Puspini's Book of Laughter and Forgetting

The Individual Self and the Social Self

2007-09-10T11:52:00.000+07:00

There are two kinds of selves : the individual self and the social self.

The individual self is the you that is completely selfish : the you that has interests, ambitions, dreams, interests and pursues those interests accordingly. This could be the you that chooses to join the army, leave your country to pursue a totally different career in some exotic place and the you who spends hours to yourself, envisioning plans and putting action agenda into your plans.

The social self is the you that shares and pools resources with those around you, for whatever motive. This is the you that hangs out with your buddies, play sports together, go shopping, watch a movie, watch sports events, go to the concert etc. At one extreme end, the social self could be the you that is currently sick of the solitaire of the individual you, and wishes to touch base with other human beings.

Somehow today during my afternoon jog around campus, I got to thinking : for a person who grew up in a tight communal culture, how much room is there to explore the individual self?

I have lived most of my life in an environment where a lot of my time within the 24-hours of the day is spent with the members of my community. Groups of friends throughout adolescence, we basically spent our afternoons and also weekends doing communal activities. In school, we decide together what classes to take, which high schools we wanna apply for etc. At work, which is a second family altogether, we compare notes on which graduate schools to apply to, what programs we wanna take and what kind of scholarship schemes are available, and also possible dissertation topics. As a result, a lot of my individual goals, interests and ambitions are shaped by that of my community’s, even though each of us have our own individual action plans.

Is this bad? It could be very bad, every time I enter into a new environment. The stark difference is manifested when the individual self comes before the social self, when my peers would rather invest time in their self-development, rather than hang out and share resources. It is also bad, in the sense that my decision-making process becomes highly dependent on the members of this community, whose better judgment I have trusted and relied upon when I’m faced with difficult situations. When members of this community are no longer near me, you can imagine how lost and crippled I feel….

Whatever the case may be, it has not become clearer to me than today, that I am about to embark on a completely solitary project, and I got lots of adjustment and catching up to do….The individual self needs to take charge and start exercising control, putting plans into actions and what not! Ofcourse that social self within me will always be around…it’s just waiting to find other like-minded kindred spirits who tend to merge the individual self and the social self!

Like Madonna to Britney

2007-06-06T22:38:00.000+07:00

The hosts of this cafe were my seniors at college. Popular figures, they were, admired for their ability to be smart and outspoken, but cool nonetheless. By being cool, I guess I'm using FEUI's popular definition of coolness, when you spend a significant amount of your time hanging out around campus,i.e. playing cards, horsing around, laughing, instead of spending most of your time at the library! ;-)

That, plus being one of the regular visitors at their cafe, concocting a drink such as this was.......like, 'wow'..... Kinda like Madonna is to Britney when the two collaborated in the song and video clip 'me against the music' I guess.

;-)

Cities and lovers

2007-05-21T22:40:00.000+07:00

Can you name one city in this world to which you would bestow the name 'Most Perfect City to Live in'? Have you ever passed by, travelled in and out, came accross or horsed around a city that just speaks to you from all its corners?

I'm talking about a city that can satisfy every single one of your emotional, intellectual and physical needs. One that gives you a range of entertaiment options from cultural, intellectual, arts, music, sports. One that satisfies your wish for a mind-blowing culinary experience. A city that provides its inhabitants with numerous cozy and inspiring corners, where people meet, talk, interact, debate, discuss and also whine, complain, compare notes on how life's antiques can occasionally throw them off their balances.

A city that is physically beautiful, where you can still feel nature, but you can't miss that buzz, that indistinguishible element of life. Such a city would be surrounded or close by the sea, maybe even a lake ( ok, a river will do as well!), green in all the right places, marked by classical yet eternally beautiful architecture, modern buildings designed with class and filled with just enough public spaces where people can stroll, stretch and enjoy the sunshine. A beautiful city can also be signified by the number and types of animals that you can spot in it. Birds : seagulls, doves or pigeons, dogs, squirrels, deers.....

I'm also talking about a city that knows no mental geographical border--it simply doesn't have an end- the more you explore it, the more you unravel and discover its beauty.

A city with soul. With a capital "S".

Sure, most of you'd say. If I did a quick survey, the following cities will definitely come up : New York, Paris, San Fransisco, Rome. My top three candidates would be New York, Paris and Istanbul. If I'm allowed to list five, I'll add San Fransisco and Vienna to the list. If I can add five more, I'll throw in : Sydney, Rome, Stockholm, Barcelona and Tokyo. I would probably have London up there, if only I've been there....If the size were a bit bigger, I would put Bologna in there, simply because of its classic and unparalelled beauty.

Imaginations and dreams can run pretty wild....but if I were asked the one city in which I would like to grow up, spend a good amount of my mature and wise years, and also grow old, my answer would probably be Jakarta. Yes, the city that has almost zero amount of the qualities I alluded to above. But Jakarta, to me, has a soul. With a capital S ;-). The paradoxical city that is full of controversies, full of assymetries, for some reason has that dwindling anti-climatic effect on me : the more I explore and integrate myself with it, the more I can come to terms with all its imperfections. Including the endless traffic jams, the lack (absence??) of walking spaces, the lack of fresh air and that chaotic and sometimes annoying J-walking of pedestrians...

All of this comparison gets me thinking....between the Perfect city and the city to which I attach partiality to....Wouldn't you say it's parallel to comparing between the perfect lover that simultaneously satisfies your emotional, intellectual and physical needs and one that you've grown so familiar and comfortable with, that all of its imperfection turns into an unconventional yet exceptional beauty to you?

Would YOU rather have a Jakarta lover? or would you constantly pursue a New York/Paris/London/Roman/Viennese lover? ;-)

An Online Conversation Over the Messenger

2007-05-08T11:04:00.000+07:00

Boy : BUZZ!
Boy : Hey....
Boy : I was just wondering if you got the invitation I sent you?
Girl: (notices her computer blinking and makes a move to shut the book she's reading..)
Girl: hey you....
Girl : yeah, I got it...Congratulations yah!
Boy: Thanks! So...you'll come?
Girl: to the wedding?
Boy: No, to the Barbeque party after! Ofcourse to the wedding, you silly girl!
Girl : hee hee
Girl : (fingers raised on top of her keyboard, pauses for a deep breath. Oh my God, he's getting married...It seems like only yesterday. Flashes of snapshots from the past suddenly struck her. The first time he picked her up at work, the movies and the sushis, the nights she used to bring food to his office when he was working late, the difficult long-distance communication after she left for Europe : painful late night phone calls full of emotional support for each other, shipping and packing gifts to and from Jakarta-Europe, the sweet emails, the way her heart stopped each time he called her 'baby' or 'sweetie'....But then there was the painful reality that she came to realize afterwards : it wasn't working....they were drifting apart...their two worlds were just too far apart......)
Girl : Sure, I'll be there...(C'mon, girl, all that happenned years ago, be happy he's found someone to settle down with...)
Boy : Thank you so much...your presence and blessing would mean a lot to me...
Boy : Terus, terus...how's life? What's going on with work?
Girl: Umm.....I'm ok...though some pretty big changes are imminent.
Boy : Huh? What's that? Are you going to school again?
Girl : Yeah....scheduled to leave for the US in a few months...
Boy : to do a Phd???
Girl : Yeah....
Boy: wooow, that's awesome! Congrats! Did you get a scholarship??
Girl : I was fortunate, yes....
Boy: woow, congratulations!! Oh man, look at you, I haven't even gotten a masters' yet, and here you are, about to do a Phd.... It's 1-0 for you!
Girl : (sporting a smile...she told herself : Oh well, but you are getting married, doesn't it make it 1-1, or maybe even 2-1 for you????...But Girl couldn't bring herself to type those thoughts....sigh, human beings and their egos....)
*blushing emoticon*....thanks, that's kind of you...
Boy: Hey , I gotta go now...Don't forget the D-date ok?
Girl : Insya allah, I'll be there. congrats again...
Boy : Thanks! Cu there yah...

--***----

What makes an economist?

2007-02-28T15:41:00.000+07:00

The roots of this question actually originated a few months back. In a conference on regional economic communities held in Beijing, an Australian colleague began his presentation by stating 'I'm actually not an economist.' Somehow, I think this was a warning to the audience (who were mostly economists) that his analysis will not be using any formal models or extensive exploration of data and statisticsl tools. But I thought he had his hands on the ball and was perfectly able to present the economic issues at stake. And then I asked him "what makes an economist anyway?" He and I threw in a couple of thoughts and but didn't come up with a definite reply. ....But today, my brother, again asked the same question. Basically his was "is it profession (training, what you do) or academics (formal educational degree) that makes you an economist?

So...I guess this is a poll : what makes a person an economist? Possible suggestions of mine listed below...

1. A degree (any degree) in economics?
2. A graduate degree in economics?
3. An affinity to numbers?
4. An extensive portfolio of research in economics?
5. The ability to formally express theories in a mathematical equation?
6. A reader of 'The Economist'?;-)
7. A person that favors reliance on self-regulating forces of the market?

I don't know, honestly....I do know that we somehow love to emphasize that our views on almost any matter are seen from 'an economic point of view' ;-)

Why my brother reads Mankiw in his spare time

2007-02-24T13:57:00.000+07:00

I belong to the sub-set of people who do not function very well in the morning. I need significant amount of time and caffeine to 'collect my soul' (ngumpulin nyawa would be the slank term in Indonesian) before I can march onwards and brave the day.

My brother, on the other hand, seems to be fully-charged come daylight. He reads the paper religiously and not just the news, also features, commentaries, business, op/eds- and he seems to digest everything in one gulp. A lot of what’s on the news are economic issues. Let’s do a quick inventory of some of them : the politics of import rice bans, the slow pace (or stagnant?) of the real sector recovery, micro-financing, why banks are ‘banking’ on the generous SBI interests instead of giving out lending to businesses, free-trade agreements, etc.

On more than a few occasions, always in the morning, he would greet me with something like this, ” Hey, Puspa, you’re the economist here- can you explain to me what’s meant by this person’s argument? He says that free-trade benefits the country’s citizens more through imports than by exports, what does this mean? What channel and how’s that possible?”
Another one would be something like “Puspa, the papers keep saying that the economy is stagnant, the real sector isn’t moving, but on the other hand, new shopping malls keep sprouting everywhere, is this not a sign of real sector activity???”

His sister must sadly disappoint him as (a) she just cannot deal with these things in the morning (not without that cup of espresso at least), (b) she’s just not good at orally articulating ideas and theoretical explanations without a proper trigger. Each time I try explain something, he poses more and more questions, questioning the assumption behind every explanation or providing counter-examples to the arguments and ideas that I tried to explain.

“Come on , Puspa, you gotta explain these things to me, I am not literate in macroeconomics, help me out here,” he said. Then I had a brilliant idea. One morning I came down to our living room with Greg Mankiw’s Macroeconomics in tow.

“Here you go, Bang—have fun!”

He seemed to appreciate my gesture. So he’s now reading Mankiw in his spare time, claiming to be more and more absorbed and enjoying the well-written book and learning the theories that are explained in a very digestible format. Aaaah, wonderful, I thought. I can enjoy my slow morning soul-collecting activity of leisurely reading the paper while I sip my beautiful home-made espresso…..

But, wait a minute! Now he actually goes on to questioning the theories!!
“Puspa- I just don’t get it, this National Income and Circular Flow thingy. Basically, if what it is earned from the production process of a good is equivalent to what we spend to make it, where’s the room for profit then?”

Yikes! Ok, ok, I get the message. My brother’s got the right approach- don’t be a lazy thinker who takes everything at face value: keep questioning, arguing, reasoning….I’m actually happy that knowledge-enthusiasts like him exist to keep on challenging thoughts.

But can we maybe do this in the afternoons or evenings, brother of mine? ;-)

Three (Unsolved?) Puzzles about Globalization

2007-02-21T00:40:00.000+07:00

Aaah, globalization : my favourite topic. Disclaimer: I am neither a blind supporter nor a fervent opposer. I am simply a stakeholder and I criticize any aspect of it that hampers progress. As my mentor used to say "ideologies are for those who are too lazy to think." One should never accept any proposal/assertion at face value. Instead, one needs to constantly reason and question. Soooo...in the interest of not being labeled a lazy bum potatoe who lets ideology do the thinking for her, I started asking myself some questions. I came up with three rather naive questions....

1. If the number crunching dudes (trade economists, that is) have repeatedly pointed out that the net benefits of globalization and free trade outweighs the costs, and that unilateral liberalization is actually the first-best scenario (as opposed to multilateral or regional), why is getting domestic support for trade liberalization such a difficult thing to do?

2. If trade deal negotiators realize that trade is not a zero-sum game, why do they always try to get a bargain and insist on making concessions?

3. If globalization creates both winners and losers at the national level - why is it so difficult to transfer the gains from the winners to the losers?

There are many ways to argue and offer answer to the questions....The main challenge is, articulating them in a succinct manner. Any takers? ;-)

My Best Friend is an Atheist

2007-02-12T17:44:00.000+07:00

My best friend is an atheist, I am a liberal muslim. By liberal, I mean I adhere to the belief in God and stick to practicing the very basic properties of Islam (shalat/daily prayers, fasting and zakat). I care less about the other dos and don’ts. He is a non-believer but has read both the Bible and the Qur’an inside out. I have never even finished reading the Qur’an. His understanding and knowledge on the history of religion surpasses mine significantly. Nevertheless, I think I can safely say that I am a firm believer in the existence of God and Islam, just as he is a firm believer in the absence of God and the power of reason.

Between our meals, coffees and drinks, many hours have been spent debating, arguing and discussing about religion, religiosity and religious behavior. We no longer live in the same city, but bytes and bandwiths still manage carry our thoughts across the ocean and provide us with a medium to exchange our views. So when I read this post from a friend on the internet, my immediate reaction was to forward the link to said best friend.

As expected, another debate ensued. He respects believers, and has never in any way belittles me and my belief, but he has a problem with the indomitable nature of religion. To him, religion does not want to be questioned nor criticized: religion IS, period, and can often drive fanatic believers to do irrational things. Reason on the other hand, is dialectical. It thrives for perfection the more and more you question it. Unlike religion, so he said…

How can I possibly accept that? How can I explain to him that for me, religion has been the exact opposite of that : the more I practice it, the more I feel that I’ve come closer to becoming a better person…. the more I practice it, the closer it brings me to my private dialogue with the Superior Being up there? How can I explain that I could not have survived many dark episodes and extremely low points in my life without my belief in God?

Then suddenly it occurred to me, that perhaps he and I weren’t exactly on the same wave length, perhaps we were comparing apples with bananas. I stumbled upon this post earlier, then it hit me. What kept me going so far was not my religion, but my Faith in God or what we in Indonesia would call iman. My faith in the existence of the Superior Being, above and beyond this universe, is what has helped me to escape some of the darkest episodes of my life. Faith in God has put me at ease, and established my continued assurance that in the very, very, very long run, this will work out for the best. It always has and it always will. What is religion then? Religion is a collection of teachings, a ‘how-to-get-to-know God’ kit. Without religion, without the properties of practicing shalat and fasting, I perhaps would not have found it in me, this faith in God…..

That of course, is my very own understanding of the word religion. But it surely isn’t that of those who plant suicidal bombs that killed hundreds of people. In fact, religion can and has been interpreted in many, many different and conflicting ways. But I think to fully comprehend this behavior, one must understand that in many aspects, religion has become a culture, an identity, one that is guarded carefully. If being a Muslim is what defines you, then yes, you would naturally want your kids to marry other muslims. If certain religious teachings have made what you are today, and the values and norms (i.e. never eat pork, never have pre-marital sex, never drink alcohol) are the values that you were brought up with, then you would naturally want to abide by it and demand that your environment understands that. If one believes that Prophet Mohammad is a noble man, one would naturally be angry at cartoon images that mock him. Sadly, one can also use religion as a justification of ill-behavior (and yes, I am talking about polygamy here!)

So there we have it, I finally admit that he is not entirely wrong ;-). Will we ever stop debating and arguing? I don’t think so. His decision to become an atheist was a conscious one, just as much conscious and aware as mine to become a believer. We’ll always be reading into things through different lenses. Besides, we are both conscious nerds who enjoy bickering and debating and fighting to have the last word in an argument. He usually wins though, and I resort to articulating in a blog, to appeal to other parties ;-)

2007-02-04T21:42:00.000+07:00

Ramblings on a dark and gloomy weekend in Jakarta

Various incoherent thoughts continue to juggle my mind this weekend, it's forcing me to contemplate and put down my thoughts in writing....
I can't help but wonder if happiness is an absolute or a relative concept... what about pain, is that relative as well? why not emotions and feelings all together---are they not relative?
The source of this confusion is ofcourse the course of events in the aftermath of this crazy flood hitting various parts of Jakarta, causing this big unruly city partially paralyzed...My neighborhood was hit pretty bad, so electricity was purposely shut down for about 40 hours. Friday morning to 3 am Sunday Morning. I woke up on Saturday feeling pretty eerie and restless due to the black out, "What? No Saturday Morning routine of veggiy-ing in front of the TV (infotainments on the background) while sipping coffee and reading my newspaper...??" Worse yet, the water is dead too...Then mom came out of her room carrying a bag of old clothes, "Give these to our tukang pijat, will you? She's now in that room massaging your grandma...Her whole family had to move out of their house because of the flood..."
Ouch.That hit home. Who am I to complain about a temporary cut of power and water? Our tukang pijat lives but a 10-15 minute walk from our house, is it possible that neighborhoods that close to ours have become victims? I went out for a walk with my cousin....Visited the local Indo Maret. Looks like there must have been at least 10 blocks that were hit by the black out as people were lining up to buy water/refill their Aqua gallons...No power in the store either...We continued our walk and kept on wondering, why were there no signs of a Posko Banjir, no centralized local help, no basecamp for help? What is this stupid neighborhood doing to help others?? Then we went to the nearest mosque...and there it was...families taking refuge...All with gloomy and desperate looks on their faces....U know what was still amazing?? There were no signs of where to deliver help! Who was taking care of all these ppl?
After some prodding we finally found the caretakers...but honestly, i was shocked by a couple of things. 1/.I really didn't realize there were that many less-fortunate ppl living in my neighborhood (the nightmare about floods is that its first victims are the less fortunate ones who live in the kampungs)....urban poor is and has been a really serious problem in Jakarta and 2/. organized help is scarce, ppl's first worries are their own supply of candles and water...Scary huh?
The effect on me was obvious. I stopped complaining about the power and water black out after the brutal truth hit me. See, one minute ago I was sad, then I consoled myself after seeing others' less fortunate than me. Now, doesn't that make happiness a relative concept? You tell me, I'm still not too convinced...
On another note, when the power finally returned, I humored myself with DVD marathons of....Beverly Hills 90210. Ouch, pretty lame huh? My brother seems to think so...Well, his idea of entertainment amids no electricity is reading Greg Mankiw's Macroeconomics....I can't help myself, though, I practically grew up with that TV series, and it doesn't help that the Walsh family are so much like my family....Only difference is that me and my brother aren't twins...and I have never dated any of his friends ;-)

Pseudo-psychological Hypothesis of Love and Conflict

2006-10-15T21:55:00.000+07:00

Ever wonder why there are conflicts in various parts of the world? Ever asked yourself why peoples of different interests and identities often find themselves so severely juxtaposed with each other that they end up in a non-stop clash? Why is it that perpetual peace seems to be an unattainable equilibrium condition?

A number of social and political science (including even economic) theories can help explain the prevalence of conflicts in this world. But let me be bold enough to propose to you a hypothesis that departs so far away from Hobbes’ leviathan and power maximization explanation or even Huntington’s Clash of Civilizations. My proposal is I guess more of a pseudo-sociological and pseudo-psychological approach to the matter. If an individual’s behavior can be a proxy to the society’s, if what happens at the society’s level is not more than a reflection of that of the individual, could it be that the reason why people are often at war with each other is perhaps because of the inability of human beings to remain at peace with themselves?

Individuals worry and fret about things ALL the time. When we don’t have a partner, we go about complaining about that lack of tickle and butterflies in the stomach, about the absence of someone with whom you could share the burden of life. When we do have a steady partner, sometimes we complain about the quality of the relationship. When life seems to have given you everything you could ever need and want in terms of physical, intellectual and emotional/spiritual needs, still you ask yourself : what’s next? What’s there left to go after?

When are we, as individuals ever at peace with ourselves? It could very well be : when we’re not in love. Please note that the object of love need not always be another individual, one can be in love with a life-style, with an idea, with an institution, with an ideology, with culture, with a nostalgic piece of land….. Love does a myriad of things to us, at one extreme end it makes us happy and ecstatic but at the opposite end it can make us sooooo sad. Love can lift you up so high and throw you right back down to earth and break you to pieces. But….even when it breaks us, tears us apart, brings us to our lowest point, we are most alive when we are in love. When we’re not in love, we feel numb, empty, dry and tend to lose perspective of life. But when we are driven by that adrenaline, that burning passion and desire for someone or something, when we start developing hopes and expectations of love, when we start putting ourselves in a gambling situation and raising the stakes for hope of an optimal outcome in love, .....we are so alive. Yet, this causes us, as individuals to be in a condition of perpetual conflict with ourselves….

So, what are we to do? Be emotion-less individuals, fall out of love in order to make peace with ourselves? Hmm…not so fast. There is absolutely NOTHING wrong with being restless, fidgety and passionate individuals, unless they make us blind to the fact that a billion other human beings are doing the same things. It may well be, that in pursuit of our love, we step into the feet of other people whose pursuit of love are adversely affected by our actions. Here’s where integrity and honesty comes in. Here’s when we are challenged to be able draw the line, between pursuing our passions and not hurting other people while doing so….

Bewildered? Confused? Protests? Ready to shoot me in the foot because of my irrational posting? Please have mercy! Remember that my idea is based on the assumption that the individual’s behavior is the perfect model, or representative of the society’s behavior, which is an assumption that is hardly realistic…. Anyways, this idea of mine is rather crazy and to a certain degree very off-track, but hey….don’t take me too seriously! After all, these are just crazy ramblings of an exhausted individual who’s restless and needs to be reminded what it feels like to be in love…..

Are we credible individuals?

2006-05-14T12:04:00.000+07:00

Thomas Schelling, last year's nobel laureate in economics (2005), is, I think, one of the smartest guys around. He understood the human psychology aspect of economics. In his seminal work on establishing credibility in monetary policy, he coined an interesting term, 'Strategic Self Frustration.' This is a process which rational individuals go through in their day to day lives, they would behave a certain way today and reverse it tomorrow, even though they know it may be detrimental. As rational individuals, we know that drinking and driving is not good. So if you drive to a party that serves alcohol, even though you had earlier decided that you will not drink (or at least not binge drink) at the party, you will still have an incentive to drink! Similarly, a government will always have an incentive to 'cheat,' or to put it simply, to not exercise discipline in carrying out their policies. This was believed by some to be the basis by which people advocate the 'Rules Rather than Discretion' view of policy making. Just like power tends to corrupt and absolute power tends to corrupt absolutely, policy makers with too much discretionary powers tend to perform badly, loses focus and lacking in discipline, therefore they need to be provided with clear rules as guidelines for their policy making. Otherwise, the government loses credibility.
Schelling's answer to this 'strategic self frustration' behavior is simple, one should imprison or incarcerate oneself. Take away the incentive and the tools and opportunity to 'cheat.' Someone should take away the car keys of the drunk driver at the party, governments should have one clear rule in monetary policy. Herein lies the solution to the credibility problem.
Is that always the case, though? What if we run into situations where it is practically impossible to have rules that are as clear-cut as rules in monetary policy? What if our subject matter is an individual's crediblity, instead of the government's? In a relationship, for example. If you're a Sex and the City Fan, would you abide by the famous Charlotte York's Rules, such as 'don't sleep with a guy on a first date or else he will ditch you,' OR 'don't open yourself up too much on a first date or he will lose interest'? A rather more personal case, my girlfriends know that if we go to a party, there's a high probability that we'd get drunk and the next day we'd be cursing ourselves with regret when the headache comes pounding and hangover is the state of the mind (and ofcourse the body). Or...as an chronic addict of friendster, multiply, instant messenger and other 'attractions' on the Net, I know that having these tools at my disposal, when I'm SUPPOSED to be writing a paper or preparing for an exam will be counter-productive....But hey! In most cases, you end up doing exactly what you anticipated restraining yourself from!
Theoretically, establishing rules is a good way of gaining credibility. But when you get down to it, rules, as they are created by human beings, are most likely going to be subjective, and the relevance will depend on the context of the analysis....So...before you incarcerate yourself completely, before you take away all discretionary powers from yourself, you should trust your judgment to review them on a case-to-case basis...we are, after all, supposed to be rational individuals right? ;-)

2006-04-26T02:12:00.000+07:00

Imperialism , was it ever Right?

Two books that we read for my 'philosophy' class this semester entertained the topic of imperialism, Lenin's "The Age of Imperialism" and Arendt's "The Origins of Totalitarianism." Both condemned imperialism, yet one was coming from an angry 'I hate capitalism' perspective, while the latter was from a more analytical, Hegellian view of history.

Hannah Arendt, an exiled German Jew, who developed a large chunk of her academic career in the US, postulated that imperialism undermined the political consensus upon which a modern nation-state was built. In the specific context of early 20th century events, she argued that this erosion of the nation-state, contributed to the rise of totalitarianism, which we all acknowledge is a bad thing...... Aha!

As I was sitting in front of the TV last night, with my Arendt book open and desperately trying to understand her argument, my German roomate walked in with her Italian boyfriend. When they asked me what I was up to, I replied with something within these lines....

A lesson for my European friend :" Gua bilang juga apa, Ndro.......imperialism is bad! "

The Italian seemed pretty shocked, "...but you can't really be so naive about it, Puspini...it was a pretty normal thing at that time....."

And I wonder how many other young people of the world, those that live in countries of former colinizers (imperialists?) spoke of the subject in such an undertone. Was it ever right to exploit the economic resources of a land of the so-called 'barbaric' for the interests of the more 'civilized' people, or even worse, for the economic and political ambitions of the bourgeosies in a faraway land? was this 'White Man's burden' argument ever plausible, just because it was the prevailing 'norm' at that period?

My answer, I guess would always suffer from the 'former colony' bias........But Arendt, to me, provided a political economic argument against imperialism.....so you can probably guess that she won my heart ;-)

2006-04-06T21:38:00.000+07:00

Welcome Mr. President

Here's a question for you all :

"What political motive do you think , drove the crazy decision of this country's president to come and give a speech at the nation's supposedly number one graduate school in international relations? "

Yup, Bush Jr.'s coming to give a talk at SAIS this Monday, April 10th.

Candidate explanations:

1. He would like to win the hearts and minds of the SAIS community "folks, you got it all wrong about Irak, democracy promotion in the Middle East IS the only way to win the fight against terrorism (unless ofcourse we want to force a regime change, we can always lead an allied invasion, under the pre-text of Weapons of Mass Destruction )"

2. "You know, about Katrina, there are man-made disasters and there are natural disasters...We can't do nothin' about them natural ones..."

3. He wants to give a pat in the back to his buddy Fukuyama and say "Son, we've parted ways, it seems..."

Any other ideas??????

2006-03-18T12:33:00.000+07:00

Brokeback on my mind : is it really all about culture

Two days ago I was giving my weekly Statistics tutorial and I was trying to come up with a good example to illustrate to my students the concept of probability and independent events. Guess what I came up with?

What does the event ‘sex : male or female’ have to do with ‘decision to see ‘gay cowboys’ movie Brokeback Mountain’? Is your decision to see the movie independent of your gender? Is it independent of your sexual orientation? booo-hooo...look who's got Brokeback stuck at the back of her mind ;-)

The initial point of attempting to illustrate the statistical concept turned into a heated debate. Most girls voted yes, and added that their boyfriends refused to watch the movie with them, because they couldn’t stand to see the smooching scenes. Girls had no problem watching guys kiss other guys, while guys feel utterly uneasy about it. Another half of the claimed that it’s not the case for them, some guys in the class (who claim to be straight) did see it. Naturally, no agreement was reached, but the majority seemed to have supported the thesis that being a straight male reduces your willingness to see men kissing other men.

The following day, I went to see Capote with my friend Chen, in an independent 'gay & lesbian' theatre in Dupont. Halfway through the movie, two women who were sitting in front of us started kissing…..

I was stunned for a moment. Rather perplexed, I tried to figure out what effects that scene had on me. Did it make me feel awkward, uneasy, did I find it repulsive? I wasn’t really sure, but one thing I knew for sure : I didn’t feel this way when I saw Ennis Del Mar and Jack Twist rolling around in a tent in Brokeback Mountain.

I can somewhat relate to the homophobic behavior exhibited by the straight guys who refuse to see Brokeback. ..…Perhaps, if you are hetero, you are more willing to remain indifferent to homosexual scenes of the opposite sex.....

One of my favourite anthropologists refuted this hypothesis, “Itu cuma budaya, Puspa, it’s all in your mind” Was he right? How could it be culture’s fault that I couldn’t help feeling what I felt?

His reply was something within these lines, “but what you are feeling is a reaction to your experiences, and your experiences from culture, and culture has taught you to raise an eye brow to homosexual scenes,”

He illustrated more examples, for example when a pregnant women is craving for some absurd object or food during her pregnancy , or the act of screaming outloud during orgasms, they are all rather artificial, people do it because it is what culture defines as the normal thing to do….

I took his point, but I was still confused. Can every ounce of feeling that we have , then be reduced to some form of social conception, to culture? Are our fears, worries, anger, emotions all a reaction to culture?

The next morning I was at Dulles Airport, about to board a plane to Boston, as I walked out of the gate, I felt a bloodrush, The plane was so small, 20 rows and 3 seats in each row. If there was one thing about flying that I dreaded was turbulents, and small planes makes turbulents even more scary! . Was I going to be okay? As the plane began to climb up,and went through turbulents, I closed my eyes and whispered endless prayers….

And then I thought to myself, ‘you know, puspini, do you really need to be so afraid? After all, ...it could just be culture’

Hffffffh, sigh of relief, I still don't have the answer to the culture question.... but at least the anthropologist's argument helped to calm my nerves!

2006-03-13T13:39:00.000+07:00

21st Century Hegellian

Last week it was abridged volumes of Marx's Das Kapital, this week it's John Stuart Mill's On Liberty and Principles of Political Economy. And the weeks before that there were Rousseau, Adam Smith, David Ricardo, Samuel Taylor Coleridge and Friedrich List. Geez, my Dad would be so proud to see that his daughter, the neo-classically trained economist from FEUI, the bastion of the Indonesian version of market fundamentalist, is being exposed to all these classic enlightenment and romantic philosophers.Yes, it is part of a course I'm doing at SAIS, a seminar on Theories of Modern Political Economy, but I've become such a junkie for political economy these days....and at this point, honestly I will kill anyone who refer to me as a Bloody Market Fundamentalist.

To me, it is such a shame that the education system in Indonesia gives scant room for introduction to philosophy.... Through the works of these writers I was able to peek into the seminal works of their predecessors such as Kant, Machiavelli, Hegel....It's such a wonder for me how centuries old texts still bears a ton of significance. Last week, an old buddy of mine in Jakarta and I discussed Western rationality, Hegel and Marx....Believe it or not, our discussion found ground on ..........a debate about Brokeback Mountain! How geeky can we be, pleeease!

rizal: thumbs down for brokeback
me : jgn nyela brokeback cuma gara2 gak doyan adegan hombreng dooong.
rizalshidiq : I'm a materialist, i fail to see the romance and beyond that.
me : hmmm....the materialistic conception of epic movies and their footages, you are original, my friend! That's what makes you a Marxist and me a Hegellian!

If You're Going to San Francisco

2006-03-13T13:06:00.000+07:00

There I was, sitting in a coffee shop called Caffe Bean, in the Theatre District of downtown San Francisco, quoted by Men's Health Magazine as the healthiest city to live in the United States. The coffe shop is owned by a Dutch guy, and they also serve an excellent brunch menu, a fusion of European style poffertjes, pancakes, crepes with the eggs all style and toast combo that you can always find in any diner accross Uncle Sam's land. A couple of German tourists were holding up the line at the cash register, as they seemed super excited about the menu and just could not make up their minds on what to order! A funny bunch they were...

After hiking about half the distance of this 700,000 inhabited city on foot with my friend Adam, I'm ready to agree with Men's Health. The hilly and amazing landscape of the city does live little to the imagination. The uphill part of the long-stretching 22nd Street, just before the famous gay-district called The Castro, was so steep they had to put steps on the sides to help pedestrians go up the distance. Beautiful scenery is surely plentiful and abundant in this city, beats the hell out of DC... SF's scorecard in supplying coffee also outperforms the DC coffee shops! Dude, they serve excellent coffee in this city! I was proud to have been able to stay away from Starbucks throughout my entire stay. Caffe Bean served me this amazing type of crepe called Dutch Pancake, hmm...superliscious.I could go on and on listing the wonderful things this city and its surrounding Bay Area have to offer. I could actually see people living up their Californian Dreams and I began to understand why people who grew up in this area have this desire to come back to settle in the area and find a job here. San Francisco is all that : Good coffee, beautiful scenery, interesting 'people watching' going-out scenes i.e. cool and fun bars/pubs/clubs, and... it's surrounded by the water! Boy this city seems that it has all the necessary elements that a a fidgety, restless young soul llike me could ever need and want...

At the same time I turned inwards, and searched for sings of identification, wondering if I could pick up signs of myself being in love with this city. It's gorgeous, it's beautiful, it's calm, it's by the sea, it's got character, people who go out here don't seem boring, there's more diversity in this city for its scale. For example, the Chinatown is home to some of the best Chinese food I've ever tasted (if you're a fan, and happen to be in the area, drop by House of Nan King, it'll be worthwhile!) There are even two Indonesian restaurants on the same block (around Post Street ) in downtown San Francisco!

But still....something seemed missing. It's the perfect urban vacation haven, but I don't know if I can live here....and I can't get over the fact that I can't seem to identify just what it is that's holding me back. Any ideas?

**Ironically, the weekend after I got back home, my flatmate put The Graduate on DVD for us.....sigh

2006-03-08T00:54:00.000+07:00

Agreeing to Disagree with Europe

Ever since my first visit to this mass of land across the Atlantic ocean, I've always been fascinated by Europe, the beautiful countries that make up the continent , the culture, the natural beauty of the landscapes, the food and especially the people. From the warm waters in Southern Italy , the lakes and amazing cliffs in Ireland, and the enigmatic and eclectic beauty of Sweden, more than a handful of Europeans have made their way into my heart. Out of the 10 or so of my classmates whom I consider my best friends, my comarades, about three quarters are Europeans. That's saying a lot, since half of my classmates are Americans.

There was a surreal touch to my blind love for Europe, admiration on the surface, without actually knowing what exactly lies underneath. Perhaps the explanation behind my love for Europe can be simply put as the following : Europe is not America. It is culture and civilization at its best, the bastion of cultural and political system prototypes. EU has developed into this ultimately ideal form of economic integration which I admired so much, that I became a stakeholder in its development. Yes, I was sad with the French and Dutch No Constitution Votes last year.

Perhaps at the same time that I’ve developed a passion for Europe, I was fed up with America. I was building up a lot of resentment , yet I was frustrated to see how my country depended so much on it and in quite good company, as the whole world "enjoys" the supply of governance and stability that the Hegemon secures us and provides us with. Perhaps the Asia-Europe connection really has a buzz to it.

Coming up closer and more personal with Europe, I came to realize it’s not quite the dream team I gave it credit for. Like all democracies, they are still dealing with lots of problems, particularly reconciling the adjustments that come with their experiments in political integration. And the one thing that I particularly felt after a closer encounter last year, was that prejudice and near racism was still prevalent among their ultra conservatives, although these are solely found in the very older generation. It doesn’t stop there, some of the big guns such as Germany, Austria, Netherlands and France are having enormous troubles integrating their immigrants, inflicting on them a handful of social and political instabilities.

But I guess the watershed in my perfect painting of a harmonious Asia-Europe relations was a heated debate that ensued between my best friend and I regarding the recent Danish cartoons/caricatures.

I’ve seen the caricatures and it’s hard to say whether or not I'm not offended. I may actually be able to see that it was not at all meant to be taken seriously. But do my ‘fellow’ muslim friends get that? Do the conservative branch, the FPI, the MUi and all those other people get it? It has been a European tradition to criticize their political leaders through caricatures and they even go to the extreme with their sacred figure of Jesus Christ.

I do not refute the current state of European norms and value that have become the underlying source of their hailed and prescious freedom of expression, and the separation of the state from the press (i.e. in no way can the Danish government in my view be held accountable for what its press publishes, if there’s anyone who should be doing an apology, it should rightly be the newspaper), but I'm sorry, i expected better of the Europeans, I expected more maturity.
When I talk about maturity, I am questioning the decision of the publication of the cartoons: it's simply provocative. I mean, come on....at a time like this? Considering the contentious climate between Western democracies and Islamic societies in the Middle East and Asia, when there are millions of idiots who still live in the middle ages, idiots that are stupid enough to continue using religious repression as a means of justifying terrorist acts? These idiots would just keep on having an excuse to 'blame it on the Western civilization.' It's like rubbing ice on a broken wound.....will there never be a way to understand each other's culture/customs/views on religion?

I’ve no excuse to the hot-headed irrational reaction of the so-called muslim world to the publication, I’m not happy at at all with the level of maturity that the Muslim world is exhibiting by burning flags and other forms of those violent protests. The fact that bugs me the most is that and my best friend and I can’t even agree to disagree. The epitome of a French citizen who strongly supports the EU and European identity, quite naturally he would insist that political freedom of expression is a universal right that should not be subject to any boundaries whatsoever, be it cultural, religious or whatnot. If Europeans are mature enough to just laugh at caricatures depicting Jesus Christ as gay, why can’t Muslims do the same?

Easy for him to say, since most of his generation have grown to become atheists and secularists, despite the fact that they continue to celebrate religious traditions such as Christmas and Easter.

Michael Walzer once said “ Justice is relative to social meanings”…..I would add “….. the same is true for rights.” Some values are not entirely universal. Please, don’t force us to assess what we view as proper or not based on your norms and values. There is still great room for mutual respect, even if we agree to disagree….…..