Hmmmmmm, I knew that tasted fishy.

An excerpt adopted from "Fast Food Nation," by Eric Schlosser.

Two things I want to say:

1- When you have to over compensate for doing something it should be clear that the original thing is probably the result of ridiculously tortured thinking, and a better and more efficient solution is out there: exhibit A here, you need to add chemicals to processed foods to make them taste like real food (or, for that matter, to keep them from decomposing.) Solution: eat real food. Food that needs chemicals to taste like food is not, in the first place food. This is entirely different from spicing, which you'll surely notice if you read the article.

exhibit B, an example from Michael Pollan's "The Omnivore's Dilemma:" waste products at factory farms. Where waste used to be used as fertilizer, it is now too far from farms to be used as such, and, in the gigantic quantities that you accumulate when your feedlot consists of tens of thousands of animals, is poisoning the water supplies for hundreds of miles. In addition, chemical fertilizers must be used to replace the nutrients in the soil no longer naturally replaced by "waste."

This is not just silliness, it is indicative of a way of thinking that is destroying the very things humans need for their survival. Five hundred years ago, there was no such thing as waste. When there is only so much on the planet to make waste out of, isn't there a predestined end to that?

2- If you want to know what you're eating (say, if you're vegan, vegetarian, keep kosher, halal, etc., simply conscientious) it's impractical if not entirely impossible to do this and eat any processed foods. As an example: I bet you didn't know (if you hadn't read this book or the article) that you've ingested parts of thousands if not millions of bugs called "Dactylopius coccus Costa" whose dessicated shells are used as red and pink coloring in such obviously meat laden products as pink-grapefruit juice and Dannon Strawberry Yoghurt.

Oh yeah, not to mention that we really have no clue what most of the thousands of chemicals the average person ingests on any given day actually do to the long-term health of the human body.

Things aren't this complicated, and there's hope on the horizon. People are finally starting to realize, in large numbers, that things aren't this complicated in the real world.

We just make it that way.

Barack Obama, and Freedom

Fair enough to say that no one will know exactly what last week's election means for a long, long time. Perhaps this is part of the reason that I've had such trouble articulating what effect it has had on me, and what it has made me feel, beyond an incredible giddiness, and an outpouring of emotion. I think I have finally figured out just why Barack Obama moves me as much as he does, and it starts with the words in his victory speech that moved me the most, playing with Lincoln's (second?) most famous excerpt from the Gettysburg address, that "government of the people, by the people, and for the people," has not perished from the face of the Earth.

There were other moments, seeing the first-family-elect step onto the stage for the first time was another, but this moment made me choke up the most. I think this is why:

I believe in American exceptionalism. I think that America introduced something new into world politics, something fundamentally new. This does not mean, of course, that I support every interpretation of this, far from it. I think most of the problems we get into involve some romantic idea of American righteousness, and so while I don't and cannot support "my country right or wrong" thinking, I do think that America introduced something critical for the future wellfare of mankind, something that no other country could have, and something that is slowly leaking out elsewhere (I do not think another country in the world could have elected Obama, (or an equivalent) for those who disagree with the "slowly" part of that) and something that is overwhelmingly beneficial for humankind and civilization.

Obviously, I am an idealist.

Over the last eight years, my idealism has been tempered by a great deal of cynicism and skepticism, (not two words for the same thing, though there are overlaps in certain situations) two other modes of thought that I am quite comfortable with, despite my core of idealism. What the idealist loves about our country, the cynic/skeptic is terrified we are losing, or have already lost. This has not been partisan (i.e., I'm not simply "anti-republican") rather it has been the fear that certain philosophies of governing embraced by the current administration have been threatening to government for the people. The road to fascism is paved with good intentions. Fascism, here, means government that uses its power to subjugate its own people. Not culturally, mind you: I would argue that conformity to cultural practices and, say, death camps, are two entirely different phenomenon. Culture is, at the same time, much more benign a form of "subjugation," if you wish to call it that, and much more insidious, built into the fabric of what people's identities are. But it is not being billy-clubbed for talking negatively about the government. I am following Naomi Wolf here. For a laundry list talk about the road to fascism, watch the following, or read her book, "The End of America."



In any case, for me, this has been the most important thing about the Obama candidacy, and the election. It is the key element that holds everything else in together: the appearance of an unabashedly rational, intellectual candidate; the major step taken for civil rights; the potential return of moral and political authority to america; returning america from the brink of modern-day laissez-faire economics; the face of america returning as being young, optimistic, inclusive, practical, idealistic (at the same time,) humble, etc. etc. opposed to the face we've seen in the last eight years; the excitement and participatory level in politics; the understanding of the importance of issues (the economy, energy, and the environment,) as trumping divisive politics (and the media, by the way;) the emergence of an interconnected citizenry plugged into the media but not dependent upon it: all of these aspects, and more, I see as the natural outcome of a (relatively) free and (relatively) open society in crisis.

Had McCain won the election despite the popular push for Obama apparent in everything and in nearly every demographic and the above, it would have been a symbol to me that the American Dream, not of a chicken in every pot, but of the enshrined ability to say and be and feel whatever one wants, and the belief that this leads to a better world for all, was either being threatened by the powers that be, or was dead already, killed when we all weren't looking.

It is, in a word, the ability to freely agree or disagree without repercussion.

America brought the sense that a country and its government are separable, and that patriotism is not love of government, but love of country, something, under the Bush administration, that was smeared two hundred years into the past. In China this has been one of the most dumbfounding aspects for me, that there is no separation, theoretically or practically, between what "the government" is and what "the country" is. There's an awareness, sure, and a line I often get from people who start interrogating me about how America could be so stupid (often a line of questioning starting with Iraq and Bush) is that "okay, okay, American people are good people, Chinese people are good people, but governments everywhere are bad." Of course, what I couldn't say, because I had had no evidence for it, was "when the people are good, and allowed a large degree of participation, the government can't but be good as well." I have some evidence for that now.

Are we being hoodwinked? Is Obama a Manchurian candidate working to support a global elite against (an important word) the citizens of the planet? A quick reversal of tone and policy by his administration in the areas that Bush has done the most and potentially permanent damage to the fabric of the country would do much to silence those two voices, skepticism and cynicism, so essential to freedom, and well-trained in the last eight years.

It is up to us to keep watch, and our power to keep the world moving towards an open and free society, inclusive and supportive of all. It is our power. And power concedes nothing.

Olympics Update 08/09- Olympics Reservations

There have been comparisons between this Olympics and the Munich Olympics of '36, centered on the idea that an oppressive and illegitimate government, the Chinese in this case, will be given the ignorant approval of the world's mood-setting class, much as Hitler's regime was legitimized by Munich, much of the world approving of the Nazi government.

There are similarities with this, but a few important differences as well. Primarily, the international media is much more unified than it was in the nineteen thirties, and so, though the split between the Chinese propaganda (media?) and the western media is great, there is still western media operating in, and reporting on, China, in an investigative capacity that was not the hallmark of 1930's journalism. In short, I do not think the Olympics will make the stories of Sudan or Tibet go away, though they may suffer a lack of attention afterwards. But that's a main and important difference. It is only an analogy, and the insinuated aftermath of the analogy, that there is going to be a major world conflict in the next three years, is hopefully not likely.

As for the similarities: it was an odd experience watching the opening ceremonies, and I actually would not have written this unless I had the experience I did, watching it alone at home, but then in a large, hip crowd at a club's party. The (mostly westerners) cheered for the western countries, boozily and obnoxiously (I was in something of a bad mood because sick) but for no team as much as America, and China, screaming (while the chinese servers looked on) Go China, Go China, in Chinese they had learned in the last week (中国加油，中国加油，for those of you keeping score.)

With the general western business enthusiasm for China (something I will write about later for sure,) and the sort of "wow, look how elegant everything is," middle-classed China tour, the west perhaps is already disposed to think of China's rise as perfectly benign. True to its entreaties for peace and harmony, the theme of the (rather fantastic if also characteristically totally overblown) opening ceremonies, China, I think, will not have the militaristic forays typical of a rising world-power (whether or not China is actually on its way to being a world power I will be discussing as well later in the week.)

But, watching the ceremony (If anyone caught the way the Chinese flag is unfurled as it is raised, that is basically emblematic of the whole tone of official China (official being much broader, of course, in an authoritarian government, than in the west): ridiculous dramatized sentimentality and self-importance again, this is a description of formality, not of the people or the culture at large) I couldn't help but feel terribly conflicted. This has become the realization of the dreams of a billion freaking people, and watching some of the Chinese women around when the torch was (finally) lit, it was clear that they were moved, some nearly to tears, while the general mood itself was one of surreality, an odd dream. Chinese people are people, and I am happy for them, and happy for them to see some respect accorded their country, but it kills me to see it placed wrong, both from the outside and within. I could not help, while watching the ceremony, but feel that a giant mistake was made placing the games here. This peace, and the harmony of the Chinese society, comes at the cost of terrible repression, though officially, of course you would never hear this acknowledged, and it's difficult to get an admission, as a foreigner, that this is the case, though, as you get to know somebody, they are less reluctant to speak their minds and defend their country, which they always feel is under assault from us westerners. As my Chinese is getting more and more fluent, I am hoping to engage some Chinese people (already friends) in a discussion about what the word "peace" could possibly mean if it covers the beating and repression of anybody willing to point out that things aren't exactly fair.

China is a wonderful country with interesting people that has a lot to share with the world, but what is currently being offered is a fantasy, one that westerners are all too likely to accept for one reason or another. It is wonderful, after all, to be a foreigner in China, but I am glad my home is somewhere else, because what is happening now in this country is not sustainable (I mean in the sense that running through central park every night in the mid-80's was unsustainable,) and the dream of this country, and the dreams of its people, may well turn nightmares, all the more likely because stoked by the paternalistic government, at the end of which, hopefully, they will wake up, but don't count on it, it hasn't happened before. Again, I will probably write more about this later. I don't mean to be too pessimistic. What virtually every westerner assumes is going to happen, that the country will slowly become more and more liberalized, is possible. Anything, after all, is possible.

But even this dream is still a cruel and unending joke for the one billion people that live here in abject poverty, and if it becomes a nightmare for the rest of the 300 or so million, it will make all of our sleep a little more restless, and this is what bothers me about westerners glibly assuming the ascension of Chinese liberalism. The Chinese can make whatever arguments they like about sovereignty (this whole peace and harmony thing is in a way a great big deal: we, the chinese say, will not attack anyone else, as long as we're free to use our army as we please inside our own borders) but if the country hits a rough patch, it could well either implode, or explode, and neither of those are going to be good for the rest of the world, interconnected as we are all becoming. Even if it doesn't, the fact that national actions (pollution, for instance) are no longer restricted to national borders means what happens in China, doesn't necessarily stay there.

Also, a side-note, the odd sentimentality that surrounds children in this country was alive and well during the ceremony, if you watched, something else that makes me sick, not just because it's so corny, but because these kids, for whom everything is done, will be forced into a mind-numbing system for the next twenty years of their lives (if they're lucky) and will never have the chance to express themselves as free human beings, the most of them, at the least.

All in all, though, I had a good night.

Keep your eyes skeptical.

UPDATE: a good little essay about this from an actual Chinese-American.