Graveyards And Orange Shirts

Disclosure: Millennium River is an independent website that uses hyperlinks. Some of these hyperlinks are affiliate links. When you click and purchase a product(s) through these links, I may earn a commission on qualifying sales. This is done at no extra expense to you. Consider also supporting this website via PayPal. Unless it is clearly stated, the content is not sponsored.

Grave

Many children went away.

It was no field trip. It was no fun and games. It was pain and suffering.

Many children never returned home. They died and filled the graves unmarked.

Their parents wept. Nobody cared.

The bee has stung. The wolf has bitten. The black bear swiped. The raccoon robbed. The river dried up.

Later, a large gathering of all sorts peoples show up, donned in orange shirts, and faces of serious demeanors.

The people have finally learned about the tragic losses.

The people have learned more about the First Peoples; the Indigenous Peoples.

Universal Basic Income

Disclosure: Millennium River is an independent, professional website that uses hyperlinks. Some of these hyperlinks are affiliate links. When you click and purchase a product(s) through these links, I may earn a commission on qualifying sales. This is done at no extra expense to you. Consider also supporting this website via PayPal. Unless it is clearly stated, the content is not sponsored.

What Is Universal Basic Income?

Universal Basic Income, often abbreviated UBI,  is a government-sponsored program in which every citizen or eligible resident would receive an unconditional flat monthly payment. Their income, employment status, or productivity levels would not be taken into consideration. The purpose behind this type of universal payment is to reduce the cost of living stress faced by a country’s residents, which would allow them to focus on education, improving their job skills, dealing with personal matters, or other things while having enough income to meet basic living requirements. Since UBI is indiscriminate of status, it ensures every resident gets something and that nobody gets left from missing a criteria, two, or three, the way other payments or programs do. In the most common UBI implementation, identical monthly payments are made to all individuals. The tax system then ensures that funds are returned to the system from those with higher incomes. 

History

“No penalty on earth will stop people from stealing, if it’s their only way of getting food.”
— Thomas More

The international COVID-19 pandemic from 2019 and onward, and the significantly increased costs of living has brought more attention to Basic Income than ever before. However, the concept of it is not new. Thomas More introduced the concept of guaranteed income in his 1516 book, Utopia. Since then, many people over the centuries have advocated some form of basic sustenance. An early example would be Thomas Jefferson in 1776 who believed in giving any propertyless individual 20 hectares of land willing to farm it. A recent notable person is American 2020 Democratic presidential candidate, Andrew Yang, whose signature policy is what he calls the “Freedom Dividend“, a Universal Basic Income in the form of $1,000 monthly for every American adult.

Experiments, But No Full Commitment

Many countries from around the world have experimented with various projects and pilots. As of August 2022, there are no countries that have a permanent Universal Basic Income in place. Canada, the United States, Brazil, Kenya, France, Spain, Netherlands, Finland, India, and Japan are some of the countries that have experimented with it. In Canada, there has been 2 forms experimental income: The Manitoba Basic Annual Income Experiment (MINCOME) and Ontario Basic Income Pilot. Though the Canadian Emergency Response Benefit was not a universal income, it has highlighted numerous topics surrounding the need for a permanent basic income that does not leave anyone behind the way it did.

The Manitoba Basic Annual Income Experiment (MINCOME) was conducted between 1974 and 1979 under the joint sponsorship of Canada and Manitoba. It was geared toward measuring the results of low-income families in Dauphin and rural Manitoba. Over the four years that the program ended up running in the 1970s, an average family in Dauphin was guaranteed an annual income of 16,000 Canadian dollars. The results? Rates of hospitalizations fell 8.5%, improvements in mental health, a rise in the number of children completing high school, and more businesses started up during the time. Most notably, it did not cause people to stop working. The exceptions were new mothers and high school students. For new mothers it meant more time for them to take care of the home and children. For high school students they could finally focus on completing school to land better careers, as opposed to dropping out of school for farm and factory jobs. The results after financial security ended? Small businesses went defunct, anxiety returned, and some people even left Dauphin good. MINCOME was closed down in 1979 under the Progressive Conservative of Manitoba government of Sterling Lyon and the federal Progressive Conservative Party of Joe Clark. They cited oil price shocks, inflation, and the increased number of people seeking the assistance, more than what the project budgeted for. The results of the study at the time were not revealed, hence what led to the governments making this misinformed assumption. It was not until 2008, when Evelyn Forget revealed the results significantly positive effects it had. The papers had been previously locked away and abandoned.

The Ontario Basic Income Pilot (OBIP) was announced by Premier Kathleen Wynne in Hamilton in April 2017. The first phase to enroll participants, was successfully completed in April 2018, with full participation across the three pilot sites:

1.Hamilton, Brantford, Brant County
2.Thunder Bay, along with the Municipality of Oliver Paipoonge, Township of Shuniah, Municipality of Neebing, Township of Conmee, Township of O’Connor, and Township of Gillies
3. Lindsay

The purpose of the pilot was to test how a basic income might help people living on low incomes better meet their basic needs, while improving outcomes in the following: food security, stress and anxiety, mental health, health and healthcare usage, housing stability, education and training, and employment and labour market participation. Unfortunately, The three-year, $150-million program was scrapped by Ontario’s Progressive Conservative government, Doug Ford, in July 2018. At the time, then-social services minister Lisa MacLeod, stated the decision was made because the program was failing to help people become “independent contributors to the economy.” Predictably, the decision and statements faced intense criticism, with many particularly pointing out that the experiment did not even get time to gather results, and that the PC violated the promise to allow the program to finish. Former Ontario NDP Leader Andrea Horwath called the decision to end the project absolutely disgraceful. Some participants have spoken out about how receiving the basic income had improved their lives — and how the program’s premature termination has left them fretting about the future.

Why

At this point, a critical question must be asked: why? Why is there no country on the planet with Universal Basic Income? Why do income experiments never turn into permanent programs, despite countless factual studies, reports, and organizations specialized in basic income with massive datasheets and media, that prove its efficacy? 3 persistent reasons:

1. Excessive paranoia that nobody will work, thus causing a labour shortage.

2. There is no money to fund it.

3. It will make inflation worse

Labour Shortage Paranoia

This is by far the most common point against Universal Basic Income. If implemented it will make people not want to work because they are given free money, causing millions to quit their jobs en masse. Utterly false! Experiments in Canada and around the world have proven that a guaranteed income of the sort, made people more willing to take risks with starting businesses, or finishing school allowing them to pursue more advanced careers. The real problem at play is not a labour shortage, but a wage shortage. If businesses truly cared that much about retaining and gaining employees, they would not only raise wages, but also treat workers better. Make them feel valued. Make them feel safe. Make them feel like there is a purpose. And particularly relevant to these times of international pandemics, an option to work full-time from home, for jobs that can be done remotely. UBI allows people to have more bargaining power, which drives healthy competition for businesses to up their wages and treatment practices. Bullying, intimidating, and using demeaning tactics to get people into working is counterproductive, and creates cycles of toxic work, desperation, burnout, and resignations. The mere fact that society is more afraid of jobs vacancies going unfilled, than private pockets being topped up, is what people should really be frightened about. The real common cause of labour shortages are things such as an ageing work force retiring at a higher rate than the working population can grow, graduates taking longer to graduate or secure work, insufficient immigration levels, and others.

Too Expensive

Critics are quick to point out how expensive implementing Universal Basic Income would be. It is easy to look at the numbers and say that $50 – 90 billion in the case of Canada, or 2.8 to 3.1 trillion in America’s situation is an astronomical amount of money. Indeed it is. What critics fail to point out is that UBI money would go right back into the economy. People that previously did not have purchasing power, will now have it. The more people there are with money, the more money can be spent on goods and services. This creates jobs, economics stimulus, allows more people to focus on school to pursue more specialized careers, and a vast assortment of other benefits. UBI is not even about printing new money; rather it is about allocating existing money directly to a nation’s citizens. Redistribution of income and wealth from some individuals and businesses to citizens through social mechanism such as taxation, welfare, public services, land reform, or monetary policies is by far the easiest way to get it done. Saying it is too expensive is a lie. It is lack of political will. It is poverty and the current programs that are supposed to combat it that are extremely expensive.

Inflation

The inflation argument is based on the myth that in order to fund Universal Basic Income, the government would have to print billions of new dollars, thus making the cost of everything go up in the process. This has already been debunked numerous times, including within this write-up itself. UBI does not require an additional excess amount of money. Believers of this myth either do not even know what inflation is or intentionally deny that UBI can feasibly done through redistribution of existing money. Inflation is when the total value of currency increases faster than the total value of goods and services in the economy. This causes the price of goods and services to rise, in attempt to get that excess money spent. While in theory it sounds good, it leads to overconsumption, hoarding commodities, thus causing a vicious battle of even more inflation and consumer shortages. On the opposite side of the spectrum, deflation happens when the money in circulation remains, while there is an excess of goods and services causing the value of it to go up. Too much deflation will cause people to hold onto money, leading to a decrease in consumer spending, lowered business profits, pushing unemployment, and makes the economy shrink. Therefore, a small, consistent amount of inflation is actually good. Even if UBI were to be funded with new money, it would balance itself out because more people with purchasing power means manufacturers and businesses will be able to scale up accordingly with the good and services they offer to keep things balanced. If hundreds of billions can be printed to go to many other sources including banks, bureaucrats and CEOs, without causing inflation, this same money can certainly be redistributed in better ways. 

Inefficacy Of Existing Programs

“A one-size-fits-all cheque is not going to end the discrimination or poor workplace standards that follow around low-income workers.” — Critic
There are several things wrong with this statement. Firstly, it falls once again into the persistent myth that Universal Basic Income is a handout to make people dodge work. Secondly, it assumes UBI touts itself as the panacea for society’s problems. That is not the point of UBI. Informed UBI supporters are aware and admit that this is not point of UBI. The purpose of UBI is to ensure that nobody falls through the gaps by not meeting certain criteria. An extremely common problem with present anti-poverty programs. UBI certainly will not make poor workplace and discrimination disappear in the snapping of a finger. It will, however, give people more bargaining power to refuse terrible workplaces, and push them change their practices and pay. This will put the needed pressure on business to create a competition that aims for the top. To assume UBI is supposed to be a welfare handout that would rapidly brush problems away, akin to that of a mythical winged being scattering sparkles, rainbows, and gold is both condescending and nonsensical.

I am a single mother who has chosen to stay home to raise my children. Yes, money does help. I refuse to accept social assistance because they treat you like a criminal, the staff are vicious towards the people they serve. Period. UBI would work. The reasons people are poor are societal. Middle and upper class people seem to believe it’s a choice to be poor. Their parents raised them to ignore and have contempt towards poverty. — Anonymous Mother

While this mother’s comment obviously does not reflect how all staff or classes treat people, as some can be nice, it does highlight a significant and extremely common reality: embarrassment and stigmatization. A lot of people, whether they are rich or not, look down very heavily on people using disability and welfare programs. They view them as unproductive leeches who drain the working population’s life force and money. On top of this, these very same programs that are supposed to help people on welfare ironically keep most of them poor, known as the poverty trap. This is because the programs themselves do not even pay enough for these individuals to sufficiently meet their needs. It can be argued for welfare that it is supposed to temporary, which it is, but disability on the other hand can be either permanent or temporary. Here is where things get very distorted: When these individuals do attempt to work, they get their benefits clawed once they make a certain amount of money, which itself is not even enough for basic survival. This forces them to have to have to work reduced hours to keep the pay, but live with substandard income, or completely forgo their benefit. If the individual is disabled, this is not practical and can be rather dangerous.

Society must not bully and intimidate the disabled, poor, and vulnerable into working. It should be securing them and making sure their basic needs are properly met at all times without embarrassing and stigmatizing them.  Majority of people do not choose to become disabled. They are either born with a condition, or something environmental like an accident can cause it. Anyone could become disabled; poor, middle-classed, and rich. The difference? If a rich person becomes injured, permanent or not, they have access to top-notch doctors, often private staff, to make sure they are given the best condition at all times. On top of this, they have all their benefits and royalties that still gives them more money than some people working an entire year. The middle class and poor? Not so much. Even if the healthcare is free, they do not get the same quick access and specialized care as easily as a wealthy person could.

Let It Go

People need to let go of this mindset that every single person: healthy, bent, crooked, sick and all must work. It is unrealistic and callous. Some people are never going to work. Some people are never going to be employable. Perhaps the general definition of work itself may be problematic: going to an office or business to be told what to do under a clock and supervision. Work can take on many forms. It can be as traditionally described, but done remotely. It can also be done independently without supervision, with the individual setting the term, scope and pay; independent-contracting. Some people will never end up being useful to society in anyway at all, despite all the efforts to help them. Are these type of people the majority? Thankfully not. If that were the case, the world would not make it to this present time in history. Could it be that if some people had a guaranteed consistent income for proper sustenance, that even if they do not make a “good employee” that they might good keeper around a neighborhood? A good volunteer? Yes, people can be valuable to society in other ways than working through a job. Nobody asked to be born. Nobody asked for a price tag on food, water, shelter, and necessities. If society can make sure to put a price tag on everything, it can guarantee an income to pay for the basics. It is all a matter of will.

Emancipation

Disclosure: Millennium River is an independent, professional website that uses hyperlinks. Some of these hyperlinks are affiliate links. When you click and purchase a product(s) through these links, I may earn a commission on qualifying sales. This is done at no extra expense to you. Consider also supporting this website via PayPal. Unless it is clearly stated, the content is not sponsored.

What Does That Word Even Mean?

Emancipation is the process of giving people social or political freedom and rights. Freeing from restraint, control, or the power of another.

Emancipation Day

This historic day paved the way to freeing over 800,000 enslaved Africans and their descendants in Canada, parts of the Caribbean, Africa, and South America. However, this only applied to children under the age of 6. Others still had to continue serving their former owners unpaid, for 40 hours a week. It not until July 31, 1838 that all enslaved people across the British Empire finally gained their freedom at midnight on that day. Since then, August 01 has been commemorated in many parts of the world, including through celebrations of freedom across Canada. In Canada, Emancipation Day did not get such status until March 24, 2021 when the Member of parliament in the House of Commons voted unanimously to designate August 01 as Emancipation Day across Canada. Trinidad And Tobago was the first country to commemorate Emancipation Day as a national holiday since 1985. 

Emancipation Day Versus Juneteenth

Juneteenth, short for June Nineteenth, is a holiday commemorating the end of slavery in the United States, observed annually on June 19. Similarly to Canada, it did not receive official, national status until 2021. On June 17, 2021, President Biden signed the bill into law, making Juneteenth the 11th holiday recognized by the federal government. In 1863, during the American Civil War, President Abraham Lincoln issued the Emancipation Proclamation, which announced more than 3,000,000 slaves living in the Confederate states to be free. Despite this, it took 2 years for the news to reach Black Americans living in Texas. The news was brought to them through Union soldiers when they arrived in Galveston, Texas, on June 19, 1865. Upon learning of their freedom, the former slaves celebrated with prayers, feasts, songs, and dances.

Black Slavery In Canada

The buying, selling, and enslavement of Black people in Canada was practiced by European traders, and colonists in New France in the early 1600s. It lasted until it was abolished throughout British North America in 1834. During that 200-year period, settlers in what would eventually become Canada were involved in the Transatlantic Slave Trade. 12 to 20 million Africans were enslaved in the western hemisphere after an Atlantic voyage of 6 to 10 weeks. During that voyage now known as the Middle Passage, approximately 2,000,000 Africans died from disease, malnourishment, mistreatment, and fights. Upon arrival in North America, enslaved Africans and their descendants were forced to work in fields, perform manual labour, and domestic work in homes. They were forced to change their names, abandon their faiths, reject their cultures, and stop speaking their native tongues. 

Slave owning was not only limited to the elite and politicians. Ownership was widespread in colonial Canada, from government, military officials, merchants, fur traders, hotel keepers, millers, tradesmen, bishops, priests, and others. It cruelly filled the need for cheap labour, and was also considered part of an individual’s wealth. The law enforced and maintained enslavement through legal contracts that detailed transactions of the buying, selling or hiring out of enslaved persons, as well as the terms of wills in which enslaved people were passed on to others. Slaves were not treated any better in Canada than they were in the Caribbean or the United States. They were viewed as property tools, with treatment varying considerably from owner to owner. Some owners would have allowed them to read and write, free them after the owner dies, or reward them land, and property. However, the mere fact that they were held as property sums up the overall treatment: inhumane. Most were tortured, jailed, or even sexually abused.

Indigenous Peoples Slavery In Canada

Long before Black slaves made up the majority of enslaved peoples, Indigenous peoples of the Americas were the main slaves. European explorers in the 1400s and 1500s were infamous for kidnapping Indigenous peoples and taking them back to Europe to be enslaved or exhibited. Indigenous peoples were not granted basic human rights, and were treated as property tools. They were bought and sold for the main purpose of manual and domestic labour. Most of those enslaved were young women, with the average age being 14 years old. Indigenous slavery in Canada did not end until slavery was abolished in Canada. 

Caribbean Slavery

Between 1662 and 1807 Britain shipped 3.1 million Africans across the Atlantic Ocean in the Transatlantic Slave Trade. Africans were forcibly brought to British owned colonies in the Caribbean and sold as slaves to work on plantations. Those involved in the trade were driven by the large financial gain to be made, both in the Caribbean and at home in Britain. However, it was not only Britain involved in the Slave Trade. The sugar plantations of the region were also owned and operated by French, Dutch, Spanish, and Danish colonists. The death rate on the plantations was high, as a result of overwork, poor nutrition, work conditions, brutality, and disease. The work in the fields was gruelling, with long hours spent in the hot sun, supervised by overseers who were quick to whip them. Tasks ranged from clearing land, planting cane, harvesting cane, to manuring, and weeding.

Slavery was not without a fight, however. There were rebellions against slavery right up until emancipation in 1834. Most notably were the slave revolts during 1700s and 1800s including: Tacky’s rebellion in 1760s Jamaica, the Haitian Revolution in 1789, Fedon’s 1790s revolution in Grenada, the 1816 Barbados slave revolt led by Bussa, and the major 1831 slave revolt in Jamaica led by Sam Sharpe. That people that ran away from slavery who would form communities became known as the Maroons.

Indentured Labour

The abolition of slavery in 1834 led to Britain creating yet another means of exploited work: Indentured Labour. After the abolition of slavery, newly freed men and women rejected to work for the low wages offered on the sugar farms in British colonies in the Caribbean. Indentured labour was a system of bonded labour that was instituted following the abolition of slavery. Indentured labourers were recruited to work on sugar, cotton and tea plantations, and rail construction projects in British colonies in the Caribbean, Africa, and South East Asia. From 1834 to the end of World War 1, Britain had transported approximately 2 million Indian indentured workers to 19 colonies including Fiji, Mauritius, Ceylon, Trinidad, Guyana, Malaysia, Uganda, Kenya, and South Africa.

The indentured workers were recruited from India, China, and the Pacific. Workers signed a contract in their own countries to work abroad for a period of 5 years or more. They were meant to receive wages, a small amount of land and in some cases, promise of a return passage once their contract was over. In reality, this rarely happened. The conditions were harsh and their wages mercilessly low. The system of indentured labour was officially abolished by the British government in 1917. Over the following century, the descendants of those who remained became significant parts of the population in a number of countries such as Guyana, Surinam, Trinidad, Jamaica, Malaysia and South Africa, and, to a lesser extent, in the East African countries of Uganda, Kenya, and Tanzania. A lot of East and South Asian people also migrated to the United Kingdom in the 1950s and thereafter.

Legacy

Though countries such as Canada, United States, Britain, Spain, Holland, and France, have long abolished enslavement systems, freedom was not truly granted upon abolishment of such systems. Formerly enslaved peoples continued to face challenges of discrimination in housing, employment, education, health, transportation, and several other areas. Even though a lot has improved between then and now, the effects from hundreds of years of colonialism still effects these society in a number of ways, mainly through superiority complex. There is still work to be done.

 

If Countries Were Flavours, What Would They Taste Like?

Disclosure: Millennium River is an independent, professional website that uses hyperlinks. Some of these hyperlinks are affiliate links. When you click and purchase a product(s) through these links, I may earn a commission on qualifying sales. This is done at no extra expense to you. Consider also supporting this website via PayPal. Unless it is clearly stated, the content is not sponsored.

Taste

If each country were to create a small, edible copy itself what would they taste like? There are over 190 countries on this planet. With so many cultures, climates, and environments, there are so many flavours that you would be able to try! Be what if that flavour was just one general flavour that best represents that particular country? What would it be? Well, that is exactly the purpose of this write-up: to explore, examine, and imagine flavours from across the world. Now because there over 190 countries, I cannot cover all of them in one writing. Instead, I resorted to restricting it to 5 countries per continent. I initially wanted to do 10 per continent, but even then, that would have been 60 flavours to write about. You know what? I am doing 10 per continent. While I did start with 5, I realized that 5 is just too small and lazy of an effort. I have expanded it to 10 to include some nations that I really felt had to be on this list.

Another important thing that I must make perfectly clear is that no offence is intended here. Yes, it is going to be largely stereotypical, but not in demeaning, offensive, or racist ways. 

North America

Canada

Canada is massive country covered in forests, lakes, and rocks. It also produces a lot of maple syrup, and has tons of fruits and greenery across its gigantic landscape. Biting into an edible, mini copy of Canada is going to have a sweet, earthy, succulent taste.

United States Of America

Beef. That is the first thing that comes to my mind when I imagine what the United States would taste like. True, it has a large variable landscape of deserts, forest, mountains, and even subtropical parts. It even has more ethnic groups in in its borders than any other country on the planet. Yet, despite that all, the flavour of the United States is a seasoned beef.

Mexico

When most people think of Mexican food, beef, tomatoes, corn, and pepper would spring to mind. As one particular flavour, Mexico will taste like a mix of beef, tomatoes, cheese and corn. Highly predictable. Even Mexicans would agree with me on this.

Costa Rica

Costa Rica may be small, but it really does live up to its name “Rich Cost”. The country is covered in rich rainforests and beautiful coasts. How would it taste? Costa Rica would taste like a leafy, fruit salad.

Jamaica

Jamaica is already widely known for its food and music, so predicting it is hyper easy. Jamaica would taste like a blend of cod, rice, pepper, and plantain.  

Panama

Panama, you are the gate of South America and North America, so what would you taste like? You taste like lime, coconut, and chicken.

Cuba

The largest island in the Caribbean! How does it taste? Tastes like a fusion of black beans, banana, and fish.

Saint Lucia

Miss Lucia, you are often touted as the honeymoon capitol of the world. But, do you really taste like honey? No, rather you taste like a good mix of plantain, chicken, and greens. 

Trinidad & Tobago

A lot of your brothers tend to taste something along the lines of banana cultivars blended with things like rice, fish, or greens. Trinidad, you on the other hand taste like coconut, pastry, and brown sugar.

Barbados

This eastern Caribbean island tastes like cornmeal, fish, and okra. Not exactly something that would make your mouth sing, but some will still find it very tasty.

South America

Guyana

Guyana; the South American country that classifies culturally with the Caribbean. What would this forest-covered, flavourful country taste like? A blend of cornflour, turmeric, yam, and goat. Meaty and doughy.

Brazil

O Brazil! Not only are the largest country in South America, you also classified as megadiverse nation in terms of peoples, plants, animals, and all! How would you be defined as one general flavour? Defining you in flavour is not an easy thing. Overall, due to your sheer number of flora both in and outside of food, you would taste like an epic mix of a sweet, sour, savory fruit.

Peru

This South Pacific South American country would taste like a seasoned blend of corn, potatoes, and fish.

Argentina

Hands down beef! Yes, just like your distant neighbours in the Northern part of the Americas, you too, would also taste like well-flavoured beef.

Bolivia

Similarly to your brother who resides to the northwest, you would also taste like a fusional potatoes and corn mix, but instead of fish, chicken.

Venezuela

Cheese, black beans, and bananas is what biting into Venezuela would give you the impression of.

Colombia

Being neighbours with Panama, also makes you the gate of the North and South America. While your neighbour has that zesty taste to it, you taste like a pastry with beans and meat in it.

Suriname

You taste so sweet and rich in the mouth, Suriname. You taste just like a blend of peanuts, bananas, and coconuts. Very rich and sweet!

Chile

Despite what your name suggests, you do not taste like chili. You taste like a corn pastry with chicken mixed into it.

Ecuador

Ecuador has the taste of meat, corn, and cheese combined. Thought you would taste fish, eh?

Africa

Egypt

Egypt; the land where the Nile flows, where the pharaohs ruled, and the great pyramids stand. How do you taste? You would be crunchy and taste like a meat-filled pastry.

Nigeria

What does Africa’s most populous country taste like? A fusion of rice, yam, and, chicken.

Ethiopia

Ethiopia, you would taste like like beef, greens, and bread.

Kenya

Perhaps those unfamiliar with you might expect you to taste like fish, only to bite into you and describe you as tasting like a rich mix of rice, maize, and greens.

South Africa

How would I describe you, South Africa? You have a gigantic assortment of foods, peoples, and wildlife, that make it somewhat challenging to describe your taste. To boil it down to one particular flavour, you taste like apricot, beef, rice, and plantain. Indeed a very unique flavour.

Madagascar

With such a sheer variety of plants, animals, and foods, you are another one of those places with an explosive mix of flavours. You taste like exotic meat, rice, greens, and coconut all in one.

Uganda

Bite into Uganda and you will find it tastes like a fusion of cassava, sweet potato, and orange. 

Ghana

Want to eat more Gulf Of Guinean countries? Ghana tastes like cassava, rice, and plantain.

Senegal

Do you like fish, rice, and tomato sauce? That is what a food-sized Senegal tastes like. There is also an animal called “senegal” but I believe it is also referred to as “Senegal parrot” to avoid confusion. I have no idea what that would taste like, and I do not encourage anyone to find out. If I were to predict, a mild, chicken-like, bush flavour.

Morocco

Morocco coco? No, this North African country tastes like beef, durum, and greens. 

Asia

Israel

Israel, you are a land of bread. Lots of bread. And chickpeas. So unsurprisingly, you taste as if somebody blended chickpea paste, olives, and flour together, then baked it into a bar.

India

Spices, spices, spices! When one thinks of Indian food, they think of a land with a rich assortment of spices, fruits, vegetables, and pastries. As expected, India tastes like a pastry mixed with spices, and vegetables..

Japan

Konnichiwa, Nippon! You taste like fish and rice. 

Mongolia

Mongolia, you have a lot of variable meats going there. I also notice that you love your pastry, and creamy beverages. That explains why you taste like a meaty, milky dumpling.

Thailand

Thailand, you are one of those countries that is on the international stage of popularity when it comes onto your food. Why? Because of the way you use such contrasting flavours and manage to make them come out good. A singular flavour? You taste like citrus, pepper, rice, and chicken. 

Taiwan

This island country would taste like a savoury mix of beef, rice, and herbs.

South Korea

Despite being home to Samsung, LG, and numerous other mega electronics, South Korea does not taste metallic. Rather, it tastes like a blend of salted vegetables.

Turkey

With a name like that, people would expect Turkey to taste like a meaty bird, but it does not! It tastes like a sweet and chewy mix of apricots, figs, and dates.

Philippines

Blend of fish, eggs, lime, and noodles. That is what you taste like, Philippines.

Kazakhstan

Tastes sweet and crispy — just like an apple. Must be all those apples you grow there, and the fact that they originate there, that drove you as whole to taste like the fruit.

Europe

United Kingdom

This island nation sure loves its breads and proteins. No wonder your taste is a chicken-bread fusion.

Italy

Italy, there is no mistake that your culinary consists mainly of 3 things: pastries, tomatoes, and cheese. Of course, there is more to it and variations, but when biting into you, you taste like that: flatbread, tomato sauce, and cheese.

Finland

This place is seen as a quiet land of forests, and people relaxing in a sauna. The taste? There is a whole lot of berries and tons of pastries. That explains why Finland tastes like blueberry pie.

Greece

Figs, cheese, whole grains, and olives. Yum or yuck? That is what this ancient, history-rich country tastes like. Quite good if you ask me.

Ukraine

Ukraine, you are frequently referred to as the breadbasket of Europe. That explains why you have that nice, fresh, pastry taste, but why do you make peoples’ mouths red? Oh, right! It is because you taste like blend of whole grains and beet.

Switzerland

The land of scenic alps and lakes tastes like cheese bread.

France

The land of fine breads, fittingly tastes like a blend of bread, cheese, and greens.

Belgium

So sweet! Belgium, you taste like a lovely blend of milk chocolate, blueberries, and strawberries. So good! 

Poland

Poland predictably tastes like a dumpling filled with cheese.

Norway

What would the land of ski resorts taste like? Bushy? Sort of. Norway tastes like a fusion of lamb, cabbage, and potatoes.

Oceania

Australia

Australia, you are a quirky one, mate. Defining your taste is not exactly a simple task. Are you supposed to be pasty? Fishy? Sweet? None of the above? So many meats, vegetables, and fruits on this gigantic island tucked away in the deep South Pacific. Let us take another bite into you to get a final verdict. Yes. Yes, you taste like bread with snapper fish and produce bits.

New Zealand

How does the adventure capital of the world taste? Tastes like sheep, potato, and berries. A fittingly adventurous taste!

Fiji

Thinking of coconuts and island fish before you even bite into Fiji? Well, it was honestly fairly easy. This Pacific hotspot taste like a fusion of fish, coconut, and sweet potatoes. 

Tonga

So much flour and coconuts in this place. No wonder you taste like coconut bread.

Samoa

Not to be confused with American Samoa, which is a territory of the United States. Samoa, as soon as you are bitten into, your taste is as one would quite expect: a blend of coconuts, bananas, and fish.

Papua New Guinea

How does the land of 800 languages taste? Crazily explosive? No, it surprisingly has a rather tame taste of cassava, fish, and coconut.

Solomon Islands

Craving something sweet and pasty? Solomon Islands tastes like sugar cane, yam, and papaya.

Palau

Like it spicy and meaty? This island country taste like chicken, papaya, and ginger.

Kiribati

Fish! Want nothing more than a pure fish flavour? This remote island country taste like rich Pacific fish.

Tuvalu

How does the World’s 4th smallest country taste? Tastes like a fusion of bananas, breadfruit, and coconut. Exotic and sweet as one could easily predict.

Antarctica

Surprise! Were you expecting Antarctica? Almost certainly not. The landmass is just ice, water, rocks, and meat. That predictably explains why biting into Antarctica taste like a gritty, meaty ice pop. Gross? Certainly not to penguins and seals! Or people that like biting into cooked, cold meat that has been frozen into an ice pop. Is there anybody actually like that? Certainly not me!

River Talk 3: Elizabeth The Long Reigning Queen

Disclosure: Millennium River is an independent website that uses hyperlinks. Some of these hyperlinks are affiliate links. When you click and purchase a product(s) through these links, I may earn a commission on qualifying sales. This is done at no extra expense to you. You may also support this website directly via PayPal. Unless it is clearly stated, the content is not sponsored.

What Should I Say About The Queen?

Before starting River Talk #3, I was not even sure if I were seriously going to choose Queen Elizabeth II as the main topic for this River Talk. I did. Now I have to think about what I should say about the Queen. Should I praise the Queen? Should I talk smack about the Queen? None of the above? A blend of both? Should be interesting to see where the course of the River will flow for Talk #3. So why the Queen again? I had a list of other topics in mind, but a week ago I had a discussion with relatives about what other ideas I could toss into the mix. Queen Elizabeth II and Platinum Jubilee were suggested to me. I dismissed it at first because I personally do not find the Queen to be that interesting of a topic. First smack point right there. Days later, I thought some more about it. I grew increasingly curious about what exactly Platinum Jubilee is. Is it a medal? A party? A song written specifically for the Queen? Not only did I become curious, I happen to already have a United Kingdom category in my River, since I have written topics pertained to them. There are only 2 write-ups in that category, so this is a good opportunity to throw a 3rd one into it.

What Is Platinum Jubilee?

Till this moment, I never knew what the word “Jubilee” meant. Upon reading the dictionary definition for it I have learned that a jubilee is the celebration of any of certain anniversaries, such as the twenty-fifth (silver jubilee ), fiftieth (golden jubilee ), or sixtieth or seventy-fifth (diamond jubilee ). I was not too off about it being a party and medal then. I do not know if they gave her a literal platinum medal during the celebration or not. However,  Queen Elizabeth II Platinum Jubilee Medals are a thing. The Province Of Alberta is awarding these medals to 7,000 Albertans throughout 2022 in recognition of significant contributions to the province. Alberta further mentions that it is a one-time program that will conclude on February 05, 2023, at the end of the Platinum Jubilee year. It seems that this has to do with Sunday, given that 2022 Jubilee was on the 6th of February.

Now Alberta made me curious about other provinces: are they doing this too? Saskatchewan and Nova Scotia have announced plans for Platinum Jubilee medals. New Brunswick and Manitoba are considering it, while Ontario, British Columbia and Québec have opted out. Québec opting out does not surprise me, but Ontario and British Columbia seems odd. Ontario is Canada’s most populous province by far, and is home to the nation’s capital. British Columbia’s name is clearly inspired from the United Kingdom’s alternate name Britain. Perhaps it is not in their interest because platinum medals of the Queen are uninteresting to these peoples. Who knows for sure.

Those feeling left out can treat themselves to a 2022 Silver Year Of The Tiger or Gold Maple Leaf Coin. What I would like to talk about next is her 70-year reign.

70 Years

70 years. Wow! 70 years of commitment to service is an extremely long time to commit something. I have always wondered why, though? Why would someone want to commit the rest of their life to such a huge role? I have tried searching “Why Is The Queen So Committed?” but have yielded a variety of media posts. I did find one thing though: Her Twitter. Yes, the Queen Tweets. Seeing as though this is 2022, it is both comical and amusing how everyone and everything has social media. Even animals have social media accounts. Can you imagine if ancient Kings and Queens had Twitter? Queen Hatshepsut? King Solomon? Julius Caesar? That could be a topic entirely on its own. What did I find on the Royal Family’s Twitter? “I declare before you all that my whole life whether it be long or short shall be devoted to your service” But why? From The Royal United Kingdom website it says that the Queen sees public and voluntary service as one of the most important elements of her work. She has links – as Royal Patron or President – with over 600 charities, military associations, professional bodies and public service organisations. These vary from well-established international charities to smaller bodies working in a specialist area or on a local basis only.

We can safely assume that she loves to serve and has a life-and-soul dedication to being involved in the community. It also helps having longevity in your genes and having access to the best care possible. Elizabeth II has been on the throne since February 06, 1952, making her the second longest monarch in the world. Who still has her beat? French King Louis XIV. He served as monarch for more than 72 years after taking the throne at age four and dying in 1715. I had to double-check the 4-year-old part. I know ancient Judah had Kings that reigned from the tender age of 7, but 4? Certainly would not happen in modern times. With Elizabeth II being 96 years old, there is a chance that she could beat him, and become not just the longest reigning monarch in Britain, but the longest reigning monarch ever! For some reason, I have a strong, unknown feeling that history will not see such a long-reigning monarch again. So this naturally leads to the next point: The future of the Monarch.

The Future Of The Monarch

Queen Elizabeth’s appearances throughout many places in the United Kingdom and the world over her lifetime has brought much admiration to her. However, her days are numbered. In 2022, she could not even attend certain events due to health issues that flared up. One that has been revealed was episodic mobility issues. Not surprising given how old her skeleton is. Who will take her place next? Prince Charles? Prince William? Some people — or should I correctly say, a lot of people think the monarchy should be abolished altogether. If you ask me, I am indifferent to whether they want to abolish it or not. If they do decide to keep it going, which they almost certainly will, I believe that Prince Charles should pass the torch to Prince William. Charles is 73. William is 39-turning-40 real soon at the time of this writing. With William being far younger, he can reign for far longer continuously, while modernising the monarchy.

The Royals have been buffeted by allegations of racism and bullying, a sex scandal involving Prince Andrew, demands that they apologize for Britain’s historic role in the enslavement of millions of Africans, the departure of the Sussexes, and bribery involving a charity with Prince Charles and how a Saudi demanded British citizenship if the Saudi gave him much money. The Royals are aware that they have a lot of work to do. Both Charles and William have already been taking on a lot of changes, and plan to make some changes for the better. How good they will perform has yet to be seen. I do hope that whoever is in charge will make the changes that need to be made.

Remove The Queen From Us

At this time, there are now 6 Caribbean countries that intend to remove the Monarch as their sovereign. If this sounds familiar, it is because Barbados has removed the Queen as its head of state to become the Caribbean’s newest republic back in November 2021. Why? Why is there such a strong urge to pluck the Queen out of the Caribbean? These countries want the ability to elect their own head of state, independent of an external body, to oversee domestic and foreign affairs. They want to formally and symbolically unlink themselves from the former empire that enslaved, brutalized, and profited off their ancestors. The massive protests that took place in the United States over Anti-Black racism back in 2020 have further fueled the desire to do so. Some have called this the “The Awakening Of Black Consciousness”.

What do I think of this? While I personally have no hard feelings towards the Queen, I can totally understand why countries whose populations are predominantly Black, Indigenous or South Asian would want to rid themselves of an institution who they feel is not benefitting them. So what about Canada? Should Canada abolish the Monarchy? A survey from Angus Reid Institute says that most Canadians have a positive view of Queen Elizabeth II, but believe that we should separate after she dies. Those that believe in the Monarchy strongly believe it has allowed Canada to be the stable, functional country it is, and that removing it will be a lengthy, complicated process. Lengthy and complicated? True. I personally do not think it will be as complicated as some people make it look, but it will absolutely be no 1-year-job-and-done sort of thing.

Final Words

We can agree that the Monarchy is not perfect. The United Kingdom undeniably has a long record of atrocities. At the same time, the royal family existing now is aware of this and has worked hard on a variety of issues. Whether or not Canada decides to get rid of the Monarchy, I am fine with either move. I would prefer for Canada to focus on inflation and stagnancy at this time. As for the Monarchy’s existence in Britain, if Britain insists on keeping it, keep it. As long as they continue to improve and work towards fixing social issues, and maintaining a good relationship with people, the institution will last as long as it can.