As American’s we’ve learned to embrace the contradictions we face between the things we say, things we’ve said, and its effects on our actual moral stances that we claim to care about. We understand the difference, the necessary gap. By this point everyone of us has implicitly lied, signing a way a long sheet of paper after claiming to have read and understood the whole thing: knowing full well we could not understand its complex entrapping rhetoric had we the free time to read it. We don’t mind this. Many Anti-Rick Perry supporters say “he’ll never be elected! he wanted to seceed the nation!” thinking this self-contradicting statement will hurt both his public opinion polls and his chances of winning primary. It can be argued that if the Anti-Rick Perrian is a remaining Obama Progressive Left supporter that the same statements can be made concerning Obama’s own re-election campaign, and that’s the key. We’ve all learned to realize that ‘politicians are just like people too’ and maybe some of the things they’ve previously said are like old facebook statuses… people are dynamic right? When it comes to wanting to like a candidate we can interpret the self-contradictory logic as part of his human quality.
Earlier today Rick Perry stood firm by his recent open borders policy issue affirming that in-state tuition should be given to illegal aliens if they’ve been living in the in-district house for more than 3 years. Rather than relying on typical policy platform to announce his stance, he is demonstrative and outspoken in what he does or doesn’t veto. By allowing education to be included as part of an economic package, and to be separated from rights of citizenry sets a new tone. It still sticks to the survival of the fittest bottom dollar, think globalization, package but it removes its conservative protectionist policy. The controversy of Rick Perry lies in his disregard for social political values (mexicans/blacks/abortions/hpv’s) but he is very firm in his neoliberal economic policy and his open border policys, and he has been very consistent in his pursuit of global investment opportunities since as early as 2007. Why should texans be offended to have their jobs taken away by somebody willing to do it cheaper and more efficient when it was texans who voted in Rick Perry to allow for the open border policy’s in the first place? It was the open borders NAFTA policy that from 1992-1997 encouraged 35 million immigrants to move to the US as Mexico was unable to compete with cheap corn prices.
It SHOULD come as no surprise then, that the bilderberg group representative Rick Perry, continues on course. It is controversial in light of being found to be controversial, in that a lot of lower class and middle class Texans thought they had voted somebody in to office that would make it easier for Texan citizens to work over non-texan citizens, not more difficult. This is emblematic of the cognitive dissonance most Americans face facing globalization continuing to elect somebody opening us up internationally as long as he’d wear a belt buckle and jeans.
Another odd thing to face in the future will be the discouraging news of the tech industry. We hope that through dominating facebook and google, as Americans we might be able to use tech innovations like apple to make us dominate the international market place. Little do we realize how international these companies are, or are becoming and how little of an effect ultimately it will have on a broader source of income for a large group of social classes. We will say “so the tech industry happened, then why is unemployment at a steady 20 percent?” Looking at Rick Perry who praised austin’s previous tech boom, saying, why can nobody get a decent sandwich or afford bread milk or gas? Why is the rent still too damn why? As the world slips global only those at the top of the totem poll (3 percent) benefit, the rest of us slide our middle class ipad dreams into argentina-style standard of living.
“UNITED NATIONS, Sept. 12 (Xinhua) — Permanent Representatives of China, Russia, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan to the United Nations jointly sent a letter to UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon here Monday, requesting him to circulate the International Code of Conduct for Information Security as a formal UN document of the 66th session of the General Assembly.
The four ambassadors called on in the letter all countries to conduct further discussions on the Code, drafted by the four countries, under the UN framework in a bid to reach consensus on international norms and rules that regulate states’ conduct for information and cyber activities at an early date.
The Code is the first of its kind to put forward comprehensive and systematic proposals on international information security rules.
According to the Code, its purpose is to identify states’ rights and responsibilities in information space, promote their constructive and responsible behaviors, and enhance their cooperation in addressing the common threats and challenges in information space, so as to ensure the Information and Communication Technologies (ICTs) including networks to be solely used to the benefit of social and economic development and people’ s well-being, and consistent with the objective of maintaining international stability and security.”
There is increased moves from major players internationally regarding internet regulations. We know what people mean by using the internet to promote constructive and responsible behavior.
It’s difficult to see internet regulations take form. They are happening behind the seems, is anyone really keeping track?