geopolit:

I have been working on this map, collecting news articles and documenting trends over the past couple years, and was surprised when it revealed that the world is deeply divided by two major spheres of influence that dominate and dictate global affairs.

The two major organizations at the center of this are NATO, and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) headed by Russia and China. Both are military organizations with each member state promising to protect each others interests and come to aid in the event of war.

This setup creates an interesting situation whereby, at its most basic level, if any two nations from differing alliances go to war, it has the potential, through the domino effect, to bring war to every continent of the world. It is this fear of global conflict that creates such tension points as North and South Korea, Israel and Iran and Pakistan and India.

Ultimately, the global powers of the United States, Russia and China don’t want to go to war but neither is willing to cave to the influence of the other. This simple division of the world helps to explain almost every decision made on the global stage in recent years and will be a good prediction of how nations will interact in the years to come.

Tweet

Soo… I’m curious about a few things: 

Firstly, I really don’t think it’s possible to divide the world so neatly into spheres of influence. Not only is it no longer the Cold War Era, but every country frankly has rather complicated politics. I have personal experience in some of these countries, and quite honestly South East Asia, for example, is divided between being in China’s bed as it rises or banding together to resist its influence. 

Vietnam, in particular, has had a hard time warming up to China because, well, China invaded it several times. They haven’t forgotten that. 

Turkey might not be all that approving of its European allies but it IS still part of NATO. It’s certainly not closer to China than it is to the West. 

What is Belarus doing there in blue at all? Last I checked… Luvchenko was anything but pro-Western. 

Also, Africa is really not so cut-and-dry… 

Basically saying, countries may not be pro-Western but that doesn’t mean that they’re necessarily pro-China. 

In any case, with development going so fast in so many countries, analysts are still leaning towards a multipolar world. where America is the strongest of several strong nations all with their own spheres of influence. Although the BRIC idea is losing tract, other predictions haven’t quite nudged it off the pedestal… and yet it still poses an interesting hypothetical future. 

darwinspark:

7 worst international aid ideas.

Maybe their hearts were in the right place. Maybe not. Either way, these are solid contenders for the title of “worst attempts at helping others since colonialism.” By Richard Stupart

bumbleful:

Interesting. What if what we are seeing today is not ‘capitalism’ anymore, as Chomsky would point out? Also, just because China’s economy is booming does not mean that world power is going from West to East. I think that conclusion/interpretation is too big of an intuitive leap and logical flaw. China is very much dependent on Western economies to strive, and without it, China would not even be close to booming today. I’m glad that the leaders disagreed with Sharan Burrow’s suggestions. Capitalism losing its “moral compass”? Oh gee, the concept was never meant to have any kind of moral compass to begin with. A lot of money has been spent on gathering all these leaders in the Swiss Alps only to figure out in the end that the “West” should practice alternative forms of capitalism, something similar to China’s, or one that is better than China’s. Okay, then what? The leaders have some ideas, but where are the steps toward achieving such result(s)?

heyadrea:

To whom it may concern, Congratulations! You’ve recently befriended/started dating/have hired a Third Culture Kid. It’s likely you’ve already asked the “Where are you from?” question and were completely bewildered by the answer. Here are some tips for success:

1. We’re really not trying to brag. When we tell funny stories about our trips to South Africa or Turkey, we’re not trying to impress you. We just want to share with you important memories from our childhood and personal history.

2. Speak up for the flag. When TCKs get together, we tend to bash American culture. We don’t mean to be offensive, but comparing cultures is just the way our minds work. But your cultural experiences, whatever they may be, are probably just as (if not more) meaningful as ours. So speak up.

3. Be patient, ask questions. TCKs suck at pop culture trivia. And we ask stupid questions all the time, like “What’s a burrito?” We’re just trying to navigate various cultures at once, so humor us. At the same time, ask us questions too. We don’t like it when people make assumptions about the places we’re from, but we love it when people are interested in our backgrounds. We’re pros at sharing stories and flaunting our well-organized Flickr.

4. We’re oversharers, but only to a point. According to the book “Third Culture Kids,” by David Pollock and Ruth Van Reken, TCKs jump into deeper communication levels faster because we’ve had to constantly and quickly form new relationships. But here’s the thing — once you get to know us, you might find that we keep you at bay. We’re just so used to leaving (or being left by) people who are close to us that sometimes we don’t want to form very deep relationships, for fear of losing them.

5. If you’re dating us, don’t be offended if we don’t invite you home for Thanksgiving, or if it takes you years to meet our parents. They’re kind of far away. Are you OK with Skype-meeting them?

6. If you’ve hired us, use our strengths. According to TCK expert Van Reken, TCK’s think outside the box and can appreciate different points of view. They are “socially adaptable and intellectually flexible,” she writes. Don’t believe me? Read Van Reken’s article, “Obama’s ‘Third Culture Team,’” yourself. More than 80 percent of TCKs say they can relate to anyone, no matter what race, ethnicity, religion, or nationality.

7. We’re sorry if we leave at a moment’s notice. TCKs will try to maintain an international dimension throughout their lives. We have lived highly mobile lives and rarely feel deeply rooted anywhere. So, if we leave, it’s not that our relationship to you isn’t important. It’s just that leaving you does not mean that our relationship is over. In other words, if we get offered that overseas assignment, we’re going to take it. To us, crossing country borders is like crossing state lines: a formality.

8. The best thing you can do is be our friend. And you’ve done that already. We’re normal. We promise.

Love, Your TCK friend.

[Written with kind advice from Denizen contributors Suzanne Leung, Kathy Lin and Jon Charnas.]

I love international films which really express their culture. 

Thus far I’ve enjoyed:

• Le Destin Fabuleux d’Amelie Poulain (French)
• Goodbye Lenin! (German)
• L’Auberge Espagnole (French… but set in Spain so it’s mostly in Spanish. This was particularly good to watch while in university)
• La Haine (French)
• Waking Ned Devine (Ireland)
• Das Leben der Anderen (German)
• Indigenes (French, about the legacy of North African Arabs in France)

I also enjoyed:

• Ong Bak (and its various sequels). I’m a bit of a martial arts movie fan, and while the stunts are impressive, the portrayal of Thailand is a little silly but interesting in its own way. 
• Shaolin Soccer/Kung Fu Hustle - My Hong Kong friends tell me that Stephen Chow (the director/star) changed his style for these two movies to be more applicable to Western audiences, but the sense of humour is still noticeably different and fun to pick out. 
• Seven Samurai - Still a classic. Only if you’ll watch black and white though. 

I used to think that America had no such films which expressed culture… but I’m wrong. A lot of them do in little ways we so take for granted because it’s mainstream media. But I think if there’s any film which you can hold up to the world and say “If you watch this, you’ll see America” then it’d have to be Forrest Gump. 

A Russian friend once recommended a film about and set in Chechnya, but I can’t remember nor find it now… 

mkillabearz:

I like how the vast majority of these “Occupy” events are taking place in countries where people actually have the means and opportunity to do something for themselves. They have freedom of speech and press. They aren’t stuck in one class or caste for their entire lives. The majority of the protests aren’t in those Middle Eastern countries which are controlled by Sharia law. I can nearly guarantee that every country that is completely white would kill people protesting like this, or send them to a political prisoner camp without hesitation.
Why don’t people realize how good they have it without wanting more? 

I don’t like this over-generalization. 

Let’s take a look at the details according to this map, shall we? 

Of the “Middle Eastern” countries with red dots you have Tunisia, Morocco, Egypt, Israel, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia and Turkey. Oh look Bangladesh. 

Missing are Iran, Syria, Libya, Algeria, the Gulf states, Yemen, Oman, and the Caucasus states. There are also the many Muslim central African countries, but those have rather more pressing concerns (Somalia, Chad, the Sudan…)

I think it’s fair to say that Libya and Syria are quite occupied at the moment. It’s important to note that Syria’s problems stem from its dictatorship, not from sharia. Actually, they don’t even observe Sharia. 

I’m surprised that there’s an #occupy in Riyadh. 

The Gulf States are an anomaly. They’re fabulously rich in oil. Bahrain had protests during the Arab Spring earlier this year but you saw how that went (army crackdown, with Saudi troops in support). In the UAE the citizens are pretty comfortable, but it’s the migrant workers who have it bad and are in no position to make rallies. 

Iran is another anomaly. I saw a picture of a rally to support the Wall Street protests but the hint was that it was organized by the Iranian government to tickle the US some more. But let’s say that Iran also follows your statement that sharia is the cause. 

Pakistan is an Islamic Republic which increasingly observes Sharia, but again, its problems are in wild multitude: widespread poverty, widespread lack of education, and unchecked military power in government. Many rural Pakistanis (the majority of the population, still) are superstitious and prone to believing government lies that the “other” Shia/Sunni eat their babies. I’m not even kidding. 

Other Muslim countries are Malaysia and Indonesia. Malaysia has two court systems: Sharia for Muslims, and something close to British civil law for everyone else. But they have an Occupy Dataran. 

Indonesia is a majority Muslim country which does not observe Sharia except in the autonomous province of Aceh, which fought a long war of independence and settled for autonomy… so that they could implement Sharia, among other things. They also have an #occupy in Jakarta. 

Missing as well are the Central Asian states (Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, etc.) but these are largely ruled by strongmen as well. 

So let’s be clear: these are varied countries with many problems. Problems so deep that something like #occupy is an effete dream. They WISH they could have the same problems. 

Instead they’re starving, hopelessly uneducated, under the thumb of dictators, or otherwise occupied with more pressing matters than worrying about Wall Street. They’ve been feeling the pinch of poverty for a long time now and protests in the past have never worked for them. Why do it now just because Americans are doing it? 

Gods damn that’s pretentious. 

Edit: I think I should be more clear. I disagree with your statement that Sharia is to blame for the lack of protests in countries without red dots. There are a whole variety of problems in those countries, without even needing to go anywhere near religion. 

I think the point you tried to make is that the #occupy protests are, like I also said, a First World problem. They are, but it doesn’t take away from what they’re trying to do, which is keep themselves from becoming like those whited out countries. 

Personally, I think that because they have the privilege to do so, they should protest. There are lot of people who can’t. Expecting them to be able to is wrong. I went a little sidetracked there and I apologize. 

British citizens who move to America generally harbor the same criticism of the English education system: that Britain tends to shun success, where Americans celebrate it. 

Read More

The list seems semi-orgasmic.