Reflections on my Trip to NYC...

So I recently, spontaneously, and last-minutey, went down to NYC this past weekend for a mini-highschool re-union.

I'll touch on a few personal thoughts before getting into what I thought of NYC:

Highschool dynamics

The night before I left I found myself, gnawing at the knot of excitement in the pit of my stomach, wondering how it would be with a group of us back together again. In the 6 years since I graduated I have only seen a couple of friends here and there. I was wondering if we would return to the same idiosyncratic and insecure relationships that dog all highschools, or if our new found maturation due to university degrees and life experience and now being at the baby steps of our careers, would make things really different.

What I found was that everyone was more mature and therefore was able to get along better. But at the same time, in some ways everyone returned to the roles they had in highschool as well.

Anyways, it was absolutely fantastic seeing everyone, and when I head to London either next year or the year after, I look forward to being able to see even more old friends then.



Observations of NYC

1) NYC is its own world. You really feel it when you are there. You could easily spend your entire life living there, without ever leaving the vast expanse of urban jungle that is the city.

2) Artistic. NYC is so artistic, in fact, I have to say that it REALLY reminds me of Montreal in the variety of styles that you see on the streets, the variety of bars that one can go to, the existence of parties all over the city at any hour, on any day of the week and the possibility of seeing the most random thing on any occasion (ie. someone walking down the sidewalk in their underwear in the middle of the day).

Of course, its all of that in Montreal X 50 and you get something closer to NY. But the similarites are really there.

3) Nice. People are very nice contrary to the bad rap that New Yorkers seem to get. I found everyone really friendly and nice and even somewhat helpful.

4) Wealth and inequality. New York is THE place to be for the elite and those aspiring to be the elite in the US. And you can feel it. The first night I was there I went to a bar/lounge which charged around 12 dollars per drink. You can find these places in Montreal and other big cities, the difference is that there, the clientele will be young professionals, and the average age probably be closer to 30. This place didnt have a person over 24 I don't think. The majority of them were students who were all still in school. I felt like I was in an alternate reality of some kind.

At the same time, you also have Harlem and Queens and other unbelievably impoverished areas right in the same city. I realized that I've gotten used to the quiet equality of Canada (don't get me wrong we still have our areas, but we have to be honest and compare ourselves to the big picture) and I'd somehow forgotten that the horrific inequality that exists in Latin American and parts of Asia, is also a reality in the US and other parts of the so-called "Western" world.

5) Guns for money. I saw flyers on 8th Ave. advertising, Guns for Money. You Bring your working guns in, we give you $200 bucks, no questions asked. When I saw this sign it hit me "yea man, you're now in the US".

I meant to take a picture of it but unfortunately didnt see them again. But apparently this "initiative" has been quite effective at getting guns off the streets.

6) Overwhelming hyperconsumerism. There are stores, stores, and more stores EVERYWHERE. The US as a country must have more entrepreneurs per capita than anyone else. And people, buy, buy, buy, and buy. And we're in a recession? The neverending and unrelenting flow of shoppers and stores was pretty exhausting.

7) People say its expensive but.... I actually didn't find it that bad. In the stores alcohol is about the same price or even less than in Montreal when you factor in the tax. There are soo many places to eat that, if you stay away from the expensive ones, you can actually find food relatively cheaply. It all depends on the lifestyle you are used to and where you go in the city. Having said that, the cost of housing is absolutely ridiculous.

Overall
It was a very cool city. I could see myself spending 5 happy years of my life there easily, although I do think that I wouldnt be able to last more than that.

Whoopi Goldberg Spotting

While sitting in the car with Zeke and his parents in the East Village of Manhatten, Whoopi Goldberg stepped out of her apartment and walked right in front of our car to cross the street. She waved at us when Zeke's dad tapped on the glass.

She looked EXACTLY like she did on tv. And sort of looked like she was just trying to get from Point A to point B without being spotted, dressed in a hooded grey sweatshirt with the hood up.

Interesting Links of the Day...

I've come across a couple of interesting links lately that I feel obligated to share with everyone.

1) First, hat tip to my friend Alex Guertin for this very cool, photo travel essay from Chernobyl.

For those of you that don't remember Chernobyl was the location of the worst nuclear disaster in human history (so far).


I have to admit that many of the photos actually give me a feeling of nostalgia for the life that I had in Eastern Europe.

2) Secondly, I'll give a shout out to my friend, Mark Kersten, for his terrific work in his blog: kerstenskolumn.wordpress.com. His latest post on "The Responsibility to Protect" , (R2P) the philosophical pondering of when does the international community have an obligation to intervene, and when does it not, is worth reading.

Kersten is currently working as Compliance and Information Coordinator for the Green Party of Canada and will be heading to the London School of Economics and Political Science next year for a Masters in IR. (If my deferral fails to go through, we may end up there together).

A new post is currently in the works (currently rolling around in the mush between my ears), I've been meaning to post on R2P for a while now, and perhaps Mark has forced my hand. I'll keep you all updated.

China's Policy on Tibet and the Dalai Lama

There may be people who disagree with this post, but the timeliness of this issue, to me, morally impells me to comment on it.

Above: Nepalese police officers snatch a Tibetan flag from a Tibetan protester demonstrating in front of the U.N. office in Katmandu, Nepal, March 17, 2008. Police used bamboo batons to disperse about 100 Tibetan protesters and Buddhist monks in Katmandu, Monday, arresting around 30 in the latest crackdown on pro-Tibet demonstrations in neighboring Nepal.
(Binod Joshi/AP Photo) Note: I was unable to find any photos from Lhasa itself.

It was March 16 of last year that, Tibetan protests broke out in the capital of Lhasa leading to Chinese troops marching on the capital and resulting in close to 150 deaths.

This year, the anniversary of the uprising passed with eery quietness, as paramilitary and plainclothes police blanketed the Tibetan capital with patrols and checkpoints.

It was also in March, 50 years ago, that an uprising against Chinese rule led to the Dalai Lama's flight into exile in India, bringing with him tens of thousands of his followers.

The general story, we know: the Peoples Republic of China (PRC) government and the Government of Tibet in Exile still disagree over when Tibet became a part of China, and whether the incorporation Tibet into China is legitimate according to international law.

I'm not too knowledgeable on the rationale China had for invading Tibet in 1950, immediately following the ascension of the Chinese Communist Party in the Chinese Civil War in 1949.

But I do believe that China's policy on the Dalai Lama shows remarkable short-sightedness for a government that has thus far shown itself to be highly effective at long term economic planning.

The reason China refuses to accept Tibetan independence is obvious.

While much of the Western world, when they think of China imagine a homogenous “workers” mass of people, composing a highly unified state, the reality is that the PRC is a very diverse country. As early as 1949, there were fifty-six registered and officially recognized nationalities (other than Han Chinese) in China. (see: Norbu, Dawa, “China’s Policy Towards its Minority Nationalities in the Nineties”. China Report. 1991. )

That’s not to say that Chinese policies haven’t attempted to dilute various identities underneath the majority-Han identity, in most countries the majority culture dominates, and in China this is no different.

But the point is this: if they give Tibet independence, many of the other regionally concentrated minorities groups might attempt to gain independence as well. (Particularly the Uyghur ethnic group in the North Western corner of the country).

The Uyghurs (see Uyghur girl above) are Turkic speaking peoples of Islamic faith who live primarily in the Xinjian Autonomous Region in the PRC.

From this perspective, China’s refusal to accept Tibetan independence for fear of losing the territory of the nation-state makes sense.

But their policy of vilifying the Dalai Lama doesn’t.

The Dalai Lama gave a speech on March 10, in Dharamsala (where he is exiled in northern India), in order to “pay tribute to all those who died, were torture and suffered for the cause of Tibet”. While his speech included the usual offers of friendship and conciliation to China with which he usually balances with criticism of its rule, it was unusually angry and pessimistic in tone.

According to the Economist, the speech “reads like the exasperated outpouring of a man despairing of the compromise he himself continues to promote”.

The unusually harsh words reflect his frustration at China’s continued dismissal of Tibetan yearnings for independence, and the bleak outlook for political progress in the region, but also the reality of the situation on the ground in Tibet.

Human Rights Watch last week reported that there were thousands of arbitrary arrests during last year’s unrest and that hundreds of detainees continue to remain unaccounted for.

This month, as I wrote above, anticipating protests during the anniversary season, the Chinese government deployed a massive security presence, foreigners have been excluded from the region, and mobile-telephone networks and websites in Lhasa have become inaccessible.

Yet these precautions show that the Chinese government is fully aware of the extent of Tibetan unhappiness with its rule.

It continues to blame this on the influence of the Dalai Lama itself. It likes to argue that before the Chinese takeover in 1950, Tibet was merely a feudal serfdom. On March 28, the Chinese government in Tibet celebrate “Emancipation from Serfdom day”.

But the Dalai Lama has democratised his government in exile, and unlike many of his followers both in Tibet and in the exiled population, he accepts Chinese rule. Not only does he argue for a “middle way” of genuine autonomy within China, he is also unwavering in his opposition to violence.

In fact, what violent acts that did occur in last years uprising in Lhasa, reflected the frustrations of a new generation of followers who have grown weary of the Dalai Lama’s insistence on non-violence.

So what should this tell us? Would things be better without the Dalai Lama’s influence?

What does China hope?

It seems as though China’s hope is that when the Dalai Lama, who is 73 years-old, eventually passes away, Tibetans will lose both their international figurehead and their internal unity.

My guess is, China hopes to subsequently instill their own, pro-China spiritual leader to replace the Dalai Lama once the current one is gone.

But right now the Dalai Lama is the only one holding things together. He, and not the Chinese government, is the only one capable of keeping the new generation of separatists in check.

If the uprisings last year are any indication, and indeed if history (see: the collapse of Yugoslavia) is any indication, if China waits that long, it may be losing its best and last hope of reconciliation with the Tibetan people that it claims are its own.

ImprovEverywhere...

I have sent a few emails about this already but it is just too cool to keep away from the blogosphere.

Alot of people have already heard of these guys but in case you haven't: ImprovEverywhere is a group and a phenomenon it is spreading like wildfire across North America.

They do organized spontaneous things in public places. According to their website http://improveverywhere.com/, they "have completed 80 missions of joy and chaos, involving thousands of undercover agents, since they have started." The group is based in New York City but there are a bunch of chapters springing up in other cities.

Last weekend ImprovEverywhere in Ottawa carried out a Guerilla Freeze (which is in my opinion one of the coolest acts):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DD84neqYfSE (Note: This clip is the one from NYC, Grand Central Station)

But they also do spontaneous musicals:

http://improveverywhere.com/2008/03/09/food-court-musical/

Anyways, I just think it is really cool what these people are doing. I'm going to be participating in next months activity here in Ottawa, whatever it may be. If you want to brighten your day, maybe you can join one, (or dareisay start your own) in your locations.

The Lesson of Harvey Milk

(I had meant to post this last friday but couldn't finish it off before heading to Montreal for a weekend military course. Thankfully this article doesn't really rely on timeliness to be relevant.)

So I finally got the chance, earlier this week, to go see the movie Milk.

For those of you who haven’t been following, the movie Milk is a biographical film which portrays last 8 years of Harvey Milk’s life. Milk (below) was a gay activist and the first openly gay elected political official (elected San Francisco supervisor in 1977).

Don’t worry, if you haven’t seen it yet, this entry won’t give anything away.

Anyways, I found myself thinking a lot about his story after the movie, and I started doing some more research into his life.

Before I state what stood out for me, as the major lesson that we can and should all learn from him, I’ll quickly review my other thoughts on the movie itself and this story in general:

-I thought Sean Penn did a fantastic job and was thoroughly deserving of the best actor Academy award.

-I was also really impressed with Emile Hirsch's performance. The last movie I saw him in was Into The Wild and I completely did not recognize him this time around. He has alot of range as an actor.

-I absolutely cannot believe that so many people (myself included) have never been taught about this guy! He was a pivotal player in the improvement of civil rights in modern American history. If for nothing else, this movie has been very important and very special for sharing this story with more people.

Harvey Milk's Important lesson: Faith in Humanity

Perhaps the most pivotal moment of the movie, and the one which determined Milk's legacy, occurred just after he was elected a San Francisco representative. The Briggs Initiative, (also known as Proposition 6) was announced by sponsor John Briggs, a conservative Orange Country legislator, and Anita Bryant, a well known singer and religious activist. This initiative sought to ban gays and lesbians, and anyone who supported gay rights from working in California's public schools.

Immediately following the highly publicized announcement of Prop 6, Harvey Milk and Cleve Jones and the rest of his political campaign team gathered in Milk's San Francisco city hall office, to decide how to react. This is obviously a critical moment, because if Proposition 6 passes, it would have serious implications for the progression of civil rights and anti-discrimination laws in the US.

Here's where I find their strategy interesting and the emergence of Milk's most important lesson.

A number of politically influential supporters of Milk advocated that they challenge the initiative and try to rally support against it by arguing that it is an affront to human rights. They believed that as the public still seemed to be very uncomfortable with the "issue" of homosexuality, and considering the power of the church and church organizations to mobilize pro-Prop 6 support, the only way to rally support against it would be to attack it for being a serious violation of individual freedoms and human rights, after all, everybody supports human rights right?

Milk, however, said that "hiding behind human rights" was cowardly. He argued, in contrary, they should openly proclaim how this is discriminatory to gays, and reinforce the statement that gays must have the same rights. He also called on all gays out there to "come out! come out! wherever you are!".

When I was watching the movie, I found myself disagreeing with Milk's strategy.

I agreed that it would be better to take the human rights defense. In my opinion, given the power of the religious organizations to mobilise support for Prop 6, and given how critical this legislation was, you have to think that it doesn't matter what defense you take, you must do everything you can to win. You must do anything you can to ensure that the laws protect your equal rights (hence that Prop 6 fails). Who cares about what people think, thats a long term issue to fight another day. In the short term, you must protect your rights. Overall, as long as the laws are there, over time, people's ideas and opinions about it will change.

So in other words, use the existing legal structure to, overtime, move social opinion forward.

That demonstrates that I have a higher amount of trust and faith in the system, than in humanity and the ability of humans to break out of narrow minded thinking.

Milk, in contrast, had faith in humanity. He argued that if all the gays out there came out, everyone would realize that they knew someone or had friends who were gay. And this realization would normalize it and make them realize that they would be taking the rights away from their friends, colleagues and neighbours. This would simultaneously change social thinking and also reject Prop 6.

This was incredibly perceptive and forward thinking, althought it was also risky. Ultimately, it demonstrated his belief in the power of goodness within humans to overcome narrow mindedness.

I won't say the end result for those who haven't seen the movie (although you can probably guess). But to me this remains one of the most brilliant decisions he made and one of the most important lessons we can learn from him.

Worldometers....

Hi all,

Very interesting site I found through my buddy Zeke that I thought I'd share with you all.

Its called Worldometers . It has a a number of different global statistics in realtime.

I don't know about you but looking through this site has me feeling like I can't breathe. Like I don't have enough air.

And I had no idea that 24,188 species have gone extinct this year! Thats tragic!

I'm not going to list here the sources they have for their statistical algorithms but its lengthy and reputable to say the least.

Take a look, and ponder the consequences for our planet and the future of the human species.