Governmental Conflict Resolution HD

Yet again, I'm inspired to write about an issue that was raised by the best damn news team on TV. It centers on Government and the people working to govern. I suggest that the purpose of government is, at it's root, to solve problems. Most people of all political stripes will agree that a government is supposed to work to solve the issues as a collective that we as individuals can not. Many would go farther to say that a government is meant to ensure its citizens are afforded the opportunity to succeed in life by providing education and a social safety net etc.. I personally feel these two mission statements, if you will, for government are pretty fair and reasonable. And if it were true that politicians, our venerable representatives in government, saw these two goals as their true guiding principles, I think we might end up with a pretty damn good government.

Here's the problem that the best damn news team on TV brought up the other day: politicians aren't in government to find solutions. Wyatt Cenac likened American politics to pro-wrestling in that conflict keeps people interested and thereby their money rolling in... Of course politics in many countries is definitely a question of where the money is, but I'd like to ask another question about motivations. What is the litmus test for politicians? Election and reelection, right? And how does a politician achieve that? It's all about how they deal with problems/issues that are important to their constituents who then approve or disapprove of their representative's job at the polls. Now here's the crux: If there's something that you as a politician can 'work on' that is viewed favourably by your electorate then how much real incentive is there to actually SOLVE anything? If politicians ACTUALLY spent their days working on finding honest solutions to the issues facing their public instead of perpetuating them by choosing conflict mitigation over conflict resolution, we MIGHT just end up with a government that works... it'd be boring, and people would likely complain that politicians don't do much, but then again, that's not really any different than our current state of affairs...

Canadians are a little better off than our southern neighbours in that the Canadian media doesn't hyper-sensationalize politicians and their issues, but that doesn't address the incentive deficit for politicians to actually solve problems by truly listening to conflicting interests, being open to alternative solutions, and being willing to compromise. I'd love to see politicians in question period strapped with those spray collars used for training pets, so that every time they start grandstanding or being counterproductive they get a solid shot of eau d'rotten egg up the nose...

I guess I've got no real solution for this issue... but this rant sounded good. Maybe I'll go in to politics.

think of the children...

The other day, while sipping my morning coffee and checking the news from the rest of the world, I came upon a story that made me furious. On Wednesday taliban "fighters" detonated a bomb in Pakistan that killed at least 8 people. Sure, three of the victims were American soldiers, but the rest were civilians, and not just any old civilians, children. The blast also destroyed a recently rebuilt school which is where at least four children were crushed in the rubble.

My heart goes out to the families of the victims. While it doesn't dull the pain of their loss, the soldiers knew they were in hostile territory, and in times of 'war' men and women in uniform are lost. That's simply a shitty fact of life. But the civilians who were there to celebrate the opening of their new school, an institution that is designed to enlighten and build communities, were robbed of not just their sons, daughters, family and friends, but also their future. Across the world, the greatest indicator for success in a community is the percentage of population with an education. ANY education. The taliban may say they were attacking the Americans and destroying an American project, but dammit they hit the Pakistanis. I know I have no idea what goes on in the minds of the taliban cowards, but how can you justify such a target? How can you look a neighbour in the eye and know that tomorrow, you're going to kill their daughter and ruin their family's chances of getting an education? The literacy rate in Pakistan is somewhere near 50% and it drops considerably the further away you get from the cities (I remember seeing somewhere it's 10% among farmers). How can you, as a man, say it's fine to take away the hope for a brighter future from a child? It makes me sick.

My next question is for those who somehow support the taliban... WHAT THE FUCK? Do you really think that killing children and destroying schools is what Mohammed had in mind when he said that it was every muslim's duty to fight for religious purity? I can honestly say no. In the Qur'an it's written that muslims will only ever fight the attacking soldiers, maybe the talidouchebags don't have this in their version of the Qur'an... Ch.2 V.191+194 "And fight in the cause of Allah against those who fight against you, but do not transgress. Surely, Allah loves not the transgressors. ...no hostility is allowed except against the aggressors." I'm pretty sure the killing of children would be classified a transgression and I don't know that they could be considered aggressors... It makes me sick that 'extremists' can completely overlook a KEY tenet in their holy book. And every muslim in and around the taliban and al qaeda should really take a step back and smack themselves upside the head with the Qur'an... Maybe it'll knock some sense into 'em. Or maybe it'll just knock them out. I'm ok with both results.

Bah, I apologize for the lack of structure, flow and wit in this post, but I'm just not sure how to express my dismay at how these dirtbags can run around in several parts of the Middle East with impunity despite their disregard for the cause they claim to be fighting for... that's all I've got for now.

Demographics and You...

Ok, where to start? First, the mood set by this 'report' is nothing less than insulting. The horror-film-esque beginning, the dire tone of the narrator and the 'menacing' middle eastern style music in the background are all attempts to make the benign demographic data seem somehow scary. Generally, demographic data are used to better predict the current and future needs of a population: how many schools and retirement homes are needed, what kind of services will be in demand, etc... I'm not sure where the numbers for the 'islamic' birth rates come from, but 8.1 kids per woman seems a little excessive. The highest numbers I could find outside of this 'report' are 4.4 kids per woman. Granted, that number knocks the western world's birth rates out of the water, but what does that mean? That in 20 years white kids will be a minority in many schools? And? Maybe it'll teach white kids a little respect for other races and cultures... The fear mongering here is shameful and I am saddened that I might be (if only from appearance) associated with this 'culture.'

I was also not impressed - I know, strong words - with the pitting of Islam (completely undefined and unexplored) against "culture" and using culture as a euphemism for christianity. If this demographic 'report' wasn't trying to be disingenuous, they may have steered clear of the emotionally charged word 'culture' which is understood as "the integrated system of socially acquired values, beliefs, and rules of conduct which delimit the range of accepted behaviors in any given society." The beauty of using this term for both the creators of the report, and for me, is that for them people perceive culture as an inherent part of one's identity and thus must be defended. Whereas for me, I look at the fact that culture is socially acquired and is not something to be lost or stolen. In the interest of honesty, the makers of the report should have instead gone with the more baggage laden term nation: a population with a shared history, culture, language and territory. But asking people to breed in order to protect one's nation from the hordes of undesirables sounds much too close to another nationalist movement that was popular in the 1930s and 40s. In using Canada as an example of how dire the threat from immigrants is, the idiots have completely disregarded the fact that Canadian culture and immigration are intimately linked. We're all immigrants for cripe's sake, and the official national policy is one of multiculturalism. How do you miss that? Or are you aware of the fact, but know that your target audience has little to no understanding of anything outside their county's borders (yes, county), so it's safe to use bullshit like that to support a bullshit premise. I think that may be closer to the truth than one might hope for from the authors of a 'report' on demographics...

I think the icing on the cake was the part of the 'report' that nearly completely exposed the fear mongering intentions behind the film. It was when they invoked the threat from Christmases past and combined them with the threat of today and warned us that "40% of the entire Russian Army will be islamic in just a few short years." Puh-LEASE. I'm actually stunned by this part of the report. I've seen it now 4 or 5 times and I still can't formulate a coherent sentence expressing my disbelief at this tactic and line of reasoning.... All that keeps going through my head is, "really?"... "I mean, really?" Sometimes a question jumps in there too, "Is anyone still afraid of Russia?" - well, I guess they will be now...

I wanted to touch on a few other things too, like the language used in the piece (short for piece of crap) like 'church regions' and talk about why they felt it necessary to actually do all the math for you like, (as of 2008) 2025 is "just 17 years from now," and 52 million doubled is "104 million," and how all of a sudden the latino population is the only thing sustaining the American 'culture.' Or how about the implications for the environment if the western world increased their reproductive rates to match those of the east. There wouldn't be enough of a planet to go around! I spent about a half an hour yesterday ranting about this report to a friend and I only stopped because I could see she was getting bored. And that's why I'll stop here too.

Let me be clear, the video above is nothing but a thinly veiled piece of racist and xenophobic propaganda and in my opinion bullshit. The report did not make me fear muslims and inspire me to breed. Rather, I am more frightened of the American christian extreme right than ever before and I am reconsidering having kids at all if only to save me from losing them to the christian extremists... (notice how I excluded the majority of christians from my ire by using a qualifying word? Something that the bigots above refused to do...) Ok. I'm done.

Democracy without Representation?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure our brethren to the south revolted because of taxation without representation. The American colony desperately wanted to have some sort influence on what happened with their hard earned tax dollars. Understandable, considering they were living in a colony which, under British rule, had no democratic structures. People's only recourse when it came to talking to the 'government' was to beg and plead with appointed representatives of the King who sat thousands of miles away.

Where is the Canadian's ire? I'm certainly not suggesting we take up arms here, but Canadians should consider the current political situation and take a moment to think. Let me help get the ball rolling. Canadians have long lived in a benevolent dictatorship. It sounds extreme, but essentially all power in the government (especially in a majority) lies with the Prime Minister - the PM chooses Cabinet members and who gets the accompanying salary, has the direct ear of the Governor General (who, as a matter of convention, does whatever the PM says anyway), selects committee members, appoints senators, etc. etc.. The Canadian people are allowed to say 'yes' or 'no' to the PM's work at intervals of at least 5 years -generally 2-4 years though. Actually influencing the direction of the government during its tenure, however, is damn near impossible, and the best most of us can do is beg and plead with a representative from the government which, for many of us, sits several thousand miles away. Sound familiar? On top of that you can't really expect a lot from said 'representative' because his/her effectiveness, and job for that matter, is entirely dependent on the will of the PM. And God forbid your 'representative' isn't from the ruling party!!! Thanks to our right honourable PM not even our 'representatives' are allowed to have a say at the moment. Proroguing Parliament has left us ALL without federal representation. And why? Steve can't be bothered by the rest of us while he and his minions devise a plan to save our economy... Bullshit. How much of our 'democratic' reputation are we going to put on the line simply because "it's not like he's killing people or something"?

Democracy isn't supposed to be easy. It's supposed to be a LOT of work. It's supposed to take the best of us to work on solving the collective problems of all Canadians - not just those carrying a certain party membership card. That's why we elect 308 people to help solve these problems... NOT 38!!! I know it must be bothersome to have to work with people with different points of view and from different backgrounds and who you can't bribe/intimidate but THAT'S WHAT A GOVERNMENT IS SUPPOSED TO DO!!!!! You guys do it, so we don't have to. You solve the big problems so the rest of us can go about our daily business making enough money to pay for the projects you design to make all out lives a little easier to navigate.

Especially as the upcoming Winter Olympics draw the world's gaze toward Canada, Canadians should be aware of how the world will see us. In my travels around the world, I've always tried to be a responsible ambassador for Canada and represent those things that have given Canadians the tremendous international reputation that many of us have truly enjoyed. It is time for Canadians in Canada to do the same. Think about what makes us the envy of the world, and what institutions, privileges and responsibilities have brought us that acclaim and if it's something we should value. Then do something about it. Ask questions, get informed, as an informed public is the hardest to dupe. Get on Facebook, MySpace, or whatever social networking site you choose, and let your exasperation be heard. It's time for Canadians to demand that their Government represent the same qualities that make Canadians so beloved throughout the world.

personal space in an impersonal city

I live in Victoria. Victoria is a city of several hundred thousand inhabitants. Victoria is a city in many respects - multistory buildings, several traffic lights, problems with homeless and a drug culture - but it nevertheless feels like a small town. There is almost always (disregarding Canada Day celebrations) lots of room for everyone. You don't have to avoid people on a constant basis while walking down the street, there are rarely line ups at grocery stores, traffic issues never delay you more than 10 minutes, and you pretty much guarantee a table or 2 buffer at any of your favourite coffee shops....

I'm visiting Vancouver (my actual home town). Vancouver is a city of several million people. Vancouver has all the city-like characteristics that Victoria has plus a sprawling suburbia and a constant feeling of claustrophobia. I'm sitting a perfectly remote (as remote as one can get in the metropolis) coffee shop and I've had my table or 2 buffer invaded not once, but twice! AT THE SAME TIME! My once spacious and comfortable corner has become an overcrowded orgy of legs, books, and coffee cups... I'm left with a mere fraction of what I thought I had fairly claimed despite the fact that I thought I'd left ample room for another party or 2 to join me in my cozy corner...

I guess, like many Canadians, I suffer from inmyspaceaphobia. I much prefer the ability to swing my arms randomly and freely in any direction to the availability of immediate conversation partners. I can always say to someone across the room,"Hey! How about that local sports team?!?!" But I can't always afford the legal council to help get me out of an inexplicable assault charge... I guess it's a good thing I'm going back to the Island tonight... :)

Resurrection

Well my friends, it has been faaaaaaarr too long since I've dabbled in the internet publishing arena. The realization that I had this soapbox comes too late for some of what I would like to think was some fabulous insight on our latest relection... And really, I have missed SO many opportunities to offer killer witticisms on the American presidential campaign that I will never get back! 

Anyway, because of a stag party induced haze I have virtually nothing to offer at the moment, but I did want to take THIS opportunity to say I'M BACK BABY!!!

short but sweet

As far as scorpions always being scorpions, that might be OK for some. I can also allow scorpions to be scorpions, but what I will never be copacetic with is representatives being politickers. Yes, politicians may be politicians, but if we are going to define people and stick 'em in boxes, lets make sure the boxes are labeled correctly in the first place. The people who debate in the Commons are NOT politicians... at least not technically. Politicians (people who practice politics - commonly accepted as the practice of determining who gets what when) are the members of the privvy council (Cabinet) and the governor general. They are the one's who are the "deciders." The rest of the yahoos in the House are REPRESENTATIVES, ensuring, theoretically, that the people of Canada and their collective will are considered when the deciders do their thing. So, when the various parties jockey to get a shot at the government in the media's eye, they've got it backwards. We already know what we think... they, the representatives, should be telling the government what we (through them) think.

In a nutshell, do your job, get re-elected. Politick, get dumped. Simple.