When you see hatred directed towards a people, a race or a religion, and someone explains that it is justified because of X, Y or Z, something has gone profoundly wrong.
Has society drifted so far, and lost its soul to such an extent, that hatred of innocent people has become acceptable because of the alleged or real actions of an individual - or even a government?
Are we no longer capable of distinguishing individual responsibility from collective guilt?
History is riddled with examples of the actions of individuals being used, or more frequently, deliberately manipulated, to condemn an entire group. That is how prejudice is legitimised, persecution is rationalised and, ultimately, atrocities are made possible.
People who excuse or justify hatred towards innocent human beings, whether on social media or in the streets, based purely on association of race, religion or identity, are embracing the very logic that has enabled humanityâs worst crimes.
You cannot condemn evil while defending hatred.
Justifying evil is itself an act of evil.
Most of the world retires at around 65.
We tell our teachers, surgeons, pilots and CEOs that itâs time to hand over, mentor the next generation and step back gracefully.
Yet look at who is running nations right now.
With Lula re-elected in Brazil at 80 (81 tomorrow), here are the presidents and prime ministers still in office aged 75 and over:
Paul Biya, Cameroon â 93
Mahmoud Abbas, Palestine â 90
Jean-Lucien Savi de TovĂ©, Togo â 87
Peter Mutharika, Malawi â 86
Sergio Mattarella, Italy â 85
Alassane Ouattara, CĂŽte dâIvoire â 84
Teodoro Obiang, Equatorial Guinea â 84
Emmerson Mnangagwa, Zimbabwe â 84
Denis Sassou Nguesso, Republic of the Congo â 82
Alexander Van der Bellen, Austria â 82
Yoweri Museveni, Uganda â 82
Ram Chandra Paudel, Nepal â 82
Joseph Boakai, Liberia â 81
Lula da Silva, Brazil â 80
Thongloun Sisoulith, Laos â 80
Daniel Ortega, Nicaragua â 80
Abdelmadjid Tebboune, Algeria â 80
Isaias Afwerki, Eritrea â 80
Donald Trump, United States â 80
Xanana GusmĂŁo, Timor-Leste â 80
Anwar Ibrahim, Malaysia â 79
Navin Ramgoolam, Mauritius â 79
IsmaĂŻl Omar Guelleh, Djibouti â 78
Mirza Fakhrul Islam Alamgir, Bangladesh â 78
Sitiveni Rabuka, Fiji â 78
Benjamin Netanyahu, Israel â 77
Dharam Gokhool, Mauritius â 77
JosĂ© Ramos-Horta, Timor-Leste â 76
Narendra Modi, India â 76
Hilda Heine, Marshall Islands â 75
Salva Kiir, South Sudan â 75
Shehbaz Sharif, Pakistan â 75
Prabowo Subianto, Indonesia â 75
Thatâs 33 leaders.
Seventeen of them are in Africa, the worldâs youngest continent, where the median age is under 20.
This isnât just about age. Experience matters, and plenty of people are still mentally sharp well into their 80s. Physically is another story. Stamina. Temperament and more.
Itâs more about renewal. Some on this list have held power for 30 or 40 years.
Some eve changed their constitutions to remove term or age limits.
Too few have built a successor.
In any well-run organisation, the leaderâs last great job is to make themselves replaceable.
Leadership isnât something you own. You hold it for a while and then pass it on.
So the question isnât just âAre they too old?â Itâs âWhy canât they let go?â
Itâs that second part that worries me most⊠What does it tell us?
A small correction first. My earlier list of presidents and prime ministers aged 75 and over had 33 names.
I missed three:
Mohammed bin Rashid Al Maktoum, UAE â 77
Rosario Murillo, Nicaragua â 75
Philip Davis, Bahamas â 75
That brings the 75-plus club to 36.
Some of you then asked about the next group: leaders aged 65 to 74, the age when most people in ordinary jobs are expected to retire.
Here they are.
74
Vladimir Putin, Russia
Emomali Rahmon, Tajikistan
Bola Tinubu, Nigeria
Kamla Persad-Bissessar, Trinidad and Tobago
Myriam Spiteri Debono, Malta
73
Netumbo Nandi-Ndaitwah, Namibia
Cyril Ramaphosa, South Africa
AndrĂĄs Baka, Hungary
Xi Jinping, China
Kassym-Jomart Tokayev, Kazakhstan
Jennifer Geerlings-Simons, Suriname
72
Recep Tayyip ErdoÄan, TĂŒrkiye
Alexander Lukashenko, Belarus
Masoud Pezeshkian, Iran
João Lourenço, Angola
Andrej BabiĆĄ, Czech Republic
Nawaf Salam, Lebanon
Mohammad Mustafa, Palestine
Kamil Idris, Sudan
Rashad al-Alimi, Yemen
Joseph Dion Ngute, Cameroon
Gordana Siljanovska-Davkova, North Macedonia
Naiqama Lalabalavu, Fiji
Philip J. Pierre, Saint Lucia
71
Abdel Fattah el-Sisi, Egypt
Asif Ali Zardari, Pakistan
70
Friedrich Merz, Germany
Frank-Walter Steinmeier, Germany
Hassan Sheikh Mohamud, Somalia
Min Aung Hlaing, Myanmar
Taye Atske Selassie, Ethiopia
69
Ferdinand Marcos Jr, Philippines
TĂŽ LĂąm, Vietnam
Shavkat Mirziyoyev, Uzbekistan
Tharman Shanmugaratnam, Singapore
Donald Tusk, Poland
Catherine Connolly, Ireland
Faustin-Archange Touadéra, Central African Republic
Mohamed Ould Ghazouani, Mauritania
68
Droupadi Murmu, India
Kais Saied, Tunisia
Janez JanĆĄa, Slovenia
Bernardo Arévalo, Guatemala
Nasry Asfura, Honduras
Sam Matekane, Lesotho
67
Li Qiang, China
Lai Ching-te, Taiwan
John Mahama, Ghana
JosĂ© RaĂșl Mulino, Panama
Konstantinos Tasoulas, Greece
Vahagn Khachaturyan, Armenia
Carlos Vila Nova, SĂŁo TomĂ© and PrĂncipe
Godwin Friday, St Vincent and the Grenadines
66
Isaac Herzog, Israel
MicheĂĄl Martin, Ireland
Jonas Gahr StĂžre, Norway
Christian Stocker, Austria
Guy Parmelin, Switzerland
Samia Suluhu Hassan, Tanzania
José Maria Neves, Cabo Verde
Miguel DĂaz-Canel, Cuba
Johnny Briceño, Belize
Taneti Maamau, Kiribati
65
Mohamed bin Zayed, UAE
Sanae Takaichi, Japan
Jeffrey Bostic, Barbados
Thatâs 67 more.
Put the two lists together:
36 leaders aged 75 and over, plus 67 aged 65 to 74.
That makes more than 100 presidents and prime ministers worldwide who are past the age most of us are told to retire. Thatâs more than half of the worldâs countries.
To be clear, this isnât just about age. Some of these leaders were elected recently and some fairly, and many are sharp and full of energy. Experience counts for a lot.
But in business, we judge leaders partly on whether they have built a successor. In politics, too many have built a constituency of one.
More than 100 countries are run by people their own pension systems should have retired, while the world gets younger.
The question isnât just whether these leaders can still do the job. Itâs also whether anyone truly capable is being prepared to take over. And why they cling to power at retirement age.
Hell, Iâm 59 and passed over full operational leadership at 56. And thatâs of a company I started, and not even a country.
If you had to ask me where I want to be in 6 years time⊠Chilling would be a good start. Not running a government đ±
The Morning After
What kind of society are we building once the common enemy is gone?
mikeabel.substack.com/p/the-âŠ
Sometimes a statistic can mislead you.
- unless you look below the surface.
I read an article this morning in a highly regarded publication. It said that one in five people globally will develop cancer. In some wealthier countries, itâs closer to one in two.
Quite a difference.
My immediate thought was: what are people in wealthy countries eating, drinking or being exposed to that makes the risk so much higher?
But when I looked into it, and researched it, there was more to the story.
An important part of the explanation is that people in wealthy countries live longer. Cancer becomes more common as we age.
Better detection also means more cancers are found.
So some of what looks like a consequence of an unhealthy lifestyle is actually a consequence of living longer.
Not all of it, of course. Lifestyle matters too.
The point is that the number alone doesnât tell us how much each factor contributes.
To be fair, the article mentioned rising life expectancy. It just didnât unpack what that meant for the comparison.
And thatâs what interested me.
We increasingly read in headlines. We see a number, form a view and move on. I caught myself doing exactly that.
In a headline driven world, we need to look below the surface more today than ever before. Not because the data or statistic is wrong, but because what we think it means may not be what itâs telling us.
There is a separate food lesson here, though. We know this but my digging resurfaced this in my mind.
Thereâs a lot to be said for simple meals with wholegrains, beans, lentils and plenty of fibre. And for limiting processed meat, red meat and alcohol consumption. Affluenza.
Being able to afford more doesnât necessarily mean weâre eating better. Heartier sure, but healthier? Not so much.
My grandfather, Dr Philip Perl, would always say: âEverything in moderation. Including moderation.â
So of course, enjoy your life to the fullest.
But there are little daily decisions we can each make that will (statistically) extend the amount of time we have too. And then of course, there is the lotto of genetic good luck and bad luck. But wise choices help too.
Garbage in. Gospel out.
We have never been more connected.
Or more divided.
In 1710, Jonathan Swift wrote: âFalsehood flies, and truth comes limping after it.â
A version of that thought is often attributed to Mark Twain. Which rather proves the point.
Swift had no internet. No feeds. No algorithms. Just pamphlets and social gossip.
Imagine what heâd make of today, when so much of what we know sits in our pockets, and yet the lie still gets there first.
Thatâs no accident.
The platforms that carry our words only reward outrage. Anger is their sugar.
A calm voice rarely travels as far.
A kind one rarely trends.
So the feed fills with fury, and the fury starts to look like world opinion. Intentionally.
Now lies are also being deliberately farmed.
Planted daily, by the thousand, in the very places we go to check the truth, where search engines and the machines we ask can hand them back to us as fact.
Garbage in. Gospel out.
Those of us who grew up before the algorithmic world should know better. We werenât immune to propaganda. But we remember forming our views without a personalised feed deciding what weâd see next. That gives us a particular responsibility to pause, question and think.
The younger generations are not foolish. Theyâre simply being hyper targeted and algorithmically manipulated.
None of us is immune.
But no one should mistake a constant stream of disinformation for sudden understanding.
Ask what youâre being shown, why you are being shown it, who benefits from it, and what evidence supports it.
So where is north, when someone is bending the compass?
We find it by thinking for ourselves without assuming we are always right. By testing what we believe, especially when we want it to be true. Beware of unconscious bias.
And always, by choosing how we treat one another.
Choose light.
Choose kindness over cruelty. Knowledge over noise. Choose science, and the plain truth of our shared humanity: we bleed the same blood, know grief, and each deserve the same dignity.
Be wary of any idea that asks you to despise a group of people in order to belong. Belonging that costs someone else their dignity isnât belonging. Itâs a mob with good branding. So much today is just this.
And be wary of virtue built on things that simply arenât true. Signalling virtue on a lie isnât virtue. Itâs just the lie, wearing a trendier outfit.
Keep a watchful eye on how societies treat their minorities. How readily their dignity can be denied, should trouble anyone who truly believes in shared humanity.
Notice whose pain is acknowledged, and whose is explained away. Notice whose right to safety is treated as self-evident, and whose is endlessly put on trial. That is where our values become entirely visible.
Standing up for a cruel thing never made anyone good. Not even when itâs popular.
Especially when itâs popular.
In the end, it comes down to something very simple.
Am I choosing to build, or to break? To unite, or to divide?
âA candle loses nothing by lighting anotherâ. The light multiplies. It fills the room.
Hatred spreads too. It goes viral. It metastasizes. It passes from one person to another until poison begins to feel like truth.
So ask yourself: Will I be a candle, lighting other candles and bringing more light into the world? Or will I help spread the poison?
Evil can flourish for a time. Goodness survives because someone keeps choosing it, and passing the light on. It endures.
Itâs not left. Not right.
Itâs build or break. Unite or divide.
Choose wisely.
Garbage in. Gospel out.
We have never been more connected.
Or more divided.
In 1710, Jonathan Swift wrote: âFalsehood flies, and truth comes limping after it.â
A version of that thought is often attributed to Mark Twain. Which rather proves the point.
Swift had no internet. No feeds. No algorithms. Just pamphlets and social gossip.
Imagine what heâd make of today, when so much of what we know sits in our pockets, and yet the lie still gets there first.
Thatâs no accident.
The platforms that carry our words only reward outrage. Anger is their sugar.
A calm voice rarely travels as far.
A kind one rarely trends.
So the feed fills with fury, and the fury starts to look like world opinion. Intentionally.
Now lies are also being deliberately farmed.
Planted daily, by the thousand, in the very places we go to check the truth, where search engines and the machines we ask can hand them back to us as fact.
Garbage in. Gospel out.
Those of us who grew up before the algorithmic world should know better. We werenât immune to propaganda. But we remember forming our views without a personalised feed deciding what weâd see next. That gives us a particular responsibility to pause, question and think.
The younger generations are not foolish. Theyâre simply being hyper targeted and algorithmically manipulated.
None of us is immune.
But no one should mistake a constant stream of disinformation for sudden understanding.
Ask what youâre being shown, why you are being shown it, who benefits from it, and what evidence supports it.
So where is north, when someone is bending the compass?
We find it by thinking for ourselves without assuming we are always right. By testing what we believe, especially when we want it to be true. Beware of unconscious bias.
And always, by choosing how we treat one another.
Choose light.
Choose kindness over cruelty. Knowledge over noise. Choose science, and the plain truth of our shared humanity: we bleed the same blood, know grief, and each deserve the same dignity.
Be wary of any idea that asks you to despise a group of people in order to belong. Belonging that costs someone else their dignity isnât belonging. Itâs a mob with good branding. So much today is just this.
And be wary of virtue built on things that simply arenât true. Signalling virtue on a lie isnât virtue. Itâs just the lie, wearing a trendier outfit.
Keep a watchful eye on how societies treat their minorities. How readily their dignity can be denied, should trouble anyone who truly believes in shared humanity.
Notice whose pain is acknowledged, and whose is explained away. Notice whose right to safety is treated as self-evident, and whose is endlessly put on trial. That is where our values become entirely visible.
Standing up for a cruel thing never made anyone good. Not even when itâs popular.
Especially when itâs popular.
In the end, it comes down to something very simple.
Am I choosing to build, or to break? To unite, or to divide?
âA candle loses nothing by lighting anotherâ. The light multiplies. It fills the room.
Hatred spreads too. It goes viral. It metastasizes. It passes from one person to another until poison begins to feel like truth.
So ask yourself: Will I be a candle, lighting other candles and bringing more light into the world? Or will I help spread the poison?
Evil can flourish for a time. Goodness survives because someone keeps choosing it, and passing the light on. It endures.
Itâs not left. Not right.
Itâs build or break. Unite or divide.
Choose wisely.
My feed keeps serving me ridiculous viral videos claiming to teach Gen Z how successful people speak.
The advice?
Donât introduce yourself by name. Make the other person tell you theirs first.
Never apologise for being late. Say, âThank you for waitingâ instead.
Itâs absolute rubbish. Pure tosh.
Introduce yourself. Offer your firm hand. Look people in the eye. Be on time. And if youâre late, apologise. âThank you for waitingâ isnât an apology. Itâs rude.
These videos are teaching young people to mistake rudeness for confidence and arrogance for presence.
Thatâs not how you build a positive relationship, earn trust or build a career. Itâs how you make a really bad first impression.
And a last one at thatâŠ
The human imagination that gave us the Taj Mahal also gave us AI
The Taj Mahal never fails to take my breath away. Itâs an extraordinary, inspiring and enduring love story and creation that captures the imagination on multiple layers and levels. So do so many of the great buildings and works of art created long before any of the technology we take for granted and have become so reliant on today.
What gets me every time, is that each one began as a fragile grain of an idea.
Construction of the Taj Mahal began in 1632. The main mausoleum was completed in 1648, and the wider complex in 1653. Thousands of people spent more than twenty years bringing that vision to life. By hand. Hundreds of years before anyone had heard of a computer, let alone AI.
As I write this, Vivaldiâs Winter (c. 1720) is playing. Another extraordinary creation that began in a human mind, and reached us through the hands and instruments of musicians.
I keep coming back to that, and it gives me real hope.
Iâm always excited by what AI can do, and of course I use it. Extensively. My worry is that we might reach for it as a solution today, far too soon: before weâve sat with a thought, wrestled with a problem, or let an idea wander far enough to become something that is truly ours. Inherently human:
It would be a pity to be so impressed by what a machine can make that we forget to be astonished by our own proven ability.
To further the conversation, what human-made place, work of art or piece of music has inspired you?
It might be the Sistine Chapel, St Peterâs, a little church in a village nobodyâs heard of, or a piece of music that stops you in your tracks. Share a picture or tell us what it means to you. I think we could all use the reminder of what weâre truly capable of.
And yes, the free image accompanying this post was made with AI. The Taj Mahal itself was imagined, designed and built by people, centuries before AI. I rather like the little irony in that đ
The boy in the first photograph, Mikey, had no idea he was keeping a careful record. He was just being eleven at the time: living through the summer days in Port Elizabeth, the friendships forged, the eccentricities of family, and all the details that quite seemed ordinary at the time - but many that werenât.
The man, Mike, in the second photograph has gone back to those details, with almost fifty years of life between them.
That, for me, is the curious double life of writing a memoir: the child lives it - and records it. The adult gets to tell it.
âBeing Abel in a World of Cainâ is now in its final edit. I expect to have the full manuscript back on Friday. After that comes the next stage: finding its publishing home.
What a wonderfully rewarding journey this has been so far. Going back, way back, and spending lots of quality time with those deeply loved and long passed.
Those incredibly funny moments, the embarrassing ones, the meaningful ones - some that were really hard to revisit, but exceptionally important to do. Rediscovering their importance and lasting impact.
(The cover shown here is the provisional concept, not the final design).
Thank you to #Environ for inviting me to deliver a keynote at your 2026 global conference today.
I greatly enjoyed sharing some thoughts ideas and case studies on branding and marketing.
Itâs always energising spending time with a business so focused on its future and committed to investing in innovation and growth đ













