Hejsan! Jag såg på ett historiskt program för ett tag sedan om en stad i det Romerska imperiet som hette Dougga och som låg i Nubien (nuvarande Algeriet) som på höjden av sitt ekonomiska välstånd, 50 år efter det att staden grundats av den romerska armén, hade en befolkning på 15 000 personer. Denna stad bestod till en början av en etniskt homogen befolkning av romare.

Men grejen i romarrikets politik för att uppnå ”Pax Romana” över hela sitt imperium var att man accepterade en frivillig integration och assimilation som ett medel för att hålla ihop sitt land. Men till vilket pris? Jo så här gick det för staden Dougga (och senare resten av imperiet) efter 50 år av stadens existens så hade den inhemska nubiska befolkningen som flyttat in i staden blivit så stor att de utgjorde majoriteten i staden. Medan de etniska romarna blev i minoritet.

Men som om detta inte vore nog så började nubierna och de etniska romarna att smälta samman med varandra i religiös, kulturell och biologisk mening! Dvs romarnas gudomar blev en blandning tillsammans med de hedniska nubiska gudarna, de båda etniciteternas kulturer blev en kultur och män av etniskt romersk härkomst tog sig nubiska kvinnor till fruar och skaffade avkomma med dessa.

Kejsaren i Rom kejsare Claudius gav dessutom nubierna samt alla andra lokala befolkningar rätt att ta över den lokala administrationen på lika villkor som de etniska romarna (vilka var de enda som fick inneha politisk makt tidigare) och detta tyckte man var jättebra då detta var ”Roms sätt att leva”.

Men vi vet alla vad som hände med Roms imperium det föll till slut och splittrades upp i två delar för att sedan helt försvinna bägge två! Detta imperium föll helt enkelt när det försökte vara främmande folk till lags i ett försök att uppnå drömmen om den ”Romerska freden”. Man kan lära sig mycket om historia om andra kulturer eller hur?

Christoffer Thunberg

Etniskt medveten nationalist och socialist

Faccio seguito qui al mio post sull’assegnazione del Nobel per la pace al Presidente degli Stati Uniti d’America Barack Obama (2009/10/10 – Nobel per la pace a Barack Obama).

Ci sono due modi di intendere la pace.

Il primo dice della pace come dell’assenza qua talis dei conflitti. La seconda è la volontà di incontrarsi tra gli uomini, di essere gli uni con gli altri, di non potere essere gli uni senza gli altri.

Il primo modo di intendere la pace può essere sintetizzato dalla celebre frase di Tacito, che riferendosi alla pax romana celebrata da Augusto, dice: “ubi desertum faciunt, pacem appellant (“dove fanno il deserto, questo chiamano pace”). L’affermazione, che lo storico latino mette in bocca a Calgaco, generale caledone nemico dei romani, in realtà non dice desertum, ma solitudinem: “dove creano la solitudine, questo chiamano pace”. Mentre il “deserto” è un luogo abbandonato, dove nessuno semina più, dove forse non c’è più l’uomo e rimane soltanto la presenza straziante delle rovine o quella anonima della natura privata dell’uomo, la “solitudine” di cui parla qui Tacito, per esserci, ha bisogno che l’uomo non sia assente; ha bisogno che l’uomo ci sia, che resti solo, che sia solo, che siano interrotte le sue relazioni con gli altri esseri umani e – di conseguenza – con sé stesso. Questa solitudine è allora ben più tragica del deserto, ne è la culla micidiale e infallibile.

Quando l’uomo è in relazione con gli altri e con sé stesso, restare soli può essere momento prezioso e fecondo di sistole, di confronto con sé stessi magari nella inquietitudine, ma sapendo e in-tendendo la quies contemplante, l’otium rigenerante, la scholé teoretica e metafisica; invece la solitudine dell’uomo irrelato è spaesamento, angoscia, potenziale ritiro psicotico.

Questo primo modo di intendere la pace presuppone quindi l’uccisione della natura relazionale dell’uomo: l’uomo non è più per-sonanza in sé stessi dell’altro e nell’altro di sé stessi; l’uomo è conchiglia svuotata, marionetta sconosciuta soprattutto a sé stessa. Se avesse vinto il nazismo, la pace nazista molto probabilmente sarebbe stata proprio questa: la solitudine di uomini senza relazione e senza anima, senza confronto, senza pari diritto di parola e di risposta. In questa pace l’altro non può né deve esistere; se lo fa, viene primo zittito, poi svalutato, poi negato, alla fine ucciso. È la pace delle mafie e dei totalitarismi. Purtroppo, se ci pensiamo bene, è la stessa pace che abita molte delle nostre famiglie dove non ci si parla più, non ci si conosce più, non si guarda altro che lo schermo a-personale della televisione (di questo ho parlato nel mio libro Noi e la tivù. Come leggere un linguaggio). Se questo tipo di pace si afferma, allora guai a chi fa pensare; allora morte a chi pro-voca (cioè “chiama innanzi”) le coscienze; allora segregazione per chi – anche soltanto con la presenza della propria diversità o, più radicalmente ancora, con la diversità della propria presenza – interroga; allora eliminazione di chi denuncia e osa anche lontanamente richiamare al pensiero, alla riflessione, alla responsabilità (che letteralmente significa “possibilità di risposta”). Allora, chi chiede di pensare, di rispondere, in una parola di esserci, questi è il nemico, anche soltanto – ripeto – con la propria diversità o con la propria pura presenza.

Il secondo modo di in-tendere e di essere la pace è gli uomini con gli uomini, l’incontro delle diversità, il dialogo, la legittimazione personale l’uno dell’altro e l’uno nell’altro, l’identificazione reciproca. Questo secondo modo non esclude il conflitto (quello non armato, naturalmente), anzi spesso lo produce, ne esige la parte migliore e vera, quella che dice dell’altro come di chi mi fa crescere, mi fa evolvere, mi distoglie dalle mie chiusure, mi porta a confrontarmi con le mie paure più profonde e, in tale modo, mi conduce a una identità sempre più ricca e profonda, sia pure nella fatica del confronto, della crescita.

Mentre la prima pace è prima o poi stato di morte e di disperazione, la seconda pace è tensione e speranza. Mentre la prima pace la si subisce, la seconda la si vuole. Mi piace pensare che non sia un caso che la parola elpìs, che in greco antico significa “speranza”, abbia la stessa radice del verbo latino velle, che significa ”volere”: è come se alle radici della nostra cultura ci fosse l’affermazione preziosa di questa convergenza tra volere e sperare, tra sperare e volere.

La pace è come la libertà, la verità, la giustizia. Non è uno stato in cui si è o una condizione nella quale si sta; se fosse questo, la pace svanirebbe in un battito o non sarebbe vera pace (parimenti, se fossero questo, libertà, verità, giustizia sarebbero solo un attimo illusorio o sarebbero falsa libertà, falsa verità, falsa giustizia). È- al contrario – una conquista da volere e da sperare, da sperare e da volere, sempre di nuovo, sempre da capo, nell’ncontro con gli altri, con la loro presenza, con la loro diversità e unicità, con le loro domande e le loro risposte, sempre di nuovo rispondendo e sempre di nuovo domandando.

L’amore per la vita non sta in libertate, in veritate, in iustitia; è invece tensione e in-tenzione in libertatem, in veritatem, in iustitiam. Non si può dunque stare e re-stare in pace, ma si è in pacem. Come bene aveva colto e detto Giovanni XXIII, la pace è l’oggetto di un “umanissimo perdurante universale cupidissimo appetito”: “Pacem in terris, quam homines universi cupidissime quovis tempore appetiverunt” (è l’inizio della enciclica Pacem in terris); è l’oggetto di una in-tenzione da volere e da sperare con voglia bramosa (bellissimo quel cupidissime di papa Roncalli, tutto carico di concreto e tutto bergamasco senso del desiderio) qui nelle terre dell’esistere, cercandola e volendola come in-separata e in-separabile rispetto alla liberta, alla verità, alla giustizia sociali e politiche, rispetto allo sviluppo (quello che Paolo VI chiamerebbe progressio) dei popoli, delle società, degli stati, delle culture, delle terre tutte.

Mi piace tantissimo pensare che il Nobel per la pace a Obama sia stato assegnato avendo presente più o meno quello che qui ho cerco di esprimere, parlando di questo secondo modo di intendere la pace.

The LA Times has an editorial discussing the possibility of the passing of the Pax Americana, the American Peace.  Interestingly, it approaches it with an air of apprehension and looks at the downside of the loss of a single dominant power as a stabilizing force.  The comments however, spill forth in full Leftist vent at what a wonderful thing it will be to not have the United States causing all of the problems in the world.

My thought on that was:

For my entire adult life the goal of the Left has been to destroy the power of the United States.

It was inconceivable based on centuries of history that after the collapse of the German Empire the Soviet Union wouldn’t march into Western Europe to spread its Bolshevik Revolution.  It didn’t because the United States stopped it.  For half a century, the United States prevented the War That Would Have Ended All Wars.  The brushfires the US dealt around the World were all part of preventing that War.  The Left called for Peace, and Nuclear Disarmament, and the end of American Imperialism; because the Left sided with the Stalinists.  They were so pissed when the Soviet Union collapsed.

For 13 years the US stymied the regional ambitions of Saddam Hussein who, if you will recall, invaded two neighboring countries at different times attempting to increase the territory he ruled, attacked others and was a threat not just to the stability of the Middle East but the existence of the Middle East.  The Left condemned this new round of American Imperialism because of course, the Left sided with the socialist Baathists.

This stabilizing behavior is almost uniquely American.  Even in the 19th Century the US prevented Latin America from being carved up into pieces of the European Empires like Africa and Asia were.  Yet despite all the power the US had to wield, it has not added any territory to itself in over a century.  Once it reached from Sea to Shining Sea, it stopped growing.  Not the normal behavior of an empire.

People cheering the fall of the American Empire might do well to remember that the end of the Pax Romana was followed by the Dark Ages…half a millennium when the technical advances and stability the Romans had established were lost.  And this time we’ll do the Dark Ages with nuclear weapons.

Be careful what you wish for Lefties.

Oh, yeah.  And any talk of American Exceptionalism would be incomplete without Bill Whittle’s address on the issue.

I bought a book from Amazon, on a suggestion of a Fresh Ink segment. Its called Mouse Guard Fall 1152, though what was suggested was the Winter 1152 volume. I decided that if Winter was good, Fall would be just as good – right? Plus then I’m starting in the beginning. It was said to be like Lord of the Rings, with mice! Critics are saying the art is amazing, even if the story isn’t mind-blowing. I’m excited. I was telling Antonio that if we go to Comic Con in 2010 – I’m going with more than a desire to enjoy the geek-dom and watch the Hall H panels – I’m going with some enjoyment of comic books! I bought it from a marketplace seller so the shipping is SLOW. The shipping period is anywhere between August 26th through September 11th. That blows – considering I placed the order on August 19th – I could be waiting UP TO three weeks for the thing. It was the best price though, so gotta do it.

I wanted to buy two, but the second one that I was interested in that was spotlighted is sold out. Must be really good Its called Pax Romana and its about how in the future, the Catholic Church has funded research in time travel – which is actually successful. The Pope the begins to send mercenaries in the past to kill key figures to make a more favorable Catholic future. Despite the fact that I’m not Catholic – more Christian – the story seems amazingly intriguing. No wonder it’s sold out!

EDIT: It was stocked while I was writing this – bought it, AWESOME!

I also ordered Catching Fire – the sequel to The Hunger Games (if you’re interested in reading them – read the synopsis for The Hunger Games, but not for Catching Fire because there are spoilers!), that’s getting released next Tuesday and I should get it hopefully by Friday. SO EXCITED! If I didn’t get such a great price on it through Amazon I would have just picked it but from my local B&N. Its a $7 difference though, which is a BIG difference.

I’m exicited for my upcoming reads, I haven’t been very interested NEW material for awhile so yay!

OPEN TO PUBLIC FREE INTERNATIONAL
SEMINAR

Dear Experts,
Kindly make the FINAL REVISIONS,
& please distributing & circulating this

OPEN TO PUBLIC FREE INTERNATIONAL
SEMINAR to all public & society concerned.
Your contribution shall be very highly appreciated & may GOD bless you all .
This is a pure plain text mail version, very light & safe for every body.

Please send correction & suggestion to.
inno888@cbn.net.id

INTERNATIONAL CATHOLIC MOVEMENT
FOR INTELLECTUAL AND CULTURAL AFFAIRS – ICMICA – PAX ROMANA

IKATAN SARJANA KATOLIK INDONESIA (ISKA – INDONESIAN ASSOCIATION OF
CATHOLIC GRADUATES) In Collaboration With

SANATA DHARMA UNIVERSITY – YOGYAKARTA, INDONESIA

CENTER FOR HISTORY AND POLITICAL ETHICS (PUSdEP) -
YOGYAKARTA,INDONESIA
TOWARD A NEW PARADIGM, SUSTAINABLE HUMAN DEVELOPMENT:
WHAT PERSPECTIVES?

At Sanata Dharma University Yogyakarta, Indonesia,
20 to 22 of July 2009
=====================================================
19 July 2009 04.00 pm -06.00 pm

Opening of Holy Mass: at Ganjuran Church
===================
20 July 2009 08.30 am -10.00 am

Welcome Speeches :

Mr. Javier Iguiñiz, President of ICMICA Pax Romana

Dr. Paul Wiryono, sj. Rector of the Sanata Dharma University,

IR. Paulus Harli, President of ISKA. Indonesia

Moderator : Laurence Kwark, SG of ICMICA PR

10.00 am – 10.30 am Break

10.30 am -01.00 pm

Topic: Crisis, Poverty: What scenarios and perspectives toward a New
Globalisation?

Keynote Speakers :

-DR.Mari Pangestu, The Minister of Trade of Indonesia

-Fr Hugues PUEL, Professor of Economy at the University of Lyon, Former
President of Economy and Humanism, “Change of Paradigm to face Crises: New
relevance of Fr Lebret’s Intuition and E & H, What Perspectives?”

-Mr. Charles Abugre, Head of Christian Aids for Africa, “Crises and Poverty
in Africa, what lessons learnt and future perspectives toward a sustainable
and human development in Africa?” (TBC)

Moderator : DR.Andre Eta Ujan (PPE, Atma Jaya)

01.00 pm – 02.00 pm Lunch
02.00 pm – 04.30 pm

Topic: Crisis, Poverty: What scenarios and perspectives for a new paradigm?

Panel of Regional Speakers:

America: Dr Enrique Valencia, Economist from Mexico, “Public Policies and
Programs to fight aginst Poverty in LA; What perspectives?”

Africa : Dr. Odamaro, sj., Prof of Economy and political science at Arupe
College, Harare, Zimbabwe, “What scenarios and perspectives toward a new
paradigm in Africa? Lessons learnt and future perspectives”

Asia : Mr. Ivan A. Hadar, National Coordinator of the Target MDG Program,
UNDP / BAPPENAS (TBC)

Moderator : DR. Richard Bagun (Kompas)

04.30 pm – 05.00 pm Break
05.00 pm – 06.30 pm
Final Keynote Speaker:

Prof. Javier Iguiñiz, the president of ICMICA Pax Romana

Professor in Economics, Pontifical University of Lima, Peru

Moderator : Mr. Egide Rwamatwara

===============================
21 July 2009
08.30 am -10.00 am

Topic: Quality of Democracy: citizen’s participation in democratic
governance?

Asian Perspective : Mr. Charles Santiago

Member of Parliament from Malaysia, “Political Participation of Civil
Society in Democratic Governance, lessons learnt and future perspectives” in
Malaysia

European Perspective : Fr. Antoine Sondag

Director of International study & Research at Caritas France (Secours
Catholiques), “Political Participation of Civil Society in Democratic
Governance, lessons learnt in Europe and future perspectives”, towards an
Alternative political economy in Europe
Moderator : Dr.Jamester Simarmata (UI)

10.00 am – 10.30 am Break

10.30 am – 01.00 pm

Latin American Perspective: by Mercedes Vega Sahdala or Ana Claudia de los
Heros on “Political Participation of Civil Society in Democratic Governance
in LA & Caribbean Region, lessons learnt and future perspectives”,

African Perspective : Mr. Mike Roussos, a former member of Gauteng
Government, RSA on “Political Participation of Civil Society in Democratic
Governance, lessons learnt and future perspectives”, towards an Alternative
political economy & Energy sources in Africa

Moderator : Dr. Raja Oloan Tumanggor (STT Jakarta)

01.00pm – 02.00 pm Lunch

02.00 pm – 04.00 pm

Keynote Speaker :

Prof. Dr. Franz Magnis Suseno,

Social Analyst in Indonesia and Professor of the Driyarkara School of
Theology
\
Moderator : Dr.Vincent J. Salosa

04.00 pm – 04.30 pm Break

04.30 pm – 06.30 pm

Topic: Democracy, Truth and Reconciliation in Indonesia:

1. Dr. Baskara T. Wardaya, SJ, Historian and Human Rights Defender &
Director of the Post Graduate of Sanata Dharma University, Yogyakarta,
Indonesia

2. Mr. Tri Subagya, MA Researcher and Lecturer, Center for History and
Political Ethics, Sanata Dharma University, Yogyakarta

3. Dr. Daniel Sparingga, Political Scientist & Professor at the
University of Indonesia, Jakarta, Indonesia

Moderator: Prof. Mark Wolff (U. of Saint Thomas, Miami, USA)

==============================
22 July 2009

08.30 am -10.00 am
Ethical / Religious Inputs: The Contribution from different faith-based
communities – How to build logic of compassion and peace for the change of
paradigm?
Reflection from Muslim Perspective, Dr. Rumadi (Wahid Institute ) &
Prof.Dr.Syafei Maarif ( Moslem)
Reflection from Protestant Perspective, DR.Joko Sutopo MTh. (UKJW)

Moderator : Dr. Baskara T. Wardaya (USD)

10.00 am – 10.30 am Break

10.30 am – 01.00 pm

Reflection from Buddhist-Catholic Comparative Perspective, Mr. Paul
Hwang, coordinator of Centre for Asian Theology and Solidarity, UCAN
journalist
Reflection from Catholic Perspective, Dr.Wiryono (Rector of USD )
Reflection from Hindu Perspective Drs.Anak Agung Suryadi.
Reflection from Budhis Perspective Drg.Cindy Tanjung
Reflection from Kong Hu Chu Perspective Master. Tjie Tjay Ing

Moderator : Dr.Andre Eta Ujan
01.00pm – 02.00 pm Lunch
02.30 pm – 05.30 pm

Final Panel on Reflection and Conclusion :

Fr. Mike Deep, o.p, : Director of the JPC of RSA, Economic and Ecological
Justice, humanising humanity – Role of Catholic Action Movements”

Mr. Young Jin Nam, from Individual Social Responsibility to a Collective
Social Responsibility, the role of alternative mass-media

Ms. Lawrencia Kwark, Secretary General of ICMICA Pax Romana, Towards a new
solidarity for an equitable and sustainable world, role of faith-based
Professional movement

Moderator : Dr.Baskara T. Wardaya

06.00 pm
Closing Mass

At Heroes Con last month, Freddie got a chance to interview Jonathan Hickman. Mr. Hickman is the writer of The Nightly News, Red Mass For Mars, Transhuman, Pax Romana, Secret Warriors, and the upcoming Fantastic Four arc starting with issue #570.

The film that Mr. Hickman references toward the end of the interview is called Fever Pitch. (starring Colin Firth, not Jimmy Fallon) Be a good consumer and buy it right now!

Keep listening until the very end of the interview for a special message from Marvel Comics superstar, Matt Fraction.

In the past, my supreme hacking skills has enabled The Kids…to deliver you some high-quality Twittering from the likes of “Uncle” Joe Biden, Amy Winehouse and Angelina Jolie.

Today, we’re proud to bring you the next installment: Brad Pitt.

Monkey see, monkey do

You know Brad. We all feel like know Brad too, don’t we?

Brad Pitt, of Hollywood fame, has it all: great movies, a Hollywood/magazine-cover-ready body, a big monkey face perfect for a revamp of Planet of the Apes, an assortment of Pygmy/aboriginal children from exotic locales and a partner who resembles a BJ-lovin’ praying mantis.

What more could he ask for? Well, maybe for those pesky break-up rumors to go away. But other than that, what to get the man that has everything? Besides opposable thumbs that is. Why a broadcast of his Twitter on The Kids.. of course!

Let’s do the damn thing. This jawn is gonna be hot.

The Kids Don’t Get It Presents: Brad Pitt’s Twitter (permission granted by A. Jolie):

11:54am: hey out there folks. just got in from japan with a malaysian baby i got on the black market for madonna’s birthday. can’t remember if she’s got one already. fingers crossed, though!

12:04pm: as some of you know, i’m an architect on the side. i love to build houses and tear down women. anyway, creating a new work-out room for angie and i. angie insists i call her “angie” in public since she thinks it makes us look for wholesome and cute and her less “conniving and whoresome”. hi angie!

12:17pm: this new workout room’s coming together like a charm! it’s practically building itself, and by “practically building itself” i mean maddox, pax and zahara are putting it together. i really suggest getting these kinds of kids. they have lean ropey muscles perfect for hammering, lifting and massaging, and when you tire of them, you can

Off to build your new rec room (and our chinese tantric swing) kiddies! Happy Birthday!

drop them off in south central or chinatown. save darfur.

12:32pm: watching friends. shh.

1:05pm: that was fun! be back in a bit, gotta get tissues or a towel.

1:22pm: just rented out the mann chinese theatre for a joint b’day party with the pitt-jolie kids and all of madonna’s adopted kids. we’re calling it 12 monkeys day. we’re going to have emilio estevez making balloon animals (he needs the work), a giant ball pen, a llama and salma hayek breast-feeding. tried to book the black eyed peas too, but their manager said they’ve already sold out. oh well.

1:33pm: man, i’m hungry but the fridge is like 14 feet away from here (rough architect estimation) where’s good help when you need it? oh right, building the workout room

1:55pm: folks, i gotta tell you; on days like this, i like to just sit on my couch and just meditate about all the things in life. like the importance of love, and building over-priced unaffordable homes for poor black people in new orleans. they need it. and ask myself the important questions like: should i have played benjamin buttons gayer so i could’ve beaten penn for milk? we’re about to shoot ocean’s 27: more man-love. should we stop congratulating ourselves at ocean’s 28 or 29? and is it ok if your partner likes you to call her your ex’s name when you’re making love? or if she calls you your ex’s name instead?

2:15pm: medicine time! time to take my mandatory sip from billy bob’s blood chalice. angie says it keeps me young and submissive. it’s in a vial marked “monster’s balls”. cute, angie!

2:20pm: want to continue my years-long design for the tsunami-sumatra folks. it’s a town that uses an elaborate water-slide instead of streets. almost done, but medicine made me so sleepy….

We're having Maddox and Pax frame this for Jen for X-mas. Angie's idea.

2:55pm: passed out after taking medicine. i think maddox and pax have taken my wallet.

3:10pm: found wallet. whew. now gotta pick a movie for tonight. angie wants to stay in. gotta pick something good. suggestions?

3:12pm: people have suggested twilight, quantum of solace and marley & me. can’t do twilight; angie finds any movie about the undead wooing an innocent “too autobiographical”, and when we watched marley & me last week, angie was confused because she couldn’t figure out “which one was the dog”. i’d pick quantum but i’m pretty sure she’s f-cked everyone in that cast. looks like we’re watching deliverance again.

3:29pm: pax just walked in complaining that he’s hot, tired and has been “hawucinating” because of the paint thinner in the workout room. kids are so cute. really folks, get some of these lil’ buggers. but get them outside the states, and make sure they’re organically-fed orphans. we buy everything organic: chicken, beef and brown orphans. end apartheid.

3:47pm: ok, time to go: angie’s coffin is stirring so she’s going to get up soon. be back later! watch ocean’s 14 coming to a theatre near you soon!

First there was Heaven, and then came the earth.

And God started weaving and weaving, and time unfolded.

And with time came other good things, and then came man.

After a while God realized the mistake He, in all His Greatness made,And God started unweaving, and time folded.And what had happened did not happen.

And what had existed did not exist.

 And nothing in the universe will ever know, or care, or remember that which could have been, but never was.

Continuing the Famous Firsts love with this month’s authors, Matt Fraction and Jonathan Hickman.

Famous First’s – #2

By Felix Ngasama

When Barack Obama announced his candidacy for the US Presidency, many people including respected political pundits dismissed him as another black loser too ambitious beyond his ability.

One blog even featured an anti-Obama article titled “Why Barack Obama will not be the first black president?”

The article’s emphasis on Barack Obama’s racial profile as a black man and how his blackness would make him lose his way or simply cause him to be out-witted during the race along the winding road to the White House was just one example of a jaundiced view against Obama’s candidacy.

Fast forward to 4 November 2008 and 20 January 2009, and it goes without saying how the article’s author got it all wrong.

Barack Obama has just been inaugurated as the 44th President of the United States of America, his blackness or darker shade of white notwithstanding. Obama has not just won the US presidential election but he has surpassed former White House candidates in many areas of his presidential campaign.

The way he accessed voters including the youth through text messages via mobile phones and Facebook, his oratory flair, the unprecedented global fascination and support that he enjoyed then and still enjoys now, and the colossal attendance of his inauguration are just some of the examples that put Obama’s presidential candidacy, successful campaign, win and subsequent inauguration unparalleled.

It was very clear from the outset that part of Barack Obama’s brilliant election campaign strategy was to remain black but campaign ‘colourlessly’. Obama knew that he already had the African-American vote and therefore he did not need to promote his blackness to black Americans to identify with them and win their votes. Nor did he need to transfix white voters to his darker shade of white lest they got blinded by racism and gave their votes to their fellow white. Needless to say he campaigned without highlighting his skin colour among both black and white voters.

Instead Obama shrewdly analysed American politics and realised that America was on a downward spiral with a faltering influence internationally, an economy that was facing recession and a foreign policy that was hatching more enemies than friends thus endangering American citizens both at home and abroad as targets of hatred and terrorism.

Obama was clever enough to realise that for the past 20 consecutive years – a socially, economically and politically yo-yo period in America – the US has been ruled alternatively by the Bush and Clinton families whose administration over those years contributed to bring down the country to its current economic quagmire, costly wars in Iraq and Afghanistan and international hatred.

After correctly analysing the American political situation, Obama went to analyse the current American psyche just as accurately. He saw that American people wanted change and he embraced “CHANGE” as the impetus of his campaign message.

Indeed Hilary Clinton was a formidable challenge to Barack Obama but astute as he is, Obama highlighted to the Democrats how by endorsing her, they would not be ushering in change but merely sending another Clinton to the White House and creating a Clinton dynasty in addition to the Bush dynasty that they had already created. Americans who were hungry for change started eating from Barack Obama’s hand and rejected Hilary Clinton as their Democratic presidential candidate. Obama emerged as the Democratic contender for the US presidency.

The contest for the Democratic Party’s ticket between Barack Obama and Hilary Clinton was the main battle – more like a final election outcome indicator. Hilary was much more a fierce challenge to Barack Obama than John McCain the Republican old chap.

Obama wasted no time in identifying John McCain’s weakness and quickly highlighted it to the American voters that John McCain was just another Bush, thanks to McCain’s support of George Bush’s policies and associating himself with religious extremists such as Pastor John Hagee who endorsed him.

McCain the so called maverick even went to the White House to seek George Bush’s endorsement and saying afterwards, “Well, I am very much honoured and humbled to have the opportunity to receive the endorsement of the President of the United States, a man who I have great admiration, respect and affection (for)”.

The majority of voters realised that electing John McCain was akin to giving Bush, the most unpopular president in American history another term, a third term. The voters realised that the old chap, John McCain, was not the change they were looking for and down McCain went, rejected. Obama finally won the US presidential election to an unprecedented resounding global celebration from major cities and towns to villages and hamlets in the forgotten corners of the world.

In modern times with the world becoming smaller and forging into one global village, global leadership has become colour-blind. It is therefore myopic to judge a person’s leadership abilities or chances to succeed by the colour of their skin.

Last year Barack Obama was given no chance but today he has been given a set of keys to the White House and Oval Office, the most powerful seat in the world. Obama has proved wrong all armchair critics, pseudo-analysts and cynical political pundits who did not give him a chance and may they have a great feast of their own unpalatable words.

In 1901, Booker T Washington – a freed slave – was the first black person to visit the White House as a guest of the then President Theodore Roosevelt. White Americans felt disgusted and protested vehemently against a black man visiting the White House. Today we have witnessed both black and white Americans sending a black man and his family to the White House not just to visit but to live there and lead their great nation.

Symbolically, Barack Obama’s election to the White House choreographed the whole world to tap-dance together with the United States in celebration. For a moment the United States, a country notorious for being the bully of the world and therefore generally hated, enjoyed the support of almost the entire world.

Barack Obama might be the architect of America’s own version of Pax Romana if his inaugural speech is anything to go by. In his speech he highlighted non-partisan unity and proclaimed “an end to petty grievances and false promises, the recriminations and worn out dogmas that for far too long have strangled our politics” and that the decayed or hackneyed partisan political arguments that have consumed the US for so long no longer apply.

Having proclaimed his domestic vision of the rebirth of America in his inaugural speech, Obama hinted on his foreign policy through a veiled condemnation of his predecessor’s violation of American ideals such as the rule of law and rights of man with his (George Bush’s) indiscriminate use of force for the sake of expedience when defending the US from its enemies. Obama proclaimed to foreign nations that, guided by these ideals as drafted by America’s founding fathers, he will seek greater cooperation and understanding between nations as opposed to bullying tactics. Obama hinted an era of old friends and former foes with whom he will work tirelessly together to deal with the problems affecting the world. He singled out the Muslim world – America’s thorn in the flesh – and promised to “seek a new way forward based on mutual interest and mutual respect”.

Can Obama use his envisaged American Pax Romana as an example to positively and constructively influence the world at large? Yes he can!

As the real work starts for Barack Obama, his success or failure may depend on the patience or impatience of the American people who put him on the throne with great expectations. As he gets down to face the task at hand and clean up the huge mess left behind by Bush, he will, no doubt, be more watched by Americans and the world than an average Big Brother housemate.

Obama has proved to all and sundry that the American Dream is not just an “Alice in Wonderland” kind of fairy tale. Indeed the American Dream is real and has its own symbol. That symbol is Barack Obama the 44th and fist black president of the United States of America.

Umberto Eco | New Statesman | 21 August 2008

Umberto Eco meditates on localised truces as a strategy to inspire broader peace

When we talk of peace and wish for peace, we always think in universal, global terms. We would not talk of peace if we thought of it only for a few, otherwise we’d go live in Switzerland or enter a monastery, as people used to do in the dark days of endless invasions.

The second way of thinking about peace, complementary to the first, is that it is an original state. From the idea of an Edenic society to that of a golden age, peace has always been advocated as the restoration of a primal condition of humanity that was at a certain point corrupted by some act of hatred and injustice. But let’s not forget that, with regard to the myths of the golden age, Heraclitus was rational enough to say that “struggle is the rule of the world and war is the father of all and the king of all”. He was followed by Hobbes and his homo homini lupus and Darwin and his “struggle for life”.

So let’s try to imagine that the general curve of entropy is dominated by conflict, destruction and death, and that the isles of peace are pretty little blips in the overall entropic fall, exceptions to war that need a lot of energy to survive.

The great peaces we have known in history, the ones that involved large territories, such as the Pax Romana, or in our time the Pax Americana (but there was also a Pax Sovietica that for 70 years curbed areas that are now in turmoil and seething with mutual conflicts), were the result of continuous military pressure. This arrangement might please those who stand in the eye of the hurricane, but those at its margins suffer from the wars that serve to maintain the equilibrium of the system. As if to say that if there is peace, it is always ours, never that of others.

I don’t believe that on this earth men, who are wolves preying on their fellow men, will attain global peace. The historian Francis Fukuyama was thinking about this peace with his idea of the end of history, but recent events have shown that history repeats itself, and always in the form of conflict.

There remains the possibility of working gradually for peace. If universal peace can result only from a military victory, local peace can spring from a cessation of belligerence. It is established when combatants are weary and a negotiating agency offers to mediate.

A succession of local peaces might lead to a long-term decrease in the tension that keeps war alive. Even if we do not always achieve this end, a peace realised like a small blip in the general entropic curve to chaos would still serve as an example, a model.

Peace as an example. This may be a very Christian concept, but I would argue that it would have been accepted by many pagan sages. Let’s make peace between us two, even if only between the Montagues and the Capulets; it will not solve the problems of the world, but it will show that negotiation is still possible.

An extract from Umberto Eco’s “Turning Back the Clock” (Vintage, £9.99), out now

With this inaugural CarryTrade post, we begin perplexed.  I dont understand.  Where did they come from?  With lightning speed and devastating accuracy, peanuts have taken over the world.  Not the animated masterpiece about the struggle of man (read, a boy named Charlie) and his efforts to keep his worldly possessions in order even when one of those possessions is a living, breathing canine, all in spite of a menagerie of half-baked “friends” attempting to make his life as arduous a slow march towards death as possible.  Nay, not that peanuts.  But the legume kind of peanut.

I’m not about to claim to have done any research on the subject – in fact I am currently fighting the urge to Ctrl-T a new window and just quickly check out wikipedia.  But that would be lying.

More importantly, I dont have to wiki-lie.  Having been alive long enough to remember a time when one was able to bring PB&J sandwiches to day camp, or bring trail mix on an airplane, or read the ingredients on a jar of Motts applesauce and not be warned that the apples may or may not have been sauced in a factory that may or not have touched peanuts (or the peanuts touched it – I’ll let the courts decide)…back to it: having been alive long enough to remember all of these things, I find it most unsettling that you will be hard pressed to enjoy some of these past times in today’s day and age.  For all I know, utterance of the word “peanut” will very soon become banned in enclosed spaces such as public restrooms and train cars.

The source of my distress lies in what I sincerely believe to be a serious softening of society.  At the dawn of time, humanity survived by conquering his enemies – be they wild beast or fellow human. The weaker species would die off, while the stronger would live on.  To be sure, I like to think that I, as well as all humans, come from a long line of winners.  But the notion of survival of the fittest is itself becoming extinct.

Back in the good ol’ nasty, brutish, and short days, I sincerely doubt the survivability of a group of peanutphobes crossing paths with a rival gang of non-peanutphobes.  The latter would don their magical legume-based weapons and dispatch of their enemies in haste.  Nowadays society does its best to make sure this doesn’t happen with all of our warning labels.

I’m not so much for returning to the past, as I am for understanding the effect of the peanut allergy on society.  Again, I dont know the facts.  Perhaps some smart-alec comment will point out that peanut allergies are very serious, that I should not make fun, and that peanutphobes have been around for a very long time indeed.  I dont care (although I would be thankful if someone actually commented).

The point here is that rise of the peanut allergy and society’s mad dash to conform to it and placate it at the expense of my enjoyment of trail mix is indicative of a greater softening of society, and of this country in particular.

In the face of the real sources of problems in our country (war, violence, hate, lack of education, poverty, a broken healthcare system, unfair trade, unfair taxes, unfunded liabilities), we take greater care to ensure that we can distract ourselves from said problems (wow, I can fit 16.5 weeks worth of songs in my pocket! Sign me up!).  Sidenote: I have to think that the musicians and singers asking for money on the subway have seen a decrease in revenue as the use of iPods increasd.  Why listen to the homeless guy sing a song when I can just as easily escape to a world of unlimited entertainment potential.  Long story short: the iPod earphones are our modern answer to the tiring practice of sticking our fingers in our ears.

And that’s where Rome comes in.  The once great Empire began to crumble beneath its lack of caring and related lack of understanding.  The worldly ones became convinced that Rome had conquered the world, and that the world was happy with it.  And the unworldly ones didnt care.  And both ended up just partaking in society’s opulence at home.  People became picky because they could afford to be.  People became lazy because they could afford to be.  It’s like the family of a great industrialist whose creativity and hard work changed the country or the world for the better: the first generation lives well off of the inheritance, but 6 generations later things arent looking as good.  Someone is forced to get creative again.  But isn’t it better to get creative on your own time, than be forced to do so?

As the borders of Pax Romana crumbled under the weight of misunderstanding and poor calculation, so too can ours.  We cannot be caught uncreative, unwilling, or uneducated.

I dont blame the peanutphobes, but I just think they are indicative of a larger problem.

CarryTrade posts will be coming from someone who has spent just over a year as an Investment Banker with one of the bulge bracket firms (although the definition of bulge bracket is quite fluid these days).  And in my business I see a mind numbing amount of mediocrity up and down the food chain.  The business and recruiting process have become so commoditized that it often seems that no one is actually thinking anymore, they are just doing.  So if you want to join the legions of Wall Street bankers, feel free.  I’m even happy to help.  But for goodness sake break the mold and come ready to think and not just do.

I found this graph over at Josh Crew’s blog and almost had to look at it twice to really believe it. Maybe I’m reading too much into it but this is basically saying that the only way to peace is by forcing it. Um.. that doesn’t work. Yet another sign that America goes the way of the Roman Empire. The Pax Romana, by the way, was only called that by the Romans themselves. The rest suffered under the boot. More on that later.

How can the members of the religion proclaiming a monopoly on truth and love be the most domineering and intolerant? I believe it comes from culture’s influence on religion.

I’m not naive. I fully understand the balance needed between diplomacy and use of force. But I increasingly get the impression that Americanism is almost synonymous with strength and dominance, in the wrong way. Yes, we are the most charitable country in the history of man. But that doesn’t make us a “Christian nation”. And thank goodness, because if I didn’t know the difference between the true love of Christ and the supposed love of the Church, I wouldn’t want any part of it.

I call it Un-Love. Wake up, Christians.

A good friend of mine Jason Lau has put down his thoughts on the challenges of globalization as we compare our world to the 1st C Roman world. Check out his thoughts on “Pax Facebook – A new global world order on an iPhone”

Have just realized that some of you can’t get to his note if you’re not his friend on Facebook and have reproduced Jason’s note here – my guest blogger, Jason Lau on Pax Facebook

Globalisation and a new world order on an iPhone, how did we get here? And what does it all mean?

I had a good discussion with our church leaders and pastor tonight about growing the church, and how we can live out Jesus’ command and mission for the church in a global, urban and post-secular world.

The conversation also got me thinking although we live in a very different world to 1st Century A.D. Rome, how similar the different times are. The paradigm gets bigger as our world gets smaller. Globalisation has made this all possible.

In a lot of ways, we are like Rome was. Rome controlled the ancient civilised world and established its ‘Pax Romana’. The Roman Empire lived in a time of ‘relative peace’ between 27 B.C. and 180 A.D. Using its military power connected by it’s famous Roman roads to make sure it was able to stamp it’s authority and control. These same roads connected cultures and economies. People of different nations were able to intermingle, different ethnic cultures were crossing boundaries, and it became a flourishing cosmopolitan economy. It also was a time when it was accepted that it was a pluralist society.

Similiarly to Rome, we live in a very cosmopolitan city, or even global , where there is ‘relative peace’ among a pluralistic society. Our global networks pave roads which connect our cultures and economies. The world economy ‘controls’ this world through it’s global financial networks. Now we see a massive shift in people of different nations who are able to intermingle instantly across the globe. Different ethnic cultures are blurring boundaries and creating fusion sub cultures, and it became a flourishing cosmopolitan economy. We are also in a time when it is accepted as a result of the infusion of cultures, that we live in a pluralist society.

In the 20th Century, there were other lesser instances of this historical model. Firstly the the UK established its ‘Pax Britannica” through global colonisation, then the United States established it’s ‘Pax Americana’ through spreading its influence through its massive defence network. Furthermore, the US established its form of democracy as its template and using both as a net to establish its economic power. Both models were much more ‘uniform’ than the Roman model.

However, the US also spawned the Internet from a defence network called ARPA in the 1960-60s. The late 20th Century also saw the growth of the international air travel network. These two factors I believe are the two key foundations of making true globalisation possible.

We are seeing a 21st Century resurgence of the Roman model on a global scale. These days our countries connect and control people and economies using the new roads, based on our global networks.

The scariest feeling I had of globalisation was my first experience of using my Blackberry overseas. The fact that I could step off a plane in Singapore, and talk to someone in Sydney to continue my job and check my e-mails as if I had never left. The feeling was eerie.

And that’s why I say the Smartphone in my hand is a symbol of globalisation.

However, in a lot of ways, the ‘global village’ is more like a set of global hubs where they are so connected, physical boundaries don’t matter much any more. Urban hubs and lifelines of our networks are focussed on the key life lines of the economy, like New York, Tokyo, Singapore, London, Sydney etc. And ironically by far, these cities in a lot of ways are far more connected to each other in the new global world much more than even to some major cities in the countries themselves!

So it’s no wonder that we might laugh about regional Australia, but it is actually a big problem not having them connected with the new roads properly. They become global back waters. Longer term they will be severely disadvantaged and more disconnected from this new world order.

Anyway, some thoughts I thought I was share. I actually haven’t fully absorbed how a more connected ‘global urban village’ on Facebook that I can connect to on my Windows Mobile Smartphone (unfortunately no iPhone for me) really means yet, but guess that’s a story for another day… Jason Lau (guest blogger)

Cover to Transhuman #1

If you’re read and enjoyed Nightly News and/or Pax Romana, you’d probably enjoy this book and you’re probably a Jonathan Hickman fan as well!

Admittedly, it was tough for me to get into it. The first 3 or 4 pages were dull and I wasn’t sure what tone the book was attempting to take. Perhaps I’m just slow in this case?

After I pressed through the slow start I really started getting into it. I can equate it pretty equally with starting a new book and digging it more and more as you turned the pages.

When I finished the book, I wanted to read the second issue immediately. I ended up loving the style of the book! I thought it felt very much like a documentary film, which I’m sure is the point.

The art isn’t really my style, but only so many artists can force me to put a book down, this is not the case with this book. It was somewhat smooth and characters where easy to identify and it lead the story pretty well.

Ultimately, what hooked me on the book was the premise of two corporations and how they rise to greatness using genetic research each from a different view point. I like the idea that both of these companies have uniquely created a superior race of humans that they call Transhumans since they can easily transcend normal human qualities.

I really want to see where they are going with this.