Anniversary Issue

Recently, we at the Kartika Review celebrated our first anniversary publication of our Winter Issue.  You should check it out, especially since there aren't any other national journals out there that are committed to publish Asian and Asian Diasporic related works.  This is a great issue to get started, if you haven't already.  My personal favorites are Shome Dasgupta's "Anklet," and Julie Wan's "Deconstructing Babel."

http://kartikareview.com/?portfolio=issue-04-winter-2008

LA Land

I have to say, the weather's not bad and it's really comfortable right now in Long Beach, but I really do need to find friends in this area and get out of the house!

So much work to do over break, it must be nice to have finals done before going home.

Free Bird(s)

The best times for blogging sincerely must be between 2:00 a.m. and 5:00 a.m. in the morning, when hardly anyone else is up and there's nothing going on except the plethora of thoughts and memories running through your head.  Good music going through iTunes too :-), I must add (thanks Lynyrd.)  

What a year this year has been.  I'm working on the editorial for Kartika, and I can't seem to get the reflective and excited tones right, although only I know how hard I've been trying :-).  Well, perhaps now you do too.

But, it's crazy to me how much stuff has gone on this year, on a personal and global scale.  I'm really astounded by the experience that 2008 has offered us: hope, inspiration, tragedy, community, challenge, memories.  

As 2008 winds down to a close, I hope you will reflect with me what has happened.  I would be really sad if I didn't let myself soak in what's happened, good and bad.

We are, at once, free birds and wandering souls.  

I'm Back! (On the Market)

Took my first dip in the stock market since spring.  I'm excited, and pretty bullish too.

Cheers!

Analyzing Blogs

I'm using this site to analyze your blog :-).

Wow SOTA!

I'm so proud of my high school!  I'm beaming!!  This is definitely one of my favorite songs, and they do it really well, and it's on youtube!  Man, I honestly really miss high school.  

Traders@MIT

Oh my gosh!  I have some exciting bit of news that will bore everyone else but me.  But it's exciting!

First and foremost, let me introduce the preliminary website for The Laramie Project, still under construction, to you, my best friends.  The website is more than halfway done, with features such as forums, blogs, an insider's look at the production, etc.  It's going to be really amazing!  Please check it out and tell me what you think.  Be critical.  What is uninteresting?  What is unclear?  Do the colors work?  Are there any questions left unanswered?  Is it easy to navigate?  Are you eager for updates at all?  Or is everything just a waste of time?

Secondly, a friend and I entered a trading competition on a whim this past Saturday at MIT, hosted by Traders@MIT and co-sponsored by J.P. Morgan and D.E. Shaw.  We got second place!!  There were over forty teams from Harvard, Princeton, MIT, Wellesley, Columbia, Dartmouth etc. etc., and we got second place!!  I still can't believe it, because I feel like I was the only humanities concentrator there and I was so sure we wouldn't place top five.  The worst part of the competition is the fact that my teammate and I could've placed first, if it weren't for a really big bone-headed move during one of the sections... to the team that won first place!  We lost hella points, and they gained hella that round.  Oh well, it means so much to me though that even though we made the biggest mistake of the competition we could still take second place.  It was sooooo amazing!!!!!!

Good Karma

So, a bunch of us took our little mentees (my mentee's name is Jason, heh) trick or treating this Halloween.  While we made our rounds of Beacon Hill and ate tons of candy, lo and behold there was John Kerry!!

(Jason, my little mentee, was less interested that we were in John Kerry.  He was more taken with the candy!)

Don't forget to vote!!  Also, if you have five minutes, I highly recommend watching this video concerning the Republican mayor of San Diego.  It regards California's Proposition 8, and is very heartwarming to see: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2y05XmZlF44 

Common Casting

Oops!  I still have two more posts on China to go.  But in the meantime, I can't say how awed and happy I am at how this week is going.  First of all, classes are great.  I got into the Social Studies tutorial I wanted ("Citizenship Rights"), and it only has six students!   I'm also getting rid of three Core requirements (Science A: Nanotechnology, Science B: Origins of Knowledge, Lit A: Lives Ruined by Literature), and fourth year Chinese!  Yikes.

But the most amazing thing this week by far has been Common Casting.  This is the week that pretty much all of the Harvard theatrical productions hold auditions for actors.  Ours has been scheduled starting this past Monday to Thursday 9 p.m. to Midnight, and we're on our last night tonight!  We've had amazing turnout, and nothing makes my day better than when an actor shows up and loves the audition, and the play, and is really excited for the production.  Because of the roundabout way that I came to Harvard theater (thank you for your understanding, team!), our team has been flooding the open, house, ethnic, and other email lists encouraging everyone to audition.  We're trying to be as friendly, welcoming and helpful as possible, because sometimes it can be very intimidating to audition in front of three to four strangers, and be judged, you know?

The monologues that we're having people read are Sherry Johnson and her discussion of a separate police officer's death, Romaine Patterson and standing up to Fred Phelps, Aaron Kriefels on discovering the body, and Jedidiah Schultz on how close to home prejudice can be.  All are very moving and heartrending monologues.  The dialogue scenes are the confession of Aaron McKinney with Rob Debree (Male), and the nearly fatal and life-altering event of Reggie Fluty and Marge Murray (Female).  Oh man!!

Personal Asian American Experience?

Just started working on a short 400 word personal article on my "Asian American experience," my first article of this kind. I'm kind of stumped right now. Just wandering around my favorite city hoping for inspiration to hit me. Ideas?

On another note it's good to be home.

7 Days

I can't believe that I only have seven days left before I head home from Beijing. I'm already in the mindset that my wonderful trip here is over, which I have to will myself to get out of this mindset.

The weather has improved a lot these past two days. It's actually comfortably hot instead of just hot and humid. Things are relatively calm in the areas I've been in, no massive crowds compiled on the streets doing anything crazy (which might be exactly what organizers have in mind)- as there would be in my home city.

(With help from friends, namely with their information and guidance) I found a location to buy Olympic tickets and am on track to see China v. Spain tomorrow! So maybe I will get to be a part of this Olympics after all. Well, I suppose if you're here, and hotel rooms are going for a thousand American dollars a day and above, and the most exciting Olympics in recent memory were taking place, you'd have to be a fool to pass up the opportunity to attend.

The only thing that I regret from this trip, which isn't much (so it speaks to what a good time I've been having here) is that I dropped my new US cellphone and my diary somewhere in Beijing. Yea, unlikely to get those back. But oh well!! Hopefully by blogging I'll be able to replace everything that was lost in my diary, and I could always buy a new phone when I return to the States.

One World, One Dream

Kudos to whoever came up with the Olympic motto for 2008, it's a really great one.

CCTV, the government run Chinese media conglomerate, has of course been running Olympic coverage all day. Today while eating lunch, I got to see on television a bunch of Presidents and foreign leaders and their spouses shake hands with President Hu Jintao of China, pause for pictures, and watch the scene repeat itself as hundreds of countries were represented. President Bush gets the award for seeming the most friendly, while President Putin seemed to be a bit tardy (he came in last, and I don't think he was supposed to do that). While these influential leaders walked across the floor, and while we saw some visuals afterwards of their huge lunch reception afterward, I couldn't help but think that although the Olympics are an athletic, nonpolitical event, if these people wanted to, they could really address some serious issues right now, besides determining whether or not to try to use the chopsticks and risk embarrassment, or cut your losses by using a fork and knife from the beginning.



Politics aside, I can't help but be really excited for tonight! It'll just be awesome because the Chinese people and Chinese government have done so much psychologically, physically, financially, politically, etc. etc. to prepare for today. One of my friends has so kindly allowed me the use of a coveted hotel room to host a gathering for me and my friends! Allright China, the world is watching! 中国加油！

I'm Back! (to blogging)

Dear all, thank you for bearing with me while I struggled through this summer in Beijing! I've been so busy with school, with work, with exploring, and with trying to eke out some sleep that I have much to catch up on, now that school and work are largely done.

Beijing has simply been amazing, and I've learned so much just by being here. It's pretty weird to be typing so many words in English now that I've lived my past few months almost exclusively in Mandarin 汉语.

I'm really, really, tremendously excited to finally have time to blog. I feel that I have learned so many new things this summer, and I have been exposed to so many new questions, that I'd be so grateful to have the opportunity to share them and organize my thoughts. I plan on starting right away. Well, time permitting. Now that school and work are over, now's the time to see all the sights and do all the things that need to be done before one leaves Beijing. Beijing is a big modern city after all!

And to all of my dear friends who I haven't seen in so long, I miss you all very, very much from the bottom of my heart. Let's try to meet as soon as possible! I'm back in the Bay Area from August 20th to September 10th, and I'm back in Boston on September 11th.

I hope all of your summers have been all that you expected them to be and more! If not, there's still one month left!

And in other exciting news!! http://www.thecrimson.com/article.aspx?ref=523946 Stem Cell Breakthrough!

Internet Troubles

Unfortunately I cannot update as often or as detailed as I originally hoped! Suffice to say I'll do my best. For some reason, whenever I try to access my blog via jjwongsf.blogspot.com, I can't. I've even tried to follow a google link to my site. I've tried this on my laptop and on my grandparent's laptop, same internet connection though. The web works, but I can't go to my site! Does this mean my blog is blocked? Haha, maybe. This makes me wonder if I've accidentally mentioned a forbidden topic or something. All of xanga doesn't work for me neither. I still get the NYTimes and wikipedia though.

I was able to post this by going to blogger.com/home, and from there access my dashboard. In any case, Beijing is really exciting and really awesome!! I've posted some pictures on facebook. If you're in the area, contact me!! I'm eager to make new friends while I'm here.

Being here is definitely an interesting cultural and economic and personal experience- and I've only been here a few days!! I definitely recommend everyone getting international experience abroad here! Pollution isn't as bad as I thought it would be. I hope to update again soon! As soon as I stop being so lazy.

Update: I can post now, but I still can't access my blog :-P

Going to China

I'm flying out to China from SFO 1:35 p.m. today! This is my first real experience abroad, so I'm really, really excited! Ahh! There are so many people I'm going to miss too, although I know I'm only gone for 2.5 months and I'll get to see everyone when I get back.

I'll try to update as much as I can from the homeland... with pictures too! I hope everyone has a great summer! Keep in touch!

Noncomprehensive List of Things to do in San Francisco

As many of you know, I'm going to be in San Francisco for four days!!

I'm making of list of things to do so I can keep track :), in no particular order:

• Enjoy the Bay Area air
• Sit on a beach
• Watch the Waves
• Chase some seagulls
• Meditate
• Read
  
• Go to Ghirardhelli Square
• Eat Inn-N-Out
• Walk the Golden Gate Bridge
• Visit Fort Mason
• Drink lots of Jamba Juice
• Call Decker from the Ferry Building
  
• Dinner with Anne and Cliff
• See Sarah Lang
• Try to reconcile with an old friend
  
• Visit SOTA! Maybe give a talk.
• Lots of hugs
  
• Explore North Beach and Coit Tower with Lunar
• Eat at Nation's with Taj
• See Indiana Jones with someone
• Ride BART
• Ride MUNI
• Go on a Downtown Adventure
• Chillax at Union Square
• Eat in Chinatown
• Go to Naan and Curry
• Take in the breathtaking views
• Dip my toe into the Pacific Ocean
• Go watch the Sea Lions
• Fisherman's Wharf Stroll w/ my Arturo Fuente
  
• Drive to Twin Peaks
  
• Cheesecake Factory
• Get plenty of Bubble Tea
• Visit my Elementary School
• Visit the Art Galleries
• Go to end-of-the-year Art and Film party
  

I'm also starting the list of things to do when I'm back in August for two weeks and have more time!!

• Finish list 1, if haven't done it
• Do all of list 1 again, if possible
• Visit the De Young
• Visit SFMOMA
• Check out the Asian Art Museum
• Visit to the SFUSD building
• Chill out with all my UC friends who I miss dearly and wasn't able to see cause you guys are lame and are still in school in MAY!
  
• Elementary School Reunion (if I can make it)
• Drive down to Monterey Bay
• Go to Six Flags
• Go to Great America
• Sourdough Chowder Bowl
  
• Find a meadow somewhere and lay in it

End of Sophomore Year

Wow, I cannot believe that I'm already half way through college. It's been both a frighteningly fast and yet exhilarating time. I love it here. Despite the trials and tribulations, I find school to be extremely challenging, rewarding, exciting, and special. I'm really looking forward to next semester's production of The Laramie Project. I had my last final today, and I stayed up until 4 a.m. because I couldn't go to sleep! I was going through every scene in my head, and also coming up with exciting ideas for publicity, outreach, recruitment, and what have you. If you can make it, I really think it'll be worth it, definitely! We're going to work very, very hard to make this production very, very special.

Coming to Harvard, I never thought I'd be so involved in theater. I thought initially that I couldn't go back, because high school was a very special place for me, and in college I'd just study the "practical" things. Well, I've learned that if I'm not happy with the things I'm doing, I should evaluate my activities, and if I'm not happy that means there are some drastic changes that need to be in order. I'm really glad that I've determined that this semester. Teaching and Theater, I think, are things that I expect to be very challenging and yet so rewarding in the upcoming junior year.

I can't believe sophomore year is over!! I need to pack things now, and empty out my room and all its modern art posters, and ... I'm getting pretty sad just thinking about it. Just 7 hours ago, I couldn't wait to be done with my last final. Now I really want to enjoy myself before I leave. I'm sad to go.

I've learned so much these past two years!! Except right now, I've done so much work these past three weeks, with final papers, oral presentations, interviews, organizing, etc. etc. I can think of nothing better to do right now than to waste all my evening playing computer games. I don't expect these posts to be read, but if you're interested, I've posted most of my final papers and presentations that have taken up so much of my life these past few weeks. Maybe someone will learn something that took me hours and hours to write. If any of these topics interest you, I'd love to hear what you have to say! I really do.

One complaint that I know I have is that I wish I had more time to work on these papers. I think that they're good, but I know that I can make them even better if I just had 1) fewer things to do in so short a time frame and/or 2) more time in which to do the things I had to do.

Anyways, here they are, in no particular order:

Social Studies Paper on Minorities in Today's Society using Beauvoir, Freud, and Foucault as a basis for discussion.

New York City Department of Education from 2002 to 2008 School Reform Analysis. This was a group project, so both the presentation and paper are jointly authored by Sarah Kasok, Jon Sproul, and Jason Wong.

Los Angeles Unified School District Urban Education Reform up to 2008 Analysis.

Statistical Analysis on Home Environment and Income on School Behavior.

P.S. We broke 3000 hits!

Social Studies Final Paper

Modeling Minorities: An Examination of the Causes and Effects of Majority and Minority Power Relations
by Jason Wong

Abstract:

This essay is primarily concerned with existing power relations among minorities in today’s society. We begin with Simone de Beauvoir’s analysis of the subjugation of women, and use this discussion to springboard into the idea that her ideas can be expanded to encompass not only women, but most minorities. In order to gain a better idea of the existing power relations among majorities and minorities, we attempt to look at Freud and Focault’s idea of society and civilization, and how societies and civilizations shape the individuals that comprise them. Finally we conclude with the thought that although economic conditions have allowed for greater equality than before, that is, that capitalism tends to break down discriminatory barriers, minorities will never truly be free of their subjugation unless society is made more aware of their existence, and culturally highlight the diversity of the human race rather than limit it.

Minorities in Society - Upload a doc

Read this doc on Scribd: Minorities in Society

Statistics and Sociology Final Paper

Home, Sweet Home: An Explanation of Income and Home Environments on School Behavior
by Jason Wong

Abstract:
in this paper I explore the idea that family income and home environment are indicators of student academic behavior. My hypothesis is that both variables can predict whether or not students are likely or unlikely to turn in their homework. Ultimately, however, my findings are unable to support my hypothesis. Multiple regression shows that, contrary to what I expected from my descriptive analysis, that family income and time alone are both pretty poor indicators of homework completion. In the end, I explore other potential factors that could be greater indicators of student behavior in school.

Home Sweet Home - Upload a doc

Read this doc on Scribd: Home Sweet Home

Urban Education Policy Case Analysis: Los Angeles Unified School District

Los Angeles Unified School District School Reform to 2008 final paper: by Jason Wong

Abstract:
In this paper I try to introduce, analyze and evaluate the reform efforts of the Los Angeles Unified School District. I note that the relatively short time frame since Mayor Villaraigrosa took partial responsibility of the school district makes it hard to tell whether or not LAUSD urban school reforms are working, although I also note that district test scores have been stagnant for a while. Finally, I make the recommendation that LAUSD improve its strategy by focusing on the three c’s: clarity, comprehensiveness, and cohesion.

Los Angeles Case Analysis - Upload a doc

Read this doc on Scribd: Los Angeles Case Analysis

Urban Education Policy Case Analysis: New York City

New York City Public School Reform 2002 to 2008 presentation and paper accompaniment: by Sarah Kasok, Jon Sproul, and Jason Wong

New York City Public School Reform 2002 to 2008 - Upload a doc

Read this doc on Scribd: New York City Public School Reform 2002 to 2008

New York City School Reform 2002 to 2008 Presentation Paper - Upload a doc

Read this doc on Scribd: New York City School Reform 2002 to 2008 Presentation Paper

The Power of Theater

Today was a really significant day for our beginning acting class. It was our last day together. The first part of our class was spent reminiscing, and sharing with each other what this class meant to us. One thing in particular resounded with me, that through this class, I've met many, many other students who I would not have gotten to know otherwise, and through this class we've all formed a distinct community. People of different tastes, theatrical experiences, backgrounds, geographic locations, ages, etc. etc. all met and conglomerated in this class. It's awesome. More so than any other academic class, wherever our individual paths lead us now, whenever ours cross with each other, we'll be more than classmates.

Unlike athletics, where people compete with one another, and unlike academic classes, where you don't really get to work with other people and get to know them, theater is a place for community, personal growth, and exploration. Where else do you explore human nature? Where else do you depend on so many other people to create art? I love theater so much. I know I probably won't be able to depend on theater as a career, but I know my appreciation of theater will last a lifetime.

Also today is the horrible news from China and Myanmar. It's so sad. We should do all we can to help, if it is just helping people be aware of the human devastation that's happening there, and compelling people to donate if they can.

For all we know, sooner or later we might be one of those victims. No place is really immune from natural disasters.

The Harvard Laramie Project

We did it!! WE did IT! I just learned of this not even three days ago, and I'm still bouncing off the walls and flying high above the clouds.

We are producing the Harvard premier of The Laramie Project! The number of performances, and performance times will be announced at a later date, but we will be putting this production on at the Agassiz Theater here at Harvard on the weekend of January 8 to 11, 2009! Everyone's invited! Please come! It's going to be awesome!

In any case, we have big plans for this production, including possibly the use of cinematography and photographs in order to create an ultra-modern artistic feel. For our publicity campaign, we are hoping to utilize all the means available to us, including print ads, posters/flyers, making use of the internet, and especially utilizing a social network as a way to connect the cast, crew, and fans of the Harvard Laramie Project! I think what's going to be new about this particular web campaign is that I'm going to encourage all of the staff, cast and crew to blog about their experiences when they can. I think it's going to be great! It's kind of like mimicking the diary moments inside the play itself (if you are familiar with this play, you'll know what I'm talking about, if not, don't worry about it!) In addition, you'll be able to ask us questions, and prod our artistic vision as we lead into opening night! Furthermore, you'll get an insider's view of what it's like to put on a theatrical production. We have much to offer! Visit theharvardlaramieproject.ning.com and check it out! You should register! And stay tuned!

For the past two weeks, our staff has poured their heart and soul into organizing a group and a proposal for our show. Our proposal for The Agassiz theater is eight pages long. Including our credentials section, our proposal's almost twenty pages! This is all for a production that wasn't even guaranteed a space or funding!

The night before I expected to hear about whether or not we got a space, I had nightmares where I begged and pleaded with everyone I knew to get this project off the ground even though we were rejected. I prepared myself not to show disappointment or cry if we were refused. I woke up the next morning, tired from an exhausting repose, and was glued to my email inbox. I received this email in the late afternoon, that read:

We were impressed by your commitment to bringing this show to the Harvard campus, and the team presentation during your interview.

The NCT/Agassiz Review Committee has decided to grant The Laramie Project a two week residency at the Agassiz Theatre for the weeks of Dec. 15 to Jan. 11 (taking into account winter recess) contingent on the following items:
- There will only be one weekend of performances, starting no earlier than Wednesday, 1/7, and going no later than a matinee on Sunday, 1/11, allowing for an evening strike.
- You agree to work with the Agassiz staff and other building users to ensure all support spaces (Horner Room, scene shop, lobbies, etc.) are shared fairly and always left clean and organized for the next group.
- You abide by the rules and policies of the Agassiz Operations Manual and Tech Safety Manual.

Honestly, I teared up. I'm so excited for this show! We have such a genuinely awesome group behind this production, I can't help but be more and more excited for this production as time passes!! We still have much work to do, such as apply for funding, and get our paperwork together and create our organization behind this production, but we're doing this! It's almost like living a dream. *pinches self* Stay with us and follow our trials and tribulations as we begin our journey to our big performance dates! Welcome, all, to The Harvard Laramie Project!

My First Class

Well, today was the final day of class for AP US Government at MIT. I've been super busy trying to get all my paperwork, finals, presentations, applications, and sanity in order, I didn't really have time to think about preparing myself for this moment.

It hit me as soon as I told the class I had to leave a little early to submit an important application for a potential production of The Laramie Project; which I hope to direct this fall on the tenth anniversary of Matthew's death. My departure felt sudden, but the class leapt to wish me goodbye. Christina and I are hoping on hosting a final get together here at Harvard next week, but we may not see many of these students for a long, long time to come.

I was waiting desolately at the bus stop for the bus to arrive to make my appointment, and I started to tear up a little bit. I remembered each of their faces from the first day of class, and since then, I've gotten to know all of them really well. I've met their families, hosted some of their visits to Harvard, talked with them about life and politics and art, and overall had a really good time this year. Sunday afternoons, from 1:30 to 5:00 became something that I really looked forward to every week, and perhaps was one of the highlights of my week.

Well, I can't describe how sad I feel to be letting go of my dear friends who I won't be able to see on a regular basis anymore and chat with. It's heartening to think about how they're all growing up and will go to college soon, and then get jobs, and run their own lives. I feel so old when I think along these lines, but in reality I know I'm growing up along with them. I hope we keep in touch, I'd be really depressed if no one from my first class contacted me again. I've learned so much from my students, more than I can ever teach them.

I sincerely recommend teaching to everyone who can, at least for a year or two. My paths have crossed with a small group of wonderful people, and I know that from now on, our paths will continue on through life's travails, together.

Roots of Racism Today

A few days ago I wondered aloud whether or not our capacity for "compassion" as a society was decreasing, or whether or not I'm just being overly sensitive. In the context of reading Weber, I was exploring some of Weber's conceptions for the disenchantment of society, such as bureaucratization and rationalization. I wrote an entire essay for my Social Studies class on why I disagreed with Weber's prognosis that bureaucratization and rationalization are disenchanting for society. Of course, I wrote in the narrower context of the roles of the politician and the scientist. Since then, I've been taken by another idea on this related problem of the disenchantment of society by thinking that people may just be withdrawing from a public life, for whatever reason, and therefore are just becoming more removed and isolated from their peers that way.

Think about it: with people living in the suburbs, or just hanging out with their own comfortable social networks and not really stretching their social boundaries, how much are people really exposed to the ethnic, cultural, economic, geographic, political, artistic and philosophical diversity around them in society? How much compassion can one feel for peers that they don't even entirely know exist, or who are almost entirely alien and foreign to them?

(In response to my musings, I've received more stories of people who have experienced and/or seen something similar. Fascinating stuff. Thank you so much for sharing with me. I really appreciate knowing that there are people out here who I can communicate with so I don't feel like I'm constantly only communicating with myself.)

In any case, one of my friends responded by asking, "How much compassion has there been in society to begin with?" In this, she was critiquing my question's implication that in order for society's ability for compassion to decrease, I had to be referring to a period of time where compassion was the norm. I've been wondering about that too; she's right. How much compassion, really, has there been in a society with a history of war, religious conflict, genocide, cheats, and colonization? The ideals that I hold in my head are either just high minded fantasies and daydreams, or something that I've only experienced on a smaller scale.

I guess I'm really remarking about how, upon leaving San Francisco, I feel that people's understanding of diversity and compassion are really different than I expected. I feel really lucky to have had a really compassionate community in high school. Compassion to me, if I can just throw out a definition, is the ability to empathize even with people that you have little understanding of, or fundamental disagreements with. A compassionate community, then, is one where disagreements and differences are tolerated, accepted, and even appreciated. Imagine what a compassionate society can be.

Truthfully, it scares me that people can cut each other off and be emotionally detached from each other. I've lived this only recently, where I fear my roommates and I (who have split up for about two to three weeks ago over fundamental differences) have little to do with one another now. I don't even think that they miss my presence, although I know that I still care for them. In any case, my example isn't exactly illustrative of the point I'm trying to make, although it is illustrative of it on a smaller scale. What I'm trying to say is that what scares me the most, is that there is a capacity in people and society to dehumanize other individuals or even other groups of people. You don't need to physically harm or disrespect someone in order to dehumanize them. Quite simply, you can shatter their dreams. You can just treat them differently, or simply ignore them. What's worse is when you actively work to suppress them.

This has happened a lot recently to many groups, but in our current American society this is happening particularly to Muslim-Americans. There's an article in the New York Times today that struck me in particular. In this case we have a Muslim-American who attempted to moderate between Muslim-Americans, Jewish-Americans, and Christians. Ultimately, her efforts were untenable, and she paid for it. Her dream was to create a school that would teach the Arabic language, just like we do with many schools for the Spanish, French, Chinese, and other languages. Religion wasn't even a consideration in the curriculum, except in the context of global studies. Yet people out there made religion an issue, and painted her as an extremist. In fact, she didn't need to be an extremist to be punished, all that people needed to do to ruin her was identify her with a group of people who the greater American society holds little compassion for.

One of these critics in particular was a Harvard grad, Daniel Pipes. In any case, here are some of his quotes:

Conceptually, such a school could be “marvelous,” Mr. Pipes wrote, but in practice, it was certain to be problematic. “Arabic-language instruction is inevitably laden with Pan-Arabist and Islamist baggage,” he wrote, referring to the school as a madrassa, which means school in Arabic but, in the West, carries the implication of Islamic teaching.

Mr. Pipes is perhaps best known for Campus Watch, a national initiative he created to scrutinize Middle Eastern programs at colleges and universities. The drive has accused professors of, among other things, being soft on militant Islam and sympathetic to the Palestinian cause. It has stirred widespread controversy and, in some cases, may have undermined professors’ bids for tenure.

Mr. Pipes was joined in the monitoring effort by other self-declared watchdogs of militant Islam. Their Web sites are often linked to one another and their messages interwoven. One critic, David Horowitz, founded Islamo-Fascism Awareness Week, a campaign aimed at college campuses. He noted in an interview that monitors of radical Islam have increasingly trained their sights on nonviolent Muslim-Americans.

It's interesting to me how the Arabic language can automatically be defined by Islamic religious fundamentalism, and the English language not automatically identified by Christian fundamentalist evangelism. This contradiction only serves to point out the absurdity of how harshly people can treat other groups they have little understanding of, and consequently, little compassion for.

In any case, her story is a complex and complicated story. Naturally, if you have time, I encourage you to read about it and think about it.

In an odd twist of fate, she was sent to the Bronx last fall to review a small, innovative school that had opened the same month as Khalil Gibran. It also taught a foreign language: Spanish. The students seemed to be thriving. As Ms. Almontaser walked the hallways, she was shaken, she said.

“It wasn’t that I was envious that her dream materialized,” said Ms. Almontaser, referring to the principal. “It was seeing her sixth graders, her teachers, and seeing that she did it. And I didn’t get a chance.”

What is the root of the problem? Can something as simple as more compassion be the end-all cure-all of racism?

Prisons and Immigration

I've been meaning to say something about the U.S. prison system and current immigration policies for a while now. Right now, though, I feel like I'm writing out of the blue, so I'm not prepared to put my heart into this post yet. Maybe I'll get to that certain place you get to when you open up your heart and just write- if I just start somewhere.

So let me start with a few thoughts:

Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses, yearning to breathe free,
The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, the tempest-post to me,
I lift my golden lamp beside the door.

When I think about our country, I think about the great ideals that we were founded upon. They weren't perfect. We were, after all, founded upon a time of slavery, of sexism, and on war and territorial expansion. But even with all these caveats, we created a country. It was a country which I think was created for the purposes of aiming for ever higher ideals of compassion and benevolence, with the goal of progressively creating a better civilization and society for us and those after us. It was written, after all, that "all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." Not some, not only citizens, not whites or landowners or those who are educated or Christian, but "all".

I love the inclusive "all" in that sentence. I love the words "yearning to breathe free", and "I lift my golden lamp beside the door." I think of these words, and I get so inspired. I feel full of love and sympathy. I want to get into public policy when I think these thoughts. I want to teach our next generation of students to feel the same way. I want to do something that expresses these wonderful thoughts that were written naught three hundred years ago.

We have come a long, long way since those early days. We have expanded suffrage and granted minorities more rights and liberties and equalities progressively with time. At the same time, I think, we are getting a little bit more isolated. I think a lot of people tend to be drawn into their own little comfortable social circles, and try not to worry about social problems unless these problems directly affect them. I look at capable people who could do some good for this world, and I see some of them distracted by suburban living, by wealth and luxury, by sailboats and video games, by everything other than thinking about what's wrong with our society and working towards a solution. I see people that look down on others, and disparage them, and add to their hopeless situation.

I don't want to disparage these people, and I don't want to say that "if they only knew better, they would think the same way that I do. " I don't think that way. At the same time, I just wish that more people were compassionate in our society. I see compassion as something that's fading away with time. I think of the people in prison, and I ask the question, why do we let so many people rot there, for so long? I think of some people's reactions to immigrants, and I wonder how they have little compassion for people who, just like their forebears, are only looking for a better life? I love Maya Angelou's poetry, especially "I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings." I don't want anyone to be the caged bird. But we have so many caged birds. Literally, we have a growing prison population (the highest in the Western world, even higher than China's on a proportionate basis) for silly things like drugs and petty crimes, which are bad, but why aren't we exploring rehabilitation and other policies just like other societies do? If our system's broken, why aren't we trying to fix it? Where is our compassion for our human brethren?

A free bird leaps on the back of the wind
and floats downstream till the current ends
and dips his wing in the orange suns rays and dares to claim the sky.

But a bird that stalks down his narrow cage
can seldom see through his bars of rage
his wings are clipped and his feet are tied so he opens his throat to sing.

The caged bird sings with a fearful trill
of things unknown but longed for still
and his tune is heard on the distant hill
for the caged bird sings of freedom.

The free bird thinks of another breeze
and the trade winds soft through the sighing trees
and the fat worms waiting on a dawn-bright lawn and he names the sky his own.

But a caged bird stands on the grave of dreams
his shadow shouts on a nightmare scream
his wings are clipped and his feet are tied so he opens his throat to sing.

The caged bird sings with a fearful trill
of things unknown but longed for still
and his tune is heard on the distant hill
for the caged bird sings of freedom.

What are your thoughts? Reactions?

The Truth Shall Set You Free

I'm struggling to find a methodology by which to state what I feel. I'm having a hard time because I don't think people are stupid. By and large, I think people are really capable of understanding anything you can teach them. Just think, in Newton's time only a few people really understood the implications of his theories on motion. Now it's standard high school physics fare. So, with time, it just goes to show that anything a genius can come up with can soon be standard knowledge. What's troubling though, as a news article that a Harvard Tutor (what we call RAs) pointed out via his blog, is that ignorance isn't bliss, it's widespread. He quotes an article that states,

"A recent survey of teenagers by the education advocacy group Common Core found that a quarter could not identify Adolf Hitler, a third did not know that the Bill of Rights guaranteed freedom of speech and religion, and fewer than half knew that the Civil War took place between 1850 and 1900."

Weber once wrote that the charismatic politician can overcome reason, and by that he meant in a good way in that the charismatic might bring back some of the magic of humanity back into our society. It's also a double edged sword. Just think about what our current government is doing to repudiate the public's knowledge on the effects of global warming, and a recent news report shows that they've been trying to convince us that air pollution doesn't really affect our health. As if. My question is how, by what passivity, or influence, or politics, do we let this happen? It's ridiculous. In an era of great technological progress and achievement, why is it that we allow parts of the government to impinge on the progress we strive for by suppressing or calling into question science?

Here's the quote from the article I reference:

Short-term exposure to smog, or ozone, is clearly linked to premature deaths that should be taken into account when measuring the health benefits of reducing air pollution, a National Academy of Sciences report concluded Tuesday.

The findings contradict arguments made by some White House officials that the connection between smog and premature death has not been shown sufficiently, and that the number of saved lives should not be calculated in determining clean air benefits.

Bureaucracies and Politicians

A while ago I posted an essay discussing Weber's view of the politician and the scientist in terms of the budding modern bureaucracy. I wrote that modern societies may not be as disenchanting as Weber realized. On the other hand, I have to give Weber credit for predicting that bureaucratic mismanagement could bring about disasters such as this:

"Arrested for killing his father late one night in 1958, James was ruled mentally ill by a judge, sent to an asylum for the criminally insane — and forgotten.

Decades after his doctors pronounced him cured, he remained trapped in a criminal justice nightmare. The hospital could only release him to the prisons authority. The prisons authority could only pick him up under a court order. The courts never called for him because they couldn't find his file.

Longing for some of his lost years, James wishes he had been convicted of murdering his father. At least then, he would have been freed after only 15 or 20 years in prison.

But a conviction would have been unlikely. His father was still alive." (link to the full story)

On another note, speaking of politicians, it's ridiculous that no one's doing anything to better manage the billions of dollars we throw at the farm industry when we could spend that money promoting sustainable, organic farming. Come on Democrats! You can do a lot of good with the money we throw at these commercial farms on a lot of issues, not just for our farms. Think about global warming, the environment, promoting domestic businesses, etc. etc. What's more interesting? Imagine going to China for organic foods. It's happening!

from sfgate.com

"Farm bill negotiators may have to trim these programs to make room for billions of dollars in automatic payouts to a few big commercial farms growing a few grain crops whose market prices are shattering records.

The 91 percent of California farmers who grow produce and are struggling against urban encroachment and environmental regulations will get none of that money. The farm bill throws a comparative pittance to the organic farming that shuns pesticides and rotates crops in a traditional method that attracts wildlife. Organic farming remains just 0.5 percent of U.S. agriculture despite soaring demand. Buyers are forced to look to China for organic produce."

The Kartika Review

I've complained a lot about the dearth of Asian American voices in cultural mediums, so it's really heartwarming to find a publication out there that is trying to develop and promote the AA voice and experience out there to the larger American society.

In reality, I think it's really remarkable that there really isn't a work or a series of works that are universally acknowledged to encompass the Asian American experience. To me, this is a travesty because the Asian American experience encompasses many historical events, is fraught with challenges and successes, encourages cultural exploration, explores the meaning of family, raises many questions around "What is American culture?"... well, you get the picture.

I hope you'll check out the Kartika Review. If you, or anyone you know, writes about anything related to the Asian Diaspora, or is a talented AA writer, please seriously consider submitting to the magazine. The Kartika Review is a quarterly magazine, and accepts submissions year-round. It's a new publication, so imagine the possibilities of what may come if we all buy-in and support this project, which is perhaps the only one of its kind.

Just think about how much more vibrant, more colorful, more interesting society is now that we are growing ever more diverse and multicultural than we ever were in history. So if one entire group of people's voices and/or artistic representations are less clear, prominent and/or developed than others, then isn't that is a cause worth working towards?

(In the interest of full disclosure, I was recently brought on as the Essays Editor for the Kartika Review. Therefore, I'm personally interested and invested in this project, and if you are a writer or are interested in writing, then I hope that you would think about sharing your work with us for the benefit of the AA community and all our readers.)

Technology and The World

If you have some time to spare, I recommend reading this article from the New York Times on cell phones, the developing world, and poverty. I found this article really enlightening. The anthropologist/designer that they hired to me seems to have a dream job. As someone who's read a lot of social theory, it's interesting to extrapolate the effects that cell phones have even to the most impoverished members of society. If trends continue, it seems like every person in the world may soon enough have a cell phone. How interesting is that? What effect do you think this would have on society?

Boycott 21

Ever since yesterday evening, I've been really actively promoting the Boycott 21 facebook group and have been trying to tell all my friends to boycott the movie. I'm worked up on this issue because this is a case of Hollywood whitewashing a partially Asian American event, and marginalizing the Asian American role.

I want to say a few words in support of boycotting 21, and then I want to say a few words about my own stances on this issue versus another stance I took publicly on a Harvard Op-Ed on Equal Opportunity Casting. I also want to say a few words why your support, even if it's just you, means a lot.

In a serious movie about the American cowboys, Hollywood (and I'd happily recant if I'm ever proven wrong) would never cast Asian Americans, Hispanics, or African Americans as the major characters. But 21 is another example of this equation being carried out in real life, albeit in reverse and only in one direction. 21 is an example where a group of people’s contributions are being marginalized, for whatever reason. This is unfair, and quite simply, the state of affairs as they are now sucks.

Asian American actors have yet to break the glass ceiling so that they are better represented on screen or on stage. If you look at the Hollywood productions themselves, there seems to be a movement (accidental, or intentional) to suppress Asian American talent. I'm not arguing that Asian Americans are being oppressed by the man! But on the other hand, Asian Americans are already given very little opportunity to break through to major productions, especially when Asian American stories like 21 are whitewashed, and when Asian productions such as The Departed, and The Ring, are redone with a White cast.

There's an argument to be had that maybe there isn't enough Asian American talent. My answer is that there is a Chicken or the Egg paradox that makes it hard to tell. Is it that there aren't enough Asians on stage or in major Hollywood productions because there is little Asian American interest in trying out for these roles? Or is it that Hollywood doesn't really give them a chance, so Asian Americans don't really bother... and Asian American talent consequently stays underdeveloped?

So why is it important to boycott a silly movie? Well, to tell you the truth, boycotting this movie probably won’t make a difference. It won’t make a difference, unless, be it on this issue or another issue, the people who matter get our message. They might hear us this time, they might hear us next time, or the time after that. What’s most important, though, is that we keep trying. Just by signing on to this facebook group, and inviting your friends makes a difference. That’s one more voice, one more human being, endorsing a message that is important for people to realize.

It’s not fair to Asian American talent that Hollywood does this. It’s not fair to the Asian American community to be largely ignored in mass media. It's not fair to society that Asians don't get to donate their version of George Clooney, or Will Smith, or Samuel Jackson, etc. etc. to the enjoyment and entertainment of society. For whatever reason, why is it intentionally harder for Asian Americans to break through in theater and in the movie theater? What in our culture doesn't allow for fair casting without consideration toward ethnic background? Even Roger Ebert has noticed a general condescending attitude toward Asian American artists and its detrimental effects. Ebert angrily proclaimed to the public at large and particularly to an amateur critic who criticized the Asian American cast and production team at a Better Luck Tomorrow event that "What I find very offensive and condescending about your comment, is that nobody would say to a bunch of White filmmakers, "How could you do this?!"... Asian Americans have a right to be whoever the hell they want to be!" (3:06) [I definitely recommend watching this youtube video]

We all know that if we don't start somewhere, if we don't say anything, if we don't do something, then nothing will change. The state of affairs will continue to persist- and some people don’t think that’s a bad thing.

It is a bad thing because there’s this dream. There’s a dream about a multicultural society, where the color of a person’s skin doesn’t matter. In this ideal society, it doesn’t matter if there’s a white actor playing an Asian American role and vice versa. But we aren’t there yet. We aren't there when this trade-off only goes in one direction. We’re at a place where Asian Americans are noticeably absent from the stage, from the movie screens, and from television. We’re in a place where we have to work to make things happen. So let’s work.

Please join us and Boycott 21, and please tell your friends. This isn't the first time this has happened to Asian Americans as a group. Otherwise, I'm inclined to agree that one instance isn't a big deal and probably doesn't indicate much, if anything. But there's been a pattern of whitewashing and anti-Asian racial casting, where Asian Americans are excluded from these historical roles and/or are ethnically subjugated if they are even given roles. The least we can do to address this problem is start a dialogue.

Follow-Up: Why Calling for Bush to Boycott the Opening Ceremonies is a Big Deal

Two nights ago I posted why I've dropped my support for Hillary. For me, her very public statement calling for President Bush to boycott the opening ceremonies of the Olympics both alienated and disappointed me. I feel like a better stance for her to take could have been Barack's "let's wait and see approach", at the very least, and an even better role model to follow on this sensitive issue would be San Francisco Gavin Newsom's handling of San Francisco's sponsorship of the Olympic torch run. Gavin, as best anyone could, balanced the needs of the torch run, the rights of its protesters and supporters very commendably. I wish our national politicians displayed these qualities.

Quite simply, many Chinese-Americans and I feel that America, though perhaps the most free and diverse nation in the world, is still not an ideal place. Stereotypes, such as that we are nerdy, tend to excel in math and science, and have no social life just aren't true, and yet you'll see these characteristics typified by the media all the time, if we aren't excluded all together. (Incidentally, you can read a well-articulated article on this other issue here.)

I'm not bringing this up to whine, or even complain. I've learned to accept these stereotypes and their consequences with a grain of salt, as a part of life that maybe some day I can help change. So why am I bringing this up? What does this have to do with Hillary Clinton's campaign-- one that I had been so excited for up until recently?

I am bringing this up because Clinton should know that her calls aren't going to do anything. China's not going to listen to her calls. President Bush is not going to listen to her on this matter. So why do it? The only reason I can think of for Clinton's actions are that docking China wins lots of political points, not only in areas where race is still a sensitive issue, but also in places that specifically view China as a threat to their way of life economically. To me, if this is the case, it's a form of race baiting-- even if it is unintentional. That's why I indicated, in my previous post, that her actions displayed either a lack of judgment, bad advice, or both.

For better or for worse, I believe that the coverage of the Olympic torch and the Olympics overall has been slanted by the Western media. If you read most of the headlines, you'll read about protesters standing out against China's human rights violations. You won't hear emphasis on quotes from protesters calling Chinese Americans communists, which is a patently ridiculous accusation reminiscent of the McCarthy witch-hunts. You won't hear about how China is single handedly bringing more people out of poverty faster than the United States, the E.U., or any other international organization. (I'm not coming to China's defense in terms of human rights violations, I just want to make the point that most reporting on China right now is really noticeably biased.) People don't realize these complicated issues, because the media's not reporting on them fairly. How many protesters even know where Tibet is?

Anyways, a lot of people have looked at this issue in more prescient ways than I care to express here right now. If anyone would like to talk about it, however, and debate it, please do!! I'd definitely spend time responding, if that is the case. But right now, I'm not sure that there is interest.

I hope this post answers your last question Sarah. To also make it clear, I'm not against Hillary. I just don't want to contribute to her campaign anymore for this primary season. I'm equally supportive of both both Clinton and Obama over McCain. I'm just not as excited as I used to be. This also explains why I'm not discounting these candidates based on their foreign, economic, or social policies. I'm for them. They're both much better than Republicans. I also think that targeting China makes it easier for some of us to forget about our own country's human rights abuses.

Why I've Dropped My Support for Hillary Clinton

After really passionately supporting Hillary Clinton as my candidate for President almost since she began her candidacy, it is with great disappointment that I have to announce that I cannot support her to that extent anymore.

(Not that my thoughts make much of a difference, I suppose I'm just announcing this personally exceptional moment to myself on my blog, maybe facebook.)

One recent event in particular prompted this change: her recent appeal to President Bush to boycott the Olympics in Beijing. The issue of China's human rights record is a separate topic, but one that is important enough to require a brief mention concerning this post. I've read many reactions to the protests in London and Paris, most of which are supportive of the protesters. I'll write another post about this issue after the Olympic flame tours my favorite city tomorrow. Save to say, I support their right to protest, on the other hand I believe they have taken their protests too far. It is one thing to make a statement and practice civil disobedience, it is another to be disruptive to the extent that one will attack people in wheelchairs in order to make a statement. These issues need to be aired out, and I'll do my best to write about this important issue tomorrow.

But for now, I think Clinton's calls to boycott the Opening Ceremonies are indicative of exactly the opposite of what I hoped for in a Presidential candidate. Objectively speaking, her protests will do nothing to convince President Bush to boycott the Olympics. Her appeal to President Bush does nothing more than appeal for political points among certain groups. In fact, her appeal does her more harm than good. She has demonstrated, by this one act, how little she really understands China as a country, while at the same time arguing for her foreign policy credentials; and has demonstrated how much she's willing to turn a peaceful international event into a forum for politics in a way that really demeans what the ancient tradition of the Olympics stands for, in my mind.

I may be wrong about what I believe the Olympics stands for, but as I understood it, it was an event to help heal international rifts and act as a peaceful, friendly forum for athletic competition. To me, the Olympics overall indicates that there are things, such as celebrating such ideals, that are more meaningful to us as a human society than rivalries. I think people kid themselves when they think that people are solely motivated by China's dismal human rights record. Let's face it, China does have a dismal human rights record. But let's also face it: What good does poking the eye of a giant do to help it better sympathize with human rights?

People with other motives too are interested in increasing rifts between America and China.

Also, I think people (particularly those who have only paid attention to issues concerning China in depth for only a few days or weeks at most) need to wake up to the twin realities of: 1) China overall, not just the Chinese government, are really excited about hosting the Olympics. It is ingrained in our culture that being hosts are a great responsibility. To not be great hosts is to lose a lot of face. For an entire international community to put politics in play where politics never really was an intention of the Olympics, except the transcendence of politics, would be an insult to the entire Chinese nation. The Chinese people already have a reason to be biased against us in the West, the Western media sometimes really does seem to report Chinese issues from a one-sided vantage point. That's not a wrong in of itself, but the Western media as an important democratic institution should not be intentionally or inadvertently giving biased reports against an entire country. And 2), let's face it, China has a really thin skin in terms of criticism. What does Clinton's appeal to boycott the Olympics really do then, if it doesn't convince President Bush to boycott? It insults the Chinese government and the Chinese people, and it doesn't accomplish much else. In the event that Clinton becomes President now, she has only more distance to cover before being able to repair relations with the Chinese. What kind of foreign policy advice is she getting? That she's willing to risk so much, for no gain, except maybe political points, is cause for my disappointment and despair that I have lost the candidate that I have hoped for. There are much better ways, in terms of impact and less divisiveness, to work out international disagreements. Forcefully bringing them into the Olympics is not one of them.

Let's make it clear: Civil disobedience and protests are great. Attacking people in wheelchairs is not. If one is a politician running for an office where one should know better (for many reasons), turning an athletic competition into an official political bashing opportunity reflects poor judgment, bad advice, and maybe both.

For these reasons, and a few others, I am renouncing my support for any Democratic nominee for the duration of this year's primary. Good luck to both candidates.

Weber’s Conceptions of the Roles of Two Types of Individuals: the Politician vs. the Scientist

This paper is primarily interested in the great sociologist and philosopher Max Weber’s account of the characteristics of the politician and the scientist and the contributions each has made to modernity. In order to place Weber’s discussions on the roles of the politician and scientist in their proper context, we must briefly discuss the rise of the bureaucratic order of the Weberian society. We begin with Weber’s sobering idea that modern society is headed toward a colorless, completely rational and bureaucratic order, which Weber indicated was the “disenchantment of the world.” We then discuss the roles and characteristics of the politician and scientist themselves, and critically examine Weber’s claim that the politician plays a bigger and more irreplaceable role in modern society than the scientist. We evaluate this idea and attempt to look at historical and current examples to support and discredit this claim, primarily focusing on the role of the scientist in modern society. Finally, I come up with my own modified analysis of the roles of the politician and the scientist. I indicate that, considering their overarching tendency to promote social progress and the overall goals of society, the roles, characteristics, and contributions of the politician and the scientist are not as mutually exclusive as Weber believed. I conclude with the thought that because politicians and scientists can contribute to society in a way that Weber may not have considered, then modern society may not be as depressing as Weber believed.

Max Weber was fascinated by the issue of modernity. Weber’s prognosis of what will result from modern society, however, was very discouraging. One of Weber’s most famous quotes reads, “The fate of our times is characterized by rationalization and intellectualization and, above all, by the ‘disenchantment of the world.’” (Weber, Science as a Vocation, p. 155) Weber believed that the defining characteristic of the modern state was the increasing reliance on rationalization and bureaucratization, which had a negative effect on society by taking away some of the magical effects of the natural world. Weber dismally wrote, “No summer’s bloom lies ahead of us, but rather a polar night of icy darkness and hardness, no matter which group may triumph externally now.” (Weber, Politics as a Vocation, p. 128) For Weber, the future brought ‘darkness and hardness’ because the rationalization of society brought on by the ascent of bureaucratic order was all but assured through the rise of democratic societies. This is because bureaucratic societies are the most effective means to level social stratification, one of the major goals of democratic order. On this idea, Weber wrote about how bureaucracies encourage equality:

“Bureaucracy inevitably accompanies modern mass democracy in contrast to the democratic self-government of small homogeneous units. This results from the characteristic principle of bureaucracy: the abstract regularity of the execution of authority, which is a result of the demand for ‘equality before the law’ in the personal and functional sense—hence, of the horror of ‘privilege,’ and the principled rejection of doing business ‘from case to case.’ Such regularity also follows from the social preconditions of the origin of bureaucracies.” (Weber, Bureaucracy, p. 224)

Two types of individuals loomed large in Weber’s account of modernity and the rise of bureaucracy: the politician and the scientist. Weber, as a preeminent sociologist, was particularly interested in studying the patterns of social relationships and interaction among and between the scientist and the politician. Furthermore, he investigated their effects on the modern social state, which we just described as increasingly rational, intellectualized, and disenchanted.

For Weber, the politician and the scientist both play key roles in the highly bureaucratic modern society. In his analysis, Weber has mostly given up on the ability of either of these two types of individuals to bring back romantic and inspiring notions of humanity and enchantment into social order. Weber overall held a low opinion of scientists. He described the culture of science as a “predominance of mediocrity” because in his mind random chance, rather than naturally endowed and/or developed ability, played a larger role in the process of academic selection. In his lecture Science as a Vocation Weber wrote:

The fact that hazard rather than ability plays so large a role is not alone or even predominantly owing to the ‘human, all too human’ factors, which naturally occur in the process of academic selection as in any other selection. […] The predominance of mediocrity is rather due to the laws of human co-operation, especially the co-operation of several bodies, and, in this case, co-operation of the faculties who recommend and of the ministries of education. (Weber, Science as a Vocation, p. 132)

Weber argues that networking and other “human, all too human” factors play too large a role when scientists achieve academic recognition and/or academic positions in academia. Weber also believed that great scientific discoveries may happen only once in a blue moon, and that these discoveries will be out of date in too short a time frame. A scientist seeking to enter the field will have to gamble on whether or not an idea will strike them at the appropriate moment. Weber famously mused that “ideas occur to us when they please, not when it pleases us,” and that “each of us knows that what he has accomplished will be antiquated in ten, twenty, fifty years.” (Weber, Science as a Vocation, p. 136 & 138) Weber’s biggest issue with science, though, is not based on the fact that he viewed success in science as random chance. His biggest issue with science is based on the idea that scientific accomplishments are purely technical achievements. Science, Weber argues, doesn’t provide additional meaning to life. In fact, Weber would say, science detracts from life. Success in science would mean increasing rationalization and disenchantment in the world. Weber argued:

It means something else, namely, the knowledge or belief that if one but wished one could learn it at any time. Hence, it means that principally there are no mysterious incalculable forces that come into play, but rather that one can, in principle, master all things by calculation. This means that the world is disenchanted. One need no longer have recourse to magical means in order to master or implore the spirits, as did the savage, for whom such mysterious powers existed. Technical means and calculations perform the service. This above all is what intellectualization means. (Weber, Science as a Vocation, p. 139)

It is important to note that Weber sees one key distinction between science as a vocation and politics as a vocation. Science as a vocation directly leads to the disenchantment of natural occurrences and our understanding of natural events. Politics as a vocation, on the other hand, (for reasons which we will discuss after this note), only indirectly leads to bureaucratization and rationalization. Furthermore, it is possible for a very talented and rare political leader to be able to inspire others and serve “the vocation for politics in its deepest meaning.” (Weber, Politics as a Vocation, 1958, p. 128) Generally, it is assumed, that both types of individuals (politicians and scientists) will encourage, promote, and protect rational bureaucratic order, although Weber leaves room to hope that a charismatic authority can restore meaning and vigor to the populace, should one arise.

Weber begins his lecture on Politics as a Vocation with the line, “This lecture, which I give at your request, will necessarily disappoint you in a number of ways,” (Weber, Politics as a Vocation, p. 77), indicating that the vocation of politics may not be as glorious, or to use a Weberian term, ‘enchanting’, as one would think. Politicians, being in charge of the political state, tend toward routine and bureaucratic order rather than promote personal relations and/or passionate behavior. The state, after all, “is a human community that (successfully) claims the monopoly of the legitimate use of physical force within a given territory.” (Weber, Politics as a Vocation, p. 78) It makes sense then that politicians would turn to bureaucratic administration in order to maintain the stability of the state, ensure law and order, and otherwise manage politics in a way that doesn’t radically alter the systems and organizations in place nor stir up the populace in a negative manner. Weber writes that “the political element consists, above all, in the task of maintaining ‘law and order’ in the country, hence maintaining the existing power relations.” (Weber, Politics as a Vocation, p. 91) The process of promoting this stability and bureaucratic order has given rise to a class of politicians who Weber describes as the ‘professional politicians’, who Weber notes, are “unlike the charismatic leader.” (Weber, Politics as a Vocation, p. 83)

Weber does, however, as previously noted, hold on to the hope that politicians can circumvent the rationality of their time through charismatic leadership. Weber writes that “As a permanent structure with a system of rational rules, bureaucracy is fashioned to meet calculable and recurrent needs by a means of a normal routine.” (Weber, The Sociology of Charismatic Authority, p. 245) He continues, however, later on in his essay entitled The Sociology of Charismatic Authority that “charisma, and this is decisive, always rejects as undignified any pecuniary gain that is methodical and rational. In general, charisma rejects all rational economic conduct.” (Weber, The Sociology of Charismatic Authority, p. 247) Charismatic leadership, Weber notes, “takes passion and perspective. Certainly all historical experience confirms the truth—that man would not have attained the possible unless time and again he had reached out for the impossible. But to do that a man must be a leader, and not only a leader but a hero as well, in a very sober sense of the word.” (Weber, Politics as a Vocation, p. 128) Charismatic leadership, then, can inspire and encourage passion in the populace through their leadership. Charismatic leaders can help men and women reach for goals they never before believe possible. But charismatic leadership is a double edged sword, in addition to being a rare quality among men. Weber notes that “by its very nature, the existence of charismatic authority is specifically unstable.” (Weber, The Sociology of Charismatic Authority, p. 248) By this observation Weber is implying that charismatic leaders can also blind a populace and encourage them to pursue action that are detrimental to their overall social welfare and best interests.

It is safe to say that Weber emphasizes the role of the politician more than the scientist. As previously noted Weber believes that scientists serve a technical purpose rather than a deeper meaning—which is to say that science as a vocation doesn’t increase human society’s sense of purpose. Weber writes,

Under these internal presuppositions, what is the meaning of science as a vocation, now after all these former illusions […] have been dispelled? Tolstoi has given the simplest answer, with the words: ‘Science is meaningless because it gives no answer to our question, the only question important for us: “What shall we do and how shall we live?”’ That science does not give an answer to this is indisputable. (Weber, Science as a Vocation, p. 143)

On this point, Weber is overly critical of the field of science. Weber does not recognize that a key characteristic of the scientist is that the scientist necessarily first takes into account the greater needs of society before embarking in scientific investigation. In order for the scientist’s discoveries to be relevant to society, which is to say that in order for the scientist to make money off his or her discovery or achieve renown from it, the scientist needs to understand toward what purpose their discovery shall serve. For example on one hand Weber makes the argument that most of humanity need not understand the physics behind a moving streetcar. Weber writes that “unless he is a physicist, one who rides on the streetcar has no idea how the car happened to get into motion. And he does not need to know.” (Weber, Science as a Vocation, p. 139) However, in order for such a technology to exist, someone needs to acquire the technical knowledge to create such an invention. In order for such a technology to serve human purposes, that person, the scientist, needs to first understand how his or her invention will further humanity’s goals.

Weber takes issue with the fact that the invention and improvement of the streetcar itself does not shed light on important questions such as “What shall we do and how shall we live?” Responding to Weber’s example, the streetcar assists human transport, and the train helps increase human industrial capacity and supports an increasing human population by transporting goods and supplies. The scientist is eminently aware of these facts, and for this reason the scientist’s technical discoveries are not outside the domain of serving larger social purposes as Weber would believe. For this reason Weber underestimates the contributions scientists have made to further the larger social questions.

It is obvious to the modern observer that science has greatly changed the experience of human society and how we humans go about our lives. Without our latest technical advances, humans would not be as connected as they are if we did not have cheap and ready access to telephones, speedy travel, and the internet. Governments, such as the United States, and other entities such as the United Nations, would not be motivated to interfere in genocides such as Sudan and Darfur if it weren’t for the populace’s easy access to news of worldly events (modern communication is a byproduct of science). The fact that international countries are pressured to react to catastrophes and crises in other states are a testament to how increasingly inter-connected human society is compared to human societies of the past where such incidences would be ignored. Science can also change human society for the worse, as well as for the better. The advent of the nuclear bomb allows motivated groups of people the option of destroying the planet as we know it. Society has necessarily reacted to these threats, especially political bureaucracies concerned with self-preservation.

Weber’s major critique of this assessment would focus on the ultimate authority by which scientists are held accountable. He would argue that scientific accomplishments are only a response to the general needs of the day, and are exploited by others such as politicians. Weber writes that individual scientists generally “maintain that he engages in ‘science for science’s sake’ and not merely because others, by exploiting science, bring about commercial or technical success and can better feed, dress, illuminate, and govern.” (Weber, Science as a Vocation, p. 138) This argument also has historical merit: the United States’ development of the nuclear bomb was a result of government sponsorship of the science, without which the nuclear bomb would likely not have developed the way it had—especially if countries did not compete to obtain the destructive nuclear technology. This shows that politics and science are inextricably linked, which Weber agrees. But the nuclear example is only one of many different examples for ways in which scientific discoveries are made. Many have been encouraged by governments, but others have been encouraged also by individuals unaffiliated with governments, be it for capital gain, academic study, and/or fame. Individual scientific discoveries happen often enough that rather than treat them, as Weber would, as exceptions, they must be included in the rule. The advent of electricity was unanticipated, and thus its discovery and utilization could not have been prompted by the government. On the other hand, other inventions such as the nuclear bomb, the internet, and other inventions were sponsored by the government to serve social and/or state needs. This shows that Weber is correct in many areas of his analysis, but could have been mistaken in others.

In response to Weber’s critique concerning the politician’s greater authority over society than the scientist, I would argue that the relationship between politicians and scientists are more complex than Weber recognizes. Weber holds the reasonable assumption that politicians hold the ultimate authority within a state. On the other hand, as Weber also recognizes, there is much movement on behalf of democratic societies of the modern era to level social stratification and enable governments to tap into the will and desires of their citizens in order to better serve them (see Bureaucracy page 224, which was quoted early on in this paper). In this manner, citizens, being “occasional politicians” (Weber, Politics as a Vocation, p. 83) can complicate the authority of the politician. Citizens, if under the influence of scientists or scientific beliefs that are contradictory to those held by politicians, can easily vote in politicians that agree with them and vote out politicians who disagree. For this reason, politicians don’t hold supreme authority over the power of the state. Furthermore, in democratic societies, there is always the possibility of the scientist becoming the politician. In modern American politics, there are many examples of scientists becoming politicians. Howard Dean, a doctor by trade, was a governor and contender for the Democratic Party’s nomination for President, and now heads the Democratic Party organization. George Foster, a physicist, was recently elected to the United States House of Representatives for the Illinois 14^th Congressional District.[1]

Weber believed that the scientist and the politician generally promoted bureaucratic order that increased rationalization, intellectualization, and disenchantment of worldly affairs. On that same vein, he criticized scientists for their technical study, and did not recognize that their discoveries and achievements can in actuality serve general social pursuits. Their discoveries in many instances are necessarily based on their understanding of social progress and how their achievements can service societal needs. To name a few of their accomplishments, many of their inventions have allowed humans to increase their population and live in greater luxury than at any other point in history, to better enjoy each other’s company even from faraway locations, to be exposed to many different geographies and cultures through advances in transportation, and each of these achievements and others (while we may take them for granted) have encouraged us to dream of other future advances in store for us. These advances have also enabled us to reach ever higher in whatever pursuit we choose to strive for. For example, we would not be able to dream about exploring space, or even conceive of space exploration, if not for the technological achievements before our time. I would argue that rather than being disenchanting, these accomplishments, and the possibilities for greater achievements, is more enchanting than he realized.

Works Cited

Weber, M. (1958). Bureaucracy. In H. Gerth, & C. W. Mills, From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology (pp. 196-244). New York City: Oxford University Press.

Weber, M. (1958). Politics as a Vocation. In H. H. Gerth, & C. W. Mills, From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology (pp. 77 - 128). New York City: Oxford University Press.

Weber, M. (1958). Science as a Vocation. In H. Gerth, & C. W. Mills, From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology (pp. 129-158). New York City: Oxford University Press.

Weber, M. (2002). The Protestant Ethic & The Spirit of Capitalism. (S. Kalberg, Ed.) New York City: Oxford University Press.

Weber, M. (1958). The Sociology of Charismatic Authority. In H. Gerth, & C. W. Mills, From Max Weber: Essays in Sociology (pp. 245-252). New York City: Oxford University Press.

---

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Foster_(physicist)