Author: Brand Smit

SUNDAY, 9 APRIL 2017

Fifty years from now only some history teachers, historians and people who are truly interested in the subject will be able to speak for more than sixty seconds about the Second World War. For most people it will simply have been too long ago, and too many things would have happened in this century that would fill people’s heads.

I mean, how many people today can still converse intelligently for more than thirty seconds about the First World War? How many people during the First World War could talk intelligently for as long as a minute about the Napoleonic wars? And remember: the events of the first two decades of the 1800s were front page news in at least major cities at the time they occurred, and hot topics of discussion around dinner tables and in the streets!

The same question can be asked about the French Revolution at the end of the eighteenth century, or the Protestant Revolution and the religious wars of the sixteenth century. A hundred years after these events, how many people could still have a factual discussion about these events?

Fact is, time moves on. Old history makes way for new history. Veterans of the greatest war for a generation or more die one after another until there is no one left who has experienced that war first-hand. And people’s interests change.

History of which you will only be ignorant today if you are uneducated or living in a cave will in many cases be so obscure in several decades’ time that people will look at you funny if you can indeed have a conversation for more than a minute about it – or, depending on the subject and the decade, a monologue.

______________________

FRIDAY, 7 APRIL 2017

Any sharp observer of a domestic cat’s daily existence will get the impression that the animal lives under a delusion. He clearly believes he is the master of the house, and that all the beds, the couch, the carpet in the living room and the kitchen sink are all his personal belongings. He also reckons it is perfectly acceptable for him to pierce the silence at three o’clock in the morning with a spine-chilling lament simply because he is bored and not a single one of his personal slaves has offered to drag his string across the floor for a mock hunt.

People, on the other hand, have this odd belief that it is good to have an honest view of reality. We believe we must acknowledge our shortcomings. We believe we must recognise if we think something is not reasonable or possible. Since that is our view, we act accordingly. We don’t risk doing certain things. We know our place. We don’t like to talk out of turn.

If domestic cats were more similar to many people, they would be in deep trouble. They would have to recognise the fact that they are extremely vulnerable animals between a quarter and one-twenty-fifth the size of most animals around them – namely humans and other animals like dogs. This more honest view of their reality would lead to cats having significantly diminished egos, sitting quietly in a corner lest someone scold them, and waiting patiently until someone is so gracious to put food out for them.

Cats definitely do not see reality as it really is – they see it as it suits them, and they act accordingly.

If anyone ever tries to make them aware of their delusion, the cat will first yawn with bored contempt, and if he thinks you still don’t get the point he will proceed to rip your new bedding to shreds. You can just imagine how the idea takes shape in the cat’s head: “Honest view of reality? Are you insane? What do you think I am – human?”

The scientist Donald Hoffman said evolution does not favour people with a good understanding of objective reality, but rather those who perceive reality in a way that enables them to survive in a most efficient way.

Clearly, this works very well for at least our cats.

______________________

FRIDAY, 31 MARCH 2017

The main idea of the Social Justice Warrior ideology is not to offend anyone. I recently read it is now offensive to say, “Long time no see” and “No can do” because it apparently offends people still learning English. Alternatively it offends Chinese people who say something similar in Chinese and the warriors consider the English equivalent to be a racist rip-off.

Other examples that can be mentioned include the passenger of a Lyft driver who slammed the driver because he had a Hawaiian hula doll on his dashboard. The man’s ignorance of how insulting the doll was to the “continent of Hawaii” was shocking to the young woman, and she insisted on him removing the offensive decoration without delay. Then there was the student who couldn’t spit enough swear words in the face of the Yale professor whose wife believed students were old enough to decide for themselves what is appropriate and what not when it comes to Halloween outfits. Didn’t the professor and his wife realise that the students didn’t want to decide for themselves whether a Pocahontas costume is racist, the young activist inquired with a face red with rage, as about a hundred other fighters were fast encircling the professor.

Being nice to people is usually a good thing. Not offending anyone is also usually a good thing. So why stop at criticising what people say or how they dress?

Here are a few suggestions for the average Social Justice Warrior who wants to go beyond pedestrian, or for whom being just an average warrior is simply not good enough anymore:

* There are lonely people out there who find it very offensive to see couples holding hands and being affectionate with each other. They are also very sad at the thought that these people will probably be having passionate sex before the end of the day. I suggest the SJ Warrior who wants to go radical should offer to have sex at least once a week with people who can’t seem to get laid on their own steam.

* Many religious people find it extremely offensive that other people don’t adhere to their beliefs or live according to their religious prescriptions. If you want to go beyond average warrior, I suggest you convert to preferably a radical understanding of [any religion of your choice] to avoid offending any radical [adherents of this religion]. [Adherents of certain belief systems] seem to be okay with other people not following their religions, but [I am sure you can find at least one other religion where adherents] also seem to be very touchy on the subject. My suggestion is that the ambitious Social Justice Warrior sets a schedule: Adhering to radical [interpretation of Religion 1] on Mondays to Wednesdays, and adhering to radical [interpretation of Religion 2] on Thursdays to Saturdays. On Sundays the radical warrior may apply to have the day off from Social Justice Central. Or, they could always use this day to have sex with lonely people.

* Less affluent warriors also feel ashamed every time their fellow warriors walk around with a new iPhone or other digital device. The true Social Justice Warrior ought to buy a new digital device for an economically less privileged fellow warrior every time they get themselves a new one. It’s the right thing to do.

* Body-shaming is a terrible social sin and people really ought to be punished severely for it. But people who carry slightly more than the average amount of body weight often feel very sad that they don’t look like other, slimmer warriors. The warrior interested in true social justice ought to start putting their mouths where their words are. Just criticising other people for body-shaming shouldn’t suffice. The true SJW should know what it feels like to be – you know? – not perfect.

______________________

TUESDAY, 21 MARCH 2017

I am part of a long tradition of people who packed up their belongings to seek salvation elsewhere, and in the process, in some cases, changing their names and learning to speak another language.

There was the migration from Europe to Southern Africa in the 1600s and 1700s, a slow drift eastwards from the Cape in the late 1700s and early 1800s, the Great Trek into the interior of South Africa in the 1830s, yet another migration out of Natal back to the interior, my family’s repeated up-and-move 150 years later, and finally my own personal migration to Northeast Asia in the late 1990s.

To add some colour to the thought, a few illustrations:

______________________

TUESDAY, 7 MARCH 2017

I have agreements with people to be present at certain times in certain places to help people with their English studies. Other than that, I keep myself busy with four other activities: language study, other ways to make money, reading, and writing projects.

I can easily spend four to eight hours per day on each of these activities. Because there are only 24 hours in a day, I am forced to spend less time on things than I would prefer to, or less time than what I need to achieve certain goals.

FRIDAY, 17 MARCH 2017

I. The woman at my one school messed up, so my work permit can’t be issued in time. That means I will be on mandatory unpaid leave next week. Of course that’s terrible, but I also thought about what I can do in the extra time I will have because of it.

Then I thought: That money I would have earned next week is not free money – I would have paid for it with my time.

Naturally I need to buy a certain amount of money every month. For this purpose I have standing arrangements to spend a certain amount of my time to buy a fixed amount of money.

The thought also occurred to me that I don’t need the money I would have bought next week for something specific. I can, however, think of a few things I can do with the time I now won’t have to spend. Result: No problem.

II. Point I is an example of how you create your own perception, which then affects your reality. Instead of being upset about the money I would not be getting, I now consider the fact that it wouldn’t have been free money, and I now don’t need to spend any time to buy that money. And seeing that I need time more than I need money, I am happy.

______________________