It's been a while since I last listened to the show, but thinking back, some of my favorite guests were:
Bill Murray, Jerry Seinfeld, Jeff Bridges, Martha Stewart, Alec Baldwin, Conan O'Brien, Quentin Tarantino, Brad Garrett, Jesse Ventura, Howie Mandel, Norm MacDonald, Tom Arnold, Steven Adler and Chip Z'nuff.
I liked the GITS SAC series a lot because of how well they balanced the action plot points with discussion about technology, security, politics and philosophy. Overall I'd struggle to think of another series which strikes that balance so well.
I saw they ran a small "python for data science" intro course this year on edx, so I figure they're definitely behind using the language in some capacity.
Your reply reminded me of a lecture from an ocw course I'm watching on and off. He covers a bit about infrastructure design and policy choices in that lecture. I thought it was really interesting.
Thinking out loud.. the Olympics in 2020 will be a good chance to showcase the country as an attractive destination, not just for tourism. They could loosen their immigration policy to coincide with the timeline.
It would still be tricky because as a society Japan is famously homogeneous, so the idea of diversity would have to be phased in slowly.. but it could be a starting point. In the end it's about adaptation to ensure a future for the country.
> In the end it's about adaptation to ensure a future for the country.
I think that most Japanese would believe that a future Japan that wasn't majority Japanese was no future at all.
From the nationalist perspective, you're essentially saying "to save Japanese society we must destroy Japanese society." To these people Japan is more than just an island, it is Japanese.
I really can't agree with you enough. What's troubling though is that any ideas of nationalism are often confused with extreme right-wing or jingoism, largely (and possibly rightfully) due to history. So it sounds bad to even say Japan is a nationalistic society.
But you've hit the nail on the head - and it is something many foreigners have little to no concept of. Being proud of one's cultural heritage and history. Even if that means recognizing the bad stains on the tapestry.
I've recognized the ones who have the worst problem with nationalism are those who are completely full of guilt of their own culture/history.
Except Japan is astoundingly horrible at recognizing "bad stains on the tapestry" like the Rape of Nanking and comfort women (in fact calling the now elderly women who were abducted and raped prostitutes with an agenda). Nationalism is a cancer and you're blind to it because of your country's thorough inculcation.
I don't understand why you are getting downvoted - there's nothing controversial or ridiculous about this suggestion. Unlikely perhaps, for reason stated elsewhere in the thread but that's another matter entirely.
I think about this too sometimes.. TNG in particular had scientifically literate characters and that sort of depth was considered normal, there was no fuss about the big ideas and the knowledge, they just applied it. It is easy to get used to a mature baseline of thought like that as a viewer. Most of the newer apocalyptic themed sci-fi just seems silly in comparison.
As a side note, I really like some of the comic books written by Jonathan Hickman, for example his S.H.I.E.L.D. or FF runs. He seems to be a fan of science.
TNG is a thing that comes back as a topic almost whenever I have a longer discussion with my mother and brother. It's those discussions that made me realize that there are two things that Star Trek world had, that I miss in the real one:
1) High level of baseline literacy we were talking about. Contrast to our world, when many people shy from learning new things, and those who do learn are often labeled as nerds and warned about dangers of having too high self-esteem. I really long for the world where this sort of anti-intellectualism is not something to be proud of, and where the social pressure is encouraging self-development, rather than discouraging it.
2) Expectation of competency. It's visible on all levels - from civilian vs. Starfleet interactions, through teamwork of starship crews, to the inner workings of big bureaucracies like the United Federation of Planets. Everyone is assumed competent until proven otherwise. Characters in Star Trek know they're working with others who are as smart as they are, and so they trust each other and trust the system. Contrast with the real world, where we often assume our coworkers are incompetent, and the predominant narrative in society is that bureaucracies are stupid and evil.
I only now realize how much my expectations of humans are different thank to Star Trek, and that a big part of my life is trying to form an area around myself, where 1) and 2) would hold.
There's also point 3), but that may be a particular quirk of my personality - I prefer stories where not individuals, but organizations are heroes. That's another reason why I love Star Trek, and that's also why S.H.I.E.L.D. was always my favourite part of the Marvel Multiverse. A magical mutated flying superhero is boring. A Helicarrier - now that's interesting. :).
Fully agree with 1) in a sense that the sciences and the humanities are all around us, in front of us, and it's not 'geek' impulse to try exploring both, it's part of being a rational, fulfilled human being.
As for 2), that's an interesting point. Perhaps it speaks to a level of maturity and mutual trust that we have not achieved yet. Maybe it manifests naturally as a result of progress with 1). It'd be interesting to read some lengthier discourse on this.. I feel it relates to government, market forces, social perception, culture and more..
https://charlierose.com/videos/28249