"After intense pressure from media and political opponents, it appears that Mr. Harper will release a platform tomorrow – a week before the vote and one day after advance polls close.Incredibly à propos and not without irony, gmail's quote of the day is from Bono: "The less you know, the more you believe."
Many Canadians, including university students, military personnel serving overseas and those whose religious observances include the Jewish holiday of Sukkot, will have already voted – without ever reading a word of the Conservative platform. Is this how Stephen Harper holds himself accountable?"
2008-10-06
beyond irony
Extract from liberal party email received today (emphasis added):
political vigilanteism
It would seem there is a violent segment of the population that feels threatened by Liberal platform/policies and, more importantly, doesn't believe in free speech. What does this say about the other parties platforms (and their followers)?
2008-10-03
from tribalism to religionism to nationalism to... ?
http://www.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=2f608f0e-0cd2-451c-bf24-1c40aae3b7b1
First a simplified context. Our survival once depended on living in tribes led by a strong leader. Gradually the groups became larger as the smarter (or desperate or beaten) leaders aligned themselves with stronger leaders. Low-level conflict was inevitable. Eventually groups aligned themselves along religious lines, leading to larger more brutal conflicts culminating in WWII. We still can't all agree on which god/being(s) is/are supreme - but at least for the last 60 years or so that argument has been more or less irrelevant and the world's borders have been relatively stable (thanks in part to the UN's slowness (aside: I wonder if it wasn't designed that way to allow emotions to simmer)). This assurance of stability permitted investment in infrastructure and private enterprise, improving our standard of living significantly. We may not have the same religion, but there is consensus and respect of each other's national borders, which is why I still believe the state - you and I and everybody else - must maintain a meaningful presence in society, actively investing in the threads stitching our social fabric together.
What comes next though? Advances in transportation facilitated massive migration around the world, where people gathered naturally (sometimes more, sometimes less) in specific areas of every city. Nationalism, democracy, hard work and a common conviction in human rights eventually broke down the barriers separating them and respectful integration began. More recently, however, human rights excesses, cultural districts reaching critical mass and more particularly advances in communication almost eliminate entirely the need (and sometimes the will) to integrate themselves with their host nations and national borders lose their relevance.
if not a centralized government system, who will we (people in general) sign a social contract with next, to decide what is best for us, ensure social justice, defence of our interests and ways of life? Since "we" are increasingly divided along cultural and religious lines, is there still hope to reconcile and (re)integrate the more extremist groups, and if so, what who gets to decide what means are justifiable? Or are we past the tipping point?
I believe people come to this country because of perceived ideals and opportunites for a better way of life. If they are disillusioned upon arrival, is that is not our fault? and is it not the natural tendency for them to gravitate toward areas where their old culture has already been reestablished, which may be less than ideal, but at least is familiar to them? (Mis-)application of current policies only accelerate this phenomenon and our disrespect for them anyway further compounds the problems. So, shouldn't we start looking at approaches to realize an environment where ideals and opportunities for self-actualization and interdependency really exist? Such a Canada was once valued as important and achievable and that perception still exists abroad. I personally still believe in it, but if we collectively "know better" now that that ideal is wrong or that it is just not achievable, do we not have a responsibility to ourselves and the rest of the world to admit it, agree on something better, and move on?
First a simplified context. Our survival once depended on living in tribes led by a strong leader. Gradually the groups became larger as the smarter (or desperate or beaten) leaders aligned themselves with stronger leaders. Low-level conflict was inevitable. Eventually groups aligned themselves along religious lines, leading to larger more brutal conflicts culminating in WWII. We still can't all agree on which god/being(s) is/are supreme - but at least for the last 60 years or so that argument has been more or less irrelevant and the world's borders have been relatively stable (thanks in part to the UN's slowness (aside: I wonder if it wasn't designed that way to allow emotions to simmer)). This assurance of stability permitted investment in infrastructure and private enterprise, improving our standard of living significantly. We may not have the same religion, but there is consensus and respect of each other's national borders, which is why I still believe the state - you and I and everybody else - must maintain a meaningful presence in society, actively investing in the threads stitching our social fabric together.
What comes next though? Advances in transportation facilitated massive migration around the world, where people gathered naturally (sometimes more, sometimes less) in specific areas of every city. Nationalism, democracy, hard work and a common conviction in human rights eventually broke down the barriers separating them and respectful integration began. More recently, however, human rights excesses, cultural districts reaching critical mass and more particularly advances in communication almost eliminate entirely the need (and sometimes the will) to integrate themselves with their host nations and national borders lose their relevance.
if not a centralized government system, who will we (people in general) sign a social contract with next, to decide what is best for us, ensure social justice, defence of our interests and ways of life? Since "we" are increasingly divided along cultural and religious lines, is there still hope to reconcile and (re)integrate the more extremist groups, and if so, what who gets to decide what means are justifiable? Or are we past the tipping point?
I believe people come to this country because of perceived ideals and opportunites for a better way of life. If they are disillusioned upon arrival, is that is not our fault? and is it not the natural tendency for them to gravitate toward areas where their old culture has already been reestablished, which may be less than ideal, but at least is familiar to them? (Mis-)application of current policies only accelerate this phenomenon and our disrespect for them anyway further compounds the problems. So, shouldn't we start looking at approaches to realize an environment where ideals and opportunities for self-actualization and interdependency really exist? Such a Canada was once valued as important and achievable and that perception still exists abroad. I personally still believe in it, but if we collectively "know better" now that that ideal is wrong or that it is just not achievable, do we not have a responsibility to ourselves and the rest of the world to admit it, agree on something better, and move on?
2008-09-25
2008-09-21
in the public interest?
haven't been keeping up with quebec politics much, so I wasn't aware that the province removed catechism from the curriculum as a gesture toward political correctness (or more probably, fiscal responsibility since they would have had to offer dedicated precious state resources to establish and implement curricula for the other principal religions (though non-RC accounts for less than 17% of the population). many surely agree with this move, saying that the state has no business teaching silly things like religion when half the kids in high school can barely spell their own names.
I disagree.
And not just because I think too much focus on the problem areas probably makes performance in those areas worse.
I disagree because it weakens the state and redirects those seeking that kind of instruction to the Church, thereby re-establishing the influence of religious leaders in society, one that the quiet revolution tried so hard to curtail.
This may sound big-brotherish, but I much prefer a well-rounded education, including religious instruction (and regular classes in gym, music and arts), in state-funded (and therefore state-supervised and accountable to the public) setting. That way all students can taste everything and knowingly choose what they want/don't want to pursue (as opposed to getting spewed out of a meatgrinder with a generic vanilla diploma and no personal, social, nor professional orientation).
And the fact that Radio-Canada is showing off how well the Montreal diocese is recruiting those "abandoned" by the curriculum (so they can teach what was deemed not-in-the-public-interest and actually teach things that may quickly become AGAINST the public interest) without balancing the piece with a counterpoint, really tees me off.
I disagree.
And not just because I think too much focus on the problem areas probably makes performance in those areas worse.
I disagree because it weakens the state and redirects those seeking that kind of instruction to the Church, thereby re-establishing the influence of religious leaders in society, one that the quiet revolution tried so hard to curtail.
This may sound big-brotherish, but I much prefer a well-rounded education, including religious instruction (and regular classes in gym, music and arts), in state-funded (and therefore state-supervised and accountable to the public) setting. That way all students can taste everything and knowingly choose what they want/don't want to pursue (as opposed to getting spewed out of a meatgrinder with a generic vanilla diploma and no personal, social, nor professional orientation).
And the fact that Radio-Canada is showing off how well the Montreal diocese is recruiting those "abandoned" by the curriculum (so they can teach what was deemed not-in-the-public-interest and actually teach things that may quickly become AGAINST the public interest) without balancing the piece with a counterpoint, really tees me off.
2008-09-19
angry mice
I tried signing up for a trade show on national security scheduled for the near future, but when I called them with problems with the online registration process, they told me the event was canceled due to security concerns.
ironic (and scary) what happens when you try to build a better mousetrap these days...
ironic (and scary) what happens when you try to build a better mousetrap these days...
negative motivation and leadership
from http://www.liebertonline.com/doi/abs/10.1089/bsp.2008.0008
"...refusal rates [of the anthrax vaccine] were related to perception of the threat [of exposure]."Nothing new there, but this next part (the conclusion, with added emphasis) is particularly interesting:
"The findings provide evidence that for some people, the policy to increase confidence in the anthrax vaccination program may have led to a decrease in levels of trust."So - what are campaign promoters going to retain from this? Don't focus on the program - instead, distract them with fear! One small step for marketers, another giant leap backward for mankind (it was bad enough when certain political parties were already doing this).
2008-09-18
violation of democracy
Right-wing policies accelerate polarization - widening the social gaps between cultural groups and between haves and have nots.
http://www.cyberpresse.ca/article/20080917/CPMONDE/80917025/-1/CPMONDE
Their premise that "trickle-down economics" works is faulty - people generally only like dealing with perceived social equals, the rich club becomes more and more exclusive and money (and automatically power) becomes more and more concentrated. What a shameful violation of the one of the basic principles of democracy and a fair market - all should have equal access to the means and opportunities to succeed.
At least I can console myself with the web 2.0. Long live net neutrality!
http://www.cyberpresse.ca/
Their premise that "trickle-down economics" works is faulty - people generally only like dealing with perceived social equals, the rich club becomes more and more exclusive and money (and automatically power) becomes more and more concentrated. What a shameful violation of the one of the basic principles of democracy and a fair market - all should have equal access to the means and opportunities to succeed.
At least I can console myself with the web 2.0. Long live net neutrality!
2008-09-17
best.SNL.openingskit.EVER
Part of me is feeling guilty about the other part of me that is tempted to support McCain just so I can see more of Tina! Oy Fey!
I guess I could buy myself a few of these action figures to pass the time.
More on this skit from The Gazette:
http://www.canada.com/montrealgazette/news/arts/story.html?id=2232e2cd-d3c6-4c4b-bb98-e79c052ab03e&p=1
I guess I could buy myself a few of these action figures to pass the time.
More on this skit from The Gazette:
http://www.canada.com/montrealgazette/news/arts/story.html?id=2232e2cd-d3c6-4c4b-bb98-e79c052ab03e&p=1
2008-09-16
Stonehenge mystery solved?
gotta wonder if Stonehenge wasn't just another case of a clever druid guy showing off or a frustrated druid wanna-be trying to prove something!
http://j-walkblog.com/index.php?/weblog/posts/moving_big_rocks
For hundreds, maybe thousands of years, people have been trying to
figure out how primitive people could build huge structures such as
Stonehenge and the pyramids out of stone blocks weighing thousands
of pounds. Scientists have been stumped.
Then along comes a normal guy - a retired construction worker - and
he says well, I would do it like this. And he does. This guy uses
the simplest tools known to man and shows how simple and easy it
would have been to create Stonehenge .
This is a really great video clip. Amazing how this guy could figure
out something that has confounded scholars for centuries. And not
only figures it out, but demonstrates it!
This guy could build a replica of Stonehenge single-handedly, while
a committee of 20 or 30 Civil Engineering professors from leading
universities would be debating how it might be done.
http://j-walkblog.com/index.php?/weblog/posts/moving_big_rocks
on shortsighted policies and campaign promises
Buying votes with tax cuts amounts to little more than blowing your kid's tuition fund on a popularity contest.
It amazes me what some of today's parties (not unlike yesterday's Republicans) will resort to in order to support their addiction to power.
It amazes me what some of today's parties (not unlike yesterday's Republicans) will resort to in order to support their addiction to power.
ah - the joys of an unregulated market!!
from http://russiatoday.com/features/news/30486:
Large-scale construction work is in full swing near the burial sites of anthrax-infected animals, which were disposed of a century ago.Amazing how some people demand freedom then get carried away with greed. It's too bad others have to suffer for it though.
"This cemetery dates from 1882. Fifteen years ago the construction of summer houses started near it, expanding the village. Although the safety zone is one kilometre away from the cemetery, every house drills a well," Sharapov said.
The diseased animals were usually burnt and buried two metres deep. But the spores of anthrax can live in the soil for decades. If mixed with dust they can be inhaled by humans and animals. But the fact doesn't seem to bother Russia's rich, who are ready to pay up to $US 300,000 an acre at what has become Moscow's Riviera.
Tver's veterinary authority says it didn't give its approval for building projects in the area.
2008-09-01
2008-08-25
overstepping jurisdiction?
If I read this news release correctly, and understood the basics of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea of 10 December 1982, this means our trusted government intends to extend its Contiguous zone to what is already recognized internationally as Exclusive Economic Zone (200nm). Problem is, this law of the sea states explicitly that the Contiguous zone "may not extend beyond 24 nautical miles" (UNCLOS, Part II, article 33). I wonder how seriously this posturing will be recognized by other countries aching for
-----Original Message-----Don't get me wrong though - I understand that the ecosystem in the Canadian Arctic Archipelago is very fragile, where even the smallest chemical spills will take forever to dissipate (too cold for anything to evaporate on its own quickly enough), and it is eyed with great interest internationally. This probably doesn't make the archipelago waters any more "internal" to Canada than planting a flag on the Moon made it American, but posturing counts for a lot in politics so I think its a good move.
From the Prime Minister's Web Site
Sent: Wednesday, 27 August, 2008 13:48
Subject: News Release / Communiqué
Prime Minister Harper Announces Government of Canada Will Extend Jurisdiction over Arctic Waters
Canadian Environment and Shipping Jurisdiction to be Enforced an Additional 100 Nautical Miles Offshore
August 27, 2008
Tuktoyaktuk, NT
The Government of Canada will extend its jurisdiction in the Arctic by doubling the range at which Canadian environmental laws and shipping regulations will be enforced, Prime Minister Stephen Harper announced today.
"Whether it is the thawing of the Northwest Passage or the suspected resource riches under the Arctic seabed, more and more countries are taking an interest in the waterways of the Canadian Arctic," said the Prime Minister. "We will be sending a clear message to the world that our environmental standards and sovereignty are not up for debate -- if you are in Canada's Arctic you will be playing by Canada's rules."
The Prime Minister announced that his government will be introducing changes to the Arctic Waters Pollution Prevention Act as part of its fall legislative agenda. Currently the Act allows the Canadian Government to regulate all shipping in zones up to 100 nautical miles from the nearest Canadian land in order to guard against pollution of the region's marine and coastal environments. Under the proposed new law, this jurisdiction will be extended to 200 nautical miles.
In addition the Prime Minister announced that his government will establish new regulations under the Canada Shipping Act, 2001 that will require mandatory reporting from all ships destined for Arctic waters within the same 200 nautical mile limit.
"As an environmental matter, as a security matter and as an economic matter we are making it perfectly clear that not only do we claim jurisdiction over the Canadian Arctic, we are also going to put the full resources of the Government of Canada behind enforcing that jurisdiction," said the Prime Minister. "We are acting today to protect our environment, improve the security of our waterways and ensure that all Northern residents - and, in particular, the Inuit - have a strong say in the future of our Arctic for generations to come."
The Prime Minister's Office - Communications
2008-08-20
water electricity carbon money spirituality and lies
Some reading about recent ban on bottled water (london ON) prompted further surfing on the topic.
Was shocked to learn that, based on calculations at Queens U, the electrical requirements alone (for each refrigerated vending machine and the associated cooling load on the HVAC system) cost the university $1178 every year (at 9.5c/kWh). The total electricity consumption (for 150 machines) in 2002 was calculated to be 1.86 GWh.
In comparison, Thunder Bay Generating Station (coal-fuelled) produces typically 1,500 GWh annually. Merely 0.12% of one power station - but that's just one vending machine contract with one institution. How much carbon emission does that represent, over and above the emissions related to the bottle-making, bottling, packaging, distribution, retail storage and consumer transportation of bottled water (assuming the extraction and filtering costs of bottled and municipal waters cancel each other out)?
On top of that, the total electrical load for the vending machines at Queens amounted to 2.3% of their annual electricity spending. That's a 2.3% tax the student population and government subsidies have to pay for the convenience of those rich (or stupid) enough to pay $2 a 500mL bottle for something that costs 50c per 1000L.
The bottled water fad also hurts tap water by taking away public support to improve and protect it, will disproportionately hurt those who can't afford to buy their water privately. Clean water is essential to life - cleanses the spirit and the temple - it should be a right, not a simple commodity!
All this because big marketers created a need (based on a 1960's study that said you need 1mL of water for every calorie of food you eat - but they omitted the inconvenient next sentence that most of that was already present in the food that carries those calories).
Not to mention, of course, the environmental costs of recycling (energy and effort consumed in the collection, sorting, melting and re-processing) these bottles that good people send back for recycling, and the pollution caused by the whopping 40% of bottles that aren't.
References:
http://www.polarisinstitute.org/files/utility%20calculator,%202.pdf
http://www.opg.com/power/fossil/thunderbay.asp
http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/story.html?id=b4392be6e338-4206-8817-592210089ea2&
Was shocked to learn that, based on calculations at Queens U, the electrical requirements alone (for each refrigerated vending machine and the associated cooling load on the HVAC system) cost the university $1178 every year (at 9.5c/kWh). The total electricity consumption (for 150 machines) in 2002 was calculated to be 1.86 GWh.
In comparison, Thunder Bay Generating Station (coal-fuelled) produces typically 1,500 GWh annually. Merely 0.12% of one power station - but that's just one vending machine contract with one institution. How much carbon emission does that represent, over and above the emissions related to the bottle-making, bottling, packaging, distribution, retail storage and consumer transportation of bottled water (assuming the extraction and filtering costs of bottled and municipal waters cancel each other out)?
On top of that, the total electrical load for the vending machines at Queens amounted to 2.3% of their annual electricity spending. That's a 2.3% tax the student population and government subsidies have to pay for the convenience of those rich (or stupid) enough to pay $2 a 500mL bottle for something that costs 50c per 1000L.
The bottled water fad also hurts tap water by taking away public support to improve and protect it, will disproportionately hurt those who can't afford to buy their water privately. Clean water is essential to life - cleanses the spirit and the temple - it should be a right, not a simple commodity!
All this because big marketers created a need (based on a 1960's study that said you need 1mL of water for every calorie of food you eat - but they omitted the inconvenient next sentence that most of that was already present in the food that carries those calories).
Not to mention, of course, the environmental costs of recycling (energy and effort consumed in the collection, sorting, melting and re-processing) these bottles that good people send back for recycling, and the pollution caused by the whopping 40% of bottles that aren't.
References:
http://www.polarisinstitute.org/files/utility%20calculator,%202.pdf
http://www.opg.com/power/fossil/thunderbay.asp
http://www.canada.com/ottawacitizen/story.html?id=b4392be6e338-4206-8817-592210089ea2&
2008-08-14
election threat?
so - he instructs his party to boycott parliamentary committees and his party's parliamentary committee members to cause all sorts of procedural delays, and then he says the system is deadlocked (because of the opposition, naturally) and says he has no choice but to call an election. boo hoo.
i suppose he's just doing what he needs to so he can get what he really wants - absolute power to rival the mighty Putin. And here I thought he was only copying the Nazi party's strategy book. Silly me!
i suppose he's just doing what he needs to so he can get what he really wants - absolute power to rival the mighty Putin. And here I thought he was only copying the Nazi party's strategy book. Silly me!
2008-08-12
Bush could weaken Endangered Species Act
Parts of the Endangered Species Act may soon be extinct:
Apparently Conservatives/Republicans are the only species on earth in a symbiotic relationship still trying to kill its host...
I'm glad somebody (Dion) has the balls to try to rebalance the economy to take environmental sustainability into account. I wish him luck.
# Bush wants federal agencies to decide for themselves if projects harm wildlifeAnother step backward to a bleak future.
# Changes would "seriously weaken" habitat protections, says conservationist
# New rules end reviews that developers say increase many project cost
# Similar bill passed in the House in 2005 but died in the Senate
Apparently Conservatives/Republicans are the only species on earth in a symbiotic relationship still trying to kill its host...
I'm glad somebody (Dion) has the balls to try to rebalance the economy to take environmental sustainability into account. I wish him luck.
actions speak louder than words
his absence is more of a statement than anything his PMO can spin.
PM STATEMENT ON THE OCCASION OF THE XXIX OLYMPIC GAMES TAKING PLACE IN BEIJINGAugust 8, 2008
Ottawa, Ontario
Prime Minister Stephen Harper issued the following statement on the occasion of the XXIX Olympic Games taking place from August 8 to 24 in Beijing:
"I am joined by all Canadians in wishing our athletes and their coaches the very best during their upcoming competitions. You are an enormous source of pride and inspiration for all Canadians and we salute your perseverance and dedication in your quest for excellence.
Canadians recognize and admire the years of effort involved in preparing for Olympic Games. From the playground to the podium, the values we learn from sport - teamwork, discipline, achievement and confidence - are values that make a society and a country stronger.
The Government of Canada is a proud partner in supporting excellence in sport. As the world comes together in Beijing to reach for one dream, we want you to know that we are following with great pride and excitement your performances at these Games.
From September 6 to 17, Canada's paralympians will also inspire Canadians as they compete in the XIII Summer Paralympic Games. We look forward to conveying our support to these exceptional athletes."
The Prime Minister's Office - Communications
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)