Thoughts on International & Global Education
|
Musings on Japanese and Ryukyu Budo
|
With the history book now in its final stages I have begun a return to my oldest project - poetry. In the coming year or so I will be releasing a collection of poems long overdue - Entitled the 'Boyne's Lament' - I shared below a very, very very early draft of the titular poem - Ironically this is the last poem written for the collection but the first shared... The final draft will not look like this but these are the stepping stones before the foundation is laid..
The Boyne's Lament Old and wide, silver-threaded, deep, Born of mist where shadows creep. I knew the tongues of those long lost, Felt the frost of battles crossed. Newgrange stones still mark my birth, Their shadows stretch across the earth. I bore the Salmon, silver, wise, A whisper cast in drifting skies. Fingers burned with lore once bright, Now fading embers in the night. No wisdom left in waters deep, Only echoes that learn to weep. I lapped at doors of ancient halls, Where feet once danced and banners called. The songs still hum beneath my flow, Murmured notes of long ago. The Táin still lingers in my stream, A hero’s wrath, a dream unseen. The bulls still rage in whispered breath, A tale of love, of war, of death. The weight of time bends back the past, Through ripples deep, reflections cast. A river’s bones, a silent tongue, Holding all yet speaking none. Mellifont’s stones, worn smooth by prayer, Soft with hands no longer there. Psalms rose up, then fell away, Where silence rests in ruined clay. Monasterboice, the crosses stand, Tall in vigil, carved by hand. Yet even saints could not defend The lives that war would never mend. No borders bind the things I keep, No single tongue within me speaks. I knew the hands of builders old, And those who drowned in hunger’s cold. I carried stories, cradled loss, Held the weight of broken trust. the troubles came, the streets ran red, A shadowed land where silence bled. The echoes of a bullet’s flight, His love fell silent in the night. In my arms they dared to stay, A last embrace beyond the fray. I held the grief, the unheard calls, Beneath the viaduct, where shadows call. But worse than war is silent blight, A poisoned soul, a starless night. No warriors now upon my bridge, But lost ones lean upon its ridge. Their pockets full of powder white, Their spirits drowned in neon light. Once I was a silver thread, A lifeline strong where seekers tread. Now factories spew their tainted bile, And silence haunts my every mile. The voices lost in drug-fuelled dreams, The drowning sobs, the choking screams. The bridges where the lovers met, Now bear the weight of lost regret. For those who stand upon my ledge, And whisper sorrow from the edge. A final step, a final sigh, And still my waters wonder why. Now the salmon flinch at the filth, The reeds droop low with sickened breath. I slide past pylons, thick with rust, Through waters clotted black with dust. What ran with silver now runs grey, And still I carry dead away. O children, hear my cry, My waves grow weak, my bed runs dry. Once I was a thread unspun, Weaving past and yet-to-come. But rivers turn, and tides will rise, A voice once lost may yet be wise. For I am water, old and wide, And still my depths refuse to hide. Should hands reach out to heal my scars, I’ll shine once more beneath the stars.
0 Comments
![]() The Christmas Suicide Spike: A Myth That Persists Despite the Evidence Now that the festive season has passed and discussions on mental health support continue into the new year, it is an opportune moment to analyse objectively the persistent myth that suicides increase at Christmas. Every year, as December approaches, media outlets recycle the claim that the holiday season sees a surge in suicides. This narrative, whether born from genuine concern or the desire to create emotive headlines, does not align with the reality reflected in robust statistical evidence. The facts show that in many Christian-majority countries, suicide rates tend to decline during December, with peaks more commonly occurring in late spring or early summer. This raises an important question: why does this myth endure, and what does it reveal about the ways we engage with information? The Data: What the Evidence Really Tells Us Multiple studies have consistently discredited the notion that suicide rates rise at Christmas. Suicide data from Western nations, including the UK, the United States, Canada, and Australia, repeatedly demonstrate that December is one of the months with the lowest suicide rates. A meta-analysis published in Social Science & Medicine (2004) confirmed this seasonal pattern, showing that:
Why Does the Myth Persist? Despite clear and consistent evidence to the contrary, the idea that Christmas triggers a rise in suicides remains widespread, partly due to deeply ingrained societal narratives and selective reporting by the media. Several factors contribute to this ongoing misconception:
The persistence of the Christmas suicide spike myth serves as a reminder of the importance of critical thinking and evidence-based decision-making. Misinformation—even when spread with good intentions—can divert resources and attention away from the times and places where they are truly needed. For example, public health campaigns that focus heavily on the Christmas period may neglect the actual peak seasons for suicide risk, such as late spring and early summer. If we are serious about addressing mental health and suicide prevention, we must focus on what the data tells us, rather than being swayed by emotive storytelling. Nevertheless, while empirical evidence must remain paramount, it is also crucial to acknowledge personal testimonies and lived experiences in mental health advocacy. Personal testimonies can shed light on individual struggles and bring attention to broader issues that statistics alone might not fully capture. However, these narratives must be complemented by factual accuracy to ensure meaningful and effective action. A More Effective Approach to Mental Health Awareness Rather than reinforcing falsehoods, we should:
The belief that suicides spike during Christmas is yet another example of how emotive narratives can distort empirical reality. While it is crucial to dispel myths, it is equally important to acknowledge that the holiday season can be emotionally challenging for many, necessitating continued support and awareness without misinformation. Personal stories can serve as powerful tools for advocacy, but they must be framed within the context of factual accuracy to ensure effective and responsible action. As we move forward, let this be a lesson in thinking critically, questioning assumptions, and making decisions based on facts rather than feelings. Mental health advocacy is essential, but it must be guided by empirical evidence rather than unverified assumptions. If we truly wish to make a difference, we must focus on when and where help is needed most—not where dramatic storytelling tells us to look. クリスマスに自殺率が増加するという神話は、統計データに反する誤解である。研究によると、多くのキリスト教圏の国々では12月の自殺率は低下し、春や初夏にピークを迎える。メディアの誇張や社会的偏見がこの誤解を広めている。正確な情報に基づいた支援が必要であり、感情的な誤報に惑わされず、実際に自殺リスクが高まる時期への対策を強化することが求められる。 ![]() The way we talk about diversity in professional spaces is, in many ways, the very thing holding us back from understanding it. Too often, diversity is framed as a problem to be solved, an issue to be managed, or a challenge to be overcome. It is seen as an external factor that organisations must ‘accommodate’ rather than an intrinsic part of the human experience—something that shapes, enriches, and ultimately transforms us all. At the heart of this misunderstanding lies a paternalistic and deeply flawed assumption: that individuals from different cultural backgrounds must be taught how to navigate dominant workplace structures rather than recognised as active, capable agents who shape and influence these spaces just as much as anyone else. The entire concept of ‘diversity training’ is built upon this premise, presenting itself as progressive while reinforcing the notion that certain groups must be guided, integrated, or made to fit. This is not inclusion; it is infantilisation—a passive-aggressive form of exclusion that pretends to offer understanding while subtly reinforcing the idea that some people ‘belong’ and others must be accommodated. Diversity, in its truest sense, is not something that can be ‘managed’ through training modules or corporate initiatives. It is a lived experience, a process of mutual transformation that has no fixed destination. It is not about helping individuals assimilate into a pre-existing system, but about recognising that every person—regardless of background—contributes to shaping, redefining, and expanding that system in ways that cannot be preordained. The question we should be asking is not how organisations can make space for diversity, but whether they are capable of evolving in response to the reality of a diverse world. Beyond the Infantilisation of ‘The Other’One of the most insidious aspects of mainstream diversity discourse is its tendency to treat cultural difference as something to be understood only by those already in positions of power. Training sessions, awareness programmes, and workplace diversity initiatives are often designed not for the benefit of those who are ‘diverse’, but for those who need to be taught how to interact with them. This framing implies that certain groups exist outside the norm, as if their presence requires explanation, intervention, or special handling. This is nothing more than a rebranded form of colonial paternalism—the belief that those who exist outside dominant cultural frameworks must be ‘helped’ to function within them. It assumes that inclusion is something that must be bestowed upon individuals rather than something they already possess by virtue of their intelligence, adaptability, and lived experience. This is why so much of what passes for diversity training is deeply condescending, reductive, and, ultimately, exclusionary. The irony is that those who are subjected to these models of ‘accommodation’ are often already more adept at navigating different cultural spaces than those designing the programmes. People who move between cultural contexts—whether through migration, education, or professional mobility—do not need to be ‘taught’ how to exist in diverse settings. They have already mastered the skills of adaptation, negotiation, and resilience. It is the rigidity of institutions, not individuals, that often stands in the way of meaningful inclusion. Diversity as a Continuous, Generative ProcessDiversity is not an issue to be resolved; it is the very condition through which human growth and learning take place. Every professional space, every community, every society is a work in progress—an evolving, unfinished dialogue between people with different perspectives, experiences, and ways of thinking. The mistake is in assuming that diversity is something that can be structured, systematised, or concluded. The most enriching forms of diversity are those that are allowed to unfold organically, through genuine dialogue, collaboration, and the mutual recognition of agency. This is not about ‘tolerance’, nor is it about symbolic acts of recognition that do little to change underlying structures. It is about seeing diversity as a generative force, one that constantly challenges assumptions, demands new ways of thinking, and expands our understanding of what is possible. A Call to Think and BeRather than asking how we can ‘solve’ diversity, we must begin to ask: how can we dismantle the assumption that diversity is a problem in the first place? How can we engage with cultural complexity not as a hurdle, but as an ongoing, ever-unfolding opportunity for growth? How can we build communities—not just workplaces--that see diversity not as a task to be completed, but as the very means by which life is made richer and more meaningful? This is not a call to action in the corporate sense, nor a prescription for better policies or improved management techniques. It is something more fundamental—a call to think and be. It asks us to move beyond the constraints of pragmatism and procedure, to step outside the narrow frames of efficiency and control, and instead engage with diversity as a way of existing in the world. It is an invitation to become more—not by fixing, accommodating, or resolving—but by learning, unlearning, and embracing the unfinished nature of human connection. To think beyond structure and be open to growth. To think with humility and be in dialogue. To think expansively and be present. That is where diversity leads—not to resolution, but to the ongoing experience of becoming fully alive. 多様性に関する現代の企業的アプローチは、しばしば誤った前提に基づき、「管理」や「解決」すべき課題と見なされる。しかし、真の多様性とは、単なる適応や統合ではなく、相互変革の過程である。本稿では、多くの「多様性研修」が他者を受け入れるのではなく、むしろ「他者を教育する」ことで無意識に幼稚化し、排除を助長していることを指摘する。多様性は管理すべきものではなく、人間の成長や共同体の発展、より充実した人生を実現するための継続的な対話である。組織や個人は、効率性や枠組みに囚われるのではなく、多様性を「未完の対話」として受け入れることが求められる。本稿は、より広い視野を持ち、変化を受け入れる思考と実践への転換を促す。 ![]() Democracies worldwide are undergoing significant transformations, with many analysts questioning whether these shifts signal a weakening of democratic governance and the rise of a corporatist or oligarchic structure. While political influencers frame these changes in hyperbolic or partisan terms, a closer examination of historical trends and contemporary developments reveals a more complex reality. The intersection of corporate power and political authority, alongside the erosion of public trust in institutions, poses a significant challenge to democratic governance. The Shifting Landscape of Democracy: Areas for Purposeful Discussion and Learning Despite the polarising soundbites and rhetoric circulating in today’s digital sphere, a broader macro-level shift appears to be taking place in democracies worldwide. Beyond the simplified narratives pushed by political influencers, it is essential to step back and critically examine key areas where democratic norms, governance structures, and public trust are being reshaped. Below are several critical areas that warrant deeper exploration and dialogue. 1. The Rise of Corporate Influence in Governance The increasing influence of multinational corporations in governance structures is a defining feature of the 21st-century political landscape. The traditional notion of democracy—where elected representatives act in the interests of the people—has been challenged by the reality of corporate lobbying, political donations, and regulatory capture. Case Study: The United States – The Role of Big Money in Politics In the United States, corporate political action committees (PACs) and billionaires have gained unprecedented influence over elections and policy-making. The landmark Citizens United v. FEC (2010) decision by the U.S. Supreme Court removed restrictions on corporate spending in elections, effectively allowing unlimited contributions from corporations and special interest groups (Mayer, 2016). This ruling has led to a system where wealthy donors and corporations can shape public policy, often to the detriment of the general electorate. For instance, the fossil fuel industry has spent billions lobbying against environmental regulations. A study by the Center for Responsive Politics (2022) found that the oil and gas industry spent over $124 million on lobbying in 2021, influencing policies that weaken climate change initiatives (CRP, 2022). This dynamic raises the question of whether political leaders represent voters or corporate backers. Case Study: The European Union – Big Tech and Digital Sovereignty In the European Union, concerns over Big Tech’s influence on policy-making have prompted regulatory actions such as the Digital Services Act (2022) and the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) (European Commission, 2022). However, major technology firms—including Google, Amazon, and Meta—have consistently lobbied to shape these regulations to their advantage. In 2021 alone, Google reportedly spent €5.75 million on EU lobbying efforts (Corporate Europe Observatory, 2021). This reflects the broader global trend where corporations wield significant influence over data privacy, digital governance, and national security policies. 2. The Erosion of Public Trust in Democratic Institutions Trust in democratic institutions is declining worldwide, driven by perceptions of corruption, elite control, and political inefficacy. According to the Edelman Trust Barometer (2023), public trust in government has dropped significantly in many democratic nations, with less than 50% of respondents in countries like the US, UK, and France believing that their governments act in their best interests (Edelman, 2023). Case Study: The UK – Post-Brexit Disillusionment and Political Transparency. In the UK, the aftermath of Brexit has led to widespread disillusionment with democratic governance. The handling of procurement contracts during the COVID-19 pandemic, where firms with political connections were granted lucrative government deals, highlighted a lack of transparency in political decision-making (Good Law Project, 2021). Furthermore, the revolving door between government officials and corporate interests—particularly in sectors such as finance, healthcare, and defence—has raised concerns about regulatory capture and the erosion of democratic accountability (Tingle, 2021). 3. Media Manipulation and the Role of Political Influencers The digital age has reshaped political discourse, with political influencers, content creators, and algorithm-driven news feeds often replacing traditional journalism as primary sources of information. The rise of soundbite-driven narratives over in-depth policy discussion has contributed to political polarisation and disinformation. Case Study: The Philippines – Social Media and the Rise of Rodrigo Duterte In the Philippines, former president Rodrigo Duterte’s 2016 election campaign demonstrated the power of social media manipulation in shaping democratic outcomes. Duterte’s team leveraged Facebook misinformation networks to craft a populist, anti-elite narrative that resonated with millions of voters (Ong & Cabañes, 2019). The use of paid trolls and automated bots to spread political messaging has since become a widespread strategy in global politics, raising ethical concerns about digital democracy and voter manipulation. 4. Economic Inequality and the Diminishing Power of the Electorate A critical component of democratic decline is the growing wealth gap, which limits political participation and access to power. Research by the World Inequality Report (2022) highlights that the wealthiest 1% of the global population controls over 45% of total global wealth, while the bottom 50% owns just 2% (Alvaredo et al., 2022). This economic disparity directly impacts political agency, as wealthier individuals and corporations have greater influence over policymaking, media, and election outcomes. Concluding Remarks: A New Era of Corporatism? While the erosion of democratic norms is evident, it would be overly simplistic to declare the absolute demise of democracy in favour of corporatism. Rather, what we are witnessing is a restructuring of governance, where corporate and elite interests play an increasingly dominant role in decision-making. The challenge for contemporary democracies is to reclaim political agency, strengthen institutional transparency, and reinforce the role of the electorate in shaping governance. To counteract these trends, reforms in campaign finance, media regulation, and corporate accountability are necessary to restore democratic integrity and limit the power of economic elites over public policy. Without such measures, democracies risk evolving into corporate-managed political systems, where the will of the people becomes secondary to the interests of multinational corporations and the ultra-wealthy. この論文は、現代民主主義の変容と企業支配の拡大について批判的に分析し、特に多国籍企業の政治的影響力、ロビー活動、規制の乗っ取り、メディア操作、経済的不平等の拡大が民主主義制度に及ぼす影響を検討する。米国、欧州連合、英国、フィリピン、フランスなどの事例を用いて、企業と政治の結びつきが政策決定や選挙プロセスに及ぼす影響を明らかにする。また、選挙資金改革、メディア規制、企業の説明責任強化など、民主主義の回復に向けた対策を提案し、企業による政治的支配を抑制する方法を探る。 References Alvaredo, F., Chancel, L., Piketty, T., Saez, E., and Zucman, G. (2022) 'World Inequality Report 2022'. World Inequality Lab. Available at: https://wir2022.wid.world/ (Accessed: 3 February 2025). Center for Responsive Politics (2022) 'Oil & Gas Lobbying, 2021'. OpenSecrets.org. Available at: https://www.opensecrets.org/industries/lobbying.php?cycle=2021&ind=E01 (Accessed: 3 February 2025). Corporate Europe Observatory (2021) 'Big Tech's Deep Pockets in Brussels: A Who's Who of the Industry's Lobbying Power'. Available at: https://corporateeurope.org/en/big-tech-lobbying-brussels (Accessed: 3 February 2025). Edelman (2023) 'Edelman Trust Barometer 2023'. Available at: https://www.edelman.com/trust/2023-trust-barometer (Accessed: 3 February 2025). European Commission (2022) 'The Digital Services Act: Ensuring a Safe and Accountable Online Environment'. Available at: https://ec.europa.eu/digital-strategy/our-policies/digital-services-act-ensuring-safe-and-accountable-online-environment_en (Accessed: 3 February 2025). Good Law Project (2021) 'COVID-19 Contracts and the Lack of Transparency'. Available at: https://goodlawproject.org/case/covid-contracts/ (Accessed: 3 February 2025). Hunter, W. and Power, T. J. (2022) 'Bolsonaro and the Struggle for Brazilian Democracy', Journal of Democracy, 33(2), pp. 47–61. Mayer, J. (2016) Dark Money: The Hidden History of the Billionaires Behind the Rise of the Radical Right. New York: Doubleday. Ong, J. C. and Cabañes, J. V. A. (2019) 'When Disinformation Studies Meet Production Studies: Social Identities and Moral Justifications in the Political Trolling Industry', International Journal of Communication, 13, pp. 5771–5790. Sengupta, A. (2021) 'India's Farm Laws: Corporate Interests and the State's Role', Journal of Agrarian Change, 21(4), pp. 647–656. Tingle, R. (2021) 'Revolving Doors and Regulatory Capture in the UK: A Critical Analysis', Public Administration, 99(3), pp. 567–582. Walker, S. (2021) 'Russia's State-Controlled Media: Propaganda and Censorship in the Digital Age', Journal of Media Ethics, 36(1), pp. 20–35. A Blog for Discussion, Not Ideology
Before beginning, I would like to thank my Grade 12 students, whose recent questions and discussions on this critical topic have been thoughtful and thought-provoking. Their maturity and flexible thinking are a testament to our planet's bright future. These conversations reflect the importance of critical inquiry in dismantling outdated and misleading ideas about Race and identity. This blog is intended to stimulate discussion rather than to promote any particular political or social ideology. It seeks to explore how social constructs—such as Race—hold immense power in shaping human societies, yet once identified as constructs, they can be deconstructed and dismantled. Tracing the historical and scientific dimensions of racial categorisation, this discussion encourages critical engagement with how we perceive and understand human differences. From a biological and genetic standpoint, Race does not exist, yet it remains a social reality with tangible effects. Historically, societies have used various forms of hierarchy—ethnicity, caste, religion, and geography—to distinguish between groups. While European colonialism codified racial divisions into law, other civilisations have also employed exclusionary classifications that share similarities with racial constructs. The key takeaway is that hierarchies and divisions are not fixed; they evolve and can be reshaped over time. The Scientific Perspective: Why Race Is Not a Biological Reality Modern genetics has thoroughly debunked the notion of Race as a scientifically valid classification. Research has shown that human variation does not conform to rigid racial categories and that genetic diversity is far greater within so-called racial groups than between them.
One of the most potent genetic arguments against racial essentialism is the discovery that all modern humans share a common maternal ancestor, often called "Mitochondrial Eve."
If there is any scientific truth to human origins, we are all connected through a shared common ancestor. This reinforces that Race is not a fixed biological reality but a social construct imposed upon a genetically continuous species. Race, Caste, and Hierarchy: A Global Perspective While Race, as conceptualised today, was primarily formalised through European colonialism by certain countries and scientific racism in the 18th and 19th centuries, the notion of categorising and stratifying human populations predates this period. Across world history, societies have used ethnicity, religion, caste, and geography—rather than strictly racial categories—to establish social hierarchies. (For example the Arab Slave Trade, the Indian Caste System, and Chinese Ethnocentrism illustrate how hierarchies existed independently of Race but served similar purposes.) 3. Conclusion: Race as a Construct and the Need for Reconstruction From a scientific perspective, Race does not exist, yet as a social construct, it has shaped human history and continues to influence societies today. ✔ Race was not solely a European invention—hierarchical divisions existed across multiple societies based on ethnicity, caste, and religion. ✔ Relatively European colonialism entrenched racial hierarchies, but other civilisations also engaged in exclusionary classifications long before colonial expansion. ✔ Race, like all social constructs, is not immutable—it can be reconstructed and redefined in ways that align with scientific knowledge and ethical progress. The persistence of racism today—despite overwhelming evidence of genetic unity and shared ancestry—is a testament to intellectual laziness, historical amnesia, and the power of social conditioning. Those who cling to racial superiority narratives ignore the very scientific advancements and historical knowledge that define modern civilisation.
If one must categorise humanity, let it be by intellectual curiosity vs. wilful ignorance, openness vs. prejudice, and knowledge vs. superstition. If Race is nothing more than a construct, racism is nothing more than an ideology of fear and falsehoods. Works Cited
This blog is dedicated to my Grade 12 students, whose critical thinking and openness to complex discussions inspire hope for the future. A.このブログは特定の政治的・社会的イデオロギーを推進するものではなく、「人種」という概念が科学的実体ではなく、社会的構築物であることを示すための議論を提供する。 現代遺伝学によれば、人間のDNAの99.9%は共通しており、人種間の遺伝的差異はごくわずかである(Collins et al., 2003)。また、**「ミトコンドリア・イブ」**の研究により、すべての現代人は約15万~20万年前の共通祖先を持つことが示されている(Cann, Stoneking & Wilson, 1987)。 歴史的にも、人類は人種ではなく、宗教・身分・地理的要因を基に階層構造を築いてきた(Hunwick & Powell, 2002)。中国の「華夷思想」、インドのカースト制度、オスマン帝国の宗教的ヒエラルキーなどがその例である。 21世紀において、人種主義は科学的・歴史的根拠を持たず、誤った認識に基づく。科学と知識に基づき、社会の再構築が求められる。 |
James M. HatchInternational Educator who happens to be passionate about Chito Ryu Karate. Born in Ireland, educated in Canada, matured in Japan Archives
January 2025
Categories
All
|
Proudly powered by Weebly