Marketing, ecommerce, and contemporary blog!

The ongoing persistent social inequalities within the United States and its current yet failed policy of global democracy we see in places in Iraq and Afghanistan will yield more terrorist attacks that happened five years ago. It may also be ones that will have far more casualties and devastation since the 9-11 attacks. The recent Al Queda attacks such as comparative places such as Madrid and London reflects certain realities that must be dealt with when it comes to global politics. The one is that much of the political shifts that we see have been towards the left. It does not mean that left leaning politics is the same as it used to be but it translate into the mere notion that much right wing and neo conservative thinking does not hold much validity in the course of world politics. On the other hand which is equally if not more important is that much of the conventions of the element of free market and capitalism is now defunct and does not hold much use or value when it comes to the debate to relieve the ills of world poverty and creating better economic driven societies. The fundamental goods that constitutes the make up of an economical situation no longer has any valid presence but exist only as memories of what one studies as the relational value of the strong or weak economy. One can take several factors that comes to mind about this. They are labor, education and as mention the previous article the mobility of goods. As stated the mobility of goods since the Post-Soviet Union break up amonts to nothing and that its causation stems from an ideologicals society whose breakdown arrived from the ever increasing presence of the mobility of goods needed in a 'free society.' However a 'free society' only means the antithesis and the reality of a society that existed as long as it did based on idealogy. Yet there is never any claim that there always existed an absolute ideological base society that permeated the USSR for it was one that was a mixture of mainting its historical foundation there and keeping up with the so called of the powers of the state for which its must be the reasons for it own being while it lasted. Certain periods characterized the structure of the USSR such as its being post-totalitarian, the era of glasnost and perestroika and the element of dissident freedoms, herierarchy and libertine ways as one come across in the writing of Vaclev Havel. What became of this so called unwavering mobility in the Post-Soviet Union era became known as globalization, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and a new form and entity though had always been around but because the change and the impact of its essential nature having undergone an unusual and radical transformation-- Al Queda. Lets take the other two factors and try tying things up as far as why Al Queda became as it did and why there is always remains terrorist threat as a result. Labor and education. One of the more interesting things that in the past up until maybe a few years ago is that in order a strong economy to thrive and grow existed a state as a British scholar is perhaps famous remarking is the control of violence. Such control as this scholar pointed out rested in the form of the nation state. There are many facets that formulate a stable and yet powerful nation-state such as Great Britain in the nineteenth century and the US in the twentieth centure were compulsory education and mass conscription. This embodied having large populations and taking advantage of migrant and immigrant cultures. Added to this were the need to build large public schools, large standing armies, a vast military arsenal(for the Cold War was a product of such as opposed to the the War on terrorism) and an industrial base constituting massive factories and plants. Education in the US gain stronger ground after the second WW with the institution of the GI Bill and later on with affirmative action. It can be say that American immigration problems is a result of Eisenhower immigrant policies such as Operation Wetback. The score was settled more precisely with the nation state as being the sole provider of peace and world hegemony when it comes to global stability. The problem arrived when the neo-imperialism became an expensive problem and the evolving of new states and what became to known as proxy wars characterized by certain presidential doctrines from Carter to Reagan(one might add that of Bush Sr as well). As the world became less of a nation state world and one of a global forum. Thus soon became the inherent demise of the nation-state era, modernity as understood, and industrialism. The 1980s may be seen as a last ditched era to hold on to this but the problem with this is that post-nation-state, post modern or post modernity and post industrial age or era did not last that long. For the world economy to survive there must be outsourcing and policies to combat such outsourcing know as maintaining 'comparative advantage.' Then came along something that existed just only in the military and in the universities computers based on p2p or peer to peer technology. As this grew and took place in the 1990s something happend the economy in the US and around the world changed. It was not the same as it was before and never it could go back to its halcyon forms. The way consumers, people, information and goods exchange changed dramatically. This led to the talk of a the 'digital divide' an advance or electronically based economy which will continue to run the economy and maintain certain persistent social inequalities. No one didn't feel it at the time for something else happend the fall of the post -industrial age. As the world becomes more dependent or interdependent on computers and as that technologies increases ever more at such a rapid rate there becomes an unbelievable demand for the raw materials that makes up the components of computers such as sand and the processing of it into microchips. As things heats sort of like an information war or cooking pressure takes place, the mobility of goods and people increases in many dimensions. No longer the nation state can maintain any world peace or assume as the likely arbitrator of solving any type of global conflict. That has to be taken on forms that no one would ever thought of come to the fore front. Thus if one sees the problems in the world as being inimical they have to be taken on that one's own hand. Here steps in Al Queda. What intelligence report about Al Queada, the hijackers of 9-11, were far from what I understood as being something akin to social pariahs or isolated individuals. Some of them were very well educated and had good families. The attacks of the imploding economy of the nation state and a failed values of the ones that existed became a strong reason why Al Queda were somewhat successful in what they did and why any future attacks will no doubt likely occur and become greater than it once was before. As the economy based on p2p increases and the world we live in now is far from a post-industrial age certain energies and element of time continues take place. It took place with the devastation with the September 11, 2001 attack and will the more than likely take place with another greater attack. The reason being that the US is historically a nation with persistent social inequalites and its aim for universal democracy only which strong violence and small periods of peace can tame. If Al Queda won't lay the next great egg to remind us where we are heading there will always be someone or something or some group to let us not forget what this country is heading towards and what this country is. A hellhole, a prison society with no walls and a trash can.
ecommercemarketing.blogspot.com

As the election year closes ahead with the chance as some put it a defeat of the Republicans in the Congress another issue for some reason has overlapped about what will might see in the outcomes of the polls in the following week and that is the view many politicians, scholars and pundits how in the past five years they think the world has changed but more importantly how those deadly attacks changed their views of the world. Since all that is given are nothing more than opinions some of the solutions that you see sounds as though nothing ever happened since those attacks. We already know with increase terrorist activities that people's rights might be compromised or in the other hand given the nature of the attackers that there are bound to be splinter groups willing to attack the US. So the problem we like to see and even know is what has really changed since September 11, 2001. The fail military and foriegn policy of the US presence mainly in Iraq and the other parts of the world may cut it but such failure or trying to understand those failures doesn't come to grip with certain ongoing reality. For starters, those attacks were based on a declining hold of the nation-state model that has been the the very axis of how and why states behave in such a way. To put it more specifically, previous wars up until the Persian Gulf War were based on what the perfect model of the nation state was. Some would imagine that the empires of monarchs were the best or the ones rooted in democracy should take precedent and yet still those of corrupt dictators telling people with absolute power what is best for them. The decline of the Soviet Union gave way ironically to any form of empires or the so-called hegemonic state. It also downplayed the role in which even though justified on a historical basis that a collection of states sharing in the same belief the value of human rights, democracy, world peace and the free flow of trade can always be achieved either through international diplomacy or military means. What this all adds up to is the value and nature of warring communities that is fast shaping and from what anyone knows in which the world will plunge into. The collapse of the USSR didn't stop war or even contain with the promise of post-Cold War peace or that the US can make the world safe from certain 'evils.' On the contrary the level playing field of war might be greater and far catastrophic than what people think. Throughout history and especially that of the last century the cycle of energy and motion of what shape society and how it relieves enmity between competing factors has grown far more intense than it ever did. It has outpace the conception of what people think of and believe of living in a world or human society. Think of how people get around from one part of the globe to another. They usually do that through flying on airplanes. Think also how goods are transported, mainly the same way including shipping and land vehicles. The problem with creating a correlation from goods and human numbers is that we always don't know what those goods are and who are always traveling from one part of the world for what purpose. Even though one can assume that all goods that are flowing from country to country or continent or continent for some weird notion are able to satisfy the world population or keeping it from growing to a world depression, the satisfaction of those goods cannot explain who and how the major players(assuming that we possibleknow who they are at any given time) might benefit from them. This might seems a bit pedantic but it is not always so. If the world changes more intensely from a historical perspective those goods, numbers and forms of transportation becomes very obscure and even distorted which explains that what kept the former Soviet Union alive at the time it did becomes also another playing field of why it fell and other entities has taken its place. It doesn't explain why not another 'empire' of the sort takes it place which can also be explained that those mobile forces makes statist empires very obsolete or very well exhaust them. However it does not affect the appetites of the major players or the battlefield in which wars are fought and won. The war that engulfed 3 to 4 million lives from 1998-2002 was one that can characterized as a world war because given geographical area it was fought over(the same size of Western Europe) and the amount of intervening countries(unusually a lot for a conflict in Africa) the idea of a world dictator emerging in that world sounds silly and hopeless niave but it doesn't--to make sense of the none believers or those who continues to believe otherwise--that the area becomes a dictatorial playground for state of the art military and scientific technologies and campaigns. Therefore it isn't hard to believe the way things happened until the two airlines crashed and collapsed the the Twin Towers nearly five years ago. So not only the idea and what constitutes war has changed but the conventions that will shape society has dynamically is continuing undergoing a major transformation.