Policy of the "Stupid Pricks" (4)

"After having lunch with chinese cuisine in a well-known Chinese Food restaurant,' Peace lily went on, "our minister wanted to know, "'By the way, if this project is being implemented, who will work on it?'

'O don't worry, said our investor, 'we have abundant labors, so we will bring in workers from China to do the work.'

'But, what about the local labors?' asked the minister.

'Oh, they can take part, but on condition that they must master Chinese languages, including Beijingese, Hanyu, Putonghua, Mandarin, Cantonese, and even Tibetan.

'But, this is a local project, why does it have to be in Chinese?' asked the minister.

'That is our requirement, and that's your misery!' replied our investor.

The minister assumed, if he refused, perhaps, even 'five times of apocalypse,' there would be 'no development if no investment,' and also 'the money will be dissapeared!' he thought like a businessman managed a country.

Seeing the minister was a little tense, our investor telling a joke, 'A farm worker greets Josef Stalin at his potato farm.

'Comrade Stalin, we have so many potatoes that, piled one on top of the other, they would reach all the way to God,' the farmer excitedly tells his leader.

'But God does not exist,' replies Stalin.

'Exactly,' says the farmer. 'Neither do the potatoes.'

'Tell me what you know about Communism,' asked the minister. While putting away the plate containing Egg Foo Yung he'd finished, our investor said, 'People in 1989-91 had to pinch themselves to make sure they were not hallucinating. Something extraordinary had happened in world politics. Suddenly communism had collapsed. Until then it had been one of the most powerful and widespread types of modern state. Coming to power in the October 1917 Revolution in Russia, Lenin and his comrades established an order which was reproduced in eastern Europe, China, East Asia, Cuba and elsewhere after the Second World War. In 1989 this communist order was removed from the face of Europe. In 1991 the same thing happened in the Soviet Union. Although China still claimed to be communist, its fundamental economic reforms meant that this was no longer accurate as a comprehensive description. Communist parties clung on to office in a few countries such as North Korea, Vietnam and Cuba; their geopolitical importance was a long way short of the power and prestige of the ‘world communist movement’ in its years of pomp. Communism was fast becoming a historical relic.

If one hundred years after the October Revolution of 1917 communism has become history, it cannot simply be confined to the past. The projects and experiences of world revolution, noncapitalist economies and collectivized societies of the twentieth century are a matter for reflection in terms of historiography, memory and the legacies they left behind. The endurance of communist regimes in some Asian countries and the integration of their economies into globalized capitalism (with the exception of North Korea) have stimulated interest, analysis and questions. This is particularly the case in light of postsocialist China’s influence in the world economy and world politics.

The seeds of modern communism germinated long before the twentieth century. The word itself—communism—was invented late, gaining widespread currency in French, German and English only in the 1840s. It has consistently denoted a desire to dig up the foundations of society and rebuild. Communists have never been half hearted about their purposes. They have focused a constant hatred of the existing order on state and economy. They have suggested that only they—and not their many rivals the political left—have the doctrinal and practical potential to transform human affairs. Some kind of egalitarianism lasted in their objectives on Determination and impatience to achieve change have been permanent features. The commitment to militant organisation has endured. But communism itself has not ceased to defy attempts at definition. No final meeting of minds is likely. One communist’s communism is another communist’s anti-communism, and this is a situation unlikely to change, says Robert Service.

What became known as communism in the twentieth century was the outcome of many influences. Its principal expression was the official ideology of the USSR and other communist states. Marx and Engels themselves—the originators of the doctrines which became known as Marxism—acknowledged three main sources of inspiration. Politically they were deeply affected by what they learned about Maximilien Robespierre and other radical politicians in the French Revolution at the end of the eighteenth century. In economics they admitted to having drawn strongly on the ideas of David Ricardo and other theorists who examined the extraordinary propulsive energies in production and commerce unleashed by capitalism in the United Kingdom. Philosophically they were fascinated by the writings of Hegel. Their fellow German had, insisted that history proceeds through stages which condition the way a humankind thinks and acts and that the great changes in social life not merely of a superficial or cyclical character: Hegel regarded the historical record as a sequence of progress towards an ever better condition of people and things.

Marxism’s co-founders were never uncritical admirers of Robespierre, Ricardo and Hegel. Indeed, Marx claimed to have turned Hegel upside down; and, of course, he neither accepted Robespierre’s specific political analysis nor condoned Ricardo’s advocacy of private enterprise.

Marx and Engels thought of themselves as working to synthesise the crucial discoveries of those who had influenced them; and they went on developing this synthesis through their middle and late careers. Both wished to be taken seriously as propagators of ‘modern’, ‘scientific’ and ‘contemporary’ communism. Their ideas were not to be sullied by association with most previous and contemporary thinkers. They were men in a hurry; they thought they were living at the end of the capitalist era and that the communist era was nigh. Neither had an introspective personality—and, apart from Marx’s brief comment on Robespierre, Ricardo and Hegel, they seldom enquired about the influences which had shaped their world-view.

Crucial to Marxism was the dream of apocalypse followed by paradise. This kind of thinking existed in Judaism, Christianity and Islam. Marx had been brought up in a Jewish family which converted to Christianity; the Engels family were Protestants. Marx and Engels as atheists later in their lives denied that true believers would be rewarded by eternity in heaven; instead they contended that they and their supporters would create the perfect society down here on earth. Christian doctrine predicted that unbelievers would meet a miserable end at the return of the Messiah. Likewise, according to the founders of Marxism, those who obstructed the advance of communism to supremacy would be trampled underfoot. The ruling classes of the day would come to rue their lordship over humankind.

Politics and economics were not the only matter exercising the minds of the radicals. By the early nineteenth century a strong trend had emerged among many thinkers. Physics, biology and chemistry made strides forwards greater than any achieved in the previous two millennia, For most thinking people—at least those who were not hewing coal, working weaving machines or digging canals—a positive excitement was in the air. They gulped it down. Then along came Darwin. Origin of the Species oxygenated intellectual life around the planet. Darwin’s achievement was to link the natural and human sciences. His theory of evolution postulated that the various animal species derived over millions of years from crude, simple-life forms which adapted themselves to their physical environment in a struggle which ended in the 'survival of the fittest.' Higher forms of life supplented lower ones. This way of thinking had enormous appeal for radical militants who eulogised the need for political battle and asserted that one specific group—the working class—would win it.

Marx and Engels thought in terms of stages of transformation which involved ruptures of a macroscopic nature. Despite their admiration for Darwin, they were drawn to notions of sharp breaks between one kind of political and social ‘order’ and another. A preoccupation with historical stages from the beginning of recorded time to the present was not new. The Greeks since the poet Hesiod, if not before, had believed that the golden age had yielded to the silver and then to the bronze. Hesiod was a pessimist: each age was worse than the one before. Later thinkers contended that big changes were inevitable but that deterioration was not inevitable. Down to Giambattista Vico in the eighteenth century, they argued that transformations were of a cyclical kind. Things underwent alteration but after time reverted to their original condition—and then, needless to say, they moved further round the old circle. Not everyone accepted such ways of thinking.

The founders of Marxism put class struggle at the forefront of their analysis; they said the working class (or the proletariat ) would remake the politics, economics and culture of the entire world. Messianism had crept in again here. Judaism and Christianity projected the arrival on earth of a Saviour who would strike down the enemies of God and raise up a community of perfection. Salvation according to Marx and Engels would come not through an individual, but through a whole class. The proletariat’s experience of degradation under capitalism would give it the motive to change the nature of society; and its industrial training and organisation would enable it to carry its task through to completion. The collective endeavour of socialist workers would transform the life of well-meaning people—and those who offered resistance would be suppressed.

Politics, they suggested, would cease to exist. This was no new idea. Jean-Jacques Rousseau in the late eighteenth century had suggested that public affairs ought to be guided by what he called the General Will. Marx and Engels followed Machiavelli in rejecting morality principle for action. They wanted to focus a glacial eye on their situation. They embraced scientific principles of analysis and recommendation. This was a legacy of the European Enlightenment. Scottish, French and English thinkers exercised a huge impact on them. David Hume and Voltaire had taken a scalpel to the fat of superstition and prejudice.

Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels provided the inspiration for twentieth century communism. No one else so effectively captivated minds on the political far left or drew other minds to that standpoint. The gusto of their writings and their politicking was tremendous. Few other variants of communist ideology any longer came under consideration outside the rarefied atmosphere of scholarly or sectarian groups. Marxism and communism for most people were co-extensive. The kind of Marxism which they knew about was to a greater or lesser extent linked to the interpretation offered by Lenin and the makers of the October 1917 Revolution in Russia.

They died in exile in the United Kingdom. Marx expired on 14 March 1883 in his family house in north London. Engels lived a dozen years more; he passed away on 5 August 1895. Both were Germans. They were bright students. They were well schooled; they read voraciously in European literature and contemporary public debates—Marx was especially expert in ancient Greek philosophy. They quickly rejected the staid bourgeois life projected for them.

They had declared in The Communist Manifesto: ‘A spectre is haunting Europe—the spectre of communism. All the powers of old Europe have entered into a holy alliance to exorcise this spectre: Pope and Tsar, Metternich and Guizot, French Radicals and German policespies. They declared, with more than a little exaggeration: ‘Communism is already acknowledged by all European powers to be itself a power.’

The future was specified. Marx and Engels predicted a final struggle between the ‘bourgeoisie’ and the ‘proletariat’ under capitalism. The outcome, they said, was inevitable: the supremacy of the proletariat. The proletariat was the name used increasingly by socialist intellectuals for the working class. Marx and Engels saw employed workers as the future saviour of mankind. They gave little mind to the unemployed. They, like most bourgeois of the period, had no time for those people at the very base of society who had no regular occupation; they despised the so-called lumpenproletariat as a bunch of thieves and indolent ne’erdo-wells. The great revolution, they believed, required an active force of organised, skilled and literate industrial labourers.

The ultimate objective for Marx and Engels was the creation of a worldwide communist society. They believed that communism had existed in the distant centuries before ‘class society’ came into being. The human species had supposedly known no hierarchy, alienation, exploitation or oppression. Marx and Engels predicted that such perfection could and inevitably would be reproduced after the overthrow of capitalism. ‘Modern communism’, however, would have the benefits of the latest technology rather than flint-stones. It would be generated by global proletarian solidarity rather than by disparate groups of illiterate, innumerate cavemen. And it would put an end to all forms of hierarchy.

Politics would come to an end. The state would cease to exist. There would be no distinctions of personal rank and power. All would engage in self-administration on an equal basis. Marx and Engels chastised communists and socialists who would settle for anything less. They were maximalists. No compromise with capitalism or parliamentarism was acceptable to them. They did not think of themselves as offering the watchword of ‘all or nothing’ in their politics. They saw communism as the inevitable last stage in human history; they rejected their predecessors and rival contemporaries as ‘utopian’ thinkers who lacked a scientific understanding.'"

"You might say, 'Why talk about Communism, they have already disbanded anyway!'" said Peace lily. "But let's observe, forty-five years after democracy apparently triumphed over communism without a final struggle, nearly thirty years on, the anti-communist victory of 1989 seemed more problematic. Authoritarianism without a mass party has recovered in Russia, and even in countries earlier designated as 'the West'. The communist regime in China, of course, did not yield: 1989's demonstrations in Beijing were crushed. Still Chinese communism was on its way to developing a new hybrid authoritarian structure that allowed for capitalism without democracy.

We'll continue our investor story in the next session, bi 'idhnillah."

Then Peace lily sang a song,

Deep in the dark, I don't need the light

There's a ghost inside me

It all belongs to the other side

We live, we love, we lie ***)

[Session 5]
[Session 3]

Bahasa

Policy of the "Stupid Pricks" (3)

"Enjoying the minister's treat of warm asparagus soup in a classy hotel, which, according to our Chinese investor, he had never tasted in his own country—and indeed, there was something interesting in the Land of Archipelago, sometimes, a news was typed in a hurry, so a 'poor guy' might be possibly typo as a 'cool guy'—then investor told a story, 'In a never never time, which was of course different from today, where now man can only 'talk to the walls,' whereas on that time, man could talk to trees.

Well, there was a man, walking languidly among the trees. He had walked here and there, begging the trees for help, but he was always rejected. Talking to the sugar cane tree, rejected; talking to Bougainvillea flowers, rejected, talking to Patchouli leaves, rejected, even talking to cacti, rejected. Finally, he sat under an apple tree. He was tired, he slept in her shade.

When he awoke, the tree greeted him, 'O come, son of man. Come and climb up my trunk and swing from my branches and eat apples and play in my sshadow and therefore, be happy!'

'I'm too big to climb and play,' said the man. 'I want to buy things and have fun. I want some money. Can you give me some money?'

'I'm sorry,” said the tree, 'I have no money.'

The tree felt sorry for the man. Just imagine, who wouldn't feel sorry for him, whose face looked like a 'bumpkin—when in fact, and the tree hadn't realized it yet, the man, by borrowing and combining expressions of a reformer and a philosopher, was nothing but a 'stupid prick'. Wise men said, 'Only fools rush in, so don't judge a book just by its theatrical action!'

'I have only leaves and apples,' said the tree. 'Take my apples, and sell them in the city. Then you will have money and you will be happy.'

And so the man gathered the apples and the leaves, then carried them away. The apple tree was amazing, her fruits had many colors, , from red, which was dominant, yellow, green, and recently, there was also blue. Are there any apples that are blue? Maybe bluish, like a blue spruce.

The man made the leaves into a crown and put it on his head. He looked like a theatrical play King of the forest. While leaving, he said to the tree, 'Don't worry, I'll be back! And when I come to you, all of this land, will have a right of ownership.'

The apple tree proved to be true, with the apple and its leaves, the man became rich and was chosen to be the village chief. The festive party lasted seven days and seven nights. Food was served and dancing was held. The party was so magnificent that a guest from abroad commented about the meal, '...almost beyond anything Hollywood could've pulled together...' rendering our Chieftain looked blushing.

While our Chieftain was busy with, 'The way of Ninja!', that's his son's slogan, the apple tree, waiting and waiting, the man didn't come. Whether it was forgotten, or deceived, certainly, the apple tree was crying. It was so sad as a storm came to hit her, causing her leaves fall, in an instant, she turned into a barren tree. Tomorrow, the days will start to get longer, but the storm, has just begun. Thus, is it possible for the apple tree will be 'Homelessness'?'"

"Let's pause our Investor's story for a moment," Peace lily interrupted. "Allow me to tell you about 'Homelessness.'

There is nothing new about homelessness, says David Levinson. There have been homeless people for some 10,000 years—from the time when humans built their first permanent homes in the first towns of the Fertile Crescent. The historical record, novels and poems, and sacred texts tell us the stories of beggars, wandering ascetics, penniless friars, displaced peasants, lost soldiers, street youths, vagrants, new arrivals in the city, and displaced workers.

Homelessness [the state of having no home or permanent residence. Whereas 'Homeless' (of a person) without a home or permanent residence, and therefore typically living on the streets] when viewed cross-culturally, is a complex issue. In many developed nations, homeless families, many of them immigrants, are the major issue. In the developing nations of Asia, Africa, and Latin America, the homeless are often women and their children, youths, and migrants from rural areas who have come to cities looking for work and opportunity. The emergence of many cities in developing nations as major regional or global commercial centers has made the problem even worse, by increasing the appeal of cities as employment centers to the rural poor while at the same time providing less and less affordable housing and support services for immigrants.

Homelessness is one of the least understood social issues. The public image of homelessness and public perceptions of the nature and causes of homelessness have little relation to the reality of the situation. Experts have yet to agree on a single definition or criterion to measure homelessness. The homeless experience high levels of social, emotional, and physical problems.

It's not easy to understand what the causes of Homelessness, because the factors that explain contemporary homelessness are so complex and intertwined. Several quantitative studies have sought to determine what factors are most associated with increased homelessness. Martha Burt found that homelessness was associated with increased unemployment, single parenthood, reduced public benefits, and high housing and living costs.

One of the causes of Homelessness in India, Indonesia and Puerto Rico, is Forced eviction. Katherine Brickell, Melissa Fernández Arrigoitia, and Alex Vasudevan (2017) wrote that Forced eviction, claims UN-Habitat, is a ‘global phenomenon’ and ‘global crisis’. Figures published by the agency indicate that during the 2000s, at least 15 million people globally were forcibly evicted. According to Amnesty International (2012), between 2007–2009 alone, over 4.5 million people were affected. Forced evictions are, ‘when people are forced out of their homes and off their land against their will, with little notice or none at all, often with the threat or use of violence’. On 2017, forced evictions in the name of ‘progress’ are attracting attention as growing numbers of people in the Global South are ejected and dispossessed from their homes, often through intimidation, coercion and the use of violence. At the same time, we have also witnessed the intensification of a ‘crisis’ urbanism in the Global North characterized by new forms of social inequality, heightened housing insecurity and violent displacement. These developments have led to an explosion of forced evictions supported by new economic, political and legal mechanisms, and increasingly shaped by intensifying environmental change. As UN-Habitat & UNHRP have recently concluded, ‘accelerating urbanization, climate change and globalization, financial and other global crises have contributed to making forced evictions even more acute and complex’.

Forced evictions, according to Brickle, et al, are themselves nothing new and that the elementary brutalities associated with displacement and dispossession must be located within a much wider historical narrative. As Stuart Elden has reminded us, ‘conflict over land, at a variety of scales, is a major factor in human affairs and […] its effects have been almost entirely negative’. According to Elden, such effects are often intimately intertwined with struggles over property and ownership and have depended on historically specific forms of allocation and distribution and equally contingent expressions of control, power and violence. These tendencies have assumed an important role within the history of capitalism and many, in this context, have singled out its constitutive dependency on the logics of primitive accumulation, violence and displacement. The relationship of eviction and expulsion to the enclosure of common lands and more recent forms of land-grabbing is thus well-established. A number of scholars have also highlighted the concomitant emergence of a settler colonialism as a conspicuously violent form of domination and dispossession.

Forced evictions are far more than the result of an individual’s or an institution’s decision or action. They are also part of a larger assemblage of elements, conditions, materials and knowledges. Forced evictions are often intensely traumatic experiences, for more attention to the emotional and differentiated impacts that forced eviction brings. A critical optic is now needed that acknowledges and attends to the different affective and emotional registers of displacement and dispossession and the un-making of home spaces. As Richardson identify, ‘Although physical and economic losses are the most apparent impacts of forced land evictions, there exist serious mental health consequences for those who experience or who are at risk of losing their land.’ The violent logic contained and enacted through forced evictions is also, always, a fragile performance of power that must contend with the people and places infracted upon, before, during and after the intervention. The profound emotional and material dislocations that the loss of home produces is therefore not prefigured as a closed or final defeat, but as a generative environment for varied forms of resistance and contestation to formal organization and protest. Whether individual or collective, organized or spontaneous, any reluctance to submit to a forced eviction is continually exposed to criminalization, framed as an actual or potential security threat that must be contained.

According to UN-Human Rights, 'Forced evictions constitute gross violations of a range of internationally recognized human rights, including the human rights to adequate housing, food, water, health, education, work, security of the person, freedom from cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment, and freedom of movement.

Forced evictions are often linked to the absence of legally secure tenure, which constitutes an essential element of the right to adequate housing. Forced evictions share many consequences similar to those resulting from arbitrary displacement, including population transfer, mass expulsions, mass exodus, ethnic cleansing and other practices involving the coerced and involuntary displacement of people from their lands and communities.

As a result of forced evictions, people are often left homeless and destitute, without means of earning a livelihood and often with no effective access to legal or other remedies. Forced evictions intensify inequality, social conflict, segregation and invariably affect the poorest, most socially and economically vulnerable and marginalized sectors of society, especially women, children, minorities and indigenous peoples.

The impacts of forced evictions go far beyond material losses, leading to greater inequality, marginalization and social conflicts. In the context of development, infrastructure projects, land acquisitions, urban renewal and mega events, eviction impact assessments are needed to: consider the wide range of impacts, and argue in favour of less harmful solutions and alternatives to the foreseen project; estimate the real costs related to eviction and displacement of individuals and community that goes far beyond the mere market price of physical structures; and allow for a better quantification of claims, including in regard to compensation.'

We'll carry on our Investor's story on the next session, bi 'idhnillah."

Peace lily then sang a song,

Masih sukakah kau mendengar

[Do you still like to hear]

dengus nafas saudara kita yang terkapar?

[the sigh of our sprawling brothers?]

Masih sukakah kau melihat

[Do you still like to see]

butir keringat kaum kecil yang terjerat

[beads of sweat of entangled helpless people]

oleh slogan-slogan manis sang hati laknat?

[by the sweet slogans of the cursed heart?]

Oleh janji-janji muluk tanpa bukti? **)

[By grandiose promises without proof?]

[Session 4]
[Session 2]

Bahasa

Policy of the "Stupid Pricks" (2)

"Next day, our Chinese investor was stricken with flu, cold, fever and headache. Imagine, he had already taken off his clothes and just wearing underwear, but the swimming party was cancelled. The strong roar of beach wind made his stomach rumble.

In the hotel restaurant, while tasting a bowl of warm shrimp asparagus soup, the investor complained to the minister, 'The United Nations is very concerned about environmental pollution, and our country is thinking about how to get rid of pollutants.'

Trying to empathize, the minister responded, 'Oh, if that so, just move them to our place. We use to live with pollutants, taking mutual advantage and friends with benefits,' Peace Lily continued her discussion with Wulandari.

She then said, "The contamination of air, water, or food in such a manner as to cause real or potential harm to human health or well-being, or to damage or harm nonhuman nature without justification is called Environmental Pollution.

Pollution, according to I.L. Pepper, C.P. Gerba, and M.L. Brusseau, is the accumulation and adverse affects of contaminants or pollutants on human health and welfare, and/or the environment. Contaminants can result from waste materials produced from the activity of living organisms, especially humans. However, contamination can also occur from natural processes such as arsenic dissolution from bedrock into groundwater, or air pollution from smoke that results from natural fires. Pollutants are also ubiquitous in that they can be in the solid, liquid, or gaseous state. Pollution is also produced as an indirect result of human activity. For example, fossil fuel burning increases atmospheric carbon dioxide levels and increases global warming. Other classes of pollutants can occur due to poor waste management or disposal, which can lead to the presence of pathogenic microorganisms in water. Another example of pollution due to human activity is accidental spillage of organics that can be toxic, such as chlorinated solvents or petroleum hydrocarbons that contaminate groundwater. Some common contaminants that find their way into the environment, with the potential to adversely affect human health and welfare.

The environment plays a key role in the ultimate fate of pollutants. The environment consists of land, water, and the atmosphere. All sources of pollution are initially released or dumped into one of these phases of the environment. As pollutants interact with the environment, they undergo physical and chemical changes, and are ultimately incorporated into the environment. The environment thus acts as a continuum into which all waste materials are placed. The pollutants, in turn, obey the second law of thermodynamics: matter cannot be destroyed; it is merely converted from one form to another. Thus, taken together, the way in which substances are added to the environment, the rate at which these wastes are added, and the subsequent changes that occur determine the impact of the waste on the environment. It is important to recognize the concept of the environment as a continuum, because many physical, chemical, and biological processes occur not within one of these phases, such as the air alone, but rather at the interface between two phases such as the soil/water interface.

Some pollutants, such as microbial pathogens, are entirely natural and may be present in the environment at very low concentrations. Even so, they are still capable of causing pathogenic diseases in humans or animals. Such natural microorganisms are also classified as pollutants, and their occurrence within the environment needs to be carefully controlled.

The question of when harm to nature is still very much related to, once again, Ethics,

As you all know, Ethics is the systematic analysis of morality. Morality, in turn, is the perceptions we have of what is right and wrong, good or bad, or just or unjust. We all live by various moral values such as truth and honesty. Some, for example, find it very easy to tell lies, while others will almost always tell the truth. If all life situations required nothing more than deciding when to tell the truth or when to lie, there would be no need for ethics. Very often, however, we find ourselves in situations when some of our moral values conflict. Do we tell our friend the truth, and risk hurting his feelings, or do we lie and be disloyal? How do we decide what to do ? Ethics makes it possible to analyze such moral conflicts, and people whose actions are governed by reflective ethical reasoning, taking into account moral values, are said to be ethical people.

We generally agree among ourselves to be ethical (that is, to use reflective and rational analysis of how we ought to treat each other) because to do so resuits in a better world. If we did not bother with morality and ethics, the world would be a sorry place, indeed. Imagine living in an environment where nobody could be trusted, where everything could be stolen, and where physically hurting each other at every opportunity would be normal. While some societies on this globe might indeed be like that, we must agree that we would not want to live under such conditions. So we agree to get along and treat each other with fairness, justice, and caring, and to make laws to govern those issues of greatest import and concern.

The most important point is that ethics only makes sense if we assume reciprocity—the ability of others to make rational ethical decisions. You don't lie to your friend, for example, because you don't want him or her to lie to you. To start lying to each other would destroy the caring and trust you both value. Truth-telling therefore makes sense because of the social contract we have with others, and we expect others to participate. If they do not, we do not associate with them, or if the breach of the contract is great enough, we send them to jail and remove them from society.

The most important point is that ethics only makes sense if we assume reciprocity—the ability of others to make rational ethical decisions. You don't lie to your friend, for example, because you don't want him or her to lie to you. To start lying to each other would destroy the caring and trust you both value. Truth-telling therefore makes sense because of the social contract we have with others, and we expect others to participate. If they do not, we do not associate with them, or if the breach of the contract is great enough, we send them to jail and remove them from society.

Much of our history of Civilizations has been characterized as exploitation, destruction, and noncaring for the environment. Why are we such a destructive species? Various arguments have been advanced to explain the roots of our environmentally destructive tendencies, including our social and economic structure, and our acceptance of technology, even religion.

According to J. Jeffrey Peirce, Ruth F. Weiner, and P. Aarne Vesilind, it seems farfetched to blame our environmental problems on our religions, because religions provide Environmental Ethics.

Then what about Science and Technology? It has become fashionable to blame environmental ills on increased knowledge of nature (science) and the ability to put that knowledge to work (engineering). During the industrial revolution the Luddite movement in England violently resisted the change from cottage industries to centralized factories; in the 1970s a pseudo-Luddite 'back-to-nature' movement purported to reject technology altogether. However, the adherents of this movement made considerable use of the fruits of the technology they eschewed, like used vans and buses, synthetic fabrics, and, for that matter, jobs and money.

Peirce, Weiner, and Vesilind say suggest that people who blame science and technology for environmental problems forget that those who alerted us early to the environmental crisis like Rachel Carson, Aldo Leopold, and Barry Commoner, were scientists, sounding the environmental alarm as a result of scientific observation. Had we not observed and been able to quantify phenomena like species endangerment and destruction, the effect of herbicides and pesticides on wildlife, the destruction of the stratospheric ozone layer, and fish kills due to water pollution, we would not even have realized what was happening to the world. Our very knowledge of nature is precisely what alerted us to the threats posed by environmental degradation.

If knowledge is value-flee, is technology to blame? if so, less technologically advanced societies must have fewer environmental problems. But they do not. The Maori in New Zealand exterminated the moa, a large flightless bird; there is considerable overgrazing in Africa and on the tribal reservations in the American Southwest; the ancient Greeks and Phoenicians destroyed forests and created deserts by diverting water. Modern technology, however, not only provides water and air treatment systems, but continues to develop ways in which to use a dwindling natural resource base more conservatively. For example, efficiency of thermal electric generation has doubled since World War II, food preservation techniques stretch the world's food supply, and modern communications frequently obviate the need for energy-consuming travel, and computer use has markedly decreased the use of paper.

If knowledge is value-flee, is technology to blame? if so, less technologically advanced societies must have fewer environmental problems. But they do not. The Maori in New Zealand exterminated the moa, a large flightless bird; there is considerable overgrazing in Africa and on the tribal reservations in the American Southwest; the ancient Greeks and Phoenicians destroyed forests and created deserts by diverting water. Modern technology, however, not only provides water and air treatment systems, but continues to develop ways in which to use a dwindling natural resource base more conservatively. For example, efficiency of thermal electric generation has doubled since World War II, food preservation techniques stretch the world's food supply, and modern communications frequently obviate the need for energy-consuming travel, and computer use has markedly decreased the use of paper.

If technology is not to blame, does it have the 'wrong' values, or is it value-free? Is knowledge itself, without an application, right or wrong, ethical or unethical? J. Robert Oppenheimer faced this precise dilemma in his lack of enthusiasm about developing a nuclear fusion bomb. Oppenheimer considered such a weapon evil in itself. Edward Teller, usually credited with its development, considered the H-bomb itself neither good nor evil, but wished to keep it out of the hands of those with evil intent (or what he perceived to be evil intent). The developers of the atomic bomb, although defending the position that the bomb itself was value-free, nonetheless enthusiastically promoted the peaceful uses of atomic energy as a balance to their development of a weapon of destruction. The ethics of technology is so closely entwined with the ethics of the uses of that technology that the question of inherent ethical value is moot. On balance, technology can be used to both good and evil ends, depending on the ethics of the users.

If technology is not to blame, does it have the 'wrong' values, or is it value-free? Is knowledge itself, without an application, right or wrong, ethical or unethical? J. Robert Oppenheimer faced this precise dilemma in his lack of enthusiasm about developing a nuclear fusion bomb. Oppenheimer considered such a weapon evil in itself. Edward Teller, usually credited with its development, considered the H-bomb itself neither good nor evil, but wished to keep it out of the hands of those with evil intent (or what he perceived to be evil intent). The developers of the atomic bomb, although defending the position that the bomb itself was value-free, nonetheless enthusiastically promoted the peaceful uses of atomic energy as a balance to their development of a weapon of destruction. The ethics of technology is so closely entwined with the ethics of the uses of that technology that the question of inherent ethical value is moot. On balance, technology can be used to both good and evil ends, depending on the ethics of the users.

Assessment of the ethics of the use of any technology depends on our knowledge and understanding of that technology. For example, at this writing, scientists are investigating whether or not proximity to the electric and magnetic fields associated with electric power transmission increases cancer risk. Clearly, the ethics associated with transmission line location depends on the outcome of these investigations. Acceptance or rejection of any technology on ethical grounds must depend on an understanding of that technology.

It means that if we are to reverse the trend in environmental degradation, we need to change the way we live, the way we treat each other and our nonhuman environment. Such ideas can be connected by what has become known as Environmental Ethics.

Environmental ethics is a subcategory of ethics. Its definition can be approached from three historical perspectives: environmental ethics as public health, environmental ethics as conservation and preservation, and environmental ethics as caring for nonhumans. Public health has historically been associated with the supply of water to human communities. Permanent settlements and the development of agricultural skills were among the first human activities to create a cooperative social fabric. As farming efficiency increased, a division of labor became possible and communities began to build public and private structures. Water supply and wastewater drainage were among the public facilities that became necessary for human survival in communities, and the availability of water has always been a critical component of civilizations. In summary, this first form of the environmental ethic makes the destruction of resources and despoliation of our environment, unethical, because doing so, might cause other humans to suffer from diseases. Our unwillingness to clean up after ourselves is unethical because such actions could make other people sick or prevent them from being cured of disease. Because ethics involves a social contract, the rationale for the environmental ethic in this case is that we do not want to hurt other people by polluting the environment.

The environmental ethic of conservation and preservation places value on nature because we want it conserved (so it can continue to provide us with resources) and preserved (so it can continue to be enjoyed by us). Environmental pollution is bad either because such pollution can be a public health concern or because such pollution can be a public nuisance, cost us money, or prevent us from enjoying nature. In the first case we want our water, air, food, and our living place not to be polluted because we do not want to get ill. In the second case we do not want to have pollution because it decreases the quality of our lives. We also do not want to destroy species because, in the first instance, these species may be useful to us in what they can provide to keep us alive longer or because, in the second sense, we enjoy having these species as our co-inhibitors.

Environmental Ethics as caring for nonhuman nature tends to be related to Spiritual Environmental Ethics. Based on the rationalization for ethics, there cannot be a very strong argument for such an extension of the moral community. Because there is no reciprocity (so goes the argument), there can be no ethics. Our caring for nonhuman nature, then, cannot ever be rationally argued and defended. One possibility is that our attitudes toward other species and nonhuman nature in general is spiritual. A spiritual environmental ethic is a new paradigm for our environmental morality. Spiritual feelings toward nature are not new, of course, and we might have much to learn from the religions of our forebears. Many ancient religions are animistic, recognizing the existence of spirits within nature. These spirits do not take human form, as in the Greek, Roman, or Judaic religions.

As long as we use the anthropocentric environmental ethic in making decisions concerning the environment, conflicts between people can be resolved in the timehonored fashion with compromise, understanding, and mutual interest.

Perhaps, it is our social structures that are responsible for environmental degradation. According to Peirce, Weiner, and Vesilind, Garrett Hardin's 'The Tragedy of the Commons' illustrates this proposition with the following story, 'A village has a common green for the grazing of cattle, and the green is surrounded by farmhouses. Initially, each farmer has one cow, and the green can easily support the herd. Each farmer realizes, however, that if he or she gets another cow, the cost of the additional cow to the farmer is negligible because the cost of maintaining the green is shared, but the profits are the farmer's alone. So one farmer gets more cows and reaps more profits, until the common green can no longer support anyone's cows, and the system collapses.'

Hardin presents this as a parable for overpopulation of the earth and consequent resource depletion. The social structure in the parable is capitalism-—the individual ownership of wealth—-and the use of that wealth to serve selfish interests. Does that mean that noncapitalist economies (the totally and partially planned economies) do a better job of environmental protection, natural resource preservation, and population control?

The collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 afforded the world a glimpse of the almost total absence of environmental protection in the most prominent socialist nation in the developed world. Environmental devastation in the Commonwealth of Independent States (the former USSR) is substantially more serious than in the West. In the highly structured and centrally controlled communist system, production was the single goal and environmental degradation became unimportant. Also, there was no such thing as 'public opinion,' of course, and hence nobody spoke up for the environment. When production in a centrally controlled economy is the goal, all life, including human life, is cheap and expendable.

Crimes against humanity under communist regimes occurred during the 20th century, including forced deportations, massacres, torture, forced disappearances, extrajudicial killings, terror, ethnic cleansing, and enslavement, as well as deliberate starvation of people. Additional events included the use of genocide, conspiracy to commit genocide, and complicity in genocide.

The democratic societies of the developed world have in fact moved consciously toward environmental and resource protection more rapidly than either totally planned economies or the less developed nations. Benjamin A. Valentino finds that ethnic hatreds or discrimination, undemocratic systems of government, and dysfunctions in society play a much smaller role in mass killing and genocide than is commonly assumed. He shows that the impetus for mass killing usually originates from a relatively small group of powerful leaders and is often carried out without the active support of broader society. Mass killing, in his view, is a brutal political or military strategy designed to accomplish leaders’ most important objectives, counter threats to their power, and solve their most difficult problems.

We will continue our conversation in the next session, bi 'idhnillah."

Then, Peace Lily sang 'Lestari Alamku', written by Gombloh,

Kuingat Ibuku dongengkan cerita

[I remember my mother telling me a story]

Kisah tentang Jaya Nusantara lama

[The story of the old Jaya Nusantara]

Tentram Kartaraharja di sana

[Peaceful, fair and sufficient in there]

Mengapa tanahku rawan kini?

[Why is my land vulnerable now?]

Bukit-bukit telanjang berdiri

[The naked hills are standing]

Pohon dan rumput enggan bersemi kembali

[Trees and grass are reluctant to bloom again]

Burung-burung pun malu bernyanyi *)

[Even the birds are embarrassed to sing]

[Session 3]
[Session 1]

Bahasa

Policy of the "Stupid Pricks" (1)

"In the Land of Archipelago, a Chinese investor, accompanied by a minister, were walking along the beach on an island that would become an Eco City, which was said to be part of the National Strategic Project. With pleasure, the investor would like to swim on the beach and said to the the minister, 'Are you sure there aren’t any sharks along this beach?'

Tried to be calm, the minister replied, 'O yes, I’m sure. They don’t get along well with the alligators,'" said Peace lily when she was meeting with Wulandari.

The peace lily, Spathiphyllum, is an Araceae family, a beautiful flowering plant. Many people keep peace lilies as indoor houseplants because they are known to drive away dangerous air pollutant. They add a beautiful dose of greenery to your space, with elegant white blooms. Their flowers look like waving a white flag, peace lilies are sometimes affiliated with peace and surrender. Tranquility, purity, and healing are a few common themes associated with peace lillies. Spiritually, the peace lily represents hope and other positive themes. As it promises new blooms each spring, many also view the plant as a symbol of renewal, as it continues to flourish through all the seasons, featuring new leaves and flowers as it grows. It’s a purifying plant, as it cleanses the air of toxic contaminants, so in Feng Shui, the peace lily is actually used to bring purity to a room or home.

Though it's name encloses 'Lily', but actually not a true lily. It's different from Lily, genus Lilium, but has the same impression, beauty and purity.

Let's listen to what Peace lily has said. "Could the investor and the minister have been talking about our earth? And is the situation really this grim? Is it time to start shedding bitter tears for those who have had their homeland taken away and at the same time caused environmental pollution? So, let me tell you from the beginning.

The sum total of living, non-living components; influences and events, surrounding an organism is called the environment. Everything that surrounds or affects an organism during its life time is collectively known as its environment. All organisms—from virus to man—are obligatorily dependent on the other organism and environment for food, energy, water, oxygen, shelter and for other needs. The environment is not static. Both living (biotic) and non-living (abiotic) components are factors in a flux and keeps changing continuously.

Biotics components are green plants, non-green plants, decomposers, parasites, symbionts, animals, and man. Abiotic components are energy, radiation, temperature and heat flow, water, atmospheric gases and wind, fire, gravity, topography, soil, and geologic substratum.

Now, for instance, let’s take the environment of a fish in the pond. External environment of fish consists of abiotic components such as light, temperature, including the water in which nutrients, oxygen, other gases and organic matter are dissolved. The biotic environment consists of microscopic organisms called plankton which it assume as well as aquatic plants, animals and decomposers.

Internal environment of fish is enclosed by the outer body surface. The internal environment is relatively stable as compared to the external environment. However, it is not absolutely constant. Injury, illness or excessive stress upsets the internal environmentm for example, if a marine fish is transferred to a fresh water environment, it will not be able to survive.

Organism is an individual living being that has the ability to act or function independently. It may be plant, animal, bacterium, fungi, etc. It is a body made up of organs, organelles, or other parts that work together to carry out on the various processes of life.

A group of organisms usually of the same species, occupying a defined area during a specific time, known as Population. Population growth rate is the percentage variation between the number of individuals in a population at two different times. Therefore, the population growth rate can be positive or negative. The main factors that make population increase are birth and immigration. The main factors that make population decrease are death and emigration. The main limiting factors for the growth of a population are abiotic and biotic components. Population density is the relation between the number of individuals of a population and the area they occupy.

If we look around ourself, we will notice that population of plants and animals seldom occur by themselves. The reason for this is quite obvious. In order to survive, individuals of any one species depend on individuals of different species with which they actively interact in several ways. Animals require plants for food and trees for shelter. Plants require animals for pollination, seed dispersal, and soil microorganism to facilitate nutrient supply. Communities in most instances are named after the dominant plant form (species). For example: A grassland community is dominated by grasses, though it may contain herbs, shrubs, and trees, along with associated animals of different species. A community is not fixed or rigid; communities may be large or small.

A large-sized, well organized and relatively independent community is called Major Community. They depend only on the sun’s energy from outside and are independent of the inputs and outputs from adjacent communities, e.g: tropical ever green forest in Montane Ecosystems.

The secondary aggregations within a major community and are not therefore completely independent units as far as energy and nutrient dynamics are concerned and are dependent on neighbouring communities and are often called societies or Minor Community, .e.g. a mat of lichen on a cow dung pad.

In a community, the number of species and size of their population vary greatly. A community may have one or several species. The environmental factors determine the characteristic of the community as well as the pattern of organisation of the members in the community. The characteristic pattern of the community is termed as structure which is reflected in the roles played by various population, their range, the type of area they inhabit, the diversity of species in the community and the spectrum of interactions between them.

There is the difference between ecology, environment and ecosystem. The environment is defined as the relationship of components present in the surroundings, whereas ecology is defined as the study of the relationship between organisms and their environment. An environment provides a place for the elements, whereas, an ecosystem provides an interaction between the elements.

The roots of ecology lie in Natural History, which is as old as human civilization. Since early history, man has indulged in ecology in a practical sort of way, knowingly and unknowingly. In primitive societies, every individual was required to have an intimate knowledge of his environment for their survival, i.e., about the forces of nature and of plants and animals around him/her.

A structural and functional unit of biosphere consisting of community of living beings and the physical environment, both interacting and exchanging materials between them is known as Ecosystem. It includes plants, trees, animals, fish, birds, micro-organisms, water, soil, and people.

Ecosystems vary greatly in size and elements but each is a functioning unit of nature. Everything that lives in an ecosystem is dependent on the other species and elements that are also part of that ecological community. If one part of an ecosystem is damaged or disappears, it has an impact on everything else. When an ecosystem is healthy (i.e. sustainable) it means that all the elements live in balance and are capable of reproducing themselves. Ecosystem can be as small as a single tree or as large as entire forest.

Ecosystems are capable of maintaining their state of equilibrium. They can regulate their own species structure and functional processes. This capacity of ecosystem of self regulation is known as homeostasis. Goods and services provided by ecosystems include: provision of food, fuel and fibre; provision of shelter and building materials; purification of air and water; detoxification and decomposition of wastes; stabilization and moderation of the Earth’s climate; moderation of floods, droughts, temperature extremes and the forces of wind; generation and renewal of soil fertility, including nutrient cycling; pollination of plants, including many crops; control of pests and diseases; maintenance of genetic resources as key inputs to crop varieties and livestock breeds, medicines, and other products; and cultural and aesthetic benefits.

The interrelations between organisms and environment on the land constitute 'Terrestrial Ecology', including Tundra—a 'barren land' since they are found where environmental conditions are very severe—and forest ecosystem, including a complex assemblage of different kinds of biotic communities. Optimum conditions such as temperature and ground moisture are responsible for the establishment of forest communities. Indiscriminate felling of trees as a result of urbanization, industrialization, mining operations, and use of wood for domestic and other purposes, have caused heavy depletion of forests, Deforestation.

One of the cause of defortation is shifting cultivation. In this practice a patch of land is cleared, vegetation is burned and the ash is mixed with the soil thus adding nutrients to the soil. This patch of land is used for raising crops for two to three years, and the yield is modest. Then this area is abandoned and is left to recover its fertility, and the same practice is repeated elsewhere on a fresh piece of land. All that is required for this method of cultivation is a set of simple tools, not high level of mechanisation. Development projects like the hydroelectric projects, large dams and reservoirs, laying down of railway lines and roads are not only extremely beneficial, but they are also linked with several environmental problems. Many of these projects require immense deforestation.

Deforestation also results from overgrazing, agriculture, mining, urbanization, flood, fire, pest, diseases, defence and communication activites. Deforestation results in an immediate lowering of ground water level and in long-term reduction of precipitation. Due to deforestation, this natural reuse cycle is broken and water is lost through rapid run off.

Mining activities in forest regions cause deforestation and soil erosion. Underground mining has also significantly denuded forests, as timber is used for supporting the roofs of mine galleries. A large number of abandoned mines are lying in bad shape and are under extensive gully erosion leading to degradation of the habitat.

Ecosystems consisting of water as the main habitat are known as aquatic ecosystems. The aquatic organisms include Neuston—unattached organisms which live at the airwater interface such as floating plants, etc; Plankton includes both microscopic plants like algae (phytoplankton) and animals like crustaceans and protozoans (zooplankton) found in all aquatic ecosystems, except certain swift moving waters; Nekton includes animals range in size from the swimming insects (about 2 mm long) to the largest animals, the blue whale; Benthos, the benthic organisms are those found living in the bottom of the water mass.

Eutrophication is a syndrome of ecosystem, response to the addition of artificial or natural nutrients such as nitrates and phosphates through fertilizer, sewage, etc that fertilize the aquatic ecosystem. It is primarily caused by the leaching of phosphate and or nitrate containing fertilisers from agricultural lands into lakes or rivers. Eutrophication eventually create detritus layer in the ponds & lakes and produces successively shallower depth of surface water. Eventually the water body is reduced into marsh whose plant community is transformed from an aquatic environment to recognizable terrestrial ecosystem.

From individuals, it increases to population, then to community, and then to ecosystem, then to an Ecotone. Ecotone is a zone of junction between two or more diverse ecosystems. For e.g. the mangrove forests represent an ecotone between marine and terrestrial ecosystem. Other examples are—grassland, estuary and river bank physical and chemical factors that a species needs to survive, stay healthy and reproduce.

A niche is unique for a species, which means no two species have exact identical niches. Niche plays an important role in conservation of organisms. If we have to conserve species in its native habitat we should have knowledge about the niche requirements of the species and should ensure that all requirements of its niche are fulfilled.

So, from this Ecotone, it then developed into the Biosphere, a part of the earth where life can exist. It is a narrow layer around the surface of the earth. If we visualise the earth to be the size of an apple the biosphere would be as thick as its skin.

Life in the biosphere is abundant between 200 metres (660 feet) below the surface of the ocean and about 6,000 metres (20,000 feet) above sea level. Biosphere represents a highly integrated and interacting zone comprising of atmosphere (air), hydrosphere (water) and lithosphere (land). Biosphere is absent at extremes of the North and South poles, the highest mountains and the deepest oceans, since existing hostile conditions there do not support life. Occasionally spores of fungi and bacteria do occur at great height beyond 8,000 metres, but they are not metabolically active, and hence represent only dormant life.

The energy required for the life within the biosphere comes from the sun. The nutrients necessary for living organisms come from air, water and soil. The same chemicals are recycled over and over again for life to continue.

Living organisms are not uniformly distributed throughout the biosphere. Only a few organisms live in the polar regions, while the tropical rain forests have an exceedingly rich diversity of plants and animals (50% of Global Biodiversity).

These levels, i.e. from individual to biosphere, are main the levels of organisation in ecology. An addition or excessive addition of certain materials to the physical environment (water, air and lands), making it less fit or unfit for life is called Pollution. Pollutants are the materials or factors, which cause adverse effect on the natural quality of any component of the environment. For example, smoke from industries and automobiles, chemicals from factories, radioactive substances from nuclear plants, sewage of houses and discarded household articles are the common pollutants. And how does pollution affect the biosphere? Air pollution can damage crops and trees in a variety of ways. Ground-level ozone can lead to reductions in agricultural crop and commercial forest yields, reduced growth and survivability of tree seedlings, and increased plant susceptibility to disease, pests and other environmental stresses (such as harsh weather).

We'll continue our talk on the next session, bi 'idhnillah."

[Session 2]

Bahasa

Story of Kinmen Bonsai

"Three bonsais were sitting in a coffee house. A Hinoki Cypress—a species of cypress native to central Japan in East Asia, and widely cultivated in the temperate northern hemisphere for its high-quality timber and ornamental qualities, a slow growing tree with many cultivars commercially available; a Trident Maple—a species of maple native to eastern China, it is a small to medium-sized deciduous tree; and an American Beech—fagus grandifolia, a large deciduous tree, a species of beech tree native to the eastern United States.

Fagus complained, 'I really want out of my pot. I feel cramped and my owner keeps trying to get my leaves to grower closer together and to grow smaller. I can't live like this.'

Maple commented, 'I think that is great Fagus. Living in wide open spaces will really let you thrive. Let me know if you need help with your plan.'

Hinoki said, 'I think that is a rotten idea Fagus. You get fed and watered regularly. You get brought in when it is cold. I can't believe you support him Maple. You drop your leaves every year and get fat way too fast.'

Maple replied, 'Well Hinoki, at least I don't cry about too little sun and drop my leaves. And besides, at least, I back Fagus,' said Wulandari as started to tell a story,'" said Kinmen, a ficus fig bonsai, to begin a talk with Wulandari. Kinmen, Ficus microcarpa, known as Chinese Banyan or Gajumari, one of plantation loved by bonsai collector, because it has a very beautiful shape, and the older it is, the more expensive it is. Generally, kinmen bonsai are planted in fairly shallow bowls. For this reason, the planting medium needs to be replaced periodically. There is something interesting in the land of Konoha, because getting a large kinmen bonsai is not easy, it takes quite a long time, so to make a large kinmen bonsai, it is done by combining several trees into one. This method is quite effective, the desired tree size can be obtained in a not too long periode. Yea, just like the parties in the land of Konoha, forming a coalition to pass the 20% presidential threshold.

"Bonsai is actually the Japanese translation for 'tree in a pot'," Kinmen went on. "However, the art of bonsai originated in China. In twelfth-century China, trees and stones were placed on plate-like earthenware and were called bonsan or bonkariyama. It was said that a few old gentlemen were sitting in a Chinese restaurant they trusted, eating delicious duck 'sweet and sour' and thinking about what to do after the meal. Internet didn't exist yet, so they had to find another hobby. That's how they came up with the idea of burying trees in pots. After realising that there were some problems squeezing the trees into pots in their original size, they started to try it as a miniature version. This worked quite well and the trees found more and more fans. However, most of the time these were not individual trees, but miniature versions of landscapes that were attempted to be authentically recreated.

Later, when this art of 'tree on plate or tray' was introduced to Japan, it evolved into the form we call 'bonsai,' and it became a common horticultural practice throughout the Edo or Tokugawa period, the final period of traditional Japan, a time of internal peace, political stability, and economic growth under the shogunate (military dictatorship) founded by Tokugawa Ieyasu. What the Japanese generally did differently from the Chinese was perfection itself. The Japanese refined the trees more and more and developed special style forms.

The art of container gardening is enjoyed around the world, but bonsai brings plants and containers into a 'oneness' that allows us to appreciate the beauty of a landscape that is complete, yet contained. It is impossible to bring the splendors of nature indoors on a grand scale, but it is possible to grace our homes with the sense of solemnity, elegance and solitude that are the essential charm of a bonsai tree. Imitating trees that have withstood many years of wind, rain and snow, the bonsai—with its winding branches, thick roots, rough bark, and white 'bones' that come from season after season of death and rebirt—is a unique and self-contained natural world. It embodies a philosophy and a skill set that the Japanese have long cherished. It is an act of 'nature worship' that harmoniously corresponds to all the characteristics of the four seasons.

A traditional Japanese way to display bonsai is to create a harmonious arrangement in a confined space such as an alcove. The decoration of the alcove is called tokokazari. Sekikazari, which literally means 'decorating a seat,' pertains to the arrangement of bonsai in an area specifically for bonsai display.

Alcove decoration consists of three elements: the main tree, an accompanying bonsai (the accent), and a hanging scroll. When the main tree is a conifer, the flowers and grasses accompanying it should represent the season. The main tree is placed in such a way that it flows toward the hanging scroll, and a high table and a ground plate are laid beneath the bonsai. Choose a hanging scroll (or other wall hanging in a less traditional space) that complements the main tree well. The sekikazari is a two-part arrangement consisting of main tree and accent.

For the background, there are principles of harmony that have been in use for many generations. On the other hand, there are a variety of arrangements tailored to modern living spaces, such as apartments. You get beautiful results when you keep the basic principles in mind, but how you incorporate those ideas, is up to you.

Now, why do you want to have one or more bonsais? The answer is, desire. But first of all, you have to be aware that a tree, even a bonsai, is a living being. Whether the tree has feelings or not, is not really scientifically proven lately. In any case, I have never seen a tree cry when it had to listen to an artist who sang a sad songs. Nevertheless, a tree is a living being. If we don't take care of it, it dies. If it doesn't get water from us, the bonsai will die. If we don't give it fertiliser, it will certainly not develop into what we think of as a great bonsai.

Before we get into the small trees, let's start with its big brothers and sisters. We must never forget that a bonsai is really nothing other than its big brother. In a bonsai, everything is smaller in proportion, but ideally it should not be inferior to the big tree in any way. We now come to an important aspect of bonsai gardening. The gift of observing details and, if necessary, implementing them on your own tree. You will know from experience that you would certainly not have become a tree mass murderer if you had had this one tip: Look closely at the trees in nature and then do everything the same way on a small scale in bonsai.

As a man, you are going to to start out more like a digger. You buy some plant cheaply and then cut it diligently. Until you understand that you should first watch the big trees and only then start on the small ones. Before we chop something to death, we should first go out into nature and see how things are done there.

When you walk into the forest to to look at some trees, you will think that all trees, whether coniferous or deciduous, grow pretty much the same and are only different sizes. But if you look more closely, you will see that the trees have a plan. They are not so different in their growth form, but always try to catch the maximum amount of light. In the art of bonsai, these growth forms are called 'styles' and describe nothing other than what you notice at the moment.

Nature is ingenious by itself and you only have to observe carefully to understand what is best for the tree. Now you have found out that trees follow a 'style' in order to get the most benefit for themselves in the form of nutrients and light. And yes, there will be trees in your bonsai design life that just don't want to grow the way you think they should. However, imperfection can also be very beautiful, it is always in the eye of the observer. What else do you hear when you simply look at a tree? Probably nothing, correct? Exactly, this aspect is important for your snipping art on the small trees. You want to transport the same relaxing 'nothing' into the bowl and into the tree. The better you succeed, the more perfect the tree will be. This hobby is not about big egos, loud engines or testosterone-fuelled boxing matches, but the person who manages to create a bonsai that brings you very close to the place you yearn for. The forest and the peace that goes with it. Now let's do a good exercise to get a feeling for the perspectives of bonsai. Sit in front of a tree of your choice, to get a feeling for the perspectives in bonsai. You can now see the trunk, the leaves, the roots and the branches in front of you? Very good, and now you have to think about what kind of bowl this huge forest dweller would fit into. The exercise is not about the tree and how you would have to cut it, but now it is first about recognising what kind of bowl you might identify with.

Now, let your brain to learn in relation to bonsai. The mini tree is supposed to trigger the same feeling in you as when you are sitting under its big brother. This means that it is basically like a model railway. You try to reproduce what is there in a different, smaller scale as detailed and accurate as possible. However, the contrast to a model railway is that your future model is a living being and is constantly evolving. You cannot say 'Oh, my tree is finished, I'll leave it like this'. The tree continues to grow and flourish under your care, and if you do nothing or intervene, nature will come back and let the tree grow wild and crosswise very quickly. You do not have to fertilise the model railway or water it daily. Quick and simple, with the hobby you are about to discover, many things will be different. You will get to know a new feeling for nature and its processes, and you will notice that you are becoming a tree junkie.

The small trees and the wire usually go together very closely, especially when it comes to shaping branches or trunks. But let's start at the beginning with the explanation. Why is a bonsai tree wired at all? As a bonsai tree is a living being that loves the sun, it often happens that branches grow at an unfavourable angle or simply get out of shape. If you can't bring the tree back into line with various special pruning techniques, you have little choice but to use wire. The bonsai wire that can be bought in specialist shops is usually made of aluminium or copper. The clear advantages of these types of wire are certainly the ease with which they can be bent and worked. There was or is sometimes also wire made of steel, but this is practically never used. Steel has the disadvantage of being quite difficult to bend and the much bigger disadvantage of rust. It takes quite a long time for rust to disappear from the branches or trunk and it also looks stupid when you have a rusting bonsai. There is a lot of literature on the market on the subject of how to properly wire a tree. But theory is always one thing, the other thing is to learn how to wire correctly in a bonsai club near you. It is not particularly difficult, but it does require practice and an instructor who can show you how to fit the wire correctly. If the wire is too tight, for example, you will have a problem after a while.

The ultimate goal of growing a Bonsai is to create a miniaturized but realistic representation of nature in the form of a tree. The ultimate goal of Bonsai is to create a realistic depiction of nature. As a Bonsai gets smaller (even down to a few inches/centimeters) it increasingly becomes abstract, as opposed to resembling nature in a more precise way. Bonsai are not genetically dwarfed plants, in fact, any tree species can be used to grow one. The best Bonsai—whether a single tree or a multi-plant or rock landscape composition—touch us, make us take notice, stop us as they catch our experience and imaginations to show us something new.

Thick trunks, textured bark, an interplay of twisting live wood and deadwood, surface roots, fine branch and twig ramification, foliage pads, relatively small leaves or needles, a complementary and relatively shallow container, tiny fruit or cones or flowers - these are just a few of the features that can be used to help portray a miniature landscape.

They are not all needed or possible in any one given composition, and they cannot simply be included "just because". A true master artisan knows, feels what is needed. And his or her creation touches us, also. Those true masterpieces are the ones which, when you first look at them, can momentarily take your breath away and raise a smile."

"I think, I'm not going any deeper to bonsai, " said Kinmen, "what I'm going to say that the philosophy of Bonsai Tree throws light on the importance of the retention of its unique character. A character that emerges despite undergoing the guiding process of its gardener. The success of a Bonsai Tree lies in its seeming naturalness. Human involvement in bonsai can be seen as an attempt to capture the nature's force of the gigantic trees and to encapsulate it into little plants, still maintaining their natural beauty.

So, when viewing a bonsai, stand in front of it and first take in the whole setting, including the pots and table, before moving on to the details. Then, scrutinize the middle of the tree height, and each part from the roots, the rise, the trunk, up to the branches, leaves and the flowers.

The illustration I've mentioned, suggests a large, old tree. The rise from the base to the first branch is a gentle curve that appears to have weathered many windy storms, the rough bark gives the impression of advanced age and the leaves convey a sense of vitality. The shape from the root to the rise is like a mountain ridge.

Bonsai are carefully cultivated and managed by human hands, and some have been trained for hundreds of years. The feeling of antiquity, sense of vitality and the skill that has gone into creating these things are already evident. If you have a young tree, you can visualize how, with care, its features will evolve. Bonsai is ideal when the tree is in its completed form (full season), so fall and winter are important times. Thus, the venerable bonsai is like an elderly person who feels long settled into the rhythms of life. And Allah knows best."

The dawn gave a signal, she brought a complete bonsai package, bonsai bowl, pebbles and moss, and mini Sakura. Wulandari left while singing Sukiyaki song by Kyu Sakamoto,

上を向いて歩こう

ue o muite arukou

[I look up as I walk]

にじんだ星をかぞえて

nijinda hosi o kazoete

[Counting the blurred stars]

思い出だす 夏の日

omoidasu natsunohi

[I remember those summer days]

一人ひとりぽっちの

hitoribotchi no yoru

[But I am all alone tonight]

幸せは 雲くもの上に

shiawase wa kumo no ueni

[Happiness lies beyond the clouds]

幸せは 空の上に

shiawase wa sora no ueni

[Happiness lies beyond the sky] *)

Citations & References:
- Gilles Kroeger, The Ultimate Bonsai Book for Men, 2021, Amazon Europe
- Bonsai Sekai Magazine, Introduction to Bonsai: The Complete Illustrated Guide for Beginners, 2015, Tuttle Publishing
- Michael Tran, Happy Bonsai: Chose It, Shape It, Love It, 2020, Penguin
*) 上を向いて歩こう, Ue o Muite Arukō (I Look Up as I Walk alternatively titled "Sukiyaki") written by lyricist Rokusuke Ei and composer Hachidai Nakamura.

Bahasa