Into the World:
The Random Thoughts in My Mind

As someone (nominally) adhering to a leftist political ideology, the continued existence (and strengthening) of social class differences is quite a major issue for me. Obviously, as all leftists, I believe that the lack of equality in opportunity (or rather, the existence of double standards in which people at higher social classes get better access to education, job training, and business relationships that enable them to have greater chance of obtaining higher incomes...elitism, in short) is the fundamental reason for class gap to emerge. With elitism, social mobility that allows for descendants of lower class to move upward in social hierarchy exists just as an idealized principle. But at this point in time, I would like to question a basic premise of this argument. In modern society, we define social class as simply as a matter of income, as we assume that better educated people with jobs that require more sophistication is bound to make more money. Furthermore, we assume that t

Approaching a 10-day count until I finally depart for my job in Japan, I am thinking about what kind of hell that I will be expected to raise once I actually start working. No, really, otherwise why would I be hired in the first place? A Japanese company's business side compels the newbies to do some sales in the beginning. And obviously, a foreigner, whose spoken (not to mention written) Japanese has some serious problems, has no way to out-compete Japanese employees in talking Japanese customers in Japanese into buying random stuff (unless its a white/black guy doing door-to-door, then the Japanese people might actually be amused enough to listen...while, at least initially). And that explains why I get rejected from practically all Japanese companies with which I applied for a job. There is no need for many multilingual dudes claiming to know foreign markets considering these big conglomerates hire local talents in different localities around the globe. The local talents do

One thing that is really noticeable these days in China is the degree of non-propagandistic political underpinning that goes into literary works. In a country where even the news still contains plenty of brain-washing tactics on respecting and loving the Party, the (limited) freedoms of thoughts shown by even highly censored publishing business here in China has been quite amazing. From democracy to human rights, the usual suspects of government censorship abound, leading the usual reader to wonder whether the book s/he is reading somehow managed to slip through the censors. Obviously, the answer is no. Government censorship is as systematic as it has always been, reviewing every book that can possibly pack a slight tinge of political ideas for dissidence. There can only be two explanations for how "open" (relatively speaking, of course) the publishing industry in China has become. The first is growing skill of Chinese literati to hide "progressive" political i

Finishing the same book that I wrote about in the two previous posts, I was surprised how there could be an optimistic conclusion to such a depressing storyline. Amid a growing increase in the number of farming migrants to the Inner Mongolian grasslands, concerted efforts to eradicate wolves and introduce farmlands into the area are undertaken. While wolves no longer harm livestock and herders become settled residents with regular services and amenities enjoyed by other citizens, the grasslands slowly turned into a vast desert spewing sand toward Beijing to the south. It seems that under modern pressures, the grassland and its masters budged, abandoning the principles that kept the grasslands healthy and sustainable for centuries. A shallow perspective would feel that this is but another typical Chinese phenomenon of trading wealth for environment, but the author has pointed out the final and ultimate demise of the nomadic-herding tribes are the greatest loss. For generations, thro

In the last post, I talked about the inevitability of nomadic-herders to be assimilated by agriculture-based civilizations despite greater strength and understanding of military strategies. Surely enough, no country in this modern world is completely based on animal husbandry, and all of the major powers all have strong agricultural backgrounds and production capabilities. A Han Chinese or any other members of agriculture-based civilizations should be happily considering this point as a matter of fact. The strength of human capability to produce resources not naturally allotted by Mother Earth may be the most basic quality that distinguish it from mere beasts. But having such a self-righteous attitude belies one of the greatest faults of agriculture-based civilizations. In their quests to continue expansion, in population, societal organization, technology, industry, etc., it does not and refuses to believe that there could be a limit to such forward progress. Technology, so far at

Out of absolute boredom of staying at home and doing virtually nothing productive, I have been reading a Chinese book on the lives of Mongolian herders on the vast steppes of the Inner Mongolian Grasslands. Written as a personal narrative of a Han Chinese youngster escaping the violence of Cultural Revolution, it explores, from the perspective of the Han Chinese, the lifestyles, values, and beliefs of the "untamed" (i.e. not converted into permanent settled communities) Mongolians in an effort to understand the ethnic differences and the spectacular military history of Mongols and their ancestors. From the very beginning, the author establishes the bipolarity of "nomadic-herding civilization" (such as that of the Mongolians) vs. "agriculture-based civilization" (such as that of the Han Chinese). As a visitor from the agriculture-based civilization, the author immediately notices the respect the herders hold for the the wolf, a creature so hated and widely