SONG OF THE YEAR!!!

我问天 a.k.a. Wa Meng Ti

翁立友

(Capo 1 = F#maj)

F Dm

风也真生气 Hong ya jin siu ki

Bb C

雨也真生气 Ho ya jin siu ki

F Dm Bb C

气我哪会无志气 Ki wa na eh bo ji ki.

F Dm

爱也消失去 Ai ya xiao xi ki

Bb Dm

情搁来斗缠 Qin ko lai dak ni

Gm C F

想妳想妳不知有啥意义 xiu li xiu li mm zai wu sia yi yi

Gm Dm

四界置探听 Si gei de dam tia

Bb Dm

叨位有妳的消息 Do wi wu li eh xiao xi

Gm Bb C C7

我的感情乎妳绑甲死死 Wa eh gam qin ho li bang ga si si

F Bb

我问天我问天 Wa meng ti wa meng ti

Dm Am

甘会冻麦创治 Kam eh dang mai chong ki

Bb Am

搁再爱妳 Ko zai ai li

Gm C C7

折磨是我甲治 ziag moa si wa ga ki

F Bb

我问天我问天 Wa meng ti wa meng ti

Dm Am

甘会冻麦创治 Kam eh dang mai chong ki

Gm Dm

想要放袂记 Xiu beh bang buay ki

Bb Dm C C7

我不知不觉醉十年 wa bu ti bu ka zui zap ni

F Dm

窗外的雨 Tang gua eh ho

Gm Dm

甘讲是男人的泪 kam kong si lam lin eh wi

Bb Am

不愿面对现实 Mm guang min dui kek si

Gm C7 F

梦中醉十年 mang tiong zui zap ni

It's not MY fault

eating McDonald's causes global warming and child exploitation.

is that shocking? but let's break it down a little. yes, McDonald's, due to its less-than-stellar corporate social responsibility (especially pre-McLibel) would not ensure that the beef it uses does not come from ranches which eat into the Amazon, hence each hamburger eaten (which figures into their projected hamburger sales for next year) [in]directly contributes to deforestation, destruction of carbon sinks, and increased greenhouse gases - ergo global warming. yes, McDonald's advertises to prepubescent gullible toddlers and hires teenagers who do not qualify for minimum wage rights - ergo child exploitation.

but we can break it down even further. it's pretty probably that not ALL McDonald's franchisees indulge in such corporate evils - there are store managers who go beyond their own prescribed standards out of personal conscience. still, the argument goes that as an entity with a certain unity at the highest levels of management, with a profit-based ethos squared solely on scientific efficiency, and accorded with certain superhuman legal privileges as a multinational non-human corporation, these minority managers would not likely ever buck the trend.

yet, there's still more to break down. as a consumer, it can't be my responsibility to prod a multinational into producing a conscience and acting accordingly! even if said entity is rather immune to traditional national regulatory bodies or even certain regional organisations. what can my eating one less hamburger do?

the truth is, it's rather simple. you are either with McDonald's or you're not. if you eat there, you're enriching them. no matter how small a margin the S$6 meal enriches them, you have quite simply shown your support. this is very very falsifiable: if you don't support McDonald's, you simply won't eat there. and btw, it's not the paltry S$6 that enriches them (much) - it's your abject apathy and/or nonchalant ignorance. consumers beget consumption: you either habitually continue in your buying patterns (often without much thinking) or you're likely to influence others to join in (e.g. eating with friends). your S$6 has a multiplier effect in a very real sense.

but then again... you might not know that McDonald's is such an enterprise. doesn't that absolve you? how can it be your fault if you didn't know... and certainly didn't do anything on purpose? i have a few other examples:

1. A toddler touches a hot kettle and get scalded. Is the negligent mother at fault?
2. An adolescent gets drafted into a gang while playing truant. Is the school at fault?
3. A heartlander buys $1 tissue paper from a disabled man who was actually enslaved by an exploitative syndicate. Is the buyer at fault?
4. A Sunday Catholic receives communion every week despite not having gone for confession in years; but she does not know she needs to receive communion in a state of grace. Is she committing double the sin? Is her parish priest at fault?
5. An uneducated hobo voted for George W. Bush because they share the same first name. Is he at fault for Dubya's mistakes? Is the minister for education at fault?

let me expand this further.

sometimes certain parties are responsible while others are not.

sometimes some parties are more responsible than others, but all are responsible in part.

sometimes many are responsible but only a few are culpable.

sometimes few are responsible but many are complicit.

"All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good men to do nothing."

usually the parties who are responsible do not want to be responsible.

usually those who are more responsible blame those who are less responsible, and those who are less responsible claim they are not responsible

usually the many who are responsible absolve themselves by hanging the culpable.

usually the few who are responsible cause disproportionate harm to the complicit, who have no idea that they themselves had contributed to their own suffering.

there is only so much time for us to remain in denial. at some point the self-destruction would become too obvious to deny. by then it's probably too late.

i'm facing it. it IS my fault.

sashiburidane

it has been a while... do i still care about sharing my thoughts? that is, the possible unidirectionality of this endeavour notwithstanding...

i have found myself lost - in my own sea of seemingly pointless thoughts, no less - on one too many occasions. having attained a state of self-debate where the self disappears into the debate, where the truth melts into infinite relative specificities, where existence and despair shake hands and make friends... i think it is time to give thinking a rest.

but what is resting? "taking a break from it all" carries such a nasty connotation. yet both are equally akin to "escape": a will-breaking hiatus which serves to deny everything that is existence - truth and doubt alike. a free-floating phase of nonchalance, utterly despondent to the flow of reality passing by; yet simultaneously dependent on that busy frenzy so as to identify itself.

i am not busy doing; but i am not busy being either. what does that make me? a contemplator of sorts? i should be too humble. the placid observer? a self-contradiction: cue the observer effect and schrodinger's cat. it is all too simple, and perhaps a little shocking - i am impaired.

my apparent break from what goes by the alias "life" was nothing short of an obtuse deflection of responsibility. it is heavy, and i am not ready - both statements of facts eternal. there was no way around it except a form of ludicrous stasis; schemingly staged to present itself as a distraught distracted disengagement. therein this hibernal farce, the mind goes into negative overdrive, seeking pleasure by escaping it; a form of masochistic torture. what truly did happen... only the insane could empathise.

nonetheless, in exiting this quasi-possession, the seat of self finds itself unaccustomed. was this what it was like to be in control? to make crucially thought-out decisions? to default on turning away and seize the day? i presume to know... but like all who are caught in life with their pants down, who knows? God knows! it is certainly time to embrace uncertainty as the crux of bearing life's crosses. make no mistake: i will be making fine mistakes.

at yet another precipice overlooking the horizon of possibilities, i stand, cowered, in awe... but this time, unassuming. do i dare say i have found myself? nope... but this time, i care.

opinions

i have many opinions.

some are based upon the emotion of the moment.

most, however, i would say are logical sentiments.

of course, there also exist the special ones which straddle both categories.

some opinions are important.

some, i think are important.

most, are probably just fragments of one person's perspective.

so then, why have opinions?

what can they do to the great big reality of the world?

what place can they have among the myriad theories, ideologies, and morals?

what am i to do with my opinions?

what will they do to me?

i'd like to think of my opinions as having some value.

some have great value.

many are probably small in that area.

but i can't imagine any of them having no value.

much less being of negative value.

if an opinion is in danger of having no value to me, i should not hesitate to eliminate it.

in fact, i cannot but expunge it from my soul.

but that's just one person's perspective.

i believe in my own judgement; but nobody else needs to.

i trust that the opinions i keep are good and useful.

i would even like to have them serve the great big reality someday.

someday... that perfect timing... but it seems, that someday is not today.

oh no, it does not seem anywhere near the horizon, that fateful someday.

until that day, my opinions seek shelter in my heart.

i have faith in them, that they will do great things for the world.

i look forward with fervent hope to that fateful someday when they are manifest.

until that day, my responsibility is to be patient.

the timing must be perfect for these valuable opinions.

the place of their revelation, as if foretold by prophecy.

the ears who would hear them, chosen by providence.

i have many opinions.

my many opinions have me.

but for now... all they can have is the safety of my heart.

where i will ponder over them, night and day.

where i will treasure them, for what they are.

where i will nourish them, until they are ready.

and when the great big reality finally calls upon them, they shall be afoot.

their candles ready to be lit, their lamps filled with oil.

when the ordained moment shall arrive, i will present my heart, strong and faithful.

her patience having paid off, she shall be renewed with radiant joy.

these pearls of wisdom nurtured to perfection shall then find their place amid the theories, ideologies, and morals.

and then we shall recognise that all along, we have shared these very same opinions.

the imagination

anyone can change the world.
each person is a part of the world.
how large a portion? that is a matter of perspective.
whose perspective? do certain persons' perspectives matter more?
that too is a matter of perspective.

i don't think it matters - every perspective matters.
these especially matter to the person from whom they originated.
a scholar or professor may say a certain thing, in how ever many words.
but the individual who listens only receives what s/he digests.
that is the perspective that matters to her/im.
that is the only perspective that matters.

so are we a fragmented hodge-podge of discrete realities?
are we really just a bunch of vaguely connected but ultimately separate bodies?
far from it.
so long as we can understand, empathise, and synthesise...
so long as we can interpret, intuit, and appreciate...
we are helplessly and utterly one.
it matters not the material matter that is discrete - not that much!
it matters that what this material matter carries can communicate.
and thus, we are all -
from the ones with least self-esteem or have lost all sense of dignity
to the ones towering above in awesome stature or full of pride -
an equivalent part of the world.

we make up reality.
we live in this reality.
we affect each other's reality.
and so we all have power - some seem more powerful, others seem less so.
but that is all merely seemingly so, for all of us are equivalent after all!
she who can change the lives of 1 billion may seem relatively influential,
yet she may not be able to change the heart of one daughter.
he who could barely love another person wholeheartedly
might have most deeply touched that person and most truly loved her without knowing.
we could all try our very best, thinking that the everyday is our responsibility;
that what we seem most capable of doing is what we should - or even must - do.
yet despite the immense planning and consolidated effort,
it is often that which is simplest which is most powerful.
we can be complex...
but we don't have to be so.

and with such a perspective...
can i change the world?
most definitely.
will i change the world?
i certainly hope so.
how will i change the world?
you tell me.

a thought on thought

why do you want me to think less?
or worse still: stop thinking?
did you think that i could?
did you think that i might somehow want to?
that thinking less or not thinking is somehow justifiable in my condition?
that my mission in life could do with less/no thinking?
or my vocation could somehow reason itself with less/no thinking?
why do you think i bother thinking in the first place?
was it all in vain?
do i ever only think vainly?
am i nothing more than a vain thinker?

question:
is this called "thinking too much"?
or is this called "the thinker stuck in an unthinking and unfeeling world"?

i do not know.
i do not dare claim to know.
you tell me.

Culture Unplugged Video

View this movie at cultureunplugged.com