Monthly Archive for December, 2007

What went wrong

Some of the most memorable, appalling statistics in history are those of the accidental genocides wrought by human exploration. After its introduction to Central America by the conquistadors in 1520, for example, smallpox had by 1527 killed millions in Mexico and precipitated the collapse of the Inca empire. The same disease, introduced by Europeans to north America, killed 90% of the Massachusetts Bay Indians between 1617 and 1619. By the end of the 18th century, European diseases—of which smallpox was the worst—had managed to kill 90-95% of the native population of the Americas (Roy Foster gives a brief, haunting account of this process in the first section of his masterpiece, The Greatest Benefit to Mankind).

In the 10th December edition of The New Yorker, there’s a piece by the writer Richard Preston, “A Death in the Forest,” that describes something alarmingly similar currently taking place in the plant kingdom. Preston focuses on the plight of the eastern hemlock, a tree native to north America, which is now threatened by the spread of an Asian insect known as the hemlock woolly adelgid. Just like humans, plants have evolved immune mechanisms that protect them from pests and infections; and, just like humans, plants are almost totally unprotected by these mechanisms against threats that are “exotic”—that come from distant places with which, until recently, they had no possibility of contact.

We’ve all heard about this kind of thing before, but the examples Preston produces—combined with the quality of his expert, restrained, appalled narrative—prove truly astonishing. Since 1904, the fungal disease chestnut blight has killed almost every American chestnut tree. Since the 1930s, the American elm has virtually disappeared thanks to an Asian fungus and a European beetle. Sudden oak death disease has now killed hundreds of thousands of oaks in California, and may soon reach eastern oaks. The American beech has lately been dying in its tens of thousands due to a European fungus, while the arrival of an Asian beetle in packing wood from China in 2001 has begun to devastate a number of species of American ash. The sugar maple could also be almost wiped out by the invasion of the Asian long-horned beetle. And the list goes on.

What can we do? Preston lists measures that can be taken for individual trees, but acknowledges that little so far has stopped the waves of dying, and he closes with an account that has an air of horrible historical familiarity—a few people, belatedly, picking up the pieces and trying to preserve the memory of what has been lost:

When it became apparent that the eastern hemlock might nearly cease to exist, Blozan [president of the Eastern Native Tree Society] and his partners founded the Tsuga Search Project, an effort to identify and measure the world’s tallest and largest eastern hemlocks before they were gone… In the Cataloochee Valley, Blozan walked into groves where he found what had been the world’s tallest hemlocks. They were already dead, but he climbed the skeletons and measured them anyway. “The data are for someone someday,” he said.

The best of the best

Tyler Cowen rounds up the—possibly US-only—”best of the year” lists that dominate cultural coverage at this time of year. For a rather different take on the end-of-year list, look out for the January issue of Prospect, published next week.

What next for human rights?

To the LSE last night to hear Kenneth Roth, executive director of Human Rights Watch, offer his thoughts on the prospects for the human rights movement in the 21st century. It was an open, honest and surprisingly stimulating talk.

Roth talked about how one of the most powerful weapons in the armoury of a group like HRW is its ability to shame rights-abusing governments into changing their ways by exposing their activities to wider audiences. The difficulty comes when the audience sees nothing shameful about the activities in question; nothing if not even-handed, Roth gave as examples Israeli citizens celebrating harsh treatment of Palestinians at the hands of the IDF, and Palestinian insouciance towards suicide bombings directed against Israeli civilians. The problem, as Roth said, is that human rights norms do not always chime with common-sense intuitions about how we should behave towards those we believe wish us ill. Roth didn’t explore the point—his audience had presumably already bought into the human rights worldview and so didn’t need persuading—but it’s not immediately obvious that norms should always trump intuitions. Julian Baggini’s article in the forthcoming issue of Prospect explores this point, in a British context, further.

Roth was, to my ears anyway, surprisingly forthright in his criticism of the US, both on straightforward human rights grounds—torture, waterboarding, Guantánamo and so on—and for tainting the concept of “humanitarian intervention”—which, Roth was keen to point out, HRW was not opposed to in principle—through mendaciously presenting its invasion of Iraq as a humanitarian war, when in fact it was nothing of the sort. HRW has made enemies among certain sections of the US right, who accuse it of promoting anti-Americanism by applying different standards to the US than to far worse abusers around the world. Responding to a similar charge from an audience questioner, Roth was unapologetic, implying that as American abuses of human rights can encourage nastier regimes to commit similar violations, there is an argument for treating the US as a special case and holding it to higher standards. (I’d be genuinely interested to see him make this case to an audience of neocons.)

In the absence of a US leadership committed to upholding human rights standards, Roth lamented the inability of the EU to step up to the plate—he described it as “consistently punching below its weight,” lamenting the fact that decisions have to be made by consensus. But it’s difficult to know what else to expect from an organisation of 27 states, each with its own national interest and foreign policy agenda, with collectively very little appetite to transfer decision-making power to unelected elites. One often gets the feeling from those on the American left that they wish the EU could get its act together and act as a genuine counterbalance to the swaggering US. But I’m afraid it ain’t gonna happen any time soon, folks.

How to find a lost canoe

I was delighted to learn that the key evidence to emerge thus far in “canoegate” (a place where spurious etymology meets lazy journalism) emerged not via the expert efforts of Interpol but via an anonymous woman going onto google images and typing in the words “John”, “Anne” and “Panama.” At which point the crucial image appeared, apparently showing amnesiac canoeist John Darwin safely standing next to his wife in Panama in 2006, an inconveniently long time before he was officially due to return from the dead.

Intriguingly, after all the recent media coverage, the trick still works. Simply go to google images, type in those three words in that order, and you’ll find staring back at you the now-infamous mugs of two of “our customers” from the move to Panama website. And while you’re at it, take a look at the top few image results for the words “tony” and “blair.” Clearly some kind of truth-gremlin has taken up google residence…

Prospect online this week

  • Ben Rawlence and Uma Ramiah report from Kisengo in southeastern DR Congo, where the discovery earlier this year of the mineral coltan—used to manufacture capacitors in mobile phones—has proved to be a mixed blessing.
  • Lucy Wadham explains how the Sarkozy divorce reveals the rise of something insidious in France—the Anglo-Saxon attitude towards privacy.
  • Shami Chakrabarti, director of Liberty, replies to Alex Carlile’s attack on Liberty’s report comparing pre-charge detention periods across countries.
  • Bella Thomas on the strange response to Andrew Anthony’s book Fall-Out.

Turner prize - everyone’s a winner

Mark Wallinger has taken this years’ Turner Prize - not for his haunting video of nocturnal, bear-suit clad wanderings, ‘Sleeper’, but for ‘State Britain’, his recreation of Brian Haw’s peace camp display.
buy cialis
buy levitra
buy propecia
buy soma
buy viagra
cheap cialis
cheap viagra
generic cialis
generic levitra
buy levitra
buy levitra
generic viagra
online cialis
online levitra
online viagra
buy cialis
buy cialis
buy viagra
generic cialis
generic viagra
buy cialis
buy viagra
generic cialis
generic viagra
generic cialis
online viagra

Accepting the £25,000 award, Wallinger stated “It was the best thing that was shown this year, and I don’t think I should be humble about it.” Wallinger continues the precedent set by Madonna, the 2001 prize-giver, whose veneration for plain speaking caused almost as much controversy as the prize itself - “In a world where political correctness is valued over honesty I would also like to say, right on m****r f***ers, everyone is a winner.”

Financially, Wallinger is still some £65,000 short of winning, having spent around £90,000 recreating the posters and political paraphernalia which Haw had spent five years amassing as part of his protest against the economic sanctions against Iraq in 2001. Will Wallinger be graciously sharing his spoils with his muse? When asked, his response was certainly candid - “What I do with the prize money is my business.”

Amis, Freely, Husain and terror

First things first: the Whitworth Hall was a splendid venue for tonight’s debate on literature and terrorism. It’s an elegant heap of neo-Gothic excess at the heart of Manchester university’s campus, with the proportions of a cathedral and an atmosphere to match. Our three speakers arranged themselves behind a narrow white-cloth-enrobed table that looked more than a little like an altar, while behind them soared a monstrous organ, evoking for me a bat in flight or the underbelly of some gothic stealth-bomber. With a near sell-out crowd of 500 in attendance, the scene was set for some serious debate.

And of seriousness there was plenty. Of debate, disappointingly, less so. Perhaps because the conversation cleaved so closely to the “terrorism” side of its remit, there was a remarkable degree of consensus on display, and only at the end did it spark into anything like mutual inquisition. Of the three speakers, in fact, only one was operating at a pitch excitable enough for engagement, and that was Maureen Freely, who appeared at several moments to be struggling to master near-overwhelming feelings and who gave what I felt was the most refreshingly direct perspective of the evening.

Continue reading ‘Amis, Freely, Husain and terror’

Coming at you fairly soon from Manchester

Oh dear. The rumours are true: Terry Eagleton will not be able to join Martin Amis in debate this evening in Manchester, due to his “international commitments” (and not—as was made clear to me by the University when I phoned up to check—not in any way because he may have bottled it).

There should still be some lively discussing going on, however, as Amis is being joined by both the translator, author, teacher and journalist Maureen Freely (best known for her translations of Orhan Pamuk) and by Ed Husain, author of The Islamist. A piece Husain wrote for Comment is Free yesterday gives some taste of his likely attitude towards “Martin Amis, who has found Islam a convenient whipping boy for all things religious”—feelings, doubtless, will be running high on all sides.

In the absence of Eagleton, live blogging doesn’t seem the most interesting way to report on the event: so instead, my laptop and I will divulge a detailed report onto this blog later this evening. Stand by for breezy observations on the clash of civilizations.