Entrepreneurial Revolution's main lesson from the 1960s was the need to design markets and worldwide trade in ways that went beyond the era of industrial revolution and colonisation. why because the first quarter of millennium of engine power had resulted in very uneven opportunities to live an innovative and happy life. Whist one group was racing to the moon, as many as half of the world's people still had no access to electricity grids nor other structures of productive markets (eg telecommunications, transport and distribution channels beyond mud-paths) why had the industrial age deviated into this world of missing opportunities- because colonisation had become the process or organising win-lose trades in which the empire won and the colonised lost; and those nations that had become biggest raced to use more and more carbon and steel even if this meant warring over other countries' resources.
The good news was that the east had innovated post-colonial models of win-win trade: starting with japan then south korea, then the mainly chinese diaspora operated superports which connected the hemispheres internal and worldwide trades; by 1970 the japanese were the 2nd largest economy to usa and the 3rd wealthiest group in the world were the Chinese diaspora; all of this was the ultimate kicker to mainland china coming out from behind the Great Wall and seeking to be the world's most positive trading influence the way it had been during the celebration of the silk road as world trade route connecting Eurasia during the first half of millennium 2
south america convened a continent wide debate - while colonisation had formally ended the question what do we like about the catholic culture and languages we have inherited. A movement rose that the franciscan segment of catholicism was what latin americans loved most. This is where you judge your most educated professionals by whether they go and live with the poorest and preferentially apply technology and innovation to solutions they need to free themselves from such system traps as having no access to electricity; when it comes to learning paulo freire mapped out what the education profession would empower if it lived up to franciscan values
ironically as the cold war spread across latin america, the opposite to franciscan-democracy of governments led by servant leaders spread; rival dictators were sponsored by america or russia and banks loaned money to their individual interests (putting the peoples/youth in future debt); often this process also made neighboring countries in latin america hostile to each other, and to survive the poorest were often overtaken by illicit drug trading networks ; conversely by good fortune returning to the eastern hemisphere: bangladesh which was finally to free itself from colonisation in 1971 needed a bottom-up development tool so that the 8th most populous nation could be develop by girl empowerment from basket case to something even more inspiring than the moon race; the bottom up village womens networking -especially brac - were based on franciscan values with their leaders choosing to live in the most desperate places first - brac started in the region where a million people had been killed and all infrastructure flattened by a cyclone; bangladesh's first national governments barely had enough taxes or aid to develop the cities; so the greatest privatisation of public services (all the most socially critical service markets; health, education, finance, food and home security, with markets designed for poorest to flourish) evolved around grassroots village womens networks.
Bangladesh application of franciscan ways was then - and remains now - the deepest collaboration system and source of action learning for poverty alleviation and responding to any community's most desperate sustainability challenges ;meanwhile north of the border: mainland chinese with the inward investment of chinese diaspora has leapt into being the 21st benchmark of infrastructure for all.
bangladesh and china share one more good fortune- the first leapfrog models of both mobile and microsolar tech were tested by partner friends of bangladesh in 1996; china's jib creating technologists for the poor like jack ma have taken such innovations to a world class level but whether they would have been inspired to do so with the case of how bangladesh women lifted up half the sky remains a moot point in 2018 as we entered the last decade in which it will be possible for education to be transformed so that all girls and boys can be the sustainability goals generation
| .Brian Beedham, foreign editor of The Economist for a quarter of a century, died this week, aged 87 F or nearly all the 25 years leading up to the collapse of communism in 1989, two intellects dominated the pages of The Econ- omist. They were Norman Macrae, as dep- uty editor, and Brian Beedham, as foreign editor. Their marks were influential, endur- ing-and quite different. Norman, who died in 2010, relished iconoclasm, and orig- inal ideas sprang like a fountain from his ef- fervescent mind. Brian, bearded, tweed- jacketed and pipe-smoking (or pipe-pok- ing), held ideas that were more considered. It was he who provided the paper’s atti- tude to the post-war world. In that world, nothing was as important as seeing off communism, which in turn could be achieved only by the unyielding exercise of American strength. This view was not in itself unusual. What made it re- markable, and formidable, were the clarity, elegance and intellectual power with which it was propounded. No issue demanded the exercise of these qualities more than the Vietnam war, and probably none caused Brian more an- guish. A man of great kindness, and with- out a hint of vanity or pretension, he was far from being either a heartless ideologue or a primitive anti-communist (though he never visited either Russia or Vietnam to put his opinions to the test). But his unwa- vering defence of American policy drew criticism from both colleagues and readers. Why did he persist in pounding such a lonely trail, even after it had become clear that the American venture in South-East Asia was doomed? The short answer was conviction. His anti-communism was born of a love affair with America. As a young man, at Leeds Grammar School and Oxford, his politics had been leftish. They might have stayed that way. But in 1955 ambition bore him from the Yorkshire Post to The Economist where, after a few months, he won a Commonwealth Fund fellowship and with it a year study- ing local politics in the South and the West of the United States. In America Brian dis- covered a national ideology based on indi- vidualism, bottom-up democracy and an active belief in liberty that meant pro- blems could be solved at home and na- tions could be freed abroad. This was ex- actly in tune with his own emerging ideas. The dispassionate romantic Coming from drab, class-ridden, 1950s Brit- ain, Brian might have stayed. But he felt in- dubitably British. The Suez crisis was be- ginning just as he left for America in August 1956; he so strongly backed the in- vasion of Egypt that he volunteered his ser- vice to the British military attache in Wash- ington, ready even to give up his new American adventure to fight for this hopeless cause. And though he later became enthusiastic about direct democracy (an en- thusiasm, like that for homeopathic pills, which was fostered by his links with Swit- zerland through Barbara, his wife), he was a monarchist to the end. Suspicious of intellectuals, Brian rel- ished exposing the soft, less-than-rigorous- ly-thought-out (he was fond of hyphens) orthodoxies of the liberal left. As foreign editor, he liked to draw unsparing compar- isons between the Soviet Union and the Nationalist regime in South Africa: to deny freedom on the basis of ideological convic- tions, he argued, was no less objectionable than denying it on the basis of colour. It was no doubt Brian’s command of words that helped to make him our Washington correspondent in 1958 and then, in 1963, foreign editor. In this role he wrote leaders on all manner of topics, often argu- ing a difficult case: for nuclear weapons, say; for supporting Israel (another of his unshakable causes) when sentiment was running otherwise; or indeed for the do- mino theory itself, which was never so ringingly defended. Brian was equally skilled as a sub-edi- tor. Articles that arrived on his desk with no clear beginning, end or theme were turned, apparently effortlessly, into some- thing perfectly sharp and coherent. More annoyingly for authors, articles that were perfectly coherent were sometimes turned with a few tweaks, deft as a paw-dab from one of his beloved cats, into pieces that said something quite different from what had been intended. A statement of fact might be qualified by “it is said” or the American invasion of Cambodia would become a “counter-attack”. These intrusions could be difficult to square with The Economist's tradition of open-mindedness; especially as Brian’s own mind was more contradictory than it seemed. His favourite conversation-part- ners were men like Henry “Scoop” Jackson and Richard Perle, hawkish intervention- ists; but he also had an acquaintance, al- most friendship, with at least one kgb man at the Soviet embassy in the 1980s. Away from work, the world he was analysing weekly was kept at bay. He did not own a television set, and found the best use of computers was to listen to American civil-war songs. Some of his pieces were pounded out on an ancient Ol- ivetti in a turret of Barbara’s family castle in the Alps, surrounded by peaks and clouds. Deep down he was a romantic, capable of great human feeling, whose head con- stantly seemed to remind him to keep a rein on his heart. He wrote sympathetical- ly and perceptively about Islam, and mov- ingly about refugees-especially boat peo- ple, and especially if they were Vietnam- ese. They were making his point for him....The Economist May l6th 2015 | .................................................................................................................................................................america's media crisis started with its biggest brands...Help teachers and children generatethe most exciting jobs creation game? A 21st C mashup of a board game like monopoly, a quiz like trivial pursuits, and both a mass media and an app such as jobs creation sharkette tank?. more : why not blog your peoples search for world record jobs creators ..last 7 years of generation of changing education 1 the board - maps of large continents and small islands, of super cities and rural villages, transportation routes for exchanging what people make connected to webs like Jack Ma's gateways where 3000 people co-create live for a day before linking in their networks (Notes on valuing freedom and happiness) join 25th year of debating whether we the parnets and youth can change education in tine to be sustainable 2 rules of jobs-rich trading games - lifelong grade 1 to 69, beginners to experienced connecting many previous games - eg game 1 if your region has no access to a seaport, how are trading dryports developed 3 backup every trial game ever played including successes & failures, searchable by valuable collaboration factors; geographically neighbouring, match particular skill (eg electrical engineerings) around the world 3.1 cases and the cultural lessons from future history that worldwide youth will need to translate if they are to be the sustainability generation 3.2 unexpected joys; eg often the most exciting innovations for linking the sustainability generation come from communities that had the least connections - eg some of the games best players are the women and girls who developed bangladesh as 8th most populous nation starting with next to nothing at independence in 1971; case sino-english translation of world record book of jobs creators- can you help us translate this into other mother tongues - isabella@unacknowledgedgiant.com us we chat line 240 316 8157 - click to diary of good news youth journalism trips 8 to china, 1 korea, 3 arab emirates, 13 bangladesh 1 to japan |
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment