| 
  • If you are citizen of an European Union member nation, you may not use this service unless you are at least 16 years old.

  • Finally, you can manage your Google Docs, uploads, and email attachments (plus Dropbox and Slack files) in one convenient place. Claim a free account, and in less than 2 minutes, Dokkio (from the makers of PBworks) can automatically organize your content for you.

View
 

real time writing

Page history last edited by PBworks 14 years ago

For ages people took words out of context and translated them into forms of expression that matched their perceptions. Art historian E.H. Gombrich called this translational process "schema and correction" to emphasize the inherently creative and necessarily creative (not neutral!) act of translation. One could say that, in the information age (cite Berkeley report on "How Much Information" here), this has weakened our ability to communicate effectively, and the signal-noise ratio creates problems on a global scale. People have difficulty in understanding the whole vue of what other people try to say. This is sometimes done purposelessly and in other situations it is done intentionally. We should never try to change a persons message to gain from or deceit that message to what suits us. We can now look at a more serious note as we witness in wikipedia, people are defining words in a way that should not be done. Wikipedia is cracking down on who it lets define words and how people are defining words for the purpose that there is no gain in defing a word incorrectly. Wikipedia is perhaps a symptom of this intensification and ongoing nature of translation. Indeed, wikipedia is emerging as a site for much translational knowledge-making. Hundreds of languages converge on this medium. Such is the context of definitional work today. The communicative practice of forging and revising definitions, a staple and commonplace in classical stasis theory that informs forensic practice, has become something more. With this frame in mind, let us now turn to a very important definitional impasse, one that if we cannot traverse across, will cost many, many human lives. The UN definition of genocide, first composed after the singularity known as the Holocaust, will now come under our analysis. It was defined right after the Jewish Haulocost by a jewish lawyer Raphael Lemkin who combined the Greek word "genos" (race or tribe) with the Latin word "cide" (to kill). The UN is not recognizing the issue in the Darfur region is Sudan as a genocide though I feel it cleary does fit this description. There are militant groups trying to wipe black people out of the region. Who is to say when they are done with this particular region they will not then move on to another region. The message "move or die" that the millitants are conveying fits the term "attempted extermination" and it certainly infers the term that brings kill and race together "genocide." If I am wrong and I misunderstood the terms then why not revise the word "genocide" to what is happening today. People are gonna change their message to not cross certain bridges. The militants are not gonna come across and say they are performing genocide. There not saying much of anything to the media. Could speaking to much and emphasizing his plan be were Hitler went wrong? Keeping his mouth shut as the Janjaweed are doing in darfur could have helped Hitler do much more damage. If he was quitely waging war on countries for various reasons he thought he might have went further. We need to not look at words but at the actions. The rebel groups are acting just as Hitler did and they need to be stopped by a fleet of nations as he was.

 

 

UN definition

A flawed definition of genocide versus an appropriate definition of genocide. How

The term was coined in 1943 by the Jewish-Polish lawyer Raphael Lemkin who combined the Greek word "genos" (race or tribe) with the Latin word "cide" (to kill).

 

After witnessing the horrors of the Holocaust - in which every member of his family except his brother and himself was killed - Dr Lemkin campaigned to have genocide recognised as a crime under international law.

 

His efforts gave way to the adoption of the UN Convention on Genocide in December 1948, which came into effect in January 1951.

 

Article Two of the convention defines genocide as "any of the following acts committed with the intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnic, racial or religious group, as such:

 

 

Killing members of the group

Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group

Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part

Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group

Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group

The convention also imposes a general duty on states that are signatories to "prevent and to punish" genocide.

Excellent introduction via definition; now, weave article 2's points into a close examination of Darfur.-ShareRiff

 

 

In my first level of inquiry on the Darfur region, I searched my memory of the limited amount of television media that I've consumed recently, and the only story on Darfur that I recall was on Chinese investment in Khartoum, Sudan's largest and capital city. Some of the story contained information on Darfur, but I don't remember anything about immiseration. I never control TV - I only watch other people's TV - so I don't remember what channel it was on, but I watch the 'world' news at least 5 hours each week, including commercials. If it is not entirely outside of the media, then it is at least limited from some sectors of the media, assuming that the different corporations have different standards.

 

On my second level level of research I looked at the recent headlines for Darfur. The most recent story on Darfur in the St. Petersburg Times was on February 23, 2007, on page 4 of the Largo Times section. The first two paragraphs make a nice abstract of the article:

 

"Those who attend Ruth Messinger's talk about Darfur on Thursday should prepare for an earful. Expect the educator, advocate and activist on the genocide in western Sudan to use statistics to drive home her points:

 

-The genocide in Darfur is now in its fourth year.

-Close to 500,000 people have been slaughtered.

-2.5-million people have been displaced from their homes.

-4-million now depend on the outside world for survival.

 

In a telephone interview, Messinger, president of American Jewish World Service, an international development organization that has been providing humanitarian aid to the displaced people of Darfur, said it's past time for people to get involved and take action."

Page 4 of the Largo Times is small-time for a non-Christian, humanitarian-aid-dispensing organization, or is it? Is it just normal? The article in the Tampa Tribune was on December 3 in the Nation/World section and contained a rather impressive fact-sheet on the region, though most of it is specific to Sudan, not Darfur. The article does not tell a first-hand account, as Sudan has "began imposing bureaucratic restrictions on international journalists." China is the country's main importer and exporter.

 

On my third level of investigation I used Google. I found some recent articles that were related to some of the previous themes I had encountered. I learned that the United States and United Kingdom are pushing for U.N. sanctions against Sudan and that Sudan has banned the media from reporting on war crimes in Darfur. The reporters in the U.S. have generally been saying "OK" but the U.N. has been saying "no" to see if additional peacekeeping troops will work. I also noticed that the U.S. has placed sanctions China.

 

So I'm at a point at my thinking where I believe that we should feed everything in the food chain, through the penguins, at least. If you are unsure, that includes human beings in Darfur, as well.

 

 

he dictionary defines genocide as the deliberate and systematic extermination of a national, racial, political, or cultural group. In other words genocide is the purposeful killing of a particular group whether is be national, political, racial or cultural in order to wipe them out. The United Nations began to develop a definition for genocide in the 1950s after the Holocaust.

Comments (0)

You don't have permission to comment on this page.