What’s in the movies isn’t always true or pretty, but sometimes it is true and ugly. And you come out kind of reeling with the relief that you don’t have to live in that narrative. So it was with Gomorrah, a fictionalised documentary about the Naples Comorrah mafia.
It would be hard to find a more striking contrast to the stylish, proud Italy of designer clothes and furniture, or the lush decadence of Caravaggio long ago. The Italy of the mafia has no beautiful people, no sense of a good or caring or even competent society. No wonder Roberto Saviano, who wrote the book the film is based on, is watching his back. Knives and bullets are never far away for the hapless residents, and escaping from the tentacles of corruption is not easy.
At the other side of the Atlantic, Notorious is a film about a rap star, Biggie Small, his life and death. I knew the rap culture had some crime, but not to the extent shown in this movie. I’ve remarked before that everything I need to know I learn at the movies, and now I have seen enough of the Mafia and rap culture to keep well away from both.
Emerging stereotypes populate both films: the infiltration of Chinese into new business arenas, and the old-new/west coast- east coast rivalries in the US. Well that second one is not new, but its manifestation in rap gangs probably is more recent. Thirty years ago there was research about Black English Vernacular, and rap culture has helped to entrench it. The dialect in the Mafia movie and the semi-gangsta rap language were equally out of my range, my native tongue not helping much with the BEV.
Always good to come home, and even the chill of a Canberra winter is welcome after an evening in someone else’s nightmare world. The pleasing almost-spring scenes on the remaining streets in the Parliamentary Triangle that haven’t been given over to apartments reflect the bucolic public service culture. Lucky us! Our government works pretty well, most of the time.
Or so I am able to convince myself, until reality jolts again. Front page, Canberra Times, today: lotsa big trees will be chopped down on City Hill to make way for the development. More shops, of course, forget the design of Canberra, and they haven’t worked out how to calm the traffic around that small but precious treed hill. Another chip at the historic centre of the capital, which is almost now old enough to be a feature. The Melbourne and Sydney Buildings will look seedy next to shiny windows – I imagine Moscow has similar conflicts, and that they are resolved more like in Gomorrah than in Barton.
What isn’t valued gets lost, be it trees or heritage or good government. But there is hope, as the Libs and the Greens in the ACT have agreed to ‘work together’ on an issue. I suppose the ordinances controlling the display of advertising material in front of shops is pretty important, but I can’t help thinking it’s not quite what I would have liked from a party with the balance of power. Go Greens! But forward, please. It’s so hard to get worked up about ACT politics, as no one seems to take on the bigger issues of planning with vision. But at least no pollies here have water boards or guns.
August 29, 2009 | Ronda Jambe
Gimme Lessa Gomorrah
August 16, 2009 | Ronda Jambe
Accountability goes digital
It has come to my attention that the government is looking for inputs to its Gov 2.0 strategy, complete with blogspace for comments. What should they do with government information? Who should see what? What about FOI? etc. All this has been part of the public conversation since well before the digital age, and much has actually changed over the years.
But plus ca change…and transparency is a long time coming. But it does seem to me that true accountability in our information soaked world will now and henceforth be measured in pixels and digits. It is probably no longer possible to have good governance without good publicly accessible information systems to underpin it, but this is still not fully grasped when designing programs.
Consider data.gov in the US. Lots and lots of searchable database, and you can both choose your format and suggest other data sets. Makes one wonder if they are measuring the impacts on democratic process in any way. Does more info make for better gov? We know that no info makes for very bad gov, but what if the relationship, like so many, is nonlinear?
It seems clear enough that for really big issues (and probably for really small ones, with small sets of devoted stakeholders) accountability and transparency now must be online.
Every project needs governance procedures that have information (and therefore digital) correlates. Things that are future-determining, like emissions trading, will only be useful to the extent that they can be digitally monitored. And the more open the monitoring, the greater the liklihood of being successfully held accountable.
School funding in Uganda, I have heard, became less wasteful when they published the school budgets. Corruption in some places might also fade if those who were forced to pay bribes could collate their info. In some places, maybe the internet is overkill. Maybe a notice board in a protected place would do. But imagine if everyone suddenly knew how much a town thug was acruing by collecting money for work spaces from his townsfolk? They might just aggregate their aggressions and overthrow him (never her, or is it?)
Perhaps GPS tracking of illegal fishing boats, or movements of nuclear fuels, or dumping of toxic wastes could all hope to open up the world to real forms of governance that are accountable to a global citizenry. I doubt that any of that will happen soon, but the Australian government now hosts an entry site that lists government consultations underway. New Zealand had this at least 10 years ago, and I suggested something similar then. Better late than never, eh?
August 10, 2009 | Graham
ETS – Exit Turnbull Stage left
The release of Malcolm Turnbull’s “Greener, Cheaper, Smarter ETS” puts the seal on his demise. You can explain Utegate away as a bizarre, once-in-a-lifetime accident, but the idea that you fight the government’s ETS by producing one of your own, is complete incompetence.
Apart from anything else, with his credibility, undeservedly, in tatters over a faked email, who is going to believe him when he says his ETS is better than Rudd’s?
It shows that Turnbull just doesn’t “get” politics, and neither, it appears do many of his colleagues. The result is that they may be wedged and forced into a double dissolution election that, while it won’t deliver Rudd control of the Senate, will decimate the Coalition.
The Coalition has a perfectly simple line available to it on the ETS. It is that it will do nothing to slow global warming because unless the rest of the world signs on to similar schemes all it will do is shift Australian emissions to countries without an ETS, and with them, Australian jobs.
This would mesh with growing community concerns that Kevin Rudd doesn’t deliver while avoiding the wedge of whether man-made CO2 emissions are a significant problem. Both the Greens and the coal mining unions could run with this, as could Wilson Tuckey and Greg Hunt.
The ETS is, like the GST, a tax on everything, and like the GST before its implementation, and for sometime after, most people don’t like it. There is also a broad political coalition arrayed against it. It should be easy to beat.
What’s more it is bad policy.
No matter what you think about global warming, the worst way to tackle it is via a complicated artificial market-based mechanism where rights to pollute will be traded using arcane financial instruments, much like, until recently, we’ve been trading mortgages, and we know where that led.
Turnbull undoubtedly needs an alternative policy, and for this there are two options.
He can propose a carbon tax which will replace existing taxes in the system so as to be fiscally neutral. As a tax on virtually everything, it has the many of the same problems of the ETS and is not something you would cheerfully take to an election.
Or he can point out that no matter how high the cost of CO2 emissions, there are no alternative technologies available at the moment to replace hydrocarbon fuels, and that the most sensible use of public monies would be to encourage development of those technologies.
Of course, if the rest of the world comes on board with an ETS, then we will have little choice but to go along with one, but until they do, there is nothing for Australia, and nothing for the Opposition, in supporting an ETS.
August 09, 2009 | Ronda Jambe
What would low carbon growth look like?
Today I spent much of the morning talking with an academic colleague about sustainable business practices, what they mean and why students are enrolling in these courses. We discussed the triple bottom line business sustainability, and systems thinking. This means the environmental, the social and the economic benefits are coupled, to use a phrase from complex systems. It hasn’t taken long for complex systems theory to reach the business world, and nowhere is it more applicable than when talking about triple bottom line sustainability.
Lord Stern, probably the world’s leading greenhouse economist, has been arguing for an economy based on low carbon growth. He believes that is the only way to avert global climate catastrophe, which he says would make the global financial crisis seem like a walk in the park.
Much of that growth would come, he says, by diverting the trillions that will need to be spent on infrastructure in the next few decades into low carbon infrastructure. This could include carbon capture and storage, if it turns out to be viable, but also renewables, public transport, better urban design, etc. And we have to stop cutting down forests, to protect not just our air but our water supplies.
That all sounds reasonable, and if enacted would bring us to what Stern describes as ‘a safer, cleaner and quieter economy and society’. All sounds good, but what would it look like away from the big infrastructure projects? What might it mean for a city like the ones most Australian live in, with our traffic and our dependence on food and goods trucked or flown in from afar?
In particular, what do young entrepreneurs need to know to set them in the right direction to deliver the goodies of this new economy? It isn’t enough to think about green collar jobs in solar panel factories, because the Chinese will be the ones doing that manufacturing, at least for the foreseeable future. Nor is it good enough to talk about all the feel good consumer items that deck the pages of the glossy green magazines, attractive though these are. We (and our economy) will not be saved by bamboo towels.
More likely, the low carbon growth will include all of this: infrastructure, consumables and some local food production. Beyond that, it will also harness the efficiencies of the electronic commerce revolution. There will be more services that help people access other innovative services. Old business models like brokering and cooperatives that have never completely gone away will be dusted off and given fresh perspectives: like the LETTS scheme with lipstick. Databases of people willing to refurbish and repair, trading and bartering on an industrial scale, E-Bay goes organic. Leveraging learning and teaching will become more formalised, more accepted, and easier.
Just my thoughts, and maybe I’ll be able to find someone to help me build that green dollhouse I’m trying to work out. The cute little LED lights that plugged via a tiny powerboard into a cute little solar panel, intended to illumine steps on a deck but just right for a doll house, worked for one day then had to go back to the hardware store. Darn!
August 04, 2009 | Graham
Congratulations to John Pilger
John Pilger has been awarded this year’s Sydney Peace Prize. John is a frequent contributor to On Line Opinion via material that we republish from his website, often at his suggestion.
The media release of the announcement says:
Examples of his work include an account of the British and American governments’ secret ‘mass kidnappings’ of a whole population of the Chagos Islands in the Indian ocean to make way for an American military base. His 1979 film Year Zero: the Silent Death of Cambodia depicted the horrors of the Pol Pot regime and the plight of the Khmer people. In 1994, Death of a Nation, shot under cover in East Timor, galvanized world wide support for the East Timorese people. His re-making of the film Palestine is Still the Issue reminds the world of a continuing occupation and cruel injustice.
Sydney Peace Foundation Director Professor Stuart Rees comments, “The jury was impressed by John’s courage as well as by his skills and creativity. His commitment to uncovering human rights abuses shines through his numerous books, films and articles. His work inspires all those who value peace with justice.â€
August 02, 2009 | Ronda Jambe
A Baad Approach
Last night we saw the film about the German 1970s terrorist group, ‘the Badder-Meinhof Complex’. At the start it said it was a true story, and the thread of events was believably jumbled and incoherent, so I assume it was a fairly accurate portrayal of the actual course of their attempts to change history.
While those events were unfolding in real time I was elsewhere occupied and wasn’t paying close attention. In my adult life, and probably throughout modern history, there has always been a sense of urgency about world problems. Environmental issues have been a growing ache for me since at least my late teens. I remember hearing about the Weathermen in the US, and marching in a huge anti-Vietnam parade that crowded the subways and ended with chants in Times Square. But that march was as far as my activism went.
On the face of it, the Baader Meinhof bunch were sadly psychopathic. They had no plans beyond destruction, and no discipline to find any. They did not rouse my sympathies or engage my mind with any grand thoughts. They reached out to the Islamists, with predictably unhappy outcomes.
Movies about terrorism always seem to come to the same dead end, so to speak. There is nothing on offer, just the brick wall of death. Provoke the state, and its reactive repression will unleash reform? Do they really think so?
Today’s challenge is to find an economy beyond expansion and a society beyond employment. That’s right, we can’t all count on living off wages. The factories of China can’t keep producing for the people of China, because they will hit the brick wall of overcapacity and environmental collapse. We can’t get to social justice via consumerism, on that much I agree with the radicals of the 60s and 70s. But blowing up the government and civilians is a mindless adolescent approach, like cutting off hands to stop theiving, or locking up women to keep society decent. There has to be another path, but perhaps there is just apocolypse, as philosopher John Gray believes. Progress towards enlightenment is the illusion of secular Christian dogma, we travel in an endless cycle of overreach, war, and recovery. Who knows for sure?
Seeing the film about the 70s made me think back on the paths I took then. As a recent migrant to Australia, and a young wife, I was exploring the cultural delights of Sydney with a dance drama group and doing a Masters in linguistics. I taught maths at a boys’ high school for a year and quickly retreated to tertiary level. With my hippie inclination, I used to make candles in my kitchen. Since then, I’ve done a few things and don’t make candles anymore. Maybe I haven’t been part of the solution, just another plodding consumer. Maybe I’d rather be like my Buddhist cat, free of attachments and part of the furniture.
One thing is sure, on a cold Canberra morning like today, while spring is still too far away, I sure wish I was where I took this photo. Perhaps you too have been there….