stillhaventfound.org

International Development:

1) Ethics and International Affairs Journal has two articles related to Globalization and Development: 1) Is Globalization Working? 2) Western Policies on Child Labor Abroad.

2) Global Youth Fund has a This I Believe essay project open to all young people (ages 13 to 25). These short essays ought to be about their personal philosophies and the core values and beliefs that guide them day-to-day. They’re especially interested in what the young people have to say about our world’s most critical challenges.

3) Media mogul Rupert Murdoch hopes to go “absolutely carbon neutral” across News Corp’s businesses. Basically, becoming carbon neutral involves reducing greenhouse gas emissions and “offsetting” the rest by investing in projects such as windfarms or forests that reduce carbon dioxide emissions. What can I say? Environmentalism is trendy!

4) Venezuela’s capital Caracas plans to seize golf courses and use the land for homes for the city’s poor. I like that!

5) Inspecting China’s sweatshops.

Politics & Economics:

6) Economic and Political Weekly on how the continued development of the arts and humanities is essential to achieving a wider understanding of social systems, the interlinkages these have with other systems, and the role of the individual embedded in it.

Progressive Christianity:

7) The Huffington Post on Crackpot Christianity in America: Part one, two and three.

8) The Washington Post on E.O. Wilson and his hopes that Christians would care more for God’s creation. And a review of his new book The Creation: An Appeal to Save Life on Earth. Andy Crouch writes a letter to Wilson.

9) I used to be Reformed and Calvinistic in my theological convictions. That was from around 1996 till about 2001 - during my late teens and early twenties. It was lonely then as I knew very few young Singaporeans into Reformed Theology. Now, according to this Christianity Today article, Calvinism seems to be getting more and more popular.

Others:

10) From China to America, driven by love.

In the enlightenment project, words were more important than acts, but that was just a blip in history. Before that, it was “the word made flesh.” In this generation, it’s vital to get back to the principle of John 1: the Word must become flesh and move into our neighbourhood. That’s the best revelation of what God’s love is and who God is. (Steve Stockman)

International Development:

1) World Bank has just released their World Development Report 2007. The title of the report is Development and the Next Generation and focuses on the future of young people (1.3 billion of them between 12 and 24) in the developing world.

2) The UK is withholding £50m it had pledged to the World Bank in protest at conditions it attaches to aid - see here and here. In response to this, Francis Fukuyama comments on Wolfowitz’s “zero-tolerance” attitude towards corruption in developing countries. See also comments from the ODI Blog here.

3) Tim Harford, author of The Undercover Economist, on why conservation laws can kill the animals they’re supposed to protect.

4) Jeffrey Sachs on how encouraging lower fertility rates promotes sustainability.

5) The Economist on doing business in Africa.

Politics & Economics:

6) Why Europe, unlike America, finds it so hard to love Israel.

7) Sabastian Mallaby on attacking inequality through tax reform.

Progressive Christianity:

8) Tyler Williams’ Top 12 Spiritually Significant U2 Songs. See also Caritas on U2’s Most Spiritual Album.

9) Tearfund’s interview with progressive Christian Jim Wallis.

Others:

10) Multiculturalism - the way to go? Some of my very preliminary thoughts on multiculturalism in Canada here.

International Development:

1) Daniel Altman’s Managing Globalization blog recently featured a Q & A with one of the foremost trade economist Jagdish Bhagwati.

2) Stephen Mallaby on Migration and Development.

3) I recall how while attending a meeting in preparation for a Model United Nations Conference, the speaker told us all to buy lots of Tim Tams (Australia’s favorite chocolate biscuit) for the Conference. Why? To be used to bribe other nations to do what we want because that is reality. Here’s proof that bribery occurs frequently in the international political realm and specifically in the United Nations Security Council. Absolutely no prizes to guess which country is the biggest culprit:

On average, a non-permanent member of the council enjoys a 59 percent increase in total aid from the United States…Aid payments sharply increase in the year that a country is elected to the Security Council, remain high throughout the two-year term, and return to their earlier level almost immediately upon completion of the term.

4) Those like me who are interested in a career in International Development may find the following information useful: Working in International Development, Talk on Careers in International Development and Getting into International Development (order book, accompanying website).

5) The New York Times on Wolfowitz Corruption Drive Rattles World Bank.

Progressive Christianity:

6) Kruse Kronicle has just completed a series of blog posts on Theology and Economics which has lasted almost 7 months in total!

7) Walter Russell Mead has an interesting article on evangelicals and US foreign policy in the Foreign Affairs magazine.

8) The father holds to doctrinal certainty. The son:

Even when I speak, some of what I say is opinion and confusion and error. I’m more in a place of learning than I am in a place of certainty.

Together, both star in the story of the Father, Son and Holy Rift.

9) Emerging Church Christian Dan Kimball wonders if the Church’s recent interest in social justice is merely a passing fad. Let’s hope not.

Others:

10) May you be blessed!

There’s been a lot of excitement here as we welcome over 15,000 foreigners to Singapore for this year’s IMF/World Bank meetings from 12 to 20 September. The IMF and World Bank are two of the four most powerful international organizations that deal with development issues - the other two being the United Nations (UN) and the World Trade Organization (WTO). The World Bank job scope is loans for the development of developing countries while the IMF deals with the stabalization of the international monetary system and the world’s currencies.

I’ve decided not to touch on controversies surrounding Singapore’s ban on outdoor protests because, simply put, international issues are infinitely more interesting than local ones =) These meetings aren’t about Singapore, but about the World Bank and the IMF. And if we should be discussing about anything, it’s about them and how their policies have affected the developing countries. And so I’ll share my thoughts about this below, which will also reflect where I am in terms of my views on various development issues:

Let me start by saying that I began getting interested in international development issues in around 2000 or 2001. From 2002 to 2005, I studied in Australia (University of New South Wales) and Canada (University of Toronto) and worked some time in Colombia in South America. I graduated with an Arts degree with majors in both Development Studies and Politics & International Relations. Most of my courses focused on development theory and development economics, which are really about international politics and economics, which are really about many things related to globalization. So all these have been my interest for years.

And very early on in this journey, I adopted a more leftist and radical viewpoint. Within the first few weeks of the start of my university life, I attended a socialist conference. I attended many other meetings and events by the socialist groups there. The anti-globalization movement was more vibrant then than it is now. And back then, I considered myself part of the anti-globalization movement. To me, free trade was close to being evil and those who promoted it only had the interests of the rich in mind. I even wrote some letters to The Straits Times defending the movement. Most of my professors too were very leftist. Some were more moderate, but I don’t recall any of right-wing persuasion. So during these early years of my encounters with development issues, I was firmly rooted in the anti-globalization camp.

However, as I started to delve more and more into the issues, I started to realize that globalization (free trade, foreign direct investment, etc.) has its pros and cons. I started to realize that things weren’t so simple after all. All these issues were more complex than I had thought or than the anti-globalization movement had made it up to be. Indeed, one thing I’ve come to realize in life is that things are seldom simple or straight forward. There are reasons for different viewpoints of an issue and it’s important to understand both sides well before taking a strong position. That’s one thing I learnt in my journey as a Christian and that’s one thing I have come to learn in this journey too.

So where am I now? I would consider myself more moderate right now. I would describe my political persuasion as centre-left. I still hold quite leftist views, though I also understand why others may hold a more right-wing view. I do not simplistically think that those who believe strongly in market forces only do so because it benefits them (the rich). I may not agree with the right-wing view but at least I do understand where they are coming from.

As I’m critical of the right-wing placing too much emphasis on the magic of the market, so I’m critical of many in the left-wing who overreact in the opposite manner by demonizing the market. Another thing I’ve learnt in life: we overreact. Things normally happens like this: Group A starts to underemphasize a particular area. People start to realize this underemphasis and come together to address the problem. They become group B. In reaction to the lack of emphasis by group A in that particular area, group B overreacts and so places too much emphasis on that particular area.

After the Second World War, the Dependency Theory (left-wing) school of thought which emphasized the importance of the role of the state and government reigned. Eventually, inefficiency and corruption became prevalent due to strong government intervention. From the 1970s and especially from the 1980s onwards, the reaction to what was perceived as an over-emphasis on the state and an underemphasis on the markets took place. The right-wing conservative economic ideology (you can call it the Washington Consensus, neoliberalism, market fundamentalism, etc.) started to become more dominant. This wasn’t just a reaction. It was an over-reaction. Whereas before the left-wing thought that a strong state would cure poverty, the right-wing now started to push the idea that unfettered free markets were the way to go.

The anti-globalization movement is a movement against this free market ideology. It has done much good in pointing out the faults of a pervasive free market economy. But alas, I believe it still is a movement that has overreacted - at least the majority in it has overreacted. Seeing hardly any positives in markets is just as bad as seeing hardly any positives in state intervention. Both views hardly do any good for poor countries.

I believe nowadays the consensus (mainstream, at least) is quite clear: both the market and the government have a role to play. It’s not about either the market or the government. It’s both/and. It may be surprising for many in the anti-globalization movement to know that the World Bank nowadays does not hold to an extreme pro-free market view. They do not hold to an extreme Washington Consensus / market fundamentalism / neoliberal economic view. They actually realize that a balance is needed between market and state. It is common to hear people criticizing the World Bank and IMF about their imposition of Structural Adjustment Programs on developing countries and how that has exacerbated poverty. While I have no doubt that all this is true, a lot of this probably has to do more with the past than the present. These two organizations have realized their mistakes. They have learnt from them. Organizations do learn. If they stay stagnant, they die. I think we need to realize too that the World Bank and IMF, while they still have got to reform in a lot of ways, have changed their thinking over the years. For example, in a great paper (totally worth a thorough read through) co-authored by the World Bank’s former President James Wolfensohn, he acknowledges that

The development community has also adopted more pragmatic means of achieving development, moving toward country specificity and flexible analysis and away from the twin dogmas of pervasive state control (1960s-1970s) and unregulated markets (1980s-early 1990s).

…With the dogmas of the state-market debate came an insistence on “monocausal” explanations of development. This led to one-size-fits-all policy approaches, as the general models left little room for actual conditions. When mainstream development thinking discarded one model in favor of another, the result was too often major changes in policy recommendations without room for nuance. The most recent (though certainly not most simplistic) manifestation of this was the Washington Consensus at the beginning of the 1990s. Its list of preconditions for growth encapsulated many neoliberal precepts in what was often interpreted as a neat recipe for development. Perhaps unfairly, that Consensus came to stand for a package of measures aimed largely at getting the government out of the economy - and it was applied with excessive uniformity across countries.

Common sense tells us that no one approach will work everywhere, since the binding constraints to development are unlikley to be the same across countries.

To be sure, saying one believes in one thing is very different from actually practicing it. However, I doubt what Wolfensohn wrote was merely for political correctness. I do believe that the World Bank as an organization endorses the above call to 1) recognize the complementarity of states and markets and 2) recognize that the country context is crucial when going from general theory to specific policy. But one ought also to note that it takes time for theory to get to the ground. Many countries may still be suffering from policies World Bank imposed years back when it still leaned strongly towards a market-fundamentalism view of economics.

What all these shows is that the World Bank is not ignorant of its failures. It is not ignorant of what critics of Structural Adjustment and neoliberalism say. It is aware and it has responded by an evolution of its policies. This is not to say that the World Bank and the IMF have got it all right now or that there is no need for protests and criticisms when their policies fail. However, it is to say that the World Bank isn’t filled with people who are out to do evil. The economists there aren’t out to create more poverty, but to eradicate it. If they have failed, it’s just that: they have failed. Yes, if they have failed, they ought to be criticized. Indeed, it’s a big thing to fail in what they do as many lives are at stake. And yes, they do need to be more careful in future. But there is simply no need to demonize the World Bank as if they are out to make the rich richer and the poor poorer. I’m sure the World Bank economists have good hearts and genuinely desire to see poverty eradicated. It is also good to remember that the World Bank isn’t one person. The institution isn’t autocratically run and I’m sure not all economists there agree with each other.

All in all, I think while there is no doubt that the World Bank and IMF had put its weight behind the neoliberal economic ideology of unfettered free markets for many years, things have been changing and they have been learning from past mistakes.

However, I do think that such changes could not have taken place without the pressures by civil society groups throughout the world. The anti-globalization movement has thus had a good effect upon these institutions. Without such pressures, the institutions may not have learnt or changed and people may not have realized the detrimental effects neoliberal economic policies have had in the developing countries. So full credit to the protests of the movement. Full credit to civil society organizations. My hope, however, is that protesters start to wise up and be more familiar with the issues. Protesters should not just make a lot of noise; they should also make the right kind of noise. They should criticize the right thing and fight for the right kind of change. For the sake of the poor and the integrity of the movement, it behooves them to be more acute in their analysis and understanding of the issues. They need to be moved less by rhetoric and guided more by accurate reasoning.

—–

I think it is very important for anti-globalization activists and the public to know that there are nuances in the views of those within the anti-globalization movement. There are more radical voices as well as more moderate ones within the movement. Different NGOs disagree with each other on issues like trade and the future of International Organizations like the IMF, World Bank and the WTO.

A more moderate voice in the movement is that of Oxfam, one of the most well-known International NGOs dedicated to development. Their Make Trade Fair campaign calls for fairer trade rules in the world (i.e. trade justice) that would benefit the developing countries. Their position on globalization and trade is reflected in their famous Rigged Rules and Double Standards report. However, many other well-known International NGOs disagree with Oxfam’s position on trade.

At the more radical end are voices calling for localization and thus limited (not merely fair) trade. Such groups are against too much trade because trading harms the environment and prevents participatory democracy (as people are affected by decisions made far away). Most of these groups would also advocate the abolition of the three International Organizations mentioned above, rather than merely reforming them.

Therefore, the anti-globalization movement contains varied positions on important issues. Not many people realize this. In fact, my guess is that most people who protest are not that familiar with the issues. Most are probably also not sure what they believe in. No doubt, they probably know what they are against. However, it’s more important to know what they are for, what the solutions are. More people in the movement thus ought to think through the issues a bit more.

—–

To end, I want to state a challenge to the people of the World Bank, the IMF and the Anti-Globalization Movement. My challenge is:

Live your lifestyle consistent with your beliefs.

By this I mean that every decision we make in our lives ought to be as consistent as possible with our claims to want to eradicate poverty. If not, we’re being hypocritical.

We need to make every decision in life count and every decision in life reflect our heart’s desire. An economist in the World Bank or IMF who earns big bucks (and they normally do) and spends his money lavishly - without much consideration to giving to aid the poor - is living a lifestyle inconsistent to his beliefs. So is the development consultant who accepts up to US$1,000 a day pay while helping those who earn less than US$1 a day. And also the anti-globalization activist who travels extensively to attend this and that protest or this or that event without due consideration to the sufferings of the earth (that result from his travel) and the fact that his money could be more wisely spent in helping the poor.

I’m much less upset when rich World Bank/IMF economists spend unnecessarily. It’s really the people who fight passionately for the poor and yet do not think twice about how their personal lifestyle decisions contradict their belief in helping the poor that greatly disappointment me.

Yes, we’re not perfect and all of us are hypocrites. I’ll be the first to admit this. I hope we all don’t shy away from admitting our hypocrisy. That’s the first step to challenging ourselves to live a more consistent lifestyle. Such would only draw more people to our cause (nobody is going to be won over by the activist who lives a hypocritical lifestyle) and the poor and the environment will ultimately benefit from our decision to live it out.

In anticipation of the IMF/World Bank 2006 annual meetings that’s going to be held in Singapore from 12 to 20 September, this week’s links are dedicated to International Development issues.

International Development:

1) In the midst of all the hoo-ha (legitimate, I might add) of recent years about the important role of the private sector in development (e.g. CK Prahalad’s Fortune at the Bottom of the Pyramid) and of combining the business and the social (e.g. Microcredit, Social Entrepreneurship), it’s easy to forget that for many of the poor in the world - perhaps even for most and for the poorest of the poor - much of their needs cannot be met through the market. This is the reason for the continuing need for aid and - as this Oxfam report In the Public Interest elucidates - strong public/state systems. As one of the report’s authors said, “Greater involvement of the private sector and NGOs can only work if public services are good.”

2) Speaking of Prahalad’s Fortune at the Bottom of the Pyramid, for those who don’t know, this book has been quite very influential in changing the way people think about helping the poor. In his book, Prahalad argues for treating the poor as consumers and making money off them while helping them at the same time. Check out these articles (here and here) by him as well as an interview with him. Aneel Karnani has recently produced a critical response to Prahalad’s ideas which can be found here. In turn, Prahalad has responded here. For other comments on the exchanges, see those by Atanu Dey and Al Hammond. I’m sure more debate will follow which can only be good.

3) The Economic Freedom of the World: 2006 Annual Report has just been released. Singapore came in number two after Hong Kong. Prominent development economist William Easterly, author of the recently highly acclaimed book, The White Man’s Burden: Why the West’s Efforts to Aid the Rest Have Done So Much Ill and So Little Good, is one of the co-authors. It’s good to note that this report was jointly published by two right-wing, economically conservative, libertarian think-tanks. Unsuprisingly, one of the main theses of this report is that economic freedom has a greater impact than foreign aid in eliminating poverty and it even goes so far as proposing cautiously that foreign aid may hinder growth. World Bank’s Doing Business 2007 report has also just been released, with Singapore occupying first place as the best country to do business in. As compared to the Economic Freedom of the World report, the Doing Business report measures more micro issues like business regulations and laws. Both of these reports would be of interest to those who believe that the private sector and entrepreneurship have an important role to play in the economic development of developing (and developed) countries.

4) Still on the topic of aid and economic freedom, Ruth Lea claims that Aid can be an obstacle to making poverty history. Paolo de Renzio responds by asking us to beware of aid skeptics.

5) Joseph Stiglitz recently released his newest book Making Globalization Work. Somewhat critical reviews available from the New York Times, the Economist and the Scotsman. Stiglitz also recently wrote a syndicated column on globalization.

6) Still on the topic on globalization, Branko Milanovic has a two-part series on Why Globalization is in Trouble - part 1 & part 2 - while Daniel Altman has an article on globalization and inequality.

7) For those who want to read more about some of the less radical concerns and criticisms people have of the World Bank, check out the book Rescuing the World Bank which is another publication recently released, this time by the credible Center for Global Development (CGD). Selected essays can be viewed here. Do also check out The Hardest Job in the World: Five Crucial Tasks for the New President of the World Bank.

8) Wal-Mart, everyone’s favorite target, on a mission to eliminate poverty and save the environment? Meanwhile, check out this new website FLOW,which is all about liberating the entrepreneurial spirit for good, which is really what Wal-Mart can be all about.

9) Timberland: a model of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR)? See here and here.

10) Another World Is Possible? One that places less emphasis on individualism and market forces and more on solidarity and co-operation? An example perhaps being Hugo Chávez’s Bolivarian Revolution in Venezuela.

I’ve never had any problems with Christ, but Christians were always a big problem for me.

And if I could, I found them always to be completely disinterested culturally, politically. I found it very hard to relax with them. They seem strange to me. I’m sure I’m strange to them.

And yet through all of us this, in school I met some people who knew the Scriptures. It was quite a moment there when people got very interested in the early church and the possibilities of imitating the early church.

But Christians can be very judgemental and in particularly the way people look, the way they carry on. They tend to judge people by surface problems - sexual immorality. These things are preoccupations historically of the church, whereas corporate greed or things like that would be never mentioned.

I’m pretty sure that the Universe operates by the laws of Karma essentially or physically laws too. And what you put out comes back against you. Then enters the story of grace, which really is the story of Christ, which turns this view of the Universe upside down. And it’s completely counter-intuitive. It’s very, very hard for human beings to grasp grace. We can actually grasp atonement, revenge, fairness…all of this we can grasp. But we don’t grasp grace very well. I’m much more interested in grace because I’m really depending on it.

…I grew up very suspicious of Christians but determined to know more about the life of Christ.

…I’ve always thought smack in the middle of a contradiction is a good place to be. Duality is the mark of a lot of great art and it’s one of things missing from a lot of Christian art. If there’s no tension…you have this great tradition of worship and music which is awe-inspiring in the Christian Churches, but music that expresses a personal journey and an attempt to wrestle truth to the ground, we don’t see much of that going on in Christianity. There is a fear of duality.

So one half you have this part which is going, “Yah I want this music to do something positive in this very negative world.” On the other hand, you want to own up to your earthly desires and your confusions that everybody has. The key that great art has in common with Christianity is “Know the truth and the truth will set you free.” I’ve held on to that very tightly. That’s how I start my day as a writer. If I start a lie, and a lie can be being the person that you’d like to be, rather than the person you are.

A lot of gospel music to me is lies because there are people pretending that everything is great. And it doesn’t ring true to other people. Now I understand it’s a step of faith. But I don’t relate to that. I relate more to the blues. The blues is more like the sounds of David. You know, “Where are you when I needed You?”

…And I asked the question I’m sure so many people asked, which is “How could this be in a world of plenty, people could be led starved to death.” And of course as you grow old you think, “Well, look, you know that’s just the way of the world.” Well, yes it is. That is the way of the world. But it is not the way the world has to be. And if that is the way of the world, we have to overthrow the way of the world.

…What else are you going to do with this thing called celebrity? I mean it’s ridiculous. It positively upends God’s order of things. Why is a film star or rock star or sports star…why would they be more important than a nurse or a fireman or a mother. I mean, it’s absolutely ridiculous. But hey, it’s currency. And I’ve decided I’m going to spend mine.

People often say to me very kind things like “You have a heart for the world’s poor” or these kinds of things like I’m Mother Teresa. I am not Mother Teresa. I am a rock and roll star living the life. But I have a head for the world’s poor. I’m strategic…God has made me an opportunist.

…The Church has historically always been behind the curve. It’s amazing to me. In Civil Rights and you know, fighting against the racism in the 60s and the 50s and the South in the United States and Aparthaid in Africa. I mean you think, “Why is the Church like this?” And I think it’s because the Church is afraid of politics. And I understand why because a lot of very dangerous people have tried to use the Church for political ends. And I understand why the Church would be a little, “Just hold on a second.” We’re not talking about politics in any partisan way here. We’re working with the left and the right. That’s what the ONE campaign is about. The second part of it is less political perhaps. Which is, the Church has been very judgemental about the AIDS virus in particular. You know, there is a sense that , “Well, these people have been living sexually irresponsible lives and it’s very expensive to come to their assistance.” And of course that is not acceptable. It’s certainly not acceptable by God

…It’s annoying. It’s rather like someone in a car crash and the driver has fallen out of the vehicle….And you think, “Oh my God, that’s a drunk driver.” Do you drive on? What do you do? Well, maybe there are other points of view that think, “Well actually you had it coming. I’m off home for my supper.” But the Scriptures won’t let you do that. Christ won’t let you do that. Christ won’t let the Church walk away from the AIDS emergency because it’s difficult, expensive and a moral hazard. That’s not acceptable. And I just had to communicate that. That this was the essence of Scriptures. It was the leprosy of our age. And Christ had been so eloquent about leprosy.

I think it was only 6% of Evangelicals felt it incumbant upon them to respond to the AIDS virus… I was very angry. I was very angry. I was angry with the Church. I never liked the Church particularly. I never felt comfortable in churches. And now I knew why. And then something dreadful happened. The Church started to wake up, started to get organized, started to get really powerful in this area and they ruined it for me.

…It’s really a definition of who is your neighbor. Love thy neighbor is not advice. It’s a command. And who is your neighbor in the global village? Can an accident of longitude and lattitude really decide whether you live or whether you die. In a globalized world can you say, “Because that’s happening over there, it’s not really my concern.” Well, you can’t if you’re a Christian. You cannot. You know there’s 2,003 verses of Scripture pertaining to the poor. I mean second only to personal redemption and salvation, the main thrust of the Scriptures is to meet Christ through working with the poor and disadvantaged. You see it in Isaiah 58, Matthew 25

…Jesus speaks of judgement once. Only once. And it’s that moment, “When the day of judgement comes, I will separate you to the left and to the right. The sheep and the goats.” And you’re thinking, “What is it? Who will it be?” The gays will go there or the guys with long hair will go here or the anti-Semites will go there? No. He says I’ll put you left and right and He goes, “To the ones who clothed me while I was naked, who fed me while I was hungry, who visited me while I was alone, I was in prison. These are my people.” And they say, “Oh, but that’s not you, Lord.” And He goes, “As much as you do it unto the least of these, you do it unto me.” It’s about judgement. That parable isn’t a soft warm fuzzy feeling. “The least of these”. That’s serious. That defines you or not as part of the kingdom or not. Your service to the poor, to the imprisoned. This is serious stuff. And it makes huge demands of us. And really what it’s talking about is equality. And that equality can be annoying. You know, because it’s like, “Ok, we accept that you are Jews, but not the blacks or not the women.” And now we say,”Ok, if you Jewish or women or Catholic, you’re equal. But not if you’re over there.” Now if you’re over there and equal before God’s eyes, we will have to serve you. Oh, how annoying. Unacceptable.

…A friend of man is a very wise man. He said to me, “Stop asking God to bless what you’re doing, Bono. Find out what God is doing, because it’s already blessed.”

…[On his favorite phrase in the Lord’s Prayer] “Thy kingdom come on earth as it is in heaven” because a lot of people are happy with pie in the sky when they die. I don’t think that is what is our purpose. Our purpose is to bring heaven to earth in micro as well as the macro. In every detail of our lives, we should be trying to bring heaven to earth.

…This group has convinced me of the importance of the Church in creating the moral as well as the practical infrastructure to deal with some of the biggest problems facing the world. People say there is no clinics where they can get AIDS drugs to people. Well I say open the doors of the Churches and make them clinics.

…We musn’t describe this stuff as a burden, as a duty. It’s really an opportunity and an adventure.

International Development:

1) There’s something really wrong when First World diplomats and aid workers who go to the Third World to help the countries avoid interacting with the local culture and realities, prefering instead to lead a life of privilege among the elite and away from the poor.

2) Africa is hip, hot and trendy! So says the New York Times. Ethan Zuckerman, co-founder of Global Voices Online, provides his input here.

3) Ok, so I admit that not all computer games are just a waste of time. Here’s an article on serious computer games. PeaceMaker (YouTube here) is a video game simulation of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict whose purpose is to promote peace. Foodforce is a UN World Food Programme (WFP) game about distributing food in Niger that has been downloaded over 4 million times! A Force More Powerful is a game that promotes nonviolence. In 3rd World Farmer, one faces the realities of managing an African farm. And finally, Sim Sweatshop seeks to increase awareness of the appalling conditions many workers in the developing world face every day.

4) I hardly have time to watch the TV or catch a movie. There’s too much junk out there and thus I don’t want to waste my time. However, I’m always looking out for meaningful and thought-provoking movies or TV programs - especially as they relate to development issues or current affairs. One recent movie cum documentary that would be of interest to those passionate about development and the environment would of course be Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth. Another one that’s recently been in the limelight is The Girl in the Café (check out this blog) which won 3 Emmys recently - including one for the best Made for TV Movie. It’s about… Well, I haven’t seen either movie, but hope to do so soon!

5) How about this: McDonald’s has a Corporate Social Responsibility blog.

Politics & Economics:

6) Immanuel Wallerstein on Five Reasons Why Great Military Powers Lose Wars.

7) Books & Culture on How container ships enabled an economic revolution.

8) People hate Americans because of their freedoms? Or because of their unjust foreign policy?

Progressive Christianity:

9) A new Christian video game uses violence and murder to spread the love of Christ. Hmmm…

Others:

10) Why stereotyping and being prejudiced probably ain’t so bad after all.