Tuesday Primary: Full Throttle on the Campaign Trail

by Larry Mongoss, guest blogger

Another Tuesday. More primaries in a race that has dragged on longer than anyone had expected it to. I am certainly not a typical voter, but the more I get to know about people in politics the less I like them. There have been a few notable exceptions to that experience, oddly enough, and mostly for silly reasons, Ronald Reagan among them, but this campaign has not raised any from either side of the aisle.

More painful than getting to know politicians, is listening to them pander to the short term interests of voters as they try to propel themselves into office. I was not surprised when John McCain, a man who has re-declared himself “very well versed in economics” suggested on April 15^th that the federal tax on gasoline be lifted for the summer. Lowering taxes has long been a mantra of the Republican Party, and lowering them on something that every person who drives can relate directly to is that much sweeter. Some people have complained that such a move is a bad one and they are right. It will do little to help consumers in the short term. The price we pay at the pump will not fall by 18.5 cents a gallon, but probably only by a few cents as oil suppliers take more of the pie. Longer term this action does nothing to address the energy, environment and security problems we face, but will only make them worse. It is a quick would-be fix that will do no good.

Thus, I was surprised when Hillary Clinton grabbed McCain’s play and ran with it on April 28^th. As implausible as it seems, I am still not cynical enough. Barack Obama, and probably some of the would-have-beens are not going along with this notion of taking away the gas tax. Actually, Obama was politically artful in describing this as a gimmick that would only save people 30 cents per day. But the argument about why this is a bad idea is an intellectual one; it does not have the visceral impact of offering someone an extra $2 in change every time they fill up.

All of this is obviously old news, and politics as usual in America, and really almost every country in the world, has a fair bit pandering policy statements (read my lips). What is interesting this time around is that the race is close, and prominently putting forth bad policy may have flipped Indiana into the Clinton column, and even makes North Carolina seem unsure. Clinton has proven herself a tenacious candidate and it would be a mistake to count her out. But wouldn’t it be ironic if clearly bad policy promulgation keeps her in the game. If it does turn out to be a winning strategy, we are in for an absolute treat this fall.

Extinguishing the Olympic Torch of Hope

by Larry Mongoss, guest blogger

It is often said that all effects are side effects and that seems to be true for the passage of the Olympic torch. The tradition of running the torch through different countries is intended to promote the games, show the inextinguishable nature of the Olympic spirit and, of course, promote the host country. I have never followed the torch relay very closely in the past, but was still struck by how worrisome it must be for those bearing the torch to not let it go out. I picture myself doing it, falling face first in a mud puddle valiantly holding up the torch only to have it put out by the water splashing up as my face goes under. The whole world gasps and I am the link that breaks the chain that holds together the games.

The pressure, it turns out, is not quite so great. There is a backup plan, a “real” torch that is kept burning in a nice dry place just in case the bearer has a mishap. Likely the backup has been invoked before, but it was not until the recent chaos in France that I found out about the dirty little secret. Symbolism – if it is going to be real shouldn’t it have to be fragile too?

That is a different topic, the side effects I am talking about relate to the goals of giving voice to the “Free Tibet” movement and embarrassing the Chinese government. By striking at that oddly honored Olympic symbol, this primary goal did meet with some success. The embarrassment, however, was not restricted to the Chinese government and the International Olympic Committee. Many people in and from China, especially young people, have taken these statements very personally. Intended or not, they see the whole thing as an attack on their motherland, not just the government that controls it. The words “Shame on China” go directly to the heart.

Worse still, and I think this is one reason the anger is so great, they see it as racial statement against Han Chinese. Though many were hoping that the Olympics would be an opportunity to increase freedom and curtail human rights abuses in China, that inclusive goal has been lost. The loud voices no longer carry a global message. Instead, what comes across loud and clear to Han Chinese is that they are being blamed for the conditions of other ethnic groups within China. When perceived in this way it suggests that the rights of those groups, especially ethnic Tibetans, trump any claim that Han Chinese have on free speech or other civil liberties. Given this interpretation, I am not surprised that so many people in China seem to be so mad.

Some, presumably a small portion, of young Chinese activists have become quite extreme in voicing their anger. They are hunting a particular protester and declaring people (including some of their own) enemies in a manner reminiscent of the Cultural Revolution, an event they are too young to have any firsthand knowledge of. Whether this worrisome behavior is condoned by their majority remains to be seen. Still, the young people of today are the rulers of tomorrow and the attitudes currently being engendered will be with them when they come into power.

So far, the anger generated seems to be directed at those directly involved in helping mire the torch in the mud. I am relieved at this; the scale of suffering that ethnic retribution within China could cause is overwhelming. But that anger, and its focus on outside influences is still troubling. The Olympics may indeed be the catalyst that aligns the attitude of the Chinese government with that of the Chinese people. Unfortunately, the emerging alignment is that the people are remonstrating against the rest of the world with exactly the same voice that the government has had for decades.

There is a tendency, especially prevalent in America of late, to label countries as good or bad. You can try to finesse that by saying what you will of the people making up that country but what comes across is: America (or substitute your country name) is evil! It is kind of hard not to be upset by such a blanket statement. Such absolutism, absolutely is bad.

I am not sure who will bring home the Golds at the upcoming games, but I have a feeling many of us have already lost. #

Also by Larry Mongoss:

Finding Silver in the Cloud of CO₂
Paterson the Blind New Governor
Also on Literal and Literary Truth
Disagreeing with Smart People
Decreasing Readership among the Corn-Fed

Discussion about the New Generation of Chinese

This generation of Chinese students, both inside and outside China, is very different from mine. Because they hold China's foreseeable future (they have already played a predominant role in recent political events), the West should try to understand them in order to learn how to peacefully co-exist with each other on the same earth. The following NY Times article and a reader response present two different views. While my own view is with Daniel A. Bell, it is important to hear from different sides.

"China’s Loyal Youth” (Op-Ed, April 13) by Matthew Forney
Daniel A. Bell's Letter to the Editor (April 19)

Johnson, Vermont: War Dilemma

The slogan on the flag reads: "WE SUPPORT OUR TROOPS / Hang a Yellow Ribbon for Your Soldier"






I asked a few writers and artists if they thought supporting our troops was the same as supporting the war. The answers were divided.

What Will Happen to the Olympic Flame in San Francisco

A friend suggested me to report the "spontaneous reaction from oversea Chinese in San Francisco." She pointed me to a post on a popular American Chinese website, mitbbs.org. The post, titled "April 9^th, Flags Flapping, Sacred Flame Glows in San Francisco," is time-stamped 15:09:25 today:

----------------------------------[in translation]

Yesterday afternoon, I got some of the flags made by volunteers.

The flags are small, only 8"x10", and the poles are two feet long. A phoenix fire ball on the white background is especially eye-catching. Volunteers in San Francisco made the flags through the night by their hot blood.

I held several tens of the little flags, feeling like a general on a Beijing Opera stage. Wouldn't tomorrow's San Francisco be like a battlefield without gun smoke?

This evening I watched TV news. Once again the Western media disgusted me. In Paris, the violent protesters kept attacking the Olympic torchbearers. They even attacked a handicapped female athlete on wheelchair! …Yet the media is still burnishing up the image of those ugly terrorists.

Friends, give up delusion! Wherever you are, whatever dialect you speak, come to San Francisco, shout with us in the cold wind by the seaside, and let our voice spread! We Chinese have been silent for too long…

-----------------------------------

Below the post are comments from about 80 supporters. The continuing support has kept the post on top of the page.

On a related note, this morning a CNN news alert titled "Protesters warming up as Olympic flame arrives in U.S." hit my inbox at 10:53 am. (The title has been changed at the time of this writing.)

The agitated voices from both sides are really worrying me. I heard from the AP that IOC was considering ceasing the relay. I think that will be good for everyone. Here's to hoping that IOC will do one thing right and carry through with the idea!

Tibet: A Balanced View Is Called for

by Xujun Eberlein

Getting a clear picture of what is happening in Tibet is no easy task. Bias is evident in both the Chinese and Western media coverage. A number of interested and thoughtful bloggers, however, have managed to paint a plausible picture, from which one does get important on-the-scene observations that help spotlight what's going on. Continue to read>>

Paterson the Blind New Governor

by Larry Mongoss, guest blogger

It makes great headlines, but never comes as a big surprise, when some politician is accused of a crime. I was a little bit disappointed when the latest rendition of that was performed by Eliot Spitzer. I have always perceived him as a pretty dour individual, and never could tell whether his aggressive prosecutions were the result of some burning sense of justice, or just the desire to spread his unhappiness more evenly. Still, he seemed like one of those guys that could be depended on to walk the talk. Hope burns eternal I guess.

The really interesting thing, however, is that David A. Paterson will now be filling his shoes. Before the Spitzer story broke I have to admit I had never heard of Paterson, and everyone seems to be making a big deal out of the fact that he will become the first African American Governor of New York. But the cool thing about Paterson is not the color of his skin, it is in his eyes. People seem to mention only in an under breath that the man is blind.

Peterson does not sound like a man that considers his blindness something to hide in the margins. According to Wikipedia (and how can I doubt that) he ran the New York City Marathon in 1999 and is on the board of a track club for disabled people. I can remember fencing with blind people when I was in college – at the time it surprised me that they would want to do that but after a few bouts with a blindfold (for me) I could understand it. They were doing it for exactly the same reason I was – it was fun (I was always a pretty noncompetitive competitor).

So why politics? Perhaps it is more about importance than fun but being blind does mean using other senses. Most importantly, Paterson will have to listen to what people say and that, all by itself, is pretty special in his trade. I hunted around a little bit and did find a list of American Politicians with Disabilities. There aren’t any blind Governors in the list and I couldn’t find any mention elsewhere so Paterson likely is the first blind Governor. Now the question that raises for me, is what happens if he wants a second term?

No matter how good a job Paterson does as Governor, in a high profile campaign his blindness is likely to weigh him down. Irregardless of how well he can capture his audience in person, when facing the end of a camera it is a different game. We are used to looking people in the eyes as they deliver their messages in our family rooms and won’t be able to do that with Paterson.

I will listen to Paterson’s progress with interest. He may be a great Governor, or he may be terrible. Ironically, through, it will probably not be his performance in office for which he is remembered. If he can keep the public ear and mount a successful reelection campaign, people will hold that feeling for some time to come. If not, his footsteps will fade to nothingness before his replacement is sworn in. Politics is usually a visual game, let’s see if substance can triumph. #

Other posts by Larry Mongoss (guest blogger):

Also on Literal and Literary Truth
Disagreeing with Smart People
Decreasing Readership among the Corn-Fed

Also on Literal and Literary Truth

by Larry Mongoss, guest blogger

Did you read the story in the New York Times – “National Enquirer Article a Fabrication?” I can’t remember what the article being referred to was about, something to do with the founding of Rome I think. Still, I was astonished that a nationally distributed periodical would knowingly publish something containing falsehoods.

After that, when I read the story about Misha Defonseca admitting that her book, Misha: A Memoire of the Holocaust Years, was made up I was not nearly as surprised as everyone else seems to have been. I have not had a chance to read the book but in it four year old Misha’s parents are taken to a concentration camp by the Nazis and she wanders for several years in the woods until she is adopted by a pack of wolves.

OK, I guess I can understand that the temptation to believe a story like that. A few internet searches do turn up modern day Moglis. From the girl found in Cambodia after, some claim, 10 years in the jungle to a boy raised by dogs in Russia, these stories appear often (there is actually a website devoted to such children). Unlike Mogli or Tarzan though, these people do not present as well adjusted mentally healthy individuals. They are, in fact, stunted and traumatized to the point where most can never function as a member of society.

Anyone with even a little bit of common sense reading Defonseca’s book must have known it was not literal truth; the question then is whether it is literary truth. In this case the real source of distrust probably arises from the fact that her parents were not taken to a concentration camp, but underground movement members caught and executed. Does that discredit every, or most, insights into the human condition that one can get reading the book?

When James Frey’s book went through a similar turn I read it with just that question in mind. The book fascinated me, not so much because of the rich, and fabricated, storyline, but more because of the disdain it showed for the AA five step program. I have always been struck by what I perceived as a lack of dissent on that program. Frey’s book provides that dissent, but is it legitimate?

The whole question of literal and literary truth has been, and continues to be, heavily debated among writers. An article in the November issue of Harper's, “A Lie that Tells the Truth” by Joel Agee, looks at this, concluding that some license is reasonable. When you approach this question from the perspective of the reader, however, different issues are at play. First, and foremost, everybody lies. Be it a memoir, a textbook or a newspaper article expecting the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth seems pretty naive.

Thus the question of legitimacy is not one for Frey, or Defonseca, or really any writer to answer, it is for the reader to decide. Literary, and most human, truths have to depend on a preponderance of evidence. In short that means you have to read more than one thing. If anyone ever tells you there is only one book you need to read on a topic, run the other way and read none, or plenty. A great writer should be loved, but never trusted. #

Related posts:

Disagreeing with Smart People
Decreasing Readership among the Corn-Fed

Disagreeing with Smart People

by Larry Mongoss, guest blogger

Charlie Rose, as he is wont to, did a retrospective on William F. Buckley Wednesday night, running together conversations from the many interviews he had done with him over the years. The show, and the passing of Buckley, made me reflect on my own dilemma: How do I think about people who are both brilliant and insightful while at the same time embracing ideals that seem to be an affront on common sense.

Listening to Buckley talk is an absolute delight, but thinking of him as the intellectual father of modern American Conservatism is frightening, made ever so much more so because he, apparently, was proud to be seen that way.

The more urgent dilemma, however, may be why there is a dilemma at all. When stupid people say stupid things it does not bother me. I shrug it off as a curiosity or, if I am feeling particularly empathetic, try to understand how they might have arrived at those views. But when smart people say stupid things it bothers me. Instead of trying to understand how they arrived at their views, I try to understand what mistake they made in arriving at their views.

That intolerance is more than a product of getting grumpy and set in my ways. Public discourse, especially political public discourse, more and more looks for a one dimensional rating system. When Hillary Clinton claimed that Barack Obama was to the right of George Bush because he did not support freezing interest rates on subprime ARMs, I was astonished. I just can’t fathom in what sense picking a position on the best way to deal with foreclosures is a left-right choice, I would have hoped there would have been some talk of effective versus ineffective.

In the face of this one dimensional worldview, I think it is more important than ever to listen to the people you disagree with, especially when they are talking about the things you disagree about. It is true that some disagreements are big enough that all the understanding in the world won’t change anything. But there are lots of disagreements that are not like that and by listening more thoughtfully, we might get closer to the truth. If in doing this we end up needing seven dimensions by which to identify ourselves so be it.

So thank you Mr. Buckley for everything you have said that I disagree with. Perhaps it is time for me to read more of your 55 books.

Another Kind of Movie Reviewer

On January 17th, a review of Terminator: The Sarah Connor Chronicles, was posted on the LanceReviews website. That review received over 1,000 hits in a single day from virtually every corner of the globe.

It is remarkable given that this website is only seven months old, and is one man's labor out of love for good movies and anguish over bad ones. In July 2007, Lance Berry launched his movie review site, on which he posts a new review every couple of days. He does not get paid doing this, and he does not run ads on his site; what he gets is the fun of reviewing and venting, plus an unexpectedly large readership.

Once a film critic/columnist for Latest Issue Entertainment, Lance Berry started his own site dedicated specifically to movie/TV/entertainment reviews, because he has a passion for film and believes that good movies should be praised and recognized, while bad films should be "drop-kicked to the furthest nether regions of hell whenever possible." The LanceReviews site receives daily hits from around the world, including places such as Japan, Russia, Australia, and the UK, in addition to the United States.

Lance is not your average movie reviewer who has to please some special-interest audiences, including the movie industry. He reviews things exactly as he sees them, which makes him a reviewer for the average person, rather an irony that "average" has such divergent meanings. And, unlike many reviewers trying hard to be entertaining for the sake of entertainment, Lance strives to be informative. That, I think, actually makes his reviews more entertaining than most.

And he is humorous and insightful. His headline on Vantage Point is “Disadvantage Point: New espionage thriller plays like another familiar film...but with half the charm.” For Jumper it is “Clunker: anywhere is possible. Teleportation flick goes nowhere fast.” Of course, not every movie is a dud. For The Spiderwick Chronicles, Lance says “Magically Enthralling: Spiderwick spins a web that ensnares its viewer...and doesn't let go!”

As you can see from the picture above, which I adapted from his website, Lance has a clever eye for layout, in this case with an ironic twist. He uses the medium of Hollywood presentation, to present Hollywood.

I don’t often go to see movies in theaters, but when I do it seems like about half the time I am disappointed. Lance, who does go to theaters a lot, seems to agree with me. In fact, he had it so strongly that he started reviewing as a way “to vent about bad movies that are foisted on an unsuspecting public.” But this is not venting in vain, not for the people who read his reviews. If you are lucky enough to read his review in advance, you are forearmed – you might instead curl up in bed with a book. If you see the review too late to save the evening, you can turn the disappointing event into a memorable laugh.

Though honest criticism might upset some people, it can also transcend that. After he saw Casino Royale, in which Daniel Crag plays James Bond, Lance posted what he called "the most honest review of Casino Royale you will read," with the headline "A Bond movie that ISN'T a Bond movie." Several people pasted copies of the review on pro-Craig sites, in order to allow bashing. Apparently some of those people still liked Lance's writing enough to come back for more.

After Lance allowed www.danielcraigisnotbond.com, a British-based site, to post his review of Casino Royale, as well as a link to his article on why Christian Bale should be the next Bond, his site began to get a lot of European hits.

I hope Lance's screenplay writing also benefits from his film reviews. Yes, he has been writing scripts seriously for the past 5-7 years. "I write well, I write fast. In the past, I have re-written 120-page screenplays literally overnight," he says, "I am versatile, writing all types of screenplays: drama, horror, science-fiction, etc. I have made several good connections within the industry recently, but I am still waiting for that 'big break'."

It is his intention to eventually produce a science fiction series, based on his screenplay and novels "The Reign".

Decreasing Readership among the Corn-Fed

by Larry Mongoss, guest blogger

I have to admit that I often fall asleep reading. Sometimes it is intentional, reading can be a lovely way to wind a day down, but sometimes it just happens. Ursula K. Le Guin, in her recent Harpers article “Staying Awake,” condemns the publishing industry for having lost sight of the business they are in, as well as for being stupid.

Le Guin’s main thrust is that the perceived demise of reading is probably overblown, and probably more due to changes in measures of success than reading habits. She likens the mindset of publishers to corn producers trying to find ways to keep increasing demand. She never got to ethanol, but suggested that much of the heavy processing of food done today was driven by a need to keep growing the corn industry.

She had me really hooked at that point, and I wanted to know what the analog had been, or was going to be, for books. Pigs eat corn so selling pork instead of corn requires more production to fill a table. Does something like this happen with books? Can you publish books that have to be read and digested in order to write more refined books that can be presented to the final consumer? Or better yet can we make reading lots of books a requirement for writing scripts for TV shows and ads so that we can deliver an even more refined product?

Clearly there is a fallacy in my reasoning here, which is probably why Le Guin did not pursue the analogy as entertaining as it might have been. Books are not really like corn. A book can be fed to a writer, and still be available to a reader. She notes that “Books are social vectors,” and it is not really their mass production but rather their ability to maintain and transmit information that is valuable. And that fundamentally is the reason she feels the publishing industry is not doing what it should. For big publishers “a ‘good book’ means a high gross and a ‘good writer’ is one who’s next book can be guaranteed to sell better than the last one.”

Books, movies, drugs – it is all the same everyone is after the blockbusters, ignoring the steady income available from the solid performers. There are actually lots of social reasons for this, which Le Guin does not go into in detail, but she is right to point out that they probably make little business sense.

Her general conclusion is that the publishing industry is both hindering our literacy, and making our literacy look worse that it is. That it has always been the case that lots of people don’t read, and that for all the machinations of publishers, “writers and readers, even as they suffer from it, regard it with amused contempt.”

Though I don’t really disagree with her conclusions, I am not sure that I was that swayed by her arguments. I would have found it much more persuasive if she had been able to back up her statements with more historical statistics. Then again, had she done so I probably would have fallen asleep. #

Related articles:

Goodbye to All That - The decline of the coverage of books isn’t new, benign, or necessary

Staying Awake - Notes on the alleged decline of reading

Judges, Parents, and Little Anna Mae

Here goes an ancient Chinese legend: Two women fight over a child, both claiming to be the real mother. They bring the battle to court. The judge draws a circle on the ground and places the child in it. He then tells the two women each to pull an arm of the child simultaneously. "Whoever drags the child out of the circle is the winner," the judge says. At first both women pull very hard. The child is writhing in pain and begins to cry. At the child's tears, one woman reluctantly lets go of his hand. The judge decides she is the real mother and awards her the child. The audience cheers the judge's wise decision – a happy ending.

The judgment in the ancient story is based on the belief that the blood-bond love transcends all others. The judge's logic is idealistically simple: the real mother would rather give up her own rights than hurt the child.

That ancient judge, however, would face a real challenge in today's international society. Read more here>>

China blocks a Hollywood movie...

"Shanghai" is about an American who investigates his friend's death in World War II-era Japanese-occupied Shanghai. read more here>>

Too Many Parents for Little Anna Mae He

After eight years of court fights between an American family and a Chinese family, the dust has finally settled – or so we thought. I have been following the case on Chinese websites all these years, but rarely have I seen any English reports, until now. As 9-year-old Anna Mae He is leaving for China with her birth parents, suddenly the mainstream English media is paying great attention to this settled case.

ABC's 20/20 channel will air the story tonight. You can also read the story on their website here. The report is quite neutral and does not reflect the intense heat generated during the eight year legal battle, still you can feel some heat in the readers comments. When it's in English, Chinese readers rarely post – of course not many Americans posted on Chinese websites either. In either language, the comments show divided views. If you read the posts in both languages, however, a huge cultural difference becomes obvious: the Chinese consider family ties a higher value than material well-being, therefore even those who reproach the He's for their initial mistakes support the Chinese family's reunion.

Read the ABC report here.

It Is Not Gender, It Is Not Color

Today my schedule is packed so I'll be short, but I do have a few words to say about the primary.

A friend told me she was going to vote for Hillary Clinton because Hillary is a woman and would be the first female President of the United States. My question is, if one truly advocates equality between men and women, why would gender be the first consideration for anything?

I'm going to vote for Obama today. It is not because of his gender, it is not because of his color. Among all the candidates, Obama appears to be closest to truth, and that is what matters to me. He speaks and acts like a real person rather than a pretentious politician. He may be relatively inexperienced, but that also means he's less corrupted. For the first time during my two decades of living in the United States, I feel motivated to vote in a primary.

"Why I'm Voting For Obama"

by Laila Lalami

Voting in presidential elections usually means picking the lesser evil among the politicians running for office, but this time I found a candidate I'm genuinely excited about: Barack Obama. The primary reason for my choice is that Obama opposed the Iraq war back in 2002. Read more>>

Shaming China? – My Response to Mr. Kristof

Nicholas Kristof, op-ed columnist for the New York Times, yesterday began a "shaming China" effort with his op-ed piece, "China’s Genocide Olympics," as he believes this is "the best way to make progress on Darfur."

When Mr. Kristof calls the Beijing Games "genocide Olympics," he mentions no words about the 1936 Berlin Olympics, in which the United States took part. That one was the true "genocide Olympics," as Hitler tried to use it to promote his agenda of ethnic cleansing. There is no compatibility between the natures of the Games in Berlin and Beijing. This fact makes Mr. Kristof's name-calling a bit laughable.

Further, I am surprised that Mr. Kristof, who writes about China often, is so ignorant of Chinese mentality, or even basic human nature.

Speaking of human nature, here's a small but illustrative incident:

One day, when I finished shopping in the local Stop & Shop, several heavy bags in my hands, my exit was blocked. A middle-aged man was standing in the middle of the narrow doorway talking on a cell phone. I waited for a few moments. He glanced at me but did not make a move. I finally said, "Excuses me, why do you stand in the door?" The man turned to me and said, "Fuck you, foreign lady!"

His wife, who was still in the store with a child, rushed over and pushed him out of my way. I heard the wife say, "She's right. You shouldn't stand in the door." The husband replied, "But she could have asked nicely!"

Apparently my accusing tone toward the man did not help. It only angered him.

A country is much like a person, only its reaction could be longer lasting and have higher impact. China has a long history resisting foreign insults and threats. With the nationalism sentiment rising higher than ever in China right now, branding the Beijing Olympics will only run counter to Mr. Kristof 's stated intentions.

I, too, want a better situation in Darfur. China's selling weapons to Sudan is disturbing, but in order to stop it, first we need to know why they did it. Is it because the Chinese government is evil in nature? If so, Mr. Kristof, you certainly can't shame an evil being by calling it evil.

The US government also sells weapons to many countries, probably more than China does. The difference between the two, as far as I can see, is that the US government's motivations are political, while China's are economic. A reader who commented on Mr. Kristof's blog suggests that China is after Sudan's oil – a plausible reason. In either case, the US and China are selling weapons out of self-interest.

Weapons are for killing. Any country selling weapons to any other country is a shame, be it the U.S. or China.

A more effective approach to restrain international weapon sales might be to establish an international treaty, much like the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. If so, the first question that comes to mind is, would the United States sign such a treaty?

By the way, I am not an advocate of the Beijing Olympics, for reasons I give in another journalism piece, "Beijing Olympic Boycott Over Burma Will Only Alienate Chinese People."

FAREWELL, HEATH LEDGER

by Lance Berry

Today he passed away, and it's a shame. Not just because of the fact that no one will be able to enjoy his work anymore. Not just because for us Bat-fans, he won't be in the third film (if there is one). Not just because I feel like I've joined the Heath Party too late...but because he was only 28 damn years old, ... More>>

U.S.: Lead, Follow or Get Out of the Way

A decade ago, in 1997, the United States refused to sign the Kyoto agreement on greenhouse gas emissions, which applies to industrialized nations only. This position has been criticized frequently in the years since.

Then last week, many countries sat down again, this time in Bali, to discuss a new set of emission standards that will replace the Kyoto accord set to expire in 2012. Out of Bali comes a framework for negotiating a new agreement, expected to take two years to finalize. It is to include but distinguish developed and developing countries. Not surprisingly, the US and China were both in the limelight during the conference.

Once again, it was the United States and not China that stood up and said no. After extending the talks an extra day in the hope of consensus, the US representatives said they were not willing to support the process. This brought about a great deal of jeering. According to CNN, at this point, the delegate from tiny Papua New Guinea dared the US to lead, follow or get out of the way. Whether rising to the challenge, intimidated by the jeering or simply making a course change, the lead US representative reversed herself and gave the thumbs up to start the more formal negotiations.

There are some indications that the US may have tried to influence China and India in the position they took at the conference, requesting that those countries reject any binding emission targets. Indeed, China did just that: China’s representative stated that it was not "fair to ask developing countries like China to take on binding targets." Whether this statement was the result of US influence, or was China’s own response from the start, will probably never be known. If something was attempted, the ironic twisting of the knife came when China said that the US should bear the brunt of the cost of new measures to control global warming.

So in the end, the US, China and almost every other country in the world, did declare a willingness to be part of the process. As far as I know, there are indeed some initiatives in China to move toward the reduction in greenhouse gas emissions. This summer in my annual visit to China, I was surprised to see a good sized wind farm on the edge of the South China Sea when I flew out of Shanghai’s Pudong Airport. And certainly the Three Gorges Dam (which I hate) on The Yangtze will, assuming it lasts, produce a great deal of hydroelectricity for China. Both are renewable resources with little pollution.

But in all of this I have to go back to a conversation I had with an official from the Transportation Bureau under China's Central Planning Committee, back when I myself was a transportation engineer, shortly after my graduation from MIT. At the time, China's auto industry boom had just begun. During a business meeting in Beijing, I commented to the official that China would have the chance to develop a more rational public transportation system and not be driven into a corner by the automobile as happened in the US. Usually mild mannered man, he got really mad and said, "You Americans already got the good life, now you don't want us to have it!"

At the time I was taken aback (I had always considered myself more Chinese than American), but on reflection, the response is not unexpected. Everyone wants to be able to choose the dream they want to pursue, and nobody wants others to tell them not to. Not making it, not getting what you want, living in misery – these are all things that the Chinese have faced with equanimity for thousands of years. Now they are wholeheartedly pursuing rapid economic development. Should that falter, or come to a crisis, there is no doubt the Chinese will adapt. It is the imposition from outside that is not tolerable.

Now that the world is facing a severe environmental crisis, it brings us to the essential question: Is it more feasible to stop poor nations from developing, or to change behavior of the rich ones?

I don’t know the answer to the question, but it is important. It will be interesting to see the story unfold.

That Spam and This Spam

So last night, when an email from an unknown sender arrived, like 99% of the daily emails I receive, my smart hand went on the auto-deletion path without consulting my brain. A moment later I remembered having caught a glance at my name in that email, which was spelled wrong with an extra 'e,' and I went for a second look in the trash folder. The email, as it turned out, came from an international literary magazine that wanted to pay $250 for my essay they were publishing. It – the email, not my essay – had "bank details" in its subject line, a perfect spam title.

I empty the trash everyday. My husband does it once a month. Who's the smart one?

Ten minutes earlier, I had found on Laila Lalami's blog a hilarious author scam story and emailed the link to my husband. We were sitting across a coffee table from each other by the fire, a laptop on each one's lap. "Read it," I said to him. He temporarily broke away from whatever code he was writing, and clicked his inbox. "I didn't get anything from you," he said. We waited for a while. Still nothing. "Check your trash," I said, and he found it there right away. He had deleted it the first thing as he opened his inbox. He blamed me, "Why did you title it 'funny'?" Because it was.

Apparently the spammers have used up all the common title vocabulary.

On a side note, when I was young in China and meat was scarce, a can of Spam made a favorite dish. We cooked it in cabbage soup, and it was delicious. Or so I thought until I came to America. One day a few years ago I bought a can – after forgetting about it for two decades – from a supermarket in Chinatown. The Classic Spam looked exactly the same, and with a certain nostalgia, I cooked it in cabbage soup, exactly the same way from my childhood memory. It tasted so awful I ended up dumping the entire pan of soup. Not sure which was changed, Spam or I.

If you did not already know, here is the history of how that Spam devolved into this spam.

------------

P.S.: For your entertainment, here's a partial list (sorted alphabetically) of spam titles came this morning:

· A Beach Bum Made $237,000 from His Lap Top
· A realistic $250K First Year Income potential.
· Add up to 4 inches to yours penis 3d45
· Are you a real man?
· belief notwithstanding
· BIG CAS1N0 Party BIG JACKPOT CA$H DOLLARS!!
· bissette
· Celebrate a New Year with an unforgettable night of love!
· Cheap and excellent software - too good to be true?
· cheap oem soft shipping //orldwide
· Christian Values Company Expanding Nationally
· Corel Draw
· Estelle Aubrey
· Exquisite Replica
· Find financial aid for your online education
· For xje
· Grow an anaconda out of your trouser snake!
· Intensify her sensations by increasing your love stick!
· Last night, for the first time ever, a porcupine showed up at our
· Lowest price worldwide
· Msn money
· No doctor visits
· No Erectile Dysfunction
· PharmaStore
· Prove that you deserve better s'e_x!
· punch parishioner
· Rep|icaWatches OmegaRolexBreitlingBvlgari GucciLongines & all at LOW-PRICE... 2jsfgg2j3omz71vezs
· Shop and compare coverages
· Software
· SOLD OUT -LIMITED OFFER-Looking for perfect gift? Buy Rolex 1ia
· The Sexiest Gift for Your Music (Lover)
· The volume of your male meat is absolutely essential!
· Tiiiiiiw
· Via.gra Email from ED.
· You won't need to furtively put socks into your trunks anymore!