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.

Wasted Opportunities

 

While I have posted now a few times on Florida Governor Ron DeSantis's campaign to keep people in abysmal ignorance. there always seems to be something more to say on the topic. My friend Gary alerted me to a new article in The Guardian about the fervent Floridian's campaign to lay waste to young minds, keep them in profound ignorance about American history, and feed red meat to his acolytes.

Last year he signed the Don’t Say Gay bill, a nasty little law that bans classroom discussion of sexuality or gender identity issues – effectively forcing children and teachers alike to stay silent about their families and lives, under the threat of lawsuits. 

Since then, the Florida governor has repeated the playbook in increasingly ambitious fashion. Last April, DeSantis signed the exhaustingly titled “Stop Woke Act,” which restricts lessons on racial inequality in public schools. The bill prohibits the teaching of material that could cause a student to “feel guilt, anguish, or other forms of psychological distress,” due to US racial history ...

Indeed, DeSantis seems intent on obstructing anything that might foster greater awareness and critical thinking.

In mid-January, DeSantis’ Department of Education issued new guidance to educators, saying that all books that have not been approved by a state compliance censor – euphemistically termed a “school media specialist” – should be concealed or removed from classrooms. Because the law deems some books “pornographic” or “obscene,” it also creates the possibility that teachers who provide books that feature LGBT content to students could be given third-degree felony charges. 

And, as mentioned in my previous post, he hasn't stopped there. 

Last month, DeSantis announced that he would ban the AP African American studies course, saying that the course, which had initially included readings on Black feminism, the Black queer experience, and the Black Lives Matter movement, violated his Stop Woke Act, and was “pushing an agenda on our kids.” 

Sadly, the College Board cowardly acquiesced in this effort to quell inquiry, and now DeSantis has set his sights even higher.

Last week, the governor announced a sweeping agenda to overhaul the state’s public universities, aiming to make their curricula more conservative by eliminating tenure protections for progressive faculty and requiring courses on “Western Civilization.” He’s started with the New College of Florida, a small liberal arts honors college with an artsy reputation. There, DeSantis installed a new board made up of Christian college administrators, Republican think-tank denizens, and the right-wing online influencer Christopher Rufo. The board promptly fired the college president, and has set about reshaping the mission and instruction of the college in DeSantis’ image.

De Santis's motives in all of this crass obstructionism is transparent.

Schools are spaces where lots of voters – and crucially, lots of the white, conservative voters that DeSantis needs to mobilize – feel they have a stake. It’s easy to get people riled up and panicked about kids, easy to pray on people’s protectiveness towards their children as a way to exploit their anxieties about the future, about a changing culture, about lost innocence. And frankly, it’s easy to get people to be mad at teachers...

And if that weren't bad enough, there is a more sinister interpretation to what he is doing.

... there is a more foundational reason why DeSantis and the far right are attacking education: it is the means by which our young people are made into citizens. Schools and universities are laboratories of aspiration, places where young people cultivate their own capacities, expose themselves to the experiences and worldviews of others, and learn what will be required of them to live responsible, tolerant lives in a pluralist society.

It is in school where they learn that social hierarchies do not necessarily correspond to personal merit; it is in school where they discover the mistakes of the past, and where they gain the tools not to repeat them. No wonder the DeSantis right, with it’s fear of critique and devotion to regressive modes of domination, seems to hostile to letting kids learn: education is how kids grow up to be the kinds of adults they can’t control.

Education has traditionally been viewed as a tool of liberation from ignorance, of social progress and increased opportunity for all. DeSantis has badly perverted it, lustily cheered on by those who would like to believe that the status quo of the 1950's (or perhaps even further back) worked just fine for everyone who mattered.

 

 

 

The Veil Of Ignorance

Lay not that flattering unction to your soul....

It will but skin and film the ulcerous place,

Whilst rank corruption, mining all within,

Infects unseen.

- Hamlet, Act 3, Scene 4

The above attests to the destructive, corrosive effects of not confronting one's wrongdoing. The wrongdoing does not go away, but continues to fester beneath the surface, often with severe consequences.

It seems the perfect metaphor to apply to  America's reluctance, and in many cases, refusal, to confront its racism.

As I recently wrote, Florida, under its governor, Ron DeSantis, seems particularly loathe to address that past, judging by the restrictions on what books and what curriculum can be taught. The main criterion for acceptability seems to be material that will keep young people in ignorance about what many of their fellow Americans have dealt with in the past and continue to confront today.

As a result of all of this, the College Board, the organization responsible for AP courses, has changed content and made optional some parts of its African American Studies. It denies that it was influenced by DeSantis's recent proclamations.

The NYT begs to differ. When the revised course was revealed at a glitzy Washington party, it was clear the board had succumbed to political pressure.

The College Board purged the names of many Black writers and scholars associated with critical race theory, the queer experience and Black feminism. It ushered out some politically fraught topics, like Black Lives Matter, from the formal curriculum.

And it added something new: “Black conservatism” is now offered as an idea for a research project.

NYT Editorial Board member, Mara Gay, elaborated  on the College Board's timidity:

They downgraded the study of Black Lives Matter, of reparations, of queer life and of incarceration. They removed prominent writers like Ta-Nehisi Coates and bell hooks, who have helped so many people understand the relationship between race, class and feminism.

It is no coincidence that the Black writers under assault, like Mr. Coates and Ms. hooks, have been militant in refusing to allow America to forget. “The time to remember is now,” Ms. hooks wrote. “The time to speak a counter hegemonic race talk that is filled with the passion of remembrance and resistance is now. All our words are needed.”

Awareness of Black history is a threat to the groups promoting racism, because 

[i]t humanizes the enslaved and their descendants. It lays bare the terrible cost of white supremacy, not only to Black Americans, but to the nation. It opens the door for exactly the reckoning that makes interracial coalitions possible, giving life to democracy and pluralism and stripping would-be tyrants of their power.

The problem is that looking directly at this history is a prospect that terrifies many white Americans. 

Canada, hardly a country awaiting canonization, at least has had the rectitude to move toward truth and reconciliation as it attempts to confront and atone for its racism toward the Indigenous.

Not so in the United States, which brings to mind an old proverb, reputedly of Russian origin, that says, Better a bitter truth than a sweet lie.

Clearly, it is a notion with which many, many Americans vehemently disagree.

 

 

 

. 

"The System Itself Is Broken"

So says Politics Girl about American law enforcement, an assertion underscored by the recent murder of Tyre Nichols, one of an untold number of victims of out-of-control police. 

American slavery may be a thing of the past, but state oppression of 
Black people continues, with no end in sight. 

I Got Nothing Today

 

...except my contempt for willful stupidity.

H/t Wu-Tang is for the Children

Reacting Instead Of Responding

 

I'm sure I am not alone in choosing not to watch the extensive video detailing the murder of Tyre Nichols. Granted, I have seen snippets on the news, but the thought of an extended viewing of a man being beaten to death holds no appeal for me.

Yet his execution on the streets of Memphis has raised a number of questions, the race of his killers not the least of them. How could five black officers have used such a level of violence against a black man? And there is no simple answer, despite those who insist there is nothing wrong with the system, just 'bad apples' who have infiltrated it as a means of exercising their abhorrent tendencies.

Others have suggested that, being black, the officers' heinous behaviour sprang from a need to show that, despite their race, they were a "part of the team," that team being the blue brotherhood - you know, the team that regularly abuses its authority, especially when dealing with people of colour, and covers up their actions accordingly.

Relatedly, others have suggested the murder just underscores a violent systemic police culture crying out for radical reform. And it is this cause that is the thorniest to deal with. Many would prefer to react to the immediate problem instead of responding with long-term solutions.

In her column today, Shree Paradkar reflects on how little progress has been made since the graphic murder at the hands of police of George Floyd, largely due kto an institutional reluctance to address root causes of the violence.

Bernice King, the lawyer and activist daughter of Martin Luther King Jr., said, “It should not require another video of a Black human being dehumanized for anyone to understand that police brutality is an urgent, devastating issue.”

The other talking point, as if to lay doubt on the fact of anti-Blackness in policing is this: “But five of the officers who brutalized Nichols are Black!”

Surely, after all the conversations about systemic racism with the “racial reckoning” of 2020, this question is but a reflection of denialism? Why else the stubborn insistence that racism is solely about what lies in the hearts of individuals?

Historically, she says, many police forces were created to monitor slaves trying to escape and move Indigenous people off their land. That legacy must be considered in contemporary police abuses.

If the race of the officers involved is relevant, it is not to give an out to white cops. It is to show how systemic racism does not require the person enforcing it to be white.

“The slogan to come out of the previous uprising wasn’t ‘Defund white police;’ it was ‘Defund the police,’ observed writer and podcaster Victor Bradley on Twitter. “Because the people focused on this issue know it isn’t justice to diversify an institution designed to enforce social injustice.”

He also pointed to the long-existing media narrative of “white cop on Black man,” leading the public to believe that personal bias of white cops was the problem. “The system is extremely anti-Black and violent even when it’s functioning normally,” he said.

Since the murder of Floyd, there has only been some tinkering around the edges of policing. 

 Anti-racism committees were instituted. Workplace workshops were briefly the rage. Lots of trauma porn — hey Black people can you horrify us with your tales of terror? Can I get you a coffee? There were some new hires and promotions: white women and non-Black people of colour benefited, continuing a history of gaining from activism for Black people. And sure, some Black people benefited, too, with institutions of power holding them up as symbols of progress, the most valued being those most willing to go along. 

But nothing systemic has really changed, and Canadians have little reason to feel superior in this regard.

Far from having their wings clipped, police power has become more entrenched than before. No city in Canada cut its budget. On the contrary, they all increased it annually (at lower rates than before, if you’re looking for reasons to hope). Given how tight city finances are, to increase the police budget is to literally deprive another more needed service in the city.

The police are convenient symbols of power when we need them. For example, given the recent spate of violence on the TTC, frequently perpetrated by mentally ill street people, it is easy for  Mayor John Tory and the TTC to say they will ramp up police presence on the subways and streetcars, while the problems underlying that violence continue to fester beneath the surface. 

Reacting is much easier than truly responding. Real change takes time. And that will never happen until there is a real appetite for it amongst the powers that be. 

 

 

 

UPDATED: She Certainly Puts Them In Their Place

Recently I have seen some quite good videos posted by young people on TikTok (a platform I am not on) that were reposted on Twitter. It heartens me to see that political awareness and engagement is not yet extinct.

I'm not sure who the following young lady is, but both her tone and her commentary about the recent anti-Trudeau shenanigans in Hamilton where the Liberal Party held a three-day retreat is priceless. I am sure it will inflame the right-wing rabble:

H/t Ryan Sarai

UPDATE: The above is Lisab0923. You can access more of her videos on TikTok.

UPDATED: The Greenbelt Fight Is Far From Over

 

If we can place any credibility in the utterances of federal politicians, the fight to save Ontario's Greenbelt from the depredations of Doug Ford's developer cronies is far from over.

According to The Narwhal, Environment Minister Steven Guilbeaut has serious concerns, given the climate change crisis we are all confronting.

... he said Ontario’s push to develop Greenbelt land “flies in the face of everything we’re trying to do in terms of being better prepared for the impacts of climate change,” and Ottawa “will be looking at the potential use of federal tools to stop some of these projects.”

 “I think we’re being told that in order to provide housing to Canadians, we need to destroy nature. I profoundly reject that premise. I think this is a way of thinking from 50 or 60 years ago.”

It appears there are two ways whereby the federal government could impede Doug Ford's greed-driven legislation. One could stop the desecration of 

the Duffins Rouge Agricultural Preserve east of Toronto, which is directly adjacent to Rouge Urban National Park. In December, Parks Canada warned Ontario that development on the agricultural preserve would violate an agreement between the two levels of government and likely cause “irreversible harm” to the park’s wildlife and ecosystems. 

Though it will likely be some time until developers firm up plans for construction on former Greenbelt land, one possible tool Guilbeault mentioned is species at risk legislation, which he can use to issue emergency orders to stop developments that would harm federally-protected species. Guilbeault did just that in Nov. 2021 when he halted work on a residential development in Longueuil, a Montreal suburb, due to threats to the habitat of the western chorus frog.

The other 

is the federal Impact Assessment Act, which the Justin Trudeau Liberals have already used to intervene on Highway 413, a controversial highway project planned to cut through the Greenbelt. The act doesn’t allow Guilbeault to unilaterally step in and halt a development — instead, citizens would need to make a request about a specific project, the Impact Assessment Agency would do an initial review and Guilbeault would decide if the federal government should give it another layer of oversight.

Guilbeaut also deplored 

that the province moved last fall to disempower conservation authorities, which oversee key watersheds, as part of Bill 23.

“I’m really saddened and shocked by what the Ontario government is doing to [the Toronto and Region Conservation Authority] and the people who invested years and years and years of efforts, time and money to advance conservation,” he said. “They can continue to be an incredible partner and we will continue to work to work with them.”

Will the growing scrutiny of the Ford government's machinations have positive results? Time will only tell, but the fact that both Ontario's auditor general and ethics commissioner  are conducting probes, and the OPP has started a preliminary investigation into the obvious criminality at work here suggests that public scrutiny, outrage and protest will not be going away anytime soon.

Something for the Ford cabal to ponder.

UPDATE: Apparently, Doug Ford is really disappointed that the feds are intruding on his 'jurisdiction'.