Are you a risk-taker or a risk-averser?

Success rides the wave of ambition and hard work. It does not come without a heavy installment of time, energy, and consistent effort.

Dreams. You want to become a successful engineer, a leading exec at a multinational, or a creative head at a classy agency - the question is how do you want to go about fulfilling and reaching it? Because it can happen. 

One factor dependent on success is your personality; how passionate are you towards it, and what steps have you taken or are willing to take to reach that goal. Will you do whatever is necessary to overcome the challenges you will be faced with? Success is not easy, challenges and obstacles wait for you at every step to pounce on you to stall your progress or take you three steps behind. It's your attitude that is key.

You can't just jump the ladder- you've got to take it one step at a time. Perhaps it might just include taking three steps back and starting all over. Positivity and attitude are pivotal in reaching your goals. Opinions are cheap so keep focused on goals and dedicate time to research as well. 

Goals. Figure out the steps needed to achieve them. Define your steps. Strategize and give yourself a time frame for reaching your short-term goals that lead to your long-term goals.

If you're a young couple entering your early 30s, sick of working for bosses that don't let you grow, have savings but are wary of the entrepreneurial risk but have always wanted to be your own boss --- study yourself, take a deep look within and see whether you transmit the famous entrepreneurial qualities and characteristics (google them if you don't know them)- to become an enterprising partnership. It's easy for a couple to work as a team and depend on one another. Both partners can distinguish different steps/routes that lead towards the main goal.

The answer lies in meticulously, logically, and mentally preparing a plan of action that will lead you to your goal. Especially if you want to be a billionaire one day. Rich. Life of luxury. Some are born into it, and others create it through sweat, blood, and hard work. 

Align your passion and ambition with a plan of action for your goals. Never stop driving towards your dream and never give up.

'Pakistan: Is Foreign Aid Helping or Hindering Development?'

Harvard Business Review Case Study  
Written Analysis of the Case by Sehrish H. Khan
Presented to Prof. F. A. Fareedy (LSE)

Identification of Key Issues 

Pakistan has a strategic location in the Middle East; its border with Afghanistan provides a refuge for terrorists, possesses nuclear weapons, frontline state of the ‘war on terror’, and is a Chinese ally. Going back to the time of Pakistan’s inception, the leaders Jinnah & Liaquat Ali Khan were both urban professionals based out of Bombay, and at odds with the feudal authorities that dominated the soil.

After losing its leaders, there was a power vacuum in 1948 and 1951. Though Pakistan was founded as a secular state, it was redefined as an Islamic Republic in 1956.

Pakistan went through four spells of military rule; its first constitution was adopted in 1956 only to be suspended from 1958 through 1970 under military rule. Turbulent times prevailed when Bangladesh achieved permanent status as a separate nation after the December 1971 war between India & Pakistan. Bhutto was tried for conspiring to murder a political opponent and hanged, General Zia took over and another military dictatorship prevailed. It was during this time that aid given to Pakistan for development, was used for building illicit nuclear weapons.

The civilian rule in 1988 after Zia’s airplane crash, ineffectual governments by Nawaz Sharif and Benazir Bhutto till the late 1990s. Army Chief of Staff General Pervez Musharraf seized power in 1999. Strengthened the army’s political influence, restoring presidential powers to dismiss the prime minister and make key appointments. In 2007 Musharraf misstepped by trying to force out the Chief justice who he feared may legally challenge his efforts to retain the political power

Violent demonstrations and protests led to negotiations with Bhutto. Bhutto and Sharif came back from exile. Before the elections, on 27 December 2007 Bhutto was assassinated, her husband started a new government and became the president after Musharraf stepped down.

Economist Intelligence Unit stated Gen. Ashfaq Kayani was Pakistan’s “ultimate political arbitrator” and its “most effective institution”. During Musharraf’s tenure from 2003-2007 Pakistan’s growth averaged over 6%. External debt as a percent of gross national income including remittances declined by more than a third.

Pakistan is the 6th most populous country in the world. Jim O’Neil of Goldman Sachs saw investor-friendly policies and ease of doing business rating than many of its peers; promising foundation for future growth, and close ties with China and the oil-based Middle East.

A significant portion of its historical GDP growth is attributed to an increase in population. In 2005, 55% of the population was between 15-64 years (working age) and 42% was >15 years. 23% of women were employed, and Pakistan had one of the highest unemployment rates among the N-11. Pakistan suffered from an education deficit; only 54% of adults (age 15 or higher) were literate in 2009.

The primary school enrolment rate was 73% for boys and 57% for girls. The adult literacy rate among women is only 40% and in men 67%. Severe lack of teachers; the pupil-to-teacher ratio was among the worst in the world, at 41-1.

Government defense spending exceeded education spending. Household spending exceeded 70% of GDP, and investment averaged a relatively low 18% of GDP. Low investment rates could be explained partly by political and economic instability; suffered unpredictable inflations and erratic interest rates. Government spending stood at 21% of GDP in 2009 but only a quarter of it went to capital investments through the Public Sector Development Program

The problem would worsen unless a new generating capacity was built. A recent agreement with Iran to construct a 560-mile $7.5 billion pipeline from its vast southern gas reserves was projected to supply Pakistan with up to a billion cubic feet of gas per day by 2015

Pakistan had the highest mobile penetration rate in South Asia, at 54% of the population and 90% of its area. Large government deficits for the past 20 years aggravated the problem of low national savings. Government bond yields had ranged from 4% to 16% in the 2000s

Tax revenues lowest levels in the world, extremely narrow tax base. One key impediment to tax collection was the central government’s limited control over rural areas, many wealthy government officials paid no taxes. 1 trillion rupees ($11.7 billion). The ratio of exports and imports to GDP was a low 31%. While nations tend to trade heavily with their neighbors. Despite low labor costs, Pakistan was a net import of goods and services.

It mostly exported low-value-added goods such as textiles and rice, and imported high-value-added goods or natural resources. With several Pakistani devaluations, the rupee lost half its value between 1995 and 2002. China’s rise as the world’s leading exporter

Remittances from Pakistani workers overseas reduced the strain on its current account deficit. Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates, export labor to Gulf. A government policy statement identified labor migration as a key source of future growth.

The war on terror hindered economic development, and Pakistan’s expenditures on law enforcement agencies. Heightened uncertainty slowed economic activities, unease among foreign investors, and capital flight. Massive unemployment in terror-prone regions

The war cost the Pakistani economy $8 billion a year in lost exports and foreign investment. The stock market was one of the best performing among emerging markets, floating sovereign bonds of maturities from 5-30 years in the international capital market.

In 2007, and 2008 favorable conditions during Musharraf's tenure. Global food & oil prices rose in 2008, hurt the economy, per capita income stagnated and poverty rates rose. The fiscal deficit reached 7.6%

Core Problem

Lack of stability is a core issue faced by Pakistan since its inception. From military dictatorships to fledgling democratic governments; Pakistan has faced major political and economic upheavals, nearly always a consequence of interrelated issues.  

The core problem faced by American counterparts after waging the war on terror-with Pakistan being the frontline state-was the knowledge of discovering Osama Bin Laden, the terrorist and ex-CIA spy gone “rogue” responsible for 9/11 attacks on World Trade Centres- present amidst a location in Abbottabad; an area closely monitored by the Pakistani Army. Whereby even the location of Pakistani Military Academy was situated near the place where OBL was detected. 

The main issue for Americans is that it's not possible for OBL to be located in such a highly military secure area without Pakistani military intelligence knowing or in fact “protecting” the location of the terrorist. A concern for Americans is that perhaps there are large factions within the Pakistani military that are anti-American and OBL sympathizers or perhaps it was a way of gaining leverage over Americans. 

Americans thus need to decide whether they want to keep spending billions of dollars of military aid on the Pakistani military. In this scenario, it is possible that the Pakistani military might tolerate militants to help justify its own existence and give the US a good reason to keep financing its military with aid.

Since 9/11, the USA has imparted over $20 billion of military and civilian assistance to Pakistan. In the past, aid was also given during the proxy war in Afghanistan with the Soviet Union, out of which Pakistan started its nuclear program. The main problem inferred is whether America should continue spending its tax payer’s money to provide aid to Pakistan, as it has over the decades, countless times. Or should it stop aid altogether. 

Analysis & Recommendation

The USA cannot risk not giving aid to the Pakistani military especially as it's the only effective institution in the country, even with its corruption. Deeming the fact that Pakistan is a frontline state in the war against terror, with its strategic geo-political ties and the fact it's a nuclear state, possibly in an unstable environment poses a delicate situation. One that can be managed either forcibly or steadily. If the USA were to take forcible unilateral action, they would have destroyed and eliminated the nuclear warheads, droned Kahuta in order to de-nuclearize the country forcibly, for the "greater good," in order for it to never, accidentally fall into terrorist hands. A steady plan of action involves assisting the country to develop and strengthen existing military/government/civilian institutions to better equip themselves in order to function effectively.

The country's tumultuous history with regard to politics, security, terrorism, and development indicates that a new strategy must be maneuvered in order to restrain terrorism in areas in the grip of feudal landowners. The only way to do that is by strengthening existing institutions, training, equipment, and education. Free education can significantly reduce poverty-driven would-be terrorists. 

In the time of the floods, it was seen that radical Islamic groups were helping flood victims, gaining popularity and sympathy. Similarly, the US needs to avidly change the mindset of people as a proactive, development-friendly country, with its prime interest in Pakistan’s development of women, industries, and labor. If the US is to help Pakistan fight the war on terror it has no choice but to spend money on the country, as public sentiment in favor of the US is vital. Scholarships, empowering women, and educating women from rural areas will increase overall literacy and also bring positive development to Pakistan. With that being said it is incredibly important for the US to have its intelligence placed in Pakistan, especially after the Bin Laden raid. There are ISI factions that may be rogue, as in every intelligence community, and it's crucial for security to have CIA officials operating on the ground and to be aware of their Pakistani counterparts actions and where the aid is being spent. Corruption is high in Pakistan, and that much was understood by the development of the nuclear arsenal and uranium enrichment. It's in USA's best interests to keep a close watch on the military aid.

For development aid, it is far better to involve non-government organizations to help establish development projects. Since corruption runs high in the political landscape, it's far necessary to involve civilian agencies and work with those agencies in building projects for water, energy, sanitation, etc. 

As China is the giant exporter of the world and has a competitive edge over Pakistan, forgoing aid and going for trade seems unlikely as China has already fit itself in that role. Thus the US must keep providing aid to Pakistan, it cannot afford to have an unstable nuclear state on its hands that's also the frontline state of the war on terror, development of Pakistan in terms of economy, is crucial for the well-being of the state and its counterparts. 

Let’s move on to taking into account the exhibits mentioned in the case. From Exhibit 17 we can see that along with financial aid rising from economic crises, the United States has been a major aid donor to Pakistan, especially in the hour of need as well. In July 2010 Pakistan was hit by massive floods, approximately one-fifth of Pakistan's total land area was underwater. According to the Pakistani government, the floods directly affected about 20 million people, mostly by destruction of property, livelihood, and infrastructure, with a death toll of close to 2,000.

The US government has pledged more money toward this year's flood relief efforts in Pakistan than the country's own government, according to a report this month from the Congressional Research Service.

U.S. contributory foreign assistance to Pakistan for flood relief, in cash or in kind was 18.7%. U.S. was also the top donor to Pakistan by donating $571 million without any coated terms and conditions. The same year U.S. granted $1,215 million which is 72.8% of a total grant received by Pakistan the same year. 

In Exhibit 16, Pakistan has turned to IMF multiple times for financial aid. Over the decades, IMF has funded Pakistan, which has gripped the country in a vicious cycle of loans, interest, and debt repayment. 

In 2008, Pakistan struggled to avoid seeking IMF's help when the country was on the verge of default on its sovereign debt of about $4 billion. The Pakistani government was reluctant to accept this assistance for several reasons. First, there is a history of poor relations between Pakistan and the IMF. Secondly, relations between the Pakistani government and the IMF may have been further strained by reports that IMF applied pressure on the World Bank to cancel $300 million in aid to Pakistan. Lastly, the government was concerned that the conditions IMF would impose on the country would be disastrous for Pakistan, both economically and politically. 

However, when all other avenues failed, the Pakistani government approached the IMF to bail out the country in November 2008. The government reached an agreement with the IMF for $7.6 billion to be given as loans over the next 23 months. The repayment of this loan began in 2011 and is supposed to continue till 2015.

According to a recent article in Express Tribune, “Pakistan’s debt obligations have crossed all sustainable levels as according to the State Bank of Pakistan the country’s debt and liabilities have soared to Rs15.2 trillion, equal to 68% of the total size of the economy.”

It can be easily derived from these facts that turning to IMF for financial aid have significantly hindered Pakistan to invest in development projects, as repayment of the loan is its biggest liability.

In Exhibit 15, countering terrorism as a war of attrition proved to be a major liability for Pakistan which hindered its economic development. As per IMF, Pakistan’s anti-terrorist campaign following the Sep-11, 2001 attacks in the USA strained the government budget, since expenditures on law enforcement were significantly increased, thus eroding the resources for development in attrition. Numerous development projects were delayed and cost overruns were the result.

IMF also found that heightened uncertainty slowed economic activities, and created unease amongst foreign investors, thus bringing about an investment deficit & capital flight. There was massive unemployment, especially in the terror-prone regions of the country as bombing and attrition of law and order took a toll on the socio-economic fabric. The government estimated that the war cost the Pakistani economy around $8 billion a year in lost exports, foreign investment, industrial output & tax collection. This indirect cost remained the major portion of the total cost of the “war on terror” almost 75% – 80% of the total cost.

In exhibit 14, we acknowledge that Pakistan stood at the 7^th number among the top remittance-receiving countries in 2009. It received $8,701 million in the form of remittances in 2009. During 2008-2009 22.2% of remittances received by Pakistan were from Pakistanis living in the United States, and 21.6% from the United Arab Emirates. It’s interesting to compare that 5.4% of Pakistani emigrants shared this remittance. According to a recent article in Express Tribune: ‘Overseas Pakistanis remitted $1.65 billion in the first month of the current fiscal year, which is 17.45% higher than the amount ($1.4 billion) they remitted during the same month of 2013-14.’

In exhibit 12a, we understand that during the year 2008-2009, the trade deficit was the worst as low-value-added goods were exported as textiles and rice which were the major export items. Textiles included bedwear, knitwear, and cotton fabric.

To further worsen the situation, the trade deficit was affected by the import of high-value-added goods as natural resources including minerals, chemicals, and fuel lubricants comprising more than 50% of the total import followed by end products or manufactured goods, which served 10% of the total imports.

In exhibit 11b we see that Pakistan’s eye on debt throughout the decade remains evident and total debt increased gradually from 2000-2006 and worsened in 2008 & 2009. Almost 90% of the debt comprised of long-term debt, with a moderate and consistent share of short-term debt catering to the cash deficit of the country over the decade.

In 11a we witness that because Pakistan has been engulfed by a fluctuating economy right from its very independence, the only favorable cash-in-hand figure was seen from 2001 to 2003. The situation went worse in the proceeding years with little improvement seen in 2009 & 2010. Exports and imports show consistent increase and decrease respectively through 1995 – 2010. The ratio of export and import to GDP was as low as 31% in 2010. The trade deficit was moderate in early 2003 but significantly worsened later in the decade

Financing requirements remained minimum in 2008 when other economic indicators showed healthy signs too. Currency devaluations posed more payments for imports, the rupee lost almost half of its value between 1995 & 2002. Remittances from overseas Pakistanis relieved the current account deficit considerably relative to GDP.

In exhibit 8, we witness that the value added per worker in agriculture by Pakistan is significantly lower in comparison to countries like Egypt or Brazil, which are performing far better than Pakistan. Perhaps it's the meager technological know-how of equipment coupled with literacy and human development that has kept Pakistan’s value added per work at the same level of production at around $900 USD.

In exhibit 7 we can study the overall GDP growth in Pakistan from 1995-2010. We see phenomenal growth between the years 2004-2007 (7.4%, 7.6%, 6.2%, and 5.7% respectively). This GDP growth was a consequence of the Musharraf era, where there was significant increases in imports and exports, change in inventories remained steady, investments grew steadily, and private consumption was lowered as was government consumption. Musharraf’s rule saw a positive growth phase in Pakistan’s history, a military dictatorship was able to impress the GDP growth, and lower expenditures than a democratic government. It was only after 2008 did the GDP fell, and that too was a consequence of the war on terror and its impact on the Pakistani economy.

In exhibit 6, we can analyze the structure of the literacy and labor participation by gender. We see a glaringly low literacy rate among women with only 40% being considered literate, and 67% of men considered literate. In comparison to China, Pakistan’s regional neighbor where 70% of the adult women consists of labor force participation, in comparison to Pakistan’s meager 23% female labor force participation. This exhibit, therefore, depicts the need for development and education, in comparison to neighboring development indicators, Pakistan scores badly when it comes to human capital development.

In exhibit 4, countries are ranked on their ease of doing business. A high ranking on the ease of doing business index means the regulatory environment is more conducive to the starting and operation of a local firm. This index averages the country's percentile rankings on 10 topics, made up of a variety of indicators, giving equal weight to each topic. The World Bank (WB) and International Finance Corporation's flagship report Ease of Doing Business Index 2010 ranked Pakistan 85 among 181 countries around the globe. Pakistan came highest in South Asia and also was ranked higher than China and Russia which were at 133. The top five countries were Singapore, New Zealand, the United States, Hong Kong, and the United Kingdom.

The Government of Pakistan has granted numerous incentives to technology companies wishing to do business in Pakistan. A combination of decade-plus tax holidays, zero duties on computer imports, government incentives for venture capital, and a variety of programmers for subsidizing technical education, are intended there.

Exhibit 3 takes into account the size of the middle class by country in 2010. Economies with a largely middle-income bracket consist of countries like Malaysia, Thailand, and China whose 60%-75% of the population earns a middle-income salary, with Malaysia being the topper for the highest upper-middle income at 14.13%. In comparison, Pakistan has a middle-income bracket of 39.5%, superior to India’s 24.6%. Pakistan shows a promising future for middle-income growth, depending largely on human capital development and business opportunities. 

Exhibit 2 shows the global population break-up of the top 10 most populated countries. World's total population is 7.18 Billion. The top 3 countries in the world constitute around 40% of world's population. approximately 4.06 billion people live in these countries, representing around 58% of the world’s population as of April 2012. 4 out of the 7 billion people live in 10 of the 196 countries, with Pakistan taking up 2.70% of the world population.

Conclusion

From the American perspective, they face the core issue of having to spend billions of USD on financial aid to Pakistan, be it military or development. What is the benefit that American taxpayers are gaining out of it? A stable nuclear power curbing extremism? Perhaps it is in the favor of the USA to initiate development projects and curb illiteracy that may result in terrorism. The best way to help any country is to aid its educational development. Therefore, human development is the best option for the Americans. 

From Pakistan’s perspective, we have seen that the US has waged proxy wars through Pakistan’s military. From the cold war to the war on terror, the US had a significant interest in Pakistan being a frontline state in the war against terror. Did that benefit Pakistan? Drone attacks caused significant civilian deaths causing resentment and ill-will. However, the Pakistani military did not mind the US making use of its resources to follow through with its ground operations. 

What is in the best interest of Pakistan, to keep accepting aid? The recommended solution:

1. Rather than receiving development aid, it is a viable option for Pakistan and USA to concentrate on trade instead. Trade is better than aid, whereby there are no strings attached to trading. 
2. Taper off aid so that current development projects keep running, and then concentrate on trade deals and human development.

What is in the best interest of the US, to keep giving aid to Pakistan? The recommended solution:

1. It is in the US’s best interest to militarily aid Pakistan, to fight terrorists around the FATA, Afghan border so that another 9/11 can be avoided.
2. It is in the best interest of the US to financially aid the empowerment and education of women in Pakistan, because women are the nucleus of the family and can raise children that are not extremist orientated, thus raising female literacy and aiding human development in Pakistan is in US’s national interest.
3. It is in US’s best interest to spend American tax payer’s money on aiding countries like Pakistan, a fledgling democracy and an unstable nuclear state, for global protection and stability.

Disclaimer

*WAC analysis is based purely on the author's personal analysis of the HBR case for academic purposes. Give due reference if using the author's analysis as a source of information. 

Cultural Imperialism

How is Film a tool of Cultural Imperialism?

Research Analysis by Sehrish Khan 

Abstract

This research will concentrate on discussing and analyzing how film has been used as an implicit tool to communicate modern, 'Western Imperialistic' ideology. It will take into account Disney's approach to cartoons in particular, as Disney cartoons and movies are watched by children and adults of all ages, castes, religions and cultures from all over the world, and cartoon characters such as Mickey Mouse, Donald Duck, Goofy have become household names and commodities, known by children of most cultures and countries. The specific animation film which I shall take as an example, throughout this research will be Disney's version of 'Pocahontas'. I will also touch upon the topic of imagery, transference of emotions, subliminal meanings or messages and exoticism as well as discussing the wide ranging criticisms of Disney cartoon.

How Does Film Become a Tool for Cultural Imperialism?

In order to understand cultural imperialism, it is best to shed light on its connection with media imperialism, since media is used as an underlying tool in aspects of culture portrayal and cultural domination. Cultural imperialism signifies a cultural level of domination which results in a cultural change or effect. Imperialism refers to the "policy or practice of extending a country's influence over other territories by conquest, colonization, or economic domination for instance, an imperial system, authority, or government".*

Some might say, this is a non-favourable cultural exchange as media is a powerful tool, a medium that communicates wide ranging messages and might have a negative effect on one's local culture, traditions, beliefs and/or practices. It can also become a negative tool, especially when one's culture is depicted falsely by the hands of the media imperialists, who some might even call, the mainstream media monopolists.

Mediums such as film, television, radio, newspapers, magazines, comics or even advertisements are more often than not, used as mechanisms to bring about a cultural change. Globalization, which is still an on-going process in today's world means there is faster communication, result of which distance less and border-less qualities emerge. Western culture seeps through our television sets, programmes like FRIENDS, soap operas like Bold and the Beautiful, multinational corporations and fast food chains like McDonalds, Pizza Hut, KFC, Star Bucks and designer clothing like Forever 21 or Guess have developed strong taste buds in countries, where these names, products, shows - had never been introduced or heard of before, until globalism took the world by storm.

Disney is a prime example of being a medium for cultural imperialism. Disney animated films, cartoons and products have become an integral part of raising children and family life greatly surrounds watching Disney's channel on TV when you have children at home. As mentioned in the abstract given above, Disney cartoons and movies are watched by children and adults of all age groups from all over the world and cartoon characters such as Mickey Mouse, Donald Duck and Goofy have become house hold commodities - toys or products of which are desired, by children of most cultures and countries. As a small example, when Shrek - the joyful ogre animation which is in two parts - was released, all the Mcdonald's chains in Lahore sold 'Shrek' and 'Princess Fiona' toys with the Happy Meals. Perhaps this connection to cultural imperialism is a bit broad based, however the argument one can debate on is that these toys or commodities bring with them Western imperialistic thought and perception, by subliminal brainwashing of children from a very young age to be hooked on to Disney cartoons and cartoon characters. To further elaborate this point, it is a fact that a child in his/her early years is highly malleable and easily conditioned. What one should question ones self is that, do we really want our children, who might be from a background of beliefs and value systems that may be excruciatingly different than what Disney cartoons stand for - believe, trust and adhere to those imperialistic meanings, which Disney is known widely to stand for? Do we really want our children watching cartoons that might have hidden/subliminal meanings or that are treatments and by products of a corporation's cultural imperialistic goals? Are we brainwashing our children from the very beginning to believe in something that's flawed to begin with? These questions are the very basis of what this research analysis stands for. Cartoons such as Pocahontas, The Lion King, The Little Mermaid - all may seem very innocent to the ignorant eye, but there is a wide ranging critical debate over the content Disney shows in its cartoons. Let's discuss this aspect further by taking the example of the Pocahontas cartoon film, and analyzing it in detail with regards to American cultural imperialism.

Analysis of Disney Cartoon 'Pocahontas'

'Pocahontas' from the get go starts with fighting the Indians, connotations of that in the film being referred to as a "fun" thing. That in itself is American stereotypical perspective of the native populous Ratcliff, the greedy English refers to where they're going as the 'free world' where freedom and prosperity awaits them all. How exactly did they plan on getting that prosperity - by robbing the Indians of their land as well as their gold? Historically speaking, the world was a slave to western colonialism, and natives have always been treated as barbarians of the land. The label on the Indians or the names given to them in Pocahontas are "blood thirsty savages" - this is the implicit message being spoken through General Ratcliff's speech on deck to his fellow ship mates, preparing them all, for the unknown, the natives, the savages. Or perhaps scaring them of the unknown; fear of the unknown is something even Josef Conrad touched upon in detail, in his novel the 'Heart of Darkness.' The native Indians of America are being referred to as savages throughout the cartoon film, a film designed and catered to Disney audiences, which largely includes children.

The colonists desire an adventure in the new world and want to dig up all the gold for themselves. Perhaps one can infer an element of greed seeping through this frame of thought. What is really strange is that the most basic form of imperialistic ideology is transferred through the dialogues of this cartoon, e.g. "If any Indian tries to stop me, I'll blast him" perhaps the creators of this cartoon might have not had the intentions to make children think like this, perhaps they were just recounting facts as facts, as racism exits so did the hate or the loathing for the natives of each land the Western colonists have subsequently conquered, maybe that was the essential basis for such terminology being used. However, perception varies and Pocahontas is a prime example of when a film becomes a basis for cultural imperialism, this is factually speaking, a children's cartoon about a love story between a native of the new world and a conqueror.

One can arguably say that the first scene of how Pocahontas is depicted standing on a cliff, shows exoticism - the native princess or woman is shown as exotic, beautiful, dark, bare foot and friends with animals. Pocahontas gives off an animalistic sexiness, that defines the exoticism that's communicated.

Perhaps children might consider it 'cool' for an Indian native princess, to be able to communicate with animals but if we analyze the thematic outlook in relation to cultural imperialism, one can infer it's stereotypical imagery that's portrayed of the native Indians in general as a description of "savages" who associate with animals and communicate with them.

The other name referred to Indians was "filthy heathens." As soon as the men landed in the free world, reached the river and stopped the ship, one of them said, "Its all ours!" - that's the general way western invaders in history have usually done it one may argue, they are only recounting history and facts. Romanticism is also an element that's been played about in this Disney cartoon film; for instance when John Smith climbs the tree to get a better look of the new world, Pocahontas's furry friend introduces himself to Smith, Smith offers the little guy a biscuit, that being an obvious example of the civilized world. The Governor's dog is spoilt, with cherries to eat and baths by his own servant, whereas in the land of the new world, animals all live like they do in the wild, fending for themselves and looking after themselves, the luxury that's being depicted of which the dog is used to can in a way give us an outlook on what the orient's definition of being civilized really means. Media is an effective tool when it comes to communicating a message, either consciously or subliminally, just like this, the portrayal of animals in the film one being spoilt and having no knowledge or likes of being in the wild and the other not being able to understand where he comes from, also explain the similar relationship of the natives with the invaders.

Just like in this film, the natives after finding out about new people coming into the land, still the Indians refer to the Whites as "visitors" the terminology differs in comparison to how the Indians are referred to. The Indians are not shown as having hostile intentions towards the visitors and thus that's why they call them as such, had they had hostile attitude towards the white conquerors they could have referred to them as invaders, intruders, aliens or barbarians. Basic values for the elders, is depicted when the Chief of the tribe asks the elders of what they think the visitor's motives are or whether they are dangerous. Over here, one can say Disney plays it safe in this particular scene, Indian values are depicted for respect of elders.

In the cartoon, Governor Ratcliff sings a song to his men telling them to keep digging until they find gold, to cut down trees, start working. The imagery shows them ripping apart the land which was previously filled with trees. Greed and going after gold and money is shown as something of a pivotal goal and its greed which has brought the white man to the new land, greed for riches and gold. The natives refer to whites now as the "beasts who invade our shores" and then shoot our people, is the exact replication of the age old concept of colonialism. The basic fundamentals of imperialistic behaviour and thought are translated by the first exchange of communication between Pocahontas and John Smith where he tells her his people will make roads and cities in the new world and when she disagrees that her people's houses are fine the way they are, he replies back in a very arrogant, superior fashion that her people don't know any better and don't know how to use the space fruitfully. Pocahontas gets mad when Smith calls her people savages, when he tries to explain why he said that, he explains further, "Savages are people who are uncivilized." The question that ponders one's mind is this: what exact message is this cartoon sending kids who barely even know anything about their own culture? Later on, the visitors are referred to as 'White demons,' which depicts the building hatred of the native for the white man who invades their land.

Pocahontas is believed to have existed but there are conflicting historical accounts of her story. But, according to the actual Powhatan tribe to which Pocahontas belonged to, the Pocahontas myth "love" story and the bravery of how she saved John Smith is full of distortions, especially about how Disney depicts and tells the story; According to Chief Crazy Horse of the Powhatan Renape Nation; he says on the Powhatan Organization's website that his people offered help to Disney in an effort to represent factual historical accounts of Pocahontas myth being accurately depicted to audiences, but Disney rejected their help and Roy Disney released a statement to a complaint launched by the Powhatan tribes people that the Disney film is "responsible, accurate and respectful."*

The Powhatan people strongly disagree with Disney's bias. Pocahontas has been romanticized, portrayed in the movie as a young, fully developed woman, whereas historical accounts as well as the tribe's head (Chief Crazy Horse of Powhatan tribe) claims Pocahontas was no more than 11 years of age, when she met John Smith. According to the Powhatans, the history as recorded by the English themselves, is badly falsified in the name of "entertainment".*

The supposedly wise grandmother-spirit willow tree agrees with Pocahontas that 'Coku,' the young man from her own people and tribe, who is in love with her and who her father wishes her to marry, is too serious and boring, but agrees with Pocahontas that the dashing Englishman is the one she should rightly be in love with. This depiction is also a violation of indigenous knowledge and wisdom, and also undermines indigenous cultural custom. Is it something exciting for dark-skinned native girls to do? Go against family, tribe, tradition, and culture and fall in love with a white Englishman, who is supposedly handsome. It is highly unlikely that a wise grandmother-spirit would advise her grandchild to do such a thing, thus this film violates historical authenticity implicitly, for its consumer-audience and against the customs or traditions of these pre-American peoples who are seen as old fashioned and in-appropriate in the cartoon film.

What is astonishing is the fact that Pocahontas was really a little girl in recorded history, but in this cartoon the audiences are oblivious to that idea and pretty much all audiences accept the way Pocahontas has been shown in the film, as a mature, voluptuous young woman, which is a distortion of the truth. Not only is this a negative portrayal of her, but one can link this whole distortion of facts as a deliberate move on Disney's part to erase the aspect of paedophilia on the part of John Smith, perhaps for the sake of better entertainment? This is because some evidence also suggests that since Pocahontas was underage, John Smith might have been a child rapist. One can only ponder why Disney follows such a unique formula, no wonder the Powhatan tribe disagrees with Disney's portrayal of Pocahontas, certainly it is an abusive fabrication. Not only that, but throughout the cartoon, one can see the hints and the indications of the native woman (Pocahontas) being portrayed to have a desiring body, and that is exoticism at its best! Disney gives sexual imagery to the love story of Pocahontas, it is a formula that has been used before on 'The Little Mermaid' where Ariel is made to look sexual from the way she dances under water to the transference of emotions. Similarly, in Pocahontas, one can say Disney produced something that translates the cultural superiority felt by Europeans at that time, in conquering and invading new lands. To them, indigenous people were understood to be "uncivilized savages." There is a famous saying - history always repeats itself in a cycle. Perhaps, animation films like Pocahontas, are in fact a double edged sword which border around several hidden messages, and children are the main targets of these hidden messages which are of culturally imperialistic nature. Culturally imperialist and neo-colonist thought and perception will not die anytime soon, not in people's minds, not in movies and certainly not in animation films.

References:

#Collins Essential English Dictionary 2^nd Edition 2006 HarperCollins Publishers 2004, 2006.

The Free Dictionary. Web address: http://www.thefreedictionary.com/imperialism 

^{# Powhatan Renape Nation; 'The Pocahontas Myth'}  Website: http://www.powhatan.org/pocc.html ^{# Disney as Mass Deception, A.H Itwaru, Excerpt, "Negative Exstacy: The Star Trek Seductions & other Mass Deceptions." Website: http://opencopy.org/articles/disney-as-mass-deception}

Earn Cash Fo Yo SOUL

Life is a time-trodden journey of moments and experiences. Man glides through three natural stages; the weak child becomes an assertive adult, then transforms back to a weakling in old age. Sometimes stuck in limbo. Neither alive nor dead. Just barely there. But one thing's certain, no fountain of youth will erase years from your life, or fabricate the years of your existence.

Everything has an equal opposing element, it's only fair for life to have death. Light has darkness, man-woman, young-old, rich-poor, good-evil, peace-suffering, or yin-yang. Tangibles and intangibles co-exist, but man is a complex creation of God, the only creation given an independent choice to do as he/she wills and to find his/her individual journey on earth. Man's time is, therefore, limited.

I was searching the web, reading articles relating to people's experiences of grief in life, and generally about the physiological and psychological effects of grief. It's an emotion that hits you when you feel irreplaceable loss, most often when someone close to you dies. From the general information, I understood that grief's effect depends on the stage of life you're at, whether you're a child, an adolescent, or an adult, the effects of the emotion vary depending on the stage and the relationship with the deceased. How strong your bond was with a deceased, whether it's your son/daughter, parent, friend, brother/sister.

'Grief has a different face on everyone', quoted on a tv show as a police officer is seen interviewing a mother of a kidnapped girl, and she maintains a calm aura while answering questions. Here's my question to you, the reader, have you ever wondered what grief would look like on you? Most people refrain from thinking about such facets of life, but irrespective, it's a facet bound to happen sooner or later. Do you think about the time when it will happen? It isn't wrong to think about it because, in a way, you'll be mentally preparing yourself for an alien emotion, and no matter how much time you'll spend contemplating it, it will still wrangle your soul once it happens.

Grief envelopes your soul, and pinches every nerve cell with depressive cognitive messages, numbing the pain at times or reversing it or inflaming it to anger. Or it can become a painful psychosomatic feeling, making you quiet, aloof, and introverted with every thought or feeling. The feelings of hopelessness and loss mixed with a sea of memories and guilt play out differently for every human being. Grief cannot be expressed till a grieving moment arises in one's life. Till someone you love very dearly dies. There's no rector scale measuring grief, it's all very different yet similar. Its existence is a natural component of your small life.

Death is the real life most people wait for in this world (dunya), because the Faith warns you of becoming too involved with your life, as you'll forget your final resting place. Faith gives you the courage to accept your fate and your destiny. Faith prepares you to get unplugged from the earth.
In Islam when you bury the dead, the women don't accompany the men to the burial. Man digs a nine feet deep grave. Gets down in the grave. Helps lower the coffin. Everyone helping thinks of their own death, who will be the people lowering my coffin? Kind of weird thinking about it but yeah ever wondered who's going to lower your coffin into the ground? 


Faith, religion, Higher Power, God, Allah, whatever you believe in or don't believe in is not my concern, but my spirit tells me that you all can be happier after death if you follow a simple rule in your life: 1 Good deed a day. It's a simple ritual. Self-explanatory. There is a plague of hate and corruption in the world, where people have begun thinking of themselves as demigods or gods on earth, challenging their evil nature to reach new heights of fame, torturing the innocent, and being uncaring towards the poor, and downtrodden. If every day of your life you spend it by being selfish, you've wasted your time. If every day you do even one deed that's selfless and caring, and to your understanding counts as a good deed, that's a useful day for you. Basically, you're buying cash for your soul through your good deeds. You need that soul cash once you konk off the face of the earth. That other world deals only in soul cash. Do your good deeds to earn it. =)

Death looms nearby every day, good deeds while you're alive equate to money after you die. Make sure you make each day count so that you feel confident about your wealth in the hereafter. Humans are made to be spiritual creatures, nurture your spiritual being. Everyone's going to their own grave 9 feet under.