The opinionated

I wonder what the reaction would be if those who so readily express opinions about the morals and general behaviour of others were asked to express an opinion about themselves? 

 

Their opinion of their own morals and general behaviour? It might make for an interesting conversation I think.

 

But this is what we all tend to do nowadays – from political leaders, newspaper columnists, radio “shock jocks”, TV commentators, and us, lesser mortals – they, we, all express opinions. Everyone has an opinion about something. However (in my opinion!) this is never knowledge based. In any event a “knowledge based opinion” would be an oxymoron, in my opinion!

 

You see if your appearance is different – your skin colour or the shape of your eyes, or you worship God (I believe there is only one) in a different way, or speak a different language from me, or dress in a “funny way”, then, in my “opinion” you are not to be trusted. You might be a rapist, or a criminal, a fraudster, a drug addict – whatever. In my “opinion” that is. Never based on “knowledge”, or verifiable facts, only in my opinion.

 

It has been declared by some (please allow for the hyperbole) that being good (therefore more like me) you are more likely to have blue eyes, a smile with pristine white teeth and blonde hair. Being evil (or different from me) you will have you black hair, red eyes, rotting teeth, and horns!

 

You know as well as I do that this is complete hogwash – that good (and bad) people are everywhere in every society. We are all part of the human “family” – good, bad and indifferent. 

 

So why then do we so freely express our opinion? I have no real idea (opinion?) except to say that (in my opinion) it might be to cause controversy. If I was a politician it might be to please my political “base” to ensure my re-election. Possibly it might be to start a rumour that may increase the value of my shares in a particular company. There is no limit to the range of human ingenuity, particularly when it comes to looking after “me” and preening my ego.

 

Bearing all this in mind and referring back to my original question, I wonder what the reaction would be if someone was asked to express their opinion of themselves?

 

Interesting.

Memories or dreams?

It is very strange how memory works. I might be going about my daily chores when a scent, a sound, a picture or something I might read, will suddenly recall an event or something about our lives together. Me with Magucha. I know that it is getting on for three years since she died (I just can’t use the euphemism “passed away”. It seems like an avoidance – to hide something). Sometimes she seems closer than at other times – like a dream – drifting in and out. 

All this reminds me of the reasons why I like poetry and why it has been used by troubadours and wandering minstrels down the centuries is that the cadence, the rhythm, matches that of music and the beat of the human heart – about sixty beats a minute. Before written language was invented, Hindus used the rhythm to help them remember verses of the Bhagavad Gita and other epic tales. Similarly the Greeks had wandering minstrels who would entertain people with tales of Olympus and the Gods who lived there. These stories were later collated by Homer and many other writers. 

This poem – and I know it may pull at the heart-strings – but I don’t care, it resonates for me - only because I grieve. This reminds me of Magucha and the love we shared.  It is all about memories. 

When tomorrow starts without me.

When tomorrow starts without me, I will not be here to see,
That the sun will rise and find your eyes; filled with tears for me,
But please know you're always in my heart, and I will forever love you,
And know, each time you think of me, I will be missing you too.

When tomorrow starts without me, I need you to understand,
That an angel came, he called my name and took me by the hand.
He told me it was time to go up to heaven far above,
And that I have to leave behind all those I dearly love.

When tomorrow starts without me, I know that you will cry,
For all my life I’d always thought that I would never die.
I had so much life ahead of me; I had so much to do,
It seems almost impossible that I was leaving you.

When tomorrow starts without me, I think of the good days, and the bad,
I thought of all our fights, next to all the fun we had.
If I could have stayed, just for a little while,
I would say I'd always be here, and then I'd make you smile.

When tomorrow starts without me, I'll realise that this could never be,
As all that would be left of me, is frozen in memories.
Then I thought of all the beautiful things that I would miss tomorrow,
I thought of you and when I did my heart was filled with sorrow.

When tomorrow starts without me I will walk through heaven’s gate,
I will feel at home even without my soul mate.
I know this is what I wanted, deep down within my bones,
And God looked down and smiled at me from his great golden throne.

When tomorrow starts without me I see everything He promised me,

“Today your life on earth is past, and now you can be free.”
“I promise no tomorrow as today will always last,
And since it's all the same you will not be longing for the past.”

So when tomorrow starts without me don’t think we’re far apart,
For every time you think of me I’m right here in your heart.

Attributed to David Romano. 

Different people – so what!

They may have a different colour skin; they may speak a different language; they may have different customs; but they will all scream in pain when tortured (as I am sure I would do); they will all bleed when hurt; they will all die of hunger if not fed; they will all die of thirst with out water.

They are all HUMAN BEINGS, like me and like you.

Christians, Jews, Muslims, Hindus all worship God – God, Yahweh, Allah and Vishnu (or Shiva or Brahma) – different names for the same thing. All worship in a different way, according to their tradition, but does it really matter?

The fact is that about 65 million people are displaced at present, in the World. This is the greatest number since World War 2. And many, if not all, have been displaced because of their skin colour, their language, their customs or the manner by which they worship God.

This is nearly twice the population of California. About the population of Great Britain and also about the same as the population of France!

This is appalling. It is outrageous that this displacement and the suffering – almost always the suffering of the most defenceless and vulnerable, women and children - should take place at all.

All because of a perceived “difference”!!

There is much wringing of hands and many words of condemnation, but methinks, too little action. These unfortunate people now have no home, little food and shelter and in many cases, no country. Children are denied education, denied the emotional and physical stability and support that is so necessary for their development to achieve fulfillment as useful citizens of the World.

Religious persecution, and this displacement of millions is, at its root, religious persecution, is a significant relapse of values, a relapse of humanity, a relapse back to Medieval, even primitive times and is a very poor reflection on our current, collective, morality.  How about the “Golden Rule” – treat others the way you would like to be treated? Have we forgotten this? Does it no longer apply?

It was Nietzsche (admittedly not one of my favourate philosophers) who, I believe somewhere said, “Anyone who fights with monsters should take care that he does not in the process become a monster.”

Are we becoming monsters?

Do differences really matter that much?

Over seventy years after the Second World War, I don’t believe this will be looked upon as our “Finest Hour”, by future generations.

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.