Authority and the Individual

By Bertrand Russell, 1949

I am still reading the book, but one of the things which really inspire me push me to drop some notes first.

It is under the chapter of "The Role of Individuality". It talks about the value of individuality, how it changes through evolution of human.

In the beginning of human history, we considered the usefulness and how we struggled for basic living. At that time, our art was found in the tools, which meant they were dependent.

After several centuries we stepped into the Renaissance. We started to do something on an impulse. We started to appreciate art and the intrinsic value of things. We built up the art of life. For sure there were slaves, serfs and peasants, who were unable to have those luxuries - luxury was for aristocrats, bureaucracy and royal families. Yet many of us started to learn appreciation.

Time goes fast. After Industrialization and when we come to now, we have mass production. Primitive production, handicrafts or fine works have been substituted by mechanized products gradually. Capitalism slowly expanded to most countries - one could not deny that the so-called communist country China is now growing to be one of the largest capitalists.

We have started to forget the intrinsic value of a product, say a car, but we concern its monetary value. We have started to forget how it was made, how amazing the technology was involved during the production and how many people were involved to make a car - in fact most of the steps were now done by machines. We concern about how much the car is cost - the more expensive it is, the more precious it is.

Not only a product, but similar case is also applied to man. How much does one earn monthly? Does he/she have to work very hard to make money? How many hours per week does he/she have to work? People become materialistic. This change is obviously miserable. Money determines.

The writer gave an example about a scientist. He might have wanted to do a research on something, but owing to insufficient capital he had to do something else, which was sponsored by a company/the government/someone. He was no longer to be able to work independently, "but essentially part and parcel of some large organization." I agree the change is "very unfortunate". The writer said "for the things which a great man could do in solitude were apt to be more beneficial than those which he can only do with the help of the powers that be." Very pathetic. It becomes difficult to succeed in influencing human affairs, as we are now slaves as well by means of money. Slave of money, sounds like a shame.

The most impressive part in this chapter is what the writer said - "we know too much and feel too little. At least we feel too little of those creative emotions from which a good life springs."

We become realistic, materialistic and merciless. When the modern world brings us enormous things, we lose or forget probably the same amount of things. The writer Russell continued - "in regard to what is important we are passive; where we are active it is over trivialities." I think of Le Petit Prince. The prince said most people forget the meaning of life, the importance of manner and the essence of heart. They are the same. Russell talked about life - "if life is to be saved from boredom relieved only by disaster, means must be found of restoring individual initiative, not only in things that are trivial, but in the things that really matter."

One of the things I think that make man differ from most animals is we know appreciation. We feel, we think and we control. Certainly we have no choice to earn our living, yet I guess this is not the only meaning. Even we have a beautiful vase, it is valuable only when we really know the value.

Nevertheless after all this, I inevitably think pessimistically. However hard we insist on our faith or our beliefs, it seems that we are always unavoidably worn by time and experiences gradually.

Oil reserves

Recently I read some news about discovery of oil reserves in Australia and Cambodia. The latest piece is from Bangkok Post. (http://www.bangkokpost.com/
breaking_news/breakingnews.php?id=112371)

Long time ago a piece of news said the Earth only remains enough coal and oil for us to use 30 years more. After that we will have no resources of those.

After knowing the new oil reservoirs, I am thinking that it is probably good to find new oil owing to the insufficient supply, but on the other hand we speed up the exploitation of the Earth resources.

I wonder, whether we are accerlating the progress of using up all the reserves in our planet, or we are discovering more potential reserves for us. Doubtlessly we are using the reserves much faster than the nature can build. It is out of the capacity.

In recent years, sustainability or sustainable development is advocated. If we search in Wikipedia, it will tell you "meets the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs" according to the Brundtland Report, a 1987 report from the United Nations.

Sometimes man tends to be contradictive. We know we have to save for the future, whereas we try to find more resources for us. When we discover, we use them; we do not often save anything. We have not really left time for the nature to recover - clearing large piece of forest, getting as much water as we can, digging as much oil or coal as we can and so on.

Definitely some scientists are developing new technology to meet our needs, and I believe they are doing their best. Nevertheless their pace is far slower than people consuming. That means before a solution is invented, we have already used up all we have and are starving.

The contradictory inspires me to think philosophically. Man tends to understand what it should or should not do, but it does not often follow. We blame ourselves, and sometimes we forgive our faults at the same time by saying this is our nature that we cannot vary. I am not very clear about this - some say we cannot vary our character, so we have to forgive and accept some of our faults, but sometimes we punish the wrongdoers; some say we know our character and defects, that's why we have to improve.

People probably have their own way to cope with their lives, yet there are still some general patterns. It is very interesting to acquaint these patterns, but sometimes it is those patterns that create questions, doubts, matters and problems.

Very hard to understand, yet I still have one question - can we just leave it to an explanation - "this is life"? Does it sound rather irresponsbile and dispirited if we always explain in this way?

Or, in fact we should not think that much, which is even more negative?

I do not think so, when we still have the capacity to go further, do more and discover more.

Child sex

I've read a piece of news about predators seeking child sex. (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?
pid=20601080&sid=a6RbY.ZKJ3CE&refer=asia)

It is estimated that "50,000 children below the age of 18 work in Thailand's sex industry, and many more in neighboring Cambodia." There are many NGOs working on this issue, yet the problem still exists owing to the lack of law enforcement. Probably the government does not take it as a serious matter, or the government in fact could not help. The vicious power behind is probably so strong that the government could not supress, or even worse that the government is part of them.

There are countless ties behind.

One of the terrible things according to the news is the oldest prostitutes are teenagers. It means the other younger ones are only children. It is very hard and painful to imagine their tragic life.

Many social problems exist in contemporary world - especially in less developed countries, and most of them have been lasting for over decades. We all know the problems, yet we are unable to solve them.

Why? In man's world it seems never be possible to live peacefully. This makes something exciting, something interesting, something terrible, something gloomy and so on. I wonder this means life. C'est la vie.

Cambodia is the "worst country" for such crimes. It is one of the least developed countries in South-east Asia. Notwithstanding all those tragedies in this kingdom, this is my dearest lovely country.

Perhaps because all these countries like Cambodia are less developed, everything is more simple, decent and lovable.

Cambodian government withdraws permission to hold beauty pageant

(http://www.canada.com/topics/news/oddities/story.html?id=
a98430fe-5c82-47ca-896f-f271ff1dce83&k=44054)

Cambodian government withdraws permission to hold beauty pageant

Canadian Press

Saturday, August 19, 2006

PHNOM PENH, Cambodia (AP) - Cambodia's government, which earlier agreed to allow a Miss Cambodia beauty pageant this year if the contestants did not bare themselves in swimsuits, has now decided that the event will not be held, an official said Wednesday.

Sim Sarak, a director general of the Culture Ministry, said his ministry has withdrawn permission for the contest after taking into account the views of those opposed to the event.

He said many opinions had been received questioning the propriety and taste of the contest, but he declined to elaborate, beyond stating that critics regarded it as contrary to Cambodian culture and tradition.

Cambodia is predominantly Buddhist and socially conservative. People normally do not talk openly about sex.

The ministry last week informed Planet Communication Ltd., a Cambodian events management company that had planned to organize the Miss Cambodia 2006 pageant, that it was withdrawing permission for the event, said Sim Sarak.

Kem Tola, the company's marketing manager, could not be reached for comment Wednesday.

Last month, before the contest was banned, he said that the company had reluctantly agreed to comply with the requirement that the contestants be modestly attired at all times.

Had the contest been held, the winner would have received a prize equivalent to $1,100 Cdn and likely be nominated to take part in next year's Miss Universe.

Miss Cambodia competitions were held in 1993 and 1995, but not in the intervening period, as the government thought it was a waste of money, said Sim Sarak. He added that swimsuits were also banned from the earlier contests.

© The Canadian Press 2006

The reason of banning beauty pageant may be that discriminate female, and in fact it is understandable for the reason of being a conservative country. Yet the problem is the government changed its mind completely. It is not a kind of child's play, is it?

Counter-terrorism Law

Last night when I was doing an assignment, I read a refereed article about the counter-terrorism law in Australia. The authors compared it with British Terrorism Law and pointed out some terrible findings.

The first finding is Federal and State police are given the power of shooting to kill when they are arresting or detaining the person for an offence. Another finding is control orders can be issued for up to 12 months for adults and three months for children between 16-18 without being charged, tried or found guilty of any offence. The third finding is preventative detention needs judicial review, but the former Chief Justice said it was not more than window-dressing and the judge was "little more than a rubber stamp." - AltLJ Vol. 30:6 Dec 2005

For me one of the things is paradox. While terror is said to doubtlessly harm the peace and be cruel, the power granted to the authority is so large that seems to be out of control. A person can be detained for 12 months in Australia and three years in the US without any obvious evidence of guilty. It is not about violence, but this is like a kind of white terror. The psychological effect that will impose on that person detained for a year or three years is not measurable. If the person is innocence, its whole logic might have been changed during the year of being locked in somewhere. It is not much better than direct violence by the real terrorists.

Peace is not only about stop fighting or stop terror, but it should be truly staying in everyone's mind. We don't have to fear of anybody because no one is going to harm us. Now the authority creates another kind of scary.

That's it.

A leader of Iran's Supreme said, "Your victory was a victory for Islam. With God's help you were able to prove that military superiority is not (measured) in the number (of soldiers), planes, warships and tanks.

Rather, it depends on the power of faith and holy war."

(Source: http://www.thestar.com/)

Victory brings damages, deaths and pain as side effects. There're always winner and loser in a war. While the winner is chosen, the negative impacts are ignored. Innocent common people are ignored. They are affected badly in both physical and psychological aspects. We are all man and should be equal. No one deserves these effects.

Yet, war has never been truly over.

Culture

Before going to the topic, let me introduce myself - I am a Chinese come from Hong Kong (It's not hard to figure out owing to previous entries). I am studying journalism in Hong Kong Baptist University, and currently I am in an exchange programme to Edith Cowan University in Perth, Western Australia.

This gives a little hint why I start to think about culture.

What do you know about Hong Kong? I went to Cambodia in May and stayed there for almost two months, and then I come here. During these days outside my city, I was asked for many times about the handover of Hong Kong sovereignty from Britain to China.

It happened in 1997, which was almost ten years ago. British rule is very far away from me. I was 12 in 1997, not very little that I could remember most things, but ten-year is a long time for most people I think.

Whatsoever. My city's history gives a special feature of many people here - ambiguous identity. After ten years the condition is improved, particularly the new generation. The matter is, we often say we are Chinese, but we would also say we come from Hong Kong instead of China. Simultaneously Hong Kong is part of China. We actually come from China.

The feature, at least for me, leads to another point. We don't very much care about the others' identity. I may know where you are from, but it doesn't very much matter for me. I don't stress on what nationality you are of. I want to know about your country, but I don't regard your origin as very important. I don't always say "a Chinese girl is ...."

I do not often catergorize people as well.

Our culture may bring us certain characters, such as my ambiguity about my identity. However our childhood, our family, our education and our life experience construct our disposition. I guess I ought not to easily think people from a certain origin always do the same thing.

Hong Kong has less wide range of origins than Singapore I think, but still there are many people from various countries. Our history also leads this city to mix up western and eastern culture. Some say Hong Kong is a cultural desert, yet in other way blank means something as well. Desert is also a kind of cultures. Anyway.

People in Hong Kong tend to be easier to accept different things. I enjoy various cuisines, various musics or art. This is an advantage.

Some people stick to their own culture. They probably accept the others, but they may not want to try, may not want to understand and may not even want to know. There may be numerous reasons. They may think themselves superior. They may not be able to understand as they do not have the curiosity. They may not be very adaptive and have inertia. They may not dare to try. Whatsoever, they probably miss the chance to experience some interesting or exciting things.

Last time when I had dinner in a restaurant with the others international students living in the student village, some people talked about the music they have in radio in their countries. Some told the others how wide the music they have in radio, like coming from America or other countries. They are proud of playing American music because it probably means they have a boarder horizon on music.

Sure I understand as it is not a bad thing. I did not join that topic very much that I told only a girl about my city. When they have American and certain European music, in Hong Kong there are musics from all over the world - America, Britain, Europe, Japan, Korea, Taiwan, China, Singapore and local music.

I don't know if I am proud of this, but I didn't try to tell everyone. I have been living in such a city for 21 years, and so I cannot think of any special with this. When people or I think something is already good enough, there must be something better elsewhere. I could never know how wide the world or the view could be.

When we are adapting the others' culture, shouldn't the others adapt ours as well? It may not be compulsory, nevertheless we should confront the others. I am not stressing, but isn't it fair that before we ask for something we need to do something first?

An adaptive quality is a merit, isn't it?

Additionally, there are many cultures. It is always good to know and experience the others on one hand and keep our own culture on the other hand.

The fake leg of Ta Mok

Again, read the followings.

(http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/view.php?StoryID=20060803-125325-1749r)

Rebel leader's fake leg to go on display

PHNOM PENH, Cambodia, Aug. 3 (UPI) -- The artificial leg worn by a deceased Khmer Rouge military commander will be put on public display in Cambodia by his family.

Ta Mok, who was known as "The Butcher" by the ultra-Maoists during the civil war, died last month at the age of 82 before he could be tried for crimes against humanity.

His lawyer, Benson Samay, said Ta Mok had instructed him to keep his leg to take to court if the trial came up after his death, a correspondent for The Telegraph reported.

But Ta Mok's family demanded it back so it could become part of a propaganda museum, and the lawyer agreed to hand it over this week, the report said. The family was reportedly repairing and decorating it for display with other relics of the war that killed an estimated 1.7 million Cambodians.

Ta Mok lost his own leg in fighting in 1975.

© Copyright 2006 United Press International, Inc. All Rights Reserved



The problem is, whether there will be people who want to see a fake leg of a butcher.

I cannot understand how inhuman this guy was and how he could do this. I could hardly imagine how people respect this leg.

It is really annoying... and also very sad as well.