Tuesday, August 30, 2011

The Visible and the Invisible

Post 44--:

Hypocritical UN Accusations
Maclean’s Magazine triggered something within me with Alex Derry’s article “Political Correctness Gone Mad?” (Aug 5, 2011). The subtitle goes “The UN upbraids Canada for its use of the term ‘visible minority.’ The UN Committee on the Elimination of Racial Discrimination is challenging Canada’s use of the term as being out of step with the aims of this UN committee. My initial and instinctive reaction is the malign thought that, in view of this UN challenge, there must be something good in Canada’s approach to merit such attention. Though I favour the existence of the UN, I am often very skeptical of the work of its departments and committees. The member nations represented on these committees are often blatantly guilty of the challenges they hurl at Western nations, often much more so in fact. I sometimes wonder whether these challenges are not the result of these members being offended at, in this case, Canada’s behaviour, because the contrast exposes them and puts them to shame. Rather than correct their own, it is easier to cook up some Western misbehaviour and yell loud enough to cover up theirs.


Today's Canada Racist?

The term “invisible minority” is a racist expression, according to the UN committee. It is said to “somehow indicate that whiteness was the standard, all others differing from that being visible.” Racism? Canada accused by a UN body of racism? People who have read my books know how embarrassed I am about Western imperialism in all its forms and how ashamed I am about Christian participation in it. It is a major theme in my writings and has been ever since my doctoral research during the 1970s opened my eyes to it. I am not one to defend the West, though Canada, being of young age and small in population, is thereby also one of the “smaller sinners.” But to accuse Canada of racism?! And that by members of the UN whose countries are rife with the stuff, whether it is racism or tribalism? Get off the pot!

Canada's Open Doors
That there is a high degree of racism in Canada I do not deny. But which country has and continues to invite people of all races more than Canada is doing presently? Oh, of course, there is Canada’s vested interest in immigration. It does not all come out of a national heart bubbling over with generosity. China, India, Nigeria—just name any non-Western country. Not to speak of that jewel of modern development, Japan, one of the worst when it comes to racism. Which of them have opened their doors more widely to people of other races than has Canada?

Racism among the "Visibles"
Again, Canadian Caucasians, of which I am one, can be faulted of racism, but let me tell you that Canada has imported more racists than you can shake a stick at it. We have more racism and tribalism in Canada now more than ever! And most of it is imported. Just ask any Korean what they think of Blacks! That’s racism. And just get two Nigerians, an Ibo and a Hausa man, living in Canada, to work together—only if they have discovered a common enemy and only in so far as that enemy affects them. That’s tribalism, complicated and made worse by religion.

"Reverse" Racism
For Canada to be accused of racism because of her use of the term “visible minority” causes me to laugh with derision. Well, yes, there is an element of racism in the concept. It is applied to me, a Caucasian immigrant, and when I think of it being applied to me I do more than laugh: I am now offended. It is racism. Living in the Vancouver downtown, I often feel like a minority, what with all the people from every Asian country around me, not to speak of Eastern Europeans, Latinos and Blacks from everywhere. In restaurants, on the bus, along the sidewalk, lined up at some counter, I definitely experience minority status. That does not bother me, for I got accustomed to it during my 30 years in Nigeria. But what is so invisible about me? I am as visible as anyone else. And I am discriminated against. Let any Caucasian try taxi driving. He is not likely to get in: Indians have sowed it up for themselves. Same for the trucking industry. Or let any Black chef try to break into the Asian-dominated restaurant industry. Now it’s “visible” vs “visible.” The term does not prevent discrimination, for the prevention of which, I understand, it was coined in the first place.

Challenge to the Visibles
And so I end up agreeing with this UN committee after all. Let’s get rid of the term along with the notion behind it. Regardless of the past—and there was that past—Canadian Caucasians can hardly be accused of racism today, unless all my Asiatic neighbours have the finger pointed at them first and work at their governments opening their doors to others the way Canada has to them. Japanese-Canadians, are you listening? Chinese-Canadians? Indian-Canadians? African-Canadians?

But regardless of all this, welcome to Canada. Many of you “visibles”, unlike my “invisible” self, were born here. Thanks for letting me in!

Thursday, August 18, 2011

Civility and Freedom

Post 43—:

My Current Situation
I’ve been traipsing around again, visiting two of our three children and their families. Currently I’m in Silicon Valley, but plan to be back in Vancouver sometime next week. In between now and then, we will be RVing our way up north with our little 20-footer. Camp here and there along the way. Pick up a couple of grandkids near Seattle and then move on to Vancouver with them.

That said, you will understand there is not a lot of time for reading and reflection in prepping myself for the next post. Well, it’s time you hear from me again. So, not having my hard paper archives I use for much of my writings at hand, I am going to do you next best. I am going to pass on to you a discussion about civility in public discourse. Sorry, it’s from the USA. As you know, I try to concentrate on Canada and Canadian sources, but sometimes you got to make do with what you have. Of course, Americans do not have a monopoly on lack of civility! I judge that sharing part of this article with you is better than simply to keep silent for another week.


Call for Civility Produces Hatred
Carrie Daklin is a Minnesota public radio commentator recently called for civility in the gay-marriage controversy in the US. She was reportedly inundated with hateful attacks. Here’s some of her reactions to these attacks:
Within days, my words, taken completely out of context, and my message — better manners — had been used as the basis for a rallying cry: Carrie Daklin of Minnesota is a homophobe.


What Happened to Civility and Toleration?
I am not sure how my message got so skewed. I have become the object of hate mail and really vicious comments, all in the name of etiquette. Go figure. I found this all rather unsettling.... What has happened in our culture, that so many of us are completely unable to accept someone who doesn't share our views? I don't agree with all that my conservative Christian friends espouse, but I support their right to their beliefs. I don't agree with a very liberal friend who said certain members of the religious right should be shot. Actually, he used the word murdered. Sadly, I think he meant it.

In retrospect, the original infraction I wrote about is positively innocuous compared to the resulting uproar. To be blunt: My article was not about gay rights, it was not about the Defense of Marriage Act, and it most certainly was not a promotion for the National Organization for Marriage.My article was on civility, it was on manners and about respect for other people, it was on public decency even toward those you might not agree with. It was about creating a conduit in our society that allows for the paradigms and values of others, so that we can get to a place of compromise. It was about working to replace anger with a tolerance that allows us to thrive.

In the last few weeks I have been a poster child for extremism — the left vilifying me, the right holding me up as some sort of hero. Both make me equally uncomfortable. Both are unwanted. If I am a poster child for anyone, it is Emily Post.

I believe these are warnings and words of caution that we can use in Canada as well. Have a great day and see you when I’m back in Vancouver.

Thursday, August 11, 2011

Contentment and Freedom

Post 42—:

You might argue that this is really no way to start off with this new blog that is supposed to deal with concrete life events. “Contentment” and “freedom” are pretty abstract terms and really belong in the other blog, “WorldlyChristianity,” that majors in more abstract issues. Well, yes and no. These are somewhat abstract terms indeed, but they are based on and evoked by a great story of people who have found those qualities of life. Besides, I did warn you at the outset that the two sometimes merge or that they cannot always be neatly separated.

I am reacting in this post to an article by Elizabeth Payne (“Imagine the Freedom of a Contented Life,” Vancouver Sun, July 26, 2011). She begins with reference to the common Canadian dream of winning a lottery fortune. Now a dream may be abstract somewhat, but this one is such a common nightly and daily phenomenon that the abstract has become a concrete and a regular event in the lives of many of us.

Allen and Violet Large, an elderly couple—both in their late 70s-- in Nova Scotia recently won $11.25 million. They had always lived a life of simplicity and contentment and saw no reason to change this just because of this sudden intrusion in their lives. Of course, it did not come altogether unwanted. After all, they did buy the winning ticket. But in contrast to others, they did not expect to find some kind of new and exciting freedom with these new resources at hand, for they “had something far more valuable and rare: satisfaction,” according to Payne. Violet, the wife, said, “We haven’t bought a thing. That’s because there is nothing we need.” So they gave it all away. Paine details the gifting. They gained in satisfaction and freedom by giving their fortune away.

Violet died shortly afterwards. Preacher Harrison said at her funeral that the reaction of the Large’s was “almost antithetical to the way many of us would respond.” That’s true. “It is a safe bet,” Payne continued, “that few imagine freedom the way Violet did—something you gain by giving those millions away.” She concluded her article thus: “That may be the real freedom: Imagining being happy with what you have.” Not sure why she used the word “imagining” here. The Large’s were content and therefore free; they did not merely imagine it.

Their attitude was indeed antithetical or opposite to the more common approach of living it up and then, for many, ending up with a life “ruined by the stuff and stress and expectations (and often, eventually, the debt) that come along with the (unexpected) money.” But that only goes to show how far removed we are from the reality that the Bible portrays. In the world of the Bible, their attitude is the common, the normal, the standard, the expected, the prescribed. Jesus said, “It is more blessed to give than to receive” (Acts 20:35). In the more contemporary style of The Message: The Bible in Contemporary Language by Eugene Peterson, it reads, “You’re far happier giving than getting.” Again, Jesus said, “Whoever finds his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for my sake will find it” (Matthew 10:39—New International Version). Peterson has it as “If your first concern is to look after yourself, you’ll never find yourself. But if you forget about yourself and look to Me, you’ll find both yourself and Me.”

The Apostle Paul wrote, “I’ve learned by now to be quite content whatever my circumstances. I’m just as happy with little as with much, with much as with little. I’ve found the recipe for being happy whether full or hungry, hands full or hands empty. Whatever I have, wherever I am, I can make it through anything in the One who makes me who I am” (Philippians 4:11, Peterson’s translation).

This is not to promote the view that poverty is virtuous, as has sometimes been thought and promoted in some Christian circles. There is that vow of poverty some take upon themselves. I have lived too long in Africa and have seen too much poverty to spiritually trivialize hunger as something acceptable. That is the opposite extreme from what obtains in much of the West. As my father used to say, “Money is nothing.” He would pause slightly and add, “as long as you have some of it.”

The Large’s had caught on to that secret of life, practiced it and were happy, content, satisfied.