Well Stephen Harper actually did something I can respect, however late and grudging. David Crombie's appointment to solve the problems created by his inaction in Caledonia
is a wise move, and therefor could not have arisen from Stephen's small-minded brain, but rather from some sensible voice in the old Blue Machine. Some genuine common sense from a conservative, how refreshing.
Monday, September 17, 2007
Saturday, August 25, 2007
Canadastan Support
More soldiers die in Afghanistan
and we are told it is our duty
to support our troops because
they are willing to die to help Afghanis
and I believe that is why the common soldiers
are there, for it is not so much
they who wield the weapons as it is
those who command them, those who create policy
whose aims I do not trust.
What the Minister of Defense
wants from Canadians
is an adherence
to political, economic
and ideological idolatries
I do not share: their public policy
masks a privateering imperialism,
and conceals caves of unholy alliances,
false reformers parading their faith
behind patriotic proclamations
in unison with Bush League bunglers
and Babylonian Whore mongers:
survivors of WWII anti-fascist campaigns
in Europe where Canadian
soldiers died by the tens of thousands
while North American profiteers and
black and brown shirt collaborators
were left free to grow strong and prosper
until the day they finally seized power through
the breaking of chads and the tampering
of electronics and through lie upon lie
still emanating from the Terror war-room
in Washington.
This nation's
right wing liberals and conservatives
benefit from the sustained hostilities
that fill the coffers of
America International Incorporated and
its subsidiary principalities and powers
and despite all that, I accept the belief of soldiers
and their families that they give their lives
and loved ones in the cause of Afghanis.
As for Minister MacKay and his generals
their words are deceptions
and the utterances of the Prime Minister
are a sulfurous stench.
and we are told it is our duty
to support our troops because
they are willing to die to help Afghanis
and I believe that is why the common soldiers
are there, for it is not so much
they who wield the weapons as it is
those who command them, those who create policy
whose aims I do not trust.
What the Minister of Defense
wants from Canadians
is an adherence
to political, economic
and ideological idolatries
I do not share: their public policy
masks a privateering imperialism,
and conceals caves of unholy alliances,
false reformers parading their faith
behind patriotic proclamations
in unison with Bush League bunglers
and Babylonian Whore mongers:
survivors of WWII anti-fascist campaigns
in Europe where Canadian
soldiers died by the tens of thousands
while North American profiteers and
black and brown shirt collaborators
were left free to grow strong and prosper
until the day they finally seized power through
the breaking of chads and the tampering
of electronics and through lie upon lie
still emanating from the Terror war-room
in Washington.
This nation's
right wing liberals and conservatives
benefit from the sustained hostilities
that fill the coffers of
America International Incorporated and
its subsidiary principalities and powers
and despite all that, I accept the belief of soldiers
and their families that they give their lives
and loved ones in the cause of Afghanis.
As for Minister MacKay and his generals
their words are deceptions
and the utterances of the Prime Minister
are a sulfurous stench.
Sunday, May 20, 2007
Parliamentary Doldrums
Now is precisely the time when the kind of parliamentary reform I envision would come in handy, ie, a non-partisan parliament, in which only the cabinet is the government, and in which lack of confidence votes would lead to a transition to a new cabinet/new PM, via a deal brokered by the Governor General, with the support of a majority in the House.
Here we have a minority government with no agenda, that most of the electorate voted against, and whose policies are therefor unacceptable to the majority of Canadians, kept in power because no one actually wants an election, a government incapable of regenerating itself because all its policies were reactions rather than responses, leaving us not with responsible government but with a reactive one, at a time when we need to be making bold new steps towards dealing with a pending global catastrophe.
I say dump Harper and his cabinet, let the GG broker a deal for a new cabinet under a new PM, and let that new government set a new agenda that will get things done.
All Harper is doing now is waiting around to become history.
Here we have a minority government with no agenda, that most of the electorate voted against, and whose policies are therefor unacceptable to the majority of Canadians, kept in power because no one actually wants an election, a government incapable of regenerating itself because all its policies were reactions rather than responses, leaving us not with responsible government but with a reactive one, at a time when we need to be making bold new steps towards dealing with a pending global catastrophe.
I say dump Harper and his cabinet, let the GG broker a deal for a new cabinet under a new PM, and let that new government set a new agenda that will get things done.
All Harper is doing now is waiting around to become history.
Wednesday, May 9, 2007
Fixed Parliamentary Terms
I'm not much of a fan of this new law because I prefer the much older system in which the government was the cabinet and the cabinet was the government. I think that system (as opposed to the government being the party in power)provides greater room for good government, an easier way to bring in proportional representation, and retains the role of the Governor General in creating new government/cabinets when a lack of confidence issue arises in the house. Which is to say that if a Prime Minister can't keep the support of the house, a new leader is asked to create a cabinet/government from the ranks of the elected house members, and if that leader succeeds the new cabinet proceeds to govern until they lose the confidence of the House. An election in that system would occur only when the Governor General can't find a leader/cabinet that can hold the support of the house. Partisanship is the biggest problem in our parliamentary system these days because the 'party in power' has replaced the 'cabinet in power', so instead of focusing on policy the cabinet focuses on electability, and the party whips turn the rest of our elected representatives into 'step and fetch' voting blocks instead of into individuals serving their constituents. The four year term may create a certain kind of stability, but most of what it stabilizes are parties.
I don't mind using parties to contest elections, but I'd prefer a non-partisan parliament once elected, and a proportionally representative cabinet/government. That's how I'd create stability and accountability and flexibility.
I don't mind using parties to contest elections, but I'd prefer a non-partisan parliament once elected, and a proportionally representative cabinet/government. That's how I'd create stability and accountability and flexibility.
Thursday, May 3, 2007
Maude Barlow came to Guelph Last Night
Maude Barlow came to Guelph Last Night to deliver a sermon in the Norfolk Street United Church, the message was Living Water and the victories of commoners around the globe in retaining or regaining their wetland stewardship, their access to free clean water, the driving back of the Nestle-Mammonites and the Coke-Pepsi Bablyon/Assyrian codes of corporate water taking throughout the Third, Second and First Worlds, Water Warriors with Water Keepers waging peace against mercenary Water Hunters, communities struggling to remain indigenous, local rites of spiritual passage since time immemorial made in the presence of ancient waters denied, people around the world, having enough. Maud Barlow in Guelph last night testifying of water battlers uniting over water, overthrowing armed fortress water-corps security forces through public pressure, defeating gun-toting compound guards at the places where the waters were stolen by Law and reclaimed by the grace of Living Water, darkness repudiated.
Communities are rising around the globe to defend water after hunted-down springs passed into the hands of water extraction profiteers courtesy of government charters, privateers draining ancient commons, the threat of violence growing in places, easing in others, the time of deciding arriving, the separating of the sheep from the goats, the choice to either live how the Waters would have us live, or die in our own waste, wrack and ruin, that choice upon us, the battle of the Age in which we live here among us being fought over water.
Maud Barlow in Guelph last night exhorted us to become new creatures in a new creation, or remain beings doomed to the fate of our own making.
The Good News for the congregation in Guelph last night is that the Living Waters will not lose, and can not fail, we will steward Eden back into being, Justice will flow like the river Isaiah prophesied, fed "like a spring whose waters never fail." (58:11) Though Maud said that differently.
The second reading I have chosen to give alongside Maude Barlow's sermon in Norfolk United Church,I chose in memory of the sun through the stain-glass windows before dusk last evening; the way the rays glowed living colour through the gothic stone windows onto the wall above the plaque that honours the dead of the Great War...
My third reading is
My Homily
We are upon the crossroads where the deals are done,
daughters and sons,
the choice is ours to choose
as we please,
between the Devil or the Deep Blue Seas.
Communities are rising around the globe to defend water after hunted-down springs passed into the hands of water extraction profiteers courtesy of government charters, privateers draining ancient commons, the threat of violence growing in places, easing in others, the time of deciding arriving, the separating of the sheep from the goats, the choice to either live how the Waters would have us live, or die in our own waste, wrack and ruin, that choice upon us, the battle of the Age in which we live here among us being fought over water.
Maud Barlow in Guelph last night exhorted us to become new creatures in a new creation, or remain beings doomed to the fate of our own making.
The Good News for the congregation in Guelph last night is that the Living Waters will not lose, and can not fail, we will steward Eden back into being, Justice will flow like the river Isaiah prophesied, fed "like a spring whose waters never fail." (58:11) Though Maud said that differently.
The second reading I have chosen to give alongside Maude Barlow's sermon in Norfolk United Church,I chose in memory of the sun through the stain-glass windows before dusk last evening; the way the rays glowed living colour through the gothic stone windows onto the wall above the plaque that honours the dead of the Great War...
My third reading is
The man brought me back to the entrance of the temple, and I saw water coming out from under the threshold of the temple flowing east. The water rose also out from the south threshold, and past the north gate and to the outer gate where the waters also poured out of the doors, and where the man said, Son of Man, this water flows fresh to the sea, where the river enters... everything will live.Ezekiel 47...
My Homily
We are upon the crossroads where the deals are done,
daughters and sons,
the choice is ours to choose
as we please,
between the Devil or the Deep Blue Seas.
Wednesday, May 2, 2007
Kyoto
It has quickly become apparent that the Conservative green plan is being greeted with universal disdain from everyone but those who will continue to benefit from an oil economy, ie. those who own Stephen Harper and his government.
Their mantra, that meeting the Kyoto commitments will be bad for the economy, really means that what the Accord will be bad for are their personal economies. Bad for the continued rape of Alberta's landscape and resources. Bad for the hold the oil men have had on the economy of Alberta since 1947. Bad for the veneer of democracy Alberta conservatives love to lecture the rest of the country with. That's the thing about libertarians posing as conservatives, they want a playing field as uneven as they can get, so they pursue the false biological imperatives of social darwinism, with themselves as dominant predators and the unseen hand of the market allegedly governing them, when what is really governing them is Mammon, the god of greed. Harper's job is to delay the inevitable demise of the oil economy as long as possible while pretending to be green, but it's not going to fly. And whatever sins the Liberals had in this field, their sins were those of the Canadian people, who apparently only woke up to the impending ecological disaster recently. The Liberals can move forward because they aren't a construct of the oilagarchy. And that really makes conservatives angry. They are the least ecologically concerned party around, and this little bit they're doing now is like a revolution for them, but it's a baby step, and we need to be taking adult steps, great long strides. Once the environment has been saved, then it will be safe to have conservatives conserve it for us, but as long as they're nothing but libertarians in green conservative drag, they need to be left to practice their baby steps where they can't cause any harm, out of office and in the privacy of their own homes.
Their mantra, that meeting the Kyoto commitments will be bad for the economy, really means that what the Accord will be bad for are their personal economies. Bad for the continued rape of Alberta's landscape and resources. Bad for the hold the oil men have had on the economy of Alberta since 1947. Bad for the veneer of democracy Alberta conservatives love to lecture the rest of the country with. That's the thing about libertarians posing as conservatives, they want a playing field as uneven as they can get, so they pursue the false biological imperatives of social darwinism, with themselves as dominant predators and the unseen hand of the market allegedly governing them, when what is really governing them is Mammon, the god of greed. Harper's job is to delay the inevitable demise of the oil economy as long as possible while pretending to be green, but it's not going to fly. And whatever sins the Liberals had in this field, their sins were those of the Canadian people, who apparently only woke up to the impending ecological disaster recently. The Liberals can move forward because they aren't a construct of the oilagarchy. And that really makes conservatives angry. They are the least ecologically concerned party around, and this little bit they're doing now is like a revolution for them, but it's a baby step, and we need to be taking adult steps, great long strides. Once the environment has been saved, then it will be safe to have conservatives conserve it for us, but as long as they're nothing but libertarians in green conservative drag, they need to be left to practice their baby steps where they can't cause any harm, out of office and in the privacy of their own homes.
Friday, April 27, 2007
O'Connor Goner
Our Minister of Arms Dealers should buy himself a package of those new lead-free 'green' bullets and do the honourable thing and put an end to the charade of his being of service to anyone but other arms dealers.
The Tories are so in love with George W's Bush League they want to be able to torture bad guys but they know Canadians don't like our image tarnished by such things so they hope to win brownie points by hiding how much they want to bend the rules only no one believes them, except their own spin doctors.
The Tories are so in love with George W's Bush League they want to be able to torture bad guys but they know Canadians don't like our image tarnished by such things so they hope to win brownie points by hiding how much they want to bend the rules only no one believes them, except their own spin doctors.
Baird bull
Federal Environment Minister Baird has bared his party's intellectual bankruptcy in a smoke and mirrors environmental policy that David Suzuki demolished in five sentences. As a long, hot, poisonous stew of a summer nears and then passes into the most toxic one in history Stephen Harper's fortunes are going to vanish back into the Alberta rumphole where he began his asinine political career as a hindseat reflection of a reactionary oiligarchy facing oblivion.
Good riddance to bad rubbish.
Good riddance to bad rubbish.
Thursday, April 19, 2007
Einsteins Bees Revisted
It is beginning to appear that there is serious doubt as to whether Einstein said anything about the disappearance of bees and the disappearance of humanity. The alleged quote of Einsteins has been making the environmental rounds, including this blog. His most recent biographer apparently doesn't know the quote.
The British Crime Writer John Baker goes so far as to say he never said it.
Beside the potential 1994 source listed above, there was a 2004 source that might be where the quote spread from more recently. ? The following is an excerpt from a story on a French bee die off.
While I won't go as far as John Baker and say Einstein never said it, the fact remains that whether Einstein did or not, doesn't change the fact that bees are dying off in the billions around the world and it is going to effect more than just the honey supply. If nothing else local plant species will die off in areas from which bees vanish, and with those plants a piece of the food chain will vanish, and thus effect mammals and other insects. And it will be one more ecological hole that will destabilize the whole.
The British Crime Writer John Baker goes so far as to say he never said it.
A pamphlet distributed [in Brussels] by the National Union of French Apiculture quoted Albert Einstein. "If the bee disappears from the surface of the earth, man would have no more than four years to live. No more bees, no more pollination ... no more men!" [From Chris Mclaughlin's "Fearful Beekeepers Plead for Curbs on Honey Imports," The Scotsman, 25 January 1994.]
Beside the potential 1994 source listed above, there was a 2004 source that might be where the quote spread from more recently. ? The following is an excerpt from a story on a French bee die off.
Meanwhile a knight in shining armour has appeared in the person of Viscount Philippe de Villiers, the right wing president of the departmental council of Vendée, western France. In his recently published book, Quand Les Abeilles Meurent . . . (When Bees Die . . .), he describes how he was alerted to the problem of fipronil by a beekeeper whose hives had been devastated. As his shoes scrunched across a carpet of dead bees, De Villiers became increasingly angry with "the monstrous mating of the agrochemicals industry and the state".
The book, whose title quotes Albert Einstein's remark that "if bees were to disappear, man would only have a few years to live", charts the beekeepers' struggle and castigates the "servile" behaviour of civil servants, the use of disinformation, the agriculture ministry and Europe.
While I won't go as far as John Baker and say Einstein never said it, the fact remains that whether Einstein did or not, doesn't change the fact that bees are dying off in the billions around the world and it is going to effect more than just the honey supply. If nothing else local plant species will die off in areas from which bees vanish, and with those plants a piece of the food chain will vanish, and thus effect mammals and other insects. And it will be one more ecological hole that will destabilize the whole.
Sunday, April 15, 2007
The Charter Of Rights Freedoms - 25 years later
Pierre Trudeau and Queen Elizabeth signed a document that
a) combined Catholic personalism and Protestant constitutional theology to establish sovereignty of the individual
b) used the chartering power of the crown to create a commonwealth which limits the rights of the House of Commons to alter the law of the land when it comes to individual rights and freedoms.
c) is both profound and will prove enduring.
a) combined Catholic personalism and Protestant constitutional theology to establish sovereignty of the individual
b) used the chartering power of the crown to create a commonwealth which limits the rights of the House of Commons to alter the law of the land when it comes to individual rights and freedoms.
c) is both profound and will prove enduring.
Friday, April 13, 2007
Dion and May and the Bees
When Stephane Dion and Elizabeth May made their deal to not run candidates against the other leader, and with May endorsing Dion as her choice of Prime Minister over Harper, that one small move changed the entire political landscape. The environment matters more than the Liberal Party.
May's run against Peter MacKay is a run against a man who acted without principle when he betrayed the deal he'd made with David Orchard to preserve the Progressive Conservatives from union with Harper's Alliance Party and MacKay deserves to reap the consequences of that betrayal.
The Dion-May deal brings to mind a respected liberal environmental blog (Climate Liberals) that has shut down for a few days because the members of its blogging community came to the decision that the environment mattered more than the Party. The blog is now called Climate Partisans and is actively seeking well known, non-liberal members to join their posting community.
I think it's the fate of the bees. Albert Einstein once said "If the bee disappeared off the surface of the globe then man would only have four years of life left. No more bees, no more pollination, no more plants, no more animals, no more man."
Well the bees are dying in Europe. In America they are dying in catastrophic numbers.
Its the Genetically modified crops, the herbicide spraying, and the use of single crop farming - all those things that those tree hugging environmentalists wouldn't shut up about for all those years.
We can't afford a Stephen Harper let's pretend-we're-an-environmentalist government. We don't have time for any more of his bullshit. It's grow up or die time, if it isn't already too late.
May's run against Peter MacKay is a run against a man who acted without principle when he betrayed the deal he'd made with David Orchard to preserve the Progressive Conservatives from union with Harper's Alliance Party and MacKay deserves to reap the consequences of that betrayal.
The Dion-May deal brings to mind a respected liberal environmental blog (Climate Liberals) that has shut down for a few days because the members of its blogging community came to the decision that the environment mattered more than the Party. The blog is now called Climate Partisans and is actively seeking well known, non-liberal members to join their posting community.
I think it's the fate of the bees. Albert Einstein once said "If the bee disappeared off the surface of the globe then man would only have four years of life left. No more bees, no more pollination, no more plants, no more animals, no more man."
Well the bees are dying in Europe. In America they are dying in catastrophic numbers.
This report notes that "Since last November, the US has seen a decline in bee populations so dramatic that it eclipses all previous incidences of mass mortality. Beekeepers on the east coast of the United States complain that they have lost more than 70 percent of their stock since late last year, while the west coast has seen a decline of up to 60 percent.
Its the Genetically modified crops, the herbicide spraying, and the use of single crop farming - all those things that those tree hugging environmentalists wouldn't shut up about for all those years.
We can't afford a Stephen Harper let's pretend-we're-an-environmentalist government. We don't have time for any more of his bullshit. It's grow up or die time, if it isn't already too late.
Sunday, April 8, 2007
David Orchard
I kind of lost track of David Orchard (mentioned in the previous post) probably because I don't watch TV and seldom read newspapers anymore, but found this on his wikipedia entry, which details MacKay's loss of principles.
Apparently this is what is happening to him recently if I'm not the only one who is taking an extended media vacation.(I know cyberspace is a media spa.)
Orchard joined the Liberals, who'd've thunk it !
Apparently this is what is happening to him recently if I'm not the only one who is taking an extended media vacation.(I know cyberspace is a media spa.)
Orchard joined the Liberals, who'd've thunk it !
On November 19, 2005, CBC Radio News reported that the Liberals were trying to recruit Orchard as a candidate in the 2006 federal election. According to the report, Orchard would be a Liberal candidate in either Saskatchewan or rural Ontario. Orchard did not run as a Liberal in the 2006 federal election but he announced his support for the Liberals and campaigned for Chris Axworthy. [4] Orchard also officially became a member of the Liberal Party of Canada during the 2006 election.
After Liberals were defeated, and Liberal leader Paul Martin Jr. stepped down, there was some media speculation that Orchard would seek the Liberal Party leadership. [5] Instead, on August 17th, 2006 Orchard endorsed Stéphane Dion to be the next leader of the federal Liberal Party.[6] At the 2006 leadership convention, Orchard led a group of approximately 150 delegates, including 32 from Saskatchewan, in support of Dion. Those delegates ended up being pivotal in helping Dion pass Gerard Kennedy for third place on the first convention ballot, and eventually win the leadership when Kennedy swung his own support behind Dion after the second ballot. Orchard has not yet declared whether he will be a Liberal candidate in the forthcoming 40th Canadian federal election, although he reports that he has received invitations to run in a variety of ridings across the country.[7]
Elizabeth May versus Peter MacKay
At one point I thought Peter MacKay was one of those Red Tories of stature that occasionally rise up out of Maritime soil, and then he proved he had no principles by reneging on the deal he made with David Orchard when he joined camp with Stephen Harper's Alliance to create an American Republican Party subsidiary, the Conservative Party of Canada. I haven't given Peter a moment's thought since, except when he was nursing his wounds over Belinda, when I gave him about ten seconds for the thought 'poor bugger, that's what he gets for marrying his fortunes to Harper's.'
In the end Elizabeth May's ability to beat MacKay in his own riding will probably come down to what kind of constituent services MacKay has provided, and I suspect they have been considerable.
Still, an 'anyone but MacKay movement' will unseat him, and a good thing too.
He needs to go back to hoeing potatoes for awhile. I think his career is toast.
In the end Elizabeth May's ability to beat MacKay in his own riding will probably come down to what kind of constituent services MacKay has provided, and I suspect they have been considerable.
Still, an 'anyone but MacKay movement' will unseat him, and a good thing too.
He needs to go back to hoeing potatoes for awhile. I think his career is toast.
Stephen and deep integration
Stephen Harper's deep integration into the American Republican Party is nicely detailed on this site.
For Stephen it appears that thinking outside the Canadian Box means getting into the American box and having all his thinking done there by republicans.
For Stephen it appears that thinking outside the Canadian Box means getting into the American box and having all his thinking done there by republicans.
Tuesday, April 3, 2007
Proportional Representation
The case for proportional representation is gaining public support and yet the idea is complicated by the nature of the proposed institutional reforms. The most recent proponents are suggesting that 30% of all elected officials be selected at large based on percentage of voters each party receives.
I think that particular proposal is problematic because people want less government, not more, however much they like the idea of proportional representation.
I think a simpler solution exists.
Historically the government was the Cabinet, and the Cabinet was the government. The cabinet had to win the approval of the House to stay in power. If a government lost the support of the House a new Cabinet was formed, either under the the same Prime Minister or under a different one. All without an election, and all dependent on the support of the House.
If we return to the idea that the cabinet is the government, rather than the government being the party in power, proportional representation becomes feasible, and far less complicated.
As far as I'm concerned, we can keep the party system to contest elections, but once elected the House itself becomes non-partisan and serves the function of the loyal opposition and/or ally of the government (cabinet). The cabinet would be made up of party members in direct proportion to their party's popular vote. The Prime Minister would be the leader of the party with the most votes unless he could not form a cabinet that had the support of the house, at which point someone else would try.
If a party won X% of the vote, but won no seats, then their leaders or other representatives would be appointed to cabinet as privy councilors. The committee make-up in the House would likewise be in direct proportion to the vote percentages of the parties. Non-seated members would be appointed as sub-privy councilors to ensure both representational and responsible government.
From my perspective, such reforms solve a number of problems with our democracy,and are reasonably simple to explain and to enact.
I think that particular proposal is problematic because people want less government, not more, however much they like the idea of proportional representation.
I think a simpler solution exists.
Historically the government was the Cabinet, and the Cabinet was the government. The cabinet had to win the approval of the House to stay in power. If a government lost the support of the House a new Cabinet was formed, either under the the same Prime Minister or under a different one. All without an election, and all dependent on the support of the House.
If we return to the idea that the cabinet is the government, rather than the government being the party in power, proportional representation becomes feasible, and far less complicated.
As far as I'm concerned, we can keep the party system to contest elections, but once elected the House itself becomes non-partisan and serves the function of the loyal opposition and/or ally of the government (cabinet). The cabinet would be made up of party members in direct proportion to their party's popular vote. The Prime Minister would be the leader of the party with the most votes unless he could not form a cabinet that had the support of the house, at which point someone else would try.
If a party won X% of the vote, but won no seats, then their leaders or other representatives would be appointed to cabinet as privy councilors. The committee make-up in the House would likewise be in direct proportion to the vote percentages of the parties. Non-seated members would be appointed as sub-privy councilors to ensure both representational and responsible government.
From my perspective, such reforms solve a number of problems with our democracy,and are reasonably simple to explain and to enact.
Monday, April 2, 2007
Partisan Posting
The worlds of political web logs are wild and wooly.
Sure there is the tame one of the various media outlets and political parties, in which staidness and sobriety rule, but in them journalistic desires not to offend advertisers dominate, as do Party desires not to offend voters.
But where the web meets the cyber ground running, everyone has an opinion on everything. Having worked as a journalist I understand the need for caution, but in the web world it's not so much objectivity that is required as not getting your facts so wrong that you look like an idiot. And in the blogosphere (dreadful word) looking like an idiot is a pretty common occurence.
I will say however, that as much as Liberals and Conservatives dislike one another it appears to have nothing of the rancour that exists between the Democrats and Republicans south of the border. Except perhaps in Alberta, the most American of all our provinces. Maybe it comes from all those sons of British Lords who bought up most of that province and settled in to rule it as cattle barons until the whacked out social credit movement arose and started talking Christian socialism, but fortunately oil was discovered in 1947 and the Alberta ruling class found common cause with American oil men and the modern Alberta conservative party was born and did away with all notions of Social Credit. Their hatred of the east is a well oiled propaganda machine designed to keep the rich rich and everyone else just fat enough to keep the oil slick in power. They even managed to commandeer Christianity and turn it into the worship of their particular cult of Mammon, while allowing free fundamentalist belief against all sins but greed.
Am I digressing ? Must be the air in the blogosphere.
Sure there is the tame one of the various media outlets and political parties, in which staidness and sobriety rule, but in them journalistic desires not to offend advertisers dominate, as do Party desires not to offend voters.
But where the web meets the cyber ground running, everyone has an opinion on everything. Having worked as a journalist I understand the need for caution, but in the web world it's not so much objectivity that is required as not getting your facts so wrong that you look like an idiot. And in the blogosphere (dreadful word) looking like an idiot is a pretty common occurence.
I will say however, that as much as Liberals and Conservatives dislike one another it appears to have nothing of the rancour that exists between the Democrats and Republicans south of the border. Except perhaps in Alberta, the most American of all our provinces. Maybe it comes from all those sons of British Lords who bought up most of that province and settled in to rule it as cattle barons until the whacked out social credit movement arose and started talking Christian socialism, but fortunately oil was discovered in 1947 and the Alberta ruling class found common cause with American oil men and the modern Alberta conservative party was born and did away with all notions of Social Credit. Their hatred of the east is a well oiled propaganda machine designed to keep the rich rich and everyone else just fat enough to keep the oil slick in power. They even managed to commandeer Christianity and turn it into the worship of their particular cult of Mammon, while allowing free fundamentalist belief against all sins but greed.
Am I digressing ? Must be the air in the blogosphere.
Saturday, March 31, 2007
Jason Cherniak, Olivia Chow kerfuffle
Apparently Jason Cherniak, a Liberal Party up-and-comer and uber-blogger has had to apologize on his blog for accusing Olivia Chow of orchestrating a campaign among her supporters in the last election to vote early and vote often. Cherniak's hot water pot faux pas reminded me of this story.
Some years ago, when Mike Harris won the first round of his lack-of-common-sense revolution I worked as a deputy returning officer in Toronto in the Trinity Spadina riding down at the Alexandra Street Centre. It was a mixed ethnic riding, with quite a large Chinese population.
Olivia Chow, then a city councilor, was on hand. What seemed like a bus-load of elderly Chinese women came in. They were all carrying a piece of Liberal campaign material designed to look like the ballots, perhaps under the logical impression that since Chinese written script was pictograhpic, a good pictograph would help them understand who they should vote for.
What I remember most isn't the campaign material, or Olivia Chow, but the way the elderly Chinese women laughed and giggled and basically swamped the ballot box, all determined to help one another vote the way they seemed to have collectively decided they were going to vote.
Olivia agreed to write a Chinese version of the rules of the polling booth to help the deputy returning officers and poll clerks deal with these extraordinarily enthusiastic voters and their collective voting habits, despite the fact that it was obvious that they all intended on voting Liberal.
That's my memory of Olivia Chow in election mode.
Some years ago, when Mike Harris won the first round of his lack-of-common-sense revolution I worked as a deputy returning officer in Toronto in the Trinity Spadina riding down at the Alexandra Street Centre. It was a mixed ethnic riding, with quite a large Chinese population.
Olivia Chow, then a city councilor, was on hand. What seemed like a bus-load of elderly Chinese women came in. They were all carrying a piece of Liberal campaign material designed to look like the ballots, perhaps under the logical impression that since Chinese written script was pictograhpic, a good pictograph would help them understand who they should vote for.
What I remember most isn't the campaign material, or Olivia Chow, but the way the elderly Chinese women laughed and giggled and basically swamped the ballot box, all determined to help one another vote the way they seemed to have collectively decided they were going to vote.
Olivia agreed to write a Chinese version of the rules of the polling booth to help the deputy returning officers and poll clerks deal with these extraordinarily enthusiastic voters and their collective voting habits, despite the fact that it was obvious that they all intended on voting Liberal.
That's my memory of Olivia Chow in election mode.
Friday, March 30, 2007
The Greening of Humanity
As far as I'm concerned this election (and every one hereafter for as long as I live) is about the greening of humanity. This is not a race between ideologies, it's race to see if humanity will even cross the finish line let alone make it to the winners podium.
Every riding in this country needs to elect the individual most committed to doing what is necessary to save humanity, not because humanity in the abstract is the be all and end all of creation, but because I have a seventeen year old son, and you have children or grandchildren or nieces or nephews or friends who have children and something violent and brutal beyond all imagining is awaiting them if something profound isn't done sooner and continuously.
Personally I don't trust Stephen Harper as far as I can throw him. He is opportunist of the worst kind, but if there is a conservative who is the greenest individual in a riding elect him or her. I don't really have an opinion on Stephan Dion, and while I don't trust the Liberal Party to live up to its creed, if there is a Liberal who will fight for a green future, elect them.
The NDP can annoy the hell out of me at times, but if there is social democrat who will do everything in their power to ensure there is a future, elect them.
If the Green Party can elect someone in a riding elect them.
If the greenest person is a communist elect them.
And keep electing them.
The next phase of capitalism is green capitalism, we need to go there now, and we need to go there without passing go, we need to have been there yesterday and the day before.
Green capitalism is to corporate capitalism what mammals were to dinosaurs.
The dinosaurs were big and brawny and too dumb to live. Green capitalism will by definition be more egalitarian and more genuinely free, because bio-regionalism is local and global in the same breath. Branch plant mentalities will not survive green capitalism anymore than dinosaurs survived the asteroid dust cloud that brought on the ice age.
Green is a movement, not a party. We need a green commons, not a dying one.
If they're not green the rest of their politics are irrelevant. This is not a time for trying to stop gay marriage or preserve labour union rights, or for turning the chamber of commerce into the new senate chambers.
This is not a time for partisan politics. It's a flat out race for the survival of our children.
Every riding in this country needs to elect the individual most committed to doing what is necessary to save humanity, not because humanity in the abstract is the be all and end all of creation, but because I have a seventeen year old son, and you have children or grandchildren or nieces or nephews or friends who have children and something violent and brutal beyond all imagining is awaiting them if something profound isn't done sooner and continuously.
Personally I don't trust Stephen Harper as far as I can throw him. He is opportunist of the worst kind, but if there is a conservative who is the greenest individual in a riding elect him or her. I don't really have an opinion on Stephan Dion, and while I don't trust the Liberal Party to live up to its creed, if there is a Liberal who will fight for a green future, elect them.
The NDP can annoy the hell out of me at times, but if there is social democrat who will do everything in their power to ensure there is a future, elect them.
If the Green Party can elect someone in a riding elect them.
If the greenest person is a communist elect them.
And keep electing them.
The next phase of capitalism is green capitalism, we need to go there now, and we need to go there without passing go, we need to have been there yesterday and the day before.
Green capitalism is to corporate capitalism what mammals were to dinosaurs.
The dinosaurs were big and brawny and too dumb to live. Green capitalism will by definition be more egalitarian and more genuinely free, because bio-regionalism is local and global in the same breath. Branch plant mentalities will not survive green capitalism anymore than dinosaurs survived the asteroid dust cloud that brought on the ice age.
Green is a movement, not a party. We need a green commons, not a dying one.
If they're not green the rest of their politics are irrelevant. This is not a time for trying to stop gay marriage or preserve labour union rights, or for turning the chamber of commerce into the new senate chambers.
This is not a time for partisan politics. It's a flat out race for the survival of our children.
Tuesday, March 20, 2007
Bloc
It is certainly no accident that the Bloc is supporting the conservatives since the conservatives stay in power in modern times with the help of people whose goal is the destruction of the country. And with the Reform roots in Social Credit and the creditise roots in Quebec, Harper can rely on Mulroney's slime machine and the remaining creditistes as well as those Quebec nationalists (ie provincialist thinkers) who are happy to dine at Harper's budgetary feed-trough which will allow him to take votes from the Bloc so he can creep his way towards a majority.
Monday, March 19, 2007
The Provincialists
I am not a provincialist, I am a municipal bio-regionalist (watersheds).
I think Quebec nationalism is an extreme form of provincialism, but it's no different than Alberta-centric or Ontario-centric politics. Provincialism is a synonym for small minded. I've essentially lived all my life in Ontario, but Ontario means next to nothing to me as a political entity.
People live in communities, and all planning in all communities is based on watershed management issues. A Province is even more of an abstraction than a nation. For my part, if I was given the task of restructuring the federation I would model it on a pyramid, with a powerful base, a narrowing middle and a small peak on top.
I'd unify the whole structure from the ground up, so that (for example) a local roads' department would be linked to the regional department, which would in turn be linked to the provincial department which would likewise be linked to the federal one. A local mayor would sit on a bioregional council of other mayors, the directly elected head of that council would become an MPP, we would have a directly elected provincial cabinet, and the directly elected Premiers would form the Federal cabinet, with the provincial cabinet members serving as MP's, with a directly elected Prime Minister overseeing the whole.
The system however would be powered from below. The provincial and federal Parliaments like the local and bioregional councils would be non-partisan, so the whole issue of party loyalty before duty would be discarded. All levels of government would operate as a tax credit union, in which politicians would be the equivalent of citizen elected board members and bureaucrats would be the equivalent of staff.
Jerry
I think Quebec nationalism is an extreme form of provincialism, but it's no different than Alberta-centric or Ontario-centric politics. Provincialism is a synonym for small minded. I've essentially lived all my life in Ontario, but Ontario means next to nothing to me as a political entity.
People live in communities, and all planning in all communities is based on watershed management issues. A Province is even more of an abstraction than a nation. For my part, if I was given the task of restructuring the federation I would model it on a pyramid, with a powerful base, a narrowing middle and a small peak on top.
I'd unify the whole structure from the ground up, so that (for example) a local roads' department would be linked to the regional department, which would in turn be linked to the provincial department which would likewise be linked to the federal one. A local mayor would sit on a bioregional council of other mayors, the directly elected head of that council would become an MPP, we would have a directly elected provincial cabinet, and the directly elected Premiers would form the Federal cabinet, with the provincial cabinet members serving as MP's, with a directly elected Prime Minister overseeing the whole.
The system however would be powered from below. The provincial and federal Parliaments like the local and bioregional councils would be non-partisan, so the whole issue of party loyalty before duty would be discarded. All levels of government would operate as a tax credit union, in which politicians would be the equivalent of citizen elected board members and bureaucrats would be the equivalent of staff.
Jerry
Wednesday, March 14, 2007
Strategic Voting
It really all depends on whether my long term strategic goals take precedence over my shorter term goals. (Does that just make them tactical goals ?) How long term can a tactic be versus how short term can a strategy be ?
My longest term goals are the establishment of a genuinely cooperative commonwealth without much need of government, corporations or unions (see tax credit unionism independentcommunitarian.blogspot.com) with the whole of the green movement being swept up in the notions of the commonwealth, a kind of community of free enterprise workers co-ops breathing clean air and drinking clean water, while eating healthy food, at no one's disadvantage. (see symbiosis independentcommunitarian.blogspot.com)
My short term goals are to stop Harper from turning Canada into a giant Reform-a-tory using whatever fair play tactics I can.
In the past I've voted green, liberal and NDP depending on where I was and what the odds were, the only Conservative I would have voted for in the whole time was David Crombie, when I lived on the poorer side of his Rosedale riding, only I didn't even vote conservative then because I didn't want to give Mulroney my vote even more than I wanted Crombie to have it, Crombie didn't need my help anyway. I voted for Bill Graham when he was still just a law professor. He lost.
Having turned 12 years old in 1967 when Trudeau was in his prime I came of age in the shadow of the Just Society, but then so did Stephen Harper and look what Alberta oil money did to his Leaside soul.
Here in Guelph Ontario where I live, I have become acutely aware that there is a hard right element to the conservatives in this city dating back to the fascism of opera singer Edward Johnson and his equally nasty son-in-law George Drew, so I have have generally voted Liberal just to keep this towns' reactionaries out of power. I have voted Green here in the provincial election (that was my long term stratgey in play) and I've voted NDP, that's my family's traditional background in play (leaving aside all those years the Pragers spent as commie's-in-the-wilderness.)
The NDP can annoy me however. And contrary to the 'You don't know Jack' button, I actually did know Jack Layton because I lived on Algonquin Island when he lived on Ward's and I got along fine with him.I even voted for him as a Toronto councilor. (I'll tell my Olivia story some other time but I have nothing against her either, the underclasses need bantam cock fighting tactics.) No, my problem with the NDP is that even given my labour background, I'm actually CCF, it's the Co-operative Commonwealth thing. And I think they've lost site of the power in their precursor. I don't need an imitation American Democratic Party, New or not. I'm a British constitutionalist at heart.
The NDP can also be too victim culture for me. As a adult who was an abused child I have issues with victims, because I know that victims have a way of taking over their own abuse, so that everything becomes their fault even when they're vocally blaming everyone else. Who were the biggest victims of the 20th century, why the fascists of course, they lost, and yet, with victims rights as the central dogma of the latter half of the 20th century sooner or later it was guaranteed that they'd have their day. And now look where we are.
My longest term goals are the establishment of a genuinely cooperative commonwealth without much need of government, corporations or unions (see tax credit unionism independentcommunitarian.blogspot.com) with the whole of the green movement being swept up in the notions of the commonwealth, a kind of community of free enterprise workers co-ops breathing clean air and drinking clean water, while eating healthy food, at no one's disadvantage. (see symbiosis independentcommunitarian.blogspot.com)
My short term goals are to stop Harper from turning Canada into a giant Reform-a-tory using whatever fair play tactics I can.
In the past I've voted green, liberal and NDP depending on where I was and what the odds were, the only Conservative I would have voted for in the whole time was David Crombie, when I lived on the poorer side of his Rosedale riding, only I didn't even vote conservative then because I didn't want to give Mulroney my vote even more than I wanted Crombie to have it, Crombie didn't need my help anyway. I voted for Bill Graham when he was still just a law professor. He lost.
Having turned 12 years old in 1967 when Trudeau was in his prime I came of age in the shadow of the Just Society, but then so did Stephen Harper and look what Alberta oil money did to his Leaside soul.
Here in Guelph Ontario where I live, I have become acutely aware that there is a hard right element to the conservatives in this city dating back to the fascism of opera singer Edward Johnson and his equally nasty son-in-law George Drew, so I have have generally voted Liberal just to keep this towns' reactionaries out of power. I have voted Green here in the provincial election (that was my long term stratgey in play) and I've voted NDP, that's my family's traditional background in play (leaving aside all those years the Pragers spent as commie's-in-the-wilderness.)
The NDP can annoy me however. And contrary to the 'You don't know Jack' button, I actually did know Jack Layton because I lived on Algonquin Island when he lived on Ward's and I got along fine with him.I even voted for him as a Toronto councilor. (I'll tell my Olivia story some other time but I have nothing against her either, the underclasses need bantam cock fighting tactics.) No, my problem with the NDP is that even given my labour background, I'm actually CCF, it's the Co-operative Commonwealth thing. And I think they've lost site of the power in their precursor. I don't need an imitation American Democratic Party, New or not. I'm a British constitutionalist at heart.
The NDP can also be too victim culture for me. As a adult who was an abused child I have issues with victims, because I know that victims have a way of taking over their own abuse, so that everything becomes their fault even when they're vocally blaming everyone else. Who were the biggest victims of the 20th century, why the fascists of course, they lost, and yet, with victims rights as the central dogma of the latter half of the 20th century sooner or later it was guaranteed that they'd have their day. And now look where we are.
Stephen and the Bush League
With the Prime Minister spending money in his Liberal-style Mulroney/Blue Machine 'buy the electorate' with their own money campaign, and with his soul-mate George W. Bush in free-fall south of the border, Canadians may just give Stephen more votes than some of us would like. If Bush was at the height of his powers a reactionary American cheerleader like Harper wouldn't fare all that well, but with George dead-ducking around the White House, Canadians aren't as worried about Harper's choral work. He can't do as much harm on the world stage if he doesn't have Bush to lap-dog dance around, going yes George, yes George to whatever half-baked religious mania inspires George on any given day.
Don't get me wrong, I believe in prophetic utterance, I just reserve the right to discern the source of its inspiration. And in George's case it was clearly being inspired by the Religious Spirit, a voice of court hacks that Isaiah and other prophets of the wilderness railed against.
Canadians are a pragmatic people that way. Mulroney embarrassed us by kissing Reagan's withered rump whenever he could. Most Canadians thought Bush was dangerous and saw through him like cellophane. Only people like Stephen Harper believe everything George says about defending freedom even while he destroys it where ever he turns. It's probably the oil industry in their blood that gives them such hallucinations.
But without George sitting off our bow as a threat to our sense of common decency, Stephen appears harmless, and Canadians are probably willing to vote for his dictatorship in larger numbers than they otherwise would have.
Jerry
Current Posts!
Don't get me wrong, I believe in prophetic utterance, I just reserve the right to discern the source of its inspiration. And in George's case it was clearly being inspired by the Religious Spirit, a voice of court hacks that Isaiah and other prophets of the wilderness railed against.
Canadians are a pragmatic people that way. Mulroney embarrassed us by kissing Reagan's withered rump whenever he could. Most Canadians thought Bush was dangerous and saw through him like cellophane. Only people like Stephen Harper believe everything George says about defending freedom even while he destroys it where ever he turns. It's probably the oil industry in their blood that gives them such hallucinations.
But without George sitting off our bow as a threat to our sense of common decency, Stephen appears harmless, and Canadians are probably willing to vote for his dictatorship in larger numbers than they otherwise would have.
Jerry
Thoughts of a Groucho Marxist
Being one of those who wouldn't join a party that would have me as a member, I intend this site to be a forum for the scattershot of my political observations. While ocassionally satirical, I am not one of those who dismisses the political process out of hand, nor the intentions of politicians.
For example Stephen Harper, I'm not planning on voting for him (in fact I don't know know which way I'll vote otherwise.) But I actually believed he was one of those earnest reform types who meant what he said after the last election before he became Prime Minister and immediately preceded to make a whole slate of sleazy appointments.
Lost my good will in the first three days, Stephen did.
Anyway, just wanted to get this up and running.
Jerry
For example Stephen Harper, I'm not planning on voting for him (in fact I don't know know which way I'll vote otherwise.) But I actually believed he was one of those earnest reform types who meant what he said after the last election before he became Prime Minister and immediately preceded to make a whole slate of sleazy appointments.
Lost my good will in the first three days, Stephen did.
Anyway, just wanted to get this up and running.
Jerry
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
