Wednesday, November 26, 2008
fer amelia my love
QUOTED FROM http://lollipop-tree.blogspot.com :
[[[ TO JIJIHUBBY:
to show my sincerity in my apologies for not replying you, i shall dedicate this post to you !! happy? excited? you should be.. wahahaha. okay.. here goes my love letter..
dear hubby, I love every little thing about you. I love your cute smile, your magical eyes, and the sound of your voice. I love your gentle touch, and I love the warmth I feel when I’m by your side. I can't stop thinking about you when we are apart. I need you by my side. You complete me. You mean the world to me. You are the best thing that has ever happened to me. You are the one I've always wished for. I never thought that I would ever meet someone as special as you. I love each and every moment I share with you.
LOL. dont cry. i know you are. woooohoooooooo :D
i love you jiji hubby and all the best for your exams. (: pass with flying colours :D
WITH LOTS AND LOTS OF LOVE
AMELIA
ps: super lesbo can. LOL. cyaaaaaa soon !! ]]]
The above was by my dearest wifey AMELIA.
Dearest BABUSENG wife, I love you lots too. :D Come and have a kiss with your hubby alibaba. <333
BTW I very touched by your blog post la, hee hee <3
11/26/2008 07:27:00 PM
Friday, November 21, 2008
I'm still alive...
...but barely...
my sis is going to take the psp along with her for her Japan trip, which happens to be in the middle of my exam period. she's trying to get it as much as she can now, so that it'll be one less distraction to me. so, what's left is fighting the urge to go to audi everytime i'm reading my ppt slides and docs.
and more importantly, to find the motivation to continue studying for HY2208, and start on the other 3 untouched modules. Oh, and revise GEK1045. So, I'm done with 30% of the studying for all my modules and my first paper is... uh... next Wednesday. yay. =___=
and i have to work during my exams. wonderful. my boss' family will be out of the country and they need someone at the office. so, it's work in between exams AND straight after it too, no break at all fer me. well.. at least i can go back to my online activities after the exams.
*groans and faints*
11/21/2008 11:55:00 PM
Friday, November 14, 2008
Ladies and gentlemen~ Presenting to you the proudest moment of my life in NUS FASS!
An A+. In NUS FASS. In HISTORY. Yes, I actually managed it! Until now I am still a bit bewildered. I was never known to have great vocabulary and I rarely regarded my stuff to be impressive at all. Yet, I did it. (Okay, so it was for my favourite history module so far.... but still, I consider it an accomplishment)
It would be totally unimagineable, but it happened. Thanks to all my dearies who are happy for me and proud of me. I love you all so much. This episode has given me more motivation to go on and for once in this whole semester, I see a faint glimmer of hope. =)
Anyways, I'll be sharing my essay here. It'll be a really really long read. You can skip it if this doesn't interest you. ^___^
HY2246: Introduction to World History
Qn 1) Could the ‘age of production’ be better defined as the ‘age of nation states’? Motivate your opinion.
The nineteenth century marked a period of rapid industrialization as well as the sprouting of various new nation states in Europe. In periodizing this period in history, both the terms “age of production” and “age of nation states” would appear to be plausible choices. However, with further analysis, it would appear that the nineteenth century should in fact be marked and identified by “production” rather than “nation states”, particularly with regards to the context of world history. This paper will examine the validity of both choices, and show why it is more befitting to label this period as the “age of production”.
It would not be wrong or illogical for one to notice that the period of the nineteenth century saw a flourishing of nation states. This period was indeed the period whereby many nations were being created. Examples of these included states like Belgium and Costa Rica. More significantly, the political upheavals during the 1848 Revolutions in Europe also subsequently led to the creation of other nation states, including the French Second Republic, and the unification of Germany and Italy. This was the period of the rapid growth and proliferation of nationalism to the entire continent of Europe. Indeed, the 1848 Revolutions and the emergence of nation states like Germany and Italy were major developments in this period. These developments kicked-started many other political changes that would last even up till the twentieth century. The rise of nationalism in the nineteenth century paved the foundation for the establishment of even more nation states later on, for example the Hungarian nationality that gained independence from the Habsburg Empire.
The importance of nation states and nationalism in this period should not be overlooked. In fact, nation states promoted economic activities through the establishment of markets. As mentioned during the lectures, the rise of nation states provided convenience for the increase in industrial activities by creating common laws, language, education, time and even opening hours in the national markets for goods. Prior to this, goods were limited to small spheres and the creation of large market zones through the establishment of nation states facilitated industrialization. It was thus the creation of nation states which fuelled the processes of mass production in the nineteenth century.
However, despite the importance of the afore-mentioned developments, these events were mostly confined to their own regions. Although the 1848 Revolutions did have important and reverberating impacts, these effects of this were to a large extent limited to the continent of Europe. For example, there were no trends of nationalism and calls for independence that resulted in the formation of nation states in Asia, per se. As a result, the appropriateness of naming the nineteenth century as the “age of nation states” is greatly diminished. Furthermore, the rise of nation states were not unique to the nineteenth century. As noted by Habid, the roots of the emerging nation states lie in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries with the examples of Spain, Portugal and England among other nation states. (1975, 15) Habid also described these processes of nation-formation as the “slow creation of nations until the eighteenth century”. (1975, 15) This implies that the nineteenth century merely saw a speeding up of this process, and that the birth of nation states did not occur in this period. As such, the role of nation states may not be as significant as what it may appear to be.
On the other hand, naming the nineteenth century as “the age of production” is certainly a more viable option. The nineteenth century, other than seeing the rise of various nation states, also recorded the greatest extent of industrialization of the entire world for the first time in history. As mentioned during the lectures, this period saw the rise of mass production and mass consumption, which accelerated changes on the global level. Beginning from Britain, the Industrial Revolutions saw an impressive shift in the production patterns after the factories began using machineries in the processes of production. As a result, there were vast amounts of surplus goods being produced, too much for the people of Britain to consume by themselves. This encouraged the British to look for markets outside of Great Britain to sell their extra goods, and this was one of the motivations behind British imperialism in creating a British colonial empire in other parts of the world.
Significantly, these developments were not confined to Britain. As the Industrial Revolution spread to other powers, for example Japan and also other European states, these powers saw increases in demands for both raw materials to facilitate mass production, and greater markets to dump the surplus goods resulting from this same mass production. These motivations were partly the reason behind the age of new imperialism, which would affect all areas of the world as European powers sought new markets and new sources of raw materials in the form of colonies overseas.
Furthermore, it was during the period of production that socialism was created out of the constant oppression of the workers in the factories. Karl Marx believed that the exploited and oppressed proletariat would eventually launch revolutions to overthrow the existing social and economic order, and resolved problems through redistributing resources and eliminating private ownership. This birth of class conflicts between the “have-it”s and “have-not”s would characterise the politics of the nineteenth and twentieth century, as noted in the lectures. As such, it can be seen that it was issues related to production that essentially shaped global developments. In the context of world history, “production” would seem to be a much more striking aspect compared to the idea of “nation state”.
Having established the significance of the Industrial Revolution in the nineteenth century, it would be necessary to note that the Industrial Revolution was not launched in the nineteenth century, but rather in 1750. However, it was in the nineteenth century that saw the spreading of the processes of machinery in mass production to other places outside of Britain. As such, this period in history is better termed the “age of production” rather than the “Industrial Revolution”, for example. Such is a distinction that would set aside the idea of “production” away from the “Industrial Revolution”.
Having made the above comparisons, it is clear that “production” was the key issue which affected global politics in the nineteenth century. Sterns, in his analysis of periodization in the context of world history, has laid out a set of criteria that should be met when one considers a periodization that is “both explicit and defendable”. (1987, 562) He states that “[a periodization] cannot rely overmuch on events or on the kinds of political change most likely to occur within rather than across civilizations. It must embrace popular as well as elite activities, as against the outdated assumption that in world history the masses can be ignored as changeless while attention rivets on elite developments.” (1987, 562) This means, essentially, that an effective periodization would need to show impacts that affect the world. Consequently, after the careful analysis of both the terms “the age of production” and “the age of nation states”, it is apparent that the nineteenth century would be better defined as “the age of production” rather than “the age of nation states”.
Bibliography
Habid, Irfan. (1975). Emergence of Nationalities. Social Scientise, 4(1), 14-20
Sterns, Peter N. (1987). Periodization in World History Teaching: Identifying the Big Changes. The History Teacher, 20(4), 561-580
My Tutor's Comments:
Convincing! What is impressive is that your arguments are concise and within the range of the word limit. You could have also discussed perhaps the act of choosing the historical events to “periodize” a certain period, but then, you would have to type more words!
A+
It would be totally unimagineable, but it happened. Thanks to all my dearies who are happy for me and proud of me. I love you all so much. This episode has given me more motivation to go on and for once in this whole semester, I see a faint glimmer of hope. =)
Anyways, I'll be sharing my essay here. It'll be a really really long read. You can skip it if this doesn't interest you. ^___^
HY2246: Introduction to World History
Qn 1) Could the ‘age of production’ be better defined as the ‘age of nation states’? Motivate your opinion.
The nineteenth century marked a period of rapid industrialization as well as the sprouting of various new nation states in Europe. In periodizing this period in history, both the terms “age of production” and “age of nation states” would appear to be plausible choices. However, with further analysis, it would appear that the nineteenth century should in fact be marked and identified by “production” rather than “nation states”, particularly with regards to the context of world history. This paper will examine the validity of both choices, and show why it is more befitting to label this period as the “age of production”.
It would not be wrong or illogical for one to notice that the period of the nineteenth century saw a flourishing of nation states. This period was indeed the period whereby many nations were being created. Examples of these included states like Belgium and Costa Rica. More significantly, the political upheavals during the 1848 Revolutions in Europe also subsequently led to the creation of other nation states, including the French Second Republic, and the unification of Germany and Italy. This was the period of the rapid growth and proliferation of nationalism to the entire continent of Europe. Indeed, the 1848 Revolutions and the emergence of nation states like Germany and Italy were major developments in this period. These developments kicked-started many other political changes that would last even up till the twentieth century. The rise of nationalism in the nineteenth century paved the foundation for the establishment of even more nation states later on, for example the Hungarian nationality that gained independence from the Habsburg Empire.
The importance of nation states and nationalism in this period should not be overlooked. In fact, nation states promoted economic activities through the establishment of markets. As mentioned during the lectures, the rise of nation states provided convenience for the increase in industrial activities by creating common laws, language, education, time and even opening hours in the national markets for goods. Prior to this, goods were limited to small spheres and the creation of large market zones through the establishment of nation states facilitated industrialization. It was thus the creation of nation states which fuelled the processes of mass production in the nineteenth century.
However, despite the importance of the afore-mentioned developments, these events were mostly confined to their own regions. Although the 1848 Revolutions did have important and reverberating impacts, these effects of this were to a large extent limited to the continent of Europe. For example, there were no trends of nationalism and calls for independence that resulted in the formation of nation states in Asia, per se. As a result, the appropriateness of naming the nineteenth century as the “age of nation states” is greatly diminished. Furthermore, the rise of nation states were not unique to the nineteenth century. As noted by Habid, the roots of the emerging nation states lie in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries with the examples of Spain, Portugal and England among other nation states. (1975, 15) Habid also described these processes of nation-formation as the “slow creation of nations until the eighteenth century”. (1975, 15) This implies that the nineteenth century merely saw a speeding up of this process, and that the birth of nation states did not occur in this period. As such, the role of nation states may not be as significant as what it may appear to be.
On the other hand, naming the nineteenth century as “the age of production” is certainly a more viable option. The nineteenth century, other than seeing the rise of various nation states, also recorded the greatest extent of industrialization of the entire world for the first time in history. As mentioned during the lectures, this period saw the rise of mass production and mass consumption, which accelerated changes on the global level. Beginning from Britain, the Industrial Revolutions saw an impressive shift in the production patterns after the factories began using machineries in the processes of production. As a result, there were vast amounts of surplus goods being produced, too much for the people of Britain to consume by themselves. This encouraged the British to look for markets outside of Great Britain to sell their extra goods, and this was one of the motivations behind British imperialism in creating a British colonial empire in other parts of the world.
Significantly, these developments were not confined to Britain. As the Industrial Revolution spread to other powers, for example Japan and also other European states, these powers saw increases in demands for both raw materials to facilitate mass production, and greater markets to dump the surplus goods resulting from this same mass production. These motivations were partly the reason behind the age of new imperialism, which would affect all areas of the world as European powers sought new markets and new sources of raw materials in the form of colonies overseas.
Furthermore, it was during the period of production that socialism was created out of the constant oppression of the workers in the factories. Karl Marx believed that the exploited and oppressed proletariat would eventually launch revolutions to overthrow the existing social and economic order, and resolved problems through redistributing resources and eliminating private ownership. This birth of class conflicts between the “have-it”s and “have-not”s would characterise the politics of the nineteenth and twentieth century, as noted in the lectures. As such, it can be seen that it was issues related to production that essentially shaped global developments. In the context of world history, “production” would seem to be a much more striking aspect compared to the idea of “nation state”.
Having established the significance of the Industrial Revolution in the nineteenth century, it would be necessary to note that the Industrial Revolution was not launched in the nineteenth century, but rather in 1750. However, it was in the nineteenth century that saw the spreading of the processes of machinery in mass production to other places outside of Britain. As such, this period in history is better termed the “age of production” rather than the “Industrial Revolution”, for example. Such is a distinction that would set aside the idea of “production” away from the “Industrial Revolution”.
Having made the above comparisons, it is clear that “production” was the key issue which affected global politics in the nineteenth century. Sterns, in his analysis of periodization in the context of world history, has laid out a set of criteria that should be met when one considers a periodization that is “both explicit and defendable”. (1987, 562) He states that “[a periodization] cannot rely overmuch on events or on the kinds of political change most likely to occur within rather than across civilizations. It must embrace popular as well as elite activities, as against the outdated assumption that in world history the masses can be ignored as changeless while attention rivets on elite developments.” (1987, 562) This means, essentially, that an effective periodization would need to show impacts that affect the world. Consequently, after the careful analysis of both the terms “the age of production” and “the age of nation states”, it is apparent that the nineteenth century would be better defined as “the age of production” rather than “the age of nation states”.
Bibliography
Habid, Irfan. (1975). Emergence of Nationalities. Social Scientise, 4(1), 14-20
Sterns, Peter N. (1987). Periodization in World History Teaching: Identifying the Big Changes. The History Teacher, 20(4), 561-580
My Tutor's Comments:
Convincing! What is impressive is that your arguments are concise and within the range of the word limit. You could have also discussed perhaps the act of choosing the historical events to “periodize” a certain period, but then, you would have to type more words!
A+
My Thoughts:
Aye, very simple language, no usage of bombastic words at all... T____T Well, I really enjoy this module. Studying events of the past, and identifying the main trends, seeing how things all over the world affect each other, tracing things back to where they began.... I really love this module. The world that we are living in now does not come about from nothing. It is pieced up by bits and pieces, big and small, from all over the world.
And I'm proud to say that despite the degree of tainting and destroying our education system has done to the teaching of History to youngsters, (especially History in secondary schools, the fun only begins in JC History..) I still love History a lot and I am constantly learning new things about all aspects of life by studying History. And being acknowledged for the insights that I bear towards the world.... It really makes me feel like all I'm going through in school is worth it, because at the end of the day I am cultivating my own intellect.
I do love learning. (But I still hate school. =x )
11/14/2008 12:59:00 AM
Friday, November 07, 2008
at the end of the day...........
Why am I doing what I am doing?
It's all for the sake of my dignity, for my pride. To show that unlike what you all think, I will not lose out. To show that I am worth something in this sick and rotting society. To prove that I exist.
But I am slowly losing sight. What is the point of proving it, when even I myself do not have faith in all this? But will quitting be a way out? Will giving up do anything to help? Will leaving ensure me enlightenment of what it is that I will engage in for the most of my remaining life?
In an elitist society, what will happen to a non-pure-breed "elite" like me, who doesn't even want to be an elite?
Is it worth it to put myself under tens of thousands of dollars worth of debts for something I hate? Academic performance was never the top priority in my life. My friends are my life. But even if I gave so much up for friends, some did not understand, some did not bother, some didn't care. Who would know the sacrifices I've made? People don't know. Will my grades know? Even if I have given up so much and adapted to an even more uneventful life, how can I find passion for something I don't appreciate? How can I find the discipline to spend hours after hours on what I deem is pointless?
This gloom, this feeling of dread whenever I remember the fact that I am stuck in an education system that promises no emotional development, how can I ever get rid of it? Hypocrites, muggers, elites, snobs, wealthy people. Institutionalization and sick bureaucracy.
I want to get out of it so much.
But I just... can't.
11/07/2008 12:11:00 AM
Tuesday, November 04, 2008
YOU
ARE SUCH A BITCH.
WHY DONT YOU JUST FUCKING GET OUT OF MY LIFE?
