For some reason I became interest in the word 'worth'. I think it started with my curiosity about it being used as a suffix on the end of surnames, like in Moneysworth, Woolworth, Wordsworth, and Shuttleworth.
My first instinct was to look the word up in the dictionary. One origin of the word given is Goth, dating before 900AD. Goth is the language of the Teutonic people who in the 3rd to 5th centuries invaded and settled in parts of the Roman Empire. I presume the town of Gotha in Thuringia, Germany was named for the Goth people.
The names I mentioned above I believe originated in northwestern England, in Lancashire and Cumbria. I guess some Goth people settled there, since it was once part of the Roman Empire. Who knows when worth got its meanings of value, merit and quality? I think it is save to say, though, that it was affixed to surnames to denote and convey the sense of wealth or the trustworthiness of the person so named.
As I examined the word more closely I discovered the Goth word for worth is wairths. I found this fascinating because of its similarity to my surname Airth. I always understood Airth to be a Scottish name, but now I believe it may have originated from the Goth, who may have also settled in Scotland. The name Airth, though, was thought to have originated from the word 'air' or 'earth'. However, nobody really knows for sure. But as I have discovered, there may be another explanation for its origin, the Goth word for worth.
The Old English pronunciation of worth is weorth, which sounds and looks a lot like earth. The Goth pronunciation of worth is wairths, which sounds very much like the Scots would pronounce worth. (As the Gershwin song goes, “You say worth, I say wairths…”) From this I am inclined to thing that Airth came from the Old English weorth and the Goth wairths, meaning that Airth means both earth and worth. And there is a connection there. Earth, in the form of land, is worth something. Being an Airth I would sooner take as one of its origins ‘earth’ rather than ‘air’ because earth conveys more worth.
Perhaps the first Airth was a wealthy landowner, hence the name. Why, there’s even a castle in Scotland named Airth, started by Fergus de Erth. I imagine a Scotsman once having said, “Your name should be airth because your wairths something”.
And what has all this to do with democracy, as it shows in my masthead? Perhaps nothing. But it was a Scotsman with another name, Smith, who helped the development of democracy by persuading governments to let people be free to purse their own self-interests and worth.
Tuesday, October 23, 2007
Tuesday, October 09, 2007
Why Democracy?
The BBC recently participated in a series called Why Democracy? It seemed like an apt question considering Democracy is the only legitimate form of governance left in the world and getting stronger. I think the series was also trying to understand what it is about Democracy, as Francis Fukuyama opined in his book "The End of History", that makes it the end point in human governance.
One interesting question asked was, “Can democracy solve climate change?” I think that if any form of government can, Democracy can, better than the alternatives of totalitarian regimes or other forms of closed societies. With the open societies Democracy has fostered it has encouraged the entrepreneurial spirit that can develop the needed technology to tackle such a problem. I am certain that under governments like communism such technology could not have developed because of their inherent lack of free markets and entrepreneurial skills that would invent such technologies.
There are examples where totalitarian governments have developed advanced technologies. The single mindedness of the communist regime in the Soviet Union did invent the technology that started the space race. But as one may have notices the democratic system of America soon surpassed that initial winning streak and won the race. That is because America had a free citizenry that voluntarily helped in the effort whereas communism did not have such a resource. Without that human resource which America had - the free market and the free exchange of ideas - the Soviet Union soon ran out of steam and could no longer compete. Similarly the Soviet Union failed in providing food for its citizens because it couldn’t develop the necessary technologies or management systems that an open society can. Why Democracy? Because in the long run it is a more sustainable system, because of its openness and freedom.
I'm also think that under dictatorships like communism the subject of climate change could never be discussed openly and freely because that would tantamount to criticizing the state and its rulers, a no-no. Also, under communism there was no such thing as freedom of the press that could expose the degradation of the environment. Thus, under a totalitarian regime the subject of climate change would certainly be hidden from the general public. My feeling is that one reason communism had to collapse is because it was covering-up what it was doing to the environment. The level of its industrial pollution had to be exposed. Under Democracy such a cover-up would amount to a criminal act.
Another good reason for Democracy is that it is the only form of government for peace loving people of all over the world. As Kant rightly speculated more than 200 years ago, democracies don’t go to war with each other. Democracy, too, is the only truly accommodating form of government, which tries hard to accommodate and balance the diverse needs and aspirations of all peoples, whether religious or political.
Why Democracy? Democracy is government of the people, for the people and by the people. Democracy’s chief aim is to keep tyranny at bay, and those who would subjugate us. On that score I think Democracy is doing an admirable job.
As a sort of afterthought the question "What is the biggest threat to Democracy?" was posed. Many said terrorism. Can terrorism destroy Democracy? My feeling is that the only way terrorism can destroy Democracy is if it resorts to terrorism tactics to fight it.
This is what I have noticed Democracy does to ward off threats to it existence, it looks inwardly and wonders what about itself it can change to defuse the threat and ameliorate things. Democracy mostly wins if it plays defensively rather that offensively, with soft powers rather than hard ones, with diplomacy and politics rather than violent conflict. This is how it eventually defeated communism.
People who think we don’t live in a Democracy, like democracies in the US or Canada, are people who live in bubbles. They just think of their own circumstances rather than the circumstances of the whole population. They aren't thinking of Democracy as mutually beneficial system but just one tailored for individual needs. Their expectations of democracy are generally ridiculous and selfish. What also bothers people is that Democracy is not perfect because that is how they heard it advertised. Democracy is not perfect because the people it serves are not perfect. Nevertheless, it is the only system that can come close to a perfection.
People who say we do not live in a democracy say so because they see others trying to undermine it and do not go to jail for it. I say to those people, grow up. There is always a group of people out there that will try and take advantage of a good thing for their own purpose. And Democracy being the open system it is is naturally susceptible to opportunists. In the long run, though, a mature Democracy is strong enough to fend of those unscrupulous individuals who take advantage of it to serve their own agenda.
One thing the BBC series did not point out as to Why Democracy? is that in comparison to all other governing systems it is the only system capable of renewing itself, because it is flexible, open and always coming up with new ideas on how to govern people. And in order to remain legitimate and vital a governing system must always reinvent itself so that is can adapt to the constantly changing circumstances of the modern world.
One interesting question asked was, “Can democracy solve climate change?” I think that if any form of government can, Democracy can, better than the alternatives of totalitarian regimes or other forms of closed societies. With the open societies Democracy has fostered it has encouraged the entrepreneurial spirit that can develop the needed technology to tackle such a problem. I am certain that under governments like communism such technology could not have developed because of their inherent lack of free markets and entrepreneurial skills that would invent such technologies.
There are examples where totalitarian governments have developed advanced technologies. The single mindedness of the communist regime in the Soviet Union did invent the technology that started the space race. But as one may have notices the democratic system of America soon surpassed that initial winning streak and won the race. That is because America had a free citizenry that voluntarily helped in the effort whereas communism did not have such a resource. Without that human resource which America had - the free market and the free exchange of ideas - the Soviet Union soon ran out of steam and could no longer compete. Similarly the Soviet Union failed in providing food for its citizens because it couldn’t develop the necessary technologies or management systems that an open society can. Why Democracy? Because in the long run it is a more sustainable system, because of its openness and freedom.
I'm also think that under dictatorships like communism the subject of climate change could never be discussed openly and freely because that would tantamount to criticizing the state and its rulers, a no-no. Also, under communism there was no such thing as freedom of the press that could expose the degradation of the environment. Thus, under a totalitarian regime the subject of climate change would certainly be hidden from the general public. My feeling is that one reason communism had to collapse is because it was covering-up what it was doing to the environment. The level of its industrial pollution had to be exposed. Under Democracy such a cover-up would amount to a criminal act.
Another good reason for Democracy is that it is the only form of government for peace loving people of all over the world. As Kant rightly speculated more than 200 years ago, democracies don’t go to war with each other. Democracy, too, is the only truly accommodating form of government, which tries hard to accommodate and balance the diverse needs and aspirations of all peoples, whether religious or political.
Why Democracy? Democracy is government of the people, for the people and by the people. Democracy’s chief aim is to keep tyranny at bay, and those who would subjugate us. On that score I think Democracy is doing an admirable job.
As a sort of afterthought the question "What is the biggest threat to Democracy?" was posed. Many said terrorism. Can terrorism destroy Democracy? My feeling is that the only way terrorism can destroy Democracy is if it resorts to terrorism tactics to fight it.
This is what I have noticed Democracy does to ward off threats to it existence, it looks inwardly and wonders what about itself it can change to defuse the threat and ameliorate things. Democracy mostly wins if it plays defensively rather that offensively, with soft powers rather than hard ones, with diplomacy and politics rather than violent conflict. This is how it eventually defeated communism.
People who think we don’t live in a Democracy, like democracies in the US or Canada, are people who live in bubbles. They just think of their own circumstances rather than the circumstances of the whole population. They aren't thinking of Democracy as mutually beneficial system but just one tailored for individual needs. Their expectations of democracy are generally ridiculous and selfish. What also bothers people is that Democracy is not perfect because that is how they heard it advertised. Democracy is not perfect because the people it serves are not perfect. Nevertheless, it is the only system that can come close to a perfection.
People who say we do not live in a democracy say so because they see others trying to undermine it and do not go to jail for it. I say to those people, grow up. There is always a group of people out there that will try and take advantage of a good thing for their own purpose. And Democracy being the open system it is is naturally susceptible to opportunists. In the long run, though, a mature Democracy is strong enough to fend of those unscrupulous individuals who take advantage of it to serve their own agenda.
One thing the BBC series did not point out as to Why Democracy? is that in comparison to all other governing systems it is the only system capable of renewing itself, because it is flexible, open and always coming up with new ideas on how to govern people. And in order to remain legitimate and vital a governing system must always reinvent itself so that is can adapt to the constantly changing circumstances of the modern world.
Monday, October 01, 2007
Hawaii
When I began this essay we were in the Pacific Ocean on board the Pacific Princess, a cruise ship on its way to Hawaii. We boarded the ship in Vancouver on a lovely sunny day after a flight from Toronto. We were on the ocean for five days before we saw land.
As usual I brought some reading material to help pass the time while on board ship. And for the first time I brought my computer so I might start such an essay. A book I brought was one written by a customer of mine, Carol Grant Sullivan, entitled “Fall Line: A Woman’s Survival in the Andes and Return to a life of Balance”. The main point of her book covers a 2000-foot fall she had extreme skiing in the Argentine Andes and her very traumatic recovery from it. But it’s also about the difficult balancing act she has faced with competing interests in her life, that of being a mother and a career women, while still pursuing her love of skiing.
For additional reading I also took a journal, The Wilson Quarterly, which coincidentally featured an article called “Women in Charge”. Eventually I realized that the two reading materials were related, since they were both about women forging ahead and cutting their own paths in a male oriented world. Then I thought of my mother who like Sullivan had also challenged the status quo and had endeavored to create a balance between her career and family life.
I am always looking for and making connection between things. Another piece of literature I brought with me to read is a book entitled “The World the Railways Made” by Nicholas Faith. As we headed towards our destination of the Hawaiian Islands we traversed six time zones. Well, these time zones, as Faith explains, were invented by the American railways in order to end a lot of confusion in business and travel. Prior to the railways the telling of time was helter skelter, at the whim of individual communities and totally confusing. Faith also pointed out that the modern world began with the coming of the railway. In other words, the modern world, which includes the Internet and cruise ships like the one we were on, could not have been without first the Railway, the world’s first international business.
As I looked from the deck of the ship the skies over Hawaii seemed hazy. Then I wondered, could that haziness be pollution from China? That, I learned later when I returned home, is quite a concern for Hawaiians, pollution from China. Everywhere we went the skies seem hazy, except on Sunday when we were in Waikiki sailing on a catamaran.
What we did on Saturday was go to Pearl Harbor. I mean, nobody should miss Pearl Harbor when in the vicinity. We saw several attractions there, including the Arizona Memorial, the battleship Missouri on which the Japanese signed their unconditional surrender, ending WWII, and the arrival of the nuclear aircraft carrier Nimutz. Now that was quite a sight, seeing the arrival of such a huge ship. It made our trip to Pearl Harbor all the more special and worth it.
Several people we met in Waikiki, where we stayed, were going on board the Nimutz on Monday for a weeklong trip to San Diego. Those people were parents of sailors who sponsored them for the trip. It sounded like a thrill of a lifetime to go on such a trip. I was envious.
There were a lot of Japanese at Pearl Harbor. A young American woman I was talking to was amazed that they were there, considering the fact that they started a war by attacking and destroying it. I explained that perhaps they came here to see history and were curious to see the horrific damage the Japanese forces had done on Dec. 7, 1941. I found it reassuring that there were so many Japanese there because to me that meant there was little animosity between the two nations, Japan and the U.S., and that the world was a more united place than in ever was in the past.
Another thing that was very Japanese in Waikiki was the white sand on its beaches. Hawaii imports the sand because inherently it only has black sand, which is due to the volcanic nature of the islands.
One thing that took my notice is the Union Jack in one corner of the Hawaiian state flag. That indicated to me that Hawaii was quite conscious and celebratory about the influence the British had in developing the modern Hawaiian culture.
What was the best part of the trip? Coming home.
As usual I brought some reading material to help pass the time while on board ship. And for the first time I brought my computer so I might start such an essay. A book I brought was one written by a customer of mine, Carol Grant Sullivan, entitled “Fall Line: A Woman’s Survival in the Andes and Return to a life of Balance”. The main point of her book covers a 2000-foot fall she had extreme skiing in the Argentine Andes and her very traumatic recovery from it. But it’s also about the difficult balancing act she has faced with competing interests in her life, that of being a mother and a career women, while still pursuing her love of skiing.
For additional reading I also took a journal, The Wilson Quarterly, which coincidentally featured an article called “Women in Charge”. Eventually I realized that the two reading materials were related, since they were both about women forging ahead and cutting their own paths in a male oriented world. Then I thought of my mother who like Sullivan had also challenged the status quo and had endeavored to create a balance between her career and family life.
I am always looking for and making connection between things. Another piece of literature I brought with me to read is a book entitled “The World the Railways Made” by Nicholas Faith. As we headed towards our destination of the Hawaiian Islands we traversed six time zones. Well, these time zones, as Faith explains, were invented by the American railways in order to end a lot of confusion in business and travel. Prior to the railways the telling of time was helter skelter, at the whim of individual communities and totally confusing. Faith also pointed out that the modern world began with the coming of the railway. In other words, the modern world, which includes the Internet and cruise ships like the one we were on, could not have been without first the Railway, the world’s first international business.
As I looked from the deck of the ship the skies over Hawaii seemed hazy. Then I wondered, could that haziness be pollution from China? That, I learned later when I returned home, is quite a concern for Hawaiians, pollution from China. Everywhere we went the skies seem hazy, except on Sunday when we were in Waikiki sailing on a catamaran.
What we did on Saturday was go to Pearl Harbor. I mean, nobody should miss Pearl Harbor when in the vicinity. We saw several attractions there, including the Arizona Memorial, the battleship Missouri on which the Japanese signed their unconditional surrender, ending WWII, and the arrival of the nuclear aircraft carrier Nimutz. Now that was quite a sight, seeing the arrival of such a huge ship. It made our trip to Pearl Harbor all the more special and worth it.
Several people we met in Waikiki, where we stayed, were going on board the Nimutz on Monday for a weeklong trip to San Diego. Those people were parents of sailors who sponsored them for the trip. It sounded like a thrill of a lifetime to go on such a trip. I was envious.
There were a lot of Japanese at Pearl Harbor. A young American woman I was talking to was amazed that they were there, considering the fact that they started a war by attacking and destroying it. I explained that perhaps they came here to see history and were curious to see the horrific damage the Japanese forces had done on Dec. 7, 1941. I found it reassuring that there were so many Japanese there because to me that meant there was little animosity between the two nations, Japan and the U.S., and that the world was a more united place than in ever was in the past.
Another thing that was very Japanese in Waikiki was the white sand on its beaches. Hawaii imports the sand because inherently it only has black sand, which is due to the volcanic nature of the islands.
One thing that took my notice is the Union Jack in one corner of the Hawaiian state flag. That indicated to me that Hawaii was quite conscious and celebratory about the influence the British had in developing the modern Hawaiian culture.
What was the best part of the trip? Coming home.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)