Team of Rivals - a short comment

In Abraham Lincoln, America is so fortunate to have such a great man born, lived and died for her. I am endeavoured to consider that Pax-America derives her good karma from Lincoln's deed.

I said it not in the religious sense. Rather, having read the highly acclaimed "Team of Rivals" by Doris Kearn Goodwin, I begin to appreciate and understand better of Lincoln and of the strenght of the American system that make it possible to produce such a truly great leader.

Very often, we tend to classify a great leader in term of the territory they conquer or the building they constructed. To my mind, they are better described as a successful leader. Greatness really mean preaching and practicing universal values that transcend time and geography.

The time was was April 15, 1865 and the place was Washington DC.

Abraham Lincoln died 9 hours later after an assasin struck a bullet into his head when he was watching in a theatre. Lincoln's passing made him one who belongs to the ages. Yes, I subsribed to this view and am convinced that he was really a benovalent and sagacious leader.

In my reading of historical figures, I don't recall any comparison that equal or coming close to such an achievement by any person of such a background within such a short time.

Lincoln, in his two Presidential terms of slightly more than 4 years prematurely terminated by the assasination, was not only maintaining a precarious Northern Union but also succeeded in ending the civil war unifying the United States and in the process presided over the end of slavery.

No question, in territorial term, his accomplishment is but a tiny fraction of what was accomplished by Alexander the Great or Caesar. In architectural term, he left nothing of monumental values resemble even the least of the Shah Jahan's Taj Mahal or the Qin Shiwang's Great Wall.

Lincoln's greatness lies beyond these. His greatness was unusual in that it vested in his magnanimity and good-natured temperament as a leader.

How often a man lost with grace and won in humility? He was one. How often, a man is tolerant of his competitors. He was one. How often the victorious is not vengeful against the loser. He was one.

The team or rivals consisting Willian Seward, the Secretary of State, Edward Bate, the AG, Edwin Stanton, the Secretary of War and Salmond Chase, the Secretary of Treasure were largly won over by his sheer strength of character, not imposing or overbearing, but subtle and intelligent.

A contemporary described Lincoln as very wise - if more radical would have offended the conservative - if more conservative the radical. That was the best desciption of the precarious North he was presiding.

At the high time of civil war between the Free States and the Slave States, Lincoln keenly believed that "there never will be two countries.... securing peace to the peoples of our one common country". The dichotomy of free states and slave states echo what we heard now from Obama, the red states and the blue states. These men appeal to the values that laid the state foundation - life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.

When the civil war was coming to an end, Lincoln in his second Presidential inauguration speech said the famous words "with malice towards none; with charity for all,.... to do all which may achieve and cherish a just and a lasting peace, among ourselves, and with all nation." It is still so apt at this time for America and for the world.

Doris has written an exceptional good book with Lincoln's management of team of rivals and what makes this book even better in my view were those passage that touched on his loss of parents, chidlren and friends, his ability to identify and empathize with others who sufferred a great deal during the war or of disease that made him so human an so sagacious.

Team of Rivals is a very moving book. I felt immense sadness for Abraham and Mary Lincoln for the sacrifce they made without having the opportunity to live long and in happiness to see their accomplishment.

Great Article on Obama's Family Influences

".... it is a geographical truth that no politician in American history has traveled farther than Barack Obama to be within reach of the White House. He was born and spent most of his formative years on Oahu, in distance the most removed population center on the planet ...... As the son of a white woman and a black man, he grew up as a multiracial kid, in one of the most multiracial places in the world, with no majority group. There were native Hawaiians, Japanese, Filipinos, Samoans, Okinawans, Chinese and Portuguese, along with Anglos, commonly known as haole (pronounced howl-lee), and a smaller population of blacks..... it is the promise of the place he left behind -- the notion if not the reality of Hawaii, what some call the spirit of aloha, the transracial if not post-racial message -- that has made his rise possible...." Click on excerpt for link to full article in the Washington Post

I came across this thoughtful and lushly written article about Barack Obama's formative years in Hawaii, stories about his family and their various journeys through life. Three things struck me the most:
(i) My mother was born in the same year as Barack Obama's late mother,
(ii) I was amazed what a multi-racial and multi-cultural place Hawaii seem to be and what an unusual perspective that must have given to Obama, and
(iii) It struck me is how the lives his grandparents and parents lived were imbued with so much disappointments and yet instead of moaning ("this is not what life is supposed to be"), except his father they met it with calm, uncomplaining, positive and purposeful acceptance.

The NYT write something about Obama's embodiment of the Aloha spirit: that of calm acceptance, unperturbable stillness of mind, trust and faith in the unseen. I think they are evidence of that state of mind.

Previously I have never thought much of Hawaii. I always thought its nice but unexceptional - except to Americans who have not checked out the rest of the world. But I am changing my mind. There were references to Hawaii being a place of deep spiritual energy. Looking at some of the photographs of the awesome natural beauty of the islands - of thunderous cliffs, craggy mountains, lush green valleys, plunging waterfalls, lava flows, deep blue sea, fire and water - and its similarity to another spiritual place closer to home comes to mind: Bali.

Moments from My Metropolis - Running into the Clintons

Last Saturday, the family decided to go for a "Family Program" at the Cloisters, a faux-medieval abbey-like building that houses the Metropolitan Museum's medieval art collection at the northern tip of Manhattan island.

The Cloisters is so named because it holds the reconstructed remnants of 4 medieval cloisters from French monastries ruined from the religious wars and the French Revolution. Anyway, I am sure you will hear more about the Met Museum (as we call it) because it is one of the true marvels of living in NY.

We got out of the subway station into somewhat of a mysterious land. Shrouded in thick fog, we walked through a little park, past an old revolutionary era fort and onwards to the (abbey like) Cloisters building - cobble stone rampants and all. It somewhat reminded me of walking up to old castles in Prague.

This Family Program was great fun. For an hour the children was brought around the Cloisters by an educator/guide on the theme of "Food in the Medieval Times", so they heard about what people used to eat, looked at eating utensils and paintings of how people used to eat and heard a vivid description of a medieval feast in Europe as they sat in a tapestry-draped great hall originally from the Flanders. And towards the end, they were brought to make some crafts in an old stone room.

That was when I decide to walk around to look for a cloister I didn't remember having seen before. As I stepped through the door way, a man quietly ushered me left, "Please turn this way, sir". Incredulous at seeing a secret service guy at the Cloisters I squinted to see who he is guarding. I could see only two secret service guys, so I thought whoever that is could not be that important. Then I saw this white middle-aged lady in a calf-length orange coloured coat and my first thought was that she must be some Latin American head of state (! quick think of what President Bachalet of Chile and President Cristina Kirchner of Argentine look like). Then it dawned on me that was Sen. Hillary Clinton ... along with some old man with glasses dressed casually in a blue fleece vest (President Bill Clinton as it turns out). They were just walking about by themselves looking at the displays like any other visitor.

Quickly I hurried back to tell Mewyee. She went off to check them out while I stayed with the kids. On our way out, we saw them again milling about in the next hall (a medieval chapel). I explained the kids who they were, got our cameras ready and decide to walk up to say hello and merry christmas (Ning insists it should be "Happy new year because Christmas is over!). Anyhow I wasn't sure what the protocol was. In Brunei, we would rush up to the Sultan and he would be happy to shake hands and have his pictures taken. As we passed the secret service guys again, I asked if we can go up and say hi to which he said, "Please leave them alone, they are on vacation".

So we left with only a sighting. But on the otherhand, I am sure this time last year, who - least of all the Clintons themselves - would have thought that Hillary Clinton would be spending 27 December 2008 by themselves at the Cloisters ..... and running into us?

Moments from My Metropolis - Scenes from Winter

The first snow storm of 2008/9 fell last weekend, dusting the metropolis with 5" -6" of snow, although about half of that got washed away by the 3" of rain that fell in between. Unlike the 1970s, when snow storm meant days of impassable streets and homeless people freezing to death, this is Micheal Bloomberg's city where city workers pre-salted the street and sat on stand-by in snowplows 2 hours before the snow fell. The efficiency is impressive. But this post is not really about urban management. This is a homage to scenes of beauty.


The longer I stayed in NYC, the more I am being captivated by a certain dignified, poetic, piognant - but not all that obvious - kind of beauty.

On Saturday, I took my younger daughter to Central Park for snow tubing: whizzing down the snowy slope sitting on a rubber tube. One of the things I love best about New York is having an enormous, stately and brilliantly-designed 160 year old parkland right at the heart of the city ( that last part is important because it takes time for trees to grow and look timeless). Last Saturday, it was simply a winter wonderland with bunches of parents-and-kids having a good time turning hills slopes into runs for toboggans, sledges, trays and tubes.

On the other hand, it was quiet enough to have your own patch of slope as you can see from this picture we took. Quite hard to imagine all this is a 10 mins cab ride from our apartment, 200m away from Fifth Avenue and just up the street from frenzied Christmas shopping of a city of 10 million.


I love how the Victorian architecture of the snow-covered arched bridges, old park lamps, wrought-iron park benches and the gentle old trees all came together into a picturesque and melancholic snowscape that reminds somewhat of scenes from Central Europe.

As the daylight slipped silently away into the evening, the scene lightened and acquired a certain magical glow. The lights came on in the park and in the windows of the stately apartment buildings visible beyond the trees. The jaggered lines of the skyscrapers began to twinkle and shine with lights. Amidst the snow, the park sat like a scene from Narnia.


The lakes were semi-frozen, and well-dressed people strolled about and taking in the sights of a winter wonderland. The Christmas card has come alive.

Reproduction and Reservation of Charter 08 Promulgation

The following is a reproduction of Charter 08 for discourse on the topic of Chinese constitutionalism in the true spirit of speech freedom for the objective of perfecting China in the pursuit of life, liberty and happiness which has no finishing line (止于至善).

This blogger find the Charter approximating my conception of what is and ought to be China. However I have certain reservation in endorsing this Charter in whole without condition.

Any political party are bound to make mistakes, some really attrocious and even outright catastrophic. Many of these parties failed and destroyed and never revive in history.

Yet, that alone doesn't deprieve a party from rejuvenation and redemption for the service of her people. Party is made of peoples. Wrong intepretation and wilful manipulation by leaders can lead a party however great to inflict untold damages to her peoples. This has been repeated in history. Likewise, with a enlightened leadership, great and benovalent accomplishment can be attained. Let me cite two examples.

I am reminded that the American Democratic Party of whom my favarite politician, Barack Obama, is representing, was once a party of slaveholders enslaving and lynching their fellow African American brothers. This party didn't fail to redeem and succeeded eventually in producing great leaders like FDR, and very likely this time BHO in the near future.

I would also say the same of KMT. Many mistakes KMT committed in the course of her ruling history in the mainland and Taiwan are unforgetable but not unforgivable when the time has come. This is illustrated by the return to power of KMT this year.

This is applicable to CCP whose mistakes were especially horrendous under Mao Zedong. Finding reasons to be angry with CCP is not difficult but what is more difficult is to give due recognition and credit to the accomplishment for the general uplifting of Chinese peoples in the last 30 years since reform and liberation.

Let's there be more inclusion 有容乃大 whether inside or outside the party in the common pursuit of perfecting China.

零八憲章

一﹑前言

今年是中國立憲百年﹐《世界人權宣言》公布60周年﹐“民主牆”誕生30周年﹐中國政府簽署《公民權利和政治權利國際公約》10周年。在經歷了長期的人權災難和艱難曲折的抗爭歷程之後﹐覺醒的中國公民日漸清楚地認識到﹐自由﹑平等﹑人權是人類共同的普世價值﹔民主﹑共和﹑憲政是現代政治的基本制度架構。抽離了這些普世價值和基本政制架構的“現代化”﹐是剝奪人的權利﹑腐蝕人性﹑摧毀人的尊嚴的災難過程。21世紀的中國將走向何方﹐是繼續這種威權統治下的“現代化”﹐還是認同普世價值﹑融入主流文明﹑建立民主政體﹖這是一個不容回避的抉擇。

19世紀中期的歷史巨變﹐暴露了中國傳統專制制度的腐朽﹐揭開了中華大地上“數千年未有之大變局”的序幕。洋務運動追求器物層面的進良﹐甲午戰敗再次暴露了體制的過時﹔戊戌變法觸及到制度層面的革新﹐終因頑固派的殘酷鎮壓而歸于失敗﹔辛亥革命在表面上埋葬了延續2000多年的皇權制度﹐建立了亞洲第一個共和國。囿于當時內懮外患的特定歷史條件﹐共和政體只是曇花一現﹐專制主義旋即卷土重來。器物模仿和制度更新的失敗﹐推動國人深入到對文化病根的反思﹐遂有以“科學與民主”為旗幟的“五四”新文化運動﹐因內戰頻仍和外敵入侵﹐中國政治民主化歷程被迫中斷。抗日戰爭勝利後的中國再次開啟了憲政歷程﹐然而國共內戰的結果使中國陷入了現代極權主義的深淵。1949年建立的“新中國”﹐名義上是“人民共和國”﹐實質上是“黨天下”。執政黨壟斷了所有政治﹑經濟和社會資源﹐制造了反右﹑大躍進﹑文革﹑六四﹑打壓民間宗教活動與維權運動等一系列人權災難﹐致使數千萬人失去生命﹐國民和國家都付出了極為慘重的代價。

二十世紀後期的“改革開放”﹐使中國擺脫了毛澤東時代的普遍貧困和絕對極權﹐民間財富和民眾生活水平有了大幅度提高﹐個人的經濟自由和社會權利得到部分恢復﹐公民社會開始生長﹐民間對人權和政治自由的呼聲日益高漲。執政者也在進行走向市場化和私有化的經濟改革的同時﹐開始了從拒絕人權到逐漸承認人權的轉變。中國政府于1997年﹑1998年分別簽署了兩個重要的國際人權公約﹐全國人大于2004年通過修憲把“尊重和保障人權”寫進憲法﹐今年又承諾制訂和推行《國家人權行動計劃》。但是﹐這些政治進步迄今為止大多停留在紙面上﹔有法律而無法治﹐有憲法而無憲政﹐仍然是有目共睹的政治現實。執政集團繼續堅持維系威權統治﹐排拒政治變革﹐由此導致官場腐敗﹐法治難立﹐人權不彰﹐道德淪喪﹐社會兩極分化﹐經濟畸形發展﹐自然環境和人文環境遭到雙重破壞﹐公民的自由﹑財產和追求幸福的權利得不到制度化的保障﹐各種社會矛盾不斷積累﹐不滿情緒持續高漲﹐特別是官民對立激化和群體事件激增﹐正在顯示著災難性的失控趨勢﹐現行體制的落伍已經到了非改不可的地步。

二﹑我們的基本理念當此決定中國未來命運的歷史關頭﹐有必要反思百年來的現代化歷程﹐重申如下基本理念﹕

自由﹕自由是普世價值的核心之所在。言論﹑出版﹑信仰﹑集會﹑結社﹑遷徙﹑罷工和游行示威等權利都是自由的具體體現。自由不昌﹐則無現代文明可言。

人權﹕人權不是國家的賜予﹐而是每個人與生俱來就享有的權利。保障人權﹐既是政府的首要目標和公共權力合法性的基礎﹐也是“以人為本”的內在要求。中國的歷次政治災難都與執政當局對人權的無視密切相關。人是國家的主體﹐國家服務于人民﹐政府為人民而存在。

平等﹕每一個個體的人﹐不論社會地位﹑職業﹑性別﹑經濟狀況﹑種族﹑膚色﹑宗教或政治信仰﹐其人格﹑尊嚴﹑自由都是平等的。必須落實法律面前人人平等的原則﹐落實公民的社會﹑經濟﹑文化﹑政治權利平等的原則。

共和﹕共和就是“大家共治﹐和平共生”﹐就是分權制衡與利益平衡﹐就是多種利益成分﹑不同社會集團﹑多元文化與信仰追求的群體﹐在平等參與﹑公平競爭﹑共同議政的基礎上﹐以和平的方式處理公共事務。

民主﹕最基本的涵義是主權在民和民選政府。民主具有如下基本特點﹕（1）政權的合法性來自人民﹐政治權力來源于人民﹔（2）政治統治經過人民選擇﹐（3）公民享有真正的選舉權﹐各級政府的主要政務官員必須通過定期的競選產生。（4）尊重多數人的決定﹐同時保護少數人的基本人權。一句話﹐民主使政府成為"民有﹐民治﹐民享"的現代公器。

憲政﹕憲政是通過法律規定和法治來保障憲法確定的公民基本自由和權利的原則﹐限制並劃定政府權力和行為的邊界﹐並提供相應的制度設施。在中國﹐帝國皇權的時代早已一去不復返了﹔在世界范圍內﹐威權體制也日近黃昏﹔公民應該成為真正的國家主人。祛除依賴“明君”﹑“清官”的臣民意識﹐張揚權利為本﹑參與為責的公民意識﹐實踐自由﹐躬行民主﹐尊奉法治﹐才是中國的根本出路。

三﹑我們的基本主張藉此﹐我們本著負責任與建設性的公民精神對國家政制﹑公民權利與社會發展諸方面提出如下具體主張﹕

1﹑修改憲法﹕根據前述價值理念修改憲法﹐刪除現行憲法中不符合主權在民原則的條文﹐使憲法真正成為人權的保證書和公共權力的許可狀﹐成為任何個人﹑團體和黨派不得違反的可以實施的最高法律﹐為中國民主化奠定法權基礎。

2﹑分權制衡﹕構建分權制衡的現代政府﹐保證立法﹑司法﹑行政三權分立。確立法定行政和責任政府的原則﹐防止行政權力過分擴張﹔政府應對納稅人負責﹔在中央和地方之間建立分權與制衡制度﹐中央權力須由憲法明確界定授權﹐地方實行充分自治。

3﹑立法民主﹕各級立法機構由直選產生﹐立法秉持公平正義原則﹐實行立法民主。

4﹑司法獨立﹕司法應超越黨派﹑不受任何干預﹐實行司法獨立﹐保障司法公正﹔設立憲法法院﹐建立違憲審查制度﹐維護憲法權威。盡早撤銷嚴重危害國家法治的各級黨的政法委員會﹐避免公器私用。

5﹑公器公用﹕實現軍隊國家化﹐軍人應效忠于憲法﹐效忠于國家﹐政黨組織應從軍隊中退出﹐提高軍隊職業化水平。包括警察在內的所有公務員應保持政治中立。消除公務員錄用的黨派歧視﹐應不分黨派平等錄用。

6﹑人權保障﹕切實保障人權﹐維護人的尊嚴。設立對最高民意機關負責的人權委員會﹐防止政府濫用公權侵犯人權﹐尤其要保障公民的人身自由﹐任何人不受非法逮捕﹑拘禁﹑傳訊﹑審問﹑處罰﹐廢除勞動教養制度。

7﹑公職選舉﹕全面推行民主選舉制度﹐落實一人一票的平等選舉權。各級行政首長的直接選舉應制度化地逐步推行。定期自由競爭選舉和公民參選法定公共職務是不可剝奪的基本人權。

8﹑城鄉平等﹕廢除現行的城鄉二元戶籍制度﹐落實公民一律平等的憲法權利﹐保障公民的自由遷徙權。

9﹑結社自由﹕保障公民的結社自由權﹐將現行的社團登記審批制改為備案制。開放黨禁﹐以憲法和法律規范政黨行為﹐取消一黨壟斷執政特權﹐確立政黨活動自由和公平競爭的原則﹐實現政黨政治正常化和法制化。

10﹑集會自由﹕和平集會﹑游行﹑示威和表達自由﹐是憲法規定的公民基本自由﹐不應受到執政黨和政府的非法干預與違憲限制。

11﹑言論自由﹕落實言論自由﹑出版自由和學術自由﹐保障公民的知情權和監督權。制訂《新聞法》和《出版法》﹐開放報禁﹐廢除現行《刑法》中的"煽動顛覆國家政權罪"條款﹐杜絕以言治罪。

12﹑宗教自由﹕保障宗教自由與信仰自由﹐實行政教分離﹐宗教信仰活動不受政府干預。審查並撤銷限制或剝奪公民宗教自由的行政法規﹑行政規章和地方性法規﹔禁止以行政立法管理宗教活動。廢除宗教團體（包括宗教活動場所）必經登記始獲合法地位的事先許可制度﹐代之以無須任何審查的備案制。

13﹑公民教育﹕取消服務于一黨統治﹑帶有濃厚意識形態色彩的政治教育與政治考試﹐推廣以普世價值和公民權利為本的公民教育﹐確立公民意識﹐倡導服務社會的公民美德。

14﹑財產保護﹕確立和保護私有財產權利﹐實行自由﹑開放的市場經濟制度﹐保障創業自由﹐消除行政壟斷﹔設立對最高民意機關負責的國有資產管理委員會﹐合法有序地展開產權改革﹐明晰產權歸屬和責任者﹔開展新土地運動﹐推進土地私有化﹐切實保障公民尤其是農民的土地所有權。

15﹑財稅改革﹕確立民主財政和保障納稅人的權利。建立權責明確的公共財政制度構架和運行機制﹐建立各級政府合理有效的財政分權體系﹔對賦稅制度進行重大改革﹐以降低稅率﹑簡化稅制﹑公平稅負。非經社會公共選擇過程﹐民意機關決議﹐行政部門不得隨意加稅﹑開征新稅。通過產權改革﹐引進多元市場主體和競爭機制﹐降低金融准入門檻﹐為發展民間金融創造條件﹐使金融體系充分發揮活力。

16﹑社會保障﹕建立覆蓋全體國民的社會保障體制﹐使國民在教育﹑醫療﹑養老和就業等方面得到最基本的保障。

17﹑環境保護﹕保護生態環境﹐提倡可持續發展﹐為子孫後代和全人類負責﹔明確落實國家和各級官員必須為此承擔的相應責任﹔發揮民間組織在環境保護中的參與和監督作用。

18﹑聯邦共和﹕以平等﹑公正的態度參與維持地區和平與發展﹐塑造一個負責任的大國形象。維護香港﹑澳門的自由制度。在自由民主的前提下﹐通過平等談判與合作互動的方式尋求海峽兩岸和解方案。以大智慧探索各民族共同繁榮的可能途徑和制度設計﹐在民主憲政的架構下建立中華聯邦共和國。

19﹑轉型正義﹕為歷次政治運動中遭受政治迫害的人士及其家屬﹐恢復名譽﹐給予國家賠償﹔釋放所有政治犯和良心犯﹐釋放所有因信仰而獲罪的人員﹔成立真相調查委員會﹐查清歷史事件的真相﹐厘清責任﹐伸張正義﹔在此基礎上尋求社會和解。

四﹑結語

中國作為世界大國﹐作為聯合國安理會五個常任理事國之一和人權理事會的成員﹐理應為人類和平事業與人權進步做出自身的貢獻。但令人遺憾的是﹐在當今世界的所有大國裡﹐唯獨中國還處在威權主義政治生態中﹐並由此造成連綿不斷的人權災難和社會危機﹐束縛了中華民族的自身發展﹐制約了人類文明的進步──這種局面必須改變﹗政治民主化變革不能再拖延下去。為此﹐我們本著勇于踐行的公民精神﹐公布《零八憲章》。我們希望所有具有同樣危機感﹑責任感和使命感的中國公民﹐不分朝野﹐不論身份﹐求同存異﹐積極參與到公民運動中來﹐共同推動中國社會的偉大變革﹐以期早日建成一個自由﹑民主﹑憲政的國家﹐實現國人百余年來鍥而不舍的追求與夢想。

Musings about CCP's Future

Came across this interesting observation yesterday as the CCP commemorated the 30th anniversary of "reform and opening up". This is the point in history when the era of reform crossed the half way mark in the PRC's total years in existence of 59 years. As a fan of symmetry (and wholly without any rational basis whatsoever), if we use 1978 as the mid-way mark from the founding of the CCP in [correction 1921 (i.e. 57 years)] and speculate a future breakthrough(?) in the CCP itself, I venture the year to watch would be ..... [correction 2035]. I am doing that (half) in jest of course. Does that corroborates with your more learned and rational calculation?

Not many political parties have lasted more than 100 years. Certainly not in continuous power. The CCP is far from perfect but it is far from condemned, but they have a lot of work to do. Because - like General Motors - like it or not, it is so big that if alive it better healthy and if it has to die then better be a soft landing than with a crash.

I believe a good portion of the CCP especially the Central Government are smart and committed patriots in the best possible sense. Just by being the only "party" in town (literally), good people have no choice but to work for the nation "through" them, whether or not they believe in the ideology. But being the only party in town also means that it also attracted all other sorts of other animals who are after power and wealth. Unfortunately, as the private sector becomes more developed and attractive as a career option, the public sector (including the CCP) will tend to lose the good people faster than the bad.

Telling one from the other; to promote one and clear the other away becomes the central imperative. This is the fundamental issue for any single party state. The response to this dillemma is what differentiates the PAP from other ruling parties; that they actively recruit the best and brightest into politics while making it difficult (i.e. strong culture of integrity coupled with the cadre system) for people who become a member for ulterior motives.

One of the great legacies of Deng Xiaoping for the CCP is its focus on pragmatism and focus on competence ahead of ideology. It may not work 100% of the time but its something to cherish, enshrine and expand into the central organizational culture, because this is what saved China in the last 30 years.

However that takes care of only half the equation. The other half is integrity and accountability.
One hopes internal party reforms move first and foremost towards rule of law and internal party democracy. Rule of law applied without fear or favour is still the best way to ensure integrity. The current tendency towards factionalism is far worse because it places personality over the law - traditionally the downfall of "Chinese" institutions throughout the ages and throughout the Chinese diaspora even. On this the CCP is not immune.

It's often argued that China is "not ready" for democracy because of the socio-economic or educational levels of its population. (I have some sympathy with that argument because liberal democratic experiments tend to fail quite dramatically in Third-World situations. It is very probable that the average person in Third World democracies would swap what they "enjoy" for the CCP. But I digress.) But can the same argument be made for democracy amongst CCP members? Surely that is a viable. The purpose for democracy is simple: power should come with accountability. At its most basic, democracy is accountability to one's peers (as citizens or party members).

Pragmatism, competence, integrity, rule of law and democratic accountability. To me, these are sound foundations for CCP's transformation and coincidentally for its sustainability. Beginning first internally then using itself as a model for going forward and outward - in doing so, living up to its ideological rhetoric as a model for progressive force in society.

Universal Declaration of Human Rights

This year is the 60th Anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted on 10 December 1948. Yesterday, I read it fully for the first time and I was lifted by the noble and idealistic sentiments it encapsulates. I imagine back in 1948, how abstract and unrealistic many of the concepts in the declaration must be for its drafters [which I found, included the Chinese scholar 張彭春 representing Asia, who apparently introduced classical Chinese philosophical ideas from Confucius and Mencius; and sought to unify Eastern and Western ideals while the Declaration was debated] and for most people in the world, which is why I have full admiration for the drafters to put in words a world not as it is or as it could be, but a better world as it should be. Although not every one might agree with every article, it is amazing to see how those ideals in the Universal Declaration have moved from Western liberal ideas towards being shared ideals by people around the world.

---------------

Universal Declaration of Human Rights

Preamble
Whereas recognition of the inherent dignity and of the equal and inalienable rights of all members of the human family is the foundation of freedom, justice and peace in the world,

Whereas disregard and contempt for human rights have resulted in barbarous acts which have outraged the conscience of mankind, and the advent of a world in which human beings shall enjoy freedom of speech and belief and freedom from fear and want has been proclaimed as the highest aspiration of the common people,

Whereas it is essential, if man is not to be compelled to have recourse, as a last resort, to rebellion against tyranny and oppression, that human rights should be protected by the rule of law,

Whereas it is essential to promote the development of friendly relations between nations,

Whereas the peoples of the United Nations have in the Charter reaffirmed their faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person and in the equal rights of men and women and have determined to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom,

Whereas Member States have pledged themselves to achieve, in cooperation with the United Nations, the promotion of universal respect for and observance of human rights and fundamental freedoms,

Whereas a common understanding of these rights and freedoms is of the greatest importance for the full realization of this pledge,

Now, therefore,

The General Assembly, Proclaims this Universal Declaration of Human Rights as a common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations, to the end that every individual and every organ of society, keeping this Declaration constantly in mind, shall strive by teaching and education to promote respect for these rights and freedoms and by progressive measures, national and international, to secure their universal and effective recognition and observance, both among the peoples of Member States themselves and among the peoples of territories under their jurisdiction.

Article 1
All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
Article 2
Everyone is entitled to all the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration, without distinction of any kind, such as race, colour, sex, language, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or other status.
Furthermore, no distinction shall be made on the basis of the political, jurisdictional or international status of the country or territory to which a person belongs, whether it be independent, trust, non-self-governing or under any other limitation of sovereignty.
Article 3
Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of person.
Article 4
No one shall be held in slavery or servitude; slavery and the slave trade shall be prohibited in all their forms.
Article 5
No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment.
Article 6
Everyone has the right to recognition everywhere as a person before the law.
Article 7
All are equal before the law and are entitled without any discrimination to equal protection of the law. All are entitled to equal protection against any discrimination in violation of this Declaration and against any incitement to such discrimination.
Article 8
Everyone has the right to an effective remedy by the competent national tribunals for acts violating the fundamental rights granted him by the constitution or by law.
Article 9
No one shall be subjected to arbitrary arrest, detention or exile.
Article 10
Everyone is entitled in full equality to a fair and public hearing by an independent and impartial tribunal, in the determination of his rights and obligations and of any criminal charge against him.
Article 11
Everyone charged with a penal offence has the right to be presumed innocent until proved guilty according to law in a public trial at which he has had all the guarantees necessary for his defence.
No one shall be held guilty of any penal offence on account of any act or omission which did not constitute a penal offence, under national or international law, at the time when it was committed. Nor shall a heavier penalty be imposed than the one that was applicable at the time the penal offence was committed.
Article 12
No one shall be subjected to arbitrary interference with his privacy, family, home or correspondence, nor to attacks upon his honour and reputation. Everyone has the right to the protection of the law against such interference or attacks.
Article 13
Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the borders of each State.
Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country.
Article 14
Everyone has the right to seek and to enjoy in other countries asylum from persecution.
This right may not be invoked in the case of prosecutions genuinely arising from non-political crimes or from acts contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.
Article 15
Everyone has the right to a nationality.
No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his nationality.
Article 16
Men and women of full age, without any limitation due to race, nationality or religion, have the right to marry and to found a family. They are entitled to equal rights as to marriage, during marriage and at its dissolution.
Marriage shall be entered into only with the free and full consent of the intending spouses.
The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State.
Article 17
Everyone has the right to own property alone as well as in association with others.
No one shall be arbitrarily deprived of his property.
Article 18
Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.
Article 19
Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.
Article 20
Everyone has the right to freedom of peaceful assembly and association.
No one may be compelled to belong to an association.
Article 21
Everyone has the right to take part in the government of his country, directly or through freely chosen representatives.
Everyone has the right to equal access to public service in his country.
The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government; this will shall be expressed in periodic and genuine elections which shall be by universal and equal suffrage and shall be held by secret vote or by equivalent free voting procedures.
Article 22
Everyone, as a member of society, has the right to social security and is entitled to realization, through national effort and international co-operation and in accordance with the organization and resources of each State, of the economic, social and cultural rights indispensable for his dignity and the free development of his personality.
Article 23
Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment.
Everyone, without any discrimination, has the right to equal pay for equal work.
Everyone who works has the right to just and favourable remuneration ensuring for himself and his family an existence worthy of human dignity, and supplemented, if necessary, by other means of social protection.
Everyone has the right to form and to join trade unions for the protection of his interests.
Article 24
Everyone has the right to rest and leisure, including reasonable limitation of working hours and periodic holidays with pay.
Article 25
Everyone has the right to a standard of living adequate for the health and well-being of himself and of his family, including food, clothing, housing and medical care and necessary social services, and the right to security in the event of unemployment, sickness, disability, widowhood, old age or other lack of livelihood in circumstances beyond his control.
Motherhood and childhood are entitled to special care and assistance. All children, whether born in or out of wedlock, shall enjoy the same social protection.
Article 26
Everyone has the right to education. Education shall be free, at least in the elementary and fundamental stages. Elementary education shall be compulsory. Technical and professional education shall be made generally available and higher education shall be equally accessible to all on the basis of merit.
Education shall be directed to the full development of the human personality and to the strengthening of respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms. It shall promote understanding, tolerance and friendship among all nations, racial or religious groups, and shall further the activities of the United Nations for the maintenance of peace.
Parents have a prior right to choose the kind of education that shall be given to their children.
Article 27
Everyone has the right freely to participate in the cultural life of the community, to enjoy the arts and to share in scientific advancement and its benefits.
Everyone has the right to the protection of the moral and material interests resulting from any scientific, literary or artistic production of which he is the author.
Article 28
Everyone is entitled to a social and international order in which the rights and freedoms set forth in this Declaration can be fully realized.
Article 29
Everyone has duties to the community in which alone the free and full development of his personality is possible.
In the exercise of his rights and freedoms, everyone shall be subject only to such limitations as are determined by law solely for the purpose of securing due recognition and respect for the rights and freedoms of others and of meeting the just requirements of morality, public order and the general welfare in a democratic society.
These rights and freedoms may in no case be exercised contrary to the purposes and principles of the United Nations.
Article 30
Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein.

Cape No.7 - Apolitical Film

Cape No.7 (海角七号) is a love-music film, and a really good one.

Watching this love film with certain political perspective, in my opinion, is hurting one's very soul for peace and love.

There are lines and a few scenes, just like in every other film, that is open to different interpretation. Yet, taking a radical interpretation to suggest this love film has a certain political innuendo is taking it too far.

The very first line "fuck you Taipei" by the main actor who left Taipei for his hometown after a disappointing career is seen by some quarters as poking the eye of the KMT.

The few scenes wherein an elderly supporting cast is singing and speaking Japanese is taken as glorifying Japanization is an outright failure to understand the historical setting in which that particular generation is subject to.

The last scene of a Taiwanese girl waiting at the dock hoping in vain for her timid and subsequently remorseful Japanese teacher cum lover to take her along with the ship departing for Japan following the surrender is interpreted as embracing Japanese Imperialism is also too arbitrary without most natural human sentiment for love.

Alas, all these misgiving and misunderstanding are stretched and twisted out of proportion. It is particularly sad that it has been politicized and it is also really unnecessary for many compatriots to make hurtful comment unhelpful to cross-strait relationship and that between Chinese and Japanese. This relationship I spoke about is not that between a polity and a polity. It is one that exist at the most basic level between peoples.

It is reported that the film is banned in the mainland because of its positive portray of Japanization in Taiwan. I hope this is not true.

Speaking for myself, I have been and will continue to be, highly critical against the right wing Japanese and also the Japanese royal house for failing to apologize unconditionally for the World War II aggression.

However, nothing in the film I find any attempt at glorifying the Imperial Japan. It is a plain portray of two love stories connected via the seven undelivered letters written on board by the then remorseful lover.

The separation between the Japanese teacher and his young Taiwanese lover in the film, is no different from, any lovers separated by the force of war and conflict. Their longing to be together and their love for each other is as human and natural as anyone of us would have desired.

It is terribly sad that many of critics have been possessed by an increasingly violence-prone nationalism to ruthlessly dismiss the bond of love between that of a man and a woman.

No way, shall we forget the history of pain and no way shall we deny the future of love and peace.

The past lesson of war and conflict make it even more imperative that love and friendship across the strait and across the East Sea shall ever be denied to us and the future generation.

********************************************************

The plot is centered at the seven undelivered love letters written 60 years ago to the title of the film, Cape No. 7, which is an old address during the Japanese rule in a very scenic seaside town, Hengchun, in the southern tip of Taiwan.

According to Wei Te-sheng, the film director, the choice of Hengchun is to amplify the various contrast in the story and the characters to deliver a message of inclusiveness of love for lovers, family and friends. This, I think, the film had succeeded.

The script delivered in Mandarin, Japanese and Min Nan (Taiwanese), particularly the latter maybe difficult for non-Min Nan speakers to understand the film well. This is a reason I believe why I like this film. Each time the Min Nan is spoken, I find resonance to my root, never mind it is slightly different Min Nan from what I speak.

My guess is that the film can strike a chord with very few overseas Chinese. There are simply not too many who speak Min Nan these day or have had an understanding of Taiwan.

No wonder, the film was recording breaking in Taiwan and yet it didn't have a strong showing in Hong Kong.

What is amazing in retrospect is that the casting is actually rather weak. The leading actor, Van Fan (an aborigine himself, this again show the inclusiness of this film) is actually a singer and had no silver screen experience prior to the shooting.

The actress is a Japanese who speak decent Mandarin who had little success in her earlier debut. Other supporting casts are mainly unknown. The film director himself had limited experience in a full-length motion and had to spend his own money to finish the production.

To live up as a successful blockbuster, Cape No 7 succeeded in connecting with everyone's longing for love, an universal value. Adding icing to the cake, the music, from sentimental to rock songs, sung mostly in Mandarin and few in Japanese, against a combination of modern and traditional musical instrument is so good to the extent that I keep replaying them from the Youtube.

Moments from My Metropolis - Cosmopolitan Confucians

[11 Dec - Revised and updated since posting]

One of the stories I remember about Confucius is this one about personal virtues of honesty and integrity. It was said that in leading my his moral example when he was briefly Chief Minister of a minor state, even the common people would not help themselves to objects/money dropped by others on the street.

So my search for the spirit of Cosmopolitan Confucians led me to think of several instances of miraculous recovery when we had left things behind in the metropolis we now live in, New York. You see, contrary to common perception of New York as an rapacious, impersonal and unfeeling place, for all the time I have been here I have found it to be surprisingly decent, human and - yes, in one word - civilized - place. There was even this survey in June 2006 by Reader Digest that (surprise!!) found that its the most helpful city in the US using three simple but unscientific tests: (i) walk up to a door and see if the person ahead holds the door; (ii) Buying something small in a shop and observe if the cashier says "thank you", (iii) Randomly dropping some books and papers in a busy location to see if anyone would help to pick up. Turns out that: 90 percent held the door open, 19 out of 20 store clerks said “thank you,” and more than 55% helped with the flying papers.

My first story was when my mother was hospitalized for stroke in September 2006. After she was first admitted, she had asked us to pack up a bag of her clothes and personal items to be brought to her at the hospital. But when we visit her the next day, we left behind – and presumably lost - the bag in a taxi. Dismayed but nonetheless I tried my best to report it to the taxi commission's lost and found hotline in case some one turned it in.

Incredibly, a few days later some body brought the bag in - not only did we recover the bag, the bag somehow made its way back to our apartment! It turned out that the next passenger who took the cab saw the bag. Later as she told us, when she saw the bag she thought what a nice bag and whoever who lost it must feel quite bad. So she decided to take responsibility for returning it. She opened up the bag and fortuitously she found my magazines inside (which still had my address on it). She realised from the address that we live close to her sister's gym so she got her sister to drop it off the next time she went for gym. What a wonderful heartwarming experience that was!

Another time, this time its Christmas last year; we went to a Barnes and Nobel bookshop at Union Square but as we were in the sunway station we realised that Mew Yee had left her gloves where she was sitting down in the bookshop.

It was the height of the Xmas shopping season and there were crowds of people everywhere and the pair of gloves she had lost was brand-new and was one of those nice super-insulated ones people wear to ski. We were not too sure if we could still find it but I decided to try anyway so I made my way back to the bookshop. The gloves were nowhere to be found where she was sitting so I made my way to the cashier. Sure enough, some one found the gloves and turned it over to the cashier ! The cashier a young black man just held the gloves up, "Is this it?" I said yes grabbed the gloves and thanked him profusely.

Moments like these makes me feel really good about human nature. Because it took more than one good person to turn it in but also another who gave it up in without doubting if I was bona fide. Faith in the integrity and uprightness of fellow citizens in their dealings with other people within society I feel is pretty Confucian.

Another characteristic that I'd observed, especially in taking public transportation, is that even when people go about within their personal shell - people tend to create their own private psychological bubbles especially in a crowded environment like public transport - people tend to pop out to help others and then pop in again.

Just this morning I happen to sit behind a young lady who was reading a tabloid who was later joined by an old lady. The old lady interrupted her to ask what street the bus was on, and all of a sudden a few people within earshot quickly spang into action. I looked out of the cloudy window (it was raining) and said, "66th"; the buy behind me quickly wiped the window with his gloves to correct me, "68th" he said before going back into our bubble. The young lady offered to look out for the old lady's stop and they got chatting about how depressing tabloid news tend to be. Before getting off, the old lady wished the young lady "have a nice day and think good thoughts". And they are off into their bubbles again.

Another such impromptu community action often revolve around the "back door". New York buses has a front door (by the driver) and a back door which open when pushed only if the driver disarms the door (e.g. at a stop). Quite often the driver forgets to disarm the door so people trying to get out would find themselves unable to open the back door. They would bellow out, "Back door!" to attract the driver's attention - and almost always people sitting near the back door would all join in a chorus of "Back door!!" - especially if the "victim" were children, older people or women unable to shout too loudly. After that instance of "community action" people would dissolve back into their own little bubbles again.

Moments like these are actually quite typical. So much so that the New York Times keep a fortnighly column for readers to write-in about such human-interest encounters in the city, called "Metropolitan Diaries". Here I enclose the link http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/24/nyregion/24diary.html to a recent column. In one post, someone tried to return a Blackberry only to find that it belonged to her old highschool coach; in another, a human chain brought out a bag of steamed dumplings from a subway car during the rush hour crush. Amusing and heartwarming.

This column remain one of my favourite columns in the venerable grey lady, NYT.

Respect for Elders - the Beijing Episode

As the mercury drops below sub-zero in Beijing , there is a very heart-warming news coming from the Capital.

Not to be outdone by the Shanghai lady cab driver (actually unrelated), it is announced that the Beijing public buses will begin to offer free ride from 2009 to elderly aged 65 and above.

Buses and the commuting system will be designed to be more elderly friendly and there will be at least 10% of seats made available to the needy.

There is even a very thoughtful directive requiring that the bus driver to ensure that the elderly are securely seated before pulling the bus.

Clearly, Confucianism is making a come back to China. Hu's governing philosophy - 以人为本 (people-based) has its root in classic Confucianism. Over time, Hu's doctrine can be extended to include not just welfare and interest of the people (民生民利) but also right and liberty (民主自由) of the peoples.

It will be a historical paradox to blame China's feudalism on Confucianism (from 1900s to 1970s) and to credit Confucianism for China's progress and democratization (starting now).

I am planning to write over the next few months some snippets on Confucianism from a liberal perspective. This is quite a misnomer because Confucianism is often associated with conservative ideas. The truth is Confucianism although coded in term of deference to the ancient and sometimes legendary kings and sages, it was actually a progressive philosophy promoting benovalent governance during the Spring and Autumn period.

What I am going to write is not a reinterpretation but rather a constructive account of the Confucianism's progressiveness that is often overlooked.

京巴士增老人座位[08:52] 2008年12月9日 (二)

北京的公共巴士集團新規定，老人沒找到座位前，巴士不能啟動。每輛巴士的「老幼病殘孕」專座須達10%以上。

明年1月1日起，65周歲老人持老年卡將免費乘坐巴士。為此，巴士集團提高了對老年人的服務標準。明年1月1日前，所有巴士廂中必須保證10%的座椅為「老幼病殘孕」專座，如果不達標或位置不對，車隊要對巴士內座椅進行重新安裝。此外，為了保證老年人在車廂內安全，老人上車後沒有找到座位前，司機不得啟動車輛。

據了解，目前本市每輛巴士上大約有8個到10個「老幼病殘孕」專座，專座顏色以黃色、紅色為主。如按照10%的比例計算，座椅總數較少的單機車基本能夠達標，但是車型14米到18米的通道車就需要增加專座。此外，由於車型不同，不少中門上車、前後門下車的巴士，專座位置設在中門，這樣反而不利於座位上的老年人從前後門下車。針對這種情況，巴士隊也將重新安裝專座。

巴士公司明年還要求在有條件的站台設老人乘車「綠色通道」。車輛進站後，將首先開啟面向老幼病殘孕候車區的車門，讓他們先上車坐到座位上，再開啟其它車門。

(京華時報)

Respect for Elders - the Shanghai Episode

Last week, on my way to Shanghai, I had a chance encounter with Jeff Ooi (see the earlier post); on my way back, I had another chance encounter with a minor celebrity of Shanghai.

She is neither an actress nor a singer. She is but a taxi driver in the Shanghai metropolis.

She is Gu Guiyun, a very chatty middle aged taxi driver. The ride to Pudong aifrport was long enough for me to discover something applaudable about this lady.

She became famous after her good deed was reported in the local press several years ago. And that little good deed is simple yet meaningful. To the cynics and critics, it maybe showy; to the great many, me included, it is a sweet and thoughtful gesture.

She gives a free ride to any octogenarian who by chance boarded her taxi. This little gesture is a token of respect to the elderly. Whatever her motives in doing so, the very doing of it encourages the public to think of the elderly.

A short greeting, a little smile or a tiny help go a very big way in how we treat and respect the elderly. There is no better way than educating our children to start from the very early age.

I am particularly impressed that this Confucianist trait is still alive in Shanghai and I applaud this Madam Gu.

Following is an online Chinese report on her charitable deed.

2006年10月30日 13:03
　　今天是重阳节，上午，五四中学的同学们迎来了一个特殊的“老师”———大众出租六分公司“的姐”顾桂云。近三年来，她一直坚守着自己许下的一条助老承诺———八旬以上老人坐车不收钱。　　　　的姐讲故事说敬老　　　　“尊老并不是一句套话，我今天就给你们说几个故事，我的女儿比你们大不了几岁，在家里，我也是这么跟她说的。”今天上午，五四中学多功能厅内，顾桂云和她的班组成员在与五四中学的少年志愿队成员们进行座谈。　　“现在油价飙升，开车成本那么高，你们家人支持吗？”同学们问。　　顾桂云笑了，“如果我的丈夫反对，我肯定不能坚持到今天，所以要谢谢他。女儿一开始也很不理解，笑我“戆”，说，妈妈，我坐公交都收钱的，你为什么开出租不收钱，哪有这么做生意的？我就告诉她，你以后也会老的，也会需要照顾的。”


在座谈中，“的哥”、“的姐”们一再强调，做好事不是刻意的，而是在日常生活中，多个心眼，做些举手之劳、力所能及的事情。　　　　坐我的车是种缘份　　　　“有人说我是做好事，当然也有人不理解，甚至说我作秀的也有。”顾桂云告诉记者，一开始她曾经把一张“八旬老人乘坐本车可以免单”的牌子贴在车子座位后面。因为是自己的个人行为，顾桂云每次都是出了公司才挂上牌子，回公司前再把牌子取下来。但是后来发现，一些乘客的第一反应是，“你们公司又在搞活动啦？”一些老人坐了别的大众车被收了钱，甚至专门打电话到公司投诉。“现在牌子我不挂了，看到年纪大的就问问人家多大岁数。”　　这些“郁闷”的往事也曾经困扰过顾桂云，“后来想想，自己要尽这份孝心，随便别人怎么想吧。”但有的人提出的要求太“过分”，顾桂云也难以承受。一位媳妇曾经打电话找到顾桂云，说自己的公公行动不便，每个星期都要到锦江乐园附近去看病，希望顾桂云可以免费接送一下，而她们家去医院要大概80元车资，加上等候每次需要3个小时左右。“我做好事也是有限度的，我自己也是上有老下有小。”对于这样近乎无理的要求，顾桂云只能无奈地摇摇头，“老人坐我的车，这就是一种缘分，我敬点孝心给他们的免单，并不是刻意去做。”　　　　父母早逝成遗憾　　　　说到这个“免单规矩”的由来，顾桂云就忍不住思念自己早逝的父母。“我的父母如果还在世，也有80多岁了，可惜他们走得早，没有享到我一天的福。”这个遗憾，让顾桂云至今耿耿于怀，每次看到白发苍苍的老人伸手拦车，她就会想起自己的父母，想起父母把自己拉扯大的艰辛。“我现在唯一能做的，就是孝敬好自己的婆婆还有这些坐我车子的老人。”　　2004年4月的一天，顾桂云在仁济医院门口接到一对从宝山罗店赶来看病的老夫妻。由于专家门诊不开，那对80多岁的老夫妇扑了个空。顾桂云开车将他们送到了瑞金医院后，搀扶老人下车。转身要走时，阿婆想起还未付钱，追了上来。顾桂云表示免费，但阿婆拉着她不让走，“小姑娘，你一个女人开出租车挣的也是辛苦钱，我们怎么能不付呢？”站在车前一时不肯离开。　　顾桂云的解释最终让老太感动得流下了泪，旁边的人得知原委后，不禁交口称赞。从此，她暗下决心，要将助老行动制度化：见到老人上车就闲聊几句，只要得知老人年过八旬，一律免车费。
　　新闻背景：顾桂云受聘校外辅导员
　　今天起，五四中学校长沈嵘聘请顾桂云担任校外辅导员，并准备邀请她下半年随行探访该校的院士老校友。　　据沈校长介绍，他从媒体上得知顾桂云的事迹后，为其坚持助老的信念所打动。在与顾桂云所属的大众出租公司进行沟通后，将其历年的感人事迹作为学生思想道德学习的榜样案例

A Chance Encounter with Jeff Ooi

I had a chance encounter with the first blogger cum Member of Malaysian Parliament, Jeff Ooi at the HKIA last Wednesday.

Jeff was unfortunate in that his flight had to be re-routed via Singapore, thank to the blockage of Bangkok airport by the royalist PAD. ( I was actually rather surprized over the weekend reading the Economist's article that is highly critical of the Thai monarchy - won't be surprise if the Economist run into trouble in Thailand.)

It was not difficult to recognise him as I have been following his blog for some times. The meeting took place at a book shop as we were browsing through books whilst waiting for our respective boarding call.

Without adhering to the Malaysia's protocol, I went up to greet him by addressing him as Jeff and not the YB. This would have been quite unthinkable with the BN politicians.

Easy going, relaxed, friendly and highly approachable, Jeff and I spoke very candidly for a couple of minutes touching on several issues including the Penang's DAP governance and the long outstanding Pakatan Rakyat's shadow cabinet line-up. I must say I was rather surprize with his candidness.

Jeff was travelling in the region to network, sourcing ideas and capitals to be brought back to Penang. He is currently the Chief-of Staffs to Lim Guan Eng, the Chief Minister of Penang State.

No question, the DAP state government, without experience of state administration prior to GE 308, is very anxious of the financial meltdown. After all, Penang's economy is mostly industrial and export oriented.

As such, the challenge to the DAP is particularly enormous however with such fine men in Jeff, my very limited experience with DAP has reinforced my favorable impression of DAP. After all, DAP has been very consistent throughout preaching competency, accountability and transparency. I would have prefered the word meritocracy to competency. Obviously competency is politically more correct in a country that confuses special position as special right.

Just a side note, in my 9 years out of the country, I had the privilege being invited to two dinners held in honor of the visiting Malaysian Prime Ministers. Dr M, as I recall, had the stateman stature for Malaysia whether or not you agree with him. At that time, he was at the height of his political career having won a huge mandate in the general election and was beyond challenge in UMNO.

Pak Lah, on the other hand, came across not as articulate and sophisticated as Dr M. He left a strong impression of more of a people's man. Another word, more grassroot. In many ways, his undoing has done more to the country than his doing. I said this without demeaning him. Many peoples I spoke to are more hopeful for Malaysia than ever. That's his greatest legacy.

One good fortune being abroad is that as long as you are socially active among your countrymen in overseas, you get these rare opportunities to be invited for official dinner, paid for either by the corporate sector eager to please the Malaysian dignitary or the Malaysian tax payers.

Terrorism is not far from us

I just learn from a friend from the industry who escaped unharm during the terrorist attack at Oberoi Hotel of Mumbai.

According to him, the terrorists were shooting indiscriminately at the restaurant guests. The terrorist didn't sort out certain nationalities before shooting. It was indiscriminate shooting to churn out the heaviest casualties.

As the terrorists were shooting, everyone were running for their life and my friend was fortunate to have escaped and survive. His American colleague and a local business partner were not as fortunate. They were killed and another local business associate were severely injured.

Not until I learn this first hand from someone I know personally, terrorism is always somewhat inpersonal and remote. This is the closest experience I had with terrorism. It really send a chill down my spine.

I had traveled to Mumbai and I had stayed at Oberoi. The victim could have been me, and indeed anyone who happens to be at the place and at the time.

Moments from My Metropolis - Hu Shih

Once in Chinatown, I noticed a Chinese bookshop above a shop. So I walked up the steps and into this rather dingy shop that is stacked from the floor to the ceiling mostly with Chinese comic books.

Those comic books - mainly wu xia, romantic stuff or translations from Japanese manga - were all bundled up and available for rent by the bundle. Stern notices abound warning people against casual reading; that would cost you $2 because for those who cannot afford to rent you can pay to read what you like at the shop!

How quaint! I imagine in shops like these poor but studious students and labourers can while away hours in the stories and (in winters, in central heating.)

Just as I was wondering how long the shop has been around, I spied a smallish framed piece of casual-looking calligraphy; it was an original autograph from Hu Shih, the 20th Century Chinese scholar and humanist.

As with many "youth intellectual" of his era, Hu Shih spent many years aboard in his formative years. Apparently he studied and researched in Columbia University, the ivy-league in New York city, and later, he returned as Chinese Ambassador to the US during the war years.

One of his great legacies was his role at Peking University where he was a prominent professor, publisher and eventually the Vice-Chancellor. In New York, he left another legacy as the co-founder in 1926, of the "China Institute of America" on East 65th Street. http://www.chinainstitute.org/

I was not sure whether he had been to the bookshop or had spent any time there, but he had addressed his calligraphy specifically to the "Dong Fang (Eastern) bookshop in New York". In a note by the calligraphy, it appeared that he gave wrote the calligraphy while recuperating from illness in Nanking.

Well, what did he write? He wrote:

勇敢的假设, 小心的求证

Translation: Be courageous in the assumptions;
Be cautious in demanding evidence.

What a wonderful glimpse of Chinese intellectual sentiment in early 20th century! How wonderful to find it in a bookshop full of comics.

New Media in the White House

It is the 1000 pound elephant in the bedroom... no its on the bed! How is the internet going to change public policy, politics and government?

Ultimately, politics and government is all about the interaction and management of human relationships. If the changes driven by the internet on our interactions over the past fews years is any guide, I believe big changes are on the way on how politics and government will function. It will be a very interesting change to bear witness.

As much as the Obama campaign will be remembered for breaking the racial barrier, in the long run political analysts of the future will probably point to a breakthrough in its tech-savvy adoption of a proto-type online, distributed, network-powered grassroot organization.

Hidden in the story http://voices.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/11/20/obama_raised_half_a_billion_on.html of how the Obama campaign raised $500m online (out of $680m total) are these increadible figures:

- Obama's e-mail list contains upwards of 13 million addresses. (Four years ago, Sen. John F. Kerry had 3 million e-addresses on his list; former Vermont governor Howard Dean had 600,000.)
- Over the course of the campaign, aides sent more than 7,000 different messages, many of them targeted to specific donation levels (people who gave less than $200, for example, or those who gave more than $1,000). In total, more than 1 billion e-mails landed in inboxes.
- A million people signed up for Obama's text-messaging program. On the night Obama accepted the Democratic nomination at Invesco Field in Denver, more than 30,000 phones among the crowd of 75,000 were used to text in to join the program.
- On Election Day, every voter who'd signed up for alerts in battleground states got at least three text messages. Supporters on average received five to 20 text messages per month, depending on where they lived -- the program was divided by states, regions, zip codes and colleges -- and what kind of messages they had opted to receive.
- On MyBarackObama.com, or MyBO, Obama's own social network, 2 million profiles were created, 200,000 offline events were planned, about 400,000 blog posts were written and more than 35,000 volunteer groups were created -- at least 1,000 of them on Feb. 10, 2007, the day Obama announced his candidacy.
- Some 3 million phone calls were made in the final four days of the campaign using MyBO's virtual phone-banking platform. On their own MyBO fundraising pages, 70,000 people raised $30 million.
-The campaign set up a grassroots finance committee through which supporters were trained to collect small-dollar donations from their friends, relatives and co-workers.
- Obama has 5 million supporters in other social networks. On Facebook, where about 3.2 million signed up as his supporters. A group called Students for Barack Obama was created in July 2007. It was so effective at energizing college-age voters that senior aides made it an official part of the campaign the following spring. And Facebook users did vote: On Facebook's Election 2008 page, which listed an 800 number to call for voting problems, more than 5.4 million users clicked on an "I Voted" button to let their Facebook friends know that they made it to the polls. (Talk about online peer pressure.)

One interesting fact is that the chief of Obama campaign's "new media" division, a guy called Joe Rospars is 27 years old. One of the creators of MyBO is Chris Hughes, who was a co-founder of Facebook, is 24 years old. [On a seperate note, Obama's chief speechwriter Jon Favreux is also 27 years old, his chief of his massively successful field operations comprising 2m volunteers is Jon Carson a 33 years old]. I do not even remember what we were doing at age 24 or 27! The powers of youth in the Obama campaign is simply staggering. In 2008, we may be seeing the first wave of techno-entrepreneurs-innovators of the political/governing world.

The question is - is this a one-off? Will it remain at the campaign level? How well does it transfer to the business of government?

One sign is this announcement 2 days ago. Julius Genachowski who is the guru of Obama's new media operations has been appointed by the transition team to head a policy group, called" TECHNOLOGY, INNOVATION & GOVERNMENT REFORM". Think about it, when have you heard anyone linking "technology and innovation" with "government reform"?

All I can say is: watch this space. Something very interesting may be going on.

*Update*
Many pundits were stumped when he appointed someone outside his inner circle - Ms. Ellen Moran, the Executive Director of Emily's list - as the White House Communications Director. That is normally a prominent White House post usually to reward the main communications /message aide of the winning campaign. In Obama's case, his communications cheif Robert Gibb became White House Spokesperson while campaign spokesperson Dan Pfeiffer was made Deputy WH Director of Communications instead. Pundits either did not have a view or mentioned something like he is rewarding Clinton-loyalists (Emily's list supported Clinton in the primaries before switching to Obama).

I don't think Obama operates with that kind of pure political calculation. We know he is a strategist not just political tactician. Instead, I see it as a move to transform the task of the White House Communications Office, to reach out beyond the congress, media and pundits - and in order to connect better with Obama's base of supporters i.e. those 10m email addresses he has.

When you think about it, Emily's List is a grassroot activist political organization (to support Pro-Choice female candidates to political office); mobilizing grassroot support is what they do. When Obama puts the managerial and organizational chief of that organization into the White House and gives her a budget and all the grassroot infrastructure the campiagn has built up including those 10m emails, it becomes obvious that Barack Obama intention is to build a Whie House operations that reaches out directly to his supporters and the public in general.

Moments from My Metropolis - I.M. Pei

Let me start with some stories of my very few and very incidental encounters with the great Chinese-American architect, I.M. Pei (full name: Pei Ieoh-Ming贝聿铭).

It all began when I discovered that old Mr and Mrs Pei happen to be my neighbours. It was an exciting discovery personally because he is well-known in Asia and is someone much talked about between my late father and myself when I was growing up. We deliberately and consciously admired his work when we visited the Louvre, Bank of China (Hong Kong), Raffles City in Singapore; and later by myself, the East Wing of Washington DC's National Gallery, the Jacob Jarvits Center, Bank of China (Beijing), Four Seasons (New York).

Not one to be easily impressed by modern architecture, I have come to learn about the master's subtle manipulation of light, shadows, reflections and space with minimal use of shapes, motifs, colours or indeed any decorations. In the end, I realise that his style of architecture is less about the building but is instead about the space-enclosed - and how the space in turn play with the light or view from the outside as they turned into shadows and reflections inside.

If one consider the gardens of Suzhou and how the designers manipulate the space, the views from the strategically placed openings and the shadows from plants and rocks - but minimal colours; one get the sense of the origins of Pei's philosophy and sensibility in his design. He is a master in engaging you by doing less and hence making you notice more.

Well, the Peis live in their town house at No.11 Sutton Place (which is between E57th and E58th street) a mere 5 minutes walk from my apartment block which is on E54th street. It is a simple and neat looking townhouse no more than 25 feet wide and painted in various shades of gray. Although it pre-dates the modern era of Pei's signature styles, the house echos the clean lines and neutral shades one often find in his designs. A few simple metal sculptures are visible from the second floor window.

One time, Mewyee and I were walking nearby when we saw the tiny old man himself coming out of his house. He looked the same as in the photographs in a grey suit and his trademark glasses. A few paces behind him, his wife came out wearing a qi pao walking quickly after him. He walked out to the middle of the street to flag down a cab and off they went.

Some time later, in conversation with a random neighbour in a park next to Pei's home, the neighbour said they often see him about, sometimes sweeping leaves off the sidewalk. One time she claimed, she shared a bus ride from midtown with him. I.M.Pei riding on the bus!

When my daughters was in pre-school, we were amused to find that Pei's daughter, Li-Anne was the school's "onward schools" counsellor we had spoken with for information about getting into private schools. She was a corporate lawyer before leaving practice after she had children so as to have more flexibility with her time. Another parents in the same school, who is Chinese-American, was so excited when she found out, she came to us saying "Guess who is Li-Anne Pei's dad?! Its I.M Pei!!" To which her husband could not understand the excitement and asked, "who is I.M.Pei?"

Just last week, when I walked by the neighbourhood I saw Li-Anne coming out of her parent's house. I just said hi, but she didn't see/hear me because she was busy walking into the middle of the street to hail a cab.

Nationality and Nationalism

Hui, what a fantastic write-up. I truly enjoy reading your second installment of "moments from my metropolis".

As we marvel at our good fortune living in our respectively enlightened metropolis, we cannot but feel dumbfounded by the slow progress made in our home countries.

Instead of grousing on lack of progress in our home countries, I am diverting to another topic - that of - nationality and nationalism. Two news on naturalization provided the backdrop to this post.

One from mainland China. The mainland chartroom and blogosphere were recently filled with angry posting on Gong Li who recently took up Singaporean citizenship. You can imagine all the accusations against this once adored celebrity from the mildly betrayal of to the highly charged treason against her mother land.

What do we make out of taking up a new citizenship?

I ponder and then I am reminded by my recent reading of Mencius. One thing that Mencius strikes me is how liberal or rather how much more liberal he is compared to the modern days liberal doctrine.

Mencius advocates, in essence, free movement of peoples from one country to another, whether to live to toil the land as a farmer or to serve as an official in the court of the new lord. I think almost all sovereign countries today would not have endorsed especially the latter.

What is the fuss with these angry netizen? They should have asked not just - why my country has failed to retain her but also why my country cannot attract more talented foreigner be my compatriot?

Least that these angry netizen know - at about the same time over in Hong Kong, a German born Jew sworn in as a Chinese citizen and gave up his Canadian citizenship. He is Allan Zeman, a successful entrepreneur in his own right and who is better known as the Father of Lan Kwai Fong, the night life district in Hong Kong (disclosure: I lived there for 6 months).

Since 2004, he is the chairman of Ocean Park, a government owned theme park that rival the HK Disneyland (partially owned by HK government as well). His success in turnaround the Ocean Park (another disclosure: my sons favorite weekend hangout) has earned him the nickname of Mouse Killer in a 2007 Forbe's article.

What a paradox with a Jew becoming a Chinese and a Chinese becoming a Singaporean!

In the world we live in, almost all people obtain their nationality from jus solis or jus sanguinis which are fortuitous. An individual is never given a real choice and therefore my view is that the freedom of adopting a new nationality is very much a human right not to be denied if an individual conforms to the law of nationality in the adopted country.

Equally it is always legitimate to be stay patriotic to one country to effect the necessary change in government or to repel foreign occupation or to end civil strife. It is ultimately about freedom of choice and that create condition for competitive improvement in the society.

Extending Mencius's basic tenet that the ruler has to be benevolent to attract peoples to the farm the idle land and the intellectual to serve as the official into the modern context, one can say that no country earn an automatic allegiance from its citizen unless its government is good or benevolent in the Confucian terminology. This will encourage all countries striving to be benevolent/good government in competing for talent besides grooming its very own.

Nationalist sentiment on the question of nationality is always mindless when the very issue ought to be self introspection and respect for individual's exercise of liberty

Moments from My Metropolis - Thoughts on Racism and Social Progress from a Cosmopolitan City

KY's wonderful post on racial discrimination merits an echoing - a rejoinder - from across the seas than just a comment.

I have just finished reading Newsweek's wonderful seven-part fly-on-the-wall account of the 2008 Presidential Campaign [http://www.newsweek.com/id/167581]. And what struck me was - despite the negativity and hostility we saw - how sensitive and adverse all the candidates were in general to the perception of racism. Which is not to say there are no more racists or racial politics, but that social change in the US has reached a tipping point where racism is now so socially-unacceptable that any temptation to exploit it will quicky be overwhelmed by the backlash. This shows the powerful social consensus in the US against racism has expanded and matured since the Civil Rights movement a mere 45 years ago.

I marvelled at this wonderful evidence of social progress first made de jure than became de facto and then becoming a universal value. KY provided some excellent examples of enlightened leadership that tries to make the ideals and aspirations of social progress tangible first through legislation which hopefully will create the condition for such progress to take root. Social progress takes time, but I am hopeful of a growing cross-cultural consensus throughout the world that is making racism less and less socially acceptable - and hence less politically attractive which then creates a virtuous cycle by creating a more conducive climate for racial tolerance. I believe this is how social progress happenned and (mostly) pushed slavery, child labour and polygamy to the margins of any society that considers itself civilized. Wither the societies and political systems that stand against the forces of enlightened global social consensus.

One of the joys of living in New York City for the past 34 months has been the daily experience of a tolerant, diverse and cosmopolitan society. I have come to admire the fact that here diversity comes naturally. Deliberately, I observe my children, ages 7 and 5 1/2, for their world-view and I must say (so far) they do not differentiate any of their friends by race. Although being in the UN International School - where every class may be a mix of more than 20 nationalities when those of both parents are counted - they are very aware of the different nationalities but interestingly, racial or national "labels" were hardly ever considered. To Ning, her friend Sara is just her friend Sara - and not an ethically Indian of the muslim religion who is South African by nationality. I find this notion of seeing people as individuals and not as labels a very refreshing and positive experience.

Being in a diverse environment means being different no longer means being a curiousity, so ironically children are more relaxed about their own cultures. During the recent UN Day, my daughters carry both the Bruneian and Malaysian flags - and they both wore a Chinese dress (although for some reason, this year she also wants to carry a Chinese umbrella). And her friend Claire (center, last row) who is American, decided she would wear a Moroccan dress and everyone thought it was interesting. The picture below is my younger daughter Hue's class where you can see at the back row, the flags of Western Samoa and Fiji among others.

Sometimes they ask, why do we have to go to Chinese school on Saturdays? And I would say, because you are Chinese - and same goes for Jeremy who also goes to Chinese school, Julie and Aram who goes to Korean school because they are Korean and Beyan who goes to Russian school because she is Russian etc. So quite ironically, diversity can also be characterised as something they have in common with their classmates.

Well, what happens outside the UN school? I enjoy the fact that in my time here, I have not been conscious of being seen in a racial light - I said "conscious" because I do not know what goes on in their minds. In casual small talk, which is a common social interaction in the US be it on the bus, in the lift, at the cafe - I am still yet to be asked (or presumed) about my race except in Chinatown where people automatically speak Chinese to me. Only in more lengthy conversations people ask where you are from i.e. which I assume to be nationality as opposed to ethnicity.

On the streets you (over)hear all kinds of languages - English, Spanish, French, Russian, German, Chinese, Korean - and I notice people either don't hear or they don't care because no one (except me) paid any attention. In my neighbourhood, there are all kinds of restaurants, French, Jewish, Turkish, Chinese, Japanese, Indian etc. I have a feeling that generally, people treat the mix of races like having a choice of restaurants in the neighbourhood - as "different cultures" rather than "different people" that add to the richness of society - to be explored or disregarded - without any personal reaction whether to approve or disapprove, like or dislike, neither to be affirmed or threatened by their presence.

My good friend Nasri came to visit last week; first time he came to the US and to New York. And I tried to take a fresh look at my city through his observant eyes and keen and curious mind. First he said, on three occasions when told people actually knew about Brunei. Second, he wonders about the racial mix in New York because he was expecting to see more Caucasians [40% white, 25% Latino, 25% blacks, 10% various-mostly-Asian; although on a working day in Manhattan its more like 60% white, 15% Latino, 15% blacks, 10 various mostly-Asian. 3x more people come to work in Manhattan than living there]. Thirdly, on a bus, as he observed the mix of people boarding the bus, he remarked to me how the racial diversity is observed throughout the city as opposed to enclaved.

I feel those are quite astute observations of a open and cosmopolitan environment; but I also had to remind him New York is not representative of all-of-America (for the record, NYC voted 85% for Obama) but more like a prototype "world city" that places like Hong Kong and Singapore openly aspire to be Asia's very own. I have to confess that living in the midst of all these made me more hopeful for the world.

Post Racial Society and Race Discrimination Law

Obama is often described as a post-racial President (elect). What matter more however is a post-racial society.

In that respect, many parts of America especially the traditional blue states have reached, if not close to, that status.

Prejudice takes a long time to eradicate. America history can testify to that. America took more than a century from the Civil War to the Civil Right movement to remedy its once racially exploitative and divisive society.

The issue is not how long it takes but rather whether it is done to eradicate racism which is arguably one of the men's greatest threat with maximum hatred with a minimum of reason.

Hitherto, the choice of public policy dealing with a society comprising of different races have been either one of assimilation/integration, accommodation, discrimination, segregation or outright inaction. All decent countries have abandoned the wide variety in favor of accommodation with equality.

My attention is drawn to two pieces of racial discrimination legislation recently passed in Asia.

One was passed by my city, Hong Kong, on July 10, 2008. The Post-handover Hong Kong doesn't practise any institutionalized racism however it must be admitted that just like all other societies there are sections of the Hong Kong society that are still possessing racial prejudice. The complaints are often related to employment and education opportunity available to the ethnic minority in Hong Kong. There are also complaint related to the provision of goods and service.

The Race Discrimination Ordinance is enacted to outlaw any discrimination, harassment, victimization and vilification on the ground of race in the areas of , among other, employment, education, provision of goods, facilities, services and premises, election and appointment to public bodies, membership and access to clubs.

The significance of this legislation in the context of Hong Kong is that we are talking of a society that is 95% Chinese that recognize the evil of racism.

The other one which is more interesting comes from Indonesia.

The law passed on October 28, 2008 treats racial discrimination as serious crime. The Anti-Discrimination Act imposes imprisonment as minimum sentence to deter people from committing racial discrimination. For leaders of public institution found guilty of adopting discriminatory policies, the law introduces a jail term one-third more severe than usually meted out.

This is a rare achievement by a country that was besieged with bloody race riot with reported mass killing and rape as recently as in 1997. Success can actually come quickly with enlightened leaders.

Eradicating racism through legislation doesn't necessarily guarantee its success but legislation is always useful to define the parameter of acceptable behaviour. Enforced by early childhood education and concerted civic education and publicity, the new and the reborn generations of the society can surely rid of racism. The issue is for the society concerned to take the first step in that direction.

Sadly, many SEA countries, Brunei, Myanmar, Malaysia and Singapore included have not ratified the International Convention on All Forms of Racial Discrimination. If this baby step is not taken, these societies is surely in need of treatment.

Hopefully with Indonesia making giant strides in human right, these neighboring countries can quickly learn the meaning of equal right for all, special privilege for none.

Reservation against the Fourth Republic Theory

Very interesting thesis.

On the US, that is an intesting way of deconstructing the patterns of history in hindsight. Regardless of my reservations of this approach, I am as guilty of any of trying to make sense of history this way.

Many philosophies including Chinese believe in historical cycles (and 72 is actually one Buddhist cycle). On the other hand, I also believe in quantum mechanical concept of society progressing in increments until it has to readjust with a big step up/down to find a new equilibrium or energy level. Although I disagree with Mr Lind's limitations to physical and material energies.
My main reservation with this thesis is that it tries to interprete the past - in hindsight - to project to the future. That approach (reductionism) is not usually the most convincing form of scholarship.

My second reservation is that this essentially look at the "trailing" instead of the leading "indicators". In short, big adjustments in government changes to catch up with changes in the people and society; and not the other way round. To revisit our earlier discussion, the best ways to see the differences between the various "republics" is to see them as major amendments to the "social contract", otherwise governemnt would lose its purpose and legitimacy.

Mr Lind is a bit too concerned about making clear demarcations between each 72 year cycles. My view is that each cycle is like different parts of a tree: each is the beginning and each is the end; if there are no roots there would be no trunk; if there are no trunk there would be no branches; and we never ask where each should begin or end?

If we had no Bush, we would probably have no Obama; no Lincoln without slavery; no reconstruction without civil war; no Jefferson without his intellectual rivalry with Hamilton (who by the way would have been President if he didnt die in a pistol duel age 44); no FDR without the depression; no economic recovery without WW2; no civil rights without widespread education in the post-war economy and so on.

So I see most things as a natural progression. Leaders do not cause transformations but transfprmations need leaders - great leaders - to give the nation strength and vision so as to step up to progress instead of falling back to the worse in human nature. Obama involked Lincoln and called this "the better angels of our nature".

All of 3 previous republics were born in times of great challenge. But they should not be confused with transformation itself because I see troubled times not as cause of transformation as triggers. The spark is needed for the fire but they cannot replace the firewood. The revolutionary war and chaos that characterized the early year of the USA; the Civil War which cost the greatest casualties of any war in the history of the USA even more than WW2 although the population was way smaller; the great depression when 20% of banks went bust and joblessness hit 25%. The challenges we are seeing now may rival all that, we simply do not know yet. I certainly hope not.

But that does not mean transformation is not at hand. One certainly hope that progress in humanity means people can be collectively aware of new realities to demand and persevere through change without needing a cataclysmic trigger to "force change". Here I find evidence in Mr Lind's lumping together of FDR's New Deal with the Civil Rights Movement (which ws given impetus by JFK's election, MLK's moral leadership and LBJ's decisive action) which is slightly incongrous because these are two different transformations of society. Although it should also be remembered that together with the Civil Rights Movement, the 60s also expanded the New Deal with LBJ's Great Society programmes. Hence, I would actually argue that a matured nation (especially one founded on liberal ideals), a developed economy (especially a free market system) and a progressive political system (especially a representative democracy) would be more capable of self-improvement and moving itself forward in smaller steps but more frequently.

I surprised myself and it still pleasantly surprised me at the amount of admiration, respect and goodwill at Obama's election all over the world. It certainly connected in a deep and profound way to the "better angels" that so many people had - not only with the US - but also with humanity and the world. Put simply, so many people woke up on Nov 5th feeling that the world is a better place than before. I believe as the days go on, this will continue to quietly stir up hidden hope, buried dreams and forgotten purpose in so many people around the world, making them feel strong and believe in themselves their children and the future. Pundits are moving now to "fearing" about the expectations Obama now has to meet. But I do not sense that because Obama's message is about self-belief, empowerment, a new sense of respect and the power of the possible. His way is not to deliver anything single handedly. His way is to show the way and create the opportunity for each individual to make their own steps - large and small - to make progress.

As for China, I think thats another posting :)

The Third Republic of the PRC

Micheal Lind offers a theory of dividing the USA into 3 republics, each roughly lasted 72 years which in turn is sub-divided into two periods each lasting 36 years alternate between a period of state centralization and decentralization.

The First Republic starts from 1788-1860 following the American Revolution. The Second Republic from 1860-1932 is founded by Abraham Lincoln that is marked by the Civil War and Reconstruction. The Third Republic began from 1932 - 2004 (too arbitrary) witness the New Deal and the Civil Right era.

Following the theory, the writer postulate that Obama will be the founder of the Fourth Republic of the United States.

I have previously offered, in similar vein but in a much simplistic and amateurish theory, that PRC is about to step into the third stage of development next year.

Unlike the Lind's theory, there is no Hamiltonian expansion and Jacksonian backlash simply for reason that PRC is too young, just 59 years old unlike the USA which is a double centurion.

Taking heed from the article below, maybe it will be more sophisticated to call it the Third Republic of the PRC to postulate my speculation of a politically reformed PRC.

My model is premised upon the Chinese concept of "sixty year cycle year" [甲子年] to disect the PRC in her first 60 years from 1949-2009. Each period lasted 30 years.

The First Republic was founded by Mao Zedong and lasted from 1949 to 1978. PRC is founded through the peasant revolution and ended by the crazy cultural revolution (officially ended in 1976). The Republic lasted for two more years under Hua Guofeng, Mao's annointed succesor until the return to power of Deng Xiaoping in late 1978. This is the revolutionary China

It follows that the Second Republic was founded by Deng Xiaoping who initiated the reform and liberation that transform the PRC into the factory of the world that we know of today.

Following my theory, the Second Republic shall be succeeded by the Third Republic next year. It is too early to speculate if Hu Jintao is the founder of the Third Republic as he has more than a year to politically reform the country.

After Obama's victory, I am now also a hopemonger, this time for a liberal and democratic China.


********************************************
Obama and the dawn of the Fourth Republic

His victory really may mark the beginning of a new era in American history.
By Michael Lind

Nov. 7, 2008 WASHINGTON -- The election of Barack Obama to the presidency may signal more than the end of an era of Republican presidential dominance and conservative ideology. It may mark the beginning of a Fourth Republic of the United States.

In the past generation Bruce Ackerman, Theodore Lowi and I, in different ways, have used the idea of "republics" to understand American history. Since the French Revolution, France has been governed by five republics (plus two empires, a directory and a fascist dictatorship). Since the American Revolution, we Americans have been governed by several republics as well. But because we, like the British, pay lip service to formal continuity more than do the French, we pretend that we have been living under the same government since the federal Constitution was drafted and ratified in 1787-88. Our successive American republics from the 18th century to the 21st have been informal and unofficial.

As I see it, to date there have been three American republics, each lasting 72 years (give or take a few years). The First Republic of the United States, assembled following the American Revolution, lasted from 1788 to 1860. The Second Republic, assembled following the Civil War and Reconstruction (that is, the Second American Revolution) lasted from 1860 to 1932. And the Third American Republic, assembled during the New Deal and the civil rights eras (the Third American Revolution), lasted from 1932 until 2004.

Yes, you read that correctly -- 2004, not 2008. A case can be made that the new era actually began four years ago. True, Bush, a relic of the waning years of the previous era, was reelected. But immediately after his reelection, the American people repudiated his foreign policy and his domestic policy, including Social Security privatization. In 2006 the Democrats swept the Republicans out of Congress, and in 2008 they have recaptured the White House.

To be sure, every shift in partisan control of government does not amount to the founding of a new republic. Obama did not win a landslide or have long coattails. His coalition is a slightly larger version of the Democratic Party that was forged in the partisan realignment of 1968-72. And the public is still divided among liberals, moderates and conservatives much as it has been for a decade or two. But my scenario does not depend on Obama's election or even on Democratic control of Congress. The Fourth Republic might have gotten off to a start -- a bad start, but a start -- under Republican auspices.

Policy shifts, more than public opinion polls or election results, suggest that a truly transformative moment may be upon us. The first three American republics display a remarkably similar pattern. Their 72-year life span is divided into two 36-year periods (again, give or take a year -- this is not astrology). During the first 36-year period of a republic, ambitious nation-builders in the tradition of Alexander Hamilton strengthen the powers of the federal government and promote economic modernization. During the second 36-year phase of a republic, there is a Jeffersonian backlash, in favor of small government, small business and an older way of life. During the backlash era, Jeffersonians manage to modify, but never undo, the structure created by the Hamiltonians in the previous era.

We see this pattern of Hamiltonian nation-building and Jeffersonian backlash in the First, Second and Third Republics of the United States. Between 1788 and 1824, the ideas of the centralizing, nation-building Federalist Party of George Washington and Alexander Hamilton succeeded. Although Jefferson and his small-government allies controlled the White House and Congress for much of this period, in practice they implemented a streamlined, cheaper version of the Federalist plan for America. Jefferson's Treasury Secretary Albert Gallatin, for example, supported a program of infrastructure and industrialization not all that different from Alexander Hamilton's. And Jefferson himself, contradicting his small-government philosophy, exercised sweeping powers as president, purchasing the Louisiana Territory from France on his own initiative and promoting a federal embargo on U.S. exports to Britain and France. The first Jeffersonian backlash came later, under Andrew Jackson and his allies between 1824 and 1860.

The election of Abraham Lincoln in 1860 triggered the secession of the South, the Civil War and Reconstruction -- the Second American Revolution and the founding of the Second Republic of the United States. During and after the Civil War, Lincoln's Republican Party remade the United States. In addition to crushing the South and freeing the slaves, the Republicans nationalized the banking system, promoted U.S. industry through high tariffs, carpeted the continent with federally subsidized railroads and used the sale of federal lands to pay for state colleges. From 1896, the Jeffersonian backlash against the system created by the Lincoln Republicans was led by Southern and Western agrarian populists and middle-class Progressives in the Northeast who, for different reasons, were alienated from the new order. While they achieved some reforms, the Jeffersonians failed to modify the essential features of the Lincoln-to-Hoover Second Republic.

The Third Republic of the United States was built by New Deal Democrats and liberal Republicans between 1932 and 1968. During the initial Hamiltonian phase, even more power was centralized in the federal government, which carried out national economic regulation, built power plants and electric grids, highways and airports, created Social Security, Medicare and unemployment insurance, and used federal power to dismantle racial segregation. Inevitably the period of Hamiltonian reform was followed by a Jeffersonian backlash that lasted from Richard Nixon to George W. Bush. Once again, populists and libertarians emphasizing different parts of the Jeffersonian legacy tinkered with the new order but failed to overturn it. Under Reagan and the second Bush, the right managed to cut income taxes and capital gains taxes. But their failure to shrink the size of post-New Deal government meant that their tax cuts, instead of inspiring less spending, merely produced enormous deficits.

George W. Bush was not only the final president of the Jeffersonian backlash period of Roosevelt's Third Republic, but the last president of the 1932-2004 Third Republic itself. The final president of a republic tends to be a failed, despised figure. The First Republic, which began with George Washington, ended with James Buchanan, a hapless president who refused to act as the South seceded after Lincoln's election. The Second Republic, which began with Abraham Lincoln, ended with the well-meaning but reviled and ineffectual Herbert Hoover. The Third Republic, founded by Franklin Roosevelt, came to a miserable end under the pathetic George W. Bush.

The election of 2004 was a fluke, like the election of 1824. The Jacksonian era -- that is, the Jeffersonian backlash period of the 1788-1860 First Republic -- began in 1824, even though John Quincy Adams became president after losing the popular vote to Andrew Jackson. (Jackson won the next two elections.) Likewise, the Fourth Republic arguably began in 2004, the narrow reelection of George W. Bush notwithstanding. 2008 is Year Four of the Fourth American Revolution.

If this analysis is right, what causes these cycles of reform and backlash in American politics? I believe they are linked indirectly to stages of technological and economic development. Lincoln's Second American Republic marked a transition from an agrarian economy to one based on the technologies of the first industrial revolution -- coal-fired steam engines and railroads.

Roosevelt's Third American Republic was built with the tools of the second industrial revolution -- electricity and internal combustion engines. It remains to be seen what energy sources -- nuclear? Solar? Clean coal? -- and what technologies -- nanotechnology? Photonics? Biotech-- will be the basis of the next American economy. (Note: I'm talking about the material, real-world manufacturing and utility economy, not the illusory "information economy" beloved of globalization enthusiasts in the 1990s, who pretended that deindustrialization by outsourcing was a higher state of industrialism.)

Naturally, the Americans alive during the founding of new American republics have other issues on their minds. The Civil War was fought over slavery, not steam engines, and the New Deal, for all of FDR's commitment to nationwide electrical power fed by hydroelectric dam projects, was animated by a vision of social justice. The broad outlines of technological and economic change merely provide the frame for the picture; the details depend on the groups that emerge victorious in political battles.

That is why it is too early to predict the outline of the Fourth American Republic. Its shape depends on the outcomes of the debates and struggles of the next generation. But it is possible to speculate about its life span. If the pattern of history holds, the Fourth Republic of the United States will last for roughly 72 years, from 2004 (or, if you like, 2008) to 2076. And if the pattern of the past holds, we will see a period of Hamiltonian centralization and reform between now and 2040, followed by an approximately 36-year long Jeffersonian backlash motivated by ideals of libertarianism and decentralization.

And even if I am right that the new era began four years ago, historians are likely to identify the first president of the Fourth Republic of the United States as Barack Obama, not George W. Bush. Obama may join Washington, Lincoln and Franklin Delano Roosevelt on the short list of American presidents who, thanks both to their own leadership and the fortuitous timing of their elections, presided over the refounding of the United States. Yes, he can.