OU blog

Personal Blogs

Stylised image of a figure dancing

Bigger is Better

Visible to anyone in the world
Edited by Martin Cadwell, Sunday 6 September 2026 at 09:52

All my posts: https://learn1.open.ac.uk/mod/oublog/view.php?u=zw219551

or search for 'martin cadwell -caldwell' Take note of the position of the minus sign to eliminate caldwell returns or search for 'martin cadwell blog' in your browser. There is a space between my name and the minus sign and NO space before 'caldwell' to eliminate the name 'caldwell' in the Google listings

I am not on YouTube or social media

Cadwell NOT Caldwell

Bigger is Better

[ 5 minute read ]

Opinion

So Africa is bigger than we thought, huh?

Apparently the Mercator maps represent Africa as being the same size as Greenland which is in reality about fifteen times smaller. That should deter some day-sailors from trying to sail around the coast of Africa in a weekend. Africa should be taken seriously. From my perspective, I already wouldn't lie down on the ground to sleep in Africa without at least something between me and the ground; something I have done countless times in Europe. I had an officer friend in the RAF Regiment who told me about his training in Belize. Although Belize is far from Africa I think there are similarities in that my friend's story related to one of the soldiers lying down on the jungle floor and then days later finding that larvae were erupting from his arms. Whether this is a true story, now I look at it in hindsight, is highly suspect. In fact, I now realise that it is a fabrication to scare trainees to NOT lie down on jungle floors without some kind of barrier. On a training exercise they would, of course, been scratching their arms and the larvae would not be allowed to erupt before medical attention was administered. In the 'wild' when you are fleeing the enemy or creeping up on them, you can't just stand up and pop over to the medical clinic or field doctor. In any case, the point was made and no doubt well received. My officer friend did say it happened to someone else; always someone else, eh?

The move to represent the size of Africa in two dimensions, as it relates to the size of other countries was almost unanimously voted for by the UN except for one country which voted against it and six abstentions. I shan't name that country that voted against it because their National Security Agency is hot on the tails of independent thinkers, including those outside their own borders. Suffice it to say that 'size matters' and the concept of demonstrating the true size of Africa on two dimensional maps relates to the consideration of investment. There is, I presume, more opportunity for savagery in a big country than a small one. Rapacious desire has more room to develop where there is land that no-one can see from the nearest town. You know; digging a small hole in the Lake District to bury your dead pet will get noticed by the locals or the visiting walkers. Scraping off square miles of the earth's crust to look for ilmenite ore, the source material for making titanium dioxide (the whiteness of paint and toothpaste among other stuff), in Africa won't be noticed by the town dwellers hundreds of miles away. Mineral poachers only have satellites to hide from.

The potential of Africa being a good investment due to its size was the UN's focus, but this was first conceived by the African nations. All they have to do now is make sure corruption is reduced to a manageable level for outside investors to feel comfortable. My understanding is that when diamonds were first found and the locals were employed to dig, the locals stole the rare big ones and handed in the myriad small stones. If I was a treasure hunter I might not need a boat to look for Spanish gold or sunken pirate ships, I might just need to know a bit more African history and speak to the right people in small villages. Yet, surely, I am being prejudiced by snippets of information I have egregiously stitched together to form a flimsy heuristic, which rule of thumb, in the light of day, many people would call out as racism. I wouldn't argue against them. I wouldn't because the one member country in the United Nations that voted against revealing the true size of Africa wants to be shown as more important than Africa, and has in the past been shown as almost as big as Africa on Mercator maps. Jealousy I have no time for and denying an entity any approbation or validation for potential is, in my eyes, just plain wrong. But, I am not considering the new world order when trade significantly shifts from the Global North to Africa. In the development of Africa we have another potentially cheap Asian-type workforce with access to rare earths and modern technology banging on their doors.

I was lucky to be able to ask a PhD graduate about his chosen field of study. It was Romano-Britain, I think. I floated a few layman questions and eventually understood that the reason that after the Romans left Britain the locals went back to their old ways and did away with underfloor heating and building with lime, was because the Romans took with them their ability to organise and specialise in singular tasks. Entering into an agrarian society with organisation could, I suggest, potentially produce a larger entity that could be a considerable threat to the rest of the world, both economically and physically through armed combat. But what do you do? Suppress the African nations? The African?

If we consider that China has a lot of investment across the world in developing countries and other countries want to stymie China's economic takeover effort, we might need to understand that allowing the manifestation of a potential superpower continent is not necessarily in the hands of the Global North. It is organisation that is the key to the opening of an African Pandora's Box. Taking the blindfold from the eyes of the African innovators may be only a few years away if creativity outside of necessity becomes available to a wider population. Reducing poverty in Africa would, no doubt throw up some interesting and novel work-arounds in hostile environments that currently cripple improvement. 

The Global North is indubitably a jealous entity which, I suspect, will be reluctant to hand over any significant control on economics and combat capability and so fairness is, I suspect, coloured by an executive decision to control growth; likewise China and India should be equally alarmed about the potential labour-force of Africa becoming organised, if it is not themselves who are the puppet-masters. Yes, I have just maligned the African and reduced them to being controllable wretches but what do you do? We saw the same in England during the Industrial Revolution when country-folk leading agrarian lifestyles 'upsticked' and handed themselves over to industrialists, future liability to debt and workhouses and even prison. While I have no reason or desire to offer African country workers as being two hundred years behind England, I do feel that a loose comparison to the plight of poor people in the past is a valid one and bears consideration. While many comfortable people bemoan the colonialism of empires past, I might metaphorically stand at their rallies with a placard that says 'See the present and look to the future.'

Perhaps though, the single UN member who voted against showing Africa as having even more potential by dint of its new perceived size is presenting a reality that the rest of the charitable world chooses to ignore simply because they want to share and be fair. Unfortunately, I feel that having an emotional force contribute to decision-making can create a manifestation that has a life of its own and will one day bite the hand of its feeder.

Just like lying down on a Belize jungle floor, any Global North entity is going to want a barrier between it and the tooth and claw of an African jungle. A jungle that is now likely to be considered more interesting than it was previously perceived as being before a new map becomes the standard.

Permalink 1 comment (latest comment by Martin Cadwell, Tuesday 29 September 2026 at 00:00)
Share post
Stylised image of a figure dancing

Detached Emotions

Visible to anyone in the world
Edited by Martin Cadwell, Tuesday 16 September 2025 at 07:51

All my posts: https://learn1.open.ac.uk/mod/oublog/view.php?u=zw219551

or search for 'martin cadwell' or 'martin cadwell blog' in your browser. 

I am not on YouTube or social media

silhouette of a female face in profile

[ 12 minute read ]

Detached Emotions

In 2012, I took a long look at myself and recorded what I found. Fortunately, I saved it, and it is reproduced here, unadulterated, or rather, unaltered. I chose 'unaltered' over 'unadulterated' because this is raw, rude me. It was never intended for publication. But much of it is residual in me, and I am ruthless with myself. After it, I have briefly interviewed myself in a pretend studio as though my 2012 statement is a video statement, with questions I ask myself today, such as what did I mean, and how have I changed or adapted.

four highly stylised people facing each other. One is read and the others are black. PTSD and Detached Emotions (raw speech)

'I suppose, straightaway, I should make myself clear in that my view on how I want to be approached by other people may be distorted by a certain degree of misanthropy as a culmination of a series of bad relationships stemming from my early childhood through adulthood to the present day.

The prevailing thought I consciously hold when considering the world about me is this: Stay away from me; do not get in my space; definitely don't bore me with your mundane words about your everyday lives; all you want to do is massage your own ego, to stimulate your mental processes or otherwise gain something from an encounter with me. What makes it worse for me is that these people don't even realise why they are talking to me. They think they are being friendly when they are actually sub-consciously establishing an hierarchy; checking out whether I am dangerous or can be dominated. This thought is in no way limited to any individual, or group, religion, creed or colour nor is it dependent on gender, looks, ability, race, health, wealth or intelligence. This thought is the result of empiricism and, in my view, has been tested and proved countless times. Another way of saying it is for me to say 'I do not directly require you or anything you possess; you do not have anything I want and never will; I do not need or want your company, comfort, conversation, or opinion; I do not want your wealth, your food, your benevolence or pity'. Again, this is not directed toward any individual and certainly should not be taken personally if it causes alarm, concern or negative reaction. That is to say, it is directed towards everyone and no-one in particular.

The one thing I primarily want, need, fantasise about and crave is consideration. This is consideration for everyone, from everyone and by everyone. But most of all, CONSIDER THIS EVERYONE: I don't like you and I am not going to like you, because if you cause me to react, respond to you or otherwise force me to discover and develop a new set of rules just so I can make you happy enough to go away and leave me in peace, you will leave me feeling irritated, cheapened, used, and with a feeling that it is me who has been considerate, patient and empathic to your needs. Again, this extends to everyone and should not be taken personally.

My maxim for a fruitful life is: do not cause negative feeling in other people. This is the 'Golden Rule' with a slight change. Do not do to others what you would not want others to do to you. This maxim has negativity woven into it, though it is controlled and purposeful, to avoid negativity caused by doing to someone what you want them to do to you. After all, how can we be sure what others want? Is it the same as I want? I will leave that question there for fear that further exploration would leave me open to inquisitive persons asking me what I want and me having to adopt a pleasant, non-patronising mode of behaviour which hopefully would not induce a negative feeling in them and would still cause them to leave me alone and never approach me again without them ever knowing the truth about what I am really thinking, because, I fear that due to the human condition, their egos would enable them to override common-sense and make them believe that they would be doing me some service by offering me a biscuit or something.

They are probably generous, perhaps even kind; perhaps they find that reciprocal generosity in a symbiotic relationship works best for them and thus they subscribe to the original 'Golden Rule' of doing to others as you would want them to do to you….. I feel sorry for them because I shall never covet what they have or need their company, whereas, as humans, they probably feel the need to belong to a group, to exercise their existence in the many roles they play in the world; to indulge in mental stimulation through conversation (banal or otherwise) or have their egos stroked – all of which demand the attention of another person.

Sometimes, I take a reward or praise when I am offered it, not because I want it, I don't, no, solely because I think it helps people to think that we are getting on okay. I derive no pleasure in satisfying people's need for platitudes, if, indeed, that is what I am giving; I feel no superiority or pride; I am just relieved that for a while my future refusals to accept gifts or reward will not be perceived as an outward sign of wanting to be disconnected from others. Without a full understanding of me and without full insight into my life I feel that they would, like so many others, mistakenly take it as a personal snub.

I am not contemptuous of people who live symbiotic lives, not a bit, no, I am jealous that they have never had to develop coping strategies such as I have.

I am puzzled by complacence, irritated by complacence, which I believe is the product of what the Germans call 'gemutlichkeit' – 'comfortableness'; something I feel that I can never now achieve. Complacence, for me, is the attitude one may adopt if one feels there is nothing to worry about; or does not perceive imbalance. 'Learned helplessness' is its pathetic friend and is, to me, arrhythmia that is recognised by the individual but feeling that nothing can be done about it, so one fears but tolerates the consequences. Neither attitude is acceptable to me and I live in a constant state of searching for either escape routes or solutions that satisfy the situation, though not necessarily me. In real terms, this means to me; Fight tooth and nail using smiles and kid-gloves to attempt to achieve an unrealistic vision of peace (which even worse, provides only temporary succour) against people who would vindictively tear my guts out if I show my soft under-belly, simply because it is in their nature to do so.'

September 2025 (a real interview between me and myself, in a fictional studio having watched the video of 2012 me)

    

       'That was you in 2012. Pretty raw stuff. Thank you for sharing it, Martin. How do you feel seeing that today?'

       'Quite alarmed really, and disappointed. I had been like that for decades by then. I find it difficult to believe that I could be so cold. Yet, it is a defence mechanism that stems from an even darker place.'

       'You started by saying that people are merely massaging their own egos and that they are not friendly towards you; what did you mean?'

       'I think I had read somewhere that people are more stimulated by talking than by listening and so I thought that people are really talking at me, rather than to me. Of course, I desperately wanted to talk to people and then to talk to me. I wanted to explain how I felt and be understood. I wanted to hear what they are saying and understand how they felt. But I felt that no-one was letting me do that. I knew that it would be a long process to carefully open up to people, each and every time I met them. Unfortunately, I actually mean every time I met the same person, because as soon as I was away from any conversation I would unconsciously rebuild the wall. No-one was going to give me that much time or space; they have their own lives and thoughts to contend with. As I say, I wanted to know them, their thoughts, theirs and mine, but ultimately, all I ever heard was mundane chatter that masked their true identity. I was certain that the lightness of their words was never a reflection of how they felt, so to me, it was just rubbish that they would endlessly spout simply because they were mentally stimulating themselves.....at my expense.'

       'Do you think that perhaps many of the people you encountered then were not as troubled as you thought; that you might have been projecting yourself on them?'

       'I am not sure I was projecting myself onto others any more than everyone else. I was absolutely certain that I was seeing the world through a dark lens but it was a lens that was made up of my perception of other people. That is why it was so important for me to understand other people and how they dealt with emotional pain. My world completely stopped when I was twelve. I was emotionally catatonic then. Like every child, I was supposed to learn from my surroundings and my peers. I had no chance to emotionally recover from my breakdown because I had a brother who would vindictively remove any opportunity for me to feel safe. It is as though he saw me as a threat to his superiority and felt he must reduce me to a helpless mess. This meant that as I grew I was only able to learn from my environment with no emotion attached to it. Everything about me is a construct, a careful fabrication of social etiquette and conversation; all without emotion. I heard only words not feelings. This was borne out in places where I stumbled, such as not recognising a hint, I still can't.' In 2012, I saw myself as a mirror to everyone else. I did not see myself as an individual person, only you, and you, and you contained in me. However, because there was no emotion there was never an ebb and flow in relationships; never moments of quiet. I just wanted more information with which to program myself.'

       'You eshewed gifts and rewards. Can you tell me why?'

       'Many people only give gifts at specific times; birthdays, Christmas....I recognised this while still in my teens. Most of us do. Because giving gifts and rewards generally is an emotional outsource, there is an expectation that emotion is reciprocated. Of course, I was not able to do that. Someone could have given me a brand new car and my reaction would have been the same as if I was given a banger. It was only the practical aspect of gifts and rewards I saw then. By 2012, I would have been pleased to be able to drive and not walk but that emotion would never be directed towards a gift-giver; it would only be realised in actually using the vehicle. Nonetheless, gift-givers would expect me to show gratification. Worse still, like most people, they would expect a reciprocation in kind. I simply could not understand why. I deliberately did not celebrate my twenty-first birthday. Many people regard the attainment of that age as seminal. But, it is no longer the attainment of majority as it once was. So, in my mind, by 2012, having not celebrated any birthdays or Christmas's since age eighteen, my idea of reciprocal gift-giving was pretty well shrivelled. I didn't know how to respond if someone even offered me a biscuit or a cup of tea. I had to have protocol for accepting anything. I would always refuse it twice and only accept if there was a third offer. By the third offer I would be feeling so uncomfortable that I would have to accept. Put upon really. I recognised that the offerer is feeling uncomfortable because I won't accept their hospitality. Looking back, I suppose I was insulting them. EVERYONE accepts their offerings and has a chat, why not me? they were asking themselves.  I was compelled to eat a biscuit, drink tea, or accept reward for doing a chore for them. I just wanted to be left alone in that emotional department. To me it was a form of bullying, but to them it is a ritual part of connecting.'

       'You said you are not contemptuous of people who live symbiotic lives. Can you elaborate on that?'

       'Ah ha. Hmmm. Most people are not going to like what I am about to say. These days i can put myself outside of myself and to some extent look at myself from how someone else might perceive me. I am not sure I really want to be honest with you now. It is uncomfortable for me right now. However, one of the most important things I promised myself that I would do, because I understand I am fundamentally flawed and will always be, is to be honest, to be honourable and to have integrity, no matter what the cost to myself. It is imperative I do not knowingly cause harm due to something I have overlooked in myself, so honesty is my safeguard...... I was contemptuous of other people who need symbiotic relationships in 2012, and I still am. I can't do that. It is completely absent in my make-up to be able to trust anyone with anything. I was practically orphaned at age sixteen and my legal guardian was a drug and alcohol crazed older brother. I grew up with an independence that I hold hard to my heart. I won't ever let go of it. I can't. It is my shield. It saves me from you and them and her. I regard seeking help from others as weak. Collaboration, to me, is a signal that someone is inadequate. Symbiosis, of course, is living among each other in a mutually beneficial way. All of how I felt in 2012 is residual in me today. It will never be displaced with something else. It can only be tempered. I will never know love, like you know love, because love came to me from a crying mother. I have to accept that I am ruthless but mostly polite and respectful. Yet, I must also understand that my ruthlessness extends also to myself; I let it, because it is only fair. I will not allow myself to solely cast contempt on the world, because in reality I am contemptuous of myself. But, it is true to say, I only see people in three aspects, beneficial to me, in the way, or as a non-playable character in a video game, as being entirely neutral and just part of the scenery.'

       'Yet, you do subscribe to symbiosis.'

      'Of course. I am not unkind. I understand that people are unaware of much around them. Someone who gets up, cheerful, and walks towards the bus stop doesn't want to meet ruthless and contemptuous me. When they call 'Good Morning' to me, I would have a terrible day of guilt if I did not return it, as cheerily as I can, even though most of the time I am acting. It would break my heart to know that someone vicariously suffers because they meet me. I don't have a filing system for emotions or a box in which to neatly to place them. At any time one will jump out at me and I will cry. But it is not crying for the present, It is crying for the past. No-one wants that on the way to the bus-stop, so I have a personality I present to the world. It is of course, wooden, but it includes trying to give people want they need as though we are in a symbiotic, though brief relationship.'

       'Would it be fair to say, Martin, that today, if you are completely honest with yourself, you are jealous?.'

       'Of course. Hugely.'

       'Martin Cadwell. Thank you.'

If you like music and would like a musical representation, one that I think matches, of how I was feeling prior to being able to break myself down again and resemble some of the pieces in a semblance of order and understanding in 2012, you might consider listening to the Album 'My Life in the Bush of Ghosts' by Brian Eno and David Byrne, released in 1981.

Permalink Add your comment
Share post

This blog might contain posts that are only visible to logged-in users, or where only logged-in users can comment. If you have an account on the system, please log in for full access.

Total visits to this blog: 882203