ON this Father’s Day, I would like to share the pain of a father who is going through difficult times because of the “wounds” inflicted by his daughter who had gone against the very principles in life he stood for and hoped his children would follow.
He is a very old friend known for his cheerfulness and a positive outlook in life. I was shocked to see him depressed and very different from the person I used to know.
He said everything was all right until a few years ago when his only daughter disobeyed him and married a man who already had a wife and grown-up children.
He loved the daughter so much and had great hopes for her. His life seems to have come to a standstill and depression has made him a withdrawn and reclusive person who avoids even his close friends and relatives.
This friend is not alone. I realise many fathers today are facing similar problems. Delinquency, drug addiction, immoral activities and crime are some of the problems which have turned their once obedient and caring children into nightmares.
Life is no longer as simple as it used to be when a father’s word was the absolute truth that could not be challenged by the children. This had its pros and cons but by and large, it contributed to peace and unity in the family, as most fathers had the welfare of the family at heart in whatever they did.
Society today is much more complex with tremendous advancements in technology. Today, the role of the elder is becoming irrelevant.
We may be highly developed in technology but we must not fail to realise that the value of experience can only be obtained after years of handling the challenges in life.
We must not forget that wisdom, forbearance and tact acquired through years of experience are equally important in managing the many pressing issues today.
Our fathers may not be technology savvy but their experiences in life were invaluable. We must not ignore them as that would only lead to our downfall.
We should explain our stand, especially when we think they are wrong. As children, obedience to our father should be out of respect for the sacrifices that he has made for our well being.
What we are today is very much due to his dedicated love that no amount of money, technology or education can buy.
He may be outdated in this world of technology but he is still relevant as we need his blessings. We can make him happy by consulting him on the major decisions in our lives. We can make him happy by trying not to do what he hates.
We can make him happy by correcting our wrongs in life. In short, we can make him happy by trying to be the children we were to our dads when we were young. We should not underestimate the value of his blessings in our lives.
On this Father’s Day, let us try to heal the wounds we have caused through disobedience by mending our wrongful ways. Obedience to our fathers should not be seen as a sign of weakness but as a sign of respect and faith in them.
Dr CHRIS ANTHONY, Butterworth
Sunday, June 20, 2010
Thursday, June 17, 2010
U.S. targets bank, shipping in new Iran sanctions
More Reuters Results for:
""
David Lawder
WASHINGTON
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad speaks in Dushanbe, June 9, 2010.
Credit: Reuters/Nozim Kalandarov
Credit: Reuters/Nozim Kalandarov
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - The U.S. Treasury on Wednesday imposed new sanctions on Iran to curb its nuclear program, blacklisting another of its state-controlled banks, companies that are fronts for its state shipping line, and more of its Revolutionary Guard Corps.
The actions are the first set of U.S. measures to implement new United Nations Security Council sanctions on Iran approved last week. They prohibit U.S. transactions with the blacklisted entities and seek to freeze any assets they may have under U.S. jurisdiction.
The Treasury also took a separate step to squeeze Iran's energy sector by identifying some 20 petroleum and petrochemical companies as being under Iranian government control -- an action that puts them off limits to U.S. businesses under a general trade embargo.
A number of the firms are based outside of Iran and their ties to Tehran were far from obvious, Treasury officials said. They also identified two insurance companies that would fall under the trade embargo, including one based in Britain.
"Our actions today are designed to deter other governments and foreign financial institutions from dealing with these entities and thereby supporting Iran's illicit activities," U.S. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner told a news briefing.
He added that the United States planned more actions to boost financial pressure on Iran in the coming weeks.
"We will continue to target Iran's support for terrorist organizations. We will continue to focus on Iran's Revolutionary Guard," he said. "And we will continue to expose Iran's efforts to evade international sanctions."
The Treasury said it added Post Bank of Iran to its list of specially designated proliferators of weapons of mass destruction, marking the 16th bank in Iran that it has sought to cut off from the international financial system.
Since Bank Sepah was sanctioned in 2007, Post Bank has stepped in to handle and disguise international transactions on its behalf, said Stuart Levey, Treasury undersecretary for terrorism and financial intelligence.
Among these were a transfer worth millions of dollars to Hong Kong Electronics, a previously blacklisted firm involved in North Korea's weapons proliferation efforts, Levey said. Previously, Post Bank only operated domestically in Iran.
SHIPPING SHELL-GAME
The Treasury's action also aims to thwart Islamic Republic of Iran Shipping Lines (IRISL) from skirting previous sanctions against it by renaming vessels and shifting them to new front companies. It blacklisted five such companies, identified 27 new vessels blocked under the sanctions, and updated entries for 71 others that were renamed, reregistered and flying new flags.
The new Treasury sanctions also take further aim at the Iran Revolutionary Guard Corps, blacklisting its air force and missile commands over their activities in the development of ballistic missiles. The United States had previously sanctioned Revolutionary Guard entities over their support for terrorist activities and Iran's nuclear and missile programs.
The Revolutionary Guard has taken over increasingly large parts of Iran's economy and "should not have any place in the world financial system," Levey said.
Iran denies Western allegations that it is seeking atomic weapons, insisting that it only wants peaceful nuclear energy.
The U.N. resolution called for measures against new Iranian banks abroad if a connection to the nuclear or missile programs is suspected, as well as vigilance over transactions with any Iranian bank, including its central bank. It also called on countries to blacklist entities linked to IRISL and the Revolutionary Guard, and urged a cargo inspection regime like the one in place for North Korea.
INTERNATIONAL COOPERATION
The U.S. actions come as the European Union states this week are considering their own sanctions over and above the U.N. resolution, including actions against Iranian banks and insurance companies involved in trade finance. The EU package could be ready by mid-July.
The success of U.S. sanctions on Iranian entities will depend largely on whether foreign governments and businesses heed them. So far, many European banks have halted trade with firms on Treasury blacklists, and U.S. officials plan a major effort to persuade governments to support the U.S. sanctions and take similar steps.
U.S. Senator Joseph Lieberman said he expects Congress to finish shortly legislation tightening U.S. sanctions on Iran that will include provisions affecting the supply of refined petroleum products to Tehran, and add to sanctions on its financial sector.
Lieberman, an independent, is a member of a House-Senate committee of negotiators working on final details of the bill and said it could pass by July 4.
"There definitely will be refined petroleum products provisions in there," he told reporters. "I think there also will be really powerful sanctions against the financial sector in Iran."
Give away riches urges Buffett
Microsoft Corp. co-founder Bill Gates and billionaire investor Warren Buffett are launching a campaign to get other American billionaires to give at least half their wealth to charity.
Buffett, chairman and CEO of Berkshire Hathaway Inc., said in a letter introducing the concept that he couldn't be happier with his decision in 2006 to give 99 per cent of his roughly $US46 billion ($A53.3 billion) fortune to charity.
Patty Stonesifer, former CEO of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, said on Wednesday that Gates and Buffett have been campaigning for the past year to get others to donate the bulk of their wealth.
The friends and philanthropic colleagues are asking people to pledge to donate either during their lifetime or at the time of their death. They estimate their efforts could generate $US600 billion ($A695.17 billion) dollars in charitable giving.
In 2009, American philanthropies received a total of about $US300 billion ($A347.58 billion) in donations, according to The Chronicle of Philanthropy.
The handful of billionaires approached so far have embraced the campaign, said Stonesifer, a close friend of Gates who offered to speak about the effort.
Four wealthy couples have already announced their pledges, including Los Angeles philanthropists Eli and Edythe Broad, Gerry and Marguerite Lenfest of Philadelphia, John and Ann Doerr of Menlo Park, California, and John and Tasha Mortgridge of San Jose, California.
In addition to making a donation commitment, Gates and Buffett are asking billionaires to pledge to give wisely and learn from their peers.
They said they were inspired by the philanthropic efforts of not just other billionaires but of the people of all financial means and backgrounds who have given generously to make the world a better place.
Their philosophical forebears are the Carnegie and Rockefeller families, who donated most of their wealth back to improve society and were the grandparents of modern philanthropy, said Stacy Palmer, editor of The Chronicle of Philanthropy.
Ted Turner's announcement 13 years ago of a $US1 billion ($A1.16 billion) gift to United Nations programs also was done in part to inspire other big givers, but did not have a noticeable result, Palmer said.
"It's a stretch to see how they're going to get to the $US600 billion ($A695.17 billion) figure," she said, noting that only 17 people on the Forbes list of the 400 wealthiest people in America are also on the Chronicle's list of the most generous American donors.
Many of these people may be giving anonymously or plan to donate when they die, but the bulk of money raised by charities today comes from non-billionaires giving $US5, $US10 or $US50 at a time, Palmer said.
Buffett's plan will eventually split most of his shares of his Omaha, Nebraska, company between five charitable foundations, with the largest chunk going to the Gates Foundation.
He also plans to give Class B Berkshire shares to the Susan Thompson Buffett Foundation, which he and his late first wife started, and to the three foundations run by his three children.
Buffett said in 2006 that his other 73,332 Class A shares of Berkshire stock, worth about $US8 billion ($A9.27 billion), would also go to philanthropy, but he didn't specify how those shares would be distributed.
Bill and Melinda Gates have made a similar pledge through the establishment of their Seattle-based foundation.
Gates and Buffett are asking each individual or couple who make a pledge to do so publicly, with a letter explaining their decision.
"The pledge is a moral commitment to give, not a legal contract. It does not involve pooling money or supporting a particular set of causes or organisations," they explain in a written statement about the project.
AP
Newscribe : get free news in real time
Buffett, chairman and CEO of Berkshire Hathaway Inc., said in a letter introducing the concept that he couldn't be happier with his decision in 2006 to give 99 per cent of his roughly $US46 billion ($A53.3 billion) fortune to charity.
Patty Stonesifer, former CEO of the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, said on Wednesday that Gates and Buffett have been campaigning for the past year to get others to donate the bulk of their wealth.
The friends and philanthropic colleagues are asking people to pledge to donate either during their lifetime or at the time of their death. They estimate their efforts could generate $US600 billion ($A695.17 billion) dollars in charitable giving.
In 2009, American philanthropies received a total of about $US300 billion ($A347.58 billion) in donations, according to The Chronicle of Philanthropy.
The handful of billionaires approached so far have embraced the campaign, said Stonesifer, a close friend of Gates who offered to speak about the effort.
Four wealthy couples have already announced their pledges, including Los Angeles philanthropists Eli and Edythe Broad, Gerry and Marguerite Lenfest of Philadelphia, John and Ann Doerr of Menlo Park, California, and John and Tasha Mortgridge of San Jose, California.
In addition to making a donation commitment, Gates and Buffett are asking billionaires to pledge to give wisely and learn from their peers.
They said they were inspired by the philanthropic efforts of not just other billionaires but of the people of all financial means and backgrounds who have given generously to make the world a better place.
Their philosophical forebears are the Carnegie and Rockefeller families, who donated most of their wealth back to improve society and were the grandparents of modern philanthropy, said Stacy Palmer, editor of The Chronicle of Philanthropy.
Ted Turner's announcement 13 years ago of a $US1 billion ($A1.16 billion) gift to United Nations programs also was done in part to inspire other big givers, but did not have a noticeable result, Palmer said.
"It's a stretch to see how they're going to get to the $US600 billion ($A695.17 billion) figure," she said, noting that only 17 people on the Forbes list of the 400 wealthiest people in America are also on the Chronicle's list of the most generous American donors.
Many of these people may be giving anonymously or plan to donate when they die, but the bulk of money raised by charities today comes from non-billionaires giving $US5, $US10 or $US50 at a time, Palmer said.
Buffett's plan will eventually split most of his shares of his Omaha, Nebraska, company between five charitable foundations, with the largest chunk going to the Gates Foundation.
He also plans to give Class B Berkshire shares to the Susan Thompson Buffett Foundation, which he and his late first wife started, and to the three foundations run by his three children.
Buffett said in 2006 that his other 73,332 Class A shares of Berkshire stock, worth about $US8 billion ($A9.27 billion), would also go to philanthropy, but he didn't specify how those shares would be distributed.
Bill and Melinda Gates have made a similar pledge through the establishment of their Seattle-based foundation.
Gates and Buffett are asking each individual or couple who make a pledge to do so publicly, with a letter explaining their decision.
"The pledge is a moral commitment to give, not a legal contract. It does not involve pooling money or supporting a particular set of causes or organisations," they explain in a written statement about the project.
AP
Newscribe : get free news in real time
Man escapes Net love scam
By K. KASTURI DEWI
kasturidewi@thestar.com.my
GEORGE TOWN: Yet another person almost fell victim to the infamous Internet romance scam when a young “beautiful English woman” started courting and wooing him over the Internet.But the love-struck businessman got a little suspicious and reported the matter to the Penang Malaysian Anti-Corruption Commission (MACC) when a “Customs officer” called him and asked for money.
The MACC swung into action and arrested the “English woman”, who happened to be a 24-year-old Malaysian.
The MACC team also arrested the woman’s husband, mother and a Nigerian man who is believed to be the mastermind.
The woman and her 25-year-old husband were arrested when they went to the state MACC office yesterday to have their statements recorded.
State MACC director Datuk Latifah Md Yatim told a press conference yesterday that the woman, who had earlier posted a picture of a beautiful English woman on the Internet, began chatting with the businessman last year.
“She claimed that she was in her 20s and the victim eventually fell in love with her,” she said.
Latifah said the businessman received a call in early March this year from a man identifying himself as a Customs officer, asking for the businessman to credit RM5,000 into his account.
“The money was to secure the release of his ‘English’ girlfriend who had been detained at the KL International Airport for bringing more than £50,000 (RM241,000) into Malaysia.”
The following day, the businessman received another call from the “officer” asking for an additional RM3,000 to be banked in as there were some problems in securing the release of the girlfriend.
“Suspecting something amiss, the businessman lodged a report with the MACC here,” she said.
Wednesday, June 16, 2010
China: Our Internet is Free Enough
China, with the most Internet users of any country in the world, has issued its first government whitepaper declaring an overall Internet strategy--one that advocates Internet growth while implicitly defending censorship policies amid global concern over online repression and China-based cyber espionage.
"I think this whitepaper is a statement that the Chinese Communist Party intends to stay in power, and also intends to expand Internet access, and be on the cutting edge of Internet innovation, and that there isn't any contradiction in any of those things," says Rebecca MacKinnon, a China Internet expert who is a visiting fellow at Princeton University's Center for Information Technology Policy.
While the document, which comes from Beijing's information ministry, contains no surprises, it is noteworthy as the first complete declaration of its kind from China. It is also clearly--if not explicitly--a response to recent events. Last year China announced it would require computers sold inside China to contain censorship software known as Green Dam, although it later suspended the requirement. And this year Google pulled its search operation out of mainland China, declaring it could no longer comply with censorship requirements after China-based attackers attempted to steal intellectual property and spy on e-mail accounts of human rights activists. Google has also asked the United States to petition the World Trade Organization to recognize Chinese censorship as an unfair trade barrier.
"The timing of course coincides with the public uproar about Google China and Green Dam software," says Guobin Yang, a China Internet expert and sociologist at Columbia University, and author of the book The Power of the Internet in China. "What is interesting here is that I see this as reflecting part of an effort to promote the government's point of view--a larger strategy of projecting 'soft power.' They want to put out their own position, a defense of their policies and strategies."
The whitepaper is partly an effort to promote the idea that states can assert sovereignty over and administer the Internet, Yang adds. "It's such big business, such a big part of the Chinese economy," he says. "More and more so, the government has an interest in maintaining growth of this economy, while at the same time it still wants to control the Internet."
China has nearly 400 million Internet users--nearly one-quarter of the world's total--plus 750 million mobile-phone users, many of whom access the Web from their phones. Despite censorship, Internet-based grassroots campaigns on Chinese social-networking sites have had some targeted successes, such as pressuring the Chinese government to jail corrupt local officials. Referring generally to this kind of activism, the Beijing whitepaper makes a bold assertion: "Chinese citizens fully enjoy freedom of speech on the Internet." Left unstated is that Chinese Internet companies are under government pressure to self-censor, and do so very effectively on a slate of banned topics, including advocacy of democracy, opposition movements, the 1989 Tiananmen Square uprising, and Tibetan independence.
"This is not the first time the Chinese government has said 'we have free speech in this country, except for the speech that isn't allowed,' and then there's a long list of things that aren't allowed," MacKinnon adds.
"There is a much broader scope of public discourse happening on the Chinese Internet now than there was in the public sphere before the Internet existed in China," MacKinnon says. "The thing is, it's circumscribed."
China's statement advertises itself as "providing an overall picture to the Chinese people and the peoples of the rest of the world of the true situation of the Internet in China." It is a synthesis of long-understood positions: China "energetically advocates and actively supports the development and application of the Internet across the country" and sees it as crucial to economic expansion, but also reserves the right to "administer" the Internet.
"Frankly, I think China is Exhibit A for how authoritarianism will survive the Internet age," MacKinnon says. "I think Americans have this assumption that nondemocratic regimes can't survive the Internet, and I think that's naïve. The Chinese Communist Party fully intends to survive in the Internet age and has a strategy for doing so. So far, it's working."
Newscribe : get free news in real time
 | |||
| Tangled Web: Chinese Internet users, like these in a Shanghai café, must contend with broad censorship amid surging Internet growth. Credit: Justin Guariglia |
"I think this whitepaper is a statement that the Chinese Communist Party intends to stay in power, and also intends to expand Internet access, and be on the cutting edge of Internet innovation, and that there isn't any contradiction in any of those things," says Rebecca MacKinnon, a China Internet expert who is a visiting fellow at Princeton University's Center for Information Technology Policy.
While the document, which comes from Beijing's information ministry, contains no surprises, it is noteworthy as the first complete declaration of its kind from China. It is also clearly--if not explicitly--a response to recent events. Last year China announced it would require computers sold inside China to contain censorship software known as Green Dam, although it later suspended the requirement. And this year Google pulled its search operation out of mainland China, declaring it could no longer comply with censorship requirements after China-based attackers attempted to steal intellectual property and spy on e-mail accounts of human rights activists. Google has also asked the United States to petition the World Trade Organization to recognize Chinese censorship as an unfair trade barrier.
The whitepaper is partly an effort to promote the idea that states can assert sovereignty over and administer the Internet, Yang adds. "It's such big business, such a big part of the Chinese economy," he says. "More and more so, the government has an interest in maintaining growth of this economy, while at the same time it still wants to control the Internet."
China has nearly 400 million Internet users--nearly one-quarter of the world's total--plus 750 million mobile-phone users, many of whom access the Web from their phones. Despite censorship, Internet-based grassroots campaigns on Chinese social-networking sites have had some targeted successes, such as pressuring the Chinese government to jail corrupt local officials. Referring generally to this kind of activism, the Beijing whitepaper makes a bold assertion: "Chinese citizens fully enjoy freedom of speech on the Internet." Left unstated is that Chinese Internet companies are under government pressure to self-censor, and do so very effectively on a slate of banned topics, including advocacy of democracy, opposition movements, the 1989 Tiananmen Square uprising, and Tibetan independence.
"This is not the first time the Chinese government has said 'we have free speech in this country, except for the speech that isn't allowed,' and then there's a long list of things that aren't allowed," MacKinnon adds.
"There is a much broader scope of public discourse happening on the Chinese Internet now than there was in the public sphere before the Internet existed in China," MacKinnon says. "The thing is, it's circumscribed."
China's statement advertises itself as "providing an overall picture to the Chinese people and the peoples of the rest of the world of the true situation of the Internet in China." It is a synthesis of long-understood positions: China "energetically advocates and actively supports the development and application of the Internet across the country" and sees it as crucial to economic expansion, but also reserves the right to "administer" the Internet.
"Frankly, I think China is Exhibit A for how authoritarianism will survive the Internet age," MacKinnon says. "I think Americans have this assumption that nondemocratic regimes can't survive the Internet, and I think that's naïve. The Chinese Communist Party fully intends to survive in the Internet age and has a strategy for doing so. So far, it's working."
Newscribe : get free news in real time
Related Articles
 Will China's Web, like its larger economy, comfortably combine extraordinary growth with government repression? |  U.S.-based search engines are choosing what they censor in China and could be blocking more than they have to. |
Anand Mahindra: Conscious Capitalism
The zero-sum game is no longer valid in the world of business. Companies must learn to collaborate with all the stakeholders in the society and earn returns through the trust they build with them.
Gandhi got an entire subcontinent to follow him and achieved a bloodless victory over the powerful British Empire by articulating the startlingly simple concept of "satyagraha" or non-violence. History provides myriad similar examples: Mandela and his vision against apartheid; the concept of human rights; universal suffrage.
Powerful ideas do not always have to occupy high moral ground. They can be practical, such as the late C.K. Prahalad's constructs of "core competence" and "fortunes at the bottom of the pyramid." They can be scientific, without being unquestionable fact, such as the theories of evolution and the subconscious. They can be inspirational and empowering like the rallying cry of American presidential candidate Obama--"Yes, we can." Or they can simply be a global wake-up call, like the film "An Inconvenient Truth," which probably created a more enduring legacy for Al Gore than a potentially bland and lackluster presidency!
Is there an idea you believe can change the world? Describe it in the comments section at the bottom of this story, and Forbes could publish your idea.
The kernel of a new and disruptive idea can emerge from the ashes of a previously venerated idea, and there is evidence of that today. We are witnessing, I believe, the breakdown of a very powerful and pervasive idea that has shaped the credo of commerce until now. This is the notion that the core purpose of business is to maximize returns to shareholders, to the effective exclusion of all else.
Perhaps there was some truth in the contention that large Indian businesses were oligopolistic and sleepy; like alligators basking in the sun that needed to be rudely awakened and forced to glide back into the fast flowing river with reptilian aggression.
However, there are signals of the birth of a new idea, one that is not a single manifesto, but an amalgam of beliefs that have been under construction for some time. There has been a widespread perception for a while--even before the great meltdown--that a new mindset was called for. With news of Enron, Madoff, Ramalinga Raju and Lehman, we all knew something was not quite right. The Rolling Stone article that referred to Goldman as a "giant vampire squid" was exercising poetic license to its fullest, but it did indicate a groundswell of discontent.
Business schools responded to this sentiment with initially desultory efforts to draft an ethics code, or to teach integrity in the classroom. But I do not believe such exercises effectively acknowledged the call for a new zeitgeist, one that proposed a new and expanded role for business in the context of the wider community.
That's why despite growing messages being relayed to business--first by semaphore, then more explicitly--that consumers and communities wanted to see a new ethos in companies, these signals were greeted with disbelief and resistance. Businesses continued to believe that community activities were kosher only if couched in the garb of "enlightened self-interest," leading, ultimately, to enhanced shareholder returns.
Of course, the need for financial returns is, and always will be, self-evident. A healthy bottom line is not just what shareholders require, it's a resource enabler for all other good things.
But it's also time to move on.
The world has shrunk considerably, and resources are so excruciatingly finite, that not just governments but businesses also need to change their vocabulary and move to a more collaborative approach. Competition will remain fierce, but a zero-sum approach to competitors and a "hunter-gatherer" interface with the environment is no longer sustainable.
We need to confront the changing order more squarely. Collaboration with our wider communities is not just one more way to build a brand or gain subsidies, or curry favor with customers; it is the ONLY way to do business. That's what customers, I believe, have been trying to tell the corporate world for some time, and earning their trust is now going to be a hygiene factor for all companies.
We, in the world of commerce, will not earn that trust simply by adopting a set of community activities, all the while believing that these are tools for enhancing shareholder returns. We need to intrinsically believe that the 21st-century company will be comprised of a different genome sequence altogether.
We have to recognize that success will not be defined just by quantitatively measuring the aggregate of our CSR activities. We have to believe, instead, that integration with our local and wider communities is the sine qua non of our existence. And that we will rise only if our work helps the fortunes of all our stakeholders to rise with us.
The interesting thing about this idea is that it requires not one messiah, but a multitude.
Anand Mahindra, Vice-Chairman and Managing Director, Mahindra Group
At a time when tidal waves of shoppers are hitting Apple stores to grab the first iPads, it seems reasonable to presume that an "idea that will change the world" will be a "thing"; some product, device, or gadget. It is all too easy to forget that the "things" that really alter our world are, and always have been, powerful and abstract ideas. Ideas that change the way we think. Ideas that change the way we perceive the world and our role in it.
Powerful ideas do not always have to occupy high moral ground. They can be practical, such as the late C.K. Prahalad's constructs of "core competence" and "fortunes at the bottom of the pyramid." They can be scientific, without being unquestionable fact, such as the theories of evolution and the subconscious. They can be inspirational and empowering like the rallying cry of American presidential candidate Obama--"Yes, we can." Or they can simply be a global wake-up call, like the film "An Inconvenient Truth," which probably created a more enduring legacy for Al Gore than a potentially bland and lackluster presidency!
Is there an idea you believe can change the world? Describe it in the comments section at the bottom of this story, and Forbes could publish your idea.
The kernel of a new and disruptive idea can emerge from the ashes of a previously venerated idea, and there is evidence of that today. We are witnessing, I believe, the breakdown of a very powerful and pervasive idea that has shaped the credo of commerce until now. This is the notion that the core purpose of business is to maximize returns to shareholders, to the effective exclusion of all else.
I remember, more than a decade ago, Tata Steel deployed an advertising tagline that declared "We also make steel." Their ads extolled the virtues of their corporate social responsibility and seemed to imply that making steel, and money, was a means to an end. The ads became a subject of amusement, and Wall Street devotees quickly pointed out how old Indian companies were not ruthlessly--and appropriately--focused on financial returns, which was why they lagged in global competitiveness and were not investors' favorites.
However, there are signals of the birth of a new idea, one that is not a single manifesto, but an amalgam of beliefs that have been under construction for some time. There has been a widespread perception for a while--even before the great meltdown--that a new mindset was called for. With news of Enron, Madoff, Ramalinga Raju and Lehman, we all knew something was not quite right. The Rolling Stone article that referred to Goldman as a "giant vampire squid" was exercising poetic license to its fullest, but it did indicate a groundswell of discontent.
Business schools responded to this sentiment with initially desultory efforts to draft an ethics code, or to teach integrity in the classroom. But I do not believe such exercises effectively acknowledged the call for a new zeitgeist, one that proposed a new and expanded role for business in the context of the wider community.
There is an evolutionary argument for such a role modification. Commerce was begun when the world was a much more hostile place, and societies still functioned much like their "hunter-gatherer" precursors. In his book Conflict Resolution, James A. Schellenberg says that "… socio-biologists believe that human nature has been profoundly shaped by the competitive conditions under which it emerged as the present species. They don't all see this as producing a general human instinct for aggression; but they do see mankind as faced with a wide range of conditions for which aggression may be a very natural response." I suppose this would account for why phrases such as "killer instinct" and "take no prisoners" form part of the corporate world's core vocabulary.
But it's also time to move on.
The world has shrunk considerably, and resources are so excruciatingly finite, that not just governments but businesses also need to change their vocabulary and move to a more collaborative approach. Competition will remain fierce, but a zero-sum approach to competitors and a "hunter-gatherer" interface with the environment is no longer sustainable.
We need to confront the changing order more squarely. Collaboration with our wider communities is not just one more way to build a brand or gain subsidies, or curry favor with customers; it is the ONLY way to do business. That's what customers, I believe, have been trying to tell the corporate world for some time, and earning their trust is now going to be a hygiene factor for all companies.
We, in the world of commerce, will not earn that trust simply by adopting a set of community activities, all the while believing that these are tools for enhancing shareholder returns. We need to intrinsically believe that the 21st-century company will be comprised of a different genome sequence altogether.
We have to recognize that success will not be defined just by quantitatively measuring the aggregate of our CSR activities. We have to believe, instead, that integration with our local and wider communities is the sine qua non of our existence. And that we will rise only if our work helps the fortunes of all our stakeholders to rise with us.
The interesting thing about this idea is that it requires not one messiah, but a multitude.
Anand Mahindra heads the $6.3 billion Mahindra Group, a conglomerate that specializes in automotive products, information technology and infrastructure. Mahindra graduated from Harvard College and then completed his MBA from Harvard Business School. Under his leadership the Mahindra Group has strengthened its position in almost all the business in the group's portfolio. Mahindra speaks eloquently and is a frequent contributor to debates on business issues and government policy. He was chosen by CNBC TV18 as the Outstanding Business Leader for 2009.
This article appears in the June 4 issue of Forbes India, a Forbes Media licensee.Edited by S. Srinivasan & Peter Griffin, 06.15.10, 06:00 PM EDT
Newscribe : get free news in real time
Newscribe : get free news in real time
Sports gambling/betting must be regulated and strictly managed
Public outcry on proposed move to legalise sports betting in M'sia
Malaysia's Prime Minister Najib Razak
Public outcry on proposed move to legalise sports betting in M'sia
KUALA LUMPUR : A proposed move by the Malaysian government to legalise sports betting has triggered a huge public outcry.
Public opinion remains split, but Prime Minister Najib Razak is facing objections not just from the opposition but also within his own ruling party.
The fiery protest from the opposition Islamic party and Muslim NGOs did not come as a surprise.
This came after news that Malaysian Chinese tycoon Vincent Tan was reportedly issued a licence to operate sports betting in some of his lottery outlets across the country.
Malaysia, a predominantly Muslim country, has one casino resort and several lottery companies, and some Muslim NGOs said that is sufficient.
Ibrahim Ali, MP of Pasir Mas, said: "It just creates a gambling culture in this country. It creates a lot of social problems because a lot of people are involved in this activity. They become lazy and really rely on this kind of thing, I think it's not good for the country."
Ibrahim Ali heads Perkasa, one of Malaysia's largest Muslim NGOs. He also feels that non-Muslims should not indulge in gambling, which is "haram" or forbidden in Islam.
Under pressure from within and outside his own ruling party UMNO, Prime Minister Najib is re-considering the whole issue of sports betting.
Billions of dollars were said to have changed hands in each World Cup season through illegal bookies who could be operating from anywhere in the world.
Authorities here said there is no way they can effectively curb illegal betting without legalising it, which at least allows them to better regulate the activities and save the government millions of dollars in tax revenues that could otherwise be lost.
The three opposition controlled states have said they will ban sports betting if it is legalised. They said giving out more gaming licences is not the way to raise money.
Lim Guan Eng, Chief Minister of Penang, said: "It's a question of enforcement. If you have proper enforcement, you can regulate it. We are not talking about banning gambling, we are talking about reducing the increasing prevalence of gambling."
Public reaction is mixed.
"At least the government can get some money out of it," one said.
"As a Muslim, how can you legalise something (that) is illegal," another added.
While the debate continues, it is business as usual for many Malaysian sports fans who continue to place their bets regardless of whether it is legal or not.
By Melissa Goh |- CNA/al
“MCA proposes strict and stringent conditions to be imposed in sports betting, including the age of punters, operating hours and others,” said party president Datuk Seri Dr Chua Soi Lek.
He said in developed countries, sports gaming industries were well managed and regulated.
Party matters: Dr Chua (centre), MCA Youth chief Datuk Dr Wee Ka Siong (left) and MCA deputy president Datuk Seri Liow Tiong Lai (right) leaving after attending the presidential council meeting Tuesday. “They have been rather successful in dealing with social ills that arise as a result of excessive betting.
“The Government should conduct an in-depth study of legalised sports betting in other countries,” said Dr Chua at a press conference after chairing the MCA presidential council meeting here yesterday.
At the same time, the Government must conduct public awareness and education programmes on the social ills of gambling.
“MCA discourages any form of betting. It is well-known that the illegal sports betting syndicates are out of control and have played an increasing role in the black economy of our country – involving money laundering and funding many undesirable business activities,” he said.
The Government, added Dr Chua, must step up enforcement in combating illegal sports betting the way it weeds out illegal 4D businesses.
Meanwhile, the issue continues to get attention in the Dewan Rakyat. Arau MP Datuk Ismail suggested that sports betting be legalised since it involved billions of ringgit and the Government could not gain revenue from the underground economy.
Malaysia's Prime Minister Najib Razak
| | Public outcry on proposed move to legalise sports betting in M'sia |
KUALA LUMPUR : A proposed move by the Malaysian government to legalise sports betting has triggered a huge public outcry.
Public opinion remains split, but Prime Minister Najib Razak is facing objections not just from the opposition but also within his own ruling party.
The fiery protest from the opposition Islamic party and Muslim NGOs did not come as a surprise.
This came after news that Malaysian Chinese tycoon Vincent Tan was reportedly issued a licence to operate sports betting in some of his lottery outlets across the country.
Malaysia, a predominantly Muslim country, has one casino resort and several lottery companies, and some Muslim NGOs said that is sufficient.
Ibrahim Ali, MP of Pasir Mas, said: "It just creates a gambling culture in this country. It creates a lot of social problems because a lot of people are involved in this activity. They become lazy and really rely on this kind of thing, I think it's not good for the country."
Ibrahim Ali heads Perkasa, one of Malaysia's largest Muslim NGOs. He also feels that non-Muslims should not indulge in gambling, which is "haram" or forbidden in Islam.
Under pressure from within and outside his own ruling party UMNO, Prime Minister Najib is re-considering the whole issue of sports betting.
Billions of dollars were said to have changed hands in each World Cup season through illegal bookies who could be operating from anywhere in the world.
Authorities here said there is no way they can effectively curb illegal betting without legalising it, which at least allows them to better regulate the activities and save the government millions of dollars in tax revenues that could otherwise be lost.
The three opposition controlled states have said they will ban sports betting if it is legalised. They said giving out more gaming licences is not the way to raise money.
Lim Guan Eng, Chief Minister of Penang, said: "It's a question of enforcement. If you have proper enforcement, you can regulate it. We are not talking about banning gambling, we are talking about reducing the increasing prevalence of gambling."
Public reaction is mixed.
"At least the government can get some money out of it," one said.
"As a Muslim, how can you legalise something (that) is illegal," another added.
While the debate continues, it is business as usual for many Malaysian sports fans who continue to place their bets regardless of whether it is legal or not.
By Melissa Goh |- CNA/al
MCA backs legal sports betting -It must be regulated
KUALA LUMPUR: Sports gaming should be allowed but it must be regulated and strictly managed.“MCA proposes strict and stringent conditions to be imposed in sports betting, including the age of punters, operating hours and others,” said party president Datuk Seri Dr Chua Soi Lek.
He said in developed countries, sports gaming industries were well managed and regulated.
Party matters: Dr Chua (centre), MCA Youth chief Datuk Dr Wee Ka Siong (left) and MCA deputy president Datuk Seri Liow Tiong Lai (right) leaving after attending the presidential council meeting Tuesday.“The Government should conduct an in-depth study of legalised sports betting in other countries,” said Dr Chua at a press conference after chairing the MCA presidential council meeting here yesterday.
At the same time, the Government must conduct public awareness and education programmes on the social ills of gambling.
“MCA discourages any form of betting. It is well-known that the illegal sports betting syndicates are out of control and have played an increasing role in the black economy of our country – involving money laundering and funding many undesirable business activities,” he said.
The Government, added Dr Chua, must step up enforcement in combating illegal sports betting the way it weeds out illegal 4D businesses.
Meanwhile, the issue continues to get attention in the Dewan Rakyat. Arau MP Datuk Ismail suggested that sports betting be legalised since it involved billions of ringgit and the Government could not gain revenue from the underground economy.
Tuesday, June 15, 2010
How Fathers Influence Their Daughters' Careers
When it comes to women's career paths, dad's influence plays an increasingly weighty role.
Last Father's Day, President Barack Obama published a column in Parade magazine about every father's most fundamental duty: "Show their children, by example, the kind of people they want them to become."
All children are shaped by their parents and/or other caregivers, of course, but when it comes to women's career paths, dad's influence plays an increasingly weighty role.
Why the increase? The American Psychological Association says that the changing economic role of women has greatly impacted the role of fathers in their children's lives. Women now comprise over 50% of the workforce, leaving fewer families than ever in traditional "women raise the children" households. Fathers are now spending more time with their children than ever, and experts say that a "father's love" plays a much different role in childhood development. Most specifically, that it develops a child's sense of place in the world.
By Meghan Casserly and Caroline Howard, 06.14.10, 07:30 PM EDT
Newscribe : get free news in real time
Reader Comments
These trends by themselves don't tell us which force (paternal, societal or otherwise) is pushing and pulling daughters down one career path or another. But they do tell us today's dads are spending more time with their children--and their daughters are paying attention. Continue on to our photo gallery of 10 successful daughters who have followed in their father's footsteps. Some might even go so far to say daughters who have eclipsed their dad's careers.
In Photos: Celebrity Fathers And Daughters
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)