Quantcast
Channel: Barely Uninteresting At All Things
Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 1759

February 11, 2020 in 2,782 words

$
0
0

• • • to set a mood • • •

• • • some of the things I read while eating breakfast • • •



Burying the Dead in Taipei’s Public Parks

The eco-friendly approach reflects Taiwan’s shifting funerary practices.


The tree burial area of ​​Fudekeng Environmental Restoration Park, Taipei. The rock says: “6, Fragrant Camphor Garden.”


TWICE A YEAR, THE CHEN< brothers Boris and Po-An hop onto the latter’s motorcycle and make their way up the mountainous district of Wenshan in Taipei. It’s a scenic journey that will take them past the leafy grounds of a solar farm that sits on a restored former landfill called the Fudekeng Environmental Restoration Park. The Taiwanese government implemented this urban rehabilitation project in 2003 to protect vestigial green space in the capital, hoping to repair damage caused by unfettered urban expansion through the 1980s.

The Chens continue driving until they arrive at a beautiful arboretum that was parceled off from the same area as the solar farm. It defies belief that this verdant sanctuary was once covered in waste. Here, the brothers set their cans of chilled coffee down underneath a grove of cinnamon trees. “Our mother’s ashes are buried there,” Boris says, pointing to a spot under the trees, about three feet away from him. No physical markers point to the presence of human remains. Aside from the Chens, there are four other people taking a stroll around the park. “The weather is not ideal today,” says Po-An, “or there might be more people.”


People gathered around a tree burial service.

Welcome to Yong’ai Garden, an area of land stretching across 1.2 hectares and one of two public parks in Taipei where tree burials have been taking place since 2007. The concept of a tree burial is simple: family members place the ashes of the deceased into a biodegradable container, and take it to the garden. They then choose from 13 clusters of almost 8,000 trees: cherry blossoms, osmanthus, magnolia, and camphor are some of the more popular options. The caretakers of Yong’ai Garden provide the family with shovels and direct them to the burial area they have chosen. They are careful not to disturb specific sites, marked by small iron rods, where another tree burial has taken place recently. The family digs a hole in the ground that is approximately half a meter deep (1’8”), places the ashes into the hole and covers it with soil and stones. The entire process is completely free of charge. In an innovative turn on traditional Chinese funerary beliefs, the bereaved are also encouraged to set up online memorial tablets for their loved ones, in place of physical gravestones.


Cherry blossoms are among the vibrant flowers of Yong’ai Garden.

Taiwan has the lowest birth rate in the world, faces the looming threat of almost half its population being elderly by 2065, and is constantly battling the problem of land scarcity. For these reasons, tree burials and other types of eco-friendly internment are becoming an increasingly popular and space-efficient way of dealing with the dead. Over the last two decades, large public columbaria, which enable the storage of urns holding human remains, have stalled the need for the development of more burial sites. These columbaria essentially serve as apartment blocks that house the dead. But as occupancy across columbaria fills up, the Taiwanese—especially those in densely populated cities like Taipei—must reckon with alternative methods of addressing death. The draw of tree burials is particularly strong because it is free, as compared to having to purchase a niche at a columbarium, which according to funeral industry experts cited by Quartz could cost upwards of NT 200,000 ($6,500)—a hefty sum, considering that the average monthly salary in Taiwan was NT 49,989 ($1,700) in 2018.



The U.S. Military Is Not Ready for a Constitutional Crisis

When I joined the navy, I swore an oath to support and defend the Constitution. But not once, in all of my training, did I receive meaningful instruction on the document to which I had pledged my life.

I spent nine years on active duty in the U.S. Navy. I served as an aircraft commander, led combat reconnaissance crews, and taught naval history. But the first thing I did upon joining the military, the act that solemnized my obligation, was swear an oath to support and defend the Constitution. How strange, then, that despite all of my training, the millions of taxpayer dollars devoted to teaching me how to fly, lead, and teach, not once did I receive meaningful instruction on the document to which I had pledged my life.

For most of my time in uniform, my lack of understanding about the Constitution was entirely academic. No one I served with imagined that we would ever find ourselves choosing between following orders and upholding our oath. Some were dimly aware that our compatriots long ago had wrestled with these issues. As an instructor at the Citadel, I taught my students about the My Lai massacre, and about the obligation to disobey an unlawful order. But it was theoretical. To my students, Vietnam was a faint echo.

Then, the global War on Terror hit its stride. We began to hear about black sites, where prisoners were detained in secret. We learned about the practice of rendition, in which captives were sent to other countries, beyond the reach of our laws. And we became aware of waterboarding, an extreme interrogation method that simulates drowning. I had left the Navy and was in law school when news of the torture memo broke. This was the George W. Bush administration’s attempt to offer a legal justification for “enhanced interrogation.” I had been through Survival, Evasion, Resistance, and Escape (SERE) school, the military’s interrogation training program, from which these techniques had been adopted. I understood the “enhanced” methods described by the Bush-administration lawyers for what they were: torture.

At the time, I found it unconscionable that legal scholars would be complicit in underwriting our government’s disregard for the Geneva Conventions. But with the benefit of hindsight, though I still find the torture memo appalling, I can at least acknowledge that the Bush administration cared enough about the law to offer the pretense of legality.


Trump puts Cuban doctors in firing line as heat turned up on island economy

After US allies expel foreign health missions, Havana warns that patients will pay the highest price for campaign against its scheme.


Doctors have recently been expelled from Bolivia and Brazil and returned to Cuba.

A Cuban medical programme that has helped some of the world’s poorest communities has become the latest target of the Trump administration’s escalating attempts to pressure Havana’s faltering economy.

Dubbed “Cuban doctors”, the celebrated – if controversial – humanitarian medical mission was founded more than half a century ago in the aftermath of Fidel Castro’s revolution, in part to enhance the country’s international influence.

Currently active in over 60 countries, the scheme has provided healthcare across the globe, from indigenous Amazon peoples to slum residents in Africa to the victims of Haiti’s 2010 earthquake.

Now its work has come under renewed fire via a combination of allegations, led by Washington, which has accused Havana of using the doctors to undermine democracy, not least in Venezuela – which hosts one of the biggest missions.

Havana has also been accused – in claims taken up by Washington – of “exploiting” the medical staff sent on the missions. One report suggested work conditions, low salaries and coercion amounted to “modern slavery”.


A Brief History Of Why America’s Healthcare System Sucks

Isn’t it kind of weird that your boss can decide whether you die of cancer? That’s effectively the logic behind employer-based health insurance. If you have it, you can get chemotherapy; if you don’t, then go ahead and be independently wealthy. If you can’t even manage that, then just die already.

Americans do not apply this logic to other necessary services. It’s not like if your house is on fire, the fireman says, “Sorry, you don’t have coverage for this, so if you want me to save your house, I’m going to need $250,000. That’s just to start. Steve’s really the door specialist, though, and that’s gonna be a whole other set of charges …” So why aren’t doctors provided as a public service like firemen, police officers, teachers, or lawyers? As with many terrible things in life, from the Cowboys to presidential assassinations, you can thank Dallas.

Even into the 20th century, hospitals were not places you went to heal. You went there to die, and that was pretty much it. Healthcare was barely regulated, riddled with snake oil, and extremely cheap. In 1900, healthcare cost the average American around 5 bucks a year (about $100 adjusted for inflation).

But healthcare rapidly improved with antibiotics, rigorous training, and scientific evidence. By the 1920s, clean and educated doctors could save your life, rather than just saw off a leg or throw cocaine at you until you died. But this came at a cost that most people couldn’t afford. Hospitals needed money to run. So that’s when administrators at Baylor University Hospital in Dallas hatched a plan. They offered healthcare to teachers on a rolling basis for 50 cents a month. By the time of the Great Depression, hospitals around the country copied the program by offering cheap plans to workers’ groups. Today you know that program as Blue Cross.

This program was hospitals negotiating directly with workers, though. How, then, did it become the standard for employers to offer private plans? It’s another oddity of the American system. Why would companies willingly shoulder the majority of an enormous cost for its employees? To understand that aspect of the American healthcare system, you have to mix in a pinch of Hitler.

Heads up if this is your first time here: When we say “history” we mean “Get ready for this asshole again.”


‘Why did she have to die?’ Mexico’s war on women claims young artist

Isabel Cabanillas de la Torre was shot as she cycled home last month in the violent border city of Ciudad Juárez. Her friends and comrades have little hope of justice.


A woman with a pink cross on his forehead takes part in a protest to demand justice for Isabel Cabanillas, an activist for women rights was murdered, in Ciudad Juárez.

They gathered in the chill of a high desert night, around a bakery on a street corner in the US-Mexican border city of Ciudad Juárez, to blend homage with mourning, love with sorrow.

Opposite them: a mural of painted eyes and the words “Te observan” – they’re watching you. And a self-portrait by the artist, Isabel Cabanillas de la Torre, 25, shedding a tear. It is a prescient touch: at the foot of the painting is a floral tribute to Cabanillas, who was shot in the head on 18 January while cycling home.

Days of rage followed: marches downtown blocking the Santa Fe border bridge; women wearing pink balaclavas to commemorate the victims of the rash of murders of women in Juárez during the 1990s and 2000s – of which this outrage is the latest mutation.

Tonight is music, conversation and celebration of Isabel’s metier: art, for sale tonight at voluntary prices towards a fund for her now motherless four-year-old son. “We’re doing what she would have wanted us to do”, said Arón Venegas, the founder of Pure Borde, the art collective to which Isabel belonged.


Graffiti and a pink bicycle at the scene of Isabel’s murder, Calle Ochoa, Ciudad Juárez.

Lydia Graco, a member of Pure Borde, said in a heart-wrenching moment: “Isa, we’re sorry we couldn’t stop your femicide. Forgive us, Isa, please. We owe you, comrade, we owe you.”


‘A lying, dog-faced pony soldier’: just what was Joe Biden talking about?

Biden called a woman a ‘lying, dog-faced pony soldier’ – but no one can find the film he thinks he’s quoting from.


Joe Biden with Madison Moore at the campaign event in Hampton, New Hampshire. His remark has left people wondering what Biden was referencing.

It was all going so badly for Joe Biden. And then it got worse.

Concerns for the former vice-president’s 2020 bid were mounting after he was caught on camera calling a woman a “lying, dog-faced pony soldier” at a campaign stop in New Hampshire on Sunday.

When Madison Moore, a 21-year-old economics student, asked Biden whether voters could remain confident in his campaign after his poor performance in the Iowa caucuses, Biden asked her if she had ever attended a caucus. When Moore said yes, Biden responded: “No you haven’t! You’re a lying, dog-faced pony soldier.”

There didn’t seem to be any hard feelings – footage showed the audience laughing at Biden’s quip, and even Moore seems to be having a little giggle.

But his remark has still left people wondering what on earth Biden was referencing.


Video Goodnesses
and not-so-goodnesses

Murray Siple’s feature-length documentary follows a group of homeless men who have combined bottle picking with the extreme sport of racing shopping carts down the steep hills of North Vancouver. This subculture depicts street life as much more than the stereotypes portrayed in mainstream media. The film takes a deep look into the lives of the men who race carts, the adversity they face and the appeal of cart racing despite the risk. Shot in high-definition and featuring tracks from Black Mountain, Ladyhawk, Vetiver, Bison, and Alan Boyd of Little Sparta.


Democratic presidential candidates go hard against Pete Buttigieg, and Joe Biden calls a woman a “lying, dog-faced pony soldier” at a campaign event in New Hampshire.

THANKS to Comedy Central and The Daily Show with Trevor Noah for making this program available to embed.


In the wake of the chaos that defined the Iowa Democratic caucus, Ronny Chieng goes to New Hampshire to find out if the state can pull off a smooth primary election.


On Friday, the President kicked off a post-acquittal purge of his administration, firing impeachment witnesses Amb. Gordon Sondland and Lt. Alexander Vindman.

THANKS to CBS and The Late Show with Stephen Colbert for making this program available on YouTube.


Seth takes a closer look at President Trump’s retaliation against impeachment witnesses as his attorney general works with Rudy Giuliani to keep digging up dirt on his political rivals.

THANKS to NBC and Late Night with Seth Meyers for making this program available on YouTube.


CAUTION: Some language may not be appropriate for work or children.

Me critical analysis of some drag defences people around the world can use against airlines and authorities.


やっと入手した”ねこじゃすり”。I got the new cat groomer.



FINALLY . . .

What a Viral Video of a Coyote and Badger Says About Interspecies Duos

Sometimes they’re buddies. Sometimes it’s strictly business.


A mutually beneficial arrangement.


WHEN HE SAW THE VIDEO of the coyote and badger, Neal Sharma was speechless. “The playful body language of the coyote first got my attention,” he says. “But when the badger snout entered the frame, it blew me away.”

Sharma is the wildlife linkages program manager at the Peninsula Open Space Trust (POST), the organization that recently released a short video shot under a highway near the southern part of California’s Santa Cruz Mountains. In it, a coyote dances playfully at the entrance to a culvert (a tunnel beneath a roadway), appearing to wait for the badger that follows. The pair then travel into the tunnel together. Nature-video gold.

They may seem an unlikely duo, but coyotes and badgers have a long-recognized relationship as occasional hunting partners—a phenomenon known to Native Americans and early settlers (and described in an 1884 paper in American Naturalist).

Out on the prairie, both species go after animals such as ground squirrels, but in different ways: Coyotes search, stalk, chase, and pounce, while badgers “are basically backhoes,” excavating tunnels and digging up animals hiding underground, says evolutionary biologist Marc Bekoff, a professor emeritus at the University of Colorado, Boulder. While shared prey makes them competitors, joining their skill sets turns out to be mutually beneficial.



Ed. More tomorrow? Possibly. Probably. Maybe. Not? Likely, perhaps.



Viewing all articles
Browse latest Browse all 1759

Trending Articles