Published in TheSource (www.thelasource.com) in July 2006.

________________________________________

When I was asked to write an article on a specific cultural experience, it took me a bit less than a second to come up with an idea.

I was born in Québec of French parents. I have been living in the West for six years, and recently went on a trip to South America. Open-minded, curious and always willing to learn about the many cultures of the world, I though that I was (oh, silly me!) immune to what is usually called “the culture chock”.

Recently, I got engaged. Thank you, and no, I don’t know the wedding date. Obviously, I had to inform my future parents-in-law of the good news. Knowing them for almost two years, I thought the situation was under control and I had, in my mind, prepared a few scenarios of what their reaction might be. Just one little detail, my fiancée is Chinese.

My fiancée’s parents are very nice and always treat me with a lot of respect, but they speak very little English and even less French (I exaggerate a little – her mother manages to get by in English). And the eight Cantonese words that I can say without creating too much laughter are not enough to have profound conversations.

Having invited my future parents-in-law to the restaurant with a speech prepared (in Chinese), I shared my intention to marry their daughter. Their reaction was, to my Westerner eyes, very puzzling. In a few seconds, the situation went from “good news!” to “professional interview”.

Their very serious reaction surprised and shocked me. I was asking myself why they think I’m not good for their daughter. What is so troubling to them that they ask me so many questions? In addition, Jenny (my fiancée), was very calm and seemed to be almost enjoying herself. In face of such unforeseen reactions, I opted for cautiousness. I shut up and ate my dim sum!

It is true that it was a bit naïve of me to expect an enthusiastic reaction from them. It has been almost three years since I was dating their daughter. They were expecting sooner or later that we were going to get engaged. Nevertheless, I was shocked.

Later, after talking to my Chinese friends, I understood that her parents’ reaction was normal. For them, asking questions meant that they approved our intentions. They just wanted to know the details of our project: our lives, future, children, etc… all questions to which for which I was not prepared.

In Latin societies, reactions are generally more… joyful. We open Champagne, hug each other, etc. The details of the wedding and married life… we’ll see later, in a few days or weeks. But in Chinese culture, an event so important must be dealt with seriousness, and the ceremony plans must be established as soon as possible. After it is all done, then we can have fun.

I got out of the experience a bit chocked, but more importantly, humbler. Ready for a new experience that is much more difficult: preparing my wedding!

Frédéric Van Caenegem

In two sections:
First:The letter I received by email (translated from French).
Second: My reaction to this lette

---

THE PRICE OF GASOLINE:

NOTE: Even if you do not have a car, you can distribute the following message to your friends.

For an intelligent war price against oil companies. It is said that the price of gasoline will soon reach 90 cents by litre. You want the prices to drop? We need to take actions. Somebody suggested a brilliant idea, which is much more judicious then not to buy gasoline this or that day, in April or last May.

Oil companies laughed at these methods because they knew that we could not continue to hurt ourselves by systematically refusing to buy gasoline: it was much more a trouble for us then a problem for them. But the following proposal could prove of frightening effectiveness if it is applied in a rigorous way. Take time to read this message and join us!

You probably believe that gasoline around 58,9 hundreds the litre is a very good bargain. We too believe that! Currently price rather oscillates around 80 cents the litre. Since oil companies and OPEC conditioned us to believe that a price between 70,9 and 75,9 cents is a very good bargain, we must take actions to show them that it is the purchasers and not the salesmen that control the market.

With the price of gasoline that climbs each day, us, the consumers, must take action. The only way gasoline prices is to fall is by hitting the wallet of oil companies by not buying their gasoline, but without hurting us. Because we need our cars, we certainly cannot stop buying gasoline. However, we can create a real impact on the market of gasoline if we act all together in this price war.

Here is what is proposed:
By the END OF THIS YEAR, WE WILL NOT BUY A DROP OF GASOLINE FROM THE TWO MORE IMPORTANT OIL COMPANIES (which are only one now) SHELL and ESSO. If they do not sell gasoline, they will be obliged to reduce their prices. If they reduce their prices, the other companies will have to follow them. But to create an impact, we must literally contact millions of customers of SHELL and ESSO.

Here are the means of arriving there. This message was sent to about thirty people. If each one of these people transmits it to approximately ten of their acquaintances (30 X 10=300), that these make the same thing (300 X 10=3000), and so on by time that this message has reached its seventh generation, we will have reached more than THIRTY MILLIONS consumers!

All you have to do is to send this message today to 10 people and requiring them to make the same thing. That is all. By this simple rule, one could, in eight days, reach not less than 300 millions people! Let us act together to make a difference! If you believe you can make a difference on the price of gasoline, pass this message to your acquaintances.

WE HAVE NOTHING TO LOSE BY TRYING!

---

Below is my reaction to this letter:

To the author of this letter,

Very attached to a form of social justice, the author tries to raise attention to his project to decrease the price of gasoline. Unfortunately, the author goes to the heart of the subject without taking some steps back. In this regard, he (or she?) don’t see that this project cannot succeed, but more importantly, the price of gasoline is not the important issue here.

Nobody “conditions” whomever to anything.

The author of this letter seems to think that there is a conspiracy of large oil companies on, I suppose, good and honest citizens, victims of the schemes of these supposedly powerful beings. That the latter “condition us” to think that gasoline prices must be high.

First, I find at best appalling to think that gasoline consumers are martyrs. Not only they are aggressors (I’ll develop this point later on), but also they are (I hope) citizens that are free and conscious of their decisions.

The author says that: “Because we need our cars, we certainly cannot stop buying gasoline”. Well I say no and he is wrong. We do not need our cars and thus we can stop buying gasoline. Our need is to move, not to drive cars. We can as a society and as citizens, set up alternatives to urban sprawling and the abusive use of the car as the main mean of transportation. It is time to check what others do in public transportation that is effective and economical (the example of Curitiba at Brazil; a city whose urban development was thought by putting the priority of public transport could be an interesting starting point.)

Gasoline consumers are not victims

Moreover, gasoline consumers are not victims, but aggressors. A constant aggression against nature, a nature that CANNOT support for a very long time the emission of greenhouses gases that comes, for about half, from the use of cars. Humans currently places themselves in a state of confrontation with nature. If this becomes a fight, I am sure of one thing: nature is much more stronger and intelligent then us.

Oil companies also sell to small retailers

And even if the big oil companies make fun of consumers (which is true, I have no doubt) and that was really what is at stake here, this project cannot work. Big oil companies also sell to small gas retailers. Where do you believe that independent gas station at the corner of the street buys its oil? It does not have a oil rig below it and it’s owner does not have all the infrastructure necessary to extract, refine, transport and distribute the black gold coming from Saudi Arabia!

Proposals to put large oil companies in difficulties

Petrol consumption being a polluting activity, the principle of the pollutant payer requires MORE taxation of gasoline and a higher car use cost. For those who think they already pay too much their gasoline, I say to them: “Driving a car is a privilege not a right”. Thus, the surplus could be used to improve of public transport, but especially it will encourage more people to use public transport. What public transportation lack is not money, but users.

Of course, all that will have to be better thought than in this small text you just have read. We must now set up alternatives to means of transports that privilege the use of cars. Slow down urban sprawling by vitalising downtowns and its close neighbourhoods. Advocate and subsidise public transport so that it not an alternative to the car, but a complement. People would use their car to go to the bus stop or subway.

It is only an idea, but perhaps by taxing gasoline to pay automobile insurances, one would reduce the fixed cost (insurance, maintenance) by increasing the cost of utilisation (gasoline). Personally, when I had a car, I could not pay the bus pass because, even if the car (insurance + gasoline) were more expensive, the liberty of action thus acquired appeared me to be worth the cost. It is finally the high parking cost in the downtown area and some mechanical problems that have made me return to the bus.

Slowly, but surely, because nature will not wait, it is necessary TO MAKE OURSELVES less dependent on cars. And a decrease of the demand is the only effective way that the consumers have to lower prices. As long as the consumers will want gasoline, they will create a pressure to rise the price of gasoline.

I watch the news and I am a little (much) disgusted to see here and there a number of strikes that are always happening among the richest elements of our society. If I were at their place, I would simply be ashamed. Ashamed to say to the whole society: “I already make lots of money, but I want more”.

Symptomatic of a society where excesses of individualism makes it completely legitimate to the public opinion to claim your rights (in this case more money and nothing other) independently of the social consequences of this request, which are simply disregarded.

Democracy is not simply the right to express yourself and to defend your interests, it is also the duty to think of others before acting out (especially if there is much poverty that surrounds us). The opulent strikers can do what they want (it is their right to require more money), but at least can they think it over before taking action?