Live 8
If you want to lose all of your free time, take a look at Google Earth. It allows you to view satellite imagery of any part of the Earth. It's a great time.
Another addictive thing is Princetons's Global Consciousness Project. It uses a series of random event generators located around the world. Each generator or "egg" produces random numbers. The squared and normalised deviation from the expected means of each generator is calculated and displayed. There's a helpful display with sounds that allows one to hear the level of deviation. In the last several minutes, I've heard a few "pings" and many more examples of the popping sort of noise that signify a significant deviation of a sort. The sounds are ordered by the magnitude of the deviation. My understanding is that before major events, the order of deviation increases drastically. It supposedly predicted the 11 September 2001 attacks on the United States and the earthquake on 26 December 2004. Of course, it didn't display a variation on other key dates such as the recent earthquake in Turkey. Nonetheless, as a believer in things unknown, I think there are bonds that we do not fully understand connecting things. Perhaps more research is required to achieve a fuller understanding. After all, Matter/Energy is estimated to make up only five percent of what's in the universe.
One of the latest things to hit the headlines is the "Live 8" concert. Everyone's been tripping over themselves in an attempt to promote this concert. Some have called it "The Greatest Thing to Happen in the History of the World." Others have more prosaically described it as "the Greatest Concert Ever." In any case, those responsible are engaging in a hearty bout of self-congratulation. Some have called for the Nobel Committee to award a Nobel Prize to Live 8 organiser Bob Geldorf. Given the quality of recipients nowadays, it wouldn't be at all surprising if St. Bob received the honours.
Of course, one is made to wonder exactly what "Live 8" accomplished. The original concert was designed to raise money for famine victims in Ethiopia. Live Aid was rather successful, though some spoil-sports believe that most of the Live Aid money never got where it was supposed to.
Live 8, on the other hand, was designed to "raise awareness" of poverty in Africa. No specific programmes other than conning the G-8 leaders into giving more money in foreign aid to Africa. The main news is that a great number of old-hat performers from the sixties put aside their immense personal feuds and joined up with the next generation of humanity's saviours to tell the Elite Eight of the world to spend more of other people's money. Not their own, of course. It would be a disservice, because only by participating in their dissolute life-styles can they renew their energies to fight the tides of global poverty with the funds of others. Besides, it does us no service to question our superiors.
Regardless, I think the difference between "Live Aid" and "Live 8" is in how charity is handled. "Live Aid" represents the classical model of charity- taking money volunteered by citizens for a worthy cause. "Live 8" on the other hand represents the new charity. Rather than appealing to individuals to volunteer their own money, the charity lobbies for funding from leaders that wield the coercive power of the state. Thus, everyone becomes an unwitting benefactor of their cause, and there's nothing they can do about it.
Even so, the final decision lies with the political elite, not our the dear soft-hearted minstrels. Political elites make decisions based on their own interests, and rightly so. I'd be rather nervous if intellectual giants such as Bono and Green Day dictated national policy. In any case, their efforts will come to nothing if the national leaders refuse to follow their programme. In the end, national interest rather than star-studded lineup will dictate the aid programmes.
So then, what is the point of "Live 8"? All indications seem to be that the proportion of those favouring a large increase in aid are about the same. There seems to be a growing cynicism about the efficacy of foreign aid as we see how the money we send is being spent.
Why must we then endure the moralistic pretensions of men like Geldorf and other veterans of the British Invasion as if they are so many latter-day Chekhovs? Simple- they view themselves as a morally superior class of being with the responsibility to be the moral minders of mere peons such as myself. They must steer us from our wayward path while shooting smack into both of their eyeballs.
Will we ever see the day where Africa can stand on its own? Possibly, but then we might have to find other poor unfortunates to assuage our consciences.
Why do we feel so guilty? Well, that's another post, and I've no answer to give. Regardless, I think that Live 8 and its ilk represent man's tendency to prefer meaningless gestures to true acts of charity.
In the mean-time, visit Professor Massa, who has an interesting post on Operation Rhine and the Bismarck, with Hitler "getting all sad" and Mecha-Stalin making a guest appearance.
Another addictive thing is Princetons's Global Consciousness Project. It uses a series of random event generators located around the world. Each generator or "egg" produces random numbers. The squared and normalised deviation from the expected means of each generator is calculated and displayed. There's a helpful display with sounds that allows one to hear the level of deviation. In the last several minutes, I've heard a few "pings" and many more examples of the popping sort of noise that signify a significant deviation of a sort. The sounds are ordered by the magnitude of the deviation. My understanding is that before major events, the order of deviation increases drastically. It supposedly predicted the 11 September 2001 attacks on the United States and the earthquake on 26 December 2004. Of course, it didn't display a variation on other key dates such as the recent earthquake in Turkey. Nonetheless, as a believer in things unknown, I think there are bonds that we do not fully understand connecting things. Perhaps more research is required to achieve a fuller understanding. After all, Matter/Energy is estimated to make up only five percent of what's in the universe.
One of the latest things to hit the headlines is the "Live 8" concert. Everyone's been tripping over themselves in an attempt to promote this concert. Some have called it "The Greatest Thing to Happen in the History of the World." Others have more prosaically described it as "the Greatest Concert Ever." In any case, those responsible are engaging in a hearty bout of self-congratulation. Some have called for the Nobel Committee to award a Nobel Prize to Live 8 organiser Bob Geldorf. Given the quality of recipients nowadays, it wouldn't be at all surprising if St. Bob received the honours.
Of course, one is made to wonder exactly what "Live 8" accomplished. The original concert was designed to raise money for famine victims in Ethiopia. Live Aid was rather successful, though some spoil-sports believe that most of the Live Aid money never got where it was supposed to.
Live 8, on the other hand, was designed to "raise awareness" of poverty in Africa. No specific programmes other than conning the G-8 leaders into giving more money in foreign aid to Africa. The main news is that a great number of old-hat performers from the sixties put aside their immense personal feuds and joined up with the next generation of humanity's saviours to tell the Elite Eight of the world to spend more of other people's money. Not their own, of course. It would be a disservice, because only by participating in their dissolute life-styles can they renew their energies to fight the tides of global poverty with the funds of others. Besides, it does us no service to question our superiors.
Regardless, I think the difference between "Live Aid" and "Live 8" is in how charity is handled. "Live Aid" represents the classical model of charity- taking money volunteered by citizens for a worthy cause. "Live 8" on the other hand represents the new charity. Rather than appealing to individuals to volunteer their own money, the charity lobbies for funding from leaders that wield the coercive power of the state. Thus, everyone becomes an unwitting benefactor of their cause, and there's nothing they can do about it.
Even so, the final decision lies with the political elite, not our the dear soft-hearted minstrels. Political elites make decisions based on their own interests, and rightly so. I'd be rather nervous if intellectual giants such as Bono and Green Day dictated national policy. In any case, their efforts will come to nothing if the national leaders refuse to follow their programme. In the end, national interest rather than star-studded lineup will dictate the aid programmes.
So then, what is the point of "Live 8"? All indications seem to be that the proportion of those favouring a large increase in aid are about the same. There seems to be a growing cynicism about the efficacy of foreign aid as we see how the money we send is being spent.
Why must we then endure the moralistic pretensions of men like Geldorf and other veterans of the British Invasion as if they are so many latter-day Chekhovs? Simple- they view themselves as a morally superior class of being with the responsibility to be the moral minders of mere peons such as myself. They must steer us from our wayward path while shooting smack into both of their eyeballs.
Will we ever see the day where Africa can stand on its own? Possibly, but then we might have to find other poor unfortunates to assuage our consciences.
Why do we feel so guilty? Well, that's another post, and I've no answer to give. Regardless, I think that Live 8 and its ilk represent man's tendency to prefer meaningless gestures to true acts of charity.
In the mean-time, visit Professor Massa, who has an interesting post on Operation Rhine and the Bismarck, with Hitler "getting all sad" and Mecha-Stalin making a guest appearance.
posted by The Admiral at 7:21 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home