done without considering tax costs for residents, architectural impact on landscapes, and environmental concerns and long-term implications. Legislators and public administrators have to come up with strategies that improve living standards for residents by adding value to the islands as a tourism destination and not increasing fiscal burden on tax payers.
Finally, Hawaiian leaders must keep track of tax revenues and expenses during positive and negative economic moments. By doing so, public authorities create policies that would support the residents who have been severely affected by systemic international crises, which greatly reduce tourism activity in the islands. Welfare policies should be designed during the period of economic bonanza as this situation allows legislators to analyze more carefully the present and future costs of creating regulations that might hamper the State’s economic growth once the local economy gains momentum once again.
References
Grandy, Christopher. 2002. Hawai’i Becalmed. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press.
Rohter, Ira. 1992. A Green Hawaii. Honolulu: Nakane O Ka Malo Press.
Part I – Summaries
Ira Rohter’s “A Green Hawaii” defends the diversification of investments in the Hawaiian islands. The professor of Political Science at the University of Hawaii at Manoa (UHM) states that mass tourism has caused more harm than positive effects on the local economy. Most jobs created were not only low-paid but also the vast majority of profit made ended up outside the islands since corporations not controlled by local entrepreneurs owned mostly of facilities and services in the tourism industry.
Writing in the early nineties, Rohter envisions “A Green Hawaii” by 2010. Economic policies supporting local business are expected to lead this transformation. Hawaiian public leaders are expected to copy and spread policies implemented by Kapolei and Waialua residents, who have decided to take over their future by rejecting the prevalent presence of large corporations on their land. In these districts, according to Rohter, communal decision-making has spread wealth among residents and established an economy less susceptible to systemic international market volatility.
Grandy’s “Hawai’i Becalmed” highlights the importance of specialization for the Hawaiian economy. It is important to note that specialization is a term never used in Grandy’s book but is interpreted in this paper as the author’s confidence in policies that do not prevent market forces from freely operating. For Grandy, it is counterproductive to prevent free market mechanisms from allocating scarce resources in the tourism sector when this industry features competitive advantages over other economic segments. Mass tourism in Hawaii has created jobs and increased tax revenues. Hawaiian residents would not have been enjoying high living standards today if the tourism industry were neglected by policy-makers.
Writing in early 2000s, the professor of Public Administration at UHM advocates a tight budget control. Hawaiian authorities have traditionally paid close attention to public expenses only during economic downturns. At these difficult periods, constituents tend to put more pressure on the government for further mitigation bills. Grandy argues that this reactive institutional behavior has resulted in acts and laws that have obstructed quick responses from private companies to help address looming recessions. This problem is amplified due to the excessive number of complicated and costly regulations. Grandy, in this context, suggests that Hawai’i’s economic growth should rely on an environment in which the private sector can freely and dynamically operates inside and outside state borders.
Part II – Main Risk and Benefit of Diversification
The main risk of diversifying investments is allocating resources in sectors that are not as competitive and productive as other industries. Tourism is the principal reason for economic growth in Hawai’i. Private and public investments in tourism infrastructure, accommodation, and various types of services have been responsible for the high living standards that Hawaiian residents enjoy in comparison with other states in the country. However, if the local government decides to create economic policies aiming the strengthening of other markets, it risks to deviate resources like capital, labor, and land to sectors that would not yield services and products as price-quality competitive as the tourism industry.
The frustrating attempt to build a high technology sector is an example. During the Cayetano administration (1994-2002), the public sector established a pool of tax credits and fiscal incentives for companies that were expected to attract high-paid jobs to the islands. This initiative, however, has not created as many jobs as expected and; in addition, resulted in a series of legislations that proven to be expensive to maintain and to promote rapid responses to moments of financial disequilibrium.
Diversification reduces unsystemic risks. As different sectors employ the workforce, the drawback of depending, for example, on foreign visitors from a single country to inject capital in the economy is minimized at times of economic uncertainty. In addition, a diversified economy tends to suffer less impact from international currencies’ fluctuation and the strengthening of different industries serves as a buffer for the local economy against market forces that are out of control in an increasingly globalized world.
Agriculture creates jobs. When more people work on their land planting and harvesting it not only creates jobs within an economic chain but also expands the local economy by propagating ripple effects throughout the food sector. Seeds, fertilizers, equipment, warehouses, wholesalers, and so on, are few businesses that greatly benefit from the multiplier effect of investments in foundation enterprises like agriculture.
Part III – Main Risk and Benefit of Specialization
The main risk of Hawai’i specializing itself in the tourism industry is wielding little control over the economy at times of international crisis. Hawai’i’s tourism industry depends heavily on overseas income. If for any reason tourists stop flying, the economy rapidly shrinks. Also, Hawai’i’s local authorities can do little to change the mood of travelers convincing them to board on planes, as September 11th 2001 exemplifies. In this context, local administrators of tourism destinations tend to function at the automatic mode while dealing with international markets ups and downs. They accelerate when visitors come and slow down when tourists sharply stop landing.
The economic crisis that hit Japan in the 80s and 90s demonstrate how much Hawai’i’s economy can be badly affected by the decline of tourist inflow. Hawai’i’s greatest economic slump happened between 1990 and 1997. The reason for this downturn was the sharp decline of Japanese tourists’ arrivals. As Japan’s economy struggled so did the Hawaiian. The result of this recession was high unemployment rates and inumerous social complaints.
The main benefit of specializing the local economy is the opportunity cost of tapping into the competitive advantage that Hawai’i presents in the tourism industry. It also makes easier and less expensive for legislators to come up with regulations that strengthen this sector. As more companies perceive local market rules as straightforward and inexpensive, more investments are made, better products and services derive from competition, and more jobs are created.
The tourism industry has been the main economic force in Hawaii since 1960s. When John Burns ruled the state from 1962 to 1974, he noticed that Hawai’i had unmatchable tourism advantages in comparison with other destinations in Asia and the US. Thus, this industry started receiving most of the attention from his and next cabinets, which largely helped the State’s economic growth from 1960’s onwards. Also, unemployment rates were kept as one of the lowest in the country. Honolulu, for example, still features one of the best quality of life nationwide and is recognized as one of the most liveable cities in the world.
Part IV – Analysis and Policy Suggestions
Hawai’i needs diversification in specialization. Tourism should continue driving the economy as the main source of capital attraction to and job creation in the islands. However, Hawai’i cannot target only the markets of Japan and the United States. China, South Korea, Europe, and Canada are economies that Hawaiian leaders should spend more time and money on elaborating marketing strategies and customer service training for visitors from these countries.
Hawaii also needs more local entrepreneurs investing in and managing the tourism sector. To address this, the state could provide special training – but not conditions – to residents. As more people who live in the islands invest their resources in tourism products and services, the economy is likely to become more competitive and diversified, more attractions are created, and more capital end up being reinvested in the islands. This initiative could also turn into a useful tool to reinvigorate environmental and cultural aspects of the islands.
Local leaders are requested to invest more in infrastructure. Traffic congestion, for example, is one of the main problems on Oahu nowadays. This problem not only affects a large part of residents but also the perception that tourists have about the main island of Hawaii. The investments in infrastructure, however, cannot be done without considering tax costs for residents, architectural impact on landscapes, and environmental concerns and long-term implications. Legislators and public administrators have to come up with strategies that improve living standards for residents by adding value to the islands as a tourism destination and not increasing fiscal burden on tax payers.
Finally, Hawaiian leaders must keep track of tax revenues and expenses during positive and negative economic moments. By doing so, public authorities create policies that would support the residents who have been severely affected by systemic international crises, which greatly reduce tourism activity in the islands. Welfare policies should be designed during the period of economic bonanza as this situation allows legislators to analyze more carefully the present and future costs of creating regulations that might hamper the State’s economic growth once the local economy gains momentum once again.
References
Grandy, Christopher. 2002. Hawai’i Becalmed. Honolulu: University of Hawai’i Press.
Rohter, Ira. 1992. A Green Hawaii. Honolulu: Nakane O Ka Malo Press.
sexta-feira, 17 de dezembro de 2010
Kanehmann: Public Policy and Happiness
Daniel Kanehmann presented at TED Talks his findings on the relation between public policies and happiness.
His triggered question was: “Can public policies make people live happier?”
The Princeton professor starts off by defining happiness. There are two ways to perceive it. First, experiencing yourself, which relates to continuous life; and second, by remembering yourself through stories.
The founder of Behavioral Economics continued highlighting the importance of understanding how memory affects decision-making processes. The last emotion felt generally has the greatest impact.
He went on by stating that money and goals are two mechanisms to control happiness.
His team found out that money does not buy happiness, but households earning more than 60.000 dollars annually are more satisfied than those who live under this threshold.
Policy makers, therefore, have to be wary of policies addressing unhappiness. Money is not a panacea for every social problem but a punchline might be.
http://www.ted.com/talks/daniel_kahneman_the_riddle_of_experience_vs_memory.html
His triggered question was: “Can public policies make people live happier?”
The Princeton professor starts off by defining happiness. There are two ways to perceive it. First, experiencing yourself, which relates to continuous life; and second, by remembering yourself through stories.
The founder of Behavioral Economics continued highlighting the importance of understanding how memory affects decision-making processes. The last emotion felt generally has the greatest impact.
He went on by stating that money and goals are two mechanisms to control happiness.
His team found out that money does not buy happiness, but households earning more than 60.000 dollars annually are more satisfied than those who live under this threshold.
Policy makers, therefore, have to be wary of policies addressing unhappiness. Money is not a panacea for every social problem but a punchline might be.
http://www.ted.com/talks/daniel_kahneman_the_riddle_of_experience_vs_memory.html
Mulgan: Crisis and Innovation
Geoff Mulgan gave a talk about crisis and innovation at TED Talks in 2009.
The former assistant of Tony Blair for public policy affairs believes that 2008 economic crisis signifies a great opportunity for rethinking capitalism.
Leaders and societies are expected to invest less in large corporations and networks and more, maybe 1% of GDP, in social entrepreneurship.
Young entrepreneurs should receive this money since they understand that coming generations seek businesses that add on relationships, empathy, compassion, and care, not consuming bare products and services.
A disciple of Michael Young, the founder of Open University, Mulgan argues that public policies have to undergo thorough experiments before turning consumption societies into sustainable ones.
Best innovations usually come from intelligent leaders who daily face social deprivation. Ideas that change lives are polished by practice, not literature.
Quoting Young, Mulgan concludes: “If you see a problem, you shouldn’t tell someone to act, you should act on it yourself”.
http://www.ted.com/talks/geoff_mulgan_post_crash_investing_in_a_better_world_1.html
The former assistant of Tony Blair for public policy affairs believes that 2008 economic crisis signifies a great opportunity for rethinking capitalism.
Leaders and societies are expected to invest less in large corporations and networks and more, maybe 1% of GDP, in social entrepreneurship.
Young entrepreneurs should receive this money since they understand that coming generations seek businesses that add on relationships, empathy, compassion, and care, not consuming bare products and services.
A disciple of Michael Young, the founder of Open University, Mulgan argues that public policies have to undergo thorough experiments before turning consumption societies into sustainable ones.
Best innovations usually come from intelligent leaders who daily face social deprivation. Ideas that change lives are polished by practice, not literature.
Quoting Young, Mulgan concludes: “If you see a problem, you shouldn’t tell someone to act, you should act on it yourself”.
http://www.ted.com/talks/geoff_mulgan_post_crash_investing_in_a_better_world_1.html
quarta-feira, 15 de dezembro de 2010
Brazil in 60 Minutes
(Wrote the text below because I am an eyewitness, after living over 25 years in São Paulo and travelling throughout the country, that injustice is not an exception but a rule in the Brazilian society and because I do not agree with politicians and economists who claim that we, the civil society, first need to accumulate capital and then work towards social cooperation to overcome daunting public challenges)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=co1cwVXhHQc&feature=player_embedded
An American friend sent me today the link above and affirmed that after watching this video I would be proud of being Brazilian.
Indeed, I got really happy to see that my country has created many jobs and attracted billions of dollars to the economy over the last decade.
However, I wonder what positions have been opened, if the poorest are living better, if this international propaganda of economic growth derives from comprehensive public policies and legal enforcement.
Honestly, I am cynical about Brazil’s future. Injustice is everywhere.
To illustrate, I share three short stories I have read recently on Brazil’s largest online newspaper.
Marco Paulo dos Santos, an intern at the Superior Court of Justice, was fired by the head of this court, Ari Pargendler. The reason for being publicly humiliated was not following Pargendler's orders to keep distance while he was withdrawing money from ATM. Santos, a Black undergraduate law student, was standing in line like any other person waiting for his turn. Pargendler, Caucasian, is still ahead of the Superior Court.
Edson Néris da Silva was beat up to death by a group of young people downtown São Paulo. For these self-proclaimed Neo-Nazi adolescents, the crime of Edson was justified because he walked hand in hand with his male partner. The police arrested 20 suspects, two of them women, but all are free and back to the streets.
José Jesus da Silva is an Indian Pataxó shot dead in the back few months ago. His friends stated that this ambush was caused by a dispute over land against landowners. Pataxó Indians have outspoken that they have been waiting for 28 years to the Supreme Court invalidate irregular titles assigned to farmers. 23 Indians have died so far and none of the farmers as a result of this dispute.
What Marco, Edson, and José share in common is that they do not belong to Brazil’s mainstream social class. They are part of the minority and their voices are rarely heard by those in power. As Brazilian leaders historically and systematically turn blind eyes to obvious cases of the violation of justice, this continental country will continue fighting against the burdens of deep social inequality and being considered a rising star only for the few fortunate rich prisoners living behind high electric fences.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=co1cwVXhHQc&feature=player_embedded
An American friend sent me today the link above and affirmed that after watching this video I would be proud of being Brazilian.
Indeed, I got really happy to see that my country has created many jobs and attracted billions of dollars to the economy over the last decade.
However, I wonder what positions have been opened, if the poorest are living better, if this international propaganda of economic growth derives from comprehensive public policies and legal enforcement.
Honestly, I am cynical about Brazil’s future. Injustice is everywhere.
To illustrate, I share three short stories I have read recently on Brazil’s largest online newspaper.
Marco Paulo dos Santos, an intern at the Superior Court of Justice, was fired by the head of this court, Ari Pargendler. The reason for being publicly humiliated was not following Pargendler's orders to keep distance while he was withdrawing money from ATM. Santos, a Black undergraduate law student, was standing in line like any other person waiting for his turn. Pargendler, Caucasian, is still ahead of the Superior Court.
Edson Néris da Silva was beat up to death by a group of young people downtown São Paulo. For these self-proclaimed Neo-Nazi adolescents, the crime of Edson was justified because he walked hand in hand with his male partner. The police arrested 20 suspects, two of them women, but all are free and back to the streets.
José Jesus da Silva is an Indian Pataxó shot dead in the back few months ago. His friends stated that this ambush was caused by a dispute over land against landowners. Pataxó Indians have outspoken that they have been waiting for 28 years to the Supreme Court invalidate irregular titles assigned to farmers. 23 Indians have died so far and none of the farmers as a result of this dispute.
What Marco, Edson, and José share in common is that they do not belong to Brazil’s mainstream social class. They are part of the minority and their voices are rarely heard by those in power. As Brazilian leaders historically and systematically turn blind eyes to obvious cases of the violation of justice, this continental country will continue fighting against the burdens of deep social inequality and being considered a rising star only for the few fortunate rich prisoners living behind high electric fences.
domingo, 5 de dezembro de 2010
Culture, Sovereignty, and Diversity
Today my classmates and I joined Professor Jill from PUBA for a visit at Ka’ala Farm on Waianae, West coast of Oahu. After learning more about ahupua’a and reflecting briefly on the relation between culture preservation and Hawai’i’s sovereignty, a friend made the following comment:
“It seems that Hawai’i’s sovereignty movement is less about race and more about cultural preservation. What do you think?”
Dana, I guess you are right. Observing the flow of this issue, I see many no-Hawaiians also vehemently supporting the complete independence of local political decisions from White House’s orders and tax systems. This already large and growing number of activists claim that they need to be recognized as citizens of a Nation-State because Hawaiian history and culture are fairly different from mainland’s.
I believe that an appropriate followed up question to your comment would be: “Does Hawai’i need supremacy over land to preserve indigenous culture? Also, what is culture and how it evolves?”
I understand that complete control over natural resources not necessarily lead to cultural preservation. Stalin had absolute power over agriculture; however, his sanguinary land collectivization program did not succeed in establishing a common set of Russian values, traditions, and beliefs among minority groups. By saying this, I am not implying that Kamehameha Schools plan to rule the islands as the Soviet dictator, but it seems that Hawaiian leaders are engaging in Sisyphus work to pass regulations like the Akaka Bill when the archipelago is nowadays a tremendous melting pot, as Yoko recalled. The main strength of Hawaiian contemporary culture lies exactly in the gray area where it overlaps with other traditions. Butch, our host this morning, and his devotedness for sharing Hawaiian traditions and taro, even though being haole, epitomizes how far transformational cultures can reach and deeply inspire.
As far as culture is concerned, I believe this phenomenon is continuously evolving. To illustrate, I remember vividly how each person in our class introduced him/herself this morning. The foreign students, except Eric from litigious Tibet, spoke up their respective countries' name. The Americans who were not from Hawai'i mentioned home states and sometimes city, like Rachel. And the ones who were born and raised in the islands proudly highlighted the districts where they grew up. These general and specific ways of introducing ourselves depict identity, which is inextricably linked to cultural analyzes, as a concept shaped by contrasting us from the others, by portraying a unique background before apparent similar fellows.
Differentiation is necessary for every culture to thrive. I feel more Canarinho when I am abroad. You certainly see yourself as more American when overseas, Hawaiian when travelling across mainland, Oahu resident when chatting with someone from neighbor islands, and Kaneohe passionate while debating against locals from other districts. These convenient identities we strategically assume depending on the context we are navigating are integral parts of every cultural process. We need to be different to be equal. And we are equals just because you and I have our special - and respectful - ways of perceiving and valuing things and phenomena surrounding us.
Sovereignty itself, therefore, does not preserve or forcefully helps cultures. Diversity does. The more Hawaiians understand that these islands are uncommon worldwide not only because of the fabulous weather and high living standards but mainly because of the various types of cultures that have settled here, the more indicators residents and no-residents alike will find available to compare, reinforce, and re-create their own manners to interact with tradition and modernity. As our friend James expressed on the way back to town: “My parents are Korean, I was born and raised in California, but surprisingly feel more interested in the Hawaiian culture”. This intriguing statement reveals that culture is a matter of choice, not race, that we shape by taking into account the values we have been exposed to and singular personal preferences.
Hawai’i is diverse and diversity is that preserves and appreciates the Aloha spirit within and beyond the Pacific waves.
PS. Once again, thanks for the ride, donuts, and water. Mahalo!
“It seems that Hawai’i’s sovereignty movement is less about race and more about cultural preservation. What do you think?”
Dana, I guess you are right. Observing the flow of this issue, I see many no-Hawaiians also vehemently supporting the complete independence of local political decisions from White House’s orders and tax systems. This already large and growing number of activists claim that they need to be recognized as citizens of a Nation-State because Hawaiian history and culture are fairly different from mainland’s.
I believe that an appropriate followed up question to your comment would be: “Does Hawai’i need supremacy over land to preserve indigenous culture? Also, what is culture and how it evolves?”
I understand that complete control over natural resources not necessarily lead to cultural preservation. Stalin had absolute power over agriculture; however, his sanguinary land collectivization program did not succeed in establishing a common set of Russian values, traditions, and beliefs among minority groups. By saying this, I am not implying that Kamehameha Schools plan to rule the islands as the Soviet dictator, but it seems that Hawaiian leaders are engaging in Sisyphus work to pass regulations like the Akaka Bill when the archipelago is nowadays a tremendous melting pot, as Yoko recalled. The main strength of Hawaiian contemporary culture lies exactly in the gray area where it overlaps with other traditions. Butch, our host this morning, and his devotedness for sharing Hawaiian traditions and taro, even though being haole, epitomizes how far transformational cultures can reach and deeply inspire.
As far as culture is concerned, I believe this phenomenon is continuously evolving. To illustrate, I remember vividly how each person in our class introduced him/herself this morning. The foreign students, except Eric from litigious Tibet, spoke up their respective countries' name. The Americans who were not from Hawai'i mentioned home states and sometimes city, like Rachel. And the ones who were born and raised in the islands proudly highlighted the districts where they grew up. These general and specific ways of introducing ourselves depict identity, which is inextricably linked to cultural analyzes, as a concept shaped by contrasting us from the others, by portraying a unique background before apparent similar fellows.
Differentiation is necessary for every culture to thrive. I feel more Canarinho when I am abroad. You certainly see yourself as more American when overseas, Hawaiian when travelling across mainland, Oahu resident when chatting with someone from neighbor islands, and Kaneohe passionate while debating against locals from other districts. These convenient identities we strategically assume depending on the context we are navigating are integral parts of every cultural process. We need to be different to be equal. And we are equals just because you and I have our special - and respectful - ways of perceiving and valuing things and phenomena surrounding us.
Sovereignty itself, therefore, does not preserve or forcefully helps cultures. Diversity does. The more Hawaiians understand that these islands are uncommon worldwide not only because of the fabulous weather and high living standards but mainly because of the various types of cultures that have settled here, the more indicators residents and no-residents alike will find available to compare, reinforce, and re-create their own manners to interact with tradition and modernity. As our friend James expressed on the way back to town: “My parents are Korean, I was born and raised in California, but surprisingly feel more interested in the Hawaiian culture”. This intriguing statement reveals that culture is a matter of choice, not race, that we shape by taking into account the values we have been exposed to and singular personal preferences.
Hawai’i is diverse and diversity is that preserves and appreciates the Aloha spirit within and beyond the Pacific waves.
PS. Once again, thanks for the ride, donuts, and water. Mahalo!
Assinar:
Postagens (Atom)