Month: February 2012

The Asia Pacific Foundation of Canada’s National Conversation on Asia team and the UBC Political Science Students Association will host an undergraduate student conference,Campus Conversations on Asia: The Values Question, at SFU’s Segal School located in downtown Vancouver. Please feel free to distribute this invitation to interested undergraduate students.

Where: 500 Granville Street, Vancouver, BC

When: March 3, 2012

Time: From 9:30 am to 3:30pm (reception to follow)

The day will feature Professor Paul Evans as the keynote speaker, as well as a panel of young Asia scholars and practitioners, a Korean drum performance, break-out sessions and a reception to finish off the day.

We welcome students from any post-secondary institution in the lower mainland. Students do not need a background in Asia to attend. Admission is free, and breakfast and lunch will be provided, but participants must fill out a registration form to confirm their attendance.

Keynote speaker‚s bio:

Paul Evans is the Director of the Institute of Asian Research (UBC) and one of Canada‚s leading thinkers on the future of Canada-Asia relations. He has been appointed at York University, the University of Toronto, Harvard University the Liu Institute for Global Issues, and the Asia Pacific Foundation of Canada. He has also been a visiting fellow at the Australian National University, National Chengchi University (Taiwan), Chulalongkorn University (Thailand), and the National Institute for Research Advancement in Tokyo (Japan). For a full bio, click here.

Panelists‚ bios:

Robert Hanlon is a Postdoctoral Research Fellow at the Institute of Asian Research (UBC) and a Lecturer at SFU, focusing on bribery, corruption and human rights in Asia. Check out his blog here.

Joanna Wong is writer, filmmaker and communications strategist on Chin’‚s emerging environmental movement. Joanna is also an Action Canada Fellow and a Principal at FlowCS, an award-winning film and creative studio dedicated to sustainability in China. Check out her videos and blog on the Human Element in China.

Aim Sinpeng is a Ph.D. candidate in the Department of Political Science (UBC) and a Visiting Research Fellow at Thammasat University. Aim focuses on democratization and civil society in Southeast Asia, the party system in Thailand and south Thai politics. Check out her blog here.

There is a website that I frequent because it puts up a lot of interesting information in fun graphs, infographics and pictures. Information is Beautiful posts a wide range of topics from China’s censorship to illegal drugs. The following image is from their “Left vs Right (World)” post, outlining the basic gist of the left-wing and right-wing political ideologies.

There is only so much that you can include in a diagram trying to distinguish the political left from right. This is a generic point to start understanding the main differences between the two sides but we need to keep in mind that there are many degrees of variation on political views (even within the same one). This diagram makes the right-wing way of thinking to be completely cold, calculated and rational, while the left-wing ideas promote more positive views on humanity. While it is true that the right-wing tends to support war, morals and discipline, it should be understood that left-wing can have corruption, discipline and rules.

And what about the people that do not fall strictly into one wing or another? When I was younger and just beginning to learn about political terms and ideas, I was massively confused. What the media taught me was that (I watched a lot of US politics on CNN) you are either left or right. There I stood, utterly confused at how I could possibly believe in personal AND economic freedom supported by a minimal government role in each aspect. For example, on this graph, I agree with the leftist thought of being progressive and supporting personal freedom. However, I also believe in the right wing ideals of non-interference in society, low taxes, and economic freedom.Yet, I do not believe in organized religion and I fully support gay and abortion rights.

What this diagram shows is that many of us are still stuck in a dichotomous way of thinking, when there are eons of possibilities for a political perspective. Left and right are the most basic division in politics but that should not encourage or pressure people to conform to simply one side or another.

Back in November, 2008, California introduced a referendum known as Proposition 8 that banned same-sex unions. Two years later, it was overturned by a court ruling. And now, a three-judge panel on the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals says that the initial Proposition is unconstitutional.

Proposition 8 originally stated that “only marriage between a man and a woman is valid or recognised in California”. Then, two same-sex couples challenged the statement because it violated their right to equal protection. The 2010 overturning of the ban claimed that Proposition 8 was a violation of civil rights.

My first reaction to the latest news on this issue? About time. It surprises and angers me how people can be so ignorant to ban a civil union between two people that love each other. Why should the government, or any other people, have the right to decide whether or not a couple can be recognized as a union? The opponents of gay marriage argue that same-sex marriage can be dangerous to society by producing gay children, or that it is unnatural and unholy. They pass judgment on gay people and the gay community based on their prejudices on what should be the norm in our culture. Yes, heterosexuality is still a dominating social norm but we need to change that and accept those that are constantly denied freedoms and marginalized. Gay people don’t necessarily produce gay children, just as a heterosexual couple can produce a homosexual child. There is absolutely no reason to think that allowing same-sex marriage will harm society. If anything, lifting the ban will encourage openness and development of diversity among us. And, really, why should straight people care whether someone they choose not to support or accept wants to marry someone they love? Discrimination of gay people and banning gay marriage is just as digressive and destructive as racism, religious intolerance, sexism, and anything you can think of.

I hope that more states move in the direction of legalizing gay marriage.

Fidel Castro unveiled a two-volume memoir of his life, titled “Fidel Castro Ruz: Guerilla of Time”. The books include everything Castro could remember from his infancy to the eve of the Cuban Revolution victory in December, 1958. Yesterday, he presented his 1000-page work for six hours to the press.

Castro said he is “willing to do everything possible to share everything I remember well”. He is being encouraged to continue writing and overcome the difficulties of remembering the past.

This memoir certainly will be an interesting read; the leader of the Cuban Revolution and the former Cuban president of 50 years must have a lot of insightful stories to share. I cannot even fathom what it would be like to be part of such a historic event and be a prominent figure in world politics. There is no doubt that Castro has seen and experienced a myriad things – both good and bad – that will affect the reader in one way or another.

There are lots of politicians who simply write memoirs to get their name out and facilitate their political agenda. Would Castro be one of them? I don’t think so, seeing as he is 85 years old and handed over his presidency to his brother in 2008. He knows he is aging and he must show the life he lived and the disastrous world from his perspective.