Jeremy Lin, international relations icon?

Jeremy Lin as a shared cultural moment in the US and China, a sports highlight (several, so far), and a chess piece in the world of diplomacy?  Shout out to Robert Wright at The Atlantic for that latter connection:

In any event, having heard a few interviews with Lin, my guess is that he’ll handle delicate questions gracefully, and that he won’t let international celebrity distract him from his on-court mission. And that’s all that’s really necessary; it’s not like he has to become a roving ambassador of good will in order to play a constructive role in international relations.

Of course, this whole conjecture about Lin’s diplomatic value presupposes that he’s the real deal–that he’ll be star for some time to come. My own guess (not that you asked) after watching last night’s game is that he will indeed hang on to star status so long as he gets better at hanging on to the ball in heavy traffic. So I’m cautiously optimistic that Jeremy Lin could wind up, so to speak, doing God’s work.

via Linsanity as a Diplomatic Asset – Robert Wright – International – The Atlantic.

For what its worth, the hype has met reality thus far–which is what makes this such an interesting subject for speculation.

On Speech Puts the US Government on Defense in Durban

This is how a single speech–by a youthful member of a non-governmental organization–can frame an issue and challenge the power of an entire government.  Forget the concern that small states may not have as much relative power; in a multilateral forum, even a simple representative can shape the narrative and thus influence the outcome.

A Middlebury College junior confronts the chief American envoy at the global climate change conference in Durban, South Africa, demanding an “urgent path” to a legally binding treaty. She draws a standing ovation but is then ejected from the room.

via Energy and Environment – Green Blog – NYTimes.com.

Intellectual Roots of Wall Street Protest

Take II on digging out up archeology of where Occupy Wall Street came from, what they want, and how effective they may be.  In the Chronicle, an exploration of its roots from the academy:

But Occupy Wall Street’s most defining characteristics—its decentralized nature and its intensive process of participatory, consensus-based decision-making—are rooted in other precincts of academe and activism: in the scholarship of anarchism and, specifically, in an ethnography of central Madagascar.

via Intellectual Roots of Wall Street Protest Lie in Academe – Faculty – The Chronicle of Higher Education.

 

Is there a religious dimension, the “shining city“?

Could OCW represent a new form of discourse, “political disobedience” against the “structure of partisan politics” as philosopher Bernard Harcourt writes in The Stone.

Is it working?  Room for Debate parses how OCW could it work better with Paul Berman, Satya Pattnayak, Naomi Klein and others.

The movement has gone global–allowing an opening for anarchists to cause trouble in Rome.  And it appears to be growing according to Silvia Pojoli in Rome…Occupy the World?

And Slate has a recap addressing the ongoing issues of where they may be right about the 1 percent, how they have influenced U.S. politic already, and how they compare to the Tea Party.

 

Quaker House at the UN

How much do you know about Quaker activity at the UN?  They hew toward “small circles and quiet processes” and are especially focused on peace building.  Early involvement included the League of Nations with formal representation since the late 1940′s. Camila Campisi, UN representative for the Quaker UN Office explains this and more in a featured  ACUNS podcast:

http://www.acuns.org/cmedia/swf/audio_player/mp3Player.swf%3bv110824762

via Campisi.mp3 – ACUNS.

Effort Fosters Tolerance Among Religions – NYTimes.com

Speaking of cooperative efforts (although only partially about consensus) consider the efforts of Patel on interfaith activism:

Interfaith activism could be a cause on college campuses, he argued, as much “a norm” as the environmental or women’s rights movements, as ambitious as Teach for America. The crucial ingredient was to gather students of different religions together not just to talk, he said, but to work together to feed the hungry, tutor children or build housing.

“Interfaith cooperation should be more than five people in a book club,” Mr. Patel said, navigating his compact car to a panel discussion at Elmhurst College just west of downtown Chicago, while answering questions and dictating e-mails to an aide. “You need a critical mass of interfaith leaders who know how to build relationships across religious divides, and see it as a lifelong endeavor.”

via Effort Fosters Tolerance Among Religions – NYTimes.com.

Introducing Carne Ross: An independent diplomat

Watch Carne Ross explain the his backstory rationale for Independent Diplomat on TED Talks, and a new model–diplomat as free agent.

YouTube – Carne Ross: An independent diplomat.

Booklist | Khanna’s Take on Running the World

The author who solidified BRICs in our vocabulary gets panned in NYTBR by Stephanie Giry, editor at large at Foreign Affairs.  Still–its on my “to read” list, but may only make the Kindle format instead of the more seminal ‘actual’ bookshelf:

Khanna hangs so many of his hopes for progress on the good works of the megadiplomats that his book can read like a roster of role models, an inspirational Who’s Who: let us praise John Ruggie of Harvard University and Peter Eigen of Transparency International and Carne Ross of Independent Diplomat; the International Crisis Group and LeapFrog Investments. Bizarrely, it also devolves into a kind of self-help manual that calls for “cosmopolitan, or cause-mopolitan” participation.Channeling Stephen R. Covey, Khanna identifies “the seven habits of highly effective diplomats.” And here are a couple of his injunctions, part morale-boosting, part shaming: “We are the new global architecture”; “If you can afford to buy this book, or have the technology to order it, you have no excuse not to contribute to the new megadiplomacy.”

via Mosh Pit Diplomacy – NYTimes.com.

How Gene Sharp Changed the World

A summary of the NYT front pager on Gene Sharp retired Harvard researcher, who may be unknown to you now, but appears to be a resource to young Serbian and Egyptian activists, as well as others in Czechoslovakia and Burma:

For those who think that books can’t change the world, there’s a wonderful piece in yesterday’s Times about Gene Sharp, the eighty-three-year-old “shy intellectual” whose writings on nonviolent revolution have played a significant role in peaceful uprisings around the globe, including those in the Middle East.

via The Book Bench: Reluctant Revolutionary : The New Yorker.

Regulating the Net at Home and Abroad: Brazil Leads Discussion at UN

Even as U.S. Republicans create a rider to block net neutrality, according to Google’s “chief internet evangelist”, an international panel at UNCTAD is heading down the wrong path in discussions by the Committee on Science and Technology this week to consider regulating the net.  The story has garnered coverage on both sides–left and right.  The coalition of NGOs, of which Google is a part, organized a petition to oppose the move:

But last week the UN Committee on Science and Technology announced that only governments would be able to sit on a working group set up to examine improvements to the IGF—one of the Internet’s most important discussion forums. This move has been condemned by the Internet Governance Caucus, the Internet Society (ISOC), the International Chamber of Commerce and numerous other organizations—who have published a joint letter (PDF) and launched an online petition to mobilize opposition. Today, I have signed that petition on Google’s behalf because we don’t believe governments should be allowed to grant themselves a monopoly on Internet governance. The current bottoms-up, open approach works—protecting users from vested interests and enabling rapid innovation. Let’s fight to keep it that way.

via Official Google Blog: Governments shouldn’t have a monopoly on Internet governance.

 

Can Twitter Lead People to the Streets? – Room for Debate – NYTimes.com

Do social networking sites rule the ramparts?  The Room for Debate blog explores the notion that what we saw in the Green Revolution and also Moldova were not representative of the true power of sites such as Twitter.  They cite Malcolm Gladwell in the recent New Yorker magazine:

“Social networks are effective at increasing participation — by lessening the level of motivation that participation requires,” he writes. And the “weak ties” created by these platforms, he adds, cannot promote the discipline and strategy that true political activism requires.Can social media tools li

via Can Twitter Lead People to the Streets? – Room for Debate – NYTimes.com.

Or, as Jared Keller wrote last summer in the Atlantic, “Twitter was no secret weapon that made the Islamic Republic disappear.”  But it does appear to be an amplifier.