We need an increasing carbon tax.

We need to stop subsidizing carbon energy producers.

We need public money invested in post-carbon energy.

We need to do it now.

I say all this, as does this NASA physicist:

The science of the situation is clear — it’s time for the politics to follow…Every major national science academy in the world has reported that global warming is real, caused mostly by humans, and requires urgent action. The cost of acting goes far higher the longer we wait — we can’t wait any longer to avoid the worst and be judged immoral by coming generations.

via Game Over for the Climate – NYTimes.com.

• April 24, 2012 -- Deconstructing the Wildrose Effect (1)
• September 14, 2011 -- CTV Spins the Daily Show for Tarsands and Farmed Fish (20)
• May 8, 2011 -- The Landslide Election Victory That Isn’t (0)
• October 10, 2010 -- Toxic Sludge Is and Isn’t Polluting the Danube: PostMedia (0)

Montenegro has been ruled by the same political party, the Democratic Party of Socialist (DPS), for the past 23 years. Along with the government of Belarus, Montenegro has the dubious distinction of being the only country in Europe that hasn’t seen a change in government since 1989. In the past several months an unprecedented wave of protests has hit the country, with workers, students, NGOs and citizens mobilizing against the government. The growing movement has called for the government to resign by 15 May 2012 or the organizers plan to escalate their campaign of non-violent civil disobedience. The movement’s demands include a call for an end to criminal privatizations, free post-secondary education and a serious confrontation with organized crime and corruption in Montenegro.

Below are two translated interviews with Janko Vucinic, head of the Niksic Steelworkers Union and a key trade union official in the Union of Free Trade Unions of Montenegro (UFTUM) that originally appeared in the independent dailies Vijesti (The News) and Dan (The Day). The first interview deals with the lead-up to the last mass protest held last week (5 May 2012). The second interview deals with the position of Montenegrin workers in light of May Day. Images accompanying the text and the accompanying captions help provide further context to the protest movement.

Thousands attend 5 May 2012 rally in Podgorica, Montenegro protesting government austerity, criminal privatization deals, high level corruption and the erosion of worker, student and citizens' rights.

Vijesti Interview

Why is it time for the government to fall?

A government that doesn’t work in the interests of the people, a government that isn’t allowed to confront  organized crime and corruption, a government that seeks to find fiscal room among the poor and which increases levies on pensioners, students and unemployed workers, a government that is basically a tool in the hands of the powerful for implementing a dictatorship over the people and for maintaining the regime cannot be our government. The fact is that they have left behind them nothing but empty towns, a destroyed economy and an army of tens of thousands of unemployed workers that have been left without jobs; these are the consequences of the “tsunami” that hit us after 23 years of DPS-SDP rule and that cannot be undone easily, even if the government was composed of the world’s biggest experts the task of undoing the damage would be difficult. However, the government of Prime Minister Igor Lukšić hasn’t even tried to change the course of its predecessors. It hasn’t taken even one action to show that it is interested in meeting the justified demands of citizens. Instead it has been careful not to move a step away from its neoliberal economic policies and has tried to avoid a confrontation with tycoons, mafia figures, bankers, etc. – that is its mentors who are effectively directing the government and who hold the final word in this state. I therefore don’t see anything wrong in asking for the resignation of a government behind which stand those who’ve put their fingers in every significant business in this state and that are pulling the strings of the puppet government of Prime Minister Lukšić. The time has come for this play to end and for the show to stop.

MANS (an anti-corruption NGO) activists block the road between the capital Podgorica and the major commercial port city of Bar in early May 2012.

What do you expect from the protest march on May 5?

We expect that they will be lead by the energy of the youth who will be gathered in front of the University [of Montenegro]. We will march along the Boulevard of the Revolution and then we will turn onto the Way of Saint Peter of Cetinje, which wasn’t accidently chosen for this march (nor was the already mentioned Boulevard of the Revolution). We expect that a large number of citizens will join us for a peaceful, respectful and civic march regardless of national, religious, political or any other belief or identity, since the majority want real changes. All of them want, if nothing else, to show that even in Montenegro the principle of changing governments is possible. They want to show the regime that governing shouldn’t be an entitlement for those in power, allowing them to freely enrich themselves at the peoples’ expense without any consequences, but instead to teach them that governing is a duty to serve the people.

Between 10-20,000 gather in the central square of Montenegro's capital Podgorica on 18 March 2012 demanding an end to utility price hikes, the annulment of criminal privatizations, a confrontation with organized crime and corruption, free post-secondary education and a decisive shift in government policy.

Where there any difficulties in organizing the protests, including more pressure than before given that you’re now calling for the fall of Prime Minister Igor Lukšić’s government?

Immediately after the first protest we organized on 21 January 2012, when an enormous number of people turned out to express their discontent with the existing state in the country by gathering before the Government building [in the capital Podgorica], the regime was in chaos. From that time, the pressures and blackmail began as the government began applying all the known and lesser known strategies of the secret services. Regardless of such pressures, an even greater number of citizens showed up to the next protest, which means that we can only expect these numbers to grow. I’m saying this because the citizens have recognized that we’re dealing here with the truly honest intentions of the organizers, that we’re all fighting together for a much better, fairer and more democratic society – for a new and better Montenegro, a Montenegro based on social justice and one without arrogant power holders, criminal elites, and self-important officials who imagine themselves (and call themselves) the creators of the state and fathers of the nation. Let’s not forget that the former Romanian dictator Ceausescu wanted to renovate the whole of Romanian history that preceded him, so it’s time for us to help our would be architects sober up a bit as well.

Students stage a sit in during a 18 March 2012 rally in Montenegro.

As a lead up to May 5, protests were organized in a number of Montenegrin municipalities. Are you satisfied with the turn out and results of these actions?

Given the speed and spontaneity with which they were organized in towns across the state and considering all the pressures, threats and other forms of instilling fear in the poverty-stricken and traumatized population, the turnout was very good and represents a good overture for the upcoming protest march in Podgorica on May 5.

The government has yet to respond to the citizens’ demands even after the protests. The latest statements by the head of the ruling party, statements by the Prime Minister and spokespeople clearly indicate that the government has no intention of considering resignations. How do you expect to realize your goals? Will the protests become more frequent or will you adopt another model?

Former workers of bankrupt and privatized firms protest in Bijelo Polje, Montenegro in early March 2012. This was one of many gatherings organized by workers and citizens in the past few months demanding a decisive change in the government's neoliberal policies (Photo courtesy of Vijesti).

By ignoring our demands and failing to respond to such massive protests only indicates the degree of fear within the ruling regime, since this is one of the methods of defense that was suggested to them by the consiglieri of the most powerful families in confronting the impoverished masses that have stood up. We are already indicating that if the government doesn’t resign after our protests, the gatherings of citizens will become more frequent. They better get used to street actions in the same way the Prime Minister has suggested to the people that they need to get used to greater price hikes and levies. It seems clear that we’re going to see more of both the former and the later unless something changes.

Prime Minister Lukšić and the spokespeople of the ruling DPS are consistently repeating that these protests are ‘political’ and that if the organizers have political pretensions that they should enter the electoral arena and offer a program… How would you respond to the ongoing attempts of the Government to pull you into the electoral system?

UFTUM General Secretary Srdja Kekovic speaking to citizens gathered in response to increased electricity prices in January 2012. This protest unleashed the current movement against the government's neoliberal course during the financial crisis.

Prime Minister Lukšić, like a good student who has memorized the right answers, continuously repeats this same story, telling us to offer a program and enter the electoral arena. Our program was stated during the second protests, which includes removing extra surcharges on our utility bills, the annulment of bad privatization deals, to establish individual accountability for corrupt deals and illegally acquired wealth and that this money be returned into the state budget. Our demands also include free education at the post-secondary level and a return of the University’s autonomy, which has come under the strong political and financial control of those belonging to the ruling coalition. It would be a lot easier for the government – if it implemented our program – to for instance take the illegally acquired €7-million that a small group received as kickbacks from the privatization of Montenegrin Telekom and in this way fill gaps in the budget. Instead, the government has chosen to cowardly find a euro here and a euro there by increasing levies on students, pensioners, etc. Lukšić is too afraid to go the more honest route. This is one case of high-level corruption that the public is familiar with, but how many more millions have gone into private pockets for which the public has no idea and will probably never find out. That is why our program includes a full investigation into the past and to return all illegally acquired funds into the state budget. In order to do this, key people in key institutions need to be finally changed – but Lukšić is not allowed to change them. That is why it’s better for him and for us that he go. As far as the electoral arena is concerned, I believe that the time will soon come when that game will no longer be played according to rules dictated by the DSP-SDP’s version of democracy; a version that includes beatings, threats, and pressures. We need free and fair elections that will reflect the real electoral will of Montenegro’s citizens.

In November 2011 Montenegro's students showed up en masse for the largest student rally in over twenty years. The demonstration signaled growing discontent among youth with endemic corruption in the neo-patrimonial system run by the ruling DPS, in power for the past 23 years. Students have increasingly demanded an end to the neoliberalization of the University, free post-secondary education and greater autonomy for the University of Montenegro from the political and financial control of the DPS and SPD (its junior coalition partner).

If your wish for the Government’s resignation was realized, do the protest organizers have a further plan of action?

Our strategy and further plans of action are dictated by the citizens themselves who gather with us and for whom we’re doing all this. Whatever their desire and mood, that is how we will define our joint positions and determine our further strategic moves and we won’t let up. This government, whose resignation we’re asking for, is the product of a longstanding dictatorship presided over by a single regime. This is why we need to remove the source of the problem, which means that simply asking the government to step down and then calling for new elections under these circumstances wouldn’t result in any progress.

This week trade unions did not mark May Day. The UFTUM did not do so because of the planned May 5th protests that were being organized, while the [pro-government] CTUM did not do so because of planned meetings with the Prime Minister on May 8. What is your assessment of the status of workers in Montenegro?

It’s been many years now since there were workers, I mean those that fill the budget, so because of this we can’t even speak of worker rights. Today getting a job is akin to winning the lottery in Montenegro, though even then it’s hard to keep one’s job. Employers are using this situation mercilessly in order to ensure that all former rights that workers had are eliminated. Now it’s mostly just a matter of survival, which the regime has imposed on us. The legalized theft of public property in the name of “privatization” has destroyed our economy and decimated the number of workers in this country. The rights of those workers that have remained have been eroded through the stipulations of employment legislation. This legislation, it has been revealed because they bragged about it, was often written by foreign tycoons who sat with the former Prime Minister in order to create for themselves, here in Montenegro, a classical field upon which to exploit workers and to transform them into precarious laborers. All of this was justified by saying that such measures would help attract foreign investors.

Protestors holding torches during 5 May 2012 anti-government rally in Montenegro.

We in the UFTUM have attempted through all forms of institutional and trade union activity to protect worker interests, but the effects on the government’s course of action were minimal. Given that the “social dialogue” has effectively been little more than the imposition of the thoughts and positions of the other social partners [i.e. the government and employers], we soon understand that our participation in such discussions was purely decorative. Given that we’re not as young and pretty like our colleagues in the [pro-government] CTUM, we’ve decided to move to the streets in order to defend worker rights and to try to change the current position of workers through protests. Let’s not forget that it has been the working class that have been identified as the largest losers of the transitional process. Because of the protests planned for May 5th, we cancelled our May Day rally, which we’ve organized every year since we appeared on Montenegro’s trade union scene.

Dan Interview

Protestors marching towards government buildings in Montenegro's capital on 21 January 2012.

What is the situation of workers on May 1 and do they have any reason to celebrate this day for workers?

In Montenegro, May 1 has for a long-time now ceased to be a workers’ holiday in the real sense of the word. I believe that many young people don’t even know the history of this holiday and it seems that the older ones have forgotten what happened in Chicago in 1886. At that time in Chicago, workers were struggling for an eight hour workday, something that many of us in Montenegro who were lucky enough to keep our jobs no longer have. Unfortunately, the truth is that here the wheel of history has gone backwards, and that we now have in Montenegro the same type of capitalism that was actual back then in Chicago. It’s very similar to the klepto-capitalism that we have here at the moment.

It’s definitely true that Montenegro’s workers have no reasons to celebrate because getting a job has become similar to winning the lottery, while the position of those who work has been brought down to mere survival since whatever is earned is only sufficient for the most basic needs (i.e. for basic biological survival). What is currently happening to Montenegro’s workers is more than sufficient grounds for studying the basic principles of how capitalism functions in its initial and most brutal forms. This is a situation in which workers have no protections, no social security and when capital is accumulated on the maximal exploitation of precarious labor.

Bauxite miners in Montenegro on hunger strike on New Years' Eve, December 2009.

What future awaits workers and can they fight for a better position?

Looking at all that is happening, one can conclude that workers practically have no future to look towards in so far as substantive changes aren’t made soon. We are facing a tough struggle to preserve whatever little remains of secure jobs and to maintain the current level of income, which is already insufficient for the normal maintenance of families. It’s no longer a question of whether or not we can fight for a better position, we’ve been left with no choice and we have to struggle at any cost since the current situation is unsustainable and things can’t really get worse than this. We’ve been thrown into this desperate situation by criminal privatizations that have destroyed our industry and left workers without jobs. Our former Prime Minister took care to ensure that this situation would only be perpetuated in the future, apparently in order to attract foreign investors, by signing into law liberal tax laws and flexible employment legislation with foreign tycoons. Of course, these laws were tailored to their needs, which effectively turned us from people with secure jobs to precarious laborers, all the while we’re expecting to fill the gaps left in the budget by these liberal tax laws. You can imagine Peter Munk or Oleg Deripaska sitting on their mega-yachts in Montenegro, chatting away with Milo [Đukanović, the former Prime

An example of the deindustrialization that has hit Montenegro's impoverished north. This is what remains of the Cellulose Factory in Berane after being stripped of its assets by new economic elites.

Minister and current head of the ruling DPS] and laughing at those ‘cowards’ in Montenegro who work a whole month for €300-400 while trying to return mounting debts.

How many workers have been left without jobs during the transition and how do they live today?

If we consider the Labor Law of 2008, which introduced as a rule fixed-term employment contracts and whose other provisions effectively freed the hands of employers to exploit and threaten workers in any way imaginable, then in reality we’ve all lost anything resembling a secure job. We will all then join the army of tens of thousands of workers that have lost their jobs during the transition. Since the new labor law was passed in 2008, there have been almost no contracts for permanent jobs signed. The stipulations of this law were slightly altered last year thanks to the initiative of our trade union, but an enormous space has nevertheless been left for employers to manipulate workers.

How are workers living today? Every good host in the village maintains a cow by ensuring that it doesn’t go hungry and that it is housed in warm and dry conditions. Today in Montenegro, there are many people who cannot afford for themselves such conditions. So how can we speak of anything else, like buying a book maybe, of buying some normal clothes other than on the flea market, or of thinking of traveling somewhere and to see a bit of the world. For the majority of us such things are mission impossible. All that’s left is to try to feed ourselves and to make sure that we’re good enough to see another tomorrow, and if we have the chance to hold a job to work for our bosses. It’s something like the life of machines or in a hen house.

Duvankomerc (Tobacco Retail) workers on hunger strike in the capital Podgorica in 2009.

Who is responsible for the closure of factories and the loss of worker rights?

The misguided and manipulative policies of those who’ve ruled the country all these years is to blame. But all of us are also partially responsible who’ve allowed them to do this to us. We only really woke up once everything was gone. It took us a long time to realize that we’ve been tricked, since there were always some other “more important” questions on the horizon, including questions around the state, the flag, disputes over the church, identity issues, debates around the anthem. Now that all of us are listening to the same hymn, the majority of us with “torn pants and empty pockets” alongside those who’ve landed on the lists of the world’s richest leaders, we’ve begun to realize that those of us at the bottom are wearing donkey’s ears. Now we need to remove those who’ve made donkeys of us and bring done those who’ve placed themselves on these lists of millionaires. We can’t achieve such a goal through “social dialogue.”

Clash between police and aluminum workers in Montenegro's capital (28 May 2009).

What will the UFTUM do to defend the interests of the working class?

The UFTUM has tried to defend worker interests through all institutionalized forms. However, the result of all these efforts was minimal. In 2008, we warned about the potential consequences of the incoming, neoliberal labor law. We denounced the criminal privatizations that were essentially little more than the legalized plunder of the people. We also noted the consequences that would follow, though we were misunderstood at the time and the government labeled us as enemies of the state.

Given that the “social dialogue” was little more than the imposition of the thoughts and opinions of the other social partners, and that we were constantly relegated to a decorative role, even though we’re not so pretty to help with the decor, we’ve decided to move our struggle to the streets and to try to change the current status of workers in this country from that of the transition’s biggest losers.

Rally in 2010 by workers of the former Niksic Steelworks, which at its height employed some 7,000 workers. Less than 1,000 workers are left working in the former enterprise's steel mill, foundry, cold press, and other production units. The enterprise's various components were 'segmented' in the 1990s and sold-off to various foreign investors in the 2000s. The end result was widespread asset stripping and the eventual bankruptcy of most of these firms. Many of the foreign and domestic investors are accused by workers of simply buying the firms to launder money.

Can we expect a continuation of this social flame and why?

The social fire has spread because life in Montenegro has become unsustainable and unsupportable for the great majority, excluding the privileged. We’re witness to the fact that everyday becomes harder. Instead of helping the people, the government is raising new levies, instead of meeting their demands, it calls on citizens to enter the electoral arena, instead of standing on the side of the people it is firmly holding the hands of large capital, tycoons, mafia figures and bankers who are jointly robbing us and taking away with them social property.

I don’t see anything wrong with the fact that on May 5th we will be calling for the resignation of the government. This government has shown that it is not interested in reducing our utility bills, that it is not interested in ending corrupt privatization deals, that it does not want to establish individual responsibility for such privatizations and the kickbacks that accompanied them, or to meet the students justified demands for free post-secondary education. Even though the government’s resignation is the first step, the second will be taking down the regime that brought us out into the streets in

the first place.

The social fire in Montenegro was lit a long time ago. It was started by those who’ve sold this country to foreign and domestic tycoons, without choosing means in accumulating their millions. I’m sure those millions they’ve managed to steal will burn up in the fire that they themselves have set.

• February 29, 2012 -- Undermining Solidarity in the Balkans: Reviewing Boris Malagurski’s “The Weight of Chains” (0)
• December 23, 2011 -- Book Review: Suffled How it Gush: A North American Anarchist in the Balkans (2)
• December 7, 2010 -- Book Review: “Don’t Mourn, Balkanize!” (2)

We should be proud of students in Quebec for rejecting Charest’s offer.

Here’s what I find interesting as a parent: We often strive to teach our children discernment. We try to instill in them the understanding that they don’t have to accept the first offer that someone makes them, that they should examine whether an offer meets their needs, whether the other party has another agenda, whether an offer would give them short-term gain to their long-term detriment, etc. It seems to be generally accepted that discernment is a fairly mature reasoning process, which might be why so much emphasis is placed teaching it.

So now, we have thousands upon thousands of students who are utilizing those discernment skills to understand and reject an offer that does not serve their needs. Not only are they utilizing their discernment, they’re doing all sorts of other wonderful things we generally try to teach out children.

* They’re doing the right thing, not the easy thing. They’re sacrificing their academic year to see that this conflict comes to a just conclusion.
* They’re advocating for those who can’t advocate for themselves. This isn’t just about tuition fees this year, or next year, or five years from now. It’s also about the precedent this sets for the way tuition fees are regarded in the future.
* They’ve organized themselves quite enviably. Every parent who has ever despaired of their child’s scattershot approach to organization should be able to appreciate this.

And those parents, those thousands upon thousands of parents who have clearly taught their children well, are probably telling those kids to get back to school and complaining to co-workers about what spoiled assholes those students are. The media, the government, the experts… it seems that everyone is decrying the student strike as immature, despite the fact that the striking students are clearly demonstrating mature reasoning faculties.

What’s the problem? Jealous? Give your kids a hug and give yourselves a pat on the back for doing a good job. Be proud of your kids. Be proud of yourselves. Jesus Christ.

• No Related Posts

If people can’t afford to buy a transit ticket, then how can you expect them to pay the $173 fines for not paying the fare? Now he wants to legislate collection agencies to further harass these people who can’t afford to buy a bus ticket. He further wants to prevent fare evaders from being able to renew their drivers licence or buy car insurance. But Lekstrom does not realize that if people can’t afford to buy a transit ticket, then how can the afford a car let alone buy car insurance.

Mayor Gregor Robertson who didn’t pay a $173 fine during his 2008 election campaign for accidentally riding two SkyTrain zones on a one-zone fare said he wanted to draw attention to what he called unreasonably high fines. He finally did pay the fine. BC NDP leader Adrian Dix also forgot to pay his fare and had to pay the fine. But people forgetting to pay the fare are not the problem. They can afford pay their fines. Now Lekstrom wants to go after those you can’t pay their fines.

The problem is that low income people, particularly those on social assistance cannot afford to pay the fare which is why the evade the fare. The fare really becomes a problem when those who can’t afford to pay the fare for three zones, so sometimes they only have a one or two zone fare to cross three zones, and then they get hit with a $173 fine. Low income people have to pay the same one, two and three zone fares as those who are working.

After years of hard work and campaigning, concession fares were offered to post-secondary students to pay only a one zone fare to cross all three zones if they had a valid student card. But they were not afforded the same concession fare as high school students and seniors. University and College students now get a U pass as part of their student fees which makes transit accessible and affordable to them. The rationale given for this is that students are not able to work full-time. People with disabilities can access an annual pass a low annual fee. So fare evasion is not a problem for them.

How can low income people, especially those on social assistance pay the same fare are those who are working? They should also have access to concession fares or they should be given a transit pass with their assistance or both depending on their situation. This would solve problem of fare evasion and all so-called cost for cracking down on fare evasion with extra security costs and installing turnstiles. This type of legislation that goes after the poor is extremely counter productive and does not solve the problem of fare evasion.

• No Related Posts

Uhh, what? So the BC government thinks that not volunteering is illegal? What’s next, mandatory volunteering at work?

The application states argues that withdrawing from voluntary activity is unlawful. Well played, BC government. Mandatory, forced voluntarism. Freedom reigns.

• No Related Posts

What do you think of the Manifesto for a Maple Spring?

Some of the Politics, Re-Spun crew explore it from each of our perspectives:

1. Are people naive to expect the Quebec tuition protesters to be the leaders of a Maple Spring to expand the Arab Spring from 2011 through Canada this year?

There are very different conditions in Canada and Arab world, obviously. Nonetheless, it’s clear that protest, insurrection and civil disobedience have re-entered the public imagination as a legitimate form of participatory politics. As such, I don’t read the “Maple Spring” moniker as a suggestion that our political establishment is on par with what the Egyptian or Tunisians had to put up with. I think of it more as a solidarity “nod.” All the same, political corruption and dissatisfaction is political reality around world—splitting hairs seems less important than actually organizing and mobilizing to “kick the bastards out!” – Jasmin

I honestly think it’s naive to think that we can just “import” the western-named Arab spring into Canada to have it become the rather awesomely named “printemps érable.” So much of what has led to the uprising in the Arab world – along so many hundreds and even thousands of deaths – is probably specific to more local currents of strife and oppression and resistance. So, to say that thousands of Quebec students will lead a revolution that will depose a dictator, all in the face of amazingly oppressive action from a military force set on killing them? Yeah, no. Have the Québec student protests reignited a feeling of resistance to the imposition of government policies that many don’t agree with? Yes, absolutely. – Kevin

I think naive is a word that is more of a gauge of a person’s attitude than a word describing the effect of the protests. If we are hopeful that the mobilization and activism in Quebec this spring can inspire the rest of Canada, then we’re not naive. If we are pessimistic about how much this sentiment can spread then perhaps it is naive to think this. We should also keep in mind that how the Arab Spring worked there will necessarily be different here. Note the hundreds of cities around the world that tried to create their own Tahrir Square when the Occupy Movement started didn’t generally succeed. So if there is to be a Maple Spring, we need to draw from recent and past experiences and look at what worked and hasn’t worked in Quebec and make our own way forward. – Stephen

2. Should the Quebec protesters be less confrontational?

Define “confrontation.” From everything the press has been reporting, most of the cases of violence were the result of ridiculously over-zealous and brutal police actions. Still, these kids have fought the government, at the very least, to a stand-still. Again, I’m not sure what we mean by confrontation but clearly street mobilizations work: you don’t ignore a movement of that size, no matter how much the corporate media may attempt to mock, belittle and dismiss them. – Jasmin

No. They’ve tried to ask nicely, they’ve made their submissions to government, and Charest has just told them to f— off. If you’re non-confrontational and no one listens to you, and then you’re non-confrontational and the government dismisses you, are you going to be non-confrontational when the stuff you’re opposing is put into place? This whole “be viciously non-confrontational!” strain of freaking out seems to suggest that people should just say “No, please.” and not do anything when they’re completely ignored. – Kevin

I think confrontation is the soul of protest and civil disobedience. With more than a dozen people arrested this weekend blocking a coal train at the 49th parallel, we see that choosing to not confront means always limiting the extent of power the people will try to exercise. I expect this to be a summer of protest against pipelines, in support of sound environmental policies and against contemptuous federal government policies. Confrontation in various degrees needs to be on the table.- Stephen

3. Are they starting a class war?

They’re not “starting” one, because the rich in this country, as in most of the world, have been waging a class war against the poor and working classes for generations. But they may very well finally be recognizing this, and thinking of themselves as a class to boot. This, in any case, is a positive development. – Jasmin

No idea. How are you defining class war? How would the Quebecoises and Quebecois define class war? – Kevin

I think the class war started centuries ago when the elites decided to go Monty Python and the Holy Grail on the historical 99%. Fish don’t know they’re in water. Most of us don’t understand the shifting sands of income quintiles to know that the rich have been getting insanely richer in recent decades while the poor and the middle income groups are suffering. The class war went from cold to hot a few times in recent centuries: the rise of democracy [sic], the union movement during the industrial revolution, the detente after the Great Depression, the 1960s in Canada, then the neoliberalism of the last few decades. – Stephen

4. How will/should the Occupy movement in Canada pick up from what the students have started in Quebec?

It comes down to numbers and sympathy. Those early protests in Montreal were excellent at showing parents, elders, teacher and Professors coming out in solidarity with the students. Only after did we really see the concentrated anti-protest narrative from the media, once they realized how big this thing had grown, and that the protesters actually enjoyed a considerable amount of sympathy from the public. As such, the Occupy movement is faced with a classic dilemma: how do we grow our movement and how do we appeal to the greatest number of people, without selling out our principles? I’m not sure I have the answers to these problems, but a more coherent and pointed agenda would be near the top of the list, I believe. Setting short term, local goals as well would go a long way towards winning support and growing the movement. – Jasmin

No idea. Despite my experience in the student movement, and my passion for student activism, it’s worth remembering that students occupy a politically privileged and bracketed existence – they’re allowed, anticipated, expected to be more radical than the rest of society because they’re in school; other segments of society do not have the same privilege to the same degree. And given that the Occupy ‘movement’ is no longer a media darling, while I’m sure much good and honest effort will be expended, I have no idea what will come of it. – Kevin

Quebec is a black box for much of English Canada. We don’t know how they operate or what their cultural styles are in protest. We need to seek out their wisdom: how did they organize themselves, what are their principles and priorities, how do they make decisions, how do they design tactics, what do leaders do? They’re clearly the most successful protest event in recent memory in Canada so we should look at what works there, how the rest of Canada is similar and different and apply lessons accordingly. Do you hear me, Occupy Movement? This is where we should be going. – Stephen

5. Will Charest go for a quick spring election before his poll numbers plummet before a 2013 election?

I doubt it. I think politicians are like most students, in this respect: I’ll do it tomorrow! If anything, you’d think his popularity would be at a low point now. 2013 at least gives him time to distract everyone from their step-down regarding the tuition. – Jasmin

Question presupposes an outcome – what if his numbers go up because of the hausse de scolarite? There are some reports that suggest this would happen – and I don’t know enough about Quebec politics to comment. – Kevin

If Charest can get a spinnable win this spring or by the fall, possibly. If not, he may need to buy as much time as possible before going to the polls, as late as December 2013. Much depends on how the students convert they message into one that resonates with the non-student voting population, and what kind of alternatives there are to the Charest Liberals, which is in part affected by the fluctuating state of the BQ and PQ and general separatist voting movements. – Stephen

6. Why isn’t the corporate media covering the quarter million students protesting?

Same reason they didn’t cover the Occupy movement. It’s not in their interests. It sets a dangerous precedent, showing people that can actually change the political environment if they organize and demonstrate in numbers. That’s not the sort of behaviour you want to promote if your life’s blood depends on a depoliticised body politic. In Canada, politics is supposed to be a spectator sport and the media simply will not stand for the “fans” rushing on to the field. – Jasmin

They are in Quebec. The student federations’ press conference announcing the tentative deal was carried province wide and attracted international attention. They’re just not covering in the rest of Canada. – Kevin

Corporate media, being corporate, is neoliberal by nature. Their for-profit agenda favours low taxes, low public funding of services and high user fees with a liberal dose of privatization. There is nothing for them to gain from credibly presenting what is happening in Quebec to the rest of the country. I think we’re looking at some pretty widespread censorship through omission. – Stephen

7. What kind of political evolution do you want to see in Canada this year?

Most of all, I’d like to see the same kind of street mobilizations happening across the country as we have seen in Quebec. At the very least we though should see some major indictments to come out of the whole “robo-calls” saga but that seems increasingly unlikely. A couple toppled Provincial governments also never hurts. – Jasmin

Not enough room to comment here. Some democracy might be nice. – Kevin

I want to see a renewal of civil power: citizens asserting their rights to take part in policy formation in the face of cynical, soft fascist, contemptuous governments with anti-worker, pro-carbon energy agendas. I’d like to see line-ups of people wanting to get into the visitor galleries of legislatures. I want to see the people paying attention to the Occupy Movement, which itself needs to express its ideals more effectively to the broader 99%. I want to see people in the streets to support first nations pursuing political, economic, social and environmental justice. That’s all. – Stephen

• August 28, 2011 -- Agreeing with Ezra Levant? (6)
• May 8, 2011 -- The Landslide Election Victory That Isn’t (0)
• October 30, 2010 -- More Worker Bashing From Diane Francis at the National Post (2)

Average salary in BC $44k, average teacher salary $70k bced.gov.bc.ca/reporting #Underpaid #Overworked #Lies #BCPoli #BCNDP #BCTF

via Twitter / @NotBCNDP: Average salary in BC $44k, ….

Firstly, teachers have at least a four year university degree, plus an extra year of teacher training. The average working person in BC doesn’t have that much training.

Secondly, the average years of experience for teachers is over 12. That puts them at the top of the a long scale of pay increments from increased experience. This comes from a high proportion of baby boomers in the public school system.

Do you think people should be paid more if they have more training and experience?

If not, I’d love to hear why.

The agenda here is to demean skilled workers, unionized workers, public sector workers, highly educated workers and workers who make more than they would than if they weren’t unionized.

The agenda here is to convince non-union workers that they should hate unionized workers and be jealous and angry with what they have. This is part of the class war we’ve been in for decades: turning workers against each other.

Unions provide better wages, working conditions, worker protections, benefits and pensions for people. This is a good thing. Non-union workers should be able to get paid better and have better conditions at work, especially when they’re doing work that is comparable to union work.

So let’s make sure we don’t let worker bashing Twitter sock puppet parody i.d.’s twist statistics without context to continue eroding worker rights and opportunities. This is about making a better future for us all. This is also what the Occupy Movement is all about.

And if you know any non-unionized workers, let’s help them find a union to help improve their lives!

• No Related Posts

Secular public schools have to teach without a religious agenda. Secular does not mean that students cannot express religious beliefs, or political, ecological, musical, poetic, artistic, or any kind of belief. In fact, if I’m not mistaken, I think school is designed to encourage higher order thinking of that sort, not suppress it. But then again, it’s been 5 years since I last taught high school. Maybe things have changed.

Do students have a right to wear shirts declaring their religious beliefs at public schools?

Yes, freedom of religion comes first:

49% 3036 votes

No, public education should always be secular:

44% 2773 votes

I’m not sure:

7% 427 votes

via Vote: Do students have a right to wear shirts declaring their religious beliefs at public schools? – The Globe and Mail.

• August 28, 2011 -- Agreeing with Ezra Levant? (6)

Coming out in the heels of Aung San Suu Kyi recent electoral breakthrough of her National League for Democracy, The Lady, is an epic feature film directed by Luc Besson, about the Burmese pro-democracy leader Aung San Suu Kyi. Michelle Yeoh’s true to life depiction of Suu Kyi’s political life as the Uniter of the Burmese peoples’ democratic aspirations gives us a very accurate understanding of the events that led to her pro-longed house arrest. She was no Iron Lady but Suu Kyi was called the Steel Orchid.  This film really helps us understand why and how she used her time in solitude to read and write her ideas about democracy and justice.

Yeoh describes the film as “an incredible love story” against the background of “political turmoil”. Paris Match names the film an extraordinary story of love between her deceased husband Michael Aris played by David Thewlis, and a woman who sacrifices her personal happiness for her people. Michelle Yeoh called the film “a labour of love” but also confessed it had felt intimidating for her to play the Nobel Prize winner.

During the shooting of the film, news broke that Aung San Suu Kyi’s house arrest had been lifted. Luc Besson hesitated to believe what he saw on TV because it looked so much like his recent footage. Yeoh used her spare time to visit Suu Kyi immediately. She says that she got the feeling she was still on the film set during the visit because Luc Besson had recreated the house so accurately. On 22 June 2011 Yeoh wanted to visit Suu Kyi a second time but was deported, reportedly over her portrayal of Suu Kyi. Yeoh watched about 200 hours of audiovisual material on Suu Kyi and took lessons in Burmese to get it all right. This really pays off and becomes evident when she delivers Suu Kyi’s historic first speeches in public in Burmese.

• April 2, 2012 -- Social Justice and Democracy Activists Fool their Foes on April Fools (0)
• November 14, 2010 -- Harper + Aung San Suu Kyi + G20 Protesters = Hypocrisy (2)
• March 21, 2011 -- Guarded Optimism About the Libyan No-Fly Zone (0)

Enter one J.J. McCullough, Huff Canada’s resident conservative iconoclast—or something. In a recent blog, McCullough weighed in on the question of the ongoing student protests in Quebec, providing a sort of “media survey” wherein he concludes, essentially, that the corporate media is not on the side of the students. I certainly hope that you were sitting down for that revelation because this sort of hard-hitting analysis is truly rare these days. McCullough brings to bear this astounding body of evidence to convince us that therefore we too should wipe our hands of the students’ struggle. I guess the argument being, there but for the grace of Canwest go I.

In any case, McCullough did attempt to provide a “balanced” account of the debate by noting that “there are a few public commentators in Canada who are not dripping with patronizing distain [sic] for the strikers, though one has to venture pretty far outside the mainstream media bubble to find ‘em.”

Welcome, ladies and gentlemen, to the fringes of the mainstream media bubble.

Jasmin Mujanović over at Politics Re-Spun (which is a very popular left-wing blog I’m sure you have heard of) takes vicious aim at Canada’s “vocal, reactionary minority” who won’t stop bashing students for being dumb and spoiled and lazy and smelly and all the rest of it. What you hacks should really be is jealous, Jasmin says.

Quebecers may be spoiled with rock-bottom tuition rates, sure, but that just shows how skilled they’ve been at learning to ‘wrest rights and resources away from the state.’ In Mujanović world this is a vastly more inspiring skill than, say, learning to balance a budget.

Now a couple of things are worth stating. It’s fairly ironic that McCullough uses his acrid “wit” to imply just how marginal I and the rest of the crew at Politics Re-Spun are and yet—here he is, citing my article. Generally, when I consider someone irrelevant, I don’t tend to engage with their writing. However, McCullough does seem to have come across my article somehow. I can only imagine that some sort of sonar was involved. Either that or this little-blog-that-could has ruffled a few feathers now and then. Granted, my article was posted a few days in advance of McCullough’s but the reader can nonetheless compare for themselves the social media stats on my piece and his. God knows, somebody is reading this stuff and it seems quite a few people are finding something to “like” here as well.

To wit, one should also note that several members of the crew here at Politics Re-Spun have been featured in major newspapers, given interviews to major news stations and generally produced excellent writing, regardless of its exposure or lack thereof. But I guess being a superstar contributor at Huffington Post does give one licence to behave like a braggart juvenile. I look forward to J.J’s next piece: “How My Dad Killed the Dead Sea.”

As it pertains to the debate of the wresting away of rights from the state vs. “balancing the budget” the word “canard” scarcely seems to do this juxtaposition justice. As I recall, and as I noted in the original article, it wasn’t students or workers that “imbalanced” the global financial budget and led to the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression. In fact, as I recall, it was precisely the so-called “fiscal conservatism” crowd which caused this meltdown. Readers will forgive me then, if I continue to insist that such rhetoric is merely a front for the dispossession of the poor and working classes by the rich. And they will likewise hopefully understand if I do, indeed, insist that we, poor and working people, likewise have a right to certain rights, services and amenities, provided to us by our ostensibly “democratic governments.”

I should also note that McCullough and I have something of a “history.” We both attended SFU at roughly the same time, where I was (unfortunately) regularly exposed to his “poignant” reactionary editorials. I even had the pleasure of responding to one myself. Alas, I suppose some things never change: McCullough is still clearly a bombastic reactionary and I still fancy myself some sort of radical. Only the size of our soapboxes has changed.

All of this is to say one thing: McCullough’s “argument” is little more than grandstanding. The fact that the corporate media has taken a critical, dismissive stance towards the students is neither surprising nor noteworthy. But like I said before: it doesn’t matter. You can spin and spin, mock and deride all you want but 200,000 people in the streets is a force in and of itself. The power of corporate media to disempower citizens should never be underestimated. But neither should the power of organized citizens to resist, either.

Those “kids” in Quebec are the most significant political movement to emerge in Canada in the last decade.  At the point at which there are hundreds of thousands of people in the streets, day after day, month after month the margins become defined by those who stay at home, to those who roll their eyes from the sidelines. And all the attempts to dismiss the economic and political realities which have necessitated this uprising will just be dust in the wind.

In the meantime, J.J. my offer of free literature still stands, friend. Keep drawing.

• No Related Posts

The Conservatives have a line of spin that’s been sticking – and that really frustrates me.  Laurie Hawn, for example, the caustic Parliamentary Secretary for the Minister of Defence, has said that when it comes to budgeting the costs of the jets, it’s not right to include “oil and gas and parts” and things like that — and he then likened buying the jet to buying a car.

According to Hawn – and the other Conservative spin-bots – you don’t include the operating costs – that is, the costs of fuel and oil and supplies when you’re buying a new vehicle because you’ve already got that budgeted when you already have a car.

Except this is total bullshit.  When you’re buying a car, or anything that consumes expensive supplies as a consequence of you using it, you want to know the operating costs of what you’re buying.  You want to know if the new car guzzles gas at 3 times the rate as the old one, or half the rate of the old one.

If you’re moving from an old Ford pickup that drinks down gasoline like you drink down water to a hybrid car that uses 25% of the fuel, you want to know how much you will save on fuel.  If, on the other hand, you’re switching from a hybrid to a four-door pickup, you want to know how much more you’ll be forking out.

The suggestion that the F-35 will have the exact same operating costs as our current jets is laughable without providing the numbers, which the government has pointedly refused to do.

To suggest that the operating costs won’t change, and that we shouldn’t consider it in our purchasing is misleading. And it’s bullshit.

To go back to the analogy of buying a car – isn’t it the case that operating costs are the reason behind the stickers in car windows?

• No Related Posts

The following programs from Halifax to Vancouver will be forced to close their doors by March 31, 2013 or accept funding elsewhere:

• Le Réseau québécois d’action pour la santé des femmes (RQASF)
• The Canadian Women’s Health Network (CWHN)
• The Atlantic Centre of Excellence for Women’s Health (ACEWH)
• The British Columbia Centre of Excellence for Women’s Health (BCCEWH)
• The Prairie Women’s Health Centre of Excellence (PWHCE)
• The National Network on Environments and Women’s Health (NNEWH)

What does this mean? Limitation, cessation or compromise of access and research in the following areas of women’s health:

• women’s health implications of the federal government’s regulation of toxic chemicals (NNEWH);
• hyper-sexualization of girls (RQASF);
• inter-generational legacy of residential schools on Aboriginal women and their families (PWHCE);
• need for trauma-informed counselling  for women with addictions (BCCEWH);
• working guide for conducting sex and gender-based analysis in health research (ACEWH);
• a critical analysis of funding for the HPV vaccine (CWHN).

Shame on the Feds, who have simply succeeded in creating further burden on our exhausted health care system, and once again shown that the status of women across the country is truly second class.

• January 9, 2012 -- Enbridge Gateway JRP Hearings Broadcast (Kitimat/Kitamaat) – January 10, 2011 (5)

Last week, our favourite sweater vest hoarding Prime Minister made the world’s laziest Nazi/Hitler invocation during Question Period. This is the latest in a string of Hitler references made by sundry politicos in Ottawa during 2012, and we’re not even half way through the year. His gaffe brought jeers and tears of laughter to denizens of the House and online. For your viewing pleasure, witness the exchange between Mulcair the Bearded Sandwich Explainer and Stevie Soulless Eyes HERE.

After I was done laughing and wiping tears of hilarity from my eyes, I went back to the Politics Respun crew, and asked them for their input. Stephen Elliot-Buckley, Kevin Harding, Jasmin Mujanovic and I weighed in:

Is there ever an appropriate time in debate for comparing our politicians, parties and policies to those of Adolf Hitler?
Short of starting some ethnic cleansing campaign or annexing a neighbouring state, no. The bar is set quite high. That said, I think there’s too much careless thoughtlessness when people are rejecting criticisms of fascism and totalitarianism and corporatism. Tossing those words around seems to fit some of the positions we’ve seen in Canada in recent decades that are contemptuous of democracy. As a society we need to be better educated about the meaning and historical context of those words so we can use them more intelligently. And we don’t need Hitler for all that. – Stephen

I’m not one to really ascribe limits to speech, save for the kind that involves things like yelling “fire” in a crowded movie theatre. That being said, I also think that there’s problems with making comparisons between exceedingly horrific historical events and the leader of the NDP asking Harper when he was going to bring Canadian soldiers home from our neo-colonialist romp in Afghanistan. There’s a balance; if you honestly, seriously, fully think that comparing the actions of your debate opponent to those of Hitler are necessary, then, by all means, do so – but don’t be surprised if you’re made out to look like an idiot after doing so. It’s a comparison that should be made exceedingly rarely, and only in circumstances that actually warrant it. – Kevin

Sure but only once they begin engaging in or advocating for the systemic genocide of a segment of our population. Until then, it’s juvenile idiocy. – Jasmin

If the politician/party/policies are truly akin to those of Adolph Hitler and not simply something that opponents of the politician/party/policies merely dislikes or takes offense to, yes. Using it as a tool to insult or derive a reaction (Godwin’s Law) does make it a de facto debating tactic. – Tia

Was Harper out of line on Thursday when he erroneously stated that the NDP did not support the fight against Hitler in 1939? Was Mulcair, when he shot back about Reform Party?

I think it would be wonderful to get into the debate about where Canada has stood on events like the Boer War, WW1, WW2, Korea, Vietnam, Iraq x2, and Afghanistan. And the centuries of various forms of war against the first peoples. There is precious little serious, non-zinger based rhetoric floating around when, as a nation, we ought to be getting into the soul of the issue of the role of our military. – Stephen

No, and no. In the most literal sense. Take a look deeper at the statements – Harper said that the “leader of the NDP in 1939″ didn’t even support war against Hitler. This – and only this – is specifically true. J.S. Woodworth, an ardent pacifist, opposed war in Germany. And he – alone in the House of Commons – voted against the declaration of war. And he was soundly castigated for his actions, and made fun of quite rightly, for his vote. Extending this smear to insinuating that the NDP itself loved Hitler is just fucking stupid, plain and simple. Mulcair, on the other hand, shot back about the Reform Party’s policies – here, he took the policies of the party as it then was and compared it to the actions of the party as it is now. No spurious smearing; if the party changed names, it’s still the party’s policies as they were, not the actions of an individual who was then castigated by the party. – Kevin

Harper’s statement was the depths of gutter politics–pathetic more than anything else. I thought Mulcair’s retort was rather funny, though, and I don’t even really like the guy. Not much else to do in a situation like that than mock the Prime Minister. – Jasmin

If the HOC was a UFC octagon (which would actually make a lot of politics in Canada much more entertaining and culturally relevant for the masses) this tactic by Harper would have been a move akin to kneeing your opponent in the balls. It was cheap, lazy and a last ditch effort to keep away from having to tap out. Mulcair’s retort was priceless, and he chalked up laugh points from me with his verbal ground n’ pound. – Tia

In the media (both traditional and social) there are perpetual invocations of Hitler/Nazis by Left of centre thinkers/commentators directed towards Harper, his government, and Conservative Party policy. Is there legitimacy in this comparison?

Like I said above, I think we need to be more precise. When we say totalitarian, we need to talk about an issue like “free speech zones” in Vancouver during our Olympics corporate orgy, with respect to the Charter and how such acts are an egregious violation of reasonable limits from Section 1 [http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/charter/page-1.html]. When we talk about corporatism and the corporate-political junta that is the neo-liberalism of the Liberal Party, Reform Party and Conservative Party, we should be clear on how we talk about governing for corporate interests. When we bring up soft fascism or hard fascism, we should connect that discussion with these handy 14 elements of fascism: http://www.rense.com/general37/char.htm. – Stephen

There’s legitimacy in comparing a lot of the actions of governments to fascism. To Hitler? Nope. And don’t get me started in the stupidity that one can find in certain right-wing fora who insist that Hitler was a commie socialist, not a right-wing fascist. – Kevin

No, absolutely not. I have very, very strong objections to Harper’s policy in particular as it relates to our treatment of First Nations peoples and overseas(mis)adventures–situations where people are actually dying)but he’s not Hitler, nor are the Tories Nazis, either. We have plenty of fascist movements around the world (including Canada) who make very few bones about their politics; we’d be better off actually engaging those people than wasting time on these partisan theatrics. – Jasmin

Comparing what is actually going on in Ottawa with the current Conservative government and WWII Nazis is laughable and makes your argument look small minded and uninformed. Like Harper or not, he’s not actively gassing his enemies in death camps and annexing small nations. Find a better comparison in history or grab some originality and create a term. I’m fond of Sweatervestism, myself. – Tia

Is Nazism a useful symbol for what makes us angry, from opinions on extended breastfeeding to criticism about opposing politicians?

I believe in Godwin’s law. Short of contemporary Nazis and similar groups, I think we need to educate people with more precise terms. – Stephen

If you legitimately think that the comparison is necessary, sure. Just don’t be surprised if you’re made to look like a complete idiot on your comparison if it’s out of line. There are way more useful comparisons or symbols to use. Boots stomping on faces, sweater vests, et cetera. – Kevin
Only a Nazi could ask such a question! Which is to say: sure…but only if you’re kind of slow and un-creative. First of all, very rarely are our opponents actually Nazi-like in nature. And on the odd occasion where I have engaged with actual fascists, the comparison to the Nazis was hardly insulting to them. So, with very few exceptions, the comparison is unjustified–and none of those exceptions are part of the mainstream Canadian political scene. – Jasmin

What is the term I’m looking for? Ah, yes. Reductio ad Hitlerum: claiming that a policy/group leads to/is the same as one advocated or implemented by Hitler/the Third Reich, and so “proves” that the original policy/group is undesirable. Guilt by association. Having been called a “Boob Nazi” (somewhat erroneously) often and FemNazi a few times, I am always perplexed as to how the person making the comparison arrives at the choice of words. I presume that the person throwing the terms around lacks a functional vocabulary/creativity. – Tia

Does invoking Hitler/Nazi in Canadian politics trivialize and desacralize memories of holocaust and the horrors of WW2?

Yes. And while trying to elicit empathy for violated peoples is a valid motive, we should do it in a more realistic context. We don’t have to go to gas chambers to talk about the abject poverty that millions of Canadians are one paycheque away from because of neoliberal, totalitarian, corporatist soft fascism. – Stephen

No. It trivializes the person making the comparison, if the comparison is not justifiable. Cf “Godwin’s Law” and etc. – Kevin

Yes, full stop. – Jasmin

Hell, yes. It’s disrespectful of people who have been affected by Hitler, who dealt a lasting blow generationally to so many families and individuals around the world. My grandparents were children/teenagers during WWII in Germany/Eastern Europe and our family is still impacted, several generations later. – Tia

Other thoughts/comments on this topic?

Harper is clearly desperate. He’s seen his polling numbers drop stunningly since the NDP leadership race, which is the kind of event to give the NDP a bump, not usually a corresponding plummet in the governing party’s stature. And now that I enjoyed the Twitterverse Monday morning kicking the tires of the NDP talking about expecting a coalition government with the Liberals and not a merger, the Harper Junta will be further trimmed in the polls. And now that the Liberals are going to let non-members vote in their leadership race, Cullenistas in the NDP can vote for a leader who is interested in a distinct, yet cooperative posture with the NDP. And yesterday NDP House Leader Cullen called for the speaker to enforce more decorum in the house. Cooperation and dignity, two of Cullen’s core leadership messages, seem to be defining this era of the NDP even if Cullen didn’t “win” the leadership. Harper’s a politician full of hate and vitriol. He is so angry, eager to demolish the Liberals, eager to cram his self-assured ideology wherever he can for the sake of some monarchist imperial brand of corporatism. He knows that suppressing voter turnout illegally or through negative politics keeps voters who embrace hope from turning up and mobilizes his base that hates their enemies. We need to reject gutter politics. As simply as last spring when Layton unilaterally stopped his party from heckling in the House, there is room for building something positive. Harper is incapable of doing that. So he invokes monsters, and in doing so, Godwin. – Stephen

The meta-narrative on Harper’s stupidity in jumping into Godwin’s law so quickly ignores the fact that Harper didn’t have an answer as to when the troops engaged in neo-colonialism in Afghanistan will be coming home – so instead he pulled out Hitler. Idiot. – Kevin

I’ve been left with a Broadway show tune from The Producers in my head, ear-worming me endlessly. Springtime! For Hitler! In Germany! Thanks for that, Harper. – Tia

• February 12, 2012 -- Liveblogging Today’s NDP Leaders Debate (1)
• February 2, 2012 -- NDP Leaders, By the Numbers and the Intangibles (3)
• October 7, 2011 -- Occupy the Church, Occupy Together (1)
• October 3, 2011 -- Encouraging Early Political Engagement: CitizenNext.ca (2)

Rarely have I been so moved by an account of the struggle working people have in the face of this new world order of anti-worker 1%ism.

We are so effectively trained to accept the balance of power is heavily tilted towards employers and employer-friendly/funded governments that we miss out on obvious things like our own rights.

So let’s not tolerate any more mill explosions, indifferent employers and governments, and neglected health and safety training.

Here is the text of the speech I gave at Victoria’s Day of Mourning ceremony for workers killed or injured on the job, held on April 28, 2012 and organized by the Victoria Labour Council and Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE) Local 50:

DAY OF MOURNING SPEECH

VICTORIA, BC

April 28, 2012

Ben addressed 200 people at the annual Day of Mourning in Victoria for workers killed or injured on the job.

As an elected official, let me start by thanking CUPE Local 50 and the Victoria Labour Council for organizing today’s event.

They have reminded us that the health, safety and wellbeing of workers must remain a central concern and responsibility of the labour movement itself.

* * *

Over time, we have seen employer and government initiatives to replace the self-activity of workers with cumbersome bureaucratic procedures.

Too often, these new procedures are designed to serve the interests of employers, rather than workers.

For example, Workers’ Compensation emerged a hundred years ago to limit the legal liability of employers.

Workers and their families lost the right to sue employers for damages, for death or injury arising from negligence.

More than 400 coal miners had been killed on Vancouver Island in the decades leading up to this legislation, as employers such as Robert Dunsmuir cut safety procedures to boost production and maximize profits.

* * *

Today, in the drive for cost-cutting, “restraint” and “austerity” – we see the same basic problem – employers who are quick to ignore safety warnings, saving costs while threatening the life and wellbeing of workers who make their profits.

The investigation of the Prince George explosion is ongoing, but I believe we may find that this was a preventable tragedy – that warnings relating to sawdust were ignored by the employer.

It is often more convenient and profitable to cling to a “business as usual” approach.

But workers and their families can be devastated as a result.

The Prince George incident suggests we need much stronger enforcement of workplace safety, and potentially stiffer penalties – both criminal and financial – against employers whose actions or negligence contribute to the death or injury of workers.

* * *

At the same time we fight to strengthen laws, we need to remain vigilant in defending the principle of the right to refuse unsafe work – whether or not this principle is sanctioned or not in provincial statute or in the language of collective agreements.

There was an era of “labour before the law,” when all actions by unions to advance the interests of workers were deemed criminal and punished with fines, injunctions and jail terms.

Sometimes, basic humanitarian values – most notably respect for human life – run up against laws enacted in employer-friendly legislatures.

Such moments underscore the need for working class self activity to uphold community values.

* * *

IN CONCLUSION, thanks again to CUPE Local 50 and the Victoria Labour Council for reminding us that workers cannot always look to government or employers to help them.

In this era of “austerity,” the need for working-class self-activity and solidarity to improve conditions of life and work will become increasingly clear and increasingly essential

via Day of Mourning | Ben Isitt.

• No Related Posts

Shaw, the Corporation

If you are a lower mainland Shaw Cable customer you may have noticed a quite vague notification of a $5 [plus HST] bill increase coming in June. It is followed by a great deal of vague advertising fluff indicating that something awesome was about to happen, but no actual details in order to get a sense of whether this is just a money grab by Shaw or if it’s an actual cost increase with value for money.

Below is the vague PR nonsense on the Shaw bills and a very frustrating Twitter DM exchange I just had with someone at Shaw trying to get actual details. It was typical big corporation slipperiness and dodginess. If this is frustrating for you, there’s a comparably affordable Telus bundle you can threaten to switch to when you call Shaw.

Enjoy, but don’t forget your barf bag.

Here is what may be on your Shaw bill this month:

Your monthly services rate will be increased by $5 (plus tax) effective June 1, 2012. The power of the Shaw Exo network brings you the best in entertainment and the fastest internet speeds in Canada. With Personal TV you enjoy more sports with TSN, Sportsnet and Sportsnet One and top specialty networks like the Food Network, History and HGTV – plus they are all available in HD at no extra cost! Visit SHAW.CA to learn more.

If you’re like me, you’ll ask “Where’s the beef?” because this is largely advertising fluff meant to make customers feel happy that big Shaw is looking out for their entertainment life.

So I tweeted to Shaw last night about getting some actual concrete, tangible details. This began a frustrating attempt to dodge their dodging to get a straight answer or even a link to some facts.

Do you sense a desire to not really say what the $5 actually provides?

Are there general improvements that are just too difficult to explain, or is there a lack of willingness to tell customers specifically what they’ll now be paying for?

Did it take an unreasonably long time for me to get some kind of acknowledgement that there are more details than the vague ad fluff, but that it’s too complicated to share that?

Have you noticed how corporations and other bureaucracies often sound like they’re trying to be helpful, while at the same time not really saying anything?

Note that in the end, they will not commit to proactively telling customers what the $5 will get them. They’ll broadly advertise improvements and if customers contact them they’ll tell customers “things,” but there is no real commitment to explain just what the $5 will do for people individually.

Shawhelp 9:57am

Thanks. Looking at your bill, the explanation is there. The EXO information is the increase. The network improvements. ^AB

To: Shawhelp 10:02am

there are no details of that very vague, broad, general advertising paragraph. are there new channels/faster internet for the $5?

Shawhelp 10:04am

The rate adjustment allows us to improve our infrastructure to bring you more channels and faster internet speeds. ^AB

To: Shawhelp 10:07am

ok, which will be my new channels for $5 more? how fast will my internet now be for my $5 more?

Shawhelp 10:15am

As we complete the upgrades we’ll be able to improve on our lineup. Your internet speeds have already been raised. ^AB

To: Shawhelp 10:20am

so why not tell customers the details of what has already happened & in the future. how exactly has the internet speed increased?

Shawhelp 10:24am

Not all changes impact customers the same way when we do rate adjustments. This adjustment is for network improvements. ^AB

To: Shawhelp 10:26am

ok, so why not send customers actual useful, clear details, with specifics, instead of vague advertising fluff?

Shawhelp 10:29am

Unfortunately we can’t customize every bill. I will definitely pass along your suggestion. ^AB

To: Shawhelp 10:31am

i’m not asking for that. i’m asking for some detailed explanation for all customers with specific plans for the $5, not ad fluff.

Shawhelp 10:37am

As I mentioned, the change impacts customers differently. Most changes are not immediate. ^AB

To: Shawhelp 10:44am

so there is no detailed information you can give to all customers about even the range of expected improvements?

Shawhelp 10:46am

As it indicates in the bill, it helps us improve our network to bring you more content and a superior experience. ^AB

To: Shawhelp 10:51am

so, would you say you’re unable or unwilling to provide more details so people can evaluate the value for that $5 increase?

Shawhelp 10:53am

As there is no quantitative aspect to the change at this time it makes it difficult to answer that. I was able to (1/2)

Shawhelp 10:53am

provide a quantitative change to your account to improve your internet speeds based on our new packaging from EXO. ^AB(2/2)

Shawhelp 10:54am

As we go forward, we hope to add more channels and better speeds as a result of the network upgrades we can perform (1/2)

Shawhelp 10:54am

because of this rate adjustment. ^AB (2/2)

To: Shawhelp 10:59am

ty, so when you can provide the quantitative info on new channels and speeds, will you be providing that to each customer?

Shawhelp 11:01am

Yes, we always do our best to announce new channel launches and new packages via our website, twitter and facebook. ^AB

To: Shawhelp 11:41am

ok, so when will you provide each customer infor on what new channels and increased internet speed they each will have received?

Shawhelp 11:59am

We will put the info out about channel launches when we have it and also work to inform all customers who contact us. ^AB

• January 12, 2011 -- Should Toddlers Be Held Captive For BC Ferries’ TVs? (9)

Carrément dans le rouge.

Just a quick memo to Canada’s vocal, reactionary minority (with vast over-representation on online forums and comments sections): the students in Quebec do not care that you think they are: “spoiled brats,” “crazy,” “anarchists,” “communists,” and/or “French” (?!). Your moaning and complaining is absolutely and utterly vacuous. Why? Because the students, unlike you, are actually mobilized and organized and are standing up for their rights. You, on the other hand, are sitting down for plutocracy. They are expanding our conception of what democratic politics ought to entail. They are engaging in the fundamental practice of politics, in fact: if you want something, you have to fight for it. They are a representation of the society we could be, rather than the tepid, depoliticized, ethereal mass we currently exist as.

That Canada’s media establishment, the Liberal Party of Quebec and their sycophants in the general public do not understand this is merely a testament to how divorced in this country we are from anything remotely resembling democratic politics. As I have droned on about before, “elections” are not politics in any meaningful sense of the word and, at least in their current form, are barely democratic at all.

Take for instance what is, ostensibly, the central concern of these protests: the question of tuition. Many a sweaty commentator on the CBC, for example, has remarked how they have “no sympathy” for these kids on account of the fact that they “already have the lowest tuition in the country!” Indeed, they do. And why do they have the lowest tuition in the country? Because several generations of students in that Province have demonstrated that they could and would mobilize hundreds of thousands of their compatriots to prevent any attacks on their access to a decent public education. The students, not the government, have delineated the contours of their political and democratic rights. And this, in turn, is why they will continue to have the lowest tuition rates in the country: because “direct action gets the goods.”

Ta-da! The mysteries of the arcane world of politics, revealed! A substantive, meaningful, “deep” conception of democracy can only exist in an environment where the citizens are prepared and able to wrest rights and resources away from the state. We need to understand that the state, especially in the era of neoliberalism, does not serve to provide for us, it serves to take things away. Corporate tax breaks, the creeping privatization of public services, the destruction of our environment in the name of “economic progress,” the criminalization, marginalization and exploitation of migrant labour—all of these are but means of dispossession.

As such, the completely backwards (and inane) argument which holds that because they have the lowest tuition rates in the country, Quebec students should not complain fundamentally misunderstands what democracy is. It is a reactionary, indeed, anti-democratic position. It is also one frequently applied to organized labour, incidentally: why are the unions always on strike? They already have comparatively higher wages and better working conditions than non-unionized workers. I know: they’re just greedy!

What a truly bizarre inversion. In a society where the rich have systematically conspired in the dispossession of the rest of the population, organized forms of resistance to this process are the one barrier between us and indentured servitude. Rather than resenting the dominant, ruling, corporate elite who have led us into the largest global economic decline since the Great Depression—and got off with barely a murmur of complaint from their government sponsors—we’re supposed to blame teachers and students (to use but two recent examples) because they have the audacity to speak out against this process? Gee, I wonder who this benefits?

I’m tired of the logic that blames other working class women and men, as well as youth, for the conditions the owners of this country have created. Yes, unions and organized populations, in general, have better living and working conditions than their non-organized peers. This is not an argument against organized labour et al, however, it’s an argument against the non-organization of working people! Rather than asking why “they” have it so good, we ought to ask why we have it so bad. And this applies whether you’re working in a non-union industry or sector, or you’re a student anywhere in this country wondering why our friends in Quebec have lower education costs.

I am excited and hopeful about what’s happening in Montreal and across Quebec (and hopefully, the rest of the country, soon enough!): it’s showing us that mass mobilization is possible and effective in Canada. At a moment where the rumors of the death of the “Occupy” movement have been so grossly exaggerated (another free hint for the reactionaries: the protests will end when the inherent contradictions of capitalism resolve themselves—good luck!), this is precisely the reminder we have needed: the emergence of what they’re calling a “Quebec Spring.” Change is possible, it is necessary but it can only happen when we organize, when we mobilize and when we dictate our own futures. All that which we might accomplish and gain depends on our ability to fight for it. Free tuition would be only the beginning, then.

Every working person in this country ought to stand with the students in Quebec, every progressive, every radical, everyone interested in a Canada that is not merely a subsidiary of oil conglomerates. Do not allow the media and the political establishment to deceive you with calls of “extremism” and “violence”; do not allow footage of Police brutality to be sold to you as evidence of domestic terrorism. I’ve written on the subject before, so allow me merely to say this: to draw equivalence between the systemic violence of the state and capital on the one hand, and the global resistance to it on the other is as factually bankrupt an argument as it is morally repugnant.

There’s hope for us yet but only if we look out for each other, if we defend each other, if we fight for each other. Solidarity means something: it means knowing who you’re with and what you’re against.

La barricade ferme la rue mais ouvre la voie.

• No Related Posts

When you were little, you learned about stranger danger, and what to do if anyone ever attacked you/touched your private parts/tried to abduct you. You’d scream. You’d kick and claw at their eyes with your nails. Perhaps kick them squarely in the crotch. You’d try to get away and draw as much attention to yourself as possible, so as to get help, and have the offender nabbed.

*THIS IS ME, KICKING AND BITING, FLAILING AND SCRATCHING AT THE EYES OF MP STEPHEN WOODWORTH. GET YOUR FILTHY HANDS OFF OF MY BODY, RIGHT NOW! GET YOUR HANDS OFF OF MY DAUGHTER’S BODIES, RIGHT NOW!*

Ol’ Stephen Woodworth is a Con MP from Kitchener. Stephen Woodworth thinks he knows better than Canadian women do about what rights they have when it comes to their reproductive choices. Stephen Woodworth doesn’t like that women currently have options beyond being pretty little baby making machines. Stephen Woodworth (who has a very phalic last name, indeed) has tabled a private members bill (It’s nice that your members get to stay private, right?) called M-312. Under M-312, a special committee in the House of Commons would be formed to review the section of the Criminal Code that states that a baby only becomes a human being after it is born. Which, in turn, opens up the door to the abortion debate that Mr. Harper has been reassuring Canadians was not open to debate at this time. In turn, our happy far-right neo-Con folks get to play high stakes poker with the personhood of Canadian women. Does this sound familiar? It should. One only needs to look to our neighbour to the south and see what fruit this right wing, dystopian abuse of women’s rights has begun to manifest. Our government seems to have mistaken Atwood’s  fictional A Handmaid’s Tale for an instruction manual.

This is vastly more than just a simple introspection on personal moral and ethical beliefs surrounding conception, gestation, abortion and the value of human life.  Bill M-312 threatens the human rights of Canadian women, and if they were to come into effect, make our role in society simply one of being a walking, breathing incubator. While I was doing my research, someone came along and did it for me – thanks to the Radical Handmaids and Rhapsody Blue for saving me time and consternation:

Today at 5:30 PM, the House of Commons will debate MP Stephen Woodworth’s motion to form a committee to “review the declaration in Subsection 223(1) of the Criminal Code of Canada which states that a child becomes a human being only at the moment of complete birth”, as well as answer several subsequent questions.

 

MP Woodworth has chosen to market the motion under the title “Canada’s 400 Year Old Definition of a Human Being”, good-naturedly alleging that the law as it stands is simply out of date, and that lawmakers of the past lacked the scientific understanding of human development that we have today.

 

Krissy Fair [1] has pointed out the inaccuracy of Mr. Woodworth’s assertion that the current law exists because, at the time of its creation, we did not understand that an unborn child was human, in addition to pointing out that the law itself is only 120 years old. The law was written with the understanding that extending the provisions of the Criminal Code to the unborn would have several unacceptable consequences.

 

Just so we are clear on the text of the law as it stands currently: “a child becomes a human being within the meaning of this Act when it has completely proceeded, in a living state, from the body of its mother, whether or not it has breathed; it has an independent circulation; or the navel string is severed.” Note the language that specifies the context: “within the meaning of this Act” – that is to say, for the purposes of criminal prosecution.

 

Much has been written about this motion, and a great deal of it focuses on the abortion issue, as it should.

 

However, as MP Woodworth so kindly reminded me in a form letter reply that disregarded the entire contents of my original letter* to him, the motion “has far wider implications than merely for the abortion issue”.

 

It is with an eye to this fact, and in the spirit of Prime Minister Harper’s promise not to re-open the abortion debate, that I would like to present several implications of Motion 312 that do not concern abortion.

 

We need not speculate on the results of declaring the unborn to be legal persons for the purposes of criminal prosecution. In fact, we may simply cast an eye South of the border, where “personhood” laws have been implemented in several states.

 

If the unborn are declared persons:

• Miscarriages would require full criminal investigations by the police, and could result in manslaughter convictions even in the case of no ill intent or wrongdoing. Personally, I think miscarrying a wanted pregnancy must be tragic enough without adding jail time to the mix. Consider the story of Christine Taylor, who was arrested for attempted homicide after feeling lightheaded and falling down while pregnant. Wanting to ensure that no harm had come to her unborn child, Taylor sought medical attention, which resulted in her arrest. [2] Laws declaring the unborn to be persons actively dissuade pregnant mothers from seeking help and making the best medical decisions for their pregnancies.

• Doctors would have the right to obtain legal custody of a fetus and, thus, a woman’s body. Consider the story of Samantha Burton, who was forcibly confined to a hospital after she had the audacity to request a second opinion on her physician’s advice of bed rest. Her forced hospitalization separated her from her two young children, and she miscarried while being confined in the hospital. [3] Laws declaring the unborn to be persons rob mothers of their right to obtain as much information as possible and make their own medical decisions.

• Certain forms of fertility treatment, including in vitro fertilization, would be made illegal.

• Women who take prescription drugs for any reason during pregnancy, even with the approval of their OB/GYN, may be charged with delivering drugs to a minor, or child abuse. Child abuse laws regarding narcotics, after all, do not allow administration of drugs not prescribed to the child if there is relatively low risk of harm: it’s just illegal, and with good reason. Thus pregnant women may be forced to compromise their health and well-being during a pregnancy.

• Conversely, women who fail to take proper vitamins such as folic acid (perhaps because they did not know that they were pregnant) would be subject to criminal prosecution.

• Women struggling with addictions to drugs or smoking could be arrested for undergoing assistive treatment, or using products such as nicotine gum in an effort to live a healthier lifestyle during their pregnancy.

• Canada may be forced to outlaw life-saving treatment for ectopic pregnancies should the date of personhood be set early enough. Ectopic pregnancies, as I am sure you are aware, rarely result in viable births and, if left untreated, will often render the woman infertile or kill her. Treatment for preeclampsia (the leading cause of death for pregnant women) could also be made illegal.

• Doctors may force pregnant women to have major surgery such as Caesarian surgery against the pregnant woman’s wishes, as was the case with Angela Carder (who died, along with the fetus) and Laura Pemberton [4]. Police may arrest pregnant women who have exercised their right to medical decision-making regarding pregnancy, labour and delivery.

These are just a handful of considerations. I encourage you to ponder them, regardless of where you stand on the abortion issue. This motion has implications for all pregnant women, not just those who would like to have abortions.

 

I think that the moment of birth is the easiest way to define a person in practical legal terms; if an unborn child is to be a person, Canada must presumably begin granting unborn children the full rights of citizenship the moment they are deemed persons. I wonder, will expecting mothers be able to declare unborn children as dependents for tax and other benefit purposes? Does this also include phasing out birth certificates and birth dates in favour of personhood dates?

 

Take a moment to consider your position… then regardless of what you decide, I encourage you to take action!

• Read Motion 312: http://www.stephenwoodworth.ca/canadas-400-year-old-definition-of-human-being/motion-312
• Write to your MP: http://www.parl.gc.ca/Parlinfo/Compilations/HouseOfCommons/MemberByPostalCode.aspx?Menu=HOC
• Share this post

 

* I am aware that MP Woodworth’s office must be very busy. But I was still surprised to receive a form letter reply that, among other things, thanked me for my “kind comments” and implored me to “promote the views we share with the utmost sensitivity and consideration toward those who disagree” and to publicly express my support for the motion.  The email also included a package of media releases, a pro-Motion 312 flyer, and a similarly supportive petition that I could pass around. I was certainly polite, but I wouldn’t have called my email kind, nor did I express any sort of support for the motion. In fact, I encouraged MP Woodworth to conduct a respectful debate in the House, and presented several arguments against the idea of striking a committee, in the hopes that he might decide to vote against his own motion. I assume my email was not read.

Abortion is ugly. It is sad that it continues to have to be an option, that not every child is wanted/able to be cared for/loved or healthy. Not all circumstances are equal, and it is essential that we continue to be given choice and control over our own reproductive decisions

Hopefully, I don’t wake up to an unwanted name change when this is over. OfStephen is really unbecoming.

Citations:

1. http://thinkmamathink.wordpress.com/2012/04/01/motion-312-wombs-for-woodworth/

2. http://news.change.org/stories/pregnant-iowa-woman-arrested-for-falling-down

3. http://news.change.org/stories/doctor-gets-court-order-to-confine-pregnant-woman-against-her-will

4. http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/how-an-anti-abortion-push-to-redefine-person-could-wind-up-hurting-women/2011/10/26/gIQAQSwGQM_story.html

• No Related Posts

The Politics, Re-spun crew deconstructs the Wildrose effect here:

Are you surprised that the Wildrose Party did not win?

No. Discontent polls well, but people sobered up when they cast their ballots. - Stephen

Surprised – no. Even Alberta isn’t quite ready to drink that special purple Kool-Aid tonic that Wildrose was offering up. Clearly they have a large number of sympathizers, and had the potential to do some damage in traditional PC strongholds, though. - Tia

I’m not. And I’m not arguing that I had a good, well-educated reason for my belief, either. I just like to think that we, as Canadians, are dignified enough to avoid electing a party that travels in a Boobie Bus. - Anna

Not one bit. It was abundantly clear with the obsessive media coverage of Wildrose/PC horseracing that the newsmakers didn’t know anymore what was actually happening in the province. All of it got sensationalized. Talking a lot about boob bus versus the @WhatSmithSaid account doesn’t translate to an understanding of public opinion, let alone accurate vote predictions. - Alex

I was at the time that I heard the returns last night; now, sort of, kind of, but maybe not really.  The media speculation was that the polls were really close and that it could have been a minority government.  This is after it was supposed to be a Wildrose majority. Stuff changes, I guess.  Most interesting to me is that there was 20% undecided going in to the election – which may have been the shift – and the apparent abandonment of the Liberal Party in support of the Progressive Conservatives. Very intriguing. - Kevin

What parts of the Wildrose Party were their biggest handicaps?

Their extremist candidates and policies are appealing, but enough voters looked for more balance. - Stephen

The average person isn’t going to be drawn in to rally around a political group who are overtly denying climate change and trying to put lipstick on the pig of their anti-abortion, anti-gay sentiments. There seems to be a large sense of  ”I like my Alberta the way it is” which left the door open for Redford and more status quo. - Tia

I’d say it was their candidates, but the bigger handicap was probably Danielle Smith’s continued support of every inflammatory, racist, bigoted thing her candidates said. - Anna

Their viciously homophobic candidates, their racist candidates, their anti-science leader who thinks that the “science is still out” on climate change (uhh, what?) and more. - Kevin

How much is the Wildrose Party like the Reform Party?

They seem to have similar extremist tendencies and a need to muzzle the radical radicals. - Stephen

There are definitely shades of Reform colouring Wildrose. This is the same political primordial bitumen ooze that they both crept out of, after all. If you could see me gesturing, I’m currently pointing one hand towards Ottawa and one hand towards Calgary, and sitting on a stack of sweater vests which I would like to submit as evidence. *Cough* Harper *Cough*. - Tia

Very similar, minus the advantage everyday Canadians had in being able to make light of Preston Manning’s pronunciation of “Reform”. Am I the only one that gets nostalgic for “Refoooooooooooorm Party” jokes? - Anna

See above. Racist candidates, homophobic candidates, anti-science. - Kevin

Will the new PC government really be much of a Red Tory party that is able to be progressive?

The Wildrose opposition may require the PCs to slide to the right and cut down on Red Tory rhetoric/policy, but they may also go the other way and represent a cohesive centre to solidify opposition to the Wildrose. - Stephen

When contrasted with the folks riding the Wildrose Boobie Bus, these Tories are definitely going to look very red. How hamstrung they’ll be by Ottawa and the thrust to move energy policies to over-drive to appease the Federal overlords and corporate investors is going to factor into how much blue starts seeping into the red. Is advancing the oil company agenda “progressive”? It might be for Albertans. - Tia

Given how much of the Liberal’s support base voted for the PCs, it would be a prudent move for the newly-elected government to move in a progressive direction. Whether or not they will remains to be seen. - Anna

Maybe. There’s a strong challenge from the conservative side in Alberta, so there will likely be a not-inconsiderable amount of conservative drift, but maybe there will be something that happens. - Kevin

What do you hope will happen with the tarsands?

I hope whatever rhetoric of science we heard will actually win out and people will recognize climate change is more important than all the petro-loonies. I’m not optimistic. - Stephen

*grumble *grumble* I would like to see responsible development and regulation of a really important resource, so that Canada and future generations of Canadians can own and control what is ours and use it to the best possible future economic advantage. I would like to see the product extracted from it processed here in Canada, not China. The current pace of development is detrimental to our economy and is a really lousy long term strategy, benefiting foreign corporations, foreign workers and a few politicians. Gordie and Gordette Canada aren’t reaping the long term benefits at all. - Tia

I’d say that I hope someone would kill them with fire, but… - Anna

That we leave them alone. - Kevin

The Alberta NDP got 4 seats and party status. Will they be able to grow significantly for the next election?

Yes, with cover from the NDP in federal opposition. It will be hard for them to get wedge issues against the PCs. - Stephen

Alberta has an NDP party? I mean, hey! Go NDP! I often pontificate on the ability of the NDP or a similar party to gain seats and membership in Alberta. I’ve come to conclude that if everyone who has ever lived in Northern BC continues to be led to the bitumen in order to feed their family, the answer is yes. At some point, blue collar, working class Albertans (and BC ex-pats) are going to have to say to themselves “How is this helping me in the long term? Who is looking out for our basic needs? This is untenable. I cannot be complicit in the deterioration of the environment and health of this province by silence/status quo.” - Tia

I suspect that depends now how far to the centre they move, and how much of the collapsed Liberal support they pick up. It’s heartening to see the NDP make it in Texas North, but I can’t see them sustaining long term gains without abandoning a lot of the core values the NDP espouses. - Anna

In my opinion, any growth for the NDP in Alberta is significant growth; I really don’t know what they’ll do for the next election. Maybe get some more votes. - Kevin

It appears that the Alberta Liberal vote collapsed to the PCs to keep the Wildrose out. What does that say about our electoral system and electoral reform?

Pseudo-proportional representation can occur with strategic voting, but looking at the popular vote, either a Liberal or NDP party would hold the balance of power for the PCs, which would have been better than a Wildrose majority. - Stephen

FPTP is archaic and needs to go. This scenario keeps playing out over and over and over. Unfortunately, it seems that people advocating for electoral reform are still on the fringes. Certainly the parties that continue to win majorities are not feeling the love for putting a bullet into the existing system. Nathan Cullen (federal NDP) has some interesting views on electoral reform that are worth looking into further. - Tia

That FPTP is a gigantic failure. But we all knew that already, didn’t we? - Anna

That First-Past-the-Post is antidemocratic. - Kevin

How will this election affect the political scene in BC?

The BC Conservative Party may look somewhat more like a chimera, but BC is different and they may learn from the Wildrose, along with maybe not having as much radical Reformistas in it so they may be risking less in the next 13 months. - Stephen

Since BC’s existing government has all but laid the province at the feet of Alberta, we’ll have the (dis)pleasure of watching Redford pressure the provincial and municipal governments to get off the fence about their support/lack of support for the Enbridge Gateway project. Between Edmonton and Ottawa,  they’ll apply pressure to try to speed up the project, hook or by crook. BC is going to continue to be divisive, and the activists/environmentalists and aboriginal groups will grow more angry and militant. Watch Clark and her gum chomping minion continue to offer thinly-veiled, lukewarm public support for whatever the puppet masters tell her to do. - Tia

I think a PC majority government with a Wildrose opposition will start leaning pretty heavily on BC to make with the Gateway Pipeline, already. - Anna

Truth: it won’t. Spin: Christy Clark will  have to become, at once, both more liberal and more conservative to emulate Alison Redford’s Progressive Conservatives / Danielle Smith’s Wildrose Party. - Kevin

• May 8, 2011 -- The Landslide Election Victory That Isn’t (0)
• May 11, 2012 -- We Must Force the Politicians to Go Post-Carbon (0)
• September 14, 2011 -- CTV Spins the Daily Show for Tarsands and Farmed Fish (20)
• March 22, 2011 -- BC 2011 Municipal Election Twitter Hashtags (3)

Sometimes I think I’m a bit ahead of some curves. Starting in the late 1990s, I developed a “gay speech” that I would use in my suburban Vancouver high school English classrooms whenever students said something like, “that’s so gay,” like homework on the weekend or something. My speech consistent of a rhetorical monologue about whether by gay the student meant maybe Irish, Korean, tall, nearsighted, balding, or some other group identifier. The answer was always no, because all they meant was stupid, pathetic, annoying, etc.

Eventually word got out and students in each class would get the gay speech when someone opened it up. After a few semesters it became somewhat of a thing, but I was sure proud of the self-examination that came from it. One semester, however, a class when almost the whole semester without anyone slipping up. And even if the gay speech didn’t stop them all from thinking “that’s so gay” or saying it in other contexts, the least I could do was help create the most non-hostile classroom environment possible.

Years later the BCTF started a fantastic campaign to empower teachers to oppose the tendency of people to use gay as shorthand for something horrible. That made me very proud.

Now, the NHL has started a campaign to address the powerful homophobia that exists in sports, including the NHL. Apparently, you CAN play if you’re gay. That’s a good start. I’m not sure I need to spend any time establishing the context that being gay in a highly testosterone sport [or otherwise] is a troublesome thing for lots of bigots.

But it will take some time for the NHL to create an air of acceptance for homosexuals in more than the “typical” sports, to come out of the closet, but in the meantime, I want to affirm and encourage everyone one of you who encounters a bigoted or merely non-thinking homophobe when they spout off some ignorance. I know from teaching high school I firmly believe that the vast majority of “that’s so gay” comments came from people who simply hadn’t thought about the power of that phrase to contribute to horrible conditions some people are forced to endure in our society.

That’s why I’d like to encourage you all to step up and confront someone who spouts some homophobia just like we do when someone starts off an anecdote with, “I’m not a racist, but…” because we all know where that goes.

And below is what I encountered last night in the Twitter some time during the Canucks losing their last game of the year. Again. Sigh. And I just want to note the really sad attempt for Mark Kozak to appeal to this Superbad movie thing to explain something, like how since it was used in a move [in a homophobic way], that maybe he’s ok saying it too. And I also wanted to note that this t-shirt company he founded has shirts that say “Truth and Consequence,” which I actually find quite fitting to him outing himself as a homophobe. Maybe a consequence for that truth could be that you let him know in Twitter that you think calling people faggles is just not ok. And maybe you won’t buy his t-shirts.

• April 18, 2012 -- Boycott the National Headshot League (#NHL) (3)
• August 15, 2011 -- Rogers Cup Tennis Champions Sexism (4)
• May 14, 2011 -- The Positive Women’s Network Enriches Community Fabric (0)
• April 1, 2011 -- Boycott NHL Sponsors Until Team Owners Ban Head Shots (3)

So here’s a Canadian prison Shock Doctrine perfect storm:

1. The Conservatives [Reform Party] want to spend billions on new prisons because they believe prisons are good. I expect them to be privately run, for profit.
2. Prisons are over-crowded already so we need more, but ideally more that are effectively designed and operated. Don’t hold your breath. Dickens-era prison philosophy is in vogue among the radical right these days.
3. Then with a new crime bill designed to round up pot miscreants [and maybe debtor prisons next?], there will be an expected increased demand for prison space.
4. Then, for dessert, close a couple prisons to further aggravate the over-crowding and reduce the system’s capacity to lock up all the 420 pot enthusiasts who will be arrested in 364 days, and the Occupy movement.
5. Then, retire to the drawing room for port and cigars as…wait for it…we absolutely MUST build new prisons now.

So what can you do?

Follow the new official opposition Justice Critic, NDP’s Françoise Boivin in Twitter and on the web.

And, of course, #TellVicEverything. You can also email/phone him here to tell him what you think of their 19th century plan for prisons in Canada.

• No Related Posts