US - how will it end?

Lots of theories abound for an end to US dominance, and 'shift' to the east. However, most of the stories were told from the perspective of 'rise of china,' but not from that of 'inside' of America.

I do not think the rise of another nation will cause an end to a nation's dominance. A lot of the social network ties and infrastructure will continue to function even when other nations enrich themselves. Much like how British dominance did not come to an end even after Japan's rise. Its trading partners, ie colonies, still remain theirs for a long time.

The strength of a nation is much obtained by these network ties and infrastructure. By infrastructure, I also mean the dominance of English, international laws favoring US culture, US MNCs and their influence on nations policies, etc. However, there lies a threat indeed to the US dominance, and that is a risk of imploding.

I think no one can topple the US but itself. Recent years of catastrophic collective decisions brought itself to it current bad state - Enron, invasion of Iraq, financial crisis, and recently John Thain's bailing out of Merrill Lynch's employees using the government bail out fund.

I am suspecting these are all the American culture's own undoing. A culture of every man for himself, and believing that it will add up to collective good. However, these appeared to show that this mindset of fighting for oneself alone can become negative when present in someone at top office. Their actions are too significant to the livelihood of too many. As a result, top officers had to be shuffled every few years (4 years for presidents).

Now, everyone is hoping Obama is someone who can cleanse the internal injuries US had sustained last few years. He has to fight for many things, inclusive of selfish corporatism. All uphill battles.

No matter how it will end, this signaled a potential weakness in America, one itself ought to be aware of.

Netizen population surpassed 1b

Wow, actually I am awed by the small number. Considering we have 6b earthlings, 84% of us are still offline.

However, also consider that US + China consisted a total of 16% + 18% = 34% of all netizen population. These are the two countries we need to pay attention when talking about Internet usage.

Building an understanding of China

I am often sadden by the state of understanding of China. This was despite the 'contemporary' anthropological papers I have read in the recent months. It came to my attention that among the common held positions on China, most of the Chinese views were missing, labeled 'traditional.' Whereas these thinkers had the more 'contemporary' understanding. But what is meant by 'contemporary' and what is 'traditional?'

For example, in my term paper, I wrote that the idea of harmony is one where 'there can be no parts wrongly present, and everything exists belongs' (Mote, 1989). The author, Frederick Mote, was a Sinologist and Professor of History at Princeton. This idea was rejected in my class as 'traditional.' Anthropologists documented harmony as communist invention to control the Chinese society.

In another instance, I mentioned in class discussion that Chinese family emphasized the division of labor more than equality between sexes. This idea was also labeled as 'traditional.' Anthropologists documented Chinese tradition as male domineering and oppressed the female. However, in my process of growing up, I have seen about half of Chinese families as female domineering.

I urged anyone who can grab a Chinese who grew up in any Chinese societies (China, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Singapore, or even Korea, Japan) and ask him about the above. Ask them what is harmony. Ask any female what she aspires to be. Remember that being an anthropologist means that you are trying to understand another person from his/her point of view. You do not color this perspective with your cultural principles, such as equality or freedom.

I am afraid the effects of dismissing anything foreign and different as 'traditional' is a sure way towards cultural imperialism. By dismissing other culture's history, you set yours own as the actual history. By dismissing other culture's reality as oppressive, you set your future as the only right path.

Looking at China today, I felt that one big point missing in Chinese anthropology is that a different future is brewing in Asia, a continent largely driven by Confucius ideals. I do not think it is going back to imperialism, nor is it heading to American type democracy. An important Chinese anthropologist often (purposely or not) overlooked by American anthropologists is Fei Xiaotong. He documented the development of Chinese societies as not entirely autocratic nor democratic. However, the emphasis on communal agreement and wise leadership is very historically bounded and I highly recommend anyone who is interested in understanding Chinese thinking to read either Frederick Mote or Fei Xiaotong. Another non-academic but broad reading on development of Asian societies is Lee Kuan Yew's second memoir: Singapore, from Third World to First.

The future of Asia is in the making, but it is not 'that' future.

Micro-actions developing into hierarchial community

One of a sign of a hierarchical community is the culture of faulting someone for the mistake of not knowing. The reason is that one had not try to find out.

However, the process of finding out goes in circle with the question itself. For instance, I was surprised by the existence of the Fly America Act today, meaning flights booked through any Federal funding has to use American airlines. This defies most assumptions practiced by most communities that professionalism chooses the cheapest flight. But how would you first ask that question if you do not know it exists?

If an organization allows the defendant to argue or circumvent the rule, it is a flat organization. If the organization fault the defendant for not finding out, it is a hierarchical organization. Faulting someone for not finding out something difficult to know in the first place creates a sense of privilege to the holders of traditions - particularly those who have been there for a long time.

Not to say who is at fault or not, just my thought about how power can be created through inter-personal micro-actions.

The Truth of Culture

I have been studying cultural differences and in any culture, there is always a set of beliefs everyone strongly believes in. If there is anything that is common across culture, it is this:

If only 1 person proclaim it, it is lunacy.
If 10 persons proclaim it, it is heresay.
If 1000 persons proclaim it, it is a trend.
If 10000 persons proclaim it, it is the truth.

This applies to what Americans called freedom, Singapore's 5Cs, and Chinese's harmony.

I think that when an ethnographer sees beyond these social reinforced mentality, one sees beyond morality. If there is a cross-cultural intelligence, this eye sees what the truth is.