The uninformed Pen

The concept of laws is very much the norm for the society of the 21^st Century.  We all live by them in some way, shape or form.  Laws, regulations and rules have existed since the beginning of civilization, and this has applied for many a year to religion as well.  We understand the rationale of laws in the real world, but when it comes to religion, how does it work?

The three core monotheistic religions, Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, are formed on the basis of laws.  There are laws that govern so much of how religion works, such as the basis of Eucharist, the salat in Islam, there are many laws that govern the basis of how religion works.  What is significantly different is the underlying basis of why practice our religion the way we do.  This is the faith element of religion, the part of the unknown that we believe about the existence of God.  The question that has always plagued humans has been the question of linking faith and law, as in the law of religion and why things are done the way they are in each individual religion.  Indeed, much of the question of faith comes from the mechanisms that lead to faith, and in that, there are many questions and discussions asked about the practice of faith.

What is crucial then, about the readings from this week, are ones that pertain to the association between faith and law.

Dt 11:18

“Let these words of mine remain in your heart and in your soul; fasten them on your hand as a sign and on your forehead as a circlet.”

Dt 11:26 - 28

“See, I set before you today a blessing and a curse: a blessing, if you obey the commandments of Yahweh our God that I enjoin on you today; a curse, if you disobey the commandments of Yahweh your God and leave the way I have marked out for you today, by going after other gods you have not known.”

The first reading, from Deuteronomy, is one of remembering the laws “as a circlet”, something that is to be remembered fully and without hesitation.  However inflexible this may sound, the sections surrounding these two passages are important to note, about what is possible with undying obedience to God, and the riches that he would give.  The second passage serves then to remind us of what would happen if we strayed from the path.  This in itself is demonstrated by so much in biblical texts, and in history itself.

The second reading, from St. Paul’s letter to Romans, is divided into two sections:

Rm 3:21 – 25

“God’s justice that was made known through the Law and the Prophets has now been revealed outside the Law, since it is the same justice of God that comes through faith to everyone, Jew and pagan alike, who believes in Jesus Christ.  Both Jew and pagan sinned and forfeited God’s glory, and both are justified through the free gift of his grace by being redeemed in Christ Jesus who was appointed by God to sacrifice his life so as to win reconciliation through faith.  In this way God makes his justice known; first, for the past, when sins went unpunished because he held his hand, then, for the present age, by showing positively that he is just, and that he justifies everyone who believes in Jesus.”

Rm 3:26-27

“So what becomes of our boasts? There is no room for them.  What sort of law excludes them?  The sort of law that tells us what to do?  On the contrary, it is the law of faith, …”

Rm 3:28

“… since, as we see it, a man is justified by faith and not by doing something the Law tells him to do.”

Rm 3:29 – 31

“Is God the God of Jews alone and not of the pagans too?  Of the pagans too, most certainly, since there is only one God, and he is the one who will justify the circumcised because of their faith and justify the uncircumcised through their faith.  Do we mean that faith makes the Law pointless?  Not at all: we are giving the Law its true value.”

To explain this further, the missing passages are inserted in italics.  It’s important here to note the missing passages, because using these; it provides an illuminating element to the linking of faith and law.  From this passage, St. Paul makes it very clear that both are intrinsically linked.  You cannot have faith without adherence to the law, and through the law – whether it be adherence or practice, one grows in their faith.  Beyond this teleological link, there is a much deeper element here, that we act our faith because we honestly believe, hope, wish, desire and seek what the law says will come through our practice of this faith.  In the Eucharist, we believe that at communion, the offerings made upon that altar are the body and blood of Christ, that, through the power of the Holy Spirit, that they are not representations.  That when we pray that the Lord listens to us, whether it is happy prayer or mournful, complaining prayer.

There are questions of whether our practice of faith actually is what the Lord is happy with; such are the arguments of theologians, the divisions of faith, the difference of opinions that exist from person to person.  It is wise to question your faith and the actions one undertakes because of faith.  Even the most pious sometimes would wonder about the existence of God, or whether or not their actions give glory to God.  Then, it would become like a Chicken and Egg scenario.  Which came first?  The Chicken or the Egg?  In essence, if the Gospel of St. John’s word is to be taken, the faith came first.  The Word came first.  Then the laws governing the Word came, and thus sprung a methodology of practicing faith, to strengthen it, to guide it, to make us question it occasionally, to bring us joy and sadness from it, to foster and engender a spirituality within us.  St. Paul continues onwards in the following passages to quote the example of Abraham and his faith in the calling of God, but there are many more examples of faith within the bible, in history, and in real life, of the actions of faith and how real individuals did not seek any sort of glory as they acted on their faith.

Paul’s reading also reminds us of being careful in the practice of faith, because a lack of attention to the understanding and practice of faith will lead to a person’s undoing, which Jesus discusses in his final reading, from the gospel according to Matthew:

Mt 7:21-27

“It is not anyone who says to me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ who will enter the kingdom of Heaven, but the person who does the will of my Father in heaven.  When the day comes many will say to me, ‘Lord, Lord, did we not prophesy in your name, drive out demons in your name, work many miracles in your name?"  Then I shall tell them to their faces: I have never known you; away from me, all evil doers!  'Therefore, everyone who listens to these words of mine and acts on them will be like a sensible man who built his house on rock.  Rain came down, floods rose, gales blew and hurled themselves against that house, and it did not fall: it was founded on rock.  But everyone who listens to these words of mine and does not act on them will be like a stupid man who built his house on sand.  Rain came down, floods rose, gales blew and struck that house, and it fell; and what a fall it had!”

Here is the reminder of what it means to be faithful.  The saying goes “Actions Speak Louder than Words.”  However, in the case of faith and belief, the actions and word must be intertwined together so tightly that there is not an opening within it.  Take a traditional braided rope.  Its strength comes from the braids that are woven together in a simple manner that give it the strength to do things that a single braid is not capable of.  Yet, as soon as the braids weaken, a slight gap appears in between the individual braids; the rope is useless and needs to be discarded.  It is the same with faith here, and the failure of faith becomes apparent, and it is the weakness of faith that leads to the collapse of the self spiritually.  Both the word – that is, scripture, the teachings of the religious leaders, and the writings of others in their faith – are intermingled with your own actions, or how you use the word that was given to us with the hope that we would learn from it.  Thus, it’s not a call to blindly follow, but to apply the wisdom that the Lord has given us to what we absorb in our spiritual lives, and to engage in the active development of our spirituality and of our daily lives, to talk and discuss and develop an enormous understanding and acceptance of the world that we live in, and all aspects of our lives.

Make Notes

If you haven’t watched this episode of Australian Story, about Charmaine Dragan, I advise you to watch it before reading on.

It’s something that society encounters very often, but it’s not dealt with properly by any facet of society, as it’s something that’s dismissed by even the best trained practitioners, and either understood or not truly felt.  It still doesn’t rate, in the opinion of some, as a problem, yet it claims lives, causes economic loss, emotional hardship, the breakup of families, the destruction of potential, an enormous ripple effect that doesn’t heal, and leaves a horrific scar amongst those affected.  This is chronic depression and, at its worst, suicide.

It’s such an easy thing to dismiss.  There are those days that we are down and out, can’t be bothered, grumpy at something, whatever the reason.  Maybe you didn’t sleep properly, some idiot nearly killed you when they drove too close to you one afternoon (as somebody did one afternoon on the way home and intentionally ran close to the kerb for no apparent reason but to try to run me over for kicks).  But then, there are those that this problem becomes a rollercoaster ride, day in, day out, and it’s not just having down days occasionally, but become a chronic, day to day thing:

When the morning seems fine, but within the space of an hour the world has come crashing down around you. When a façade of happiness is an act to hide the reality that resides within the mind.  When there are days that getting out of bed even to not go to work, but sit at home and mope, is too much of an effort.  When some days they work to the point of exhaustion.  When there is a horrible sense of loss as the friends leave after a wonderful day.  When there is a desire to seek out the most simple of happy moments to make the day bearable, or much more enjoyable, or there is a indulgence on pleasureable things in life (such as physical enjoyment, etc.).  When their attention to detail and their desire for perfection reaches a point that seems narcissistic.  When critique of themselves proves to be  greater than the critique itself, and that really, it shouldn’t be.  When the friends, family, work colleagues all have a piece of a puzzle, yet none of them could make up the whole picture.  When the person feels that they are a massive burden on all the people around them, and it is better to cauterize or remove the problem, which is them.  These, and many more things, are examples of what it’s like.  Words can’t describe the feeling, that sensation that physical, the machinations of the mind, that someone goes through while being chronically depressed.  It doesn’t come through  on paper, it doesn’t come through while talking.  Think freefalling eternally without a parachute, and then the floor suddenly appearing.

It’s fun to joke about them, or dismiss them as something that’s in the mind.  Yet explain to me why there are branches of science and medication devoted to the study and treatment of it?  Why then, do pharmaceutical companies make millions on the prescriptive drugs that assist in the treating of it?  Why then, do people still engage in acts of violence against themselves, people they love and that trust them, or they trust?  It becomes clear then, that it’s not really that much of a laughing matter, to dismiss as something that can be worked on easily and will disappear, or even to be lambasted after a period of time.  The reality is that most people that are chronically depressed, will be so for a very long period of time, maybe for the rest of their lives.  It’s not a joke.  It’s not funny.  It’s not something that can be shoved under the carpet, dismissed, disregarded, discarded.  It’s not something that people snap out of.  It’s not something that will disappear.  It is something that is real.  It is something that takes an enormous amount of time.  It is something that may never go away.  It is something that the sufferers know causes immense stress on their relationships, and has enormous regrets about.  It is something that is self-magnifying, self-destructive, self-compounding.  It is something that nearly all sufferers can coming from a million miles away, yet, as a moth is inexorably drawn to a flame, cannot stop themselves from doing.

So what is this message about?  Think about what you say, how you act, what you do around the people that you know, or suspect, of having a depressive illness.  For them, they feel that they’re walking on glass around you all the time.  Keep an eye out on yourselves about how you feel, or how they feel.  It’s about reaching out to all around you, not in the superficial, pat on the back manner, or the intellectual engagement manner.  It’s about listening to the real you.  It’s about seeing the danger signs and reading them properly, and dealing with them effectively.

It’s also about how close to home it can touch for us.  A high school colleague’s younger sister committed suicide years ago, and another instance occurred at the same school during my years at school too.  More recently, about 4 years ago, a work colleague that was well known by many students and staff members at Monash University threw herself in front of a train.  Why she was well known was because she had been the president of the Student Association during my time there, and she reflected everything that has been written here. She was a high achiever, happy, bubbly, smiling person, with everything to live for.  But she took her own life.

But why write this?  Because I’ve been there, and I’m still there.

God bless you all.

Make Notes

The Victorian state government released a statement yesterday that they were to increase the amount of available land in Melbourne to 90,000 extra blocks in three signalled growth corridors on the outskirts of Melbourne.  This has been in response to an escalating problem of housing affordability in the city itself, something that is affecting the two largest cities in Australia.  Both Sydney and Melbourne are suffering from a scarcity of available properties, which has seen the price of housing increase at an unheard of rate.  Home buyers have had to endure a continuous rise in the price of dwellings, while there has been no corresponding increase in wages, coupled with rising daily living expenses and increasing interest rates on borrowing money.  Indeed, this is a complicated part of economics that would warrant extensive analysis of causes and effects, and this author is ill qualified to make statements on what would be a way to cut what is appearing to become an even more tightly bound Gordian knot.

However, this piece is more about the problematic nature of announcing the land release to alleviate the problem of unaffordable housing.  There are inherent problems with governments that automatically react in a knee-jerk manner to such crises, and it creates for even more long term problems than the short term issues that it promises to solve.

Firstly, the land releases are on the fringes of the city.  That is not a problem, as they have been designated growth corridors for some time, and there is a distinct lack of land anywhere closer in that could be released for residential use.  However, while it is early days, the problems that have occurred with other areas that have been released for residential housing highlight some problems of poor planning that has plagued Melbourne.

If people live within a 10 – 12km radius of the city, then they are still within a zone where there is good public transport and a road network that, while probably slow, still allows a good variety of flows across and in and out of the city.  Beyond the 12km radius, you reach what this author has dubbed “Commuter hell”.  This is where traffic is funnelled along a number of major arterial corridors, and there is a lack of good public transport infrastructure (reliant on low density, non-renewable resource-using dependent transit services), inefficiently planned neighbourhoods where there is excessive resource usage.  The list goes on.

There are so many examples of this problem across the board in Melbourne.  From Doncaster, where there has been a serious need for some sort of mass transit service for years, yet it remains serviced by buses along, Rowville, another example of a boom suburb in Melbourne that is heavily dependent on cars due to a lack of serious infrastructure, to the newer suburbs such as Tarneit, Caroline Springs, etc.

The facts are these:  The developed world has to seriously reconsider a massive redevelopment of how it builds cities and makes them grow.  This is especially prevalent in cities in young countries, such as Australia and the USA, where cities sprawl to the size of small countries in Europe.  The age of the vehicle as the primary form of transportation is over, and the development of mass transportation systems (e.g: rail) should be paramount.  Rebuilding and reconstructing cities to increase population density should be the norm rather than the exception, along with embracing environmentally sustainable design using renewable resources.  Further to this would be designing and constructing buildings and their facilities so they last, for say, over 100 years.  New housing estates should be built to increase population density per square km, and have proper services in place (such as a good shopping centre, health services, good public transport), through smaller and more efficient housing, smaller land plots, better design of road structures, and forward planning.

This is just a teaser of what this author recommends as a path to city development.  Australia is not a country of infinite resources, and neither is it a country that has a lack of intellect, wisdom or ability.  However, the government needs to recognise that this announcement needs to come with a strong plan on how to move forward, see the past mistakes and their flaws, and not make the same mistakes again.  Also, righting some of the wrongs of the past and fixing existing holes in infrastructure will improve the overall liveability of the city itself.

Make Notes

On Wednesday the 13^th of February, 2008, the Prime Minister of Australia got up in parliament and said sorry to the Stolen Generation, indigenous Australians that were forcibly removed from their families and communities because they were children indigenous Australians (of which one or both were parents), taken and placed in foster care, where, in some cases, they were subject to physical, sexual and mental abuse.  This policy, borne in a time of the ideas of eugenics and master races, was only ended in the latter half of the 20^th Century, when thousands of lives had been affected and people across the nation have been touched by these actions, a new dawn has arisen in the step towards a complete reconciliation between mainstream and indigenous Australia.  For the two centuries of Australia’s settlement by Europeans, this relationship has been not one of equals.

Thus, the act of an unconditional apology has far reaching impact and consequences.  Above all, the expression of a genuine regret and sorrow, contrition, and repentance for the actions of the past has shown its immense power.  Not only does it acknowledge the damage and hurt caused, it allows the process of moving forward, a process of healing that may have been stalled or never started to begin or continue.  The scenes of people in the Gallery of the House of Representatives hugging each other, crying, and of similar scenes on the Federation Lawn outside Parliament house are indicators of the depth of such an act.  The resultant feedback has been very positive, whether it is from children at school, or older people that lived through the years of this policy.  Years of anger, resentment and campaigning washed away as the nation was united in self reflection.

Two examples spring to mind, both from talkback radio.  The first was from a teacher at a primary school that had organised for their children to watch to apology live.  Afterwards, a child asked where this actually happened.  When the teacher replied “Australia” the child burst into tears.  The second was from a music producer that toured an indigenous band around Australia in the 1970s.  When this band arrived at Melbourne they asked for a white band manager.  When asked why, they said that they wouldn’t get a hotel room without one.  From two aspects, we can reflect on the power of what occurred.

However, it was indicative that not all agree with what actually occurred that morning.  This was made clear in the response from the Leader of the Opposition, and it shows how divisive this issue has been within Australia itself.  While most of his reply was in the same mould as the Prime Minister, parts of it contained qualifications and reasoning behind the policy itself.  Furthermore, the speech served to highlight the current problems that still affect indigenous Australia, and the current intervention itself.  There are problems with the response that resonated through the audience.

The first is the qualification of the agreement to the apology.  Consider which is more powerful from your friend: an apology, or an apology that comes with a “but” attached to it.  Qualifying or reasoning why you were wrong by attempting to justify your actions does not display the same amount of contrition.  The same goes for those that were providing excuses for apologising – “Governments should not be responsible for the actions of previous administrations” and “By providing an apology we leave ourselves to the prospect of compensation claims” – these are, in this author’s opinion, words by which people hide behind their own self-centred beliefs of their own correctness in the matter, using words that could be considered in the same mould as war criminals hiding behind the excuse that they were following orders.

The second is whether or not providing the gruesome details of the current intervention actually provided any benefit to the healing process.  Describing in detail the number of acts and then attempting to associate them with the process of intervention added to the image of how much more work needed to be done to solve the myriad of problems that still afflicts indigenous Australia, yet was it necessary to remind Australia of this?  The fact that this section was concluded by a request that the current intervention plan be continued made it clear that this message was more political than anything else.

Beyond the recognition of the amount of work that was still needed to facilitate reconciliation was the question of compensation and reparations.  This question has been raised by various quarters of the community.  The problem is the type of compensation that should be provided.  Direct compensation for individuals in a monetary form would be frowned upon.  While a magnanimous gesture, would it actually provide long term improvements in their lives?  It probably would, but a more structured approach would be to ensure that they can provide for themselves and give them medical benefits to cater for their needs (whether it be physical or mental), proper comfortable housing, a good job, along with bigger initiatives and policies that address these long standing problems.  What was definitely highlighted was that proactive policies address the raft of statistical gaps between mainstream and indigenous Australia.  The inability of the state and successive governments to deal with these issues in a method that didn’t require forceful intervention is not only indicative of the ignorance of the depth of these problems, but also a complicit systemic and premeditated policy of denial.  States, governments, societies and communities are all associates and participants in this, whether by active choice or blind ignorance.

These issues of the plight of minorities and oppressed groups should remain a discussion point until the problems are solved.  The apology was the first step towards the proper reconciliation, as an acceptance of the past wrongs is the beginning of a way to move on.  A form of compensation that addresses the problems that plagues our indigenous populations will be worth more than individual repayments to undoing the past damages.  In that, the future will represent the benefactors.  No amount of money can heal the past, or bring back the lost years, and no amount of money can account for the damage, but with proper policies, the descendents can benefit and gain the justice so long deserved.

Make Notes

Heath Ledger’s death from what appears to have been an accidental overdose on prescription medication was not only extremely tragic, but should also serve as a reminder of the fragility of life itself.  From all reports, he lived every day as if it were his last, and touched the hearts of all those who knew him personally and those who did not.  While we mourn the passing of a life that had been taken far too soon, such was his talent on screen and his charisma, there is much a message about his life that we should all take away for our own consideration.

We should all live life and each day as if it were to be our last day on Earth.  This idea is written time and again through many self help books and passed through as wisdom by word of mouth, but beyond the simple idea there is something far more complicated bound up in this phrase.  Our time in this mortal coil is short, and none of us can predict when our clock will stop.  Indeed, even the healthiest of us can suddenly pass away, while people who abuse our bodies live until they are 90.  No matter what, we cannot control the date of our departure.

But that is not to say that we should abuse this time, by abusing our bodies by poisoning it, by not caring about other people and be abusive and focused on oneself, by being greedy and hoarding material goods to make us feel better, or any forms of activities that provide us with such short term sensations of pleasure.  There is another saying that goes “At your funeral, what will you be remembered for?”  This provides us with the second part of advice that complements the first provided here.  Live life to the maximum, but also remember, in your wake, consider the first and foremost memory that people will remember you by.  Thus, be generous and giving, honest and passionate, forgiving and just, redeeming and searching, understanding and knowing, thinking and serving, ultimately selfless and needless.  The more that a life is lived while in the service of others without compunction or expectation, the more genuine rewards will come your way.  Remember this: the people that are remembered and revered, and will be unendingly, are the ones that gave their life in the service of others.  All others will fade away.

It is also important to emphasise the limitations of each individual as well, and not to cross that invisible line that compels us to stop.  At the end of the day, our mortality is carried by the physical limitations of what the body and mind can handle.  It is impossible, and even dangerous, to go beyond these limitations and rely on various stimuli (such as medication) to be able to maintain a normal routine.  Reports coming in have said that Heath had medication to help him sleep, and that there was more than one type of drug at his side.  If that were the case, then here is a case of reliance and dependence on various stimuli to maintain a normal routine.  There are those that are much worse and have horrible addictions to horrendous drugs, but in a convoluted manner, both are very similar.  Whatever the reliance or addiction is, there is a reason and cause as to the development of such a “need” in the first instance.  The same goes for people who rely on such items to “party harder” or “go further”.  That is not to say that the use of prescriptive medicine should be avoided, but they need to go hand in hand with understanding of why it had to come to using the drug in the first instance.  For example, people that are depressed may be on anti-depressents, but the prescription is usually written by a psychiatrist and in conjunction with therapy.  At the end of the day, if there is a problem, one needs to deal with it, not by utilizing something to reduce the impact, but to address the problem branch and root. 

It seems sad then that Heath Ledger, prior to his death, lamented the fact that he did not see enough of his daughter, Matilda.  If anything, his life imitated his art, especially in the movie Brokeback Mountain.  Ennis almost didn’t have enough time to see his daughter get married, neither did he have the conviction to stand up for his personal loves, and sacrificed everything in the process.  If anything, Heath may have loved his life, but he made sacrifices in it as well that were troubling him, such as a commitment to a family and his daughter.  Mourn the passing of a person that has impacted on many, but also learn something from it and use their experience to grow from it, in every little way.

Make Notes

When I switched on the TV last night Channel 9 aptly ran a Cold Case episode that resonated with a national holiday in the USA.  On every 3^rd Monday in January, (in 2008 it was on the 21^st of January), it was the birthday of Martiin Luther King Junior, in remembrance and celebration of a man that did much for the civil rights movement through non-violent protest.

The episode, “Strange Fruit”, focused on a Cold Case (a criminal case that has gone “cold”, in that it remains unsolved and the clues leading to the crime has dried up) revolved around the death of a young African-American boy at the time that Martin Luther King Jr. made his landmark speech on the steps of the Abraham Lincoln memorial on 28 August, 1963.  While at the time, his death was unsolved, the episode leads us through how and what occurred in the days leading up to his death.  It highlights the racial divide and revealed elements of the dark past that the USA has had when it comes to racism and bigotry, as there were also elements of gender bias built into the episode, alongside the racial biases.

If anything, the episode highlighted that there is still some way to go for Western societies to claim to be truly egalitarian and equal, regardless of race, gender and age.  While constitutions enshrine these concepts, and laws are created to uphold them, this does not protect society from the expression of biased attitudes and beliefs.  However hurtful and negative these thoughts may be, the writer does not believe in an active pursuit of people that either have these, or express these thoughts.  Beyond the individual’s free rights to express and think, the reality is that there are reasons for why an individual may think the way that they do.  Furthermore, it can be said that such views are not a representation of society as a whole, but a very small minority, that may be very vocal.  What is the concern then is that if individuals repress their personal views in fear of their retribution, and do not attempt to deal with the rationale behind their dislike.

For example, Pauline Hanson, who is known internationally for her rather colourful views, may have genuine reasons for why she believes that immigration should be barred.  Of course, she ignores her own heritage and also her own personal problems.  Maybe she was unhappy to be stuck owning a fish and chips shop, while others (particularly Asians in her view) seemed to get good jobs and drive fancy cars.  It was an odd alignment of stars that got her into Federal Parliament in the first place.  When her position was made public, even John Howard, who was known to have a very traditionalist view of the world, and disliked Australian immigration policy in how it was regulated, distanced himself as much as he could from her position.  Since her fall from parliament, she has occasionally attempted to run for parliament but failed to garner enough support to gain election.  In many ways, she is the Kryptonite of Australian politics.  Nevertheless, she gains some support, and her views do resonate with parts of Australian society, which cannot be denied.

The question is not how do we remove the problem, but why do individuals hold such views and where is the basis for it?  Humans are given logic and emotions to produce thought and philosophise about a wide range of views, issues, problems and equations.  The issue here is the underlying basis for where this position originates from, and how these issues are brought forth, for what one would find is that in all cases of such bigoted, racist or ageist views are expressed through fear.  Fear of the unknown, fear of others, fear of loss, and fear of the self.  This last one is the worst, as it reflects the internal conflict and dislike of the condition of one’s position or place in life and resorts to blaming others, belittling them or attacking them when the greater problem lies within themselves.  It is far easier to reject or attack another while not dealing with one’s own demons.

Consider the historical perspectives and this scene is repeated again and again by cultures and societies alike.  The white supremacists in the USA today see the invasion of African-Americans and Asians alike as an intrusion onto their right to be the superior race, yet their doctrines are based on fear.  “They will take our jobs, our lands, etc. etc.”.  Same goes for Nazism and the persecution of the Jews, or Israeli occupation of Palestine and Palestinian suicide bombings.  Even the centuries old religious wars against Protestantism, or the clashes between Muslims and Christians that have pervaded for centuries, have been based on fear.  Even contemporary reactions to African migrants in Australia, automatically labelling them as part of gangs and painting them as thugs, is a fear of the unknown.

Thus, controlling the problem through legislation, enforcement, or societal norms will not solve or remove it from socieety, but exacerbate it.  If anything, a serious amount of education and understanding needs to be applied to ameliorate these divides that still exist in society.  Acceptance and Compassion are virtues that are rarely used in the development of society, workplaces and relationships.  Making the effort to reach out, understand and accept others is a step in the right direction.  Whether it be dealing with racial issues, gender inequality, the fact that you’re too old or too young, whatever it is.  People have reasons why they feel the way they do, whether it be rational or not.  Reaching out to someone can address the issues branch and root, and completely reverse the problem altogether.

One of the most powerful images I can remember is of Pope John Paul II, having nearly died from an assassination attempt by Mehmet Ali Ağca in 1981, visited the man in prison and talked with him for 20 minutes.  A friendship was created between two very different men, one who reviled the other, yet was able to see beyond his hate and embrace a person that he called “the incarnation of all that is capitalism”.  While I only know about this through reading, such an image has since had a renewed importance for myself.  While individuals can’t be expected to be able to be as saintly as the Pope, society as a whole can benefit from such gestures made by great people and learn from them.

“Southern trees bear a strange fruit,
Blood on the leaves and blood at the root,
Black bodies swinging in the southern breeze,
Strange fruit hanging from the poplar trees.”

“Pastoral scene of the gallant south,
The bulging eyes and the twisted mouth,
Scent of magnolias, sweet and fresh,
Then the sudden smell of burning flesh.”

“Here is a fruit for the crows to pluck,
For the rain to gather, for the wind to suck,
For the sun to rot, for the trees to drop,
Here is a strange and bitter crop.”

Strange Fruit – Abel Meeropol (as sung by Billie Holiday)

Video link to Martin Luther King Jr.’s speech

Wikipedia article on 1981 Pope Assassination Attempt

Make Notes

A journey of personal growth is always one that takes a lifetime, but there are moments where the pace of the journey varies.  2007 was a year where the journey slowed, halted, and regressed, but then suddenly has made massive sumps.  I have come to recognize the flaws and multitude of issues that I need to address, and this has not been easy.  While this sounds familiar to most of you, I also realize that we all are flawed in our own little way.  The difference is when one realizes the flaw, sees them for what they are, addresses and redresses them, and emerges in a transformed and enlightened manner.  Seeking perfection will lead to eternal discontent, but that is not what I seek.  What is clear is that in self-reflection, the self-destruction of negatives and the self-improvement through positives will lead one down to the right path, and this only comes through determination, endurance, hard work, and commitment.

There are so many of us that are blind to our own flaws, unwilling to shift as they are so sure of their own rightness.  My first thought is this: never allow yourself to become immutable in a position (immutable meaning unmoveable).  While enormous good can come from such actions, it is truer to say that the worst excesses have come from the stubbornness of people in their own beliefs.  If anything, history’s worst excesses and decadence have been caused by an inability to accept difference and tolerance.  Even at home, the worst of your arguments and fights are because of one’s inability to see the other side and the need to defend your own “rightness”.  At the end of the day, which is more important?  That you are right, or that you are happy?

Last night I had one of those nights that I will treasure, it was one of the most wonderful New Year’s Eve’s ever.  I spent my evening with a group of people that, from all of their varied experiences, showed me how unimportant my personal suffering has been, and how much I had been focusing on my own pain, when around me there are people that have had it infinitely tougher.  I shared a table with a couple that lost one of their parents, one lost their job, poor physical health, and other trials and tribulations that made mine pale into comparison.  Another has no home and is living in a shared accommodation with 4 other people, and doesn’t have many prospects for work or a future.  Another is going on the Sea Shepherd anti-whaling vessel, risking life and limb to support a very good cause for a few months.  I realized that my reality isn’t that bad, and that millions have it worse.  My second thought is his: Even at your worst, your position is not hell on earth.  Others will have had it harder than you.  I am personally guilty of ignoring this, but one makes their heaven by their own decisions and choices.

Another thing that has emerged from 2007 is that there will be a benefit from my journey.  A very well known celebrity said that what inspired them was a massive emotional journey when they were a teenager in their personal life.  From that, they resolved to never be in a position where they would be rejected, cheated on, or left behind again.  It’s not to say that it won’t happen, but having a year of loss, I refuse to lose again.

In reality, I think 2008 will be a better year.  I’ve already learnt so much, made new friends, been inspired to go to new heights and change on a grand scale, all of this within a day of stepping off into the New Year.  I think I’ve done pretty well.

A prayer to finish:

I’ve been such a fool to spurn what you have given to me.  You have provided insight into myself and what kind of person I was, bound up in my own life, focused and centred around myself.  I thank you for showing me that I still have much to learn and far to go in becoming a person of true selflessness and sacrifice, in that what I do is not only for my own gratification, or for people that I know, but for a betterment of those around me whether I know them or not.  I hope that all that are witness to this will benefit from the seeds that I now sow.

I hope and pray, whoever and wherever you are, that you will stand by me and with my as I undertake this journey.  If I am weak and I struggle in my fight, you will lend and help me with your guidance and support, when your benevolent hand, eternal tolerance, loving voice, and guiding light will be reflected in my determination and commitment to the cause.  With you by my side, I know that I can reach my goals and achieve whatever I wish to achieve.

Thank you for this chance, opening my eyes, showing the plank that still rests in my own and blocks my vision, showing me that I can remove this impediment, and helping me in my journey.

Please have a wonderful year and I hope to see you sometime soon.

Make Notes

What went wrong?

Well, pretty much everything as soon as Kevin Rudd got the Labor leadership, although prior to this there were already signs that all was not well.  We should start with Workchoices, the legislation that was more based on individual ideologies rather than genuine desire within the community.  While many have claimed that this single piece of legislation has had a major impact on the voting choices of the Australian public, there is much to say that this legislation wasn’t the main reason that people changed their vote as some within the Union movement would love to claim.  Yes, it was a horrendous piece of legislation that changed the complexion of the landscape of employer-employee relations in favour of employees.  Yes, it predominated much of the news and became a massive bugbear for the government, so much so that it changed the name and introduced a fairness test to ameliorate concerns.  But, one piece of legislation does not make an election.  The problem is that, if anything, a lot of things went wrong for the government in the last 12 to 15 months.  Beyond Workchoices, there were other questions that went poorly answered. 

First question was one about the environment, or rather, the lack of innovation or leadership from the government on addressing the growing concerns raised by the public (locally and internationally) on global warming/climate change.  As evidenced by the lengthening drought, the lack of genuine initiatives to combat the water crisis in the food bowl of Australia, the government did not proactively respond to these concerns.  While the ALP did not provide a brilliant response, they did enough to differentiate themselves from the LP.  Sign Kyoto, move on.  The LP was left spluttering in their wake with the line of looking beyond Kyoto, not realizing that perceptions of actually doing something by signing Kyoto meant much more than the actual value of the treaty itself.

The second question was the one about the leadership of the party itself.  This came to a head in 2006 when it was revealed that there had been a secret agreement between John Howard and Peter Costello about a leadership transition, which did not occur.  What happened was similar to the Kiribilli agreement between Bob Hawke and Paul Keating of the early 1990s, only in this script, the treasurer didn’t challenge directly and walk off with the prize.  This issue continued to haunt the LP all through 2007 in some way, shape or form, culminating with the unprepared announcement that Howard would be retiring “somewhere in his fifth term”.  What followed was a poorly scripted and thought out campaign to present both Howard and Costello as part of a team, when it had been made very clear over the years that both couldn’t stand the other.  This was made even more ridiculous with the sight of both of them appearing on Today Tonight, of all shows, as a happy brotherhood.  While the hypocrisy was evident, the reality was that Peter Costello, beyond him being a good bloke, was not good leadership material come election time.  If anything, this was played upon by the ALP throughout the campaign, especially once it became very clear that Howard was retiring.  Also, if anything, the LP misread the people when it came to the “it’s time” factor.  While Costello may not have been as popular as Howard in a head-to-head battle with Rudd, if there had been enough time for Costello to build a base and establish himself as his own man (say 12-18 months), on Saturday the election may have been a much more close-run thing.

The third question was the one about leadership, and whether or not the ALP or the LP presented a clear vision for the future, and this one also stems towards another problem of the campaigns themselves.  Yes, the ALP vision was blurry and lacked a huge amount of developed substance at many levels, but the LP’s agenda was exactly the same.  The difference was that the LP’s message was one that asked voters to look back and consider their track record, and say “if you like that, stick with us” while not spending more time developing a vision of the future.  What the ALP did here was actually create some sort of blurred vision of where Australia was to be, and yes, it lacked any sort of real genuine innovations or developments, but it was a message that was forward thinking and looking towards 2010 and 2013, rather than one that was based on past performance.  The reality was that the LP didn’t look as if they had a vision of the future, and again, perception is important to people.  The LP and their senior members were the past, and the ALP presented themselves as the future.

The fourth question was the campaign itself and how the LP’s election campaign was poorly run in comparison to the ALP’s campaign.  Beyond the first week, when the ALP was caught by the LP tax cut announcement, the ALP campaign remained completely on track and responsive to anything the LP threw at it.  If anything, the LP looked more harried and under pressure as the weeks drew on, making more mistakes in their press conferences, off-camera comments, and other various smaller errors that spoke extensively of a lack of control by the party of the message that was being presented.  This culminated on the week prior to the election of LP members being caught distributing fake flyers that were supposedly in support of the ALP’s stance on Bali.  If anything, this controversy hurt the LP enormously and took the party off message for the remaining three days of the campaign.  But, there were more of these moments during the entire month.  The leak that Malcolm Turnbull had attempted to persuade the LP cabinet to ratify Kyoto was one.  Another would have been that Howard raised the question of his leadership during the APEC summit prior to the election.  These little mistakes translated into periods where the message was no longer under party control, and the LP had too many of these to deal with in comparison to the ALP.

Who is going to lead now?

This has to be the most complicated question to answer for the LP.  There is a massive dearth of genuine talent within the parliamentary wing of the party after this election.  John Howard has lost his seat.  Peter Costello has announced that he will not put his hand up for the leadership.  Mal Brough, who was touted as a potential leader, has lost his seat.  A massively reduced majority of members has left only a small selection of potential people to lead the party to 2010.

If anything, they will be, as The Age put it on Sunday 25 November, drinking from a poisoned chalice.  The party has been decimated by this loss, and now out of government across the entire country, they will face more problems than just a dearth of political talent (see below).  The possibility of the LP, as it currently stands, of making a return to government in 2010 is very poor indeed, thus it is very understandable why Peter Costello has chosen not to lead the party in opposition.  While he would make a formidable opposition leader, his association with the Howard government would be a massive burden to carry, especially in light of the strength of the change of mood within the electorate.  He knows that 2010 may not be a possibility, and if he was not going to stand again in 2010, then there would be little point in warming a seat for the next parliamentary LP leader.

This leaves a very small, and unimpressive field to choose from.  The following people have already declared their intentions: Malcolm Turnbull, Tony Abbott and Brendan Nelson.  Other possibilities include Alexander Downer and Julie Bishop.  Joe Hockey has already ruled himself out, and other such as Andrew Robb and Christopher Pyne have possibly put their hand up as deputy leader.  Beyond that, there isn’t much to choose from in terms of individuals that could be nominated as leader.  The one person that was being groomed for the potential position, Mal Brough, lost his seat during the election.

Each individual that have declared or are possibilities have their own incumbent problems.  Malcolm Turnbull is smart and a new face within the LP, but his inexperience and polish as a politician really showed during this campaign.  Furthermore, he is not a unifying force within the party at this point, he remains a divisive figure.  The same could be said for Tony Abbott, although for different reasons.  Abbott lacks any sort of genuine political charisma, but retains every part (if not more) of Howard’s conservatism.  If anything, the LP under Abbott would become even more conservative than it is now, something that may annihilate the party.  His performance during the election campaign was appalling.  Brendan Nelson has the problem of having the historical ALP links count against him, but he also lacks charisma and has seen to mishandle the two portfolios that he was tasked with while in cabinet (Education and Defence).  Because of this he was never seen during the campaign.  Alexander Downer, while the most experienced in this group, would probably not run.  He has been there already, and now he will not enjoy doing it again.  There are also questions of his longevity in parliament, and he has hinted that he may not be around past 2010.  There are also questions of his popularity in cabinet. 

This leaves Julie Bishop, who probably would not be a bad choice if she chooses to run for opposition leader.  She would make a good representation, but probably lacks experience as an opposition leader.  Of course, we said the same thing about Kevin Rudd when he took the opposition leader job in December 2006.  The other person, that is not running, is Joe Hockey, and his moderate position would have been a good rallying point for the LP to run to, despite his problematic association with Workchoices.

What has become clear is this.  The person that will lead the Liberal Party to their next election victory may not yet be in parliament.  The chances of the party returning to power in 2010 are slim, and it may be 2013 before they have a real chance of ending the ALP reign.

What direction to take?

This may seem a stupid question to ask, but it is not a simple as it seems.  Now that they are out of government across the country, the LP’s ability to muster support and rebuild after this loss will be severely hampered.  Paul Kelly on Insiders put it succinctly – they will have a very limited ability to raise funds and seek patronage.  Furthermore, the massive factionalism that used to claim the ALP has already begun to surface in the LP, and this needs to be dealt with swiftly by the new leader.  Beyond that, a serious bout of soul searching and rebuilding of the party needs to be undertaken.  The problem is that if the recriminations within the party continue, there won’t be much of a party left to be a viable opposition to the ALP.  Just because the LP has not been in opposition does not mean that they should automatically give up.  They need to take this blow as part of the process, examine the causes, fix them, and move on.  This will be tough, but, in a nutshell, that is what needs to happen.  Even a complete re-examination of the basis of the party and its founding values needs to be considered and revisited.  Whatever it takes to rebuild the party and forge it into something that could be considered a political force again.  That’s as simple as it gets.  But, sometimes simplicity is the key to success.

Make Notes

I’ve been through a pretty turbulent month.  I’ve been dumped from a relationship over the phone, had an emotional breakdown at home and at work, fought with my mum, handed in my resignation letter, and emotionally swung from catatonia, depression, anger to random moments of happiness.  In short, I’ve been something of an emotional rollercoaster wreck.  But having a talk today with a good friend of mine has helped massively, and it’s affirmed a lot of things that I may have had doubts about or issues that I felt that I needed to deal with, especially the things that stemmed from the breakup of my relationship, and also where I wanted to go with my life.  I won’t deal with my professional issues here, as that is more reserved for another long rant about my opinions on the education system, but my personal life is something that I need to write here as a sort of affirmation.

Relationship-wise, I think I’m going in the right direction.  There are days that I still feel pain and hurt, but most days I’ve improved a lot from having days where I wake up and I just don’t do anything and I’ve been dead to the world.  These days now are more about thinking and dealing with these moments, and from a lost day, I’ve gotten down to maybe an hour, so I’ve made some progress.  Writing about it, reading about it, mentally dealing with the reasons, going through a bit of grieving, this all helps a little bit, but there’s still some lingering feelings that are hard to get rid of.  There are the moments that pop into my head of the past, of happier times.  There are the vivid dreams which leave me sad and emotional when I awake.  There are those mental arguments with myself about the future, and what I can do to change it, or move on.  I can’t change what’s happened before, but I can definitely do something about the future.

I’ve realized that I’ve got to heal myself before I can even consider the future.  There’s all of these problems with me that I’ve got to work on, such as my lack of self-dependence, my loss of self, my retreat into myself and my defensiveness of my flaws and faults and lashing out at these, being lazy and not showing my commitment to a relationship, all my personality flaws and issues that prevented me from progressing as a person.  On the flip side, I also realize that I’m not a horrendously bad person.  Like all humans, I’m just horrendously flawed and imperfect.  This is not bad, in fact, this is very normal.  If I was looking for perfection, I would be unhappy for the rest of my life, but I’m looking for some improvement to the self, and emerging from this period in the manner of a butterfly emerging from its chrysalis of a cocoon would be a satisfying result.  If my peers and friends come up to me and say afterwards that “You’ve become a different person, the same, but different all the same”, then I would know that I have made some sort of major personal change.

That is the other real challenge.  One may work hard at change, but it’s the changes that stick with you and you don’t revert to the old habits, they are the hardest to keep.  It shouldn’t even be the ones that you have to think about anymore, they represent a shift in persona, rather than a temporary shift.  For example, I’ve been attempting in the last 2 months to stop saying “like”.  For me, it has become a religious cauterization.  I hear it every day, people randomly using that “l” word, and it has gotten to the point where it is distinctively irritating if I hear it, and if I use it.  The problem is that it is hard to remove, and a large part of me says that if I can do this and make it a permanent change, I really can do a lot of other things.

This brings me to an earlier question that I posed in an earlier post.  This is the issue of the disposable relationship, or to be more precise, the problem of not only a disposable relationship, but our search for the easy relationship.  I fear that, in a way, we’re creating a world where what we seek in love is something that is not something that is built, but we all seek what I have come to say is the “love at first sight” kind of love, the idealized version of love that we all yearn for, but in reality probably could never find.  I know of only a few instances where I would say is the case, but most successful relationships in the real world would have been ones where there has been a lot of work between the two people.  The main thing has been the desire to commit to the relationship and their willingness to stay and work on the conflicts and differences of opinion that may exist.  It may not be one where they end up with consensus, they may maintain their opinions.  But they have both made that commitment to continue to work at it, and what they both have had has grown into something spectacular and beautiful, that may lead to a long and fruitful union between two minds.

The thing is that, the current world encourages us to consume and discard when finished with alarming alacrity.  In particular, if it does not work, there is no need to fix it, it would cost more, so we dispose of it instead.  The question then is this: are we now engaging in the same mindset with relationships?  Phenomenon such as speed dating, online dating and flirting, singles or desperate and dateless balls, the objectification of physical appearances, valuing physical features and completely ignoring the emotional, intellectual and mental features of a person, the increase emphasis of sex in the developed world, it makes me question whether all of my work to achieve a level of self-improvement is worth the effort.  I have to believe that most people live in the veneer of looking for their great love, but are willing to work on a relationship if they see the value in it, and that my current feeling is more a result of being burnt and not an emerging societal change.

I somehow do doubt that it is an emerging movement, as from my experiences with people, that this opinion may not be true.  However, the opinions that I have are from my generation.  I am unsure about the new and upcoming generation of young adults and children that have been exposed to a lifetime of easy, casual relationships and the concept of love at first sight.  Even the concept of speed dating, that is, knowing whether you would like someone, or finding a serious partner, within the first 5-10 minutes of a conversation, holds some truth but places enormous pressure on the self to perform.  In this high-paced, consumer-style world, there should still be a place for romance and love.

But what I’ve learnt is that love is something that is built.  Love doesn’t blossom at first sight.  That kind of love is not the honest, truthful kind.  The truest love is the one that still exists after you have broken off the relationship, months down the track, the pain and suffering is gone, and you can say with conviction in your heart and mind that you love someone, even for all of their faults and flaws, and that you would be happy for them no matter who they’ve become, and wish them all the best.  That’s love.  That’s what REAL love is all about, and I guess I’m experiencing bits of it now, although I've still a lot to learn.

1 Corinthians 13:1-13

"If I speak in the tongues of men and of angels, but have not love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal.
If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but have not love, I am nothing.
If I give all I possess to the poor and surrender my body to the flames, but have not love, I gain nothing.

Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud.
It is not rude, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs.
Love does not delight in evil but rejoices with the truth.
It always protects, always trusts, always hopes, always perseveres.

Love never fails. But where there are prophecies, they will cease; where there are tongues, they will be stilled; where there is knowledge, it will pass away.
For we know in part and we prophesy in part, but when perfection comes, the imperfect disappears.
When I was a child, I talked like a child, I thought like a child, I reasoned like a child. When I became a man, I put childish ways behind me.
Now we see but a poor reflection as in a mirror; then we shall see face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I am fully known.

And now these three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love."

Read 1 Note -Make Notes

I’ve been recently watching a show on television called Californication, and most people that would read this would look at me and say “you’ve been watching what?”, as a response to the gratuitous sex scenes, the misogynistic tone of the episodes, the occasional brilliant bit of dialogue interspersed with more average writing.  What is missed, however, are some of the issues and questions that are being asked.  In one scene, the main character, Hank Moody, asks the question: “Why is the city of angels (LA) so hell bent on destroying its female population?”  This morning, I thought, “Why is the world so hell bent on destroying its female population?

Last night I had a fantastic time with a group of old friends at a Turkish restaurant.  It was a night of average food, good conversation, good alcohol (of which I had very little) and good hookah (sheesha).  But in between the conversation the males had an intriguing time engaging (specifically with their eyes) the members of the opposite sex.  Not the ones on our table, mind, but the others that kept on flitting by our table - be it behind our seats, or across our window vantage point.  I enjoyed myself immensely, being the chauvinistic, bitter male that I was last night, although it probably didn’t win me any accolades amongst my peers.  In the cold light of morning, I begin to wonder why that we’ve reduced women to an object to be obtained and not understood. 

We’ve been brought up in a consumer society, throwaway objects, replaceable devices, buy and buy and buy.  Is that now applying to our emotional development as well?  Men and women are taught to be more masculine, more feminine, more concerned about how they look, what they wear, what they smell like, how beautiful they are, what is the right bodyshape, what is the wrong bodyshape, what is healthy, what is not, blah blah blah.  To achieve this, we consume.  Self help books, diet foods, exercise programs with personal trainers, this season’s clothes, next season’s fads, the next big thing, casual sex, one-night stands, alcohol by the barrel, drugs by the line or bag.  It’s all about consuming.  Unfortunately, does that mean that we become consumers in building something as simple as a relationship?

Women are especially placed in a tough position.  Unfortunately, we live in a chauvinistic world.  Both sexes glorify and vilify the other in a variety of ways, but the method of how women are portrayed in this new world of ours places this unimaginable pressure on women to conform to an image of what guys would like, forcing them to do crazy stuff such as starve, deny and potentially destroy themselves.  Post traumatic stress disorder, depression, anxiety, suicide, rehab clinics, drug overdoses.  These are things that, while they may have existed, are more prevalent now than ever before.  How possible is it for anyone, male or female (but especially female) to be able to attempt to conform and feel good about themselves, while consuming at a vast rate, and also have a healthy relationship with another person?  When it becomes too hard, do we just discard the relationship?  It surely feels that way as I delve deeper into understanding the world that I live in.  If it doesn’t work, we chuck it, and you apply the same mentality to your TV as you would to someone that you love, cherish, and hope to have a future with.

And why is it also that, across the world, that women are the ones made to suffer?  The developed and developing world places unimaginable pressures on women to be in the image of women that men glorify or “worship”, while women in other societies are trampled on through religion, abuse, traditional customs, slavery, rape, torture, assault, in general a loss of any human rights and dignity?  Haven’t we gone far enough in destroying women as people that stand side-by-side with men and crushing any hope and dignity that they have in their self affirmation and right to equality?  Are women and men not capable anymore of engaging in a circle where both are seen to share the same circle, both with different roles, but half of a full circle, and willing to make the commitment instead of consuming their relationship and then discarding it when the first trouble decides to hit?  I sometimes do wonder.

Make Notes