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.

Just saying that it is just another a natural disaster is not always a good way to dismiss no matter how devastating a hurricane, an earthquake or a tsunami that happens to strike somewhere else on this planet. Many arguements has been used to play down the devastating effects of the more recent natural catastrophes that has occured far away and here in the US. Among them were accounts of them that happened in the recent past and that they are what they are mother's nature disturbing effect upon us all or just another part and process of nature correcting itself. Too little has been argued that the these recent tragedies-- and here I am referring to the deadly hurricanes that happened to strike the Southern part of the US, the recent earthquake in Pakistan and the tsunamis that occured in the Far East Asia last December--have in part been caused by humanity impact on the environment whereas left very little any room for the legitimacy of ecological politics at all. To understand the potential devastating and perhaps apocalyptical nature of these natural causes one has to try to look at it from a stronger political perspective and the better way is to start of with the recent tragedy of the World Trade Center. My arguement for the longest time has been that the World Trade Center attacks is a constant surge and release of energy that has been building up and that radical fundamentalism is no more than a de novo and more likley become an ancestral things that has managed to shake things. My arguement goes as forth. With the increasing use and development of computers mainly in the form information is shaped and distributed the more and greater the the pressure it will have to place on the environment and civilization for the matter sort of like a post-institutional effect whereas modern and post modern instutions must adapt by either being replaced by virtual ones or by de novo ones. The internet itself is pretty interesting because despite what everyone believes the internet itself or the way information and commerce is occuring there is one in which going through a post-institutional effect stronger than the ancient ones it is argueably supplanting. The internet more than anything requires a lot of energy and a massive economy for its being, yet like anything for it to survive or for certain corrections to take place the internet more or less must give out to other forms and that would probably be a world like you see in those science fiction movies such as 'Minory Report.' The World Trade attacks represents not only this shortcoming or depend on how you look at it success of the internet but more or less something else poetical and that is the post-institutional effects of the state and I might add the economy itself. One of the more recognizable forms that in which is marked by the collapse of the state is argued by a noted scholar such that the state looses its monopoly of violence and like you see in the recent warlords much of that violence falls into mafias, warlors and ethnic tribes. Another has to do with the economy and that purportedly is the fact that since the fall of the Soviet Union there is not much to add to the decisive arguement that capitalism has triumped over communism or socialism for the matter. It can be viewed that capitalism and the way things are managed offered certain benefits when it comes to price and scarcity but capitalism like everything everybody has missed out is more than certainly a modern and post-modern failure. This does not rule out an economy whereas there is a sort of exchange of goods and services or in one in which economic output, growth and accountabilty may take place but more so that capitalism cannot escape the haunting effect of post-institutionalism. Much not left in the framework of capitalism these days as the poor lost soul of the Soviet man must rekindle his identity with the stuff that is made and sold for centuries when manking discovered and use commerce but in a dynamically politically shaped world we see these days such as again the rise of the electronice economy and its evil twin the post-modern industrial society required to sustain it. At any rate the balance of a rising middle class that existed that managed to stave off the brunt the early countries endured in the earlier twentieth century does not exist any more. The rise of supertechnology among many other things makes the present army that we have sort of obsolete. It is weird to see these days as a high point to fight for one's country or its creed whereas thanks to the likes of Al Queada and the recent Germany election did much away with that. The idea of fighting for democracy and world peace seems pretty much anachronistic and too cling to it by indoctrinating in public institutions that it has much of a world value seems a bit passe. However back to the World Trade Center, the energy that has been unleashed questions much of what that needs to be done in understanding the shape of war and maintaining any reasonable type of political stability. Much of the world politics that has followed those attacks has pretty much that has been defined by post-instituitional forces such as Al Queda such as the sniper shootings, the Madrid bombing, the London bombing and more recently the Bali bombings. The Hurricanes in Louisiana occured in a red state whereas not to take it wrongly there is just not much to be rebuilt or that a conventional approach seems futile and obsolete. The criticism for the recovery effort has been mired strongly and arguementatively so on the charge of racism,such that the president was very reluctant to do anything about it and the more interesting thing about the this recovery whether one like it or not that such an effort of rebuilding that part of the Deep South amounts more strikingly to a Reconstruction effort at a cost to the tune of $40 billion dollars and the idea of less and minimalist government is becoming more or less an endangered idea. what ever the case maybe we see the president approval rating at an all time low and the controlling party in a dissarray. A budget cut to offset the cost of the rescue effort can have nefarious political consequences. Like the tsunamis given so many people even in a post modern world such a natural disaster had an effect similar to a regional war of some sorts and thus it should be treated as such. It is say that only natural calamities are nothing more than an arena for the groups like Al Queda and the stronger post-institutional effects to take place. It wouldn't be hard to grasp the idea that if the US have problems from terrorism that it would unlike the September 11, 2001 originated from the Northern part but of a constant migration from that part of the country.

The recent Hurricane that occured in Louisiana only shows what a sham the current political and economic system that we have led to believe on way or another is. In just matters of hours more than a thousand people have been killed, somewhere between 20,000 to 50,000 refugees fleeing to neighboring states such as Texas and damage estimates between $12 to $30 billion dollars.

One minute the world was celebrating that London has become the city to host the Olympics of 2012, an event short of war that supposed to bring nations and people from all over together to compete without shedding any blood. With their guards having been left down and also anything short of irony, a terror attack that left close to sixty people dead and hundreds injured shocked and surpise us all. The culprit as always these day is a wing or in this case a splinter group for the Al Queada movement. So one might wonder why the attacks happened as they did and in essence another question must be raised what do they mean? To answer these two questions one has to look at things from a different perspective. This perspective would mean that what has flowed from the events of 9-11 World Trade Center attacks can not always be resolved by pointing needlessly and aimlessly at a bunch of disgruntled Islamic fundametalist who wants to change and fashioned the world the way they want to. It has more to do with understanding the nature and course of history. As I see it the September 2001 terror attacks is in some bizarre way a manifestation of the fall of the Soviet Empire which in itself a tremendous amount of energy being built up and must be released. It is only with destruction of the Soviet Empire that so much that has characterized the past 2,000 years of history must take place all well within one century. It is too say that with the fall of the Soiviet Union is just only the acceleration of history collapsing and changing at intense speed and pressure. The ten years or so followed it becomes nothing more than just another a millenium sort of speaking. The 1990s as we supposed to believe saw the explosion of the growth of things like the internet and dismantling and creation of states. I would argue that what all this means is tremendous shift of something great such as a post-institutional effect of the world we live in. In effect such a phenomena would have as its criteria several factors. Among them technological growth at intense speed and secondly the use of war to alleviate the tensions brought about this. In fact what makes Al Qeuda interesting not that they are post-post modern entities or embodiment of such intensities but they are embrace something along the line of higher ethics that are far superior to the rest of the world. For the world to catch up would require much transformation and something new to accomodate the post-institutional changes about us. It wouldn't likely ever happened unless of course a global war is induced. All there is a just an increase of the building up of energy and a terror attack to release-- and merely so-- these energies. The outset of any post-institutional society is the idea and notion that physical institutions are just fast being replaced by virtual institutions or in cases de novo ones. A good example of the latter is the internet itself. People might have a clue where it may come from and how it changed society and the way we do things such as commerce and more obviously commmunication and entertainment but no one does not have a clue what it will be in the next ten to twenty years or what form it will take. After all we can't rely on the hardware we see in computers and microchips to keep it going after all the production of such things merely makes ecologically speaking things worse. The next best thing is probably something you see in 'Minority Report' a world run by nannotechnology. With it comes its pressures and the foundation upon which such a thing may lie on. So in a sense a post-institutional society is also one that is a sociey that will be slam with one of supertechnologies one which as I have always stated that mankind's thirst for knowledge of the universe will produce an economy no matter whatever constraints and economic impossibilities there is. If that comes along, there will be rogue individuals, societies, classes of people vying for control not of just the world but the technologies that needed to rule the world. Think of technologies that you see such as warp technology, nanno suits, stuff out of a 'Terminator' movies, hulk like super soldiers, the power of invisibilites and other stuff creating or even awakening anomalies slipping away from the control of the government to some wily individual. Thus you have something like the Al Queda a product of Soviet-American conflicts in places like in Afghanistan that too will transform and propagate into other forms or entities that is unrecognizable. Subsequent of the attack in Madrid which shows due to geopolitical shifts with rising oil prices or such prices about to peak, along with the post-institutional effect of politcs itself; in the case of London, is the ability of Al Queda just setting the ground of another theme by criss crossing what these technologies are in fact becoming that is the elusive nature of technology and the ability for technology to replicate itself to counter it--hence technological advancement incarnate. Just like all you see each day the deterioration of America's power worldwide sort of like a post-institutional effect in foreign policy(making the world safe for democracy or in the London instance peace) just happened to take place in Iraq here you see the rise of the thrills of supertechnologies that is setting the stage for not only a greater conflict that will add a new theme to what is going on but also to just another door in history in a form of a global or another great war.
As it should be understood the Al Queda group is becoming larger not smaller namely on the side of understanding human ethics but that too become irrelevant as the push and built of energy and the way the world is changing setting the battle ground of the ultimo ration of the world to come--War!

It is a thought worth thinking but not actually taking seriously about the internet and computers taking over. Is it possible that we can live in a world where there are no books pencils and pens and everything is placed on a computer? If the answer to that question is yes, it is strange for how that will come about. Like anything about the so called virtual world trying to take over we are face with the difficult task of it coming to grips with the usual politics that it has to endure and the trade offs and the way we define the next economic structure.


Here is something interesting to look at. In the June 6, 2005 issue of Business Week in an article written by Burt Helm and Hardy Grove on page 42 titled "Intellectual Property: Google This:'Copyright Laws'" the authors discusses about Google new plans and adventure to scan entire books that might come into conflict with certain copywright laws. According to the authors, already five universities and other libraries including Harvard, Stanfor, Oxford, Michigan and the New York Public Library has already sent in books to be scanned. The endeavor is known as the 'Print for Libraries' program.

According to the recent decision in the case Gonzales v. Raich state laws does not protect those from being prosecuted from federal law when it comes to growing and using medicianl marijuana even from extreme sick cases such as cancer, HIV/AIDS, glaucoma or otherwise life threatening disease. Under the Supreme Court guidelines the use and involvement of marijuana comes under 'interstate commerce' and hence under the realm and authority of the federal government. Why if there is ever such as ruling has to be in the dissenting arguements in which case no one would argue or even expect to have any meaning any more in American politics-states rights. It was the same reasoning that Southern segregationist used to challenge the overturning of Jim Crow laws. Whatever the case maybe states as I understand it was never meant to have any decisive claim on the politics of American constitution. The debate over who gets what as far as claims of a federal or national authority over local and state jurisdiction ended when the civil war 'ended' and the passage of the 13th, 14th and 15th amendment. Liberals in the early part of the 20th Century saw very little in ascertaining state's right but saw state institutions as a forums and mean or what some one would say experiments in garnering national reforms but in any event times have change and that type of thinking as we see with some of the Orwellian reform these days such as the abolition of affirmative action in California or the new wave of social engineering by turning society virtually into a prison makes little sense for the court these days to take seriously these off the wall reform in medicinal marijuana on state level. If anything such legislation recognized by a dozen or so states are nothing but power politicking of the habits and mores of the 1960s ,a fetish if you may so call it. I don't see nothing wrong with legalizing marijuana which at any rate is just two different things--one's view on drug legalization and the rule of law in pertinence to the recent court decision. In fact it would be a very well policy for drugs and narcotics to be legalized. There are many arguements in the way for this one of them is to cut down terrorism as I agree with any one who would argue this point, the second to reduce the incarceration rate and make laws a little bit fairer and thirdly to make a society like the US more laid back and a great country to be in.