Search

- Home

We are never much bothered about our actions until they come back to us.  I am not here talking necessarily about Karma.  Rather, I am more interested in how we react to how we’ve been treated by other people; even when we’ve done worse.  We seem to think that it is okay to treat other people how we wish, but not okay for people to treat us the same way.

What you’ve failed to realise is that the way you behave says a lot about who you are, and how you would like to be treated too.  You teach people how you’d like to be treated by your actions.  If you derive happiness in making other people sad, you would attract people like you into your life, and they will end up treating you the same way.  You may feel like a winner at that moment; but the truth is that you’ve actually lost all sense of dignity and trust from other people.  That’s more than you’ve taken from the people you treated badly.

Also, your actions reveal how you feel about yourself at every point in time.  Think for a moment, if you are happy person, would you reflect sadness? No, the reason why you are displaying sadness is because you are sad in yourself and are looking for a company.  Your target company is usually a happy person, and this is because happiness is the opposite of sadness.  You target a happy person because they are showing the opposite of who you are.  Unfortunately, your sadness is increased by targeting this people, your situation is unchanged, and you become a target of who you are too.  What an interesting chain of events!

I hear you say things like – I just don’t like that race, don’t like the way they speak, and many more.  And for these reasons, you treat them disrespectfully.  Think about it, is this really because they are the opposite of you? And what’s wrong in them being different from you? Are they in fact better than you because they are not about disrespecting other people? Asking yourself these questions before you act can help you begin thinking in a different way. Your decision determines your actions toward other people, and consequently, how other people treat you too.  People continuously make up their minds on whether they’d like to be involved in your life and how to treat you. These are serious decisions and in most cases in response to who you are.

There’s nothing wrong in treating other people well.  Why treat other people the way you don’t want to be treated? Just as they don’t know your story; you don’t know theirs.  This means that you don’t know them enough to be disrespectful or bad to them.  A lot of people out there have stories to them, which make them who they are, and ones you may not necessarily agree to.  Unfortunately, treating them badly will not change who they are; rather, it makes things worse, shows your true personality, and lays the groundwork for how people will treat you too.

The fact that you treat people badly shows you are the problem. Afterall, you cannot give what you do not have.  When you begin to treat people right, then you will receive the same act of kindness in return.

 

Please follow and like us:
error

If confidence is the belief in one’s ability, and ability is defined as one’s skills, talent or proficiency in a specific area, does this mean that a non-confident person lacks ability? Or could it be that their abilities have not been spotted, catered for or overshadowed by another ability?

From what I have seen and experienced so far; I think a lot of abilities have been overshadowed by other abilities.  This is the reason for unspotted abilities and the ones not catered for.  The society and workplace have not helped too.

In today’s society, people go for roles solely because they need to make ends meet and pay bills. They take on roles that don’t do justice to their skills or talents and make them seem as lacking in confidence. This is because they have delved into areas that aren’t theirs or proportionate to their real abilities. 

In addition, people try to embrace skills that the society see as relevant.  They forget that these skills only became relevant because the natural owners of these skills gave them the recognition they have today. Once we’ve found our abilities, we can make them desirable and relevant in the society. This is what the society should inspire.

Then, they finally secure a job based on their skills, and are met with the workplace conundrum.  The workplace makes them feel less confident because they don’t engage much in social activities such as: office drinks, chit chat, presentation, to name but a few. When in fact, they don’t necessarily need these activities in carrying out their roles successfully.  They are extracurricular activities, which they can opt in or out of.  The workplace seems to forget that people come to work, not for social activities, but for what they were employed to do, and shouldn’t be made to feel less confident if they chose to opt out of any activities that don’t define them.   How do we expect to grow more skills and talents when we expect everyone to be a sanguine? Let’s help people grow and thrive in who they truly are. 

So, when we talk about confidence, basically, we should relate it to people’s skills, talents or proficiency.  When they are happy in themselves, without the threat of acting or being someone else, it inspires confidence in them.  The lack of confidence is because they are not working within their abilities or are been forced to be someone else, and the world is missing these abilities – abilities overshadowed by other abilities, with no opportunities to boom.  We aren’t all going to be motivational speakers, presenters, socialites, etc. Therefore, people’s confidence shouldn’t be confined to these skills. If they choose to learn them, then that’s great.  If they don’t think they need to, then they should be free to say so, and not be seen as lacking in confidence. It’s unfair, and ultimately, suppresses abilities.

Please follow and like us:
error

Looks like the UK needs to start preparing for no-deal Brexit after all.  Though the Prime minister has said that he would try and get a deal, the EU have refused to bulge.  I hear that the leader of the opposition party, Jeremy Corbyn is seeking help from the top civil servant to intervene to avoid a no-deal Brexit during the general election campaign.  This comes amidst report that MPs could back a vote of no confidence in the new Prime Minister, Boris Johnson.

Mr Johnson has written to the civil servants to prepare to leave the EU by the Brexit deadline of 31st October.  To this effect, their top priority and his is an exit without a deal. It’s also been reported that the government special advisers have been instructed not to take annual leave until 31st October.  Presumably, as the top priority of the government is now no-deal Brexit.

The government’s argument continues to be it’s the people mandate.  The people voted to leave during the referendum, and the mandate should be upheld.  What I find interesting is that the house voted down Theresa May’s withdrawal agreement three times, and the EU made it clear that they won’t be reopening the withdrawal agreement, most especially, now that the new Prime Minister has requested for the ‘Irish backstop’ to be removed from the Brexit discussion, the EU has gone completely quiet, and are also preparing for a no-deal Brexit. If EU stance is that the withdrawal deal cannot be renegotiated, the obvious options are no-deal or stay within the single market.  The MPs are of course very confused, and I wonder what actually makes them feel that another referendum will solve their mess.  A big shame that people voted at the last referendum not understanding what they voted for – but that a lot of people are clear on what it actually means to leave or stay, we may be shocked by the outcome of another referendum.  Nothing’s guaranteed at this moment!

Please follow and like us:
error

Political rhetoric has now become a new way to showcase bias and pedal the ideology that if people don’t do something about the infiltration of other races, it could get out of hands. It’s a subtle way of preaching and inciting hatreds and should carry the same criminal conviction as a hate preacher.  Where the words of a political leader encourage people to do something about a situation, which result in civil or criminal actions, such a political leader could not be removed from the situation, as they laid the foundation for such actions. 

It is political rhetoric that inspires extremists to carry out atrocities that produce shocks to spread fear, show their grievance and hatred for other races.  But it could also be argued that within this political rhetoric is found the bias of the political leaders themselves.  A political leader that’s naturally bias creates division with their rhetoric because they can only give what they have.  Their bias come out of their rhetoric and causes radicalisation. 

If a political leader isn’t bias, then they won’t see immigration as a threat but an opportunity that can be managed through an orderly and respectful process.  Rather, a bias political leader preaches negativity, as if the country does not benefit from migration. Consider how much immigrants pay to live and work in other countries.  Cost of application alone ranges from 100 – 3k per person, and in cases of special service up to 6k. Cost of studying from 10k and above with no recourse to public funds including Health Services.  They work and pay tax like a citizen of the country and yet treated disrespectfully by Political Leaders rhetoric.  All in the name of seen as doing something about immigration, and in some cases bias.  No one going to live in another country is ignorant of the immigration rules that exist in the country.

How many political leaders have actually made clear in their speech the benefits to their countries as a result of immigration.  All they ever talk about is ‘too much immigration’, ‘they are taking our jobs’ and many more.  I’m yet to understand how they’re taking jobs in countries where there are lots of jobs, yet skills shortage? These are some of the lies presented by bias leaders, when in fact, they aren’t true. Yet, they capitalise on the gullibility of their citizens to expand their propaganda and create a hostile environment.

But then also, are we so gullible that we buy-in to what the political leaders say or is it just a case of our own individual bias as well – that we choose to ignore the truth and accept falsehood.  We are bias against other people who don’t look like us, speak like us, act like us and many more.  But do they really need to look like us, be like us or even act like us?  What a boring world that would be – if we all look alike, talk alike, act the same!

I hope we would see events that have happened in the past, as lessons for the future.  I hope we would begin to realise that we all need each other to grow our societies.  Immigration is good and never to be seen as a threat, but an opportunity for economic growth, relationships, friendships, and variety, the spice of life.

Please follow and like us:
error

Right, we have 86 days to go until 31st October – Deal or No Deal.  So, what should we expect in the event of a No Deal?

  • Short term disruptions
  • No trade agreement with the EU and we will also lose associated agreements with about 70 countries.
  • UK returns to the World Trade Organisation (WTO) terms until it agrees new deals.

For British businesses trading with the EU, of which there are 250,000 of them – that would mean new customs and border controls and possibly higher tariffs.

  • Immigration rules apply. It will be up to each country to guarantee the rights of their citizens. 
  • UK stops making £9bn a year contribution to EU budget.
  • Likely price increase for goods and services.

The new prime minister has approved over 6 billion to prepare us for No Deal. It looks like we all need to start preparing too.

Please follow and like us:
error

Out of the many fishes in the ocean, there are only three fishes that can climb trees. They are the Mangrove killifish, Climbing Catfish and the Climbing Gourami. But how do they manage to do so?

The Mangrove Killifish can adjust their gills to live out of the water, such that when the water around the mangroves becomes dry, the Killifish scrambles up the tree and hide until the water comes back.

The Climbing Catfish can grip with its pelvic fin.  Samples of its pelvic fin has been found clinging to rocks, but it’s not stretched enough to think that they could climb trees too. However, the assumption is that they can climb trees.

The Climbing Gourami comes out when the water it lives in dries out and looks for a new home.  As it’s gills are spikey, it is believed it can use them to climb up a tree.

These fishes can therefore be referred to as aqua terrestrial because they can survive under and over waters.  But, does that make them better than the other fishes in the ocean? Do we then fail to acknowledge the existence of the adaptability skills of the other fishes in the ocean because they can’t climb trees? What impact will this have on science and research?

We must remember that these fishes were uniquely formed for a purpose.  For some of them, to be able to survive when the waters they live in dry up and for others, to live in bigger waters that never dry up.  The skills required for these levels of waters therefore differ – hence the ones that can climb trees.

This applies to human beings.  Whilst some humans can climb trees, others cannot. This does not make them less skilled; they’re just not shaped for that purpose.  We were formed differently, with skills and abilities that helps us to adapt to our environments.  It’s no wonder we have musicians, doctors, lawyers, artist, designers, gamers, mathematician, scientists and many more.  So, why should we all be able to climb trees when there are more to do than just climbing trees?

Imagine what would happen if we try to force a solely aqua fish to climb a tree. This is what we do to people, every time, we fail to recognise their uniqueness.   They find it hard to make ends meet or achieve anything.  Their weakness begins to define them because they were forced to climb a tree, when all they know how to do is swim.

It’s about time that we stopped forcing people to climb trees and allow them the freedom to find their own niche. Let’s introduce in schools a more robust curriculum that incorporates subjects showcasing more strengths and career paths.  Employers should become more aware of individual strengths and focus on them than their weaknesses.  The society should allow humans to showcase their talents without feeling stupid.

As Albert Einstein puts it, “everybody is a genius. But if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it will live its whole life believing that it is stupid.”

Please follow and like us:
error

Over the years, we have seen the display of various leadership styles, and have given them names ranging from charismatic to authoritarian. But what exactly is true leadership?

As with most things, leadership is a divisive topic. One that has divided people, and continuing to do so whether at home, work, and constitutionally.  For instance, our decisions on whom to marry, submit to at work and constitutionally are largely based on our understanding of leadership, and in some cases, how the society would react to them.

Thus, what does leadership stand for? The word ‘leadership’ contains two standalone words, ‘leader’ and ‘ship’.  A ‘leader’ is a person in control of a ‘ship’. A ‘ship’ is a large boat for making a journey across the sea. This means that leadership entails controlling a large boat on sea to bring it to safety.  We can therefore use an example of a ‘Captain or Shipmaster’ in this context to help us understand true leadership.

Let’s look at the role of the sea captain.  The sea captain is like your everyday CEO, President or Prime Minister or anyone regarded as a Leader. The Captain doesn’t drive the ship, instead, they oversee everything onboard including the people, systems and processes. And when the ship is docking, the Captain takes control of the ship, placing his hands on the control to bring into the dock.  The Captain therefore not only controls the ‘ship’ but also brings the ‘ship’ to safety.

Sometimes, the Captain delegates tasks to the staff Captain or another Senior Officer in order to develop them (of course with close supervision); preparing them for the future.   Does true leadership therefore involves developing other people so they can grow into the same confidence and aspiration? And by so doing, are we developing true leaders?

Again, the Captain must carry the other crew members along before, in the middle and after the journey to ensure rules are understood and followed adequately. Failure to do so could be devastating. Is this what we see in our politics today?  Are we seeing a situation where the leaders are no longer carrying people along, consequently, leading to disaster? Today, the opinions of the leaders are because of their own decisions, and do not reflect the opinions of the people.

Because the Sea Captain must take care of the different operational matters and navigation, they work closely with these various areas of expertise to gain some understanding of their work and continue to learn and keep abreast of new developments. Without which, it will be difficult for the Sea Captain to bond with the crew and keep them motivated. The Sea Captain knows already that they have talented and skilled team who are integral to the success of their leadership; as such, the need to keep them motivated and show they can relate to their needs, concerns and worries.

Next, the display of emotions in leadership, should this be regarded as weakness?  Absolutely not! Isn’t this why most of our leaders today are hard hearted? We made them so; we did so by saying they’re not allowed to display emotions, when in fact, their display of emotions show greater strength and understanding of people’s needs.  I doubt a Sea Captain will hide from displaying emotions in a sinking ship, knowing that they have the responsibility for the crews and the people on the ship.  The fact that they can be helpless at times isn’t a show of weakness, but that they’re human.  And like every other human, need help and support to take the next step. This also applies to when the ship docks.  An overwhelming emotion of relief.  Who wouldn’t? And who wants hard-hearted leaders?

This takes me nicely to another leadership quality displayed by the Sea Captain, the heart to serve. In case you didn’t know, the Sea Captain must be the last person to leave a ship in difficulties. Morally, they have the responsibility for everyone on the ship; and legally, to ensure their safety comes first. Therefore, the Sea Captain remains until the last person’s left.  In this humane sense, the charm of their leadership continues.  Unfortunately, the preferred leadership style today comes with self sacrificial lambs. The leader is the first to be saved, and thereafter, the people beneath them.

Hence, true leadership isn’t only about charisma, authority etc.  it’s about serving the people, ensuring their safety, welfare, and creating opportunities for them to reach their full potential.

Please follow and like us:
error

Isn’t interesting that we all want a fair, transparent and honest environment? We all want people to be honest with us – but do we truly appreciate honesty? And what exactly does it mean to be honest?

Let’s take the definitions of honesty in both the Oxford and Cambridge dictionary, they both emphasised, ‘trust’. This means that an honest person is one that can be trusted.  But, trusted to do what? Trusted to be reliable, to be true, and just say it as it is.  But then again, how many of us like to hear it as it is?

Not too many I presume. We want people to be honest with us; and get upset when they are.  We want to be honest with people, but we find it hard to accept their honesty.  So, why are we so much after honesty? Why do we ask of people what we aren’t ourselves?

Why do we find it hard to receive honesty?  We want to feedback honesty and openness but react when others feed the same back to us. We emphasise transparency; when we aren’t transparent ourselves.  If the truth be told, none of us is honest, and the only one that’s honest is the one that’s happy to accept honesty in whatever shape or form.  One that approaches honesty with clear mind, most especially, if they have been honest with other people.

So, if truly, we want people to be honest with us, then we need to earn it.  We need to do more than just ask for it; we need to show the willingness to accept honesty from them in return.

Please follow and like us:
error

What’s interesting is that some of these countries have wealth of resources and potentials to drive economic growth in all its forms – and still, are being regarded as undeveloped. This is mainly because they’ve failed to maximise the resources and potentials at their disposal efficiently. They have leaders who are more interested in the display of wealth than creating economic opportunities or developing potentials. The implication being a declining economy, generation that cannot compete on the world’s stage, confuse and lost.

But are these leaders at fault? Not at all, because they were put in the position of power by their own people.  Even though, they’ve become bad realities to them, the people are still happy to keep them on.  Even when, they can see so much failure in strategy, economy recovery, employment and provision of basic amenities, which are leading to loss of future generations, they still vote for them. And, these leaders continue to do nothing about the potentials leaving their countries every day in search for what they’ve failed to provide; in search for how they could explore their potentials. These are generations of these countries now lost in other parts of the world.  It’s a big shame indeed!

What these leaders fail to understand is the importance of identifying and developing their potentials.  The fact that developed countries are seeking out these potentials and developing them, is in fact what make them developed countries.  Their abilities to see and explore potentials in all its form is what make their wealth sustainable.  So, if undeveloped countries are less interested in their own potentials, they are virtually saying they’re happy to remain undeveloped.  They’re happy to lose their future generations.

But are people going to continue to fold their hands, and allow their future generations to be lost again?  To be lost like the ones in the past in circumstances of servitude. Is it time for people to innovate other ways, seek new leadership with potentials for integrity, passion, courage, good judgement and empathy for the people.  A leader that would put the future generations back on the level playing ground. A leader that listens and work with the people to reduce marginalisation, poverty and imbalance in the justice system. A leader that’s interested in untapped potentials and would create opportunities to ensure these potentials are fully maximised.  A leader that truly cares, knows how to pray and not ashamed of weeping…

If these countries would like to avoid the risk of losing their generations and missed opportunities, then, the people must be willing to try new ways, new people, without which, things remain the same.  A little bit of risk is required to drive any change. They can’t continue to throw away potentials because of wrong leaders who couldn’t care less.

Please follow and like us:
error

We were wonderfully created as one human race to expand and fill the earth.  But what did we do? We built walls and reclassified ourselves by race.  We coined out the word ‘race’ to put our stamps on different landmasses, and then created a distinct group of human races based on physical and behavioural transformations.  The distinction that gave rise to racism – the belief in the inferiority and superiority of races.

Whether we accept it or not, there’s only one human race; otherwise, animal race.  A race that continues to expand into different areas of the earth’s landmasses, as they move along them.  In order to live successfully on these landmasses, they would have to learn the relevant adaptation skills and put in place certain practices that differ from landmass to landmass. And for every time they move along the earth, in search of a better life, love and many more, they’ll take with them their learned practices and also try to learn new ones depending on the landmass they settle in.

Unfortunately, some of us see these movements as threats to our existing associations. We prefer our own associations and would not welcome any new ones. We’d do anything to stop the movements including being hostile and racists towards them. What we fail to understand, however, is that we cannot stop people moving along the earth, as that would also have an impact on us. It would mean stopping holidays, explorations, adventures, employments and many more, as we would not be justified entering other people’s landmasses if we’ve prevented them from doing the same.

But this is not who we are. We are freeborn; and enjoy the opportunity to be able to see the world and interact with it. We were so created and that’s why everytime we push people away, other people feel drawn towards them. The reasons for our hostilities, are the reasons other people want to know more about the new associations. Hence, the reason the world is becoming smaller. We are discovering a lot more about the human race and our similarities and anyone who remains a racist soon find themselves living in the gullibility of the past, which is dying out, as each day progresses.

People are finding love around the world, they are looking for new opportunities wherever they can find them, and establishing new friendships that stick closer than their existing ones. These are all signs of a world moving away from the gullibility of the past. So why remain unhappy and isolate ourselves from the beauty of diversity of the human race?

Please follow and like us:
error