Guns, Germs and Happiness
The question of what is important in life is perhaps as unsolvable as any of the large philosophical issues. However, it remains of interest to try and decipher what humans want, need, and what society actually encourages them to do. Should we place work over pleasure? A job over a family? Of course, most people will say that we need to balance the two necessities, but where is that balance to be placed? Europeans take three times as much vacation as their American counterparts – yet their economies keep running and there is a general pleasantness to being and living on the Continent. Despite their smaller homes, smaller cars, and smaller roads – they outlive Americans, Canadians, and Australians. In fact, if we looked at the hours spent on the job, Europeans are more efficient than Americans. There was a recent rating of countries according to their “happiness factor”; unsurprisingly, developed economies were not at the top of the list – though Europe did top the developed world. The index can be found here:
So should we value a new car every year or spending more time with our children? Of course the choice is never as clear as that. Increased industrialization means more jobs and technology. Technology generates comforts like heating, clean water, and medicine to help us live longer and more comfortably. Which, leads to the point that everything is connected. You cannot go to work without a mode of transportation – which likely pollutes; causing harm to the environment, you, your family and your neighbor. Without relying on the overused adage of the Butterfly Effect and Chaos theory, we need to start appreciating the connections between our actions and the planet’s reaction. So where to draw the line? I think it becomes important to identify what truly enhances our lives and what is simply consumption for the sake of consumption.
In my humble opinion, advertisement and marketing should be, by and large, banned. For the vast majority of people, it incites them to purchase, consume and dispose of items they would not have otherwise acquired – all of which leads to more work. This cycle is what drives capitalism and is one of the main reasons that communism failed – not that I am espousing Marx’s flawed theory. A well-known (but fake) story is of how NASA spent millions of dollars to create a pen that worked in the zero gravity environment of space. In the vast emptiness of space there is no gravity to push the ink downwards and onto the paper. These millions of dollars devoted to R&D produced an impressive engineering feat. More importantly, the money created prototypes, reports, testing facilities, and jobs; feeding the fire of capitalism. The communist Russians used a pencil.
I recently read “Lost Horizon”, written in the 1930s by James Hilton. In this novel, a Tibetan monk of European origin simply stated, “Laziness in doing stupid things can be a great virtue”. This simple statement illustrates what is needed in society – a hesitance to work for the sake of work. On a similar note, it is said that the Army looks for a certain type of person to become officers: lazy, but very smart. The antithesis, hard working and stupid, is detrimental to the Army or private employer. Someone who continues to work without stopping to think whether what he is doing is worthwhile is a horrible thing. Though of use to the tyrant, he is of little use to himself or humanity. On the gates of the concentration camps in Fascist Germany, it stated quite simply, “Arbeit Macht Frei”, or “Hard Work will set you Free”. This statement is quite true – work will set you free. Free from family, free from philosophy, free from emotion, free from creativity and consequently, free from humanity. As a society we must start to realize what kinds of work are needed and what type of work can be avoided.
One will counter argue that unnecessary work is necessary to keep the economy growing and technology improving. Any meddling by social scientists (though I do not believe in that term) and politicians invariably leads to lower production and less “wealth”. To a certain extent this remains valid, but only when we look at wealth in the form of bricks of gold. You can have wealth of emotions, wealth of thought, and wealth of experience – none of which count towards your nations GDP. Waste and consumption of mindless junk – now largely produced in Asia – seems like the underlying cause of pollution (of both the mind and body) and the now-so-chique Global Warming.
Again, a common argument will be, “go tell a poor African or Chinese that they were better off without electricity and running water”. I would never claim that to be true, rather the thrust of my argument is that we must avoid waste so that we can provide for the truly needy. I do not know the numbers, but the quantity of food thrown out by North American restaurants, grocers and consumers on a daily basis is likely sufficient to feed the entire needy population of Africa, South America and Asia. In fact, during my time in Asia, I experienced the “new” wealth of China. In The People’s Republic of China, it is very typical for the nouveau riche to demonstrate their wealth by ordering three times more food than could possibly be consumed by the dinner party. In a country that was starved to death for 50 years, this ability to purchase and throw out is the ultimate demonstration of wealth.
More worrying than the simple tasteless gesture is the illustration of the have-not’s perception of wealth. The Chinese perceive wealth as an ability to waste – and sadly, in most cases throughout the world, this relationship holds true. How can we possibly change this engrained sociological trend? I do not know. Yet it certainly starts with education. All elementary schools should teach moderation and respect for the environment alongside English and Mathematics. We need to create a society of humility, emphasizing respect for the planet and our fellow man.
In the words of American Psycho character Patrick Bateman,
“Well, we have to end apartheid for one. And slow down the nuclear arms race, stop terrorism and world hunger. We have to provide food and shelter for the homeless, and oppose racial discrimination and promote civil rights, while also promoting equal rights for women. We have to encourage a return to traditional moral values. Most importantly, we have to promote general social concern and less materialism in young people.”
Indeed Mr. Bateman. Yet, the true moral of American Psycho is that the truly wealthy are so rich they can throw out human lives – not just food.
The question of what is important in life is perhaps as unsolvable as any of the large philosophical issues. However, it remains of interest to try and decipher what human’s want, need, and what society actually encourages them to do. Should we place work over pleasure? A job over a family? Of course, most people will say that we need to balance the two necessities, but where is that balance to be placed? Europeans take three times as much vacation as their American counterparts – yet their economies keep running and there is a general pleasantness to being and living on the Continent. Despite their smaller homes, smaller cars, and smaller roads – they outlive Americans, Canadians, and Australians. In fact, if we looked at the hours spent on the job, Europeans are more efficient than Americans. There was a recent rating of countries according to their “happiness factor”; unsurprisingly, developed economies were not at the top of the list – though Europe did top the developed world. The index can be found here:
So should we value a new car every year or spending more time with our children? Of course the choice is never as clear as that. Increased industrialization means more jobs and technology. Technology generates comforts like heating, clean water, and medicine to help us live longer and more comfortably. Which, leads to the point that everything is connected. You cannot go to work without a mode of transportation – which likely pollutes; causing harm to the environment, you, your family and your neighbor. Without relying on the overused adage of the Butterfly Effect and Chaos theory, we need to start appreciating the connections between our actions and the planet’s reaction. So where to draw the line? I think it becomes important to identify what truly enhances our lives and what is simply consumption for the sake of consumption.
In my humble opinion, advertisement and marketing should be, by and large, banned. For the vast majority of people, it incites them to purchase, consume and dispose of items they would not have otherwise acquired – all of which leads to more work. This cycle is what drives capitalism and is one of the main reasons that communism failed – not that I am espousing Marx’s flawed theory. A well-known story is of how NASA spent millions of dollars to create a pen that worked in the zero gravity environment of space. In the vast emptiness of space there is no gravity to push the ink downwards and onto the paper. These millions of dollars devoted to R&D produced an impressive engineering feat. More importantly, the money created prototypes, reports, testing facilities, and jobs; feeding the fire of capitalism. The communist Russians used a pencil.
I recently read a book entitled “Lost Horizon”, written in the 1930s by James Hilton. In this novel, a Tibetan monk of European origin simply stated, “Laziness in doing stupid things can be a great virtue”. This simple statement illustrates what is needed in society – a hesitance to work for the sake of work. On a similar note, it is said that the Army looks for a certain type of person to become officers: lazy, but very smart. The antithesis, hard working and stupid, is detrimental to the Army or private employer. Someone who continues to work without stopping to think whether what he is doing is worthwhile is a horrible thing. Though of use to the tyrant, he is of little use to himself of humanity. On the gates of the concentration camps in Fascist Germany, it stated quite simply, “Arbeit Macht Frei”, or “Hard Work will set you Free”. This statement is perhaps not as untrue as one might think – work will set you free. Free from family, free from philosophy, free from emotion, free from creativity and consequently, free from humanity. As a society we must start to realize what work is needed and what type of work can be avoided.
One will counter argue that unnecessary work is necessary to keep the economy growing and technology improving. Any meddling by social scientists (though I do not believe in that term) and politicians invariably leads to lower production and less “wealth”. To a certain extent this remains valid, but only when we look at wealth in the form of bricks of gold. You can have wealth of emotions, wealth of thought, and wealth of experience – none of which count towards your nations GDP. Waste and consumption of mindless junk – now largely produced in Asia – seems like the underlying cause of pollution (of both the mind and body) and the now-so-chique Global Warming.
Again, a common argument will be, “go tell a poor African or Chinese that they were better off without electricity and running water”. I would never claim that to be true, rather the thrust of my argument is that we must avoid waste so that we can provide for the truly needy. I do not know the numbers, but the quantity of food thrown out by North American restaurants, grocers and consumers on a daily basis is likely sufficient to feed the entire needy population of Africa, South America and Asia. In fact, during my time in Asia, I experienced the “new” wealth of China. In The People’s Republic of China, it is very typical for the nouveau riche to demonstrate their wealth by ordering three times more food than could possibly be consumed by the dinner party. In a country that was starved to death for 50 years, this ability to purchase and throw out is the ultimate demonstration of wealth.
More worrying than the simple tasteless gesture is its illustration of the have-not’s perception of wealth. The Chinese perceive wealth as an ability to waste – and sadly, in most cases throughout the world, this relationship holds true. How can we possibly change this engrained sociological trend? I do not know. Yet it certainly starts with education. All elementary schools should teach moderation and respect for the environment alongside English and Mathematics. We need to create a society of humility, emphasizing respect for the planet and our fellow man.
In the words of American Psycho character Patrick Bateman,
“Well, we have to end apartheid for one. And slow down the nuclear arms race, stop terrorism and world hunger. We have to provide food and shelter for the homeless, and oppose racial discrimination and promote civil rights, while also promoting equal rights for women. We have to encourage a return to traditional moral values. Most importantly, we have to promote general social concern and less materialism in young people.”
Tru Dat Mr. Bateman. Yet, the true moral of American Psycho is that the truly wealthy are so rich as to be able to throw out human lives – not just food.
Published on July 13, 2006Taegukgi, Film, Civil War and the Human Mind
Tae Guk Gi is an epic Korean War movie that I believe is one of the greatest war movies ever. It tells the story of two brothers who are sent off to the Korean War. The older brother takes the riskiest missions available in the vain hope that he will be able to send his younger brother home. The war destroys their family and their country. This film is one of the goriest war movies I have seen and a large portion of it is devoted to battle scenes. This begs the question, how much violence in a war movie is too much and how much is too little.
Nota Bene: If you want an in-depth review of the plot, the following site is pretty good: Click Here
A war movie is a war movie because it concerns war. Despite the obvious redundancy of that comment, there is little doubt that battle should be the main thrust of the film, but we must concern ourselves with two aspects of the depictions of battle scenes: 1. Their length vis-à-vis the film’s length and 2. Their depth, meaning the goriness and proximity to a true battle scene. I firmly believe that both elements must be adhered to to the point of the audience thinking it may be slightly too much. If there is any hope of conveying the horrors of war to a popcorn munching audience, the audience must at the very least be made to feel uncomfortable. If the battle scenes are too ‘light’ then the audience may come across with a sugar coated version of the front lines. At the same time, overly gruesome scenes can turn an audience off the more human aspects of war – broken minds, broken families and broken lives.
The next thing that this film does, which I believe is very important, is its presentation of the war for what it was: a terrible civil war backed by foreign powers. Fighting on home soil is something that all North Americans and some Europeans are out of touch with. I have always maintained that it is entirely different to send your armies off to a foreign land as opposed to having the mortars and bullets landing near your childhood home. In civil war, it is the civilians who suffer the most. Families are torn apart, homes are destroyed and friends turn on each other. This film is probably the first one that really shows a civil war.
After watching it for a second time, there is an important scene at the beginning, which foreshadows all that is to come. The soon-to-be wife of one of the brothers shows a bag of barley, which she obtained at a communist rally. She states that it is impossible to get good food and that “she would kill for food like this”. That’s what civil war is. Rarely is it about political ideology or great injustice, more often than not, people switch sides, turn on neighbors and commit unthinkable crimes for food and land. Ideologies and racial tension are the symptoms of resource shortages, not the other way around. A closer look at Rwanda, Sudan, and other conflicts often demonstrate how a few evil people take advantage of a weakened country to manipulate it to their ends.
Another main reason that this film remains so powerful is due to its two main characters. The film revolves around their love and hate for each other. The human mind cannot conceptualize large-scale events very well. We cannot imagine the size of the planet, the atmosphere, the universe, war or genocide. Of course, when we are told for the first time that six million Jews were gazed by the Nazis, we sit back and realize what evil humanity is capable of. However, try and imagine six million unique faces, their families, their fear and innocence and we simply draw a blank. Just as computers have technical limitations, so too does the human brain. We have a limited capacity to imagine and place unique items. Numerous studies confirm this truth; notably, the vast majority of the population can only place six musical tones in order, above six tones, we begin to mess them up and cannot properly arrange them.
This of course does not apply to the musically inclined, but it does apply to most people. On the same note, the majority of the population has difficulty seeing large events on their full scale. For that reason, a story that follows the plight of one person or a single family is much more powerful than a documentary about the entire conflict. On a personal level, I was much more deeply touched when I visited the Anne Frank house in Amsterdam than when I visited the concentration camps in Germany. This film conveys to the full extent the sacrifices that one family member makes to the other in the context of a large conflict and the consequent destruction of his humanity.
One last point that is worthy to be retained from this film is how far we, and the Koreans, have come. In a little of fifty years, South Korea has become a top technological and economic power. The atrocities of this war are unthinkable to today’s youth and we should be thankful for our ignorance. War is perhaps the worst aspect of humanity’s power and must be avoided. Appeasement is not the solution, but education, communication and cooperation is. Communist China has become an international powerhouse out of its own will, full-blow war was not needed to destroy Soviet Russia, India slowly developed its own potential, South Korea is exactly the same geographic dimensions as before the war and the few African countries that are doing okay are the ones which were not privy to colonialism or foreign aid. Political change can only be brought about from the inside and foreign intervention has never worked. For that reason, the Iraq war cannot and will not be brought to a promising conclusion anytime soon. The people of the country are the ones with the keys to success and no foreign power, no matter their might, can overcome that.
This film remains very important because it demonstrates the particular atrocities of a civil war from the perspective of the people who lived it, not the foreign saviors or criminals.
The Tipping Point
I recently read the book The Tipping Point by Malcolm Gladwell. If was pretty cool and disciussed many things of interest. Most notably, this book seems to have fallen into a new category of non-fiction, which I like to call: Synthesization. Meaning, there are these non-fiction books which have been topping bestseller lists despite their serious content. They do not actually present much new “data”, but rather, they take many different studies and synthesize them into a coherent image that is applicable to real life. Such books, which I have recently read are: The Inginuity Gap, The Tipping Point, Collapse, The White Man’s Buden, and The Weather Makers.
They have very broad relevence to society and science. Below is a brief email I sent to the author of Malcolm Gladwell, if you are familiar with the topic. Tell me what you think.
Malcolm Gladwell,
I have just read your book The Tipping Point, and found it quite interesting. What came to mind when reading the section about the Salesmen, Maven and Connectors was the new website called Facebook.com. Much like mySpace and other personal sites it displays peoples lists of friends and shows the different networks that they are part of. But what is of most interest is that some people may have upwards of 300 people listed as friends but have few wallposts, which are comments that are posted by users but are visible to the entire community. It has been said that you judge your love by the amount of people that love you, not the amount of people you love.
This brings me back to the point that as you discussed in your book, Connectors have a knack at making connections with people, but more than that they have knack at making connections that people remember. So some of these people who list 300 friends, but have 50 comments are unlikly to be connectors despite their apparent popularity; whereas someone with 150 friends, but 150 comments may in fact be much more connected. In other words, these people have deeper connections because it is other people who feel a need to contact that one person and not that one person to continuously stay in contact with all his 150 friends.
Another side note that I would have liked to see some case studies about is poverty. As far as I know there have not been any places where a Tipping Point has been reached regarding poverty. Many IMF and World Bank economists claim to be able to start a poor economy on the road to growth by injected an initial supply of capital, framing some key laws and regulations and then letting the country take care of itself. This has never worked despite claims to the contrary. Post WWII Japan took off because of western technology, but the ideas and laws regarding industry were largely home-grown. This failed idea of applying western thought to poor contries is well outlined in the book The White Man’s Burden by William Easterly. So do you think it is possible to apply the theory of the Tipping Point on a large society wide scale, particularly in a society to which you are not native to? Meaning, can you make a third world society sustainable by identifying the Tipping Points of that society with the help of locals and research and then applying your findings to the country as a whole? Just a few thoughts.
Hope your work continues well and that there are more interesting books and articles to come.
Regards,
Jonathan Olivier BRUN
Published on June 26, 2006Wealth and Poverty
The problems that face the average Canadian, American, French or any western citizen are rarely life threatening or of great proportions. Long ago are the days when people were genuinely worried about their security, food, or their shelter being taken from them. There remains tremendous poverty in the western world, children who go to school hungry and face aggression and violence in their neighborhoods, homes and schools. While we cannot forget the less fortunate, we must cherish what we have built. By and large, we have developed as a society to such a point, that the thought of being drafted for war, waiting in bread lines or being sent to prison is a thought only entertained at the movies.
Society is approaching a point where nearly everyone was born in a post-WWII world. And while there have been wars since, non have demanded the sacrifices that were needed to defeat fascism. My generation’s main concerns are the cars they will own, jeans they will wear and the size of their homes. Complaints are so disproportionate with the situation it is difficult to comprehend. The past fifty years have been the best in human history. Never has such a period of decadence and stability been accessible to such a large percentage of the population.
We need to remind ourselves of this truth everyday. When we forget the lack of historical precedence, we lower ourselves to the level of materialism, superficiality and irrelevance. I do not propose that we give up our nice, safe cars, cottage homes or all-inclusive trips to Tijuana; only, that we understand that in our daily lives we are rarely in a situation that is either serious or worth fighting over. Of course we still get cancer, perish in accidents, lose family, go bankrupt and face serious issues; but on a general level, our society has a stability and level of wealth never before seen in the history on mankind.
We must cherish the family we have, the friends we know and avoid confrontation over who gets the front seat, the best table at the club, or the new toy. We, as a society, need to stop complaining about the small problems we may have and start solving the big ones. I will never propose complacency and I will be the first to tell you that our current consumption level and lifestyle is not sustainable.
It is therefore our responsibility to future generations to solve our real problems; degradation of the environment, human rights, and most importantly, education. We have the technology and the manpower to accomplish great things if only we did not spend the time we do dwelling on consumption, the noise of your next-door neighbor, the friend who said something stupid. Education on matters such as environment, homelessness, domestic violence, and other social issues should have a place along our children’s English, Math and History classes. It is not enough to teach the past, we must inform them of the necessary steps to conquer our future.
Developing countries such as China and India will never see the level of wealth that we enjoy in Canada. The simple mathematics of resources dictates that we cannot all have cottages, two cars, and unlimited drinking water. However, with proper technology and better social education, these western privileges will be accessible to many people. What I hope to confer from this brief piece is that we must take everything with a grain of salt. When you get upset of a friend’s intonation or language, a bad driver, or a impolite bank teller; take a breath and think not of a child starving in Africa, but rather of the security and wealth that our western society has. In our world, our problems are not of the most dangerous nature and in many cases, it is all just a game.
Published on February 26, 2006Looking Back on My Middle Kingdom
I once read that if you stay in China for a week you can write a book; if you stay for a month, you can write an essay; if you stay for six months, you can write a paragraph; if you stay for a year you can write a sentence, and any longer, you can’t write anything at all.
I very much feel this is true, once you have stayed in China for a prolonged period you realize how complex it is. A quick glance, and you may think you have identified some key differences, but when you look closer you realize that it is not that simple.
I have wanted to go to China ever since I started reading about its emergence 5 years ago, while still in CEGEP. I knew I had to find a way to go so that I could experience the most possible with the smallest incurred cost. When I finally made it to China, I was asked by my friends if I had a “culture shock” when I arrived in China, the truth is I think I was well prepared mentally and my largest “culture shock” was actually when I got back to Montreal. I knew about the poverty and the injustice in China, but what amazed me was how kind and welcoming even the poorest of people could be when we sat down to talk with them. At the base, all humans have common desires; security, love, and comfort.
After seven months in China you realize how petty any problem you could have in Canada is. I have never worried about getting food, or escaping the police, or being confined to a life on a factory line. I genuinely feel that most people should travel to a third world country to truly see how the majority of the world lives.
I had the luxury of traveling all over China for work and for vacation. The country is vast and diverse and in many ways, cannot be grouped into one greater China. Many of the more remote areas are barely under the control of the central government and it is difficult to imagine a high level of devotion to the party. What this leads to, is an appreciation for what we have achieved in the western world, our complex institutions, respect for the law and our relative equality of living standards. Before leaving the developed world, you tend to take this for granted and assume that it is relatively simple to build such said institutions, when in fact, it is remains the greatest challenge any developing nation faces.
On a more personal level, I spent most of my free time with individuals who were significantly older than I. Most of my friends were 27 to 30 years of age, and without exaggerating, time spent with that age group will inevitably change the perspective of a 22 year old. Their life experiences, personal accomplishments, and responsibilities altered my view of what it takes to be successful. In China, I met more adventurous, more daring types of people than I met on my jobs in Timmins or Dunkerque (my previous two work terms). These people push you do more, move faster and work harder. I plan to go on more trips, experience more cultures and keep pushing hard.
It remains very difficult to quantify the effects that China had on me, but there is no doubt that it changed me for the better. I will likely return thanks to my positive experience and my base of Mandarin skills that I have acquired. Many things that I expected to find in China, I did not, and many that I did not expect, occurred.
Published on January 27, 2006