Unknown thugs have assassinated Parveen Rehman (http://dawn.com/2013/03/14/parveen-rehman-a-fighter-for-the-poor-silenced/ ), probably because she was carefully documenting the corruption involved in development schemes in Karachi.
I have been using her for several years now as an example for my students of how a single person can make a big difference in the life of millions, without being rich or having connections, a medical degree, etc. She saw a need and took it upon herself to help those in need and while, in the process, she joined other organizations, it was always on her own terms. She always pursued her own agenda and avoided the bureaucracy of the NGO movement. She remained media-shy and so also avoided becoming famous, but she made a difference. She was a great role model.
And now the ratfucks killed her. This is why Pakistan can't have anything nice. :(
It's Pakistan. They might have just killed her for being a woman. It's a fucked up place, and social development is racist. Still, you're right.
Quote from: grumbler on March 14, 2013, 09:51:21 AM
I have been using her for several years now as an example for my students of how a single person can make a big difference in the life of millions, without being rich or having connections, a medical degree, etc.
I just hope you add "... as long as that person knows what he/she is doing and lives in a prosperous Western Democracy, otherwise they'll just get killed".
W.E.I.R.D. people are really weird. Used to getting everything easily.
Quote from: Martim Silva on March 14, 2013, 10:41:15 AM
Quote from: grumbler on March 14, 2013, 09:51:21 AM
I have been using her for several years now as an example for my students of how a single person can make a big difference in the life of millions, without being rich or having connections, a medical degree, etc.
I just hope you add "... as long as that person knows what he/she is doing and lives in a prosperous Western Democracy, otherwise they'll just get killed".
W.E.I.R.D. people are really weird. Used to getting everything easily.
No, they're prosperous Western Democracies because those people did those things there when they were neither prosperous, nor democracies.
Seems to be a norm in shit hole countries. Folks like her, the selfless ones, generally meet a demise like this, and these shit hole countries are the worse for it. IMO it's why they never change and will never takes themselves to the next level.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on March 14, 2013, 10:47:32 AM
No, they're prosperous Western Democracies because those people did those things there when they were neither prosperous, nor democracies.
Wrong on the first point. Western countries have been prosperous(relatively) since they started owning all the trade routes several centuries ago.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on March 14, 2013, 10:57:35 AM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on March 14, 2013, 10:47:32 AM
No, they're prosperous Western Democracies because those people did those things there when they were neither prosperous, nor democracies.
Wrong on the first point. Western countries have been prosperous(relatively) since they started owning all the trade routes several centuries ago.
1 - they didn't suddenly start owning all the trade routs of the world. They found ways to get to India without using the trade routs that were monopolized by other countries. Who somehow managed not to become as relatively prosperous as the westerners manged to when they found a rout that didn't require interaction with the previous owners of all the trade routs.
2 - this doesn't explain how the western countries which did not own the trade routs and the peasants in those western countries that didn't participate in the trade got so rich as well?
Is this akin to a ACW hijack?
Quote from: Martim Silva on March 14, 2013, 10:41:15 AM
I just hope you add "... as long as that person knows what he/she is doing and lives in a prosperous Western Democracy, otherwise they'll just get killed".
Eh even living in a prosperous Western Democracy may not save you, depending just on how much of a difference you are making. If you go around changing the world somebody is not going to like it.
Quote from: Valmy on March 14, 2013, 12:18:31 PM
Quote from: Martim Silva on March 14, 2013, 10:41:15 AM
I just hope you add "... as long as that person knows what he/she is doing and lives in a prosperous Western Democracy, otherwise they'll just get killed".
Eh even living in a prosperous Western Democracy may not save you, depending just on how much of a difference you are making. If you go around changing the world somebody is not going to like it.
The US has had it's share for sure.
Quote from: Martim Silva on March 14, 2013, 10:41:15 AM
W.E.I.R.D. people are really weird. Used to getting everything easily.
:huh:
What was she getting besides the satisfaction of helping people?
Quote from: Martim Silva on March 14, 2013, 10:41:15 AM
I just hope you add "... as long as that person knows what he/she is doing and lives in a prosperous Western Democracy, otherwise they'll just get killed".
I love the smell of racism in the morning. Smells like.... Portugal
QuoteW.E.I.R.D. people are really weird. Used to getting everything easily.
I love the smell of stereotyping in the morning. Smells like.... Portugal.
It is a terrible loss.
My aunt recently went on a trip to Afghanistan to oversee the building of a school for girls in a remote community. I asked her is she was ever concerned about her safety and she said she wasnt very concerned for her own safety but she was concerned for the safety of the people that were taking the real risks - the local people who were doing the actual work.
Quote from: Viking on March 14, 2013, 12:13:47 PM
1 - they didn't suddenly start owning all the trade routs of the world. They found ways to get to India without using the trade routs that were monopolized by other countries. Who somehow managed not to become as relatively prosperous as the westerners manged to when they found a rout that didn't require interaction with the previous owners of all the trade routs.
2 - this doesn't explain how the western countries which did not own the trade routs and the peasants in those western countries that didn't participate in the trade got so rich as well?
1- they didn't start owning the old trade routes, it's just the new ones were better.
2- the age of exploration was a jumping off point for Western prosperity, but agreed that that was not the only factor. However, it still had little to do with democracy.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on March 14, 2013, 01:19:13 PM
1- they didn't start owning the old trade routes, it's just the new ones were better.
You think sailing all the way around Africa was a better route than the caravan route?
Take a look at the comments below the article, looks like the readers of Dawn are well aware that they live in a fucked-up country and have suffered a great loss with this woman's death.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on March 14, 2013, 01:22:01 PM
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on March 14, 2013, 01:19:13 PM
1- they didn't start owning the old trade routes, it's just the new ones were better.
You think sailing all the way around Africa was a better route than the caravan route?
If it wasnt then why were the caravan routes (and the Venetian trade with them) replaced by them?
Quote from: Admiral Yi on March 14, 2013, 01:22:01 PM
You think sailing all the way around Africa was a better route than the caravan route?
Yep. Ships were always better than overland, in tonnage if not speed (though I bet I could sail from Venice to India in a caravel faster than I could make the overland trip).
Quote from: grumbler on March 14, 2013, 09:51:21 AM
Unknown thugs have assassinated Parveen Rehman (http://dawn.com/2013/03/14/parveen-rehman-a-fighter-for-the-poor-silenced/ ), probably because she was carefully documenting the corruption involved in development schemes in Karachi.
I have been using her for several years now as an example for my students of how a single person can make a big difference in the life of millions, without being rich or having connections, a medical degree, etc. She saw a need and took it upon herself to help those in need and while, in the process, she joined other organizations, it was always on her own terms. She always pursued her own agenda and avoided the bureaucracy of the NGO movement. She remained media-shy and so also avoided becoming famous, but she made a difference. She was a great role model.
And now the ratfucks killed her. This is why Pakistan can't have anything nice. :(
You are setting your students up for failure in the real world if you do not alerts them to the possible (usual) negative consequences of "making a difference." Sure, they may not get killed, but your future (American/Western) do-gooders can easily get themselves fired, raped, isolated, or impoverished while they try to "make the world a better place." Or these kids may later do evil in the name of "doing good."
Further, I see 20-somethings believe that they can only "help people" if they go to Africa and take pictures with little black kids to post on Facebook.
Aww shit.
Quote from: Phillip V on March 14, 2013, 03:15:29 PM
Quote from: grumbler on March 14, 2013, 09:51:21 AM
Unknown thugs have assassinated Parveen Rehman (http://dawn.com/2013/03/14/parveen-rehman-a-fighter-for-the-poor-silenced/ ), probably because she was carefully documenting the corruption involved in development schemes in Karachi.
I have been using her for several years now as an example for my students of how a single person can make a big difference in the life of millions, without being rich or having connections, a medical degree, etc. She saw a need and took it upon herself to help those in need and while, in the process, she joined other organizations, it was always on her own terms. She always pursued her own agenda and avoided the bureaucracy of the NGO movement. She remained media-shy and so also avoided becoming famous, but she made a difference. She was a great role model.
And now the ratfucks killed her. This is why Pakistan can't have anything nice. :(
You are setting your students up for failure in the real world if you do not alerts them to the possible (usual) negative consequences of "making a difference." Sure, they may not get killed, but your future (American/Western) do-gooders can easily get themselves fired, raped, isolated, or impoverished while they try to "make the world a better place." Or these kids may later do evil in the name of "doing good."
Further, I see 20-somethings believe that they can only "help people" if they go to Africa and take pictures with little black kids to post on Facebook.
Better for them to do nothing. :)
Quote from: garbon on March 14, 2013, 03:30:30 PM
Quote from: Phillip V on March 14, 2013, 03:15:29 PM
Quote from: grumbler on March 14, 2013, 09:51:21 AM
Unknown thugs have assassinated Parveen Rehman (http://dawn.com/2013/03/14/parveen-rehman-a-fighter-for-the-poor-silenced/ ), probably because she was carefully documenting the corruption involved in development schemes in Karachi.
I have been using her for several years now as an example for my students of how a single person can make a big difference in the life of millions, without being rich or having connections, a medical degree, etc. She saw a need and took it upon herself to help those in need and while, in the process, she joined other organizations, it was always on her own terms. She always pursued her own agenda and avoided the bureaucracy of the NGO movement. She remained media-shy and so also avoided becoming famous, but she made a difference. She was a great role model.
And now the ratfucks killed her. This is why Pakistan can't have anything nice. :(
You are setting your students up for failure in the real world if you do not alerts them to the possible (usual) negative consequences of "making a difference." Sure, they may not get killed, but your future (American/Western) do-gooders can easily get themselves fired, raped, isolated, or impoverished while they try to "make the world a better place." Or these kids may later do evil in the name of "doing good."
Further, I see 20-somethings believe that they can only "help people" if they go to Africa and take pictures with little black kids to post on Facebook.
Better for them to do nothing. :)
False. Do something, but be ready for the possible consequences.
I don't really see how that's a relevant criticism to grumbler. Do you have evidence that he doesn't alert them to the possibilities of negative consequences / the difference between helping and padding one's resume with do-gooder sounding things?
Quote from: Phillip V on March 14, 2013, 03:15:29 PM
You are setting your students up for failure in the real world if you do not alerts them to the possible (usual) negative consequences of "making a difference." Sure, they may not get killed, but your future (American/Western) do-gooders can easily get themselves fired, raped, isolated, or impoverished while they try to "make the world a better place." Or these kids may later do evil in the name of "doing good."
Think that's a bit overboard for 9th grade girls, though? Maybe a little?
QuoteFurther, I see 20-somethings believe that they can only "help people" if they go to Africa and take pictures with little black kids to post on Facebook.
Somebody's gotta give them powered milk mustaches and swat away the flies off their eyelids. Not going to happen by itself.
Right now, the Death Star Grumbler is moving to the Philip system.
Quote from: Ed Anger on March 14, 2013, 07:36:33 PM
Right now, the Death Star Grumbler is moving to the Philip system.
THAT'S NO MOON
Those aren't Pillows!
Quote from: Ed Anger on March 14, 2013, 07:36:33 PM
Right now, the Death Star Grumbler is moving to the Philip system.
Not at all. Phil is stating an honestly-held opinion in a completely non-hostile, non-insulting way. He makes some assumptions, but those are so far from the truth that they don't bother me at all.
Had Phil made these comments in general, and not about my classes, I would agree with him.
Worst Death Star.....ever.
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on March 14, 2013, 01:19:13 PM
Quote from: Viking on March 14, 2013, 12:13:47 PM
1 - they didn't suddenly start owning all the trade routs of the world. They found ways to get to India without using the trade routs that were monopolized by other countries. Who somehow managed not to become as relatively prosperous as the westerners manged to when they found a rout that didn't require interaction with the previous owners of all the trade routs.
2 - this doesn't explain how the western countries which did not own the trade routs and the peasants in those western countries that didn't participate in the trade got so rich as well?
1- they didn't start owning the old trade routes, it's just the new ones were better.
The Roman Rout Med-Suez-Red Sea-India was perfectly good. Preferrable when the government of Egypt was sane. The new rout was preferable because the government in Egypt rarely was sane. That still doesn't answer the question of why the same winds that took the portugese to india and back didn't do the same for indians going to portugal?
Quote from: Peter Wiggin on March 14, 2013, 01:19:13 PM
2- the age of exploration was a jumping off point for Western prosperity, but agreed that that was not the only factor. However, it still had little to do with democracy.
Actually it does have a lot to do with democracy. The big trading companies were in the tradition of autonomous trading cities and corporations which had existed for hundreds of years already since the high middle ages and institutions like the VOC and the City of London were examples of the various stake holders in the society which democracy eventually became a means of conflict resolution for.
The thing is we had better ideas and we had been having better ideas for hundreds of years before the opportunity to fully exploit them arose. The portugese sailors (note how portugal didn't benefit as much from opening and initially attempting to monopolize the route to the east as the dutch and english did when it was open to all) that opened the rout merely removed the barrier that the mongols and the arabs had in place preventing trade to the east.