Success lessons in pottery and fixing cars

SATURDAY, 5 MAY 2018

I have already established the fact and pointed out that as a child I didn’t learn much about money from my parents, just as they didn’t learn much about it from their parents, nor did their parents learn much from theirs, and so on.

Then I realised – just now, if I wanted to learn about pottery, and about engines and cars, I landed with my bum in the proverbial butter. My mother was very competent with a potter’s wheel, and if we showed an interest, she was always eager to teach us. And it was my dad’s responsibility to keep the car we had on the road. At one time, a cheap clunker was all we could afford, so my father had to perform a miracle to restore it back to a working condition. And I was always expected to lend a hand. There were always lessons and instructions – this is how this part works … this is what you call this tool … this is how you fix that.

It is true that I had no interest in pottery or car engines or fixing automobiles. (Especially the latter I have regretted a number of times in my life.) If I had shown an interest, I could have had a strong foundation in place as early as my teenage years for what I might later have pursued as a career. Or something I could have used to make money outside of a formal profession.

My grandparents, and the six or seven generations before them, were cattle farmers. My mother was an artist, and my dad – despite his ambitions to pursue a white-collar profession, was an auto-mechanic. And both my parents had exceptional talent in these two areas.

THURSDAY, 15 NOVEMBER 2018

I seem to look back a lot these days saying I wish my parents taught me about investment and marketing and how to convince more or less social equals to work for you and how to sell a product or a service with confidence. Fact is, they didn’t. But, as I already pointed out in the first part of this text, if I wanted to learn about pottery – and there was a lot to learn, or how to fix cars, even how to buy and restore and old clunker and sell it at a profit (which my father was forced to do because the car was too heavy on gasoline), I couldn’t have asked for better teachers.

It sounds a bit like the child who’s given a sandwich, but who’d rather go hungry because it’s not chicken pie: “I wanted to learn about marketing and advertising and investments, and all my parents could teach me was about pottery and fixing cars!”

In my defence, I can only say that one doesn’t choose your interests when you’re eight years old, or ten or fourteen – you discover them. Plus, it’s not as if I knew at the age of fourteen that in twenty years’ time I would need a working knowledge of investments, and of managing people, and of paid advertising campaigns and how to sell and market a product and service.

______________________

Kanye West and the debate on slavery

FRIDAY, 4 MAY 2018

At the end of April 2018, Kanye West had the social media world in full riot mode over comments he had made on TMZ. He said: “When you hear about slavery for 400 years. For 400 years? That sounds like a choice! Like, you were there for 400 years […]? You know … it’s like, we’re mentally in prison.”

My interpretation: If given a choice between violent death on the spot or being cast in chains, most people would certainly choose the chains. You are then taken away, loaded on a ship, and after a nightmare trip lasting several weeks, you are offloaded on the coast of another continent where you are sold to someone who plans to extract from you the maximum amount of labour possible. Then, after you’ve worked yourself to death, your body is thrown into a shallow grave.

How many choices did these unfortunate people have throughout the process since they were loaded onto the ship? Some imprisoned people rebelled and overwhelmed their abductors. Most probably thought they would try something as soon as they had arrived, and they recovered from the traumatic journey and the abduction leading up to it.

How many of these captured people ultimately did rebel against their situation? Thousands (just on the island known today as Cuba alone there were rebellions recorded in the years 1795, 1798, 1802, 1805, 1812, 1825, 1827, 1829, 1833, 1834, 1835, 1838, 1839–43 and 1844). Why? Some captured and enslaved peoples did not accept their new status. They chose to resist. They were willing to pay a terrible cost if they failed.

Is the fact that thousands resisted a judgment against the millions of slaves who never rebelled? Speaking just for myself … how can I judge them if I – had the dice rolled differently – would probably have been counted among the millions who accepted their new reality?

* * *

No matter how unpleasant a particular fact is, or how terrible the implication, if something is true, it’s not a lie. In the Caribbean, slaves – many of them strong, young men – outnumbered slave owners ten-to-one. Once again, did some slaves rebel? Yes. Did some succeed in their rebellion? Yes.

Why didn’t more slaves rise up? Many factors certainly played a role, including psychological manipulation, the incorporation of slaves into the system of exploitation and suppression of other slaves through selective benefits such as a lighter workload and better food, and also the desire to stay with loved ones rather than putting their lives and their own lives in even more danger.

Can the acceptance of their status and reality be regarded as a choice? It seems cruel to say it was. Piers Morgan is one of the people who argue that cruelty on the part of slave owners made choice impossible. But did thousands of slaves not make the choice to not be slaves anymore? Did thousands of slaves not succeed in regaining their freedom (see the story of the Jamaican Maroons)? The American artist, will.i.am says on Twitter: “There were lots on slaves that revolted & they were lynched or shot & raped, physically, psychologically with spiritual warfare that is still present today … to say that was their choice is to blame it all on our ancestors & it Disrespects their suffering …”

I believe what Kanye West meant, as other people pointed out and were subsequently torn apart for on social media, was that millions of slaves accepted their reality and status because the pathological cruelty of slave owners and authorities at the time had put them in a mental prison. Kanye West himself explained it as follows, in a post that has since been deleted: “The reason why I brought up the 400 years point is because we can’t be mentally imprisoned for another 400 years. We need free thought now.” Someone else on Twitter responded to this by saying, “Saying that if black people had just broke free of ‘mental imprisonment’ they could’ve broken free of physical slavery is disgusting victim blaming. And totally ludicrous, to boot.” To which writer and cartoonist Scott Adams replied: “I believe the proposition on the table is that giving yourself a victim identity is less productive than looking forward.”

I further believe that Kanye West’s intention was that if you continue thinking about yourself in a particular way, it won’t help you to be free and achieve your own potential.

What is actually a positive and constructive message, was incorrectly interpreted as lack of respect for millions of people who suffered under a brutal system. But what did Marcus Garvey mean when he said, “Liberate the minds of men and ultimately you will liberate the bodies of men”? He also said, “We are going to emancipate ourselves from mental slavery, for though others may free the body, none but ourselves can free the mind.” That is surely also what Bob Marley meant when he sang “Emancipate yourselves from mental slavery. None but ourselves can free our minds.” Were Marcus Garvey and Bob Marley accused of insulting slaves? Were they accused of not being sensitive? Were they accused of victim blaming?

Kanye West could probably have expressed himself more clearly. The storm that burst around his head, however, indicates reluctance to try to understand what somebody means and an eagerness to demonise someone who expresses an opinion that doesn’t correspond to what is considered good and correct thinking. Why demonise? Why not just listen and try to understand? Why the rush to circle the wagons and start shooting?

* * *

Does it matter how you think about your life, yourself, and your ability to create your own future? Can it be said that some people are in a mental prison, even if their arms and legs are not physically chained? Suppose you are a victim of something or has been a victim in the past. Does thinking constantly about yourself as a victim help you to move forward? Is it possible that you eventually become a victim of your way of thinking about things?

Was it Kanye West’s intention to offend slaves? Or did he try to say something about outlook on life? Did he try to say that it is better not to think of yourself as a slave but as a free person with the ability to create your own future?

It is certainly a controversial question, but how much truth is in the idea that millions of slaves remained slaves because they accepted their status and reality? (That certainly does not mean, as someone claimed in a quotation in a Huffington Post article, that slaves deserved their misfortune.)

WEDNESDAY, 6 JUNE 2018

White supremacy was a delusion, and accompanying confidence trick. Brown and black peoples and other groups who suffered because of it failed to call the bluff. Or, maybe it would be more accurate to say some black and brown people called white people’s bluff, but not enough of them did so, and when they did, they didn’t get enough support. (See the article, “Did African-American Slaves Rebel?”)

FRIDAY, 7 DECEMBER 2018

On the one hand, you have people who reckon that slaves had a choice – a terrible choice but a choice nevertheless and chose to remain slaves. On the other hand, you have people who say that slaves had no choice about their lives and status. The latter is a much more dreadful thought to me than the former. It is almost similar to claiming that slaves were not like “ordinary” people. Again, an unacceptable thought, not to mention that it may lead to other unpleasant conclusions. But this is the position that people like Piers Morgan, will.i.am and the author of the Huffington Post article take. Do they say that these people did not have a desire to be free, like “other ordinary people”? And if they had a desire to be free, how was it that they didn’t understand about choice?

What would people like Piers Morgan, will.i.am, the author of the Huffington Post article, and thousands of other people on social media who criticised Kanye West have said to slaves who were planning to escape from a plantation? “Don’t be ridiculous – you’re slaves!”? Would they have reprimanded Harriet Tubman and Frederick Douglass to immediately stop their disobedience and return to the plantation? Would they have reminded escaped slaves that as slaves they didn’t have the ability to choose between life as a slave or to possibly die a horrible death if they were recaptured – but if they got away, they would be free?

My view of the matter is that people who had dreams and desires and aspirations, and who strove to live as free people – like other people of their time and certainly all times, were captured and taken away as slaves. Circumstances and exceptional cruelty of slave owners and traders convinced most of these people that their dreams and desires and aspirations were impossible, and they chose to accept their fate. Most of their children, and most of their later descendants also chose to give up on “normal” dreams and desires and aspirations, and to subject themselves to people who acted as masters over their fate.

It’s a tough idea to wrap your mind around, but it’s the only way one can also realise that a certain percentage of captive people did not accept their apparent fate, and indeed rebelled – many of them successfully. If they had never had a choice to either rebel against their status or to accept it, how could they have taken the steps that history proved thousands did?

To celebrate their exceptional bravery and courage should not take away any sympathy for the millions of people who accepted their status, whilst quite possibly being cognizant of the fact that other people did not. It is after all – let’s be honest here – what most people do today: They accept their apparent fate rather than rebel against it as a first step to creating a better life for themselves.

WEDNESDAY, 12 DECEMBER 2018

For me, the real insult lies in the opinion of people like Piers Morgan who say the slaves did not have choice, that they did not have the ability to see that their options were miserable, but that there was a chance to get away.

To say, “Nonsense, they had no choice, no consciousness even of choice,” is in my opinion to strip them of a cardinal aspect of their humanity. It is almost as if it is easier then to understand why they were kept as slaves in the first place: “These people are not like us,” a slave owner could have said to his son on the veranda of their homestead of a plantation in the southern United States, or in the Caribbean in the seventeenth century. “They don’t understand choice. They don’t understand that they can run away, and we may not recapture them.” The boy might have responded: “We’ll probably capture them again, and they know what we’ll do with them.” Then his father would have asked him: “But wouldn’t you have taken the risk if you were a young slave? I think I would have – but that’s because we understand the concept of choice, and because see ourselves as free people. These people don’t think like us. They’re not able to live as free people like you and me.”

Terrible, isn’t it? But this is the implication of what Piers Morgan is saying, and what other people say who support his view.

______________________

The New Left, or Program Yourself – A few remarks

SATURDAY, 28 APRIL 2018

A conflict between two sets of ideas seems to be raging in the West.

On the one hand there are people who say: “This set of beliefs is the truth. That’s all that matters. Anyone who doesn’t agree with us or support our ideology is part of the problem, and is therefore a legitimate target for our protests, insults, and even physical violence.”

This set of ideas is seen by its adherents as theology – beyond debate, and beyond critical analysis, and it is proclaimed with the conviction and passion of missionaries.

On the other side of the conflict are people who reckon that some of the things their “opponents” say about structures that suppress people, and about gender, and identity, and so on are interesting. They go so far as to believe you may end up speaking more intelligently about the nature of human beings, relationships between people and groups, and the nature of power, if you look at these ideas and consider them seriously.

But they also say: “How valuable is it to see yourself as the victim of years, decades, or centuries of oppression? You will probably have to convince half of the population – or more – that you have suffered more in your life than they have, or that they and their ancestors enjoyed structural advantages and opportunities at the expense of you and your ancestors and that they therefore owe you something. Some of the things you say may be true. But does it help you put food on the table? Does it help you to take care of your children, and put a roof over your head and theirs?”

“Focus on your strengths,” they will add. “Focus on what you have and forget about things that won’t help you put food on the table. Focus on the positive; imagine the negatives as just an illusion. Create your own future, from today, by seeing yourself as a creator, not as a victim.”

* * *

I understand – or I think I understand – both sides. I grew up with loyalty to a certain set of beliefs. I was taught that believing was a matter of life and death. I viewed people who didn’t believe like me as blind, ignorant, wrong, and doomed. Even years after deciding to follow reason rather than tradition, I couldn’t completely get away from a certain way of thinking: I still saw myself as a Searcher for the Truth.

Over the last few years, though, I’ve become more attracted to a different set of ideas: practical ideas that can improve anyone’s life who is willing to give it a chance. These ideas include that human beings are programmable – that you actually have the ability to create your own reality. This means that you may have to fool yourself at the beginning. You may have to believe that you can do things you can’t prove you can do. You might need to fake it for a while. But what happens eventually? It starts becoming your reality. And in the end, what may not have been the truth at the beginning, becomes your truth – your new reality.

* * *

In simple terms: If you think of yourself as a victim of structural oppression to whom something is owed, then that will be your daily reality. If you think of yourself as a creator, or a programmer of your own psyche and associated reality, and you focus on what is possible and what you can do, there’s a good chance that you will bring about a better reality for yourself. And seeing that this reality will be built on positive thinking and creative energy, there is no end to what you can accomplish.

Is this to say that you have to ignore inconvenient truths? Not at all. You acknowledge verifiable aspects of reality – maybe you don’t have use of your arms and/or legs, for example, but you also ask: How can I work with this?

* * *

The side insisting that their understanding of affairs is the only truth is blinded by loyalty to their ideology. They believe allegations because the “right” people are accused. They don’t seek evidence because the one who is accused of something is in any case guilty of greater crimes, so it doesn’t matter if they are technically innocent of the particular crime they’re accused of. Good, reasonable arguments are rejected because the “wrong” people make the argument. People who ask questions are accused of helping the “wrong” side with their questions, and of enabling bigger sinners to commit bigger sins.

Principles that have helped people to live better lives since the eighteenth century, to ensure better lives for the maximum number of people, and to examine and comprehend how people and nature function, are also in the line of fire. Principles of scientific research that yield verifiable results are ignored or simply rejected when they don’t reinforce or confirm the accepted ideology. And freedom of speech is seen as an instrument in the hands of the oppressor, rather than a right that everyone has to air his or her opinion, no matter how strange or unpopular that opinion may be.

The fact that there is a raging conflict of ideas in the West is clear for all to see. That one side is shooting themselves in the foot and poking their fingers in their own eyes may not be so obvious.

______________________

What I would like to tell my farmer ancestors

THURSDAY, 5 APRIL 2018

The fact that the members of the Smit-Bornman family – my parents, my two sisters and I – have such a complicated relationship with money is most likely related to the fact that our ancestors were mainly livestock farmers for 250-300 years, and were still farming up to two generations ago, although with more than just cattle.

The difference between a livestock and a crop farmer is a difference not only in lifestyle but in farming technique. The crop farmer needs to know when, what and where to plant, and when to harvest, and will think twice before giving up good land and moving away just because pasture for sheep or cattle is getting harder to find. There’s also a difference in labour management – amongst other things, the crop farmer needs more hands on the farm. Another factor is entrepreneurial spirit – the crop farmer needs to know what fruit and vegetables are in demand, how big the demand is and at what price he has to sell his produce to at least break even.

All of these differences are relevant to understanding my own family’s relationship with money because, as I pointed out, my ancestors were steeped in the culture, lifestyle and profession of cattle farming for centuries.

As far as I could determine, not one of my grandparents knew much about the four things that one should do to become wealthy in the city: selling and marketing, extracting value from the labour of people who are more or less your social equals, advertising your service or product, and re-investing your profits so that your wealth increases – with a little luck. My own parents were more or less fresh from the farm, and they had to get to know the city on their own. They had to observe what other townies were doing, and eventually learned to survive in the city to an adequate degree.

But they also didn’t learn much about the things that make you financially independent. What they learned was that you gained a skill, and then made yourself useful to some company or institution, or to the state. And if you were fortunate, you got a “permanent position”, focused on your “career” for the next forty years, and in the meantime started a family in a middle-class suburb with beautifully mowed lawns and clean, quiet streets.

That is what my parents had learned, and that is what they taught me and my two sisters. Study hard, matriculate from high school, go to university, get a degree, make an impression on some company or institution, and continue the whole cycle.

Only problem is, this model doesn’t work well for everyone. Another thing: Very few people ever become financially independent by selling their time to someone else.

There is surely more than one road to the Promised Land, but knowing how to sell and market, how to extract value from the efforts of people who are at a similar social level than you, how to promote a service or product, and how to invest your profits in such a way that you get richer and richer with a little luck is definitely one way.

My grandparents taught my parents few, if any, of these urban skills, and in turn my parents taught us hardly any of this.

Of course, we have been, and are clever enough to master these things on our own. And if you work out soon enough that it is specifically those things that need to be mastered, and luck is at least a little on your side, you can whisper across the vast plains of the Eastern Cape, the Free State and the old Transvaal to you livestock farming ancestors: Don’t worry about me; I’m flourishing in the city. But if you take too long to master these skills and life starts chafing, you’ll be leading the kind of life in the city about which you’d rather not inform your humble forebears.

______________________

A pattern of doubt and little writing

MONDAY, 12 MARCH 2018

It’s already March, and I’m only on page 14 of this year’s notebook.

I’m not so sure anymore that I have anything left to say. There was a time when I could argue with great confidence. I’m not sure if I can do that now.

Surely it’s got something to do with the fact that I’m in my late forties.

Then I wondered about previous decades. Given that 1998 – my late twenties – was a year of major upheaval in my life, one might have expected to see more writing from that time. I didn’t write much. The year when I turned 37 – 2008, produced a few pieces, but nothing compared to, for example, 2001 or 2003 and 2004. Will 2018 continue this pattern?

I also thought earlier today that this story of being uncertain about the value of what I write is nonsense. “Be prepared to be wrong!” I reminded myself.

A few minutes later, however, I started doubting whether this was such a good approach.

MONDAY, 19 MARCH 2018

If the choice is between DELUSION and DYING LIKE A WORM, I choose DELUSION.

______________________