Daily Musings -- Feb 11th

An article in Truthout, this week, has an excerpt from Max Haiven's new book Crises of Imagination, Crises of Power: Capitalism, Creativity and the Commons (Zed Books, March 2014)

I want to quote many paragraphs but will just leave you with this one. 

"The crises of our age, like the crises of ages past, are the crises of capitalism. In this book, capitalism represents a cancerous disorder in the 'fabric' of social reproduction, one that works by perverting our sense of what and who is valuable and conscripting us to reproduce a system that works in the short-term interests of the few and against the interests of the vast majority of humanity. The failure to acknowledge that the many global crises we now face are, inherently, crises of capitalism represents a massive failure of the imagination. And without the radicalization of the imagination, we have no hope of overcoming these crises." 

With slightly more exciting news and a little sneak peak -- Looks like the book launch will be part of this year's Mayworks Festival!!
____________________________________________________________________________

On the environmental front more bad news. . . 

Even a single polar bear can devastate all the eggs on a single island where birds such as common eiders nest. This unfortunate colony was visited by three bears at once. (Courtesy Steve Marson)

Polar bears cannot get to seals -- In northern Hudson's Bay the ice is frozen 60 days less per year.  The freeze is thirty days later and breakup is thirty days earlier.   So, in bad news for both birds and polar bears -- they are raiding bird nesting islands and eating eggs in huge numbers in some cases more than decimating the population.   In this piece on CBC it says: 

Iverson, a Ph.D. candidate in the Department of Biology at Carleton University, recalled one rampage he witnessed in which a polar bear ate its way through an eider duck nesting colony with 300 nests, each containing about four or five eggs. The eggs were nearly "completely consumed within about a 48-hour period."

____________________________________________________________________________

And on the Harper Cons. . . the story of how our national resources including water are going to be essentially sold off -- as soon as you tie public funding to P3's for municipal water you have essentially transferred control over water - a public good and something we need to survive -- to for-profit companies.  This is not more efficient or cheaper,  it just transfers a public good into private profit and should not be contemplated by any municipality in Canada (some have private sector involvement already!   )  Read more about on Rabble.

and there there is the elections act - something yesterday - more tomorrow -- this is bad. .  very bad. . .   This piece on Rabble is terrifying -- when even the Chief Electoral Officer calls it "an affront to democracy"   something is terribly wrong and we need to be reacting.  Unfortunately I heard today (Feb 11th ) about an action by the Council of Canadians yesterday -- where everyone was supposed to contact their MP but since my partner and I are social media mavens and news hawks and we didn't know about it. . . I think it must have been kept too quiet!
________________________________________________________________________________

Then there is this NYTimes story about Snowden -- love you Eddie -- come by anytime.  You will go down in history as a hero --- hope they give you the Nobel (which he has been nominated for by two Norwegian Parliamentarians.)

Using “web crawler” software designed to search, index and back up a website, Mr. Snowden “scraped data out of our systems” while he went about his day job, according to a senior intelligence official. “We do not believe this was an individual sitting at a machine and downloading this much material in sequence,” the official said. The process, he added, was “quite automated.”

The findings are striking because the N.S.A.’s mission includes protecting the nation’s most sensitive military and intelligence computer systems from cyberattacks, especially the sophisticated attacks that emanate from Russia and China. Mr. Snowden’s “insider attack,” by contrast, was hardly sophisticated and should have been easily detected, investigators found.

___________________________________________________________________________

A coupe of nice ones from the Olympics -- and pushing gay rights -- no matter that Russia doth protest too much. . . 


One is a story about the Greek team in blue and white as usual but with rainbow gloves to give the Russian state the finger, with. . .


And the other is a CBC story about how there has been more prominent LGBTI press and support as a result of the anti-gay law in Russia. . . in fact, says CBC they may be the gayest games ever!  Which says in part: 

"You look around Canada today and there's municipalities flying rainbow flags all over in support of the LGBT population," said Helen Kennedy, executive director of Égale Canada, a charity promoting LGBT rights."

_______________________________________________________________________________
 No comment on these two - but they interested me and may interest you too . .

http://feministcurrent.com/8585/woody-allen-and-the-persistent-myths-of-rape-culture/



http://consortiumnews.com/2014/01/14/israels-hand-in-guatemalas-genocide-2/

Daily Musings Feb 3rd.

Is Edward Snowden a prisoner in Russia?   The Guardian newspaper asks.  In the second exclusive extract from his new book, The Snowden Files, Luke Harding looks at the role of Russia's shadowy intelligence agency, the FSB, in securing the whistleblower's exile – and whether they have cracked his secret files.   I feel so bad for Snowden -- instead of politics he often brings out the Mom and Grannie in me. . . I just want to bring him home and look after him.

_____________________________________________________________________________

There was a presentation in Halifax on the possibility of postal banking. . . a good idea whose time has come though the Post office CEO doesn't think so. . .   It suggests in part:

Traditional banks are closing, true. But they're also exclusive places and increasingly centralized in high density, higher income, areas, like shopping malls.
To prove the point, he draws back the curtain of a boardroom at the Holiday Inn in Dartmouth. Outside is the neon rush of another Pay Day loan storefront, a high interest loan provider that preys largely upon those who have been excluded from traditional banks due to poverty.
“We know who uses the pay day loan system,” says Bickerton. “It's basically the people who have been excluded form our 'great' banking system. In many cases they are part of the 3-5% of the population who don't have banks accounts. These are the poorest people in the country and they are systematically excluded from the banks. We know that First Nations people are often the greatest users of the pay day loans. Why? Because they are the most excluded from our banking system.”
Another of the great bank-excluded classes are rural Canadians. And here, with its cross-country network of postal outlets, Canada Post would be at a distinct advantage. Bickerton notes that there are over 2,000 bank-less communities across the country that are served by a postal outlet. Add a financial service delivery capacity to these outlets - et voila - an instant underserved market, goes the logic.

I like it. 

____________________________________________________________________________

Tell Shell's New CEO to stop drilling in the Arctic.  Sign the petition here.
_____________________________________________________________________________

Our way or the highway. . .U.S. Cuts off aid to Bolivia,  Bolivia says: 

In any case, Morales said, 80 percent of the United States’ money returned to the U.S. in the form of Bolivian contracts for business enterprises and consulting services, “so what aid are we talking about?”

“If we review the data, the latest data, I believe it comes to 20 or 25 [million dollars], practically nothing,” he said at a press conference in the presidential palace.

Presidential chief of staff Juan Ramón Quintana told the press that USAID contributions amount at present to $23 million.

“We want to tell [the United States], with much pride, that we’re not a mendicant state, we are not beggars, we don’t need charity, we have pride and we’re going to finance the struggle against drug trafficking ourselves,” . . .       

See more here. 

 ___________________________________________________

Lakoff!!!   George Lakoff has tried to teach the left about framing.  He says, in this interview in the Guardian,  we are still losing -- he is mostly talking about the democrats in the U.S. and many of them are not progressive at all. . . but I still buy the framing idea.  It is just hard to make confident, black and white statements when you have an analysis, and not just an opinion, or  direct revelation from the Lord.   Lakoff says in part:

'Conservatives don't follow the polls, they want to change them … Liberals do everything wrong'

Of course me and mine are not liberals in small or large L versions. . . but I still think we can learn from this. 

 "Framing is not primarily about politics or political messaging or communication. It is far more fundamental than that: frames are the mental structures that allow human beings to understand reality – and sometimes to create what we take to be reality. But frames do have an enormous bearing on politics … they structure our ideas and concepts, they shape the way we reason … For the most part, our use of frames is unconscious and automatic."

. . ."the left, he argues, is losing the political argument – every year, it cedes more ground to the right, under the mistaken impression that this will bring everything closer to the centre. In fact, there is no centre: the more progressives capitulate, the more boldly the conservatives express their vision, and the further to the right the mainstream moves. The reason is that conservatives speak from an authentic moral position, and appeal to voters' values. Liberals try to argue against them using evidence; they are embarrassed by emotionality. They think that if you can just demonstrate to voters how their self-interest is served by a socially egalitarian position, that will work, and everyone will vote for them and the debate will be over. In fact, Lakoff asserts, voters don't vote for bald self-interest; self-interest fails to ignite, it inspires nothing – progressives, of all people, ought to understand this.

____________________________________________________________________________

 This is just a funny piece, in MacLeans,  about how the government bureaucrats in Ottawa struggle with twitter.  Everything has to be approved and takes a lot of time and a medium that should be timely is left to languish and is always late.
____________________________________________________________________________

Does raising the minimum wage kill jobs?  asks Rabble blogger Tod Ferguson.   The right says: 

The Ontario PCs, the Canadian Federation of Independent Business (CFIB) and the usual suspects for the 1% have been wringing their hands and wailing about how terrible the notion of increasing the minimum wage by $0.75 is. The CFIB claims that increasing the minimum wage hurts minimum wage workers "by reducing the businesses' capacity to hire and retain them." In fact, the CFIB predicts that a 10 per cent increase in the minimum wage would trigger up to 321,000 job losses.

However the rest of the article provides actual,  statistical evidence from  5 provinces that it does not. 

___________________________________________________________________________

You'll have to watch this to get the joke but all I can say is that I would have considered this an effective ad for landmine removal.   I am not sure it is a great ad for staying in school.  watch it - what do you think?  Perhaps the OZ mindset is different from here but I don't think that this would be at all compelling. . .
____________________________________________________________________________

Good news/bad news . . .



http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/02/01/us-spain-abortion-idUSBREA100E020140201?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews

1 of 4. Thousands of people march to protest a government plan to limit abortions in Madrid February 1, 2014.

Credit: Reuters/Andrea Comas

 And in Alabama,  pregnant women who miscarry can be refused care -- all the staff in an emerg don't want to end that pregnancy where you might bleed to death?  They are being protected from liability and have no obligation to help you find treatment -- just a way of saying -- women can go die. Appalling. Details on the ACLU site, here.
______________________________________________________________________________

Given that my son (30 years old),  lives here full time, and his two children 12 and 7, live here part time, and we are not chomping to have them gone; this article was a little breath of fresh air for me.  

It seems to me, it was/is capitalism,  in the rush for "expansion of the economy" and selling more more more. . .  that broke down the extended family and moved us all to nuclear families, and now to atomized individuals. . . (so that everyone needs their own fridge, TV, car, stove, washer and dryer, lawn mower etc.)  Living in extended family (however defined - we have spent many years living with family members that we met and made into family ourselves) is an act of resistance!!

_______________________________________________________________________________

ALjazeera reports on the effect on children in Gaza and the lack of international response to get Justice for the families in Gaza even though so many of Israel's actions are illegal.  

                                                            Photo by AljAZEERA

They say in part: 

. . . It has been five years since Operation Cast Lead, a 22-day Israeli military offensive in Gaza which took place between December 27 and January 18, 2008 and claimed the lives of at least 1,400 Palestinians, including more than 350 Palestinian children.

Despite damning evidence of war crimes, the US government played a role in blocking international efforts to hold Israel accountable for serious breaches of international law. The resulting impunity has enabled Israel to continue its oppressive policies in Gaza where children undoubtedly remain targets.

. . .

 Human rights groups, including Defence for Children International Palestine, Al-Mezan Centre for Human Rights and Human Rights Watch, have documented cases of children killed and maimed in unlawful attacks; the destruction of civilian infrastructure such as schools and water and sanitation networks; the use of children as human shields; the unlawful use of white phosphorous in populated areas; and the arbitrary detention of children.

. . .

Following the attacks, the UN Human Rights Council established a fact-finding mission headed by Justice Richard Goldstone. Their mandate was "to investigate all violations of international human rights law and international humanitarian law" that may have been committed at any time in the context of the military operations conducted in Gaza between December 27, 2008 and January 18, 2009. Although international law requires states to investigate war crime allegations, Israeli authorities refused to cooperate with the investigation.
The mission's report, published in September 2009, found evidence of war crimes and possible crimes against humanity committed by both the Israeli military and Palestinian armed groups. Known as the "Goldstone Report", it was overwhelmingly endorsed by the UN General Assembly on November 5, 2009, with 114 states voting in favour of a resolution demanding that Israel and the Palestinians undertake "independent, credible investigations" into alleged war crimes. The resolution also urged the Security Council to take action on the report's recommendations, primarily by referring cases to the International Criminal Court.
Unsurprisingly, the US was one of 18 countries to vote against the resolution. The Obama administration then employed its diplomatic power to mitigate the impact of the Goldstone Report, and also blocked any further potential progress through the Security Council. 

Turning the Ship of State

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.

Capitalism, alienation, moral courage and guilt, lots of guilt.

This morning, on CBC - Sunday Morning - I heard Ann Michaels, author of "Fugitive Pieces" and now "The Winter Vault", talking about how people are confronted at some point in their life with a requirement to have moral courage, and often they feel that it is very beyond them - that they do not know what to do . She says that is why people need to practice morality and making moral decisions - so when called up on to make a difficult decision their moral decision making is "practiced".

I was thinking about how I (kind of) live this way, or try to, and cause myself no end of stress making moral decisions that sometimes I can fulfill and other times I cannot. Often these are "political decisions", but they have a large ethical or moral component. I make these decisions many times each day, because I believe that all of my decisions - small to large - impact on the world and others in it and therefore have an effect on those around me and on the planet. I remember when my husband's cousin moved from the US back to Canada with her US born/raised husband - how he said that he had never met people as principled as us - he said he had no idea that some people actually thought about how to live, and then tried to live by their principles. It was flattering, but we were surprised because we thought a lot of people (at least those well educated with good jobs and time to contemplate their lives) would be worrying about living according to their principles - Of course, that was twenty years ago and now we know that most people do not.

Most people, I believe, do not think about anything but their own immediate need, even though I also believe (possibly without corroborating evidence) that people are basically co-operative, social animals and do understand what is good for the pack/tribe/city/province/country , is also good for them. They don't vote that way, but I thought that was a result of the influence through education, media etc of monopoly capitalism.

So why I am tormented by driving a car (I live 30 minutes out of town and there is no bus service) to work every day - never mind that it is a condition of my employment that I have a car and bring it to work and that the employer pays the maintenance costs of my vehicle. I moved to NS and moved to this house . . . I fell in love with the view and being in the country and only when gas went to $1.50/litre did I really start to get it. I try not to idle but in winter found myself doing it on occasion while waiting in the car (lined up in traffic, or waiting for someone on the street). I didn't mean to set up my life this way, but I am stuck with it at least for the immediate future - although moving back "to town" is on the horizon.

I try not to eat meat, because it is not sustainable, but find myself doing it because it is too easy and fast - and the veg options are often boring (not that they need to be - but at work for instance there are many soup and sandwich lunches - the "veg" option will be a slice of processed cheese and a thin slice of tomato and maybe -if you are lucky - some lettuce.) or non-existent. When I am depressed it is meat that I crave - a bacon and tomato sandwich or lamb chops with greek salad. . . I believe it would be better to have none but I don't do most of the cooking. The other day I had a class where we served vegetarian lasagna and 5 people out of 20 went out for lunch without even trying it, because it was vegetarian! I try not to eat a lot of fish because they are not sustainable - NS farmed mussels, clams and oysters - all OK. Lobster seems to be a debate, though I am still eating it a couple of times a year (esp. this year, because this year it was a moral imperative to buy lobster to help the fishermen!) and it is Local. I do carry the fish list with me - but hey its not like you can ask at the counter in Sobey's - "Is that haddock dragged or long lined?" I mean you can ask, but they haven't a clue. I keep asking and insisting that I will buy fish when they do know but every single time I have the feeling that I am the only one who has ever asked. (At Pete's Fruitique fish counter - they know!)

I don't buy newspapers anymore but read them online saving a little paper - but then yesterday Kevin did buy the Globe and Mail because an American flag with a hammer and sickle on the front cover was more than he could resist. We use reusable (not plastic) bags, and try to keep our plastic and disposables (like paper towel and foil) at a minimum - but if you are also working hard and often and long on issues, time to traipse all over the city trying to find unwrapped food is tough, so most of our shopping is done at big grocery stores where our only option is avoidance of the worst things. Most fruit and veg are still unwrapped although it is amazing how often the cashiers want to wrap that romaine in plastic before putting it in my non-plastic bag!

I have been lucky in that I have had opportunity for most (but not all) of my adult life to work at jobs that were related to issues I cared about. But even there I found myself being unpopular or even being asked to leave jobs (twice) because my politics and moral judgements were unpopular. (too left wing!) i have worked in commission sales and consulting though. . . making even more difficult decisions about who and what I was supporting and the social value of contracts and their possible outcomes.

We never made any "investments" even when we had money (well OK we have 3-4,000 in mutual funds that were back end loaded so we had to keep them ) invested in some year when I suddenly panicked about retirement until I realized there was nothing I could do - I am just going to be poor.

I am tormented about food - I would love to do the 100 mile diet but esp in Nova Scotia pretty difficult without devoting yourself to it almost full time (time I do not have) but we do buy Local first, then organic, sometimes taking distance alone into account. (Quick - no googling allowed - try buying tomatos in NS. . . which is closer Florida or an Ontario greenhouse?)

I think the world would be better if we didn't keep buying stuff and especially "new stuff" all the time though my own alienation has never been sated by shopping anyway (except maybe shopping for food.) It is easy to shop at thrift shops for my grandchildren, but as I am over "average" size there is little to nothing that would fit me in the thrift store, although I have been lucky on occasion - again if I had more time to browse I might be lucky more often - but I only have time to run in and out - for the most part I am just wearing clothes that are 10 years plus old. . . except a couple of years ago I had to buy some summer stuff as everything I had was too heavy.

For most of my life I have not had the money or the time to travel. I have worked since I was 16 but always seemed to have a lot to do and not much money. Until recently I never ran up a big credit card debt (did move and live on a paid down mortgage though - so now at 56 have little equity left) Now that there is more life in the past than in the future, I decided - screw it I want to travel - and now we have credit card debt - though we have been to India and Cuba. But, now that I have made the decision that it is time to see the world before I get too old or sick or poor (I don't have much of a pension to look forward to) it is not very moral to fly. Flying creates a ton of GHG's - so I know I should not do it for "fun". . . but I want to, and I am not sure that I am willing to stop. On top of that I live in Nova Scotia but my aging mother lives in Toronto as does one son and my sister. My other brother lives in Montreal with his wife, and my son is moving there in the fall. So family is spread across Canada and because we get so little vacation in this country it is impossible to visit without flying. Should I just stay home and perhaps try and make do with calling? It will not make my mother feel that I love her and care about her and will upset the rest of my family that I appear "not to care" , so I guess I will keep flying and feeling guilty about it.

I don't shop at Walmart - ever - and don't understand how people can. They are the front runners in a chain of exploitation that goes round the world - I mean I shop at Zellers and most of their stuff also comes from Chinese factories but somehow they are not the player in maximizing profits and reducing costs - especially the cost of human capital that Walmart does. . . but it seems to really rub people the wrong way that I boycott Walmart, (they really flip about my Chapters boycott!) and if I actually don't make any enemies over it, I sure don't make friends, while everyone is feeling that I am criticizing them for their choices. And, I guess I am. . .

I live in a house that is not as clean as some, because I don't use a swiffer or other disposable "stuff" and I don't use a lot of powerful cleaners - lots of vinegar, baking soda and environmental cleaners. No bleach in the washing machine (I have NEVER used bleach) no fabric softener, but we use a commercial detergent because Kevin seems to react to the "environmental" ones. We think about a lot of these things because we have a well and a septic system - we are responsible for our own water system, whether it is clean and safe, and have to worry about how much effluent we are pumping into the septic system and worry about whether it is functioning properly and how often(if ever) it needs to be pumped out. This makes you aware of the environmental impact of your water use - we also have a low flow well - so we do not have unlimited water. So no one in this house lets the water run unnecessarily though we have not run out of water for a couple of years (used to run out the first year we were in the house, 'til we got to used to water not being limitless - but there is plenty. )

We live on the coast, on an inlet that is partly salt marsh. I have no idea what I should be doing to stop the shoreline from eroding if anything, and I wonder about the beaches near me and what I should be doing to protect them - I don't think that anything I am doing is making the erosion worse but I don't know much about it.

I thought I wanted to live here, out of town, on the ocean, near (but not on) the big surf - I love the ocean but to afford to live here I need a job that pays a lot - and I have one - a good paying, exciting, interesting job, but it leaves no time to enjoy the ocean, the house, the trails - really almost none and then if you want to use your vacation time to see a bit of the world (feeling guilty about the flying) then why am I living here? So I moved to NS to be in nature, to be near the ocean and to be more contemplative - and all I have done is make for a lot of travel time, distance from family and reduced income (although I still make a decent living) and so I am thinking about selling the house, moving into town, maybe renting an apartment instead of buying another house, and going back to City living but in this province. That makes me wonder if I should be thinking about moving back to Toronto . . . oh me. . . so those are my thoughts for the morning - just felt compelled to share - and now I am off to take the grand kids to see Monsters vs Aliens. . . hope we have a good time. I will feel guilty about eating expensive popcorn, driving two cars too far, eating crap and being too fat. . . but I cannot do anymore.