Seek The Truth
Archive for June, 2004
The Blind Only See What They Want To See
Jun 1st
Ironically for one who has previously written on “The Power of Positive Thinking“, I would like to make the strongest possible commentary on negativity and the destructive influence of negative people.
All organisations have them and they are usually characterised by being covert rather than open, and delight in trying to seek out allies and convert them to their negative slat. They are easily identifiable physically – they tend to sidle sideways rather than walk upright! They believe strongly in conspiracy theories!
Negative people personify the expression that “the blind see only what they want to see.” Their life story is contrasting; everything about their lives outside the work place is very positive. Their children always do well, their spouses enjoy great success at their work place and their family life is the very epitome of the happy ever after story.
At their own work place however, it is a different story. Here their lot is so different. Everything about the work place is wrong. The leadership is wrong, the decisions are wrong, the wrong people are in the wrong places. In a school setting, wouldn’t you just know it, they get more kids than other classes! They get the hardest kids, the slowest kids and the naughtiest kids. They get the worst room, the crapiest furniture and don’t get the same text books as the rest. Every single time they go to use equipment, it doesn’t work, it’s not there or it was left in a mess. And the kids, they don’t get breakfast, their parents don’t care, they’re away from the school and when they’re not, they’re late. They never do homework, other teachers don’t like them, they smell and they don’t try!
The negative person is never at fault and is never wrong. They just get the raw deal. It is always someone else’s fault. Clearly, the reason they get all the slack kids is because the principal doesn’t like them. The fact that the wrong decisions are made, not enough resources are available and the photocopier isn’t working is clearly because the right person isn’t in charge!
A major danger for schools and other organisations is that negativity is contagious and negative people are never content to keep their own opinion to themselves. By covert stealth they seek to influence others and convert allies for their cause. These people are the well poisoners always seeking to find fault, to assign blame and provide reasons for why things can’t happen or won’t work. Present a new idea or initiative and the merchant of doom will immediately list nine reasons why it won’t work. They will then spend the next fortnight in diverted energy trying to convince others of the impending failure! If a child or teacher in another class does well, then of course they would, they had everything going for them. They were obviously given advantages that others didn’t enjoy.
Negative people should be avoided like the plague. They become injurious to health, happiness and career. They are relentless to the point of being boring because they are so one dimensional. They are often shrill and sometimes become insistent of exclusiveness in professional relationships – they will sulk if you are seen chatting with the enemy, especially the boss. They cause you to become very weary and tired as they are high energy drawers. They cause you to become confused by the one sided intensity of their crusade.
Not only is negativity contagious but it is exceptionally dangerous to both physical and mental health. The medical links between negativity, stress and organic or mental health problems are well established. Prolonged exposure to negativity is a form of emotional abuse, and in a marriage, grounds for a divorce. Violence is an extreme form of negativity. The descriptors of serial killers and social deviates are usually always high in negativity. These people are loners, isolates and are absolutely convinced of conspiracies against them.
How do you deal with these people in the work place? The well poisoner thrives on positive feedback to their perspective and an audience. They also prefer to work out of the bright glare of daylight. By depriving them of an audience and by not giving any feedback that could possibly be construed as agreement, you limit their campaign. However, by challenging their perspective either by simply saying “no, that’s not the way I see it” or by challenging their viewpoint, you destroy them. Avoid them, say nothing, or confront them. To stay and listen gives them an audience and simply encourages them.
Avoid loud and aggressive persons, they are vexations to the spirit.
- Max Ehrmann ‘Desiderata’
Children’s Commissioner Speaks Out Against Culture Of Violence
Jun 1st
MANAAKITITA A TATAOU TAMARIKI
CHILDREN’S COMMISSIONER
CHILDREN’S COMMISSIONER
Friday, June 18, 2004
Press release
Children’s Commissioner speaks out against culture of violence
Children’s Commissioner Dr Cindy Kiro has spoken out against children and this country’s poor track record for protecting children against physical harm.
In a keynote presentation to the Children’s Issues Centre seminar being held in Wellington today (Friday 19 June), Dr Kiro says concerted action by both government and the community is needed to improve New Zealand’s statistics on children and young people.
Dr Kiro says New Zealand has high rates of maltreatment of children and escalating rates of notifications to Child, Youth and Family for cases of child abuse and neglect.
From 1989 to 2000, 162 children and young people aged 0-19 years died as a result of homicide and 3584 children were admitted to hospital as a result of non-accidental injury inflicted by others, Dr Kiro says.
“Like other western nations, we venerate and romanticise childhood, while at the same time we abuse, molest, incarcerate, segregate and exploit our children”
The Children’s Commissioner notes UNICEF research shows a pre-school child in New Zealand is 13 times more likely than a child in Sweden to die as a result of pedestrian injury.
“There seems to be a widespread indifference to the need to actively manage risks to our children and young people, both physical and psychological. Despite our outcry when tragedy occurs, we too frequently sit by and allow lesser abuses to go unquestioned”
Dr Kiro says the government’s SKIP programme (strategies with kids, information for parents) and the recently released Children’s Issues Centre research into alternatives to physical punishment provide important information for parents and people who work with children.
However Dr Kiro says people need to realise since Sweden banned physical punishment in 1976, only four children died in the following 20 years.
“There are more deaths from maltreatment in Aotearoa each year, than in Sweden over the entire 20 year period” Dr Kiro says.
For more information:
Dr Cindy Kiro 021 396 782
Penny St John (Communications Advisor) 025 687 3123
National Culture and Education Under Free Trade
Jun 1st
In June 2004, I attended the Third International Conference of Cultural Professional Organisations in Seoul, the Republic of Korea. Four hundred delegates from fifty seven countries met to discuss the effects that free trade agreements, particularly involving the United States, pose for the protection and extension of cultural diversity especially in smaller and less well developed economies. This conference and previous ones, have sought the development of a binding international treaty through the auspices of UNESCO, to protect cultural diversity from the ramifications of free trade agreements. It is anticipated that UNESCO will release its draft declaration shortly, for possible adoption at the 33rd session in 2005.
There is a world wide movement for the liberation of world trade, a reduction or elimination of tariffs and tariff protections and of government subsidies and incentives. It is led by the World Trade Organisation and takes the form of Free Trade Agreements, Closer Economic Relations, Bilateral Investment Treaties and other international trade agreements. Within this movement, all aspects and components of a nation’s economy are subject to inclusion in a Free Trade Agreement, including culture and education. The World Trade Organisation identifies culture as a commodity. By so doing, the cultural identity of a country will be subject to the interests and dealings of a major economic force, particularly the United States. The modus operandus of the United States, especially to smaller and third world economies is to “take it or leave it” – accept the free trade agreement we offer, including open access to your culture and education, or there will be no agreement.
The cultural sectors in many countries particularly in film, broadcasting and publishing are at risk of being taken over by large multinational companies. Many governments fight to preserve their national and cultural identity through government support and subsidies. However, World Trade Organisation agreements prevent such subsidies and policies to protect local culture. Countries like Korea and France have local film and music quotas and have been put under tremendous pressure to reduce or eliminate these by U.S trade negotiators. The recent Australia – United States Free Trade Agreement not only requires local television quota to be reduced but forever prevents it being increased. Any new media to be developed in the future requires Australia to consult with the United States. Developing economies can not compete with the cultural might of the United States. Hollywood not only produces 85% of the western worlds films, they are almost all inevitably in English. This along with world wide television programming by the likes of CNN and BBC is a major threat to the retention and strengthening of local culture and indeed, language.
Beginning in Canada in 1998, a Coalition for Cultural Diversity organisation was formed. Its mission was that the cultural sector should not be a subject of trade and commerce negotiations. The international conferences in Montreal 2001, Paris 2002 and in South Korea 2004, sought a mechanism to achieve this aim. A number of countries and organisations such as Canada, France, the European Union and Brazil have made strong declarations for cultural diversity. UNESCO was seen as the best forum to develop a cultural protection clause to be inserted in all free trade agreements. The Coalition for Cultural Diversity believes that cultural diversity is a fundamental right for mankind and that each country must have the sovereign right to develop, implement and preserve cultural policies. The CCD support and promote the establishment of UNESCO’s “International Convention on Cultural Diversity” to assure cultural exemption in international trade agreements – (The Third International Meeting of Cultural Professional Organisations, Seoul, South Korea, June 2004).
It is anticipated this declaration will be adopted at the 33rd UNESCO’s General Conference in 2005, to guarantee each nation’s cultural policy.
Such an agreement is vital given the backdrop of culture being treated as a general commodity and traded as a subject of free trade in the name of “market economy”. Individual nations face difficulty in winning and protecting local culture against the strong forces of trade agreements. No culture or language should disappear because it did not have market competitiveness and could not withstand the strong bullying of the weak in order to secure a Free Trade Agreement. Korea is an excellent case study. Following the 1998 financial crisis, Korea began negotiations with the United States to sign a U.S. – Korea Bilateral Investment Treaty. A requirement was that the Korean film quota system be scrapped allowing open access to the U.S film industry. The Korean film industry and public protested and the Bilateral Investment Treaty was never signed. However, pressure from the United States trade and commerce officials continues and with another period of Korean economic down turn and the threat of North Korean instability, it is anticipated the fight is about to begin again.
The education sector is also at risk. Globalisation of trade and culture also impacts on education. A major function of education is to disseminate the national culture – literature, music, art, dance and drama. If New Zealand schools didn’t promote and disseminate New Zealand Arts, particularly Maori Arts and culture, then who would? A defining aspect of our national identity would be lost. To have possible restrictions placed on the exclusivity of promoting and disseminating New Zealand culture in New Zealand schools would be a subjugation of our national sovereignty. Similarly, through free trade agreements it might become feasible for a large multinational publishing house or corporation to take over a sector of the New Zealand education system and superimpose the philosophy and curriculum direction of its choice. Already, particularly in underdeveloped countries various educational “brands” are already in the market place.
In summary, World Trade Organisation trade agreements put national cultural identity and development at risk. Individual nations find it hard to stand up against powerful trading countries to exclude cultural protections from Free Trade Agreements. The development of an international legal agreement through UNESCO is seen as an essential protection especially for smaller and developing countries. Several countries have already begun a consultative process and consideration of the issues (including the United States). Within the New Zealand context, greater awareness of the UNESCO Declaration needs to be created within the government, the cultural professional organisations, trade unions and within Maori. It is strongly to the advantage of New Zealand that there is a binding international process to ensure the sovereign right of states to take appropriate measures for the protection and promotion of cultural diversity.
