Saturday, April 2

Gold Dinar for Islamic Countries

The Dinar has long since has had exotic and evocative images, starting from piles of dinar’s in the pots in Alladin’s cave to the very fact that its gold. Anyway, one Malaysian state has gone and launched the Gold Dinar and Silver Dirham as its currency, apparently in a bid to be more Arab than the Arabs. Besides the fact that the actual Arabs think these wannabe Arabs are clowns and look down upon them, but when you wrap these things in religion, then everything is all right, its a one large happy family and and and. So what are the chances that the OIC suddenly goes into a collective huddle and decides that all countries will suddenly adopt the Dinar and Dirham. Well, ummm, no, not according to this research.

I quote the research highlights:

► This study suggests the lack of broad linkages within the entire OIC. ► Given OIC’s diversity, the idea of a Gold Dinar for the entire OIC may be stillborn. ► There exists scope among some smaller clusters for potential monetary union. ► Bahrain/ Saudi, Qatar/ Kuwait of the GCC states show symmetrical supply shocks. ► Bahrain, Qatar, Saudi, UAE have same response of GDP and prices to supply shocks.

Give it some more time, guys, then it could potentially work. But the areas concerned are just too different. Still, the OIC has its work cut out for it if it wants to evolve this monetary system. Although why on earth would anybody take anything that the OIC says seriously is beyond me, that organisation is about as useful as a bladeless knife with no handle.

Friday, April 1

Teaching History to Children

Here’s a very interesting article on how to teach history to children. I quote one piece specifically:

By about the age of eight or 10, children should have a simple, logical and non-cynical narrative of their country to carry around for the rest of their lives as a net to catch knowledge in. Non-cynical, because children cannot build such a net if teachers are running down the credibility of what they impart. That is the problem with teaching young people: there is a line on one side of which a teacher’s duty is to promote credulity and on the other side of which it is to promote scepticism. Errors are inevitable. But they will be self-correcting, to some extent. By age 16, students will have as much cynicism and “distance” as any educator could wish.

History is important for citizens, it provides the kids with the framework of what the society was and is like, what are its expectations and what it expects the future citizens to be like. But in particular, I liked the idea of history being a net to catch knowledge in.

But looking at the teaching of history to my two kids, it is seriously crappy. If you ask them what being British means, they have no clue. I got more out of me being taught in India about being Indian rather than my kids are getting taught about being British. Which is a shame.

One has to have pride in their country. It gives a sense of belonging. Nothing wrong in having pride in your country. You have to have pride and feel good about yourself, no? Otherwise what kind of kids are we raising? And that emerges from a clear understanding of the good things that your country has done, a clear explanation of the bad things we did and how we improved upon it. Much to do, much to do, I am afraid

Thursday, March 31

Thou Shalt Be Overweight: Religious Involvement Correlated to Obesity

First the story:

A new study from Northwestern University's Feinberg School of Medicine says religiousness and overeating are linked: Study participants who reported attending church weekly, or more frequently, were almost twice as likely to be obese than those who went rarely or never. Researchers aren't entirely sure why praying correlates with BMI, but say it may have to do with the church's potluck eating culture, the near extinction of church-sponsored baseball and basketball leagues, an emphasis on marriage, which can lead to weight gain, and using food as a reward for good deeds. The research, which was presented at a recent American Heart Association conference, tested a group of 2,433 people when they were age 20-32 for cardiovascular disease risk factors like diabetes, hypertension and smoking. They repeated the same tests over the next 25 years and noticed the church link when they were analyzing the data.

Second, what the hell? is it because overeating makes you be with the Lord sooner?

Managing and Engaging Rising China: India's Evolving Posture

A good long article on the latest phase of Indo China engagement. I quote bits of the intro and conclusion:

India's relations with China are uneasy in the best of times, but over the past few years the spectrum of differences between the world's two largest countries has steadily widened, with the relationship becoming more complex as a result. The Chinese ambassador in New Delhi acknowledged this state of affairs during an interview just before Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao visited India in December 2010 for damage control, characterizing relations as being in a “fragile” state that needed care.1 Little visible progress, however, has been made in resolving a series of issues which have become politically unpredictable and made India's diplomatic relations with China tenuous. Thus, Wen's statement during the visit that “we are partners not competitors,”2 made said more in the spirit of hope than describing the current reality. There has indeed been some cooperation in economic ties and in areas of global significance such as climate change. But the list of issues pending resolution which bedevil the relationship has been growing. The constructive partnership envisaged in 2005, when the two countries announced the India-China Strategic and Cooperative Partnership for Peace and Prosperity,3 remains unfulfilled and has proven difficult to attain.

India's relationship with China is at a crossroads. It can go in several directions depending on how the two deal with each other's concerns and their ability to reach a reasonable settlement on some of the core sovereignty and security issues. Both need a stable, sensitive, and reasonably cooperative relationship as their status and power in the world changes. The rest of Asia also wants to see peace and stability maintained in this major relationship of the 21st century, even as the two states compete in trade and diplomacy. The world's interest lies in the simultaneous growth of India and China, from which it can reap vast gains. China, in particular, needs to come to terms with the constraints on its diplomacy being imposed by its nationalist territorial discourse, irredentism, and a preponderant realpolitik approach, especially in its diplomacy toward India. It needs to work to untangle the complexities that have emerged over the past five years, while helping to forge a stronger understanding of the interests which link the two countries.

For the past two decades, India has invested in expanding its ties with China with the hope that, in the process, long-term disputes will give way to a mature and mutually beneficial relationship. India's recent emphasis on reciprocity and mutual interest in its China relations and its growing sensitivity to China's assertiveness indicate that it must also prepare for an alternative scenario in which constructive engagement may not work in managing a rising and assertive China.

Constructive engagement may not work in managing a rising and assertive China.

The power of Asia's two largest countries is undergoing gradual but fundamental change. Without a strong structure of cooperation and understanding in place, unsettled disputes between China and India could get out of hand and seriously destabilize Asia. The emerging Asia faces many opportunities for peaceful development. The uncertainties are not as acute and unpredictable as the uncertainties and conflicts Europe faced when it was rising through the 19th and 20th centuries. The gains from growing cross-border trade and investment, the industrial and market networks across the region, and the involvement of international and regional companies in widening regional networks act as brakes against war. Nonetheless, the challenges to peace and stability are serious enough and need to be addressed by the two states in a constructive manner if they are not to repeat the mistakes of the European powers.

Sunday, March 27

Teaching History to Children

Here’s a very interesting article on how to teach history to children. I quote one piece specifically:

By about the age of eight or 10, children should have a simple, logical and non-cynical narrative of their country to carry around for the rest of their lives as a net to catch knowledge in. Non-cynical, because children cannot build such a net if teachers are running down the credibility of what they impart. That is the problem with teaching young people: there is a line on one side of which a teacher’s duty is to promote credulity and on the other side of which it is to promote scepticism. Errors are inevitable. But they will be self-correcting, to some extent. By age 16, students will have as much cynicism and “distance” as any educator could wish.

History is important for citizens, it provides the kids with the framework of what the society was and is like, what are its expectations and what it expects the future citizens to be like. But in particular, I liked the idea of history being a net to catch knowledge in.

But looking at the teaching of history to my two kids, it is seriously crappy. If you ask them what being British means, they have no clue. I got more out of me being taught in India about being Indian rather than my kids are getting taught about being British. Which is a shame.

One has to have pride in their country. It gives a sense of belonging. Nothing wrong in having pride in your country. You have to have pride and feel good about yourself, no? Otherwise what kind of kids are we raising? And that emerges from a clear understanding of the good things that your country has done, a clear explanation of the bad things we did and how we improved upon it. Much to do, much to do, I am afraid