On the acceptance of difference

Some societies are more accepting of the "different" among them, than others. One of the poorest, in this respect, seems to be Russia.

A couple of days ago, I bumped into a Russian friend who is married to a Singaporean. She told me of many things, but what struck me were her reasons for leaving Russia. She is Caucasian, so these reasons may not have applied to her...but that she felt uncomfortable about the situation was clear. In Russia, you are punished if you are different. This punishment begins at bullying and ends at murder. If, for instance, you are smart, at school, you will be bullied, in Russia, on a daily basis, simply for being different in this respect. If you are Asian, you might very well be killed.

My friend told me of one case she knew of, in Russia, in which a Korean family, consisting of a mother, father and ten year old daughter, were set upon by Russians, and beaten to death. Even the ten year old girl was killed. The reason for their murder was just that they were Asian.

Now, clearly, Russia is an extreme example. This tendency, of Russians, to pick on the outsiders in their midst, can only weaken the country and lead to a diminished nation. Russia is a country that cannot benefit from the input of non-Caucasian foreigners, for instance...it would simply be too dangerous for such people to consider living there. Thus, the Russian talent pool is narrowed and impoverished - and the whole of Russia suffers from it.

However, there are other countries, in which outsiders are not accepted. To some degree most countries are guilty of this, though perhaps with a less extreme response than the Russian one. In all cases, the country is weakened by its refusal to accept diversity: with a variety of different people of different backgrounds, come different capabilities and that can only be to the good of a nation.

My hope is that the Russians mature and come to accept outsiders in their midst - and that other countries with similar attitudes also grow up a bit. It does no-one any good, to pick on anyone. Anywhere in which any group of people suffers from any kind of discrimination is a place that is weaker than it could be.

There is no harm in being aware of difference - and perhaps even intrigued by it - but we must most certainly fight against any intolerance of difference, of whatever kind. Accept the different...you will be doing your town, city, country, a lot of good by doing so.

In the meantime, however, if you are Asian, I would recommend steering clear of Russia, for the time being.

(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.

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

Freedom of Speech and the United States

Is there true freedom of speech in the United States? Is there freedom of speech on the internet? Does it endanger international relations and stray into politics, to speak freely on the internet?

I ask these questions for a reason. You see, I keep an eye on the locations of those who visit my website and on who comments on my pages. It is helpful to keep track of such things, since then I know something of the perspective of those who comment. I have, therefore, noticed something with regards to one of my posts. I wrote of George Bush's difficulty with the English language, picking up on a Reuters report that had made his mangling of English centre stage. It seems that simply speaking of such things is not permissible, at least in the eyes of at least one American. You see, there used to be regular visitor to my blog from Bothell, Washington - or Washington, Bothell. Every day, they would visit my blog. Until, one day, I wrote about George Bush's linguistic limitations, not in censure, but with a sense of worry about the wherewithal of a nation's Commander-in-Chief. Apparently, one is not really free to speak of anything one wishes in America - at least, Americans on the ground don't really respect freedom of speech, with their hearts and minds. You see, if you speak freely, without wish to offend, they can get offended and take umbrage: so where does that leave freedom of speech? It is, in effect, only a theoretical entity, in America. That visitor from Bothell, Washington had been a steadfast regular on my blog - but after I alluded to the Reuters report on George Bush, she or he, wrote a somewhat miffed remark on the post, and then never visited my blog again.

To me, his or her action is very significant. It means that, in practice, there may not actually be true freedom of speech in the United States (or perhaps anywhere else - but most other places don't actually boast of having it in the first place). True freedom of speech, in my eyes, implies that no-one will take any kind of action against you, for voicing an opinion. Not visiting a blog, again, comes under the category of a retributive action. It indicates, therefore, that the high principle of freedom of speech is not actually respected by that individual. That action led me to wonder how many, or how few, other Americans really understand what a world where speech was truly free should be like. In such a world, no opinion would ever attract censure and all would be listened to with equal open-ness. That is the ideal that America speaks of, when it boasts of its freedom of speech. Yet, in truth, the reality falls short of that, at least if this example is anything to go by.

It is perilous, it seems, to speak of anyone in politics. People are polarized and any opinion, about anyone political, whether it be local or international, is likely to differ from the opinions of many of one's readers. In a free world, where speech was truly free, it would not matter. One's opinion would not lead to problems. I have learnt, however, from observing that event, that although one may write as one wishes, on the internet, that certain opinions - perhaps any opinion, in fact - will lead to some people taking exception to it.

We have, therefore, the freedom to write as we wish - but not the freedom to be welcomed universally.

Freedom of speech is an admirable ideal - and it is heartening that the United States says it upholds such a thing. Indeed, as I understand it, it is a First Amendment right, in the Constitution. Yet, its citizens - at least some of them - have not yet fully internalized what freedom of speech really means. I look forward to a day when all the world is free, in every way - being free in speech, is probably the easiest freedom of all - if only people would be tolerant of each other, in all our infinite variety.

(If you would like to learn more of Ainan Celeste Cawley, a scientific child prodigy, aged seven years and ten months, or his gifted brothers, Fintan, four years and three months, and Tiarnan, twenty 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, College, University, Chemistry, Science, genetics, left-handedness, precocity, child prodigy, child genius, baby genius, adult genius, savant, gifted adults and gifted children in general. Thanks.)

The gifted and the future of society

The future of a community and a society may be measured easily: simply ask how do they treat their most gifted?

It is an undeniable fact that almost all human advance depends on a few creative individuals. Without the input of these individuals, little new would actually occur. One need only look at the productivity of the most creative compared to those who are bright but less outstanding...the total productivity difference can be orders of magnitude. Think of Leonardo da Vinci - his productivity was equivalent to that of many creative people, the output of dozens of lifetimes.

Thus, how a society nurtures such people really has an impact on the future health, prosperity and soundness of that society. If the gifted are nurtured and nourished, encouraged and supported, then that society will flourish. However, if the gifted are opposed, discouraged, vilified and left unsupported, it is almost certain that that society will fail, in the long-term - it will slowly dwindle away due to lack of innovation; lack of creativity, lack of leadership.

I write this because of attitudes I have picked up around the world.

In America, if the gifted boards are anything to go by, support for the gifted is not what it should be: there is a lot of envy and intolerance of anyone more gifted than themselves (from "gifted" people themselves). I don't think this bodes well for the future of the USA. In the city-state of Singapore, however, we have so far, been greeted very well...it is uncanny really. For Singapore has a reputation for oppressiveness - on which I cannot comment - and America has a reputation for freedom. Yet, the country that is free has citizens that have attacked us, verbally - and the country that is reputedly not free has citizens who have been kind to us. It really is telling.

So which country has a future? The country that is "free" - but giftist...or the country that is not free - but is meritocratic?

It will be interesting to find out.