Urban planning community

+ Reply to thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 25 of 28

Thread: Arcology built with modern technology

  1. #1
    Cyburbian
    Registered
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    50

    Arcology built with modern technology

    I'm looking for feedback on a personal project I've undertaken, a rough design/concept for an "arcology" that could be built with today's construction methods, with comparable costs.

    http://ecomegastructure.blogspot.com/

    I'm not looking for any kind of social critique, just feedback on the technical aspects.

    I would appreciate the input of any engineers/planners/architects on this.

  2. #2
    Cyburbian ColoGI's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Colo Front Range
    Posts
    2,471
    Quote Originally posted by PatrickMc View post
    I'm looking for feedback on a personal project I've undertaken, a rough design/concept for an "arcology" that could be built with today's construction methods, with comparable costs.

    http://ecomegastructure.blogspot.com/

    I'm not looking for any kind of social critique, just feedback on the technical aspects.

    I would appreciate the input of any engineers/planners/architects on this.
    Look at the light and air requirements for places that build point-tower structures, like Hong Kong, Vancouver, Singapore, etc., esp the subtropics or tropical big cities. You'll see they don't allow such developments as the spacing in the conceptual rendering is inadequate for light and air. Re-do with each tower rotated 23-45º and see how the light enters the units and go from there, using two wind regimes of prevailing westerlies and northeast trades. Good luck.

  3. #3
    Cyburbian
    Registered
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    50
    Thanks for the helpful feedback. A couple questions:

    "Re-do with each tower rotated 23-45º "

    Do you mean rotate each tower by the same amount, or by differing amounts?

    "using two wind regimes of prevailing westerlies and northeast trades"

    Sorry, I have no idea what this means. What is a wind regime?

  4. #4
    Cyburbian boilerplater's avatar
    Registered
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Heaven or Las Vegas
    Posts
    916
    Is this meant to be basically a mathematical exercise? It reminds me of that ultimate Sim City that was supposed to be ultra-efficient. Look it up on YouTube. It appears rather sterile and inhumane.
    Adrift in a sea of beige

  5. #5
    Cyburbian
    Registered
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    50
    It's not intended to be a mathematical exercise. One of the arcology concept's main flaws is that most of the designs Soleri envisioned couldn't be built without advances in construction technology. I'm trying to come up with a design following the same basic concept as an arcology but built with today's construction methods.

    What exactly do you mean by sterile and inhumane? These seem like subjective criticisms. A lot of people, myself included, think that suburbs of bungalows in the countryside are sterile and inhumane, besides being unsustainable. An untextured model is going to look pretty sterile. Anyway, the model isn't meant to reflect the final appearance, just the general layout/concept, and I'm still working on refining it. What I want to know are potential technical problems like ColoGl pointed out.

  6. #6
    Cyburbian ColoGI's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Colo Front Range
    Posts
    2,471
    Quote Originally posted by PatrickMc View post
    Thanks for the helpful feedback. A couple questions:

    Do you mean rotate each tower by the same amount, or by differing amounts?
    That depends upon the wind regime. And how the wind deflects off the adjacent tower.

    Quote Originally posted by PatrickMc View post
    Sorry, I have no idea what this means. What is a wind regime?
    This is a key component of such designs, to give access to air and light. AIUI Hong Kong has plans that consider wind corridors for access to fresh air. If you are going to go into practice and actually make a pitch to build such....erm....developments, it is important that you understand air and light and their movement.

  7. #7
    Cyburbian
    Registered
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    50
    ColoGl:

    Right - I always assumed that the actual orientation of the towers would be dependent upon local conditions (wind patterns, topography and such). The model shown would be adapted to the local conditions. Unfortunately I don't yet have the technical ability to do this myself, I guess I will have to wait until my skills are up to par. I'm in sustainability studies; my interest in urban planning is peripheral to that.

    A question/comment about light requirements:

    One common complaint leveled against skyscrapers is that increased unshaded surface area increases energy requirements compared to more closely-spaced, shorter buildings. By placing the towers relatively close together it seem like you could alleviate this. The apartments could be arranged so that they received natural light from the perimeter of the block or from the courtyard. My question is: do the light requirements inadvertently increase energy requirements by requiring the buildings to be far apart and thereby increasing unshaded surface area? Is it possible to "violate" the light requirements and still have a design that permits adequate natural light into the apartments?

    Thank you for your help.

  8. #8
    Cyburbian ColoGI's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Colo Front Range
    Posts
    2,471
    Quote Originally posted by PatrickMc View post

    A question/comment about light requirements:

    One common complaint leveled against skyscrapers is that increased unshaded surface area increases energy requirements compared to more closely-spaced, shorter buildings...

    [snip]

    My question is: do the light requirements inadvertently increase energy requirements by requiring the buildings to be far apart and thereby increasing unshaded surface area? Is it possible to "violate" the light requirements and still have a design that permits adequate natural light into the apartments?

    Thank you for your help.
    Patrick:

    People want natural light access into their dwelling units. Look at several cities' orientation requirements - they all require light access. To reduce unwanted solar gain in hot months, you can increase R-values on sunward walls, install low-E glass (or for winter solar gain, spec window coverings), use awnings to control light access...esp in winter when heat is free. Access to light is a law in England. People want it - it is called 'right to light' and reinforced via several clarifying laws to Common Law.

  9. #9
    Cyburbian
    Registered
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    50
    Quote Originally posted by ColoGI View post
    Patrick:

    People want natural light access into their dwelling units. Look at several cities' orientation requirements - they all require light access. To reduce unwanted solar gain in hot months, you can increase R-values on sunward walls, install low-E glass (or for winter solar gain, spec window coverings), use awnings to control light access...esp in winter when heat is free. Access to light is a law in England. People want it - it is called 'right to light' and reinforced via several clarifying laws to Common Law.
    Sorry, I guess I wasn't clear enough:

    I understand that people want and need natural light - I was wondering how arbitrary the light requirements themselves were. That is, is it possible to fulfill people's need for natural light without following the light requirements? Would it be possible to place the buildings close together and still have natural light reach every apartment, with careful orientation of the living units and windows?

  10. #10
    Cyburbian ColoGI's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Colo Front Range
    Posts
    2,471
    Quote Originally posted by PatrickMc View post
    I was wondering how arbitrary the light requirements themselves were. That is, is it possible to fulfill people's need for natural light without following the light requirements? Would it be possible to place the buildings close together and still have natural light reach every apartment, with careful orientation of the living units and windows?
    You'll have to model it and see.

  11. #11
    Cyburbian JimPlans's avatar
    Registered
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Gone to a better place (in my mind)
    Posts
    407
    I get the basic concept of arcologies, that they are "largely hypothetical structures [that] would contain a variety of residential, commercial, and agricultural facilities and minimize individual human environmental impact. They are often portrayed as self-contained or economically self-sufficient." I just don't believe that they are possible, precisely because they are supposed to be self-contained and self-sufficient. Creating dense living patterns is pretty simple. Plenty of areas do it already. Creating economic, social, and agricultural systems that require no outside inputs or exports is impossible. Not even the planet Earth as a whole can pass this test, as it gets all of its energy from an external source. Arcologies remind me of the architectural equivalent of perpetual motion machines, and would be about as successful.

    As for density built using current construction methods, check out these links:

    Public housing in Singapore

    Photos of Ijburg

    Ijburg: City of Islands

    If every person on earth lived in settlements with the density of Ijburg (10,000 persons per square kilometer), every one of us would fit into an area the size of Texas. That's dense enough for me. Add some high-density hydroponics and that's about as close as anyone is going to get to creating an arcology (IMHO).

  12. #12
    Cyburbian ColoGI's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Colo Front Range
    Posts
    2,471
    Quote Originally posted by JimPlans View post
    I get the basic concept of arcologies, that they are "largely hypothetical structures [that] would contain a variety of residential, commercial, and agricultural facilities and minimize individual human environmental impact. They are often portrayed as self-contained or economically self-sufficient." I just don't believe that they are possible, precisely because they are supposed to be self-contained and self-sufficient. Creating dense living patterns is pretty simple. Plenty of areas do it already. Creating economic, social, and agricultural systems that require no outside inputs or exports is impossible. Not even the planet Earth as a whole can pass this test, as it gets all of its energy from an external source. Arcologies remind me of the architectural equivalent of perpetual motion machines, and would be about as successful.
    Not to mention a sea of point-towers cannot function when cheap energy goes away.

    There is a key reason that dwelling units used to be only so high, and not just because of construction technology: who is going to walk up and down 46 flights of stairs?

    There are strategies to arrange human habitation for the coming day when cheap energy goes away and we will be forced to live our lives without profligate waste. Lifting massive material high in the air, and performing expensive, regular maintenance to ward off gravity and effects of weathering is not a low-energy strategy.

  13. #13
    Cyburbian
    Registered
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    50
    Quote Originally posted by JimPlans View post
    I get the basic concept of arcologies, that they are "largely hypothetical structures [that] would contain a variety of residential, commercial, and agricultural facilities and minimize individual human environmental impact. They are often portrayed as self-contained or economically self-sufficient." I just don't believe that they are possible, precisely because they are supposed to be self-contained and self-sufficient. Creating dense living patterns is pretty simple. Plenty of areas do it already. Creating economic, social, and agricultural systems that require no outside inputs or exports is impossible. Not even the planet Earth as a whole can pass this test, as it gets all of its energy from an external source. Arcologies remind me of the architectural equivalent of perpetual motion machines, and would be about as successful.
    My definition does not include self-sufficiency of resources.

    What I'm proposing is slightly different from an arcology. The structure would be self-sufficient in terms of services, not resources. The structure would have an optimal population: big enough to achieve maximum efficiency and economies of scale, but small enough so as to not feel overcrowded.

    As for density built using current construction methods, check out these links:

    Public housing in Singapore

    Photos of Ijburg

    Ijburg: City of Islands
    If every person on earth lived in settlements with the density of Ijburg (10,000 persons per square kilometer), every one of us would fit into an area the size of Texas. That's dense enough for me. Add some high-density hydroponics and that's about as close as anyone is going to get to creating an arcology (IMHO).
    I think 10,000 per square kilometer is still a little low. Ideally, everything would be located in a one square kilometer area, so that everything could be easily walked to. I think 15,000 - 20,000 per square kilometer would be just high enough to justify all the services required by a self-contained community.

    Taking these criticisms into consideration, I've now started toying with another design: 30-40 story residential towers would house the population. Connecting each of the towers would be 5-10 story podium buildings, containing work space and public services. By connecting the towers together with podiums you can create a single connected structure. This plan also has the benefit of being flexible: it doesn't have to all be built at once, and it can be expanded as needed. I'm sort of envisioning a kind of hyper-eco density, Vancouver style, but with all the cars removed, and all the buildings connected. Might this be a more realistic/achievable model?

    Quote Originally posted by ColoGI View post
    Not to mention a sea of point-towers cannot function when cheap energy goes away.

    There is a key reason that dwelling units used to be only so high, and not just because of construction technology: who is going to walk up and down 46 flights of stairs?

    There are strategies to arrange human habitation for the coming day when cheap energy goes away and we will be forced to live our lives without profligate waste. Lifting massive material high in the air, and performing expensive, regular maintenance to ward off gravity and effects of weathering is not a low-energy strategy.
    The proposal (towers+podiums - see my post above) would use 1/3rd the energy, per capita, as a modern city - more efficient than New Urbanism. NYC is the most energy efficient city in America, and it has many towers. Vancouver is another example. Increased density decreases per capita consumption. Sure there is a point of diminishing returns, but no one seems to know what that is. Some engineers claim that it's 50 stories, others claim 5. I've never been able to find a definite answer to this question using hard data.

    There seems to be considerable debate regarding the efficiency of towers - If you spread people around in lower-density walk-up buildings, you will have greater need for horizontal transport, which consumes more energy than vertical transport (elevators). With more horizontal area occupied, you would also need more roads, sewers, power lines, etc. With walk-ups it also seems like you would get more exposed surface area since you would need more buildings for the same population, increasing energy requirements. Then again, walk-ups are easier to maintain, like you mentioned.

  14. #14
    Cyburbian ColoGI's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Colo Front Range
    Posts
    2,471
    Quote Originally posted by PatrickMc View post
    The proposal (towers+podiums - see my post above) would use 1/3rd the energy, per capita, as a modern city - more efficient than New Urbanism. NYC is the most energy efficient city in America, and it has many towers. Vancouver is another example. Increased density decreases per capita consumption. Sure there is a point of diminishing returns, but no one seems to know what that is. Some engineers claim that it's 50 stories, others claim 5. I've never been able to find a definite answer to this question using hard data.

    There seems to be considerable debate regarding the efficiency of towers - If you spread people around in lower-density walk-up buildings, you will have greater need for horizontal transport, which consumes more energy than vertical transport (elevators). With more horizontal area occupied, you would also need more roads, sewers, power lines, etc. With walk-ups it also seems like you would get more exposed surface area since you would need more buildings for the same population, increasing energy requirements. Then again, walk-ups are easier to maintain, like you mentioned.
    I specialize in green infrastructure and urban ecology. So I come at these things differently in terms of scale, resources, and projecting future conditions than most planners IME. In 5-10 years, IMHO, you won't be writing your second para. as we will be paying closer to true cost for carbon energy. That means building and maintaining vertically will be problematic, as expending energy to resist entropy is expensive, and the more entropy you resist, the more costly. Vertical transport will be for those who can pay for it. We are reaching our limits. Such structures will soon be beyond our means.

    Second, this sort of density that you like is not embedded in our social structures. Ideologically, ~1/2 the American human population won't live in such places right off the bat, regardless of future energy costs (spring 2010 JAPA will help you understand). Sure some populations will shift closer to work and in more efficient envelopes. Maybe there will be one development somewhere in the states that looks like this. But you'll have to aggregate a ton of land and most redevelopment ain't that big.

    But I suppose it is a fun mental exercise.

  15. #15
    Cyburbian
    Registered
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Austin, TX
    Posts
    50
    Quote Originally posted by ColoGI View post
    I specialize in green infrastructure and urban ecology. So I come at these things differently in terms of scale, resources, and projecting future conditions than most planners IME. In 5-10 years, IMHO, you won't be writing your second para. as we will be paying closer to true cost for carbon energy. That means building and maintaining vertically will be problematic, as expending energy to resist entropy is expensive, and the more entropy you resist, the more costly. Vertical transport will be for those who can pay for it. We are reaching our limits. Such structures will soon be beyond our means.

    Second, this sort of density that you like is not embedded in our social structures. Ideologically, ~1/2 the American human population won't live in such places right off the bat, regardless of future energy costs (spring 2010 JAPA will help you understand). Sure some populations will shift closer to work and in more efficient envelopes. Maybe there will be one development somewhere in the states that looks like this. But you'll have to aggregate a ton of land and most redevelopment ain't that big.

    But I suppose it is a fun mental exercise.
    ColoGl,

    My viewpoint is actually more extreme than yours, not rooted in mainstream planning at all. I don't think capitalism will survive the coming decrease in resource and energy availability. I think rationing will come to replace money, and major industries (like housing, energy, transportation, etc) will be nationalized. It would take a long time to explain why I've come to this conclusion, but I have dedicated a considerable amount of time and energy to studying these issues.

    A 40 story steel-reinforced concrete structure is already made of recycled materials - glass, steel and concrete are "recycled" from the very beginning of their production process. Sure it takes energy to move things vertically, but I think the impact of this is being overestimated. If you consider the fact that the residents would be consuming just 1/3rd the amount of energy they would normally be consuming in an average city, then such developments would "pay back" the cost of their construction through energy savings. Anyway, aren't towers the dominant form in many countries that are energy-poor? - how is that explained?

    What do you think of my second proposal? I took your criticisms into account and rethought things: In plan II, 30-40 story residential towers are spaced apart for adequate lighting and connected by 5-10 story podiums containing work space and public areas/services. It would still essentially be one structure where one could walk to anything they needed, but it is more flexible and can be expanded as needed. It basically has all the advantages of the first plan but with the added advantage of flexibility, and solves the lighting problem.

  16. #16
    BANNED
    Registered
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Santa Barbara
    Posts
    19
    there are advantages to vertical that are being over looked. Going vertical means cheaper to heat, less walking around town, and etc.

    The wave of the future will be Arcologies, cost to move things vertically pales in comparison to the cost to move them otherwise horizontally.

    The best way to achieve high density in a way that allows for optimal light for all of the units is to use radial symmetry and have several wings.

    I have designed Arcologies since I was 10.


    Please start your questions over, I will be happy to answer them, and to illustrate.



    That means building and maintaining vertically will be problematic, as expending energy to resist entropy is expensive, and the more entropy you resist, the more costly. Vertical transport will be for those who can pay for it. We are reaching our limits. Such structures will soon be beyond our means.
    I'm sorry, thats just wrong. In fact the truth is the absolute reverse of that. The higher density you go the more you conserve energy, not only for heating, plumbing, and electricity, but also for transportation.

    Quote Originally posted by ColoGI View post
    Not to mention a sea of point-towers cannot function when cheap energy goes away.

    There is a key reason that dwelling units used to be only so high, and not just because of construction technology: who is going to walk up and down 46 flights of stairs?

    There are strategies to arrange human habitation for the coming day when cheap energy goes away and we will be forced to live our lives without profligate waste. Lifting massive material high in the air, and performing expensive, regular maintenance to ward off gravity and effects of weathering is not a low-energy strategy.
    Cheap energy isn't going away. Fossil fuels are. Green energy has always been more accessible, cheaper, and in all ways better than fossil fuels.

    Geothermal power stations with yields higher than nuclear power stations will cost less to build and will function more or less over geological time.

    The idea that everything must die off because oil and coal are going bye bye is just another scare and propaganda tactic of the oil and coal industry, and has nothing at all to do with science fact or what the future of energy looks like.

    Rather than perpetuating oil and coal propaganda and lies, it makes more sense to take a look at real cost/ benefit analysis of the different forms of energy available to us.

    Whatever you DO know about, Energy and power isn't something you can speak to.

    1. There are many different ways to derive energy.
    2. Each of these methods has different relationships with the environment
    3. Each of these methods has different costs and different benefits
    4. Each of the these methods has different pros and cons.
    5. A partial list of methods; oil, coal, shale, wood, gas, Biofuels (a. food crop, b. hemp crop c. algae) Solar, Thermal Solar, Wind, Tidal, Geothermal, Hydrogen, Hydrolic, Zero Point, Nuclear.

    6. Oils relationships with the environment are
    a. oil is ancient organic material that has undergone geological processes.
    b. oil is removed from the ground via oil wells. Ie oil is mined from the Earth.
    c. oil is burned in order to get heat and chemical reaction to create the energy.
    d. burning it creates smoke. the smoke is toxic. it is multiply toxic to the ecosystem in multiple ways.
    e. its causing global warming
    f. it causes cancer
    g. it causes acid rain
    h. thus it hurts humans personally and the whole ecosystem as whole in these different ways.
    7. oil costs a certain amount of money to obtain from the earth, depending on how deep it is and at what pressure it is under.
    8. oil costs a certain amount of money to refine and process, as well as to transport.
    9. The pros of oil are that ;
    a. it is accessible with very primitive levels of technology
    b. our current energy infrastructure is based on oil
    c. oil costs less than biofuels or, at least, it used to.
    d. oils over all cost benefit analysis remains do-able from the perspective of economics alone.
    10. The cons against oil are
    a. oil is actually very expensive as technology compared to other forms of energy in which initial
    costs render yields not limited by physical quantities. Solar power stations, Wind, and Geothermal all provide energy options which
    are simply cheaper over the long term.
    b. oil pollutes the ecology as mentioned in its environmental analysis above.
    c. that pollution will cause the extinction of life on earth as we know it should it continue.
    d. we have already reached a tipping point where we have raised the global temperature so high that the new larger contributor to
    greenhouse gasses is the ice that is being melted.
    e. thus we need solutions to reverse global warming, or, our civilization is doomed.
    11. Coal. The specifics change, but Coal, like oil, is an ancient organic substance exposed to geological processes, mut be burned, and thus
    contributes to pollution and global warming.
    12. oil Shale and coal Shale. Similar to oil and coal or extensions of them, shale is harder to mine and harder to extract oil from.
    thus it costs more to process.
    13. Biofuels. The difference between biofuels and oil or coal is that biofuels have not been exposed to geological processes, but rather,
    similarly effecting technological processes.
    a.Biofuels still have toxic smoke which pollutes and which contributes to global warming
    b. Biofuels trade energy shortage and economic stress for food shortage and economic stress, thus creating c +d
    c. Biofuels create food shortages, hunger, and contribute to global poverty
    d. Biofuels make food more expensive.
    14. Solar Power
    a. solar power is derived from the suns light and chemical processes.
    b. Solar panels are a permanent fixture which will continue to derive energy whenever the sun shines.
    c. Solar panels have real but comparatively very tiny environmental costs.
    d. Solar panel technology is up to date and evolved, no more research is actually required.
    e. assorted pundits and candidates and politicians and so forth like to tell us that they favor more research for solar power.
    Thats a secret unsecret way of saying that they don't support employing it as a real world solution, because solar power has worked
    and has been feasible and economically viable for over 20 years.
    f. Solar power is derived at a specific rate depending on the size of the panel, the efficiency of the absorption of the sunlight, and the amount of
    sunlight available.
    g. Solar power does better at high altitudes because theres less atmospheric interference.
    h. Solar Power has very low yields per physical system cost. In order to run a car on Solar energy, you have to panel the entire car,
    and in order to run your house on solar energy, you would have to panel your entire rooftop and buy energy saving appliances.
    i. Solar power is most attractive and useful in a whole energy strategy because it is uniquely mobile. Geothermal wells or Wind
    power or tidal power (for obvious reasons) won't run a car directly.
    j. Solar power could in theory be used to solve the energy crisis almost by itself, by paneling over a very large surface area. This surface area
    has been calculated variously, with low estimates ranging in 10 by 10 miles, and high estimates ranging upto 200 by 200 miles.
    h. The problem with this is that the cost/ benefit analysis shows us that this would be very expensive when compared to a holistic energy strategy.
    i. Solar power has very low yields when compared to geothermal power.
    15. Thermal Solar. Thermal Solar is a variation of Solar power with a much cheaper cost, a much lower per square foot yield, and operating at a much simpler technology level.
    a. about 100 miles by 100 miles (median estimate) of Thermal solar paneling could in theory meet our energy needs.
    b. Thermal Solar can be done in such a way that it has lower materials costs and lower materials environmental impact.
    c. Thermal solar involves using light to heat a liquid which creates energy by pushing a turbine when the fluid expands.
    16. Wind Energy.
    a. Wind energy is derived from creating large turbines called wind mills.
    b. Wind mills are generally very large affairs.
    c. The larger a windmill is, the more energy it creates relative to its overall material cost.
    d. This means that the cost/ benefit analysis shows that larger windmills are cheaper.
    e. Windmills create medium yields of energy when they are operating.
    f. One good large windmill can probably meet the energy needs for perhaps a dozen homes.
    g. The USA could in theory meet all of its energy needs via wind power, if we invested heavily also in enormous
    distribution network infrastructure.
    h. The USA is rich in wind energy compared to most places on the earth.
    i. the problem with windmills is downtime when theres no wind.
    j. This is significantly less a problem than with solar downtime due to no sun.
    k. Wind and Solar together as a team can capitalize on the two extremes of climate, and should thus be employed
    alternately depending on the location one wishes to provide energy for.
    l. for instance, Solar power is better in New Mexico, Arizona, California, Texas, And sunny places.
    J. And yet Wind power is better in places like New Jersey, Oregon,...places alongside the Canada Border.
    k. The other problem with wind power is that it can create quite an eye sore to look at.
    l. Wind power also can be very devastating to local bird populations.
    m. Wind and Solar might be good tandem partners for cities like Denver, where theres lots of wind and lots of sun,
    but not usually at the same time except for when it is.
    This allows such a system to generate power in the sunny months with solar and in the winter months with wind.
    17. Tidal Power
    a. Tidal power is derived much like wind power is, from the movement of water instead of air.
    b. Tidal power is slightly higher in potential yields because water is denser.
    c. Tidal power would have to be done more or less on remote beaches , probably in large fenced
    areas to protect the systems from animals and animals and humans from the systems.
    d. Tidal power is obviously only viable on the coastlines of oceans or very large bodies of water such as lakes.
    e. Tidal power could in theory meet all of our energy needs.
    f. the cost/ benefit analysis for tidal power is a bit murky because its a mostly unexplored technology.
    g. however, proof of concept units do exist and the technology is very simple.
    h. tidal power has problems due to the corrosive nature of salt water and erosion.
    i. Tidal power is unpopular because it ruins one beach per facility.
    j. Most accessible tidal power exists in the energy of waves.
    k. Cost/ benefit analysis shows that tidal power can be done out at sea, but it becomes increasingly more expensive the further out
    you go to get the power back to land.
    l. Tidal power is probably a good solution for arctic regions which don't get much sun, and whose wind conditions might on some occasions be too intense,
    pulling windmills down.
    m. Along with Solar power and Wind power, tidal power provides a third leg of medium level yield energy for low materials cost in situations where
    geothermal power would be too expensive.
    18. Geothermal Power
    a. Geothermal power is energy derived from the heat of the earth.
    b. that heat is on average several miles beneath the surface.
    c. However, there is a lot of variance in how deep that heat is, and every state has regions where that heat is within a few hundred meters of the surface.
    d. Geothermal power like wind power becomes cheaper per materials cost the larger the plant is.
    e. Geothermal power has very high potential yields, and is in fact competitive with nuclear power in terms of sheer yield.
    f. Geothermal power plants could in theory be built with higher energy yields than nuclear power plants. However, this is not advised or advisable, due to
    potential tectonic stresses such high energy plants could create.
    g. in the range around 100th or even 1 tenth the yield energy of a nuclear power station, geothermal power stations could be built which would have
    virtually no impact on tectonic stresses.
    h. Tectonic stress is an important variable. Frequently geothermal power is most accessible along fault lines. However, these should be ignored for
    caldera like situations where the system is not contributing or in danger due to tectonic stresses.
    i. There are many different ways of configuring a geothermal power station, and only one which this author supports. This is called double circuit closed system geothermal power.
    j. double circuit simply means that the water drops on one circuit and the steam comes up on the other.
    k. closed circuit means that no water is ever lost in the system, because even the heating element chamber is a well engineered container
    L. Geothermal power can in theory meet all of our energy needs
    M. of the resources available to us, it does this with the cheapest over all cost, the smallest possible ecological footprint, and the highest level of
    permanency.
    N. Geothermal power is not a good solution in situations where a small amount of power is needed for small communities or remote estates. It has a high material cost and start up cost to drill the well.
    O. Geothermal power is theoretically available almost everywhere on the surface of the earth.
    P. current oil wells now go as deep as 7, 8, 9 miles deep.
    Q. Enough Geothermal power is accessible within 200 meters depth to meet all of our energy needs.
    R. where larger power sources are wanted in places where that heat is deeper, it is still true that geothermal heat in most places is not
    deeper than 4 miles.
    S. In some rare situations where the crust is thick, geothermal power might be as deep as 20 miles.
    Don't drill there, import the energy from 150 miles away somewhere.
    19. Hydrogen power;
    a. Hydrogen power is an up and coming technology which we can expect to see having good strong applications 20 or 30 years from now.
    b. Hydrogen power is very promising, but currently, its still mostly a way to store energy, not create it.
    c. The two main exceptions to this are using corrosive rare earth metals to get reactions, and using phased electrical energy to short out the binding force.
    d. The problem with the former is that the rare earth metal is itself a form of fuel, and that creating it, and "burning" it with water both create toxic
    substances as side effects.
    e. the problem with the latter is containment of the field and what happens when organic matter is exposed to high energy bursts of electricity.
    f. To the knowledge of this author, water based solutions which continue to use a combustion engine are frauds.
    g. When Hydrogen becomes a used technology, it will probably be for very large equipment and uses, such as trains, planes, and large boats
    20. Hydrolic or Hydro Electric power.
    a. This energy is created by damming a river and using falling water to drive a turbine.
    b. this is incredibly damaging to the ecology.
    c. Yields are fairly high per materials cost, but, still, hydro electric materials costs are comparable to geothermal power, which doesn't destroy an entire
    ecosystem per power plant.
    d. Hydro electric power does not exist in anywhere near sufficient quantities to meet all of our energy needs.
    e. This author finds hydro-electric power to be a bad idea all the way around, not even as useful as nuclear power.
    21. Nuclear power
    a. Nuclear power (currently) is derived from using rare earth metals in reactions which turn some fraction of those fuels directly into energy.
    b. The radioactive fuels must be mined, and this results currently in the deaths (and serious health problems) of many Miners.
    c. Nuclear power currently creates hyper toxic and radio active wastes, which cost money to tend and babysit, and which in an accident
    of ignorance 10 thousand years from now could wipe out an entire continents worth of our descendants.
    d. Nuclear power is in many senses still a futuristic technology with much promise and much potential.
    e. Thus nuclear power should be studied and refined in the laboratory.
    f. The focus of such studies should be in finding ways to use non radioactive fuels,
    finding ways to create dissipating forms of radiation only, and finding ways to eliminate the problem of wastes.
    g. Nuclear power is very high yield, but it has exorbitant costs, especially over the long term.
    h. Compared to Geothermal power, nuclear power is extremely expensive, gets more expensive instead of less expensive over time, is extremely
    dangerous, and perhaps most importantly, sooner or later we will run out of nuclear fuels, and still be forced to move on to geothermal power.
    i. Nuclear power will be most useful for purposes of exploring our solar system and our galaxy.
    j. There is no good reason to use nuclear power for domestic use considering the other much better alternatives.
    22. Zero point energy
    a. Zero point energy is derived from quantum phase state fluctuations where energy is created in contradiction to the "laws" of conservation of mass and
    energy.
    b. Zero point energy is a futuristic technology which may become realistic within the next 100 years.
    c. Final stage proof of concept zero point energy research should be conducted at least as distant from the earth as the oort cloud, due to the unforseeable
    nature of potential dangers.
    d. In theory, zero point energy could create a self sustaining quantum phase reaction which could create nearly unlimited energy in spaces literally too small to be seen by the naked eye.
    e. Early stage research into zero point energy is the entire field of quantum mechanics, specifically Singularities, branes, and quantum holographics.


    23. Summary of findings.
    a. Geothermal, Solar, Wind, Tidal, and Hydrogen Technologies together provide a clear and easy path towards green and sustainable energy.
    b. Geothermal energy specifically is the solution which a realistic green energy infrastructure should be rooted in.
    c. It is reasonable to project a total holistic solution in which 80 percent of our energy comes from geothermal, 10 percent from Solar, 5 percent from
    Wind, and 5 percent from Tidal.
    d. It is also worth mentioning that electric cars are a current and viable technology.
    e. This is all of it simply a sumary of known and provable science fact. The only reason why most people don't know all of this is that oil companies
    and rich evil jerks have spent billions of dollars to flood the public with propaganda and misinformation.
    f. The other strategy of the evil empire jerks is to promote energy resources such as biofuels or nuclear power which create a situation of extreme expense so that they can continue to exploit our need for energy in order to make money. A Geothermally based energy infrastructure would provide
    extremely cheap energy (especially over the long term) and this would be the death of the energy industry.

  17. #17
    Cyburbian ColoGI's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Colo Front Range
    Posts
    2,471
    Quote Originally posted by prometheuspan View post

    Whatever you DO know about, Energy and power isn't something you can speak to.
    Since you know zero about me, you are reaching and guessing for some strange reason. Ah, well. I guess that's OK, lad.

    Baseless statements notwithstanding, apparently neither can you, if you think the EROEI of renewables will approach coal and oil any time soon, even taking externalities into account and adding them in and scaling up in time to make a 1:1 replacement. Society and vested interests don't work that way in our world.

  18. #18
    BANNED
    Registered
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Santa Barbara
    Posts
    19
    i don't need to know you to know you are wrong. The only way that coal or oil have ever been able to compare cost effectiveness is to only measure extreme short term.

    Any long term cost/benefit analysis shows that what we think of as the standard numbers is just lying with math.

    Coal mines run out of coal and oil wells run dry. Geothermal power stations run for geological time and can do so at a tiny fraction of the cost of nuclear while providing the same yield.

    I will again state flatly, you are running on ignorance and propaganda fumes, and you don't know what you are talking about.

    Most people who think they do don't. Its no crime.

    However, your advice is wrong, and following it is a bad idea.

    Further more, it costs more energy to transport things horizontally if you fail to stack vertically. So no matter how you look at it, your still looking at it via skewed numbers.

    As far as energy returned on energy invested goes, Geothermal power wins this contest amongst energy alternatives hands down.

    The problem has always been that oil industry and coal industry giants have managed to bully their way into keeping such technologies on the fringe. For good reason. If we had switched over to geothermal in 1970 like we knew we should have, by now your electricity bill would be cents per year.

    Profitability is often a very different question than EROEI, now isn't it?

    There is no reason to make this harder on yourself than it otherwise is.

    You are a victim of bad information.

  19. #19
    Cyburbian ColoGI's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Colo Front Range
    Posts
    2,471
    Quote Originally posted by prometheuspan View post
    i don't need to know you to know you are wrong. The only way that coal or oil have ever been able to compare cost effectiveness is to only measure extreme short term.

    You are a victim of bad information.
    I actually contribute information on both solar and wind to several industries via publications and presentations at varied industry conferences, thanks. If I were wrong across industries, I wouldn't be invited to contribute. Or, alternatively, they are wrong and you are right.

    Interesting argumentation notwithstanding, I should point out that when you figured out the short-term economics and the special physics, and how to implement your...special...vision on the ground, at that point you were morally bound to let the world know.

    Did you? You have a moral and ethical duty to share your unique knowledge with the world, and keeping this important information to yourself will surely mean that you will spend an eternity in your particular religion's bad place.

    So get to work and share your reality's special economics and energy collection and resource extraction economics and distribution physics. You are morally bound to the world to get to work and solve this problem with your special knowledge that no one else has but you. Move along, lad, and get to work. No more missives here as that is wasting time when you could be solving the world's problems, there is a huge scaling up to do at the same time there is limited resource base on this finite planet. You obviously have overcome this problem, and the world needs to hear it. Let us know, lad! Let us know!

  20. #20
    BANNED
    Registered
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Santa Barbara
    Posts
    19
    Quote Originally posted by ColoGI View post
    I actually contribute information on both solar and wind to several industries via publications and presentations at varied industry conferences, thanks. If I were wrong across industries, I wouldn't be invited to contribute. Or, alternatively, they are wrong and you are right.

    Interesting argumentation notwithstanding, I should point out that when you figured out the short-term economics and the special physics, and how to implement your...special...vision on the ground, at that point you were morally bound to let the world know.

    Did you?
    Nothing i have said is new or unusual, and in fact the science facts are quite simple, and in fact they are absolute. I have made plenty of efforts to confront disinformation, and you telling me about your unfortunate situation only makes me sadder for the humans in general. I am, here and now, once again, doing what it takes to confront propaganda and BS noise, and I have done everything in my power to do that and will continue to do so.





    You have a moral and ethical duty to share your unique knowledge with the world, and keeping this important information to yourself will surely mean that you will spend an eternity in your particular religion's bad place.
    This is not unique knowledge, however, it is knowledge as opposed to propaganda and lies.

    Also, my particular religion has no bad place aside from the ones other people create for themselves via their bad religions.


    So get to work and share your reality's special economics and energy collection and resource extraction economics and distribution physics.
    This is not my reality, nor is it personal. You attacking me and trying to make it personal only demonstrates that you have no argument and that you also have no moral compass.


    You are morally bound
    epic fail. You are acting immorally and abusively and trying to manipulate me using
    false morality.



    to the world to get to work and solve this problem with your special knowledge that no one else has but you.
    Anyone who has studied the facts instead of play propaganda whore knows the truth, nothing is "special" about this knowledge.

    Move along, lad, and get to work.
    Psychology teaches us that most insults are accidental projections. So how old are you and how long have you had your peter pan syndrome?


    No more missives here as that is wasting time when you could be solving the world's problems, there is a huge scaling up to do at the same time there is limited resource base on this finite planet. You obviously have overcome this problem, and the world needs to hear it. Let us know, lad! Let us know
    Its really very simple. The only way to claim that oil or coal compare for cost/benefit analysis is to compare only the very short term- two years or so.

    Any long term real world cost benefit analysis quickly shows that in fact all forms of green energy are cheaper over the long term.

    Yes, i know thats not the industry standard or the accepted factoids according to muggles, but thats only because the oil and coal industry have billion dollar propaganda machines and scientists don't even try to compete.

    I am not interested in verbal sparring with you and you should know that aside from having an education in Civil Engineering and Energy Sciences I am also an expert in formal conversational logic and Psychology.

    I suggest that you take a breather and try not to take this personally.

    You are a victim of bad information. Don't continue on past that point to be a jerk.

  21. #21
    BANNED
    Registered
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Santa Barbara
    Posts
    19
    http://www.yankodesign.com/2009/08/17/heavenly-abode/

    http://www.yankodesign.com/tips-publication/

    http://sustainabledesignupdate.com/?p=544

    http://www.viswiki.com/en/Arcology


    what does permaculture, arcology, civil engineering, cable cars, geothermal power, solar power,tidal power, have to do with a political problem?
    [2:44:23 AM] prometheuspan: isn't it obvious?
    [2:44:33 AM] prometheuspan: how would you solve the palestinians problem?
    [2:44:37 AM] prometheuspan: seriously?
    [2:45:53 AM] primarly let them solve their own problem. Have USA stop supporting the Jews militarily, have the arabs stop supporting the palentstiens. Neither of these things will occur but that is the solution that I see.
    [2:46:18 AM] prometheuspan: Thats not a solution tho.
    [2:46:27 AM] prometheuspan: thats a clock ticking down till dooms day.
    [2:47:58 AM] It's the solution I see. What I see is that outside nations are interferring with those people and that causes those people to become further stuck in their habitual hatred of each other. The solution is not a do one thing and it's fixed, it's about providing them opportunity to build their own relationship on their own terms.
    [2:48:44 AM] prometheuspan: to some extent we agree ...
    [2:48:53 AM] prometheuspan: the outside interference is mucking it all up.
    [2:49:05 AM] prometheuspan: but there have to be standard ground based pragmaticsolutions...
    [2:49:20 AM] prometheuspan: and those can work with or without outside interferences...
    [2:49:24 AM] hence, stop supporting either side and allow them to realise that their habitual hatred is caused by themselves. From there they can then work on THEIR problems and as required as for help from others.
    [2:49:35 AM] prometheuspan: and more importantly are absolutely required or there is no real solution.
    [2:50:04 AM] prometheuspan: They have to have the ideas of how to make a working civilization...
    [2:50:11 AM] prometheuspan: thats the true core thing everyone misses
    [2:50:18 AM] prometheuspan: you can't just send everybody to their corners...
    [2:50:28 AM] prometheuspan: they have to have workable solutions to their real problems.
    [2:50:43 AM] prometheuspan: You are right about that on the one hand, but on the other hand...
    [2:50:48 AM] prometheuspan: when it comes to brass tacks...
    [2:51:03 AM] prometheuspan: it could still go down with or without nations interfering...
    [2:51:13 AM] prometheuspan: so in some senses all of that is also a side show...
    [2:51:15 AM] ah, you think that the problem is a material problem. I disagree, I think the problem is one of hatred. Fix the hatred and the material issues can be worked on. At the moment you are talking about the material, surely you recognize that the root issue is one of hatred rather than land or other material items.
    [2:51:22 AM] prometheuspan: the one everyone gets hung up on...
    [2:51:36 AM] prometheuspan: yes.. of course that is true...
    [2:51:39 AM] prometheuspan: but its a circle.
    [2:51:49 AM] prometheuspan: you can't step out of the circle short of food and water.
    [2:52:08 AM] prometheuspan: nobody wants to think about how palestinians are malnourished and drinking sewer water
    [2:52:24 AM] prometheuspan: or how those conditions rightly drive a "resistance" movement.
    [2:52:43 AM] prometheuspan: or how thus the only way to stop the madness is to build the arcology and then allow
    [2:52:47 AM] prometheuspan: people to move in...
    [2:52:53 AM] prometheuspan: on terms that they "get it".
    [2:53:08 AM] prometheuspan: applied maslow.
    [2:53:21 AM] prometheuspan: nobody can stop hating if they are starving with somebody to blame for it.
    [2:53:26 AM] prometheuspan: and inversely...
    [2:53:42 AM] prometheuspan: people won't blow themselves up over their hatred if they dod have food and water
    [2:53:47 AM] prometheuspan: and realistic living conditions.
    [2:54:00 AM] prometheuspan: its a material/emotional problem...
    [2:54:06 AM] prometheuspan: but the maslow hierarchy is
    [2:54:14 AM] prometheuspan: physical/social/emotional...
    [2:54:21 AM] prometheuspan: you have to start at the bottom and work up.
    [2:54:27 AM] prometheuspan: theres really no other way.
    [2:54:42 AM] a man dies in 3 days without water, if they didn't have water they'd all be dead. likewise food takes about a month or so depending upon the person.
    [2:54:51 AM] The bottom is hatred.
    [2:55:44 AM] prometheuspan: but that hatred is pinned to real living conditions.
    [2:55:53 AM] or rather they have their physical needs met, in the most part.
    [2:56:01 AM] prometheuspan: it can't be solved or lessened until the living conditions change.
    [2:56:16 AM] prometheuspan: they don't have their physical needs met for the most part.
    [2:56:36 AM] prometheuspan: they live in tin metal huts fer crissakes.
    [2:56:50 AM] I've not been there.
    [2:57:15 AM] prometheuspan: you don't need to go...
    [2:57:22 AM] prometheuspan: a good few hours on google...
    [2:57:25 AM] prometheuspan: will reveal...
    [2:57:36 AM] prometheuspan: that most of what you thought you knew is israeli propaganda.
    [2:57:48 AM] prometheuspan: but hey...
    [2:57:53 AM] prometheuspan: flip that one around.
    [2:57:58 AM] Have you read "The Iron Wall, Israel and the Arab world" by Avi Shlaim?
    [2:58:02 AM] prometheuspan: how do you solve the israeli problem?
    [2:58:08 AM] prometheuspan: no?
    [2:58:15 AM] prometheuspan: heard of it tho
    [3:00:03 AM] I got 150ish pages into that book and realised that everytime someone came up with a solution or seemed to be cutting to the core issue - they got assainated. Hatred is the issue, anyone who talks of peace is killed. As long as that mentality consumes the people and their leaders then no amount of material things will even matter.
    [3:00:26 AM] prometheuspan: yes.
    [3:00:30 AM] prometheuspan: you are right.
    [3:00:33 AM] prometheuspan: and then..
    [3:00:38 AM] prometheuspan: that plays out again on the net.
    [3:00:44 AM] prometheuspan: i offer the peace solution...
    [3:00:52 AM] prometheuspan: treat it as a civil engineering problem...
    [3:00:59 AM] prometheuspan: and what happens?
    [3:01:08 AM] prometheuspan: my avatar is murdered.
    [3:01:09 AM] you are verbose. you know this. lol!
    [3:01:15 AM] prometheuspan: yes.
    [3:01:18 AM] prometheuspan: but its on topic
    [3:01:21 AM] prometheuspan: its not spam
    [3:01:27 AM] prometheuspan: and it is the solutions to the problems...
    [3:01:34 AM] prometheuspan: once you peer through all the politics.
    [3:01:40 AM] prometheuspan: and quit blaming people.
    [3:02:08 AM] ok. how are you at accepting. The forum admin/moderators have called it spam, therefore it's spam.
    [3:02:22 AM] prometheuspan: i don't accept that.
    [3:02:36 AM] prometheuspan: as far as i am concerned that proves kai is an idiot or a propaganda artist
    [3:02:38 AM] prometheuspan: or both
    [3:03:38 AM] well there is your issue. just like the jews or the arabs don't accept each others view point and fall back on their own preconceptions and this means they are eternally at war, so to you don't accept the mod/admins view point on spam and so you are eternally at war with them.
    [3:03:58 AM] prometheuspan: er..
    [3:04:01 AM] prometheuspan: or i just leave.
    [3:05:06 AM] prometheuspan: its not spam. Its on topic, its centered on topic, and in fact its much more on topic than most of the blibbering on the thread.
    [3:05:29 AM] prometheuspan: nobody calling something something its not makes it that way.
    [3:05:38 AM] yeh sure, you can do that. But the palentsiens and jews don't want to leave, they love their land and want to stay. So they get angry when their view point is denied and that leads to hatred. Look at yourself, you want to help and you are denied and you are flickering between hatred and love - the hatred is there, and you aren't even particularly threatened when compared to the jew/palentsien situation.
    [3:05:44 AM] prometheuspan: they are wrong. thats very simple.
    [3:06:16 AM] prometheuspan: i can think of ten differences to your metaphor.
    [3:06:26 AM] prometheuspan: the first is that i don't have to live with them.
    [3:06:29 AM] sure you can, and no doubt there are many.
    [3:06:40 AM] instead think of the similarities.
    [3:06:45 AM] prometheuspan: okay.
    [3:06:48 AM] the jews think they are right.
    [3:06:55 AM] the arabs think they are right.
    [3:06:57 AM] prometheuspan: both parties are dead wrong.
    [3:07:00 AM] they hate each other.
    [3:07:05 AM] prometheuspan: theres no getting around that.
    [3:07:16 AM] prometheuspan: and they both deserve all of that hatred.
    [3:07:18 AM] they don't listen to each other.
    [3:07:20 AM] prometheuspan: no getting around that.
    [3:07:27 AM] they kill the people who say "listen to each other"
    [3:07:28 AM] prometheuspan: they will never listen to each other...
    [3:07:34 AM] prometheuspan: yes...
    [3:07:37 AM] prometheuspan: so..
    [3:07:48 AM] prometheuspan: the only solution is to solve the physical problems and then work up.
    [3:08:03 AM] prometheuspan: i can't solve these problems...
    [3:08:19 AM] prometheuspan: if i was the prez of the USA i would have solved those problems tho..
    [3:08:24 AM] prometheuspan: easy as pie.
    [3:08:30 AM] so what needs to be done? build the relationship first. physical stuff is not first, mental stuff is not first, emotional stuff is first.
    [3:08:36 AM] prometheuspan: it takes authority and power...
    [3:08:48 AM] prometheuspan: you and most people think so.
    [3:08:53 AM] prometheuspan: but thats where they get hung up.
    [3:08:59 AM] prometheuspan: back to pre-eminence of needs
    [3:09:23 AM] prometheuspan: nobody can change the rut of the emotional level until after they are thinking clearly with nutrition.
    [3:09:41 AM] prometheuspan: its a catch 22.
    [3:09:45 AM] well if most people think it is so, then it is so. raging against the way the world is is futile, it leads to more rage, hatred and other destruxctive feelings which lead to destructive actions.
    [3:09:58 AM] prometheuspan: you are right, but still that part of it doesn't matter.
    [3:10:21 AM] what part doesn't matter?
    [3:10:34 AM] prometheuspan: no, if most people think that gravity is all in our imaginations that doesn't stop gravity from being real.
    [3:10:55 AM] prometheuspan: people are the product of their social environment.
    [3:11:07 AM] prometheuspan: change the social environment and they may still hate...
    [3:11:07 AM] please answer... what part doesn't matter?
    [3:11:13 AM] prometheuspan: but not with explosives...
    [3:11:20 AM] prometheuspan: the hating.
    [3:11:25 AM] prometheuspan: the hating doesn't matter.
    [3:11:33 AM] prometheuspan: its one of the variables you have no control over.
    [3:11:37 AM] prometheuspan: you can't stop the hating.
    [3:11:42 AM] prometheuspan: you can stop the starving.
    [3:12:01 AM] prometheuspan: high order problems demand that we look at what we do actually have the power to change.
    [3:12:08 AM] You are wrong. the hating is what matters most, it seems to me to be the core problem, if they didn't hate each other then all the other problems could be fixed.
    [3:12:28 AM] prometheuspan: all of their problems can be fixed except that one ...
    [3:12:35 AM] prometheuspan: whether or not they continue hating.
    [3:12:41 AM] prometheuspan: hating is irrelevant.
    [3:12:57 AM] prometheuspan: its an obstacle sure...
    [3:13:00 AM] prometheuspan: and a tuff one...
    [3:13:16 AM] prometheuspan: but maslow/pavlov still trumps...
    [3:13:36 AM] if you give them food, shelter, water, houses, cars, businesses, education, stability and they still hate, then they will destroy the shelter, reject the food, uses their cars as car bombs, destory businesses and study warfare.
    [3:13:46 AM] prometheuspan: big if.
    [3:13:58 AM] prometheuspan: actually there have been some interesting projects and charities...
    [3:14:05 AM] prometheuspan: which have proven my point...
    [3:14:11 AM] prometheuspan: with ex terrorists ...
    [3:14:25 AM] prometheuspan: explaining how they changed their lives once they were given a real chance...
    [3:14:46 AM] prometheuspan: also paralells with gangs in the USA...
    [3:14:56 AM] prometheuspan: It turns out that you can't stop the hating...
    [3:15:01 AM] prometheuspan: but you can stop the killing...
    [3:15:14 AM] prometheuspan: because its not worth it any more.... if you have a life to cherish.
    [3:15:27 AM] prometheuspan: people don't blow themselves up out of just the hatred...
    [3:15:40 AM] prometheuspan: people miss the other critical necessary ingredient-
    [3:15:43 AM] prometheuspan: desperation.
    [3:16:15 AM] : You studied history? specifically the british empire?
    [3:16:30 AM] prometheuspan: no not specifically them...
    [3:16:38 AM] prometheuspan: christian world history...
    [3:16:47 AM] prometheuspan: that branches into british...
    [3:16:59 AM] prometheuspan: i know more than most people do but not like...
    [3:17:02 AM] prometheuspan: lots...
    [3:18:29 AM] divide and conquer, the british had such an huge empire because they ruled with two main concepts, first was to divide the coloney upon the natural lines - to reinforce the differences between the people so that the people thought that they needed the british to rule them, the 2nd was that the british ruled fairly lightly, seeking to be )relatively) lighter in their rule so as to not give the populace an outsider to hate and hence focus their hatred upon.
    [3:19:15 AM] prometheuspan: yes.
    [3:20:22 AM] Now that same theory was used by the birtish on a much larger scale on the continental mainland. The british would support or withdraw support in such a way that kept the two major powers on the continent about equal in strength, hence sometimes britain support germany, or sometimes france, and so france and germany always faced off against each other and didn't bother much about conquering britain.
    [3:20:51 AM] prometheuspan: yes
    [3:21:21 AM] I see a parallel with Israel. Look at them, they are the toughest most militarily advanced nation in the middle east. and the british PUT them there, surrounded by enenmies, and the americans support israel.
    [3:22:06 AM] prometheuspan: yes.
    [3:22:35 AM] why do they do this? Seems to me that it is in the usa's best interest for israel to be a lightnigh rod for the arabs to hate! and hence the problem of middle eastern power is focused in the middle east rather than on USA. This means the usa is less threatened at home. So it remains in the usa's best interest to support israel.
    [3:22:56 AM] prometheuspan: yes
    [3:24:50 AM] ... hence why i think the solution is for the rest of the world to leave the middle east alone. yet the rest of the world will not do this, for it is in the western worlds own best interest to keep the middle east weak. for if they are weak then they feel threatened, and need to buy weapons or tech, and they sell their oil/resources for those things, and west gets oil, mid east gets weapons - yet truly the weapons don't make them stronger, they actually make them weaker! for the weapons allow the mid east to kill each other, growing their hatred and causing, contributing to and reinforcing the hatred that already exists.
    [3:25:11 AM] prometheuspan: yes
    [3:25:32 AM] prometheuspan: to me..
    [3:25:41 AM] prometheuspan: i see all problems in terms of the civil engineer.
    [3:25:43 AM] prometheuspan: to me
    [3:25:49 AM] prometheuspan: this is a civil engineering problem.
    [3:25:55 AM] prometheuspan: 90 percent.
    [3:26:06 AM] prometheuspan: the rest is all politics and mumbo jumbo...
    [3:26:12 AM] prometheuspan: blaming the victims...
    [3:26:24 AM] prometheuspan: deciding whos wrong or right when they are both wrong...
    [3:26:36 AM] politics is not mumbo jumbo, it's hard and real, it's the most powerful concept on the planet.
    [3:26:38 AM] prometheuspan: 5 percent is that hate you are talking about...
    [3:26:56 AM] prometheuspan: and that i can't do anything about beyond what maslow and pavolv will allow...
    [3:27:11 AM] prometheuspan: which is that hate tends to dissipate when people have positive lives in front of them.
    [3:27:25 AM] prometheuspan: politics is not mumbo jumbo, it's hard and real, it's the most powerful concept on the planet.
    [3:27:34 AM] prometheuspan: yes and no.
    [3:27:47 AM] prometheuspan: its powerful a lot because of its emptyness.
    [3:28:01 AM] prometheuspan: almost all power for political parties relies upon mass ignorance...
    [3:28:12 AM] prometheuspan: and acceptance of the VS approach to thinking and solving problems.
    [3:28:25 AM] prometheuspan: i studied political science.
    [3:28:30 AM] prometheuspan: nobody ever uses it.
    [3:28:59 AM] prometheuspan: if we did then the tea party cries of "socialism" would be laughed down into oblivion.
    [3:29:11 AM] prometheuspan: what is real is whats ignored.
    [3:29:27 AM] prometheuspan: 99 percent of what we call politics is the noise created to keep us from waking up to whats real.
    [3:29:47 AM] in politics two wrongs, makes a relationship.
    [3:29:52 AM] prometheuspan: lol
    [3:29:54 AM] prometheuspan: right
    [3:30:06 AM] sometimes that is just the way it is.
    [3:30:09 AM] prometheuspan: till resolution do we part. lol
    [3:30:54 AM] now you have a choice, either accept your posts where spam and modify your behaviour or not. that will decide if you are going to keep posting on RF.
    [3:31:10 AM] were/are spam.^
    [3:31:18 AM] prometheuspan: my answer is they aren't.
    [3:31:22 AM] prometheuspan: and i won't.
    [3:31:33 AM] prometheuspan: it wasn't working anyways.
    [3:31:42 AM] prometheuspan: everybody loves the old double bind.
    [3:31:56 AM] prometheuspan: Damned if i do for having knowledge and damned if i don't.
    [3:32:51 AM] prometheuspan: i'd rather just find some place where i will be appreciated.
    [3:32:57 AM] prometheuspan: not walk on eggshells.
    [3:33:06 AM] did you build the relationship first? Any single piece of knowledge is far less important than a working and respectful relationship.
    [3:33:08 AM] prometheuspan: or make believe i'm wrong when i know i'm not.
    [3:33:24 AM] prometheuspan: did you build the relationship first? Any single piece of knowledge is far less important than a working and respectful relationship.
    [3:33:42 AM] prometheuspan: |-(
    [3:34:10 AM] prometheuspan: i had a few threads.
    [3:34:18 AM] prometheuspan: they didn't work.
    [3:34:41 AM] prometheuspan: I tried to start things up and everybody got paranoid i was looking for an argument.
    [3:35:04 AM] prometheuspan: afraid to say anything on the othe rhand for fear i will what- show them up?
    [3:35:09 AM] prometheuspan: its impossible.
    [3:35:20 AM] prometheuspan: i'm not allowed to know as much as i do.
    [3:35:24 AM] prometheuspan: its just not kosher.
    [3:35:39 AM] prometheuspan: nobody wants to have the plain facts laid out...
    [3:35:51 AM] prometheuspan: it ends the conversations legs.
    [3:36:43 AM] prometheuspan: i did manage to get a lot of frubals...
    [3:36:54 AM] prometheuspan: from people who then themselves didn't comment...
    [3:37:20 AM] prometheuspan: building bridges not my forte.
    [3:37:28 AM] prometheuspan: solving high order problems yes.
    [3:37:35 AM] prometheuspan: humans...
    [3:37:42 AM] prometheuspan: are a whole batch of high order problems...
    [3:37:48 AM] prometheuspan: too hard for me....
    [3:37:49 AM] prometheuspan: lol
    [3:38:09 AM] building relationships is a high order problem, it has a complexity that astounds me.
    [3:38:15 AM] prometheuspan: yeah
    [3:38:19 AM] prometheuspan: fer sure
    [3:38:30 AM] prometheuspan: elasticity to.
    [3:38:48 AM] prometheuspan: at least with the palestinian problem the variables are large enough that they get solid.
    [3:38:58 AM] prometheuspan: you know where to find them the next time you approach the problem.
    [3:40:34 AM] i have no illusions about my contribution to the palenstine problem. i am doing nother for or against it.
    [3:40:41 AM] nothing

  22. #22
    BANNED
    Registered
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Santa Barbara
    Posts
    19
    #
    ---------
    who said it did. handy straw man argument. Ending poverty is done by investing in social and civil infrastructures.
    -----------


    we've seen that time and time again. You can give populations funds, but without actually building institutions, those funds are wasted.
    ------------
    once again, republicans prove that they are arguing with satan in the mirror.
    ---------

    The idea that economics is the primary motivation for terrorism has been laughed right out of the room by the overwhelming consensus of the academic and professional research on the matter.
    ----------
    BS. Virtually every sociologist says that poverty is the chief contributing factor to crime and war and terrorism.
    Now you, the ignorant republican is going to pretend to tell me what sociologists think? Thats hilarious.
    ---------

    *you* thought *you* chased me away? You've got to be kidding.
    ----------
    I proved bush was a liar. You dropped the thread and didn't resurface for weeks.
    ---------

    I had far, far, far, more important things to do than horse around on tribe. Right now I'm recovering from a minor injury i sustained prior to graduating USAJFKSWCS and am just poking my head in temporarily.
    --------
    Yeah, your injury was to your delusional mental cage and capacity to sustain your doublethink.
    reply to this post
    #
    prom...
    prometheusPAN
    online 111
    Re: Let's revist the WAR thing
    Today, 12:51 AM
    in response to: Re: Let's revist the WAR thing
    Duh, howabout you cite evidence?
    -----------
    of what, exactly?
    ---------

    show me where you see the policy outlined anywhere?
    ----------
    Being pretty vague, i'm sure its a form of self protection. Name a specific assertion and i will be glad to prove it,
    just like i did the LAST TIME i proved you were a mentally caged ignoramus.
    --------

    Your position is patently ridiculous, Prometheus.
    -------------
    What is my position?
    Which position are you referring to, exactly?
    ------
    --------

    trying to communicate with people like you is like trying to discuss space exploration with people who think the moon landing was faked.
    ---------
    Trying to communicate with you is like talking to a zombie. All you see is the blood red tint of your brains oozing out your eye sockets.
    You are incapable of reasoning, you know only what propaganda you have been spoon fed, and the moment you come against solid hard facts that prove you are dead wrong, you hang up the phone and flee.
    reply to this post
    #
    prom...
    prometheusPAN
    online 111
    Re: Let's revist the WAR thing
    Today, 12:53 AM
    in response to: Re: Let's revist the WAR thing
    socrates.berkeley.edu/~pdscott/iraq.html

    BUSH'S DEEP REASONS FOR WAR ON IRAQ: OIL, PETRODOLLARS, AND THE OPEC EURO QUESTION

    (Updated 5/27/03)

    As the United States made preparations for war with Iraq, White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer, on 2/6/03, again denied to US journalists that the projected war had "anything to do with oil." <1> He echoed Defense Minister Donald Rumsfeld, who on 11/14/02 told CBS News that "It has nothing to do with oil, literally nothing to do with oil."

    Speaking to British MPs, Prime Minister Tony Blair was just as explicit: "Let me deal with the conspiracy theory idea that this is somehow to do with oil. There is no way whatever if oil were the issue that it would not be infinitely simpler to cut a deal with Saddam...." (London Times 1/15/03).

    Nor did Bush's State of the Union Message, or Colin Powell's address to the United Nations Security Council, once mention the word "oil." Instead the talk was (in the president's words) of "Iraq's illegal weapons programs, its attempts to hide those weapons from inspectors, and its links to terrorist groups."

    However our leaders are not being candid with us. Oil has been a major US concern about Iraq in internal and unpublicized documents, since the start of this Administration, and indeed earlier. As Michael Renner has written in Foreign Policy in Focus, February 14, 2003, "Washington's War on Iraq is the Lynchpin to Controlling Persian Gulf Oil."

    But the need to dominate oil from Iraq is also deeply intertwined with the defense of the dollar. Its current strength is supported by OPEC's requirement (secured by a secret agreement between the US and Saudi Arabia) that all OPEC oil sales be denominated in dollars. This requirement is currently threatened by the desire of some OPEC countries to allow OPEC oil sales to be paid in euros.

    The Internally Stated US Goal of Securing the Flow of Oil from the Middle East

    As early as April 1997, a report from the James A. Baker Institute of Public Policy at Rice University addressed the problem of "energy security" for the United States, and noted that the US was increasingly threatened by oil shortages in the face of the inability of oil supplies to keep up with world demand. In particular the report addressed "The Threat of Iraq and Iran" to the free flow of oil out of the Middle East. It concluded that Saddam Hussein was still a threat to Middle Eastern security and still had the military capability to exercise force beyond Iraq's borders.

    The Bush Administration returned to this theme as soon as it took office in 2001, by following the lead of a second report from the same Institute. <2> This Task Force Report was co-sponsored by the Council on Foreign Relations in New York, another group historically concerned about US access to overseas oil resources. The Report represented a consensus of thinking among energy experts of both political parties, and was signed by Democrats as well as Republicans. <3>

    The report, Strategic Energy Policy Challenges for the 21st Century, concluded: "The United States remains a prisoner of its energy dilemma. Iraq remains a de-stabilizing influence to ... the flow of oil to international markets from the Middle East. Saddam Hussein has also demonstrated a willingness to threaten to use the oil weapon and to use his own export program to manipulate oil markets. Therefore the US should conduct an immediate policy review toward Iraq including military, energy, economic and political/ diplomatic assessments."

    The Task Force meetings were attended by members of the new Bush Administration's Department of Energy, and the report was read by members of Vice-President Cheney's own Energy Task Force. When Cheney issued his own national energy plan, it too declared that "The [Persian] Gulf will be a primary focus of U.S. international energy policy." It agreed with the Baker report that the U.S. is increasingly dependent on imported oil and that it may be necessary to overcome foreign resistance in order to gain access to new supplies.

    Later the point was made more bluntly by Anthony H. Cordesman, senior analyst at Washington's Center for Strategic and International Studies: "Regardless of whether we say so publicly, we will go to war, because Saddam sits at the center of a region with more than 60 percent of all the world's oil reserves."

    The Unstated US Goals of Increasing the Flow of Oil from the Middle East, and US Dominance of the Area

    Behind the acknowledged concern about the "free flow" of Persian Gulf oil are other motives. Following the recommendations of the Task Force Report, the Bush administration wishes to increase international (which may well turn out to mean US) investment in the under-developed Iraq oilfields. On 1/16/03 the Wall Street Journal reported that officials from the White House, State Department, and Department of Defense have been meeting informally with executives from Halliburton, Schlumberger, ExxonMobil, ChevronTexaco and ConocoPhillips to plan the post-war expansion of oil production from Iraq (whose oilfields were largely held by US companies prior to their nationalization). The Journal story has since been denied by Administration officials; but, as the Guardian noted on 1/27/03, "It stretches credulity somewhat to imagine that the subject has never been broached." <4>

    It is worth pointing out that Saddam Hussein already has offered exploratory concessions (which remained inactive because of the UN sanctions) to France, China, Russia, Brazil, Italy, and Malaysia. If Saddam is replaced by a new client regime, it seems likely that these concessions will be superseded, although there are reports that the US has offered France, Russia and China a share of post-war Iraqi oil, as an inducement to get their support in the Security Council. <5> Last September former CIA Chief Woolsey threatened in the Washington Post (9/15/02) that the price for participation by France and Russia in the post-war Iraq oil bonanza should be their support for "regime change." <6> It would not take much of such menacing talk from official sources to turn the Bush campaign against Iraq into a campaign against Europe (see Postscript).

    Iraq's proven oil reserves are 113 billion barrels, the second largest in the world after Saudi Arabia, and eleven percent of the world's total. The total reserves could be 200 million barrels or more, all of it relatively easy and cheap to extract. Thus increasing Iraqi oil production will diminish the market pressure on oil-importing countries like the US. It will also weaken the power of OPEC to influence oil markets by decisions to restrict output. Indeed, were Iraqi oil production to expand to near its capacity, the quotas established by OPEC would cease to be honored in today's market. <7>

    But the US is not just interested in oil from Iraq, it is concerned to maintain political dominance over all the oil-producing countries of the region. Secretary of State Colin Powell gave a glimpse of US intentions when he told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee on February 6 that success in the Iraq war "could fundamentally reshape that region in a powerful, positive way that will enhance U.S. interests." In conceding that it will be necessary to station US troops in occupied Iraq for the foreseeable future, the US is serving notice to Iran and to Saudi Arabia (both of which were once secure bases for US troops but are so no longer) that the US will reassert its presence as the dominant military power in the region.

    The Unstated US Goal of Preserving Dollar Hegemony Over the Global Oil Market

    Dominance of Middle Eastern oil will mean in effect maintaining dollar hegemony over the world oil economy. Given its present strategies, the US is constrained to demand no less. As I explain in this extract from my book, Drugs, Oil, and War (pp. 41-42, 53-54), the present value of the US dollar, unjustified on purely economic grounds, is maintained by political arrangements, one of the chief of which is to ensure that all OPEC oil purchases will continue to be denominated in US dollars. (This commitment of OPEC to dollar oil sales was secured in the 1970s by a secret agreement between the US and Saudi Arabia, before the two countries began to drift apart over Israel and other issues.) <8>

    The chief reason why dollars are more than pieces of green paper is that countries all over the world need them for purchases, principally of oil. This requires them in addition to maintain dollar reserves to protect their own currency; and these reserves, when invested, help maintain the current high levels of the US securities markets.

    As Henry Liu has written vividly in the online Asian Times (4/11/02),

    "World trade is now a game in which the US produces dollars and the rest of the world produces things that dollars can buy. The world's interlinked economies no longer trade to capture a comparative advantage; they compete in exports to capture needed dollars to service dollar-denominated foreign debts and to accumulate dollar reserves to sustain the exchange value of their domestic currencies. To prevent speculative and manipulative attacks on their currencies, the world's central banks must acquire and hold dollar reserves in corresponding amounts to their currencies in circulation. The higher the market pressure to devalue a particular currency, the more dollar reserves its central bank must hold. This creates a built-in support for a strong dollar that in turn forces the world's central banks to acquire and hold more dollar reserves, making it stronger. This phenomenon is known as dollar hegemony, which is created by the geopolitically constructed peculiarity that critical commodities, most notably oil, are denominated in dollars. Everyone accepts dollars because dollars can buy oil. The recycling of petro-dollars is the price the US has extracted from oil-producing countries for US tolerance of the oil-exporting cartel since 1973.

    "By definition, dollar reserves must be invested in US assets, creating a capital-accounts surplus for the US economy. Even after a year of sharp correction, US stock valuation is still at a 25-year high and trading at a 56 percent premium compared with emerging markets."

    But central bankers around the world do not expect either the US dollar or the US stock markets to sustain their current levels. As William Greider in The Nation (9/23/02) has pointed out:

    "US economy's net foreign indebtedness--the accumulation of two decades of running larger and larger trade deficits--will reach nearly 25 percent of US GDP this year, or roughly $2.5 trillion. Fifteen years ago, it was zero. Before America's net balance of foreign assets turned negative, in 1988, the United States was a creditor nation itself, investing and lending vast capital to others, always more than it borrowed. Now the trend line looks most alarming. If the deficits persist around the current level of $400 billion a year or grow larger, the total US indebtedness should reach $3.5 trillion in three years or so. Within a decade, it would total 50 percent of GDP."

    There is also a major potential threat to the overpriced dollar in Japan's unresolved deflationary crisis. As observers like Lawrence A. Joyce have commented, the dollar would take a major pummeling if the Japanese government (as seems quite possible) were suddenly required to fulfil its legal obligations to bail out failed Japanese banks (which could easily happen if a sustained scarcity of oil were to keep oil prices at $40 a barrel or higher):

    "There is only one place where the Japanese government can get enough money to bail out its banking system: The Japanese government owns about 15% of our U.S. Treasury securities. And it would have to start selling them if it found itself facing a major banking crisis.

    "That would send the already ailing dollar down even further. And the initiation of a sale of our Treasury securities by Japan, of course, would immediately trigger a worldwide stampede to do the same before the securities become worth only a fraction of what they were purchased for. At the same time, interest rates in the U.S. would immediately go through the roof."

    Washington is of course aware of these problems, and believes that overwhelming military strength and the will to use it supply the answer, persuading or forcing other countries to support the dollar at its artificial level as the key to their own security. In an article entitled "Asia: the Military-Market Link," and published by the U.S. Naval Institute in January 2002, Professor Thomas Barnett of the US Naval War College, wrote: "We trade little pieces of paper (our currency, in the form of a trade deficit) for Asia's amazing array of products and services. We are smart enough to know this is a patently unfair deal unless we offer something of great value along with those little pieces of paper. That product is a strong US Pacific Fleet, which squares the transaction nicely."

    There is some merit to this argument with respect to friendly countries like Japan, whose defense costs have been lowered by the US presence in Asia. But of course the Islamic countries of the world are less likely to appreciate the "great value" of a threatening US presence. Instead they are more likely to follow the example of Malaysian Prime Minister Mahathir Mohamad, and turn to the Islamic gold dinar as a way to diminish dollar hegemony in world markets and increase the power of Islamic nations to challenge US policies.

    The United States has at present little reason to fear a challenge to the dollar from Malaysia. But Malaysia is an Islamic country; and the US has every reason to fear a similar challenge from the Islamic nations in OPEC, were they to force OPEC to cease OPEC oil sales in dollars, and denominate them instead in euros.

    The Unstated US Goal of Preserving Dollar Hegemony Against Competition from the Euro

    As noted in a recent article by W. Clark, "The Real But Unspoken Reasons for the Iraq War", the OPEC underpinning for the US dollar has shown signs of erosion in recent years. Iraq was one of the first OPEC countries, in 2000, to convert its reserves from dollars to euros. At the time a commentator for Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty predicted that Saddam's political act "will cost Iraq millions in lost revenue." In fact Iraq has profited handsomely from the 17 percent gain in the value of the euro against the dollar in that time. <9>

    Other countries have gradually been climbing on to the euro bandwagon. An article in the Iran Financial News, 8/25/02, revealed that more than half of Iran's Forex Reserve Fund assets had been converted from dollars to euros. In 2002 China began diversifying its currency reserves away from dollars into euros. According to Business Week (2/17/03) Russia's Central Bank in the past year has doubled its euro holdings to 20 percent of its $48 billion foreign exchange reserves. And for a very good reason, according to its First Deputy Chairman Oleg Vyugin: "Returns on dollar instruments are very low now. Other currency instruments pay more."

    Business Week continues:

    `The story is the same across the globe. Money traders say that institutions as diverse as Bank of Canada, People's Bank of China, and Central Bank of Taiwan are giving more weight to the European currency. By the end of this year, they predict, the euro could account for 20% of global foreign currency reserves, which today amount to a cool $2.4 trillion. Little more than a year ago, the euro made up just 10%. "No one is saying that the euro's going to replace the dollar as the premier reserve currency," says Michael Klawitter, a currency strategist at WestLB Research in London. "But it will increase in importance for many central banks."...

    `The shift to the euro has big implications for the foreign exchange markets and the U.S. and European economies. Currency specialists say the yawning U.S. current account deficit, now at 5%, is bound to drive the dollar down further, and the euro still higher, over the next two to four years. Although the greenback may stage a short-term recovery once the looming war with Iraq is over, predictions are that it will then continue its downward trend, and that central banks will play their part in the descent. "Even if central banks increase their euro holdings by just a few percent, it will have a major impact in the markets," says Klawitter. "We're talking many billions of dollars."'

    If not deterred, OPEC could follow suit. Libya has been urging for some time that oil be priced in euros rather than dollars. Javad Yarjani, an Iranian senior OPEC official, told a European Union seminar in April 2002 that, despite the problems raised by such a conversion, "I believe that OPEC will not discount entirely the possibility of adopting euro pricing and payments in the future."

    Meanwhile Hugo Chavez has been taking Venezuelan oil out of the petrodollar economy by bartering oil directly for commodities from thirteen other third world countries. Although this has not yet qualified Venezuela for official membership in Bush's "axis of evil," the heavy hand of the Bush Administration in the recent coup attempt against Chavez was only too obvious. (See "Venezuela Coup Linked to Bush Team," London Observer, 4/21/02, for details about the roles of US officials Elliot Abrams, Otto Reich, and John Negroponte.) <10>

    Conclusion: How Should the US Be Addressing These Real Problems?

    To conclude, the Bush administration is not threatening Iraq out of pique or whim. The recent policies of both parties have indeed made the US vulnerable to foreign oil and petrodollar pressures. But hopefully decent Americans will protest the notion that it is appropriate to rain missiles and bombs upon civilians of another country, who have had little or nothing to do with this crisis of America's own making.

    Some in addition will continue to explore avenues whereby America's oil and financial vulnerabilities can be diminished without continuing down the road to Armageddon. These problems are serious, but economists have put forward proposals for diminishing them peacefully and multilaterally. With respect to oil, Ralph Nader has just written, "The demand is simple: Stop this war before it starts and immediately establish a sane national energy security strategy." In fact one key ingredient of such a strategy, restriction of demand, can be found in saner parts of the Baker Institute reports that the Bush administration has mostly chosen to ignore.

    But an energy strategy for the United States must be addressed in the larger context of an economic and financial restructuring of global institutions and currency flows. With respect to the more esoteric financial problems of the dollar, the economist and futurist Hazel Henderson has written that "My recommendations for reforming current international institutions, revitalizing the UN and expanding civic society are summarized in Beyond Globalization (1999). A more balanced world order must center on reforming global finance, taxing currency exchange and reducing the dollar's unsustainable role as the world's de facto reserve currency (which is destructive for all countries -- even the US itself). I favor a global reserve currency regime based on the parity of the US dollar and the euro. The fundamentals in the USA and the EU suggest that the G-8 has an opportunity to peg the dollar and the euro into a trading band. This, together with the new issue of SDR's [Special Drawing Rights]. proposed by all the IMF country members, promoted by George Soros and opposed only by the USA, would lend to more stable currency markets."

    Without endorsing these specific proposals, I wish to second two rather obvious principles:

    1) The problems of global financial instability must be addressed. As George Soros, famed as the man who broke the British pound in 1992, wrote later in the Financial Times,” "To argue that financial markets in general, and international lending in particular, need to be regulated is likely to outrage the financial community. Yet the evidence for just that is overwhelming."

    2) A multilateral approach to these core problems is the only way to proceed. The US is strong enough to dominate the world militarily. Economically it is in decline, less and less competitive, and increasingly in debt. The Bush peoples' intention appears to be to override economic realities with military ones, as if there were no risk of economic retribution. They should be mindful of Britain's humiliating retreat from Suez in 1956, a retreat forced on it by the United States as a condition for propping up the failing British pound.

    America's influence in the world has up to now been based largely on good will generated by its willingness to resolve matters multilaterally. This legacy of good will should be acknowledged and consolidated by the Bush Administration, as it faces the difficult post-war challenge of restoring law and order in Iraq. US military might may be unchallenged, but the health of our economy and finance depends on peace and cooperation with our friends.

    FOOTNOTES

    <1> Ari Fleischer Press Briefing of February 6, 2003:

    Q Since you speak for the President, we have no access to him, can you categorically deny that the United States will take over the oil fields when we win this war? Which is apparently obvious and you're on your way and I don't think you doubt your victory. Oil -- is it about oil?

    MR. FLEISCHER: Helen, as I've told you many times, if this had anything to do with oil, the position of the United States would be to lift the sanctions so the oil could flow. This is not about that. This is about saving lives by protecting the American people....

    Q There are reports that we've divided up the oil already, divvied it up with the Russians and French and so forth. Isn't that true?....

    MR. FLEISCHER: No, there's no truth to that, that we would divide up the oil fields.

    (Concerning Mr. Fleischer's second answer, see footnotes 4 and 5 -- PDS.)

    For an exhaustive rebuttal of a similar statement by Ari Fleischer on 10/30/02, see Larry Chin, "The Deep Politics of Regime Removal in Iraq", onlinejournal.com.

    <2> In an earlier draft of this essay I quoted extensively (as have many other writers) from a news story by Neil Mackay in the Scotland Sunday Herald (10/6/02). This story claimed that Vice-President Cheney himself commissioned the second Task Force Report, and that former US Secretary of State James Baker delivered the Report to Cheney. I now doubt that either claim is true.

    <3> One of the Baker Task Force members was Kenneth Lay, the former chief executive of Enron, which went bankrupt after carrying out massive accountancy fraud. The Task Force Report begins with references to "recent energy price spikes" and "electricity outages in California," which we now know were engineered by Enron market manipulations for which two Enron energy traders have since pleaded guilty to conspiracy charges (Forbes, 2/5/03).

    <4> An extremely interesting news item last October in Alexander's oilandgas.com revealed that the US was planning not only for the post-war exploitation of Iraq's oil reserves, but for Iraq's relationship to OPEC as well:

    "30-10-02 The US State Department has pushed back its planned meeting with Iraqi opposition leaders on exploiting Iraq's oil and gas reserves after a US military offensive removes Saddam Hussein from power to early December. According to a source at the State Department, all the desired participants are not yet available.

    "The Bush administration wants to have a working group of 12 to 20 people focused on Iraqi oil and gas to be able to recommend to an interim government ways of restoring the petroleum sector following a military attack in order to increase oil exports to partially pay for a possible US military occupation government -- further fuelling the view that controlling Iraqi oil is at the heart of the Bush campaign to replace Hussein with a more compliant regime. (Emphasis added -- PDS)....

    "According to the source, the working group will not only prepare recommendations for the rehabilitation of the Iraqi petroleum sector post-Hussein, but will address questions regarding the country's continued membership in OPEC and whether it should be allowed to produce as much as possible or be limited by an OPEC quota, and it will consider whether to honour contracts made between the Hussein government and foreign oil companies, including the $ 3.5 b[illio]n project to be carried out by Russian interests to redevelop Iraq's oilfields, which, along with numerous other development projects, has been thwarted by United Nations sanctions.

    <5> "Oil firms wait as Iraq crisis unfolds" by Robert Collier, San Francisco Chronicle,9/29/02:

    `Iraqi opposition leaders suggest that unless France, Russia and China support the U.S. line in the Security Council, their oil companies may find themselves blacklisted.

    `"We will examine all the contracts that Saddam Hussein has made, and we will cancel all those that are not in the interest of the Iraqi people and will reopen bidding on them," said Faisal Qaragholi, operations officer of the Iraqi National Congress, the opposition coalition based in London that plays a central role in the American anti-Hussein strategy.

    `Ahmed Chalabi, the INC leader, has gone even further, proposing the creation of consortium of American companies to develop Iraq's oil fields.'

    <6> As the Asia Times reported on 10/21/02,

    `The war of positioning for a possible post-Saddam Iraqi environment is getting more ruthless by the minute. American oil conglomerates are openly courting representatives of the Iraqi National Congress (INC), the umbrella opposition. The darling of Exxon Mobil and Chevron Texaco is Ahmed Chalabi, US vice President Dick Cheney's pal and major contender for the title of Iraq's number one opposition figure. Chalabi, the INC leader, has already stressed on the record that he favors the creation of a "US-led consortium to develop Iraqi oil fields. American companies will have a big shot at Iraqi oil."

    `To widespread doubts about how a pro-American post-Saddam government would respect contracts signed with non-American oil giants, the INC has reassured all players - mostly Russian and European - that the new post-Saddam administration will honor all its PSAs.

    `The Future of Iraq Group, a State Department task force, officially is not talking about oil - which sounds like a joke. [Cf. footnote 4 -- PDS] And there's also no official confirmation that oil has been a key issue in the current hardcore Security Council negotiations between the US and Britain, on one side, and France, Russia and China on the other. But it is obviously not by historical accident that oil companies from these five permanent Security Council members are all positioning themselves for the post-Saddam environment.

    `People like former CIA supremo James Woolsey are not even disguising Washington's plan to turn Iraq into an American protectorate with an Arab Hamid Karzai al-la Afghanistan eager to open the oil taps for American oil giants. Woolsey had been openly saying that if France and Russia contributed to "regime change", their oil companies would be able to "work together" with the new regime and with American companies. Otherwise, they would be left contemplating passing cargoes in the Gulf.'

    <7> Note that the true issue here is not just access to Iraq oil, but control over it. As Michael Parenti reminds us, in 1998, when the UN allowed Iraq to increase its exports into an already over-supplied oil market, this was perceived as a threat to US interests:

    `The San Francisco Chronicle (22 February 1998) headlined its story "IRAQ'S OIL POSES THREAT TO THE WEST." In fact, Iraqi crude poses no threat to "the West" only to Western oil investors. If Iraq were able to reenter the international oil market, the Chronicle reported, "it would devalue British North Sea oil, undermine American oil production and---much more important---it would destroy the huge profits which the United States [read, US oil companies] stands to gain from its massive investment in Caucasian oil production, especially in Azerbaijan."'

    <8> "The US handled the quadrupling of oil prices in the 1970s by arranging, by means of secret agreements with the Saudis, for the recycling of petrodollars back into the US economy. The first of these deals assured a special and on-going Saudi stake in the health of the US dollar; the second secured continuing Saudi support for the pricing of all OPEC oil in dollars. See David E. Spiro, The Hidden Hand of American Hegemony: Petrodollar Recycling and International Markets (Ithaca: Cornell UP, 1999), x, 103-1a, 121). These two deals assured that the US economy would not be impoverished by OPEC oil price hikes. The heaviest burdens would be borne instead by the economies of less developed countries" (Peter Dale Scott, Drugs, Oil, and War: The United States in Afganistan, Colombia, and Indochina, (Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield, 2003), 41-42; cf. 53-54).

    <9> The 17 percent gain was calculated as of February 2003, when the euro was worth $1.08. Now, as of May 2003, the euro is worth $1.16.

    <10> In August 2000 Chavez met with Saddam Hussein in Baghdad, the first head of state to visit him since the 1991 Gulf War. Chavez told the press later that "We spoke at length on how to boost the role of OPEC." This was part of an extended Chavez tour to bolster OPEC unity against US-led pressure to lower oil prices, then at nearly $30 a barrel.
    reply to this post
    #
    prom...
    prometheusPAN
    online 111
    Re: Let's revist the WAR thing
    Today, 12:54 AM
    in response to: Re: Let's revist the WAR thing
    theres millions of hits more of where that came from ronnie.

    iraq is and always was a war for oil. everybody knows this except the zombie crowd.
    reply to this post
    #
    prom...
    prometheusPAN
    online 111
    Re: Let's revist the WAR thing
    Today, 12:58 AM
    in response to: Re: Let's revist the WAR thing
    www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...1214.ece

    www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/0...66.html

    www.antiwarcommittee.org/resou...il.htm

    tp://www.hinduonnet.com/stories/20...0031000.htm
    The Hindu April 12, 2003

    We all knew the invasion of Iraq was about oil. Here was the country with the second largest proven reserves of crude and the easiest to extract. The invader-country, on the other hand, was the world's largest consumer of oil and it now imports more fuel than it produces. The U.S. is also home to most of the largest petroleum extracting and producing companies.

    Now that Iraq has been occupied and is to be administered, Roman Empire style, by serving and retired U.S. army consuls, Iraq's oil resources are there for the picking.

    All the links between Iraq's resources and U.S. needs must have been recognised by the members of the inner circles of decision-making in Washington, given their past connections with the petroleum industry. But was there a link between the U.S. invasion and the currency in which global trade in oil is conducted? The theory has been advanced that the war was all about aborting a bid, experimented with by Iraq, to end the central role of the U.S. dollar in oil trade. The stakes were too high here. A change from the dollar to the euro would have shaken the very foundations of the economy of the imperial power, so the threat had to be cut off at its very roots. The theory seems almost conspiratorial and therefore implausible.

    But the developments in the global oil market in recent years have been there to take note of. And on the other side, there are the real conditions which have made the U.S. economy dependent on the dollar retaining its pre-eminence in the global economy. These connections too would not have escaped the notice of the inner circles of power in Washington and therefore must have played a definite role in persuading the U.S. that it was in its economic interests to invade Iraq.

    The U.S. dollar is the preferred currency of global trade. More than two-thirds of national foreign exchange reserves are denominated in the U.S. dollar. About 40 per cent of the dollars issued by the U.S. are held outside the country by non-U.S. nationals and entities.

    All this makes the U.S. currency the most powerful one in the world; the de facto international currency. This power is in part a reflection of U.S. economic supremacy during 1950-75. The global power of the dollar has continued for other reasons, a reflection, especially since 1990, of U.S. political and military supremacy. When a particular currency is sought after by the rest of the world, the issuing economy has much to profit. The U.S. has done precisely that over the past four decades. When the dollar was linked to the value of gold (until the early 1970s), the U.S. used the status of its currency to finance its Vietnam War. It kept the currency presses running knowing that the rest of the world was willing to hold whatever it printed. Even the delinking of the dollar from the value of gold made no difference.

    With members of the Organisation of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) denominating oil sales in dollars and building up stocks of "petrodollars", the U.S. more than ever began to use the dollar's status to do things that no other country could afford to. It consistently ran up huge current account deficits in its balance of payments - because there always have been Japanese surpluses, petrodollars and the funds of the corrupt which have been invested in U.S. securities and other local financial assets. The rest of the world has been, in effect, financing domestic U.S. savings.

    The U.S. trade deficit now stands at $460 billion and its current account deficit at over $500 billion (5 per cent of the GDP). This means, as one U.S. economist, David Dapice, recently put it, the U.S. depends on a daily capital inflow from the rest of the world of $1.5 billion to prop up domestic consumption. The value of the dollar is therefore held up by large capital inflows.

    What if the dollar ceases to be the currency of choice in the global economy or even if the euro becomes a serious contender? What if all the funds parked in the U.S. money are pulled out? What if this flow of capital dries up?

    The effect on the U.S. economy would be cataclysmic since the amounts involved are huge. Robert Brenner, another U.S. economist, estimated that in end 2000, foreign ownership of the U.S.' gross assets were equivalent to as much as 67 per cent of GDP and argued that "any serious attempt to flee these assets would put enormous pressure on the dollar". More recent data from the U.S. Federal Reserve show that the situation has not changed since then. At the end of 2002, the market value of foreign ownership of just U.S. financial assets (corporate equity and bonds, U.S. Treasury securities and bank deposits) added up to $3,350 billion or more than one-third of the U.S.' GDP.

    The U.S. is clearly financially dependent on the rest of the world. If this is a lever foreigners do not use, then it is because there is - as yet - no threat to the dollar as a global currency.

    Where do oil and Iraq fit into all this? Global oil contracts are denominated in the U.S. dollar. This means that the U.S. consumers of oil are unaffected by the movement of their currency, while the rest of the world ends up paying more for oil whenever the dollar's value goes up. So, any shift away from the dollar will affect consumers. The annual value of the global oil trade is now more than $600 billion. This accounts for 10 per cent of world trade. A movement away from the dollar denomination of oil contracts would naturally reduce the global importance of the currency and fundamentally weaken the U.S. economy. Whether out of design or not, Iraq had already demonstrated that an oil economy outside the world of the U.S. dollar was possible. In 2000, Iraq asked for and was granted the right by the United Nations to have its oil exports under the U.N. oil-for-food programme conducted in euros.

    What seemed a foolish decision then (because the euro had plunged in value) turned out to be very profitable for Iraq. The appreciation of the euro by 20 per cent since late 2000 meant that Iraq got more for its exports. More than two years ago, the U.S.-based energy analyst, Arjun Makhijani, drew attention to the implications for the U.S. of a larger shift to the euro in global oil trade. Iraq's experiment has not prompted other oil exporters to follow the same path.

    But OPEC has taken notice. In as carefully worded a speech as was possible, Javad Yarjani, a senior OPEC official, spoke in 2002 of the possibilities and benefits of the world moving away from dollar oil contracts and shifting to euros. Since nearly half of OPEC's imports are from the European Union and OPEC is the main supplier of oil to the E.U., such a shift makes sense, to begin with, for the European economies. Russia is reported to be considering oil futures in euros and Iran switching a major part of its foreign exchange reserves to the same currency. A larger shift to the euro will spell larger trouble for the dollar.

    This then was the setting for the U.S. invasion of Iraq. An economy that is powered by debt-laden consumption growth, that has low or negative savings, that keeps running up huge current account deficits and can afford to do all this solely because of foreigners' preference for its currency has everything to lose from even the smallest of threats to the present order of things.

    It was in the U.S.' interest to end the first experiment of a switch to the euro in oil contracts. Its invasion of Iraq has accomplished that.
    reply to this post
    #
    #
    prom...
    prometheusPAN
    online 111
    Re: Let's revist the WAR thing
    Today, 1:08 AM
    in response to: Re: Let's revist the WAR thing
    opinion.inquirer.net/viewpoi...he-Media

    www.youtube.com/watch

    www.youtube.com/watch

    www.youtube.com/watch
    reply to this post
    #
    .
    .
    offline 35
    Re: Let's revist the WAR thing
    Today, 4:03 AM
    in response to: Re: Let's revist the WAR thing
    1) You said it. You stated that FOR THE COST of the Iraq war, we could have ended world poverty. This is a ridiculous and laughably naive statement

    2) "BS. Virtually every sociologist says that poverty is the chief contributing factor to crime and war and terrorism.
    Now you, the ignorant republican is going to pretend to tell me what sociologists think? Thats hilarious. "

    bwahahahahahah. hahahah. gasp. First off, for the eight millionth time, not only am I far from ignorant on these issues, and have the diplomas to prove it, both academically and militarily, your initial claim is still TOTALLY bogus.

    www.nber.org/digest/may05/w10859.html
    www.hoover.org/publicatio...437231.html

    "The experts have maintained for a long time that poverty does not cause terrorism and prosperity does not cure it."

    www.fas.org/irp/threat/frd.html

    "Russell and Miller found that more than two-thirds of the terrorists surveyed came from middle-class or even upper-class backgrounds"

    read "Suicide Bombers: Allah's New Martyrs" by Farhad Khosrokhavar, who is pretty much considered to be one of the leading sociologists on this issue, and he makes it clear - Muslim suicide bombers are middle class and well educated.

    www.foreignpolicy.com/story/cms.php

    www.theatlantic.com/doc/200306/hoffman

    "And contrary to popular belief, the bombers are not drawn exclusively from the ranks of the poor but have included two sons of millionaires. (Most of the September 11 terrorists came from comfortable middle- to upper-middle-class families and were well educated.) The Israeli journalist Ronni Shaked, an expert on the Palestinian terrorist group Hamas, who writes for Yedioth Ahronoth, an Israeli daily, has debunked the myth that it is only people with no means of improving their lot in life who turn to suicide terrorism. "All leaders of Hamas," he told me, "are university graduates, some with master's degrees. This is a movement not of poor, miserable people but of highly educated people who are using [the image of] poverty to make the movement more powerful."

    gosh, once again I'm right, and you're wrong. shocker.

    3) "I proved bush was a liar. You dropped the thread and didn't resurface for weeks"

    Uh, no, you did nothing of the sort

    4) "Yeah, your injury was to your delusional mental cage and capacity to sustain your doublethink"

    No, actually it was to my plantar tendons from humping 70 lbs around 25 miles on a brutal ruck march.
    reply to this post
    #
    .
    .
    offline 35
    Re: Let's revist the WAR thing
    Today, 4:10 AM
    in response to: Re: Let's revist the WAR thing
    Oh gosh, there goes Prom again, citing blogs and what not as hard evidence. Try sourcing something with some credence, would you?

    Maybe a reputable paper, you know, one that publishes things from people who actually know what they're talking about?

    or maybe some random blogger

    www.nowpublic.com/world/ira...acts-legit
    www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...17.html

    I like both.

    You simply wont find this "iraq war for oil" argument in any respected academic or professional journal like Foreign Affairs or Foreign Policy Review - and there's a reason for that
    reply to this post
    #
    prom...
    prometheusPAN
    online 111
    new post
    Re: Let's revist the WAR thing
    Today, 5:01 AM
    in response to: Re: Let's revist the WAR thing
    1) You said it. You stated that FOR THE COST of the Iraq war, we could have ended world poverty. This is a ridiculous and laughably naive statement
    ----------
    According to a doublethinking fascist ignoramus.
    ------------

    bwahahahahahah. hahahah. gasp. First off, for the eight millionth time, not only am I far from ignorant on these issues, and have the diplomas to prove it, both academically and militarily, your initial claim is still TOTALLY bogus.
    ---------
    Military credentials huh? I think that pretty much proves my point.
    --------

    www.nber.org/digest/may05/w10859.html
    www.hoover.org/publicatio...437231.html

    "The experts have maintained for a long time that poverty does not cause terrorism and prosperity does not cure it."

    www.fas.org/irp/threat/frd.html
    ------------
    While very interesting, all you have is propaganda from republican and etc sources.
    ---------

    "Russell and Miller found that more than two-thirds of the terrorists surveyed came from middle-class or even upper-class backgrounds"
    ----------
    Irrelevant. The cause of terrorists is that they see themselves as freedom fighters.
    They represent in their own minds those who we are oppressing.
    ---------

    read "Suicide Bombers: Allah's New Martyrs" by Farhad Khosrokhavar, who is pretty much considered to be one of the leading sociologists on this issue, and he makes it clear - Muslim suicide bombers are middle class and well educated.
    ---------
    Again, they think that they represent millions of people living in concentration camp conditions in gaza and etc.
    ---------

    "And contrary to popular belief, the bombers are not drawn exclusively from the ranks of the poor but have included two sons of millionaires.
    ---------
    It is well known and well understood that most high ranking terrorists are from the elite caste, just like our own leaders are from
    our elite caste. Thats a pathetic straw man argument.
    -----------


    gosh, once again I'm right, and you're wrong. shocker.
    -----------
    No, all you are is a good distortionist and straw man argument user.
    ----------

    3) "I proved bush was a liar. You dropped the thread and didn't resurface for weeks"

    Uh, no, you did nothing of the sort
    ------------
    The evidence to the contrary is overwhelming.
    -------------

    4) "Yeah, your injury was to your delusional mental cage and capacity to sustain your doublethink"

    No, actually it was to my plantar tendons from humping 70 lbs around 25 miles on a brutal ruck march.
    ------------
    Sure, we believe you.
    reply to this post
    #
    prom...
    prometheusPAN
    online 111
    new post
    Re: Let's revist the WAR thing
    Today, 5:04 AM
    in response to: Re: Let's revist the WAR thing
    Oh gosh, there goes Prom again, citing blogs and what not as hard evidence. Try sourcing something with some credence, would you?
    ------------
    Theres just so much evidence. What, you don't think john mcccain or alan greenspan qualify?
    As usual, all you do is ignore the evidence presented, you obviously haven't even looked at it.
    -----------

    Maybe a reputable paper, you know, one that publishes things from people who actually know what they're talking about?
    -----------
    Sure, i can dig up scholarly articles on sociology. But you won't listen to those either.
    --------


    You simply wont find this "iraq war for oil" argument in any respected academic or professional journal like Foreign Affairs or Foreign Policy Review - and there's a reason for that
    ----------
    You are an idiot. Everytbody knows that the war was for oil, your inability to see obvious cause and effect only prooves you are delusional.

    But lets go one thing at a time, shall we?
    reply to this post
    #
    prom...
    prometheusPAN
    online 111
    new post
    Re: Let's revist the WAR thing
    Today, 5:07 AM
    in response to: Re: Let's revist the WAR thing
    first off, terrorism is caused by several root factors, of which poverty is only one lynchpin.
    ------------
    www.neuromaster.com/LOCsocps...pt_04.htm

    www.iospress.nl/flyers_b/f...6037543.pdf

    Terrorism is a multi dimensional phenomenon and this publication aims at
    comprehending it. This book has unique characteristics in terms of its focus on
    different issues; it has a comprehensive focus on the conceptualization of terrorism
    and understanding of it. It does not only explain the concept, it also addresses the
    important issues which help us to really understand why and how individuals commit
    such an act. Issues range from social and psychological analysis of a terrorist
    behavior to extremist subcultures and globalization. This publication also successfully
    reviews and analyzes underlying causes of terrorism and what really makes it
    valuable is that the chapters present the topics with relevant data which is current
    and up-to-date. Issues such as inequality, globalization, immigration, gender, and
    democracy are analyzed with research involving comprehensive data analysis.
    Furthermore, the book has both theoretical discussion and practical experience
    which makes this study a source book for the academicians and practitioners. It
    reflects the experience and knowledge of the authors most of whom have both
    academic and practical experience in the field. The chapters have the analysis based
    on professional experience and successful academic research.

    Contents:
    Introduction: Sociological and Psychological Aspects of Terrorism
    S. Ozeren and I.D. Gunes
    Understanding Terrorism: Conceptual Framework and Individual
    and Organizational Terrorist Behavior (First Five Articles)
    • Formation of the Concept of Terrorism / E. Sezgin
    • Theory of Prism: Individual Capital and Frustration / I.D. Gunes and S. Ozeren
    • Terrorism as Suicidal Homicide: A Durkheimian Approach / M. Sadri
    • Fundamentalism as a Universal Mindset – Case Study of Religious Fundamentalism: Turkish
    Hizbullah / O. Basibuyuk, O. Karakus and H. Akdogan
    • Terrorism as a Social Reality / T. Kiknadze
    Underlying Causes of Terrorism: Multidisciplinary Approach (First Five Articles)
    • Does Inequality Trigger Terrorism? / M. Kayaoglu
    • The Poverty, Inequality and Terrorism Relationship: An Empirical Analysis of Some Root Causes
    of Terrorism / M. Koseli
    • Democracy, Terrorism, and Islamist Movements: Comparing Hamas, Hizbullah, and the Islamic
    Action Front / C.R. Ryan
    • Social Causes of Terrorism in the Arab Society / D.M. Al-Badayneh
    • Terrorism and Migration in Turkey between 1992 and 1995 / Y. Simsek
    Responding to Terrorism: A Comprehensive Review
    • Amnesty as Counterterrorism Policy: An Evaluation of the Turkish Amnesty Law of 2003 / Z.
    Ozdogan and A. Ozdogan
    • Historical Perspectives on the Role of Federal, State and Local Law Enforcement Agencies in the
    United States in Domestic Intelligence Operations Relating to National Security / P.D. Schertzing
    • Adaptation of Community Policing in Arab and Muslim Communities in Response to Terrorism /
    M. Gozubenli and H. Akbas
    Legal Aspects of Responding to Terrorism: A Delicate Balance
    • Evaluation of the PATRIOT Act: Section 215 / A. Celik and F. Vursavas
    • The Senior British Judiciary and the “War on Terror”: “Not Ready to Make Nice” / A. Bradney
    • Rethinking the “Liberty-Security Balance” in Difficult Times: Some Notes on the Turkish
    Experience / Z. Arslan
    The Impact of Communication and Technology on Terrorism: Effective Facilitators (First Five
    Articles)
    • The Emerging Threat of Cyberterrorism / J.F. Addicott
    • Terrorists and the Internet / A. Woods
    • Communication Methods in Terrorist Organizations: A Case Study of Al-Qaeda Connected
    Terrorism in Turkey / I. Pekgozlu, H. Ozdemir and E. Ercikti
    • Osama bin Laden Audiotape and Its Effect on the US Newspapers / Y. Yuksel
    • Creating a Data Archive to Facilitate Research on Understanding and Responding to Terrori
    reply to this post
    #
    prom...
    prometheusPAN
    online 111
    new post
    Re: Let's revist the WAR thing
    Today, 5:08 AM
    in response to: Re: Let's revist the WAR thing
    Instructor: Colin J. Beck
    Office hours: Mondays 1-3 pm & by appointment
    Bldg 120, Rm 135
    (650) 723-0257
    cbeck@stanford.edu
    Sociology 109/209: Sociology of Terrorism
    Spring 2005
    Tuesdays and Thursdays, 3:15-4:30
    Building 200, Room 305
    This course explores social science accounts of the root causes of terrorism from the most micro
    of cognitive science understandings of terrorist acts to the most macro of historical theories
    concerning the dynamics of the international system. A critical understanding of explanations of
    terrorism and the nature of contemporary international terrorism is the goal of this course.
    The course is divided into four parts. Part I examines the issue of defining terrorism and how it
    can be studied from a social science perspective. Part II includes theoretical views on the
    dynamics of terrorism and a basic introduction to modern terrorism. Part III explores perspectives
    on the causes of terrorism through the case study of political Islam. Finally, Part IV is an in-depth
    look at Al-Qaeda and contemporary international terrorism in light of the theoretical perspectives
    covered in the first parts of the course.
    Readings. There are two required texts for this course, available in the bookstore:
    Bruce Hoffman 1998, Inside Terrorism. Columbia University Press: New York, NY.
    John Cooley 2002, Unholy Wars. Pluto Press: Sterling, VA.
    Additional required readings are noted on the syllabus below and are available on the Coursework
    system (coursework.stanford.edu) and are on reserve at Green Library.
    Requirements. All students are responsible for reading the assigned material, informed and
    engaged class participation, two short papers, a take-home midterm, and a longer final response
    paper. Students enrolled at the 200 level should undertake original research for the final paper and
    are responsible for an in-class presentation.
    Class Participation 10%
    Paper 1 15%
    Paper 2 15%
    Take-home midterm 25%
    Final Paper 35%
    Deadline Policy. Due dates are selected with care for the pace of the course as well as your
    comprehension of the material and are not flexible. Accordingly, late work will be penalized by a
    reduction of 1/3 a letter grade on that assignment for each day late. Once, and once only, during
    the quarter you may have a 24 hour extension, no explanation needed. No further extensions will
    be granted. Use it wisely.
    Accommodations, Auxiliary Aides and Services. If you have a disability that requires
    accommodation, please contact the Disability Resource Center (DRC). The DRC can provide a
    variety of resources to aid instruction, and will work with the instructor and the student to arrange
    suitable accommodation. www.stanford.edu/group/DRC/ and info@drc.stanford.edu
    Part I: Conceptualizing and Studying Terrorism
    March 29th, Tuesday Introduction
    March 31st, Thursday A Brief History of Terror
    US Department of State 2003, “Introduction” and “Year in Review,”
    Patterns of Global Terrorism, pgs i-xii and 1-5.
    Weber, Max. “The Meaning of ‘Ethical Neutrality’ in Sociology and
    Economics,” pgs 1-11.
    April 5th, Tuesday Conceptualizing Terrorism
    Tilly, Charles 2004. “Terror, Terrorism, Terrorists,” Sociological Theory,
    22(1): 5-13.
    Hoffman, Bruce 1998. “Defining Terrorism,” Inside Terrorism, pgs 13-
    44.
    April 7th, Thursday Studying Terrorism Sociologically
    Turk, Austin 2004. “Sociology of Terrorism,” Annual Review of
    Sociology, 30, 271-286.
    Senechal de la Roche, Roberta 2004. “Toward a Scientific Theory of
    Terrorism,” Sociological Theory , 22(1): 1-4.
    Part II: Dynamic Theories of Terrorism
    April 12th, Tuesday Micro-Theory of Terrorism
    Victoroff, Jeff 2005. “The Mind of the Terrorist: A Review and Critique
    of Psychological Approaches,” Journal of Conflict Resolution, 49(1): 3-
    42.
    Paper 1 due
    April 14th, Thursday Tactics of Terrorism
    Pape, Robert A. 2003. “The Strategic Logic of Suicide Terrorism,”
    American Political Science Review, 97(3): 343-361.
    Hoffman, Bruce 1998. “Terrorism, the Media and Public Opinion” and
    “The Modern Terrorist Mindset: Tactics, Targets and Technologies,”
    Inside Terrorism, pgs 132-184.
    April 19th, Tuesday The Terrorist Life-Cycle
    Della Porta, Donatella 1995. “Social Movements, Political Violence, and
    the State,” Social Movements, Political Violence and the State, pgs 187-
    216.
    Oberschall, Anthony 2004. “Explaining Terrorism: The Contribution of
    Collective Action Theory,” Sociological Theory, 22(1): 26-37.
    April 21st, Thursday State and State-Sponsored Terrorism
    Chomsky, Noam 2002. “Is the War on Terrorism Winnable?” and
    “Crimes of State,” 9-11, pgs 23-27, 39-57.
    Byman, Daniel 2003. “Should Hezbollah Be Next?” Foreign Affairs,
    82(6): 54-66.
    April 26th, Tuesday Battle of Algiers
    Hoffman, Bruce 1998. “The Post-Colonial Era,” Inside Terrorism, pgs
    44-65.
    Supplemental Readings on the Battle of Algiers
    April 28th, Thursday Terrorism in a Global Age
    Hoffman, Bruce 1998. “The Internationalization of Terrorism” and
    “Terrorism Today and Tomorrow,” Inside Terrorism, pgs 66-86, 185-
    213.
    Cooley, John 2002. “Preface to the Third Edition,” Unholy Wars, pgs xixviii.
    Part III: Theories of the Origins of Terrorism
    May 3rd, Tuesday Religion and Terror
    Juergensmeyer, Mark 2000. “Terror and God,” Terror in the Mind of
    God, pgs 3-15.
    Hoffman, Bruce 1998. “Religion and Terrorism,” Inside Terrorism, pgs
    87-129.
    Midterm due
    May 5th, Thursday A Brief History of Islam: Lewis vs. Said
    Lewis, Bernard 2003. “Introduction” and “The Rise of Terrorism,” The
    Crisis of Islam, pgs xv-xxxii and 138-164.
    Said, Edward 1997. “Introduction to the Vintage Edition,” Covering
    Islam, pgs xi-xlviii.
    May 10th, Tuesday Origins: Democracy, Economy and Palestine
    Krueger, Alan B. and Jitka Maleckova 2003. “Education, Poverty, and
    Terrorism: Is There a Causal Connection?” Journal of Economic
    Perspectives, 17(4): 119-144.
    United Nations Development Programme 2002. “Overview,” Arab
    Human Development Report 2002, 1-13.
    Paper 2 due
    May 12th, Thursday Origins: Culture and Modernization
    Huntington, Samuel P. 1993. “The Clash of Civilizations?” Foreign
    Affairs, 72(3): 22-40.
    Norris, Pippa and Ronald Inglehart 2002. “Islamic Culture and
    Democracy: Testing the ‘Clash of Civilizations’ Thesis,” Comparative
    Sociology 1(3/4): 235-263.
    May 17th, Tuesday Origins: Geo-Political Perspectives
    Bergesen, Albert and Omar Lizardo 2004. “International Terrorism and
    the World System,” Sociological Theory, 22(1): 38-52.
    Cooley, John 2002. “Carter and Brezhnev in the Valley of Decision,”
    “Anwar Al-Sadat,” “Zia Al-Haq,” and “Deng Xiaoping,” Unholy Wars,
    pgs 1-63.
    Part IV: Al-Qaeda and the Future of Terrorism
    May 19th, Thursday Trail of Terror: Egypt to Afghanistan to 9/11
    Cooley, John 2002. “Recruiters, Trainers, Trainees and Assorted
    Spooks,” “Poppy Fields, Killing Fields and Druglords,” “Russia: Bitter
    Aftertaste and Reluctant Return” and “The Contagion Spreads: Egypt
    and the Maghreb,” Unholy Wars, pgs 64-180.
    May 24th, Tuesday Al-Qaeda
    Cooley, John 2002. “The Contagion Spreads: The Assault on America,”
    Unholy Wars, pgs 193-226.
    Wright, Lawrence 2002, “The Man Behind Bin Laden,” The New Yorker,
    September 16th, 2002.
    May 26th, Thursday Threats and Responses
    Cooley, John 2002. “Epilogue to the Third Edition,” Unholy Wars, pgs
    227-233.
    National Commission on Terrorist Attacks 2004. “What to Do? A Global
    Strategy,” 9/11 Commission Report, pgs 361-398.
    May 31st, Tuesday Conclusions: American Empire?
    Ferguson, Niall 2003. “An Empire in Denial: The Limits of US
    Imperialism,” Harvard International Review, 25(3): 64-69.
    June 3rd, Friday Final Period
    Final paper due by 3:15 pm

    www.stanford.edu/~cbeck/So...llabus.pdf
    reply to this post
    #
    prom...
    prometheusPAN
    online 111
    new post
    Re: Let's revist the WAR thing
    Today, 5:10 AM
    in response to: Re: Let's revist the WAR thing
    Rutgers University
    Department of Sociology
    Seminar in Sociology: Terrorism
    Soc 422:01; Spring 2007
    Beck 221 - MW6 (5:00-6:20)
    Elizabeth Mitchell
    Office: LSH B206, Livingston Office hours: T 1:00-2:00 Douglass Café, DC Student Center
    Tel: 445-4039 (W 2-3:00 pm) W 2:00-3:00 LSH B206
    Email: emitchel@rci.rutgers.edu
    Course Description
    Welcome to our class on “terrorism”! The course explores the forms, definitions, and symbolic
    meanings of “terrorism”; its causes and effects; the ideology, strategies and resources of terrorists; and the
    ways in which the targets of terror adapt to, and seek to thwart and control terrorist attacks.
    In order to become more resilient to the threat of future terror attacks, we must better understand
    global conditions in the post-modern world and the ideologies of people in societies both beyond and
    within the US. Thus, the class considers both international and national dimensions of contemporary
    terrorism. However, rest assured that prior to taking the class, you are not expected to have a huge
    knowledge of terrorism, social conflict, world geography or international relations.
    Specific Course Objectives
    The specific objectives of the course are:
    (1) to understand the many definitions and existing types of terrorism;
    (2) to consider the structural and ideological conditions that motivate terrorist activities; and to think about
    ways to cope with terrorist action;
    (3) to build overarching theoretical frameworks for understanding social conflict and particularly conflict
    that includes the use of terror;
    (4) to develop ethical guidelines for ourselves, our social groups and formal organizations, and our country
    in responding to conflict and terrorism; and finally
    (5) to promote critical thinking, and the ability to use social theory to logically analyze tension-filled
    social issues, particularly those that have involved terrorist activities.
    Books
    The following four books are available for purchase at the Livingston Bookstore and online sources (e.g.
    Barnes & Noble, Amazon). (You may wish to share some or all texts with another student - or use copies
    on reserve at Kilmer Library.)
    1. Cindy C. Combs. Terrorism in the Twenty-First Century. 4th ed. Prentice Hall, 2006.
    (ISBN: 0-13-193063-X) (Also available in electronic form for a $28 subscription at
    www.safarix.com/013193063X/)
    2. Gus Martin. Understanding Terrorism: Challenges, Perspectives, and Issues. Sage Publications, 2006
    (ISBN: 1-4129-2722-6)
    3. Charles W. Kegley, Jr. The New Global Terrorism: Characteristics, Causes, Controls. Prentice Hall,
    2003 (ISBN:0-13-049413-5)
    4. Thomas J. Badey, ed. Annual Editions: Violence and Terrorism: 07/08. McGraw Hill, 2007 (ISBN: 0-
    07-351619-8)
    Assignments, Journals, Exams, and Class Participation
    1. Students are asked to choose a case study that involves the use of terror: e.g. a case study of a
    particular terrorist event, or an organization that employs terror tactics, or a society currently beset by
    terrorism. During the middle section of the semester you will be asked to research and report, in oral and
    (draft) written forms, on various aspects of your particular case study. Due to class size and time
    constraints, it is preferable that you work in pairs, or groups of three, on this assignment. (30 % of grade)
    You will need to revise this draft paper before it is due in final form at the end of the semester.
    2. Students are asked to keep a journal of diverse entries (assigned each week, or every 10 days; initially
    about 1½ pages in length) summarizing and responding to readings, the week’s class discussion, and/or
    relevant events reported in the media. (30 % of grade) Note: I strongly encourage you to monitor social
    conflicts, especially those involving terror tactics, by frequently reading a reputable newspaper (e.g. New
    York Times, Washington Post; Christian Science Monitor); news magazine (e.g. The Nation; Economist);
    watching cable TV (e.g. BBC, C-span); or checking internet sources (e.g. bbc.co.uk, www.cbc.ca), or a
    website that monitors conflicted societies. (See list below.)
    3. Students in this senior seminar are expected to be very active in class discussions and to take the lead in
    discussing aspects of terrorism presented in our readings, lectures, and other media sources. This means
    that you must always be well prepared for class and that you will be graded on the quality and frequency of
    your oral participation. (20% of grade)
    4. A midterm exam will test students’ overall understanding of the forms, causes, effects, and sociological
    explanations of social conflict, terrorism, and conflict resolution. (20% of grade)
    Tentative Class Schedule and Reading Assignments
    (Some readings listed below may be dropped, and others may be substituted. Stay tuned…)
    1/17 Introductions
    1/22-1/24 Conceptualizing “Terrorism”
    Gus Martin, “The nature of the beast: defining terrorism”, 33-70; Cindy Combs, “An idea whose time has
    come”, 4-19; and “Not a modern phenomenon”, 22-31; Walter Laquer, “Postmodern terrorism” in Kegley,
    151-159
    1/29-2/12 Who are “the Terrorists”?
    Combs, “Criminals or crusaders?” 53-72; Martin, “Terror from below”, 152-179;
    Richard Falk, “ A dual reality, terrorism against the state and terrorism by the state” in Kegley, 53-59;
    Martin, “Terror from above”, 109-142; Combs, “Terrorism by the state”, 75-98;
    Karla Cunningham, “Cross-regional trends in female terrorism”, in Badey, 154-164; Terri Toles Patkin,
    Female Baggage: Female Palestinian suicide bombers and the rhetoric of emotion” in Badey, 170-178;
    Susan McKay, “Girls as ‘weapons of war’ ” in Northern Uganda and Sierre Leonean fighting forces” in
    Badey, 180-186
    2/19-2/21 Causes of Terrorism
    Martha Crenshaw, “The causes of terrorism” in Kegley, 92-103;
    Karen Armstrong, “Ghosts of our Past,” in Badey, ed., 2-5; Matthew Morgan, “The origins of the new
    terrorism”, in Badey, 9-14; Martin, “Beginnings: the causes of terrorism”, 75-103;
    Martin, “Violence in the name of the faith: religious terrorism”, 182-214; Mark Juergensmeyer, “Holy
    orders”, in Badey 144-147; Bernard Lewis, “The roots of Muslim rage”, in Kegley, 194-201
    2/26-2/28 Ideologies that Legitimate and Excuse Terrorist Acts
    Paul Wilkinson, “Why modern terrorism? Differentiating types and distinguishing ideological
    motivations”, in Kegley, 106-134; Combs, “Ideology and terrorism: rights and wrongs”, 36-51; Martin,
    “Violent ideologies: terrorism from the left and the right”, 220-260
    3/5 MIDTERM EXAM DUE
    3/12-3/14 Mid-semester break
    3/19-3/21 International and Domestic Terrorism
    a. International Terrorism
    Brian Jenkins, “International Terrorism: the other world war” in Kegley, 15-26; Llewellyn Howell, “Is the
    new global terrorism a clash of civilizations?” in Kegley, 173-184; Combs, “Terrorism Inc.” 100-121
    Suggested: Arlene Tickner, “Columbia and the US: From Counternarcotics to Counterterrorism”, in Badey,
    72-79; Martin, “Terrorist Spillovers: International terrorism”, 269-303;
    Jeffrey Nedoroscik, “ Extremist Groups in Egypt”, in Badey, 58-70
    b. US Domestic Terrorism
    Combs, “Domestic terrorism in the US”, 174-197;
    Martin, “The American case: terrorism in the United States”, 424-468;
    Michael Reynolds, “Homegrown terror”, in Badey, 86-91;
    Scott Smallwood, “Speaking for the animals, or the terrorists?” in Badey, 92-94; Kathleen Blee, “Women
    and organized racial terrorism in the United States” in Badey, 95-101
    3/26-3/28 Terrorists: Training, Tactics, Weapons and Targets
    Combs, “Terrorist training”, 123-152; Martin, “Tools of the trade: tactics and targets of terrorists”, 344-
    383;
    Combs, “The media”, 153-172; Martin, “The information battleground: terrorist violence and the role of the
    media”, 390-417; Brigette Nacos, “Terrorism as breaking news”, in Badey, 110-123;
    David Talbot, “Terror’s server”, in Badey, 129-133
    Martha Crenshaw, “Why is America the primary target?” 160-172
    4/2-4/4 Responding to Terrorism
    James Johnson, “Just war theory: responding morally to global terrorism”, in Kegley, 223-238; David Held,
    “Bringing international law to bear on the control of new terrorism in the global age”, in Kegley, 253-266
    Suggested: Martin, “Responding to terror: the options”, 345-383; Combs, “Legal perspectives”, 199-222;
    “Terrorism, Intelligence and the Law”, 243-262; “Security measures: a frail defense”, 264-281
    4/9 Student Presentations (w. draft papers previously sent to other class members)
    Note – readings for each of these classes [4/9 to 4/23] include
    (1) draft papers authored by student presenters, and
    (2) readings recommended by student presenters
    4/11 Student presentations (w. draft papers due)
    4/16 Student presentations (w. draft papers due)
    4/18 Student presentations (w. draft papers due)
    4/23 Student presentations (w. draft papers due)
    4/25 COMPLETE JOURNAL DUE
    4/26-4/30 The Threat of Terrorism: Future Trends and Personal Responses
    Combs, “The new terrorist threat: weapons of mass destruction”, 283-302;
    Combs, “Future trends”, 304-319;
    Martin, “What next? The future of terrorism”, 527-560
    5/2 FINAL PAPERS DUE (revised case study with theoretical analysis)
    ____________________________________________________________________________________
    Appendix 1: Websites that monitor social conflict, violence, terrorism, and/or conflict resolution
    American Sociological Association’s Peace, War and Conflict Section www.peacewarconflict.org/
    British Broadcasting Corporation www.bbc.co.uk/
    The Carter Center www.cartercenter.org
    Flashpoints www.flashpoints.info/
    Israel and Palestine www.mideastweb.org/briefhistory.htm
    Northern Ireland Conflict Archive on the Internet (CAIN) cain.ulst.ac.uk/events/peace/sum.htm
    USIP (United States Institute of Peace) www.usip.org
    Women waging peace www.womenwagingpeace.net/
    World Press Review www.worldpress.org/
    Terrorism and Political Violence: An International Bibliography users.skynet.be/terrorism/
    Journals that deal specifically with terrorism
    Terrorism
    Studies in Conflict and Terrorism
    Terrorism and Political Violence.

    sociology.rutgers.edu/undergr...chel.pdf
    reply to this post
    #
    prom...
    prometheusPAN
    online 111
    new post
    Re: Let's revist the WAR thing
    Today, 5:31 AM
    in response to: Re: Let's revist the WAR thing
    Now, lets look at some basic facts.

    1. There are 5 million people living in gaza alone.
    2. These people do not have access to clean water to drink.
    3. These people do not have access to sufficient food and most suffer from malnutrition.
    4. All human behavior is motivated by NEEDS.
    5. Nobody does anything unless they believe consciously or unconsciously that their action will be a viable tactic to meet
    their needs.
    6. All of that poverty and suffering concentrated in one place in a slow motion genocide creates the root underlying cause of
    what we call terrorism. If you ask terrorists why they don't like us and listen, they will eventually get around to telling you its because
    we are oppressing them.
    7. In the nation of Iraq there is is on average 1 or 2 persons in every family who have been killed in the war.
    8. In Gaza, death rates are even higher than that, virtually everybody in Gaza has many close relatives who have died- in many cases from
    lack of medical care or supplies combined with dehydration and malnutrition.
    9. While there are political, religious, egoic, and cultural secondary causes for terrorism, the true root and underlying cause is in fact
    poverty and our oppression and participation in a slow motion genocide.
    10. Remove this original cause, and they will still hate us for historic, religious, and political reasons, but not ENOUGH TO BLOW THEMSELVES UP OVER.
    11. Many different programs of people on the ground including programs created by reformed terrorists focus on this problem and any real diplomatic efforts with those close to the problem reveal universally that REFORMED TERRORISTS consider poverty the number one problem.
    12. Nobody in the USA wants to know about this or think about it, its the secret unsecret hard truth nobody wants to face because given that it is true, it means that wecaused terrorism by being oppressors, and we can uncause terrorism by means of charity.
    13. Repugnicons can't even be charitable to people in the USA, let alone to people that they are PROGRAMMED LIKE ZOMBOTS TO HATE.
    14. Thus, the idiotic assertion by bush and others to the effect that "they hate us because they hate our freedoms". No stupid, they hate us because they are perfectly aware of how WE DEPRIVE THEM OF THEIR FREEDOMS VIA ECONOMIC WARFARE.
    15. The cost of the Iraq war is now well into the 4 trillion dollar range.
    16. There are only 6.5 billion people on the planet, thats almost 1000 dollars per person.
    17. But most people don't live in poverty, when you subtract the people who do not need aid, the figure is more like 30 thousand dollars per
    person.
    18. That money invested in building housing, farms, civil infrastructures, schools, and employment infrastructure could in fact end poverty on earth and there are many different organizations and groups that have pointed this out.
    19. Including me, as long ago as 20 years ago.
    20. What morons like you (ronnie in the "intelligent political discussion tribe) fail to see do to not wanting to see it is that the only reason
    for war is the emanuel goldstein effect. War is simply a way to waste resources so that society never addresses its real problems thus that
    the ruling caste can continue to profit from human suffering by offering illusory ladders out of it which amount to mass wage slave labor.
    War is merely a way to diabolize an exterior enemy to unite the people around a common "percieved threat" in order for the elite to mask
    the simple truth that the upper caste are social and economic parasites.
    reply to this post
    #
    prom...
    prometheusPAN
    online 111
    new post
    Re: Let's revist the WAR thing
    Today, 5:36 AM
    in response to: Re: Let's revist the WAR thing
    www.jstor.org/pss/1131684

    www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10605490

    Yassin MM, Shubair ME, al-Hindi AI, Jadallah SY.

    Department of Biology, Islamic University, Gaza Strip.

    A total of 489 stool specimens were collected from school children aged 6-11 years. The target area is overcrowded, with improper sewage disposal system and low socioeconomic standards. A questionnaire was designed to include relevant informations. Each stool specimen was processed by the direct smear microscopy, zinc sulphate flotation technique and formol-ether sedimentation technique. The present study revealed an overall prevalence at 27.6%. Six parasites were detected. Giardia lamblia (62.2%) was the most frequent species found, followed by Ascaris lumbricoides (20.1%) then, Entamoeba histolytica (13.3%). The prevalence of these parasites was found to be related to age, socioeconomic and sanitation conditions. Most of the other parasitic infections were of mild intensity. There is an urgent need to correct the present situation by improving the living conditions, providing facilities for the population such as modern housing, proper sewage disposal system, health education and execution of survey programs for parasites to treat the infected persons.

    www.sciencedirect.com/science

    Abstract

    Objective: To establish the nature and extent of maltreatment experiences, coping strategies, and behavioral/emotional problems, and their relationships, in a sample of Palestinian adolescents.

    Method: A study of 97 male adolescents aged 15–19 years, and attending a vocational training center based in the Gaza Strip. Adolescents completed the Child Maltreatment Schedule and the Ways of Coping Scale (WAYS). The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) was completed by adolescents and by their teachers.

    Results: Findings revealed high rates of emotional and physical maltreatment. Reliance on emotion-focused or avoidant coping strategies was associated with exposure to maltreatment. Use of maladaptive coping also predicted emotional difficulties in the respondents.

    Conclusions: Coping strategies are an important indicator of psychosocial functioning in adolescents who have experienced maltreatment. Identification of coping styles can augment the assessment of at-risk adolescents. Emotion-focused strategies, in particular, appear to be widely used by young people from non-Western cultural backgrounds.
    Résumé
    reply to this post
    #
    prom...
    prometheusPAN
    online 111
    new post
    Re: Let's revist the WAR thing
    Today, 5:37 AM
    in response to: Re: Let's revist the WAR thing


    Abstract:
    Al-Ama'ri camp is situated to the south of Ramallah city in the West Bank of Palestine. It is densely populated, with a total population of 4,046, divided into 760 households, on a surface area of 93 dunums (93,000 m2). In this research, the relationship between the housing conditions at Ama'ri camp and the prevalence and incidence rates of upper respiratory tract diseases has been studied. The diseases and symptoms most encountered in winter, and those include: common cold, cough, pharyngitis, influenza, ear infection, asthma and bronchitis have been studied. It was found that these are diseases directly related to poor housing conditions. Cold housing, presence of dampness and moulds, dust and smoke, burning of biomass fuel, crowding, poor ventilation and inadequate lighting problems are commonly found in the houses of this refugee camp.

    Keywords: Housing; health; refugee camps; developing countries; Palestine

    www.ingentaconnect.com/conten...rt00001
    reply to this post
    #
    prom...
    prometheusPAN
    online 111
    new post
    Re: Let's revist the WAR thing
    Today, 5:45 AM
    in response to: Re: Let's revist the WAR thing
    smartpolitics.tribe.net/photos...66fd309

    Just to be fair, heres a "study". It makes the same known logical fallacy you do. Terrorists are usually well off persons themselves who
    believe that they represent large groups of other victims.
    -----------

    Rooted in Poverty?: Terrorism, Poor Economic Development, and Social Cleavages
    Author: James A. Piazza - James A. Piazza is an Assistant Professor of Political Science at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte whose work has appeared in Party Politics, Economic and Industrial Democracy, and the Southeastern Political Review.a
    Affiliation: a Department of Political Science, University of North Carolina, Charlotte, NC, USA
    DOI: 10.1080/095465590944578
    Publication Frequency: 4 issues per year
    Published in: journal Terrorism and Political Violence, Volume 18, Issue 1 March 2006 , pages 159 - 177
    Subjects: Security Studies - Pol & Intl Relns; Terrorism & Political Violence;
    Formats available: HTML (English) : PDF (English)
    Article Requests: Order Reprints : Request Permissions

    Purchase Article: US$28.00 - buy now buy now add to cart buy now [ show other buying options ]

    purchase type customer type online access payment method price
    Single Article Purchase Any 3 days credit card US$28.00 buy now buy now add to cart add to cart
    Issue Purchase Any permanent credit card US$167.75 buy now buy now add to cart add to cart

    If you would like to pay in any other currency please see the purchasing help pages for more information.

    * Sign In Sign In
    * Online Sample Online Sample

    Abstract
    This study evaluates the popular hypothesis that poverty, inequality, and poor economic development are root causes of terrorism. Employing a series of multiple regression analyses on terrorist incidents and casualties in ninety-six countries from 1986 to 2002, the study considers the significance of poverty, malnutrition, inequality, unemployment, inflation, and poor economic growth as predictors of terrorism, along with a variety of political and demographic control variables. The findings are that, contrary to popular opinion, no significant relationship between any of the measures of economic development and terrorism can be determined. Rather, variables such as population, ethno-religious diversity, increased state repression and, most significantly, the structure of party politics are found to be significant predictors of terrorism. The article concludes that “social cleavage theory” is better equipped to explain terrorism than are theories that link terrorism to poor economic development
    reply to this post
    #
    prom...
    prometheusPAN
    online 111
    new post
    Re: Let's revist the WAR thing
    Today, 5:46 AM
    in response to: Re: Let's revist the WAR thing
    increased state repression and,
    reply to this post
    #
    prom...
    prometheusPAN
    online 111
    new post
    Re: Let's revist the WAR thing
    Today, 5:50 AM
    in response to: Re: Let's revist the WAR thing
    sociology.unc.edu/programs/...rgrad/sej/

    http://www.globalisationforthecommon...-in-palestine/


    Israel and Palestine: There can be no Peace Without Economic Justice in Palestine

    Posted by Kamran Mofid, Ph.D. under News

    As recent as last week, Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice met with Israeli and Palestinian leaders and urged them to step up their efforts to find a lasting peace.
    “Everybody recognizes that the creation of a viable, independent democratic Palestinian state that can live side by side in peace with Israel would be not just a remarkable achievement but a just achievement,” Rice said in a news conference with the Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, in the West Bank town of Jericho.
    Rice also held talks with the Israeli prime minister, Ehud Olmert, in Jerusalem, in which she expressed her appreciation for remarks Olmert had made earlier in the week as an “important step that was likely to both contribute towards calm and advance the peace processes in the region”. Moreover, in the last few days the Baker-Hamilton report on Iraq has recommended attempts at a revival of the Israeli-Palestinian peace process.

    As everybody knows, we have been here many times before: so many peace processes and so many failures with tragic consequences for all. This is so, because those promoting such proposals, it seems, have failed to acknowledge that, the key which will open the door to peace is called justice. Furthermore, there will be no peace between Israel and Palestine, and no true security for Israel, so long as there exists such a level of poverty, inhumanity and economic injustice in Palestine. The words and sentiments of the UN Report on Palestine which was released yesterday (7/12/06) rings true, a gist of it can be noted below.

    UN aid agencies launched their biggest appeal for funding to tackle the humanitarian crisis in the Palestinian territories, asking for $453m for next year and warning of a weakening in the Palestinians’ ability to govern.

    Senior UN aid officials in Jerusalem said there were clear signs of a worsening economic crisis. Around two thirds of the 4 million Palestinian population are living below the poverty line and half the population were “food-insecure”, meaning they could not afford the basic foods to meet dietary needs. Unemployment was running as high as 40% in the Gaza strip and at around 25% in the West Bank. Kevin Kennedy, the UN humanitarian coordinator, said the crisis was not only an economic collapse but was also tied to an increase in closures and access restrictions imposed on the occupied territories by the Israeli government and to continued conflict, internal political fighting and a breakdown of law and order.

    The UN has warned there has been a gradual weakening of the Palestinian Authority. The crisis results from an international boycott imposed in March after Hamas won the elections and formed a government. Israel has since withheld $60m a month of tax revenues that should go to the Palestinians.

    Although some of that money has been spent paying the Palestinian bills of Israeli electricity and water companies, the Israelis have now withheld nearly $600m.
    The international community, under the Quartet of the US, the UN, the EU and Russia, has also halted direct funding to the Palestinian government, saying it must recognise Israel, halt violence and accept past peace agreements. The freeze means salaries for 160,000 government workers have largely gone unpaid. “Obviously the longer the current situation continues, with further deterioration, a lack of salaries, people on strike, continued military conflict on both sides, [the] further [the] weakening of the Palestinian Authority and its institutions”, the Report notes.

    In the past year, the UN observes, there had been a 40% increase in the number of barriers and checkpoints across the West Bank. In addition, there have been continued closures of the crossing points for people and goods out of Gaza. Under an agreement negotiated last November, Israel was to open up the main crossing points to relieve the economic crisis. But the crossings have in effect been closed, with Israel citing security concerns.

    How Can a Lasting Peace Process Move Forward?
    Sound economic policies, effectively implemented, are essential elements of the peace process in the Middle East. “Economics of Hope”, leading to envisioning, enabling and empowering the disposed and marginalised people of Palestine is the most effective path to a non-violent resolution of conflict in the Middle East and a long-term security for Israel. Without economic empowerment, leading to tangible economic wellbeing and prosperity, all forms of peace proposals and dialogue, although valuable, will remain ineffective in realising their overall objective: peace, security and harmonious living, side-by-side.

    Hopelessness Leads to Violence
    Experience in the Holy Land has shown that hopelessness leads to violence, but the prospect for empowerment leads to peaceful coexistence. Calm and relative cooperation prevailed after the successful negotiations at Camp David over 25 years ago, after the Oslo agreement of 1993, and during and after the Palestinian elections of 1996. These were times when moderate leadership and sound judgment prevailed, and there was hope that further progress would be made. Tragically, radical and violent actions subsequently intruded.

    The Path to Peace, Reconstruction, Security and Prosperity: Challenges and Opportunities
    It is increasingly apparent that the problem of economics is not just a technical problem for experts but is above all a moral and spiritual issue. The world is longing for a system that would be both participatory and socially just; a system with a functioning economy that would be at the same time sensitive to theological consequences. We must deal with the issue of economic empowerment that has a religious tract. Through our indifference and complicity, the integrity of our faith is in jeopardy.
    People everywhere, given a chance prefer to be compassionate, spiritual and caring. They want to be able to practice their religions freely. More and more, they also want to see that their religious values have a bearing on their economic systems and structures. This philosophy is nowhere stronger than in the Middle-East, whose people by and large are very spiritual, religious, hospitable, informed and cultural. They largely do not reject the pivotal values behind the market economy. Indeed, the Middle-East region throughout the history has been the major area of, and for, business, trade and commerce. They do know that, under the right conditions, a market economy can drive development, decrease poverty, encourage productivity, and reward entrepreneurial energy.
    The children of Abraham in the Middle East know well that religion is a major factor in the formation of social networks and trust. In addition, the impetus for focusing specifically on spiritual/theological economics draws on the growing recognition in economics and other social sciences that religion is not epiphenomenal, nor is it fading from public significance in the 21st century and the importance to social/economic dynamics of human economic intangibles. Recent developments in the social sciences suggest a growing openness to nonmaterial factors, such as the radius of trust, behavioural norms, and religion as having profound economic, political, and social consequences.
    Spiritual Economics, Reconstruction and Development in West Bank and Gaza
    Palestinian Economy: An Overview
    The Palestinian economy is made up from the following industries:

    * Construction – this is one of the biggest sectors of the Palestinian economy. Demand for his sector is from the rapidly growing population, displaced persons still living in squalid camp conditions and reconstruction of war damaged property.
    * Agriculture is one of the biggest exporting sectors of the Palestinian economy and is also a major source of employment. Demand for this sector is expected to rise due to cost advantage enjoyed by this sector and growing demand from the local population.
    * Tourism is one of the major sources of foreign currency income for the Palestinian economy. With such world famous sites as Bethlehem and Jericho under its jurisdiction this sector is expected to contribute significantly to the economy of the Palestinian economy for the foreseeable future– as long as there is an absence of armed conflict.
    * Light manufacturing is one of the growing areas of the Palestinian economy. Sources of demand for this sector are from the local Palestinian population and also Israel where Palestinian products enjoy a strong cost advantage against their Israeli competitors.
    The Palestinian Authority’s economy is largely dependent on the Israeli economy as most points of import and export are controlled by Israel’s security measures. Furthermore, Israel’s close proximity to the Palestinian market makes Israel one of its biggest trade partners. Subsequently the economic fortunes of the Palestinian economy are closely tied to the peace process. In times of calm between the two sides the Palestinian economy has witnessed marked improvements, especially in areas such as construction and tourism. Periods of peace have also been marked by higher rates of investment in its economy and lower rates of unemployment. In times of conflict such as the recent Intifada the reverse has proven true where as a result the Palestinian economy entered a period of major recession and even almost collapse.

    Economic Forum for the Common Good: Areas of Concentration
    As part of its vision to empower people to create a peaceful, prosperous and sustainable Middle East, The Economic Forum of the Globalisation for the Common Good Initiative- proposes the following sectors as the initial areas of concentration:

    * Faith and Economic life: The Economics of Reconciliation and Peace Building.
    * Beyond Corruption and Informal Economy: Good Governance and Economic Development for Peace.
    * Tourism for Peace. Unlike many other regions in the world today, the Middle East has become synonymous with conflict. Images of wanton destruction and meaningless violence are commonplace. But there are other facets to the Middle East that are rarely seen, and the region’s history provides great examples of beauty, tranquillity, sacredness and peace. As children of Abraham, we should be concerned about ways of bringing our communities together for the good of all.
    * Agriculture for Peace. To support peace through policies leading to agricultural development increased employment and economic growth.
    * Business for Peace. It is our understanding that business is the dominant institution in society today and the one most capable of responding to rapid change. As such, business must adopt a new tradition of responsibility for the whole. It must do this by defining business interests within the wider perspective of society in order to create a positive and sustainable future.
    * Youth Leadership programme for Peace: Today’s youth in Palestine will one day lead their communities in various capacities, build their economies, and make decisions that will have an impact in the lives of future generations. A series of programmes on conflict resolution, good governance, peace making and economic development will be initiated.
    * Economic and trade relation between the West Bank and Gaza.
    * Economic and trade relation between Israel and Palestine.
    * Economic and trade relation between Palestine and Egypt.
    It is expected that the economics of hope for the common good, will lead to the creation of an environment which will foster a better understanding between the Israeli and Palestinian people, where many other equally important issues dividing them- such as the unity government in Palestine, the recognition of Israel and the acceptance of the past peace agreements by Hamas, etc- can be addressed and resolved. A hopeful Palestinian population, who enjoys the fruits of a just economy and trade relation with its neighbour, surely is better equipped to talk with Israel on the issues of security than otherwise.

    For a more detailed treatment of these issues please see:
    www.islamonline.net/English/...e02.shtml
    * Kamran Mofid, a British Citizen of Persian origin, Founder, An Inter-faith Perspective on Globalisation for the Common Good Initiative; and the Co-editor, Journal of Globalisation for the Common Good. He was awarded a doctorate in economics from the University of Birmingham, UK.K in 1986. In 2001 he received a Certificate in Education in Pastoral Studies from Plater College in Oxford.
    Dr. Mofid’s work is highly interdisciplinary, drawing on Economics, Politics, International Relations, Theology, Culture, Ecology and Spirituality. His writings have appeared in leading scholarly journals, popular magazines and newspapers.
    His most recent book, Promoting the Common Good: Bringing Economics and Theology Together Again (With Rev. Dr. Marcus Braybrooke-2005) was published by Shepheard-Walwyn, London. Mofid’s other books includes: Globalisation for the Common Good (2002), The Economic Consequences of the Gulf War (1990) and Development Planning in Iran: from Monarchy to Islamic Republic (1987)
    Web sites:
    www.globalisationforthecommongood.info/
    lass.calumet.purdue.edu/cca/jgcg/


    « The Persistent Middle East Crises: The Path to an Enduring Peace is through Economics of Hope & Justice for the Common Good | Annual Globalisation for the Common Good Conference set for Australia 2008 »
    reply to this post
    #
    prom...
    prometheusPAN
    online 111
    new post
    Re: Let's revist the WAR thing
    Today, 5:52 AM
    in response to: Re: Let's revist the WAR thing
    advocacynet.org/page/dwrc

    www.afsc.org/israel-pale...inciples.htm

    he AFSC's long experience in the Middle East, reaching back to the end of World War II, convinces us that looking at issues of war and peace from an ethical and religious perspective can be useful and timely. The AFSC believes that focusing on the precious humanity of those in conflict with one another will open new ways for considering how peace might be achieved and sustained. The Middle East policy of the United States and most of the rest of the Western world, as well as the policy of the Israelis and Palestinians, has for too long accepted the myth that only violence and the threat of violence can produce stability and create peace. The reality is that violence has not brought peace, and the threat of violence has only exacerbated the conflicts.

    By definition, the peace for which the AFSC is working will be not merely the absence of war, but the presence of justice - justice between nations, and within nations as well. Because we are worried that not all involved parties are on the road to a peace sustained by justice, we welcome this opportunity to explain our position on some of the most contentious elements in this conflict, including some that have not been addressed at all in the aftermath of Oslo. As we state our position, we hope to make clear that it is informed by a concern for truth and justice, and is shaped by compassion and care.
    Components of a Just Peace

    1. Self-determination

    Self-determination has been a leading principle in the breakup of colonial empires and in the creation of independent states in the Twentieth Century. The truth is that Israelis have already exercised their right to national self-determination and now have their own state. The Palestinians continue to be denied that right. In accordance with its ethical and religious beliefs and with international law, the AFSC has consistently upheld peoples' rights to self-determination. Specifically, the AFSC affirms the right of both Israelis and Palestinians to live as sovereign peoples in their own homeland, a right that encompasses the possibility of choosing two separate states. We acknowledge that other options such as bi-national state and confederation are being discussed. Ultimately it will be up to both parties to determine national boundaries, but the AFSC believes that the starting point for discussion should be those borders reflected in United Nations resolutions 242 and 338, substantially the borders that were in place before the war of June 1967. Since the issue here is of one land and two peoples, no one's right to self-determination should be exercised at the expense of someone else's. Consideration of this issue should address, in a timely way, the repatriation of refugees. Any settlement of boundaries must be based upon respect for the rule of law and for the right of both peoples to determine their own future. Both parties should be guided by an ethic of reciprocity: what holds true for one side in a conflict should hold true for the other as well. This ethic will help address the very real power imbalance that currently exists between Israelis and Palestinians, an imbalance that works against mutually acceptable and just agreements.

    2. Rights

    The same principles of reciprocity present in self-determination must also extend to the discussion of human rights, which provide the foundation to any building of peace. Human rights include the freedom to practice one's religion, the freedom of assembly, free speech, free press, the right to education and adequate nutrition, and civil rights for all people, regardless of race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, political orientation, nationality, or ethnicity. Rights of minorities within the Israeli state and within a future Palestinian state must be safeguarded. Other important rights include the right to legal representation, a fair trial, and protection against discrimination in employment, housing, education, and health care. The AFSC also affirms the right to freedom of movement within borders and freedom from collective punishment, because these rights often have been denied. These rights ought to be secured not only at the end of the peace process, but also to inform the process itself. The AFSC has long contended that means determine ends. Therefore just ends can be accomplished only through just means.

    3. Economic Justice and Natural Resources

    All parties need to take action to ensure equitable access to resources such as land and water. Fair taxation and distribution of resources are critical elements to establish and maintain peace, not only between Israelis and Palestinians, but also within each separate society. It is important that people, goods, and services be able to move freely in the region. People should have the right to build and live anywhere, but not as a result of unwarranted land confiscation and illegal settlements. Mobility for trade, employment, education, and residence is critical to establishing and sustaining peace. These issues can be addressed before, during, and after any political solution to the conflict.

    4. Governance

    The AFSC supports the rights of both Palestinians and Israelis to choose their forms of governance. We affirm our support for a democratic process that is accountable to all its people as the surest means of achieving sustainable and just political structures.

    5. Security

    The foundations of security are to be found in trust, respect, and mutual recognition of the humanity and past and present sufferings of both parties. Security is contingent upon the achievement of self-determination and the promotion and protection of basic human rights. Such security does not currently exist. While it is tempting to suppose that only military strength can achieve and guarantee security, the AFSC has maintained that military might only increases fear and distrust and exacerbates the power differences that already exist between conflicting parties. Consequently, the AFSC supports substantial reduction of armaments to all states in the Middle East, because the availability of arms contributes to the prevalence of violence and causes the use or threat of violence to be the first resort to settle any personal, communal, or national dispute.

    6. Status of Jerusalem and Settlements in Gaza and on the West Bank

    Since the 1967 war, unilateral Israeli settlement in Jerusalem and on the West Bank and Gaza has been one of the great obstacles to the peace process. The AFSC believes that the building of settlements in the occupied territories, including in the city of Jerusalem, violates Israel's obligations as an occupying power under the terms of the Fourth Geneva Convention. Compensation or restitution to those who have lost their homes and lands by illegal means are topics that must be and have not yet been addressed. Consistent with AFSC's belief that Israel and Palestine is a land for two peoples, Jerusalem must be regarded as a city that can be united but also can be shared by both peoples. Since the status of Jerusalem continues to be a very great obstacle to peace at the present time, the AFSC believes that no party in the conflict should alter the reality on the ground in a unilateral way, as Israel has done with its settlement policy. The AFSC also affirms its support for open access to the city for Palestinians, as well as Israelis, as a religious, political, socio-economic, and residential center, even before the final status of Jerusalem has been determined.

    7. Responsibilities of the International Community

    It is in the national interest of all countries that there be peace in the Middle East. Countries within the United Nations have already given support for an eventual two-state solution based upon UN Resolution 242. All countries, but especially the United States, should affirm the principles of self-determination in accordance with human rights and international law, and should support the control and reduction of arms into the area and the expansion of economic, non-military aid. Aid should be linked to programs that build democratic infrastructures, secure human rights, and preserve human dignity. The AFSC believes that the world community's goal should be disarmament in the whole region of the Middle East and elsewhere and the implementation of the nuclear non-proliferation treaty.
    Conclusion

    The road to peace needs to be carefully re-constructed and followed. Violence and the threat of violence often appear to be short-cuts to reaching the goal. However, as A.J. Muste observed, they are short cuts that become blind alleys. The surest road to peace is the path of empathy, where self interest can give way to shared interest, where separateness can give way to reconciliation, where domination can give way to justice. Helping to build that road and joining with Israelis and Palestinians who choose to walk it, are tasks to which the AFSC continues to dedicate itself.
    reply to this post
    #
    prom...
    prometheusPAN
    online 111
    new post
    Re: Let's revist the WAR thing
    Today, 5:53 AM
    in response to: Re: Let's revist the WAR thing
    Maslow's hierarchy of needs - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Maslow's hierarchy of needs is a theory in psychology, proposed by Abraham Maslow in his 1943 paper A Theory of Human Motivation, [1] which he subsequently ...
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maslow's_hierarchy_of_needs - 41k - Cached - Similar pages
    MASLOW'S HIERARCHY OF NEEDS
    Maslow has set up a hierarchy of five levels of basic needs. Beyond these needs, higher levels of needs exist. These include needs for understanding, ...
    honolulu.hawaii.edu/intranet/committees/FacDevCom/guidebk/teachtip/maslow.htm - 9k - Cached - Similar pages
    Educational Psychology Interactive: Maslow's hierarchy of needs
    Research paper discusses various studies into what energizes, directs, and sustains human behavior. Includes existence, relatedness, growth, introversion, ...
    chiron.valdosta.edu/whuitt/col/regsys/Maslow.html - 18k - Cached - Similar pages
    Hierarchy of Needs
    Self-actualization is the summit of Maslow's hierarchy of needs. It is the quest of reaching one's full potential as a person. Unlike lower level needs, ...
    www.abraham-maslow.com/m_motiva...Needs.asp - 24k - Cached - Similar pages
    Abraham Maslow
    Maslow took this idea and created his now famous hierarchy of needs. Beyond the details of air, water, food, and sex, he laid out five broader layers: the ...
    www.ship.edu/~cgboeree/maslow.html - 32k - Cached - Similar pages
    Maslow's Hierarchy
    Abraham Maslow described a hierarchy of needs that is taught in more classes on need than any other subtopic!
    changingminds.org/explanations/needs/maslow.htm - 23k - Cached - Similar pages
    Hierarchy of Needs - Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs
    The hierarchy of needs emphasizes the importance of self-actualization and is often pictured as a pyramid. Learn more about the five levels in Abraham ...
    psychology.about.com/od/theoriesofpersonality/a/hierarchyneeds.htm - 23k - Cached - Similar pages
    Abraham Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs and diagrams of Maslow's ...
    Abraham Maslow's Hierarchy Of Needs, free maslow diagrams, downloads, Maslow pyramid, motivational needs model, plus free online training and organizational ...
    www.businessballs.com/maslow.htm - 31k - Cached - Similar pages
    The First Axiom is One's Existence
    Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs is an important psychological theory ... I feel that there is something profoundly missing from Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs. ...
    www.deepermind.com/20maslow.htm - 14k - Cached - Similar pages
    Concentric(R)
    georgen.connect.net Not Available. The domain georgen.connect.net which you are trying to access is currently unavailable. This may occur for several ...
    www.connect.net/georgen/maslow.htm - 1k - Cached - Similar pages
    reply to this post
    #
    prom...
    prometheusPAN
    online 111
    new post
    Re: Let's revist the WAR thing
    Today, 5:54 AM
    in response to: Re: Let's revist the WAR thing
    Maslow's hierarchy of needs
    From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Jump to: navigation, search
    This article needs additional citations for verification.
    Please help improve this article by adding reliable references. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (February 2008)

    Maslow's hierarchy of needs is a theory in psychology, proposed by Abraham Maslow in his 1943 paper A Theory of Human Motivation,[1] which he subsequently extended to include his observations of humans' innate curiosity.

    Maslow studied exemplary people such as Albert Einstein, Jane Addams, Eleanor Roosevelt, and Frederick Douglass rather than mentally ill or neurotic people, writing that "the study of crippled, stunted, immature, and unhealthy specimens can yield only a cripple psychology and a cripple philosophy."[2] Maslow also studied the healthiest one percent of the college student population. In his book, The Farther Reaches of Human Nature, Maslow writes, "By ordinary standards of laboratory research...this simply was not research at all. My generalizations grew out of my selection of certain kinds of people. Obviously, other judges are needed."[3]
    Contents
    [hide]

    * 1 Representations
    * 2 Deficiency needs
    o 2.1 Physiological needs
    o 2.2 Safety needs
    o 2.3 Social needs
    o 2.4 Esteem needs
    * 3 Growth needs
    o 3.1 Aesthetic needs
    * 4 Criticisms
    * 5 References
    * 6 See also
    * 7 External links

    [edit] Representations
    This diagram shows Maslow's hierarchy of needs, represented as a pyramid with the more primitive needs at the bottom.
    This diagram shows Maslow's hierarchy of needs, represented as a pyramid with the more primitive needs at the bottom.[4]

    Maslow's hierarchy of needs is often depicted as a pyramid consisting of five levels: the four lower levels are grouped together as being associated with Physiological needs, while the top level is termed growth needs associated with psychological needs. Deficiency needs must be met first. Once these are met, seeking to satisfy growth needs drives personal growth. The higher needs in this hierarchy only come into focus when the lower needs in the pyramid are satisfied. Once an individual has moved upwards to the next level, needs in the lower level will no longer be prioritized. If a lower set of needs is no longer being met, the individual will temporarily re-prioritize those needs by focusing attention on the unfulfilled needs, but will not permanently regress to the lower level . For instance, a businessman at the esteem level who is diagnosed with cancer will spend a great deal of time concentrating on his health (physiological needs), but will continue to value his work performance (esteem needs) and will likely return to work during periods of remission.

    [edit] Deficiency needs

    The first four layers of the pyramid are what Maslow called "deficiency needs" or "D-needs": if they are not met, the body gives no indication of it physically, but the individual feels anxious and tense. The deficiency needs are: survival needs, safety and security, love and belonging, and esteem.

    [edit] Physiological needs

    These are the basic human needs for such things as food, warmth, water, and other bodily needs. If a person is hungry or thirsty or their body is chemically unbalanced, all of their energies turn toward remedying these deficiencies and other needs remain inactive. Maslow explains that "Anyone who attempts to make an emergency picture into a typical one and who will measure all of man's goals and desires by his[her] behavior during extreme physiological deprivation, is certainly blind to many things. It is quite true that man lives by bread alone — when there is no bread".[1]

    The physiological needs of the organism (those enabling homeostasis) take first precedence. These consist mainly of (in order of importance):

    * Breathing
    * Drinking
    * Eating
    * Excretion

    If some needs are not fulfilled, a person's physiological needs take the highest priority. Physiological needs can control thoughts and behaviors and can cause people to feel sickness, pain, and discomfort.

    [edit] Safety needs

    With their physical needs relatively satisfied, the individual's safety needs take over and dominate their behavior. These needs have to do with people's yearning for a predictable, orderly world in which injustice and inconsistency are under control, the familiar frequent and the unfamiliar rare. In the world of work, these safety needs manifest themselves in such things as a preference for job security, grievance procedures for protecting the individual from unilateral authority, savings accounts, insurance policies, and the like.

    For the most part, physiological and safety needs are reasonably well satisfied in the "First World". The obvious exceptions, of course, are people outside the mainstream — the poor and the disadvantaged. If frustration has not led to apathy and weakness, such people still struggle to satisfy the basic physiological and safety needs. They are primarily concerned with survival: obtaining adequate food, clothing, shelter, and seeking justice from the dominant societal groups.

    Safety and Security needs include:

    * Personal security from crime
    * Financial security
    * Health and well-being
    * Safety net against accidents/illness and the adverse impacts

    [edit] Social needs

    After physiological and safety needs are fulfilled, the third layer of human needs is social. This psychological aspect of Maslow's hierarchy involves emotionally-based relationships in general, such as:

    * friendship
    * intimacy
    * having a supportive and communicative family

    Humans need to feel a sense of belonging and acceptance, whether it comes from a large social group, such as clubs, office culture, religious groups, professional organizations, sports teams, gangs ("Safety in numbers"), or small social connections (family members, intimate partners, mentors, close colleagues, confidants). They need to love and be loved (sexually and non-sexually) by others. In the absence of these elements, many people become susceptible to loneliness, social anxiety, and Clinical depression. This need for belonging can often overcome the physiological and security needs, depending on the strength of the peer pressure; an anorexic, for example, ignores the need to eat and the security of health for a feeling of control and belonging.

    [edit] Esteem needs

    All humans have a need to be respected, to have self-esteem, self-respect, and to respect others. People need to engage themselves to gain recognition and have an activity or activities that give the person a sense of contribution, to feel accepted and self-valued, be it in a profession or hobby. Imbalances at this level can result in low self-esteem or inferiority complexes. People with low self-esteem need respect from others. They may seek fame or glory, which again depends on others. It may be noted, however, that many people with low self-esteem will not be able to improve their view of themselves simply by receiving fame, respect, and glory externally, but must first accept themselves internally. Psychological imbalances such as depression can also prevent one from obtaining self-esteem on both levels.

    [edit] Growth needs

    Though the deficiency needs may be seen as "basic", and can be met and neutralized (i.e. they stop being motivators in one's life), self-actualization and transcendence are "being" or "growth" needs (also termed "B-needs"); i.e. they are enduring motivations or drivers of behavior.


    [edit] Aesthetic needs

    Based on Maslow's beliefs, it is stated in the hierarchy humans need beautiful imagery or something new and aesthetically pleasing to continue towards Self-Actualization. Humans need to refresh themselves in the presence and beauty of nature while carefully absorbing and observing their surroundings to extract the beauty the world has to offer.

    [edit] Criticisms

    While Maslow's theory was regarded as an improvement over previous theories of personality and motivation, it had its detractors. For example, in their extensive review of research which is dependent on Maslow's theory, Wahba and Bridgewell[5] found little evidence for the ranking of needs Maslow described, or even for the existence of a definite hierarchy at all. A study conducted in 2002 forwards this thought, claiming: "the hierarchy of needs is nothing more than a fool's daydream; there is no possible way to classify ever-changing needs as society changes"[6]. Chilean economist and philosopher Manfred Max Neef has also argued fundamental human needs are non-hierarchical, and are ontologically universal and invariant in nature - part of the condition of being human; poverty, he argues, is the result of any one of these needs being frustrated, denied or unfulfilled.
    reply to this post
    #
    prom...
    prometheusPAN
    online 111
    new post
    Re: Let's revist the WAR thing
    Today, 5:59 AM
    in response to: Re: Let's revist the WAR thing
    The modern pyramid of needs has now evolved from a deeper understanding of instinct as it is coded in the reptile brain.

    In this new ladder, there are five major need groups. These are;
    Physical, Social, Emotional, Mental, and spiritual/transcendent.
    Additionally, sometimes Environmental needs are added previous to physical needs, especially in situations with harsh climates,
    or for purposes of space exploration.

    The hierarchy describes acutely how the subconscious mind prioritizes and creates goals for the purpose of survival, and maslows ideas
    regarding pre-eminence due turn out to be very true, even if his orginal hierarchy was seriously flawed.

    It is now well understood that psychology is at its root motivated behaviors stemming from needs which are then compared with schema
    and past tactics in order to generate outcomes where ones needs are met. All behavior is thus motivated by needs, and nobody behaves or acts for any reason other than to meet some need, given that they believe that their behavior will work as a tactic to meet said need.
    reply to this post
    #
    prom...
    prometheusPAN
    online 111
    new post
    Re: Let's revist the WAR thing
    Today, 6:03 AM
    in response to: Re: Let's revist the WAR thing
    zfacts.com/p/447.html

    These figures only include monies directly authorized specifically for the iraq war and do not include monies allocated previously to the department of defense, do not include monies allocated to black ops, and do not include monies allocated to private sector enterprises such as halliburton or blackwater.

    www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11880954/

    By Martin Wolk
    Chief economics correspondent
    MSNBC
    updated 5:25 p.m. PT, Fri., March. 17, 2006


    Martin Wolk
    Chief economics correspondent
    • Profile
    • E-mail
    One thing is certain about the Iraq war: It has cost a lot more than advertised. In fact, the tab grows by at least $200 million each and every day.

    In the months leading up to the launch of the war three years ago, few Bush administration officials were willing to comment publicly on the potential costs to the United States. After all, no cost would have been too high if the United States faced an imminent threat from an Iraq armed with weapons of mass destruction, the war's stated justification.

    In fact, the economic ramifications are rarely included in the debate over whether to go to war, although some economists argue it is quite possible and useful to assess potential costs and benefits.
    Story continues below ?advertisement

    In any event, most estimates put forward by White House officials in 2002 and 2003 were relatively low compared with the nation's gross domestic product, the size of the federal budget or the cost of past wars.

    White House economic adviser Lawrence Lindsey was the exception to the rule, offering an "upper bound" estimate of $100 billion to $200 billion in a September 2002 interview with The Wall Street Journal. That figure raised eyebrows at the time, although Lindsey argued the cost was small, adding, "The successful prosecution of the war would be good for the economy.”

    U.S. direct spending on the war in Iraq already has surpassed the upper bound of Lindsey's upper bound, and most economists attribute billions more in indirect costs to the war effort. Even if the U.S. exits Iraq within another three years, total direct and indirect costs to U.S. taxpayers will likely by more than $400 billion, and one estimate puts the total economic impact at up to $2 trillion.

    Back in 2002, the White House was quick to distance itself from Lindsey's view. Mitch Daniels, director of the White House budget office, quickly called the estimate "very, very high." Lindsey himself was dismissed in a shake-up of the White House economic team later that year, and in January 2003, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said the budget office had come up with "a number that's something under $50 billion." He and other officials expressed optimism that Iraq itself would help shoulder the cost once the world market was reopened to its rich supply of oil.
    Video special: Iraq then and now
    'Shock and awe.' 'Embeds.' Do you remember?
    Day by day, images of a four-week invasion
    Highlights from our exclusive Baghdad blog
    How much do you recall? Take our special quiz
    SEE ALL OF OUR SPECIAL SECTION

    Those early estimates struck some economists as unrealistically low. William Nordhaus, a Yale economist who published perhaps the most extensive independent estimate of the potential costs before the war began, suggested a war and occupation could cost anywhere from $100 billion to $1.9 trillion in 2002 dollars, depending on the difficulty of the conflict, the length of occupation and the impact on oil costs.

    The most current estimates of the war's cost generally start with figures from the non-partisan Congressional Budget Office, which as of January 2006 counted $323 billion in expenditures for the war on terrorism, including military action in Iraq and Afghanistan. Just this week the House approved another $68 billion for military operations in Iraq and Afghanistan, which would bring the total allocated to date to about $400 billion. The Pentagon is spending about $6 billion a month on the war in Iraq, or about $200 million a day, according to the CBO. That is about the same as the gross domestic product of Nigeria.

    Scott Wallsten, a resident scholar at the conservative American Enterprise Institute, put the direct cost to the United States at $212 billion as of last September and estimates a "global cost" of $500 billion to date with another $500 billion possible, with most of the total borne by the United States.
    reply to this post
    #
    prom...
    prometheusPAN
    online 111
    new post
    Re: Let's revist the WAR thing
    Today, 6:04 AM
    in response to: Re: Let's revist the WAR thing
    The Iraq War Will Cost Us $3 Trillion, and Much More


    washingtonpost.com readers have posted 171 comments about this item.
    View All Comments »

    Comments are closed for this item.
    Discussion Policy
    Discussion Policy
    CLOSE
    Comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions. You are fully responsible for the content that you post.
    Who's Blogging
    » Links to this article
    By Linda J. Bilmes and Joseph E. Stiglitz
    Sunday, March 9, 2008; Page B01

    There is no such thing as a free lunch, and there is no such thing as a free war. The Iraq adventure has seriously weakened the U.S. economy, whose woes now go far beyond loose mortgage lending. You can't spend $3 trillion -- yes, $3 trillion -- on a failed war abroad and not feel the pain at home.

    Some people will scoff at that number, but we've done the math. Senior Bush administration aides certainly pooh-poohed worrisome estimates in the run-up to the war. Former White House economic adviser Lawrence Lindsey reckoned that the conflict would cost $100 billion to $200 billion; Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld later called his estimate "baloney." Administration officials insisted that the costs would be more like $50 billion to $60 billion. In April 2003, Andrew S. Natsios, the thoughtful head of the U.S. Agency for International Development, said on "Nightline" that reconstructing Iraq would cost the American taxpayer just $1.7 billion. Ted Koppel, in disbelief, pressed Natsios on the question, but Natsios stuck to his guns. Others in the administration, such as Deputy Defense Secretary Paul D. Wolfowitz, hoped that U.S. partners would chip in, as they had in the 1991 Persian Gulf War, or that Iraq's oil would pay for the damages.
    ad_icon

    The end result of all this wishful thinking? As we approach the fifth anniversary of the invasion, Iraq is not only the second longest war in U.S. history (after Vietnam), it is also the second most costly -- surpassed only by World War II.

    Why doesn't the public understand the staggering scale of our expenditures? In part because the administration talks only about the upfront costs, which are mostly handled by emergency appropriations. (Iraq funding is apparently still an emergency five years after the war began.) These costs, by our calculations, are now running at $12 billion a month -- $16 billion if you include Afghanistan. By the time you add in the costs hidden in the defense budget, the money we'll have to spend to help future veterans, and money to refurbish a military whose equipment and materiel have been greatly depleted, the total tab to the federal government will almost surely exceed $1.5 trillion.

    But the costs to our society and economy are far greater. When a young soldier is killed in Iraq or Afghanistan, his or her family will receive a U.S. government check for just $500,000 (combining life insurance with a "death gratuity") -- far less than the typical amount paid by insurance companies for the death of a young person in a car accident. The stark "budgetary cost" of $500,000 is clearly only a fraction of the total cost society pays for the loss of life -- and no one can ever really compensate the families. Moreover, disability pay seldom provides adequate compensation for wounded troops or their families. Indeed, in one out of five cases of seriously injured soldiers, someone in their family has to give up a job to take care of them.

    But beyond this is the cost to the already sputtering U.S. economy. All told, the bill for the Iraq war is likely to top $3 trillion. And that's a conservative estimate.

    President Bush tried to sell the American people on the idea that we could have a war with little or no economic sacrifice. Even after the United States went to war, Bush and Congress cut taxes, especially on the rich -- even though the United States already had a massive deficit. So the war had to be funded by more borrowing. By the end of the Bush administration, the cost of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, plus the cumulative interest on the increased borrowing used to fund them, will have added about $1 trillion to the national debt.

    The long-term burden of paying for the conflicts will curtail the country's ability to tackle other urgent problems, no matter who wins the presidency in November. Our vast and growing indebtedness inevitably makes it harder to afford new health-care plans, make large-scale repairs to crumbling roads and bridges, or build better-equipped schools. Already, the escalating cost of the wars has crowded out spending on virtually all other discretionary federal programs, including the National Institutes of Health, the Food and Drug Administration, the Environmental Protection Agency, and federal aid to states and cities, all of which have been scaled back significantly since the invasion of Iraq.

    To make matters worse, the U.S. economy is facing a recession. But our ability to implement a truly effective economic-stimulus package is crimped by expenditures of close to $200 billion on the two wars this year alone and by a skyrocketing national debt.

    The United States is a rich and strong country, but even rich and strong countries squander trillions of dollars at their peril. Think what a difference $3 trillion could make for so many of the United States' -- or the world's -- problems. We could have had a Marshall Plan to help desperately poor countries, winning the hearts and maybe the minds of Muslim nations now gripped by anti-Americanism. In a world with millions of illiterate children, we could have achieved literacy for all -- for less than the price of a month's combat in Iraq. We worry about China's growing influence in Africa, but the upfront cost of a month of fighting in Iraq would pay for more than doubling our annual current aid spending on Africa.

    Closer to home, we could have funded countless schools to give children locked in the underclass a shot at decent lives. Or we could have tackled the massive problem of Social Security, which Bush began his second term hoping to address; for far, far less than the cost of the war, we could have ensured the solvency of Social Security for the next half a century or more.

    Economists used to think that wars were good for the economy, a notion born out of memories of how the massive spending of World War II helped bring the United States and the world out of the Great Depression. But we now know far better ways to stimulate an economy -- ways that quickly improve citizens' well-being and lay the foundations for future growth. But money spent paying Nepalese workers in Iraq (or even Iraqi ones) doesn't stimulate the U.S. economy the way that money spent at home would -- and it certainly doesn't provide the basis for long-term growth the way investments in research, education or infrastructure would.

    www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...46.html
    reply to this post
    #
    prom...
    prometheusPAN
    online 111
    new post
    Re: Let's revist the WAR thing
    Today, 6:07 AM
    in response to: Re: Let's revist the WAR thing
    www.idealist.org/if/i/en/av/Org/2514-96

    e can help billions of people - and ourselves...

    The End Poverty Campaign is a comprehensive program. It makes innovative use of free and fair trade, microfinance and other social entrepreneurship innovations. These fairly new, low-cost and proven methods have already helped hundreds of millions of people lift themselves from poverty.

    AN URGENT PROBLEM
    More than 850 million people go hungry worldwide, 1.2 billion live on less than a dollar a day.

    This threatens mass migrations, epidemics, political chaos, war and terrorism. All this endangers us, too.

    Public opinion of the USA is at an all-time low in many parts of the world. This makes it easier for terrorists to recruit against us, so this is surely also a very serious national security concern.

    WE MUST TAKE THE LEAD
    This should include many of the very valuable Millennium Development Goals that Jeffrey Sachs outlines in his excellent book, The End of Poverty. But we can accomplish even more.

    The USA must be seen taking the lead to create a much better, more just, safer and sustainable world. This will bring virtually unlimited benefits for us and all future generations.

    We can do this at a remarkably small cost to us.

    WE CAN END EXTREME POVERTY
    You can support increased charitable giving and comprehensive legislation to end poverty worldwide by 2012. This is readily achievable in just five years - if the United States and the other developed nations spend just 1.5% of GDP national income.

    That's just a penny and a half on the dollar. It's what the USA spent for the Marshall Plan. That changed the course of history for all of Western Europe after World War II - also in just five years.

    This expense is far less than we spend on weapons that can never fully protect us in today's grossly unjust world.

    There are plenty of proven techniques and resources to accomplish an essential goal. The price is low, the time frame realistic. We, too, will benefit in greater prosperity and security.

    We can gather the best experts to make sure we use the most effective methods. We can adapt the methods most likely to work in each location.

    A MAJOR PRIORITY
    Like the 1960s goal of putting men on the moon, this is a visionary, inspiring goal.

    And this project has greater humane value than sending men to the Moon or Mars. With millions of lives at stake - perhaps our own, too - it's much more urgent.

    WE NEED TO ACT NOW TO END GLOBAL POVERTY!

    Wise giving and effective legislation will create and fund targeted, well monitored programs with strong incentives for proper management. Aid should be conditional on cooperation and transparency by the host nations' governments - or go directly to the people.
    reply to this post
    #
    prom...
    prometheusPAN
    online 111
    new post
    Re: Let's revist the WAR thing
    Today, 6:10 AM
    in response to: Re: Let's revist the WAR thing
    www.different-travel.com/

    Poverty Statistics

    Roughly 200,000 people died as a result of the Asian tsunami. This was considered a disaster so big, the world was galvanised into action on an unprecedented scale. However, against this backdrop of suffering, we must remember that 210,000 children worldwide die from hunger every week!


    Furthermore:


    Poverty is one of the biggest contributors to disease and death worldwide and the gap between the world's rich and poor is getting bigger... help us and support Make Poverty History - in doing something different you can make a difference to the lives of many. Join us in volunteer work on international development projects to aid communities become more self sufficient through one of our volunteer holidays and tours or charity challenges and help alleviate the consequences of world and child poverty:



    * 850 million men, women and children do not have sufficient daily food, and over half of them are chronically malnourished. And the figures are RISING!
    * Every year, 11 million children aged five years or under die from hunger
    * Every 3 seconds, someone somewhere dies of starvation
    * Poor nutrition causes the death of 1 in 3 people in the developing world

    HIV/AIDS

    * 93% of HIV/AIDS sufferers live in the developing world
    * HIV/AIDS is the one of the biggest contributing factors to hunger and poverty in Africa. As parents die, they leave behind orphans who must care for themselves - and often don't manage to.
    * In 2001, half a million people died from AIDS in southern Africa alone. In 2003, over 14 million people were infected in southern Africa
    * Every day HIV/AIDS kills 6,000 people and another 8,200 become infected

    Malaria

    * In Africa, a child will die from malaria every 30 seconds
    * Malaria kills 1 million people each year in Africa, and 3 million throughout the world

    Other issues

    * Within the last ten years, over 2 million children have died as a result of armed conflict
    * 1.2 billion people live without access to clean drinking water
    * 2.6 billion people live without basic sanitation, which kills 5 million people (mostly children) each year
    * Every minute, somewhere in the developing world, a woman will die whilst giving birth
    * In Afghanistan, 6% of pregnant women will die whilst giving birth - 1,000 times the rate of the UK
    * 1.3 billion people survive on less than 50 pence a day
    * Another 2.7 billion people survive on less than £1 a day
    * The net wealth of the 10 richest billionaires is $133 billion, more than 1.5 times the total national income of the least developed countries
    * The cost of ending global poverty is estimated to be a mere 1% of global gross domestic product (GDP)
    * In 1971, the world's wealthiest countries pledged to increase their aid budgets from 0.46 of GDP to 0.7%. However, in 2003 that figure had actually fallen to 0.24%
    * The UK has pledged to finally meet its 1971 target by 2020 - nearly 50 years later!
    * The USA spends only 0.15% of its GDP on development aid
    * The world spends $900 billion each year on its military budget
    * Debt relief for the 20 poorest countries would cost only $5.5 billion - the same amount as it cost to build EuroDisney!

    In the time it has taken you to read these facts:

    * 61 people have died of starvation
    * 15 people have died from poor sanitation
    * 10 people have died from malaria
    * 8 people have become infected with HIV
    * 7 people have died from AIDS
    * 2 women have died in childbirth
    * and the world has spent $2.6 million on war!

    Please go here to find out more: www.makepovertyhistory.org


    The difference between concern and compassion is simple. Concern says 'that's wrong and someone should do something'. Compassion says 'that's wrong, and I must do something'. The Different Travel Company is committed to doing something, committed to making a difference to people's lives through responsible tourism, committed to helping people to become self sufficient and committed to giving people a future, their dignity and self respect.
    Adrian Yalland - The Different Travel Company


    The greatest good you can do for another is not just share your riches, but reveal to them their own.
    Benjamin Disraeli

    If you light a lamp for somebody, it will also brighten your own path.
    Buddha
    reply to this post
    #
    prom...
    prometheusPAN
    online 111
    new post
    Re: Let's revist the WAR thing
    Today, 6:19 AM
    in response to: Re: Let's revist the WAR thing
    The cost of ending global poverty is estimated to be a mere 1% of global gross domestic.....








    ETHICS General

    1. Endeavor to do the least possible or no harm to all persons, property, life, liberty, livelihood, environment, self, others, family, community, Country, World, Economies,
    Children, Elders, Workers, Voters, and Ecosystems. (And so forth.)
    2. Endeavor to make all of ones labor to meet ones own needs also coincide with the maximum energy potential of benefit to others. Practice the law of charity and reap
    the rewards of the law of karma. Give your best to others and go the extra mile, for the
    good of all, for the benefit of all of ones relations.
    3. Emotions derive from primary instincts. Flight renders fear and fight renders Rage.
    4. Emotional Energies are best resolved via right action problem solving process, not
    allowing emotion to guide or control ones thinking or process.
    5. The 1st and second principle applies as a matrix to the whole Needs Pyramid. That Pyramid consists of Physical needs at the base, social needs, emotional needs, mental
    needs and spiritual needs at the top.
    6. We only move up through the pyramid of needs one need at a time and in order of
    priority for survival. Needs are coded as instincts that drive all of human behavior. All
    behavior is tactic to meet ones needs. Behavior which harms others or which fails to benefit the whole of society is unethical behavior, but it must be understood to exist
    as a psychology which is an instinct attached to a bad problem solving tactic. People
    only act to meet their needs, if they act badly, what they need to act better is a better
    tactic.
    7. Thus do no harm and work for the good of all as you climb your pyramid of needs
    and be cognizant of what your needs are, and lucid in terms of having good tactics that
    are socially beneficial for meeting your needs.
    8. Most morality can be expressed as iterations of the do no harm rule. Do no harm against ones relationship with spirit, Do no harm which would kill another person, do no
    harm by stealing or thieving, do no harm by potentially transmitting STDS i.e., law against
    Adultery, the list goes on etc; most of the Ten Commandments can be rewritten as specific details of the do no harm rule.
    9. Ethics is the process of reconciling the needs of society with the drives of the Reptilian
    and Mammalian Brain and thus Ethics are the laws of nature which allow us to exist in
    peace as a culture or society instead of continuing the law of the jungle.
    10. We are spirits in animal bodies, and there is a law of the jungle under our skins which must be somehow evolved and cultivated into cooperation (and cooperative
    process) rather than violence (and violence as a problem solving process.) The law of the jungle is violence. The law of Angels is Cooperation.
    11. Everything is connected to everything else, thus anything you do to another you do
    to yourself. This becomes increasingly true as the law of karma carries out its permutation selections of what would otherwise be random chance rendering thus
    synchronicities.
    12. A person cannot obtain waking altered states of consciousness until they resolve
    the assorted shadow issues of the Mammalian and Reptilian Mind.




    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ethics
    www.journals.uchicago.edu/ET/
    www.utm.edu/research/iep/e/ethics.htm
    www.scu.edu/ethics/pract...isethics.html
    ethics.sandiego.edu/
    www.suite101.com/article.c...ase/112259
    www.pbs.org/now/shows/22...n-ethics.html


    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primum_non_nocere
    www.conbio.org/cip/article74har.cfm
    www.ascensionhealth.org/ethics...ood.asp
    skeptically.org/ethicsutility/id10.html
    search.yahoo.com/search;_y...oBelxXNyoA
    www.globaljusticemovement.org/mis....htm

    www.blueletterbible.org/kjv/1C...13.html
    scriptures.lds.org/1_cor/13
    scriptures.lds.org/en/1_cor/13/1a
    scriptures.lds.org/en/bd/c/41
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1_Corinthians_13

    www.buddhanet.net/e-learning/karma1.htm
    world.std.com/~aditya/BB/...20KARMA4.htm
    www.ncf.ca/freenet/root...s/karma2.html
    www.thebuddhadharma.com/issues...l02.htm
    www.purifymind.com/YogaKarma.htm
    www.purifymind.com/UnderstandKarma.htm

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eye_of_a_needle
    www.eyeoftheneedle.net/Church...dle.htm
    www.debunker.com/texts/needleye.html
    www.shamar.org/articles/camel-needle.php


    dictionary.reference.com/browse/instinct
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Instinct
    www.actualfreedom.com.au/libra...ts.htm
    drbeetle.homestead.com/mindrules.html
    www.neurosemantics.com/Stutte...ern.htm

    www.barrettdorko.com/article...ress.htm
    www.fortunecity.com/milleniu...rain.html

    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Masl...y_of_needs
    crs.uvm.edu/gopher/nerl/.../b/c/PyN.html
    www.age-of-the-sage.org/psycho...id.html
    www.businessballs.com/maslow.htm

    www.bibliotecapleyades.net/sume...4.htm
    www.commondreams.org/views04/0817-13.htm
    www.vanderbilt.edu/AnS/Anth...ctice.htm
    www.atam.org/SerpentBrain.html
    www.psycheducation.org/emotio...lex.htm
     HYPERLINK "www.geocities.com/somewhere...html" www.geocities.com/somewhere...Brain.html































    PSYCHOLOGY General
    1.Psychology is the study of the human mind. Most specifically the psyche, most generally All of human behavior.
    2. The human Brain is composed of between 40 and 70 different organs, depending upon
    how you define differences. These are called brodmanns brain areas. Each brain area
    is responsible for specific types of brain processes and mental functions.
    3. The human mind has four main operational conditions, they are beta brainwave states, alpha brainwave states, delta brainwave states, and theta brainwave states. Each of these might be further subdivided into waking or sleeping states of consciousness.
    4. Beta brainwave states are those in which the dominant area of the brain is the frontal lobes. Alpha brainwave states are those in which the dominant area of the brain is the Mammalian brain or Occipital lobes, and Delta brainwaves states are those where the brain is dominated by the Reptilian Brain or brain stem. Theta brain wave states are
    a second waking condition in which the body is healed, or, in which the normal flow of
    dominance from top of brain to bottom of brain is reversed, and the bottom of the brain
    loads information into the top, which is then experienced as dreams.
    5. We have instincts which compel us to seek out gratification of our needs. All behavior is motivated by a conscious or unconscious belief that said behavior will get some need met.
    6. Psychology involves first an instinct, which compels a thought process, and then a planning or strategizing session in which the individual uses their maps of reality and belief systems as well as learned knowledge and social conditioning to arrive at an end
    product of doing something to get what you want. Schema are maps of reality which we
    use as tools to meet our needs .Social Conditioning and personal experience and learning
    play vital roles in helping the mind to think up tactics to meet needs.
    7. Criminal behavior is behavior which that person believes will get their needs met. Punishment was well demonstrated to have little or no effect on learning curve. What is required for a person to change their behavior is a functional tactic that does work to get their needs met.
    8. Groupthink is a social phenomenon of psychology where a group uses false
    consensus process to end up behaving stupidly as a group. Groupthink occurs when
    people cave into social pressures, where propaganda replaces knowledge or facts, and where group identity is created out of participation in group delusions, lies, codependency, or criminality. Groupthink is how a mob drifts to the lowest common denominator, and why a mob is potentially vicious, evil, and sociopathic. Group
    authority ameliorates and dissolves personal conscience, and by having their emotions
    manipulated and their social identity threatened, people give up their own better judgment and accept the judgment of the most psychopathic member of the group.
    9. Pack Psychology is the psychology exhibited primarily by mammals in small groups
    in which 3 primary roles are assumed by social participants. The roles are Alpha- the leader, Beta- the followers, and Delta- the orbiters. In human society that translates in a super-simplified way into bullies, cliques, and nerds.
    10. Problem solving psychology must contend against groupthink and pack psychology in the arena of opinion. Problem solving psychology is emotionally neutral and uses the mind and logic to look at all aspects of a problem and try to come up with a viable problem solving process. Problem solving psychology is the worst enemy of both
    Rightist and Leftist Dogmatists. True problem solving psychology comes from the place of the radical middle. It takes in all sides and all viewpoints, and it gives each its fair dues
    And attention in creating a problem solving process that works from the big picture down through into the nano details.


    Psychology;
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychology
    psychology.about.com/
    www.psychology.org/
    psychology.wikia.com/wiki/Main_Page
    www.encyclopedia.com/doc/1E1...lgy.html
    www.socialpsychology.org/

    Brodmanns brain areas and etc;
    www.umich.edu/~cogneuro/j...rodmann.html
    spot.colorado.edu/~dubin/ta...dmann.html
    www.whale.to/b/brain.html
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brodmann_area
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List...uman_brain
    thebrain.mcgill.ca/flash/ca...ne05.html
    www.csuchico.edu/~pmccaff/...unit4.html
    faculty.washington.edu/chudler/qa2.html

    brainwaves;
    www.brainwaves.com/brain.html
    pages.prodigy.net/unohu/brainwaves.htm
    brain.web-us.com/brainwavesfunction.htm
    www.crossroadsinstitute.org/eeg.html
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brainwaves














    SOCIOLOGY General
    1. Sociology is the study of groups of people, how they interact, how they create and hold group structures and group identities, how they band together, how they deal with conflicts, and everything that whole groups of people do.
    2. Sociology studies social units such as families, packs, tribes, villages, cities, hives, herds, and mobs.
    3. The precarious balance of true democracy is that society must balance social welfare and social support and services against the counterweight of free enterprise. If the balance falls off towards social welfare, the society falls into entropy as the government destroys
    private enterprise to fund social services. The result is socialism, which always decays into its own form of totalitarianism. If the balance falls off the other way, then free enterprise results in a plutocracy and then an oligarchy followed by mild oligarchic mercantilist fascism and then a severe oligarchic fascism. Socialism is not a whole goal
    or endpoint we wish to arrive at, but the system "as is" is out of balance resulting in a corporate oligarchy. The only way to fix this is to return the power back to the people and
    restore a genuine democracy.
    4. Sociology understands that social phenomenon are very complicated, and that social problems have many underlying contributing causes for any given effect. Oversimplification, blaming, black and white thinking, and false dilemmas do not help to solve problems in a real way.
    5. People are conditioned to behave by their social environment. Personal responsibility is important, but where statistics show a trend in negative or antisocial behaviors, Society
    as a whole must shoulder some part of the blame and work to improve conditions socially
    just as it works to rehabilitate the criminal, so should it seek to rehabilitate itself.
    6. People have several layers of personal space, a psychological truth which is mostly subliminal, but which nonetheless governs almost all social interactions. People should learn to consciously understand personal space to cut down on miscommunication and stress due to problems handling personal space issues.
    7. The best way to run a democratic system is by using consensus process to the point of
    a clear and overwhelming (two thirds) majority. Consensus process means talking about and working out issues and differences to arrive at a mutually beneficial compromise much of the time.
    8. The best guardian of the balance between socialism and free enterprise is intellectual meritocracy. A functional society should be free of propaganda, should not have anti-intellectualism, and should consider ideas on their rational merit, not according to what
    others have to say or social pressures, but by means of a reproducible rational problem
    solving application of intelligence and knowledge.


    Sociology Introduction;
    www.thomsonedu.com/thomsone...ipline.do
    www.polity.co.uk/sociology...txtbks.asp
    highered.mcgraw-hill.com/sites...y.html
    www.sdsmt.edu/online-cour...00/Intro.htm
    www.sdsmt.edu/online-cour.../course.html
    www2.wwnorton.com/college/soc/giddens5/
    www.camden.rutgers.edu/~wood/207syl.htm
    core.ecu.edu/soci/juskaa...10/soci1.htm

    Types of Government;
    stutzfamily.com/mrstutz/Wo...ofgovt.html
    news.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/h...2151570.stm
    home.earthlink.net/~kingsid.../id2.html
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Form_of_government
    www.twyman-whitney.com/americ...ent.htm
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List...government

    Social Conditioning;
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soci...nditioning
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oper...nditioning
    answers.yahoo.com/question/index
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soci...ing_theory
    www.dailyom.com/articles/2006/4952.html
    changingminds.org/technique...ioning.htm
    www.winthrop.edu/english/n...social.htm

    Pavlov;
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivan_Pavlov
    www.psyhist.com/conditioning.html
    www.sntp.net/behaviorism/pavlov.htm
    users.cwnet.com/phelps/pavlov.htm
    forerunner.com/forerunner...iorism.html
    tip.psychology.org/skinner.html
    www.brembs.net/operant/
    psychology.about.com/od/beha...cond.htm


















    EDUCATION REFORM General
    Curiosity drives learning if it is allowed to do so and not shut down.
    Curiosity is shut down via the current system, creating the ADD disorder sudden appearance on the charts. One half of ADD is a person who can’t pay attention. The other half is a boring culture, delivery of information modus
    operandi.
    Curiosity driven learning involves more brain area participation. If a person doesn’t really like their experience, the subconscious mind edits it and doesn’t learn from it. Using curiosity driven learning potentially accelerates the learning curve such that it would not be unreasonable for the society of the future to expect the equivalent of a multiple PhD education from High School.
    The largest obstacle to curiosity driven learning is the current student to teacher ratio. Curiosity driven learning requires a personal curriculum to be developed per child, an enormous labor process for most teachers. The cure is to use peer tutoring, and older child tutoring in conjunction with professional testers. Teachers are being asked do two different jobs, Teaching and Testing. Testing is incredibly underutilized. How can you know what a child is ready to learn if you have not learned from them who they are and what they know already?
    The second largest obstacle is a lazy educational system which must be corrected
    and re-educated itself. The educational paradigm being taught for use is not the one which is being taught in reform education psychology and sociology classes.
    The first battery of tests should be; IQ tests, aptitude tests, Sanity tests, Type of intelligence per intelligence tests, learning style tests, performance tests, peer skills tests, comprehensive topical subject tests, and in general, any test which can be used to effectively appraise an individual child for the purposes of creating for that child a personalized curriculum.
    The topics of psychology, sociology, conversational logic, and ethics should be added to the current curriculum for all Middle School (ages 12 to 14 or grades 6 thru 8) and High Schools
    Personality differences including learning styles and Types of intelligence
    Can mean that people learn in very different ways. Groups of students should be organized without regard so much to age as to learning style. A class full of visual
    Learners from 3 age groups is better than a class full of kinesthetic learners and visual learners who find each other distracting and each others interactions with the teacher bizarre. Throw in some introverts and some extroverts and a speed-reader or two, and a teachers modus operandi cannot hope to reach well the different types of Students that s/he is teaching.
    10. Our society is composed of a population which is by about 50 percent Anti-intellectual. (As part of a deep and long term attempt at denial of science facts)
    The sheeple will crucify the nerds, that’s the end result of pack psychology and anti-intellectualist mob events. Both alleged “Sides” in the great orchestrated argument between left and right are delusional dogmatist simple minded over simplified versions of reality, oversimplified problem solving process, and thus oversimplified and therefore
    Usually counterproductive pseudo solutions. Polarity does not contain sanity, both sides are polarized via each other, but the line that connects those two dots at no point in time Ever gets around to the big picture or the whole truth. Evolution and mother nature will on the other hand favor the nerds.

    Education reform;
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Educational_reform
    www1.worldbank.org/educatio...onreform/
    www.education-reform.net/
    dmoz.org/Society/Issue...cation_Reform/

    Curiousity driven Learning
    www.csl.sony.fr/~py/develo...obotics.htm
    www.idsia.ch/~juergen/interest.html
    www.childtrauma.org/ctamater...osity.asp
    www.csun.edu/~vcpsy00h/s.../explore.htm


    Types of Intelligence;
    www.macalester.edu/psycholo...ypes.html
    www.ldpride.net/learningstyles.MI.htm
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mult...elligences

    Learning Styles;
    www.ncsu.edu/felder-publ..._Styles.html
    www.ncsu.edu/felder-public/ILSpage.html
    www.chaminade.org/inspire/learnstl.htm
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Learning_styles
    www.funderstanding.com/learni...les.cfm

    Student Teacher Ratio:
    www.edspresso.com/
    www.edreform.com/index.cfm
    www.dreamagic.com/jesse/isedurat.html

    Anti Intellectualism;
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti...lectualism
    chronicle.com/free/v47/i15/15b00701.htm
    www.amazon.com/Anti-Intel.../0394703170
    www.csmonitor.com/2003/0121...-lehl.html
    mtprof.msun.edu/Spr1997/TROUT-ST.html
    www.wayofthemind.org/2006/07...tualism/
    urresearch.rochester.edu/retri...sm.pdf
    www.boston.com/news/local...her_ratios/

    CIVIL ENGINEERING General
    Civil Engineering is about how to build society or civilization from the nuts and bolts pragmatic perspective. A civil engineer is unconcerned with personally understanding
    The social impact of their work unless they are specifically asked to think about that.
    Rather, what a Civil engineer thinks about is how to build a structure, have it last, have
    It mesh with its environment, have water flow around it, have wind not push it over. A Civil Engineer builds what society asks for generally, adding the details that make a description into an operational reality.
    Many social and civil problems have civil engineering components. Energy usage
    And creation, for instance, has both a social and a civil level as problems to be solved. Zoning laws and other social considerations limit what a civil engineer can do. And, rightly, civil engineering realities create limits for sociologists. Civil engineers are concerned with how efficiently resources are used, how much load a structure can bear, how well a structure accommodates traffic, and other details such as environmental impact.
    Civil Engineering has aesthetic components, resource management components, construction components, and other issues which must be juggled for a good overall design and implementation.
    Serious solutions for assorted problems are implied by depth understanding of civil engineering issues. Poverty for instance can in theory be out civil engineered by building the structures that are needed to house people, employment, education, and social welfare systems. The solution for instance to the Palestinian problem once diplomacy has finished is civil engineering; building the new State of Palestine and simultaneously building a strong Israel. Eco Villages, Tribal Arcologies, Permaculture,
    Cable cars, Solar power, Geothermal power, Wind power, Tidal power, and other such
    Civil engineering solutions can solve myriads of problems that would be untenable from the sociologist’s desk alone. Simultaneously, Good civil engineering requires us to be honest about things that don’t work, such as fossil fuels, bio-fuels, nuclear power, hydroelectric power from rivers and dams, and individualized mass transportation.
    Ideally, most people should live in communities rather than in nuclear families
    Cut off from community support, and communities should maintain community gardens
    And local employment to increase the efficiency of civilization as a whole.

    Civil Engineering;
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_engineering
    www.icivilengineer.com/
    engineering.purdue.edu/CE/
    www.unm.edu/~civil/
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cate...ngineering
    whatiscivilengineering.csce.ca/



    Economic Social Justice;
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Civil_justice
    indymedia.us/en/topic/ec...rchive.shtml
    www.commondreams.org/community.htm
    www.cesj.org/thirdway/ec...-defined.htm
    www.cesj.org/


    Eco-Village;
    www.gaia.org/gaia/
    gen.ecovillage.org/
    www.ecosustainablevillage.com/
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eco-village

    Arcologies;
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arcologies
    www.arcosanti.org/theory/ar.../main.html
    www.arcology.com/
    www.halfbakery.com/idea/Sel...rcologies

    Permaculture;
    www.attra.org/attra-pub/perma.html
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Permaculture
    www.permaculture.net/about/d...ons.html
    www.permaculture.net/about/b...ion.html
    www.permaculture.org/nm/inde...e/index/


    Cable Cars;
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cable_car
    www.rickly.com/sgi/cable_cars.htm
    www.cable-car-guy.com/html/ccmain.html
    www.photovault.com/Link/Veh...me01.html

    Solar Power;
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_power
    www.solarelectricpower.org/
    www.montanagreenpower.com/solar...x.html

    Geothermal Power
    geothermal.marin.org/pwrheat.html
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Geothermal_power
    www1.eere.energy.gov/geother...nts.html
    geothermal.marin.org/
    www.msnbc.msn.com/id/15749933/

    Wind Power;
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wind_power
    www.otherpower.com/otherpower_wind.html

    Tidal Power;
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tidal_power
    inventors.about.com/od/tstar...power.htm
    waterpower.hypermart.net/tidal.html
    www.esru.strath.ac.uk/EandE/W...ower.htm

    POLITICAL SCIENCE General
    What kind of government does the USA have? What kind of government does Santa Barbara have? Because while it is intended to be an approximation of democracy, via
    The process of representation, how much representation does the common person have
    In a false dilemma war between republican and democrat? How much access do we have
    To our representation? How much does our representation really work to represent us? And are they loyal to the people, or, are they loyal to that fraction of the people who can afford to belong to the aristocrat class? In theory, the political process is where and how society codes ethics and social and civil engineering into actual laws and rules and actions of the government. Politics might be defined as that sphere of social reality devoted to government, and in a democracy, Political science becomes the complicated process of getting social participants to fully invest in their own self governance.
    Political science is thus about the cycle of communication, ideation, and manifestation of social and civil self administration. In America, this is a dialogue allegedly between any and all, but in reality, it is a monologue with two sock puppets
    Taking up all of the air space. What difference is there between the $rich$ leftists and the
    $rich$ rightists? Both rule over the under-caste of laborers and Workers, who in truth end up having little or no say in government. The masses are drowned out by two sock puppets screaming at each other.
    Political Science combines all other sciences in one way or another. It involves Ethics, Morality, Physics, Architecture, Psychology, Sociology, Law, communications, Logic, and in one way or another every other science or paradigm. The subtopics of Political science are therefore Political Science sub all of the other Sciences and paradigms. But do our representatives have the information they need to juggle so many
    Problems and issues? Do we as a society have a problem solving process, and are we solving problems? Or are we mostly making social problems worse by complicating society?
    Perhaps more importantly, all of the sciences have bearing on Political Science.
    Communications theory gives us solutions to most problems in government which we simply fail to employ. Civil Engineering tells us with mathematical certainty what the
    Consequences are of building or failing to build any given thing. Sociology has the answers easily to almost all serious social problems. Hard Science can solve the energy
    Crunch. The problem is that people are allowing money to make the decisions, not a lucid
    Problem solving process. The problem is that the answers the sciences have to give us are being ignored, so that power hungry fools can continue to stay on top of their power-play games, and stay cozy, unaffected by truth or knowledge or reason.
    All opinions were not created equal. The perspective of a sociologist is simply a more well formed perspective than a laypersons is if we are to seriously consider solving social problems. Opinion is based in emotions, in simplifications, and usually, in leftist or rightist sponsored propaganda. But neither left nor right side is interested in solving problems, as much as they are trapped in a net of their own making of lies they told themselves often enough that they believed them. The saddest part of ignorance is that if
    People would just slow down, they could take the time to educate themselves.

    Political Science;
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_science
    ocw.mit.edu/OcwWeb/Polit...nce/index.htm
    www.apsanet.org/
    www.britannica.com/eb/artic...l-science

    Propaganda
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda
    www.propagandacritic.com/
    www.sourcewatch.org/index.php
    www.esrnational.org/whatispropaganda.htm
    www.britannica.com/eb/artic...ropaganda
    answers.yahoo.com/question/index
    www.sourcewatch.org/index.php
    www.serendipity.li/more/propagan.html
    mason.gmu.edu/~amcdonal/P...hniques.html
    www.readwritethink.org/lesson...iew.asp

    Types of government;
    stutzfamily.com/mrstutz/Wo...ofgovt.html
    news.bbc.co.uk/cbbcnews/h...2151570.stm
    home.earthlink.net/~kingsid.../id2.html
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Form_of_government
    www.twyman-whitney.com/americ...ent.htm
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List...government





    Oligarchy;
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oligarchy
    www.britannica.com/eb/artic...oligarchy
    www.bartleby.com/65/ol/oligarch.html
    dictionary.reference.com/brows...garchy
    www.oligarchyusa.com/
    www.theatlantic.com/doc/prem...005-03-30
    www.democracymatters.org/article.php
    familyrightsassociation.com/news...y.htm
    www.shoutwire.com/comments/..._Oligarchy
    www.irregulartimes.com/oligarchy.html

    Class warfare;
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Class_Warfare
    www.therationalradical.com/outr...e.htm
    www.disenchanted.com/dis/tec...are.html
    www.thenation.com/blogs/capitalgames
    www.nytimes.com/2006/11/26...6every.html
    answers.yahoo.com/question/index


    reply to this post
    #
    prom...
    prometheusPAN
    online 111
    new post
    Re: Let's revist the WAR thing
    Today, 6:21 AM
    in response to: Re: Let's revist the WAR thing
    Now, I have put more than enough information on the table to support my assertion, but we already know that all ronnie will do is
    come up with some stupid and most likely evil method to invalidate it.

    On the other hand, If i continue to go on and on, it gets to be a bit tiring.

    As far as any SANE person is concerned, I have more than made my point.

    lets see if ronnie is dumb enough to challenge me for round two.

  23. #23
    BANNED
    Registered
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Santa Barbara
    Posts
    19
    prometheuspan
    3/20/2001 8:23 PM 1 out of 23


    An ARcology for purposes of this discussion is a house built as a single building for a
    tribal group or a hive instead of for a nuclear family. The first size, for no less than 20
    and no more than about 2000 individuals, The larger size for as many as billions of
    people.

    Certain theoretical environments, such as starships are by nature larger size
    Arcologies, but we will only explore the smaller size for this thread.

    Arcologies were brought to the attention of American Consciousness by a man named
    P. Santeri.

    A lot of problems are solved socially and economically as well as ergonomically
    when you do an Arcology well. A lot of people have a knee Jerk reaction against the
    idea but don't really understand that things could very possibly be better in every
    concievable way in such a situation.

    Taking a City block on which currently resides say 14 houses, and building on 7 of
    those lots a structure 10 stories tall, you could house an extraordinary number of
    people in avery space saving fashion.

    Thats a selling point to a social engineer but nobody else.

    Heres a list of advantages.

    1. You could give all of those people more room in which to live than they currently
    have.
    2. You could save on heating, electricity, and frankly all utilities tremendously.
    3. Child care suddenly becomes a group collaborative effort, instead of a trying chore.
    In a tribal social structure, all the adults take responsibility for the Children.
    Thus no one adult is over stressed with tooo many or too much.
    4. School, work, and all social functions can happen within the Arcology or on its
    grounds.
    5. No need thus for automobiles, therefore no more emissions problems.
    6. A whole host of social needs that we are not getting met right now would get met.
    7. Labor process such as cooking and cleaning could be cut down on significantly.
    8. By including sound proofing, theres no reason to believe you couldn't have privacy in
    your own space.
    9. With the bedrooms on the outside of the building and using an open porch style of
    construction, everybody could have their own sunlight and access to tiny, personal
    outdoor yards.
    10. The problem of urban sprawl would thus be dealt with and our childre n could look
    forward to living in paradise instead of ghettos of their parents creation.

    So first, I'll design and explain a theoretical 2000 person arcology, and then we will
    look at how each of these and more advantages apply.

    But before any of that happens, by all means let me have your thoughts and feelings.

    for more info, go to "Yahoo.com" and type in "Arcosanti" for the search parameter.




    screenqwen
    3/20/2001 8:35 PM 2 out of 23

    in theory this is good but people are the main trouble. i unfortunetly have lived in many communal situations none of which worked out. for what ever reason, people that close together do not work. i have lived in houses with other people most of who do not clean up or take care of their monetary or chore responsibilities. i'd have to give that some serious thought. i like to garden and require a lot of space for that not some little private thing. people also live different and the space one person needs another does not. it seems a good thing maybe some of it with private housing for different needs.i would like to hear more about it however, maybe i am wrong about the concept.



    prometheuspan
    3/20/2001 8:47 PM 3 out of 23

    n theory this is good but people are the main trouble. i unfortunetly have lived in many
    communal situations none of which worked out. for what ever reason, people that
    close together do not work.
    ---------------------
    Its a hard answer to apply but it can work. The main problem is that you have to make very real changes in the way you run society at the same time, and thats hard. It has been shown to be feasable in places like China, Japan, and even New
    York. The next thing is building them so that they are really really nice to live in, which is I think the main thing.
    ----------------
    i have lived in houses with other people most of who do
    not clean up or take care of their monetary or chore responsibilities. i'd have to give
    that some serious thought.
    ---------------
    Yes thats the kind of problems you face. This is one of the hardest solutions to face but also one of the strongest. If you do it well its going to be real good for us. If we do it poorly it will of course suck. Its not like some of the other solutions that you just do it and it works. Theres a lot of smaller problems inside of the big problem that you have to deal with in order to make it work right.
    -----------------------
    i like to garden and require a lot of space for that not some
    little private thing.
    -------------------
    My version of arcology includes self sufficiency, so they grow all of their own food, and that means a lot of garden space.
    ------------
    people also live different and the space one person needs another
    does not. it seems a good thing maybe some of it with private housing for different
    needs
    ---------------
    Throw your concerns to the wind for a moment and just imagine on the puter what it would have to be like if you solved all of those issues and had something that indeed really did work for you. In other words, think of yourself as queen engineer, and just build it to suit you. Try for 2000 people.
    ---------

    .i would like to hear more about it however, maybe i am wrong about the
    concept.
    -------------
    You are not wrong. This is always the hardest of these solutions to sell to people.




    prometheuspan
    3/20/2001 8:51 PM 4 out of 23

    Just imagine if you will a bedroom 30 feet long and 30 feet wide. All the privacy anybody could need. Plus a small kitchenette and bathroom inside of that same very large room.

    Then imagine a huge set of several large living rooms to share with freinds and loved ones, a great big extended family.

    There are two or five kitchens and while you can cook if you want to at any time, you don't have to most of the time as there are just a few cooks for the whole community whose job it is to cook for everybody.

    You have a porch balcony and a bird feeder, your own smaller private porch garden, and access to the very large and impressive community garden, where you have your own private patch.

    Theres swimming pools, saunas, hot tubs, and all kinds of activities to participate in socially, including dance, song, and crafts.





    deepeco
    3/20/2001 11:35 PM 5 out of 23

    the problem that i have with the idea of "arcologies" is that they represent another technological "fix" that would ultimately drive humans further away from nature. while arcologies could be socially "beneficial" for humans, they represent the pinnacle of our anthropocentrism. we continue looking for technological solutions to the ecological crisis, when it is nothing so simple. it is nothing less than a fundamental sickness of the mind. i for one would find no consolation in a giant arcology shut off from all that is natural.



    arielmessenger
    3/21/2001 12:38 AM 6 out of 23

    I talked briefly with Paolo Soleri once many years ago and didn't come away feeling any better about his Archologies. His huge designs weren't feasible structurally and the people who had to live in them were in effect, in Soleri's work of art. Oh, you could individualize some of the ornamentation of your personal dwelling but the overall design was Soleri's creation. One man. How does a group determine what structural design in going to be used if not a single person's or even a group's shared design. The process must involve the group and like others here, my negative experience of communal decision-making makes me want to make sure I never let any group have that sort of power over my personal life. And for sure, I wouldn't want to let any single person determine these kinds of decisions. The natural development of towns and cities may not be ecologically efficient but natural development allows everyone to choose for themselves what kind of living situation they want instead of having all those decisions made beforehand by the Archology architect or the people who joined the Archology first.

    Deepeco's objection is also valid. Living in a huge manmade structure high off the ground continues the divorcement of human life from the natural world.

    Archologies are made for outer space but on earth they just blot out a large portion of the natural sky and the earth with gigantic artificial construction.



    Hatman
    3/21/2001 2:13 AM 7 out of 23

    arielmessenger, deepeco-
    I hope that this board will concentrate its energies around solutions. Although your prior experiences will be extraordinarily valuable in knowing what not to do, I would ask that you share what would and did work, what you liked and disliked, and how you would design an harmonious living arrangement better.

    'pan-
    I love the idea and the concept, but how would disputes be resolved in a just way that would retain the spirit of kindness? If a person steadfastly refused to entertain the course of kindness, how would the person be expelled--or would they be? How do you envision the social structure? What chores would be shared, and which would be individual? If an individual refused to cooperate in the matter of shared duties(cleaning common areas, for example), how would the situation be handled?
    Perhaps, as arielmessenger suggested, all 2000 who had expressed an interest in living cooperatively should discuss how they would like to live--in detail--prior to construction/renovation.
    I believe that if one proceeds with an eye to doing justice, loving kindness, and practicing humility, harmony will reign.
    Peace-

    Hatman



    Prometheuspan
    3/21/2001 4:26 PM 8 out of 23

    hatman, thank you. Folks, lets try our best to see the solutions potentials and hammer out the details. Clearly theres a lot of details to hammer. I am asking a lot I know, but lets just go for the hypothetical here and try to work our way into a spirit of cocreative energy.

    deepeco, my ideas about arcologies as stated include each arcology being agriculturally self sufficient. Thats the opposite condition to your percieved objection.

    As far as paolo goes, lets face it, hes a genius and on that note deserves our respect. Hes also an egotist who has more or less hijacked a very brilliant idea and who really isn't serving that ideal because he isn't engineering a better society, hes just building big structures.

    That said, by all means please just try to think about and write down what you would want the structure to be like in order for you to want to live in it.

    Remember we are going for a target community of 2000.




    Prometheuspan
    3/21/2001 4:33 PM 9 out of 23


    'pan-
    I love the idea and the concept, but how would disputes be resolved in a just way that
    would retain the spirit of kindness?
    --------------
    It is my belief that if we apply some of the other solutions we have mentioned so far that this won't be an issue. Remember, if and only if a society makes the individual their first priority, THEN each individual will make society their first priority.
    That simple relationship and formulae is the key to everything. Right now people are expected to make society their first priority, but lets face it, society doesn't give a crap about me or you personally. Wether you or I live or die is all put up and into terms of wether or not we conform to societies expectations, or instead, become on some level a criminal.

    You don't have unhappy malcontents in a society which genuinely seeks to make everybody happy by meeting their needs.
    Abe maslow solves the problem before it even starts.
    ----------
    If a person steadfastly refused to entertain the
    course of kindness, how would the person be expelled--or would they be?
    -------------
    Thats a difficult question and I think we would have to go on a lot more particulars of the individual case. The worst case scenario for simple lazyness is I guess yes expulsion.
    -----------





    Prometheuspan
    3/21/2001 4:36 PM 10 out of 23

    How do you
    envision the social structure? What chores would be shared, and which would be
    individual? If an individual refused to cooperate in the matter of shared duties(cleaning
    common areas, for example), how would the situation be handled?
    Perhaps, as arielmessenger suggested, all 2000 who had expressed an interest in
    living cooperatively should discuss how they would like to live--in detail--prior to
    construction/renovation.
    I believe that if one proceeds with an eye to doing justice, loving kindness, and
    practicing humility, harmony will reign.
    Peace-
    ---------------------
    These are good questions and they are all social engineering questions.
    Clearly such a social structure won't work unless the social climate is itself well adjusted. Those are other solutions than this one however and I think that the best thing to do is take one solution at a time, lest this thread be hijacked into "social
    engineering".

    The answers to these questions are the Abraham maslow and the instinctual human solutions.






    Prometheuspan
    3/21/2001 4:46 PM 11 out of 23

    To get us started folks, with a 30 by 30 bedroom as mentioned, you end up with
    oh, lets see. We do this in rows so we chop to a thousand first, thats 3000 feet long
    and with an internal hallway only, 70 feet wide. Since I am going to put the common areas in the middle and give peoples bedrooms outside windows/porches, we increase our width to 120 feet wide, for two widths of bedrooms, two internal hallways at 10 feet wide each, and a 40 foot wide middle for the living rooms and so forth.

    Now you can stack this in any number of ways but I would go for a minimum of three stories tall. That takes us down to 1000 feet long.

    Six stories would be better in my mind as I am going for expediency. So thats 500
    feet long, 120 feet wide, and about 60 feet tall.

    The average city block right now is with houses 40 feet cube, plus 20 feet on each
    side for about an 80 foot by 80 foot lot. That 80 foot by 80 foot lot serves 2 adults and as I last recall in america, 2.3 kids. (correct me if I make any mistakes.)

    So with our arcology, we are taking that 160 foot wide city block that runs say
    10 houses long (And two wide) for a total population of 20x4.3 for a rounded up total of only 100.

    So now, just think about what we can do with the sourounding 20 blocks.

    Can you say permaculture? Can you say Garden of Eden?




    Prometheuspan
    3/21/2001 4:50 PM 12 out of 23

    olympic size swimming pools, and parks, and yards.

    Of course right next door we have our industrial section, where we make all kinds of technology toys for ourselves and others.

    Instead of covering 20 blocks with houses and having sprawl, and needing more land to farm in order to eat, we cover 1 block with housing, we eat directly off the land around us, and we add in enough peripheral details to make it paradise.

    I know its a big huge psychological leap over a wide precipice. I know I am taking about giving up the way that people now live and shooting for something that may even be a bit dangerous. But What we could in theory get back in return is too huge for us to ignore.






    Prometheuspan
    3/21/2001 4:51 PM 13 out of 23

    taking =talking there.



    arielmessenger
    3/21/2001 9:38 PM 14 out of 23

    As an alternative structure, this is what I would like to see: Co-op condominium Eco-castles. Unlike arcologies or condominium apartment buildings, there is one large building design that is almost always welcomed in every society and that is the Castle design. People love castles, always have and always will. No matter what the terrain they're situated in castles always seem "neat" buildings and evoke pleasant responses from almost everyone. Why not create co-Housing (democratized) eco-castles? Castles can be big but they're not so big people get put off by their sheer size as they do the various large apartment complexes including arcologies models. Blending the Co-housing principle with the castle design seems to me a way of getting people to accept environmentally friendly cluster housing arrangements. And because castles have a lengthy history and even though vary from castle to castle, they still have a "traditional" look to them so that they become neutral environmental structures that people living in them can individualize their personal living spaces without feeling they are stuck in some one person's architectural fantasy.



    deepeco
    3/21/2001 10:28 PM 15 out of 23

    prometheus & hatman... i know my response is counter to providing a solution. however, to say that such criticism should not be addressed is ludicrous as long as you are attempting to find "solutions" to the ecological crisis. prometheus you say that arcologies are counter to what i'm saying about separating humyns from nature because they would be agriculturally self-sufficient. i don't see how this solves the problem at all. of course you can put as many plants as you want in arcologies, but that doesn't make it natural or part of the Earth. it's just disturbing to me that such a quick fix to the problem would be considered as a long term solution. you may conserve "resources" and decrease polution, but arcologies are just another step in a long line of misguided technological "solutions" to a problem that begins in the mind.



    deepeco
    3/21/2001 10:35 PM 16 out of 23

    if you want to talk solutions to the problem, we should look at more simplistic levels of organization. i think bioregionalism offers an excellent alternative to the global superstructure of economics and environmental degradation via modernity. we should return to the Earth in its most natural form. different areas of the Earth are distinguished by features that make them unique i.e. the plains, forests, etc. if we would look at the regional level and move into community organization, a lot of problems could be solved arising from a detatched society. when people begin to think of their surroundings as delicate ecosystems they need for food, water, etc., the mindset of indifference cannot last for long. a sense of urgency arises unlike in present society where we can go through our lives indifferent to ecological destruction because we do not know where the majority of what we have comes from.


    arielmessenger
    3/21/2001 11:36 PM 17 out of 23

    Deepeco, now you're getting to it. Bioregionalism, watershed consciousness and climax ecology are the basic awarenesses we humans must develop as a priority. Each bioregion has its own natural climax succession cycle. Each watershed too and if we do not pay attention to those natural climax succession patterns we will continue to screw up the planet. My personal philosophy (now spiritually based as well) is that modern civilization must and is slowly learning how it has been alienated from the natural world that supports it and how it must reforge a new natural civilization paradigm that puts human beings as a responsible steward species in place of human beings as shortsighted exploiters and destroyers of natural ecological systems. Climax Civilization is coming one way or another.



    Hatman
    3/22/2001 4:32 AM 18 out of 23

    arielmessenger-
    Love the "castles" idea! We could call them "many mansions", if you like.
    'pan-
    I don't translate words into pictures very well, but the concept is sound. Do you know anyone who has a website and graphics knowledge where we could go, experiment, and have cool visuals?
    deepeco-
    I share your concerns. Years ago, I believed(and still do!) that we now have the technology to make virtually anywhere on, under, or even above the Earth not only habitable, but profitable and earth-friendly. I divided the Earth into 7 basic areas: Mountain, Seashore, Riverbank, Plain, Desert, Ocean, and Sky(including space). For each area to be workable, there must be an overabundance of a particular resource, e.g. Wind or Lightning, in the Mountains and Plains, Sunlight in the Deserts, etc. These must be incorporated into the technology, i.e., using the Sun and Sand to make glass products in the desert, and so on.
    The main point, however, is that different people love different areas best, and suitable housing(with its attendant energy, water, refuse collection, communication and recreation needs)would need to be designed specifically to function in those environments. When people begin to see themselves as needed, useful, and appreciated, mental health greatly improves. I had always hoped that a society of "pioneers", or multi-task oriented people could be assembled, ones that would be willing to learn to share responsibilities on a rotating basis, such as water purification/sewage treatment, power generation and distribution, emergency medical, CCC(Command, Control, Communications), fire control/suppression, etc. I personally believe that specialization leads to isolation and "clannish" behavior, such as evidenced by the trade guilds of years gone by. It would be much better, IMHO, if everyone was conversant with all the facets of living in a balanced society.
    Peace-

    Hatman



    prometheuspan
    3/22/2001 6:04 PM 19 out of 23


    As an alternative structure, this is what I would like to see: Co-op condominium
    Eco-castles.
    -------------------------------
    Lovely. Grand Idea. In fact, rather in harmony with another idea of mine, which is open pit rock quarry construction. Earthworks by the way are for all practical purposes forever whereas current construction techniques with wood etc. have single generation lifespans.

    Using modern techniques such as cement, and metal reinforcment, you could build some very awesome castles.
    ------------------------------

    conserve "resources" and decrease polution, but arcologies are just another step in a
    long line of misguided technological "solutions" to a problem that begins in the mind.
    -------------------
    deepeco, I am listening to you but not following you. Perhaps you could give us your own problem definition... make a thread of it even. The fact remains that arcologies are an incredibly wise use of space and human resources, and force us to solve a whole horde of social probelms that we are just avoiding right now.
    There isn't a better solution in the whole batch. Its not a "Quick fix" its a long term solution for any number of reasons.
    ------------------
    if you want to talk solutions to the problem, we should look at more simplistic levels of
    organization. i think bioregionalism offers an excellent alternative to the global
    superstructure of economics and environmental degradation via modernity. we should
    return to the Earth in its most natural form. different areas of the Earth are
    distinguished by features that make them unique i.e. the plains, forests, etc. if we
    would look at the regional level and move into community organization, a lot of
    problems could be solved arising from a detatched society. when people begin to
    think of their surroundings as delicate ecosystems they need for food, water, etc., the
    mindset of indifference cannot last for long. a sense of urgency arises unlike in
    present society where we can go through our lives indifferent to ecological destruction
    because we do not know where the majority of what we have comes from.
    ------------------
    You haven't adressed one simple fact. I agree with bioregionalism and I think that trying to let nature take back over the world is a grand plan. But people are going to live in something and we are not going to change that fact. The only question is, is it better for people (and the environment) To live in nuclear family houses or in tribal size arcologies? The answer is clear. By the way, people don't realize this right now, but the modern "City" is really a sprawl nightmare HIVE.



    prometheuspan
    3/22/2001 6:08 PM 20 out of 23

    eepeco, now you're getting to it. Bioregionalism, watershed consciousness and
    climax ecology are the basic awarenesses we humans must develop as a priority.
    Each bioregion has its own natural climax succession cycle. Each watershed too and
    if we do not pay attention to those natural climax succession patterns we will continue
    to screw up the planet.
    ------------------------
    all true and all completely seperate issues to the one that we have on the table.
    How do we house humanity? City hives? Or TRibal arcologies? I think the answer is clear.
    ----------------------
    My personal philosophy (now spiritually based as well) is that
    modern civilization must and is slowly learning how it has been alienated from the
    natural world that supports it and how it must reforge a new natural civilization
    paradigm that puts human beings as a responsible steward species in place of
    human beings as shortsighted exploiters and destroyers of natural ecological
    systems.
    --------------------------
    I couldn't agree with you more. We are in the process of coming back to nature.
    Theres a whole lot of aspects to that.
    -----------------------
    Climax Civilization is coming one way or another.
    ------------
    Not sure what you mean by this.




    prometheuspan
    3/22/2001 6:11 PM 21 out of 23



    arielmessenger-
    Love the "castles" idea! We could call them "many mansions", if you like.
    'pan-
    I don't translate words into pictures very well, but the concept is sound. Do you know
    anyone who has a website and graphics knowledge where we could go, experiment,
    and have cool visuals?
    -----------------
    Yes, Arcosanti has some. TRuly, I don't personally like his designs, and the pictures are not exactly revealing of what things look like on the inside, which I think is very important.
    -------------

    This other stuff is a completely different topic. Who wants to start the thread?
    I suggest "Naturalized bioregions" And "Watershed Protection"
    Just ideas tho.



    arielmessenger
    3/22/2001 10:12 PM 22 out of 23

    For anyone who wants to know more about "Climax Civilization" they can check it out in the Climax Civilization pages of my website at http://abc.11net.com/climxciv.html
    What I called Climax Evolution Theory was and is my philosophical explanation of social change I discovered in 1975. But since my religious conversion experience in 1979 it has been incorporated into my religious beliefs and my communitarian and environmental activism stemming from my religious beliefs. It's all in my online book in progress at http://abc.11net.com.



    prometheuspan
    3/23/2001 4:40 PM 23 out of 23

    Creating our own centers of art and our own forms of entertainment. With a community of 500, several
    musical groups, from rock to folk to classical to jazz, could emerge, and at that scale, having our own movie
    theatre (and making our own movies!), theatrical groups, and perhaps even radio and closed-circuit
    video-tape stations can become a real possibility.

    Our basic concern for ecology and the ecological use of technology within the village will heavily influence the
    general standard of living. Every "home" will not be fully equipped with the latest gadget for homemaking
    convenience; there will be no two-car families. Rather, walking and bicycling will be the principle modes of
    transportation within the village. Centralized Laundromats and large walk-in freezers will avoid costly duplications.
    Fully equipped centralized kitchens and bathing facilities will reduce individual needs to a minimum. High quality
    stereo equipment, photographic equipment, fine tools, and music studios will be available to all through cooperative
    use.

    With all this variety, our village will be a real center for life, combining the natural joys of country living with the
    cultural opportunities and diversity of people so often missing in going back to the land.
    ------------------
    This is a great site everybody, by all means go check it out!
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails aptarray3.jpg  

  24. #24
    Cyburbian ColoGI's avatar
    Registered
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Colo Front Range
    Posts
    2,471
    Whoops! Sorry everyone, I had no idea this was a spammer, wasting bytes. Apologies.

  25. #25
    BANNED
    Registered
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Santa Barbara
    Posts
    19
    thats rich. you want to keep things stupid, low brow, and spread disinformation, and i am keeping things to the topic instead of engaging you. So you call it spam.

    I keep trying to assume good faith and you keep proving thats a bad idea.

    Got any drawings? do any architecture? Or are you just here to give wrong advice and then be pig headed about it when somebody points it out?

    I am multiply competent in many different fields and the only thing you have demonstrated that you are good at is being a jerk.

    the spammer is you. Do us all a favor and leave this thread, you clearly do not have and never did have a contribution to make to it.
    Attached Thumbnails Attached Thumbnails modernsideview4xz.jpg  

+ Reply to thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

More at Cyburbia

  1. Replies: 2
    Last post: 09 May 2009, 1:50 PM
  2. Replies: 12
    Last post: 23 May 2005, 5:31 PM
  3. Ambivalence concerning technology
    Friday Afternoon Club
    Replies: 14
    Last post: 27 Aug 2004, 6:55 PM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last post: 13 Jun 2000, 9:08 AM