Yesterday was an amazing anniversary, in terms of the person involved and his most incredible life work, which caused untold controversy in Victorian times, when first revealed to the world, but has been shaping the ideas of the scientific community around the entire world ever since.

No single person has been as influential about human understanding of life on Earth than English naturalist Charles Robert Darwin – born on 12 February 1809 in Shrewsbury, Shropshire into a wealthy and well-connected family and dying in 1882 -. whose theory of evolution by natural selection is now the unifying theory of the life science.

Darwen explained how the vastly diverse kinds of living things came about, how environmental adaptions occurred, his words the most plausible explanation for the phenomenon of evolution ever recorded. His massive evidence collecting was often based on his own observations and experimentation with natural flora and fauna.

Darwin clearly demonstrated that there is very little real difference between humans and other animals, and that degrees of difference in all things provoked profound reactions, many of which in heated debate to this day. Even were his theory of evolution to be put aside, his lifetime achievements are numerous, doing highly original and brilliant work in fields as diverse as geology, botany, psychology and scientific travel writing among other disciplines.

He was without a doubt one of the most original and influential people throughout science history. One of hisl grandfathers was Josiah Wedgwood – china manufacturer -, the other Erasmus Darwin – a leading 18th century English intellectual. Charles Darwin studied at Edinburgh University – at first for a medical degree – later switching to divinity at Cambridge before, in 1831, joining survey ship HMS Beagle on a 5-year scientific expedition.

Most Europeans of the time believed in creationism and the words of the bible, though Darwin’s reading of  Principles of Geology by Lyell – the author asserting that fossils had to be evidence of ancient life-forms – reinforced Charles beliefs about the animal world. It was the Galapogos Islands where he noticed that individual islands supported their own finches – closely related but subtly different in each case.

Returning to the UK in 1836, Darwin began a two-decade search for the truth, experimenting and observing before, in 1858 jointly announcing – with fellow naturalist Alfred Russell Wallace – their discoveries over 20 years before, one year later Darwin published Origin of Species. This book caused uproar, simply because the contention that humans might just have evolved from apes threatened prevailing society ideas on how the world was created.

The scientist was savagely attacked, by the Church and other scientists, but once he had let his genie out of the bottle, there would never be any going back. He died on 19 April 1882 and was buried in Westminster Abbey, but there is little doubt that, were looking down from on high at the way his ideas have shaped scientific thinking for the last 150 years, he would undoubtedly be extremely pleased.

All women do is complaining and all men are idiots. Well, that’s how it looks like to a lot of people, but why? Why are woman usually the one cleaning after the man? Why are men such slobs at home in the first place? Why aren’t men romantic? Why do woman nag men to death about not being romantic enough?

These questions have been asked all around the world and since people spoke for the first time. First and foremost you have to understand that the brain has change because of human’s physical traits and evolution. For 100,000s of years women had to stay home to protect they’re child especially when they’re pregnant. Woman wouldn’t want to hunt a saber tooth and risk the life of their unborn child, so they stay home a let the men do the hunting. Only in a proximately 50 years, women were known to go out and take charge in the work force, but there is still evolutionary bits left in woman’s (and man’s) brain that stayed with the humans.

In general when it comes to problem solving, men and women have different ways in viewing things. consciously a woman will ask “How do I solve it?” An example that could be used for 1,000s of years; when a mother’s child gets sick, she needs to find the solution to that problem right away, without asking any other questions.

when problem occurs to men they will first ask “Why should I solve it?” Another example that can be used for 1,000s of years; when men go out to hunt for food and risk their lives, they want to know why instead of how first, to make sure the risk is important and worthy.

In modern times where the differences in roles between men and women had blurred significantly but their attempt to solve the problems has not change, so as they attempt to solve everyday challenges subconsciously the woman will only ask “why?” after their attempt. “Why is this happening to me? Why am I even doing this in the first place?” In that attempt the woman will complain because she doesn’t have the answer that she was asking subconsciously, While men in the other hand will ask “how” after their attempt, usually looking like incompetents.

If you go to a woman’s house usually it will be clean, pretty and with lots of decoration while inside of a man’s house usually dirty and barely any decorations whatsoever. The reason behind that is evolution. Remember that for 100,000s of years the men would hunt while the women would stay home. That has affected both sexes up to even today. Men in general do not like to stay home compared to women (they much more rather go fishing, hunting or go play football) Women in general much rather stay home and read a book. Because of evolution, men are more comfortable to go outside of their environment.

Psychologists at Queen Mary, University of London did a research that shows gay men and straight women share a poor sense of direction. The Sun news site says: “Both (women and gay men) are poor at navigating and rely on local landmarks to get around, the study suggests.

They are also slower to take in spatial information than heterosexual men.

This means driving in a strange environment is likely to be more challenging for gay men and women than for straight male motorists.

Psychologists at Queen Mary, University of London, conducted computer-based tests of spatial learning and memory on 140 volunteers recruited through advertisements in newspapers and magazines.

They showed that gay men, straight women and lesbians navigated in much the same way and shared the same weaknesses.

But there were also differences between gay and heterosexual men and straight and lesbian women.

Previous research had already shown that the male myth of women being poor navigators has some bearing on reality.

Men consistently outperform women on tasks requiring navigation and discovering hidden objects.

Women, on the other hand, are more successful in tests requiring them to remember where objects lie.”

This means the female human learned to organize to their surroundings; the human male did not.

As hunters the men tend to be visualized and be systematic; women (who were left in the village) were socializing, tacking care of the children, and doing whatever they can at home. This can explain why men are not as romantic as women would like them to be. Women sexuality is stimulated on touch, and tends to sympathize when it comes to romance. Men sexuality is stimulated more on visualization, and tends to systemize when it comes to romance. This would explain why men are known to be more sex oriented, and woman to be more oriented towards relationships.

It is common knowledge that men and women are different; these differences have caused a great deal of arguments that has ended in terrible circumstances, all because they do not quite understand each other. Men and women both have they’re strong points and weaknesses but together with two different mindsets, they can complete each other, and lets not forget some of the best romantic literature were written by men, and some of the best world leaders were women, we should never judge anyone simply because of their sex.

Food

In my opinion Americans should be the most well prepared nation to experience another country’s normal foods. As I have explained to people here in Hungary, the US was a created nation from the grouping and immigration of other nations. We may have started out a primarily British originated country, but over the years we have been the refuge of other nationalities do to our ‘free’ and sometimes ‘equal’ policies. So when these people came to our country, they brought there foods with them. This naturally morphed our country into having sort of a compilation of foods from different nationalities. In my home we primarily eat a lot of Irish and Italian style cooking (because our family’s cultural back rounds), but I still have eaten from a lot of other styles as well.

So with that said, the normal foods of Hungary I am pretty much well prepared for. The biggest meal of the day is lunch (as opposed to dinner for us). The typical lunch almost always starts with soup, which can range from a chicken to a cabbage base. It is also very common to top off the soup with sour cream or chill pepper. Then is the main coarse of usually meat and a side (Rice or potatoes). And finally some kind of desert, usually cakes. On a comical note, some Hungarian cakes I would classify as cookies, but when explained to me what kind of cake it is in English, they will almost always avoid using the word ‘cookie’. That is because the the word in Hungarian refers to an abnormally small piece of male genitalia. The other meals of the day are more like snacks, and I often find myself eating a sandwich.

 The weirder things that I have seen or eaten are just a little bit harder to get down though. Hungarians like to put toppings on EVERYTHING. The most known instance of this is putting ketchup and mayonnaise on their pizza. Hungarians also eat some of the less desirable parts of animals as well. I have eaten pig ears, pig toes, chicken hearts, and chicken livers. But there are also things like bulls penis, cow eyeballs, horse sausage, and chicken testicles. The absolute weirdest thing I had here was this kind of gelatin that contain the ears a toes of a pig.

Tradition

When I talk about tradition I will mainly speak about holidays. 

Nameday: Since Hungary is a mostly Catholic nation, Hungarians label certain days for saints and certain characters in the bible. If you have the same name as this person, then this is your nameday. Namedays are sort of celebrated as minibirthdays.

Christmas: Christmas in Hungary is usually celebrated on two separate days. Since St. Nickolaus’s nameday is on the 6th of December, he bring small presents and chocolates on that day. But as for the 25th, baby Jesus or an angel brings presents to the good little girls and boys, not Santa.

Easter: For Easter the boys are supposed to sprinkle the girls and then the girl will give them sweets and decorated eggs in return. The fathers will also sprinkle their daughters and give them treats as well.

Independence Day: There are many independence days in Hungary because Hungary was invaded by many different nations. They were invaded by the Mongolians, Turkish, Austrians, Germans, and Russians so they have an Independence Day for each of these times.

Communication

Communication can be classified by two things, spoken language and body language.

Spoken language: The spoken language of Hungary is refereed to as “Magyarul” by Hungarians, but other countries refer to it as some variation of Hungarian. Hungarian is classified as one of the hardest languages in the the world. The setup of this language differs from any other European language, unlike most of the others who are relatively similar. Hungarian is a free language, meaning that you can usually put the words in any order you want and have the meaning usually stay the same. The language also has many suffixes to put on the ending of the word. Asztal means table, while Asztalon means on the table.

Body language: As a boy, when I walk in the room it is customary to shake every other mans hand when entering a room. You also give ‘puszi’ or two kisses on each side of the cheek to the females and very close male friends. Also, any personal direct action must be carried out with eye contact. So when clinking glasses or shaking hands you must keep eye contact or you will come off as rude.

Hefner is a philanthropist, he has heart and a soul. I was going to bash the very idea of internet porn but decided to sway away when I realized, everyone has their sins, and one person is not going to stop that. The only thing you can do, is not to type the site into the search bar. You are the step toward Itsy leaving her maiden name Bitsy for something much larger.

The brain will always bring in those sexual desires, whether it be with man or woman, perhaps even both. You know your own sexuality and you know what you can control and what you cannot. I speak not to quiver the religious or too hex the Atheists. I speak in tongue known to all of us, the tick of our tock. It is what you perceive it to be, Sexual release or blasphemy, It can destroy you or it can help you gain the feeling of love and passion. Everyone takes it differently, It is what it is.

I do not recommend everyone to glance at it. And I know that those are sons and daughters of others, but what we do in our lives our by our own judgment. As I had mentioned before in a previous article we “reflect” differently. The heteros and the homos, the Bi’s and the uncertain.

Love is a wonderful thing and sex can enlighten when used correctly, a bond between lovers, everyone has a fantasy, and everyone will play it in their head. The mentality of some our not wired correctly and it does lead to sickening and unheard of situations, but that is how it was received by one, not the whole multitude, Tick…Tock….Tick….Tock.

The cogs are all spinning in our heads and the visions are dancing erotically within our brains. Remember it is censorship and locks that make the brain want more. Do not dissect the scenes too fast, for you know yourself that Itsy Bitsy has taken a bite of you once before in one way or another

“The controlled, become uncontrollable.”- EFL

“Elegy for My Father, Who Is Not dead” Explication

“Elegy for My Father, Who Is Not Dead” dramatizes the tension between what the father and the child believe is the “after life“. The child believes that death is unavoidable, but he or she is not ready to go just yet, and is not willing to say goodbye to his or her father: “I can’t / just say goodbye,” (14-15) whereas the father rejoices for when death will come; he feels he has lived out his life fully, and that the after life is somewhere they child and father can meet again: “…waving, shouting, Welcome back.” (19) Through conversational diction, the narrator’s overall uncertainty shown through form and situation, the narrator establishes a dubious reflection of what he or she believes will happen in contrast to what the father is “convinced” (19) will happen.
In the first line, the speaker takes a large leap to clearly establish his or her uncertainty of the father’s readiness of death, immediately pulling up a barrier of separation from the future: “One day I’ll lift the telephone / and be told my father’s dead.” (1-2) The speaker uses the separation for two reasons: one, the diction of the line is conversational and honest, so the reader feels they can understand the narrator’s view more easily, and look at it more openly. The second reason is that the “[o]ne day” tells the reader though the speaker knows that the father’s death will happen eventually, he or she is not ready to come to terms with the future death. Using the second reason of

avoidance of the future, the poem becomes a concept of possibilities where whether the death is now of later, the child cannot accept it until he or she is ready for his or her own death. Throughout the rest of the poem, the child uses similar diction, such as: “I think,” (6) or “convinced,”(18) to add to the over-arching uncertainty and honesty of the narrator. The honest, yet unsure diction the narrator uses in the poem is how he or she sorts through the father’s acceptance of death.

For the first half of the poem, the uncertainty of the narrator is contrasted with the sureness of the father, but this pattern shifts on line 13: “I do not think he’s [the speaker’s father] right.” Up to this point, the reader sees the narrator sifting through the father’s reasoning: “In the sureness of his faith, he talks / about the world beyond this world” (3-4). The narrator makes a point to clearly establish differences between what is sure and what isn’t through form. When the narrator is certain, the sentences become shorter, to the point: “I do not think he’s right./ He’s ready. I am not” (13-1). Through the usage of form, the reader structurally sees the shift of the narrator. It is no longer just what the narrator is not sure of, but becomes what he or she believes will not happen; sureness: “I see myself on deck, convinced / his ship’s gone down, while he’s convinced / I’ll see myself on the dock / and waving, shouting, Welcome back” (18-21). This quote reemphasizes the father’s belief that after death, there’s another harbor, one at which he will be reunited with his child, “Welcome back.” On the other hand, the child is “convinced / his ship’s gone down,” (18-19) believing that death is not something to look forward to, but something final, a ship “gone down” (19).

More so that anything, the situation is one of the key factors of “Elegy for My

Father, Who Is Not Dead.” The father, who has now lived out his life, is ready for death: “…he talks / about the world beyond this world / as though his reservations have / been made” (3-6). The child has not lived out his or her life fully, nor is he or she ready to say goodbye to his or her father: “I can’t / just say goodbye as cheerfully / as if he were embarking on a trip / to make my later trip go well” (14-17). What sets this poem apart form the rest is that it’s very concise and truthful. When reading it, the reader understands what the narrator is going through, and at the same time, there are parts where readers become confused, just as the speaker. Sometimes is it someone’s time to die, and they are ready to take that “voyage”, but the others tell them “no”, that they are “embarking on a trip” that will make them leave forever.

One thing the author of the poem does that easily sums up his or her confusion is the title, “Elegy for My Father, Who Is Not dead”. When the reader sees “[e]legy”, he or she thinks of death, but in the second part of the title, “Who Is Not Dead”, confuses the readers because the father isn’t dead yet, but the narrator is writing an elegy, as though he were dead. “Elegy for My Father, Who Is Not dead” strongly emphasizes the differences in belief, a common argument hit on at some point in human life. Tapping into the common issue, the author directs the reader easily onto a course of uncertainty.

We  are  not dumb. We are sentient beings; some of us with the gift of the gab. But that doesn’t account for our not listening to others. We have every right to give others a chance. Many of us find ourselves talking without knowing whether it makes any sense at all to the listener or  not or is the other person listening?

Communication:- A  word,very profound word in the field of education, sports, health etc. Who do you think are at the root to make this understanding functional both in the personal as well as the public front? Yes, it is the teachers. Parents do play a significant role but teachers save us from being too hard-hearted to the world outside where people are screaming their nerves out to be listened.

How good is active listening?

Well, it gives you an idea of the content spoken or makes sense if at all. There are people who listen with a half minded pose making the speaker dubious about having made an impact. The classroom scenario can be a best example. No matter what the age is, the art of active listening must be inculcated in the student right from childhood.

Need for communication skills.

The ubiquitous social problems like child labour, poverty, malnutrition, overindulgence with the physical contact, corruption, unemployment etc is directly proportional to the lack of communication skills in the present day youth. Movies reflective of human ingenuity in projecting life as it is in the mother tongue or the national language best tickle the national sentiment and has no influence over the tongue. When ‘Slumdog Millionaire’ made millions very few went to watch the English version.

Remember Ishaan Avasthi in ‘Taare Zameen Par’ voicing dyslexia in English class where letters conglomerate haphazardly to make no sense at all? That’s the kind of lot passing out of most of the schools and colleges. They either resort  to cheating or pick their father’s pockets.

Incoherence in presenting coherent thoughts in the form of written answers for which they are tested  is one of the reasons they score less. What is undervalued by the present teenagers is the curriculum design which needs to be immensely taken care of by the education system if the world has to see India at her best. Many a times parental pressure,conflicts at home, peer pressure inhibit the blossoming of critical thoughts which naturally thwart the organisational skills in a student. Thanks to the internet that has done more harm than good by allowing the students access prohibited sites and adopt malpractices at an age when they need to keep their sanity at place.

Is it only the school scenario?

No, definitely not. It is the school at the base. Workplace injunctions merit quite a lot of degeneration in the communicational skills written or otherwise. An aspiring candidate may not understand the intent behind  a question out of nervousness or not having been well prepared. An annoying employee  breaking the trust of his/her colleagues or an imposing boss can hover like a vampire in minds making work burdensome and uninteresting. There are thousands of us valuing our reserves to maintain decorum to the satisfaction of others but finally who is at the receiving end when the output turns out to be a mess?

Has technology no role to play?

Yes of course, it does. Here’s the root cause of all other dysfunctional and paralysed communicational skills. It’s the hand and the brain doing the work of  all. Manpower counts nil and companies value people with more of technological skills than communication. It won’t be surprising if Chetan Dube’s IPSoft sees a number of people waving bad-bye to their jobs as expert systems will be capable of ‘self-healing, self-learning and autonomously solving  a majority of the problems that arise on the computer networks.

Summary:

Political leaders, movie hunks, under-qualified teachers apart from others (for the list is endless) have unknowingly contributed to the major disadvantage of the communication skills. What must be kept in mind is that, we are human beings and we have the tongue to execute the intentions our minds envision. To help the world see a better India lets anticipate the following points:

PrimaryLevel to Post- Post Graduate Level:

i.                     Teaching skills: English does have an important role to play and making it mandatory at level one in all schools regional or otherwise will have a scientific effect in the grooming of the child. A child’s power of retention is the best during this stage. Teachers must also take special care to clarify to the parents that the right learning attitude and understanding of the subject will not make the child look down upon them. Instead make them feel proud.

ii.                   Reading skills: The students must make it a habit of reading what is given, aloud with understanding. Reference to a dictionary and practise of writing the mind out can result in good organisational skills. Many a times we fail to read and undertstand due to absent mindedness, sloppiness and make blunders in the bargain. Intelligent reading is crucial to one’s preparatory stage to keep the creative instinct kindling.

iii.                  Writing skills: The purpose and objective of what is being learnt should be made clear in the school as well as the college level. The right use of grammar in ‘nominalisation’ exercises  must be made so functional that the interrelationship of all the subjects is viewed naturally by the student. Special education teachers as well as the primary and secondary level teachers must teach the grammatical rules of avoiding spelling errors to build the natural instinct in the child to refer to the dictionary whenever required. Parents must be made aware that certain skills at certain points of time must be honed in the right way to extract maximum results.

iv.                 Kinesthetic skills: The art of speaking, acting and doing in conformation to the needs of a situation is valued  by all and sundry. An idea or a sense of discrimination goes a long way not only to establish long lasting relationships with others but also solicit managerial guidance for a quick promotion. The art of executing this skill is gifted to all, only we need to know and be aware of how to implement it in our lives.

v.                   Technological and presentation skills. Confidence and knowledge is at play in executing these skills. Amidst unaccustomed customers and corruption rowing the money to escalated levels these two skills work wonders. A techno honcho or a salesman must keep the customer in the mind and target the sophisticated group to drive the point home. Undoubtedly if these two are mastered the world will be at our hand. Given the resources that we have, a necessary input of these two skills can empower labour and expand human resources manifold curtailing unemployment problem and financial crisis.

vi.                 Leadership skills: The void of ‘no-matter-what-you-say-I’ll-do’ mentality can be curbed by powerful motivation and working skills shown by a leader. ‘Practise to preach’then mindfully  becomes the carte blanche to one’s life.

vii.                Organisational skills: Good entrepreneurship lies in making the purpose and the objectives of the company clear to its employees. Clarification not only does justice to one’s natural skills but also help build trust and confidence in each other leading to quality produce. A step by step move develops analytical and logical skills thereby making the employee a rational factor and an exponent to the company’s extra income.

viii.              Interpersonal skills: Be it a teacher, a professor a project manager, the smooth functioning core to the upgradation of the company’s objectives and mission lies in good inter-personal skills. Constant appreciation in some form or the other and reprimands on a similar justifiable front is like tonic to an employee. Ideas, in support of the employees’ welfare is bound to see additional feathers in the company’s cap. No sooner does the factor get it’s required domain to flourish, than all differences amongst company workers melt down to a microscopic level. Clarity of differences in opinions may see an acceleration in the intrapersonal skill graph.

ix.                 Non-Verbal skills: Focussed interactions can be well supplemented at required destinations with the right kinds of gestures, facial expressions, eye contact, hand shakes peppered with patience, courtesy and a bit of curiosity. Under cross cultural contexts women have been seen playing a pivotal role undertaking communication challenges to optimise healthy relationships between two parties. Just as a certain amount of homework is done to buy the newest Ipod or mobile, so also a basic history and understanding of cultural differences is key to see the economic crisis disappear under a steady flow of foreign income.

x.                   Performance Skills: A thorough understanding of the skills mentioned above can be a research paper for a candidate willing to see India shine. The willingness to do and optimism, backed by good oratorical skills, will polish performance skills. Problem solving mentality can be a challenging phase in one’s life amidst complications of the Indian business structure. One’s performance is at stake and if one has the health and the stamina to confront the intelligentsia, one has done one’s job.

The educational institutions affiliated to the Cambridge International Examinations is a booming industry.( In closing), better late than never!

I think the best type of protest is the boycott of products. I believe this because this type of protest is a open one. Everyone can join in the boycott, which harms the economy of the whites. Boycotts like these can, and are probably best done at bus stations as the bus companies were run by wealthy whites who had mostly blacks as their customers. This boycott than of bus companies would than force the whites to give in.

This protest can be also done to shops and restaurants (not on the sheet), which were also a major asset of many whites. Most shops and restaurants were segregated at that time, as the whites thought blacks were unhygenic and unworthy to be a equal to them.

The reason I personally believe that this is also the best form of protest because boycotting is a personall choice. No one can force you to buy something you dont want if you deem it unneccessary. This form of protest also strikes at the heart of the US internal economy so that many people, even the president, will notice, and therefore the strikes will have a very powerfull message that the black people want changes to the enforcement of their rights.

On the other hand though I believe the worst form of protest out of the list would be the sit ins and the Freedom riders. This is because for sit ins, white people made fun of the people who sat in, throwing food on them ect, this isn’t going to get as much attention as the other protests, unless a key newspaper coincidently is there at one of these sit ins. As for the freedom riders, whites would beat blacks for taking their seats. These whites had protection by KKK lawyers, police oficers and judges who often decreased their sentence, if their was even a sentence, by a huge amount.

These forms of protests also could have a legal backfire as well. The whites could file a complaint that their rights were infringed when blacks took white only seats, in other words meaning that whites could sue the blacks. This than combined with the fact that KKK members were mostly in the courts, made sure that blacks had to stay in their seats.

Image via Wikipedia

What’s The Matter With Our Indians?

“Never criticize someone else unless you walk a mile in his moccasins.”
- Lakota Sioux proverb

To begin, let’s examine the title.

Five hundred years after Christopher Columbus (Christophe Colomb, an Italian cartographer of some considerable renown) defrauded his Spanish sponsors into believing that he had discovered India–naming the inhabitants he found “Indians”–many people still call the aboriginal peoples of North America Indians. By the way, Columbus didn’t “discover” the Americas. Being a map maker, he had spoken on many occasions with Norse map makers who had been to North America many times with Norse fishermen who had been visiting the continent for hundreds of years. Thus began the great North American fraud, but more on that later.

The aboriginal people of North America sometimes call themselves Indians, but they aren’t serious about it. African Americans sometimes call themselves “niggahs” too, but as a people they don’t care for the moniker any more than the aboriginals like whites to call them Indians. “Indians” is a bad name given them by ignorant Europeans whose primary purpose in coming to North America was to steal and to conquer. They called it discovering, exploring, trading, but let’s use plain language here. They planned to take as much as possible and give as little as they could get away with. It was the European way of the time.

“Our” is wrong as well. What are called Native Americans in the USA and First Nations in Canada were never conquered, never defeated as a people. Of the hundreds of distinct tribal groups–at least the ones that were not slaughtered to extinction (Beothuk, the original “redskins” that lived in Newfoundland) or decimated as they tried to defend themselves in “Indian wars”–none were truly defeated. They didn’t have any concept of “owning” land, so they were prepared to share it with the newcomers. Since the newcomers themselves were not decimated by such delightful diseases as smallpox that the Europeans delivered, the white skins soon outnumbered the natives. As always, size (of population) matters.

So far as aboriginal peoples of North America are concerned, even today, they are Americans or Canadians only according to citizenship documents they may have needed for travel purposes. They consider themselves citizens of their own nations, as promised them in treaties written for them by English speaking lawyers, in English legalese, explained to them in simple but deceptive language they could understand. The English speakers had no leave to negotiate, so it was a “take it or leave it” situation. This matters because in most of these cultures no one forces another to say “No” to anything and it is considered very rude to be forced into saying “No” yourself by another person. The aboriginals agreed to treaties partly because their culture taught them to be agreeable, to not say “No” to someone who is offering something.

They were tricked into giving up “ownership” of their land (a concept they never had in their culture) by Europeans who promised them homes on land they would control (”reserved” land, thus called reserves or reservations) and rights to fishing and hunting on their traditions lands, free education and a stipend for each person from the Crown each year.

The aboriginals had no concept of “king.” They knew of a Creator that was active in their lives but never seen, so they assumed that the unseen King would also look after them as the Creator did. And, of course, keep promises made in writing.

What were the living conditions? A little perspective is in order here. After the Second World War, representatives of the (white) government of South Africa came to Canada to see how the Canadian government dealt with its “Indian problem.” Then they went home and, following the Canadian pattern, enacted Apartheid. Apartheid was banned in South African years ago when the black skinned people vastly outnumbered the white skins and the world turned against a prejudiced government in South Africa. However, in Canada, the Indian Act still exists, though the government has made promises for many years to remove it. The United Nations has condemned Canada publicly for its apartheid regulations, to no avail. Apartheid still exists, not in South Africa, but in Canada. On “the rez.”

Are “Indians” forced to stay on reservations these days? No, in Canada about half live off their home reservations. But any government benefits come only to those who live on the reserves. If you live off the reserve, even briefly–especially if you are a woman–then move back to the reserve, good luck trying to get your rights to benefits back from the government.

Now about the “What’s The Matter” part of the title. What’s the matter is that North American aboriginal people did not die out, as expected, which is why they were given such a “sweet deal” in the apartheid style treaties. What’s the matter is that the culture of the North American aboriginal people is very, very, very different from the culture that was brought to North America from Europe. If this article were expanded to book length, it would still not be long enough to explain the many differences between the cultures of the Europeans (now white North Americans) and the aboriginals.

What’s the matter is that the white governments of North America never kept the promises they made to the aboriginal peoples in legally drafted and signed treaties they drew up themselves. No aboriginal group was ever offered the chance to draft a possible treaty because they were considered by the Europeans to be inferior people, not quite human in the European sense. Not only were the conditions of the treaties in the style now known as apartheid, the governments didn’t even keep the few promises they made in those treaties. Promises they made up themselves.

We are used to politicians making promises before elections, then forgetting them once the elections are over. But if we have a legal agreement with the government, we expect the government to keep its end of the bargain. The government certainly expects us to keep our end, and is prepared to enforce it with imprisonment if we don’t. The government of Canada has never kept its part of the treaties it agreed to with the aboriginal people it wanted to avoid going to war with. There were no Indian wars in Canada to speak of. The aboriginal peoples had no choice but to let the white skins take over their land, exploit it with farming, with mines, with oil wells, while receiving zero in return for their agreeing to “share” that same land. Their “reserved” land, by coincidence, rarely proved to have any real value, including for hunting the animals they traditionally hunted for food, temporary shelter and clothing.

The “problem” with “our Indians” is that the white people lied, cheated, duped their treaty partners, then refused to keep even the few concessions they made in the treaties they signed to keep the peace. And the white people can’t understand why their “Indians” are upset. Wouldn’t you be upset?

Not only do the aboriginals not have a concept of land ownership (no one would accept ownership of the air, so why should people want to own the land when we can all share?), they don’t have a word for “religion”. Aboriginal people don’t have a problem with belief and faith, with wars and arguments between people who believe in the same God, as whites do. They never ask “Do you believe in God?” Every one I know and have read about believes in a Creator. That’s not the God of the Abrahamic religions (Judaism, Christianity, Islam). The Creator is a part of everything, to them. Including rocks, trees, grass, wheat, bears, snakes and people. In fact, the concept of Creator largely agrees with what physics has proven about atoms being components of everything, about energy and matter being different versions of the same thing, about everything of importance being accessible. Science doesn’t agree with the concept of a supernatural, but the aboriginal people do not blame scientists for their shortsightedness. They accept what others think and choose to believe.

It’s the rest of us non-natives who can’t accept differences, who can’t accept others who don’t believe what we have been taught, who can’t accept that aboriginal people believe what they can feel and experience while whites want to have mysteries based on “faith.”

The problem is not with the people we white North Americans call Indians, but with us white North Americans not caring enough about others to learn about them, to see if what they believe, what they know, how they live, may be better than what we have been taught. We treasure our ignorance and want to preserve it for our children. Those who believe anything radically different from what we have been taught must surely be “inferior,” so may safely be disregarded.

Bill Allin is the author of Turning It Around: Causes and Cures for Today’s Epidemic Social Problems, a guidebook for parents, grandparents and teachers who want to grow children who do not treasure ignorance, but who embrace learning about all people so that world peace can become possible.
Learn more at http://billallin.com

Each one of us is different. All of us cannot have similar view point on every issue. Therefore, whenever the views on a certain issue clash, conflict takes place between the involved parties. There can be only two consequence of any disagreement- either it will get worse or it will get solved. A learned person is the one who comes out of the conflict or resolves the conflict neither by giving in or by giving up. This situation is called a Win-Win situation in a conflict resolution.  That is when both the parties who are involved in a conflict find a middle way so that none of the egos are hurt and the disagreement is solved without any party winning or losing.

In 1976, Thomas Kilman suggested 5 different ways of resolving a conflict:

1.     Accommodation: Accommodation is when one of the parties involved in the conflict withdraws from the argument surrendering in front of the other party. It is to acclimatize to the wishes of the other party involved i.e quietly agreeing to what the other party wishes by sacrificing one’s own wish. If possible, accommodation is the best and the simplest way to resolve any conflict and should be utilized frequently.

2.     Avoidance: As the name explains, Avoidance means avoiding or postponing the conflict. It is not a permanent measure to resolve the conflict. It involves restraining oneself from getting into the argument by the ways like:

a.     Changing the subject of the conflict

b.     Restraining oneself from discussing the differences

c.      Postponing the discussion

d.     Just smiling on countering the issue

e.     Withholding ones feelings to refrain from getting into an argument

3.     Collaboration: Collaboration strategy is for the satisfaction of both the parties involved. The goal is to achieve a win-win situation. It is when both the parties agree to work a way out so that none of the parties are at loss and the mutual agreement is achieved. Ability to listen and understand other parties concern is a very major pre-requisite if the parties want to resolve the conflict through collaboration.

4.     Compromise: Compromise calls for partial rather than a complete satisfaction of both the parties. It involves a give and take agreement where the parties involved find a middle way of reaching the solution to an argument by giving up something for getting something i.e. by doing compromise.

5.     Competition: It is entirely a win-lose situation where one party wins and one looses. Competition is when the parties involved in the conflict wants to win at any cost, neglecting the wishes and feelings of other party. Competition should be the last resort in conflict resolution when no other strategy works out. It is detrimental for the healthy relationships between the two parties even in future.

Conflict is a normal part of life. The skill worth learning should be how to refrain our self from getting into a conflict or how to resolve the conflict in a win- win situation, if by any chance we came across conflict. For a win-win situation to take place, listening ability is really important. It is very much obvious that none of the parties involved in a conflict will ever like to understand the other party’s viewpoint. Therefore a learned man is the one who stops talking and starts listening when a conflict arises. Competition strategy in conflict is never a healthy resort. One should try to resolve it with accommodation, compromise or collaboration for the healthy relationship of the parties involved. Some points to be taken into consideration for resolving a conflict in a win-win situation are:

a.     Getting into the root of the argument and making sure if the issue is worth fighting.

b.     Listen more fight less. Sometimes listening and understanding the facts by one party helps in resolving the conflict escaping long never-ending arguments.

c.      Always try to find a middle path for resolving the conflict instead of directly jumping into competition with each other.

d.     Don’t call large crowd of people to assist you in your conflict resolution rather sort it out using your own conflict resolution skills. Third party interference for decision making is fine as long as it is resolving the conflict in a healthy manner.

e.     Prioritize what is more important: the issue or the relationship with the other party, and then get into a serious argument. The consequences of the conflict can ruin your relationship forever with the other party involved.

f.       Never choose violence as an alternative.

g.     Take the help of a counselor, if required.

Conflict resolution is easy if we try to come across the solution through which both the parties are satisfied. One should know that getting into arguments with each other is a never- ending and a destructive exercise. Rather we should always try to find a solution from which we can constructively come out of the conflict, maintaining healthy relationships with the other person or group.