Musings from the Shore

Letter from Hendsbee Re: Occupy Eviction

2011-11-15T13:28:00.001-04:00

Below is the text of an email I received Sunday, Nov. 13th from David Hendsbee. I wrote to him on the 12th after the events of the 11th.

I believe that there are at many factual errors in his response.

I have my own eyes to observe 1) there WAS brute force used on the protesters, I witnessed it myself, (there are a myriad of sites with video and photos - I will try to add some when I have more time.)
2) they were not given enough time to plan to go elsewhere or re-locate. When I got there at 12:45 (app), tents had already been taken down, by police; and 3) a suggestion that occupiers had been "bought off" -- all I can say is -- "I wish" and I doubt it - they certainly got some financial and other support - I took food (hot baked potatoes) and winter jackets down there. . . but I don't think I was "buying them off. . . !
4) last night, just after the 5:00pm update on 95.7, Mayor Kelly said that there was "definitely a vote, at an in camera meeting - and any councillor that says otherwise could have been out of the room - but that there was a vote. . . Hendsbee says that there was not. . . that councillors, he says, were simply "informed" that there would be an "enforcement".
5) Mayor Kelly also said last night, on 95.7FM that they Occupy were not told that they could not return but that they were not told that they could. Hendsbee says that they were told that they could NOT return. I cannot find any evidence of this in the media, as he suggests.

and I'll just quickly add an objection to a sixth - "their indebtedness to the unions that have co- opted this movement for their own means to rally against the private sector." I have not seen a "rally against the private sector" - even Jim Stanford (CAW Economist) does not deny that "we need a market". Auto workers and ship builders rely on the private sector for their good union jobs - why would they "rally against the private sector".

text below is all from an un-altered email from David Hendsbee received by me on Nov. 13th.

________________________________________________________________________________
Margaret Anne - HRM Council did NOT vote to pass nor enact a new bylaw. The Parks Bylaw P-600 has been on the books since May 1999 and only amended twice since then in 2003 & 2006. We were just advised that it was going to be enforced.

The Occupiers camping is in violation of section 8 subsection 1 & 2. When the protest first started we needed clarification of whether or not the Grand Parade is considered 'parkland'. That legal clarification was sought and later confirmed. We offer them ( with municipal permission ) an alternative site of the Commons but they refused. HRM wanted a peaceful relocation prior to Remembrance Day ceremonies to ensure that event went off as planned and uninterrupted. And the Occupiers were also told that they were not welcome back afterwards. That was well reported in the madia too. The Grand Parade is needed for 4 more civic events in the next few weeks : Holiday Parade of Lights, HRM Xmas tree Lighting, the Menorah Candles / Hanukkah festival of Lights, and the New Years Eve celebration. So why should we allow illegal encampments that will dispel other public events that are intended for the greater enjoyment of the general citizenry.? Who is trampling upon whose rights and freedoms ?

After the Remembrance Day service was over, HRM officials provided notice to the occupiers that they are in violation of the Parks bylaw. After the service of the notice, police met with the protesters and asked them to start making preparations to leave. After several hours, HRM saw no effort on their part to start taking down tents. We had sincerely hoped they would abide by the bylaw. Unfortunately, some chose not to comply which required police to begin dismantling and removing the tents. Initially things were going quite well and a number of people took down their tents and left. A small group of people, however, attempted to prevent police from taking the tents down. In the end, 14 people (12 men and 2 women) were arrested for obstruction of justice. Brute Force was not used.

Halifax Regional Police has received over 50 public complaints of every nature regarding the protesters, including noise complaints, drug use, minor assaults, medical emergencies, aggressive and threatening behaviour, and defecating in the bushes. In the last week, we’ve had other citizens refused access to Victoria Park, including a woman in a wheelchair who wasn’t allowed to pass through, another woman who was spat on, and a family who wasn’t allowed to bicycle in the park. That type of conduct is also in violation of the Park Bylaw P-600 Section 3 - subsection 1 (a), (b), and (d). HRM staff cleaned up the garbage left behind by the protesters which is another violation under section 7 . HRM is not infringing on their charter rights. They still have the right to assemble, to demonstrate and to protest at will. However, they do not have the right to camp on municipal public park property unless otherwise designated as a 'campground' or duly granted permission to do so.

May I ask you why don't they - the Occupy NS take up residency on the south lawn of Province House ?. Be at the statute of Joe Howe who won the right of speech and Freedom of the press from his infamous libel case. Also the HRM Parks Bylaw does not apply to provincial property. Take the protest to the level of government that has the direct ability to address corporate greed through taxation and regulations. Also they can address social injustice through welfare reforrn, income assistance, wage parity, rent controls, etc. Etc.

Perhaps the Occupiers have been bought off and lost their moral justice to be a true voice of reform due their indebtedness to the unions that have co- opted this movement for their own means to rally against the private sector. And as you know Democracy is not always pretty or perfect. We still have the rule of law to that needs to be observed too. Best regards - David

Day One - N.S. Federation of Labour 2011 Convention

2011-10-24T20:53:00.000-03:00

Today opened with a speech by Rick Clarke President of the N.S. Federation of Labour.   He opened by mentioning a Globe oped piece today -- an attack on public sector workers. We have all got to be vigilant and speak out, talk back, write letters, but do not let these attacks go without a response.
He talked about Ships Start Here, and what that 25B contract means for N.S. workers, and the N.S. economy. He announced that the funding for the Office of the Worker Counsellor had been renewed and how well they had done in a review.   He talked about the need for 1st contract legislation which was also covered in a resolution debated in the afternoon, but referred back to be debated tomorrow.

He talked extensively about the need to fight back against the Harper govenment, and how much that government is attacking the rights of workers. He also talked about our provincial NDP government and the neeed to work with them but never give up demanding what we need from them.

He spoke passionately about Occupational Health and Safety (OHS) and the need for the provincial government to make changes to protect workers. 23 fatalities last year, 7000 compensable injuries -- we need to expand education and awareness to save lives. We need universal Workers Compensation coverage (not all workers in N.S. are covered by WCB).   We also need regulation changes to ensure that bullying and psychological harrassment are covered under OH&S legislation.

We need government to enforce the OH&S laws currently on the books. Lets put those repsonsible for injuries and death at work, in jail, instead of just providing corporations with a fine that is a tax deduction.   NO more carnage at work!

Most of the day was spent debating resolutions. None of them provoked substantial debate and most were passed unanimously. All four Labour Council resolutions passed: 1) expanding the CLIFF festival to N.S., 2) Setting up a committee to propse ways of setting up a worker's action centre in NS, 3) Expanding Mayworks and Mayday celebrations to more locations in N.S. and 4) having the NSFL coordinate a munipal election campaign and strategy throughout the province.

In the afternoon we were treated to a presentation by some of the folks from Occupy N.S. who are working on democratic processes and keeping everyone's attention on the fact that greed is the problem, that wealth is concentrated in too few hands and the result is the elimination of democracy and choice for the people. Everyone is encouraged to go and hang out at the Occupy movement at the Grand Parade . . . they still have General Meetings every night at seven pm. Every Friday night is a dance party!

Caucuses were held at the end of the day to elect some General Vice Presidents, but as of this evening only one is reported.   Margaret Anne McHugh, Secretary of the Halifax-Dartmouth & District Labour Council was elected the CEP General Vice President of the NSFL, by the CEP Caucus.

Tonight at Celtic Corner (across from Alderney Landing in Dartmouth) is the CD Launch of Cape Breton Protest Songs. All welcome.

Opening -- Nova Scotia Federation of Labour 2011

2011-10-24T20:15:00.000-03:00

Last night was the kick off of the 2011 Nova Scotia Federation of Labour Convention. It began with a Call to Order, and the singing of Solidarity Forever. (So glad I had been going to choir and felt in full voice. eat speech welcoming )

Then our own President, Brother Kyle Buott gave a great speech, in part to Welcome delegates to Dartmouth, which you can see below. He finished up with a quote from Eugene Debs "Speak truth to power and they will call itrevolution"

This was followed by a speech from the President of the CLC - Brother Ken Georgetti which can be seen at: http://www.youtube.com/tonytracy#p/a/u/1/wMTWhNqCZiM

Brother Georgetti spoke to a number of issues - congratulating NS on the "ships" contract, and urging us all to press the NDP provincial government for first contract legilstion. He sent us a warning abour the dangers of the Harper
government in Ottawa, and urged us to standup and fight back. He spoke of Labour's support for the "occupy movement" nationally and internationally, and spoke about how our problems, especially income inequity all do go back to "corporate greed".

The last speaker was the keynote speaker, Mike McBane who spoke on health care and particularly on the need to ensure a new federal/provincial health accord 2014. We need to fight against privatization and be wary of giant, for profit, health care corporations . . . see http://www.healthcoaltion.ca/ for more info.

NDP, BDS and The Canadian Boat to Gaza

2011-06-17T12:56:00.003-03:00

Although a certain part of me is screaming "now is not the time". . . because we have a federal government that is launching a serious attack on working people, the poor, and families, I know many of you will be saying - Margaret Anne - we should be sticking together now. . . nevertheless, I am compelled to do the following. . .

Since I could vote, I have worked for, voted for and donated to the NDP. I have run as a candidate provincially and federally, for the party. I will continue to vote for them (what choice do I have, other than withdrawing from the process??) and will even remain a member, but today, I have cancelled my monthly automatic donations (PACs) to both the provincial and federal NDP.

I figure there is little point in doing so, unless I publicize why - so this is my post today.

I have cancelled my PACs (automatic monthly donations) over Gaza, Palestinians generally, the Canadian Boat to Gaza and the Nova Scotia Trade Mission to Israel. I will be explicit and I hope educational in the following.

First the province -- in the news yesterday I heard that Premier Dexter is "leading a Trade Mission to Israel this fall." I could hardly believe it but I looked it up and sure enough they are actually promoting it on the government website.

Now, here's the thing - there is an International Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions Movement. According to the website: http://www.bdsmovement.net/bdsintro

For decades, Israel has denied Palestinians their fundamental rights of freedom, equality, and self-determination through ethnic cleansing, colonization, racial discrimination, and military occupation. Despite abundant condemnation of Israeli policies by the UN, other international bodies, and preeminent human rights organisations, the world community has failed to hold Israel accountable and enforce compliance with basic principles of law. Israel’s crimes have continued with impunity.
In view of this continued failure, Palestinian civil society called for a global citizens’ response. On July 9 2005, a year after the International Court of Justice’s historic advisory opinion on the illegality of Israel’s Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territories (OPT), a clear majority of Palestinian civil society called upon their counterparts and people of conscience all over the world to launch broad boycotts, implement divestment initiatives, and to demand sanctions against Israel, until Palestinian rights are recognised in full compliance with international law.

There are National and International groups helping to enforce and expand BDS in countries around the world. In Canada there is http://www.independentjewishvoices.ca/ and http://www.cjpme.org/ and, in particular I draw your attention to: http://ijvcanada.org/ijv-vji-statements-enonces/letters-to-the-press/nova-scotia-should-not-be-choosing-sides/ which is specifically about the Premier's trip to Israel and why it is wrong. I found it compelling enough to take this action - it says in part:

At a time when the world community is working to resolve the situation, when Israeli and Palestinian human rights groups are increasingly vocal and suffering for it, when even U.S. President Barack Obama has challenged Israel’s policies, Nova Scotia should not be going the other way. Sometimes, friends need to tell friends they are wrong and back it up with action. And if Nova Scotia cannot, or will not, do this, it should step to the side and stop making things worse.

I encourage others to cancel your PAC (not your membership/critical support) and let the provincial NDP in N.S. know why . . .   Would you pay for a government that supported South African Apartheid or segregation in the U.S.? I didn't think so - if you support this Trade Mission - you are on the wrong side!!!!

Federally, I was appalled to find Jack Layton telling the people risking life and limb on the Canadian Boat to Gaza; like anti-apartheid work in S.A. or freedom riders (some of whom died) in the U.S. . .   that they should abandon this mission and work through "international channels and organizations". . .    Uh? WTF?

You can find info on the Tahrir - the Canadian Boat to Gaza - here.

I also enjoyed this video:

Gaza Island from Albino Squirrel Channel on Vimeo.

There have been U.N. resolutions and investigations and reports and they all condemn the actions of Israel for mass punishment of Gaza, breaking International Law at sea, and in the building of illegal settlements, taking over Palestinian land, and a myriad of injustices done daily to Palestinians in Israel and the West Bank. I was made to pay attention when the shelling began in late 2009 - remember Operation Cast Lead - the massacre of Gazan women and children? Gaza ia a little strip of land - bordering Egypt, Israel and the Mediterranean.
It is about 40 km long and about 6-12 km long - smaller in space than many cities. There are over 1.5 million people live in the Gaza Strip and there is no legal way in or out for most people.   In Operation Cast Lead Israel began shelling this imprisoned population killing over 1400 Palestinians, over half of them women and children. At this point I got active in Palestinian support work. It was like putting people in prison and then shooting at them.   After that Israel will not led all aid in . . .   there is a crazy list of prohibited materials not just building materials like concrete and rebar but also foodstuffs and toys that are randomly prohibited.   Business cannot be carried on and it is the only country in the world where 70% of the population lives on humanitarian aid.

All this condemnation comes from the U.N., it is true, but then nothing. At some point, "the people" and not governments (since they apparently will not) have to stand up and say - "We are not going to permit this anymore"! I am not well organized enough (and have family and work commitments) but in my heart I am on that boat to Gaza. . .     I was on the Mavi Marmara in spirit and felt the repercussions - what if it had been me?

If you had a way to defend people wouldn't you take it? The NDP press release from June 9th says:

Statement on Gaza flotillas

June 9, 2011
In difficult situations of conflict, it is important to respect people’s right to peaceful protest, and the protection and safety of all parties involved must be a priority.
Earlier this week, I met with the Israeli Ambassador and urged the government of Israel to lift the blockade of Gaza. I also indicated that it was not New Democrat policy to support the flotilla but reiterated New Democrats’ concern for the safety of protesters and urged that the utmost caution be used.

This is not enough, not strong enough -- perhaps there are some international "niceties" being observed here - but to say that . . . well we don't think they are doing the right thing ("New Democrats do not support the Flotilla") and we'll ask them to reconsider going? Safety may be a priority but this has no teeth - so I guess the NDP is OK with letting those Canadians stand up for an (they agree) illegal blockade, on their own with no support, not even a "good on ya", for taking this on.

So join the BDS movement - educate yourself about Gaza, the issues of Palestinians generally and the injustices and violence done to them by the "western" and friendly state of Israel. You can start with:
http://www.icahd.org/?page_id=76 and some of the Canadian sites/links above.

And then, maybe we can get the NDP leadership onside on this issue -- they should be on the side of the angels. Check out this letter to Jack Layton from one of the Canadians - David Heap - who will be travelling on that flotilla to break the blockade (an illegal blockade I might add, which Jack Layton says he agrees is illegal) but cannot support the Boat or support the Canadians who will be on it. In part Heap says:

Those opposed to justice will always try to intimidate those who stand on the side of the oppressed: our work must always be to face these risks nonviolently and not give in to intimidation. These risks are greatly reduced (though not eliminated) by solidarity: we are safer when we walk with others on a picket line, and we will be safer on the Canadian Boat to Gaza because of the many Canadians who have contributed to our campaign and who will be following our progress towards Gaza.

Will you stand with us, and with them? Or will you stand on the sidelines of history?
Pulitzer-winning author Alice Walker, who will be on the U.S. Boat to Gaza, has called our Freedom Flotilla the "Freedom Ride of this era”.

So my money will be going to the Canadian Boat to Gaza and not to the NDP. It is painful but it had to be done.

Democracy and a totalitarian regime of the Mind

2011-06-12T09:18:00.001-03:00

I actually wrote this right after the election on May 2nd but never got around to "publish" -- so I did so today although it is really not much more than a link to a document:

I must admit, I am a bit in shock about the Canadian election outcome - a majority government led by a man I cannot see but anything less than a builder of a markets-only-driven, fascist police state.   If you are rich you are worthy - if you cannot make enough to live on ( and we are skewing the ability by giving a very small percentage a lot and the rest nothing) too bad - go directly to jail. Those jails, by the way, will be housing those of you too poor, or mentally ill to make a living.   Also, they will be privately owned providing a profit to those who squeeze every last drop of profit from the incarceration of prisoners. I actually feel a little afraid and I have been traditionally one of the fearless. After the G20 I don't know or believe that my "rights' in this country mean anything at all.

I was reading the Gene Sharp document (From Dictatorship to Democracy: A conceptual framework for Liberation) and thinking about what they had done in Egypt - I thought it should be so much easier here - why is it not, and what can be done about it?

We are trapped, not by guns but by our own minds - however, if we free our minds the guybns willno doubt appear.    In totalitarian regimes it always seems that everyone knows that how they are being governned is "wrong" - but in North America, we are not sure.

Workers that make less than they need to "live" believe that someday they will be rich (myth: work hard and you will prosper) or at least their children will be better off (work hard and your children will be better off than you - second generation in the last three in which this is not true - wages have been stagnant for 60% of the populations for the last thirty years, and 20% - the poorest are worse off) and that somehow what hurts me economically and helps the rich ( current tax system) will somehow result in more and better jobs (also not true.)

If somehow people could get the info and believe it that the government should be "run" for the majority (say 80%) of people we would have increased taxation of corporations and the rich (Canada is now 2nd or 6th lowest depending on what you look at), reduced spending on jets and other expensive military hardware meant for aggressive wars, a national Daycare program, a national Housing program,a National Energy program, and regulations to stop speculation on food. Yes, it takes the the profit out of some things, or at least caps or reduces it - but for the majority to benefit why is that a bad thing?

NDP Surge - voting is in vogue. . .

2011-04-30T10:14:00.000-03:00

I wrote the following a while agao - but never hit publish. I am even more excited today!

___________________________________________________________

Wow. . . I feel like something is happening! and I could not be happier.

As of this morning the NDP is WAAAAAYYYY up in the polls and there is a "surge". Ekos is projecting 100 seats after the results of an EKOS poll published yesterday.

No more strtategic voting, and all those people who always said that they would vote NDP - "but they can't win" have to think about what they are doing in this election.

Look, I don't think a gentler neoliberal party will solve the world's woes, and I wish they were truly socialist. . . but at least they will uphold parliamentary democracy, defend pensions and regulate the banks and guns. I don't think I can count on them to nationalize the oil companies but I do think that healthcare will be secure. . .

So I say - get out there and tell everyone to vote NDP!

The EKOS poll from yesterday -

Fantastic blog at: http://comeuppance.blogspot.com/2011/04/coalitions-are-nothing-to-fear.html

It ends with a list of John McMurty'sunspeakable truths. . .
Here are McMurtry's 30 examples of "unspeakable truths" (written in 1988) which you can test for yourself by asking "how many times do I see this "truth" in the mass media:

1.Taking more out than you put in as a regular practice – as in money profits – is morally wrong.

2.The capitalist workplace is anti-democratic.

3.General Motors, Dupont. IT&T, Standard Oil and Ford Corporations all produced military supplies for the Nazi armed forces during World War II while the United States was at war with Germany.

4.Unearned wealth should be abolished as a matter of just public policy.

5.The government needs to regulate the investment of Canadian/U.S. capital abroad to societies with poor human rights and environmental standards, so as to protect these standards in both North America and the developing world.

6.The free market means that those without money to buy what they need do not have the right to live.

7.The major player in the international drug trade since the Second World War, using drug enforcement laws to maintain its monopoly, has been the United States government to finance internationally illegal foreign interventions.

8.Over 70% of eligible U.S. and British voters did not vote for Reagan or Thatcher "landslides".

9.The arms race and international wars are very profitable for most multinational corporations.

10.The long-term pattern of U.S. and Canadian foreign policy in the non-white world has been alliances with fascist-type governments rather than their opponents.

11.The "free world" is not truly free because its citizens do not have the effective right to criticize the capitalist system.

12.The history of Western civilization is largely a history of genocide against nonwhite peoples and cultures.

13.The greatest danger to Canada's freedom and security comes from the United States.

14.There is no Correlation between people's wealth and their merit.

15.In many cases, social ownership of major industries is sound social policy.

16.The very rich ought not to be admired, but rather condemned for their acquisitive self-interest at others' expense.

17.A small minority's monopoly ownership of society's means of production is an issue that needs to be carefully examined.

18.Pollution/poverty are specially advantageous to the major shareholders of private enterprise.

19.Our major social problems are caused by the profit imperative overriding all other values.

20.The belief that God sanctions our social order or our state at war is a superstition.

21.There may be better alternatives for long-term sexual union than the private property structure of state-regulated marriage.

22.The Soviet Union pays significantly more than the world-price for imports from the countries of East Europe, and charges significantly less for its exports.

23.Socialist revolution has been by and large beneficial for the living standards of most citizens in societies where it has occurred.

24.Over 90% of Canadian citizens are not capitalists but members of the working class who depend for their living on wages or salaries.

25.Unions have historically led the struggle for improvements in health care, working conditions and social security for the population as a whole.

26.The business community has excessive political and economic power in our society.

27.Our schools do not train the young to think critically, but to obey corporate or office authority without question.

28.The President and his leading advisors arc provable war criminals.

29.Christianity calls for the redistribution of wealth.

30.The mass media are essentially a joint-stock company of profit and advertising, for major private corporations.

Election!

2011-03-27T21:06:00.000-03:00

Well I was working on FB but there is just too much to say. . . too many links I want to share . . . so many feelings. . . so much to comment on. . . so much to worry about. . .

First, my views are NOT reflected by any of the current political parties. I have voted NDP for 25 years, love Megan Leslie and will be supporting the NDP in this election. (and I ask you to do so too )

I was actually impressed by Elizabeth May in the last election, until she indicated that she was in fact a Liberal - just another opportunist apparently with no ideology/positions to speak of, just a desire for power. So although the CBC - find which party you are closest to - poll today indicated that I was a Green (seems like if you come out on the left socially and economically you end up a Green - though truly I don't think that reflects where they are on the spectrum. . . ) I think that poll was either inadvertently skewed or intentionally telling people that they are Green and not NDP to split the progressive (though many of us holding our noses either way) votes.

I don't think that there is a lot of difference between the Conservatives and the Liberals - although I do think that the Conservatives have "fascist" tendencies, and so I fear them more. I think that they were less transparent and border on corrupt. They hate women, and immigrants, and anyone who is not an able-bodied white male. They certainly have no respect for parliament or for process - the only things that protect us in a democracy - along with Citizen participation, of course, which is ebbing away in every election as people believe it makes no difference which party you vote for. . .

I no longer want armed revolution (aggressive violence seems pointless to me and just results in the death of too many innocent men, women and children) but, I am not sure that it is possible to vote ourselves outside of neo-liberalism. Even the NDP, I think, would only be kinder/gentler neo-liberals and ideally I want a whole new system that valourizes public good, that is centred around reproducing people (in reasonable numbers) and not producing "widgets", that is truly democratic and reflects the will of the majority, but defends the rights of minority views and communities. So yea, I am a democratic socialist.

So without another option I am supporting the NDP in this election and ask you to do so. (even though they for example, continue to, too often, defend Israel - what should be a pariah state - among other things) I ask you to vote. In fact, I beg you. I suggested to my oldest son one day that the country had moved right (and it was depressing me) and he said - no it hasn't, it is just that we have lost 15% of voters in the last 10 years -- please come back. See the table below from Elections Canada and Please vote.

4 September 1984	24,343,181	16,774,941	12,638,424	75.3
21 November 1988	25,309,331	17,639,001	13,281,191	75.3
26 October 1992^2-3	20,400,896	13,725,966	9,855,978	71.8
25 October 1993	27,296,859	19,906,796	13,863,135	69.6⁴
2 June 1997	27,296,859	19,663,478	13,174,698	67.0
27 November 2000	28,846,761	21,243,473	12,997,185	61.2⁵
28 June 2004	30,007,094	22,466,621	13,683,570	60.9
23 January 2006	30,007,094	23,054,615	14,908,703	64.7
14 October 2008	31,612,897	23,677,639	13,929,093	58.8

So more on this election. . .

I believe that a coalition government is a good idea unless the NDP can actually take power. Not impossible as LaPresse poll indicates that the NDP is now at 20% in Quebec and the Liberals at 11%!!! (Bloc 38% and Cons 23%)   I don't know why we cannot at least discuss it now and I don't know why Canadians don't like it - perhaps I should blog about how Parliament works - we elect parliament and they elect the government. Once parliament is elected the members that represent the largest party normally become the government and their leader becomes Prime Minister but in a very minority situation many permutations are possible including a "coalition government" which is common in other countires - that's what they have no win the U.K.

Harper is constantly "on" about how this is some sort of "coup" or doesn't reflect the "will of the people". . . but I think that the people should be demanding that the government of Canada be made up of the largest number of MP's possible and not just one party. . .   that is simply not working.   Harper shows his ignorance and pettiness and meanness and small mindedness and apparently gets away with it - as he himself signed onto a coalition of this sort in 2004.

So, just in case you have not yet got the message - support the NDP - no strategic voting please! And if you need a history lesson on why Harper is sooooooo bad - check this out. 10 reasons to oppose the Harper government - the Harperium. . .   those with contempt for Parliament and Canadians and who care more for coporations

Majority of Americans support the legalization of marijuana, Economist says.

2011-02-26T10:22:00.000-04:00

According to this article, in the Economist,

A huge majority of Americans, more than two to one once don’t knows have been excluded, support the legalisation and taxation of marijuana. Even without excluding the don’t knows, a clear majority favours treating the drug equivalently to tobacco and alcohol.

It also concludes that:

If our poll is right, then it can only be a matter of time before laws start to change, at least in the more liberal states.

The poll is interesting, but I did think of equivalencies from the past. . .

E.g. During the heatlh care debate it was clear that the MAJORITY of Americans wanted real health care reform, but the law makers - affected no doubt by the lobbyists from big-pharma, private hospitals and insurance companies were convinced, by lobbyists, that doom and gloom were the only possible outcomes (or maybe American Politicians are literally just corrupt and giving into bribes - esp in the form of donations to their re-election campaigns) See, for example: this article from Physicians for a National Health Program
Once you explain health care reform to Americans - they support it.

So, I suspect that since legalizing marijuana would have a number of positive effects on the general population - fewer people, especially young people with criminal records, fewer people in prison, fewer people gumming up the court system etc. All of these factors reducing costs that must be born by taxpayers. That is, it is not just the potential tax revenue. . . Anyway, I can see that "the people" will want to legalize it (personally I wish it were not regulated for personal use - except maybe by limiting what you could grow - to avoid large scale operations - so that one could grow 6-8 plants for personal use without having to resort to buying from the state - but that debate is for another day. . . much like you can make wine and consume it but not sell it.) but that there are "interests" in society that oppose it, in self-interest.

Anyway, the legalization of marijuana has a negative effect on some parts of the economy and might reduce the need for or reduce the expansion of prisons, policing, courts, and even other medications. So, who do you figure is lobbying against the legalization and regulation of marijuana? Llikely those companies that build and operate private prisons, those that make a living from the courts and that need or want large volumes of cases and those that sell drugs that a cheap or home grown marijuana could replace.

As a result I am not expecting legalization or regulation, in the U.S. any time soon -

Canadians seem to be split on the issue of legalization in most polls, but it seem more likely to happen here first. . . though not with the present government! They apparently want to lock up as many people as possible and put them into private, for profit prisons - I am guessing owned by their friends or people they want for some reason to impress - the market should not be in the business of prisons!!!!

I remember once before linking to an article by Conrad Black about how private prisons are bad - and I have read information by Marc Emory (Prince of Pot) who is currently incarcerated in an American private prison - which he claims does not operate according to the rules set out for prisons in the U.S. - but since one is a "prisoner" there is no place to complain.

I think legalized and regulated marijuana would be a good thing - unlike most Canadians though I would like to see all drug problems treated like a health problem and not a criminal one -

Democracy

2011-02-19T14:42:00.002-04:00

______________________________________________________________________
Yesterday, I wrote about the goings on in the U.S. about legislating away Collective Bargaining. I tripped over a great interview with Noam Chomsky, by Amy Goodman analyzing the U.S. drive to bust the unions. . .
"Democracy Uprising" in the U.S.A.?: Noam Chomsky on Wisconsin’s
______________________________________________________________________

Just BTW - In Egypt - not a single woman on the committee to write the constitution. . . just sayin'.
The Egyptian Centre for Women's Rights
________________________________________________
Today I am thinking about "democracy" . . .

Definitions of democracy on the web include:

the political orientation of those who favor government by the people or by their elected representatives
a political system in which the supreme power lies in a body of citizens who can elect people to represent them
majority rule: the doctrine that the numerical majority of an organized group can make decisions binding on the whole group

What is democracy? Is it always "representative"? Does one "have to believe in it"? Is it a "political orientation", a natural occurrence, a learned tactic, a principle or an ideology? Is it an economic statement, a political one or a social ideal? Do we have it in Canada? Is it "democracy with limits", "democracy with exceptions" or just limited democracy. It certainly exists in only certain spheres - like at the ballot box, but not generally at work, and for too many women and children still not at home.

People think about democracy a lot and conflate it a lot with capitalism.   I wrote a blog about that a while back - but now I think people are possibly even more confused about democracy but also have had "enough".   The word "democracy" is getting thrown around a lot as the middle east engages in "demonstrations for democracy". or "pro-democracy demonstrations".

I began to think about "democracy" (again) more earnestly when an article in an Israeli paper made mention of "democracy with exceptions". . . meaning that you cannot vote for those we do not like. (i.e Islamists) For instance, even though, in Gaza, the Hamas was elected (though now saying, according to some suspect sources, that they will not participate in elections) and Hugo Chavez was elected President in Venezuela (see South of the Border - a film about the South American/Bolivarian revolutions) -- through "democratic elections". . . on the news, though, (even CBC radio recently!) they are often called "dictators" as they are opposed to U.S. hegemony in their respective regions. . .

So, trying to relate these thoughts about "democracy" to my city, region, province, country, work and home life. . . I thought first about work -- I teach courses to union members, generally trying to make them "active"; to give them tools and information to help them mobilize, organize and monitor in their workplace. The union is truly democratic and run by those who are elected and/or by those who take on tasks and show up to do the work.   But, given the total size of the organization few people are real participants in this truly democratic organization. So, the processes are democratic (and they truly are) but the participation is small and so is it really "democratic"?   Do people get what they want?   Do they want what is good for them? Is it the greatest good for the greatest number? What if the majority want to leave the union, or bargain away overtime, in order to feel like management rather than union employees. Will this really improve things for them at work? Does democracy just mean "majority rules"? Does it need to be tempered with individual rights, ad rights for minorities?   What about the right to eat, or have a house, or work, or have children?

I have been thinking about a comment made by a participant in a class in December, 2010. She said that people "don't believe in democracy anymore", and, by that, she did not mean that people don't see it as an ideal - but that people no longer think there is actually any democracy, anywhere.   That's why they do not show up to vote in elections - it makes no difference, they say, there is no point in participating - someone (the rich and corporations if they think it through, though most don't) else's needs and desires will be filled but not mine. . .whether I donate to a political party, vote in an election, write a letter to the editor or get on the street with my co-workers. I won't get what I need, so what is the point? (Partly for myself - I wonder sometimes - what do you need in Canada? when 80% of the world lives on $5.50 (USD) per day or less. . . just sayin' - should probably think about that 80% of the world more and stop sweating over our receding democracy. . . )

Still connected to thinking about democracy - Last summer, I attended a fabulous conference in Montreal - held by Civicus. The Civicus World Assembly was 800 or so people from 94 countries talking about how to make progress with civil society players - "the people" - not political parties or governments or corporations but people (and they definitely include unions in the list of "civil society actors".|)

Aside -- I got access to this pricey conference (for an individual in North America - those from the south pay less) by being a "professional blogger", part of their Web 2.0 team and was one of the very few folks there from a union (and the union did not actually send me) but I hope that more union folks will attend this year - it was fabulous, and definitely worthwhile!) Go check it out -- http://www.civicusassembly.org/ 60% off now! Unions should send people - I cannot go this year because the dates, in Sept., are right at the beginning of my busiest period in my union's two year education cycle. But it is one last time in Montreal next year (2012) and I hope to be able to attend before it moves to some more distant part of the world.

At one 2010 Civicus workshop session (at a table of 6-7) two of the participants were from Burma (Myanmar) and when I complained about the lack of participation of Canadians - especially in political parties or election outcomes, even voting - an older man from Burma - said - "ah and here we are thinking that if we just had pluralistic political parties and democracy, all of our problems would be solved!" (Guess it is all a matter of perspective and how many people in your country watch TV and who controls the content of the TV or radio broadcasts).

Another aside (a little trouble staying coherent this morning!) - www.Rabble.ca had a great article about how we believe things to be "true" and that if the same person tells you over and over wrong facts or strange analysis you will soon come to believe that many people believe those same things. It was in an article about Fox News North bt I cannot find it now. . .   Anyway, if there is no truth, is it possible democracy can exist.   If the majority want what is good for a tiny minority (the rich are blessed by god and we should deny them nothing) is that democracy?

If the majority of Canadians want the rich and corporations to pay more taxes, and if even the NDP is taking it off the table - and the Liberals (who have the same Neoliberal economic policies as the Conservatives) for the moment still say they want the most recent reductions rolled back. . . What IS THE POINT? Maybe Capitalism simply does not allow for real democracy.   What do you think?

Make the Rich Pay.

2011-02-18T09:28:00.002-04:00

I am at a bit of a loss to explain the attack on the public sector these days. . . it is fast and furious - and culminates this week in a cry for reduced pensions for politicians.

They (the media? the public? the right masquerading as one or both?) have already called noisily for the reduction of public sector pensions - because after working 30 years at a decent salary and contributing ( in my case) nearly 10% of every pay to pension contributions - public sector workers are being told that the pension is "too rich". . . what is that about?

By the way, like most other Canadians, when/if I retire (if I could at 65) I will have 12 years in a public sector pension plan, that pension plan paying me about 24% of my pay in a pension, when I retire. I have about about $16,000 in personal RRSP's, from when I had no pension plan (working for non-profits and trying to save the world, and not worrying about my income now or later, even though I am well educated and have a lot of skills) and a husband who worked part time, freelance jobs in film and TV all his life, and has nothing but a small CPP pension. We will be poor, if and when I retire. I had hoped to retire young enough to "see the world" but as a parent with a boomerang who returned with two small children, a husband who became unemployed (and is over 50 and not finding it easy to get work that does not involve saying "you want fries with that" - and in fact, not sure he could get hired in fast food!) late in life, and a reasonable public sector type income (I, in fact, now work for a union); it is not going to happen - no "seeing the world" for me - at least not when I retire - no volunteering in India (after all that effort to study Hindi!), and no money to take the grand kids to Disney World. . . or winter in sunny climes or summer on the beach. . .

In addition, the provincial and national debts are being blamed on public sector workers - who do not set the tax rates, or decide (they can advise but not decide - I draw your attention to exhibit A - the Oda Case) where money, and how much money, will be spent - they do deliver the services that the public howls about when they are NOT delivered or there is a wait, or they refuse to work unpaid overtime to make up for staff shortages and/or unfilled positions . . .

Anyway, now the U.S. is trying it on big time - OUTLAWING collective bargaining in the public sector

MADISON, Wis. (AP) — Wisconsin lawmakers are prepared to pass a momentous bill that would strip government workers of nearly all collective bargaining rights over the loud objections of thousands of teachers, students and prison guards who packed the Capitol for two days of protests.The nation's most aggressive anti-union proposal has been speeding through the Legislature since Republican Gov. Scott Walker introduced it a week ago. After clearing a major legislative hurdle Wednesday night, it was headed to votes in the Senate and Assembly.

Up to 20,000 people filled the Statehouse on Wednesday, cheering, singing and chanting in demonstrations unlike any seen in Madison for decades. Their numbers included many families and teachers from the Madison school district, which was forced to close after more than 40% of its 2,600-union covered employees called in sick.

and with Harper in Ottawa looking for a majority - and his penchant to follow the lead of the U.S. these news stories are startling. . . Rob Ford in Toronto wants to follow some of this lead, too (He's the new crazy right wing mayor of Toronto whose win is barely fathomable) and start privatizing city services from garbage to transit in order to "bust the unions". Sigh . . . So, in the U.S. actual outlawing of collective bargaining - we are where? In some middle east or North African dictatorship ? Bit of a joke there, this week as the middle east populations get to their feet and demand real democracy (our phony kind is gonna' look bad soon).

Canada had a middle class partly based on our union density and the ability of labour to make sure that some profits stayed in the country and benefited Canadians. . . in taxes paid and purchasing power to improve and expand the economy . . .

But there has been no increase in real wages in the last 2-3 decades (see The Bubble, James Laxer, The Trouble with Billionaires - Linda McQuiag and Neil Brooks or
The spirit level : why greater equality makes societies stronger /by Wilkinson, Richard G.) and instead of getting together and demanding more, voting the bums out (and a real government of the people in) or demanding changes in taxation most people seem to have accepted that it is all the fault of their neighbours and work colleagues, a fault of the "overpaid" public service workers.

If you want to have a nurse that's competent and happy, the next time you or a loved one is in hospital; if you want to have forest workers, and fire fighters risk their lives the next time a forest burns too close to your home; if you want to get an appointment to apply for a driver's license or you want some one making sure that the drugs you take (OK that system is not working very well but that's for another post!) are safe - then you have to defend, and not attack, public sector workers.

Is there a solution? to debt, reduction of services and increased taxes on the poor and middle class - Well one is proposed by the National Union of Government and General Employees - a union of public sector unions across the country - Have the rich and corporations pay their share! it is a much better solution than blaming public sector workers! They - who help maintain a middle class int his country - and should not be blamed for it.

International Day to Eliminate Poverty

2010-10-17T15:29:00.005-03:00

	"The campaign to make poverty history - a central moral challenge of our age - cannot remain a task for the few, it must become a calling for the many. On this International Day for the Eradication of Poverty, I urge everyone to join this struggle. Together, we can make real and sufficient progress towards the end of poverty."
	United Nations Ex-Secretary-General, Kofi Annan "Excerpts taken from his message to be delivered on the International Day for the Eradication of Poverty , 17 October 2006".

Today, October 17th is the International day to Eradicate Poverty, and as a result I have spent some considerable time this week in meetings, or just in conversation with people about poverty. . .   and here is what I have learned . . .

The vast majority of people here in Nova Scotia, Canada believe that poverty (in Nova Scotia, not in the Global South) is pretty personal, that the causes are identifiable as lack of education or opportunity and and that the solutions lie in charity and better public services.   Although there are many reasons for the income discrepancies in this country, no one seems, at least at first blush, to think about   the systemic reasons. . .

Isn't poverty a result of the income distribution system?   A large portion of jobs (I wish I knew how many) are minimum wage or low income jobs. (5.5% of jobs in Nova Scotia were minimum wage in 2005. I cannot find data for the last 5 years -- any suggestions? Since the minimum wage has increased three times since then and since the actual real dollar increase in wages has been pretty stagnant it does make me wonder if the percentage might be higher now. . .) Since we primarily use work to distribute income, if you are sick or disabled or mentally challenged, or mentally ill, or addicted or a hundred other reasons that keep you from working, then you will receive so-called "income assistance" which, of course puts you well below the poverty line. Usually assumed to be the LICO's set by stats Canada.

There is an old Marxist theory about "surplus labour". The theory being that employers want to keep an "army" or "pool" of surplus labour (those not working) in order to keep wages low. With capital able to gallop around the world they not only encourage that but it is a matter of public policy. (Starting with Paul Martin and probably before, the government believes that they have no need to work to lower the unemployment rate; that around 8% is acceptable.) They have been moving capital around for 30 years and out of North America for the last 20+. Just take the plant/factory/call centre and move it to where wages are lower.    Now, in a place like Nova Scotia, where we have an aging population and we are not even replacing the steadily declining population - there is a shortage of labour,.   That should drive wages up, but guess what? It does not. Instead, the federal government allows what they call "temporary foreign workers" to take jobs that cannot be filled by Canadians.   When you look at the list of occupations they all look like professionals. but the reality is here in Nova Scotia that there are many workers (mostly from the Philippines) that are here on these work permits to work at Wendy's and Tim Horton's; there are 9-12 working at the St. Mary's Smoke House (fish plant) in Sherbrooke, Guysborough County, Nova Scotia where there is a 30% unemployment rate and where there would have been a line to get these $10 an hour jobs.   No one knows how they got approved. ..

Anyway, my point is that poverty is not caused by my personal failings or illness - my addiction is as likely to be a symptom of poverty (thank you, Gina) as the cause - but is systemic.

This video of Malcolm Gladwell is American but identifies part of the problem -- the rich are NOT paying their share in the north, and rich corporations and a small number of ultra rich folks are just reaping the rewards of thieving the resources from the Global South.

Palestinians, Fighting Poverty, Bill C-354 and thoughts on Cuba

2010-09-25T17:50:00.002-03:00

This week the Human Rights Committee, of the U.N. made public their paper on the May 2010 attack on the Flotilla trying to take aid to Gaza, and the murders on the Mavi Marmara.

The draft paper which will be presented to the committee on Monday, called:
Report of the international fact-finding mission to investigate violations of international law, including international humanitarian and human rights law, resulting from the Israeli attacks on the flotilla of ships carrying humanitarian assistance.

They say in the summary that:

This report was prepared by the fact-finding mission established by the Human Rights Council in resolution A/HRC/RES/14/1 of 2 June 2010 to investigate violations of international law, including international humanitarian law and human rights law, resulting from the interception by Israeli forces of the humanitarian aid flotilla bound for Gaza on 31 May 2010 during which nine people were killed and many others injured. . .

. . .

The report contains a legal analysis of facts as determined by the Mission with a view to determining whether violations of international law, including international humanitarian and human rights law, took place.
The fact-finding mission concluded that a series of violations of international law, including international humanitarian and human rights law, were committed by the Israeli forces during the interception of the flotilla and during the detention of passengers in Israel prior to deportation.

The whole report is rather damning, although most media coverage in Israel writes it off suggesting that the committee was "biased from the beginning" and that the U.N. is generally biased toward Israel.

The report suggests that Israel's boarding of the Mavi Marmara (and others in the flotilla) in International Waters, was illegal and that they have broken the 4th Geneva Convention and that some people could face criminal charges, as there is "clear evidence to support prosecutions." There are many more conclusions and recommendations - from paying compensation to victims to returning the property that Israel seized from passengers.

Part of the recommendation which also includes a statement that there IS, in fact, a humanitarian crisis in Gaza, says:

The Mission considers that several violations and offences have been committed. It
is not satisfied that, in the time available, it can say that it has been able to compile a
comprehensive list of all offences. However, there is clear evidence to support prosecutions of the following crimes within the terms of article 147 of the Fourth Geneva Convention:
• wilful killing;
• torture or inhuman treatment;
• wilfully causing great suffering or serious injury to body or health.

The Mission also considers that a series of violations of Israel’s obligations under
international human rights law have taken place, including:
• right to life (article 6, ICCPR);
• torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment (article 7,
ICCPR; CAT);
• right to liberty and security of the person and freedom from arbitrary arrest or detention (article 9, ICCPR);
• right of detainees to be treated with humanity and respect for the inherent dignity of
the human person (article 10, ICCPR);
• freedom of expression (article 19, ICCPR).
The right to an effective remedy should be guaranteed to all victims. The mission must not
be understood to be saying that this is a comprehensive list by any means.

A Canadian boat to Gaza is planned for another Int'l Contingent - - to assist or donate see more at:
http://canadaboatgaza.org/cms/sites/cbg/en/statement.aspx

Another interesting development in the Middle East - there is now an IPhone app created by Americans for Peace Now re: "facts on the ground" in the occupied territories. It is quite a WOW sounding app - though I have not had a chance to try it. The story says that:

Settlements are symbolized by little blue houses on the map. Clicking once on the icon gives its land area. A second click brings up a window with more details: the year it was established, population, ideology (or lack of), character (secular or religious), amount of 'private Palestinian land' it occupies, and a graph that tracks its population growth.
iPhone users can also zoom in on outposts marked in red. The map includes the route of the Green Line, Jerusalem's municipal boundaries, and the various zones under different security arrangements, Area A and Area B.

__________________________________________________________________________________

Also today - some (I think) good news from Cuba.

A story today, following on the announcement that they are laying off a lot of government workers says:

Cuban authorities will issue licences to open small private businesses starting next month in 138 different areas of economic activity, as well as to rent out homes, Cuban state media reported Friday.
The move follows Cuba's announcement earlier this month of plans to eliminate 500,000 jobs in its sprawling government sector by the first quarter of 2011.
The Cuban Communist Party daily Granma published a list of trades that will be allowed to engage in self-employment, including masons, carpenters, plumbers, electricians, massage therapists, typists, hairdressers, computer programmers, domestic personnel, driving instructors and flower salesmen.
'Those who are registered as self-employed and those who join them will have the obligation to pay taxes on personal income, on sales, on public services and on the use of labour force, beyond contributing to social security,' Granma said.

Allowing Cubans to have small businesses, and to hire other workers is new - here's hoping that it is of assistance, and that once the economy is a little less controlled, perhaps the controls on civil society will be lessened, although I do not want to see Cuba become another poor Caribbean nation with huge income disparities. . . as well as an example of civil society and Trade Union repression. My own experiences in Cuba (but I do not speak Spanish well enough to have a political discussion) are that people don;t like the system but think it is "fair". They are reasonably happy with the fact that incomes are pretty fairly allocated and they do not see a big difference. They are, though, rather unhappy to be prohibited from leaving the country "on holiday", and some people complained about lack of access to medicine even though they had money. In Havana that was the most common complaint from hospitality workers who can amass the cash (from tips) but cannot take a trip (money cannot leave the country frivolously I guess. . . )

_________________________________________________________________________________

When I attended the Civicus Congress this year, I learned a bit about fighting against poverty and for Human rights. One of the people I interviewed was Sylvia Borren, the co-chair of the Global Call to Action Against Poverty (Whiteband) Campaign. She spoke at length about how we, in the north, have laws that protect the children and women (and men, of course) in our countries from gross exploitation. If a company was to use child labour in Canada they would face stiff penalties, especially if there was trafficking involved. . . . But, if a Canadian company is using child labour in India or China, or some other country, there are no such penalties. Now NDP member of the House of Commons Peter Julien has introduced a Private members Bill - Bill 354 to support international protection of human rights - not just in Canada, anymore.

There is a conference on Parliament hill tomorrow that I wish I could attend on this topic. There is a Rabble story about it - but what you can do if you cannot attend the conference is help Peter push the Bill by printing out and signing the petition at:
http://peterjulian.ndp.ca/sites/default/files/Petition- A call to support Bill C-354_The international promotion and protection of human rights act. ENG.pdf

Wouldn't it be meaningful if we could force Canadian companies to act with ethics, considering human rights and non-exploitation everywhere they worked/invested/manufactured etc. I do not expect the Bill to pass -- there are too many people in Ottawa beholden to or too friendly with international corporations/finance, but it is dream that I support, and that I think would/could be supported by most working Canadians. Bravo Peter J.

Democracy, "free markets" and a "free press".

2010-09-12T08:47:00.001-03:00

A month or so ago, I wrote a post about Economic Justice and it has caused some questions - but one of the main ones is about the relationship of economics to democracy.

Can you have democracy without a free press, or a free market? What is a free press or a free market? What is democracy, anyway?

Even if a consensus on precise definitions has proved elusive, most observers today would agree that, at a minimum, the fundamental features of a democracy include government based on majority rule and the consent of the governed, the existence of free and fair elections, the protection of minorities and respect for basic human rights. Democracy presupposes equality before the law, due process and political pluralism. Is reference to these basic features sufficient for a satisfactory concept of democracy?

That definition from the Economist's, Democracy Index, is, I think, OK with me. Too often though there is conflation of the concept of democracy with unfettered markets.   In my view, the words free press and free market generally mean a society where one can purchase and invest without limitations, in which one can purchase a press/media/access to an audience and run it unencumbered - these days even by promoting insurrection or an overthrow of the government, if you happen to be in a State that wants a non-American model. (Cuba and Venezuela and China come to mind, though obviously Cuba takes the worst of the criticism, then Venezuela and then China, even though Venezuela has free and independent elections and China has none.) But, we do have a lot of trade with China (they make it, we buy it) and they are not expected to part with their "state" oil, whereas small South American countries are expected to make it available, cheaply to U.S. interests or they are "dictatorships" - like Venezuela which, in fact, has had free elections with int'l observers.

Most definitions seem to assume that a free press is just one which runs encumbered by the State and it's regulations - where the state does not regulate the press in any way. But is this really a "free" press? Those governments that have more planned economies, promote legislation to help the poor, and/or that do not have completely open "markets" where rich Americans (primarily) cannot just come in and take the resources and flee, or exploit the labour and flee, and who regulate the press, to try and educate people and resist the attempts of trans-national corporations and their lies - can they have a "free" press? How would we measure it? Hopefully, not by following the resistance to hate speech, and calling it a failure of free speech, as the so-called "International Free Press Society" does.

Too often I hear people talk about democracy related to "free markets". Free markets generally means an unencumbered, even unregulated market - one where people are less important than profit; one where corporations have the same rights as people, and where you have more "rights" when you have more money. As soon as a society starts to regulate, to make society "fairer", more "just" - at that point - corporations, and people with lots of money, start crying foul because they cannot make a profit from your labour, or by exploiting our common resources, without paying a fee/royalties or taxes, or just being outright prevented from their aims.

There is a difference between democracy and a free market. One can vote for leadership, at the neighbourhood, district, region, province/state or national level. If the votes are fair and no one is banned from voting, (there is total suffrage), if the system is fair (probably a system of proportional representation) and if votes cannot be purchased either directly or through media buys, there is a level of human rights, and no oppression of minorities, then one has a democracy, I think.   But if, as in the U.S., there is no control over who can fund, or how much one can fund a political campaign, and no regulation of what you can say once you buy the time to broadcast or deliver in print, then it becomes, in my analysis, less democratic.

Now, what about the so-called "free press" - what makes it free? Is it access for all? Is it a fair distribution of paper and the airways?   No - it is a so-called "free press" when it can be purchased and when you can say anything that you like with that purchased access to an audience.   Is it really a "free press" when it is only available to those with the money to purchase national media? Again, my analysis would suggest that this is not in fact a "free press". This is a press available to the highest bidder, or the one with cronies in the business, or who controls a large corporation that can make a media buy like the recent purchase of CTV by BCE Inc.

I simply cannot understand why universally, people are not constantly asking questions about this democracy, free press, free market set of false notions.   No one (well not on the TV news, or in the national/mainstream press) calls Saudi Arabia a dictatorship, or an authoritarian regime, or worries that it is undemocratic, no one sends me petitions to sign about the position of women in Saudi, no one talks about press censorship in Saudi or any of the related Arab states. . . (OK occasionally there is news that a Canadian or U.S. national is going to be "put to death" or "flogged' for some - by our standards - insignificant crime, but this tends to be short lived) Why? Because although they are extreme and undemocratic - they have "free markets", and a press friendly to a capitalist economic system, unfettered markets and foreign investment.   In Saudi Arabia, only males over 21 may vote, there are few ballots, and, according to The Economist's Democracy Index, the Saudi government is the seventh most authoritarian regime from among the 167 countries rated. It is also according to the World Bank - the 13th easiest country in the world in which to do business. . . and really, they seem to ask - what could be more important? I am having a "go" at Saudi because they are not democratic, bad on Human Rights and yet they are considered a good, easy place to do business and so we seldom see them maligned in the "free press".   Iran on the other hand - also with Sharia law, with actually more freedom for women, and which ranks higher on the democracy scale (for authoritarian regimes mind you) is constantly maligned in the press (not that I am suggesting that it should not be) and although higher on the democracy scale than Saudi, is 137th in ease of doing business, compared to Saudi's 13th. Also, Saudi Arabia is the world's leading country in the case of torture-by-flogging , public beheadings and publically crucifying condemned prisoners. But Iran as we know, is far more vilified.

Again, according to the Economist Democracy Index -

The principle of the protection of basic human rights is widely accepted.
It is embodied in constitutions throughout the world as well as in the UN Charter and international agreements such as the Helsinki Final Act. Basic human rights include
freedom of speech, expression and the press; freedom of religion; freedom of assembly and association; and the right to due judicial process. All democracies are systems in which citizens freely make political decisions by majority rule. But rule by the majority is not necessarily democratic. In a democracy majority rule must be combined with guarantees of individual human rights and the rights of minorities.

Sept. 12, 2010 - this morning there is also this story at Rabble -

As a hunger strike by over 30 Mapuche political prisoners in Chile reaches a critical stage, international media attention is growing for their demands for an end to the anti-terrorist laws under which they were tried and convicted. These regressive laws remain on the books from the era of the Pinochet dictatorship in Chile, and have been routinely used against leaders of the Mapuche's struggle to defend their land and autonomy.
The hunger strike began on July 12, and many of the prisoners are now in very precarious health, having lost up to 18 kg.
The Foreign Affairs and International Trade Canada website does not include a word about the Mapuche hunger strike. In contrast, over the past two months the Canadian government has issued five press releases concerning human rights in Iran.[my bolding]

So why don't our "democratic" countries speak out for the rights of others, in these countries, even the ones that are "easy to do business in". We would not allow someone to procure children for sexual slavery or trafficking of their labour in our own country, but we do not condemn it or allow charges against those of our own citizens who do this in other countries, and, although there is at least some outcry about individual child sexual abusers (even if it happens in Thailand) there is no outcry when corporations with a "head office", or with substantial interests here, in Canada, use child labour in other countries. There is no demand that there be open disclosure from corporations about where and how they source their products and the conditions of work and the workers who make, or pick, or sew the products in question. Why not? If there is democracy here, and we consider it of value, why shouldn't there be democracy everywhere and why should we not demand it/insist on it - at least with our purchasing power, and of those corporations who want to have the right of a citizen here - then have the responsibility of a citizen of a democracy - everywhere.

In the meantime, how do you define democracy? Is the Economist Index helpful, does it measure the right things? Are capitalism and so-called "free markets" related to democracy or does democracy mean something different to you? What would democracy at work, look like?

For me, democracy should mean that everyone has access to citizen participation tools and organizations that can improve economic justice, the environment, relative poverty and improved distribution of income, everyone has equal access to the opportunities in the society, and no class or gender or race or religion, or ability or lack of it, holds you back from participating in making things better for yourself, your family, your community and the world.

CEO's, charities and private members' bills

2010-09-08T12:31:00.001-03:00

A couple of days ago, there was an unbelievable post in the Globe and Mail. I am sputtering with a kind of rage after reading it, although daily the mainstream press does make me rage or cry.

The Globe piece was written in response to a private member's bill that sets out to limit the salaries of CEO's of charities. I don't know what drove the member to introduce the bill, but it seems reasonable to me, although it might have been good to include something about minimum salaries because too many people in the sector make way too little money!

It is the case that everyone pays a portion of these salaries since charities pay NO taxes - so there does need to be a public good in the work that they do, and the public should be benefiting from their work. The federal government registers charities and gives them numbers so that they can in turn, give out charitable receipts for the donations, so that people do NOT pay taxes on the money that they donate (or at least it has a tax benefit - not $1 -$1 depending on how much you donate and your income.)

So the federal government on behalf of Canadians, gives out the numbers and set out rules for charities about how much you can spend on administration, and how you have to report, and how quickly you must spend the donated money etc. (It is a complex system and people without MBA's and law degrees figure it out every year. ) Anyway the private members bill, for good reason wants to limit the salaries of charities to no more than $250,000 per year. Now given that amount is 5X the average salary of a Canadian that seems like it should attract sufficient "talent". . . As far as I can see, to make big money, you just have to not care - and to take the lesser dollars one has to care about the work and not the income. I mean $100,000 a year is in the top 5% of income earners in this country - 250,0000 is in the top 1-2% . . . we really cannot find the talent to run a charity (even a big one) in 95-98% of the working population?

The article says in part:

But what if, in fact, we’re actually hurting the needy by restricting charity salaries? What if it is the case – as it is with most of the rest of the economic world – that when you increase the amount of money you are willing to pay, you can recruit from a better talent pool, and if you recruit from a better talent pool, you can get leaders who can increase the amount of money being raised for the needy?

What we don’t realize is that the kinds of restrictions being proposed have a powerful negative effect. They create stark, mutually exclusive choices between doing well and doing good for the brightest young minds coming out of our best universities, law schools and business schools. As a result, tens of thousands of them – any one of whom might have made an enormous difference fighting social problems – march directly into the for-profit sector each year without even considering a career in charity, because they are unwilling to make the kind of lifelong economic sacrifice that the charity ethic requires of them. Their talents are lost to the needy forever and gained for a lifetime by the marketers of Budweiser, BMW and Botox. How is that smart?

Because I can see the heads nodding, I felt compelled to explain why this is so misguided.

I would like to see data, applying to non-profits and charities that suggests that "when you increase the amount of money you are willing to pay, you can recruit from a better talent pool, and if you recruit from a better talent pool, you can get leaders who can increase the amount of money being raised for the needy?"

All those people that are only out for their own benefit, who go where their income can be maximized, they are a better talent pool for the charity sector? This may be great for the "Capital Casino" that these folks normally work in, and they may be smart enough to run a charity, but I fail to see the connection. There is some magic about $250,000 to get the best and most committed? If you get more talent, you get better leaders? Of course being a talented money maker/manager makes you great at running a charity because it is just like the "capital casino" - it is just like the captains of industry to want to "increase the amount of money raised for the "needy"! For the Needy? What year is this? This smacks of improving life for those in the poor house. You know what else? Those charities that pay the big bucks - hospitals and universities are at the top of the list are hardly for the needy -- charities for the so-called needy - we are talking the Elizabeth Fry and John Howard Societies, the drop in's for the mentally ill, the Oxfam's and Care and Service Canada. . . for the 70% of the world even worse off than poor Canadians. Will increasing their CEO's salary really get better talent that can raise more money? Maybe, but only because they are better connected to the money already! And I will take THAT into consideration, (always hire rich people to raise money as they can make their rich friends donate in larger numbers than I can) but more "talent"? - not on your life.

Imagine the talent that it takes to run an operation on a shoe strong, so that all the money can go to "clients and services"; where you have to worry about the number of photocopies that you are using; or making sure that you keep enough money in the bank, after providing service, to make payroll every two weeks; where you have to worry about your administration costs as a percentage of your income, because you don't have an organization like a University or a hospital that has a separate "foundation" that raises the money so that all that University and hospital admin is covered not by the charity dollars but by the hospital or university. . . yup we really need those financial cowboys to be running the charities of the country.

Last thing about salaries - somehow the author of this article keeps stating that people shouldn't have to make "financial sacrifices" in order to do charitable work - and I agree - but let's lift all those folks making $25-45,000 per year up - let's have them earn in the $60-80,000 range - CEO's? they can make up to $100,000 or, as the Bill's author suggests - $250,000. Who, is making a financial sacrifice at $250,000/year? More than double, nearly triple, the average family income in Canada.

You know what else, there is more that is wrong with "charities". . . the charities in this country were once advocates for the poor, and if you like, "needy" - but that is no longer allowed. If you want to advocate for the poor, a change in legislation, an increase in benefit, or a change in taxes - you better not be doing it as a charity. So, these days my money goes to organizations that advocate and educate but cannot get charitable status - the CCPA, the Media Coop(The Dominion), Rabble and Straight Goods, Greenpeace. (Well OK I gave money for Pakistan, and a couple of friends were raising money for the Stephen Lewis Foundation and N.S. Gambia and well OK - I am loose with my bucks, and I carry change to give away on the street) I certainly don't think that immediately, everyone should do this - especially when it comes to charities that work on Int'l Development but. . .

I have a suggestion - lets not have this discussion about how much to pay the Charity CEO's - lets have a progressive tax system where the rich and the corporations pay their share; lets have a decent guaranteed annual income, use tax dollars to provide needed services, and use our charity dollars to try and eliminate the $2.00 divide. (70%+ of the world lives on less than $2.00 a day) That will eliminate a need for six figure salaries for those running "charities" altogether, we can just eliminate the need for the work.

Corporate and Gov't Internet Control

2010-09-03T21:07:00.000-03:00

This was originally written for and posted on the Civicus Blog

Short but sweet - Just thought I should post a link to a piece in the Economist . . . as it is of interest to those defending a civil society space . . . as an internet - no longer accessible, no longer free and possibly controlled and monitored by states could be an increasing problem.

It shows a graph of country's requests to remove information . . .

[caption id="attachment_276" align="alignnone" width="595" caption="From the Economist"][/caption]

There is also a full article on controls that governments and corporations are trying to set up to have more "sovereignty" over the information on the web.

It speaks to the "balkanization and possible reduction in "freedom" and free access to and on the internet.

That article says in part:

. . . a decade and a half ago. . . [it was]prophesied [that] a digital paradise in which not only would commerce be frictionless and growth exponential, but democracy would be direct and the nation-state would no longer exist.

. . .

. . . The internet was a wide-open space, a new frontier. For the first time, anyone could communicate electronically with anyone else—globally and essentially free of charge. . .

. . .

Fifteen years after its first manifestation as a global, unifying network, it has entered its second phase: it appears to be balkanising, torn apart by three separate, but related forces.

First, governments are increasingly reasserting their sovereignty. Recently several countries have demanded that their law-enforcement agencies have access to e-mails sent from BlackBerry smart-phones. This week India, which had threatened to cut off BlackBerry service at the end of August, granted RIM, the device’s maker, an extra two months while authorities consider the firm’s proposal to comply. However, it has also said that it is going after other communication-service providers, notably Google and Skype.

Second, big IT companies are building their own digital territories, where they set the rules and control or limit connections to other parts of the internet. Third, network owners would like to treat different types of traffic differently, in effect creating faster and slower lanes on the internet.

It is still too early to say that the internet has fragmented into “internets”, but there is a danger that it may splinter along geographical and commercial boundaries.

Although not mentioned in this article, I have some similar concerns related to the explosion of "cloud" computing. Although storing all of your data, on someone else's hardware may be convenient (accessible from anywhere) it does cede control over the data to a central player/location and make it harder to keep data private. Controls are so much easier in a centralized rather than diffuse network - just another area in which Civil Society needs to be vigilant.

Open Space Technology at Civicus 2010

2010-09-03T17:28:00.000-03:00

This blog was written, by me, for, and originally posted on, the Civicus World Assembly Blog.

This year at the Civicus World Assembly, in addition to sessions that involved detailed presentations, there were three days - three afternoons from 2-5 - that were devoted to sessions with very generalized titles and that were conducted using Open Space Technology. This is not "technology" in the sense of computing, phones, tweeting or Web 2.0 generally, but is a very simple democratic facilitation technique (very "low tech" in fact. )

Open Space Technology is a facilitation method that has no structure, within a defined set of rules. I have seen it work amazingly well but I think it did not work well (although it was done very well) at the Civcus Assembly, for a number of reasons. There were three Open Space groups and my experience is based only on one; the other groups may have had more cohesion and better/more satisfying outcomes. . .

According to Open Space World

In Open Space meetings, events and organizations, participants create and manage their own agenda of parallel working sessions around a central theme of strategic importance, such as: What is the strategy, group, organization or community that all stakeholders can support and work together to create?

Usually, in my limited experience, with Open Space, the participants create the agenda, and the questions, based around a shared or mutual interest in the outcome – for instance – every one works for the same organization and wants to maximize profits, or increase impact, or improve service. In my experience, it does not work well when the outcome, that we want to achieve, is a weak or vague vision, or so large that the people in the group cannot take control of the strategies that need to be implemented to achieve the desired outcomes.

So my group was titled: Reconciling economic development, the fight against poverty and climate justice: what and how can civil society contribute?

The first day the room was full. I am guessing, perhaps more than 50-60 people were in the room, maybe more (I never thought to count). We had some opening remarks from Kumi Naidoo, Executive Director of Greenpeace International and Past General Secretary of Civicus, that were appropriately directed to the question of how the three things were related and how they intersect. I was excited. I definitely see tensions between these three – not outright hostility just a question of priorities. If you are busy trying to get the world to cut down on carbon, or save the ocean, or get rid of cars, in order to save the planet and eventually improve people's lives, even save them from climate devastation/crisis - your priority may not be working on poverty and social justice/human rights, today. But people are dying and being imprisoned and kept from organizing to improve their lives - today! Not that environmentalists don't care about that, I realize it is just not what they are working on – but everyone cannot be doing big climate change work. . . Although people do not always like the comparisons, I think that the concept is useful: someone has to be building the dam while others are pulling the drowning out of the water. The question - how do we make sure that we are all working together - no point in your diverting the river so that others will flood. . .

I felt that the agenda on day two became one in which direct action on climate change became the priority and the question that was posed and the issues represented in the title were lost by the end of day 2. The agenda was essentially “hi-jacked” buy a focus on the environment. Now I understand all the way, that the south is going to be affected first by climate change and that drought and floods are going to affect the south first, and most extremely. I wrote about it in a previous blog, but I felt that too much time was spent on individual solutions for the north – get rid of cars, use your purchases to buy a new world. . . etc. I wanted to see solutions based on green jobs and technologies for the developing world – how small farms, eco-farming, agroecology, and perma-culture could help and would be good for the environment and people. How does moving to sustainable fishing or farming or manufacturing help the move to improve democracy, human rights, gender equity and civil society space (yup – I love the big questions?)

So although unsatisfied at the end of day two, I was nevertheless interested enough to return, as I wanted to see what kind of action would emerge from some rather “deep” discussion. By Day 3 though, we were a very small group – one of the “rules” of Open Space is that “you let your feet talk” - if you are not getting anything out of your group – move to another group – or go out in the hall, or go home, but don't hang around feeling that you are wasting your time. The other principles are: 1) Whoever comes are the right people, 2) whatever happens is the only thing that could have, 3) when it starts is the right time, 4) when it's over it's over. These aren't prescriptive, according to Open Space World - they are the results of thousands of little experiments.

So none of the actions on Day 3 seemed to include all of the elements of the question – how can civil society contribute to the reconciliation of the fight against poverty, economic development and climate justice. The discussion that came closest – and the one that I worked on - was to create an index against which governments of any economic model, north or south, could be rated against, with data mostly available, and that would measure poverty, human rights and environmental impact/justice. But this action was far too big for anyone in the group to take on, although all of us were willing to work on it. There are many other measures, indexes etc., but they take many people to analyze the data and they are usually based on the OECD only, or on the U.N. development index etc. Another problem with most current indexes is that they use the current economic model of growth as an indicator – this needs to be altered to measure improved sustainability, relative poverty and inequality, and Human Rights. Other groups came up with great projects – plant a million trees in Mozambique, or distribute Diva Cups (reusable menstrual cups)to young women in a country in the global south. . . but they seemed specific and didn't seem to reconcile all three issues at all – but then I was not in those groups – feel free to tell me about your different experience in the same group.

So I enjoyed my time in the space, and think it is a great facilitation technique because it demonstrates what can arise out of an open, free democratic space. Personally, I learned some things and made some friends, but I thought that there was not enough cohesion in the group, to ask harder questions - that the overall question/goal/outcome/ of the group was ignored by the majority (or perhaps everyone was influenced by the more aggressive) in the group. It was a great use of open, democratic space – the group takes control - but a disappointment for me and I expect others. . . since the group went from so large, to so small.

I would use Open Space again for a Civicus Assembly, (though I am not involved in those decisions!) but I would suggest that either the questions be ones that would attract a group of people with a more common goal/outcome (who could debate ways of getting there); that how the actions would be implemented (web based follow up - Civicus as an organization committed to follow up on one or two most promising items?) was clearly outlined, or, alternatively, that the entire Civicus Assembly be involved in creating the agendas, groups and spaces in the first place so that we could follow the group questions to a group facilitator with a specific agenda, that I share, and want to work on. It would be unwieldy with so many people but it could also be magic.

Climate Change and North South Reparations

2010-08-26T10:09:00.000-03:00

Originally written and posted for the Civicus World Assembly Blog

One fifth of Pakistan is underwater, millions of people are homeless. . . the scale is so large that it is nearly impossible for me to fathom. (I feel a shift in the force, Luke) It is a large climate crisis.

In the event that you have any doubt that the Pakistan Floods (or Russian fires) are related to climate change see here (really, the jet stream has stalled!?) and here and here.

According to Dr. Jeff Masters,

The year 2010 now has the most national extreme heat records for a single year--eighteen. These nations comprise 19% of the total land area of Earth. This is the largest area of Earth's surface to experience all-time record high temperatures in any single year in the historical record. Looking back at the past decade, which was the hottest decade in the historical record, seventy-five counties set extreme hottest temperature records (33% of all countries.) For comparison, fifteen countries set extreme coldest temperature records over the past ten years (6% of all countries).

Huffington Post Slide show - 9 countries with record heat this year.

On the last morning of the 2010 Civicus World Assembly, Kumi Naidoo put it all in perspective for me. I cannot quote him exactly, but the important concept is that "aid" is not really aid - that's a misnomer. It should not be called aid, it is payment of a debt to the south from the north. We, in the north, have destroyed/warmed the climate, but the south pays the price, or at least they are going to pay it first,. They have, for the most part, the least economic resilience and ability, to save people from climate change - e.g floods and other environmental disasters, causing crop failure and wiping out homes. Over 300,000 people (before Pakistan) were already called "climate refugees". The north (it is very hard to say "we" when I have been fighting environmental and social justice issues for 35 years, but what else can I say?) warmed the earth (and continues to do so) by literally (and liberally) spewing green house gases, but we also bury our toxic waste in the south, and generally make garbage that others are expected to clean up, or put up with. At our rate of consumption in the north, we would need 5 planets to bring everyone to this northern standard of living. So we ALL need to change - but individual action, though laudable, is not enough.

Now, it is time to pay, to make reparations - as the south is going to pay the price first (we will all suffer eventually as record temperatures in Russia and Finland this summer demonstrate) and eventually there is little anyone can do. . .

So we all need to take individual actions to stop creating GHG's and decrease our own carbon footprints - get out of our cars, be careful about what we consume - want less. . . but, in addition, we have to come together to take collective action, to make sure that we make corporations and governments work together to save the planet, and we have to act quickly.

Things are clearly heating up. In the north, we have a debt to pay. It is not just climate of course, we owe a debt that we should/must repay - in Haiti for instance, among other countries of the Global South. Exploitation and outright theft of people, resources and labour have been rampant. The injustice is now on such a massive scale that it is hard for ordinary people to see. But it is important that the education and the action begin.

Global Food Prices - Food Crisis

2010-08-16T21:40:00.001-03:00

This post was originally written and published on the blog for the Civicus Assembly

What causes rising food prices? And how do we stop it from outpacing inflation?

Some suggest that recent increases in global food prices are being driven by increases in the world's human population - that the increases, in both, are linked and inevitable. By their account our population simply outstrips the capacity of our environment to support sustainable food production. There are those who believe that mandated, legislated zero population growth is the only way we can ensure enough for all and keep the planet from being "used up".

While slowing or stopping population growth will likely assist in meeting the sustainability of the planet and people in the long term, it’s unlikely that long-term population growth is the driving factor of recent food price fluctuations. If population growth was the engine of inflation in food prices, one would expect a gradual increase rather than leaps and spikes.

Other explanations are more complex. They point to the role played in food price energy costs - e.g. fertilizer, farm equipment and food distribution. These links are the centre of a recent report by the World Bank. Energy does impact the price of food, no question, but is it the primary driver, given that prices took another big jump in the last 6 months, without similar changes in the cost of oil?

There is, as well, the contribution of issues at the supply end, related to poor harvests (which can cause hoarding by both farmers and consumers), or changes in crops grown. Those issues, are strongly dependent on environmental factors, including flood or drought, but also because choices about what to grow and where to grow it can be (sometimes unreasonably) influenced by national policies and subsidies. This is the narrative focused on by a recent story in the Financial Times detailing the poor grain harvest in Russia this year, and the subsequent global rise of grain prices, especially of flour. Russia’s decision to ban grain exports in response has resulted in shortages elsewhere. The Times suggests that:

Tight supplies, changing weather patterns and rising demand in emerging economies have all contributed to rising concerns about food security.

Not a word in these explanations, however, about what Civicus website visitors identified as the most likely culprit -- financial speculation. And, all of these explanations also ignore other dimensions of each of these issues including the contribution of climate change (as does a recent BBC report decreasing on rice harvests) monoculture, overuse of chemical fertilizers and herbicides and pesticides, not to mention GMO's . . . and a failure to develop agricultural policies that are going to meet the needs of those that farm - rather than far away consumers.

A July 2010 article in Harper's , entitled The Food Bubble: How Wall Street Starved Millions and Got Away with It, the author, Frederick Kaufman, argues pretty convincingly that the creation of a commodities index for grain helped fuel speculation, and that as food prices rose so did the index. The short version, which he presents in an interview with DemocracyNow, of his analysis is that massive investments by banks in wheat futures led to prices that were not 8%, but up to eight times higher than usual. The result? He says in part:

FREDERICK KAUFMAN: How did this work? Instead of a buy-and-sell order, like everybody does in these markets, they just started buying. It’s called "going long." They started going long on wheat futures. OK? And every time one of these contracts came due, they would do something called "rolling it over" into the next contract. So they would take all those buy promises they had made and say, "OK, we still—we’re just going to—we’ll buy more later. And plus we’re going to buy more now." And they kept on buying and buying and buying and buying and accumulating this unprecedented, this historically unprecedented pile of long-only wheat futures . . . Now, a lot of people are saying, "Oh, it was biofuel production. It was drought in Australia. It was floods in Kazakhstan." Let me tell you, hard red wheat generally trades between $3 and $6 per sixty-pound bushel. It went up to $12, then $15, then $18. Then it broke $20. And on February 25th, 2008, hard red spring futures settled at $25 per bushel. . .

. . .

And, of course, the irony here is that in 2008, it was the greatest wheat-producing year in world history. The world produced more wheat in 2008 than ever before.

. . .

JUAN GONZALEZ: And the result was, as the price went up, that there were food riots around the world.

FREDERICK KAUFMAN: Yeah.

You can watch the interview with Kaufman here. You can also read Goldman - Sach's letter defending themselves, and the author's response.

On addressing the contribution of speculation to 2008’s food price increases, and subsequent food riots, however, Kaufman is not alone. here’s an excerpt from the conclusions of another recent report from the World Bank, Placing the 2006/08 Commodity Price Boom into Perspective:

In this paper we examined three key factors whose role has been somewhat controversial: speculation, the growth of demand for food commodities by emerging economies and the role of biofuels. We conjecture that index fund activity (one type of “speculative” activity among the many that the literature refers to) played a key role during the 2008 price spike. Biofuels played some role too, but much less than initially thought. And we find no evidence that alleged stronger demand by emerging economies had any effect on world prices. Although tentative, these conclusions provide insights into the determinants of
the future path of commodity prices, which is still uncertain.

Food and markets - prices, sovereignty, security, availability - are all connected and all complex. Raj Patel briefly outlines some of the causes here. Speculation has contributed, surely, but Patel points that so too has the exposure to the volatility inherent in exposure to world markets as a result of liberalization of trade:

In 2009, Raj Patel and Eric Holt-Giménez, released a book, Food rebellions! Crisis and the Hunger for Justice. The precis of the book suggests that democratizing food systems and making society work for everyone is part of the answer:

Food Rebellions! suggests that to solve the food crisis, we must change the global food system — from the bottom up and from the top down. On one hand, farmers utilising sustainable approaches to production need to be supported, and farmer-to-farmer agroecological knowledge must be spread. At the same time, food and farm advocates need to work in local, national and international policy arenas to open dialogue, demand transparency and change the 'rules' currently holding back agroecological alternatives. The book frames the current food crisis as a unique opportunity to develop productive local food systems as engines for sustainable economic development. Hunger and poverty, the authors insist, can be eliminated by democratising food systems and respecting people's right to safe, nutritious and culturally appropriate food and to food-producing resources — in short, by advancing food sovereignty.

There are many other possible answers…what do you think? What is the most important cause of increasing food prices? What can we do to make sure that everyone can afford, and ultimately has enough, to eat?

Following publication of this blog I received this article: Food Commodities Speculation. . . which does talk about the rise of food prices based on speculation. It was written by:

Olivier De Schutter was appointed the UN Special Rapporteur on the
right to food in March 2008 by the United Nations Human Rights
Council. He is independent from any government or organization, and he
reports to the Human Rights Council and to the UN General Assembly.
All reports are available on http://www2.ohchr.org/english/issues/food/
annual.htm. See http://www.srfood.org for a thematic classification
of all reports and statements of the Special Rapporteur. The Special
Rapporteur can be contacted on srfood@ohchr.org

Reclaim the Gobal Commons

2010-08-13T21:05:00.000-03:00

This blog was originally written and posted for the Civicus World Assembly.

There is a movement rising that seeks to organize the world in a new (and old) way. It involves two concepts - promoting "the commons" and fighting "enclosure".

According to "Another World is Possible":

The global commons is the set of natural resources, basic services, public spaces, cultural traditions, and other essentials of life and society that are, or should be, part of a public trust to be enjoyed by all people and cherished for the planet’s well-being. Another way to conceive of these assets is how it is said in Spanish: el bien común, the common good. Behind the commons is the fundamental idea that life, information, human relationships, popular culture, and the earth’s riches are sacrosanct and not for sale.

Today, all over the world, pieces of our commons are being commodified and/or privatized by the powerful and rich, in deals made possible by corporate trade accords and government. Being snapped up in the giant tag sale now underway is, well, pretty much everything: the creation of babies, health care, indigenous or shared knowledge, public radio and television, schools, human organs, genetic mapping, control of the use of plants and animals, water, and air. (Yes, air. Beyond the recent fad of oxygen bars, carbon trading is the buying and selling, effectively, of air). And that’s a limited list.

Naturally, people aren’t just taking this sitting down. They are inventing ways to ensure that society’s and nature’s wealth remains for the use of the community and for the sustenance of the earth. Collectively, the endeavors can be seen as the global commons movement.

In a book from 2008, called The Magna Carta Manifesto, Peter Linebaugh writes about the erosion of rights, once clearly established, for the many, mostly western societies, which are based on "common law." The book "blurb" as linked above says:

This remarkable book shines a fierce light on the current state of liberty and shows how longstanding restraints against tyranny—and the rights of habeas corpus, trial by jury, and due process of law, and the prohibition of torture—are being abridged. In providing a sweeping history of Magna Carta, the source of these protections since 1215, this powerful book demonstrates how these ancient rights are repeatedly laid aside when the greed of privatization, the lust for power, and the ambition of empire seize a state. Peter Linebaugh draws on primary sources to construct a wholly original history of the Great Charter and its scarcely-known companion, the Charter of the Forest, which was created at the same time to protect the subsistence rights of the poor.

You can see a rather lengthy, but fascinating, interview with Peter Linebaugh, about the book, and the concepts here:

Today, struggles to defend "the commons", range from First Nations, in Canada, fighting to protect the land from the oil sands exploitation, to the Adavasi people in India, or indigenous people in South America, having their land exploited by mines and dams, without compensation (because the land does not have a deed in the name of an individual, it is a commons for the people to use, as needed and not individually owned.) Unfortunately any "commons" is too often thought of as as just land, water, resources etc. that no one owns. . . yet.

The Commons though, conceptually, means that we all own the resources, feel that they are ours, and therefore we are all stewards of the resources, and have a need to look after them. So it is not just a way to get everyone's needs met, but is also a way to protect the earth. See: Earth Commons Rising and/or (warning direct link to english pdf) The Commons Manifesto

Just for fun, (and because it can be motivating) I include here a musical interlude -- Struggles against enclosure and to hold onto the commons spawned movements in Great Britain from the 12th-20th century in Britain. One 17th century movement called the Diggers or the True Levellers. . . who wanted to eliminate enclosure and work the land "in common" and on the commons - planting vegetables on so-called "wasteland", are well known.

There is also a (relatively) new organization called "On the Commons" that says of the idea of a commons based society:

A commons-based society refers to a shift in values and policies away from the market-based system that dominates modern society, especially over the past 30 years. The foundation of the market is narrowly focused on private wealth, while the commons is built upon what we all share—air, water, public spaces, public health, public services, the Internet, cultural endowments and much more.

One of the most compelling ideas being raised today is the possibility of evolving from a market-based society to a commons-based society. The commons has always been an element of human civilization. But its central role in sustaining all societies has recently been rediscovered, inspiring new lines of thinking in fields ranging from high technology to public health to business.

A commons-based society is one that values and protects commons assets, managing them for the benefit of everyone. Market-based solutions would be valuable tools in a commons-based society, as long as they do not undermine the workings of the commons itself.
Is "the commons" a useful concept? Can we return to, or create, a new world where there is a real "commons"? Combined with the elimination of enclosure (that is the increasing privatization or "ownership" of once free resources like water, but also corporate ownership of words and art,and the potential death of "net neutrality") development of non-monopoly markets, an unfettered civil society, and real democracy, it helps me envision a world that might be organized in a different way, and one in which civic engagement would be easy, necessary and effective. As, Jack Layton, a Canadian politician used to say: Don't let them tell you it can't be done."

Women's Unpaid Work

2010-08-08T13:28:00.000-03:00

This post was written for and was originally posted at: http://citizenshift.org/blogs/civicus

Economics and Women's Unpaid Work.

A few weeks ago, in India, the Supreme Court ruled that it was not just or fair for women, who are "housewives' (or their families), to be compensated, at a substantially lower rate than men and/or the "employed", when they are in a motor vehicle accident. But, more surprisingly, the justices said, that, seeing home-based work, as without economic value, was tantamount to gender bias and should not be tolerated. According to an article in Tehelka, an Indian magazine :

Seeing women’s home-based work as without economic value, the judges said, was tantamount to gender bias, and they suggested that not only the particular law in question (the Motor Vehicles Act) but also others should be changed, and the question of the value of women’s work should be taken up by Parliament. In a further radical step, they cited a report by an NGO that values Indian women’s homebased work at $612.8 billion per year!

It was back in 1988 that Marilyn Waring wrote a book (If Women Counted: A New Feminist Economics) about how women's work was unpaid and uncounted, in the gross domestic product, of any country. You can see the original NFB video, "Who's Counting, Marilyn Waring on Sex, Lies and Global Economics", from 1995, at: http://www.nfb.ca/film/whos_counting/ or here:

15 years on, and her analysis is still true. We could debate her conclusions and suggestions for remedy, but there has not been much improvement in the counting of women's unpaid work in any country. There is also a good overview of the issue of women's unpaid work in Canada and around the world at: Women and the Economy.

At least the "amount" of unpaid (mostly women's) work is now being measured in the census of some countries - but that is about to change - perhaps for the better in India, but for the worse in Canada. It is a side note, but an interesting one, that a Google News India search reveals only the Tehelka story and one in the Economic Times (Times of India), about this judgement, at all. [later: found one more story, actually a "comment" written by an MP at - http://www.deccanchronicle.com/dc-comment/women-prejudice-823 - I wonder if there are more I missed?]

India is moving forward. Clarity about the work done by women, and all unpaid labour, is increasing; the analysis is increasing and, not surprisingly, action on the economic and ethical implications are increasing. In Canada, the clarity is being removed, the data won't be collected, the question won't even be asked.

There has been a public controversy raging in the last few weeks, over changing the so-called "long form" census, from a mandatory census form, to a voluntary “national household survey” that is NOT mandatory (for which there has been universal condemnation, including the resignation of the chief statistician, and yet the government has not changed their minds, and do not seem likely to do so.) But, lost in THAT controversy is another.

The question on the, now voluntary, “household SURVEY”, about unpaid work, is being eliminated. Antonia Zerbisias writes about the loss in the Toronto Star - She says in part:

All but lost in the controversy over the Conservatives’ impending elimination of the mandatory long-form census is how, in the proposed $30 million dollar replacement — the voluntary National Household Survey — Question 33 from the long form has been cut.

Question 33 (let’s call it Q.33) is a three-part query that has been in place since Canada made commitments at the 1995 UN World Conference on Women in Beijing. The question gathered data on how much time people spent on unpaid work: domestic chores, child care and attending to the needs of elderly relatives and friends. It helped make Canada a world leader in “time-use” data.

The results have also been showing how women are faring, socially and economically.

For example, the results indicate that despite a higher volume and percentage of women in the workforce over the past 20 years, changes between men and women in respective unpaid workloads have merely been “marginal.”

Based on information gathered in the 2006 census, StatsCan reports that, on average, “Women spend about an hour a day more on basic housework chores than their male counterparts. In 2005, women aged 25 to 54 averaged 2.4 hours daily cooking, cleaning and doing other basic unpaid household chores, compared with 1.4 hours per day for men in this age range.”

Two-thirds of Canada’s unpaid work is being performed by women. No matter how the value of that is evaluated —anywhere between 30 to 45 per cent of Canada’s $1.5 trillion GDP. That’s a heck of a lot of productivity that is being completely discounted.

Clearly women's work contributes to productive work and "the economy", everywhere, even if the numbers re participating in the formal economy are different. For example: Only 18% of women in India work "outside the home". But it is 2010 and time to count women's productivity, paid or unpaid, around the world, as part of what makes economies function smoothly. It is time that, looking after people, should be counted, around the world.

There are a lot of other things that should be counted as economically productive, and plenty that should not. See for example, Raj Patel on the BP oil spill. I will save those issues, however, for another blog.

Civil Disobedience - a useful tactic?

2010-08-03T11:28:00.003-03:00

This post was originally written for the Civicus World Assembly and may be found there.

"If you're a young person looking at the future of this planet and looking at what is being done right now, and not done, I believe we have reached the stage where it is time for civil disobedience to prevent the construction of new coal plants that do not have carbon capture and sequestration," Al Gore to the Clinton Global Initiative gathering, 2008.

I wrote previously, broadly, about Economic Justice - but the themes of 2010 Civicus Assembly are also about advocating for, and implementing, solutions. Some solutions are positive, they build on our successes, and try and create the conditions for, and models of, the world that we would like to see - a more equitable and just world. Examples abound, and I could have chosen many others, in CIVICUS member groups, and around the world - including such projects as: increasing all aspects of the "Solidarity Economy", working on building housing and improving access to food and markets, finding sustainable ways of living - by creating sustainable agricultural, forestry and fishing practices, or in a myriad of ways available to build community, civil society participation, and sustainability.

But, sometimes we have to stop the attacks, the damage, the inequality, the injustice, and we are forced into a defensive or aggressive (but non-violent) posture - we cannot wait for a chance to join with others, globally or locally, to build the world that we want to see eventually - sometimes we have to act now and we have to STOP actions: be it, whaling, bulldozing homes in the West Bank and Gaza, ripping up the land and polluting the water like in the Canadian Tar Sands, or stealing land from peasant and/or indigenous peoples. And for that, we have a limited number of options - letter writing, protesting in the street, PR through social networks or earned media, lobbying governments, and internationally agencies, and working in elections . . . and, also, civil disobedience.

Kumi Naidoo - Executive Director of Greenpeace and author of a new book - Boiling Point : Can Citizen Action Save the World? - has a video posted on his blog, on the Greenpeace site.

In the video (see video below) Kumi says, in part, "At a time, when civil disobedience appears to be the only way we can actually push our governments, Greenpeace's methodology [of non-violent direct action] offers us the most promise. Because, right now, the only possibility that we have to get our governments to listen to us and to act with the urgency that the situation calls for is to ensure that they are constantly being pushed."

The Canadian Environmental law Centre at the University of Victoria, has a handbook for Canadians particularly for struggles in the forest industry, called: Civil Disobedience: a Legal Handbook for Activists. In it they define and contextualize civil disobedience:

Civil disobedience can be defined as deliberate disobedience of the law out of obedience to a higher authority such as religion, morality or an environmentalist ethic. Civil disobedience has existed in various forms for as long as people have lived in organized societies governed by the rule of law. Its primary purpose is usually to change the law or society's views on a particular issue. It is a public action intended to have a political effect. Civil disobedience can be defined by certain criteria:

it is employed only after other means have failed

it is non-violent

it is undertaken openly

its participants are willing to submit to prosecution and punishment for breaking the law

it is aimed at publicizing and challenging injustice

it is not employed for coercive or intimidating reasons

Civil disobedience is seen as morally justifiable if it contributes to the social good and is performed by someone who is well intentioned and well informed. Reasoned and thoughtful resistance through civil disobedience can often serve as a check on the political system and prevent serious departures from justice. The fact that one can engage in principled disobedience of the law is generally a sign of a nearly just society, for in an unjust society, dissenting voices may be simply crushed. In a relatively just society, the use of civil disobedience can be an effective and morally justifiable way to change laws or government policies.

So, do we need to agree with this definition? Do we need to have a debate about how and when civil disobedience is a useful and productive tactic? Lots of people being arrested and jailed (as in the G20 in Toronto June, 2010 - although they were not for the most part practicing civil disobedience but were legally protesting) is not much use, if all of the activists are simply imprisoned, and for many years. And, yet, being willing to accept the punishment that goes with the disobedience, was traditionally part of civil disobedience (as it demonstrates one's agreement with the rule of law, in general, just not the one you are protesting!) along with non-violence.

If we are using civil disobedience, what principles are important, and what - if you use it in a country which has no functioning "rule of law" or where inequality and or discrimination against certain groups is rampant - is the role of civil disobedience? Is it still a valid choice?

Some of these issues, and the increasing criminalization of any kind of dissent, will be explored in a workshop on Day 3 of the Assembly called W25: Activism is Not a Crime.

What do you think about Civil Disobedience? Have you used it? Are you willing to be arrested or jailed for your beliefs? To save the planet? To save a people? To save yourself and your family?

Whorfian Hypothesis and gender

2010-08-01T08:14:00.005-03:00

This post in the Economist got me thinking. . .

Do you know the whorfian hypothesis? I bought it hook, line and sinker in my first year at university (anthropology major) - it suggests that language that we speak, affects our thoughts in clear ways - it makes us how we are - that is, that what you speak is what/how you think. In the Whorf hypothesis, one cannot think outside the confines of one's language. Examples I remember from University, include that the Tibetans do not have nouns - the table is not a noun or thing in the way that we think of things as solid - but the table, in Tibetan, is tabling. . . and the Hopi have no tenses (complicated but this - no tenses in Hopi - turns out to not be entirely true)

I am not even sure that it is true about the Tibetan language - - and I am not sure that I want to propose what that might do to your thinking - pretty profound. . . but it would obviously make you see the world differently - everything in your world is in a state of being. . .
Now having said that - keep in mind that the wharfian hypothesis has become very controversial and not everyone even agrees that a language can restrict or bend your thought patterns.

So I was thinking about the whorfian hypothesis today, and about language - and language learning - because I am studying Hindi - and I realized that, in Hindi - lots of words (I don't know how many as I am still in "basic" Hindi . . . ) are pronounced differently if you are a man or a woman. So for instance a man says: "I understand" - he says: "Main somajthaha hoon." But a woman says "Main somajtahi hoon." I was wondering if that is true in Arabic, or in other languages where there is more gender separation than in English. I know it is true in Thai - any other languages? In what languages do men and women speak a different language? And does it affect the way that the culture/world sees gender - its importance or non-importance?
Blows my hypothesis out of the water if Arabic doesn't separate gender. . . although it could be the exception to the rule!

I may be onto something here (apparently not an original thought) Found an overview of the researcher's study - mentioned in the Economist article which says:

Does treating chairs as masculine and beds as feminine in the grammar make Russian speakers think of chairs as being more like men and beds as more like women in some way? It turns out that it does. In one study, we asked German and Spanish speakers to describe objects having opposite gender assignment in those two languages. The descriptions they gave differed in a way predicted by grammatical gender. For example, when asked to describe a "key" — a word that is masculine in German and feminine in Spanish — the German speakers were more likely to use words like "hard," "heavy," "jagged," "metal," "serrated," and "useful," whereas Spanish speakers were more likely to say "golden," "intricate," "little," "lovely," "shiny," and "tiny." To describe a "bridge," which is feminine in German and masculine in Spanish, the German speakers said "beautiful," "elegant," "fragile," "peaceful," "pretty," and "slender," and the Spanish speakers said "big," "dangerous," "long," "strong," "sturdy," and "towering." This was true even though all testing was done in English, a language without grammatical gender. The same pattern of results also emerged in entirely nonlinguistic tasks (e.g., rating similarity between pictures). And we can also show that it is aspects of language per se that shape how people think: teaching English speakers new grammatical gender systems influences mental representations of objects in the same way it does with German and Spanish speakers. Apparently even small flukes of grammar, like the seemingly arbitrary assignment of gender to a noun, can have an effect on people's ideas of concrete objects in the world.

Economic Justice

2010-07-30T11:22:00.002-03:00

This blog was written for the Civicus world assembly blog and is reproduced here.

One of the themes of this year's CIVICUS assembly, in Montreal, is Economic Justice. What is economic justice? I am sure that there are some accepted definitions, but, none of them come from economics! So, my definition is: simply ensuring that everyone has access to, due to the fair allocation of: land, jobs, money, even opportunity; that no one is denied water, food, a home, a job. . . the basic needs and more .. . because they fit a "category" of people that are to be exploited or robbed. One should not be denied the right to basic needs (including education and healthcare) because one is black, lives in Africa, or South Asia, are a woman or a child, or belong to the wrong class, caste or tribe. So one needs the freedom to participate, to demand, to lobby, to organize and one needs education and a kind of optimism -- that things can be fairly allocated, can be just, can be distributed differently.

One of the things that holds back economic justice is a failure to consider all economic models. Most (but not all) of the world has adopted some form of capitalism. We say (at least in North America) "the economy" as if we mean it is some unchangeable force of nature. Jim Stanford - a Canadian economist - wrote a book called "Economics for Everyone". In it, he argues that we have a capitalist economic system and he writes about how it works. He does not propose socialism, or any other model, but does suggest that we should all understand that it is just one possible model, and that the constructs underpinning the "economy" can be changed. He also suggests that we should understand how "the economy" works, in order not be bamboozled by governments and economists into thinking that a restructuring of priorities and social organization are impossible.

He has a great website to accompany the book - Economics for Everyone - in which he says ". . . It provides a comprehensive description (and critique) of free-market economics." This is not your usual "economics text" but is written for the average "activist" to understand. The site actually includes slides, study guides, teacher's notes etc to run a course on how the economy works, and in my own experience, Jimbo is absolutely willing to help if you are trying to put the course together.

One of the things that he does not cover is those things that are not counted in the economy but should be. . . As Einstein famously said: Not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted.

For that, I turn to a great book by Raj Patel - "The Value of Nothing" - again there is a website to accompany the book - The Value of Nothing - that site says in part:

Opening with Oscar Wilde’s observation that “nowadays people know the price of everything and the value of nothing,” Patel shows how our faith in prices as a way of valuing the world is misplaced. He reveals the hidden ecological and social costs of a hamburger (as much as $200), and asks how we came to have markets in the first place. Both the corporate capture of government and our current financial crisis, Patel argues, are a result of our democratically bankrupt political system.

In what way? Because, he argues, in most countries corporations have become defined as "legal people" , and, because, in addition, we have been engaging for thirty years in "enclosure" -- owning and allowing ownership of more and more "things" - intellectual property, common lands, seed, water etc. More and more people are being ignored. We know, as he says, quoting Oscar Wilde, "the Price of Everything and the Value of Nothing". He says (p. 172/73):

"over the past thirty years, the accelerating price of enclosure, and the increasing scale of the theft, have brought our planet to the edge of destruction. Internationally, environmental costs have been shunted from rich to poor, most notably though not exclusively from global warming. A recent report offers a very conservative estimate of the number of people harmed by climate change today at 325 million, every year. The number of deaths from weather changes alone is set to exceed 500,000 people per year.. . and most of these deaths will happen among those who have had the least to do with causing pollution, people whose countries were colonized by the very same powers that have caused this new catastrophe. . . Handing the matter over to capitalism is, however, likely to prove as good an idea as asking the iceberg to fix the Titanic."

Patel does not argue that there can be no markets. On the contrary he argues that they have always existed and that what has changed is the way that we organize markets, what has value in them, and how we decide what to work on. Unfortunately too often our political decisions are based on profit, the marketplace and return on investment. He does say that alternatives are difficult to implement - how do we remove "corporate rapacity" from government and "the bleak weight of consumerism from our political imaginations." However, he does suggest that it IS possible and worth working on.

Great video overview of his thesis at:

Speaking of great videos and having just mentioned the weight of consumerism - another site, if you have not seen it, that is worth watching is:

the Story of Stuff. In it, Annie Leonard not only tells us what is wrong with the way that we are organized economically - but at least for me, she offers some direction for solution, including the fact that you don't have to work on everything - but need to working on some part of the "fix". . . the whole video is 20 minutes long - but it is worth it! Please take the time.

The site, with other issues , videos and resources is at: Story of Stuff

If economic justice is going to be achieved then we in the north (or, if you prefer the west or the so-called "developed" nations) have an obligation to pay our share, and more than our share now, since we have, as a community, been stealing from the rest of the world for a couple of centuries. As an example you can see my post on Haiti - Haiti - which describe the theft from Haiti, and it is just one example.

All of these issues need to be debated, discussed and consideration has to be given, re how to improve economic justice and distribution. Can Canadians ever demand, in large numbers, that we: democratize our economic system; that we give up some privilege/luxury (out of the car and onto the bus . . . people, eat local. . . people) to ensure better international distribution; that we collect taxes, but use them to help others we have traditionally stolen from; that we agree to provide a lot more in aid/development assistance; that we reduce our carbon footprint and allow others to increase theirs; to more radically open our doors to economic and climate migrants?. . . If not I fear the world is headed to overheating, plankton loss, and ocean death, and eventually the end of human life.

Too bleak an outlook? What do you think?

Water, more on SEWA , and the long from census

2010-07-27T07:05:00.005-03:00

Water. . .

I wrote a little about international access to water, yesterday; and this morning, there it is, in the news. . . Funny how these things hang around in the ether. . .

The story was in the The Toronto Star this morning and the head was: UN to vote on right to water: ‘Historic’ chance to ease human suffering, says Canadian activist

The "activist" in question is Maude Barlow - the founder of the Council of Canadians. The article says in part:

A United Nations vote to recognize water as a basic human right is a “historic” chance for the global community to ease human suffering, according to a Canadian activist in the thick of a last-ditch lobbying effort.
“We’re running out of water and the crisis is getting worse,” Maude Barlow said Monday from New York, on the eve of a vote expected as early as Wednesday at the UN General Assembly.

“If we don’t make a statement that we don’t want entire populations left behind, what does it say about us? About our humanity?”

Barlow, former senior adviser on water at the UN and chair of the Council of Canadians citizens group, is optimistic the resolution will pass by majority vote.

However, it appears powerful nations — including Canada — either will not support it or will push for a version that Barlow says would continue to allow water to be bought and sold as a commodity.

Of course Canada, emphasizing free market policies and lauding corporations over the needs of people, that our government has become, would not want to say that water is not a commodity and cannot be bought and sold - they would privatize the air I think, if they could. I want to re-write the headlines - Canada votes to deny water to the poor, shareholders of water corporations are gonna' party like its 1999.

When did "shareholder's interests" become more important than citizen interests? At least once we pretended that this was not the case and so if you caught a government out, voting for corporate interests, over the public, you could point it out and changes might happen. Now it is like everyone is a Reagan Clone -- everyone buys trickle down or class mobility- trickle down in that (even though it has proven over and over again that it only leads to greater disparities between rich and poor) when corporations do well - they employ more people etc and so everyone benefits - the rising tide lifts all boats theory. . . and then there is class mobility and people believe that they can be lifted beyond the next level to the top - this is people who vote and support what is good for the rich because they believe that they will "be there someday".

Anyway, shouldn't water and food and shelter be accessible to everyone? It is not. We should agree that we are going distribute the wealth of this world in a way that means that everyone has the basics covered. We will have to do with less, as others need more. Yes where there is drought or famine for some other reason (often war) we need to get water and food to people - this is much easier if no one owns the water. Then international support can help drill for the water, put in a well or pipes to move it around. When water is privatized, the water corp. has to make sure that a profit is made, which increases the price on every well dug, every pipe laid. . . So why is Canada not agreeing to declare that water is a human right - more from the Star article:

Foreign Affairs spokesperson said in an email Tuesday that Canada already “recognizes there are linkages between access to safe drinking water and certain existing human rights obligations,” and supports further study on the issue of water as a right.
The email also said Canada asserts “its international human rights obligations in no way limit its sovereign right to manage its own resources.”

Barlow dismisses the argument that Canada’s water resources could be jeopardized by the proposed UN resolution. She says the sweeping 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights doesn’t mean Canada has to guarantee jobs or pensions for every country.
. . .
Time is critical, says Barlow, because the world is facing “a double whammy”: continued lack of water through poverty and the growing physical and ecological crisis that deprives the world of clean water.

___________________________________________________________________

After mentioning SEWA yesterday I wanted to follow up with more information about why I love them and think they are a great model. I would love to know more about them.

SEWA is the "Self-employed women's association" of India - of course the poor in India, as elsewhere, are for the most part not employed. By that I do not mean that they are "unemployed" but that they are small resellers of goods, subsistence farmers, makers of crafts, drivers of taxi's - that is they are self-employed. Some estimates are, that 80% of the world population are "not employees". So SEWA has been a very successful model in assisting women in India that are in this category - they say on their website:

SEWA is a trade union registered in 1972. It is an organisation of poor, self-employed women workers. These are women who earn a living through their own labour or small businesses. They do not obtain regular salaried employment with welfare benefits like workers in the organised sector. They are the unprotected labour force of our country. Constituting 93% of the labour force, these are workers of the unorganised sector. Of the female labour force in India, more than 94% are in the unorganised sector. However their work is not counted and hence remains invisible.

One story I heard some time ago - but it may be somewhere on their website [later: found the detail at: http://www.sewa.org/Rudi Products And Rudi Multi Trading Co Ltd.asp] or I may have read it elsewhere is about one of the things that SEWA does -- is that many women are subsistence farmers. When food is harvested, sometimes they have surplus that cannot be eaten or stored. However, let's say on any given day you have 10 tomatoes - 10 tomatoes will get you say 50 rupees at the market, but the bus ride to and from the market is 30-50 rupees - so it is not worth going - you cannot earn cash from your surplus as it too small an amount - so SEWA
runs a truck that drives through these remote places and buys the surplus at the same rate the women would get if they could get to the market - providing cash income. I don't know why that seems like such a simple.good idea but I really thought it was terrific as the subsistence farmers in India do not do well, although it represents so much of the country.

___________________________________________________________________

Cannot believe that the Cons are still holding out on the Long Form census - from the perspective of most "ordinary " folks - this looks like a big mistake - apparently, it is just pandering to the Con "base" who are to the right of Atilla the Hun! Those same folks who want shareholder rights to be paramount, who want more actions made crimes, who want to lock more people up for longer, who want to give the police more powers, privatize our jails etc. But, eliminating the census also insures that there will never be reliable, acceptable data to prove that we have poor people, aboriginal people, people who speak other languages at home, people who have health problems - among other groups with needs. . . what a travesty . . . Most recent CBC update at: Clement, Sheikh to testify about census reform

Travelling with Matt in Gaza, Civicus and SEWA

2010-07-26T18:35:00.004-03:00

First something wonderful! You may remember Travelling with Matt. His website, "Where the Hell is Matt?" showed him dancing, badly, around the world. The video of his travels, and dancing with people in many countries, was very inspiring and uplifting, and brought us all together. Now he has a video where he is dancing with children in Gaza. Watching the kids dance, and reading about them having a good time at summer camp, made me very happy.

___________________________________________________________________
Another great thing that is happening in Canada. . .

I hope I can attend this assembly. CIVICUS 9th Annual World Assembly, which this year is in Montreal. See: http://civicus.org/world-assembly Sounds very appealing. . . It will be interesting, and much would be new to me. I want to participate and would hope for increasing my knowledge base about development issues, and to participate in making decisions about future outcomes fro the organization and its members.

The following workshop interests me in particular--

Abstract:

In the backdrop of increasing economic inequalities threatening to arrest social cohesion and harmony, the search for solution-oriented interventions to secure economic justice has gained centre-stage in the global development debate and practice. At the proposed workshop, participants will have the opportunity to share experiences, learn and gain practical tips from a highly experienced panel of civil society practitioners about the criticality of participatory governance approaches in promoting equitable economic development policies, securing economic rights of people and achieve inclusive growth. Specifically, participants will be exposed to tools and approaches such as Participatory Budgeting, Public Expenditure Tracking, Social Audits and so on. A part of the panel discussion will be driven by a video documentary produced by the International Budget Partnership (IBP)

Presenters:
Manjunath Sadashiva, CIVICUS Participatory Governance Programme, India
Anu Pekkonen, CIVICUS Participatory Governance Programme, Finland
Helena Hofbauer, International Budget Partnership, South Africa
Elizabeth Pinnington, Pinnington Training and Research, Canada
Yogesh Kumar, Samarthan, India

In India, I saw so much more participation in parties and politics. . . and it seemed like everyone had a real analysis of what was going on. . . So I would really like to engage in that discussion - how can they increase participation in India, especially among the poor - who demonstrate but get excluded from party politics - and, how can it be emulated in other countries?

That CIVICUS Assembly is being followed by something else, that's free (Civicus is expensive - $600.) and also looks interesting. . . is the Citizen's Media Rendevouz The website says, in part:

In an era where mass media is increasingly fragile (declining advertizing revenues, financial crisis, digital revolution, fragmenting audiences, etc.), citizen media have an unprecedented opportunity to occupy the public sphere, particularly due to the advancement of social media and the democratization of modes of production.

For this second edition, the Citizen Media Rendez-Vous seeks to advance innovative practices within citizen media’s landscape, here and elsewhere in world. How can the public access and appropriate new media projects to better inform and mobilize itself? How can citizen media be used in the defense of human rights?

The Citizen Media Rendez-Vous gathers bloggers, engaged filmmakers, photographers and citizen journalists, media experts, alternative and independent media practitioners, web entrepreneurs, as well as others from the media landscape in turmoil. The Citizen Media Rendez-Vous is a space that promotes the sharing of ideas and practices. It invites new perspectives and encourages new collaborations. Lively exchanges among panelists and participants will touch subjects such as the creation of content, the containers within which content is placed (technology platforms) and different community organizational models.

I am planning to go to Montreal for these events. I have registered for the Rendevous and applied to be a volunteer blogger for the CIVICUS Assembly, as I cannot afford the registration fee.
___________________________________________________________________

Last link suggestion today . . . and another happy one is to a story in the NY Times

The story is about a poor Indian woman from Gujarat who was selected by SEWA (Self-Employed Women's Association) to come to NY to promote Indian handicrafts. I am particularly impressed with SEWA (have been for some time) who have helped organize women in India using a kind of trade union model. They also have a very successful and profitable bank that serves those who were originally thought to not need a bank - micro credit is now used in lots of places. Anyway, it was a story that made me laugh and cry. I won't spell it out - just follow the link -From Untouchable to Businesswoman - and go read it for yourself.

I cried partly because in lots of India, and Africa too, it is hard for people to find clean drinking water. Today Kevin and I went for a hike through an area that once housed many people on a "poor Farm" outside Halifax, NS. We were thinking and talking about the model of having a "poor farm" where you went to work and eat if you were too poor to feed yourself, and worrying that we have not come much further - too poor to feed yourself you can get welfare which will leave you well below the Canadian low income cut offs and not able to feed, house, and transport yourself. . . Eventually it became a "mental institution" instead, and we know how those services are available and serve us well (not!) The farm had a reservoir, which we found, but the water was very "dirty' looking and it started us thinking about people who have to drink water that is not clean and safe, and who even have to feed it to their children. . . it is the kind of thing that SEWA helps with, in India.

Pink Sari's and Making Shareholders Pay

2010-07-22T11:42:00.007-03:00

Nova Scotia.
Yesterday, the Halifax Chronicle Herald ran a story about the decisions that the provincial government has to make, about the 12% increase in rates that N.S. Power is asking for. . . It appears that there are not many options to save us from this increase, except possibly reducing the demands on reducing pollution, and increasing alternative power that the province and regulator have demanded of the utility. That is because neither newspaper nor government seems to perceive any alternative but to pass on the increase to consumers.

Since 1991 and the sell off (death of a public utility - short term gain for long term pain for everyone in the province) of Nova Scotia Power - the utility has made a bundle - not just in income, but in profit - certainly over a billion dollars and probably more.

You can see some financial info re: NSPI at the Globe and Mail here.

As you can see - they operate in the black and have a huge amount of equity. Last year they paid a .33 cent dividend.

Aren't shareholders supposed to be taking a "risk" when they invest? (OK I know that is no longer true and certainly NSPI would be considered, at least in N.S., "too big to fail".) Still - why can't the shareholders take some of the hit in terms of reducing "pollution" - it's a privately owned "public utility" - that is everyone needs it and there is no competition and it can be regulated publicly - I say - let the shareholders take some of the burden. I am not suggesting that they be put out of business with regulations (although I would buy it back for the public if I could . . . see Bruce Wark's editorial -- in the Coast - Utility Sales Never a Good Idea. ) but just that it be OK to reduce profit in the public interest.

Then today the province announces - see story in the Chronicle Herald - that they will push back the dates for reducing pollution for NSP - esp mercury - article says in part:

Premier Darrell Dexter said Thursday that the province will extend until 2014 the 2010 deadline for lowering mercury emissions to 65 kilograms a year, down from 168, in an attempt to reduce the utility’s projected double-digit rate hikes for next year.

That's so that they don't pass on a price increase to consumers - but couldn't the province regulate the emissions and refuse a rate increase? Why not? Somehow "corporations" and their profits, and the interests of their shareholders, are more important than the health or costs for the average consumer. How did we get here? And more importantly can we change it?

_____________________________________________________________________

Another item today. . . speaking of making change. . . something I just love and think could be emulated and serve as a model for organizing --

In Uttar Pradesh (UP) one of the poorest states in India there is a movement that few of us had heard about (Good facebook coverage the last couple of days!) that has had quite a bit of success over the last 4-5 years.

According to an article in Slate:

India is witnessing a rise of vigilante groups, the most sensational of which is the gulabi, or pink gang, operating in the Bundelkhand district of the Uttar Pradesh state, one of the poorest districts of India. Some gangs have started what Indian journalists describe as a "mini-revolution" on behalf of women. . . . . .The gulabis, whose members say they are a "gang for justice," started in 2006 as a sisterhood of sorts that looked out for victims of domestic abuse, a problem the United Nations estimates affects two in three married Indian women. Named after their hot-pink sari uniforms, the gang paid visits to abusive husbands and demanded they stop the beatings. When obstinate men refused to listen, the gulabis would return with large bamboo sticks called laathis and "persuade" them to change their ways. . . . . . Pal's group now has more than 20,000 members, and the number is growing. Making her way from one far-flung village to another on an old rusty bicycle, she holds daily gatherings under shady banyan trees, near makeshift tea-stalls selling the sweet Indian drink chai and other popular village hangouts to discuss local problems and attract new recruits.

Or for more click on pic below from an article on the BBC site:

Women practicing with laathi's - they chase and beat men and go after corrupt officials - hundreds even thousands of them - if only we could organize women to be so effective everywhere.

Most of the news in India is from the early days in 2006 but now there is a support website - set up in France: www.gulabigang.org. They also have a Facebook site: http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=23654846769&ref=search

___________________________________________________________________

Sunday Musings and The Iron Wall

2010-07-18T20:35:00.003-03:00

First, here's a great article - American Psychosis - from Adbusters Magazine - by Chris Hedges, a Pulitzer Prize-winning reporter for the New York Times, who is the author of a book - Empire of Illusion: The End of Literacy and the Triumph of Spectacle. I was just trying to get through the book, before it has to be returned to the library, but I think this article is a bit of a precis - saving me some time! In part, he says:

Our culture of flagrant self-exaltation, hardwired in the American character, permits the humiliation of all those who oppose us. We believe, after all, that because we have the capacity to wage war we have a right to wage war. Those who lose deserve to be erased. Those who fail, those who are deemed ugly, ignorant or poor, should be belittled and mocked. Human beings are used and discarded like Styrofoam boxes that held junk food. And the numbers of superfluous human beings are swelling the unemployment offices, the prisons and the soup kitchens.

It is the cult of self that is killing the United States. This cult has within it the classic traits of psychopaths: superficial charm, grandiosity and self-importance; a need for constant stimulation; a penchant for lying, deception and manipulation; and the incapacity for remorse or guilt. Michael Jackson, from his phony marriages to the portraits of himself dressed as royalty to his insatiable hunger for new toys to his questionable relationships with young boys, had all these qualities. And this is also the ethic promoted by corporations. It is the ethic of unfettered capitalism. It is the misguided belief that personal style and personal advancement, mistaken for individualism, are the same as democratic equality. It is the nationwide celebration of image over substance, of illusion over truth. And it is why investment bankers blink in confusion when questioned about the morality of the billions in profits they made by selling worthless toxic assets to investors. . .

. . . The belief that democracy lies in the choice between competing brands and the accumulation of vast sums of personal wealth at the expense of others is exposed as a fraud. Freedom can no longer be conflated with the free market. The travails of the poor are rapidly becoming the travails of the middle class, especially as unemployment insurance runs out. And class warfare, once buried under the happy illusion that we were all going to enter an age of prosperity with unfettered capitalism, is returning with a vengeance.

Unfortunately, given his great analysis, Hedges really suggests no cure, no respite. He, in fact, suggests that Americans should start thinking like people under the Apartheid regime in South Africa or dissidents in the Soviet Union. He suggests the emergence of a corporate state and ultimately a fascist state is nigh upon us. . . He says:

Resistance movements will have to look now at the long night of slavery, the decades of oppression in the Soviet Union and the curse of fascism for models. The goal will no longer be the possibility of reforming the system but of protecting truth, civility and culture from mass contamination. It will require the kind of schizophrenic lifestyle that characterizes all totalitarian societies. Our private and public demeanors will often have to stand in stark contrast. Acts of defiance will often be subtle and nuanced. They will be carried out not for short term gain but the assertion of our integrity. Rebellion will have an ultimate if not easily definable purpose. The more we retreat from the culture at large the more room we will have to carve out lives of meaning, the more we will be able to wall off the flood of illusions disseminated by mass culture and the more we will retain sanity in an insane world. The goal will become the ability to endure.

But I remain more of an optimist - or maybe it is that I live in Canada (alright not as optimistic as I would have been before I saw the police state emerge and not be denounced by all at the G20) and not in the U.S., but I still believe that there is hope - although if we moved to a true democratic state that worked for people I guess that the U.S. might feel compelled to bring their military to bear. . . but that doesn't seem immediately likely - at least not while our Prime Minister is busy buying 9 BILLION dollars worth of fighter jets that cannot reach the arctic but work great on air craft carriers of which we have precisely ZERO!

I still think it is possible that we can build a state that at the very least moderates (if not eliminates) the "free market", that works for people instead of corporations and that can find a way to keep all children out of poverty (their parents, and people without children, too!) I have been to India, and Kerela really is a miracle - a miracle born not of increased development but of improved distribution!

It is possible to have jails/prisons but to keep them humane and to assume that every one in them is innocent until proven guilty - a point I embarrassingly must admit I got from Conrad Black and that got driven home by the detention situation at the G20; but also by a friend who was arrested and jailed over night because he "forgot" (with good reason if you knew the whole story) about a trial in which he was the witness - he was the victim of a crime and wanted to go to court and testify - anyway he got locked up , cold, no food, no coffee etc. Pretty bad scene, and something that can and should be fixed.

Instead I do think it is true that TV, The Web, social networking video games etc keep everyone distracted and living under an "illusion" that things are OK as they are and that they don't require fixing - just tweaking - until it is your child or friend who arrested, or fired or becomes homeless - and then the system seems to need a kick! Let's start kicking and screaming, instead of going to bed, getting high and watching another reality TV show!

___________________________________________________________________

Just a little story that usually gets away - I happened to notice this and cannot believe (well OK I can believe it) that this is not bigger news. Story is that Wall Street, specifically the Wachovia Bank, now merged with Wells Fargo, is laundering drug money, making a fortune and getting away with it - because - get this! - these banks are too big to fail , and as Smith says in this article:

No big U.S. bank . . . has ever been indicted for violating the Bank Secrecy Act or any other federal law. Instead, the Justice Department settles criminal charges by using deferred-prosecution agreements, in which a bank pays a fine and promises not to break the law again . . . . Large banks are protected from indictments by a variant of the too-big-to-fail theory. Indicting a big bank could trigger a mad dash by investors to dump shares and cause panic in financial markets.

Here is some of the detail - but you can read the whole story at Bloomberg.com

Wachovia, it turns out, had made a habit of helping move money for Mexican drug smugglers. Wells Fargo & Co., which bought Wachovia in 2008, has admitted in court that its unit failed to monitor and report suspected money laundering by narcotics traffickers -- including the cash used to buy four planes that shipped a total of 22 tons of cocaine.
The admission came in an agreement that Charlotte, North Carolina-based Wachovia struck with federal prosecutors in March, and it sheds light on the largely undocumented role of U.S. banks in contributing to the violent drug trade that has convulsed Mexico for the past four years. . .

. . .

Wachovia admitted it didn’t do enough to spot illicit funds in handling $378.4 billion for Mexican-currency-exchange houses from 2004 to 2007. That’s the largest violation of the Bank Secrecy Act, an anti-money-laundering law, in U.S. history -- a sum equal to one-third of Mexico’s current gross domestic product. . .

“Wachovia’s blatant disregard for our banking laws gave international cocaine cartels a virtual carte blanche to finance their operations,” says Jeffrey Sloman, the federal prosecutor who handled the case. . .

“It’s the banks laundering money for the cartels that finances the tragedy,” says Martin Woods, director of Wachovia’s anti-money-laundering unit in London from 2006 to 2009. Woods says he quit the bank in disgust after executives ignored his documentation that drug dealers were funneling money through Wachovia’s branch network. . .

The bank didn’t react quickly enough to the prosecutors’ requests and failed to hire enough investigators, the U.S. Treasury Department said in March. After a 22-month investigation, the Justice Department on March 12 charged Wachovia with violating the Bank Secrecy Act by failing to run an effective anti-money-laundering program.

Five days later, Wells Fargo promised in a Miami federal courtroom to revamp its detection systems. Wachovia’s new owner paid $160 million in fines and penalties, less than 2 percent of its $12.3 billion profit in 2009.

If Wells Fargo keeps its pledge, the U.S. government will, according to the agreement, drop all charges against the bank in March 2011.

Additionally there is more analysis of the story at: Alternet

There are not many other stories except on blogs, and a reprint of the Bloomberg story in the Edmonton Journal. Sigh - peaceful protesters go to jail and banks can launder billions for Drug Cartels and simply get away with it because they are too big too fail.

___________________________________________________________________

Most people have now seen the clip on Youtube of a young woman getting told she will be arrested for assault if a bubble touches an officer -

but I was pleased to see that it was actually covered in a story today in the National Post!!! and sympathetic to the bubble blower - who was later arrested for having eye wash in her back pack.

___________________________________________________________________

Saw a fabulous film today called The Iron Wall - if you get a chance see it - even though it is 5 years old - it is a fabulous history of Israeli Zionism and Palestine and I did not know how things were (and now they are worse) in Hebron. I cannot imagine. Break the Siege of Gaza!! Free Palestine. There is little hope left for a two state solution but I am an optimist!
You can see the whole thing here but it is a poor copy from google video. I suggest that you order your own copy from the Palestine Store and support the film makers - or have a look at the website at: THE IRON WALL

____________________________________________________________________
And lastly comes this story, in the Toronto Star, about an NGO in Afghanistan called in the article Team Canada because the real name cannot be used - the reporter says to keep the workers safe - but I am suspicious of this whole thing and I don't know why - maybe because they all are ex-military - they may be heroes but they may be mercenaries - I cannot figure it out - so I am looking for feedback. . . anyone been in Afghanistan and know this makes sense - sounds like they have a lot of money to spend - and I just worry that it is more military - and also its paying people to dig ditches - literally - but at least they don't just fill them in again. . . and what about the women?

Halifax - Toronto - a comparison from a CFA

2010-07-08T09:09:00.013-03:00

OK, so I am a "newbie" - a CFA. (That's comes from away for those you not in the Atlantic Provinces.) I have lived here for only 4 1/2 years. That is very new, in Nova Scotia. Nowhere else that I have lived (N.B., B.C., Ontario, Quebec and Sask.) do so many people have roots that go back 100's of years. That may suggest that I may be unreliable in some of my analysis of what's going on in Nova Scotia, but it also provides an opportunity to do some analysis from a position of both inside and outside - visitor and resident

I realized after the events of June27th/28th in Toronto, where I lived before moving to Nova Scotia, (and I have lived in 3 other provinces as well) that part of me still feels like a Torontonian and that it felt like "my city" and my friends were under siege and being arrested, at the G20.

. . . but this post is not about that (sighs of relief all round), but about what I see as the benefits and down-sides of living here, in Nova Scotia - what I am giving up and what I gain. I am not sitting back in Nova Scotia, I am very involved in party politics, in neighbourhood organizations, the labour movement and human rights support work. So I have met a lot of people, and not just a few. My job as an adult educator and my union involvement have brought me in touch with hundreds, possibly thousands, of Nova Scotians. Every year I am paid to drive (on major highways granted) from Sydney to Yarmouth and I consider myself privileged to do so.

First, the things I miss about Toronto (for all you who hate it, and think that it has no redeeming features!)

1) Movies - In Toronto, I could see a lot of Indie and Int'l (sub-titled) films that simply never make it here. On the UP side - the Film festival in Halifax each September is easy to attend, you don't need to be standing in line for hours to get tickets and there are lots of great films! I just have to wait until they come out on DVD to see those features that I will miss in the theatre. http://www.cinemaclock.com/toronto.html

2) Flights to there. . . As near as I can determine, in the winter, out of Halifax (Iceland, Paris and Frankfort seem to be added in the summer months) one can fly to southern destinations on charter flights and to London, and of course to other Canadian and some U.S. destinations - but in Toronto I could fly to many destinations in the world. See: Halifax Airport
Up side -- airport is small, well organized and since all the construction is over, easy to get in and out of! Also when it comes to summer vacations, you cannot go wrong staying in the province, attending festivals, daytripping, or going to the end of the earth, or just driving a back road to find some vista you have never before seen. See: Tourism Nova Scotia or Nova Scotia.com

3) Cheap and cheerful restaurants with interesting flavourful food. . . We used to eat out at least a couple of times a week - going for Japanese or Indian we could spend $30 for dinners including both of us having a beer - not true in Halifax-Dartmouth. Thai was more, but not as pricey as here and the "good' restaurants here, are all just too expensive - when we go out we seem to spend $80-100 with tax and tip - so we eat most nights at home. Upside - I have learned to cook! and Lobster at $4-8/lb, fresh scallops, mussels, clams and oysters all at an affordable price (OK the oysters, even here, are a luxury) makes up for it!

4) Diversity of the population, hearing a myriad of languages every day, and stories about and from many different countries. This is the reason most people here give me for hating Toronto - (too many people of different races and accents - if one more person tries to explain what is wrong with Toronto by describe their experience of being "the only white person on the subway car" I am going to scream out loud) but, I missed this especially during the World Cup. My last office in Toronto was downtown and during World Cup each country's contingent could be counted upon to be running and/or driving down the road waving the appropriate country flag and singing and chanting - what fun! Further downside. . . although I would not swear that Torontonians are less racist than Nova Scotians (or specifically Haligonians), they know that they should not speak racist statements aloud - or expect to catch hell for it, immediately. Here, I still hear people utter incredible racist stereotypes, and have no idea that they should apologize for saying that "the Chinese are bad drivers" or that "Paki's" (a term few people seem to realize is a slur - and which is applied to all South Asians and others - whether Indian, Nepali, Tibetan, Bangladeshi, or sometimes Afghani and even Fillipinos) are poor housekeepers, or most recently that Iranians are pigs (from a B&B operator who had one family of Iranians stay with her, and who I cannot convince do not represent the whole nation!)

Things that I love about Nova Scotia and that totally make up for the above. . .

1) The ocean. At my house the tide literally rises and falls in my backyard. One morning a deer swam across the inlet right in front of my house. I can drink my tea while the sun climbs in the sky and watch birds. In March and April there are ducks - many varieties, by July the cormorants and Great Blue Herons are back and in the summer we often see Osprey and eagles. I can kayak in the morning before work, or ride my bike on trails through woods, and/or along the ocean inlets, and in the evening, if there is a low tide, I can sit on the deck and watch the sunset while the whimbrels, and willets, and maybe godwits, go by fishing in the rocks and shallows. From the shore in front of my house I see fish jump, small white crabs and large red legged crabs along with shrimp and eels. Not to mention the clams, and mussels and and periwinkles. You can watch swifts and turns swoop, and you can watch cormorants dive and come up eating fish.

2) The beaches (but where is the signage, people?) The beaches are amazing and there is great variety. You can (and I live only a few km's from) go to Lawrencetown Beach which is rocky but has change rooms, lifeguards and a canteen in the summer months and where there is surfing all year long. In fact, in the winter the surfing they say is better - with more storms the surf is up and the water is "thicker". Rainbow Haven Beach is sandy and has the same amenities but is safer for kids. Just stay away from looks like a river but is where the tide goes in and out rushing quickly.

And Conrad Beach (left) is a long crescent of sand and a beach with sand bars - they say the "undertow" is strong, but with the kids in close to shore it feels pretty safe - and oh the sand castles we have built, and the kites we have flown.

3) Friendly, helpful, generous people. Never, anywhere in Canada have I met such generous helpful and friendly people. (OK - actually I think NFLD may get the prize, but I have never lived there so cannot compare!) Every one speaks to everyone. After a couple for years here, and lots of time spent on trails and beaches, I returned to Toronto, and walked the Mimico Linear Park - which had been promised all the time I lived in Mimico but never completed. . . I said hello to everyone on the trail until I realized I was scaring the Toronto natives, when one woman looked aghast at me and literally ran away (I am a middle aged woman and don't think anything about me looks scary!) It just seems to be true that speaking to strangers in most circumstances in Canada's biggest city makes people assume that you are mentally ill.

4) The Annapolis Valley in the summertime - farms and farm markets, Ross Creek Centre and a whole lot more. Now it is true that I could be in Niagara in an hour out of Toronto, but somehow the Annapolis valley seems so much more accessible - and there is no rush hour, getting out of town, no backlog of Friday evening drivers trying to get away. . .

5) Old stuff - there has been habitation here for a long time - friendly. helpful first nations and early European settlement (yeah I realize that it was colonialism but it is still interesting) like in Annapolis Royal. . . (Pictured below)

6) The view from almost anywhere - Everyone knows about the Cabot Trail and the Southshore but the Eastern Shore and the mainland highlands - esp Cape George - Parrsboro, the Northumberland Shore, everywhere you look the natural Beauty is stunning. There is almost no drive you can take that does not result in some fabulous site.

So although there are things that I miss (my mother and sister, good friends and long time colleagues) there is lots to make me happy and keep me here. And I have not mentioned that N.S. also elected an NDP government (jury is still out but they are going gangbusters on the environment - except for the burning of wood for commercial power.) who I hope will make improvements in some of the social ills and poverty that still plague this province.

Turning the Ship of State

2010-07-05T09:37:00.008-03:00

OK - so I am still a little upset by the events of the G20 police actions, in Toronto. In fact, I cannot erase it from my mind. It torments me night and day. Maybe the Black Bloc successfully accomplished what they were attempting by showing that the might of the state is authoritarian, and it will come down on your head, without due process, and 1000+ people now know what that feels like. . .

I fear that we are at the beginning (or maybe in the middle) of what I, in later years, will see more clearly as a "police state" - when common protest - taking to the streets is somehow perceived by too many as dangerous, out of the mainstream and not representative of their needs or views. I do not know immediately how to change the direction of the country - but I am thinking about it (and you are being subjected to reading about it) and I know I am not alone - but too few people are troubled.

I was reading a lot about corruption in India, this morning, and some of the attempts to "clean it up". It is still pretty bad - but I thought, in a lot of ways maybe they are more honest about their politicians' and bureaucrats' corruption. There, they have investigative journalism - more than one weekly magazine dedicated to exposing corruption and theft from "the people". These are not far left publications - more like McLeans - but exposing what is going on. I think of all of the horrible things that I know about from reading "alternative" news sources, Twitter, Blogs and yes I suppose left analysis; from Canadian Mining Companies' behavior in Canada and around the world (esp exploiting first nations - see: http://www.miningwatch.ca/) to the behaviour of our federal government - refusing to uphold democratic principles and acting like a dictator. . . e.g from James Travers in the Star :
The Star, by the way, has had some decent stories and columns around the city losses, destruction and out of control policing. . . )

Systematically, and without explanation, the Prime Minister is testing every limit on his power. Along with successfully shuttering Parliament for the second time, he's neutering committees charged with the primary democratic responsibilities of safeguarding the treasury and forcing the government to explain its actions. He's challenging independent rulings against how Conservatives funded their 2006 election and how this government treats Canadians in trouble abroad.
Politics is an uncompromising blood sport played to win within loose rules. By learning Liberal dirty tricks, adapting to changing circumstances and reinterpreting every regulation in his favour, Harper is proving to be a shrewd and accomplished contestant.

Far less clear is what he accepts as legitimate constraint, the line in the democratic sand not to be crossed.

Last year ministers threatened to go over the head of the de facto head of state if Governor General Michaëlle Jean allowed a coalition of "Liberals, socialists and separatist" to use their Commons majority to topple his minority. This winter Harper is essentially making the argument that Parliament is getting in the way of his government governing.

or see: the new Lawrence Martin Book,

The Martin book will chronicle how Harper has come to be the master controller, dominating every aspect of governance. It will assess his accomplishments and failings and his effect on the workings of the democratic system.

The "democratic deficit," as it is sometimes called, has become an issue of such concern to Canadians that they recently staged nationwide protests over Harper's decision to suspend parliament. The book will chart how, since Pierre Trudeau, Canada has seen a steep decline in its democratic standards.

So, we know, and I think can all agree, that we are slowly eroding our democracy and that governments, now govern for the "owners" and for the corporations and their shareholders - those of us who earn a living (80% of us) get little, and indeed, less all the time.

In case that is in doubt, I offer the details of how things have been for the last while, which are well demonstrated on the CCPA's site - http://www.policyalternatives.ca/projects/growing-gap

but also in this statement from Armine Yalnizyan, the economist at CCPA, from another paper:

But, after three decades, the evidence shows the neoliberal game-plan just didn’t deliver, at least for most of us. Still, we were running too fast to gripe much about it, or perhaps we were distracted by our ridiculously cheap baubles and toys… when along came a global financial meltdown. That turned the “less government, more market” mindset on its head -- at least for a time.

But now that we’ve spent $66 billion in Canada stabilizing what we have repeatedly been told is the world’s best financial system, that damn mantra is back – “less government, more market” – just in time to tell the people who are the collateral damage of neoliberalism what we can’t afford to do: help them.

What we really can no longer afford, however, is the discredited, corrupt idea of neoliberalism. It didn’t deliver prosperity to the majority of Canadians. Instead, it brought:

a huge tax shift -- from corporations to households, from richer people to poorer ones; from taxing incomes to taxing spending; from taxing income flows from savings and capital gains to shielding those forms of income;

the lowest rates of spending and revenue collection by the federal government since late 1940s (as a share of the economy);

a vastly smaller safety net, and more expensive basic services like education and housing;

less collective action through governments, and less collective action outside governments (unionization rates today are at same level as 1961, 31.4%; the peak was 36.5% in mid-1980s; today only about 18% of private sector workers are covered by collective agreements, about 75% of public employees);

a shrinking share of jobs from the two traditional sources of middle-class employment, manufacturing and public sector;

median wages stagnant for 30 years;

greater inequality: the bottom 40% of Canadian families raising kids are worse off now than their predecessors 30 years ago, though they are better educated and working more; only the top 10% have seen significant gains;

record household indebtedness;

less regulation and oversight on investments and credit creation;

more foreign ownership of our enterprises (and more Canadian capitalists owning stuff offshore);

climate change (and a disregard for it);

economic collapse; and

workers hating other workers more than the people who wrecked the system: ("I don't have what you have, so why should you have it?")

Also, in a paper by Ed Broadbent - in case you need any more convincing that we, the working people of this country, are not doing well ,and that there is a war against us, going on. . .

It’s important to note that, even at the peak of the deficit problem, alternative policies were available. In continental Europe, it is widely accepted that higher and more progressive taxation is needed to maintain an equal social rights-based notion of citizenship. Even in the U.S., in dealing with a similar deficit problem in the 1990s, President Bill Clinton (although he did further deregulate the financial sector) made few changes in social policy. Instead, he dealt with the U.S. deficit by relying on economic growth and tax increases on upper-income Americans.

The scale of the increase in inequality and the reduction of social rights, beginning in the last decade of the 20th century, is immense. Keep in mind that most Western economies, including Canada, had experienced the best decade of economic growth in 40 years, a period which the trickle-down soothsayers said would benefit everyone. Between 1998 and 2007, the average wage of full-time workers rose from $33,000 to $40,000, but that was less than the rate of inflation. During the same period, the top 1% of Canadians increased by 100% their share of total wages and salaries, and the compensation of the top 100 CEOs tripled, from an annual average of $3.5 million to $10.4 million.

The vast majority of Canadians actually experienced a downward shift in their share of the national income that they had worked to create. Seventy per cent of Canadian households have a smaller share now than they had at the end of the 1970s. A final statistic: excluding the elderly, the bottom 50% of Canadians have lower after-tax incomes than their equivalents in the late 1970s.

I don't know what else to do besides sign petitions, write letters, send emails and rant in blogs. I go to protests, and I have not stopped, but I really do feel like hitting the streets is not effective any more. If, as the recent poll, reported in the Toronto Star suggests,

The Angus Reid poll, which surveyed 1,003 Canadians and 503 Torontonians, found that 73 per cent of Torontonians and two-thirds of Canadians believe police treatment of protesters was justified during the G20 summit.

It is no way to get the public onside! So how do we turn this around?

What news are these folks watching? Could they have got the impression that those arrested were the same folks who were smashing windows, burning cars and generally using violence and (property) damage? I suppose that they could be - 'cause we know that the city (or someone in charge) did not send the fire department, but let a police car burn for 2 hours to make sure that all of the news gathering agencies "got their shot". . . but I am not sure that "the public" just feels like "protesters" are "someone else" - that they do not represent their (the public's) interests - why is that? Probably because TV news (where most folks get their news these days, although there is lots of "multi -sources" of news - TV, radio, newspapers, the Internet) is big in Canada esp among those who access only one news source - But if you are listening to talk radio, getting your news from yahoo.com or just reading newspapers online - National Post.com - you may be getting multiple sources but you are not getting multiple viewpoints.

I am too lazy today to put in the links to prove some points, but if you have doubts - send me a message and I will make that attempt - but I have been adding info to a previous blog about the G20 - if you want some evidence, about police atrocities. At this point it is questions of another nature - not proving that something was "fishy" and undemocratic and totalitarian - you'll have to accept that at the moment. And then I can move on. . .

to exploring how we can get Canadians to rise up, to question, to make demands . . .

There is this great video about how the questions need to be reframed. . .

Because I want somehow to influence the public, I no longer donate to "charities" - After years of donating a day's pay a year to the United Way, all of my annual donation money now goes to groups in other countries like Navdanya.org in India; in Canad to think tanks and alternative news. Rabble.ca, The Dominion (Media Co-op) and CCPA get monthly donations - along with the provincial and federal NDP - but sometimes I don't know why I bother with the NDP . . . certainly I have for 25 years been disappointed with NDP governments - although most (but not all) are not much better than their Liberal counterparts -- but I don't know how to refrain from electoral politics . . . I work in every election, but even when "we win" somehow it doesn't feel much different. Sure would like to try a federal NDP government but not convinced that they would be willing to do anything militant or radical and I suppose - how can they control or change what happens at the provincial level?

So, musing today -- really just bummed about the world, the country I live in (no pride here - no Happy Canada Day) and wondering why no one pays attention - I think I'd best go read Ralph Milliband again . . .

Hm m m interesting. . . In The State in Capitalist Society, Ralph says p. 4/5 (OK - I am demonstrating my age here -- he wrote in 1969 and 1973 but it had a big influence on how I see the state , capitalism and the world)

. . . But most Western 'students of politics', tend to start, judging from their work, with the assumption that power, in Western societies, is competitive, fragmented and diffused; everybody, directly or through organized groups, has power and nobody has, or can have too much of it. In these societies citizens enjoy universal suffrage, free and regular elections, representative institutions, effective citizen rights, including the right of free speech, association and opposition; and both individuals and groups take ample advantage of those rights, under the protection of the law, an independent judiciary and a free political culture.
As a result, the argument goes, no government, acting on behalf of the state, can fail, in the not very long run, to respond to the wishes and demands of competing interests. In the end, everybody, including those at the end of the queue get served. . . its [believing in this liberal-pluralist view] first result is to exclude , by definition, the notion that the state might be a rather special institution, whose main purpose is to defend the predominance of a particular class. "

So maybe people don't believe that there is a dominant class - maybe they believe in that bourgeois democracy, or that there is fragmentation among groups and classes - but my personal experience (esp canvassing in elections where you get to talk to everybody) is that people now believe that there is a dominant/elite class, and they know that they are not part of it; but they believe (however erroneously) that there is class mobility and they want the rich to benefit because everyone (well too many people) believes that they may be rich before their life is over. . . So we don't have to convince "the public" that there is a class that benefits from the state's power - we simply have to convince them that they are not part of that class or that they are unlikely to have "upward mobility" any longer.

The details of how things have been for the last while are well expressed on the CCPA's site - http://www.policyalternatives.ca/projects/growing-gap but also in this statement from Armine Yalnizyan the economist at CCPA, quoted above.

On the other hand, having said all that, maybe we have little to complain about in N.A. - maybe although we are worse off en masse, than we were twenty five years ago - maybe we don't notice because of the human exploitation in other countries that allows us to get our food, our clothes, electronics and and our baubles, made by people who are far worse off than us -- at low cost. Maybe we should be thinking about the exploitation of others, in other countries, but supported by this state - like where the clothes we wear are made, or where Canadian mining companies are exploiting children, or raping the land, and how that may be putting money into our RRSPs, from our mutual funds (for those of you that have such a thing!)

Maybe we don't think about the international distribution of wealth BECAUSE we feel that we are hard done by - that we didn't get as much as someone else - that we are lacking, have unmet needs, and so we think only about getting our due and not about the Human Rights, and progressive economics, combined with progressive legislation and regulation - that might make the world a better place and in the long run,make us happier by making us less alienated, and more collective, less of a consumer, more of a citizen, less of an atomized individual and more a community member. . . that's the world I want to head for - I just don't know how to get there or how to get the great mass of people to care enough, or believe it is possible enough, to come with me.

Canada Day and thoughts on the DRC

2010-07-01T12:07:00.008-03:00

I wasn't born in Canada (Scotland) but I have lived here since I was a toddler, (see picture - me and my Mom circa 1955/56) and so know no other country as home. ( I could carry a UK/EU passport, but I do not, I carry, and have always carried a Canadian one) Other than wide open spaces (the reason for my parents immigration - my father was a hiker, fisherman and mountain climber and found Canada's wilderness compelling. ) I don't think I was a lot better off here than in Scotland, where I would have received a much cheaper education and still had state health care . . . Anyway, I was thinking about Canada on this day when my Facebook friends are all congratulating each other for living in such a great country - and I do wish everyone a very Happy Canada Day. . . and I have to face it - I have a nice house with a great view and a loving family and although we suffer occasionally from a number of maladies and misfortunes - we are better off than 80% of the people in the world. But if you, like me, don't feel free if others are imprisoned, are not satisfied if people are hungry, are not warm knowing others are cold . . . then it is hard. . . I feel connected to the others in the world. All their ills, I feel strongly are partly my fault, my choices help or hinder them. . . so on musing about that . . .

But I am still reeling with outrage over the 1000+ arrests in Toronto - most if not all of them illegal or perhaps even punitive. . . If you are not up on those issues, see my blog from a couple of days ago. . . and yesterdays where I am concerned about increased militarization and feeling like I am in developing police state. . . So reeling about those things I was hoping for some good news, and was not surprised to learn that Canada had asked for debt relief to be withheld from the DRC (Democratic Republic of Congo - formerly Zaire), because, although not a big area of work or study for me, I do understand there are many problems in that nation that need rectified - the rape of 10's of thousands of women and girls - see http://www.doctorswithoutborders.org/news/article.cfm?id=1836 and http://www.stoprapeindrc.org/

or

Eve Ensler's compelling column in the UK Guardian about how helping the women and girls in the Congo will help her feel a lot better about her Breast Cancer -- http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/jun/12/cancer-atrocities-congo-violence;

and the exploitation of children in mines - esp Koltan mines. . . http://makeitfair.org/the-facts/news/child-labour-and-human-rights-abuses-behind-the

But, imagine my surprise to learn in that article in the Star that Canada is blocking debt relief, not because of child exploitation and/or Human Right's Abuses, but because the government in Kinshasa has closed a Canadian Mine --

But a decision on the debt by the World Bank has been put off temporarily at Canada’s request because of concerns arising from a dispute between the Kinshasa government and a Canadian mining company, Vancouver-based First Quantum Minerals.

“Canada remains concerned about the recent cancellation of mining contracts by the DRC government, and believes that the international dispute settlement mechanism initiated by First Quantum Minerals should be allowed to run its course,” a spokesperson for Finance Minister Jim Flaherty said.

Nope, Canada asked for debt relief to be cancelled or postponed, until the alleged unfair treatment of a Canadian Mining company is resolved. "First Quantum Minerals is seeking international arbitration after the DRC government closed its $700 million (U.S.) Kolwezi copper tailings project following a review."

I do hope that some of the unfair mining practices, the rape of the land, and the exploitation of mineral resources, war, violence and rape and exploitation of children is assisted in this - otherwise - Canada is, on this Canada Day, not a whole lot better than some pretty foul places in the world.

So on this Canada Day, I ask you, please, my Canadian brothers and sisters, who share my values, and I believe that is most of you. . . stand up for the rights of people over corporations; people's needs over corporate profits; and the rights of women and children (and men) to live without violence; and make Canada not just the true north strong and free but a strong, free country that stands up for the freedom (starting with the freedom to be sheltered, fed and live without violence)of people throughout the world; strong in defense of women and children, and a country that sends peace keepers not war bringers.

On this Canada Day, I wish I believed in a guy in the sky because I want to pray for change I fear this week, (Toronto police actions, G20 generally, 28 war ships in the Harbour, visiting unelected heads of state; and a valourization of war, children beaten by police in Bangladesh, 10,000 farmers committing suicide in India, continuing control of Monsanto over food, and private corporations over water, climate change and no will to stop it, increasing poverty and alienation in Canada) will never come without divine intervention.

In the meantime though, I ask you to mull over what we need to fix, and how we can fix it, and start with this great column by Murray Dobbin reproduced on Rabble . . . Is this What a Police State Looks Like? Demand an inquiry into what happened in Toronto - this is not just a problem for the Toronto Police, this was Police forces from across the country participating in actions led by the ISU/RCMP.

Bangladesh Garment Workers Protest

2010-06-30T13:07:00.005-03:00

Slide show, at the Guardian Newspaper, of garment workers in Bangladesh being beaten by police with batons (these are disturbing images) after/while protesting wages and working conditions. I'll be checking my clothes to make sure that they aren't made in Bangladesh! Though it is a tough call as the children are likely working so that they don't starve although the wages are very low and the working conditions very bad. . . So maybe my "boycott" would just hurt the children - they need organized, but even then the state can be repressive. . . any suggestions? Other than funding NGO's, how do we help make sure that we are not contributing to the exploitation of workers (esp children) in Bangladesh?

Click on pic below for link to the slide show on the Guardian site.

Wishing for peace, seeing war, war prep and a Monarch

2010-06-30T08:04:00.011-03:00

I turned on the "The National" on CBC last night and was rather shocked by the orgy of war that I saw there. I knew that the Queen was here. I knew that there was a sailpast/review and I knew that 5,000 sailors and 28 ships including plenty of "foreign vessels" were in or coming to Halifax Harbour.

But, following the abuse of police powers (The police chief even lied to the press and so far has not been fired, which I find incredible) on the weekend, in Toronto, the view of 28 large "warships" passing ion the harbour was almost more than I could bear.

I felt like I had fallen into some militarized future - and then I realized that the future is now, and the future is here - and I am feeling unsure what to do to make the world more peaceful. . .

Even the language is not tolerable - "an Armada of Warships" According to the National Post:

Queen Elizabeth and Prince Philip received a royal salute Tuesday as they boarded the frigate HMCS St. John’s in Halifax harbour to review the large armada of warships assembled to mark the 100th anniversary of the Canadian Navy.
Seventeen foreign warships — including the British aircraft carrier HMS Ark Royal and the American carrier USS Wasp — arrived here last week to join the Canadian navy in celebrating its 100th anniversary.
The city’s waterfront bristled with modern warships and is filled with sailors from Canada, the U.S., Britain, France, Denmark, Germany, Holland and Brazil.

Armada, warships and all this with a sense of celebration? Yes I know that it was a "birthday" party for the Canadian Navy - a centennial to celebrate but shouldn't this rather be a day of mourning? 100 years since we started a navy and too bad we still need one. . . that would strike the right tone. . . I felt like "in my day" - that this could not have happened but it probably did - I just feel like at least 25 years ago it would have been controversial. Why is it not? What are the ships for? (OK for the Canadian Navy - their latest mission was to help in Haiti - but that is not their main purpose these days) They are to hurt people aren't they? That is their intent - to kill, drown, maim, whatever - I just cannot see it as any different from cheering on the villain in a slasher horror movie.

Now not only did we have the centennial of a military force and celebrate it - but it was done with a royal review - really. . . a Queen? I don't have strong feelings about the Monarchy usually - as I understand it, it costs us nothing to have her as titular head of state (until she visits, I assume as our guest) so it is "weird" but who cares. . . but when one reads the Star. . .

From the Toronto Star:

No one does pageantry better than the British Royal Family, of course, but even by their standards, this was a spectacle unlike any other.

Not only did it fill Halifax Harbour, it took over Bedford Basin with a gathering of 20-odd warships from around the world. Frigates and tenders, aircraft carriers and corvettes, they waited patiently for the Queen to sail past and then gave her three rousing cheers.

Her Majesty, aboard HMCS St. John’s, stood in her viewing box as she passed each ship, an improbably tiny figure to be at the centre of such a vast undertaking. Even those normally immune to the appeal of military ritual could not help but be impressed by the sheer scale of the two-hour event.

Ships from Canada, Great Britain, France, Norway, Brazil, Germany, Holland, Denmark and the U.S. assembled for the occasion. With their crews lined up, in full dress uniform, all flags flying, they were an impressive sight. Even HMCS Cornerbrook, one of the ill-fated submarines Canada bought from the U.K. several years ago, managed to muster a degree of dignity on this memorable afternoon.

So, I am shocked at the orgasmic response of Canadian Media. . . and so far Dominion, Media Co-op, Rabble, etc have nothing - maybe it will just be ignored.

I do not regularly watch TV news anymore as the coverage and analysis is so bad - I used to be able to get some satisfaction from the CBC but they seem to have made a hard right turn (to keep their funding? If they want them gone no right wing news coverage will save them) and one has the feeling that Peter Mansbridge revels in it. (Senate appointment coming his way at retirement?)

Just another day of wishing the world could be different. Wishing we could be celebrating and mourning a very different set of activities and incidents.

And on a lighter note - thanks to Tony Tracey for sharing this link.

G20, protests and policing

2010-06-29T12:55:00.017-03:00

I was trying to resist writing about the G20 and Toronto because, really, I thought everyone would be reading about it - and I am not even there - so what can I add? Then I realized that a lot of people may be only watching the "mainstream" TV news - although even there, there has been plenty of criticism about the abuse of police powers, illegal arrests and lengthy detentions. So I thought I would post a few of the most interesting pieces I have reviewed. A lot of the "interesting" material is video, for which I apologize, as I prefer to read myself - but interviews have resulted in some interesting views and descriptions that do not appear in print.

So - "security" and "policing" in Toronto around the G20 - on with the show! I am today rather embarrassed for Canada and especially for Toronto although they had little to do with it - even the mayor asked that it be held elsewhere, which brings me briefly to. . . why is the Tyee dissing Torontonians and the Mayor - and suggesting that they invited the G20 - they didn't want it held there? See what I mean at: The Tyee.

___________________________________________________________________

This Real News interview with Paul Cavalluzzo, about the Ontario Public Works Act that removes probable cause & right to free and peaceful assembly, is frightening. Near martial law set up by regs that are likely unconstitutional - not only resulting in police power to demand ID and to search without warrants, but the act (or regs I wasn't paying close enough attention) also suggests that if there is any evidence given by a "guard" (cop) under this act, then you have to prove that you are innocent - kind of removes all of our supposed rights to be innocent until proven guilty - but you can watch to get all the detail . . .

EEK! Now it turns out there was no 5 metre outside the fence rule - it was all made up by the Chief of Police - see the Globe and Mail Story. In addition the police were displaying weapons that that they said were taken from arrested protesters but even the Globe and mail caught them out - as the story says in part:

The items, which were laid out on several tables in the lobby of Toronto Police headquarters, include gas masks, cans of spray paint, a replica gun, crowbars, saws, pocket knives, a staple gun, a drill, a baseball bat, a slingshot, chains, bear spray, dog repellent, handcuffs and bows and arrows. Some of the arrows had their pointy ends covered with fabric, which officers said were designed to be dipped in a flammable liquid and lit ablaze.
However, the “weapons” included items not normally considered dangerous, including skateboard and bicycle helmets, bandannas, golf balls, tennis balls, bamboo poles, goggles, rope, plastic tubes and walkie talkies. The police also laid out several notebooks and shields depicting red clenched fists, a resistance symbol.
In addition, some of the items presented to the media were not seized by protesters. A car search last Friday netted a cross bow and chain saw but they were not determined to be G20 related, and no charges were laid. When this was pointed out, Chief Blair acknowledged the items should not have been displayed but said “everything else” was seized from summit protesters.
However, police also included objects taken from a Whitby, Ont., man who was heading to a role playing fantasy game in Centennial Park Saturday morning. As was reported by the Globe on Saturday, Brian Barrett, 25, was stopped at Union Station for wearing chain mail and carrying a bag with an archery bow, shield and graphite swords. His jousting gear was seized by police, but was on display Tuesday, even though he was not charged and police told a Globe reporter it was a case of bad timing.

I am not sure, but I think that once the Chief of Police has lied twice to the press he should be asked to resign - and if the police did not have the right to detain people, ask for ID without probable cause, and search without a warrant or probable cause, I am not sure how any of these charges are going to stand up - except for people who are clearly identified on video tape smashing property of some sort.

On July 10th this linked article appeared in the Star, so maybe, just maybe (I am not yet forgiving) Blair didn't lie and wasn't even in charge. . . but I don;t trust the TO police or the Star yet.
___________________________________________________________________

Another telling (and interesting video) is with Steve Paiken - a "mainstream" news reporter and host of The Agenda on TVO. You can also read a transcript on this page.

http://www.therealnews.com/t2/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=31&Itemid=74&jumival=5328&updaterx=2010-06-29+09%3A40%3A49

According to Paiken, the cops arrested people rather indiscriminately and rushed peaceful protesters as well as beating up a stringer for the Guardian.

On July 1st The Ottawa Citizen published this column by Steve Paiken in which he says in part:

I have lived in Toronto for more than three decades. I have covered my share of demonstrations. We have a wonderful history of peaceful democratic protest in this city. But at the incident I found myself in on Saturday night, democracy took a major step backwards. And many will have to answer for that.

Steve Paikin is anchor and senior editor for The Agenda With Steve Paikin on TVO.

___________________________________________________________________

I thought that The Star editorials (largest circulation newspaper in Canada and not at all a "radical" paper) were pretty telling - civil society is not happy about arresting over 900 people, holding may for 9-24 hours and then letting them go "without charge" and even the ones who are charged are not likely to be convicted (although I guess some might - we will have to wait and see)

You can see them at:

Today's editorial - Mass Arrests Not Justified -

Yesterday's by the Star's publisher. . . John Cruikshank - G20 editorial: Brutal spectacle failed a city and its people

Other opinion pieces with info about the actual ISSUES that the "protests" were about, in the Star, include:

Thousands Stood Up for Humanity by Sid Ryan, and Linda McQuaig's Police and Bankers Exempt from Austerity.

Also now you can see Naomi Klein's take on the wrap up of the G20 and what they "accomplished" - in the Guardian June 29th

My city feels like a crime scene, and the criminals are all melting into the night, fleeing the scene. No, I'm not talking about the kids in black who smashed windows and burned cop cars on Saturday.
I'm talking about the heads of state who, on Sunday night, smashed social safety nets and burned good jobs in the middle of a recession. Faced with the effects of a crisis created by the world's wealthiest and most privileged strata, they decided to stick the poorest and most vulnerable people in their countries with the bill.
How else can we interpret the G20's final communique, which includes not even a measly tax on banks or financial transactions, yet instructs governments to slash their deficits in half by 2013. This is a huge and shocking cut, and we should be very clear who will pay the price: students who will see their public educations further deteriorate as their fees go up; pensioners who will lose hard-earned benefits; public sector workers whose jobs will be eliminated. And the list goes on. These types of cuts have already begun in many G20 countries, and they are about to get a lot worse. For instance, reducing the projected 2010 deficit in the US by half, in the absence of a sizeable tax increase, would mean a whopping $780bn cut.
The cuts are happening for a simple reason. When the G20 met in London in 2009, at the height of the financial crisis, the leaders failed to band together to regulate the financial sector so that this type of crisis would never happen again. All we got was empty rhetoric, and an agreement to put trillions of dollars in public monies on the table to shore up banks around the world.

___________________________________________________________________

There is too much on Rabble.ca or the Dominion, to pick stories but there is plenty on both websites.

www.rabble.ca especially for analysis and opinion and (The Dominion) Toronto Media Coop - for news from those on the front lines.

___________________________________________________________________
There are now reports on the police actions at the Summit, by
1) Canadian Civil Liberties Association. Titled : A Preliminary Report of Observations during the G20 Summit
2) and from Amnesty International -Toronto and the G8/G20: Peaceful protest suffers amidst heavy security measures and acts of vandalism

Both reports suggest that the police actions were not appropriate, CCLA says:

It is the opinion of the Canadian Civil Liberties Association that police conduct during the G20 Summit was, at times, disproportionate, arbitrary and excessive. In our view, despite instances of commendable and professional conduct, the policing and security efforts, especially after 5PM on June 26 and June 27, failed to demonstrate commitment to Canada’s constitutional values.

And Amnesty says:

Lessons must be learned from these events. We call on the Canadian government and the government of the province of Ontario to cooperate in launching an independent review of the security measures that were put in place for the G8 and G20 Summits. The review should include opportunities for public input and the results should be released to the public. Among other issues, the review should consider:

•The impact of security measures, including decisions about the location and venues for the two summits, on the protection of human rights, including the freedoms of expression and assembly.

• The ways in which police operations and the use of legal provisions such as the Public Works Protection Act have impacted the rights of the many thousands of people living, working and operating businesses within and near the G20 security zone.

And from the Toronto Star: Calls for G20 Inquiry Ratchet Up.

____________________________________________________________________
Individual reports of illegal arrests and detention. . .
http://toronto.mediacoop.ca/story/story-my-arrest-detainment/3997

and
http://www.facebook.com/#!/note.php?note_id=397205503638&id=511491565&ref=mf

and this story in the Star of a TTC worker detained and imprisoned on his way to work - even after the supervisor vouched for him - that he was a TTC worker on his way to work.

An individual just plucked off the street in Toronto on Sunday morning - because "he had a a bandanna" http://danielfrancavilla.tumblr.com/post/764540391/abusing-the-peaceful-a-fellow-toronto-design

Man with prosethesis arrested at Queens Park by police who dragged him, took his leg and glasses etc.
http://niagaraatlarge.com/2010/07/05/thorold-ontario-amputee-has-his-artificial-leg-ripped-off-by-police-and-is-slammed-in-makeshift-cell-during-g20-summit-–-at-least-one-ontario-mpp-calls-the-whole-episode-“shocking/

Bubble blower arrested: http://www.acreativerevolution.ca/node/2480
____________________________________________________________________

Also as of July 1st comes this story . . . Canadian Civil Liberties Association planning joint lawsuit for those illegally arrested and detained (and assaulted!)

http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/torontog20summit/article/830747--joint-lawsuit-planned-for-g20-arrestees#article

No one is getting a fair day in court. As of July 14th there are still those who have not yet had a bail hearing - adding to t6htis is the strange ways in which courts and bail hearings are being conducted - here's one example:
http://www.thespec.com/Opinions/article/808295

A Rabbi defends Gaza, Libby Davies and Human Rights

2010-06-22T10:08:00.003-03:00

I was so excited to read this open letter to Jack Layton defending Libby Davies. You can see the whole post at: http://rebdavid.blogspot.com/2010_06_01_archive.html#3002382674389795855

Here's part of the letter to Jack Layton from Rabbi David Mivasair, that is posted on his blog.

Libby said that she thinks the Israeli occupation began in 1948. Well, it did. I can introduce you to Palestinians living here in Vancouver who were forced out of their homes at gunpoint by Jews in 1948 and their villages destroyed. That’s occupation. It happened. Denying it doesn’t change a thing.

Just look at this map on the left here of the 1947 UN partition plan. The UN assigned the orange parts to the Jews' control and the pink parts to the Arabs. Now, look at a 1948 map of the ceasefire lines. The purple is what Israel held and eventually became its more-or-less acknowledged boundaries until 1967.

Even well before 1948, Jewish organizations launched a well-planned and well-executed campaign to establish “facts on the ground” by planting 57 settlements literally in the middle of the night all over the country. This was especially true in the southern Negev desert region so that the UN would grant that area to the Jewish state-to-be. Even though there was negligible and recently imported Jewish population amidst a far larger and very well-established Arab population (in that large orange area in the south), the UN partition granted it to the Jews and not the Arabs. This is a source of great pride in Israel, well-known to every school child and celebrated in museums. To know more, see "Tower and Stockade", tourist attraction and commemorative coin.

To imply that Libby doesn’t support the existence of the State of Israel is nothing but disingenuous manipulation. You know that’s not true; Libby does support the existence of the State of Israel. It is Israel’s behaviour that Libby condemns – and rightfully so.

Naxalites, Maoists, India

2010-06-22T06:47:00.004-03:00

Due to an article in Tehelka, an Indian investigative journalism magazine, I am thinking again about "the Maoists" or "Naxalites" in India.

In the interior of India there are people called the Adivasi or "tribal" people - these are people that are thought of much like we think of our indigenous people in Canada - those people "over there" - not Hindi, Muslim, Christian or Buddhist - they are outsiders and because they traditionally held their land in common they are not -"owners of the land". As a result the government sees the land (or at least has too often treated it that way) as unoccupied or at least unowned and gives mineral, mining and damning rights to multi-national corporations which flood or destroy the land of the Adivsai. Since the 1940's the Maoists have been the only ones helping and defending the Adivasi people. So as Roy (see next para) put it, 90% of the Maoists are Adivasi but not all the Adivasi are Maoists.

A while ago, I was quite compelled by Arundhuti Roy's article in Outlook that defended the Maoists and their violence, see here, because they are defending those without rights or privilege in India and the movement is growing especially among the "tribal people". Several articles have been published lately that were very sympathetic to the Maoists or Naxalites as they are known in India.

Their previous violence has targeted police, military, paramilitary and corporations. There has been some (but little) collateral damage - killed civilians (and always because they were unluckily traveling on the same bus or train as lots of military or police.) Now, suddenly a few weeks ago, a civilian train travelling from Kolkata to Delhi is blown up, or the track was sabotaged, it seems to be still a little unclear - but it was clear that two months ago, a bus load of police and security police wanna-be's was attacked and there were "civilian casualties" - although the bulk of deaths were police - and everyone is blaming the Maoists who have apparently only slaughtered (relatively) innocent civilians - what's the dealio?

Another article in Outlook here.
and here, questioning whether it was in fact, the Maoists.
Another story here from Al Jazeera
And lastly in the Guardian - UK supporting the struggle for the landless even if not the Naxalite methods. . .

But they have not got control over all of the forces that are calling themselves "Maoists." In this article from Tehelka they suggest that the Naxals and the Green Hunt (paramilitary force set up by the government to hunt Naxals - Judum ) are both torturing and killing people, including raping women, and executing people for being anti-naxal informers, or for supporting "the other side" . . . This sounds reminiscent of stories from Vietnam - but most people just want to return to their villages and improve their lives. . .. As the Tehelka article puts it:

It has been five years since the Judum was formed, but there is no rehabilitation policy for displaced villagers. TEHELKA visited four ‘relief’ camps and found that almost 100 percent of the Adivasis want to return to their villages. Manni Paro pays a Judum leader Rs 200 a month to keep her mud hut and tarpaulin sheets. Those who cannot afford the bribe moved further into the more cramped sections of the camp.

“We were much happier in our villages. The Naxals didn’t bother us before the Judum started. We got fish from the lakes and reared our chicken. Everything was cheap,” says Madkam Sita, from Konta camp. “Here, there is nothing to do and not enough to feed my three children.”

In what is perhaps an attempt to corroborate the government’s claim that it is giving the Judum no official support, the supply of free ration to the camps was stopped three months ago. Korsa Sanmu, Sarpanch of Silger and Judum leader, met the CM for answers. “We can’t feed you forever. You have to stand on your own feet. The supplies had to end at some point,” he says the CM told him.

The desperation has triggered a new trend. Most Dornapal camp villagers now trek upto 20 km to cultivate their fields, always fearfully. Some have received notices from the Naxals: “Come back home. We will not harm you.” But the past records are ugly, and there is a trust deficit in Dantewada.

For those whose homes are deeper in the jungle, even such daily trips are impossible. Mangal Dai from Aserguda village now toils under the NREGS, but yearns for his five-acre plot. “If I go back, the Naxals will kill me for being part of the Judum, and the Judum will kill me for helping the Naxals,” he says. “We’re being hounded at both ends.”

More trouble for women - I do hope that things improve. . .

Columbian election corruption

2010-06-21T13:32:00.003-03:00

So from the Associated Press (as published by the Chronicle Herald) - comes this story about the winner of the Columbian election. . .

BOGOTA, Colombia — A 58-year-old U.S.-educated economist who dealt withering blows to leftist rebels as defence minister has won Colombia's presidency by the largest margin in modern history.

Juan Manuel Santos got 69 per cent of the vote in Sunday's runoff in a ringing endorsement of his promise to continue the U.S.-backed security policies of outgoing conservative President Alvaro Uribe that he helped craft.

Just one problem that seems to go unmentioned in this article from the Huffington Post. . .

But documents obtained from Colombia's Camera de Comercio - the private national Chamber of Commerce - raise questions about a possible conflict of interest and show that he may not be so committed to transparency as it seems. The documents listing the board's membership made clear that he sat for several years on the board of directors of a securities firm that manages election logistics- from printing voting cards to transporting stuffed ballot boxes - while at the same time heading Uribe's "U" political party.

Santos' campaign did not respond to a request for comment for this story.

Some Colombians contacted for this story are troubled by Santos' mix of the elections business and politics. "None of the candidates who are vying for the presidency should have had relationships with a company carrying out elections," said Alejandra Barrios, director of the Electoral Observation Mission, a watchdog agency. "This kind of relationship should have been disclosed for the sake of transparency."

So the winner "by a landslide" of the Columbian Presidential elections is on the board of directors of the company that makes the election systems? hm m m .. . what's wrong with this picture.

Also, Canada has just signed free trade agreement with a country that kills and jails union activists, people who work for civil and human rights, or who are political opponents.

On June 21st, for example, at least 32 miners were killed in Columbia with the Associated Press reporting, that at least 40 miners were still underground, and that "The exact cause of the explosion is unknown, but the mine's records indicate it lacked a methane ventilation pipe and gas-detection devices."

There is just no way that we should be helping our corporations do more work in Colombia -- According to the Council of Canadians. . .

Despite widespread public demands to put human rights before corporate interests in Colombia, on June 14 Liberal and Conservative MPs voted ‘yes’ to the third and final vote on the Canada-Colombia Free Trade Agreement (Bill C-2). This agreement has been stalled for over a year because of a persistent human rights crisis in Colombia that continues to see labour leaders assassinated and rights activists threatened with murder. A human rights side agreement to the FTA, proposed by the Liberals and tabled on May 31st in the House of Commons, is wholly inadequate. Human rights and trade justice advocates continue to call for an independent human rights impact assessment to be carried out before the free trade deal is ratified. But on June 1, Liberal and Conservative members of the committee abruptly shut down debate on C-2 without hearing from a list of witnesses who could have spoken to the deal and its human rights side agreement. It is the responsibility now of the Senate to hear from those witnesses and to put rights before trade.

Sunday Musings. . .

2010-06-20T07:17:00.006-03:00

From a film review of a film called Winter's Bone , this morning, by Dorothy Woodsend, from The Tyee.

Registered Democrats and Republicans, although ostensibly on opposite sides of the political fence, share many characteristics. It is the third group of unregistered and disenfranchised voters that are very different.

This third group is the largest and continuing to grow quickly.

Writes Adams: "According to our data, the values showing the most pronounced growth in the United States from 1992 to 2004 fell into three categories: risk-taking and thrill-seeking, Darwinism and exclusion, and consumption and status-seeking... The values of the average American also reveal a growing resignation to life in a world of dog-eat-dog competition: Americans increasingly register a Darwinist attitude toward both economic and social life, becoming more likely to reason that those who suffer misfortune in life deserve what they get and that others shouldn't worry too much about helping them."

From the abandoned ruins

It will be interesting or maybe terrifying to see what happens when this population outstrips the remaining two. Or maybe it's already in the process of happening, according to James Kunstler who has been patiently waiting for the imminent collapse of American society and writing furiously the entire time. "Our popular culture would embarrass a race of hebephrenics. We think that neck tattoos are cool. A lot of our pop music is overtly homicidal. Our richest citizens have managed to define a new banality of evil. Our middle classes are subject to humiliations so baroque that sadomasochism even fails to encompass the finer points... we're digging our national grave with a kind of antic glee, complete with all the lurid stagecraft that Las Vegas, Hollywood, and Madison Avenue can muster."

What type of films will emerge out of the ruins? Maybe no films at all, just UFC fighting, meth and porn. In the meantime, films such as Winter's Bone give us a glimpse into the chasm of class and economic difference in America. It's a pretty cold and harsh place, it would seem.

________________________________________________________________

The same Tyee also has a great post called Ideal Summer Reads and really I am posting it here so that I can come back to it, myself. Certainly west coast focused, ut a number of books sound fabulous. Appealing particularly to me :

C'Mon Papa: Dispatches from a Dad in the Dark by Ryan Knighton (Knopf Canada)
Bringing home a baby is an exciting and daunting experience for any new parent -- now imagine if you literally couldn't see the kid for whom you are responsible. Knighton started losing his sight when he was 18, and by the time he and his wife had their daughter Tess, he was almost completely blind. His memoir of those first years -- of trying to avoid poles on a busy street with a three-month-old strapped to his chest, of panicked moments, uncertain if his toddler was missing or asleep -- is funny, poignant, and illuminating.

When I was a midwifery student I was involved in the care of a blind couple, having their second baby. It was rather nerve wracking, and, particularly with small children, it seemed like it was going to take a lot of help for them to parent. You know, you cannot clean up the shit if you cannot see it. They were smart people, and loving and capable parents, and I think that the children, both sighted, were going to be looked after - but I have often thought of them over the years . . . You would need assistance to take your kids to the park, and the frustration of a toddler in your apartment refusing to answer you (they would quickly figure out that you could not see - and likely use it against you! I am a sucker for little kids - so they manipulate me, with apparently, no ill will. ) So I am looking forward tio reading about a parent in similar circumstances!
__________________________________________________________________

Body Image perceptions - How the brain deals you a poor hand . . . .

From New Scientist - everyone sees their hand as bigger than it is. . . and the info that this might provide for others studying body image distortions -

____________________________________________________________________
Controversial Pesticide Worries Scientists

by Amy Standen from the NPR website.

I only buy organic or local strawberries, but this story about the non-organic California Strawberries is worrying. They are using a new pesticide (since the old one, methyl bromide, hurts the ozone layer!) but the new one -methyl iodide - is considered toxic at much lower doses and is a huge problem especially for farm workers - so although if you only eat them once or twice a year the cheap ($5.99 for a kilo) California strawberries could be hurting workers who are exposed to large volumes. Demand that they use a different method and don't buy the berries from California. (not to mention the carbon, but I cannot throw too many stones as I do buy organic California strawberries occasionally.)

_________________________________________________________________

NDP and Gaza

2010-06-18T05:55:00.005-03:00

I am terribly appalled at the attacks on Libby Davies. Clearly she was bushwacked, and if you watch the video (I think a lot of people who are criticizing are just reacting to press reports) she was doing her best to stick with party politics and policies, but was clear that her own opinions were a little different - I have written to Jack, Tom Mulcair and more. . . defending her - I think she is the greatest. . . and her openness and willingness to engage and talk to people is what is getting her into difficulty. She is being vilified for exactly what she she should be lauded for. . . Defending Libby Davies, Interestingly she has been particularly lambasted by the Liberals who suggest she should resign over calling Palestine "occupied", supporting the BDS movement and talking about "apartheid" in Israel. What's funny about that is here is a Guardian article from 2002 in which Ignatieff syas of his flight over the West bank:

I knew I was not looking down at a state or the beginnings of one, but at a Bantustan, one of those pseudo-states created in the dying years of apartheid to keep the African population under control.

____________________________________________________________________

And just after we signed a free trade agreement with Columbia:

More than 70 Colombian miners were feared dead on Thursday after they were trapped by an explosion that ripped through a coal mine in what could become one of the Andean country's worst mining disasters.

Not to mention this little gem from Columbia, from an article in the huffpo:

BOGOTÁ, Colombia - The man most likely to become Colombia's next president this Sunday has played a previously undisclosed role as a corporate officer of the company hired to run the nation's elections over the last decade, while he was a political leader, business records obtained by the Huffington Post Investigative Fund show.
The role of Juan Manuel Santos - a former defense minister in the government of current president Alvaro Uribe and a scion of one of the nation's most powerful families - is not widely known in the South American country, where his family controls some of the leading news organizations and there are reports of voting irregularities.

___________________________________________________________________

And a study about preventing stroke with some interesting finds:

When it came to food groups, fish and fruits — components of a Mediterranean diet — appeared to have the most striking protective effect against stroke, but not vegetables.

Increased consumption of red meat, organ meats, eggs, fried foods, pizza or salty snacks, and cooking with lard were all associated with an increased risk of stroke.
The risk of stroke also increased the higher the person's waist-to-hip ratio, while regular physical activity — defined as four hours or more per week of moderate (such as walking, cycling or gardening) or strenuous (jogging, vigorous swimming) exercise — lowered the risk of all strokes by 30 per cent.

So I guess I'd better up my fruit consumption!
Read more: http://www.montrealgazette.com/health/Hypertension+tops+list+stroke+risk+factors/3169829/story.html#ixzz0rC6dzyEB

___________________________________________________________________
And happy news n the Swat Valley in Pakistan
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=127909459&ft=1&f=1001

No longer banished from public view by the Taliban's strict social code, women are weaving new lives — literally, in some cases.
With the help of the Karachi-based Heritage Foundation, widows and single mothers are learning to master looms and earn a living for the first time. With help from UNESCO, the program is offering females — from teenage girls to women in their 70s — the chance to learn the cherished art of Swati embroidery and make a livelihood.

The article goes on to talk about teeming markets, and girls on the streets with heavy book bags - I was skeptical - maybe this is some kind of Pakistani propaganda (or U.S.) - "we drove the taliban out. . . " - so I checked and found many other stories about the same change - everyone is going back to Swat. . .

http://gulfnews.com/news/world/pakistan/notes-from-taliban-heartland-part-2-1.641437
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/8729099.stm
http://www.app.com.pk/en_/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=106435&Itemid=2

___________________________________________________________________

Oh. . . come on. . .

The environmental showpiece of the G8 summit has lost some of its lustre.
World leaders will bask in the glow of only five solar-powered street lights instead of the planned 15 when they arrive in Ontario's cottage country later this month.

The solar lamps are the G8 summit's "signature environmental project." They were supposed to line the pathways of a resort near Huntsville, Ont., during the leaders' one-night stay.

___________________________________________________________________
And just in case you were rushing off to have some untested stem cell treatment -- keep in mind: (and beware bogus stem cell research)

The death of a woman after she was treated with stem cells at a private clinic in Thailand has reinforced warnings for desperate sick people to avoid "stem-cell tourism" – the gamble of undergoing untested stem-cell treatments in unlicensed private clinics abroad.

Post-mortem results reported this week reveal that the stem-cell treatment almost certainly killed the woman, who had been suffering from kidney disease. She developed strange lumps in the kidney, liver and adrenal gland.

Berlin, Obesity, Gender and an Accelerating Universe

2010-06-11T17:36:00.003-03:00

I would like to visit Berlin - I already knew that, as there are a lot of pieces that I have read about the living art in Berlin, from film to sculpture and found art, and performance art - it all seemed to going on. . . then today I read this piece in the Tyee and now I really want to go to Berlin! It says in part:

Sometimes Berlin seems like a huge open-air gallery, or a big art school project by precociously talented students. Street art is everywhere and a lot of it is very good. There's stuff hidden away in dank alleys that would probably be featured on gallery tours back home. Clothing stores and odd shops are almost always worth exploring. There are more cool t-shirts for sale here than anywhere in Europe. And decent restaurants with prices Paris probably hasn't seen since Napoleon.

__________________________________________________________________
On a more depressing note. . . I think I first heard about the issue of gender balance (that is lack of it) in medical studies, at the Vancouver Women's Health Collective and in Women's Studies at Simon Fraser University in the 70's. Now today an Editorial, in Nature, has me, if not confused, at least startled that in 40 years we have not made much progress. The subhead to the editorial titled Putting Gender on the Agenda is: Biomedical research continues to use many more male subjects than females in both animal studies and human clinical trials. The unintended effect is to short-change women's health care. harumph. . . no wonder I try and avoid conventional medicine and prefer alternatives. . .

____________________________________________________________________

Also of interest today - review of a new book called Obesity The Biography.

__________________________________________________________________
And last, but not least, an interesting article in New Scientist about the accelerating expansion of the universe. . . why does this cause me some anxiety? No idea -- worried about everything ending in 2012 perhaps!
Check out:

Did a 'sleeper' field awake to expand the universe?

Gaza Flotilla Aftermath and Toxic spills in the arctic

2010-06-01T07:41:00.009-03:00

Visit msnbc.com for Breaking News, World News, and News about the Economy

International Condemnation is continuing and growing. Two more ships are en route to Gaza (I assume that were part of the original convoy but broke down en route, as one is the Rachel Corrie, which was packed with aid in Ireland) And also en route 40 cars from the UAE - although I have no idea how they are getting to the, I assume, Rafah crossing from Egypt.

All I can think today is that everyone must stand up and be counted or as we all know. . . "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing."

Good recap Story and updates from the NYTimes, titled: Israel Holds Hundreds Seized During raid.

A very good article analyzing the PR impact for Israel can be read at: www.stratfor.com

An analysis of the legal position of Israel - this is either piracy or more correctly an act of war since it was military that made the attack. See Here.

And summarizing the feelings that I have, an opinion piece from the Guardian:

And even the National Post seems to come down on criticizing Israel. . . in this article.

Travers of the Toronto Star on Canada's "too cozy" relationship with Israel. You should write and tell the PM that you want Gaza opened up and Israel to deal fairly with Palestinians. . .

Click here to send an email to Stephen Harper and other Canadian leaders pressuring them to act immediately on this issue - this is a form letter from Canadians for Justice and Peace in the Middle East.

Now Egypt is opening the border at Rafah. http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6502H820100601 but according to Voices and Echoes of Palestine on Facebook - all goods are still being inspected and approved by Israel - and thousands of people are waiting to cross the so-called "open" border. They definietly do not trust Egypt's government.

Returning Activists recount the raid at Haaretz - an Israeli paper.

____________________________________________________________________
Also interesting (and more bad news) as it was news to me. . .
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/toxic-spills-put-arctic-under-threat-report-finds/article1585959/

Crying over Gaza Bound Aid/Activists

2010-05-31T10:12:00.006-03:00

I cannot do much but cry this morning - however ineffective that is. I don't personally know anyone on those ships in the Mediterranean, but I feel like they were my brothers and sisters in spirit, and that given opportunity I could have been on one of those ships.

I hope this is some sort of turning point about Canada's (and the U.S.) support for Israel. They have become the enemy that they were supported to help rid the world of. I think people in Israel should be able to live in peace, but they elected this right wing war mongering government. It is going to mean more violence. . .

In case you are asleep under a rock this morning - Israel boarded ships loaded with humanitarian aid meant for Gaza, in International Waters, this morning and killed at least 20 and injured over 60. I await more news. Turkey has withdrawn their ambassador (the largest/lead ship was Turkish and so are all the dead - as reported so far) They have been denounced by the U.N. including by Ban-Ki-Moon and by Sarkoszy in France -

See Judy Rebick's blog here.

Israel says that they were "fired upon:" first and reacted but Turkey says that there were no arms aboard. See here. She says in Part:

Woke up at 3 am today for some reason and looked at my blackberry twitter feed. I couldn't believe my eyes. Israeli Defense Forces had just attacked the Gaza Freedom Flotilla killing human rights activists and trying to defend it by some cock and bull story about lynch mobs. I haven't felt that kind of horror since I heard about the massacre in Sabra and Shatila in 1982, not because the death toll is as high but because of the understanding that the Israeli government will stop on nothing. Please go out to the protests in your town. List follows as does a statement from the Alternate Information Center, a Palestinian/Israeli group in Israel.

She lists protest in Toronto, Vancouver and Ottawa but let me know if you know of others - especially in Halifax, I have to take this grief and anger somewhere!

Video of Israeli soldiers boarding here:

Conrad Black, Maoists in India, G20 Security

2010-05-29T14:52:00.007-03:00

Musing on Conrad Black today - given his correct analysis (mostly) in the National Post (front page!) today, I think that part of the cure for what ails us, is to send the rich to jail for a while. . . where they learn things like - everyone behind bars in not guilty of a crime, people deserve to be treated with dignity even in jail. . .

Speaking to a three year old report on the government's plan on what to do with Canadian prisons Black says: "As so often in other fields, this document seeks to import to Canada much of the worst of American practice, and none of the best, unless Canada now idealizes gratuitous official severity." and, he claims, he knows whereof he speaks having spent considerable time in American prisons with the approach (punishment, not rehab, treat them like they are guilty until proven innocent . . .) now being proposed by the Harper government.

Black says in this article in part:

This Roadmap--which was released in 2007, and which the Harper government began officially responding to in its budget in 2008, setting out a five-year plan -- turns the humane traditions of Canada upside down. It implicitly assumes that all who are convicted are guilty and have no remaining claim to decency from the state, and that treating confinees accordingly is in the interest of the legally unexceptionable majority.

The Roadmap does not mention prisoners' rights, beyond basic food, shelter, clothing and medical care, and assumes that they are probably not recoverable for society and that the longer they are imprisoned, the better it is for society. Almost no distinction is made between violent and non-violent offenders.

Conrad black defending prisoners - imagine! He also says that the unborn have rights in a sentence in the middle of the article, and he holds other views I find abhorrent, but this was amusing, nevertheless.

___________________________________________________________________

Also musing about the Maoists in India. I was quite compelled by Arundhuti Roy's article in Outlook that defended the Maoists and their violence, see here, because they are defending those without rights or privilege in India and the movement is growing especially among the "tribal people". Several articles have been published lately that were very sympathetic to the Maoists or Naxalites as they are known in India. Their previous violence though has targeted police, military, paramilitary and corporations. There has been some (but little) collateral damage - killed civilians (and always because they were unluckily traveling on the same bus or train as lots of military or police. Now suddenly a civilian train travelling from Kolkata to Delhi is blown up, or the track was sabotaged, it seems to be still a little unclear - but it was clear that a last month, a bus load of police and security police wanna-be's was attacked and there were "civilian casualties" - although the bulk of deaths were police) and everyone is blaming the Maoists who have apparently only slaughtered (relatively) innocent civilians - what's the dealio?

Another article in Outlook here.
and here, questioning whether it was in fact, the Maoists.
Another story here from Al Jazeera
And lastly in the Guardian - UK supporting the struggle for the landless even if not the Naxalite methods. . .

U of T is shutting down for the G20 including sending students off campus, closing buildings including residences. A concern, see: http://www.socialistproject.ca/bullet/361.php

Musings on Gay Rights in Cuba, Gaza Flotilla, Catholic Church & abortion

2010-05-28T07:28:00.008-03:00

I was pleased to see the news about Cuba's march against homophobia this year - apparently bigger and better than last year!

Although proud of Cuba for most of my life, I was always ashamed of their human right's record (although I understand the need to defend the state and the system) especially around gay rights, (and of course the right to dissent, although with the U.S. big hammer, backing dissenters it is a different situation from most states, and this is not the place for that post!) and was not uncritical of the state.

I am pleased, however, to report that things are getting much better, and Cuba is called by some: "the most progressive Latin American Country on gay rights. " This may not be true as Venezuela is also quite progressive, at least "legally". In Cuba you can get a free state sponsored "sex change" operation (sex reassignment surgery) and free hormones to maintain your assigned gender. But relationships are not acknowledged. In Venezuela a law acknowledging same sex unions is expected, soon. It is written by several authors that Cuba does not acknowledge same sex unions because marriage has little meaning in the country for heterosexuals and so there is little demand for it. Which state has the most discrimination day to day, is not clear to me but is dealt with in several wikipedia articles dealing with this issue.

I got started thinking about this due to an article in Direct Action from Australia which says in part:

One of the factors that have helped change attitudes has been the government’s strong commitment to education, research and improvement. In 1972 it set up the National Working Group of Sex Education (GNTES). Composed of professionals of various ministries with a multidisciplinary approach, the group’s main mission was to create and implement the policy for a national program of sex education. Importantly, it was also tasked with research, counselling and education about issues surrounding sexuality. GNTES helped advise and advocate for gay, lesbian and transgender rights throughout the 1970s and ’80s. It set up municipal research, education and counselling services across Cuba and in 1989 became the National Centre of Sex Education (CENESEX).

CENESEX has been leading the campaign against homophobia. On May 17, 2008, it organised activities to mark the International Day Against Homophobia. Associated Press reported at the time, “Cuba’s gay community celebrated unprecedented openness — and high-ranking political alliances — with a government-backed campaign against homophobia on Saturday”. Mariela Castro, director of CENESEX and daughter of President Raul Castro, joined government leaders and hundreds of activists at a one-day conference that featured shows, lectures, panel discussions and book presentations. Mariela Castro told Associated Press, “This is a very important moment for us, the men and women of Cuba, because for the first time we can gather in this way and speak profoundly and with scientific basis about these topics”.

The president of Cuba’s national parliament, Ricardo Alarcon, told reporters at the conference that the government needs to do more to promote gay rights, but many Cubans still need to be convinced. The previous night, during prime time, Cuban state television ran the US film Brokeback Mountain, the story of two gay cowboys.

That said, other Gay organizations are not allowed/acknowledged, gay relationships are not recognized, they cannot celebrate a "Gay pride" day, and there is still a lot of homophobia in the population. (And I have no way to gauge whether it is better or worse in other countries in central and south America.) But I am happy that Cuba is not a monstrosity of homophobia and that there is state sponsored education to teach people to stop being discriminatory. You can read more at:
Wikipedia - LGBT Rights in Cuba
BBC - Castro Champions Gay rights in Cuba
AP - Cubans March Against Homophobia
Havana Times - Being Homosexual in Cuba.
______________________________________________________________

Also musing (in terror) this morning on Gaza. A flotilla of nine ships, from Ireland, Turkey, Sweden and other countries, carrying 700 activists and 10,000 tons of humanitarian aid, are approaching Gaza by sea, in an attempt to break the Israeli Siege of Gaza. The siege continued since the 2007 election of Hamas, is a "collective punishment" of the people of Gaza for supporting the wrong government - this is illegal and an international crime.

According to wikipedia:

The Gaza Strip (Arabic: قطاع غزة‎ Qiṭāʿ Ġazza/Qita' Ghazzah, Arabic pronunciation: [qitˤaːʕ ɣazza]) lies on the Eastern coast of the Mediterranean Sea. It borders Egypt on the southwest and Israel on the south, east and north. It is about 41 kilometers (25 mi) long, and between 6 and 12 kilometers (4–7.5 mi) wide, with a total area of 360 square kilometers (139 sq mi). The territory takes its name from Gaza, its main city.

The territory has a population of about 1.5 million people, as at July 2009,^[1] 1 million of whom were, as of March 2005, refugees^[2] who fled to the territory from other parts of Palestine as part of the 1948 Palestinian exodus arising from the 1948 Arab-Israeli War and their descendants. The population is predominantly Sunni Muslims and speak a Western Egyptian dialect of Arabic. . .
The Gaza Strip is one of the territorial units forming the Palestinian territories.^[7]^[8]^[9]^[10] Actual control of the area within the Gaza Strip borders are in the hands of Hamas, an organization that won civil parliamentary Palestinian Authority elections in 2006 and took over de facto government in the Gaza Strip from the Palestinian Authority by way of its own political maneuvering and armed militia in July 2007, while consolidating power by violently removing the Palestinian Authority's security forces and civil servants from the Gaza Strip.

From my post earlier this month:
"Also thinking about Gaza today and the flotilla of ships on their way to hopefully break the seige of Gaza. See this article on Al Jazeera . . . Imagine 1.5 million people trapped in a prison strip of land, with no employment, not enough calories and no way to "escape" and no where to escape to. . . I cannot understand why there is not a huge outcry about Israel's policy of collective punishment of all of the people of Gaza. This piece says in part:

Ultimately Israel is faced with two questions: does it continue its policy of collective punishment and prevent the flotilla from entering Gaza until Gazans succumb to Israeli demands? Or does it allow the aid to enter and attempt to demonstrate to the world that Israel does in fact respect human rights?

Unfortunately neither of these options bode well for the Israelis, option one for the obvious public outcry that will spill out as a result of 800 people stranded in the water. And although option two would be smarter from a public relations perspective, it would be an indirect admission by Israel that its policy of collective punishment and continued siege is flawed, not to mention illegal. It seems Israel only has a few days left before it is to make up its mind on what could be one of its toughest tests yet."

Click on image below, for link to very recent article in Haaretz.

Hamas police ahead of the arrival of an aid flotilla.
Photo by: AP

You can follow the flotilla and see where they are - live - on http://www.witnessgaza.com/

Crowd for send off of boat from Turkey to free Gaza:

Israel is threatening to stop the fleet and is insisting that humanitarian aid is let into Gaza (although this does not include cement or steel to rebuild houses, enough calories for everyone to eat without starving, lots of medical equipment.) Their siege is meant to "punish' the people, including the children, of Gaza, to get them to change their support for Hamas - anybody know when that worked!?

Other links:
Al Jazeera - Tensions Rise over Gaza Aid Fleet
Israel's Disinformation Campaign Against the Gaza Freedom Flotilla.
Protest letter Template

__________________________________________________________________

An op-ed piece in the NY Times caught my attention yesterday. It is by Nicholas D. Kristoff and titled Sister Margaret's Choice. In it he tells the story of a Catholic nun - who some call a "Saint" who has been excommunicated by the Catholic Church because she did not stop an abortion.

According to the story:

“In this tragic case, the treatment necessary to save the mother’s life required the termination of an 11-week pregnancy,” the hospital said in a statement. “This decision was made after consultation with the patient, her family, her physicians, and in consultation with the Ethics Committee.”
Sister Margaret was a member of that committee. She declined to discuss the episode with me, but the bishop of Phoenix, Thomas Olmstead, ruled that Sister Margaret was “automatically excommunicated” because she assented to an abortion.

So not one priest who assaulted and sexually molested little boys and girls, has been excommunicated (I assume that I DO NOT have to provide links or evidence for that statement!) but, don't object to saving a woman's life, and get excommunicated. Kristof goes on to say:

I heard about Sister Margaret from an acquaintance who is a doctor at the hospital. After what happened to Sister Margaret, he doesn’t dare be named, but he sent an e-mail to his friends lamenting the excommunication of “a saintly nun”:
“She is a kind, soft-spoken, humble, caring, spiritual woman whose spot in Heaven was reserved years ago,” he said in the e-mail message. “The idea that she could be ex-communicated after decades of service to the Church and humanity literally makes me nauseated.”
“True Christians, like Sister Margaret, understand that real life is full of difficult moral decisions and pray that they make the right decision in the context of Christ’s teachings. Only a group of detached, pampered men in gilded robes on a balcony high above the rest of us could deny these dilemmas.”

I am in a bit of a rage over that one. Ordinary church goers just seem to ignore these things (unless they happen to their family) - N.S. is full of Catholics who somehow see these actions of the church and hierarchy as outside their experience with the church - there is no way to change the church from within, as it is not democratic in any way - or responsive to "the people" so the only answer is to run away! run away! and I encourage that! If you feel compelled to attend mass - just don't leave any money behind! They have to get responsive and responsible for what they preach, or start selling off assets, and although that will keep a lot of men in gilded robes going for a long time - they will be rather meaningless without a flock!

________________________________________________________________

Just for fun - this is interesting -- First Human Infected with a Computer Virus. It is really about the electronics that people carry with in them - pacemakers, hearing aids etc. - other electronics may be available for more "cosmetic" or "enhancement" purposes and they will be "like part of us" but they will be susceptible to computer viruses. This is one of those problems that exists in principle but not yet in fact - but it makes sense that it is coming.

__________________________________________________________________

A good article on Straight Goods today (hey, and send them some money!) Partly pasted below but worth reading the whole thing. . .

G20 lingo

Here's the difference between the bank levy and the Robin Hood tax.

Dateline: Tuesday, May 25, 2010
Kelly Crichton
With the G20 conference approaching, we have been hearing a lot of confusing talk about an international "bank levy" and also about the Financial Transactions Tax (FTT) — also called the Robin Hood Tax. The two taxes are not at all the same thing and can't be conflated.
When discussions began prior to the G20 in Pittsburgh last year to "do something" about the banks and the mess the economy was in, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown raised the idea of a Financial Transaction Tax — a re-working of the old Tobin Tax idea to properly reflect the times.
The FTT would be a tiny levy of .05 percent on all commercial global financial transactions. (The Tobin tax was just on currency trading.) The FTT would earn a very substantial amount of money — estimated to be at least $650 billion per year.
Half of the funds raised would remain in domestic hands, and could be used in the event of another financial meltdown, or to shore up domestic social programs. The other half of the funds would go into a global fund to aid development in the world's poorest countries and to help developing countries adapt their economies to the realities of climate change.
. . .
The FTT is very different from a bank levy, which would simply impose a tax on the banks. The bank levy would not be an instrument of global redistribution as is the FTT. And, in fact, it has been criticized as possibly creating an atmosphere of even greater recklessness, because, in effect, the banks would now have an "insurance" fund to fall back on.
An FTT on the other hand, is seen as something that could stabilize markets by discouraging the most egregious kinds of market activity, day trading, and short term speculation — what has often been called "casino capitalism" on the exchanges of the world.
The FTT — also known as the Robin Hood Tax — has had a great deal of publicity in the UK and Europe, in part due to the Oxfam International campaign and the participation of Ben Kingsley and Bill Nighy, but also because it was seen by many to be a global tax whose time had come.

Tuesday Musings on banks, pot, oil patch subsidies and abortion.

2010-05-25T08:39:00.005-03:00

Well, I do know that the Canadian banks are large and profitable and I had bought the argument that we did not need to bail out our banks, because we have heavy (and required) regulation of the sector. Then, I read this article, by Murray Dobbin, which should be required reading, for Canadians especially Conservative Party supporters. If his analysis or facts are wrong, please let me know, because I expect to be quoting this for quite a while to come. In it he says that it is myth that we did not "bail out" banks in Canada, that the Harper Gov did the following:

We are, according to the IMF, actually the third worst of the G7 countries, behind the U.S. and Britain, in terms of financial stabilization costs.

First, we put up $70 billion to buy up iffy mortgages from the big five banks, through the Canadian Mortgage and Housing Corporation, taking them off the banks' balance sheets. That is almost the exact equivalent the U.S. bailout -- it spent 10 times as much, $700 billion, and its economy is about 10 times as large.

Secondly, the Harper government established a fund of $200 billion to backstop the banks -- money they could borrow if they needed it. The government had to borrow billions -- mostly from the banks! -- to do it. It's euphemistically called the Emergency Financing Framework -- implying that our impeccable banks might actually face an emergency. It is effectively a line of low-interest credit and while it has not all been accessed, it's there to be used. Could it help explain why credit has not dried up here as much as it has in the U.S.?

Third, the government now insures 100% of virtually all mortgages through CMHC eliminating risk for the banks -- and opening the door to the ridiculous flood of housing loans we have seen over the past few years. The result: housing has become unaffordable for tens of thousands of Canadians and new rental housing has dried up.

He also provides more analysis - absolutely worth a read - we are being lied to!

In addition, of course, the banks are profitable not just because of government guarantees/assistance - in fact they are about to announce big profits again (see this article in the Globe and Mail) and an increased profit rate, and just where do they make this money? From me and you - from "retail" banking profits - I cannot operate on cash these days and I pay a lot for the privilege. To have a chequing account that allows me unlimited interact withdrawals, to withdraw money from MY bank only, without charge, and to write unlimited cheques, I pay $12.95 a month plus $3.00 a month just to have an overdraft (then I pay interest on it, as well, if I use it.) That's close to $200 a year and I am sure it is over, once things like bank charges from "other" machines (at $1.50 a pop) are factored in - or interest on my overdraft, which I do use. I used to pay another $3.00 per month to have my cheques returned to me but since they now only return photocopies, and since I write so few cheques, I have cancelled that. . . At any rate, my employer uses direct deposit and unless I keep a large balance in my account, I cannot get rid of fees - our house lives kind of hand to mouth - so keeping a balance of $2-3000 is not on.

Also of note today, about banking, in Canada, is that home ownership costs are rising across Canada, and the reason is, primarily, the expected rise in Bank of Canada rates, according to this article from the Globe and Mail. Of course the banks were still charging over 5% for a 5 year mortgage when the Bank of Canada rate was near zero - so now they will be increasing to keep that 5+ % spread - and the 15% -20% that they earn on Credit cards - it makes it tough to try and keep the money from them. We do some credit union "banking" but they cannot look after everything - and since we moved to N.S. have found the credit union didn't want to do anything to get our business - and the banks treat us like "special customers" and yes I fell for it. . . I hope to slowly move everything over to a credit union again (as we did in Toronto and Vancouver) but even then the credit union's here, in Nova Scotia do not seem as progressive and consumer friendly as those we participated in (even so far as being on Board committees) in Ont. and B.C.

My last beef on financial services this morning (and it does affect other sectors) is again the Globe and mail reports (I should stop reading the financial pages it just upsets me!) an expected increase, this year, in Executive Compensation. It is also misleading in part as it says that there was "almost no increase in executive compensation", in one line, and then immediately says - Oh but cash compensation was "up" seven percent! OK - so they did not get their big stock options or they weren't worth as much because of the "meltdown" - I think that big CEO's helped create the mess and getting increases of over 7% while auto workers and others were asked to take "cuts" just demonstrates what wrong with the system! From the article:

A Globe and Mail review of pay for CEOs at Canada’s 100 largest public companies in 2009 shows top executives across Canada received, on average, almost no pay increase last year.
The cash portion of pay packages – salary and cash bonuses – did show substantial growth, with a combined median increase of 7.6 per cent. (Medians reflect the experience of the middle-of-the-pack CEO, while averages can be skewed by CEOs with particularly large or small compensation amounts.)

Read the article for more detail on how they fared, and how they are expected to be back to making real increases this year. (I say - where's mine!?)

______________________________________________________________

The Chronicle Herald is running a Canadian Press story this morning, that says that Canada is mulling cuts to the oil patch subsidies (thank gawd for small mercies!!)

OTTAWA — Canada is contemplating taking the lead on a key G20 pledge by announcing the elimination of some tax breaks for the oil patch prior to the June summit in Toronto, The Canadian Press has learned
G20 leaders agreed last September in Pittsburgh they would reduce distorting fossil fuel subsidies over the medium term and pledged to present concrete national plans in Toronto.

But sources say Ottawa wants to get ahead of the pack. They say senior officials are studying a proposal that would see Ottawa announce plans to reduce tax support for the oil and gas sector prior to the summit.

As the story suggests - "If Canada took unilateral action on fossil fuel subsidies, 'I think everybody would fall over dead' with shock, he said." Me too -but I do hope it happens.

________________________________________________________________

A story from Canadian Press appeared in most big city papers yesterday and today, that is of interest - the Chronicle Herald Story can found here - but it was also covered in the Globe and the Star.

OTTAWA — The Harper government turned its back on advice from its own civil servants when it excluded abortion funding in its G8 maternal- and child-health initiative, The Canadian Press has learned.

Briefing notes prepared in January by the Canadian International Development Agency for International Co-operation Minister Bev Oda suggest access to safe abortion services could save numerous lives in developing countries.

Abortion was among the measures CIDA felt were necessary to meet the ambitious maternal health goals Ottawa plans to promote at the upcoming meeting of world leaders in Ontario next month.

________________________________________________________________

Although not a personal fan of Marc Emery, I support his business and believe that he was treated appallingly, and that his extradition should break some Canadian law, or at least break the spirit of Canadian Law, if not the rule of law explicitly. I have written and called on his behalf, and I don't actually see how this is different from say, Saudi Arabia asking for the extradition of the publisher of Victoria's Secret Catalogue shipped in, or sending alcohol to Saudi -Arabia. Not smart, but does one get extradited from Canada where these things are legal because they are illegal somewhere else? I just don't get it. Why is this different? Why are we not protecting Canadian Citizens? I was shocked that he could be extradited to the U.S. for a business that he carried on in Canada and paid Canadian taxes on, and declared his business.

I found it interesting that the Marc Emery extradition story was carried, with some question, even in the Hindu in India.
________________________________________________________________

Great article on Al Jazeera by Robert Fisk of the Independent. In part he says:

More and more today, we journalists have become prisoners of the language of power. . .

Let me show you what I mean. For two decades now, the US and British - and Israeli and Palestinian - leaderships have used the words 'peace process' to define the hopeless, inadequate, dishonourable agreement that allowed the US and Israel to dominate whatever slivers of land would be given to an occupied people.

. . .

Same again today. We western journalists - used yet again by our masters - have been reporting our jolly generals in Afghanistan as saying that their war can only be won with a "hearts and minds" campaign. No-one asked them the obvious question: Wasn't this the very same phrase used about Vietnamese civilians in the Vietnam war? And didn't we - didn't the West - lose the war in Vietnam?

Yet now we western journalists are actually using - about Afghanistan - the phrase 'hearts and minds' in our reports as if it is a new dictionary definition rather than a symbol of defeat for the second time in four decades, in some cases used by the very same soldiers who peddled this nonsense - at a younger age - in Vietnam.

Language being used to "confuse the issue" - check it out!

______________________________________________________________

Lastly this morning, I am still thinking about Facebook, privacy and data accumulation and my part in it. One article in PCWorld suggests that Facebook should use opt out of complete privacy instead of opt-in if they are really committed to privacy.

Then there is this article from the Washington Post by Mark Zuckerman - the founder of Facebook who commits to improving privacy again including:

We have heard the feedback. There needs to be a simpler way to control your information. In the coming weeks, we will add privacy controls that are much simpler to use. We will also give you an easy way to turn off all third-party services. We are working hard to make these changes available as soon as possible. We hope you'll be pleased with the result of our work and, as always, we'll be eager to get your feedback.

If they get a turn off for "all third party services" I will likely remain on FB, as that is what makes me really crazy!

Have a great day - let me know what you think about any of this . . .

Today's News

2010-05-24T10:45:00.006-03:00

So today, it turns out, according to this story in the Guardian, that Israel offered to sell South Africa nuclear weapons during the years of Apartheid in South Africa.

The story is also subtitled: Secret apartheid-era papers give first official evidence of Israeli nuclear weapons

The story says in part:

The "top secret" minutes of meetings between senior officials from the two countries in 1975 show that South Africa's defence minister, PW Botha, asked for the warheads and Shimon Peres, then Israel's defence minister and now its president, responded by offering them "in three sizes". The two men also signed a broad-ranging agreement governing military ties between the two countries that included a clause declaring that "the very existence of this agreement" was to remain secret.

____________________________________________________________

Also yesterday the NY Times editorial was about Omar Khadr and the mistreatment of him as a child. They say in part:

Mr. Khadr was not a mere bystander. He was indoctrinated into armed conflict by his father, a member of Osama bin Laden’s circle who was killed by Pakistani forces in 2003. But if his trial goes forward this summer as scheduled, he will be the first person in decades to be tried by a Western nation for war crimes allegedly committed as a child.
That has drawn justified criticism from United Nations officials and civil liberties and human rights groups. The conditions of Mr. Khadr’s imprisonment have been in clear violation of the Geneva Conventions and international accords on the treatment of children.

Bring Omar Khadr home! people - we should be ashamed as a country not to restore a citizen, who was born in this country and who was recruited as a child soldier by his family, no less than if he had been dragooned by some militia in Africa, which this country condemns. We cannot have policies that are only trotted out when they are convenient - If we believe in the rule of law, as a country, (I do, but I know that Harper and Harperites do not, or at least they cause serious questions about their commitment on a regular basis) we must always condemn those who recruit and train child soldiers whether they are from our country or some other. Those child soldiers deserve a chance at life, rehabilitation and reintegration. At 15 Khadr could likely have been rehabilitated - and integrated into Canadian society - but after 7 years in Guantanamo - tortured and threatened and spending all of that time with jailers, and with others who also believe in extremism - that may never be possible, and that is the fault of Canada along with the U.S.

Patience, crying, confusion and Dances of Universal Peace

2010-05-24T07:25:00.005-03:00

Saying that one should be patient and withstand trouble doesn’t mean one should be defeated and overcome. The whole purpose of engaging in the practice of patience is to become stronger in mind, stronger in heart. And you also want to remain calm. If you lose patience and your brain becomes confused with emotion, you will lose the power to analyze and figure out how to overcome the negative force that is opposing you. ~~~ Dalai Lama

I think I am pretty patient - I am patient with the grand children, usually patient waiting in lines, and goodness knows I have been patiently waiting my whole lfe for a change in the way the world works. (I really thought that capitalism would fall apart in my lifetime - It is such a bad way to organize things for people and the planet.) I want to "clear my mind" so that I can "figure out how to overcome the negative force that is opposing" me. I am taking this quote (above) from the Dalai Lama to heart this morning, because one outcome of my injury/accident is that even more than before(and it was considered a problem, before!) I cry easily. I don't cry because someone has hurt my feelings. I sometimes cry in pain, but usually I cry, because I am powerless to stop Monsanto, to build affordable housing, or because a plane crashed in India, or Israel killed unarmed young teen Palestinians, or some woman was stoned to death for adultery after a rape - I don't know how to get patient and emotionless about the world.

I cannot do yoga, ride a bike or paddle a kayak - I can walk. (Broken vertebrae - so-called burst L3 on Feb 1st) I need something that is easy and not "vigorous" and yet is calming and distracting and I thought today about something I don't think I can indulge in, in Halifax. In the past, in Toronto, I attended "Dances of Universal Peace" - I loved it - it was a fantastic way to meditate - while dancing and singing/chanting - simple movements and chants/songs and you are soon removed from your emotional reaction to things and feeling calm and relaxed - at least that was my experience.

My brain does become "confused with emotion" and I do I think I lose the power to analyze - I do get over the emotion quickly and it doesn't stop me from getting on with things - but it does cause ripples in the world around me - it upsets others, and I think it makes me murky indeed, in my thinking, even if only temporarily. In addition, one of the songs that I learned (but, of course do not remember) was a song to Kwan Yin (Quan Yin) goddess of compassion and wellness... We held the world in our arms and walked and chanted holding the world between our spread arms out in front of us. While holding the world in our arms, we were coached to imagine that we were loving the world intensely, and yet we were separated from the pain of the world and able to hold it at arms length. I need to practice more of that. . .
This image is by Bob Spencer and can be found on the website of the Dances of Universal Peace. Click on image for link.

So I am looking for suggestions. If not Dances of Universal Peace (and remember no bending or twisting, no exercise other than walking - I can dance a little as long as it is not "ballistic") and a limited ability to meditate for more than 10 minutes at a time. I could do so for longer after yoga but now that my body is either sluggish or pent up it is much harder - also hard to find a completely comfortable position as I am in, at least a little pain, most of the time.

Suggestions?

Sunday musings

2010-05-23T10:31:00.005-03:00

Great article by Antonia Zerbisias about Ottawa's approach to women and the request (I did not hear about this anywhere else) for as she says:

Funding for more than 20 established organizations that have helped women make great strides has been yanked by Status of Women Canada.
Nobody has explained the cuts.

That’s why, next Wednesday, both current minister Rona Ambrose and former minister Helena Guergis have been summoned to a special meeting of the House of Common’s Standing Committee on the Status of Women to explain their funding decisions and criteria.

“The committee does not believe that it has the data it requires to assess whether the department is funding appropriately according to its mandate,” says committee chair Hedy Fry, who was SWC minister in the Chretien government.

Women's groups cuts, equality for women cut as a goal and nobody to do the explaining. . . thank you to the committee for trying to bring some light to this . . .

Zerbisias provides further info about the cuts and what is being funded - bibles, bible colleges - this is scary changes to policy:

Consider the silence from the Conservatives on continued funding by Canadian International Development Agency (CIDA) for the International Planned Parenthood Federation, which helps women and girls in 174 countries.
Meanwhile, CIDA announced $357,146 for the Prince Albert, Sask.-based Chakam School of the Bible Inc. to build a school in Sudan.

Then there’s the $495,600 CIDA grant to Wycliffe Bible Translators of Calgary, which works so that aboriginal people in far-flung corners of the world can read the scriptures in their native languages.

“It’s okay to translate the Bible,” says Demers. “But there are aboriginal women here who are dying.”

In fact, adds Demers, groups seeking CIDA funding are being told to leave the phrase “gender equity” out of their grant applications.

______________________________________________________________

Also thinking about Gaza today and the flotilla of ships on their way to hopefully break the seige of Gaza. See this article on Al Jazeera . . . Imagine 1.5 million people trapped in a prison strip of land, with no employment, not enough calories and no way to "escape" and no where to escape to. . . I cannot understand why there is not a huge outcry about Israel's policy of collective punishment of all of the people of Gaza. This piece says in part:

Ultimately Israel is faced with two questions: does it continue its policy of collective punishment and prevent the flotilla from entering Gaza until Gazans succumb to Israeli demands? Or does it allow the aid to enter and attempt to demonstrate to the world that Israel does in fact respect human rights?

Unfortunately neither of these options bode well for the Israelis, option one for the obvious public outcry that will spill out as a result of 800 people stranded in the water. And although option two would be smarter from a public relations perspective, it would be an indirect admission by Israel that its policy of collective punishment and continued siege is flawed, not to mention illegal.

It seems Israel only has a few days left before it is to make up its mind on what could be one of its toughest tests yet. And it is posing these questions that make the Freedom Flotilla so significant.

I have been and supporting the International BDS (Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions) movement, boycotting Chapters and MEC (formal boycott's although I am not sure that I agree with the decision to boycott MEC) and informally products made in Israel and O Solo Mio shoes since about half their stock id from Israel. See this new article about the success of the Cultural BDS movement.

__________________________________________________________________

Also musing this morning, about Internet privacy and whether to stay on Facebook. I have started blogging more (here - www.musingsfromtheshore.blogspot.com), tweeting, (ma_mchugh) and emailing people so that I am not so dependent on facebook. I feel like if I remove myself entirely from FB I am going to miss out on knowing about events and even keeping up to date with news outside the mainstream. . . but I do not want to be participating in the data mining (I am not too worried about my own data - go ahead and try to use my Palestinian Solidarity or feminist rants to sell me something personally!) as I am a large FB user - posting and reading other's posts more than once a day.

Lots of links to thoughtful discussion on FB and its challenges and also on Google, who are in trouble for collecting our data though they say they have not used it. I am in kind of future shock especially on what info corporations have on me - the issue is articulated in the Times Online:

Facebook’s privacy policy is now 5,830 words long, more than the US Constitution. “Our online selves are not just stuff for databases, they are part of us. Facebook has no real respect for its customers,” said Milan.

So far the charge has been led by the technorati. Danah Boyd, a Microsoft researcher and top tech blogger, wrote: “The battle that is under way is not a battle over the future of privacy and publicity. It’s a battle over choice and informed consent. It’s unfolding because people are being duped, tricked, coerced and confused into doing things where they don’t understand the consequences.

“Facebook keeps saying that it gives users choices, but that is unfair. It gives users the illusion of choice and hides the details from them ‘for their own good’.”

Other influential techies, including Cory Doctorow, co-editor of the weblog Boing Boing, have already quit Facebook. More worryingly for the firm, the controversy is getting increasing attention in Washington DC.

The Electronic Privacy Information Center (Epic), an advocacy group, has asked the Federal Trade Commission to investigate Facebook changes that have meant more information is made public by default and also shared automatically with other websites.

Lots of other discussions about this. I am looking at torproject.org and chi.mp as replacements although not entirely, of course - they do different things. . . - and of course this blog which will allow me to only post once a day to FB - until I decide whether to get out entirely.

Another interesting article can be found on the Economist site - yup everyone is now worried. . .

As the Economist says:

Facebook’s problem is more fundamental. True, the social network has some of the most extensive privacy controls on the web, but these have now become so complex—and are tweaked so often—that even privacy experts find them bamboozling. The company also has a powerful incentive to push people into revealing more information. Facebook generates most of its revenue from targeted advertisements based on users’ demography and interests, so the more data users share publicly the more money it can mint from ads. It may well be betting that users are now so hooked that they are unlikely to revolt against a gradual loosening of privacy safeguards.

The worst thing is Facebook’s underlying prejudice against privacy. Sign up and it assumes you want to share as much data as possible; if not, you have to change the settings, which can be a fiddly business. The presumption should be exactly the opposite: the default should be tight privacy controls, which users may then loosen if they choose. If Facebook fails to simplify and improve its privacy policy, it will justly risk the wrath of regulators—and many more Facebook suicides.

______________________________________________________________

Lastly I was very impressed with an article on Racism in Nova Scotia found in the Globe and Mail this weekend. . .

Picture from the Globe and mail article linked above. . .

NDP under attack by Halifax Chronicle-Herald

2010-05-22T16:03:00.004-03:00

You know, I have issues with the N.S. NDP. No one, and no party, is perfect and they have done some good things and made some mistakes, in the last year. I worry that they are not moving fast enough and not being visionary enough. BUT the Chronicle-Herald seems to be on a bit of vendetta against the current governing party - are they not ordering enough newspapers?

First the expense scandal - which all things considered was 1) not that bad and 2) came to light BECAUSE the government was determined to clean things up and keep MLA's accountable. But they could not catch a break on that one. . . and were given no quarter for the fact that they were trying to improve the accountability and get expenses under control. I am embarrassed that the CH among other news sources in the province thought that a $300 brief case was too much for a PREMIER! or that he might have travelled on a 20 hour flight to Vietnam first class - as I understand it the ONLY first class flight he has taken as Premier! Like I said embarrassing.

I was appalled this morning to read the story in the CH about Dan O'Connor. I am not going to debate whether the premier's chief of staff should be allowed to defend the government anonymously, but for the CH to "out" him because they did not like what he said, was I think, pretty stinky! I was confused about a few facts, but Parker Donham sets it straight on his blog, Contrarian, today's entitled: Caught in a falsehood, Herald lies again.

He says in part:

A story by Judy Myrden in Friday’s Chronicle-Herald falsely conflated the cost of producing the

NDP Government’s new Electricity Plan with the cost of a Pictou County media briefing and announcement of the plan

The effect was to overstate the cost of the news conference by four times.

Called on the falsehood, the paper repeats it in today’s lead story, also written by Myrden.

Myrden then compounds this dishonesty by falsely accusing Premier Darrell Dexter’s chief of staff, Dan O’Connor, of denying he had anonymously posted comments to the Herald’s website pointing out the paper’s misrepresentation.

WTF? What is up with the Herald?

I knew that due to a recent court case in N.S. that, where defamation was involved, you could not expect to keep your posts anonymous if you got yourself involved in a libel suit and or the police were involved, but I did expect the paper to never "out me" on the front page no matter what I said. So I have asked the CH to remove my "log-in" membership - whatever they call it and do not plan to ever post a comment on their site again. I don't subscribe, but read the CH online - so I cannot cancel my subscription . . . It's my weak blow for privacy on the web, this week - next FACEBOOK!!!