Is this the new world paradigm?

I wonder if the current method of communicating (in no more than140 characters) is affecting how we see and react to the world about us?

It used to be that when we communicated, face to face or by that, now very “old fashioned” letter writing, we were aware of the need to be polite, to be humble, to show self-restraint and to be discrete, particularly when dealing with those personally unknown to us.

In this regard, you may not be aware of this, but I have more than a passing interest in other religions and beliefs – that is other than Christianity. They are important I feel, as they (these other religions) influence some 6 billion people. That is a fair number!

In this connection I offer a very abbreviated (hopefully reasonably accurate) synopsis of an aspect of Hinduism that I find quite interesting. This is interesting as what has been believed for thousands of years (Hinduism, and it derivatives, is the oldest surviving religion in the world - I understand it even predates Judaism) is strangely applicable in todays rather unsettled world.

The Hindus believe in the “Yugas” – or the different ages that human beings have experienced in the world since we first became human. We are, according to these beliefs, now about 3000 years into the last of the four Yugas - the Kali Yuga wherein civilization degenerates into chaos.

Some of the (alleged) attributes of the Kali Yuga, are that:

•    Rulers will become unreasonable.

•    Rulers will no longer see it as their duty to promote spirituality, or to protect their subjects: they will become a danger to the world.

•    People will start migrating.

•    There will exist no topics on the subject of spirituality or God, even at the residences of so-called saints and respectable gentlemen and nothing will be known of the need for sacrifice, even by word.

With regard to human relationships:

•    Avarice and wrath will be common. Humans will openly display animosity towards each other. Ignorance will be widespread.

•    People will have thoughts of murder with no justification and will see nothing wrong in that.

•    Lust will be viewed as socially acceptable and sexual activity will be seen as the central requirement of life.

•    Sin will increase exponentially, while virtue will fade and cease to flourish.

•    People will take vows and break them soon after.

•    People will become addicted to intoxicating drinks and drugs.

An interesting future! It used to be that facts were facts and news was news. No more!

Quite appropriately, Nietzsche, admittedly not my favorite philosopher, said: “Anyone who fights with monsters should take care that he does not in the process become a monster.”

How shall we live? Confucius – he say!

We are living in a troubled world, beset by many trials and tribulations and where ethics is in short supply – as has always been the case, I suppose, but with modern communications they seem somewhat compounded and “in your face”, as it were. So this all begs the question – in this Twenty-first Century how are we to live? What should be our collective aims? What is mankind’s purpose?

Some time and quite a few posts ago I wrote about ethics and the conditions and attributes necessary for ethical conduct to occur. I now refer to some old texts to expand on this subject.

In the Analects of Confucius (551 BC to 479 BC)  translated by Simon Leys, there is a quote about the importance, in ancient China, of the notion of the word ‘gentleman’.

“Originally it meant an aristocrat, a member of the social elite: one did not become a gentleman, one could only be born a gentleman. For Confucius, on the contrary, a ‘gentleman’ is a member of the moral elite. It is an ethical quality, achieved by the practice of virtue, and secured through education. Every man should strive for it, even though few may reach it.”

To understand this statement it may help to recall what Confucius had to say about justice and laws some twenty-five centuries ago:

 “If you govern the people by laws, and keep them in order by penalties, they will avoid the penalties, yet lose their sense of shame. But if you govern them by your moral excellence, and keep them in order by your dutiful conduct, they will retain their sense of shame, and also live up to this standard.”

In light of the astounding lack of trust and moral leadership shown - and admitted – by many of today’s leaders, I truly believe that it is time for everyone to stop, even take a step back and look, I mean really examine, their actions and see whether they make any sense.

Take the apparently common scenario: “I am spying on you because I know that you are spying on me but I want my spies to find out what your spies are trying to find out about me because my spies are trying to get the same sort of information about you”, kind of thing.

No one likes being spied on, so why do it? I mean, really, does this make any sense? Is this the way we want to live?? After five million years of human evolution if this is the finest example of all we have achieved, then God help us all!!!

If you are a “Creationist” I ask if this is the finest example of all we have achieved since the days of Adam and Eve??? Again, if it is, then God help us all!!

Just because spying is an age old “game” does not mean that it is the right thing to do; just because “everyone is doing it” does not mean it is the right thing to do; just because everyone is doing it does not make it ethical!!!

So – repeat after me, all together now, “Always treat others the way you would like to be treated - because there is no other viable option!”

Please talk to me!

What do you do – or what can you do, at work, when your superior cuts you out of the loop of information and limits the control you have over your life? I guess that you would have an argument and then walk out and find another job. But what happens when a country's leader does the equivalent of the same thing?

With all the modern means of communication, why is it that people don’t talk to each other? Governments communicating with their citizens; firms communicating with the workforce, down to an individual level, to let them know what is going on and how they are tracking and the importance of their contribution is vital for harmonious relationships and an individual’s general well being. Yet this is a significant failing with most governments and in many organisations.

To me this is a classic example of any organisations indifference, down-right bad “people management” and very poor communications. It is also an example of the (unfortunately common) attitude that the only thing governments care about is power (and money) and that the only thing firms care about is money – their citizens or staff, their morale, work-life balance, welfare and well-being come a long way second.

I believe that poor communications is at the core of what is happening in the Muslim world at present – the current “popular” uprisings against oppressive regimes. People are getting tired of continually being told what they can and cannot do by an elite class or group who consider themselves better than others and above the law (rule by edict). Part of the problem is that Muslim law and religious practices are so intertwined that the State, religion and the law courts are one and the same.
This leads to massive conflicts of interest. Similar problems were recognised in England over 1000 years ago when the King (John) was forced to step back from actually ruling the country and to agree to the separation of powers – that the State, the Law courts and elected Parliament (the Government) should be independent from each other.

Muslim (Sharia)law does not operate in this way. But I really think that something similar will have to occur in countries where Koranic Law prevails. Currently the Mullahs are both the lawyers and the enforcers of the law – in effect they are the law makers, judges and ‘executioners’ of the law. They are not, however, trained in law – they are trained in the Islamic religion. This is not necessarily the same thing. The Koran, as I understand it, suggests a code of conduct, which if followed should lead to peace and harmony between all peoples. The same applies to Christianity and Judaism – we are all ‘children’ of Abraham after all. The trouble is no one follows the code of conduct – everyone has their own interpretation – just look at the problems between Shia and Sunni Muslims - both followers of the same faith.

I suggest that until there is a separation of powers in the Muslim world these uprising will continue for some time yet. People need some personal control over their lives – an elected parliament gives this element of control. If this separation of powers actually happens then there will be a long overdue renaissance in the Muslim world.

Chinese Characters

There was a local news item the other day regarding Chinese authorities concern about the “purity” of the Chinese language. They are apparently contemplating means to prevent the popularization of non-Chinese words (mainly English) together with the use of non-Chinese letters and characters.

Let me admit first up that I have no knowledge at all of Chinese – I can neither read, write nor speak any words in that language, so what I am saying now is based on my general knowledge, not on specifics. But I understand that Chinese is not a phonetic language (it is tonal), in that a Chinese “word” cannot be broken down into individual vowels and consonants, like words based on the Indo-Persian–Greek-Latin languages (ie English!). I am hoping that someone, with knowledge of Chinese, will correct me if I am wrong!

Be that as it may, how the Chinese authorities are going to enforce the “purity” of their language is difficult to imagine. Being an authoritarian government I suppose they could employ undercover “word police” arresting people who dare to use non-Chinese words in their speech. The trouble with this approach is that it poses two problems for the “language purity” authorities and the Chinese people in general:-

a. As soon as authorities “ban” the use of a word the message has to be disseminated somehow. The media generally – posters, the press, TV, the internet and cell phone SMS would all need to be employed to spread the message. Immediately many millions of people who had never heard of the “undesirable” word would now know what it was! So rather than curtailing the spread, the consequence would be to spread it even further – albeit, with a warning.

b. The world is a dynamic place and language follows. Many “new” words would represent new ideas, technology, inventions and concepts and “slang”, which may have no equivalent in Chinese characters or sounds. If the authorities wish to prevent these “new” words from entering and “polluting” their language they will need to employ an army of linguists to study every and all publications and the social media so as to constantly devise new characters or combinations of existing characters to equate to the new “sounds” and meanings.

The French tried this (to prevent the encroachment of English into French) and I believe that they have given up a battle they discovered they would never win. Society changes faster than any government authority can hope to emulate and as I said before language follows a similar course. This is the “advantage” of English – it is so adaptable – it absorbs and incorporates any new, useful word, from whatever language and then “adopts” it as its own – and nobody cares one way or another.

English (simply put) is based on three principal languages – Latin, Germanic (Saxon) and French, but has incorporated words (at least the sound but with Anglicized spelling) from Scandinavia (Norse), Holland (Dutch), Greece, the Middle East (Arabic), India, Australian Aboriginal, North American Indian, many other countries and yes, even Chinese.

Remember that a language is purely a means of communication, so it does not really matter which language is used as long as people understand the message! English has now been adopted as the “official” language of air and marine safety and many other international organizations. This came about, through a process of “soft power” – admiration, striving to emulate the activities of successful people, in music, in literature and a general accessibility. Authoritarian rule will never stop a “natural” process.

Are your relationships OK?

Relationships are funny things. We can think that everything is OK in our relationship with our spouse, partner, children, work mates, friends or whoever. But is it really so?

We must be fair in our relationships – treat others as you would like to be treated – is the best way. This really means good communications. Tell people how you feel; if you are upset; if you are angry; if you are disappointed with something they have done. But you have to expect to get similar treatment! To have others telling you how they feel!

The other day a lady came to see me. She was in a bit of a panic. Some days earlier she had been at the breakfast table with her husband of many years. He had recently retired, she had just seen the last of their children leave home, so they were in an ‘empty nest’ situation. She had spent the best part of the last twenty five years looking after the children, while her husband had been working. The situation was that as she was eating her breakfast she looked at her husband (who was reading the paper) and thought, “I know your name but I don’t know you! I don’t know your favourite colour. I don’t know your real likes and dislikes. I don’t know what moves you, what makes you happy, what makes you sad. I just don’t know you!” For years they had been dealing with each other in a superficial way. No REAL discussions on their thoughts, or views, or how they felt on anything meaningful. They had not communed (ie communicated) for years!! It was actually quite sad.

Now that they only had themselves to deal with she got scared. How was she going to handle this? Now that he was, as it were, divorced from the self worth of his job, and she from the daily care of the children, she realised they had nothing in common. Their relationship was in need of some radical treatment.

Are you like that?