Floods of stupidity

Large parts of the UK are currently completely underwater from floods and storms that have battered the lengthy coastline of this little island. Some people will immediately point out that this demonstrates the power of climate change to impact even the richest countries on the planet. I, however, would argue that the response to the floods merely demonstrates the complete and utter uselessness of politicians in the UK (and possibly elsewhere).

On the absolute stupidest level of complete denial, we have the United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP). Their leader, Nigel Farage, has claimed that such enormous floods have nothing to do with a changing climate, they're “just weather”. Another member of the same party has managed to appear an even bigger fool, by claiming that the floods are God's punishment for gay marriage – yes, in the year 2014, someone really said that out loud. Meanwhile, the former Conservative chancellor Nigel Lawson has said that the floods demonstrate why we shouldn't build wind turbines in the countryside – I won't insult your intelligence any further by trying to explain his reasoning.

This complete scientific illiteracy coming from marginal politicians would be laughable if it weren't being mirrored in more subtle ways by the government itself. There has been a lot of discussion about how to best avoid future flooding, and a number of Conservatives have claimed that dredging the rivers would do the trick – that is, removing the build up of silt from the banks of the rivers to allow water to flow more freely. In actual fact, this wouldn't do a lot – it would primarily just move the water downstream at a quicker rate, simply flooding a different town. So if it's not actually a useful response, why are so many politicians suddenly pushing it?

The most sensible response to the issue would be to accept that flooding is here to stay. Because of the changing climate, the UK will start to experience more and more bad winter storms like these in the years to come – perhaps not every year, but certainly on a more regular basis than previously. And if flooding is here to stay, we should engineer our rivers to collect flood water on land that has been set aside specifically for the purpose of being flooded – essentially creating a small lake that will flood each year in the winter and then drain in the summer. This will collect most of the flood waters, reducing their impacts on towns and villages.

But that will not be suggested by the politicians, because it would mean converting agricultural land back to natural land – rich landowners wouldn't be able to plant any crops on this new flood land, which means they would lose out on a fraction of the generous subsidies they receive from the British government and the European Union. The rich landowners would rather see the people in rural towns and villages get flooded instead, despite the devastation it causes to these communities. And, because this is the way things happen in the UK, when the rich want something, they get it. Hence, the politicians suggest useless dredging rather than any serious solutions.

In the end, then, this is not so much an issue of climate change as it is an issue of political will. As long as it suits the government and the landowners of the UK to do nothing, nothing will get done, and we will continue to suggest minor changes that will not really impact on the problem. It's time for the UK to understand that these floods are a wake-up call – to realize that climate change is not going away, and eventually we will have to take real action to deal with it, even if it hurts the rich while benefiting the poor.

[ UK climate change, UKIP, Nigel Farage, gay marriage, scientific illiteracy, marginal politicians, UK flooding ]

Death is cheap in Florida

This week has seen the culmination of a trial in Florida which has, well, not exactly gripped the nation. In fact, beyond a few news stories here and there, and the occasional blog, it's actually been pretty quiet – mainly because this is the kind of story that is happening increasingly often in the USA, and it's becoming increasingly difficult to work up the level of shock and anger it deserves. The case involves a white man named Michael Dunn who stopped off at a gas station with his girlfriend on the way to a hotel. The car next to his was full of black teenagers who were playing loud music. Dunn apparently told his girlfriend how much he hated 'thug' music, and when she went inside to buy some groceries and pay for the fuel, he confronted the kids in the car. They refused to turn the music down, and things took a turn for the worse.

Dunn claims one of the teenagers flashed a gun at him (although no gun has ever been found), and he responded by shooting the boy, and then firing more shots into the car as it sped away. By the time the shooting victim could receive medical attention, it was too late – he was dead. Dunn, meanwhile, simply drove to his hotel and ordered a pizza. Now a jury in Florida has found Dunn guilty of attempted murder – for shooting at the other three inhabitants of the car as it drove away – but delivered a hung verdict on whether he killed Jordan Davis, the dead teen. Yes, somehow they were sure that he was trying to kill three of the teenagers he shot at, but not sure whether he was responsible for killing the one that he actually hit with a bullet. Dunn faces decades in prison anyway, and there will be a retrial on the hung verdict, but the case has still angered many who see it as another example of a white man killing a young black person and getting away with it.

That's right - another one, because this is starting to happen with alarming regularity in the US. There is, of course, the famous case of Trayvon Martin, who was walking home from a local shop with a bag of Skittles when a neighbourhood watch officer, George Zimmerman started following him, and eventually shot him dead. Zimmerman claimed self-defence, and was acquitted. In other parts of the country, similar events have taken place. Near Detroit, a young black woman got into a car accident, and knocked on a nearby house to ask for assistance. Instead, she received a shotgun blast to the head. The shooter has been charged with murder, with the trial set for June, but it took days of concerted publicity for the case before the police acted. An almost identical event took place a few months before, this time in Charlotte, North Carolina, when a black man who had been in a car accident knocked on a door for help. The homeowners called the police, and when the police turned up and the man ran towards them, they shot him several times. He also died. The officer in question has been charged with 'voluntary manslaughter', meaning the shooting is considered self-defence. Self-defence against an unarmed man who had just crashed his car.

Essentially, in large parts of the US it seems to be almost legal to shoot black people who are found in the wrong place at the wrong time. You might be charged with murder, but it's rare to be convicted – remember, even Michael Dunn has not been found guilty of actually killing a black teenager, only of trying to kill them. Black youths are seen as lesser people, as people who need to stay in their place, and as people who are inherently threatening to the white community. And, of course, this verdict comes at the same time that the American media is relentlessly attacking Russia for its treatment of gay people – a treatment which is almost exactly the same as America's treatment of black people. Both countries are treating a portion of their population as second class citizens and as less-than-human – but only one of them is being openly hypocritical about it.

[ Michael Dunn, Jordan Davis, Trayvon Martin, George Zimmerman, shotgun blast to head, using gun, killing black people, American media, treatment of gay people ]

The hypocrisy of humanitarianism

A few days ago, the UN released a long-awaited report on human rights abuses in North Korea. It comes as little surprise to hear that the government of the Hermit Kingdom is abusing its own citizens, but the actual details of that abuse remain sobering. Collective punishment continues (though the report found it isn’t as widespread as initially believed), with entire families imprisoned for the crimes of a single member; freedom of speech is non-existent; hunger is rife, partially due to the poor state of the North Korean economy, but also because of the government reserving food for the most ‘useful’ citizens and the army; freedom of movement is severely constrained, with access to the relatively luxurious capital of Pyongyang only available to those who show loyalty to the party; and, of course, there are the labour camps – unimaginably grim places in which ‘enemies’ of the regime are worked to death, starved, beaten, tortured, and forced to kill their own children. The UN have even compared the crimes of the regime to those of the Nazis.

At the moment, and perhaps for the next week or two, there will be outrage in the western newspapers and the governments of Europe and North America will make statements condemning Kim Jong-un and his fellow leaders. The North Korean leaders are committing some of the gravest crimes against humanity ever seen, and the USA and others must be seen to stand up against them. But what will be done to actually change the situation for ordinary North Koreans? Despite continual claims by the west to humanitarian goals and a desire to spread democracy, nothing will be done to aid this slowly dying country.

Humanitarian intervention has, of course, happened before – some countries have been deemed to be behaving so badly towards their population that the west has no choice but to get involved and set things straight. Curiously, these countries always tend to be the ones with the most oil – Iraq, Libya, possibly Syria in the future – or the ones which crossed a line and attacked a superpower – such as Afghanistan. This is, of course, just a coincidence – there’s no way that decisions on humanitarian intervention would be based on the profit and benefits that could accrue to the west, because that wouldn’t be a very humanitarian way of looking at things, would it?

Truthfully, North Korea’s leaders know they can continue on their current path without facing the consequences of military attack or a withdrawal of food aid. Korea has no oil, and few major natural resources in general, so the west has no pressing need to bring it onside. It also has the backing of a superpower, China, and is at least tolerated by another member of the UN Security Council, Russia. Ultimately, intervening in North Korea would bring no benefits and a whole lot of hassle to the west, so I’m sure we’ll find that the lives of North Koreans are not as important as the lives of the Iraqis and Afghans we ‘liberated’ from their dictatorships.

Once again, this seems like an example of the hypocrisy of western governments – preaching humanitarian aims while really only considering the geopolitical economics of profit and loss for themselves. Those governments need to eventually decide what it is they really stand for – either the lives of the unprofitable North Koreans are as important as those of the oil-rich Iraqis, or they’re not. It’s time for the west to be honest about its values, and admit that they sometimes have to put ethics aside in the name of politics.

ana shell media, ana shell media press, behaving badly towards population, collective punishment continues, crimes against humanity, dictatorships, enemies of regime, entire families imprisoned, force to kill children, freedom of movement, freedom of speech, geopolitical economics, government of the Hermit Kingdom, governments of Europe, human rights, human rights abuses in North Korea, humanitarian aims, humanitarian goals,humanitarian intervention, hypocrisy of humanitarianism, hypocrisy of western governments, Kim Jong-un, labour camps, long-awaited report, military attack, natural resources, North America, North Korean economy, North Korean leaders, oil-rich Iraqis, Pyongyang, rife hunger, show loyalty to party, spread democracy, UN Security Council, western newspapers, withdrawal of food aid, work to death

Welcome to the Everywhere War

This week the US government publicly admitted that it is building a case against an American citizen that it claims is a member of Al-Qaeda who is planning terrorist attacks against America. Ordinarily, this wouldn’t be shocking news – the various branches of justice in the US build cases against people for illegal activities all the time, and terrorism is certainly an illegal activity. However, this case is remarkable because the end result of the folder of evidence being put together will not be a trial before a judge and jury in a court of law. Instead, if the justice department puts together a convincing enough case, the CIA will be authorized to immediately kill the man with a drone strike from the skies above whichever country he is currently hiding in.

No trial is needed, it seems; and the man will not be given the chance to defend himself, as is usually the right of every American citizen who is accused of a crime. Instead, a combination of bureaucrats and politicians, with President Obama ultimately at its head, will become judge, jury, and executioner of this man, and quite possibly of many of the people around him at the time the CIA strikes, who will no doubt find their own lives being taken as ‘collateral damage’.

This isn’t the first time such an attack will have happened, of course, although it does seem to set a precedent for the US government openly admitting that it is considering assassinating one of its own people. A US citizen and Muslim cleric named Anwar al-Awlaki was killed by a drone strike in Yemen in 2011, with similar justifications from the government. Equally, if we put aside the issue of American citizenship, countless others have been murdered by US drone strikes over the past few years on the basis of confidential information that we are not allowed to see – but the justice department, the military, and the US government all assure us that anyone killed was definitely an ‘enemy combatant’.

We are now in the middle of what geographer Derek Gregory calls ‘the everywhere war’ – an unannounced worldwide conflict in which every nation is a potential battlefield and every person a potential target. Gregory points to the militarization of the US-Mexico border and the use of computer viruses against Iranian nuclear reactors as examples of the worldwide spread of this war. Sticking with the Middle East, the US has essentially extended its war against Afghanistan into Pakistan, where it constantly conducts air and even ground raids in its attempt to find members of Al-Qaeda and the Taliban. That war has extended again across the gulf to Yemen, where regular drone strikes have stirred up such resentment that the country is constantly on the brink of revolutionary collapse. Such a collapse would, of course, give the US even more reason to continue with the strikes to defeat a new ‘radical’ government. The normal rules of war do not seem to apply – the US feels it can attack whoever it wants whenever it wants with complete impunity, all in the name of ‘national security’.

Some of the blame for this ‘everywhere war’ must lay with Al-Qaeda and Islamic militants themselves, of course, who have attacked indiscriminately. But the US needs to be held to higher standards than the people it calls terrorists. It needs to approach things in a manner that respects the law, precisely to show that it is different from Al-Qaeda. And randomly exterminating people without trial simply because they happen to be in the poor, underdeveloped nations that these extremists are targeting, is not going to demonstrate to the world that the US is morally superior. The US government is becoming bolder about its belief that it can target anyone it wants with this week’s announcement – but it needs to reverse that policy, and quickly.

American citizen who is accused of a crime, ana shell media, ana shell media press, Anwar al-Awlaki, branches of justice, building a case, collateral damage, Derek Gregory, enemy combatant, illegal activity,Iranian nuclear reactors, member of Al-Qaeda, militarization of US-Mexico border, national security, on the basis of confidential information, planning terrorist attacks, potential battlefield, potential target, President Obama, publicly admit, remarkable case, respect the law, revolutionary collapse, shocking news, terrorist attacks against America, the everywhere war, underdeveloped nations, US drone strikes, US government, use of computer viruses, worldwide conflict

Is Europe breaking down?

The EU has been rocked in the past few days by the news coming out of a country that doesn’t even belong to the 28-country bloc – Switzerland. The highly complex Swiss political system allows for regular national referenda to be held on issues of popular concern, if enough signatures can be gathered to put a measure on the ballot. The right-wing Swiss People’s Party managed to promote a referendum on the issue of restricting immigration – not just from Africa and Asia as we might expect, but even from other European countries. No-one expected it to pass, and polls in the last week suggested it would fail. But on the day of the vote the measure passed with 50.3% in favour and 49.7% against.

The implications are already worrying people across the continent, although the Swiss government has three years in which to draw up legislation to implement the vote – and will presumably be looking to do so in the least restrictive way possible, as much of Switzerland’s wealth comes through freedom of people and capital. Although Switzerland is outside the EU, it currently reaps all the major benefits of membership, including tariff-free trade and free movement. This vote puts all of that in jeopardy, and EU members like France have already suggested that it will mean re-examining the European relationship with Switzerland. All in all, it seems like an insane decision by the Swiss voters, and one which will damage them just as much as it will harm the rest of the continent.

That’s not to say Switzerland doesn’t have a certain amount of form on backwards referenda decisions. In 2009, the country voted to ban the construction of minarets on mosques, in a campaign that was marked by controversial race-baiting posters designed by the Swiss People’s Party. However, this latest vote feel more significant in terms of the resurgence of right-wing feeling in Switzerland and across Europe, as it suggests that ill-feeling towards foreigners is expanding from the usual targets of Africans and Arabs towards fellow Europeans. In the midst of an economic recession that shows no signs of ending anytime soon, Europeans have begun to turn on one another – the Greeks blame the Germans for their problems, the British blame the Romanians, the Ukrainians blame the Russians, and, it seems, the Swiss blame everybody but themselves. In this atmosphere, the Swiss People’s Party currently receive over 25% of the vote in Switzerland, and the equally anti-European United Kingdom Independence Party are set to come second in the forthcoming EU elections, ahead of the Conservative party that currently leads the government in the UK. The rest of Europe has not escaped the rise of this right-wing sentiment, and I’ll discuss some other examples in future blogs.

Ultimately, this intra-European tension helps nobody, and the idea of Switzerland, one of the richest countries in the world and vital part of the global economy, closing its borders seems ridiculous to everyone except the Swiss voters themselves. However, it does highlight the increasing tension which needs to be worked out within Europe – perhaps the wealthiest and most fortunate area on the planet, but which still contains so many people who feel left behind and excluded from the modern economy. This is clear in the breakdown of the Swiss vote, with rich, cosmopolitan areas like Geneva and Zurich voting strongly against the motion, but the rural areas that still rely on agriculture voting strongly in favour. In the modern European economy, some are winning while others continue to lose and to feel that their place in the world is slowly being eroded. The Swiss vote shows how vital it is to turn that situation around and ensure everyone is included and made to feel listened to – whether city-dweller, farmer, citizen, immigrant, or otherwise.

agriculture voting, ana shell media, ana shell media press, anti-European United Kingdom Independence Party, benefits of membership, British blame Romanians,Conservative party, construction of minarets on mosques, cosmopolitan areas, economic recession, EU elections, Europe breaking down, European relationship with Switzerland, free movement, freedom of people, global economy, Greeks blame Germans, implement the vote, intra-European tension, lead the government, modern economy, modern European economy, one of the richest countries in the world, promote a referendum, race-baiting posters, regular national referenda, restricting immigration, right-wing Swiss People's Party, Swiss government, Swiss political system, Swiss voters, Switzerland's wealth,tariff-free trade, Ukrainians blame Russians

A Sweet Advert, but a Bitter Taste

American television loves sporting events. It loves them because they're popular, but it also loves them because they provide numerous opportunities for commercial breaks, which at this point are pretty much the primary art form in North America. During the recent Superbowl and the Sochi Winter Olympics opening ceremony, Coca-Cola used these commercial breaks to air an advert which would appeal to the emotions of the millions of viewers and get them to buy more of the weird sugary brown water that they sell. The spot featured a number of children singing 'America the Beautiful' in a range of languages, highlighting the diversity of the USA and the ability for people from all backgrounds to come together and celebrate the history and achievements of the country. It's an incredibly cheesy advert, which rather obviously plays on the 'cute kids' angle, but I guess it does its job.

However, some of the viewers of this harmless commercial have been outraged. A number of people on Twitter and Facebook, among other places, have been arguing that English is the national language of the US, and songs like 'America the Beautiful' should only ever be sung in English. This ignores several important things – such as the fact that the US does not have an 'official language', and that the original European settlers spoke Dutch, French, German, Swedish, and Spanish for hundreds of years before English became the de facto national language. But it does highlight the growing tensions between white, English-speaking Americans, and those from other backgrounds – particularly Latinos.

The US has long been a nation of immigrants, and has so many Spanish speakers that it will soon be the majority language. There are Chinatowns in every major city, where Mandarin and Cantonese are regularly heard. There are even pockets of French speakers in states like Maine near the Canadian border. In theory, language shouldn't be a big issue in the US – the diversity of tongues should simply be an everyday fact that people have adjusted to. But it isn't. It remains a highly emotive issue that is able to whip part of the country into a nationalistic, borderline-racist frenzy. This shows how well conservatives in the US have done in moving the debate away from economics and towards culture.

Look at the so-called 'Tea Party' for instance – the ultra-conservative movement that sprang up in the wake of Obama's 2008 election. Many of the people complaining about the Coca-Cola advert have no doubt voted for or otherwise supported Tea Party candidates in the past. The movement is most popular in the poorest states, but it is bankrolled by some of the richest people in the country. The result is a movement which ignores the low wages, corporate subsidies, and exporting of jobs to Mexico and China which keep its members poor, and instead blames 'foreigners', Latinos, Muslims, the disabled, and the unemployed for their problems. The response to the Coca-Cola advert is the latest example – the idea that the big problem facing America is its languages, rather than its economic policies and institutionalized inequality, would be laughable if so many people didn't believe it.

This focus on cultural issues rather than economic ones is a masterstroke by the rich elites that run these social movements – they have got the poor white English-speakers of the US to focus their hatred on other marginalized groups, rather than realizing their similarities and combining their power to focus on the rich and the corporations who are encouraging inequality and poverty in order to line their own pockets. And as long as this continues, we will keep seeing ridiculous controversies like the one over this commercial.

[ sporting events, coca-cola, sochi winter olympics, america the beautiful, twitter, facebook, tea party, economic policies, social movements ]

Low-cost electricity and capital outflows

How much can be earned off of the global energy problems facing developing markets? It’s possible to earn a lot, and regularly.

“We’re providing countries with the unique opportunity to participate in integrating their companies into this new business,” says one Ana Shell Fund employee. “We are inviting developing markets to learn how generating electricity using syngas produced via the gasification of renewable resources like agricultural waste and city garbage can lower the cost of a kW/h to around $.02 USD. Sometimes less.”

Countries in South-East Asia are at a high risk of a “sudden stop” of foreign capital flows, and therefore need to obtain access to low-cost electricity as soon as possible. In the opinion of Morgan Stanley London office analysts Manoj Pradhan and Patrick Drozdzik, India, Indonesia, Mexico and Thailand may experience an exodus of capital investment because investors tend to shy away from developing markets.

Ana Shell Fund’s comments on reforming the energy industry have been made against the backdrop of Indian, Turkish and South African central banks raising their key interest rates in order to protect their currencies, the International Business Times writes. According to their economists, a “sudden stop” is defined as the termination or even outflow of capital from a country. It also includes restricting said country’s access to international financial markets for a determined period, which would weaken their national economies.

In order to implement affordable power generation projects in developing markets, the Ana Shell Fund has formed a work team. The fruit of their collaboration is an Eco-SV turbine with an efficiency factor (EF) of over 55%, and best of all – it’s cheap to manufacture! This turbine would enable electricity to be produced at the low cost of two cents per kW/h. The purpose for this project is to reduce developing countries’ dependencies upon capital inflows and loans, helping them balance current account deficits, establish monetary freedom, and lessen China’s influence over foreign economies. Under existing economic conditions, the countries at the highest risk must determine how they will finance their budgets and energy deficits, and whether they will explore new financial avenues. It is worth pointing out that Thailand, Turkey, and Ukraine have recently suffered from political upheaval. Who will step up and take responsibility for our future?

Capital outflows are at an all-time high. According to data gathered by the Societe Generale, the total cash inflow into developing markets’ stock funds reached a peak level of $220 billion USD in February of last year. Since then, over $60 billion USD have been allocated to foreign assets. According to analysts’ forecasts, in the nearest future, the migration rate will more than double. The same fate is expected for the EM-obligations fund. Among other things, the gradual tapering of the US Federal Reserve System’s quantitative easing program may become cause for concern. That is why it is so important to create a cheap power industry, Ana Shell Fund analysts claim.

We are inviting all developing markets to participate in this Consortium.

affordable power generation projects, agricultural waste, ana shell fund, ana shell media, ana shell media press, balance current account deficits, capital outflows, cheap power industry, city garbage,dependencies upon capital inflows, developing markets, Eco-SV turbine, efficiency factor, EM-obligations fund, energy deficits, establish monetary freedom, existing economic conditions, exodus of capital investment, explore new financial avenues, finance budgets, foreign capital flows, foreign economies, gasification of renewable resources, generating electricity,global energy problems, interest rates, International Business Times, international financial markets, lessen China's influence, low-cost electricity, Manoj Pradhan, migration rate, Morgan Stanley London office, national economies, participate in Consortium, Patrick Drozdzik, political upheaval, quantitative easing program, reach peak level, reforming the energy industry, Société Générale, South-East Asia, stock funds, total cash inflow, US Federal Reserve