The Nomad and the Olive Branch

Ever since man invented the wheel, technology as a whole has advanced farther than any of us can ever fathom. The wheel became the cart and the cart became the chariot and the chariot became the carriage and the carriage became the car. The glider got an engine which took it to space. The brick oven started to run on electricity and not on gas. Not long after, it also got the power to emit microwave radiation and the chance to blow up bowls of spaghetti. The pen gave way to the typewriter, and ENIAC gave way to the laptop computer. Writing on stone was later inscribed on leaves, papyrus, paper, and the Word document. Indeed, it would seem that technology has become almost synonymous with human progress. As much as some tried to use that technology to benefit the working man's daily life, much of it has been done for the sole purpose of ruining it altogether, and I'm not just talking about taxes and the mail delivery system. I'm talking about the other thing in life that...

A common yet grave fallacy is to assume that (the actions of) (part of) the infrastructure of a particular country at a particular time and place is derived from a singular cause, of which a metaphysical nature attributed to said cause would be even more so. That said, attributing (a perception of) (failed) politics as an "outflow" of a country's culture is in my honest opinion a crock of bull. I'm not denying that culture and politics are related: there clearly is a relationship between the two in the broader historical context. However, this reductionist outlook panders to more than your garden variety racism, itself being built on misinterpretations and misunderstandings. Why is that? First of all, consider that politics and culture are mutually exclusive concepts, although their definitions may not appear to be so on the surface. Politics (according to the pseudo-omniscient Wikipedia [1] ) is a process by which groups of people make collective decisions. The...

The state of human affairs over the past decade have overall not been taking a turn for the better. War, violence, scandal, shallow gossip, tragedy, and other profit-generating stories congest newspaper headlines and the nightly broadcasts. With the recent economic crises, things aren't looking up, either. As the human population on Earth grows ever so nearer to the carrying capacity, humanity as a whole seems to be taking a downhill swerve... ...or is it? There is at least 1 or 2 in 10 people out there who have heard about the recent story regarding the Chilean miners. Being trapped for at least 15 days underground about 2 months ago, almost no one was sure that they were going to survive. The lack of oxygen, food, and water would surely deprive them of life if the toxic gases, ash, soot, and dust didn't choke them to death first. Around the world, many people watched and, when news of them still being alive 17 agonizing days after the entrapment surfaced ( "All 33 of...

by Jeremy Hammond; June 7, 2010 A proper understanding of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict requires exposing numerous myths about its origins and the reasons it persists. Myth #1 – Jews and Arabs have always been in conflict in the region. Although Arabs were a majority in Palestine prior to the creation of the state of Israel, there had always been a Jewish population, as well. For the most part, Jewish Palestinians got along with their Arab neighbors. This began to change with the onset of the Zionist movement, because the Zionists rejected the right of the Palestinians to self-determination and wanted Palestine for their own, to create a “Jewish State” in a region where Arabs were the majority and owned most of the land. For instance, after a series of riots in Jaffa in 1921 resulting in the deaths of 47 Jews and 48 Arabs, the occupying British held a commission of inquiry, which reported their finding that “there is no inherent anti-Semitism in the country, racial or ...

Benjamin Franklin once said that there is no such thing as a good war or a bad peace. The concept of "just war" seems to be too idealistic: given the variety of historical accounts that cover any particular war in known history, there will always be an opposing narrative calling out injustices on part of the "other". The fallible nature of man and the subjectivity of human perception have guaranteed the perpetuation of such a pattern of injustice against those who are wronged... wrongfully. After all, war is political. It's a means to an end for those seeking resources, land, wealth, influence, and power. Yet oftentimes we are led to believe that armies around the 1st Century B.C. onwards have started to adopt more restrictive measures in dealing with enemy positions. Is it possible that the people of these times became aware of the monstrosity of warfare, and the barbarity of killing needlessly and endlessly? It may seem that way, especially considering the e...

It is not new to see on the television screen a man or a woman in a tight suit speak "on behalf" of the "people", stating promises and chanting slogans to rile the masses before them to support their transitions to power. The world, however, changes for them once they get comfortable in the leather chairs of their presidential offices. They are swamped with the demands of lobbyists and the common people, and are held ambivalent over what pacifies the rage of the common man and what betters the common man's socioeconomic status in light of an improving nation (both of them mutually exclusive concepts). Consider, however, that voters for a particular politician who aligns himself/herself with a particular political affiliation tend to support the campaigned ideology. Yet, politicians are still stuck in the aforementioned quagmire, even in the light of scenarios which can not be solved at the time being by promoting a certain economic or social system or belief. Fo...