Sigma’s Simulacrum of Reality

Tony Blair

Right off the bat, I’m going to say that Tony Blair is my idol Especially when I first got interested in politics in Malaysia. Then, I was just beginning to understand the divisions in politics, and was shopping for a side that I could barrack for. Conservatism put me off instantly with its overzealous religion + cold capitalism combo. Hard-left socialism also looked to me to be too much like the failed communism to appeal to me. It was then that I discovered the ‘Third Way’ aka social democracy that was championed by Blair and Clinton. Decided then that that was the camp that I would cheer for.

Social democracy

Tony Blair then was only in his early years as PM of the UK. He, along with Anthony Giddens introduced the Third Way to the world. I’ve read Gidden’s book, and he proposed the Third Way as the modernisation and evolution of the Left.

Tony Blair understood that the era of union-dominated workplace and blind nationalisation of public institutions is gone. Instead, when he assumed the leadership of Labour he seek to change his party’s Clause IV in its Constitution which which strived for wholesale privatisation of those institutions. He also purged and subdued many of his party’s hardcore leftists and promoted his centrist colleagues. Many people nowadays are beginning to forget how difficult it is to actually change a major party from within. One just have to look at Abdullah’s or Anwar’s failure to do so for UMNO to get a sense of the difficulty in overcoming a party’s inertia to change. But did it Blair did, giving his reformed party the moniker ‘New Labour’ to differentiate it from its past reincarnations.

In 1997, the British public decided that New Labour was finally less socalist-radical enough to be trusted to lead the nation with the charismatic Blair heading it. It won by a historic landslide (largest ever for Labour) against the Conservative government, winning 418 seats against the Tories’ paltry 165. The Tories did not have any seats in Scotland or Wales as a result and many government ministers lost their seats. The Tories are still feeling the effects of that slaughter till this day.

As PM, Blair has revitalised the British economy. He has pumped massive amounts of in health and education, as well as introducing market-based mechanisms there to increase their efficiencies. He has also introduced many liberal social issues, such as the introduction of gay marriages and increased immigration levels.

However, due to the very human nature of having short memories and only remembering the bad, Blair will probably be best known as the PM who lead the UK into a dodgy war based on dodgy intel. I oppose the Iraq War, not due to some pansy peacenik premise, but because that war was based on the wrong premise and had nothing to do with crushing Al Qeada what so ever. Therefore, I support the Afghanistan War. And I disagree with Blair’s unhealthily close relationship with George W Bush.

But in the larger scheme of things, I am of the opinion that Tony Blair was still a great UK Prime Minister and a terrific New Labour leader.

Long live the Third Way!

People not answering smses. Is it really so hard to answer those bloody things?

The name ‘China’ was given to that country by the early Western explorers, derived from the corrupted (or mispronounced) word ‘Qin’, the name of the empire of Emperor Shi Huangdi.

But why are we still using that name? Since it sounds so dissimilar to its correct Mandarin name of ‘Chung Kuo’. Shouldn’t China just change its name to Chung Kuo?

Although I cannot as yet claim to be a ‘hardcore’ Asian movie lover due to the fact that I haven’t seen as many Asian movies as I would have liked yet, I can say that I am an Asian movie fan nowadays.

So I was pleasantly suprised when I found a BBC documentary on Asian cineme on YouTube, entitiled ‘Asian Invasion’. Apart from the Pommy host’s somewhat annoying accent, this was a good documentary. It is split up into 3 episodes, focusing on Japan, Hong Kong and South Korea respectively. Check them out below:

Ep 1: Japan

Ep 2: Hong Kong

Ep 3: South Korea

From my personal experience so far, I’ve found that I really like the Korean style of movies right now. They better utilise location cinematography than those other two countries. I also like the way Koreans portray themselves in their films. Korea is given an image of being a modern mega city with a heart. Lastly, I think of those three countries (okok, so HK technically is China, but what the heck), Koreans make the best sappy melodrama romantic stories, complete with beautiful chicks and for the girls, hot guys March on the Korean Wave!

Hong Kong movies are fine, but they somehow lack that refined technical touch that Koreans have which make their movies look ‘clean’ and ‘crisp’. Hong Kong’s movies, with the exception of a few more exceptional ones, generally looks ‘rougher’. Although Hong Kong has always produced great cops vs triads films and a few good romantic comedies, they seem to lack in the drama department.

Somehow, I just don’t like Japanese movies, based on what I saw in the documentary. The Japanese seem to have this thing for sadism and pain. Either that, or outright wackiness (see The Squid). Both type of styles which I have always steered clear from. Their animes are a different story though. I especially like their deep sci-fi animes.

All in all, I am still partial towards the great Korean films that are coming out from Korea right now. They seem the most appealing to me. And apparently, I’m not the only one with these sentiments. Many people are now into Korean pop culture ala its movies, dramas, and music due to the Korean Wave pop phenomenon which swept across Asia in early 2000. I have discovered that I am not immune to this as well. Apart from their hot chicks, I have found that I also like the way their language sounds. It’s more guttural when compared to Mandarin or Japanese. Lower and deeper. Cool. Japanese sounds especially sissy to me, what with their high pitched style of talking. And the Korean culture itself, especially its male culture, is decidedly ‘macho’, what with beating each other up or what not. Rockin’ No wonder they’re known as the hotheaded Irish/Italians of the East!

To me: Korean > Hong Kong > Japanese

About a week ago was the 18th anniversary of the Tiananmen Square Massacre. I just felt like talking a little bit about it now.

First, here’s a rockin’ video of it to fire up the pro-democracy camp before we start

All fired up now? Haha, let’s get on with it then!

I’ve written about this before, and what I found disturbing was many of the commentors who took the side of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP) in this act. They point out that “Look and how successful China is right now. If it wasn’t for the crushing of the student uprising in 1989, this Modern China would not have eventuated”.

To me, firstly this brutal crushing of that uprising clearly demonstrates how insecure the CCP towards its legitimacy to govern. Remember that its only mandate from the people that it had was back in 1949, when popular support for it among peasants resulted in it gaining power and the right to govern, winning the contest between it and the Kuomintang. This mandate (not from heaven anymore, but from the ordinary people) has not been renewed for close to 58 years now, since it does not hold popular elections. So it got mightily spooked when protests by a bunch of students rapidly gained widespread support from many other parties, including worker’s unions, intellectuals, and most crucially, the average Joes. This was a manifestation of the rot and lack of freedom prevalent in the system at that time. The support that those students got begs the question of under what mandate does the CCP has for continuing to govern China? By right, in an election, the CCP would probably have lost government then.

It is a measure of how poor a government’s skills are when it has to resort to shooting its own people when they show their displeasure towards it.

Now, fast forward in 2007, China is definitely a country on the rise. It has firmly taken the well-trodden path of the Asian Tigers before it in liberalising its economy and attracting tonnes of FDIs. It also laid the foundations for its continued ascension through providing a solid educational system for its population and good infrastructure for businesses (unlike poor India). Then those Tigers would rake in the moolah through intensively exporting its goods, and gradually moving up in what they produce. The only differrence and hence additional difficulty that it faces is its ridiculously large size, both in terms of landmass and population.

But what now? There is a general consensus that China has two alternative paths to choose from. The first is what those Western commentators prefer: Initial phase of consolidation of economic strength through autocracy, followed by secondary phase of political liberalisation. Actually, in all fairness, so what if those Westerners love preaching this model? As an Asian, I find it totally logical and appealing as well. This model has been successfully followed by:

1. South Korea
Dictator: Park Chung Hee (1961-1980s)
Start of true democracy: 1987

2. Taiwan
Dictator: Chiang Kai-Shek (1960-1980s)
Start of true democracy: 1990s

For the alternative, we have the ‘Enjoy your wealth and forget about politics model’. Interestingly, I can only find one good example of this model: Singapore. Single-handedly hauled up from the third world and into the first through the herculean effort off Lee Kuan Yew in the phenomenal space of 30 years. But is this model sustainable? The success of this ‘personality model’ hinges upon an outstanding (or more) individuals such as Mr Lee. But what happens when Mr Lee and co. are eventually replaced by a batch of less virtuous (in terms of incorruptibility anyway) men? Then by virtue of this personality-centralised model, it would be extremely difficult to oust that leader without violence, since no viable opposition were allowed to form and internal checks and balances have already been subjugated by that bad leader. If that happens, then this whole model will collapse. That’s why the sometimes unsightly democracies of Taiwan and South Korea are still the better model compared to Singapore’s, since once a robust democratic system takes root, it doesn’t matter if a corrupt or incompetent leader becomes the leader there, as once his flaws start to show, he would be duly shown the door in the next election.

Right now, it would seem that China is firmly adhering to the ‘Singapore model’. But unlike Singapore, corruption would be much harder to control and eliminate for China as the government there has to oversee a much larger country. Things might be good now there, thanks to a somewhat ‘good’ crop of leaders running the country, but what if the equivalent of a Robert Mugabe assumed power in the CCP? Then without any checks and balances provided by democracy, the country would go to hell again. Democracy also provides dissatisfied citizens an outlet to vent their anger and change their government bloodlessly. As it stands now, how will these things be accomplished in China? Do the Mainland Chinese people really want to go through another chaotic uprising when they want to change an un-viable government?

“People shouldn’t be afraid of their governments. Governments should be afraid of its people”.

If this statement does not apply a country, then something is not quite right there. Malaysians should do well to ponder on this as well.

I have always had terrible experiences in buying jeans that fit me.

Recently, my old jeans died. Holes formed. RIP.

So I had to go jeans hunting. And man, was the experience shyt. I was hoping I would be able to quickly grab one in less than 15 mins, but ended up spending close to 45 mins trying them on.

I have a waist size of 32, which judging from the lack of them in many of the stalls which I have checkout out, seems to be one of the most popular sizes. Also, it seemed that many of the jeans had cuttings which didn’t suit me at all. Price was also an issue. Went into Politix after being attracted to its huge “30% Off” signs and came out shell-shocked. Apparently the original prices for the jeans in there were about AUD$200+, so 30% off doesn’t exactly make it that much cheaper.

I used to be oblivious towards the types of jeans out there. It was only recently that I learnt there were bootcut, flare, straight, skinny and loose jeans. Phew. Decided to got for either bootcuts or flares, as straights and skinnies would have made an already skinny me look even skinnier. And loose jeans just makes me look like some kinda rapper wannabe.

FINALLY, after 2 forays into shopping malls, I found a couple of clothing chain which suited my shape: “Just Jeans” and “Jay Jays”. Bought a pair of bootcut jeans for AUD$60 from the former at Broadway. “Jeans West” has nice and relatively cheap jeans too, but all of their cuttings didn’t suit me at all. Must have all been made from the same mould… They have nice shirts though…