Women in History

AiS this past year

Finals are halfway done, schools out in less than a week, and summer is fast approaching. As I look back on this crazy class I've come to realize that the "correct" way of learning isn't always the right way to learn. From the moment we got "The Death of Mr. Bolos" assignment I thought I was doomed. I'm not the kind of person who usually enjoys discussions or loose curriculums. So I automatically thought that I would get nothing out of this class and would not learn a thing. How wrong I was. This class has taught me that sometimes the facts your reading are not the only things out there. You have to look beyond whats on the page and focus on things such as, why are we reading about this, who wrote this, how much space is dedicated to this, and so on. Also, throughout this past year I have made so many connections from my everyday life to topics we have talked about in AIS. Although I'm not very good at blogging what I've seen, they are definitely circulating in my mind. I'm positive that I will continue to look for those connectors long after our last day of class. But I think the most important thing to take out of this class was the fact that I had to break out of my little comfortable shell. It's intimidating walking into a classroom with 40 other people who all have their different opinions and methods of thinking. At least in my case, raising my hand was an accomplishment on its own. Yet, I like to think my participation has improved over the past year and I will continue to reach my hand out a little further every day from now on. I guess all I have to say is thanks Mr. Bolos and Mr. O'Connor. It's been a fun and exciting year. 

Yo check it...

So I found this on the front page of cnn today:

http://www.cnn.com/2008/HEALTH/conditions/05/07miraculous.memory/index.html

For more information check out my other two blogs on this.

So Junior Theme is still going and its never ending. However, I've finished one part of the research criteria which is ann interview. Over e-mail, I had the opportunity to ask John Perkins, Confessions of an Economic Hit Man, a few questions about the U.S. government's foreign aid policy. Some of his answers to my questions were really surprising. You could tell how passionate he was and how much he cares about our country and future generations. Here are a couple of the questions I asked: (bold is Mr. Perkins)



The United States claims that one of the reasons for giving foreign aid is to combat terrorism. Do you think that giving money to countries like Colombia, Pakistan, and Iraq really achieves this goal? Why?

No, it encourages terrorism which only exists on a significant scale because people are impoverished, exploited and desperate. Violence begets violence. The money ought to go toward helping the poor get better lives. That's the way to combat terrorism.

Why is there such a difference between foreign spending in the Middle East while underdeveloped countries in Africa desperately need money? Isn't one of the goals of foreign aid to reduce poverty?

Unfortunately foreign aid is about exploiting and helping the multinationals, not reducing poverty. People like you and the rest of your generation will suffer terribly from this, as it creates an unstable, unbalanced and desperate world. You and I must work to change this terrible situation.


I'm really excited to incoorperated these and the other questions into my junior theme.

Coincidence..I think not

I was watching 60 minutes today and one of the top headlines was a story about the US and world economy. Basically it was talking about how countries are pouring money into our economy to help major corporations because of our current recession. Countries like China, Kuwait, Abu Dhabi are investing billions of dollars in shares of companies such as Citigroup and other "mega banks".

This, as 60 minutes put it, "has raised troubling questions: are these mostly undemocratic regimes saving Wall Street … or invading it?"

Now doesn't this sound familiar??

If you read my last post you would have noticed that US corporations have been throwing money into underdeveloped countries and getting oil, UN votes, etc from that.

It seems as though the US is afraid they are going to be in the same cruddy boat they built for other countries.

One of the biggest worries for the US is China. China has trillions of dollars to spend and lately have been focusing their attention on the United States. Economist Peter Navarro explained "China’s pattern of behavior: its unfair trade practices, currency manipulation, technology espionage, and a refusal to crack down on counterfeiting." This seems really scary but it's hard to dismiss the fact that this is what the United States has been doing for years.

Coincidence..I think not

Junoir Theme

As Spring Break is sadly coming to a close our class is finally starting Junior Theme. I know that I want to base my topic off the book Confessions of an Economic Hit Man but I don't know how to narrow that down. I think I'm going to do something about corporations and how they are corrupt. I talked to Mr. Bolos and he suggested to forcus on places such as the United Fruit Company or the World Bank. But the problem with that is that I want to talk about the United State's role in all of this. It's kinda sneaky how they cheat countries out of billions of dollars without directly doing anything at all. If you look at previous blog you'll be able to kinda see what I'm talking about.

Economic What?

I've just finished reading John Perkin's book Confessions of an Economic Hit Man and to tell you the truth I'm a little disturbed.

The book "is not fiction. It is the true story of my [Perkin's] life" (xii). Perkins tell the story of his as an economic consultant and what he calls himself as an "economic hit man"

But what exactly is that?

In his own words:

"Economic hit men (EHMs) are highly paid professionals who cheat countries around the globe out of trillions of dollars [...] Their tools include fraudulent financial reports, rigged elections, payoffs, extortion, sex, and murder. They play a game as old as Empire but one that has taken on terrifying dimensions during this time of globalization" (xi).

To sum that up EHMs go to undeveloped countries and get their political and financial leaders to accept huge loans from the United States in order to aid their countries by developing infrastructure such as power plants or roads. However, the loans are so big that the countries are never able to pay them back and instead have to offer the US a form of payment that includes control over United Nations votes, installing military bases, or access to resources like oil.

This small detail of an EHM's job reminded me of some of our class' Reconstruction ideas today. As a way to help the South, the North would give them money so that they could, like what our country is doing today, build infrastructure that was needed. As a way of payment, the South would give the North cotton, tobacco, and whatever else they might have been able to give.

While this seems like a good plan, the results are usually not what they seem. In most countries "Economic Hit Men" invade poverty levels shoot up as well as unemployment and public debt. At the same time, the countries national resources that were available to the people decrease leaving them with very little to survive on.

After looking at this, would that Reconstruction have worked? Would the South fall into great deficits? Could that have been another incentive to rebel? These are all questions that can never be answered but it's a different perspective that even though a plan might seem really good, when acted out the results may exceed all your previous expectations.

If you want to learn more about Confessions of an Economic Hit Man or about John Perkins visit http://www.johnperkins.org/