insights

The first award of the 2007 season goes to those who have been referring to Gabriolans as Fractious and Divisive.

Most dictionaries define divisive as tending to cause disagreement, dissension, discord and conflict, as well as disruptive, factional, discordant, and alienating.
Fractious is defined as easily angered, annoyed, or irritated, having an unpleasant disposition and being inclined to make trouble; also as some combination of complaining, cross, cranky, crabby, disorderly, ill-natured, mean, nettlesome, ornery, peevish, peckish, perverse, pettish, petulant, quarrelsome, snappish, testy, tetchy, thin-skinned, touchy, uncompliant, undisciplined, unmanageable, unruly and being difficult to control. I cannot help but wonder what people hope to gain by using such insulting terms to describe their fellow Islanders.
Of all the definitions I think only the last – being difficult to control – really refers to most in our community. Islanders in general tend to be independent minded and resistant to being told how to live and what to believe. Islands, by their very nature tend not to attract followers. Followers tend to stay on the mainland. Likewise, small islands don’t tend to attract the politically ambitious. Those who need to be perceived, as “leaders” tend to find island living frustrating as independent people neither need nor want leaders.
I think those who refer to Gabriolans as fractious and divisive do so out of frustration at not being able to readily manipulate or convince islanders to join their cause; they seem to confuse fractiousness with independence. I believe this because I don’t see much evidence of fractiousness on this island, quite the opposite in fact. Gabriolans are quite able to band together to accomplish that which they see to be in their interests. Evidence of this is exhibited in concrete form such as the museum, Agi Hall, and the community center and The Commons. Less concrete but equally clear are the results of the Referndumb, the landslide victories in the last local elections, the support for the Island Trust in general and the Trust’s decision to trade land density for 700 acres of parkland which the vast majority of islanders supported, and more recently the growing support and commitment to the new medical clinic.
There is equally impressive evidence of Gabriolans working together in the way they took care of each other during the latest snowstorm and the way neighbours keep an eye on the property of those who are vacationing or away for other reasons, as well as the ease and trust exhibited in picking up hitch-hikers on the island or in the concern expressed when your car breaks down and almost every person going by stops to offer help. Or how about the many volunteers from the fire department to PHC to the annual Salmon Barbecue who willingly dedicate of time to the common good of the community? Another example of the non-fractiousness of the community is demonstrated by the generosity islanders show to those who have or are going through crisis.
As I look around this island I see much more evidence of islanders co-operating and working together than I see of discord, divisiveness and petulance. I think those who would label us “fractious” might be well advised to look in a mirror if they want to see those who are fractious. I think the ones who have been using the term fractious so much lately are those frustrated because the majority won’t buy into their particular plan; they are confusing fractiousness with independence. I also think that those who get so frustrated that they toss about such labels might want to think about whether it is the Islanders that can’t work together or whether there is something basically wrong with the direction you want the island to go in. Regarding other islanders as hicks that don’t know what is good for them is may be a comfortable way to salve your ego when your approach is rejected but it is also an incredibly arrogant and erroneous point of view. It is a point of view that blinds you to possibility that maybe the problem lies not with the people but with the message.

For various reasons that would take to long to explain I have been spending a fair bit of effort in trying to reconcile the above three views with our experience of life and the way we make decisions. Essentially, I have been doing this because my worldview is strongly influenced by aspects of these three approaches to understanding.

Cognitive psychology interests me because it recognizes that our existing schemas (or structures, templates or paradigms) alter many of our perceptions and even memories. Zen interests me because it emphasizes the impermanence of all, the intuitive part of decision-making; as well as the futility of depending on objective judgment. Quantum physics interests me partially because it makes us consider that all possibilities not only will happen but also already have happened and they are all valid. Interesting stuff but what does it have to do with day to day life? Hopefully the following may shed some light on the interactions of all these things – at least in my own mind, which in the final analysis is the only thing I can be even partially sure about and even them I can only be partially sure of my sureness.
I think we can all agree that our perceptions of ourselves is often very different from others perceptions of us; likewise two people can see or hear the same thing and yet have totally different views on what just happened. There is much evidence to support this view. Two people describing a car accident seldom agree on just what happened, they may not later agree even on the color of the car. This discrepancy between the perceptions of people is well known and eyewitness accounts are generally viewed with much less confidence than they were in the past. Some interesting experiments were done involving showing a brief film clip of a well-dressed white male assaulting a Rastafarian – later people were asked to describe what happened. Most people who saw the clip thought the Rastafarian had assaulted the white man - so much for eye witnesses, and so much for our ability to assess reality without taking into account the power of our beliefs, former experiences and existing attitudes.
Our perception structure is necessary because we need it to make sense of the world. If we had to figure out what to do with stairs every time we came in contact with them it would be terribly time consuming; so we have a mental structure of stairs that lets us deal with them unconsciously, which is the good part. The not so good part is that we form these structures or schemas unconsciously and often very early in life. In he process of forming these structures other emotions and experiences often gets mixed up in the formation process.
We end up with a structure that unconsciously filters experience to match our beliefs, our prior experience and our emotional state. An example of this is someone may end up with a fear of falling every time they use stairs and sometimes this fear can influence the choices they make for the rest of their lives. Some people associate height with fear or develop other phobias and biases. People can see themselves as easy going when others perceive them as hot headed, or perceive themselves as weak when others see strength, some see the glass as half-full well others see it as half-empty; the alternative choices and viewpoints are as nearly infinite.
So if we accept that our accumulated life experience influences and filters events it is not a large leap to understand that this same accumulated experience and view of ourselves also influences our memories. How often do we discover that others remember an event or experience differently than we do? We edit memories unconsciously to bring them more into line with our perception of our beliefs about the world around us and ourselves. We now enter a sometimes vicious circle of our present experiences being filtered through our memories of our past experience and our memories are being edited and\or re-interpreted based on our present experience. Confused yet? So how do we arrive at the truth – chances are we don’t. We arrive at our truth for the present but that may change based on future experience. A prime example of this is first impressions.
We form impressions of others based on our first encounter with them. Our impressions are not just based on what they do but are filtered by our past experience with other people and situations that are similar. We then interpret future interactions with the person based on our first impressions, which may or may not be right but are certainly incomplete. Sometimes we have an experience with the same person that helps us get to know them better and then our impression of them is changed. With this new impression we alter our original impression and to some extent we also unconsciously edit our memories of that first encounter to both reflect our new impression and to maintain our self-image of being good at judging people’s character from first impressions. The cycle of new impressions, experience, filtering and editing of memories goes on constantly and usually unconsciously.
So then can we ever truly claim to really know or be in a position to judge another?
? Personally, I think not; and yet we must make decisions based on inaccurate and incomplete and often distorted information. We must make decisions in order to act; otherwise we can become paralyzed by fear that we are making the wrong choice or judgment.
Given all of the above where does that leave us. We must interpret experience and we must make some kind of judgments in order to do so. Yet we know that our decisions, actions and judgments may very well be in error because our perceptions may be distorted. We never have and never will have enough absolutely impartial perceptions to make absolute judgments, so we are always making approximations. The trick is to realize that though we have to make a decision or judgment in order to function in the present we should also be aware that our judgment is not infallible and our decisions may well have to change in the future. If this gives us no certainty in life then we have learned one of the most important lessons –we should not be quick to judge others and we should be open both to the possibility that our original judgment may be incorrect and to the possibility that both we and the other person may change. This brings us full circle back to the incompleteness of knowledge, the impermanence of all experience and our own mutability. Both Zen and quantum physics show the same – there maybe an absolute “Truth” but we are not normally equipped to understand it. Hopefully this makes us a little more humble, less judgmental and more open to both our experiences and to others, and if it does that it is a good start.

I recently had a somewhat heated but civil debate with a friend of mine about whether the local economy depends to a large part on tourism. The reason the debate was a little heated is that none of my friends are wimps, the reason that it was still civil is all my friends believe that good people can have differing viewpoints – this is a concept that often gets lost when debates turn ugly. Nevertheless, despite what some people tell you, you don’t have to pick sides and every debate doesn’t have to cost you friends. In fact, I would not be comfortable having a friend that could not argue with me. The trick of developing real friends is knowing that at times you will argue, disagree and for awhile may even be angry at each other – good friendships survive all of this and become stronger because you value their input knowing that it will be real. Sometimes friends (as well as lovers) have to just agree to disagree. This involves people with a high level of tolerance and who accept the fact that we are by our nature likely to perceive the same things differently and that consequently our viewpoints being different we will naturally disagree. Would we really want to live in a world where we saw everything the same? Where we all lived exactly the same and thought the same and there was nothing new or different. Yuck, just the thought of all that conformity makes me shudder.

Throughout my life I have been fascinated by the incredible juggling act that all of us go through in exercising the freedom to choose while trying to avoid the blame or consequences of those choices.
We live in the freest society in history. We have raised individual freedom to the highest pinnacle of what is fair and just. We demand our freedoms and actively resist any encroachment on them. We are free to live wherever we choose (and can afford), free to choose our profession (or choose none), free to charge whatever the market will bear (regardless of how many can’t afford our price), free to indulge whatever whims and passions our credit allows. We are even free to deny that we have freedom of choice.. In all of this freedom that we demand, we have forgotten that freedom is based in responsibility; we can’t have one without the other.
. Many people like to blame violence on society, many others blame it on parenting, still others blame it on peer groups, alcohol, drugs, sugar, early weaning, childhood trauma, or even on their horoscopes. The pattern of blaming everyone and everything except ourselves is as ingrained as our assumption that we have a right to do pretty much anything we please and the consequences (if any) can usually be put off on someone else. Those who use violence feel justified in doing so, until they get caught, at which point they usually try to pass themselves off as the real victim. Those who have violence done to them are pretty sure they are innocent victims regardless of what choices they made to put themselves in the path of violence. Oh what a can of worms that last sentence will open, but hey, I’m just the writer, I shouldn’t be held responsible for how you interpret what I write (after all, my muse made me do it).
Yes, I do understand that children are a product of their environment. Society, TV, video games, books, peers, schools and, most of all, parents influence the way that children develop. Children are shaped and modeled by these influences, especially during their “formative years”, but what about when they grow up? Children do (like kittens) grow up. What happens then? Adults demand all the freedoms of society, is it not reasonable that they accept the responsibility? When you are an adult it doesn’t matter how you got the way you are; it doesn’t matter who messed you up as a child, BECAUSE as an adult you have the choice of staying messed up or of choosing sane and responsible modes of conduct. If you accept the freedoms of adulthood then you should accept the responsibilities as well. I know this is an unpopular position, people like having somebody to blame, people like to feel that someone else is responsible for their shortcomings, it’s uncomfortable to be your own conscience. Many of us would prefer to think of ourselves as a victim. Being a victim is a popular fantasy. Being a victim allows us to believe that what happens to us is never our fault. We have no choice because someone else made us what we are. How many times have we heard statements like, “they made me so angry, I just lost it”, or “if it hadn’t been for my parents, siblings, friends, co-workers team mates, etc, then I would have succeeded, scored, got the promotion, or whatever”. Another popular favourite is my parents, society or spouse failed me, betrayed, me or didn’t understand me”. We have a million excuses for failure, almost always it’s someone else’s fault.
The hardest part of becoming an adult is to try to stop using excuses. Adults are responsible for their actions. If you are violent towards someone else, then you, and only you, are responsible for that violence. As an adult you choose to change or to remain the same, but it is your choice. I am not saying that I expect anyone to be perfect but we should strive to change what is necessary. We should put as much effort into being responsible as we do in exercising our freedom.
Conclusion: to paraphrase some philosopher (I forget which one). We are all self-made men, but only the successful will admit it.

Nattering Nabobs of Negativity is a quote, look up who originally coined the phrase.Every place or community has them. They come in all shapes and sizes, but what they all have in common is that they are always complaining or whining or blaming somebody or something else for their unhappiness, or for their inadequacies. If their marriage breaks up it is someone else’s fault. If their business fails somebody else caused it. If they are unhappy with what they have accomplished, somebody else was holding them back. Nothing is ever good enough or done well enough for these people and yet, they do nothing to make the situation better. They just mill around like lost sheep nattering away. They are constantly negative to any idea that might make the community better and yet they think that they are nabobs and it is up to other lesser people to do the necessary work. Even when others create something new or better in the community these people still grumble, whine and natter, complaining that what others have done is not enough or in some way does not meet with their approval. They are however quick to take the credit if something should work out, all the while nattering on and on about how hard they worked to achieve this thing and what little help they had from others. These people would expect others to row the lifeboat all the while criticizing the efforts of those rowing and nattering about what an inconvenient time and place the ship picked to sink.The following is from the handbook for developing Nattering Nabobs of Negativity. One must master as many of the following behaviours as possible:- Find Fault with any positive statement.- Belittle and trash-talk anybody who does not agree with you.-Inflate your ego to near bursting pressure (check for leaks, often).-Gossip viciously and with malice afore thought.- Dump on anyone with a plan that is different from yours.-Spread disinformation at every opportunity. -Assassinate at least one person’s character per week (more if you want extra points).-Brag whenever possible, about how smart you are.-Complain about how dumb other people are.-Take credit for other’ work or ideas.-Engage in conspiracies regularly.-Make veiled references to secret and powerful organizations that you belong to (if you can’t think of one, use the Masons, everybody else does).-Worry about the state of the world so much that no one will expect you to do anything as menial as helping resolve local problems.-Scoff at others effort at least three times a day.-Blame your faults on someone else’s behaviour during your formative years (from birth to age 75).-See hidden agendas in any act of altruism.-Attribute altruistic motives to your self and friends when you screw the community.-Screw the community often and thoroughly (but only for altruistic reasons).-Misinterpret the statements of others (especially those statements you don’t like).- Manipulate behind the scenes while someone else is the front man.-Scapegoat someone else if any of your ideas backfire.-Disparage your elected representatives whenever possible, but don’t run for office.-Bully someone every day and do it publicly whenever you can.-Practice looking dangerous when in rage so everyone will be afraid to make you angry.-Fake a heart attack and blame it on your enemies (make sure you don’t do this too often). - Proclaim that you have the moral high ground whenever you are trying to sneak something by.-Talk loudly about your ethics so that people are focussed on your innocent face while you pick their pockets.-Warn of impending doom every hour on the half hour (or whenever someone takes an opposing view).-Practice looking betrayed and emotionally wounded when anyone suggests that your behaviour is less than honourable.-Behave dishonourably often (but try not to get caught).-Be careful not to make any commitments you can’t back out of later.-Practice denial till you can do it with a straight face and in a believable manner.-Pretend that you are thinking out loud whenever someone overhears you talking to yourself.It is not easy to be successful at being a nattering nabob; it takes hard work and commitment to making sure you are always a negative force in your community. It takes nerves of steel to live with the constant fear of being seen as you really are. You must be ever vigilant and on guard so that you don’t accidentally do something positive. It is a hard and lonely road, so you have to really get off on being a martyr.

As some of you know I am gathering material for a history of Gabriola –1945 to 2005. Sort of trying to pick up where June left off. With that in mind I have been seeking out personal accounts, journals, pictures, documents and memorabilia of gabriola during that time period. The reason I am doing this now is that people who lived here during those years are aging and if we want first hand accounts then now is the time. With that in mind I am encouraging involvement in this heritage project, and I believe the best way to encourage involvement is to print some of that information. I am hoping that future columns of Then and Now will be written largely by the people who where there. The information for this column comes from Fred Withey who was born hers in 1940 and whose father started the shipyard at Silva Bay.In the early fifties there were approximately 300 people living on Gabriola going up to 500 by the mid 60’s, I say approximately because then as now it is almost impossible to get an accurate census. Then there was one phone line with 32 homes using it. Everyone had a combination of long and short rings and listening in to your neighbours conversations was even easier than it is now with cell phones, then as now some felt the phone service inadequate but many didn’t have phones at all. There were three grocery and dry goods stores each of which doubled as a gas station for cars and boats. These stores filled the role of supplying hardware, building materials and local gossip. Strangely enough, given the population, each gas station was supplied by tankers of separate oil companies.Then as now the ferry service was perceived as being inadequate with a side loader that carried five cars, and 2 – 4 sailings per day usually, but none if the seas were rough as the boat didn’t have the engine power to work against high winds and rough seas were dangerous.There where no paved roads or strip malls, and no hotels or bed and breakfasts per se as there weren’t many if any tourists, but apparently there was a coffee shop run by Bea and Ben Bodaker. There was a post office and part-time taxi, and there was even a limited bus service – the small school bus took paying passengers as well as students. There were two schools one near the community hall for grades 4-6 and the other for grades 1-3 in what is now the Women’s Institute. The North and South end had separate community halls (which had quite a rivalry stemming in large part from how and where the ferry got located). Then as now there were diverse groups each claiming to be the majority.. Other than at the shipyard there were few full time jobs so most people worked at a variety of things depending on the season - farming, fishing, logging, general labour. Even the road crew was originally part-time. Electricity came to the island the same year as the first salmon barbecue –1955. Television came in 53 (although few could afford it or had a generator to power it) and the only station people could get was Seattle.Fred reports that there were few fences on the island so the sheep and deer often got into people’s gardens. “There used to be lots of Squirrels and Chipmunks. Also lots of Grouse. There were less Deer than today, very few Seals, lots more Fish, many more Orcas, fewer Blue Herons. There were no Geese, less Eagles, no Turkey Vultures”. Orcas where then known as Killer Whales and people believed they were dangerous – Fishermen would often shoot them if they got a chance”.Despite the hard work and lack of luxuries (or what we often think of as necessities today) Fred says it was a great place to live and for kids to grow up – many people still think so. Thanks Fred.

A close friend of mine thinks that I was born an optimist. She is not being complimentary; she regards my optimism as a birth defect. Needless to say (but I will say it anyway) she is not an optimist. She doesn’t see herself as a pessimist (I do), she sees herself as a realist. She contends that, regardless of whether the glass is half-empty or half-full, the drink will be both inadequate to meet the thirst and one too many before driving. She is probably right if the drink is alcohol, but what if it is honey? In that case, she says the glass doesn’t contain enough balanced nutrients and also has too many calories.She doesn’t vote because “all of them are crooks”, but likes to complain about the decisions politicians make. She won’t run for public office because she is too ethical to fit in and also because if she won she would be a target for criticism. She thinks people are too egotistical to sacrifice for the common good and hates what taxes do to her paycheck. She believes that people are essentially unworthy of note and yet desires to be a reporter. She sees no contradiction in her views.Many people share her views; I don’t disagree with all her observations just with some of her viewpoints. I think most disagreements between people have less to do with “the facts” than with the interpretation we put on “the facts”, she, of course, disputes this ‘errant viewpoint”. I agree that people are imperfect. I agree that we have many problems in our society; I agree that our institutions do not work the way they were designed. I agree that most public figures are more concerned with their self-gratification and self-interest than with doing what is right or what is best for the society. I agree that every society and form of government is eventually inadequate to meet the changing world and eventually either collapses or degenerates beyond the point of sustainability. She is most likely right that baby boomers will eventually collapse our social systems, not through intent but through sheer weight of numbers. In short I agree that any and all societies have eventual fatal weaknesses. I agree that often people (including her and me) fail to live up to our ideals. I don’t dispute ‘the facts” but I do dispute what “the facts” mean.I believe that our society is a transient thing and will eventually become something other than what is intended. I agree that the days of ‘western’ power and dominance are numbered but I don’t think that what we created was in vain. I think some of our ideas (or memes) that we have developed will influence what replaces us. I think that much of what we accomplished, though imperfect, was well worth the effort. I believe that it is better to get involved than to complain. I believe that though many politicians give into temptation the system is still worth believing in. Granted that most of what we do will be inadequate it is still worth trying. Given that anyone who stands out or even takes a stand will become a target by those afraid to risk themselves. I also believe that those who try to ‘fade into the woodwork’, ‘stay out of the lime light’, or “avoid being noticed’ eventually become victims of the “Nattering Nabobs of Negativity” anyway. I think it is ‘better to fail than not to try’. I think that our society has accomplished what it has through the people who dare rather than those who fear. I think it is easy to sit in the ‘cheap seats’ and criticize the efforts of others; but just because it is easier doesn’t make it right. Non-involvement doesn’t bring safety it merely brings obscurity. I agree that people are not perfect and I agree that our society has failings: but look at our accomplishments and see if what we have wrought was not worth the effort. Our society is better today than 40 years ago - dispute that if you can. I believe our greatest accomplishments lie in the future not the past.Given that people tend to be extremely self-centred, myopic towards the long view and likely to ‘value the bird in hand more than the flock in the bush’ it doesn’t surprise me that society has such major failings. What surprises me is not how badly society works, but that it even works at all.