My Blog

Was I One Those Teachers Who Smothered Creativity, or Indoctrinated Children?

A commentary on our education system.

Advertisements

Several months ago, a news article came across one of my news feeds titled, We are born creative geniuses and the education system dumbs us down, according to NASA scientists. My immediate reaction was: No way was I a part of a system that “dumbs down” kids. I made them smarter. The truth was, this headline disturbed me, and when I first saw it, I ignored it and never bothered to read it, thinking I’ll read it some time later. Well, later is here, and I read the article. Here is the jest of the article.

Scientists gave a test that looks at the ability to come up with new, different, and innovative ideas to 1,600 children between the ages of 4 and 5. What they found was that 98 percent of children fell into the genius category of imagination?  The scientists were so astonished that they decided to make it a longer study and tested the children again five years later when they were ten years old. The result? Only 30 % of the children fell in the genius category of imagination. When the test was given at the age 15, the figure had dropped to 12%. Curious about adults, they tested them as well. Shockingly, only 2% of adults are still in contact with their creative genius after years of schooling.

The results were replicated more than a million times, implying that the school system robs us of our creative genius. That is especially disturbing to me because that means I played a part in it. I was a school teacher for 35 years. I had to ask myself: Did I really “dumb down” kids? I refused to believe it, but these results suggest otherwise. This bothered me, so I set out to prove otherwise.

The Huffpost’s article, How Schools Are Killing Creativity, says this about schools.

You were bullied, made fun of, and you had this teacher that told you to stop dreaming and live in reality. So what did you learn at school? You learned to stop questioning the world, to go with the flow, and that there’s only one right answer to each question. The “whys” you have always wanted to ask are never on the test, and they are omitted from the curriculum.

I had to admit, there is a lot of truth in that. I taught in a system that gave standardized tests which counted 50% of the student’s final mark. My focus as a teacher was preparing students for the government test, so I’ll be honest, all creativity went out the window. We didn’t have time to create and look at a diversity of viewpoints. We taught only what we had to in order to  prepare students for the test.

Benjamin Greene, founder of Britain’s biggest brewery says, “The biggest atrocity of all is to indoctrinate our children into a system that does not value their creative expression, nor encourage their unique abilities.”  I would have to agree, and sadly, I had to admit I may have contributed to it.

During my research, I came across numerous articles suggesting that our school systems indoctrinate children. This was even more disturbing to me, as in my mind, there was no way I was a part of a system that indoctrinated kids. I was preparing them for life and the “real world.”  Was I naive?

Most dictionaries define indoctrination as, “The process of teaching a person or group to accept a set of beliefs uncritically.” American Journalist and author, Peter Hitchens said, “Is there any point in public debate in a society where hardly anyone has been taught how to think, while millions have been taught what to think?” Do our education systems teach children what to think? Having been in the education business, I would have to say yes.

Curriculum presents a point of view, and even though we as teachers try to teach kids to think critically, they are reluctant to do so. Students resist thinking critically, unless forced to, and with standardized tests, they didn’t have to for most part. Richard Dawkins, in his book, The God Delusion said, “Do not indoctrinate your children. Teach them how to think for themselves, how to evaluate evidence, and how to disagree with you.” I must agree. I believe we as an educational system have failed to teach our students how to think for themselves, or at least do it well. Instead we teach them “facts” to learn for a test.

American astrophysicist, Neil deGrasse Tyson said, “When Students cheat on exams it’s because our School System values grades more than Students value learning.”  Therein lies the flaw with the education system. There were thousands of times during my career when students would say to me, “Just tell me what I need to know for the test.”

American journalist, H.L. Mencken said, “The aim of public education is not to spread enlightenment at all; it is simply to reduce as many individuals as possible to the same safe level, to breed a standard citizenry, to put down dissent and originality.”  Are we teaching kids to be submissive? If we are, I am troubled!

I taught in the Catholic School System, and so I had to ask: Do Catholic schools indoctrinate? Catholic Answers’ article, In Defense of Indoctrination, does not hesitate to admit that Catholic schools indoctrinate, for it states:

…indoctrination itself is not wrong, because children have to be taught something in order to grow up to be functional members of society. The question is, what should they be taught? This means that Catholics and other Christians should have the right teach their children about God and his moral law without being unfairly labeled as practitioners of “indoctrination.”

Maclean’s article, Why are schools brainwashing our children? maintains that education systems in the Western world are “brainwashing” young children to be social activists, saying,

Increasingly, faculties of education in Canada and much of the Western world are preparing their student teachers to weave social justice throughout the primary school curriculum…as well as into a range of cross-curricular activities, events, and projects. The idea is to encourage kids to become critical analysts of contemporary issues, empathetic defenders of human rights and gatekeepers of the beleaguered Earth.

Is that a bad thing? Depends who you ask.  An article by The Federalist, says,

Many people have long suspected that governments sometimes attempt to indoctrinate their people to increase the government’s own power and influence. Unfortunately, ambitious governments will not stop at merely controlling what their people can do; they must control their minds.

The article goes on to say,

Few people seem to have a clear definition of indoctrination, and thus call anything they dislike indoctrination (e.g., “Leftists professors are indoctrinating their students,” “Those fundamentalist Christians are indoctrinating their kids,” or “Facebook is indoctrinating its users.”).

What is the solution to indoctrination then?  This same article states:

The only real solution to indoctrination, then, is good teachers. Good teachers (which include parents, mentors, and other knowledgeable adults) train students in methods of thought while supplying the stuff of thought. They teach a person to evaluate an argument properly, find actual solutions to problems, and determine what is true and what is false.

I tried to be one of those teachers, and it’s true! Most of the articles related to indoctrination and the education system are critical of the system’s use of a LGBQT Inclusive Curriculum, or promotion of a liberal agenda, or a conservative one, or a sex-education curriculum that they believed promoted promiscuity, and on and on. All maintained that the school system is indoctrinating children. According to the definition of indoctrination, they are. The reality is, you cannot remove viewpoints from school systems, as every curriculum designer, and every teacher has their point of view.  Is that Good? Depends on your perspective.

As far as I am concerned, if teachers are ‘indoctrinating’ kids to stand up for human rights and to protect the planet, then I am proud that I was one of those teachers. I say bravo to the teachers who do so. If our educational systems are stifling creativity and teaching kids to be submissive, then shame on them. As The Federalist article says, teachers must be allowed to teach their students “to evaluate an argument properly, find actual solutions to problems, and determine what is true and what is false.”

What is Wrong With Being Wrong?

A commentary on our culture’s obsession with being right.

Numerous posts come across my Facebook feed, and for the most part, I typically ignore them, but this week a post caught my attention. It contained the following meme:

It’s true. People do get offended if you say, or even imply, they might be wrong. I’ve experienced it. I have to admit that even I have had times in my life when it was important for me to be right. I can think of many times when I was offended when told I was wrong. It got me thinking about the question: Why are people so obsessed with being right? Why are people so afraid to admit they’re wrong? An email, which I get regularly from Neal Donald Walsch, arrived in my inbox, and ironically it was about that topic. It read:

I believe God wants you to know that being “right” has nothing to do with it.

The idea that you call “right” is the idea that someone else calls “wrong.” The solution that you call “perfect” is the solution that another calls “unworkable.” The position that you feel is unassailable is the very position that others assail.

What will solve all of this? Not attack, that’s for sure.  And not defence, either. So what is left? Simple human love. The kind of love that says, “It doesn’t matter who is right or wrong. It only matters that you are not hurt.  And that we both can benefit. All true benefits are mutual.”

Wow! Those are some wise words, but it didn’t answer the question: Why is it so imperative to be right? I did some research, and in a Psychology Today article titled, Why Is It So Important to Be Right?  it said,

…this fixation is more likely wed to highly competitive cultures than traditionally oriented, cooperative societies. In the latter, issues of right and wrong don’t equivalently inform one’s sense of self or identity. The ego may be shaped by other influences, such as being honored, respected, or altruistic. In first-world cultures, the drive to be right advances one in the competitive race. In the desire to get ahead, this is utilized as a core value.

That explains it.  That answers the question. We live in a highly competitive world and being right (or being the best or being number one) is highly valued.   Our parents, our schools, and even our governments encourage us to be competitive; to be the best. If we’re not the best, then we are failures. Cooperation is encouraged by our religions, but even our religions are competing with one another to draw in believers. Cooperation is NOT highly valued in our culture. Our need to be right is ingrained in us from the moment we are born, because of the culture we live in.

In an another article titled, Why It’s Better to be Human Than to Be Right, it says the consequences of having to be right are:

  1. We oversimplify reality, as not everything can be divided into right or wrong.
  2. No matter how smart or logical we are, our mind plays a role in filtering our experience.
  3. We fear being wrong. We believe if we are wrong there’s something wrong with us.
  4. The decree to be always rights adds huge stress. Our brain is under constant pressure either justifying our thoughts or hiding our flaws.
  5. We stop listening to others. The belief of ‘being always right’ assumes that everyone else is wrong. When we own the truth, we stop trying to understand other people’s points of view.
  6. Resistance to being wrong paralyzes our understanding.
From: sheofferedthemchrist.wordpress.com

The above listed costs to needing to be right make a lot of sense. We do oversimplify reality, because let’s face it, our puny brains will never fully understand reality. Quantum Physics is proving that. We do fear being wrong, because we do think there is something wrong with us if we admit we’re wrong. Let’s be honest, being right adds enormous stress to our lives. Our brain must work overtime to justify our positions, or maybe we really are hiding our defects. Having to be right does paralyze our understanding. There is little doubt in my mind that obsessing about being right is damaging.

Psychology Today’s article, What’s Wrong With Being Right, says

Yet neither the positive nor negative perceptions that we hold represent an absolutely accurate reflection of reality. They are, rather, interpretations of ourselves, other people, and our world produced and shaped by our mental software. The difference between what is and what I think is can be an incredibly difficult distinction to make, because our thoughts can be extremely convincing when we are trying to discern the truth.

Practicing open-mindedness and reflection is enormously valuable in our close relationships [or any relationship for that matter]. It can be very difficult for those of us who have long been so attached to being right. It’s freeing, but humbling.

Realistically, our brain can never know all the facts, or understand the information we receive, because of our programming. A Christian would interpret information through Christian beliefs and values, whereas a Buddhist would interpret information through Buddhist thinking. A conservative would interpret information through conservative beliefs and values, whereas a liberal would interpret information through liberal beliefs and values. Our thoughts—or ego—convinces us that we are right and the opposing viewpoint is wrong. This doesn’t mean one is wrong and one is right. They’re just two different point of views, but as long as the need to be right exists, cooperation and consensus building cannot occur.

Perhaps American poet, author and teacher, Stephen Levine, said it best when he said, “Our addiction to always being right is a great block to the truth. It keeps us from the kind of openness that comes from confidence in our natural wisdom.”

So how do we move beyond the need to be right? Neal Donald Walsch says, “Simple human love.” Mother Teresa said, “Let us always meet each other with a smile, for the smile is the beginning of love.” I think Gautama Buddha, or The Buddha, said it best when he said, “Sometimes it’s better to be kind than to be right. We do not need an intelligent mind that speaks, but a patient heart that listens.” 

My favourite answer is a quote by Paula Heller Garland, a lecturer at University of North Texas. She says, “Often after arguing about differing opinions, I hear people say, “let’s agree to disagree.” I look forward to a time, so open-minded I’ll hear people say, “I’m right and you can be, too” That is what I’m working towards.

Is Democracy Broken?

A commentary on the present state of the world’s democracies.

A few weeks ago, we visited friends in a nearby city. During one of our discussions, this friend mentioned that he is disillusioned with democracy (not his exact words). I asked him why and he questioned the type of leaders that were being elected; leaders who were racist, narcissistic, misogynistic, anti-immigration, and who support white supremacy. This got me thinking. I began to wonder if democracy is broken.

When I visited China last November, our tour guide said something that made me question democracy. Our guide said the democratic world accomplishes little as governments are always squabbling. He further explained, whenever a democratic country elects a new political party, the previous party’s policies are reversed, thus little progress is made. I elaborated on this in my post on China (see China post). This begs the question: Are our democracies working efficiently? Is there something wrong with the way democracy is presently practiced?

Presently, there is increasing popularity in electing extremist right-wing politicians. According to Reference, neoconservatism is considered to be one of the more extreme right-wing ideologies. It takes a firm stance against anti-authority media and aligns itself with religious conservatives. Religious conservatives have specific positions on certain political issues such as abortion, homosexuality, creationism, science education, treatment of prisoners, immigration, and many other issues. Typically, conservative Christians favour anti-abortion laws, oppose gay marriage,  and many have a hardline against illegal immigration (see Intelligence Report).

Extremist right-wing politicians also tend to be nationalistic. In high school social studies—one of the courses I taught for many years—nationalism is defined as the belief that nations will benefit from acting independently rather than collectively, emphasizing national rather than international goals. Nationalist leaders are gaining momentum in Europe (see BBC). American president Donald Trump calls himself a nationalist. (See HuffPost). There are many extremist right-wing nationalistic politicians being elected. Why is this so? Does this mean democracy is failing us?

When our politicians act more like school aged children with their bullying behaviours and temper tantrums when they don’t get their way, I believe democracy is broken. When it becomes acceptable to vote for politicians who spout rhetoric that is divisive and “unchristian,” democracy is failing us.  When it becomes acceptable for the US president to use profanity, such as the “F” bomb (listen to Trump), we are electing a breed of politicians of the lowest kind.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu faced criminal investigations for fraud and bribery. A google search shows numerous US politicians under investigation. The US president is under investigation for obstruction of justice as well as other crimes. Two former Brazilian presidents were investigated for a scandal known as Operation Car Wash (see BBS).

My province recently elected a premier who was under investigation of voter fraud (see CBC). I thought politicians where supposed to have integrity. Even more disturbing for me, is our newly elected premier handed out earplugs to his caucus, clearly indicating his refusal to hear debate from democratically elected opposition members about a bill that removes some bargaining rights for government workers (see HuffPost). This kind of behaviour from a leader stems from arrogance; a leader who thinks his party knows best and those who have alternative views are to be ignored. I thought the heart of democracy was healthy debate. Apparently not in my province. Former US president, Barack Obama said, “The strongest democracies flourish from frequent and lively debate, but they endure when people of every background and belief find a way to set aside smaller differences in service of a greater purpose.” I believe this to be true. When healthy debate is squashed in our legislatures, then as far as I am concerned, democracy is broken.

That leads us to the question: What is wrong with democracy? Former British Prime Minster, Winston Churchill once said, “The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter.” Perhaps he is onto something.  Louis L’Amour, an American novelist said, “To make democracy work, we must be a nation of participants, not simply observers. One who does not vote has no right to complain.” Exactly!

My brother and his wife worked during our province’s recent election, and both expressed how appalled they were by the electorate. They said they had numerous voters in their 30s and 40s who were voting for the first time. They also said they fielded numerous questions asking how the voting process works. Both my brother and his wife were shocked when several voters asked them why there were names on the ballots which they did not recognize. Many of them were looking for the party leaders’ names on the ballot. I was shocked to hear this. This is why, at least in part, democracy is broken. The voters are failing democracy.

Former US president, Franklin D. Roosevelt said, “Democracy cannot succeed unless those who express their choice are prepared to choose wisely. The real safeguard of democracy, therefore, is education.” That is it! Voters are too apathetic to educate themselves. That explains, at least in part, why Donald Trump won the 2016 election.  Trump’s supporters are largely uneducated, according to polls (see Inquisitr).

Former US president, John F. Kennedy, once said, “The ignorance of one voter in a democracy impairs the security of all.”  I have to wonder if unprepared voters, who buy into the dangerous rhetoric being spouted by extremist right-wing nationalistic politicians is putting world security at risk. History teaches extreme nationalism started both world wars. Jose Marti, a Cuban poet, writer, and nationalist leader said, “The first duty of a man is to think for himself.”  Democracy is literally “rule by people,” and is a system where the citizens choose their leaders or government. To fix our broken democracy, people need to start thinking for themselves and educating themselves. Voters need to make informed decisions when voting, and that means determining what news stories are true and which are “fake news” stories. This does not seem to be happening at the moment as most voters believe the rhetoric spouted by extremist right-wing nationalistic politicians. English humourist, writer, and journalist, Allan Coren says, “Democracy consists of choosing your dictators, after they’ve told you what you think it is you want to hear.”  Ralph Waldo Emerson, American 19th-century philosopher says, “Democracy becomes a government of bullies tempered by editors.” Are we electing dictators? Seems that way to me. Are we electing bullies?  I see this more and more, and voter ignorance is to blame.

Former US president, Abraham Lincoln said democracy is “government of, by and for the people.”  I still believe this is why democracy is the better system when it is not broken. Former US president Barack Obama said, “No party has a monopoly on wisdom. No democracy works without compromise.” Perhaps compromise is another problem. We’re living in a polarized time in history and compromise seems to have gone out the window. Each political party thinks they know best and are unwilling to listen to other parties’ views. An openness to different points of views and a willingness to compromise must occur for democracy to work effectively! Politicians must unite and do what is best for all. 

I know it is more complicated than what I’ve outlined, and democracy has problems other than those I’ve addressed above. The issue of corporate donations to help political parties get elected, for example.  Corporate wealth increases when a corporation’s preferred political party is elected and makes policies that perpetuate corporate greed. An informed electorate that votes responsibly is a good start to fixing our broken democracies.

Is Hate the New Norm?

A commentary on the increase of hate crimes.

Lately I’ve been seeing a lot of news reports about hate crimes; reports that I find both disturbing and alarming. Here are a few examples.

I recently read about a homophobic attack on a lesbian couple in London, England. The couple were travelling on a city bus where they were assaulted by a group of teens after they allegedly refused to kiss each other on demand (see Homophobic Attack).

The New York Times reported that in “Staten Island, the phrase ‘Synagogue of Satan’ was spray painted on a wall outside of a Jewish school. In Brooklyn, a pro-Hitler message was scrawled on a poster outside a Jewish children’s museum whose mission is to fight anti-Semitism. In Manhattan, two rainbow pride flags were set on fire outside of a gay bar.” (see Swastikas and Burning Pride Flags).  Another New York Times article reports “The number of reported murders, rapes and robberies in New York is lower now [2019] than it was a year ago…These recent figures show that the drop in crime that began in the mid-1990s has largely continued…Reported hate crimes are up 64 percent compared with this time a year ago. A majority of those incidents were targeted at Jews, officials said” (see Hate Crimes Up).

In my country, Canada, CBC News reports that “the number of police-reported hate crimes reached an all-time high in 2017, largely driven by incidents targeting Muslim, Jewish and black people, according to Statistics Canada data… [saying] hate crimes have been steadily climbing since 2014, but shot up by some 47 per cent 2017, the last year for which data was collected” (see Hate crimes reach all time high).

This is just a small sampling of articles I’ve seen about hate crimes. Not only was I alarmed and disturbed, but began to wonder if hate was the new norm. One of last times hate was so prevalent on our planet was pre WWII, during a time when Hitler set out to eliminate Jews, LTQB, and other undesirables. It was also the time of the Nanking massacre in China by the Japanese. The last time the world went down a path of hate; a path lead by Hitler and other extremist leaders, WWII occurred.

I used to naively think that the human race had learned from WWI and WWII and would never make that mistake again. Now I am not so sure. One thing that strikes me, is many of those who are perpetrating hate claim to be Christians. THEY ARE NOT TRUE CHRISTIANS.

A meme recently went across my Facebook feed which is a quote from Jimmy Carter, the 39th president of the United States.

I agree with the former US president. Homophobes are not real Christians! I saw another meme on my Facebook feed.

That sums it up. Hate is the choice. We cannot choose homosexuality no more than we can choose to be heterosexual. It wasn’t a choice for me. I was just attracted to the opposite sex. I did not choose to be Caucasian. I did not choose to be born in Canada, although I am grateful I was. I did not choose to  come from European heritage. I can, however, choose to hate because I fear someone different than me. I can also choose to include and love those different from me.

Pope Francis is quoted as saying: “A person once asked me, in a provocative manner, if I approved of homosexuality. I replied with another question: ‘Tell me: when God looks at a gay person, does he endorse the existence of this person with love, or reject and condemn this person? We must always consider the person” (see  America Magazine in 2013). Pope Francis also said, “It is deplorable that homosexual persons have been and are the object of violent malice in speech or in action. Such treatment deserves the condemnation from the church’s pastors wherever it occurs.”

Where is all this hate coming from. One word answers that. FEAR. Much of that fear is propagated by extremist leaders.

Kevyn Aucoin, American makeup artist, photographer, and author, once said:

Fear is the most debilitating emotion in the world, and it can keep you from ever truly knowing yourself and others – its adverse effects can no longer be overlooked or underestimated. Fear breeds hatred, and hatred has the power to destroy everything in its path.

How true that is. Angela Merkel, former Chancellor of Germany, once said, “Hatred, racism, and extremism have no place in this country.” I agree with Ms. Merkel wholeheartedly. Hatred, racism, misogynism, anti-immigration, or anti-tolerance of any kind has no place in any country, especially my country.

The bottom line is unless humanity makes the choice to love one another, humanity is headed down perhaps another dark path like those that caused WWI and WWII.  After all,  Jesus commanded in John 13:34 of the Christian scriptures,

“I give you a new commandment, that you love one another. Just as I have loved you, you also should love one another.”

This is what a true Christian does!

These Pathogens Have Not Been Eradicated?

A commentary on the state of our world.

A Pow Wow my wife and I attended two years ago.

Last week my wife, a friend, and I attended an event called, “Meet the Inuit.” It was a series of talks by Inuit, Metis and Indigenous speakers, along with cultural performances. Many speakers said things that caught my attention. One Indigenous speaker talked about the clash of two cultures; Indigenous, Inuit, and Metis cultures verses European culture.

This made sense to me. Indigenous culture is present orientated—time conscious without clocks—whereas European Canadians are future oriented—time conscious with clocks. Indigenous Canadians (likely all Indigenous peoples) share their possessions freely—at least traditionally,  cooperate, are spiritual, and live in harmony with nature whereas European Canadians are savers and hoarders, compete for goods, driven by capitalism, and try to conquer nature. The world views of these two groups are vastly different.

Some of the speakers shared their experiences in the Residential Schools. It always strikes me when a Residential School survivor speaks of being taken away from their parents at ages 4 or 5, given haircuts and new clothes, told never to speak their native tongue, kept from their siblings who were attending the same school, and forced to stay several years in an unwelcoming large building. One speaker even told us how his brother literally was taken off the street by government agents without his parents being informed. His parents thought his brother had gone  missing.

CBC News has an article titled, Genocide against Indigenous Peoples, reports that the Canadian Museum for Human Rights in Winnipeg, Manitoba, now deems the treatment of Indigenous Peoples in Canada a genocide. Previously, the museum had said Indigenous Peoples faced cultural genocide rather than genocide.

The United Nations’ convention on Genocide (1948) says a genocide is:

  1. causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group
  2. deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part
  3. forcibly transferring children of the group to another group.

As The Star’s article, Cultural genocide?  says;

Canada did not pack Indigenous people onto train cars and send them to be gassed, or march them into fields and execute them with machine-gun fire. However, our country committed not “cultural” genocide, but just regular genocide.

We forcibly took children from families — sometimes at gunpoint — and flew them to remote locations they could not escape — sometimes in tiny handcuffs — where they were submitted to a program of forced labour and “education” designed to destroy their cultures and civilizations. This desire to destroy cultures seems to be the reasoning for various public figures’ use of the adjective “cultural” before genocide. The other reason, I presume, is that some cling tightly — and childishly — to the idea that Canada has always been on the side of goodness and justice, and they find it very hard to accept, admit, and announce that we are a country that committed a program of genocide that lasted for many decades.

Results of Rwandan Genocide

Let’s call “a spade a spade.” Canada committed genocide against our Indigenous, Inuit and Metis people; a genocide no different than the ones committed by Nazi Germany during WWII, or Rwanda in 1990s.  I must confess, I was one of those Canadians that held to the idea that Canada has always been on the side of goodness and justice. I no longer think that, and I now recognize that Canada has a dark past. Let us not forget the Japanese Internment during WWII; another dark part of our history.

One of the Indigenous speakers talked about how our greatest hurdles come from within. He spoke about what he called, The Six Social Pathogens.

Merriam-Webster defines a pathogen as a specific causative agent of disease. It typically refers to a bacterium or virus, but in the context of the speaker, a pathogen is a causative agent of the disease of racism. The six pathogens are: assumptions, presumptions, stereotyping, profiling, bias (for, or against), and misappropriation of feelings. This speaker says everyone—whether we’re aware of it or not—has some or all of the for mentioned pathogens working within us.

Before I go any further, let’s define the six pathogens. An assumption refers to something that is accepted as true without proof, whereas a presumption refers to an idea that is considered to be true on the basis of probability. Stereotyping is a set idea that people have about what a person, or group of people, are like. Profiling is the act of suspecting or targeting a person on the basis of observed characteristics or behaviour. A bias is a particular tendency, trend, inclination, feeling, or opinion, especially one that is preconceived or unreasoned.  Misappropriation means to put to a wrong use, so misappropriation of feelings is putting our feelings to a wrong use.

These six pathogens don’t just apply to attitudes towards the Indigenous, Metis, and Inuit people. They can apply to any group. As I observe what is happening in my country and the world, I would argue that these pathogens are presently very active. A Statistics Canada report in 2016 (the latest statistics I could find), revealed that the number of violent hate crimes rose 16% from the previous year, driven by increases in common assault, criminal harassment and uttering threats.” A 2014 Statistics Canada report found that, in two-thirds of cases, victims of crimes don’t report these hate crimes to the police.

As long as these six pathogens are alive and active, and there is a “us verses them” attitude, racism, prejudices, hate crimes, and so on, will continue. As long as we identify with a tribe instead of the human race, there will be conflict. As long as Christians, or Jews, or Hindus, or Muslims, or Buddhists think their faith is the right faith, there will be religious conflict. As long as there is masculism, there will be feminism. As long as feminist seeks to promote the rights and equality of women—which they should—and see themselves as equal with men, there will be misogyny, which is the disrespect and oppression of women.

As long as conservatives, as opposed to liberals, think their philosophy is best, there will be political tensions. As long as there are people who believe in “White Supremacy,” there will be racism and hate crimes. As long as there is ethnocentrism—The Cultural Superiority Complex, there will be anti-immigration. I could go on and on. Neale Donald Walsch, in one of his Conversations With God books, said, “Your way is not the only way. It’s just a way.”  We humans need to integrate that. Unless humans are willing to understand and accept differences, our planet is headed down a dark path.

Now, I had to ask myself: Do I have these pathogens? When I thought about it, and was completely honest with myself, the answer is yes. Have I made assumptions, or presumptions? Yes. I once believed Christianity was the superior religion. Did I stereotype? Yes. I once thought that people living on the streets were just too lazy to get a job. Did I profile? Yes. I targeted “unique” individuals in high school. Did I have biases. Yes. I had preconceived ideas about Indigenous people—they were lazy, drunks, etc.—until I educated myself. Were my feelings misappropriated? Yes.  I had my opinions about the LGBT community until I got to know some of their members. I would judge people based on first impressions, when I knew nothing about them, or knew anything about their story. In other words, I didn’t follow the Muslim proverb:  To understand a man, you’ve got to walk a mile in his shoes, whether they fit or not. Other variations of this proverb are: walk a mile in someone else’s moccasins, put oneself in another’s shoes, put oneself in another’s place, walk a mile in someone else’s shoes, and see the world through someone else’s eyes. Now, I try to do this; I try and  understand others and avoid judging them. I’m not saying I’m always successful, but I try.  If humanity did the same, perhaps our planet would be in a better place.

It All Makes Sense to Me Now

A commentary on the meaning of self love

I usually have no problems coming up with topics to blog about, but for this post, I struggled—and I don’t know why—to come up with a topic. That is why I have taken longer than usual to post again.

That all changed last week, as two things happened that profoundly affected me. The first was a short video, titled, What’s the Perfect Relationship, that appeared on my Facebook feed. This video caught my attention, so I watched it numerous times. Please view the video, maybe even more than once.

Watch Me:   What’s The Perfect Relationship

The video’s message is profound, yet simple. Its message is not even a new message to me as I have heard and read this message many times. Many people have said it, but I like the way the late Dr. Wayne W Dyer said it. “If you don’t love yourself, nobody else will. You can only learn to love others if you start loving yourself.”

After watching this video numerous times, I asked myself: Do I fully love myself?  If I am honest with myself, the answer is ‘NO’. I realized that I have never fully loved and accepted myself. Yes, I loved some parts of me, but I certainly didn’t love all aspects of myself. I was never completely happy with myself. I was often self-critical. I would think, my gut is too big, my hair is too grey, I should have been more assertive, and on and on. I have always lacked self-confidence, and if I fully loved myself, I would be confident. Furthermore, if I am critical of myself, then it makes it easy for me to be critical of others.

Then I asked myself: Have I believed the lies society and my culture have taught me, and if I am completely honest with myself, the answer is ‘YES’. The reality is, we compare ourselves to others, we judge, are judged, and we learn to judge ourselves.

Let’s look at two of those lies.

Looking young is better than looking older.

From: http://www.dazeddigital.com/

Let’s face it, we live—at least in North America—in a society that idolizes youth. We are told through advertising, that ‘we must look young’. That is why according to Marketwatch, the global anti-aging market is expected to exceed more than US$ 216 Billion by 2021. There is no shortage of anti-wrinkle creams, anti-aging supplements, and hair colouring products on the market. Then there are the anti-aging procedures; surgical procedures such as brow lifts, eye bag removal, fat transfer (also known as fat injections), facelifts, liposuction, neck lifts, tummy tucks, and so on (See procedures explained). There are also many nonsurgical procedures as well. Let’s be honest,  body shaming and fat shaming are a big problem in our societies. (see 14 Painful Examples Of Everyday Fat-Shaming). My point is, many or perhaps most people believe the lie that we must look young and therefore, chase the ‘fountain of youth’, and a lot of people are wealthy because so many believe this lie.

I had to ask myself: Have I bought into this lie? and if I am completely honest, the answer is ‘YES’. I sometimes put on anti-aging creams. I have seriously considered dying my grey hair at times. Yes, I did not like that I looked older. I thought looking young was better.

Success = money, status, or a satisfying career.

We live in a materialistic society. Society teaches that if we want to be happy, we must own a lot of expensive things like big screen TVs, a nice house, the latest iPhone, or a new car. To do this we need wealth. If we have wealth, we can buy the expensive items that give us status. And even more,  if we can become that six figure CEO, then we will have a satisfying career and we will have achieved the ultimate in success.

I had to ask myself: Have I bought into this lie? and if I am completely honest, the answer is ‘YES’. I thought I had to have the nice house, the nice vehicle, and a nice RV to be happy. When I had the wealth to buy these things, then I was successful, and I would have status. Yes, I believed the lie.

The video says society teaches, “You are not enough.” I believed it; I believed I was not enough. The reality is, “I am already enough.” I am perfect the way I am just as you are perfect the way you are. I did not treat myself like someone I loved. As the video says, “treat yourself like someone you loved.”

Even though I had heard the message, ‘you have to love yourself, before you can ever love someone else’, the fact is, I really didn’t understand what that meant.  How do you love yourself?  I didn’t know the answer to that question, until now.

It was the second profound thing that happened to me this week that enabled me to understand what ‘loving yourself’ means. This weekend, my wife and I attended a ‘Celebration of Life’ for a 15-year-old who literally didn’t wake up one morning. The young lady who sadly passed away in her sleep was a granddaughter of very good friends of ours, and her mother was someone I once had the privilege of teaching.

During her ‘Celebration of Life’, numerous friends, teachers, coaches, cousins, aunts, uncles, a godmother, and her parents spoke about the impact this teenager had on their lives. Over and over, I heard of how this young lady, who was 6 foot, 4 inches tall (193 cm), was confident, wise beyond her years and profoundly impacted everyone she met. Almost every tall teenager that I had ever taught was self-conscious about their height and lacked confidence. I kept thinking all during the celebration, I wish I could have known this young lady, and what an incredible young lady she must have been.  I kept wondering: What is it about this young lady, who sadly passed away much too soon, that made her so special? Why did she have such a profound effect on those who knew her?

Then it came to me; I knew the answer, or at least the only thing that made sense to me. This 15-year-old teen was able to deeply impact others because she fully loved herself.  She did not believe the lies society taught. She did not believe the lie, “You are not enough.” This young lady saw herself as “already enough;” “perfect the way she was,” and because she did, she saw everyone else she met as already enough, and perfect the way they were. She treated herself like someone she loved.  She did not judge herself and therefore, she did not judge others.  She did not compare herself to others, and she did not compare others. She completely loved and accepted herself—tallness and all—unconditionally. She fully loved herself, so she was able to fully love others. When you are able to fully love another, you profoundly affect them.

The article, Psychological Facts About Love, says,

Studies have shown that happiness is contagious.  It can be hard for people to walk away from someone who is happy, or not love someone who is happy simply because they are so enjoyable to be around.

Every speaker during this teen’s  ‘Celebration of Life’, commented on how she brought so much joy into their lives. She was able to do this because she fully loved herself, and when you love yourself, you are joyful.

It made sense to me now. I understood what loving myself really means. It means accepting that I am good enough the way I am; faults and all. It doesn’t matter that my hair is greying—who am I kidding—grey and I have a few wrinkles. I don’t have to look young. I don’t have to have material things to be happy. I am perfect the way I am, and it does not matter one iota what others think. Now I know what I must learn to do. This is what this special teen whom I never knew taught me, and for that I thank her.

Tribalism Isn’t Working, so There Needs to be a Better Way

A commentary on our present state of democracy.

The province where I live is presently immersed in an election to determine who will govern  for the next four years. As I educate myself and watch the campaigning, I am alarmed.  Why you ask? The Edmonton Journal’s article, Controversies hound numerous MLA hopefuls ahead of Tuesday’s election, outlines numerous candidates, most from one political party, who have posted homophobic, Islamophobic, and white supremacist comments on social media. There are other controversies as well, such as one of the parties being under RCMP investigation for voter fraud and a “kamikaze’ scheme during the leadership race, yet people continue to support this party. I don’t understand why.

More and more, it feels like elections and politics are becoming increasingly divisive and polarized. Politicians show no shame in provoking anger, attacking one another, bolstering fear, and pitting people against each other. This certainly is true for the provincial election happening right now. I see it in our Federal politics as well, with the current Prime Minister and his government attacking the opposition leader and his party and visa versa. Threats of lawsuits for defamation of character are taunted. Then there is the United States, the most polarized country with its president constantly attacking someone and most definitely displaying these polarized views.

I’ve gone through numerous elections before, so I’m trying to understand what is happening in this one. I don’t recall them being so divisive before. It could be my memory, but I don’t believe so. We seem to be living in turbulent times. Recently, someone helped me understand what is happening. He said—not  in these exact words—’our democratic system is based on tribalism’. What is he talking about?

The Oxford Dictionary defines tribalism​ as “the state or fact of being organized in a tribe or tribes,” and “the behaviour and attitudes that stem from strong loyalty to one’s own tribe or social group.” Yes, this is what is happening in our politics. We have tribes—political parties with specific philosophies on how to govern—with members loyal to the tribe, that is, political party, and its tribe members refuse to consider philosophies different from the one they align themselves with.

From Debate.org

I see two main philosophies; conservatism and liberalism, or some may say the progressives. The Oxford Dictionary defines conservatism as “commitment to traditional values and ideas with opposition to change or innovation,” and “the holding of political views that favour free enterprise, private ownership, and socially conservative ideas.” It defines Liberalism as, “willing to respect or accept behaviour or opinions different from one’s own; open to new ideas,” and “favourable to or respectful of individual rights and freedoms.” That same dictionary defines progressives as “an idea favouring social reform,” and “favouring change or innovation.”

That appears to be it. Both philosophies are found in most democratic countries,  and its people are aligned with one or the other. In Canada, some of our political parties even have these words in their names. Federally, we have the Conservative Party of Canada and the Liberal Party of Canada. In my province, we have a Liberal Party and the United Conservative Party (UCP). In the U.S. there are the Democrats—the tribe that follows liberal/progressive philosophy—and the Republicans—a conservative philosophy. Even churches like the Catholic church is divided into conservatives and liberals. I’ll be honest about which tribe I align with. It’s the Liberal tribe as we have to be open to new ideas, since many of the old ways are not working.

From my point of view, political tribalism is failing us. As I mentioned earlier, it stokes anger, promotes attacks on one another, bolsters fear, and pits people against each other. I’ve read many of the comments on political stories involving the provincial election, and people are nasty, and insults are written to those who oppose their views. Conservatism is strong in rural areas of my province, and my experience has been most are unwilling to listen to other points of view. They dig into their positions and refuse to listen to counter arguments. This is NOT healthy!

The New York Times has an opinion article called, The Destructive Dynamics of Political Tribalism, which outlines the many ways tribal politics is detrimental to our societies. Canada’s Maclean’s Magazine has an article titled, Tribalism is tearing Canada apart. The title needs no explanation.

There must be a better way; a gentler, kinder, and more cooperative way. I’ve pondered this and the only system that makes sense to me is a system of governance involving consensus, which means a general agreement must occur in decision-making.

Wikipedia explains consensus decision-making as,

a group decision-making process in which group members develop, and agree to support a decision in the best interest of the whole group or common goal. Consensus may be defined professionally as an acceptable resolution, one that can be supported, even if not the ‘favourite’ of everyone.”

Wikipedia says consensus decision-making aims to be:

  1. Agreement Seeking: A consensus decision-making process attempts to generate as much agreement as possible.
  2. Collaborative: Participants contribute to a shared proposal and shape it into a decision that meets the concerns of all group members .
  3. Cooperative: Participants in an effective consensus process strive to reach the best possible decision for the group and all its members, rather than competing for personal preferences.
  4. Egalitarian: All members of a consensus decision-making body are afforded, as much as possible, equal input into the process. All members could present, and amend proposals.
  5. Inclusive: As many stakeholders as possible should be involved in the consensus decision-making process.
  6. Participatory: The consensus process should actively solicit the input and participation of all decision-makers.
The Legislative Building of the NWT.

Does consensus decision-making exist in governance today? Absolutely. Consensus democracy government is alive and well in Canada as it is used in two of Canada’s three territories; Northwest Territories and Nunavut. These Legislatures are designed so politicians sit in a circle, symbolizing a unity of purpose.  In Provincial Legislatures, opposing parties sit across from each other, symbolizing opposing views. It’s interesting to note that the population of these territorial jurisdictions are a majority of Indigenous people.

Consensus democracy government stems from the Indigenous culture. I’ve always maintained that the traditional Indigenous people have always done things right, and this is but another example. A blog by Indigenous Corporate Training Inc. called What does traditional consensus decision making mean? explains some of the roots of this form of governance. I know many of you are thinking “no way consensus democracy would work because it is impossible to get everyone to agree.” This blog explains,

Consensus is not the same as unanimity. Consensus means a group or community arrives at a consensus by listening to the opinions and concerns of others – they work towards a suitable decision. Not everyone is necessarily pleased with the outcome but they realize it is the best decision for the community. Unanimity requires that everyone involved agrees.

This is how governments should work, and need to work. Perhaps it is time for democratic countries to seriously look at alternatives, such as consensus democracy. Just because tribal politics has been our the way till now, doesn’t mean we can’t make a change for the better.