Meanwhile, ah've bin thinking

While the newspapers, TV and radio news broadcasters have reported the world on its way to hell in a hand-basket, I’ve been travelling. I’m told that travel broadens the mind and for some people, sometimes, I believe that it does. 

For some others it means nothing more than confirmation to self about how very important we travellers are. At least, many seem to think so. After all, we can afford to be transported. Much of the world can’t afford to eat properly, despite all manner of international aid. Others scrimp and save to pay someone to transport them illegally but we aren’t concerned about all that from 39,000ft., are we?

The epitome of this falsehood about our importance is demonstrated to me by the Welsh clown in the TV advert for luxury holiday cruises. “Ah, this is the life!” he summarizes, smugly. Of course it is; he was paid very well by the cruise company to say that.

˜ ˜ ˜ ˜

Realise with real eyes the real lies

Things that I felt absolutely sure of but a few years ago, I do not believe now.

This thought makes me see more clearly how foolish it would be to expect

all men to agree with me. (Jim Rohn 1930-2009)

I’m sure every generation has its own ‘Fings Ain’t Wot They Used To Be’ experience. Some call it ‘progress’ but I think ‘change’ is a better description. The word ‘change’ allows the individual to determine whether or not there is progress but ‘progress’ implies that any change, whether it be social, political, or religious is for the good. It ain’t necessarily so – with apologies to Porgy and Bess.

I’ve mulled recently on the idea of ‘-ism’. Dictionary.com defines ism as:-

A noun - a distinctive doctrine, theory, system, or practice: as in This is the age of isms. (??)

The word that immediately springs to mind from that is ‘schism’. The same Dictionary.com tells me that this, too, is a noun, meaning:

1. division or disunion, especially into mutually opposed parties.
2. the parties so formed.
3. Ecclesiastical.

1. a formal division within, or separation from, a church or religious body over some doctrinal difference.
2. the state of a sect or body formed by such division.
3. the offense of causing or seeking to cause such a division.

I believe that tells me all I want to know about Conservatism, Liberalism, Communism, Socialism, Catholicism, Anglicanism, Calvinism, Islamism, terrorism, opportunism and so on. All these words are divisive except when applied to their respective adherents. For them, an ‘ism’ unites. Isn’t that interesting?

That led me to ‘-ist’: a suffix of nouns, often corresponding to verbs ending in -ize or nouns ending in -ism, that denote a person who practices or is concerned with something, or holds certain principles, doctrines, etc.: as in apologist; dramatist; machinist; novelist; realist; socialist; Thomist. And specialist? (My question mark)

In short, -isms and –ists seem to be labels that we apply conveniently to determine social separation and division of some kind. (Dictionary.com again). I find it remarkable that we are able express our divisions with a single word and not even think about it.

˜ ˜ ˜ ˜ ˜

While the world holds its breath

Presidents Trump, Putin and Kim Jong-un stand nose to nose on the world stage and strut the most alarming ‘I’m-right-you-are-wrong’ pantomimes while the rest of us look on helplessly. 

The media focuses on the leaders but thoughtful people also focus on those behind the thrones. I’m referring to the advisers, counsellors, (Queen’s Counsellors in Britain) and other vested interest sycophants, the -ists and -isms that have the ear of current, here-today-gone-tomorrow leaders.

When these, too, pass away, where do we stand, dear thoughtful reader? What are our values? What is our –ism?

How about PRAGMATISM?

noun

1. character or conduct that emphasizes practicality.

2. a philosophical movement or system having various forms, but generally stressing practical consequences as constituting the essential criterion in determining meaning, truth, or value. (Also dictionary.com)

How about ‘to thine own self be true’? (Act 1, scene 3, Hamlet by William Shakespeare).

So, it seems that everything boils down to whether or not each thoughtful individual is willing to pay the price for holding true to their own version of meaning, truth or value. Individual-ism has its (often high) price and so does conformity and compliance. There is no get out clause.

I leave you with my own philosophy:

Cause no harm

Be honest

Be peaceful

(They can’t touch you for it).