Presidential Temperment

I mentioned some time ago that temperment would be an important part of determining my vote in the coming election. Working in Japan has afforded me a really interesting glimpse into the importance of temperment in a leader. Here in Japan, employees are constantly shuffled between schools and I have had the opportunity to work for several different principals during my time here at a bunch of different schools. As I watch students come and go, I am beginning to notice that the school itself carries a character and a texture of its own that is flavored by the students that pass through. As I watch principals come and go, I notice that the temperment of the principal causes different aspects of the school and the students to be highlighted.

To draw on this experience to describe a country, there is a texture to America that defines us as a country, and as people are born into citizenship and die out of it, that texture takes on different flavors over the course of history. As presidents come and go, their temperment highlights different aspects of the texture and flavor of Americanness. I do a poor job explaining my thoughts on the importance of temperment, but the following article does a much better job.

Enjoy!

http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/20081016/us_time/doestemperamentmatter;_ylt=AlKBOlVn4KfahS0HmDzaLlJH2ocA

 

An attempt at inspirational words

A time for deep thinking

For those of us who are Americans, we have now arrived at a time for thinking deeply about who we are.  At the forefront of all our minds is November 4^th, when we will elect a new president in an election cycle where there is no incumbent. At this particular moment in history, who we vote for seems to be far less important than why we vote for them.  We have become too focused on our individual needs and desires and we have lost sight of the underlying concepts that tie us together as Americans.

As we take the time to pause and consider our lives and our identities as Americans, the problems we share seem to be more apparent than those concepts that tie us together.  Partisan bitterness sours our political debates with each other; a variety of unsustainable lifestyles sour our economy; political strife in faraway places highlights our isolation; distrust highlights how disconnected we have become from the values and the environment that define us, and for many, the first world suddenly seems to be on the brink of a dark and forbidding future.

But there is another way to look at the situation we find ourselves in. We can look at the current crisis as the end of a particularly long chapter in American history, of which the last eight years have been but a page or two. We can look at this as a time for renewal of the American dream; far from spelling out doom, the problems we share might just shed light on those elusive underlying concepts that tie us together.

Think for a moment: what is the idea that defines our times, what do we call the era of history in which we live? In the opinion of this author, we can say that we live in the post-Cold War era, or the post-9/11 era, or the post-industrialist era, or the post-modern era, and in at the heart of these descriptions, we can see that elusive underlying concept that unites them all, the basic idea that has defined the final pages of the 20th Century is this: we have been living in a time defined primarily by what it has ceased to be.

Dreams within Dreams

The question that now faces us is this: given that the 20th Century is over, what will the 21^st Century be like? To be sure, it’s a difficult question to answer, and we are 8 years late in beginning our attempt, but we have to at least try to answer that question.  We cannot be complacent and worry only about our own well being. We need to imagine the future, however difficult that might be.

Now, I tend to think that the future is so difficult to imagine because, like people who think they are saving good money even as their credit card debt skyrockets, there is a strong motivation to think only of the here and now.  We don’t want to look at the broader world because it is changing, and it is changing rapidly. We have come to loathe change because for some, life is filled with the semblance of the American dream, and for these people, change has lost its power to bring good things; for others, life is lived on the brink of disaster, and for these people, so long as everything remains the same, it will be possible to make the monthly payments on a debt that would destroy life as we know it if it were to suddenly come due in full.

However we live individually as Americans, one thing that is for sure is that we, as a nation, owe a debt we don’t wish to describe. Nevertheless, I will describe it: our nation owes a debt to the local environments of faraway places, where life has become near impossible for the sake of our convenience.  We owe our debt to the underpaid workers who support us in unnecessary luxury.  We owe our debt to foreign countries who let us use money we have never earned.  We owe our debt to the countries we bomb in order to preserve economic stability so that oil doesn’t cease to flow into the refineries.  We don’t like to describe these debts because we want to enjoy the delusion that we are ahead of the game. Unfortunately, it is just a delusion, and it is a delusion that departs from reality with ever increasing speed.

The argument has been made that the last presidency was like a bad dream, and that sentiment carried with it the connotation that we could awaken to a world that filled with bright light of the morning sunshine. If we have dreamed, it is the fitful dream of a nation with unfulfilled obligations in the waking world. However fitful our dream, waking life is likely to be more difficult.

If we live in a delusion, it is a delusion we can no longer afford. If we live in a dream, it is a dream that has departed far enough from the laws of nature that our slumbering minds can no longer comprehend it. And perhaps, we are a nation of delusional dreamers, dreaming that we dream.

After all, the end of the 20th Century has been defined by a multiplicity of Americans achieving the American Dream, regardless of the cost; suburbia has sprawled even as mortgages have become unstable and the environment has ceased to play a meaningful role in our lives.

We are beginning to learn that achieving the American Dream leads to a life much like the life we led before we achieved the American Dream, the only real difference being that we now lack something to dream about.When life is lived in pursuit of dreams that may come true someday, change is a welcome friend.  Sometimes it will bring hardship, but hardship is always tempered with the optimism that change might also help us to realize our dream.  By contrast, in a life in which dreams have been achieved prematurely, change only fills our hearts with the dread that we will lose what we have not earned.

The closing sentence of the 20th Century is this: it is no longer even possible to discuss rationally the path that has led us to where we stand now.

A New Chapter

Imagining for a moment that a new chapter of American history begins with this sentence, think one more time about the ideas that defined the last century. In retrospect, the most basic idea of the last century seems to have been war, a legacy left by the dwindling frontiers of 19th century colonialism.

Just as frontiers had dwindled at the end of the 19th century, war began to dwindle near the end of the 20th century and with the dwindling of war, the goals that had accompanied that idea also began to vanish until, left with little else, the leaders of the latter days of the 20th century began to declare war on ideas.  As a result, our culture became more and more brittle and shallow.

But even as war dwindled into asymmetrical conflict, the basic concept of the 20th century left the world its own legacy; the activities of the last century inspired the rise of the world economy. In the legacy of war, the world became interdependent, and so long as the world economy doesn’t collapse, it is my belief that war will not be the idea that defines the 21^st Century.  I believe that the opportunities available to us in the 21st Century will no longer be quite so much correlated to the size of our nation’s stockpile of missiles.

The 21st Century

Instead, the 21^st Century will be defined by economic competition and frontiers will no longer exist in either the first or the third world. If the current story of the human race doesn’t collapse under its own weight, the 21st century might even see aysmmetrical conflict dwindle into nothingness, though this depends largely on whether we choose to lesson the distance between the first and third worlds or increase it.

Should we choose to lessen than distance, the path to success in the 21st Century will be paved by understanding instead of exploitation of the third world. Of course, the future won’t be entirely rosy and bright in contrast to a past that was dark and brutal.  Exploitation of the third world will still exist, the difference will be that such exploitation will lead more and more directly towards failure and failure will be an uglier condition than ever before.

Here in the first world, we will lose something beautiful as the idea of the frontier dissapears from this world.  In the third world, war is likely to intensify before it dwindles and if war in the third world dwindles, the legacy that dwindling will leave is something we cannot yet imagine.

If we choose to lessen the distance between the first and third worlds, the military connection we now have with many third world countries will be submerged in understanding.  Two things worth mentioning are that first, the military connection we have with other countries, first and third alike, will never disappear completely, no matter how submerged in understanding those connections become, and second, the understanding in which these military connections become submerged will not be the difficult sort of understanding.  While it is easy to understand those that are like us, and the easy sort of understanding is nearly synonymous with feelings of love, it is difficult to understand those who are different; and in this author’s experience, understanding of differences seems to inspire contempt and loathing more often than it does love and harmony.

Perhaps escaping from that contempt and loathing is what makes the idea of a frontier so beautiful. In any case, in a world without frontiers, where the distance between the first and third worlds has become small, there will be no possibility of escaping the difficulties and disappointments of understanding differences.

Perhaps what I have just written seems overly pessimistic, but it is my belief that the lowest lows of a world defined by understanding will probably prove uglier and less noble than those of a world defined by war, frontiers and exploitation.

The New Road To Success…

For all that I have just written however, I do not believe the 21st Century will be an ugly time to live.  Even while the lowest lows may be lower than those we know today, the highest highs of a world defined by understanding will also probably prove more beautiful and better than what we know tody. The 21^st Century will usher in an era where the good life approaches a monopoly on beauty, and hell on earth is defined by rampant meaningless drudgery.

In a world without frontiers, I think practicality will play a much larger role in the art of being successful and happiness will be more closely tied to living in accord with the environment. Where once the environment ruled the lives of human beings like a tyrant, the 21^st Century will be a time where a good relationship between a group of humans and their environment will be all that stands between us and the spiritual poverty of meaninglessness; human beings will suddenly become aware of the fine line that separates practicality from drudgery.

But for all that the environment will be important, the 21^st Century will not be defined by sustainable lifestyles nor by neutral environmental impacts. Instead, it will be defined by change. The environment changes, it always has, and it always will. This is a fact that modern technology has allowed us to ignore for a time, but in the 21^st Century, as we reenter into a dialogue with the environment in which we live, success will require practical and adaptable lifestyles far more so than it will require idealistic sustainable ones.

…And Four Civic Virtues That Will Let Us Travel That Road

The four civic virtues that will be important in the future will be awareness, understanding, connectedness, and adaptability. These civic virtues will reemphasize the importance of the human beings in their own lives and where the trend in the last century was greater mobility of jobs, the trend in the 21st century will probably be greater mobility of workers.

As such, as we choose regulations for the 21^st Century economy, it will be important to solidify the borders of regional markets in the world economy and it will also be important to make those borders nationally porous. As we choose immigration policies, it will be important to create a system of visas that allow for international exchanges of labor and of ideas, while balancing the need to retain a sense of national loyalty amongst citizens, wherever they choose to live. It will be important to revitalize the idea of citizenship as a responsibility to one’s own country even while contributing to the success of regional market. We will need to rethink national identity in terms of the opportunities afforded by the environment of each particular nation as opposed to our desires as consumers. Whereas now demand defines our markets, the 21st century markets will be more defined by supply.

In light of these needs, as we choose governance for 21^st Century nations, it will be important to reject opportunities afforded by military strength. As we choose the new structure of the military and civil services, we need to do so with an eye towards maintaining the infrastructure of the world economy. it will be important to organize these services with more of an eye towards protecting existing freedoms as opposed to providing revolutions from above. Democracy needs to be spread by human beings, instead of by the power of guns, and freedom must be claimed by those who possess the power to claim it. It will also be important to remember those who do not have the power to claim freedom and to constantly push at the economic boundaries of the free world. In general, though, the role of governments along with their military and civil services will be to support what exists rather than create what does not.

A time for prudent choices

Along these lines, as we choose our next president, we need to remember that it is not the President or the government who defines whatever new direction of the United States of America might embark upon, instead, it is the American people. This is as true in the future, as it has been in the past. Of course, in our particular predicament, it is much easier to identify with Main Street and blame Wall Street, but the fact is that our lives aren’t currently defined by Main Street or Wall Street, but rather by Easy Street. As Easy Street dead ends, we can blame corruption in Washington, we can blame greed on Wall Street, we can blame the powerlessness of Main Street, but, in the this author’s opinion, it would be more constructive to blame ourselves.

In democracy, the responsibility ultimately lies with us as citizens to use our freedom constructively and innovatively. Perhaps we have become lazy and selfish. Perhaps we have forgotten that freedom is the starting point of goodness instead of the definition. But now that we find ourselves in a time of deep thinking, we can choose to change. One chapter of American history has ended and a new chapter is beginning. The important thing on November 4^th, will not be who wins the election, the important thing will be that Americans came together and voted. The important thing after November 4^th will be that we, as American citizens, take onto our own shoulders the responsibility of making our nation the hero of the next chapter of American history.

 

History Rocks

To my great sorrow, history tends to be one of the most overlooked disciplines, despite its obvious relevance to so many issues. But perhaps that will change!

People often ask, where are the big ideas? What has happened to the stories through which we understand ourselves? The novelists have drawn in their horns. Big stories rarely emerge through the blandness of politicians’ books or the think-tanks’ social engineering manuals. Even Barack Obama’s historical sweep is pretty bland. But turn to the history section of Water-stone’s or Borders and there’s a vivid, bubbling conversation going on, as interesting again as intellectual life was in the 1960s, or Edwardian times.

Here’s to hoping. As political scientists increasingly devote themselves to academic masturbation, maybe people will start noticing where it’s at!

 

Babel

I watched Babel last night and I really liked it!  I was ready to hate it at the beginning when it seemed to me that the movie makers were setting Morocco up to look like a lifeless, cultureless place where people lack morals.  It seemed that they were setting this image up in contrast to an image of America where children are sweet and innocent in a culture that is full of life and vibrancy.

In fact, I think they were setting it up in this way, and intentionally so.  The abrupt shift away from Morocco to a focus on a deaf-mute Japanese girl named Chieko brought out the importance that the film makers placed on perspective.  It took a while for Chieko’s character to fully reveal the importance of perspective, but I thought it was most clearly brought out in the scene where she visits a dance club.

The film makers keep shifting between her perspective, wherein there is no sound and a third person perspective with sound.

The exploration of perspective through Chieko’s character really brought out for me the differences between the experiences of Brad Pitt’s character, Richard, and the British man in the tan jacket.

Richard is dealing with a life threatening situation to his wife and this is bringing him into contact with some of the local people.  Trust relationships are slowly being built up on the basis of this crisis.

The British man, by contrast, is an outsider to the situation and is building no trust relationships with the locals.  Unlike Richard, he has no one to act as a translator for him and he is left with only his preconceptions.  To him, the situation is that he is on a bus and there has been a shooting; he remembers an incident when all the tourists on a bus in Egypt were killed and he is using that paralell as a model for his decision making. 

He can’t read the expressions of the people watching him, and he can’t understand the language they speak, which combined with his decision making model based on the Egypt terrorist attacks makes him assume the worst.

So to go back to the beginning.  Morocco really is an empty place for Richard and his wife Susan.  Something has happened between those two that has disrupted their trust relationship, which has in turn has created a big problem at home.  As such, Richard attempts to run away from the problem by going to a place he considers devoid of anything familiar to try to get back to basics and rebuild his trust relationship with his wife.  These reasons for coming to Morocco shape his experience there.

The experience of leaving “home” and going to “somewhere else” is mirrored in the character of Aunt Amelia, who, 16 years prior, left her home to come to America.  During those 16 years, she built up a new life for herself in her “somewhere else” and that “somewhere else” became “home.”  Her reasons for going elsewhere differed drastically from Richards and her experience diverged accordingly.

 With this set up, Babel becomes a movie that is unapologetically presenting subjective realities in four different countries: Morocco, America, Mexico, and Japan.

The presented reality of Morocco is tied to Richard’s perception, the presented reality of America is tied to Aunt Amelia’s perception, the presented reality of Mexico is tied to the preception of Richard and Susan’s children, Debbie and Mike, and the presented reality of Japan is tied to the perception of Chieko. 

I thought that these subjective realities were a nice change of pace from the usual attempt in this kind of movie to present an objective reality.

What I really liked about this movie was that it didn’t stop at just presenting subjective realities, but rather also attempted to place that subjective reality into the context of objective reality.

By objective reality, I guess I mean the actions of the police.  I am calling it objective reality because the movie set these actions up to suggest that both at the Mexico/America border and in Morocco, the police were acting strictly according to protocol.  In Japan, the police also acted strictly according to protocol, but in Japan, the film makers presented us with a commentary on those protocols in the face of Kenji, the kind hearted Japanese police officer who ends up comforting Chieko.

By avoiding the sense that any of the police officers are corrupt, the movie offers their actions up as a silohuette of the regimes that rule each country.  I didn’t get any sort of sense of the true nature of these regimes, but through the various characters’ interaction with the silohuette of the regime, I got a good idea of relationship between citizen and state in each country.

Mexico had by far the most stand-offish relationship between citizen and state presented in the movie, as police presence was entirely absent in Mexico.  This relationship was followed by shown in Japan where police were an unobtrusive presence in everyday life, but there was a great deal of wariness of falling on the wrong side of the police.  Next came the relationship found in Morocco wherein the police were intrusive and demanding.  The relationship that involved the most interaction between the state and citizen was shown in America wherein the police did everything possible to protect their citizens from harm while casually disregarding the humanity of all non-citizens in pursuit of that goal.

Has anyone else seen the movie recently?  Did you like it?  Hate it?  Do you agree with my reaction to it?  Or do you think I am way off base?

 

All Populists Are the Same

To nobody’s surprise, Hugo Chavez takes the natural next step after eliminating the free press and will shortly be abolishing term limits.

President Hugo Chávez will unveil a project to change the Constitution on Wednesday that is expected to allow him to be re-elected indefinitely, a move that would enhance his authority to accelerate a socialist-inspired transformation of Venezuelan society.

The removal of term limits for Chávez, which is at the heart of the proposal, is expected to be accompanied by measures circumscribing the authority of elected governors and mayors, who would be prevented from staying in power indefinitely, according to versions of the project leaked in recent weeks.

Just to throw the gauntlet down (although I sympathize that everyone is away in these last summer months), MarchHare and SagaciousLam, you guys don’t seriously defend this guy anymore, right? Do you need any more evidence that Chavez is now solidly on the long list of communist, populist, hypocritical thugs?

 

Rove Resigns

Karl Rove is resigning. Lol, I never heard about this one though:

Mr Rove has been accused of underhand political tactics since his teenage years.

As a student, he invited Chicago vagrants to turn up for free beer at a plush reception for a Democrat state candidate – an incident he later described as a “youthful prank” that he regretted.

Republicans for Voldemort.

 

As long as it has a seat…

I was getting my morning news fix when I came across an article that caught my attention.  Toilets use too much water! We must reduce our dependence on toilet water! Now there is a formula environmentalist statement for you.  “A uses too much B, therefore A must reduce A’s dependence on B.”  In a thousand years, this will be our contribution to the great logical syllogisms such as “Socrates is a man, all men are mortal, therefore Socrates is mortal.”

Whether or not you agree with the environmentalists, I know one thing for certain, and that is this: I’ve used some interesting toilets in my time.  The toilet in my house here in Japan currently has an in-bowl ass air-conditioner, bidet, toilet seat heater and a double flush system, small for the liquid, big for the other stuff.  Its not quite as nice as my neighbors toilet which lifts the the lid for you and turns on the lights when you walk into the room and further, if you stand in front of it instead of sitting down, it lifts the seat for you.  After you are finished, it takes care of everything that needs to be taken care of.  One lady in an English class I teach at night just installed a toilet that talks you through the process (I have yet to use it, though I am eager).  Apparently, if you don’t like talking while you are doing business,  you can ask it to shut up and vibrate for you and what’s more, it will.

Despite these creature comforts, public toilets are a different matter.  At the school where I work, there is only one Western-style flushing toilet and it is hidden in a bathroom that only I, the gym teacher, and the principle know about.  The rest of the toilets at my school and indeed in most public toilets around Japan are simply ditches in the floor.  You squat over them and do your business.

Let me tell you, the worst part is not your proximity to your poop, that isn’t so bad and I am even getting pretty good at writing letters with my poop.  The worst part is that there is no way to relax.  Reading a newspaper and drinking a cup of coffee while you go becomes impossible and this, in my books, is an outrage.  A good life is scarcely possible without a seat.

Now, before coming to Japan, I worked for a company that used composting toilets, both high a low tech ones depending on whether you happen to be front country or back country and it wasn’t bad at all.  I am all for the use of composting toilets so long as they have a seat on which I can relax.

 

Got a headache? Have sex…

Curing headaches is reason 173 of 237 ‘whys’ of why we humans mate…What else constitutes ‘the most thorough taxanomy of sexual motivation ever compiled?’  Check out John Tierney’s  New York Times artcle, “The Whys of Mating.”

The four general categories are:

“¶Physical: “The person had beautiful eyes” or “a desirable body,” or “was good kisser” or “too physically attractive to resist.” Or “I wanted to achieve an orgasm.”

¶Goal Attainment: “I wanted to even the score with a cheating partner” or “break up a rival’s relationship” or “make money” or “be popular.” Or “because of a bet.”

¶Emotional: “I wanted to communicate at a deeper level” or “lift my partner’s spirits” or “say ‘Thank you.’ ” Or just because “the person was intelligent.”

¶Insecurity: “I felt like it was my duty” or “I wanted to boost my self-esteem” or “It was the only way my partner would spend time with me.”

The most cited reason to mate was, of course, physical attraction…Other reasons range from ‘burning calories’  to ‘change the topic of conversation’ (hmm)…I’d admit to the former, but don’t quite see how one can converse with all that humping…

Also, ‘research’ now confirms that men seem to be more prone to use their dicks to get what they want: a raise, a promotion etc, while women mate because they love the person…I think this finding just shows that men are simply more honest…

 

Political Upset in Japan and the Fickleness of the Mob

On Sunday, Prime Minister Abe Shinzo lost a great deal of support in elections across Japan and pulled a very Bush-esque move when he defied tradition and explained that despite no longer being in the majority, he would remain in office because voters really support his policies deep down in their hearts.  To my mind, saying that the voting record doesn’t reflect voter’s true feelings is a dangerous move.  Abe’s rationalization was that the current uproar against his administration is fueled more by momentary feelings that will disappear as time moves on.

In my opinion, one of the things that makes democracies so condusive to being at peace with each other is the fickleness of the mob.  I think it is the very fact that when momentary feelings cause an adminstration to lose support, the administration is changed.  In general, it seems that whenever a country pursues a grand nationalistic project, wherein the fickleness of the mob is repressed, bad things happen and a lot more harm than good takes place.

What’s more, when politicians decide that the national opinion shouldn’t dictate their actions, they create a divide between the government and the people making it possible for foreign powers to play successful rhetorical games.

With Abe embattled in negative public opinion, the US seized the opportunity to pass a non-binding resolution calling for Japan to accept responsibility for the use of “comfort women” during World War II .

We had a small debate several months ago about whether the US should become involved in this debate in which I argued that the timing was off and as such the US should stay out of it.  At this juncture, however, I tend to agree that passing this resolution is a good idea. Especially in light of the recent US Cold War disclosures.

I think the interesting thing is that when government is split from the people, either by the strong will of leaders like Prime Minister Abe or President Bush, or by sectarian violence in case of Iraq, the words of foreign powers suddenly become more powerful.  Terrorists come to have the rhetorical power to manipulate America and Iraq to their will, America comes to have the rhetorical power to manipulate Japan to its will.  (For my thoughts on this, check out the following thread)
Whether the rhetorical manipulation aims at an ignoble goal or a noble one, it seems clear to me that attempting to repress the fickleness of the mob, far from strengthening a country, leaves it far more vulnerable to outside forces.

 

Celebratory Gunfire in Iraq

As an avid fan of picking apart movies, I have always wondered: what happens when a crowd fires guns into the air in celebration.  The bullets go up and then, don’t they come down again?

The answer apparently is yes.

 Yesterday, the Iraqi soccer team won the Asia Cup after taking the lead in the final game 1-0 against Saudi Arabia.  Spirits were high as the whistle sounded and I was ecstatic.  Nothing like a major soccer victory to pull a country together and help it transcend its problems.  I went to bed full of anticipation and when I checked the news to see what the Iraqi national reaction would be, I found out that, sadly, people do die due to celebratory gunfire.

In Iraq, there were at least four people killed and many more were wounded by celebratory gunfire.  That there was celebratory gunfire at all highlights once again the delicate situation of the Iraqi national psychology in the face of daily violence.  Were four people to be killed, or even one person, for that matter, in celabratory gunfire within the US, the soccer victory would have been entirely overshadowed.

In Iraq, quite to the contrary, a low body count for the night brings a sigh of relief, especially after the terrorist bombing of the celabratory party of Iraq’s victory last week over South Korea. 

While perhaps not the light at the end of the tunnel for Iraq, its still great that they won.