Internet Sleuths

While the internet often does much harm to innocent parties, it also allows for a form of social and even criminal justice when bad things happen. Invariably, these bad things occur when people behave in ignorant, racist and unkind ways. One of the foremost sheriffs of this landscape is Michal McWhorter, a Floridian who uses as his Twitter handle TizzyEnt. Most of the mischief he chronicles consists of Americans behaving very badly, but the following, culled from the streets of Toronto, was originally posted by a Canadian, @thatdaneshguy, whose Twitter account, I see, has been suspended. 

It features two men (pictured above), one a professor at George Brown College, Tom Supra, and the other, Jerry Jarosinski, an employee of Klick Health, behaving in an indefensible manner.

One hopes that a measure of justice will ensue. Judging by some of the comments in response to this tweet, the odds seem good: 

The Math Hatter

@hatter185

·

9h

Replying to

@TizzyEnt

and

@thatdaneshguy

Hey

@GBCollege

, I'm sure you don't want this kind of man teaching at your prestigious place of higher learning, especially considering what I'm sure is a diverse student body.

Leon Z.

@LeroyJe50292138

·

8h

Replying to

@TizzyEnt

and

@thatdaneshguy

@GBCollege

You should be ashamed to be represented by such a terrible, racist, and frightening person.

Allegra and Milo's Mum - RIP Gracie

@cmurphy307

·

1h

Replying to

@TizzyEnt

and

@thatdaneshguy

@klickhealth

is this the sort of behaviour that's condoned by your company? This is pretty embarrassing for your company if it is. I can guarantee you that if I was a minority I wouldn't waste any time giving your company my business. Jerry Jarosinski needs a come to jesus talk.

MaryAnne B52

@MaryAnneB52

·

4h

Replying to

@TizzyEnt

and

@thatdaneshguy

@thatdaneshguy

has his @account suspended I wonder why. I hope it’s not because of both those racist from Toronto I saw it was on collage and young st. It’s a hate crime in Canada what those two did to that Asian woman. I hope he gets his account back he helps so much

Clearly, the ball is in the court of George Brown College and Klick Health, which ironically has received accolades for inclusiveness. Feel free to spread the word about these two misfits.

I shall keep you informed of any developments in this sordid affair.

The Will Rogers Of Politics

Despite all of the green virtue-signaling that comes from Ottawa on a regular basis, those who follow such things know that it is largely empty rhetoric that hides some very, very inconvenient truths. On the one hand, there never seems to be sufficient funds to implement meaningful programs that would improve people's lives (think full dentacare, pharmacare and affordable housing). On the other, there is no dearth of money to subsidize the fossil fuel industry, to the tune of many billions per year.

Despite that largesse, Big Oil seems unable to afford to clean up its own messes, despite additional government inducements to do so. The following video is well-worth viewing to see how environmental destruction by the industry continues apace.

The Canadian government is a world leader in pretending to be a world leader in environmentalism. Watch this ad from the brightest minds in Ottawa, who have cooked up a new climate solution: flushing a trillion litres of oil sands waste into Alberta’s largest river.

In true Will Rogers fashion, the Trudeau government clearly has never met a corporate entity it didn't like.

A Clear And Present Danger

Clearly, the education system in the U.S. is subversive, eh? 

H/t Walter Masterson

Left unchecked, will this lead to the horrors of a more compassionate and understanding society?

Breaking Up Is Hard To Do

                                                                

I do not fit the usual profile of a stalking victim. I am not young, rich, a public figure, a celebrity nor female. Yet the past week has made me empathize with those who fall victim to the obsession that often prompts unwanted surveillance.

It all started when I had the audacity to change my Internet, telephone and television service provider, after being approached by a rival company that made me an offer I couldn't refuse. (I won't name either company involved, as I have no desire to be a shill for the corporate agenda.) Suffice it to say that the new suitor offered technologically superior service, a better channel selection, a free streaming service for six months, enhanced phone service, and a cost savings of at least $60 a month for the next two years. As well, the usual hefty installation fee was waived.

And best of all, they would cancel my existing contract with the rival company and give me a prepaid Visa card for any expenses incurred in breaking the contract. It all seemed so bloodless, since I wouldn't have to endure the usual "customer retention" ploys that occur when one is threatening to leave a company, a practice I am quite familiar with from previous renegotiations over the years with the departing service.

It was a neat, arm's length relationship-severing with the jilted party - or so I thought.

Almost immediately, the phone calls began, urging me to stay with my current 'partner'. (Since I have call display, I only listened to the messages they left me.) These calls became a daily feature of my life until the new service was up and running, telling me how they could make things right for me. However, because I had already undertaken to commit to the new service, I had no intention of breaking my word.

Then the emails began. The first one expressed regret at not being able to reach me by phone, with a large caption reading, Give us one more chance to make things right, and promising an exclusive offer in hopes of retaining me as a customer. Both the calls and the emails continued, prompting me to regard them as desperate and whiny, trying to keep our 'relationship' intact. It got to the point where I apologized to my wife for bringing this messy affair into our home. I had so hoped for an amicable breakup.

What is my point in all of this? Perhaps it is obvious, but I hope it serves as a reminder that corporations are not our friends, and they are essentially profit (greed)-driven, no matter how all of their advertising suggests otherwise. But, it is also a reminder that we perhaps all too often underestimate the bargaining power we have when viable alternatives exist. Those alternatives serve as leverage.

Leverage is necessary, since no price reductions for 'loyalty' are ever offered. For example, I am sure (and this was especially apparent from reports when online learning was the only option during the height of the pandemic) there are still customers who pay hefty fees on accounts that have limits on how much internet one may use before incurring extra charges. That was my case before embracing streaming, and it was only after threatening to leave that I was given unlimited access. Do not expect the corporate heart (if that is not an oxymoron) to be touched and a company to reach out to you proactively to see if it can do better for you. 

You, and you alone, must take the initiative. Any feelings of loyalty to your ISP, I can assure you, will not be spontaneously reciprocated.

Thought For The Day (The Week, The Month, The Year, Etc.)

This from Professor Michael E. Mann:

Sagan rightly feared the "celebration of ignorance". He didn't quite anticipate, however, the *weaponization* of ignorance that we are now seeing.

Carl Sagan predicted QAnon more than two decades ago:

If you have never read the book, The Demon-Haunted World is well-worth your time.

Hard To Swallow

                               
While there are many topics of pressing concern to write about these days, I can't resist a lesser story that in my view underscores corporate greed, writ large.

Some may have heard about the recent roll-up-the-rim fiasco at what Canadians like to believe is their national coffee emporium, Tim Horton's. Now owned by multinational Restaurant Brands International, which benefits quite handsomely from Canadians' loyalty, the institution is publicly reminding all of us that the only loyalty it has is to the bottom line. And that bottom line is hardly impacted by its recent 'technological 'glitch', which has left some pursuing legal action against the company.

A Southwestern Ontario man says he’s retained a lawyer after a Tim Hortons prize app told him he’d won $10,000, only for the coffee giant to call it a technical glitch and deny the win.

Jeremy McDougall, 37, of Tillsonburg is among an unknown number of customers who thought they’d won the five-figure prize in the annual Roll Up To Win campaign after being notified by the Tim Hortons digital app their cup was a winner.

“We were pretty over-the-moon thinking we won $10,000” McDougall said, noting his wife lost her job right before Christmas. The win, he said, made them think “the tide is turning for us. I thought it was some good fortune but, nope.”

Roll Up To Win is a popular annual contest run by Tim Hortons. Formerly it was manual – customers literally loosened the rim of their paper cup to see if they’d won a prize – but has now migrated to the company’s digital app.

 The restaurant chain is facing something of a public-relations nightmare after the contest’s first day, Monday. Officials with the company have said a “small subset” of players was incorrectly notified that they’d won the company’s jackpot draw, a $10,000 daily prize meant to be awarded to one person a day.

The company added it has offered a $50 gift card as compensation to players who received the erroneous award notice and is in the process of contacting the false winners “to express our regret for the disappointment caused by this error.”

McDougal is not the only one unwilling to accept the insulting offer of a $50 gift card.

There are other unhappy people who are indicating they also received the $10,000-winning message. Wrote one man on Facebook: “I’ve never won something big in my life. And now, to only be let down by the news, is devastating.”

Added another man: “I want the $10,000 that your app told me I won.”

Given that I brew my coffee at home and rarely resort to buying a cup, this story is important to me only because it reminds all of us that the chummy, patriotic feeling the company has been trying to cultivate and exploit over the years is simply PR. Scratch beneath the surface, and it is a cold, calculating and ugly picture that emerges, showing the true contempt in which Tim Horton's holds its customers. Otherwise, it would swallow its 'mistake' in order to make disappointed customers whole.

Meanwhile, Canadians still swallow their swill. Perhaps it is too much to expect, but one hopes some will remember this outrage when contemplating their next 'Timmy's run'.

 

 

 

Signs Of The Times

I've been really busy this week and haven't had time to post. The following reflects just a few of the things I haven't written about, as seen through the eyes of Moudakis:

Catholic Love

 

I offer the following without comment, except to say that it is incredible that in the 21st Century, we still have so many benighted people amongst us. 

Read only until you feel your gag reflex starting to kick in:

Police were called in to deal with angry parents after they disrupted a Catholic school board meeting north of Toronto earlier this week over the issue of safe spaces for LGBTQ students.

The parents attended the York Catholic District School Board (YCDSB) meeting Tuesday evening in Aurora to oppose what are known as "safe space" stickers, which are used by some teachers to signal acceptance to LGBTQ children and teens. 

Carlo Ravenna, one of the parents, spoke directly to the board about the stickers in a pre-approved deputation. 

"They shouldn't say 'safe space.' They should say 'danger zone,'" he said at the meeting. "Preaching confusion in the guise of inclusivity and acceptance is truly disgusting."

The parents say the stickers, and any LGBTQ-inclusive messaging, are at odds with their Catholic faith.

 Sheree di Vittorio, another parent who made a virtual deputation, told the board, "Catholic schools should not allow transgender or LGBT students to attend."

"It is most certainly not appropriate to engage kids to be open to these ideologies. There are biblical reasons why homosexuality is considered a sin … regardless of what Pope Francis may think," she said.

After the two deputations, a crowd of parents in the gallery became increasingly disruptive, the board said in a statement sent to CBC Toronto.

Shouting and cries of,"You're all pathetic!" and, "Stay away from our kids" can be heard on video of the meeting. 

Fortunately, despite that pitchfork-bearing rabble, there are some sane voices within the board:

Paulo de Buono, whose child was at a YCDSB school until last year, is also a teacher with the Toronto Catholic District School Board. Safe space signage is an important tool for teachers to help students feel safe, he said.

"For a  group of students who have been marginalized too long, and so, so much in the Ontario Catholic system, they need to know that we're making an effort to have safe spaces for them," de Buono said.

He said the school board needs to start open and honest discussions with parents about issues of gender and sexuality to better educate them about equity and inclusion.

"They need to understand that this is Ontario, this is Canada, that there are certain basic human rights that students have," de Buono said.

"This is a public school board. It may have the word 'Catholic' in it, and that includes certain privileges, but it does not include the right to treat students so wrongly."

Brenda Agnew, a trustee with the Halton Catholic District School Board, agrees that educating parents is crucial.

"I truly believe that if people had a deeper understanding of what those conversations look like, and how that is being woven into our school days, that there would be a higher level of acceptance," she said. 

I wrote in my previous post that we can choose not to do evil. Sadly, we know the above mob has not entertained the possibility of such a choice.

The Value Of Self-Censorship

 

I am one who firmly believes that far too many people are far too easily offended today, whether it is reflected in demands to tear down statues because of historical transgressions, as in the case of Sir John A., or tossing out all of Winston Churchill's accomplishments because of his and the Empire's historical racism ( as opposed to making the statues part of history's lessons). That being said, there really is no excuse today for people to be blowing dogwhistles that appeal to a very base base.

Such is the case with the much-publicized cancellation of Dilbert, thanks to its creator, Scott Adams, opining that Black people are  “a hate group” that white people need to “get the hell away from.”

Adams deserves every cancellation he gets, but he’s not alone in deserving our opprobrium.  He might not have made the specific racist remarks he made but for Rasmussen Reports, which, smack-dab in the middle of Black History Month, decided to ask a pair of questions more befitting of Confederate Heritage Month.

Rasmussen Reports pollsters asked 1,000 people to agree or disagree with two statements: “It’s OK to be white” and “Black people can be racist, too.” Nothing good was ever going to come from those questions, and it was irresponsible and incendiary for Rasmussen to use those questions, and only those questions, in a survey.

White supremacists know such statements well.

“It’s OK to be white” is a sentence that has been embraced by white supremacists who oppose good-faith efforts to make our country more diverse, equitable and inclusive. “Black people can be racist, too,” is another sentiment one hears primarily from white people who don’t want to be reminded of the oppression white Americans have carried out. They are the same people who, contrary to all the evidence, argue that racism in America works both ways.

Of course, as is often the case in such matters, Adams sees himself as a victim, but I have both an observation and a little advice on this matter for him and his fellow travellers.

First, I think we have to admit that very few of us are completely without biases. Some of them might be minor, or they might be very significant. None of us is without blame in our lives. As long as we recognize and acknowledge to ourselves those prejudices or inclinations, we can choose not to act upon them.

Now I know many will say that if you have those biases, they will inexorably reveal themselves through what they like to call microaggressions. They may be right, but human nature offers the opportunity for growth, and I am of the firm opinion that we can choose to resist evil, because its embrace is a conscious act, doubtlessly influenced by conditioning and even unconscious underpinnings. 

My advice to people like Scott Adams and his ilk is simple: keep your views to yourself. To pronounce upon such matters from a position of some influence does no one any good. Indeed, I would extend that advice to everyone. We have to realize (and it can be humbling) that the larger world is not thirsting for our views, and that any impulse to believe otherwise is sheer egoism. 

And haven't we had more than enough of that nonsense in recent years?

 

 

Responding To The Corporate Siren Call

The other day, I posted about our successive governments' inability to resist the siren call of the corporate imperative, wedded as they are both socially and ideologically to their summons. In my previous post, I explored how postal banking fell victim to that imperative. Today I explore another example of our representatives' unseemly subjugation of the electorate's well-being to the demands of their real overlords. 

Pharmaceuticals constitute yet another powerful tail that wags the government dog. The genesis of the problem lies both in the disastrous privatization of Connaught Labs and the extension of drug patent protections, both occurring under the aegis of former prime minister Brian Mulroney, a man who never met a corporation he didn't like. Since the former is widely known, it is the latter that I shall deal with here, en route to a larger point.

The problem goes back to 1987, when

pharmaceutical corporations promised to spend 10 per cent of their revenue on research and development in Canada in exchange for longer monopoly patents (and therefore bigger profits) on the drugs they produce. 

That was known as Bill C-22, (which also created the Patented Medicine Prices Review Board, which I shall return to momentarily).

The pharma promise turned out to be a false one. A 2014 study conducted by the Council of Canadians found that 

companies actually spent less than half that – in fact just 4.5 per cent – of their sales in 2013 on research. The National Post reports, “It is more evidence that the industry’s long-standing attempt to link patent protection with research investment holds little water, say experts in the area.”

Despite this, the Trudeau government is still clearly in the thrall of Big Pharma, as reflected in recent actions by Health Minister Jean-Yves Duclos.

The NDP has called for a parliamentary investigation into allegations the Liberal government caved to corporate lobbyists who oppose changes to drug pricing reforms, as Ottawa faces pressure over the long-delayed process to rein in pharmaceutical costs.

The demand comes as three members of the Patented Medicine Prices Review Board (PMPRB), the country’s drug pricing regulator, resigned — including two this week — after the government asked the board to pause consultations on a reform that Parliament’s budget watchdog estimates could save Canadians billions of dollars in drug costs. 

Earlier this week, online media outlet The Breach reported that Health Minister Jean-Yves Duclos penned a letter to the board’s acting chair requesting the pause due to stakeholder and industry concerns. One of the resigning review board members also slammed Duclos and the government, alleging they chose to echo corporate opposition to the changes and undermined the board’s work to keep drug prices in check.

“It is difficult enough for a sector-specific regulator to do its job in the face of a hostile industry. But when the government adds its voice to that of industry, all that lies before the regulator is an endless tunnel with no light,” wrote former board member Matthew Herder in his resignation letter this week.

The board's work is extremely important, and what is at stake is quite significant:

The regulations have been in the works since 2016, and they would allow the board to consider the market size, as well as the costs and benefits of certain drugs before it determines prices for Canadians. The proposed rules would also permit the board to change the list of countries it uses for price comparisons, among other things.

When Big Pharma went to court over the proposals, the Quebec Court of Appeal ruled some parts were unconstitutional; the Trudeau government didn't even bother to appeal.

“In choosing not to seek leave to appeal, the government effectively countenanced the evisceration of its own reform,” [resigning board member Matthew] Herder said.

Grovelling before Big Pharma has a long and odious history. As reported in The Breach, because Canadians pay among the highest drug prices in the world, in 2017 the government launched something called Protecting Canadians from Excessive Drug Prices. 

The original policy would have saved almost $13 billion in drug costs over 10 years. 

Almost immediately, the policy hit a wall of resistance from the industry and industry-funded patient groups. After a series of delays, court challenges, and threats that included withholding new drugs from Canadian patients, the industry appeared to have won the fight.  

To appreciate the full extent of industry resistance to anything that would reduce their profits, I encourage you to read the above Breach article in full.

And so I end as I began: our government, while happy to engage in political theatre, refuses to stand up to its real master, the corporate sector. And all of us, both literally and figuratively, are the poorer for that sad fact.

 

About The Company You Are Keeping

If you haven't read it yet, check out Owen's post today about the uproar over Conservative MPs feting Christine Anderson, the far-right politician from Germany. Now embroiled in damage control. Con leader PP insists there is no place for such extreme views in Canada, claiming that his MPs knew nothing about her racism. 

The entire incident reminds one of the axiom that we are judged by the company we keep. Which brings us to the following TikTok video, reposted on Twitter, in which lisab0923 brings up some unpleasant truths that PP would rather we not ponder:

Genuflecting At The Altar Of Corporate Giants

For the longest time, I have been pondering the timidity of successive governments to be on anything but the good side of the corporate titans who walk among us. Certainly, we sometimes hear brave words that are scripted from the world of political theatre, but when the metal hits the pedal, as they say, the veil is lifted, and compliance to the corporate imperative is guaranteed.

Take postal banking, for example. Canada actually has a long history of postal banking that was ultimately brought to an end by the intercession of big banking interests:

This system began operating in 1868 with 81 locations and grew quickly. By 1884, there were 343 post office savings banks, with a balance of $13 million from almost 67,000 accounts. However, Canada's postal banking system confronted challenges from chartered banks by the 1890s. These banks, facing a recession, became interested in attracting the kind of small-time depositors who used post office savings banks and they actively worked to undermine postal banking. In 1898, the chartered banks successfully lobbied the government to reduce the interest rate paid on deposits at postal savings banks from 3% to 2.5%. They also worked to eliminate advertising by postal banks. 

Despite the fact that the services allowed anyone to have an account, it ended in 1969. Since that time, there has been increasing interest in bringing them back, largely due to the obstacles that poor, disenfranchised people have in securing an account with one of the big banks, whose onerous (and very lucrative) fees pose an insurmountable barrier to many. Indeed, a secret study was conducted by Canada Post that showed both the need for, and the benefits of, postal banking. Unfortunately, most of that report's finding were redacted.

The only alternative many Canadians currently have is the usurious pay-day loans and check-cashing services, which, through astoundingly high interest rates, cruelly bleed the hapless user. In a report done two years ago by Marketplace,, the rate for loans appeared to be an astounding 47%:

Lenders in Canada can charge up to 60 per cent interest, according to the Criminal Code of Canada. A rate of 46.96 per cent seems well under this threshold, but there are several ways of calculating interest. In fact, a 46.96 per cent APR (annual percentage rate) comes in at just under 60 per cent when using the calculation dictated by federal law. 

"So they all manoeuvre just below, just to make sure there are no [criminal] charges," said Ringuette. "Quite a good business plan for them. But what about Canadian consumers?"

Given that interest rates were at record lows until recently, that people would borrow/cash cheques at one of these businesses attests to their desperation, a desperation that could be alleviated by postal banking.

Unfortunately, our government overlords seem very loathe to permit the kind of competition that would unsettle not only payday loan services but, more importantly, the fat profits enjoyed by the big banks. Why? One part of the answer surely lies in the composition of our federal governments, including the current one. Most are hardly what you would call rank-and-file Canadians; the kind of money it takes to run for office and get elected is to be found largely in campaign donations from the moneyed, who will not back those wishing to upset the applecart. As well, the vast majority of our representatives move in circles that most of us only know about second hand. Not for us are the environs of the Bronfmans, the Rodgers, the CEOs of big business, all with vested interests in maintaining as much as possible the status quo that benefits them so richly.

None of what I have written should come as a revelation. However, with current levels of political disengagement, there would seem little prospect of (or need for) real change. Until Canadians start demanding better, our politicians will continue to worship at the altar of our Corporate Giants.

The Real Snowflakes

The extreme right seems to take pleasure in calling progressive people snowflakes, implying that they are such sensitive souls that any criticism or views that don't accord with theirs hurt their feelings. Of course, the real snowflakes are the rabid right, who profess outrage whenever someone calls them what they are, tin-foil-hat devotees. Yet somehow it is alright for them to call for Trudeau's execution or, more popularly, brandish their F.ck Trudeau emblems. 

The following young lady, who I have featured before, takes the true measure of these people in the following short video.

A Hidden History

Ideally, history teaches us about the past, enabling us to gain perspective on what came before and learn lessons so that we don't make the same mistakes over and over again, ad infinitum. While recent history underscores the fact that we are not apt students, even the small chance of taking instruction from the past is not possible when some history is purposely hidden, obscured, or minimized. 

That is precisely what happened with the race massacres that occurred in the United States starting around 1916 and culminating in the Tulsa Massacre of 1921. I have to admit that I only learned of the latter when viewing HBO's Watchmen, which begins with that event.

I just finished watching Rise Again: Tulsa and The Red Summer, a National Geographic documentary that, in my view, should be required viewing in high schools throughout the U.S. as part of their history courses. In it, students would learn not only about the Tulsa Massacre but also the myriad ones that preceded it in places as diverse as Washington D.C., Elaine Arkansas, and New York City. It is precisely this kind of access to knowledge that Ron DeSantis in Florida is trying to make illegal.

Here is the trailer for the film, which I cannot recommend highly enough.

Shameless And Incorrigible

I was going to post about Doug Ford today on another topic today, but then I came across this video, yet another testament to his shameless lack of ethics and morality. It pertains to the recent announcement that Magna International will be the recipient of a $23 million Ford government grant for EV development despite this fact: The company has a net worth of $15.6 billion and has more than 200 locations worldwide, according to Forbes.

Oh, and one more thing. Ford's daughter, Kayla, works for Magna. Apparently, conflict of interest is a concept beyond the premier's ken.

About The Company We (Or At Least Some Of Us) Keep

Normally, I would say that the following consists simply of unsupported assertions. However, since it is about Doug Ford, and with the stench of corruption so overpowering, it is in my view justified, the Premier's stout denials of impropriety notwithstanding.

If we are indeed judged by the company we keep (and cultivate), Doug Ford and his crew are surely wanting. Corruption, and the appearance of it, should be countenanced by no one, and will hopefully be remembered at the next provincial election.

The American Taliban

One of the main joys of this part of my life is helping to look after our granddaughter, who is now 18 months old and very, very bright and engaged in the world around her. Sometimes, in order to 'coax' her to eat, we play some children's programming available on YouTube. Like the many books she has, the programs involve a diversity of characters, both White and non-White, both straight and gay, which I think is a tremendous way of teaching about the world's diversity.

Education has real power.

Unfortunately, in Ron DeSantis' world, diversity is perceived as inimical to young minds, and many jurisdictions in Florida are pursuing with real gusto his directives against materials that will enlighten young minds and ultimately help develop critical-thinking skills.

The following is from TizzyEnt (aka Michael McWhorter) whom I follow on Twitter. He makes a daily practice of calling out injustice and racism, and most of his material is quite compelling. See for yourself in the following.

It is doubtful that many people in Florida see themselves as the American Taliban, but I will be happy to hear from those who would challenge that assertion.

Such Blatant Hypocrisy

 

Being on the right side of history is a popular desire these days, and many opportunities are afforded by Black History Month. It offers progressives and companies the chance to stand with the Black community in expressing pride in their multitude of achievements that many people are unaware of. If you doubt those achievements, a quick online search will enlighten you.

Unfortunately, many companies citing solidarity with Black people and an abhorrence of racism do so as a kind of corporate virtue-signaling, while their true character is to be found elsewhere.

Such is the case in Ron DeSantis's Florida, where the governor's corporate contributors reveal a startling hypocrisy. And that hypocrisy envelops many national brands, all quite recognizable.

Amazon, AT&T, Coca-Cola, Comcast, DoorDash, General Motors and Walmart have all made public statements in celebration of Black History Month. Google posted online on 1 February: “Learn how Google is recognizing and celebrating Black voices, joy and success this Black History Month.”

But the Center for Political Accountability found that each of these companies donated significant sums of money to political groups that prominently supported DeSantis.

Another egregious offender, at least before relations with DeSantis went south, is Disney.

... early in the election cycle ... Disney contributed $50,000 to his re-election campaign and $125,000 to the Republican party of Florida, which supported his campaign and inauguration.

The list goes on, and you need only read the Guardian article to get more names. 

What makes this so shameful? As I have written previously, DeSantis is on a campaign to control what Florida's children read and learn about Black history.

 Earlier this month, the second-term governor announced plans to block state colleges from having programs on diversity, equity and inclusion as well as critical race theory, or CRT, which examines the ways in which racism was embedded into American law and other modern institutions, maintaining the dominance of white people.

The DeSantis administration also blocked a new advanced placement course on African American studies from being taught in high schools, saying it violates state law and is historically inaccurate. In the new framework, topics including Black Lives Matter, reparations and queer theory are not part of the exam.

And last year, DeSantis signed the “Stop Woke Act” that restricts certain race-based conversations and analysis in schools and businesses. The law bars instruction that defines people as necessarily oppressed or privileged based on their race.

A US state shelved m book – yet all I was doing was trying to help people live their lives

Fox Fisher

Read more

The governor has imposed sweeping restrictions on books in public schools, forcing some teachers to remove books from their libraries or use paper to cover up their shelves. They face felony charges if unsanctioned books are present in their classrooms.

ThThe pattern of repression is clear, and it is spreading.

At least 25 states have considered legislation or other steps to limit how race can be taught, according to an analysis by Education Week. Eight states have banned or limited the teaching of critical race theory or similar concepts through laws or administrative actions.

     All of which reminds us of the true nature of the corporate imperative: to make money, to pursue its fiduciary obligations to shareholders, and to lie with ease when it benefits them.

At  least we still have journalists willing and able to provide a transparency that many would be more than happy to obscure.

 

It's Not Going Away

In my post about homelessness the other day, I wrote, In Toronto, a motion that would have kept warming centres open from November to April was defeated, despite shelter space being at a premium. 

Homelessness is not going away, and many citizens are acutely aware of that fact and the immorality of Toronto's decision.

A shameful shelter vote, Feb. 10

I am sad and appalled by Council’s heartless and immoral vote against 24/7 warming centres this winter. There can be no justification for voting against providing warmth for people seeking shelter from the cold.

People need warm, safe places to be instead of stairwells, bridges, parks, ttc buses and subways, libraries, etc. The approximately $400,000 per month warming centres would cost, is a drop in the bucket compared to other city expenses that are not vital to prevent suffering and save lives.

The basic purpose of government is to provide essential services for the safety and security of its citizens. As Edward Keenan opines, when there’s money for police and the World Cup, how can 100 people a day be turned away from shelter?

I am angry that the Mayor and Council have failed their core responsibility.

 Dawn Michael, Toronto

The heartless decision of the mayor and some councillors not to see keeping warming centres as their first priority shames all Torontonians.

Brydon Gombay, Toronto

One need only walk a few city blocks or ride the TTC to be confronted with the human suffering and despair of individuals who are unhoused.

It is heartbreaking to witness people bedded down on our sidewalks and to know that our elected representatives believe that the citizens of this city are OK with this callous disregard for human life.

The complex issues that lead to homelessness are certainly not resolved by warming shelters, but leaving people exposed to the cruel elements of our Toronto winters is just wrong.

Barbara McMorrow, Toronto

The refusal of Toronto city council to ensure there are warming places 27/7 in the winter is a new low, done while the police budget is goosed upwards.

But maybe we can lower the bar to something the slim majority of council might support: opening up the city hall parking garage as a shelter.

I’m sure it isn’t all that well used, especially on the lower levels, and at least it’s warmer than outside. It’s already owned by the city, and there’s a lot of security around already. Yes, if it were completely repurposed, it might present a problem for some of the drivers at city hall, but Line 1 subway is minutes away. and there’s the Bay Street bus and the Queen streetcar.

Hamish Wilson, Toronto

There are clearly no simple answers to the growing dimensions of homelessness, but at least the above, and I am certain many thousands more, are unwilling to accept a patently untenable status quo. 

It is incumbent upon all of us to speak for those who have no voice.

 

 

 

My Man Snoop Dogg

Can't beat him for colour commentary, as you will see:

Given contemporary events, I thought a change of pace was called for.

The Face of Homelessness

I have been thinking a lot about the homeless for quite awhile now. It is a problem difficult to ignore given the proliferation of people 'living rough,' attested to by the increasingly common tent encampments that are frequently rather gleefully taken down with alacrity by city officials. Are there alternatives? In Toronto, a motion that would have kept warming centres open from November to April was defeated, despite shelter space being at a premium. 

Unquestionably, it is to our collective shame that people are living without a semblance of dignity, dignity they could achieve if we made it a real political issue. 

The poor have no political voice, largely because they don't vote and have no power. Leverage only occurs further up the social scale. But it it would seem far past time that people realize, if not for altruistic reasons, then at least for selfish ones, that the problem of homelessness is everyone's problem. 

Consider the recent, seemingly unprovoked, attacks on people in the street, on the streetcar and in the subway, often in broad daylight. Obviously, those perpetrating the attacks are largely mentally ill, a condition frequently exacerbated, if not caused, by homelessness. 

You can do it for yourself, or you can do it for the collective good. And yes, that would require a reallocation of government resources and/or tax increases for the the well-to-do, something that has become the third rail in politics.

The homeless have a face. Thanks to ESN Parkdale for the following:

Richard was evicted from Lakeshore and Jameson yesterday. His tent and belongings were trashed in front of him, by a large mechanical claw and a group of

@cityoftoronto

workers. They didn’t offer any shelter, because there’s none available (per the City’s own stats).

Food For Thought

I found this on Twitter. Thanks to Michael Warburton for this clip on Mohammed Ali musing about language.