hyperinflation and humble pirates

a quick look at the bank balance is more than all I need to assure myself that I should spend time studying economics.. even a cursory examination of what's written below will show that "we are but humble pirates…….”

however..

i am not the only one puzzled.

if what I have heard is correct, the executive in the usa has been instructing the fed. to buy bonds.. to finance it's (the govt.’s) expenditures.

um…

the money supply has been very much increased.. the M1 machine, as economists say, has been cranked up and this of course leads to inflation in the medium to long term.... higher or lower.

everyone knows that.. both domestically and internationally. that there will be inflation in the usa at some point is a known known..…..there is also some expectation that the green-back could turn into a toxic asset any tick of the clock basically. if people with large enough holdings lose their sang froid.. (or decide to get out while the getting is still good…..)

bank runs happen.

of course americans are financially savvy people.. I am sure that as soon as the greenback is recognised as valueless they will have already gotten rid of them and be using something else. (cigarettes, small bags of cocaine...) um.. and the only losers will be foreigners stupid enough to be caught with trillions of them…

maybe I’m wrong..

it seems to me that the federal deposit insurance act of 1934 has lead to banks in the usa making very risky loans since that time. <:strokes beard sagely:> this is where the toxic assets bit comes in and the trillions of bailouts… ’34-07… (its obviously the feds who are to blame.)

the first rule of finance is that a dollar today is worth more than a dollar tomorrow. hence investment .. – purchase of new capital goods.. plant and equipment. (or financial investment.)

this is simple enough for me to understand..

the question is:-

a) is this happening in the usa? or with anyone spending dollars? ans.. I don’t think so..

b) when the discount rate is expected to be ‘x’ when x is a know unknown.. but probably way off the gauge….. then how much inflation is this gonna cause?

answer… no one knows.. the dollar is the international (fiat) reserve in a global economy that is unprecedented.

a run on a bank isn’t a rational occurrence. nor does it have to be a national occurrence.

i don’t think there is anyone who can say what will happen. all that can be said is that it is going to happen pretty soon.. and it will never be the same as it has been from 1934 till 2007.

the second principle of finance is that a safe dollar is worth more than a risky one… I don’t think we even need to mention this one.

just a week ago I thought that hyperinflation in the usa was exaggeration .. doom scenario. but when I read up about it.. germany.. Bolivia…(the story there is that the unexpected happens ....) I am beginning to think it is not so far-fetched. and even being provoked.… (dare we say...? I am happy to say that i live in a country where i can.)

national economies are not unbreakable no matter how robust they may at some point in time seem.

i wouldn’t rule it out and I reckon most people are preparing psychologically for it as well.

it comes down to what Beijing decides to do and what would cause them to sell their treasuries (toxic American assets)…. maybe the fact that the usa no longer has control of its currency is the reason why they ( the yanks) wouldn’t mind it happening.. …..though there might be a bit of an argument on the street first..

… but dudes.. it had better be convincing. .. very.

better luck next time.

i’d best buy those new gumshoes I need while they’re still cheap.

2012 seems the useby date for that five buck note left over from last holiday. (mayan calander)

maybe we should start getting used to thinking in redbacks.

tf.

…

japanese zen and d.t. suzuki

japanese zen/

it’s a commonplace to read comparisons of the credit contraction in japan since the early 1990s to the current problems in the usa. don’t worry. if you’re interested .. there are plenty of places to get it.. I’m not going to comment on it.

what interests me about japan is its take on zen. or rather the zen take on modernity and its synthesis into japanese life.

Buddhism came to japan first from korea then from china usually said to be half way through the first millennium a.d.

the native religion, Shinto, (kami no michi) is associated with nature.. lives alongside as a kind of subtext. it became formalised with the introduction of Buddhism, confuciansim and Daoism.

the origins of zen buddhism have to be sought in India. it is said to have come from the ‘flower sermon’ of guatama buddha. (he held up a flower for his students but said nothing……perhaps it was about direct intuitive comprehension…another level of consciousness..) the word.. zen is from the chinese chan. 禅. which in turn is a translation of sanscrit dhyana (घ्यान )also known as one of the eight stages of yoga according to patanjali..

sects of Mahayana Buddhism developed in japan.. shingon.. (tantric) jodo.. or pureland Buddhism and tendai have been as important as zen.

in the context of Japanese zen, no particular sutra is given paramount importance as in tendai (that emphasises the lotus sutra), but the emphasis is on the unwritten tradition of the dharma passed from the buddha to all masters.

the founder of Japanese zen is said to be eisai 1141-1215 ce. a relative latecomer to Japanese Buddhism, he brought it with him from china establishing a temple in Kyushu. his form of zen is called rinzai-- most recognised in the ‘west’. its well know representative is hakuin.

less well known is the soto sect of zen founded by dogen. his school is characterised by emphasis on seated meditation .. zazen.

a third sect established by bankei holds that any set method is a hinderance . his non-method is spontenaity. which he holds is a reflection of reality.

zen practices were brought to international attention by dr. d.t.suzuki last century. the goal of zen is enlightenment. (satori) .the discovery of the true buddha nature of being…

so it seems that satori is the Japanese for dhyana..

influenced by the rinzai sect, dr. suzuki advocates the koan exercise as the way there. the impediment being the conventional functioning of the mind-- (chatter)... the koans are designed to bring this kind of mental activity to an end. the koan is a puzzle that cannot be solved by conceptual thought…. the master gauges the state of the aspirant and sets an appropriate koan.. for practice. (reminds me of karate kid …i'm serious.. i loved that movie..)

dr. Suzuki, a widely recognised scholar, also wrote on pureland buddhism.. the school that has as its aim rebirth into the pure land of amitabha. (ie enlightenment).. it is achieved primarily by mantra. (escape from the limitations of the concrete mind.)

Suzuki's work is profoundly optimistic. he sought to bridge cultural barriers. in fact the successfully synthetic nature of modern Japanese culture is huge cause for optimism.

its got zen written all over it. ...just shake off the blues!

tf

...

chinese (fractal) history and innovation.

more chinese (fractal) history .

it’s the chinese economy that is the subject of attention these days… and rightly so. while worst case scenarios picture the usa looking something like Afghanistan on a bad day within a few years, despite its problems, china presents a welcome alternative vision.

there has been a major correction.... the proletariat revolution has altered the structure of china at the deepest levels but old (fractal) patterns die hard. the elders of the land know what they are doing. I am confident of it. and have much confidence in them.

so .. what has been the traditional economic structure of china? how does it relate to the present (mind-blowing and environmentally catastrophic) growth model ? and when the revolution is over, what is the synthesis going to look like?? I think these are fair enough questions. probably not that easy to get the head around in one night. but here goes with the basics and some observations at least.

chinese society is traditionally divided into 4 classes. at the top is the scholar or public official as part of the structure answerable to the son of heaven..

then there is the peasant.. agriculturist.. then come the merchant and artisan who seem to compete not to be last. (Confucian society was at least formally anti-commercial--- viewing the profit motive as disharmonious in society/not respectable.)

the seeds of the system’s demise were in the problem that the merchant or landlord class tended to acquire all the peasants’ property leading to huge disparities in wealth. and the system collapses under the stress of peasants being reduced to serfdom and their revolt. over and over again... (han , tang, ming.)

unchecked landlordism... has led to the peasant having the final say.

land tenure became transformed during the qing dynasty when the smart money started going to trade and increasingly sophisticated financial services…it led to small land-holdings and petty-landlords.. obviously the trend has accelerated in more recent times.

the 4 traditional class distinctions broke down.

1949 was more a coup de grace. the revolution began a long time before then.

so you get a maoist/communist system where landlordism is ideally not going to be a problem.. but .. instead you have the problems caused by social upheaval.. the huge bulk of the population drifting to the city .. and an organic restructuring of society/economy.. with cadre still on top (or vying with merchant) merchant coming next, then artisan and finally peasant put on the bottom of the pack. suddenly there is no longer a peasant class with the clout it once had.

that seems to be what has happened. its what basically happened in the industrial revolution in Europe.. I guess ;; farmers have some political muscle.. but nothing like they once did..

since the industrialization of agriculture, things have changed. there is no need for 90% of the population to be engaged in growing food. its more like 9%. difficult to see a going back.

one point that is seldom made is that a source or even the source of economic prosperity is in innovation.. this has certainly been true in the usa.

that it is true also of china is ignored.. mostly by the chinese themselves though it is changing.

paper.. about 1000 years before it arrived in Europe. printing, gunpowder. the use of cast iron.. were innovations that have transformed one economy after another that has been able to harness them. the robe of the mandarin has certainly spent time in the laboratory before.

chinese simply lost the initiative in the qing dynasty. these things go around in cycles. (fractal time)

t.f.

shahrukh khan and mauryan history

I have had to study up on Indian history and before saying anything at all about it I had to make sure I wasn’t making an idiot of myself.. hehehe.

i watched the (2001) movie asoka with shahrukh khan on the weekend .

he was the guy whose detention in an american airport recently gave rise to comment in the indian media…..,,,mmm

it seems that the film was a flop commercially but to be honest I haven’t enjoyed a movie so much in years. it’s a long one about 2 and a half hours. .. best done in 2 or 3 sittings.

it was criticised for being ahistorical. I think its an unworthy criticism. if you want history, there are books. this is an artist’s (santosh sivan) rendition of a critical moment in the life of ashoka.

its pretty clear what happened historically but the problem is the complexity ..

it goes something like this.

Indian history seems to start becoming clear with an empire called Magadha beginning around the 7^th century b.c. the well known Siddhartha Gautama started life as a prince of its first dynasty.(haryanka)... it was a period where India started getting a reputation as a land of spiritual values. ( a lot of sorting-out of values)

two dynasties later was the nanda dynasty. it was this formation that effectively scared off alexander’s troops after he managed to cross the Indus in 326 and encountered stiff resistance from one porus.. (parvateshvar) king of panjab. . (Indian historians seem to be in denial about alexander and basically ignore him.)

however Chandragupta maurya, (who had reportedly seen alexander as a child ) overthrew the nanda dynasty 321 after aligning with a philosopher and cunning political economist-- ( one chanakya, author of the famous arthashastra. indias textbook on politics.) . he also drove out the macedonians that alexander had installed in the panjab.

chandragupta’s son, bindusara expanded the kingdom over most of present day India. it was engineered by chanakya and inherited by ashoka.

ashoka initially intended to expand the kingdom further but in the wake of the carnage of the fight against Kalinga, a rival kingdom, he renounced violence. this is the subject matter and climax of the movie. (I cried)

the resolution is of course the imperial consequences of his embrace of the policy of ahimsa.

the mauryan dynasty under ashoka was responsible for the promotion of Buddhaist ideals throughout south east asia. his impact on the history of civilization is considerable.

after the maurya, there were 3 more dynasties including the well known gupta dynasty (240-550 ad) after which the influence of Buddhism declined in India, initially to the advantage of Brahmanism in its various forms then to be finally eclipsed by the moghuls/turcopersians.

now it may be that the film’s critics have a huge understanding of Indian history, whereas I make no pretence that mine is any more than barely superficial. however it may also be that Buddhism is very unpopular in India despite the lip service paid to ashoka, one of the greatest men she has produced to date.

tejas fu.

edmund burke and (neo) conservatism..

once again I started to read up on someone.. heyek the economist.. only to find out that he was influenced by Edmund Burke.

so.. best get a clear picture of burke coz his ideas are still alive and well and probably kicking your butt.

he is remembered as the philosophical founder of modern conservatism. it should be seen in clear distinction to classical conservatism.

born 1729 in Dublin from a so called ‘old english’ family. (the old English were the descendants of the Norman invaders of Ireland by henry 2 of England. (a story for another day)

he became the leading figure of the whig party in England after dropping out of law and travelling in Europe in the 1750s.

he published some satire and some work on aesthetics. associating with the leading intellectuals in London of the time. leading him to involvement in politics and election to the birtish parliament in 1765 house of commons.

it was a time when the main debate was over the limits of the constitution and limits to the executive authority of the king. he advocated a party political system and representative democracy..... in opposition to the ‘torys’ who were the kings friends-- or any specific interest group. parliament needed principles not arbitrary /tyrannical rule.

he became instrumental in the passing of the repeal of certain laws act 1772 (free trade with Ireland). he supported various unpopular issues such as catholic emancipation. and banning the use of the pillory. (seriously. in 1780 ....they used to do it to convicts in sydney as well. i think its been stopped.) he appeared liberal by the standard of the time at least. or at least made every effort to do so.

his work ‘reflections on the revolution in france’ was his most influential work. and taken as a manifesto of ‘liberal’ conservative thought.

the French revolution he called a ‘tyrannical democracy’ .. he simply didn’t believe in the rights of man..

revolution is basically a destructive affront to the natural order that has evolved over time.

the ‘glorious revolution ‘ of 1688 english restoration of parliament on the other hand was the restoration of the ancient rights of englishmen... though it got rid of the king, it left the traditional institutions of government intact.

people cannot overthrow morality which is from god

the present state of affairs is the sum of all past and shouldn’t be questioned. (if it isnt broken don’t fix it jingoist mentality of today)

he supported the American revolutionaries slogan no representation .. no taxation.. as a traditional English right .. not as a revolution against the natural order… such was the nature of his liberal conservatism….( i get the feeling it wasnt so much a support of revolution as a jab at george 3rd.)

it seems he was defending a system that allowed him to live in luxury and defend the system with impunity.. which is defending the indefensible in my book.

he believe firmly in the privitization of property and the class system. a property based hierarchy.. the basis of social structure that has grown up over time and is basically not understandable. it should be just accepted.

the social contract of rousseau is a sham.... .there is no individual contracting with society.. they are there not to reason why but to serve the system which its something that gentlemen don’t question

adam smith commented that his economics were aligned with his own.

he was ciriticised by reactionaries in the whig and torys for his opposition to british imperialism in Ireland (scorched earth) and India (the dope trade.)

he deeply influenced figures such as Disraeli and Gladstone. Churchill as well.

marx saw in him a synchophant in the pay of the English oligarchy. a vulgar bourgeois. while they were different times and he faced a reactionary murderous establshmehnt .. it is difficult not to agree with marx on this score at least.

he sparked a lively debate among people like Thomas paine and mary Wollstonecraft. such was the level of the debate at the time.

tf.

diamonds.. and some basics.

diamonds.

diamonds have remarkable physical qualities…the most tightly compressed form of carbon. strong covalent bonding between the atoms. more than 99.9% carbon. hardest substance with the highest thermal conductivity. they are formed under intense heat and pressure deep within the earth.. some 150 kms beneath the surface.. in the earth’s mantle..to which they rise in the medium of magma ..molten rock in volcanic activity. its as if the core of our marvellous planet is scattered with diamonds gracing the logos--planetary and solar.. (some stars are said to have a diamond core. some diamonds are said to originate from space.)

on the surface of earth though, they are rare.

because it is so dense, light travels slowly through it.. causing remarkable optical characteristics..

prized as jewels since antiquity it is in the past few centuries that they have become popular. their value is enhanced by skilful shaping.. the diamond is given faces. or faceted by engraving a mark/ line with a diamond pointed tool and applying the correct pressure. it is not a rough trade. the planning and execution can take years. they are hard and expensive.

up till the mid 18^th century India alluvial deposits were the source. since then they come from mostly brazil, Africa and Australia.

the art of producing artificial diamonds took a while to emerge. but not from want of trying.

that the diamond consisted of carbon was recognised in expiriments carried out in france in the late 1700s.. subsequently it was recognised that the other form of carbon in mineral form .. graphite, differed in its structure.. it needed to be placed under pressure.

a growing body of literature developed on what didn’t work..

the science of high pressure developed gradually through the 19^th century.

in 1913 with the development of thermodynamics, xrays were used to determine the atomic structure of diamonds.

the structure of a diamond is the diamond (tetrahedral) lattice. we know today that it is an allotrope of carbon.. ie. it is carbon with its own way of bonding at an atomic level.....

it was increasingly obvious that pressure was the key to diamond formation.

in time synthetic diamonds were made but their use is mainly in industry.

drill bits.. abrasives. possible uses include semiconductor for microchips. or use as a heat sink in electronics.

the way to test a real diamond is with thermal conductivity.. spectroscopy , luminescence and microscopy can determine it sorigin. there are screening machines that do it.

its interesting. .. I haven’t scratched the surface really..

open-source.. way to go.

open source

the internet makes available for the asking more knowledge and information tools than were available to the most sophisticated agencies dealing with such matters less than a generation ago.

of course unorganised facts have negative value when it comes to gaining the comprehension that is the object of research. philosophy or a comprehensive world-view is what is valued ….as it gives coherence to life.. it is order that overcomes chaos. light of reason that overcomes the darkness of ignorance. these are truths.

that knowledge is freely available is so a great portal to a better world. we are standing on it.. and passing through in greater numbers as the clock ticks (in gigahertz these days.)

open source software is the way it is happening. it is the alternative to proprietary software. the source code of the programs is freely available. its like the guys who didn’t get the job at Microsoft decided to work for nothing and posted the fruit of their labour on the net for the good of all.

well.. its not new to say that it is better to work for nothing than do nothing. (check out my blog.. hehehhe)

i use wikipedia several times a day. its open source. linux, the o.s. on my computer is the same… I think my cell phone runs on open-source software.. probably a dozen other things I do in a normal day are totally underwritten by it..

if you want to improve the program you are free to do so.. its open and non-commercial. everyone benefits and growth is explosive.

that knowledge is a public good is a huge boon.

education is becoming transformed. whatever you need to know is available. you can have a whole library on a flashdrive. a lifetime’s reading.

the university down the road used to be surrounded by a high wall of sandstone and wrought iron….with sharp spikes on the top…… even broken glass set in the stone. like a loony bin…..

its so come down like a berlin wall.. or great chinese one.

open source is a revolutionary model. it is the model that offers the dynamic to change …..it points to a very bright future.

hurrah!!hurrah!! hurrah!!

tejas fu.

elizabeth, fact and fantasy.

over the weekend I got Elizabeth out .. a movie with cate blanchet and geoffrey rush..

cate blanchet put in a performance I thought. not an easy character to play.. and structurally the movie is well, good...

in fact Elizabeth is quite an extraordinary character. a whole ‘age’ is named after her. very interesting times. (elizabethan times maybe said to continue in the fantasy of some.)

but was/is it all actually as rosy as the cheeks of cate blanchet??

i think not.

daughter of henry VIII. and anne boleyn. kinda harsh childhood.( henry had anne’s head off when Elizabeth was 2 .) it was a thing for which her father developed a penchant.)

she secured an education of sorts (at the time a good one for an english girl), was appointed to the throne at the age of 25 after an upbringing on court intrigue.

England was in a position of extreme luck.. start of the more enlightened age of the industrial revolution…many of the developments started in England....the rest of europe exhausted by war (100 year war).. .. the renaissance blooming.. in Elizabethan England..

Protestantism seems to have delivered a flowering of culture sheltered from the stifling religiosity from rome and its proxies.…

.. it was a period of change…rapid progress intense intellectual activity in so many fields..

as the movie portrays .. john dee, the occultist, indicates that it was a time for one empire to take off..it was to be either the Spanish or the English..

well.. with the benefit of hindsight we know what happened.

one of the more remarkable events of her time was the defeat of the Spanish 'amarda'. this is a pivotal point in the history of international relations.

12 july 1588 a combination of bad Spanish strategy, miscalculation had the Spanish fleet destroyed. a huge blow to the trumped up pomp of the spaniards fresh from a glut of new murders and pillage in south America.(subsequent to the inquisition.) they also probably got more fight than they were used to after the pathetic efforts of the moors and the asymmetrically armed incas. etc. ( it could be something that started the urban rumours of cursed spanish gold.. as the fleet was bought with gold i suspect... from abroad.....)

what the movie doesn’t mention is the brutality of the scorched earth policy of elizabeth’s ‘protestant’ armies in ireland.. the confiscation and appropriation of the entire country from its people.... (this is the point I want to make.) elizabeth 1 seems to have had a more than mild race hatred for the irish. (she even murdered mary queen of scotts . it does come out though melodramatically in the movie.)

still…. out of sight .. out of mind. as they say. but ..its actually very much alive in the minds of people with an irish background ..

speaking from experience (humbly I hasten to add) …of the intimations passed down in a family.. through the generations.. the blighter who mostly gets the finger pointed at him is Cromwell rather than elizabeth.. ….

it was cromwell’s armies in the mid 17^th century (half a century after the end of elizabeth’s reign) that were responsible for the murder of thousands of irish civilians .. even some 50000 sold into slavery in burma and Barbados.. (check the record if you don’t believe me.)

Elizabeth tudor wasn’t directly responsible for cromwells psychopathy but it was in her time that the policy encouraging the like was launched. it was elizabeth tudor's british crown that started with a scorched earth policy in ireland.

these were policies that were set to starve a million odd to death and destroy the prospects of millions more.. as the next 200 years unrolled.

and she was directly responsible for starting it.

people are reported to say ‘malacht cromail ort’ ..’the curse of Cromwell on you’ but even then it maybe not just a reference to oliver but to the earlier Cromwell Thomas 1485-1540 an uncle of oliver…. the architect of the English reformation. (for whom henry the 8^th was arguably just a front.)

they’re old wounds .. septic basically. gangrenous.. on the body politic (a phrase Elizabeth used)

shekur kapur , the director of the movie, argues that the movie portrays Elizabeth against fanatical Spanish intolerance.. but it is not that simple.. he is way out of touch with what was really going on .. way out of his depth.

still truth never sold dvds .. probably never will. kapur obviously has no understanding of the wounds Elizabeth tudor and her father opened and was probably chosen for the job on account of his qualification. its not just about eye candy and pretty costumes. this is spreading misinformation and ignorance about the root of a certain leviathan…. and should be snubbed heartily (as it has been in reviews and the boxoffice.)

shekur if you’re reading this, maybe he should try bollywood mate. but I guess that if you could get a gig there, you wouldn’t have gone to universal pictures.

…

epicurus of samos.

epicurus 341-270 bc. was a philosopher of classical Greece,, (born in samos of Athenian parents) his school met in his garden in athens, small in his life but his influence was lasting. along with the stoics and skepics it lasted well into roman times.

though some people say it is a form of hedonism, this is definitely not to do it justice.

the reason why I want to get it clear is that I was thinking about john stuart mill the other day.. he is know as an English utilitarian. actually he was just an emotionally twisted boy who was parroting his teacher Jeremy bentham who himself was a crank regurgitating the ideas of others (including epicurius.)

the concept of utilitarianism was delt with long ago by epicurus, and delt with far more subtly than mill or other ‘utilitarians’ since.

when ‘Christianity’ became the state religion of rome (--as if the teachings of Christ could be a state religion. ::snort:: ), epicurius was basically banned and reviled. establishment ignoramuses equated him with hedonism. anyone who’s views lack a conventional spiritual morality was targeted. ( it was the dark ages…in some places they haven’t finished)

according to epicurus…

individual pleasure is the sole or chief good in life. it should be taken in moderation. and the greatest pleasures are those of the mind. one must also be careful about ones pleasure as some are not legal and prosecution is something definitely to be avoided. ( disclaimer: do not try this at home. lol. fu.)

knowledge is to be sought to rid oneself of superstition and fears. otherwise learning is to be discouraged as making inroads into time that could be spent having pleasure I guess.. heheh.

he rejects mysticism and is really very down to earth about what he likes. (which I imagine comes from his islander background and must have been a breath of fresh air in athina.)

other than the possibility of gaining happiness from it, virtue has no particular value. ( I guess virtue in the sense of αρετή )

Epicurus was an atomist and epistemologist. his outlook is not superficial. his utilitarianism is but one facet of a way of life embracing what planetary being has to offer.

he contrasts sharply with platonic ideas and directions. no wonder the Christian neo-platonists hated him.. hehehe.

it’s the creed of a cultivated minority as Bertrand Russel points out. it could survive in the refined atmosphere of an elite Athens or rome perhaps. (not sure about new york). virgil the great latin poet was an epicurian.

in the dark ages people turned to mystery religions.(Christianity ) or neo Platonism or stoicism.. equating anything remotely engaging pleasure as sin eminating directly from hell.. . a warped position to be sure.

epicure in common parlance these days is a yuppie who only buys designer gourmet which is exactly the kind of cheapening/debasing one should expect in modernity.

chinese history in 2 paragraphs.

last week I made a mental note to brush up on some chinese history.

it is very long and complex, but like everywhere the country has changed more in the past 60 years than in the period from the qin dynasty up till the inglorious abdication of pu yi in 1912. its long it but follows a pattern and a model that is straightforward.

it goes like this:-

there was a mythological age of sovereigns who lived a very long life..yellow emperor.. followed by the three kingdoms -- xia, shang and zhao of antiquity..somewhere around 2^nd millennium bc. shang is very real.. from the archaeology. even the writing is basically recognisable as chinese.

by the middle of the 5^th century bc there were 7 warring states. these were united by the qin. (from which the name china is said to derive.) use of iron and military advances set the qin up as dynasts for 200 years and the basic model of chinese civilization was established..(admin. and feudal order.

the qin were ruthless totalitarians ..the movie ‘hero’ graphically portrays it. (great movie incidentally with jet lee.)

it was however an unpopular dynasty and overthrown by the han.. led by a pleb. by the end of the second century ad there were some 60 million people.. huge by the standards of the day. economic weakness and some subprime emperors led to an overthrow of the han. (chinese today call themselves 'han')

there was a series of several short dynasties . then the tang period kicked off in the early 7^th century.. which is something of a classical formulation ..the tao enjoyed favor at court... it lasted till 906.. followed by several short dynasties. in 960 the song --a watered down version of the tang by the looks—stepped up.... there were mongols in 1234 brought by non other then gengis khan..a bloody disaster..but within a few years kubilai ruled as a son of heaven according to the chinese model. later on in the same century marco polo was amazed at the level of china’s civilization even under foreign domination.

1368 the mongols were toppled by the ming.. a chinese vote of no confidence.. 1421 their capital became Beijing.

under the manchus who established the qing in 1644, china flourished till 1795.. then there seems to have been a turning point in its fortunes.

it was hidebound.. bureaucracy by conformity to an ideological system of confucious that the master himself would’nt have recognised in a fit.. with some kind of buddhist subtext.. it couldn’t grow. it was fake. population too big.. it had reached its limits. and began to decline..

decline was accelerated by western incursions. leading to ‘the taiping rebellion’.. when chinese asserted self determination.

finally early 20^th centry they reject the manchus and even the age-old system that the latter tired to rule by. .. there was a feeble attempt to reinstate the empire 1915 ..but the model had outlived its usefulness. dr. sun yat sen gave the nationalist republic his best shot but with no agreement reached between nationalists and proletariat party.. the communist republic --in another hardwon act of self determination --was formed in 1949..

wow. that’s it. chinese history in two paragraphs..and they said it couldn’t be done.. heheh

so china is no longer the centre of the universe..nor is its top job occupied by the son of heaven… in 1949 it was time for it to soberly take its place as a republic and member of the community of nations as it were.. despite some catastrophic decisions along the way, its record has been extraordinary and has granted a new lease of life to a quarter of humanity... and shows every sign of improving.

lagos ..mega-city .. mega-future.

mega projections. future projections.

lagos is huge and getting huger… it is a megacity balooning out of the oil wealth of Nigeria drawing millions.

second most populous city in Africa was the capital of Nigeria till 1991 when it was transferred to the purpose built Abuja.

Nigeria is the eighth most populous country in the world. over 150 million. it is a regional power. with a growing economy.

lagos was a Yoruba settlement who seem to have been the traditional custodians of the area for quite a few millennia actually... lagos is the portugese name.

history is like this.

it was a centre for the slave trade from 1404-about 1900 when local people sought help from the british who had banned slave trading in 1807. it became a british colony in 1861. the rest of Nigeria was claimed in 1887 when Britain claimed a sphere of influence in west Africa. . lagos became the capital of the british colony that they had (up)started in 1914..

independence came in 1960. (ahem)

several back-to-back military coups-d' état s and civil wars later, Nigeria joined opec in the 1970s the income immensely benefiting the military clique.

sani abacha was the most brutal of the several military dictators they had to have. many harrowing stories.. but nigeria is ultimately not an unhappy story.

ethnic violence, corruption, militarism religious sectarianism.... same as, same as. post-colonial military dictatorship.. but.. it contrasts to others...

nigeria is rich in mineral resources in addition to oil there are serious agricultural resources and a developing manufacturing base. ( they send out a lot of really annoying scam emails but lets not gripe.. hehehe)

as for lagos, theyre calling it a ‘conurbation’. its population has ballooned to around 8 million but is only guessed at.

you’d think it would be an unhappy story.. but it apparently isn’t.. people flock there from the poverty-stricken, rigidly conservative countryside. they come with energy and ambition…. men, women and children.

a lot of the city is not serviced with anything like water or drainage… there is supposed to be something like one ‘police man’ per 1000 people

much of it is a huge shanty town…but.. for the people it is a city of opportunity. the fast growing megacity is where the booming real-economy is…..

while it has few formal jobs, it has a thriving underground economy. hustling.. bartering.. odd jobs.. the people are said to be either business-savvy or not there at all.

there is a breakdown of traditional order and infrastructure but there is a transformation of it into a productive urban form. trafficjams become markets.. defunct infrastructure finds some transformed use..

innovation combines with new models like microfinance to yield dramatic improvement in peoples’ lives.

lagos maybe a vision of the future for many places. maybe even some that now enjoy a much higher standard of living. i get the feeling its a place where water soon finds its true level.

change, the buddha reminds us, is the only constant.. it is coming to a place near you.. it maybe that mega cities are the modus it is gonna take.

tf

homo economicus vrs homocidal economists.

homo economicus and homicidal economists.

could the real economists please stand ..!!!

as the pillars of the guilded bastion continue to go down.. lol.. and the silk suited backsides of the establishment begin furtively looking around for a place to run, (bernie madoff was small beer) …. the question is starting to arise… what form will the new economics take?

it’s a serious question. the last faculty of economics I visited was full of yes-men and uber intelligent liars so blinded by Chicago (economics school) that it takes little imagination to vision the drab sandstone building that once housed them as a burnt out shell (given a year or two.).. haunt of owls and vermin. in a crumbling concrete jungle. like the burnt-out cat-house of a former generation.

all the experts and all the billions of dollars and still children starve… to death. day by day .. by the thousands while the 'economists' flick channels on sky.

well here at tejas fu’s political economy... its benevolence towards children and the vulnerable that is the ultimate criterion in business. ,,,…shove your greenback up your bottom line.

but what of the real economics?

real economics fits into the sustainability framework..(this is the point i want to make.)

it is hinted at by people like professor mohammad yunus of the grameen bank.. it is about social capital..

professor yunus’s story goes like this:-

was deeply affected by a famine in Bangladesh in 1974 and set about trying to find a way out of poverty for the vulnerable. he finally came up with microcredit (against the background of the massive failures of the above mentioned pseudo-economist and w/bankers.)

professor yunus worked tirelessly.. not to maximize his profit.. but to minimize the poverty of his people. that is what a real economist does in case anyone didn’t know.

so there is cause for huge optimism.. once that the bloodsucking incubus of global neo-conservatism’s bottomline is outed, there is a chance for a huge leap forward for the economy/ecology of the planet. because yunus isn’t the only one. there are other real people.

just imagine what the world would be like if economists devoted their time to maximising a society’s real capital.. its people and their talent of gold..(not the metal).

the opportunity will have to be seized and held on to by the real economists. now is the start of a power vacuum.

so begins the interregnum.

t.f.