GP Blog

2008 MYE question

2008-07-06T17:35:00.000-07:00

Has the movement towards globalization given rise to increased terrorist activities?

Globalisation is a phenomenon that dominates the twenty-first century with the help of the improvement of technology. Globalisation essentially improves communication and trade would-wide and many countries, especially the developed ones, gain a lot of economic benefits from it. We embrace it and move towards it. Therefore, the security community had ignored almost all security issues brought about by globalization in the twentieth century. However, people must remember that with globalization, not only does the world become smaller in terms of communication flows and net exports of goods and services, it also becomes smaller in terms of the reach of terror. Terrorists make use of various aspects of globalization to their advantage and the pressuring outcome is that terrorist activities have been increasing at an alarming rate. Statistics show that as compared to the 1960s, the number of terrorist activities now has increased by two hundred percent. Therefore, I believe that to a large extent, the movement towards gloalisation has given rise to increased terrorist activities.

One probable reason for the staggering increase in terrorist activities can be the fact the terrorist networks at work today make use of the technological tools of globalization. New communication methods such as the Internet has made it possible for extremist political groups to establish large organizational networks, exchange information and combine resources. A prominent example would be the works of the terrorist organization. Al-Qaeda, led by Osama bin Laden. The organization has literally migrated online to escape detection in an atmosphere of increased vigilance. As a result, the organisation’s use of the Internet became more sophisticated, encompassing financing, recruitment, networking, mobilization, publicity, as well as information dissemination, gathering and sharing. Al-Qaeda members constantly upload videos of their terrorist activities onto the Internet to glorify the jihadist activity of suicide bombers and to romanticize participation in jihad through stylized portraits of mosques and musical scores among others. This leads to a rise in the number of terrorist activities because it becomes much easier and more convenient for the terrorists to spread their ideology worldwide. Encourage worldwide participation in their movement, and it provides them with a platform to carry out their discussions on terrorism simultaneously in different parts of the world. This greatly improves their efficiency in carrying out their attacks.

Then, the increase in the number of terrorist activities can also be the result of people being unhappy with globalization. As paradoxical as it is, it creates a sense of powerlessness for those people left on Earth where there are no viable alternatives to the orthodoxies of the World Bank. Certain communities that have been unable to gain benefits from globalization, for example, still have great pride in their own traditional cultures and cannot accept second-class status. They are also unable to accept the erosion of their cultures brought about by the multinational companies residing in their countries. Multinational countries take over their surroundings. Bangalore in Karnataka, India, for instance, is most well-known for their manufacturing of electronics and due to the western influences from the multinational companies there, the state now resembles a typical Western city, looking like Florida in America. Therefore, the inability for certain groups of people to accept these changes will in turn engender the need for expressive violence to garner attention to their discontent, be it communicative or symbolic. The expressive violence during the attack on the World Trade Centre, a global icon, on the eleventh of September 2001 shows that globalization gives expressive violence a greater symbolic force than ever.

However, it can also be argued that the movement towards globalization has not given rise to increased terrorist activities. As mentioned before, globalization will also lead to a more vigilant world. Communication flows become so much more improved that civilians also get first-hand information on possible terrorists and terrorist attacks. The cooperative efforts to stop these acts of violence all around the world was made possible by globalization. This would very well deter terrorists from attacking and they have to be much more sophisticated in their planning in order to carry out their attacks successfully. Singapore is a good example of a globalised country that is able to deter terrorist activities. The advanced technology brought about by globalization has allowed that country to prevent any form of terrorist acts like suicide bombings from occurring successfully. Hence, the number of terrorist activities may fall instead of rise due to globalization as well.

The increase in the number of terrorist activities could very well be attributed to other factors. It could be because of wars are fought. Statistics have shown that the number of terrorist activities during the Cold War increased by more than one hundred and thirty percent due to the greater desires to sabotage the enemies. Then, in recent years, the Iraq war has caused a sharp increase in the percentage of terrorist activities being held, with a twenty-five percent increase in just one year, from 2005 to 2006. The situation in Iraq at that time was particularly worrisome because the country was turning into a laboratory and training ground for future terrorist activities elsewhere. This could have given rise to increased terrorist activities and since it happened in the twenty-first century as well, it could have made it seem as if the increased terrorist activities were due to the movement towards globalization when it was actually due to other factors.

In conclusion, globalization could have provided a negative impact on the rise of terrorism, or it could have provided positive impacts. However, it is much more evident that it causes negative impacts as far as terrorism in concerned. Regardless of this, the undeniable problem is that somehow, there has been a rise in the number of terrorist attacks world-wide. Therefore, the elitist groups in our communities must take charge of the situation immediately before the rise in numbers become so overwhelming that a global man-made catastrophe is all that awaits us at the end.

Term 3 Blog Task.

2007-09-14T07:28:00.000-07:00

Is same-sex marriage a practical consideration in this age of globalisation?

Marriage has been traditionally known as an institution between a man and a woman but now, there are many controversies about marriage and whether same-sex marriage should be allowed in countries. Same-sex marriages may bring about economic growth in the country which is essential for globalisation but it may upset how the society works. Therefore, should same-sex marriage be allowed in countries because of globalisation?

There are people who are totally against same-sex marriages especially because of religious purposes. For example, most Christians are against same-sex marriage because they think this goes against biblical teachings however, Leviticus 18:22, Leviticus 20:13, First Corinthians 6:8-10 and Romans 1:24-27, have never outright define marriage in a purely heterosexual way. Does this means that homosexual can marry another homosexual? Although there are religions who oppose same sex marriage, there are also religions who do not oppose or even favour same-sex marriages. An example will be at the 1996 Unitarian Universalist General Assembly, delegates voted overwhelmingly that because of "the inherent worth and dignity of every person" same-sex couples should have the same freedom to marry that other couples have.

By allowing same-sex marriages would mean that there will be more homosexuals around and the problem on discrimination will surface. For example, a heterosexual US citizen who marries a foreign partner immediately qualifies to bring that person to the United States, while long-term gay and lesbian binational partners who have spent decades together are denied the same rights, forcing foreign gay partners to seek expensive temporary employer or school-sponsored visas or face separation. In many countries, marital status is an important factor and once your marital status is different from the rest, you will be treated different too.

In conclusion, i think that there are many factors to consider before allowing same-sex marriage in a country especially in a country like Singapore where the older generation are still conservative. However, i think that the homosexual couple should not be deprived of this right.

Research On GP

2007-09-09T18:17:00.000-07:00

Globalisation and Culture in the Asia-Pacific Region: http://www.mediatimesreview.com/february05/Globalisation.php
http://www.globalpolicy.org/globaliz/cultural/globcult.htm

Environment and Biodiversity
http://enrin.grida.no/biodiv/biodiv/nrcbd/ukraine/en_21.htm
http://habitatnews.nus.edu.sg/pub/naturewatch/text/a082a.htm

Sustainable Development
http://usinfo.state.gov/journals/itgic/0402/ijge/gj01.htm
http://www.bmj.com/cgi/content/full/325/7361/399?ck=nck

Terrorism and War
Iraq and the "War on Terrorism
Reaction to the September 11, 2001 events

Term 3 Blog Task.

2007-08-11T22:03:00.000-07:00

"The mother of revolution and crime is poverty"(Aristotle) Do you agree?

I agree to a large extent that the cause of crime and revolution is poverty and this is often seen in third world countries.

Poverty is defined as the state of being poor and lack the means of providing material needs or comfort. Revolution and crime is the result of it could be because people need the basic needs to survive and yet, they were not given anything hence resorting to crimes such as stealing and going on riots just to get the basic needs. Revolution and crimes are actually about the same because people who does that wants to achieve their aim, which is to have a better life.

One reason is because of the wide income gap in the country. Take Singapore for example, there are people who are doing very well and there are people who are the total opposite. According to an article in February 2007 from the International Herald Tribune, it states that 'average wages were rising with the economy' but 'incomes among the bottom 30 percent of households had actually fallen'. This is a serious problem that needs to be solved because if it is left untouched, those people who are in the bottom 30 percent of the households will feel very indignant and may start a revolution.

The other reason is because of the increasing standard of living in the country. People who are already earning much lesser than others have to support the family and with the rising standards of living, they could not cope with the life in Singapore. An article in August 2007 from The Straits Time states that the economy is 'projected to rise by 5 to 7 percent' and the value of HDB homes will also continue to rise. In this case, it is very hard for the bottom 30 percent of households to catch up with the economy, increasing the precentages of crimes and revolutions.

However, crimes and revolutions may be caused by poverty where people are desperate to get their basic neccessities, it can also be caused by a person's character. If a person is neglected by his family and mix with bad companies, he is most likely to commit crimes. Hence, i agree to a large extent that revolution and crime is caused by poverty although there may be other reasons causing it.

Ageism, Xenophobia, Lookism, Disablism

2007-08-05T18:00:00.000-07:00

Article on Disablism (discrimination because of disability) : http://www.bbc.co.uk/ouch/columnists/tom/060904_index.shtml

Article on Lookism (discrimination based on looks) : http://www.personneltoday.com/Articles/2005/04/18/29307/overweight-and-underpaid-as-lookism-sweeps-the-world.html

Article on Ageism (discrimination based on age) :
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4041713.stm

Article on Xenophobia (discrimination against Foreigners) :
http://www.iht.com/articles/1996/02/14/edpaul.t.php

June Hols Task

2007-07-05T05:58:00.000-07:00

Based on the two articles that i've read, both articles believe that freedom of speech is essential in the world today. In Singer's article, it states that in a democratic country, freedom of speech is essential and in Szilagyi's article, it states that it is important to ensure the freedom of expression of all its citizens for a democratic advancement in a society. I agree with this view because in a democratic society, if there is no freedom of speech, people do not have the right to voice their views then there is no democracy in the country.

Although both articles believe freedom of speech is important now, they have different views. Singer's article believe that freedom of expression should not be restricted and if it has, in any way, affected someone else, the person should not be blamed because this is what freedom of speech is. On the otherhand, Szilagyi's article states that freedom of speech comes with responsibility. If it has affected another person in one way or another, the person should be held responsible and i believe that his view should be adopted. Freedom of speech without any social responsibility would lead to insensitivity towards other people or races thus leading to potential problems in the country. Hence, Szilagyi's view should be adopted because in a multi racial country like Singapore or even the other countries where people of different races stay together, it is more important to be sensitive to each other's feelings. Therefore i think that freedom of expression should come together with social responsibility.

Capital Punishment

2007-04-29T18:00:00.000-07:00

"The death penalty is murder and should be abolished." Do you agree?

Death penalty is not considered as murder beacuse murdering someone, to me, is after careful planning and furthermore, the victim did not do anything wrong but by sentencing someone to death, is because the accused had done something against the law and there's no motive behind it. If the accused had done something against the law and is sentenced the death penalty, it means that he had done something grave like drug trafficking and hence he should be responsible for his own actions. Since he know the consequences of doing something against the law, then he is asking for it. Another reason why it is not considered as murder beacuse it brings justice to the victim's family members and poses a threat to society. If the accused had killed someone and is acquitted, then how will the people and the family members think? So, I think the death penalty should not be abolished to serve as a reminder for people to constantly check on their actions and the consequences of it.

On the other hand, the death penalty is considered as murder because a person's life is precious. It should not be taken away just because he had done something wrong. Instead, the accused could be sent for counselling or other things to change his look on life and change him to a better person. Although the accused had done something wrong to be given the death penalty, but by killing him, it does not solve anything or make the victim feel better. Two wrongs do not make a right. Another reason why it is considered as murder because of the cruel froms of execution like the electric chair. Everyone should die in a dignified way and there should not be any forms of cruel execution. Therefore, i think the death penalty should be abolished to a certain extent.

In conclusion, I think that the death penalty should not be abolished because I think without it, people will think that there is no consequence for commiting crimes thus more crimes will be committed and people should be responsible for their actions.

CENSORSHIP

2007-04-26T05:31:00.000-07:00

Consider the merits and demerits of censorship and state your reason why you think it is un/necessary.

Censorship is used to restrict things that are not meant for people of a certain age especially children. It could be because of the violence that it depicts or maybe even the wrong values that it will instill in young children example pornography.

But is it good to censor things or should we let the childern see the things that should be censored since they will have to face it sooner or later? Is it appropriate to shelter them from what is happening in the world and let them be naive thinking that everyone is trustable? This is what censorship does to people.

Without censorship, the world may be in chaos because wrong values will be taught to children. For example, showing a nine year old child violent scenes in a movie where people die for no reason, people taking revenge on their enemies or maybe even to the extent of limbs not being together with the corpse and muderers are not caught by the police. When he grow up, will he think that doing all these are common and he could get away so simply thus doing it? If thats the case, the world be in chaos with people taking revenge and killing each other.

Therefore, i think that censorship is necessary. Although they will be sheltered, not knowing whats happening, we can slowly introduce the various things at different age when they are appropriate to know instead of being open and let the small children know everything resulting in instilling the wrong values in them...

How does the media and its subjective perception affect the way this incident was handled?

2007-04-15T06:49:00.000-07:00

The media can affect how things are handled because they choose to believe what is true instead of finding out the truth. In this case, the media happened to take the two swimmers 'smiling' while pointing at the disqualified list next to a television monitor and hence assuming that they're happy the Americans were disqualified. So, are the reporters reporting the truth or are they just making their own assumptions? It will lead to undesirable consequences if the incident was not properly handled. The media made the whole incident seemed like the Singapore swimmers were at fault by not carrying themselves with dignity at international meets whereas the Singapore Swimming Association stated otherwise, insisting that their ties with America is very strong and such a thing would not happen. According to the article, the swimmers explained that they smiled because it was 'hard to believe' and not beacuse of happiness. The media and its subjective perception could be indirectly accusing someone. If the media handled it in a better way, there would not be a controversy over Singapore swimmers showing bad sportsmanship and the report would not be widely-circulated across the globe. Therefore, i think that the media handled this incident very poorly by only believing what they see and not wanting to probe further into it. 'Different people will interepret those emotions and reactions in different ways.' It is how we look at them and whether we want to believe what we think is the truth or whether we want to find out the truth.