Once upon a time, there was a non-conforming sparrow who decided not to fly south for the winter. However, soon the weather turned so cold that he reluctantly started to fly south.
In a short time ice began to form on his wings and he fell to earth in a barnyard. Almost frozen, a cow passed by and crapped on the little sparrow. The sparrow thought it was the end. But, the manure warmed him and defrosted his wings. Warm and happy, able to breathe, he started to sing. Just then, a large cat came by and hearing the chirping, investigated the sounds. The cat cleared away the manure, found the chirping bird and ate him.
Morals to the Story
Everyone who shits on you is not necessarily your enemy.
Everyone who gets you out of the shit is not necessarily your friend.
If you're warm and happy in a pile of shit, keep your mouth shut!!!
(the author is unknown but the story is brilliant)
I recently spent a week in Punta Cana, Dominican Republic by myself. I wanted to get away from NYC and work and that was a greatly needed escape.
I had a wonderful time, beach, sun, reading, scuba diving… and met some great people whom I hope to keep in touch with, from young Brazilian newlyweds on their honeymoon, to a recent American expat (my dive master) enjoying the adventure and freedom of making that piece of paradise his “reality” (as opposed to those of us on a brief break from it), and enjoyed an occasional card game with some strangers.
In fact, some of my most interesting encounters have been from solo traveling, whether in Thailand where I met my South African friend Claire, a most beautiful person, to Laos where I befriended some young Laotian monks, one of which, Khamsouk, I’m still in touch with, despite our limited conversations. Some encounters last just the time of a train ride or a few days rest, like people encountered at the Tibetan monastery I stayed at in Dharamsala (home of the Dalai Lama whom I got to briefly see before being stumbled over by those dear Tibetan monks running to the free food! ;) but are just as enjoyable and sometimes make a lasting impression.
Forgetting about those previous great experiences, I have to admit to having moments of doubt when preparing to leave for DR. You’d think that after spending time in war-torn countries or refugee camps, I’d be prepared for a week at the beach, yet I had to defend myself so much in the weeks preceding my trip as to why I was taking this trip solo, that it started getting to me. I ended up taking 6 books with me, thinking I’d be so miserable I would just go through one a day (needless to say I did not make it through even 1/3rd).
While no one seems to question spending months in the Congo for work, it’s a whole other story when it comes to spending one week of holiday at the beach (ie: with no real purpose but far niente). The first question I inevitably got when mentioning my upcoming trip was “who are you going with?”. Then would come the “look “: wide eyes going through various emotions from fear for me to pity, to the “why would anyone do that?” stare.
Let me tell you, why. There is no more peaceful a holiday than going by yourself. No one to take into account but me, myself and I. No one to coordinate dates with or debate location, no one to compromise with on activities, or to consult when hungry or tired, no one to make you feel obligated holding a conversation with when you just want to read, or simply enjoy the silence. I honestly never got bored, though of course I welcome the new friends I made and they definitely made my trip more fun, but I am pretty sure I would not have gone past small talk had I not been by myself.
I do think that being able to share a travel adventure with a loved one is amazing and I have at times wished I could share a sunset or a beautiful encounter with someone I cared for. But there was nothing cultural or mind-blowing about my week at the beach that I felt needed to be shared (though would have happily brought back the weather and warm sea with me).
Reinforced in my convictions that a solo trip is nothing to fear, I now feel sorry for those who don’t get it. What are they so scared about?? Having to spend time with themselves?
Results-Only Work Environment. Just heard about that in the latest TED video of Dan Pink. It's this "revolutionary" idea that companies only require for the work to be done, but do not impose fixed schedules. People can work from wherever they want, whenever they want. That means, no need to change your computer screen away from facebook or closing your chats as soon as you hear your boss approaching, or pretending to look busy while counting the minutes left til the clock hits 5pm. No need to take "sick days" - conveniently always on a Friday or a Monday to take off for a long week-end, or rush away from your morning snuggles..
I have never understood this in "regular" jobs. The idea of having to pretend you are busy when you are not and just sit there and waste your mind away. Companies that have started implementing ROWE are showing tremendous results: Improved workforce productivity up to 41% and reduced voluntary turnover rates (as much as 90%).
It just make so much sense to me. You are happier at your job, so put more passion and loyalty into it, and at the same time you get to spend more time on the important things like your family.
As any European will probably agree, the US work standards of 10-days vacation/year are not worth the increased productivity it may bring. I cannot understand how one can function on only 10 days break a year. How are you supposed to find time to travel? Recover from stress and lack of sleep? 10 days is inhumane!!! (Especially when you have a mom in France, a dad in Italy, a grandmother in Switzerland and friends to see around the world! ;) ROWE at least makes up for it.
Now of course there are also some flaws. You really have to be self-disciplined and focused. And working from home can get boring too. But as long as I can I will hold on to the freedom I have of writing this blog at 11am on a week day from the comforts of my bed.
In unrelated but just as sad news, a federal study of mercury contamination found the toxic substance in every fish tested at nearly 300 streams across the United States.
Seems like we just can't stop chemical pollution at ourselves, we just gotta ruin ever species there is.
Not to worry though as there will soon not be any fish left to pollute (or eat).
"God Bless America" has become so common of a political slogan, that today is it almost banal. Yet no other president before Nixon - amidst the Watergate scandal- had ever concluded a speech with those words. The phrase did not catch on right away, and it would take Ronald Reagan who made it his standard sign-off, to install it permanently in the political lingo.
That said, God started making a major appearance on the American public stage as early as 1864, on the 2-cents coin. "In God We Trust" became the official motto of the United States by an Act of Congress in 1956 and is now on every dollar banknote and coin. I thought I had spotted an exception as I looked at my 1$ "Martin Van Buren" coin but God forbid... it has not been forgotten but instead of finding it on the face, you have to look for it the outer edge. (Though collectors will be interested in knowing that there are an estimated 50 000 George Washington 1$-coins in circulation, mistakenly struck without the edge inscriptions..).
What is fascinating to me though is that despite its growing "membership", atheists are America's least trusted group. Indeed, it might come as a surprise but Americans rate atheists below Muslims, recent immigrants, and homosexuals.
The reason seems to be that religious people fear that atheists lack the fear of God that is apparently required to live with moral values, in accordance with the guidelines of the Books.
Does that mean that the reason religious people try to be "good" (and the definition of "good" can vary quite a bit according to the interpretation of the Books one chooses) is because they want to make sure they secure their spot in Heaven?
Is that really better than those who just want to lead a good life, not because they have anything to gain from it or anyone to fear, but just because they think it's right?
At the risk of getting criticized by those who have kindly given me a home in their country, and be told to move back to my own if I'm not happy...I have to admit that I do agree with Bill Maher - and not just in reference to the US, though it is the focus here.
I will not dwell on the past when Americans voted not once but twice to put Bush in power (giving comics worldwide a source of daily material), nor will I spend time on the fact that Obama's education was held against him during his presidential campaign (!) or that Sarah Palin actually got a following.
However, in light of the current sinking standards of the health care debate, and amidst of the "birthers" movement, here is what I what I have to say: SHUT UP!
I think that now is one of those times when people who are ignorant on the issue (I’m talking health care, I’m not even going to address the birthers) should not be asked to participate in a discussion whose standards they are only lowering with their shouts. To be fair, it is a complex issue and there is a lot of propaganda on both sides but this is further reason why people should use some silent time to listen and educate themselves before making false accusations, and creating chaos. (The irony is that the loudest voices are more likely the ones who would benefit the most from reform).
Though the current town hall meetings started with the good intentions of encouraging constructive dialogue, reaching across differences, and offering everyone a chance to participate in this important issue, this has proven to be placing way too high expectations on the average citizen.
Though the United States offers some of the best standards in higher education worldwide - and I'm glad I got to take advantage of it - less than 30% of the US population actually holds a college degree, and when it comes to secondary education, the US really lags behind.
According to the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD)'s 2006 Program for International Student Assessment (PISA), U.S. 15-year-olds trail their peers from many industrialized countries. The average science score of U.S. students lagged behind those in 16 of 30 countries and in math they ranked at #24. The PISA survey is the most comprehensive and rigorous international yardstick of secondary-school students' attainments.
My point is not to question the American educational system itself but the power placed on people who - at least from the images the media have painted- seem to show little or no understanding of the issue nor - that's the sad part - any real interest in understanding it. Yet these are the people who are determining the future of health care, via the pressure they will be able to apply on the government though their loud cacophony.
Though I would love to believe in what Mandela described in his book Long Walk to Freedom as his model for democracy, in remembering his experience with tribal leadership - "Democracy meant all men were to be heard, and a decision was taken together as a people" - I don't think this is always the wisest option when addressing people with various special interests or limited understanding of the issue at hand.
Democracy can only work up to a certain point. History has many examples of its flaws, like the tiranny of democracy, where a majority oppresses a minority, or examples of democratic elections that give rise to "illiberal democracies" (for a great article on the topic, read Fareed Zakaria's take on it).
And this is not a problem facing just Obama, whose platform of change -including in regards to health care- he was elected on. Back in my home country of France, President Sarkozy, has been facing similar challenges. Elected because he promised to shake things up, once given the opportunity to do so, the French have responded to him as they know best, by taking to the streets and protesting any chance for modernization of the country. (Under President Chirac, the biggest disappointment was the French rejection of the European Constitution - due to a lot of misunderstanding- a setback that the EU has still not gotten over. It is not clear why Chirac asked for a referendum when he could have had the Treaty ratified directly by the French parliament, but this is a perfect example of what can go wrong when you ask people uneducated on an issue to voice their opinion).
While Sarzoky has made no efforts in hiding his frustration as to ruling a stubborn people, Obama has remained as much as he can his cool self. But no doubt that in private, as Jon Stewart jokes, he surely sighs a lot as he watches the quality of the ongoing debates drop.
(watch from minute 5 to 5:40, and more!)
In conclusion, "if you want to call me an elitist for this, I say thank you. Yes, I want decisions made by an elite group of people who know what they're talking about. That means Obama budget director Peter Orszag, not Sarah Palin.
Which is the way our founding fathers wanted it. James Madison wrote that "pure democracy" doesn't work because "there is nothing to check... an obnoxious individual." Then, in the margins, he doodled a picture of Joe the Plumber." (Bill Maher)
Here are some videos and films I think are worth seeing, in no particular order. Not necessarily the best films ever of even the best documentaries, but films that make you think, that may inspire you to change your habits, or just have a greater awareness about certain issues. I will be updating it regularly and welcome your suggestions to add to the list.
From its extraction through sale, use and disposal, all the stuff in our lives affects communities at home and abroad, yet most of this is hidden from view. The Story of Stuff is a 20-minute, fast-paced, fact-filled look at the underside of our production and consumption patterns. The Story of Stuff exposes the connections between a huge number of environmental and social issues, and calls us together to create a more sustainable and just world. It'll teach you something, it'll make you laugh, and it just may change the way you look at all the stuff in your life forever.
Irena Salina's award-winning documentary investigation into what experts label the most important political and environmental issue of the 21st Century - The World Water Crisis.
I have greatly reduced my use of water plastic bottles since watching this film and stick to tap water when I go to restaurants.
I saw this film recently and have started paying much more attention to what I eat. Though I have not yet found the strength to become a vegetarian, I am much more careful of what I buy, trying as much as I can to stick to organic, local food.
It features interviews of Eric Schlosser, the author of Fast Food Nation which is a read that definitely changed my lifestyle. While I grew up on McDonalds and fast food, since reading that book in 2004, I have only set foot once in a McDonalds' -for reasons beyong my control (I swear!) and barely eaten in any other fast-food place either. If you watch Morgan Spurlock's Super Size Me, another great film, you might be tempted to do the same. (But for you Cali people, fear not, In-N-Out remains on the good list of socially-conscious places)
Another "food" doc... but this time in the context of globalization. Considering the riots in the past couple of years sparked by the rising price of food or lack of food, it is bound to also become a recurring topic. Can the Earth feed 9 billion people - as we are expected to be by 2050??
I saw Al Gore's live presentation when I was interning at the United Nations, and the film is pretty much the same. Gore's fantastic job raising awareness about the global warming issue got him the Nobel Peace Prize in 2007.
I just saw this movie and thought it was amazing. Brilliant advocacy filmmaking, inspiring. Though the fate of some 20 000+ dolphins/year killed in the small Japanese village of Taiji, may not seem of importance in the larger scale of things, the film is also about the preservation of our oceans in general.
Not necessarily Michael Moore's best film but it's really relevant in the midst of current health care reform discussions. Now you may accuse Michael Moore of bias and of being extreme and you would be right, but I don't understand why that has been held against him. He is a filmmaker - of course, he is going to push for his point of view! He is not claiming to be a "fair and balanced" journalist so, people, give him a break! Whatever one may think of him, Michael Moore has definitely opened up doors in the field of documentary filmmaking, and has been able to reach a huge audience on important issues, and at least sparked discussion.
In regards to Sicko, last month, a former health insurance insider, now turned whistleblower, Wendell Potter, explained in Bill Moyer's journal on PBS, the methods the health insurance industry used to try to discredit Michael Moore's movie, admitting that Moore's movie was accurate.
I won't go into a debate about health care here, but I sure do miss my government-controlled health insurance from my days in France!
This is not for any specific video, I just think ALL of TED's lectures are worth watching. TED is a small nonprofit devoted to Ideas Worth Spreading. You can watch all the TEDTalks' videos online. Or just check their latest one from my blog list.
Looks like this film has finally made it to the theaters! I first saw some rushes when volunteering at the IFP Market in 2004, when it was called "Fields of Fuel" at the time... and 4 years later the final cut made it as part of a "green" screening series at the Lincoln Center and won the Audience Award at Sundance..it sure has taken the filmmakers a long time to get it out there but glad it is! Enlightening look at alternative energy sources.
I thought I'd start my first blog with a subject we all aspire to, though few of us ever seem to truly grasp it.
The saying goes "money can't buy happiness", yet, in this time of global financial crisis, I think quite a few who have lost it all and with it the life they had built, would beg to differ. Money opens access to a material world the consumerist society we have become is taught to cherish and crave - for better or worse. Sports cars, big home(s), brand clothes, a trophy wife..money brings power and status in a society that values it, but also the security to be able to provide for your family, offer your children the best education and the best health care. Money also offers those who have it the chance to spend more time focusing on things they enjoy - lest they become prisoners of their money-making jobs.
Though I try to lead a fairly simple life and enjoy simple pleasures, I can't deny that I myself would sure love to have more money! That said, I don't think I would ever be willing to do so if it were at the expense of a fulfilling job. But I know this choice is an option not all have the possibility to make and puts me among the lucky few - at least for now, where even though I am not making loads by any means, I can sustain myself and have no dependents to provide for.
If psychologist Scrully Blotnick 20 year "wealth creation" study is correct, following my passion is more likely to make me a millionaire than running after the money. I sure hope he is right!
That said, as much research has shown, while during their lifetime individuals typically get richer, they do not necessarily become happier. It is family, social, and community networks that bring joy. Seriously... past the firsts few millions, what difference can it really make in your life whether you have $20 millions or $200 millions? Does one really need a 5th house to be happier than their neighbor with "only" 4? And if that's the case, why are some of the happier people I've met in my life been those with the most humble lifestyles? Why are those who abandon any material greed/craving to follow a spiritual path (in the religions that require such extreme steps) those that seem the most at peace?
Anyways, all this thinking about happiness came to me after reading an article by Ian Bullock in July 2009 issue of Adbusters- a magazine I greatly recommend. It makes reference to Dr. John Helliwell's research. Helliwell is an economist at the University of British Columbia who has spent the past 15 years studying well-being by using direct measures of life satisfaction. He has found, for example, that it takes a 40% increase in salary to counter balance a 10% drop in job satisfaction. This actually reminds me of a recent news article that pointed out that on the upside of this difficult economic situation, people seem to be currently more satisfied with their jobs (and surely the fact that they actually still have one) than before.
Helliwell's research shows that good governance is the most influential variable in levels of happiness in different countries. At the core of his claims is a collection of data collected by a Stockholm-based non-profit, the World Values Survey Association (WVSA) which has polled over 350,000 people in countries woldwide. The results show that "economic development, democratization, and rising social tolerance have increased the extent to which people perceive that they have free choice, which in turn has led to higher levels of happiness around the world".
Also at the center of Helliwell's source of happiness is the idea of community, of being together. Though he quickly points out that virtual communities such as facebook don't replace real, live communities that provide the rich and fulfilling relationships necessary for well-being.
But back to the idea of governance and happiness - Bhutan is a small kingdom located between India and China. It is an isolated nation (as an example, television was only introduced in 1999) ruled by a constitutional monarchy, and would be of little relevance to my topic if it weren't that it is the only country in the world to define its success not only by it's GNP but by its GNH, its Gross National Happiness. According to its entry in wikipedia, the "term was coined in 1972 by Bhutan's former KingJigme Singye Wangchuck, who has opened up Bhutan to the age of modernization. It signaled his commitment to building an economy that would serve Bhutan's unique culture based on Buddhist spiritual values." It serves as a unifying vision for the economic and development plans of the country. Its four pillars are the promotion of sustainable development, preservation and promotion of cultural values, conservation of the natural environment, and establishment of good governance.
In a widely cited study, Bhutan ranked 8th out of 178 countries in Subjective Well-Being, a metric that has been used by many psychologists since 1997. In fact, it is the only country in the top 20 "happiest" countries that has a very low GDP.
Last year, the World Values Survey found Denmark to be the happiest country on Earth (a rank it has held amongst its European counterparts for 30 years), followed by Puerto Rico and Colombia. Zimbabwe was found the least happy, with Iraq and Russia close by (I would imagine North Korea - had its people been able to participate would not rank much better - a photographer who managed to enter the country called it The Land of No Smiles). The United States ranked 16th.
Denmark is not the richest country but has high living standards and has been one of the most socially progressive cultures in the world. It was for example, the first country (1989) to grant same-sex couples the same rights as marriage through the enactment of a partnership law. A recent opinion piece in the NY Times suggested however that what makes the Danes truly happier than their similar neighbors is their low expectations, and the fact that they live day by day/in the present (a practice advocated by Buddhists too).
Anyways, this first blog is quite long and not sure anyone will make it to the end. I am not sure if it really has a point or any logic, but I just found the different ways to look at happiness interesting and wanted to share with those who might find it interesting too!
At the end of the day, happiness is an ensemble of things from micro to macro. At the risk of being called a communist though, I believe that "social" nations like the Scandinavian ones are a leading example of how when society is happy as a whole, its individual members are happier. Thus, if raising taxes a little can enable greater health care, education, common goods and less work time, then it is worth it. It all comes around. (Scandinavian countries are also the most generous when it comes to the percentage of their GDP that goes towards development aid... while the USA ranks 23rd).
On a personal note, I don't know if I can lower my expectations, but I know that living in the present is certainly a start - one I have had difficulties applying. But as some of my favorite authors, Saint-Exupery and Coelho have alluded to in their famous paraboles, "happiness is a journey, not a destination" (Father Alfred D'Souza).
Thanks for reading so far and please share your thoughts/comments if you have any.. what do YOU think is the secret to happiness?
But less than two weeks after Corazon Aquino's death, and in light of current struggles faced by the people of Iran, I just wanted to mention the power of the people as it is to me a symbol of some of the greatest acts of courage and beauty in the sad modern history of oppressive governments.
Having spent quite some time in South Africa, amandla (a Xhosa and Zulu word for "power") is to me first and foremost linked to the fight against Apartheid...and the many heroes, known and unknown who sacrificed their lives for justice. Best known of all, of course, is Nelson Mandela - who, faced with the option to stick to his life of a privileged black man and the chance to raise his family, or to risk a lifetime sentence rotting in jail, away from his loved ones, chose the latter, a decision that changed the course of history of an entire people. He made the conscious choice that his personal life/happiness weighed little on the scale compared to the eternal freedom (insh'allah!) of an entire people - oppressed for 300 years before that.
That same choice was made by Aung San Suu Kyi - the leader of the pro-democracy movement of Burma- who has been in some form of imprisonment for 14 of the past 20 years (her house arrest was just extended for another 18 months by the military junta). When in 1999 her British husband was in the final stages of cancer, she declined the offer by the junta to leave the country to be by his side, fearing she would not be allowed back in. She has not seen her two sons since 2000. How many more of these silent heroes are there around the world whose names we do not know? These prisoners of conscience- as Amnesty International calls them- who rot in jail, hard labor camps, perhaps torture chambers, so that their sacrifice may serve the purpose of a greater cause?
Some like Gandhi have been lucky to live to see their accomplishment (though Gandhi was assassinated shortly after). Gandhi's Quit India massive non-violent civil disobedience movement against British occupation led hundreds of thousands of people to the streets. It motivated a population of millions like never before to claims of independence. That independence was finally granted in 1947.
Though I already knew of Gandhi and Mandela, the People Power Revolution really became concrete to me after seeing a documentary in a Peace and Conflict class by the dear late Professor Andrus at USC, on the Philippines' 1986 non-violent revolution. Following 20 years of authoritarian ruling of Ferdinand Marcos, 2 million Filipino civilians took to the streets over a period of 3 days. Marcos eventually fled the country and Corazon Aquinos was elected on February 25 1986, becoming the "Mother of Democracy" and the first female president of any country in Asia.
Other peaceful revolutions have followed, like the 1989 Velvet Revolution in Czechoslovakia that saw the overthrow of the Communist government and Vaclav Havel become president.
Yet not all have managed to stay non-violent or even to accomplish its goals. The Buddhist monks of Burma have had no such luck in their attempt for change last year. The Nepalese 2006 democracy movement effectively removed the king and installed a new government but many came to the streets putting their life in danger. And so have the Iranians in the past 2 months. Following alleged fraud elections, they have taken the streets by tens of thousands - the biggest unrest since the 1979 revolution. But the government's violent response has forced them back into their homes. Who could blame them?
Perhaps those who have taken the bullets fighting for the dreams of a fairer society. Those who have spent their lifetime in jails prevented from living the life that was meant. But is it fair to ask a nation's people to take on this burden, to possibly sacrifice their youth/their life for those who will come after? It is a high price to pay. One that offers the chance to be remembered in History, or forever forgotten- denied recognition by the victors. Is it a cause worth the risk? Not this time. But in remembering the heroes of the past, we keep the hope alive. The power is to the people. Amandla.
I run a small NGO called Ayoka Productions. I graduated with a B.A in international relations from the University of Southern California (USC) and a Master's in international affairs from Sciences-Po, in Paris - the city where I grew up. I have traveled the world and hope to keep on doing so, meeting amazing people along the way.
