ok, this post isn't really about puppies... i didn't know what to call it, so i went with puppies because i like puppies and they make me happy so HECK YEAH i'm gonna call this post "puppies!" and you can just live with it! ha!
*ahem*
recently, i've been having a lot of trouble sleeping... i lie awake at night and think to myself, 'man, i really wish i could fall asleep right now.' unfortunately, i can't fall asleep because, simultaneous to that thought is ANOTHER THOUGHT: 'i wonder if the DOD has a chart on their website for how much assistance they gave to Timor-Leste from 1999-2005...'
first of all, this proves how much of a nerd i am. um, i can't fall asleep because i'm too busy thinking about what the DOD did in Timor-Leste? moreover, with a timeframe? really? i need a life! but even more interesting (interesting may be a stretch) is the fact that a person can think two entirely different thoughts at the exact same time. and actually, as i was thinking these two thoughts simultaneously, i realized i was doing it and started wondering how that was possible. in a way, it was like right when i was at 'fall asleep' in the first thought and at 'chart on their website' in the second thought, a third thought started: 'how the crap am i thinking so many thoughts at once?'
unfortunately, as soon as i started thinking about my superhuman simultaneous thought abilities, i was wide awake. this was the opposite of what i wanted, but since it was already happening i figured i might as well actively try to have two thoughts at once. fail. it turned into something like this: 'man, i really wish i wonder if the DOD has i could a chart on their website fall asleep for how much assistance they right now gave to Timor-Leste from 1999-2005...'
seems like my superhuman simultaneous thought abilities only work when i don't think about them. otherwise, it's just the same old jibberish that usually occupies my head. but still, it's pretty cool to have superhuman abilities, even if they only appear uninvited when they are least welcome.
sigh.
Wednesday, December 1, 2010
Monday, November 29, 2010
the next 10 days of my life...
here's my to-do list for the next 10 days:
- tuesday 11/30 - final presentation on the DRC
- thursday 12/2 - final paper on Timor-Leste (20 pages)
- monday 12/6 - revised research proposal due (10 pages)
- tuesday 12/7 - final paper on DRC/greed and grievance (15-20 pages)
- thursday 12/9 - final exam in US Experiments in Peacebuilding
- friday 12/10 - FREEEEEEEEEEEEDOM!!!!!!!!!
Monday, November 22, 2010
Friday, November 19, 2010
"Dear Regime" by Roger Sedarat
Dear Regime,
After you've ground him into powder,
you can burn this to a fine ash. His family feels
it would be better off with nothing.
My Father returned from Iran with everything but his bones.
He said customs claimed them as government property.
We laid him on a Persian carpet in front of the television.
When I’d hold his wrist to his face
because he wanted to know the time,
we could see the holes made from swords in his elbow.
His arm reminded me of kabob koobideigh.
It was hard for him to look outside;
he said the cumulus clouds
were too much like marrow
and he couldn't stand watching the dog
sniff the backyard, searching
for the rest of him. My sister and I put him to bed
thinking that beside our mother
he'd turn into himself,
but through the door we only heard him crying,
telling his wife he could never again make love,
and through the keyhole we saw her shivering with him
wrapped around her like an old blanket
until he died one morning.
She folded him into a rectangle,
mailing him in a white shoebox
back to his country.
i like this poem. it's depressing, but i think it captures the feeling of homesickness really well... you're still alive, but you're missing an integral part of what makes you able to function, to live, and to thrive. and i love the imagery at the end... she folded him into a rectangle, mailing him in a white shoebox back to his country. he got to go home after all.
After you've ground him into powder,
you can burn this to a fine ash. His family feels
it would be better off with nothing.
My Father returned from Iran with everything but his bones.
He said customs claimed them as government property.
We laid him on a Persian carpet in front of the television.
When I’d hold his wrist to his face
because he wanted to know the time,
we could see the holes made from swords in his elbow.
His arm reminded me of kabob koobideigh.
It was hard for him to look outside;
he said the cumulus clouds
were too much like marrow
and he couldn't stand watching the dog
sniff the backyard, searching
for the rest of him. My sister and I put him to bed
thinking that beside our mother
he'd turn into himself,
but through the door we only heard him crying,
telling his wife he could never again make love,
and through the keyhole we saw her shivering with him
wrapped around her like an old blanket
until he died one morning.
She folded him into a rectangle,
mailing him in a white shoebox
back to his country.
i like this poem. it's depressing, but i think it captures the feeling of homesickness really well... you're still alive, but you're missing an integral part of what makes you able to function, to live, and to thrive. and i love the imagery at the end... she folded him into a rectangle, mailing him in a white shoebox back to his country. he got to go home after all.
Wednesday, October 27, 2010
terrorism
so last night in class we discussed terrorism... mainly we talked about what terrorism is (and also, therefore, what terrorism isn't). turns out it's a relatively hard concept to define, especially when it is so politically loaded. for instance, can states be terrorists? can an act be an act of terrorism even if it doesn't involve killing anyone? my thoughts? yes and yes.
the common understanding of terrorism is that it is the use or the threat of the use of violence intended to influence a target group through fear. it is important to note that this target group is not necessarily the victim of the terrorist acts, but rather the witnesses. the fear within the target group causes social cohesion to disintegrate and increases the power of the terrorists. the concept can be thought of as a triangle:
after class, i found myself thinking about this concept in terms of politics. it's a stretch, but one could almost argue that some current political rhetoric is causing fear among certain groups of the american population, and that this fear is influencing their behavior. the catch in this argument is that it is not politicians who are threatening the american population with violence, they are simply highlighting the threats of others (for example: "the terrorists will get us unless we do X" or "homosexuality is going to destroy american society"). their intent may be the same: by highlighting these threats, politicians create or encourage fear, and this fear makes their constituents easier to control (maybe control is a poor word to use - manipulate? not sure).
anyway, despite the fact that these are just speculations, i think it's interesting that a parallel (however tenuous) between american politics and terrorism can be made at all. clausewitz wrote that war is politics by other means, but can we maybe also say that, sometimes at least, politics is terrorism by other means? probably a stretch, but interesting nonetheless...
the common understanding of terrorism is that it is the use or the threat of the use of violence intended to influence a target group through fear. it is important to note that this target group is not necessarily the victim of the terrorist acts, but rather the witnesses. the fear within the target group causes social cohesion to disintegrate and increases the power of the terrorists. the concept can be thought of as a triangle:
after class, i found myself thinking about this concept in terms of politics. it's a stretch, but one could almost argue that some current political rhetoric is causing fear among certain groups of the american population, and that this fear is influencing their behavior. the catch in this argument is that it is not politicians who are threatening the american population with violence, they are simply highlighting the threats of others (for example: "the terrorists will get us unless we do X" or "homosexuality is going to destroy american society"). their intent may be the same: by highlighting these threats, politicians create or encourage fear, and this fear makes their constituents easier to control (maybe control is a poor word to use - manipulate? not sure).
anyway, despite the fact that these are just speculations, i think it's interesting that a parallel (however tenuous) between american politics and terrorism can be made at all. clausewitz wrote that war is politics by other means, but can we maybe also say that, sometimes at least, politics is terrorism by other means? probably a stretch, but interesting nonetheless...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)