tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-44084152051009135492024-02-20T16:26:43.062-05:00the disgruntled democratExposing the cultural myths underlying our political economyBrian Gibbhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15361320319319431428noreply@blogger.comBlogger262125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4408415205100913549.post-24405563462458407052023-12-15T10:37:00.000-05:002023-12-15T10:37:54.618-05:00Hear the Call<p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiuF-y0zMFUKY6LinmAP_Lw8Tu_7uA8aCftxT2Vq8U0D5e7eJ1fpacFVU1_4n_feGP5YjDtGeONJV7NUFE9ODU6f_fOKCl_VzQviR_X58l-gut-6U805z_f89TvcV-KEfaxFD4Xb9Upv0EsoY0PSoyBt41yZeDpcbVJlw1KG0C2dmHJApSxhN9PfBiWFuc/s1024/Standing%20alone.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="1024" data-original-width="1024" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiuF-y0zMFUKY6LinmAP_Lw8Tu_7uA8aCftxT2Vq8U0D5e7eJ1fpacFVU1_4n_feGP5YjDtGeONJV7NUFE9ODU6f_fOKCl_VzQviR_X58l-gut-6U805z_f89TvcV-KEfaxFD4Xb9Upv0EsoY0PSoyBt41yZeDpcbVJlw1KG0C2dmHJApSxhN9PfBiWFuc/s320/Standing%20alone.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><br /> Have you ever stood alone in the wilderness, where the only
sounds that break the silence are the breathing of the forest or the distant
roar of the sea? Have you ever felt an unspoken kinship with the world around
you amidst the rustling of leaves or the crashing of waves - a sense of
belonging to a greater existence that thrives beyond the bustle of our busy
lives? Reflect for a moment on this connection, this intimate dance with
nature. Has it ever stirred within you a deeper calling, a quiet insistence
that the natural world is not just a backdrop to human activity, but a living,
breathing partner deserving of respect and care?<p></p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">This call recognizes that every creature, every plant, every
microorganism, and the ecosystems they inhabit possess an inherent worth,
irrespective of their utility to humans. It's a call that echoes the innate
value of life in all its diverse forms, challenging us to look beyond our
anthropocentric worldviews.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">It urges us to see past mere numbers and species lists, to
understand that biodiversity is not just a resource to be managed or conserved
for human benefit, but a complex tapestry woven from innumerable threads of
life, each significant in its own right. These myriad forms of life, with their
intricate interdependencies, craft the richness of the natural world, from the
vastness of the ocean's depths to the kingdom within a single droplet of dew.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">It asks us to embark on a quest for harmony—a desire to
reclaim our place as respectful participants in nature rather than as
domineering conquerors. It implores us to recalibrate the scales and to tread
gently upon this Earth, our shared home, to fundamentally shift our sense of
self and our values in favor of an ecological self, one that inherently
recognizes our interconnectedness with the living world. We are invited to
ponder the sacred essence of life itself.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Imagine the fulfillment that courses through us when we
plant a tree whose shade we know we may never sit under. This is the essence of
intrinsic action—it is doing right by nature for its own sake, nurturing a bond
with the Earth that goes beyond what can be measured or quantified. It's an
acknowledgment of a shared existence, intrinsic motivation that fosters a deep
sense of purpose and connection with all forms of life.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">This satisfaction is not just psychological—it's a profound
realization that our smallest gestures towards the earth echo our understanding
of its sacredness. The call urges us to defend and protect—it invites us to
feel the pulse of the living world in our veins, to hold it dear, and to act in
ways that affirm this fundamental truth of connectedness. Our intrinsic actions
become our silent oaths to the continuity of life, a solace to our spirits, and
a testament to the capacity for humanity to live harmoniously within the
greater ecological community. By embracing intrinsic action, we honor not only
the external ecosystems that sustain us but also the internal ecosystem that
is our conscience—a timeless, gratifying alignment with the heartbeat of the
world.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">To plant a garden that nurtures biodiversity, to choose a
lifestyle that treads lightly upon the earth, to engage in community action not
for accolade but for the sheer rightness of the act—these deeds forge a deeper
satisfaction, the kind that external rewards can never kindle.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Empathy, too, plays its part. When we gaze upon the natural
world not as a stranger, but as a family member, our actions are no longer just
decisions, but gestures of love and protection. This empathy extends beyond our
human kin and unto the furthest reaches of life—an acknowledgment that we are
all interwoven into this great, intricate web of existence.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">And then, there's moral responsibility: the cognizance that
our choices imprint upon the generations to come and the environments that
cradle them. To act in accordance with the call is to accept a guardianship
over the planet, a trusteeship solemn and profound. It is about living today
with the foresight of tomorrow's hindsight—choosing a legacy of stewardship and
respect over one of neglect and exploitation.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Motivation, when sparked by one's own value system and
empathetic connection to life, radiates a purpose so profound that it
transcends the mere act. It animates our spirits with an unbreakable resolve,
fortifying our journey through the oncoming storms of change with a courage
that is rooted, deep and true, in the very essence of what it means to be human.
It brings a peace that descends when our actions are in sync with a profound
respect for Earth’s myriad inhabitants; the happiness that bubbles up from living
a life of deliberate simplicity and purpose.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">The intrinsic reward of aligning with the call taps into
something ancient, a primal and undiluted joy. It's the profound sense of
'rightness' that fills us when picking up trash along a riverbank, restoring a
swatch of wetland, or whispering gratitude to the trees canopying above—a
gratitude for the air they gift, the life they support. This joy stems from
knowing that every small gesture is a verse in the grand ode to life, each one
a stitch in the healing of the world's ailing fabric.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">This spiritual dimension is not confined to traditional
religious contexts; rather, it is a universal thread, capturing an essence of
connectivity that binds us to the living tapestry. It's a daily communion with
the natural world, a meditation upon our shared breaths with all that grows and
glows, crawls and calls.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Listen then, to the symphony of those who have walked this
path, to the testimonies of transformation that shine like beacons. Envision
the man who built a sanctuary in his backyard, inviting butterflies and bees to
flourish, finding in their dance a mirror of his own renewed vibrancy. Consider
the woman who turned from consumer to conservator, who now delights in the art
of repurposing, in the sanctuary of sustainable living, and feels a richer
wealth for it.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Within these stories of alignment with the call, we uncover
a common thread – the realization that we are not just protectors of the
environment, but kin to it, woven from the same material, dancing to the same
rhythms. This alignment is where the cerebral melts into the spiritual, where
advocacy transforms into communion, and where action evolves into an
enlightened existence—a life cradled by a love so palpable for this planet that
each breath becomes an inhalation of joy, each step a signature of our deepest-held
convictions.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">To embrace the call is to tap into a vein of emotional and
spiritual fulfillment that runs deeper than any river, and as eternal as the
mountains—anchoring our ephemeral human experience within the enduring legacy
of the living Earth.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Yet, even the most steadfast can find themselves shadowed by
doubts and challenges. The colossal scale of climate change, with its vast and
complex problems, looms large, and the contribution of any single individual
can appear, at times, as a mere whisper against a storm. In this sobering
light, we must confront the daunting truth that the ark of environmental change
cannot be lifted by our hands alone.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">But let us remember that there is power, undeniable and
potent, in each environmentally conscious choice we make, in every seed of
sustainability we plant, irrespective of its immediate impact on the grand
tableau. In a world craving for change, the transformation of one life still
sends ripples through the collective consciousness, and these ripples have a
way of merging into waves.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">It is here, in the recognition of our own agency and the
potency of our personal narrative. Through individual acts of environmental
stewardship, we not only cultivate an ecologically harmonious lifestyle for
ourselves but also lay the paving stones for others to follow. In the quietude
of personal conviction, we discover that the smallest actions carry within them
the blueprint for a grander vision—a world where each gesture of respect for
the Earth nourishes the roots of global transformation.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Thus, while we acknowledge the critiques and the
complexities of championing a greener Earth, let us also reaffirm our belief in
the cascading impact of individual efforts. Each of us can strive toward an
existence that honors every facet of the planet we call home—asserting, through
the power of personal example, a profound truth: every step toward ecological
balance, no matter how solitary it may seem, is a solid stride toward a future
enriched with the fruits of harmony.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">The tapestry of life—a vibrant, pulsing thing—wraps the
globe in a silent plea for attentiveness and care, germinating the seeds of
individual change that can collectively breathe vitality back into the world's
wilted corners. It invites us to look inward, to consider the deep-seated
convictions that spur us into motion, and to cherish the intrinsic actions that
manifest them.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">In this spirit, let us heed the call to action—an invitation
to reflect upon our daily choices, our beliefs, and our silent promises to
future generations. Look upon your life as a canvas of possibility, each
brushstroke an opportunity to enact change through simplicity, through conservation,
and through a heartfelt alliance with the natural world. Let us rise above
disheartenment and instead, embrace the inherent power of our deeds, no matter
the scale.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">May we move forward with a resolve as resilient as the
ancient forests, as purifying as the mountain streams, and as boundless as the
skies above—empowered by the knowledge that in caring for the Earth, we are
truly caring for ourselves. In the delicate balance of the ecosystem, as in the
whispers of our own spirits, lies the affirmation that to live in harmony with
this planet is to touch the very essence of what it means to be alive.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><br /></p><ul style="margin-top: 0in;" type="disc">
</ul>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>Brian Gibbhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15361320319319431428noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4408415205100913549.post-7429006984900328312023-12-07T16:15:00.000-05:002023-12-07T16:15:10.237-05:00We Can't Get There From Here<p class="MsoNormal"></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjgRNItGMF_gguyOKEdBk26LZsuyWnbbIjQBvdb4A6P9IgeHHZycyOmxgF_KOt6UmTH8tYYsT6ws2xa3Gwgou7doUvfujXUun9RMdildxvjKSSrC0b62CwFmLUYjIfbPJpbVAXcOVtAHVld5rfd-vNdYPr9kznYD-MYxa0SnJZmDHlsAJu3aIFysbBchTM/s1024/We%20cannot%20get%20there%20from%20here.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="932" data-original-width="1024" height="291" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjgRNItGMF_gguyOKEdBk26LZsuyWnbbIjQBvdb4A6P9IgeHHZycyOmxgF_KOt6UmTH8tYYsT6ws2xa3Gwgou7doUvfujXUun9RMdildxvjKSSrC0b62CwFmLUYjIfbPJpbVAXcOVtAHVld5rfd-vNdYPr9kznYD-MYxa0SnJZmDHlsAJu3aIFysbBchTM/s320/We%20cannot%20get%20there%20from%20here.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><br />The thing about deciding to write a story set in the future
is what to make of the present and how it creates a trajectory of plausible
events, scenarios, and themes projected into the future. At the moment,
dystopian futures seem to be the most likely setting. This shouldn't come as a
surprise, given the gap between the promises made to reduce greenhouse gas
(GHG) emissions and the results achieved. Every year, representatives of the
world's nation-states gather to confirm that something must be done to stop the
planet from sliding towards global climate catastrophe, while emissions increase
every year.<o:p></o:p><p></p><p class="MsoNormal">In what has been hailed as a landmark agreement, 196 parties
at the UN Climate Change Conference (COP21) in December 2015 signed the Paris
Agreement, a legally binding international treaty on climate change that aims
to hold the increase in the global average temperature to well below 2 degrees
Celsius above pre-industrial levels and to pursue efforts to limit the
temperature increase to 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels. To
achieve this, GHG emissions must peak by 2025 at the latest and fall by 43% by
2030.<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal">That ain’t gonna happen. We can’t get there from here.<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal">According to the World Meteorological Organization, 2023
will already be the hottest year on record, with September 2023 being the
hottest September ever. The Copernicus Climate Change Service also reports that
on two days in November 2023, the global average temperature exceeded two
degrees above pre-industrial levels. Finally, ahead of COP 28 in Dubai, the
United Nations released a "chilling" report stating that the world is
heading for a temperature rise of around 3 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial
levels by the end of the century, even if countries fully implement their
Nationally Determined Contributions (NDCs) or action plans to reduce emissions
of planet-warming gases.<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal">Obviously, something is amiss. It’s as if the right hand
doesn’t know what the left is doing. Or maybe it does and doesn’t give a shit.
For example, the United States is on pace to extract a record 12.9 million
barrels of crude by the end of 2023, which is more than double what was
produced a decade ago.<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal">Here’s the thing. <o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal">We can’t get anywhere near the GHG emission targets as
stipulated in the Paris Agreement as long as we remain in the existing global
political economy. Following four hundred years of imperial conquest and the
war that was supposed to end all wars, the League of Nations was formed with
the aim of creating a peaceful global order. It failed to do so. Less than
thirty years after its birth, the world was plunged into an even greater
bloodbath, the Second World War. Out of the ruins, the United Nations took over
the mandate of the League of Nations and sought to become the center where
member nations could work together to solve international problems of an
economic, social, cultural, or humanitarian nature. As could be expected, it is
failing miserably in the fight against catastrophic climate change.<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal">The problem arises from the fact that the UN is a collection
of sovereign nation-states that retain the right to govern themselves without
external interference. As a result, the member nations can choose to simply
ignore whatever UN resolutions they feel impinge on their right to
self-determination, such as the USA’s desire to increase its oil and gas
production, regardless of what this means for the likelihood of meeting agreed
upon GHG emission targets. The same goes for the other major climate change
culprits, China and India.<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal">The crux of the problem is that the sovereign nation-state
is a historical anomaly, born on European soil and then transplanted to the
rest of the world with disastrous consequences. As an organizing principle, it
came into being in a world that no longer exists.<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal">Looking back, it's worth remembering that the rise of the
nation-state coincided with the expansion of corporate capitalism and imperial
conquest. This was because the return on investment was greatly enhanced by the
capture of natural resources, and then emerging markets on foreign soil. In other
words, corporations and nation-states co-evolved because they needed each other
to expand their reach, economic power, and profits. For example, the rise of
the British Empire was made possible by the unscrupulous practices of the East
India Company, imitated by the Dutch and the VOC (United East India Company),
and perfected by the Americans with their numerous corporate giants ranging
from Coca-Cola, General Motors, Exxon Mobil to Microsoft and Apple.<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal">Although in the eyes of the United Nations each member
nation remains sovereign, in the realpolitik of the 21st century, the power of
big money rules the nation-state. People elect their representatives, but big
money calls the shots. In this political economy, the role of government is
limited to providing the physical and social infrastructure that allows for
commerce, as measured by each nation’s GDP, to grow and to keep the locals
happy enough to continue working at their soul-sucking jobs that create
incredible wealth for those at the top.<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal">Indeed, when it comes to the power of big money to
accumulate capital, nation-states and their governments have become a
hindrance. So much so that huge corporations now register themselves in the
jurisdictions that have the lowest corporate taxes. Likewise, their
shareholders whisk their portions of the earned profits to offshore tax havens
located in the "nations"—in reality, former or current colonies, like
the Cayman Islands, Bermuda, and the British Virgin Islands—in order to take
advantage of the low or zero-income taxes, strict secrecy laws, and easy access
to global financial markets.<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal">In a sense, the legal fiction we call the corporation has
evolved to the point where it no longer needs its host, the nation-state, and
in the process has dragged its shareholders to live and function on a different
playing field from those parties limited to toiling away in the landlocked
nation. As a result, big money is free from the physical and social constraints
normally experienced by most people.<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal">Therein lies the problem. The global economy was built and
continues to grow on the basis of extracting and burning fossil fuels from
geographical locations located in spaces governed by nation-states in their
various forms: democratic (Norway), pseudo-democratic (Canada, USA, UK, and
Australia), family dynasties (Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar, United Arab
Emirates) and the despotic (Venezuela and Russia). However, the companies that
grew and prospered while protected by their national interests, British Petroleum,
Shell, and Exxon Mobil, have become cash cows for private investors living in
their havens, soon to be armed lifeboats, around the world.<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal">In short, climate change creates catastrophic weather
extremes that have the biggest impact on people living in land-locked nations
with no means of escape, but limiting the probability of their occurrence means
reducing the enormous wealth created by the global fossil fuel economy. Without
oil and gas, the global economy will collapse, and with it, the revenue streams
that flow to the richest .001% of the earth’s population.<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal">Let’s not kid ourselves. The ultra-rich are not going to
kill the goose that lays the golden eggs.<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal">Instead, they will organize media events like COP 28, a
global conference on fighting climate change, hosted by the oil-exporting
United Arab Emirates and presided over by Sultan Ahmed Al Jaber, who is
currently the chief executive officer of the Abu Dhabi National Oil Company, at
which the keynote speaker was King Charles, the hereditary monarch and head of
state of the UK, a nation that has recently approved yet another coal mine,
expanded oil and gas exploration in the North Sea, and delayed a ban on the
sale of fossil fuel-powered vehicles. WTF? It’s like hosting a Weight Watchers
meeting at an all-you-can-eat buffet where the guest speaker is the CEO of
McDonald’s.<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal">This does not bode well for the future.<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal">The other thing to bear in mind is that the power of big
money has an institutional lock on the way the world's political economy
operates. With the fall of the Berlin Wall and the so-called end of history,
there are no alternatives to the way life is organized on the planet,
notwithstanding the continued existence of indigenous communities in the
remaining isolated bio-diverse regions where, for one reason or another,
corporate invaders are not allowed to exploit the natural resources there.<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal">So, it looks like humanity, or at least most of it, is
royally fucked.<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal">As I sit down to start my next novel after Christmas, I can
only foresee a future setting in which the current global industrial consumer civilization
collapses, leaving behind a few scattered individuals trying to pick up the
pieces of what remains, while trying not to repeat the mistakes of the past.<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal">Inevitably, my audience will be dispersed in space and time.
Hopefully, my grandchildren will read the novel and say that Grandpa’s heart
was in the right place.<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p><p>
</p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>Brian Gibbhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15361320319319431428noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4408415205100913549.post-22114270155046543512023-11-28T07:59:00.002-05:002023-11-28T10:23:40.303-05:00Living On A Different Planet<p> </p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhSmC5iuYOPNyqyrqd1IfvhwrmtlGLeUk9FO0saW1P_33awLelM2rE_qFY7ngSeUEG9zEKQCMdolgdNrRa0xPm-cUizsEhzy6E32Q49TtIvblYT-c6uXiXH1bjtCIO6N6EolMddlJE7vPqLJFQ2drFBwsRFwmVfZ6n8TAS4JIgOUYjSd6kXTtRUfRfOhhw/s600/Different%20planet.webp" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="400" data-original-width="600" height="213" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhSmC5iuYOPNyqyrqd1IfvhwrmtlGLeUk9FO0saW1P_33awLelM2rE_qFY7ngSeUEG9zEKQCMdolgdNrRa0xPm-cUizsEhzy6E32Q49TtIvblYT-c6uXiXH1bjtCIO6N6EolMddlJE7vPqLJFQ2drFBwsRFwmVfZ6n8TAS4JIgOUYjSd6kXTtRUfRfOhhw/s320/Different%20planet.webp" width="320" /></a></div><br />Something is off. I can feel it, and I’m not the only one.<p></p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">There’s something fundamentally wrong. It’s not at the
periphery. It goes much deeper than that.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">It’s as if a huge crack has emerged at the foundation of Western
civilization, threatening to bring the whole thing crashing down.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">There are no quick fixes.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">It's about how we imagine reality and our place in it.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">The modern sense of reality has been long in the making and
has come to dominate the planet and all other ways of being on Earth. It was
born on European soil, took root in the minds of many, and guided the great
enterprise of imperial conquest, the slave trade, the rise of the nation-state,
the industrial revolution, a world at war, the great acceleration, the
information revolution, globalization, and climate change.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Some would have us believe in its narrative of progress: of
humans moving from dank caves, huddled around fires, to finally finding their
place among the stars. Others would invoke the myth of Icarus, the boy in Greek
mythology who soared high above the sea on wings of feathers and wax, but,
ignoring his father's warning, flew too close to the sun, which melted his
wings and sent him plummeting to his death.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Perhaps, reaching for the stars in itself is not an act of
hubris, but the way we have chosen to place ourselves above nature, separate,
almost god-like in the way we are changing life on the planet is, and we do so
at our peril.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Humanity is experiencing an ontological conflict: two groups
of the same species living on a different planet. On the one hand, we have
those who believe that a Judeo-Christian God gave humans dominion over the
earth and all the creatures in it, based on the idea that humans are superior
and possess a God-given right to control and exploit nature for their own
benefit, implying that humans are distinct, totally separate, with man being
the measure of all things. Later, with the rise of rationalism in the 17th and
18th centuries, nature became viewed as a machine, to be measured, analyzed,
and manipulated by humans. By the 21st century, this worldview has come to
dominate and direct what takes place on the planet.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">But the modern worldview, though dominant, has not
eliminated other ways of being in the world. There are those who do not believe
that humanity is above and separate from nature. On the contrary, they do not
share the anthropocentric belief that humans are the center of the universe,
entitled to disregard and devalue other forms of life and the ecosystems that
sustain them. Rather, as the keystone species on the planet, humans have a duty
of care to ensure that life, in all its myriad forms, thrives in the present
and for future generations.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">It is the presence or absence of this duty of care that
creates a fundamental conflict between those who subscribe to the modern
worldview and embrace a rapacious desire to extract as much wealth as possible
from the world's natural resources with a devil-may-care attitude toward the
consequences of their actions, and those who would impose limits on human
behavior in order to exercise humanity's collective responsibility to ensure
that life flourishes.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">It appears that, for now, the desire to be free of all
constraints and the belief in freedom’s guarantee of a better life, manifesting
in unencumbered individuals trading freely in free markets, has won the day.
Surprisingly, philosophic beliefs dating back to the Enlightenment, when there
were less than a billion people on the planet, have remained essentially
intact. Attempts to redirect a small portion of the extracted wealth to support
the ecosystems and the people who dwell in them are met with savage attacks
that seek to demean and denigrate anyone who dares to suggest that a
redistribution of this wealth is in order. So powerful are the voices and
interests that protect and advance the global industrial-consumer way of life
that nothing, including the dissenting opinions of the international scientific
community, will stop them from cranking up the global thermostat (now at 422
ppm of CO2 in the atmosphere), which will render many parts of the planet
inhospitable for both human and other-than-human life.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">It is as though we are held captive in a prison of our own
making while smoke and fire creep closer and closer, threatening to engulf the
inmates and those who keep the prison running. Clutching the keys to the gate,
the overseers are deaf and blind. Undeterred, they follow the orders on how to
create an ever-expanding global economy. Their rationality prevents them from
responding to the warning signs. They are like men made of tin, unable to feel
the suffering of others because they have no hearts and refuse to imagine how
things could be different.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">The algorithms of wealth extraction churn on, and as
expected, the biosphere, which supports all life, continues to degrade. <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">As I watch this sad spectacle unfold in slow motion, I
wonder if Daedalus ever lived to rue the day he attached the wings made from
wax and feathers upon his son. His neglect of his duty of care led to a tragic
result. Likewise, our collective neglect of our duty of care for future
generations is the stuff that tragedy is made from. <o:p></o:p></p>Brian Gibbhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15361320319319431428noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4408415205100913549.post-90311422178750730022023-11-20T10:44:00.000-05:002023-11-20T10:44:14.057-05:00What If We Are the Bad Guys?<p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjhjVUZZhgcnmvt2KXYXr4hSis45damVimE230MWy43wWETnOGYULpk2zu_NHTq3mnzTomOykwF9BPKohCoANAm_LxdaphaX56-3JD2VPGbrc87329lvZhlECbVKjptlziG_0vqMLy3gsqazkZnrjk89DkfC3sgLIHbyn4bYXGNuNUhesjwfJv2CBKXRP8/s300/Bad%20guy.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="168" data-original-width="300" height="168" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjhjVUZZhgcnmvt2KXYXr4hSis45damVimE230MWy43wWETnOGYULpk2zu_NHTq3mnzTomOykwF9BPKohCoANAm_LxdaphaX56-3JD2VPGbrc87329lvZhlECbVKjptlziG_0vqMLy3gsqazkZnrjk89DkfC3sgLIHbyn4bYXGNuNUhesjwfJv2CBKXRP8/s1600/Bad%20guy.jpg" width="300" /></a></div><br />I started watching the adaptation of Anthony Doerr's <i>All
the Light We Cannot See</i> on Netflix. I loved the novel and am enjoying the
series. One thing I've noticed is that it's pretty obvious who the bad guys
are. They wear Nazi uniforms and go around killing people.<p></p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">There is a young Nazi soldier who must be a good guy because
he refuses to reveal the location of the young blind girl who is now
broadcasting on a radio frequency he used to listen to as a child. When
confronted by a fellow soldier to reveal his secret, he responds by killing the
evil Nazi and disposing of his body.<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal">Nazis make great bad guys since there is little, if anything, they can do to redeem themselves in the eyes of the reader or viewer.
Eventually, however, time moves on, and we need to look for other bad guys who
come and go depending on the latest twist in the world of global politics.
Russians and Serbs seem to have caught on because of their nasty accents. Arab
terrorists also fit the bill, followed by Latin American drug dealers.<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal">But what if the bad guys cannot be identified with a
specific geographic location? What if the bad behavior is shared by billions of
people? What if readers figure out that they are the bad guys? Will they
keep reading?<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal">
</p><p class="MsoNormal">It’s easy to portray the good guys. Make them victims and
show them engaged in acts of kindness. Not so easy for the bad guys when the
gang includes almost everyone I know, including myself.<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal">I was born during the Great Acceleration. Houses were cheap.
Cars were cheap. Gas was cheap. And life was sweet if you happened to be a
white person living in North America. As I grew up, we were treated to what
seemed to be a never-ending series of new consumer products and upgrades to
existing ones.<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal">I'm old enough to have started watching broadcast programs
on a black-and-white television, then in color, to have the choices expanded
with the advent of cable and VCRs, and finally to have been replaced by
streamed programs distributed over the Internet.<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal">
</p><p class="MsoNormal">Although I have chosen not to own a car, I have been a
frequent flyer, taking advantage of cheap flights and visiting more than
twenty-five countries around the world. In other words, I have been part of the
problem, a member of the dinosaur-sized ecological footprint club.<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal">Imagine the following scene from an American movie. It's
Thanksgiving, a time of year when family members make the pilgrimage back to
their parents' house for the traditional meal. Except this year, the youngest
daughter has decided not to attend. She says she can't justify making a trip
that will spew more greenhouse gases into the atmosphere. The rest of the
family is appalled. How can she be so disrespectful to the sanctity of the
family? What's her problem? Is showing her East Coast friends how woke she is
more important than being with her family?<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal">
</p><p class="MsoNormal">I seriously doubt a scene like this would make it to the big
screen in movie theaters or the smaller screens scattered around the house. It
cuts to the quick. There is a problem most families avoid talking about. How is
our North American lifestyle contributing to the climate catastrophe now
underway? Instead, let's deny that a problem exists. Let's vilify someone so we
can all enjoy our gluttonous feast and give thanks that we're not sweltering in
50-degree heat nor ass-deep in floodwaters.<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal">Scenes like this raise doubts about what the hell is going
on. No doubt some viewers would interpret the scene as not supporting the
dubious claim that there is something wrong with the daughter, but that there
is something wrong with the family, something wrong with the way they live.<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal">But people don't want to feel guilty, so they're not
inclined to consume entertainment that evokes feelings of moral failure. Film
and fiction distributors don't readily support such artistic visions. There's
more money to be made in offering escape. Life is hard enough without being
reminded of what lies ahead. The band plays on while the women and children
scramble for the lifeboats.<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal">
</p><p class="MsoNormal">I wonder if we have entered a new epoch of artistic
expression. I remember studying Renaissance poetry, the Victorian novel, and
20th-century American literature at university. Perhaps my grandchildren will
be able to recognize the film and fiction of the early Anthropocene period.<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal"><br /></p><p class="MsoNormal"><br /></p><p class="MsoNormal"><br /></p><p class="MsoNormal"><br /></p><p class="MsoNormal"><br /></p><p class="MsoNormal"><br /></p><p class="MsoNormal"><br /></p><p class="MsoNormal"><br /></p><p class="MsoNormal"><br /></p><p class="MsoNormal"><br /></p>Brian Gibbhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15361320319319431428noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4408415205100913549.post-22337726271308644582023-11-17T09:20:00.000-05:002023-11-17T09:20:40.190-05:00Living and Writing in the Anthropocene <p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi-h77FeD_E8HoJx5OASnfNJpMbffU5kd1g68Lk26_5VAwT1QB5PL788pTAy1_jl1Ukxz-DVkS_ZHva1xMDyDRlVmiDbyFYFZ6cqtGyCubthvoCl5UA9plA7BkGK1MSkxzcoucdL2ScxIFQJwL1U34ytjFdiukuNqZyREhZccEC9_Ze2yHMHUy0RVBHuvY/s387/Logo.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="297" data-original-width="387" height="246" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi-h77FeD_E8HoJx5OASnfNJpMbffU5kd1g68Lk26_5VAwT1QB5PL788pTAy1_jl1Ukxz-DVkS_ZHva1xMDyDRlVmiDbyFYFZ6cqtGyCubthvoCl5UA9plA7BkGK1MSkxzcoucdL2ScxIFQJwL1U34ytjFdiukuNqZyREhZccEC9_Ze2yHMHUy0RVBHuvY/s320/Logo.png" width="320" /></a></div><br />I don't need to imagine a dystopian future. The Anthropocene
epoch is already here. Extreme weather events are happening right now where I
live in South America. Right now, there is a severe drought in the higher
altitudes of the Andes in Ecuador and Colombia, the Amazon basin, and it
extends further south into Paraguay, Bolivia, Argentina, and Uruguay, and north
into Panama, where the Panama Canal is drying up, causing a severe reduction in
the number of ships passing through the canal, and also in Mexico, particularly
Mexico City, where officials have begun to restrict water use as freshwater
reservoirs continue to shrink.<p></p><p class="MsoNormal">How does this affect me?<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal">The lack of rain has lowered the production of hydroelectric
power where I live, leaving the Ecuadorian government no choice but to impose
rolling blackouts throughout the country, which means that I am currently
without electricity for two hours in the early afternoon every day. <o:p></o:p></p><p>
</p><p class="MsoNormal">Fortunately, my laptop is charged, and I can use the time to
get back into a writing routine. For me, it's an inconvenience that I can
easily take advantage of. Others are not so lucky. For them, the loss of
electricity means a loss of income in a country where the average person earns
only $6000 USD per year.<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal">On the coast of Ecuador, we only have two seasons: the rainy
and the dry. At the end of the last rainy season, it took almost two extra
months for the savannah-like climate to return. A surplus of rain brought
floods to my city, turning the normally dry vegetation into vast swaths of
green.<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal">We were warned that the onset of El Niño, the cyclical
warming of the surface waters of the Pacific Ocean, now intensified by global
warming, could bring extreme weather conditions. Drought and its impact on
power generation were predicted. Fortunately, the early onset of heavy rains in
the Andes has brought some relief, but what worries us now is the possibility
of diluvial rainfall in the coming months, such as California received during
the winter of 2022-23.<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal">
</p><p class="MsoNormal">In fact, climatologists are warning that there is a good
chance that this year's <i>El Niño</i> could bring catastrophic flooding the
likes of which we haven't seen since 1998, when floods destroyed crops, roads, and bridges, caused landslides, soil erosion, and water contamination, and were
responsible for 300 deaths and the displacement of more than 30,000 people.<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal">Right now, the sea level is fifteen centimeters higher than
normal, and the water temperature is three degrees warmer than average along the
coast of Ecuador, which doesn't bode well for the immediate future. Reading
this in a report, I couldn't help but think of Hurricane Otis, which recently
devastated Acapulco, Mexico. In less than twelve hours, Otis went from a
tropical storm to a Category 5 hurricane, becoming the strongest storm on
record to hit the Pacific coast of Mexico, taking dozens of lives and causing
billions of dollars in damage.<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal">I have reason to be concerned. I have reason to feel a
twinge of eco-anxiety, but given the potential impact of <i>El Niño</i> on my
life here in Ecuador, I feel remarkably calm. I guess all those years of
watching news reports of catastrophic weather events in distant places have
numbed me to the possibility that I could become a victim of climate change. <o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal">Until it happens to you, it's someone else's problem. In
other words, if you don't realize that you're in harm's way, you'll just go on
living your life like everyone else around you.<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal">
</p><p class="MsoNormal">Ay, there’s the rub.<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal">Those of us fortunate enough to have been born in the global
North tend to take our collective comfort for granted, as if we had an
inalienable right to live our lives in the lap of luxury, the right to indulge
in the spoils of five hundred years of imperial conquest. However, as
historical climate patterns enter an unstable, perhaps chaotic phase, there is
no escape on the planet from the vagaries of the emerging hydrological cycle,
which swings wildly from one extreme to another, making once-in-a-century weather
events a regular occurrence. <o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal">At present, those with the most to lose are pinning their
hopes on the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) to
find a lasting solution to the most serious global threat since the deployment
of nuclear weapons during the Cold War. Despite annual meetings of the COP, the
UNFCCC's supreme decision-making body, no binding agreement has emerged to curb
the production and burning of fossil fuels. As a result, greenhouse gases
continue to accumulate in the atmosphere and global warming is accelerating.<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal">
</p><p class="MsoNormal">With no viable solution on the horizon, it appears that the
New Global Order has adopted the survival of the richest as its modus operandi,
both within and between nation-states. Nations in the global South are being
devastated by changing weather patterns due to the consumption patterns of
those in the North. Calls for financial aid to respond to the economic and
humanitarian disasters caused by extreme weather events are heard, but not
acted upon. Having already been stripped of much of their natural resources
during centuries of wealth extraction, first by Europeans and then by
Americans, the poor nations of the global South are ill-equipped to meet the
challenges of life in the Anthropocene.<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal">Similarly, the treatment previously reserved for the
colonized is now being applied to the population within the rich nations.
Inflated asset values are driving up the cost of living for those who must work
to live. In order to maintain a middle-class lifestyle, many are forced to
increase the number of hours they work as side hustles become pervasive. Those
"essential workers" who are unable to increase their income face the
unenviable choice of paying rent and utilities or buying food. Worse, as
affordable housing becomes scarce, the poor are forced to live out of their
cars and vans or on the streets. No wonder life expectancy in the U.S. is
declining, especially for people of color and those without college degrees.<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal">
</p><p class="MsoNormal">What the rentier and the salaried classes have in common is
an aversion to loss that prevents any meaningful reduction in the burning of
fossil fuels. For the rentier class, global economic growth, which is
predicated on fossil fuels, must continue in order to maintain the desired
return on investment and increase the accumulation of financial wealth. For the
salaried class, the transition away from fossil fuels can only be tolerated if
there is no loss of material comfort. Together, both classes conspire to keep
the industrial consumer civilization in place, allowing only marginal changes,
such as the addition of renewable energy sources to the ever-increasing fossil
fuel energy supply. Consequently, we see
a few electric vehicles on the road, a few solar panels on houses, and a few
wind turbines in the distance, times whose presence gives the false hope that
things are about to change, but in reality, there is little if any hope that
humanity can prevent catastrophic global warming from taking place.<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal">These are the in which we live. <o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal">As a writer, I feel the need to capture in a story my
experience of watching a civilization collapse. I don’t think a post-apocalyptic
tale will do. There is too much still in play, and future generations will want
to know:<o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: 36.0pt;">“What were you thinking?” <o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: 36.0pt;">“How could you turn this
beautiful planet into a living hell?” <o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: 36.0pt;">“For what?” <o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: 36.0pt;">“So, a few of you would never
have to work and could enjoy the finest things that money can buy?” <o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: 36.0pt;">“And you let them?” <o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: 36.0pt;">“Your crimes against the future
of humanity will never be forgotten.” <o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-indent: 36.0pt;">“May you find your just reward in
the afterlife. May you feel the pain of those whose lives you have destroyed.” <o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal">
</p><p class="MsoNormal">It's good to feel my creative juices flow again. To return
to the flow. <o:p></o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal"><br /></p><p class="MsoNormal"><br /></p><p class="MsoNormal"><br /></p><p class="MsoNormal"><br /></p><p class="MsoNormal"><br /></p><p class="MsoNormal"><br /></p><p class="MsoNormal"><br /></p><p class="MsoNormal"><br /></p><p class="MsoNormal"><br /></p><p class="MsoNormal"><br /></p><p class="MsoNormal"><br /></p><p class="MsoNormal"><br /></p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>Brian Gibbhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15361320319319431428noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4408415205100913549.post-982532124788980072023-11-02T13:28:00.001-04:002023-11-04T14:37:24.574-04:00The Lost Souls of Guayaquil<p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiHLKXAztH8r4nNXZM8WF5NR8nHOgP3UspCSkauzcz2KYW1gUNJn0jjr5-9JzvM2OZ2GcRJYAH1PN8QnjJ18GD117Oe8z1sYKY8BqpK7FewDqvlUPn0l2AH5cgQ6G2brUQrpXPqDwFvXF-_WSoyJdB-zP9qY3XfR6qUzaum9ZtgC_i3Vno8OGfFbwAyap4/s2700/thelostsoulsofguayaquil_6_ebook.jpeg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="2700" data-original-width="1800" height="580" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiHLKXAztH8r4nNXZM8WF5NR8nHOgP3UspCSkauzcz2KYW1gUNJn0jjr5-9JzvM2OZ2GcRJYAH1PN8QnjJ18GD117Oe8z1sYKY8BqpK7FewDqvlUPn0l2AH5cgQ6G2brUQrpXPqDwFvXF-_WSoyJdB-zP9qY3XfR6qUzaum9ZtgC_i3Vno8OGfFbwAyap4/w386-h580/thelostsoulsofguayaquil_6_ebook.jpeg" width="386" /></a></div><div><br /></div>Spectacularly creative and emotionally gripping. The Lost Souls of Guayaquil is an original and thought-provoking novel about life, death, and what defines us in between.<div><br /></div><div>This masterful piece of magic realism is intimately tied to class struggle, political violence, and social inequity. The straightforward narration is visceral, personal, and richly layered with cultural detail, bringing scenes and characters to believable life. The depth of detail depicting the spiritual and healing practices found in Ecuador is immersive and fascinating, while the author's intensely journalistic tone will leave jaws dropped with the sheer power of the prose.</div><div><br /></div><div>This surreal plunge into the past and beyond is difficult to put down -- or forget.<br /><div><span face=""Amazon Ember", Arial, sans-serif" style="background-color: white; color: #0f1111; font-size: 14px;"><br /></span></div><div style="text-align: center;"><span face=""Amazon Ember", Arial, sans-serif" style="background-color: white; color: #0f1111;"><span style="font-size: medium;"><a href="https://www.amazon.ca/Lost-Souls-Guayaquil-Brian-Gibb-ebook/dp/B0CL7WJ3Y2/ref=sr_1_1?crid=CWWWBGXW324&keywords=lost+souls+of+guayaquil&qid=1698945819&sprefix=%2Caps%2C132&sr=8-1">Order Here</a></span></span></div></div>Brian Gibbhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15361320319319431428noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4408415205100913549.post-53301776606676284122021-11-24T12:28:00.002-05:002023-07-23T14:20:06.802-04:00It's The End Of The World As We Know It<p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhmt3zLahMuovMskewCfzsy2YVxmh2luJN0QMbt8-JdJAX7ChSq-0R3gVoq9mEuvgIODk4rXmN7EN4U6lY-oOYVKNo6QjkGCSc80-NJxsaIJWtM-0fNcvo_TgiuhwQcBgSJxUl4h6l7gIQ/s1086/Merrit+bc.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="820" data-original-width="1086" height="242" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhmt3zLahMuovMskewCfzsy2YVxmh2luJN0QMbt8-JdJAX7ChSq-0R3gVoq9mEuvgIODk4rXmN7EN4U6lY-oOYVKNo6QjkGCSc80-NJxsaIJWtM-0fNcvo_TgiuhwQcBgSJxUl4h6l7gIQ/s320/Merrit+bc.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><br />First, there was the plague. In February 2020, the
Coronavirus pandemic seized the planet, disrupting normal life, and taking more
than five million lives and counting as it spread despite humanity’s best
efforts to limit its reach. Then, there was fire. In the summer of 2021, in
the paradisal setting of the Rocky Mountains in British Columbia, Canada, the temperature
rose to 49.6 degrees Celsius as a heat dome settled upon the Pacific Northwest.
The day after the record high was set, the village of Lytton burst into flames,
destroying more than 90% of the buildings in the village. Houses on the
adjacent Lytton First Nation reserves, home to the Nlaka’pamux people who have
resided on the territory for thousands of years, also burned to the ground.
Hundreds of people in the province died from heat-related illness; more than a
billion sea animals were cooked alive; and crops were destroyed – the cherries
were roasting on the trees Then came the floods. In November 2021, an atmospheric
river drenched the region that had just survived the summer wildfires. More
than a month’s rain fell during 24 hours, causing massive flooding, and forcing the
evacuation of the entire population of nearby Merrit, British Columbia, with approximately 8,000 residents. Vancouver, Canada’s largest port, was cut off
from the rest of the country; the principal roads and rail lines had been
washed away. <div><br /></div><div>Burned to the Ground: The Canadian village incinerated by record temperatures (watch video)</div><div><br /></div><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgpROnYfrTfCBvib-GUUj0VMqY31NKrHu-zrA_GXvcCbLcJsNshNkHmL8pq5wMzOd9YqPMdcIsHaUpJTDseFssO1Ikk3QKjl6TIpZUBisTQq0KCNi3euuP8u4CCknDZfcJSieU6gK51Gma9Cgd18lx8f1mP0LzfQ0bUGLsKiHEq4LOntNnr7qYt_L-BWjI/s1000/Burned%20to%20the%20Ground.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="563" data-original-width="1000" height="180" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgpROnYfrTfCBvib-GUUj0VMqY31NKrHu-zrA_GXvcCbLcJsNshNkHmL8pq5wMzOd9YqPMdcIsHaUpJTDseFssO1Ikk3QKjl6TIpZUBisTQq0KCNi3euuP8u4CCknDZfcJSieU6gK51Gma9Cgd18lx8f1mP0LzfQ0bUGLsKiHEq4LOntNnr7qYt_L-BWjI/s320/Burned%20to%20the%20Ground.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><br /><div><br /><div><br /></div><div><a href="https://www.theguardian.com/news/ng-interactive/2023/jun/08/burned-to-the-ground-the-canadian-village-incinerated-by-record-temperatures" target="_blank">https://www.theguardian.com/news/ng-interactive/2023/jun/08/burned-to-the-ground-the-canadian-village-incinerated-by-record-temperatures</a><br /><p></p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Suddenly, there were
thousands of climate change refugees looking for shelter. In a weird twist of
fate, a nearby Seventh Day Adventist Summer Camp and Conference Center, aptly
named Camp Hope, offered to take in some of Merrit’s refugees. In case you are
wondering, The Seventh Day Adventists are a Protestant denomination that
strongly believes in the sanctity of the Sabbath and the imminent second coming
of Jesus, in other words, a doctrine that incorporates a strong belief in the end
of days as spelled out in the bible. A few weeks earlier, Camp Hope had taken
in refugees from the Lytton First Nation reserves. As a result, Camp Hope became
the meeting place for displaced people from both Indigenous communities and the
descendants of the European settlers who made their way onto what had been
exclusively Indigenous land. <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">You have to think at some point in time, there would be an
exchange, some type of communication between these two forsaken groups. I would
love to have been there. A clash of civilizations. Competing narratives trying
to make sense of what had just happened. I imagine someone from the Nlaka’pamux
band lashing out at one of the beleaguered, white residents from Merrit, saying
something to the effect, “Look at us. We tried to warn you. But you wouldn’t
listen.” And a Seventh-Day Adventist handing them both a pamphlet explaining
how these types of natural catastrophes are a warning of the second coming.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Personally, I don’t think it’s necessary to cite scripture
to understand what’s happening, although the idea of the apocalypse certainly
appears to be in play. Instead, we can look to science to give us an
explanatory narrative, which unfortunately might be even more frightening than
end-of-days scenarios we have previously known.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">In short, we have left the Holocene geological epoch, the
period of time after the last ice age in which the planet’s climate warmed and
remained stable for approximately 10,000 years, giving rise to human
civilization. Some time ago, we entered into the Anthropocene epoch, the period
of time in which human activity started to have a significant impact on the
planet's climate and ecosystems. That of course came about with the invention
of the steam engine, giving birth to the Industrial Age and the corelating burning
of fossil fuels to propel the economic expansion. <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">With the increase of CO2 released into the atmosphere due to
the burning of coal, oil, and gas, scientists correctly predicted that this
would have an effect on the environment: higher concentrations of CO2 in the
atmosphere would increase its greenhouse effect, eventually leading to global
warming. The particulars, how much and how fast, have been the subject of intense
debate, but the underlying principles to why the planet could expect global
climate change if we continued to indiscriminately dump trillions of tons of
CO2 into the atmosphere were sound. <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Some scientists label the 1950s as the point in time in
which the Great Acceleration occurs, a period of time in which the consumption
of material goods begins to skyrocket worldwide as the planet’s inhabitants yearn
and aspire to North American levels of consumption. In 1958, the concentration
of CO2 in the atmosphere was approximately 310 parts per million (ppm). Today
(Nov. 17, 2021), the concentration was measured at 414 ppm, an increase of a
mind-boggling 33% in only sixty short years, a blink of an eye in geological
time.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">As could be expected, the planet has warmed up since the
dawn of the industrial age, approximately 1.2 degrees Celsius and that has
already brought on cataclysmic climate change: glaciers in retreat, polar ice
caps melting, extended periods of severe drought, unprecedented wildfires in
North America, Europe, and Australia, increased atmospheric disturbances, grasslands
turning into desserts, and ocean acidification leading to the death of coral
reefs, to mention a few.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">It’s not as if the leaders of the countries in the Global
North had not been forewarned. As early as 1957, scientists in the United
States sensed the potential scale of the problem that global warming presented –
human beings are now carrying out a large-scale geophysical experiment of a
kind that could not have happened in the past nor be reproduced in the future –
and decided to build a site to measure atmospheric carbon dioxide near the
summit of Mauna Loa on the Big Island of Hawaii, 11,500 feet above sea level.
For ten years, they collected data, and Presidents were informed of the
potential risks of global warming. Finally, in 1979, at the request of
President Jimmy Carter and the National Academy of the Sciences, the Climate
Research Board was convened to assess the future climatic changes resulting from
man-made releases of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. The Board reached a
stark conclusion in its report: <i>Carbon Dioxide and Climate: A Scientific
Assessment</i>. The Assessment predicts that based on current rates of CO2
emissions (emission rates have increased significantly since the publication of
the report) the global surface of the earth will warm 2 to 3.5 degrees Celsius,
more so at higher latitudes, sometime during the twenty-first century. <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">During the 1980s, the Americans and the rest of the world
dithered when it came to reducing CO2 emissions. Instead, attention was focused
on the problem of atmospheric pollution caused by the release of chlorofluorocarbons
(CFCs) normally emitted by refrigeration, solvents, and aerosol sprays that
were reducing the level of ozone in the atmosphere (remember the hole in the
ozone layer), thereby allowing a dangerous level of ultraviolet light to reach
the earth, potentially causing unprecedented levels to skin cancer to appear.
Here was a problem that was much easier to fix. To their credit,
representatives from around the world were able to negotiate an agreement, the
Montreal Protocol, to reduce the use of CFCs, and the threat to human health
was successfully mitigated. Yet, such an agreement, although showing that international
cooperation to solve a global environmental problem was possible, did nothing
to abate the increasing extraction and burning of fossil fuels globally.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">There was a ray of hope in 1988 when NASA climate scientist,
Jim Hansen, appeared before a Senate Committee and reported that there was undeniable
evidence establishing the link between an increase in global surface
temperatures and the greenhouse effect. The signal had emerged from the noise
and the world took notice. That same year the United Nations established the
International Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) which was tasked to periodically
provide reports concerning climate change, drawing upon the peer-reviewed
scientific research papers from around the world. A few years later (1995) the
United Nations sponsored the first annual global conference about climate
change held in Berlin. Some twenty years later, it appeared that some progress
had been made at the level of discussions: during the 2015 conference in Paris,
an agreement was struck to provide a global framework to avoid dangerous
climate change by limiting global warming to below 2 degrees Celsius while
pursuing efforts to limit the warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius. In some people’s
minds, the Paris Agreement represented a potential pathway to avoid
catastrophic climate change. A glimmer of hope – perhaps, but in reality,
despite all the talk, more CO2 was being dumped into the atmosphere than ever
before.</p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Looking at the data compiled and presented by Barry
Saxifrage in the following charts concerning the consumption of oil, gas, and
coal, it is clear that the global burning of fossil fuels has actually increased
dramatically since 1990. <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi59OPQv6rxt2S929pVNZXMCh4DMlDi418nqnZmIR4SKaFnhvR1sOOrXTN7rvwEGp_rrLm0nZxh8xNXYfJ1BdVU23805VmFwJOxiNOwelfhtzwaLeinEQcEM0A21CP9zpMD21y_fu0IRJc/s511/bp-global-fossil-burn-cops.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="511" data-original-width="350" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEi59OPQv6rxt2S929pVNZXMCh4DMlDi418nqnZmIR4SKaFnhvR1sOOrXTN7rvwEGp_rrLm0nZxh8xNXYfJ1BdVU23805VmFwJOxiNOwelfhtzwaLeinEQcEM0A21CP9zpMD21y_fu0IRJc/s320/bp-global-fossil-burn-cops.jpg" width="219" /></a></div><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>As measured by the metric, tonne of oil equivalent (toe), a
metric used to compare different sources of energy (a Mtoe is a million toe and
a Gtoe is a billion toe), the level of consumption of all fossil fuels combined
rose from <b>7.1</b> Gtoe in 1990 to <b>11.7</b> Gtoe in 2018, a staggering
increase of 65%. As could be expected, the acceleration of the global fossil
fuel burn would show up in the CO2 atmospheric measurements at the Mauna Loa
observatory: from 1990 to 1999 the annual mean of atmospheric CO2
concentrations increased <b>1.50</b> parts per million (ppm) per year; from 2000
to 2009 the annual mean increased <b>1.97</b> ppm per year; and from 2010 to
2018 the annual mean increased <b>2.40</b> ppm per year. This acceleration
should be more than a cause for concern because the trend raises the specter of catastrophic climate change.<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal">Looking at the global fossil fuel burn from a longer
historical perspective, we discover that more than 80% of the CO2 emissions dumped
into the atmosphere occurred after the Great Acceleration in the 1950s, and
more than 50% since 1990 when the threat of global warming had become well
known in the political corridors around the world.</p><p class="MsoNormal"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjnBWjL9naZv5MP1PYUvEAKKRG-YYGL_WlkmSlnxFdwO0GcmnFiss7cUuxuTRh4JFNVEJ63Epwvl2DtyxT5DmKKUBhYDPyT9YFkJfrhjkel_rCg-KARnv6MYdDa1cHmaNk6eWjWG2pUZX8/s700/global-fossil-burn-since-1751.jpg" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em; text-align: center;"><img border="0" data-original-height="280" data-original-width="700" height="128" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjnBWjL9naZv5MP1PYUvEAKKRG-YYGL_WlkmSlnxFdwO0GcmnFiss7cUuxuTRh4JFNVEJ63Epwvl2DtyxT5DmKKUBhYDPyT9YFkJfrhjkel_rCg-KARnv6MYdDa1cHmaNk6eWjWG2pUZX8/s320/global-fossil-burn-since-1751.jpg" width="320" /></a></p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">No wonder the youth of today look at the UN-sponsored
conferences on global change with cynicism. In their eyes, the world’s
politicians have been co-opted by the multinational fossil fuel corporations,
and both are engaged in a concerted effort to greenwash the future, which will
certainly be bleak for future generations if the present trends continue. <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">For example, the latest global conference held in Glasgow in
2021, COP26, confirmed that such meetings were, in the words of the world-renown,
young activist, Greta Thunberg, little more than “blah, blah, blah.” <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">And she’s right.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">The take-a-ways from COP26 included more hollow pledges
committing governments to future actions that have no compliance measures to
ensure that the reductions in the burning of fossil fuels will be met; a
laughable recognition that the burning of fossil fuels is linked to climate
change; and the failure to put into words the commitment to “phase out”, not “phase
down” the burning of coal.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">What is more telling are the actions undertaken by the
governments of the world leaders who try to pass themselves off as climate
change warriors. In the case of Canada’s Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, his
government bought the Trans Mountain pipeline so to continue with its
construction it would triple the amount of tar sand oil, one of the most
destructive carbon-intensive and toxic fuels on the planet, to be exported from
Alberta. The pipeline runs across British Columbia, a province that has just
been hit with two climate change catastrophes in less than six months. In a
similar vein, the French President, Emmanuel Macron, has lent his support to
the building of the East Africa Crude Oil Pipeline, slated to be the longest in
the world, bringing even more oil to global markets, in order to increase France’s
economic presence in the region. Finally, the American President, Joe Biden,
proud of the green energy proposals in his Build Back Better plan recently
signed into law, failed to halt the approvals for companies to drill for oil
and gas on U.S. public lands – more than 2000 permits were approved during his
first six months in office – and his administration opened up more than 80
million acres in the Gulf of Mexico to auction for oil and gas drilling only
four days after the close of COP 26 in Glasgow, a lease sale that has the
potential to emit more than 500 million metric tons of greenhouse gas emissions
into the atmosphere.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Here’s the thing. It doesn’t matter how many new clean
energy resources we develop to fuel our vehicles, heat our homes, and light our
buildings as long as we continue to dump CO2 into the atmosphere. Adding new
CO2 at the present rate increases the greenhouse effect and, as a result, increases
global warming, regardless of how much of our energy needs are met by renewable
resources. <o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">As the following chart demonstrates, the growth in the available
amount of clean energy is woefully insufficient to match our energy needs as
compared to the global fossil fuel burn.<o:p></o:p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh1AGIHtHpOg7HzXnICPoV0GhLo0oFlmT-5atCGZzapyVZd_wfJAOZ57zWiCRUDJ-riXPwNN49rlzQB_GmjGZPJUHj263FO2ZQh830AuUE1n7bN8CYoCayP53B93hzsbRR2Zn_QkMZsL8I/s511/bp-global-energy.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="511" data-original-width="350" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh1AGIHtHpOg7HzXnICPoV0GhLo0oFlmT-5atCGZzapyVZd_wfJAOZ57zWiCRUDJ-riXPwNN49rlzQB_GmjGZPJUHj263FO2ZQh830AuUE1n7bN8CYoCayP53B93hzsbRR2Zn_QkMZsL8I/s320/bp-global-energy.jpg" width="219" /></a><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh1AGIHtHpOg7HzXnICPoV0GhLo0oFlmT-5atCGZzapyVZd_wfJAOZ57zWiCRUDJ-riXPwNN49rlzQB_GmjGZPJUHj263FO2ZQh830AuUE1n7bN8CYoCayP53B93hzsbRR2Zn_QkMZsL8I/s511/bp-global-energy.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><span style="text-align: left;"><br /></span></a><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh1AGIHtHpOg7HzXnICPoV0GhLo0oFlmT-5atCGZzapyVZd_wfJAOZ57zWiCRUDJ-riXPwNN49rlzQB_GmjGZPJUHj263FO2ZQh830AuUE1n7bN8CYoCayP53B93hzsbRR2Zn_QkMZsL8I/s511/bp-global-energy.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><span style="text-align: left;"><br /></span></a><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh1AGIHtHpOg7HzXnICPoV0GhLo0oFlmT-5atCGZzapyVZd_wfJAOZ57zWiCRUDJ-riXPwNN49rlzQB_GmjGZPJUHj263FO2ZQh830AuUE1n7bN8CYoCayP53B93hzsbRR2Zn_QkMZsL8I/s511/bp-global-energy.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><span style="text-align: left;"><br /></span></a><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh1AGIHtHpOg7HzXnICPoV0GhLo0oFlmT-5atCGZzapyVZd_wfJAOZ57zWiCRUDJ-riXPwNN49rlzQB_GmjGZPJUHj263FO2ZQh830AuUE1n7bN8CYoCayP53B93hzsbRR2Zn_QkMZsL8I/s511/bp-global-energy.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><span style="text-align: left;"><br /></span></a><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh1AGIHtHpOg7HzXnICPoV0GhLo0oFlmT-5atCGZzapyVZd_wfJAOZ57zWiCRUDJ-riXPwNN49rlzQB_GmjGZPJUHj263FO2ZQh830AuUE1n7bN8CYoCayP53B93hzsbRR2Zn_QkMZsL8I/s511/bp-global-energy.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><span style="text-align: left;"><br /></span></a><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh1AGIHtHpOg7HzXnICPoV0GhLo0oFlmT-5atCGZzapyVZd_wfJAOZ57zWiCRUDJ-riXPwNN49rlzQB_GmjGZPJUHj263FO2ZQh830AuUE1n7bN8CYoCayP53B93hzsbRR2Zn_QkMZsL8I/s511/bp-global-energy.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><span style="text-align: left;"><br /></span></a></div><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p>As Saxifrage’s chart shows, the energy obtained from renewables
and nuclear power did increase significantly from 1990 to 2018, from <b>1.0</b>
Gtoe to <b>2.1</b> Gtoe, an increase of <b>1.1</b> Gtoe. However, the energy
obtained from burning fossil fuels in absolute terms increased from <b>7.1</b>
Gtoe to <b>11.7</b> Gtoe, an increase of <b>4.6</b> Gtoe. Thus, the increase in
energy obtained from the burning of fossil fuels was four times greater than
the increase in energy obtained from renewables and nuclear power. Moreover,
the gap between the two categories of energy use has risen from <b>6.1</b> Gtoe
in 1990 to <b>9.6</b> Gtoe in 2018. This is cause for concern since the global
demand for energy is returning to pre-pandemic levels, thereby re-establishing
the historic trend of the use of energy from burning fossil fuels far
outstripping the use of energy from other sources. </o:p></p><p class="MsoNormal"><br /></p><p class="MsoNormal"><br /></p><p class="MsoNormal"><br /></p><p class="MsoNormal">According to Saxifrage, “it is just another form of climate
denial to expect clean energy to force fossil fuel burning to fall — let alone
fall all the way down to zero as required to avoid a climate crisis.” I agree.
It is also another form of climate denial to expect carbon sequestration
technology or geoengineering interventions to counteract potential catastrophic
climate change without severely reducing the global fossil fuel burn.</p><p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">So, either we eliminate the use of energy obtained from burning
fossil fuels – an extremely disruptive change, requiring fundamental changes to
the way we lead our lives and organize our societies – or we continue along our
present collective path, leading us to the possible extinction of the human
species as the planet’s atmosphere morphs into one that no longer supports
human life.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Such a scenario makes me think about the pamphlets the Seventh
Day Adventists were handing out to the climate change refugees in Camp Hope,
British Columbia. If I could rewrite the story in the pamphlet, I would say
that we were all born into something like the Garden of Eden, but we were not
cast out. On the contrary, those of us lucky to find ourselves in paradise
never learned when enough is enough, and we let our desire to have more and
more get the better of us, and we chose to ignore the warning signs that we
were destroying the garden. Moreover, we decided to build a wall around a
portion of the garden and began to transfer the wealth from outside the walls
inside, leaving the people who lived outside of the walls to live on the
impoverished soil. Those living inside the fortress blamed the poorer people
for their plight, saying that they deserved their misfortune because the
outcasts were liars, and cheaters, and refused to help themselves.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">I would also change the part that deals with the apocalypse.
In the biblical version, as prophesized in the Book of Revelation, the apocalypse
depicts the complete destruction of the world preceding the establishment of a
new world and heaven. In my version, the destruction of human civilization is
not a prelude to a better life. Rather, the massive die-off of humans is simply
a stage in the evolution of the planet: the dominant species on the planet
became too numerous and greedily devoured as much of the planet’s natural
resources as it could, destroying the habitat that made its life possible on
earth, and putting into play planetary forces out of their control that over
time brings about the extinction of the species. Humans may be warm-blooded and
capable of performing advanced cognitive feats, like putting a man on the moon,
harnessing the tremendous energy contained within a single atom, or writing a
symphony that elicits tears of joy, but when it comes to our collective
intelligence, we are like the dinosaurs that used to be the dominant species
and met their demise as a result of climate change.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">The other thing that calls into question our collective
intelligence is that unlike the biblical version, where the coming of the end
of days is revealed, and the hidden information about God, the real nature of
our lives and the spiritual world is made known, humanity knows very well what will
bring about its demise, but chooses to do little or nothing to change the path it’s
on.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">The scientific evidence available to all doesn’t lie. The
message is clear: stop extracting and burning fossil fuels!<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Yet, we continue on this path as if there were no tomorrow. Consequently,
I feel like I am a character in a science fiction film in which humanity learns
that there is an asteroid hurtling toward the earth and will destroy the planet
upon impact. However, in this movie, there are no heroes that save the day. As
well, the cascade of natural disasters unfolds in what appears to be slow
motion. This movie doesn’t last two hours; it runs for decades, perhaps for
centuries, slowly grinding towards its inevitable conclusion: the end of the
world as we know it. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span><o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p><br /></div></div>Brian Gibbhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15361320319319431428noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4408415205100913549.post-88365026841668905312021-11-01T12:44:00.002-04:002021-11-01T13:16:24.228-04:00Will Canada Ever Get Woke ?<p><span style="font-family: arial; font-size: medium;"></span></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: arial; font-size: medium;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgjOXcVZaKAZZGrI_fLJStF1GRJCfg1CBdceIWtauofbPUUNqUAR9hsCJFnLywaOt3w4xMz2bGRhb5Iie2dIf-rYYu7O9QgRYBukfeVi2Vw4evoiThhYjx_RO5JJQa53e8EnPIkG6SxPC8/s640/Woke+canada.jpg" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="480" data-original-width="640" height="240" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgjOXcVZaKAZZGrI_fLJStF1GRJCfg1CBdceIWtauofbPUUNqUAR9hsCJFnLywaOt3w4xMz2bGRhb5Iie2dIf-rYYu7O9QgRYBukfeVi2Vw4evoiThhYjx_RO5JJQa53e8EnPIkG6SxPC8/s320/Woke+canada.jpg" width="320" /></a></span></div><span style="font-family: arial; font-size: medium;"><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 115%; margin-bottom: 6pt;">Maybe, but not
in my lifetime. Canada’s colonial mentality, although showing its age, has
brought so much wealth to those who adhere to its cultural imperatives that
this mentality is not going to be tossed aside anytime soon. </p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 115%; margin-bottom: 6pt;">To be Canadian is
to be trapped in a historical narrative of conquest, arriving from British soil,
not unlike the Spanish, French, and Portuguese forays into the Americas, that
has as its <i>raison d’être</i> the never-ending extraction of wealth from the
land and its people.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 115%; margin-bottom: 6pt;"><o:p></o:p></p>Recently,
however, Canadians have discovered that something is amiss among the
fundamental ideas of colonial expansion. For one, before declaring that the new
colony was terra nullius, an empty land devoid of inhabitants, ready to be colonized
by European settlers, it should have been recognized that the Indigenous people
living in the coveted territory had rights to the land that predated the
arrival of the settlers. In a symbolic gesture, the act of signing of treaties
with the indigenous peoples recognized their rights to the land, but in the
realpolitik of the day, the treaties were empty gestures, never to be respected,
never to impede in any meaningful way the land grab that was about to take
place.</span><div><span style="font-family: arial; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></div><div><span style="font-family: arial; font-size: medium;">Essentially our
Fathers of Confederation faced a problem: how to build a nation on stolen land?
The answer: first round up the undesirables, take their ancestral lands, and relocate
them on reserves of impoverished territory that cannot support their
traditional way of life, in other words, genocide by administrative decree.</span><p></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 115%; margin-bottom: 6pt;"><span style="font-family: arial; font-size: medium;"><o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 115%; margin-bottom: 6pt;"><span style="font-family: arial; font-size: medium;">Although
partially successful, placing indigenous peoples on reserves did not solve the
problem. Too many of them hung on to their lives and their traditions. Since
the military solution of entering into the reserves and slaughtering the
“natives” was a non-starter, the Canadian Government of the day, led by Prime
Minister Sir John A. Macdonald, who was also Minister of Indian Affairs,
decided instead to create the Indian Residential schools with the goal of
assimilating Indigenous children and adolescents into what was the, for the
most part, European culture -- in the words of Sir John, “take the Indian out
of the child.”<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 115%; margin-bottom: 6pt;"></p><p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 115%; margin-bottom: 6pt;"><span style="font-family: arial; font-size: medium;">In creating the
Residential schools, the Canadian Government removed by consent or by force
tens of thousands of Indigenous children from their homes, some as young as two
or four years of age; attempted to deprive these children of any connections
with their parents; underfunded and willfully neglected the educational system so
thousands of students perished from malnutrition, poor medical care, and
disease; created a system where child labor was a norm and where academic
achievements were severely compromised; and failed to provide oversight and
accountability, which led to rampant physical and sexual abuse of the children.
More than 150,000 Indigenous children were taken from their families and forced
to attend the schools during the 19th and 20th centuries. An estimated 6,000
children died while attending these schools.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 115%; margin-bottom: 6pt;"><span style="font-family: arial; font-size: medium;">Eventually,
Canadians learned about their horrible fate. Much of it was documented in the
report tabled by the Truth and Reconciliation Commission in 2015. Years later, the
memories of the cultural genocide resurfaced in 2021 when thousands of unmarked
graves containing the bodies of indigenous children who were living in the
residential schools were discovered. The nation was reminded of its shameful
past.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 115%; margin-bottom: 6pt;"><span style="font-family: arial; font-size: medium;">Yet, looking at
how Canadians reacted to the newly discovered graves suggests that something
had changed in the national zeitgeist. The traditional boisterous festivities
to celebrate Canada Day were muted, partially by the COVID pandemic, more so by
the somber realization that the nation had been founded on a fundamental injustice
towards Canada’s Indigenous peoples. Many Canadians decided to forego donning
the nation’s colors of red and white, and chose instead to wear orange in
recognition of the crimes committed against the innocent children who had been
identified as being part of the “Indian problem.” Many municipalities decided
to cancel Canada Day events, but in Winnipeg, the capital of Manitoba, the
anger boiled over: protesters threw red paint on the statue of Queen Victoria
in front of the provincial legislature, the monarch who had come to symbolize
the rise of the British Empire, and then <a href="https://twitter.com/i/status/1410753619431919618">toppled her statue</a>,
as well as statue of Queen Elizabeth, Britain’s reigning monarch and Canada’s present
head of state.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 115%; margin-bottom: 6pt;"><span style="font-family: arial; font-size: medium;">In my
recollection, this was a first in Canadian history. Never before have we seen
such a public desecration of the symbols of empire. After all, Canada had been initially
settled by British loyalists. No matter. The collective shame of having the nation
founded on the colonial desire to expand the empire, killing innocent children
in the process, was too much to bear. It was as if Canadians had finally
realized that their colonial past was not something to be celebrated. They were
awoken by a painful remembrance of the past that affected the way they felt
about the present. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 115%; margin-bottom: 6pt;"><span style="font-family: arial; font-size: medium;">But what about
the future? Are Canadians ready to continue to explore the consequences and
possible remedies of the imperial project that gave birth to the nation: the European
quest to plunder the planet at the expense of the rest of the world’s
inhabitants, a project that continues today no longer under the flags of the respective
mother or father lands, but under the logos of the multinational corporations who
run the world and the financiers who try their best not to attract any
attention to themselves or the hoard of wealth they have stashed away in
offshore tax havens?<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 115%; margin-bottom: 6pt;"><span style="font-family: arial; font-size: medium;">The stakes are
high. The health of the planet is in peril, as is the well-being of future
generations of Canadians. The economic model we have come to know after the end
of the Second World War, heavily dependent on the extraction and exportation of
non-renewable resources, is no longer sustainable. Likewise, for our current
levels of consumption. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 115%; margin-bottom: 6pt;"><span style="font-family: arial; font-size: medium;">We have a stark
choice before us. Either we abandon our obsession of trying to perpetually grow
the economy and realize that there are limits to growth, in particular how much
carbon dioxide we dump into the atmosphere, or we will face the unintended
consequences of our collective actions, an inhospitable planet.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 115%; margin-bottom: 6pt;"><span style="font-family: arial; font-size: medium;"><span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span>We can no longer hide behind the veil of willful
ignorance.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 115%; margin-bottom: 6pt;"><span style="font-family: arial; font-size: medium;">Making the necessary
changes will not be easy. It requires a deep structural change to the way we
have been taught to lead our lives. The practice of making our collective
decisions based on what is best for economic growth has been incredibly
successful in creating wealth, with the exception, of course, of Canada’s
indigenous peoples, who were never really considered to be part of the plan to
raise the material well-being of the population.<o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 115%; margin-bottom: 6pt;"><span style="font-family: arial; font-size: medium;">Considering
that my grandparents, who lived through the Great Depression, had difficulty putting
enough food on the table and to clothe their children properly, I understand
how Canadians have benefited enormously from the economic imperialism first
foisted upon us by the British and then continued by our desire to imitate the
lifestyles of our rich, white, American cousins. <o:p></o:p></span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 115%; margin-bottom: 6pt;"><span style="font-family: arial; font-size: medium;">Our attachment
to the modus operandi of perpetual wealth accumulation is our collective sacred
flaw. We can talk about many things, but the one thing we are unable to do is
sustain a discussion about how our lifestyles are no longer sustainable given the
consequences of climate change. We need to wake up and smell the coffee. All of
us, not just Canadians, need to reduce our consumption: less movement on the
ground, less air travel, less construction, less plastic, less meat. Moreover,
in the political realm we must stop using public funds to subsidize the fossil
fuel industry, and we need to raise taxes on corporate profits and the transfer
of funds between generations in order to pay for the required structural changes
within Canada and to help defray the costs of transitioning away from fossil
fuels in the developing world. There is no way around it. There are no
technological fixes on the horizon. The longer we delay, the worse the
situation will get. We need to act now. <span style="mso-spacerun: yes;"> </span></span><o:p></o:p></p><span style="font-family: arial;"></span><p></p></div>Brian Gibbhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15361320319319431428noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4408415205100913549.post-72629905316165602832021-09-12T20:29:00.000-04:002021-09-12T20:29:02.735-04:00Here's A Scary Thought: Let's Keep Fossil Fuels In The Ground<p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><br /></div><p></p><p></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEisfIgVzlWjxROTyovrluk2XF9MPqoMG-CRm9VggCGHbL3LKZQiZnBXx1gr2osrnRkdiVLvKdSnDpaB-tvKNafl231zDiFhTeuz_l2SazS0Dx0fVooRfXOH4sxoh7zYFnOIocd_Vh4kX7U/s990/drilling2000.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="556" data-original-width="990" height="180" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEisfIgVzlWjxROTyovrluk2XF9MPqoMG-CRm9VggCGHbL3LKZQiZnBXx1gr2osrnRkdiVLvKdSnDpaB-tvKNafl231zDiFhTeuz_l2SazS0Dx0fVooRfXOH4sxoh7zYFnOIocd_Vh4kX7U/s320/drilling2000.jpg" width="320" /></a></div><span style="font-family: arial;"><span style="font-size: medium;">WTF? What are you talking about?</span></span><p></p><p><span style="font-family: arial; font-size: medium;">You heard me right. Let's keep them in the ground. The choice is clear. If we continue to extract and burn them, dumping huge amounts of greenhouse gases into the atmosphere in the process, we risk rendering the earth inhospitable for human life. Or, we could stop torching the earth by simply leaving them in the ground. A drastic reduction in their availability would require a </span><span style="font-family: arial; font-size: medium;">complete redesign of the economy, forcing us to develop the use of renewable energy sources to replace fossil fuels.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: arial; font-size: medium;">But that would cause massive pain to a lot of people who depend on their exploitation to earn their livelihoods. Absolutely. Yet, in comparison to the suffering that awaits humanity as a result of parts of the planet becoming inhospitable, it is minor. Short-term pain, long-term gain.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: arial; font-size: medium;">But what about the economy? Weaning ourselves off of fossil fuels would shrink the economy.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: arial; font-size: medium;">Well, there are times when you have to say FUCK the economy: the outbreak of the global COVID pandemic comes to mind. In order to save lives, the populations of the world's leading economies were locked down and commerce was severely reduced, thereby limiting the spread of the virus. Economic growth was sacrificed for the benefit of the population at large.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: arial; font-size: medium;">Turning to the question of catastrophic climate change, if ever there were a context in which the thought, "FUCK the economy" should reign, it is in the context of the immense challenge facing us to mitigate the damage of climate change. If we don't change our ways, and do so quickly, we face the very real possibility of bringing on a massive die off of the human race within the next hundred years.</span></p><p style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: arial; font-size: medium;"><b>Related Posts</b></span></p><p style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: arial; font-size: medium;"><a href="https://thedisgruntleddemocrat.blogspot.com/2012/04/living-in-age-of-stupid.html"><b>Livivg in the Age of Stupid</b></a></span></p><p style="text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: arial; font-size: medium;"><a href="https://thedisgruntleddemocrat.blogspot.com/2010/12/sometimes-you-have-to-say-fuck-economy.html"><b>Sometimes You Have Too Say: "Fuck the Economy"</b></a></span></p><p><span style="font-family: arial; font-size: medium;"><br />There are some that think this isn't such a bad idea, believing that my strong feelings on the subject are too anthropocentric. Maybe I'm wired that way. Others have already reached the conclusion that catastrophic climate change is inevitable and that there isn't anything we can do now to prevent it. The process is already too advanced to change the planet's trajectory. Consequently, we should try to squeeze out as much pleasure as we can before the party is over, like the passengers who drank and danced while the band played on after the Titanic had struck the iceberg.</span></p><p><span style="font-family: arial; font-size: medium;">Personally, I believe we have a moral obligation to abandon our addiction to fossil fuels. Perhaps, going cold turkey is not the way to go about it. Nevertheless, the "Keep Fossil Fuels In The Ground" meme needs to gain traction. It needs to spread and filter its way into the political discourse. The sooner, the better!</span></p><p><span style="font-family: arial; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></p><p><span style="font-family: arial; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></p><p><span style="font-family: arial; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></p><p><span style="font-family: arial; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></p><p><span style="font-family: arial; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></p><p><span style="font-family: arial; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></p><p><span style="font-family: arial; font-size: medium;"><br /></span></p>Brian Gibbhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15361320319319431428noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4408415205100913549.post-36677610703446605932021-08-30T22:52:00.002-04:002021-08-30T22:52:51.356-04:00Wake Up Canada: It Doesn't Have To Be This Way<p style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; font-stretch: normal; margin: 0in;"><span style="background-color: black; color: white;"><br /></span></p><p style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; font-stretch: normal; margin: 0in;"><span style="background-color: black; color: white;"><br /></span></p><p style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; font-stretch: normal; margin: 0in;"><span style="background-color: black; color: white;"></span></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span style="background-color: black; color: white;"><br /></span></div><span style="background-color: black; color: white;"><br /><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhm4O1x00sIdkOAgMeutZB73htYcXB4kb48G_N7RutaXsTH1QYk0EuwqSDDMh0ZOdQpr9LX3OF-xwhEOhUIj_EMWMLof34N8pYKnFZ75VokCZ7Dr7PU1yREj0Zy6pYzBe5B0riWBRQcoLE/s299/forest+fire.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="168" data-original-width="299" height="168" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhm4O1x00sIdkOAgMeutZB73htYcXB4kb48G_N7RutaXsTH1QYk0EuwqSDDMh0ZOdQpr9LX3OF-xwhEOhUIj_EMWMLof34N8pYKnFZ75VokCZ7Dr7PU1yREj0Zy6pYzBe5B0riWBRQcoLE/s0/forest+fire.jpg" width="299" /></a></div><br />These are trying times. A global pandemic has forced millions of people to re-evaluate their priorities and rethink the way their lives are structured. Yet, in the midst of the tumult, Canadians have been forced to go to the polls to elect a new government even though the government in place has done an admirable job of handling the Covid-19 crisis. Why? Is it because of what Prime Minister Justin Trudeau dubiously asserted to be a toxic situation in Parliament? <o:p></o:p></span><p></p><p></p><p style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; font-stretch: normal; margin: 0in; min-height: 13.1px;"><o:p style="background-color: black;"><span style="color: white;"> </span></o:p></p><p style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; font-stretch: normal; margin: 0in;"><span style="background-color: black; color: white; font-family: inherit;">Toxic for whom? For the population at large, or for Trudeau’s aspirations to rule the country like a king? Seeing that the Liberal government has been able to pass all of its legislation without having the opposition parties that are in the majority force an election by means of a non-confidence motion, it appears that the problem is Trudeau’s desire to rule as if he had the support of the majority of Canadian electors when clearly he hasn’t. The only way he can expect to form a majority government and assume the regal powers that go with it is that the antiquated first-past-the-post electoral system distorts the popular vote so to fabricate a false majority. No wonder he reneged on his promise to change the voting system. He now stands to be the principal beneficiary of its systemic distortions.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; font-stretch: normal; margin: 0in; min-height: 13.1px;"><o:p style="background-color: black;"><span style="color: white;"> </span></o:p></p><p style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; font-stretch: normal; margin: 0in;"><span style="background-color: black; color: white; font-family: inherit;">If we dig a bit deeper, the real problem isn’t simply Trudeau’s desire to rule like a king, but Canada’s inability to upgrade its political system from a system born in the nineteenth century, before the advent of electricity, to a system capable of responding to the challenges of the twenty-first century, a century in which humanity’s future is threatened by its refusal to make the necessary changes to ensure its survival in the face of catastrophic climate change.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; font-stretch: normal; margin: 0in; min-height: 13.1px;"><o:p style="background-color: black;"><span style="color: white;"> </span></o:p></p><p style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; font-stretch: normal; margin: 0in;"><span style="background-color: black; color: white; font-family: inherit;">Canadians find themselves trapped by a political system that perpetuates the colonial obsession with wealth extraction. The two political parties that have governed Canada, Liberal or Conservative, since confederation may differ with regard to their social policies, but both have given their unwavering support to economic policies that give priority to the perpetual accumulation of wealth. In this regard, both parties are the flip side of the same coin, what the French refer to as: la pensée unique. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; font-stretch: normal; margin: 0in; min-height: 13.1px;"><o:p style="background-color: black;"><span style="color: white;"> </span></o:p></p><p style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; font-stretch: normal; margin: 0in;"><span style="background-color: black; color: white; font-family: inherit;">Although it may be argued that this manner of thinking served the nation well throughout the twentieth century, having helped to build the infrastructure that makes modern life possible, it is the inability to let go of this colonial mindset that is the real issue. Essentially, the present system of governance promotes the wealth accumulation modus operandi to such an extent that it prevents any significant change that would steer the nation in another direction.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; font-stretch: normal; margin: 0in; min-height: 13.1px;"><span style="background-color: black; color: white; font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></p><p style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; font-stretch: normal; margin: 0in; min-height: 13.1px;"><span style="background-color: black; color: white; font-family: inherit;"><span>However, for Canada not to change direction, along with all the other developed nations, runs </span><span>the risk of sacrificing the well-being of future generations because they will be the ones who will be saddled with the onerous task of trying to survive in a world where today’s extreme weather events are no longer considered to be extreme.</span></span></p><p style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; font-stretch: normal; margin: 0in;"><span style="color: white; font-family: inherit;"><o:p style="background-color: black;"></o:p></span></p><p style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; font-stretch: normal; margin: 0in; min-height: 13.1px;"><o:p style="background-color: black;"><span style="color: white;"> </span></o:p></p><p style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; font-stretch: normal; margin: 0in;"><span style="background-color: black;"><span style="color: white; font-family: inherit;"></span></span></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><span style="background-color: black; color: white; font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></div><p style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; font-stretch: normal; margin: 0in;"><span style="background-color: black; color: white;">I wonder how many citizens from Lytton, British Columbia will be voting in this federal election? I’m sure that many of them will be, but they won’t be casting their votes in the small town they used to call home. After recording the highest temperature since records have been kept in Canada, 49 degrees Celsius, Lytton had the misfortune of being caught in what seemed like a case of spontaneous combustion from a Dickens’ novel. The nearby forest burst into flames and engulfed the town in a fire that burned 90% of the buildings to the ground.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p></p><p style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; font-stretch: normal; margin: 0in; min-height: 13.1px;"><o:p style="background-color: black;"><span style="color: white;"> </span></o:p></p><p style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; font-stretch: normal; margin: 0in;"><span style="background-color: black; color: white; font-family: inherit;">Hello Canada. That was your wake up call. The formation of heat domes has increased in frequency during the last ten years. How many towns need to meet the same fate before Canada takes concrete action instead of setting carbon emissions goals that it never meets? The time has come for immediate action. Forget trying to make believe change is in the works. as long as no concrete measures are put into place. It might be already to late to mitigate the damage that climate change will bring about during what’s left of the century. But we have a moral obligation to assume the duty of care towards the environment. Nothing less will do.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; font-stretch: normal; margin: 0in; min-height: 13.1px;"><o:p style="background-color: black;"><span style="color: white;"> </span></o:p></p><p style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; font-stretch: normal; margin: 0in;"><span style="background-color: black; color: white; font-family: inherit;">Now, here’s the thing. Giving Trudeau a majority government will only exacerbate the problem. Remember this is the man who thought it would be a good thing if the Canadian government would support the expansion of the Trans Mountain pipeline that would almost triple the amount of oil being transported from Alberta through the interior of British Columbia, a province that is now experiencing the worst forest fire devastation in living memory. Talk about throwing gasoline on the fire. The Canadian government bought the Trans Mountain from Kinder Morgan Inc. for C$4.5 billion in 2018 after the company threatened to scrap the line's expansion amid fierce environmental opposition. It did so while Trudeau’s Liberals formed a “majority” government with less than 40% of the popular vote.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; font-stretch: normal; margin: 0in; min-height: 13.1px;"><o:p style="background-color: black;"><span style="color: white;"> </span></o:p></p><p style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; font-stretch: normal; margin: 0in;"><span style="background-color: black; color: white; font-family: inherit;">One of the fallouts of the COVID pandemic, however, is the realization that nothing is written in stone. Change is possible. For example, millions of people have continued to work through these difficult times, no longer having to waste two hours of their day commuting to and from their place of work. Instead, they learned to work from home without a demonstrable loss of productivity. Now the majority of these workers don’t want to return to the status quo, the way things were before the pandemic. They would prefer to continue to work from home, at least for a coupe of days per week. Others came to the realization that they were sacrificing too much of their lives for the sake of keeping their jobs. As a result, the Great Resignation has ensued and millions of workers in North America have quit their jobs.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; font-stretch: normal; margin: 0in; min-height: 13.1px;"><o:p style="background-color: black;"><span style="color: white;"> </span></o:p></p><p style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; font-stretch: normal; margin: 0in;"><span style="background-color: black; color: white; font-family: inherit;">In a similar vein, the pandemic has demonstrated that a majority government in Parliament is not required to run a country like Canada even during a global health crisis. In fact, the concentration of political power in one person constitutes a significant risk since one person holding such power can make decisions that imperil the well-being of the population as has been the case in the Trump-led USA, the Johnson-led Great Britain, and the Bolsonaro-led Brazil.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; font-stretch: normal; margin: 0in; min-height: 13.1px;"><o:p style="background-color: black;"><span style="color: white;"> </span></o:p></p><p style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; font-stretch: normal; margin: 0in;"><span style="background-color: black; color: white; font-family: inherit;">Facing the even greater challenge of responding to the challenge of dealing with catastrophic climate change, Canadians would do well not to place all their eggs in one basket by handing Trudeau a majority government. He can’t be trusted to do the right thing. Political power means too much to him, and to maintain that power he will be extremely reluctant to do anything that would diminish the returns to the investors in the gas and oil sector. He won’t bite the hand that feeds him. <o:p></o:p></span></p><p style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; font-stretch: normal; margin: 0in; min-height: 13.1px;"><o:p style="background-color: black;"><span style="color: white;"> </span></o:p></p><p style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; font-stretch: normal; margin: 0in;"><span style="background-color: black; color: white; font-family: inherit;">But that what’s needed to even have the slim chance of mitigating the effects of extreme weather events like the one that destroyed the town of Lytton. The new normal that we are rapidly moving towards includes what were once in a lifetime weather event happening every year and what were once in a millennium event happening every decade.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; font-stretch: normal; margin: 0in; min-height: 13.1px;"><o:p style="background-color: black;"><span style="color: white;"> </span></o:p></p><p style="-webkit-text-stroke-width: 0px; background-attachment: initial; background-clip: initial; background-image: initial; background-origin: initial; background-position: initial; background-repeat: initial; background-size: initial; font-stretch: normal; margin: 0in;"><span style="background-color: black; color: white; font-family: inherit;">A minority Liberal, Conservative, or New Democratic Party government is Canada’s best option at the moment. That way the regal powers of the crown-in-parliament political system will not be transferred to a single person. As much as some people are disappointed with Trudeau’s performance, a majority Conservative government is not something to be desired. No one person should be empowered to make the decisions for the entire country, especially now since the quality of life of future generations is now in our hands.</span></p><p><span style="background-color: black; color: white;"><br /></span></p><p><span style="background-color: black; color: white;"><br /></span></p><p><span style="background-color: black; color: white;"><br /></span></p>Brian Gibbhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15361320319319431428noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4408415205100913549.post-52255486426407608332021-08-11T17:06:00.000-04:002021-08-11T17:06:07.459-04:00A Lament For A Paradise Lost<blockquote style="border: none; margin: 0px 0px 0px 40px; padding: 0px; text-align: left;"><blockquote style="border: none; margin: 0px 0px 0px 40px; padding: 0px; text-align: left;"><p class="MsoNormal"></p><div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh-LUF3TnfQtph0UZHx23iriSWqEkCztPr_VC2ox7DEkHp4iyayihj9FOIlflO9VMNYIxvYZfC2DjyF22I5yIn2BK_p1Y6EzIP9d0b7MuoX8s80IbhpcUBbKKW0FNqHNA1lXmoQAWOOblc/s300/lament+for+a+paradise+lost.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="168" data-original-width="300" height="168" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh-LUF3TnfQtph0UZHx23iriSWqEkCztPr_VC2ox7DEkHp4iyayihj9FOIlflO9VMNYIxvYZfC2DjyF22I5yIn2BK_p1Y6EzIP9d0b7MuoX8s80IbhpcUBbKKW0FNqHNA1lXmoQAWOOblc/s0/lament+for+a+paradise+lost.jpg" width="300" /></a></div><p></p></blockquote></blockquote><p class="MsoNormal" style="text-align: left;"><br />Not having written a blog post for a couple of years, I knew
that it might be difficult to get into the flow. I wanted to break my silence. I
thought I would write a post about climate change and that I would take my
usual tone of the disgruntled citizen railing against the powers that be for
their inaction and a complacent citizenry for not paying sufficient attention
to what’s going on. Then, this Monday, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change published its latest<a href="https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/"> assessment</a>, and the prognosis was worse than what I
feared. It now seems certain that climate change is occurring at a faster rate
than we thought, the change is unequivocally being caused by human activity,
and the effects will be felt for centuries. The only thing we can do know is
mitigate the damage. For example, if we can cut global emissions in half by
2030 and reach net zero by the middle of this century, we can halt and possibly
reverse the rise in temperatures. Good luck with that!<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">I am not a pessimist. Far from it. However, the scale of the
change required to be able to reach those lofty goals are beyond humanity’s
capacity to change. It would require a total make over of how we live our
lives. Massive investments would need to be redirected into re-engineering how
we make things, how we move about, and what and how we consume what is
produced. In other words, our level of comfort and the convenient way in which
life has been arranged for the vast majority of people in the developed world
would become a thing of the past.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">One of the key takeaways from the global response to the
COVID pandemic is how deeply we are attached to our precious lifestyles. What
should be a simply straight forward public health issue has become politicized.
Throughout Europe and North and South America a significant number of people
resent or even refuse to adopt rather innocuous measures like wearing a mask in
public or getting vaccinated against the virus, claiming that their rights are being
infringed upon. Moreover, there are sufficient number politicians who pander to
their desires not to have to make changes in the way they live. As a result,
the number of human lives lost and the level of grief to be endured is far
higher than it need be.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">I say this because the level of change required to mitigate
climate change is exponentially greater than what has been required to limit
the effects of the spread of the COVID virus. This is extremely discouraging
since the effects of contracting the virus are immediate and the spread of the
human misery caused by the virus is very rapid. It only took a few scant months
for the world to become engulfed in a global crisis. Yet, countries like the
United States of America and Brazil dragged their heels when it came time to
protect their citizens and hundreds of thousands of people perished as a result
of government inaction.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">If major, economically-advanced nations cannot respond
adequately to the threat of the spread of a virus, it is extremely unlikely
that they will be able to respond adequately to the threat of climate change.
Too many players have to come to agreement on what needs to be done in too
short of a time frame for an effective response to emerge. Besides, the
political will is not there. Governments are not apt to take action that would
reduce the earnings of the shareholders of fossil fuel companies, and citizens
who are trying to return as quickly as they can to their previous lifestyles
are not going to force the issue.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">So, what’s left for the distraught to do? Not much.
Individuals cutting back on their own consumption of fossil fuels will not be
enough. The damage has already been done and will only get worse as we plod
through the rest of the century. By the time humanity reaches the tipping point
of realizing that it is the midst of a climate catastrophe, it will be too
late. The apocalyptic images we have witnessed in the summer of 2021 are
alarming, but no where near what is coming down the road in the years ahead.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p></o:p></p><p>I mourn losing what we had, and ask forgiveness to future
generations for not exercising the duty of care necessary so that you too could
behold the amazing beauty of the earth as it used to be. </p>Brian Gibbhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15361320319319431428noreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4408415205100913549.post-24527884140073821752019-10-22T08:23:00.000-04:002019-10-22T08:23:03.848-04:00Trudeau Remains Prime Minister Thanks to Canada's Pathetic Voting System<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhr92NPIAUXjCFhkbHNXQWBm8SBhOmyAgD4mMXLtnc9f2j4CnCu7WsCiDqFVPRGoCUrXJm_es9M91sg_zP8BwcAmoaLgT5TaIFUFSZ5Nst9tvNOj4qlPrNca9pUZyFkDVLvfHdR6TD85mU/s1600/blackface.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="450" data-original-width="293" height="200" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhr92NPIAUXjCFhkbHNXQWBm8SBhOmyAgD4mMXLtnc9f2j4CnCu7WsCiDqFVPRGoCUrXJm_es9M91sg_zP8BwcAmoaLgT5TaIFUFSZ5Nst9tvNOj4qlPrNca9pUZyFkDVLvfHdR6TD85mU/s200/blackface.PNG" width="130" /></a></div>
What do Justin Trudeau and Donald Trump have in common? Both leaders actually lost the popular vote in the last elections. However, they both became the leader of their respective countries due to the distortions of the voting systems used in each one.<br />
<br />
In the 2015 electoral campaign, Justin Trudeau promised that this would be last the Canadian federal election using the archaic voting system, single member plurality (SMP) better known as first-past-the-post (FPTP). He didn't keep his promise. Now we know why.<br />
<br />
In yesterday's general election, from a democratic perspective Trudeau did not win the election. He lost. The Conservatives actually received more votes. He is the Prime Minister because of the manner votes are translated into seats in Canada.<br />
<br />
In reality, there are 338 separate elections during the general election. In each one, all that is required is to receive the most votes. There is no direct relation between the total number of votes cast and the distribution of seats.<br />
<br />
In a hypothetical example, if we divide a region into ten distinct electoral districts and in each district, Party A wins 40% of the vote, Party B wins 30%, and Party C wins 20% of the vote, Party A wins all the electoral districts and gets 100% of the available seats. Obviously, the goal here is not to provide democratic representation but to reward the political party who wins what is essentially an electoral contest not an exercise in democracy.<br />
<br />
That's just what happened in Canada. Trudeau didn't win a democratic election. He won a piss poor electoral contest just like Trump won in the USA, held with slightly different rules but with the same intent.<br />
<br />
In Canada during the last 15 years, there have been 6 referendums at the provincial level that gave the option of changing the voting system. There will be a seventh referendum in Quebec in 2022. The problems of FPTP are well known. Even Justin Trudeau is aware of them.<br />
<br />
So, why don't Canadians demand something better? Well, that would entail sustained political engagement and Canadians are just too lazy and would simply prefer to defer to authority and continue to participate in electoral contests rather than live in a democracy.<br />
<br />
Perhaps, the only way to get out of this mess is for the Supreme Court of Canada to declare the voting system null and void for not respecting the right to vote as stipulated in Section 3 of the Charter.<br />
<br />
Soon, there will be Charter Challenge launched by a group of citizens that seeks such a result.<br />
<br />
Maybe the Supreme Court will uphold the rights of Canadians to participate in a meaningful exercise of democracy when choosing their representatives. Brian Gibbhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15361320319319431428noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4408415205100913549.post-54561541540306637262019-09-19T18:04:00.000-04:002019-09-19T18:04:10.293-04:00Canada's General Election Looks Like a Bad Kabuki Performance<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjPJhpxwCJVO8-eZ5tii7G4X-TM_S9C1UhXte5hM28vvjvui6GW29_OxJ-avL9uKmT5lVw2flMPRBc5FMhAHPj51cnLGh-rh9jFlzcWKBUQrtd0c-acwGOeis_bhSUk6bhY69cWhzX24Dc/s1600/blackface.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="450" data-original-width="293" height="320" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjPJhpxwCJVO8-eZ5tii7G4X-TM_S9C1UhXte5hM28vvjvui6GW29_OxJ-avL9uKmT5lVw2flMPRBc5FMhAHPj51cnLGh-rh9jFlzcWKBUQrtd0c-acwGOeis_bhSUk6bhY69cWhzX24Dc/s320/blackface.PNG" width="208" /></a></div>
Normally, I find Canadian General Elections to be rather boring. For 150 plus years, Canadians have been governed by either the red party or the blue party. Now, since neither party can attract 40% of the popular vote, the election is decided by which party will receive the benefit of the systemic distortions that the first-past-the-post voting method brings about. In the last election, the red party was awarded all of the 61 seats available in the Maritimes although it had only received 56% of the popular vote there. This was enough to give the red party a majority of seats in Parliament and full control of the government. No wonder the leader of the red party, Justin Trudeau, reneged on his electoral promise of changing the voting system.<br />
<br />
But this general election is turning out to be something different. It reminds me of the Japanese traditional theater, Kabuki, in which the actors dress up in vivid costumes, wear a lot of make up, and strike dramatic poses to make contact with the audience.<br />
<br />
In the Canadian version, Justin Trudeau has had photos of him unearthed, revealing him dressed up like a genie from the Arabian Nights, wearing dark brown make up. Say no more. A picture is worth a thousand words, but this time the staging has gone awry.<br />
<br />
Coming after a multitude of photos showing how cool our Prime Minister was supposed to be, these photos suggest something totally different. Without his staff photographer there to stage the shot, these photos suggest the real character of the person playing out his role in our political theater, one that is certainly not very flattering.<br />
<br />
In this case, the pose, the costume, and especially the make up shout out racist hypocrite.<br />
<br />
My oh my, how is the audience going to react? Certainly, many Canadians will feel like they were duped into thinking that Justin Trudeau embodied the values of social justice. Looking at these photos along with the video showing him as a young man wearing black face, I can't help but think that a great many voters who voted for the red party in the last election will either vote for the green party or decide to sit out this election and not go to the polls.<br />
<br />
So the only real question left to be decided in this is whether Trudeau's abysmal Kabuki moment will be enough to oust him as Canada's Prime Minister.<br />
<br />
Fortunately, this crappy<i> telenovella </i>will soon be over.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Brian Gibbhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15361320319319431428noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4408415205100913549.post-46236452924785527302019-09-11T21:09:00.000-04:002019-09-11T21:09:31.018-04:00When It Comes To Boring Nobody Does It Better Than Canada<table cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="tr-caption-container" style="float: left; margin-right: 1em;"><tbody>
<tr><td style="text-align: center;"><a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhaJPe4ZhwJwEHQVJZPkoabqfQZcOqWfVcXqFMpGsn67cCLsRaemacyzk69TIJzKgHkNMV6NNg57Vr0rY4YjTID6vcPPlp8HMaGZ4QDGIK6nzo-FMJ3Js53Emc-8bbwmCSgkjj5NtBnmKo/s1600/Boring.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: auto; margin-right: auto;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhaJPe4ZhwJwEHQVJZPkoabqfQZcOqWfVcXqFMpGsn67cCLsRaemacyzk69TIJzKgHkNMV6NNg57Vr0rY4YjTID6vcPPlp8HMaGZ4QDGIK6nzo-FMJ3Js53Emc-8bbwmCSgkjj5NtBnmKo/s1600/Boring.jpg" /></a></td></tr>
<tr><td class="tr-caption" style="font-size: 12.800000190734863px; text-align: center;">A Group of Canadians Watching the Leaders Debate</td></tr>
</tbody></table>
Same as it ever was . . .<br />
Same as it ever was . . .<br />
(<em>Once In A Lifetime</em>, The Talking Heads)<br />
<br />
It's a moody Manitoba mornin'<br />
Nothing's really happening, it never does (<em>Moody Manitoba Morning</em>, The Bells)<br />
<br />
Having lived for almost all my life in Canada, I am struck by the boring sameness of life in the Great White North. Yes, there are some interesting places to visit and some interesting people to get to know, but, all in all, living here is like watching the snow melt.<br />
<br />
I think it has something to do with the geography. In a travel brochure you might see some appealing photos of Quebec City, Peggy's Cove, Niagara Falls and the Rocky Mountains, but what the brochures fail to mention is the vast distances separating our sights of interest and how excruciatingly boring it is to traverse those spaces of the big empty.<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<strong>Related Posts</strong></div>
<a href="https://www.blogger.com/null" name="735816707124875685"></a><br />
<div class="post-title entry-title" itemprop="name" style="text-align: center;">
<a href="http://thedisgruntleddemocrat.blogspot.ca/2012/07/canadas-lamentable-lack-of-imagination.html">Canada's Lamentable Lack of Imagination</a></div>
<div class="post-title entry-title" itemprop="name" style="text-align: center;">
<a href="http://thedisgruntleddemocrat.blogspot.ca/2012/04/canadas-greatest-cultural-achievement.html">Canada's Greatest Cultural Achievement: The Charter of Rights and Freedoms</a></div>
<br />
I know. I come from the prairies. Living in Winnipeg was cool, but ask anyone what it is like to drive in or out of Winnipeg on the Trans Canada Highway. The greatest danger comes from the fact that the land is incredibly flat and the road is incredibly straight. It is so boring that people fall asleep at the wheel while driving, leading, of course, to tragic consequences.<br />
<br />
A couple of years ago, I decided to drive from Ottawa to Winnipeg and traversed our largest province, Ontario. Let me tell you, the Canadian Shield is interesting for about fifteen minutes of the two full days of seeing nothing but rocks and lakes and trees and the occasional Tim Horton's, Canada's favorite coffee and doughnut shop. So boring that my two sons sucked me into an argument when leaving Thunder Bay about whether Terry Fox is a Canadian hero just to yank my chain in order to break up the monotony.<br />
<br />
I can also attest that driving from Winnipeg northward to Thompson, Manitoba, and along Quebec's Lower North Shore are as boring if not more so than driving across Ontario. Some would argue that the most boring drive is from Montreal to Toronto. It's difficult to decide. To do so would involve an extremely boring conversation I would rather avoid.<br />
<br />
Regardless, if people are to survive and prosper in Canada, they need to be genetically endowed to be able endure long periods of time where nothing much happens and to fill those days, weeks, months, and years, with mind-numbing routines in order to pass the time. Life in Canada is about exciting as paying down a 25 year mortgage.<br />
<br />
My father, on the other hand, lived through some remarkable times. He grew up during the Depression; went off to fight in the Second World War; played professional football; brought up two kids that saw a man walking on the moon.<br />
<br />
Not me.<br />
<br />
The only iconic moment that comes to mind thinking about the last fifty years in Canada was Paul Henderson scoring the winning goal with the time running out in the final game of the Canada-Russia Summit Series in 1972. Not a lot has happened since. Like what? The Charter, NAFTA, Justin Bieber? That's about it. History is what happens outside of Canada. OK. The Raptors winning the NBA title was pretty awesome.<br />
<br />
Which brings me to Canada's current General Election, which will go down in history as one of the most boring electoral campaigns ever held, as about exciting as driving across Ontario.<br />
<br />
In fact, Canada's present social contract has been in place for more than 40 years. All we do is tinker at the periphery. Raise or lower taxes slightly. Add on an additional social program here and there. Nothing that would rock the boat. Steady as she goes.<br />
<br />
All in all, it comes down to which leader can do the least harm. Four more years of the same, or four years of someone brand new that is trying to convince us that there are no big plans in the works? These are the choices?<br />
<br />
In any case, whoever forms the next government will probably not have a majority of seats in Parliament. Nothing new there.<br />
<br />
Stay tuned. Given how the first-past-the-post voting system does not work very well with multi-party elections, I am sure that the either the Red Party or the Blue Party will be the recipient of an electoral distortion that will either one a majority of seats. Ho hum. Same as it ever was.<br />
<br />
After all, if it ain't broke, don't fix it. Let's keep on chugging along with what we got, and thank God we are not living in Central America, a place where you can't sit patiently and watch the snow melt.Brian Gibbhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15361320319319431428noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4408415205100913549.post-20407296267213876902019-08-06T22:40:00.000-04:002019-08-06T22:40:56.492-04:00Connecting the Dots Between Electoral Systems and Income Equality<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjB9d55xF9FOzvDpA7eqlW_Gt3X9_vnCKDGzRfEDicO9kgxAzEs899lSAMpZ5QcOOXTxTd8-tRwteznUaQdgV50a_QhJ4mK7yXY1mj3P1N84icIEjQxc3TqJ04-ofxZ1Pt4JgFkrqSqjAI/s1600/connecting+the+dots.jpg"><img alt="" border="0" id="BLOGGER_PHOTO_ID_5669812228766168578" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjB9d55xF9FOzvDpA7eqlW_Gt3X9_vnCKDGzRfEDicO9kgxAzEs899lSAMpZ5QcOOXTxTd8-tRwteznUaQdgV50a_QhJ4mK7yXY1mj3P1N84icIEjQxc3TqJ04-ofxZ1Pt4JgFkrqSqjAI/s200/connecting+the+dots.jpg" style="cursor: pointer; float: left; height: 156px; margin: 0px 10px 10px 0px; width: 200px;" /></a><br />
At long last, people have realized that the politics of economic growth are conceived to enrich the top 0.1% of the population at the expense of the bottom 99%.<br />
<br />
However, one huge question remains: how do you fix the system?<br />
<br />
The answer is that you have to change the electoral system that enables a small minority to effectively buy the politicians that will do their bidding. To do this, we have to get rid of selecting our elected representatives by the single member plurality method more popularly known as first-past-the-post.<br />
<br />
If ever there was a voting system designed to favor rent seeking, the economic term for buying favors, it is first-past-the-post. I love the name because the horse race allusion captures what happens in the stands at a race track: being able to pick the winner backed by a significant wager pays off handsomely.<br />
<br />
Let us remember that there is no greater return on investment in countries that use first-past-the-post than making a financial contribution to a political party coupled with a post election lobbying campaign. In the market, competition is fierce and investments to increase market share or profitability are fraught with uncertainty as competitors try to gain advantage in a zero-sum game. So, instead of trying to tip the entire playing field in one's direction, it is much easier to increase profits by getting those who set the rules of the game to intercede on one's behalf with a government contract, favorable legislation, or fiscal policy.<br />
<br />
This is how the top 1% reap the lion's share of the nation's wealth. They hedge their bets, so it doesn't matter who wins the election. Both parties that offer government options to the electorate are funded by or by those who owe their social standing to the one per centers. Consequently, electoral campaigns come and go, focusing on peripheral issues, leaving in place the cumulative gains that the constant lobbying piles up for those in the upper most echelons of the society.<br />
<br />
Indeed, accumulating favors is relatively easy to do when polling data tells you where the political parties stand relative to one another and all that is required is to pick which candidate will garner the most votes in each single electoral district. No messy formulas that award seats on the basis of the popular vote. Few surprises with regard to which candidate from which party will get elected. As a result, it is not difficult to identify who needs to be influenced in order to obtain preferential treatment and a cosy symbiotic relationship between politicians and their financiers comes about.<br />
<br />
No wonder the anachronistic first-past-the-post resists attempts to replace it with other electoral systems that give better representation of the popular vote. To change the voting system, especially for one that gives proportional representation, increases the uncertainty of the results and consequently increases the risk of getting a return from one's campaign contribution.<br />
<br />
In fact, multiparty coalitions are much more difficult to influence since there is no one who can wield authority in a unilateral fashion. Moreover, when everything has to be negotiated, there are no guarantees that the negotiated agreement will deliver the goods. In the process of negotiation, one's preferred outcome may fall off the table in the process of reaching an agreement.<br />
<br />
To change the political economy so that there is a more equitable distribution of a nation's wealth, the demos, in other words the 99% who are effectively under-represented, must ensure that the transfer of political power from the electorate to elected officials that occurs as a result of election is done in a truly democratic fashion.<br />
<br />
This will not occur as long as the first-past-the-post system is in place. To change the distribution of wealth, people must disable the political institution that enables the concentration of wealth in the first place.<br />
<br />
(This post first appeared in November, 2011.) Brian Gibbhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15361320319319431428noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4408415205100913549.post-50859475343130115782019-07-26T09:24:00.000-04:002019-07-26T09:24:28.877-04:00Too Many Bozos On This Bus<h2>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj6sFsCL8oAigV7DhKQU8CWZnnDNNobeYCxO9fAKP83MpPpIgAbIpTUcuwUgbMi6biBkFHcbIHAvWzHQ9rRoG38wzmlMFdoHhzLlYJeI6Ld83EWK0sLbX7HhQD3ATVR83arYNdasjoI7HQ/s1600/Boris+and+Donald.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="177" data-original-width="284" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj6sFsCL8oAigV7DhKQU8CWZnnDNNobeYCxO9fAKP83MpPpIgAbIpTUcuwUgbMi6biBkFHcbIHAvWzHQ9rRoG38wzmlMFdoHhzLlYJeI6Ld83EWK0sLbX7HhQD3ATVR83arYNdasjoI7HQ/s1600/Boris+and+Donald.jpg" /></a></div>
</h2>
<h2>
Desperate times require desperate measures. The privilege of the old stock citizens, White Anglo-Saxon Protestants, is being threatened in the USA, the UK, and in Canada. It's just a question of demographics. </h2>
<h2>
Low birth rates combined with the arrival of many immigrants from around the world, in other words, people of color, give rise to demographic projections that the old stock will soon be outnumbered. As a result, long standing privilege could be threatened</h2>
<h2>
In all three countries, there exits an unholy alliance between the ultra rich and the plebes from the old stock. On the one hand, the ultra rich do not want to be funding the social programs that are extended widely to the population at large. On the other, the old stock wants to maintain their perceived superior position in the status hierarchy so they give their votes to the political parties that want to conserve how the society is structured.</h2>
<h2>
Trying to point out to the old stock that well-funded social programs like health care, child care, and post-secondary education, to mention just a few, would also be beneficial to them is, for the most part, a waste of time.</h2>
<h2>
Tribal identities take precedent over rational thinking. Therefore, twenty-first century politics in these three countries has morphed into a weird form of infotainment where buffoons can become the leaders of the ruling parties and their supporters don't seem to mind.</h2>
<h2>
How else can you explain (other than the rigged electoral systems) the presence of Donald Trump as the President of the United States, Boris Johnson as the Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, and Doug Ford (brother of Rob Ford) as the Premier of Ontario, the largest and most populated province in Canada.</h2>
<h2>
All three are clown-like in their behavior, and this personality trait appears to be an integral component of the new electoral strategy for right wing political parties. The more outlandish the leaders, the better.</h2>
<h2>
We know from cognitive research that stimulating the reptilian brains of humans is the best way to get them to behave in a certain manner. With regard to politics, tribal identities and fear can be easily manipulated so that the higher cognitive functions like reason never come in to play.</h2>
<h2>
For instance, research has shown that when conservatives were exposed to evidence demonstrating that a partisan belief was false - such as a report demonstrating that Iraq did not have weapons of mass destruction or that lowering taxes doesn't increase government revenue - they became more convinced than ever that those beliefs were actually true.</h2>
<h2>
In other words, leaders who tell lies and behave erratically not only invite criticism, they benefit from it by solidifying support among their supporters since their brains will go into overdrive to protect their tribal identification with their party and its leader. </h2>
<h2>
Off-the-wall statements like: build a wall to keep out Mexicans and get them to pay for it, leaving the European Union will be beneficial to the Brits, or promising people from Ontario a buck a beer might seem so ridiculous to risk losing votes, but such tactics actually motivates supporters to go out and vote in general elections that have low participation rates. </h2>
<h2>
Essentially, the idea of winning over undecided voters on the basis of a well-thought out electoral platform that includes measurable objectives and lays out realizable plans to achieve them are a thing of the past. Instead, governments are now formed on the basis of galvanizing core supporters with clearly communicated boundaries of us and them and fomenting fear about what the others would do to us if they ever gained power.</h2>
<h2>
As well, the buffoonery of the leaders divert attention away the real political agenda that is being advanced for the benefit of the ultra rich. Any outlandish statement a leader makes is quickly picked up by social media and is given sufficient political spin so by the time it appears in an individual's news feed, it has been sufficiently altered to confirm the recipient's political beliefs. So much for reasoned political debate. </h2>
<h2>
Given the systemic distortions that the electoral systems in all three countries bring about, any advantage that can be gained in mobilizing the core supporters is then amplified when the popular vote is then translated into electoral college votes in the US, or number of seats in Parliament in Canada and the UK. Importantly, it isn't necessary to garner the greatest number of votes. In fact, all that it takes is to win a sufficient number of electoral districts and the voting system will take care of the rest.</h2>
<h2>
So, don't expect any significant change within the Anglo-American Empire as long as the old stock voters provide the ultra rich the means to maintain their political power. Eventually, demographic change may tilt the playing field in the other direction, but I wouldn't count on it. Moreover, those who presently control the political agenda will not leave quietly. They will go out with a bang not a whimper.</h2>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<h2>
</h2>
<h2>
</h2>
<h2>
</h2>
Brian Gibbhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15361320319319431428noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4408415205100913549.post-38984859402068636202019-07-08T12:06:00.001-04:002019-07-08T12:06:22.959-04:00Will Quebec Finally Become a Distinct Society Politically?<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj_tMYIoejagkdXp6B9A9iaFznHSJc1nzEqNQKnrWXlQPvlPe3Ys6Z_2pNxM3Kxf9S7DestjE0NadZ6bWGCL7QG-FLUnY8CZFxtHFklsk73b1eS3j79dXlLg2WOmgnJlcCxUDFdgNOpFP0/s1600/Quebec+ballot+box.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="195" data-original-width="260" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEj_tMYIoejagkdXp6B9A9iaFznHSJc1nzEqNQKnrWXlQPvlPe3Ys6Z_2pNxM3Kxf9S7DestjE0NadZ6bWGCL7QG-FLUnY8CZFxtHFklsk73b1eS3j79dXlLg2WOmgnJlcCxUDFdgNOpFP0/s1600/Quebec+ballot+box.jpg" /></a></div>
<span style="font-size: large;">These are interesting times in North America. There are general elections looming in both Canada and the United States. In 2019, Canadians will decide if they want to continue to be led by Justin Trudeau, and in 2020 Americans will decide if they want to be led by Donald Trump. </span><br />
<div>
<span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-size: large;">In Quebec the situation is different. The biggest decision facing the population is whether it will continue to elect its government with an outdated electoral system that regularly distorts the outcome of how the voters actually voted. For example, in Canada, Justin Trudeau leads a majority government with only 39% of the popular vote, whereas in the United States, Donald Trump is the President despite the fact that he obtained fewer votes than Hillary Clinton.</span><br />
<div>
<span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-size: large;">As should be expected, the question of democratic legitimacy remains a central issue to how both Canada and the United States are governed. In both countries, governments were formed that did not respect the desires of the electorate as expressed by the popular vote. In short, the systemic distortions produced by the respective electoral methods allows for a the will of the majority to be circumvented in favor of the desires of the few.</span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-size: large;">The question concerning the democratic legitimacy of elected governments in both countries is nothing new. Attempts to change the voting system in Canada have come and go for more than 100 years. In the United States talks about changing how the electoral college elects the President surface when its method produces a democratically unacceptable result as it did in the last Presidential election in 2016.</span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-size: large;">The continued use of such overtly flawed electoral systems brings to the surface the cultural values of the nations that use them. Evidently, there must be a larger societal good that is advanced in the place of having fair elections. Taking into consideration the very large inequalities in the manner wealth is distributed in English speaking countries -- the United States, the United Kingdom, Australia, and Canada are among the worst offenders among developed countries -- the electoral systems in place in each of these respective countries advance the desire to concentrate great wealth with a small minority at the expense of the majority of its citizens.</span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></div>
<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgiRQo7r25P0GKVYWA59-4mWJvzJ5WgYm7FZ6cDTooUIahUUROSd6s0WffZZTzwdFYTSYG0wfgRMD8_7XlPXJiBE0cxSoX19nNFVroZhBBM-oDurov4yBRAgAvNIuAh1muP6plUUAr3Szk/s1600/Income+Inequality.PNG" imageanchor="1" style="margin-left: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" data-original-height="272" data-original-width="488" height="178" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgiRQo7r25P0GKVYWA59-4mWJvzJ5WgYm7FZ6cDTooUIahUUROSd6s0WffZZTzwdFYTSYG0wfgRMD8_7XlPXJiBE0cxSoX19nNFVroZhBBM-oDurov4yBRAgAvNIuAh1muP6plUUAr3Szk/s320/Income+Inequality.PNG" width="320" /></a></div>
<div>
<span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-size: large;">In Quebec, however, although the province uses the same first-past-the-post voting method like the rest of the provinces and states in North America, the inequality in the distribution of wealth in Quebec is significantly smaller. In 2016, using the most widely used measure for wealth distribution, <a href="http://plus.lapresse.ca/screens/8023eca7-c313-4e95-9312-f8b2641f1d1b__7C___0.html">Quebec's Gini coefficient </a>(0.292) was almost identical to Germany's (0.291) and more in keeping with Sweden (0.273), Finland (0.264) and Norway (0.250) than that of the United States (0.457).</span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-size: large;">Having lived in Quebec for twenty-five years and having learned to speak French fluently, I can attest that from a cultural perspective Quebec is a distinct society when compared to the rest of North America. Maintaining the continued survival of a French-speaking community requires much more concern with the well-being of the collectivity than a simple focus on the well-being of the individual so common in English-speaking societies. As a result, the state is much more present in the social-economic sphere, the most obvious example being the language laws that promote the use of French and limit the use of English in commercial activities. Moreover, there is strength in numbers so the Quebec government actively supports the formation and the well-being families via generous maternity and paternity leave, government-subsidized day care, and inexpensive post-secondary education. </span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-size: large;">Indeed, the very fact of being a French speaker in Quebec carries with it a deeper concern for the well-being of other French speakers because the continued survival of the community requires a level of attention to its overall health not found in those regions in North America where a l<i>aissez-faire</i> mentality reigns. Consequently, although how the Quebec government performs is always under scrutiny, its continued presence and legitimacy in the society is not subject to debate as is the case in the rest of North America. For instance, people in Quebec pay higher taxes than those living in other states and provinces, but there exists a widely-held realization within the population that those taxes are converted into social programs that benefit the entire population.</span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-size: large;">Historically, these fundamental cultural differences have fueled the political desire to create an independent state in Quebec, separate but associated with the rest of Canada. There were two referendums (1980 and 1995) concerning the creation of a sovereign state but in both instances the proposal was rejected. Subsequently, the support for a sovereign state has waned but those fundamental cultural differences remain, which brings us to the question of the decision to use a different electoral system in Quebec than in the rest of North America.</span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-size: large;">Notwithstanding the continued desire to create an independent state in a significant minority of the population, there is a proposal on the table to change the electoral system in Quebec supported in principle by three of the four political parties represented in the National Assembly that would bring its political system in much better alignment with its political culture than the one in use today that was transplanted upon North American soil by the British.</span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-size: large;">In summary, single member plurality voting (SMP) systems (better known as first-past-the-post) allow for the strongest minority within a country to rule as if they were the majority and to impose their agenda upon the electorate despite the fact that their agenda is very often at odds with the desires of the majority. In fact, elections in countries that use SMP do not have as there objective to reflect the voting intentions of the electorate. </span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-size: large;">Rather, the distortions inherent to the systems tilt the voting intentions towards a single party that will be declared, more often than not, the winner of a winner-take-all contest and awarded the right to rule as if it had the support of the majority of the voters. As a result, we can say that this type of electoral system produces an authoritarian government which lacks democratic legitimacy but rewards those who finance the electoral campaigns quite handsomely. This is one of the legacies of the British Empire.</span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-size: large;">Conversely, if we look at Europe and, in particular, countries that are small, relatively homogeneous, and like Quebec, that need to protect and promote a historic, linguistic community (Norway, Finland, Sweden, Denmark, the Netherlands), we notice that their governments are consensual, arising from the use of electoral systems that do not distort in any meaningful way the composition of the respective national assemblies from the popular vote. </span><br />
<span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span>
<span style="font-size: large;">Consequently, the authority to govern is not based on the systemic distortions inherent to the voting method and the ensuing governments represent a variety of viewpoints since these voting systems (proportional representation) do not normally award a majority government to a single political party.</span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-size: large;">Presently, the new voting system being considered to replace the outdated British variant is a proportional voting method and the current Premier of Quebec, Francois Legault </span><span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: inherit; font-size: large;">of the Coalition Avenir Québec party promised that he would implement the change, unlike the Prime Minister of Canada, Justin Trudeau, who made the same promise in the last federal election but then broke it once he became Prime Minister.</span><br />
<div>
</div>
</div>
<div>
<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-family: inherit; font-size: large;"><br /></span>
<span style="background-color: white; color: #222222; font-size: large;">It has been said that the willingness to change the electoral system is proportional to the proximity to power. Once elected by a SMP system, the political parties that propose to make the change when in opposition invariably find the reasons not to make the change once they form the government.</span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: inherit;"><br /></span></span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-size: large;"><span style="font-family: inherit;">Clearly, the ball is squarely in Francois Legault's court. What remains to be seen is whether he will act in a politically expedient manner, or bring Quebec into the twenty-first century by breaking with the past to give Quebec an electoral system that reflects its distinct culture. </span></span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></div>
<div>
<span style="font-size: large;"><br /></span></div>
<div>
</div>
</div>
Brian Gibbhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15361320319319431428noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4408415205100913549.post-53792861913084077052017-05-15T06:29:00.000-04:002017-05-15T06:29:30.876-04:00America Is Ruled By Those with a Cold, Cruel Heart <div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgi5w5PCIuYNATCkg6-5Ena1fWELnzGVJ7_O3Z16slEXS2DcoJi3iqBfuwpAYTHPsybd0fmjrhEETrmm2_toInbB6qYJqYs7gEXbLAkRZ1g5UzyQa_nxLwDDMooukaGXv2F4V8Wlgi6IR4/s1600/American+Health+Care+Act.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgi5w5PCIuYNATCkg6-5Ena1fWELnzGVJ7_O3Z16slEXS2DcoJi3iqBfuwpAYTHPsybd0fmjrhEETrmm2_toInbB6qYJqYs7gEXbLAkRZ1g5UzyQa_nxLwDDMooukaGXv2F4V8Wlgi6IR4/s1600/American+Health+Care+Act.jpg" /></a></div>
<i>The purpose of government is not merely to afford pleasure to those who govern, but to make life tolerable for those who are governed. Bertrand Russell</i><br />
<br />
Growing up an hour's drive from the Canadian- American border, I have always been somewhat in awe of what Americans can do when they put their minds to it. Indeed, the "can do" spirit is something quintessentially American. It is woven into the fabric of the American dream, for better or worse, but is something to behold and to wonder.<br />
<br />
After all, Americans invented the nuclear bomb, which, as odd as it may seem, put an end to the scale of carnage and horror thar occurs when nations engage in total warfare as was the case in the World Wars. As it turned out, the mere thought of mutually assured destruction has to this day prevented the major military powers from taking each other on.<br />
<br />
Years later, when I was a boy, I watched in real time on a black and white television in the comfort of my living room as the first man, an American, set his foot on the moon. It still boggles my mind that not only were they able to put a man on the moon, but that we could witness this truly historic event unfold nearly a quarter million miles away -- live<br />
<br />
Presently, you are reading this text thanks to the communicative power arising from yet another American invention, the Internet, which has given birth to the World Wide Web and all the applications we can download to do things that our forefathers never had dreamed of with a simple tap on a screen.<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b>Related Posts</b></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<a href="http://thedisgruntleddemocrat.blogspot.ca/2016/06/the-united-states-of-fear.html">The United States of Fear</a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<a href="http://thedisgruntleddemocrat.blogspot.ca/2013/05/the-new-empire-is-american-as-apple-inc.html">The New Empire Is American as Apple Inc.</a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<a href="http://thedisgruntleddemocrat.blogspot.ca/2013/01/while-american-empire-prospers-nation.html">While the American Empire Prospers, the Nation Becomes a War Zone</a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<a href="http://thedisgruntleddemocrat.blogspot.ca/2010/09/economic-apartheid-runs-rife-in-america.html">Economic Apartheid Runs Rife in America</a> </div>
<br />
Yet, with all this imagination, with all this know how, the richest and most powerful nation the world has ever seen is unable to provide for and take care of all its citizens. In fact, as reported in <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2016/12/why-are-so-many-americans-dying-young/510455/">The Atlantic:</a><br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
For the first time since the 1990s, Americans are dying at a faster rate, and they’re dying younger. A pair of new studies suggest Americans are sicker than people in other rich countries, and in some states, progress on stemming the tide of basic diseases like diabetes has stalled or even reversed. The studies suggest so-called “<a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2015/11/boomers-deaths-pnas/413971/">despair deaths”</a>—alcoholism, drugs, and suicide—are a big part of the problem, but so is obesity, poverty, and social isolation.</blockquote>
It's as if those who govern have turned their backs on those who are governed. When it comes to health outcomes in the United States, there is a steep social gradient. In short, the richer you are the longer you live and with a better quality of live. Conversely, the poorer you are, chances are that your life will be shorter and be plagued by a number of ailments brought on by lifestyle choices that are difficult to escape.<br />
<br />
Importantly, it doesn't need to be this way. It is not as if God has ordained this state of affairs. Unfortunately, many Americans, in particular within the ruling class, behave in concordance with the belief that wealth, as well as skin color, is a sign of divine favor, while poverty and sickness are the sign of moral decrepitude and skin color is a sign of moral and spiritual degeneration. In other words, in America God's chosen few are rich and white, like the founders of the nation.<br />
<br />
This twisted cultural meme, a weird mutation of the Calvinist doctrine of election, has been embraced by America's ruling elite throughout the nation's history. This point was brought to my attention during my last trip to New York City, where upon visiting the National Archives, aptly located in the financial district, I learned that Broadway, the longest and most famous street in the Big Apple, was originally built by African slaves on what was left of a trail forged by the Indigenous peoples living on Manhattan. In fact, since its inception as an English colony, the creation and accumulation of wealth in America has involved and often depended upon the exploitation of an underclass, which in this case involved the exploitation of those who were thought to be subhuman.<br />
<br />
Today, things have changed, but nowhere near what we could expect from a civilized nation in the twenty-first century. For instance, in almost all of the developed countries in the world, adequate health care provided to the entire citizenry is thought of a basic human right. After all, no one knows what the fates have in store and misfortune may fall upon any of us. As a result, in developed nations basic health care is made available to everyone.<br />
<br />
Not so in the United States of America. In the US, where health care is delivered for the most part by the private sector motivated by the desire for profit, the guiding principle informing the system is "pay for the service, or die"! How Christian!<br />
<br />
It's not difficult to see why. Extending adequate health care to people of limited means requires the financial participation of the wealthy. Indeed, the inclusion of millions who were previously uninsured into the Affordable Care Act (ushered in by President Obama), so that they could enjoy the benefits of being eligible to receive health care beyond their individual capacity to pay was predicated on a surtax levied upon the wealthy, those with incomes of more than $200,000 per annum. Now that the republicans control Congress, the Office of the President, and the Supreme Court, the Affordable Care Act has been repealed and replaced by the aptly named, the American Health Care Act, which eliminates all the taxes in the previous act that were included to pay for the subsidies that help people buy insurance, estimated to add up to $592 billion. Furthermore, the Congressional Budget Office concluded that over 10 years, 24 million fewer Americans would be covered under the present bill who otherwise have had insurance under the Affordable Care Act.<br />
<br />
So, what is the future for these 24 million Americans, who most probably will find themselves without health insurance? Obviously, those who rule America don't give a shit about them: "let them fend for themselves and may God have mercy upon their sorry-ass souls."<br />
<br />
What a missed opportunity to bring America within the fold of civilized nations. Instead, the core values of Social Darwinism have once again been unleashed. The exploits of the exceptional will be applauded and the plight of the downtrodden will be ignored.<br />
<br />
America, a great place to visit, but thank God I don't live there.Brian Gibbhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15361320319319431428noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4408415205100913549.post-76844762301780247592017-05-02T08:27:00.000-04:002017-05-02T11:54:43.166-04:00Canada at 150: Stll an English Settler State<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiEuIdi_GYog8pmMnIdrZvAck__peBNU5DVUIzZnUyUXAZTxPc9Kql5hZAmAjCA2PfZPu8QMOI8BE5xajQLr6PwN7Yswp6PLuF7V_Y0L7ddQBGngHwmoZAzFVeCbF5HdBfI2iq6aHGAO50/s1600/Canada+at+150.png" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiEuIdi_GYog8pmMnIdrZvAck__peBNU5DVUIzZnUyUXAZTxPc9Kql5hZAmAjCA2PfZPu8QMOI8BE5xajQLr6PwN7Yswp6PLuF7V_Y0L7ddQBGngHwmoZAzFVeCbF5HdBfI2iq6aHGAO50/s1600/Canada+at+150.png" /></a></div>
<br />
<i>plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose </i><br />
<br />
(the more things change, the more the stay the same)<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
That's pretty much how I feel about living in Canada in the second decade of the twenty-first century. Yes, this country has seen a lot of changes, from the building of the trans-national railway to the creation of the information superhighway. Yet, when it comes to our political economy and our system of governance, we are still what we were 150 years ago, an <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Settler_colonialism">English settler state</a>.<br />
<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<strong>Related Blogs</strong></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<a href="http://thedisgruntleddemocrat.blogspot.ca/2016/11/democraphobia-runs-rampant-in-north.html">Democraphobia Runs Rampant in North America</a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<a href="http://thedisgruntleddemocrat.blogspot.ca/2016/01/are-canadians-ready-for-democracy.html">Are Canadians Ready For Democracy?</a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<br /></div>
<br />
<br />
Looking back at the Europe's imperial conquest of the rest of the world, Britain did something different as compared to the Spanish and Portuguese when it decided to people on a vast scale some of its colonies with successive waves of English settlers and thereby established control of large territories occupied by indigenous peoples: the United States, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand. In fact, with the exception of the United States, which fought the British to win its independence and to become a republic, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand are still part of the Commonwealth, a vestige of the former British Empire, and still have a hereditary monarch, Queen Elizabeth, as their head of state.<br />
<br />
<br />
What amazes me is how resilient this form of governance has turned out to be, resisting any substantive change to the manner in which we govern ourselves for 150 years. Think back to Canada at the time of Confederation in 1867: approximately, one million people spread out over a huge expanse of land, with the majority living in rural sectors. This is a time that predates electricity, air travel, and the internet.<br />
<br />
<br />
Without question, the scale of the economy and the amount of communication within and between peoples in different nations was tiny as compared to what we experience today. You would think that given the monumental change we have seen in the manner in which Canadians live their lives since Confederation would be reflected in Canada's political institutions.<br />
<br />
<br />
Apparently not.<br />
<br />
<br />
Living in the twenty-first century, a time in which I regularly chat via Skype with my fiancé who lives in South America at no additional cost than my connection to the Internet, and that I can pull up onto my screen the latest edition of daily publications from around the world like the New York Times, The Guardian, or Le Monde in seconds, I am absolutely flabbergasted that we retain a system of governance that embodies a hereditary monarch, an appointed Senate, an electoral system that uses a voting method (first-past-the-post) in which each and every vote does not count equally, and that the system grants what constitutes the powers of an elected monarch (in Canada the Prime Minister can declare war without the consent of Parliament) to the leader of a political party that did not garner the majority of the popular vote. <br />
<br />
<br />
WTF? How is it that we have done so many marvelous things over the last 150 years but we have never gotten around to creating a modern, democratic, nation-state?<br />
<br />
<br />
What also boggles my mind is not only do we cling to an outdated system of governance but that even making a relatively simple change, like creating an electoral system in which the representation in Parliament accurately reflects how people voted, is next to impossible. <br />
<br />
<br />
How complicated can it be? If we are going to tell the world we are a democratic nation -- the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms states that we are a nation that adheres to the values of if a free and DEMOCRATIC society -- the least we could do is create and use a democratic electoral system.<br />
<br />
<br />
However, it has been my experience that the most powerful political institutions in Canada, the Prime Minister and the Supreme Court of Canada have, in effect, resisted bringing Canada into the twenty-first century with regard to the nature of its political institutions. The former refused to honour a campaign promise enshrined into a Speech from the Throne (so much for the symbolism) to change our aberrant voting method that dates to the middle ages, while the latter refused to hear a case that challenged the constitutionality of the said voting method, but did find the time to pronounce on what are the acceptable limits of bestiality. Go figure.<br />
<br />
<br />
Given this turn of events, I have become resigned to the fact that I will not see Canada make any qualitative changes to its status as an English settler state in my lifetime. Sure, I am free to marry another man if I wanted to, and end my days with the assistance of a doctor if I so choose, and will soon be able to buy marijuana legally if I so desired, but although these things maybe important to others, they matter not to me.<br />
<br />
<br />
What I would really like to be able to do is to participate meaningfully in the way this nation is governed, but that's not going to happen anytime soon. Instead, what I am being offered is the opportunity to smoke a joint at my leisure so to take the edge off the discomfort that arises when I reflect upon how the state makes sure that my political voice and the voices of more than a million other Canadians who take seriously the health of the global climate are effectively silenced.<br />
<br />
<br />
Happy Birthday Canada! Unfortunately, we are going to have to part. You may embody many admirable qualities, but not the one that matters most to me.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Brian Gibbhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15361320319319431428noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4408415205100913549.post-72894038681197776162016-12-05T08:15:00.000-05:002016-12-05T08:15:22.700-05:00Considering What Just happened in the US, It should Be Painfully Obvious Why Canada Should Change Its Voting System<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiwruc5WoAvcWwOHgA_7TpfBlnOxDxCuVts38GOBXovOrdJdPN2TxEs9hN5V-AaMoyvX75_XNINeoqOtZlyjT4zsXClMmk3JL1OE9_te4AL2ODWHRgRPHPIdu8MZtz-RXlQlfcv_LI-T4E/s1600/Trump.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiwruc5WoAvcWwOHgA_7TpfBlnOxDxCuVts38GOBXovOrdJdPN2TxEs9hN5V-AaMoyvX75_XNINeoqOtZlyjT4zsXClMmk3JL1OE9_te4AL2ODWHRgRPHPIdu8MZtz-RXlQlfcv_LI-T4E/s1600/Trump.jpg" /></a></div>
It's hard to believe but it's true. Donald Trump is the President-elect of the United States of America. A man who has never held a public office in his life now is Commander and Chief of the most potent and lethal military force in history. Put another way, the fate of planet rests in the apparently small hands of a man many consider to be a narcissistic sociopath. <br />
<br />
Yes, this man now has access to the nuclear codes. I sincerely hope and pray he doesn't decide to nuke anyone.<br />
<br />
So, how did this happen? Much has been written in the aftermath of Trump's victory. Most of the analysis concentrates on socio-economic variables centered on gender, class, and race. But the fact of the matter is that Trump did not win the Presidential election. He lost the popular vote. Indeed, Hillary Clinton received approximately 2.5 million more votes than Trump. What occurred is that the Electoral College awards its votes on a state-by-state basis. Whoever gets the most votes in the state (with the exception of Maine) gets all of the state's electoral college votes. Add them up and the President-elect is the one who gets the majority of electoral college votes. In other words, it is the distribution of votes in the winner-take-all electoral districts that determine the winner of the electoral contest.<br />
<br />
Was this election democratic? No! Clearly, the democratic result of the popular vote was overturned by the mechanics of the voting system. The name of the game in a Presidential election is to win as many states possible that produce the greater number of electoral college votes. The margin of victory in any given state does not matter. For example, the fact that Trump did poorly in the most populous states of New York and California did not matter since he won a greater number of smaller states that in the end produced 20% more electoral college votes than what Hillary won.<br />
<br />
This is not the first time the candidate who loses the popular vote has gone on to become the American President. The last time it happened was in the 2000 election when Bush defeated Gore despite not having the support of the majority of American electors. Electoral results carry consequences like the war in Iraq, which was clearly the result of the lie that claimed that the Iraqis possessed arms of mass destruction that required a US military invasion. What now lies in store for America and the world at large has given rise to great concern for the safety of the global community.<br />
<br />
Certainly, the question that needs to be raised is how can the most powerful nation in the world use such a dubious electoral system to decide who will lead the nation? Simply put, the problem is that the Americans have never gotten around to modernizing their electoral system, which is, for the most part, a relic of its colonial past as an English settler state. Winner-take-all electoral districts are still in use in England, the USA, Canada, and Australia. The rest of the world, however, has moved on to adopt electoral systems that do not produce such aberrant electoral results.<br />
<br />
It just so happens that Canada is now in the process of deciding whether to change its voting method. During the last federal election in Canada, the soon-to-be-elected Prime Minister Trudeau promised that the 2015 election would be the last using the winner-take-all, plurality system called first-past-the-post. Ironically, Trudeau became Prime Minister as a result of the distortion brought on by the voting system: his Liberal Party only received 39% of the popular vote; but in one region, the Maritimes, he won 61 out of 61 electoral districts with only 56% of the popular vote, thereby giving him a "majority" government, meaning that the electoral system had created a majority when in reality his party only had the support of the minority of the population.<br />
<br />
Fabricating majority rule and the reversal of popular vote are only two of the major problems of first-past-the-post. It also systemically under-represents or denies altogether representation to smaller political parties. Essentially, the supporters of such parties are effectively disenfranchised. In the 2004 federal election, for example, the Green Party of Canada received almost one million votes but was denied any representation in Parliament thanks to the electoral system.<br />
<br />
Canadians have been aware of these problems for almost one hundred years. In fact, in the provinces other voting methods have been used, but for many reasons we have never taken these problems serious enough to make a qualitative change to the voting system at the federal level. Looking at what just happened in the US, we should realize that a hostile take over of one of Canada's traditional governing political parties by a demagogue is wholly possible. In fact, Germany adopted proportional representation largely to prevent this possibility from ever happening again given the tragic turn of events leading to carnage of the Second World War.<br />
<br />
Let's not be smug Canada. It could happen here. Do the right thing. Adopt proportional representation and make Canada Trump proof.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
Brian Gibbhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15361320319319431428noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4408415205100913549.post-34993020352768142512016-11-14T07:41:00.002-05:002016-11-14T07:41:59.289-05:00Democraphobia Runs Rampant in North America<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiBYaCC59AAXwd5DeXGoUlEV78g07TxC0hM7YwO4XOqRf_pK1W3l9QDP9zkNpGxirwPykj51wMW-M7e_g5Sv616yaNSzo3DBrJBrY_GsRMcZy-Qu_S6a9Xn5Nai94iaMLbLzY7aVQumpqk/s1600/Angry+mob.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEiBYaCC59AAXwd5DeXGoUlEV78g07TxC0hM7YwO4XOqRf_pK1W3l9QDP9zkNpGxirwPykj51wMW-M7e_g5Sv616yaNSzo3DBrJBrY_GsRMcZy-Qu_S6a9Xn5Nai94iaMLbLzY7aVQumpqk/s1600/Angry+mob.jpg" /></a></div>
The fear of democracy has a long history. Plato was mistrustful of the demos, believing it would be subject to bullies and to tyrants. In England, the storming of the Bastille in France by the sans-culottes during the French Revolution was dismissed as a regrettable manifestation of "mobocracy". According to Thomas Jefferson, one of the most influential framers of the American constitution: "A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where the fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine." Really? I guess as a slave-owner, he had cause for concern if ever the "mob" had taken over and moved to take away his "right" to own slaves.<br />
<br />
This denigration of the demos into the unruly mob is a tendency that we have not shaken through out the Anglo-American countries of the Northern Hemisphere. Somehow down under, the Aussies and the Kiwis have been able to overcome the fear of the rule by the many and have adopted more modern democratic institutions, namely electoral systems in which the electoral results reflect the will and the desire of the masses in the representation found in their elected assemblies.<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b>Related Posts</b></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<a href="http://thedisgruntleddemocrat.blogspot.ca/2015/12/hear-my-voice-democracy-first.html">Hear My Voice, "Democracy First!"</a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<a href="http://thedisgruntleddemocrat.blogspot.ca/2015/09/hey-canada-step-into-21st-century-stop.html">Hey Canada, Step Into the 21st Century: Stop Outsourcing Governance of the Nation</a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<a href="http://thedisgruntleddemocrat.blogspot.ca/2014/06/taking-back-sovereignty.html">Taking Back Sovereignty</a></div>
<br />
This has not yet happened in Canada, the UK and the USA, which still cling to their outdated electoral systems that regularly distort electoral outcomes, where the results are often far from what the people intended. In North America, this is particularly the case.<br />
<br />
Here in Canada, the last two federal elections have produced "majority" governments in which a single party has found itself with a majority of seats in Parliament despite the fact that each of the two political parties that won the subsequent elections actually received less than 40% of the popular vote. In effect, Canada is ruled by a minority that systemically receives the benefit of an electoral distortion in its favor and rules as if it had the support of the majority.<br />
<br />
To the south of us, the Americans just staged a Presidential election in which according to the popular vote, the loser, Donald Trump, has become the President-elect despite the fact that his opponent Hillary Clinton received approximately two million more votes. In this case, the election was decided by the infamous Electoral College which uses an antiquated method to decide the election: the winner of the popular vote in each state gets all of that state's electoral votes, and the winning candidate that goes on to become the President is the candidate who garners the majority of the College's electoral votes, not the overall popular vote. At last count, Trump was awarded 20% more electoral college votes despite having received less votes overall than his opponent.<br />
<br />
What's up with that?<br />
<br />
Obviously, both Canada and the US pay only lip service to democratic principles. For instance, the most fundamental feature of democracy is that it is the rule of the majority. Yet, in both countries, electoral procedures are allowed to deviate from the democratic norm, which lead to the formation of governments that although created as a result of a popular election, do not reflect this most fundamental feature of democracy, the rule of the majority. As is often the case, the Devil is in the details and in both countries the Devil manifests itself in each country's use of single member, winner-take-all, plurality electoral districts. To the winner go the spoils of victory. To the other candidates nothing. Hence all the ballots for the other candidates, which often constitute the majority of the votes cast in the electoral district, do not bring about any effective representation for the electors who cast them.<br />
<br />
Put another way, we do not hold democratic elections in North America. What we do is stage electoral popularity contests guided by slightly different rules than in democratic elections. The winner of the popular election appears to have the legitimacy of a democratic result, but in reality the winning candidate or political party has won according to the rules governing the popular elections in each country, not by the rules governing democratic elections of which the most important is that each vote counts and counts equally.<br />
<br />
This masquerade has been going on for quite some time. At the heart of the problem is the fear of what the "many" might want and what the "many" might do. Fear of an unruly mob taking over is far-fetched since the rule of law, backed by a substantial police and military presence, is well-entrenched in both countries. However, the well-off few have reason to fear that the many, if given the reigns of power, would move to better redistribute the nation's wealth and to pass environmental and social legislation that would make the accumulation of great wealth of the few more difficult. Heaven forbid! <br />
<br />
In reality, elections in North America are for the most part and with few exceptions little more than popularity contests conducted by the ruling elite that allows the population at large to participate in a public spectacle in which the public chooses between the two options provided to them by an electoral process designed and maintained by the wealthy. For example, although there are considerable differences between Trump and Clinton at the level of outward appearance, neither represent a significant departure of the way wealth is acquired and maintained in the US. Similarly, in Canada, with regard to social issues there are considerable differences between the Conservatives and the Liberals; however, both parties are the flip sides of the same coin when it comes to financial and economic matters.<br />
<br />
Presently, in Canada there has been a Parliamentary Committee created to examine how to change the voting system as a result of the promise made by our new Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, during the last federal election. This is the fourth time such a committee has been struck in about one hundred years. Will this time be any different? <br />
<br />
Indeed, a promise made during an electoral campaign is often much different than the promise kept once the government is in power. In this instance, it is the fear of the unknown that prevents the newly elected government from changing the electoral system because by changing the rules by which governments are formed, notwithstanding the possibility of making the government more democratic, there lies a very real possibility that the ruling party might lose its lock on political power that the present system has conferred upon it. Better the devil we know than to risk an uncertain future.<br />
<br />
In my mind, "the only thing we have to fear is fear itself." In Canada, we spend billions to educate the public. Consequently, we are not any less intelligent collectively than the people who govern us, although we are probably less concerned with the accumulation of wealth of the few than the well-being of the many. To me, democracy is not such a scary proposition.<br />
<br />
Get on with it! Brian Gibbhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15361320319319431428noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4408415205100913549.post-85930371379503668342016-11-09T05:55:00.001-05:002016-11-09T05:55:33.574-05:00Sorry Folks, But This Scribe Saw It Coming<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgerPXLP-12AS_TcA2V0cnBwEkWrDcKriLtiSybsZ6UKa_EogR_tjmuL1yyahtovWtWOQxWZ_BiKygLRRsdd1iSTr4Zvm9yjvEepS8S75jgb76zi0uwltHc_wqc9VZKlDCixFpwuko_qDk/s1600/FullSizeRender.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" height="213" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgerPXLP-12AS_TcA2V0cnBwEkWrDcKriLtiSybsZ6UKa_EogR_tjmuL1yyahtovWtWOQxWZ_BiKygLRRsdd1iSTr4Zvm9yjvEepS8S75jgb76zi0uwltHc_wqc9VZKlDCixFpwuko_qDk/s320/FullSizeRender.jpg" width="320" /></a></div>
One really good thing about not watching television is that it is much easier to pick up on things that the mainstream media does not want you to think about. As this Presidential election played out, what the media tried to do is sweep under the rug was the depth of the anger that a great number of Americans were feeling towards the ruling liberal elite: the Ivy league educated, neo-liberal, condescending-towards-working-class hucksters who used to run the country. Because of their control of the media, they were able to persuade about half the population, city dwellers for the most part, that their way was the only way to run the country. They were in for a rude shock.<br />
<br />
Back in March of 2016, I knew something had changed and that this election would be different. In a previous blog, <i><a href="http://thedisgruntleddemocrat.blogspot.ca/2016/03/americas-quiet-revolution.html">America's Quiet Revolution</a></i>, I wrote:<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
By now you probably noticed that things are not quite right in the land of Uncle Sam. A lot of people are angry and "they ain't gonna take it any more". So much so that the financial-media-congressional complex is losing control of the country. In short, the dispossessed underclass from across the political spectrum are refusing to follow their marching orders handed down by the ruling elite of both the Democrats and the Republicans. Imagine the Republicans choosing Donald Trump as their candidate for the presidency and the Democrats choosing Bernie Sanders. The former is a demagogue while the latter is a self-declared democratic socialist. What's up with that?</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
I think that the majority of Americans have finally woken up to the fact that they have been exploited mercilessly for the last forty years. They now know that the economy is rigged for the benefit of the super rich, the .01% of the population. For the great many, the economic recovery from the Great Recession has brought little if any relief, while the top of the top have received 80% of the newly created wealth. Now the shit has hit the fan, and the underclass is about to take matters into their own hands. . . .</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
How this is all going to turn out is anybody's guess. One thing is for sure, however, the USA is presently morphing into something new. Traditional constituencies are breaking apart and a new order is on the horizon.</blockquote>
After seeing and having read about what happened surrounding the surprise result of the Brexit referendum in the United Kingdom, I couldn't help but connect the dots. In June of 2016, I published another blog, <i><a href="http://thedisgruntleddemocrat.blogspot.ca/2016/06/the-decline-of-anglo-american-empire.html">The Decline of the Anglo-American Empire</a></i>, in which I explored what seemed to be a common thread:<br />
<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
The revolt of the elites in the West and most notably in the English-speaking nations has been going on now for the last thirty-five years. Essentially, the members of the moneyed class have decoupled their futures from those with whom they share a geographic and political community. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
In short, the Washington-Westminster consensus entails a neo-liberal agenda of cutting corporate and personal income tax, deregulating financial markets, reducing investments in social programs, moving manufacturing to where labor and environmental laws are lax, encouraging predatory lending to the disadvantaged, and extracting wealth from the real economy to be re-invested in off shore tax havens. </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
In doing so, the elites have left the common folk in the United Kingdom (UK) and the United States (US) behind to fend for themselves in a beleaguered society that no longer has the sufficient resources and economic opportunities to maintain the quality of life that previous generations enjoyed. . . .</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Before, throughout the post war period, there existed an inclusive social contract that embodied the belief "that we (those of Anglo-Saxon descent and their close cousins) were in this together." No longer. Now, there exists a "sink or swim" worldview in which those with the good luck of being born into well-off families are gliding quite well through the turbulence that incessant globalization has brought about, a middle-class struggling to keep their heads above water, while the poor are drowning in hopeless despair.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
What has changed is that the callous treatment previously reserved for members of visible minorities has now been expanded to be applied to the vast majority of those who represent the racial bedrock from which the Anglo-American Empire drew its strength -- the English in the UK and white Americans in the US. Both groups, having grown accustomed to preferential treatment, resent the decline in their living standards and are now pushing back, refusing to follow the leadership of their ruling elites. . . .</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
The tectonic plates are also shifting is the US as the two-party political system seems to be coming to an end. Most notably, in the run-up to the Presidential elections, white Americans have abandoned the leadership of the Republican Party to nominate the xenophobic, trash-talking, demagogue Donald Trump. In doing so, they have repudiated the economic program that has left them behind as compared to the very well off, the upper 1% of the population. Instead, they have embraced the vilification of those of different skin color, in particular Mexicans and Arab Muslims, who, apparently, are responsible for the hard times that many Americans are now experiencing as a result of the stealing jobs from white Americans by immigrants.</blockquote>
By the end of July 2016, once both parties had nominated their candidates, I started to sense that things might not unfold the way the mainstream media was scripting the campaign. In my blog with the foreshadowing title, <i><a href="http://thedisgruntleddemocrat.blogspot.ca/2016/07/the-us-presidential-election-drowning.html">The U.S. Presidential Election: A Drowning Man Will Clutch at a Dragon</a></i>, I wrote:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Well, it's done. The Republican and Democratic Parties have nominated their candidates to become President of the United States of America, Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton. Really? These are the choices? The sociopath who can do the least harm? . . </blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
In offering these two candidates to the electorate, both parties have shown very clearly the failings of the two-party political system. Moving forward to November, the media will focus its attention on what promises to be a campaign filled with personal attacks, a veritable tele-reality affair, which might play in Trump's favor, but in the end, regardless of the outcome, the real losers will be the vast majority of Americans.</blockquote>
Finally, during the last weekend of the campaign I saw what I thought was an absolutely brilliant video that addressed what I thought what had been the ballot box question all along. If you want to understand why Trump won the election, you should view: <i><a href="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vST61W4bGm8&index=1&list=PL4E71Rk9mse6dZq42a24HMDfnhUtQOXVR">Donald Trump's Argument For America</a></i>.<br />
<br />
Not that I was absolutely certain that he would win, but I thought he had a good chance despite all of the propaganda polls that were circulating days before the election. In my final blog of the campaign, <i><a href="http://thedisgruntleddemocrat.blogspot.ca/2016/11/choosing-between-donald-vile-or-crooked.html">Choosing Between Donald the Vile or Crooked Hillary: The Absurdity of It All</a></i>, published on November 7, 2016, the day before Americans would prove the pundits wrong, I wrote:<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
I understand how it all came about. Let's face it. The majority of Americans have been screwed over royally by a ruling elite that cares more about their stock options and speaking fees than the well-being of the population. Over the last ten years the meme of the top 1% has penetrated the national psyche. To secure Clinton's nomination all that was needed was to control the Democratic primaries, which as it turned out proved relatively easy to do. Seeing how her nomination turned out to be an unpopular choice -- no other politician symbolizes the politics of privilege better than Hillary -- the task for the media was to focus the electorate's attention on perhaps the only other candidate who could be even more repugnant than Hillary, Donald Trump. The thinking was that the American electorate would never be that stupid as to elect a man who proclaimed that he would build a wall to keep out illegal Mexican immigrants and that he would get the Mexicans to pay for it.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
But the choice for many Americans is not a rational one. In fact, for many the decision is fraught with emotion. Dare I say that the decision to vote for Trump, aside from fascists and xenophobic racists, is simply a grand gesture of saying "fuck you" to America's ruling liberal elite. In living memory, Americans can remember earning $80,000 a year from a single job that had benefits and a decent pension. Now, millions toil for paltry wages: two jobs to earn $30,000, and a whole generation is stuck with mountains of student loan debt of which many will work a lifetime without ever paying off the debt.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
I can see the twisted logic. It's payback time. Force those who have the most to lose by America running of the rails to have to deal with the antics of Donald Trump. It's like someone who lives in an all white enclave accepting a lower offer to buy his or her house in order to sell to an African-American family just to piss his or her neighbours off.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
I guess desperate times cry out for desperate measures and I think electing Trump would unquestionably be a wake up call for America's ruling elite who thought overwhelming advantage in campaign spending and media coverage would be enough to have their candidate elected.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Yet, things may not turn out as planned. The unthinkable may come about. Seeing through the charade of an election designed to place yet another millionaire into the highest office in the land and to do likewise with Congress, more than half its members are also millionaires, ordinary Americans just might serve notice that they are no longer to follow the script laid out for them, thinking that if the top 1% has, in effect, abandoned the population, in having to deal with a Trump as President at long last they will be in the same boat as their fellow citizens.</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
Misery loves company.</blockquote>
So, there you have it, my take on the Presidential campaign. Without question, Trump winning the election represents a significant rupture from the past. Was it a total surprize? I don't think so. But to see it coming, you had to discard the opinions and the analysis from the mainstream American media and read the reports of those who were travelling through the USA during the campaign and capturing what they experienced. It was all captured by the written word, but you had to search for the reports and resist the spoon feeding provided by those who had way too much invested with maintaining the status quo.<br />
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
</blockquote>
<blockquote class="tr_bq">
</blockquote>
<br />
Brian Gibbhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15361320319319431428noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4408415205100913549.post-63287122509491448192016-11-07T06:58:00.000-05:002016-11-07T06:58:21.684-05:00Choosing Between Donald the Vile or Crooked Hillary: The Absurdity of It All<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgNgSqxa-_ckSspS_-qRJjC5ANhIMKEQpuRgSZDLDE361bqvF9Nw5-lkJ2pkiRqLABoB5IrsSmfxopnOVIwB5oDrPR6yuH4PmLCROwELJ2F0ajfLcr1MxwUKCFp4zPot3yCgARf5pHn_po/s1600/trust.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEgNgSqxa-_ckSspS_-qRJjC5ANhIMKEQpuRgSZDLDE361bqvF9Nw5-lkJ2pkiRqLABoB5IrsSmfxopnOVIwB5oDrPR6yuH4PmLCROwELJ2F0ajfLcr1MxwUKCFp4zPot3yCgARf5pHn_po/s1600/trust.jpg" /></a></div>
So America, it all comes down to this: the whole world waits with bated breath while you decide which of your more despised Presidential candidates loses the election. I think it's safe to say that those of us living outside of the USA hope that Trump loses. After all, if he wins, as Commander and Chief of the most potent military force on the planet, he would be given access to the codes that control America's nuclear arsenal. Oops, sorry about that humanity.<br />
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Other than my immediate concern about the safety of the planet, what strikes me the most about this election is how absurd it is. Come on America. Really? That's the best you can do? Give the electorate the choice of being led by an overtly narcissistic, racist, misogynist sociopath or a cold-hearted, calculating, sell-out-to-the-financial-elite sociopath?</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
These are the choices?<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b>Related Posts</b></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<a href="http://thedisgruntleddemocrat.blogspot.ca/2016/08/life-liberty-and-sociopathic-pursuit-of.html">Life, Liberty, and the Sociopathic Pursuit of Wealth</a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<a href="http://thedisgruntleddemocrat.blogspot.ca/2016/07/the-us-presidential-election-drowning.html">The U.S. Presidential Election: A Drowning Man Will Clutch at a Dragon</a></div>
<br />
<div>
Back when I was in high school, I had to study The Theatre of the Absurd in such plays like Beckett's <i>Waiting for Godot</i> and Ionesco's <i>Rhinoceros</i>. Having to decide between the two most reviled Presidential candidates since public opinion polls have been used to measure popularity strikes me as an absurd proposition. I liken it to being invited to be a judge for a body building contest only to find out that all of the contestants are morbidly obese. What's up with that?</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
I understand how it all came about. Let's face it. The majority of Americans have been screwed over royally by a ruling elite that cares more about their stock options and speaking fees than the well-being of the population. Over the last ten years the meme of the top 1% has penetrated the national psyche. To secure Clinton's nomination all that was needed was to control the Democratic primaries, which as it turned out proved relatively easy to do. Seeing how her nomination turned out to be an unpopular choice -- no other politician symbolizes the politics of privilege better than Hillary -- the task for the media was to focus the electorate's attention on perhaps the only other candidate who could be even more repugnant than Hillary, Donald Trump. The thinking was that the American electorate would never be that stupid as to elect a man who proclaimed that he would build a wall to keep out illegal Mexican immigrants and that he would get the Mexicans to pay for it.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
But the choice for many Americans is not a rational one. In fact, for many the decision is fraught with emotion. Dare I say that the decision to vote for Trump, aside from facists and xenophobic racists, is simply a grand gesture of saying "fuck you" to America's ruling liberal elite. In living memory, Americans can remember earning $80,000 a year from a single job that had benefits and a decent pension. Now, millions toil for paltry wages: two jobs to earn $30,000, and a whole generation is stuck with mountains of student loan debt of which many will work a lifetime without ever paying off the debt.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
I can see the twisted logic. It's payback time. Force those who have the most to lose by America running of the rails to have to deal with the antics of Donald Trump. It's like someone who lives in an all white enclave accepting a lower offer to buy his or her house in order to sell to an African-American family just to piss his or her neighbours off.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
I guess desperate times cry out for desperate measures and I think electing Trump would unquestionably be a wake up call for America's ruling elite who thought overwhelming advantage in campaign spending and media coverage would be enough to have their candidate elected.</div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
Yet, things may not turn out as planned. The unthinkable may come about. Seeing through the charade of an election designed to place yet another millionaire into the highest office in the land and to do likewise with Congress, more than half its members are also millionaires, ordinary Americans just might serve notice that they are no longer to follow the script laid out for them, thinking that if the top 1% has, in effect, abandoned the population, in having to deal with a Trump as President at long last they will be in the same boat as their fellow citizens.<br />
<br />
Misery loves company. </div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
<div>
<br /></div>
Brian Gibbhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15361320319319431428noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4408415205100913549.post-61638217175105882412016-08-29T06:34:00.000-04:002016-08-29T06:34:43.477-04:00Life, Liberty, and the Sociopathic Pursuit of Wealth <div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh1gKlNXKB4EDvVxWq_x-mRzpjMpj-nZrLchq0192yhxF-Je3LmABJEm7I7ibhB-GMfTk5ezbHzUhqify6Ubom1U1rIj0TxnQfGbQk2emXhoQtXnh40CdURqFyza57mi-qQf-L8CmD0AaA/s1600/Trump+and+Clinton.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEh1gKlNXKB4EDvVxWq_x-mRzpjMpj-nZrLchq0192yhxF-Je3LmABJEm7I7ibhB-GMfTk5ezbHzUhqify6Ubom1U1rIj0TxnQfGbQk2emXhoQtXnh40CdURqFyza57mi-qQf-L8CmD0AaA/s1600/Trump+and+Clinton.jpg" /></a></div>
<i>We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.</i><br />
<br />
(The United States Declaration of Independence)<br />
<br />
<br />
Well, it has been decided. Donald Trump will be the Presidential Candidate for the Republican Party and Hillary Clinton will be the candidate for the Democrats. I know. It's so easy to say that "these are the choices?" Yes, they are and it says miles about what kind of nation the United States of America has morphed into. <br />
<br />
The nation was indeed founded on lofty ideals arising from the Enlightenment, extending to the early settlers primarily from Britain, but the rights were not extended to the indigenous peoples and the African slaves. It would take a bloody civil war during the nineteenth century and the struggles of the civil rights movement of the twentieth to arrive at some semblance of all humans being created equal although many members of the indigenous, feminist, and LGBT communities might disagree.<br />
<b><br /></b>
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b>Related Posts</b></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<a href="http://thedisgruntleddemocrat.blogspot.ca/2016/07/the-us-presidential-election-drowning.html">The U.S. Presidential Election: A Drowning Man Will Clutch at a Dragon</a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<a href="http://thedisgruntleddemocrat.blogspot.ca/2016/06/the-united-states-of-fear.html">The United States of Fear</a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<a href="http://thedisgruntleddemocrat.blogspot.ca/2015/05/the-politics-of-greed.html">The Politics of Greed</a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<a href="http://thedisgruntleddemocrat.blogspot.ca/2014/08/the-bright-and-shiny-lumpen.html">The Bright and Shiny Lumpen Professional Class of the Post-Industrial Age</a></div>
<br />
Looking closely at the aforementioned unalienable rights of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, it seems clear enough that one has the right to be alive and to be free to do as one wishes within the existing legal framework, but it is the pursuit of happiness that raises the most concerns, especially how it is presently pursued in the United States. To be happy requires, at the very least, that one's basic survival needs: food and water, adequate shelter, clothing, education, and the possibility of earning a living are met and in a manner in which that one doesn't have to worry from one day to the next if they will be. That being said, it is evident that millions of Americans have reason to belief that their pursuit of happiness has been seriously impeded by social structures that favor one segment of the society, the rich, at the expense of the majority of Americans.<br />
<br />
To be sure both candidates represent the interests of wealthy Americans who desire to focus their pursuit of happiness on their pursuit of wealth. In fact, both candidates are multi-millionaires. In the case of Donald Trump, he inherited his wealth from his father and has continued in his father's footsteps as a real estate developer. In the case of Hillary Clinton, she was born into a family of more modest means, but yet somehow managed to team up with her husband, the former President of the United States, Bill Clinton, to parlay their public service careers into a multi-million sum of net worth. In other words, one was born rich, the other got rich.<br />
<br />
Essentially, they represent two sides of the same coin, the sociopathic pursuit of wealth. By that I mean that they embody characteristics often associated with sociopaths: narcissism, lack of empathy, a belief that they are exempt from societal norms and rules, and engaging in intentional deceit to advance their self interest. Taken together these characteristics bring forth an attitude of indifference with regard to how their behavior might have negative consequences for others.<br />
<br />
Of the two candidates, it is much more apparent that Trump manifests sociopathic tendencies. He is unabashed in his efforts to promote his name and image -- to such an extent that some journalists are saying that he is not a serious candidate and is only using the Presidential campaign as a means to promote his name and the Trump brand. Given his outlandish statements, for example, telling people he intends to build a wall between the United States and Mexico to keep out the drug dealers and rapists and will get the Mexicans to pay for it, it doesn't seem out of the realm of the possible that he is testing the limits of what he can say and do as a candidate in order to cash in on his exploits at a latter date. Moreover, his crass comments about minorities clearly demonstrates lack of empathy and his refusal to make public his personal financial records show a blatant disregard for the public's right to know sufficiently the background of the person they are contemplating voting into the most powerful political position on the planet. <br />
<br />
Of course, his economic plans include reducing the taxes of the most wealthy and improving the economic lot of white, lesser educated, males by implementing xenophobic social and economic policies. Less immigrants supposedly means more jobs for white people, not necessarily good paying jobs with benefits, but jobs nonetheless. <br />
<br />
With Clinton, the sociopathic tendencies are not as readily apparent, and she exploits the constant opportunity to redirect attention concerning important questions about her character and behavior towards the easy target, Donald Trump. Repeatedly, members of the public raise the question of how could the Clintons become so rich as politicians supposedly employed by them to advance the public good. It is well known that she was paid princely sums to give speeches to associations from the financial sector on Wall Street, but she refuses to make public the transcripts of the speeches. Perhaps, the so-called speeches were little more than bribes attached to services rendered and to be rendered at a later date. Likewise, what are the connections between the Clinton Foundation and the US State Department, of which Hillary Clinton was the Secretary of State? It appears that donations to the Foundation opened doors within the Obama administration. Answers could be forthcoming but unfortunately people who could shed light on what was happening behind closed doors end up dying under mysterious circumstances before they have the opportunity to testify. Similarly, important and troubling questions about how the integrity of the Democratic Party Primaries leading to Hillary's nomination as the Party's Presidential candidate remain unanswered to date although a number of lawsuits alleging electoral fraud have been launched, the President of Democratic National Committee, Debbie Wasserman Schultz, was forced to resign, and a few people who worked on Clinton's campaign have also met their untimely demise. <br />
<br />
Although Hillary appears to be much more liberal in her social views, her economic policies favor the pursuit of wealth by the rich liberal elite, those educated at Ivy League universities, like Hillary, Bill, and Obama, who parlay their social connections in the financial, legal, technology, and entertainment sectors to do very well for themselves in the neo-liberal order they helped to create. It should be noted that Hillary is already more than half way to her goal of raising one billion dollars for her presidential campaign.<br />
<br />
Looking forward to the Presidential election in November the average American has very little to hope for. Both candidates represent the interests of the already and the soon-to-be rich. For those on the outside looking in on the spectacle of the ostentatious display of wealth that the modern-day Gatsby-like personas love to put on, good luck to you. However, if you believe that your vote could make a difference and you are thinking that maybe it is in the best interest to limit the damage that either one of these sociopaths could inflict upon America, you should consider voting for a progressive candidate in the Senatorial or Congressional elections.<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />
<br />Brian Gibbhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15361320319319431428noreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4408415205100913549.post-89110412848308884232016-07-27T09:59:00.000-04:002016-07-27T09:59:42.471-04:00The U.S. Presidential Election: A Drowning Man Will Clutch at a Dragon<div class="separator" style="clear: both; text-align: center;">
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhfJsg00ehyphenhyphenUj6OWP6PIeczXRlkr3eJ0Q92J9zPe00CcwxLYamhV9V3bduhHzaYmKFZfDeJAKTDvfznoVAXhRu_HZe39_pnVIKuqUsGEW6CUPl_uSyAH-Nl2xFU1Dir2WWehL0Oci90-nk/s1600/drowning+man.jpg" imageanchor="1" style="clear: left; float: left; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-right: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEhfJsg00ehyphenhyphenUj6OWP6PIeczXRlkr3eJ0Q92J9zPe00CcwxLYamhV9V3bduhHzaYmKFZfDeJAKTDvfznoVAXhRu_HZe39_pnVIKuqUsGEW6CUPl_uSyAH-Nl2xFU1Dir2WWehL0Oci90-nk/s1600/drowning+man.jpg" /></a></div>
Well, it's done. The Republican and Democratic Parties have nominated their candidates to become President of the United States of America, Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton. Really? These are the choices? The sociopath who can do the least harm?<br />
<br />
In some ways, they both appeal to the same constituency, the super rich. Neither of the candidates promise to do anything that would upset the unbridled pursuit of wealth that America is famous for. Why would they? They are both multimillionaires. Both have increased their wealth using suspect practices, Trump in the real estate market and Clinton with her dubious charitable foundation. Given their histories, neither will make wealth distribution an important feature of their political agendas.<br />
<br />
Where they differ is in their outward appeal to wealthy Americans. Trump is the candidate of the military-industrial complex. Might makes right and in so doing a lot of profits for military contractors. Hillary, on the other hand, is the candidate of the financial-media-entertainment-technology complex. Fortunes are now made distributing infotainment and no one knows this better than the Clintons.<br />
<br />
<div style="text-align: center;">
<b>Related Blogs</b></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<a href="http://thedisgruntleddemocrat.blogspot.ca/2016/03/americas-quiet-revolution.html">America's Quiet Revolution</a></div>
<div style="text-align: center;">
<a href="http://thedisgruntleddemocrat.blogspot.ca/2014/08/truth-be-told-rich-dont-give-shit-about.html">Truth Be Told: The Rich Don't Give A Shit About The Economy That You Live In</a></div>
<br />
Where they also differ is in which segment of America's rapidly growing dispossessed they can find electoral support. Trump's appeal is with the down and out of the white underclass, those who have been pushed out of the comfort of a middle class lifestyle and are now forced to compete for jobs in the low paying service sector with people of color, immigrants and Afro-Americans. On the contrary, Hillary, as a woman vying to be the first female President, appeals to the people of color as someone who has overcome the obstacles that society has put in her way to attain her version of the American dream.<br />
<br />
In reaching out to both sectors of America's underclass the Presidential candidates are asking those who are having difficulty keeping their heads above water to reach out and grab the tail of a dragon because after giving either one four years at the helm of the nation, the lot of the underclass won't be any better, probably worse, while whoever goes on to become President will quickly forget the plight of the majority of the electorate as soon as he or she takes the oath, involve America in yet another senseless military conflict, and make sure that his or her cronies are well taken care of. In other words, same as it ever was.<br />
<br />
What makes this election different, however, is the rather large number of traditional supporters of the two grand political parties that don't want to have anything to do with either candidate. On the Republican side, there are a great many who see the nomination of Trump as the death of their party, prompting former President, George W. Bush to muse publically whether he would be the last Republican President. For the Democrats, a very large segment of the progressive wing has come to the realization that the Democratic Party is no longer a viable option to advance their political causes and won't vote for Hillary if it means increasing the possibility that the neo-fascist Trump will become President.<br />
<br />
In offering these two candidates to the electorate, both parties have shown very clearly the failings of the two-party political system. Moving forward to November, the media will focus its attention on what promises to be a campaign filled with personal attacks, a veritable tele-reality affair, which might play in Trump's favor, but in the end, regardless of the outcome, the real losers will be the vast majority of Americans. Brian Gibbhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15361320319319431428noreply@blogger.com0