Friday, October 31, 2008
Yay!
80km in a month - this is great! Next month's challenge is 90km.. My strategy of adding 10km per month is working at the moment, even with being sick and downsizing in September, but I wonder when I'll hit a max. Soon, perhaps?
Thursday, October 30, 2008
Thank you London
As I have given up my job I have taken up going to lectures. London hosts an abundance of free lectures every evening at universities, and so far I've at LSE heard distinguished lecturers speak on the subjects of climate change, the sociology of space and global health. I've decided to review the lectures I go to - to help me remember (which is pretty much a necessity!) and to spread the word.
David King spoke on the interrelated challenges the world faces. Population increases (the world's population is projected to be 9 billion in 2050, a 50% growth from current levels) will put pressure on energy security and supply, water resources, health and education, conflict and terror, biodiversity, food production and factors influencing climate change. These are all closely related, as for example an increased population will need more food, there will be less land to produce it on, which will lead to conflicts over water/land/food resources.
The US's choice to use food produce for bio-fuel has already had a considerable global effect in that there is less food available for global food aid, i.e. people are starving that were previously recipients of maize and other crops. Another example was the unwillingness to accept GM rice that can withstand being submerged for up to 3 weeks ("normal" rice can only survive about 6-7 days). The slower, traditional gene-enhancing selective purification has taken 18 years, whereas he postulated that GM could have yielded the same result in just 2 years.
His main points seem to be that science should be used intelligently to solve the global problems mentioned above through focused scientific development, and that regulation and government leadership is imperative to ensure development and innovation. Finally, "the most important change needed is a mental and ideological change" regarding the acceptance and use of science to ensure human life and comfort. His focus on scientific advances as the crux of development and decisions is perhaps a bit questionable, but nevertheless an interesting and challenging position.
Next lecture was Robert Sampson from Harvard speaking on the sociology of spaces, and how perceptions on places are shaped by the degree to which places are (un-)kept/disordered (which is a fairly common conception) and also by the influence of demographics and poverty levels. These factors determine not just the current situation, but also the future through a perceived understanding of the place. It may sound banal, but the way a place is perceived has a strong influence on the development of that place over long periods of time. (I can't find my notes from this one, so I might plump this review up when I locate my notebook!)
Tonight I intended to go to a lecture on urban spaces and representation of social issues through the media of film. It was however cancelled, and instead a random selection landed on another lecture, this one on global health inequalities. It was really interesting and with a great lecturer, Michael Marmot, who's at the forefront of his field (he lead the WHO Commission on Social Determinants on Health).
He showed through a variety of research that health inequality (or inequity, as he called it) is closely related to the economical situation of the population being examined. Furthermore, the economical situation is (as you would expect) closely linked to educational achievements. He gave the example of how medical advances had over a number of years saved 180.000 lives in the US. Educational improvements in the same period and context held the potential to save 1.4 mio. lives.
He said that it had been suggested that this cause, improving the living conditions and health of the world's poor, would be heard more if it was possible to quantify the benefits of improving the education/economy/health of vulnerable communities. His response was in that situation to say that social justice, fairness and empowerment of people should be enough of a reason. I really respect him for this, and wish that more people would accept and value human decency to a further extent than what is currently the case. Politicians rarely make any decisions that don't (presumably) lead to improvements to the economy. But is it not more important to consider the quality of life of people, and to rethink our current infatuation with the "development-is-good mantra"?
An investment of 100 billion USD could give 1 billion people living in slums running water, cooking facilities and toilet facilities, improving their quality of life immensely and reducing the health and economic inequalities (by freeing up time spent queuing for water, less people sharing toilets, etc). This is generally considered an unrealistic pipe-dream of well-wishing do-gooders. In contrast 900 billion USD has just been pumped into failing banks.
I find it interesting that all three lectures focused on the way we perceive the world as important to the development. Again, it seems banal, but these guys, who are all important in their field, stress it, so I don't feel too stupid repeating it.
Positive change is not impossible, it's simply a question of will. Idealist as I am (and I'm actually a bit proud of my "slightly" naive outlook on life in this regard) I believe that it is possible for all of us to make a difference. Things only stay the same as long as we stay the same.
I intend to keep it up. In particular I hope to maintain the statistics of hitting a free reception after 2 out of 3 lectures.
David King spoke on the interrelated challenges the world faces. Population increases (the world's population is projected to be 9 billion in 2050, a 50% growth from current levels) will put pressure on energy security and supply, water resources, health and education, conflict and terror, biodiversity, food production and factors influencing climate change. These are all closely related, as for example an increased population will need more food, there will be less land to produce it on, which will lead to conflicts over water/land/food resources.
The US's choice to use food produce for bio-fuel has already had a considerable global effect in that there is less food available for global food aid, i.e. people are starving that were previously recipients of maize and other crops. Another example was the unwillingness to accept GM rice that can withstand being submerged for up to 3 weeks ("normal" rice can only survive about 6-7 days). The slower, traditional gene-enhancing selective purification has taken 18 years, whereas he postulated that GM could have yielded the same result in just 2 years.
His main points seem to be that science should be used intelligently to solve the global problems mentioned above through focused scientific development, and that regulation and government leadership is imperative to ensure development and innovation. Finally, "the most important change needed is a mental and ideological change" regarding the acceptance and use of science to ensure human life and comfort. His focus on scientific advances as the crux of development and decisions is perhaps a bit questionable, but nevertheless an interesting and challenging position.
Next lecture was Robert Sampson from Harvard speaking on the sociology of spaces, and how perceptions on places are shaped by the degree to which places are (un-)kept/disordered (which is a fairly common conception) and also by the influence of demographics and poverty levels. These factors determine not just the current situation, but also the future through a perceived understanding of the place. It may sound banal, but the way a place is perceived has a strong influence on the development of that place over long periods of time. (I can't find my notes from this one, so I might plump this review up when I locate my notebook!)
Tonight I intended to go to a lecture on urban spaces and representation of social issues through the media of film. It was however cancelled, and instead a random selection landed on another lecture, this one on global health inequalities. It was really interesting and with a great lecturer, Michael Marmot, who's at the forefront of his field (he lead the WHO Commission on Social Determinants on Health).
He showed through a variety of research that health inequality (or inequity, as he called it) is closely related to the economical situation of the population being examined. Furthermore, the economical situation is (as you would expect) closely linked to educational achievements. He gave the example of how medical advances had over a number of years saved 180.000 lives in the US. Educational improvements in the same period and context held the potential to save 1.4 mio. lives.
He said that it had been suggested that this cause, improving the living conditions and health of the world's poor, would be heard more if it was possible to quantify the benefits of improving the education/economy/health of vulnerable communities. His response was in that situation to say that social justice, fairness and empowerment of people should be enough of a reason. I really respect him for this, and wish that more people would accept and value human decency to a further extent than what is currently the case. Politicians rarely make any decisions that don't (presumably) lead to improvements to the economy. But is it not more important to consider the quality of life of people, and to rethink our current infatuation with the "development-is-good mantra"?
An investment of 100 billion USD could give 1 billion people living in slums running water, cooking facilities and toilet facilities, improving their quality of life immensely and reducing the health and economic inequalities (by freeing up time spent queuing for water, less people sharing toilets, etc). This is generally considered an unrealistic pipe-dream of well-wishing do-gooders. In contrast 900 billion USD has just been pumped into failing banks.
I find it interesting that all three lectures focused on the way we perceive the world as important to the development. Again, it seems banal, but these guys, who are all important in their field, stress it, so I don't feel too stupid repeating it.
Positive change is not impossible, it's simply a question of will. Idealist as I am (and I'm actually a bit proud of my "slightly" naive outlook on life in this regard) I believe that it is possible for all of us to make a difference. Things only stay the same as long as we stay the same.
I intend to keep it up. In particular I hope to maintain the statistics of hitting a free reception after 2 out of 3 lectures.
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
Hibernation
Snow is falling over London town tonight. I didn't believe it at first; it was raining heavily as I worked my way home. Now, large snow flakes drop silently to the ground (bar one, which landed on my hand and was imbibed), and what seems a grey mass obscures my view. Surprising as it is, it somehow seems appropriate, having just turned back the clocks in accordance with the cultural construct of "daylight savings".
It suits my mindset fairly well. I think it's time to pull the covers over my head for some numbing sleep. Perhaps a full 6 months or so?
It suits my mindset fairly well. I think it's time to pull the covers over my head for some numbing sleep. Perhaps a full 6 months or so?
Friday, October 17, 2008
Monday, October 13, 2008
Americans in the world
As a Dane growing up primarily in Denmark who also holds American citizenship I have always been inundated with comments and opinions on "how/what/who Americans are". When I was a kid I had to tell other kids from my class that what they saw in 90210, Saved by the Bell and all those other television series was not directly transferable to understanding who Americans are, what they stand for or how they live.
I grew up in a liberal, tolerant and understanding family. The values my family and I myself hold dear are equality in opportunities, obligations and rights for all, fairness, care for society's vulnerable and above all tolerance of people with different opinions, faith, nationality. Tolerance does not incur acceptance of wild postulates, it means accepting people's right to hold those opinions. If I disagree, however, with someone holding a different opinion to myself, I will question them and probe their claim. Not in a run to discredit them but to understand their position, and to see how they build their case and why it falls out differently to my understanding of the issue. I will most definitely offer my view on the case and hope to develop both parties' understanding. Dialogue is the way to go. And if a common understanding can't be reached, then let's at least agree to disagree on good terms.
You see, I prefer discussion and searching for an understanding of the truth over a claim deemed to be infallible, the ultimate truth. The truth is, I think, an ever evolving instance of understanding aspects of the issue at hand and linking and analysing them.
You cannot generalise a population of 300 million into a single category. Or into two, or five or ten. I understand the simplification processes that we all use to get a handle on the world, but as an American, I can't accept people calling us racists, haters, or egocentrics, the world's police, etc. And ton another note, I can't accept people wanting to kill Danish people for the execution of acts allowed under Danish law within Danish territory, but that is indeed another story.
I certainly do not agree with the policies that have flowed from the White House through the last 8 years, and I have in fact at times been embarrassed to admit that I am American. But does that not go to show you that there are great differences, levels of acceptance and tolerance within a group of people whom a large amount of the world holds little more than contempt for? My whole family is staunchly Democratic (both Danish and American sides), and I do think that one of my cousins is on the way to becoming a politician (he doesn't know this yet, shh!).
What makes this whole situation even more painful is that people making the most ruthless and hurtful claims are often the least educated, or ones that hold knowledge stemming from a singular base. How will you ever understand the values of a Democrat if you don't listen and take in what's being said? How will the Western world ever understand the areas of different ideologies if they don't engage in a real and tolerant conversation with them? The same goes for the apparent deafness created by hatred some Muslims and Muslim countries hold against America and other Christian nations. (Let me just interject the facts that I am not at all religious, and that I have friends of a variety of faiths, including Muslims).
When I was a kid and my classmates made claims to "understanding" that Americans are all airheads like Donna and Kelly from Beverly Hills 90210, or have dysfunctional family relations like in Married with Children, I tried to inform them that not all Americans are like that.
As an adult I feel the need to make this same claim once more, but in a much more serious situation and to a different audience. Not all people are like the low-educated, lowest common denominator, biased, racist and obviously ignorant qualities being exhibited at Republican voter rallies, volunteer meetings and on Republican blogs and websites.
Not all Americans feel the need to re-ignite a racist and religion-based war on "people who are different to us". So, as a an American, allow me to apologise for the racist insinuations made by the would-be-VP in the horrible case that Mr. McCain should win the current election. And bear with people voting for this pair. Most have a low degree of education, very little understanding of the way the world works and think that only their own happiness and success is important.
Although I am American, I have never before voted in an American election, even though I disagree strongly with Mr. Bush and his advisers and one might say that I should have done so before. But now's the time to send a signal to America and to the World that a tolerant, educated and intelligent man who deals in facts instead of playing on emotions of fear should take his rightful place in the White House. The fact that he is fairly young for a politician in his position, a Democrat, and that he is of mixed race just makes my choice even easier.
I grew up in a liberal, tolerant and understanding family. The values my family and I myself hold dear are equality in opportunities, obligations and rights for all, fairness, care for society's vulnerable and above all tolerance of people with different opinions, faith, nationality. Tolerance does not incur acceptance of wild postulates, it means accepting people's right to hold those opinions. If I disagree, however, with someone holding a different opinion to myself, I will question them and probe their claim. Not in a run to discredit them but to understand their position, and to see how they build their case and why it falls out differently to my understanding of the issue. I will most definitely offer my view on the case and hope to develop both parties' understanding. Dialogue is the way to go. And if a common understanding can't be reached, then let's at least agree to disagree on good terms.
You see, I prefer discussion and searching for an understanding of the truth over a claim deemed to be infallible, the ultimate truth. The truth is, I think, an ever evolving instance of understanding aspects of the issue at hand and linking and analysing them.
You cannot generalise a population of 300 million into a single category. Or into two, or five or ten. I understand the simplification processes that we all use to get a handle on the world, but as an American, I can't accept people calling us racists, haters, or egocentrics, the world's police, etc. And ton another note, I can't accept people wanting to kill Danish people for the execution of acts allowed under Danish law within Danish territory, but that is indeed another story.
I certainly do not agree with the policies that have flowed from the White House through the last 8 years, and I have in fact at times been embarrassed to admit that I am American. But does that not go to show you that there are great differences, levels of acceptance and tolerance within a group of people whom a large amount of the world holds little more than contempt for? My whole family is staunchly Democratic (both Danish and American sides), and I do think that one of my cousins is on the way to becoming a politician (he doesn't know this yet, shh!).
What makes this whole situation even more painful is that people making the most ruthless and hurtful claims are often the least educated, or ones that hold knowledge stemming from a singular base. How will you ever understand the values of a Democrat if you don't listen and take in what's being said? How will the Western world ever understand the areas of different ideologies if they don't engage in a real and tolerant conversation with them? The same goes for the apparent deafness created by hatred some Muslims and Muslim countries hold against America and other Christian nations. (Let me just interject the facts that I am not at all religious, and that I have friends of a variety of faiths, including Muslims).
When I was a kid and my classmates made claims to "understanding" that Americans are all airheads like Donna and Kelly from Beverly Hills 90210, or have dysfunctional family relations like in Married with Children, I tried to inform them that not all Americans are like that.
As an adult I feel the need to make this same claim once more, but in a much more serious situation and to a different audience. Not all people are like the low-educated, lowest common denominator, biased, racist and obviously ignorant qualities being exhibited at Republican voter rallies, volunteer meetings and on Republican blogs and websites.
Not all Americans feel the need to re-ignite a racist and religion-based war on "people who are different to us". So, as a an American, allow me to apologise for the racist insinuations made by the would-be-VP in the horrible case that Mr. McCain should win the current election. And bear with people voting for this pair. Most have a low degree of education, very little understanding of the way the world works and think that only their own happiness and success is important.
Although I am American, I have never before voted in an American election, even though I disagree strongly with Mr. Bush and his advisers and one might say that I should have done so before. But now's the time to send a signal to America and to the World that a tolerant, educated and intelligent man who deals in facts instead of playing on emotions of fear should take his rightful place in the White House. The fact that he is fairly young for a politician in his position, a Democrat, and that he is of mixed race just makes my choice even easier.
Tuesday, October 07, 2008
getting all worked up...
and along comes this extremely competent word smith and sums up all that I feel on the subject: Mrs. Palin.
Thursday, October 02, 2008
So. 28.
I apologise in advance for the soggyness of this post; however most of you will know that this is what happens to me when left to my own devices. I turn pensive and grateful. And loud about it.
Long gone are the days were I would collect chestnuts in the large pleasure grounds north of Copenhagen with my childhood friend and build a city of chestnuts and matchsticks and animals to roam the streets.
Gone are the painful teenage years where fitting in and achievement seemed so important and was measured primarily in the number of guys you snogged.
And here I am in a (no longer so foreign) country, jobless (of my own accord, granted), and with a fairly uncertain future. And 28.
It's been a bumpy ride so far, with ups and downs, and there are few things I would have been without. One thing I have learned though, is to appreciate the nearness and caring of valued friends (and family members, who in effect are also friends), even when we are not physically near. I am lucky to have many people in my life who care and worry about me when I'm down, and who celebrate with me when things go well.
And for that I am thankful.
M
Long gone are the days were I would collect chestnuts in the large pleasure grounds north of Copenhagen with my childhood friend and build a city of chestnuts and matchsticks and animals to roam the streets.
Gone are the painful teenage years where fitting in and achievement seemed so important and was measured primarily in the number of guys you snogged.
And here I am in a (no longer so foreign) country, jobless (of my own accord, granted), and with a fairly uncertain future. And 28.
It's been a bumpy ride so far, with ups and downs, and there are few things I would have been without. One thing I have learned though, is to appreciate the nearness and caring of valued friends (and family members, who in effect are also friends), even when we are not physically near. I am lucky to have many people in my life who care and worry about me when I'm down, and who celebrate with me when things go well.
And for that I am thankful.
M
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)