I have read that “Every day, thousands of people travel to indoor ranges across the country —to hone their shooting skills, to compete against other shooters, to have a good time.”[1]

I struggle in vain to imagine killing as a sport, a source of “fun.” Still, I am aware that since time immemorial, men have chosen to arm themselves, often as a way of hiding their inner emptiness.

Atop the belly of this elephant sits the Archduke Ferdinand who, by the time of his assassination at age 50, had reportedly killed nearly 300,000 animals whose demise he proudly recorded in his personal journal.

Violence leads to violence. The assassination of the Archduke triggered two world wars leading to over one hundred million deaths.

One hundred million men, women, and children killed because people took sides when a man venerated as “Archduke” was assassinated.

How does anyone who has ever gazed lovingly at the face of a fellow human et alone at the face of a child come to view people as superfluous, as mere “civilian collateral”? War has long since progressed from being red-coated men shooting at soldiers proudly dressed in blue or brown or green. I am haunted by these few lines from an inspiring book:

“Speaking of Napoleon,” Drinkwater said, “I don’t like to hear of men being shot with cannons. To me it seems ungentlemanly. Battle should be man to man, pistol to pistol, sword to sword.”[2]

Ungentlemanly! What conceivable connection can there be between war and the gentle-ness of a gentleman? And how can killing with modern weaponry still be viewed as proof of manliness or masculinity? I’m sorry, but I fail to see men merely as gorillas in modern dress asserting their power to dominate. Nonetheless, I note with sadness that here in Canada, both Conservatives and Liberals seem to view military might as the prime function of government:

This budget spends 2 1/2 times more money on the military than the Conservatives allotted in their spring election platform. It cuts a similar amount from government programs as the Conservatives’ campaign promised. And it delivers half of the middle- and upper-income tax cut the Conservatives promised.[3]

Do we still play “follow the leader” when he (yes, alas, female leaders are still relatively rare) suggests military action is needed? Has it really been necessary for the U.S. to engage militarily in country after country?

When I asked Google about postwar military involvement, I learned this:

Since World War II, the U.S. has engaged in numerous overseas military actions, leading to significant loss of life, with estimates of 20-30 million deaths attributed to U.S. involvement in conflicts and support for regimes, affecting numerous countries through direct invasions, covert ops, and proxy wars, driven by Cold War containment, counterterrorism, and strategic interests, utilizing a vast network of bases to project power globally, resulting in cycles of violence and destabilization despite varied stated goals like promoting democracy or stability.[4]

20-30 million deaths! So many millions of deaths just within my lifetime! Unthinkable! And making the nightmare scenario even worse is the fact that “in the past year alone, there have been 10,000 combat-related deaths in what are considered “major” wars, but this figure does not include “excess” deaths indirectly resulting from famine, disease, or disruption of services.[5]

As we approach the season of peace on earth and goodwill toward all, isn’t it time we all became what too many people still dismiss pejoratively as “soft”?

Round and round in my head go the words of Jacinder Ardern, one of the rare women to become leader of a democratic country. In her new book she writes this:

Some people thought kindness was sentimental, soft. A bit naïve, even I knew this. But I also knew they were wrong. Kindness has a power and strength that almost nothing on this planet has. I’d seen kindness do extraordinary tings. I’d seen it give people hope; I’d seen it change minds and transform lives. I wasn’t afraid to say it aloud, and as soon as I did, I was sure: kindness. This would be my guiding principle, no matter what lay ahead.[6]

The power of kindness, even something as simple as a hug was brought home to me recently at a gathering to celebrate the 80^th birthday of a friend whose hugs have often brought me comfort. In searching for a way to express my gratitude for those precious moments of kindness on his part, I came across this:

This morning, thanks to Maria Popova, my inbox contained a copy of E.B. White’s “Beautiful Letter to a Man Who Had Lost Faith in Humanity:”

As long as there is one upright man, as long as there is one compassionate woman, the contagion may spread and the scene is not desolate.

It is quite obvious that the human race has made a queer mess of life on this planet. But as a people we probably harbor seeds of goodness that have lain for a long time waiting to sprout when the conditions are right.

Man’s curiosity, his relentlessness, his inventiveness, his ingenuity have led him into deep trouble. We can only hope that these same traits will enable him to claw his way out.^[8]

Daily, I interact with people who harbour those seeds of goodness, but have no idea where to plant them. If we are to claw our way out of trouble, then it becomes important to seek fertile ground in which to plant our seeds. My own challenge, and my challenge to you is to do more than merely hope. The world needs our goodness, just as the weaker of the premature twins needed the strength and the comfort of her sister’s arm.

As we approach the winter solstice and what we experience physically as the darkest days of the year, I challenge you to light a candle not just for Advent or Hannukah or Christmas, but because you long to give birth to your own seeds of goodness. The holidays should and could be more than occasions to patronize merchants and purchase gifts.

I challenge us all to light a candle daily, as in days of yore when light was not yet available at the touch of a switch. Each of us can bring a word of encouragement to a fellow human. Each of us can take a few moments to reach out personally to a friend. In addition, each of us can probably spare time to send a few lines to a politician reminding them of what matters, be it homelessness, the despoliation of nature, or some form of suffering or injustice in need of immediate action. Some of us will find ways to do even more, and we should all treasure and applaud their efforts to leave this world a bit better than it was.

And wherever and whenever we can, let us follow their example and use our time, our energy, and our innate talents to plant yet another seed of goodness.

[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2025/11/04/briefing/at-the-gun-range.html

[2] Ken Follett, The Armor of Light, Viking, 2023, p.234

[3] https://thetyee.ca/Analysis/2025/11/04/Military-Wins-Public-Programs-Lose-Carney-Budget/?utm_source=daily&utm_medium=email

[4] https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&q=the+United+States%27+%28US%29+extensive+overseas+military+engagements+since+World+War+II

[5] https://english.news.cn/20220902/735703a45cfd458791179d4c0a80e727/c.html

[6] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ongoing_armed_conflicts

[7]Jacinda Ardern. A Different Kind of Power. Crown Publishing Group, 2025, p.202

[8] https://www.themarginalian.org/2014/05/06/e-b-white-letters-of-note-book/?mc_cid=6c36cf7ba3&mc_eid=a9608906e5

What exactly are we supposed to remember? From every approaching city bus, the message Lest We Forget flashes at me. City Hall itself is festooned with signs honouring the fallen as well as paper and plastic poppies donated by a local elementary school. “What exactly did those children learn?” I ask myself. “What were they thinking while they fashioned their artwork? Did they imagine that one day, they would be told that it was their noble duty to die in defense of Canada, the country that we still honour as our home and native land?”

We seem to think that it is only in self-defense that we might go to war. So when exactly were we invaded and by whom? History informs me that the only time that happened was when our American cousins attacked in the war of 1812-14.

What we commemorate on November 11 happened just over a century later. Neither Canada nor what was then our “mother country” had actually been attacked. It was all the fault of Gavrilo Princip. Does his name ring a bell?

I thought not. He was the nineteen-year-old who assassinated the Archduke Franz Ferdinand in June 1914. Was the Archduke our friend and ally ? For what reason did his death matter to Canadians?

Well, actually, it didn’t. Few people today, and even fewer back then could have easily placed their finger on a map to point to Serbia. However, because Gavrilo was Serbian, and the Archduke was heir to the Austro-Hungarian Empire, Austria-Hungary declared war on Serbia. This prompted Russia (our ally in WW I as the case in WW II) to mobilize in Serbia’s defense. Fighting being such fun, Germany then declared war on Russia and France, the allies of Great Britain who then decided to enter the fray.

It all makes sense, doesn’t it? The sad irony is that both sides claimed to worship and to adhere to biblical counsel that we should love our neighbours as ourselves. I wept upon seeing Oh! What a Lovely War, the musical that includes a brief truce that actually happened in 1914 when German soldiers began singing “Stille Nacht” (”Silent Night”) and their British counterparts responded with “Silent Night,” creating a moment of peace and camaraderie.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/how-silent-night-became-the-christmas-song-that-stopped-world-war-i-1.2878263 - even if only temporarily!

I have a vivid memory of being a student at the Sorbonne, and using the Christmas break to go skiing with a group of my fellow students. We were lodged in a rather humble home in the Austrian Alps. On Christmas eve, the owner of the home produced a tree that he lit with real candles. His family sang Stille Nacht, my French friends sang Sainte Nuit, and I joined my fellow English-speakers with Silent Night. Then, we all hummed the carol together, and we embraced before putting on our skis and schussing down to the village below to attend midnight mass. Unforgettable !

We need more occasions on which to connect instead of opportunities to kill. We discount enemy losses and venerate only own. Worse yet, we ignore at our peril the subsequent hatred engendered by our actions.

Countless civilians died because the Treaty of Versailles, which was drafted in large part by people who had never set foot on terrain where people who spoke German were suddenly considered part of a new country. The Treaty so offended Germans that they elected a government that built up the military and went to war, in part as a way of providing work for its millions of unemployed men. A year after being elected, the Nazi government had reduced unemployment by 50% and by 1939, the number of unemployed had dropped to below 1%. Does a future day await when AI or some new technology replaces so many former workers that beefing up the military once again becomes a way of restoring pride to the unemployed?

I trembled recently when voices on the right counseled the Canadian government to expand its military strength in response to Donald Trump’s suggestion that we agree to become the 51^st state. Do my fellow Canadians really think that in an age of nuclear technology, we should defend militarily if and when the U.S. decides that it needs our water or some other precious resource?

Hydrogen bombs are 1000 times more powerful than the atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki during World War II.

To me, war has become increasingly unthinkable. Rather than teaching young boys to demonstrate their manliness by stepping up to the plate when their country calls, is it not time to teach humans everywhere to do as advised in Isaiah 2:4? Is it not time that we beat our swords into plowshares, our spears into pruning hooks, and that nations not learn war anymore?

Each October, we drape our homes in cobwebs and skulls, telling ourselves it’s “just for fun.” But what if Halloween reveals something deeper? What if it is the fear of all that seems to lie beyond our control?

In a world where cruelty makes the daily headlines, perhaps the ghosts we most need to face aren’t the ones in costumes, but the quiet evils that live among us. Greed and selfishness that sprout and scatter their seeds in fertile human hearts. What if our fear is not of monsters, but of war and savage cruelty on the part of some individuals and their chosen leaders, balanced by apathy and indifference on the part of others?,

Still, as our ancestors once lit fires to guide lost souls home, so too can we rekindle small flames of hope, kindness, and courage.

Pure Evil

It is almost Halloween as I write. The thousand-year-old history of Halloween has roots in the Celtic harvest festival of Samhain, which was observed in ancient Britain and Ireland on November 1st. During the Samhain festival the souls of those who had died were believed to return to visit their homes, and those who had died during the year were believed to journey to the otherworld. People set bonfires on hilltops for relighting their hearth fires for the winter and to frighten away evil spirits, and they sometimes wore masks and other disguises to avoid being recognized by the ghosts thought to be present. It was in those ways that beings such as witches, hobgoblins, and demons came to be associated with the day.

I have just passed a neighbour’s house with a front yard from which dozens of skulls seemed to leer at me, mocking my pretense that life has value, that the human thrust is toward goodness and kindness. Most disturbing of all was a mock gravestone that bore the words Pure Evil.

Oh, how I’d love to believe that we have laid Pure Evil to rest, once and for all. Alas! Instead, I see it reflected everywhere, including in today’s headlines that greet me with their usual emphasis on death and destruction.

We comfort ourselves that Halloween is “just for fun,” a harmless excuse for costumes and candy. Yet beneath the laughter, there lingers something more troubling — perhaps even revealing. Why do we feel compelled to mock death, to make it familiar? What does it say about us that we decorate our porches with ghosts and gravestones, but hide our elderly and our dying behind closed doors?

Maybe our fascination with horror is really a symptom of fear — a desperate attempt to trivialize what we cannot control. When death feels near, we disguise it. When cruelty seems too vast to comprehend, we turn it into entertainment. Perhaps, without realizing it, we laugh so that we will not have to weep.

Evil, after all, is not buried beneath a plastic tombstone. It is not a ghost that rises once a year, demanding our attention. It lives quietly, invisibly, in our indifference — in the times we look away, in the cruelties we normalize, in the way we stop expecting goodness to prevail. The ghosts that haunt us are of our own making: greed, apathy, fear, the slow erosion of compassion.

And yet — I think of the ancient bonfires of Samhain, those hilltop flames that once symbolized the triumph of light over darkness. They were not meant to frighten, but to guide: to help lost souls find their way home, to keep the living warm through the long night. Perhaps that is what we need again — not skeletons and skulls, but bonfires of the spirit. Small acts of courage. Kindness rekindled. Candles in windows that say, There is still light here.

Perhaps the real purpose of this season is not to celebrate the grotesque, but to remember the fragility of goodness — and our responsibility to guard it. Darkness will always find its way back, but so can light. Each of us carries a spark that, if tended, can turn even the smallest flame into a beacon against the night.

Author’s Note

Helen Wilkes is the author of The Aging of Aquarius: Igniting Passion and Purpose as an Elder (2018) and Letters from the Lost: A Memoir of Discovery (2010). She writes from Vancouver, Canada, exploring the intersections of aging, ethics, and the enduring search for light amid darkness.

I had forgotten much that I had learned in Ontario about the War of 1812-14, including respect for Laura Secord, the Canadian heroine who left her cow only half-milked and dashed 20 miles on foot to warn of an impending American attack.

It happened before, and with Trump’s recent talk of turning Canada into the 51^st state, I fear that it may happen again. When the Americans want our water or a rare mineral or an important resource, I fear that they will not ask, but will simply take.

Meanwhile, we look back at the Napoleonic conflict as ancient history, far removed from contemporary realities. Indeed, it was with shock that I read in Ken Follett’s remarkable book these words expressed by a member of the British ruling class:

Speaking of Napoleon, I don’t like to hear of men being shot with cannons. To me it seems ungentlemanly. Battle should be man to man, pistol to pistol, sword to sword.” P.234[2]

The distance between the days when battle was proof of “manly” courage and our current reality is simply unbridgeable. Even recent history has become unthinkable. Only this morning, I read these lines:

One of the Cold War’s darkest chapters was played out on the empty plains outside Semipalatinsk: it was here that the Soviet Union carried out most of its nuclear testing. They detonated, on average, one nuclear bomb a month, 456 in total. And every explosion had an echo on the other side of the world, in the Nevada Desert and the Pacific Ocean, where the Americans did their testing; the two superpowers carried on like this for nearly forty years.[3]

I continue my reading, growing ever more terrified of what may lie ahead:

There is no limit to how big a hydrogen bomb can be. “Ivy Mike”, as the new bomb developed by the Americans in 1952 was called,… was four hundred and fifty times more powerful than the atom bomb that had been dropped on Nagasaki in 1945.”[4]

World War III? I have already seen references to the proposed line-up of “us” vs Russia, China, North Korea and Iran. Unthinkable!

Even without envisioning the countless dead in a potential future war, reminders of the past tell me that war can and must no longer be the way forward. I have just seen this grotesque reference to Shakespeare:

In “ Titus Andronicus”, the antagonists’ hunger for retribution leaves the stage “dripping with chopped-off tongues, amputated limbs, severed heads, and murdered children baked and served to their mother for dinner.”

I fail to understand why, when technological breakthroughs are so astounding, we cannot devise systems to solve disagreements aside from killing each other. If we can go to the moon, invent AI and space mirrors that see light from 13.8 billion years ago, why do we still consider war as the only real means of solving territorial aggression?

Is it a case of power corrupts, and that absolute power corrupts absolutely? Why has not a single political leader emerged in recent years to guide us meaningfully toward peaceful solutions?

When I cast my eyes upon those in my family, upon my friends and the various communities to which I belong, I see nothing but kind-hearted people all striving to leave this world a better place because of the changes that they are trying to bring about. Multiplied millions of times by my glimpses of people living on every continent and in the dozens of countries it has been my good fortune to visit, how can I not also believe the words of my adaptation of Psalm 23 ?

Surely goodness and mercy shall follow us all our lives, and we shall dwell in peace on this beautiful planet with which Creation has endowed us!

With the Canadian day of Thanksgiving just ahead, how can we focus our gratitude upon all that we have been given while also making an important contribution to a world where gratitude replaces greed? A world in which peaceful solutions rise from the hearts of our future leaders and their supporters?

[1][1] Ken Follett, The Armor of Light. Viking, 2023, p.520

[2] Ibid., p.234

[3] Erika Fatland, Sovietistan: Travels in Turkmenistan, Kazakhstan, Tajikistan, Kyrgyzstan, and Uzbekistan. Pegasus Books, 2020, p. 181

[4] Ibid., p.188

Part of why I have not recently posted on Substack is because I received so little response from readers. I had pictured Substack as a means of engaging in dialogue with far-flung friends and acquaintances as well as with new-found readers drawn to -or opposed to - my concerns. Perhaps it is my non-alignment with people like S. (see below) that has created too large a gap between my values and my interests and those of the general public. Only this morning, an article in my Inbox from The New York Times included these words:

My friend S. writes a letter to herself every year on her birthday, but she doesn’t open them. I asked her for advice. “I tend to kind of graze over various areas of my life, internal and external,” she said. “Who did I hang out with? Who did I wish I spent more time with? What was my favorite beverage? What smell couldn’t I get enough of? What made me really sad? What lit me up?”

What is my favorite beverage as a topic of interest? Will this really matter next year or the year after? If this parallels what interests you, then small wonder that my postings have not resulted in millions of avid followers. What smell couldn’t I get enough of? I worry more about the fact that 10 men (yes, they all identify as “men”) now possess six times more wealth than the poorest three billion humans on earth. Unlike S., I don’t fret about those with whom I hang out, but I do stress about climate change, global inequities, human suffering and much else to which I cannot in good conscience turn a blind eye.

Wishful thinking will not help. Meaningful change will only happen when enough of us cease to be mere by-standers and seek avenues to promote the health and well-being of all humans along with the survival of this richly endowed planet that is our home. I shall write in in the belief that you share at least in part my concern for questions to which there are no easy answers.

I am haunted by many issues. Probably much like you, I was deeply distressed when Donald Trump expressed the desire to annex Canada as the 51^st state. I was even more shocked to learn that many Canadians immediately wrote to our Prime Minister, urging him to beef up our military forces, and that our P.M. is now planning to spend billions to do just that. [1] Do my fellow Canadians really think that we can and we should militarily defend our borders against what is probably the world’s greatest nuclear power?

Drawn by its subtitle How Ordinary Lives Were Transformed By The Rise Of Fascism, I have just begun reading Julia Boyd’s book, A Village in the Third Reich. My heart skips a beat as I read the reaction of a young woman who opened her door to a uniformed member of her country’s military forces:

My husband did not ‘fall’, the woman responded angrily. He was a good mountaineer…He was a fine, strong man. He was murdered. The crazy Prussian Kaiser forced him to invade another country. It was not the fault of the one who shot him, the one who only defended his country.[2]

Although we (mostly) refrain from calling our Presidents and our Prime Ministers crazies akin to the Kaiser, they have compelled or lured young men to fight. My own father, who raised rabbits and loved every living creature was drafted at age 17 , and became the enemy whose defeat we celebrate annually on Nov 11. He never spoke of his service in WW I, but the photo of him and his two brothers and his father, all in the uniform of the Austrian Kaiser speaks volumes about the ways in which young men are conscripted.

During my own lifetime, Canadians signed up to kill Germans, Italians and Japanese soldiers and civilians. Then, as we held our breath, our Russian ally became our big, bad enemy in what was called the Cold War. I did not sleep a wink the night of the Cuban missile crisis as Kennedy and Khrushchev went head-to-head and nuclear destruction threatened to engulf the world. Meanwhile, almost as a sideline, our political leaders involved us in actual wars in Korea, Viet Nam, Iraq, and Afghanistan. Still waiting in the wings are decisions on whether and how to intervene in the conflict in the Middle East, in the Ukraine, and in the Sudan. In addition, we watch the nightly news as they report on continuing armed conflict in Syria, Ethiopia, Myanmar, and Yemen. I read with horror items like this:

It is the most sickening league table on Earth. Which of the world’s three current major wars has resulted in the most deaths? On the latest figures, the Russia-Ukraine war has left more than 200,000 dead in two and a half years, overwhelmingly soldiers. The Hamas attack and ensuing Israeli assault on Gaza has registered 43,000 mostly civilian deaths, according to official figures (though in July a Lancet article estimated the Gaza toll could reach as high as 186,000 as a result of its destroyed public infrastructure).

The Sudanese civil war, which began last year, has death toll estimates that vary wildly. According to medics in the region, the number of people killed could be between 20,000 and an even more horrifying 150,000. This follows some 2 million deaths over two war-torn decades in South Sudan and Darfur. It is estimated that since April 2023, more than 7 million Sudanese have been driven from their homes and face starvation in the desert. Their stories rarely feature in the news.

We care about Ukraine and we care about Gaza. We care enough to supply one side or the other with weapons and aid. Do we care about Sudan? Or rather, do we care enough to do something, beyond sitting back and saying something must be done?[3]

For me, war is not and has never been some abstract reality. To kill our fellow humans is always wrong. It matters little whether war is the accompaniment to the search for riches as was the case in bye-gone days of empires and colonial powers or whether war stems from some religion that claims to consider others as our brothers and sisters under the watchful eye of the Divine. To my knowledge, the Commandment “Thou shalt not kill!” is not followed by a footnote saying “unless your government tells you to.” While I recognize that Hitler and Stalin were terrible leaders, every country has had its share of those, and some still do. That does not make war the only possible solution. If we can go to the moon, if we can invent technology whose impact we can barely imagine, if we can create items like the James Webb Space Telescope that allows us to see approximately 13.5 billion years into the past - nearly as far back as the Big Bang, when the universe as we know it began, - then surely we can find a way to live side by side, solving our problems without killing each other.

Perhaps as our starting point, we could all take to heart the Hippocratic oath taken by our doctors: “Primum non nocere. First, do no harm.”

We could follow that up with the admonition from Pirkei Avot (Ethics of the Fathers) : "You are not obligated to complete the work, but neither are you free to abandon it." Do what you can. Contribute what you can. You alone cannot do it all, but your can make a difference by doing your best.

We could then top it all with what AI informs me are “universal beliefs”: The shared values and understandings that transcend individual cultural differences and resonate with people globally. Examples include the belief in kindness, compassion, education, and justice. These beliefs provide a common ground for human connection and understanding in a diverse world.

[1] www.pm.gc.ca/en/news/news-releases/2025/06/09/canadas-new-government-rebuilding-rearming-and-reinvesting-canadian-armed forces

[2] Julia Boyd, A Village in the Third Reich: How Ordinary Lives Were Transformed By The Rise Of Fascism. Pegasus Boks, 2023, p.11

[3] https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/oct/11/sudan-war-us-conflict-civilian-military-intervention

I have just stumbled upon a quote from the man whose name to me has always spelled GENIUS. Albert Einstein.

Not until the creation and maintenance of decent conditions of life for all people are recognized and accepted as a common obligation of all people and all countries—not until then shall we, with a certain degree of justification, be able to speak of humankind as civilized.

I immediately looked up the word “civilized,” and I found it to be the opposite of "barbarian." Does that mean that those of us who fail to contribute actively to “the creation and maintenance of decent conditions of life for all people” can be dismissed as no better than savage barbarians? Does my failure to be actively engaged in creating a better world for all humans make me uncivilized?

It was only yesterday that I answered honestly to some friends who said "Helen, how are you?" Rather than respond with the expected "Fine, thanks," I spoke my truth.

"Troubled," I replied. "Troubled by so much that is happening both locally and globally. I'm not sure what I should or could be doing and where my responsibilities begin and end. What does it mean, to be a human? Does that mean that I am part of a community, and that I have a responsibility toward my fellow humans?

I spoke openly about several recent experiences that have left me deeply troubled. I began with a description of what had so shaken me during our recent joint Jewish-Muslim venture to feed the needy living in squalor on sidewalks in the very centre of Vancouver. I pictured the man who seemed unable to even pull up his pants and who stood with his buttocks and penis exposed as people walked past him. I tried to describe the attractive young woman in the alleyway who burst into tears and ran away when I asked if there was some way that I could help her. I described the countless desperately hungry people waiting in line, ad how they had stuffed handfuls of rice into their mouth the moment that a plate of food was in their hands. I asked my friends if I should become part of the weekly sandwich-making brigade that I knew some volunteers had joined.

I spoke also of what has been troubling me on the international scene. The on-going violence in the Middle East, of course, but also the situation in the Sudan where “Millions of children, some only one year old, are at risk of rape and other forms of sexual violence.” [1] Are there no limits to what men will do once they become convinced that "the other" is their enemy? Have we learned nothing from WWII and from other wars about dehumanizing people who live on the other side of some artificially drawn line in the sand?

At a recent rally, President Donald Trump used language in a speech that echoed Adolf Hitler, comparing his political opponents to "vermin."...Trump praised Hungary's strongman leader: "The head of Hungary – very tough, strong guy – Viktor Orban," Trump told the audience, adding approvingly, "He didn't allow millions of people to invade his country."[2]

How can I fail to cringe as I read these words spoken by the man for whom millions of Americans have just voted? Alas, however, my cringe changes nothing. Do I also have a responsibility to act in some way, and if so, how? Does my failure to act render me uncivilized, a do-nothing by-stander akin to the Germans who waited until it became too dangerous to act or even to speak up?

An empathetic friend tried to console me with the words of The Serenity Prayer, often attributed to theologian Reinhold Niebuhr. "God, grant me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference."

I wish those words could bring me comfort, but I have heard them used too often as a reason to sit back and do nothing. Too many people shrug off all responsibility for what is happening in the world by attributing “wisdom “ to their laziness or their indifference. Their so-called wisdom is really only an excuse for and a justification of their inaction.

Why do we watch, listen to or read “the news” unless we want to know what is happening so that we can take some form of meaningful action?

Perhaps we all need to believe in our ability to effect change. Perhaps as I said in my last Substack posting, we can at least make a difference to one starfish. As I have learned from the kind and caring people in my immediate world, each of us can make a difference in our own unique way. Among those who are my role models is someone who visits jails and penitentiaries regularly. Someone else who rescues severely mistreated dogs and cats. Another person who goes into senior centers to deliver a healing touch to those in physical or spiritual pain. They all have skills that I lack, but I have other ways to contribute. We all do.

Perhaps, like me, you will derive inspiration from people who are outside our personal circles of friends and associates. Alexander Jollien, born cerebrally motor-incapacitated for life and raised in an institution, is a man who has every right to be bitter and to scorn his fellow humans. Instead, he writes this:

Some people say that human beings are bad, selfish, that they think of nothing but themselves. … I want to take this idea that humans are selfish by nature and wring its neck…[Freud] says that he has found very little “goodness” in people, that for the most part they’re pretty much scum. But what I’ve found is the opposite.[3]

Instead of throwing in the towel and giving up on humanity, take Jollien’s words to heart. Join me in seeking ways to apply Einstein’s dictum. Use your own unique gifts and innate ability to effect change and to hasten the creation and the maintenance of decent conditions of life for all people.

[1] https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cvgpdxk853jo

[2] https://www.npr.org/2023/11/17/1213746885/trump-vermin-hitler-immigration-authoritarian-republican-primary

[3] Matthieu Ricard, Christophe André, Alexandre Jollien. In Search of Wisdom: A Monk, a Philosopher and a Psychiatrist on What Matters Most. Sounds True, 2018, 9.

Among the questions troubling me has been the issue of global poverty. How can I, Helen, do something, - do anything to counterbalance the obscene wealth, the billions concentrated in the hands of some while starving mothers in other lands gaze upon their dead infants, still attached to a breast from which no milk has flowed.

Copilot advises me as follows: Eliminating poverty globally is a monumental task that requires a multi-faceted approach, encompassing economic, social, and political reforms. One of the most effective strategies involves implementing sustainable development programs that focus on education, healthcare, and economic opportunities for marginalized communities. …

Access to quality healthcare is equally crucial, as it ensures that individuals can lead healthy, productive lives. This includes not only addressing immediate medical needs but also providing preventive care and maternal health services. …

Addressing systemic issues such as corruption, inequality, and lack of infrastructure is vital. Governments and international organizations must work together to create transparent systems that ensure aid reaches those who need it most.

I agree. Humans must do whatever is in their power to alleviate pain and suffering. It is impossible, however, to reconcile this belief with what Americans are advocating through the leadership that they have chosen. In her new book, the CBC’s Carol Off writes as follows: Republican politicians have come right out and declared that…America should be a place where people can enjoy their wealth and property unmolested by the needs of others.[1]

“Unmolested” by the needs of others! Who are these uncaring pseudo-humans who view the misery of others as an infringement on their right to happiness? “Unmolested” by the awareness that others are suffering?

Just days ago, I was exposed to the reality of local suffering when I took some home baking to the Downtown East Side for a joint Muslim-Jewish outreach to the homeless and the needy. I came away broken by what I saw up close. Not just dozens, but hundreds of the desperately hungry, not waiting for even a plastic spoon as they stuffed handfuls of rice into their mouths. Sidewalks littered with the broken bodies of victims looking more dead than alive. Alleyways with young women sobbing in desperation. Images I cannot erase from my mind, and this is Canada where at least there is a small safety net and a modicum of social support.

And yes, I can do more baking and contribute more money to more organizations, but that will not suffice to help those who are too broken to help themselves. Is there no truth to the saying: “From each according to their ability, to each according to their needs”? Isn’t that why we have governments, so that we can collectively do what individuals cannot? I cannot make water flow from a tap in my kitchen or vanish down the drain and flow to the sea. I cannot build roads, hospitals, schools or establish the technological infrastructure that surrounds us.

Another slice of cake will not solve problems requiring much more expertise, much more medical, psychological, and practical support than I can provide. I have often repeated to myself the story of the little boy picking up stranded starfish along the beach. When mocked for his efforts to do the impossible, the boy simply says “I may not be able to save them all, but I saved that one” as he tosses another starfish back into the sea. Perhaps, as individuals, that is the best that we can do.

I deplore the selfish thinking that leads politicians to promise to lower our taxes by “axing” necessary structural, environmental and social services. Those of us who are able to help must do even more to help those who are unable to cope with life and its demands. Like the stranded starfish, they cannot crawl back to the sea. They need our helping hand in order to survive.

[1] Carol Off, At A Loss For Words: Conversation in an Age of Rage. Random House Canada, 2024, p. 58

Last week, a sign outside a church in my neighbourhood bore this message:

Let Us Stand Firm in Uncertain Times. God is With Us.

My Questions:

- Is "us" the same group both times? Who is the "us" that is standing firm and who is the "us" that God is with?

- Is God with both the Russian and the Ukrainian mothers whose sons are dying in battle?

- Is God with both the Israelis taken hostage and with the people in Gaza upon whom death and destruction have rained since October 7? Today, these words arrived in my morning mail from someone who heard one of the released hostages describe his ordeal :

How, after all, do you even permit yourself to get into bed, with the heat set precisely how you like it, the blankets how you want them, the person you love asleep next to you and a full fridge downstairs, when you have just heard how dozens of people are still living chained to walls, literally starving, regularly beaten almost to the point of no return, always terrified, too often alone? (Daniel Gordis@Substack.com)

- Is God also in the Sudan, the Congo, and in Colombia where the most important contributors to the on-going “asymmetric” war are listed as multinational corporations and the United States along with Cuba and the drug trafficking industry fighting either with or against far-right paramilitary groups, crime syndicates, or far left guerrilla groups, all seeking to increase their influence in Colombian territory.[1]

- Is God also with the parents of children who are dying of hunger or disease?

- Is God just standing there watching, or what does it mean, to say that "God is with us?" Is God “with us” as we watch unspeakable cruelty and human suffering?

- Does God not expect us to do anything? What does it mean, to “stand firm” in the face of sorrow and misery? Does the very word “stand” imply that we should stand still and that we should not act? And if it means that we should act, then in what way?

I have sent my questions to the minister of the church, but I have as yet received no response. What I noticed instead is that the sign has now been changed, and that it reads as follows:

In Uncertain Times, Let Us Remain Steady in Love and Justice.

Again, I am puzzled. Among my questions:

-How can we both advocate love of our neighbours and justify killing them if they belong to a different nation?

Does “justice” exist, or is it a purely human concept? Is justice innate, and are we born with a sense of fairness? Why else do even young children shout “No fair” when they perceive an unjust situation?

Is the world in its natural state a place of unfairness, and is it up to us as humans to rectify the situation? Can we say that it is fair that some people die of disease while others get to live? That some people are abused or born into dreadful conditions whereas others are born into wealth and comfort, into sensible parenting and circumstances that allow for a “good” life?

And finally, how does one advocate for “love” when, on the very same day, there were calls from Canadian politicians to beef up the military rather than rely on American power to “defend” us against the enemy. And which former friend and ally are we being groomed to consider as our next enemy?

Many have forgotten or perhaps never knew how greatly Europeans who had fought countless wars against each other welcomed the fact that our Russian allies approached from the East in WW II, allowing “us” us to blaze our way in from the West.

Many have also forgotten that what some historians consider the start of WW II occurred in China in 1937. The country's eight-year war with Japan sowed the seeds for the attack on Pearl Harbor but ultimately contributed to the Allied victory in the Pacific—at an incredibly high price for the Chinese[2]. When Japan was finally defeated in 1945, China was on the winning side, but lay devastated, having suffered some 15 million deaths, massive destruction of industrial infrastructure and agricultural production, and the shattering of the tentative modernization begun by the Nationalist government.[3]

How shall I envisage 15 million dead, and balance that vision with love and justice?” How many more must die before the words “love and justice” become more than empty words?

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Colombian_conflict

[2] https://www.history.com/news/china-role-world-war-ii-allies

[3] https://www.google.com/search?client=firefox-b-d&q=WWII%2C+china+vs+Japan

I have never forgotten the student from another country whom I caught cheating on a final exam. He was slipping answers across the aisle to a fellow student. He did not deny it. Instead, he explained that in his country, he would be praised for helping a friend.

Does our society value caring about our fellow humans, or is climbing the economic ladder our primary interest? When was the last news story that you read, watched or listened to that featured remarkable acts of generosity and outreach?

Research tells us that Canadians now spend almost ten hours a day dialed in to media[1]. Other research informs us that “Our cognitive and emotional systems are not prepared for the constant flow of information, which means at any given moment we can know every terrible and complex thing happening in the world. We are not prepared to encounter constant threat. The more people tune into these possible threats, the more their mental and emotional health can deteriorate.[2]

What does it say about us that our media almost exclusively feature tales of disaster and suffering under the premise that “If it bleeds, it leads?” Does that premise ultimately lead us to expect crime and cruelty to be the norm? Does it desensitize us, leading us to be bored if tomorrow’s headlines are not worse than what was featured today?

Where is the balance between staying informed and mindless escapism?

[1] https://www.jennifer-moss.com/writing/how-headline-stress-disorder-is-affecting-you-and-what-to-do-about-it

[2] https://news.westernu.ca/2025/02/political-stress/

The Oxford Dictionary lists the following as synonymous words : contentment, contentedness and satisfaction. Those words caused me to wonder. Are they only to be narrowly interpreted, and do they refer only to one’s personal life?

How can I experience contentedness and satisfaction when war and destruction continue to kill both innocent civilians and young people drafted into the military by those who rule their land? How can I be satisfied when 700 million people, almost ten percent of the global population, lived in extreme poverty in 2024? How can I ignore climate change and other devastating threats?

The Oxford Dictionary also suggests “cheerfulness” as a synonym, but I doubt that all cheerful people are happy. I know too many people who put on an act. They pretend to be cheerful, but deep down, they are dreadfully unhappy.

The fifth synonym listed in the Oxford Dictionary is “pleasure.” Again, I know many people who indulge in pleasures that bring only fleeting glimpses of happiness. Sometimes, they even trigger long-term unhappiness. I think here of myself, and of how I used to stuff myself with fattening foods in order to tamp down the misery that threatened to overwhelm me. I think of my long-ago addiction to tobacco, the momentary pleasure of lighting a cigarette followed by profound guilt and shame.

I think instead of Sonja Lyubomirsky, a leading figure in the field of happiness research. She defines happiness as “an enduring state of mind consisting not only of feelings of joy, contentment, and other positive emotions, but also of a sense that one's life is meaningful and valued.”

I think she’s right. Pleasures may abound, but unless we feel that we are making a contribution, unless we feel valued and that our life is meaningful, happiness remains elusive and momentary at best.

Last week’s Substack posting and the smiles of the two women in the yurt has me thinking whether they may be other aspects of life in the developing world that we might do well to adopt.

Among the eye-opening differences that I noted, was the degree of honesty and trust that was everywhere on display. Open-air markets and the countless items being sold from tables or carts on street corners in particular drew my attention. People – usually women and elderly men – often simply sat on the sidewalk with whatever they had managed to gather or amass. Sometimes, these were glass jars or plastic containers filled with berries. Sometimes, these were household items or a jumble of well-worn clothing. Sometimes, as for this woman, it was an assortment of dried and fresh grasses and greenery.

Some people, like the owner of the stand behind the woman, had acquired larger bags of pre-packaged goods which they were selling for less than the cost in a store whose owner would need to charge a higher price to cover the cost of buying or renting space in a building.

As I looked at the bags piled on the boxes behind the woman and at other stalls selling sacks of potatoes and large items like watermelons, I wondered what would happen as night descended. Surely there would be no truck or other conveyance ready to whisk these people and their goods to some out-lying suburb where homes were cheaper! Their homes would be nearby, or at least within reach of city transit.

I began to visit these street markets and stalls in the evening hours, and to my surprise, I saw that most tables and stalls were simply covered with a plastic tarp in case of rain, and that the actual produce and material objects were left for re-sale the next morning. When I inquired about theft, especially of smaller objects that it would be easy to slip into a pocket or a purse, the students and the teachers that I questioned looked at me with surprise. “Theft?” they said. “We are brothers and sisters. We do not steal from one another.”

I contrast this with news reports from Canadian retailers who claim that shoplifting has become rampant. In the belief that self-checkout technology makes theft easier, many shops have installed cameras. [1] In Bishkek, the local supermarket where I often shopped also had self-checkout facilities, but there was nary a camera in sight.

What conclusions shall I draw? Is there some aspect of our culture that makes us more egotistical, more concerned about our own needs and desires and less caring about our fellow humans? Is the concept of other people as our “brothers and sisters” merely a matter of empty words?

[1] https://www.biv.com/news/retail-manufacturing/surge-in-shoplifting-employee-theft-shakes-vancouver-retailers-9667967. See also https://www.ctvnews.ca/business/widespread-theft-costing-canada-s-retail-industry-dearly-e ts-1.6904286xper

I saw this reflected in many ways. I noted that when new people approached at a bus stop, complete strangers were soon engaged in animated conversations that often led to smiles and laughter. When children returning home from school arrived at the bus stop, adults spoke to them. I contrasted this with our Western mentality of “Don’t speak to strangers” that teaches children from an early age to distrust anyone to whom a parent or teacher has not given their approval.

That mentality remains in the back of our minds, leading us to avoid eye contact, to keep the focus on our hand-held screens, and to pretend that we don’t see our fellow humans in coffee shops, restaurants and other public places, even when they are sitting adjacent to us.

It is an attitude that may well have come to America along with the early colonizers of the land. More than half the younger generation of Brits say that they are uncomfortable starting a conversation with a stranger.[1] Their discomfort along with the isolation experienced by so many citizens has led the Prime Minister of the UK to appoint a Minister of Loneliness.

Persistent loneliness (lasting longer than two weeks) has been linked to high blood pressure, heart disease and stroke, as well as to Alzheimer’s disease. The United States Surgeon General has stated that it can also lead to premature dementia, obesity, drug and alcohol abuse, depression and suicidality. He has also warned that “combating loneliness requires not just individual action, but also a collective responsibility. It's a public health issue that demands the same level of attention as any other epidemic.”[2]

Medical experts consider it more dangerous than smoking 15 cigarettes a day. They advise us to talk to strangers because even 30 seconds of friendly conversation with a store clerk or cabdriver has a positive impact on mood.[3]

And what about these warnings that “Asking if social media makes you lonely and depressed is a little like asking if eating makes you fat. … As with any diet,… the latest research suggests that limiting social media use to 30 minutes a day “may lead to significant improvement in well-being.” [4]

Increasingly, I see few people limiting their use of social media in the way they limit their intake of fat, sugar, or fast food. I see the constant scrolling as a desperate attempt toward off loneliness and the lack of genuine human contact. I think back fondly of those encounters at bus stops in Kyrgyzstan and the two smiling women I photographed in a yurt.

Can we still learn in our society to be less afraid of the “strangers in our midst”? Is it too late to make it our motto to Love thy neighbour as thyself ?

[1] https://www.whistlepunks.com/news/brits-have-lost-the-art-of-conversation/

2. https://www.newsweek.com/us-surgeon-general-loneliness-epidemic-1960451

[3] https://www.prevention.com/health/mental-health/a29873388/loneliness-epidemic/?

[4] https://www.health.harvard.edu/blog/is-a-steady-diet-of-social-media-unhealthy-2018122115600

After a lifetime of hard work and struggles galore, these elders no longer get the recognition they crave. Often, like hermit crabs that retreat into their shell when threatened, elders withdraw from life and remain within the narrow enclosure of a familiar place and a well-trodden path.

I think occasionally of a friend I used to visit regularly. Other than reminiscences about our shared past and summaries of films or programs she had just watched on TV, there was very little to talk about. She saw that the path of leisure she had chosen in retirement had drastically narrowed her life, but she dared not expose herself to unfamiliar circumstances.

I think more often and with great admiration of a woman confined to her bed by some horrendous medical condition. To make matters worse, she was advised to lie flat, keeping her head on the pillow at all times lest she trigger a blood clot. “Thank goodness for technology,” said she. In short order, she volunteered to offer a listening ear to anyone who cared to reach out with a problem, a dilemma, a question, or a story. In no time, people from all over the world began to call her, grateful for a listener. No need for her to give advice or to find solutions. They just needed someone to listen.

This woman remains a daily reminder to me that there is always something that I can do. Old age is a time for giving, and the more we give, the better we feel about ourselves. Of course, it is nice when our efforts are recognized, but this does not always follow. Nevertheless, the more we give, the more likely we are to receive acknowledgement. This, in turn, awakens within us the desire to continue giving as best we can.

How can I feel unseen when almost daily, my inbox brings messages like this?

I hope this message finds you well! I just wanted to take a moment to reach out and say hello. I often think about our meeting and hope you had a great experience here in Kyrgyzstan. Please know that I truly cherish the day we spent together. Your kindness left a lasting impression on me, and I am so grateful to have met you.

In Kyrgyzstan, whatever I gave was returned to me in countless ways. The thanks I received were sometimes wordless, but the faces of these children speak volumes.

For me, a recent invitation to teach English in Kyrgyzstan was an opportunity to incorporate new concepts while building upon previous learning.

Kyrgyzstan is an independent country that uses the Cyrillic alphabet rather than our 26- letter Latin-script. Had you been at my side, and had you struggled along with me to decipher signs posted on streets and shops, would you have smiled to see the word “Pectopah” and to realize that it spells “Restaurant?”

With that ability to draw upon a lifetime of learning, I recalled that in the Cyrillic alphabet, the P is an R, the C is an S, and that in the original French word Restaurant, the AU is pronounced as O, the AN forms a nasal A, and the final T is silent.

It felt good to realize that, despite being an octogenarian, I am guardian of a treasure house full of prior learning, and yet, there is still room for growth. As we age, rather than revert to youthful and often mindless pursuits, we can apply the fruits of our personal and professional history in creative and deeply satisfying ways.

How it would feel for you to note that despite all your limitations, you still have a mind that works and a brain that is capable of figuring things out? As Ecclesiastics 3 reminds us, “To every thing, there is a season.” Childhood, adolescence, even adulthood with its composite burdens of marriage and mortgage, of children and the challenge of shepherding and guiding them, these are all seasons of life that must be left behind as we age.

But fear not! Wondrous new opportunities await. Join me in exploring possibilities and expanding horizons.

The mare writing these words is almost 90. She has just returned from a trip that took her more than halfway around the world. Specifically, to Bishkek, capital of Kyrgyzstan. Yes, she had to look it up to even locate it on a map.

And no, she was not travelling with fellow anglophones and a tour guide responsible for for keeping the group clearly apart from local natives while pointing out which iconic landmarks to admire, which museums to visit, and which sites to see and photograph for the less fortunate back home.

And yes, that narrow path just to the left of the river is indeed a road, just as the hole in the floor of the closet in my residence is considered to be a toilet.

Subscribe now