05.24.09
Posted in Current Events, Rants at 12:18 am by Kaihaku
Last Thursday, the President gave a speech on national security which held beneath a thick layer of beautiful rhetoric the inclination to implement at least one disturbing new policy. Well, perhaps new is not quite appropriate, rather he outlined his intention to make a certain policy of the last Administration legal. He, of course, took pains to separate himself from that Administration and emphasized that this policy would be absolutely guarded against abuse. Absolutely.
The policy is ‘indefinite preventive detention,’ which is the imprisonment of individuals solely on the suspicion that they will become a threat. It is illegal under the Sixth Amendment which states that ‘In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial‘ and ‘be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation‘. If the possibility of becoming a threat is a crime then each and everyone of us is a criminal. Since it is not a crime then each and everyone of us who is not a criminal otherwise is not a criminal, that includes those deemed potential terrorists by the government.
The “War of Terror” is not a War. Terrorism is not a political force, nation state, or ideology; it is a particular form of violence. It is comparable to declaring War on marital abuse or rape. A friend of mine once said that, “All men are potential rapists.” While that is a true statement of good cautionary value, it is ultimately of no legal value. The potential threat of an individual committing a crime is not a crime. Then some claim that these individuals should be considered Prisoners of War allowing them to be legally held until the ‘War’ is ended. Aside from the fact that this is not a ‘War’, Terrorists should not fall under Prisoner of War status because 1. It is generally impossible to separate a combatant from a non-combatant in this ‘War’ and 2. Even if this is a ‘War’ on Al Qaeda rather than Terrorism it is a war that has no foreseeable end. The United States should not confront Terrorism as if it were going to war, Terrorism should be considered a criminal activity. Terrorists should be punished to the fullest extent of the law but they should not be subjected to special treatment beyond the law.
For well over half a century the ‘Free World’ has sharply criticized dictatorships for exercising this kind of power. There is only token difference between holding ‘Enemies of the State’ indefinitely without specific charge and holding ‘Threats to the State’ indefinitely without specific charge. This is exactly the situation in dictatorships around the world, due process is necessary to preserve all other rights. All other freedoms are ultimately invalidated if the government can freely incarcerate individuals who have committed no crimes. Such a power is by its nature arbitrary. No amount of guarantees or safeguards can negate that this compromises a, perhaps even then, core tenant of the Constitution. Transparent rule of law is not optional in a democratic state, it is essential.
“I consider [trial by jury] as the only anchor ever yet imagined by man, by which a government can be held to the principles of its constitution.”
–Thomas Jefferson to Thomas Paine, 1789. ME 7:408, Papers 15:269.
Perhaps this administration will be so upright as to not abuse a law of this sort but I am positive that it will be abused eventually. This would set a dangerous precedent, one that future administrations and certain other nations will surely make use of to justify their abuse of power. It will be difficult to critique a dictatorship for holding journalists (even of other nationalities) as enemies of the state without trial, specific charge, or time limit when the United States is doing the same.
Thankfully, there are a wealth of protests against on this speech available online, so at least I don’t feel alone in being alarmed at this. Low Points in American history compares this to the Alien and Sedition Acts of 1798 and the Japanese internment of the 1940s. Glenn Greenwald has two lengthy posts on the subject, Obama’s civil liberties speech and Facts and myths about Obama’s preventive detention proposal. Dan Froomkin of the Washington Post details Problems With Preventive Detention.
If this is the course that our government is destined to head in then it’s my opinion that the terrorists have won. This is certainly a slippery slope and if someone as supposedly progressive as President Obama continues on it then I’m filled with a cynical skepticism on the future of our democracy.
Please, send letters to your representives and even the President himself letting them how deeply you disaprove of this fundamental violation of everything the Consitution stands for.
Permalink
05.23.09
Posted in Media at 9:24 pm by Kaihaku
I just finished From the Land of Green Ghosts by Pascal Khoo Thwe. The memoir provided compelling insights into the myriad of cultures within Burma and the politics tying them all together. In the same way that U Sam Oeur’s memoir Crossing Three Wildernesses provides an intimate telling of Khmer spirituality, From the Land of Green Ghosts offers a personal glimpse at the spirituality of the Padaung and of many other ethnic groups in Burma. The narrative is a deeply personal one and breathtakingly candid. Thwe is unabashedly honest with himself and the cultures he interacts with, showing a degree of maturity and awareness that most of us would do well to learn from. The points where the drums beat hardest in the narrative, directed towards the ruling regime, never felt forced to me, rather they were honest expressions of a deep rooted outrage. One which felt shared by most of Burmese society. The journey of Thwe’s life is at turns endearing, inspiring, and heartbreaking but it is always enlightening. The portions dealing with Moe were particularly potent.
One of the cultural insights that I appreciated the most was Thwe’s reflections on education, comparing Cambridge’s development of individual opinions to Southeast Asia’s emphasis on memorization and conformity. He identifies this mental freedom as the root of political freedom and acknowledges how difficult it was to adapt to. Insightfully he comments on how Western-style political freedom will be impossible until the root culture had adapted to the Western-style of education; one which does not prize conformity.
His honest narrative of his emotions in new lands and cultures is immediately understandable to anyone who has been immersed in an foreign culture. His insights on the differences between cultures, from showing respect to a benefactor to something as simple as the meaning of a smile, is enlightening.
An other remarkable aspect of Thwe’s telling is his account of the fusion of local spirituality and the Catholic church. Raised in this apparent contradiction he remains able to value apparently opposing ideals and customs, retaining respect for his tribal identity even while advancing through the halls of Cambridge. That quality is a rather unique one, too often ethnic writers in exile adopt the opinions of their host lands but at least Mr. Thwe seems to have retained his own voice.
The writing was at times rough and rarely transitioned smoothly. There were also a few surprising grammatical errors that I would have expected editors to remove. Despite that, From the Land of Green Ghosts was an excellent and fairly fluid read.
There is much room for comparison between Crossing Three Wildernesses which I consider the best personal account of the Khmer Rogue that I’ve yet read and From the Land of Green Ghosts. Both narratives are powerful for their personal accounts of their people, times, and cultures. Both follow a similar path from countryside to education to exile. Both are among the most compelling memoirs I’ve read and detail events far beyond my own experience in such a way that they are almost relatable to.
Permalink
05.20.09
Posted in Life and the happenings there of at 3:56 am by Kaihaku
Today I finally got to the Dentist for the first time since coming to Cambodia. I had always intended to do so sooner but…well, you know how it is. It ended up being the single best Dentist visit that I can remember. Phnom Penh and Cambodia in general is flooded with Dentist offices… Quite a few of them look just a bit sketchy and I wouldn’t vouch for most of them but the prices are low.
The Bright Smile Dental Clinic was recommended to me by Barbara who has been visiting there for most of her years here. Mr. Song Borauk was my attending dentist. He was the most pleasant and open dentist I’ve ever had. He explained what was happening each step of the way. After two and a half years in Cambodia I have two new cavities and one potential forming up. I’d noticed all three before, which one was a big reason I finally got around to going to the dentist, but Mr. Song gave me some details on them that I wasn’t accustom to. No dentist in the United States has ever told me that one of my cavities wasn’t a big deal (the small deep one was dangerous, the wider one on the crown not so much) or commented so frequently on what healthy teeth I have (given that this is Cambodia I can see why he might think so). As he finished his examination he noted that I had a botched filing on the back of my two upper incisors, the two teeth were cemented together when they should have been separated. I knew about that but was surprised when he offered to remove and reapply the filing properly. I remember wondering why that dentist in the United States hadn’t used some sort of barrier to keep the filing from cementing the teeth together, after having the filing done properly I really wonder. Probably the most remarkable thing about Mr. Song, who I believe is just a junior dentist in the clinic, is that we went through all of that with no novicane. It was available if I wanted it but he was tactful enough that it wasn’t necessary. Which, again, makes me question the skill of dentists back home. At the least, Mr. Song was much friendlier than any dentist I’ve had in the States.
After an hour and a half of work, for four filings and a scaling my total bill came to $50 and as a bonus I could still talk normally for the rest of the day.
Permalink
05.06.09
Posted in Life and the happenings there of at 2:10 am by Kaihaku
Today Miles and I had a meeting at IDE with Mr. Phillip Charlesworth who has a wealth of experience working with irrigation and agricultural development in Cambodia. The main purpose of the meeting was to hear his thoughts on a possible new study to evaluate water projects in Cambodia and identify factors that would make them more sustainable long term. The possibility of a second study on pesticide use in Cambodia was also discussed.
Among the wealth of information gathered there were a few interesting tidbits.
CARE did a study which showed that small irrigation schemes yield thirteen times the return of large structures. While this is validating to MCC’s small scale irrigation work I’m worried that other donors will take it to heart. It may be true that large irrigation schemes don’t have the same direct effect on production but many smaller irrigation schemes need them to function – it doesn’t help to have a network of small canals if there’s no water source to plug them into.
The Prey Veng Department of Meteorology, which shares an office with PVIO, is widely regarded as the second best in the country. Only Battambang is widely regarded as better. This was another encouraging moment for me. I should have compared the Prey Veng Department of Water Resources to Departments in other provinces more often.
Support is growing for linking more services to Farmer Water User Groups – primarily agricultural extension services. This is another encouraging point as, to some extent, PVIO is already implementing this.
There was more and even more enclosed in a wealth of documents coming via email but I’ll stop there. It’s an exciting time for work on all fronts.
Permalink
05.04.09
Posted in Media, Ramblings at 7:22 am by Kaihaku
In 2005 Orson Scott Card wrote an opinion piece for the LA Times celebrating the overdue “death” of Star Trek. Thick with the condensation that has sadly become his defining character trait he lambasted the series and it’s fans.
So why did the Trekkies throw themselves into this poorly imagined, weakly written, badly acted television series with such commitment and dedication? Why did it last so long?
Here’s what I think: Most people weren’t reading all that brilliant science fiction. Most people weren’t reading at all. So when they saw “Star Trek,” primitive as it was, it was their first glimpse of science fiction. It was grade school for those who had let the whole science fiction revolution pass them by.
A new reincarnation of Star Trek is only a few days away and it seems an apt time to contemplate if Star Trek deserved to die…again?
Tentatively I would say yes.
After a magnificent run and evolution The Next Generation ended on a dull self-absorbed note.
Deep Space Nine was a wonderful series for Trekkies to follow but it didn’t capture the broad interest that The Next Generation had.
Voyager was a lackluster series which relied far too heavily on sensationalism and failed to live up to that which had come before. It was sleazy, racy, and ultimately uninspiring.
Enterprise… Does anything actually need to be said?
The last of the movies to impress me was The Voyage Home. Not all of those that followed were terrible but none of them shone.
Corporate Star Trek lost its momentum, floundered, and died. It did deserve to die. The answer was not to make the franchise darker, sexier, or even look to the past.
Not that I agree with Card in the slightest who writes off the most influential science fiction series in history as primitive uninspired rubbish.
In a broader sense though the heart of Star Trek has never stopped beating. It is ingrained in who we are as a culture. Star Trek is more than a space opera series of adventures with themes touching on thought-provoking issues. Star Trek is an obtainable vision of the future. I know, transporters and warp drives are obtainable? No, the vision is a societal one. After ages of poverty and plague, of bloody war and needless waste, humanity will finally unite in the peaceful pursuit of progress and reach out into the stars.
Much of science fiction is meant to prepare us for possible threats to life as we know it. It is to arm us with the understanding necessary to protect our way of living. They prepare us for rebellions – against artificial lifeforms, aliens, mind control, genetic modification, the ultimate consequences of the patriot act, etc.
Star Trek and some others also show us another way of living. They arm us with the vision of a different society. They prepare us for revolution – for true equality, sustainable peace, powerful freedom, progress, etc.
Societies stagnate and decline when they fight to preserve themselves but they flourish when they struggle to achieve a greater vision.
Because it existed Star Trek has moved the future towards its ideals, as happened when young Whoopi Goldberg saw Uhura, a competent black woman, treated as an equal on television. In her own words, “Momma! There’s a negro lady on TV and she ain’t no maid!” That fictional character inspired Goldberg to become an actress so she could pass on the validation she felt as a child. When Nichelle Nichols, the actress who played Uhura, decided to leave Star Trek after the first season she was convinced to stay on by Martin Luther King Jr who stated that she was a role model for the black community.
Star Trek had remarkable characters working together in a remarkable way because of its era. Instead of looking to a future where East and West had eradicated each other with nuclear weapons, Star Trek looked to a future where all of humanity, even Russians, were united in a peaceful enterprise.
In my opinion that is a significant part of what was missing from Voyager and Enterprise. It’s also what I believe will be missing from the new Star Trek movie. The lasting appeal of Star Trek doesn’t stem from its crazy adventures, characters, or even philosophical moments but rather from its overarching vision. It’s obtainable and, in fact, we’ve already obtained a large portion of it. It’s served as a self-fulfilling prophecy and it can’t do so in the same way again. Which is what this reboot will miss – Star Trek needs a new updated vision not to continue trying to rehash Roddenberry’s “formula”.
Gene Roddenberry himself was aware of this, that there was no Star Trek formula for success but rather it was the ideal behind Star Trek which made it successful.
We believed that the often ridiculed mass audience is sick of this world’s petty nationalism and all it‘s old ways and old hatreds, and that people are not only willing but anxious to think beyond most petty beliefs that have for so long kept mankind divided. So you see that the formula, the magic ingredient that many people keep seeking and many of them keep missing is really not in Star Trek. It is in the audience. There is an intelligent life form out on the other side of that television too.
The whole show was an attempt to say that humanity will reach maturity and wisdom on the day that it begins not just to tolerate, but to take a special delight in differences in ideas and differences in life forms. We tried to say that the worst possible thing that can happen to all of us is for the future to somehow press us into a common mould, where we begin to act and talk and look and think alike. If we cannot learn to actually enjoy those small differences, take a positive delight in those small differences between our own kind, here on this planet, then we do not deserve to go out into space and meet the diversity that is almost certainly out there. And I think that this is what people responded to.
The result of that was that seven years after being dropped by the network for saying those things, there are now more people watching it than ever before. And if you ascribe those things to any mystic or scriptural brilliance in Star Trek, you miss the entire point. For what Star Trek proves, as faulty as individual episodes could be, is that the much-maligned common man and common woman has an enormous hunger for brotherhood. They are ready for the 23rd century now, and they are light-years ahead of their petty governments and their visionless leaders.
I believe that the world is hungry for a Star Trek but I’m not even remotely convinced that a reboot of the old Star Trek will fill that need. We need a vision of an achievable optimistic future that gives us the hope to challenge ourselves. I think the new Star Trek will be a great movie but I’m not expecting to be challenged by it. Paramount is attempting once again to salvage its franchise by boldly going where man has gone before instead of seeking out a vision that reinvigorates the franchise. It’s not about phasers, transporters, klingons, holodecks, photon torpedoes, Kirk, or even the Enterprise. It’s about the future and boldly looking towards one that we could obtain but haven’t yet.
All that said I’ll still be getting my hands on a copy as soon as possible.
Permalink