Categories
Politics & government

[2156] Of 2009-2010 Chilean presidential election

A few days ago Chile lived through one of the most important moments in its recent history. It is the election of a President who belongs to the right-wing after 20 years of left-centre government. For some, this is a complete disaster and almost the end of Chile in the way as we know it. For others, this moment is a real breakthrough for Chilean people, now that the country will grow faster and better.

Before discussing who is right or who is wrong, if we might say so, we need to discuss why the right wing won the campaign and whether they really won or if the left-centre lost. Both things look exactly the same, but they are not. Sebastian Piñera, the President-elect of Chile, is a billionaire with roots in the middle class. He is very smart in the way that he used this to show that if you work very hard you can achieve anything that you want. The origins of his wealth are a little controversial if not at all.

The other main reason is that the coalition in the government could not hear people’s voices who were asking more participation and renovation of leaders. It was such a problem that left-centre block chose an ex-president to be their candidate. This candidate, Eduardo Frei Ruiz-Tagle, despite his experience, could not spark people’s faith again. In addition, the left wing was divided among 3 different candidates while for first time the conservatives were united behind Sebastian Piñera. The left wing promised new faces for a future government, but nobody believed them because these politicians have promised that before without fulfilling it.

Piñera showed a strong identification with the idea of change and hope, as Obama in the United States. People wanted to believe, people needed to believe. Furthermore, Piñera’s campaign was cheerful and exciting while the other side’s campaign tried to scare people by saying things such as ”Chile will be sold” and used hate as a mechanism.

This was an awful surprise because the left wing won the election for democracy 20 years ago using the strategy that Piñera used for this election. World is round and now the right wing used left wing strategies. The other mistake was that Piñera looked to the centre in political terms, while Frei turned to the left looking for communist votes. Chile is not a left wing country. Chile is a moderate and centrist country. People believe in a mix between capitalism and social welfare programs. I have to point out that this is my opinion based on the facts. All this could explain why Piñera won, or perhaps why left-centre coalition lost.

For some people, this is a horrible disaster because they believe that Piñera will end the social programs and will privatise the public companies. However, Piñera has been very clear that he will not privatise public firms, but he will implement many changes. The President-elect has promised to keep the social programs and to do them more efficient.

There is no doubt that he will pay more attention to entrepreneurship than public health or education, but he cannot change the whole system with a competitive congress. Chilean democracy has many institutions which make it difficult to change things in one direction or another. This is both good and bad. Nevertheless, this makes the system stable and reliable for private and foreign investment which is necessary for the progress of the country. Once again, this is my opinion.

The Conservatives are very glad, maybe too much. Piñera has shown himself as a liberal in the moral and economical aspects. The more extreme right politicians might be disappointed soon. Piñera supports homosexual rights and this can be an important clash between him and his followers.

In conclusion, the well-developed democracy in Chile makes the system stable and reliable providing guarantees for everyone. Because of this, every Chilean can give their opinion and work hard to build a better society irrespective of their political colour. Viva Chile!

Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved

JORGE ROJAS is an engineer and graduate student in economics at the University of Sydney. He is member of the Party for Democracy, a center-left Chilean party upholding liberal and progressive ideas.

Categories
Science & technology Society

[2071] Of masquerading: H1N1, facemasks and soap

Last week in Kuala Lumpur, I was at the Plaza Rakyat LRT station when a family lugging wheelie suitcases asked me whether they were at the right platform to get to KL Sentral. Being from out of town myself, I said I did not know, but continued to watch them because the two teenage daughters were wearing surgical masks. I have had a rather ghoulish fascination with infectious diseases since childhood, and when the pandemic started back in April, my lab-mates and I followed it like Malaysians watching the English Premier League.

The family eventually got affirmation from someone else that we were indeed on the correct platform. As we waited for the train, one of the girls’ shoulders shuddered, and she pulled down her mask to cough vigorously without covering her mouth. Relieved, she replaced the mask and continued staring into space.

Despite advisories from the Ministry of Health and other experts, most people still have the wrong end of the stick regarding surgical masks: their primary purpose is to protect other people from your germs, not the converse. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s advice on facemask use is that sick persons, not well, should wear them. They do protect the wearer from large splatters, but they do not filter out aerosol-sized droplets and have big gaps around the nose and sides, unlike a real respirator. When I had to wear an N95 respirator for working with viruses in graduate school, the fitting involved trying on several different models and jumping up and down while being sprayed in the face with a saccharine solution to check if any droplets got through.

(On the other hand, the use of facemasks in healthcare settings such as clinics and hospitals can help to slow the spread of flu, since many people may be infected and shedding virus in those locations. This still does not mean that an uninfected individual wearer is protected, and neither WHO nor the CDC recommend mask use in community settings.)

If facemasks do not work, why are people so enthusiastic about them?

First, it gives people a sense of control over the situation. We can watch out for robbers, but an invisible virus is a terrifying, insidious idea for most (especially those who cannot do math and think the world is ending). Unlike the advice to stay healthy, wash your hands, and go home if sick — which a sensible person should practice all the time anyway — buying a mask gives the consumer a sense of having done something concrete. The same goes for heading to the doctor to demand Tamiflu, which to me is really terrifying because antiviral abuse inevitably leads to viruses becoming drug-proof.

Secondly, I think Malaysians are exceptionally susceptible to silly claims about health because we are muddled between our Asian cultures with their various traditional remedies, modern biomedical science, and Western pop-culture pseudoscience. All you have to do is look at the number of ads in the newspapers and on banners selling health products (Tongkat Ali vs. Quantum Pendants). The exorbitant prices that masks were going for, before the introduction of price controls last week, further encouraged the perception that masks were a valuable prophylaxis against the dreaded flu. The terrible quality of science and math education does not help either, since it creates the mentality that those are things you memorize for exams, not tools for real-world application.

The final irony is that influenza virions (virus particles) are notoriously fragile and break down quickly at room temperature — this is in comparison to viruses like polio, which can hang around in water supplies for quite a long time. In particular, the stability of the virus in aerosols at tropical heat and humidity is significantly less than in the cold, dry winter in so-called ”temperate” countries, which is why we usually have low levels of flu year-round rather than seasonal outbreaks like Europe, Australia, and North America.

Some researchers think that flu is more likely to spread by contact or fomites (contaminated objects) in tropical regions. That means that your best friend is not a facemask, but a soap bottle. As an enveloped virus, flu is particularly susceptible to detergents. Why this has not been more strongly emphasized by the MOH, and why you can see toilet attendants wearing facemasks while guarding public toilets with no soap, boggles the mind.

Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved

HWA SHI-HSIA recently finished her MS in comparative biomedical sciences at the University of Wisconsin. She maintains http://xenobiologista.com/blog/.

Categories
Politics & government

[1613] Of Mr. Ma has a herculean task

May 20 will be the day the new Taiwan President gets sworn in.

While I am an avid admirer of Mr. Ma, I think he is facing an impossible task ahead of him.

For eight years, this country had laid stagnant due to political infightings while the government that was more interested in advancing its political agenda of Not Part of China than taking care of its own people. National pride and maintaining the dignity of the country is important, but it is nothing compare to improving the living standard of your own people and developing the economy.

Most casual outside observers would look at the election result and ask, “So, are 60% of the Taiwanese people pro-reunification?” These people most likely drew the same conclusion in 2000 and again in 2004. While it is true that the China topic has always been hotly debated in all the presidential elections, Taiwanese people ultimately cast their vote based on the issues that concerns them the most: it’s the economy, stupid!

In 2000, KMT was the poster child of corruption and ineffective government. It was essentially living off its past glory and getting out of touch with the people. DPP meanwhile was the fresh alternative to KMT and the candidate at that time was a charismatic leader who is vocal about changes, getting rid of corruption and running a government that is more for the people. DPP’s Chen Shui-bian won that election.

DPP did not do a fantastic job during its term. The opposition however was just as pathetic and the next 4 long years turned out to be grudge match between the two sides. Essentially, the same factors that contributed to the defeat of KMT in 2000 were still applicable in 2004. While you can always blame the shooting scandal for the upset, KMT wouldn’t have gotten a pretty win, and on hindsight, had KMT won that election, it will just mean reverting back to the old way of doing things as KMT offered the same deal to voters as they did 4 years previously.

This time around though, KMT, at least on surface, have more young blood surfacing to the front. While many would argue that the old faces had merely moved into the dark acting as puppet masters, this at least offers some progress. So, to a lot of people, the 2008 election may not be an indication of how well KMT had transformed, but more of how bad a job DPP had done over the last 8 years and how quickly it had followed in the footstep of the “old” KMT. Over the last 8 years, we saw corrupt officials, we saw ineffective government, we saw policies that ignored the need of the people and we saw Taiwan continued to lose its competitiveness in the global economy.

So by electing Mr. Ma into the office, voters have extremely high (and even unrealistic) expectation of him. He will need to catch up on what was not done over the last 2 terms, he will need to grow the Taiwanese economy at the backdrop of a possible global recession, he will need to convince people that there are no puppet masters in the dark and he can control the different factions in his own party and ultimately, he is the leader that will take Taiwan back onto the right track. And yes, he also needs to protect Taiwan from the 1,400 missiles aimed at the island right now.

Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved

LIU YEN LIN, the author, is a Taiwanese living in Singapore. He is an economics and political science graduate of the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.