Excavations


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

- David Hume



Friday, April 4, 2014

Canada and remembering the Magna Carta

Did you know that the year 2015 represents the 800th anniversary of the signing of the Magna Carta by King John, who, by so doing (after being forced by English barons) acknowledged that the monarchy was under the law?  By raising the question of who sets limits on the authority of the King, the Magna Carta (or Long Charter) contributed to the rise of parliament.

Unfortunately James Moore, former Minister of Heritage, and our current Minister of Heritage, whose name escapes me, along with the rest of Cabinet, as well as, assuredly, the Prime Minister, have focussed their attention on more recent events to mark.  First there was the recognition of the War of 1812, and since then preparations have long been under way to remember our boys at Vimy Ridge in 1917, and the First World War in general.

This emphasis on our military history brings out a certain Roman sense of virility. But what about the medieval history of the “mother of all Parliaments”?  Surely the Government of Canada should want to celebrate the Westminster model of parliamentary democracy on such an auspicious occasion.  Or are the Conservatives suffering from a serious case of cognitive dissonance?

At any event, let’s also remember that 2015 is also our election year, and it’s our opportunity to set limits on the authority of our King Prime Minister.

Wednesday, March 26, 2014

Letter to Ukraine

Recently you were visited by our Prime Minister, Mr. Stephen Harper, but I am sorry to say he failed to make a stopover at Runnymede, site of the signing of the Magna Carta, before he ventured into Ukraine to promote your democracy.  You see, what Harper says in Ukraine is the opposite of what he does in Canada, and on this particular occasion he did not have his music band with him to serenade you with current Beatles hits.  If his band were reunited (God forbid), and if our Prime Minister were to sing, may I recommend “Hello, goodbye” (“I don’t know why you say goodbye. I say hello”).

Here at home the “Harper Government” has introduced the so-called “Fair” Elections Act, which has garnered criticism from all corners, including the Globe and Mail, our newspaper of record, which has published an unprecedented 6 editorials eviscerating the legislation, which is being rushed through Parliament, as with all government bills since the Conservative Party election to majority government.  You would think that if the bill were “fair”, and given that it has everything to do with how our elections are run, the government would not limit debate; maybe it would even consult some of the opposition parties.

The same Conservative Party that had trouble with the scandal of robo-calls in the last election are now gutting Elections Canada, the body responsible for investigating such irregularities.  Canada was widely regarded as an open democracy, but now voting rights are being limited by a hidden problem we did not know even existed until the legislation was drafted.  The real problem is now voter suppression, and the real targets are the young, who are not likely to vote Conservative.  Moreover campaign spending is protected by a curious loophole that benefits mostly, you guessed it, the Conservative Party. And now, as well, each incumbent will have the power to appoint election officials, formerly the domain of (non-partisan) Elections Canada.

This is really the tip of the iceberg, but it is also the tipping point.  While he was jetting off for Ukraine, Canada’s Supreme Court declared that Harper’s monkeying around with his appointment to that same august body “illegal” and “unconstitutional.”  If it were not for that major embarrassment, dragged over six months, and if not for the implications the decision bears on Harper’s fiddling with the Senate, Canada would be ever closer to the “Alberta model”, where there once was a “King Ralph” and where the same party has ruled for 43 years.  The “Harper government” needs its comeuppance, but Canada’s Parliament is not up to the task of Runnymede, because Canadians no longer live in a meaningful democracy, saved only by the Supreme Court.  This is why, I respectfully suggest, Ukraine should say “goodbye” when King Harper comes to say “hello”.

Wednesday, March 12, 2014

Batman and Robin, and a homeless shelter

Did you know that the example of Batman and Robin provides direction on how to deal with the Tri-Cities[1] Bridge Shelter?  The story of Batman and Robin was inspired by the Middle Ages, when there once was a King Alfred (and a Robin Hood), and where Gothic architecture reigned.  At the heart of the medieval system was the reciprocal relationship between lord and vassal (or in popular terms, the allegiance of Batman and Robin).  The vassal, or peasant, offered his service to the lord, and the lord offered his protection.  It was a relationship based on duty, and it kept society connected.

The medieval model of society was shattered by Revolution, Industrialism and, of course, Darwinism, the notion of “the survival of the fittest”.  But feudal allegiance appeared once again in the trenches of World War One, only to be immortalized by Tolkien’s Lord of the Rings, in particular the relationship between the two Hobbit heroes, Frodo and Sam.  Today we still find traces of the medieval idea of service and protection in our police, our firemen, our churches, our nurses – and in our doctors.

But we don’t find medieval ideals, or much reciprocity, in our Federal Government, which has not yet guaranteed funding for the Tri-Cities Bridge Shelter.  Without it, there will be no service for the homeless “peasants” of Tri-Cities suburbia until a permanent shelter is built in 2015.  Batman is equipped with his “Gothic” cape to help and protect society while our government touts “Roman” rule of law, but forgets the inverse: our equality before the law.  Selfless protection has perhaps morphed into selfish protection, and the Tri-Cities is poised to degenerate into the likes of Gotham City, thanks to possible government inaction.  What would Batman and Robin have to say about this particular absence of duty to our fellow mankind? Probably a lot.





[1] Coquitlam, Port Coquitlam and Port Moody are known as the Tri-Cities, part of Metro-Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada 

Sunday, March 2, 2014

Dietrich Bonhoeffer tweets on Rob Ford, among other things

Dietrich Bonhoeffer was a German resistance-movement theologian who publicly denounced Hitler on the radio in 1933.  After spending two years in prison he was hanged by the Gestapo in April 1945.  Some consider him a saint.  Here (if you will) is what he might say about the likes of Toronto Mayor Rob Ford, presently in Hollywood:

Many people are spoilt by being satisfied with mediocrity.  It may means that they get to the top more quickly, for they have fewer inhibitions to overcome.[1]




[1] Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Letters and Papers from Prison (London: Fontana Books, 1953), p. 129.  The above quotation dates from August 1944.

Friday, February 14, 2014

On Harper's "Fair" Elections Act (Bill C-23)

Bill C-23 requires that “citizens” produce (and, of course, pay for) government-issued photo ID in order to vote in the next federal erection election.  May I remind the reader (and the “Harper Government”) that the Robo-call affair was not about “citizens” casting multiple ballots. Given that our election day is fixed to September, students especially, along with seniors and other marginalized populations, will find themselves even more readily disenfranchised, assuming that some of these groups even wish to exercise their right to vote, a questionable matter these days. While also emasculating a so-called “bureaucracy,” headed by the Chief Electoral Officer (who acts in the public interest – a notion alien to right wing thinking), Harper is adding (though, in effect, not equally among us) a bureaucratic (and as I suggest - expensive) prerequisite to voting. Is this truly a Fair Elections Act when our rights are as such transformed?  

The truth of our beloved “Harper Government” emerges as each anti-democratic step follows another.  There is no need for confusion.   We are witnessing the corruption of Canadian democracy, first withered by small-minded ideologues now plotting to maintain every dark corner of electoral advantage in an effort to perpetuate power ad nauseam.

Saturday, February 8, 2014

On a Canadian Conundrum - and Cannabis

If a Canadian federal election were to be held today, which party would you vote for – the Conservatives, NDP, Liberals, Greens, or Bloc Québecois? Well, if I were to vote now I would choose none of the above.  It’s a Canadian conundrum - and a real problem for discerning voters, because our federal parties keep to uncompromising and untenable platforms.

As ruled by the “Harper Government,” Canada is so undemocratic that a vote for a Conservative candidate borders on constitutional treason – just look for instance to the hack job on the CBC, which is now bereft of its editorial independence.  We live in a country that no longer has freedom of the press for our national public broadcaster.  Who in their right mind wants to vote Conservative?

Then look to the Official Opposition NDP. Stacked by soft Quebec nationalists à la Mulroney, the NDP Party under “Tom” Mulcair hopes to dismantle the Chretien government’s “Clarity Act”, now widely regarded as a success story (or the only thing federalists have going for them).  For Mulcair, the formula “50% plus 1” is enough to dismantle Canada, should a referendum on separation in Quebec actually happen.   It sounds to me that the NDP are a profoundly disloyal opposition; they very much deserve to return to third party status for this reason alone, aside from their Peter Pan dream of eliminating the Senate.

How about the Liberals under Trudeau?  Recently bolstered by caucus evictions of Senate Liberals, Trudeau wants to escape the Conservative “not a leader” caricature of his predecessors Ignatieff and Dion.  But Trudeau is still floundering on his party’s national platform to legalize marijuana.  Too bad he did not bother to check out his mother Margaret’s autobiography, Changing My Mind, before he adopted this “liberal” policy.  Margaret Trudeau suffers from bipolar disorder, and for two or three decades she was “addicted” to pot, which contributed to her chronic episodes of “extreme mania”.[1] It was only when Margaret Trudeau stopped smoking pot on her doctor’s orders that she got better and came into her own.[2]

In other words, Justin Trudeau has learned absolutely nothing from his mother’s experiences, which makes him look foolish, and now his policy on pot will contribute to any number of mental health crises among the vulnerable, once there is legal access to marijuana.  It is also well documented that marijuana use is an early trigger for the onset of schizophrenia, especially among those who are susceptible to this serious and tragic illness.[3]  Legal pot is a way of dealing with foreign drug cartels, but schizophrenics become our domestic victims, and they don’t vote.  Both the Liberals and Greens advocate the legalization of pot; that they do so is indicative of their poor grasp of mental health matters.  Pity.  Pot is also much like a Brave New World solution, where people take its equivalent, soma, in order to get a “holiday from the facts.”[4]  Moreover, the legalization of pot represents post-colonialism at its worst: instead of the disgraceful nineteenth-century Opium Wars, it is now the West which seeks further amusement and distraction, while the Chinese economic engine climbs to ascendancy.

Having eliminated the Conservatives, NDP, Liberals and Greens, there is only the hapless Bloc Québecois, which is not represented outside of Quebec.  That leaves no party to vote for, but many reasons to stand on guard against this Canadian conundrum. Allow me to suggest a remedy:  stymied potential voters should be allowed a “veto” on each and every ballot in the next federal election.[5]  

Yes, an extra entry on each ballot to say “I deny” should be considered by Elections Canada to give people of conscience a chance to express their dissent at oppressive party platforms.  It is a good to declare independence from leaders deprived of foresight, as well as hindsight.





[1] Margaret Trudeau, Changing My Mind (Toronto: Harper Collins, 2010), p. 283.  Margaret Trudeau frequently describes herself in her memoirs as “addicted” to pot.
[2] Ibid., p. 240.
[3] For an introduction see, for example, David Suzuki’s CBC documentary “The Downside of High” on The Nature of Things.
[4] Aldous Huxley, Brave New World & Brave New World Revisited, intro by Margaret Atwood (Toronto: Vintage Canada, 2007), p. 224.
[5] Thanks to Wade, who probably watches too many Seinfeld episodes.