Can Pupils Learn 'Britishness'?

The short answer is: No, they can't.

You have to 'feel' something about a country to really appreciate it, and that takes time. One can learn the history of it, learn about the lifestyle, the crime, the values, but one can only appreciate what the country truly represents by being part of it for a while. We have to feel comfortable about that particular country, being in alignment with its aims, values and mores, before we can truly feel a part of it and what it represents for us. Otherwise one simply pays lip service to an ideal while feeling exactly the same. Worst still, one will also be caught in a kind of limiting limbo, while hankering after 'home'.

Another important element is the whole concept of 'Britishness'. With its obvious fluidity and continually changing mores, who defines it for whom? Politicians, civil servants, sociologists? What do we leave out of those lessons and what becomes acceptable? Reggae is now an embedded part of the British culture, despite its Jamaican heritage. Will that be part of any information, question or discussion provided, or will it be some outmoded monocultural interpretation of the essence of Britishness? And what about the elements of Britishness that will not make it to the lessons but which are regarded as equally integral to those who adhere to them and value them?

This is a cultural minefield, the effect of an evolving multicultural society, that only very courageous people would dare to tread.

Personal Experience
On a personal note, it took me 10 years after arriving in Britain 40 years ago to actually 'feel' British. Until then, I strongly resisted getting a British passport, despite my ex-husband's constant encouragement, hankering back to Jamaica at every opportunity, with strong loyalties to match. I was the epitome of Lord Tebbit's yardstick for measuring British loyalty. I certainly felt little loyalty to Britain because, during those early years, the only cricket team I ever wanted to win was that of the West Indies!

The main effect of this split loyalty was that every time my British Sikh husband and I travelled anywhere with our family, he and the children would be whisked off to the fast queue while I was held back for a good old search for any ganga I was perceived to have, the dreaded 'weed' I might have carried back with me! Didn't matter that his suitcase could have been full of it too as he passed without scrutiny. I was Jamaican so I would be guilty. I soon learnt to give him all the extra bottles of rum we had that would have attracted attention! Being searched with little respect was so regular as to be ad nauseam. Having a Jamaican passport condemned me to the ritual of immigration racism and handy stereotype which I felt powerless to change. I certainly didn't feel 'British' when I was clearly excluded and being treated differently.

Then one morning 10 years later, I just didn't wish to be Jamaican anymore. I wanted a British passport. I had gradually realised, on subsequent visits back to the homeland, that I had little in common with the folks back 'home'. My perspectives had changed dramatically, yet with a slow realisation. I thought like a Brit and did things like a Brit. Fellow Jamaicans used to point at us in some mirth noting how we 'acted funny'. My children and immediate family also lived in Britain and I felt I truly 'belonged'. Until that Eureka moment of acceptance, that feeling of being at one with one's homeland, any talk of teaching 'Britishness' is sheer pie in the sky.

Today I adore Britain, I enjoy living here, and certainly wouldn't live anywhere else. Yet it took 10 years to have such a contented feeling of confidence and belonging in order to leave Jamaica behind. Sadly, many people never make that transition, depending on their experience. If it is negative, and they feel excluded, they tend to hanker forever after the perfect 'home' they left behind, one that would have been moving on with time, in reality, but had fossilised in their heads in an idealistic way - a situation that tends to have a tragic effect on their children's sense of self, identity and belonging too.

Pupils can learn what a narrow perspective of being 'British' is all about, from a dubious monocultural perspective, but they can never learn what it is to be truly British in the essential emotional terms of appreciation and love in that superficial process. Only time can teach them that. Nothing else.

Do we really need a Black History Month?

As one who has spent the last 14 years promoting multiculturalism from the rooftops in the UK, through the only book on the subject and two annual national diversity awards, I have been pretty saddened this year to hear government ministers and others trumpeting that 'multiculturalism isn't working' or we 'cannot celebrate diversity because it encourages difference' and keeps us separate. But both statements are based upon ignorance and fear which does not really help a diverse community to move forward together.

There is nothing wrong with celebrating diversity or encouraging multiculturalism. What has been terribly wrong is a marked absence of respect on both sides of the cultural divide which makes appreciation difficult. The word 'respect' is glibly shouted by everyone in times of crisis, but it seems to be only in connection with our own needs and viewpoint and very little to do with others. We all seek respect, we feel we are denied it, we accuse each other of not giving it. But in reality, we are simply in love with the idea of the word itself, not its implementation. This could be because we really do not understand the meaning of this important word. Let's take some glaring examples of disrespect.

Origins of Disrespect

1. Exclusive labels: October has a special significance for minorities. As usual, it is Black History Month to celebrate Black heritage and culture. This is not just a showcase but an educational opportunity for the White majority to learn about their minority neighbours. It also empowers Black people to take pride in their identity and thus a wholesome cause for celebration. There are also many pointedly 'Black', 'Asian' or 'Muslim' organisations which were created to encourage a positive identity and to guard against isolation, primarily because of their exclusion from the mainstream. Nothing wrong with that at all. However, how would members of minority groups feel if they suddenly saw signs and promotion for a 'White History Month', 'White Women Forum', the 'White Professional Association' or the 'White Entrepreneurs Club', labels which are clearly racist and exclusive? They would rightfully be up in arms. Where is the sensitivity (respect again) for the pointedly White exclusion in those labels? Yet, in a diverse society, such cultural sensitivities are very important if we are to learn about, value, and appreciate one another.

2. Negative media coverage. Black History Month emerged because of a lack of positive attention to minorities (respect again!) by the media. Minorities in Britain are virtually invisible in every aspect of life except crime. We hear about them ad nauseam in relation to terrorism, guns, gangs and street crime but hardly in any other dimension. The only time you hear about minorities is when something negative is being reported. Black History Month was introduced to counteract that media exclusion, to give much needed positivity and visibility. Yet, there should be no need for a Black History month at all because there is just a flurry of activities in October (and February in the USA), a month saturated with events where everyone tries to be heard, to be significant and valued, and then nothing else for the other 11 months. Like tragic cuckoos, they coo loudly once, then go back inside their clocks for another year. What minorities need is to be treated ordinarily, like the majority community, with balance and value.

For example, the focus on celebrities is pervasive in our society. But where are the minority celebrities and achievers? The ones well known in their communities but are ignored by the mainstream press? Where are the minority guests on chat shows? On discussion panels? On entertainment programmes? Where are the minority writers to give alternative viewpoints? Such an exclusive and racist approach keeps minorities in the public eye as extraordinary and non-contributing beings who are simply taking from society. It uses them in situations that bolster national fear (immigration and crime) while ignoring the vast majority of law abiding, legal citizens quietly playing their part in their communities. Minorities are also used in a cynical way to show national pride abroad, as with the Olympics when multculturalism was suddenly cool and essential, but are largely excluded from the preparations, the promotion and the service contracts.



Lack of Recognition
3. Today I visited the website of a top national newspaper and, of its 24 writers paraded for the public, only one was Black. I won't even mention television and radio because commercial radio, in particular, is dismal when it comes to representation of their diverse audience among radio staff. Is it any wonder that the views in the media are so skewed against minorities when there is a basic lack of recognition for them, with hardly anyone speaking with any cultural knowledge? That is why there is very little sensitivity (respect again) to minority views and feelings. Being on the negative end of any reporting, they are fair game for people seeking sensational headlines without any responsibility for the divisive consquences of their actions. The BBC has been recently accused of racism by a prominent writer in 21st century Britain. That is very sad today. The real worry is that if the BBC is still lagging behind in its own objectives, a service which is supposed to be serving, and representing, the whole community, what can one expect of lesser organisations?

Diversity and multiculturalism can work harmoniously when all parties are prepared to compromise, and accord each other respect. We cannot simply demand respect for ourselves while giving none because no country can thrive with a divided nation. If we really love our country, we strive together to make it a great place to live. However, we cannot respect what we don't understand or appreciate.

Starting from that base, Black History Month should be scrapped and minority heritage and culture celebrated all year round, just like that of the White majority, but under a diversity label. For example, what about Our Diverse Music in January, Our Diverse Literature in February, Arts and Crafts in April, Dance in May, Diverse Foods in June?...You get the drift. It means that, instead of just focusing on minority crime and negative issues around minorities, the White media can actually begin to pay some proportional attention, throughout the year, to the positivity of being a minority, and the rich diversity of our nation, through the cultural exchange of knowledge, particularly encouraging involvement and patronage by White sponsors and patrons. That is the only way to make all people feel included, to engender loyalty and pride, and the main way to change White perception of their Black neighbours.

It is also the only way for all British citizens, whatever their origins, to feel significant, appreciated, valued and included. In effect, to feel respected.

Why Ken Livingstone was Wrong to Apologise for the Slave Trade

The 200th commemorative anniversary of the abolition of the slave trade was marked by Ken Livingstone with a suitably emotional and tearful apology on behalf of London and its part in it. The capital's Mayor wept openly as he told the audience about the atrocities millions had to endure during their transportation from Africa and the legacy of that singular act of inhumanity.

Having thought deeply about it for a few days, I believe he was wrong to apologise.

It is easy to seek current retribution for past wrongs. It has become increasingly fashionable to demand an empty apology, one that applies guilt by proxy, hoping that it will somehow make things better 200 years down the line. But apologies are just words which make the people who utter them feel good and those hearing them feel vindicated, but offer no guarantees of the sincerity to match or the political will to bind those words to future actions. For an astute politician as Mr Livingstone, that was a master stroke of sensitive PR which is bound to garner him a few words of admiration, on top of the expected votes of appreciation.

However, regardless of his feeling of sincerity, apologies are mainly palliatives for those wishing to blame others for their problems in a selective way without really doing anything to change the miserable status quo many of them might still endure today. Apologies do nothing for the endemic racism, the continuing invisibility of minorities in Britain, the embedded inequality between communities, the lack of confidence, pride and self-esteem among Black people, or the alienation felt by their youngsters to the extent that they would wish to continually destroy themselves - the real legacy of slavery through displacement, lack of identity and a lack of self-worth.

There are also other important reasons why there should be no apology for the slave trade, or any other historical atrocity.
First, regardless of how inhuman the act, we cannot take it upon ourselves to apologise for the values and beliefs of people of a bygone age. That is to imply our superiority over their judgement based upon limited knowledge of the reasons for their actions or the mood at the time. They were the best judges of their time because they LIVED in it and based their decisions on the nature of THEIR society, whether it is agreeable to us or not. Just as we are now living in the 21st century and are making decisions based upon what is appropriate to us and the knowledge we have, so every age bases its actions on the beliefs, resources, information and aspirations they have. They behaved in the only way they knew how, until new information, new values, developing reason and being challenged taught them otherwise.

For example, the fact that Bush and Blair were wrong to go into Iraq will not be decided in 200 years time by a different world. We will make that judgement now, based upon our values of what is ethically right and wrong for us as a people in this time and space. If we do not admit any wrongdoing over the tens of thousands of lives lost in that country and the parlous state it is in, should we expect a future American president and a future British prime minister, who might not have any experience of 'terrorists', to publicly apologise to the future Iraqi people for what is happening now? To use their limited judgement in a different era, a different mood and different objectives to judge our actions now? That would be very silly because they would be taking upon themselves authority which they do not possess over our age, dictating to us what they believe to be right by THEIR ethical standards and interpretation of our actions, while ignoring the world we are inhabiting now and its dangers. Not only would they not understand the fears that drove the decision to invade, but they would also deprive us of the right to decide our own destiny. Any apology for Iraq should be made by current leaders, in our time and age, because they carried out the deed and were sure of the reasons why it was necessary, not by some self-righteous people in 200 years using their inappropriate ethics to judge us.

Livingstone broke down in tears as he apologised for his London's role in the transatlantic slave trade. ©Daily Mail

The Value of Each Age
Each period of time has led us, in turn, to this one through exploration, education and innovation. Every era is thus a natural phase in our evolutionary development, teaching us something new every step of the way as mankind advances. No age is better than the other because every age is essential to our unique emotional and professional journey, continuing stages which have brought us to where we are. We cannot judge a past age by our standards because that age did not have our knowledge, beliefs, social mores or resources. We are learning all the time, improving on past actions, with the hope of not repeating the mistakes we make along the way. To use our current knowledge to denigrate the actions of a bygone age and apologise on its behalf is rather arrogant and foolhardy because without the curiosity, experiments and mistakes of that age we would not be where we are now.

Improved information and education ensure our growth, one which should give us a greater understanding of, and appreciation for, the limitations of the past. Seeking apologies for past acts might sound honourable but this is simply applying guilt by proxy, being made purely for appeasement or a superficial notion of 'justice' without any real value. For example, why on earth would I apologise to my best friend now because my great grandfather might have killed her great grandfather? The fact has to be acknowledged by us, but the most important thing is the friendship we now share and the journey we are prepared to make together in the spirit of forgiveness and mutual appreciation. We cannot build anything or improve our lives if we are both in resentment and recrimination mode. Furthermore, apologies do not denote remorse or real regret because the pain, magnitude and true consequences of any act can never be understood by anyone outside that age. They can only be guessed at with compassion.

Apologies are also highly selective. We only apologise for those atrocities which carry the most condemnation or voice. What about all the other violent acts and unjustified killings in history? Who is going to apologise for those? And why are only European peoples being asked for an apology regarding the slave trade? What of the African chiefs and leaders who sold their people in slavery? Who is asking current African leaders for an apology? Or doesn't their part in it matter too?

So Ken has publicly apologised. What now? What is the point of an empty apology without anything else to change the status quo of inequality and disrespect, of resentment and recrimination, of continuing prejudice and discrimination? Apologies are inappropriate in these instances because it is not the apology that is important, but actually moving on in the future being kinder and more understanding people because of what happened. Apologies merely accord history more precedence over the present and future while preventing any real practical changes in perception or respect. The words soon replace the necessity for healing actions.

What matters most now is a clear acknowledgement of past atrocities by everyone, especially the part such acts play in hampering the progress of a community, and a genuine desire to learn from them to prevent repetition and to appreciate the enormous cumulative consequences down the years for those involved. The most important time should be the present, that's all we are guaranteed, no other. Instead of apologies, there should be the sincere desire to make the present and future a much more richer experience for all concerned in a spirit of reconciliation, real equality and genuine justice.

That can only be achieved through greater visibility, affirmation and reinforcement for people of African origin, utilising their talents, appreciating their contribution to British society and encouraging personal education and emotional development. However, along with such external actions, many displaced Africans (like African Caribbeans) need to relinquish the slavery mentality they still have, the lack of self-belief that plague them, the sense of impotence and victimhood which embraces them and the huge barriers to achievement that exist mainly inside their heads which no amount of apologies can ever eradicate.

Why I love Paul Potts and Lewis Hamilton

Two unlikely heroes have emerged from the UK to leave a trail of feel-good feeling strewn across the country in the most unusual way. The first winner of Britain's Got Talent, Paul Potts, moved reality shows to a new level when he was crowned the undisputed king of talent in the programme. Yet he couldn't have been a more unlikely winner at the beginning.

Paul Potts appeared on stage at the audition looking pained, dishevelled and grim-faced to hide his uneven teeth and clearly uncomfortable. Not too attractive, one might say. A former victim of bullying, and clearly lacking in confidence and esteem, he would not have looked out of place as an lost orphan. In a world focusing on beautiful celebrities and spurious interpretations of beauty, Paul would have been firmly placed on the near side of ugly. When he told the judges, including the dreaded Simon Cowell, that he was going to sing opera, they cast unbelievable sideways glances at each other, unable to hide their disbelief. This would be over quickly, they must have thought, red buzzers at the ready. He was way down the audition list towards the end, so they were not in the best of moods. They questioned him briefly and he began.

What followed next was sheer poetry and fantasy, being so unexpected as to be unreal. He began to sing Nessun Dorma and in a few moments the audience had tears rolling down their eyes. I felt goose pimples all over my body and was suddenly very tearful too. He had the most incredible voice I had ever heard. I have never liked opera but I knew from that moment onwards I would follow Paul Potts to any concert he did. His voice was mesmerising. Apparently he spent £12,000 on lessons and thought they were wasted as they didn't lead him to much. But little did he know that he was being prepared for such an amazing moment in his life, that the money was the best investment he did. He brought the house down and went on to win the final. The judges were naturally speechless. At the time of writing, more than 3 million people had seen his video below.



Paul Potts might have won £100,000 and the chance to perform before Her Majesty the Queen, but his win has far greater implications for two important reasons. First, the final show on TV had 12 million viewers, the highest for a long time on such a show. The audience simply lapped up his talent. People obviously want to hear of positive things, not just depressing news of killings and maimings. Second, people love the underdog because they too can live vicariously through those winners, to dream of their big day. British society is also in transition and if people like him can help to remind us of what is beautiful, wholesome and really important, that is no bad thing. Paul Potts, a humble mobile phone salesman with a big dream realised that dream, and, in the process, will be helping an awful lot of people not only to see a new perspective on entertainment, but, most important, a new perspective on their world. Many people will be the richer for it.

It is interesting that in the same week another unlikely champion emerged from Formula One racing. Cheeky, bright, articulate, very talented and the Black champion ever, Lewis Hamilton, raced home to take the sport by storm, both in Europe and in America, seemingly with the greatest of ease. These two amazing young men in their own way offer tremendous inspiration for an awful lot of people in the UK. Most important, Lewis Hamilton and Paul Potts have shown the value of having a dream and being passionate about it, no matter the costs. If you believe badly enough, and dedicate time and effort to it, things will happen in time. Paul got into debt paying for his lessons. His wife must have wondered what on earth it was all about. All that money they could ill afford must have seemed a waste. This week she found out just what was possible. Lewis had started in the sport almost from the toddler stage, with a doting father who held three jobs at one time just to help him move closer to that dream. The stuff of books and legends.

Young men, and women, all over the country now have permission to dream, not just about being famous for being famous, but to realise that dormant talent they night possess and dare not admit before now. For the first time in a very long while it feels truly good to be British. Cheers to Paul Potts and Lewis Hamilton. Good Luck!

Is the British Royal Family Irrelevant?

A member of the Royal Family finally said something about the disappearance of little Madeleine McCann, a full 14 days after she disappeared. Members of this august family are not known for their pronouncements on the public stage, but it has been accepted that when there is a real tragedy, especially on a personal basis, we expect our Royal Family to give a lead, especially in compassion, care and appreciation of the situation. Despite that appalling tragedy for the family, and the incredible amount of attention it has drawn, it took Prince Andrew two weeks to say something, and it wasn't planned either. He departed from his set text in Scotland to be human. One could be cynical and say that, whatever else he was going to pronounce on at that event would not have had so much media coverage, so he made a wise decision!

The Royal Family is rapidly becoming an anachronism in today's classless world of high tech reactions, individual expressiveness and instant soundbites. The Queen still gives out medals and public honours based on the 'British Empire', yet where that empire exists these days is entirely beyond me. Paradoxically, she is head of a commonwealth which is highly multi-racial, yet there is not a single Black person in her entourage, no Black advisers and certainly no Black staff in her palace. Furthermore, this commonwealth is is weighed down under the oppressive symbolism of an unjust 'empire' that obstinately continues to take pride of place in our language, no matter how offensive it is to certain sections of the British community. There is no move to get rid of the archaic, divisive and racist symbolisms which divide her subjects, despite her important role in the commonwealth.


In the dark ages
The problem with the royal Family is that it has not changed with the times. Members are still trying to apply traditional, unequal ways of behaving to a situation which has long dispensed with tradition. Diana offered a golden chance of bringing the monarchy up to date with current expectations, but her demise meant that her sons offer the best hope of change. In a world where blog is king, there is no place for silence from our Royal Family anymore otherwise they rule themselves out of our rapidly advancing world simply by omission. That could explain why, except for the Queen, William and Harry, their popularity has dramatically declined and only a few people turn up to see them at events. We need a caring, expressive Royal family who is not just there for the tourists, but one who, through its own lead, will begin to justify the £10 million per year the public purse has to supply to keep them in the dark ages.

In its present form, the Royal Family is definitely irrelevant, having the trappings without the substance. As a strong Royalist who has no desire to see Britain become a republic, to me it would be nice to see a leading Family which is more in tune with our modern age, more approachable, more inclusive and far more appreciative of the benefits of technology to getting their own message across; one that is no longer guided by a colonial empire but reflecting a modern society based on respect for the individual, regardless of class, race, creed or birth.

A Light of Hope for Madeleine

A LIGHT FOR MADELEINE!



On Thursday 3 May 2007, little Madeleine McCann from the UK was taken from her bedroom, from her parents and her family while on holiday in the Algarve. As a mother myself, I am not sure what I would have done if my child suddenly vanished. It must be the most awful feeling of desolation and impotence, with not knowing being the hardest part. My heart goes out to Kate and Gerry McCann. I hope they find the courage to keep hoping for her return. This candle is my personal tribute and prayer for Madeleine to be found safely.
Love and Faith conquer all.

This candle will burn in hope until Madeliene is returned to her family. May she be protected from all harm by the ocean of love and prayers that surrounds her. Please feel free to leave comments of support. Thank You.

Is it Time to Ditch the Old Ageist Mindset?

In an interview regarding getting older in the New York Times Magazine, Nora Ephron says, with obvious feeling, "Old age can be pitiful. That's why Americans tend to ignore it. First it was ignored. Then it was boosterized by all those people who wrote these stupid books about it. This insistence on the joy of aging, the joy of menopause, the joy of late-life sex — this is all garbage."

That was a real pity because there was no obvious counter interview for ageing put by the NYTM, so this one negative view appeared to speak for all women. Bearing in mind that many women fear ageing too, they would have been left even more depressed and downhearted by those comments. The real tragedy here is that many people look to Nora, a well established writer, for guidance and enlightenment. If there is no 'joy' of being older, what would she advise those who fear the process to do? End their life in midstream to avoid ageing?

I am not sure if the way we age is a cultural/race thing, but most of the Black people I know look fabulous at any age. I remember watching a programme on the BBC not long ago about the history of soul music. They were interviewing some of the soul stars of the 60s and I had to keep reminding myself that these amazing looking people, without a single wrinkle, would have been in their late 60s or 70s. They looked no older than mid-40s. Many of them would have disagreed with Nora that ageing had no joy attached to it, perhaps because ageing comes naturally to them. They don't fret about it!

I also spoke at a conference recently and most of the people there were over 50 and it was difficult to tell their ages. But there was one noticeable thing about all the delegates in the room. They had come to learn career, business and confidence tips for self-improvement and not one person cared about their age in a negative way. Most were boastful about how they looked for their age. These people could show Nora a thing or two about the real joys of ageing. It got me thinking about how we need to change our perception to really appreciate getting older.




Low Mortality Rate
Two hundred years ago, one was likely to die in mid-40s or early 50s. It meant that, from about 35 years old, you were considered as 'old' and expected to do 'old' things with your life, like being seen and not heard, especially if you were a woman. During the 20th century it was quietly assumed that one is young until 40, middle aged until 60 and 'old' after that. Since then we have had a revolution in technology, changing the direction and quality of our lives dramatically, but we are still stuck with the same old ageist mindset on getting older. The result is that employers, programme makers and media producers still fear ageing and treat it in outmoded terms, so much that 18 million people over 50 in the UK, the flower-power baby boomers who liberated their age in the 60s, are still waiting to be treated like their younger counterparts. We have shiny new technological tools working with old decrepit mindsets that should have been educated, along with technology, to expect the unexpected and to think outside the box. People are changing rapidly in their behaviour while many of the power brokers are still stuck back there judging others through their own fears.

I am 59 and I don't have even one wrinkle. I have a beautiful face, beautiful smooth skin and great legs – and I won't even mention my fantastic boobs, which many younger women would die for. I have never used anti-ageing anything. Everything about me is natural, no help from anywhere apart from plain moisturisers. I have never been to a hairdresser in my life as I don't like anyone else's hands doing my hair. I feel and look no less sexy than when I was in my 40s or 30s, with a trail of men, from all ages, trying to attract my attention . Yet I have no wish to be young again. I love the age I am and shout it from the rooftops. I believe that there is nothing more wonderful than having wisdom, experience and intellect along with all those other physical assets. An awesome combination. I boast daily that when I reach 60, 70 and beyond, I will still be as fabulous. There's a 77 year old woman on my MySpace page who does not look a day over 45! You can see the self confidence, sense of pride and wellbeing in her face - the key to getting older. She is clearly enjoying who she is. Nora Ephron, she certainly is not!

Ageing has been a joy for me throughout my life because I have NEVER thought of ageing in negative terms. I have always looked forward to my birthdays and enjoyed every one. I never look for wrinkles, I never worry about how 'old' I am getting. Instead, every day I remind myself that dead people don't age. So, if I am ageing, I am alive.....and hallelujah for that fantastic fact! What is the point of being alive only to tell yourself every day how horrible you look. Might as well end the torture by flagging down the next bus and getting under it!

The Power of Thoughts
For the uninformed, we age first in our heads and our bodies gladly oblige. So if we sit and stare at ourselves every day, bemoaning how OLD we look, that's precisely what we will have more of, because we cannot have positive things while thinking negatively. If we see age as 'garbage' and a joyless existence, that's precisely what we will enjoy. However, when we begin to appreciate our life, ourselves, and the people accompanying us on our journey, the world becomes a magical place and life is a true joy. In line with the effects of new technology on our lives, it is time we lose the old senile, fearful views on ageing.

Currently we have people living until 120+, with many thousands reaching 100 without too much fuss. It needs a new perception of the whole process. It means accepting that, with each new decade of good health and good living, people are going to live longer. As long as we keep using our brains and bodies they will serve us magnificently too. Time to acknowledge that a YOUNG person now is at least up to 45 years, a middle-ager is up to 70 and an older person anything after that, with the markers shifting constantly. Ten years from now, a really old person might be perceived as one who is 85 years and above because many people would be living to 115! Time to do away with limiting age numbers and let people prove themselves, at whatever age they are.

I have a theory I would love to prove because I believe that, from birth, we are brainwashed by society, the media and loved ones into negative expectations around ageing, which then become self-fulfilling prophecies. I would love to experiment with some people on an island where every newborn was told, daily, that they will live forever, and then see what happens. My guess is that, because they would have been told nothing else, they would have nothing to fear and their perception of ageing would be entirely different from ours. Positive ageing would become part of their belief system and they would live like ageless people, regardless of their actual mortality. They won't live forever, but they are likely to live a darn sight longer than the average person does now.

We never completely fulfil our potential till the day we die. It is time to stop using age as the sum of the individual; to stop writing a person off at any point in their life; to let them show us, through the quality of their existence, exactly what age they are. Then we will have freed ourselves from the tyranny of oppressive ageist numbers and really 'live' that precious life we're granted in every sense of the word.

Why it is Difficult to Earn RESPECT

From today, an 18 year old at the start of his adult life will be spending the next 25 years of it in prison in the UK for killing another man who he said paid him no 'respect'. Yet another Black youngster is behind bars, his freedom and potential dramatically cut short like the life of his victim. Bradley Tucker shot unarmed Peter Woodhams after Peter had already been knifed by someone in Tucker's hoodie gang. He lost his life trying to stand up to the bullies.

According to the judge, Bradley "perceived disrespect". He feared loss of face in a challenge that he perceived from the man he killed - a challenge to the standing he felt he had in the eyes of the people whose respect he sought. Gang members tend to talk about getting 'respect' from each other and others. They believe that the negative acts of wounding and killing should encourage even more 'respect' and save face. But they will always fail in getting the desired result because of a misunderstanding of the word respect and a lack of awareness of how it is acquired. Respect is a positive word. It has nothing to do with negativity or negative acts. So one cannot get respect through negative behaviour. One can probably get a temporary feeling of satisfaction and power, but no real respect. There are also six dimensions of the word respect.

At the heart of respect is sensitivity to others and their feelings. By demanding respect, or bullying others into showing it, that goes against the grain of earning that respect because there is no sensitivity. We are all automatically entitled to respect by virtue of being living, thinking human beings. Respect is thus automatic in the first instance for who we are and proclaim to be. However, maintaining that respect is the difficult bit because unless the six dimensions of respect are in place (curiosity, attention, dialogue, sensitivity, empowerment, healing), we are likely to withhold respect from that person and treat them with either contempt or disdain, especially through ignoring them or resisting their attempts to draw our attention or engage in dialogue.


Reasons for Joining Gangs
Most important, real respect begins from the self. If we have no respect for ourselves, we cannot expect it from others either. That would be a difficult thing to do. For example, someone being a murderer, yet expect to be treated as though he hasn't committed a crime, is contradictory. He is a criminal. Until there has been a successful rehabilitation for his action, he will always be perceived in a negative light and denied the respect he seeks.

People join gangs for a variety of reasons but the key one is to foster a sense of belonging, an essential part of the confidence triangle. Most gang members will be low in self-esteem and the stronger ones will have a craving for power. Not being able to use that power in positive ways in the wider world, they will use it negatively to feel better about themselves. In such groups, where the only glue holding members together is the desire to belong and feel wanted, the achievement they crave is likely to come in deviant acts to maintain that feeling of power and desire for 'respect'. Yet that is not the basis to earn respect because there is no self-respect already in place. Instead, members are likely to expect others to like what they reject - themselves. They will also be expecting others to condone negative acts which are likely to be part of their rituals and affirmation process. Yet those very acts merely serve to alienate the wider public and form a dubious base for their efforts to impress other members. In such a negative situation, how could Bradley expect to get the respect that he himself denied others?

Bradley Tucker is another tragic youngster who thinks he can earn respect by force through the maiming and killing of another person. But he lost respect for himself when he became a member of a deviant gang and began his reign of terror against his neighbourhood. He said he only meant to scare his victim. I am inclined to believe him. But what obviously got in the way when he pointed the gun at defenceless Peter Woodhams was that feeling of power again, the sudden realisation of the heady power to snuff out a man's life to prove a point, while momentarily forgetting that he was robbing himself of a life too.

Why Paris Hilton's Sentence is the Right One

Paris Hilton has been sentenced to 45 days in prison for violating her probation terms. She won't be able to choose her prison, there will be no work releases, electronic monitoring or any other concessions. Just a plain old jail with an hour outside her cell each day. Her mother thought the sentence was 'pathetic and disgusting' and her lawyer was 'shocked and surprised' by it. Why is that? What exactly did they expect when Paris kept breaking the law? Is she special in that regard?

If one disobeys the law one can expect retribution. What is the point of having laws which some people ignore or which only work with some types but not others? If the law is not applicable to all, can we expect it to work to society's benefit when we want it to do so? If we give no respect to the law we are actually condoning a lawless society and one dreads to think of the consequences of that. The law can only be effective if it is taken seriously, treated with respect and applied to everyone, whether rich or poor, high or low, famous or unknown. If those three elements are not in place, judges and lawyers might as well pack up and go home.

There are four reasons why this is a just sentence. First, Hilton was caught for alcohol-related reckless driving in 2006, and reckless driving costs lives. Simple and unequivocal. She could have killed someone in her state. She was given 36 months probation, $1500 in fines and mandatory alcohol education. All of which she accepted, especially reporting for enrolment in the education programme. Yet she never did enrol and, worse still, she took to driving again and was stopped twice by police when she was not even supposed to be in her car! She said she didn't know she was banned! Wow!


The Responsibilities of Being Celebrity
Second, Hilton is a celebrity role model, whether she acknowledges that or not. Millions of teens and other women across the world who look up to her would be watching, and even emulating, what she does. Flouting the law is not behaviour to inspire, or even reassure, such fans and followers, neither can she be allowed to disregard her probation by placing herself above it.

Third, for the law to work effectively, its application has to be consistent and perceived to be fair, no matter what the actual reality says. By ignoring whatever Hilton does in her case, a strong message of bias would be sent out to the general public regarding favoured people and their ability to ignore the law. The effect of that kind of action on others who are similarly sentenced would be disastrous, for upholding the law, for respect of it or instilling a sense of fairness in its jurisdiction. Worse of all, it would weaken the legitimacy of that law.

Finally, no one is above the law. Ignoring her actions would have encouraged others to do the same, especially when there are many people caught daily drinking and driving. How would such similar resistance by the public have been contained if it got out of hand? If a celebrity is going to behave as if a legal ruling doesn't apply to her then she must be prepared to take the consequences. One cannot flout the law then expect any mercy because the very act of doing as one pleases is to put one's self outside of its orbit. And if the law ceases to apply to our lives, what kind of state are we heading for?

At least one thing will come out of this. All those on similar probation who might be tempted to do the same will probably think again if they don't want to go to prison. Well done, Judge Sauer! Common sense is beginning to rule at last! There really should be no appeal to waste taxpayer's money any further.

Why Prince William and Kate Were Right to Split

Prince William and Kate Middleton have called it a day. Of course, the media were quite unprepared for it and is in a state of shock. Whom else do they have to train their lens on now? Lean times are certainly ahead. There are also negative comments from disappointed members of the public besotted with the possibility of the proverbial fairy tale-ending. Cutting remarks about him being 'just like his father' and being 'selfish' and 'immature', as though this young man should be living his life just for the benefit of everyone else. William and Kate have done exactly the right thing for them, regardless of which sections of the media, or public soothsayers they have inconvenienced by not staying together till the longed-for coronation. In fact, by their sensible, though sad, action, they have shown that they are quite capable of looking after themself and making the appropriate decisions without too much fanfare. In fact, proving far more mature than some who are behaving otherwise.

For a start, potential partners come into our lives for any of four main reasons: To help us out of a crisis, to teach us something new, to boost our confidence and build us up to face the next stage of our journey, or to be the permanent spouse we seek. The trouble with many single people is that they are so keen to find such a person, they tend to believe every person they meet will be the BIG ONE, the permanent partner. They burden every meeting and relationship with that expectation and are then surprised when it doesn't work out. Instead of allowing the friendship to evolve in its own way, they expect a lot which is then not delivered and rapid disappointment follows.

Secondly, just because William is a Royal prince does not excuse him from the processes of love and from any break-ups that might ensue with any person he takes up with. Having been together for a while, which encouraged people to take them for granted and make assumptions, does not mean they would be permanent either. Nothing is certain when it comes to affairs of the heart, especially with the Royal Family which has already set a very bad precedence in the consistent failure of its relationships. At least this is not another marriage on the rocks. There is room for review and regrouping, if they wish that. Kate Middleton is a remarkable, loyal, warm and discreet individual who seems perfect for the job but any relationship has to be about two people's needs being fulfilled, not just one.


Steady Anchor of Stability
Though the couple might be close in age, by her behaviour it is clear that Kate is far more mature in herself and desires, and perhaps was ready for more stability and permanence, than William was prepared for. Perhaps Kate has been there for reasons 2 and 3, as a steady anchor for William, to teach him new things and to boost his confidence and maturity for the next important stage of his life, rather than be the next queen. Or, it could be that William needs time out to live in his own way, away from her, to actually appreciate her value, and his role, if he is to make the right decisions for his future. No one can do that for him. If he doesn't feel ready for any commitment, maintaining the relationship just for show, in order to please others or because he is Royal, will only lead to the same results that has been had before and much unhappiness all round.

William deserves to have the life he wants until he is ready to settle down, particularly with the demanding role ahead of him. He seems to be a very intelligent and caring person. It is so sad and meanspirited when this young man is being compared to his father every time he does something which does not suit the expectations of others. William is only 24 and needs to develop into his own person without being compared to his father in every action he takes. He needs room to breathe and has a lifetime ahead of him to be like his father! Just now, William wants to be like every other youngster: to have an enjoyable life and to sample its attractions while he is young before he settles into responsibilities.

This break perhaps merely reflects a different stage in the couple's friendship. After having time to themself at college, they probably found the reality of his position and responsibilities in the wider world a difficult period of adjustment, which they probably need time to appreciate and change direction. Kate Middleton might yet be the right woman for William, after a spell away from each other, and meeting other people. But only HE can find that out, in his own time, not well meaning others who like to use their narrow expectations to dictate what they think is best for him.

Why Don Imus Was Right to be Sacked

The CBS popular radio announcer, Don Imus, who enjoys over two million listeners on the radio station WFAN, called the Black members of the Rutgers University team "nappy headed hoes". As usual, he does not believe he is racist and leading Black leaders called for him to be fired. As a Black person, normally I would be against anyone losing their job or livelihood because of a racist remark, no matter how abhorrent. But this case is different for three main reasons.

First, Imus has had thirty years in his job, building up a sizable audience for his morning show; people who, no doubt, look to him for guidance and being a role model. One would have thought that those years in the job would have given him a sensitivity for the feelings of his audience and a respect for the listeners who keep him there. One would also have expected that such long years would have built up an expertise which fosters the kind of responsibility and respect we would expect from such an experienced talk show host.

Yet, his critics say that during his thirty years he has shown a 'pattern of racially charged remarks' which he retorted were either 'misinterpreted' or 'satirical'. Regardless of misinterpretation, or otherwise, they were still racist, yet he did not desist. But racist remarks of any kind have no place in the vocabulary of someone on the public stage who is supposed to be serving a diverse audience. Being in a position of authority, especially with the privilege of being White in a majority White community, carries certain responsibilities as well as rights. We cannot attack people who are weak, or powerless, then say we are not bullies. Just as one cannot continue to use racist language down the years, aimed at vulnerable members of the community, then say one is not racist. It's a contradiction in terms. If we use the language of the bully, we are bullies, and if we use the language of the racist, we are racist. We cannot use the language of hate if we aspire to love. The two are inompatible.


Language Conveys Meaning
Second, the language we use defines who we are. For example, the word 'boredom' does not exist in my vocabulary. I have never used it in my lifetime to describe my feelings because I have too much to do in any one day and cannot find the time to be bored at any point. The word NO does not exist for me either, especially when trying to achieve something, because I believe everything is possible. Someone else who does not believe that will think 'no' first before they look at the possibilities. Moreover, I have never thought of saying anything racist about another person because I value every person and treat them with respect until they show me otherwise. So language is not just something we learn to use for communication or our benefit; not just something we pluck out of the air at random. Language represents who we are, body and soul, and the meanings we wish to convey.

We cannot use negative language and achieve positive aims, neither can we put down others and expect to make friends with them. Language reflects our identity, ethics, beliefs, who we are and aspire to be. We give life to what we believe through language. We would NEVER use words we are not comfortable with unless we are coerced. We also stamp our own style on our use of words so much that when something comes from us which doesn't sound in line with our personalities, not the 'normal' thing we would say, people begin to wonder. Language comes from the heart and the head to reflect exactly who we are and what we value. So when we use negative terms against others, we are actually demonstrating our fears, our insecurities, our low self-esteem, prejudices and, most of all, our feeling of power over them. We have the power to say such remarks, so we do it. Otherwise, why would this man, who has a job many would die for, wish to say something so awful about vulnerable women far away he didn't even know - comparing Black beauty to White beauty which is culturally incomparable.

Finally, his responsibilities. Don Imus has a radio programme which goes out to a diverse community with sponsors from that community. When he disparagingly talks about certain people in such racist ways, what message is he giving to his Black listeners about their worth and value? Most important, how does he expect those listeners to react who thinks him worthy enough for their time in tuning in to his programme? Sometimes, as we get so bloated with our own power, we forget about respect to the people who put us where we are. The word RESPECT has sensitivity at its core. Where was Imus' sensitivity to his diverse audience?

However, the comment which summed up the real effect of Don's offensive remarks came from Senator Barack Obama about his children and went straight to the heart of the issue with its simplicity. "He didn't just cross the line," Obama said in an interview. "He fed into some of the worst stereotypes that my two young daughters are having to deal with today in America. The notions that as young African-American women.....that somehow makes them less beautiful or less important. It was a degrading comment...."

Imus abused the authority placed in him as a public announcer, one who is supposed to be serving ALL members of his public, not just the White section of it. If he decides to make racist fodder out of others, he should know that carries consequences. By showing little sensitivity to his diverse audience and supporters with those awful sexist and racist remarks, he effectively relinquished the authority vested in him to act in an unbiased way and forfeited that respect. It depends on the society we seek if we can actually condone such discriminatory behaviour in the 21st century. The world has moved on a lot with our global interaction, a point that certain old hands are ignoring and resisting until they are foced to acknowledge it. Perhaps for the first time in his life, Don Imus is learning that certain actions have consequences, and free speech actually carries responsibilities for ensuring the rights of everyone.

The Real Value of Barack Obama's Presidential Bid

The first time I heard of this man he was touring Kenya, his ancestral village, and everyone there was gushing about him, treating him like a king returning home. This was late 2006. I had never heard of Barack Obama before, didn't realise he was an American senator, also didn't realise how few African-American senators there were, but was not at all surprised at the hero-worship back there.

Black people do not have too many wholesome heroes to inspire them. Many of the latter day heroes tend to come from the music field and what a dreadful example of drugs, drinks and rock and roll many of them are setting; not to mention the distasteful words in rap music which show little respect to women, and others, for that matter. Even when there is clear genius among us, we have a way of robbing it of its effect (Michael Jackson comes to mind?). I adore that man's music yet feel so disheartened at the way he has changed himself in such a sad way, detracting from the very talent we are trying to appreciate.

Starved of Black role models, many people despair of ever being reflected significantly while clinging to people like Oprah Winfrey and Oscar winners Denzel Washington and Halle Berry for some reflected glory. Minorities everywhere live vicariously through role models because of the absence of homegrown heroes, and Blacks in the UK are no different. In fact, when Colin Powell first became a general, one letter writer to the Voice newspaper noted drily that, "Had General Powell been in Britain he would have been Corporal Powell!"



No Inspiration for Black Teenagers
I have never forgotten that because it struck a chord of relevance and recognition which, 20 years down the line, is still resonating loudly with the invisibility of minorities in public positions of power and responsibility. There just aren't any to inspire the teenagers coming up; to reinforce their presence and value. Many of those in place are 'yes' people, beholden to the political party which put them there, securing their positions while being afraid to rock the boat, without backbones to be individual and to make that real difference, as they are gradually swallowed up by both the Establishment and the 'system' and lose their voice.

You can tell a lot about the government of a country in how they seek to unite the people and be representative of them. If the people associating with Britain's government and monarchy are anything to go by, the is an all-White country! You will not see a Black person of substance or expertise around the them in Britain, unless it is a bodyguard! Yet the Queen is the head of a multicultural Commonwealth and loves to boast about that when she visits them. Obviously charity does not reach as far as our home! This is very disappointing to me because, with Britain's history, and the way it trumpets regularly about justice and fairness, one would have thought it would have led the field in recognising diversity and its own multicultural population in more visible and tangible ways. As a staunch Briton, who love this country, I find that so sad.

That's why America has always had a special place for Black people everywhere because, through the relentless advance of our African-American brothers and sisters in all walks of public life, we too can live vicariously and pretend we have similar opportunities. Our successful African-American brothers and sisters allow us to dream, to imagine, to luxuriate in what is possible. We feel as though we share that success because it looks so easy, and we have so little. However, we have always acknowledged that the supreme position of president was always closed to everyone except White males. Not any more, it isn't. Thanks to one man who dared to dream, we can share that too in believing the sky is truly our limit.


Tremendous Self-Belief
The real value of Barack Obama lies not just in the possibility of him creating history on an unimagined scale. It actually lies in what he represents to Black people everywhere; the fulfilment of the impossible. As Nelson Mandela once echoed in a speech, by his fearless action and tremendous self-belief, Barack gives permission to all of us to dream too in a way which wouldn't be understood by a White person in any number of years, because they take success and status for granted. White role models are limitless, proliferating every minute of every day to become commonplace and taken for granted. When a White person says he'll be a millionaire by the time he is 30, that is almost a fact beyond dispute. There are too many millionaires around to suggest otherwise. When a Black person says it, we wonder from what basis. How are they going to do it with the lack of role models to inspire them and the lack of precedence to motivate them? A superhuman task. It then becomes an uphill struggle as they contend with self-doubt, the scepticism of their peers and the discriminatory practices around them.

However, regardless of whether he gets into the White House or not, the presence of Barack Obama in the American presidential race has already turned a new chapter for every African-American male by showing them their own worth and power. Barack has taken the baton from Colin Powell and is proving to them that the humblest person, without wealth or whiteness, can attain the highest office. And it must begin to do something positive to their thinking and aspirations. I do hope so.

The heartfelt words from this donor, a Navy veteran, which accompanied the $5 he sent to Barrack, says it all. It was his first ever donation and his daughter inspired him to send the money: He said, "Being an African American male, to have that positive role model in Senator Obama, it's given me so much hope. To be able to look at my daughter one day and tell her, 'You can be anything you want in the world' ... In the past I might have said, 'You could be anything you want to be. But president? No' ... But now, he's given me that light. Now, I can tell her, 'You really can be anything you want in the world.'"

Amen to that, sir – and Thank You!

4 Key Reasons Why Barack Obama Will be The Next US President

On 11th February I wrote an appreciative blog on Barack Obama, the new presidential hopeful. Then I was in awe of the 'audacity' of this man from nowhere, much inspired by him and his dreams and I wondered whether his hopeful dash had anything to teach the UK. However, I concluded my blog with these words: "Much as I would like Barack Obama to become the next President, I do not think that he will, on this round. I think he should be Hillary Clinton's running mate and what an unstoppable team they would be - his charisma with her experience, not to mention the differing gender, race and personal ethos which would add extra appeal. He would at least dent her conservatism while gaining the necessary training to succeed after her.

Well, two months down the line, I take it ALL back! In my humble opinion Barack Obama will be the next President of the United States of America for the following reasons:

1. Grassroots Support: Barack is intent on being the People's President in a very clever move to distance himself from the big lobbyists and sectional interests which usually drain White House incumbents of their power. The fewer factions he has to answer to, both White and Black, when he gets into office the more his hands will be freed to carry out the kind of policies he wishes to introduce to change America and unite it, as he is promising. If his hands are not tied with great expectations from those with the power, he can embrace the masses more sincerely with more room for action.

He is quietly involving as many people as he can so that when he actually stands on those White House steps, the ordinary man in the street who donated his $5 can actually beam with pride and say, "I helped to get him there." And that's a powerful sense of inclusion Mrs Clinton hasn't yet realised, or learnt, in our YouTube and blogger age. People want to feel significant and valued and, with his website, of which I am a member, Barack Obama is doing just that, with regular information and encouragement to be part of his circle as well as a pioneer in the dramatic change afoot in America. It would be exciting times for those who have never been involved in the political process or got near a potential president. To know that their effort and involvement can actually make a difference would be a tremendous boost for their feeling of worth and value!

Big business and big money can help to get you into any public office in the USA, but it is the people who will keep you there. By encouraging his supporters to hold meetings in their houses and communicate with one another as much as possible – in essence, to be mini-campaign managers for spreading the word on his behalf to attract even more local attention – he is building a formidable base of public support because nothing succeeds like word of mouth. Soon this 100,000 flock, and the money he is likely to receive, will both dramatically expand as people realise he is now a very serious contender.



Shrewd Move
2. New Style. It is clear that Barack and his team are determined to do things very differently. Notice how they deliberately waited to announce their first quarter figures, well after the hullaballoo of the Clinton camp. They were in no rush to boast. That was a shrewd move because Clinton's aides completely underestimated him, believing that their money was so high as to overwhelm her rivals. But, not for the first time, has Barack snatched the initiative and the media attention in a dignified way, demonstrating that he is his own man, who is determined to do things his way, and a new way, and can take care of himself very well. Notice too that he has refrained from cosying up to people like Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson, though he has praised their role in making it all possible for him with their pioneering days. He is trying not align himself with specific factions in order to encourage a broader appeal. And that can only be good for both the country and his support base.

3. Time For a Big Change. The negative antics of President Bush has ensured that America has lost a lot of its power, credibility and respect, and is now ready for change. Not just a cosmetic one, but a dramatic change. In fact, watch the world's response to America once Barack is installed, at least in the first couple of years as he proves himself. His manner will be far less adversarial because he is a conciliator who speaks from love, not hate, and that is why people find it easy to warm to him. I knew I would see a Black president in my lifetime because the signs were always there. But I never believed one without too much experience and so young would be taking centre stage, which shows his maturity, sincerity and great competence at dealing with what he has to do.

4. Blind Spot. America has had a blind spot ever since Hillary has been campaigning. There was such a foregone conclusion about her ability to fundraise and fit the role of president that they left little room for any alternatives. No one could have predicted Barack Obama's presence and enormous success so far. Like the Google juggernaut, no one saw him coming. Being so preoccupied with all the other old contenders, they left little room for the new. Those who did spot him in the distance were perhaps ready to dismiss his chances because of his relative inexperience. But Google came out of nowhere to dominate the world with their new way of thinking, amazing innovations and fearless way of acting. Barack Obama, whom the rest of the world had barely heard of 6 months ago, seems to have begun his own journey towards global domination.

It is no longer a question of whether he will get into the White House. It is simply a matter of when, and the sooner the better. Anyone who can have such an impact on a huge country in such a short time has tremendous talent for leadership, which his supporters obviously desire. The only place for such a talent to do itself justice is right at the top, in America's historical White House, its main seat of power, from which it can lead and inspire.

The Greatest Empowerment to a Child

This week the British government said that schools can ban students from wearing Muslim veils, if teachers believe they affect safety, security or pupils' learning. School administrators have the right to ban students from covering their faces under a new uniform policy, but educators should speak with parents before introducing such a ban, said Schools Minister Jim Knight in a DEfS statement.

"And while they should make every effort to accommodate social, religious or medical requirements of individual pupils, the needs of safety, security and effective learning in the school must always take precedence," he said.

As expected, some leading Muslims have objected to the ban, but I welcome the government's leadership on this issue because, as both a former education manager, and a keen promoter of diversity and a multicultural society, I agree wholeheartedly with it. It is all about human respect, inclusion and value. We use the word respect regularly in our daily lives, but very few people understand what it really means. It is not a singular cure-all for worthy intentions, but a very powerful 6-dimensional word which goes to the heart of diversity, human worth and appreciation.

Genuine respect is all embracing. It carries much compassion, little judgment and is entirely non-selective. It sees positivity before negativity, strength before weakness and possibility before judgement. Above all, it is mutually reinforcing, not one way. So respect is never present where only one party claims the need to be respected for their values and traditions through appeasement or bullying. That expectation would reflect mere power and a lack of respect, making it an extremely good pointer to interpersonal interactions. At the heart of respect is sensitivity through compromise. If we are not prepared to compromise with another, there is no respect.


Consequences of Emigrating

When we settle in a different country, we choose that country because of what it offers us, at the beginning, but also what we feel we can contribute to it over time. One of the consequences of emigrating is that we lose at least 50% of what we cherish and value, unless we remain in the past, holding on to something we can never regain. Then we lose much more than that in security and self-worth. If we wanted that country to be like the place we have left, why emigrate at all? Simpler to stay put and preserve the cherished customs and traditions which are reinforced by others around us.

The minute we leave our homeland, the need for compromise becomes essential because nothing will be as we left it. Our new life will need negotiation, adjustment and embracing change in a massive way. It will be pretty scary but very rewarding. We cannot impose our values on the new country of residence. It is bound to change us over time because that is the natural law of change. We can never resist it, no matter how long it takes, otherwise we will be fossilised in a time warp while everything briskly moves on around us, as shown by the conflict between the older generation of immigrants who are stuck back there and the new generation born in the UK. Furthermore, only oppressors and colonists seek to impose their language and customs on the new countries they inhabit.

For me personally, as a former education manager, the ban is appropriate and well overdue. We cannot have equality for some women in Britain and not for others. I would also NOT employ someone veiled to teach young children, or have them wear the veil in school either, for one single important reason. The greatest encouragement to anyone, let alone a young child, is a SMILE. It is at the heart of inclusion and belonging. It is very powerful, it costs nothing and can move mountains when everything else fails because of its inclusiveness and reassurance. Without that smile there is nothing familiar and welcoming. Children of whatever age live for that smile of approval and reinforcement. At the youngest ages they soon learn that a smile is the essential currency of love and inclusion, a reinforcement of their worth; that the simple smile takes on a life of its own and opens doors to other aspects of enjoyment. Take it away, and there is doubt, fear and insecurity in the young mind.

Teachers are there to teach but children do not learn just from what they actually say. Children learn from example, from expressions, from a sense of being valued and wanted; from a simple smile of encouragement to do improve their efforts. Boys do not cover their faces in a classroom. In a land striving for equality, girls should not cover their faces either. It is important that children communicate with each other from as early as possible, if we are to reduce prejudice, ignorance and bigotry. A smile is one of the most powerful forms of communicating in any language, especially when other communication isn't possible. Covered faces in a classroom do nothing to bridge the cultural gap, to aid understanding of others, or to enhance self-worth, self-esteem and belonging. Neither do they communicate anything about the joy and positivity of being a vibrant and exciting part of a true multicultural society. They simply breed suspicion and mistrust, continually reinforcing them and us.

What's in a Name?(3) The Enslavement of our Children

Does the way Black children are behaving have anything do do with the slavery of their ancestors and their own achievement? With Britain currently commemorating the 200th anniversary of the Abolition of the Slave Trade, it got me thinking about the real legacy of slavery on Black people, particularly in how we perceive ourselves, the names we use and the way our low self-esteem affects our children.


Once I attended a meeting in London of very keen, Black education professionals, who had each paid £75 for the privilege of discussing a particular report and its potential impact on the community. I waited eagerly for its content. However, my one abiding memory of that meeting was the negative way three very vocal 'sisters' totally hijacked the proceedings to question who had written the report and what colour that person should have been. For the next two hours, absolutely nothing was discussed until the terminology was sorted out and the colour of participants was fully checked and analysed: a total waste of delegates' time, money and talents. Months later, I am still trying to work out what we achieved on that day because we never did get to the actual findings! I am sure my experience is not unique and could explain why often so little is achieved within our community.

Black though we may be, if we have never been to Africa, we are no more 'Africans' than the descendants of the early Britons across the Pond who fought with the UK for their independence and are now very much Americans. They cannot call themselves Britons when they have very little physical or cultural ties with the mother country, and don't even speak the same language. Names are extremely important when they are associated with a sense of wellbeing and a definite history. However, people who cling to the past, long after it has lost its meaning, tend to be stagnant in their ambitions, fearful in their thoughts and fossilised in their actions. Having a sense of continuing frustration, yet not sure how to deal with it, they gradually find it easier to look towards another utopia, to see it as the answer, even when it is alien to them and is merely just a dream. Thus the place they left decades ago, like Bangladesh, Jamaica or India, is still 'home' even forty years afterwards. This view stops them facing their new reality, keeping them exposed as very obvious minorities, forever on the periphery while they abdicate responsibility for their future and blame the past for any present predicament.


Inscurity and Underachievement

The notion of a home far away also harms their children's present and future. It implants a constant reminder of instability and impermanence and is one of the biggest causes of insecurity and underachievement. If their parents are going 'home' sometime in the never never, why should they bother to work here? Why bother with making real friends? With buckling down to school work if you are going to be uprooted suddenly to 'go home'? Sadly, 15 or 20 years down the line, when the parents are still in Britain clinging to their outdated memory of 'home', the children would have completely lost theirs through apathy and alienation. In the meantime, the 'home' they fondly hang on to has changed beyond recognition. Trapped in time and fossilised in their brain, the cherished perfect past is a far cry from the actual reality; one which is a vibrant, moving form of constantly changing mores; one which would be almost as alien to them as to anyone else.

We stop developing when we live in the past and hang on to it for its own sake, while being constantly bitter and vengeful. In this way we learn nothing from it to safeguard or improve our future. Black people are of African descent, and that is labouring the obvious. Though we need to know our history and our roots, that knowledge should enhance, not retard, our progress. We have chosen, or been given, a different future which we must develop to the fullest in the brief time available. If you feel strongly about any country, more than you do about the place you live in, then DO something about it! Why not visit that place, examine its prospects and help to build it up? Share your expertise with the community to enable others to benefit from your contributions while you gain a sense of fulfilment.

Hankering daily after somewhere else, while we do little to improve our current existence, makes life needlessly difficult and frustrating. It becomes a good excuse, and a handy ploy, to prevent us ever facing our own reality. It also keeps us stuck in the paradise of our dreams while the paradise we could help to build disintegrates around us. A country divided cannot thrive. Its people has to work together, not against each other, to give it life and success.

It really doesn't matter what we call ourself. We can only extend and conquer the earth when actions take precedence over words; when we know who we are and wish to be, when we accept that identity fully and head off into the future to give it life. Only then will we be able to deal with any obstacles in our way; to feel confident about our potential for making a difference to ourself and our environment. Repressing our ambition under a daily concentration on labels, names and theories indicates real fear and little self-esteem as we replace deeds with semantics and a lack of vision.

Key Questions for Our Future

Whether you are an African who has never been to Africa, an Asian who left your country years ago, or a Briton who is going nowhere else, here is a little challenge to tease out your true identity: Apart from mere words, what have I done for Africa lately? For Jamaica? For India? For Pakistan? For Britain? For Me...?

The answer will not only be truly enlightening, it might actually point you in the right direction for the greatest achievement of all time: liberating yourself from the semantic slavery which has chained you for long enough to the aimless sinking ship of negativity and regret. There really is a connection between the death of seven Black youngsters in six weeks, the state of the Black community and how it views itself and the apology demanded from the British government over slavery. They are all linked to our self-perception, sense of impotence and genuine frustrations. We have got an apology from Tony Blair about what happened hundreds of years ago and the legacy it has left.

Fine, so what now? Only self-confidence and high self-esteem can propel our children to greater self-love and achievement. Unless we love and respect ourself, our children have no hope of loving or respecting themselves too. They will always be ashamed of who they are and keep taking it out on each other. Many of us are still back there wallowing in self-hate and slavery. But it's time to start taking responsibility for our lives so that we can give our children the reinforcement, strength and pride to take reponsibility for their lives too.

An apology from the politicians might force some superficial accountability and assuage some egos, but it is an empty gesture which reflects the past and does little for us and our future. The real question is: When are WE going to forgive ourselves for our distressing past and actually discard our slavery mentality to realise the wonderful, talented beings we are? This is fundamental to the progress of Black children, to their feelings of security and value, and to leaving our own positive legacy, no matter where we are settled in the world.

What's in a Name?(2) The Language of Slavery

How does the language we use uplift or degrade us? With Britain currently commemorating the 200th anniversary of the Abolition fo the Slave Trade, it got me thinking about the real legacy of slavery on Black people, particularly in how we perceive ourselves, the names we use and the language used to describe anything black.

Even today, every word in the English language connected with the word 'black' is full of nastiness, darkness and foreboding, and I won't even quote Shakespeare to prove it. Courtesy of my thesaurus, the colour white is 'virginal, unblemished, immaculate, innocent, pure'. Black is 'dark, murky, funereal, evil, villainous, wicked!' They may be just words on a page but they reflect the anxiety of the people who gave them meaning and demarcated human beings into roses and rejects. Worse still, constant daily usage ensures their transformation into lethal psychological weapons for those affected by it.

With enlightenment and time, that instant identification with past masters has begun to fade among Black people. Admiration and hero-worship have gradually given way to suspicion and anger through the gradual acknowledgements of painful truths. For the first time ever, the full horror of the slave trade and Britain's part in it, and its financial benefits from it is being openly discussed, not from a sanitised blameless corner but through education of man's inhumanity to man. African Caribbeans, or African Americans, are fighting back, actively seeking that lost childhood to recapture their worth, self-esteem and true identity. But it is an uphill task because of its entrenchment in our psyche. We may have lost too much too quickly and are in danger of leaping too far to the other side.

Under the guise of 'discovering' themselves, there has been a definite slide towards aligning with Africa, where many Black Britons have never been, and with which they have little incommon except the colour of their skin, instead of the country of their birth or residence; the one that nurtures them and protects their interest. Asians do the same by refusing to let go, even when they know that they are never going back 'home'. Scared of losing their roots and traditions, they trap themselves and their families in a cultural time warp which eventually stunts their growth, slows their evolution and heightens their feeling of insecurity. In this way we all label ourselves like useless packages which are being knocked from pillar to post in a wilderness of denial.


Turning to Africa for Comfort
Instead of a solidarity in being Black, acknowledging a common past and linking together for a better future, wherever we are, many eagerly turn to Africa (or Mother India) from whom they descended for their comfort and validation. Many Blacks wear their African label proudly, while turning inwards on their brothers and sisters to put them down, to revile their efforts and to mock their successes. Someone has to be blamed for the legacy of servitude and self-hate. Their peers and colleagues easily become the identifiable enemy while the real culprit (lack of self-belief, lack of self-love and lack of forgiveness) stalk wantonly inside them, eating away at their consciousness, hopes and ambitions, rendering them helpless, vulnerable and emotionally sterile. Then we wonder why, as a people, we are not more successful, we are dogged by crime and delinquency and we feel so bad within ourselves. But wherever there is little self-respect, we cannot have the respect of others.

The names we choose for ourselves do matter. They are clear signs of personal confidence, self-perception, basic identity and future potential. Personally, I prefer British Black. I might have descended from a slave but I do not have to be one in my thoughts and mentality. As Bob Marley sang: "Emancipate yourself from mental slavery, none but ourself can free our mind." I cannot go back in time to right any wrong, and another White person cannot do that either, but by treating myself with love and respect, I can command the respect of others too; by teaching my children to love themselves and respect themselves, they will also be able to free their thoughts from the negative past to boldly go into the future to claim their birthright. By celebrating my presence and the gift of life, I can make my own legacy and a huge difference to my world.

Being a Black Briton, is a conscious decision. I am not a member of an 'ethnic minority' because minority emphasises being out of the majority; on the periphery of the mainstream looking on longingly, but never allowed the opportunity to join that privileged majority. Being 'Black' also emphasises that, though I may not be a member of the White majority, I am equally proud of who I am and where I hope to go. I used to be a Jamaican, representing the land of my birth. Deep within me I will always have a fondness for, and a sort of wonder, that a tiny little island has had such a phenomenal impact on the rest of the world through creativity, music and sports! Jamaica represents my history, and a very proud one too. Regardless of how my ancestors got to Jamaica, someone elsewhere decreed that I should be a Jamaican and I am very proud of that roots.

Yet, at a time when racist folks continually threaten to make life uncomfortable for all Britons, and others talk of 'apology', 'repatriation' and 'compensation, there will have to be one person standing aside from all that to take a different view - me. I have no wish to return to my past because there is nothing happening back there. The past is important for placing us in time and noting the significant moments in our history, but a concentration on the past robs us of both a present and a future. If we are busy back there, we cannot be busy here too. It is a short step from simply finding scapegoats for feelings of inadequacy which then prevent us looking at ourselves. The past is useful for changing the present and developing the future in a more enhancing way. It is not for wallowing in self-pity or harbouring futile thoughts of revenge.


Loyalty to Our Country
Whether I like Britain or not, this is now my home, not Jamaica, not Africa not anywhere else. My ancestors could not choose to go to Britain. They were forced to be here. But I had the choice of going to America, Canada, Europe - mostly anywhere I wanted to, and I chose the UK. I adore this country and wouldn't live anywhere else. That was a conscious choice and has remained so. This is where I live, and where I now celebrate the 40th anniversary of arriving in London from Jamaica; where I have spent many wonderful years, where my children have to live when I am dead and gone and where I wish to contribute my skills to enable us to enjoy a fulfilling life. The fact that I am finally sure in my mind who I am, what I want and where I am going has helped me to move on to another important plain: to other important things like future achievements, a rewarding career reflecting my purpose in life and the support I can give to my children and any grandchildren by being close at hand for them when they need me.

Importantly, I am now able to focus upon my own self development in a way which would be denied me if I had to be continually worried about who I am, where I am and where I want to go. Self knowledge comes gradually over time but if, after 15, 20 or 25 years spent in one place, those questions are still causing anxiety without a real sense of belonging, there is major psychological stress and dissonance which needs to be addressed. In fact, one thing has always fascinated me about the semantics of identity, especially in America. All the weak minority groupings attach a prefix to who they are: like Hispanic-Americans and African-Americans. The White ruling class, the one with the power and the resources, the media and the control, have jettisoned any overt claim to their roots and simply settled for being Americans! Are they the only true Americans then? Could that be the secret of their success? I suppose if we are not serving two masters there will be only one set of instructions. European Americans have moved away from trying to prove their existence because, having proven it already, they now flaunt it proudly.

Black Britons, and to a large extent, Black Americans, are still trying to prove themselves and it will carry on in this new millennium for a very long time. This could explain the deep divisions among them, the basic lack of self-respect reflected in the language they use for their women, the obsession with the 'right words' and labels, an even stronger obsession with things African - but from a distance - and a negative, inward looking perspective which helps to rob their children of their birthright and the security needed for them to belong. Many Black people are stuck in a groove of semantics to such an extent, most of their energies are dissipated on what they should call themselves, and what people are saying about them, instead of what they should actually be doing with their lives and the positive legacy they could leave.

What's in a Name?(1) The True Legacy of Slavery

With Britain currently commemorating the 200th anniversary of the Abolition fo the Slave Trade, it got me thinking about the real legacy of slavery on Black people, particularly in how we perceive ourselves and the names we use.


Names should be positive terms, but they can be cultural baggage. If you belong to a 'minority' group, what do you call yourself? The choice is easy if it has a definite historical, geographical or religious base. However, what if you are from the Caribbean but insist on being called African? Or an Asian who left your birthplace decades ago but still hark back to it as 'home'? Does all that really matter.

Take any name we call ourself: man, woman, doctor, priest, African, Caucasian, Asian. They all have one thing in common. They represent a specific persona as an individual, a member of a social and cultural group, and set us apart from everyone else who does not share the same background or characteristics. Names and titles are important for establishing individual identity, maintaining tradition, emphasising a particular skill or lineage, marking our place, unmistakably, in a historical and geographical context. Names are usually positive. We are meant to be proud of who we are and what we call ourselves. However, for Black people outside of Africa (like African Caribbeans) that is not always the case.

Black people living abroad have been desperately trying to come to terms with themselves for a very long time because of their chequered past and broken links with their countries of origin. Judged by their colour first, before anything else, it has been a painful demoralising process which some have managed to overcome but to which others have helplessly succumbed. Yet the answer to their anxieties lie in their eventful past. Whether they call themselves Melangian. African, Afro-Caribbean, African American or simply Black, there is a continuous search for a lost childhood, a huge gap in their past when everything happened but very little was spoken about it. Black people everywhere share this unique history.


Dirty Secret
They have been the only race, in modern times, who were forcibly ejected en masse from their place of birth and dispersed all over the world to be the slaves of another race of people. That one conscious slice of being Black, which continually haunts them, will never be understood by a White person in any number of lifetimes. It is such a powerful, pervasive and debilitating emotion, a kind of dirty secret scanning years of discrimination and entrapment, that Black strangers passing by only have to look at each other briefly in the street to share something instantly familiar, oddly binding and utterly unspeakable which hovers relentlessly through time.

It is not easy to appreciate, or empathise with, this legacy of slavery, because it is a legacy of displacement, not only in purely physical terms, but also in emotional, historical and psychological ones. For Black people of the African Diaspora there is a continuous sense of statelessness, of not belonging; of lacking the roots and experience of a promising childhood which was rudely torn apart, summarily dispensed with and utterly destroyed by slavers; cut short by something vastly alien, bewildering and shocking.

As a consequence of this brutal act there has been a marked absence of glory in anything black. No Black heroes, no great victories or inventions (those have been kept hidden). I was really surprised to learn, through the musical Black Heroes in the Hall of Fame, that the traffic lights were invented by someone Black! All my life, robbed of role models, I naturally assumed the inventor was White, my childhood having taught me that only White colonists did great things.


Serving and Obeying
Like a form of imprinting, White Europeans were the first 'parents' Black slave children saw, received their value from and had to serve and obey in a kind of sub-human state. This affected them not only for the rest of their lives but down the ensuing centuries through the generations that followed. How can one ever talk of true equality when one group started off being the slave of another, being deprived of basic human rights and freedoms, and their own dreams and hopes? If you start with a disadvantage, which follows you down the years, how do you recover from it to enjoy real parity with the masters who exploited you to build themselves and their fortunes? It is very difficult. That is why there has always been this desire, in the absence of anything positive about being Black, to use the White culture as a role model in all spheres. One only had to look at the way singers form the 50s presented themselves to the public, how 'White' they were made to look, or tried to be, in order to be 'acceptable'.

For a long time, devoid of ancestral role models and any sense of self, the lost children of Africa looked to the White race for inspiration, as well as guidance in decorum, style of dress, hair care and general behaviour. They did learn how to assimilate a different culture, in their desire to be recognised and to belong, but they lost something valuable in the process - their own identity, sense of worth and sense of direction. Black people saw the White aura and tried to capture it. They admired White inventiveness and tried to emulate it. But these White role models saw only their colour and forever damned it, especially through their language. This has left many Black people confused about their roots: stateless, nameless and, at times, unwanted caricatures of another race.