The repeated call for a new constitutional convention is partly rooted in the fact the the current PRC constitution contains many contradictions and many omissions and also lack of implementation.
For instance, a peoples democratic dictatorship is contradictory in terms. The lexicon is a mere tribute paid to the classic Marxism that is out of place even in China.
An example of omission is the fact that the Chinese Peoples Political Consultative Council (CPPCC) has no actual constitutional basis. The often perception that the CPPCC is the upper chamber of Chinese legislature is invalid and the complaint that CPPCC is ineffectual is unjustified for it is not given the constitutional power.
An example of lack of implementation is the safeguard of peoples practising their civil and political rights as enshrined in the constitution. The arbitratry exercise of administrative power without adequate check and balance led to frequent outbreak of protests and sometimes riot. The latest example is from Wengan of Guizhou province where the peoples were storming the district government offices.
The problem is accute because there is no trusted channel for redress in the present arrangement and the enforcement officers are often regarded as corrupt and with contempt. The loss of public confidence is a critical issue which the CCP leadership has to restore.
The honesty, the devotion and the hardwork of the CCP cadre in the early revolutionary years, which earned the overwhelming public support and confidence were the reason why CCP trashed the corrupted KMT. Winning hearts is more crucial than winning the battles, CCP should know this well.
Another major reason for a new constitutional convention is because the present constitution is extremely weak in devising a sound political institutional framework and a compelling political vision statement commensurate with the Chinese's aspiration as an emerging benign world power and a harmonious country at home.
The generally less than positive image or perception of China in the western media cannot be all attributed to misunderstanding, prejudice and conspiracy alone. No amount of public relationship alone is going to change the status quo unless there is fundamental change in the system itself. The often underlined Chinese characteristic cannot be so far off from the universal value and practice.
I always find it sad and angry each time that the cuddly giant panda is caricatured with menancing eyes and posture as an innuendo of the political China today. This has to change not just because the bear itself is so cute, peace loving and cuddleable. More so, because China has the DNA to be as tolerant, respectable and inspirational.
That can start with a new constituional convention. A completely new constitution is catalyst to creating a nation that is harmonious internally and peaceful worldwide. This bring us back to refer to the five Chinese political theories of the last 100 years or so examined and posted in the month of May this year for some direction.
The evolving nature of the CCP leaders' politcal theories reflect the pragmatism of the succesive CCP leaders to adapt to the requirement of the days especially with the development of Deng-Jiang-Hu's theories which offer a more robust explanation legitimizing CCP's rule.
It is also not too unreasonable to suggest that the Deng-Jiang-Hu's theories are refining the peoples livelihood principle as propagated by Dr Sun's Three Peoples' Principles. This is perhaps the most developed aspect of Chinese political theory.
What is now more urgently required is however something closer to developing and refining the other two principles of Dr Sun's theory. On strictly a theoretical comparison, Dr. Sun is more thoughtful and coherent and surely it can be relied upon as a reference in deliberating the new constitutional requirement.
Its progressiveness is to be admired where he eloquently seek to introduce, for example, election, recall, initiative and referendum. Any of these are not present as a constitutional device in the PRC.
Dr Sun's separation of 5 powers maybe cumbersome but offer a useful reference to install a mechanism of check and balance. The current deployment of internal CCP disciplinary mechanism for checking abuses and corruption do not possess the quality of transparency, fairness and independence from actual or perceived political interference as one would have expected from a proper due process.
More importantly to China is to offer the compelling vision and reason for a single nationhood especially among the dissenters from Taiwan,Tibet and Xinjiang and other domestic critics.
On this, CCP has shown the flexibility with instituionalizing the regional autonomous government and one country two systems to hold the present China together. To take another bold step forward in whatever form is arguably the better way than the current one to foster one China nationhood.
The obssession with the one party rule is definitely another stumbling block to fostering one China. CCP has to make a decision whether CCP is for China or China is for CCP. The party and state relation is so interwined to prevent a proper governance in place.
Giving up ruling power hegemony, sharing power with others whether on a national or regional basis, allowing check and balances, submiting to people's mandate periodically, safeguarding civil and political right, guaranteeing free press, and redefining PLA as the nation's armed force and not as the party's militia are the concessions CCP has to make for China.
China is unusual in her nationhood experience where almost all other started with building the national institutional framework and process before or along with economic development. In my eye, China is about to undergo a political reengineering phase for the next 30 years.
The first 30 years of PRC (from 1949-1978) is the revolution age; the following 30 years (from 1979-2008) is the economic development age; the next 30 years, hopefully, is the political reconstruction age.
Tuesday, July 29, 2008
Sunday, July 27, 2008
Haze in Beijing and Chinese ecology
Beijing is blanketed in haze with low visibility. The weather forecast authority insists that the the haze is caused by the moisture in the air and not by the polutant. There is no cause for alarm.
I am not a scientist. I don't know what is the cause.
What is true is that Beijing is hazy today, on July 27, 12 days before the openning of Olympics and 7 days after the city implemented the "odd and even number plate" traffic rule to reduce by almost half of traffic volume on the road. No question, the traffic has improved significantly. It remains insufficient.
Situated closed to Gobi to the west and blocked by mountain range to the north with a wide plain to the south and the east, Beijing is not geologically the best place for a Swiss hamlet.
Sandust from the Gobi, smoke polutants from the farms and factories in Hebei, dust and waste from the never ending construction and the exhaust smoke from the car numbered in millions as well as discharge and dispose of 16 millions residents have combined to aggravate the fragile and arid ecological condition of Beijing.
The taxi drivers whom I spoke to are concerned with the image the Beijing project to the visitors. No amount of Olympics athlete's prowess and records and the host hospitality are going to change what is breathed into the lungs. That will be a more lasting impression.
The government must not be so narrow minded to impose measures just for the sake of Olympics. The visitors may number in hundred of thousand during the one month sports event. There are however 16 millions of Chinese nationals living in the capital, most of whom live for their entire lifes.
The taxi driver I spoke to cherish his youthful day in 1950s when he was able to swim and catch fish at a river near the Zhongwenmen. The river has since gone paving ways to road.
This remind me of Chongqyechon of Seoul. Chonggyechon was originally a small stream but paved with concrete to make way for an expressway. Few years ago, the former mayor and the present president Lee Myun Bak restored the stream and return the source of life back to Seoul. Singapore river is another example which is so much an attraction now that the tourists are happy to dine along the once poluted river at Clark and Boat Quay.
Will these be learnt by Beijing whose obsession seems to be building signature architecture forgetting that however adorable the architectures, they are nothing if visibility is hampered by haze, dust and polutants.
Certain Chinese green activists have advocated relocating the capital for ecological reason. However the proposal doesn't attract any mainstream debate seemingly it maybe too political a topic to discuss.
Moving the capital is not the panacea. Ultimately, there has to be long term green policy to keep the ecology.
I remember reading a history book on China ecology - the retreat of elephans - an environmental history of china. Once upon a time in China, rhino and elephant were roaming in large number. Where are they now? We have them in the muzium in the form of cups and other carved out of the rhino horn and elephant ivory.
Another more recent example, the Tai lake, once regarded as the land of fish and rice. What happens to her now? The green algae made the lake worse than a sewarage. Another algae example is Qingdao. It was as recent as 3 weeks ago where thousand of PLA soldiers were sent to clean the bay infested by algae to make it in time to host the Olympics sailing event.
Not to mention the carbon belching out and the toxic pouring out of the factories collectively known as the Made in China. They are hardly regulated by the local governments whose primary interest is tax collection rather than conservation of nature and environmental protection.
30 years of economic expansion has taken the toll on the Chinese ecology. It's time for tough conservation and environmental policies and enforcement for the healing to begin. Officers with conservation accomplishment should be exemplified and made a hero and be called the "Green Lei Feng".
This maybe out of fashion.
A better suggestion is to allow a healthy and vibrant Chinese society to evolve where the peoples are empowered to promote conservation and defend against environmental encroachment by authority or business interest establishment. What does that mean? (to be continued)
I am not a scientist. I don't know what is the cause.
What is true is that Beijing is hazy today, on July 27, 12 days before the openning of Olympics and 7 days after the city implemented the "odd and even number plate" traffic rule to reduce by almost half of traffic volume on the road. No question, the traffic has improved significantly. It remains insufficient.
Situated closed to Gobi to the west and blocked by mountain range to the north with a wide plain to the south and the east, Beijing is not geologically the best place for a Swiss hamlet.
Sandust from the Gobi, smoke polutants from the farms and factories in Hebei, dust and waste from the never ending construction and the exhaust smoke from the car numbered in millions as well as discharge and dispose of 16 millions residents have combined to aggravate the fragile and arid ecological condition of Beijing.
The taxi drivers whom I spoke to are concerned with the image the Beijing project to the visitors. No amount of Olympics athlete's prowess and records and the host hospitality are going to change what is breathed into the lungs. That will be a more lasting impression.
The government must not be so narrow minded to impose measures just for the sake of Olympics. The visitors may number in hundred of thousand during the one month sports event. There are however 16 millions of Chinese nationals living in the capital, most of whom live for their entire lifes.
The taxi driver I spoke to cherish his youthful day in 1950s when he was able to swim and catch fish at a river near the Zhongwenmen. The river has since gone paving ways to road.
This remind me of Chongqyechon of Seoul. Chonggyechon was originally a small stream but paved with concrete to make way for an expressway. Few years ago, the former mayor and the present president Lee Myun Bak restored the stream and return the source of life back to Seoul. Singapore river is another example which is so much an attraction now that the tourists are happy to dine along the once poluted river at Clark and Boat Quay.
Will these be learnt by Beijing whose obsession seems to be building signature architecture forgetting that however adorable the architectures, they are nothing if visibility is hampered by haze, dust and polutants.
Certain Chinese green activists have advocated relocating the capital for ecological reason. However the proposal doesn't attract any mainstream debate seemingly it maybe too political a topic to discuss.
Moving the capital is not the panacea. Ultimately, there has to be long term green policy to keep the ecology.
I remember reading a history book on China ecology - the retreat of elephans - an environmental history of china. Once upon a time in China, rhino and elephant were roaming in large number. Where are they now? We have them in the muzium in the form of cups and other carved out of the rhino horn and elephant ivory.
Another more recent example, the Tai lake, once regarded as the land of fish and rice. What happens to her now? The green algae made the lake worse than a sewarage. Another algae example is Qingdao. It was as recent as 3 weeks ago where thousand of PLA soldiers were sent to clean the bay infested by algae to make it in time to host the Olympics sailing event.
Not to mention the carbon belching out and the toxic pouring out of the factories collectively known as the Made in China. They are hardly regulated by the local governments whose primary interest is tax collection rather than conservation of nature and environmental protection.
30 years of economic expansion has taken the toll on the Chinese ecology. It's time for tough conservation and environmental policies and enforcement for the healing to begin. Officers with conservation accomplishment should be exemplified and made a hero and be called the "Green Lei Feng".
This maybe out of fashion.
A better suggestion is to allow a healthy and vibrant Chinese society to evolve where the peoples are empowered to promote conservation and defend against environmental encroachment by authority or business interest establishment. What does that mean? (to be continued)
Saturday, July 26, 2008
Polls and Predictions
Bro KY,
I notice the pundits are trying out a new narrative that goes something like "Obama have had a fantastic week and McCain could not look more pitiful by comparison" - what else can you say about the one about showing up in a german restaurant in Ohio to counter Obama's speech before 200,000 people in Berlin - "but that is not translating into the polls".
Like you I check the RCP Latest Polls. (After all, great minds think alike) And I must say that the trends are clearly in Obama favour and an Obama sweep is on the way this November.
First of all, although the daily national tracking polls tend to fluctuate between a tie and +6 for Obama, the average seems to be steady around +4 for Obama. For McCain's numbers, I see a floor of around 39; a ceiling of around 44 and average of about 42. For Obama, the floor seems to be around 44 ceiling of 50 and average of 46-47.
If you look at the battleground polls, where it all matters, the situation on the ground is even better for Obama. He leads solidly in most states that Democrats won in '04 except MI where he has a small lead despite not campaining during the primaries. He is also placing many previously red states in competition - he looks solid in IO, NM, NV, OH - good chances in CO, MO & FL and has decent chances in VA and IN. Obama wins when he takes the first 4, I can see a sweep when he takes the next 3 and possibly a landslide if he takes the next two. That is despite a 4% lead nationally.
I also see other factors that boosts his margins. This time the Democrats has a more aggressive, better funded and better organized ground strategy.
On my street, I have already been approached 3 times by Democratic Party canvassers trying to register voters - unfortunately as a non-American I am not eligible - 2x by Obama volunteers giving out pamphlets. Taking a leaf from your book, next time I see one I will ask them how their efforts are going. As a result, voter registration is apparently at record level in many states. With statistics showing that 35% of African-Americans and 45% of hispanics not registered to vote, this is a huge opportunity for Obama especially in swing states in the Southwest. I see voter registration as giving at least +1% or +2%% advantage to Obama and given that on average 50% of people vote in the general elections, the impact can potentally be 5% in some states.
That same ground organization will super-charge the Democrat's get-out-the-vote efforts. Obama's strategy against HRC relied extensively on his experience as a grass-root organizer and he is applying that same technique to build a nationwide network of volunteers. As I mentioned earlier, the high costs of gasoline places the ability to identify voters and getting them to the voting stations an important factor. For the less-enthusiastic supporters who may decide to save money instead of driving to vote (as is common for semi-rural communities in the Southwest, Midwest and South) - or poorer voters who does not have a car, this will have a major impact on voter turn-out. The advantage for Obama is that by having fought all those primary countests and having led the voter registration drive in all these states, he has a head start in being organized locally, of knowing where his voters live and the organization to put them into play. Given that historically the Democrats have been sadly lagging compared to the GOP's network on the Christian-right, this should add another 1% to 2% to Obama's numbers.
Finally, voter enthusiasm amongst Obama supporters are 4-times higher than for his opponent. This has the effect of higher voter turn-out for his supporters and having a larger pool of potential volunteers to leverage upon. Given that the Christian-right appears to be less than enthusiastic for McCain, the total impact of voter enthusiasm gives Obama yet another 1% advantage.
You add it up, and that is an in-built 5% advantage (possibly more) even if for a the improbable 50:50 situation. Hence, I am convinced a +4% poll advantage is potentially worth even more in practice.
Obama is now working to lift his poll upwards from the 50% ceiling. As you pointed out, he has the courage to confront his challenges and embrace perceived shortcomings. He is focused on lessening the 'fears' and concerns about his background and his capability. I saw on a poll that 58% of people has a +ive impression of Obama meaning he can potentially improve his poll ceiling on the merits i.e. by persuading them of his ability or policies. (Conversely the 35% negatives are probably no longer open-minded to persuasion). The trip to Mideast and Europe should help with this group of voters. Another opportunity are the almost 80% of Americans who disagree with the way the country is going; that is potentially another 30% in-the-play if they can be persuaded that McCain is McSame. Even if they do not vote Obama they will be less likely to vote for the otherside.
Polls tend to be backward looking rather than forward looking, I believe it will take a month or so for any sets of polling to present a clearer picture. Lets keep checking the RCP.
I notice the pundits are trying out a new narrative that goes something like "Obama have had a fantastic week and McCain could not look more pitiful by comparison" - what else can you say about the one about showing up in a german restaurant in Ohio to counter Obama's speech before 200,000 people in Berlin - "but that is not translating into the polls".
Like you I check the RCP Latest Polls. (After all, great minds think alike) And I must say that the trends are clearly in Obama favour and an Obama sweep is on the way this November.
First of all, although the daily national tracking polls tend to fluctuate between a tie and +6 for Obama, the average seems to be steady around +4 for Obama. For McCain's numbers, I see a floor of around 39; a ceiling of around 44 and average of about 42. For Obama, the floor seems to be around 44 ceiling of 50 and average of 46-47.
If you look at the battleground polls, where it all matters, the situation on the ground is even better for Obama. He leads solidly in most states that Democrats won in '04 except MI where he has a small lead despite not campaining during the primaries. He is also placing many previously red states in competition - he looks solid in IO, NM, NV, OH - good chances in CO, MO & FL and has decent chances in VA and IN. Obama wins when he takes the first 4, I can see a sweep when he takes the next 3 and possibly a landslide if he takes the next two. That is despite a 4% lead nationally.
I also see other factors that boosts his margins. This time the Democrats has a more aggressive, better funded and better organized ground strategy.
On my street, I have already been approached 3 times by Democratic Party canvassers trying to register voters - unfortunately as a non-American I am not eligible - 2x by Obama volunteers giving out pamphlets. Taking a leaf from your book, next time I see one I will ask them how their efforts are going. As a result, voter registration is apparently at record level in many states. With statistics showing that 35% of African-Americans and 45% of hispanics not registered to vote, this is a huge opportunity for Obama especially in swing states in the Southwest. I see voter registration as giving at least +1% or +2%% advantage to Obama and given that on average 50% of people vote in the general elections, the impact can potentally be 5% in some states.
That same ground organization will super-charge the Democrat's get-out-the-vote efforts. Obama's strategy against HRC relied extensively on his experience as a grass-root organizer and he is applying that same technique to build a nationwide network of volunteers. As I mentioned earlier, the high costs of gasoline places the ability to identify voters and getting them to the voting stations an important factor. For the less-enthusiastic supporters who may decide to save money instead of driving to vote (as is common for semi-rural communities in the Southwest, Midwest and South) - or poorer voters who does not have a car, this will have a major impact on voter turn-out. The advantage for Obama is that by having fought all those primary countests and having led the voter registration drive in all these states, he has a head start in being organized locally, of knowing where his voters live and the organization to put them into play. Given that historically the Democrats have been sadly lagging compared to the GOP's network on the Christian-right, this should add another 1% to 2% to Obama's numbers.
Finally, voter enthusiasm amongst Obama supporters are 4-times higher than for his opponent. This has the effect of higher voter turn-out for his supporters and having a larger pool of potential volunteers to leverage upon. Given that the Christian-right appears to be less than enthusiastic for McCain, the total impact of voter enthusiasm gives Obama yet another 1% advantage.
You add it up, and that is an in-built 5% advantage (possibly more) even if for a the improbable 50:50 situation. Hence, I am convinced a +4% poll advantage is potentially worth even more in practice.
Obama is now working to lift his poll upwards from the 50% ceiling. As you pointed out, he has the courage to confront his challenges and embrace perceived shortcomings. He is focused on lessening the 'fears' and concerns about his background and his capability. I saw on a poll that 58% of people has a +ive impression of Obama meaning he can potentially improve his poll ceiling on the merits i.e. by persuading them of his ability or policies. (Conversely the 35% negatives are probably no longer open-minded to persuasion). The trip to Mideast and Europe should help with this group of voters. Another opportunity are the almost 80% of Americans who disagree with the way the country is going; that is potentially another 30% in-the-play if they can be persuaded that McCain is McSame. Even if they do not vote Obama they will be less likely to vote for the otherside.
Polls tend to be backward looking rather than forward looking, I believe it will take a month or so for any sets of polling to present a clearer picture. Lets keep checking the RCP.
Thursday, July 24, 2008
Obama's Travels
America is enthralled with Obama's current tour overseas. And I am beginning to see Obama's strategy behind why he is doing it and the way he is doing it. And I must say its quite brilliant.
I remember when GHW Bush first took over from Ronald Reagan, people like me took sometime to adjust to seeing him as president. The comparison is till too fresh in the mind. Even my sister said he did simply was not as polished and classy as Reagan. A similar thing happenned when Clinton got elected. He seemed very young and the wind blew his hair about; and my father said he had a husky voice. A few years later, my father remarked that Clinton is "becoming more and more steady as a President". Moral of the story: it takes time to be visualized as President of the United States.
And I suspect, for many Americans it was just this little bit harder to visualize a black man as President of the United States. Especially when his opponents seem to think he is too young and inexperienced.
So imagine being fed images like his press conference yesterday at the hilltop Temple of Hercules with Amman, Jordan behind his as back drop. It was a commanding performance in both image and substance. The media is starting to talk about Obama's gravitas. And there are images of him meeting foreign heads of states where due to his advantage in height, he came across as comfortable and in command. Slowly, like in Isreal today, praise from his foreign hosts will leak out and who is more credible? Some GOP congressman from the Midwest riling at his lack of experience or the King of Jordan?
In the best of times, Washington is not the best place in the world to learn about the world. The foreign policy circle in Washington can be quite insular and populated by swarms of policy peddlers and people with opinions and contacts to hawk about. Much if not most of them are in a perpetual revolving door between (often junior) government positions, policy think-tanks and lobbying firms. Occasionally, they organize junkets or conferences for policy makers to visit the relevant parts of the world and be fed a certain world-view. Taken as a whole, that in my opinion, does not make a very good training ground for foreign policy experience.
This much I know from just reading his books. He studied international relations in Columbia University. He spent his childhood in Hawaii (which is as foreign as it gets in the USA) and in Indonesia. He backpacked through Europe for a month. He has visited his mother and room mate in Pakistan. He has been to Kenya at least 3 times and he has been back to Indonesia as well (finishing his first book in Bali). And yes, as senator he has been to Kenya, Isreal, Russia, Uzbekistan, the UK and Iraq. In his book, he wrote knowledgeably about global issues.
I remember when GHW Bush first took over from Ronald Reagan, people like me took sometime to adjust to seeing him as president. The comparison is till too fresh in the mind. Even my sister said he did simply was not as polished and classy as Reagan. A similar thing happenned when Clinton got elected. He seemed very young and the wind blew his hair about; and my father said he had a husky voice. A few years later, my father remarked that Clinton is "becoming more and more steady as a President". Moral of the story: it takes time to be visualized as President of the United States.
And I suspect, for many Americans it was just this little bit harder to visualize a black man as President of the United States. Especially when his opponents seem to think he is too young and inexperienced.
So imagine being fed images like his press conference yesterday at the hilltop Temple of Hercules with Amman, Jordan behind his as back drop. It was a commanding performance in both image and substance. The media is starting to talk about Obama's gravitas. And there are images of him meeting foreign heads of states where due to his advantage in height, he came across as comfortable and in command. Slowly, like in Isreal today, praise from his foreign hosts will leak out and who is more credible? Some GOP congressman from the Midwest riling at his lack of experience or the King of Jordan?
So I see this strategy in play: Put simply, instead of running against McCain he is running against George W Bush. Very cleverly, he is changing the reference point with whom he is compared to from John to George (and reinforcing the impression that John is the same as George anyway). More than just showing people that he can clear the bar as President and Commander-in-Chief; he is giving Americans a glimpse of how good it feels to have a President who is intelligent and respected, and how good it feels for the world to love America (which I suspect is the enduring image Obama wishes to present from his speech in Berlin tomorrow - imagine how an American would feel if the crowd roars aprovingly when Obama tells them how proud he is of being an American?)
In the best of times, Washington is not the best place in the world to learn about the world. The foreign policy circle in Washington can be quite insular and populated by swarms of policy peddlers and people with opinions and contacts to hawk about. Much if not most of them are in a perpetual revolving door between (often junior) government positions, policy think-tanks and lobbying firms. Occasionally, they organize junkets or conferences for policy makers to visit the relevant parts of the world and be fed a certain world-view. Taken as a whole, that in my opinion, does not make a very good training ground for foreign policy experience.
This much I know from just reading his books. He studied international relations in Columbia University. He spent his childhood in Hawaii (which is as foreign as it gets in the USA) and in Indonesia. He backpacked through Europe for a month. He has visited his mother and room mate in Pakistan. He has been to Kenya at least 3 times and he has been back to Indonesia as well (finishing his first book in Bali). And yes, as senator he has been to Kenya, Isreal, Russia, Uzbekistan, the UK and Iraq. In his book, he wrote knowledgeably about global issues.
In stock market investing, people say that you can make money from information that the market does not know and information the market ignored. The conventional wisdom has mistakenly assumed that just because he had a short resume in Washington that he has little foreign policy experience. Most Americans, I am convinced, are in for a surprise how much he knows about the world; because so far, his savviness with the world has been ignored.
Wednesday, July 23, 2008
2 pints of beer in Mohamad Sultan
6-8 pm July 22, 2008
Singapore, a country that I admire and a country that I somewhat don't understand as much as I would like. I have been here many times and yet I don't feel I know her well enough.
I decided to take a stroll and the 20 minutes walk from the hotel to Mohamad Sultan was so pleasant without a single drop of sweat. I enjoyed the walk because I find space and the greenery here which I don't when I am in Hong Kong. I enjoyed watching the colonial era architecture which are so much better conserved than in Hong Kong.
These are among the reasons for my fondness of Singapore. Still, I frequently ask myself which place is more livable and which place has a brighter future. To this, I still haven't had an answer.
I found myself alone sitting on a bar in one of the pub along Mohamad Sultan. It was my curiosity of the architecture and the facade that led me walking into the pub along this once famous party street. Inside the pub, beside the steel rails for bar top dancing, there is a steel beam structure to reinforce this 90 years old building. Hang on the wall are old photos of Strait Chinese family and potrait. That remind me of my own maternal great grandmothers who were of baba nyonya descent.
I was surprized that there was no one for the happy hour and in between that one hour or so before two regulars walking in to order a jug of beer, I had a conversation with the lady boss. She is savvy and well travelled.
I drank my pint of draft beer and I listened to the story of her business and from there, the Singapore governance.
She recounted the prime days of her business when patrons lined up to get in for partying. The business was so good that they had to turn away customer lest they irk the enforcement officers.
The closing time was strictly enforced and so was the crowd control. Enforcement officers would be present 5 minutes before closing time to make sure all lights were switched off. Inexplicably, the enforcement officers would often be present to issue summon for bar top dancing when the party went wild (following government standard) or the patron numbers had exceeded what was permitted. The fine would sweep away the profit of the night and they ended up doing a night of national service.
Bar top dancing was barred for years and the moment the government legalised it, the government began to collect bar top dancing licencing fee. Was it the extra money for the openness?
Then came 911. Her business dropped the next day after the government removed the parking lots along the street. This has to do with the fear of car bombing as Mohamad Sultan was frequented by expatriate.
From then onwards, it is downward spiral. Without street parking lots, happy hours crowd turn elsewhere to down their beer. The subsequent extension of closing hours remain short in regaining Mohamad Sultan's good old day. (I must disclose I had my small share of good time at Mohamad Sultan before 911).
Despite the poorer crowd, the bussines carried on thank to the loyal and sometimes nostagic patrons like me but in larger part the thanks goes to the lower rent (3$ psf compared to 20$ psf in boat quay).
One nice thing I heard was that her business had never paid any protection fee to triad society even though there were attempts asking it. This is a strong sign of the rule of law, isn't it?
In between, I asked her if she was aware of LKY's slip under oath in a suit against an opposition figure. She said no. This is the second no I receive. The first one came from the taxi driver who fetched me from the airport. I am not too sure if the news was censored or prudently not reported in the local press.
So much the impression I have for Singapore press freedom. Yet, I left the pub for dinner still without having the frequent questions answered.
Singapore, a country that I admire and a country that I somewhat don't understand as much as I would like. I have been here many times and yet I don't feel I know her well enough.
I decided to take a stroll and the 20 minutes walk from the hotel to Mohamad Sultan was so pleasant without a single drop of sweat. I enjoyed the walk because I find space and the greenery here which I don't when I am in Hong Kong. I enjoyed watching the colonial era architecture which are so much better conserved than in Hong Kong.
These are among the reasons for my fondness of Singapore. Still, I frequently ask myself which place is more livable and which place has a brighter future. To this, I still haven't had an answer.
I found myself alone sitting on a bar in one of the pub along Mohamad Sultan. It was my curiosity of the architecture and the facade that led me walking into the pub along this once famous party street. Inside the pub, beside the steel rails for bar top dancing, there is a steel beam structure to reinforce this 90 years old building. Hang on the wall are old photos of Strait Chinese family and potrait. That remind me of my own maternal great grandmothers who were of baba nyonya descent.
I was surprized that there was no one for the happy hour and in between that one hour or so before two regulars walking in to order a jug of beer, I had a conversation with the lady boss. She is savvy and well travelled.
I drank my pint of draft beer and I listened to the story of her business and from there, the Singapore governance.
She recounted the prime days of her business when patrons lined up to get in for partying. The business was so good that they had to turn away customer lest they irk the enforcement officers.
The closing time was strictly enforced and so was the crowd control. Enforcement officers would be present 5 minutes before closing time to make sure all lights were switched off. Inexplicably, the enforcement officers would often be present to issue summon for bar top dancing when the party went wild (following government standard) or the patron numbers had exceeded what was permitted. The fine would sweep away the profit of the night and they ended up doing a night of national service.
Bar top dancing was barred for years and the moment the government legalised it, the government began to collect bar top dancing licencing fee. Was it the extra money for the openness?
Then came 911. Her business dropped the next day after the government removed the parking lots along the street. This has to do with the fear of car bombing as Mohamad Sultan was frequented by expatriate.
From then onwards, it is downward spiral. Without street parking lots, happy hours crowd turn elsewhere to down their beer. The subsequent extension of closing hours remain short in regaining Mohamad Sultan's good old day. (I must disclose I had my small share of good time at Mohamad Sultan before 911).
Despite the poorer crowd, the bussines carried on thank to the loyal and sometimes nostagic patrons like me but in larger part the thanks goes to the lower rent (3$ psf compared to 20$ psf in boat quay).
One nice thing I heard was that her business had never paid any protection fee to triad society even though there were attempts asking it. This is a strong sign of the rule of law, isn't it?
In between, I asked her if she was aware of LKY's slip under oath in a suit against an opposition figure. She said no. This is the second no I receive. The first one came from the taxi driver who fetched me from the airport. I am not too sure if the news was censored or prudently not reported in the local press.
So much the impression I have for Singapore press freedom. Yet, I left the pub for dinner still without having the frequent questions answered.
Top Chinese Legends and Stories
Bro KY,
It began on a whim. One day in May as I was walking my elder daugher Ning to school, I decided to tell her the story of "Kong Ming Borrows the Arrows" from the Tales of the Three Kingdom. I remember my father telling me that story all so long ago. And here I was in NYC telling my 6 year old the same story.
She was fascinated!
And from then on, she wanted a new Three Kingdoms story every day. I ran out after day 3, after "Ruse of the Empty City" and some stories about the rivalries between Cao Cao's two sons - Cao Pi and Cao Zhi - detouring on to the story of "Cao Zhi weighing the elephant" and the "Seven Paces Poem".
Then I went to buy a simple book to beef up my knowledge. I decided to focus on Zhuge Liang. So we continued with the Battle of the Red Cliff (East winds and fire boats), Kong Ming and the Wooden Horses, Kong Ming and the Maze, the story of Kong Ming imposters, Sun Quan's three visits to Kong Ming, etc.
In fact, earlier I have told her the legend of the White Snake (having acquired a comic book to freshen up my memory).
Then, we went through a phase of the Journey to the West. We found a book from her library about Sun Wukong and his origins and later his rampage through the heavens until he met his match in the Great Buddha.
Most recently, I also got a book of the legends of the eight immortals (pa xian); so told her the legend of the Yellow Crane, the one about Zhang Liquan acquiring a begger's body, the one about Zhang Guolao and his donkey eating the magic root, the story about a hole dug by an immortal which replicated 20 elderly mothers for a greedy official.
Still, she couldn't get enough of the stories.
So, bro KY, what other stories would you list from the Chinese history and mythology that we can pass on to our younger generations?
It began on a whim. One day in May as I was walking my elder daugher Ning to school, I decided to tell her the story of "Kong Ming Borrows the Arrows" from the Tales of the Three Kingdom. I remember my father telling me that story all so long ago. And here I was in NYC telling my 6 year old the same story.
She was fascinated!
And from then on, she wanted a new Three Kingdoms story every day. I ran out after day 3, after "Ruse of the Empty City" and some stories about the rivalries between Cao Cao's two sons - Cao Pi and Cao Zhi - detouring on to the story of "Cao Zhi weighing the elephant" and the "Seven Paces Poem".
Then I went to buy a simple book to beef up my knowledge. I decided to focus on Zhuge Liang. So we continued with the Battle of the Red Cliff (East winds and fire boats), Kong Ming and the Wooden Horses, Kong Ming and the Maze, the story of Kong Ming imposters, Sun Quan's three visits to Kong Ming, etc.
In fact, earlier I have told her the legend of the White Snake (having acquired a comic book to freshen up my memory).
Then, we went through a phase of the Journey to the West. We found a book from her library about Sun Wukong and his origins and later his rampage through the heavens until he met his match in the Great Buddha.
Most recently, I also got a book of the legends of the eight immortals (pa xian); so told her the legend of the Yellow Crane, the one about Zhang Liquan acquiring a begger's body, the one about Zhang Guolao and his donkey eating the magic root, the story about a hole dug by an immortal which replicated 20 elderly mothers for a greedy official.
Still, she couldn't get enough of the stories.
So, bro KY, what other stories would you list from the Chinese history and mythology that we can pass on to our younger generations?
Tuesday, July 22, 2008
Globalization of Conflicts
KY made a good point in the earlier post about globalization and religious conflicts. I quite agree that globalization has the potential to add fuel to age-old human conflicts.
With the movement of ideas, destructive ideologies are able to migrate and gain new converts. It is quite possible that globalization enables marginal ideologies the ability to gain critical mass which hitherto they were unable to. With the movement of people, there are increasing opportunities to sow division. Arguably, the greatest impact comes from the rapid societal changes that globalization entails creating new reasons for frustration, envy and dislocation. Hence, the very same power that globalization are able to unleash for growth, opportunity and human progress; also bring malignant influences.
In the end, what we are talking about is still the eternal race between light and darkness within the human soul. It is part of the human condition to engender conflicts because the tendency is to look for division and to seperate the world into 'us' and 'them'.
Every extremist dream of an idealised homogeneous society (everyone like them of course); whether we are talking about religious extremists, racial extremist or national extremist. In human history, that idea is the probably the most destructive fantasy ever sold; and millions have bought it. It is a dangerous idea that has no place in a modern society.
It is also a false idea that conflicts will magically disappear society will be at peace once it is 'purified' either somehow made religiously or ethnically homogeneous. Without religious or ethnic conflicts, there would be other conflicts. Violent conflicts exist even within societies without religious differences (may be Cultural Revolution China and Taliban Afghanistan are 2 examples on different extremes). All societies are human and conflicts are part of all human society.
Where I agree with you completely is that religion and ethnicity is historically a common cause for conflict. When we talk about religion or race we are talking about them as society's fault lines, and religion and race are particularly powerful fault lines that are easily turned into mass hysteria to be exploited by the power that be. Careful analysis of conflicts throughout history often find complex but usually logical drivers of conflicts: economic, political, personal; but those conflicts are often cloaked in the more emotionally convincing (and dare I say, more convenient) banners of religion and race.
What I am deliberately careful about is any response that amount to to replacing one fault line with a new fault line; and notwithstanding our positive intentions replacing one conflict with another. The reason is that once we set ourselves as an arbiter of what others can be or do or say or believe, we are setting up a conflict between our views, no matter how logical with their views no matter how misconceived. Criminal law still entail great amount of divisions and conflict, even when (after thousands of years of consensus building) everyone agrees certain behaviors to be wrong and to be subject to sanctions of society. Even then I wonder how much public order (e.g .why people tend not to murder or rape as they please) can be credited to the fear for the law? or is it out of enlightened self-control as a civised member of a modern society? I believe a lot of credit has to be given to the latter especially when you observe how people respond during extreme situations such as survivors of earthquake in Sichuan. (The same cannot be said always, the aftermath of Katrina comes to mind.)
The reason is that, from my perspective, the future of human survival depends on breaking down barriers. As globalization breaks down distance and political barriers, my chief concern is whether the human barrier can be broken down fast enough. Climate change is going to result in massive displacement of people because there will be losses and gains all over the world in terms of how livable the place is. If you look at the world's populations, they are congregated in the same places - usually in the river valleys or river deltas of major rivers - for historical reasons as determined by the technologies and politics from 1000 years ago. For that reason, they are not even concentrated in the most productive regions of the world by today's technology e.g. the great plains of North America, Brazil, Ukraine, Argentina and Canada produces large percentages of the world's food but they are not densely populated.
Hence, if you look at the areas where population pressure on the land is the greatest and then accelerating it through climate change, you can get a sense forboding that large numbers of people will need to move or hundreds of millions will die. The reason that keep people from moving are distance and political barriers. Political barriers are serious impediments to the natural distribution of people to resources. If you look at the Sino-Russian border, on one side you have population density of less than 10 per sq km; the otherside is more like 1000 per sq km. held by just a line on the map. If you dry up the harvests in the Ganges and Indus or the Yellow River by 50% you will have massive problems .. and the fact that Russia and Canada will be warmer, more productive and offset the loss in production will be of little comfort to those people and those countries.
So one way or the other, the people have to move or resources need to move. Either way, we need to be talking about removing barriers.
With the movement of ideas, destructive ideologies are able to migrate and gain new converts. It is quite possible that globalization enables marginal ideologies the ability to gain critical mass which hitherto they were unable to. With the movement of people, there are increasing opportunities to sow division. Arguably, the greatest impact comes from the rapid societal changes that globalization entails creating new reasons for frustration, envy and dislocation. Hence, the very same power that globalization are able to unleash for growth, opportunity and human progress; also bring malignant influences.
In the end, what we are talking about is still the eternal race between light and darkness within the human soul. It is part of the human condition to engender conflicts because the tendency is to look for division and to seperate the world into 'us' and 'them'.
Every extremist dream of an idealised homogeneous society (everyone like them of course); whether we are talking about religious extremists, racial extremist or national extremist. In human history, that idea is the probably the most destructive fantasy ever sold; and millions have bought it. It is a dangerous idea that has no place in a modern society.
It is also a false idea that conflicts will magically disappear society will be at peace once it is 'purified' either somehow made religiously or ethnically homogeneous. Without religious or ethnic conflicts, there would be other conflicts. Violent conflicts exist even within societies without religious differences (may be Cultural Revolution China and Taliban Afghanistan are 2 examples on different extremes). All societies are human and conflicts are part of all human society.
Where I agree with you completely is that religion and ethnicity is historically a common cause for conflict. When we talk about religion or race we are talking about them as society's fault lines, and religion and race are particularly powerful fault lines that are easily turned into mass hysteria to be exploited by the power that be. Careful analysis of conflicts throughout history often find complex but usually logical drivers of conflicts: economic, political, personal; but those conflicts are often cloaked in the more emotionally convincing (and dare I say, more convenient) banners of religion and race.
What I am deliberately careful about is any response that amount to to replacing one fault line with a new fault line; and notwithstanding our positive intentions replacing one conflict with another. The reason is that once we set ourselves as an arbiter of what others can be or do or say or believe, we are setting up a conflict between our views, no matter how logical with their views no matter how misconceived. Criminal law still entail great amount of divisions and conflict, even when (after thousands of years of consensus building) everyone agrees certain behaviors to be wrong and to be subject to sanctions of society. Even then I wonder how much public order (e.g .why people tend not to murder or rape as they please) can be credited to the fear for the law? or is it out of enlightened self-control as a civised member of a modern society? I believe a lot of credit has to be given to the latter especially when you observe how people respond during extreme situations such as survivors of earthquake in Sichuan. (The same cannot be said always, the aftermath of Katrina comes to mind.)
The reason is that, from my perspective, the future of human survival depends on breaking down barriers. As globalization breaks down distance and political barriers, my chief concern is whether the human barrier can be broken down fast enough. Climate change is going to result in massive displacement of people because there will be losses and gains all over the world in terms of how livable the place is. If you look at the world's populations, they are congregated in the same places - usually in the river valleys or river deltas of major rivers - for historical reasons as determined by the technologies and politics from 1000 years ago. For that reason, they are not even concentrated in the most productive regions of the world by today's technology e.g. the great plains of North America, Brazil, Ukraine, Argentina and Canada produces large percentages of the world's food but they are not densely populated.
Hence, if you look at the areas where population pressure on the land is the greatest and then accelerating it through climate change, you can get a sense forboding that large numbers of people will need to move or hundreds of millions will die. The reason that keep people from moving are distance and political barriers. Political barriers are serious impediments to the natural distribution of people to resources. If you look at the Sino-Russian border, on one side you have population density of less than 10 per sq km; the otherside is more like 1000 per sq km. held by just a line on the map. If you dry up the harvests in the Ganges and Indus or the Yellow River by 50% you will have massive problems .. and the fact that Russia and Canada will be warmer, more productive and offset the loss in production will be of little comfort to those people and those countries.
So one way or the other, the people have to move or resources need to move. Either way, we need to be talking about removing barriers.
Monday, July 21, 2008
Beijing Airport Terminal 3 - recent experience
The Terminal 3 of Beijing International Capital Airport, one of the largest in the world with 986k square meter in total floor area, in many ways resemble that of Hong Kong International Airport. After all they are both designed by the same British architech, Norman Foster.
T3 is made up of a main passenger terminal (Terminal 3C), 2 satellite concourses (T3D and T3E). Check in is at T3C and all international flight arrive and leave at T3E. Connecting between them is the intra-terminal train.
My experience as a frequent traveller to Beijing has been one marred with many glitches especially with the intra-terminal train.
In several occasions since March 26, 2008, the train I boarded stoped mid-way and took unjustifiable long time to travel the 2 km stretch between T3C and T3E. In one occassion, there was smoke coming out from the electric cable powering the train.
In all incidents, there was not a single announcement to explain the cause or to comfort the passenger anxiety.
Another disappointment with the T3 is how the boarding gate is numbered. It is not intuitive for the passengers, especially those who are in a hurry, to locate the exact boarding gate. While I understand the logic of the numbering but the design of the airport boarding gate that spread out to two large and distant wings and the numbering system employed made it very un-traveller-friendly.
Lately, my departing fligts have suffered significant delay in departing averaging 1 and 1/2 hour due to air traffic control. I don't know if this is related to the tighter security imposed or attributable to other causes.
Few major improvements are noted: checking in is much quicker and there are a lot more immigration counters at traveller's service. They typically offer the travellers their best smile. Hope this will be continued after the Olympic game.
At the security check, one of the most stringent after USA, the staffs entrusted to do the security check are all young damsels. This is a big plus to mostly male travellers. One of my colleague comment that he does enjoy the brief body search which he finds rather sensual.
T3 is made up of a main passenger terminal (Terminal 3C), 2 satellite concourses (T3D and T3E). Check in is at T3C and all international flight arrive and leave at T3E. Connecting between them is the intra-terminal train.
My experience as a frequent traveller to Beijing has been one marred with many glitches especially with the intra-terminal train.
In several occasions since March 26, 2008, the train I boarded stoped mid-way and took unjustifiable long time to travel the 2 km stretch between T3C and T3E. In one occassion, there was smoke coming out from the electric cable powering the train.
In all incidents, there was not a single announcement to explain the cause or to comfort the passenger anxiety.
Another disappointment with the T3 is how the boarding gate is numbered. It is not intuitive for the passengers, especially those who are in a hurry, to locate the exact boarding gate. While I understand the logic of the numbering but the design of the airport boarding gate that spread out to two large and distant wings and the numbering system employed made it very un-traveller-friendly.
Lately, my departing fligts have suffered significant delay in departing averaging 1 and 1/2 hour due to air traffic control. I don't know if this is related to the tighter security imposed or attributable to other causes.
Few major improvements are noted: checking in is much quicker and there are a lot more immigration counters at traveller's service. They typically offer the travellers their best smile. Hope this will be continued after the Olympic game.
At the security check, one of the most stringent after USA, the staffs entrusted to do the security check are all young damsels. This is a big plus to mostly male travellers. One of my colleague comment that he does enjoy the brief body search which he finds rather sensual.
Friday, July 18, 2008
Globalization manifies the religious conflict
The statement that cause you rumminating is more of a dicta than a ratio. Frankly, I have not done any statistics to back up the assertion and the comment is made with instinct out of general observation and general knowledge of history.
My unscientific view is that the religious segtarianism and polarization have widened following the globalization in particular in the form of communication and transportation.
My observation is that religious conflict doesn't exist in a country where a particular religion has the hegemony, like those in South America, Saudi Arab and Japan.
Country where followers of different faiths are sizable and yet the country is stable without polarization are few in between. In Asia, Korea is exemplary where the Christians and Buddhists are at peace. Though Malaysia is without violence, the polarization does exist with government backed Islamization policy from 1980s.
Where followers of two competing faiths in a country are sizable, religion is always used as a cause or a pretext. Sri Lanka (Buddhism vs Hinduism), India (Hinduism vs Islam), Thailand (Buddhism vs Islam), Iraq (intra-Islam), Northern Ireland (intra-Christianity) are examples where the domestic religious segtarianism reaches the level of violence.
The world at large is dominated by the rivalry between the two great monotheistic tradition, represented by Islam and Judeo-Christianity, played out in the proxy conflict between Israel and Palestinan.
The scope of this conflict stretches from the islands in the Philippines and Indonesia to inland in Africa. The actors of this conflict reside in the cities in Europe and America as well as in the oasis town in Arab and villages in Asia.
This conflict is not new, it is millenium old. Yet the intensity of the rivalry between these two monotheistic faiths has taken a new chapter of accute intensity following the globalization.
Any incident with religious dimension (think of salman rushdie, Danish cartoon, collateral damage by American, 911, Palestinian retaliation against Israelis) whether domestic or international can quickly be turned into a much bigger religious rivalry and often civilizational clash supported and funded by an international network of supporters and sympathizer whether organized or individual.
This is not possible in the past to reach the current scale and intensity when the mode of communication is not instant and the mean of transportation is slowed. Thanks to cell phone, satelli
I am inclined to believe that the security check and liquid items limit imposed on me at airport can be traced to this religious segtarianism. We are just too polite not to admit it.
This is my argument that globalization has exarbated the religious conflict like never before in the world at large.
Religion itself arguably is not the cause, it is always the people, said many religious apologist and moderate. This is the same as the car is not the cause of accident but the driver.
Yet, didn't we regulate traffic rules and impose on the passenger the safety belt. The same applies to the practice of religion.
There has to be rules. It is not a restriction on freedom of idea, conscience or religion. It is the rules governing the practice of religions to make sure tolerance replaces violence and diversity replaces adversity.
My unscientific view is that the religious segtarianism and polarization have widened following the globalization in particular in the form of communication and transportation.
My observation is that religious conflict doesn't exist in a country where a particular religion has the hegemony, like those in South America, Saudi Arab and Japan.
Country where followers of different faiths are sizable and yet the country is stable without polarization are few in between. In Asia, Korea is exemplary where the Christians and Buddhists are at peace. Though Malaysia is without violence, the polarization does exist with government backed Islamization policy from 1980s.
Where followers of two competing faiths in a country are sizable, religion is always used as a cause or a pretext. Sri Lanka (Buddhism vs Hinduism), India (Hinduism vs Islam), Thailand (Buddhism vs Islam), Iraq (intra-Islam), Northern Ireland (intra-Christianity) are examples where the domestic religious segtarianism reaches the level of violence.
The world at large is dominated by the rivalry between the two great monotheistic tradition, represented by Islam and Judeo-Christianity, played out in the proxy conflict between Israel and Palestinan.
The scope of this conflict stretches from the islands in the Philippines and Indonesia to inland in Africa. The actors of this conflict reside in the cities in Europe and America as well as in the oasis town in Arab and villages in Asia.
This conflict is not new, it is millenium old. Yet the intensity of the rivalry between these two monotheistic faiths has taken a new chapter of accute intensity following the globalization.
Any incident with religious dimension (think of salman rushdie, Danish cartoon, collateral damage by American, 911, Palestinian retaliation against Israelis) whether domestic or international can quickly be turned into a much bigger religious rivalry and often civilizational clash supported and funded by an international network of supporters and sympathizer whether organized or individual.
This is not possible in the past to reach the current scale and intensity when the mode of communication is not instant and the mean of transportation is slowed. Thanks to cell phone, satelli
I am inclined to believe that the security check and liquid items limit imposed on me at airport can be traced to this religious segtarianism. We are just too polite not to admit it.
This is my argument that globalization has exarbated the religious conflict like never before in the world at large.
Religion itself arguably is not the cause, it is always the people, said many religious apologist and moderate. This is the same as the car is not the cause of accident but the driver.
Yet, didn't we regulate traffic rules and impose on the passenger the safety belt. The same applies to the practice of religion.
There has to be rules. It is not a restriction on freedom of idea, conscience or religion. It is the rules governing the practice of religions to make sure tolerance replaces violence and diversity replaces adversity.
Thursday, July 17, 2008
Confucianist Perspective of Barack Obama
A new post is coming! The past few days I have been ruminating on a remark from KY earlier, that "...history has not gathered sufficient number of success in enlightening mankind." That made me wonder how much of that statement is true because I am by nature, optimistic.
So ruminating is what I am doing, thinking in short bursts until I get interrupted or distracted, and will be happy to share my thoughts when they are (finally) coherent!
Meantime, last weekend we went on a short trip to Lake Skeneatheles one of the 'Finger Lakes' in upstate New York. I had an amazing experience swimming in the lake and its icy cold crystal clear waters. The water actually felt different more alive and energetic; and I was bouncing with energy after that.
I also had the opportunity to finish reading all the chapters of Barack Obama's Audacity of Hope that I'd skipped or skimmed through earlier. I must say its an intelligently sumptious and nutritious read. Every chapter is a powerful and well-written weave of personal anecdote, a masterful dissection of the prevailing arguments that both sides of the political spectrum hurl at one another and the public, always seeking to understand before shaving away the extreme, unrealistic or simply mistaken views, often emerging with a set of very plausible basic principles with which to move ahead. I was more impressed than ever.
Something else also came through. Amidst all the chatter in the media about Obama shifting to the centerist position and changing his positions tells me that they have not read his book. The candidate you see today is what he wrote about 2 years ago. He is a center-left and has always been. HRC gave him the cover to run from there (in substance) but he has been skillful enough to appeal to the idealism of the leftier fringes.
But above all, its the thinking style and personal qualities that shone through. I thought this is a voice I would like to listen to for year to come not because he has all the answers but because he offers a compelling reasoning of the challenges we face without dismissing either the difficulties or different views. The incorrigble Confucian in me finds the idea of leaders as a teacher and a guide a very attractive proposition.
So ruminating is what I am doing, thinking in short bursts until I get interrupted or distracted, and will be happy to share my thoughts when they are (finally) coherent!
Meantime, last weekend we went on a short trip to Lake Skeneatheles one of the 'Finger Lakes' in upstate New York. I had an amazing experience swimming in the lake and its icy cold crystal clear waters. The water actually felt different more alive and energetic; and I was bouncing with energy after that.
I also had the opportunity to finish reading all the chapters of Barack Obama's Audacity of Hope that I'd skipped or skimmed through earlier. I must say its an intelligently sumptious and nutritious read. Every chapter is a powerful and well-written weave of personal anecdote, a masterful dissection of the prevailing arguments that both sides of the political spectrum hurl at one another and the public, always seeking to understand before shaving away the extreme, unrealistic or simply mistaken views, often emerging with a set of very plausible basic principles with which to move ahead. I was more impressed than ever.
Something else also came through. Amidst all the chatter in the media about Obama shifting to the centerist position and changing his positions tells me that they have not read his book. The candidate you see today is what he wrote about 2 years ago. He is a center-left and has always been. HRC gave him the cover to run from there (in substance) but he has been skillful enough to appeal to the idealism of the leftier fringes.
But above all, its the thinking style and personal qualities that shone through. I thought this is a voice I would like to listen to for year to come not because he has all the answers but because he offers a compelling reasoning of the challenges we face without dismissing either the difficulties or different views. The incorrigble Confucian in me finds the idea of leaders as a teacher and a guide a very attractive proposition.
Thursday, July 10, 2008
Freedom, Accountability and the Thinking Being
My biology teacher from Form 3 says homosepiens means "thinking man" or in the modern understanding of the language "thinking person". But historically having independent thought was seen to be a dangerous idea.
The powers that be were worried, "What if they think the 'wrongly'?" or worse, "They will convince others of their 'wrong' ideas?". Hence, even as the shackles were loosened on the freedom of thought other controls remain to limit the freedom. To borrow (and twist) the words of Voltaire, man was born to think freely but everywhere he think only within the limits of his beliefs.
Most ideology - whether religious, political, social or intellectual - sought to separate the 'good' from the 'bad' and 'right' from 'wrong'. And there are various ways to control how people think: through the force of law and persecution on the one extreme, to peer pressure, to guilt and shame. Mostly the way we think is simply result of social conditioning. We were given a template view of reality and we simply ... stopped thinking. Most of us were simply lulled into unthinking ignorance.
I am reminded of a conversation with my new office-mate - a German chap named Kai. I do not remember what we were talking about but he told me that - above all else - the German education system is based on everyone thinking and acting based on their own decisions. Given their recent history, it is frowned upon to be agreeing or doing something just because someone else says so. I have not met enough Germans to make my own assessment of how well that is working in reality, but I believe it is laudable as a starting point.
So let me introduce a different perspective to your posting that there should be rules on religious freedom, I'd submit that rules limiting thinking or ideas (I put religion as an idea or thought) is actually the default setting for much of human history. The trouble starts when different groups try to impose their ideas on others. Intolerance cannot be distinguish by whether it is rooted in politics, race, social conditions or religion, for they all rely on division and mobilization of the unthinking and ignorant through fear and hatred by convincing them that they are more “right” than all the others.
And I believe the answer to intolerance and divisive ideology lies in the thinking being. The issue, my friend, is not that there is too much freedom of religious thinking and too little limits. On the contrary, my contention is that there is not enough thinking and hence, people get lulled by religion into conditioned reflexes and into imposing their own "limits" on what others should be allowed to think.
History has taught us again and again how dangerous the state of unthinking ignorance is. Any ideology be it religious, political, social or intellectual are mainly the creation of human thoughts and this state of unthinking ignorance is being exploited again and again to the present day causing the suffering of millions. Surely, one would think, that kind of outcome could not be 'right'. A note here: although I believe in 'larger' spiritual energies of wisdom and intelligence that are above you and me, but I find the practice of religions to be full of human follibies.
Liberal education in the sense of one that encourages wide-ranging intellectual exploration, encourages original thought, critical thinking and robust testing of ideas ... is actually a fairly old idea giving rise to many of the world's great philosophies. A liberal education is associated with the idea of an 'educated' or 'learned' person. Although it may be tougher or more lucrative to be a chartered accountant, one tend not to think of them when asked to describe someone "learned". (For lawyers, the answer is "yes of course"). But historically, being expected to think tended to be the preserve of the few and not for the person in the street.
Even the very idea that everyone should be educated is a relatively new concept. Even for a society where education is so revered and so key to worldly success as in ancient
Is there room for religion in this? Strangely, yes. I would argue but the approach to religion need to be secularized. True, there may be issues where logic and reason can go no further, and perhaps, one need to trust in a higher being. But religion lulls the discussion into unquestioning dogma and simply allows the divine to become an excuse for non-thinking and lack of human responsibility.
So my suggestion is to encourage more reasoned thinking/ action, intellectual exploration and personal responsibility for own actions; and at the same time, acceptance of questioning and debate (hence the possibility that one may be wrong), respect for differences (hence accepting moderation) and faith in humanity (hence get away from wanting to control and remake others). The key lies within the thinking person being responsible for his own thoughts and his own actions
Wednesday, July 9, 2008
Accountability of Religious Freedom
History tells us that the earlier European settlers in America were Christian sects persecuted by the mainstream Christianity way back in 17th century. It seems now that the descendants of the persecuted are now discriminating against the non co-religionist.
The story we have today from CNN was this American atheist soldier who sued Army for discrimination whilst serving for this country in Iraq. (see http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/07/08/atheist.soldier/index.html?iref=mpstoryview).
Though the Founder separates the church from the state at the time of establishing the Union, the modern history of USA, however, has shown significant religious inroad onto the administration of the state especially when the GOP is in power. This is mainly attributed to the religious base that GOP depends upon.
Whereas there are enactment almost everywhere for the freedom of religion or conscience, there are often too little protection for the minority who profess a non-mainstream faith. Thank goodness it is the USA, had the same occurred in many other countries, there is no legal recourse.
The point here is not about seeking a legal recourse. Rather, it is to ask some basic questions: whether the religion polarizes or unifies the peoples; whether religion is tolerant to accommodate rival faiths.
We often hear a lot of political correct answers. This piece is not one of them.
Almost all the monotheistic religions, from Judaism, Christianity to Islam, there is always a single God. Naturally as repeatedly proven by history, these faiths and their believers are competiting for converts and influence in society and government. They seek to entrench their religious interest at the expense of the minority or competing faiths. If they are in the minority or outside the establishment, they attempt to encroach upon and to wrest power from the established religion power base. These competition and rivalry is often intense and sometimes bloody.
Missionaries of any religions, however charitable and selfless their service, their ultimate, if not, unspoken goal is to bring the non-religionist to worship the God whom they pray. Admitedly there are moments of peace and harmony but the larger part of the history and the present remain chronically infected by the polarization by competing faiths and their followers. The Israel and Palestine conflict is one of the inter-religious polarization. Iraq is an example of intra-religious polarization.
Even the arguably the most peaceful religion, Buddhism, has spurred, some religious group of right wing militant organization in Sri Lanka. This is not to mention the less intense religious discrimination in the world today.
It is actually not inappropriate to view inter-faith competition, by almost natural extension, religious discrimination and/or persercution, in the same vein as the nation states rivalry, corporate competition and indeed individual dispute.
We have sophisticated public international law and institutions to regulate nation states as well as international bodies' conduct. We also have rich body of corporate laws and large number of agencies to enforce and regulate corporate behaviour. Equally, we have civil and criminal law to maintain a proper civil community.
Yet there is no law regulating religions. It is perhaps the freedom of religion that
everyone subscribe now that polarize the world and the people. Freedom without responsibility and accountability is like the freedom of one's fist that doesn't stop even at the other's nose. The responsibility and accountability are not owing to the God one worship alone.
Answering to one's God cannot be a passport to preach hatred against; to instill intolerance and contempt against; to advocate violence and sanction against the non co-religionist. There are different Gods and maybe no God to different persons and hence a common value system has to be in place.
To make sure that religion is not the cause of or pretext for polarization, children ought to be brought up in a system of common values of respecting and tolerating different practice of faiths. Only if the children of today and tommorrow are brought up this way, will we stop the vicious religion-inspired and sometime sanctioned polarization from setting in just like what the history have all along shown us.
Further regulation or least a code of conduct on preaching and missionary activities need to be propagated. Even as open a society as America, we have seen from the Rev. Jeremiah Wright's episode, which helped to spur so intense a debate of what is acceptable of preaching in the America. Without responsibility, who knows even the churches of the free world today may become the religious fundamentalist in the Middle East.
We must recognize the constant threat of religious polarization is as critical and as pressing as environmental or humanitarian issues. Avoiding this topic is sure to see many more years of human suffering and casualty.
The world today can do something about this. As much as how an international charter has given the modern world the concept of the freedom of religion, there ought to be now another international charter regulating the conduct and behaviour of religious activities of faith-based organizations and governments.
We call it the Accountability of Religious Freedom!
The story we have today from CNN was this American atheist soldier who sued Army for discrimination whilst serving for this country in Iraq. (see http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/07/08/atheist.soldier/index.html?iref=mpstoryview).
Though the Founder separates the church from the state at the time of establishing the Union, the modern history of USA, however, has shown significant religious inroad onto the administration of the state especially when the GOP is in power. This is mainly attributed to the religious base that GOP depends upon.
Whereas there are enactment almost everywhere for the freedom of religion or conscience, there are often too little protection for the minority who profess a non-mainstream faith. Thank goodness it is the USA, had the same occurred in many other countries, there is no legal recourse.
The point here is not about seeking a legal recourse. Rather, it is to ask some basic questions: whether the religion polarizes or unifies the peoples; whether religion is tolerant to accommodate rival faiths.
We often hear a lot of political correct answers. This piece is not one of them.
Almost all the monotheistic religions, from Judaism, Christianity to Islam, there is always a single God. Naturally as repeatedly proven by history, these faiths and their believers are competiting for converts and influence in society and government. They seek to entrench their religious interest at the expense of the minority or competing faiths. If they are in the minority or outside the establishment, they attempt to encroach upon and to wrest power from the established religion power base. These competition and rivalry is often intense and sometimes bloody.
Missionaries of any religions, however charitable and selfless their service, their ultimate, if not, unspoken goal is to bring the non-religionist to worship the God whom they pray. Admitedly there are moments of peace and harmony but the larger part of the history and the present remain chronically infected by the polarization by competing faiths and their followers. The Israel and Palestine conflict is one of the inter-religious polarization. Iraq is an example of intra-religious polarization.
Even the arguably the most peaceful religion, Buddhism, has spurred, some religious group of right wing militant organization in Sri Lanka. This is not to mention the less intense religious discrimination in the world today.
It is actually not inappropriate to view inter-faith competition, by almost natural extension, religious discrimination and/or persercution, in the same vein as the nation states rivalry, corporate competition and indeed individual dispute.
We have sophisticated public international law and institutions to regulate nation states as well as international bodies' conduct. We also have rich body of corporate laws and large number of agencies to enforce and regulate corporate behaviour. Equally, we have civil and criminal law to maintain a proper civil community.
Yet there is no law regulating religions. It is perhaps the freedom of religion that
everyone subscribe now that polarize the world and the people. Freedom without responsibility and accountability is like the freedom of one's fist that doesn't stop even at the other's nose. The responsibility and accountability are not owing to the God one worship alone.
Answering to one's God cannot be a passport to preach hatred against; to instill intolerance and contempt against; to advocate violence and sanction against the non co-religionist. There are different Gods and maybe no God to different persons and hence a common value system has to be in place.
To make sure that religion is not the cause of or pretext for polarization, children ought to be brought up in a system of common values of respecting and tolerating different practice of faiths. Only if the children of today and tommorrow are brought up this way, will we stop the vicious religion-inspired and sometime sanctioned polarization from setting in just like what the history have all along shown us.
Further regulation or least a code of conduct on preaching and missionary activities need to be propagated. Even as open a society as America, we have seen from the Rev. Jeremiah Wright's episode, which helped to spur so intense a debate of what is acceptable of preaching in the America. Without responsibility, who knows even the churches of the free world today may become the religious fundamentalist in the Middle East.
We must recognize the constant threat of religious polarization is as critical and as pressing as environmental or humanitarian issues. Avoiding this topic is sure to see many more years of human suffering and casualty.
The world today can do something about this. As much as how an international charter has given the modern world the concept of the freedom of religion, there ought to be now another international charter regulating the conduct and behaviour of religious activities of faith-based organizations and governments.
We call it the Accountability of Religious Freedom!
Tuesday, July 8, 2008
Malaysian ABC = Anwar, Bala and Chua
The typical Ali, Bala and Chong are a poor abandoned lot indeed. And we are not talking of just the poor rural Chinese or Indians.
For all races in modern Malaysia, there are fewer and fewer opportunity to get ahead. If you are in business, business opportunities can be found only at the margins. In the old days, one can find opportunity in mining, timber, rubber or construction but now they are run by conglomerates or given to cronies.
Well-paying jobs are becoming rare in the factories because of competition from China. Elsewhere they require higher and higher qualifications and skills. On the other hand, the quality of education appears to be deteriorating. Government schools are of poor quality and the same can be said for higher education. So much for affirmative action when the prize is sub-standard education. Even as parents flock to send their children to Chinese medium schools, they too are not moving ahead with the times - lets just say the education is not the equal of what children get in Singapore or in Australia. Even then I hear that in smaller towns children drop out of school because they simply lose hope in the value of education. One cannot really blame them for thinking that when they see parents leave their jobs in the bank to be hawkers to earn more money. And good teachers stop teaching to open tuition centers because they need to make more money.
For the middle class, the road ahead just gets steeper and steeper. Malaysia is becoming a 2-tier society; there are 2 standards to almost everything one that is for everyone and the other you pay for. Roads, schools, hospitals, sports facilities, public transport, law and order, media etc. there is one set for the public at large (which is getting worse and worse and trending towards 3rd world level) or the one you pay good money for (which is trending towards first world).
If you are middle class and wanting to maintain your living standards, you pay and pay. First its the car (because the public transport is unacceptable quality), then its private schools, private hospitals, universities, social security/retirement or even to use sports facilities or a swimming pool - all of which you need to pay because the government version is in shambles - toll roads (partly because public roads have been taken away and given to cronies to toll), gated communities (because security outside is in shambles), even to watch TV you need to buy Astro . So the middle class see more and more of their quality of life taken away and turned into something that they have to pay for, and usually that means paying some cronies.
It saddens me to see many middle class (often, Chinese) parents who were managers and professionals but for whom the total sum of their entire life's savings went to pay for higher education for their children (plus a house if lucky). And then those same children now work twice as many hours only to (effectively) make less money their parents once did because they need to spend so much more just to stay alive. I wonder what is the real meaning of life in modern M'sia and if that's much of a life. And we are talking about the lucky ones. Almost everyone I know has an exit plan - Australia, Singapore, Canada, USA or New Zealand.
You would agree something is not right. Perhaps even more than racial politics, loss of civil rights and crony capitalism, the past 25 years has debased the whole notion of the meaning of life in Malaysia. That is the real and everyday tragedy of corruption.
The political system is just another symptom of how Malaysia is missing so much of the sense of common purpose and common decency. Its the comfortable, forgiving and friendly Malaysia where there was a sense of principle, humour, fairness and community.
So while we are rivetted with Anwar, Bala and Chua for good reasons, the level of debate can - and need to be - elevated to a higher level. One wonders who has the moral authority to unite the people provide leadership to fix what really matters.
You would agree something is not right. Perhaps even more than racial politics, loss of civil rights and crony capitalism, the past 25 years has debased the whole notion of the meaning of life in Malaysia. That is the real and everyday tragedy of corruption.
The political system is just another symptom of how Malaysia is missing so much of the sense of common purpose and common decency. Its the comfortable, forgiving and friendly Malaysia where there was a sense of principle, humour, fairness and community.
So while we are rivetted with Anwar, Bala and Chua for good reasons, the level of debate can - and need to be - elevated to a higher level. One wonders who has the moral authority to unite the people provide leadership to fix what really matters.
Friday, July 4, 2008
Two DPMs and a 2Ss- a saiful and a sodomy
The Star, a Malaysian English newspaper, reported on July 24 that Mohd Saiful Bukhari Azlan, the sodomy accuser against Anwar visited Deputy Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak at the latter’s home to seek his view a few days before he lodged a police report against Datuk Seri Anwar Ibrahim. ( see http://www.thestar.com.my/news/story.asp?file=/2008/7/4/nation/21741173&sec=nation)
The Malaysian public are a bunch of lucky fellas and yet they are still ungrateful to the government of the day. The above report reveals how caring and how compassionate the government minister is? Knowing his boss was to pass on the batton to him, Najib leads by example.
Najib, despite holding the second most senior political office in Malaysia and despite his wife being implicated in a gruesome murder in a statutory declaration, still found time to entertain visit from a confessor of sex abuse or a confessor of illicit sexual practice and gave him personal counsel. Kudos to Najib before we revert to criticising him.
On Najib's advice to the poor Saiful, the poor saiful has knocked on to the wrong door. Instead of getting some common sense advise like what every Ali, Bala and Chong in the Malaysian streets would do to a person who has a crime committed against him or her, that is, going to lodge the police report, the YAB, said it was up to him.
Not being trained as a counselor or a lawyer, Najib advice to the poor saiful can be said to be either inapt for lack of common sense or condescending to the intellect of a university dropout.
Maybe the Malaysian government ministers are inapt or condescending in dealing with these sort of uncommon situation, the fact of the matter is that we cannot take away the fact that their caring attitude in openning the their door to counsel sex victims is something they deserve applause.
Perhaps Najib shouldn't stop at counselling at Saiful alone. He should offer himself at says, Lorong Haji Taib, counseling other sexual victims or illicit sexual practictioner.
It is also noted that the DPM office is opened to any scholarship aspirant never mind that the DPM is not the Minister of Education (you may wonder what the MOE is doing that DPM has to do his job)and never mind that the aspirant is a university dropout. Such a compassionate government is indeed rare (much better than the Bush's no child left behind legislation), such much kudos we must give to the government, particularly Najib.
On Saiful, the Malaysian has a lot to learn from him - never mind that one is a university dropout, just goes to the DPM office and ask for the scholarship. Even if one fails, one still get a photoshoot with the power-that-be as a memorabilia.
Certainly if one has ever engaged in any illicit sexual practice such as oral sex besides the anal, which is also a crime in Malaysia and feel the need to repent or simply want to live by the rule of law, one is free to knock on Najib's home to get personal counsel.
Finally, let's deal with whether the sodomy allegation was politically conspired, as Anwar claimed. Najib's admission of Saiful's visiting him days before lodging the police report, ummmm, do give rise to suspicion of political conspiracy, using the standard among every Ali, Bala and Chong (aiya Bala is a sensitive name now) in the Malaysian streets. No question Najib's admission was tactically smart to pre-empt Anwar's allegation of conspiracy before Anwar reveals the Najib-Saiful meeting. It is already sensational to allege a former DPM the second time of sodomy! It is even more sensantional for a sitting DPM to meet with the sodomy accuser before the allegation goes public! don't you think so?
The Malaysian public are a bunch of lucky fellas and yet they are still ungrateful to the government of the day. The above report reveals how caring and how compassionate the government minister is? Knowing his boss was to pass on the batton to him, Najib leads by example.
Najib, despite holding the second most senior political office in Malaysia and despite his wife being implicated in a gruesome murder in a statutory declaration, still found time to entertain visit from a confessor of sex abuse or a confessor of illicit sexual practice and gave him personal counsel. Kudos to Najib before we revert to criticising him.
On Najib's advice to the poor Saiful, the poor saiful has knocked on to the wrong door. Instead of getting some common sense advise like what every Ali, Bala and Chong in the Malaysian streets would do to a person who has a crime committed against him or her, that is, going to lodge the police report, the YAB, said it was up to him.
Not being trained as a counselor or a lawyer, Najib advice to the poor saiful can be said to be either inapt for lack of common sense or condescending to the intellect of a university dropout.
Maybe the Malaysian government ministers are inapt or condescending in dealing with these sort of uncommon situation, the fact of the matter is that we cannot take away the fact that their caring attitude in openning the their door to counsel sex victims is something they deserve applause.
Perhaps Najib shouldn't stop at counselling at Saiful alone. He should offer himself at says, Lorong Haji Taib, counseling other sexual victims or illicit sexual practictioner.
It is also noted that the DPM office is opened to any scholarship aspirant never mind that the DPM is not the Minister of Education (you may wonder what the MOE is doing that DPM has to do his job)and never mind that the aspirant is a university dropout. Such a compassionate government is indeed rare (much better than the Bush's no child left behind legislation), such much kudos we must give to the government, particularly Najib.
On Saiful, the Malaysian has a lot to learn from him - never mind that one is a university dropout, just goes to the DPM office and ask for the scholarship. Even if one fails, one still get a photoshoot with the power-that-be as a memorabilia.
Certainly if one has ever engaged in any illicit sexual practice such as oral sex besides the anal, which is also a crime in Malaysia and feel the need to repent or simply want to live by the rule of law, one is free to knock on Najib's home to get personal counsel.
Finally, let's deal with whether the sodomy allegation was politically conspired, as Anwar claimed. Najib's admission of Saiful's visiting him days before lodging the police report, ummmm, do give rise to suspicion of political conspiracy, using the standard among every Ali, Bala and Chong (aiya Bala is a sensitive name now) in the Malaysian streets. No question Najib's admission was tactically smart to pre-empt Anwar's allegation of conspiracy before Anwar reveals the Najib-Saiful meeting. It is already sensational to allege a former DPM the second time of sodomy! It is even more sensantional for a sitting DPM to meet with the sodomy accuser before the allegation goes public! don't you think so?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)