We never seem to learn do we – as in the human race I mean. Something like 2500 years ago Herodotus, the Greek historian (born c 484 BC and who died sometime between 421 and 415 BC) stated in his famous “The Histories” that:
“It is always great buildings and the tall trees which are struck by lightning. It is God’s way to bring the lofty low.... For God tolerates pride in none but Himself.”
He was referring to humans and how we try to gain some, often unfair, advantage over our fellow being. This is of course usually in the context of money (what’s new?). Herodotus also recorded the Greeks had astutely observed the fact that:
“Human prosperity never abides long in the same place.”
To my way of thinking all human life has one purpose and one only – the well being of humanity. And I wonder whether all the technological advances we have made, and continue to make, on an exponential growth pattern, actually do HELP humanity. Money is very useful in this regard if used to assist those in need – to purchase their requirements. But do we need huge arsenals of weapons; do we need to spend countless billions on developing new or more ‘refined’ ways of killing each other? Wouldn’t it be much better to spend this money trying to right some of the wrongs and injustices of the past, to the extent that those who may have felt they had been treated unjustly or in some other way wronged, feel compensated and have no need to take further action?
The three basic requirements of humanity seem to be slipping further out of the reach of many – adequate food, shelter and personal security. These still seem to elude the one billion people (according to the World Health Organization) currently at the point of starvation, who often live in the most hazardous regions – particularly Africa and the Indian sub-continent. So what are the wealthy doing about it?
As I said before the purpose of human life is to help humanity. Why aren’t we doing it? There is enough food thrown away in the developed countries (so I have read somewhere) to feed all those in need. Are we those “great buildings and the tall trees” to be laid low by God because He “tolerates pride in none but Himself?” To consider oneself ‘above’ or ‘better’ than others, who are starving with lack of shelter and without any personal security, is surely ‘pride’; is surely ‘hubris’.
This, surely, is pride asking for a fall?
Also consider the observation that “Human prosperity never abides long in the same place.” It would seem that not many in Wall Street read Herodotus or if they did they didn’t think it would apply to them – they cared for no one but themselves and the money they were ‘making’ through their obscene commissions. Certainly, I would guess, the despicable Bernie Madoff thought he was above all this ‘nonsense’ – how wrong he was (I doubt that he ever read Herodotus). Madoff seems never to have cared about the well being of anyone other than himself – and look where it got him.
If you follow my thinking that as humans our main purpose in life is to help our fellow beings you will understand my continual reference to the Law of Cause and Effect and to the importance of ethics in our relationships. It is needful to be always fair, honest, kind, compassionate, empathetic, moderate and just in all our dealing. To be anything else is to invite the Gods to cut you down to size and to ‘bring the lofty low’.
In colloquial English call this the ‘tall poppy’ syndrome – in Australia at least we seem to take a perverse pleasure in seeing the ‘self promoted mighty’ laid low and cut down to the size of normal human beings.
Wednesday, July 15, 2009
Tuesday, July 14, 2009
Injustice revisited
I have previously written about the injustices perpetuated by the Israeli’s against the Palestinians and particularly those in Gaza. These continue and the recent change of Government in Israel will not, I fear, alter this deplorable situation a great deal. Again this is autocratic governance and tyranny to maintain the status quo, to the ‘benefit’ of the Israelis. Again all in the name of God, (Yahweh) – all above board, apparently, because the Israeli’s use their army to enforce their autocratic rules and because we have been told, by the Israeli’s or course, that the Israeli army is the most moral (and presumably ethical) army in the world.
While I certainly abhor the terror tactics used by Hamas and others of that ilk, I also strongly believe that Israel is wrong to use the methods they do.
Then there is North Korea, Burma, Zimbabwe and of course China, to name but a few of the current countries with dubious records, all tyrannies and in the case of North Korea, Burma and Zimbabwe, basket cases as well.
But there is no need to look far afield. We have injustice at home. The Aborigine has been shockingly treated – the history of abuse (shot, chained and flogged), neglected (health and education) with virtually no representation (the Australian constitution was changed only in 1967 to allow full citizens rights) suffered by the original inhabitants of Australia is appalling. And don’t forget that the Aborigines in Tasmania were exterminated with official sanction. In Tasmania they had survived 12500 years isolation (since the melting of the last ice age inundated Bass Straight) to the 18th Century, but were all dead within about 200 years – how is that for injustice.
Also don’t forget the abuse of women and children in Australia – those who are most vulnerable. The Australian Bureau of Statistics publishes figures measuring the extent of violence (physical and sexual) against women which is quite shocking (the figures do NOT show other forms of abuse – emotional, social, financial etc). Would you believe that 23% of women who have ever been in a long term relationship have experienced violence at some time during the relationship? Or that 42% who had been in a previous relationship had suffered violence from that previous partner? And so it goes on.
Now why? Why would any sensible person want to commit a violent act, of any sort, against someone they purport to love? And someone who, to boot, is weaker and more vulnerable than they are?
I have been looking for any statistics (which I have yet to find - which i will soon) to prove it, but I feel sure that much of this violence is alcohol induced. This of course is a whole new subject of its own – I mean excessive consumption of alcohol.
Alcohol, as with all things, in moderation is ok. But when one drink leads to another and another, and there is a predisposition to anger or violence then the can of worms is exposed and innocent people suffer.
All this injustice, both national and individual, for what – pleasure? An ego trip? Control and/or ‘power’? Human nature is fascinating isn’t it, though sometimes for all the wrong reasons.
While I certainly abhor the terror tactics used by Hamas and others of that ilk, I also strongly believe that Israel is wrong to use the methods they do.
Then there is North Korea, Burma, Zimbabwe and of course China, to name but a few of the current countries with dubious records, all tyrannies and in the case of North Korea, Burma and Zimbabwe, basket cases as well.
But there is no need to look far afield. We have injustice at home. The Aborigine has been shockingly treated – the history of abuse (shot, chained and flogged), neglected (health and education) with virtually no representation (the Australian constitution was changed only in 1967 to allow full citizens rights) suffered by the original inhabitants of Australia is appalling. And don’t forget that the Aborigines in Tasmania were exterminated with official sanction. In Tasmania they had survived 12500 years isolation (since the melting of the last ice age inundated Bass Straight) to the 18th Century, but were all dead within about 200 years – how is that for injustice.
Also don’t forget the abuse of women and children in Australia – those who are most vulnerable. The Australian Bureau of Statistics publishes figures measuring the extent of violence (physical and sexual) against women which is quite shocking (the figures do NOT show other forms of abuse – emotional, social, financial etc). Would you believe that 23% of women who have ever been in a long term relationship have experienced violence at some time during the relationship? Or that 42% who had been in a previous relationship had suffered violence from that previous partner? And so it goes on.
Now why? Why would any sensible person want to commit a violent act, of any sort, against someone they purport to love? And someone who, to boot, is weaker and more vulnerable than they are?
I have been looking for any statistics (which I have yet to find - which i will soon) to prove it, but I feel sure that much of this violence is alcohol induced. This of course is a whole new subject of its own – I mean excessive consumption of alcohol.
Alcohol, as with all things, in moderation is ok. But when one drink leads to another and another, and there is a predisposition to anger or violence then the can of worms is exposed and innocent people suffer.
All this injustice, both national and individual, for what – pleasure? An ego trip? Control and/or ‘power’? Human nature is fascinating isn’t it, though sometimes for all the wrong reasons.
Monday, July 6, 2009
The Chinese Take Over
What will happen when China recovers from this current economic malaise first and overtakes the US as the largest functioning economy in the world? I make a prediction (based on nothing but a gut feeling) that by 2030 China will surpass the US as the largest economy in the world.
I know that this is a bold prediction. But I was correct about a much easier one – the US invasion of Iraq. At that time I wrote to the US Embassy and asked them to pass on a message to Bush that he would live to regret his invasion, that it was wrong – whatever the motives. I never got a reply - which I never expected anyway.
This time I base my prediction on trade and population. The US has about 305 million people and China about 1.3 billion. Much of the US’ previously unassailable position was based on intellectual property, manufacturing and exports. Now their exports are declining – they have ceded much of their manufacturing might to the Chinese – who make most of the world’s electronic and white goods and clothing. And the Chinese are learning fast so their intellectual capabilities are expanding rapidly. The Chinese also control much of the worlds cash reserves (the US has none!) and cash, as always, is king. In fact the Chinese are bolstering the US economy by holding trillions of dollars worth of US Treasury bonds.
No one likes what the Chinese have done to Tibet, nor how the communist regime tries to control the general population – it tries to control access to the internet, it controls the number of children any family may have (which is causing a huge gender imbalance). But the Chinese Government does have an agenda – they wish to raise the standard of living of their people as quickly as possible.
I also base my prediction partly on an article written many years ago now by Lt General John Glubb, known also as “Glubb Pasha” (a British general who commanded the Arab Legion before and after the Second World War) for Blackwood, an British monthly magazine. He called his article “The Fate of Empires” in which he determined that the average empire survived for 250 years. He went back in time to the ancients and followed the creation and fate of empires through to the 20th Century.
Generalising a great deal one could say that the British Empire lasted from about 1750 to about 1950 – say 200 years. Glubb stated that the Americans were slightly different in that they never had much of an ‘external’ empire and that theirs was rather an ‘internal’ empire. The American continent was so rich in resources, internally, that they never (until recent times) had to look abroad for resources to feed their economic growth. So now taking 1776 as the start of the American ‘empire’ and, while they are obviously not finished yet, taking my, predicted, date of 2030 as a cut-off, that makes 254 years.
No matter when the American’s lose their control of the world economy – and they will eventually, they will find it difficult to play second fiddle to anyone. Particularly if they are treated the way they have treated others over the years.
I know that this is a bold prediction. But I was correct about a much easier one – the US invasion of Iraq. At that time I wrote to the US Embassy and asked them to pass on a message to Bush that he would live to regret his invasion, that it was wrong – whatever the motives. I never got a reply - which I never expected anyway.
This time I base my prediction on trade and population. The US has about 305 million people and China about 1.3 billion. Much of the US’ previously unassailable position was based on intellectual property, manufacturing and exports. Now their exports are declining – they have ceded much of their manufacturing might to the Chinese – who make most of the world’s electronic and white goods and clothing. And the Chinese are learning fast so their intellectual capabilities are expanding rapidly. The Chinese also control much of the worlds cash reserves (the US has none!) and cash, as always, is king. In fact the Chinese are bolstering the US economy by holding trillions of dollars worth of US Treasury bonds.
No one likes what the Chinese have done to Tibet, nor how the communist regime tries to control the general population – it tries to control access to the internet, it controls the number of children any family may have (which is causing a huge gender imbalance). But the Chinese Government does have an agenda – they wish to raise the standard of living of their people as quickly as possible.
I also base my prediction partly on an article written many years ago now by Lt General John Glubb, known also as “Glubb Pasha” (a British general who commanded the Arab Legion before and after the Second World War) for Blackwood, an British monthly magazine. He called his article “The Fate of Empires” in which he determined that the average empire survived for 250 years. He went back in time to the ancients and followed the creation and fate of empires through to the 20th Century.
Generalising a great deal one could say that the British Empire lasted from about 1750 to about 1950 – say 200 years. Glubb stated that the Americans were slightly different in that they never had much of an ‘external’ empire and that theirs was rather an ‘internal’ empire. The American continent was so rich in resources, internally, that they never (until recent times) had to look abroad for resources to feed their economic growth. So now taking 1776 as the start of the American ‘empire’ and, while they are obviously not finished yet, taking my, predicted, date of 2030 as a cut-off, that makes 254 years.
No matter when the American’s lose their control of the world economy – and they will eventually, they will find it difficult to play second fiddle to anyone. Particularly if they are treated the way they have treated others over the years.
More on Injustice
I have written before on this but I want to say some more about injustice. Injustice is a pervasive cancer and a blight on the lives of many and a major impediment to peace in the world. Wherever there is autocratic governance, wherever there is tyranny and terror, wherever there in uncertainty - whatever generates fear - there you will find injustice.
Why and for what?
It is all about “power”. It is all about the “prestige” that accompanies power, and of course it is all about ego. Power gives the impression that the powerful are “better”, are “different” from the rest of society and therefore “deserve” the panoply that goes with the power and the position.
But as the Romans said two thousand years ago “Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely”. So power leads to corruption, which cascades down the line to injustice, to uncertainties and because no one knows what to expect next – this leads to fear. And fear gives the “powerful” a greater sense of their power which leads to more injustice, more fear and ultimately to terror and tyranny, in a fairly predictable sequence of events.
Those who are autocratic, those who terrorize and create an atmosphere of fear have the most to lose and they know it – think Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, and currently the Burmese Junta and Mugabe (just to name a few). States ruled by terror never last. Those in ‘control’ live increasingly isolated lives for fear that their own lives may be cut down in one way or another - the immutable law of cause and effect will always prevail – they will reap what they sowed. It has always been this way and can be no other. This is justice balancing out the injustice by taking out the instigators of the original injustice – even though it may take a significant period of time – justice will prevail.
The recent tragic events still unfolding in Iran are a case in point. The Iranian ‘Guardian Council’ is there, principally, to ensure that those in power remain there. It is also there to, presumably, keep the Islamic faith intact and pure. But who determines what ‘purity’ means? So to keep themselves safe and to maintain the faith this Guardian Council pays a militia (which is above the law) to kill, maim and create fear – all presumably in the name of God, of Allah the Merciful.
One can only wonder at the mentality of these people and despair.
Why and for what?
It is all about “power”. It is all about the “prestige” that accompanies power, and of course it is all about ego. Power gives the impression that the powerful are “better”, are “different” from the rest of society and therefore “deserve” the panoply that goes with the power and the position.
But as the Romans said two thousand years ago “Power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely”. So power leads to corruption, which cascades down the line to injustice, to uncertainties and because no one knows what to expect next – this leads to fear. And fear gives the “powerful” a greater sense of their power which leads to more injustice, more fear and ultimately to terror and tyranny, in a fairly predictable sequence of events.
Those who are autocratic, those who terrorize and create an atmosphere of fear have the most to lose and they know it – think Hitler, Stalin, Pol Pot, and currently the Burmese Junta and Mugabe (just to name a few). States ruled by terror never last. Those in ‘control’ live increasingly isolated lives for fear that their own lives may be cut down in one way or another - the immutable law of cause and effect will always prevail – they will reap what they sowed. It has always been this way and can be no other. This is justice balancing out the injustice by taking out the instigators of the original injustice – even though it may take a significant period of time – justice will prevail.
The recent tragic events still unfolding in Iran are a case in point. The Iranian ‘Guardian Council’ is there, principally, to ensure that those in power remain there. It is also there to, presumably, keep the Islamic faith intact and pure. But who determines what ‘purity’ means? So to keep themselves safe and to maintain the faith this Guardian Council pays a militia (which is above the law) to kill, maim and create fear – all presumably in the name of God, of Allah the Merciful.
One can only wonder at the mentality of these people and despair.
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
The natural order of things
It is sometimes worth considering the natural order of things and why we do the things we do.
One does not do something to be happy – one IS happy and does something to express it. One does not do something to be ethical – one IS ethical and does something to express those ethical ideals. We don’t need someone else to tell us – this is just part of the natural order of things.
Just take what I heard today. I heard that the owner and founder of the company I work for, an old man, had died. I only met him once and he seemed nice enough but there has been no ‘official’ communication. There was a rumour which a friend of a friend ‘confirmed’. This is just not good enough. While I appreciate the privacy, the grief and the sensitivities of the family, surely there is a responsibility to the employees to keep them in the ‘loop’ as it were, and to keep them informed? I would not have expected a ‘daily bulletin’, or anything of that nature, but something to let me know would have been welcome. I mean I am supposed to be part of a ‘team’ – or so I am told. Not much evidence of this now, is there? But they obviously have their reasons.
Enough of this negativity! I need to move on and thinking of this man’s death leads me to the subject of symbols and rituals. We use them all the time. A symbol is something we use to explain the inexplicable. It is something which our family, or group, or society use to mean something that everyone in the family, group or society understands but cannot really explain. Seeing that a death initiated all this lets use a flame by way of example. Most Western cultures have a ‘Tomb to the Unknown Warrior’ with the symbol of an ‘eternal flame’. To me this symbolises the sacrifice that soldiers make; it symbolises the ‘eternal’ life that can never be fully extinguished while there are people to remember; it symbolises the funeral pyre and is of really ancient origin; it also symbolises the ‘unity’ of Man – that we are all the same – all part of the human race – that the ‘unknown warrior’ is a part of us all.
A ritual on the other hand is used to express the inexpressible and may be a physical event or something we may verbalise – “I wash my hands of you!”- I am no longer concerned about you. Then there are the well known ‘universal’ rituals of Easter and Christmas – the Easter bunny - the hoped for fertility in the growing season of Spring (Northern Hemisphere) and the giving of presents – celebrating the birth of the new year and the return of the sun (again originally a Northern Hemisphere ritual) now taken over by Christianity.
These are just some of the things we find difficult to explain or express and yet they are part of our lives and some are remnants of a half remembered ancient past when Nature, the ebb and flow of the tides and the cycle of the seasons had a deeper meaning than it does for us city dwellers of today. I know there are many other examples of symbols and rituals used by many people around the world.
This is all as it should be and is part of the natural order of things, at least I consider it so. Symbols and rituals help us make sense of the world in our own way.
One does not do something to be happy – one IS happy and does something to express it. One does not do something to be ethical – one IS ethical and does something to express those ethical ideals. We don’t need someone else to tell us – this is just part of the natural order of things.
Just take what I heard today. I heard that the owner and founder of the company I work for, an old man, had died. I only met him once and he seemed nice enough but there has been no ‘official’ communication. There was a rumour which a friend of a friend ‘confirmed’. This is just not good enough. While I appreciate the privacy, the grief and the sensitivities of the family, surely there is a responsibility to the employees to keep them in the ‘loop’ as it were, and to keep them informed? I would not have expected a ‘daily bulletin’, or anything of that nature, but something to let me know would have been welcome. I mean I am supposed to be part of a ‘team’ – or so I am told. Not much evidence of this now, is there? But they obviously have their reasons.
Enough of this negativity! I need to move on and thinking of this man’s death leads me to the subject of symbols and rituals. We use them all the time. A symbol is something we use to explain the inexplicable. It is something which our family, or group, or society use to mean something that everyone in the family, group or society understands but cannot really explain. Seeing that a death initiated all this lets use a flame by way of example. Most Western cultures have a ‘Tomb to the Unknown Warrior’ with the symbol of an ‘eternal flame’. To me this symbolises the sacrifice that soldiers make; it symbolises the ‘eternal’ life that can never be fully extinguished while there are people to remember; it symbolises the funeral pyre and is of really ancient origin; it also symbolises the ‘unity’ of Man – that we are all the same – all part of the human race – that the ‘unknown warrior’ is a part of us all.
A ritual on the other hand is used to express the inexpressible and may be a physical event or something we may verbalise – “I wash my hands of you!”- I am no longer concerned about you. Then there are the well known ‘universal’ rituals of Easter and Christmas – the Easter bunny - the hoped for fertility in the growing season of Spring (Northern Hemisphere) and the giving of presents – celebrating the birth of the new year and the return of the sun (again originally a Northern Hemisphere ritual) now taken over by Christianity.
These are just some of the things we find difficult to explain or express and yet they are part of our lives and some are remnants of a half remembered ancient past when Nature, the ebb and flow of the tides and the cycle of the seasons had a deeper meaning than it does for us city dwellers of today. I know there are many other examples of symbols and rituals used by many people around the world.
This is all as it should be and is part of the natural order of things, at least I consider it so. Symbols and rituals help us make sense of the world in our own way.
Wednesday, June 24, 2009
Ethics and Trust
I wonder what it is about politicians. I certainly don’t trust them a great deal (pollies of either persuasion) and it seems I am not alone in my feelings. The politician’s antics in the Federal Parliament on the hill in Canberra, over the last few days have not shown any of them in a particularly favourable light.
The last Roy Morgan poll (April 2008) rating various professions and occupations for ‘Trust’ and ‘Ethics’ ranks Federal politician (at 17 out of 29) above Directors of public companies, Business executives, State MPs and Talk back radio announcers.
But it ranks them below Bank managers, Public servants and Public Opinion Pollsters.
Nurses, Pharmacist and Doctors are still at the top of the ranking.
These are the people who are supposed to be running our country, policing our borders, sending soldiers to war and maintain the value of the coin of the realm.
It makes you wonder doesn’t it!
The last Roy Morgan poll (April 2008) rating various professions and occupations for ‘Trust’ and ‘Ethics’ ranks Federal politician (at 17 out of 29) above Directors of public companies, Business executives, State MPs and Talk back radio announcers.
But it ranks them below Bank managers, Public servants and Public Opinion Pollsters.
Nurses, Pharmacist and Doctors are still at the top of the ranking.
These are the people who are supposed to be running our country, policing our borders, sending soldiers to war and maintain the value of the coin of the realm.
It makes you wonder doesn’t it!
Sunday, June 21, 2009
Ordinary things
When I write, which I enjoy, I write mainly for myself. I write to clarify my thoughts about something I have read, that I heard about or something I was told.
Often what people tell me – particularly my wife – may turn out to be a ‘home truth’. Now a ‘home truth’, like all of what people say about someone else, is just an opinion or a judgement, often based on limited information.
Some people are greatly offended by ‘home truths’, and yet, apart from an opinion a home truth may be nothing but a self evident fact or a trait, or something else that in some way irritates the observer, the teller of the ‘home truth’. But it is their ‘truth’, not yours.
One partner in a marriage, or someone at work may say to the other, “you are always so untidy,” or “once you start something you never seem to finish it.” This may, or may not be a fact – as the observer sees it. Yet there is always a reason – either the person complained about has different priorities, lacks the necessary skills and does not want to admit it, or has been distracted. There is always a reason which is why a ‘home truth’ is not always valid.
If a ‘home truth’ does hurt it may well draw attention to something which you acknowledge in yourself – for instance that you lack consideration for others (your untidiness), or that you have never been persistent in your endeavours and have never finished anything you started (laziness??). You may acknowledge the veracity of the ‘truth’ but be unwilling to accept it because it does not match your idea about yourself and the image you seek to portray to the world. That is why it is uncomfortable or why it hurts.
The other thing about ‘home truths’ is that they are just opinions and opinions are notoriously unreliable. They depend on the mood, at the time, of the opinionated; on that person’s outlook on life; their education, life experience and so on – generally not reliable indicators of a ‘truth’, home or otherwise.
We make judgements and assumptions based on sometimes very limited information.
Often what people tell me – particularly my wife – may turn out to be a ‘home truth’. Now a ‘home truth’, like all of what people say about someone else, is just an opinion or a judgement, often based on limited information.
Some people are greatly offended by ‘home truths’, and yet, apart from an opinion a home truth may be nothing but a self evident fact or a trait, or something else that in some way irritates the observer, the teller of the ‘home truth’. But it is their ‘truth’, not yours.
One partner in a marriage, or someone at work may say to the other, “you are always so untidy,” or “once you start something you never seem to finish it.” This may, or may not be a fact – as the observer sees it. Yet there is always a reason – either the person complained about has different priorities, lacks the necessary skills and does not want to admit it, or has been distracted. There is always a reason which is why a ‘home truth’ is not always valid.
If a ‘home truth’ does hurt it may well draw attention to something which you acknowledge in yourself – for instance that you lack consideration for others (your untidiness), or that you have never been persistent in your endeavours and have never finished anything you started (laziness??). You may acknowledge the veracity of the ‘truth’ but be unwilling to accept it because it does not match your idea about yourself and the image you seek to portray to the world. That is why it is uncomfortable or why it hurts.
The other thing about ‘home truths’ is that they are just opinions and opinions are notoriously unreliable. They depend on the mood, at the time, of the opinionated; on that person’s outlook on life; their education, life experience and so on – generally not reliable indicators of a ‘truth’, home or otherwise.
We make judgements and assumptions based on sometimes very limited information.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
