Forbes' World's Most Powerful List: a reflection.

Forbes has produced a list of the world's most powerful people. Now, I suppose there is nothing particularly wrong - or particularly novel - about such a task. However, I took exception to how Forbes defined their effort. Forbes said of its inaugural ranking, that it had narrowed the list to 67 people: "a number based on the conceit that one can reduce the world's 6.7 billion people to the one in every 100 million that matter."

Wow. So, Forbes thinks the rest of us don't matter. They are, rather crassly, defining their list as the only 67 people "who matter". Well, pardon me for a moment, for having an opinion of my own...but I don't think much of what - and whom - Forbes thinks "matters".

According to Forbes, a person matters if they are rich, powerful or both. Power is defined in terms of the ability to influence people or events. That is it. No other ingredients appear to be necessary. They completely omit all qualities of character, mind, personality, intelligence, creativity...apparently, these things just don't "matter".

Let us look at the Top 10 on Forbes' World's Most Powerful List:

1. U.S. President Barack Obama
2. Chinese President Hu Jintao
3. Russian Prime Minister Vladimir Putin
4. U.S. Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke
5. Google founders Sergey Brin and Larry Page
6. Carlos Slim, Chief Executive of Mexico's Telmex
7. Rupert Murdoch, chairman of media group News Corp.
8. Michael T. Duke, Chief executive, Wal-Mart Stores
9. Saudi Arabia's King Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz
10. Bill Gates, co-chairman, Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation

It is a list of people most of whom are familiar, yes. It is also notable that everyone on the list is, by most people's standards, wealthy. Many of them, are billionaires...all of them are, at least, millionaires. That Forbes...a magazine most obsessed with wealth, should compile a list of wealthy people to define those that "matter", should be no surprise. Yet, in my view, only two people on this list actually matter...the rest shall largely be unregarded by history.

Those two people are the founders of Google: Sergey Brin and Larry Page. They matter for a very simple reason: they had an idea. They created something. They contributed something new and useful to the world. Now, Bill Gates also started a company...but I don't really consider him to be a creative person - his software was bought from others, his ideas were all secondhand, observed from others. No: Bill Gates is not a great creator, but he is a great business person. However, in my view, being a great business person does not constitute someone who "matters".

The most important people in the world, the people who really "matter" are not the rich; not the powerful, nor necessarily the influential: the people who matter are those who create something new. Everyone else is dependent on these creative people - everything else is derived from their efforts. Thus, the people above, in that Forbes list are SECONDARY, to others who created that which those people are working with. They are not the key people. They are not the key drivers. They are not, contrary to what the rather shallow thinkers at Forbes "think"...at all people who matter. They are, in fact, people of no real consequence at all.

Think about it: Barack Obama, did not create the United States. He appears to have no real personal creative powers. He brings nothing new to the world. The same applies to all the other world leaders and Kings: Hu Jintao, did not create China; Vladimir Putin did not create Russia; the Saudi King Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz did not create Saudi Arabia - nor does any of them exhibit much true creativity. They are decision makers, yes...but creators, no.

Then again it should be pointed out that the role that these Presidents and Kings perform exists apart from them. They did not create the role of President or King. Anyone could be President or King...it is only a series of accidents and blessings of fortune (and perhaps in the case of Obama and the like, a personal hunger), that makes them President or King. It could easily have been someone else (though, in the case of a King, it was determined at birth). What they do, would be done anyway, by someone else, by some other blessed person. Their role is not unique, not self-created. It is simply a POSITION that they occupy. They did not create the position. All they are doing is occupying a position. To my mind, that does not mean that they matter. The position is simply a placeholder for a function in society, that any person could be chosen to perform. Being chosen to perform that function does not mean that the person who performs matters in particular...because they did not create the position that they perform. There was no creative step involved, at any stage...nor need there be at any stage of the performance of their duties. Their roles are not creative roles, they are roles of decision and power. They do, however, nothing new. They subsist on worlds created by a host of others. They are not, therefore, themselves of much significance, by this measure of significance. They do not "matter".

Apart from Ben Bernanke, all the others are business people...but like I said, in general, business people do not create that which they do business with and in: they merely sell, promote and package the creative work of others. The business people are not, therefore, in themselves, significant, by this definition of significant.

Forbes' entire list, apart the Google founders, consists of relatively uncreative men. If what matters is defined as those who are creative, then none of these people actually matter at all. They may be immensely rich; they may be immensely powerful; they may be immensely influential - but their entire lives and essence are secondary to the creators on whom they depend. They are, therefore, of no true significance, themselves. The minds they subsist on, are the significant ones. We would have to know whom they base their life work on; who has formed them; who guides them, from whence "their" ideas come. Then we would know who is of true significance.

I realize that there are those who would argue with my view that it is creative people who really matter...but consider this: everything in the human world, was created by a human mind. Most people do not create anything at all, they simply spend their lives manipulating the creations of others. Who are the most significant, who matters most: those who create and contribute something new to the human world - or those who are best at manipulating that which has already been created? To my mind, the ones who create and contribute to the world of human possibilities, are the ones who matter. The others, those so expert at manipulating this world, that they become stupendously rich, immensely powerful or unbelievably influential, do not matter at all, by comparison - for they do not add anything new to the world, all they do is take control of it. Now, as anyone would know, who has ever worked, the one in charge is often not the best person in an organization...they are just the one best suited to seizing power. So, too, is it with this Forbes list: it is a list of people most adept at "working the system", leveraging power and wealth in their own directions...but not necessarily at creating anything new. Thus, in the ultimate scheme of things, they have no true significance. They do not matter - for they did not create that which they control.

The sad thing about all of this, however, is that those who created the elements of the worlds that these men control, are, generally speaking, not known: they are anonymous inventors, unfeted thinkers, whose names have not been so much lost in time, as never known at all. Our world is one that regards those most unworthy of attention, and ignores those who most deserve our respect. We elevate the administrator, above the creator; the man of state, above the man who changes our state of understanding. In this modern world, those who do again, what has always been done, but do it well and do it loudly, are feted - but those who do, for the very first time, what has never been done before, are too often, hounded for it.

Success is easy if you don't dare to be original. However, if you wish to change the world, in any way at all, though it be for the better, the whole world will be against you. Everyone on that Forbes list, took a relatively easy path to success. By this I mean, that, though they have great power, wealth and influence, that pathways exist for people to tread to their positions. What they have achieved was, in almost all cases, something that already existed. It was a position that needed to be filled, or a product that needed to be sold. They did not create it. However, should anyone ever wish to do anything new, they will find that there is no path to success in that endeavour: there is nothing but a blocked road, with no visible way through. The creator must find their own path....indeed, more accurately, they must build their own road, where no road has gone before.

Though the creator's path is so much more difficult to travel than the politician's, or the businessman's, or the administrator's - for none of the elements exist, and all must be created along the way - our society does not regard the creator as often, or as highly, as it does the President, or the King, or the Tycoon. Oddly, we live in a world that cherishes the worthless, and yet belittles the priceless. A President is no match for a poet; a King no match for an artist; a Tycoon, no match for a writer. The merest scientist is worth more than the greatest administrator. The world was built on the bricks called ideas - and it is those that contribute new bricks to this world, who should be most regarded. It is not those who then use the bricks, to build their wealth, their power and their influence, who should be well-regarded - for not a one of the bricks came from them. They did not fashion the ideas with which their empires are forged.

Forbes is in error, to state that its 67 famous names, are the only people who "matter" in this world. Almost none of their chosen names, really matter. Forbes has chosen money men and powerbrokers, over creators. That tells us nothing of real importance about the world - it just informs us, of Forbes' value system, that is all.

A list of people who really matter, would be a list consisting purely of creative thinkers. It would be a list of scientists, writers, artists, poets, musicians, social innovators, mathematicians, musicians and philosophers. It would not contain a single President, King, powerbroker, businessman or administrator - unless that person was also one of the creative categories mentioned.

It is telling of our times, that Forbes thinks its list of the powerful important. They have completely forgotten what the Greeks learnt so, so long ago: it is the thinkers, who matter, to a civilization most. What does it say of our times, that Forbes doesn't know that?

(If you would like to learn more of Ainan Celeste Cawley, a scientific child prodigy, aged eight years and seven months, or his gifted brothers, Fintan, five years exactly, and Tiarnan, twenty-eight months, please go to:http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2006/10/scientific-child-prodigy-guide.html I also write of gifted education, IQ, intelligence, the Irish, the Malays, Singapore, College, University, Chemistry, Science, genetics, left-handedness, precocity, child prodigy, child genius, baby genius, adult genius, savant, wunderkind, wonderkind, genio, гений ребенок prodigy, genie, μεγαλοφυία θαύμα παιδιών, bambino, kind.

We are the founders of Genghis Can, a copywriting, editing and proofreading agency, that handles all kinds of work, including technical and scientific material. If you need such services, or know someone who does, please go to: http://www.genghiscan.com/ Thanks.

IMDB is the Internet Movie Database for film and tv professionals. If you would like to look at my IMDb listing for which another fifteen credits are to be uploaded, (which will probably take several months before they are accepted) please go to: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm3438598/ As I write, the listing is new and brief - however, by the time you read this it might have a dozen or a score of credits...so please do take a look. My son, Ainan Celeste Cawley, also has an IMDb listing. His is found at: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm3305973/ My wife, Syahidah Osman Cawley, has a listing as well. Hers is found at: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm3463926/

This blog is copyright Valentine Cawley. Unauthorized duplication prohibited. Use Only with Permission. Thank you.)

The Jewish Assumption for the Gifted.

The Jews are well known to be gifted. Well, actually, this is not strictly accurate - for it is a mere splinter of the Jewish race, the Ashkenazi Jews, who are actually more gifted than usual. The remainder of the Jews (the ones in Israel, for instance), are pretty average, in every way.

In terms of IQ, the Jews have a reputation for being more gifted than others. Yet, again, this is a simplified story. American Jews were estimated to have an average IQ of 112.6 by Herrnstein and Murray in 1994 (which would make them the most gifted group on Earth); but Israeli Ashkenazi Jews were only estimated to have an IQ of 103.5, on average, by Lynn in 2006. This is very similar to European averages and does not justify their illustrious reputation. Thus, the story is a mixed one. So, too, is it more complex. Jews tend to be high on verbal and mathematical skills and as equally retarded, on visual skills, as they are gifted on verbal/mathematical. Thus, they have unequally distributed abilities.

Now, I have written of the background of the Jews, for a very particular reason. If you search on Yahoo with the terms "Ainan Cawley", one of the associated terms it will suggest to you, is "Jews"...another, quite unaccountably, is "The Dead Sea". I find this bizarre. To me, this means that there must be sufficient numbers of people, in the world, assuming that a) because Ainan is gifted and b) because Jews are supposedly more gifted than others that c) Ainan must be a Jew. Well, sorry to disappoint any Jewish readers, but Ainan is not a Jew. Nor does he have a single Jewish gene in him (except for the genes shared by all humanity etc.). Ainan is not a Jew and none of his relatives are, either.

This is not the first time that the Jewish Assumption, as I call it, has been made about our family. Many years ago, in New York, shortly after I had been on CNN, for my Lord Valentine the Misplaced character invention, I was called a "Yid", by an American who had once been married to a Ford heiress. I had never heard the term and had to ask others what he meant. They said: "Yiddish...a Jew."

I was rather stunned into silence and didn't say anything in response to his accusation. I understood, then, as I understand, now, that this man was making a fundamental error of thinking: that I was "intelligent", that Jews are "intelligent", so I must be a Jew. This is really, really, quite silly. Just because the Jewish average IQ is somewhat above normal, and so there will be more highly intelligent Jews than is typical of a racial grouping, this does NOT mean that other races do not have equally (or even more intelligent), members. They do. Intelligent people are to be found in all races, though with differing prevalences. It is both an unsafe and a ridiculous assumption to make, to think that Jews have the monopoly on intelligence. Indeed, in some areas of intelligence, such as the visual (mean IQ 91.3, according to Backman), or oddly, memory (IQ 95.1 according to Backman), Jews are deficient compared to other races, on average. So, the Jewish "we are intelligent", story, is actually a mixed one: they are good, on average at some things - namely school type skills - but bad in other areas.

There is a danger in the kind of thinking which attributes to Jews, all intelligence. If it is taken on and believed (and I wonder to what extent it is believed in America, given the American's view of me, above?), then it will lead to people overlooking intelligence and gift from other racial groupings. There will be the view that others cannot be as intelligent as Jews...and so certain children might go unrecognized and unsupported for their gifts.

There are many highly intelligent and highly creative people in this world who are not Jewish. In fact, most such people are not Jewish. So it is time to shelve the assumption that a highly gifted person must be a Jew. The assumption is real - for I have encountered it at different times of my life, across two decades. It is time to recognize that gift, intelligence and creativity, may arise in a person of any race - and I mean any race - so do not assume that a person of a particular race cannot possess these characteristics - or that a person who does possess them is necessarily a Jew. More often, than not, they will not be Jewish at all.

It should be noted that this is not an anti-Jewish posting. I have nothing against Jews, or any other race, for that matter. It is a posting that seeks a better understanding of the situation and one that seeks to dispel a common misperception about the most gifted of people among us.

In particular, I would like to dispel the notion (which is common enough to have been picked up by Yahoo), that Ainan Celeste Cawley is a Jew. He isn't - nor are any of his relatives. In fact, Ainan is half-Malay and half-Irish; a Eurasian...and not one bit Jewish at all. Thank you.

(If you would like to learn more of Ainan Celeste Cawley, a scientific child prodigy, aged eight years and seven months, or his gifted brothers, Fintan, five years exactly, and Tiarnan, twenty-eight months, please go to:http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2006/10/scientific-child-prodigy-guide.html I also write of gifted education, IQ, intelligence, the Irish, the Malays, Singapore, College, University, Chemistry, Science, genetics, left-handedness, precocity, child prodigy, child genius, baby genius, adult genius, savant, wunderkind, wonderkind, genio, гений ребенок prodigy, genie, μεγαλοφυία θαύμα παιδιών, bambino, kind.

We are the founders of Genghis Can, a copywriting, editing and proofreading agency, that handles all kinds of work, including technical and scientific material. If you need such services, or know someone who does, please go to: http://www.genghiscan.com/ Thanks.

IMDB is the Internet Movie Database for film and tv professionals. If you would like to look at my IMDb listing for which another fifteen credits are to be uploaded, (which will probably take several months before they are accepted) please go to: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm3438598/ As I write, the listing is new and brief - however, by the time you read this it might have a dozen or a score of credits...so please do take a look. My son, Ainan Celeste Cawley, also has an IMDb listing. His is found at: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm3305973/ My wife, Syahidah Osman Cawley, has a listing as well. Hers is found at: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm3463926/

This blog is copyright Valentine Cawley. Unauthorized duplication prohibited. Use Only with Permission. Thank you.)

The roots of kindness.

World Kindness Day is on 13th November 2009. So, it is apt that attention should, once more, focus on the Singapore Kindness Movement. The big question to be asked, first, of course is: is Singapore an essentially unkind society?

The short answer, unfortunately, is yes – and I shall tell you why. Singapore is a country built on competition. It is a nation that has raised competition to be the apex of all human endeavour. Were there Ten Singaporean Commandments, the first would be: Thou Shalt Win (At All Costs). Here, in Singapore, the only thing that matters, really, is that one should “win”, no matter what it takes to do so. In a culture where the only success is to be “No.1”, it seems necessary, to the people, to step on everyone else to get there. People brought up to believe that “winning is all”, become people who will do anything to win. This creates a fundamentally unpleasant attitude towards other people. You see, in such a “winner takes all” culture, other people are not seen as one’s fellow citizens, of a shared nation, but as one’s COMPETITORS. It is a small step from the word “competitor” to the word “enemy”. Thus, true Singaporeans don’t love their fellow man, they compete with them; fight with them; trample on them. They come to be people who only think of one person: themselves – no-one else is considered, or even considered worthy of being considered. No-one else matters, but “me”.

Singapore is a nation of people each of whom has the same thought running through their heads: “me, me, me”. There is no room for thought of anyone else. The consequences are clear. Singaporeans won’t do even the most basic of kindnesses for each other. They slam doors in each other’s faces, instead of holding them open. They get on trains, or into lifts, before others have got off. They steal each other’s taxis, getting into cabs others have called. They jump queues and get angry if challenged (which rarely happens). If offered a seat, on a bus, or a train, they will almost always fail to say “thank you”, but will sit in silence. Unbelievably, they even attack their fellow Singaporeans online, for doing well, in any endeavour. The list of poor behaviours could go on forever – but there is no need, for all the behaviours share one thing in common: a lack of thought for anyone else. Here, no-one considers the feelings of others.

Now, how are we to change this? How are we to make a kinder society? The Singapore Kindness Movement is a start. At least, it might prompt people to reflect on the issues and begin a process of personal change. However, I think it is too late to expect adults to change their ways, significantly. If Singapore is to become noted for the kindness of its people (which would, after all, be a lovely thing, wouldn’t it?), the efforts must begin in early childhood. Singapore’s children need to be taught to think of their effect on others; they need to learn to consider the feelings of others, just as much as they do their own. Parents can help with this, but schools should take on much of the burden. The instilling of kindness, as a desired attitude, could be woven into every lesson, in every school, in the land. It should begin with the teachers…perhaps they can be kind to their students. Every time they do so, they are teaching the children about kindness.

Perhaps, too, if Singaporeans could learn to compete less, with each other, and appreciate more, each other’s achievements, then a greater consideration for each other, might grow in their hearts. If Singaporeans can accept that other Singaporeans can win, too, and that that is something to feel pride in, rather than resentment of, perhaps the essential attitude of Singaporeans towards each other, might be changed for the better.

Kindness is a very important quality of a people. A kind person makes the lives of every person they ever meet, better. Of course, the opposite applies, too: an unkind person, makes the lives of everyone they meet worse. So, the Singapore Kindness Movement does not represent a trivial idea. It represents something fundamental to the quality of life, for everyone living in Singapore. If Singaporeans are, on the whole, unkind to each other, then it makes Singapore an unpleasant place to live in. Thus, it is important, for every Singaporean to begin to think in terms of how they can be kind to others. At each and every interaction, with other people, thought should be given to how they might show kindness, in that moment. Were all to do this, Singapore would quickly become one of the world’s most pleasant places to live in.

Of course, it takes two people to be kind: not just one. By this I mean, whenever anyone shows a kindness to another, that other should say: "Thank you", for the kindness shown. Should they not thank their benefactor, they would be greeting a kindness, with rudeness...which is just another variety of unkindness. So there are two parts to this: being kind to others - and being polite to those who are kind to us.

Be kind!

(If you would like to learn more of Ainan Celeste Cawley, a scientific child prodigy, aged eight years and seven months, or his gifted brothers, Fintan, five years exactly, and Tiarnan, twenty-eight months, please go to:http://scientific-child-prodigy.blogspot.com/2006/10/scientific-child-prodigy-guide.html I also write of gifted education, IQ, intelligence, the Irish, the Malays, Singapore, College, University, Chemistry, Science, genetics, left-handedness, precocity, child prodigy, child genius, baby genius, adult genius, savant, wunderkind, wonderkind, genio, гений ребенок prodigy, genie, μεγαλοφυία θαύμα παιδιών, bambino, kind.

We are the founders of Genghis Can, a copywriting, editing and proofreading agency, that handles all kinds of work, including technical and scientific material. If you need such services, or know someone who does, please go to: http://www.genghiscan.com/ Thanks.

IMDB is the Internet Movie Database for film and tv professionals. If you would like to look at my IMDb listing for which another fifteen credits are to be uploaded, (which will probably take several months before they are accepted) please go to: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm3438598/ As I write, the listing is new and brief - however, by the time you read this it might have a dozen or a score of credits...so please do take a look. My son, Ainan Celeste Cawley, also has an IMDb listing. His is found at: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm3305973/ My wife, Syahidah Osman Cawley, has a listing as well. Hers is found at: http://www.imdb.com/name/nm3463926/

This blog is copyright Valentine Cawley. Unauthorized duplication prohibited. Use Only with Permission. Thank you.)