With the recent advent of passionate environmentalism, populations across the world have converted to 'eco-friendly.' Later this month, Rollins College will be co-hosting the 7th Annual Global Peace Film Festival. The festival is held in order to promote a wide variety of ideas, both new and old, each serving the purpose of promoting world peace.
One film of particular interest, is titled 'One Village Same Ocean.' Director's synopsis:
'As a cruise ship threatens to move into Mayport Village, residents and supporters band together to show that community, livelihood, environment and health cannot be bargained for. Journey the seas with shrimpers, and unveil the area's astounding lost history. This is the story of a small fishing village fighting the powerful cruise ship industry. Will these ships continue polluting the very places they promote visiting? Or will one camera and a wealth of knowledge unite supporters in protecting the ocean and the fishermen left along its’ shores.'
Josh Hansbrough 2009
You can see the screening of this film on Saturday, September 26th at 3:45 pm in the Winter Park Library, opposite Rollins College.
Tuesday, September 1, 2009
Sunday, April 29, 2007
Economics?
well, this is going to be my last post of the year. sad, even though it is quite possible that nobody has even read anything i've written. but if you have, then this is the end of the subscription.
i'm just going to reflect on my gameplay throughout the semester, and analyze how it has related to a class about economics. i would have to say that if this was strictly an economics course, then the hours devoted to gaming would have been a total and utter waste. i feel that the game deals a lot more with the development of nation states and survival strategies than anything else. however, since our course also doubles as a history class, the game becomes much more relevant. it ties in a lot of specifics in terms how things game to be.
the only thing that i could say that would have made the game more relavent is that maybe it could have made the person who was engaging in the campaign cope and deal with the events that went down. i feel like some of the major societal changes that occurred (like the rise and fall of feudalism for example) went more or less unnoticed. when in reality, they were some of the most important economic developments that our world has ever seen. i just feel that it led me to only find new ways to complete the game, not question why things were happening.
i'm just going to reflect on my gameplay throughout the semester, and analyze how it has related to a class about economics. i would have to say that if this was strictly an economics course, then the hours devoted to gaming would have been a total and utter waste. i feel that the game deals a lot more with the development of nation states and survival strategies than anything else. however, since our course also doubles as a history class, the game becomes much more relevant. it ties in a lot of specifics in terms how things game to be.
the only thing that i could say that would have made the game more relavent is that maybe it could have made the person who was engaging in the campaign cope and deal with the events that went down. i feel like some of the major societal changes that occurred (like the rise and fall of feudalism for example) went more or less unnoticed. when in reality, they were some of the most important economic developments that our world has ever seen. i just feel that it led me to only find new ways to complete the game, not question why things were happening.
Monday, April 9, 2007
the importance of keeping up with the times
another article that i recently read on economist.com, dealt with a little bit of history. how appropriate for this class right? yea, that's what i thought when i read it. lucked out i guess. anyways, the article essentially lays down the importance of taking advantage of an absolute advantage. sorry for the redundancy. it also gives a real life example of how important it is in today's growing world (largely the fault of globalization) to 'keep up with the times,' and accept the fact that the free-market society is sweeping across the globe. resistance is futile.
this is most definitely the case with the country of ghana...not so much with north korea. back in the 1960's, the gnp per head for each of the two countries was approximately $390 american. however, a series of events have lead north korea to currently posses the 9th largest economy in the world, and ghana to be stuck at the 94th. to make a long story short, when ghana gained independence from britain back in the 1957, the first president instilled a pan-african socialist ideology within the country. back then, ghana had a world-wide absolute advantage in producing cocoa. the administration of ghana unfortunately set the market price of cocoa at 25 cents per pound, and stepped in as the third party in international trade. they sold the cocoa to the rest of the world at market price, which was 50 cents per pound, using the profits for other governmental operations. this caused the cocoa farmers to abstain from farming cocoa, and they turned to farming other crops. this, combined with a number of extremely high tariffs on imports, created a protectionist philosophy that kept ghana's economy stuck in the past.
north korea, who was an economic equal to ghana until their independence, slowly crept up in the 'world rankings.' the north korean government essentially eliminated all of their tariffs, and issued corporate incentives for firms that traded internationally. even though they had to 'sacrifice' a generation (by sacrifice i mean that north korea had a very educated work force at the time, who mainly farmed. however, they stopped farming, and moved to working in the factories), it proved to greatly benefit the welfare of the country as a whole. north korea recognized the change in the international playing field, and largely reaped the benefits.
once again, this may seem to be a vague connection to civilization iv. lets just assume that i play the game so often and so avidly that i have lost all other intellectual skills, and am having a hard time thinking about anything else other than the game. so it's hard for me to make any connections with real life because i don't know anything else any more. i apologize if that made no sense at all, im on adderall. but through my gameplay, i have come to realize that just as in real life, the free-market society reigns supreme. trading freely with everyone not only builds your economy unlike any other method, but it builds trust and good relations with others. if you are seen as an empire that is open to trade, and will grant the occasional favor or sacrifice, then you will be payed back in the future. in a global world, much like in the game, in a large scope, free trade benefits everyone involved.
this is most definitely the case with the country of ghana...not so much with north korea. back in the 1960's, the gnp per head for each of the two countries was approximately $390 american. however, a series of events have lead north korea to currently posses the 9th largest economy in the world, and ghana to be stuck at the 94th. to make a long story short, when ghana gained independence from britain back in the 1957, the first president instilled a pan-african socialist ideology within the country. back then, ghana had a world-wide absolute advantage in producing cocoa. the administration of ghana unfortunately set the market price of cocoa at 25 cents per pound, and stepped in as the third party in international trade. they sold the cocoa to the rest of the world at market price, which was 50 cents per pound, using the profits for other governmental operations. this caused the cocoa farmers to abstain from farming cocoa, and they turned to farming other crops. this, combined with a number of extremely high tariffs on imports, created a protectionist philosophy that kept ghana's economy stuck in the past.
north korea, who was an economic equal to ghana until their independence, slowly crept up in the 'world rankings.' the north korean government essentially eliminated all of their tariffs, and issued corporate incentives for firms that traded internationally. even though they had to 'sacrifice' a generation (by sacrifice i mean that north korea had a very educated work force at the time, who mainly farmed. however, they stopped farming, and moved to working in the factories), it proved to greatly benefit the welfare of the country as a whole. north korea recognized the change in the international playing field, and largely reaped the benefits.
once again, this may seem to be a vague connection to civilization iv. lets just assume that i play the game so often and so avidly that i have lost all other intellectual skills, and am having a hard time thinking about anything else other than the game. so it's hard for me to make any connections with real life because i don't know anything else any more. i apologize if that made no sense at all, im on adderall. but through my gameplay, i have come to realize that just as in real life, the free-market society reigns supreme. trading freely with everyone not only builds your economy unlike any other method, but it builds trust and good relations with others. if you are seen as an empire that is open to trade, and will grant the occasional favor or sacrifice, then you will be payed back in the future. in a global world, much like in the game, in a large scope, free trade benefits everyone involved.
walk the walk
i'm going to be honest with everyone. i have run out of 'original' ideas to talk about in these blogs. well at least in terms of coming up with a detailed analysis of my strategies and tactics for completion of a campaign. so this week, i'm going to discuss a current event, and attempt to relate it to some current game play that is underway.
i have recently read an article in an online economics journal, which addressed president bush's current stance on a free-market society, or lack there of. the bush administration has demonstrated to much of the american public that above all else, it prizes a free-market society. however, president bush has recently signed legislation that levies a substantial tariff on the import of chinese glossy paper. this was obviously done as an effort to protect that portion of the american economy from being harmed by foreign dumping. one might not see this as being a huge deal because the glossy paper imported from china make up less than 0.1% of the total amount of chinese imports. however, what the article points out is the fact that this new tariff is going to open the floodgates for other industries to file anti-dumping claims against other nations. it is far more symbolic than anything else.
this legalisation makes the bush and his republican administration seem fickle, and may cause a number of new problems with his 'fast-track' policy that expire june 30th of this year. the point that i am trying to make while relating this to civilization iv, is that in order to be taken seriously as a prosperous nation, the government in power must stand true to it's principles. i've experienced it in the game; if i trade periodically with a myriad of different empires, with no regard to order or a pattern, you cause more problems than it's actually worth. in order to thrive, you have to choose a policy to govern by, and follow through. you have to 'walk the walk' if you're going to claim to be a free-market society or employ protectionist policies if that is your choice. you cannot dance between two or more ideologies. you will not build rapport with your trading partners, or gain the trust of your allies.
i have recently read an article in an online economics journal, which addressed president bush's current stance on a free-market society, or lack there of. the bush administration has demonstrated to much of the american public that above all else, it prizes a free-market society. however, president bush has recently signed legislation that levies a substantial tariff on the import of chinese glossy paper. this was obviously done as an effort to protect that portion of the american economy from being harmed by foreign dumping. one might not see this as being a huge deal because the glossy paper imported from china make up less than 0.1% of the total amount of chinese imports. however, what the article points out is the fact that this new tariff is going to open the floodgates for other industries to file anti-dumping claims against other nations. it is far more symbolic than anything else.
this legalisation makes the bush and his republican administration seem fickle, and may cause a number of new problems with his 'fast-track' policy that expire june 30th of this year. the point that i am trying to make while relating this to civilization iv, is that in order to be taken seriously as a prosperous nation, the government in power must stand true to it's principles. i've experienced it in the game; if i trade periodically with a myriad of different empires, with no regard to order or a pattern, you cause more problems than it's actually worth. in order to thrive, you have to choose a policy to govern by, and follow through. you have to 'walk the walk' if you're going to claim to be a free-market society or employ protectionist policies if that is your choice. you cannot dance between two or more ideologies. you will not build rapport with your trading partners, or gain the trust of your allies.
Sunday, March 25, 2007
time for something new
to tell the truth, i'm beginning to get bored with civilization iv. so in order to combat this unfortunate occurrence, i have started to experiment with different scenarios and strategies. what i have employed in my most recent campaign, is the strategy is total and complete isolation. i begin the game normal in all respects; i forge a capital city, begin raising an army and accruing resources. however, i have limited my number of cities to 4, and have decided not to trade with anybody...under any circumstances. i have in a sense, cut myself off from the rest of the world.
what i have discovered, is exactly what we have learned to expect from our teachings in class , and from what we are supposed to read. this leads me to believe that what we are being taught, for once, is not a load of shit. thank god. but anyways, back to my campaign. substantial amounts of time have passed, and i have noticed that i am extremely far behind what i normally am. this is a controlled experiment, mind you. i am the greek empire, as usual, and have played in the exact same fashion as i always do. but due to the fact that i have employed extreme isolationism, i am falling further and further behind the rest of the world.
while playing this, i noticed that this situation is pretty damn close to a civilization of people that we learned about early in the course. the people of papa new guinea come to mind. much like my civilization, the people of papa new guinea have thrived as a people for thousands of years, but have never made the leap passed hunter-gatherers. now in my campaign, the people naturally begin to farm, but still are substantially sub-par in all other respects. papa new guineans have spent centuries in isolation, and if you allow me to employ a cliche, "stuck in time." because i refuse to trade, i'm just waiting for mansa musa or theodore roosevelt to get pissed off enough to beat the living hell out of me. i figure it's only a matter of time before it's game over.
what i have discovered, is exactly what we have learned to expect from our teachings in class , and from what we are supposed to read. this leads me to believe that what we are being taught, for once, is not a load of shit. thank god. but anyways, back to my campaign. substantial amounts of time have passed, and i have noticed that i am extremely far behind what i normally am. this is a controlled experiment, mind you. i am the greek empire, as usual, and have played in the exact same fashion as i always do. but due to the fact that i have employed extreme isolationism, i am falling further and further behind the rest of the world.
while playing this, i noticed that this situation is pretty damn close to a civilization of people that we learned about early in the course. the people of papa new guinea come to mind. much like my civilization, the people of papa new guinea have thrived as a people for thousands of years, but have never made the leap passed hunter-gatherers. now in my campaign, the people naturally begin to farm, but still are substantially sub-par in all other respects. papa new guineans have spent centuries in isolation, and if you allow me to employ a cliche, "stuck in time." because i refuse to trade, i'm just waiting for mansa musa or theodore roosevelt to get pissed off enough to beat the living hell out of me. i figure it's only a matter of time before it's game over.
Tuesday, March 6, 2007
Strange Similarities
while playing one of my original campaigns, i have experienced much success in being the most advanced country in many aspects of the game. according to the score that is kept on the right (what i've always thought to be the 'advancement meter'), i have always been extremely far ahead of the curve. it hasn't appeared, and doesn't appear that any nation can hold a candle to my civilization.
at the beginning of the game, i hit the ground running. i began making giant leaps and bounds in terms of the military, religious, cultural, educational, and productive aspects of my empire. however, i have noticed an increasing trend in my campaign. it is that some of the nations that i am competing against and trading with are suddenly creeping closer to becoming my economic equal. the gaps are closing quickly, and for a while, i struggled to come to terms with this strange phenomenon.
however, it dawned upon me that this situation posses uncanny similarities to today's global situation regarding the united states and the progress of other countries around the world. since the beginning of globalization in the 1960's, the united states has remained so far ahead of the rest of the world that it gave us a false impression of invincibility. this is no longer the case. the united states, just like my empire in the game, is still advancing at a respectable rate, but due to direct foreign investment and development of standards in otherwise impoverished nations, they are progressing that much faster.
i feel that this is exactly what is occurring in my game. i have been trading extensively with the russians, and because of it, they have been given a boost in terms of economic progress. china is predicted to overtake the united states economically in the near future, and it is likely that russia will do the same to me in the game.
at the beginning of the game, i hit the ground running. i began making giant leaps and bounds in terms of the military, religious, cultural, educational, and productive aspects of my empire. however, i have noticed an increasing trend in my campaign. it is that some of the nations that i am competing against and trading with are suddenly creeping closer to becoming my economic equal. the gaps are closing quickly, and for a while, i struggled to come to terms with this strange phenomenon.
however, it dawned upon me that this situation posses uncanny similarities to today's global situation regarding the united states and the progress of other countries around the world. since the beginning of globalization in the 1960's, the united states has remained so far ahead of the rest of the world that it gave us a false impression of invincibility. this is no longer the case. the united states, just like my empire in the game, is still advancing at a respectable rate, but due to direct foreign investment and development of standards in otherwise impoverished nations, they are progressing that much faster.
i feel that this is exactly what is occurring in my game. i have been trading extensively with the russians, and because of it, they have been given a boost in terms of economic progress. china is predicted to overtake the united states economically in the near future, and it is likely that russia will do the same to me in the game.
Sunday, February 25, 2007
city placement
as i continue to play civilization iv, i am learning more and more about some of the basic strategies when it comes to producing an empire that can stand the test of time. one of these strategies that has proved itself to be extremely important, is that of premeditated city placement. whether it is to provide your empire with protection, or to fully utilize the available resources, i am convinced that it is imperative to make intelligent decisions while placing a city.
in terms of resources, you must first understand where different resources are located. obviously, it is beneficial to have a city on the coast, because a fishing industry is an excellent source of food for your empire. another example is having a city near forests is important as well so that you can enjoy the benefits of excess lumber.
aside from building cities near resources, i feel that it is also a good move to build your city so that you are protected by the natural surroundings. even if this means searching for the right spot for your capital when the game begins, it might prove to be worth the extra time. in my current campaign, my capital is placed right in the middle of a peninsula, restricting the number of ways that the city can be attacked. if you can take advantage of the natural boarders, you can base your military defense off of that, and be stronger than you ever would be if you were defending yourself in the open.
to me, it seems like this theory has held up throughout history. until the spanish came to the new world, the mayans were tucked away in the mountains of peru. they were protected from other peoples by the mountains, and remained hidden from anyone and everyone.
in terms of resources, you must first understand where different resources are located. obviously, it is beneficial to have a city on the coast, because a fishing industry is an excellent source of food for your empire. another example is having a city near forests is important as well so that you can enjoy the benefits of excess lumber.
aside from building cities near resources, i feel that it is also a good move to build your city so that you are protected by the natural surroundings. even if this means searching for the right spot for your capital when the game begins, it might prove to be worth the extra time. in my current campaign, my capital is placed right in the middle of a peninsula, restricting the number of ways that the city can be attacked. if you can take advantage of the natural boarders, you can base your military defense off of that, and be stronger than you ever would be if you were defending yourself in the open.
to me, it seems like this theory has held up throughout history. until the spanish came to the new world, the mayans were tucked away in the mountains of peru. they were protected from other peoples by the mountains, and remained hidden from anyone and everyone.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)