A Letter to a British MP

Dear Mr. Gilbert

I am unaware as to whether you voted for or against an attack on Syria last week. I am sure, though, that you are well aware of the fact that the chemical weapons pretext is being used in the same vein as the Gulf of Tonkin incident and the Iraq WMD debacle. The only difference is that the truth is known before the fact: Russia has produced irrefutable evidence to the UN that the sarin used in the attack cannot have come from the Syrian military and the rebels have admitted to misusing sarin provided by Saudi Arabia in the recent attack on Aleppo. 

Thus, as a British Citizen and a descendant of a St. Austell family, I urge you to take or maintain a stand against the planned attack that clearly only serves the corporate interests benefiting Mr. Cameron et al. A British attack on Syria can only escalate violence and human rights abuses in that sovereign nation. 

I urge you, in coming debates and votes on the issue, to consider an important question and encourage your fellow MPs to do the same: are you a human or a corporation?

Respectfully,

Dylan James Lawson Brown B.Soc.Sci(Hons)

Pluribus et Unum, Daggarook en Kakpraat

When I lived in Kochi, I was visited by a playwright who was doing research for a future production. Her topic: South Africans living in Japan. This got me thinking about my place here, as a citizen of a nation so heterogenous that calls itself "Rainbow", living in a land so culturally uniform that its ethnic and linguistic homogeneity exceeds 98%.

It has been nearly a year and a half since her visit, and since then I have spent a nearly equal amount of time in each country, letting this distinction set in. The raison d'etre for the job I am currently doing for Matsuyama City through CLAIR (Council of Local Authorites for International Relations) can be summed up in one word: "internationalization". But for me as a South African, it is more than just about helping Japan to upgrade its cultural interface with the western world. It is about being a representative for an entirely different mode of thought and way of being.

Let me illustrate by sketching a comparative outline of the two countries. South Africa is roughly three times the size of Japan, with slightly over one third the population. It borders six other countries, while Japan has no borders anywhere in its archipelago. It has eleven official languages; Japan, one. The South African religiously inclined can choose between Islam, Hinduism, more than seven different types of Christianity and a host of indigenous animistic religions. The 98% of Japanese who aren't Christian can choose between Shintoism and Buddhism, and often choose both, since they are not mutually exclusive. In essence, South Africa is the picture of diversity, Japan the poster-child of uniformity.

But heterogeneity vs. homogeneity is only the most obvious difference. Orientals and Occidentals think differently. In the west, individuality, at least culturally, is protected, encouraged and highly valued. In the east, the opposite is true: individuality, while not discouraged or devalued, is secondary to the collective. This is embodied by the relative prominence of hierarchy. Deference to authority is embedded in the Japanese language. This makes it a particularly difficult language to learn, and can pose problems for the foreigner who is not sure whether to address up, down or across the linguistic hierarchy in unfamiliar social situations. Coversely, the active socioeconomic promotion of previously disadvantaged and oppressed groups as well as the vigorous culture of protest and aversion to echoes of the apartheid past in South Africa turns the concept of hierarchy almost into an anathema. This dichotomy of individual and collective, combined with those of equality and rank, and variety and sameness, places South Africa and Japan at extreme opposite ends of an archetypal spectrum.

My job is thus not just to teach English and represent my country, but to bridge a conceptual chasm, with my mind on one end of the gap and my body and contemporary lived experience on the other. I have to show that engaging with the world requires much more from the Japanese than just learning its lingua franca. It entails cultivating an understanding that, contrary to its experience with the USA, engaging with the other requires more of a paradigm of equality than one of superiority vs inferiority; that the experience of diversity serves more to enrich than to threaten Japanese cultural identity, and that those in the west can be better understood with awareness of the relative sanctity of the individual over the collective. Moreover, I have to bring back home, whether through means like this blog or through embodied paradigms upon my return to South Africa or other western countries I am connected to, lessons from this side. These are lessons from a country whose society has been shaped by a series of natural and man-made disasters of devastating magnitude which kill tens of thousands at a time. Japanese people do not just know how to live in densely populated spaces, they know how to recover when those spaces are utterly destroyed. These societal traits were admirably demonstrated in the aftermath of the triple disaster of March 11th 2011 and stood in stark contrast to the way people in Louisiana behaved toward each other after Hurricane Katrina in the USA. Politeness, deference, notions like "reading the air" (ascertaining the nature of social interactions before participating) and "public face" vs. "private face" (knowing when, where and how to appropriately express emotion) go hand in hand with a moral code and a sense of civic duty instilled in the public school system from an early age to foster a resilient, productive and peaceful society.

While it is important for Japan and South Africa to remain on either end of the spectrum as respective exemplars of unity and diversity, it is also important for those of us from either country, suffiently familiar with our own culture to be representative, yet sufficiently marginal to get by for long periods in the other, to make the exchange. In doing so, we not only foster intercultural understanding, but help to resolve an important dichotomy in thought, easily encompassed by any armchair philosopher, but extremely difficult to bring forth into the world of lived experience. South Africans in Japan need, and are especially well positioned, to think with both eastern and western minds, to see the equality while participating in the hierarchy, to be individuals while functioning in the collective and to represent diversity in a homogenous context. While being the interface between such challengingly distant archetypes, we are priming ourselves and by extension the world around us to help develop a more syncretic approach to other troublesome dichotomies like science and the humanities, first and third world, male and female; ultimately, and all-encompassingly, yin and yang, for we are on the very cusp. And this world is in dire need of a union of opposites.

Today's topic is something which has provided clarity of vision, is called upon in troubled times and works tirelessly and thanklessly, sweeping aside that which threatens us with disaster: The windscreen wiper. Sometimes we forget the importance of the little bits of rubber that protect us from fluids that can mean the difference between life and death.

The windscreen wiper was invented by Mary Anderson in 1903. Well, all she really did was come up with the idea and then get somebody else to design it, then take all the credit. She was told by the company she asked to market the idea for her that "we do not consider it to be of such commercial value as would warant our undertaking of its sale". Serves her right I say. I bet those guys would feel like idiots if they knew that a hundred years later the Bosch corporation in Belgium alone churns out 300 000 of the things every day.

A windscreen wiper blade is held in place by a structure known as a whippletree, the kind of ridiculous name reserved for very important things that nobody thinks about, like uvulas (that thing that dangles from the back of our mouths) and aglets (those bits that keep the ends of shoelaces together). The whippletree is connected to the car by a long arm, and since windscreen wipers are a legal requirement in most countries, every time you go for a drive in the rain you have the long arm of the law in front of you. Waving a blade in your face. On a whippletree.

Don't ask.

Presence

Things have changed pretty drastically over the past few years; within our own lives and in the outside world. The Earth rumbles and shudders just as you would with your skin teeming with so many parasites sucking from your being. Upheaval is everywhere.
I'm sure you have your own story to tell, of how you or those you know have been affected by the inevitable global recession, crime, war or disaster. Mine goes like this: Almost a year ago, I walked away from a very comfortable life. An easy job, a beautiful relationship, a house in the country, a nifty car and an enviable schedule. I had reached the event horizon of an unsustainable situation. Within a few days I was sleeping on a friend's couch, single, bewlidered and on the other side of the world.
But in a matter of months, everything has changed again. I have been a researcher, set builder, production assistant, student, editor and a pizza delivery guy. Now I am back in Japan, busier, riding my bicycle between challenging appointments in the city. I am learning to accept that my partner of five years now lives with another man in another country. We will likely never see each other again. On Monday I was in London. Tuesday, Kuala Lumpur. Wednesday, Osaka. Yesterday morning I gave a speech to a hundred children. In Japanese. That evening I was in a classroom with people from Indonesia, America, the UK, Australia and China. I had supper at a Nepalese restaurant with people from Canada, Ireland and Jamaica. To say that life is a blur would not do justice. It feels more like a fruit salad.
Surprisingly, I feel fine. I have stumbled across a mental faculty that helps me still my noisy brain, my monkey-mind filled with the chatter of conditioned responses and if-then scenarios. It is Presence, and we all have it, to some degree. Another name for it is Awareness, something which exists neither in the past nor the future, but in the all-encompassing now. I have heard it said that there is nothing to prove that we haven't arrived at the present moment preformed with ready-made memories, that the past never happened in the way we presume. I don't give this idea much credit, but I am in no position to discount it. Because all we can really know is right here right now, and our proof for this is in our direct conscious experience of it, whatever it may be: an arrangement of atoms, a computer generated matrix, an idea in the mind of God, all or none of the above. Descartes thought, therefore he thought. He made an assumption that existence could be derived from thinking. But thinking is an inevitable consequence of being alive and having a brain. I am, therefore I think. I Am/To Be requires nothing but awareness. Not even thought. Much less a cartesian distinction between mind and body, for these are functions of each other. Awareness is that which observes thought. And I have a suspicion that it pervades the universe. Rather than flail around labouring the point trying to tie this up, I will call upon the eloquence of R Buckminster Fuller: "I live on Earth at present, and I don't know what I am. I know that I am not a category. I am not a thing—a noun. I seem to be a verb, an evolutionary process—an integral function of the universe."

The Secret SOTU

John Effer, Foreign Policy in Focus contribtor, recently composed the State of The Union Address as what would be going through Obama's head, rather than what he would be reading off the teleprompter. I had to repost!

I feel entirely qualified to look into the president's eyes to get a sense of his soul. Here's what I believe President Obama will be thinking as he reads off the teleprompter:

I stand before you tonight to say that in my next two years in office I will focus like a laser beam on the economy, to make sure that America is competitive, that we are growing, and that we will create jobs not just for today but for the future.

Well, I had to say that, didn't I? Frankly, I wish the unemployment rate was not at 9.1 percent, that Congress had passed a larger stimulus package followed by a job creation bill, and I didn't have to stand before the American people and pretend that I can change the economy during the rest of my term. The Republicans don't want the economy to improve over the next two years because that would kill them at the polls. The more people suffer, the more they vote tea party. So the next two years, on the congressional side, will be all about deficit reduction rather than preventing the economy from going into a deflationary spiral. Don't look to Congress for help with jobs, people! Trying to create jobs with no federal money is like fighting a gun battle with a knife.

Honestly, I'd rather talk to you all tonight about foreign policy. That's where I can excel. I don't have to deal with crazy Republicans or back-stabbing Democrats. I can just behave like an executive should behave – decisively. Look how I handled the recent state visit with Chinese leader Hu Jintao. Sure, there was lots of blah-blah-blah, but in the end I extracted $45 billion in Chinese investments, which translates into 235,000 jobs. It's a sad comment on American politics that it's easier to enlist Beijing's help for job creation than to get Congress to pony up the funds.

What I really like doing is going abroad, meeting with foreign dignitaries, and making landmark speeches. People in other countries don't ask me about jobs, don't treat me like I'm some glorified employment counselor. As soon as I leave the country, I can talk about the big picture. I can talk about the abolition of nuclear weapons. I can talk about new engagement with the Muslim world. It's a shame I can't do that in a State of the Union address. I have to stick to the economic numbers, like I'm the Accountant-in-Chief.

What really gets my goat is that when I do go abroad, the U.S. press can only focus on the little things – did I bow correctly, whose hand did I shake. I scored a deal with Medvedev on arms control. I managed to improve relations with India without upsetting Pakistan. We were able to put together a government in Iraq. I won the Nobel Peace Prize, for crying out loud! And the press goes after Michelle for touching the Queen of England's shoulder? Tell me: if we were white, would they pull that nonsense?

The world's people are hungry for a new kind of American leader. But back home, a quarter of all tea party sympathizers think I'm the anti-Christ, literally! I've continued almost all the major elements of the Bush counter-terrorism policy. We increased drone attacks in Pakistan. We surged in Afghanistan. We kept in place extraordinary rendition and endorsed military tribunals. And somehow, all of this translates in the minds of an appalling number of Americans into my being…Muslim.

Then there are the progressives. I never promised to withdraw U.S. troops from Afghanistan. They greeted my surge plan as if it were some great betrayal. I said all along that we were fighting the wrong war in Iraq and we should shift our attention to the right war in Afghanistan. Sure, I prefer diplomacy to war. For one thing, it's cheaper. But I'm no pacifist. We'll start pulling out troops from Afghanistan in July, and I'm emphasizing that in this speech. But as any strategist knows, you have to put down cover fire before withdrawal, and that's what the surge is all about.

Meanwhile, we haven't gone to war with Iran or North Korea. True, relations with those countries haven't exactly improved. But I haven't given any easy ammunition to the right by "appeasing" those countries or risked overextending our military capabilities by attempting more aggressive measures.

I'd love to talk about climate change and renewable energy and trade policy. I'm a wonk at heart. But I learned during the campaign that Americans are not interested in the details. They're like consumers who buy complicated electronics, don't bother to read the instruction manuals, and then complain that things don’t work. They want me to fix the economy like they want the plumber to fix the leaky faucet or the electrician to repair the porch light. At our December press conference after the tax deal, I let Bill Clinton handle all the details of the package with the press. Bill's better at that, anyway. People don't feel he’s lecturing. Maybe it's his accent.

After the attack in Tucson, some Democrats and Republicans are sitting side by side tonight in the chamber. Don't be fooled by this show of temporary affection. The next two years are going to be ugly. So, even though I'm not getting into the weeds with foreign policy in this speech, look for me to focus on international relations in the second half of my term. Like I said, I like to travel. And frankly, Afghanistan and Pakistan are looking a lot safer these days than Washington.

Thank you. I'd better add that God bless stuff or else even more Americans will think I'm Muslim. And good night.

Hippie Killing Machine

I recently found out that President Obama has announced the release of the new F/A 18 Hornet strike fighter that runs on a blend of conventional jet fuel and biofuel. The first flight, scheduled for Earth Day, will burn several thousand pounds of biofuel derived from the Camelina Sativa plant, a close cousin of Cannabis Sativa, an illegal plant in the USA and much of the world. The aircraft has been dubbed the "Green Hornet", even though it is the most prodigious fuel burner of all US naval aircraft.

I trawled the web to find some fuel consumption stats to compare them with, say, a fleet of hundreds of humvees tearing down the road at full throttle, but alas, such information appears to be classified. Needless to say, this thing's engines are thirsty. It is therefore hardly surprising that Mr. Obama, in his prudence, has paid lip service to the benefits derived from making this thing burn plants that are a few weeks, rather than a few million years, old.

That said, hasn't anyone noticed the blatant subversion of the ecological movement by labelling this thing 'green' and launching it on Earth Day (when it will fly around and add several tons of CO2 to the atmosphere)? It is a killing machine. If it was plugged frontways into your house it would drain it of air in less than a second, and backwards, in just as much time, fill it with more than enough noxious gas to kill your entire family. And yes, even when it's running on biofuel.

This is part of a pattern that George Orwell first brought to our attention. In the same speech, Obama actually said the words "clean" and "coal technology" in sequence. He also said "We will not be guided by political ideology but by scientific evidence" when referring to expanding offshore oil drilling. Last time I checked, ramping up fossil fuel production meant bringing ecological collapse that much closer and an obvious nod to the oil cartels which actively squash (by means of coersion and murder) real clean technologies (the pefectly viable kinds that run on water, geokinetics and sunlight and produce no pollution).

The teabaggers (bless their misguided souls) are right on one thing. Obama is a liar (it comes with the job). But remember, he is just a mouth. A puppet. He does the bidding of others, hidden behind his charisma.

We, as people who would like to leave a healthyish planet for our children to inherit, can subvert these hidden monsters dressed as men by refusing to buy their bullshit. We create our own truth thank you. We create our own intentions. We are insulted by such oxymorons as 'a greener military' and 'fighting for freedom'. What a load of crap. We envision a future in which these monsters and the machinations of their war factory are exposed for all to see. Manufactured enemies and conflicts will then have no sustenance, and war itself will die.

How to Recognize a Globalist Agenda When it Slaps You in the Face

The nomination and awarding of the Nobel Peace Prize to Barack Obama has been met around the world with expressions of disbelief, confusion and incredulity. Rightly so. After all, how can the figurehead (I hesitate to say leader) of the world's biggest arsenal of nuclear weapons, world's largest and most complex military, world's most beliggerent country which not only overtly invades sovereign nations on flimsy pretexts, but covertly supports bloody coups and insurgencies elsewhere, be even mentioned in the same sentence as the word 'peace'?

The Nobel Peace Prize, as most of you know, originated from the last will and testament of Alfred Nobel, the Swedish inventor of dynamite. Although dynamite was not used on battlefields during his lifetime, he knew that it would be, and was so appalled by this that in mitigation he called for the establishment of a prize that should go to "the person who shall have done the most or the best work for fraternity between the nations and the abolition or reduction of standing armies and the formation and spreading of peace congresses."

Despite the fact that Obama was nominated for this prize less than two weeks into his term, there is one glaring point that should have disqualified him immediately. He has increased the amount of troops in Afghanistan, and has authorised the use of drones to fire rockets into villages in nuclear armed Pakistan, killing people who had no idea of what is even going on. This creep into Pakistan is a spreading of the fiery part of America's global war on terror (WW3). There goes "reduction of standing armies" and "fraternity between nations".

To be fair, Obama himself said that he did not think he had done enough to deserve the award, or to be in the company of the transformative figures who had won it before him, though he did not have the conscience to decline the prize, as Le Duc Tho did in 1973. His Cairo address marked a shift in America's attitude to the Arab world, at least rhetorically. The same can be said of the disapproving murmurings about Israel's Apartheid style treatment of Palestinians and Nazi Liebensraum style expansionism. Talk. And talk is cheap. Iraq is still hell, Guantanamo is still open, the atmosphere is still the USA's gaseous garbage dump, poor people in America are still denied healthcare. More proof that campaign promises are the poorest kind of promise. Symbols say more than talk. Take a look at the presidential seal of the United States. The star of David made up of thirteen stars hovers above an eagle grasping a thirteen leaved olive branch in one claw and thirteen arrows in the other. The Cairo address may have appeased some Arabs and Muslims, but most of them know which star this bird is following and that its not going to let go of those arrows any time soon.

So who decided to award this warlord the world's heretofore most respected peace prize? Nominations are only accepted from previous prize winners, a very small section of the world's intellectual elite, and the world's political elite. The committee is comprised of five people, all of them members of the Norwegian parliament. The chairperson is Thorbjørn Jagland, also secretary general of the Council of Europe. Although not a member of the EU, Norway is a member of the European Economic Area and complies with many EU policies and stipulations for this reason.

This is just a rough sketch of the visible power structure of who decides where the prize goes, but take a step back , and try to describe this whole idea of war-spreader-gets-peace-maker-prize in one word...

... That's right. Orwellian. And Orwell's famous maxim from 1984 immediately springs to mind:

"WAR IS PEACE. FREEDOM IS SLAVERY. IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH"

And you are watching Big Brother. Do we need a bigger wake up call than this to show us that there is a globalist agenda at work here, conflating archetypes and attempting to subvert our very ideas of what peace, freedom and strength mean? That the war of terror is a war on Terra, the very consciousness of our planet and the basis of our remaining sense of human unity? That these would-be world controllers not only control our parliaments, media, industry and 'healthcare', but also seek to control our minds?

I think they've dropped the ball on this one though. Awarding Obama the Nobel Prize for Peace is a step too far. They've jumped the gun. Too many people are standing up and saying "WHAT!?" and the hits on David Icke, Michael Tsarion, Drunvalo Melchizedek and Credo Mutwa's websites just keep soaring.

Are you buying the lie?