Blog Writing : On Uncharitable Criticism/Name Calling

*Credits
There definitely are enough treatises out there detailing rules and standards for good writing style in blogging. And this would hold true with regard to the select words, ideas, and phrases to use to attract and invite readership to one’s blog. Teasing and goading those restless search engines to up rank one’s site in their search results.

There are even those which dispense recommendations on what subjects to write about for optimum exposure and penetration in the blogosphere.

Other works have ventured out into the world of proper etiquette and rules of conduct in blog writing.

But is there enough literature out there that addresses specific issues, say, concerning criticism, beyond just the tone and degree of civility in dealing with them?

With regard to uncharitable criticism which continues to be on the rise in the blogosphere, do we believe too readily what we hear or read about others, especially with regard to things that tend to bolster and validate our own pre-conceived notions about people and ideas?

Taking into account that we often render judgment on others – with prejudice, whether consciously perceived or not. Yet we are viscerally aware that frequently our judgments are influenced by our temperaments, tastes, moods, ambitions, and yes, even self-love.

Thus, it usually is the better path to refuse judgment on one person based on negative criticisms one hears from another. Many an innocent man’s name and reputation have been besmirched, not only when he is absent and unable to defend himself. But also when the man concerned refuses to stoop to the level of exchanging incendiary rhetoric or validating errant charges leveled against him.

We as a species are quite predisposed to feeling superior and justified when we criticize others. And in the process we are apt to exaggerate the faults of our neighbor. And trot in false courage and justified glee, knowing we have cavalierly humiliated or derided another.

And if inordinate interest in the criticisms is generated, it typically fuels and inflames more uncharitable talk.

Thus, still an effective way to show disapproval of back-biting is to seek shelter in the golden rod of silence.

We accept that everybody makes mistakes. And the human critic may very well “know” better than the others. But even then, that same critic may not discern the innermost motives and intentions of the person being criticized. In this light then, one has no right to reveal and delve on the faults of others, except to protect the innocent, to help the guilty person himself, or for the public good.

More importantly, we ought to remember we ourselves may object to being the object of such criticism if directed against us.

Speak now of the criticized one as we would want others to speak of us when we are criticized.

We ought to be more willing and predisposed to think well of others than to think evil.

And let us aim to leave all judgment, as much as we are able, to one where judgment resides.

For while man proposes, He alone disposes.

No Macbeth's Lament

Scanning through the global news, one can see that the world’s on fire. No, make that, in conflagration. Or in an uncontrollable firestorm? Brush fires are ablaze every which country one looks. Tinderboxes or powder kegs smoldering. Sparks flying over seared political and social landscapes. Not much need to elaborate, to convince any reasonable person.

So laments are in order?

Superficially, definitely yes. But a little cursory in-depth (like reading between the lines) and honest reading of news as reported ought to consign laments to some obscure closet. Or at least, unwelcome and undeserved.

But in a world of half-empty or half-full rivalries, it decidedly appears that the half empty crowds are on top of the heap. They hold sway. They define discussions –and more importantly, they are influencing societal opinions and values. Or could, at least, in many respects.

Consider this one specific instance.



While initially not much attention given by high-powered media, the news came out that the US now “officially” has a population of 300 million people, pushed largely by immigration comprising significantly of illegals. Making it the third most populous nation in the world!

This count could easily be challenged. For after all, who can count the illegals reliably? Government officials cannot even reliably count those clandestinely crossing the borders in number batches that can be sorted and counted easier than counting populations in urbanized areas.

The world’s most populous country, China, is suspected to show an undercount of its population, given the understandable dread held by its citizens in honestly declaring numbers of children beyond the proscribed number allowed by the government.

Thus, it should be quite as easily to also project that because the extrapolation is that there are 11 million illegals in the country already, then the “unofficial” count of US population ought to be over 311 million already.

And what’s with this milestone? For one, it has garnered for the country the “honor” as the ONLY industrialized country to register population increases. Made significant because peoples from all over the globe continue trooping in record numbers to avail of opportunities of bettering their lives, economically, politically and etc.

We assume then that those who are here, especially those who account for the increases, are indeed bettering their lives – at least comparatively speaking, i.e., compared to their old lives in their old homelands.

A good and laudable development, and a cause for some celebration, right?

But examine what dire prognostications the report highlights.

And make your judgment.

Here’s a sampling, whether this news is “a milestone for sure but is this a cause for celebration or anxiety?”

“….it is unsustainable, they say.”

“On a global scale the average US citizen uses far more than his or her fair share of the planet's resources…”

“there was also a global perspective to America's rapacious model of consumption”

“The US - with five per cent of the world's population - uses 23 per cent of its energy, 15 per cent….”

On Leaving The Old Homeland

Emigration is now so commonplace that people tend to take a lot of things for granted. Reading this tells us how the world has been revamped and reshaped as a result of continuous population movements from the time man got serious recording his history.

Yes, there are tedious well-articulated requirements imposed not only by the homeland of the émigré but also by the prospective host country – such as passports, visas, authenticated certificates of one’s circumstances of birth, marriage, etc; and even financial requirements. Quite daunting and at times costly hurdles.

But beyond these, I suspect many immigrants are not predisposed to confront and resolve issues relating to the intangible things required of them beyond the legal requirements for entry and permanent residency.

And the Philippines as a country for one is in such a vulnerable situation, gleaning from the number of its citizens leaving the country, literally in droves, either as temporary workers or as immigrants. I had intimated in a previous blog that FilAms in my very limited circles of relatives and acquaintances willingly give up only that part of their Filipino-ness that allows them to get by in their new environment, but tenaciously clinging to those that do not grate on or openly conflict with the social or political milieus of the adopted country. And this accommodation has not much regard to years of residency or citizenship. In other words, the length of stay does not necessarily dilute this concessionary view.

We could easily come up with a generally acceptable definition of what an immigrant is and one which would be generally acceptable:

An immigrant is someone who intends to reside permanently, and not a casual visitor or traveler. Immigration means "in-migration" into a country, and is the reverse of emigration, or "out-migration.

And we could pick from the following acculturation strategies (created by John Berry) that are opened to immigrants as possible choices:

1. assimilation – replacing one’s previous identity with that of the new host society.

2. integration – refers to the capacity to access aspects of the dominant culture, while simultaneously retaining an ethnic identity.

3. separation(segregation) – the group also retains its own culture, but does not want to have contacts with the dominant one. And segregation refers to society’s policy of exclusion.

4. marginalization – implies losing one’s cultural background, but being simultaneously denied access to the dominant culture.

While many may have criticized the model above as relying on simplified assumptions, critics concede it does amply define the capacity of immigrants to make choices.

Given the above, where do we stand as immigrants in other countries?

But first, of late attention has been focused on Mr. Jim Paredes, a third of the popular Filipino singing group, Apo Hiking Society, who with his entire family migrated recently to Australia. Attention deserved not necessarily because Mr. Paredes typifies the Filipino immigrant, but more because Mr. Paredes is a high-profile celebrity in a country that celebrates and enshrines celebrity-ness in its workaday life. And a little consequent furor erupted when a local article from a personal interview came up with a headline adjudged not factual, stating that Mr. Paredes had given up on the old homeland.

Then the other day, I got hold of the October ’06 issue of Filipinas magazine where in a feature Mr. Paredes journalizes his and his family’s experiences in Down Under. He delves essentially on the more mundane aspects of living in a new community in a new country, “concessions” he and his family have had to accede to, like doing housework, marketing for foodstuff, eating new food, etc.

Because he chose to delve more on the inner or interior changes of the family’s personal behavior, rather than aspects of its social behavior, his following statement on emigrating proved both interesting and revealing:

You got to leave things behind, and the most important thing to leave behind is the mindset you had back home.

Taking and understanding mindset in its strongest sense could mean a lot of giving up.

Here’s a definition from Wikipedia:

A mindset, in decision theory and general systems theory, refers to a set of assumptions, methods or notations held by one or more people or groups of people which is so established that it creates a powerful incentive within these people or groups to continue to adopt or accept prior behaviours, choices, or tools. ...

How much of Filipino-ness does one leave behind to be able to adapt well to the new environment?

While it may not translate to giving up on a country, it could entail a lot of giving up on one’s ethnic and cultural uniqueness. And as the integral demand of assimilation process of acculturation above, not only giving up but replacing one’s previous identity with that of the new host society.

And once one elects citizenship of the host country, the issue of allegiance starts to kick in it being a requisite in the oath of citizenship which succinctly defines the duty a citizen owes to the country. Acting as yet another thorny issue to be delved into and resolved by the immigrant.

And in our continuing search for the identity we are assuming or want to assume in our adopted country, one notices some reservation or reticence a Filipino may harbor in this journey toward self-actualization.

Thus, one can notice that many FilAms view with askance at the idea that he is expected to assimilate, resulting possibly from a dread that may have been engendered by the oft-quoted charge other compatriots have leveled about other Filipinos becoming more American than the native Americans.

Given the seeming complexities detailed above, an immigrant may opt for integration as the more acceptable path. Or maybe try to get lost or seek comfort in the hazy and often controversial world of multiculturalism, which in the US critics have blamed for cementing disunity in the community and slowing down education growth among minorities, among other things.

The question is somehow how the rest of the population views this choice. Thus, while integration allows equal access to everybody without regard to race or color, the continued retention of one's ethnic identity could appear as coming out from the separate but equal playbook, and encouraging division along ethnic lines. And perpetuating the uncomfortable practice of having hyphenated Americans.

On The Economic Front

Words could have bigger impact than numbers

Thus, intones the bannered headline of a short economic report on current developments in the US economy.

The report details the fear that certain data on falling prices could be easily misunderstood, I suppose even by those who are savvy on economic issues. This I say because sadly, I can surmise that the common perception is that the typical man on the street may not be nuanced enough to understand these developments.

We are wont to bewail the lack of focus and emphasis on economics in our secondary education, at least with the basics such as how the economy works in general, or as some dismissively rue, simply how to maintain and balance checkbooks.

I personally believe that this utter dearth of understanding of basic economic phenomena can be collated and proved from polls after polls directed at how the citizenry perceive the overall economy.

Thus, this heavy reliance on words rather than numbers has been with us for a while and extends beyond the issues propounded by the article.

The current situation is decidedly a good subject for discussion.

Consider the following developments.

Unemployment hovers around 4.7% and this level may be as near as the country can get to attain that full employment equilibrium as Keynes enunciated.

The DOW-Jones indices are treading on uncharted territories, breaching highs recorded in the past. Though we should not mistake their accomplishments as reflective of the overall growth and health of the economy, they do reflect the vibrancy of and confidence in the economy.

While the overall housing market may be slowing down after its almost decade-long phenomenal surges in numbers and prices, we should not lose sight of the fact that overall house ownership has also steadily increased in the same period, across most ethnic and economic status lines. And the continued influx of future immigrants will no doubt continue to press on harder on the housing markets to perform.

The size of the US economy continues to grow at very healthy rates, in spite of all the turmoil it has had to go through. One economist pointed out the US economy grew during the period of a few years at a size equal to the total Chinese economy. Astounding!

And we got blessed with an extraneous boost when crude oil prices started plummeting, and so gas prices are now rapidly going downward.

In the area of challenges, first we had the tech bust beginning of the new century, which when reckoned accounted for a few trillion losses in value of stocks, mostly tech stocks.

Then we had 9/11, which according to some estimates had the country, NYC being a crucial part of it, reeling from a loss of over 11 billion dollars during the first year. Then the two wars which to this writing we continue to wage, regardless of which side we may find ourselves staking our support.

Then we have to contend with the other global economies that are determined to challenge our dominant positions in world trade. And we should not forget to add the hate/dislike factor that some countries have tacked on to these challenges. With enough hate/dislike that some of its citizens are only too willing to do us harm both in person and our assets abroad.

And these moves related to global terrorism have made necessary precious treasures from our economy to be expended for our protection and security. Which expenditures could have been channeled to more productive and/or creative endeavors to grow the economy even more.

But still in the final count, we continue to exhibit those inspiring developments in our economy.

And on the political front, no serious economist will deny that government administrations do not really have control or influence on the overall economy, except maybe to step aside and allow the established and stable economic institutions to run their courses,. Still, one should be realistic enough to concede that the citizenry does give some credit to the sitting administration when these good things happen.

And of course, some blame when the economy goes bad.

Are we so inclined?

Just The Truth Please, Google Watches

“The reason why we are so willing to talk (or write) is, because by discoursing together we seek comfort from one another . . .
Avoiding superfluity of words, Thomas a’ Kempis.”

No doubt, talking, communicating, discoursing with each other is one predisposition quite difficult to curb or supplant. We long for company. We are by nature social beings. We are not complete unless and until we become part of the social structures around us, be they family, clubs, friends, gangs, office mates, and yes, even fellow bloggers.

This new medium of blogging allows us to pursue this yearning in a much more efficient and universal way, traversing beyond geographical frontiers and great distances.

And now also beyond just keeping touch with our little worlds, this new medium takes on a myriad of functions, not only in our social milieus, but also in such other narrower or more specialized areas as politics and business. This medium now transcends all aspects of human living. In all aspects imaginable. Namely, in education, news gathering and broadcasting, and still more countless others.

So pervasive as to be confusing and overwhelming.

And thus, aside from information overload, the more critical issue of where the truth lies in this swirling universe of data, opinions, news, images, etc. becomes truly a critical concern.

While in the pre-electronic stages, man could search through fewer sources, “bibles” that could be regarded as universally reliable in discovering and discerning known truths, such as why not, holy books and works of great men, in this now indefinable universe, where any eager beaver with typing skills and Internet access can add to the exponentially expanding chest of electronic knowledge base, learning the truth can truly be a very daunting task.

Take a cursory test, and browse through, for example, sites that do round-ups whether of political news/developments, or fitness programs, or sports, or science news, or even with uncontroversial subjects such as, say fishing. Or results of war?

One can readily get the impression that the world of knowledge and information has become one big “he said, he says” game. The head or tail odds game of learning where the truth lies. 50-50 chance of being right or wrong. (Though many would opine that truth usually hides somewhere in between two very opposing views.)

Regardless, the advent of electronic media has as a largely unintended consequence made arriving at the truth a more difficult task.

But let us not be disheartened, the maid of truth is not done yet. She continues to find ways to elevate her ways to man’s consciousness. With able assistance of the same tools that allow for the quick dispersal and access of available knowledge, we might be in the threshold of yet another milestone in the continuing flux that electronic technologies are bringing us.

Google predicts that in the very near future, we may be developing what it calls “truth predicator” software. While this eventual reality is not expected to unquestionably mark out truth in every and all statements made publicly available, we should be able remarkably increase the probability that readers/hearers can arrive at the truth.

As Google declares, “We (at Google) are not in charge of truth but we might be able to give a probability..”