June 2009

–The Global Peace Index does what it intends to do: Make us think about peace–Most have never heard of the Global Peace Index. It is put together by the Institute for Economics and Peace, a non-profit organization with an address in New South Wales. For the last 3 years it has ranked nations along certain criteria in order to determine their levels of peace. This year New Zealand was first, Denmark and Norway tied for 2nd and 3rd place respectively. Japan was no. 7, Canada, 8. Finland and Slovenia tied for 9 and the United States was 83rd ahead of countries like Libya and Gabon. The last four in the 144 countries ranked are in that order Israel, Somalia, Afghanistan and Iraq as no 144. France was no. 30 and the United Kingdom 35. The panel of experts behind the index looks at criteria which are aimed at gauging levels of democracy, transparency, education and material well being. They also look at internal strife and conditions leading to internal or external problems. This year food riots in several countries affected the ranking as did the other consequences of the global economic crisis such as unemployment. Several indicators affecting security measure house pricing and pensions are also included, which could explain one of the reasons for the U.S. poor showing. But the point of course is not to engage in a contest of pride but to think through what peace entails and make us all more aware of what goes into making peace. While the index may be a news filler, an afterthought or even an interesting tidbit, it ought to be something for us to ponder.

–Twitter may be a phenomenon but it seems it may have an underside–I just read a long article about Twitter. No matter one’s generation it is a phenomenon, the difference being in what kind of a phenomenon, each generation seeing it through their own prism. I’ve been intrigued and curious but not taken in by it. It is a followers’ medium. For celebrities, for certain businesses, for those who have a following it is useful or at least suit their purposes. If I’m correct, what this implies is distressing because the implication is that Twitter works on the herd mentality, and would thus reinforce what may be a lower aspect of being human. It does so at a time in the history of humanity when individual thought is crucial if our herd instincts are to be left behind for greater things.
I am left with a question of whether or not Twitter is harmful?

–A new UNICEF report tells us there are more hungry people in South Asia, a reminder of the inequalities that exist and the role we need to play to eliminate them–UNICEF reports that the impact of the economic crisis on women and children in South Asia has in the past two years resulted in a jump of 100 million in the number of people who are hungry. More than 400 million people are now chronically hungry in the region. Those earning less than two dollars a day spend up to 80% of that on food. UNICEF economist Aniruddha Bonerjee is concerned that this means that many families “have been forced into choices that one cannot accept” referring to parents feeling forced to pull their children out of school and sending them back to work in order to have enough for food. The region’s poor have born the brunt of the economic crisis and UNICEF regional director has called on India and Pakistan “to urgently reduce their defense spending and increase their social investments…”
One thing such news items assert are the inequalities existing in the world, and most of all the injustice these inequalities stand for. As such they become a reminder that we have the responsibility to put aside complacency and participate in any way possible to lessen their impact, if not their existence.