As the results seem to indicate that Mr. Bush has won four more years with a far clearer mandate than in 2000, the world has to wonder what qualities Americans see in their leader that the majority of the world is cannot see.
From my perspective, Bush is a bullying, ineloquent anti-intellectual who uses religious imagery and fear to reach his voters. The debates portrayed a man who cannot deal with criticism, has a weak grasp of issues of consequence, and cannot conduct himself in a professional manner that is expected of a major world leader. His folksy “charm” and ability to reduce issues to their simplest denominator might make him a good mayor of some small unimportant isolated town, but they are serious handicaps when on the world stage. Rather than engaging people on an intellectual level, he taps into their deep fears and religious beliefs to intimidate and coerce the citizens into voting for him. By invoking the name of God and by creating an image of steadfastness and unwavering conviction, he portrays himself as a crusader for God and a defender of “good”. Meanwhile, the corporatists and chicken-hawks that compose the rest of the Bush administration, use this religious veil to make themselves and their friends richer.
According to ABC News, exit polls were reporting the most important factor influencing the voters were the moral issues such as abortion, stem cell research and gay marriage. The war in Iraq, the more general war on terror (yes, they are separate) and the economy were apparently of far less importance. The rest of the world, however, viewed the election generally as a referendum on the war in Iraq. The world’s support for Kerry was founded more on their disgust with the circumvention of international law and blatant unilateralism flaunted during the initial invasion of Iraq, the obvious lack of planning to deal with the reconstruction of a devastated country, and the future American intentions in Iraq given the oil-lust that drives the two boys from Texas. People outside of the U.S. hoped that a new president would be able to heal some of the division and hatred that the Bush administration has created.
Since most people outside of the United States would not have considered moral issues when deciding between Kerry and Bush, this would help explain the sizable discrepancy between international and American opinion. However, it does not excuse many Americans from failing to understand the narrow mindedness and ego-centric nature of their decision to renew and strengthen George Bush’s mandate on the basis of moral issues rather than international policy.
Many Americans will argue that international opinion is inconsequential and should not influence their decision. However, as a country that professes to be the world’s judge, jury, and executioner, failing to understand the anger and distrust that pervades the international community with regards to the Bush administration is a failure of Americans to think beyond their borders and act as global citizens.
Wednesday, November 03, 2004
Tuesday, October 19, 2004
The Blinking Bush
As I noted in my last post regarding the second debate, Bush seemed to have trouble controlling the muscles around his eye lids. A pesky mosquito on Monday night awoke me at 4 am and urged me to turn on the TV to watch ABC's This Week. At the end of the program it showed an excerpt from the Late Show with David Letterman. In a span of less than 20 seconds during the third debate, the Bush Blink Counter registered about 30 blinks. Perhaps a call to the Guinness Book of World Records is in order.
The excessive blinking almost exclusively occurred while Mr. Kerry was levelling criticism at Bush and his administration. Blinking seems to be the way he deals with stress and is a physical manifestation of his discomfort.
Others, perhaps more cynical than me, have suggested that it is a form of Morse Code and George was signalling out SOS. However, there is a much more plausible explanation. After they were caught with the radio transmitter installed on George's back, Karl Rove and company needed another method of convincing the public that George could put together a couple of coherent sentences. A quick call down to the basement of the CIA gave Karl access to a top-secret optical transmission device that sends signals and imprints them directly on the retina with enough energy to short-circuit the brain and directly connect with the nerves controlling the vocal cords. Thus, without Bush's brain impeding the proceedings, he was able to make it through the debate looking only slightly simian. However, the side effect of transmitting information directly to the retina is excessive blinking. Perhaps some effectively applied Botox around the eyes would help calm this. Something to look into for next time.
On a slightly more serious note...
Perhaps it was due to the bright lights, exhaustion or just being George Bush, but the debates made me wonder if George is taking psychological medication. When he looked directly into the camera to answer what he had learned from the powerful women in his life, his eyes looked completely lifeless, his affect muted, and his response slow and unnatural. Certainly, few can match the polished persona of John Kerry, but there is something disconcerting in the mannerisms and conduct of George Bush. As I never paid much attention to US politics until recently, I cannot make comparisons but it would be interesting to study his facial movements and general affect over time to see if there has been any significant changes.
A quick serach of the internet shows many other people have questioned the mental health of the President. Furthermore, there have been rumours of erratic and "conduct unbecoming of a president" during his tenure. Perhaps, his aides are slipping some pills into his morning coffee?
The excessive blinking almost exclusively occurred while Mr. Kerry was levelling criticism at Bush and his administration. Blinking seems to be the way he deals with stress and is a physical manifestation of his discomfort.
Others, perhaps more cynical than me, have suggested that it is a form of Morse Code and George was signalling out SOS. However, there is a much more plausible explanation. After they were caught with the radio transmitter installed on George's back, Karl Rove and company needed another method of convincing the public that George could put together a couple of coherent sentences. A quick call down to the basement of the CIA gave Karl access to a top-secret optical transmission device that sends signals and imprints them directly on the retina with enough energy to short-circuit the brain and directly connect with the nerves controlling the vocal cords. Thus, without Bush's brain impeding the proceedings, he was able to make it through the debate looking only slightly simian. However, the side effect of transmitting information directly to the retina is excessive blinking. Perhaps some effectively applied Botox around the eyes would help calm this. Something to look into for next time.
On a slightly more serious note...
Perhaps it was due to the bright lights, exhaustion or just being George Bush, but the debates made me wonder if George is taking psychological medication. When he looked directly into the camera to answer what he had learned from the powerful women in his life, his eyes looked completely lifeless, his affect muted, and his response slow and unnatural. Certainly, few can match the polished persona of John Kerry, but there is something disconcerting in the mannerisms and conduct of George Bush. As I never paid much attention to US politics until recently, I cannot make comparisons but it would be interesting to study his facial movements and general affect over time to see if there has been any significant changes.
A quick serach of the internet shows many other people have questioned the mental health of the President. Furthermore, there have been rumours of erratic and "conduct unbecoming of a president" during his tenure. Perhaps, his aides are slipping some pills into his morning coffee?
Tuesday, October 12, 2004
Surplus!!
During the last debate, the two candidates sparred over the ever growing US debt. Although I forget the exact figures, the yearly deficits were certainly in the hundreds of billions of dollars and growing the national debt at a staggering rate. Bush portrayed Kerry as a tax and spend liberal who will most certainly raise taxes. However, through the magic of debt financing, Bush can simultaneously cut taxes and increase spending.
North of the border, Canadian politicians are distraught over the surplus that has been generated this year. Admittedly, the paltry $8 billion dollars wouldn't cover the bill for Halliburton but it does demonstrate that the current economic conditions do not necessitate running huge budget deficits each year. Canadian politicians are up in arms that the surplus is greater than expected and the money must be spent at reducing the national debt rather than being spent on increasing the health care or other public programs.
But wait, isn't the war in Iraq a significant contributor to the deficit? Yes, it is but the US had the opportunity to reduce its costs if it had worked in concert with the United Nations rather than acting unilaterally in a "coalition of the willing". Canada, traditionally an ally of the United States simply because of its geographic proximity, opted out of joining the coalition but would have contributed some of its budget surplus to the cause if the UN felt the military action was justified.
Although Bush derided Kerry for ignoring the contributions of the coalition members during the debate, many of these "willing supporters" have in fact been bribed for their support. Turkey received $30 billion in aid while numerous other governments have been promised compensation for their rubber stamps. What is the net contribution the coalition members have made once the financial compensation and other promises are deducted? It would not surprise me that the coalition costs the US more than it contributes with the possible exception of the UK.
Veneer of a coalition isn't cheap.
North of the border, Canadian politicians are distraught over the surplus that has been generated this year. Admittedly, the paltry $8 billion dollars wouldn't cover the bill for Halliburton but it does demonstrate that the current economic conditions do not necessitate running huge budget deficits each year. Canadian politicians are up in arms that the surplus is greater than expected and the money must be spent at reducing the national debt rather than being spent on increasing the health care or other public programs.
But wait, isn't the war in Iraq a significant contributor to the deficit? Yes, it is but the US had the opportunity to reduce its costs if it had worked in concert with the United Nations rather than acting unilaterally in a "coalition of the willing". Canada, traditionally an ally of the United States simply because of its geographic proximity, opted out of joining the coalition but would have contributed some of its budget surplus to the cause if the UN felt the military action was justified.
Although Bush derided Kerry for ignoring the contributions of the coalition members during the debate, many of these "willing supporters" have in fact been bribed for their support. Turkey received $30 billion in aid while numerous other governments have been promised compensation for their rubber stamps. What is the net contribution the coalition members have made once the financial compensation and other promises are deducted? It would not surprise me that the coalition costs the US more than it contributes with the possible exception of the UK.
Veneer of a coalition isn't cheap.
Memories of Debates Past
During the late 80’s, I was a big fan of Saturday Night Live. Their political sketches in particular were a brilliant commentary of the times. I still vividly recall the debate between George H. Bush and Michael Dukakis. Dana Carey’s portrayal of George Sr. was uncanny and John Lubitz with his deadpan demeanor and bushy eyebrows proved to be a credible Governor Dukakis. As the men took their positions behind their respective podiums, Dukakis began to elevate accompanied by the sound of hydraulics. Unfortunately, he held the switch a little too long and instead of gaining the few inches he required to look his opponent in the eyes, he had acquired the height of an NBA star. Thus, more hydraulics were required to bring him down to the desired height.
As the debate progressed, George Bush repeatedly asked the moderator (Jan Hooks as Diane Sawyer) if his allotted time had expired. Inevitably, George Sr. still had considerable time remaining and was forced to continually repeat the mantra “Stay the course, a thousand points of light” while interlocking his fingers, a gesture his son mimicked at the end of the second debate. After watching the vice-president struggle and wax ineloquently, Mr. Dukakis looked into the camera, shrugged his shoulders and said, “I can’t believe I am losing to this guy.”
I am sure Mr. Kerry looks into the mirror every morning and says the same thing.
As the debate progressed, George Bush repeatedly asked the moderator (Jan Hooks as Diane Sawyer) if his allotted time had expired. Inevitably, George Sr. still had considerable time remaining and was forced to continually repeat the mantra “Stay the course, a thousand points of light” while interlocking his fingers, a gesture his son mimicked at the end of the second debate. After watching the vice-president struggle and wax ineloquently, Mr. Dukakis looked into the camera, shrugged his shoulders and said, “I can’t believe I am losing to this guy.”
I am sure Mr. Kerry looks into the mirror every morning and says the same thing.
Presidential Debate Part 2
A rainy Saturday afternoon provided me an opportunity to watch the second presidential debate in its entirety. It gave me a fuller appreciation of the time limitations, the nature of the questions asked and the way the two men conducted themselves over the full 90 minutes. Limiting myself to highlights, especially when coupled with “expert” commentary, certainly influences my opinion and I was grateful to have viewed the debate in its raw form.
What immediately struck me was how the candidates used the questions, no matter how specific, to launch into prepared rhetoric that either twisted the question grotesquely or avoided it all together. Both Kerry and Bush were guilty but the final question to George Bush still resonates in my mind. A member or the audience asked Mr. Bush to provide three examples of mistakes that he has made during his four years while president.
First, he made light of the fact that he makes thousands of decisions a day, some trivial, others of great significance. Then, in an attempt to obfuscate the question, he theorized that in the future, historians might judge some of his actions to be mistakes. However, Mr. Bush insisted that in his mind, all his decisions have been correct and he would not categorize any of them as mistakes.
Admitting a mistake is always a hard thing to do and one might postulate that for a president to do so would be political suicide especially when you purport yourself to be the all-seeing, all-knowing, never-wavering Commander-in-Chief and “leader of the free world”. However, with the recent revelations concerning the multiple failures in intelligence, the premature declaration of “Mission Accomplished”, the inability to capture America’s Number One enemy, Osama Bin Laden, and the lack of precautions taken prior to September 11th despite the warnings of an imminent terrorist attack, Bush certainly had many mistakes to choose from; yet, in his political mind, he had done everything correctly.
Could Bush have admitted to three mistakes and survived politically? That is a difficult question given how the media and competition would have jumped on a clip of Bush saying we made a mistake and replayed it ad naseum. It would have been particularly damning for Bush as he always portrays himself as a strong leader and someone who reduces issues to simple yes-and-no, black-and-white dichotomies.
In the debate, Bush hammered home this simplistic view of issues throughout the evening particularly when criticizing Kerry’s voting record in the Senate. Frequently, Bush would point to a vote in the Senate and deduce Kerry’s position from how he voted. For example, during the debate over abortion, President Bush criticized Kerry over not voting for the bill ending funding for partial birth abortions. Bills are not simple documents. They contain complex legalese and often deal with multiple, but related issues, at once. Thus, included in the partial-birth legislation were other anti-abortion-related articles that Mr. Kerry did not agree with. Thus, he voted no and he explained his reasoning in the debate. As Mr. Kerry spoke, Bush, rather than listening politely, turned to the audience, shrugged his shoulders, whispered the word “What?!” and shook his head in apparent mock of his opponents reply. Again, sophomoric debating techniques were on display.
During the debate on stem cell research, Bush made a remark that he does not believe in sacrificing the life of an unborn in an attempt to cure diseases that afflict the living. Thus, he endorsed a bill that severely limited embryonic stem cell research to the currently available stem cell lines. Although he may be against the “killing of the unborn”, Bush seems to have no qualms about sacrificing the living in his quest to rid the world of “evil” and deliver “freedom”. His sponsorship of the war on Iraq has murdered thousands of Iraqi children, women, and other innocent civilians, not to mention over 1000 young Americans. It seems severely hypocritical to prevent the killing of unborn embryos while simultaneously sanctioning the murder of the living.
Regarding abortion, Mr. Kerry made it clear that he does possess religious beliefs having been raised as a Catholic. He emphasized, however, that he cannot press these views upon everyone and legislation should be free of religious ideology. He commented that an ideal judicial decision should be unbiased and the background of the author indeterminable. In other words, there should be a clear separation of religion and government. I do not recall Bush directly commenting upon the issue of religion and government but the final two words of his closing statement were “God Bless”. I have never quite understood this phrase. To me, it seems something that should only be uttered by a religious leader who deems himself to be doing the work of god and not someone who should be looking out for the interests of all Americans, regardless of religion. Certainly, the term god can mean many different things, but I am sure that the god George was calling on to bless his audience was very defined, was spelled with a capital “g”, and particular to his religious views.
Overall, I do feel Kerry won this debate although I felt he could have been more pointed in his criticism of George Bush. However, given the time limitations and the pressure of having to compress everything into two minute statements or 30 second rebuttals, many things must be left unsaid. In terms of character, I cannot recall John Kerry making a joke or cracking a smile throughout the debate. He came across as concerned, serious, and eloquent but perhaps unable to connect with the average person. George Bush seemed confident during his prepared monologues but seemed to falter when required to formulate his own rebuttals which usually began with a light-hearted joke. In contrast to the mask of composure that covered Kerry’s face while being criticized, George looked far more uncomfortable; his hands were clenched and the frequency of blinking increased markedly. It would be interesting to watch the face of each candidate throughout the debate regardless of who was talking since it would give a more revealing picture of each man.
Overall, I found the debate interesting and relatively entertaining. Realizing the structural limitations, I did not expect to be dazzled with in-depth discussions or have my opinions of the two men radically altered. In Canada, given the multi-party nature of our parliament, there are usually four or five candidates vying for airtime in a televised debate. Thus, each person is allotted a limited amount of time and it often becomes a contest over which opposition party leader can deliver the sharpest barb at the incumbent leader and score the most points with the electorate. A televised debate between just two leaders seems to be far more effective and entertaining format. This certainly does not mean I favour a two party system. How two parties, especially when they both lean to the right of the political spectrum, can possibly represent the interests of all Americans is unfathomable and a probable cause of the apathy towards politics in general.
What immediately struck me was how the candidates used the questions, no matter how specific, to launch into prepared rhetoric that either twisted the question grotesquely or avoided it all together. Both Kerry and Bush were guilty but the final question to George Bush still resonates in my mind. A member or the audience asked Mr. Bush to provide three examples of mistakes that he has made during his four years while president.
First, he made light of the fact that he makes thousands of decisions a day, some trivial, others of great significance. Then, in an attempt to obfuscate the question, he theorized that in the future, historians might judge some of his actions to be mistakes. However, Mr. Bush insisted that in his mind, all his decisions have been correct and he would not categorize any of them as mistakes.
Admitting a mistake is always a hard thing to do and one might postulate that for a president to do so would be political suicide especially when you purport yourself to be the all-seeing, all-knowing, never-wavering Commander-in-Chief and “leader of the free world”. However, with the recent revelations concerning the multiple failures in intelligence, the premature declaration of “Mission Accomplished”, the inability to capture America’s Number One enemy, Osama Bin Laden, and the lack of precautions taken prior to September 11th despite the warnings of an imminent terrorist attack, Bush certainly had many mistakes to choose from; yet, in his political mind, he had done everything correctly.
Could Bush have admitted to three mistakes and survived politically? That is a difficult question given how the media and competition would have jumped on a clip of Bush saying we made a mistake and replayed it ad naseum. It would have been particularly damning for Bush as he always portrays himself as a strong leader and someone who reduces issues to simple yes-and-no, black-and-white dichotomies.
In the debate, Bush hammered home this simplistic view of issues throughout the evening particularly when criticizing Kerry’s voting record in the Senate. Frequently, Bush would point to a vote in the Senate and deduce Kerry’s position from how he voted. For example, during the debate over abortion, President Bush criticized Kerry over not voting for the bill ending funding for partial birth abortions. Bills are not simple documents. They contain complex legalese and often deal with multiple, but related issues, at once. Thus, included in the partial-birth legislation were other anti-abortion-related articles that Mr. Kerry did not agree with. Thus, he voted no and he explained his reasoning in the debate. As Mr. Kerry spoke, Bush, rather than listening politely, turned to the audience, shrugged his shoulders, whispered the word “What?!” and shook his head in apparent mock of his opponents reply. Again, sophomoric debating techniques were on display.
During the debate on stem cell research, Bush made a remark that he does not believe in sacrificing the life of an unborn in an attempt to cure diseases that afflict the living. Thus, he endorsed a bill that severely limited embryonic stem cell research to the currently available stem cell lines. Although he may be against the “killing of the unborn”, Bush seems to have no qualms about sacrificing the living in his quest to rid the world of “evil” and deliver “freedom”. His sponsorship of the war on Iraq has murdered thousands of Iraqi children, women, and other innocent civilians, not to mention over 1000 young Americans. It seems severely hypocritical to prevent the killing of unborn embryos while simultaneously sanctioning the murder of the living.
Regarding abortion, Mr. Kerry made it clear that he does possess religious beliefs having been raised as a Catholic. He emphasized, however, that he cannot press these views upon everyone and legislation should be free of religious ideology. He commented that an ideal judicial decision should be unbiased and the background of the author indeterminable. In other words, there should be a clear separation of religion and government. I do not recall Bush directly commenting upon the issue of religion and government but the final two words of his closing statement were “God Bless”. I have never quite understood this phrase. To me, it seems something that should only be uttered by a religious leader who deems himself to be doing the work of god and not someone who should be looking out for the interests of all Americans, regardless of religion. Certainly, the term god can mean many different things, but I am sure that the god George was calling on to bless his audience was very defined, was spelled with a capital “g”, and particular to his religious views.
Overall, I do feel Kerry won this debate although I felt he could have been more pointed in his criticism of George Bush. However, given the time limitations and the pressure of having to compress everything into two minute statements or 30 second rebuttals, many things must be left unsaid. In terms of character, I cannot recall John Kerry making a joke or cracking a smile throughout the debate. He came across as concerned, serious, and eloquent but perhaps unable to connect with the average person. George Bush seemed confident during his prepared monologues but seemed to falter when required to formulate his own rebuttals which usually began with a light-hearted joke. In contrast to the mask of composure that covered Kerry’s face while being criticized, George looked far more uncomfortable; his hands were clenched and the frequency of blinking increased markedly. It would be interesting to watch the face of each candidate throughout the debate regardless of who was talking since it would give a more revealing picture of each man.
Overall, I found the debate interesting and relatively entertaining. Realizing the structural limitations, I did not expect to be dazzled with in-depth discussions or have my opinions of the two men radically altered. In Canada, given the multi-party nature of our parliament, there are usually four or five candidates vying for airtime in a televised debate. Thus, each person is allotted a limited amount of time and it often becomes a contest over which opposition party leader can deliver the sharpest barb at the incumbent leader and score the most points with the electorate. A televised debate between just two leaders seems to be far more effective and entertaining format. This certainly does not mean I favour a two party system. How two parties, especially when they both lean to the right of the political spectrum, can possibly represent the interests of all Americans is unfathomable and a probable cause of the apathy towards politics in general.
Sunday, October 03, 2004
Sports Day!
Late September and early October is the Sports Day season in Japan. Usually, the heat of the summer is subsiding and the sun shines frequently. This year, however, has seen an excessive number of rainy days forcing the delay, and in the case of some schools, cancellation of the event.
A week ago I was able to attend Innai Chubu Elementary School's Sports Day while yesterday I involved myself in KamiInnai Elementary School's Fureai Taikai (ふれあい大会）. Unlike the other schools in my area which have student enrollment of 50 to 120 students, KamiInnai possesses only six students, and perhaps more amazing, four staff. Last year, the student to staff ratio was 1:1, with the seven students being matched by three teachers, a principal, a vice-principal, a health teacher, and the ubiquitous tea lady who always ensured my tea cup was brimming with hot green tea. Needless to say, the school is unique and the atmosphere could be described as magical.
Obviously, a sports day involving six students, their parents and the teachers would prove to be a little lonely. So, members of the local community are invited to attend as well. As you can imagine, with only six kids at the school, the local area's average age probably approaches 70 years. Therefore, the elderly of the area come out in force and make it a joy to watch. Where else can you see a 80 year old lady putting on a firefly costume and running around a track?
Events exclusively for the students are interspersed with numerous events involving the adults. The children help officiate and watch the adults make fools of themselves as they pop balloons with their asses, make themselves dizzy by spinning around a baseball bat, and cover themselves with a strong foundation of flour and water in the search for an elusive candy.
The event brings the community together and allows for interaction between the youth and elderly something that I feel is extremely important especially given the aging population.
Other fellow bloggers have commented on the overt militarism that pervades these Sports Days as if the Imperial Army could be ressurected at a moments notice by simply blowing a whistle at a school. Certainly, the marching and coordinated cheering can be construed as miliaristic but so can most sports events throughout the world. American football is a case in point. The entire game is infused with militarism and overt aggression is not only permitted, it is applauded. The language of the military and football are so entwined that it came become difficult to discern which was the original source. Furthermore, marching bands, a staple of high school and college football events , are certainly of military origin.
Regardless of the military overtones, the dedication that both the students and the teachers demonstrate is unseen in my North American experiences. The teachers have the day's events planned to the minute while the students spend countless hours perfecting their cheers and practicing for events. If you have a chance, I highly recommend attending an event. This is where the importance and effectiveness of teamwork begins.
A week ago I was able to attend Innai Chubu Elementary School's Sports Day while yesterday I involved myself in KamiInnai Elementary School's Fureai Taikai (ふれあい大会）. Unlike the other schools in my area which have student enrollment of 50 to 120 students, KamiInnai possesses only six students, and perhaps more amazing, four staff. Last year, the student to staff ratio was 1:1, with the seven students being matched by three teachers, a principal, a vice-principal, a health teacher, and the ubiquitous tea lady who always ensured my tea cup was brimming with hot green tea. Needless to say, the school is unique and the atmosphere could be described as magical.
Obviously, a sports day involving six students, their parents and the teachers would prove to be a little lonely. So, members of the local community are invited to attend as well. As you can imagine, with only six kids at the school, the local area's average age probably approaches 70 years. Therefore, the elderly of the area come out in force and make it a joy to watch. Where else can you see a 80 year old lady putting on a firefly costume and running around a track?
Events exclusively for the students are interspersed with numerous events involving the adults. The children help officiate and watch the adults make fools of themselves as they pop balloons with their asses, make themselves dizzy by spinning around a baseball bat, and cover themselves with a strong foundation of flour and water in the search for an elusive candy.
The event brings the community together and allows for interaction between the youth and elderly something that I feel is extremely important especially given the aging population.
Other fellow bloggers have commented on the overt militarism that pervades these Sports Days as if the Imperial Army could be ressurected at a moments notice by simply blowing a whistle at a school. Certainly, the marching and coordinated cheering can be construed as miliaristic but so can most sports events throughout the world. American football is a case in point. The entire game is infused with militarism and overt aggression is not only permitted, it is applauded. The language of the military and football are so entwined that it came become difficult to discern which was the original source. Furthermore, marching bands, a staple of high school and college football events , are certainly of military origin.
Regardless of the military overtones, the dedication that both the students and the teachers demonstrate is unseen in my North American experiences. The teachers have the day's events planned to the minute while the students spend countless hours perfecting their cheers and practicing for events. If you have a chance, I highly recommend attending an event. This is where the importance and effectiveness of teamwork begins.
Some advice for Dick
Dear Dick,
I know that you will be engaging in a debate on public TV with John Edwards shortly. Although I am sure Karl Rove and the others are busy filling your mind with the lies and deceptions you need to disseminate on that night, let me give you a bit of advice.
I heard you talking to Senator Pat Leahy a couple months ago. You told him to "Go fuck yourself." With all the recent hoopla about the vulgarity of TV degrading American Christian morals, you should be careful with that wicked tongue of yours.
Here is the advice; using "fuck" as an adjective rather than as a verb might help keep the FCC at bay. Thus, please note the following instructive examples.
EXAMPLE 1
“John Edwards! Go fuck yourself” This is bad. THE WORD has been used as a verb and the FCC will be hounding you. You could claim that it was a vocabulary allocation failure. However, on the positive side, it might increase your popularity amongst those hip, hard-to-reach, MTV demographic. But, please, please refrain from flashing a nipple. I enjoy keeping my partially digested food within the confines of my digestive tract.
EXAMPLE 2
“John Edwards! You are a fucking, feeble, French-loving faggot” Perfectly acceptable as THE WORD has been used as an adjective. Furthermore, you will have appeased fans of alliteration, religious right gay bashers, and Freedom Fry fans.
If you are still confused, ask Bono. He knows the difference.
I know that you will be engaging in a debate on public TV with John Edwards shortly. Although I am sure Karl Rove and the others are busy filling your mind with the lies and deceptions you need to disseminate on that night, let me give you a bit of advice.
I heard you talking to Senator Pat Leahy a couple months ago. You told him to "Go fuck yourself." With all the recent hoopla about the vulgarity of TV degrading American Christian morals, you should be careful with that wicked tongue of yours.
Here is the advice; using "fuck" as an adjective rather than as a verb might help keep the FCC at bay. Thus, please note the following instructive examples.
EXAMPLE 1
“John Edwards! Go fuck yourself” This is bad. THE WORD has been used as a verb and the FCC will be hounding you. You could claim that it was a vocabulary allocation failure. However, on the positive side, it might increase your popularity amongst those hip, hard-to-reach, MTV demographic. But, please, please refrain from flashing a nipple. I enjoy keeping my partially digested food within the confines of my digestive tract.
EXAMPLE 2
“John Edwards! You are a fucking, feeble, French-loving faggot” Perfectly acceptable as THE WORD has been used as an adjective. Furthermore, you will have appeased fans of alliteration, religious right gay bashers, and Freedom Fry fans.
If you are still confused, ask Bono. He knows the difference.
My take on the debate
Media coverage of US politics in Japan is surprisingly extensive. In the past months, both the Democratic and Republican conventions were broadcast live on BS1, NHK’s free satellite channel, in addition to the usual CNN, ABC and PBS news programs. When I lived in Canada, I usually ignored the US news stations in preference to news with a Canadian perspective which demoted American politics to 3 or 4 minute stories rather than hour long programs. However, given Japan and America’s unique relationship, it is understandable that a significant percentage of air time is consumed with issues concerning American politics and economics.
I was unable to watch the debate in its entirety but did see the highlights. As I suspected, John Kerry conducted himself as a refined debater using relatively sophisticated techniques to broadcast his ideas to the public. Bush appeared to be an accomplished high school debater and nothing more. When Kerry mentioned the need for the US to apply a “Global Test” before acting preemptively, the best rebuttal Bush could enunciate was a shrug of the shoulders and a dimwitted “What’s a Global Test?” accompanied by his trademark smirk.
As an aside, that smirk has irked me for years. To me, it is what you would find on a smug kid who would rely on his dad to bail him out when the water became too hot. It usually appears when something Bush considers witty and sharp tongued emerges from his mouth. In my opinion, it shows contempt for the general public and demonstrates his inability to intellectually engage the issues.
I will concede that the incumbent president or a former vice-president is always placed on the defensive in a debate which is often the more difficult position. Thus, Kerry, armed with ample fodder with which to attack Bush, seemed to be on the offensive most of the night. When Bush did attack Kerry’s frequent wavering on issues such as his support for the Iraq war, instead of simply defending himself, Kerry used it to effectively attack Bush’s ability to judge when American lives should be sacrificed. This effective technique allowed the viewers to directly compare who had made the greater mistake.
I enjoy intellectual arguments that take more than one or two sentences to enunciate. Too frequently, complex issues are reduced to easily digestible sound bites or are ignored completely as they are deemed not fit for public consumption. While Bush continued with his rhetoric about being a strong leader and Commander-in-Chief who supports his troops, I particularly enjoyed Kerry’s comments about the Cuban Missile Crisis when an official visited Charles De Gaulle and offered to show him the spy photographs justifying the American position. De Gaulle responded that he did not need to see the photos as he believed the word of the American president. Kerry then contrasted this with the lies and half-truths that the American government used to justify their war to the United Nations and how the current American president will never be able to regain the trust of the international community again. I thought it was an extremely effective method of conveying the distrust of the current administration that pervades the international community. However, it would not surprise me if references to De Gaulle are too obscure for the general electorate and continue the perception of Kerry being elitist. I am sure that the cry for Freedom Fries are still echoing through some cafeterias and people will wonder how Kerry could have the gall to bring up De Gaulle.
It does appear that Kerry “won” the debate in the general public according to polls taken immediately following. This must be particularly troubling for the Bush campaign given that national security which is intimately tied with the “War on Iraq/Terror” is Bush’s strength. It will be interesting to watch the remaining debates and what changes will be made. In my opinion, Bush needs to display more intellectual prowess and a firm grasp of the issues. Too often he is unable to come up with concrete examples and fumbles with important names. He is the master of repeating the same thing over and over again, much like his father’s “Thousand points of light”, “Stay the course”. However, one must wonder how effective this strategy will remain given Mr. Kerry’s demonstrated debating skills on Thursday evening.
I was unable to watch the debate in its entirety but did see the highlights. As I suspected, John Kerry conducted himself as a refined debater using relatively sophisticated techniques to broadcast his ideas to the public. Bush appeared to be an accomplished high school debater and nothing more. When Kerry mentioned the need for the US to apply a “Global Test” before acting preemptively, the best rebuttal Bush could enunciate was a shrug of the shoulders and a dimwitted “What’s a Global Test?” accompanied by his trademark smirk.
As an aside, that smirk has irked me for years. To me, it is what you would find on a smug kid who would rely on his dad to bail him out when the water became too hot. It usually appears when something Bush considers witty and sharp tongued emerges from his mouth. In my opinion, it shows contempt for the general public and demonstrates his inability to intellectually engage the issues.
I will concede that the incumbent president or a former vice-president is always placed on the defensive in a debate which is often the more difficult position. Thus, Kerry, armed with ample fodder with which to attack Bush, seemed to be on the offensive most of the night. When Bush did attack Kerry’s frequent wavering on issues such as his support for the Iraq war, instead of simply defending himself, Kerry used it to effectively attack Bush’s ability to judge when American lives should be sacrificed. This effective technique allowed the viewers to directly compare who had made the greater mistake.
I enjoy intellectual arguments that take more than one or two sentences to enunciate. Too frequently, complex issues are reduced to easily digestible sound bites or are ignored completely as they are deemed not fit for public consumption. While Bush continued with his rhetoric about being a strong leader and Commander-in-Chief who supports his troops, I particularly enjoyed Kerry’s comments about the Cuban Missile Crisis when an official visited Charles De Gaulle and offered to show him the spy photographs justifying the American position. De Gaulle responded that he did not need to see the photos as he believed the word of the American president. Kerry then contrasted this with the lies and half-truths that the American government used to justify their war to the United Nations and how the current American president will never be able to regain the trust of the international community again. I thought it was an extremely effective method of conveying the distrust of the current administration that pervades the international community. However, it would not surprise me if references to De Gaulle are too obscure for the general electorate and continue the perception of Kerry being elitist. I am sure that the cry for Freedom Fries are still echoing through some cafeterias and people will wonder how Kerry could have the gall to bring up De Gaulle.
It does appear that Kerry “won” the debate in the general public according to polls taken immediately following. This must be particularly troubling for the Bush campaign given that national security which is intimately tied with the “War on Iraq/Terror” is Bush’s strength. It will be interesting to watch the remaining debates and what changes will be made. In my opinion, Bush needs to display more intellectual prowess and a firm grasp of the issues. Too often he is unable to come up with concrete examples and fumbles with important names. He is the master of repeating the same thing over and over again, much like his father’s “Thousand points of light”, “Stay the course”. However, one must wonder how effective this strategy will remain given Mr. Kerry’s demonstrated debating skills on Thursday evening.
Tuesday, September 21, 2004
Just a short story...
When I am not at work, I am working. Being the borderline workaholic that I am, I engage my free time in a valiant attempt to improve Japanese English abilities and line my pocket with a few more yen. On Monday and Tuesday nights, I teach a junior high school student who was fortunate enough to enjoy three weeks in Switzerland this summer participating in a summer camp.
With just three weeks of exposure to English, his ability and cofidence in the language increased dramatically. He is no longer afraid of making mistakes and actively attempts to expand his vocabulary and attempt new grammatical constructions. It is certainly refreshing for me since the majority of students are reserved and shy when I attempt to engage them in English conversation and are stumped sometimes by the most rudimentary of questions.
Unfortunately, this newfound confidence has created some friction amongst his classmates at school. Last night he recounted the story of fighting three boys who were upset over his English ability. According to my student, he is answering too many questions and speaking too much in class. Whether or not there are other factors involved, I cannot be sure but it is common for students who attempt to demonstrate their abilities to be shunned and ostracized by their classmates. Thus, most students will not volunteer an answer since it draws unwarranted attention to themselves. This perpetuates the teacher directed learning that dominates the classroom. The teacher stands at the front while the rest of the students "absorb" the information while staring "intently" at their notebook. Unfortunately, more often than not, absorb is really deflect and intently is more likely to be blankly.
Learning a language is a perfect subject for actively engaging the students. Unfortunately, it is often a struggle to involve the students in an interactive manner. In fact, a Japanese English teacher that I teach with recently lamented that he wished he taught at university since he could just lecture and not worry about class participation.
However, learning a language also requires that the students are not afraid to take risks and make mistakes. This can be very difficult in the Japanese classroom environment. Often the analogy is made to the nail that sticks up being hammered down. However, rather than the external force of the hammer, the classmates themselves pull the student back into the woodwork of conformity.
I can only hope that my student strives to improve his English while not adversely affecting his relationship with his peers. It is a delicate balance and Japanese schools are unfortunately littered with students who have been unable to conform sufficiently.
With just three weeks of exposure to English, his ability and cofidence in the language increased dramatically. He is no longer afraid of making mistakes and actively attempts to expand his vocabulary and attempt new grammatical constructions. It is certainly refreshing for me since the majority of students are reserved and shy when I attempt to engage them in English conversation and are stumped sometimes by the most rudimentary of questions.
Unfortunately, this newfound confidence has created some friction amongst his classmates at school. Last night he recounted the story of fighting three boys who were upset over his English ability. According to my student, he is answering too many questions and speaking too much in class. Whether or not there are other factors involved, I cannot be sure but it is common for students who attempt to demonstrate their abilities to be shunned and ostracized by their classmates. Thus, most students will not volunteer an answer since it draws unwarranted attention to themselves. This perpetuates the teacher directed learning that dominates the classroom. The teacher stands at the front while the rest of the students "absorb" the information while staring "intently" at their notebook. Unfortunately, more often than not, absorb is really deflect and intently is more likely to be blankly.
Learning a language is a perfect subject for actively engaging the students. Unfortunately, it is often a struggle to involve the students in an interactive manner. In fact, a Japanese English teacher that I teach with recently lamented that he wished he taught at university since he could just lecture and not worry about class participation.
However, learning a language also requires that the students are not afraid to take risks and make mistakes. This can be very difficult in the Japanese classroom environment. Often the analogy is made to the nail that sticks up being hammered down. However, rather than the external force of the hammer, the classmates themselves pull the student back into the woodwork of conformity.
I can only hope that my student strives to improve his English while not adversely affecting his relationship with his peers. It is a delicate balance and Japanese schools are unfortunately littered with students who have been unable to conform sufficiently.
Long, long ago...
Joel recently mentioned in his blog about his thwarted attempt to register for the annual Japanese Language Proficiency Test held on the first Sunday of December. Although I do consider myself a touch more organized than my friend, I certainly emphathize with his plight. Despite the facade of high tech wizardry that surrounds Japan, much of what goes on behind the scenes in offices and governments harks back to scenes from Canadian offices circa the 1970's. The whole application process involves a lot of unnecessary aggravation.
First, one must find an application form which is not an easy task since they are not readily available. Last year, the closest bookstore in Oita that stocked the form (60km from where I live) had sold out of their allotment. So, in a pre-emptive move, I headed to the city of Kitakyushu to pick one up, using the rationale that the bigger city would have more forms and more locations. Alas, all their forms were gone. Disappointed but not defeated, I headed to another bookstore in Oita at a large shopping complex (home of the pet raccoon). Finally, I found the coveted application form although I did have to debate with the clerk for a few minutes over the deadline. He was sure that the application deadline had passed and that they had no more left. Fortunately, I persisted and after opening a few drawers, I was 500 yen poorer but in possession of the allusive form.
At first, I was a little miffed about having to pay for an application form. However, I do see the logic in trying to prevent people from casually picking up the form without any real intention of applying. The 500 yen probably provides enough of a deterent to the whimsical. Yet, the whole idea of having to locate a piece of paper and accompanying instructions at select stores throughout the country strikes me as antiquated. Given the pervasiveness of the internet, why not make the form available online so that potential applicants have easy access? This would have saved me and probably many others from the need to crisscross the prefecture in search of a form.
I was able to take advantage of my digital camera to produce the required picture for the application form. This is certainly more convenient than heading for the local photo studio as I had to do in the past. After carefully filling in the form, I headed to the post office where I had to fill in a money order, have the forms stamped, and sent away by registered mail. The process at the post office took approximately 15 minutes. Unlike Joel, I took some time between classes to attend to this business. In Innai, the post office is not open on weekends so I was unable to the experience the frustration of discovering that they don't do registered mail on a Sunday. After paying for the application form, the test fee, the money order fee, and the registered mail fee, the total price came to about 6,500 yen or about $80 CDN which is $20 more than the fee charged in Vancouver. In addition, I was able to download the form, write a cheque and send it off in the mail which was far more convenient and efficient than all the steps that I had to endure in Japan. Furthermore, the application deadline is September 27 rather than the September 12 date in Japan. Note to Joel, if your reading this, you can still take level 2 in Canada!
Japan does have a reputation for high tech and I am sure that international companies such as Honda and Sony have behind the scene operations that are efficient and modern. However, my town office still uses dot matrix printers and carbon paper to produce many of their documents. Intraoffice mail is not used and all memos are passed around in paper form where each member of the office stamps it with his personal seal. Hours are recorded with mechanical punch cards and piles of paper frequently avalanche onto my desk from the pulpy piles that periodically build on my coworkers desk. At schools, many teachers still employ word processors that are equivalent of electronic typewriters and many school newsletters are still written by hand. Student marks are submitted in paper form and the report cards are all carefully assembled by hand.
Admittedly, not everything modern is necessarily better. A handwritten newsletter feels more personal. Hardcopies of documents always feel a little more reassuring than an electronic representation. Sometimes, I do feel like I am living in the past when in Japan which is in direct opposition to the image portrayed in the media. I do realize that living in a small town probably exaceberates this feeling but registering for the test reminds me that even national level organizations still adhere to more traditional methods.
First, one must find an application form which is not an easy task since they are not readily available. Last year, the closest bookstore in Oita that stocked the form (60km from where I live) had sold out of their allotment. So, in a pre-emptive move, I headed to the city of Kitakyushu to pick one up, using the rationale that the bigger city would have more forms and more locations. Alas, all their forms were gone. Disappointed but not defeated, I headed to another bookstore in Oita at a large shopping complex (home of the pet raccoon). Finally, I found the coveted application form although I did have to debate with the clerk for a few minutes over the deadline. He was sure that the application deadline had passed and that they had no more left. Fortunately, I persisted and after opening a few drawers, I was 500 yen poorer but in possession of the allusive form.
At first, I was a little miffed about having to pay for an application form. However, I do see the logic in trying to prevent people from casually picking up the form without any real intention of applying. The 500 yen probably provides enough of a deterent to the whimsical. Yet, the whole idea of having to locate a piece of paper and accompanying instructions at select stores throughout the country strikes me as antiquated. Given the pervasiveness of the internet, why not make the form available online so that potential applicants have easy access? This would have saved me and probably many others from the need to crisscross the prefecture in search of a form.
I was able to take advantage of my digital camera to produce the required picture for the application form. This is certainly more convenient than heading for the local photo studio as I had to do in the past. After carefully filling in the form, I headed to the post office where I had to fill in a money order, have the forms stamped, and sent away by registered mail. The process at the post office took approximately 15 minutes. Unlike Joel, I took some time between classes to attend to this business. In Innai, the post office is not open on weekends so I was unable to the experience the frustration of discovering that they don't do registered mail on a Sunday. After paying for the application form, the test fee, the money order fee, and the registered mail fee, the total price came to about 6,500 yen or about $80 CDN which is $20 more than the fee charged in Vancouver. In addition, I was able to download the form, write a cheque and send it off in the mail which was far more convenient and efficient than all the steps that I had to endure in Japan. Furthermore, the application deadline is September 27 rather than the September 12 date in Japan. Note to Joel, if your reading this, you can still take level 2 in Canada!
Japan does have a reputation for high tech and I am sure that international companies such as Honda and Sony have behind the scene operations that are efficient and modern. However, my town office still uses dot matrix printers and carbon paper to produce many of their documents. Intraoffice mail is not used and all memos are passed around in paper form where each member of the office stamps it with his personal seal. Hours are recorded with mechanical punch cards and piles of paper frequently avalanche onto my desk from the pulpy piles that periodically build on my coworkers desk. At schools, many teachers still employ word processors that are equivalent of electronic typewriters and many school newsletters are still written by hand. Student marks are submitted in paper form and the report cards are all carefully assembled by hand.
Admittedly, not everything modern is necessarily better. A handwritten newsletter feels more personal. Hardcopies of documents always feel a little more reassuring than an electronic representation. Sometimes, I do feel like I am living in the past when in Japan which is in direct opposition to the image portrayed in the media. I do realize that living in a small town probably exaceberates this feeling but registering for the test reminds me that even national level organizations still adhere to more traditional methods.
Tuesday, September 14, 2004
Japanese Female Degree Holders
An article posted on Japan Today's website cites a recent OECD (Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development) states that Japan possesses the lowest ratio of female degree holder's among the groups 30 members. Unfortunately, the article is rather sparse in specifics and I have been unable to find the original survery at the moment. However, I will venture a few personal observations on why Japan, a country that prides itself on its education system, possesses so few female degree holders.
Observation #1
Japan has a system of female junior colleges that offer 2 years of higher education. Unlike the college system in Canada which often acts as a stepping stone towards university, once the students graduate, they generally enter the workforce. From people I have met, they tend to focus on subjects such as child care, cooking, clerical skills, and languages. Thus, after graduating, they enter the workforce until they are married. Most of my female Japanese friends tend to work in offices doing basic accounting and clerical work at hospitals or offices. Once they find or are introduced to their husband, they often quit their jobs to focus on rearing children. Once the children enter the school system, they often return to the workforce in the same position as before. Thus, the junior college system helps to ensure that females do not gain the education necessary for advancement in the workplace.
Observation #2
From magazines to television, the objectification of women is rampant in Japanese society. Even on regular daytime shows, women parade around in bikinis to advertise products. Women's roles in variety shows seems primarily relegated to either a supporting role or giving looks of surprise and shock when they are exposed to something new. With few exceptions, women are in the background while the male host is in obvious control. Therefore, female viewers are exposed to very few role models who display the benefits of higher education and, instead, are shown that exuding cuteness and innocence is what is expected of them.
Observation#3
In my town office, all the important officals are male. For example, in the board of education with a staff of six including me, two are females. One, as expected, plays the role of the clerical worker, making copies and ensuring that our tea cups are always full of hot green tea. The other is the assistant to the section head. She is constantly busy, answering the phone, dealing with mountains of paperwork and all her other responsibilties. Her frenzied level of activity is in sharp contrast to the leisurely paced section chief. His mornings always begin with a carefully reading of the morning paper. It is often followed by checking out the catalogue of the latest product that he wants to purchase. Most tellingly, when 5 o'clock arrives, he is the first to punch his card and make a quick exit. The assistant, however, almost never leaves at 5 and on the odd occassion that she does, other people make sarcastic comments. From what I can perceive, despite enduring long hours and demonstrating ceaseless dedication, most females are never rewarded with promotion or increases in pay. Given this lack of recognition and chance for advancement, it is little wonder that many females are content with remaining in positions that offer comparable pay but do not require a huge sacrifice in their personal lives.
Obviously, these are just personal observations and lack any rigorous investigation. However, it is sad to see obviously talented and exceptional females being unable to fulfill their potential due to a system that does not reward female's for pursuing their education and careers. Obviously, there are exceptions and many Japanese females have made important contributions in a variety of fields. However, as the survey indicates, many Japanese females are denied the ability to fulfill their potential by a society that tends to relegate females to supporting roles and looking good on TV.
Observation #1
Japan has a system of female junior colleges that offer 2 years of higher education. Unlike the college system in Canada which often acts as a stepping stone towards university, once the students graduate, they generally enter the workforce. From people I have met, they tend to focus on subjects such as child care, cooking, clerical skills, and languages. Thus, after graduating, they enter the workforce until they are married. Most of my female Japanese friends tend to work in offices doing basic accounting and clerical work at hospitals or offices. Once they find or are introduced to their husband, they often quit their jobs to focus on rearing children. Once the children enter the school system, they often return to the workforce in the same position as before. Thus, the junior college system helps to ensure that females do not gain the education necessary for advancement in the workplace.
Observation #2
From magazines to television, the objectification of women is rampant in Japanese society. Even on regular daytime shows, women parade around in bikinis to advertise products. Women's roles in variety shows seems primarily relegated to either a supporting role or giving looks of surprise and shock when they are exposed to something new. With few exceptions, women are in the background while the male host is in obvious control. Therefore, female viewers are exposed to very few role models who display the benefits of higher education and, instead, are shown that exuding cuteness and innocence is what is expected of them.
Observation#3
In my town office, all the important officals are male. For example, in the board of education with a staff of six including me, two are females. One, as expected, plays the role of the clerical worker, making copies and ensuring that our tea cups are always full of hot green tea. The other is the assistant to the section head. She is constantly busy, answering the phone, dealing with mountains of paperwork and all her other responsibilties. Her frenzied level of activity is in sharp contrast to the leisurely paced section chief. His mornings always begin with a carefully reading of the morning paper. It is often followed by checking out the catalogue of the latest product that he wants to purchase. Most tellingly, when 5 o'clock arrives, he is the first to punch his card and make a quick exit. The assistant, however, almost never leaves at 5 and on the odd occassion that she does, other people make sarcastic comments. From what I can perceive, despite enduring long hours and demonstrating ceaseless dedication, most females are never rewarded with promotion or increases in pay. Given this lack of recognition and chance for advancement, it is little wonder that many females are content with remaining in positions that offer comparable pay but do not require a huge sacrifice in their personal lives.
Obviously, these are just personal observations and lack any rigorous investigation. However, it is sad to see obviously talented and exceptional females being unable to fulfill their potential due to a system that does not reward female's for pursuing their education and careers. Obviously, there are exceptions and many Japanese females have made important contributions in a variety of fields. However, as the survey indicates, many Japanese females are denied the ability to fulfill their potential by a society that tends to relegate females to supporting roles and looking good on TV.
Tuesday, September 07, 2004
Presidential War Records Part II
I don't usually watch TV at 4 o'clock on a Tuesday morning, but the howling winds of the typhoon prompted me to head downstairs and stuff a few plastic bags into the hood scoop of my car. After returning, I turned on the TV for a typhoon update. After verifying that the typhoon was indeed on course to batter my town, I switched to the satelitte channel where they were rebroadcasting an ABC news program "This Week" hosted by George Stephanopoulos. The discourse centred around the Republican Convention and focussed on using the Vietnam War Records as a central issue in the campaign.
Mr. Stephanopoulus interviewed Senator John McCain. Although I am not too familiar with the Senator, he continued to denounce the ads that attacked Senator Kerry's war record and asked for everyone to move on and put the events of 30 years ago behind and focus on the future. Later, a political strategist with the Bush campaign continued the same theme of how Bush is forward looking while Kerry continues to harp upon his past.
I do agree that the debate over presidential war records should merit only minor consideration when it comes to chosing the president. However, I cannot help but feel that the Bush campaign is again using dirty political tricks to discredit Senator Kerry while appearing to be "above the fray."
I recall reading, perhaps in Al Franken's book, about the political tricks employed by the Bush team during the 2000 election and during the transition. One trick was the insidious push-poll where pollsters would phone up potential voters and ask a hypothetical question. For example, they would ask whether they would be more or less likely to vote for Senator Kerry if he had lied about his war record. Although there is no basis in fact for the statement, the seed of doubt is planted and the voter may be inclined to believe it as true. Another trick was used during the transition between the Clinton and Bush administration. Rumours spread that the Democrats were vandalizing and damaging the White House in an attempt to thwart a smooth takeover. When asked about for more details or concrete evidence, the Bush team responded that they would not produce it because they did not want to involve themselves in dirty politics. They were, again, "above the fray". Both of these tactics allowed the Republicans to plant seeds of doubt and distrust in the mind's of voters and then portray themselves as holier and purer than their opponents by refusing to discuss the issue any further since they did not play such dirty political games.
The same strategy seems to be in operation now. After bringing up Mr. Kerry's war record, publicly questioning the validity of his decorations, accusing him of lying to receive his medals, the Republicans now want to move on before the discussion of Bush and Cheney's lack of war records becomes too heated. The damage to Senator Kerry's reputation has been done and now the Republicans want to portray Senator Kerry as someone fixated on the past and unable to focus on the future.
Whether or not Karl Rove and the Bush team was directly involved in the making of the ads that attacked Kerry's war record is a rather moot point. The ad was politically motivated and it worked to undermine the public's trust in Kerry. Now the situation is ripe for the Bush team to take advantage by denouncing the ads, giving the appearance of virtue. Furthermore, they are now able to criticize Kerry as a leader fixated on the past as he attempts to defend his past, while Bush (who conveniently doesn't discuss his war record) looks to the future and a war he cannot win.
Politics is a dirty game and the team that plays it the best is often the winner. Karl Rove and his team seem to be the most able to manipulate stories, twist the truth, and convince voters that Bush is the best person to lead the country while the Democrats seem to have trouble capitalizing on all the blunders and miscues that Bush and his handlers make.
May the best marketing team win!
Mr. Stephanopoulus interviewed Senator John McCain. Although I am not too familiar with the Senator, he continued to denounce the ads that attacked Senator Kerry's war record and asked for everyone to move on and put the events of 30 years ago behind and focus on the future. Later, a political strategist with the Bush campaign continued the same theme of how Bush is forward looking while Kerry continues to harp upon his past.
I do agree that the debate over presidential war records should merit only minor consideration when it comes to chosing the president. However, I cannot help but feel that the Bush campaign is again using dirty political tricks to discredit Senator Kerry while appearing to be "above the fray."
I recall reading, perhaps in Al Franken's book, about the political tricks employed by the Bush team during the 2000 election and during the transition. One trick was the insidious push-poll where pollsters would phone up potential voters and ask a hypothetical question. For example, they would ask whether they would be more or less likely to vote for Senator Kerry if he had lied about his war record. Although there is no basis in fact for the statement, the seed of doubt is planted and the voter may be inclined to believe it as true. Another trick was used during the transition between the Clinton and Bush administration. Rumours spread that the Democrats were vandalizing and damaging the White House in an attempt to thwart a smooth takeover. When asked about for more details or concrete evidence, the Bush team responded that they would not produce it because they did not want to involve themselves in dirty politics. They were, again, "above the fray". Both of these tactics allowed the Republicans to plant seeds of doubt and distrust in the mind's of voters and then portray themselves as holier and purer than their opponents by refusing to discuss the issue any further since they did not play such dirty political games.
The same strategy seems to be in operation now. After bringing up Mr. Kerry's war record, publicly questioning the validity of his decorations, accusing him of lying to receive his medals, the Republicans now want to move on before the discussion of Bush and Cheney's lack of war records becomes too heated. The damage to Senator Kerry's reputation has been done and now the Republicans want to portray Senator Kerry as someone fixated on the past and unable to focus on the future.
Whether or not Karl Rove and the Bush team was directly involved in the making of the ads that attacked Kerry's war record is a rather moot point. The ad was politically motivated and it worked to undermine the public's trust in Kerry. Now the situation is ripe for the Bush team to take advantage by denouncing the ads, giving the appearance of virtue. Furthermore, they are now able to criticize Kerry as a leader fixated on the past as he attempts to defend his past, while Bush (who conveniently doesn't discuss his war record) looks to the future and a war he cannot win.
Politics is a dirty game and the team that plays it the best is often the winner. Karl Rove and his team seem to be the most able to manipulate stories, twist the truth, and convince voters that Bush is the best person to lead the country while the Democrats seem to have trouble capitalizing on all the blunders and miscues that Bush and his handlers make.
May the best marketing team win!
Monday, September 06, 2004
My Pet Raccoon
On the weekend I visited Oita's Park Place, a medium sized retail-entertainment complex located near the Big-Eye Stadium about 20 minutes from downtown Oita City. Amongst the many shops is a pet store that often stocks rather unusual pets.
Last year I was surprised to see a praire dog sitting in a cage. I had never considered prairie dogs to be pets but then I originally thought ferrets to be unusual companions. However, after taking care of my neighbours two ferrets for about a month, their idiosyncrocies and playfulness endeared them to me. Bear and Muffin were affectionate, loved to be held (as long as your nose wasn't too close to Bear's face) and would actually chase my sister and I around the yard. When the owners returned, they were amazed at the change; the sheen of their fur, their improved personalities.
My family also acquired a particularly unique bird from a friend. A Red Lorry, the bird had been a gift to my friend's father. Although Laurel, as she became known, had all her physcial needs met, she was largely ignored and placed in a cage distinctly lacking in distractions. Consequently, she occupied most of her time making lots of ungodly noises. After a few weeks and many tears shed, Laurel gradually began to warm to us and become an integral part of our family. The most endearing trait is her ability to speak. Combined with her intelligence, she can almost engage in a simple conversation. Approaching her cage elicits a "hello" while a wave of the hand initiates a "bye-bye". Opening a cupboard causes her to cry out for a delicious cookie while giving her a kiss makes her whisper, "I love you." And, when you try to ignore her, she will ask in the sweetest voice, "What'cha doing?"
However, on Saturday, I was in for a little bit of a shock. Sitting in a cage priced at approximately $2000 CDN, was a あらいぐま which literally translates into a washing bear. This raccoon looked distraught as it paced back and forth, making whimpering sounds and occassionally stretching his paws through the bars. For me, raccoons had always been wild animals that visited at night in search of food. A neighbour who was fond of all animals, would feed a family nightly for many years. Every evening, the family would make its pilgrimage to the neighbour's back door, mounting the fence and trapezing along the top until it reached her yard. The family, always traveling in a well disciplined single file followed their route so religiously that a path was gradually worn into the lawn. Although the raccoons would approach the house without fear, they were never friendly and shied away from any contact with humans.
Certainly, raccoons are charming looking animals. Their colouring, especially the black band that covers their eyes, gives them a unique appearance. Their ability to manipulate objects with their paws gives them an almost human quality. Most importantly, the fuzziness of their fur endows them with an undeniable cute, cuddly factor.
Looking at a couple of internet sites, it quickly becomes apparent that raccoons do not make wonderful pets. Most sites recommend liability insurance, and strongly warn against keeping raccoons in captivity. Other issues include 3 to 4 months a year of increased aggressiveness during mating season, being particularly sloppy eaters due to the need to dip their food in water, and the threat of obesity as they require a specialized diet and ample exercise. Given that most Japanese live in an urban setting and lead busy lives, I cannot envision a raccoon living a happy existence inside a home.
My only hope is the pet store strongly cautions potential customers of the dangers and challenges that owning a raccoon entails. However, given its prominent location at the front of the store, I fear that the store will sell the animal to anyone with the money and the desire to have a unique pet.
Last year I was surprised to see a praire dog sitting in a cage. I had never considered prairie dogs to be pets but then I originally thought ferrets to be unusual companions. However, after taking care of my neighbours two ferrets for about a month, their idiosyncrocies and playfulness endeared them to me. Bear and Muffin were affectionate, loved to be held (as long as your nose wasn't too close to Bear's face) and would actually chase my sister and I around the yard. When the owners returned, they were amazed at the change; the sheen of their fur, their improved personalities.
My family also acquired a particularly unique bird from a friend. A Red Lorry, the bird had been a gift to my friend's father. Although Laurel, as she became known, had all her physcial needs met, she was largely ignored and placed in a cage distinctly lacking in distractions. Consequently, she occupied most of her time making lots of ungodly noises. After a few weeks and many tears shed, Laurel gradually began to warm to us and become an integral part of our family. The most endearing trait is her ability to speak. Combined with her intelligence, she can almost engage in a simple conversation. Approaching her cage elicits a "hello" while a wave of the hand initiates a "bye-bye". Opening a cupboard causes her to cry out for a delicious cookie while giving her a kiss makes her whisper, "I love you." And, when you try to ignore her, she will ask in the sweetest voice, "What'cha doing?"
However, on Saturday, I was in for a little bit of a shock. Sitting in a cage priced at approximately $2000 CDN, was a あらいぐま which literally translates into a washing bear. This raccoon looked distraught as it paced back and forth, making whimpering sounds and occassionally stretching his paws through the bars. For me, raccoons had always been wild animals that visited at night in search of food. A neighbour who was fond of all animals, would feed a family nightly for many years. Every evening, the family would make its pilgrimage to the neighbour's back door, mounting the fence and trapezing along the top until it reached her yard. The family, always traveling in a well disciplined single file followed their route so religiously that a path was gradually worn into the lawn. Although the raccoons would approach the house without fear, they were never friendly and shied away from any contact with humans.
Certainly, raccoons are charming looking animals. Their colouring, especially the black band that covers their eyes, gives them a unique appearance. Their ability to manipulate objects with their paws gives them an almost human quality. Most importantly, the fuzziness of their fur endows them with an undeniable cute, cuddly factor.
Looking at a couple of internet sites, it quickly becomes apparent that raccoons do not make wonderful pets. Most sites recommend liability insurance, and strongly warn against keeping raccoons in captivity. Other issues include 3 to 4 months a year of increased aggressiveness during mating season, being particularly sloppy eaters due to the need to dip their food in water, and the threat of obesity as they require a specialized diet and ample exercise. Given that most Japanese live in an urban setting and lead busy lives, I cannot envision a raccoon living a happy existence inside a home.
My only hope is the pet store strongly cautions potential customers of the dangers and challenges that owning a raccoon entails. However, given its prominent location at the front of the store, I fear that the store will sell the animal to anyone with the money and the desire to have a unique pet.
Sunday, September 05, 2004
Japan's Nuclear Industry
Although Japan regularly records large monthly trade surpluses, approximately 80% of Japan's energy is foreign sourced making the country extremely vulnerable to fluctuations in the price and supply of oil. In an attempt to alleviate this dependency, Japan has embarked on an ambitious nuclear program. At present, 25% of Japan's electricity is produced by nuclear fission at 53 reactors throughout the country.
However, the industry has been plagued with a series of accidents in the recent years which have called into question the safety of these operations. The latest accident occurred on August 9th in Fukui prefecture. Although no radiation was released, four workers were killed when superheated steam burst from a pipe that had gradually deteriorated from an original thickness of 10mm to 0.6mm. In 1999, workers mixing uranium in buckets caused a release of radiation in the Tokaimura power plant north of Tokyo forcing the evacuation of local residents and resulting in the death of several employees.
Web surfing on this topic lead me to an interesting article posted by the BBC concerning Japan's "nuclear slaves" in 1999. According to the article, many non-technical jobs such as cleaning around the reactors are contracted out by the nuclear power company to sub-contractors. These sub-contractors frequently hire homeless or disadvantaged people, offering them wages that are higher than they would otherwise expect to receive. The workers are then subjected to dangerous working conditions and are not educated on the risks that they are taking. Since these people are homeless, they are seen as expendible and their health woes will largely go unnoticed. An official from The Japan Atomic Power Company noted that although the company follows the national safety standards, it does not involve itself in the hiring practices of its subcontractors nor does it track the health of these temporary workers.
Another article of interest I discovered concerns the safety and training issues that lead to the 1999 nuclear accident at Tokaimura which did result in a leak of radiation. The article highlights the saftey regulations that were ignored in the interests of cost cutting, the lack of training given to workers, and the attempts to keep the accident as quiet as possible by ignoring reporting procedures and failing to give timely evacuation orders to surrounding residents.
When I lived in Miyagi, my homestay father worked at the Onagawa Nuclear Power Plant located on the Pacific Coast approximately 450km north of Tokyo. I was able to take a tour of the plant and I did come away impressed with the apparent cleanliness and efficiency of the plant. However, I realize appearances can be deceiving and I don't pretend to have any expertise in evaluating nuclear power safety. What actually goes on behind the scenes and what the conditions were inside the other reactors, I will never know. However, given what I have read, my jokes about my homestay father glowing and mysteriously being able to turn on electrical appliances may not be as far-fetched as I hoped. All I can be thankful for is that there are no nuclear power plants located close to my town. Click here to see where the closest nuclear power plant to you is located.
However, the industry has been plagued with a series of accidents in the recent years which have called into question the safety of these operations. The latest accident occurred on August 9th in Fukui prefecture. Although no radiation was released, four workers were killed when superheated steam burst from a pipe that had gradually deteriorated from an original thickness of 10mm to 0.6mm. In 1999, workers mixing uranium in buckets caused a release of radiation in the Tokaimura power plant north of Tokyo forcing the evacuation of local residents and resulting in the death of several employees.
Web surfing on this topic lead me to an interesting article posted by the BBC concerning Japan's "nuclear slaves" in 1999. According to the article, many non-technical jobs such as cleaning around the reactors are contracted out by the nuclear power company to sub-contractors. These sub-contractors frequently hire homeless or disadvantaged people, offering them wages that are higher than they would otherwise expect to receive. The workers are then subjected to dangerous working conditions and are not educated on the risks that they are taking. Since these people are homeless, they are seen as expendible and their health woes will largely go unnoticed. An official from The Japan Atomic Power Company noted that although the company follows the national safety standards, it does not involve itself in the hiring practices of its subcontractors nor does it track the health of these temporary workers.
Another article of interest I discovered concerns the safety and training issues that lead to the 1999 nuclear accident at Tokaimura which did result in a leak of radiation. The article highlights the saftey regulations that were ignored in the interests of cost cutting, the lack of training given to workers, and the attempts to keep the accident as quiet as possible by ignoring reporting procedures and failing to give timely evacuation orders to surrounding residents.
When I lived in Miyagi, my homestay father worked at the Onagawa Nuclear Power Plant located on the Pacific Coast approximately 450km north of Tokyo. I was able to take a tour of the plant and I did come away impressed with the apparent cleanliness and efficiency of the plant. However, I realize appearances can be deceiving and I don't pretend to have any expertise in evaluating nuclear power safety. What actually goes on behind the scenes and what the conditions were inside the other reactors, I will never know. However, given what I have read, my jokes about my homestay father glowing and mysteriously being able to turn on electrical appliances may not be as far-fetched as I hoped. All I can be thankful for is that there are no nuclear power plants located close to my town. Click here to see where the closest nuclear power plant to you is located.
Another Typhoon
As #18 approaches Kyushu, I could understand if readers begin to feel that I have some unnatural fixation on this natural phenomenon. Certainly, I have mentioned typhoons repeatedly over the past month but that is because this year's typhoon season has been particularly severe.
Usually, only two or three typhoons per year actually reach land. Last year, I do not recall any typhoons approaching my town of Innai. Most vere off harmlessly into the Pacific causing little disruption to the main islands of Japan. This year, however, six have already landed and tomorrow's typhoon will mark the seventh. Furthermore, #19 appears to be headed towards Japan as well although it will not likely hit Kyushu.
As I speak, it is raining quite heavily and the winds are gusting; a sure sign that the typhoon is approaching. When I get home tonight, I will stuff a plastic bag in the hood scoop of my car to prevent a repeat of last week's damage to my car's spark plug. I am also considering taping a sign to my steering wheel to remind me of the bag's presence. I am sure that melted, burnt plastic covering my engine would be a greater evil than a little bit of water...
Usually, only two or three typhoons per year actually reach land. Last year, I do not recall any typhoons approaching my town of Innai. Most vere off harmlessly into the Pacific causing little disruption to the main islands of Japan. This year, however, six have already landed and tomorrow's typhoon will mark the seventh. Furthermore, #19 appears to be headed towards Japan as well although it will not likely hit Kyushu.
As I speak, it is raining quite heavily and the winds are gusting; a sure sign that the typhoon is approaching. When I get home tonight, I will stuff a plastic bag in the hood scoop of my car to prevent a repeat of last week's damage to my car's spark plug. I am also considering taping a sign to my steering wheel to remind me of the bag's presence. I am sure that melted, burnt plastic covering my engine would be a greater evil than a little bit of water...
Tuesday, August 31, 2004
I am a typhoon victim
Well, not me but my car. Having thought that I had emerged from Typhoon #16 without a scratch, Tuesday night found me listening to my car perform on 3/4 time rather than 4/4.
My car is a Toyota Trueno GT-Z which I purchased a year ago for a little less than $1500 CDN. The Z in its name denotes the presence of a suerpcharger that allows the 1.6L engine to produce over 170 horsepower with minimal lag and superb low end response.
Essentially, a supercharger is a turbine that is powered off an accessory belt from the engine. The turbine compresses the air to about 8psi, force feeding extra air into the engine. As oxygen is essential for combustion, the extra oxygen allows for a more powerful explosion and thus more power. To increase air density further, an intercooler acts to reduce the air temperature and thus feed more oxygen to the engine.
Intercoolers are usually located in 2 possible locations; in front of the engine behind the bumper or on top of the engine. Cars with intercoolers located in latter position can be easily identified with a hood scoop that allows cool air to contact the intercooler. Subaru Impreza WRX's are a common example. With the intercooler located on top of the engine, my car is fitted with a hood scoop. Usually, only air and a small amount of moisture is allowed to enter the engine compartment. However, with the rain falling horizontally rather than vertically during the typhoon, enough water entered into the engine compartment to cause the spark plug to become wet and refuse to fire. Thus, instead of listening to a smooth purr, a syncopated, rough sound emanted from my tailpipe last night.
Fortunately, the fix was a rather simple matter of removing the spark plug, drying it off, and reinserting it. Without any tools however, I had to take it to my mechanic who graciously charged only $25.
When I lived in Canada, my cars were quite new and almost no repairs. My Acura Integra's fuel pump expired making it difficult to start. My Prelude suffered nothing more than a failing battery after 7 years although in the care of my father, the power steering pump failed. With my current car, this is the third item in as many months. Certainly, when you pay so little for a car, a few problems are to be expected.
The first problem was a squealing sound from the left front wheel. The noise first became noticeable when I turned the steering wheel sharply. Gradually, the noise increased to include driving straight ahead. Under acceleration, the noise disappeared but became embarrassing when my foot lifted off the throttle. The problem? Bad wheel bearings. This was diagnosed by the mechanic shifting the wheel back and forth and noticing the 1 inch of slop. The bearings were replaced and the sound disappeared.
Three weeks later, I noticed water on the floor of the passenger footwell. At first I thought it was just water leaking after a severe rain and made a mental note to check for leaks around the windows next time I washed the car. I noticed the water had a bit of an oily texture to it but didn't think too much. Much to my chagrin, it was not merely rainwater but coolant that had exited the engine through the heating system.
Cars have a heater core which is used to heat the car's interior. The heater core is essentially a small radiator that dissipates heat into the heating ducts of the car. The coolant from the engine is pushed through the heater core, heating the surrounding air. It is then mixed with a certain amount of external air to achieve the desired temperature. My car's heater core developed a hole allowing the coolant to leak out, into the ducts and into the passenger footwell. As I drove along, the insufficient amount of coolant caused the engine to overheat, stranding me at an old ladies house. By adding water to the radiator, I was able to nurse the car to my mechanic. There, I was given an option. Replace the heater core for approximate $400 or bypass it for $10. Given that winter was still 6 months away at the time, I agreed to the bypass operation. At present, I am satisfied with my decision. However, I might be cursing my cheapness on those cold winter nights.
My mechanic is a particuarly talkative fellow who takes longer to talk to me than repair the car. As he speaks rapid fire Japanese with a healthy sprinkling of technical jargon and local dialect, my comprehension of his words of wisdom is sparse. However, a few nods of my head, a couple words here and there seem to inspire him to further monologuing. I must admit to being a bit of a car nut so I do my best to understand and learn. I should take up his invitation to visit on weekends for I am sure I will learn a lot more from first-hand experience than I would ever receive by trying to absorb words and diagrams from books.
My car is a Toyota Trueno GT-Z which I purchased a year ago for a little less than $1500 CDN. The Z in its name denotes the presence of a suerpcharger that allows the 1.6L engine to produce over 170 horsepower with minimal lag and superb low end response.
Essentially, a supercharger is a turbine that is powered off an accessory belt from the engine. The turbine compresses the air to about 8psi, force feeding extra air into the engine. As oxygen is essential for combustion, the extra oxygen allows for a more powerful explosion and thus more power. To increase air density further, an intercooler acts to reduce the air temperature and thus feed more oxygen to the engine.
Intercoolers are usually located in 2 possible locations; in front of the engine behind the bumper or on top of the engine. Cars with intercoolers located in latter position can be easily identified with a hood scoop that allows cool air to contact the intercooler. Subaru Impreza WRX's are a common example. With the intercooler located on top of the engine, my car is fitted with a hood scoop. Usually, only air and a small amount of moisture is allowed to enter the engine compartment. However, with the rain falling horizontally rather than vertically during the typhoon, enough water entered into the engine compartment to cause the spark plug to become wet and refuse to fire. Thus, instead of listening to a smooth purr, a syncopated, rough sound emanted from my tailpipe last night.
Fortunately, the fix was a rather simple matter of removing the spark plug, drying it off, and reinserting it. Without any tools however, I had to take it to my mechanic who graciously charged only $25.
When I lived in Canada, my cars were quite new and almost no repairs. My Acura Integra's fuel pump expired making it difficult to start. My Prelude suffered nothing more than a failing battery after 7 years although in the care of my father, the power steering pump failed. With my current car, this is the third item in as many months. Certainly, when you pay so little for a car, a few problems are to be expected.
The first problem was a squealing sound from the left front wheel. The noise first became noticeable when I turned the steering wheel sharply. Gradually, the noise increased to include driving straight ahead. Under acceleration, the noise disappeared but became embarrassing when my foot lifted off the throttle. The problem? Bad wheel bearings. This was diagnosed by the mechanic shifting the wheel back and forth and noticing the 1 inch of slop. The bearings were replaced and the sound disappeared.
Three weeks later, I noticed water on the floor of the passenger footwell. At first I thought it was just water leaking after a severe rain and made a mental note to check for leaks around the windows next time I washed the car. I noticed the water had a bit of an oily texture to it but didn't think too much. Much to my chagrin, it was not merely rainwater but coolant that had exited the engine through the heating system.
Cars have a heater core which is used to heat the car's interior. The heater core is essentially a small radiator that dissipates heat into the heating ducts of the car. The coolant from the engine is pushed through the heater core, heating the surrounding air. It is then mixed with a certain amount of external air to achieve the desired temperature. My car's heater core developed a hole allowing the coolant to leak out, into the ducts and into the passenger footwell. As I drove along, the insufficient amount of coolant caused the engine to overheat, stranding me at an old ladies house. By adding water to the radiator, I was able to nurse the car to my mechanic. There, I was given an option. Replace the heater core for approximate $400 or bypass it for $10. Given that winter was still 6 months away at the time, I agreed to the bypass operation. At present, I am satisfied with my decision. However, I might be cursing my cheapness on those cold winter nights.
My mechanic is a particuarly talkative fellow who takes longer to talk to me than repair the car. As he speaks rapid fire Japanese with a healthy sprinkling of technical jargon and local dialect, my comprehension of his words of wisdom is sparse. However, a few nods of my head, a couple words here and there seem to inspire him to further monologuing. I must admit to being a bit of a car nut so I do my best to understand and learn. I should take up his invitation to visit on weekends for I am sure I will learn a lot more from first-hand experience than I would ever receive by trying to absorb words and diagrams from books.
Wednesday, August 25, 2004
Climbing Mt. Fuji
Also known as standing in the world's longest, highest, coldest line.
I returned from my week of adventure yesterday morning and I am still grappling with the lack of sleep. Sleeping on ferries, in capsule hotels, and various people's floors isn't the best way to fulfill one's sleep requirement but what is many hours of missed sleep when you receive such memorable experiences in return?
I ascended the mountain with nine Japanese friends, only two of whom I had met before. We drove from Yokohama to Yamanashi and arrived at the 5th stage just before 9pm. Yes, we were hiking at night. The idea is to reach the summit just before sunrise and watch the sun's rays emerge while sitting atop of Japan. As I had mentioned before, I had no delusions that the hike would be an amazing natural experience like hiking the West Coast Trail in Canada. I was aware of the crowds, the garbage and the smell of septic tanks would be an integral part of the expereince. However, the sheer number of people was overwhelming.
We began our climb at 9pm and there were quite a few people around. However, you could easily pass the slower the hikers and maintain a decent pace. Occassionally, there would be bottlenecks that would slow one down but, overall, you could march to your own drummer. As the night progressed, the crowds thickened to the point where passing slower hikers became impossible. Hikers completely filled the trail and each 4 or 5 steps taken were followed by a minute or two of waiting until I could progress 4 or 5 more steps closer to the summit. Needless to say, the time (about 3am) and the cold, howling wind, made the minutes of waiting seem much longer. The sky began to brighten in the east around 4:30am and the dreams of watching the sunrise from the summit were dashed. The sheer number of people made it impossible to climb any faster.
Sunrise occurred at about 5am and I managed to take a few pictures of the sun as it shone intermittently between the fast moving clouds that swirled around Mt. Fuji's peak. After another hour of slogging, I reached the top and huddled in a shelter in an attempt to protect myself from the wind and volcanic dust. After recovering for about an hour on the summit, we gathered our gear up for the descent down. Usually I enjoy the climb more than the descent but the lack of people, the soft volcanic sand that cushioned my joints, made it more enjoyable than I would have imagined. Plus, the idea of returning to the car provided a powerful incentive for a quick descent.
It was interesting to watch people climb the mountain. Many seemed to be on auto-pilot, moving at the same pace as those in front. As I waited for my friends to catch up, I would watch one person stop for no apparent reason. Although there was room to pass on the side, those following would also stop and rest. It seemed more of a forced death march rather than an enjoyable, memorable experience. It also surprised me to see so many women making the climb. I would estimate that 60% of the climbers were female and there were many groups of all female climbers. Living in a town where I am the only foreigner, I was also amazed to see all the foreigners. On reflection though, any famous attraction attracts tourists and Mt. Fuji is no different. The hikers are certainly not reflective of the makeup of the general population.
Would I recommend climbing Mt. Fuji? Yes, definitely but with the caveat that anyone expecting a "back-to-nature" experience should steer clear. Saturday night is probably the worst possible night to climb given the hordes of climbers. A weekday night would certainly be less crowded and undoubtedly more enjoyable. Climbing during the day is also an option but there is something undeniably unique in climbing a moutain at night and watching the sunrise from the summit.
Other insights/observations:
1. Toilets at the base cost 50 yen while those on top cost 200. Manage your bladder accordingly. Also, be prepared to stand in line to use the facilities.
2. Drinks cost 200 yen at the base (already 50 yen more than usual) and rise according to the elevation. Packing your own food and drink is certainly most economical.
3. Walking sticks can be purchased at the base and branded at each of the stations on the way up.
4. Starting at the 五合目(5th stage), you work your way to the 九合目 which is the summit. Each level was usually indicated by a collection of mountain huts. However, you quickly learn that each stage has a number of substages also indicated by a collection of huts. It was a little disheartening to trudge along for about an hour, reach the huts and realize that you are still on the same stage.
5. Dress for the winter. Although it was warm enough for just a t-shirt and shorts and the base, as you climb, the temperature drops and the wind picks up. Although I did not have a thermometer, I am sure the temperature was close to 0 and the windchill made it seem even colder. Ensure you have warm headwear, a good jacket with the ability to add or subtract layers underneath and a pair of gloves. In other words, dress for winter. Most people brought their skiwear although I soldiered on with my cold weather cycling gear.
I returned from my week of adventure yesterday morning and I am still grappling with the lack of sleep. Sleeping on ferries, in capsule hotels, and various people's floors isn't the best way to fulfill one's sleep requirement but what is many hours of missed sleep when you receive such memorable experiences in return?
I ascended the mountain with nine Japanese friends, only two of whom I had met before. We drove from Yokohama to Yamanashi and arrived at the 5th stage just before 9pm. Yes, we were hiking at night. The idea is to reach the summit just before sunrise and watch the sun's rays emerge while sitting atop of Japan. As I had mentioned before, I had no delusions that the hike would be an amazing natural experience like hiking the West Coast Trail in Canada. I was aware of the crowds, the garbage and the smell of septic tanks would be an integral part of the expereince. However, the sheer number of people was overwhelming.
We began our climb at 9pm and there were quite a few people around. However, you could easily pass the slower the hikers and maintain a decent pace. Occassionally, there would be bottlenecks that would slow one down but, overall, you could march to your own drummer. As the night progressed, the crowds thickened to the point where passing slower hikers became impossible. Hikers completely filled the trail and each 4 or 5 steps taken were followed by a minute or two of waiting until I could progress 4 or 5 more steps closer to the summit. Needless to say, the time (about 3am) and the cold, howling wind, made the minutes of waiting seem much longer. The sky began to brighten in the east around 4:30am and the dreams of watching the sunrise from the summit were dashed. The sheer number of people made it impossible to climb any faster.
Sunrise occurred at about 5am and I managed to take a few pictures of the sun as it shone intermittently between the fast moving clouds that swirled around Mt. Fuji's peak. After another hour of slogging, I reached the top and huddled in a shelter in an attempt to protect myself from the wind and volcanic dust. After recovering for about an hour on the summit, we gathered our gear up for the descent down. Usually I enjoy the climb more than the descent but the lack of people, the soft volcanic sand that cushioned my joints, made it more enjoyable than I would have imagined. Plus, the idea of returning to the car provided a powerful incentive for a quick descent.
It was interesting to watch people climb the mountain. Many seemed to be on auto-pilot, moving at the same pace as those in front. As I waited for my friends to catch up, I would watch one person stop for no apparent reason. Although there was room to pass on the side, those following would also stop and rest. It seemed more of a forced death march rather than an enjoyable, memorable experience. It also surprised me to see so many women making the climb. I would estimate that 60% of the climbers were female and there were many groups of all female climbers. Living in a town where I am the only foreigner, I was also amazed to see all the foreigners. On reflection though, any famous attraction attracts tourists and Mt. Fuji is no different. The hikers are certainly not reflective of the makeup of the general population.
Would I recommend climbing Mt. Fuji? Yes, definitely but with the caveat that anyone expecting a "back-to-nature" experience should steer clear. Saturday night is probably the worst possible night to climb given the hordes of climbers. A weekday night would certainly be less crowded and undoubtedly more enjoyable. Climbing during the day is also an option but there is something undeniably unique in climbing a moutain at night and watching the sunrise from the summit.
Other insights/observations:
1. Toilets at the base cost 50 yen while those on top cost 200. Manage your bladder accordingly. Also, be prepared to stand in line to use the facilities.
2. Drinks cost 200 yen at the base (already 50 yen more than usual) and rise according to the elevation. Packing your own food and drink is certainly most economical.
3. Walking sticks can be purchased at the base and branded at each of the stations on the way up.
4. Starting at the 五合目(5th stage), you work your way to the 九合目 which is the summit. Each level was usually indicated by a collection of mountain huts. However, you quickly learn that each stage has a number of substages also indicated by a collection of huts. It was a little disheartening to trudge along for about an hour, reach the huts and realize that you are still on the same stage.
5. Dress for the winter. Although it was warm enough for just a t-shirt and shorts and the base, as you climb, the temperature drops and the wind picks up. Although I did not have a thermometer, I am sure the temperature was close to 0 and the windchill made it seem even colder. Ensure you have warm headwear, a good jacket with the ability to add or subtract layers underneath and a pair of gloves. In other words, dress for winter. Most people brought their skiwear although I soldiered on with my cold weather cycling gear.
Thursday, August 12, 2004
Yasukuni Shrine
As three more Japanese cabinet ministers plan to visit the Yasukuni Shrine on August 15 to commemorate the end of World War II and the Prime Minister has confirmed he will visit the shrine again next year, the appropriateness of their visits is once again being debated. Mr. Koizumi has visited the shrine on four occasions since he became prime minister in 2001.
As demonstrated by the recent Asia Cup soccer tournament held in China, many Asian countries, especially South Korea and China, still hold a great amount of ill-will towards Japan and feel that having government ministers visit a shrine where convicted war criminals are enshrined is indicative of Japan's lack of remorse for its past imperialistic actions and a continued hostility towards its neighbours.
The shrine, located just outside the Imperial Palace in Tokyo was built in 1869 on the request of the Emperor Meiji following the restoration of the monarchy and the end of shogunate rule. The shrine originally housed the spirits of those who died in the Boshin Civil War. As the 20th century progressed and Japan became involved in a variety of conflicts, the number of spirits climbed to approximately 2,466,000. Although the shrine always espoused nationalistic and militaristic views, the addition of 1,068 war criminal spirits including General Tojo, the wartime prime minister, sparked further suspicion of Japan's inability to come to terms with its past. It is interesting to note that prior to the enshrinement of the war criminals, Japan's Asian neighbours did not criticize the visits of public officials. However, after 1978, the opposition has become more and more vocal with concerns that Japan is returning to its imperialist past and may once more threaten the sovereignty of its neighbours.
To provide a western perspective, imagine the outcry if Germany's prime minister visited a shrine where, among others, the spirits of Hitler, Goebbels and other members of the Third Reich were enshrined. Although the prime minister could claim he was commemorating the other spirits of the war dead, the mere appearance of worshipping such hated and vilified figures would create uproar among Germany's neighbours and other groups, especially the Jews.
Although the opposition to the visits has been most vocal externally, there has been heated discussion within the country as to whether or not the visits by public officials, especially the prime minister, violate the constitutional separation between state and religion. A number of cases have been brought before a variety of Japanese courts and the rulings have been inconsistent. The cases have centered on whether or not Junichiro Koizumi has visited in the shrine in the official capacity as prime minister. Earlier this year a Fukuoka court decided that the Prime Minister had visited the shrine in the official capacity of prime minister thereby violating the constitution. However, other courts have sided with the Prime Minister citing that his visits were of a personal nature.
Junichiro Koizumi is a Japanese citizen and is entitled to the same degree of personal freedom that other Japanese are entitled too. As a citizen, he has the right to visit a shrine of his own choosing. However, as Prime Minister, his actions in his private life cannot be completely separated from his position as prime minister. Many professions expect their members to maintain standards that are higher than those that are set for the general public. This is what generates respect and reverance for the position; the job of prime minister is one of supreme responsibility and his conduct, whether or not it is in an official capacity, reflects upon this position. Furthermore, during his visits, he signed his name as Prime Minister, used prime ministerial vehicles and staff to assist his visit. In other words, it had all the trappings of an official visit although he considered it to be private.
Mr. Koizumi has noted that his visits to other shrines have not provoked any controversy although they too could be considered a violation of the constitution by the same rationale. While this is true, the Yasukuni shrine is symbolic of Japan's militaristic past and as such generates strong feelings of anger and resentment. This has fuelled those who feel slighted by the visits to take the matter to court. Since his other visits to other shrines have not generated such emotion, there has been no desire to pursue the matter through the courts. Furthermore, I believe that the plaintiffs are less concerned about the requirement for the separation of religion and state. They want to put an end to the Prime Minister's visits to the Yasukuni Shrine. The most effective way they can do this is to use Article 20 as a tool to legally force the Prime Minister to cease his annual worshipping at the Yasukuni shrine.
All heads of state need to pay respect to those that have died in the name of the country. To not have this opportunity would denigrate the sacrifices that so many people have made. However, the secret ceremony in 1978 to enshrine the sprits of the war criminals has polluted the shrine's meaning and allowed this controversy to erupt and fester. Unless some action is taken to separate or remove the war criminals from the shrine, the Prime Minister's visits will forever be seen as a glorification of past militarism and a refusal to reconcile relations with neighbouring countries.
The Yasukuni website is located here. It provides some interesting reading that would make Orwell proud. "Nevertheless, to defend the independence of the nation as well as the peace of Asia, the sad development of wars with other countries arose." Perhaps the Shrine's hired scribe is the same person who helps the Bush administration justify their war on Iraq...
As demonstrated by the recent Asia Cup soccer tournament held in China, many Asian countries, especially South Korea and China, still hold a great amount of ill-will towards Japan and feel that having government ministers visit a shrine where convicted war criminals are enshrined is indicative of Japan's lack of remorse for its past imperialistic actions and a continued hostility towards its neighbours.
The shrine, located just outside the Imperial Palace in Tokyo was built in 1869 on the request of the Emperor Meiji following the restoration of the monarchy and the end of shogunate rule. The shrine originally housed the spirits of those who died in the Boshin Civil War. As the 20th century progressed and Japan became involved in a variety of conflicts, the number of spirits climbed to approximately 2,466,000. Although the shrine always espoused nationalistic and militaristic views, the addition of 1,068 war criminal spirits including General Tojo, the wartime prime minister, sparked further suspicion of Japan's inability to come to terms with its past. It is interesting to note that prior to the enshrinement of the war criminals, Japan's Asian neighbours did not criticize the visits of public officials. However, after 1978, the opposition has become more and more vocal with concerns that Japan is returning to its imperialist past and may once more threaten the sovereignty of its neighbours.
To provide a western perspective, imagine the outcry if Germany's prime minister visited a shrine where, among others, the spirits of Hitler, Goebbels and other members of the Third Reich were enshrined. Although the prime minister could claim he was commemorating the other spirits of the war dead, the mere appearance of worshipping such hated and vilified figures would create uproar among Germany's neighbours and other groups, especially the Jews.
Although the opposition to the visits has been most vocal externally, there has been heated discussion within the country as to whether or not the visits by public officials, especially the prime minister, violate the constitutional separation between state and religion. A number of cases have been brought before a variety of Japanese courts and the rulings have been inconsistent. The cases have centered on whether or not Junichiro Koizumi has visited in the shrine in the official capacity as prime minister. Earlier this year a Fukuoka court decided that the Prime Minister had visited the shrine in the official capacity of prime minister thereby violating the constitution. However, other courts have sided with the Prime Minister citing that his visits were of a personal nature.
Junichiro Koizumi is a Japanese citizen and is entitled to the same degree of personal freedom that other Japanese are entitled too. As a citizen, he has the right to visit a shrine of his own choosing. However, as Prime Minister, his actions in his private life cannot be completely separated from his position as prime minister. Many professions expect their members to maintain standards that are higher than those that are set for the general public. This is what generates respect and reverance for the position; the job of prime minister is one of supreme responsibility and his conduct, whether or not it is in an official capacity, reflects upon this position. Furthermore, during his visits, he signed his name as Prime Minister, used prime ministerial vehicles and staff to assist his visit. In other words, it had all the trappings of an official visit although he considered it to be private.
Mr. Koizumi has noted that his visits to other shrines have not provoked any controversy although they too could be considered a violation of the constitution by the same rationale. While this is true, the Yasukuni shrine is symbolic of Japan's militaristic past and as such generates strong feelings of anger and resentment. This has fuelled those who feel slighted by the visits to take the matter to court. Since his other visits to other shrines have not generated such emotion, there has been no desire to pursue the matter through the courts. Furthermore, I believe that the plaintiffs are less concerned about the requirement for the separation of religion and state. They want to put an end to the Prime Minister's visits to the Yasukuni Shrine. The most effective way they can do this is to use Article 20 as a tool to legally force the Prime Minister to cease his annual worshipping at the Yasukuni shrine.
All heads of state need to pay respect to those that have died in the name of the country. To not have this opportunity would denigrate the sacrifices that so many people have made. However, the secret ceremony in 1978 to enshrine the sprits of the war criminals has polluted the shrine's meaning and allowed this controversy to erupt and fester. Unless some action is taken to separate or remove the war criminals from the shrine, the Prime Minister's visits will forever be seen as a glorification of past militarism and a refusal to reconcile relations with neighbouring countries.
The Yasukuni website is located here. It provides some interesting reading that would make Orwell proud. "Nevertheless, to defend the independence of the nation as well as the peace of Asia, the sad development of wars with other countries arose." Perhaps the Shrine's hired scribe is the same person who helps the Bush administration justify their war on Iraq...
Tuesday, August 10, 2004
Presidential Candidate War Records
Again, ABC's Nightline has given me fodder for my log. Last night, they broadcast a program discussing the war records of John Kerry and, to a lesser extent, George W. Bush. The program concentrated on recent TV commercials that are criticizing John Kerry and accusing him of lying or exaggerating to achieve his war medals and denounced him as an unfit leader. Serious allegations.
The men accusing Kerry are themselves fellow veterans, not media hacks or people without some any first-hand knowledge of his actions in Vietnam. Furthermore, one would assume that criticizing a fellow veteran especially over something as serious as lying about his actions in combat to achieve medals, is not done lightly, no matter what the personal or political gains. However, one of the men now criticizing Kerry was an ardent supporter in the 1996 Senate race, publicly speaking out in favour of Kerry based on his leadership qualities and his demonstrated and acknowledged bravery in Vietnam. However, in 2004, something has made him change his mind.
When one watches a political commercial, one must ask who is behind it and what motiviations do they have. Obviously, if the issue had been so serious, these veterans should have sought to have his actions investigated before or soon after the medals were awarded, not 30 years later when the motivation seems so obviously political. In addition, the commercials are funded in large part by a diehard Texas Republican who has close connections with Karl Rove, Bush's Senior Advisor.
When the program interviewed the veterans, they seemed more critical of Kerry's actions after the war than his actual performance during it. Kerry's anti-war stance after returning seemed to be the focus of their anger and this anger is certainly understandable since Kerry's position undermined the sacrifices and risks that all veterans faced. On the Net, there is a website called Vietnam Veterans Against John Kerry which outlines their crticism of the presidential candidate. It does provide some interesting reading although I thought a lot of the material seemed to portray Mr. Kerry as a man of compassion and critical thought rather than some radical idealist that should not be trusted. The excerpt below is from the above website. The part italicized is highlighted in the original text.
Kerry commanded his first swift boat, No. 44, from December 1968 through January 1969. He received no medals while serving on this craft.
While in command of Swift Boat 44, Kerry and crew operated without prudence in a Free Fire Zone, carelessly firing at targets of opportunity racking up a number of enemy kills and some civilians. His body count included-- a woman, her baby, a 12 year-old boy, an elderly man and several South Vietnamese soldiers."It is one of those terrible things, and I'll never forget, ever, the sight of that child," Kerry later said about the dead baby. "But there was nothing that anybody could have done about it. It was the only instance of that happening."Kerry said he was appalled that the Navy's ''free fire zone'' policy in Vietnam put civilians at such high risk.
Kerry experienced his first intense combat action on Dec. 2, 1968. He was slightly wounded on his arm, earning his first Purple Heart. In late January 1969, Kerry joined a five-man crew on swift boat No. 94 completing 18 missions over 48 days, almost all of them in the Mekong Delta
Unlike George W. Bush who never served in combat, John Kerry's experience with the trauma and reality of war has given him a unique perspective that certainly influences his decision-making process. This experience, as intangible as it is, can only help a president understand what it means to activate the military and send them half way around the world to engage in a conflict.
The program also discussed whether or not the Democrats have a right to criticize anti-Kerry ads that focus on his war record when the Democrats themselves have ads that focus on George W. Bush's war record or, more importantly, lack of it. To me, they are different issues. There is no dispute that John Kerry served in Vietnam, put himself at risk, and was awarded metals. Whether he deserved these metals or not can be disputed but it does not dismiss their existence. Furthermore, his anti-Vietnam stance was born out of experience rather than simple idealism that other anti-war protestors could be accused of. The ads attacking George W. Bush focus on an absence of any documentation about his activities in 1972. Also, the documentation that does exist indicates a concerted attempt to avoid duty in Vietnam and even a failure to fulfill his basic military obligations. These are very different issues. John Kerry could be viewed as a student who receives a university degree with an A average. However, some of his professors and fellow students criticize him for really being a B student and not deserivng all the accolades. George Bush, on the other hand, purports to have a degree but no one has heard of the university and none of the professors or fellow students are available to confirm his claim. Which is more worthy of criticsm?
Regardless, a war record is only one aspect of a candidate and it certainly shouldn't be used as the sole basis for making one's decision. At the same time, it should be understood that the criticism of Kerry's war record is a rather weak and underhanded political attempt to discredit a man who served his country and put his life at risk while distracting voters from the inconsistencies and issues the plague George W. Bush's record.
The men accusing Kerry are themselves fellow veterans, not media hacks or people without some any first-hand knowledge of his actions in Vietnam. Furthermore, one would assume that criticizing a fellow veteran especially over something as serious as lying about his actions in combat to achieve medals, is not done lightly, no matter what the personal or political gains. However, one of the men now criticizing Kerry was an ardent supporter in the 1996 Senate race, publicly speaking out in favour of Kerry based on his leadership qualities and his demonstrated and acknowledged bravery in Vietnam. However, in 2004, something has made him change his mind.
When one watches a political commercial, one must ask who is behind it and what motiviations do they have. Obviously, if the issue had been so serious, these veterans should have sought to have his actions investigated before or soon after the medals were awarded, not 30 years later when the motivation seems so obviously political. In addition, the commercials are funded in large part by a diehard Texas Republican who has close connections with Karl Rove, Bush's Senior Advisor.
When the program interviewed the veterans, they seemed more critical of Kerry's actions after the war than his actual performance during it. Kerry's anti-war stance after returning seemed to be the focus of their anger and this anger is certainly understandable since Kerry's position undermined the sacrifices and risks that all veterans faced. On the Net, there is a website called Vietnam Veterans Against John Kerry which outlines their crticism of the presidential candidate. It does provide some interesting reading although I thought a lot of the material seemed to portray Mr. Kerry as a man of compassion and critical thought rather than some radical idealist that should not be trusted. The excerpt below is from the above website. The part italicized is highlighted in the original text.
Kerry commanded his first swift boat, No. 44, from December 1968 through January 1969. He received no medals while serving on this craft.
While in command of Swift Boat 44, Kerry and crew operated without prudence in a Free Fire Zone, carelessly firing at targets of opportunity racking up a number of enemy kills and some civilians. His body count included-- a woman, her baby, a 12 year-old boy, an elderly man and several South Vietnamese soldiers."It is one of those terrible things, and I'll never forget, ever, the sight of that child," Kerry later said about the dead baby. "But there was nothing that anybody could have done about it. It was the only instance of that happening."Kerry said he was appalled that the Navy's ''free fire zone'' policy in Vietnam put civilians at such high risk.
Kerry experienced his first intense combat action on Dec. 2, 1968. He was slightly wounded on his arm, earning his first Purple Heart. In late January 1969, Kerry joined a five-man crew on swift boat No. 94 completing 18 missions over 48 days, almost all of them in the Mekong Delta
Unlike George W. Bush who never served in combat, John Kerry's experience with the trauma and reality of war has given him a unique perspective that certainly influences his decision-making process. This experience, as intangible as it is, can only help a president understand what it means to activate the military and send them half way around the world to engage in a conflict.
The program also discussed whether or not the Democrats have a right to criticize anti-Kerry ads that focus on his war record when the Democrats themselves have ads that focus on George W. Bush's war record or, more importantly, lack of it. To me, they are different issues. There is no dispute that John Kerry served in Vietnam, put himself at risk, and was awarded metals. Whether he deserved these metals or not can be disputed but it does not dismiss their existence. Furthermore, his anti-Vietnam stance was born out of experience rather than simple idealism that other anti-war protestors could be accused of. The ads attacking George W. Bush focus on an absence of any documentation about his activities in 1972. Also, the documentation that does exist indicates a concerted attempt to avoid duty in Vietnam and even a failure to fulfill his basic military obligations. These are very different issues. John Kerry could be viewed as a student who receives a university degree with an A average. However, some of his professors and fellow students criticize him for really being a B student and not deserivng all the accolades. George Bush, on the other hand, purports to have a degree but no one has heard of the university and none of the professors or fellow students are available to confirm his claim. Which is more worthy of criticsm?
Regardless, a war record is only one aspect of a candidate and it certainly shouldn't be used as the sole basis for making one's decision. At the same time, it should be understood that the criticism of Kerry's war record is a rather weak and underhanded political attempt to discredit a man who served his country and put his life at risk while distracting voters from the inconsistencies and issues the plague George W. Bush's record.
Sunday, August 08, 2004
Not a Typhoon but a Hurricane
Living in a small, rural town, the selection of channels is rather limited. There are about 8 separate channels although it is common to have at least 2 or 3 of them broadcasting the same show. Thus, when you want to watch TV, your choices are rather limited.
In Vancouver, I had to flip through approximately 60 channels eventually settling on nothing. There was almost too many choices; what video is going to be next on the music channel? Any late breaking news on CNN, MSNBC, Newsworld? All these channels required constant monitoring reducing my ability to concentrate on one program. Additionally, the channel advance button on my remote was looking a little worn although my thumb muscles were beginning to show some definition.
Last night, the movie on TV was "The Hurricane". Directed by Norman Jewison and released in late 1999, it chronicled the story of a boxer, Rubin "Hurricane" Carter, who was imprisoned for murder in the mid-1960's. The film painted Carter as the helpless victim of a corrupt, racially biased justice system that conspired to convict and incarcerate the innocent Carter. Although I had listened and enjoyed the Bob Dylan song, "The Hurricane", I had not listened to the lyrics carefully nor had I understood the origin of the song.
As with any movie, I expected the writers and directors to use their artistic license to craft a story that would provide enough drama to appeal to a wide audience. In addition, condensing a story that extends over 30 years requires that certain facts are left unsaid and events are omitted to make the story more palatable. In other words, a movie should never be treated as a documentary (and documentaries themselves should always be viewed with a critical eye) but as a stepping stone for a more thorough investigation if the story should prove interesting.
The story did grip me; the movie strives to make the issue of his innocence clear. We see that he was obviously not involved. We know that the investigating officer holds a grudge against Carter for his childhood actions and which becomes more intense when the boxer achieves success in the ring. We hear his pleas, listen to his eloquent words protesting his innocence. We appreciate the positive effect his story has on a young black male who makes The Hurricane his idol. We empathize with the Canadians who volunteer their valuable time to research his case, uncover the hidden truth while facing threats to their life by the police attempting to keep the past buried. All of this adds up to a compelling story that cannot help but make the viewer side with The Hurricane and revile the corruption, racism and hatred that blight the justice system and society in general.
However, the truth is never so clear.
Searching on the web for more information on the case, I found a website written by a freelance Canadian writer who has spent much time researching and compiling information regarding The Hurricane. Her thesis is that the movie, and Bob Dylan's song for that matter, in an attempt to make the story more appealing to a general audience, ignores many details and the dark side of The Hurricane which undermines his credibility. Although I do not have the time to sift through all the arguments she presents, I do not doubt that the case is far more complicated than an 8 minute song or a 2 hour movie can portray and nor do I believe The Hurricane is in the same league as activists such as Malcolm X, Nelson Mandela or Gandhi. The website is worth a visit for a much closer examination of the issues that surround the case. Although I do appreciate her information, I do feel that her editorializing is unwarranted especially given the confrontational style she adopts in her writing. For example,
"Carter was not 11 when he and a group of his friends encountered a middle-aged white man, depicted as a maniacal pedophile in the movie, at the Great Falls. He was 14 when he was convicted for clubbing the man over the head with a bottle and robbing a watch and $55 dollars. It was Carter's fourth juvenile offence. Carter was an experienced and savage street fighter, the leader of a gang called the Apaches. Anyone would have thought twice before tangling with him, let alone trying to proposition him. Does this assault sound like a case of self-defence?" (italics added)
The sentence “Anyone would have thought twice before tangling with him” rests on the supposition that the pedophile was cognizant of his prior behaviour and could distinguish between a 14 year old street fighter and a “regular” boy of the same age. Another point of contention is that he was convicted when he was 14. However, there is no mention of when the incident occurred. It is conceivable that he was closer to the age of 11 and the legal proceedings occurred over a number of years.
Regardless of the truth, as elusive as it is in all complicated situations, the movie does raise awareness of injustices that do exist and how people can become victims of systemic racism and bias that are embedded in our institutions. Raising these issues is of great import and the movie provides a useful springboard for investigating this specific case and discussing racism in general. Any cursory examination of the incarceration statistics in the United States shows that something is seriously wrong with the current system. Despite the movie’s looseness with certain facts and its elevation of a perhaps unworthy Rubin Hurricane Carter to almost mythical status, it's abiltity to inspire people to question the inequalities and injustices that surround them and to work towards positive change is worthy of praise and makes The Hurricane a movie that should be watched.
In Vancouver, I had to flip through approximately 60 channels eventually settling on nothing. There was almost too many choices; what video is going to be next on the music channel? Any late breaking news on CNN, MSNBC, Newsworld? All these channels required constant monitoring reducing my ability to concentrate on one program. Additionally, the channel advance button on my remote was looking a little worn although my thumb muscles were beginning to show some definition.
Last night, the movie on TV was "The Hurricane". Directed by Norman Jewison and released in late 1999, it chronicled the story of a boxer, Rubin "Hurricane" Carter, who was imprisoned for murder in the mid-1960's. The film painted Carter as the helpless victim of a corrupt, racially biased justice system that conspired to convict and incarcerate the innocent Carter. Although I had listened and enjoyed the Bob Dylan song, "The Hurricane", I had not listened to the lyrics carefully nor had I understood the origin of the song.
As with any movie, I expected the writers and directors to use their artistic license to craft a story that would provide enough drama to appeal to a wide audience. In addition, condensing a story that extends over 30 years requires that certain facts are left unsaid and events are omitted to make the story more palatable. In other words, a movie should never be treated as a documentary (and documentaries themselves should always be viewed with a critical eye) but as a stepping stone for a more thorough investigation if the story should prove interesting.
The story did grip me; the movie strives to make the issue of his innocence clear. We see that he was obviously not involved. We know that the investigating officer holds a grudge against Carter for his childhood actions and which becomes more intense when the boxer achieves success in the ring. We hear his pleas, listen to his eloquent words protesting his innocence. We appreciate the positive effect his story has on a young black male who makes The Hurricane his idol. We empathize with the Canadians who volunteer their valuable time to research his case, uncover the hidden truth while facing threats to their life by the police attempting to keep the past buried. All of this adds up to a compelling story that cannot help but make the viewer side with The Hurricane and revile the corruption, racism and hatred that blight the justice system and society in general.
However, the truth is never so clear.
Searching on the web for more information on the case, I found a website written by a freelance Canadian writer who has spent much time researching and compiling information regarding The Hurricane. Her thesis is that the movie, and Bob Dylan's song for that matter, in an attempt to make the story more appealing to a general audience, ignores many details and the dark side of The Hurricane which undermines his credibility. Although I do not have the time to sift through all the arguments she presents, I do not doubt that the case is far more complicated than an 8 minute song or a 2 hour movie can portray and nor do I believe The Hurricane is in the same league as activists such as Malcolm X, Nelson Mandela or Gandhi. The website is worth a visit for a much closer examination of the issues that surround the case. Although I do appreciate her information, I do feel that her editorializing is unwarranted especially given the confrontational style she adopts in her writing. For example,
"Carter was not 11 when he and a group of his friends encountered a middle-aged white man, depicted as a maniacal pedophile in the movie, at the Great Falls. He was 14 when he was convicted for clubbing the man over the head with a bottle and robbing a watch and $55 dollars. It was Carter's fourth juvenile offence. Carter was an experienced and savage street fighter, the leader of a gang called the Apaches. Anyone would have thought twice before tangling with him, let alone trying to proposition him. Does this assault sound like a case of self-defence?" (italics added)
The sentence “Anyone would have thought twice before tangling with him” rests on the supposition that the pedophile was cognizant of his prior behaviour and could distinguish between a 14 year old street fighter and a “regular” boy of the same age. Another point of contention is that he was convicted when he was 14. However, there is no mention of when the incident occurred. It is conceivable that he was closer to the age of 11 and the legal proceedings occurred over a number of years.
Regardless of the truth, as elusive as it is in all complicated situations, the movie does raise awareness of injustices that do exist and how people can become victims of systemic racism and bias that are embedded in our institutions. Raising these issues is of great import and the movie provides a useful springboard for investigating this specific case and discussing racism in general. Any cursory examination of the incarceration statistics in the United States shows that something is seriously wrong with the current system. Despite the movie’s looseness with certain facts and its elevation of a perhaps unworthy Rubin Hurricane Carter to almost mythical status, it's abiltity to inspire people to question the inequalities and injustices that surround them and to work towards positive change is worthy of praise and makes The Hurricane a movie that should be watched.
Thursday, August 05, 2004
Artists and Politics
Every weekday evening, ABC's Nightline is rebroadcast in Japan on BS1, a satellite station that focuses on news and sports. Last night, Ted Koeppel was discussing the involvement of artists in the current US election campaign. Essentially, the argument against their involvement centres on an artist being unable to grasp and intelligently discusses the matters of great import that face the United States and the world.
As many artists pointed out, the idea that artists should be politically silent is a relatively new concept. Being relatively familiar with music of the 1960's, much of the work was politically charged with commentary denouncing the war in Vietnam, discrimination or other injustices. More recently, Robbie Robertson released a song that was based on an interview with Leonard Peltier, a Native American who many believe was wrongly imprisoned.
We don't question an artist when they discuss love or other life issues but when "serious issues" are raised, their credibility is questioned. Why is this?
The main reason for attacking the appropriateness of a politically active artist stems from fear; fear from those in power that the artist will actually succeed in mobilizing and influencing the usually apathetic masses. From what I perceive, the US media market is split into two main streams; the news/talk format and entertainment format. The news/talk format is predominantly right wing and continually espouses views that are supportive of the current administration. I would assume that people who listen to this format are politically active and they vote in line with the views expressed by the hosts of the shows. The entertainment stream generally avoids discussion of politics unless it has some entertainment value; a sex scandal is always good fodder. Since politics are largely ignored, they become unimportant and the listener would be less likely to engage in the political process.
Thus, a popular artist who discusses politics and activates this previously uninvolved group, especially if they do not toe the right wing line, presents a substantial threat to the current administration and their supporters. This fear leads to attempts to discredit the artists and prevent the political activation of a substantial number of potential voters.
A common argument against politically active artists is that they are unequipped to deal with substantial issues that are facing the world. They will be denounced as not in touch with the harsh realities that face the world and are misguided, perhaps idealist, in their simplistic view of the world. In certain cases, this may be true. There have been many occassions where an artist will make a daft comment or have a shallow grasp of an issue. However, this should not brand all artists as ill-informed soap boxers. President Bush has one many occassions shown substantial lapses in comprehension of important issues and an inability to appreciate the incongruity of his statements "See, free nations are peaceful nations. Free nations don't attack each other. Free nations don't develop weapons of mass destruction." George W. Bush, Milwaukee, Wis., Oct. 3, 2003. And he is paid to be informed and articulate in these matters.
I would argue that well-informed artists are, in many ways, more able to discuss issues in a disinterested and unbiased manner. A business leader will support a government that implements policies that allow for more profits and an expansion of the business. His or her views are ultimately self-serving although they will wrap it in the rhetoric of creating jobs for the unemployed. Members of a religious group will fight to ensure that their ideals are forced upon the general public. They seek direct personal benefits for their political activity.
Artists, rather than benefitting from expressing their views, can risk alienating part of their audience and face admonishment from the record company that holds their contract. The Dixie Chicks were severely criticised by many right-wing groups for their disparaging remarks against President Bush. Well organized groups pressured radio stations to limit their airplay and stifled their right to freely express their opinions. When Bruce Springsteen was asked by Ted Koeppel if he was being politically active for his one personal benefit, Bruce replied that he was unhappy with the direction the country is heading and he doesn't want his children to live in the country that the current administration is creating. To me, being motivated politically to create a country that benefits future generations is refreshing rather than a cry for tax cuts or the imposition of religious fundamentalism.
There is much more that I wish to write on this topic as I feel that I have just begun. I will come back to it in the future. However, I wish to close for the moment with this thought:
How can a country that prides itself on freedom of expression be so paranoid about dissenting opinions that conflict with the current administration's policies. Is that not what makes a healthy democracy? Isn't the free exchange of ideas and opinions the best way to create a country that is inclusive and free from domination by a select group of people? Shouldn't everyone be able to express their opinion regardless of their occupation? Why should business people be considered superior to artists when politics are involved?
It is unfortunate that the coroporate culture, one that shuns the common person, is becoming accepted as the norm. People shouldn't be involved in the government; let the business leaders, the lawyers, and the rich deal make the sacrifice as they grapple with such difficult matters while you consume our products and help perpetuate the huge inequality gap that separates the rich from the rest. Political involvement by all members of society is probably the most important aspect of a democracy. Without this involvement, the government will be over-run by special interests and cease to be government for the people by the people but government for the rich by the rich.
As many artists pointed out, the idea that artists should be politically silent is a relatively new concept. Being relatively familiar with music of the 1960's, much of the work was politically charged with commentary denouncing the war in Vietnam, discrimination or other injustices. More recently, Robbie Robertson released a song that was based on an interview with Leonard Peltier, a Native American who many believe was wrongly imprisoned.
We don't question an artist when they discuss love or other life issues but when "serious issues" are raised, their credibility is questioned. Why is this?
The main reason for attacking the appropriateness of a politically active artist stems from fear; fear from those in power that the artist will actually succeed in mobilizing and influencing the usually apathetic masses. From what I perceive, the US media market is split into two main streams; the news/talk format and entertainment format. The news/talk format is predominantly right wing and continually espouses views that are supportive of the current administration. I would assume that people who listen to this format are politically active and they vote in line with the views expressed by the hosts of the shows. The entertainment stream generally avoids discussion of politics unless it has some entertainment value; a sex scandal is always good fodder. Since politics are largely ignored, they become unimportant and the listener would be less likely to engage in the political process.
Thus, a popular artist who discusses politics and activates this previously uninvolved group, especially if they do not toe the right wing line, presents a substantial threat to the current administration and their supporters. This fear leads to attempts to discredit the artists and prevent the political activation of a substantial number of potential voters.
A common argument against politically active artists is that they are unequipped to deal with substantial issues that are facing the world. They will be denounced as not in touch with the harsh realities that face the world and are misguided, perhaps idealist, in their simplistic view of the world. In certain cases, this may be true. There have been many occassions where an artist will make a daft comment or have a shallow grasp of an issue. However, this should not brand all artists as ill-informed soap boxers. President Bush has one many occassions shown substantial lapses in comprehension of important issues and an inability to appreciate the incongruity of his statements "See, free nations are peaceful nations. Free nations don't attack each other. Free nations don't develop weapons of mass destruction." George W. Bush, Milwaukee, Wis., Oct. 3, 2003. And he is paid to be informed and articulate in these matters.
I would argue that well-informed artists are, in many ways, more able to discuss issues in a disinterested and unbiased manner. A business leader will support a government that implements policies that allow for more profits and an expansion of the business. His or her views are ultimately self-serving although they will wrap it in the rhetoric of creating jobs for the unemployed. Members of a religious group will fight to ensure that their ideals are forced upon the general public. They seek direct personal benefits for their political activity.
Artists, rather than benefitting from expressing their views, can risk alienating part of their audience and face admonishment from the record company that holds their contract. The Dixie Chicks were severely criticised by many right-wing groups for their disparaging remarks against President Bush. Well organized groups pressured radio stations to limit their airplay and stifled their right to freely express their opinions. When Bruce Springsteen was asked by Ted Koeppel if he was being politically active for his one personal benefit, Bruce replied that he was unhappy with the direction the country is heading and he doesn't want his children to live in the country that the current administration is creating. To me, being motivated politically to create a country that benefits future generations is refreshing rather than a cry for tax cuts or the imposition of religious fundamentalism.
There is much more that I wish to write on this topic as I feel that I have just begun. I will come back to it in the future. However, I wish to close for the moment with this thought:
How can a country that prides itself on freedom of expression be so paranoid about dissenting opinions that conflict with the current administration's policies. Is that not what makes a healthy democracy? Isn't the free exchange of ideas and opinions the best way to create a country that is inclusive and free from domination by a select group of people? Shouldn't everyone be able to express their opinion regardless of their occupation? Why should business people be considered superior to artists when politics are involved?
It is unfortunate that the coroporate culture, one that shuns the common person, is becoming accepted as the norm. People shouldn't be involved in the government; let the business leaders, the lawyers, and the rich deal make the sacrifice as they grapple with such difficult matters while you consume our products and help perpetuate the huge inequality gap that separates the rich from the rest. Political involvement by all members of society is probably the most important aspect of a democracy. Without this involvement, the government will be over-run by special interests and cease to be government for the people by the people but government for the rich by the rich.
Tuesday, August 03, 2004
Climbing Mount Fuji - A Tentative Plan
On August 21st and 22nd, I have been invited to climb Mt. Fuji with two friends from the Tokyo area. Although I use the word friends, they are really just acquaintances. I met them once at a party in May and they invited me to accompany them up the mountain. Knowing that climbing Fuji is one of those experiences that you should do while in Japan, I informed them that I was interested. After climbing the 3776m that is Mt. Fuji, I hope I will be able to call them friends.
From the stories I have heard, Mt. Fuji is not as pristine and tranquil as the pictures taken from afar would lead you to believe. Thousands of people trek up her flanks during the short climbing season and wherever thousands of humans go, you can be assured that a great deal of destruction and mess follows. I have heard stories of human waste fouling the mountainside and upsetting one's olfactory bulbs; countless stands and vending machines selling food, drinks and a myriad of trinkets to aid (or perhaps hinder) the climb. Plus, all the people climbing at the same time creates a human train that proceeds at the pace of its slowest member, no doubt an old man or lady, hobbled by arthritic joints. However, I can be thankful that they have yet to construct some sort of high speed lift that would whisk everyone up the mountain in climate controlled comfort.
Mt. Fuji has great significance to the Japanese. In fact, the characters that represent its name, have changed over the centuries reflecting the culture at that time. The current characters, 富士山, means the mountain of warriors. This name was adopted during the Kamakura shogunate when bushido, the code of the warrior, was developed. Prior to this, the name was less culturally charged, with characters representing it as a mountain that had no equal (不二山） or as a mountain perpetually covered by snow (不尽山）despite being snow free for at least a couple of months in the summer.
There seems to be many different trails to ascend Mount Fuji with varying levels of difficulty. In fact, one of the trails allows you to drive your car to an elevation of 2400m before being forced to climb the remaining 1376m. As I will be with friends, I probably will have little say in what trail I ultimately climb. Although I would prefer a challenging route, the experience of reaching the summit and watching the sunrise will be sufficiently rewarding regardless of the degree of hardship experienced during the climb.
From the stories I have heard, Mt. Fuji is not as pristine and tranquil as the pictures taken from afar would lead you to believe. Thousands of people trek up her flanks during the short climbing season and wherever thousands of humans go, you can be assured that a great deal of destruction and mess follows. I have heard stories of human waste fouling the mountainside and upsetting one's olfactory bulbs; countless stands and vending machines selling food, drinks and a myriad of trinkets to aid (or perhaps hinder) the climb. Plus, all the people climbing at the same time creates a human train that proceeds at the pace of its slowest member, no doubt an old man or lady, hobbled by arthritic joints. However, I can be thankful that they have yet to construct some sort of high speed lift that would whisk everyone up the mountain in climate controlled comfort.
Mt. Fuji has great significance to the Japanese. In fact, the characters that represent its name, have changed over the centuries reflecting the culture at that time. The current characters, 富士山, means the mountain of warriors. This name was adopted during the Kamakura shogunate when bushido, the code of the warrior, was developed. Prior to this, the name was less culturally charged, with characters representing it as a mountain that had no equal (不二山） or as a mountain perpetually covered by snow (不尽山）despite being snow free for at least a couple of months in the summer.
There seems to be many different trails to ascend Mount Fuji with varying levels of difficulty. In fact, one of the trails allows you to drive your car to an elevation of 2400m before being forced to climb the remaining 1376m. As I will be with friends, I probably will have little say in what trail I ultimately climb. Although I would prefer a challenging route, the experience of reaching the summit and watching the sunrise will be sufficiently rewarding regardless of the degree of hardship experienced during the climb.
Monday, August 02, 2004
Learning to Love a Typhoon
From reading my last post, you would assume that I would be ready to rant and rave against Typhoon #10 for destroying my weekend plans. However, things sometimes have a strange way of working out.
Knowing that the typhoon was to arrive on Saturday, my friend decided to take Friday off and make the journey to Oita on Thursday night. Although I had suggested this to her, I thought her busy work schedule would have made it impossible. However, a phone call from her Thursday evening informed me that she was on her way to the ferry and I should be in Usuki by midnight. Hurriedly, I tidied up the apartment and headed out. Now, Usuki is about 80km for where I live and traversing previously untravelled roads in the dark, especially in Japan, is never as easy as it sounds. However, I arrived with about 20 minutes to spare.
We arrived home at 2am, both of us quite exhausted, and quickly went to bed until I was awoken at 8am by a phone call from my mother informing me that our bird had made an amazing recovery from its mysterious ailment that had disrupted her balance for two days. We lazed about the apartment for a couple of hours before heading out. We drove to Takkirikeikoku, a valley with a river that is so shallow and flat that you can comfortably walk barefooted along the riverbed for about 2km until it ends in a waterfall. The coolness of the river was a welcome relief from the heat of the day and my car; my car's air conditioning is terminally weak and keeping the windows open is a far more effective method of cooling. However in 35 degree weather, open windows only provide a slight relief. After the valley, we headed off for a peaceful lunch at a restaurant in the mountains and then off for a drive to see some of the sights.
After enjoying a yuzu flavoured ice cream cone and visiting the "oosanshouoo", we went back to the apartment and watched the movie "Kill Bill". I had watched it once before but it was my friend's first time. She seemed to enjoy it despite the violence; she did flinch when certain body parts were lobed off and the blood began to flow.
Off we went for dinner at a curry restaurant, a full tank of gas and a viewing of the stone bridges that are illuminated at night.
As the typhoon approached on Saturday, we decided to stay relatively close to home in case the weather turned bad. Off for lunch, then to the Ajimu winery. With the approaching typhoon, almost everyone had decided to stay at home, making the winery extremely empty. For Japan, I suspose the winery is relatively impressive but it certainly does not compare to those in North American or Europe. We were able to enjoy a few tastes of the wine and wandered around the facilities. Later, we headed to a waterfall that I had never been too. Again, the threatening weather ensured that no one else was there, allowing us to enjoy its beauty in solitude. Since the weather has been dry recently, recent rain would have made the falls more spectacular but they were certainly enough to impress my friend.
Feeling the rain approaching, we decided to head to the local supermarket to pick up some food for the evening inside. We decided to make yakisoba and bought the required ingredients. However, as the night progressed, we were too full and/or unmotivated to actually make it. Thus, the ingredients still sit in my fridge as I write. We watched another movie.
On Sunday, the typhoon had passed and we headed off to Beppu for the 2 o'clock ferry. In all, the weekend was very enjoyable.
Knowing that the typhoon was to arrive on Saturday, my friend decided to take Friday off and make the journey to Oita on Thursday night. Although I had suggested this to her, I thought her busy work schedule would have made it impossible. However, a phone call from her Thursday evening informed me that she was on her way to the ferry and I should be in Usuki by midnight. Hurriedly, I tidied up the apartment and headed out. Now, Usuki is about 80km for where I live and traversing previously untravelled roads in the dark, especially in Japan, is never as easy as it sounds. However, I arrived with about 20 minutes to spare.
We arrived home at 2am, both of us quite exhausted, and quickly went to bed until I was awoken at 8am by a phone call from my mother informing me that our bird had made an amazing recovery from its mysterious ailment that had disrupted her balance for two days. We lazed about the apartment for a couple of hours before heading out. We drove to Takkirikeikoku, a valley with a river that is so shallow and flat that you can comfortably walk barefooted along the riverbed for about 2km until it ends in a waterfall. The coolness of the river was a welcome relief from the heat of the day and my car; my car's air conditioning is terminally weak and keeping the windows open is a far more effective method of cooling. However in 35 degree weather, open windows only provide a slight relief. After the valley, we headed off for a peaceful lunch at a restaurant in the mountains and then off for a drive to see some of the sights.
After enjoying a yuzu flavoured ice cream cone and visiting the "oosanshouoo", we went back to the apartment and watched the movie "Kill Bill". I had watched it once before but it was my friend's first time. She seemed to enjoy it despite the violence; she did flinch when certain body parts were lobed off and the blood began to flow.
Off we went for dinner at a curry restaurant, a full tank of gas and a viewing of the stone bridges that are illuminated at night.
As the typhoon approached on Saturday, we decided to stay relatively close to home in case the weather turned bad. Off for lunch, then to the Ajimu winery. With the approaching typhoon, almost everyone had decided to stay at home, making the winery extremely empty. For Japan, I suspose the winery is relatively impressive but it certainly does not compare to those in North American or Europe. We were able to enjoy a few tastes of the wine and wandered around the facilities. Later, we headed to a waterfall that I had never been too. Again, the threatening weather ensured that no one else was there, allowing us to enjoy its beauty in solitude. Since the weather has been dry recently, recent rain would have made the falls more spectacular but they were certainly enough to impress my friend.
Feeling the rain approaching, we decided to head to the local supermarket to pick up some food for the evening inside. We decided to make yakisoba and bought the required ingredients. However, as the night progressed, we were too full and/or unmotivated to actually make it. Thus, the ingredients still sit in my fridge as I write. We watched another movie.
On Sunday, the typhoon had passed and we headed off to Beppu for the 2 o'clock ferry. In all, the weekend was very enjoyable.
Thursday, July 29, 2004
Thwarted by a Typhoon
Alas, the 10th typhoon of the season is bearing down on Japan, heading towards the island at a walking pace of 6km/h. Normally I would not be too concerned but it is on the verge of destroying my weekend plans. My friend, who lives on the island of Shikoku, is to come to Oita this weekend. However, with the approaching typhoon and the resulting high waves, the ferry service between Kyushu and Shikoku is likely to be cancelled, thwarting our weekend.
Typhoon forecasting seems to be an inexact science; in fact, weather forecasting in Japan, could be best described as an exercise in inaccurate guesses. My favourite is the 1 week forecast that provides a full seven days of prognostication. However, the accuracy of them makes Nostrodamus look like a sharp-shooter. Inevitably, the forecast changes even for the next day. Perhaps I am being too judgemental. I am not a meteorologist and I probably don't appreciate the difficulty of forecasting weather in the nothwestern Pacific. Also, if the general public understands the forecast's limitations and views it with some skepticism, then there is no harm. However, those of us that assume them to be accurate are in for a rude shock when we pack the sunglasses and sunblock and realize that an umbrella and a change of socks would have been far more appropriate.
So here is hoping that the typhoon takes a turn away from Japan and allows my weekend plans to go ahead. However, this will probably be the time that those people staring at the weather maps get it right...
Typhoon forecasting seems to be an inexact science; in fact, weather forecasting in Japan, could be best described as an exercise in inaccurate guesses. My favourite is the 1 week forecast that provides a full seven days of prognostication. However, the accuracy of them makes Nostrodamus look like a sharp-shooter. Inevitably, the forecast changes even for the next day. Perhaps I am being too judgemental. I am not a meteorologist and I probably don't appreciate the difficulty of forecasting weather in the nothwestern Pacific. Also, if the general public understands the forecast's limitations and views it with some skepticism, then there is no harm. However, those of us that assume them to be accurate are in for a rude shock when we pack the sunglasses and sunblock and realize that an umbrella and a change of socks would have been far more appropriate.
So here is hoping that the typhoon takes a turn away from Japan and allows my weekend plans to go ahead. However, this will probably be the time that those people staring at the weather maps get it right...
Wednesday, July 28, 2004
The First Post
Inspired by Joel Swagman whose Blog I have found to be most entertaining, and fueled by a desire to rekindle my writing skills, I have created this blog. I sincerely hope that I find the motivation to formulate ideas, thoughts and insights that help me understand myself and the world around me while providing other people with a different perspective and, perhaps, some entertainment.
First, a little background...
Presently, I live in a small town located in Oita prefecture, Japan. Employed by the local board of education, I teach English to the four elementary schools and the one junior high school. Innai-machi has a population of just over 5000 which seems to dwindle monthly as the aged pass away and the young move to the excitement and opportunity of the bigger cities. Thus, the most rare of species in my town is a single person between the age of 20 and 30.
Born and raised in North Vancouver, Canada, I lived the typical middle-class childhood; both my parents worked (and still do) extremely hard to provide a comfortable existence for my sister and I. Although we were not rich, we certainly were comfortable.
After graduating from secondary school, I attended the University of British Columbia, attaining my Bachelor of Science in Biology. A year later, I enrolled in the teaching program at UBC and received my Bachelor of Education.
Since then, my work experience has been varied: substitute teaching for the North Vancouver School District, teaching English in Japan, teaching mathematics in Langley, doing accounting in the movie industry, and even pushing boxes of linen around a warehouse. My present job in Japan is with the JET program which allows for one year contracts renewable up to a maximum of 3 years. Presently, I have completed two years and have just started the third year. Thus, this time next year will find me beginning a new endeavour. But that is for another post...
First, a little background...
Presently, I live in a small town located in Oita prefecture, Japan. Employed by the local board of education, I teach English to the four elementary schools and the one junior high school. Innai-machi has a population of just over 5000 which seems to dwindle monthly as the aged pass away and the young move to the excitement and opportunity of the bigger cities. Thus, the most rare of species in my town is a single person between the age of 20 and 30.
Born and raised in North Vancouver, Canada, I lived the typical middle-class childhood; both my parents worked (and still do) extremely hard to provide a comfortable existence for my sister and I. Although we were not rich, we certainly were comfortable.
After graduating from secondary school, I attended the University of British Columbia, attaining my Bachelor of Science in Biology. A year later, I enrolled in the teaching program at UBC and received my Bachelor of Education.
Since then, my work experience has been varied: substitute teaching for the North Vancouver School District, teaching English in Japan, teaching mathematics in Langley, doing accounting in the movie industry, and even pushing boxes of linen around a warehouse. My present job in Japan is with the JET program which allows for one year contracts renewable up to a maximum of 3 years. Presently, I have completed two years and have just started the third year. Thus, this time next year will find me beginning a new endeavour. But that is for another post...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)