China’s ascendancy has come with a rising ambition to put their stamp on world affairs. But since their system of governance remains autocratic and repressive, the West has thought it prudent to begin to pull back investing in their land. The hope had always been that political change in China – toward a more open system – would come through trade. Instead, the Chinese Communist party keeps tightening its hold on their population. Many western companies have now begun to move their Chinese operations to other nations, notably Vietnam and India. Germany, on the other hand, is choosing to go in the other direction, increasing their investments in China. Is this wise? Is it naïve on the part of Germany’s business leaders to expect that China’s communist party will treat their increased investments any differently than those of other nations as they pursue their policy of favoring their own SOEs – state owned enterprises? I think it is. The communist party will not now change for German automakers and chemical plants. Instead the Chinese leadership will learn how to use their ties with Germany to find their way into the rest of Europe and undermine the western alliance. The German business sector knows of this risk and yet they persist. Has the lure of profits clouded their judgment? I think so. The cohesiveness the West has found in support of Ukraine’s defense needs much care to keep it alive. Engaging with Chinese company Huawei for the installation of 5G systems to upgrade communications infrastructure was deemed a poor choice by America, since it would open the way for information gathering on western operations by Chinese authorities. But while most of the West has agreed to bar Huawei from bidding on the 5G upgrade, Germany has chosen to believe there is no risk and will not do so. France, by contrast, is barring Huawei. Judging by the close economic ties Germany had developed with Putin over the years, it seems their successive governments have had trouble with reality. Denying that China is keen on using the West to their own ends is embracing denial. German business leaders think they will be spared but they will not. Of course, in the meantime, money will be made by both sides. By increasing their investments in China, Germany will be contributing to that nation’s ambition of world domination. German business leaders, with the complicity of prime minister Olaf Scholz, are denying reality. They have a history of doing so. Meanwhile, gentlemen, Ukraine could use more help. Winds of freedom are blowing from Ukraine. Not from China.
Photo by u0414u043cu0438u0442u0440u0438u0439 u0422u0440u0435u043fu043eu043bu044cu0441u043au0438u0439 on Pexels.com
Andrei G., 22, a soldier who took part in the invasion of Ukraine on February 24th, 2022, was selected to meet with Vladimir Putin in the Kremlin. Andrei had distinguished himself on the battlefield where he showed courage and skill. He served 6 consecutive months without a break until a battlefield explosion severely injured his right arm tearing it off at the shoulder. The remainder was amputated. He was awarded a medal of honor for his service to Russia which he is wearing pinned to his jacket on the right. He and Putin sit across each other in the room. Two military aides to Putin stand by. Through the window we see snow falling. It is mid morning in Moscow.
Putin – If there were more like you, we would have already conquered Ukraine. Andrei (left hand resting on his thigh) – There are more like me. Many more. On our side and their side. But they are fighting for their land. We are not. Putin – Ukraine is our land. Fascists in their government have manipulated public sentiment against us. Those Fascists are being paid by the West, which wants to extend their control over our people. But just like we defeated Hitler, we will defeat them. Andrei – Why do they want to extend their control over us? Putin – To take over our vast national resources and to encircle China.
Andrei looks down at his hand as he pauses.
Andrei – The Ukrainians I have fought don’t look like they are being manipulated by anyone. I have served because I answered the call to duty. In combat I killed 16 men. I am not proud of it.
The two military aides look at each other.
Putin – You are probably suffering from combat fatigue. It will affect your judgment, even make you depressed. But you will recover, I am sure of that. I will have our military psychologists work with you to restore your health and judgment.
Andrei shakes his head slowly as he looks at Putin.
Andrei – How do you recover from killing 16 brave men? Putin – Combat fatigue is pernicious, it affects your mood also. You need time to heal. We have specially designed settings to treat the condition. I will send you to one. Andrei – I don’t think I have combat fatigue. If I did have it, I’m over it. I got over it while recovering from the surgery to remove what was left of my right arm. Putin – Combat fatigue will make you say things you will regret later. For instance, because of your courage, once you get treatment, you could have a good job in the army as a motivational speaker, speaking to the troops to help them fight better. It comes with good pay and chances for advancement. With only one arm, your possibilities for work are diminished. Andrei – I may have only one arm but I am an intelligent man. I would like to explore my options. But thank you. Putin – Of course. Andrei – I have other concerns… which I’d like to share. Putin – Go ahead.
Andrei (sensing that the moment is precious) – This is your war, Mr President, not Russia’s war. If I had been using my brain I would have defected, like so many have done since your expanded order for recruitment…
Putin’s eyes narrow as the two aides share a look of concern between them.
Andrei – … but because I didn’t think clearly, I became your accomplice and then killed 16 men. Brave men, all of them, fighting for something that mattered, not for the vanity of one person.
Flushed with anger, Putin’s expression turns somber. He looks directly at Andrei.
Andrei – In battle, in the fury and danger of every moment, I developed a conscience… and having done so it became harder to kill Ukrainians… or send others to kill them in your name.
Putin thinks of ending the interview and glances at the aides standing by. They are ready to step in.
Andrei then reaches for the medal of valor pinned on his right chest and awarded by Putin himself, takes it in his hand and extends it to Putin.
Putin (exploding, shouting) – Fool! Fool! To show my gratitude I have offered to give you something but you sit there and tell me I’m a liar. Fool! You have no understanding of what it means to lead a nation, to not let it be pushed aside by the West and China. Russia will not be humiliated! Andrei – You mean you will not be humiliated… Putin – Silence! How dare you. Andrei (defiantly) – Why should we pay for your dreams of power? Putin – I said silence!
And with a sudden swing of his arm he swats the medal off Andrei’s hand, the medal tumbling to the floor and bouncing off before coming to rest near a wall.
The two aides quickly step front and placing themselves on both sides of Andrei, pull him back by his shoulders.
Aide – We should remove this man, Mr President. Putin (controlling himself) – Wait. (to Andrei, calmly) I should send you to prison for your disrespect… but I won’t. Instead, you will be discharged from the Army.
Andrei shrugs with an air of insouciance.
Putin – … but you shall not speak of your ideas to anyone… understood?
Andrei stares back.
Putin signals for the aides to remove Andrei. They pick him up by his shoulders, escort him out, wait a few moments for a vehicle, sit in the back seat flanking him and drive off. Moments later, near a corner in central Moscow, the car stops, one aide gets out and Andrei exits after him. Not a word is exchanged between them. Andrei walks off and disappears into the crowd of pedestrians. The time is 11 am. The snow is still falling.
He hasn’t been heard of since. His family put in a complaint with the authorities. Some say he crossed the border with Estonia and then joined Ukrainians in their fight. Some say he emigrated to America. Others say he was seen in London. No one is certain. But wherever he is, his proud and defiant spirit lives on.
Do not let him silence your voices. He is no leader. Leaders are people who help us become better than who we are. Not worse. You need to join the world, not turn your back on it. Ukraine was never a threat to you or your country. Ukrainians want to become free to choose their destiny, not join in Putin’s plans. He is an envious man. He has not been able to develop your potential as a people and looks around and sees other nations moving past Russia. But he doesn’t know what to do. So his envy is turned to murderous rage. In your name. With your talents and resources you could become one of the top nations in the world. Instead, you have chosen to build nuclear weapons. You have chosen to enlarge your destructive powers rather than your creative ones. So you hide behind such weapons. That is your failure as a nation. But you can recover. Right now, in one of your prisons, sits Alexei Navalny, one of your bravest men. Navalny chose to openly challenge Putin. Because of it he was poisoned and nearly killed. He will never be released unless Russians speak up. You cannot win the war with Ukraine. The West won’t let you. It does not matter how many nuclear weapons you have because you can’t fire them. If you do, then you will burn also. Nuclear weapons are useful to scare people. But then you can’t use them. You can’t use them because other nations have the same weapons. If Putin fired a nuclear weapon toward the West and one of our cities burned, then your cities would burn, too. Beautiful Moscow and St Petersburg would be gone. The madness of nuclear weapons is that they can only scare people and that’s it. No more. Think about it. All that effort and that’s all you get for it. There was one leader, a real leader, a Russian leader, who once proposed to Reagan, then the American president, to ban all nuclear weapons. Imagine that. The vision. That leader wanted to free the world of fear. I wish Reagan would have had the imagination your leader had. That leader was Mikhail Gorbachev. That flash of brilliance came from a Russian. There is more of that in you. So step up and use that light you have to brighten the darkness in our world. Today, many countries are torn by war and repression, kept from fulfilling their potential by small minded men like Putin. We need you to emerge so other countries will emerge. And maybe the Chinese, seeing your example, will rise against the oppressive communist party that now deprives them of their freedom. Rise Russia, rise! Putin is holding you back. Rise and the world will rise with you. The price you pay will be well worth it. And we will all be grateful.
Consider these two examples. About a year ago or so in Florida, a man riding a motorcycle was tapped by a moving vehicle at an intersection. By his own admission, neither he nor his bike were damaged. But the other vehicle, driven by a woman, didn’t stop and left the scene instead. The man in the bike followed. Another person, who had witnessed the accident, followed, too. The woman arrived at her home, aware that the man in the bike had trailed her. She went inside, took out her gun, stepped out and pointed it at him. The man drew his own and shot her dead. No charges were pressed. What stands out in this incident? The woman should have stopped, yes, apologized and taken responsibility. The man who chose to follow needed only to get her license plate and report it to the police. He already had a witness. But he didn’t. He chose to seek justice on his own. Now consider this second example. A few days ago, in Houston, a man and his wife were robbed at an ATM. As the robber fled, the man shot at him but missed. Instead, he struck and killed a 9 year old girl sitting in a passing car. A grand jury chose to not indict the man. So who takes responsibility for the death of the 9 year old? No one. In both instances, the responses of the shooters show poor judgment and a profound disregard for our institutions. The number of states which allow its residents to carry guns without a license is steadily increasing. But it does not make any sense. What is being neglected in the two examples described above? The level of emotional continence in the men who fired the guns. Neither had enough emotional strength to see the potential consequences of their actions. The law let them get away with it but their behaviors are clear examples of what we’re not doing as a society. To not require a license to carry a weapon that can kill another person is to assume that the carrier is of sound judgment. Otherwise, why would it be allowed? So why are we not measuring that? This is our failure as a society. We have let Second Amendment defenders carry the day without regard for the character that should stand behind it. In the name of freedom we are failing to protect our citizens. In the year 1789, March 4th, in the city of New York, the second amendment was put forward as part of the bill of rights. It read, ‘A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.’ That was 233 years ago, nearly a quarter of a millennium. At the time it was justified as the nation was being formed and its institutions developed. But today the second amendment is outdated. It has become an obstacle to our political maturation and public safety. Why didn’t the man in the first example call the police so they, instead, would track the woman? He had all the identifying information. Why didn’t the man in the second example, think of the consequences of an errant shot? Now an innocent 9 year old is dead because of his poor judgment. Neither shooter was doing anything for the ‘security of a free State’ as the second amendment reads. But the law allowed it. Both men were indulging their lack of emotional control and poor judgment. In Texas, there is now a motion being proposed to allow the lowering of the age for lawful possession of a firearm without a license to 18 years. No mention is made of assessing the emotional maturity of the gun bearer. The second amendment to the constitution is impeding our democratic progress. In the face of growing global threats, i.e. China, it is imperative that we accelerate our civic maturation, to go hand in hand with our technological, scientific and industrial advancement. Evidence that we are not making enough civic progress is the extreme polarization we are stuck with at this time. What is needed now is to foster dialogue between our citizens and facilitate emotional growth. Not unrestricted gun ownership. The second amendment is impeding our personal safety and our evolution as a nation.
Yesterday, John Fetterman and Mehmet Oz dueled in their only debate. I read that Fetterman showed some dysfunction in some of his replies, which stem from the stroke he had last May and will take some more time to get over. His doctor, Clifford Chen, has given him a good health report while allowing that some cognitive dysfunction is still present. In an article in the New York Times, also from yesterday, Dr Taylor, a neuroscientist who had a stroke 25 years ago and is fully recovered, underscored the importance of neuro plasticity, the brain’s ability to correct its deficits. It appears that neuroplasticity is working for John Fetterman as he is making steady progress. He did postpone debates with Mr Oz because he wanted more time to heal. So what are some of the differences between these two men? Fetterman was mayor of Braddock, a small former steel town, for 13 years. He worked hard to stem crime in the area. Then he used that record to get elected as Lieutenant Governor. Mr Oz, a former cardiovascular surgeon, owes his fame to his association with the Oprah Winfrey show, and subsequently his own program, where he endorsed remedies of dubious effectiveness. Mr Oz didn’t even live in Pennsylvania until he decided to run for the Senate. He lived in New Jersey. So he flew in to run for the Senate, on the wings of an endorsement from the great wizard of Mar-A-Lago, Donald Trump, who’s still claiming that the election in 2020 was stolen from him. By comparison, John Fetterman has been committed to battling our social ills for a good part of his life. I don’t agree with Fetterman’s choice to legalize marijuana, but many people do and one day it will be legal throughout the nation. But I strongly agree with his steadfast efforts to bring about criminal justice reform. The main difference between the two men lies in their history of political involvement. Fetterman has been socially involved and deeply so. Oz is obviously a talented man, but it was Oprah and his own TV show which have made him a household name. Not political involvement. We don’t need in office people who are merely famous. We need people who have a history of grappling with our social dysfunction. Donald Trump had zero record of doing anything to help anyone before running for office. But he was rich. Somehow, that appealed to many. Perhaps they thought he would lead them to riches also. Trump has gotten away with a lot. But that story is slowly coming to an end. Unbelievably, his endorsements still work in some communities. In Georgia he has chosen to support Herschel Walker, the former football player, to run for the Senate. Never mind that Walker has no record of prior political involvement. . The wizard of Mar-A-Lago is again betting that his charm and charisma will be enough to put his people in the Senate. We have to choose, don’t we? Appearance over substance. If we make the wrong choice, we may end up joining a crowd marching to overturn an election. We decide.
Good choice by his party, though it took them some time to figure it out. Six weeks of Liz Truss, his predecessor, and a handful of horrible economic choices which Sunak predicted would not make sense. It is astonishing that the conservative party went for her plan even though the evidence against it was overwhelming. Cutting taxes and increasing governmental spending during a period of rising inflation? No, said Sunak, and he was firm about it. Because of it he is now prime minister. The first prime minister of color in the UK. Another good point for a country divided by Brexit, largely on matters of immigration. It is also refreshing to see Britain’s parliamentary system work effectively. Leader not performing well, out with them. Quickly. Thank you to Boris Johnson who decided to step aside and not further delay a decision. He had his day, and his good points, but in the end the flaws piled up. I thank Johnson for his solid support of Ukraine. That proved to be his high point. Kyiv will remember him well, as Zelensky has said. My sense is that Sunak will do a terrific job. He’s conscious of the many difficulties that lie ahead and is eager to square with them. He gives me the impression that he has the strength of character to deal with adversity. On the matter of his being a person of color. It is a great step forward for Britain. The royal family has had its troubles accepting Meghan Markle, a person of color also and Prince Harry’s wife, as one of their own. We hope that King Charles will be wiser on that count. Sunak is clearly aware of how much is expected of him. As was the case here in America when Obama was elected in 2008. In a Europe roiled by immigration issues, Sunak’s performance will be watched closely. How much can Europe transform its immigrants, how quickly can they make them one of their own? There will be a lot of Sunak watching. The man is ready for the job, exultant that he’s been trusted with the responsibility and confident that he will deliver. In the tradition of his nation, Sunak will be a friend to America, and to the western alliance that needs to stay unified and so face down the rising Chinese threat. Here’s to Britain, long a strong defender of democracy, proving that the system works. And here’s to the British people, and their regenerative capacities. Thank you
They sit across a table in the interrogation room of the detention center. She is Nasrin, a beautiful woman, 31, with expressive eyes and lustrous, shoulder length black hair. She is not wearing her headscarf. She was apprehended earlier in the day as she walked in a business section of Teheran without her hijab. The policeman who had detained her had written a short note which lay on the table along with her identifying information. The security officer, a wiry man in his mid thirties, nodded to himself as he read the note. Then, aloud to Nasrin…
Officer – ‘Woman ignored my call for her to stop and instead walked faster. Another policeman that was ahead of us saw me chasing her and he blocked her path and we both detained her. Arrogant. Stubborn.’
The officer looks at Nasrin directly.
Officer – Why? Nasrin – Because it’s my body and it belongs to me and no one else. Officer – But you are Muslim… Nasrin – So far. Officer – You want to change your religion? Nasrin – Ha! I’m well aware that if I tried that I would be guilty of apostasy, punishable by life imprisonment or death. Officer – Yes… we are who we are… and our rules come from the prophet who heard them from Allah. So… how is Islam making you unhappy? Nasrin – Those rules were made by men, at a time when women were subservient. The world has changed and Islam should change with it. Officer – Have you read the Qur’an? Nasrin – It needs to be updated. Officer (irritated) – Nasrin… please… I’m going to pretend I didn’t hear that. Have you been to the West? Nasrin – I haven’t. Not yet. But I plan to. Officer – I see. What do you think the purpose of wearing hijab is? Nasrin – To keep women down. Officer – You are stubborn. I’m trying to help you but you’re not letting me. All you have to do is agree with the law and you can walk out. Why make life difficult for you? Do you want me to send you to a tribunal of clerics so they can decide what punishment to give you? Nasrin – Do you know what the real purpose of the hijab is? Officer – Please be careful with your words because I don’t want to send you to detention. Nasrin – The hijab is meant to protect men from their insecurities. Officer – What? Nasrin – A beautiful woman will attract other men’s attention and you can’t handle that…
Annoyed, the officer sits back.
Nasrin – … So you cover us up… but it’s up to us if we want to stay with the men in our lives… or go elsewhere… or simply be with no man… or woman. Our sexuality is ours… ours to share it with whom we want. That’s why this theocracy we live under is obsolete. And the protests you’re seeing are about that. About the freedom of our bodies and the freedom of our minds. We own our bodies and minds, not the clerics, not the ayatollahs, not the police, not you. We give birth to men and women… if we stopped giving birth… if we refused to have you in our bodies… there would be no more Iran… that is our power. Now our work is to claim it, to affirm it. Officer – Have you ever been married? Nasrin – Not yet. Maybe I never will. Officer – You don’t want to have children? Nasrin – I don’t have to be married for that. My freedom is more important than anything else. And we, Persian women, are learning that. And it appears incompatible with living under this regime. Officer – I’m going to pretend I didn’t hear that. Nasrin – Do you have daughters? Officer – Yes, I do. Nasrin – Don’t you want them to be free?
The officer leans forward, looks down at the ground.
Nasrin – When we get our freedom, which we will, men will discover freedoms of their own that they didn’t know were possible. Officer – What? Nasrin – Your keeping us so controlled, keep you from becoming better men.
The officer looks straight at Nasrin, the expression stern. But then, to her surprise, he breaks into a chuckle as his eyes soften.
Officer – You’re going to put your hijab back on and you’re going to walk with me out of this place. We will walk two blocks, with you wearing your hijab. Then you will go your own way. And if I ever see you again… I will ask you to share a meal with me. Now, put your hijab back on and let’s walk out.
Nasrin does so, and the two walk out of the detention center. The guards at the entrance bow respectfully to the officer as he and Nasrin go by.
They are very clear about it. ‘The Communist Party knows what is good for you. So you have to do as we say. If you don’t, then there will be consequences.’ One such consequence is being reeducated. You are taught the right way to think. ‘Party people have tried very hard to do the thinking for you, so you should be grateful to be the recipient of such wisdom.’ Xi Jinping has even put his ‘elevated thoughts’ into a booklet, ‘Xi Jinping Thought’, just like Mao Ze Dong did before him with the little Red Book. Is there a cost to trying to do your own thinking? Just ask the Hong Kong dissenters who are now in prison or exile, after the celestial powers of Xi Jinping came down hard and crushed them in 2019. China is asking the world to respect their way of doing things, because that is best for their people. Never mind asking the Uyghurs in Xinjiang province how they feel about it. They, too, like Hong Kongers, have felt the mighty Chinese fist. China is presently holding their 20th National Congress, where Xi Jinping is expected to be reelected to a third 5 year term as president. Speculation has it that he’ll ask for a fourth term at the next congress in 2027. And on and on. China has studied carefully the downfall of the Soviet Union, to ensure they don’t make the same ‘mistakes.’ Mistakes being anything that erodes the party’s integrity and clout. As far as they’re concerned, Gorbachev was an idiot and weakling and his policies of Perestroika (restructuring) and Glasnost (opening) exactly what to avoid to prevent the erosion of their power. But Gorbachev was no idiot. Instead he opened the way to free many countries that had languished under the tight controls of the Soviets. Sadly, the reforms he made possible didn’t last in Russia itself. He transferred power to Boris Yeltsin in 1991 and then Yeltsin chose Putin as premier in 1999. That was the big mistake. Had Yeltsin been a better judge of character, Russia would not have been saddled with the profound limitations of Putin. With the enormity of the atrocities committed by him, the likelihood is that the post Putin era will be one of greater openness. The very opposite of what China would like. Which may create tensions between them. Let’s hope so. People in power in China have persuaded their citizenry that deferring to a one party system is the answer. They have been told to sacrifice their freedom to accomplish their goals of world domination. The Chinese population is under close surveillance and lacks freedom of speech. They have made enormous material progress in the last 40 years, in large part due to their opening to the West which brought in ideas and technological knowhow. That in turn stimulated China’s own creativity. But the mistake they make is to think that freedom can be sacrificed. Even in open and democratic societies, not all people choose freedom. But those who do are the ones who keep the forward thrust of nations alive. Human beings can sacrifice freedom temporarily to attain certain goals, but it should not be for long. Being distant form it ends up diminishing us. China is going through a prosperous period at present. But it won’t last. As the pace of prosperity begins to diminish, the communist party and its army of non thinkers will rage against its perceived enemies which will lead to disastrous actions. Cruelty of the same dimension as what we’ve seen in Ukraine, lies in the future of China. We’ve seen it with Uyghurs and Hong Kongers. They’ll try to do it also with Taiwan. We, meanwhile, should do all we can to increase our strengths – industrial, military and civic – so we can go to the assistance of those in need like we do today in Ukraine. The reelection of Xi Jinping for a third term is not a good sign. China’s reluctance to be open has already had enormous consequences. After the outbreak of CoVid 19 in Wuhan, they refused to cooperate with the World Health Organization to investigate the source of the spread. When Australia asked for an investigation of such action, China responded with trade restrictions on that nation. That’s who they are. Creative in some ways, backwards in some others. Always controlling. We should not let down our guard and must keep strengthening our country and the West. Otherwise, China will be reeducating us into thinking like them.
Retreat! Go home! You’ve lost this war. Stop murdering people, Ukrainians and your own. The West will not stop supporting Ukrainians and we will not surrender to you or anyone. We are a free people. Russians are not. You have failed. But you don’t have the decency to own up to it, and instead want to sacrifice more of your own brothers and sisters, while firing more missiles to Ukraine to destroy all you can and massacre as many as possible. Pause when you’re looking at yourself in the mirror. Look carefully. Yours is the face of inhumanity and cruelty. There’s no way back for you. If you dreamt of being revered as a great leader, you failed. And you failed because you thought you could own other human beings, strip them of free speech and command them to obey you instead. Those who resisted, you poisoned, incarcerated or killed. That is you who are. You have built nothing. You think your nuclear weapons will save you? They will not. Because if we give in to you now, we will have to give in tomorrow. If you fire your nuclear weapons we will fire back. If New York burns, then Moscow will burn. And the Chinese know that if that happens, then Shanghai and Beijing will burn too, for the West cannot allow China to be left intact, for they are your accomplices and they will take advantage to dominate everyone they can. That is who the Chinese are at this stage of their development. Look at them, just starting a big convention to reelect their dictator, Xi Jinping, to another 4 years. They’re very proud of their accomplishments. So they won’t let you ruin things for them. If they see you eager to fire on the West, then they’ll turn their nuclear weapons and point them at you, to keep you from destroying what they’ve worked hard to build. They will not let you drive them to destruction. You could have done something very different with Russia, a nation with so much talent and so many natural resources. But your ego needed to be fed and you convinced Russians that was a national priority. It has taken them a while to realize that such deal was costly and at their expense. But there’s still time for you to stop committing atrocities. I’m sure Russians will let you enjoy retirement in peace. But they must act now. It could be anyone stepping up and saying, ‘enough!’ It could be a member of your personal guard, stepping up and saying, ‘You have caused so much destruction, this can’t go on.’ Anyone, please, act now. Russians, you started it. Now stop it. We earn our freedom every day.
Both come into this world needing stimulation and nurture to be able to thrive. From the start, the desire for friendship and love is felt by both. Basic skills are soon acquired to function in the community. But something begins to happen at about there. The group one belongs to, has rules that should be followed to better manage the inevitable conflicts. The Creator sees the benefit of it. The Destroyer starts to think, how can I get around them? With the acquisition of work skills, the desire for personal autonomy gathers strength. The realization that one need not be tied to one’s community of origin sets in and there is a large world out there that beckons. Early in our existences two questions come forward to face us. What to do with our lives? What can we do best? How we answer them will determine our futures. The better responses will come if we’ve developed a good sense of self, which in turn flows from having had positive interactions with fellow human beings. The Creator thinks in terms of improving themselves and earn the admiration of peers. The Destroyer also thinks of their improvement, but with a twist – how to be feared and take advantage of others. The Creator sees the need for deepening friendships. The Destroyer sees the need for developing alliances. I see envy as a key driver for the Destroyer. They asses, early on, that they are different, that they don’t have what Creators do but find that they can use them. Shallow friendships would be the norm for the Destroyer, or else they’d betray their true nature. While both busy themselves in the quest for advancement, the Destroyer never loses sight of how to gain advantage over others. Once Creators find a path for their strengths, they set about to improve themselves and, in doing so, enrich their communities by the services they render. The Destroyer may have identified personal strengths they could develop, but what attracts them the most is the desire to manipulate and use people. They may be aware of envy as a powerful motivator in their lives but, if they are, they choose to not wrestle with the emotion and learn how to manage it. The desire for control supersedes it. Creators, in their commitment to their work, find meaning in their lives. Destroyers may find meaning, too, but of a different kind, one filled with the power wrested from those who didn’t have the courage to follow their own paths. In our world today, there are Destroyers in position of great influence. Some have become leaders of nations. Those who applaud them or have become their pawns, should ask themselves, ‘why did I choose to not find my own path? Now, each time I applaud the Destroyer I am saying, I am your accomplice, your vassal and instrument.’ Man earns his freedom every day.
Oscar Valdes 