Race can continue as a factor in admissions, so long as practices are narrowly tailored to ensure campus diversity.
http://chronicle.com/article/Colleges-May-Keep/141975/?cid=pm&utm_source=pm&utm_medium=en
Sunday, September 29, 2013
Saturday, September 28, 2013
The Generation Gasp: September 28, 2013
TV: An Entertainment Mecca
Saturday, September 28, 2013
Claire:
Once upon a time, watching television was for Philistines. The uncultured masses would tune in to watch the latest sitcom every night, blissfully ignorant, while the intellectuals would sit in their ivory towers reading books, or at the very least saving their money for a subscription to a network like HBO or Showtime, where all the "artsy" television supposedly dwelled.
That's how the joke goes, anyway. These days, though, a few shows have me questioning the old adage that television is just for dummies and couch potatoes.
"Breaking Bad" is the most obvious - and currently talked about - example. The phrase "best show on television" has been bandied about in its direction quite a bit lately, and for once, I can't say I disagree.
The series finale takes place tomorrow night, much to the mixed emotions of many.
The story of Walter White has fiercely captivated fans for five years due mainly, I think, to its superb character development and innovative storytelling. It's sad to see one of the most excellent shows on television reach its conclusion, but it's also refreshing to watch a well-planned show get tied up neatly (or, more likely, with a bang), rather than see yet another show milk a once devout audience's loyalty until all love is lost.
That's not a general statement - I'll now refer to exhibit B, Showtime's "Dexter." The serial killer antihero drama culminated on Sunday night with a mess of plot holes, nonsensical choices, and a broad feeling of dreary resignation.
Ironically, even Dexter looked exhausted and disgusted by the end of it all. It was sad to see a show limp along on creative fumes for three seasons, but even sadder that the flashbacks in the finale only served to remind us, ever so briefly, of how good the show was at one time. There are hushed talks of a spin-off show in the works, and all I can say is: no, Showtime. Take a step back.
But I think that "Dexter," while at one time innovative in its own right, will become more of a cautionary tale to show runners and writers than anything else.
Yes, the "Dexter" series finale had plenty of viewers, almost all of whom immediately took to the internet to loudly complain. The show's producers even agreed to an interview in which they attempted to explain their choices to fans.
"Dexter" seems to already be fading from public memory as something of a dinosaur, the product of over inflated egos and even more excessive salaries. Meanwhile, "Breaking Bad," despite airing on the less prestigious AMC, will set the bar for years to come.
Because the truth is that there are too many good shows out there right now to rely on fan loyalty alone. Fans will hate-watch your show and then take to their blogs to further tear it down, point by point, and they'll be referencing English lit and Greek mythology while they do it. Television is getting smarter, fans are getting sharper, and we're all demanding more from our entertainment. I, for one, am all for it.
Because heaven knows I did not pay an extra 20 bucks a month to watch the once deliciously devious Dexter become a gosh darn lumberjack.
Jim:
I'm of the generation who remember FCC Chairman Newton Minnow's May 9, 1961 speech to the National Association of Broadcasters in which he labeled TV "a vast wasteland." That was never entirely true. When Newton made that remark, American TV news reporting was on the verge of a golden age of its own, for instance.
Notably, a half century ago next month, Walter Cronkite made his tearful announcement that JFK had been murdered in Dallas. In the following days, television brought the Kennedy funeral into all of our homes.
Then came LBJ and the escalation in Vietnam. A strong argument can be made that the antiwar movement of the late sixties and early seventies was directly related to television bringing the war into American living rooms every evening.
The power and potential of TV news was intelligently and wittily explored in "The Newsroom," the HBO series that finished its second season about a week ago. Jeff Daniels, who plays the anchor, won an Emmy the other night for best actor in a drama. He deserved it. His portrayal is poignant and powerful.
If you haven't seen the very first scene of the very first episode of the series' first season, get your butt and your browser over to YouTube and give a gander.
In that scene, responding to a student's query as to why America is the greatest nation in the world, Daniels' character explains why America isn't. We are number one in only three things anymore, he contends: Number of incarcerated citizens per capita; number of people who believe in angels; percentage of GNP spent on our military. Powerful stuff, penned by Aaron Sorkin of "West Wing" fame.
If TV ever was a vast wasteland - and don't try telling that to the late, great Edward R. Murrow, who took on Senator Joe McCarthy when the rest of America was quaking in its boots - Claire is correct that it is a mecca of top-flight entertainment today.
Read More Gasps at
http://www.tnonline.com/news/columns/thegenerationgasp
Read More Gasps at
http://www.tnonline.com/news/columns/thegenerationgasp
PrintThisThursday, September 26, 2013
Executive bonuses: legalized theft?
| ||
| Tell AIG: Anger over executive bonuses is not "just as bad" as white mobs lynching Black people in the Deep South. | ||
| The petition to AIG's board of directors reads: "CEO Robert Benmosche's comments were astonishingly ignorant and wholly appalling. Justified public criticism of AIG granting $165 million in executive bonuses right after receiving the biggest bailout in U.S. history is NOT “just as bad” as lynchings in the Deep South. You must fire Benmosche and disavow his comments immediately."
Automatically add your name:
| ||
Dear Jim,
And just six months later, AIG became a poster child for bad corporate behavior by spending $165 million on bonuses to the very executives who drove the company off a cliff. As if that weren't bad enough, it was just reported that AIG's CEO, Robert Benmosche, claimed that the anger over these executive bonuses is "just as bad and just as wrong" as white vigilante mobs lynching African Americans in the Deep South. Tell the AIG board of directors: Fire CEO Robert Benmosche and publicly disavow his remarks comparing anger over AIG executive bonuses to our nation's despicable history of lynching African Americans. Click this link to sign the petition automatically. In an interview with the Wall Street Journal, Benmosche said that the uproar over bonuses "was intended to stir public anger, to get everybody out there with their pitchforks and their hangman nooses, and all that — sort of like what we did in the Deep South [decades ago]. And I think it was just as bad and just as wrong."2 Rep. Elijah E. Cummings has already called for Benmosche's resignation, stating, "As the leading critic of AIG's lavish spending before and after its taxpayer-funded bailout — and as the son of sharecroppers who actually experienced lynchings in their communities — I find it unbelievably appalling that Mr. Benmosche equates the violent repression of the African American people with congressional efforts to prevent the waste of taxpayer dollars."3 Rep. Cummings knows what he's talking about — he led the congressional investigation in 2008 into the financial excesses that led to AIG's near collapse. It is simply outrageous for the CEO of a bailed-out company to take verbal criticism about the irresponsible use of taxpayer dollars and equate it with the murderous violence meted out to African Americans in the South. We cannot let Benmosche's remarks stand. That's why we're joining Rep. Cummings in calling for Benmosche to be removed from his position as CEO of AIG. Tell AIG's board of directors: Fire CEO Robert Benmosche and publicly disavow his remarks comparing anger over AIG executive bonuses to our nation's despicable history of lynching African Americans. Click the link below to sign the petition automatically: http://act.credoaction.com/go/2009?t=5&akid=9015.3371131.Y32uCy Benmosche responded to concern over his remarks by saying in a prepared statement, "It was a poor choice of words. I never meant to offend anyone by it." This statement falls far short of either apologizing for or even acknowledging the utter astonishment and incredible offense his remarks have caused.4 It was completely appropriate for Americans to criticize the company that received the biggest government bailout in U.S. history when it turned around and gave millions of dollars just months later in bonuses to the executives who presided over its near collapse. It is beyond offensive for the CEO of AIG to compare that criticism to the white vigilante violence that terrorized African Americans during one of the darkest chapters in American history. Thank you for joining me in calling for the board of AIG to fire the CEO and disavow his astonishingly ignorant and wholly appalling remarks. Jordan Krueger, Campaign Manager CREDO Action from Working Assets
Automatically add your name:
1. "American International Group." Wikipedia, accessed on September 24, 2013.
2. Leslie Scism, "AIG's Benmosche and Miller on Villains, Turnarounds and Those Bonuses." Wall Street Journal, September 23, 2013. 3. Leslie Scism, "AIG's Benmosche Backs Off Inflammatory Comments." Wall Street Journal, September 24, 2013. 4. ibid |
A Cli-Fi Review from Danny Bloom
from dan FYI http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/feat/archives/2013/09/26/2003573018 === News - 1 new result for [''the man with compound eyes'' wu taiwan] === Book review: The Man with the Compound Eyes Taipei Times Fast forward to 2013: Taiwanese nature writer Wu Ming-yi (吳明益) has just released an English translation of his The Man with the Compound Eyes (複眼人) ... Book review: The Man with the Compound Eyes By Dan Bloom / Contributing reporter The Man with the Compound Eyes, by Wu Ming-yi.Back in 2009, the New York Times published an article headlined “Recyclers, Scientists Probe Great Pacific Garbage Patch,” which noted that a group of scientists had “set sail from San Francisco Bay ... to study the planet’s largest known floating garbage dump, about 1,000 miles north of Hawaii.” Fast forward to 2013: Taiwanese nature writer Wu Ming-yi (吳明益) has just released an English translation of his The Man with the Compound Eyes (複眼人) that’s aimed at an international readership. The 300-page novel, which has an eye-catching cover for the new British edition, is about that same floating dump. Wu started writing the novel in 2006 when he read about the floating trash vortex in Chinese-language newspapers. As novelists often do, he concocted a “vision” based on the vortex: An Aboriginal teenager from the imaginary island of Wayo Wayo rides this garbage island and washes up with it one day on the east coast of Taiwan. In the ensuing chaos, the Taiwanese print and TV media have a field day reporting this ecological calamity, and Taiwan — the story is set in the near future of 2020 — is never the same. In many ways, The Man with the Compound Eyes is a Pacific novel, about a Pacific Islander identity that differs in many ways from the commonplace Han Chinese-centric novels that are published in Taiwan. The novel stars the boy from Wayo Wayo and a middle-aged Taiwanese college professor named Alice, both of whom are thrown into Taiwan’s east coast wilderness in a search for some lost hikers -- and enlightenment. There’s a cast of characters that expats will know well from their travels along the east coast, and Wu plots the story in very Taiwanese terms. (The English translation by Canadian expat Darryl Sterk, a professor at National Taiwan University, is superb and sensitively captures the nuances of Taiwan’s Aboriginal cultures and languages.) Publication Notes The Man with the Compound Eyes By Wu Ming-yi 300 pages Harvill Secker Paperback: UK Wu’s rollercoaster of a story is about wilderness, wildness, wonderment, love. It’s also about “massage parlors” along the east coast where tired and drunk soldiers go for rest and relaxation, with mini-lessons thrown in about various aspects of Aboriginal culture and food. For readers in Taiwan who have been here for a number of years and know the east coast well, Wu’s novel is sure to strike a chord. But just how this Pacific novel will do overseas with readers in Europe and North America who know little about Taiwan or the Aboriginal cultures here remains to be seen. As a longtime expat in Taiwan, I read the novel as a critique of modern society’s disregard for our planet’s ecology and environment — a wake-up call, in other words, for Taiwan and the rest of the world. Readers overseas might find Wu’s story merely a pleasant diversion from the daily grind. You may not have to know much about Taiwan or insect eye biology to enjoy The Man with the Compound Eyes, and the mid-book chapters about that reveal the mystery behind the man with the compound eyes are perhaps the best writing to ever come out of a Taiwan novel. Some readers have drawn comparisons between the novel and Yann Martel’s Life of Pi. Yes, it’s that kind of book, and it would make that kind of movie, too. Wu’s work began its literary life as a mostly-neglected, unheralded Chinese-language novel in 2011. Taiwan’s Ministry of Culture and the National Museum of Taiwan Literature (國立台灣文學館) used their resources and contacts to help set the book on its way to translation and overseas publication. 12NEXT › <http://www.google.com/url?q=http://www.taipeitimes.com/News/feat/archives/2013/09/26/2003573018&ct=ga&cd=ODE4NzQzOTE3MjQwNDE4NTExOQ&cad=CAEYAA&usg=AFQjCNGLe7PxQk6G6y5DOl2O3jZBnOfkHQ> See all stories on this topic: <http://www.google.com/url?q=http://news.google.com/news/story%3Fncl%3Dhttp://www.taipeitimes.com/News/feat/archives/2013/09/26/2003573018%26hl%3Den%26geo%3DTW&ct=ga&cd=ODE4NzQzOTE3MjQwNDE4NTExOQ&cad=CAEYAA&usg=AFQjCNFGvqO-UO4xyyArotkztE7zQF3cgw> - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - Delete this Google Alert: <http://www.google.com/alerts/remove?cd=ODE4NzQzOTE3MjQwNDE4NTExOQ&cad=CAE&source=alertsmail&hl=en&gl=TW&s=AB2Xq4jAkkaCDfumwoJCAvPf2TGU_3oOkdDWMdI> Create another Google Alert: <http://www.google.com/alerts?cd=ODE4NzQzOTE3MjQwNDE4NTExOQ&cad=CAE&source=alertsmail&hl=en&gl=TW&s=AB2Xq4jAkkaCDfumwoJCAvPf2TGU_3oOkdDWMdI> Sign in to manage your alerts: <http://www.google.com/alerts/manage?cd=ODE4NzQzOTE3MjQwNDE4NTExOQ&cad=CAE&source=alertsmail&hl=en&gl=TW&s=AB2Xq4jAkkaCDfumwoJCAvPf2TGU_3oOkdDWMdI> -- CLI FI CENTRAL: 'Cli-fi' – a new literary genre http://pcillu101.blogspot.com/
No shutdown!
 |
|
Jim -- If you had a big deadline coming up at work, what would happen if you just watched cat videos and refused to do your job? Some House Republicans are treating the deadline for Congress to pass a budget like it's not all that serious. They've decided that they don't like Obamacare, so they're going to refuse to pass any budget that includes funding for it. And if they get their way, our government will shut down after September 30th. So buckle up, Jim, because we're in for a showdown -- and OFA is going to spend every damn day from now till the budget deadline reminding John Boehner what he needs to do. We need your voice on this -- add your name, and join the hundreds of thousands of Americans who are saying "NO" to a shutdown. Some of these guys are so far gone that as we head toward a government shutdown, Speaker Boehner had the gall to call a bill that defunded Obamacare "a victory for common sense." But we're seeing signs of pressure mounting on them to do the right thing. Even Karl Rove came out publicly to say that John Boehner needs to stand up to this extreme plan that would shut down the government. We can't afford to play nice here -- join this fight, and tell John Boehner to get the job done: http://my.barackobama.com/Say-No-to-a-Shutdown Thanks, Abby Abby Witt Deputy National Director of Issue Campaigns Organizing for Action ---------------- The other side will spend millions to maintain the status quo. We're fighting for change -- chip in $5 or more to support OFA today. |
Wednesday, September 25, 2013
Guest article: Francesco Sisci on China's parochial "world" view
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China/CHIN-01-240913.html
SINOGRAPH Parochial limits to China's world view(Sep 24, '13)
China's responses to the political crisis in Taiwan and to the Syrian malaise reflect distinctly different approaches; Taiwan prompting rumblings over the limits of democracy, and events in Damascus bringing stoic, non-interventionist silence. The common thread through both is a parochial approach to politics that suggests nationalism keeps Beijing out of touch with international destiny. - Francesco Sisci
SINOGRAPH Parochial limits to China's world view(Sep 24, '13)China's responses to the political crisis in Taiwan and to the Syrian malaise reflect distinctly different approaches; Taiwan prompting rumblings over the limits of democracy, and events in Damascus bringing stoic, non-interventionist silence. The common thread through both is a parochial approach to politics that suggests nationalism keeps Beijing out of touch with international destiny. - Francesco Sisci
BEIJING - Three separate events evolving in the past few days are showing
different angles of one problem for Beijing - its difficulty in coping
with sudden crises. This should demand deeper cultural changes even
before structures are modified.
With growing perplexity and surprise, Beijing is following the political crisis unfolding at the moment in Taipei. Very briefly, President Ma Ying-jiu has expelled popular parliament speaker Wang Jin-pyng, who is accused of having pressured the judiciary into investigating Ma's friend in the DPP, caucus whip Ker Chien-ming. The crisis is portrayed in Taiwanese newspapers as a fight between Ma, whose popularity is at a historic low, and the large families controlling the nationalist party, the KMT: the Liens (honorary KMT chairman Lien Chan and his eldest son, former Taipei EasyCard Corp chairman Sean Lien), the Wus (honorary KMT chairman Wu Po-hsiung), the Haus (Taipei Mayor Hau Lung-bin), and the Chus (New Taipei City Mayor Eric Chu).
All in all, it seems that Taiwan's politics are dominated by a few political strongholds that hijack policies on the island. In this fight, the goals and objectives are confused through pressure on the judiciary, investigations, mudslinging, etc. Those are all things that don't give a very good image of democracy at work in a part of China. The situation in Taiwan objectively dampens the already low enthusiasm for a process toward democratic reforms in Beijing. One-party rule at least guarantees that these face-losing power struggles take place behind closed doors, and at least appearances, so extremely important in China, can be saved in order to rule the country.
During the same days, China was a silent player in a political show that is very important for its future: Syria. China is objectively the country most interested in development in the Middle East, and the future of Syria could bode well or ill for that development. China is extremely dependent on energy imports from the Middle East. The United States plans to become energy self-sufficient in a few years, thanks to shale gas, and therefore is no longer interested in what happens in the Middle East.
Russia is indirectly interested in development in the Middle East, as calm or chaos in the region could create a global energy crisis or eliminate one, and thus influence its own energy exports. Because of its high extraction costs, Russia could be forced out of the market by low oil prices, which could happen if there is no chaos in Middle East, where they have lower extraction costs.
Therefore, China should have had a greater interest in advancing a solution in the Middle East, especially since its economy is over four times the size of Russia's.
China disliked the idea of the United States intervening with missiles in Syria, as that could have started a chain reaction, creating more chaos in the region and spiking oil prices worldwide. Russia objectively has less interest in preventing an American intervention. Chaos and energy price hikes would benefit Russian oil and gas exports. Yet it was Russia that intervened in the Middle East, offering to mediate and dismantle Syria's chemical weapons and creating great difficulty for the Obama administration. The Pope, heading a global Catholic movement calling for one day of prayer and fasting for peace in the Middle East, also contributed to America's decision to renounce an intervention in Syria.
This whole situation, though, showed that China seems unable to take charge of its own international destiny.
This may be good news for those who are scared of Chinese global intervention and China's ambition to become number one in the world. But actually, this enthusiasm should be deeply reconsidered. If China does not have a position in the world that is in accord with other countries, it means Beijing is de facto isolated - something that doesn't bode well for Beijing's future. Furthermore this isolation objectively could help nationalist thinking in the country, as these people consider the interests of China with no concern for the interest of other countries.
Russia, despite being an economic midget nowadays, was able to propose an initiative that garnered vast support in the world and actually helped America. This proves that the quest for political influence before moving on to military might and economic prowess depends on the ability to propose political plans and ideas that can be shared by a large number of countries. Russia seems very capable of multiplying the weight of its economy and military by using true strategic ideas.
China, conversely, seems intent on undercutting its economic and military muscle by producing no political initiatives or very naive ones. China should not in fact think of its economic interest alone. Considering one's national or personal interests alone, without taking into account the interests of others, moves into nationalism, it leads to a desire of conquest and annihilation. Conversely considering one's interests together with the interests of the other brings to the exchange of market economy, where both buyer and seller have to gain to repeat the transaction and be happy.
China can strengthen its growing economic and political muscle by proposing plans shared by the largest number of countries possible - that is, through China finding common ground between its national interest and the interests of the world. Having no international profile or a negative international profile only isolates China.
Russia, possibly also because of the heritage of the international communist system, which claimed a global ideal besides the narrow national view, was able to offer a proposal that cut a lot of ice in the world.
What do the Taiwan and Syria issues have in common? A parochial look at politics. China didn't want to put forth a proposal on Syria because Beijing feared making a mistake and it didn't know what to do or say that would be welcomed by the world. Similarly, it thinks political power struggles kept behind closed doors are better than power struggles in the open, which makes all of the leaders lose face.
Besides being held back by those who have an interest in preserving the political status quo, Beijing also believes it does not know how to move from its own present political system to a more open one. But an open power struggle, showing the transparency of the political debate, enhances the international profile of the country. All in all, despite all the scandals, the present political fight in Taiwan has drawn global political attention and much of it is good, as it shows a greater attention to the rule of law in the island. Moreover, internal political isolation may have a direct impact on the pace of domestic reforms (see US hurdles strew China's reform path).
But in both cases, China is projecting an image in the world that does not help it. And this is not just a projection; in the past year or so, it has become a matter of reality. Nobody has clear numbers, but many people in Beijing and Shanghai tell stories of huge capital flights. Many people with money are looking for safe havens outside of China, taking billions out of the country.
The common explanation for all this is that people are growing uncertain about China's long-term objective. They do not know what China will do in the future, so they are scared. This is a direct consequence of China's inability to move on the path of political reforms, which would demonstrate to investors in and out of China a clear long-term path. China's timidity on the global scene makes the country appear as a political dwarf.
The deep reason for all this is possibly in the third event of the past days. On Sunday China gave Bo Xilai, standard bearer of the neo-Maoists, ex-party chief in Chongqing, a life sentence. It was milder than his wife, Gu Kailai, who got death sentence with reprieve, but heavier than his former henchman Wang Lijun, who is to be in prison for 15 years. The sentence then indicates that, according to the court, the responsibility of this whole affair is mostly given to the wife, the husband covered up for her and the henchman was just the loyal executioner.
For Bo Xilai it is heavier than the 20 years sentence many people were talking about, and it seems to mean that Bo was punished for his defiance during the trial, when he did not admit his guilt and was challenging the court thus apparently rejecting a previous political agreement for his public confession. (see Bo breaks from script, but sticks to role, Asia Times Online, Sep 3, 2013).
Yet the issue of the resurgence of new nationalist trends, disguised as neo Maoist thought, is not solved as it remained out of the trial and out of the ongoing debate on the Chinese internet. The political issues may be too complicated to discuss in a public forum in China, but they might be addressed in the forthcoming Party Plenum in November.
The nationalist mindset seems to be the root of the problem. It is conservative at home and unable to take a global view of international affairs. Then it cannot manage to propose solutions which many countries see as reasonable. It considers Chinese interests in isolation, as if Beijing was still the capital of the old empire where everything stemmed from the Forbidden City. But that imperial dream is no longer, and no one in the world supports it.
Francesco Sisci is a columnist for the Italian daily Il Sole 24 Ore. His e-mail is fsisci@gmail.com
With growing perplexity and surprise, Beijing is following the political crisis unfolding at the moment in Taipei. Very briefly, President Ma Ying-jiu has expelled popular parliament speaker Wang Jin-pyng, who is accused of having pressured the judiciary into investigating Ma's friend in the DPP, caucus whip Ker Chien-ming. The crisis is portrayed in Taiwanese newspapers as a fight between Ma, whose popularity is at a historic low, and the large families controlling the nationalist party, the KMT: the Liens (honorary KMT chairman Lien Chan and his eldest son, former Taipei EasyCard Corp chairman Sean Lien), the Wus (honorary KMT chairman Wu Po-hsiung), the Haus (Taipei Mayor Hau Lung-bin), and the Chus (New Taipei City Mayor Eric Chu).
All in all, it seems that Taiwan's politics are dominated by a few political strongholds that hijack policies on the island. In this fight, the goals and objectives are confused through pressure on the judiciary, investigations, mudslinging, etc. Those are all things that don't give a very good image of democracy at work in a part of China. The situation in Taiwan objectively dampens the already low enthusiasm for a process toward democratic reforms in Beijing. One-party rule at least guarantees that these face-losing power struggles take place behind closed doors, and at least appearances, so extremely important in China, can be saved in order to rule the country.
During the same days, China was a silent player in a political show that is very important for its future: Syria. China is objectively the country most interested in development in the Middle East, and the future of Syria could bode well or ill for that development. China is extremely dependent on energy imports from the Middle East. The United States plans to become energy self-sufficient in a few years, thanks to shale gas, and therefore is no longer interested in what happens in the Middle East.
Russia is indirectly interested in development in the Middle East, as calm or chaos in the region could create a global energy crisis or eliminate one, and thus influence its own energy exports. Because of its high extraction costs, Russia could be forced out of the market by low oil prices, which could happen if there is no chaos in Middle East, where they have lower extraction costs.
Therefore, China should have had a greater interest in advancing a solution in the Middle East, especially since its economy is over four times the size of Russia's.
China disliked the idea of the United States intervening with missiles in Syria, as that could have started a chain reaction, creating more chaos in the region and spiking oil prices worldwide. Russia objectively has less interest in preventing an American intervention. Chaos and energy price hikes would benefit Russian oil and gas exports. Yet it was Russia that intervened in the Middle East, offering to mediate and dismantle Syria's chemical weapons and creating great difficulty for the Obama administration. The Pope, heading a global Catholic movement calling for one day of prayer and fasting for peace in the Middle East, also contributed to America's decision to renounce an intervention in Syria.
This whole situation, though, showed that China seems unable to take charge of its own international destiny.
This may be good news for those who are scared of Chinese global intervention and China's ambition to become number one in the world. But actually, this enthusiasm should be deeply reconsidered. If China does not have a position in the world that is in accord with other countries, it means Beijing is de facto isolated - something that doesn't bode well for Beijing's future. Furthermore this isolation objectively could help nationalist thinking in the country, as these people consider the interests of China with no concern for the interest of other countries.
Russia, despite being an economic midget nowadays, was able to propose an initiative that garnered vast support in the world and actually helped America. This proves that the quest for political influence before moving on to military might and economic prowess depends on the ability to propose political plans and ideas that can be shared by a large number of countries. Russia seems very capable of multiplying the weight of its economy and military by using true strategic ideas.
China, conversely, seems intent on undercutting its economic and military muscle by producing no political initiatives or very naive ones. China should not in fact think of its economic interest alone. Considering one's national or personal interests alone, without taking into account the interests of others, moves into nationalism, it leads to a desire of conquest and annihilation. Conversely considering one's interests together with the interests of the other brings to the exchange of market economy, where both buyer and seller have to gain to repeat the transaction and be happy.
China can strengthen its growing economic and political muscle by proposing plans shared by the largest number of countries possible - that is, through China finding common ground between its national interest and the interests of the world. Having no international profile or a negative international profile only isolates China.
Russia, possibly also because of the heritage of the international communist system, which claimed a global ideal besides the narrow national view, was able to offer a proposal that cut a lot of ice in the world.
What do the Taiwan and Syria issues have in common? A parochial look at politics. China didn't want to put forth a proposal on Syria because Beijing feared making a mistake and it didn't know what to do or say that would be welcomed by the world. Similarly, it thinks political power struggles kept behind closed doors are better than power struggles in the open, which makes all of the leaders lose face.
Besides being held back by those who have an interest in preserving the political status quo, Beijing also believes it does not know how to move from its own present political system to a more open one. But an open power struggle, showing the transparency of the political debate, enhances the international profile of the country. All in all, despite all the scandals, the present political fight in Taiwan has drawn global political attention and much of it is good, as it shows a greater attention to the rule of law in the island. Moreover, internal political isolation may have a direct impact on the pace of domestic reforms (see US hurdles strew China's reform path).
But in both cases, China is projecting an image in the world that does not help it. And this is not just a projection; in the past year or so, it has become a matter of reality. Nobody has clear numbers, but many people in Beijing and Shanghai tell stories of huge capital flights. Many people with money are looking for safe havens outside of China, taking billions out of the country.
The common explanation for all this is that people are growing uncertain about China's long-term objective. They do not know what China will do in the future, so they are scared. This is a direct consequence of China's inability to move on the path of political reforms, which would demonstrate to investors in and out of China a clear long-term path. China's timidity on the global scene makes the country appear as a political dwarf.
The deep reason for all this is possibly in the third event of the past days. On Sunday China gave Bo Xilai, standard bearer of the neo-Maoists, ex-party chief in Chongqing, a life sentence. It was milder than his wife, Gu Kailai, who got death sentence with reprieve, but heavier than his former henchman Wang Lijun, who is to be in prison for 15 years. The sentence then indicates that, according to the court, the responsibility of this whole affair is mostly given to the wife, the husband covered up for her and the henchman was just the loyal executioner.
For Bo Xilai it is heavier than the 20 years sentence many people were talking about, and it seems to mean that Bo was punished for his defiance during the trial, when he did not admit his guilt and was challenging the court thus apparently rejecting a previous political agreement for his public confession. (see Bo breaks from script, but sticks to role, Asia Times Online, Sep 3, 2013).
Yet the issue of the resurgence of new nationalist trends, disguised as neo Maoist thought, is not solved as it remained out of the trial and out of the ongoing debate on the Chinese internet. The political issues may be too complicated to discuss in a public forum in China, but they might be addressed in the forthcoming Party Plenum in November.
The nationalist mindset seems to be the root of the problem. It is conservative at home and unable to take a global view of international affairs. Then it cannot manage to propose solutions which many countries see as reasonable. It considers Chinese interests in isolation, as if Beijing was still the capital of the old empire where everything stemmed from the Forbidden City. But that imperial dream is no longer, and no one in the world supports it.
Francesco Sisci is a columnist for the Italian daily Il Sole 24 Ore. His e-mail is fsisci@gmail.com
Posted with his permission.
Just one more way the rich get richer
The tax implications of Harvard's $6.5 billion capital campaign:
http://chronicle.com/blogs/conversation/2013/09/24/how-taxpayers-are-helping-to-finance-harvards-capital-campaign/?cid=pm&utm_source=pm&utm_medium=en
http://chronicle.com/blogs/conversation/2013/09/24/how-taxpayers-are-helping-to-finance-harvards-capital-campaign/?cid=pm&utm_source=pm&utm_medium=en
If only they would spend this money on the poor!
|
|
Jim -- I want to get a gut check from you on something. Have you seen the latest TV ads against Obamacare? They're absolutely disgusting -- spreading myths to try to convince young people they shouldn't sign up for health insurance. Here's the thing: They're spending millions on this strategy -- $400 million and counting since Obamacare passed. We know we're never going to have the kind of cash the other side does, so we're doubling down on our grassroots plan -- volunteers are getting out in their communities with the truth, and we'll make sure people who need insurance know how to get it. Obamacare is one of the signature achievements of the past five years, and I know a lot of us will fight like hell to protect it. So my question for you is: How much are you willing to chip in to fight back? https://donate.barackobama.com/Protect-Obamacare Thanks -- more to come on this, but now is a great time to get fired up. Erin Erin Hannigan Health Care Campaign Manager Organizing for Action P.S. -- It can be pretty daunting to think about how much money the other side is going to spend on this. We've known for a long time, though, that TV ads are no match for real one-on-one conversations. That's why we're asking you to invest in this grassroots work today. ---------------- The other side will spend millions to maintain the status quo. We're fighting for change -- chip in $5 or more to support OFA today. |
The latest news in the world of civil disobedience:
 |
| English: Sketch of Theodore Roosevelt chasing a wolf (Photo credit: Wikipedia) |
http://www.npr.org/player/v2/mediaPlayer.html?action=1&t=1&islist=false&id=226010295&m=226011252
Efforts reportedly include destroying traps and putting nails on roads where trappers and hunters travel. These law breakers claim they are actually supporting the federal Endangered Species Act. Some have published a wolf-hunting sabotage manual.
Uncle Sam is all over North Africa
 |
| English: Flag of MNLF (as used in Tripoli peace negoacitions) Català: Bandera del MNLF (USADA A LES NEGOACIONS DE PAU DE TRIPOLI) (Photo credit: Wikipedia) |
As the Kenyan mall siege signifies, Africa has become the new battleground in the War on Terror. From the hostage taking in Mali to the terrorist attacks in Kenya, Al Qaeda affiliates are attempting to reassert their radical jihadist movement across the top half of the African continent. The U.S. is countering that initiative with aid to African nations, training, intel support, drone strikes... and maybe a bit more.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)