My blog has moved!

You will be automatically redirected to the new address. If that does not occur, visit
http://www.diannaeanderson.net
and update your bookmarks.

7.6.10

down the rabbit hole

I apologize in advance that this has nothing to do with a Japan update. It's something that's been on my mind a lot lately, and I wanted to get my thoughts out where my friends could read them. Regular updates will continue later.

Last summer, I went up to Dallas with a friend to see Coldplay live. It was my first time going up to the D/FW area without having the airport as my goal, so naturally, my friend Amber and I took some time and wandered about. We went to the West End of Dallas, and realized we were blocks from JFK's assassination site. Being naturally curious and interested in history, Amber and I walked over to Elm Street and discovered a number of people milling about and taking pictures. Realizing that this had to be the spot, Amber and I walked over to a low wall and looked around.

It was then that a homeless man (I think his name was Steve) came over and stood next to us. Steve pointed out to us the "x" in the middle of the road that signifies the exact spot where JFK got shot, and to the grassy knoll where there was supposedly a second gunman. He knew his history, and his also knew his own spin on it - he proceeded to tell us about how the parade had gotten rerouted the day before, putting the Kennedys in prime position for assassination, and how certain things about the day didn't add up. While he told me a lot of ostensibly true things, these kernels of truth were couched in an immensely complex story about how it was the Russian mob who wanted JFK dead, and that's why Lee Harvey was shot too on his route from the jail to the courthouse. This conspiracy theory stretched far and wide, to the highest levels of government. While Steve didn't provide a plausible reason for the Russian mob wanting JFK dead - something that seems to be lacking in a lot of JFK-centric theories - he was adamant that his version of the truth was the right one.

Since that moment, I've been hearing a lot of conspiracy theories about all sorts of different subjects. When one becomes involved in the social justice movement, one unfortunately encounters a lot of...well, odd...people who have their own pet theories to support, and reasons behind causes. I like to think that I will support a cause that leads to justice happening even if it comes from the mouth of someone spouting conspiracy as the cause for injustice, but lately, my patience has been stretching thin.

Conspiracy theories tend to fail a simple test of reason, and seem to function on a plane all their own - the less facts there are to support it, the more some will willingly believe it. Sure, I'm pretty fine with it if you want to believe that we didn't walk on the moon. I can't prove it to you (though, the Mythbusters made a darn good attempt recently) and it doesn't really strike me as something super important to living one's life. My problem comes in when you begin to base your actions, your way of looking at the world, through a filter of conspiracy.

Conspiracy theories are everywhere, from Illuminati symbolism in Lady Gaga's work, to the Catholic Church wanting to hide a sado-masochistic feminist sexual cult, to fluoride in the public water, to aliens. Each of these theories has their own supporters and some of them are harmless - like walking on the moon - but some have serious consequences if believed without independent research or, well, thought.

For example, there's a popular theory out there dealing with medicine and vaccines. The idea is that vaccines are actually pretty well useless, and some are even harmful, but the government and medical companies make money off of them, so they've hushed up the Truth. Based on one article published in the 1990s and then retracted by not only the scientific journal that published it but by nine of the ten authors who wrote it (the last we will get to later) and discredited by the scientific community at large [and most often by independent researchers who have nothing to gain], many contend that the vaccines - specifically an additive necessary to many vaccines called thimerosal - is linked to the recent uptick in the diagnoses of Autism in young children. As a result, those who support this theory do not vaccinate their children, resulting in 1. the child not being able to attend school because of the lack of vaccination, 2. the child being exposed to and vulnerable to several diseases that would otherwise have been harmless - indeed, without vaccines, a child is much more likely to die young.

Counter-arguments are multifarious and multifaceted. My basic question to answer conspiracy theory is "what's the end goal?" Who has something to gain by imparting an incurable condition on hundreds of children? The answer is usually: pharmaceutical companies who stand to make money off of vaccination, the government, which is in the pocket of Big Pharma, and doctors, who are often persuaded to test new drugs via incentive from the pharmaceutical companies.

I don't deny that there is a connection between pharmaceutical companies and the government. There are numerous Senators who are likely in the pocket of Big Medicine, just as an equal amount are in the pocket of Big Agriculture or Big Business. That is simply how things work in our system, and I agree immensely that this is a broken system - lobbyists and their ilk cause as many problems and road blocks to the way our government runs as the government does to itself through infighting, elections, etc. But, could Big Pharma and Big Government, so nestled in each other's pockets, have such far-reaching forethought as to knowingly put out a theory of vaccination, continue it for years and years, teach it to every biology teacher out there, fabricate studies saying vaccines work, and then quash a lone theory that claims there might be a causal relationship between vaccines and autism?

I honestly don't think our government's that smart. I mean, c'mon, Congressmen aren't even that good at hiding their extra-marital affairs. You think a conspiracy that would have to stretch over literally thousands, if not millions, of people, could be orchestrated by men who frequently can't remember to delete incriminating texts from their phones? And what would be the purpose of the hundreds of millions of vaccines donated to third world causes, Doctors Without Borders, disaster relief and free clinics?

Besides that, there are the mounds of proof against such a relationship between thimerosal and autism: remember that article I mentioned earlier? The one man who still says those results are valid lost his medical license in the United Kingdom after he used his son's birthday party as a medical study, giving the small children a test drug without asking for consent or even informing the parents what he was doing. He has now moved to the USA, and is making money off of selling his anti-vaccine conspiracy. There's also the argument that there really hasn't been an uptick in autism - we're just able to catch cases and symptoms earlier, and more kids are being diagnosed as a result. Because autism appears on a spectrum, we're ending up with diagnoses from mild to severe. Because of advancements in diagnostics, it seems like there are more than predicted in the 1990s, but that's only because the prediction was wrong, not that we have seen any actual increase.

The problem with conspiracy theories is that humans like stories. We liked complicated explanations because the simplest solution is often the most boring. It's much more fun to say that Lady Gaga is a mind-controlled robot who references this subtly in her work for those "in the know" than, maybe, just maybe, admitting that she's making some sort of artistic statement that only makes sense to her. Or an even simpler explanation: she just wants to make money by being as outrageous as humanly possible - shock value = monetary value in artistry as of late. But that, of course, doesn't make for a good story. It's much more fun to create the idea that there's this whole sector of elite that want to brainwash the public in order to...to...what now?

And here's where I run up against a brick wall with most conspiracy theories. What purpose do they serve? To what end would this conspiracy aim? Take the Russian mob-JFK assassination: What purpose did the Russian mob have in taking out JFK? Can you point me to tangible changes in policy with LBJ as president that would have served to aid the Russian mob? Is there some reason that taking out a well-liked, good liberal president and replacing him with another well-liked liberal president achieved any conspiratorial end? Or the vaccines - it would seem that knowingly causing autism would raise more costs for the government because, now that the kid is in the school system, they end up spending more of that vaccine cash on getting the kid in special education. It costs thousands more - to the taxpayer, to the government and to the pharmaceutical company - to educate a special needs student than it does an average, not handicapped child. The cost-benefit doesn't seem to work out.

Most conspiracy theories, to me, seem purposeless. While it's fun to tell the story, I have to question why in the world the government would benefit from having a dumber public (fluoride in the water) or why a giant oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico is somehow benefiting...well, anyone?

What it comes down to me is paranoia versus hope. With conspiracy theories, what you most often find is a general distrust of authority, to the extent that anyone speaking from an authoritative standpoint on an issue is not to be trusted. What action does this lead to? You don't vaccinate your kid. You don't attend church. You are an independent thinker! Huzzah? So what? You question absolutely everything, to the point where you don't know if you can even trust your own mind because it could be influenced by the entertainment you consume. You go so far down the rabbit hole that you don't know whether or not to trust anyone. You can't enjoy the music you're listening to because of the potential symbolism in it. You can't work at that place because they support mind control. To me, itt seems like a pretty paranoid existence if you take it too far.

To me, the problem is taking oneself out of the system. If the entire world is webbed in conspiracy and mind control and Illuminati and what not, then how in the world do I get out of this? Everything I touch - the couch I sit on, the computer I type on, the grape juice I drink - is tied into conspiracy. I can't even turn on my water faucet for fear of mind control. Who do I trust? No one. Who do I love? No one.

In the end, I can't take that sort of existence. That's where I see conspiracy theory headed - it doesn't teach critical thinking, but rather, paranoid excess of thought and mistrust. Conspiracy theories tend to be more destructive than edifying and less critical thinking than hypocritical "lack of proof proves my point."

Instead, I hope. I choose, instead, to see the better of people. Rather than always looking at the seedy underbelly, mistrusting my superiors or deflecting the blame for a bad occurrence off onto this unnamed conspiratorial force, I instead choose to think that most people are going through this world as I am - bumbling along, hoping to make the right choice, unable to see the future but hoping the decision I make is the right one.

It is much easier to argue for justice and love from a standpoint of hope than paranoia.

It is much easier to create a movement toward justice and hope if you are able to trust that education is the way to open minds to Truth and not a form of indoctrination of evil.

It is much easier to love others if I have the hope of Jesus Christ and the backing of the community of the Church, than if I see the Church as a mass of conspirators.

Basically, I tend to agree with Occam's Razor: the simplest solution is usually the right one.

Why do we have vaccines? Because it is the scientific community's consensus that this is the best way to prevent deadly diseases.

Why was JFK shot? Because Lee Harvey Oswald had some sort of grudge against him.

Why was Lee Harvey shot? Because he shot the President and pissed off a good number of people.

Why does the Catholic church have pagan imagery? Because, at the time it was founded, taking on symbols of the culture it was attempting to evangelize was a good way to get through to people - think St. Patrick and the bringing of the Gospel to Ireland.

Why does Lady Gaga have references to the all-seeing eye? Because these are potent artistic and literary symbols that afford an artistic expression, NOT literal expressions of mind-control (just think, if she was a mind-controlled robot, would she be able to give us little hints toward it?...I doubt it)...

So while it may be fun to go down the rabbit hole occasionally, and while it is usually good to take information with a grain of salt and do one's own fact-checking, we also need to be careful not to misread the text and remember the nature of the characters we're dealing with. Conspiracy may make for a good convoluted story, but in the end, it's usually the Butler who did it, with a simple smoking gun.

____

For more information on why, specifically, The Da Vinci Code is complete bull (from someone who has both read the book [twice] and studied the issue), leave a comment, or shoot me a message elsewhere. I'd be happy to give you some info.

5.6.10

konnichiwa!

If anyone had a time lapse camera trained at my desk in my living room, they would think I am a raging alcoholic. Every night, I have three or four wine glasses filled near to the brim with dark purple liquid.

But fear not! I am just a Baptist, drinking grape juice out of what happens to be the largest glass in my house - a large round wine glass.

I am still adjusting to this whole "having an entire apartment to myself" thing. In some respects, it still feels a bit like I'm just living in someone else's house for a little while before I get moved to a more permanent location, like in witness protection or something. On the other hand, I have decorated a bunch and have adjusted to sleeping in a bed that is just ever so slightly too small for my tall frame.

It's been a busy first week in Shimonoseki. I started teaching right from the get go on Tuesday, and have been enjoying my classes. The lower level English Oral Communication courses can be frustrating at times, especially as I have no way of talking to the students in any language but the one they are in that class to learn. I'm sure it will get more comfortable eventually, but for the time being, it's a bit frustrating. However, my writing class, composed of top level English students, is a breath of fresh air - the students can express themselves decently well and the language barrier is more of a low wall than an insurmountable fortress.

I've gotten to speak with my parents a couple of times, which is nice, and I'm slowly developing the ability to stay up past 10, which means I'm overcoming the jet-lag.

Sorry this is kind of a scatter-brained post, but I figured I should get something up so that you know I'm not dead.

Other adventures I've been having:

-I used the onsen for the first time yesterday. Discovered it doesn't drain into a pipe, but onto the floor of my bathroom (which has a drain). Unfortunately, said drain must be a bit clogged as it...well, took FOREVER to drain so I had to watch it carefully to make sure it didn't flood the whole room.

-I had fugu today. Yep, that's right: blowfish or pufferfish, depending on what you want to call it. It was deep-fried in some sort of batter, and was actually really, really delicious. Squid was also available at this lunch, but I didn't want to go too far into the exotic realm. ;)

-Today is my last day without a couch. My lovely neighbor, Linda, offered to buy me some furniture as a housewarming present. We found a nice, white leather with red trim, 50s Art Deco style couch for a pretty reasonable price, with free delivery. So tomorrow between 2 and 4, I will have a couch! (Which also means I now have a place for people to crash when they come to visit! Hint hint.)

-Linda and I also took the ferry across the strait to Mojiko today, and explored the town a bit. Shimonoseki, for those who don't know, sits on a strait between Japan's main Island and it's southernmost [large] island. Mojiko is a port town across the strait from Shimonoseki, and it takes 5 minutes by ferry to get there. They have stores that sell American goods, and a 31-foot tower where you can see for miles (see above). There's also a house there where Einstein stayed for a little while when he was in Japan in 1922.

-I am slowly conquering the grocery store - thus the presence of grape juice in my fridge. I have discovered (I think) a way to make Yakisoba noodles at home, so I've been having those a lot. I also discovered that peanut butter is very expensive here, so I need to be careful how much I eat at once (a fact I forget when it comes to the actual making of a sandwich). Bread here is about twice as thick as that in the states, which makes for interesting eating.

I'm settling in nicely and enjoying my time here. Next week, I'll be getting up at 3AM my time to hopefully watch England trounce the US, so if you're watching that game, you're watching it with me. And here's a parting gift, a video of my walk to work:

31.5.10

"rebolution in my mind"

I have no real idea what time it is.

It may be 8:00PM Japan time, but when I try to figure out what time it would be okay to call my parents back home, my clock gets all fuzzy. I think it's about 5AM there? But I have no real idea.

I have been in Japan for a total of two days now. Each day so far, around 2:00, when I am away from the computer and unable to write things down, I have great ideas for how I am going to approach this first blog - different approaches, ideas, stories to tell, already in just two days. Should I focus on the things that have been frustrating? Should I talk about the way Ted Tsutsumi, one of my bosses, limps everywhere he goes but still takes the stairs instead of the elevator? Should I discuss how weird it is to be thrown into teaching still jet lagged and feeling a bit ill? Should I discuss my night in Narita at all, or should I leave that for another time?

There are a lot of things I could cover. And a lot I don't have time for right now. See, it's 8PM, and I'm already sleepy. At about 4PM, I was having trouble writing my name. I had to fill out the same form three times: the first, my writing was neat enough for the Japanese man to decipher. The second, I put the wrong address down for my home address in the states. The third was thankfully done closely enough to right that they let me go on.

Forms. I think that's what most of my life for the past 48 hours has consisted of. Forms forms forms. There are forms for the bank, forms for alien registration, forms for customs, forms for getting my stamp, forms for taxes, forms for getting my rebates. Forms that I don't even know the purpose of but had to fill out anyway.

One interesting thing in Japan might just be their proclivity for signs, forms, and warnings. On the highway, there are mile markers (or kilometer markers, as the case is here) like you would find in the US...only between these mile markers are denotations of decreasing 10 point decimals. For example, between mile markers 7 and 8, you would see 7.9, 7.8, 7.7, every few yards. A bit unnecessary, if you ask me.

And then there's the stamp. Apparently, for official documents, a signature is not enough. Instead, each person (or most people, I guess), carry around a small stamp, as in an ink stamp. This stamp has the lettering for their name on it, and after a signature or in lieu of one, they put the stamp in red ink. I, too, now have a stamp, with the katama (Japanese script for foreign words) for "Anderson" on it. It's a cute little wooden piece, and I received a complementary case from the lady at the stamp shop with a little red ink pad in it.

However, as awesomely cool as it may be to have a stamp with the katama for my name on it...this process doesn't make much sense to me. What if someone steals my stamp? Or, more likely, what's to differentiate people with the same last name?

As one of my fellow Americans told me today, eventually you just stop asking why. And to some extent, I already have. I'm not asking why in the world they think that paper sticking to and covering the windows is somehow better at blocking daylight than a curtain (it's not). I'm not asking why they sort the trash into color coded bags. I'm not asking why their tubs wouldn't fit a 10 year old, much less a 5'8" 24 year old American. I'm not asking why they repeat times and dates, but don't tell me why I need to know them.

What I am asking is: Where the heck is my office?


___
PS: Blog post taking from a tshirt I found in the local department store. And no, the "b" is not a typo.

19.5.10

How Glenn Beck Convinced Me to Change

A few weeks ago, I was driving back from Austin in my roommate's car by myself. I was scanning through radio stations, trying to find something that wouldn't bore me, when I happened across one of the many conservative talk radio shows that populates this area (my normal choice is NPR, but it was in the middle of one of those ridiculous jazz improv/elevator muzak shows). This particular radio show was discussing the new AZ Immigration Bill, and within the five minutes of listening, I had heard more than enough denigration of illegal immigrants and maligning of character to last me a week. In anger, I looked down at the radio and gave it a mighty one-finger salute before changing the station.

I don't like myself when I get angry.

Though the story about the radio might be kind of funny (I mean, who flips off an inanimate object?), the lesson I've been slow to learn is that this reactive anger is not loving. No matter how right I may feel my argument is, it means nothing if I am unable to speak so in love and grace.

One thing I tend to forget in arguing is my positions were not arrived at easily. I was not convinced by comments on a blog, or by someone yelling at a TV screen. I believe my currently liberal leaning politics are the result of years of change, starting with friendships I had in high school, and things I learned in college and graduate school. There has been a good nine years worth of change behind what I write, and a good couple of years of research, living, and experience.

However, when I react to others, I tend not to afford them the same sort of benefit of doubt. When I write emails to my parents about Glenn Beck's latest "dangerous" statement, I forget that they have 36 years on me, and have probably spent similar amounts of time thinking about their issues.

Recently, I did what I do in my downtime: I got involved in an internet debate over SB 1070, Arizona's immigration bill. Having spent the last year developing a my own unique viewpoint on nationalism, borders, America, and immigration, I, of course, jumped into the debate with fury. "How could people hold such a view of Hispanics?" "Wow, that's a really ignorant statement!" "That's just so wrong!"

Of course, my arguments were much more fleshed out, and much more supported than those statements, but they are certainly things I said to myself as I put together my arguments. Bolstered by my smart friends who I love and respect joining in and saying that I was right, I continued the debate probably past the point it was doing any good. While I did achieve some concessions, I didn't convince anyone.

I've been realizing lately that my style of argument may need to change. Having been a debater in high school, and a naturally good writer, I tend to approach my arguments in a way that I'll lay out my case, attempt to respond to counter arguments in a way that bolsters my own point, and I rarely make concessions. This type of argument comes naturally to me because it allows me to be selfish: I don't have to actually listen to what the other side is saying. I just have to look for holes in their argument.

It's really hard to change this when we genuinely believe the other side is wrong.

It's darn near impossible to change a mode of thinking when it's an issue really close to one's heart, such as faith or politics.

But, as I've been slowly realizing, the only way to true community is not through divisive political arguments, but through genuinely listening and hearing out the other side.

This past weekend, my parents were in town for my graduation with my MA. On the way down to Austin, as is inevitable when my parents and I get together, politics came up. As it is common nowadays, the topic was the AZ immigration bill. I explained to my father that part of my objection to the bill is that it offers no provision for victims of trafficking - an illegal is an illegal is an illegal, regardless of their means of entrance into the country. My father listened to this explanation, and I could tell that he was thinking about it. He told me he hadn't thought of that angle, and it troubled him, because he knows it's an issue close to my heart.

This is the type of reaction I would like to model. Rather than just saying the words "I hear what you're saying," I want to actually hear people. I want to listen; I want to think about why they believe what they believe. I want to consider the whole of the person, not just the argument made. And maybe, just maybe, if I do this, I will eventually be able to listen to conservative radio and Glenn Beck without wanting to give the one-finger salute.

10.5.10

On Banksy and Street Art


I've spoken a bit before on this blog about my philosophy considering art in terms of how a Christian should consume it, but I don't know that I've spoken about what specific kinds of art I like.

I like art that challenges, that provokes, that pokes a little humor at things we take seriously, and that presents a perspective different from one's own. Modern art is some of my favorite stuff - Andy Warhol is fascinating, Gustav Klimt is great, and Annie Lebovitz is a great photographer. One of my favorite days was when Chase and I were in New York before leaving for India, and we went to the Museum of Modern Art. It was fantastic seeing what products older artists felt were important to their time - Warhol expressed his distaste for commercials by creating pop art. Annie Lebovitz sought to portray the world as she saw it through her camera lens. Klimt used color and romantic images to redefine humanity.

Each new piece of art gives us a different way of looking at life, and a lot of the time, the vision put forth by the artists is frequently one of hope, of looking beyond the pale into that green country under a swift sunrise that our world could become (that's a Lord of the Rings reference, for those of you who didn't catch it).

In this vein, I've recently become a fan of what you might call street art or anarchic art. It's art that is produced in unconventional venue and by unconventional means. Rather than oil paints, paintbrushes and a canvas, the artist uses a blank wall and spray paint cans. British artist, Banksy, is remarkable in this manner.

The above is Banksy's "One Nation" work. I'm not sure on the history, but the term CCTV is British, and refers to Closed Circuit Television Cameras - security cameras. They are all over the place in England - one of my favorite movies has a line that Britain is "the most watched nation on Earth." Banksy's work is a comment on that fact, pulling in the idea of Orwell's Big Brother, and of course, "One Nation Under ___" is a comment most are familiar with because of the repeated phrase from the American Pledge of Allegiance. It's an interesting commentary on the tension between security and privacy in both England and America.

In this vein, tonight I discovered what is supposed to be a humor site called Hacked IRL (In Real Life), which catalogs graffiti done in various spots. I was surprised that many of the posts actually contained what could be considered art, if not on the same level as Banksy, at least clearly influenced by him.

This art exhibits a different way of looking at the world, a way to make a statement and a way to give me some hope that there are some creative people still left in the world.

Basically, I'm bringing this up because I'd like to challenge you to look at the world in different ways this week. What new ways can you find hope? What new ways can you challenge people? Do you choose to speak in a way that brings people into conversation?

5.5.10

"now that I have seen, I am responsible"

A fellow blogger/author who is in the Dominican Republic right now working with Haitian Refugees posted that he can't get this song (below) out of his head.



In this interconnected, globally smaller world, all of us have seen, and all are held responsible. This artist, New Zealander Brooke Fraser, commented once in an article that "I'd rather be seen as a fool for trying to change the world then not do anything at all."

Lord, never let me forget India. Never let me forget what I have seen, the people I have met, and the things I know of your love.

Related.

3.5.10

Pray For Tennessee

The pictures and video coming out of Tennessee this past week have been horrifying and beautiful in their own ways. For those of you who don't know, Nashville received record rainfall over the weekend, causing flooding throughout the city. The below video has some images from the floods, and gives you a small glimpse of how truly bad it is.



Disasters like this remind me of how truly fragile everything we have is. I think that's why I like storms so much - it's a terrifyingly beautiful reminder of how brief and tenuous our grasp on life is. When things like this come, what matters is not whether or not my stuff is alright, or that my house is destroyed - all of that is just stuff. What matters is whether or not my family and friends are okay, have a good meal to eat and a warm place to sleep.

You can donate to help relief efforts at the Red Cross' website. This is a place right on our home turf, and many friends and family are in the area - Faceless International is headquartered in Franklin, just outside of Nashville. We must help.