Regionalization of regions great and small...

For those of you who have had a few drinks with me over the course of an evening that may have led to a discussion of BC identity politics, which is actually everyone who reads this blog :), you will already have an understanding of where I'm going with this. But just for fun, I'm going remind everyone of the varying definitions of the term 'region.' In international politics, a region is normally assumed to be a massive area that encompasses countries or even continents with intertwined economies and a degree of intermingling of their populations (e.g. Asia Pacific, North Atlantic, Eurasia -for you Orwell fans out there, etc.). In national politics, a region is normally denoted by similar characteristics on a smaller geographical scale (Northern BC, the St. Lawrence river basin, the maritimes, etc. I'm sure you get the picture). In European politics, the term region is used much the same way, but has an interesting additional facet: it includes communities in regions that are similar to eachother economically and socially, but different in geography and nationality (fishing regions {in Spain, England and Germany}, agricultural regions {portions of France, Poland and Italy} etc.). This regionalization of Europe has allowed for a fostering of regional identity within and across Europe, increased weight/voice in the European and national policy processes, greater sharing of knowledge and, in the cases of N. Ireland, (correct me if I'm mistaken- Spain isn't my area of expertise) Catelonia and the Basque country, peace through greater self-determination...
And now to the pith and substance of what I'm getting at (my 'pithy' remark is directly related to the obscene amount of Canadian legal crap I'm reading right now). Recenty, Trade Minister D. Emerson has openly supported the creation of a free trade zone amongst the 22 members of the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (Apec), as an alternative to the faltering WTO. Following the reasoning and logic in Europe and eshewing any realist/protectionist baloney, the promise of such a project is considerable. Considering Vancouver's current demography, many of our possible future partners have remarkable diaspora populations already contributing to the Canadian economy, why not set up a regional body that will set all of us working for each other's benefit? If we can move beyond a purely economic cooperative unit, we may be able to move toward gr8dad's Union of Democratic Nations, where we can help those who are willing and able to commit to the same 'core values' that we all agree are necessary for lasting relationships... I say let's do it Canada! and let Cascadia (BC, WA, OR, & maybe CA if they're good) work within that framework to maximize our geographical opportunities.

Time for hockey! thanks for listening

a disorganized rant of immense importance... would that it were grander

In honour of Anti-Violence week and the up-coming Rememberance Day, and in response to the atrocious happenings in the Asian (South) communities in the lower mainland, I ask this: Why all the hate? As founder of the forthcoming non-profit organization AVION (Anti-Violence Initiative Of North-america) I find it particularily distressing that in a country like Canada where intolerance is intolerable... in a city where the residents can complain of minimal traffic and some healthy doses of rain and the unbelievable line-ups at their local starbucks (poor babies), the recent months have seen 3 women of south-asian origins killed... 2 of them by their spouses. I could question the validity of the astonishment exhibited by the community's members, but instead, I question the sanity of ANY ONE -irrespective of race- who can find a good reason to murder any one in given the loveliness in which Vancouver finds itself situated... I differentiate murder from killing in that murder is an action that is done with understanding whereas killing someone might be a hot-blooded accident (a fist fight gone too far) or in self-defence. I guess what this ramble is getting at, is that I can not phathom any reason that would possess me to want to strike someone dead and actually follow through with it. There has to be, especially in our meagre lives of relatively little import, a better way to move beyond conflict without diving into it lock-stock and barrel.
I wear a poppy to remind people (myself included) that others have given their lives so I don't have to, and that I respect them for that, and I owe it to them not resort to the hateful behaviours that sent them to war in the first place... So, to my two grandfathers I pledge that I will never use violence until it is the absolute last option to protect that which was given to each human at birth: life and liberty. Furthermore, I will never recognize violence as a tool, but only as an inevitable necessity of volitile situations and I will seek to enlighten those who choose not to acknowledge the avoidability of violence.

I guess that will do it for now... I think I always get a little defensive about this issue around this time of year, partially because of 11/11 but also its an attempt to ease my own murderous thoughts that are aimed a profs with inane paper requirements. :)

peace out :)