The War against Elites

In the recent Pennsylvania Democratic party primary, Senator Hilary Clinton pounded on Senator Barrack Obama and called him an elitist and out of touch with reality, capitalizing on Obama’s 'bitter' comment few days earlier. While one will never know exactly how much damage that comment has done to his campaign in Pennsylvania and else where later, Obama was obviously so concerned that he had to clarify, spin, and ultimately apologize for ‘misuse’ of words. Merriam-Webster defines elites as 'the best part of a class'. So what is wrong of being an elite? Why are both candidates trying hard to portray themselves more like a populist, the opposite of elitist?

My readings so far suggest that in American politics of the last century, the only worse label than a socialist or communist seems to be an elitist or intellect! I have to say such a revelation really came as a surprise to someone like me, a first generation immigrant, who owes much to education and learnings off and on-the-job. Wasn’t a crucial factor for the success of this nation the system and constitution designed by the Founding Fathers who were outstanding intellects and elites? Why is there such contempt for intellects and elites nowadays? Is it because the resentment that some of them are from privileged classes?

Susan Jacoby, a brilliant American intellect, has recently published a book The Age of American Unreason that has fascinating discussions of the phenomenon, the history, and the reasons for anti-intellectualism in America. Her appearance and interchanges with Steven Colbert in his April 22nd Show was brief and entertaining.

But seriously, she is speaking up against the dangerous anti-intellectual attitude that is affecting the mental health of this nation and we should all be concerned about. The Obama’s Pennsylvania primary incident is merely the tip of an iceberg.

I suspect the issue is deep; it goes back to the very basic principle of ‘one man one vote’ and ‘majority rule’ democratic system that gives each of us equal weight and significance, independent of any attribute including intelligence and knowledge. Ideally, we would like the elected leaders be the ‘best’ in every attribute we can come up with - the exact definition of elite, and yet at the same time, as an individual, I surely do not like to be reminded of my own shortcomings even though the reality is there are so many out there who are ‘smarter’ than me (note: half or so of us will always be below the average for a given attribute by the very definition of average stat ;-) So, how can we resolve this dilemma and move beyond denial and political correctness?

Recall that there is no guarantee to begin with that the majority shall get things right that is NOT what democracy is promising. It only promises the representation of everyone’s voice and opinion and avoids the danger of self-perpetuating tyranny of minority and dictatorship. It offers people a peaceful way to remove elected representatives and leaders for whatever the reasons including incompetence and abuse of their delegated power. It cannot by itself prevent manipulation and misrepresentation by politicians. That is where pursuit of knowledge and intellectual comes in to help the odds that we select great leaders. After all, the outcome of the election simply reflects the collective wisdom of the voters; we have no one else to blame but to learn and try to make a better judgment each and every time. And the way to learn and try is to pursue and improve our knowledge and judgment.

For those capable men and women who are aspired to public service and politics, I will say to them: it is pretty straightforward; I don’t need you to pretend you are like me when you are not. If I vote for you that is because you know a lot more and are ‘much smarter’ than me. I don’t need you to say things to make me feel good that is my therapist’s job, not yours. I want you to pay attention to your responsibilities: ask the right questions, do thorough fact-based (not faith-based) analysis, and make good judgments and decisions. I want you to convince me that you are diligent, competent, compassionate, and respectful. How hard could that be?

Talk to you soon!

Religious Freedom and Separation of Church & State

Two weeks ago, on April 3, Texas authorities raided the Polygamist Yearn for Zion (YFZ) Ranch in Eldorado, Texas that is owned by the breakaway Mormon sect known as the Fundamentalist Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints (FLDS). 416 children of various ages were removed and (Texas State) court proceeding is underway to determine who shall have the custody of the children to protect them from alleged abusive environment and practice. The basic issue is the doctrine followed by the FLDS sect (and a small number of splinter groups) brainwashed underage girls younger than 18 to accept “arranged” polygamous marriage to older men, and boys to practice polygyny and abuse when they grow up.

A week ago, we happened to be in Salt Lake City to attend a wedding that brought back some memories. My first encounter with Mormons (or more accurately LDS, Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, distinct from splinter groups like FLDS) was during my college senior year when I was staying at my sister’s apartment in Taipei city which is two blocks away from a Mormon church. I often saw neatly dressed young Mormon missionaries in white shirts and black pants merrily riding down the streets in high bikes. Then 32 years ago, my wife and I visited Salt Lake City briefly during our “make-up honeymoon”, on our way back to Berkeley after staying at the Yellowstone National Park in Wyoming. One of the “must visit” places is of course the magnificent Mormon Temple and headquarter of LDS, built from 1853 through 1893. In addition to the beautiful and immense organ of the church, I still remember vividly till today the statements etched on the wall that remind the Mormons of the persecutions and hardships they had endured since founded by Joseph Smith, Jr. in 1830 in upper New York through the migration led by Brigham Young to the Great Salt Lake Valley in 1847 (Photo on theright is taken from the Antelope Island of the Great Salt Like).

According to various statistics (see e.g. The Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life), there are estimated 3.7 millions Mormons out of the 220+ millions U.S. adults (18 years and older) and there are over 12 millions Mormons worldwide as a result of successful missions over the years. Further, about 60% of the ~2.7 millions of Utah residents today are Mormons although the percentage appears to be decreasing over the decades. While Mormon is a distant 3^rd (1.7%), percentage wise in U.S. adult religious affiliation, after Protestant (51.3%) and Catholic (23.9%), it has been under the spotlight from time to time in U.S. history, partly due to its concentrated populations in a few areas and thus the exhibited local political and economical power. One latest example was Mitt Romney’s 2008 Republican presidential candidacy who was a governor of Massachusetts and is a Mormon. Of course the most event was the LDS leadership’s decision in 1890 to obey the law and suspended its practice of polygyny (no, they never practiced polyandry which is also a form of polygamy). That happened only after decades of legal battles, began with the 1874 test case that asserted the First Amendment right and separation of Church and State, and ended when the federal government announced that they would start to seize the assets of the temples, following the supreme court’s ruling and reaffirmation of the rights of government to take punitive measures against the church and individuals. One can’t help but wonder is there something fundamentally wrong with polygyny or polygamy in general? Where should the line be drawn? Why and when should government spend its time and energy in setting up anti-polygamy laws and enforce them rigorously?

The reality is many social and religious practices do evolve and change over time for many reasons including political and economical ones. Adoption and rejection of Polygamy is no exception; for instance, Roman practice and laws had a lot to do with the prohibition of polygyny by majority of Jewish and Christian. Indeed it has been practiced in various places and times by some groups with varying degree of objection/acceptance or tolerated by the rest of the society. This could be considered as respect for religious freedom or tradition provided it does not do harms physically or mentally to oneself or others!

What most of people would find unacceptable and intolerable in the FLDS (and some other) case is the cult-like practice whereby (male, in this case) leaders hide behind religion and use the name of God and selected part of scriptures with literally interpretation to brainwash and indoctrinate sect members including children. It deprives the individuals of the sect every human right I can think of and it is simply wrong and immoral. It is particularly offensive as they impose their wills on children who would never be given a chance to grow up with skills that allow them to think independently and critically. It is the worst form of abuse in my opinion – the deprivation of advanced thinking ability that distinguishes human beings from animals.

No doubt the Texas YFZ Ranch case will be challenging legally and no doubt a lot of harms have already been done to children that could be irreversible. We must make it clear however such abusive cult-like behavior will not be tolerated. We must take aggressive legislative and legal actions against those who abuse the children mentally and intellectually, not just physically. Religious groups who do not respect the laws should be stripped off their status at minimum (thus tax and financial support by the society!). That is the true spirit of the separation of church and state. The law of the land must be followed by all but the dead!

Talk to you soon!

Blowin’ in The Wind

On April 8^th, 2008, Bob Dylan was awarded a Pulitzer Prize for his contribution to music. The legendary singer-songwriter was given the Special Citation In Music “for his profound impact on popular music and American culture, marked by lyrical compositions of extraordinary poetic power.”

For those who are too young to know him, Dylan was a symbol of anti-war and civil right movements in 1960s. Yes, the poetic power there was as illustrated by one of his most memorable songs Blowin’ in The Wind in 1963, early in his career, at the height of civil rights movements and early days of the Vietnam War.

To me, Bob Dylan has always been a poet more than a folk star. He is more a soul of American than a rock singer. To mark this award occasion and to remind all of us the tragic Iraq War as it enters the 6^th year, below is my attempt of a Chinese translation of the lyrics of Dylan's Blowin’ in The Wind.

隨風而逝 Blowin’ in The Wind

一個人要走過多少路, How many roads must a man walk down
我們才能接納這人? Before you call him a man?
唉,一隻鴿子要飛過多少大海,
Yes, n how many seas must a white dove sail
才能在沙丘上歇息? Before she sleeps in the sand?
唉,要多少炮彈飛越我們頭上,
Yes,n how many times must the cannon balls fly
才能永無戰爭?
Before they’re forever banned?
朋友們,謎底是 - 隨風而逝.
The answer, my friend, is blowin’ in the wind,
謎底是 - 隨風而逝.
The answer is blowin’ in the wind.

一個人要往上看多少次, How many times must a man look up
才能識得天空? Before he can see the sky?
唉,一個人要有幾隻耳朵,
Yes, n how many ears must one man have
才能聽到人們的哭泣? Before he can hear people cry?
唉,要犧牲多少人,
Yes, n how many deaths will it take till he knows
我們才覺悟代價太大?
That too many people have died?
朋友們,謎底是 - 隨風而逝.
The answer, my friend, is blowin’ in the wind,
謎底是 - 隨風而逝.
The answer is blowin’ in the wind.

一座山要矗立多久, How many years can a mountain exist
才能回歸大海? Before its washed to the sea?
唉,人們要偷生多久,
Yes, n how many years can some people exist
才能獲得自由? Before they’re allowed to be free?
唉,一個人要轉幾次頭,
Yes, n how many times can a man turn his head,
才能視而不見?
Pretending he just doesn’t see?
朋友們,謎底是 - 隨風而逝.
The answer, my friend, is blowin’ in the wind,
謎底是 - 隨風而逝.
The answer is blowin’ in the wind.

Talk to you soon!

Slowly Boiled Frog

Finally got around to watch the famous 2006 documentary film Inconvenient Truth about the tireless campaign for awareness of global warming by Al Gore, former Vice President 1993-2000, used-to-be-next-president 2001, and Nobel Peace Prize co-recipient 2007. Al Gore did an excellent job of articulating the complex issues in laymen’s terms and the needs for immediate actions. He also used the popular metaphor of slowly boiled frog to warn us the likely destruction due to ignorance and complacency. Before I blog on, let me first go and turn off the excess lighting in the house!

Being a born skeptic with a superficial impression from limited exposure of this subject, I was not sure exactly what to make out of it for a long time. Do I really need to do something differently now? Or since I consider myself a pretty decent resident of planet earth, what more do I need to do before others? Ok, the average world temperature seems to be increasing but how bad is it and so what? Didn’t it happen more than once long long time ago before any of us was born? How and why is it different this time? Um… may be it would be nice if temperature of my area goes up a little in the winter... Ok, the sea level is rising, but by how much and what is the big deal? Would it affect me who live 15 miles from the shore? Is that ALL?

What caught my attention in the film was the measurements and data that tell us there IS something different this time: we are witnessing an extremely rapid deterioration of critical indicators of our climate in hockey stick shape curves when plotted as a function of time. What is most alarming is that the underlying feedbacks and interactions of contributing factors are such that the deterioration is accelerating at a much faster than constant rate. One example, the North Pole icecap is experiencing accelerated meltdown and now some new estimates suggest it may disappear completely by 2040, i.e. in my life time! You may not care about polar bears but you should known that the icecap is the main “air conditioner” of planet earth and is what keeps ocean streams going and lower latitude areas cool! This observation and new understanding by scientists suggests that the previous models and projections are likely to underestimate significantly how soon “the shits will hit the fan”.

More worrisome news: some had projected that, based on the population currently living in low elevation coastal areas, regions like Bangladesh, Pakistan and India alone could be seeing over 100 million people be displaced due to rising sea level by end of this century. Other estimates had put hundreds of millions to 1 billion people across the world be displaced in next few decades (will you or some of your family members be one of them?) Considering what 2005 Hurricane Katrina (which by the way became a category 5 hurricane partly due to global warming) had done to this country that displaced about 1+ million people, shouldn’t we be worried now? Further, significant shortage of food and fresh water supply are expected due to increased drought conditions and melting snowcaps of high mountains that currently provide the fresh water to about 1/6 of the earth population, even if you ignore the population growth and resulting additional demand for resources.

The good news is there are many entities and learned people who have been concerned and studied the global warming problems for quite sometime. United Nation (UN) established in 1988 a scientific body - The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to evaluate the risk of climate change caused by human activity (note the carefully chosen neutral term of the study objective). It has compiled and issued 4 assessment reports since 1990 (the last one was issued in 2007). Along with Al Gore, IPCC was a co-recipient of the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize for its contributions on this issue. The bigger yet challenge however is to get countries and people together to take corrective and preventive actions.

The biggest hurdle is an economic one: it is intuitively that with today’s most popular energy sources and technology, there is a strong correlation between the per capita energy consumption (which can be considered as a measure of wealth) and per capita carbon dioxide emission (which is the dominating part of greenhouse gas emission). Further, the latter, when aggregated in total, is almost perfectly correlated with the average earth temperature. Thus it is not surprising that, according to the IPCC’s 2007 assessment, per capita carbon dioxide emissions of India, China, European Union and USA are roughly at 2, 5, 10 and 20 tons, respectively. With continued development on the current trajectory, one can expect the parity of per capita emissions will decrease (which is good) but the total emission, the product of per capita emission and total population, will increase dramatically (which is bad) and thus a disastrous outcome for ALL.

Politically, U.S. government has been alone in the international community on what should be the “fair share” of reduction of greenhouse gases. In fact, the Bush government has not nor intended to seek ratification of the Kyoto Protocol first created in 1997. Public opinion wise, it is not clear to me if Americans’ awareness and understanding is there yet. One of the multiple choice survey questions in the June 2005 report of PIPE (Program on International Policy Attitudes) was: “ There is a controversy over what the countries of the world, including the US, should do about the problem of global warming. Please tell me which statement comes closest to your own point of vie: a)Until we are sure that global warming is really a problem, we should not take any steps that would have economic cost, b)the problem of global warming should be addressed, but its effects will be gradual, so we can deal with the problem gradually by taking steps that are low in cost, c)global warming is a serious and pressing problem . We should begin taking steps now even if this involves significant cost." This question was also asked in ’04 and ’98 and the results from the surveys were: 21%/42%/34% in ’05 vs. 15%/44%/39% in ’98. I would submit it indicates further polarization of people’s opinion on how urgent the issue is! One more data point about how informed people are: the same report found that 43% of respondents assumed incorrectly that Bush government is in favor of participating in the Kyoto Treaty!

This is exactly a slowly boiled frog scenario. Hopefully we the human are more intelligent and capable of predicting the futures. We don’t have to be stuck with the same old thing and painful trade (of good life vs. environment) if we work hard on alternative technologies and life styles soon enough. There are a lot of ways one can help addressing the threat of global warming, see e.g. Wikipedia’s entry on Mitigation of global warming. At the policy level, we can press our representatives and government to craft legislations and adopt policies that lead to better environment. At individual level, we can get more educated and learn how to sustain and not to abuse our environment. We can distinguish quality from excess of life. We can vote with our wallet to encourage greener and energy efficient goods. Last but not the least, we can eat more healthy - less meat and more vegetables; Livestock's Long Shadow, a 2006 U.N. report, noted that 18% of the greenhouse gas emission can be attributed to livestock sector!

For those who refuse to believe in science and do not want to act before it is too late, my advise to them is to please keep your mouth shut and stop arguing. That alone will decrease their contribution of carbon dioxide emission (through exhale).

My favorite Chinese language tidbit is about the word "crisis" which in Chinese is My favorite Chinese language tidbit is about the word “crisis” which in Chinese is 危機 (wei ji). The first character 危 (wei) means danger and the next one 機 (ji) means opportunity. Yes, we better not let earth be turned into a planet like Mars today. We must capture this opportunity and create a quality habitat for generations to come.

Talk to you soon!