India Backlog 13: Helena Norberg-Hodge

That Being Said, we need to address our reasons why we should categorically reject China's efforts to "modernize" Kashgar. It will help to look at the most vocal objector to modernization of Central Asia, Helena Norberg-Hodge.

When I first arrived in Leh, the capital of 5,000 inhabitants, cows were the most likely cause of congestion and the air was crystal clear. Within five minutes’ walk in any direction from the town centre were barley fields, dotted with large farmhouses. For the next twenty years I watched Leh turn into an urban sprawl. The streets became choked with traffic, and the air tasted of diesel fumes. ‘Housing colonies’ of soulless, cement boxes spread into the dusty desert. The once pristine streams became polluted, the water undrinkable. For the first time, there were homeless people. The increased economic pressures led to unemployment and competition. Within a few years, friction between different communities appeared. All of these things had not existed for the previous 500 years.

Ms. Norberg-Hodge is still actively involved in Ladakh, and in August i attended a seminar at the Womens' Center hosted by her. In attendance were a whole mess of Western tourists and several classes from the Moravian school on Changspa.

Ms. Norberg-Hodge's basic thesis is this: Development of "third-world" countries comes with the implicit assumption that "first-world" societies are somehow better than the local society. The economic aspects of consumer culture that we take for granted--centralization, accumulation of wealth, appliances, etc--are completely foreign to groups of people without any contact with the first world. By no means are they inherently desirable. Instead, the first world compels the third world to accept our way of life and conform. Just consider the loaded terms first- and third-world. We do not tell them about the environmental and psychological impacts of a developed life.

Probably three people in the room disagreed: Jason, the schoolteacher, and me.

Jason's disagreement, which i echoed at the time, was structural. Development brings advances that are undoubtedly useful. Medicine is the most obvious, but also infrastructure that was necessary to support Leh's population (which has quintupled in 25 years). Also communication: telephones, the internet, et cetera, that connect people to the global society (global society was a big kick we were on in India). The overall advancement of the human race is Jason's primary philosophical stance. How could you endorse action that would stall it?

The schoolteacher's disagreement was more philosophical. First off: the teacher was from further south and was exceptionally educated. He touched on Jason's points as well--agricultural advances in particular--but the main thrust of his argument was How can you, a foreigner, a Westerner no less, come into Ladakh to tell us how to live our lives?

He didn't explicitly state this but was getting at what makes me uneasy about Ms. Norberg-Hodge's anti- or counter-development projects: her argument is really just the other side of the same coin. Regardless of her message, it's still a Westerner telling a Local how to develop their country. To some extent this approach is necessary to further her goals, which are by no means unjust in and of themselves. The forces of conventional development are too strong to adopt a passive opposition. However, her argument still does not allow Ladakhis to decide for themselves how to develop.

This is really the principal problem facing Central Asia. None of the outside parties allow the locals the power of self-determination, whether it is the Indian, Pakistani, or Chinese governments, Wahhabis, philanthropists, or tourists. Even Greg Mortenson's approach is not pure: he has repeatedly stated that his schools stand in opposition to the development of madrassas and Islamic fundamentalism, which like Norberg-Hodge's projects may be a necessary evil. When we talk of development of any so-called third-world country, we should not object to new policies because they are culturally damaging, politically motivated, or Islamic. The only legitimate opposition that outsiders can offer is objection to plans that do not allow the local population the power of self-determination. Read More......

Okay, China, help me out here

NYT: China to raze old Kashgar, relocate inhabitants: Doesn't this seem like a terrible idea?

For those who are not China, Kashgar (Kāshí) is an old Silk Road city on the fringe of China's Uyghur Autonomous Region (Xīnjiāng). The Uyghurs are a Turkic, largely Muslim group whom the Chinese government considers "troublesome." To this extent, they used the groundswell of post-9/11 support for antiterrorist efforts [against Muslims] to crack down on the Uyghur Nationalist movement.

Kashgar's old city is, unsurprisingly, full of Uyghurs. In its place, says the Times,

...will rise a new Old City, a mix of midrise apartments, plazas, alleys widened into avenues and reproductions of ancient Islamic architecture “to preserve the Uighur culture,” Kashgar’s vice mayor, Xu Jianrong, said in a phone interview.

This is all being done under the pretense of public safety, in this case an earthquake hazard. But things don't all quite add up.

Mr. Xu calls Kashgar “a prime example of rich cultural history and at the same time a major tourism city in China.” Yet the demolition plan would reduce to rubble Kashgar’s principal tourist attraction, a magnet for many of the million-plus people who visit each year.

China supports an international plan to designate major Silk Road landmarks as United Nations World Heritage sites — a powerful draw for tourists, and a powerful incentive for governments to preserve historical areas.

But Kashgar is missing from China’s list of proposed sites.

So really what's going on is kind of an unholy union between gentrification and ethnic cleansing. The Chinese government has imposed an urban redevelopment plan that would gut the local community while establishing greater control over a troublesome population. We've seen similar plans imposed in the United States, and we've also seen the repercussions. The Chinese government has the political muscle to make a plan like this happen. We'll also see what repercussions come from this. Read More......

Also the homeland's about to go to war

link Read More......

As if anyone still listens to Rush Limbaugh.

I only say it because i know it's not true.

Since the right cannot denounce Sotomayor for being a Hispanic woman without alienating both women and Hispanics, they've been spouting this nonsense about Sotomayor's "reversals" by the Supreme Court. The essence of this post over at Balloon Juice is that they are full of it, but it's really no surprise that Rush has no concept of how the judicial system works:

Rush says Sotomayor has been reversed 80% by the Supreme Court. We find out through various tortuous arguments that She has heard 380 cases of which only 6 have been reviewed by the Supremes. Of these only 3 have been overturned. So thats .8% are overturned. In the recent past The reversal rates for all cases heard by the Supremes are 61% and Sotomayor has been reversed 50% of the time.

In other words there is no there there, Rush is full of shit and the sun sets in the west.

I'm only irritated because i know people still buy this crap. Read More......

Isostatic adjustment in the New York Times!

As Alaska Glaciers Melt, It’s Land That’s Rising: Hooray! Basically the massive weight of a glacier depresses the land surface, so when it is removed (melted), the land surface rises to reach a new state of equilibrium. In Alaska, isostatic adjustment is coupled (tripled?) with excessive sedimentation and tectonic uplift, such that Alaska is quite literally rocketing out of the Pacific. On a geologic time scale, that is.

Hooray for post-glacial rebound, that is: not climate change. That kind of sucks.

Finland gains about 9 square miles of land per year due to isostatic adjustment. Most of Canada is presently being isostatically adjusted, such that north-flowing rivers will one day flow south. Read More......

Awards!

So today i get an email notifying me that i've won an award from GSA to the tune of $2,500.00. I didn't even sign up for anything. Apparently my proposal was automatically nominated for this prize and was considered the best MS project out of 45 applicants in the Quaternary Geology field.

But my actual grant proposal (which was for about the same amount of money) was rejected outright. Which begs the question: if my proposal was "the best" and still did not get funded, what about the other 45 poor grad students? Are the folks at QGG high? Or was everyone else just dismal? Because mine sure wasn't all that. Read More......

Insert appropriate John Kenneth Galbraith quote here.

Here's a pet peeve: People with FDIC-insured bank accounts whining about nationalization of the banks.

Buddy, you can't hate on the government while using it as a safety net in case the banks fail. First off is the whole self-contradiction thing: you don't believe in the Federal government, except when it saves your ass? Come on. Unless you're a libertarian whack job with bars of gold stashed in your mattress, you just can't make a legitimate argument for letting the major banks fail. Because then not only do the banks become federalized under Chapter 11 bankruptcy--your savings also become federalized. Your argument, just, doesn't, work.

Really, though, i'm just pissed off because too many conservatives are trying to get a free ride on the bus. We all paid for the bus to be built, we paid for the roads down which this bus drives, we paid for the driver. Maybe the bus wasn't constructed to spec and started to have trouble. Maybe the last driver rode the clutch a bit too much. It doesn't matter. Now the bus is in the shop and we need to pay to get it running again. It's fine if you don't want to pay for air conditioning or leather upholstery. But when the bus breaks down, you take it like a man and pay. You sacrifice because your neighbors depend on that bus. And you, in turn, depend on your neighbors.

If you aren't willing to drop another dime, get off the damn bus.

Today's conservative represents the absolute erosion of civil society. Because to get the nation out of this mess, we are going to have to pay, collectively. One way or another. It's too big to just clobber one group and get on with our lives. And even though they would like to believe it, the people out Teabagging and actually listening to Glenn Beck are not the ones who would suffer the most from a severe recession. I mean, hell. If your worst problem in this world is taxes...you don't have problems.

You have to come to terms with the fact that the actions of others have repercussions for you. Sometimes, life just isn't fair. So come on now. Grow the hell up. Read More......

Extreme Sheep Art

For the record, my advisor is Welsh.

(HT: Jen) Read More......