Iain Duncan Smith: When A Quiet Man Goes With A Bang, Forget The Sizzle, Check The Steak

IDS resigns

Iain Duncan Smith (IDS), self-proclaimed “quiet man of politics”, former leader of the Tory party, Work and Pensions Secretary and Cabinet member resigned in an incendiaryletter to the Prime Minister yesterday. He left because the cuts to benefits announced in the budget just 3 days ago are going to be shelved and re-worked. He had long opposed these cuts, but been forced to defend them publicly. In essence IDS like many in his party had started the reform of the Welfare system with the assumption that people were work-shy, that disability benefits had been the sinecure of scroungers and that all that had to be done was to “encourage” and “motivate” people who had become economic malingerers, through failures in Welfare Policy, to become economically active, taxable individuals who could contribute to Britain’s recovery. The  "BedroomTax" , the re-badging of Disability Living Allowance (DLA) to the Personal Independence (PIP) and a raft of changes had the net result of hitting the disabled and the most vulnerable the hardest. When then it became apparent that Chancellor Osborne’s budget rewarded his political targets - young people, entrepreneurs and the very wealthy -  with benefits in the context of swingeing cuts against the poor, IDS resigned. He said of these benefits: “they are not defensible in the way they are placed within a budget that benefits higher earning tax payers”. He goes on to wonder if: “enough has been done to ensure we are all in this together”, calling into question the core Government claim that we really are all in this together.

Related Topic: Plausible Deniability, The Meme That Drives Exclusion

Timing 

PM and IDS hold opposing views on Europe

Meanwhile the timing of this resignation at a time when the Tory party has given a hall pass to its members at all levels to campaign for or against membership of the EU according to their conscience, makes his resignation politically deadly. He has thrown The Chancellor’s budget into complete disrepute and with it the judgement of a key stay in Europe campaigner and potential leader of the Tory party in George Osborne. This is a double blow to the PM, the Party and the Stay in Europe campaigners. If the budget of the government is unsound, what else, one might legitimately ask, is unsound about the political vision of PM Cameron, his Chancellor and the Stay in Europe cohort?

The answer to these questions do not lie in the alphabet soup of re-branded benefits or the arithmetical juggling of the Chancellor benefiting some, hitting others and clearly demonstrating we are NOT all in this together. 

Forget the sizzle, check the steak

Assumption: Benefits claimants are scroungers

The answer does not even lie in our understanding of government accounts and fiscal policy. To understand what is happening, all one needs to evaluate is the basic assumptions those who campaign for our votes hold about their fellow citizens. What view of men and women do they subscribe to? Do they respect the equal dignity of all, or do they think some are more deserving than others, no matter how well they spin their message with slogans and brand their policies?

People are the same everywhere. They can be driven by greed, haughtiness, a contempt for ordinary people, compassion, a sense of respect for their fellows and a sense of morality that renders some decisions unconscionable. The question is, which values our political aspirants have at front of mind. I’d argue that only a delusional person could not see what is happening in the UK politically now. Whether that person cares is of course another matter. And what is worse, the media is simply reporting the cosmetic facts and only joining the dots at the most superficial level. Will voters be smarter? They need to look beyond the sizzle of the steak and seek the beef to see how fresh it really is, in spite of the sweet seasoning we all smell and find so appetising. 

6 things I've Learned About Denial That Directly Impact Diversity.

Diversity is about our ability to embrace people from varied backgrounds with respect and ease. To do this requires the social skill of viewing things from multiple perspectives so we can accept new ideas and new ways of doing things. In business, where "innovation" has become the word du jour in recent times, and society in which people of diverse backgrounds are more and more in our spaces, our ability to embrace diversity not only makes us mores successful business wise but also happier as individuals. In a working life spanning several decades I have discovered that the human tendency toward living in denial is perhaps the greatest roadblock to our ability to embrace diversity as a way of life and doing business. Here are 6 things about denial, not all bad, that directly impact our ability to embrace diversity.

1. Keep Calm And Carry On

When we live in denial of any reality we numb ourselves to the impact and presence of that reality. A good example is bereavement. When first told of the loss of a loved one, many people just cannot accept that they will never, and I mean never, talk to, laugh with, drink with, hug, hold kiss that person ever again. The reality is so awful we numb ourselves to it and subconsciously deny it’s happened. Not a bad thing if you have to comfort others reeling in shock, organise funerals and the like. You are numb with shock, but crucially are able to function because of the shock.

2. Let’s Face The Music And Dance

Well that’s not entirely true, you actually deny the mood music and dance anyway, because denial enables you to keep up your spirits, even make light of and joke about the awful event that you can’t face. Again, useful in the short term. Who wants dive into a bottomless depression and fall apart? There’s the famous anecdote of the paratroop officer on Arnhem bridge in WWII whose lightly armed men, facing a crack tank brigade, were being torn to shreds in that ill-fated action. He carried an umbrella throughout the fight and explained to his men just before he died, “I’m hopeless with passwords but everyone knows that only an Englishman would be mad enough to carry a brolly onto a battlefield, so our boys would always know I was one of them.” Total denial to the point of surrealism, but he kept his men’s spirits up to the end!

3. Dodgy Logic.

We deny reality by minimisation, rationalisation and fantasising, using their logic to hide from the facts. Minimisation as in “Oh come on its not that bad really is it?” or “well look on the bright side, things are getting better aren’t they?” This is the logic which says, look on the bright side, the terrorists at Charlie Hebdo could have killed 20 or 30 journalists not just 12.

Related Topic: Plausible Deniability - The Meme That Drives Modern Exclusion. 

Rationalisation to maintain denial is where explanations for behaviour are made without comment on the value or worth of that behaviour. Saying that “well he behaves like that because he’s never met anyone from that background,” may well be true, but fails to acknowledge that the behaviour itself is hateful or inconsiderate. Rationalisation feels to its victims like an excuse for bad behaviour.

Fantasising, living in a dream world seems bizarre for adults but is very common and is one way of dealing with unpleasant or thorny problems we cannot face. It’s almost as if by repeating the fantasy often and long enough reality will disappear, but of course it never does. Examples in daily life are pretending you did not very publicly snub someone just the day before, yet meet them cheerily at the next occasion. The denial is so effective that the victim asks themselves, “did I imagine what happened yesterday?”, which of course they didn’t. Other ways in which fantasies are maintained is censorship of speech where certain subjects including diversity itself are just not welcome in polite conversation. The unease created is a powerful way in which groups are held in line with the fantasy. If no one is talking about it, then it cannot be happening says the dream.

4. Denial Maintains The Status Quo.

Denial of a situation helps maintain stasis and never addresses the problem. If an issue has been censored from sight, it can’t exist and of course will never be addressed. How can you solve a problem that does not exist?

5. Denial Is The Perfect Growth Medium For Impending Catastrophe.

Any problem facing an individual or a business metastasises and grows when not addressed. The problems can be hidden in plain sight but owing to a collective denial of the issue it can grow to the point it becomes totally toxic to the larger community before it’s addressed. This happens in personal relationships, in businesses and in communities. Couples slowly growing apart,  Group Think  in businesses leading to awful decisions are all examples. Why did our society not see radicalisation  looming over the horizon, given years of social statistics indicating exclusion in certain demographics? Why did it take so long for the authorities to act despite countless allegations of paedophile activity by high placed celebrities like Sir Jimmy Savile . By contrast, diversity and other social challenges which are widely spoken of without fear of censorship (such as women’s rights) see continued progress even though resistance to them is deeply embedded in prevailing cultural values and memes.

6. Denial Does Not Stop By Itself.

People need permission and an enabling environment to stop denying realities that may be toxic to themselves, their businesses and their communities. Individuals and usually those in positions of social, executive or opinion forming authority usually need to take the lead and champion a constructive way of dealing with the issue being denied. On a personal level, each individual has to decide (or not) for themselves to liberate their thinking and way of being. The rewards are plentiful – an enriched life based on reality, and an improved sense of self-worth that is shame and guilt free. Denial of reality holds us all back and limits our lives to a fraction of the possibilities we can help ourselves and others enjoy.

Your comments on Denial are welcome. Can you add insights on the subject?

For coaching in managing diversity email Tet Kofi Media at tet@tekofi.com.

5 Reasons Why Every Day Could Be Christmas

Christmas is an amazing time. Soldiers hell bent on killing each other have even set up truces, temporarily halt their mutual slaughter, and play football, as in  WW1. The shops enter heaven on earth as their till takings explode. People talk to those they don’t usually get on with (sometimes including family), and everywhere the spirit of human bonhomie abounds. It’s a cypher for a mini world peace of sorts but here are 5 reasons it could happen 365 days a year.

First give yourself permission

Sure there is the religious celebration of the birth of Christ and its cry for peace on earth in the case of Christmas, and that’s an important stating point. However, the key thing is, some cause, some idea gives us permission to be peaceful and we act on that admonition. Why can’t we give ourselves this admonition and permission every day. It works over Christmas and many religious festivals so it can be done.  The birth of Christ is the “excuse” but we could find any number of “excuses” for giving ourselves permission to be jolly and convivial.

 

Want for it to work

The second reason we could have Christmas every day is we all want it to work. We all want to have a good time because we are tired of the daily conflicts, game playing, and number one-ism that sadly characterises a lot of interactions with those outside our tight inner circle. The truth is we fight, abuse and control others because we fear that if we don’t we might lose something – our privileges, advantages, special benefits of one sort or another. Of course the cycle of conflict created makes it more likely that further conflict will ensue. Deep down everyone just wants a happy, stress free life we just don’t know how to get it because we haven’t given ourselves permission to have one. (That’s not a life free of challenge by the way, happiness is probably impossible without challenges to motivate us.)

Take responsibility

Thirdly even the most outrageous glums we know grudgingly get into the spirit of Christmas and start to own it for themselves. If at first they give presents because they’re expected to, after a few days of buying them, experience shows that people start to enjoy giving and the tendency becomes one of over giving if anything. So it can be done, and crucially it gets done because each individual takes responsibility for dropping their pebble of largesse into the big ocean and the ripples travel far (and not just to shopkeepers). Actually no one is making you jolly, you are becoming jolly by being jolly and it’s amplified by the jolliness of others.

 
Guess What? It just doesn't matter

My fourth and favourite reason for saying that Xmas can be an all year thing is that we suddenly subliminally get the notion that whatever is the cause of the conflict ….it doesn’t matter. Not that our conflicts are imagined, we’re not making them up, but we rise above them, behave convivially and soon discover another perspective which enables us to ride over our differences. Why can’t we do that every day?

The downside leads to the upside

The fifth reason Xmas could still be on by say mid-May, early September or whenever is that all the downsides associated with it, debt, alcohol abuse, family and relationship bust ups, even suicide are like the dross that rises to the top when ore is smelted to leave the pure metal running free. We soon learn that it’s the thought not the pound value of the gift that gives the lift, we learn that we don’t need to anaesthetise ourselves with alcohol to become social, we soon realise that falsely love bombing people with prezzies is trumped by an actual relationship based on mutual respect. Under those circumstances, we spend money meaningfully, make the involvement of alcohol the effect of a good relationship not its phoney cause, and that authentic closeness lifts people out of dire lonely misery.

So yes for all these reasons Xmas could run year round in spirit, and everyone would be winners. It is a state of mind kicked off by the religious festival! Do you believe it? Share your view here in the comments.

Get A Free Gift Wrapping Video Series…

The images are gift wraps by gift wrapping expert Neelam Meetcha. You can style your gift wrapping this year with a FREE gift wrapping video series on how to arrange and gift wrap a basket. Get Free access at www.giftwrappingtrainingacademy.com  

Five Lessons For Business From One Thing Black Parents Teach Their Children

Almost every black parent has “that” conversation with their children when they intone words to the effect “You've got to work ten times harder than the others to get ahead.” I first heard that from mine around age 13. I didn't really pay attention. Add a public school environment to my age and I felt more or less invincible.  I was very wrong because the science proves that there is much wisdom in this advice, and while minority ethnic families have freely bandied it about for generations, your business can take 5 lessons from it that will make your staff more productive, your customers more satisfied, and your reputation much stronger; all effects that flow straight to your bottom line.

In-Groups

The first lesson is that people form in-groups in any community including companies. Members of our in-group are those we identify with and support. They are chosen for the likelihood of their giving us positive feedback about ourselves. In-group members are a kind of fan club who help us maintain a positive self-image and are therefore welcome. We view them as individuals, are able to overlook their quirks and even see these sometimes as the very things that make them unique and attractive. In meetings we refer to them by name, quote their contributions, make eye contact are relaxed around them and so cause them to feel more confident to contribute, take punts at flying edgy ideas, which even if not accepted are still applauded as creative attempts. We evaluate their work and output higher, and are sympathetic when in-group members fail or stumble.

Out-Groups

The second lesson is that there are others in our communities who we place in the category of out-group members. They are people we don’t identify with and typically won’t look for or expect positive feedback from. Despite being co-workers, they are definitely the “away” team and though afforded basic courtesies get no positive passion from us. We see out-group members as a homogenized group and are unable to see their quirks as endearing or indicative of a unique personality. Their ways are more likely to be seen as deviations from the “norm” (of our in-group) and further proof that they really are not part of us. In meetings we don’t quote them, refer to their points, mention them less by name, and won’t be as open to their creative punts, more likely seeing them as of little merit or unworkable. It is very easy in a group of say 5 people for the 3 people who form part of our in-group to shut out the two who are seen as  members of the out-group, without noticing that this is what we are doing. Complaints from members of the out-group are unsympathetically heard and often attributed to the stereotype we have prior formed about “such people” – stereotypes such as being anti-social, disengaged, defensive, uncreative, of less merit and the like. Of course the behaviour of the in-group will by its very nature enable and increase the manifestation of these stereotyped behaviours which then become self-fulfilling prophecies. “See?  I always suspected that’s how he or she (out-group member) is,” an in-grouper would then think.  

Informal Networks

The third lesson is that creating in and out groups will naturally exclude out-group members from the informal networks that every organization needs to promote its work. These networks are the places where social engagement gives access to decision makers, influencers, opinion formers, and sometimes the nuanced information required to do a job well. New opportunities for career development while passing through the formal networks are often best accessed through these informal networks. Exclusion from informal networks mean out-group members will very likely not do their jobs as well,  gain access to the privileged information they need or progress as quickly up the career ladder. This of course will be seen as further evidence to in-group members of out-group members belonging in the out-group because they’re “just not as good!”

Mentoring and Grooming

The fourth lesson for companies derives from the third. It is by having access to the informal networks that individuals are mentored and groomed for career development. There are hard skills and soft skills in any job, so while two candidates may be equally qualified in the hard skills, the “softer” nuances of the job which really differentiate the rookie from the rock star will not be made available to out-group members. This is simply because they were excluded from the sources and exposure that provide those insights. Mentors have a percentage in those they foster and nurture. They tend to look for opportunities to guide their wards onward and upwards too, an arrangement that works always to the advantage of those accepted into the informal networks. People always pass the ball to members of their own team.

Living In Denial

The final lesson for companies is that they will likely live in denial of the 4 effects outlined so far, and blame them on the inherent nature or behaviour of out-group members. This is what social psychologists call a  classic attribution error where individual nature is seen as the cause of an event without realising that the environment is exerting heavy pressure to shape the outcome of events and behaviour.  While attribution errors by in-group members may look intentional to members of the out-group, in-group members are in fact often completely unconscious of these errors. The simple truth is that people like people like us!

Membership of in and out-groups may be formed along lines of race, gender, sexual orientation, age, class, in fact any significant cultural or demographic trait that marks one individual as VISIBLY or behaviourally different to others. These exclusions hurt the company, its profits and may damage its reputation. They can limit access to markets, ruin group harmony, significantly reduce the productivity of staff, and destroy the creative spark in a company because creativity is found at the confluence of multiple or different viewpoints. The insights above derive from the work of social psychologists including Henri Tajfel and John Turner in the 1970’s and is founded in the science behind Social Identity Theory.  So while black parents may not have understood the science behind their statements, there was much wisdom in what they have passed down. If you’re a member of the out-group, you have your work cut out for you, and smart companies will work hard to understand and manage the negative impacts of social interactions at work. Leave your comments on your experience of these lessons here, they are very welcome.

I have coached senior management teams on managing diversity in large and small organisations. My clients have included L’Oréal in 5 Countries (UK, Holland, Switzerland, Hungary, Czech Republic) The British Army, Logica (CGI), The European Commission in 4 countries (Spain, Iceland, Germany, Slovenia), British Aerospace (Warships Div.) in the UK, The Cabinet Office and a host of SMEs in the UK. Email tet@tetkofi.com for further information on how I could help your organisation or start-up.

The Race From The Bottom: Why Most Africans Must Learn To Do Romantic Love

Good at fraternal, bad at romantic relationships

Cast your mind back, as a habitual knife, spoon and fork user, to the time you first used chopsticks. Remember the hash you made of your noodles or stir fry then? Well that’s exactly the mess Africans or should I say West Africans, or even more specifically Ghanaians, make of romantic love after centuries of being experts at fraternal and sisterly love. They are as poor at managing romantic relationships as they're good in fraternal relationships, but why?

The extended family is based on a network of familial relationships which are very like fraternal and sisterly relationships. Such associations are tightly regulated with rules and usages established centuries ago, and given “constitutional” force by cultural endorsement. Everyone there knows how they treat a brother, sister, cousin, uncle, aunt, nieces and nephews, grandparents, family friends and the wider society. The rules are clear, well learnt and mostly believed in.  Note that none of these relationships involve sexual relations. What's right and what’s wrong is easy to uphold without the temptations provided by hormonal drives or impulses. In a romantic relationship however, the incendiary impact of sex renders most of the rules useless or unenforceable, and people seem lost as to how to proceed without these externally imposed rules. To provide a crutch to lean on, Ghanaian and many West African romantic relationships default to the style and manner of fraternal relationships and simply replicate them. This is much safer. The rules of engagement are already in place, order is restored, but the passion in the relationship is cooled or extinguished, losing that uniqueness of bond that intimacy opens to lovers. Utility, or just managing things, takes over. This has been my observation. It’s a kind of fraternal business relationship, and it could be had with virtually anyone else that follows the rules, not just your unique partner. This fraternal relationship just comes with the added bonus of mandated, legitimised sex! A notion of entitlement or ownership, based purely on the rights conferred by the association is easily fostered, without being anchored in a genuine, heartfelt, intimate one-on-one relationship.

Very few people say "I love you" in their native language

Very few people say “I love you” in native West African languages. The words exist, but are just rarely used in a passionate context. When West Africans do express such love, it’s usually in a foreign language like English. Perhaps this is because a mental adjustment needs to take place before such intimacy can “legitimately” be expressed. In the cultural context that their native language refers to, it is, if not taboo, almost in violation of the caveats of a brotherly relationship. As the relationship between lovers is being governed by the rules of a fraternal relationship, it surely feels weird to introduce passionate one-on-one-relationship intimacy.

Pair bonds if secure, lack passion

The traditional African cultural set-up is designed to promote the success of the group and extended family as a whole, not the survival of paired lovers as a unit. The extended family will thus always survive, but the paired couple may not, and any children from say a marriage or couple will usually be well cared for by the extended family. Thus in traditional West African culture, the survival of the extended family is paramount, a must have; while the survival of the romantic unit is relegated to just a “nice to have”. Nice to have because if you live with a partner it might as well be in some degree of peace and harmony, even if passionless.

The pressure on individuals to stay loyal to their respective extended families is thus often at the cost of the development of their private pair bond. These pressures often mitigate against husband and wife getting too close to each other emotionally, for fear they will tear themselves apart from their almost feudal fealty to the extended family. This makes the survival of romantic relationships more tenuous.

Parents having grown up in powerful extended families themselves know how extended family relationships work, and are able to pass their experience to their offspring. But being themselves innocents in the art of managing romantic love, they are unable to teach their children the life and attitudinal skills to create or maintain romantic relationships.  African kids just don’t see their parents in romantic mode and have to invent the wheel on this when it’s their turn to try a romantic relationship. There are no great love stories that I know of to set a standard in the culture, more a series of proverbs that explain the “rules” of relationships. The balance of power is thus firmly tipped against the marriage units’ survival in favour of the extended family’s ubiquitous onward march.

Africans must learn the art of romance

The world has however changed and won’t go back to how it was.  Individual freedom away from extended families is on the rise, backed by greater personal economic freedom, especially that of educated, middle class women.   The pair bonded state – whether enshrined in marriage or loosely entered into as cohabitation – is the most likely future building block of society. If Africans are to survive and thrive in the future, learning what romantic love is all about is already a “must do”, not just a “nice to have”. We are rather like the visitor to a Chinese restaurant trying chopsticks for the first time. We make a total hash of it, spread food everywhere and are only slowly nourished by the little we get into our bodies through our clumsy efforts. But in this restaurant there are no knives and forks available to fall back on! The race up from the bottom is on. People will have to learn to step up to romance.

Do you "live" for real or are you just a "survivor"?

Quality Survival: Sea Food platter with Tagliatelle al Funghi

It seems that in real life, to whom little is given much is expected! That’s how the old saying should read. When life is reduced to a matter of survival we don’t really live in the true sense. We don’t really do anything, we just run on the survival treadmill like hamsters in a cage. What do I mean by a survival oriented life? A life that values above all else those things that you can: eat; drive in; live in (with some degree of luxury); have sex with (of either gender); holiday at (the more exotic the better); provide warmth or coolness (depending on your latitude), clean running water, energy to power life; bodily adornment (via clothing or accessories – preferably with some degree of style and glamour); fame; status; and power over others so you can gain a bigger share of all the survival fulfillers prior listed. You might just as well be a lion on the serengeti, or a wolf in the tundra when your'e in this mode.

Living and construction require deferred gratification

What is curious is that survival is an entirely selfish endeavor, animalistic even (in the anthropological not pejorative sense). However to live, we require to engage in a positive way with others, a way that enhances the welfare of more than number one. Love, creativity of any kind, construction of any kind is only really possible when one reaches out beyond number one. Love for example has to reach beyond just sex and brings complex human qualities into play, like negotiation, empathy and trust. Survivors don’t love, they lust. Survivors need instant gratification, but living requires a sense of purpose and deferred gratification.

Sunflowers (Van Gogh Gallery) Vincent Van Gogh 1888

The man who in 1888 created the iconic picture of sunflowers in a vase sold one painting in his lifetime and died in poverty. Was he a fool or did he live? A century later in 1988 this picture, Van Gogh's "Sunflowers" sold at auction in Christies for £25m. Art lovers everywhere consider it a masterpiece.

Whether you’re in Accra or Accrington, London or Lagos, Rome or Ramallah you have to ask the question: "are you surviving or actually living?"  The picture at the top was a tasty bit of “survival” I did the other day at my favourite restaurant in Ealing, West London. The gratification was instant!! Enjoyment, total, no question.  But in a hundred years who would offer a bent penny for my telling of it?

Code May Drive Modern Life, But The Colour Code Does Not.

Colour is a limiting descriptor

October is  Black History Month throughout the UK, but we should mind our language, because we are all more than just a colour!

In the old days it was Physics, Chemistry and Biology. Now we call it Science. In the old days , it was civil, mechanical and electronic engineering, now we call it Tech! In the old days everything was colour coded including people, now the only code we talk of are the strings of instructions that drive programmes. Language should change to suit the needs, perceptions and understanding of the times.
Its time for the language describing people to change too. The idea of people as  "black", "white" or "brown" is just too limiting; way too yesterday to be meaningful. Once we impose a colour label on people we actually help create a problem we then have to solve. Invoke colour, and you invoke stereotypes based on recent political and social histories. In the hierarchy of modern times, white folk self perceive as superior , followed by the brown folk and orientals (once called Yellow - how cringe making is that ?),with the dear old black folk bringing up the rear at the foot of the totem pole of social worth. These stereotypes  prescribe how people should be perceived, and quickly become a self fulfilling prophecy in social and global outputs.

Different levels of worth according to the colour code

The lives of the rainbow coalition of humanity assume different levels of worth, and this is often reflected in official policy and its impacts in everything from the judicial system, through to international policy initiatives. So called "white" people seem to  behave as white people are expected to behave at one end,while black people do the same at the other. Even when they want to change, the tag of colour becomes an albatross round their respective necks.White people usually enjoying greater wealth and privilege, don't even notice others, until something goes seriously awry, like a riot, or a war! And until the parties read an article like this, all these dynamics seem to run in the background without anyone's conscious awareness or guidance. Its a kind of autopilot that few have front of mind at any time. Put Black people at the head of the totem pole and there is no reason to expect them to behave differently.  Nevertheless, the driver of behaviour is not colour for any group. Economics and the resulting politics are far more powerful drivers of behaviour than colour.

If you're not "black" or a council worker during October's "Black History Month", or an executive in an enterprise that's been approached for sponsorship of a "Black History Month" activity, it will likely fly blithely under your radar. The month has become an increasing non-event year on year and I'm sure the moniker we give it is in part to blame. I can see everyone shouting about Fashion Revolution, or Bringing Back our Girls or, Standing up for Cancer. I can't however, hear any but the die hard "community activists", long a dying breed, getting excited about Black History Month.

Geography is a far bigger driver of behaviour

 I'd be tagged as black , but the colour of my skin drives nothing in my life. Even the genes I carry and my physiology, are probably more the result of my geographical origins than my colour. Colour does not affect the way I think, the way I feel, or the way I behave. Those things are driven a lot more by where I've lived, the kind of upbringing I had, and a thousand formative experiences related more to time, place, geography, education and life philosophy. Thus I struggle with the value of the title "Black" History month. Its the wrong label. The label should have a lot more to do with the geography and history of the human ideas and histories recounted or reviewed in "Black History Month". 

The air war Britain is already involved in is about economics and geo-politics. It is being framed as a religious war by those who need the PR mileage such framing confers. This would be analogous to say a hyper active thyroid being diagnosed as a nutritional problem because the victim presents with weight loss. Without the right language, we look for the wrong solutions and misdirect our efforts.

So forget the colour spectrum, I'm going for the human spectrum. Join me if you dare! Call it African Diaspora Month. Its far more descriptive, or can you suggest a better name?