Hung and Dried

Well Australia has a hung parliament and may have multi-party government. Australia is in shock, interestingly enough, because most other democracies in the world has seen this happen more often than not. It has always been ridiculous to assume that 3 parties would cover the opinions of the whole electorate. We are after all a multi-cultural society.

Britain has also discovered that the less homogeneous the society, the less representative the two major parties. The more diverse the concerns and interests of the electorate means that it is more unlikely that the major parties will be able to satisfy them.

Each party’s election campaigns concentrated on the areas that they considered their strengths. These however were not necessarily the issues that voters were focused on.  The ETS and health were sidelined issues. Tax was the focus of the Liberals. Now I have been told that their campaign was effective, but it didn’t speak to me.

From the moment Abbot deposed Malcolm Turnbull, he started with his mantra of “ a big, bad tax”.  Having tired of the mantra^, most of their ads had no effect on me. Labour were defensive from the beginning, a problem that started with Kevin Rudd.  From the day Abbot deposed Malcolm Turnbull as leader of the Liberal party, Rudd went on the defensive, apologising for a lot of things. He did this while enjoying high personal ratings and sensational public opinion polls. For some reason, a government that was legislating and acting with the support of the general public, imploded.

For this reason and not for any other, Kevin had to go.  Malcolm Turnbull proved to be a man of his word. He lost the Liberal leadership by one vote, because he didn’t vote himself. Abbot of course voted. He further enhanced his name by crossing the floor on the ETS, which only weeks earlier had been supported by over 50% of the Liberal party. Turnbull comes out all of this smelling of roses.

If I had any power within the Labour party I would be looking for new strategists. What a terrible job they did. For some reason when you see a party back pedal as much as the Labour party it is easy to buy into the opposition claim that they are failing as a government.

Of course getting rid of an incumbent Prime Minister through Partycide, is never good for a political party. Julia Gillard may have been the pawn of many lobby groups as claimed by the opposition, but has proven herself to be strong and capable over the campaign.

I personally find Abbot irritating and I’m sure many of his own party agree with me. He doesn’t seem to project anything that would encourage confidence him as a leader.

I love the fact that the fate of the country is in the hands of independents. It reminds me of Israel. The negotiations are the most interesting.  Ex- Country party  members representing communities with specific interests will decide who rules; and why not? I like the fact that they  take this responsibility and that they are open minded.

I certainly wouldn’t be surprised if they side with the Labour party based on the National Broadband plan.  This issue is enormous; it affects health, education, migration and city planning in rural areas.  The rollout plan of the Liberals fall far short of what is demanded by “Rural Australia” let alone “Outback Australia”.  National Broadband leads to better lives to those in the country. Not just by feeling less isolated, but also allowing access to immediate and interactive communication, country doctors can be helped by colleagues in the city or even overseas. It may also see Rural Australia becoming a much more attractive option for immigrants and even city-dwelling Australians.

Do I feel sorry for the investors in mining? No! Will they stop investing here if we whack on a “big new tax”? No! I don’t think anyone bought into the poor old billionaires plights. 

“Big new tax” vs no clear message from Labour except maybe, “beware Tony Abbot could be your PM” and neither had much affect on the elections. It came down to timing. The timing was wrong for the government. They got one thing right. Kevin Rudd had already turned into a political liability, but overthrowing a Prime Minister is rare. No one remembered that a few weeks earlier the leader of the opposition was replaced. We may well get a chance to rectify the stalemate in another election.

What fun!!

The Lure of the coffee shop

I am sitting in a trendy coffee shop on Balaclava Road in East St. Kilda at around lunch time. It is the last week of the school holidays and there is an eclectic group of people in and around.  I never thought I would say this, but the school kids definitely bring down the tone of the place.

Well positioned to watch the passing traffic as well as what’s going on in the coffee shop.  I am sitting at a long table that means it is not exclusive. A couple sit at the same table carrying on a conversation.  Old friends, catching up. She is obviously flirting; he is successfully avoiding her advances while trying to subtly to say no.

My mistake. They were no school children, but Israeli’s on holiday after the army; quiet but dour looking young men. I hope my son is a little more exuberant when he comes to visit. It is a visit I am looking forward to, but with some trepidation. I have not achieved much and what I have achieved, I’ve lost. Still a truism of parent/child relationships is that, it doesn’t matter what age you tend to fall back into the roles. Thankfully we have always had a very good relationship (I think).

I’m glad I took a seat by the window, because there is a lot more action going on out there. A couple of ladies further down the cafe speaking at full volume had been drowning out the music. I hope they start talking again soon.  Hey there goes a Rabbi I know.

 I popped out to speak to him and scored myself a lunch invitation, which brings me to the downside of this very pleasant way to pass an afternoon, the cost. Cafe owners have a vested interest in having computer users sit in their cafes. Firstly they are paying customers; albeit usually minimum payers, but they also give the impression that the place is full.

The woman who was trying to pick up the guy is now sitting next to me on her computer. Across the aisle another woman is working/playing on hers. There is a woman next to her who seems to feel left out so she splits her time between playing on her I-phone and leaning back to read the computer screen of her neighbour as she busily types.  How nosy and rude.

I guess it’s hard to come into a coffee shop by yourself without an “aide” to make it look like you have something to do. Still it’s strange that this woman has no shame. Of course little is she to know that I have been watching her.  

Does this mean I have no shame? Surely not!. I am an observer of human behaviour, a writer, an artist. Anyhow, that’s my excuse.

So why would this woman come an sit in a coffee shop by herself, what is the lure of the coffee shop? Of course, it’s a great place to meet people, but it is especially great for people watching. A sort of social zoo if you will; where you can watch people grazing and going through several phases of the mating ritual.

Fascinating stuff, however my big tip is find a place where you enjoy the coffee and they are not too pushy about getting you to order.

A dangerous silence

This op-piece by Ed Koch, former mayor of New York supports what I was trying to say in my previous post.
(Just click on the title)

A dangerous silence

Obama and Israel

In the lead up to the American election in 2008 one of the main accusations made by the Republicans was that Obama lacked both international and political experience.  Well he’s gaining the experience now, but at a cost. Obama is a visionary, but visions need to be put into action, that requires pragmatists. Pragmatists (as opposed to realists, which seems to be a boast more that a label) can say no, this won’t work and then work toward achieving something like what was wanted or next best thing.

Obama wanted to change America’s standing around the world. In Europe, that wasn’t difficult. Firstly, he wasn’t George. W and secondly the Europeans got caught up in the Romance of the Obama election victory.  They understood both how incredulous the victory was and what the social ramifications could be.

The Arab Middle East is not Europe;  and Middle Eastern politics is a completely different reality. The guy kissing you warmly on both cheeks is as likely to plotting your death as what to offer you to eat.  The modern political states are colonially imposed realities, and now Islam is quickly replacing Arabism as the major expression of self-identity across the region.

Would they like Obama because he is black and his father was a Muslim? Well the fact that his father was a Muslim works against him. His father‘s religion determines his religion according to Islam (and Christianity). He has therefore rejected the religion. Interestingly enough being black doesn’t work for him in an area where the blacks are openly seen as inferior. He was never going to be greeted as a folk hero, but was definitely seen as more amenable to the Arab voice.

Incidentally this amenability does not always generate a grateful reaction and can often be seen as a weakness. Promises for money, is easy money, because those promises are made in English for those people.  The American way of buying approval doesn’t work in the Middle East. Americans deal with the governments. These governments are largely distrusted by the people.  The Arab state that has a modicum of democracy is Lebanon and they are being held hostage by a terror organisation (as is the whole south of the country which had traditionally been the Christian part of the country).

After more than a year in power, Obama’s standing in the Arab countries has not changed. His obvious conclusion was that it must be because of the Palestinian/ Israeli conflict and more specifically Israel. He did not conclude that it might be because in that year in power not only has American not reduced its troops in either Iraq or Afghanistan, in fact the opposite. They have been increased.  Yet Obama seems to believe he has credibility. I suggest that Obama’s posturing has led the Arabs to surmise that they may be able to achieve much by sidling up to him. The question is, who will play who? The wilier side will.

For this reason Obama’s posturing on Israel and Iran has been particularly instructive.  The nuclear issue and Iran is one that is extremely worrying.  Almost 70 years ago a charismatic leader of a nation was seen as using hyperbole when saying he would wipe out the Jews, while flexing military muscle in direct contradiction to the terms of treaties that Germany had signed. As the Sudatenland fell, the world did nothing. 65 years later a charismatic leader of a nation makes the same claim about the Jews (using much of the same language in describing them), flexes his might by developing a nuclear weapon in contempt of the treaty to which it is a signatory. If he threatened to wipe out all Christians, or even infidels, the reaction would be very different. J ‘accuse. The world does not see the threat.

Does the blame lie with Israel, or has Israel been painted into a corner? A country that fits into Tasmania 3 ½ times with a population of 5 million surrounded on 3 sides with 22 Arab states with a combined population of about 200 million. With the West Bank in the hands of the Palestinian Authority, Israel is 14 kilometres across at its narrowest point. This is right across the centre of the country, between the West Bank town of Tulkarem and Israel’s fourth border, the Mediterranean Sea. This is a country that has faced 4 multi-front wars and 2 less-fronted wars, 2 intifadas, 1 war of attrition and ongoing war of attrition up to today, is expected to make concessions.

 Israel justifiably is a little worried about its security. No one else seems to be.  Obama called on Israel to halt all settlements on the West Bank, without defining the terms, or even checking what had been agreed upon in the past. That call was further than any Palestinian leader had gone since their recognition of Israel.  At best this was reckless and irresponsible and worst it could lead to armed conflict.  Hamas declaring an up scaling of its conflict with Israel and Fatah considering a new Intifadah, a sure indication that they feel they have public sympathy.  

An Israel, friendless, despite assurances this week commemorated Holocaust Memorial Day.  It is a  sharp reminder how the Jews were expendable.  This week coming Israel will commemorate Remembrance Day for its fallen soldiers immediately followed by its Independence Day.  All of these days interconnect not just historically, but more importantly they are interconnected in the collective Israeli psyche.

Can an Israel, with this psyche, attempt to bomb Iran nuclear plants?  Yes. Should they? Well, I just say, they shouldn’t have to.  To Obama I say do a bit of reading. Speak to people who know. You have people around you who have been there and done that. Dennis Ross is a good example.  I am sad to admit that after 1 year in power Obama has reduced the trust between the 2 countries to zero.

K-Rudderless.

In one of my previous posts I ridiculed the Liberal Party for choosing an unelectable Tony Abbot as its leader.  Now, although I still believe him ultimately unelectable, he is in there with a chance. Kevin Rudd has somehow managed to turn an imploding Liberal party into a united party by shooting himself in the foot, toe by toe. If he has a spin doctor, he should have his political allegiances’ checked. In this election year, several alarm bells should be going off for our leader.

Firstly, he comes across and still looks like and dresses like, teacher’s pet.  It is not the sort of character Australians necessarily warm to. However they were sick of the ‘class nerd’, Howard.  There is no doubt that Rudd is intelligent. We know he feels at home with diplomats and speaks Legalese, Diplomatese and fluent Chinese. His few attempts to be blokesy or folksy sounded so unnatural they were held up for ridicule It may be unfair, he may be a great guy, but I have to admit, I’d rather have a beer with Tony Abbot.  Even though I disagree with much of what he says and thinks, he comes across as someone you could have an interesting discussion with and not come out feeling like you were being condescended to.

Secondly, Rudd lacks a rudder. He seems to go where the media directs him. He has been reactive rather than pro-active.  Abbot came to power with a party seriously split. Forced to back down from a promise their previous leader had given on the ETS. More than 50% of Liberals supported the ETS. However, Abbot was allowed a Honeymoon period in which he managed to equate the ETS with a “Great Big New Tax on Everything”. There was no attempt to explain the ETS to the public as a response and therefore every Australian today can chant the mantra that the ETS is a Great Big New Tax. The eventual Liberal alternative plan was farcical, but never seized on by the government. It was never compared to the ETS to show that the opposite was in fact true. Liberal spin doctors managed to change the discussion to “Insulation-gate”. It was something that Rudd should have nipped in the bud and Garrett should have been the political collateral sooner rather than later.

The strange apology for not doing enough, or for not doing what he promised, or whatever it was for, left me dumbfounded. After a few days of niggling from the opposition the Prime Minister removed his foot from his mouth to replace it with the other.  It reinforced a feeling that Rudd reacts to his perception of the polls. The problem with public apologies is that they need to be backed up with public action.

The health plan seemed like a grab for headlines. If proposing a federal takeover from the states, the minimal amount of homework would have required him to check in with the states, especially since they are all Labour states.  The Education plan on the other hand, while coming under some criticism from Teachers Unions and schools, but seems to be accepted by the public at large. Perhaps because this is under the control of Julia Gillard who sounds like a Primary school Principal when speaking, or perhaps because she seems to be in control.

This should be Rudd’s third alarm bell. I am not familiar enough with the internal machination of the federal Labour party to know why Rudd holds the stick over Gillard, but I imagine that eventually that will become irrelevant. Rudd is clearly seen in the minds of most Australian as the visiting Australian Prime Minister, while Gillard is seen as Prime Minister of Australia.

The fourth alarm bell was fired off recently by the Liberal party calling for restricting immigration. This call was made on the basis that this year’s number of immigrants was unsustainable as a level of immigration.  I would challenge that fact, but that will be another post, but the obvious answer to that is that there is no data to support the assertion that this figure would be repeated. 

Australia is a country built on immigration. European migrants, who arrived as refugees after World War 2, would not be allowed into Australia under today’s laws.  We are part of a world treaty on refugees as well as many regional ones. We fulfil our obligations under those treaties. That has been true of Australian governments across the political spectrum since 1972.

Immigration should not be confused with the refugee issue. Immigration is the people that we allow in.  Having tried unsuccessfully to bring my wife and son to Australia, I know how difficult it is to immigrate to Australia. The business community were quick to condemn the Liberal policy, but guess what Kevin did. He seemingly backed the Liberals. I am also quite vary that this issue will explode into a race issue in the next election campaign.

Generally speaking Rudd is surrounded by very competent people. It is the redeeming factor of this government.  Gillard, Smith and the very versatile Junior Minister Greg Combet and Lindsay Tanner do their jobs and others.  Luckily for them, Tony Abbot will always be unelectable to some and raise a question mark with many others. He is backed by Julia Bishop who seems to like being deputy to everyone. Joe Hockey, likeable, but not seen to be in Abbot’s camp.

 A party that his healing, but still deeply wounded needs to be put to  the sword by a party in power that would win an election if held today. If I was Kevin I would introduce that great American value of bi-partisanship looking for cooperation outside of the usual committee room, cooperation for the benefit of Australia, thus diffusing the ability if the opposition to attack government policy and exploiting any splinters in the opposition.

My feeling is that Rudd is busy doing something, but doesn’t seem to control the country. He controls the party and shines at question time, where his condescending sarcasm is appreciated. I hope he can change that image or turn it over to the Prime Minister of Australia, Julia Gillard.

The Education Curriculum

The Federal government has decided to get more involved in our health and education system. The understood delineation in responsibilities between Federal and State governments has been that the federal government is responsible for things that affect Australia as a sovereign nation, like Defence and Immigration. However, by having Education and Health under State control, there is a problem of standardisation. Is a doctor from Queensland the same as a Doctor from Western Australia?  Is a matriculation in South Australia worth the same as Matriculation in Victoria?

Having worked in Education my whole working life, I feel qualified to at least have an opinion on the issue, as opposed to Health and hospitals, which I will not address in this article. So why is the federal government getting involved in Education?

Standardised tests in Numeracy and Literacy are given to all Grade 3, 5 and 7 across the country and this has led to standardised learning in certain areas. By standardising the rest of the curriculum we ensure that a student moving from one state to another will have no more problems that a student moving from one school to another as the learning material will be the same. That’s great.  How else does it help?

Australia has always been reactive in its policy rather than forward thinking. A shortage of manpower in a particular section of the economy will lead to an adjustment of emphasis in the education system. The effect of which is felt several year down the line.

After Australia largely ditched Technical schools almost a generation ago, we are in the midst of a ‘tradie’ crisis. This affects our immigration quotas as well. The good news for Australia is we no longer have a shortage of hairdressers, much to the chagrin of thousands of want to be migrants who were doing courses that would help their visa applications.

School was meant to prepare you for life and we once had PM who thought “Life wasn’t meant to be easy”.  Yes, back in the “good old days”, we were punished corporally and had to show respect to our elders, stand up on buses for them and for any adult for that matter. And you tell that to kids today and they just don’t believe ya! (with apologies to Monty Python).

Despite the buzzwords, transparency, multiple intelligences, heterogeneous learning and of course, differentiated curriculum, the curriculum is not going forward. It is returning to the past; but it is not going backwards. It is simply readjusting for the time and maybe even recognising some merit in the past way of thinking and teaching.

Grammar is going to be taught as part of English. As someone who has taught English overseas, I believe this is a really positive step. Yet it leaves a very daunting question. Who is going to teach it? Changing the curriculum is great, but the teachers are the ones that have to adapt; Much more so then the students.

Teachers, who have never learnt grammar at school or even during their tertiary education, are now expected to teach it. I’m sure there will be many teachers spending this year staying one lesson ahead of the students in certain areas.

Schools, being in control of their own budgets have been very busy hiring “graduate teachers” as opposed to experienced teachers; as every year experience adds to the teacher’s salary. They are now staffed with teachers teaching a curriculum that is foreign to them. 

Don’t get me wrong. I think the government is getting it right on education. The emphasis on creating a more transparent system, one that will prepare the student to meet the challenges of life in the 21^st century is a step in the right directions. There will be hiccups and quite a lot of pressure on teachers, who will more answerable to school, parents and ultimately their students, but striving to reach a national standard is positive.  It will be interesting to see if that is extended into high school. I believe a national matriculation would be a very positive step.

When I was at uni in the 70’s, competition was a dirty word. We’ve come a full circle since then. I also believe that without going overboard, competition is not unhealthy. The trick with competition is to maintain the competitive spirit and that will be the biggest challenge for the teachers; reign in the leaders and continue to motivate the other end of the spectrum. It’s a tough gig being a teacher.

Dubai and all that Stuff

The enigma that is middle - eastern politics and the middle - eastern mind-set make is so radically different to ours. Too often we apply western values and a western approach when trying to make sense of the middle - east and then find it difficult to understand what is happening. It’s too easy to say it’s a Jewish- Muslim thing. The Arab world and the Muslim world are anything but united.

Mahmoud al-Mabhouh, the senior Hamas operative killed in Dubai was not a popular man. There were many that wanted him dead.  Israel, who claims that al-Mabhouh was involved in attaining high grade rockets to be smuggled into Gaza through Egypt, wanted him dead.  Interestingly Jordan and Egypt would want him dead for an extension of that same reason.

Anything that promotes Hamas bolsters the Muslim Brotherhood in Jordan and Egypt, both secular, pseudo democratic, dictatorship. Egypt especially keeps the Muslim Brotherhood under the thumb, as they are seen as the biggest threat to the regime.

Fatah, the faction of Mahmoud Abbas, which was evicted from the Gaza strip by Hamas and even within Hamas, where there is a rivalry between the Gazans and those based in Damascus. Of course the other major player in anything untoward is Iran.

Iran who has its satellites, Syria and the Hezbullah controlled Lebanon sitting on Israel’s northern borders, continues to support Hamas, but begrudgingly. Hamas is a Sunni organisation and Iran is Shi’ite and that is usually enough reason to go to war. They are both Muslims, just like the Protestants and the Catholics in Ireland are both Christians.  They may need no other reason to do this, than implicate Israel and deflect pressure from the UN on their Nuclear Program. According to Dubai police 2 of the ‘hit team’ escaped to Iran; not a place Israelis like to go, as you can imagine.

With all the noise being created about this, it doesn’t seem like this man is going to be mourned by very many.  Did Israel do it? Quite probably. Did others do it do implicate Israel? Quite possibly. While the former is most likely, we can still entertain the latter.  Even the few mistakes by the Mossad have made have never been made on this scale. Is this reasonable doubt? In a court of law, I am sure it would be.

However the main story has been the use of passports. It seems that it would be rather foolish of Israel to use passports of real people and especially those of its own citizens that have dual citizenship. Israel is not a ‘stupid’ country. So many people, so many passports and so easily traced, strange. The only people to have been arrested so far are 2 Palestinians, even stranger.

For arguments sake, let’s say Israel did do it? Why is everyone so surprised that 3^rd country passports were used. In every spy movie I have ever seen, the spy opens his bag to reveal a swath of passports from many countries. I assume every spy agency does the same.

So why the shock and horror?  The use of passports of real people seems to be the deviation from espionage norms.  That is what most espionage agencies don’t do, that is probably the best argument for it not being Israel. Of course that then raises the question, how did the perpetrators get into the files of Israel’s interior ministry?

This has got to be worth a movie at least. 

Apprehensively welcoming the new decade.

We enter a new decade with a much greater sense of foreboding than on entering this millennium ten years ago. Of course the big worry then was the Y2K virus; which was going to shut down all the computers on the planet and end life as we know it. And when we needed it, “people”- kind came up with its greatest invention-: The IT guy!

There was the romance of the new millennium, the stupid argument over when the millennium really started and there were the doomsayers who were ready for it all to end. For most of us, though 2000 represented that titillating entity, the Future. It was the standard time set in all early Sci-Fi movies, for being the future. In no small part, because we had modelled inventions on those movies, we entered the millennium with having achieved many of the predictions. Only a few were wrong-: the cars don’t fly and the only people that wear spandex suits, ride bikes.

We were hip and technologically savvy back then, right? Well, maybe not as much as we remember. We used email, today referred to as gray mail, because only old people use it. Some people were still using tapes and cassettes in “Walkmans”, but most of us had “Discmans”. Well of course they are “Sooooo last century.” The first i-pod hit the markets in 2001 and changed the world significantly. We had chat programs and some even had webcam capabilities by 2000. Today the world chats on facebook and twitter and everyone is accessible 24/7.

Could it have been that long ago, when if someone didn’t answer their phone it meant you either had to try later or wait till you saw them. No mobile phones and not even answering machines. How did people do it?

In the latter part of the last century I had the pleasure of being part of a group of people trying to build a kibbutz ( a socialist, commune, farm – based community). Idealists all of us, trying to create a more just society. For the first 5 years I lived there, we had one phone for the whole community. True we were a little isolated and we felt a bit cut off, but socially this little community was alive. Every afternoon we would visit each other. If you stayed at home, people would drop in, if you went out, you would just knock on a door and wait for the invitation.

When phones were introduced we were excited, we could call each other. The interesting phenomena; however was the decrease in social activity. This was not necessarily because of more time spent on the phone either. The phone allowed you to decline visitors; something you couldn’t do if they were standing on your doorstep.

We talk about us being a global village, because all and everyone are accessible 24/7. If something is happening anywhere in the world, except in the most repressive of regimes, we know about it, can watch it and even chat to people on the ground. If we want to call a friend, we can page them or track them down at will.

However, as in the kibbutz scenario, this is not a more social world, just more connected. We can chat to people anywhere in the world, but we don’t sit around over coffee and cake/ wine and cheese/milk and cookies, and discuss. We can’t see the eyes of, nor detect the body language or other nuances of whomever we are conversing with. The less social we are, the less social we are able to be and the less we feel any obligation to participate. Participation can be restricted to random tokenism.

Today, as we enter this new decade, we face an ongoing Global Financial Crisis, likely Global warming and the growing threat of terrorism ( which at the risk of being politically incorrect) the growing threat of Islamism (please note the “ism” . I am not talking about Islam per se). Wars and economic recessions around the world are causing the largest flood of migration since the Vietnam War and maybe even since World War Two.

We live in a world where theoretically we can see each other and speak to each other. Do we though? I don’t think so. I think we observe and then we all make our judgements based on our own “frame of reference” (see first article on blog page). Does familiarity breed contempt? Maybe it does!

Humankind is standing on the edge of the ravine ready to dive in head first. What used to be the “free world” is looking decidedly unsure about its values. Huge waves of migration from Muslim countries have changed the demographic face of Europe. While still ostensibly Christian countries, the demographic is altering. This has led to the rise of the Right, most noticeably with two British National Party members being elected to the European parliament. The outcome is bound to be civil unrest. It is no mistake that Turkey is finding it impossible to get accepted into the European Union. Watch how Germany votes on this issue.

Nationalism and religion are set to set Europe ablaze and many of the western countries seem painfully unaware of how their bowing to the “prevailing” winds, has left them with no credibility. It is interestingly the former Eastern bloc countries that can “Call it as it is”, because they have not being targeted by immigrants and need not pander to any ethnic group in deciding a stance. They truly appreciate the freedom that is offered by being aligned to the West.

Ask any of my former students. I told them in 1997, when I worked it out, and I was still telling them last year-: Following cycles of the last 120 years, I predicted a financial collapse in 2012 ( I could have been wrong, or the worst is yet to come) and World War Three in 2015, which will largely be fought on religious grounds. We are constantly reminded that those who do not learn the lessons of history, are bound to repeat it. Of course the Catch 22 here is that the more something fades into history the less it is considered important.

I would love to finish on an optimistic note. I don’t know if I can, but maybe on a reassuring note. As a species we are survivors and we will survive. It is our most basic instinct. But unlike many other creatures, the human baby has no innate survival mode other than crying. It cannot survive if left alone. This is true, even at quite an advanced stage of motor skills acquisition. We rely on others to survive. We can’t do it by ourselves.

We need other people so that we can survive. That is a truism for us as individuals, nations and a planet. If we take that truism to heart, then maybe we will have cause for optimism

I wish all of my readers well over the Holiday period and a happy, healthy and successful 2010.