With many nations enjoying a higher standard of living, millions of wealthier people are now vying for the same limited resources many western nations have enjoyed in excess for decades.  Nations like Japan, who rely heavily on imports, would see import costs quickly rise at the same time as climate change affects the annual rains.  One of the ways governments stay in power is by ensuring people have access to food and water. Sure, people bitch and moan about the stupid decisions they make, but the average person will start grabbing weapons and rioting if forced to go without food and drink.

It’s hard to believe that as little as a decade ago we took for granted the the reliable availability of food.  However, how can governments ensure they can feed their own population while simultaneously preventing the starvation of other nations?

Doing More With Less

In the next 45 years, it’s expected that Japan’s population will fall from 130,000,000 to somewhere around 90,000,000.  While many people see this as a negative, it could very well be a positive.  We can see time and time again that when a country enjoys a higher standard of living, the people have fewer children.  The reason for Japan’s declining birthrate is slightly more complex than this, but it doesn’t need to be seen as a bad thing.  If there are 40-million fewer people to feed by 2055, then there will be less need for Japan to use strong-arm negotiations to ensure their people have the resources necessary to enjoy living.

The world’s population is expected to be somewhere around 9-billion by this time, also.  This is a ridiculous number that shows just how incapable we humans are of understanding the poetic justice of cause and effect.  With only 6.8-billion people on the Earth at the start of this year, we’re seeing almost one third of them go hungry for most of the year.  Just how the heck are we supposed to feed another two billion mouths?

There’s no denying that the next 40 years will push human ingenuity to a whole new level, but steps also need to be taken to ensure that everyone does their part to consume less food.  Annual hot dog eating competitions might be fun, but it’s also a display of excessive waste and lunacy.  Most of us do not quite realize the scale of this issue, myself included.  But it’s going to be one of the most serious problems that we humans have ever faced.

“The Perfect Storm” Is Not Just Cliché, It’s Possible

I hate to use the phrase “perfect storm” because it seems these two words are used in every second sentence when discussing humanity’s future, but here we are.  In order to feed such an incredible number of people, humanity will need to remember our very first industry: agriculture.

Urban sprawl may need to stop as we start to recover developed land for agricultural use.  However, there are problems with this.  Agriculture is never a sure thing.  New diseases are being discovered all the time around the world, destroying our crops and livestock.  Chemical fertilizers are incredibly CO2-heavy during manufacture and will likely not be permitted much longer.  Invasive insects have enjoyed a spike in numbers due to odd weather patterns, and important insects such as bees have been dying off in such numbers that hundreds of species may be on the verge of extinction.

So what’s the answer?  I hate to say it, but we’re now wholly dependent on science.  Even if we were to “roll back” our lifestyle by 500 years it wouldn’t be enough to solve the problems we’ll be facing in the near future.

A large percentage of the world’s crops are vulnerable to destruction by weeds, fungi, and insects.  We need to find a way to prevent it from happening if we are serious about both maintaining and increasing food production in the near future.

Naturally climate change, disease, and bugs aren’t our only enemies here; Humans are just as dangerous.  Political and economic situations can quickly alter the balance of our food and water supplies, quickly escalating any problem we might face.

The next quarter century will either see humans make some incredible strides towards self-sustainability, or a devolution into warlike tribes protecting what few resources we have available.

What’s your take on this problem? Will import-dependent nations like Japan suffer in the face of global climate change?  Will the world run out of food?  I’d love to hear your thoughts.

Case in point is the full body scanners that have been in use at some UK airports over the last year.  These scanners sell for about 750,000円 and are capable of peeking under the clothes of anyone who walks through them.  Not only does this allow security to check for any illegal objects carried outside of a person’s body (it can’t peek under the skin), but it provides a great tool to people looking for blurry images of naked people.

Naturally, due to child protection laws, people under the age of 18 have not yet been subjected to searches via the ePeep, but this is just a little technicality that can be subverted by another few bomb scares involving people as young as 6 months.  What better place to hide a kilo of C4 plastic explosive than in the diaper of a baby?

Truth be told, I’m really not looking forward to flying anytime in the future.  Even if I were to fly directly from Japan to Canada, the unnecessarily long security check process (which, for me, routinely involves 3 sets of full body examinations by different people) and ridiculous number of restrictions would make the sojourn so uncomfortable that I’d rather make the trek on a rotting sailboat with a shipload of spiders during typhoon season.  As a result, I’ll be keeping my feet firmly planted here in Japan until governments come to their senses and implement the only true method of ensuring absolute protection for people on flights; nudity.

Flying By the Seat of Our パンツ

People flying on a plane should not be permitted to wear any clothes except for a pair of tight-fitting underwear (or diaper) issued by the airlines.  People will be examined in the same condition as they were born, and given clean linen only after the examination.  People who are uncomfortable being naked in public should find other (more environmentally friendly) alternatives to flying.  I should also mention that children will not be exempt from this dehumanizing process, and no carry-on luggage will be permitted at all.

Not only will this prevent most religious people from flying, but it would help the environment by cutting down air travel by more than half what it is now.  Business people who often fly from place to place will now make more use of the trains or Skype, and the throngs of adventurous travelers in search of exotic locales to while away their time will stay local and boost the local economy.  Of course, people who enjoy a good show of nudity will get the added bonus of flying in a plane full of bored and mostly-naked people who will probably be far more open to polite discussion than most clothed people at a coffee house.

Naturally, people could still hide weapons in specially-trained body cavities, but the types of weapons would be severely limited.  Flying couldn’t get much safer than this.

What do you think? Is my idiotic plan sufficient to please governments and occasional flyer’s while simultaneously thwarting would-be terrorists?  Do you have a better idea? I’d love to hear your thoughts.

Today two American reporters were given a pardon from Dear Leader for sneaking into North Korea from China for their little TV show which, in North Korea, is considered a ‘grave crime’.  They admitted to sneaking into the nation to film life in the reclusive nation.  They were given a trial and found guilty.  They were sentenced to 12 years at a labor camp to atone for their crimes.  Oddly enough, North Korea stuck to their version of the law long enough to successfully put two Americans behind bars for their actions.

Since when is it okay for people to knowingly break the laws of another land only to receive a “Get Out of Jail Free” card?  Are all those Mexicans that have been arrested by the American authorities for illegally entering that country all of a sudden going to be sent back to Mexico with a complete pardon?  If a former president of Mexico visits Mr. Obama to get these people out of jail with a full pardon, will America’s Dear Leader be as generous as his North Korean counterpart?  Something tells me that’s a big “No”.

Responsibility Absolvement

A similar thing is happening in the UK. Gary McKinnon hacked into almost 100 U.S. Military servers to extract information on a range of topics. He’s now being extradited to the United States to face a judge for his crimes. However, he’s not going willingly. For the last few months, he and his family have been fighting the extradition order saying that he should remain in the UK, even if he’s convicted. McKinnon suffers from Asperger’s Syndrome and feels that his special needs would not be taken care of should he be sent to a maximum security prison.

Oh boo-hoo. Are maximum security prisons too tough for someone with something as serious as AS? Maybe Mr. McKinnon should have thought of that before embarking on his quest to hack a bunch of military servers for UFO information. His case is still ongoing, but I wonder if he will be forgiven by the US government as nobody died as a result of his illegal activities.

How about the case of the pregnant woman that was arrested in Laos for attempting to smuggle a rather large amount of drugs? She was caught red-handed with a huge stash of the stuff, and even had a fair trial in Laos for this serious offense. After months of betting and pleading to serve her time in a UK prison, she was finally granted her wish and will now give birth to her child in the UK while she serves out her time in a much more comfortable prison setting than she would have had in Laos.

Since when has it become okay for guests of a nation to commit serious offences while away from home? Isn’t this effectively the same as going to a friend’s dinner party and having sex with their dog?

If You’re Not Willing to Do the Time …

The number of people that have been getting away with minimal or zero consequences for actions deemed incredibly unacceptable is an insult to the host nation as well as anyone that happened to be from the same country as the offender. If I commit a crime outside of Canada, I will not go crying to my government to spring me from whatever hellhole of a prison I might find myself in. Heck, unless wrongfully accused of something outside of Canada, my home government won’t even realize that I’m in another country. That’s the way it’s supposed to be. When in Rome, do as the Romans do. 99% of the time, that means obeying the law.

I seriously hope that this trend stops in the near future as people need to realize that they are responsible for their actions. If someone wants to do something illegal, they’d better make darn sure they’re never caught. However, if they are, they’d better be ready to serve the time … even if they feel it’s unfair.

It’s the poetic justice of cause and effect.

What’s your take on this whole situation? Should people be expected to serve time in a foreign prison if they commit a crime in that nation? Should governments be expected to bail us out of jail if our failed idiotic plans don’t pan out? I’d love to know what you think.

So what is the difference between a planet and a dwarf planet? Oddly enough, it’s not quite as simple as you’d think. When it comes to astronomy, the term “dwarf” does not follow the same definition as we’ve come to expect thanks to Snow White’s friends and other scientists that have identified dwarf variations of animals. Instead a dwarf planet is defined as “a celestial body orbiting the Sun that is massive enough to be rounded by its own gravity but has not cleared its neighbouring region of planetesimals and is not a satellite. More explicitly, it has to have sufficient mass to overcome rigid body forces and achieve hydrostatic equilibrium.”  Naturally, dwarf planets should not be confused with minor planets, as the two are quite a bit different.

Unlike it’s tiny sibling, a planet is considered a body that orbits the Sun, is large enough for its own gravity to make it round, and has “cleared its neighbourhood” of smaller objects.  Oddly enough, this means that any of the worlds discovered outside the solar system are technically not planets, as they do not orbit the Sun, but their own stars.  Luckily, we can get away with calling the recently discovered alien worlds “exoplanets,” but it means that we will need to once again re-evaluate the definition of a planet once we begin to live outside the Solar System.

Okay … Now What?

It will be interesting to see if this opens the door for other regions to follow, or if it will inspire a new round of necessary planet inclusions. If Pluto is considered a planet, then surely larger objects such as Ceres, Haumea, Makemake, and Eris should be upgraded and become planets as well. This would push up our solar system’s numbers from the current eight to thirteen. Will the state of Illinois agree that these other worlds should be included? If not, what reason would they cite? Pluto was discovered by an Illinois-based scientist, so does this mean that Pluto will regain its status for the sake of state pride? Is this just a simple attempt to save money in education? Surely the school boards still have a few million books published around 1960 that haven’t been completely destroyed by over-use in the public schools.

Unfortunately, this seems to be little more than another example of what happens when the state gets involved with science.  Governments should not have the ability to call they don’t understand a scientific fact, just like scientists should not have the ability to accept massive bribes and take part in ludicrous scandals.  Have we learned nothing from the centuries of mistakes humans have made by overriding science in the name of religion?

Alas, it seems that we will never learn.  Perhaps we’ll see something in the papers next week about how the world is as flat today as it was when God created it 7,000 years ago.

Citations:
IAU: Resolution Votes
NASA: Dwarf Planets

Yesterday I was sent a picture of an advertisement on the side of a bus that read “Science flies you to the moon. Religion flies you into buildings.” While this is clearly a slap in the face to every person who even remotely practices Islam, what really upsets me is the sheer ignorance behind this advertisement. Are all religious or spiritual people seeking martyrdom in some incredibly dramatic event deemed unacceptable by most people on the planet? Somehow I doubt it. Going further, why the dig at Islam? Of all the religions on Earth, Islam is perhaps the most accepting of scientific inquiry and fact. Heck, the continual advancement of science and mathematics is an integral part of the Qur’an, regardless of what the media wants us to believe. A cursory examination of the scientific accomplishments during the height of the Ottoman Empire will prove that.

If You Don’t Like Religious Solicitors, Don’t Peddle Your Wares, Either

As anyone who reads this site can attest, I am a huge supporter of the scientific community. On top of that, I have a great deal of respect for the majority of all religious people I’ve had the privilege to meet and talk with. I’ve had very stimulating conversations with people who believe evolution to be science fact, and I’ve had just as many interesting conversations with people who believe this to be science fiction. A few have had the idea that life exists elsewhere in the cosmos, and a handful have disagreed saying that life only exists on the Earth and it’s our duty to honor and respect the planet because of it. Some people have sworn that the Earth is as flat now as it has ever been, and I congratulate them for the effort.

But can any of these things be completely exclusive of the other? Hardly.

So why is it that many people who claim to be scientists continually put down religion and consider anyone with any amount of spirituality as blind as a bottom-dwelling ocean fish? Why is it that the very “people of science” who detest being bothered on their day off by people who are spreading the world of their religion think it’s okay to do the very same to everyone else?

Thank God that most scientifically-minded have more than a few semi-functional neurons to rub together.

A Difference of Opinion

It should be said that I am not Muslim, although I have studied Islam quite extensively over the last decade. Of all the major religions of the world, Islam has to be one of the least understood by most in the Westernized nations. Have some terrible things been done in the name of Allah? Oh, yes. Have some things been done in the name of God? Oh, yes. Which ones have been more devastating? Well … that depends on what country to have allegiance to.

A few well-armed and cave-dwelling misfits successfully launch a plan that has been shown in dozens of Hollywood movies before the 9/11 to get back at the very government that had abandoned them after the fall of Russia, and everything in the Western world changes. People cry foul and rally around a wounded United States, allowing them to walk into whatever nation they want to lay waste to a foe whose only advantage is the home playing field. Was it terrible? Definitely. Is the ongoing “crusade” against Islamic nations and peoples a just response? You tell me.

Militarily-superior Christian and Jewish nations have laid waste to far more cities and killed far more innocent civilians in the last 5 years than any Wahabi-Islamic militant could ever hope to achieve. If anything, it seems that science not only gets us to the moon, but it gets a whole lot of people killed in unjust retaliatory actions.

Hopefully the people that put this ad in action will retract it in the near future. Such proliferation of religious intolerance is about as rational as the ideologies of the very people who are against scientific inquiry….

… And that’s one fire that cannot be fought with fire.

Did I over-react? Was this what the advertisers were hoping to accomplish? What are your thoughts on the advertisement?

Before the previous subsidy program was axed, Japanese solar manufacturing firms held a huge portion of the market. That said, once the domestic market lost their tiny rebate, the sheer costs of installing a simple solar panel seemed too great for the average consumer. Thanks to falling demand, the two major manufacturers, Sharp and Kyocera, were unable to secure enough silicone, which then capped their continued growth due to the booming demand for the substance.

The New Plan

It’s with this incentive package that the Japanese government hopes to cut the price of residential solar panels by as much as 50% in the next three to five years, but how many people will be willing to invest such a large amount of money into a product that is expected to come down in price by such a large margin?

As of last month, the average consumer could purchase a 3 kilowatt solar power collector for about 2,300,000円. The government subsidy is good for 70,000円 per kilowatt, so that means a return of 210,000円. While the 9% discount is nice, it’s still priced way too high for most homes. On top of this, the amount of money that a family would earn back from the local electricity company for such a contraption would not amount to any significant savings. Depending on what prefecture a person lives in, a 3 kilowatt solar panel could require upwards of 580 years of continuous operation to pay for itself!

Who can afford this at a time when all the big manufacturers are crying over the rapid contraction of the nation’s exports and the soaring value of the Yen?

Curbing Enthusiasm

Before getting too much farther, I don’t want to sound too critical of the government’s plan to subsidize the installation of solar equipment in this country. It is really a great idea, and market surveys have found that over 35,000 buildings may be outfitted just this year alone. That should help companies like Sharp and Kyocera maintain some of their employees, while also giving the installers some work. All in all, the package is estimated to be worth approximately 9-billion Yen, and there could be more when the next federal budget is tabled in April of this year.

Emissions reached record levels last year and, according to some incredible numbers published by the people in Tokyo, they hope to have Japan’s CO2 emissions back down to Meiji-Era (Early 20th Century) levels by 2050. While this might seem like a pipe dream, it is certainly possible given the amount of engineering prowess some of the geniuses at Honda, Toyota, Sharp, Sony, and Mitsubishi have. As a result, the government has also mandated that over 70% of all newly built houses will have at least some solar power collection in place by 2020. Add this to the number of auto manufacturers that are producing electric-only vehicles in the next five years and the government might just be lucky enough to have corporations and citizens performing most of the hard work to reach the lofty goals set by old men in high-carbon outputting buildings.

The Right Direction?

There’s no denying that Sharp and Kyocera have hit some pretty hard times due to the lack of domestic investment in their solar products, but is the government’s decision to boost seemingly ecologically friendly power generation through the use of subsidies the right answer? If people are receiving money for installing solar panels, should the government also start rewarding people who drive “Kei Plate” cars or avoid owning a car altogether?

Changing a nation like Japan from an over-industrious nation into a substantially reduced emission’s-producing country is not going to be easy feat, and regardless of whether global warming is a result of humankind’s endless streams of carbon going into the atmosphere or the currently super-active Sun, we certainly need to do something to reduce the chemical stew that is clogging the air. Whether the subsidy will have any positive effect or not on the green-ness of Japan remains to be seen, however, with a few more promotional programs put forward by both the government and corporations, residents in Japan may be more willing to invest in the cleaner technologies to make up for the last few centuries of industrial excess.

Do you think this subsidy will have any effect on people’s willingness to drop 2.3-million Yen into solar panels for their home? Would you invest in the technology if you knew similar or superior panels would be available within a few years for almost half the price? I’d love to know your thoughts on the matter.

The project, dubbed the “Cyber-Safety Plan”, has already drawn criticism regarding its feasibility from several groups but the government is adamant that the system will help protect children from being exposed (intentionally or otherwise) to inappropriate materials.

According to the Australian government, home-based filtering will do absolutely nothing as it can usually be bypassed by children as young as seven years old. Yet, while the idea to filter the internet on the ISPs end is good in principle, the technology required to actively block these potentially inappropriate materials from viewing in real time is not available. The filters will block access to websites, yes. But everybody, including a seven year old child, knows that most illegal materials are traded on P2P technologies that cannot be easily filtered.

That said; the system is planned to have two tiers of operation. The first tier, which people could not opt out of, will block all content the Australian government deems to be illegal. This can be scaled up or down at any time and without notice. Control of the site black list will be held exclusively by the Australian Communications and Media Authority, and the list will never be made publicly available. The second tier, which is optional, would see all pornographic and sexually explicit content filtered out completely.

International Support

There seems to be quite a bit of interest in this project by other western nations, as well, as countries like Japan have expressed interest in blocking such material from web users. Many school boards think this is a great way to protect children from witnessing child pornography, police groups think this will make it easier to locate and track the illegal trading of such material, lobby groups feel this is the best way to make the internet a safer place, and parents view this with the same regard.

On one hand, it’s easy to see the benefits of filtering the internet at the ISP-level, as it will ensure our pre-pubescent children are not witness to acts of sexual promiscuity or other less-than-Fisher Price subjects. However, by blocking access to websites that display material the government deems unworthy of sharing, does this not open the doors to censorship on a broader scale? What about the responsibility parents have of properly educating their children on both the good and the bad sides of the internet?

The Cyber-Safety Plan is certainly a well-intentioned method for keeping the internet a “family safe” environment, but it seems to be little more than an elaborate system designed to let the general public blame others when their children view something they themselves might not want to see. With the exception of PornTube, there is very little online our children can witness which isn’t already on MTV, Fox, CNN, and other powerful TV stations.

Am I Missing Something?

Should the day come where I find my elementary school child sitting at a computer and staring at a sexually explicit scene on the screen, the last person I would expect to hold accountable would be the government. Instead, I would hit Alt+F4 to close the browser and discuss the situation with my child. Depending on whether this was a repeat offense or not, I might even call my wife in to have a “family discussion” on the topic of appropriate viewing materials.

Democratic governments were not, in theory, designed to protect us from ourselves, but to protect us from without and to ensure that the citizens of the country had the bare minimum to enjoy a happy and prosperous life. It’s not their job to make sure my children grow up happy and mentally prepared to handle everyday life, it’s mine. Parents who cannot accept the responsibility to properly raise their children shouldn’t have them in the first place. Why should my occasional appetite for pornographic material be stymied because my neighbors can’t pay attention to their child’s online activities?

Besides, porn is not the biggest problem that children face online today. There are far more cases of stalking, bullying, chatting with sexual predators, and identity theft going on online than there are of grade school children sharing flash cards loaded with pornographic media. If this isn’t enough, most “illegal materials” (a phrase that is not completely defined to allow ambiguity) are encrypted and split into many files to prevent such basic filtering attempts. How will the Australian government account for these?

$126-million Better Spent Elsewhere

While I can empathize with the Australian government regarding their attempts to filter the seemingly seedy underworld that is the internet, the ends will not justify the means. The project is slated to cost an estimated $126-million (AUS) at a time when governments around the world are seeing their coffers empty out at record speeds. Rather than using this money to protect parents from the harsh responsibilities that come with being a parent, the government should be using it to prop up their falling dollar or fund other projects that will put food in some empty stomachs.

It’s true that young people should not be witnessing things that they are not mentally prepared for, but it is part of growing up. My parents taught me right from wrong whenever I strayed too close to the line, and I will do the very same for my children. There is no government in the world that should put limitations on what we can see, hear, or judge for ourselves.

What’s your take on this? Should governments or ISPs have the right to filter the internet?

In an effort to pull Canada out of a severe economic slump, the three main opposition parties of Canada have agreed to join forces in order to pass a series of bills aimed at keeping the nation’s economy strong and vibrant in this difficult time. This new conglomerate, which has been contractually agreed to be championed by none other than Stephane Dion of the Liberal Party, will see the strong-willed Partie Quebecois and the ‘For the People’ New Democratic Party work together in a way that has never been seen before in Canadian politics. Although each of these parties has very different agendas, they’ve all agreed that it’s in the nation’s best interest to usurp power from the recently re-elected minority government and do what’s best for everyone.

Steve Jobs v2.0?

Although some fellow Canadians, such as Michael McKinlay, has referred to this new mega-party as an “Unelected Retard Government,” I’m forced to disagree.

Before the temporary democratic amalgamation contract was finalized last week, Stephane Dion was expected to resign his position as the Liberal Party leader. This was not only due to the lack of public opinion for the man, but also because he had failed to lead the Liberals effectively to gain more support and win either of the last two elections. However, now that the Prime Minister’s Office is just an arm’s reach away, Dion has agreed to stay on and lead the country out of its economic turmoil with his clear vision and superb management skills.

And where have we heard this before? Ah, yes … at Apple Computer!

Around the world people have looked to their politicians to be more like Obama; a man who is not only well spoken but projects the image that one would expect for the leader of a nation. Stephen Harper, while having some years experience as the leader of one of the world’s largest nations, does not project the same type of confidence and cool that the general population has come to expect from their leaders. But there is a problem with following too closely in Obama’s footsteps: people will argue that Canadian leaders lack their own style and must emulate other popular figures in order to win the hearts and minds of the citizens.

So, rather than go with an Obama-like image, the New Democratic Mega-Partie du Canada will do one better: they’ll go for a Steve Jobs image.

It makes so much sense, too!

After Apple fired Mr. Jobs in the 90s, the company stagnated to the point of bankruptcy. Upon the return of The Steve, everything became sleek and happy, with a throng of loyal followers who are often poised and ready to defend their stylish sweater-wearing leader unto the ends of the Earth! Perhaps the same will work for Mr. Dion….

After the people (kind of) fired the Liberal Party in 2006 by giving Harper’s conservatives their first minority government, the Liberal Party became stagnant. Living off the very same platforms and principles that had won it elections in the early-90s when the world was a safer and happier place. But people don’t want to hear about re-hashed health care and education packages with promises of government reform. They’ve heard that all before! Instead, what people want is a little passion, some sleek lines, and woefully incompetent leaders to release expectedly inadequate products at inexplicably high prices in an effort to whet the general public’s appetite for the next version.

If I didn’t know any better, I’d say that Stephane Dion is the right man. Who else could pull off being a Canadian Steve but Stephane? It’s genius, I tell you.

Uniting All, Under One Party

Yet, despite this interesting turn of events, the real reason behind the creation of this New Democratic Mega-Partie du Canada is not to make Stephane Dion the country’s next Prime Minister. No, that would be too logical. Instead, the idea is to force the Canadian public into realizing just how foolish they’ve been since voting Brian Mulroney out of office.

Until recently, the country has flip-flopped between extremes. Rarely was a minority government put into power. Instead, the public would wait until a political party did something to get us angry enough to actually leave our homes on Election Day, and then we’d vote in the opposite party. That’s how the system was designed to work, and it’s worked quite well for almost 142 years. However, by electing two minority governments in a row, the Canadian people are asking all of the political parties in the House of Commons to cooperate to reach the best decisions for the nation at large. Since that’s obviously against the best interests of each party’s agenda, they’ve been mostly deadlocked on all but the most obvious of issues.

So what’s the best way out of this predicament? It’s simple: give the voters a reason to pick just one party.

This is the genius behind this New Democratic Mega-Partie du Canada.

The Liberals are now completely in bed with Satan (a.k.a. The Partie Quebecois and the New Democratic Party). The Bloc Quebecois are now teamed up with their sworn enemies, the English. And the New Democrats have allied with the very people they swore to fight tooth and nail, the Liberals. By doing this, each of these three parties have spat in the face of their constituents, negating any chance of being re-elected in their ridings.

Final outcome: a Progressive Conservative Super Majority.

A Land of Extremes

Canada has been called a melting pot for cultures and people, and it’s certainly true when we tour the bigger cities in each of the country’s wonderful provinces. However, unlike these mega-cities of differing people, the government has always required a certain type of extremism in order to function on any level. We can’t have a minority government for any length of time, just like we can’t let the Natives get fair compensation for all the inhuman things we’ve done to them since the early 16th Century.

So by taking these extreme measures during his final months in politics, Stephane Dion is paving the way for a decade of leadership from a Progressive Conservative super majority in the Canadian Parliament.

Thank you, Mr. Dion.

A young couple walked down the sidewalk during the night, laughing at some private joke that only they could understand. Upon seeing a large orange construction cone the young man, no more than 19 years old, knocked it over. For reasons unknown to anyone, the two intoxicated youths started laughing again.
“To the young man on Kent Street wearing the red jacket, please pick up the orange cone you knocked over.” The voice boomed over the otherwise quiet neighborhood, silencing the couple as they looked around for the source of the command.
“Yes, you,” came the voice again after the man pointed at himself. “You’re being monitored on CCTV, and it’s an offense to tamper or move safety equipment without authorization. Please return it to its upright position.”
Reluctantly the young man walked back to the fallen cone and picked it up. Careful to put the cool plastic object back in the same spot it had been before.
“Thank you,” the voice responded. “Have a pleasant evening.”

London’s CCTV Project has been in effect for quite some time, and it seems to be catching on with governments around the world. Less than six months after London’s first implementation of the program, other cities around the world started talking about the possibility of starting their own video monitoring and crime prevention systems. Despite the loud protests by citizens across the globe, in newspapers, and online, this is a project that many police forces are in favor of. The standard disclaimer given to people worried about the omnipresent cameras is often along the same lines: if you have nothing to hide, then you have nothing to fear.

A popular TV show in Japan recently showed a half-hour piece on the effectiveness of London’s CCTV system and, I must admit, that it seems to be quite effective in helping the police quickly catch people who commit some serious crimes. However, within the first five minutes of the show, they had focused on the ease police had identifying some of the less-attractive members of society. My first thought after seeing just how quickly a CCTV operator could spot a drug dealer was “What does this have to do with national security?”

That said, there are some others in Japan that would like to see similar systems implemented in and around our neighborhoods to protect the women, children, and elderly that are often preyed upon by those looking for an easy target.

But is this the right solution?

Good for the People. Good for the Economy.

There is no doubt that implementing a wide police-monitored CCTV network across the country in various cities and neighborhoods would bring a respectable amount of security to the residents of those places. On top of this, tens of thousands of people would need to be employed to build, maintain and operate the extensive video network. Japan’s flagging technology sector would be boosted by the sudden demand for storage space, high-powered servers, and optical data transmission lines. The local economies would immediately benefit also, as security personnel are always required, regardless of economic strength.

We can’t forget that people are much less inclined to commit crimes if they feel someone is watching them. Children will not sneak a cookie before dinner if the cookie jar is in mom’s field of vision, and grown men will not break into a store if their actions will be recorded in high definition. Heck, with a good resolution camera, not only would police be able to capture a detailed description of the perpetrator, but they’d have irrefutable video evidence that could be presented in a court of law to convict the guilty party.

Not a week goes by that we don’t hear someone on TV comment about how the security blanket that someone had wrapped themselves into after moving to a “nice little community” was irrevocably torn asunder. With such a system in place, women can feel secure walking down the streets at night. The elderly can be outside in peace. And parents would not need to worry about sexual predators stalking their children.

It sounds like a win-win situation.

Good for “Them”

But what price would we pay for such a lavish sense of security?

One of the most common complaints about such systems being used at shopping malls and in downtown cores is the loss of privacy that so many people hold dear. If cameras begin appearing around our homes then we would have absolutely no privacy from police agencies. There are some very sophisticated software applications available to governments and airports that can read and match thousands of faces in video feeds within seconds and, should cameras begin popping up at every place between our home and our work, then it would mean that government agencies would know at a moment’s notice where any one of their citizens was at a given time. It’s bad enough that this can already be done by triangulating cell phone signals, but with cameras a person can know without a doubt exactly where to find us.

A big concern involves the intangible issue of trust. The only time a person should be monitored extensively is if they cannot be trusted. However, monitoring everyone to ensure a small minority of people don’t commit crimes would be a clear sign that governments and police agencies do not trust the people around them. It borders on the obsessive, and the paranoid. As a result, people would spend more time looking out for the police than they would potential criminals.

Another concern would be the rapid adaptation and sophistication of existing criminals or social deviants. When existing strategies just won’t work, people will often find new ways of performing the actions they so long to do. Pickpockets will learn how to better blend in to the crowd. Stalkers will learn how to look less suspicious. Other predators will learn how to dodge the systems that are put into place. There is no way to completely prevent the devil within.

And where would the police be? As it stands now, there are so few police on patrol here in Japan that a person could easily commit almost any crime they wanted in the smaller cities and never get caught. Even with cameras in place, there are far too few police to quickly mobilize and surround an individual. We can’t forget about the rules that police in this country are bound to, either. You cannot be arrested by just one police officer … there needs to be two or more. When a cop is riding around the city on a bicycle and he sees someone steal a wallet or cell phone, he must call in for backup in the form of a patrol car and do no more than observe until a full unit arrives.

How effective is that?

Not the Brightest Crayons in the Box

My biggest concern, though, would be with the potential breach in data security. We’ve seen time and time again in the UK and other parts of the world where sensitive data is lost on a USB drive, or a stolen notebook, or a removable hard drive that just happens to disappear for a few hours. If the police are given the power and ability to monitor every citizen’s movements for every moment of every day, then it would be incredibly tempting to criminals to get their hands on that data.

Need an easy mark? It’s easy. Just get someone on the inside to pull up someone’s name and other pertinent information and copy it on one of the many portable forms of mass storage. Then, for a set price, you can have detailed information about a person’s movements. What routes they take to the stores, and when they step just outside of a camera’s range. If I were following someone, this is the route that I would take. Why should I do all the dirty work when the cops can do it for us?

Everyone has a price. It’s just a matter of finding it.

Disconnecting

We can’t forget the social repercussions of such an action, either. While the security industry might boom, cities may find themselves unable to secure workers. People might leave areas that are surrounded by cameras in fear of an Orwellian nightmare that may or may not take place. Some might wonder where this type of monitoring might end, and decide that it is preferable to live in the country-side and grow fruits and vegetables rather than work in a monitored city ruled by the Long Arm with an iron fist.

Where will it end?

Governments already know our personal contacts via the places we work and the co-workers we mingle with. Police agencies are permitted to obtain our telephone records going back as far as seven years in some countries. ISPs around the world are recording every website visited and every file downloaded. Social Networking sites like FaceBook and MySpace have been monitored for years by federal police who want to find potential terrorists. Corporations have been collecting information on our spending and saving habits for years, and have even tailored their offers towards us as a result. Search engines know what information we look for and present targeted ads.

There is already too much of our personal information stored in databases around the world, and no way for us to opt out of these incredibly complex systems aside from fleeing to an uninhabited atoll somewhere in the South Pacific. But even then we’ll still be followed one way or another.

Aside from the introduction of “Newspeak”, one might think that the tragic social structures we read about in 1984 were at last coming to fruition.

God help us all if they do.

We’re Not All Bad

Millions of people were shaken out of their false sense of security by the attacks in America, the U.K., and several South-Pacific nations. As a result, many asked that their government step in and make their homes safer from those faceless men and women who wish to do us harm. However, when we take a step back and examine the situation now, we are no safer today than we were ten years ago. In fact, we’re less safe because instead of being observed by the occasional terrorist who wants us to feel pain, we’re being observed by our government who wants to maintain the sweeping powers citizens recently gave them.

I will freely admit that I was once a person that would say “If you’ve done nothing wrong, you have nothing to fear.” But, after seeing the large number of blunders in data security around the world, and after seeing so many people arrested for petty offenses through the use of equipment put up in the name of “national security”, I’m forced to change my position. There are certain lines that governments just shouldn’t cross, but many are starting to cross them.

Give me liberty or give me death. But for no government will I give away my freedom. If I wish to take my wife to a park on our day off, that’s nobody’s business. If I want to visit a bookstore in Sakae during my lunch break, that’s nobody’s business but my own. If I want to use a public washroom before going into a customer’s building, there shouldn’t be an unblinking eye to make sure that I’ve double-wiped my ass.

We elect leaders to maintain the status quo and to keep the nation’s interests safe. We don’t elect them to feed on the fears of the very people they’re supposed to lead.

What do you think of these Close-Caption TV feeds that police agencies are putting up around the world? Is this the right way to keep us safe from those who wish to do us harm? I’d love to hear your thoughts on the matter.

And How’s That? This post has 1,984 Words.

“I guess I can’t go back,” he said to me as we walked down the crowded street.
Curiosity piqued, I asked for clarification.
“The wrong guy won, which means that there’s no point going back.”
“You supported McCain, then?”
“I support anyone that’s not some dumb Islamic terrorist from Kenya. I thought the President of the United States had to be from America.”
“He is from America. He was born in Hawaii.”
“His father’s from Kenya.”
“Your father’s from Spain. Does that mean you shouldn’t be allowed to vote or have a say in American politics?”
“The only reason he won was because black men in America have more rights than white men.”
Struck by the sheer ignorance behind the ludicrous statement, being polite with the falsely educated dolt was no longer an option. “Name one,” I challenged.
“Name one what?”
“Name one right that non-white American citizens have over their Caucasian neighbours.”
“They get cheaper rent. They can collect unemployment longer. They can be hired for any job regardless of their skill. They can get loans easier. They can–“
“Shut the f**k up,” I commanded. “What part of America did you say you were from?”
“I’m from ‘Real America’,” he said, taking one of the dumbest political statements from the 2008 Presidential Campaign and wearing it with pride.
“Then I guess you’re right. You can’t go back. Because in 2 years when everyone sees just how superior a well educated man with skin darker than yours can run a nation, they’ll begin to change their tune and become a little more accepting of people that don’t look or think exactly the same way they do.
“Of all the racial bigots I’ve had the opportunity to meet, you’re by far the dumbest f**k I’ve ever wasted time on. Weren’t you just bitching and moaning the other day about how you can’t get work at a real Japanese company because of your skin colour? What about the trouble that you had getting a hotel room a few months back in Ibekuryo? Heck, you even have the audacity to bitch and moan about how nobody will sit next to you on the train, as though you have some kind of proximity-related airborne disease.
“Despite all of the racially-related issues you think you’re experiencing here in Japan, you still can’t see just how difficult it is for a Non-Caucasian person to accomplish such amazing things in America? Despite everything you’ve experienced in this country since moving here six years ago, you still can’t put yourself in another man’s shoes?
“S**t. You’re not only the dumbest f**k I’ve ever met in Japan. You’re the dumbest f**k I’ve ever met. Period.”

As you might have guessed with the preamble, I had a rather heated argument with another foreigner here in Japan that is unhappy with the recent events in America. Having taken the news of Obama’s victory with a huge dollop of rage, Doofoo (the name I shall assign this Dumb F**k – a.k.a. Düfü) proceeded to declare the entire country of America a lost cause. Considering the country’s recent problems, including the nation’s second major recession in less than a decade, I fail to see how the election of a rookie senator from Illinois could signal the end of one of the planet’s strongest nations. Sure, things might seem bleak for the millions that are losing their homes, jobs, and dreams. But it’s only a matter of time before these problems are resolved and the country goes back to being the arrogant spender it has been ever since the “Greatest Generation” made it a free-for-all in the 1950s.

What struck me the hardest about Doofoo wasn’t so much that he was upset that his preferred candidate lost. Instead, it was how he argued against the victor. Everything that he had heard on the campaign trail, regardless of whether it was slander from the Clintons or slander from the McCain/Palin party, seemed to be his only source of information. Rather than investigate the allegations himself with the help of the internet and other educated news sources, he decided to let the opposition parties say whatever they wanted and then pass it off as an unquestionable fact. This blind faith might be accepted and encouraged in some of the more extreme religious or spiritual cults, but to think that a person could put 100% faith in slander from another person’s mouth is just absurd.

Why is slander from Palin a fact, but slander from Kim Jong Il is lunacy? Why is slander from Clinton a fact, but slander from a group of angry Talibani insurgents is crazy talk?

The two are exactly the same thing. Warped perceptions of an opponent based on events that were either taken out of context or modified to suit the needs of another.

Thank God I’m Canadian

Doofoo and I have had several conversations over the last few months, as he and I work in the same area of Nagoya. He is employed (for now) at an insurance company a few hundred meters from where I work, and we sometimes run into each other while taking the subway. Whenever we do happen to meet, our discussions often turn to politics or how he was somehow wronged by someone somewhere in Japan.

Normally, I’ll listen to anything someone is willing to talk about because it gives me a window into their understanding of the world. By listening, I can try to see a situation the way they do, which is often the most productive way to solve problems. That said, I just cannot put myself into Doofoo’s shoes anymore. His backwards hatred of anything Non-Caucasian (or with some combination of female and Asian) brings up the bile and loathing I feel for anyone that cannot accept a person as a person.

To think that human beings have come so far, yet so many are still so immature….

It’s disheartening.

I, for one, sincerely hope that people like Doofoo are a dying breed. We humans are far too mobile and far too intelligent to be concerning ourselves with such petty differences. Regardless of what colour someone is, what gender they happen to be, what gender they happen to sleep with, what language they happen to speak, or what education they may have, we really aren’t all that different.

For every one difference we look for, we miss ten things that make us the same.

P.S. – Congratulations to Mr. Obama for persevering through a seemingly endless parade of farces and unnecessary name calling.  The world looks forward to working with you, Sir.

“I had a lock-on that had the proportions of a flying aircraft carrier,” Torres explained.  “I was only a lieutenant and very much aware of the gravity of the situation. I felt very much like a one-legged man in an ass-kicking contest.”

The declassified files show no official explanation for the event, which came about during a time of heightened tension between Western powers and the mighty Russian Republic. But UFO expert David Clarke believes the sighting might have been part of a secret U.S. project to create phantom aircraft on radar screens to test Soviet air defenses.

The object was reported to spend times hovering motionless in the sky before accelerating to speeds in excess of 10,000 kilometers per hour and flying erratically. Given that no human could survive the G-Forces of such acceleration, and such unnatural flight paths were traveled, there is no plausible way to conclude the object was piloted by anyone on Earth.

But was it from the great beyond

Since before the dawn of written language, humans have told stories of incredible people who come from beyond. In cave paintings we can see, what appears to be, disks in the sky. In Renaissance art we can see men in cone-shaped rockets. In the last century we have heard thousands of tales of people being abducted, or contacted, or witnessing vehicles of incredible technological prowess and design. But does this mean that we are being watched by beings of extra-terrestrial origin? To what purpose would these visits serve?

Even though this was a subject discussed several months back, it is certainly worth another look.

Looking For Signs

Where there are threats, real or imagined, there are opportunities for personal gain. This rule has been seen time and time again in human history, and it is seen yet again with some countries handling of the ongoing “War on Terror” If there were intelligent beings with technology superior to ours regularly coming down to Earth, we would have likely developed some kind of defense against them, if not made plans to go to war and conquer some planets for ourselves. Regardless of whether this would be some unified and altruistic “Us vs. Them” mentality, or one seized upon by capitalistic juggernauts and sold to us under the guise of self-preservation, we would be meeting these beings out there, rather than down here.

On top of this, when we examine the maneuvers performed by these supposedly inhuman vehicles, they defy the laws of motion and rationality that we have come to expect in objects throughout the universe. Why would a large vessel of scientific or military purpose accelerate to incredible speeds and decelerate on a dime only to hover a few hundred meters from where it was, only to do it again? Why would a craft that can travel untold light years need to jump a kilometer or two closer to an object at speeds in excess of Mach 12? It’s certainly not to get a better look at some human activity, as the sensory equipment on such a vessel would undoubtedly be so vastly superior to anything that we could imagine that the Hubble Space Telescope would look like a young child’s play-thing rather than a delicate instrument of science.

Then there’s the abduction issue. If humans are so interesting as to warrant a close up scientific examination, why would they be so kind as to return us to the very same place we were taken from after finishing whatever tests they might want to perform? Why bring us back at all? It would be far more interesting, from a scientific point of view, to keep us in captivity so that we could be studied in greater detail. At the very least, we could be brought back to some other world to be put on display in some exotic zoo or killed and put on display in some museum. If the tests are not meant to kill us, then clearly the beings realize that we have some type of capacity for sentience or intelligence, and the whole game of studying an indigenous species would forever be changed on this world.

Looking at how humans categorize, study and exploit living organisms for our own entertainment, it’s difficult to imagine a species with a greater level of intelligence or historical record to make such obvious errors in judgment.

Looking For Conspiracy

All this said there are some who feel that UFO’s are from other worlds, and that the human race has been grounded by a galactic commission that feels we’re not yet ready to explore the boundless reaches of outer space. The theory goes a little something like this:

In 1971, after NASA’s last manned moon mission, the UN was visited by diplomats from a grand coalition of planets who advised us to stop sending people to extra-terrestrial worlds. Instead, we are permitted to send robotic probes as far as the outer reaches of our solar system, but no farther. Faster-than-light vehicles are prohibited, and there is to be no study on anti-gravity or space-time distortion equipment. When the extra-terrestrial coalition believes we are ready to move on to the next stage of galactic exploration, they will let us know.

While the concept of being visited by a diplomatic group of extra-terrestrials is far-fetched and utterly fantastic, it’s most interesting to see that some people actually believe the UN is competent enough to enforce such a law. The UN has consistently failed to respond to anything in a timely fashion, and can no more manage other nations than it can manage its “Disaster relief” operations. Of course, there are several other wild theories about why man has not ventured beyond Low Earth Orbit since the Early-70s, but this was the one that seemed the most plausible … which doesn’t say much about the others.

Paying Attention

Considering the sheer vastness of space and the number of stars that we can see with our limited technology, there is very little doubt in the minds of millions that we’re not alone. To think that we are the only semi-intelligent creatures in the universe is beyond narrow-minded. It’s disappointing. Eventually we will make our way out among the stars and, when we do, it will be a great and wonderous thing to meet new people and new civilizations. To see how others have developed, biologically, technologically and sociologically, would be an amazing gift.

We had the opportunity to explore new cultures several hundred years ago during the era of colonization, and we blew it terribly. Let’s hope that the human race will once again have the opportunity to study and explore all that the universe’s inhabitants have to offer.

What do you think of the recent UFO file declassifications? Are these unidentified craft of extra-terrestrial origin, or are over-active imaginations making a mountain out of a mole hill? I’d love to hear your thoughts on the matter.

But it does make me wonder whether this is something that the continent actually needs help with.

Africa is supposed to be the land where we all originated from. As it stands today, we hear more about the troubles and heinous crimes against humanity in various African countries than we do about people’s need for something faster than a 1.5 MBit ADSL internet connection. There are millions of people displaced from their homes for fear of torture, rape, slaughter, famine, or some combination thereof. There are millions who don’t have clean drinking water. There are millions who can’t even afford a handful of food every week … their bodies have all but shut down in the hopes of surviving another day. Why is it that some companies like Google are spending money on something that is really not as important as the real necessities of life?

Charity, when done properly, can be a good thing. Several key leaders say that most of the problems in Africa can be resolved with a better education the resources to make use of that knowledge, and I agree. That said, the very same thing can be argued when it comes to America’s response to perceived threats, Russia’s territorial disputes, South Korea’s endless temper tantrums, and Canada’s laughable military build-up. Rather than providing faster internet access for people on the First Continent, it may make more sense to invest in clean water systems and technical schools.

If I were living in Africa, I’d be much more inclined to learn something useful that I could immediately apply in my community than to complain about surfing the web on a 28.8 kilo baud modem.

The XO Laptop Tie-In

Complaining aside, this could be a great selling feature for the OLPC (One Laptop Per Child) Program currently in effect in several countries. The economical notebooks do come equipped with a 802.11-g antenna, and this would provide ample speeds for almost anyone that would need quick access to the rich content found all over the world in various languages.

Google’s plans involve using satellites to bathe the poorer African nations in high speed data access. Various relay towers would be set up in various nations to interface with cell phones and WiFi-enabled devices. From there, people could access the global community at speeds rivaling what we would find with optical connections in many people’s homes.

But is it really necessary?

First World Crawlers

As it stands, 40% of internet users in westernized nations like Canada, America and Britain are still using a dial-up internet connection. On top of this, approximately 30% of the households in these countries do not yet have internet access. If people in the First World can still go without the digital ecstasy that is the internet, is it really so important that we provide lightning-fast speeds to a continent that will not be able to make decent use of it?

The basic necessities of life are food, clothing and shelter. On top of this we need to ensure that people are not in fear of wrongful persecution, religious extremism, or personal injury. Once this is accomplished, education and medical care comes next. According to various charity websites talking about the basics of life, nowhere do they mention “the right to 100 MBit internet connections.”

It’s true that wealthier nations and organizations around the world should try to help those in need. However, it may make more sense to look after the key basics before providing something that will not easily provide a better life for people. Sure, with the internet people can learn how to make or maintain sewage systems, water treatment facilities and other important devices. But how can one just expect others to know how to search for this stuff online without having the proper tools, equipment and knowledge that they will not be driven from their homes in some half-baked militant coup?

Perhaps I’ve just grown pessimistic about the need to bring cutting edge technologies to those that don’t already have the same things I had growing up. But this plan doesn’t make sense to me.

What’s your take on this?

Considering how I have NEVER gone into the U.S. once without some kind of bad luck (food poisoning, luggage falling apart, being refused boarding a plane, being refused entry back into Canada when walking over the Peace Bridge, getting sick after eating at various restaurants, having a drunk American jerk shove me into a wall at a hockey game because I wasn’t wearing a home-team jersey, etc.), I will not risk the possibility of being stripped of my digital electronics. Sure, I always have backups of the data, but that’s not the point. It’s the principle of the matter.

If I have to fly through the US in order to save a few hundred dollars on the already-expensive flights to Canada, only to have my notebook, PDA, cell phone or digital camera taken, then I’m out a lot more money than I “saved”. On top of this, if the US never has to give stuff back, this is a great excuse for anybody working at the US Border to take whatever the heck they want from me and keep it for themselves. While the US government has some pretty impressive databases, I somehow doubt that everything seized will be properly recorded or processed.

I seriously hope that the next leader of that country can put things back to the way they were before Bill Clinton left office. While the nation wasn’t perfect, it was a heck of a lot friendlier than it is now. Security is important, yes, but what price must people pay for that security? Most of the country’s people are already armed … do they really need to be protected by the ever-watchful eyes of big brother, too?

It’s a shame that the country that once stood for freedom has gotten lost in its search for peace of mind.

It’s a good thing I don’t write software for companies, anymore

Disaster prevention was key in the design of this nuclear power plant, and the safety mechanisms worked near-perfectly.  The reactors were quickly shut down through automated systems, the rods were secured, and not one life was lost.  The facility was hit with a quake measuring 7 out of 7, in a country where Richter’s Scale just won’t do, and it’s still standing.  Surely this is a redeeming qualification to resume power generation in a country where a summer-time electrical consumption rate of 98.2% capacity is considered “expected.”

Oddly enough … no.

The seven nuclear power reactors, which together are capable of generating 8.21 GigaWatts (more than any other plant on Earth), will remain offline for the summer and probably until sometime in mid-to-late-2009.

About As Green As An American SUV

Electricity is insanely important in Japan as anything that can be plugged into a wall socket is plugged into a wall socket.  Chairs, sofas, coffee tables, aquariums, book shelves, digital scales, toothbrushes, and throw rugs.  Anything and everything that can have a computer chip, light bulb or fan, usually gets one … whether it’s necessary or not.  With such a reliance on power, the Japanese public will not tolerate such Third-World situations as rolling blackouts or, heaven forbid, brown-outs.  To this end, the Tokyo Electric Power Company (TEPCO) resumed operations at two thermal power plants in 横須賀市 (Yokosuka).  While this will help compensate for the lost power generation from Kashiwazaki-Kariwa, it will also emit an extra 30,000,000 tonnes of CO² into the atmosphere.

Yay.

Despite the rage and insults lobbed at China for their excessive use of coal-powered plants, few people pay attention to where their electrical power comes from.  With so much of the country flirting dangerously with shortages this summer, it’s time for us to think about these issues.  TEPCO must show that it’s implemented a dynamic set of safety measures if it wants to resume operations at Kashiwazaki-Kariwa, and government agencies need to make more of an effort to educate the public on the need for nuclear power plants.

Whether this will happen, though, remains to be clear.

We can see the same kind of story between Japan and Russia concerning the sovereignty of 色丹 (Shikotan), 国後 (Kunashiri), 択捉 (Etorofu), and the はぼまい (Habomai) group of islets just off the northern coast of 北海道 (Hokkaido). Unlike the situation with Russia, though, the South Koreans are much more ambitious with their dramatic territorial claims.

But who is the rightful nation to this semi-appealing group of rocks sitting exposed in the middle of the Sea of Japan?

Historical Perspective

Japan first took control of Takeshima in the early part of the Edo period (1603-1867). Before this time, there were no inhabitants on the islands, and the only significance this small region had was the fishing. The islets were put under the jurisdiction of Shimane Prefecture in 1905, and all was well and good with the situation.

This changed in the 1950′s, though, when South Korean President Syngman Rhee declared Takeshima as sovereign Korean territory and gave them the name of Dokdo (meaning “Independent”). This transpired shortly before the San Francisco Peace Treaty came into effect in 1952, where Japan’s internationally recognized sovereign territory was mapped out. Since this time, South Korean military personnel have illegally occupied the islets.

The Current Situation

South Korea and Japan are neighbours, both politically and geographically. The nations have worked together well in the past, and they’ll need to continue working together if they hope to create any lasting relations with North Korea and secure their position as an economic power-house on the Pacific coast. While there has been quite a lot of huffing and puffing on various subjects, the nations of South Korea and Japan are not all that different. Why the mention of a group of islets in a teachers’ manual warrants the recall of ambassadors and prompts official protests is beyond me.

The teacher’s book explicitly avoided talking about the Takeshima islets as though they were an integral part of Japan’s territory, and asked that lessons on this disputed collection of rocks be handled in the same fashion as how teachers currently discuss the disputed regions in the northern territories. This includes discussing the dispute between the nations, as well as the history behind the political impasses.

Looking at this from a third perspective, it’s clear that Japan’s Education, Science and Technology Ministry has clearly given a good amount of consideration towards South Korea and how they would view the instruction booklet. Despite this, the South Korean government is opposed to the move, and proved it by temporarily recalling their Ambassador to Japan, Kwon Chul Hyun.

That said, what Japanese school children are taught in school regarding these disputed lands could affect their sovereignty at some point in the future. If the residents of this nation are completely unaware of the history regarding Takeshima, they may let the region go at some point in the future to the Koreans, which could then affect Japan’s commercial concerns in the region.

Or so I’m told.

Diplomatic consideration belongs in government buildings and should have little to do with how Japan decides to discuss a portion of their history with the coming generations. Unlike the curriculum guidelines that are laid out by the ministry every ten years, the instruction manual is not legally binding. That said, it’s significance cannot go unnoticed as it often serves as a guideline when editing school textbooks and during classroom exercises. For this reason, publishers will have to commit themselves to providing incredibly clear explanations of the situation in their textbooks, while teachers must properly educate their students. This will be some slippery ground as nations tend to be quite sensitive about topics such as sovereign soil.

Finding a solution to the Takeshima islets issue will be incredibly difficult. Hopefully the governments of these two nations can sit down and rationally discuss the topic without upsetting too many of the ultra-nationalistic individuals on both sides of the sea. It’s incredibly important that Japanese people understand the issue and can state their case to the international community, but it’s also important to keep an open dialogue with their passionate neighbours.