The Good Life

It is truly sad that there are so many embittered people in the world. And it is even sadder that so many of them are young.

Yet, I see too many of these people who think that a good life should be handed to them on a silver platter, or fall out of the sky into their laps as they lie idle. They are passive participants in life. They expect that life should happen to them.

Although that can occasionally be the outcome, passive people are usually battered around by life’s waves, at the whim of the wind and the currents. They allow themselves to be victims of life rather than champions of it. They are takers rather than givers, pawns rather than players, dreamers rather than doers, doubters rather than optimists.

Dreaming is good. It may even be necessary. But one has to go after those dreams, seize them and make them reality. A rich life is not embodied by wealth or celebrity. But wealth or celebrity need not impede it. A rich life is one that brings satisfaction to one’s sense of self. And there is no better way than to be kind to strangers, giving of one’s self selflessly and forgiving of those who may have intentionally or unintentionally placed obstacles in your way. Forgiveness is a great healer. 

Everyone can make a positive contribution to our world. And no contribution is too small. Be grateful for what one has rather than regretful for what one perceives as lacking. Gratitude is life’s golden chalice. Bitterness and cynicism are life’s poison. They will stifle one, make one shrivel inside and leave one empty.

It has been said that “youth is wasted on the young”. That quote is attributed to several people, including Bernard Shaw and Oscar Wilde. The latter has also claimed “I am not young enough to know everything.” It is a shame that youth denigrates age or that age underestimates youth’s potential. There should be a symbiotic relationship of respect between the two, and then the world might become a better place.

Medical Meltdown

I had a medical meltdown the other day... not about the corona virus, but about the medical system here in general. This is not an issue in Nova Scotia alone however. We are supposed to have universal health care in Canada. For years we did. Our system is often still excellent when it is responding to a crisis in a person’s health – that is in a reactive way. It is not at all good in a proactive way, at least from my experience.

We do not have a doctor here. It does not seem likely that we ever will have one. We would gladly take a nurse practitioner. It is not to be. We have been on a waiting list for several years now. We have not advanced on that list it appears. If we have, the advancement is not meaningful or significant. Part of the problem is availability of doctors outside the dense urban areas. It was the same in Ontario.

When we left Ontario, we gave up a very good family doctor and connexions with many specialists.  However, for years after our doctor there had retired, we were likewise doctorless and on a waiting list that did not seem to be effective. We found a doctor only through a friend’s referral.

It seems to me the answer is fairly simply, more nurse practitioners, greater use of foreign trained doctors and a requirement that people who receive medical training in Canada, which is to a degree subsidized here, have to spend some time in rural medicine, even if it means assigning them, as clergy are often assigned to rural areas.

Here in Nova Scotia we have a community medical clinic nearby. Once it was a hospital, and quite a good one I understand. It no longer is. It still has an Emergency department, when it is staffed and open. Covid has not helped the situation.

My tribulations in relation to the clinic have a long history. I don’t think I have ever been there without stress resulting from the visit. The procedure is never the same twice. One used to be able to get an appointment to see an on duty medical professional. That stopped some time ago, even before Covid. Once I waited three hours to get a referral, and then just as I though my turn was approaching, a sign went up that only emergencies would be seen for the next three hours. I walked out.

Recently, my partner and I both had confirmed appointments for bloodwork at the clinic ten minutes apart. He had booked the appointments online.   Apparently he had spoken on the phone with some doctor, perhaps a nurse, in the process. This person told him not to worry about a requisition; they would look after it. This is a new procedure, possibly arising from the pandemic limits on personal contact.

We arrived at the clinic and my partner went in first, as his appointment was scheduled for ten minutes before mine. We were told on the emailed confirmation form not to enter the clinic until five minutes before our scheduled time.

As my appointed time approached I went in. I was greeted at the door by security and an inquisitor. She said to me, “What are you here for? “Bloodwork”, I said as I passed her my appointment confirmation form. She did not seem to want it. “Where's your requisition?” she asked. I again offered her the paper that said my appointment for 9:20 that morning was confirmed. She asked, “What doctor ordered the bloodwork?” I said “None. I did!  I don't have a doctor. I have an appointment in four minutes. It was booked online.” She said, “Go to the next wicket”.

The next wicket is where one takes a number before sitting down in the waiting room. As I grabbed for the ticket, a woman behind the next screen called out, “Don’t take that! You need a requisition - You'll have to go down to the collaborative practice to get one.” She’d obviously had listened in on the previous conversation.

I went down to the collaborative practice and waited for another several minutes until someone paid attention to my presence! She finally looked up: “Can I help you?” I said, “I need a requisition”. She asked, “For what?” I said “For bloodwork”. “Who's your doctor?” she retorted. I replied, “I don't have one”. She asked, “Do you have an appointment”. “For what?” I said. “To see a doctor about a requisition”, she answered. I said, “No, I have an appointment for bloodwork ten minutes ago. When we booked it online, it did not say I required a requisition.” “Just a minute”, she said with some frustration.

Then a doctor came out and intervened.... He told me to go into his office. The interrogation started again. My blood pressure was rising enough to send a rocket to Venus. “What's it for?” “Why do you need it?” “Who ordered it?” - blah blah blah. If I had a doctor, they would know that I’ve had cancer and am supposed to have my bloodwork taken every year as follow-up.

However, I was fed up. My appointment time had passed anyway and so I stood up. I had been there before for a simple referral and waited more than three hours. I did not want to repeat that. The doctor then said, “Would you like me to start the process for the requisition?”  

I sighed, and said: “No, I am tired of this bloody system” and I walked out.

  

The Baby or the Bath Water

As an adult, with some degree of education and life experience, I cannot believe the childish reaction on Twitter, in the press and from some politicians to the Oprah Winfrey interview of Harry and Meaghan. Someone once said, to put it in perhaps more politically correct terms, “Let them that are without sin cast the first stone.”

Now, I was not there when some unspecified “Senior Royal” uttered  to Harry in private an interest in, or as Harry has interpreted it, a concern about in the colour of the then in vitro baby’s skin. Nor, most likely, were you. I do not know of anyone who would not be curious about such matters in the circumstances. Indeed, it was commonly discussed by people of different races whom I know. I would guess, even for those who dared not voice the question, that it was a matter of curiosity.

This does not make a racist of the individual, let alone of the Institution of Monarchy. One only had to view the on-line Commonwealth Day service at Westminster Abbey on March 8, 2021 to glean that the Royal Family is far from racist. Indeed, they have done more than most other individuals or institutions to improve the lot of marginalized people and to bring together people of all races.

If one could re-write history, what might have happened if Britain had not gone out and colonized the world? Britain has been itself the subject of invasions and colonization throughout its own history: the Scots from Ireland, the Norse, the Romans, the Norman French, and had Hitler be victorious, the Germans. Migration, exploration, and colonization have been the state of the world since time immemorial: e.g. Egypt, Rome, Greece.

Surely some other country would have taken up the rod of colonization, had it not been Britain. Would it have been France, Spain, Portugal, Norway, Holland, Denmark or Germany. All were colonizers. Would it have been China, Russia, the United States or Japan? Would it have been some Middle Eastern or North African Kingdom? Whether it was one or, as was the reality, a combination of these states, the world would certainly have been colonized. And it is being colonized now.

Indeed, we are continuing to colonize. Now, we have reached out into outer space. And so, I suspect, many of you are likely celebrating this achievement.

Migrations are occurring at unprecedented rates caused whether by wars, insurrections, state or religious oppression, famine, economic need or desire, or global climate change. China is colonizing Africa and much of the world through investment and financial aid today. There are always strings attached.

And, sadly, as despicable as it is, slavery has been here too since time immemorial. The human creature is capable of great good and, tragically, of great evil. No race or people have been free from skeleton’s in their collective ancestral closet, and this includes slavery in its various forms: Rome, Greece, Egypt, feudal Europe, most Western countries into the 19^th Century. And slavery or servitude if you prefer, still exists in some countries today. The indigenous peoples of Africa, and North, Central and South America all have had forms of slavery in their past. National and tribal wars persist.

Personally, I am not sure why one should apologize for the sins of one’s fathers (and mothers); but one should learn from them and strive not to repeat them.

A member of the so-called “Republic” in Britain recently held out on Twitter that the United States was the greatest democracy in the last one hundred years. Really? Well then let’s look at that country since 1920. It perpetuated institutional racial segregation, not just systemic discrimination but positive discrimination, well into the 1960s. It currently has unacceptably high rates of poverty and illiteracy for a western democracy. Education and healthcare are out the financial sphere of far too many people in that country. Imprisonment is embarrassingly high and the prisons overflowing. The death penalty is still in place in too many states. Homosexuality is still illegal in some states. Too many are unable to vote due to institutional and financial barriers imposed on them. And most of these failings fall on the shoulders of racialized and marginalized citizens or residents.

Guns are everywhere in that democracy. White Supremacist militias thrive. The country has engaged for years in propping up fascist dictatorships in South and Central America and instituted, with devastating impact on the world, illegal wars, and unproductive economic embargos. It has committed war crimes it won’t acknowledge. It has bullied its neighbours and allies economically. And, recently, it had freely elected one of the most despicable leaders in contemporary world history. The greatest democracy in the world?

Democracy is a vague term. It takes many forms. To hold it out as some immutable and irreproachable form of perfect government and the panacea of world ills is pure folly. The criticism that is being directed at the Monarchy today would be better directed at humanity itself. Let those without fault be critical. But more importantly, let those with fault learn and move on. My granny frequently warned: “Don’t throw out the baby with the bath water”.

Pathetic People

I did not watch the Meagan-Harry interview with the Dowager of Gossip on March 7, 2021. But unfortunately, it has been all over the internet this morning.

Where do I start with poor Meagan and Harry.

Meagan claims that she didn't know that she was expected to curtsey to the Queen when she met her. Yet, at the time, she was engaged to a Senior Member of the Royal Family who knows the Royal protocols well. So then, who's fault was that. Had Harry explained nothing to her? How naïve. 

She claims that an unspecified senior member of the family had voiced concern, or was it simply an interest, in Archie's possible skin colour. Personally, I don't know anyone who wasn't  curious about that. I very much doubt there was concern – possibly amusement by an elder at the prospect of a Black Royal. As for the suggestion that “the Palace” is racist, one only has to view this year’s inspirational Commonwealth Day celebrations on YouTube at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-cqI8-iBkJ4 to glean that this accusation is rubbish.

They claim they had to escape the media attention in Britain and that they sought privacy by moving to the United States – world capital of trash media and invasion of privacy. Then they seek out Hollywood style attention in Netflix and Spotify and whine on very public television to the Queen of media gossip.  

Harry complains about not getting financial support after he quit “the Firm”. I am not sure how many people get paid after they quit a job. I certainly didn’t, after working many more years than Harry has put in as a working Royal. 

Then they complain about no continuing security service by the British Government after they voluntarily move halfway across the globe into the arms of a different country.  Give your heads a shake!

And Harry whines that Daddy, who is a very busy man, won't  talk to him after Harry has attempted to undermine him at every turn. Oh dear, how nasty.

The Duke and Duchess of Netflix! Poor them.

A Grave Subject

A friend has informed me of a Facebook question she posed and the Facebook response she received. The question was why do cemeteries seem to all face the graves east west with the head of the deceased facing east? The answer came from an evangelical Christian.

Now I shall weigh in as a pagan.

It is true that Christian cemeteries (and now by tradition) have faced the graves east-west with the headstone facing east. And so for those believers in the Christian faith, they faced the direction of the assumed arrival of Jesus. And it has been a very delayed arrival indeed.

Jewish cemeteries, I understand, tend to face the graves either in the direction of Jerusalem (which was generally easterly) or the gate of the cemetery. The latter, it seems, is because on the resurrection, which Jews believe in, they would leave the cemetery by the gate!!! However, it seems that one of these two directions is not always the case.

Muslim graves tend to face Mecca, which traditionally lay the graves in a north-eastly direction because Mecca was generally south-eastly.

But much of this tradition comes from pre-Christian times in which the sun was the focal point of beliefs. The sun rises in the east. The dead would witness the sunrise. The sun has been a symbol that other religions have adopted but transformed, often in order to make conversion of “pagans” less of a transition for those people.

So, as graveyards become more secular, it is a tradition that has simply been carried over.

Would a Christian in China have to face west? I know, you will tell me that the world is round; but it would be a much shorter distance to face west.

I believe there are some religions that don’t worry about these directional requirements. Regardless, it is much easier to burn the body; then one doesn't have to worry about whether one is facing east, west, Jerusalem, Mecca or Timbuctoo.

Here endeth the lesson.

A Bad Rap

Snakes have been unfairly characterized since time immemorial. Of course there are those that can be harmful. But where we are, these types of snakes do not currently reside. However, a cottage neighbour of ours has a phobia of these much maligned creatures. She will not go in swimming if one has been spotted in recent weeks.

In the thirty-four years we have been spending summers here, I could probably count the number of times I have sighted a water snake on the fingers of my two hands. I admit that some snakes are particularly nasty looking. But to others there is a certain beauty in their shape, colours and hue. And they serve a very useful ecological purpose: eating mice!

I was saddened, even sickened, recently to hear that this neighbour had without regret killed a large snake that was sunning peacefully on a rock by her cottage shore. What had that snake done to deserve summary execution? Nothing. Her fear is irrational and even she knows this.

Why do so many of us human beings think we can so casually commit such atrocities? We have no more right to life on this planet than these creatures. Certainly, if one is threatened with harm in a real sense, one has a right to take action to preserve one’s health and safety. But wanton destruction of another creature’s life is despicable.

And it seems that this disrespect of nature is rampant. It is human arrogance at its worst. Our sense of entitlement at times disgusts me.

A cottage should be a place where one observes and enjoys nature to the fullest. Once I believe it was. However, sadly, it seems this is no longer the case. It has become a place of excess consumerism. Instead of quietly paddling a kayak or canoe around the water’s edge, one does circles on jetskies or screams in a rubber sleigh in the large wake behind a too powerful boat. Instead of quietly observing the rock formations, the trees on the shoreline with their magnificent roots sculpted by nature, and the variety of creatures that shelter there, people of all ages are racing around in loud and oversized motor boats, oblivious to, or worse uncaring of, the wonders they are disturbing and the harm the are doing.

These days cottagers rarely swim in the lake, have no knowledge of handling a canoe or do not engage in physical activities that actually take skill. Rarely are they found sitting on a dock observing what lies before them. Do they ever see or notice the lovely painted turtles that sun on the fallen and submerged tree trunk, the deer peacefully grazing in the marshy areas, or the frogs peeking out from between the lily pads? Their large boats, noisy and travelling at ridiculous speeds with their destructive wakes drive these wonders away unseen, unobserved.

How sad that they miss the ducklings hiding in the reeds, or the heron standing sentinel by the shore. How sad too that they do not take time to notice and drink in the shadow shapes on the distant shore or the ever-changing sky-scapes. Tragic is their ignorance of the morning mist and the brilliant sky in the dark of night.

If only they would sit quietly and listen to the hooting owl, the howling wolf or the plaintive call of the loon at night, maybe then they would begin to understand that we do not own this planet earth.  At best we are caretakers of it. We are only a small part of a greater eco-sphere. We must learn to respect the whole.

Systemic Discrimination

I was once asked by the Ontario Human Rights Commission staff interviewing me for a job, what “systemic discrimination” was. That was thirty-five years ago. I did not get the job.

There is a lot of talk about systemic discrimination these days. It is largely in the context of racism. Many say we have it here in Canada. Some disagree. It has become a cry of political jousting. But I do not believe people are talking from the same standpoint.  

If one means our society is systemically discriminatory because our laws were, and indeed our very Constitution was fashioned by rich white men, then yes, there may be hidden biases embedded. But tell me how to fix it. Do we toss out Parliament because it is a Caucasian and European invention? What do we replace it with: tribal councils? I have seen nothing that works any better and much that functions far worse.

A wise woman has once stated that hindsight is a poor judge of history. I concur. Taking down statues or changing the names of streets, schools or towns is not the answer. One should not whitewash the past anymore than one should glorify its wrongs.

We know dreadful things have happened throughout time. The witch hunts of the New England colonies and elsewhere, the inquisition, the criminalization of homosexuality, the Jewish pogroms, the enslavement of blacks – and the socially forced servitude of others, the extermination of indigenous people, religious massacres, the expulsion of people from Acadia, Ireland, Scotland and other places. And of course, there has been conquest and colonization since time immemorial: by France of England, by Rome, by Greece, by Islamic countries of Europe, by European countries of the world, and more recently by the United States, and by China. Dreadful things are still happening worldwide and at home. And of course there has been mass migration, which has caused great upheaval, since homo sapiens first arose in the belly of Africa.

In Canada, I agree, there is systemic racism against indigenous people written into our Constitution of 1867. It was somewhat tempered by the embedding of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms into it over one hundred years later; but not perfectly so. We still have a form of apartheid. 

We are conflicted. Did Europeans conquer Canada, or did they settle here under non-European terms? What do these so-called treaties with various tribes mean? I have not seen any conclusive or convincing answer. Sometimes one must accept reality and practicality. One cannot go back in time anymore than the Anglo-Saxons could undo the Norman conquest of 1066, or the ancient Picts could undue the Scots' invasion many centuries earlier. One must go forward. Sometimes “good” does arise from the ashes of “bad”.

One says that our police forces are home to “systemic discrimination”. If one means that the laws and policies around policing are in a system-wide manner filled with discrimination, then I think this is not correct. The problem is not the system. It is, I believe, the people. People are racist, homophobic, anti-Semitic, sexist, xenophobic. What we lack is education. People learn these discriminatory stances at home. They learn them in their churches, and sometimes in their exclusive clubs and schools. We have come a long way to change the laws and the policies. We have failed, however, in the education of the people. We have failed in the recruitment and screening of people in positions of authority: be they law enforcement officers, politicians, preachers, bureaucrats or educators.

From some of these dreadful events, we have learned. And from others we are still learning. But does anyone have a solution or are they just advocating change without knowing what that looks like. The latter is dangerous. There is no consensus, even among the different interest groups.

Another wise old woman, my maternal grandmother, used to say: “Don’t throw out the baby with the bathwater”. When someone, - politician, activist or whoever - can offer a practical solution, I will listen. Until then, from my perspective, we need to work on education. We need to weed out the remaining laws and policies, or perhaps it's only their application, which have an impact on people in a discriminatory fashion. This is not just about racism.