Turning a Madhyamaka Trick: Reply to Huntington

Huntington (2007); argues that recent commentators (Robinson, 1957; Hayes, 1994; Tillemans, 1999; Garfield and Priest, 2002) err in attributing to Nāgārjuna and Candrakīrti a commitment to rationality and to the use of argument, and that these commentators do violence to the Madhyamaka project by using rational reconstruction in their interpretation of Nāgārjuna’s and Candrakīrti’s texts. Huntington argues instead that mādhyamikas reject reasoning, distrust logic and do not offer arguments. He also argues that interpreters ought to recuse themselves from argument in order to be faithful to these texts. I demonstrate that he is wrong in all respects: Nāgārjuna and Candrakīrti deploy arguments, take themselves to do so, and even if they did not, we would be wise to do so in commenting on their texts.     

CSIR 1926–1939

The Council for Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR, later to become CSIRO) was established in 1926 to replace the pre-existing Institute of Science and Industry. Its beginning was suffused with an optimism based on surpluses in Commonwealth revenues in the years 1926–8, an optimism which was reflected in the action of the Parliament in voting the sum of ł500,000 to be placed to the credit of a Trust Fund to give the new organization a good start. This amount was the exact sum which was mentioned by the then Prime Minister, W. M. Hughes, in his burst of enthusiasm, in December, 1915, when he first launched the Advisory Council of Science and Industry.     

The EU,Economic Partnership Agreements and Africa

Africa has been divided into four groups of states by the European Union in the negotiation of Economic Partnership Agreements (EPAs) that will define the relationship between Africa and Europe in the future. The EPAs are unfair. They demand reciprocity between the EU countries collectively and each African country individually and they set conditions that will be demanded by any other country or groups of countries with which African countries seek trade arrangements. Further, separate EPAs among different groupings of African countries will undermine Africa’s wider integration efforts, leaving it in thrall to EU companies. In their present form the EPAs are not in Africa’s interest and will unnecessarily undermine the potential for Europe’s improved relationship with the continent.     

The Implications of Brexit for the Caribbean’s Future Relationship with Britain and the EU

Abstract

The UK Brexit referendum to leave the EU has created concerns internationally, particularly for countries that have formal trade, aid and investment treaties with the EU and none with Britain alone. The notion of a Commonwealth Free Trade Agreement (FTA) is a non-starter and would bring no benefits to the Caribbean. But, Britain outside the EU deprives the Caribbean of a sympathetic voice on a range of issues, including financial services, and alters the level of official development assistance that will be available from remaining EU members that have no historical relationship with the English-speaking Caribbean. The importance of the UK as a market for their goods and services make it imperative for Caribbean countries to start early ‘talks’ with London so as not to be crowded out by FTAs that the UK will conclude with countries larger and richer than the Caribbean. At the same time, Brexit provides an opportunity for the Caribbean to revisit its unsatisfactory Economic Partnership Agreement with the EU. Caribbean countries need to determine their objectives and take early initiatives to realise them.