28th July 2010

Self Talk; keep it positive

Watch the language you use in your own head. When you maintain a positive outlook you can let your life speak for you.

You have heard about “self-talk” – that conversation that each of us has with ourselves, all the time. It is one of the core concepts in mastering your future. In fact, self-talk provides the catalyst for hardening the concrete (our beliefs) that forms the foundation upon which we build our lives.

Now, when adversity strikes, no matter what form that adversity takes, if you can, take a moment and really listen to the words you use to describe the situation. Are you talking about what you can’t do, or what you can do? Are you talking about the finality of the situation, or the possibilities for turning it around?

What I’m really asking you is this: Are you positive or negative in your approach to your future? Most of us don’t really listen to the words we use, but we should. We choose words out of habit, sometimes, more than intent. The words we use cause pictures in our minds, and those pictures are flooded with what we are feeling. And these feelings color our moods, our relationships with those around us – well, everything.

When adversity hits – whether it is a massive oil spill, a job loss, a loved one diagnosed with a disease, or something as everyday has a traffic jam – stop, if you can, and listen to what you are saying, either out loud or to yourself. Is this conversation making things worse, or is it making things better?

Paul Palmer

Remember, you do have a choice.

Technorati Tags: ,

posted in let your life speak, paul palmer | 0 Comments

28th June 2010

Where are We Really At??

Do you ever stop and look around. I know it can be hard in these trying times in life. I wanted to bring to light a lot of thinking I have been doing, transform it to text so that someone else out there might be able to benefit. I have been locked in life lately myself, much like the rest of us out there. I have been pondering great things to come and wondering just how would be the best way to get those thoughts out of my head onto paper for the “rest of us” to share with one another. I had the great opportunity of being able to sit down with a gentleman that ran for the Mayor of LA a few years back. We sat and spoke recently and talked back and forth about the economy, and what’s driving us out there. He was talking about projects he is trying to become involved in, multi-billion dollar projects providing the highest degree of technology and state of the art design engineering. After our discussion we had which was the least to say pleasant, he left with his wife. He was attending a seminar here in Las Vegas and we agreed to meet and follow up the following week. That was that.

I remember it was about an hour after they left I was caught up in thought on what had just happened. Had this been another opportunity for me? Was I really right in that spot, almost as if either fate or destiny had run its course yet again? Could you really keep getting all these opportunities thrown at you, does it really work like that? I think back in awe at so many times in my life and travels had I seen the wrong side of the coin so to speak folks stuck either by choice or not in the most depressing situations. I can’t help but stop and think about how awful I feel inside, the hurt for another human being the compassionate feeling I get knowing we all came from the same place. Just some less fortunate, makes me sad. I brought myself back to my thoughts and realized I had this time at hand, I wasn’t stuck there I had been given a chance and just had to do something with it. I had to seize.

I came to the realization that we all have at one time or another been given or will be given that chance, the knock on the door. We have to be prepared to handle that time when it comes. What you do with the opportunity when it arrives will define you not only in character but as a persona as well. I have seen those times come and go to not only my closet dearest friends but I too am guilty of not taking the chance or the risk when I saw it coming let alone when it was right in front of me. I had to asses my self situation, where was I at in life. Did it matter as long as the road traveled was moving forward? I came to find in me it did matter, who was I after all?

Did you ever feel like it was you, you were the one. Not the end all be it all of course but that person? It’s funny in life how we all go through our own trials and tribulations and at or in those times of despair we feel drawn closer to a higher power some call it or in my case I feel closer to my God. Where are we really at in our life? That has been my biggest question from my clients. It’s hard to know where you are driving the vehicle if you are lost in the fog, or riding in the back seat right. How can we expect to have a well balanced Personal life and Business life if we aren’t centered ourselves? I feel it now more than ever for me to reach out this message to those that need it. Find your self; it’s never too late to turn it all around. I want to leave you with this, find your self and the rest will fall into place. Find inner peace within YOU, then you wont have to worry about spreading it around…it will be radiating from within you out to the world around thus making it a much better place for all of us. The times are drawing to a close for mankind and time is now of the essence more than ever and for some you are running out. Don’t let it be to late! Thanks for the reads; I will try to write this year more about personal development and Business development hoping to make our lives much more comforting. Remember as they change, we change. See you real soon!

Hazen Martin

Director Business Credit

Business Credit Solutions Inc

Nevada State Corporate Network Inc

www.fasttrackcredit.com/buscredit.asp

Hazen Martin
http://www.articlesbase.com/entrepreneurship-articles/where-are-we-really-at-751529.html

posted in let your life speak | 8 Comments

7th June 2010

Five Ways to Become a Leader

Leadership is a quality that cannot be taught. Either you have it or you don’t. Some people like to take charge, be their own person and follow their own path. Some prefer to take direction from others. Leadership is not a quality that can be found outside of yourself, you need to develop it from inside yourself.

Here are five suggestions that will help you cultivate your own leadership skills:

1. Don’t feel like you have to prove anything to anyone, anywhere.

If you’re in class, and someone wants to make a speech that’s rife with inaccuracies, bias takes and general nonsense, let them. You do not have to display your intellectual prowess in order to prove that this person is an idiot. You don’t have to feel obligated to set the record straight. Likewise, you shouldn’t feel pressured into abandoning an unpopular belief, just because the majority of people around you claim that it’s false. Don’t feel pressured into being anything for anybody. This is your life, you can live it they way you want.

2. Talk the talk and walk the walk.

Don’t be a hypocrite. Don’t flip-flop or flake. If you say something, mean it. If you promise to do something, do it. Be true to your word in every situation.

3. Let your actions speak louder than your words.

Deeds have more weight than words. You can pay lip-service to hard work and achieving your goals, but if you never act upon these declarations, you’re just talking. People respond to bold action. Figure out what it is you want to do, and set your plan in motion immediately.

4. Don’t be intimidated by any person, place, thing or idea.

Develop thick skin. Learn to take emotions out of the equation. Don’t let anyone make you feel bad. There’s not enough time for self-doubt, you have too much to do. You will be faced with awkward situations where you will feel challenged in some way. Stick up for yourself and your ideas. Don’t let your environment dictate how you react. No one can say anything that’ll phase you, if you refuse to let yourself be phased.

5. Feel like you are in control of any and every situation.

Leadership is about controlling difficult situations. You have to feel like you are master of your own domain in every possible scenario. Sure you will face overwhelming incidents in life, but when you do, stand up and accept it. Push forward. Get past your problems, free your mind of all restrictive doubt, and execute a solution.

Leadership cannot be taught from without, but it can be developed from within. Be confident in yourself and your abilities. Don’t let anything get under your skin. Follow your word, take action, and no that you are in control of your own life.

Chris Stout
http://www.articlesbase.com/college-and-university-articles/five-ways-to-become-a-leader-84726.html

posted in let your life speak | 10 Comments

5th June 2010

Aids Isn’t Going Away: “tomorrow Will Come With a Hellish Vengeance”

A few years ago, I took a class at ETSU: Biology and Beyond which was a course that dealt with education on HIV and the history of AIDS. I wanted to learn more about the disease so I signed up for the class. It was one that would forever change my life. While taking the class, I was not only able to hear the stories of extraordinary people but I also learned of their horrific, yet heroic lives after discovering they were living with HIV. Today, our global community ignores the fact that HIV and AIDS is on the rise again and as the memory of those lost to AIDS seemingly fades in the eyes of our leaders; their voices should forever be heard throughout the world.

HIV and AIDS are as different as Night and Day, HIV is Life and AIDS is (still) a death sentence.

You can live with HIV but you will die of AIDS. You can fight the battle as hard as your body will allow but AIDS will win the war. While our leaders refuse to spend more money and time on prevention, people continue to die and AIDS is gaining ground on us as a global community.

We haven’t found AIDS to be contained at any point since its first appearance in 1981, when the CDC learned of the epidemic that would later be referred to as AIDS (Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome). By the year 2000, an estimated 36.1 million people were living with HIV/AIDS and an estimated 800,000-900,000 people were living with the virus in the United States. According to statistics posted at http://www.one.org , 38 million people are now infected by HIV/AIDS. While some say there is progression toward finding a cure, many are blinded by facts that simply don’t exist. While some will convince themselves it will not affect them or their lives, an estimated 2.8 million people died in 2005 and in that same year, an estimated 4.1 million people were infected with the virus (2006 Report on the Global AIDS epidemic, UNAIDS, May 2006). With rising numbers once again, eventually this disease will affect you or someone you know.

The timeline of the disease is staggering and those lives that have been affected by HIV and AIDS include far more than the names we will all remember. I have the permanent stories of Kimberly Bergalis, Elizabeth Glaser, Debbie Runions, and a precious little boy named Ryan White forever in my mind. All of these individuals seemed to live with great bravery yet they have died in vain if this country doesn’t begin to take a stand now.

I really believe that tomorrow will come with a hellish vengeance if today we ignore what we should’ve done yesterday about this disease.

There’s no question about it. When I first signed up for the Biology and Beyond Class, I thought there would eventually be a cure for AIDS. However, by the end of the semester, after I spent time working at a local hospital where there were patients diagnosed with the disease, I saw their vision. There wasn’t one. It’s ironic really, many of those people living with HIV, and later even in the face of death, felt as if they were just the early victims. They knew others would follow and those who died, knew the tomorrow they wouldn’t see held the same for many more victims as they started to battle for their own last days. The reason is apparent now but back then, it wasn’t that clear to me. HIV and AIDS patients knew there was too much of a stigma attached for full awareness to ever be successful. This is thanks to misdirected political agendas and it still exists today.

In 1992, Elizabeth Glaser addressed the Democratic National Convention and stated, “Exactly 4 years ago, my daughter died of AIDS. She did not survive the Reagan administration. I am here because my son and I may not survive 4 more years of leaders who say they care but do nothing.” She later went on to say, “America Wake up. We are all in a struggle between life and death.”

Elizabeth Glaser pleaded with our leaders in 1992 and all who were in attendance heard her but chose to do nothing. Today, we sit at a standstill as our elected and appointed officials decide how to spend more money and more time just to avoid accepting responsibility. I absolutely believe that tomorrow will come with a hellish vengeance if today we ignore what we should’ve done yesterday about this disease. There is no doubt in my mind.

While state and federal leaders spent hours opposing online wagering, ironically, they were gambling with the lives of those who could’ve used their support and would have appreciated the appropriated funds to work toward the fight against AIDS. Instead, our government chose to play craps with human lives and people continued to die.

The fact is, Americans have been led to believe through silence that the AIDS epidemic was on a road that would soon end when in actuality; the spread of HIV has apparently taken a U-Turn when you look at the shocking numbers above.

Let Us Stop This Disease Before It Stops All of Us Who Are Left

While I was a student at ETSU, I had the opportunity to meet Debbie Runions who became an advocate for the education and prevention of AIDS. Debbie, after just one sexual encounter became very ill three weeks later and three months later tested positive for HIV. That was in 1992. She too, addressed the Democratic National Convention in 1996 and she too was heard. Our politicians then simply pushed forward in another direction. Debbie died in October of 2005.

When I heard her speak at ETSU and later had the opportunity to sit down and talk with her, I discovered what her life had been like after she was diagnosed with HIV. She talked openly and honestly about her disease. She surprised me when she talked about the fact that she was thankful she had been given the opportunity to have the disease because of what it had allowed her to do. I learned later that was Debbie. She radiated optimism. Debbie knew her fate was sealed yet she chose to make the most of the life she had to live while she could live it even if it would be within the parameters and limitations of living with the virus.

Debbie’s story will always be imbedded in my mind. I can honestly say after hearing her speak, I was deeply humbled and truly feel she made a profound difference in so many lives. She had a gift to give through her message and her spirit will live on forever but her hope for political intervention may not.

While our politicians have been slinging mud at one another, their efforts could’ve been redirected in a more positive light. Instead of ministers on television running around with an entourage of followers running up astronomical bills on lavish lifestyles, they too could help. Instead of picking up prostitutes on their congregation’s dollars, they could make a choice to spend their money to save a family ridden by poverty and AIDS.

Our country and the entire global community must understand, this disease doesn’t just pick out favorites. It attacks people of all races, young and old, straight and gay. The disease is not interested in what you look like, who you’ve slept with, or what drug you’ve put in a needle. This disease takes hostages and then slowly but surely, begins terrorizing them with the stigma of the disease itself and the fear of dying.

We do have an epidemic on our hands. While our leaders have gone from one issue to another, people have gotten sick. While meetings were conducted to decide something as frivolous as whether or not Americans could have the freedom to gamble online, more people died. While a television evangelist took his body guards out for another four thousand dollar outing, countless people clung to their one dollar a week and still others were left in the epitome of poverty because of the high cost of health care and medications for a person living with HIV.

What have we decided holds value in this country? Does a human life no longer hold any substantial meaning to those in political office with the means to do something to help mankind? Apparently not, but as Americans, we have an obligation to do something to help. This is our world and our problem.

We no longer have the Debbie Runions and Elizabeth Glasers to speak out at the Democratic Conventions. Now it is up to everyone else to lead by their example. Visit ONE and start doing your best to make a difference. Global AIDS and extreme poverty is more important than who’s sleeping with whom. It’s far more detrimental to our society than any online gambling campaign just to prove a political point and it is certainly more important than listening to the ramblings of a television evangelist asking for your money so he can go buy his methamphetamines.

Isn’t it time after all the pleading from those who had their lives cut short that we finally take a stand? Isn’t it time we demand for our government to take the initiative to fight extreme poverty and Global AIDS? Isn’t it time for a day of reckoning? The debt we’ve paid to this global crisis has already been way too high. It’s time this country took a stand on the important issues at hand. It is time for retribution.

Susan Alvis
http://www.articlesbase.com/politics-articles/aids-isnt-going-away-tomorrow-will-come-with-a-hellish-vengeance-97275.html

posted in let your life speak | 2 Comments

2nd June 2010

The Lips in Bible and Quran

Before dealing with the topic of the Lips in Quran versus Bible versus sciences, it is mandatory to remember that the total words in the Bible are 788,280 while the total words in the Quran are 77,473. It follows that, the Bible is more than 10 times the Quran word-wise.

The Lips are mentioned 121 times in the Bible (KJV) and once in the Quran, i.e. the Bible mentions the Lips 121 times more than the Quran

In other words, the Bible has the potential of more than 10 times (word-wise) and 121 times (subject-wise) than the Quran to talk about the Lips.

The Lips in the Bible:

The Bible says:” For the lips of a strange woman drop as an honeycomb, and her mouth is smoother than oil”; Moses said: “I am of uncircumcised lips”; Isaiah said: “I am a man of unclean lips”; The Lord shall cut off all flattering lips and will put my hook in thy nose, and my bridle in thy lips

In addition, the Bible cites that the leper (a patient with skin disease) shall put a covering upon his upper lip, and shall cry, “Unclean, unclean”. The Bible also says that: There are Swords, indignation, fruit and calves in their lips,

And Poison especially the poison of asps is under their lips.

The lips of a strange woman:

Proverbs 5:3

For the lips of a strange woman drop as an honeycomb, and her mouth is smoother than oil:

Moses said: “I am of uncircumcised lips”.

Surgeons say that Circumcision is for the Penis not the Lips!

Exodus 6:12

And Moses spake before the LORD, saying, Behold, the children of Israel have not hearkened unto me; how then shall Pharaoh hear me, who am of uncircumcised lips?

Exodus 6:30

And Moses said before the LORD, Behold, I am of uncircumcised lips, and how shall Pharaoh hearken unto me?

Isaiah said: “I am a man of unclean lips”.

Isaiah 6:5

Then said I, Woe is me! For I am undone; because I am a man of unclean lips, and I dwell in the midst of a people of unclean lips:

The leper (a patient with skin disease) shall put a covering upon his upper lip, and shall cry, Unclean, unclean.

Leviticus 13:45

And the leper in whom the plague is, his clothes shall be rent, and his head bare, and he shall put a covering upon his upper lip, and shall cry, Unclean, unclean.

What are in their lips?

Swords, in Psalm 59:7

…swords are in their lips:

Indignation in Isaiah 30:27

Behold, the name of the Lord cometh from far, burning with his anger, and the burden thereof is heavy: his lips are full of indignation, and his tongue as a devouring fire:

Fruit in Isaiah 57:19

I create the fruit of the lips;

Calves in Hosea 14:2

…so will we render the calves of our lips.

What are under their lips?

Poison in Psalm 140:3

They have sharpened their tongues like a serpent; adders’ poison is under their lips.

The poison of asps in Romans 3:13

Their throat is an open sepulchre; with their tongues they have used deceit; the poison of asps is under their lips:

Other meanings about the Lips:

Leviticus 5:4 … pronouncing with his lips to do evil,

1 Samuel 1:13 … her lips moved

2 Kings 19:28…I will put my hook in thy nose, and my bridle in thy lips,

Job 2:10 … In all this did not Job sin with his lips.

Job 33:3 … my lips shall utter knowledge clearly.

Psalm 12:2

They speak vanity every one with his neighbor: with flattering lips and with a double heart do they speak.

Psalm 12:3

The Lord shall cut off all flattering lips, and the tongue that speaketh proud things:

Psalm 22:7 … they shoot out the lip,

Proverbs 7:21 …with the flattering of her lips she forced him.

Proverbs 10:13

In the lips of him that hath understanding wisdom is found: but a rod is for the back of him that is void of understanding.

Proverbs 10:21

The lips of the righteous feed many: but fools die for want of wisdom.

Proverbs 14:23

In all labour there is profit: but the talk of the lips tendeth only to penury.

Proverbs 18:20

A man’s belly shall be satisfied with the fruit of his mouth; and with the increase of his lips shall he be filled.

Proverbs 24:2

For their heart studieth destruction, and their lips talk of mischief.

Ecclesiastes 10:12

The words of a wise man’s mouth are gracious; but the lips of a fool will swallow up himself.

Song of Solomon 4:3

Thy lips are like a thread of scarlet, and thy speech is comely: thy temples are like a piece of a pomegranate within thy locks.

Song of Solomon 4:11

Thy lips, O my spouse, drop as the honeycomb: honey and milk are under thy tongue; and the smell of thy garments is like the smell of Lebanon.

Song of Solomon 5:13

His cheeks are as a bed of spices, as sweet flowers: his lips like lilies, dropping sweet smelling myrrh.

Song of Solomon 7:9

And the roof of thy mouth like the best wine for my beloved, that goeth down sweetly, causing the lips of those that are asleep to speak.

Isaiah 28:11

For with stammering lips and another tongue will he speak to this people.

Isaiah 29:13

Wherefore the Lord said, Forasmuch as this people draw near me with their mouth, and with their lips do honour me, but have removed their heart far from me,

Isaiah 37:29 therefore will I put my hook in thy nose, and my bridle in thy lips,

Isaiah 59:3

For your hands are defiled with blood, and your fingers with iniquity; your lips have spoken lies, your tongue hath muttered perverseness.

Lamentations 3:62

The lips of those that rose up against me, and their device against me all the day.

Ezekiel 24:17

Forbear to cry, make no mourning for the dead, bind the tire of thine head upon thee, and put on thy shoes upon thy feet, and cover not thy lips, and eat not the bread of men.

Ezekiel 24:22

And ye shall do as I have done: ye shall not cover your lips, nor eat the bread of men.

Habakkuk 3:16

When I heard, my belly trembled; my lips quivered at the voice: rottenness entered into my bones

Matthew 15:8

This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me.

Mark 7:6

He answered and said unto them, Well hath Esaias prophesied of you hypocrites, as it is written, This people honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me.

Hebrews 13:15

By him therefore let us offer the sacrifice of praise to God continually, that is, the fruit of our lips giving thanks to his name.

1 Peter 3:10

For he that will love life, and see good days, let him refrain his tongue from evil, and his lips that they speak no guile:

Beautiful meaning:

Psalm 31:18

Let the lying lips be put to silence; which speak grievous things proudly and contemptuously against the righteous.

Psalm 34:13

Keep thy tongue from evil, and thy lips from speaking guile.

The Lips in the Quran:

On the other hand, the Quran says that: Does the man think that no one sees him?; Allah gives him two eyes, a tongue and a pair of lips and guided him on the two paths of good and evil, yet he has not scaled the height?

Surah 90: 7-20

7] Does he (man) think that no one sees him?!

8] Have we not given him two eyes?

9] And a tongue, and a pair of lips?-

10] And guided him on the two paths (of good and evil)?

11] Yet he has not scaled the height.

12] What could let you know what the height is!

13] (It is) the freeing of a slave,

14] or the giving of food in a day of hunger

15] To an orphaned relative

16] Or to a needy person in distress;

17] So that he becomes one of those who believe, charge each other to be patient, and charge each other to be merciful.

18] Those are the companions of the right.

19] But those who disbelieve in our verses, they are the companions of the left,

20] With the fire closed above them, (vaulted over, all round).

Back to the main topic of my series of articles (1- 63); this is my question to you smart readers: “Is the Quran quoted from the Bible “?

Prof.dr. Ibrahim Khalil
http://www.articlesbase.com/science-articles/the-lips-in-bible-and-quran-151011.html

posted in let your life speak | 27 Comments

21st May 2010

The Third Act for Women Over 50: Preparing for Joy and Fulfillment in Midlife

We are the first generation of women who have had careers for most of our lives. We are entering a period of life that is virtually uncharted, a time in which we are free from social expectations and reduced family obligations, with the freedom, resources and desire to engage in new activities with meaning and purpose. It is not news that we will live longer and with generally better health than previous generations. Science and medical advances have extended our years. This will give us the opportunity to turn our dreams into realities, to consider options previously considered impractical, and prioritize how we want to spend our time. Now, it’s up to us to decide how to plan for our continued vitality. Most of us are uncertain about what we want from the next 20, 30 or even 40 years ahead of us. Although we may be clear that we don’t expect to follow in the steps of our parents and grandparents and retire, few of us have maps for how we want to proceed. Many of us in our middle years share in conversations with friends comments like the following:

I don’t want to retire, but I want to work less. I want something more meaningful than just playing golf and traveling. While these are fun, they are not enough. I want to make a difference in my community, in the world. What will I do with my time, if I quit work? Will I be satisfied? I want more leisure time, a more balanced life. I want to continue to learn and be challenged. I want to do those projects I’ve never had time to do. How can I stay vital and healthy? I don’t want to feel old!

These are all important questions and considerations. The unspoken question often underneath them is, “What am I feeling called to do?” We often don?t stop long enough to ask this question, let alone wait for the answer. Yet, if we want to find meaning and fulfillment in our later years and be in charge of our lives rather than having them run us on autopilot, it is important to take the time to explore these questions.

This phase of our life that we reach during mid-life, might be called the third act. Our first act revolved around our growing up years, which morphed into our second act of finding a partner, raising a family, and establishing a career. Yet, as we enter our third act, we are often now free from social expectations, we have reduced family obligations as our children have grown, we may be divorced or living alone, and we might have accumulated savings from years of hard work. What will we meaningfully do with our time? How can we shape the life we choose to live?

What Is Waiting in the Wings?

Preparing for your third act means first reviewing your second act and identifying what scripts or themes connect the stories in your work and career, your family, volunteer and social life. What scripts are assets that you can build upon? Which ones are liabilities that you need to adjust or learn to manage? In addition, reviewing your second act may bring back interests and passions from earlier years that you want to resurrect. With this review you can begin to explore the opportunities that are waiting for you in the wings and that you might want to bring onto center stage. In preparing for the rising curtain of your third act, we have found it helpful to raise questions about the various facets of our current lives,the emotional, physical, professional, personal and spiritual,to clarify for ourselves what is waiting in the wings for our third act. Below you will find some thoughts about each area and some questions to explore.

Emotional

Popular stereotypes would lead us to believe that most of us go through a mid-life crisis between 40 and 60 leading to unhappiness and depression. But researchers report that, far from being a time of turmoil, dissatisfaction, and dread of getting old, only a small percent (23%) of participants report having a midlife crisis.1 In many cases it had nothing to do with aging. Based on the results of this study, most people are entering their sixth or seventh decades with an increased feeling of well-being, equanimity and sense of control over many parts of their lives.

Questions to explore: What brings you joy, pleasure, and deep satisfaction? How can you express your appreciation for those pleasures? How can you continue to find those emotional rewards in the coming years?

Physical

We know that many of us have two, three, four or more decades of life remaining and that each generation is more active with more health and vitality than ever before. Yet we also may have neglected our fitness and gained some weight, and now find our cholesterol or blood pressure too high for good health.

Questions to explore: How is your current health and fitness? Do you need to take some action to lose weight, quit smoking, improve your diet or get more rest? What will it take to improve your health and fitness?

Professional

As we mentioned in the opening paragraph, we are a generation of women who have pursued careers for most of our lives. For many, those careers have brought achievements and the personal and financial rewards of success in our chosen fields. Such success has also often meant the stressful demands of long hours and hard work to meet unfair expectations or to challenge traditional stereotypes. Many of us are ready to slow down, to have more time for relaxation and to enjoy other interests. And we may not want to or financially be able to quit working. Others of us want to leave one career behind and launch a new and perhaps more entrepreneurial venture that we have always dreamed about. Others of us want to use our professional skills in ways that contribute and make a different to our community or to the world.

Questions to explore: Do you want or need to continue to work? Are you interested in launching something new? How much do you want to work? Do you want to use your skills, experience or your time as an activist or leader contributing to the solution of global issues or volunteering in your community?

Personal

Full time work and raising a family leaves little time for women to pursue hobbies, leisure time activities or make contributions as a volunteer. As our family obligations are reduced and we think of working only part-time or even leaving our work and careers, opportunities open up. We can pursue long-delayed dreams, complete neglected projects, learn to play the piano, speak Spanish, study history, or make a meaningful contribution to causes about which we are passionate.

Questions to explore: Do you have a passion to make a difference, to contribute to your community? Do you have dreams or projects you have longed to pursue? Do you have subjects you want to study or skills you want to learn?

Spiritual

The multi-tasking, over-scheduled life, cruising on auto-pilot, leaves little time to explore the questions of deeper meaning in our lives. When time does emerge, we are often at a loss, listlessly drifting from one thing to another, and feeling somehow empty of purpose, meaning and direction.

Questions to explore: Are you wondering if you will be satisfied, if you quit work and leave your career? Are you asking what you are called to do and what will provide meaning and purpose in this next phase of your life? Is your life fulfilled and guided by your spiritual beliefs?

Creating the vibrant, rewarding script for your third acts requires the review of the second act. It also requires intentional focus on how to bring these important qualities that bring satisfaction into our lives. Some of us can find that focus on our own. For others of us, we may need to combine the space for our reflective focus with an opportunity to explore our questions in dialogue with others and seek feedback and encouragement. We need to take the time and intention to implement our hopes, dreams, and goals to shape and create a vital, vibrant, and engaging script for our third act.

(Endnotes) 1- Study of nearly 8,000 Americans by the MacArthur Foundation Research Network on Successful Midlife Development. Quoted in a news article. Paper unknown

Beverly Scott
http://www.articlesbase.com/self-improvement-articles/the-third-act-for-women-over-50-preparing-for-joy-and-fulfillment-in-midlife-735632.html

posted in let your life speak | 7 Comments

14th May 2010

Jesus Christ, Superman Part Four

It’s a bird. . It’s a plane. . No! It’s Jesus Christ, Superman, Savior of the world! “Roll the stone away, Lazarus come out!” Commanded Jesus. Immediately Lazarus walked out from his rocky crypt pulling the grave clothes away from His face while taking a deep gulp of fresh air.

John 11: 45-48, “Many of the people who had come to visit Mary saw what Jesus did, and they believed in him. But some of them returned to the Pharisees and told them what Jesus had done. So the Pharisees and the chief priests met with the Council and said, ‘What shall we do? Look at all the miracles this man is performing! If we let him go on in this way, everyone will believe in him, and the Roman authorities will take action and destroy our Temple and our nation!’”

Jesus Christ, Superman, had once again demonstrated His miraculous powers. Even Lazarus, being dead for four days, couldn’t stop Him from accomplishing His mission to show the world what He could do if only they would place their faith in Him.

All the people were astonished at His powers and celebrated Lazarus’ return from the dead. There were still those who loved the world and refused to believe that Jesus was the chosen Messiah. They wanted to control their own lives in this world. They didn’t need or want a Savior! They wanted to be in charge.

The power struggle that ensued, stirred the unseen wicked spiritual forces of Satan. They forced their thoughts into the minds of the Pharisees determined to put Jesus to death.

John 11: 46-52, “One of them, named Caiaphas, who was High Priest that year, said, ‘What fools you are! Don’t you realize that it is better for you to have one man die for the people, instead of having the whole nation destroyed?’ Actually, he did not say this of his own accord; rather, as he was High Priest that year, he was prophesying that Jesus was going to die for the Jewish people, and not only for them, but also to bring together into one body all the scattered people of God.”

The stage was set and the plot against Jesus thickened. Now Jesus Christ, Superman, would give His life so that all people would have the opportunity to believe in Him and be saved from a lost and fallen world of darkness and evil.

Lazarus’ miraculous recovery changed from that of victory to one of secrecy and hiding. Now Jesus could no longer speak in the temple. Satan’s desire was to defeat Him and bring an end to Jesus’ teaching of truth.

Just the same, Jesus had more work to do in order to convince the world why they needed Him. He had to teach His disciples how believing in Him would help them to see through the darkness that Satan placed into every man’s life.

Jesus had to become the beacon of light that would shine brightly throughout the entire world and fill the hearts of God’s children with the wonder working power of the Holy Spirit. To believe in Jesus is to unleash the greatest power man has ever known.

The inner voice of the Holy Spirit would teach them the rules to the game of life. A voice of good that changes people and makes them radiant love and reflect a Spirit of purity that spurs others to desire what they have.

The Passover Festival was about to begin and Jesus had no choice but to go to Jerusalem. He did not go in secret this time, instead He road as a humble servant of God on the foal of a donkey.

The celebration that filled Jerusalem compelled all people to grab palm branches and cast their cloaks onto the ground. Jesus came in victory displaying before all people that God’s way is better than how men perceived the Messiah would come.

God desired for Jesus to be a soldier who would never fight a man made war. Jesus was a Savior that would go beyond this world and fight against the spiritual forces of the unseen heavenly kingdom. He would be the mediator for all people who would ask Him for help so they could fight the ultimate war found in the game of life.

Each person who was born a man would be given a task that went beyond an earthly battle. It was a war that took place in the minds of men. A war of Satan coming up against an equal force of godly men who would fight the human battles with faith and love.

John 15: 12-14, “My commandment is this: love one another, just as I love you. The greatest love a person can have for his friends is to give his life for them. And you are my friends if you do what I command you.”

Now the world and how people live in the world is radically different. We are now God’s soldiers doing battle against every bad thing that happens in the world. We carry our crosses just like Jesus and we fight against the plagues of the world found in illnesses, like cancer.

We are unleashed into the world so we can show people we are not even afraid to die. Death has no fear over us because we believe that this world is temporary. Our faith in Jesus Christ gives us the ability to hold in our arms children who have aids. Even when the child is sweating from the fever that has engulfed his body releasing the toxins that put the disease into his tiny body in the first place and exposing us to the disease.

Believing in Jesus’ supernatural power brings healing and miracles into our life so we can stand strong as a warriors determined to love the homeless and the drug addicts of the world. We are not afraid!

We don’t judge the weaknesses found in every man because we love our neighbors as ourselves. When we give to others we understand that the suffering that person is going through could be us. Having this knowledge allows us to forgive and live our lives just how Christ lived as a humble servant. A servant who was just as susceptible to suffering as anyone else.

John 15: 18-21, “‘If the world hates you, just remember that it has hated me first. If you belonged to the world, then the world would love you as its own. But I chose you from the world, and you do not belong to it; that is why the world hates you. Remember what I told you: “No slave is greater than his master.” If they persecuted me, they will persecute you too; if they obeyed my teaching, they will obey yours too. But they will do all this to you because you are mine; for they do not know the one who sent me.’”

Suddenly the greatest game that will ever be played takes form, revealing to man the truth over the condition of the world. Anyone who fights for God will suffer persecution just as Jesus. For our fight is against more than man. Our fight is with the spiritual forces of evil and its desire to force all men to live in the world for Satan!

From the very first sin of Adam, a game formed. When Adam and Eve desired to become like God they forced all men into the valley of the biggest decision they would ever make. A life game that was geared to teach them the difference between right and wrong. In order for truth to be revealed all people had to be presented with a choice that would lead to a test.

Satan represented the wrong choices. Evil found in greed, sexual immorality, sickness, death, the desire for power, thinking evil about others, war, poverty, murder, and injustices of all kinds. God is the opposite from Satan revealing the value of being a servant. Showing us that love is better than hate. Giving is better that receiving and abiding by goodness is the ultimate goal for each person’s life.

Jesus brought a new light of understanding before all people. His truth about how the world works gives power to an individuals life so they can stand up against evil and win the world for good.

Lazarus rose from the grave so Jesus could prove to us that we can have the same power over death. Death was Satan’s control over people, but life is what we receive when we stop thinking like weak human beings and believe in the miracle working power that is available to all those who place their faith in Christ.

Jesus Christ Superman, was the ultimate Savior of the world. His message was that of love. His goal was to give His life so others would have the power to conquer the world game of life for God and good. Our reward is an eternity in heaven!

To be a miracle working Superman is to believe in the unseen and to know that our lives are more than the physical and concrete of our present day world. We must take up whatever cross of suffering we must bear and believe with faith that we can win our individual game for Jesus Christ.

Linda Dipman
http://www.articlesbase.com/religion-articles/jesus-christ-superman-part-four-126191.html

posted in let your life speak | 14 Comments

9th May 2010

Redefining the American Dream – Work From Home and Love It!

If you have been laid off in this recessionary economy or fear that you could be let go in the next round of layoffs then you need to read this article and take it to heart. Some of you have already learned (the hard way) that an employer is not going to take care of you and your family when times get tough. A company has a responsibility to its owners and shareholders to remain profitable and in order to do that in a recession many companies are laying off large portions of their workforce. People want the security of a job yet they do not realize that a job does not truly offer security. The only thing it offers is a steady paycheck and a false sense of security while employed, but there is no guarantee of future employment. Why is it that millions and millions of people will put their entire livelihood and survival on the line for a job that has no guarantees? Probably because it is what the “masses” are doing and we are just doing what we have been taught to do by our parents, our teachers and our well-meaning friends and relatives. However, the world is changing so dramatically on a day by day basis that if we are not also changing and adapting to the technologically advanced world around us then our skills and abilities to provide value will be as obsolete as a an old worn out computer from the 80s.

If we do what we have always done we cannot expect a different result. If you want to create financial freedom and time freedom in your life then you need to begin thinking differently and acting differently than you have before. If you want the same predictable and certain future then keep doing what you are doing. Those on the 9-5 treadmill of living paycheck to paycheck will more than likely end up either dead or dead-broke by that idyllic retiring age of 65. Do you want that to be you? I don’t! If you want to powerfully live a life that you love then you cannot rely on someone outside of yourself to provide it for you! You must take control, you must take full and complete responsibility for each and every aspect of your life, no matter what, and you must begin to set your course in the direction of your dreams, of your goals, your ambitions and your passions.

If you think that you cannot make a fantastic living doing what you love and engaged in a work or a business that inspires you, you are wrong! If you will begin to open your eyes and to LOOK for examples around you and throughout the world of people that have pursued their passions, followed their dreams, and focused on doing a work that they loved doing, a work that was not work to them, you will be amazed and inspired by the endless examples that surround us. We only see what we want to see; what we believe. If we believe that dreams and ambitions must be sacrificed for the cause of a steady paycheck and making ends meet, then that reality is what we will see all around us, to solidify that belief system in our minds. Yet, if we choose to look outside of our limiting belief systems and to look for other examples of people living outside of the box, so to speak, we will find numerous examples with ease.

The 21st Century is unveiling an incredible home-based business revolution unlike anything ever seen in the past. More and more people are in business for themselves, working from home, providing high quality products and services in the marketplace and being compensated well for the value they are providing. You can do this. Opportunities abound. I personally know dozens and dozens of people, as young as their 20s and 30s, that are making high six-figure incomes and even seven-figure incomes engaged in exciting, inspiring and powerful home-based businesses. There are many phenomenal opportunities that are available to anyone that is willing to commit themselves, improve themselves, be properly trained and follow those who have gone before. I know that anyone can achieve their personal and professional goals if they are willing to sincerely commit themselves to doing so. We need to believe in ourselves and we need to redefine what the American Dream is all about, in my opinion.

The American Dream is NOT about getting loaded up with debt, living in a house we can’t afford, going to a job that we absolutely loathe and then pretending to our friends and family that life is just wonderful. That is bogus, yet that is exactly where millions upon millions of Americans find themselves right now. Overleveraged, uninspired, depressed, broke (financially, mentally, emotionally and spiritually), and ready to just throw in the towel on life. All too often we do what the masses do. We rack up debt, we get into a bigger home just because we can and because the bank approved the loan (even though they shouldn’t have), we rely completely upon our job to help us get through the week….then, all of a sudden, our job is gone. Poof! Just like that, our American Dream built upon a house of cards utterly collapses beneath us. Is all lost? Only if you believe it is. All is not lost! Where there is human will, human heart, human spirit, and human determination, there is always hope and always opportunity for re-creating life anew. In fact, some of the most successful, prosperous, happy, healthy and dynamic people that I know had to hit rock bottom before they could begin to progress and advance in their lives in accordance with their dreams, goals and personal passions.

May I suggest that that the American Dream is really about living life on purpose. It is about living life fully, passionately and completely, and making the very most of each day. It is about providing massive value for other people and as a result seeing massive value coming back into our lives on a daily basis. The American Dream is about taking full responsibility for our lives, for our thoughts, for our actions, for our results. It is about taking control of our lives and grasping the phenomenal freedom and opportunity that is ours to make anything of our lives that we choose. It is about continuous progress, improvement and personal development. It is about a clear understanding that if we are not growing we are dying and if we are dying then the American Dream is dying as well. It is about a lifelong commitment to excellence, to being more than we ever have been before. It is about rising above the mediocrity of the past and living life powerfully in the present moment. It is about loving, serving, giving and celebrating life.

Don’t take my word for it, discover YOUR American Dream within YOURSELF. What did you love doing as a child? What are your true passions, strengths and interests? What would you do every day, all day long, even if you didn’t get paid for it? The answers to those questions will assist you in discovering your true self, your purpose, your passions and your motivators that will cause you to jump out of bed in the morning and to lie awake at night. Regardless of your personal beliefs, you are full of pure potentiality and infinite greatness. If you are willing to embark on a journey of self-discovery, to break the mold of generations and to discover the life that you were meant to live, that is when you will be born anew and experience the joys and thrills of life with a new perspective on what reality is.

Don’t settle for the same old same old! Everything happens for a reason! If you were laid off and have automatically jumped right back into looking for another job to pay the bills, take a step back. Take a moment to pause, to breathe, to reflect and to discover what seed of opportunity lies waiting for you in this moment of adversity. You will never find doors or windows of opportunity in your times of difficulty if you are not looking for them. Yet, you are surrounded by them and you may not even know it.

If you would like to make a change, to be in business for yourself and to really take on the lifelong commitment to personal development and living a life of excellence, then join with me. I’m always looking for business partners to work with, for people to help, encourage and inspire along the path to their dreams. Success is not a destination. Success is not about having something or being something. Success, happiness and true fulfillment comes simply from progressively working towards a worthy ideal, a passionate goal. If you are now working towards an inspiring goal in your life, then you are successful. You will achieve your goal if you stay the course.

Take a few moments to write down your goals for the year. To specifically outline what you would like to accomplish this year in your life if anything were possible. Then focus in on those goals and seek out opportunities that will provide you a pathway towards their achievement.

If you would like to learn more about the Company that I have aligned myself with and that has provided me with an unlimited opportunity for developing time freedom and financial freedom, simply visit my site and learn about the best home based business in the world!

Until then, enjoy the journey!

Munro Murdock

Munro Murdock
http://www.articlesbase.com/home-business-articles/redefining-the-american-dream-work-from-home-and-love-it-725643.html

posted in let your life speak | 4 Comments

4th May 2010

Churchill – Right or Wrong ? an Analysis

“We are shaping the world faster than we can change ourselves, and we are applying to the present the habits of the past.” (W. Churchill)

To warrant a citation as one of the most influential or the most influential man in our century, entails a convincing description of a long term devotion and impact on the direction of society and history. This author submits that in the 20th century the intractable flow of events has been towards the liberation of people, both in spiritual and material terms, and that the defining principles of some type of Liberal Democracy now hold true in many regions of the globe – many more than at the start of the century. Let us not underestimate this fact. For the first time in human history, more people have control over their own lives as a % of the population than ever before. It is too be expected that this shall continue, but of course such a trend is not certain.

There are people enough who would like to derange the liberation of the mass, and pass us back to the days of centralised or oligarchic control. However in toto there is no intellectual or economic challenger to the Liberal Democratic model at this time. One of the great new situations and driving forces of our world today is international economic interdependence. Further world-wide integration is unstoppable. There will be fits, regressions, complaining and pauses, questions, arguments, harangues, and resolutions, but always over time a forward movement towards what may be termed unshackled and fair trade and cross border integration will proceed. What needs to be addressed is how can we fairly develop the markets and the economic strength of less developed nations whilst still maintaining the economic growth and market access of more developed nations. The balancing act will be marvellous to behold. Adam Smith infused with both Galbraith and Greenpeace.

In this regard and given that the values and concepts of Liberal – Democratic society are subtle and complex, we need then to go back and ask ourselves, “How did we get here and why.” Thus the perspective of history is necessary. If we look at how this century evolved it can be determined that very few leaders have had such a imposing and sincere belief in Liberal Democracy and the accumulated spoils produced by such a society: freedom, self determination, security and a healthy standard of life, as did Churchill. He was not a corrupt politician interested in the pursuit of power for its own sake, but a statesman interested in power for its intelligent application to better the lot of the common citizen.

The program that Churchill followed in his life, and I speak here of his Liberal-Democratic program, was, with the exception of 1 occurrence (the independence of India, which will be discussed later), remarkably consistent with the theme of expanding Liberal Democratic principles. This is due in large part to his upbringing in the Liberal Aristocracy of the British Empire; due in part to his political father’s Liberal ideals and his American mother’s robust (and extremely adulterous) New World energy; and due in part to his experiences across the world as a young man, where he witnessed the power and relative success of the Liberalised (though not really democratic) British Empire, in comparison with other orders that lacked the discipline to generate and project wealth and power. As a prophet of Liberal Democracy, there could have been no better trained or indoctrinated messiah than Churchill. The man whose family history had been formed around the development of British Parliamentary, and Liberal Orthodox supremacy.

Again as with other outstanding humans he still achieved much more, than his contemporaries; many of whom were as intelligent, dedicated and immersed in the achievement of moral and political prestige as Churchill. This is where then Churchill’s story becomes interesting. What set him apart from the others ? Chance, money, dumb luck, patronage ? In human destiny all of these play a role. But to climb a pinnacle these are not enough. I would submit that Churchill provides illumination and support to many of Bennis’ leadership notions. Or how else could he have scaled the heights ? He had definite views on how a society should be structured and shaped. The love of a tempered democracy, the creation of a system to ensure proper leadership and guidance, the development of systems to allow prosperity, peace and support, occupied the mind of this man throughout his whole life. Churchill was obsessed with improving the lot of mankind and consumed by the proper use of power and leadership. And like Bennis he believed in a set of management and leadership principles that propelled him to greatness.

For those who write, think and practice true leadership, Churchill possessed radical views. Not of the immoderate, intolerable type. But those of classical, orthodox, Liberalism. Churchill believed in the need for the State to take an active part, both by legislation and finance to ensure that minimum standards of life, labour and social well-being for all citizens were maintained in an atmosphere conducive to fair trade and entrepreneurialism. Among the areas where Churchill during his varied career, took an active part were; prison reform, unemployment insurance, state-aided pensions for widows and orphans, permanent arbitration for labour disputes, state assistance for the unemployed, shorter hours of work, improved retail shop conditions, a National Health Service, wider access to education, taxation of excess profits and employee profit-sharing. Quite a list from a man who was supposedly one dimensional – the World War II embodiment of victorious unconquerable Britannia.

Other great men and women could be analysed and presented. But Churchill, one of the most complex, energetic and effective of history’s leaders, stands as an unparalleled example of leading and dealing with crisis, while defending, developing or discerning the limitations, values and concepts of political leadership and importantly freedom and democracy. He was unique. His style, mode of governance, deeply rooted and strongly held system of beliefs, and importantly his gaping weaknesses, should serve as a serious model upon which to reconstruct the training and choosing of our political leaders and governmental workers. It is not a perfect model. But certainly it is better than the ad-hoc, clandestine, shaded political leadership system we have today. Let’s then take a cursory look at Churchill’s skills according to the framework laid out in the last chapter. A fuller explanation of his skills will follow in Chapter Four when we discuss his actions during World War Two.

Character:
In reading any volume about Churchill’s life the most blinding aspect in understanding his success, is the quality, depth and strength of his character. Many other men would long have given up, or perished in their chosen professions, if they had been subject to the same trials as Churchill. In general from studying his life I can safely state that he never took the easy route. He was certainly never offered the easy spoils. Yet he never bowed his knee to opinion polls, party whips, or popular expressions that ran contrary to his own judgement and sense of purpose. In comparing Churchill with other great’s of this century there is no one that had to endure the opprobrium, distrust or number of setbacks as did Churchill. Even the witch hunt instigated against William Clinton, is pretty mild stuff compared with what the press had to say about Churchill during the first half of this century. I am always amazed that Churchill was able not only to survive through it all, but survive with a smile.

This is not to romanticise his or anyone else’s macho strength and egotism. Both in large doses are negative. However, without strength of character change is impossible, adversity cannot be overcome and good never triumphs over evil. In the dawning age of ‘Principle Parties’ as replacements for the outmoded ‘Political Parties’ trained individuals, relishing and brandishing these 3 traits will be needed to cut through the Gordian knot of the insoluble political drift we have today. We must remember the tenets of evolution and that change is not always progressive or better. To advance the human species needs change and conflicting ideas. These are necessary — not lobby groups, supine presidents and empty suits.

Upon the scarred field of politics Churchill stressed strength and magnanimity as the cornerstones of his behaviour. If impatience was his great weakness than offering magnanimity to the defeated – whether a local political opponent or Germany after World War II – casted Churchill as a strong but gallant knight and a man raised above the normal dash and din of political conflict. He fought all battles with limitless reserve and strategy. He offered friend and foe alike illimitable goodwill and respect after the conflict. His ideals imbued with history and coupled with a vision of where his country should be in the world were marked by a sense of fair play. Principles and not parties dictated his actions. For these reasons he is a man to be honoured and acclaimed as a defendant of democratic right and privilege.

To be effective statesmanship must lay on established principles and constraints rather than on emotive impulses and frayed passions. We should not forget that nations have no permanent friends, only semi-permanent interests, a covenant that often offends popular sympathy and belief. For it is these realism’s, that politics is a game of shifting fortunes, relationships and situations, that disgusts the great majority in democratic lands. Politics is like making love– natural, necessary and enjoyable– only if it is done properly. What is discernible about Churchill is his hard-headed realism and practicality in accepting such truths. Consequently he looked ahead a great deal more carefully and cautiously than many of his contemporary observers thought mutating viewpoints and re-evaluating some of his opinions. Of course some cried that he was too fluid and perhaps could not be trusted and other criticasters weary of Churchill’s rhetoric, would delight in emphasising that Churchill was a product of the late 19th century immutable and intractable. Thus from both sides – conservatives and liberals – Churchill received a drubbing, regardless of the integrity of his actions.

Churchill’s bellicosity caused much of the drubbing. One should consider the weight and purity of Churchill’s virtue and charity to all he contacted – friend or foe – even though he received the most acidic and heavily concentrated attacks of any politician in any era. Critics never tired of chopping at the tree of Churchill’s accomplishments. It began when he crossed the floor in 1904 to join the Liberals. It received a great accretion in strength during the winter of 1913-4 when Churchill was the subject of a broad protest by pacifists, economists, and social reformers who thought that as First Lord of the Admiralty he was too profligate and was promoting the arms race. At the root of the discontent and many to follow, was the fact that Churchill was not a good party man. As such the image of the war mongering pirateer was born and created by an aspersive socialist press. Churchill was not a war monger, “his thought has always been, between the wars, upon the means of making peace among the peoples.” For his critics such distractions were carefully ignored. It was during 1913-14 that the apparati to hang Churchill politically was established and raised for action.

What is inestimable is the fortitude and resilience of mind and body to withstand such brutal, crabby treatment that Churchill received at the hands of malcontents and frustrated plotters. His closest friends recognised clearly the political courage of Churchill. On November 11 1922, T.E. Lawrence (Lawrence of Arabia), wrote to a friend; “The man is as brave as six, as good-humoured, shrewd, self-confident and considerate as a statesman can be and several times I’ve seen him chuck the statesmanship course and do the honest thing instead.”

The honest thing included enacting proper change. When we view the broad balance of Churchill’s career and factor in the jealousy inherent in the political field and the degree of envy held by many of Churchill’s excessive successes we observe that many of his greatest contributions to the establishment of public welfare and governmental responsibility were initiatives driven from within, without concern to reputation, personal circumstance or fortune. Most were decidedly modern and far sighted. This is quite clear in his advancement of ‘Tory Democracy’ – economic growth with general support for the masses. Tory Democracy is another prescription for centrist governance. Often times this led him to advocate the dismemberment of party politics and the establishment of a broad nationally based governance: “Parliamentary debate has become largely meaningless. All the time the two great party machines are grinding up against each other with the utmost energy, dividing every village, every street, every town and city into busy party camps. Each party argues that it is the fault of the other. What is certain is that to prolong the process indefinitely is the loss of all…Once it can be seen that a great new situation or great new issues lie before us, an appeal should be made to the people to create some governing force which can deal with our affairs in the name and in the interest of the large majority of the nation.”

Part of Churchill’s trajectory to statesmanship can be seen in the light of time. First accumulate a reputation for outspoken principled action. Second, accumulate power via alliances, learning and public positioning. Then state a vision resplendent with clear principles, meanings and images while solving local problems. Lastly accede to great affairs and the devising of solutions in a national and international context. This trajectory needs to be buttressed by character, skills (verbal and technical), vision and power accumulation and recognition. To have these skills imbedded in action is not enough. A person must also have as a bedrock a clear and clean sense of duty and morality.

Importantly Churchill was clean. Adultery, conspiracy, or treachery were never a part of Churchill’s character. Loyalty, aggression and impulsiveness were the main exciting agents in Churchill’s life. His extreme ambition bordering at times on foolhardiness but always driven by an abnormal energy galvanised all around him. Churchill was always a contrarian thinker, and a statesman of the highest order, but he was not a Machiavellian posturer. His success rested on energy, innovation and positive thinking, all in a consistent framework employed in over 50 years of statesmanship.

Skills:
Churchill personified the well instructed and knowledgeable Leader. He was a self-developed man. As a youth he immersed himself in governing, leadership and policy. He never ceased learning and improving all of his life. He spent a great deal of time learning skills from his contemporaries such as Lloyd George, Lord Fisher, Herbert Asquith, F.E. Smith, and Max Beaverbrook amongst many others. On a political level this education led to a vision not only of strong morality but of rationality. In very few instances did Churchill compromise his personal code of morality for the sake of political gain. In this he was exemplary. But he was also a realist. He was adept at combining power and ethics in a compelling package. Very few understood the effective use of political leverage better than Churchill.

Compare Churchill’s self-education program with the political elite today. How many are steeped in history, philosophy, and the rigours and tribulations of historical notables ? What percent of our esteemed political masters exhibit such a rounded appreciation of the conditions and matters that shaped and will continue to shape the human story ? As Churchill sourly commented to then Prime Minister Stanley Baldwin in 1928 concerning the ease with which World War One could have been avoided: “Think of these people, decent, educated, the story of the past laid out before them. What to avoid, what to do etc. Patriotic, loyal, clean — trying their utmost. What a ghastly muddle they made of it ! Unteachable from infancy to tomb — there is the first & main characteristic of mankind.”

In looking at his life nothing can sum up the traits and skills of Churchill in short pleasing verbiage. He was patently too many people, a definite renaissance man, engaging in politics, writing, reporting, painting, farming, hunting, polo playing, warring and investing. Besides a massive intellect and memory Churchill possessed a spirit spurred with the whips of energy. It was unrelenting. His was the creed of action and contempt for delay. Mission was founded and achieved by exploring, questioning, trying, failing and trying again. During the 1930’s when the Stanley Baldwin and Ramsay Macdonald governments neglected the build-up of British war making strength and sought the treacherous path of appeasement to satiate the Nazi beast, Churchill who had long criticised the insipidity of such a program exclaimed in 1936 the memorable words about Baldwin’s government revealing his contempt for hiding inactivity in political closets; “The government simply cannot make up their mind, or they cannot get the Prime Minister to make up his mind. So they go in strange paradox, decided only to be undecided, resolved to be irresolute, adamant for drift, solid for fluidity, all powerful to be impotent.”

Brilliant diction summing up the most hated of Churchill’s dislikes – inaction. But we have still to reach that quality in Churchill, which warrants us in calling him great. For a man may be gifted far above the ordinary, without earning the emblem of true greatness. Churchill had brilliant gifts. He was, in addition, driven by a limitless, borderless, shifting, resolute ambition. Without such magnificent ambition, men never have, and never will accede to the summit of power, prestige and greatness. “Fame is the spur that the clear spirit doth raise (that last infirmity of noble mind), To scorn delights, and live laborious days.”

But unseemly ambition is insufficient to earn the appellation of great. It has to be elevated by noble principles (‘that last infirmity of noble mind’), to allow a man to rise above the supine mass. Flaming pertinacity is dangerous without the fibre of moral strength. Credibility rests on the broad shoulders of honesty and reliability. No Leader can shrug off those characteristics of success. Genius and energy do not necessarily shape the epiphanies of leadership. They have to combined in harmony and strength with the skills and qualities that we discussed in the last chapter, and which illuminate true leadership.

Intelligence:
But character, skill and morality are not enough for leaders. Intelligence is necessary. It does us no good having a clutch of well intentioned clods fouling up the process. Intelligence can only really be measured by verbal capacity and skill. IQ measures and tests are inaccurate. Churchill owned the English language and he owned the skill of persuasion. As such he commanded the heights of leadership. He could communicate the moment, the mission, and the energy. Churchill was one of the few politicians in our century that had a beautiful, lucid communication and vocabulary. Emboldening this was his common sense, technical skill and creativity. Above all the dynamism of his verbal adroitness lied in the desire for action and not drift.

A baser form of intelligence is what can be termed ‘Political Antennae’. In most political circles this skill is usually too overdeveloped. In the case of Churchill it was surprisingly weak and poorly unused. Churchill’s rhetoric was maybe too developed and at times not flexible enough for his audience or plainly inappropriate. But this weakness is still overshadowed by his capacity at conciliation and political problem solving and more vitally by his verbal capability. Churchill engineered delicate dispute resolutions over South Africa, Ireland, and social reform in England to name but a few, quickly striding across political boundaries and ideologies and involving himself intimately with those who had the greatest grievance in order to solve the conflict. Coupled with his strong array of communication skills he achieved a political pre-eminence that darkly shadowed his companions.

His oratory and conciliatory skills were allowed to flourish due to the mastery of technical details. Churchill was one of those rare politicians that actually knew what he was talking about. This dedication to lucidity ties in with persuasion and compromise and the knowledge of details leads to flexibility because plans can be made for each situation. Churchill always had three or four contingency plans for every situation. Strategy and vision thus sprung from intelligence and from being able to see the whole picture and from the confidence that one way or another the vision would be achieved.

This vision coupled with creativity gave Churchill adequate resources to enact change and innovation. In political spheres Churchill was light years ahead of his companions in collecting, analysing, and synthesising information at the micro level and relating it to the big picture. His innovation stemmed from patient practicality and discipline and not inspired genius as romantic novels about great change would like us to believe. This vision included fair economic trade and economic liberalism, adequate welfare for the population, peace and democratic governance, classical and scientifically or technically based education, and a powerful security apparatus to combat evil and aggression.

In achieving his aims, and in using his native and educated intelligence Churchill consciously chose to be nobody’s knave. He flaunted his independence, not only in action, but also in flamboyant dress and style. Yet his romantic urges were touched by the humbleness of most people’s lives, but to those at the summit where power corrupts, contracts are broken, lies are purveyed as half-truths, the issue of spirit and mores takes on a different colour. Basically Churchill trusted his own counsel and that of a half-dozen friends. To the rest of the world he looked like a recluse. To those who knew him well, he was defending himself against the often wicked and spiteful attacks of political banditos. Hence sympathy for the mass, trust for the few.

In this regard Churchill was exceptionally callous and rough to friend and foe alike in his early years. But as time tempered and beat down the baser impulses of searing rhetoric, Churchill acquired another skill — that of informal networking and interpersonal persuasion. He became as he aged refreshingly human. However, it was not until the 1930’s when he was in his late 50s and early 60s, that strident verbal missives were shelved for moderate expositions (with some notable exceptions) of the situation at hand, and fair treatment was meted out to friend and foe alike.

As Churchill matured so did his attention to friendship. “If F.E. (Smith), was strong meat and stronger drink, then Churchill in contrast to his public reputation as a ‘domineering’, even ‘rude’, figure, had in the intimacy of personal friendship a quality which is almost feminine in its caressing charm” As F.E. wrote, Churchill had a ‘simplicity which no other public man of the highest distinction possesses.’ He also endeavoured to perform many deeds of goodwill to aid friends and family. It can be summarised by Philip Snowden a long-time Churchill opponent and liberal critic, “Your generosity to a political opponent marks you for ever in my eyes the ‘great gentleman’ I have always thought you. Had I been in trouble which I could not control myself, there is none to whom I should have felt I could come with more confidence that I should be gently treated.”

A budget of good humour, tact and some considered patience fund the other necessary resources and tools to achieve success. Alone they are unsubstantive. It is better to be dour and effective, than gay and incompetent. Allied to well-developed skills and principles, sensitivity, embedded in the formidable array of humour and tact, provides a potent and efficient tool. About Churchill it is fair to say that he was ambitious and calculating; but not cold and that saved him. As a colleague stated, “His ambition is sanguine, runs in a torrent, and the calculation is hardly more than the rocks or the stump which the torrent strikes for a second…queer, shrewd power of introspection, which tells him his gifts and character are such as will make him boom….He was born a demagogue, and he happens to know it.” Yet ambition without a defining purpose can not only corrupt, but it can also destroy.

Vision:
A crowning vision is really the linchpin that will attract followers. Most good and great individuals have displayed a pretty consistent approach to the world and a pretty stable world view. Some superficial analysis may suggest that because Churchill changed parties, challenged convention, criticised incompetence and insipidity and usurped obedience, he was a grasping, clawing, malevolent opportunist. If rigid conformity is the sign of good political standing, Churchill was indeed recklessly unpredictable and unreliable. However, the picture of Churchill as a soldier of fortune, an adventurer and a troublemaker was and is incorrect. Strong ethics, values and principles guided his actions. He had little of Lloyd George’s cunning or the well-disguised craftiness of Stanley Baldwin. His decisions might have been unpredictable, but his motives were seldom hard to fathom. Churchill rarely embroiled himself in the base pettiness of political intrigue in part from a distaste of such ignominy, combined as well with a guileless personality.

To the charge of unreliability Churchill retorted that, “To improve is to change. To be perfect is to have changed often.” In actual fact the changes were due to some effort at self improvement, but to a fidelity of what he already was. Churchill was most consistent with his own true north direction when he was the least supportive of his party’s policy. Churchill never could swallow the party line always choosing and deciding for himself. In assessing Churchill’s skill base the following is a reasonable portrait: “Far from changing his views too often, Mr Churchill has scarcely, during a long and stormy career, altered them at all. If anyone wishes to discover his views on the large and lasting issues of our time, he need only set himself to discover what Mr Churchill has said or written on the subject at any period of his long and exceptionally articulate public life, in particular during the years before the First World War: The number of instances in which his views have in later years undergone any appreciable degree of change will be astoundingly small….When biographers and historians come to describe his views…they will find that his opinions on all these topics are set in fixed patterns, set early in life and later only reinforced.”

This historical reality is evidenced when studying Churchill. What drove Churchill in his personal intellectual and political journey’s can also be said to mirror the advance of imperialism in the 19th and 20th centuries . Thus not only did he possess grand skill, he was also a student but more importantly a conscious product of history. In this regard he closely resembles (consciously no doubt) British and world history. Even in his literary works this is reflected. For instance in Churchill’s book, ‘The Story of the Malakand Field Force’, which depicts British soldiery in north-western India at the turn of the 20th century he questioned what motivated men and nations to face great hazards. The principal elements that Churchill discovered were preparation, discipline, vanity and sentiment and he remarked that sentiment was the most important of the group. Churchill believed that civilisation can only march forward if it clings to a vision – a sentiment that ennobles its occupation and galvanises its spirit. Empires fall because the sword begins to dominate the sentiment and the people lose hold of the impulse and spirit that the sentiment contained and made the use of the sword in the first instance appropriate.

This spirit and vision was evident and mature. He commiserated with the poor, the downtrodden or the straggling. Some of his mightiest missions and political forays were instigated on behalf of those who lived lives beyond his comprehension but not his beyond his compassion. Yet here lies a paradox. Within political circles and in the ring of friends and associates he could be extraordinarily blind, politically inept, insensitive and roguish. Or so it appears from a distance. Yet for the great mass of ‘Poor England’ or for the devotion of the Commonwealth nations, tears would be produced, sagas told, and emotion unleashed. The difference is dramatic but crucial.

If we examine for instance his stand on fair economic trade he was malleable to changing circumstance but rather solid in his underlying belief in market forces, with government succouring the unlucky. He left the Conservatives over Fair Trade in 1904, when they put forward a policy of protectionism, anathema to an orthodox Liberal like Churchill. He only returned to the Conservative party in 1924 when undue governmental interference in trade had been expunged from their agenda, and when the political costs of doing so were at a low threshold. Fair trade in the mind of Churchill did not preclude beneficial and justified government involvement to at times, stimulate employment and counteract nefarious foreign practice. For instance by 1908 Churchill had developed a respectable appreciation of contra-cyclical public works feeling that in useful but uncompetitive industries such as afforestation, public departments should be constructed to allow the expansion or contraction of work according to the needs of the labour market, much like the utilisation of an accordion. He was also much taken by the notion of having a governmental body dedicated to intelligence gathering on market conditions and inputting clever designs regarding the balance of trade and the proper use of employment. These concepts were never tried.

Supportive of free or at least fair trade, Churchill throughout his career could never conceal his concern for the effects of such unbridled combat upon the poor man and women. Speaking in a lecture at Oxford in June of 1930 he posited that unencumbered free trade was not at that time working: “The growth of public opinion, and still more of voting opinion, violently and instinctively rejects many features of this massive creed. No one, for instance, will agree that wages should be settled only by the higgling of the market. No one would agree that modern world-dislocation of industry…should simply be met by preaching thrift and zeal to the displaced worker. Few would agree that private enterprise is the sole agency by which fruitful economic activities can be launched or conducted.” Churchill appended to this suspicion of market forces the idea of an economic council, chosen in proportion to parliamentary representation as an agent of economic advice. This concept of an objective economic watchdog was never viably pursued.

These economic doctrines – fair trade and support for the common worker – were strictly consistent with his life long pursuit of social stability, prosperity and opportunity. In wider party politics Churchill was a radical who consistently attacked the Conservatives as a party of wealthy vested interests conspiring to exploit the poor. He had a rough belief in proper mass democracy (though part of him sympathised with the viewpoints of the controversial Nietzche who feared for mass democratisation feeling that the great features of aristocratic or privileged existence would disappear), and most of his actions were ‘de Tocquevillian’. Churchill was fundamentally concerned that there should not be governmental obstruction to the mass of the people realising the benefits that a liberalising democracy could bring into their lives. In 1908 he wrote to Asquith:

“There is a tremendous policy in social organisation. The need is urgent and the moment ripe. Germany with a harder climate and far less accumulated wealth has managed to establish tolerable basic conditions for her people. She is organised not only for war, but for peace. We are organised for nothing except party politics. The Minister who will apply to this country the successful experiences of Germany in social organisation may or may not be supported at the polls, but he will at least have a memorial which time will not deface of his administration.” If we consider the tremendous tasks in which the human race and governments; local, regional, national and hopefully international, will struggle against in the near future then social organisation and re-organisation, probably of a brutal or dislocative nature will not be completed in the current ‘pork and play’ atmosphere in today’s political systems. Politicians engaged in change will need the courage to ignore the polls and do what needs to be done.

Churchill was a master at this, usually getting the House of Commons to agree to his proposals even if he was in a subordinate or even antagonistic position. The skills used to complete such duties were varied. Very rarely did they include threats, bullying, trampling on souls, or the use of political power. Logic, parliamentary procedure, emotional colour and well-researched positions counted as more important. Churchill proposed and acquired the acceptance of the House on a number of far reaching proposals, including;
- Institution of Labour Exchanges and unemployed insurance
- National Infirmity Insurance
- Special state industries such as roads, afforestation
- Modernised poor law (law mandating that children should support their parents)
- State control of the railway
- Compulsory education until age 17

Churchill’s economic beliefs and education though broader and more profound than many politicians were attached to a series of principles. He loathed dependence and esteemed individualism. He was fully in support of laissez-faire and the doctrines of 17th, 18th and 19th century English economics. His faith in Adam Smith, John Locke and Edwardian experience compelled Churchill to espouse his support in the benedictions of unshackled economic exchange. In October of 1902, in a letter to a political colleague while still a member of the Conservative party, Churchill commented that it was necessary by an ‘evolutionary process’ to create a wing of the Conservative party which would either infuse vigour into the entire unit, or allow the formation of a central coalition. Churchill realised as he stated in the letter that his plan would become most important as an incident in or possibly as a herald of the movement, but that it would also move suspicion that he was moved only by mere restless ambition and not substantive issues. He needed a grand theme and found it in the Free Trade debate of 1903-4. Churchill was unable to countenance the stance of the Conservative party in their clamouring for protection and left joining the Liberals on May 31 1904. Allegations of opportunism, deceit and cowardice, rained down upon him as he shifted sides. In a note to a friend Churchill admitted; “(The) Free Trade issue subsides it leaves my personal ambitions naked and stranded on the beach – and they are an ugly and unsatisfactory spectacle by themselves, though nothing but an advantage when borne forward with the flood of a great outside cause.” Indeed without a great cause ambition is a rather repulsive picture.

For Churchill and others liberal ideals as exemplified by the Free Trade question meant more than simply the abolition of protective tariffs. It personifies a whole philosophy of political, social and economic organisation. John Stuart Mill in ‘Principles of Political Economy’ in 1848 developed the ‘Laissez-faire’, concept and every departure from it, unless required by some great good, is a certain evil. This commandment created the key notes of mid-Victorian liberalism: the reliance upon individualism, the establishment of self-respect, and self-reliance, and the organisation of voluntary and co-operative societies to better the plight of the weak, wounded and suffering.

Support for such mantra was rooted in an earlier period of excitable prosperity. Coinciding with the advent of Free Trade in the years 1850-1870, there was an economic boom in the UK. It can be fairly argued that the removal of tariff barriers probably had only a marginal impact on the British economy. Nevertheless, psychologically the advent of free trade was closely associated with entrepreneurial zest and commercial success. It appeared that market forces working within the social and political structure solved the question of English strength, which preoccupied the country from 1820-50.

Churchill knew his economic history well. It moulded and galvanised his political and philosophical beliefs. It shaped his political attitude and formed one of his bedrock principles – free movement of goods and services. This created in his political philosophy a paradox — Churchill was at once a radical and a traditionalist. He was a radical in changing structures and governmental organisations and arcane laws to facilitate the movement of finance and trade on a more fair and free basis. He was also a radical in his determination to raise the general standard of living, economic opportunity and chance for decent education and welfare. He was a traditionalist in his empathy that the productive capitalistic system as the only guaranteed method of sustaining society and providing a nation with the capability to ensure adequate standards of wealth and progress. It must be protected at all costs – vision must be enjoined by the means to protect its vested interests.

Power:
In assessing the use of power Churchill’s career and leadership in this regard actually represents Britain’s peculiarity as a Great Power which during its hegemony was formed in the conjunction of three factors: her naval strength, her imperial possessions, and her financial hegemony. Through two stints as First Lord of the Admiralty, Chancellor of the Exchequer and through two World Wars, Churchill devoted the lion’s share of his time and energies to upholding these interlocking causes, making it conspicuously clear in the process that he had no intention of presiding over the liquidation of the British Empire. As Chancellor of the Exchequer Churchill presented 5 budgets (1925-1929). In British history only Pitt, Walpole and Gladstone can equal that record. Though vastly entertaining as pieces of oratory and acting adroitness his budgets adhered as much as it was possible to economic orthodoxy. Many times Churchill was accused of slight of hand sophistry in the compilation of his numbers and in the collection of his tax revenue. However, this allegation has been and could be made with more convincing effect against every other Chancellor in this century. What is more important to note is that Churchill’s orthodoxy underpinned the Victorian notion of Britain’s greatness.

Churchill was a realist and understood power. Power is really to be embraced and used and is in some ways the centre piece of leadership. To ignore it is to perish. Because of his somewhat apolitical view of the world Churchill could discern very clearly the different perspectives on how nations viewed peace and how any destroyer of peace would appear in various forms to different nations. To prevent war and general international dislocation he at times called for zones and regional structures, including World-Grand Alliances. Power and strength were vital: In his words, “Appeasement from strength is magnanimous and noble and might be the surest and perhaps the only path to peace.”

Though primarily remembered as a war-hungry demagogue, Churchill on at least half a dozen occasions defiantly crusaded against the level and purpose of military spending. These personal programs were driven in part by his political position. That is only a small part of the answer. During the 1920’s Churchill felt that military expenditure was too high and should be curbed given the threat of inflation, the spectre of economic dislocation and the vital investments needed in infrastructure and social programs. These economic indicators drove Churchill to proselytise against excessive taxation and to insist on reviews of defence expenditures. It was necessary Churchill felt, to augment the Royal Air Force allotment and decrease the high administrative costs of the army and look suspiciously into the Royal Navy claims of needing more funding. The cabinet agreed with Churchill: “that the Fighting Services should proceed on the assumption that no great war is to be anticipated within the next ten years” although, “provision should be made for the possible expansion of trained units in case of an emergency arising.” Little of the war-mongerer appears in this sentiment though security was never to be imperilled.

Churchill was emphatic that the 10 year rule be reviewed each year. This 10 year dictum uttered in the mid 20’s obviously proved false since in 1936, the Germans seized the Rhineland. Beginning with the rise of Hitler and the stench of his ideology, Churchill began advocating not only a mammoth increase in armament production but also a closer relationship with Russia. Strategy had changed again. This option was proffered from a man who in the early 1920’s had supported the incursion of British soldiers into the heartland of Russia to cleanse it of Bolshevism. Churchill regarded Bolshevism as the lowliest creed and construct of mankind’s civilised history. These adjurations were consistent with his concept of maintaining a balance of power and bargaining from a position of strength, all in the name of effacing and avoiding an evil tumult. It is – and should be – one of the chief reasons for our admiration and support of Churchill that he consistently advocated peace by international understanding and if understanding were to collapse to resist any impingement of freedom by force.

But his political courtship of Russia was based on seemingly obvious and important facts. As Churchill previsioned in the early 30’s a new line of French fortifications established only along the French part of the Rhine would enable Germany to attack France through Belgium and Holland. He knew that Germany would not respect the neutrality of the Low Countries in her desire to rip and tear the French to pieces. He also warned that Poland, Czechoslovakia, Yugoslavia, Rumania, Austria and the Baltic’s, were at risk, and that Britain could not detain a German advance into these areas from her current submissive position of weakness. Churchill wanted to station a part of the British fleet in the Baltic to outnumber the German fleet. To achieve measurable, guarded security an alliance with the Bolshies was inevitable, vital and more importantly achievable.

If stronger lines had been followed in the 1930’s World War Two could have been avoided. With a ‘Churchillian’ leadership of the world and vision of power and morality we could have escaped the disgusting slaughter of 70 million people. In a 1945 speech to the combined Belgian Senate and Chamber, Churchill stressed what is still surely relevant in our world today; namely the resistance and prevention of dictator aggression: “If the United States had taken an active part in the League of Nations, and if the League of Nations had been prepared to use concerted force, even had it only been European force, to prevent the re-armament of Germany, there was no need for further serious bloodshed. If the Allies had resisted Hitler strongly in his early stages, even up to his seizure of the Rhineland in 1936, he would have been forced to recoil, and a chance would have been given to the sane elements in German life, which were very powerful especially in the High Command, to free Germany of the maniacal Government and system into the grip of which she was falling. Do no forget that twice the German people, by a majority, voted against Hitler, but the Allies and the League of Nations acted with such feebleness and lack of clairvoyance.”

After the Second World War he continued such pleas arguing in various speeches for France and Germany to bind wounds and for Russia to be a partner with the West in the greater development of a peaceful Europe. When it became obvious that the Soviets intended to challenge if not supplant the West (especially after the communist seizure of power in Czechoslovakia in 1948), than the tone of conciliation turned to a growling of an affronted bulldog as Churchill told American officials, that now is the time, promptly, to tell the Soviets that if they do not retire from Berlin and abandon Eastern Germany, withdrawing to the Polish frontier ‘we will raze their cities’. In his signal ‘Iron Curtain’ speech in Fulton Missouri in 1948 Churchill implored that the UNO must work effectively to prevent another war recognising Russia as a leading nation, remembering the gallantry of its efforts in the last war, and acknowledging its ‘Iron Curtain’ control of Eastern Europe which necessitated the banding and collation of Western strength and might.

It is a complex issue and drives to the heart of politics that so many of us view with revulsion – peace through strength and shifting alliances and geopolitical supporters. To understand such necessities today we need to understand the human animal. In scanning leadership and the great broad stretch and gesture of events, the basic construct of the human animal has to be borne in mind. Churchill constantly reminded his associates of the base fact that we really have not changed genetically in the last 100,000 years. DNA and microbiology are 1 of 2 great frontiers of human discovery in the next generation, (the other is information technology). As advances are made in understanding the human genome, advances must also be made in the way society and the leaders of society are structured and educated.

Churchill’s view of international affairs was pragmatic though not Machiavellian. He had two basic precepts of security — use history as a guide and foster a balance of power between the strongest lands, and ensure that the internal national health was seasoned and keen. Churchill frequently referred to his debt to those who had laboured before himself as he did to Katherine Asquith, on April 5 1929; “How strange it is that the past is so little understood and so quickly forgotten. We live in the most thoughtless of ages. Every day headlines and short views. I have tried to drag history up a little nearer to our own times in case it should be helpful as a guide in present difficulties.”

This enduring commitment to knowledge and of increasing the power, and not the dependency of the layman, both intellectually and politically was the central tenet of Churchill’s political genius. He could combine the new world with the old gleaning the important knowledge from the past, to help shape the institutions of the current and future. To say he was old-fashioned as some critics contend is simplistic. Churchill more than any other figure helped create the modern welfare nation state (though he would be appalled at its size and generosity today), promote peace through strength and ensure that the precarious balance of power between east and west, that was the only stability guaranteed to mankind for 44 years, was not toppled. Pure motives, unflinching devotion to good, ambition stemming from benign aspirations, all lead to quality. As one commentator explained of Pitt, so it could be ascribed to Churchill: “Pitt desired power, and he desired it, we really believe, from high and generous motives. He was, in the strict sense of the word, a patriot. He saw the national spirit sinking.” In conclusion then, we can state that Churchill matches many of those qualities and skills that define true leadership and greatness. It is these defining values that warrant the assertion that Churchill was indeed this century’s most important catalyst in propelling the world to where we are today. And I have not even discussed in detail his stand against Hitler and totalitarianism.

Thus, as a new millennium dawns I do believe that if we can revise our current system of educating ourselves and our leaders along the principles already evinced; namely, character, skills, intelligence, vision and understanding power, that we can create a proper cadre of leading men and women and that all of society will benefit from the reduction of intrigue and pettiness. Human nature can be changed, however painfully long it will take. In order to understand how we can do this it is often times necessary to understand how the ‘great’ or historically important at any rate went about it. I don’t think that in the 20th century there has been any more dedicated man who defended the Liberalised view of freedom, economic exchange and human dignity, better than Churchill. For this reason, he should be nominated as the most influential man of the past century. And for this reason his skills and weaknesses should be studied and appreciated with especial care.

C. Read
http://www.articlesbase.com/business-articles/churchill-right-or-wrong-an-analysis-700334.html

posted in let your life speak | 14 Comments

2nd May 2010

Rodrigues Island: Case for Self-determination

Cry Freedom

Rodrigues Island: Case for Self-Determination

Three hundred years ago, men and women in flesh and bone, were kidnapped from their villages in Guinea; trapped and captured like animals in Senegal; ripped from their families in Mozambique; herded aboard slave ships in Madagascar, and shipped across the Indian Ocean to this part of the World. Those who survived ended their days, labouring like beasts of burden for foreign masters. They would never see Africa again. To the rest of the world, these unfortunate individuals lend a human face to the dark-end of a fading history; to us Rodriguans, they were much more – they were our great great … grand fathers and mothers.

Historical Perspective

To get to the inmost heart of our liberation struggle from Mauritius, it is sufficiently important to briefly revisit Rodrigues’ timeline. There are differing versions of history. We have the slave-driver’s version according to the slave-driver; we have the slave’s version according to the slave; we have the versions of those who see world conquest as Jus ad bellum (just cause for war) and the versions of those who do not. From this hazy distance, when we search for a truth buried somewhere in a dead past, among so many other diluted, distorted and deformed half-truths – we can only take a leap of faith.

The name Rodrigues was eponymously plucked from Diego Rodriguez, a Portuguese sailor whose brief visit in 1528 heralded the coming of the Europeans. There is some evidence that Chinese Mariners, Arab and Malay traders, and Pirates may have stumbled on the island as far back as the tenth century. No record of any indigenous population exists. By 1638, a council on nearby Reunion Island was already administering Rodrigues as a French possession. It remained a French colony until British troops stormed the island in 1809. It was then governed as a separate British territory until May 30, 1814, when its administration was transferred to Mauritius.

During the Second World War, 300 of our compatriots, my father among them, from our tiny active population, supported the British in Tobruk and El Alamein.

Yet, in March 1968, we were bound to Mauritius against our will, and marooned in the colonially imposed ‘forced marriage’ of unitary rule. Having offloaded Mauritius, the British in Rodrigues simply packed their bags, shot their dogs, and took off.

In effect, we became the whipping boy, left behind at the mercy of new masters, to foot the bill for the transgressions of others.

Our history has been one long painful struggle against non-consensual governments: from French possession, French colony, English possession, dependency of the colony of Mauritius, ‘district’ of Mauritius, to Island region of Mauritius today.

Neo-colonial labels replaced colonial tags; alien masters took over from foreign rulers, but for our people – the dysphoric cycle grinds on: Adieu l’esclavage – Bonjour l’esclavage (farewell slavery – good morning slavery.)

Political Domination

By 1960, the decolonization of Mauritius and Rodrigues islands had already been decided. When subsequent negotiations and constitutional conferences were held in London and Mauritius in 1961, ‘65 and ‘67, Rodriguans were deliberately excluded. The pretext was that we did not have any political parties or organizations.

During that epoch, the ultraconservative Mauritian party, PMSD (Parti Mauritian ‘Social Democrat’), had been running a campaign of scaremongering, along ethnic lines in Rodrigues. Besides promises of freedom, its leader, Duval, had managed to convince our people that the Devil and his Dam would descend on Rodrigues after the British pulled out. Not surprisingly, in their first contact with the ballot box in 1967, an overwhelming ninety-eight percent of Rodriguans voted against being attached to Mauritius. Sadly, the express views of our people did not take precedence over the urgent conspiracy to annex our homeland.

Of note, in 1967, Rodriguans were not offered a choice between freedom and colonialism; we had to face the horns of this dilemma: British colonization or Mauritian occupation … a foreign ruler or an alien master. Not too dissimilar to Indochina’s quandary: Japanese occupation or French colonization.

Rodriguans did not wish to continue living under a British heel, anymore than we craved the prospect of living under a Mauritian one. And we certainly did not fancy the idea of uprooting our families, leaving the bones of ten generations of our ancestors buried in Rodrigues, to sail into exile in foreign lands. Nonetheless, in those blood-curdling days in Mauritius, people were dying in the streets; we feared being carved up next. The chilling reality of the times saw many discard their possessions, homes and lands, to escape to Canada, Australia, France, England, South Africa and other parts of the World. For some, this still cuts close to the bone.

In 1968, before the ink was dry on a unilaterally drafted Independence constitution; baton-wielding police hoisted the Mauritian flag atop Port Mathurin under a cloud of tear-gas. Rodriguans became unwilling Mauritian citizens overnight. On occasions when our stout-hearted brothers and sisters resisted, British troops were summoned to put down our protest.

Admittedly, after the British left in 1968, our hands were not cut off. All the same, Rodrigues was reduced to a Mauritian fiefdom, where marginalization soon became institutionalized. We found ourselves with higher unemployment, higher cost of living, higher infant mortality, higher primary education drop-out rate and lower literacy and living standard than Mauritius. Discrimination, domination and exclusion became the norm. Today, force majeure continues to buttress the status quo.

In 1976, a separate ministry was set up to deal with Rodrigues’ specificities. So far, only a handful of ‘moderate’ Rodriguans, with their wings clipped, have ever been co-opted to this portfolio. What’s more, no Rodriguan has filled this post in the past ten years, and the likelihood of it ever being different, seems remote. Mauritian politicians arbitrarily choose the minister for Rodrigues and politically-appointed Mauritian bureaucrats govern Rodrigues by proxy – irrespective of our votes.

In 1991, when Rodriguans, had the temerity to demand more control over their own affairs, a token island Council was put in place to placate them. Fellow travellers and party hacks were handpicked and allowed to make recommendations on local matters. But, when the Council, though toothless, began to fuel nationalist pride among those with ‘ideas above their station’ – it was unceremoniously disbanded in 1996.

In 2001, following a long sustained struggle, the idea of Autonomy for the ethnically diverse people of Rodrigues, was first mooted. Finally, 170 years after the abolition of slavery, far reaching devolution from the centralized rigidities of Mauritian control came into sight … albeit briefly.

In 2002, after much fanfare, after the spin-doctors had recited their precision-tooled sound bites, after the pig-headed and the big-headed had had their photo opportunities – ‘Autonomy’ arrived. The names were changed from Island Council to Regional Assembly and from Councillors to Commissioners. A few buildings were erected here and there, a few factotums got to fly to Mauritius, there to sit, silent and still, on government back-benches and a plague of introduced Chameleons overran Rodrigues. That was roughly the extent of it.

Mauritian ministers continued to micro-manage our affairs and we got to elect the lackeys who run their errands. The central government retained all legislative and executive powers and practically everything else. Eventually, even its rusted-on supporters had to concede that our promised ‘Autonomy’ was a dud.

When we peek one inch beyond the chic sophistry, we see one people still ruling another, not only without that other’s consent – but against its will.

Loie sans partage (absolute rule) is alive and well in Rodrigues; it can be seen any day of the year, flexing its muscle and beating its chest in Port Mathurin.

At the risk of belabouring the obvious, one cannot consider limited administrative discretion to be Autonomy, anymore, than one can seriously consider a piglet to be an elephant.

The colonial legacy of authoritarian bureaucratic dictatorship was never dismantled in Rodrigues – it was reinforced. External bureaucratic-warlords command and our people obey without question. The chief of police, the judge, the minister for Rodrigues, all the principal heads of department, all the lawyers, all the policy makers, all those who actually govern Rodrigues – all come from Mauritius.

When our Creole language, in which is stored the experiences and struggles of our people, is spurned in our Assembly – when seventy percent of our people are disqualified from political office, because they do not speak a foreign language –

when half-nourished, half-educated and half-free schoolchildren are forced to learn three languages – when there is a dearth of educational material on our African culture in a curriculum designed for us, by others – when our children mimic cultures, beliefs, languages and traditions dissimilar to their own, in order to validate their sense of self-worth – when our civil service which represents ninety percent of our educated, is effectively gagged from political discourse – when our people speak of Independence in tentative muffled whispers, for fear of government spies – when everything is controlled by external forces, there is no freedom … only domination.

Constitutional guarantees of no ruling caste, of no second class citizens, of consent of the governed to govern, seem to apply to all, except in respect to Rodriguans.

The Rodriguan citizen is like a beleaguered character, hopelessly trapped inside an eternal nightmare of suppressed resentment, being forced to watch helplessly, as his culture crumbles into dust.

Mauritius speaks of human rights at the United Nations, pledges solidarity with SADC (Southern African Development Committee) and the African Union – yet retains its own Colonial Dominion. The double-edged morality is staggering.

Self-Determination

Much water and much blood have flowed into the Indian Ocean, since our brothers and sisters in Madagascar, India, Sri Lanka, Comoros, Africa, Maldives, Seychelles and Mauritius were freed (at least in theory) from the wretched web of Colonialism.

But for us Rodriguans, the on-going ignominy of Mauritian Occupation still haunts our daily lives.

In the 21st century, the island of Rodrigues, one of this regions’ last remaining manifestations of Colonialism has become the ‘sick man’ of the Indian Ocean, forever bonded to an artificial welfare drip, and still begging a foreign kleptocrat to let us go.

It is argued that because on May 30th 1814, Britain dubbed Rodrigues a dependency of the colony of Mauritius, and administered it as part of the island of Mauritius, it automatically became an integral and indivisible territory of Mauritius. Therefore, any dismemberment of territory before independence would have been illegal under international law.

If we follow this line of reasoning, then we also recognise that all colonially-imposed arrangements are forever binding on all future generations. And when this thinking is extended retrospectively, then, Mussolini’s 1936 laws could still be cited today, as justification to go on bedevilling the lives of Ethiopians, forever.

During Mad-Dog-Morgan’s governorship of Jamaica, looting and rape were the arrangements of the day. As one would reasonably expect, when Morgan the pirate left, his arrangements left with him. The British themselves snatched Rodrigues from the French at the point of a bayonet hooked-up to a gun; likewise, any arrangements they made during their rule became null and void – the very minute they left.

There was never any 11th Commandment, which accorded Britain divine-right to bequeath our lives, our lands and our country to Mauritius, for time without end.

Our people were not Mauritius’ or anyone else’s private property. We were not cattle to be handed over from one master to another to another.

Unitary rule was part and parcel of British colonial policy. As a result, despite underlying divisions among different geographical ethnic groups, territories were artificially forced into a unitary state. For example, New Zealand was administered as a dependency of the colony of New South Wales; islands of the Caribbean were grouped together willy-nilly; Seychelles was administered as part of Mauritius;

There were plans afoot to group all British East-African colonies under a federation. And it was only the selfless vetoes of India’s leaders that saved Burma from being administered as part of India. Unfortunately, Rodrigues did not have a Ghandi, or a Jinnah or a Nehru; we had Duval, demagoguery and double-cross a go-go.

The simple truth, however unpalatable, is when colonial rule ended in 1968, the island of Rodrigues had a population, and that island belonged to that population, and was not up for grabs.

On March 12th 1968, there should have been two proud islands, side by side, in free association, both celebrating their freedom. Alas, there was pride on one side of the Indian Ocean and humiliation on the other. On the gloomy anniversary of that miserable day, some Rodriguans still hold a minute’s silence … and remember.

The flaw in the dismemberment argument is that it is predicated on the false premise that Rodrigues was a legitimate territory of Mauritius prior to Independence. This was never the case. Mauritius never discovered a terra nullius Rodrigues; it never captured Rodrigues by conquest; the British never wrested Rodrigues from the French in 1814 simply to give it to Mauritius; Rodriguans never surrendered their individual sovereignty and their territorial integrity to a ‘Pax Mauritiana’ – Moreover, the Rodriguan nation never consented to be part of, or governed by Mauritius.

State sponsored propaganda, unremittingly repeated and embedded in school children as fact, is extremely difficult to unlearn. The untainted truth is Rodrigues was part of the British Empire until 1968; today, it is an annexed country under Occupation.

It is no more a territory of Mauritius, than Hercules is a son of Zeus.

Whether Britain gifted Rodrigues to Mauritius in 1968, as it gave Eritrea to Ethiopia or whether Mauritius opportunistically annexed it, is neither here nor there.

Whatever deal, whatever collusion took place between Britain and its Mauritian colonial minister, without our consent was illegal and immoral.

It was akin to a departing pirate rewarding his faithful slave, with a slave of his own.

It was the shameless advancement of one country’s territorial ambition at the expense of its neighbour. Mauritius added 130,000 miles of our EEZ (exclusive economic zone) to its territory, and our people lost their homeland and their dignity.

The United Kingdom, Mauritius and the International community clearly understand this, as I do, as you do, as we all do … It was wrong then – It is wrong now!

In 1968, our economic or political unpreparedness should never have been used as an excuse to deny us our independence. Mauritius should have been granted its own independence separately, as Northern Rhodesia was. Rodrigues should have been placed under the guardianship of the Trusteeship Council of the United Nations, as a non-self-governing territory. A pan-African commission or UN special committee for self-determination could then have put together a long term plan for Independence.

Under a mutually agreed-upon constitution, with suitable opt-out clauses, we could even have remained in free association with Mauritius, rather than being perpetually entrapped in the existing abomination, euphemistically known as ‘Autonomy’.

If historical debts, legal or at least moral responsibilities, abrogated in 1968, are made good to some extent, past injustices can be belatedly rectified. We remain hopeful.

It is not our lot in life, to be perpetually governed by other people. We did not accept non-consensual rule from France; we did not accept it from Britain – we will never accept it from Mauritius.

Ethnic Dilution

The majority of Mauritius’ 1.3 million population are descendants of Indian indentured labourers, mainly from Andhra Pradesh, Gujarat, Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu, Bihar and Uttar Pradesh, brought by the British to meet labour shortages on Sugar cane plantations; whereas, ninety-five percent of Rodrigues’ forty thousand strong population are direct descendants of African slaves.

We are as distinct, as say Mexicans and Kenyans. This ethnic heterogeneity differentiates the one island from the other.

Rodriguans are not an indigenous group or an ethno-national minority seeking piecemeal internal self-rule; we are a separate people with a fervent aspiration to self-determine our future. Our case for full sovereignty is an exceptionally strong one. More to the point, we can never give up our homeland – our forefathers paid too dear a price for it!

Until recently, Rodrigues’ small maximum carrying capacity (approx.50,000) and its geographical isolation, have managed to preserve its cultural identity to some extent. However, the past few years have seen Mauritians, in ever-increasing numbers, being fast-tracked onto crown land in Rodrigues.

If this trend (or government policy) continues, it is a mathematical certainty that it will dilute our ranks to a moribund minority. Much like mixing thirty bottles of beer with one bottle of lemonade – the lemonade disappears.

Once our culture, traditions, language, and way of life are gone; once we have lost our identity as a people; once our claim for sovereignty has been forever extinguished – we would have become a nation of semi-Slaves and half-repressed Serfs, stuck at the bottom-end of a Mauritian vertical class structure.

The once proud people of Rodrigues would have been reduced to a motley mob of untouchables, straw hats under the arm, bowing and scraping in the demimonde of Mauritian ghettos or eking out a living on the mountain ridges in Rodrigues.

We could never again aspire to be anything more than just half a people; we would be forever playing catch-up to other cultures. As a people, we would be dead.

For Rodriguans, this is an existential challenge. If we do not meet it, if we wait for the time that must come, we will surely follow the Dodo. This, I do not believe – I know.

Conclusion

The common Portuguese name Rodrigues (son of Rodrigo) was poorly chosen for us, by old masters, in evil times. Faced with being branded with it forever, even the Brotherhood of Goblins, Gnomes and Gremlins would be reaching for the AK47. Seriously though, ‘Rodrigues’ is an old relic, fossilized in another era, clearly disconnected from and incompatible with the essence of our people. And not to mention, the blood-spattered images of Portugal’s brutal savagery in this region, which the name evokes – It is time for our generation to give it (Rodrigues) back to history.

We have lost a country – our body politic is being trampled underfoot; the stench of humiliation is everywhere; cultural oblivion looms large, and yet, we are still blighted by a small clique of bloated puppets and ‘well-assimilated’ latter-day Uncle Toms, wanting us to accept foreign domination.

Strangers overseas, who we do not vote for and cannot remove, design our electoral systems and electoral boundaries, decide our laws, taxation, tariffs, decide our health, education, foreign and economic policies. Strangers, decide our children’s future –

Strangers decide – Strangers have been deciding for the best part of 300 years.

It is time – we decided! For, we too, have a brain and a backbone. Yes, it is true! We too, have dreams and hopes of our own.

It is time to cut the neo-colonial umbilical cord sharply adrift, to take active steps to decrease dependence on others, to believe that if we reduce our wants and work hard, that self-reliance is possible and indeed desirable.

It is time to stop depending on built-in assumptions, on ideas and systems that have been partly responsible for our ongoing subordination. It is time to try other ideas, other approaches, perhaps invent new ones which better adapt to our circumstances.

It is time to stop imitating others and trust in ourselves – for who we are, has worth.

Rodriguans are a resilient people. I say this, because contrary to popular belief, it is our people who have worked the land and fished the seas and kept farm animals and kept this small economy afloat – generation after generation. We have done it before, we are doing it now – we can do it better. Let’s not hesitate to continue drinking from the old well (the land and the sea), until the ghost of globalization arrives with the magic potion.

It is time to dump the usual too-poor, too-small, and not-yet-ready arguments. They are like bad records that have been played over and over again. They are intended to shackle rather than liberate. Fortunately, oppressed people the world over have ignored them, otherwise most islands in the Caribbean, Indian, Atlantic and Pacific, much of Africa and Asia, and possibly half the planet would still be under some form of colonial rule today. In any case, how large and how rich would a country need to be, for its people to qualify for their freedom? Moreover, who would decide?

Our leaders must re-connect with the poor and dispossessed in this country, re-establish links with our ethnic kin in Africa, re-organize our people at the grassroots and demand that which was stolen from us in 1968 … our Country.

Let us not be discouraged by the indifference of a dog-eat-dog McWorld, let us not dither, let us steel our resolve and demand our Independence. Let us speak of it proudly in every home, in every church, in every bazaar, in every fishing-post, on every farm, on every street-corner, on every bus and wherever or whenever our people meet.

Our task will not be without sacrifice, but if we turn our back on Independence now, we condemn our children to another 300 years of foreign domination. The alternative is simple: struggle or eternal subservience.

Our people have been the human Guinea pigs for some of the world’s most cold-blooded social experimentations. We have been at the painful-end of the whole monstrous gamut of Slavery, Colonialism, neo-Colonialism and ‘civilising missions’ of Missionaries. Despite the inhumanity, the degradation, the indignity; despite the loss of our grand African names, our sense of self, our traditional African clothing, our beliefs and our relationships with our kinfolk in Africa – we have already forgiven and moved on.

Perpetual domination is not a destination to where we want to lead our children, or as the late Pope John Paul II used to say to occupied people everywhere “you are not what they say you are; let me remind you who you really are …”

Our people have undergone a long-enough apprenticeship to be free. The time has come for us to climb out of the abyss of serfdom and view the world through our own eyes.

As children of this flying planet, it is our incontrovertible right to self-determine our own future; let us exercise that right and reclaim our heritage in the human family.

With this firm wish warming our hearts, with our heads held high – let us brace ourselves to face a hopeful future with fortitude.

Vive Rodrigues … Libre

Alain Leveque

September 07, 2006

Alain Leveque
http://www.articlesbase.com/politics-articles/rodrigues-island-case-for-selfdetermination-98483.html

posted in let your life speak | 1 Comment