Time to think

I just realized that this was a draft from almost two years ago and that I had forgotten to actually publish it. But I thought it was worthwhile so making up for that error now:

Recently, I visited Monticello - the beloved home of the third president of the United States, Thomas Jefferson. Every American child learns about Jefferson as the third president and his importance in the history of the nation (not to mention, since 1998, his apparent relationship with his slave, Sally Hemings). What may not always be mentioned in those lessons is his other interests and proficiency in many of them. Or, if they are, they are secondary to the larger importance of his place in history.

But I was reminded that Jefferson truly was a renaissance man in every sense of the word. It was his fervent belief that the purpose of government was to secure the natural rights of man, the rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. While this may seem natural to those of us in the 21st century, it was quite a leap at a time when the right of governance was determined by birth and those who were not so fortunate were subjected to the whims of those who were. Almost every nation in the world was run by kings and leaders whose positions were determined by their lineage, not by their ability to lead. Their people were subjected to lives similarly predetermined by their birth, but not at the lofty level of their lords and lieges. To argue that men had the right to choose their own leaders and to pursue their own lives independent of kings chosen by God was a revolutionary thought in more than a few ways.

These were things about which I was certainly aware though partly forgotten over the years. But my visit to Monticello did remind me and I was grateful for the opportunity to relearn them. I have and will also continue to relearn those lessons for they are no less important today than they were 200+ years ago.

But what caught my interest was what apparently also caught Mr. Jefferson's interest - architecture, science, history, technology and horticulture - among other things. He was an accomplished architect (I believe he designed Monticello), noted the daily weather in a diary for 50 years and filled his home with maps of the known world at his time as well as bones of animals not known in his homeland and artifacts from different cultures. His intellectual curiosity knew no bounds. Combined with that interest, however, was the desire to spread the knowledge out further. The University of Virginia, a highly regarded place of higher learning, was conceived and originated by Mr. Jefferson. Indeed, he was a man of letters (more than 20,000 if I recall correctly) who professed his love of books to his friends. Aside - I had forgotten that the US Library of Congress was founded through the generous assistance of Mr. Jefferson.

Jefferson's legacy is one of the few who can be said to be almost universal. His approach to government, not to mention his contributions to science and the pursuit of higher learning, have endured and are emulated not just in his own nation but elsewhere throughout the world. This is a man to whom great debts are owed and much praise is due. Frankly, I think the world needs another like him who can transcend his own time and similarly provide for the future.

NOW he's illegitimate?!

Syria's Bashir Al-Assad has lost the legitimacy to rule according to Hillary Clinton. Of course, the previous several months when he was shooting, beating and otherwise terrorizing his subjects (yes, I am using that term deliberately) he was still a legitimate ruler and someone that the US was trying to find ways to cajole into behaving better. However, now that he's unleashed his supporters to rampage through the US embassy in Damascus, NOW he's no longer a legitimate ruler.

Ignoring the fact that the US is assuming the role of sole arbiter of who is the legitimate ruler of any nation (other than the US), I'm sure that those who have been sacrificing themselves to promote a better form of government in Syria are now thrilled to know that the US actually agrees with them - months after the fact and only after the US government itself has been the target. Sort of reminds me of Afghanistan which the US essentially ignored (when the Taliban was abusing its citizenry in the late 90's) until the 9/11 attacks and then it was the first target of US revenge.

Yep, I guess if you want to help topple your government and you live in a nation where the leader is cozy with the US, ratchet up the pressure and get the tyrant to personally offend the US if you want any assistance (or even pro-forma support).

Venezuelan medical care is that bad?

A few weeks ago, Venezuelan leader Hugo Chavez underwent surgery to deal with a pelvic abscess (sounds painful, quite frankly) - in Cuba. I have to admit that my first thought was, um, why is the leader of a nation having surgery in another country rather than in his own nation? I would assume that pelvic abscesses are not something so unfamiliar that they can't be handled as part of a routine procedure and would therefore be something that could be handled by doctors in your own nation. After all, can one imagine the president of the US going to Turkey (or Switzerland, for that matter) for a similar procedure?

Heck no! (S)he would undergo surgery in his own country from the best his nation has to offer. So, I guess it begs the question of exactly why Chavez had surgery in Cuba (for which, to those otherwise unaware, he has been an economic patron while Fidel Castro has been his political mentor). Is it because Venezuela doesn't have competent doctors? Perhaps Chavez doesn't want his own populace to be aware of his weakness (from whence he might be dumped from office)? Maybe it's more convenient to perform surgeries in Cuba than it is in Venezuela?

Cuba does seem to have an excess of doctors that it exports throughout the world so I guess they must have a decent reputation... And it's not the first time leaders have had medical concerns dealt with external to their own countries (the Shah of Iran and members of the Saudi Arabian elite are notable personages who sought medical care in the US for serious or rare medical conditions that could not be addressed in their respective nations). But it certainly does not speak well of either the Venezuelan medical system or the trust that the leadership has in it. Too bad the poor Venezuelans who make up much of his political base can't have similar options when it comes to their own medical care...

Expanding Points of View

I recently finished Christiane Bird's Neither East Nor West, a story of her travels in Iran. Her book reminds me of one of my favorite blogs, Seeing Red in China, by an American named Tom about his view of China on a daily basis. What these two things have in common is a desire to look beyond the very narrow, news-oriented point of view of daily life in Iran and China respectively and offer their readers the opportunity to see life in places they may otherwise never have the opportunity to see. Frankly, it is people like this that help to bring the world closer together and make it, hopefully, a better place for everyone.

And while my commentary may be directed more at Westerners (and Americans in particular), it is by no means limited only to them. Misconceptions and generalizations about others has no limits nor boundaries and they are rarely positive. The only way to overcome those misconceptions is to truly live some place else and recognize that life in the US is really not that significantly different than it is in China or Iran or anyplace else. This is not to suggest that there are no differences but to point out that we tend to have a very limited perspective when we think of others. For example, we tend to view Iran as a misogynistic, radically religious, fundamentalist nation that is bent on acquiring nuclear weapons and imposing a radical view of Islam upon the rest of the world. Yet few Westerners realize that there is a great deal of diversity within Iran, that they actually do have elections (perhaps not to the standard that we have in the West but certainly better than any in the Middle East) and that there is a long line of Persian history, art and culture to which they are the inheritors. The same goes for China. To hear China in the news, it is often in regard to their rising economic status, their belligerent behavior in the South China Seas toward their neighbors, the rising number of protests in the countryside or their human rights violations (see Liu Xiaobo, among others). Yet very little street-level discussion is provided to offer the full context of life in China - much of which revolves outside of the limited political view with which it is held in nations outside of China. Indeed, I have always found it interesting that Chinese often knew more about US politics (although often negative or bad things) than most US citizens. In reality, it could be argued that the majority of people in both Iran and China like the US, if not necessarily its government or policy decisions. But then again, there is a sizable portion of US citizens who have problems with its government and policy decisions, so there may be some validation to that particular argument.

Perhaps not everyone has the opportunity to travel to these places and see things for themselves but they should, at the very least, avail themselves of the opportunity to read about them beyond the limited scope of what they see/hear in the news. Expanding one's horizons and perspectives can only be to the benefit of not only the individual but potentially even rising to higher levels of policy making that can allow nations to work together to solve problems for the mutual benefit of more than a select few. Perhaps this is a simplistic and naive point of view but everyone should dream about making the world a little better else nothing will change. As the saying goes, think globally - act locally.

Where's Captain Obvious?!

Reading through something on Yahoo earlier today had me wondering if someone had forgotten to reference Captain Obvious. Yes, the headline of the article was "TV Executives Admit in Taped Interviews That Hollywood Pushes a Liberal Agenda". It was all I could do stop myself from uttering out loud, "Oh really?!"

Yes, someone actually got a bunch of Hollywood writers, producers, execs and who knows who else to admit on camera that they were biased, happily so, and would just as soon see anyone who isn't of the same opinion as they go unemployed (at least in Hollywood). Now, I'm sure that some of these people who were interviewed will then cry foul that their tapes were released (exactly what would make them think that TAPED INTERVIEWS would not be used at some point in a public forum?) and others will freely continue to admit that they are better than their non-conservative peers with no public recrimination. And in Hollywood, it does not seem that recriminations from their many like-minded peers will be forthcoming, so that does not seem to be a deterrent to spouting forth their points of view. But I wonder if they will be at all more hesitant to express such views if no one watched their shows and they suddenly find themselves unable to earn an income? (Not that I think that likely; that is more of a wandering thought meandering through the vast desert of empty space in my head.)

And I do not begrudge them their views even if I do not necessarily agree with all of them. No, I think what gets me is the arrogance they show in their superior beliefs and the disdain that they hold for any who do not believe as they do. It is surely an open secret (if "secret" be the right term) that Hollywood has a liberal bias and that is not so much an issue. If you do not like what Hollywood produces, then go create your own or find your entertainment elsewhere. But to assert the rightness of your beliefs and then to deny others who might disagree with you the opportunity to work for/with you would find you in front of a courtroom in almost any other line of business. Heck, Target was recently targeted (no pun intended) for protests when it was learned that the company had donated money to anti-gay politicians. They then backtracked and offered to compensate the opposite side in order to avoid any controversy. Yet the Hollywood elite (and even the not-so-elite) boast of their narrow-minded views and the retribution they deliver to those who don't agree and no one says anything. While they claim to hold tolerant views, it is clear from their words and actions that they are extraordinarily intolerant - while accusing anyone who disagrees with them as being such.

In the world in which I live, this is called hypocrisy. And, anywhere outside of Hollywood, it would not only be frowned upon but likely means of all kinds of not-so-positive things to happen. However, in Hollywood, it appears to be the standard. But I guess that shouldn't be so surprising for an industry that is based on escaping reality.

More political demonization thoughts

Sometimes, it amazes me how people see each other, particularly when it comes to politics. And, I will preface before I go further that I am absolutely certain this is nothing new but the speed with which things are spread via the internet simply allows this sort of vitriol and negative stereotypes to perpetrate themselves with lightning speed. And, for the purpose of this post, I will limit myself to US politics as that is what I am most familiar with. The general stereotype is that Republicans are social and fiscal conservatives, often deeply religious and strongly supportive of the military and financial responsibility. For Democrats, it is the belief that they are borderline communists whose belief in greater government interaction with society is for the betterment of all and who prefer that the rich should be taxed more heavily to support the poor and downtrodden in society who cannot do for themselves.

It should be pretty obvious to anyone who has read this blog for any period of time that I do not belong to either of these political parties as I tend to despise them pretty equally for different reasons. The one thing I dislike is hypocrisy and I strive hard not to be that way in my own life. However, it seems impossible to be involved with any sort of political activity and not become hypocritical at some point. Republicans, to me, are hypocritical based on their "Do as I say, not as I do" attitude, particularly galling for a group that positions themselves as the more "moral" party based on their increasingly religious credentials (and when I say religious, I am referring more to Christian). Correspondingly, Democrats gall me for their attitude of being the more "elitist" party who thinks they know all of the answers and can implement them if only the government were granted more power to do so - in spite of the mountain of evidence through history that indicates that increased power with government usually does not provide for anything to society other than the desire for more power for those who already have it. But this does not stop either party from stooping to various lows to denigrate their opponents for transgressions while ignoring their own. Perhaps this is why so many people outside of the political beltway try to ignore it.

So what has ignited this particular post? The following comment came through my Twitter feed recently and it just irked me a little.

If you slotted Hitler into the current Republican presidential field he’d be a moderate.

Obviously, it is posted by someone with Democratic leanings. But how is it ok for Democrats (the supposed peace party - their current president probably excluded) to make these associations? Or, for that matter, how is it ok for Republicans to paint Obama as anything from Lenin to Stalin to Mao to Hitler (individuals whose only comparable feature was that they were all dictators within the last century)? And, frankly, how does this sort of discourse allow for any sort of rational compromise to occur that will benefit the nation as a whole? It often seems like the entire point of politics today is nothing more than a race to see who will finish first regardless of the consequences. And the deteriorating state of society that seems very evident to any who wish to see it is the sad result. It is not the fault of the Democrats or the Republicans, it is the fault of both and a society that happily allows itself to be fooled into thinking that it is someone else's fault in order to avoid blame unto themselves. I only hope that we will wake up one day to recognize that we are the ones who have to take action if we hope to avoid falling into third world status in the next generation.

The Tank Man

Last night, we watched The Tank Man. I had never seen it and recently found it was on Netflix so I ordered it. While several years old, I still found it to be very enlightening in some regards and it certainly was news to my better half (who lived in China at the time and was completely unaware of many of the things that were shown in the documentary) as well as Mini-Me (who was exposed to something that he ordinarily would not have seen).

The events of the spring of 1989 in China, as I have pointed out in this blog previously regarding the similarly egregious Cultural Revolution, remain unexamined in China as a result of explicit refusal by the government to permit it. This inability to examine the events of that time have allowed for only the perspective of Westerners who were able to both videotape and write about their experiences and it certainly colored an entire generation both in and outside of China. In China, that generation remains unable to articulate their experiences unless they leave (with no intention of returning). In the West, that generation views China today through a lens that is still colored by the actions of a tyrannical government that willingly sacrificed its legitimacy (and I use that term loosely) through the use of battlefield weapons against its own people in order to preserve its rule.

The actions of a single man, defying the might of the state, is a defining image and has imbued many who have seen it with a strong sense of purpose and strength in terms of the relationship with the state. His willful defiance stands in contrast to the weakness of those few in power in China who chose to brutally murder their citizens instead of working to create a better society for everyone. Their fear of their own people is what precipitated the tragic events that June 3 night and, while the actions of a single man (who remains unidentified to this day) have helped to restore some pride to China, that fear continues to haunt the nation. A fear of looking in the mirror and seeing the ugliness and finding a way to address it so that the future can be made to look prettier. The reality is that China can fix the bullet holes in the buildings, repair the tire tracks from the tanks on Changan Avenue and show the world a wonderful Olympics a mere 19 years later but all of that will be a mere facade built upon a fragile framework that will threaten to collapse until it is reviewed and truly repaired. Hopefully, all Chinese will one day be able to learn the entire story of that spring as well as the truth behind the Tank Man.

Android Apps

Yesterday, while waiting for Mini-Me's piano recital to begin, was cruising through the Android Market to see what apps I could just find. Now, bear in mind, that I refuse to pay for any apps at this point - particularly games - so I was just seeing things that could be of use. And the current list of apps on my phone must make me seem pretty nerdy as it runs a fairly comprehensive list of free Chinese language learning apps (1000 Chinese, Chinese Word of the Day - which had an incorrect definition for yesterday's word I should point out - Chinese Translator, Google Translate, Chinese flashcard apps and a couple of dictionaries for added measure), multiple news apps (ranging from CNN, MSNBC, FoxNews, BBC, Al-Jazeera and others) and a few games that I enjoy (Chess, Chinese Chess, Pente and Sudoku among others - though my progeny would prefer I get racing games). This does not, of course, include a sizable portion of my music collection that I have yanked onto the phone.

But, came across a couple of very useful apps that I had probably heard of previously but somehow neglected to look up once I actually purchased this phone less than six months ago. The most notable were three - Shazam (a music service that helps to identify songs you may not know), Coupons (which provides an online list of coupons that can be used at various retailers - and I'm curious to find out whether I can actually use these coupons directly from my phone as they say) and GasBuddy (which helps to find the best gas prices in the local area or wherever you wish to search). Using GasBuddy, I managed to actually get gas for $.15/gallon less than I would have found if I'd refilled at my local station. And Coupons helped me find some decent coupons for the restaurant we'd eaten at the previous evening (oh well, better late than never to learn). Meanwhile, I've managed to confuse Shazam only with a couple of Chinese songs (but not all of them) so that is a pretty useful app (since I truly love music and would like to know about certain songs when I hear them).

So, it does beg the question of what other useful apps are out there that people have used? I use the Samsung Galaxy which means I'm limited to the Android market but most apps exist on both the Android and iPhone markets so there aren't many limitations. I'm sure there are others that are handy for the casual user (which is how I view my own usage). If you have some recommendations, feel free to share them.

Cultural Revolution vs. French Revolution

Perhaps it is because of my interest in China and Chinese history but I am rather familiar with the Cultural Revolution and consider it to be one of a series of tragedies that have occurred under the Communist Party. However, I find it particularly egregious that there has been very little in the way of official study that would allow for complete disclosure of the tragedy. Instead, it has been glossed over officially in China with no serious attempts at understanding what happened and why - and any attempts to do so are strongly dissuaded at best if not resulting in detention or worse. Surely the horrors, the breakdown of family and society, the destruction of historical sites and artifacts would all resonate with the victims and encourage some form of reflection to determine the causes and learn how to prevent a repeat action. Yet it is seemingly ignored in the official annals - perhaps with good reason on the part of the leadership.

After doing some reading lately on the French Revolution, I learned more of the events of that time and the horrors that were visited upon the French as a result. And what is frightening are the similarities between the French Revolution and the Cultural Revolution in China less than 200 years later. The tyranny of a few fighting for power and overthrowing the established order by seeking radically extreme views of constant revolution (Robespierre, Marat & Danton among others in Franch, Mao in China), the destruction of the monarchy in France and the rightists in China, and the breakdown of social order and its replacement by chaos and anarchy.

Yet the terror of the French Revolution is now condemned to history and its lessons learned by a population that has not repeated those mistakes. The problems of the Cultural Revolution are more known outside of China than they are in the country. There is uncertainty whether it could be repeated. Those who suffered during the Cultural Revolution either are unwilling to speak of it or are openly prevented from doing so - after all, it was in the past and "mistakes were made" but the implication is that China cannot move into the future unless it forgets the negative past. However, it is the very belief that the past should be forgotten in order to concentrate on the future that prevents China from attaining the prosperous future it foresees for itself. It is impossible to see the future and work hard to succeed when you cannot overcome the past. This is true for individuals and no less true for nations.

Unless and until China and its citizens are able to become more introspective and view their history in a more dispassionate manner - rather than the enforced, faux-positive nationalistic viewpoint supported by the Communist Party - there will be no way to overcome that past and move forward to attain the goals they have set for themselves.

Thoughts on Osama's demise

Last night at 10.00 pm, I saw flash go across my Twitter feed indicating that President Obama would be making an announcement at 10.30 pm EST. So, my curiosity aroused by the fact that the president was requesting time on the national television stations at 10.30 on a Sunday night, I decided to stay up to see what was going on. Normally, I would have been bound for bed by that time since I have to get up at 6 am in the morning for work, but I figured I could handle it for a day.

At 10.30, I flipped on the television and found a news station that had the talking heads wondering what was so important that the president need to announce. They originally considered it had something to do with Libya (which, to be honest, was also my first thought). Then, about 10.50, some 20 minutes after waiting for the president to appear, the news started to filter out that Osama bin Laden had been killed with no shortage of varying details (in this case, "rumors" would be a better description) as to his demise.

My better half and I both looked at each other in amazement and not some small degree of satisfaction. The perpetrator of the worst terror attack in our lifetimes had come to suffer a not totally inappropriate fate at the hands of the military of his avowed enemy. He was killed in a surprise attack against his compound where he had spent, according to reports, much of the last six years.

We watched as the television showed scenes of spontaneous celebration breaking out in various parts of the US. I followed my Twitter feed as people from all over the world offered various commentary on his death, ranging from the witty to the macabre and everything in between - much of it by people who I know as being mainly apolitical at best. The actions of September 11, 2001, planned by Osama bin Laden, had now been revisited upon him and justice, such as it was, had been served almost 10 years later by the nation that had suffered under the repressive memories that he represented.

And yet, I now stop to ponder, almost 24 hours later, just what is the appropriate reaction in this situation. Should we feel glee at the killing of another individual, even one as evil (subjective though that term may be) as Osama bin Laden? Does his death restore the sense of peace and security that America (and much of the rest of the world) may have known prior to 9/11? Does it bring back to life those who died on that tragic day or repair the lives that were ripped asunder?

There are no easy answers to these questions. For me, I take no satisfaction that he died the way he did but I am not unhappy to see him gone. I miss the sense of security that I had prior to 9/11, illusory though it may have been, but recognize that it likely will never return to what it once was in my mind. But then again, the days passed are always better than today in our minds so this is not surprising. I did not suffer losses directly as a result of that day but I do not know how I would feel if I had - and I am glad that I do not have to worry about that feeling.

My hope for tomorrow is that it will be better and brighter than today. I hope the spectre of Osama bin Laden will disappear soon and the negative inspiration that he provided will fade as the hope of an entire region replaces the hatred that he so fervently espoused with the strong push for freedom that has enveloped it over the last several months. May his legacy be not his hatred and violence but the recognition by people that he was the antithesis of what we all desire and the hopes we have were encouraged by opposition, and successor, to him.