However, just like my undergraduate years at university, all good things must come to an end. As of this moment I’m not planning on posting any new serious content on lomohut though the twitter updates will continue to update the main page.

This isn’t the end of my blogging career, far from it. Sometimes it’s better to begin with a clean slate and a name of your own. A new home if you will. While my new home is still under construction, once it is finished I will let you know.

UPDATE My new site is live (as of a few weeks ago). Check it out at www.james-vandyne.com

I have added a few things though that is neat for me and you might enjoy too. First is Twitter support. Twitter is a kind of “Microblogging” website, that is it is a blog that is limited for 140 characters per “post” and excells at being updated fairly often. Notes during the day, random thoughts etc.

What’s more, there are some awesome apps for iPhone and such that allow me to update Twitter without being in front of my computer of anywhere near WiFi (thanks to intertube connection on my iPhone). As such, I found myself updating Twitter more often than my full-strength blog and decided to go ahead and integrate Twitter into Lomohut, which you can see above.

The other is what I’m deeming a “Foodblog”. The idea is, since I am always taking photos of food anyway, I might as well use it to keep track of what I am eating day in and day out. It also adds some accountability so I “can’t” go out and eat a gallon of ice cream without posting (not that I’ve done that before). Maybe it will help me eat healthier. My current idea is anything and everything I eat.

I will be continuing to tweak this more throughout the week as I have time so be on the lookout.

Even though I was only gone for a year in Japan and have never been backpacking in my life, the film has a certain amount of resonance within me. It’s something I’ve dreamed about for a long time. I don’t want to say right now is not the right time to travel, because it will never be the “right time”.

It’s a matter of making something a priority in one’s life and finding a way, any way to achieve that. After all, “Maybe in sixty years I’m dead. I want to say, ‘I had a good life.’”

I’ve also got my plane ticket for Japan. Flight leaves a a few days after graduation. I will be returning in January for the job hunt etc.

Until next time.

People often ask what is the purpose of the United Nations, mistakingly believing that its purpose is to prevent war completely. In this post I will argue that preventing war is not the role of the UN and that if we assess it based its unique position in the international system we will discover that the UN actually quite effective.

Many people believe that the purpose of the United Nations is to prevent war. After all one of the purposes written in the United Nations Charter is to “maintain international peace and security…” However there is a large gap between maintaining peace and preventing war. Maintaining peace generally refers to using troops for peace keeping or using troops for peace enforcement, a nuance that we will get to in a moment. As a neutral third-party it is not the United Nations’ place to act on behalf of either states nearing a conflict as doing so would displace their neutrality.

Once a conflict has occurred the United Nations still cannot send troops in immediately to ensure peace and stability. This is where the nuance between peace enforcement and peace keeping comes in. Peace enforcement is military action to reinstate the sovereignty of a nation i.e. collective self-defnse e.g. Kuwait vs. Iraq in 1991. Kuwait’s sovereignty was breached and it called for collective self-defense to get Iraq out of Kuwait to restore peace and stability in the region. Conversely, peace keeping can only occur when all parties involved agree for the United Nations to come in and maintain order and they must remain neutral. The moment both nations do not agree to their presence they must leave.

Thus any military action prior to conflict must be preempted by many attempts at diplomatic and economic coercing. However as long as any issues remain internal to a nation the United Nations and its member states cannot legally make any actions militarily. Much of this is due to the fact that the international system is anarchical and that no state has the inherit right to manipulate other states.

This said I can imagine to most people without the ability to enforce peace preemptively or of its own individual will the United Nations is completely useless and irrelevant. However if we consider the United Nations has a unique position in this anarchical international system the relevance of the UN becomes clear. The UN is not a world government (as some like to believe), it does not have sovereignty nor any rights beyond those in its charter, and membership is completely voluntary. But because of its position outside of the state and existing purely as an international body it can act neutrally on a global scale.

With its existence outside of the state, voluntary membership, and neutral position, the ideal role for the United Nations is clear. Organizations and agencies created by the UN should be able to move about the world relatively freely to fulfill their purpose. The UN is not so much as a keeper (or enforcer) of peace, but rather the only organization that has the position and structure necessary to create, manage, and more importantly legitimize these international organizations. Thus any organizations or associations have the reach and neutrality necessary to complete their job without stepping on regional toes.

Today’s globalized world requires an organization that can manage global issues while maintaining state sovereignty. The United Nations is not perfect in its form and function nor is it necessarily the best organization through which to manage all international affairs. However, thus far for as per diplomacy, research, and administrative tasks on a global scale we do not have any other organization that has the international legitimacy and neutrality to perform this tasks. Simply put, it might not be perfect but it’s all we got. Given the choice between a global world with an United Nations-esque organization and a global world without I would pick the world with.

Everywhere I look in society I see madness. I see 4 dollar a gallon petrol prices yet people still drive their large trucks as fast as ever, seemingly unaffected, unaware, or uncaring. Politicians calling for change with an arrogant and stubborn population. It’s not entirely their fault though. The required change is fundamental and difficult. The house needs a good shaking.

Here I sit, a stranger in a stage land. Only the truth can guide me home.

When riding the trains (or at least the JR variety) they have been showing this cartoon recently that I’ve found quite funny called ダーリンは外国人 – My darling is a foreigner. It’s based on a manga and I picked up the first two the other day. I’ve only read about 60 pages into the first volume (of 5) so far and it is quite entertaining.

One of my favourite parts that I’ve read so far is when she is comparing a regular Japanese’ response and Tony’s (the main character) response when it comes to service. This example is a glass of wine with lunch that doesn’t taste good. The average Japanese response is more of a commenting on the flavor to the person dining with them saying something like “This wine is a bit….”.

But this guy! He calls the waiter over and asks for the manager. The manager seeing the foreigner automatically speaks to the Japanese person. At which point he has to interrupt with something to the effect of “Hey! Shouldn’t you be talking to me! I’m the one that is complaining”. He assumed that the foreigner doesn’t speak Japanese…

A common pattern in Japan sadly. A belief that foreigners can’t possibly speak Japanese, which simply isn’t true. I know there are people who have lived here for 5+ years and don’t speak a word of Japanese, which to me is unacceptable. If you are going to live in a foreign country, part of your responsibility as a foreigner is to learn to speak the local language. Unless of course you like 差別 (Discrimination), and want to be treated special. Me? I just want to be treated like everybody else.

Packing is depressing.

I have signed up to donate as many copies of Jisho and Byoyomi as needed for the PMC challenge, for research and treatment of cancer. The idea is simple: people buy software bundles (auction or otherwise) and all proceeds, minus eBay fees etc go to charity to help fight cancer, i.e. I nor Seth (the guy organizing this) makes a dime.

There is a lot of really great software and donors on the list (I am towards the middle). When the auctions start it will be a good time to get that software you’ve been craving for a while and help raise money to fight cancer!

You can get more information on the PMC Software page.

It is kind of neat to know that something that I have worked on and built could help people and also motivate people to raise money to research and treat cancer. I hope it’s a huge success.

One thing that always perplexes me is people’s desire to convert people to their side, to their political viewpoint. If they can’t convert them to their personal viewpoint they often try to silence them in their opposition. Examples of this could be communism in Japan from 1922 ~ 1946[1], democracy in Burma[2][3], or even communism during the Cold War in the United States.

They do it mostly for perceived political stability i.e. the current governing body doesn’t get its authority questioned. However, I would argue that limiting their freedoms, even if they oppose you, will provide one with the exact opposite of the desired effect i.e. your authority will be questioned at every turn.

If you ask yourself a simple question, who is the largest threat to a country’s government? A) current members of the government B) members of the public who like the current government or don’t really care one way or another C) people who disagree with the current government but can voice their opinions D) people who disagree with the current government but are silenced one way or another

Most would answer C. My answer is A and D – the people you least suspect or the people from whom you are inviting it.

History has shown us time and time again that leaders of countries are often betrayed by their second in command. They are already so close to the top, and once they are at the top they needn’t worry about possible punishment. Further more they also carry some clout within the body itself and as such can are positioned to make changes easier and smoother.

The choice a silenced dissident vs. a vocal dissident seems counter-intuitive – let me explain. A group of people who can express their opinions and wills freely, without fear of punishment will voice that opinion. This has a number of benifets: First it gets a lot of political unrest out of those being political. Just voicing their opinion will do wonders for them to think that the government is listening to them and that they are making a difference; Second it allows the current administrating body to keep a pulse on what the public thinks. Most governments that have this problem don’t care what the public feels about a particular subject, but even appeasing them ever-so-slightly would keep most happy – as they see “progress” towards their viewpoint.

Lets contrast this with a group who is suppressed. Straight off the bat you don’t know who is a potential member of the group you want to suppress. As such – every person automatically has to become a member of that silenced group by default. They must then prove that they are not a member ideologically in order to live normally. Almost immediately the ruling party has not only pissed off the suppressed group, forcing them underground to organize and plot. In addition they’ve also just alienated the entire population.

The only viable option is to allow political dissidents to voice their opinion, and listen to that voice. Government should represent the ideals of society and if the those ideals aren’t met or worked toward, it will be replaced. If the the demands by dissidents are just and change is needed, it must occur. If it does not occur the governing body’s time in power is limited.

[1] Communism was actually illegal in Japan until 1946 when it was legalized by the American occupation.
[2]Myanmar recently just recently extended the house arrest of Aung San Suu Kyi, a democracy advocate for another year. See the Seattle Times for more information.
[3] Myanmar. The current junta in Burma renamed Burma to Myanmar. As the United States government does not recognize the junta as the legitimate rulers, they do not officially recognize Myanmar.

A large portion of the book covers the flaws and mistakes in nutritionalism. That is eating a food for its nutritional value and not the food itself. That food is more than the sum of it’s vitamins and minerals. It’s not the carotene that makes a carrot healthy for you, it’s the carrot.

Perhaps the most scary thing about the book, is the waking up to the fact of how wrong the industry is. How processed the food, or rather food like substances as Pollan calls them, in today’s supermarkets are. The labels on food-like-substances that say FDA qualified, which if you read the fine print allows the makers of said food to make most any claims they want to. Disgusting.

Perhaps the best observation in the book is on state of the gas station. He says:

<blockquote>
    <em>"Don't get Your Fuel From the Same Place Your Car Does

American gas stations now make more money selling food (and cigarettes) than gasoline, but consider what kind of food this is: except perhaps for the milk and water, it's all highly processed nonperishable snack foods and extravagantly sweetened soft drinks in hefty twenty-ounce bottles. Gas stations have become processed-corn stations: ethanol outside for your car and high-fructose corn syrup inside for you"  (Pollan, 192)</em>
</blockquote>

Towards the end of the book he gives a number of food algorithms. Not hard fast rules, but algorithms that can help you eat real food. I have reproduced a few of the ones I liked the most below. Please keep in mind that there are generally a page or five to explain them, but even at face value they are pretty good.

• Avoid food products containing ingredients that are a) unfamiliar, B) unpronounceable, c) more than five in number, or that include d) high-fructose corn-syrup
• Shop the peripheries of the supermarket and stay out of them middle
• Get ouf of the supermarket whenever possible
• Eat mostly plants, especially leaves
• You are what what you eat eats too
• Pay more. Eat Less
• Eat meals

These are simple things that we normally don’t think about. Things so simple as eat meals have been lost on us. It should be a given, but many people fall into the trap of snacking. All day. Pay more. Eat Less. That is eat higher quality foods, but as they cost more – you will naturally eat less. You will probably be more apt to eat slower (and taste!) your food as an added side bonus.

There are so many good things to say about this book I can’t do it any justice. You really should read it. It will change your complete outlook on food. Unless you like to getting your food from the same place your car does.

To maybe wet your appetite here is a talk given by him.