Caveat: Obamiconography

pictureI saw the photo of our Future Space Emperor at the Telegraph (.co.uk) website. It looks like some weird Orthodox Jesus icon, with the presidential seal behind him exactly just so…
Don’t get me wrong… I’m really not trying to be sarcastic when I call him Future Space Emperor. I think, first of all, that it just sounds funny. It captures the weird Obameschatology that grew up around his campaign. But also, what if he really does turn out to be Space Emperor, at some point?
Really!  It could happen!
picture

Caveat: Black or White or What?

In a recent article that appeared in The Atlantic magazine (January 2009) by Hua Hsu, "The End of White America?" the historian Matthew Frye Jacobson asks "Why is it that in the United States, a white woman can have black children but a black woman cannot have white children?"   This has always bothered me.  And it makes glaringly obvious the arbitrary nature of "race."

True post-racialism necessarily must lead to the elimination of such facile and artificial categories as black and white.  Ethnic difference will, of course, persist.  But that's not the same thing at all.

Caveat: Love with no need to preempt grievance

Elizabeth Alexander's poem that she read at the Space Emperor's inauguration has received some unkind reviews.  But I found the text of it, and despite its reception, I think I rather like it.  At the risk of annoying a copyright god somewhere, I will reproduce it.

Writing a poem for such an event, in an era when poetry, especially poetry for public reading, is largely moribund, and for such a diverse audience as "all of America"… well, this is no small challenge.  She could have done much worse.

"Praise song for the day."
by Elizabeth Alexander
[2009 Obama Inauguration]

Each day we go about our business, walking past each other, catching each others' eyes or not, about to speak or speaking. All about us is noise. All about us is noise and bramble, thorn and din, each one of our ancestors on our tongues. Someone is stitching up a hem, darning a hole in a uniform, patching a tire, repairing the things in need of repair.

Someone is trying to make music somewhere with a pair of wooden spoons on an oil drum with cello, boom box, harmonica, voice.

A woman and her son wait for the bus.

A farmer considers the changing sky. A teacher says, "Take out your pencils. Begin."

We encounter each other in words, words spiny or smooth, whispered or declaimed; words to consider, reconsider.

We cross dirt roads and highways that mark the will of someone and then others who said, "I need to see what's on the other side; I know there's something better down the road."

We need to find a place where we are safe; we walk into that which we cannot yet see.

Say it plain, that many have died for this day. Sing the names of the dead who brought us here, who laid the train tracks, raised the bridges, picked the cotton and the lettuce, built brick by brick the glittering edifices they would then keep clean and work inside of.

Praise song for struggle; praise song for the day. Praise song for every hand-lettered sign, the figuring it out at kitchen tables.

Some live by "Love thy neighbor as thy self." Others by "First do no harm," or "Take no more than you need."

What if the mightiest word is love, love beyond marital, filial, national. Love that casts a widening pool of light. Love with no need to preempt grievance.

In today's sharp sparkle, this winter air, anything can be made, any sentence begun.

On the brink, on the brim, on the cusp — praise song for walking forward in that light.

 

Caveat: “We bought their stuff, now they have our money”

Above, is a quote I heard on NPR, explaining the current macroeconomic situation between China and the U.S.  I rather thought its simplicity was beautiful, and yet explains it better than many much more complicated accounts.  And I realize it doesn't mean that China is rich — all that money is really in the hands of the narrow elite that runs things in China, and specifically in its huge reserve of foreign exchange held by the government.  So it will require changes in policy on the part of China's government to "free up" that money to aid in the recovery from the current economic crisis.

Caveat: Perennial Peripheria

I noticed that California’s perennial water politics controversy, the Peripheral Canal, is in the news. It’s actually been on my mind, on and off.  The reason is complicated.
Since I came to Korea, some of the aspects of the EFL curricula I have been provided with to teach from that I have most liked have been the various “debate programs.” I think debate is a great way to teach not just language skills, but also to address important, related issues such as critical thinking and general confidence.  And when I think about debate, I always think about the debate class I had at Arcata High. It was in 10th or 11th grade, I think. Funny that I don’t remember that.  Nor can I recall the teacher’s name.  But, what I remember with great clarity and vividness was that the topic I ended up with, back in the beginning of the 80’s, was the Peripheral Canal:  to build or not to build? I remember trudging up to the Humboldt State University library repeatedly to study such archana as tracing the lobbying money being spent by the MWD (Metropolitan Water District of Southern California, a semi-private institution despite its name, kind of like the Fed of water politics), and feeling like I was uncovering some scary scandal, like in a movie.
The issue has always been interesting. I view it as the sort of archetype of the typical exceedingly complex environment vs human debate.  It has always had sincere environmentalists positioned on both sides.  On the one hand, the current extent of ongoing environmental degradation in the California Delta is unsustainable without some major change or human remediation. This has been recognized and essentially uncontroversial for 30 years (i.e. since before I was debating it in high school!). But other people fight the idea of building a canal to help “save” the delta, because the same canal will be able to support even further and faster degradation, unless properly managed for the benefit of the Delta ecosystem instead of simply to slake the ever-growing thirst of California’s cities.
pictureOne interesting feature of the current push is that some groups are pushing for an amendment to the California Constitution to make sure that the Delta (meaning its ecosystems) get representation of some kind on the board that oversees the management of any canal that is built.  Meanwhile, the governator, with characteristic recklessness, is pushing beginning of actual construction very hard.  Wanting it to be part of his legacy.  And, arguably, with the economic crisis creating a positive political environment for big public works spending (stimulus!), there’s some brilliant tactics on display there.  The canal would be the largest water-related public works project since the California Aqueduct was completed.
Some things have changed.  It’s no longer South vs North — Sacramento, lurking right on the eastern edge of the Delta, is thirstier now than L.A. was 30 years ago.  And many locals who opposed the canal in years past are now so desperate to see something done to save the Delta that they are more in a mood to compromise.  At least, that’s my perception.  I still don’t know what the right answer is… I think the Delta is doomed, regardless, at least as it is….  Canal or no canal, rising sea levels (global warming) will push salt water farther and farther inland (people forget that the Delta area between Sacramento and Vallejo is at exactly sea level… and Sacramento is the U.S. city most vulnerable to rising sea levels after only New Orleans, despite being 150 miles inland) unless other steps are taken that dwarf the canal both in terms of ecological impact and cost:  some kind of barrier will have to be built, a la Netherlands’ giant seawall, to keep San Francisco Bay from invading the Valley.
Anyway, all of which is to say… as I teach kids debating skills, I think back to that class.  I hated the teacher… probably it’s a good thing I don’t remember him.  But it was my first real academic-style “research” experience, and it generated what appears to have evolved into lifelong interests in a) the issues of the California Delta, and b) formal debate as a pedagogical method.
picture

Caveat: 200% return?

I can't find the link or article now, but I really did see this:  apparently the Argentine government recently paid $3 (yes, 3 dollars) to nationalize Aerolíneas Argentinas (apparently in bankruptcy).  The previous owner was upset, although he´d acquired the bankrupt airline sometime previously for only $1.  I don´t see why he should be upset… that´s a 200% return on his investment, which is damn good, in these difficult times.  I´ll keep searching and post a link it if I can find it.

Soundtrack:  Moody Blues'  "Blue World"

[Embedded youtube added later, as part of Background Noise.]

<iframe width="480" height="390" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/I1x2JnoRF-4" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Caveat: Spain surpasses Italy in per capita GDP

We are mostly accustomed to thinking of Italy as the strongest of the economies of Southern Europe, but I have always suspected they were losing ground to the more dynamic Iberians.  Now an article I found today in El País confirms this suspicion of mine.  The Spanish, at least on per capita terms, are in fact richer than the Italians, and closing in on the French.  I think that's interesting, especially in this time of alleged global economic crisis.

 

Caveat: “self-inflicted ideological wounds in a largely ideological struggle”

Michael Gerson, writing about the Bush administration’s “war on terror,” summarizes many of the difficulties with the phrase “self-inflicted ideological wounds in a largely ideological struggle.” I think this is an excellent description the Bush administration’s overall effect on U.S. global image and identity, too. But I also wonder how different it will be possible for the up-and-coming Space Emperor to be: with Gates and Clinton as his representatives, it’s clear he’s not straining for a radical change or departure from the status quo. If he manages change at all, it must be something he hopes to effect gradually. Is he planning to do so? Or is it all smoke and mirrors? Is there any germ of ideological commitment of any kind, amid all the packaging? I’m disturbed by the recent mess in the Illinois statehouse, involving Blogojevich attempting to “sell” Obama’s seat in the Senate. How could the future Space Emperor not have been aware of these shenanigans? If he wasn’t, that seems nearly as criminal, from the standpoint of negligence, as if he had been aware of them but wasn’t addressing them. I’m unhappy… not that I was ever really wholly drawn into the Obamania in the first place. I’ve had reservations that it was all packaging and fluff around something less pure than people seem to have been hoping. Yet I still feel uneasy to find that I’m seeing those reservations confirmed.

CaveatDumpTruck Logo

Caveat: Government

Regarding the desirability of government:  "We have been through some hard times, but the worst was when we had a government." – Somali businessman Abdirizak Ido, as quoted on the National Geographic website.  A true libertarian disciple, wounja say?

Meanwhile, a columnist named Chris Haire, writing for the Charleston City Paper today, says of Bill Kristol (conservative commentator), "[h]is dreams of a Benevolent Global Hegemony turned out to be a malicious worldwide clusterfuck."  This comment made me laugh for a while.  Especially appearing in a fairly mainstream-seeming blog.  I went on to discover I don't agree with a lot Mr Haire has to say.  But I enjoyed the moment of humor, anyway.

Caveat: Space Emperor Obama, Quoting Lincoln

Space Emperor Obama's book, The Audacity of Hope, gives clear evidence of his dangerous socialist tendencies… as, for example, when he quotes that proto-communist, Lincoln, on page 188.  The future Space Emperor writes:

But our history should give us confidence that we don't have to choose between an oppressive, government-run  economy and a chaotic, unforgiving capitalism.  It tells us that we can emerge from great economic upheavals stronger, not weaker.  Like those who came before us, we should be asking ourselves what mix of policies will lead to a dynamic free market and widespread economic security, entrepreneurial innovation and upward mobility.  And we can be guided throughout by Lincoln's simple maxim:  that we will do collectively, through our government, only those things that we cannot do as well or at all individually and privately.

Caveat: Space Emperor Obama, Chasing Cars…

Peggy Noonan (former Reagan staffer), writing for the Wall Street Journal (a decidedly right-leaning newspaper if ever there was one) about Barack Obama: “One wonders if in the presidency he’ll be like the dog that chased the car and caught it: What’s he supposed to do now?”
This actually very concisely sums up some of my own misgivings about Obama.  But… the alternative is worse.  I keep repeating that to myself, like a little mantra.   I believe that.  McCain is erratic, and he has no chance of (or seeming interest in) behaving moderately in the realm of foreign policy.   Further, his age and health combined with the Republican’s choice of Palin for the vice-presidency is utterly terrifying, and actually calls to mind Heinlein’s prediction that the U.S. would become a religious dictatorship sometime in the early 21st century.  Anybody willing to concede the possibility that a rapture-believing yet undeniably charismatic Christian fundamentalist Sarah Palin in the White House would work to accelerate America’s move toward an undemocratic, imperial presidency with an inflexible, Bible-prophecy-driven agenda?
Therefore, with Noonan’s caveat firmly in mind, I nevertheless reiterate my endorsement of Obama.  For what it’s worth.  So, at the risk of seeming vaguely partisan, here are some supporting quotes. Or… are they?
Jon Stewart, a few nights back (and this is totally a paraphrase, since I didn’t see the transcript): “Update from the Future:  Space Emperor Obama has now successfully spread communism to the Zykon Galaxy.”
And, in an interview Obama had with Stewart, after his infomercial on Wednesday night, Obama said, melancholically: “it’s not very funny:  cooperation.”  Why does Barack remind me of my father? He’s more my age, than my father’s.  But his manner, his cool affect (and/or eerie lack thereof) definitely remind me of my dad, sometimes.
Obama’s accent is my dad’s, too: generic Western American (as befits a man raised in Hawaii, right?). The very complex vowel clusters of westcoast English, but none of the southern and britishish diphthongs that make my mother’s accent so distinctive, for example, nor the upper midwestern level vowels that have tinged my own accent at least somewhat (although I still probably sound more western than midwestern). Obama can “talk black” if he needs to, kind of the way I can talk Minnesotan if I want to: years of immersion can give one a facility for switching accent-codes. But his fallback accent is very western and profoundly “white,” and that’s probably partly why this black man may soon be our next president.
pictureLastly, while cruising Second Life the other day, I found a political “lawn sign” that I thought was subtle and hilarious – see picture at right. It was attributed to Comedy Central (which is what sent me fishing around Comedy Central’s website in the first place and led me to the Jon Stewart quotes above), but a bit of googling yielded zero results for phrases like “vote fossil” or “dirt first.” So I will have to settle for a screenshot of the sign, since I can’t find/verify the source for a proper attribution.
It’s a funny moment, too, when Bill Kristol (editor of the very conservative Weekly Standard) channels Jesse Jackson (“Keep hope alive!”) in support of John McCain.  A bit earlier, Kristol said (again, I’m paraphrasing), “If you’re a liberal, vote for Obama. If you’re conservative, vote McCain. It’s not a psychodrama, it’s an election.” I would basically agree with that… except, does that make me a liberal?  Am I comfortable with that label? Seems like, only sometimes.
Speaking of the Comedy Central website, I also enjoyed the tiny informational message at the top of the page – see the center of the screenshot below:
picture
In unrelated news, I think this is very interesting. It is now possible to get the Chinese Internet Experience (i.e. censored) outside of China [UPDATE 2020-03-27: link does not work]. I’m not sure what this would be for, but it seems to fit with the tagline of one of the people who commented on the article: Hack the Planet. I like it, though I doubt I have any use for it whatsoever.
picture

Caveat: Viendo el debate presidencial en vivo en español

Esta mañana, me dediqué a mirar en vivo en el web el tercer debate, ¡en español!  ¿Porqué en español?  En parte, sólo por la novedad de poder hacerlo, pero, también porque brinda una cierta frescura a los mensajes ya tan aburridas de los candidatos.  Es interesante como oír los argumentos de Obama y McCain en voces de traductores (en voces femininas los dos) me enfoca mejor en sus contenidos, y permite olvidar las personalidades en cierta manera.  

Sin embargo, la negatividad de McCain, su postura defensiva, sobresalía en los fragmentos que escuché.   Y, mirándole, con su cara de viejito enfadado… difícil de aguantar.

En otras noticias, nótese como McCain sigue algo confundido respecto al siglo en que se encuentra, mirando como parece querer cambiar las reglas (que el mismo ha ayudado en crear) bajo las cuales operan las nuevas medias.

Otra pequeña observación: nunca antes me había fijado en que McCain es un zurdo.  ¿Significa algo éso?

Cita:  "While America remains a center-right country, this may well be a Marxist election in which economic realities are determining the political superstructure."–Michael Gerson, in op-ed column.

Caveat: 미국무부, “북한은 긴장 높이는 행동 중단해야”

Headline-du-jour: US State Dept, “N. Korea-TOPIC tension high-TOPIC [again?] behavior interrupt-do-OBLIGATION… [and then what?]”.  Not sure quite how to parse this, in detailed terms.  But the idea seems relatively clear, given current events.  I didn’t realize -야 (=[grammatically subordinate obligation]) could terminate a non-subordinate clause, however.   Or that there could be two TOPIC markers in the same clause, for that matter.   Perhaps it’s some journalistic shorthand?  Or perhaps since it’s the rather incoherent US State Department, being quoted?

Caveat: Mexico Still Independent, Sorta

Monday and Tuesday were Mexican independence day.  Two days, yes.  They put the event of declaring independence right at midnight, as that way they can party two days in a row each year.  But this year, the celebration was marred by grenades being lobbed into crowds in Morelia (which is the place in Mexico where I've spent the second-longest amount of time, after only my "#3 hometown," Mexico DF).

Mexico has always had a strong undercurrent of violence and anarchy, but lately I'm beginning to wonder if my time in Mexico in the mid-to-late 80's was maybe exceptional in being relatively tranquil, or whether in fact it was just as violent as now but I was simply being oblivious to it.  I know that the murder rate in Mexico City was very high even in the 80's, but it's even higher now.  Back then, murders were out of hand in the U.S. as well, so maybe it didn't seem so alarming.  Nowadays, the rate in Mexico City is the among the highest in the world, while notorious death-dealing U.S. cities like L.A. or NYC have improved substantially.

My run-in yesterday with Korean private-sector bureaucracy had me thinking about Mexico, too.  Obviously, any run-in with bureaucracy can cause me to wax nostalgic for those interminable hours standing in lines at banks or government offices in Mexico.  Though the DMV in California isn't disimilar.   Superficially, Korea has leapfrogged into the developed world.  But the undercurrent of thirdworldism (as pat and offensive and cliche as that really sounds) is still there, to be found, lurking under the surface of things.

Now that I work for a large, much-more-faceless corporation, perhaps I'm seeing that more, too.  Anyway, it's on my mind. 

But back to Mexico.  I'm worried.  When I surf the news articles on the grenade incident, I detect a certain institutional despair over the increasingly out-of-control situation vis-a-vis the drug violence that seems to be sweeping the country.  And, like any vaguely liberal American, I blame the American "drug war," at least partly, for the problem.   But Mexico's ambivalence about genuinely enforcing rule of law is saddening.  It's depressing to observe its tendency to allow money of all varieties (thus including narco-money) to seep into and quietly control all political processes, in ways that makes U.S. money-driven politics look profoundly transparent, humane, and fair.  Calderón seems as weak and aimless as any old boy priísta in his day.  The congress, supposedly more under the panista´s control than during the Fox term, stil seems to resist any efforts whatsoever at reform.  The PAN, far from offering anything genuinely new, just seems to be a new PRI with a sexy neoliberal headdress but nothing really new, and the left (PRD etc.) remains as chaotic and self-absorbed as ever. 

In other notes:  "These are your father's parentheses."  LISP programming language humor.

Caveat: Barack me obamadeus

I ran across the above phrase while surfing through panels of the webcomic xkcd (one of the best comics of all time – and the fact that I believe this proves I'm a nerd).  It struck me as funny, and made me laugh out loud (which is not the same as LOL, after all). The phrase is a play on the title of that German guy Falco's 1985 pop hit (his only U.S. hit), "Rock me Amadeus."

The distortion has been attributed to an episode of Jon Stewart's Daily Show in June, but I have found occurences of it in the blogosphere from quite a bit farther back than June, including a scathing criticism of Obama in a difficult to attribute blog written April 1, 2008. The criticism is sarcastic and brutal, yet cogent and mostly accurate as far as it goes. Yet it doesn't dissuade me from thinking we're still better off under Obama, next term, than McCain. Politics is so depressing.

Caveat: Running Mates

I really haven't been impressed with how the U.S. presidential candidates picks of running mates has played out. Obama played it excessively safe, and frankly I've always found Biden to be almost creepily inauthentic – an old-school democrat machine politician as far as I can tell. And now a vote for Obama isn't an unambiguous vote for "change," after all. 

Meanwhile, McCain chose a total wildcard in Palin. Pandering to the youth and female vote without actually managing to cross the line into something genuine or exciting. In actuality, if we look at her positions, Palin is more plausible if we read her as a fillip for the conservative, Christian-right base of the Republican party, who just "happens to be" female and relatively youthful. But she, also, therefore manages to make McCain's efforts to be a "different" sort of Republican – less beholden to the far-right – completely moot.

Their actions lowered my interest or desire to vote for either of them, and I am forced to return to my basic motivation: I will probably vote for Obama not because of what he stands for be merely because I perceive the Republicans to be the more dangerous brand of hypocrite, currently.

Caveat: 스페인 여객기 추락 153명 사망

I had another tiny yet triumphal linguistic milestone this morning when I logged onto the internet. I opened up google news, which, because of my IP address, plops me down on the Korean version of the site by default. Normally, the only time I spend time on google news in Korean is if I’m intentionally and masochistically spending time there trying to decipher a headline or maybe (if I’m feeling ambitious) the first line of an article.
But today, I had the experience of a headline grabbing my attention and leading me to click through to the article. It said: “스페인 여객기 추락 153명 사망…19명만 생존.” It helped that there were a few keywords in the article that I easily knew: 스페인=(Spain), 명=(PEOPLE COUNTER), 사망=(dead). So it was about 153 people dead in Spain. More terrorism? I, the reading public, had to know more!
Of course, I went to google news in English, finally, to satisfy my curiosity. But it was cool to have the experience of “spontaneous reading” (as opposed to deliberate reading, I guess). Still, reading about airline crashes, whether in Korean or English, isn’t necessarily smart, right before an airplane trip.
And now, a completely unrelated thought. There’s been a lot in the news lately about McCain closing his gap with Obama in polls on the presidential race, and much commentary about how they’re “neck and neck,” or somesuch.
But Obama is still at 60 points to McCain’s 40, if you look at Intrade.  Intrade is a “prediction market”–a place where people bet real money on the outcomes of future events–and a large number of studies have shown that prediction markets are phenomenally more accurate than polls at predicitons.  So I’ll just keep watching Intrade and keep ignoring the polls–I will be surprised if that historical accuracy doesn’t again prove out.

Caveat: comander-in-chief.com

pictureAn article in the LA Times (online) about Sean Tevis was intriguing.  It’s showing how the new, Obama-style of internet-based fundraising is beginning to impact local political races, in the reddest of red states, Kansas.  He’s using geek-speak and webcomics to transform the electoral process in a state legislative race. At right is a particularly funny excerpt from the comic on his website. I could borrow this diagram to explain how to survive in Korea as a westerner!
In fact, I’m not entirely unfamiliar with Olathe, KS… I’ve spent a little bit of time there. That area is basically a Marin County or Westchester County for red-staters (which is to say that Johnson County, KS, is one of the wealthiest counties in the country, but unlike most of the U.S.’s wealthiest counties, it’s about as red as red can get). So the fact that a democrat-leaning computer guy is using the internet to raise unexpected campaign cash, even there, is proof that this new mode of campaign finance is truly taking root, I guess.
Really, the credit belongs to Howard Dean, as I understand it. And various semi-counter-cultural computer types from Vermont and, of course, Silicon Valley. It was Dean, in the 2004 race, who first used the internet effectively in this way – and had it been the case that he’d managed to avoid the “Iowa Scream,” things could have developed Obama-style in that election.  But instead, Dean’s campaign self-destructed and the deanoids (including Dean himself, from his position running the DNC) are now the not-so-secret engines driving the internet-based fundraising juggernaut that is barackobama.com.  Hmm… I just had a thought. I said sometime back that Obama was going to be our Urkel-in-chief, but how about this: commander-in-chief.com? I wonder who might be squatting on that particular domain name.
In other news… The character Han Ji-eun in Full House is quite different from others I’ve seen, so far, in Korean dramas. Most of the characters (both male and female) in these shows seem to struggle with the same sorts of cultural-based communication taboos that I’ve confronted in my working environments–see my post of several days ago. In fact, it is the existance of these communication taboos that very often drive so many of the convolutions of plot and character development, where, just like in Baroque Spanish drama, the “misunderstanding” is the cultural apparatus behind all the great stories. But Han Ji-eun evolves to become amazingly straightforward in talking about her feelings and situation, which makes her a very sympathetic and appealing character to me.
Quote:
“Power begets more power, absolutely.”–Frank Rich, regarding Obama, in a recent editorial in NYT
-Notes for Korean-
context:  talking with my students about big numbers
억=100,000,000 (one hundred million)
context:  learning to use the grade-posting website at my new job
평가=evaluation
관리=management, admin
상담=consultation, talk
원생관리=(I haven’t got a clue what this means, dictionary not helping…
문제=theme, subject, question
풀이=explanation
표시=indication, manifestation (with a check box, …표시 means “show…” I think)
context:  reviewing old notes (from 7/1 – 7/14)
첫걸음 baby steps, first steps
첫 maiden, first time of something
걸음 walking, pace
정표 keepsake, memento, love token
걷기 fall into step, tip toe…
운동 movement, motion
인재채용 employment recruitment
눈싸움 a snowball fight
긴급 emergency
기상청 weather forecast
문화 culture, civ
겪다 undergo, experience, suffer
분야 sphere, realm
인간  mortal, human
인간계 the world of mortals
사신 (邪神) demon, false god
사신계  ?the world of demons (shinigami)
매일 daily
같이 like, similar to, same as, as usual, side by side
똑같다 alike, absolutely identical, exact image of
맞다 to be right
여행  travel, trip, voyage
돈 money, cash
여우 fox
암여우 vixen (female fox)
아이구 oh my! oh goodness!
picture

Caveat: Postponement

After several weeks of anxiety over whether or not to renew my contract with ElBeuRitJi (the hagwon taking over my current employer at the end of this month), partly because of it being a bit of an unknown, now I've managed to simply postpone the decision.  ElBeuRitJi will "inherit" my existing contract, which ends at the end of August.  So I have to work for them, regardless, for one month.  That will give me a chance to get a feel for how they are, and for them to get a feel for how I am.  Essentially, I will just not sign anything until down the road a month. 

Meanwhile, I've decided to make a halfhearted commitment to the Obama campaign – I signed up on his social networking site my.barackobama.com.  As I've said some months back, I was more of a Richardson supporter (although even that had its ambivalences because of my libertarian tendencies), but I'm so certain we need to exclude the Republicans from government (given that they have behaved in such frighteningly unlibertarian ways – in everything from size-of-government to social policy to civil liberties to foreign policy), that I've decied to just come out and openly support Obama – for what it's worth. 

Caveat: An Aimless Drive

"Life is an aimless drive that ya take alone.  Might as well enjoy the ride, take the long way home." This is the chorus from the Bloodhound Gang's song, "Take the Long Way Home."  I'm not sure that I have anything specific to say about this. But it's a good quote. And right now, I'm listening to the Beastie Boys.

On NPR, earlier, I heard a man named Tom Segev being interviewed.  He's a columnist for the newspaper Ha'aretz (Israel), and was talking about the whole question of to what degree the Israeli government interacts with groups such Hezbollah or Hamas.   He said (and, because this is overheard on the radio, I don't know that it's a perfect quote), "We claim never to be negotiating with terrorists.  In fact, we are always negotiating – every government in the world is always negotiating – with terrorists."

This struck me as profoundly and fundamentally true, and puts lie to the constantly enunciated position of most governments that "negotiating with terrorists" is neither appropriate nor ever pursued as a matter of policy – "so as not to encourage them" so to speak.

I would only like to add further to his observation, by wondering:  if this [i.e. "negotiation"] did not occur, with great regularity, mightn't terrorists eventually abandon their activities as fruitless?  Terrorists are successful with their generally ideological missions mostly to the extent to which the terror they sow can induce governments to react and change policies, cede resources, or capitulate.  This has always been true, and all war is, ultimately, terrorist in nature, and just an extension of politics by other means, as the aphorism has it.

And now I'm listening to Radiohead's "Backdrifts."

Caveat: existentialist-in-chief

I was reading an article discussing General Clark's recent comments regarding McCain's qualifications to be "commander-in-chief."  (The thought being, roughly, that having been a prisoner-of-war is brave and shows strong character, but isn't the same as command experience.)  I was thinking about that phrase, commander-in-chief.  And began toying with the idea of McCain as "prisoner-of-war-in-chief," reflecting on the way that a person's formative experiences and character can come to define a presidency:  Nixon as rogue-in-chief, Reagan as movie-star-in-chief, Clinton as bubba-in-chief. 

In this vein, and if McCain is to be prisoner-of-war-in-chief, what would Obama be?  I think about aspects of his character and formative experiences, and think, maybe something like community-activist-in-chief?  Perhaps, less charitably, he could become our Urkel-in-chief.  There's definitely something to the idea that, like the sitcom prototype (the legendary Urkel), Obama manages to transcend racial and cultural stereotypes in part through his nerdiness – which is to say, nerdiness as an essential stereotype runs "deeper" than race.  Which actually says something pretty positive about the state of race relations in America, maybe.  I  think it was Joel Stein who first suggested the comparison between Obama and Urkel, but I don't know that most of the comparisons have been entirely meant to be positive.  Still… who am I, as pale white ubernerd, to judge?

Caveat: Sith Master of Silicon Valley

I was reading a Forbes magazine article (byline Brian Caulfield and Wendy Tanaka 06.13.08) about the failure of the Microsoft-Yahoo deal and Yahoo's subsequent scramble for googlence, and one of the lines that stood out to me was a characterization of Larry Ellison (the wildly eccentric boss of Oracle Corp) as the "Sith Master of Silicon Valley."   I liked the idea that this might be on target.

I'm a shareholder in Oracle, and furthermore, I hold an Oracle certification as a Database Administrator – which is ironic since all my actual DBA and development work has been with Microsoft's competing SQL Server product, for which I hold no certification.

Despite this, I am not a fan of their product line, exactly – it is about as baroque as a high technology product line can get and still function.  The reason I bought stock in the company was, rather, because I saw first hand, during my years working with the Paradise Corp (a pseudonym) IT department the amazing ease with which Oracle's enterprise sales team took my employers for a multimillion dollar ride.  A project which was started in 2003 is still going on, years after the original anticipated "go live" date, and as far as I know, it barely works if at all, and only with a zillion caveats (appropriate to mention, I suppose, for this blog).

I figured if all of Oracle's sales teams were half as effective as the ones working my IT higher ups at Paradise, that company had a locked down revenue stream for decades to come.  So, through thick and thin, I remain a loyal Oracle shareholder – and among all my long-term holdings, it's been, overall, one of the most pleasing.  Or maybe that's just the luck of jumping on (and off and on again) the bandwagon at the right time?

Caveat: The Beef

There have been massive and ongoing protests here in Korea over the government's efforts to comply with what should have been a rather routine resumption of imports of U.S. beef.  Most international analyses of this situation that I have seen focus on the fact that it is about more than beef, but that it's not necessarily simple anti-Americanism either.  Something in-between:  it's about authority and control – meaning, whether or not South Korea can or should yield to American pressure to resume imports, or whether it should stand on its own authority and resist.

I find this intriguing, given my own neverending saga over the question of authority and how to deploy it successfully in my current work environment.  This evening, I became frustrated because I felt that one of my coworkers had undercut my authority by telling me, in front of a student, that maybe I shouldn't make them stay late to finish homework (a fairly common form of mild discipline for students who don't complete their work).  This set me up, since to make the student stay at that point I was not only being "unfair" to the student but also ignoring the plea for compassion from one of the student's other teachers.

When I complained about this, the response was: oh, we're not undercutting your authority.  And a demand for concrete examples of other times I felt this occurred, since I had worded my complaint rather broadly, and said that I felt my authority was "frequently undercut."  This wasn't wise of me, as arguments with my one supervisor always seem to devolve into arguments of the factuality of my complaints – a good strategy on his part, since the burden of proof is on the complainer.

Regardless of the wisdom my complaint, I found myself feeling especially put off by a suggestion that somehow the only reason I lacked authority with my students is because I somehow don't have the creativity or force of personality to make that authority for myself.  And coming home and looking at the news, I started to think about the radically different relationships American and Korean cultures cultivate with respect to the concept and practice of authority.  All of which is to say, I'm aware that there's a cultural gap underlying the communication gap, which is brought to the fore by the "authority" gap that I'm experiencing everyday.  And I have no idea how to proceed.

Caveat: Holy Cow… uh, Brains.

One change I'm beginning to notice since the election of the conservative and pro-American Lee Myung-Bak as president last December:  many who oppose the new president, one whatever grounds, incorporate a certain strident anti-Americanism into their discourse.  This is logical, as South Korea's relationship with the U.S. is (and has, historically, long been) an emotionally-loaded hot-button on both the left and right.

This is nowhere more visible than the current outcry over something that was supposed to be a routine aspect of moving forward on a free trade agreement with the U.S. that was part of the president's platform: the resumption of imports of American beef.  South Korea, like Japan, had placed a ban on American beef imports back in 2003 after the incident where an American cow had been detected with BSE (bovine spongiform encephalopathy), more commonly called mad-cow disease. 

Now that the government has moved to remove the import ban, many Koreans are in a panic over the possibility of infected U.S. beef unrestrictedly entering their markets and diets.  It hasn't helped that there have recently been other issues with the U.S. beef supply (not directly related to mad-cow but definitely related to broader food-safety concerns), such as the authorities closing down that giant processor in California a few months back when it was discovered the place was allowing clearly sick cattle to proceed to slaughter, in contravention of law.

I'm of two minds regarding the Korean public's hue and cry over mad-cow.  On the one hand, I regret that political opposition to the president and his policies, often quite legitimate, is being anchored to an issue with such flimsy scientific foundations as BSE, which is not clearly understood by any scientific community in the world, and given that no incontrovertible case of transmission of "mad-cow" from meat to human has ever been documented in the U.S. (although 3 cases of "new variant Creutzfeldt-Jakob Disease" have been found via autopsy – but that's out of a population of 300 million, and it's never been shown that BSE is the only possible source of vCJD).

Nevertheless, I do believe strongly that there are other very strong health and environmental reasons for attempting to reduce consumption and better regulate the world's beef supply – and U.S. beef industry practices are central to this.  Factory farming of beef is neither environmentally sound, nor is it sustainable, and, likely, it will eventually be linked to all kinds of currently poorly-documented and little-understood health ills.

For these reasons, I tend to support the South Koreans' protests as being "right action for wrong reasons."  Which is pretty common in politics, in general, in my opinion.   Burning effigies of American cows – have at it!

Caveat: The Supremacy Clause and Judicial Activism

Ever since the U.S. Supreme Court's decision in Medellin v. Texas (earlier this year), I have felt deeply troubled.  The so-called "supremacy clause" of the U.S. Constitution states:  "all Treaties made under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the land."  But the court held that unless the Congress passes specific laws implementing treaties, treaties are not binding domestic laws.  How is this interpretation in any way in line with constitutional intent?

I'm not trained in law, but the supremacy clause, and our governments' disregard for it, has always troubled me.  I feel strongly that the "founding fathers'" intent was in line with something U.S Grant subsequently envisioned: 

I believe at some future day, the nations of the earth will agree on some sort of congress which will take cognizance of international questions of difficulty and whose decisions will be as binding as the decisions of the Supreme Court are upon us.

Essentially, I think that the Supremacy Clause must have specifically had in mind the sorts of binding supranational treaties we now see with organizations of states such as the U.N. or the E.U.  I don't think that such supranational polities were in any way beyond the conception of the founders of the U.S., given that it seems very likely they viewed their own project as a supranational rather than national project – there was nothing subtle or requiring interpretation in the name they chose:  United States of America.  They expected more states to join, they thought they were already supranational, and they were not trying to build a nation, but rather replace it, as a concept, with something new.  In this sense, the E.U. as it stands today is perhaps closer to their conception than the contemporary U.S. 

That's just my opinion.  So… whatever.  I had a bad day today at work, so I decided to rant on about something where I'm both uninformed and singularly unempowered.

Back to Top