Wow, I just read a first-person piece describing the struggle of rural people and their experience growing up in China. Entitled, "I fought for 18 years to have a cup of coffee with you", it really hit me hard.
In related news, the United Nations Film Festival is showing a documentary on rural China called Restoring the Light. Made by Carol Liu, a Stanford alum ('05).
TODAY (Wed, Oct 26) at 5:15 PM
Stanford Medical School (Li Ka Shing Building)
Room: Alway M114
More info at http://www.restoringthelight.com/
Wednesday, October 26, 2011
Tuesday, October 25, 2011
When the tide turns
ATTN: Russia and China
RE: "Syrian Opposition Calls for Protection from Crackdown" from NYTimes
When the popular movement triumphs, how do you think the people of Syria and their newly-elected government will receive you? The populace knows you are stymieing efforts at the United Nations to protect human lives in Syria. (See: http://wapo.st/rKdVMg)
It may behoove you to support the people working to peacefully secure their rights, rather than a regime that brutally suppresses a non-violent movement with bullets and tanks. Moreover, given the reasonable nature of the Syrian protestors, can you really justify supporting Assad to your own population? Is there any moral grounding for your actions, other than naked self-interest?
Even if you view this through the geopolitical lens of national interest, a weakened autocrat sitting on a tinderbox won't be a useful partner in the long run. He may be more pliant, but he will also be less able to support your initiatives or guarantee stability. Indeed, Assad's reputation on the world stage and in the region have already been severely undermined. In contrast, an empowered and legitimate government grateful for international support in the Syrian people's time of need will be much more amenable to working with you and would welcome your future investments.
Choose wisely.
URLs:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/26/world/middleeast/syria.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/russia-china-block-syria-resolution-at-un/2011/10/04/gIQArCFBML_story.html
RE: "Syrian Opposition Calls for Protection from Crackdown" from NYTimes
When the popular movement triumphs, how do you think the people of Syria and their newly-elected government will receive you? The populace knows you are stymieing efforts at the United Nations to protect human lives in Syria. (See: http://wapo.st/rKdVMg)
It may behoove you to support the people working to peacefully secure their rights, rather than a regime that brutally suppresses a non-violent movement with bullets and tanks. Moreover, given the reasonable nature of the Syrian protestors, can you really justify supporting Assad to your own population? Is there any moral grounding for your actions, other than naked self-interest?
Even if you view this through the geopolitical lens of national interest, a weakened autocrat sitting on a tinderbox won't be a useful partner in the long run. He may be more pliant, but he will also be less able to support your initiatives or guarantee stability. Indeed, Assad's reputation on the world stage and in the region have already been severely undermined. In contrast, an empowered and legitimate government grateful for international support in the Syrian people's time of need will be much more amenable to working with you and would welcome your future investments.
Choose wisely.
URLs:
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/10/26/world/middleeast/syria.html
http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/russia-china-block-syria-resolution-at-un/2011/10/04/gIQArCFBML_story.html
少管閒事、瓦上霜
The story of Yue Yue, the Chinese toddler who was struck on the road, then summarily ignored by 18 passers-by before being hit again by another vehicle, has brought to a head an issue that I've been pondering about for a while. It reflects the real problem in China today, which is one of ethics.
In Chinese society today, there is a lack of concern for the fate of others. This is paralleled by an absence of a civic culture, a certain sense of public-spiritedness. Instead, it's all about "me, my, mine" and what I want. We desperately need something different.
Forced public action is not the way -- that's just coercion, and is ultimately ineffective. (This is why Communism rings so hollow today). Instead, we must change hearts and minds, awakening people's loving-kindness and come together to exercise compassion for others. Only that kind of normative transformation, undertaken freely and with good will, is sustainable in the long-run, and can permanently alter society for the better.
Otherwise, what we're left with is this barren landscape entirely bereft of humanity. Yet (ironically) this has been a historical problem with Chinese people. The critiques of this abdication of responsibility for other human beings became quite sharp in the modern era -- for instance, in the literature touching on issues of social justice in the late 19th and early 20th centuries.
But the major difference is that at least in the past, we had certain traditional obligations to others -- to our parents, our siblings, our other relatives -- that kept us from being completely selfish prigs. We knew how to look beyond ourselves. There were also proper ways of behaving toward others in society. Today, it seems egocentricism reigns, and self-enrichment is the only watchword.
We can blame the people involved, but a serious part of the problem is related to governance. If a government fundamentally does not respect the rights of individuals and believes they can simply be trampled and tossed aside, how can we expect it to effectively inculcate positive social values? If the government itself is just fine when millions of people are displaced and their homes demolished; or when people should be squashed for the sake of "development," any admonition to act differently rings hollow. If the government treats people as resources to be pushed around and moved however the center sees fit; if it places no value on the lives of Chinese; if it doesn't care about individuals, but always views things in the lens of "the mass of people," then how can it possibly promote sensitive actions at the personal level?
If the government's position is that fundamentally, human lives don't matter all that much, and can be sacrificed for other objectives however the Party sees fit, is it a surprise that all levels of society see this and fall into the same ranks that disrespect and denigrate human lives?
So now it falls upon social organizations to teach and to share how we might care for others. But perhaps this will actually be a more effective program, because any action necessarily becomes a voluntary effort. And therein lies the strength of such a social movement: people choose to act benevolently. They now consciously strive to be more generous, expansive, broad-minded and compassionate. And that act of choosing is important, because it means the issue has been considered and is now being acted upon. It takes place in a "mindful" way, which is a crucial step in learning to care for others, and then applying these principles in real life.
From the Guardian:
少管閒事
"The fundamental problem, in my view, lies in one word that describes a state of mind: shaoguanxianshi, meaning don't get involved if it's not your business. In our culture, there's a lack of willingness to show compassion to strangers. We are brought up to show kindness to people in our network of guanxi, family and friends and business associates, but not particularly to strangers, especially if such kindness may potentially damage your interest.
各人自掃門前雪，莫管他家瓦上霜
Fei Xiaotong, China's first sociologist, described Chinese people's moral and ethical characteristics in his book, From the Soil, in the middle of the last century. He pointed out that selfishness is the most serious shortcoming of the Chinese. "When we think of selfishness, we think of the proverb 'Each person should sweep the snow from his own doorsteps and should not fret about the frost on his neighbour's roof,'" wrote Fei. He offered the example of how the Chinese of that period threw rubbish out of their windows without the slightest public concern. Things are much the same today.
...
China's moral crisis doesn't just manifest itself in personal life but also in business practice and many other areas. The high-profile "poisoned milk powder" case and the scandal of using "gutter oil" as cooking oil have shocked and disgusted people around the world. Last year an article, "Why have Chinese lost their sense of morality?", in which the author tried to find an explanation, was widely read. He reasoned that China has introduced the concept of a market economy from the west but failed to import the corresponding ethics, while the traditional moral principles of China no longer fit the market economy model.
There's a lot of sense in that. I believe that the lack of a value system is also deepening the moral crisis. Before Mao, the indifference towards others once so accurately described by Fei existed but was mitigated by a traditional moral and religious system. That system was then almost destroyed by the communists, especially during the 10 mad years of the Cultural Revolution from 1966 to 1976. Nowadays communism, the ideology that dominated Chinese people's lives like a religion, has also more or less collapsed. As a result, there's a spiritual vacuum that cannot be filled by the mere opportunity of money-making."
URLs:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/oct/22/china-nation-cold-hearts
http://blogs.wsj.com/chinarealtime/2011/10/18/would-good-samaritan-law-have-helped-little-girl/
Note: This is the Chinese government that also jails lawyers who wish to help people and declares them subversive. Are we really surprised? http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/10/24/2470019/china-cuts-access-to-lawyer-who.html
In Chinese society today, there is a lack of concern for the fate of others. This is paralleled by an absence of a civic culture, a certain sense of public-spiritedness. Instead, it's all about "me, my, mine" and what I want. We desperately need something different.
Forced public action is not the way -- that's just coercion, and is ultimately ineffective. (This is why Communism rings so hollow today). Instead, we must change hearts and minds, awakening people's loving-kindness and come together to exercise compassion for others. Only that kind of normative transformation, undertaken freely and with good will, is sustainable in the long-run, and can permanently alter society for the better.
Otherwise, what we're left with is this barren landscape entirely bereft of humanity. Yet (ironically) this has been a historical problem with Chinese people. The critiques of this abdication of responsibility for other human beings became quite sharp in the modern era -- for instance, in the literature touching on issues of social justice in the late 19th and early 20th centuries.
But the major difference is that at least in the past, we had certain traditional obligations to others -- to our parents, our siblings, our other relatives -- that kept us from being completely selfish prigs. We knew how to look beyond ourselves. There were also proper ways of behaving toward others in society. Today, it seems egocentricism reigns, and self-enrichment is the only watchword.
We can blame the people involved, but a serious part of the problem is related to governance. If a government fundamentally does not respect the rights of individuals and believes they can simply be trampled and tossed aside, how can we expect it to effectively inculcate positive social values? If the government itself is just fine when millions of people are displaced and their homes demolished; or when people should be squashed for the sake of "development," any admonition to act differently rings hollow. If the government treats people as resources to be pushed around and moved however the center sees fit; if it places no value on the lives of Chinese; if it doesn't care about individuals, but always views things in the lens of "the mass of people," then how can it possibly promote sensitive actions at the personal level?
If the government's position is that fundamentally, human lives don't matter all that much, and can be sacrificed for other objectives however the Party sees fit, is it a surprise that all levels of society see this and fall into the same ranks that disrespect and denigrate human lives?
So now it falls upon social organizations to teach and to share how we might care for others. But perhaps this will actually be a more effective program, because any action necessarily becomes a voluntary effort. And therein lies the strength of such a social movement: people choose to act benevolently. They now consciously strive to be more generous, expansive, broad-minded and compassionate. And that act of choosing is important, because it means the issue has been considered and is now being acted upon. It takes place in a "mindful" way, which is a crucial step in learning to care for others, and then applying these principles in real life.
From the Guardian:
少管閒事
"The fundamental problem, in my view, lies in one word that describes a state of mind: shaoguanxianshi, meaning don't get involved if it's not your business. In our culture, there's a lack of willingness to show compassion to strangers. We are brought up to show kindness to people in our network of guanxi, family and friends and business associates, but not particularly to strangers, especially if such kindness may potentially damage your interest.
各人自掃門前雪，莫管他家瓦上霜
Fei Xiaotong, China's first sociologist, described Chinese people's moral and ethical characteristics in his book, From the Soil, in the middle of the last century. He pointed out that selfishness is the most serious shortcoming of the Chinese. "When we think of selfishness, we think of the proverb 'Each person should sweep the snow from his own doorsteps and should not fret about the frost on his neighbour's roof,'" wrote Fei. He offered the example of how the Chinese of that period threw rubbish out of their windows without the slightest public concern. Things are much the same today.
...
China's moral crisis doesn't just manifest itself in personal life but also in business practice and many other areas. The high-profile "poisoned milk powder" case and the scandal of using "gutter oil" as cooking oil have shocked and disgusted people around the world. Last year an article, "Why have Chinese lost their sense of morality?", in which the author tried to find an explanation, was widely read. He reasoned that China has introduced the concept of a market economy from the west but failed to import the corresponding ethics, while the traditional moral principles of China no longer fit the market economy model.
There's a lot of sense in that. I believe that the lack of a value system is also deepening the moral crisis. Before Mao, the indifference towards others once so accurately described by Fei existed but was mitigated by a traditional moral and religious system. That system was then almost destroyed by the communists, especially during the 10 mad years of the Cultural Revolution from 1966 to 1976. Nowadays communism, the ideology that dominated Chinese people's lives like a religion, has also more or less collapsed. As a result, there's a spiritual vacuum that cannot be filled by the mere opportunity of money-making."
URLs:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2011/oct/22/china-nation-cold-hearts
http://blogs.wsj.com/chinarealtime/2011/10/18/would-good-samaritan-law-have-helped-little-girl/
Note: This is the Chinese government that also jails lawyers who wish to help people and declares them subversive. Are we really surprised? http://www.miamiherald.com/2011/10/24/2470019/china-cuts-access-to-lawyer-who.html
Tuesday, October 18, 2011
The 5Rs of Common Thread
Sign the Patagonia pledge to not buy something if you don’t need it. Reduce, repair, reuse, recycle, reimagine! It's a pretty innovative/courageous/risky/bold stand from a clothing company. Definitely requires a re-imagining of the business model -- but could also produce some very compelling stories and help to cement loyalty.
"The Common Threads Initiative addresses a significant part of today’s environmental problem—the footprint of our stuff. This program first asks customers to not buy something if they don’t need it.”
—Yvon Chouinard, Patagonia founder & owner
http://www.patagonia.com/us/common-threads/
I wonder if there's a way to get Da Ai Technology into a partnership as well ...
"The Common Threads Initiative addresses a significant part of today’s environmental problem—the footprint of our stuff. This program first asks customers to not buy something if they don’t need it.”
—Yvon Chouinard, Patagonia founder & owner
http://www.patagonia.com/us/common-threads/
I wonder if there's a way to get Da Ai Technology into a partnership as well ...
Sunday, October 16, 2011
Reminder: DON'T BE EVIL
On October 25th and 26th, Access will be hosting the Silicon Valley Human Rights Conference (https://www.rightscon.org) in San Francisco. The main focus of the conference is to examine and explore how the high-tech industry can better plan for and manage the emerging human rights implications of their technologies. The event is designed as an exchange of experiences, learnings and best practices between tech companies, grassroots activists, technologists, civil society organizations, academics and governments.
Sponsored by Google, Facebook, Yahoo, Skype and Mozilla, among others, in partnership with civil society organizations.
Also, ATTN CISCO: Don't be a moral pygmy. Live up to the Valley's ethos. These companies aren't just businesses; they are the projections of our ideals and beliefs, our dreams and values. We choose to work for them because we believe they are helping to create a world we want to live in. Yes, we engineers are allowed to say that. Thank you, that is all.
Watch at least 0:20-0:45 for the relevant quote.
Sponsored by Google, Facebook, Yahoo, Skype and Mozilla, among others, in partnership with civil society organizations.
Also, ATTN CISCO: Don't be a moral pygmy. Live up to the Valley's ethos. These companies aren't just businesses; they are the projections of our ideals and beliefs, our dreams and values. We choose to work for them because we believe they are helping to create a world we want to live in. Yes, we engineers are allowed to say that. Thank you, that is all.
Watch at least 0:20-0:45 for the relevant quote.
Saturday, October 15, 2011
Tiger Cubs, Tiger Tiger Cubs & American Battle Hymns
I started reading Amy Chua's book, "Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother" and I suddenly realized that she's not the voice of our parents' generation, the people who are thought of as stereotypical "tiger moms." Chua is actually the voice of *our* generation.
When she talks about her childhood and upbringing, or reflects back on her life choices, she articulates the concerns and hopes and fears people like us have. She grew up in a conservative (Chinese/Fujianese) household, but chose an independent, though high-achieving, route. Her tone, her insights, her wry sense of humor -- it all sounds like *us.* It's definitely not the way our parents speak or communicate.
Chua's explanation of Asian parenting doesn't come from the perspective of a tiger mom; it comes from the perspective of a tiger cub analyzing "Asian parent" behavior, and then choosing to apply it in the lives of her own children. This style of parenting comes about not because it's the only way she knows how (as it would be with immigrant parents), but as a rational choice.
So even if her daughters, Sophia and Lulu, are close in age to us, they are actually more akin to our (future) children -- the third generation in America. The life stories that my peers and I relate to aren't theirs, but Chua's. (Lawyer mom and Jewish professor dad in New Haven? Definitely not something we are familiar with.) And given her experience growing up in America, she is more refined and sophisticated in what she chooses to do and how to justify it than your average Asian mom.
While I don't necessarily agree with all of Chua's prescriptions for parenting in the first few chapters, I do find much of the diagnosis compelling. The author's voice is unmistakably ours.
You can say "Battle Hymn" is a book about Chinese parenting, but even just a few pages in, I can already recognize it is an unequivocally American work.
#secondgenABC
When she talks about her childhood and upbringing, or reflects back on her life choices, she articulates the concerns and hopes and fears people like us have. She grew up in a conservative (Chinese/Fujianese) household, but chose an independent, though high-achieving, route. Her tone, her insights, her wry sense of humor -- it all sounds like *us.* It's definitely not the way our parents speak or communicate.
Chua's explanation of Asian parenting doesn't come from the perspective of a tiger mom; it comes from the perspective of a tiger cub analyzing "Asian parent" behavior, and then choosing to apply it in the lives of her own children. This style of parenting comes about not because it's the only way she knows how (as it would be with immigrant parents), but as a rational choice.
Author and professor Amy Chua
So even if her daughters, Sophia and Lulu, are close in age to us, they are actually more akin to our (future) children -- the third generation in America. The life stories that my peers and I relate to aren't theirs, but Chua's. (Lawyer mom and Jewish professor dad in New Haven? Definitely not something we are familiar with.) And given her experience growing up in America, she is more refined and sophisticated in what she chooses to do and how to justify it than your average Asian mom.
While I don't necessarily agree with all of Chua's prescriptions for parenting in the first few chapters, I do find much of the diagnosis compelling. The author's voice is unmistakably ours.
You can say "Battle Hymn" is a book about Chinese parenting, but even just a few pages in, I can already recognize it is an unequivocally American work.
#secondgenABC
You've got to clean up after yourself
Today in The New York Times, another article about "Occupy Wall Street" that jogs some thinking. The police are moving protesters aside, so the walkways can be cleaned. Afterwards, the protesters are welcome to return, but sleeping bags and tents will not be allowed back in.
The issue of litter and filthy sidewalks might seem pedestrian, but in a way, it may symbolize a lot more.
The challenge by the police, and the attempts to rise to the occasion and clean their own mess can be seen as a test: if the so-called rabble here can actually be constructive instead of destructive; if they can show that they are not simply a bunch of "dirty hippies" or "messy socialists," then not only will they be allowed to continue the demonstration in the manner they see fit (with those tents and sleeping bags allowed back in), but even more importantly, with greater public support.
No one said change has to be disorderly. Socialist vandals are scary precisely because they cause chaos. In demonstrations past (think G8 or WTO), some of more idiotic individuals revel in it. But that so-called 99% includes middle class people, and they do not relish disorder.
This is therefore a litmus test for "Occupy Wall Street." Can you stop the destructive imbeciles among you, those people who have no civic regard and no sense of public-spiritedness, who litter with abandon and break things, just because they feel vengeful, annoyed, or simply malicious. Those people are as much about "me me me" and self-gratification and rejection of social norms as the high-fallutin' CEOs on Wall Street.
So this battle's one for the middle class. You, "occupiers" -- can you show that you can make this arrangement last? Do you have enough respect and discipline to not just be an angry mob that leaves trash and destruction and discomfort in its wake? Do you have decency and concern for others? Without this, how do you expect to gain the trust of the common people.
Oh, there may be proposals for people to act for the greater good, but I fear those ideas may be shouted down by the ass holes among them, and the thing will degenerate into the lowest-common denominator of every-man-for-himself-except-we're-mad-at-Wall-Street-too. When the Left and the Radicals can show a modicum of care for others in their midst, and for the land and public areas that are shared by everybody; when it's not the pot-smokers and unruly, but the studious and well-behaved, then this 99% idiom might actually convince the center to join in.
This battle for cleanliness and the resolve to clean is really a battle for this nascent movement. Let's hope the extremists don't win.
Facing Eviction, Protesters Begin Park Cleanup
The issue of litter and filthy sidewalks might seem pedestrian, but in a way, it may symbolize a lot more.
The challenge by the police, and the attempts to rise to the occasion and clean their own mess can be seen as a test: if the so-called rabble here can actually be constructive instead of destructive; if they can show that they are not simply a bunch of "dirty hippies" or "messy socialists," then not only will they be allowed to continue the demonstration in the manner they see fit (with those tents and sleeping bags allowed back in), but even more importantly, with greater public support.
No one said change has to be disorderly. Socialist vandals are scary precisely because they cause chaos. In demonstrations past (think G8 or WTO), some of more idiotic individuals revel in it. But that so-called 99% includes middle class people, and they do not relish disorder.
This is therefore a litmus test for "Occupy Wall Street." Can you stop the destructive imbeciles among you, those people who have no civic regard and no sense of public-spiritedness, who litter with abandon and break things, just because they feel vengeful, annoyed, or simply malicious. Those people are as much about "me me me" and self-gratification and rejection of social norms as the high-fallutin' CEOs on Wall Street.
So this battle's one for the middle class. You, "occupiers" -- can you show that you can make this arrangement last? Do you have enough respect and discipline to not just be an angry mob that leaves trash and destruction and discomfort in its wake? Do you have decency and concern for others? Without this, how do you expect to gain the trust of the common people.
Oh, there may be proposals for people to act for the greater good, but I fear those ideas may be shouted down by the ass holes among them, and the thing will degenerate into the lowest-common denominator of every-man-for-himself-except-we're-mad-at-Wall-Street-too. When the Left and the Radicals can show a modicum of care for others in their midst, and for the land and public areas that are shared by everybody; when it's not the pot-smokers and unruly, but the studious and well-behaved, then this 99% idiom might actually convince the center to join in.
This battle for cleanliness and the resolve to clean is really a battle for this nascent movement. Let's hope the extremists don't win.
Monday, October 10, 2011
十十 Happy Birthday, ROC!
十十 Happy birthday, Republic of China! The dream is still alive.
十十 Today marks 100 years since October 10, 1911.
十十 The Republican Revolution of 1911 ended imperial rule by the Qing Dynasty, and ushered in the birth of Asia's first democracy.
十十 Remember the ideals that generation of revolutionaries fought for: liberty, equality, popular sovereignty. The rule of law. The right to participate in one's own governance. The right to determine one's own fate.
十十 May all people one day enjoy the fruits of peace, freedom and democracy that spring from the seeds planted by our forebears.
Sunday, October 09, 2011
UC Chile
An article from The Guardian profiles one of the leaders of the student protests in Chile. From "Camila Vallejo – Latin America's 23-year-old new revolutionary folk hero":
URL: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/oct/08/camila-vallejo-latin-america-revolutionary
Vallejo "focused on what she sees as the positive achievements thus far. 'For years, Chilean youth have been consumed by a neo-liberal model that highlights personal achievement and consumerism; it is all about mine, mine, mine. There is not a lot of empathy for the other... This movement has achieved just the opposite. The youth has taken control… and revived and dignified politics. This comes hand in hand with the questioning of worn-out political models – all they have done is govern for big business and powerful economic groups." ...
Throughout the six-month revolt, Chilean students – in many cases led by 14- and 15-year-olds – have seized the streets of Santiago and major cities, provoking and challenging the status quo with their demand for a massive restructuring of the nation's for-profit higher education industry. In support of their demands for free university education, since May they have organised 37 marches, which have gathered upwards of 200,000 students at a time ...
What began as a quiet plea for improvements in public education has now erupted into a wholescale rejection of the Chilean political elite. More than 100 high schools nationwide have been seized by students and a dozen universities shut down by protests.Hey, maybe the UC system could serve as a model for public education. Oh wait, that could happen only if we stop gutting this world-class model of higher education. Get it together, California! I'm also a little bit worried by these "takeovers" of schools. If not controlled, this kind of action might smack of the Cultural Revolution. One major difference is that Chile is a democracy with constitutional protections for citizens. Given the repression of the Pinochet regime and the non-violent movement that rose to overthrow it, the populace cares about concepts like liberty and the protection of human rights. That should be a major bulwark against unfounded attacks.
URL: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/oct/08/camila-vallejo-latin-america-revolutionary
Saturday, September 24, 2011
ABC in the PRC
Yeah, Locke! From Elizabeth Economy: Chinese Media Knock U.S. Ambassador to China for Being Too Popular.
(Reuters)
"A series of candid photos of the ambassador with his family -- carrying their own luggage, riding in a minivan, and flying economy class -- elicited a tidal wave of ... popular attention" from the Chinese public, who are holding him up as a sharp contrast to their own officials. However, government-run newspapers have taken offense and are criticizing this public adulation.
Well, Ambassador Locke might not speak Mandarin, but this low-key and frugal behavior seems pretty Asian (American) to me. ABC's represent!
P.S. At APEC, I witnessed first-hand how the minister of a certain Chinese government body had three people haul his luggage for him, among other ostentatious things.
Tuesday, September 20, 2011
Derby Time!
Lots of hipster animals for the Shirt.Woot Derby this week. Some that I like are displayed below. You can click to vote for them in the Derby:
"Indie Turtle" (here)
"Neighborhood Thrift Store" (here)
"Couldn't Care Less Bear" (here)
"No Thanks" (here)
I also liked these thumbnails on the site:
a
b
b
c
d 
d
e
a. "Panda Dance" (here)
b. "Neighborhood Thrift Store" (here)
c. "Couldn't Care Less Bear" (here)
d. "So Meta" (here)
e. "Scoff. Cooler than you." (here)
Saturday, September 10, 2011
Gevulot
'I used to like it, crafting, making things out of the coral. You visualise a thing. You find the words that it is. And you sing them to väki; it grows and makes it. And in the end you have something that is truly yours, a new thing in the world.'
-- Mieli, on how she made Perhonen. From The Quantum Thief
-- Mieli, on how she made Perhonen. From The Quantum Thief
Tuesday, September 06, 2011
What's it for?
An appalling expose in Danwei about how some Chinese students blatantly fabricate their college applications, usually through the connivance of "educational consultants."
In the back of our minds, we all know there are people who fake their apps, but seeing it leveled so clearly is shocking and a bit horrible to contemplate. This kind of behavior is really quite troubling, on an ethical level and a personal level.
These people are stealing places that would have been open to a deserving student from a low-income family who may have the aptitude and the credentials, but not the money to pay exorbitant amounts for "polishing" services. (BTW that is another thing our humanities program can offer: a truthful letter of recommendation -- an honest appraisal of an applicants' ability to do college-level work and genuine interest in broadening horizons. The instructor has a good BS meter).
Please read the article for yourselves. I am aghast! When did such dishonesty become acceptable? If the whole system is predicated on cheating your way to the top, it demeans and devalues the honest work that others have done. I understand the desire to study at a top university in America, but it in no way justifies buying your way in or misrepresenting who you are.
College and the application process is an opportunity to express who you are, in an open, honest and sincere way. This is who I am. This is how I come to be who I am, where I am, how I am; and these are the things I believe in. Accept me on the merits of who I am, and what I have done, and the principles for which I stand.
Cheating completely defeats the purpose of a university education, because it is not only about acquiring technical skills or learning to navigate personal relations, though these are indeed important. Higher education presents a unique, life-transforming opportunity to discover oneself.
I wish to be somewhere I belong, to be accepted for who I am. I want to be part of a community that welcomes me precisely for being myself. Only then can I know that this place is where I truly belong.
If I can only get somewhere by fundamentally misrepresenting myself, how can that be the right place for me? It defiles the sanctity of the institution to which I am applying, and it disrespects my own identity by forcing me to distort my person. It is a losing proposition, and destructive to both the university and to the student who attempts to fake his or her way in.
Can you look your peers in the eye? Can you engage your professors with a straight face? Can you sign the Honor Code without shaking? Moreover, can you look in the mirror and live with the person that looks back? Cognitive dissonance is a bitch, and one day you will pay for it. On a gentler note, how can you not wish to be who you are? That is all one can ask for in this world. Many times, there are other pressures, responsibilities and obligations that wear on us. University is our chance to express ourselves, to have an opportunity to be who we really are: 當自己的人.
In the back of our minds, we all know there are people who fake their apps, but seeing it leveled so clearly is shocking and a bit horrible to contemplate. This kind of behavior is really quite troubling, on an ethical level and a personal level.
These people are stealing places that would have been open to a deserving student from a low-income family who may have the aptitude and the credentials, but not the money to pay exorbitant amounts for "polishing" services. (BTW that is another thing our humanities program can offer: a truthful letter of recommendation -- an honest appraisal of an applicants' ability to do college-level work and genuine interest in broadening horizons. The instructor has a good BS meter).
Please read the article for yourselves. I am aghast! When did such dishonesty become acceptable? If the whole system is predicated on cheating your way to the top, it demeans and devalues the honest work that others have done. I understand the desire to study at a top university in America, but it in no way justifies buying your way in or misrepresenting who you are.
College and the application process is an opportunity to express who you are, in an open, honest and sincere way. This is who I am. This is how I come to be who I am, where I am, how I am; and these are the things I believe in. Accept me on the merits of who I am, and what I have done, and the principles for which I stand.
Cheating completely defeats the purpose of a university education, because it is not only about acquiring technical skills or learning to navigate personal relations, though these are indeed important. Higher education presents a unique, life-transforming opportunity to discover oneself.
I wish to be somewhere I belong, to be accepted for who I am. I want to be part of a community that welcomes me precisely for being myself. Only then can I know that this place is where I truly belong.
If I can only get somewhere by fundamentally misrepresenting myself, how can that be the right place for me? It defiles the sanctity of the institution to which I am applying, and it disrespects my own identity by forcing me to distort my person. It is a losing proposition, and destructive to both the university and to the student who attempts to fake his or her way in.
Can you look your peers in the eye? Can you engage your professors with a straight face? Can you sign the Honor Code without shaking? Moreover, can you look in the mirror and live with the person that looks back? Cognitive dissonance is a bitch, and one day you will pay for it. On a gentler note, how can you not wish to be who you are? That is all one can ask for in this world. Many times, there are other pressures, responsibilities and obligations that wear on us. University is our chance to express ourselves, to have an opportunity to be who we really are: 當自己的人.
Monday, September 05, 2011
Tomorrow is Classic 明天會更好
中秋節 is coming!
Since the Mid-Autumn Festival will take place in a few days (sometimes referred to as the "moon festival"), I shall post a couple of excerpts that I like, from a story called "月牙兒" (Crescent Moon).
《月牙兒》, 老舍著：
"愛這個月牙因為看著它，使我心中痛快一點。他在夏天更可愛，他老有那麽點涼氣，像一條冰似的。我愛它給地上的那點小影子，一會兒就沒了；迷迷糊糊地不甚清楚，及至影子沒了，地上就特別的黑，星也特別的亮，花也特別的香——我們的鄰居有許多花木，那棵高高的洋槐總把花兒落到我們這邊來，像一層雲似的。
我敢在院中走了，一個春天的月牙在天上掛著。我看出它的美來。天是暗藍的，沒有一點雲。那個月牙清亮而溫柔，把一些軟光兒輕輕送到柳枝上。院中有點小風，帶著南邊的花香，把柳條的影子吹到牆角有光的地方來，又吹到無光的地方去；光不強，影兒不重，風微微地吹，都是溫柔，什麼都有點睡意，可又要輕軟地活動著。月牙下邊，柳梢上面，有一對星兒好像微笑的仙女的眼，逗著那歪歪的月牙和那輕擺的柳枝。牆那邊有棵什麼樹，開滿了白花，月的微光把這團雪照成一半兒白亮，一半兒略帶點灰影，顯出難以想到的純淨。這個月牙是希望的開始，我心裡說。
二十
我又找了胖校長去，她沒在家。一個青年把我讓進去。他很體面，也很和氣。我平素很怕男人，但是這個青年不叫我怕他。他叫我說什麼，我便不好意思不說；他那麼一笑，我心裏就軟了。我把找校長的意思對他說了，他很熱心，答應幫助我。當天晚上，他給我送了兩塊錢來，我不肯收，他說這是他嬸母棗胖校長棗給我的。他並且說他的嬸母已經給我找好了地方住，第二天就可以搬過去。我要懷疑，可是不敢。他的笑臉好象笑到我的心裏去。我覺得我要疑心便對不起人，他是那麼溫和可愛。
二十一
他的笑唇在我的臉上，從他的頭髮上我看著那也在微笑的月牙。春風象醉了，吹破了春雲，露出月牙與一兩對兒春星。河岸上的柳枝輕擺，春蛙唱著戀歌，嫩蒲的香味散在春晚的暖氣裏。我聽著水流，象給嫩蒲一些生力，我想象著蒲梗輕快地往高裏長。小蒲公英在潮暖的地上生長。什麼都在溶化著春的力量，然後放出一些香味來。我忘了自己，我沒了自己，象化在了那點春風與月的微光中。月兒忽然被雲掩住，我想起來自己。"
"愛這個月牙因為看著它，使我心中痛快一點。他在夏天更可愛，他老有那麽點涼氣，像一條冰似的。我愛它給地上的那點小影子，一會兒就沒了；迷迷糊糊地不甚清楚，及至影子沒了，地上就特別的黑，星也特別的亮，花也特別的香——我們的鄰居有許多花木，那棵高高的洋槐總把花兒落到我們這邊來，像一層雲似的。
......
我敢在院中走了，一個春天的月牙在天上掛著。我看出它的美來。天是暗藍的，沒有一點雲。那個月牙清亮而溫柔，把一些軟光兒輕輕送到柳枝上。院中有點小風，帶著南邊的花香，把柳條的影子吹到牆角有光的地方來，又吹到無光的地方去；光不強，影兒不重，風微微地吹，都是溫柔，什麼都有點睡意，可又要輕軟地活動著。月牙下邊，柳梢上面，有一對星兒好像微笑的仙女的眼，逗著那歪歪的月牙和那輕擺的柳枝。牆那邊有棵什麼樹，開滿了白花，月的微光把這團雪照成一半兒白亮，一半兒略帶點灰影，顯出難以想到的純淨。這個月牙是希望的開始，我心裡說。
......
二十
我又找了胖校長去，她沒在家。一個青年把我讓進去。他很體面，也很和氣。我平素很怕男人，但是這個青年不叫我怕他。他叫我說什麼，我便不好意思不說；他那麼一笑，我心裏就軟了。我把找校長的意思對他說了，他很熱心，答應幫助我。當天晚上，他給我送了兩塊錢來，我不肯收，他說這是他嬸母棗胖校長棗給我的。他並且說他的嬸母已經給我找好了地方住，第二天就可以搬過去。我要懷疑，可是不敢。他的笑臉好象笑到我的心裏去。我覺得我要疑心便對不起人，他是那麼溫和可愛。
二十一
他的笑唇在我的臉上，從他的頭髮上我看著那也在微笑的月牙。春風象醉了，吹破了春雲，露出月牙與一兩對兒春星。河岸上的柳枝輕擺，春蛙唱著戀歌，嫩蒲的香味散在春晚的暖氣裏。我聽著水流，象給嫩蒲一些生力，我想象著蒲梗輕快地往高裏長。小蒲公英在潮暖的地上生長。什麼都在溶化著春的力量，然後放出一些香味來。我忘了自己，我沒了自己，象化在了那點春風與月的微光中。月兒忽然被雲掩住，我想起來自己。"
Thursday, September 01, 2011
Seediq Bale - Taiwanese historical epic
A new film from the director of Cape No. 7, the smash hit from Taiwan. Seediq Bale tells the story of resistance by an aboriginal tribe against the Japanese in the 1930s. It looks like an epic film, mixing the emotional resonance of a variety of tales: the 300 at Thermopylae; Squanto, the Native American who helped the Pilgrims survive their first years in the New World, who bridged cultural divides; Avatar and the preservation of home culture; resistance by Indian tribes against westward expansion, led by chiefs like Crazy Horse. A general spirit of anti-colonialism seems to prevail. There are some stunning nature shots, and it's pretty cool that the actors speak in the aboriginal language. (Trailer below.)
Tuesday, August 02, 2011
BMW Electric
BMW's electric vehicles for urban mobility. The "i" series should be out by 2013. A little late to the game, but glad they are moving forward in a serious way.
I went to a seminar in winter quarter, where the BMW folks presented their strategy for entering this space by appealing to a particular user -- it's a lifestyle, not just a vehicle.
Article here. Check out the photo album of the i8, too. You'll (inappropriate verb here) after viewing it.
I went to a seminar in winter quarter, where the BMW folks presented their strategy for entering this space by appealing to a particular user -- it's a lifestyle, not just a vehicle.
Article here. Check out the photo album of the i8, too. You'll (inappropriate verb here) after viewing it.
Sunday, July 31, 2011
You don't say ...
The train issue in China is deeply distressing. It is fast becoming a symbol of some of the fundamental problems with the country and the Party today.
How can you not give people time to mourn and memorialize those who have been lost? Why would you shut off coverage instead of allowing the public to grieve together? Moreover, shedding light on problems and harnessing public outrage can help force changes in a corruption-riddled rail system. Do you want to solve fundamental problems or not?
This quote struck me as an articulation of one of the basic problems in China, and it's something I've discussed with many friends over the years. Yet so many years later, it's still the same issue:
The host of the television program asked: “If nobody can be safe, do we still want this speed? Can we drink a glass of milk that’s safe? Can we stay in an apartment that will not collapse? China, please slow down. If you’re too fast, you may leave the souls of your people behind.”
It's just so frustrating and tragic. When 76 people in Norway are killed, it is a time for deep mourning and for national reflection. People talk about how this could have come to pass in Norwegian society -- what the implications are, how to respond so that Norway's values are maintained, while also improving security. The government's response will be scrutinized deeply so that such an incident will not happen again.
In China, when 40 people are killed, the media is told to play up positive coverage and make it a "feel-good" event to bolster the Party. Aside from the crassness, where is the introspection? It's not only the Railway Ministry that has to respond, because it wasn't just a technical hiccup. People have to ask themselves, what kind of society, what kind of incentive structure, what kind of system gave rise to the conditions that resulted in this tragedy? Should we accept things on those terms, or what needs to change? But none of these questions will be asked.
The attitude is cavalier: "Just mop up. Hey folks, shows over, get back in line." No time for mourning ... I can't even fathom the idea of pretending that everything is okay, everything is all right. Sanitize history, sanitize news, sanitize life. Blot it all out, because everything has always been all right.
Good for the Economic Observer. They're willing to speak what is. From the WSJ:
China Imposes Blackout on Train Wreck Coverage
After days of growing public fury over last month’s crash and the government’s reaction, Chinese authorities have enacted a virtual news blackout on the disaster.
Beijing imposes media ban on rail crash coverage
Chinese newspapers, which last week defied government censors, were forced to scrap pages of coverage of the Wenzhou rail crash at the last minute on Friday night, after the Communist party’s propaganda organ issued an order restricting crash coverage that was not “positive”.
How can you not give people time to mourn and memorialize those who have been lost? Why would you shut off coverage instead of allowing the public to grieve together? Moreover, shedding light on problems and harnessing public outrage can help force changes in a corruption-riddled rail system. Do you want to solve fundamental problems or not?
This quote struck me as an articulation of one of the basic problems in China, and it's something I've discussed with many friends over the years. Yet so many years later, it's still the same issue:
The host of the television program asked: “If nobody can be safe, do we still want this speed? Can we drink a glass of milk that’s safe? Can we stay in an apartment that will not collapse? China, please slow down. If you’re too fast, you may leave the souls of your people behind.”
It's just so frustrating and tragic. When 76 people in Norway are killed, it is a time for deep mourning and for national reflection. People talk about how this could have come to pass in Norwegian society -- what the implications are, how to respond so that Norway's values are maintained, while also improving security. The government's response will be scrutinized deeply so that such an incident will not happen again.
In China, when 40 people are killed, the media is told to play up positive coverage and make it a "feel-good" event to bolster the Party. Aside from the crassness, where is the introspection? It's not only the Railway Ministry that has to respond, because it wasn't just a technical hiccup. People have to ask themselves, what kind of society, what kind of incentive structure, what kind of system gave rise to the conditions that resulted in this tragedy? Should we accept things on those terms, or what needs to change? But none of these questions will be asked.
The attitude is cavalier: "Just mop up. Hey folks, shows over, get back in line." No time for mourning ... I can't even fathom the idea of pretending that everything is okay, everything is all right. Sanitize history, sanitize news, sanitize life. Blot it all out, because everything has always been all right.
Good for the Economic Observer. They're willing to speak what is. From the WSJ:
China’s Economic Observer decided this weekend to publish a hard-hitting special report on the previous week’s high-speed train collision near the city of Wenzhou, defying strict orders from propaganda authorities in Beijing to play down coverage of the accident.
While many other newspapers obediently killed reports and took the train collision off their front pages in response to Friday night’s order, the Economic Observer devoted eight pages to its special report, entitled “No Miracles in Wenzhou,” and promoted it on its front page with a striking illustration showing the logo for the Ministry of Railways superimposed over a black-and-white photo of one of the ruined trains.
Beneath that image was an equally striking commentary on the accident titled “Yiyi, When You’re Older.” The commentary, which takes the government to task for its opaque handling of the accident, it written as a letter to Xiang Weiyi, a 2-year-old girl whose “miraculous” rescue has been widely trumpeted in state media.
Excerpts from that essay, translated by China Real Time:
Yiyi, when you’ve grown up and started to understand this world, how should we explain to you everything that happened on July 23, 2011? That train that would never arrive, it took away 40 lives that loved and were loved, including your parents. When you’re grown, will we and this country we live in be able to honestly tell you about all the love and suffering, anger and doubts around us?
How do we tell you that, even as they’d declared there were no more signs of life in the wreckage and had started cleaning up the site, you were still there struggling in the crushed darkness. Do we tell you that, with the truth still far off in the distance, they buried the engine; that before any conclusions had been reached, the line that had given birth to this tragedy was declared open. They called your survival a miracle, but how do we explain it to you: When respect for life had been trampled, caring forgotten, responsibility cast aside, the fact that you fought to survive – what kind of miracle is this?
Yiyi, one day you might pass by this place again. When the train whistle once again startles this silent land, will we reluctantly tell you about all the hypocrisy, arrogance, rashness and cruelty behind this tragic story?
Yiyi, we should tell you the truth, our country has been this way before. We want to tell you, those adults you see have wondered countless times whether in this era we’ve forgotten love, caring and basic trust. We’re full of complaints, but our anger is only that. We believe without doubt that life will continue on this way.
…
Yiyi, how do we explain to you that, at that time, there were two completely different images of China: one blossoming in the midst of the people, the other hidden in officialdom. We hope that when you’ve grown up and understand things, when you’ve learned to see with your own eyes, think with your own mind and encounter this world through your own actions, you will find this has changed.
…
Now, Yiyi, on behalf of you lying there on that sickbed and those lives buried in the ground, people are refusing to give up on finding the truth. Truth cannot be buried – no one plans to give up the inquiry. We know that anything we take lightly today might lead to our rights being violated and our lives being ignored again tomorrow. We reap what we sow. If every fact we seek becomes a secret, we’ll never know the truth. If we keep giving up half way in our pursuit of dignity, we will never be treated with dignity.
To live – to live with dignity – is that rainbow you get to see only after suffering through the wind and the rain. Yiyi, when you’re older maybe you’ll realize that dark night of July 23 was when things started to change. After that day, we won’t simply complain, but instead learn how to advocate and act. We understand that we have rights, we respect these rights and are will spare no effort to protect them.
Yiyi, if we’re going to promise you and other regular children like you a future, the journey must start from the wreckage of the train collision. That is the best way to remember your parents, and all the others who perished there.
– Josh Chin. Follow him on Twitter @joshchin
Friday, June 10, 2011
You can't buy ...
Article from The New York Times on recent unrest in Inner Mongolia.
Sigh, this is what you get when you mix Communist historical materialism with a sheen of capitalist greed. No respect or understanding for the importance of culture, or the depth of feeling regarding issues of identity. They don't even care about their own culture, much less that of other peoples.
You think you can buy your way out of this mess? Or just put up a perfunctory "museum"? Culture is something to be cherished and lived on an everyday basis. People have the right to shape their lives according to their traditions. Money doesn't make people forget.
Well, maybe it makes post-Communist Chinese people forget. But other peoples don't.
“The Mongolian situation is very worrying for the Chinese leadership because you can’t just throw money at an issue like ethnic identity,” said Minxin Pei, a China expert at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace and professor of political science at Claremont McKenna College in California.@CCP:Like ... hello! Really?
Sigh, this is what you get when you mix Communist historical materialism with a sheen of capitalist greed. No respect or understanding for the importance of culture, or the depth of feeling regarding issues of identity. They don't even care about their own culture, much less that of other peoples.
You think you can buy your way out of this mess? Or just put up a perfunctory "museum"? Culture is something to be cherished and lived on an everyday basis. People have the right to shape their lives according to their traditions. Money doesn't make people forget.
Well, maybe it makes post-Communist Chinese people forget. But other peoples don't.
Tuesday, June 07, 2011
Is this what a Confucian society looks like too?
Denmark is pretty amazing: solidarity and social capital; trust of government and neighbors; resistance to abuse and oppression ... and the happiest people on earth!
(I've been to the country and can attest to the high level of trust that people have for one another, because they have confidence in other citizens. At the airport, a mother stood up and asked her neighbor (an African man) to please keep an eye out on her two young children, who were playing on the floor. Then she went off to take care of business, leaving her kids with a stranger.)
Granted, there may be some differences in how Danish society and a "Confucian society" are structured (certainly between Danish society and a traditional Chinese one), especially in areas like hierarchy and social status. And the country's values may be based off of different principles. But in some sense, the emphasis on harmony, social responsibility, and virtue mentioned in this article made me think of Confucian ethics.
As an exemplar of the Western humanistic tradition, perhaps Denmark can show us a way forward. (P.S. the US is not the only repesentative!). So the question is, how do we get there?
http://www.theatlantic.com/life/archive/2011/06/the-worlds-happiest-people/239971/
The World's Happiest People
By Robert Lavine
Jun 6 2011, 10:20 AM ET16
Denmark regularly ranks among the world's happiest countries, and it also saved most Danish Jews during World War II. What explains the society's success?
Denmark has the highest well-being of any country in the world, according to a recent Gallup Poll, with 72 percent of Danish people "thriving." (The worldwide median is just 21 percent.) In addition, during World War II, the country rescued almost all Jewish Danes from impending atrocities.
A kind of positive psychology underlies both accomplishments. People who trust their government and their neighbors, and who resist abuses in their society, are more likely to feel a sense of well-being in their own lives. Social psychology shows that countries with little trust are less likely to be happy. Networks of support between people and groups—what the political scientist Robert Putnam called social capital—promote people's well-being and their ability to react well to crises, from turmoil in North Africa to flooding in the U.S. and tsunamis in Japan.
Consider the mutual support at the root of Denmark's resistance to atrocities and what we can learn from Denmark's experience.
In 1943 the Nazi occupation met growing contempt from the Danish population. Strikes and sabotage in Denmark led to brutal reprisals. When the Danes received word of the plan to deport their Jewish citizens to concentration camps within days, the inclusive Danish community that had developed over decades or even centuries sprang into dramatic action. Danes from all walks of life helped 7,200 Jewish Danes cross the Oresund Strait to safety in neutral Sweden, allowing over 95 percent to survive the war. Nurses hid people in hospital rooms, resistance members held off armed German patrols, women followed coded messages to bring food for departing families, and refugees waded through cold water in darkness to the lights of waiting fishing boats.
Studies of personality traits may offer clues about why the rescue was so widely supported. In Dutch psychologist Geert Hofstede's Power Distance Index, which measures how differently people treat others because of their social status, Danes ranked among the lowest in unequal treatment. In a 2004 Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology study, Danes were also low in experiencing negative feelings like anger and anxiety, as well as in compulsive rule-following.
How do Danes reconcile their standing up and rescuing others with their traditional reluctance to stand out? Danes are taught not to tolerate abusive behavior, and to speak their mind even if others disagree. A case in point is the boy Christian who retaliates against bullying in the 2010 Oscar-winning Danish film "In a Better World." Danish people respect authority, but only if authority is virtuous, according to Mette N. Claushoej, recent Danish Embassy adviser in Washington (who, the embassy wishes to emphasize, was expressing her personal views). And they are taught not to think of themselves as better than others. Their sense of shared responsibility for all members of the group, evidenced by their widespread support of social welfare, might help explain the Danes taking risks during the 1943 rescue.
Furthermore, the recent Gallup well-being poll, conducted this April, isn't an outlier. For decades international surveys have shown a greater percentage of Danes who describe themselves as happy compared to other national groups. An egalitarian society with widespread financial security certainly contributes to Denmark's contentment. But contrary to welfare-state stereotypes, Forbes magazine recently rated Denmark as the world's best place to do business.
What may be essential are the supporting networks between people and groups that enhance social capital. Social capital is a major predictor of national happiness, according to new research in the 2011 Journal of Happiness Studies. A 2004 Cambridge University study concluded that mutual support and trust in society leads to well-being in Denmark and elsewhere. The research finds that the citizens of countries that scored highest for happiness also scored highest for trust in their governments, their laws, and each other. Where trust was lacking, "even the well off tended to be unhappy," according to the study.
To be sure, there is neither a simple nor linear cause-and-effect relationship between social psychology and historical events. The surveys cited began years after World War II, and what holds true in Denmark might not be the case elsewhere, such as the Arab countries now undergoing upheavals. But the upshot is that successfully confronting the atrocities of a brutal regime seems to be correlated with attaining national happiness.
Just as Denmark's defiance of the Nazis can be linked to its internal values of trust and willingness to speak out against abuse, the same traits are linked to its more recent well-being. National well-being in Denmark is forged from shared experience under stress, and the country provides a positive example as places like Egypt and Japan rebuild their societies during these tumultuous times. Take it from the world's happiest country.
(I've been to the country and can attest to the high level of trust that people have for one another, because they have confidence in other citizens. At the airport, a mother stood up and asked her neighbor (an African man) to please keep an eye out on her two young children, who were playing on the floor. Then she went off to take care of business, leaving her kids with a stranger.)
Granted, there may be some differences in how Danish society and a "Confucian society" are structured (certainly between Danish society and a traditional Chinese one), especially in areas like hierarchy and social status. And the country's values may be based off of different principles. But in some sense, the emphasis on harmony, social responsibility, and virtue mentioned in this article made me think of Confucian ethics.
As an exemplar of the Western humanistic tradition, perhaps Denmark can show us a way forward. (P.S. the US is not the only repesentative!). So the question is, how do we get there?
http://www.theatlantic.com/life/archive/2011/06/the-worlds-happiest-people/239971/
The World's Happiest People
By Robert Lavine
Jun 6 2011, 10:20 AM ET16
Denmark regularly ranks among the world's happiest countries, and it also saved most Danish Jews during World War II. What explains the society's success?
Denmark has the highest well-being of any country in the world, according to a recent Gallup Poll, with 72 percent of Danish people "thriving." (The worldwide median is just 21 percent.) In addition, during World War II, the country rescued almost all Jewish Danes from impending atrocities.
A kind of positive psychology underlies both accomplishments. People who trust their government and their neighbors, and who resist abuses in their society, are more likely to feel a sense of well-being in their own lives. Social psychology shows that countries with little trust are less likely to be happy. Networks of support between people and groups—what the political scientist Robert Putnam called social capital—promote people's well-being and their ability to react well to crises, from turmoil in North Africa to flooding in the U.S. and tsunamis in Japan.
Consider the mutual support at the root of Denmark's resistance to atrocities and what we can learn from Denmark's experience.
In 1943 the Nazi occupation met growing contempt from the Danish population. Strikes and sabotage in Denmark led to brutal reprisals. When the Danes received word of the plan to deport their Jewish citizens to concentration camps within days, the inclusive Danish community that had developed over decades or even centuries sprang into dramatic action. Danes from all walks of life helped 7,200 Jewish Danes cross the Oresund Strait to safety in neutral Sweden, allowing over 95 percent to survive the war. Nurses hid people in hospital rooms, resistance members held off armed German patrols, women followed coded messages to bring food for departing families, and refugees waded through cold water in darkness to the lights of waiting fishing boats.
Studies of personality traits may offer clues about why the rescue was so widely supported. In Dutch psychologist Geert Hofstede's Power Distance Index, which measures how differently people treat others because of their social status, Danes ranked among the lowest in unequal treatment. In a 2004 Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology study, Danes were also low in experiencing negative feelings like anger and anxiety, as well as in compulsive rule-following.
How do Danes reconcile their standing up and rescuing others with their traditional reluctance to stand out? Danes are taught not to tolerate abusive behavior, and to speak their mind even if others disagree. A case in point is the boy Christian who retaliates against bullying in the 2010 Oscar-winning Danish film "In a Better World." Danish people respect authority, but only if authority is virtuous, according to Mette N. Claushoej, recent Danish Embassy adviser in Washington (who, the embassy wishes to emphasize, was expressing her personal views). And they are taught not to think of themselves as better than others. Their sense of shared responsibility for all members of the group, evidenced by their widespread support of social welfare, might help explain the Danes taking risks during the 1943 rescue.
Furthermore, the recent Gallup well-being poll, conducted this April, isn't an outlier. For decades international surveys have shown a greater percentage of Danes who describe themselves as happy compared to other national groups. An egalitarian society with widespread financial security certainly contributes to Denmark's contentment. But contrary to welfare-state stereotypes, Forbes magazine recently rated Denmark as the world's best place to do business.
What may be essential are the supporting networks between people and groups that enhance social capital. Social capital is a major predictor of national happiness, according to new research in the 2011 Journal of Happiness Studies. A 2004 Cambridge University study concluded that mutual support and trust in society leads to well-being in Denmark and elsewhere. The research finds that the citizens of countries that scored highest for happiness also scored highest for trust in their governments, their laws, and each other. Where trust was lacking, "even the well off tended to be unhappy," according to the study.
To be sure, there is neither a simple nor linear cause-and-effect relationship between social psychology and historical events. The surveys cited began years after World War II, and what holds true in Denmark might not be the case elsewhere, such as the Arab countries now undergoing upheavals. But the upshot is that successfully confronting the atrocities of a brutal regime seems to be correlated with attaining national happiness.
Just as Denmark's defiance of the Nazis can be linked to its internal values of trust and willingness to speak out against abuse, the same traits are linked to its more recent well-being. National well-being in Denmark is forged from shared experience under stress, and the country provides a positive example as places like Egypt and Japan rebuild their societies during these tumultuous times. Take it from the world's happiest country.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)