Young Arabs Cross the Rubicon

“I do have an unyielding belief that all people yearn for certain things: the ability to speak your mind and have a say in how you are governed; confidence in the rule of law and the equal administration of justice; government that is transparent and doesn’t steal from the people; the freedom to live as you choose. Those are not just American ideas, they are human rights, and that is why we will support them everywhere.”

Those were the stirring words President Obama used at his Cairo speech in June of 2009. But eloquence and oratory cannot mask reality. As Egyptians rise is revolt against the kleptocracy of Hosni Mubarak, the Obama administration is desperately trying to adjust its sails against the furious wind of change sweeping Egypt. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton initially praised Egypt’s “stability” under Mubarak but now that the Arabs have crossed Rubicon, she is using words like “restraint” and “reform” and urging “transition to a democratic regime.”

Why does the United States so often finds itself on the wrong side of history, at least initially? Why does it so easily settle for Faustian bargains with autocrats like Mubarak? For the Muslim world, in particular, America’s policy has been driven by an irrational combination of oil, Israel and Islamic terror. Mubarak used the bogeyman of “Islamic Jihadists” (Muslim brotherhood in his case) to convince America that keeping him in power was the only option, and so our government obliged him with $1.3b in military aid every year. Not just the tanks and the fighter planes, even the tear gas and the rubber bullets being used against Egyptians bear the label “Made in America.” Only the water in the water cannons presumably comes from the Nile. Is it any wonder that ordinary Egyptians do not quite look upon America as a beacon of freedom and democracy?

In his second State of the Union address on January 25, President Obama equated Tunisian revolution with freedom. “We saw,” he said, “that same desire to be free in Tunisia, where the will of the people proved more powerful that the writ of a dictator. And tonight, let us be clear: the United States of America stands with the people of Tunisia, and supports the democratic aspirations of all people.”

What a golden opportunity the President missed by not including Egypt in his address! Extolling the virtues of democracy, the President said, “… as contentious and frustrating and messy as our democracy can sometime be, I know there isn’t a person here who would trade places with any other nation on earth. We may have differences in policy, but we all believe in the rights enshrined in our Constitution. We may have different opinions but we believe in the same promise that says this is a place where you can make it if you try. We may have different backgrounds, but we believe in the same dream that says this is a country where anything’s possible, no matter who you are, no matter where you come from.”

As my Egyptian friend Mustafa asked: “Does this mean that the United States reserves the right to experiment with democracy to enjoy its fruits, while Muslim puppets deny democracy to their people to cater to misguided American interests? This is nothing but arrogance and hypocrisy.”

American-Muslims, meanwhile, have thrown their full support behind Egyptians fighting unarmed for their freedom. During the Friday Khutbah in the largest mosque in California’s Silicon Valley, for instance, the Imam urged us to pray for their success in throwing out the pharaoh and preventing dynastic decadence. In solidarity with the Egyptian anger revolution, American Muslims have already demonstrated in San Francisco, New York, Los Angeles, Chicago and Boston. More protest marches are planned.

During the Tunisian revolution, President Zine El Abidine Ben Ali and his sycophants cut off Internet access, particularly access to Facebook. As reported by Alexis Madrigal of The Atlantic, the Facebook security team at its headquarters in Silicon Valley discovered that Ammar, the nickname Tunisians have given to the authorities that censor the Internet, was trying to steal an entire country's worth of passwords. With the stolen passwords, Ammar was deleting Tunisians’ Facebook accounts!

After more than ten days of intensive investigation, Facebook's security team realized that Tunisia’s Internet service providers (ISP) were running a malicious piece of code that was recording users' login information when they went to sites like Facebook.

The security team coded a two-step response. First, all Tunisian requests for Facebook were routed to an https server. The https protocol encrypts the information sent across it (the “s” in “https” stands for “secure” or “secure sockets layer” (SSL), so it is not vulnerable to the keylogging strategy used by the Tunisian ISPs. The second technical solution was a "roadblock" for anyone who had logged out and then back in during the time when the Tunisian malicious code was running.

Facebook rolled out the new solutions to all of Tunisia five days after the company discovered what was happening, and access to the site was restored.

Hosni Mubarak also followed the path of his now-deposed fellow-dictator: He ordered the state-controlled ISPs to completely cut off Egypt’s Internet access. But Egyptians were not deterred. The air was charged with electricity and possibilities. The revolution had taken on a momentum of its own, and while Facebook and Twitter initially helped, Egyptians had already transcended the Internet.

Still, it is reasonable to expect that companies like Facebook will give special consideration to activists trying to overthrow repressive regimes. If the company wants to remain central to people's political aspirations, it has to come up with a powerful, long-term solution that can be activated at a moment’s notice when access to the site is denied by any country. From a hardware point of view, if dictators block Internet data pipes into their countries, perhaps multiple satellite connections as backups can be in place so that communication can continue uninterrupted in spite of latency issues.

However the technology evolves, the days of dictators who equate dissent with treason and oppress and torture their people are coming to an end. Muslim nations are beset by modern-day pharaohs. For the creativity of millions of Muslims to flower in freedom, the pharaohs will be overthrown, if not today, then certainly tomorrow. That is the lesson of Tunisia and Egypt.

In Solidarity with the Egyptian Anger Revolution

American-Egyptians in the San Francisco Bay Area, supported by all the local Islamic organizations, have planned a protest march in San Francisco on Saturday, 29^th January, at the corner of Market and Montgomery, at 12 noon.

“We are all united behind Egyptians defying curfews and protesting the oppressive and illegitimate regime of Hosni Mubarak,” said a Silicon Valley engineer who migrated to the U.S from Alexandria a decade ago. “The Pharaoh must go.”

“I am so proud to see my countrymen finally throwing away their fear and taking on this brutal police state. For 30 years, Mubarak has kept us hostage. The poor have no food. The middle class is not doing any better. There is no peace for anyone. This must end,” said an Egyptian businessman from San Jose, who wishes he were in Tahir Square, Cairo, right now.

Anwar, who has been in the U.S. for 25 years, is delirious with joy at what is taking place in Egypt. But he isn’t sure the military will desert Mubarak anytime soon, since he is one of them. “We haven’t reached the tipping point yet,” he said, “but this revolution will not fizzle. Egyptians have suffered for too long. Freedom will come soon, God willing.”

Egypt has taken a cue from Tunisia. Just as the Tunisian president Ben Ali was forced to flee Tunisia after Tunisian youth rose in revolt, they want the same fate for Mubarak.

Egyptians are calling on all freedom-loving people, including Americans from all walks of life, to join them in protesting the tyrannical government of Hosni Mubarak on Saturday in San Francisco. The Arabic words in the poster they are circulating for the Saturday March read, from the top, Ash Shabu (The People), Yuridu (Want), Isqatan Nizam (The Fall of the Government).

State of the Union Address and Community Colleges

A significant part of President Obama’s Second State of the Union (SOTU) address dealt with education. Already flagged as the “education president,” Mr. Obama asserted that his “Race to the Top” program was superior to George Bush’s “No Child Left Behind,” because it is “more flexible and focused on what's best for our kids.” What do states have to do to qualify for the $4.3 billion fund in “Race to the Top”? They have to come up with "the most innovative plans to improve teacher quality and student achievement.” If they can do that, “we'll show you the money," the President said.

Teacher quality and student achievements will define the future of education in America. But how are these being implemented, particularly in community colleges? Oratory and eloquence cannot mask reality. The recession has forced many colleges to cut classes and programs across the board and layoff teachers or force pay cuts. A grim and uncertain air hangs over these institutions.

“Because people need to be able to train for new jobs and careers in today's fast-changing economy, we are also revitalizing America's community colleges,” the President said. He gave some examples of successes but overall, educators agree that the revitalization of community colleges exists only in theory and not in practice.

All the educational reforms of the past several decades share one thing in common: meager results. A report issued by the Institute for Higher Education Leadership and Policy at Cal State Sacramento, for example, documents abysmally low student transfer and completion rates at California’s community colleges. Of the students who started out with the intention of transferring to a University of California or Cal State school, just 23% had made the jump six years later. Transfer rates for Latino and black students were even worse. Only 14% of Latino students and 20% of African American students successfully made the move to a four-year college.

Clearly, community colleges are in dire need of revitalization. Giving pink slips to good teachers because they are younger and do not have tenure is the wrong way to go about it, however. Imposing outdated curricula on students that have no relevance to 21st-century skills is a prescription for failure. Community colleges routinely turn away qualified teachers because they do not hold this or that certificate, this or that equivalency, even though they have acquired a vast amount of useful knowledge in their fields through work and research. This is short-sighted and self-defeating.

While the government must do its share, community colleges themselves must also step up to the plate. They must get rid of arcane rules and regulations so that their classrooms can be filled with gifted teachers. When students interact with engaging and knowledgeable teachers, learning flourishes and doing big things becomes possible.

Of Chinese and American Mothers

American media is abuzz with news of China these days. As President Barack Obama plays host to Chinese President Hu Jintao and both leaders agree to cooperate on various fronts, there is an undeniable undercurrent of unease and anxiety in America over China’s seemingly unstoppable ascendancy.

China’s economy is the envy of the world. In technology, particularly green technology, China’s progress has been astonishing. By testing a new generation of stealth fighters, China has informed the world that its military is keeping pace with its soaring geopolitical ambition.

But two recent “events” have compelled the attention of the average American even more than China’s material and military progress, increasing the anxiety level.

One was the result of an international study, released in December 2010, (http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/54/12/46643496.pdf) that looked at how students from 65 countries performed in reading, science and math. Traditional powerhouses have been Singapore, South Korea, Finland, Canada and Japan. But the clear winner in all three categories by a wide margin this time was Shanghai, China!

The United States? It came in 17^th in reading, 23^rd in science and 31^st in math.

As if to explain the phenomenon, the other “event” appeared in the form of an essay in The Wall Street Journal on January 8. Written by Amy Chua, a professor at Yale Law school and titled, “Why Chinese Mothers Are Superior,” it was excerpted from her book, “Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother.”

Chua’s thesis is as stark as it is uncompromising: Chinese mothers are superior to their Western counterparts because they demand the best of their children and drive them relentlessly until they are at the top. They know that “nothing is fun until you are good at it,” and that one becomes good at something only through hard work and discipline. Since “children on their own never want to work, it is crucial to override their preferences.” Chinese mothers override their children’s preferences routinely and ruthlessly until they have reached, and exceeded, their goals.

In Chua’s case, nothing less than an “A” in every subject (except gym and drama which she considered unimportant) was acceptable from her two daughters, Sophia and Louisa, starting when they were 6. “For example,” says Chua, “if a child comes home with an A-minus on a test, a Western parent will most likely praise the child. The Chinese mother will gasp in horror and ask what went wrong … Chinese parents can order their kids to get straight As. Western parents can only ask their kids to try their best.”

Chua never let her daughters watch TV or play video games. There were no sleepovers or extra-curricular activities or computers. Once, Sophia came in second to a Korean kid in a math competition, so Chua made her do 2,000 math problems a night until she regained the top spot.

7-year-old Louisa was having difficulty once mastering a particularly difficult piano piece. Chua made her practice almost to the breaking point, night and day. There were tears, screams, insults, threats to burn all the toys. “I wouldn't let Lulu get up, not for water, not even to go to the bathroom. The house became a war zone, and I lost my voice yelling.”

In the end, Louisa was able to give the perfect recital before an audience. Chua finds American parenting weak, aimless and half-hearted. American parents are too concerned about a child’s self-esteem. The child may be lazy and manipulative but hurt his tender feelings? Heavens, no! American parents are consumed by the present - what’s going on with their children’s education here and now - whereas Chinese parents groom their kids for the future, with all the attendant sacrifices, be it to become a math whiz or a musical prodigy.

The furor erupted immediately. Parents and pundits of America pounced on Chua’s claims with outrage, scorn, even mockery. A representative response came from Ayelet Waldman, a writer based in Berkeley, California.

Comparing her style with Chua’s point by point, Waldman pointed out that she resisted any attempt to impose the violin or the piano on her children. She encouraged sleepovers, watching TV, playing video games, the use of computers and the Internet. She is grateful if her children are satisfied with their efforts in tests, the score notwithstanding. She wants her kids to have fun while learning and acquire good social skills that come only from human interaction and never from books. She wants her kids to be happy, even though she knows that there is enough trauma in any home to make this as daunting as a perfect SAT score.

Waldman’s point is that most children eventually find their way, through failure as much as through success. Parents just have to trust them, guiding them with a firmness tempered by love. If a child is passionate about reading and loves books, even if she is dyslexic (as Waldman’s daughter was), she can overcome her handicap and come out of the experience surer of herself, “a more powerful and tenacious person.”

The danger here is to generalize and claim that this or that method of parenting is superior. There is no perfect parenting code because every parent has to learn on the fly, even if there is much in the tradition to fall back on. The right parenting skills lie somewhere between flexibility and firmness, between tough love and unquestioning love, between nature and nurture, between reining in and letting go, between, one may say, prose and poetry.

Every child, like every snowflake, is unique, and one size will never fit all. As Waldman puts it, “roaring like a tiger turns some children into pianists who debut at Carnegie Hall but only crushes others. Coddling gives some the excuse to fail and others the chance to succeed. Amy Chua and I both understand that our job as mothers is to be the type of tigress that each of our different cubs needs.”

Amy Chua’s views on parenting style almost unleashed a clash of cultures, especially when a commentator pointed out that Asian-American girls aged 15 to 24 have above average rates of suicide. However, things have settled down somewhat and the consensus is that each culture brings something unique to the table when it comes to parenting. Those with open minds can pick up pointers from other cultures to add to their parenting skills.

Rudyard Kipling thought that “East is East and West is West, and never the twain shall meet,” but in this Age of the Internet, East and West meet everyday in the marketplace of ideas – including ideas about parenting - and both are enriched in the process.

Tunisia Shows the Way

When the history of the downfall of Arab dictators is written – ten years, twenty years, even 50 years from now – one name will find an honored place in it: Mohammed Bouazizi of Tunisia.

The 26-year-old with a degree in computer science couldn’t find employment, a fate he shared with 200,000 fellow Tunisian graduates in a population of 10 million. Driven to despair, he tried to sell fruits and vegetables to make a living. The corrupt, repressive police arrested him for lack of a “license” to operate as a street vendor and repeatedly harassed and tortured him. Unable to cope with the indignity, he set himself on fire on Dec. 17, and died on Jan. 3.

The flame that consumed Bouazizi ignited a mass movement throughout the country as Tunisians gave vent to their pent-up feelings against the dictatorial regime of Zein el-Abidine Ben Ali.

For 23 years, Ben Ali and his family and cronies looted the treasury, building beachfront villas and taking a cut from every business while the young population (half of Tunisians are under 25) lived lives of deprivation. A ruthless network of enforcers and informers, drawn mostly from the ranks of the army and the police, kept the populace at bay.

But the self-immolation of Bouazizi changed the equation. Social networking sites, particularly Twitter, helped spread the word and the Jasmine revolution was underway.

The unthinkable happened, a first for the Arab world: Ben Ali and his entourage fled the country.

Tunisia has rarely been in the news in America. Occasionally we heard stories of how Ben Ali was our ally in the fight against terrorism and how Tunisia was a model of democracy. France was even more aggressive in propagating this lie because of its historical ties with the country.

The recent Wikileaks, however, revealed to the world what every Tunisian had known for years, that the regime of Ben Ali was corrupt and authoritarian beyond imagination.

But why did the U.S. go along with the status quo? For the same reasons that our country has gone along with gross human-rights violations in Arab countries: preference for sugarcoated stability to trumped-up threats of radical Islam.

All a dictator like Ben Ali had to do was dangle the specter of Muslim extremists taking over, and the United States turned to jelly. Consider how long some of the Arab dictators have been in power - Libya’s Moammar Gaddafi, 42 years, Yemen's Ali Abdullah Saleh, 33 years, Egypt’s Hosni Mubarak, 30 years – and ask yourself, “Is it that these countries have no worthier candidates than these aging autocrats who are already grooming their sons (never daughters!) to continue their dynastic decadence?”

The answer, of course, is no. But by running police states while keeping the United States happy with manufactured anti-terrorism crackdowns, the dictators continue to rule unchallenged. Thus, there are no new ideas in these countries, no innovations in education, science and technology, and no programs to meet people’s aspirations.

But the game is up. It may take years but business as usual in the Arab world has run its course. Could anyone predict only a few months back that an Arab dictator could be toppled by street riots and demonstrations? As Percy Bysshe Shelley wrote:

“My name is Ozymandias, King of Kings:

Look on my works, ye mighty, and despair!'

Nothing beside remains. Round the decay

Of that colossal wreck, boundless and bare,

The lone and level sands stretch far away."

The U.S. is showing signs that it is finally beginning to read the handwriting on the wall. In a visit to Qatar this month, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton warned Middle Eastern leaders that "in too many places, in too many ways, the region's foundations are sinking into the sand … Those who cling to the status quo may be able to hold back the full impact of their countries' problems for a little while, but not forever. If leaders don't offer a positive vision and give young people meaningful ways to contribute, others will fill the vacuum. Extremist elements, terrorist groups and others who would prey on desperation and poverty are already out there, appealing for allegiance and competing for influence. So this is a critical moment, and this is a test of leadership for all of us."

Lip service is easy. What is needed is action. Unless it aligns its foreign policy with its values instead of with political expediency, and starts recognizing the legitimate aspirations of the Arab populace, particularly the educated young, U.S. influence will dramatically shrink in the region.

There is no turning back. Tunisians have shown that they can write their own scripts. The Egyptians, Moroccans, Syrians, Jordanians and others have taken note. Martin Luther King’s “I have a dream” speech now has an Arab resonance and the “fierce urgency of now” has already begun to animate the Arab youth. Change is indeed afoot.

Healing a Disturbed Nation

To turn a tragedy into a triumph of the human spirit takes intelligence, grace and eloquence. President Obama showed all these qualities in his moving tribute to the fallen and their families in Arizona, on Wednesday, January 12.

In giving us a summary of the lives of the six who died, he made the memorial service both personal and universal. In telling us the inspiring but also heartbreaking story of nine-year-old Christina Taylor Green, Obama transformed her brief life into a beacon for the nation.

In paying tributes to those who prevented more deaths by stopping the gunman, and the doctors and nurses who acted with urgency to tend to the wounded, the president said, "These men and women remind us that heroism is found not only on the fields of battle. They remind us that heroism does not require special training or physical strength. Heroism is here, all around us, in the hearts of so many of our fellow citizens, just waiting to be summoned - as it was on Saturday morning."

The President helped lift us from a paralyzing darkness into light. It was all from the heart. There was nothing political about it. He alerted us not to fall for partisan finger-pointing. "... at a time when our discourse has become so sharply polarized - at a time when we are far too eager to lay the blame for all that ails the world at the feet of those who think differently than we do - it's important for us to pause for a moment and make sure that we are talking with each other in a way that heals, not a way that wounds."

America needs to hear these words now. Poisonous rhetoric has seeped into every corner of the land and Americans are perilously close to becoming citizens of two distinct and divided Americas. We have to recognize our inevitable differences of opinion without demonizing those with whom we disagree.

"But what we can't do," the President said, "is use this tragedy as one more occasion to turn on one another. As we discuss these issues, let each of us do so with a good dose of humility. Rather than pointing fingers or assigning blame, let us use this occasion to expand our moral imaginations, to listen to each other more carefully, to sharpen our instincts for empathy, and remind ourselves of all the ways our hopes and dreams are bound together."

Expanding the moral imagination and sharpening the instincts for empathy are, of course, easier said than done. Yet this is what we must do, and Obama was right to invoke these challenges on this somber occasion.

The President held up Taylor Green's short life as an example for us, her innocence, her aspirations, her love for America. "And in Christina...in Christina we see all of our children. So curious, so trusting, so energetic and full of magic. So deserving of our love. And so deserving of our good example. If this tragedy prompts reflection and debate, as it should, let's make sure it's worthy of those we have lost. Let's make sure it's not on the usual plane of politics and point scoring and pettiness that drifts away with the next news cycle."

President Obama gave a stirring speech in Arizona. There will always be evil in the world, but so will there be good as well. The good can, and will, triumph over evil, despite occasional setbacks. "The loss of these wonderful people should make every one of us strive to be better in our private lives - to be better friends and neighbors, co-workers and parents. And if, as has been discussed in recent days, their deaths help usher in more civility in our public discourse, let's remember that it is not because a simple lack of civility caused this tragedy, but rather because only a more civil and honest public discourse can help us face up to our challenges as a nation, in a way that would make them proud."

The President has regained the footing he seemed to have lost in recent times. He did this by transcending politics and pointing us toward a nobler vision of America. Let's hope he can build on it, matching words with action while inspiring us to reach for our better selves.

Easy Gun Breeds Violence

A psychotic man walks casually into a gun store and buys a slick 9mm Glock automatic pistol. To ensure that his diabolical plot doesn't go awry, he also buys extra magazines loaded with ammunition. That way, he calculates, he can fire at least 20 rounds from a 30-round clip. By then, he will have comfortably mowed down his targets - any living, breathing human will do - and engrave his name next to the infamous assassins of the past.

22-year-old Jared Lee Loughner did just that, killing six people, including a bubbly third-grader, and critically injuring Arizona's Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, his main target. The Congresswoman had called a community meeting in Tucson on January 8 to gauge the mood of her constituents. It was held in the open, a vivid display of democracy in action, until Loughner opened fire and splattered the sidewalks with blood.

Much will be written about what caused Loughner to trip. Menacing to begin with, he unnerved everyone around him in the community college where he was a student. Given his mental state, he must have found the toxic rhetoric of the likes of Glen Beck and Sarah Palin music to his ears.

But ultimately it was one stark fact that made the difference between impotent rage and murderous realization: Buying a gun in Arizona, as in many other states, is as easy as buying milk.

If the NRA and the gun lobby, more correctly, the assassin lobby, is not checked and Congress does not pass laws to keep firearms out of the hands of citizens, particularly the deranged, America will continue to be periodically convulsed by the violence of madmen and psychopaths. There are about 85 guns per 100 Americans. Think of that 85% gun ownership for a moment, and see if you don't get the shivers! On the average, 80 Americans die from guns every day.

Unless we as a nation revisit the first two constitutional amendments and enact tougher gun-control laws, and acknowledge to ourselves that love of gun is an addiction just like the addiction to drugs or alcohol or sex, history will continue to repeat itself and more innocent blood will be splattered on our sidewalks and in our homes.

Muslims Must Protect Their Minorities

What is happening to Muslims? In Egypt's Alexandria, Muslim terrorists killed 21 Coptic Christians on New year's Eve and wounded hundreds. This community has lived in Egypt for almost two thousand years and at 8 million, comprise 10 percent of Egypt's population. In Nigeria, a Muslim terrorist cult attacked several churches last year that left scores dead. In Iraq, a church was taken over by Muslim fanatics on October 31, 2010, that resulted in the killing of about fifty Christians. In Pakistan, Asia Bibi, a Christian and a mother of five, faces a death sentence under the country's notorious blasphemy law. For daring to speak out against this law, Salmaan Taseer, the governor of Punjab, was gunned down by one of his bodyguards.

"My name is Ahmad and I'm a Muslim, but that's not important now," said a young Egyptian high-school student who had gathered spontaneously with a thousand other Egyptians in the Center of Cairo on the first of the year. He was holding the Quran in one hand, a crucifix in the other. "I've come to protest against what happened to our Christian brothers and to show that the religious communities in Egypt won't let themselves be divided."

Such sentiments are indeed being expressed by outraged Muslims at the deaths of minorities who have lived among them for centuries. Unfortunately, they are relatively few in number. Too many Muslims are either afraid or reluctant to speak out against atrocities committed by other Muslims. But let a non-Muslim mock Islam or attack mosques and suddenly these lambs turn into lions as they take to the streets condemning Western aggression and attacking Western interests.

We Muslims cannot continue with this hypocrisy and double-standards for long. We are the ones committing the ultimate blasphemy, through our silence and appeasement of Muslim fanatics. We see Western conspiracy at every corner but are blind to the elephant in the room, the terrorism by Muslims against Muslims and non-Muslims alike. We deny constantly that our cruelest enemies are from within our folds.

We cannot be good Muslims unless we are also good Christians and good Jews. That is what I understand by the reference to "People of the Book" in the Quran. Unless we commit to protecting the minorities living among us, we will be betraying the fundamental tenets of our faith. It is as simple as that. If Muslim minorities living in the West come under attack, can we really blame anyone but ourselves?

Eliminating Desire

“Eliminating Desire” is the perplexing personal interest Mark Zuckerberg lists on his Facebook page. The Facebook founder has become an Internet icon as the number of users of his social network, already more than 550 million, approaches a billion. The company got tons of publicity when Zuckerberg was selected as TIME magazine’s 2010 person of the year. Facebook overtook Google as the most visited site in the U.S. in the past year, a phenomenon unthinkable only a few months ago.

But back to that desire thing.

In an interview, Zuckerberg explained: “I just want to focus on what we’re doing … I think it would be very easy to get distracted and get caught up in short-term things or material things that don’t matter. The phrase is actually ‘Eliminating desire for all that doesn’t really matter.’”

Now, whether history will judge Facebook to have been a transformational or a frivolous innovation is unclear. But that intriguing, enigmatic sentence bears reflection: “Eliminating desire for all that doesn’t really matter.”

The idea of what matters and what doesn’t is, of course, unique to each of us, shaped by faith, culture, passion, inclination. To a technologist like Zuckerberg, connecting people across the globe in a seamless digital network is probably all that matters. Everything else is peripheral. To a scholar, seeking knowledge, and adding to it if possible, is paramount. To a writer, unlocking the mysteries of the human heart is the point. And so it goes.

But then, desires find a way of weaving themselves into our goals and the effect is to scatter focus, as a prism scatters light.

One such desire is more like distraction but it has become so overpowering in our times that it is indistinguishable from what we call addiction, which is desire running rampant. It is our constant need for digital stimuli, one of its chief architects being, ironically, Mark Zuckerberg.

Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, iPhone, YouTube, Texting, Email – such are the mind and time-sucking vortex of the Web, and many of us plunge headlong into it from the moment we wake up until a few hours of nightly shut-eye. (What some of us would give to dispense with sleep if that were possible!) Work is now in our pockets, literally, keeping us in a 24x7 state of connection.

But this state of affairs is also what makes Zuckerberg’s statement all the more intriguing. Here is a 26-year-old billionaire who has the means to fulfill any desire that glides into his mind, yet he is singularly focused on his goal. And while his goal may be to create an even more seductive vortex, we must give him credit for resisting desires that afflict most of us – more stuff, more money, more vacation, more everything.

The summit of all desires is, of course, the desire for “things.” Very few of us resist the siren call of materialism. If my neighbor has a 50” TV, why, I must have the biggest HDTV in the market. If he drives a Cadillac, I must drive a Mercedes. If his home has eight rooms, mine must have at least twelve. And if there is no one in sight who can compete with me in possessions or power, does it mean that I can rest? No! Like a shark, I must be constantly moving, even if it means to remain at the same spot.

The unbridled acquisitive instinct that lies dormant when the means aren’t there but blooms instantly when they are, is what causes so much despair and heartbreak. Wise travelers inform us time and again of seeing people in distant lands, whom we regard as dwelling in adversity, who get more out of life’s simple joys – family, friendship (real, not virtual), community, nature – than affluent people living in mansions and surrounded by stuff but surviving on Prozac and therapy. Yet all of us who engage in materialism in one form or another know that the charm of new purchases - a car, a pair of shoes, a watch – wears down in days, until we get the next new “thing” in a deadening cycle of diminishing sensitivity.

So, how to eliminate desire for “all that doesn’t really matter”?

Sometimes it is forced on us, as the Great Recession did, and continues to do. Many Americans have discovered that giving away stuff – clothes, gadgets, cars – and living with less clutter makes life more meaningful. Millionaires have discovered that instead of fretting about the first million begetting the next, they can lead a more satisfying life on, say, $40,000 a year. (Americans living below the poverty line will consider that a sign of affluence). It is no wonder that the top word that we searched for in 2010, according to Merriam-Webster, was “austerity.”

But reflecting on life’s purpose can also have a salutary effect. What exactly do we want out of life? Is it to be the envy of our neighbors, the toast of our societies? Is it to dazzle others with our knowledge, to make lesser mortals tremble with our power? Is it to climb the greasy pole of success on the backs of others? All these desires have shallow roots, however worthy they may appear. Perhaps it will dawn on us, if we can be alone with our thoughts, that happiness often flows from outlasting our impulses.

A man is rich in proportion to the number of things he can afford to let alone, said Thoreau. It is an insight we should put to use as we welcome a new year.

The Muslim scholar Al-Harith bin Asad al-Muhasibi (165 A.H – 243 A.H) left us with this instruction for achieving our dreams: “You will not achieve what you want unless you give up what you desire, and you will never achieve your dreams until you are patient with what you hate.”