New Era for Bangladesh?
Landslide victories are becoming rarer in our times as distinctions between contesting parties blur and political objectives merge. It was thus all the more stunning when, in the Bangladesh parliamentary election held on December 29, the Awami League (AL) trounced Bangladesh National Party (BNP) 230 to 29 out of a total of 299 seats. In previous elections, the two parties eked out victories over each by the thinnest of margins.
The AL victory was so crushing that even its leaders found it hard to explain. That AL leader Sheikh Hasina appealed to the optimism and aspirations of Bangladeshis, as opposed to the campaign of fear and opportunism that BNP leader Khaleda Zia ran (anyone remember Barack Obama and John McCain?), had much to do with the outcome. While Hasina promoted the idea of a digital Bangladesh and specific goals for economic development, Khaleda tried to rally the people by promising them that she will “save Islam." Bangladeshis are sick and tired of politicians abusing religion to secure power. Not only did they reject BNP’s premise, they dealt all the religious parties a crushing defeat as well.
In the 2001 elections, for instance, the Jamaat-e-Islami party grabbed 17 seats and its leaders, in alliance with BNP, took control of two powerful ministries. Their fanaticism and misogyny brought untold misery to the people. This time, again as BNP's key ally in a four-party alliance, Jamaat's total haul was … 2. All of their leaders were soundly defeated at the polls. Another religious party did not win a single seat. It is a telling sign that two leftist parties – never popular in Bangladesh - won 5 seats, outperforming the Islamist organizations. The message is clear: Bangladeshis do not want to mix religion with politics.
What now? Both AL and BNP governed Bangladesh alternately since its independence, and under the watch of both, the country earned the dubious distinction of “most corrupt nation on earth.” Is it possible that this time it will be different, that Sheikh Hasina and her party will put the nation’s interest above political vendetta, nepotism and personal accumulation of wealth? Will this be the dawn of a prosperous and progressive Bangladesh?
It is a daunting challenge but miracles occasionally occur and sometimes events make the (wo)man. Sheikh Hasina will have a free hand in charting a new course and defining a new era for Bangladesh. There’s hope in that as well as danger. (Let's not forget that Richard Nixon, to cite an example, also won a landslide victory in 1972). If she surrounds herself with sycophants and incompetents as she did in her previous stint as the prime minister, Bangladesh may very well go under. But if she seizes this historic opportunity to help Bangladesh achieve its true potential, she will not only redeem herself and her father Sheikh Mujibur Rahman, the founder of the nation, she will have made a lasting contribution to world peace and stability. And how can Sheikh Hasina help Bangladesh achieve its potential? By running a government of civility, law, accountability and non-partisanship, by curbing inflation and creating jobs, by building the infrastructure to harness the power of the Internet, by empowering the honest and the competent, and by enabling the native entrepreneurship of Bangladeshis to flower.
Tuesday, December 30, 2008
Tuesday, December 23, 2008
Align America's K-12 Students with International Standards
The sorry state of America’s K-12 public education system is highlighted by how its students fare on the international stage. In math and science, we rank 18th out of 24 industrialized nations. Occasional spikes in PISA test scores only underscore how far we have fallen behind nations like Singapore, Finland and Japan. Our high school dropout rate is a national catastrophe. The symptoms are endless. Even allowing for the tendency to be more pessimistic than what the situation warrants, it is clear that more than financial institutions, what needs urgent overhauling is our public school system. It is perhaps themost critical challenge for the Obama administration.
Recommendations about how to raise the standards of our schools to meet the demands of the 21st century continue to pour forth from various organizations and foundations. Bill Gates, speaking on behalf of the Gates Foundation, acknowledges that small classrooms and breaking up big schools into smaller units didn’t work because a key factor was missing: rigorous accountability. That includes elected school boards, teachers and IT departments. At the center of this is the teachers unions whose main function seem to be to protect teachers at any cost, particularly the incompetent. Gates is a fervent believer in weeding out bad teachers and paying the good ones substantially more than whatthey take home now. He is wary of increased federal intervention in education, which he thinks is fundamentally a state and local matter.
A new report from the National Governors Association, the Council of Chief State School Officers, and Achieve Inc., offers several recommendations for rebuilding America’s public education system. Called “Benchmarking for Success: Ensuring U.S. Students Receive a World-Class Education,” it lists five steps toward building a globally competitive education system in America.
1. Upgrade state standards by adopting a common core of internationally benchmarked standards in math and language arts for grades K-12.
2. Leverage states’ collective influence to ensure that textbooks, digital media, curricula, and assessments are aligned to internationally benchmarked standards.
3. Revise state policies for recruiting, preparing, developing, and supporting teachers and school leaders to reflect the human capital practices of top-performing nations and states around the world.
4. Hold schools and systems accountable through monitoring, interventions, and support to ensure consistently high performance, drawing upon international best practices.
5. Measure state-level education performance globally by examining student achievement and attainment in an international context to ensure that students are receiving the education they need to compete in the 21st century economy.
This is the most detailed report I have seen where performance of American students have been tied to the performance of international students. It is a recognition that we must have the humility to borrow from countries like Finland and Singapore whose educational practices continue to pay enormous educational, economic and social dividends for them. We know what these practices are: Attract the best and the brightest to the teaching profession by training them extensively and rewarding them with high pay, track teacher and student performances rigorously and ruthlessly and take proactive actions where necessary, and never let politics trump accountability and high standards. Not really secrets, are they?
Achieving a common academic standard is a most daunting challenge. As Lou Gerstner, an educator and former chairman of IBM, has pointed out, there are over 15,000 school districts in America, each with its own standards, curriculum, teacher selection, classroom rules and so on.
Can the recommendations of the governors be implemented? The question is: Who can take on the bruising battle with conflicting interest groups and entrenched mindsets that cannot see beyond the next curve in the road? The federal government can go just so far. “No Child Left Behind” has been manipulated beyond recognition in many states. The bar for academic performance has been shamelessly lowered to allow school administrators to claim that their woefully unprepared wards are moving forward and not being left behind. States are in the grips of boards and unions and any call for changes get mired in endless debates and deliberations. (Hence the success of charter schools).
It really is up to the American people. Where there is a will, there is a way. This spirit has guided Americans for more than two centuries, particularly during difficult times. The critical mass is there. Can the Obama administration be the catalyst for bringing about fundamental changes in our K-12 public education system? Unless something goes terribly awry, I believe it can.
The sorry state of America’s K-12 public education system is highlighted by how its students fare on the international stage. In math and science, we rank 18th out of 24 industrialized nations. Occasional spikes in PISA test scores only underscore how far we have fallen behind nations like Singapore, Finland and Japan. Our high school dropout rate is a national catastrophe. The symptoms are endless. Even allowing for the tendency to be more pessimistic than what the situation warrants, it is clear that more than financial institutions, what needs urgent overhauling is our public school system. It is perhaps themost critical challenge for the Obama administration.
Recommendations about how to raise the standards of our schools to meet the demands of the 21st century continue to pour forth from various organizations and foundations. Bill Gates, speaking on behalf of the Gates Foundation, acknowledges that small classrooms and breaking up big schools into smaller units didn’t work because a key factor was missing: rigorous accountability. That includes elected school boards, teachers and IT departments. At the center of this is the teachers unions whose main function seem to be to protect teachers at any cost, particularly the incompetent. Gates is a fervent believer in weeding out bad teachers and paying the good ones substantially more than whatthey take home now. He is wary of increased federal intervention in education, which he thinks is fundamentally a state and local matter.
A new report from the National Governors Association, the Council of Chief State School Officers, and Achieve Inc., offers several recommendations for rebuilding America’s public education system. Called “Benchmarking for Success: Ensuring U.S. Students Receive a World-Class Education,” it lists five steps toward building a globally competitive education system in America.
1. Upgrade state standards by adopting a common core of internationally benchmarked standards in math and language arts for grades K-12.
2. Leverage states’ collective influence to ensure that textbooks, digital media, curricula, and assessments are aligned to internationally benchmarked standards.
3. Revise state policies for recruiting, preparing, developing, and supporting teachers and school leaders to reflect the human capital practices of top-performing nations and states around the world.
4. Hold schools and systems accountable through monitoring, interventions, and support to ensure consistently high performance, drawing upon international best practices.
5. Measure state-level education performance globally by examining student achievement and attainment in an international context to ensure that students are receiving the education they need to compete in the 21st century economy.
This is the most detailed report I have seen where performance of American students have been tied to the performance of international students. It is a recognition that we must have the humility to borrow from countries like Finland and Singapore whose educational practices continue to pay enormous educational, economic and social dividends for them. We know what these practices are: Attract the best and the brightest to the teaching profession by training them extensively and rewarding them with high pay, track teacher and student performances rigorously and ruthlessly and take proactive actions where necessary, and never let politics trump accountability and high standards. Not really secrets, are they?
Achieving a common academic standard is a most daunting challenge. As Lou Gerstner, an educator and former chairman of IBM, has pointed out, there are over 15,000 school districts in America, each with its own standards, curriculum, teacher selection, classroom rules and so on.
Can the recommendations of the governors be implemented? The question is: Who can take on the bruising battle with conflicting interest groups and entrenched mindsets that cannot see beyond the next curve in the road? The federal government can go just so far. “No Child Left Behind” has been manipulated beyond recognition in many states. The bar for academic performance has been shamelessly lowered to allow school administrators to claim that their woefully unprepared wards are moving forward and not being left behind. States are in the grips of boards and unions and any call for changes get mired in endless debates and deliberations. (Hence the success of charter schools).
It really is up to the American people. Where there is a will, there is a way. This spirit has guided Americans for more than two centuries, particularly during difficult times. The critical mass is there. Can the Obama administration be the catalyst for bringing about fundamental changes in our K-12 public education system? Unless something goes terribly awry, I believe it can.
Saturday, December 20, 2008
Cutting the Gordian Knot of America's Public Education System
In a recent opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal (12/1/08), Lou Gerstner, the former CEO of IBM and chairman of the Teaching Commission from 2003-2006, summarized his ideas for rescuing the nation’s failing public school system. They are forceful and provocative and merit attention from Obama and his education secretary.
Gerstner disarms his critics by putting America’s school reformation movement in context. “Despite decade after decade of reform efforts, our public K-12 schools have not improved.” That surely includes the efforts of the Teaching Commission that he led for 4 years. “Why,” he asks, “after millions of pages, in thousands of reports, from hundreds of commissions and task forces, financed by billions of dollars, have we failed to achieve any significant progress?”
As Gerstner notes, the problem isn't "what to do," nor is it a failure of commitment. Instead, he believes that “the problem lies with the structure and corporate governance of our public schools. We have over 15,000 school districts in America; each of them, in its own way, is involved in standards, curriculum, teacher selection, classroom rules and so on. This unbelievably unwieldy structure is incapable of executing a program of fundamental change. While we have islands of excellence as a result of great reform programs, we continually fail to scale up systemic change.”
To transform the school system, he identifies four key elements: 1) Set high academic standards for all of our kids, supported by a rigorous curriculum. 2) Greatly improve the quality of teaching in our classrooms, supported by substantially higher compensation for our best teachers. 3) Measure student and teacher performance on a systematic basis, supported by tests and assessments. 4) Increase "time on task" for all students; this means more time in school each day, and a longer school year.
(Italics are mine to indicate the enormous political challenge these requirements will pose for the Obama administration, even if only a subset is considered).
Who can quarrel with these suggestions? In one form or another, they have been proposed several times over the years, only to die on the vine, as Gerstner himself concedes.
So what can Barack Obama and Arne Duncan do to ensure that it's different this time? As Gerstner sees it, the particular solution he proposes is challenging but doable: a) Abolish all local school districts, saving only 70 from the 20 largest cities in 50 states. b) Establish a set of national standards for a core curriculum comprising, for a start, reading, math, science and social studies. c) Establish a National Skills Day to test every third, sixth, ninth and 12th-grader against the national standards and publish the result. d) Establish national standards for teacher certification and require regular re-evaluations of teacher skills. Teacher skills are to be judged against one criterion only: advances in student learning. Those who succeed must be able to earn well in excess of $100,000 per year while underperforming teachers must be purged. e) Extend the school day and the school year to effectively add 20 more days of schooling for all K-12 students.
Can such a solution, or variations thereof, be implemented? Local school districts will undoubtedly put up bitter fights. There will certainly be the inevitable, debilitating clash between Teachers’ Union and the “progressives.”
But the students themselves are hungry for change and parents and concerned citizens are supportive of overhauling the nation’s public school system. They have given Obama the mandate to do so. The 44th president must make it a priority of his administration to cut the Gordian Knot of America’s public education system and transform it into a source of creativity. America's future depends on it.
In a recent opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal (12/1/08), Lou Gerstner, the former CEO of IBM and chairman of the Teaching Commission from 2003-2006, summarized his ideas for rescuing the nation’s failing public school system. They are forceful and provocative and merit attention from Obama and his education secretary.
Gerstner disarms his critics by putting America’s school reformation movement in context. “Despite decade after decade of reform efforts, our public K-12 schools have not improved.” That surely includes the efforts of the Teaching Commission that he led for 4 years. “Why,” he asks, “after millions of pages, in thousands of reports, from hundreds of commissions and task forces, financed by billions of dollars, have we failed to achieve any significant progress?”
As Gerstner notes, the problem isn't "what to do," nor is it a failure of commitment. Instead, he believes that “the problem lies with the structure and corporate governance of our public schools. We have over 15,000 school districts in America; each of them, in its own way, is involved in standards, curriculum, teacher selection, classroom rules and so on. This unbelievably unwieldy structure is incapable of executing a program of fundamental change. While we have islands of excellence as a result of great reform programs, we continually fail to scale up systemic change.”
To transform the school system, he identifies four key elements: 1) Set high academic standards for all of our kids, supported by a rigorous curriculum. 2) Greatly improve the quality of teaching in our classrooms, supported by substantially higher compensation for our best teachers. 3) Measure student and teacher performance on a systematic basis, supported by tests and assessments. 4) Increase "time on task" for all students; this means more time in school each day, and a longer school year.
(Italics are mine to indicate the enormous political challenge these requirements will pose for the Obama administration, even if only a subset is considered).
Who can quarrel with these suggestions? In one form or another, they have been proposed several times over the years, only to die on the vine, as Gerstner himself concedes.
So what can Barack Obama and Arne Duncan do to ensure that it's different this time? As Gerstner sees it, the particular solution he proposes is challenging but doable: a) Abolish all local school districts, saving only 70 from the 20 largest cities in 50 states. b) Establish a set of national standards for a core curriculum comprising, for a start, reading, math, science and social studies. c) Establish a National Skills Day to test every third, sixth, ninth and 12th-grader against the national standards and publish the result. d) Establish national standards for teacher certification and require regular re-evaluations of teacher skills. Teacher skills are to be judged against one criterion only: advances in student learning. Those who succeed must be able to earn well in excess of $100,000 per year while underperforming teachers must be purged. e) Extend the school day and the school year to effectively add 20 more days of schooling for all K-12 students.
Can such a solution, or variations thereof, be implemented? Local school districts will undoubtedly put up bitter fights. There will certainly be the inevitable, debilitating clash between Teachers’ Union and the “progressives.”
But the students themselves are hungry for change and parents and concerned citizens are supportive of overhauling the nation’s public school system. They have given Obama the mandate to do so. The 44th president must make it a priority of his administration to cut the Gordian Knot of America’s public education system and transform it into a source of creativity. America's future depends on it.
Monday, December 15, 2008
A Journalist's Despicable Behavior
Muntadar al-Zeidi may have found his five minutes of fame but what he did was despicable. By hurling shoes at George Bush, visiting Iraq for the last time as president, he shamed a culture known for extending hospitality even toward the despised.
Bush will probably go down as the worst president in U.S. history, displacing perennial bottom-dweller James Buchanan (1857-1861). His manufactured war has caused the deaths of tens of thousands of Iraqis in the 5 1/2-year war. His Manichean worldview has brought untold sufferings to a vast section of humanity. And his fiscal ignorance and irresponsibility has contributed to the economic meltdown now sweeping the world. He is a disgraced person that the world cannot wait to see retire.
Still, to throw shoes at a visitor is an insult that speaks volumes for the thrower rather than the thrown. There are those who feel gleeful but there are also those who are shamed and outraged by al-Zeidi’s behavior. Iraqis need authentic leaders who can summon their best instincts to rebuild their tattered nation. This will not be accomplished by people succumbing to their basest instincts for personal revenge. George Bush can salvage some goodwill and dignity for himself by asking the Iraqi giovernment to pardon the misguided and stupid journalist.
Muntadar al-Zeidi may have found his five minutes of fame but what he did was despicable. By hurling shoes at George Bush, visiting Iraq for the last time as president, he shamed a culture known for extending hospitality even toward the despised.
Bush will probably go down as the worst president in U.S. history, displacing perennial bottom-dweller James Buchanan (1857-1861). His manufactured war has caused the deaths of tens of thousands of Iraqis in the 5 1/2-year war. His Manichean worldview has brought untold sufferings to a vast section of humanity. And his fiscal ignorance and irresponsibility has contributed to the economic meltdown now sweeping the world. He is a disgraced person that the world cannot wait to see retire.
Still, to throw shoes at a visitor is an insult that speaks volumes for the thrower rather than the thrown. There are those who feel gleeful but there are also those who are shamed and outraged by al-Zeidi’s behavior. Iraqis need authentic leaders who can summon their best instincts to rebuild their tattered nation. This will not be accomplished by people succumbing to their basest instincts for personal revenge. George Bush can salvage some goodwill and dignity for himself by asking the Iraqi giovernment to pardon the misguided and stupid journalist.
Saturday, December 06, 2008
Indian Muslims Take a Stand
In an unprecedented move, Indian Muslims have refused to bury in their graveyards the nine terrorists who killed almost 200 people and injured many more in India's financial hub last week. The Muslim Jama Masjid Trust, which runs a 7.5-acre graveyard in the heart of Mumbai, said it would not bury the gunmen because they were not true followers of Islam. Declared a spokesman for the trust: “People who committed this heinous crime cannot be called Muslim. Islam does not permit this sort of barbaric crime.” Other Muslim organizations throughout India have voiced support for the decision by the Trust.
The president of the Indian Muslim Council, Ibrahim Tai, said that the terrorists had defamed Islam. "They are not Muslims as they have not followed our religion which teaches us to live in peace. If the government does not respect our demands we will take up extreme steps. We do not want the bodies of people who have committed an act of terrorism to be buried in our cemeteries." Many Muslim groups have vowed to take to the streets in protest if the authorities force the militants to be buried in Muslim graveyards.
Against the backdrop of the terrible tragedy that befell Mumbai last week, this stand by Indian Muslims offers some solace. The terrorists and their masterminds who claim Islam as their religion must know that they have been exposed for what they are: cold-blooded killers with no respect for life. They will find no place on earth because their abode is hell.
P.S. On December 8, thousands of Muslim men, women and children came out on the streets of Mumbai to denounce the terrorists. "We disown and denounce all those who kill in the name of jihad. Terrorists are fascists and enemies of Muslims as Islam doesn't preach killing of innocents," said poet-lyricist Javed Akhtar.
For the first time, liberal Muslims were joined by clerics from organizations such as the Jamiat-ul-Ulema in expressing anger at terrorists who have hijacked Islam. Actor Javed Jaffrey said Muslims had to speak out because "it was Islam that was being maligned. There is nothing called Islamic terrorism. Islam is being misinterpreted by some groups. They kill people in the name of jihad. A religion that asks its members to greet each other with `Assalamu Alaikum (peace be with you)' could never
Actor Farooq Sheikh said: "Terrorists are Muslims' number one enemy.” Activist Alyque Padamsee explained that there were two types of Muslims - real and fake. "Terrorists are fake Muslims while peace-loving tolerant Muslims are the real Muslims," he said. "... The killing of innocents is wrong. Those who don't believe it are fake Muslims. Committing suicide is a sin in Islam, so how can a suicide bomber believe he will go to paradise?”
In an unprecedented move, Indian Muslims have refused to bury in their graveyards the nine terrorists who killed almost 200 people and injured many more in India's financial hub last week. The Muslim Jama Masjid Trust, which runs a 7.5-acre graveyard in the heart of Mumbai, said it would not bury the gunmen because they were not true followers of Islam. Declared a spokesman for the trust: “People who committed this heinous crime cannot be called Muslim. Islam does not permit this sort of barbaric crime.” Other Muslim organizations throughout India have voiced support for the decision by the Trust.
The president of the Indian Muslim Council, Ibrahim Tai, said that the terrorists had defamed Islam. "They are not Muslims as they have not followed our religion which teaches us to live in peace. If the government does not respect our demands we will take up extreme steps. We do not want the bodies of people who have committed an act of terrorism to be buried in our cemeteries." Many Muslim groups have vowed to take to the streets in protest if the authorities force the militants to be buried in Muslim graveyards.
Against the backdrop of the terrible tragedy that befell Mumbai last week, this stand by Indian Muslims offers some solace. The terrorists and their masterminds who claim Islam as their religion must know that they have been exposed for what they are: cold-blooded killers with no respect for life. They will find no place on earth because their abode is hell.
P.S. On December 8, thousands of Muslim men, women and children came out on the streets of Mumbai to denounce the terrorists. "We disown and denounce all those who kill in the name of jihad. Terrorists are fascists and enemies of Muslims as Islam doesn't preach killing of innocents," said poet-lyricist Javed Akhtar.
For the first time, liberal Muslims were joined by clerics from organizations such as the Jamiat-ul-Ulema in expressing anger at terrorists who have hijacked Islam. Actor Javed Jaffrey said Muslims had to speak out because "it was Islam that was being maligned. There is nothing called Islamic terrorism. Islam is being misinterpreted by some groups. They kill people in the name of jihad. A religion that asks its members to greet each other with `Assalamu Alaikum (peace be with you)' could never
Actor Farooq Sheikh said: "Terrorists are Muslims' number one enemy.” Activist Alyque Padamsee explained that there were two types of Muslims - real and fake. "Terrorists are fake Muslims while peace-loving tolerant Muslims are the real Muslims," he said. "... The killing of innocents is wrong. Those who don't believe it are fake Muslims. Committing suicide is a sin in Islam, so how can a suicide bomber believe he will go to paradise?”
Thursday, December 04, 2008
From Here to Infinity
One Two Three . . . Infinity by George Gamow is a classic that has introduced generations of readers, laymen and professionals alike, to the pleasures of mathematics and science. The experience of Sheldon Glashow, who shared the 1979 Nobel Prize in physics with Abdus Salam and Steven Weinberg, is typical: "One book, which I found in 1947 when I was 15 was the book by George Gamow called One, Two, Three - Infinity, which I still re-read from time to time. It's just a book describing the wonders of nature and, to the extent that a high school kid could understand, how we understand things about nature. That was one book I really appreciated."
First published in 1947 and revised in 1961, Gamow uses far-ranging knowledge, humor, imagination and his delightful and idiosyncratic pen-and-ink illustrations to explain the challenges and discoveries of science. His conversational writing style draws the reader in, and even thought parts of it have become dated, his book succeeds in achieving that most elusive of goals: kindle our sense of wonder at nature's mysteries.
Gamow begins with the strange yet familiar number infinity. How does one count it? Are there different types of infinities? Can two infinities be compared? Gamow calls Georg Cantor (1845-1918) the founder of the "arithmetics of infinity" and explains how his idea of Sets gave us a new way of grasping infinity's significance.
(Random associations appear unbidden. Gamow calculates that the number of sand grains necessary to fill up the visible universe would be over 10100, that is, 1 followed by 100 zeros. The mathematical term for 10100 is Googol. That is what Larry Page and Sergey Brin wanted to call their start-up but through a misspelling, the company they co-founded became known as Google.)
Gamow devotes several chapters exploring the properties of space and time using nothing more than middle/high school arithmetic, and gives a good overview of the ideas that led to Einstein's Special and General Theory of Relativity. He "uncovers" atomic and nuclear physics by tracing their historical roots from the Greeks, progressing all the way to the "modern alchemy" of radioactivity, fission, fusion and elementary particles. The discovery and implications of nuclear chain reactions are particularly well-told.
The value of Gamow's narrative on the foundation of modern physics lies not in its completeness (it is obviously not) but in its capacity to inspire readers to explore the subject in greater detail on their own.
Perhaps the most masterful chapter is "The Law of Disorder." This physical law is also known as "The Law of Statistical Behavior" and Gamow goes through various examples, including the "Drunkard's Walk," to show how scientists can draw profound conclusions about nature by looking at seemingly ordinary problems "a little more attentively" than the average person. Two examples he cites are Brownian motion and diffusion. There is also a discussion of probability and the Law of Entropy that is instructive and entertaining.
"The Riddle of Life" chapter reflects Gamow's interest in biology, a field that he took on as a physicist and to which he ended up making fundamental contributions. The last chapters deal with the study of planets, stars, galaxies and beyond.
One would not know by reading One Two Three . . . Infinity that Gamow made seminal contributions to nuclear and quantum physics, and that he was one of the chief architects of the Big Bang Theory, the idea that the universe began in a terrifyingly hot explosion that flung the stars and galaxies in all directions in an expanding universe. As far back as 1948, Gamow predicted that the radiation from the Big Bang must be filling the universe. Many physicists believe that he deserved a Nobel Prize for his daring theory and prediction. However, it was not to be. Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson won the physics Nobel Prize in 1978 "for their discovery of cosmic microwave background radiation." In 2006, John Mather and George Smoot won the physics Nobel Prize for "increased support for the Big Bang scenario for the origin of the universe."
Be that as it may, Gamow's reputation as a scientist is secure, not only because of his original contributions in many areas (an anomaly in our era of narrow specializations), but also because of the way he popularized science and inspired generations of readers to tune in to the wonders of the "microcosmos" and the "macrocosmos." One, Two, Three - Infinity reflects the spirit of this brilliant scientist and master storyteller.
One Two Three . . . Infinity by George Gamow is a classic that has introduced generations of readers, laymen and professionals alike, to the pleasures of mathematics and science. The experience of Sheldon Glashow, who shared the 1979 Nobel Prize in physics with Abdus Salam and Steven Weinberg, is typical: "One book, which I found in 1947 when I was 15 was the book by George Gamow called One, Two, Three - Infinity, which I still re-read from time to time. It's just a book describing the wonders of nature and, to the extent that a high school kid could understand, how we understand things about nature. That was one book I really appreciated."
First published in 1947 and revised in 1961, Gamow uses far-ranging knowledge, humor, imagination and his delightful and idiosyncratic pen-and-ink illustrations to explain the challenges and discoveries of science. His conversational writing style draws the reader in, and even thought parts of it have become dated, his book succeeds in achieving that most elusive of goals: kindle our sense of wonder at nature's mysteries.
Gamow begins with the strange yet familiar number infinity. How does one count it? Are there different types of infinities? Can two infinities be compared? Gamow calls Georg Cantor (1845-1918) the founder of the "arithmetics of infinity" and explains how his idea of Sets gave us a new way of grasping infinity's significance.
(Random associations appear unbidden. Gamow calculates that the number of sand grains necessary to fill up the visible universe would be over 10100, that is, 1 followed by 100 zeros. The mathematical term for 10100 is Googol. That is what Larry Page and Sergey Brin wanted to call their start-up but through a misspelling, the company they co-founded became known as Google.)
Gamow devotes several chapters exploring the properties of space and time using nothing more than middle/high school arithmetic, and gives a good overview of the ideas that led to Einstein's Special and General Theory of Relativity. He "uncovers" atomic and nuclear physics by tracing their historical roots from the Greeks, progressing all the way to the "modern alchemy" of radioactivity, fission, fusion and elementary particles. The discovery and implications of nuclear chain reactions are particularly well-told.
The value of Gamow's narrative on the foundation of modern physics lies not in its completeness (it is obviously not) but in its capacity to inspire readers to explore the subject in greater detail on their own.
Perhaps the most masterful chapter is "The Law of Disorder." This physical law is also known as "The Law of Statistical Behavior" and Gamow goes through various examples, including the "Drunkard's Walk," to show how scientists can draw profound conclusions about nature by looking at seemingly ordinary problems "a little more attentively" than the average person. Two examples he cites are Brownian motion and diffusion. There is also a discussion of probability and the Law of Entropy that is instructive and entertaining.
"The Riddle of Life" chapter reflects Gamow's interest in biology, a field that he took on as a physicist and to which he ended up making fundamental contributions. The last chapters deal with the study of planets, stars, galaxies and beyond.
One would not know by reading One Two Three . . . Infinity that Gamow made seminal contributions to nuclear and quantum physics, and that he was one of the chief architects of the Big Bang Theory, the idea that the universe began in a terrifyingly hot explosion that flung the stars and galaxies in all directions in an expanding universe. As far back as 1948, Gamow predicted that the radiation from the Big Bang must be filling the universe. Many physicists believe that he deserved a Nobel Prize for his daring theory and prediction. However, it was not to be. Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson won the physics Nobel Prize in 1978 "for their discovery of cosmic microwave background radiation." In 2006, John Mather and George Smoot won the physics Nobel Prize for "increased support for the Big Bang scenario for the origin of the universe."
Be that as it may, Gamow's reputation as a scientist is secure, not only because of his original contributions in many areas (an anomaly in our era of narrow specializations), but also because of the way he popularized science and inspired generations of readers to tune in to the wonders of the "microcosmos" and the "macrocosmos." One, Two, Three - Infinity reflects the spirit of this brilliant scientist and master storyteller.
Thursday, November 27, 2008
Madness in Mumbai
I saw a movie called “Slumdog Millionaire” that opened yesterday. Set in Mumbai (formerly Bombay), this Bollywood production is about the stirring story of Jamal Malik, an orphan who has witnessed and experienced unspeakable horrors but who goes on to win 2 crores of rupees in the wildly popular Indian TV show called “Who Wants to be a Millionaire?”
Jamal was born in the teeming slums of Mumbai. When he was about 5, his mother was killed by a Hindu mob in a burst of communal violence. He and his older sibling Salim are “rescued” by criminals whose “business” consists of turning helpless slum orphans into lifelong beggars and prostitutes, and a constant source of income, by disfiguring and brutalizing them.
The two brothers manage to escape and a harrowing sequence of events and escapades follow, with Jamal finally, and improbably, facing the arrogant game-show host. Each question is the source of flashbacks about how he came to acquire its answer through the hard knocks of life that he had to endure. While the older Salim becomes the goon of a godfather and loses his soul (eventually he redeems himself), Jamal retains his integrity in adversity while nurturing a keen aptitude for factoids. Not only does he win a gigantic pile of cash, in the end he even gets the girl. Bollywood melodrama notwithstanding, all of us came out of the theatre smiling.
The smile did not last. With life imitating art but in reverse, on the very same day, Muslim terrorists attacked luxury hotels, train stations, a synagogue and even hospitals in Mumbai, killing over a hundred people and injuring many more. These nihilists fired at random, apparently with “serene smiles” on their faces, as bodies fell around them.
No definitive details have emerged about them yet, but it is difficult to even imagine how human beings can become so brainwashed and turn into such cold-blooded murderers.
The murderous rampage by a few Muslim terrorists have made Muslims everywhere, particularly Indian Muslims, angry, frustrated and vulnerable. The last thing India, and the world, needs is Hindu-Muslim violence. Terrorism threatens us all. It is against all the values that we hold dear. It is against everything that gives life its meaning, irrespective of religion and culture. Terrorists have their own "religion," no matter what they may call themselves, and the essence of that "religion" is to hate and kill. We must unite against it. That is the only way we can defeat it. There is no other way.
I saw a movie called “Slumdog Millionaire” that opened yesterday. Set in Mumbai (formerly Bombay), this Bollywood production is about the stirring story of Jamal Malik, an orphan who has witnessed and experienced unspeakable horrors but who goes on to win 2 crores of rupees in the wildly popular Indian TV show called “Who Wants to be a Millionaire?”
Jamal was born in the teeming slums of Mumbai. When he was about 5, his mother was killed by a Hindu mob in a burst of communal violence. He and his older sibling Salim are “rescued” by criminals whose “business” consists of turning helpless slum orphans into lifelong beggars and prostitutes, and a constant source of income, by disfiguring and brutalizing them.
The two brothers manage to escape and a harrowing sequence of events and escapades follow, with Jamal finally, and improbably, facing the arrogant game-show host. Each question is the source of flashbacks about how he came to acquire its answer through the hard knocks of life that he had to endure. While the older Salim becomes the goon of a godfather and loses his soul (eventually he redeems himself), Jamal retains his integrity in adversity while nurturing a keen aptitude for factoids. Not only does he win a gigantic pile of cash, in the end he even gets the girl. Bollywood melodrama notwithstanding, all of us came out of the theatre smiling.
The smile did not last. With life imitating art but in reverse, on the very same day, Muslim terrorists attacked luxury hotels, train stations, a synagogue and even hospitals in Mumbai, killing over a hundred people and injuring many more. These nihilists fired at random, apparently with “serene smiles” on their faces, as bodies fell around them.
No definitive details have emerged about them yet, but it is difficult to even imagine how human beings can become so brainwashed and turn into such cold-blooded murderers.
The murderous rampage by a few Muslim terrorists have made Muslims everywhere, particularly Indian Muslims, angry, frustrated and vulnerable. The last thing India, and the world, needs is Hindu-Muslim violence. Terrorism threatens us all. It is against all the values that we hold dear. It is against everything that gives life its meaning, irrespective of religion and culture. Terrorists have their own "religion," no matter what they may call themselves, and the essence of that "religion" is to hate and kill. We must unite against it. That is the only way we can defeat it. There is no other way.
Sunday, November 23, 2008
Sink the Somali Pirates!
In the gloom of market collapse and foreclosures and layoffs, there was a rare burst of sunshine last week. An Indian frigate destroyed a Somali “mother” pirate ship in the Gulf of Aden off the coast of Africa. Three speedboats packed with pirates unfortunately escaped.
These ruthless Somali brigands are causing havoc on maritime trade and costing the global economy millions. There have been 90 attacks this year alone, leading to the hijacking of 14 ships and 250 crew members, the latest being a tanker with $100 million worth of Saudi crude. The pirates’ goal: astronomical ransom in exchange for release of ship and crew.
Is the international community so helpless that these high-sea assaults cannot be stopped? The Indian Navy has proven otherwise by confronting the Somali warlords-turned pirates with decisive force.
I have some Somali friends in San Jose who are so outraged by the shame and horror these pirates have inflicted on the reputation of their country that they struggle for words. As they see it, there are only two rules of engagement with the pirates:
In the gloom of market collapse and foreclosures and layoffs, there was a rare burst of sunshine last week. An Indian frigate destroyed a Somali “mother” pirate ship in the Gulf of Aden off the coast of Africa. Three speedboats packed with pirates unfortunately escaped.
These ruthless Somali brigands are causing havoc on maritime trade and costing the global economy millions. There have been 90 attacks this year alone, leading to the hijacking of 14 ships and 250 crew members, the latest being a tanker with $100 million worth of Saudi crude. The pirates’ goal: astronomical ransom in exchange for release of ship and crew.
Is the international community so helpless that these high-sea assaults cannot be stopped? The Indian Navy has proven otherwise by confronting the Somali warlords-turned pirates with decisive force.
I have some Somali friends in San Jose who are so outraged by the shame and horror these pirates have inflicted on the reputation of their country that they struggle for words. As they see it, there are only two rules of engagement with the pirates:
- Shoot first, ask questions later
- Capture as many as possible and put them on trial for a world-wide audience
Who will take the responsibility? Actually, any country’s navy can send the rogue ship and speedboats to the bottom of the ocean. Just ask the Indians. What is required is resolve and action. In spite of its disastrous involvement in 1993, my Somali friends feel that the United States should still play a leading role in putting an end to these attacks. Ordinary Somalis are trapped between the lawless and violent ways of rival warlords and are forced to suffer in silence in their failed state. Pirates have always been, and will always be, enemies of the human race. Their fervent wish is for the scourge of the pirates to end before the year is over.
Sunday, November 16, 2008
Rabindranath Tagore: Poet, Activist and Educator
When he won the Nobel Prize for literature in 1913, the great Indian poet Rabindranath Tagore (1861-1941) was virtually unknown in the West.
His Gitanjali (“Song Offerings”), a collection of poems championed by William Butler Yeats, secured for him the highest prize in literature over contenders like Thomas Hardy and Anatole France. Tagore went on to create a body of work greater in scope and power than Gitanjali. His true genius bloomed after the Nobel Prize, a fact unique in the history of literature.
A significant amount of Tagore’s work is infused with a vision of the greatness he saw possible in his native land, a confluence of civilizations due to Hindus, Muslims, Buddhists, Sikhs, Jains, Parsis, Christians, Moguls, Dravidians, and Aryans. India, as he saw it, was greater than the sum of its parts. Through poems and plays, speeches and songs, he strove for this possibility to the end of his day.
Britain in Tagore’s time ruled India with an iron hand. But the rulers were becoming nervous. A young activist named Mohandas Gandhi had returned from South Africa in 1915 to lead the nationalist movement, becoming a proponent of Satyagraha (literally, “eagerness for truth” but more commonly interpreted as passive or non-violent resistance) to British rule. Although Tagore and Gandhi differed on ways to achieve independence, both believed in regenerating their people through the curbing of communal instincts. The challenge of this possibility continues to this day.
Politics did not interest Tagore but that did not keep him from boldly opposing British tyranny. When government troops led by English officers opened fire on a political gathering in Amritsar in 1919, killing 379 Indians and wounding scores of others, Tagore renounced the knighthood that England had bestowed on him four years earlier. As a poet, he felt it was the strongest statement he could make to draw world attention to the crime.
It cost him friendship and popularity in the literary circles of Europe and even in America, but he considered this act one of the high points of his life. It was also during this time that he composed some of his most powerful poems against oppression and injustice. When Gandhi was imprisoned without trial in 1932, he condemned it. In a letter to England’s Prime Minister Ramsay MacDonald, he warned that the British were closing the door on peaceful negotiations with Indian leaders.
Tagore was self-taught. Attempts by his parents to educate him in schools had failed. Young Rabindranath found conventional classrooms suffocating. In 1901, he founded an experimental school at Shantiniketan (“Abode of Peace”) near Calcutta, free from traditional restrictions. Classes were held in open air and joy in learning was given the highest importance.
By 1921, the school had evolved into Vishwa-Bharati University (World University) where students from all over India came to study. It is a testimony to Tagore’s ideal that funding for the University came from both Hindus and Muslims.
Tagore did not live long enough to see the end of the British Raj and the partition of the sub-continent along religious lines in 1947. He died six years earlier, still nurturing a harmonious vision of India, as riots were flaring.
In “The Religion of Men,” a set of lectures delivered at Oxford in 1930, Tagore said: “Freedom in the mere sense of independence has no content, and therefore no meaning. Perfect freedom lies in a harmony of relationship.” In an earlier poem, he had written of the perfect union of knowledge and freedom that he came to embody in his own supremely creative and protean life:
Where the mind is without fear and the head is held high;
Where knowledge is free;
Where the world has not been broken up into fragments by
narrow domestic walls;
Where words come out from the depth of truth;
Where tireless striving stretches its arm toward perfection;
Where the clear stream of reason has not lost its way into the
dreary desert of dead habit;
Where the mind is led forward by thee into ever-widening
thought and action;
Into that heaven of freedom, my father, let my country awake.
When he won the Nobel Prize for literature in 1913, the great Indian poet Rabindranath Tagore (1861-1941) was virtually unknown in the West.
His Gitanjali (“Song Offerings”), a collection of poems championed by William Butler Yeats, secured for him the highest prize in literature over contenders like Thomas Hardy and Anatole France. Tagore went on to create a body of work greater in scope and power than Gitanjali. His true genius bloomed after the Nobel Prize, a fact unique in the history of literature.
A significant amount of Tagore’s work is infused with a vision of the greatness he saw possible in his native land, a confluence of civilizations due to Hindus, Muslims, Buddhists, Sikhs, Jains, Parsis, Christians, Moguls, Dravidians, and Aryans. India, as he saw it, was greater than the sum of its parts. Through poems and plays, speeches and songs, he strove for this possibility to the end of his day.
Britain in Tagore’s time ruled India with an iron hand. But the rulers were becoming nervous. A young activist named Mohandas Gandhi had returned from South Africa in 1915 to lead the nationalist movement, becoming a proponent of Satyagraha (literally, “eagerness for truth” but more commonly interpreted as passive or non-violent resistance) to British rule. Although Tagore and Gandhi differed on ways to achieve independence, both believed in regenerating their people through the curbing of communal instincts. The challenge of this possibility continues to this day.
Politics did not interest Tagore but that did not keep him from boldly opposing British tyranny. When government troops led by English officers opened fire on a political gathering in Amritsar in 1919, killing 379 Indians and wounding scores of others, Tagore renounced the knighthood that England had bestowed on him four years earlier. As a poet, he felt it was the strongest statement he could make to draw world attention to the crime.
It cost him friendship and popularity in the literary circles of Europe and even in America, but he considered this act one of the high points of his life. It was also during this time that he composed some of his most powerful poems against oppression and injustice. When Gandhi was imprisoned without trial in 1932, he condemned it. In a letter to England’s Prime Minister Ramsay MacDonald, he warned that the British were closing the door on peaceful negotiations with Indian leaders.
Tagore was self-taught. Attempts by his parents to educate him in schools had failed. Young Rabindranath found conventional classrooms suffocating. In 1901, he founded an experimental school at Shantiniketan (“Abode of Peace”) near Calcutta, free from traditional restrictions. Classes were held in open air and joy in learning was given the highest importance.
By 1921, the school had evolved into Vishwa-Bharati University (World University) where students from all over India came to study. It is a testimony to Tagore’s ideal that funding for the University came from both Hindus and Muslims.
Tagore did not live long enough to see the end of the British Raj and the partition of the sub-continent along religious lines in 1947. He died six years earlier, still nurturing a harmonious vision of India, as riots were flaring.
In “The Religion of Men,” a set of lectures delivered at Oxford in 1930, Tagore said: “Freedom in the mere sense of independence has no content, and therefore no meaning. Perfect freedom lies in a harmony of relationship.” In an earlier poem, he had written of the perfect union of knowledge and freedom that he came to embody in his own supremely creative and protean life:
Where the mind is without fear and the head is held high;
Where knowledge is free;
Where the world has not been broken up into fragments by
narrow domestic walls;
Where words come out from the depth of truth;
Where tireless striving stretches its arm toward perfection;
Where the clear stream of reason has not lost its way into the
dreary desert of dead habit;
Where the mind is led forward by thee into ever-widening
thought and action;
Into that heaven of freedom, my father, let my country awake.
Friday, November 14, 2008
Sense in the Time of Hardship
As economic misery mounts for the average American, pundits are busy pointing fingers. You can almost hear them coo: “I told you so!” Yet the same pundits told us before the bubble broke that we were in the era of limitless prosperity, that only the sky was the limit for hedge funds and stocks. The laissez faire market stretched to its extreme has gone bust. Bankers don’t regulate banks any more than inmates regulate asylums. (Coming to think of it, that’s what has been going on in these institutions of higher capitalism!) Ascribing altruism to Wall Street executives makes as much sense as asking a tyrant to punish himself for his crimes.
With the onset of the credit crunch and the scaling down of various forms of want, I have noticed a rather funny reaction among my fellow Muslims. It is a variation of “I told you so,” only more arrogant. If only people were not as greedy or selfish or unjust, this would not have happened, they say, conveniently forgetting that on average, Muslims are as guilty of unchecked materialism as anyone else. All scriptures advise believers not to live beyond their means, not to consume recklessly, not to engage in usurious transactions. But, of course, belief is easy and action difficult.
We need to change our habits and attitudes. Looking back, I see how much “stuff” I bought over the years that I had no use for. My overfilled garage bears testimony to my expensive foolishness. I had to have these things because … well, it was cool to have them. It satisfied a primal hunger for possessions that I felt helpless to resist until economic reality set in. Now the latest in digital cameras and smart phones and smarter toasters leave me looking the other way, in disgust or indifference.
I doubt that we will ever return to the “less is more” trend of the ‘60s and ‘70s but at least we are beginning to reflect on what is important and what is not, what is "need" and what is "want." We knew all along that as the newness of a gadget or a tool or a car or a house wears off, it loses its grip on our psyche and on our sense of happiness. But it made no difference to our desire to acquire, relentlessly and indiscriminately. Tough adjustment, however, has revealed the stark emptiness of toys, gilded or plain, and we are the better for it. If only this sense lasts even if the “good times” were to return!
As economic misery mounts for the average American, pundits are busy pointing fingers. You can almost hear them coo: “I told you so!” Yet the same pundits told us before the bubble broke that we were in the era of limitless prosperity, that only the sky was the limit for hedge funds and stocks. The laissez faire market stretched to its extreme has gone bust. Bankers don’t regulate banks any more than inmates regulate asylums. (Coming to think of it, that’s what has been going on in these institutions of higher capitalism!) Ascribing altruism to Wall Street executives makes as much sense as asking a tyrant to punish himself for his crimes.
With the onset of the credit crunch and the scaling down of various forms of want, I have noticed a rather funny reaction among my fellow Muslims. It is a variation of “I told you so,” only more arrogant. If only people were not as greedy or selfish or unjust, this would not have happened, they say, conveniently forgetting that on average, Muslims are as guilty of unchecked materialism as anyone else. All scriptures advise believers not to live beyond their means, not to consume recklessly, not to engage in usurious transactions. But, of course, belief is easy and action difficult.
We need to change our habits and attitudes. Looking back, I see how much “stuff” I bought over the years that I had no use for. My overfilled garage bears testimony to my expensive foolishness. I had to have these things because … well, it was cool to have them. It satisfied a primal hunger for possessions that I felt helpless to resist until economic reality set in. Now the latest in digital cameras and smart phones and smarter toasters leave me looking the other way, in disgust or indifference.
I doubt that we will ever return to the “less is more” trend of the ‘60s and ‘70s but at least we are beginning to reflect on what is important and what is not, what is "need" and what is "want." We knew all along that as the newness of a gadget or a tool or a car or a house wears off, it loses its grip on our psyche and on our sense of happiness. But it made no difference to our desire to acquire, relentlessly and indiscriminately. Tough adjustment, however, has revealed the stark emptiness of toys, gilded or plain, and we are the better for it. If only this sense lasts even if the “good times” were to return!
Wednesday, November 05, 2008
Crossing the Race Rubicon
The improbable candidate achieved the unimaginable and overnight, the world became a better place.
Four years ago, the president-elect said at the Democratic National Convention, “I stand here knowing that my story is part of the larger American story, that I owe a debt to all of those who came before me, and that, in no other country on earth, is my story even possible.”
Last night, it all came together for Barack ("blessing" in Swahili) Hussein Obama in a way that even he could not have dreamed in 2004.
Obama stirred hope in the hearts of people, not just in America but around the globe, but let us not forget that he matched his hope with hard work, undaunted by setbacks and by those who said, “No you can’t.”
“Yes we can” is now a part of the American vocabulary.
By electing an African-American as the 44th president of the United States, America has finally crossed the race Rubicon.
Martin Luther King’s dream that we should be judged not by the color of our skins but by the content of our character is now a reality, even if tempered by memories of hidden wounds too painful for some to forget.
African-Americans voted overwhelmingly for Obama but he could not have been elected president if whites did not vote for him in such unprecedented numbers also, from idealistic students and blue collar workers to liberal intellectuals and Hollywood moguls. Consider this stark fact: North Dakota, Utah, Montana, Vermont, Nebraska and New Mexico went for Obama although there isn't much of an African-American presence in those six states. The biggest shocker of all: Obama won North Carolina and Indiana, two of the reddest states in America. Until now.
America has become colorblind.
While this holds profound lessons for all, it is particularly meaningful for European nations where immigrants are often treated as second-class citizens even after decades of invaluable contributions to their respective societies. Perhaps Obama’s victory will convince France, England, Germany, Denmark, Sweden, Holland, Spain and other countries to also become colorblind and inclusive. There really is no other way.
Until now, when the world looked up to America, it was because of its science and technology and medicine. But now the world will also look at America with awe and wonder because of its socially enlightened citizenry. Who could have ever imagined that?
Reversing the “either you are with us or against us” threat that defined George Bush’s belligerent foreign policy is a priority for Barack Obama. He has promised to meet unconditionally with any world leader to discuss and negotiate peace. The international temperature seems to have already cooled by a few degrees, and even though securing agreements with nations alienated by American arrogance may take time, the prospects are promising, given the spontanaeous outpouring of global goodwill for the president-elect.
The danger posed by global warming is another priority. Throughout his campaign, Obama spoke passionately about the earth’s dwindling resources, its relentless exploitation by all but Western countries in particular, the urgency of clean energy sources, reducing greenhouse gas emissions and carbon footprint, and legislating sane policies based on scientific evidences to protect us and our children from rising seas and diminishing landmass.
But the sheer wonder of an African-American making the White House his home for at least the next four years is so astonishing that it blocks out other thoughts.
It was on New Year’s Day in 1863 that Abraham Lincoln signed the Emancipation Proclamation. A hundred years later, in 1963, Martin Luther King informed Americans and the world that he had a dream. A year later, Lyndon Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act, outlawing racial segregation in schools, public places, and employment. Johnson followed it up with the National Voting Rights Act in 1965 to empower African-Americans to cast ballots without fear.
But the laws were only theories and it took many more years before they became reality for those they were meant to protect. A movie currently playing in theatres –The Secret Life of Bees – based on the best-selling novel of the same title by Sue Monk Kidd – gives viewers an idea of how many lives were lost and shattered before African-Americans could actually vote.
While many commentators have reflected on these historic milestones in the wake of Obama’s victory, one name has gone unmentioned. It is that of Muhammad Ali. Obama inspired us with the audacity of hope but in the ‘60s, Ali lifted our spirits with his raw audacity alone. From “I have seen the light and I am crowing” to “I ain’t got no quarrel with them Viet Cong,” Ali spoke truth to power, opening raw wounds in the psyche of America that provoked anger and revulsion but in the end proved cathartic for the nation. The change that he brought about through his audacity and moral courage surely played a role in the election that transfixed us on November 4th and transformed the world.
P.S. Toni Morrison, the last American to win the Nobel Prize in literature in 1993, gave an interview to The Wall Street Journal on 11/7/2008. The relevant excerpt follows:
Q. What do you think Mr. Obama's win says about American conception of race?
A. We're still a very active, volcanic country which is part of its excitement - the reinvention of ourselves and the constant search for what democracy means. I'm keenly aware of this peculiarity for this country. You couldn't imagine a win like this in Europe, because they're more static in how they run things. I can't imagine a Senegalese man in Paris running France - but now maybe.
Q. It's interesting that very little of the public discourse about Mr. Obama deals with his mixed-race status.
A. The other part of his race and his cultural experience was swept under the rug. That was deliberate so he could be the quintessential American even though the country was built on diversity. They had to tiptoe around that, but I think that nuanced discussion will happen. I kept saying that this is not an African-America but it's this specific man. This man. I can think of a lot of African-American that I would not vote for.
The improbable candidate achieved the unimaginable and overnight, the world became a better place.
Four years ago, the president-elect said at the Democratic National Convention, “I stand here knowing that my story is part of the larger American story, that I owe a debt to all of those who came before me, and that, in no other country on earth, is my story even possible.”
Last night, it all came together for Barack ("blessing" in Swahili) Hussein Obama in a way that even he could not have dreamed in 2004.
Obama stirred hope in the hearts of people, not just in America but around the globe, but let us not forget that he matched his hope with hard work, undaunted by setbacks and by those who said, “No you can’t.”
“Yes we can” is now a part of the American vocabulary.
By electing an African-American as the 44th president of the United States, America has finally crossed the race Rubicon.
Martin Luther King’s dream that we should be judged not by the color of our skins but by the content of our character is now a reality, even if tempered by memories of hidden wounds too painful for some to forget.
African-Americans voted overwhelmingly for Obama but he could not have been elected president if whites did not vote for him in such unprecedented numbers also, from idealistic students and blue collar workers to liberal intellectuals and Hollywood moguls. Consider this stark fact: North Dakota, Utah, Montana, Vermont, Nebraska and New Mexico went for Obama although there isn't much of an African-American presence in those six states. The biggest shocker of all: Obama won North Carolina and Indiana, two of the reddest states in America. Until now.
America has become colorblind.
While this holds profound lessons for all, it is particularly meaningful for European nations where immigrants are often treated as second-class citizens even after decades of invaluable contributions to their respective societies. Perhaps Obama’s victory will convince France, England, Germany, Denmark, Sweden, Holland, Spain and other countries to also become colorblind and inclusive. There really is no other way.
Until now, when the world looked up to America, it was because of its science and technology and medicine. But now the world will also look at America with awe and wonder because of its socially enlightened citizenry. Who could have ever imagined that?
Reversing the “either you are with us or against us” threat that defined George Bush’s belligerent foreign policy is a priority for Barack Obama. He has promised to meet unconditionally with any world leader to discuss and negotiate peace. The international temperature seems to have already cooled by a few degrees, and even though securing agreements with nations alienated by American arrogance may take time, the prospects are promising, given the spontanaeous outpouring of global goodwill for the president-elect.
The danger posed by global warming is another priority. Throughout his campaign, Obama spoke passionately about the earth’s dwindling resources, its relentless exploitation by all but Western countries in particular, the urgency of clean energy sources, reducing greenhouse gas emissions and carbon footprint, and legislating sane policies based on scientific evidences to protect us and our children from rising seas and diminishing landmass.
But the sheer wonder of an African-American making the White House his home for at least the next four years is so astonishing that it blocks out other thoughts.
It was on New Year’s Day in 1863 that Abraham Lincoln signed the Emancipation Proclamation. A hundred years later, in 1963, Martin Luther King informed Americans and the world that he had a dream. A year later, Lyndon Johnson signed the Civil Rights Act, outlawing racial segregation in schools, public places, and employment. Johnson followed it up with the National Voting Rights Act in 1965 to empower African-Americans to cast ballots without fear.
But the laws were only theories and it took many more years before they became reality for those they were meant to protect. A movie currently playing in theatres –The Secret Life of Bees – based on the best-selling novel of the same title by Sue Monk Kidd – gives viewers an idea of how many lives were lost and shattered before African-Americans could actually vote.
While many commentators have reflected on these historic milestones in the wake of Obama’s victory, one name has gone unmentioned. It is that of Muhammad Ali. Obama inspired us with the audacity of hope but in the ‘60s, Ali lifted our spirits with his raw audacity alone. From “I have seen the light and I am crowing” to “I ain’t got no quarrel with them Viet Cong,” Ali spoke truth to power, opening raw wounds in the psyche of America that provoked anger and revulsion but in the end proved cathartic for the nation. The change that he brought about through his audacity and moral courage surely played a role in the election that transfixed us on November 4th and transformed the world.
P.S. Toni Morrison, the last American to win the Nobel Prize in literature in 1993, gave an interview to The Wall Street Journal on 11/7/2008. The relevant excerpt follows:
Q. What do you think Mr. Obama's win says about American conception of race?
A. We're still a very active, volcanic country which is part of its excitement - the reinvention of ourselves and the constant search for what democracy means. I'm keenly aware of this peculiarity for this country. You couldn't imagine a win like this in Europe, because they're more static in how they run things. I can't imagine a Senegalese man in Paris running France - but now maybe.
Q. It's interesting that very little of the public discourse about Mr. Obama deals with his mixed-race status.
A. The other part of his race and his cultural experience was swept under the rug. That was deliberate so he could be the quintessential American even though the country was built on diversity. They had to tiptoe around that, but I think that nuanced discussion will happen. I kept saying that this is not an African-America but it's this specific man. This man. I can think of a lot of African-American that I would not vote for.
Friday, October 31, 2008
“A Rendezvous with Destiny”
In Abraham Lincoln’s time in the 1860s, it was the question of Union and Disunion, of slavery and freedom. In Franklin Roosevelt’s time in the 1930s, it was the Great Depression with its unending bread lines, and recovery through the New Deal.
During George Bush’s eight years of presidency, described by the late author David Foster Wallace as “an unmitigated horror show of rapacity, hubris, incompetence, mendacity, corruption, cynicism and contempt for the electorate,” history repeated itself. An unspoken civil war now exists between the haves and the have-nots, subtler but no less lethal for the Union. In Northern California where I live, I see more and more people – white and black - standing by the roadside and in front of grocery stores, holding up signs that read: “Hungry. Please help.”
In their time, Americans chose Lincoln and Roosevelt to save the country. Who will they choose on November 4th this year? Lincoln speaks to us across the century and a half that separate his time from ours: “With malice toward none; with charity for all; with firmness in the right, as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in; to bind up the nation's wounds …” Roosevelt’s words also resonate across the years: “Only thing we have to fear is fear itself.”
One candidate has articulated these ideals in his campaign, convincing a vast number of voters that he can bind the nation’s wounds, reverse the economic meltdown and bring the old America back, the America that the world used to look up to, a strong and prosperous nation that put its power in the service of justice and peace at home and abroad.
That candidate is Barack Obama, the senator from Illinois, land of Lincoln.
Born in Hawaii of a black man from Kenya and a white woman from Kansas, this cosmopolitan, contemplative man has gained the confidence of Americans across party lines. He has called us to a higher purpose, in which liberty and equality are not enemies but symbiotically related, and we have responded. His steady resolve, inclusive worldview, common sense and sound judgment, combined with his grace and eloquence, has so energized Americans that this election may see the highest voter turnout in U.S. history.
If one were to summarize the reasons for Obama’s astonishing rise, it would be that he engaged in the politics of hope while McCain engaged in the politics of fear.
Particularly for young Americans, this hope over fear has fired their imagination even more than what John Kennedy, the architect of the New Frontier, was able to accomplish in 1960. Obama defined his message of hope in his keynote speech at the Democratic National Convention in 2004: “Hope in the face of difficulty, hope in the face of uncertainty, the audacity of hope … that is God's greatest gift to us, the bedrock of this nation, a belief in things not seen, a belief that there are better days ahead.”
An upset can still occur on November 4th. That is why Obama has appealed to his supporters not to become complacent even for a minute and to make sure that they all vote on Election Day.
McCain and Palin launched unethical, unfounded attacks against Obama by questioning his patriotism, dropping innuendos about his middle name, calling him a “socialist redistributionist” (whatever that means) and accusing him of consorting with terrorists. Americans are fed up with these negative and fear-mongering tactics. They see McCain as an extension of Bush's failed policies, and recognize that an intelligent, intellectually curious and visionary African-American, “a transformational candidate” in the words of Colin Powell, can guide the nation toward a new and humane direction as Lincoln and Roosevelt did during their times.
What about the rest of the world? Gallup Polls recently conducted in 70 countries representing nearly half the world’s population reveal that 3 out of 4 favor Obama over McCain in the U.S. presidential election.
Can Barack Hussein Obama rise to the post-election challenges if elected? Can he meet the post-election expectations? Talking heads are already raising these questions, and certainly the challenges and expectations will be exceptionally difficult to face and fulfill, but in these final hours, Americans are animated by only one hope, that after almost eight years of unrelenting national darkness, they will awake to a fresh and promising dawn on November 5th.
In 1936, Franklin Roosevelt said: “This generation of Americans has a rendezvous with destiny.” Seventy-two years later, so do we, so do we.
In Abraham Lincoln’s time in the 1860s, it was the question of Union and Disunion, of slavery and freedom. In Franklin Roosevelt’s time in the 1930s, it was the Great Depression with its unending bread lines, and recovery through the New Deal.
During George Bush’s eight years of presidency, described by the late author David Foster Wallace as “an unmitigated horror show of rapacity, hubris, incompetence, mendacity, corruption, cynicism and contempt for the electorate,” history repeated itself. An unspoken civil war now exists between the haves and the have-nots, subtler but no less lethal for the Union. In Northern California where I live, I see more and more people – white and black - standing by the roadside and in front of grocery stores, holding up signs that read: “Hungry. Please help.”
In their time, Americans chose Lincoln and Roosevelt to save the country. Who will they choose on November 4th this year? Lincoln speaks to us across the century and a half that separate his time from ours: “With malice toward none; with charity for all; with firmness in the right, as God gives us to see the right, let us strive on to finish the work we are in; to bind up the nation's wounds …” Roosevelt’s words also resonate across the years: “Only thing we have to fear is fear itself.”
One candidate has articulated these ideals in his campaign, convincing a vast number of voters that he can bind the nation’s wounds, reverse the economic meltdown and bring the old America back, the America that the world used to look up to, a strong and prosperous nation that put its power in the service of justice and peace at home and abroad.
That candidate is Barack Obama, the senator from Illinois, land of Lincoln.
Born in Hawaii of a black man from Kenya and a white woman from Kansas, this cosmopolitan, contemplative man has gained the confidence of Americans across party lines. He has called us to a higher purpose, in which liberty and equality are not enemies but symbiotically related, and we have responded. His steady resolve, inclusive worldview, common sense and sound judgment, combined with his grace and eloquence, has so energized Americans that this election may see the highest voter turnout in U.S. history.
If one were to summarize the reasons for Obama’s astonishing rise, it would be that he engaged in the politics of hope while McCain engaged in the politics of fear.
Particularly for young Americans, this hope over fear has fired their imagination even more than what John Kennedy, the architect of the New Frontier, was able to accomplish in 1960. Obama defined his message of hope in his keynote speech at the Democratic National Convention in 2004: “Hope in the face of difficulty, hope in the face of uncertainty, the audacity of hope … that is God's greatest gift to us, the bedrock of this nation, a belief in things not seen, a belief that there are better days ahead.”
An upset can still occur on November 4th. That is why Obama has appealed to his supporters not to become complacent even for a minute and to make sure that they all vote on Election Day.
McCain and Palin launched unethical, unfounded attacks against Obama by questioning his patriotism, dropping innuendos about his middle name, calling him a “socialist redistributionist” (whatever that means) and accusing him of consorting with terrorists. Americans are fed up with these negative and fear-mongering tactics. They see McCain as an extension of Bush's failed policies, and recognize that an intelligent, intellectually curious and visionary African-American, “a transformational candidate” in the words of Colin Powell, can guide the nation toward a new and humane direction as Lincoln and Roosevelt did during their times.
What about the rest of the world? Gallup Polls recently conducted in 70 countries representing nearly half the world’s population reveal that 3 out of 4 favor Obama over McCain in the U.S. presidential election.
Can Barack Hussein Obama rise to the post-election challenges if elected? Can he meet the post-election expectations? Talking heads are already raising these questions, and certainly the challenges and expectations will be exceptionally difficult to face and fulfill, but in these final hours, Americans are animated by only one hope, that after almost eight years of unrelenting national darkness, they will awake to a fresh and promising dawn on November 5th.
In 1936, Franklin Roosevelt said: “This generation of Americans has a rendezvous with destiny.” Seventy-two years later, so do we, so do we.
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
Nobel Scientists for Obama
Science took a severe beating from George Bush and his administration. Funding for cutting-edge research dried up in physics, chemistry, biology and medicine. Where once the U.S. dominated, from high-energy physics to medical research, the scientific frontier has slowly moved to Europe. That’s where most of the exciting work in science is done these days. The Large Hadron Collider (LHC), the world’s most powerful particle accelerator at the Swiss-France border, is only one example.
In an open letter to the American people, 76 American Nobel Prize-winning scientists (including the three chemisty and physics laureates this year) endorsed Barack Obama for president. (Martin Chalfie, the chemistry winner, has even recorded a video of his endorsement). They are the Who’s Who of American science. Their passionate support for Obama and disdain for Bush, and by extension of McCain and Palin, should be a wake-up call for Americans struggling to understand why we as a nation have fallen behind other countries in basic scientific research. Only the other day, the clueless Sarah Palin mocked fruit fly research as a waste of taxpayers’ money. Christopher Hitchens’ devastating deconstruction of Palin’s ignorance and the importance of fruit fly research that led to a Nobel Prize for Thomas Hunt Morgan in 1933 makes for fascinating reading.
P.S. 11/1/08 - Here is another response to Palin's "scientific" observations on the fruit fly by a scientist.
Science took a severe beating from George Bush and his administration. Funding for cutting-edge research dried up in physics, chemistry, biology and medicine. Where once the U.S. dominated, from high-energy physics to medical research, the scientific frontier has slowly moved to Europe. That’s where most of the exciting work in science is done these days. The Large Hadron Collider (LHC), the world’s most powerful particle accelerator at the Swiss-France border, is only one example.
In an open letter to the American people, 76 American Nobel Prize-winning scientists (including the three chemisty and physics laureates this year) endorsed Barack Obama for president. (Martin Chalfie, the chemistry winner, has even recorded a video of his endorsement). They are the Who’s Who of American science. Their passionate support for Obama and disdain for Bush, and by extension of McCain and Palin, should be a wake-up call for Americans struggling to understand why we as a nation have fallen behind other countries in basic scientific research. Only the other day, the clueless Sarah Palin mocked fruit fly research as a waste of taxpayers’ money. Christopher Hitchens’ devastating deconstruction of Palin’s ignorance and the importance of fruit fly research that led to a Nobel Prize for Thomas Hunt Morgan in 1933 makes for fascinating reading.
P.S. 11/1/08 - Here is another response to Palin's "scientific" observations on the fruit fly by a scientist.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)