The Warning Signs Are All There

There are many reasons that can be adduced for the declining health of democracy: widespread disaffection from the political process; pervasive anger among citizens; the disproportionate influence of social media; economic inequality and inequity, widespread ignorance and mental laziness, the endless scramble to provide food and shelter for one's family, etc.

But whatever the reason, people ignore the warning signs of this decline at our collective peril. Not unlike Hitler in Mein Kampf, in the United States Donald Trump is clearly signalling his plans to dismantle the constitution and country that people have traditionally pled their allegiance to.

And people should be very, very afraid.

During a Veterans Day speech, Mr. Trump used language that echoed authoritarian leaders who rose to power in Germany and Italy in the 1930s, degrading his political adversaries as “vermin” who needed to be “rooted out.”

“The threat from outside forces,” Mr. Trump said, “is far less sinister, dangerous and grave than the threat from within.”

From a man who has professed admiration for dictators like Vladimir Putin and Rodrigo Duterte, these are dangerous utterances.

Scholars, Democrats and anti-Trump Republicans are asking anew how much Mr. Trump resembles current strongmen abroad and how he compares to authoritarian leaders of the past. 

“There are echoes of fascist rhetoric, and they’re very precise,” said Ruth Ben-Ghiat, a professor at New York University who studies fascism. “The overall strategy is an obvious one of dehumanizing people so that the public will not have as much of an outcry at the things that you want to do.” 

Beyond his dangerous rhetoric, what exactly is Trump planning? Apparently, this tactics will

include using the Justice Department to take vengeance on his political rivals, plotting a vast expansion of presidential power and installing ideologically aligned lawyers in key positions to bless his contentious actions.

Even Trump defenders trying to explain away these seeming threats reveal more than they know in their pallid defences of their man.

Steven Cheung, a campaign spokesman, responded to criticism of the “vermin” remarks by saying it came from reactive liberals whose “sad, miserable existence will be crushed when President Trump returns to the White House.” 

He has tested the legal system with broadsides against the integrity of the judiciary, railing against prosecutors, judges and, more recently, a law clerk in his New York fraud trial as “politically biased” and “out of control.”

 Crowds at Mr. Trump’s events have generally affirmed his calls to drive out the political establishment and to destroy the “fake news media.” Supporters do not flinch when he praises leaders like Mr. Orban, Xi Jinping of China and Vladimir V. Putin of Russia.

Standing amid nearly two dozen American flags at an Independence Day celebration in South Carolina in July, Mr. Trump promised retribution against Mr. Biden and his family.

“The gloves are off,” he said. The crowd unleashed a resounding cheer.

Simple people like simple solutions. Given the composition of the American populace, it is clear that many living there have found their voice, and their man, in Donald Trump.

Shiny New Things

 

Despite our professed admiration for things that have withstood the test of time (heritage buildings, old literature and traditional values come to mind), it is undeniable that there is much allure to be found in the new as well. We marvel at innovative architecture, science and engineering, to name but three. And that is often all to the good; otherwise we would simply be mired in the past. 

However,  sometimes we can be blinded by the sheen of shiny new things and fail to appreciate the many costs that accrue in throwing out the old and embracing the new.

Such is the case with the Doug Ford government's plan to redevelop Ontario Place in the image of a tawdry but expensive spa, a development that has both  profound financial (think $600 million taxpayers' dollars to build an underground parking lot), aesthetic and environmental costs. Many protests have occurred opposing this development, and now an insider has emerged to voice his concern.

A prominent landscape architect, known for designing Trillium and Tommy Thompson parks, has walked away from the redevelopment of Ontario Place, citing his opposition to clearing hundreds of trees to make way for a private spa and waterpark on Toronto’s waterfront.

After it became clear he couldn’t influence plans from the inside, Walter Kehm told the Star he could no longer be tied to a project that threatens a decades-old wildlife habitat, likening his professional commitment to protect nature to a doctor’s Hippocratic oath: “Do no harm.”

Earlier this fall, the former director of the University of Guelph’s school of landscape architecture resigned as a senior principal at Toronto-based LANDinc, one of two firms under contract to help design and construct the “public realm” of Ontario Place.

Kehm voices concern about the less-obvious destruction involved in this construction.

In more than half a century, “the 800 trees on the West Island have developed their own ecological niche,” he said. “We’re talking about more than the trees. We’re talking about a home for all the species that live there.”

Refreshingly, this expert  is able to consider something other than the bottom line.

Kehm said he had repeatedly advocated to preserve the trees on the West Island, as part of his broader vision for a forested Toronto waterfront, including during a meeting near the end of last summer.

The “big vision” for Toronto’s waterfront that Kehm had fought for, one he’s dubbed the “Emerald Necklace,” takes inspiration from a connected chain of parks that runs through Boston.

In the midst of a mental health crisis — on top of a changing climate — he stressed the importance of not only protecting “urban forests,” such as the one found on West Island, but also creating more opportunities for Torontonians to harness nature’s therapeutic benefits. 

In the world of quick profits and secret, sleazy backroom deals that characterize the Ford government, a public expression of integrity is both rare and welcome. I therefore leave the final world to Kehm:

“Nature is calming for the soul,” he reasoned. “You don’t need a spa for that. You need trees.”

 

 

 

Such Elequence!

This took place at a school board meeting in Virginia. The rest is self-explanatory.

I'm Getting Tired

The woes of the world are wearing me down. I therefore choose to change channels completely today and focus on comedy, one of the few escapes this world permits almost everyone.

There are five comedians whose work I have revered for many years. At the top of the pantheon is George Carlin, whose clips I have featured more than once on this blog. The other four are as follows: Albert Brooks, Gary Shandling, Larry David and Jerry Seinfield. The absurdity of their observational and conceptual humour may not appeal to everyone, but in this fractured world, you have to find relief where you can.

There is a new documentary on Crave called Albert Brooks: Defending My Life. Here is a clip from it:

Enjoy, and forget the rest of the world, if only for a brief time.

If You Are Of A Certain Age

 ... you will get this, the latest from Moudakis.

About That Free Speech Thing

Increasingly, it seems that free speech and freedom of expression are contingent upon whether the powers that be approve of your views. Recent events surrounding the Israel-Gaza war underscore that reality.

Close to home, Humber College has expressed 'regret'  over a recent incident where a student was removed from campus for his views. 

• 
  
  
• X
• Email
• Reddit
• LinkedIn

Dozens of students organized a walkout at Humber College in Toronto on Tuesday after one student was removed from campus for putting up stickers of the Palestinian flag amid heightened tensions on many Canadian university campuses.

Hani Alaf, a Syrian-Canadian postgraduate student, says he plastered about a dozen stickers around Humber's Lakeshore campus last Tuesday. The stickers depicted the Palestinian flag and read "Boycott Israeli Apartheid."

Two days later, he was sitting in class when a staff member of Humber's public safety department approached him and asked him to leave campus and not return, he says.

"[I was told] that I have been accused of spreading hate speech, of spreading antisemitic rhetoric and of desecrating and vandalizing property," Alaf told CBC Toronto.

Told that he would be arrested should he return. Hence the student walkout, and now that the incident has been held up to the sanitizing rays of public scrutiny,  the college has expressed its regrets and he can return to campus.

And slightly farther afield, there is the great exception American Republicans are taking with Palestinian-American House Democrat Rashida Tlaib, who has tried to emphasize the humanity of victims on both sides. To their shame, a number of her fellow Democrats voted for the censure, the final count being 234-188 in favour of her censure.

But she is not prepared to accept this:

In remarks on the House floor, Tlaib defended her criticism of the country and urged lawmakers to join in calling for a ceasefire in Gaza.

“I will not be silenced and I will not let you distort my words,” Tlaib said. “No government is beyond criticism. The idea that criticizing the government of Israel is antisemitic sets a very dangerous precedent, and it’s been used to silence diverse voices speaking up for human rights across our nation.”

She also said she had condemned the Hamas attacks on Israeli citizens several times.

Finally, across the  pond, English PM Rishi Sunak has no tolerance for a pro-Palestinian protest on Armistice Day, one that the Met Commissioner, Mark Rowley refuses to block:

Rishi Sunak has vowed to hold the Metropolitan police commissioner, Mark Rowley, “accountable” for his defiance of demands for a ban on a pro-Palestinian march in London planned for Armistice Day.

Downing Street would not say whether the government would overrule the Met’s decision.

Asked whether it would intervene, the official said: “The Met are operationally independent and obviously the focus on the discussion today is about their approach. It is a poignant weekend of remembrance where people from across the UK come together. Planning a march to coincide with that which, based on previous marches, may include incidents of expressing racial hatred, for which there were a number of arrests last weekend, would be provocative and disrespectful.”

Sterling examples of free speech and freedom of expression, something we are always told are legacies of those who fought and died in both world wars, seem no longer the tradition when dealing with Pro-Palestinian demonstrations.

Irony, anyone?

 

• Facebook
• X
• Emai

• Reddit

• 
  

Repost: Sometimes, All You Can Do Is Feed The Birds

Let's face it: life is grim these days, the Israeli-Hamas war but another reminder of our collective inhumanity, not just in the perpetration of evil acts of destruction but also in the very debate about whether a ceasefire in the killing of Gazans should be considered. with over 10,000 Palestinians dead thus far, that the question has become a huge heated topic of debate perhaps tells us a great deal about how far we have sunk. I am reminded of a term that was often used on the television series Law and Order: depraved indifference.

Additionally, given the rapidly deteriorating conditions of the world politically,  environmentally, socially and just about every other way one can think of, rather that simply disengaging in life, and hiding in our caves. is there a solution that is realistic and eminently doable.?

Over a year ago, I posted something about my personal philosophy that perhaps provides a partial solution, at least for me. Here is that post:

For many years, there was a popular saying that everyone seemed to know: "Think globally, act locally." Basically, it was a call to consider the global environmental implications in every decision we make. Not a bad sentiment, but I find myself living by something quite different in these latter days of my life.

In my backyard, which is perpetually sun-challenged, I have an array of drought-resistant perennials ranging from Hostas to Black-eyed Susans to Purple Coneflowers. Unfortunately, I have never had any luck with my Milkweed efforts, but at least the 'garden' offers something for pollinators.

Also in the backyard I keep a birdbath and two bird feeders, both of which I replenish regularly. Seeing the birds come and the bees collecting pollen offers me a small measure of comfort in these dark days. Because, when you think about it, sometimes all you can do is feed the birds.

The above  essentially encapsulates what has become my philosophy of life. Recognizing that the big issues like war, famine, drought, massive climate change, to name but four, have little likelihood of remediation, I was forced to change my outlook in order to keep even a semblance of hope and positivity.

Feeding the birds both literally and metaphorically allows me to maintain my humanity. Metaphorically, it means doing some good, usually locally, where I can. Such acts do not have a world-shaking impact but perhaps might make someone else's life just a little bit better or at least reduce their suffering in a small way.

I will not bore you with details of how I try to practise this philosophy, but opportunities to help abound: community refrigerators, hot-meal programs, volunteering, foodbanks, mentoring, helping a neigbour, providing a sympathetic ear to someone in distress,  just being present for another, etc.. Each of us, in our way, in our own communities, can help to "feed the birds." 

In my life, I have much to be thankful for. I accept the goodness in my life with gratitude, knowing that days of grace are guaranteed to no one, nor are they really ever merited. As grateful as I am, if I can do even a little to show monetary/emotional support for individuals who are suffering, I feel called to do so.

We sometimes really do underestimate what a kind word, a sympathetic voice, a show of support or a small donation can achieve in someone's life.

Nearer My God To Thee

As the Benighted States of Amerika lurches ever-closer to a full-blown theocracy with the election of Mike Johnson as House Speaker, a timely reminder: be careful what you wish for:

Amen.

UPDATED: Powerful Political Leadership

As the war between Israel and Gaza rages on, it is almost too painful to watch the devastation that the former is inflicting on the latter. I have always been steadfast in my view that criticism of Israel, which is clearly warranted in its ongoing retaliation for the horrible Hamas attack, is not a manifestation of anti-Semitism, but rather the valid criticism of a nation-state, something we do regularly when other countries overstep their bounds.

Sadly, however, politics being what it is, most 'leaders' are loathe to engage in anything more than pro-forma declarations of Israel's right to defend itself, while inserting parenthetic sympathy for the humanitarian crisis in Gaza. Political courage and leadership are most often singularly lacking in the discussion.

Nonetheless, most right-thinking people are undoubtedly appalled by the rising number of anti-Semitic outrages being committed these days under the pretext of reaction to Israel's actions in Gaza. People are being attacked, children are afraid to venture out to school, places of worship are being desecrated. None of this can be justified. 

Germany, which knows well the cost of anti-Semitism, offers an especially lucid and heartfelt analysis of the ugliness that is spreading; given its history, what it says matters. German Vice-Chancellor Robert Habeck released the following nine-minute video, which merits careful viewing and careful reflection. It makes a clear distinction between legitimate criticism of the Jewish state and anti-Semitic actions. Even if you don't have the time to watch the entire piece, try to watch some of it, as the concern, compassion, balance and historical context contained therein are well-worth your consideration.

UPDATE: Thanks to Toby for providing this link to a full transcript of Habeck's speech.

Two Seasonal Reminders

I guess we never really outgrow Halloween, especially when the auguries spell something scary for Doug Ford.

And editorial cartoonists are certainly trying to put the fear of God into the premier:

H/t Theo Moudakis

A Sunday Thought

With the NDP imploding under the weight of idealists and ideologues, and with some calling for the resignation of Marit Stiles, the following editorial cartoon seems to hit its target:

The only possible victor emerging from this debacle, in my view, will be the Ontario Liberals, especially if they choose Bonnie Crombie (who Doug Ford fears) as their next leader. While one female leader sinks, another will likely rise.

Not A Team Player

 

I have never been much of a joiner. I never really participated in team sports, committees (unless I had no choice), or group endeavours. There is something about the passionate intensity of such pursuits that has always left me cold. And, of course, history teaches us a great deal about happens when we lose ourselves in collective mania.

I therefore feel a measure of sympathy for Hamilton Centre MPP Sara Jama, the erstwhile NDP member ousted from caucus over her refusal to recognize and submit to the party hierarchy. It is not always easy to play nice with others. But my sympathy is limited.

There are many posts on social media decrying NDP leader Marit Stiles' decision to remove Jama. Some profess admiration for Jama's unwavering defence of Palestinians and vow never again to vote for the party. Indeed, someone went so far as to vandalize the window of Stiles' constituency office.

All, of course, are entitled to their opinion, but what they fail to understand in their idealistic fervour is that politics is a team sport. It is something one presumably knows before running for office. And it is a truth that Ms. Jama chose to ignore repeatedly.

Marit Stiles had this to say about her removal from caucus:

NDP Leader Marit Stiles announced Monday that Sarah Jama was removed from caucus because she has “broken the trust of her colleagues,” less than an hour before government MPPs passed a motion that will prevent Ms. Jama from speaking in the legislature.

 Ms. Jama, who was elected last March to the riding of Hamilton Centre, has been the source of controversy for the NDP after she posted a statement two weeks ago about the conflict in the Middle East. The post focused on the plight of Palestinians and human-rights violations in Gaza but did not speak about Israeli lives lost or condemn Hamas for its atrocities against Jewish people.

Ms. Stiles initially demanded that Ms. Jama remove the post, but the rookie MPP did not do so. Instead, Ms. Jama issued an apology to Jewish and Israeli people, condemned Hamas, and called for a release of all hostages and an end to the siege in Gaza. Ms. Jama’s original post, which she has since moved to the top of her social media, remains online. 

It would seem that Stiles worked earnestly to avoid removing her from caucus.

“Ms. Jama and I had reached an agreement to keep her in the NDP caucus, which included working together in good faith with no surprises. Our caucus and staff have made significant efforts to support her during an undoubtedly difficult time,” Ms. Stiles said in a statement.

“Since then, she has undertaken a number of unilateral actions that have undermined our collective work and broken the trust of her colleagues.”

Drilling right done to the essential truth, it is clear that Jama, in her own purist approach to politics, was undermining Stiles' very leadership of the Ontario NDP, as well as offering the gift to the Ford government of diversion from the Greenbelt scandal. These are two facts that the idealists among us fail to acknowledge.

Politics has been called "the art of the possible," a pragmatic perspective that, in my view, speaks another essential truth. By ignoring that truth, Jama has consigned herself to political oblivion and betrayed her obligations to her entire constituency.

 

Unpalatable Truth

 

The Israeli-Gaza war is heart-breaking, so much so that I find I cannot look at imagery of the dead on both sides. The Hamas attack on Israel was horrific, but so is the Israeli retaliation, clearly breaking international law by targeting civilians in Gaza. What is little known and virtually unreported in North America, however, is how the Jewish nation has in fact cultivated Hamas for many years.

From the 1970s onwards, Israel aided the development first of the Muslim Brotherhood in Gaza, and subsequently Hamas, created by the Brotherhood during the 1987 intifada. The aim was to undermine the authority of the secular PLO. “Bolstered by this policy”, the Times of Israel observed last week, “Hamas grew stronger”. Those who want to maintain the land of Israel solely for Jews and those who want to eliminate Jews from that land are as much in a mutual embrace as in a death struggle.

And this was reported by UPI in 2002: 

...according to several current and former U.S. intelligence officials, beginning in the late 1970s, Tel Aviv gave direct and indirect financial aid to Hamas over a period of years.

Israel "aided Hamas directly -- the Israelis wanted to use it as a counterbalance to the PLO (Palestinian Liberation Organization)," said Tony Cordesman, Middle East analyst for the Center for Strategic Studies.

The Times of Israel reports that,

[b]olstered by this policy, Hamas grew stronger and stronger until Saturday, Israel’s “Pearl Harbor,” the bloodiest day in its history — when terrorists crossed the border, slaughtered hundreds of Israelis and kidnapped an unknown number under the cover of thousands of rockets fired at towns throughout the country’s south and center.

Where all of this will end is anyone's guess; the odds of the conflict spreading are significant. The only thing I know with any certainty is that reflexively supporting Israel, no matter what it does, will only ensure that the suffering on both sides is prolonged, and the press does no one any good by self-censorship in this matter.

Consequently, the anger, resentment and hatred felt by Palestinians today will find new generations to carry on this conflict, either overtly or through repeated, smaller attacks, long into the future.

 

In All Humility

This is all we can really say:

Real Thinking Requires Hard Work

I have thus far refrained from writing anything about the atrocities taking place in The Middle East. I have nothing constructive to add to the debate. However, I can't help but make an observation and reproduce the thoughts of another writer, who I will get to in a moment.

First, a walk down memory lane: the immediate aftermath of 9/11 saw this famous declaration from then-president George Bush:

Such a proclamation, that you are either "with us ...  or you are with the enemy" is clearly the product of an untutored mind, a mind that sees the world in bifurcated, absolutist terms. It is the favoured stance of both the simple-minded and the extreme radical, on both the left and right of the political spectrum. They allow for no nuance, no willingness or capacity to hold two conflicting views at the same time. God forbid that reason should enter into the calculus.

And so it is in the current war between Israel and Hamas/Gaza, the refusal to allow for the fact that the terrible attack on Israel did not happen in a vacuum, and the suffering inflicted on both sides is horrendous and worthy of condemnation. 

I came upon a very thoughtful and thought-provoking article today by The Star's Shree Paradkar, one that doubtlessly will bring about a severe reaction from some. Because many readers do not subscribe to newspapers, I am taking the liberty of reproducing the entire piece, something I don't think I have ever done before in this blog.

See what you think:

I’ve been sick for a few days. Now I’m sick at heart. Sick in body and spirit. Like many in Canada, I’ve spent a sleepless night that’s reverberating with the sound of a clock a world away. Tick-tock, tick-tock.

More than a million people given 24 hours to get out, or else.

How are they planning it? What will the elderly and disabled do? Are there roads?

Will they send the minors first? Half a million of them?

Bombardments on the way.

No water.

No food.

No electricity.

The babies on incubators in hospitals? The people in the ICU?

No beeps there.

Tick-tock, tick-tock.

What about the Israeli young ones who died?

That, too, is a tragedy. Of course, it is horrendous.

Hamas is bad. The Israeli government is bad. Innocent Israelis and Palestinians are being targeted and killed.

See, it’s not difficult to believe more than one thing is true at the same time.

But since the Hamas surprise attack last weekend in Israel that included mass killings and hostage taking, and Israel’s vicious retaliation including tightening its 16-year-long illegal blockade on Gaza, we have been fixated on a fake litmus test that decides whether we care for humanity or whether we support terrorism. The test question: “Do you condemn Hamas”?

Of course I condemn them — but why must I be made to say it?

Have we lost our reason? Or have we simply pulled off the mask of reasonableness?

When Hamilton NDP member Sarah Jama released a statement in solidarity with Palestinian people, the response in corners that usually see chest thumping about free speech became chilling very quickly. First there was her own party leader Marit Stiles publicly throwing her under the bus, asking for a retraction. There was Premier Doug Ford demanding she step down, falsely claiming Jama was “publicly supporting the rape and murder of innocent Jewish people ” Of course, she had done no such thing, but the howls became louder.

A Black, Muslim disabled woman was being hounded. Then the racists smelled blood and came rushing up to say, “Go back to where you came from,” and much worse.

Eventually Jama apologized.

Her sin? She hadn’t condemned the attack.

But not condemning it does not mean support of it, or of Hamas. It’s not so hard to understand the reluctance to condemn the Hamas attack on demand, horrible though it is. The Palestinian ambassador to the UK, Husam Zomlot, who lost family to Israeli attacks, puts it this way: “It’s the Palestinians that are always expected to condemn themselves,” he told the BBC in a now viral video. “How many times has Israel committed war crimes live on your own camera. Do you start by asking them to condemn themselves?”

He’s right.

Palestinians are so rarely defended. More than a million people in north Gaza, half of them children under 18 who have never voted, and certainly not for Hamas? Abandoned by the world, how can they be saved? Tick-tock, tick-tock.

So now, in a cruel twist, it has fallen upon Jews — the very people whose trauma was triggered by the Hamas attack — to put aside their own grieving, their own coping and become the voice of restraint.

That’s why Jewish groups such as Independent Jewish Voices Canada are calling for a ceasefire. Or why we see Daniel Levy, president of the U.S.-Middle East project, getting so blunt on TV. When a BBC reporter said: “The Israelis would say we’re targeting Hamas,” he said, “Do you really keep a straight face when you say that? Do you think terrorist organizations embedded in populations who are denied their most basic rights are ended once and for all in a military campaign? Does that happen in history?”

Tick-tock.

A day after the Hamas attacks, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said, “Canada unequivocally condemns” them and that Canada reaffirms its support for Israel’s right to defend itself in accordance with international law.”

Other Western leaders condemned the attack, with U.S. President Joe Biden calling it “an act of sheer evil.” But all pretended that this was happening in a vacuum. Nobody is asking them to justify it, but there wasn’t even an attempt to acknowledge how we got here.

The international law is now being openly broken. Forced deportation or forced transfers are defined as both a war crime and a crime against humanity.

Could the international community now condemn Israel?

No. The U.S. sent weapons.

Could other people protest on behalf of Palestinians?

No. Germany, France and many European nations banned them (some rightfully when they descended into antisemitism).

Could the politicians at least acknowledge that Palestinians have been denied basic human rights?

No.

Could the politicians say: Palestinians have a right to live?

Apparently even that is too much.

While Gaza starts to get closer to extinction, all Trudeau managed were a few waffling words about unilateral military actions “not contributing to the kind of future we all want to see.”

U.S. Secretary of State Anthony Blinken asked Israel to show restraint.

Tick-tock.

History needs to know we saw this happening, we understood what it was and we did nothing to prevent it.

We need to know that to be on the right side of history requires that we grow a backbone in the present.

Real thinking requires hard work. It would appear that many of us are not up to the task.