Blog Archives

Walter's Blog

"But how can you live and have no story to tell?" Fyodor Dostoevsky

Reflections on recent events, plus the occasional fact free rant unfiltered by rational argument.

"If you want to read a blog to get a sense of what is going on in Hong Kong these days or a blog that would tell you what life was like living in colonial Hong Kong, this blog, WALTER'S BLOG, fits the bill." Hong Kong Blog Review

Hong Kong weather

19/7/2018 0 Comments

Friday Cartoon

0 Comments

15/7/2018 2 Comments

July 15th, 2018

According to Donald Trump, the Queen thinks Brexit's complicated. Who’d have figured that? We know that Donald is not high on detail nor facts, some of which he appears to construct from his imagination. In that regard, he’s the same as those folks playing identity politics.

Politics is sound-bites, short-messages in an internet-age of limited attention span. These days we rarely see issues in their hues and tones, digesting all the facts.

With Britain's looming departure from the European Union, the country needs politicians who think. They need ‘expert’ precision. Unfortunately, there don’t appear to be any in the arena. These days experts are trashed, especially when their facts challenge sacred positions. As Michael Gove famously pointed out, people are "sick of experts”.

And yet, we need experts to navigate Brexit with success. We need rational thought, instead of descending into a mess of rhetoric-ladened emotions. It’s not only Brexit, in many aspects of governance and politics rational thought is missing.

Hong Kong’s property market is a good illustration. The public is demanding government action to reign in surging prices. Fearful of public sentiment, our Chief Executive has sought to tinker at the edges. What is evident is that her government doesn’t understand the dynamics of the process. Ignored are the impact of broader issues and the intersectional nature of the problem. Intervention here may create unforeseen consequences there, with outcomes worst than the present. In short, it’s complicated.

For example, the Occupy movement was primarily a middle-class entity. The kids came from affluent backgrounds to demand change. Their property-owning parents offered lukewarm support at best. If those parents see the value of their property fall because of ham-fisted government policy, then what? They’d be less sanguine and more militant. Thus, the government creates another obstacle.

Adding to the morass is a divide between those who care about evidence and reasoning, against those who abandon them altogether. Perception polls feed this. These are the ones that find “All men are misogynists” and “All women repressed”. (The latter is easy to refute, spend five minutes with my Mum). It’s the sort of nonsense that comes from “Wimmin Studies". The Marxist origins that underpin these courses need exposing for their falsehoods.

These studies, with transparent untruths, produce reports that trade around as facts. Trump is an adopter of these tactics. But so-called progressive colleges have been at it for years. Here is an official publication from Brown University ... “quantitative data, statistical information and documentation are tools of systematic oppression”. The university urged students to set more store in their personal experiences.

That’s a stunning statement from a seat of learning. Had our ancestors decided to ignore data, we’d still be struggling to get out of Africa. “I know there’s no food here, we’ve had no rain for four seasons, but I’ve a gut-feeling the rains will return. Let’s hang around”. End of the game.

Those who reject scientific truths still need their iPhones and the internet to function. They take medical care formulated around scientific processes. All rooted in quantitative data and rationality. Thus, they rely on the products of the system they seek to denigrate.

Now I’m stepping into hot water. Rape and sexual assault on college campuses raise a host of issues. As a father of two daughters, I wanted to understand the risks my kids faced. To comprehend the issue you must cut through the rhetoric and noise. When you get to the scientific data, something emerges. It’s troubling, and again it’s complicated. Moreover, it's not the straightforward narrative put forth by feminists.

A 2015 Harvard study that meets proper scientific standards revealed a thorny dynamic. First, there is no evidence that women are being stalked and attacked on campuses. The instances that take place arise from social interactions. Female students entering male dorms are the most vulnerable. The attacker is most likely to be a friend or acquaintance.

Also, what Harvard found is a drinking problem; incapacitated victims and drunk offenders. In cases where the victims claimed physical force, they also reported that 69% of the offenders were drinking. Thus, you have drunk young men behaving terribly with drunk young women. This dynamic contrasts with that portrayed by feminists groups. Gangs of marauding males seeking to rape females aren't there.

Of course, if you point this out, you are immediately victim-blaming. Emotions supersede facts in the post-modernist world. Yet, we know the dismissal of empirical reality can have awful consequences. It’s the sort of thing that has kids not receiving vaccinations because of spurious claims of harm. These kids then suffer measles, rubella and other avoidable diseases.

It's evident that across the political spectrum there is a lack of understanding of detail. Brexit, climate change and nuclear disarmament are examples. Politicians take the easy route, they drop the evidence, as perception trumps (no pun intended) facts.

Nothing will change until we stop thinking around ideology or group identity. We need leaders who analyse with clarity. Remember, nature and market forces don’t care which group you identify with. Climate change has no heed of your feminists, socialist or conservative credentials. If we mess up to throw systems out of kilter, all groups suffer. That’s an objective truth.

2 Comments

13/7/2018 0 Comments

Friday Cartoon

0 Comments

13/7/2018 1 Comment

When Worlds Collide

Please like me!

Yesterday, two significant political entities collided with the inevitable sparks, fury and fire. Trump landed in Brexit Britain. Of course, Trump had to have his say. He criticised Prime Minister Mrs May, offered support for Boris Johnson and in the process broke every diplomatic rule in the book. Welcome to Trump world.

On Brexit, like much of what Trump says, there is a central truth. Arriving from the NATO conference, he’d admonished the Europeans asserting the US pays 90% of the costs. It’s 67%, but the truth of the assertion is there. 67% is a staggering figure when the primary beneficiary is Europe. The Europeans needed to be told that. Last month I stood in the American cemetery above Omaha Beach in Normandy. You can't fail to be struck at the human costs of attaining freedom. No one should only add up the money when the US has paid in blood and bones.

Trump let rip that Prime Minister May failed to follow his advice on Brexit. Be tough is his mantra. Her soft Brexit he warned wouldn’t endear the US to making trade deals. He could have pointed out that May’s Brexit is so soft all the shenanigans appear worthless. Again, he’s too keen on the rant. Having said that, the truth of a weak Mrs May is unavoidable.

I’m no Brexiteer. Nonetheless, the vote stands. Plus people voted for many things under Brexit. At the top of that list is border control. It’s not clear how this is going to work, with the devil in the details. That’s the issue with Brexit at every level. The details are crucial, and ordinary folks aren't bothered enough to understand the machinations.

You could claim Mrs May won a victory this week by seeing off big beast Boris from her cabinet. Along with him went other hard Brexiteers. As such, she strengthened her control, steadied the ship and set a course with her ‘white paper’. Yet, she's not won the war, only a battle. And the next salvo is likely to fall soon. Her enemies are awaiting the departure of Trump. After all, this is England, so certain rules of etiquette apply. Anyway, he’s consuming all the media oxygen. Distracted by him, the Brexiteers are unlikely to garner the coverage needed to build momentum.

On a side note - Trump isn't getting the full British smoochy treatment. Instead, he’s shuffled around the back-door. A parade at Blenheim Palace, which is not even a proper palace; meet the Queen at Windsor and then off to golf in Scotland. No parade up the Mall in an open carriage to Buckingham Palace for him. No adoring public, and no address to Parliament. Every effort is being made to keep protestors away.

In Hong Kong, we are watching this with interest. British politicians delight in alleging that demonstrators here face heavy-handed policing. Strange, they are silent when British police act to block freedom of expression on London's streets.

Anyway, once Air Force One’s wheels are up, the game restarts. The Brexiteers will take to the field of battle to assert May has sold Britain out. Still, they face a dilemma. They can’t on principle agree to May’s soft Brexit. But, an all-out assault on her may trigger a leadership challenge, then a general election. That could see Corbyn elected as Prime Minister.

Between a rock and a hard place, the Brexiteers need to step with care. They can continue to snipe from the sidelines to win a few concessions. Beyond that, options are few. Mounting a full assault on Mrs May without a foreseeable positive outcome is high risk. And she knows it. If she gets through the next two weeks, this will go down as a most remarkable political survival act.

If nothing else, Mrs May is a tough lady and for that deserves credit. Trump could have recognised that tenacity. Although, I agree she's weak on negotiating with the EU. Why? Was this always the plan, a covert effort to scuttle Brexit? If so, it’s working.

1 Comment

<<Previous

YOUR CART

Walter's Blog

Friday Cartoon

July 15th, 2018

Friday Cartoon

When Worlds Collide

Author

Archives

Home

Introduction

Contact Walter