End of Stress for World's Ticking Social Bomb

End of Stress for World's Ticking Social Bomb
Morality is doing what is right, regardless of what we are told;
Religious dogma is doing what we are told, no matter what is right.
- Elka Ruth Enola, Canadian poet, advocate, teacher, opponent of Sharia-based schools

A bit of departure from my usual range of topics for this article as I attempt to explain why so much trouble in every country in the Middle East is actually the best thing that could happen for the future of our world.

I recently finished reading Chasing A Mirage: The Tragic Illusion of an Islamic State, by Tarek Fatah. Fatah is nothing if not blunt about a disease that is infecting every democratic nation in the world. We might call the perpetrators of this disease terrorists, suicide bombers or militant Muslims who have politicized one of the world's great religions for their own personal power or for the power of their leaders. Fatah calls them Islamists. Comparing an Islamist to an ordinary Muslim is like comparing Adolf Hitler to your average Christian. These people all worship(ed) the same God, but they do and did so very differently.
When the great Prophet Muhammed completed setting down the Muslim holy book, known as the Qur'an (or Koran or any number of other English spellings of an Arabic word), the last thing in the book was the clear statement that the book comprised the whole religion of Islam, as given to him by Allah (the Arabic word for God). He made it clear that what he wrote down as messages from Allah was a religion, a way to lead one's life, a belief set, not a political formula. When he died shortly thereafter, struggle began for leadership of the religion, but also for political leadership of all Muslims. Potential leaders then and now don't follow the word of Allah (the Qur'an), the word of Muhammed or the word of any sincere Muslim imams since that time, but instead their own greed for power.
That struggle continues to this day, 1400 years later. It powers terrorism, radical Islamists who lead violent revolutions when they can and use force to oppress or kill their own people when necessary to gain or to hold power over them. As I write this, that powers Moammar Gadhafi's slaughter of his own people in Libya, a country he seized control of and has held total authoritarian control over for 42 years. Gadhafi, like other political leaders of the Arab world (some of whom have been ousted already, some are still struggling to hold power), believes that he holds ultimate power over his people by divine right. Divine right means that he believes he was anointed by Allah.
When demonstrations in Tunisia toppled the president of the country, it troubled world-watchers who expected the Middle East (almost exclusively Arab, except for Persian Iran) to ignite with civil wars virtually overnight. The Tunisian demonstrations had been peaceful, but they were not expected to be so elsewhere. Then hundreds of thousands of Egyptians (to start, they became millions) gathered in Tahrir (liberation) Square, in Cairo. Egyptian demonstrations were notorious for being bloody, even deadly, in the past. This time they were peaceful and President Mubarak resigned (encouraged by his own military). Something had changed.
Demonstrations in other Arab countries have also been peaceful. Libya became violent only when Gadhafi's military fired real bullets at unarmed demonstrators and killed many of them. The only Arab countries where large demonstrations have not happened were in places like Saudi Arabia and Syria, where the military stopped demonstrators quickly and assisted some of them to "disappear" permanently. Within the Arab world, people knew that other Arabs under all other autocratic regimes were also ready to shake off the shackles of oppression by their dictatorial leaders (sometimes also known as "kings," often as presidents-for-life).
Why should we who live in free countries care? Saudi Arabia (home of two of Islam's most important cities, Medina and Mecca and owner of about 20 percent of the world's known oil supplies) has sponsored schools and universities that teach nothing but militant Islamism in every democratic country in the world. The Saudi royal family has spent billions of dollars on these schools, building them and maintaining them, for many years.
These are the schools that teach young people who become suicide bombers, aggressive demonstrators at G8 and G20 summits, political candidates who claim prejudice against Muslims in order to gain enough sympathy to get them elected to political office in many parts of the world. That includes the USA, the UK and Canada where the schools are kept open and active when police try to shut them down by their leaders cry prejudice in the media.
Meanwhile, back in the home countries in the Middle East, the leaders have blamed the US, the UK, Israel and the West in general for all the problems in their respective countries. Especially for poverty of the people, which the leaders have claimed is caused by the capitalist West. Politically left-leaning people in the West believed the claims of the Middle East leaders and the imams of the Islamic schools. In Canada, for example, a country that prides itself on its official multiculturalism, the New Democratic Party has often publicly supported the Islamic schools, claiming prejudice against them in matters such as the wearing of the hijab.
The people, the ordinary citizens of Middle Eastern countries, were apparently not fooled though we didn't know that. They finally admitted to themselves that their problems were caused by their own greedy leaders and not by the US or Israel. Now the people want to throw out the lying militants that have ruled their countries for so many years.
They will succeed, as large masses of people always do eventually. To you, that will mean that Islamist schools and mosques run by militant imams in your country will have their main sources of income (such as oil-rich Saudi Arabia and Iran) dry up. That will likely reduce the risk of terrorist problems in your country considerably. That could change the political climate in your country. Not just for the next few years, but forever.
It might mean that sociopathic industries in the West who have made uncountable billions of dollars by teaching us to fear "terrorists" may finally have to become more ecologically friendly with their environment--with our environment--as we turn our attention to their pollution of the air we breathe and the water we drink and away from "terrorists" who never presented much of a threat to us anyway. As the poor citizens of Middle Eastern countries mature and take control of their own destinies away from power hungry and greedy autocrats, we will mature along with them and take control of our air and water--and of our own lives in many ways--away from industrialists. They had no right to teach fear and materialism to us to distract us from the emotional control they have held over us for decades. By believing them we became emotional slaves to their will, which was always to make huge profits, no matter what effects that had on our lives or our environment.
Let's cheer for the citizens of the Middle East, but not send our militaries there. They don't want us to interfere. They want to feel that they are finally in control of their own lives. If our militaries interfere, people like Gadhafi will slaughter their own people and blame the West for starting civil wars.
Let's learn from them. It seems they are ready to treat us as brothers and sisters after all. We should respond accordingly, with respect.

Bill Allin is the author of Turning It Around: Causes and Cures for Today's Epidemic Social Problems, a guidebook for parents and teachers who want to know how to develop the children in their charge socially and emotionally as well as intellectually and physically. Our worst social problems are caused by people who are underdeveloped or maldeveloped socially and/or emotionally.
Learn more at http://billallin.com/

Intellectual Obesity And Information Diarrhea

The internet and technology associated with it have opened access to quantities of information unparalleled in human history. No emperor of Rome, monarch of the British Empire or ruler of any other empire has ever been able to acquire information the way anyone with a computer can today.

A friend wants to buy a garden tractor. He is able to research many different brands, compare quality and durability within brands of each manufacturer and among the various brands available on the market. Having selected a few for further research, he accesses several blogs and forums to learn about the experiences of users of each and gets warning about what to avoid. Then, trailer behind his van, he can pick up the best buy he has made by playing each seller against the others.

Not long ago I was contacted by a college student from Australia as a source for material she was researching on a topic on which I have expertise. Others, strangers every one and representing six different continents, have contacted me for information and advice about problems they have experienced. To them, I am accessible due to the internet.

However, this unprecedented access to information by millions of people comes at a cost. That cost is time, as a researcher must wade through mountains of information that is more advertising and propaganda than fact, and that takes time. Google can only point to sources, not to the most factual and succinct sources.

Children use the internet to learn about all sorts of topics. The media warn us about the dangers of pornography and adult web sites for kids. And they caution parents to monitor the activity of their children on social sites like Facebook.

But the media can't help children or parents to distinguish between factual information and political propaganda, religious come-ons, sites that outright lie about the products they sell, warranties on products they sell that aren't worth the paper they could be (but aren't) printed on, or "research" that could better be described as personal hobby than oriented to scientific method.

In short, the internet is the greatest source of trash information in human history.
Yet children and adults read this stuff. If it's well written, readers tend to become believers. Form, rather than factual substance, gives it street cred.

As television viewership declines, reading of material on web sites increases dramatically. This contributes to what retired Canadian educator Jim World calls intellectual obesity. Kids and adults can have heads crammed full of misinformation, trivia that may be attractive but serves them no good purpose (think the style and content of supermarket tabloids) and opinions-turned-beliefs on topics about which they have very limited verifiable facts.

In general, schools don't teach how to distinguish between facts, lies and propaganda, whether on the internet or on television. A small part of one course I took years ago focussed on political spin, editorialized news sources and propaganda. It may have been the best time I ever spent in school. Most people never get that experience, so they become prey for the wolves of the internet. Internet wolves know their sociology.

Humans being subject to human nature, the more they know, the more they want to tell others. Rumour and unsubstantiated fact has always been a part of human dialogue. But it could usually be distinguished as rumour and ignored or treated accordingly.

Today we have kids and adults who believe the most outrageous things because they read it on the internet. In North America, over half of all adults use the internet as their primary source for news and information. With a few rare exceptions, most of it is not subjected to scrutiny the way newspaper and television news reports are.

If US President George W. Bush could use newspapers, radio and television to spread lies about weapons of mass destruction that didn't exist in Iraq, then use the lies to start a war, what could happen when the unfiltered internet is used to brainwash people in every country of the world about the lies or misinformation its sources want to spread?

Don't call it information diarrhea if the term offends you. But let's not pretend that the internet is a source of verifiable facts. It's not. Most web sites are supported by companies or organizations with something (product or idea) to sell or individuals who want their ill-considered and often poorly formulated thoughts to be recorded for posterity.

Do we need more laws to protect us? No. The present plethora of unenforced and unenforceable laws on the books now prove that method doesn't work. More laws just make the bad guys get smarter to avert and avoid them.

The only way to protect people from misinformation and religious or political propaganda on a global scale is to teach children how to identify fact from fiction, truth from propaganda, sham from gem. That means changing part of the curriculum in high schools.

The other day I discussed with a friend the twice in my life that I have used skills I learned from two years of trigonometry in high school. I struggle today to comprehend how the average person could use calculus in their lives when they can't tell truth from lie, don't know how to think for themselves and believe everything that is carefully presented as if fact by a politician.

Being able to tell fact and truth from what is not is an essential life skill. If it's not taught in schools, most people will not learn it. They will be potential victims waiting to be victimized. This has always been true, but never more important than in this 21st century.

This world does not need any more victims or people who are too stupid to distinguish between truth and lies. We need to teach every child.

Bill Allin
Turning It Around: Causes and Cures for Today's Epidemic Social Problems, a guidebook for parents and teachers who want to make their children savvy about the ways of the world that could make them victims if they can't protect themselves.
Learn more at http://billallin.com

Good News! What's That?

Times have not become more violent. They have just become more televised.
- Marilyn Manson

I am not one who believes that musicians and other entertainers should not express their opinions publicly, no matter the form of their entertainment or the issue under discussion.

Though I do not listen to the music of Marilyn Manson or appreciate his onstage antics, he is an intelligent man with insights into human nature that go far beyond those of the average person.
Is there more violence in the world today than in the past or is there simply far greater coverage by television networks of tragedies around the world?

Let's begin with wars. The United Nations states that there are fewer wars going on in the world today than ever before in human history. We normally have between 27 and 32 wars ongoing in the world at any given time. We have 24 at the moment. One measurement of what constitutes a war is that more than 10,000 people have died in a partisan conflict (that is, not plain genocide).

Most wars today take place in poorer countries--that is, the general population suffers from poor nutrition and education is not free and widespread among all socioeconomic classes. Many of today's wars are taking place in countries that are either Muslim states or where the population is primarily Muslim. This is mere coincidence because Islam spreads faster among very poor people. Although violence is preached in some mosques, it is also taught (and has been in the past for two millennia) from Christian pulpits.

Studies have verified that war takes place less frequently in countries where the general population has a higher level of education. Violence may be recorded in higher numbers in better educated populations, but that's because much of it goes unrecorded in poorer countries where the general level of education is lower.

Small efforts are taking place in many poor countries where teachers from rich countries volunteer to teach kids who might otherwise receive no education. Governments in rich countries spend far more money in developing resources in poor countries so that their own corporations can exploit those resources than they do in teaching the children of the countries. We could raise the level of general education in the world if governments were more interested in making peace than in developing industries that thrive in war conditions.

Television news teams and news organizations in general love to broadcast records of violence. In Afghanistan, for example, each time a soldier from NATO is killed or injured, it hits the news of the soldier's native country, though almost no news of rebuilding of infrastructure and education systems ever gets air time.

In the news business, no news is bad news. News about violence is much easier to find than news about good events that happen. People who do good works under tough circumstances tend to stay below the news radar because news reporters have too often in the past brought them unpleasant backlashes resulting from exposure. Good news, no matter how welcome by viewers, is harder to find than bad news.

News networks have conditioned us to believe that we want to know bad news. They compete with each other not to show us the good things that happen in our neighbourhoods and our countries, but how tragedy wreaks havoc with lives, families and futures. Tragedy inevitably involves violence in the news business.

Now that half the people in developed countries get their news from the internet, the same sources of news that supply our television stations give us the same goods on their web sites. It's easier for us to read from a network news site than it is to seek out news sources that are more impartial and that provide information about good stuff.

Even without trying, someone who wants to avoid violent and partisan news can't help learning the latest escapades of Britney Spears, for example. But if Muslims in a community work together to raise money to help rebuild a Jewish synagogue that has been damaged by bigotted and violent vandals, few will learn about it.

Whatever sources we use to learn about what is happening in the world, we should keep in mind that they are partisan and they present highly editorialized material. We can also remember that their bias is toward bad news, not good news.

Good news is out there. We need to find it. If that's too hard, we should make some good news ourselves.

Bill Allin
Turning It Around: Causes and Cures for Today's Epidemic Social Problems, a book about how, what and when to teach children what they need to know to lead balanced and confident adult lives that are not poisoned by biased media.
Learn more at http://billallin.com