L - World Press Freedom Day 2013

   This post is a summary of one article published at http://www.un.org/, on May 3, 2013, with the title above. And a report published at http://en.rsf.org/press-freedom-index, on may 2013 with the title of: " 2013 World Press Freedom Index: Dashed Hopes After Spring."

   United Nations Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon said, " a fundamental right on its own, freedom of expression also provides the conditions for protecting and promoting all other human rights. But its exercise does not happen automatically, it requires a safe environment for dialogue, where all can speak freely and openly, without fear or reprisal."

    The world press freedom day was proclaimed by the U.N. general assembly in December 1993. Since then, May 3, the anniversary of the declaration of Windhoek is celebrated worldwide. It is an opportunity to:

_ Celebrate the fundamental principles of press freedom.

_ Assess the state of press freedom throughout the world.

_ Defend the media from attacks on their independence.

_ Pay tribute to journalists who have lost their lives in the line of duty.

     There is a growing awareness that ensuring freedom of expression must also necessarily extend to safety online, and securing a free and open internet as the precondition for it. The digitalization of the media reinforces the global trend of freelancing by further expanding journalism beyond the ranks of employees and media institutions. Included in the supply of news today are citizens reporters and individuals bloggers, it is in society`s interests that they receive the same protection as professional journalists. Digitalization also means that more and more information is transmitted and stored online. Journalists have had their computer confiscated and hacking. Journalists increasingly need to know how to protect data.

   On average, in past years, only about one-in-ten cases of crimes against journalists and social media producers has led to a conviction. This level of impunity is not just bad in principle in terms of flouting the rule of law, in terms of which every state has a duty to protect its citizens. On even greater concern, because of the visibility involved, impunity for attacks on journalists in particular sends a signal to the wider public to keep quiet about corruption and human rights violations. The result is a self-censorship across a society and an erosion of public faith in the judicial system. In this way, impunity also feeds a vicious cycle.

   This year`s press freedom index is a better reflection of the attitudes  of governments towards media freedom in the medium or long term. The same three countries that headed the index last year hold the top positions again.( Finland, Netherlands and Norway ). At the other end of the index, the same three countries as ever, occupy the last three places in the index. ( Turkmenistan, North Korea and Eritrea ).

     In the Americas, just as the emergence of major protest movements ( and ensuring crackdowns ) had a big impact on the rankings of certain countries in 2011, so a decline in the protests has logically had an impact a year later. Chile, for example, rose 20 places to 60th in the index after the previous year`s student protests. For similar reasons, the U.S. rose 15 places to 32nd, recovering a ranking more appropriate to the "country of the First Amendment." The clearest new trends are to be seen in the south. Brazil fell again, this time 9 places to 108th, after falling 41 places in 2011. Its media landscape is also badly distorted. The regional media are exposed to attacks, physical violence against their personnel, and there is also court censorship orders, which also target the blogosphere. Despite a high level of physical violence against journalists, Peru rose 10 places to 105th, now topping Brazil, itself one place above Bolivia 109th, where several media were the targets of spectacular arson or dynamite attacks and both national and local polarization are having an impact.                                                                                                            

Government, Geography, and Growth

    This post is a summary of a book review essay, published at http://www.foreignaffairs.com, on October 2012. And was written by Jeffrey D. Sachs, professor at Columbia University and adviser to U.N. Author of "The Price of Civilization"(2011). The title is above.

        According to the economist Daron Acemoglu and the political scientist James Robinson, economic development hinges on a single factor: a country`s political institutions, more specifically, as they explain in their new book, "Why Nations Fail," it depend on the existence of "inclusive" political institutions, defined as pluralistic systems that protect individual rights.

        The broad hypothesis of "Why Nations Fail" is that government that protect property rights and represent their people preside over economic development. Their causal logic runs something like this: economic development depend on new inventions, and inventions need to be researched, developed, and widely distributed. Those activities happen only when inventors can expect to reap the economic benefits of their work. The profit motive also diffusion. Western readers will take comfort in the idea that democracy and prosperity go hand in hand and that authoritarian countries are bound to either democratize or run out of economic steam.

        This tale sounds good, but it is simplistic. Although domestic politics can encourage or impede economic growth, so can many other factors, such as geopolitics, technological discoveries, and natural resources, to name a few. Acemoglu and Robinson`s simple narrative contains a number of conceptual shortcomings. For one, the authors incorrectly assume that authoritarian elites are hostile to economic progress. In fact, dictators have sometimes acted as agents of economic reforms, often because international threats forced their hands. After Napoleon defeated Prussia in 1806, Prussia`s authoritarian rulers embarked on administrative and economic reforms in an effort to strengthen the state. The same impulse drove reforms behind Japan`s Meiji restoration in the late nineteenth century, and South Korea`s industrialization in the 1960s. China did not become the fastest-growing economy in history after 1980 thanks to domestic invention, it did so because it rapidly adopted technology that were created elsewhere. It has aimed, with great skill, to integrate its local production into global tech systems in the process. 

       The overarching effect of these analytic shortcomings is that when Acemoglu and Robinson purport to explain why nations fail to grow, they act like doctors trying to confront many illnesses. Whether a sick body or an underperforming economy, failure can arise for any number of reasons. Bad governance is indeed devastating, but so, too are geopolitical threats, adverse geography, debt crises, and cultural barriers.

       As for the future of development, Acemoglu and Robinson`s narrow focus on political institutions offers insufficient predictive help. Consider how ineffectual the theory would have been at foretelling the global winners and losers in economic development from 1980 to 2010. The authors tell a story many want to hear: that western democracy pays off not only politically but also economically, yet, economic life neither so straighforward nor so fair. Authoritarian regimes sometimes achieve rapid growth, and democracies sometimes languish. Author`s story sometimes is right: politics matters, and bad governance can kill development. Yet the key to understanding development is to remain open to the future complexity of the global processes of innovation and difusion and the myriad pathways through which politics, geography, economics, and culture can shape the flows of technology around the world.

     Hinge - depend entirely on

     Preside over - be in charge of a situation.

     Steam - force of movement

     Overarching - dealing with everything

     Languish - grow weak or feeble

     Myriad - very great number

Privacy Rights Activism in Latin America

      This post is a summary of an article published at https://www.eff.org/ in September 24,2012. And was written by Katitza Rodriguez and Renata Avila. The title is above.

          Throughout Latin America, new surveillance practices threaten to erode individuals` privacy, yet there is limited public awareness about the civil liberties implications of these rapid changes. Some countries are pursuing cybercrime policies that seek to increase law enforcement power without strong legal safeguards.

          For Latin America privacy advocates, all of this makes for an uphill battle. There are few NGOs working in the region specifically on privacy and surveillance, and the lack of it, is further complicated by a pervasive societal attitude that security trumps privacy. Despite the inherent difficulties, the privacy movement has been working tirelessly to shed light on overarching surveillance practice and to preserve civil liberties. Social media and blogs have made a huge impact in activism work in several countries.

         In Brazil, "Movimento Mega"(http://movimentomega.org.br/)is a grassroot movement responding to threats to internet rights. Recently fought an invasive cybercrime bill by advocating a civil rights framework for the internet that include safeguards for free expression and privacy. The Brazilian Institute of Consumer Protection (http://www.idec.org.br/)has also launched a similar campaign. Another important Brazilian NGO is Institute NUPEF, (http://nupef.org.br/)educates policymakers and civil society on internet rights, including privacy.

         There are also longstanding  human  rights  NGOs  who are  beginning to focus more in internet policy ( including privacy ). For instance, "Asosiación pro derechos humanos" has challenged illegal government surveillance in Peru during the presidency of Alberto Fujimori. Fujimori has been jailed for human rights violations after being tried for violating the secrecy of communication and other human rights abuses during his presidency. It marked the first time a elected former president was prosecuted at home for serious human rights violations, including the violation of privacy.

        Privacy activism in Latin America is on the rise, and several countries still lack strong civil society groups working in this area. Human rights NGOs in the region tend to prioritize traditional causes such as health, education, citizen security and ongoing battles surrounding forced disappearances and torture. While privately funded organizations work passionately on privacy related topics, privacy is not their sole priority.

       Unpaid volunteers are driving much of this activism, and the organizations struggle with limited resources. Despite these challenges and limited coverage of their efforts in the mainstream media, support for their campaigns has continued to grow.

      Trump - beat by saying something is better.

      Shed - accidentlly drop or spill.

      Secrecy - ability to keep a secret, privacy,seclusion.

      Grassroot - most basic level of an activity or organization.

XLIX - Political Engagement: Getting Informed and Involved

        This post is a summary of two reports. The first with the title of, "Civil engagement and particularized trust." Published at http://www.bsos.umd.edu/. Written by Eric M. Uslaner, University of Maryland and Richard S. Conley, University of Florida. The second with the title above, published at http://www.luc.edu/.

         More than 150 years ago, Alexis de Tocqueville (1805-1859, French political thinker, best known for his book, "Democracy in America", that today is considered an early work of political science), found that Americans always came together to make their lives better. More recently Robert Putnam (American political science and profesor of public policy at Harvard University) has extolled the benefits of joining, he said, "participation in civic organization inculcates skills of cooperation as well as a sense of shared responsibility for collective endeavors." Putnam and other exponents of social capital argue that communities and nations with high levels of civic engagement are more trusting, happier and prosperous. Social capital, as Putnam sees it, is an interlocking and mutually reinforcing set of values, norms of behavior, civic engagement and cooperative behavior that constitute a virtuous circle. Together these components lead people to cooperate with each other and to produce a better society. The values and social connections underlying social capital help build bridges across diverse groups. When people interact with each other, they can work together to solve common problems. To gain the benefits of social capital, people do not have to work hard in civic associations. All sorts of social connections will do the job, including informal social ties and apolitical groups. We argue that this argument misses an important dynamic of social interaction. The social capital is important because it leads to cooperation among strangers. The confidence in others is an essential part of social capital leading to widespread cooperation.

         Democracy thrives when individuals are engaged in matters and participate in public life. The building blocks of daily life; schools, workplaces, houses of worship, businesses, roads, places of entertainment and government buildings are maintained by fellow citizens. It is important to appreciate where these resources come from and how they are sustained. Democracy means rule of many. It invites members of the community to participate in the decisions that affect them. A healthy democracy allows for debate and invite everyone into the process of reaching conclusions about policies and investments. Democracy gives people a voice in public matters, if they take advantage of it. Citizens committed to democracy are prompted to uphold the values that benefits the common good. They are motivated by principles of fairness and they believe in equal opportunity for all. Democracy is dependent upon the willingness of citizens to get involved and informed about public matters.

        How can people participate in public life?

 - Reading the newspapers and voting.

 - Volunteering in projects.

 - Sending emails to politicians, organizations and media.

 - Participating in demonstrations or local council meetings.

 - Visiting government offices.

 - Talking about public policies.

 - Donating ( money, time, advice, etc )

XLVIII - Referendums: Arguments For and Against.

       This post is a summary of two articles. The first one, with the title above published at http://www.publications.parliament.uk/. The other with the title," National initiative for democracy ". Published at http://www.vote.org/.
         

       Witnesses referred to arguments that referendums enhanced democracy by giving voters greater opportunities for involvement. Referendums could be seen as "pure democracy" a symbolic reminder that democratic finds its legitimacy in the consent of the people. Referendums offer the potential to reshape the political division between citizens and legislators. The government acknowledge the arguments that referendums could ensure that the public are consulted on significant issues.

       Peter Browning argued that, "at a time when public trust in this system is probably lower than ever, referendums could help restore faith in British democracy." The government stated that it could be argued that referendums could provide the government of the day with a mandate to undertake change, or it could legitimate a significant change. Witnesses saw the value of referendums as a safeguard against controversial decisions being taken, other opined that referendums enhanced public engagement with the political process, as they understand that their participation has real policy implications. Other recommend referendums for the debate that they could engender to promote political knowledge. It allow the people and political class to focus on an issue thus enabling citizens to learn deeply about the topic. A number of witnesses states that referendums could complement representative democracy. In Switzerland, it is used not to replace but to supplement representative democracy. In Australia, New Zealand, and Ireland, referendums and representative democracy successfully coexist.

        A principal objection to referendums was that they may be used as a tatical device by the government. Steve Richards political commentator of "The independent", said that "a leader does not dare hold a referendum unless they are convinced that they are going to win it". Some argue that referendums tend to be dominated by media, political parties, employer and employee associations, rather than ordinary citizens. Others negative feature are that referendums fail to deal with complex issue and that they are costly.

       Led by former U.S. senator Mike Gravel, national initiatives ( referendums ) empower us, similar to ballot initiatives in 24 states. It gives us a "plan B" whenever representatives do not represent us (or debt, domestic spying, and bailouts for criminals represent you?). Direct democracy like this is both, a strategy and a goal of the movements everywhere, like Occupy Wall Street and others. This vote is not poll. It is legal.

      Why ballot initiatives ( referendums )?

    Put the people in the drivers seat. Responsibility brings more responsible people: more people vote in states with referendums. In Switzerland, often national referendums since 1891 result in the highest newspaper readership in the world.

     National referendum break the monopoly congress has on national legislative power.
    One of the U.S. founders, James Madison said, " the people is in fact, the fountain of all power, and by resorting to them, all dificulties got over."

      

XLVII - Human Rights Activists Taught Online Tactics

       This post is a summary of two articles, the first one with the title above, published at http://www.bbc.co.uk/, on November,5th 2012 and written by Sean Coughlan. The other has the title " The joys of online activism," published at http://www.guardian.co.uk/, on January,18 2011, and written by Jonathan Glennie.

     An international training institute to teach online tactics for human rights campaigners is being set up in the Italian city of Florence. This training centre, set up by the European wing of the U.S. based Robert Kennedy Center for Justice and Human Rights, wants to combine academic study with practical skills, with an appropriate simbolism is based in a former prison building, donated by the city of Florence. Frederico Moro, the director says,"the intention is to use technology to promote democracy, human rights, and justice." He adds, "campaigners might have passion and belief in their struggle, but they also need practical knowledge." These students will be blog writers and campaigners. Recruiting will be complicated by the need to protect the privacy of people who might be put at risk even by applying. Mr. Moro says that the institute will not be partisan in supporting either right-or-left wing causes, but will act in defence of individuals facing violations of their human rights whether it is political oppression or violence.

      But what does a digital activist need to know?  There are some websites that allow for anonymous internet access. There are also means of circumventing censor`s attempts at blocking websites. There are also "work around" to make online video and phone calls more secure from surveillance. A NGO from NY called Witness is working with YouTube on a dedicated human rights channel, it is already hosting hundreds of videos from a wide number of countries. Rana Husseini, a Jordanian activist and journalist who uncovered stories about killings, says the internet has given voice to public opinion. She also concerns that digital tech can be used as tool for surveillance and control as well as openness and investigation.

      There are many worrying trends in this modern era of globalisation, most notably the ease with which companies can operate, apparently outside any democratic parameters set by international community, but I never been part of the "anti-globalisation" movements because there are so many positive aspects to globalisation. The most important are those related to the incredible improvements in communication that the world has witnessed in the last two decades, largely down to the internet. If governments are falling to keep the excesses of capital and corruption in check, these new global communities could be an important part of the answer. There are many examples today of when people in one part of the world realise that suffering and injustice thousands of miles away is of concern to them. Nowhere is this more evident than in an internet campaigning phenomenon that in the space of four years has announced a new vision for what kind of world community is possible: Avaaz. I have clicked in this website in support of campaigns ranging from banning cluster to boycott Ivory Coast until Laurent Gbagbo steps down. Some have criticised this kind of "clicktivism", claiming that this is a shallow form of protest compared with the interlocked arms of marchers of the last century. But Avaaz gives its 6.5 million members a chance to say we care as well. Last year, the Brazilian congress voted on a measure to bar politicians convicted of corruption from standing for office, most thought the measure would fail, as so many of those in congress were themselves corrupt ( estimated at 25% ) but in the largest internet campaign in Brazilian history, 2 million people signed a petition supporting the legislation. It passed. What is attractive about engaging in this way is that it combines surprising perspectives ( not the same old gripes ) with a stark understanding of the reality of politics. This is not about giving, is about participating. While charity fatigue is a well-known phenomenon, I have yet to come across solidarity fatigue.

      I have signed  four petitions at Avaaz: 1) Defend the human rights in the Americas.   2) Congressmen to reject the PEC 37/2011, limiting the power of public ministry.   3) Save the Guarani-Kaiowá tribe.    4) The end of secret vote in the congress. Today Avaaz has more than 21 million members being Brazilians its greatest  community with more than 3,6 million. Besides Avaaz, there is also Change.org

      Thanks to the good job done by the police, my motorbike has returned to me. 

The Social and Personal Benefits of Learning

       This post is a summary of a report published at http://www.learningbenefits.net/ on October 2008. The title is above.

      The Centre for Research on the Wider Benefits of Learning ( WBL ) was set up in 1999 at the Institute of Education in the University of London. But its researches represent a variety of disciplines, including sociology, psychology and economics. 

      Unsurprisingly, the research found that more highly qualified individuals generally earn more and make a bigger financial contribution to society. Education can affect virtually every aspect of our lives, as the report have shown. However, its wider benefits, are often indirect and subtle. This centre has developed new ways of thinking about these issues. The wider benefits of learning are realised through two major channels: Personal characteristics and skills, and also social interactions.

       It has been estimated, for example, that a student who completes high school in the U.S. contributes with approximately of $139,000 in taxes revenue, $40,500 in public health cost savings, $26,000 saved in law-enforcement and prison costs, and $3,000 in welfare savings. But the benefits of education go far beyond this equation. Educated individuals are more likely, on average, to interact more positively in social networks, from voluntary work to local government. Education is therefore socially, as well as economically, productive, as the following finding demostrate.

      People with better qualifications are more likely to have healthy lifestyles, to be fitter, and such health advantages can be transferred to the next generation at the earliest age. One more year of education has been shown to increase life expectancy in the U.S. by as much as 1.7 years. An important U.S. study estimated that a 10% point rise in the rate of high school graduation would cut the murder rate by between 14% and 27%. A 1% point increase in the graduation rate would lead to a reduction in crime of between 34,000 and 68,000 offences per year. A WBL study published in 2007 showed that children from disadvantages backgrounds who are given a good grounding in numeracy in infant school are more likely to succeed in English as well as Maths at age 11. Learning can promote societal cohesion and strengthen citizenship. Such a system can extend and deepen social networks and support the development of not only shared norms, but the values of tolerance, understanding and respect.

     Other research has shown that the more students are engaged in their education, the more willing they are to play a positive role in public life. If we use the idea of human capital to include skills valued in the labor market, then identity capital can be used to describe the skills valuable in negotiating other aspects of life that matter to individuals, families, communities and nations.

     The development outcomes of an educational experience may emerge during learning or soon afterwards. The wider benefits, on the other hand, emerge from a complex and lengthier processes that occur over the lifecourse, this is a dynamic process. Education is, or should be, about more than developing skills that have economic value. It is also one of the primary means of promoting individual well-being and a key 'civilising' influence on communities and nations. Our research confirms that education has wide-ranging and sizeable effects that extend well beyond the labor market. While these wider outcomes may also have knock-on economic impacts ( through reducing costs of health care and crime, for example ), it is important to remember that they enhance the quality of life, not only for individuals, but also for society.

      Another key message is that the chances of children of an educational success are significantly increased if they have parents who support their learning. Developing skills of parents as the "first teacher" will therefore do a great deal to reduce inequalities.