Excavations


... nothing is more essential to public interest than the preservation of public liberty.

- David Hume



Tuesday, September 29, 2015

John Stuart Mill on the Niqab Affair

Here in his classic On Liberty (1859) John Stuart Mill raises the spectre of not only the “tyranny of the magistrate” but also the “tyranny of the majority” who today oppose the wearing of the niqab during citizenship ceremonies.  This Niqab Affair remains a glaring example of where our prime minister is not abiding by his “rule of law” mantra, and it demonstrates his disregard for the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms when it suits him.  Instead Harper is actively drumming up prejudice against a tiny minority, who, as of now, are being denied basic citizenship rights.

Protection, therefore, against the tyranny of the magistrate is not enough; there needs protection also against the tyranny of the prevailing opinion and feeling, against the tendency of society to impose, by other means than civil penalties, its own ideas and practices as rules of conduct on those who dissent from them; to fetter the development and if possible prevent the formation of any individuality not in harmony with its ways, and compel all characters to fashion themselves upon the model of its own.  There is a limit to the legitimate interference of collective opinion with individual independence; and to find that limit, and maintain against its encroachment, is as indispensable to a good condition of human affairs as protection against political despotism.[1]



[1] John Stuart Mill, On Liberty, ed. Gertrude Himmelfarb (Toronto: Penguin, 1985), p. 63.

Sunday, September 27, 2015

Reforming Parliament's "Second Chamber": Thoughts by L.T. Hobhouse

Here are some thoughts on the reform of England’s House of Lords by the English political philosopher L.T. Hobhouse, first published in his book Liberalism (1911).  They are quite pertinent to the possible reform of the Canadian Senate.

What we need, then, is an impartial second chamber distinctly subordinate to the House of Commons, incapable of touching finance and therefore of overthrowing a ministry, but able to secure the submission of a measure either to the direct vote of the people or the verdict of the second chamber – the government of the day having the choice between alternatives.  Such a chamber might be instituted by direct popular election.  But the multiplication of elections is not good for the working of democracy, and it would be difficult to reconcile a directly elected house to a subordinate position.  It might, therefore, as an alternative, be elected on a proportional system by the House of Commons itself, its members retaining their seats for two Parliaments.  To bridge over the change half of the chamber for the present Parliament might be elected by the existing House of Lords, and their representatives retiring at the end of this Parliament would leave the next House of Commons and every future House of Commons with one-half of the chamber to elect.  This Second Chamber would then reflect in equal proportions the exiting and last House of Commons, and the balance between parties should be fairly held.  This chamber would have ample power of securing reasonable amendments and would also have good ground for exercising moderation in pressing its views.  If the public were behind the measure it would know that in the end the House of Commons could carry in its teeth, whether by referendum or by renewed vote of confidence at a general election.  The Commons, on their side, would have reasons for exhibiting a conciliatory temper.  They would not wish to be forced either to postpone or to appeal.  As to which method they went to the country with a series of popular measures hung up and awaiting their return for ratification, they would justly feel themselves in a strong position.[1]



[1] L.T. Hobhouse, Liberalism, intro. by Alan P. Grimes (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1971), pp. 125, 126.

Saturday, September 26, 2015

NDP Conundrums

Question:

What do NDP candidate Alex Johnstone (who apparently – and incredulously - had no knowledge of Auschwitz) and NDP leader Tom Mulcair (who is eager to open up the Constitution in order to eliminate the Senate) have in common?

Answer:

Apart from belonging to the “New” Democratic Party, they share a limited understanding of history.

Friday, September 11, 2015

"Please, sir, I want some more"

Did you know that any number of senior high school students in the Coquitlam School District go without lunch until after 2pm?  It’s called “Block 5” lunch, part of the wonders of the semester system.
 
Did you know that there’s likely a similar number of students who are stuck with “Block 1” lunch?  It means that they can sleep in every day, but once they are at school they are not entitled to a lunch break until school lets out – sometime after 3pm.
 
Of course students are entitled to snack in class, as long as they don’t disturb the teacher, but most students find it impossible to snack around Gym class and unwise to do so in Chemistry class. Maybe these students should all take Foods class instead so they can eat what is cooked in school.

Breaks between “Blocks” are down to a leisurely 3 minutes – making it impossible to digest edibles on the run.

My observation has been (I don’t know about you) that young, growing bodies are always hungry. But now many high school students are made actually to feel hungrier during school time in their senior years.  I guess it’s called planning.
 
Hunger concentrates the mind.  The answer to raging hormones is to not feed teenagers.  The idea is that youth will be so delirious with famine they won’t be tempted by street drugs: they will instead be overwhelmed by more basic concerns.  But do you ever stop to wonder why teenagers want to rebel against adult authority?  There is even now a word for it: “hangry”.

Our School District apparently values efficient kids in expanded classes with shrinking stomachs.  Students are told Performance and Grades matter, but do they matter as full persons? They seem to be considered “half-citizens” and half “child labour”, especially in the light of sometimes oppressive homework loads. Meanwhile school board administrators get lunch at a reasonable time.


Thursday, September 10, 2015

Harper and Calvin on the Syrian Refugee Crisis

Here is an excerpt from The Western Intellectual Tradition, first published in 1960, exploring the link between Calvin (Harper’s favourite theological leader) and Totalitarianism:

Only rarely has a thinker in the last 500 years gone back from this [Renaissance] ideal of human potential and fulfillment.  Calvin was such a thinker who went back, and believed as the Middle Ages did, that man comes into the world as a complete entity, incapable of any worthwhile development.  And it is characteristic that the state which Calvin organized was, as a result, a totalitarian state.  For if men cannot develop, and have nothing in them which is personal and creative, there is no point in giving them freedom.[1]

Allow me to develop this line of thought further.  Because Calvinism looks back to the Middle Ages, it misses out on the root idea of Renaissance “humanism” – behind which we find notions of today’s Western “humanitarianism” - or what we non-Calvinists would call the proper treatment of Syrian refugees.  In other words, Harper’s anti-humanism goes a long way in explaining his government’s meagre response to the crisis.



[1] J. Bronowski and Bruce Mazlish, The Western Intellectual Tradition: from Leonardo to Hegel  (New York: Harper, 1960), p. 500.