God Save the Queen – From her Son

 

Lads can be a lot of fun – however, just because you can relate to the guy doesn’t mean you should want him running things

Now that Ghislaine Maxwell has been found guilty of sex trafficking, the single most pressing question on everyone’s lips is whether she will go quietly or whether she’s going to spill the beans on some of the most powerful people around. The most prominent name on the list is Prince Andrew, the Duke of York, who is also the second and reportedly favorite son of Queen Elizabeth.

The Duke of York is what you’d call the Covid-Virus of British Diplomacy. Whilst he’s not in the direct line for the British Throne, he is a prominent member of the royal family or at least one of the ones that makes the news. As such, everything he says or does is open to public scrutiny. Both monarchy and government are screwed by whatever he does. Nobody is quite sure what will come up should he stand trial and his avoidance of court makes it look like he’s being protected because of his status.

Prince Andrew has also not helped himself. Nobody will ever forget his infamous interview with the BBC on the matter where he appeared shifty and guilty:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QtBS8COhhhM

 

 The nicest thing you can say about him is that his infamous remarks about his inability to sweat due to his time in the Falklands War have created lots of jokes on the internet. He has become the living example of “deadwood” in business case studies:

https://ianwhitworth.net/how-to-spot-the-deadwood-in-your-business/

 

To be fair to the Duke of York he isn’t the only royal in history to have been a problem. The Queen got her job because her uncle abdicated the throne to marry a divorcee and he was known to be a Nazi sympathizer Her sister, the late Princes Margaret was as colourful as she was dutiful. Nobody can forge the scandals that Prince Charles got involved in over his affairs with Camilla Parker Bowels (now is wife). He was, as my Finnish friend reminded us, “The weird man who kicked a beautiful blonde out of his bed for an old hag.” The said Beautiful Blonde, Diana, Princes of Wales also had no qualms actively portraying the Royal Family as wealthier version of EastEnders and that activity has now been passed onto her latest daughter-in-law who is on a mission to remind us how “unwoke” the Royal Family is.

However, whilst all these previous scandals were “embarrassing” they were not actually criminal. Sure, nobody wants their intimate conversations out in the public domain. It’s humiliating for people to know your ambition is to be your girlfriend’s tampon but its not criminal. Wondering about your grandchild’s skin tone might show you up to be out of touch – but it isn’t criminal.

Having sex with an underaged girl who has now made a case that she was trafficked into having sex with you, is, unfortunately for the Duke York, a criminal offense. It’s called “statutory rape” and in the hierarchy of crimes, it ranks somewhere near the bottom.

Prince Andrew as is reported, seems to be unaware of the problem that he is. The royal family have seen to it that he has stepped back from Royal Duties (effectively told to disappear). It’s been reported that the person pushing out of the limelight is his brother, the Prince of Wales, who is pushing to have a slimmed down monarchy:

https://pagesix.com/2021/04/28/prince-charles-is-making-sure-prince-andrew-stays-out-of-public-eye/

However, whilst the Prince of Wales has become more active in the running of the monarchy, he is still not yet the monarch and it is said that his mother continues to have a lot of affection for him. As my mother once said, “A mother’s natural instincts are to protect her children no matter how awful they are:”

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-9989621/Queen-wont-overrule-Prince-Charles-plan-Prince-Andrew-away-public-duties.html

Whilst it’s clear that the Prince has become “deadwood” for the Royal Family, its actually not that long ago when he was regarded as the fun-loving, relatable one, a little like his nephew, Prince Harry. Unlike his brother, Prince Charles, he was relatable (who do you think makes better company – the guy who talks to plants or the guy who chases skirt?) and unlike his younger brother, Prince Edward, who dropped out of the Royal Marines and got into the theater, Prince Andrew was a “real man” who had a real military career, including active service in the Falklands War (nothing puffy about “Randy-Andy”).

He was, in many ways, the story book prince, who cut a dashing figure in his military uniform.

 

Which girl wouldn’t fall for a handsome prince? – Copyright, The Daily Mail

Unfortunately, like his nephew, the fun, loveable phase didn’t last very long. Harry has evolved from a loveable rogue into a “woke-twat,” who spends his time bitching about how hard he has it because he’s not getting perks of being in the monarchy since he stepped back from being an active-duty royal.

Prince Andrew, however, has become something worse. He’s evolved from handsome prince into a sleazy, entitled old man who refuses to give back. Randy-Andy, who was a loveable rogue became “Airmiles Andy” who saw no problem with jetting around the world at the tax payers’ expense (Unlike his older brother who has always felt the need to justify his existence and as was highlighted in 1992, he alone of the Royal Family handed over a portion of his income earned independently of the tax payer to the government’s coffers, even though he was under no legal obligation to pay tax).

 

 The handsome prince got a little too used to the high life and never questioned if his friends were good for him.-Copyright The Straits Times

If you leave aside the issues with their respective wives, Charles was the “boring-strange” one who was actually using his “privileged” status to ensure that the less privileged would actually have a better shot in life. The Prince’s Trust is one of the more active organisations in the United Kingdom doing good for poor people:

https://www.princes-trust.org.uk/

 

 Andy was the fun one who grew to believe that it was his right to party at other people’s expense. If he wasn’t being funded by his mother or the tax payer, he found dodgy friends who were willing to pay for it:

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/nov/16/questions-persist-over-how-prince-andrew-funded-luxury-lifestyle

Whatever is said of Prince Charles, you cannot fault him for trying to use his position to make life better for people The same cannot be said for Andrew and in a funny way, he is the person proving his brother right in as much as there is a need to slim down the monarchy.

The best part is the fact that the man seems unable to recognize the problems he caused or the crap that he’s in. He’s been relieved of all royal duties for a good reason. Yet, he chooses to start a row about wearing an admiral’s uniform at his father’s funeral. Why do that?

In way, the person who shoulders the most blame is the Queen, who has worked tirelessly for her people. Her fault came from a good place – the desire to be the mother that she wasn’t with her older children, as is reported below:

https://www.elle.com/culture/movies-tv/a35093734/the-crown-prince-andrew-queen-elizabeth-favorite-child/

Still, there’s so much you can blame on a person’s parents. The man is 60 and he’s got access to all the advice that he can get. Surely, you’d imagine that he would be able to sort his own mess out by now? His siblings seem to have managed?

 

Handsome Prince Liked to Party too Much and Now He’s a Sad Old man – Copyright Hello

There’s nothing wrong with being a “party-boy” or hanging out with “party-boys.” However, there comes a moment when you got to notice if the party boys are willing to clean up after the party is over. If you notice that the party boy only wants to party and expects you to clean up the crap, its time to move on and find actual friends.

Freak Elections

 

This time last year (January 6, 2021) the world was treated to the sight of hundreds of people storming the Capital Building in Washington DC. America’s Congress came under attack and its legislators were forced to flee.  However, unlike September 11, 2001, the attack on the US Capital was not the work of a “Mad Freedom Hating Muslim” extremist hiding in the caves of Afghanistan. The attacks were committed by Americans, who were for the records, mostly the ones of European decent (You could say they were as mainstream as it gets).

Like the terrorist who flew the jets into the Twin Towers in New York and the Pentagon, the people who attacked the capital had a grievance.  They believed that they had been robbed because the candidate they had voted for, former US President Donald Trump, had lost. As far as they were concerned, this was a fraudulent and freaky election and something had to be done about it:

 

Copyright Aljazeera – This is what happens in S***hole countries  

For a world used to America as a global champion of competence, these images were shocking. From 15 December 1788 onwards, America had been the global example of how to transfer power peacefully. Elections were held. The winner celebrated but more importantly, the loser conceded peacefully. As with the case of the 2000 election, disputes were settled through the court system rather than through mob violence.

In very simple terms, it was news when Goodluck Jonathan handed over power peacefully to Muhammadu Buhari after losing the 2015 election in Nigeria because it had never happened before. However, this was not Nigeria (a country which the then President labeled as an S***hole) but America. Nobody should have imagined that a losing candidate would ever “not concede” when the results were clear (Fox News was very clear that there was no evidence of voter fraud despite what Fox Commentators were trying to tell them) let alone bring the mob into the picture.

I will leave a more detailed discussion on what happened a year ago to the better qualified. I will however, argue that the then occupant of the White House had presented his case to his base of voters that his losing would be a “freak” election. His case was simple – it was inconceivable for him to lose in normal circumstances and any “freak” result would be the result of some nefarious plotting and therefore bad.

Now, here’s the interesting question, how would Mr. Trump get the idea of painting any election defeat as a “freak” and therefore bad event? Well, I guess many things are going to be said about Mr. Trump, but I will argue that there is a possibility that the great snake oil salesman got his ideas from a self-appointed Chinese sage who was enjoying a second career as an international consultant on how to build a nation.

Back in 2008/2009, Mr. Lee actually raised the possibility that military intervention might have been necessary in the event of a “freak” election which would see the People’s Action Party (PAP) lose power. Whilst were noises of discontent on the ground, Mr. Lee’s party was in no danger of losing power and even with the loss of four seats in the 2011 election, his party’s dominance remains absolute by most standards.

Furthermore, Singapore along with Malaysia remained unusual for the region because both nations had a history of keeping out politics. Singapore’s selling point to the foreign investor community was the fact that power was decided by the ballot box rather than by the generals unlike say Thailand, Indonesia or Burma.

So, why would Mr. Lee who had done so much to “sell Singapore” to the foreign investor community raise the specter of something that had never happened before? Was it even possible for the military to play a role in politics? An analysis of the specter of military intervention can be found at:

http://kentridgecommon.com/military-action-in-the-event-of-a-freak-election-result-a-contemplation-of-such-a-scenario/  

Mr. Lee did distance himself from the specter of military intervention when questioned about it by the author Catherine Lim. He even mentioned that the system did provide “opposition” parties with every opportunity to succeed and even mentioned that if the PAP deserved to lose because it got incompetent or corrupt, it would deserve to lose.

A more comprehensive report on Mr. Lee’s remarks can be found in the following report:

https://www.asiaone.com/News/AsiaOne%2BNews/Singapore/Story/A1Story20090904-165691.html

Whilst the 2 September 2009 remarks did distance Mr. Lee from raising specter of the possibility of military intervention, it was very clear that he believed that a “freak” election result meant “non-PAP” government and the automatic assumption was that it would inevitably be incompetent – as was very clear in his remarks several months earlier:

https://www.thestar.com.my/news/regional/2008/06/27/lky-one-freak-election-result-is-all-it-takes-to-wipe-spore-out  

As a rule of thumb, Singapore’s elections are as certain as death and taxes. The electorate has shown that it does want the government run by the PAP but it wants the government to understand that it is ultimately responsible to the electorate. So, for years, the electorate kept Mr. Low Thia Khiang in Hougang and Mr. Chiam See Tong in Potong Pasir despite the best efforts of the government to unseat them. However, in 2011, the electorate showed that even with two unshakeable opposition politicians, the PAP wasn’t listening to its bosses and so, they sacked the PAP team in Aljunied and gave Mr. Low’s Worker’s Party the seeds of being an actual effective opposition voice.

What happened? Once again, much has been said about the 2011 election but what is clear was that whilst the people still respected Mr. Lee as an elder statesman, they were tiered of the “self-serving sermons.” A party that had done so much to build the nation should have remembered that the way to ensure that a “freak” election would no happen would be by ensuring that the voters would never have a reason to create one. Scaring voters with talk about a “freak” election backfired because instead of focusing on why one would take place, they focused on the negatives of what would happen if they were not in power.

In all fairness, Mr. Lee Kuan Yew did many good things for Singapore and it was good that he was able to share much of his wisdom with the world. His success in the shape of a shinning Singapore was his calling card. However, while it is ironic, if Mr. Lee’s greatest contribution to the world might come from his last disappointment where politicians get the idea that scaring voters away from kicking them out of power backfires, thus forcing them to do their jobs to ensure that the voters will not have a reason to remove them.

The Miracle of Laughing at Yourself

 

A few days after writing about the friendship between the late Archbishop Desmond Tutu and the Dalai Lama, (As it Should Be) I received a lovely snippet of the interaction between these two old men from my mother. The video clip is below:

 

What becomes very clear about the relationship is that the friendship between the two men is genuine and if you forget the fact that both men (or in the case of the archbishop was) were very old (over 80) and representing two different faiths, you would imagine that they were school boys or at least trying to relive their school days. They spend a good portion of the clip ribbing each other in the way that only real friends can (think of the way that they both call each other mischievous and when asked about how they see death, the archbishop says that the Dalai Lama doesn’t worry because he can always reincarnate).

The banter and the obvious pleasure that they take in each other’s company is part and parcel of what makes these men so great. Both the Archbishop and the Dalai Lama fought for their respective people against forces that were far more “powerful” in the material sense of the word and have not only survived but become glorified as a result.

Like it or not, we live in a world where might is inevitably right. Why, for example, does the world turn a blind eye when American troops march into Middle Eastern countries? Does anyone seriously think that the world is actually going to do anything meaningful about China’s mistreatment of its ethnic minorities? The answer is obvious – nobody is going to risk getting on the wrong side of the big elephant of geopolitics.

We can talk all we want about “World Order” and the “Rules based System,” but when the elephants want to do something that contravenes the rules, nobody is going to stop them. American military and economic protection are often vital to the survival of nations. Being able to access the Chinese market and getting Chinese investment are increasingly vital to nations too, so damn the rules-based system because, might is inevitably right. As Stalin is reported to have once said when talking about the Pope – “How many divisions does the Pope have?”  Apartheid was brought to an end for a simple reason – nobody wanted to deal with a rogue regime on the Southern tip of Africa. Unfortunately for Tibetans and Uighurs, China is an economic powerhouse and its military is getting stronger. Even American Presidents keep conflicts with China to the verbal.

However, whilst might (military and economic) counts, its not everything and simple morality has a way of twisting the mightiest of beings and showing up their limits. Let’s remember, India got its independence from the Empire that the sun never set on because “A hundred thousand Englishmen cannot rule 300 million Indians, if the Indians simply refuse to be ruled.” Whilst Indian independence was not free of violence, it was actually remarkably peaceful.

Both Desmond Tutu and the Dalai Lama have become figures of reverence because they were willing to take on the far more powerful adversaries without turning nasty. These men are like Aikido masters in combat in as much as they are the non-aggressive guys who make a mockery of their more powerful adversaries (it pains me to admit it as a former karate student, but Aikido masters have a way of making mockery of Karate techniques).

Take the Dalai Lama is an example. Whilst he is acknowledged as the leader of the Tibetan government in exile, he is to all intents and purposes a refuge. Whilst his circumstances are better than the average refugee, you could argue that his actual geopolitical clout is zero. Yet, he is regarded as one of the great modern-day saints. Part of his stature is due to the fact that he is who is. However, another part of his stature is due to his “opponents” in the Communist Party in the People’s Republic of China. If there’s anyone whom the Chinese Communist Party hates more than the any particular democratically elected president of Taiwan, it is the Dalai Lama, whom they’ve gone so far as to describe as a “Wolf Wrapped in Monks Cloths.”

On paper, the Chinese have won hands down. Geographic Tibet is theirs. Thanks to mass migration, native Tibetans are now a minority in their own country. Tibetans have reached a stage where they not only a minority but an annoying minority in their own country. China has money and as mentioned earlier, not even American Presidents will take their “conflicts” with China between the talk stage. More importantly, the Dalai Lama no longer calls for “independence” for Tibet but for “autonomy” within the People’s Republic (a case of – since you call us “autonomous,” give us real autonomy).

So, on paper, China is winning. However, despite its apparent victory, the Dalai Lama has uncanny ability to annoy China’s leadership. If China is a school yard bully, the Dalai Lama is the annoying kid that gets smacked down but bounces us to continue annoying you. The best part is that his ability to annoy is based on nothing more than an ability not to be intimidated. Just look at this interview he gave to the comedian John Oliver as an example of how the Dalai Lama is the living example of “Word never hurt me.”

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bLY45o6rHm0

 

 Let’s go back to Stalin’s “How many divisions does the Pope have.” You have the Dalai Lama with no divisions (even as an independent country, the Tibetans never really have an army to speak of) and you have President Xi Jinping, who is China’s most powerful leader since Mao Zedong. President Xi commands the world’s second largest economy, and the world’s largest army, which is getting ever more advanced. Yet it’s the guy with no divisions to speak of, who sits down with an interviewer who calls him “arrogant” at one stage who is scaring the guy with so much more. President Xi, despite all his power (rated in the top three of the world’s most powerful people year after year) bans “Winnie the Poh” from China because someone on the internet said he looked like Winnie.

How badly has China’s almighty machine been scared? Well, as John Oliver argues, its at a stage where they’re trying to create knock off lamas the way they create knock off handbags. Given that they Dalai Lama is at an age where dying is an expectation, they CCP is going to the ridiculous stage of trying to control the reincarnation – or to get the Dalai Lama beyond the grave. Just look at the following link:

http://m.tibet.cn/eng/culture/tibetan/201512/t20151203_5775742.html

The nail got a good whack on the head in 2016 when the Chinese Communist party went and decried the Dalai Lama for disrespecting …. wait till you hear it – “Buddhist Tradition as seen in the following report from the Daily Mail.”

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3512583/High-ranking-Chinese-official-says-Dalai-Lama-making-fool-Buddhism-suggested-reincarnated-bee-mischievous-blond-girl.html

 

 The irony being that he managed to turn a Communist regime which is set up on the premise of destroying anything resembling the supernatural into a defender of the belief in reincarnation.

Think about it, this old man has got under the skin of one of the most powerful regimes on the planet in a way that no one else has by not taking them too seriously and in the process making them look ridiculous.

Think of the Stephen King novel and movie “It” where the kids finally defeat the alien monster by laughing at it. Nothing else worked except laughter.

Nothing hurts a bully more than ridicule. The China-Dalai Lama is one example. In the Western World one of the most prominent forces in keeping the powerful in check has been comedians, as was most prominently underscored during the Trump Administration had a field day.

Nothing exposes weakness more than the inability to laugh at one’s self. I think of Singaporean politicians who become so in love with being politicians that they sue at anyone who “hurts” their feelings. The only beneficiaries being the lawyers and newspapers. Why does the machinery of state need to be involved in solving hurt feelings? How strong are you if you need to bring so much money and power to get over having your feelings hurt? BY contrast, the man who can laugh at himself can take on the world.

Time to Remove the Cult of Busy

 

It’s the second day of the year and I’m about to start work tomorrow. Unfortunately, it looks like Singapore will, in the new year, aim towards getting people back to the office and the concept of nine-to-six will be back. I describe this is an “unfortunate” event because everyone else will be celebrating the “return to normal,” when the fact of the matter was that normal was actually unnatural and instead of using the pandemic to create a new and more sustainable normal, we’ve merely been trying to ride things out so that things could get back to normal.

I make no secret of the fact that I detest the office as an institution. The very thought of sitting in an office, looking at files and attending meetings fills me with a powerful sense of self-loathing.  If we are truly honest with ourselves, we will realise that the office is a place for the worst forms of social congregation masquerading as a place of work. If I look at my own experiences, I have achieved nothing note worthy in an office. Everything that I take pride in was done when I was a freelancer. If I am honest, the only thing I achieved in seven years of an office job in the financial district was not ramming my forehead into the noses of the species that thrives in an office.

One of the things I detest most about the office and all things associated with the office is the fact that they are part of a cult – namely the “Cult of Busy.” This is an insane cult which worships “being busy” as if it were the be all and end all of existence.

Now, I have nothing against being busy. If you look at certain things like the activity on a ship or an aircraft, you’ll realise that being busy is a good thing. It genuinely requires a lot of activity to keep a ship moving at sea or a plane moving in the air. In the restaurant, being busy was a good thing because it meant that you had plenty of customers, which meant that there was revenue coming in for the day and that in turn means that the boss has the money to pay your salary.

What I’m against, is when “busy” becomes a cult. This particularly rife in the professional fields like law and accountancy where staff are expected to work 12 hours a day and 365 days a year. Now, to an extent, this is understandable. If you are a lawyer going for trial, you do need to prepare vast amounts of documents and quite often, it’s the juniors who have to pull “all-nighters” because its part of the learning curve.

However, you know something is wrong when people whom you would assume are capable of intelligence start bragging about the hours they put in and how they don’t sleep and don’t have time for other facets of life. If you walk around any given office, you’ll find that the one who gets praised is the guy who comes in “early” and leaves “late.”

I admit that I was part of this cult. My first job for a small agency worked me 24/7. Ex-wife hated it and threw regular tantrums. I loved the job. Saw a great future and threw myself into the 24/7 cult believing that I would grow as a professional and a person. To be fair to my ex, she actually had a point. After five months on the job, I quit because I reached a stage where I could no longer string a sentence when writing copy and I lost the ability to service clients properly.

However, I was proud of my ability to “work the hours,” that I actually mentioned it in the interview when I was offered a two-week internship at RappCollins DDB. The reply from the boss was “That’s great because sometimes we can get insanely busy but I’m more interested in the work in the hours rather than the hours you work.”

Those words of wisdom have stuck with me. When I left the agency world to be a freelancer at the end of 2005, I suddenly appreciated that many of my “busy” hours were actually wasted. As a freelancer I tried to move away from billing for my time and charging for the results that I achieved because I had no name and therefore my time had no value, so I had to show the world that I could get results. For the record, I still believe that you should charge for results rather than time spent.

When I entered the semi-legal profession of liquidations, I started becoming “busy” again. It was important to be busy because revenue was dependent on being busy. Time-sheets were a mantra of being “professional.” I remember a lawyer from a big firm telling me, “Spending time is not a problem for us – time is what we sell you.”

That truism is one of the biggest issues with “professionalism.” Instead of encouraging “professionals” to solve problems, it encourages the “professional” to blow problems out of proportion because, as this lawyer pointed out – they are selling you their time rather than their expertise. “Professionals” are not experts who can achieve better outcomes than a client but very busy people.” Since they’re paid to be busy, they become good at being busy.

What nobody questions whether that “busy” is actually going towards achieving the outcome that the client needs. So, you have a situation where people brag about how many hours, they spent in the office rather than what they actually do.

For me, the productivity killing powers at the office or the church to the cult of busy were reinforced by the lock down in April 2020. I managed to produce things free of interruptions, ego management and the challenges of having the post letters. I’ve done my best to avoid entering the office since then and avoid any opportunity to brag about being busy because as long as I was out of the office, I actually managed to do things. As someone on Linkedin pointed out:

 

 Normal wasn’t healthy and in an age where we have advanced so far, there is no reason to be stuck at the Church of the Cult of Busy. We have the necessary tools to be productive at work and still have time for the important things in life. Isn’t time we stopped being slaves to a pointless cult?

Will a Wet End Lead to Greener Beginnings?

 

I’ve got about an hour to bash out my usual blog summary about the year 2021. This year, is the first year that I spent the better part of the eve at home. Didn’t have a restaurant gig to earn me a few extra bucks and there are no parties for me to go to. What I do have, however, is a comfortable home and I’m enjoying a glass of an apricot liquor that I took from the clearance of a Central Asian restaurant a few days back.

So, when you consider that this year was pretty much dominated by various forms of Covid and various restrictions, I guess I should be thankful that I am in the position where I can sit at home and bash out a blog piece with a glass of liquor and Oreo cookies. Whilst towards the latter half of the year, I was limited to one source of income, I actually had a steady source of income, which is more than what many people had.

I guess you could say that things on the global front improved a little with the arrival of an American President who actually treated the pandemic seriously. However, whilst Mr. Bidden has provided much needed sanity, the nation remains exceedingly divided and tribal. One has to ask; can a single 78-year-old heal the gap in less than four years? Furthermore, the other geopolitical elephant hasn’t done much better. Whilst its tempting to enjoy watching billionaires being taken down a peg in the name of “shared prosperity,” it’s been at a cost. Whatever growing freedoms Chinese citizens were starting to enjoy have been curtailed and the businessmen that the Chinese government has gone after were maverick innovators that the modern economy needs in order to move. Sure, China was showing that it was tackling inequality but are its methods going to make the problem worse? The world as comedian Bill Mahr argues is trapped between democracies that can’t get things done and autocracies that are downright nasty. The rest of us, can only look for a balance.

Just as nations need to look for a geopolitical balance between democratic but ineffectual America and effective but nasty China, individuals also need to look for balance. For me, I’ve accepted that the “corporate career” I fantasised about was not meant for me. I’ve come to accept that I am not meant to be a major part of the “working professional” class. Yet, it’s a path I can’t quite abandon in as much as it pays me enough to get by and at the same time allows me the time to look for things to keep me occupied.

So, I stay in my existence in the insolvency trade. I hate looking at files and documents and I avoid looking at anything remotely legalistic in nature. However, I do what I can to spend time with traders of assets. Always thought trading in scrap had a certain nobility to it. We live in a world where we are encouraged to waste and create rubbish, so what can be better than making a living from getting people to waste less. One of my great friends from this side of the business takes pride in the fact that he hasn’t bought a t-shirt for over a decade because he’s picked up his cloths from liquidation asset sales.

The Evil Young Lady is still trying to find her feet and to get her life sorted. I’ve told her that I have two major tasks in life. One, I need to see that she’s secured onto a path or at least made the effort to look for what she wants out of life. The other, is to prepare for old age – not that I think I am particularly old but now that I am over 45 and rushing towards 50, I have to accept that certain things will be denied to me and I have to find some way of ensuring I head into the twilight in some comfort.

Interestingly enough, the hero of the year, is the Vietnamese girl that I entered into a “life-partnership” with a decade ago. Huong took a friend’s shop and is now working hard to build up a business. I do what I can to help her out particularly in the area of managing government stakeholders and managing compliance issues. I’ve also managed to use her business to polish up copywriting skills as I help to edit her post on Facebook. This is a woman whom many would have said was “wrong” for me but then I decided to take the chance on something that might have been so wrong that it would actually turn out right. I am glad to say that her hunger and drive to make a better life for people around her have proved my bet to be thus far correct:

 

A sample of what Sky H Beauty Singapore does – visit our Facebook page at - https://www.facebook.com/skyhbeauty.sg or come down to be treated like royalty.

In a few moments, this wet end of 2021 will be over and we will start 2022. I hope that what we experienced in 2021 will only get us ready for 2022 to be a better year in every sense of the word.  

As It Should Be

 One of the saddest moments of 2021 will undoubtedly be the passing of Archbishop Desmond Tutu on Boxing Day at the age of 90. The late Archbishop was a champion for justice, having worked alongside Nelson Mandela during the struggle against “Apartheid” and he was also a person who worked tirelessly to unite a much-divided nation when he was Chairman of the Truth and Reconciliation Committee.  Even in retirement, the archbishop was a voice that continued to speak for those who didn’t have a voice and he drew the ire of the Zuma Administration (an administration that gave us the term “State Capture.)

I don’t think that there’s much more that I can say that hasn’t been said about Archbishop Desmond Tutu than what has already been said. However, as a student of Tibetan Buddhist student of Anglican Theology, I like to remember him for his great friendship with the Dalai Lama, whom in his letter of condolence to the Archbishop’s family talked about the spiritual bond between them. So, how did an Anglican Archbishop who promotes God and a monk from a faith that does not have a good find a “spiritual bond.”

https://www.dalailama.com/news/2021/condolences-in-response-to-the-death-of-archbishop-desmond-tutu

 

 Copyright – Tibet Sun

Well, it would appear that they found a common bond and spoke up for the common good. Both men understood that spirituality was not about promoting their “religions” but in using the platforms that their respective religions provided them in order to make life better for humanity.

Both men were famously aware of how religion could be used to do good and also to do harm. Desmond Tutu described it like a “knife” that could either feed people or harm people:

 

 The Dalai Lama was famously asked what was the best religion and he famously replied that the best one was the one that made you a better person.

 

It shouldn’t be the case but the views that these old men have are fresh air. The points on faith that these men made are guidelines of what spirituality and being close to the divine should be about. Its so sad that they are of a generation that is dying (Desmond Tutu died at 90 and the Dalai Lama is 86). Contrast this attitude to the growing religious chauvinism, whether is Evangelical White Supremacy as shown by many parts of the Republican Party, Islamic extremism in much of the Middle East, Hindutva in India or the violent version of Buddhist Dharma that encouraged the slaughtered Rohingyas in Burma.

I remember putting up my position of being a Buddhist who studied Christianity but has been blessed by Muslims and getting a few responses about being confused and to an extent, getting ready for hell. Seriously, in this day and age, why are people so keen to use their religion and relationship with the divine to kill off anyone else?

The Dalai Lama and Archbishop Tutu understood that faith and a relationship with the Almighty was meant to unite humanity and to make life better for others rather than to impose dogma onto people. These are real men of God and as they get ready to pass on (or already have as in the case of Desmond Tutu) and the voices of extremist get louder, it feels as if humanity will get further away from the Almighty.

Is There a Difference between a Whore and a Prostitute?

 

I’ve noticed two stories on the Independent Singapore (a website that occasionally picks up pieces from this blog), about the link between money, income, status and relaitonships. The stories can be found at:

https://theindependent.sg/nus-student-feels-like-a-loser-because-her-boyfriend-bought-her-a-louis-vuitton-wallet-instead-of-a-chanel-one/?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook&fbclid=IwAR1LJ2NJxyYO993mljS8isaBONhQpbAKjfo2vNwKU0IQGCXqQ0AHbettA40#Echobox=1640390423 ; and

https://theindependent.sg/money-minded-woman-says-her-husband-earns-4000-a-year-at-one-point-but-she-still-loves-him-nonetheless/?utm_medium=Social&utm_source=Facebook&fbclid=IwAR1GCMDRbAlorAZmxShJxepyV6FeXPEsPAlbR0ctEh3sIueHb800xGp6mYs#Echobox=1640679535

These stories illustrate something fundamental about Singapore. At the surface level, you could say that the relationship between money and relationships touches on the key social issue caused by the influx of foreigners. Much of the focus on the discussion of foreigners has been about jobs or specifically the “threat” of other Asians (specifically Indian Nationals) taking “professional” jobs from the local population. While its received less attention in recent months, the issue of foreign girls (specifically Mainland Chinese) “stealing” from old men through “dubious relationships” has also been part of the key complaints about the influx of foreigners since 2004.

One does not need to be a data scientist to understand that there were plenty of Mainland Chinese and Vietnamese girls who selling their bodies in the redlight district. There were also plenty of old men throwing away their pension money on young, nubile things, mainly from the Mainland China and Vietnam. When Covid Clusters started exploding in dodgy karaoke lounges, everyone was focused on the evils of “dogy Vietnamese girls.”

So, I get it that Mainland Chinese and Vietnamese girls are as well liked in “PMET Singa-Land” as Indian Nationals with professional jobs. There are dodgy Mainland Chinese and Vietnamese girls just as they are Indian Nationals with dodgy degrees. However, as with the Indian Nationals (let’s remember that whilst you have the lot with dodgy degrees, you have the lot from IIM and IIT – places that produce Fortune 500 CEOs, something which our “world class” universities have yet to do), we not only have to ask ourselves if tarring every Mainland Chinese or Vietnamese with the same brush is fair, we also need to ask ourselves if we’re any better?

Whenever a Singaporean man ends up going for a Mainland Chinese or Vietnamese girl, you’re bound to get a flurry of comments on how the man is going to get screwed for money. You will also get a load of comments about how Singaporean men are “Marrying Down” and as one of my colleagues from my last agency job said “Singaporean men can’t live up to the standards we set for them.” Apparently Singaporean Chinese men cannot take independent, intelligent women in the same way that their Western counterparts can (though having seen what many white guys end up with, it’s a natural instinct to question the judgement of a White Man on Asian women as it is to question a White Man’s work ethic).

However, as the stories in the Independent would suggests, the “standards” that are being set have less to do with character and more to do with earning power. I mean, if a young student feels that she’s being short changed over a branded handbag, it does reflect something about her value system and what she’s been brought up to expect. Given that this is a university student we’re talking about and not a farm girl, the question remains what type of “elite” class are we raising.

Let’s face it, unless you are Jeff Bezos or Elon Musk, money plays a key role in survival. I go to a job and deal with people in suites who make me want to puke because I need to pay bills and my job puts food on the table. Let’s also be perfectly honest, we all like nice things. Between sleeping on a park bench or a fluffy bed, I chose the latter?

However, whilst money is important and material things are nice to have, we need to question if these things should be the defining of one’s character. I believe that for some, money is merely a commodity to be exchanged but to many, money, career and whatever they own, define them. I would argue that this is where we need to distinguish between a prostitute and a whore.

 

 

 Is she really that different – copyright South China Morning Post:

 

 

 From them – Copyright Mashable

To an extent, a prostitute is someone who has sex for a living. Every girl on the street corner of Geylang is a prostitute. It’s their job. They have to sell a fantasy to whichever customer comes their way in order to ensure they have money. You could say, all of us are prostitutes because we get f** for a living in one way or another and somehow, we need to sell fantasies to the clowns that pay. However, our job does not necessarily make us who we are.

A whore on the other hand is a different story. A whore doesn’t necessarily walk the street corners of dodgy places hopping to turn tricks. What a whore does is to try and get a paying person who will keep paying. Whereas the transaction with a prostitute is clear (money for a good time), its not necessarily so with a whore. Whores may actually have a genuine love for you as long as you have money. One of the most distinguishing signs of a whore is how she treats other people, particularly those whom she perceives as “lower” down. I remember a young Pinoy girl who married one of the partners in the Bistrot. With me, she was pleasant. However, I used to get very upset when she was talking to the Pinoy guys. Didn’t have to understand Tagalog to get the idea that she was reminding them that she had risen above them – and they were the ones doing honest work.

The issue I had was not so much her relationship with the partner in question but the fact that she couldn’t help but lord it over the Pinoy guys who she used to hang out with. The message was clear – she was too good for them.

Whilst all of us are to an extent prostitutes, we actually have an option of not being whores. Yes, we all put on a façade to do what we need to earn to get the coin – but we can choose how we behave when we’re in a position of having money.

I know great guys who have made pots of money but it never seemed to affect their personality. I think of Hans Hofer, founder of Apa Guidebooks who was happy to take the tube in London and was also happy to do drinks in ULU (University of London Union). I also think of Arun Jain, current MD of Intellect Design Arena, a listed company, who had no issue jumping onto the MRT (apparently has no issue with the tuk-tuks when he’s in India). Mr. Jain’s personal net worth is probably north of the US$100 million. These guys are examples of men who chose not to be whores when they made lots of money. They chose not to be whores.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m2zsf4Kg_9I

 

 Would you believe the name squatting down for a meal with his hands was one of the richest men on earth?

By contrast you have the “professionals” in places like Shenton Way, who are officially “respectable” but after a drink or two, you realise that they make the residents of Geylang look like the saintly division of the Salvation Army.

There are professional accountants who are very insistent that they are professionals and therefore you have to speak to them in a certain way. However, they think its perfectly acceptable to whistle at waitresses to summon them and whilst payments for their fellow professionals will flow, there’s always a cash flow issue when it comes to issuing payment to people like the stationary company.

This is the type of behavior that makes what goes on in the whore houses saintly. In the whore houses, you have girls who will f*** the wealthy (the wealthier the better) so that they can give the money to the poor – specifically the families they’ve left behind. By contrast the respectable whores will screw over the poor so that they can give money to the rich. I remember one of them was very upset with a Vietnamese girl for “cheating” a Caucasian lawyer. Complained that the gave her money but she “screwed other guys.” What was not mentioned that the Caucasian guy was a lawyer who managed to get himself “barred” from entering Singapore, a country that can’t get enough of “Caucasian” Professionals, whilst the girl in question built a business, sold it and travels in an out freely. The man must something to an extent that even the Singapore government wouldn’t be able to cover for him and we need to ask – really, who is the dubious one here?

Let’s understand that there is a difference between a prostitute and a whore. Let work towards making it easier for the people trying to make a living and at the same time, let us bring up our young with values beyond the material. A nation of whores is really no nation at all.

God’s Fine Print

 Now that the festivities are winding down and the actual day has passed, I thought I’d make the point that although my school boy theology is nearly 30-years rusty, but its most likely that the person we know as Jesus of Nazareth was not born on December 25. I’ve heard several reasons for this, ranging from the change of the calendar by the Emperor Constantine (the first Christian Emperor of the Roman Empire) to the fact this date was associated with Saturnalia, an old pagan fertility festival that the early church founders found easier to adapt than abolish.

That little snippet of trivia should in no way distract from the significance of the festival. The birth of Christ is the central theme of Western and by many extents, global civilization as we know it and if the date of December 25 is a “set-up” it was a pretty clever one in as much as the day after is St Stephen’s Day or Boxing Day as its better known. Stephen was the first martyr of the Christian faith. He was, a man who refused to bow down to the version of God as expressed by the Sanhedrin and penalty for Jews who p*** of the Sanhedrin back in those days was stoning.

 

 This was how Stephen died for this faith - Not the best way to die ……..Copyright – Lee Jay Walker  

So, why would the early church leaders choose to commemorate very brutal death of the first Christian martyr straight after it celebrated the birth of Jesus, or the reason for the church’s very existence?

As a matter of disclosure, I did take Christian theology up to A-levels and my teacher expected me to read theology at university. However, I realized that I didn’t have the patience for detailed study and the thought of learning ancient Greek (the compulsory element as you have to read the New Testament in the original language) and used the national service period as a reason to abandon the dreams of those who had great hope in me. I place this disclaimer so as to clarify that I am merely giving an opinion based on my personal beliefs and observations.

I believe the significance of having St Stephen’s day after Christmas sends a clear message about faith and just about everything else in life, which is the fact that you cannot have glory and joy without being prepared to suffer for it. The point is easier to explain at Easter where we commemorate the pain of Good Friday before the glory of the resurrection of Easter Sunday. However, the point should not be lessened at Christmas. Think of St Stephen’s day as the fine print of the divine contract. Everyone gets excited by the “birth of the savior” on Christmas day because it’s a promise of all sorts of wonderful things. However, there’s the fine print, which says that in order to reach the promised land of heavenly glory by following the proverbial “savior,” you got to be prepared to lose everything, including your life.

This is important because much of the modern capitalistic system is based on instant gratification without the painful bits. Lotteries are the prime example. The odds of winning the lottery defy logic. According to Forbes, you have a 292.1 million to one chance of hitting the big power ball jackpot. By contrast you have a 300,000 to one chance of being struck by lightning. You’d think that with such poor odds, no logical person would by a lottery ticket. Yet, despite these odds, lotteries throughout the world continue to thrive? Why? Everyone is attracted by the prospect of being wildly rich without having to slog and save towards wealth. Being rich is attractive – working to the extent of having to pay a personal price is not.

Another extreme example is “miracle diets” which promise you a beautiful body is you just buy them. I would love to be as lean and trim as Bruce Lee in his prime. Training for six hours a day and 365 days a week like Bruce Lee is a different story:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dklsnzXT8yQ

These are extreme examples but the point remains, most of us want the glory without having to struggle for it and there’s a twist to it in Singapore where an “easy life” is seen as an “entitlement.” Too many of Singapore’s leaders forget that one of the key elements of our success came from having to do the ground work. Lee Kuan Yew wasn’t born Prime Minister. He had to struggle to know his electorate. The English-speaking Mr. Lee had to force himself out of his comfort zone to communicate in Mandarin and Hokkien to get people to vote for him.

However, this isn’t the case today. How many of the ruling party’s potential candidates for parliament have had to leave their comfort zones to know the electorate? The only criteria for parliament seem to be checking the right boxes set by an all-knowing party executive and before you know it, you have a cushy side gig paying an allowance that is five times the national average wage.

At least politicians have to face some form of competition every five-years.  Lower down the line you have senior civil servants being appointed CEO of big companies in businesses that are unrelated to their previous work experiences. It’s called “Sharing talent” with the private sector and everyone is supposed to believe this will benefit the rest of us. Doesn’t work like this in 2021/2022. Bosses are expected to understand the ground and know how their organisations work. Yet, nobody expects the former civil servants to know the businesses they have been parachuted to run. Why are we surprised when the companies run by former civil servants end up with floundering share prices and un-balanced sheets despite having a national monopoly on essential services and products?

The leaders of the media industry once claimed that the market was “too small for competition.” The reality is that it is “too controlled” to punish managerial incompetence. Too many of our leaders across all sectors fall in love with being the boss without understanding that bosses need to do work. Hence, they rush out of their way to lavish luxuries and opportunities on hedge fund owners but struggle to pay what is due to movers and stationary providers without understanding that their business needs the support of partners. Yet, the system shields them from incompetence.

This has to change if Singapore Inc is to have a future. Market forces must be allowed to punish leaders who fail to do the work of leaders. In religious terms we all want the divine glory that Jesus brings but are we prepared to put the work that Stephen died for? Unless we are willing to answer in the affirmative, we shouldn’t get the divine glory.  

When the God from the Gutter Gets Old

 

It’s officially Christmas Eve and I’ve already started having attend the various celebrations that one has to go to as part of the corporate scene. Company lunch and Middle Eastern restaurant was excellent and I left the place rolling – so much for the year’s efforts to look that bit slimmer.

I love Christmas or at least I love the good food and opportunities to drink. If I were in Europe, the highlight would be the family goose, which my mother has turned into an art form (or as the Evil Young Woman said when I brought her back for Christmas – “Oh Grandma cooks good). I’m not big into presents but I guess that comes from the fact that I’ve been into shopping – never understood the thrill of owning things.

However, as much as I love Christmas revelry, I’ve always found it strange that we would celebrate the birth of Jesus by endless consumerism. The man that we call Jesus Christ, was from a family so poor that he had to be born down in a manger with the animals. I guess in modern terms, he had to be born in a petrol station because there was simply nowhere else for him to be. If you read all four gospels, you will note that Jesus preferred the title “Son of Man” as opposed to “Son of God,” and he hung out with social outcast (tax collectors and prostitutes.) His teachings cheered on the lowest of the low and he admonished those in power. Jesus of the gospels wasn’t exactly a capitalist by traditional definitions, let alone a member of the Tucker Carlson fan club that is the modern American Republican Party.

So, if you look at who the gospels tell us Jesus is, it goes without saying that celebrating his birth with endless consumerism shouldn’t be the way to go (not that I’m against good food for the season). Instead of trying to benefit retailers, our Christmas celebration should be more in line with that of Mr. Gilbert Goh, one of Singapore’s better-known activists, is doing:

 

 Taken from Gilbert Goh’s Facebook page.

I guess you could call Mr. Goh a “Social Welfare Entrepreneur,” who spends his time serving an ignored market – only in this case he’s giving food to those who are unable to help themselves rather than selling a product or service.

Whilst there is nothing to suggest that Mr. Goh is doing this in the name of any particular faith, he is doing that the early Christians used to do – go out, heal the sick and feed the hungry free-of charge.

One would imagine that Mr. Goh would be the type of person that the rich, famous and powerful would want to be seen with as part of their efforts to burnish their credentials with the people by being around a guy who is doing what he can to ensure the vulnerable have things a little better.

 

 Note the joy on their faces – Taken from Mr. Gilbert Goh’s Facebook page.

However, this being Singapore, Mr. Goh is considered something of a trouble maker by Singapore’s elite. I thank Thambi Pundek (aka, Singapore’s Young Muslim Politician who believes in feasting on pork on a Ramadan Day), for explaining it most clearly “Why you want to do these things – there’s the government and grassroots?”

Well, whilst I am not “Anti-Ruling Party” (though I wish I really had the millions some of my fans on TREmeritus imagine I’m being paid to write ruling party propaganda), per se, Mr. Goh is providing a necessary service to market that is tragically only going to increase – namely a growing army of dispossessed old folks.

 

 He is part of a growing number ……taken from Mr. Gilbert Goh’s Facebook page

Let’s state the obvious, these are not “welfare louts” or “druggies” that make the number of destitute in the Western world. They are not the tramps who lived on the same street as me in London’s Soho. If anything, these were the guys who made Singapore what it is. They didn’t have much but they slogged hard and sent their kids to school. As a rule of thumb, these guys don’t beg or ask for spare change. They try to sell you tissue paper at the hawker centre or they rummage through the dustbins looking for cans that they can sell to a recycling agent. You’ll see them trying to flatten drink cans with a rock even if they barely have the strength to lift the rock.

Then, as was part of my lunch conversation, a good portion of them end up getting screwed by the kids they devoted their lives to. It’s a classic case of the kid and his family see that the old man or old lady has a property that can be turned into cash (this being the land of very expensive property) and before you know it the old person is conned into moving in with the kid and the his or her property is sold. Then somewhere down the line there is fall out with the child or the in-law and before you know it grandpa or grandma gets turfed out.

Then, as another client of mine explained to me, there are government programs to assist the poor. However, many don’t know how to get them and need assistance – let’s not forget that we are talking about a generation that had it imprinted on its DNA that seeking assistance was the greatest act of shame.

Something needs to be done and when you consider the fact that Singapore is officially one of the richest nations in the world:

https://www.worldometers.info/gdp/gdp-per-capita/

 

 We have the money and we have the ability to look after our vulnerable elderly. We have bragged that we are a wonderful “Asian Values” society that respects its elders, yet at the same time we are content to help them go through the trash to look for a means of buying a cup of coffee. How can this be right on a moral standpoint?

In a strange way, solving this issue would probably help solve a few others. Let’s put it this way, every time one sees a homeless elderly person, one is bound to get the idea that ending up like that is a reality. Would you give your all to contribute to a place that will toss you aside once you are old and vulnerable or would you take what you can and then get out to look for more welcoming pastures the moment it looks like you won’t be able to pee straight? If we are to learn anything this Christmas it should be the fact that looking after the vulnerable is not an airy fairy concept created by politicians but a practical and essential element of building a resilient nation that people want to contribute to.