The Erudite Donkey vs. The Economist

The Erudite Donkey once again rears its ugly head. This time he goes toe-to-toe in two separate matches: first against a representative of a particularly distasteful variety of Chinese nationalism, and then directly with the Economist magazine. Don't desert me now, dear reader, as this is an epic and rollicking tale, replete with shocking twists and turns that culminate in a dramatic conclusion.



Perhaps you readers of the Donkey have heard that the former president of Taiwan was given a life sentence for corruption and the misappropriation of state funds. Despite the seriousness of his crime the sentence was inappropriately severe and the trial was marked by irregularities. It reflects the growing influence of China on the KMT government in Taiwan. Chen fought for independence and now he is being punished for it. It is retribution, plain and simple. In an Economist article on the subject I responded to a Chinese poster who wrote an off-topic diatribe on how Westerners love to bash China. Any articles critical of China in the Western press are flooded with these baseless accusations from blindly patriotic Chinese nationalists. It is a troubling product of the Communist Party's program of propaganda. They draw attention away from their own short-comings by encouraging the demonizing of others.

Here is a link to the original article.

Here is the comment which I felt the need to respond to:

justlistenall wrote:

September 17, 2009 12:35

justlistenall wrote: September 16, 2009 18:14
On account of this article, many posters have offered good opinions about Mr. Chen Bian’s verdict, Pro and con.
But, do you know why even for a relatively local article on the conviction of Mr. Chen in Taiwan, there are still a few posters with postings after postings to bash Chinese value and system and China’s leaders (It's laughable that some undoubtedly with double poster pen names to play up its postings by the tale telling duet endorsing of each other)?
Here is why in my view:
1. Subconsciously, these posters are resigned to the fact that Taiwan is a part of China and that Taiwanese and Mainlanders are all Chinese. That’s why whenever the word Taiwan is mentioned, it immediately triggers their nerves on matters concerning China.
2. They can’t stand the thought or the fact rather, although they can’t do anything about it that China is awakening and prospering.
China today is Japan’s largest importer, replacing the U.S., that is helpful on Japan’s economy recovery, and China is India’s largest exporter. China is world’s first nation to develop and dispense immunization formula for H1N1; about two weeks ahead of the U.S. which is troubled by more than 400 unfortunate deaths.
China runs worlds fastest regularly scheduled commercial trains (Beijing-Tinjing) at 340 Km/H a clip; and China spends about $30 m a day constructing Beijing-Shanghai high speed railway soon to be finished ….
3. China of course has problems to work at too, and tons of them. These postings just can’t pass up any chance to jump in to ridicule these problems with brutal exaggeration and graphic distortion, wishing in their sick minds that China would remain and get stuck in the problems and the more the merrier for them.
All these words of “human rights”, “totalitarianism”, “ethnic strife” etc. out of their pseudo fancy bashing postings are but abusive cover for their dark side or inside.
Such are the general state of postings of China bashing in my observation on the forum of this article. I feel sorry for these bashing posters.
Then again, they are serving unwittingly as some negative material to remind people to work harder for the good of their country, China, the U.S., India,… indeed whichever their country happens to be.


and my comment in response:

> > China bashing? What a joke. The irony of you throngs of Chinese posters that
> > jump all over even the smallest criticism of your country, is that you're
> > demonstrating how you've yet to mature as a truly modern country. You think
> > because you have fast trains it somehow excuses the fact that China doesn't
> > have free speech. Thank God there are those in the West who take time to
> > point out the flaws in China because in your country, doing the same can land
> > you in jail. Why don't you grow up and show how much you really love China by
> > starting to criticize it yourselves. That is the only way it will ever
> > improve.

The above comment of mine was deleted without any indication or explanation. The comment I was responding to was allowed to stand along with the following one which mocks my language in garbled English:


religionofreason wrote:

September 17, 2009 15:50

Thank God there are those in the China who take time to point out the flaws in West prejudices and politic zealots because in your country, doing the same can land you in minor sideline. Why don't you grow up and show how much you really love democracy by starting to criticize it yourselves. That is the only way it will ever improve and gaining the convincing credit.


I repeat that my comment was deleted but the preceding and following ones were allowed to stand.
Here is my first letter of complaint addressed to the Economist:



Sir,

You removed a post of mine under the name of fumanchuck in the comments section of your article 'Go Directly to Jail' from September 12th. The comment was posted on September 17th. I would like an explanation as to why this was done. Unfortunately I did not save a copy of this comment as I in no way saw the possibility of it being removed. The comment was neither abusive nor off topic. I would like a copy of this comment sent back to me with an acceptable explanation. Perhaps you should review who is editing these comments and reevaluate whether they are qualified for the job. I am doubly upset by this as the comment was arguing for free speech. I await your reply.

Charles Sands (Taichung, Taiwan)



Here is the first response:

Dear Sir,
 
The attached comment, posted under the pen name fumanchuck, has been deleted  
from Economist.com. The comment was removed because it breaks our comments  
policy:
http://www.economist.com/about/terms_and_conditions.cfm#8
 
We ask that future comments be made in the spirit of good-natured debate.  
Repeated violation of our comments policy will result in your being blocked  
from posting comments on Economist.com.
 
Yours sincerely,
 
Comments Moderator
Economist.com
 
Your comment:
----------
China bashing? What a joke. The irony of you throngs of Chinese posters that
jump all over even the smallest criticism of your country, is that you're
demonstrating how you've yet to mature as a truly modern country. You think
because you have fast trains it somehow excuses the fact that China doesn't
have free speech. Thank God there are those in the West who take time to
point out the flaws in China because in your country, doing the same can land
you in jail. Why don't you grow up and show how much you really love China by
starting to criticize it yourselves. That is the only way it will ever
improve.
 
 
----------


 

My second letter of response: 

Sir,

You indicated that I violated your policy but not as to
how. I read through your policy before I sent the first letter of
complaint and I've read it again now. Would you please be so kind as to
enlighten me on the specific portions of my message that violated any
one or more specifically stated points in your policy. I would also
like to be informed if this letter of reply is being made by the same
person who deemed it fit to silence my voice. I will not be satisfied
until you fulfill these requests. 

Sincerely,
Charles Sands

The response from the Economist:

Dear Sir,
 
The Economist hosts its forums so that its readers are able to discuss, 
debate and analyse the article to hand. Your comment was "off-topic" and as such was deleted.
 
Best,
 
Comments Moderator

My third letter of complaint:



Dear Comments Moderator,

It is interesting that you first explained the removal of my comment stating that it was not "in the spirit of good-natured debate", but now you state that the comment is "off topic". Perhaps you reviewed your own comments policy and found that there is no mention of any requirement to be "good-natured". It is also curious to me that you chose to remove my comment for being "off topic", yet you deigned to allow the post that I was responding to and the one's following that refer to my "off topic" message, including the one which mocks my language in nearly incomprehensible, garbled English. Furthermore, perhaps you did not understand that I was providing a critique of how the first message, and others like it, were in fact "off topic" in their accusations of "China bashing".

I have provided them for you here:

justlistenall wrote:

September 17, 2009 12:35

justlistenall wrote: September 16, 2009 18:14
On account of this article, many posters have offered good opinions about Mr. Chen Bian’s verdict, Pro and con.
But, do you know why even for a relatively local article on the conviction of Mr. Chen in Taiwan, there are still a few posters with postings after postings to bash Chinese value and system and China’s leaders (It's laughable that some undoubtedly with double poster pen names to play up its postings by the tale telling duet endorsing of each other)?
Here is why in my view:
1. Subconsciously, these posters are resigned to the fact that Taiwan is a part of China and that Taiwanese and Mainlanders are all Chinese. That’s why whenever the word Taiwan is mentioned, it immediately triggers their nerves on matters concerning China.
2. They can’t stand the thought or the fact rather, although they can’t do anything about it that China is awakening and prospering.
China today is Japan’s largest importer, replacing the U.S., that is helpful on Japan’s economy recovery, and China is India’s largest exporter. China is world’s first nation to develop and dispense immunization formula for H1N1; about two weeks ahead of the U.S. which is troubled by more than 400 unfortunate deaths.
China runs worlds fastest regularly scheduled commercial trains (Beijing-Tinjing) at 340 Km/H a clip; and China spends about $30 m a day constructing Beijing-Shanghai high speed railway soon to be finished ….
3. China of course has problems to work at too, and tons of them. These postings just can’t pass up any chance to jump in to ridicule these problems with brutal exaggeration and graphic distortion, wishing in their sick minds that China would remain and get stuck in the problems and the more the merrier for them.
All these words of “human rights”, “totalitarianism”, “ethnic strife” etc. out of their pseudo fancy bashing postings are but abusive cover for their dark side or inside.
Such are the general state of postings of China bashing in my observation on the forum of this article. I feel sorry for these bashing posters.
Then again, they are serving unwittingly as some negative material to remind people to work harder for the good of their country, China, the U.S., India,… indeed whichever their country happens to be.


and...

religionofreason wrote:

September 17, 2009 15:50

Thank God there are those in the China who take time to point out the flaws in West prejudices and politic zealots because in your country, doing the same can land you in minor sideline. Why don't you grow up and show how much you really love democracy by starting to criticize it yourselves. That is the only way it will ever improve and gaining the convincing credit.

Am I to take these as examples of the kind of good-natured, on-topic messages that the Economist encourages, or has there been some kind of an oversight on your part? You can review my removed comment again at the bottom of this message. Please respond.

Sincerely,
Charles Sands



No response for three days. My fourth letter of complaint:


To: The Editor and the Comments Moderator

Dear Mr. or Ms. Moderator,
(I apologize for not knowing the proper form of address as you've tellingly chosen to remain anonymous)

It appears that you have not deigned my last email worthy of response, or perhaps you are at a loss for words. This is unsurprising to me, as it is of course much easier to delete the words of others, than to actually account for your own actions in writing. Besides, not even the greatest barrister in England could justify the disappearance of my comment and the allowance of the preceding and following ones which I provided for your review. I could have provided you with numerous other examples of comments that are equally "off topic", pertaining to the article in question and to others, but that would have been unnecessary. The unjustness and inconsistency of your actions is plain to see.

I am more concerned though, as to why this error occurred. It is a serious matter to silence the voices of others. I wonder if you realize exactly how serious it is. It pertains to the concept of free speech, which you may or may not have noticed was what I was arguing for in my comment. You are an employee of the Economist. This publication has stood as a symbol of the democratic values of openness, accountability and rational thought for more than 150 years. I respectfully submit that your actions pertaining to the deletion of my comment are a disgrace to the institution you represent. I can only hope that this was an isolated occurrence and that your actions are being monitored.

If my case is not an isolated occurrence--if you regularly silence the voices of others, based not on any consistent application of your company's comments policy, but rather on some other criteria known only to yourself--I must infer that you are not suited to the position you now hold. If this is the case, I will make the "good-natured" suggestion that you may find more rewarding work as a censor for an authoritarian government such as that in China. In such a position you will not need to hide behind euphemistic titles such as 'moderator', you can do your censor's work in complete invisibility; blocking web pages, deleting articles, and tearing pages out of publications such as those of your current employer.  In such a position you will also not be bothered by the nuisance of accountability.

Here is a quote that you should keep in mind the next time you find your finger quivering over the delete button. I suggest you print it up and post it in your cubicle:

We can never be sure that the opinion we are endeavoring to stifle is a false opinion; and if we were sure, stifling it would be an evil still.  ~John Stuart Mill, On Liberty, 1859

And this, which echos the point of my original comment:


Censorship reflects society's lack of confidence in itself.  It is a hallmark of an authoritarian regime.  ~Potter Stewart

Here is my comment, once more provided for your review:

> > China bashing? What a joke. The irony of you throngs of Chinese posters that
> > jump all over even the smallest criticism of your country, is that you're
> > demonstrating how you've yet to mature as a truly modern country. You think
> > because you have fast trains it somehow excuses the fact that China doesn't
> > have free speech. Thank God there are those in the West who take time to
> > point out the flaws in China because in your country, doing the same can land
> > you in jail. Why don't you grow up and show how much you really love China by
> > starting to criticize it yourselves. That is the only way it will ever
> > improve.

Sincerely,
Charles Sands


The final response from the moderator:

Dear Mr Sands,
 
Having re-reviewed the comment in question, I agree with your complaint
and the comment has been reinstated on our website.
 
Kind regards,
 
Comments Moderator

Final score:   Donkey 1  :  Moderator 0

America's Food Revolution

Here's a nice synopsis of the history and current state of American food from Jerry Weinberger at City Magazine.

Oh, and for those of you anxiously awaiting Kinger's exposes on  Jail Food and Choosing the Right Knife, unfortunately, internet access, as well as all knives and sharp objects, have been denied to him along with the other prisoners. Hopefully he'll be released on good behavior in the next week or so and we'll be able to once again enjoy his informative and witty reparte.  Our thoughts are with you Kinger. Be strong!

Cha Xui Bao

Visa run to HK? Check out Cha Xui Bao for the best eats in Canton. Blogging it up for your culinary pleasure.

Ensuring the Future of Food

I found this video entitled The Future of Food, on the Pink Tentacle web site. It's produced by Japanese design team Groovisions, for Japan's Ministry of Agriculture Forestry and Fisheries (MAFF) . This has got to be the funkiest educational video I've ever seen. Covering some off the most important issues related to food and agriculture in Japan, Groovisions utilizes a very simple style of animation in which most of the spatial movement follows an isometric grid. This style works perfectly for illustrating the numerous charts and figures in the video. But it is the child-like, Lego-land style of The Future of Food that makes it so fun to watch. I laughed out loud throughout. Only in Japan do you have government sponsored educational videos which would be perfectly at home projected on a wall during a rave.

And if you're interested in the latest moves in Japanese culture, check out the link to Pink Tentacle. Stylish and intelligent.

Meat and Memory Part 1: Laoatian Barbecued Chicken Breast

In 2004 I took a week-long vacation to Laos. I had chosen Laos based on friends telling me it was relatively non-touristic and the people were perhaps the friendliest in the world. I flew into Thailand and crossed the border by bus. After spending a night in the capital, Vien Tien, I proceeded to take a long and perilous bus ride to Luang Prabang. Soon into the journey I was hooked.  The bus wound at high speed through an endless series of rolling mountains. The green hill-sides were punctuated by patches of bright yellow and pink flowers cascading down the gulleys. On the 10 hour trip, I remember almost no evidence of industry or development. Human habitation seemed limited to clusters of shacks located at intervals along the road.

Luang Prabang is a city that has largely retained its traditional architectural character. It is known for its numerous ancient temples, all constructed with the characteristic sloping Laoatian roofs. A huge proportion of the population are monks. Chanting is heard everywhere and the monks are eager to strike up conversations and practice their English. In Laos, the philosophy of Buddhism is not relegated to the temples, it can be felt in the everyday interactions of the people. The locals disarmed me with their smiles and seemed to move through their lives with a relaxed contentedness. These were truly the friendliest and most gentle people I have ever met.

Two experiences poignantly illustrate this point. The first was riding in a bicycle rickshaw driven by a very old man. When I got in, we agreed on a price and he took me to my destination. After I paid him, the change he returned to me was short by a small amount. I pointed this out and asked for the rest. He just looked up at me and gave me a shy smile and then looked down at the crumpled bills in his hand. I couldn't do anything but smile back and walk away. This is compared to a similar experience I had in Thailand, where I stubbornly demanded my money and ended up having a knife pulled on me. The second incident happened while walking down a small alley after dark. The street was empty except for a group a young men hanging out, talking and laughing. Experience had taught me, that as a foreigner in a third world country, this was not a comfortable situation to be in. At the very least I expected some cold stares as I walked by, but to my surprised they all smiled, waved and said hello. It is these kinds of seemingly insignificant interactions that end up defining a culture in one's mind. 

As I slowly adjusted to the atmosphere, I felt myself smiling more and I was able to replace some of my cynicism and sharpness with a deeper feeling of calm. I spent my days wandering aimlessly through the city and sitting by the Mekong river drinking coffee and reading. I could spend hour after hour gazing at the patchwork of vegetable plots of the far side of the river and watching the long wooden boats slowly pass by.

Laos is one of the few places left in the world where large-scale industrialized farming practices have yet to take over. Every restaurant and cafe seemed to have chickens walking around loose, pecking away at the ground. Truly free-range chickens like these are very difficult to find in most of the world now. These chickens are free of drugs, they are allowed to follow their instinctual behavior patterns, and their diet is comprised of the native plants and insects found in the area. Compare this to the chicken most of the world now eats--raised in boxes, pumped full of growth hormones and antibiotics, and engineered to grow massive breasts and mature in a number of weeks. One can hardly look upon them as belonging to the same species.

As it so happened, when I arrived in Laos, I had been a vegetarian for two years. But seeing these plump chickens pecking around me, I couldn't help imagining them roasted with herbs, deep fried in batter, and barbecued with a tangy sauce. Walking through the night market one evening I came upon a stall broiling chicken breasts over charcoal. The breasts were butterflied and inserted into split bamboo sticks that were tied at one end. This allowed customers to eat as they walked without the aid of printed bags or boxes destined to end up as street trash. I watched the cook repeatedly paint the breasts with some sort of dark, oily sauce. I took the plunge and ordered one up. The taste of this chicken was pure revelation.  I had never eaten poultry of this quality.  The texture was dense and chewy, and the flavour rich and deep. The sauce was a type of light salty oyster, mixed with the juices of the cooked birds. I was in ecstasy as I slowly chewed each bite, savouring the experience.  Describing the flavour of this meat is like trying to describe the colour red to a blind person, words inevitably fail to do it justice.

Of course part of the joy I felt when eating this chicken had to do with being deprived of meat for two years. As we all know, absence makes the heart grow fonder. But I still feel that somehow the kindness, honesty, and humanity of the Laoation people had somehow found its way into the taste of that chicken. Or perhaps in the five years I've been away from Laos, I've combined in my mind my impressions of the culture with the taste of that meat. Regardless, all things are connected, and what really matters is that I have this beautiful memory to look back on.

Meat and Memory: An Introduction

Here's a fun question. What's the best piece of meat you've ever eaten in your life?

As one gets older, the ranking of one's life experiences into bests and worsts becomes more and more ridiculous. Older memories fade and evolve in their retelling. We reach a point where we're not sure how much of a memory survives from the actual experience and how much is a product of the recalling and retelling. While we imagine we can mentally thrust ourselves back through time to a specific moment, what we actually see in our mind's eye is the latest in an endless series of copies of copies that may have little resemblance to the original.

Nevertheless, slotting our memories into categories of goods and bads and bests and worsts is part of the human condition. The sum of these simplistically categorized memories forms the basis for our decision making process. Like all animals, we need to make thousands of rapid-fire decisions every day. When we see another person, we almost instantly categorize them into one of our facile folders of likes and dislikes. This is our subconscious protecting us from potential danger--our mechanism for surviving in the fight-or-flight reality of life. The same is true of food. We need some sort of instant visual or olfactory indication as to whether the food we put in our mouths will give us life or cause illness or death. Therefore, when presented with a dish, our subconscious performs a rapid search of our memories and brings up a verdict of good or bad. Ambiguities do not indicate a clear course of action so our memories avoid them. To rank our experiences into bests and worsts is slightly different but no less simplistic. It allows our egos to set broader goals and gives us the means to set long-term plans to achieve them.

But I digress...

To return to the meat question, I'll have to narrow it down to several finalists:

• A butterflied barbecued chicken breast
  
• A broiled ribeye steak with salt and pepper
• A pan seared foie gras with peaches
• A plate of yellow-fin tuna sashimi
• An order of tuna tataki
  
• A deer loin roasted in red wine and rosemary
  

 Each of these meat experiences, at the very least, deserves an article of its own. At the most, they could be expanded to a series of autobiographical novels. For to truly delve into the joy of food, one must delve into the joy of life. Food is not eaten in a vacuum, it is inextricably linked to our experiences. Our memories of food have less to do with the actual dish that was in front of us, than with the specific time and place in which it was consumed. Conversely, a particular dish may subconsciously lead us to recall a time or feeling in our deeper past.

Thus, in this upcoming series on Meat and Memory I will explore the strange, dark corners of my history and psyche. Like an archeologist, I will dust off the hidden layers of my mind, and piece together the ruins into some semblance of understanding. Will this lead to revelation? Maybe. But as in all things, the journey is more important than the destination.

(Image: Autumn Cannibalism by Salvador Dali, 1937)

The Take-Out Pizza Loophole and others

There are scammers, and there are scammers. While one kind may eek their way out of chipping in on the restaurant bill, another type is seeking not to exploit the generosity of his friends, but to find a chink in the restaurant's armor. It is a noble scammer and a savvy, business-minded individual who can detect and utilize the most precious of all subtle errors...the loophole. And in the world of food, there are a few...but not many. However, a couple of these take-out loopholes are now made available to you through your genius friends at The Hungry Donkey.



Imagine this: It's a Sunday evening, it's raining, and you can't be franked to get off the couch and go out looking for food to eat. There's a few of you sitting there contemplating, and while one or two think it would be a worthy adventure to leave the house and have a nice sit-down dinner, they are outnumbered, and alas pizza will be ordered. And now comes the hard part--what kind of pizzas to get. One friend suggests salami with green peppers, one would like a vegetarian pizza, and perhaps the one who is still thinking about going out to eat, might suggest something like: pepperoni with extra pampers. Wrong. Wrong. And Wrong again. This is where the common man fails. 


Customization is how pizza restaurants make profit. They are, in fact, not unlike a car dealership in this way. Each topping is added to the base at an individual cost. For sure, there are a few ready-made favorites on a menu, but if you wish to assert a semblance of individualism, you will definitely pay top-dollar for it. But wait, there's a loophole in the system. It is this: You want salami with green peppers? Green peppers will be counted as an additional topping, at lets say: 60NTD. Now you have a standard 200NTD pizza, plus one veggie. Add another veggie, and you're looking at an additional 120NTD on the whole. Now, you're up to 320NTD for a fairly simple pie. Instead, why not order the vegetarian pizza with say, salami on it? You are now only adding one topping to an already decked out pizza, chock full of at least 3 different veggies to begin with. And depending on the price range at any given pizza restaurant, your savings may be up to 100 dollars. So there it is: The vegetarian pizza with meat. Try it, it works. 


Another popular scam I find myself using on a semi-regular basis can be found at Subway. When it comes time to choose your veggies, the employees are trained to assume you want everything. They do this for only one reason: to give you as much lettuce as possible. Lettuce is cheap as hell, it is springy and it fills the sandwich to the brim, leaving very little room to accommodate the other more pricey toppings. This also acts as a psychological trick. You think: the sandwich is full. It is complete. But not so: it is full of crappy ice-berg lettuce and 3 olives.  Here's how to get out of it: First, insist on less lettuce. Stop them! Tell them you are allergic, for chrissakes! This will reverse the psychological ploy on the employee. They now see an imcomplete sandwich before them. Now get them to load it up. They will continue their automaton way of laying out 4 of each vegetable slice, but you can simply ask for more. Eventually they might stop, but surely at this point your sub will be loaded up with real vegetables. The employee will be a little confused, but who gives a care? I learned this one from an old friend of mine, who used to go into Subway and bluntly say: "put as much on there as you can without getting fired." I however, have taken it to a more user-friendly subtle level. Try it.


I hope you have enjoyed these loopholes, and I hope you will save a few extra clams in trying them out. If you have any others, please feel welcome to post them in your comments. And remember, whenever you find yourself at a family sit-down restaurant, ask for more bread. It usually works.