Tag Archives: Politics

Life

The tyranny of the majority

November 9, 2008 – 9:07 pm

On May 15th, 2008 the California Supreme Court made a historic decision. They ruled that it was a violation of the equal protection clause of the California Constitution to not afford gay couples the right to marry – almost exactly the same ruling they had made in 1948 on inter-racial marriage (which was at the time not allowed in California). Between June 16th (the day gay wedding licenses started being issued) and November 4th, approximately 18,000 couples got married in California.

The evangelical right was having none of the above. They knew that if gay marriages were allowed to continue in California (a major cultural force in the USA, and a state with the 7th largest economy in the world)…it was only a matter of time before they would become be allowed nationallly. After all, this exact sequence had occurred on the issue of inter-racial marriage. 19 years after the 1948 California ruling noted above, in 1967 the US Supreme Court (in a famous decision Loving v. Virginia) made the same ruling thereby eliminating all barriers to interracial marriage in the USA.

So on November 4th just as racial discrimination was dealt a massive and perhaps final blow with the election of the first African-American President of the USA, Californians voted by a 52.5% to 47.5% majority to take away this fundamental right to marry from gay couples in the state. Ironically, the same voters made the correct decision to expand animal rights in California.

Anger and sadness have enveloped millions in California since Proposition 8 passed last week…and this issue is by no means settled. Here are the thoughts of one prominent Los Angeles lesbian and mother who is in a 22 year committed relationship. I should also mention she is Deputy Mayor for Housing and Economic Development Policy for Los Angeles…working tirelessly to create more affordable housing for the poor and disadvantaged.ray

<!– /* Font Definitions */ @font-face {font-family:”Cambria Math”; panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:roman; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:-1610611985 1107304683 0 0 159 0;} @font-face {font-family:Calibri; panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4; mso-font-alt:”Times New Roman”; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:swiss; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:-1610611985 1073750139 0 0 159 0;} @font-face {font-family:Tahoma; panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:swiss; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:-520082689 -1073717157 41 0 66047 0;} /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-unhide:no; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:”"; margin:0in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:”Calibri”,”sans-serif”; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:”Times New Roman”; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;} p.MsoPlainText, li.MsoPlainText, div.MsoPlainText {mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-link:”Plain Text Char”; margin:0in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:10.5pt; font-family:”Tahoma”,”sans-serif”; mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:”Times New Roman”; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;} span.PlainTextChar {mso-style-name:”Plain Text Char”; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-unhide:no; mso-style-locked:yes; mso-style-link:”Plain Text”; mso-ansi-font-size:10.5pt; mso-bidi-font-size:10.5pt; font-family:”Tahoma”,”sans-serif”; mso-ascii-font-family:Tahoma; mso-hansi-font-family:Tahoma;} .MsoChpDefault {mso-style-type:export-only; mso-default-props:yes; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:”Times New Roman”; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;} @page Section1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in; mso-header-margin:.5in; mso-footer-margin:.5in; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} –>

Yes we Can! Reflections on Gay Marriage in California

Helmi Hisserich, Deputy Mayor, Housing and Economic Development Policy

On November 4th, Gays and Lesbians were pushed to the back of the bus. The vote to change California’s constitution to ban same sex marriage was an act of prejudice against a minority group and a vote for second class citizenship. It is a sad irony that happened on the same day
that America voted for our first African American President. But it is also a reminder that the fight against prejudice is long and painful.

For the past 173 days I have thought about the meaning of marriage almost every day. I am a lesbian who has been in a relationship for 22 years. My partner and I have been faithful to one another, for richer or poorer, in sickness and health for more than two decades, but we have never had a wedding. We have been registered domestic partners since the law first allowed it in 1998, but that is definitely not the same as marriage. On my paycheck, my taxpayer ID says “single”.

On May 15th, 2008 when the moderate Republican Supreme Court said the California Constitution guaranteed the right of same sex couples to be married, a sense of acceptance and equality came over me that was so powerful it I felt it deep in my bones. My God, I do have the fundamental right to pursue happiness in marriage with the person I love. This is what it means to live in a free country, this is the meaning of equality. My gay and lesbian friends all talked about it, especially those of us who are in long term relationships. We all felt we were being protected and accorded dignity under the law. It felt amazing. Prejudice is funny that way, when it is removed you realize
how accustomed you have become to being treated with less respect you deserve.

The 173 days between the California Supreme Court decision and the November election were painful. For me, it felt like a walk to the gallows. I know good people who are awkward and uncomfortable about homosexuality. I knew the yes on 8 campaign was playing on peoples fears. It made me sick to think that people by referendum could vote to take my rights away. In California you can change the constitution with a simple majority vote, but you need a two third majority to raise sewer fees. What kind of justice is that?

On election night, I was at the Music Box theater in Hollywood, which was the rallying place for the No on Prop 8 campaign. When Barack Obama was elected president, the place went wild. People were cheering and crying. We all understood the importance of this election. Many of us had worked on the Obama campaign as well as the No on 8 Campaign; donating time and money to bring about change. For an hour we felt jubilant beyond measure. But then the reality hit that our friends and neighbors had voted to eliminate our constitutional right to marry. The happiness faded.

The day after the election, my daughter came home from 6th grade and told me kids were saying gays and lesbians are disgusting. She said she felt like people hated our family without knowing us. That is what prejudice is, I told her, judging people without knowing them. But 50 years ago a black person and a white person could not get married, and today someone from an interracial family was elected the president. She asked if we could change the constitution back to what it was. At first my though wandered to the difficult struggle we face to gain acceptance, but as I looked at down at her shining face in her blue community organizer t-shirt, the future became very clear – “Yes we Can”.

Tags legal rights, Life, marriage, Politics, prop 8, same sex marriage, spirituality and relationships | Comment (0)

Public Policy World World Affairs

A New Focus for American Foreign Policy: Human Rights

October 24, 2008 – 10:40 pm

One of the fatal flaws of the Bush approach/policy framework that I would love to see Barack Obama change…is this idea that it is America’s job to spread Democracy around the world. As a student of Democracy and child of the largest Democracy in the world (India), I do believe in and love Democracy. However, just like Capitalism….Democracy, too, is a flawed, chaotic, and imperfect system and I just don’t think it’s America’s job to tell other countries what political system is best for them.

In fact from a purely theoretical standpoint, I believe a ‘benevolent autocracy’ is likely the best political system to help efficiently/quickly advance a society economically and socially. The only issue is, those benevolent/enlightened autocrats are really difficult (virtually impossible) to come by….and power corrupts, so this too is a slippery slope.

In any event, to get back to the original point of this blog….I believe America needs to officially change this stated policy of spreading Democracy….and focus primarily on spreading/ensuring basic human rights for every human being. Even if you disagree with my point on Democracy….I think most should agree safety comes before politics…and the problems the people of the world face in so many countries (including the Middle East) are still about safety.

Let’s work on the basics, and get to politics later.

Tags democracy, foreign policy, international affairs, middle east, obama, Politics | Comment (0)

Life Politics World Affairs

Rascist slurs at McCain/Palin rallies should be denounced by candidates and party

October 21, 2008 – 10:45 pm

I was trying last night to have a mellow evening at home after a full day of work. The full day of work was quite an experience after spending 3 blissful months ‘Exploring my Zen’ (as I like to call it) following the collapse of Indymac during the Summer. So here I was…cuddling with my 2 freshly bathed (and good smelling) Great Dane’s Lara and Tank…watching TV. But what I saw on CNN shocked me.

It looked (from the multiple clips they showed) like many people (definitely way more than a handful) at Palin/McCain rallies were screaming rascist comments and the crowd was supporting them. This included statements like “Obama bin Ladin”, “Mohammed Husein Obama”, “Them Commies”…etc.

Could this really be going on in America, without bipartisan public denunciation? As I recall, McCain actually defended the people attending their rallies during the final presidential debate. Is this new, or do these conversations go on in this rough tone more regularly? I sure hope I see McCain or Palin step up and call this nastiness what it is – unacceptable in America.

On a broader note: We take things like equal protection under the law and non-discrimination so much for granted at least all the places I’ve lived in America which includes Universities (New Jersey), Cities (Los Angeles, Chicago), Companies (McKinsey, Indymac, and many Fortune 1000 clients served while at McKinsey), or just plain walking around (anywhere….from San Francisco to Michigan to Oregon to Dallas to Seattle to Arizona…the list goes on).

But none of these “now so obvious” modern principles of equality so clearly embodied in the US constitution came naturally to Americans, or really to most societies around the world. They (for the most part) had to be inflicted on the majority by the righteous/enlightened minority or the founders of the modern day states.

Tags discrimination, mccain, palin, Politics, presidential race | Comment (1)

Business Education Life Public Policy Real Estate

A suggestion for addressing the root-cause of this financial crisis….from a (humble) Banker who has experienced it firsthand

October 13, 2008 – 10:47 pm

One of the fundamental reforms that is nowhere to be seen on the horizon…that I believe is absolutely critical to addressing one of the key root causes of the current crisis of confidence in the global financial markets is the lack of any significant education on the topic of personal finances and money management in middle/high school and college curriculums worldwide, including in the US.

So here’s my idea Mr. Paulson and (hopefully future) President Obama: add a mandatory requirement that every middle school, high school, and college student in America get a basic education in how to think about personal finances (budgeting, money management, borrowing, net worth, financial ethics etc.). The long term benefits of such an addition to educational standards in the US and other countries would be invaluable.

I am regularly amazed by how little formal or informal education any of us receive (unless we have very diligent and focused parents with good personal financial habits…a rarity) on the topic of money. Yet, understanding money and making/managing it (in whatever quantities “work” for each individual) is critical for the achievement of personal success and happiness.

Tags Education, financial crisis, money management, obama, personal finance, Politics, Public Policy | Comment (0)

Education Life Politics Public Policy World World Affairs

Fighting and debating the wrong “war”

March 30, 2007 – 10:49 pm

I find myself quite uncomfortable with the near consensus I see in America today (as reflected in the media and recent policy coming out of the House and Senate) on the belief that “the war” on terror is going poorly, and the answer to this problem is for America and the world to pull out and leave the Middle East to solve it’s own civil and societal issues.

My two main contentions/concerns are as follows:

1. I feel everyone is missing the forest (the real war), as they are focused on the trees (Iraq, and sometimes Afghanistan). The war, and I do believe, we are in the midst of “the third world war” is much broader than just the conflicts in these 2 countries….and I fear “pulling out” of Iraq, may reflect a broader pull back on any sustained attack or defence against the root cause of the war….which I believe is largely, if not fully, unaddressed today (more than 5 years after 9/11).

2. The real war we have is not a physical war at all. It is a virtual or mental war….a war of beliefs and values (largely Islamic beliefs and values on key issues, but broadly religious fundamentalism and the violation of basic human rights using religious beliefs/edicts as a justification).

This real war is the ultimate untraditional war. Yet, the world has largely responded to it with traditional tactics….i.e., physical attack and defence. Hundreds of billions of dollars have been spent already, on physical conflicts in both Afghanistan and Iraq. Imagine what this money could achieve if appropriately redirected into fighting the real war….the war of beliefs.

I think it’s time to take a step back, somehow firmly but fairly extricate ourselves out of Iraq over time (I know this in itself is a huge issue, but I’ll leave my thoughts on Iraq specifically for a separate discussion. I will say I think it’s key despite all the past mistakes….to leave Iraq a much better and more peaceful place than it was and is), redefine and understand the real war against terror, and get cracking using more “untraditional” means such as economic policy, incentives, education, TV and the internet, opportunity and basic common sense and logic….to help the muslim world adopt a more moderate version of their religion (as has happened with other religions, including Christianity over the past few hundred years).

It won’t be easy for people to ignore the actual words from the Quran that are used by some to justify killing, discrimination against women, and other inhumane and backward practises….but this is religion….and muslims must adopt moderating changes themselves after debate and discussion….if they are to retain their pride….which is paramount when you are talking about religion and culture.

Tags Education, george bush, iraq, middle east, obama, Politics, Public Policy, war on terror | Comment (0)

Education Life People Politics Public Policy World World Affairs

How the middle east will be liberated

May 13, 2006 – 10:53 pm

Ultimately, I believe true ‘liberation’ and ‘freedom’ for the oppressed in the middle east (those that are denied opportunity and freedom….particularly youth, women and children) will have to be achieved by the people in the middle east for themselves.

Perhaps I am biased, being Indian (given our history of achieving freedom from the British through struggle). This freedom will be achieved on the ground over time with education, knowledge and a taste for how it feels to be able to determine one’s own future. Check out this great article from last week’s Wall Street Journal. To me, the media is the most important tool in helping bring information to people….so their own minds and hearts are changed. We should be spending billions on this….not mere millions. Look what TV, knowledge/information and opportunity have done for post-liberation India!!
Lastly, to clarify, I am talking about true internal change….not just a change in the broad, high level framework of government (which the US has facilitated in places like Iraq). The high level framework too is important…but not nearly enough in an of itself.Liberty TV

By KENNETH Y. TOMLINSON
May 6, 2006; Page A8

In recent weeks, we’ve heard a great deal in Washington about how we ought to be broadcasting to Iran. But it might be instructive to examine what U.S. international broadcasting is already doing.

Very recently, on a Persian-language satellite television broadcast from the United States, the people of Iran learned that Iran’s oldest and largest student organization, Tahkim Vahdat, urged the government to suspend uranium enrichment and to cooperate with the international community by restricting nuclear development to peaceful uses. The group called the government’s behavior “irrational and confrontational.” Needless to say none of this appeared in Iran’s government-controlled media; few rulers on earth exercise the degree of censorship enforced by the Iranian government.

Another program featured the story of Hossein Derakhshan, once jailed in Iran for starting an Internet blog. Upon his release, he managed to get to Canada where he now runs the most popular blog — in Iran.

Or consider this exchange that occurred on our nightly Persian-language news and current affairs program on the Voice of America.

Moderator, Ms. Setareh Derakshesh: “Our guests today are Mr. Bijan Kian, a businessman associated with the American Council on Foreign Relations, and Dr. Abbas Maleki of Sharif University in Tehran, who is currently a Harvard Research Fellow in the United States. Dr. Maleki, how do you see the possibility of direct negotiations between Washington and Tehran on Iran’s nuclear policies?”

Dr. Maleki: “From the beginning, direct talks have been part of Iran’s agenda. From Iran’s point of view, the nuclear issue is not a real problem. This is part of the overall process of development which is going on in all parts of our society, like nanotechnology, biotechnology, IT and so on . . .”

Mr. Kian: “It is amazing to hear about such claims as progress in nanotechnology in a country where there is widespread unemployment, poverty, drug addiction, prostitution, so many women’s issues and, finally, political repression and coercion. The real dispute is not between our two countries. It is between the Iranian people and the government of the Islamic Republic . . .”

Dr. Maleki: “Well! Using polemic language and slogans talking about political coercion is very easy. Even in the U.S., that technologically speaking is the most advanced country in the world, you still have poverty everywhere, unemployment and so on. Tehran is so much cleaner than New York. You can go and check the trash-ridden streets of New York. Go and have a look at poor people there. . . . Just look at the war in Iraq and Afghanistan and now this atmosphere of war the U.S. government is creating about Iran . . .”

Ms. Derakshesh: “Dr. Maleki: The majority of the people in Iran live under the poverty line — and Iran’s prisons are filled with political prisoners . . .”

Dr. Maleki: “Excuse me! You are the moderator yet you are passing a wild judgment.”

Ms. Derakshesh: “This is not my personal opinion, sir . . .”

Dr. Maleki: “Whose facts are these, where did you get them — that there are political prisoners in Iran?”

Ms. Derakshesh: “These are facts reported by credible international human rights organizations.”

Mr. Kian: “Whenever we talk about what is really going on in Iran, what we say will be branded as slogans by supporters by the regime. I have to emphasize that the American government is not in favor of war with Iran. Just look at what has been said by President Bush and his secretary of state.”

* * *
In VOA and Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty, the U.S. has a model illustrating how broadcasting news and information (i.e., the truth) can lead to the liberation of a people.

That certainly occurred in the former Soviet Union and Eastern Europe. Recognizing that fact, the U.S. Broadcasting Board of Governors moved to increase television and radio to Iran long before the current crisis in that country. In early 2003 we launched Farda, a round-the-clock, youth-oriented radio service to Iran. A few months later we began broadcasting daily Persian news and current affairs satellite television.

The television launch may have been modest — $1.9 million for 30 minutes daily with repeats. But we have come to recognize that satellite television is to the future what shortwave radio was to the past.

That daily program today is an hour (with repeats), and by September, thanks to better than $9 million from the Bush administration and Congress, we will be broadcasting four original television hours — with news, debates and call-in shows — daily. Funds in a supplemental now before Congress could increase these broadcasts even more — and strengthen our coverage.

Small satellite dishes are proliferating in Iran and there are strong indications that VOA’s nightly programming is becoming a staple for large numbers of Iranians. Telephone polling (which tends to undercount audiences living under repressive regimes) show that better than one-in-five adult television viewers say they regularly watch VOA’s satellite television programs.

As was the case with RFE/RL and VOA in the Cold War, it is important that our broadcasts are provocative — and credible. Intense journalistic supervision is critical to achieving this goal. Truth does not lie half way between the views of Washington and Tehran. But talk and debate programs give Iranians a taste of freedom — and enlightenment.

Ultimately, the future of Iran rests with the people of Iran. Just as in the Cold War when the people ultimately prevailed over their oppressors, it will be the people of Iran who will deliver their country from the tyrants who rule them now. To paraphrase Winston Churchill, we can give them the tools — information the mullahs don’t want them to hear and debate challenging the lies of mullah-sympathizers — and the people of Iran can finish the job.

Mr. Tomlinson is chairman of the Broadcasting Board of Governors, which oversees U.S. international broadcasting.

Tags culture, freedom, media, middle east, Politics, Public Policy, World Affairs | Comment (0)

Life People Politics Public Policy World World Affairs

Fitting yourself into a neat box: The problem with bundling opinions

September 21, 2005 – 11:03 pm

Some on this blog have complained about the use of labels to denote ‘bundles of opinions’. Liberal. Conservative. Democrat. Republican. Gay. Straight. Pro or Anti-Hindu. These complaints struck a cord with some of the feelings I have on this issue. Why do we need someone else…a political party, a social group etc to tell us which opinions and views ‘belong together’?

I have a practical answer to this question: most people don’t have or want to take the time to think through how they really feel about each issue that is important to our society, particularly if their own life is ‘OK’ in that particular area. So, they align broadly with a group or party…and vote based on this broad choice, thinking most of the time they will vote ‘right’ (i.e., consistent with a more thought through personal choice on any particular topic).

This practical consideration, however, doesn’t make me feel better about the choices available, as I believe they significantly (and potentially adversely) impact legislation ‘on the margin’ (i.e., active legislation today).

A few examples:

1. Why does a pro-free trade stance belong with an anti-gay rights stance? Trade doesn’t have much to do with religion.
2. Why can’t you be pro-teacher and pro meritocracy and pay-for-performance in education (charter schools in America)?
3. Why can’t you be pro-Hindu (one of the greatest, and most flexible religions in the world!) without being anti-Muslim?
4. Why can’t you be pro-business and pro-gay rights or pro-choice? Who do you vote for if this is the case?

I think it’s time we started voting for issues, not parties!!

Tags parties, partisanship, Politics, public affairs, voting | Comment (0)

Business Politics Public Policy World World Affairs

Capitalism: Imperfect, but our best available option

August 21, 2005 – 11:06 pm

I can’t help but offer an alternate view to the ‘critique of capitalism’ posted here a few days ago. Many critics of capitalism (including the author of the post above) compare the outcomes of capitalism (quoting the various ills in the world today e.g., inequality) to an imagined ‘ideal state’ that has never existed in the history of the world.

I’m a realist, focused on practical executable solutions (i.e., what should we do differently based on what we have learned) and believe the current outcomes of capitalism should be compared to the outcomes of pre-capitalistic and non-capitalistic socieities and economies.

This, more real, analysis reveals that although capitalism is by no means perfect (there are winners and losers in capitalism, just as there have been winners and losers in the evolution of our world. I believe the role of government is to mitigate the brutal ‘survival of the fittest’ results of capitalism), it is by far the best option available to countries and socieities seeking to improve their peoples standard of living.

Just go ask any Indian who tried to improve his or her families lot in life in the pre-1991 ‘socialist-democracy’ era and who has been trying to do the same post the 1991 liberalization of India’s economy. I think the answer is crystal clear. Non-capitalistic societies end up being extraordinarily political, with power, opportunity and information controlled by a few. Capitalism is an objective, fair system with the best (although not perfect) outcomes. I believe the best answer economically is a capitalist economy, balanced by government supported equality of opportunity (as much as possible – e.g., by ensuring equal access to education) and government provided ‘safety nets’ for those that fall to the bottom of the totem pole in capitalism.

Tags capitalism, economics, globalization, inequality, money, Politics | Comment (0)

rayman mathoda

Tag Archives: Politics

The tyranny of the majority

A New Focus for American Foreign Policy: Human Rights

Rascist slurs at McCain/Palin rallies should be denounced by candidates and party

A suggestion for addressing the root-cause of this financial crisis….from a (humble) Banker who has experienced it firsthand

Fighting and debating the wrong “war”

How the middle east will be liberated

Fitting yourself into a neat box: The problem with bundling opinions

Capitalism: Imperfect, but our best available option

Pages

Recent Posts

Categories

Blogroll

Archives