KAYJATTA

PAGE ONE: THE DEMISE OF THE PRINT MEDIA

 

The print media has been in decline for the past several years, largely due to the emergence and growth of online (web) news. Major daily newspapers such as the Rocky Mountain News and the Philadelphia Daily have collapsed, some have filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection, and others such as the New York Times have resorted to mass layoffs to stay afloat.

 A combination of technological advancement in communication, aggregation, and declining advertisement revenue are responsible for speeding up the crisis in the newspaper industry. With the internet and the proliferation of mobile devices such as the I-Phone, I-Pad, Notebook and Net book computers as well as social media such as Twitter and face book; dissemination and consumption of news has become greatly decentralized and diversified. The example of Brian Stelter, the twenty one year old at the New York Times is an epitome of the new direction the media is taking. With an increasing number of people being tech savvy and well connected socially, news generation, dissemination and accessibility is incredibly high. Many of these consumers of news turn to the convenience of the web for news; and for no surprise at all, the advertising dollars follow them there. “Brian Stelter is a robot assembled in the basement of the New York Times to destroy me”, said David Carr. While this statement may sound like a joke, it is a stark illustration of the confrontation between the old and the new media represented by Stelter and Carr respectively.

As the media technology changes, along with consumer preference for news, we are forced to reconsider the meaning and ethics of journalism. The cases of New York Times’ Judith Miller misinformation scandal over Weapons of Mass destruction in the run-up to the Iraq war, the Jason Blair (of the New York Times) scandal over plagiarism and stealing content from other newspapers, and the Wiki Leak scandals over the diplomatic cables have raised serious ethical questions about reporting and the role and nature of reporters. Wiki Leaks founder, Julian Assange, in answering a question from the New York Times’ Brian Stelter defined journalism as “a tool to a goal and that goal is justice”. But Assange, despite his long history of trouble with the law, is also believed to have stolen sensitive content for publication in Wiki Leaks. The Wiki Leak publications were not made with journalistic objectivity and good faith, but they also shattered that age-old power imbalance in the print media. The so-called “New York Times Effect” is suddenly under severe strain as news generation, dissemination and accessibility decentralizes.

Mamadou Maiga - Reuw Reuss

KAYJATTA

Great song !!! I think it was the early 90s, and its was Maiga, Salam Jallow, Mbye Nderr, and Fallou. Yeah, they almost turned our world upside down...

Fallou Dieng - Weex Bet

KAYJATTA

THE BROCCOLI EFFECT:

About a couple of months ago during deliberations on the Obama healthcare plan; Justice Scalia, one of the most intellectual conservative judges of the Supreme Court espoused the "broccoli " analogy. Justice Scalia argued that if government can force people to buy health insurance, then there is nothing to stop the government later forcing people to buy broccoli because of its health benefit. This is called the slippery slope argument-once ca c ause cof action is taken, there is no turning back. At the time I disagreed with the logic of Scalia's argument, but the new law being proposed in New York to ban soda (food) because of its health risks makes me want to take a fresh look at Scalia's argument ....

BRENDA FASSIE singing for Nelson Mandela in South Africa (Vul'indlela / ...

KAYJATTA

fatou guewel sama naar bi

KAYJATTA

LATIN QUARTER performing 'RADIO AFRICA' on TOTP

KAYJATTA

ENVIRONMENT AND DEVELOPMENT:

                                                           Kayjatta

The environment and development are recurring issues of conflict among environmental scientists and economists. The goals of economic development/economic growth often conflict with the goals of environmental protection and sustainability. As a result, a large a body of literature has developed by academia over the years with regards to this discourse about the economic, social, political, philosophical, cultural and physical environmental implications of the impact of economic development/economic growth on the environment.

This paper discusses this topic from the perspectives of the following articles and scholars:

1.      ‘Uneven and Combined Development…’ by James O’Connor.

2.      ‘Third World Critique of Western Environmentalism, by Ramachandra Guha.

3.      ‘The Tragedy of Commons’ by Garret Hardin

4.      ‘Poverty Breeds Over-Population’ , by Barry Commoner

5.      GDP as a measure of economic development and societal well-being.

In ‘Uneven and Combined Development….’, O’Connor explores the impact of modern capitalism on the stability of the natural and social environment. He argues that economic development as a result of industrialization has been achieved at great costs to environmental and cultural stability. But economic development itself has been examined in two contrasting senses. Firstly, economic development is described as “uneven” in the sense that there is uneven spatial distribution of production, consumption, wealth, labor relations and political configurations (O’Connor, 1989). This uneven development has resulted in the dichotomy between country and town, developed and under-developed countries, and generally exacerbated global poverty and inequality. Secondly, economic development is described as “combined” in the sense that industrial capitalism, in its effort to maximize profits combines the most profitable features of development and underdevelopment.

O’Connor argues that the worst environmental disasters disproportionately affect the poor and the marginalized (1989). He cited examples of pesticide poisoning in India and Mexico both in 1984, the earth quake in Mexico City in 1985, the volcanic eruption in Colombia, and the flooding in Mississippi.

O’Connor also explores the spatial origin (source) of pollution and its impact as it relates to “uneven’ and “combined” development approaches.  He argues that because of “uneven development” where industry and population are concentrated in (pockets) of urban centers, the earth’s assimilative capacity is disturbed and pollution and resource depletion results. In a similar way, agriculture (monoculture) and resource extraction being concentrated in the rural (countryside) or underdeveloped areas, the assimilative capacity is disturbed in these areas and the soil resources are depleted as well. He cites examples from Brazil and the Sahel in Africa where monoculture and deforestation (introduced by colonialism) ruined the soil resources so much that recovery from the resulting poverty is still impossible. In “combined development’, O’Connor recognizes the social and economic forms that maximizes profits in a global economy. The movement of people from resource-deprived poor regions (countryside and underdeveloped nations) into industrial towns and developed nations; and outsourcing of capital and technology to less regulated poverty stricken regions are all features of “combined development”.  As a result, air pollution and resource depletion in these underdeveloped nations worsen. Air pollution in the cities of underdeveloped nations such as Ankara (Turkey), Bangkok  (Thailand), Bombay (India), Cairo (Egypt), Caracas (Venezuela), Mexico City (Mexico),  Seoul (South Korea) and Tehran (Iran) for example are much worse than many cities in developed countries; (O’Connor, 1989).

Partly as a result of these global and regional disparities brought about by the uneven and combined impact of industrial economic development, different philosophical, socio-political and academic movements have arose with regards to the relationship between humans (and human activity) and the physical environment. One such movement is called deep ecology. One of the critics of this movement is Ramachandra Guha. Guha welcomes the philosophy of deep ecology, but doubts it fits the underdeveloped nations; arguing that it uniquely fits the American culture. The sole focus on wilderness preservation can threaten economic survival in the underdeveloped nations, Van De Veer and Pierce, 2003). Guha identified four underlying aspects of deep ecology in relation to human/nature interactions, namely:

1.      Deep ecologists subscribe to the idea of a biocentric world as compared to an anthropocentric world where the earth’s welfare is supreme to the interests of mankind. Guha insists that this dichotomy is irrelevant to the real environmental problems of over-consumption and militarization.

2.      Deep ecologists also emphasize the preservation of wilderness and restoration of degraded areas. This, Guha argues ignores the real environmental and economic problems faced by poorer people in the underdeveloped world, and their livelihood is therefore threatened.

3.      Deep ecologists also relate their conceptual roots of biocentrism to Eastern religious philosophies and primal people in non-Western cultures. Guha objects to this claim and argues that Eastern religious sources are selectively cited and lacks the environmental awareness that deep ecologists claim it has.

4.      Deep ecologists consider themselves as the “leading edge” and custodians of global environmentalism.

In addition to these four tenets of deep ecology, Guha argues that there are two fundamental ecological challenges facing the world; over-consumption by the industrialized world and the urban elite in the underdeveloped nations, and militarization; and none of these has to do with the dichotomy between anthropocentric and biocentric world views that dominate the philosophical debates among environmental groups.

Lastly, Guha recommends equity as well as economic and political redistribution of production as an alternative to Western emphasis on wilderness preservation and restoration.

As indicated above, these issues of environment and development can be complex, controversial and in some cases very divisive. Another perspective that contributes to this ongoing discourse is that provided by Barry Commoner in his article “Poverty Breeds Over-Population”.  Commoner is perhaps a neo-Malthusian in that he largely concurs with the Malthusian premises of population growth, although he sees the solutions as more complex. Although technological advancement and its resultant increased food production has changed the Malthusian population equilibrium, Barry Commoner blames lack of economic growth for the population explosion particularly in the underdeveloped world.  Rather than viewing population control as a precursor of economic growth, Commoner views economic growth as the driver of declining birth rates; and he further argues that this has not happened in the underdeveloped world. Increased economic development results in increased higher education and opportunities especially for women, thus reducing birth rate since highly educated women tends to marry later and bear fewer children. Therefore Commoner argues that birth rate is not purely determined biologically, but also socially determined. Partly because of this, Commoner rejects the “Life-Boat Ethics” (earth as a spaceship) concept of Garrett Hardin. He (Commoner) recognizes what might be called demographic parasitism as colonialism and neo-colonialism where the Western world is able to sustain large populations at high standards of living largely be living off of the resources of the underdeveloped nations of Africa, Asia, and eastern Europe.

The connection between family size and infant mortality has been identified by Commoner. This observation is very relevant to the underdeveloped nations where infant mortality is still very high and consequently family sizes are large to ensure the survival of some of the off springs. Also in the underdeveloped world large family size ensures adequate availability of farm labor.

Garrett Hardin’s “Tragedy of the Commons” is an argument for privatization and individual personal responsibility. It could as well serve as a hand book for today’s conservative thinkers. Hardin argues that private property owners are better suited to care for the property, as compared to common (access) property where many become free riders by taking as much as they can while contributing as little as they can to the upkeep of the common property. He argues that the air and water resources are polluted today because they are treated as common property. Hardin’s argument is similar to Ronald Coase’s theorem, however critics of both pointed out that both confused common property rights to ‘open access’ and that in much of the underdeveloped the use of commonly shared property come with social responsibility where the right to use can be lost if the property is not taken care of. Private ownership of land for example as observed in East Africa (Kenya) but also true for much of Africa has resulted in commoditization of land and smaller and smaller subdivisions causing overgrazing, deforestation and depletion of soil nutrients. The resulting environmental destruction increases poverty and inequality.

This above discourse considers some of the leading authorities on the issue of economic development and the environment. The debate is far from settled but the concepts outlined here could help development experts chart a reasonable development strategy that balances the need for economic development and the environmental sustainability.

References:

6.      ‘Uneven and Combined Development…’ by James O’Connor.

7.      ‘Third World Critique of Western Environmentalism, by Ramachandra Guha.

8.      ‘The Tragedy of Commons’ by Garret Hardin

9.      ‘Poverty Breeds Over-Population’ , by Barry Commoner

Youssou Ndour -Gambie Deuxième partie

KAYJATTA

AN ANALYSIS OF MARTI’S ‘OUR AMERICA’ AND LEVERTOV’S ‘LIFE AT WAR’:

KAYJATTA

INTRODUCTION:

Jose Marti was born and educated in Havana, Cuba in 1853. Marti was a radical political activist and intellectual, writing articles for a clandestine newspaper since he was seventeen years old until his arrest and deportation to Spain. He then settled in the United States after travelling extensively in Europe. In the United States, he continued his clandestine activities, writing about Latin America for the Central American audience.

Marti’s most important piece of work is called ‘Nuestra America’ completed in 1887, a sort of a socialist revolutionary manifesto that laid out the practical foundation for mobilizing Latin American working class. This work is largely informed by revolutionary literature, Latin American folk heroes and culture, as well as his religious convictions as a catholic. Marti was both an intellectual and a warrior. He did not only articulate his political views in written form, but also actually went to war for those ideas.

Denise Levertov on the other hand is an outright pacifist. Born in Essex, Wales in the United Kingdom in 1923 to Jewish parents from Russia; Levertov’s rich background of Jewish, German, and English origins will influence her later writings and world views. She became a naturalized U.S. citizen in 1955.

In the 1960s and ‘70s, Levertov’s writings turned to political activism as she became a very vocal anti-war advocate. Her major work, ‘Life at War’ is perhaps her most important anti-war writing; in which she consistently deplored the injustice of the Vietnam War with vivid imagery largely drawing inspiration from religious and compassionate convictions.

ANALYSIS:

The Cuban writer and political activist, Jose Marti was a nationalist anti-imperialist, who nonetheless had deep admiration for the United States but strongly opposed its expansionism in Latin America. In this regard, Marti compares strongly to the English-American poet, Denise Levertov. Levertov, an anti-imperialist on a somewhat equal standing was a strong opponent of the Vietnamese war and American expansionism in Asia largely on the grounds of religious morality. In his essay, “Our America”, by which according to Dr. Ramirez, Marti referred to Latin America; he celebrates North America but also condemns it for its activities in Latin America much like Levertov’s polarity between America at home and America abroad (in Vietnam).

While religion runs deep in both Marti’s “Our America” and Levertov’s “Life at War”, Marti leans more on political ideology than the more religious morality of Levertov. Also the more pragmatic and perhaps virulent Marti who would eventually organize and even go to war for his cause contrasts starkly to the more subdued appeals by Levertov.Levertov is by all indications a pacifist who laments the horrors of war in such succinct language and compelling imagery as in these lines: “the scheduled breaking opens of breast whose milk/ runs out over the entrails of still-alive babies/ transformation of witnessing eyes to pulp-fragments/ implosion of skinned penises into carcass-gulleys” (Levertov 80).

In that respect, Marti is more of a revolutionary like the Great Simon Bolivar of Latin America whom he admirably alludes to in his writings. This is unlike Levertov who feels herself physically detached from the war so far away that it renders her unable to act as she expressed in this line: “The disasters numb within us" (Levertov 79). Therefore if Marti, a revolutionary cum socialist intellectual were a hybrid of Frantz Fanon and Leo Tolstoy; then Levertov, with her strong religious background and training as a nurse, would be a cross between Florence Mahoney and Mother Theresa. There is some kind of intellectual nostalgia and nationalism about Marti that is not seen in Levertov, as he paid homage to Latin American culture and heroes as well as a yearning for peasant life closer to nature similar to Tolstoy. That is perhaps why, he argued, “the natural man has triumphed over the imported book in Latin America, the mestizo over the exotic Creole,and nature over false erudition” (Barnett 2002). Marti’s arguments stem largely from his vision of himself as part of the oppressed while Levertov’s lamentations derive from her position as part of the oppressor, yet both are deeply concerned with the enormous human suffering brought about by oppressive government policies (Rosenthal, 2006). While Levertov laments the tranquilizing effect of “breathing in the war” daily which renders us immune to the horrors of war, Marti actively sought an uprising against imperialism and to achieve Latin American liberation.

As a Latin American nationalist, Marti condemns both Washington and Europe as he argues that “there is no nation to be more proud of than the … republics of Nuestra America that rose among the silent Indian masses…” (Barnett 2002). This kind of nationalism was not seen in Levertov, despite her anti-war stance and advocacy for American (military) withdrawal from the world particularly Vietnam. In addition to his revolutionary ideas, Marti also laid out an impressive political philosophy about the nature and operation of government. He argued that “to govern well in America, one has to know the elements of the country and how to unite those elements so that each citizen can attain self-realization…” (Marti 86, 87). Levertov, a social activist nonetheless, did not venture much into political philosophy. Marti also celebrates ideas, but then he was very wary and suspicious of those who wield so much power in ideas. He recognized that “a powerful idea, waved before the world at the proper time, can stop a squadron of iron-clad ships” (Marti 84).

CONCLUSION:

There is a broad common thread that runs between the works of Jose Marti and Denise Levertov. They are both pre-occupied with the socio-political condition of man, the condition of human suffering and how to achieve a better living condition for mankind.

However, Marti appears more inclined to pragmatism than Levertov. Marti actively sought to transform his philosophy into action for liberation while Levertov concedes to the paralyzing effect of the daily dose of news about war. Religion played a key role in the ideas of both writers, but again Marti leans more towards political ideology and revolutionary literature than the more puritanical Levertov whose condemnation of war (in Vietnam) is derived from a purely religious and compassionate position. Therefore, Marti arguably is a more objective advocate than Levertov.

Also Marti is a Latin American nationalist who appealed to his readers to look inwards unlike the more internationalist posture of Levertov. In addition to being a poet and essayist, Marti is by all means a political philosopher, sometimes going to extreme length to lay out his vision of government and the governed. Levertov makes no such attempt at political philosophy. Levertov is a writer first, then a political activist whereas Marti is a political activist first, then a writer.

Citations:

1.      Rosenthal, Peggy. Making Peace: Denise Levertov (2006).

2.      “Nuestra America” by Jose Marti

3.      Life at war, Denise Levertov

4.      Dr. Ramirez. Caribbean Literature: Online Overview of Jose Marti’s “Our America”

5.      Breslin, Paul. Modern American Poetry