We Can Marry Democratic And Authoritarian Values Into One!

The above video tries to explore the idea of marrying Democracy and Meritocracy values into one system.  In real life, currently, we do not have a system in which both values could be incorporated in a balance manner.  For an example, in the West, Democracy is being valued more, thus the systems lean toward mediocre leaders with greatest popularity.  In the East, the opposite case mostly occurs.  Still, there probably are situations that smooth sailing does occur for the West, and bad sailing does occur for the East.  This is a luck and bad luck happenstances.  For an example, the people in the West might just pick the best leaders by chance, thus the system could be run by the most popular leaders who are not mediocre.  In the East, bad luck could occur, thus the system could have corrupted, mediocre leaders who hold the positions of power and don’t want to relinquish such powerful positions — thus they become unpopular for sure.

The luck and bad luck happenstances are the unexpected elements, thus these things are beyond the control of the system.  What people want are the system that can be configured in a way that ensures the highest chance of electing the best leaders that could run the country in the best manner if possible.  Unfortunately, electing is more of a popularity contest than electing the best leaders.  Why?  Election is about who got more votes, and thus in theory anyone could be running for a position to get votes.  Strangers vote for each other — it’s more about who appears to be the most competence gets the popularity — thus getting the position.  In the Meritocracy system, a pretender who could keep the act together might also appear to be competence, thus fooling the previous leaders who vouch for his or her promotion.  Still, the Meritocracy system is built to ensure the highest chance of picking leaders according to meritocracy values.

When marrying Democracy with Meritocracy, we’re running into a direct conflict.  Democracy encourages the priority of voting while Meritocracy encourages the priority of strictly observing/testing before a promotion.  Thus, in reality we don’t see any system which distributes equal powers to Democracy and Meritocracy.  In China, I think some local regions do have elections, but it’s obviously one party state — so there is no true election at the very top.  So the true dilemma is how are we marrying the Democracy and Meritocracy together?

I have an idea!  Why don’t we have a constitution that ensures a house of Democracy which governs by election, but the house of Democracy is there to examine the performances of the most popular leaders who had gotten the positions through the voting process.  After the leaders’ terms are up, they need to be either promoted to longer term positions according to their performance-report-cards, but if their performances are poor they could be demoted or even be impeached.  Once they got promoted to longer term positions they could move into the house of Meritocracy.  Still, even once they reach the house of Meritocracy, more examinations must be done to ensure that the leaders within the house of Meritocracy are truly excellent.  If they’re just pretending to be excellent at their jobs, they could still be impeached within the house of Meritocracy.

Well, I think the idea I suggest above could be tested out for the case of marrying Democracy and Meritocracy together.  It’s like the people got to participate in a popularity contest before the real leaders could eventually be recognized.  Such a system does provide layers of examinations of our leaders so they could not take it easy and get so corrupted such as becoming lazy in serving people, involving in corruptions and scandals, and so forth.  What do you think?

Advertisements

Nationalism Vs. Globalism, Where Does This Lead? Probably to a Nowhere!

Globalism seems to be getting a bad rap lately, because locally people are suffering from global competition.  Jobs from a global market either had already been moved to another part of the world in the name of efficiency in cost and whatnot or will be replaced by market elsewhere that is more competitive.  So, locally, people are not feeling good at all about global aspects.

We’re seeing many people try to promote local brand, local ideas, local culture, and local anything over anything global.  Of course, it’s not a bad thing to promote local culture, ideas and whatnot, because these things are essential for a local life-force.  Nonetheless, when we become too extreme in promoting local over global agenda, we may create an atmosphere that would lead to a road of violences and not of solutions.

Imagine how the Nazi or similar groups came about or will be created because of such extremism.  Basically, I believe that the Nazis were not only Hitler’s henchmen, but many of them were believing in a movement of a pure race mentality which believes in purity and superiority over other identities.  So, in Hitler’s time, if you’re a Jew, you would be considered the lowest scum of all scums on earth, thus Hitler did try to wipe out the entire Jewish identity from the planet earth.

The Nazi mentality would seem making sense for the Nazis, but on the outside most people would not agree, because such a movement promotes senseless killing and senseless violence.  Thus I think anything that is taking too extreme may do more harm than good.  So, in these days, many people are promoting local brands over global brands, and it’s not really a bad thing.  Nonetheless, I think we should do this on a scale that makes sense — by not overdoing it.  If not, we may promote a form of extremism that will only incite a bigger conflict eventually.

Imagine a scenario in which we would close off our border, stop trading with everyone else globally, and try to create a self-sustain nation in which we believe that would stop global competition and bring better economic prosperity for people within our nation — this looks a lot like North Korea now.  But we all know that North Korea isn’t doing very well economically for a very long time.  Actually, North Korea had been poor since the conception of its whole political body.

Just right next door, China, once was as poor as North Korea, but now this neighbor known as China has become the largest economy on earth in term of Purchasing Power Parity measure and many people suggest that China will become the largest economy on earth in nominal GDP term sooner than later.  The neighbors cannot be any differ in term of size and economic prowess, because the gap between the North Koreans and the Chinese seems to be the size of a galaxy — an exaggeration of course but relevant nonetheless.

China achieved all of their success not by closing down borders, stop trading, and try to be self-sustained like North Korea, but China opened and continues to open up just the right amount of space for foreign trades, investments, cooperations, and whatnot.  So, I think China did think about how to face the challenge of global competition before they opened up their economy just right which had allowed them to be where they are today.

For countries like the United States, we’re facing a challenge of cost efficiency, and so our products are more expensive to export.  Perhaps we should think about closing our door with just a right amount of space but leave the door open just wide enough to stem the outflow of jobs — creating enough breathing space for people within the country to survive and thrive and compete.

Nonetheless, such a solution is only for short term treatment, because in the future our technologies may be so disruptive that the technologies we will employ will take away all of our jobs.  When such thing occurs, no matter how many borders you close down, how many trades you stop from occurring will not be able to keep jobs at home.  So, the solution won’t be available in the basket of creating jobs for the people, but the solution would be in the basket of how to support a society in which people will no longer work for a living, on a global scale.

What is the solution?  At the moment, I don’t think any single solution would be satisfactory in answering the AI taking away jobs question, because we’re not actually suffering from a total domination from a machine overlord just yet.  Instead, we’re seeing machines slowly take away jobs from various people in various sectors.  Eventually though, the Artificial Intelligence would get so smart that it would take away most jobs from the people.

If AI is inevitably going to take away most of our jobs, we should steer the course of such a trend to benefit the humanity.  After all, we’re the humanity!  So, I suggest that we should employ smart machines to create the abundances that we need to free us all from basic necessaries, and this would allow us to focus on living better.  We then would probably question ourselves what would we do if the smart machines do all the jobs.

Will we become so bored and mindless that we rather die young than live too long?  Nonetheless, in the future we may have technologies that would extend our lifespan.  But there is a possibility in which we as the humanity as a whole would try to explore the next frontier which is the universe itself.  Maybe the smart machines would get us to be so free that we would venture out into the farthest space within the universe to explore and question not only our origin, but the universe itself — and have a better chance at doing this than ever before.

Anyway, after watching “Nationalism vs. globalism: the new political divide | Yuval Noah Harari” TED Talks video on YouTube, my brain starts to question a lot more about our future.  This brief essay is the result of my watching of this video.  The video is right after the break.  Enjoy!

What Chaos Theory And Determinism Have To Do With Infinite And The Scale Of A Universe?

I don’t pretend to know much about Chaos Theory, and what I’ve learned more of it is from the documentary “The Secret Life of Chaos” (2017) directed by Nic Stacey.  From this documentary I learned of the people like Alan Turing whose lifeworks had big impact on how we perceive of Chaos Theory today.  Before I even knew about Chaos Theory and the definition of deterministic system of a philosophical doctrine, I have had thoughts of my own in regarding to things that can be counted within both observable and unobservable universes.  By reading a bit into Chaos Theory and the definition of deterministic system, I’ve come to a realization that Chaos Theory and deterministic system together as a unit which resembles a perfect marriage.

When you think of Chaos Theory, you think of simple elements that can be counted yet these elements have the potential of creating unpredictable combination in nature and elsewhere.  For an example, if you take a look at a huge tree with many branches, the whole tree does look like a complex pattern, but if you take a closer look at the tree the elements can be break down into very simple similar patterns.  Nonetheless, the branches on the tree are unpredictably formed in countless simple patterns that together they make the tree to be a more complex feature.  The predictability in the picture of a tree which forms by unpredictable patterns of branches is the tree and branches themselves.  This is the side of deterministic system.

Without a brain like a human being, yet the branches on the tree know how to self-organized into similar branches with different patterns to form a predictable outcome as a tree.  Chaos Theory suggests that most things in nature can be simple and unpredictable yet self-organized to form predictable features, thus nature isn’t like a clockwork machine in which the gears would always be turned in the same directions.  Hint this is why I realized Chaos Theory and deterministic system together as a perfect marriage.  For your information, people are using Chaos Theory to study human’s heart, animal skins’ patterns, weathers, and whatnot.

My own thoughts now come into the mix in regarding to all of this.  I have always thought of both observable and unobservable universes can be broken down into elements that can be counted and summed it all up.  What do I mean by this?  If we can think of 1 + 1 equal 2, then we can think of every element in the universe can be thrown onto a scale for weighing and summation.  Nonetheless, I also do think these elements in each of themselves have behaviors and features that create potential for probable outcomes.  Thus I think we can count up all elements within the universe if we can be sure of all the potentials and probabilities there are within a universe.  We must also remember that each element can combine with another and many others to form new elements, thus the potentials and probabilities like these must be accounted for within the equation too.

I may have misunderstood in one aspect of Chaos Theory is that I think Chaos Theory suggests that the unpredictability side of things cannot be accounted for in any math, but the potentials and probabilities are there for the unpredictability to become predictability once the whole picture is formed.  For me, I think it’s absurd that the potentials and the probabilities within the universe are endless and infinite.  I think if the universe is truly endless and infinite, then why not earth in the first place be just it and the sun, stars, and everything else shouldn’t be existed in the first place.  I think we can agree on that if we have a powerful enough machine we could sum up all elements within planet earth to eventually have them weigh on a single scale to come up with an exact number of how much earth is made of right?  I think the universe is in this manner too.

If what I’ve been stated thus far are all true, should infinite be a number which we can weigh?

Thus, I think the potentials and probabilities of what exist cannot be endless and limitless, and here is where I determine that if we have a powerful enough machine we can too put a universe on a scale for weighing.  Furthermore, since the potentials and probabilities are not infinite, so there must be other universes out there.  Since the potentials and probabilities are capable to form within our imagination — I think Chaos Theory should agree with me that human conscious is the byproduct of the potentials and the probabilities of the system we’re in — I think our imagination of limited universe is too within the potentials and probabilities of the system.  Otherwise, our imagination wouldn’t allow us to imagine the universe is limited.  Here is what I think next, there shouldn’t be a law that limits the shape and size of a universe unless the potentials and probabilities of such are not existed.  Who say earth is round and the universe cannot be square?  Perhaps, another universe is square and ours is in a very weird shape which we have no word to describe such a shape.

Creative Thinking: Aliens & A Star

I read something on the Internet today, and the article mentioned that a star, Gliese 710, is heading toward our solar system.  This is interesting to me since I have only heard of other smaller bodies of space to be traveling around like a comet or so, but something as big as 60% of our Sun could be traveling like this is something new to me entirely.  The article mentioned that in about 1.35 million years or so, this star would enter our solar system and cut through Oort Cloud which may trigger lots of other smaller bodies of space to travel in earth’s direction.  This could mean lot of stuffs could hurl toward earth and create lots of destructions.

Anyhow, that is interesting, but my imagination is running wild again.  I’m thinking that if an alien civilization out there that is so advance in which they have the knowledge of turning a star or a planet into a spaceship.  Perhaps, they could travel to another solar system like so without ever needing a smaller spaceships to do so.  They could breed and live as usual in a planet size spaceship, and once they arrive at a solar system they would carry on their whatever they have had in mind.

Nonetheless, the question is can the aliens remember their objectives after 1.35 million years?  Or perhaps, in couple hundred thousands more years, the aliens already know how to speed up their star size spaceship to the point that it will reach earth for let’s say in half the time of 1.35 million years?

Anyhow, this is only a scenario in which my imagination runs wild on, and so don’t take what I’m writing here literally.  For all we know, perhaps it’s only a star which hurls toward earth’s direction.  Nonetheless, as an intelligent species, us humans should be opened to all possibilities, and only in this manner that we may never be caught by any surprise which could have a devastation on us all.

When It Starts To Crack (Poem by Vinh Nguyen)

Just another poem I’d written thus far.  Enjoy!

Something is so shiny and translucent,
brittling to the point of shattering,
yet holding together so tightly, so glittery,
brightly so in creating some reflections,
sometimes it rather lets things to shine through,
uncompromisingly proving to be glittery still,
a ceiling of this could not be shattered,
hanging too tightly together as tough as steels,
as the sunlight slips through the silky mass,
splashing a golden surface among the shadows,
though it is glittery and slippery and shatter-easy,
it’s a unit of strength which stands among the giants,
only when the components within the unit show cracks,
it is when the ugliness begins to grow onto the surface,
breaking away what once was gravity defying act,
which had held the impossible together,
thus the slippery slope begins the sliding path,
down back to earth where worms squirm in all directions,
trying to gnaw into the once smooth glittery surface,
more ugly cracks begin the madness,
pushing the sadness to a new level,
once a mirror, a glass to let sunlight through,
now it is lying, shattering on the damp, darken ground.

Why Are The Chinese Flourishing Under An Authoritarian Regime?

Why isn’t the Chinese government allowing the Chinese to elect the country’s leaders and yet China is still flourishing?  Western people like us are often wondering why this is the case.  Some people from the United States and other western states have believed that once the Chinese are wealthier, they would demand a full blown democracy sort of governmental regime.  Nonetheless, I think this sort of belief is kind of make believe.

Chinese history had recorded many Chinese historical dynasties that were able to provide prosperity that had no equal in historical time periods, and so the ancient Chinese were able to flourish and get wealthy in all sorts of manners.  Yet, in those time, the Chinese were all ruled by a king or an emperor.  The modern Chinese regime is similar yet different than the past dynasties in several ways.

Basically, the modern Chinese regime is an authoritarian body, because the Chinese cannot elect their leaders.  This is very similar to how past ancient dynasties had ruled China.  Nonetheless, Chinese modern regime is different than the past ancient Chinese regimes/dynasties in a sense that Chinese modern leaders are not likely to be able to pass their positions down to their children as if their positions could be inherited.  Instead, there is a process within one party system that would weed out the bad and pick the good to govern an institution within China.  Nonetheless, this process is very similar to how the ancient Chinese dynasties had done in promoting meritocracy.

Anyway, as historical periods in China has shown us that the Chinese can unite and operate just fine under one party system, and so we in the West should not expect China to emulate the Western democratic systems.  Nobody knows the future, perhaps China may emulate the West in the future, but in my opinion I don’t think this will likely to occur at all.  Instead, I think China would still be one party state in foreseeable future, and yet the Chinese will be able to flourish in this particular environment.