Animals
Analyse recent changes in the relationships people have with animals, drawing on Adrian Franklin’s ideas about changes in family life.
Introduction
In order to analyse recent changes in the relationship people have with animals there are a few changes in family life that can drawn on from Adrian Franklin. We can look at the new flexible family unit with various aspects of individualism. Family structures have also adapted within the many types of modern homes. Using Franklins views of ‘Ontological Insecurity’ that has developed in post modernity an analyses can be made of the change in western cultural perspectives toward animals, in particular pets. Also how animals have gone from being something just to eat or a working tool into something loved and protected by laws. As a developing and progressive civilisation, people have found ways to express their affections toward animals in a trusting and committed way that has been the consequence of diminishing human to human relationships. With a career focus for some family members and the many opportunities for sport, hobbies and other interests people have created families of individuals all trying to negotiate internal roles, affection and even time. In this emotionally unfulfilling environment, pets have been given more prominence and their emotional stability is the plug filling the emotional gaps.
History of Human Animal interaction
In tutor England people saw animals from the Christian perspective that they are here to serve humanity. They saw it in the same context as Adam and eve in the Garden of Eden. (Franklin, A. 1999 p11) In early modern England people lived in close proximity with animals, it was common in winter to live under the same roof (Franklin, A. 1999 p11). When people became more urban they no longer needed to “place a difference” with humans and animals with “rituals of separation” that where “brutal and cruel” (Franklin, A. 1999 p12). Now the culture of difference had already been established, people allowed themselves to have pets. They then started to see the old way of treating animals as bad. As society grew into an industrial world, under Fordism animals become a consumer item for capitalists to make profits. With experimental systems they introduce “chemical and hormone additives to fine tune animal health” (Franklin, A. 1999 p131). Animal’s movement is limited and they are taken out of their environments for cost cutting and more manageable “in order to improve yields and profits” (Franklin, A. 1999 p131). Some aspects of our history with animals can still be seen in some capitalist formations such as the meat preparation and farming industries. However also to come from Fordism was the higher incomes that workers could get and the average lifestyle got better. This allowed more working class people to afford pets (Franklin, A. 1999 p39). Since the 1960s pet keeping has become more prominent. A growing pet food and pet service industries show this. “In Britain the number of dogs rose by 66 per cent between 1963 and 1991”, a higher rate with cats, “with a 75% increase between 1963 and 1995” (Franklin, A. 1999 p89). Franklin also provides evidence of the rising amount of money spent on pets in the 1990s. This shows an increasing trend toward a more accepted and loving attitude toward their pets.
Animal Protectionists
There are extreme groups of animal rights campaigners who don’t eat meat and want to separate humans from animals to allow animals to have their own natural habitats and that they should be protected (Franklin, A. 1999 p32). With the change in the perspective about animals society has new ways to show care and attention, animal rights groups have pushed for laws and with advertising the realities of some ‘in-human’ aspects of modern capitalist treatment of animals, they have brought more public awareness and support for their causes. This has brought people from loving the animals in their homes to loving all animals. Treating animals like they have feelings and that as a dominant species we must protect them not hurt them. People see helping animals now as an “outlet for ‘good works’...”, “where humans form a cast of saviours, champions and heroes” (Franklin, A. 1999 p197)
Most people in post modernity are considered to have a ‘sentimental’ view of animals. They have had or currently have a pet, believe in the fair treatment of animals and they like activities related to animals, like the Zoo, safari parks, National parks and watching TV programs about animals, “they are most likely to eat meat, support a limited application of animals in scientific experimentation, be concerned about endangered species and have ambivalent feelings toward hunting” (Franklin, A. 1999 p32). Franklin shows in this how the majority of people have become balanced about animals.
Emotional Needs
Some feelings of tension between humans in modern families have helped to develop relationships with animals (Franklin, A. 1999 p5). As we have shifted our focus more onto our pets as part of the family we have also begun to accept them as having human rights within many homes, Animals are now being treated like they have the same rights as humans in many homes (Franklin, A. 1999 p5) “Animals are uniquely positioned relative to humans in that they are both like us but not us” (Franklin, A. 1999 p9). Our relationship with animals has grown because animals are more stable than human relationships, “they make long term bonds with their human companions; they rarely run off with others; they are almost always pleased to see ‘their’ humans; their apparent love is unconditional (and therefore secured) and they give the strong impression that they need humans as much as humans need them” (Franklin, A. 1999 p85). As they have proved their worth within the home of many kinds of family’s pets have become more important and treated more like they are humans. One of the signs that pets have become part of the family emotional system in post modernity is the higher rates of human names given to them in the UK and Australia and of personalised nick names they have in the US (Franklin, A. 1999 p95). Even rats can have human names and be seen as part of the family and treated as though they are human (Knight, J. 2005 p134).
As part of sustained pet involvement in modern homes relationships with pets and their owners have become “highly individualised and personal” (Franklin, A. 1999 p84), pets have become signifiers of a pet keeper’s image. Lap dogs for women and effeminate men, aggressive dogs for men displaying a ‘Tough guy’ image and traditional hunting breads have become popular family pets because of their intelligence and loyalty. The Rat has gone from being a disgusting beast to a pet that is loved and cared for. In its natural setting it is filthy and diseased. In its pet role it is clean and rewarding for some people (Knight, J. 2005 p119). Rats have a long history of being bread, with evidence of hobby rats as far back as the 1800s (Knight, J. 2005 p124). They are now a fairly common pet and reflect another type of Pet owner like Punks and Goths (Knight, J. 2005 p131). As people have lived longer with pets they have adopted them and present their pets with personalities and rights on an equal bar as humans. Their importance to the people they share homes with has evolved them into being more humanised. They are now more like a child who never grows up then an animal.
Practical implications of pets
Pets have become the playmate of an only child or children with working parents, a companion for the single person and part of therapy for the sick and infirm. Elderly people are able to feel more productive and have a purpose in their day if they have to get up and feed a cat or put him outside to go to the toilet, the cat will make noises until it gets what it wants. Pets also give the sick and infirm company. (Franklin, A. 1999) Elderly with pets can live longer than those who don’t. Pets can replace children in some families and can give an only child an emotional supportive companion. These animals can teach children interaction skills, how to care for another living creature. In some families animals are part of the entertainment for children, something to play in the park with and to help get kids away from the Television and gaming technology.
Conclusion
Western society has become more driven with careers, individual interests and a more flexible family unit has appeared. This has created an Ontological Insecurity in our society that has drawn people into closer relationships with animals (Franklin, A. 1999 pp194-195). As the decline of ontological security developed in late modernity pet numbers increased and people’s attachment to animal relationships grew more predominant. Family members have become more unreliable and less available in regards to many of the humans emotional craving. On the other hand animals are dependant and loving providing a child like attachment that fulfils the need for a reliable emotional bond. The need for a stable companionship and other “ordinary but significant embodied benefits-touch, someone to come home to, someone to doze with, cuddle, groom, feed, even clothe.” (Franklin, A. 1999 p195).
Bibliography
Franklin, A. (1999). ‘Pets and Modern Culture’. Animals and Modern Cultures. London: Thousand Oaks.
Franklin, A. (2006). Animal Nation: The True Story of Animals and Australia. Sydney: University of New South Wales Press.
Knight, J. (2005). Animals in Person: Cultural Perspectives on Human-Animal Intimacies. Oxford, New York: Berg.
Smith, N. (1999). ‘The howl and the pussy: feral cats and wild dogs in the Australian imagination’. Australian Journal of Anthropology, 10(3), 288-305.
Some of the Family
The Important things in life are not things
Wednesday, September 22, 2010
Essay on Globilization
It has been claimed that globalisation has the potential to reduce inequalities in the world. Conversely, it has been argued that globalisation is leading to deeper and broader social inequalities. Evaluate these claims, using at least two topics covered in the course.
This essay will lay out the issues about globalisation in regards to social inequalities and the potential for the reduction of inequalities. It will look at the colonial conquests with the power and control these brought to primitive countries and see the way the economic system was set up ensuring Europe was gaining wealth from the cheap labour and other resources of less developed nations. We will also look at the way the modern economic system still holds this power flow from the Transnational Corporations (TNC’s) and that these corporations still help to boost their host Nations. We will see how the economists claim to help people in any country to which they can bring the Global Markets. During this it will be explained how this power and control is keeping people in situations that assist profits for the “rich club” and to show that even though new technology and world systems could be created for better opportunities and equality for workers, instead these mechanisms are used primarily to boost the networks of the powerful and to maintain the status quo for the capitalist financial interests.
The European colonisation of undeveloped countries has been a substantial historical process. This has boosted the rise of capitalism and has been the base of Transnational Corporations. Through the trade routes they conquered, developed and protected, these countries were able to exploit the primitive populations of the new found colonies (D J Boudreaux, 2008 pp 9-10). The discovery of the gold in the New World (America) allowed Europe to have the financial boost that instigated the renaissance. Europe was getting richer and more cultured while the new colonies were left in a state of poverty and exploitation. In modernity we see the rise of companies with factories and the fight between unions and corporations in developed countries and new concepts of workers’ rights against production costs and profit margins. The Fordism era must also be taken into consideration with the rise of consumerism to make more customers for mass produced products (Robin Cohen and Paul Kennedy 2007 p87). It is no surprise that these foundations of globalisation lead us to an indulgent market that still exploits the under developed nations. These combine technology and cheap labour for mass production and they evolved into post-Fordism with relations to capitalists gaining more control through casual and temporary work with little if any benefits for workers (Cohen, Kennedy (2007 p101).
The World Bank maintains a lot of financial control through ongoing debt. It has the vantage point of the bird’s eye view of the whole global economic situation. It is no doubt they know how things work for the maintenance of the capitalist profit plans and how they can go about them. John Williamson from the World Bank while talking to a science convention in Sri Lanka argued the benefits and the problems of globalisation and how the primary globalisation was set up for financial reasons. Trade through global networks is the driving force of international links. He argued that there was benefit for countries with low skilled labour to increase the living standards in their poor nations through new technologies if they produce items cheaply for the world markets. But he argues that this then lowers the standards of low skilled labour in developed nations. He also discussed that the poor nations should focus on education to compete with other nations who provide low skilled labour.
He also stated that, “there is a good analytical reason for arguing that trade will tend to make the rich richer and the poor poorer” (Williamson, 1998).
The book Small Countries in a Global Economy points out that small countries with specialised production such as Switzerland with watches, Ghana with cocoa, Nicaragua with coffee and Kuwait with oil have found the way to do well on the world stage of markets. They can even control the prices of such products through their level of production (D Salvatore, M Svetlicic and J P Damijan 2001 pp 71-72). They also show how globalization has been good for the smaller nations gaining sovereignty from larger empires like the Soviet Union. After there independence some get caught up in the importance of sovereignty verses economy and the fact they must comply with many internationalist rules and regulations along with competitions with other countries for low skilled labour and other industry making them servants to Multinational Corporations (Salvatore, Svetlicic, Damijan 2001, pp 25-27). Hence nations are joining with other countries in Conglomerates (like the European Union) to get the benefits of free trading deals, open borders, and combined trading might against other conglomerates such as the USA (Salvatore, Svetlicic, Damijan 2001, pp 8-15). This means that although there has been a boom in New Nation States since the break of World War II there has also been the hard fact that these new nations need the trading power of the greater nations close to them to compete and survive in the global market. The empires were broken down after WWII when they became too restrictive for capitalism, and American-dominated global hegemony started to take the place of European colonialism. These new states can thank globalization for their new found independence from Imperial rule. This in turn shows that globalization has helped bring some level of self determination to these countries. The idea of the New World Order that was being developed in 1989 was going to bring peace because of free trade markets through Globalization and it was a big ideal for those pushing the United Nations position and the larger number of countries involved in it (Salvatore, Svetlicic, Damijan 2001, p 3).
One positive aspect of globalisation has been the uniting of groups for workers rights around the world. The workers networks have been fighting government oppression, companies who exploit workers and environment impacted issues. It could be argued sadly that they have little real effect on the quality of life for the world’s poor and low paid workers. Unions have been in an uphill battle that could be seen as them losing (Rodrik 1997 p75). They make some inroads and then the corporations along with Governments find ways to reduce their effectiveness. In the US the workers asked for the human side to be taken into consideration, and that the cost of labour should not be part of the financial equations as labour is more than profits; it is people (Rodrik 1997 p76). In countries that succeed in gaining higher wages, there is a consequence of higher unemployment (Rodrik 1997 p11). Their factory closes down because the TNC moves their business to a factory that still exploits its workers. They undercut the factory with better conditions and higher production costs as a result (Rodrik 1997 pp 1-2). The struggle to keep profits coming in are reflected by Rodrik by such sayings as “low wage competition” and “race to the bottom”, representing the desire to pay as little as possible for the use of labour (Rodrik 1997 p3).
Rodrik goes on later to explain how the workers have three major issues, firstly that they pay a larger share now in work conditions and benefits, secondly that they have an insecurity in regards to pay rates and hours worked because of higher labour productivity and thirdly their bargaining power is eroded in regards to settling the terms of employment by the rising unemployment (Rodrik 1997 pp 4-5). With little hope of promotion, no surplus income (barely enough to live with) and the risk of not being able to find another job because the number of unemployed is putting pressure on available jobs to the point that any mistake could see them replaced. Then when changes happen that reduce the conditions of employment there is no way to protest without jeopardising jobs. The modern low skilled labour has been manipulated into becoming a slave type cast by corporations who have too many binding circumstances hanging over the employee’s heads. On top of this they are kept powerless by their bills and general high cost of living in consumer societies. Debt grows and envelopes their lives, leaving them chained to their jobs. This is in contrast to the middle to high income earners who have highly mobile opportunities with their skills and educations to be able to negotiate and to move on if they are not satisfied.
Much of this is reflected by the companies themselves with different ways they look at work ethics on a global front. In some cases were companies will look after their home countries employees who will be higher skilled and harder to replace, but they outsource some functions (like low or unskilled labour) to other countries in order to exercise the “exit” option instead of the “voice’ option. This allows them to be disengaged from local communities, removing themselves from responsibility for the people around the outsourced facilities (Rodrik 1997 pp70-71). Products are now easier to move through modern communications and transport technologies, easier border controls, and inviting governments. Local employment options are locked into globalisation whether they like it or not. Only drastic government restrictions can alter this formula (Rodrik 1997 pp 71-72).
Bolton argues that the current climate of anti nationalism is fuelled and supported by the powerful TNCs and the Governments that need and support them. They use the term “racist” as a way to subdue any form of national pride and anyone who wants to protect their national culture from mass immigration that forces the lowering of wages and homogenises the cultures into a potential world culture. This would then break down barriers of trade as the lack of national pride means that there is no longer a resistance to globalisation and multiculturalism. He also explains that Marx supported the free trade agenda by the capitalists because it also suited his own desire to see the nation-state destroyed (Bolton 2009). These prejudices toward Patriotic/Nationalists politics lead to an international move to put down nationalism and remove it from having any voice. This political favouritism toward internationalist driven politics in itself shows an example that globalisation creates an unequal environment for political expression.
The financial driven experts have their own view of this. Boudreaux claims that historically it is nationalist based economic countries which cause financial depressions (D J Boudreaux, 2008 p10) and that the current countries which suffer the most poverty are those who have cut themselves off from the Global Market, such as North Korea and Niger (Boudreaux, 2008 p34). He also shows that the lower fifth of a country’s income earners go up or down as a result of the country’s economic percentage. So that when a country is doing well at the market trade their people’s wages will go up right down to the lowest paid worker (Boudreaux, 2008 p30). He rubbishes the argument that wages drop in the high consumer countries as a result of cheap labour in poorer nations. He uses statistics from the United States showing that workers are compensated based on their productivity (Boudreaux, 2008 p60). If he is to be believed then all the countries that are poor are that way because their Governments shut them off from the world economy and that everyone has a better life as a result of Globalisation.
The TNCs with their economist apologists will argue that they are improving the world with globalised capitalism and free trade. Their rationale seems to be that the accumulation of wealth by a few will allow a drift of money to the bottom of the food chain to help even the poorest people. Yet even this is in itself showing an unequal spread of wealth. The %5 higher wages across the country will be good for someone on high wages, but show very little extra for someone on bare minimum wages (Boudreaux, 2008 p30). They also argue that technology will help poor countries. This is true if it is applied to assist people. The evidence is often contrary to this with the technology going to the hands of those who will exploit it for their own gain.
On the surface with global pop culture and the high level of entertainment for the developed and developing countries, it is easy to over look the huge inequalities of the underdeveloped nations compared to the developed. It is also more evident of the growing gap between rich and poor in western countries. But modern lifestyles have become the masters of distractions. While the status quo is maintained with the wealthy expanding their power and the debt bound Governments making policies to support capitalist progress, the workers and the poor in both third world and developed world are not able to have a high standard of life (Cohen, Kennedy 2007 pp 114-116 and 202-203). With the modern technologies created to make human life better, easier, healthier, those who are suffering from poverty, disease, starvation and a list of other problems are mostly ignored because they are born out of sight from the “rich club” nations and the wealthy people of their own nations. In the end it comes back to the same TNCs exploiting the third world countries for profit over-looking the possibilities for equalising people and instead keeping the situation as a financial, not a human advancement.
Bibliography
• Robin Cohen and Paul Kennedy (2007) Global Sociology. 2nd Ed. Palgrave MacMillan.
• D Salvatore, M Svetlicic and J P Damijan (2001) Small Countries in a Global Economy. Palgrave, New York.
• D J Boudreaux, (2008), Globalization, Greenwood Press, London
• D Rodrik (1997), has Globalisation gone too far? Institute for International Economic, Washington
• John Williamson, (1998) Globalization: The Concept, Causes, and Consequences. http://www.iie.com/publications/papers/paper.cfm?ResearchID=330
• K Bolton (2009), Multiculturalism as a Process of Globalisation, Ab Aeterno No. 1, Journal of the Academy of Social and Political Research, Athens, pp. 25-31
This essay will lay out the issues about globalisation in regards to social inequalities and the potential for the reduction of inequalities. It will look at the colonial conquests with the power and control these brought to primitive countries and see the way the economic system was set up ensuring Europe was gaining wealth from the cheap labour and other resources of less developed nations. We will also look at the way the modern economic system still holds this power flow from the Transnational Corporations (TNC’s) and that these corporations still help to boost their host Nations. We will see how the economists claim to help people in any country to which they can bring the Global Markets. During this it will be explained how this power and control is keeping people in situations that assist profits for the “rich club” and to show that even though new technology and world systems could be created for better opportunities and equality for workers, instead these mechanisms are used primarily to boost the networks of the powerful and to maintain the status quo for the capitalist financial interests.
The European colonisation of undeveloped countries has been a substantial historical process. This has boosted the rise of capitalism and has been the base of Transnational Corporations. Through the trade routes they conquered, developed and protected, these countries were able to exploit the primitive populations of the new found colonies (D J Boudreaux, 2008 pp 9-10). The discovery of the gold in the New World (America) allowed Europe to have the financial boost that instigated the renaissance. Europe was getting richer and more cultured while the new colonies were left in a state of poverty and exploitation. In modernity we see the rise of companies with factories and the fight between unions and corporations in developed countries and new concepts of workers’ rights against production costs and profit margins. The Fordism era must also be taken into consideration with the rise of consumerism to make more customers for mass produced products (Robin Cohen and Paul Kennedy 2007 p87). It is no surprise that these foundations of globalisation lead us to an indulgent market that still exploits the under developed nations. These combine technology and cheap labour for mass production and they evolved into post-Fordism with relations to capitalists gaining more control through casual and temporary work with little if any benefits for workers (Cohen, Kennedy (2007 p101).
The World Bank maintains a lot of financial control through ongoing debt. It has the vantage point of the bird’s eye view of the whole global economic situation. It is no doubt they know how things work for the maintenance of the capitalist profit plans and how they can go about them. John Williamson from the World Bank while talking to a science convention in Sri Lanka argued the benefits and the problems of globalisation and how the primary globalisation was set up for financial reasons. Trade through global networks is the driving force of international links. He argued that there was benefit for countries with low skilled labour to increase the living standards in their poor nations through new technologies if they produce items cheaply for the world markets. But he argues that this then lowers the standards of low skilled labour in developed nations. He also discussed that the poor nations should focus on education to compete with other nations who provide low skilled labour.
He also stated that, “there is a good analytical reason for arguing that trade will tend to make the rich richer and the poor poorer” (Williamson, 1998).
The book Small Countries in a Global Economy points out that small countries with specialised production such as Switzerland with watches, Ghana with cocoa, Nicaragua with coffee and Kuwait with oil have found the way to do well on the world stage of markets. They can even control the prices of such products through their level of production (D Salvatore, M Svetlicic and J P Damijan 2001 pp 71-72). They also show how globalization has been good for the smaller nations gaining sovereignty from larger empires like the Soviet Union. After there independence some get caught up in the importance of sovereignty verses economy and the fact they must comply with many internationalist rules and regulations along with competitions with other countries for low skilled labour and other industry making them servants to Multinational Corporations (Salvatore, Svetlicic, Damijan 2001, pp 25-27). Hence nations are joining with other countries in Conglomerates (like the European Union) to get the benefits of free trading deals, open borders, and combined trading might against other conglomerates such as the USA (Salvatore, Svetlicic, Damijan 2001, pp 8-15). This means that although there has been a boom in New Nation States since the break of World War II there has also been the hard fact that these new nations need the trading power of the greater nations close to them to compete and survive in the global market. The empires were broken down after WWII when they became too restrictive for capitalism, and American-dominated global hegemony started to take the place of European colonialism. These new states can thank globalization for their new found independence from Imperial rule. This in turn shows that globalization has helped bring some level of self determination to these countries. The idea of the New World Order that was being developed in 1989 was going to bring peace because of free trade markets through Globalization and it was a big ideal for those pushing the United Nations position and the larger number of countries involved in it (Salvatore, Svetlicic, Damijan 2001, p 3).
One positive aspect of globalisation has been the uniting of groups for workers rights around the world. The workers networks have been fighting government oppression, companies who exploit workers and environment impacted issues. It could be argued sadly that they have little real effect on the quality of life for the world’s poor and low paid workers. Unions have been in an uphill battle that could be seen as them losing (Rodrik 1997 p75). They make some inroads and then the corporations along with Governments find ways to reduce their effectiveness. In the US the workers asked for the human side to be taken into consideration, and that the cost of labour should not be part of the financial equations as labour is more than profits; it is people (Rodrik 1997 p76). In countries that succeed in gaining higher wages, there is a consequence of higher unemployment (Rodrik 1997 p11). Their factory closes down because the TNC moves their business to a factory that still exploits its workers. They undercut the factory with better conditions and higher production costs as a result (Rodrik 1997 pp 1-2). The struggle to keep profits coming in are reflected by Rodrik by such sayings as “low wage competition” and “race to the bottom”, representing the desire to pay as little as possible for the use of labour (Rodrik 1997 p3).
Rodrik goes on later to explain how the workers have three major issues, firstly that they pay a larger share now in work conditions and benefits, secondly that they have an insecurity in regards to pay rates and hours worked because of higher labour productivity and thirdly their bargaining power is eroded in regards to settling the terms of employment by the rising unemployment (Rodrik 1997 pp 4-5). With little hope of promotion, no surplus income (barely enough to live with) and the risk of not being able to find another job because the number of unemployed is putting pressure on available jobs to the point that any mistake could see them replaced. Then when changes happen that reduce the conditions of employment there is no way to protest without jeopardising jobs. The modern low skilled labour has been manipulated into becoming a slave type cast by corporations who have too many binding circumstances hanging over the employee’s heads. On top of this they are kept powerless by their bills and general high cost of living in consumer societies. Debt grows and envelopes their lives, leaving them chained to their jobs. This is in contrast to the middle to high income earners who have highly mobile opportunities with their skills and educations to be able to negotiate and to move on if they are not satisfied.
Much of this is reflected by the companies themselves with different ways they look at work ethics on a global front. In some cases were companies will look after their home countries employees who will be higher skilled and harder to replace, but they outsource some functions (like low or unskilled labour) to other countries in order to exercise the “exit” option instead of the “voice’ option. This allows them to be disengaged from local communities, removing themselves from responsibility for the people around the outsourced facilities (Rodrik 1997 pp70-71). Products are now easier to move through modern communications and transport technologies, easier border controls, and inviting governments. Local employment options are locked into globalisation whether they like it or not. Only drastic government restrictions can alter this formula (Rodrik 1997 pp 71-72).
Bolton argues that the current climate of anti nationalism is fuelled and supported by the powerful TNCs and the Governments that need and support them. They use the term “racist” as a way to subdue any form of national pride and anyone who wants to protect their national culture from mass immigration that forces the lowering of wages and homogenises the cultures into a potential world culture. This would then break down barriers of trade as the lack of national pride means that there is no longer a resistance to globalisation and multiculturalism. He also explains that Marx supported the free trade agenda by the capitalists because it also suited his own desire to see the nation-state destroyed (Bolton 2009). These prejudices toward Patriotic/Nationalists politics lead to an international move to put down nationalism and remove it from having any voice. This political favouritism toward internationalist driven politics in itself shows an example that globalisation creates an unequal environment for political expression.
The financial driven experts have their own view of this. Boudreaux claims that historically it is nationalist based economic countries which cause financial depressions (D J Boudreaux, 2008 p10) and that the current countries which suffer the most poverty are those who have cut themselves off from the Global Market, such as North Korea and Niger (Boudreaux, 2008 p34). He also shows that the lower fifth of a country’s income earners go up or down as a result of the country’s economic percentage. So that when a country is doing well at the market trade their people’s wages will go up right down to the lowest paid worker (Boudreaux, 2008 p30). He rubbishes the argument that wages drop in the high consumer countries as a result of cheap labour in poorer nations. He uses statistics from the United States showing that workers are compensated based on their productivity (Boudreaux, 2008 p60). If he is to be believed then all the countries that are poor are that way because their Governments shut them off from the world economy and that everyone has a better life as a result of Globalisation.
The TNCs with their economist apologists will argue that they are improving the world with globalised capitalism and free trade. Their rationale seems to be that the accumulation of wealth by a few will allow a drift of money to the bottom of the food chain to help even the poorest people. Yet even this is in itself showing an unequal spread of wealth. The %5 higher wages across the country will be good for someone on high wages, but show very little extra for someone on bare minimum wages (Boudreaux, 2008 p30). They also argue that technology will help poor countries. This is true if it is applied to assist people. The evidence is often contrary to this with the technology going to the hands of those who will exploit it for their own gain.
On the surface with global pop culture and the high level of entertainment for the developed and developing countries, it is easy to over look the huge inequalities of the underdeveloped nations compared to the developed. It is also more evident of the growing gap between rich and poor in western countries. But modern lifestyles have become the masters of distractions. While the status quo is maintained with the wealthy expanding their power and the debt bound Governments making policies to support capitalist progress, the workers and the poor in both third world and developed world are not able to have a high standard of life (Cohen, Kennedy 2007 pp 114-116 and 202-203). With the modern technologies created to make human life better, easier, healthier, those who are suffering from poverty, disease, starvation and a list of other problems are mostly ignored because they are born out of sight from the “rich club” nations and the wealthy people of their own nations. In the end it comes back to the same TNCs exploiting the third world countries for profit over-looking the possibilities for equalising people and instead keeping the situation as a financial, not a human advancement.
Bibliography
• Robin Cohen and Paul Kennedy (2007) Global Sociology. 2nd Ed. Palgrave MacMillan.
• D Salvatore, M Svetlicic and J P Damijan (2001) Small Countries in a Global Economy. Palgrave, New York.
• D J Boudreaux, (2008), Globalization, Greenwood Press, London
• D Rodrik (1997), has Globalisation gone too far? Institute for International Economic, Washington
• John Williamson, (1998) Globalization: The Concept, Causes, and Consequences. http://www.iie.com/publications/papers/paper.cfm?ResearchID=330
• K Bolton (2009), Multiculturalism as a Process of Globalisation, Ab Aeterno No. 1, Journal of the Academy of Social and Political Research, Athens, pp. 25-31
Wednesday, August 11, 2010
New Zealand European Nationalists and the issue of Maori self determination
In recent New Zealand history many Kiwis have had a problem with the growing level of self determination of New Zealand Maori. This has resulted in some people gaining influence and participation with the so called “Right Wing” organisations in New Zealand on the basis of opposition to Maori.
It has helped the New Zealand First party gain support (even though much of its leadership are identifiably Maori), with the Act Party also trying to score electoral points with a so-called “One New Zealand” policy. This involvement of raw reactionary membership into the politics of the perceived right wing organisations has created a dilution of, and diversion from, key anti-internationalist policies that the primary Colonial heritage protection parties put forth. Often it is a threat to their feelings of dwindling security in the Nation. This has rolled over to recent migrants as well, with Asian, particularly Indian, immigrants having issues with the perceived greater rights of Maori.
The National Front and other “Right Wing” groups have had membership applications from such migrants. The many membership applications that come from NZ Europeans because of the newly created divide from Maori activists and growing Maori rights is the topic of this article.
The education grants, land claims, quota of Maori workers in Government Departments and the regular news articles about Maori protesting and complaining are all too new to an old way of thinking.
These issues brought many people to think about the mainstream media and the pandering Governments as a group of forces fighting against the average kiwi. Something that many of these newly awoken people don’t realise is that the Maori face the same struggle as does the white activist.
There are common problems that get in the way of both movements: the media, mass hysteria, government harassment and the indifference of the majority of people toward the issues that are being addressed. White Nationalist organisations in New Zealand follow a common theme. That is of the Third Position politics. These have some socialistic type policies along with Nationalism and cultural protection. These views can and are shared by people in many other cultures, including some Maori activists. With a shared goal, the two predominant cultures can work together with a stronger frontline of activism. This action must get past blind racism and the ignorance that is in some degree entrenched within some “Right wingers”. Because of the low numbers of participants in “Third Position” parties (such as the National Front) many of the people swayed by reaction are accepted into the party ranks and allowed to have influence with other members. This can cause a split of motivations in an organisation’s core; leading to internal issues that are slow to be resolved. Some members focus on potentially damaging policies that would divide our cause from the Maori cause, and from those who want to fight international finance issues, mass immigration, United Nations influence and other far reaching concerns.
With this influence comes a sideshow of political issues that draw away from many of the most positive and productive policies. With Maori Nationalists onside with the struggle to stop the eventual over running of New Zealand, by Chinese immigrants who have some sympathy for communist doctrine if not overtly with communist views. These are a real threat to New Zealand’s security and for the survival of the European (British in particular) cultures that have built the infrastructure and economy of this Nation.
Along with this is the unified belief of interference by foreign investors, the United Nations with their world policies and the greed of our own politicians and leading capitalists. These are united against us with money as their driving factor. This level of polluted minds has affected Maori leadership with many Maori now having to fight their own Trust boards for rights and lands. It is no longer white men ripping off Maori; in many cases it’s their own people. It is not Maori who are keeping the working class and poverty classes of New Zealand as cattle for cheap labour with low employment rights; it’s our Government and capitalist institutions that have been chewing away at Unions and other such groups that try to protect people from the growing divide of the rich and poor. Essentially we are in this together. The struggle is not to fight the Maori growth of culture and their language, the white nationalist should be supporting them, and in return the Maori that are willing will support European rights and self-determination. A true partnership could be reached that would unite the Bi-cultural element of this Nation; the elements that created the kiwi culture, which includes the generosity of traditional Maori, sharing what they have, and dealing with spiritual issues.
When Gaelic Colonisers first got here they found many similarities with Maori culture. They adapted fast to living amongst them and to working out the base elements of unity for the good of all. It was when the finance industry got involved with the land confiscations and sales that far reaching problems were entrenched into both Maori and NZ Europeans, each having their own arguments about the matter. But as John A Lee, the famous Labour politician, observed years ago, “The Maori think the Pakeha won the land wars, but he only won the debt, and now we’re all – Maori and European – in the same boat, sinking in a sea of debt.
After WW2 the Urbanisation of Maori was a significant historical process. Many were cut off from their traditional support and lost their cultural identity. These things are relevant to our own cause. They became the highest criminal offenders, and lowest paid workers because of the impact that such transitions have. The same is happening to the lower classes of NZ Europeans, who have been shunted from their traditional roots of family and culture because of the modern shift toward capitalist individualism. It is the path to misery for both cultures. It must be fought against by both causes.
Maori now have a good run with the culture being sold as an industry. But one day they will face the same struggle again to save their people’s identity. The Chinese will not care for their culture or their customs. Protests end with tanks and guns, prison executions and other unthinkable tortures. This is how they end the Tibetans, political activists, and anyone who believes in freedom of speech. They will just fill factories with people who have no culture, no purpose, no hope, who will just work for them as factory fodder. In this the capitalists and the communists work together. They will bring their slavery to our shores and we will let them!
A good look at the history of Maori Urbanisation is a must, along with the rational ideas that link us together as a Nation. We should no longer resist Maori Culture; we should support it and build that partnership the treaty talked about. Both treaties (Littlewood and Waitangi) wanted New Zealand to be united as a partnership. As long as we are divided we will be defeated by the wealthy, greedy, foreign, globalized capitalists who are over-powering us and controlling the bulk of the population like puppets. It is them who make the policies that destroy us, they are the ones who drive insane, unmanageable money policies and they let the greed and power grey their view of the world and what could be done to actually do well for each people. As Hugh Fletcher, one of the NZ wealthy, said a few years ago; Maori sovereignty means very little when it is transnational corporations rather than national governments that run the economy. We are in a struggle with the “politically correct” views about mingling cultures; multiculturalism (muddy culture). The proponents of this agenda no longer have loyalty to their own people, they no longer care about the Nation, they just follow intellectual ideas about humanity and globalization, they look past all the harm it does and all the suffering.
Maori and European New Zealanders have common issues to deal with. Let us unite against them before neither of us has anything left.
It has helped the New Zealand First party gain support (even though much of its leadership are identifiably Maori), with the Act Party also trying to score electoral points with a so-called “One New Zealand” policy. This involvement of raw reactionary membership into the politics of the perceived right wing organisations has created a dilution of, and diversion from, key anti-internationalist policies that the primary Colonial heritage protection parties put forth. Often it is a threat to their feelings of dwindling security in the Nation. This has rolled over to recent migrants as well, with Asian, particularly Indian, immigrants having issues with the perceived greater rights of Maori.
The National Front and other “Right Wing” groups have had membership applications from such migrants. The many membership applications that come from NZ Europeans because of the newly created divide from Maori activists and growing Maori rights is the topic of this article.
The education grants, land claims, quota of Maori workers in Government Departments and the regular news articles about Maori protesting and complaining are all too new to an old way of thinking.
These issues brought many people to think about the mainstream media and the pandering Governments as a group of forces fighting against the average kiwi. Something that many of these newly awoken people don’t realise is that the Maori face the same struggle as does the white activist.
There are common problems that get in the way of both movements: the media, mass hysteria, government harassment and the indifference of the majority of people toward the issues that are being addressed. White Nationalist organisations in New Zealand follow a common theme. That is of the Third Position politics. These have some socialistic type policies along with Nationalism and cultural protection. These views can and are shared by people in many other cultures, including some Maori activists. With a shared goal, the two predominant cultures can work together with a stronger frontline of activism. This action must get past blind racism and the ignorance that is in some degree entrenched within some “Right wingers”. Because of the low numbers of participants in “Third Position” parties (such as the National Front) many of the people swayed by reaction are accepted into the party ranks and allowed to have influence with other members. This can cause a split of motivations in an organisation’s core; leading to internal issues that are slow to be resolved. Some members focus on potentially damaging policies that would divide our cause from the Maori cause, and from those who want to fight international finance issues, mass immigration, United Nations influence and other far reaching concerns.
With this influence comes a sideshow of political issues that draw away from many of the most positive and productive policies. With Maori Nationalists onside with the struggle to stop the eventual over running of New Zealand, by Chinese immigrants who have some sympathy for communist doctrine if not overtly with communist views. These are a real threat to New Zealand’s security and for the survival of the European (British in particular) cultures that have built the infrastructure and economy of this Nation.
Along with this is the unified belief of interference by foreign investors, the United Nations with their world policies and the greed of our own politicians and leading capitalists. These are united against us with money as their driving factor. This level of polluted minds has affected Maori leadership with many Maori now having to fight their own Trust boards for rights and lands. It is no longer white men ripping off Maori; in many cases it’s their own people. It is not Maori who are keeping the working class and poverty classes of New Zealand as cattle for cheap labour with low employment rights; it’s our Government and capitalist institutions that have been chewing away at Unions and other such groups that try to protect people from the growing divide of the rich and poor. Essentially we are in this together. The struggle is not to fight the Maori growth of culture and their language, the white nationalist should be supporting them, and in return the Maori that are willing will support European rights and self-determination. A true partnership could be reached that would unite the Bi-cultural element of this Nation; the elements that created the kiwi culture, which includes the generosity of traditional Maori, sharing what they have, and dealing with spiritual issues.
When Gaelic Colonisers first got here they found many similarities with Maori culture. They adapted fast to living amongst them and to working out the base elements of unity for the good of all. It was when the finance industry got involved with the land confiscations and sales that far reaching problems were entrenched into both Maori and NZ Europeans, each having their own arguments about the matter. But as John A Lee, the famous Labour politician, observed years ago, “The Maori think the Pakeha won the land wars, but he only won the debt, and now we’re all – Maori and European – in the same boat, sinking in a sea of debt.
After WW2 the Urbanisation of Maori was a significant historical process. Many were cut off from their traditional support and lost their cultural identity. These things are relevant to our own cause. They became the highest criminal offenders, and lowest paid workers because of the impact that such transitions have. The same is happening to the lower classes of NZ Europeans, who have been shunted from their traditional roots of family and culture because of the modern shift toward capitalist individualism. It is the path to misery for both cultures. It must be fought against by both causes.
Maori now have a good run with the culture being sold as an industry. But one day they will face the same struggle again to save their people’s identity. The Chinese will not care for their culture or their customs. Protests end with tanks and guns, prison executions and other unthinkable tortures. This is how they end the Tibetans, political activists, and anyone who believes in freedom of speech. They will just fill factories with people who have no culture, no purpose, no hope, who will just work for them as factory fodder. In this the capitalists and the communists work together. They will bring their slavery to our shores and we will let them!
A good look at the history of Maori Urbanisation is a must, along with the rational ideas that link us together as a Nation. We should no longer resist Maori Culture; we should support it and build that partnership the treaty talked about. Both treaties (Littlewood and Waitangi) wanted New Zealand to be united as a partnership. As long as we are divided we will be defeated by the wealthy, greedy, foreign, globalized capitalists who are over-powering us and controlling the bulk of the population like puppets. It is them who make the policies that destroy us, they are the ones who drive insane, unmanageable money policies and they let the greed and power grey their view of the world and what could be done to actually do well for each people. As Hugh Fletcher, one of the NZ wealthy, said a few years ago; Maori sovereignty means very little when it is transnational corporations rather than national governments that run the economy. We are in a struggle with the “politically correct” views about mingling cultures; multiculturalism (muddy culture). The proponents of this agenda no longer have loyalty to their own people, they no longer care about the Nation, they just follow intellectual ideas about humanity and globalization, they look past all the harm it does and all the suffering.
Maori and European New Zealanders have common issues to deal with. Let us unite against them before neither of us has anything left.
Thursday, August 5, 2010
Working on my Right Wing history
Anyone who has stories and events that they want to send me about things that happened during my involvement in groups can send them into me.
Also I am needing a couple of people to Edit the work as it is done. Even though I am becoming a little more literate, I still need someone to have a look for me.
Anyone with Pictures they want to share of events etc that I was involved in, please send them in as well.
I'm even open to the anti's stuff. It would be good to have some of their stories in the book. Especially the big cries they have about getting their buts kicked. Iv got lots of events when they cowardly outnumbered and attacked our people, threatened and hurt our women and other depraved activities that the trendy lefties have done to impress their mates and the perverted masses in this system who think that attacking our people was OK since we are "wrong" and "evil" etc.
I guarantee this book will affect people. It will have the true stories of my own Skinhead life, Gang wars, brutal violence, and enough sad stuff to get through to the more emotional people.
Some of this stuff has been written in the past. I have a bit of stuff lying around waiting to be put together.
Also I am needing a couple of people to Edit the work as it is done. Even though I am becoming a little more literate, I still need someone to have a look for me.
Anyone with Pictures they want to share of events etc that I was involved in, please send them in as well.
I'm even open to the anti's stuff. It would be good to have some of their stories in the book. Especially the big cries they have about getting their buts kicked. Iv got lots of events when they cowardly outnumbered and attacked our people, threatened and hurt our women and other depraved activities that the trendy lefties have done to impress their mates and the perverted masses in this system who think that attacking our people was OK since we are "wrong" and "evil" etc.
I guarantee this book will affect people. It will have the true stories of my own Skinhead life, Gang wars, brutal violence, and enough sad stuff to get through to the more emotional people.
Some of this stuff has been written in the past. I have a bit of stuff lying around waiting to be put together.
Intro for the new Blog
I'm back online. In my first year at Uni. Learning how it is all done in the big world of the education system. Even though I was living in Waikato, there is no way I could go to Uni there. After they accepted that crap about Kerry Bolton that was full of lies they cant be taken serious as an education provider of truth. I went to Canterbury Uni a few years ago for my Social Work and just got through. But I passed. Now I am doing Sociology. Yep its full of lefty "do gooders". But some of them are OK. I can cope with it. A lot of rubbish is taught though. Bias and unproven things said as facts. But I'm lucky to be able to accept that's the way it is these days in all the state controlled systems.
I hope one day to be Qualified and able to publish my own stuff with proper research and facts to show our cause of European Culture preservation and the preparation for survival situations. Things don't stop being true just because I don't have the time do fight for them like I used to. Its incredible how many people think I have given up on what I believe in. I just got busy with the good things in my life, and tired of the many dramas in the wider Nationalist Movement, most importantly the Alcohol and even drug abuse along with immorality and issues that I just don't want around my family.
My God and Family are the most important things to me. I have a supportive loving wife. 7 Great children (20, 16, 11, 9, 6, 3, baby) and a grandson (4) who love me and who I spend much of my time with. I am more open now about my life and who I am. I used to be very guarded about my personal life. I now see it as just part of my progress, and if people want to know who I really am then they need to know about my precious gifts from God, my Wife, my Kids, my Mum and my mates/brothers.
I am fortunate to have great friends who have stood beside and behind me for years. Men who have been my advisers, comrades, funders, back up and brothers to me through many trials and success. There have been mistakes made, and I have lost some good men because of my character flours at times. But It was all part of the process, and I am left with the refined people who still stand with me. They are like my "Drushina" (band of friends) who have been in different groups with me and now stay in my life with many shared adventures.
I look ahead now, watching things progress and digress in different organisations. Designing presentations on Street subcultures in New Zealand, writing a short life story about my experiences with right wing groups.
This Blog will be the updates, the annoying things going on, the hypocrisy I see in the world, Government, University, Left Wing and their twisted views and bizar logic and anything else that just feels relevant.
In time I will do a paid site for short books and articles that have a public appeal (controversial).
I hope one day to be Qualified and able to publish my own stuff with proper research and facts to show our cause of European Culture preservation and the preparation for survival situations. Things don't stop being true just because I don't have the time do fight for them like I used to. Its incredible how many people think I have given up on what I believe in. I just got busy with the good things in my life, and tired of the many dramas in the wider Nationalist Movement, most importantly the Alcohol and even drug abuse along with immorality and issues that I just don't want around my family.
My God and Family are the most important things to me. I have a supportive loving wife. 7 Great children (20, 16, 11, 9, 6, 3, baby) and a grandson (4) who love me and who I spend much of my time with. I am more open now about my life and who I am. I used to be very guarded about my personal life. I now see it as just part of my progress, and if people want to know who I really am then they need to know about my precious gifts from God, my Wife, my Kids, my Mum and my mates/brothers.
I am fortunate to have great friends who have stood beside and behind me for years. Men who have been my advisers, comrades, funders, back up and brothers to me through many trials and success. There have been mistakes made, and I have lost some good men because of my character flours at times. But It was all part of the process, and I am left with the refined people who still stand with me. They are like my "Drushina" (band of friends) who have been in different groups with me and now stay in my life with many shared adventures.
I look ahead now, watching things progress and digress in different organisations. Designing presentations on Street subcultures in New Zealand, writing a short life story about my experiences with right wing groups.
This Blog will be the updates, the annoying things going on, the hypocrisy I see in the world, Government, University, Left Wing and their twisted views and bizar logic and anything else that just feels relevant.
In time I will do a paid site for short books and articles that have a public appeal (controversial).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)