The Way It Can Be

Sunday, October 28, 2007

The Rise of Agriculture, The Fall of Hunting & Gathering & Humanity's Uncertain Future by Louis Evan Palmer

Rather than repeat the various claims as to agriculture's superiority over hunting & gathering, perhaps we can illustrate the situation better by exploring relevant facts & claims regarding hunting & gathering as a way of life and see how they measure up versus agriculture.

Let's begin with an interesting observation made by Timothy Earle in "How Chiefs Come to Power" - the population in north Denmark went down after they took up agriculture! This is not an isolated observation but contrasts with the often cited ability of agriculture to support a larger population with fewer producers; a fact given as one of the key reasons why agriculture supplanted hunting & gathering. Yes but maybe not right away.

However, it is difficult to properly compare the two societies because hunting & gathering societies existed for some two million years for homo erectus, and some one million years for homo sapiens, while an agriculture-based lifestyle has been with us not much more than ten thousand years. If the current agriculture-based approach falters because it is not sustainable then being able to support a huge population increase for a relatively short time will be irrelevant.

Hunting & Gathering provided a wide variety of natural seasonal foods. This resulted in better nutrition which resulted in men and women being taller in hunter-gatherer societies. A critical marker in assessing societies, particularly pre-historic ones, is average height. In this regard, hunter-gatherer was a better way to go.

Another plus for hunter-gatherer societies was that they were more egalatarian. Because they were mobile, hunter-gatherers were less subject to attack than sedantary agricultural communities. Of critical importance, hunter-gatherer groups were far less subject to disease. Major epidemic diseases like smallpox and tuberculosis are almost exclusively nurtured and confined to agriculture-based societies.

A hunter-gatherer life is often portrayed as precarious and difficult but, in fact, in good environments, it was a surprisingly leisurely life, 3 or 4 hours and you were done for the day. Much is made of the inability to store food but that also is not accurate: dried strips of meat & fish were stored and carried and a staple during hunting forays, or the winter months in colder climates; dried fruits, nuts & honey would also keep and were easily transported.

Some early cities unearthed in the Middle East were based on hunting & gathering and reached sizes of several thousand. They had some artisans and other non-food-producing members.

Distinction in a hunter-gatherer society was based more on personal attributes than on possessions - someone was a good speaker or storyteller, a good hunter, a good forager, very strong or brave or fast. The kind of things that we still value when we can think about it for long enough in the midst of the rat race we've created for ourselves.

Time will tell if people can truly make the transition to a sustainable post-agricultural society. In the meantime, it may be worth comtemplating two striking charteristics of hunter-gatherer societies: their satisfaction with less and their faith in the ability and willingness of their enviroments to sustain them. With the way our world is going, we may be back to that worldview and life sooner than we realize.

The Rise of Agriculture, The Fall of Hunting & Gathering & Humanity's Uncertain Future, Louis Evan Palmer, The Way It Can Be, http://twicb.blogspot.com

Support his art, ideas and worldview

BUY BOOKS BY LOUIS EVAN PALMER

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright 2007 Louis Evan Palmer lives in Ontario Canada. His short stories have appeared in numerous publications.

BUY BOOKS BY LOUIS EVAN PALMER

Sunday, September 23, 2007

The Concept of Innocence by Louis Evan Palmer

"Thefreedictionary.com" gives the definition of "innocence" as:..The state, quality, or virtue of being innocent, as: Freedom from sin, moral wrong, or guilt through lack of knowledge of evil; Guiltlessness of a specific legal crime or offense; Lack of knowledge or understanding; ignorance; Freedom from harmfulness..."

It can be used to imply other levels of creation or existence, in that, someone or something that is innocent can be innocent by virtue of not being of this world, or not participating in it, or only now emerging into it. Their innocence is in this existence.

Most often associated with the concept of innocence is a baby. What blame can be affixed upon a baby? We can ascribe various powers to a baby or think that it may serve as a vehicle for future fulfillment but that is not the baby, it is someone or something acting upon the baby in that same way it could act on any one of use. To lose that innocence, we would have to be able to form some kind of intent. The same arguments run towards any good that may issue from a baby, if it is innocent, then there is none other than what is inspired within each of us.

This concept reaches out to impinge on other ascertations like one used for abortions that have to do with rape. The wrongfulness of the rape itself is levied against the by-product, a living entity. Can we truthfully place blame on an unborn baby? Not if we believe in innocence and what it confers on its holders.

Crimes committed against the innocent are always more abhorrent to us because of their blameless state. In wars and the many crimes that come from that cauldron of hate, the crimes against babies and young children arouse our deepest repulsion because they have no possible excuse and every possible condemnation - because they are innocent.

In courts of law, the concept is more restricted, in that it refers only to a specific offence with which a person is charged. It asks us to ignore everything else that is known about that person and consider only the offence in question with the presumption of innocence. It is a more difficult application of that concept but it again serves the ideal of acting correctly and fairly.

We care about our animal friends partly because of this presumption of innocence on their part. Innocence always implies closeness to True Nature and to Truth. The concept of innocence is deeply-seated in our psyche and ennobling. As a society, we must strive to understand and preserve it and from that, to protect and nurture those innocents in our midst.

The Concept of Innocence, Louis Evan Palmer, The Way It Can Be, http://twicb.blogspot.com

Support his art, ideas and worldview, Order books by Louis Evan Palmer

BUY BOOKS BY LOUIS EVAN PALMER

Order via Kindle link above or at right of screen

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Saturday, September 22, 2007

Move UN Headquarters to Auckland, New Zealand by Louis Evan Palmer

The headquarters for a world governance body should not reside in the territory of the hegemon of the day or in the cities of any of the major powers. It compromises its independence and, over time, impairs its functioning.

It should reside in a country and city that can accomodate a key global organization, that is sufficiently advanced culturally and technologically, and that is not aligned in a significantly binding way in any alliance. It should also move physically closer to the majority of the world's population in Asia. Such a country exists in New Zealand, with the suitable city being Auckland.

The United States, through a variety of spokespersons, has stated on numerous occasions that it does not support the United Nations, that it would like to see the UN Headquarters move out of New York City, and the like. It is a country that has embarked on many wars of self-interest and has demonstrated an increased belligerence and lawlessness in its actions. Its main interest in any world bodies is in using them to further its own narrow self-enriching aims.

A move could serve as an impetus for other needed changes like adding India to the permanent security council. Perhaps adding the European Union as a single member and dropping the United Kingdom and France. It can also be used to strongly move against illegal spying and eavesdropping. A country like New Zealand will be less susceptible to blackmail and behind the scenes deal-making which should make the operation of the UN headquarters more transparent and less corrupt.

Let's settle on a date. How about January 1st, 2012 as the inauguration of the new UN Headquarters in Auckland, New Zealand? Start sending your letters and petitions now to make it happen.

Move UN Headquarters to Auckland, New Zealand, Louis Evan Palmer, The Way It Can Be, http://twicb.blogspot.com

Support his art, ideas and worldview, Order books by Louis Evan Palmer

BUY BOOKS BY LOUIS EVAN PALMER

Order via Kindle link above or at right of screen

O.J. Simpson and "What's Mine is Mine" Syndrome by Louis Evan Palmer

From Dictionary.Com, the definition of "syndrome" is: "A group of symptoms that together are characteristic of a specific disorder, disease, or the like."

In his latest publicly-disclosed brush with the law, O.J. Simpson continues his obsession with what he thinks is "his" and his willingness to use any means to keep or retrieve it.

To think that someone with his past and his means would care about a bunch of trashy mementos to the extent of organizing a criminal enterprise to take them back is difficult to fathom. Rather than call the auction people involved directly or initiating a lawsuit, Mr. Simpson decided to go with his posse and take back what was his. Flimsy excuses about a lack of response from the police since his dodge of murder charges don't hold water as he should have gone through a lawyer not the police.

What this incident does illustrate in the boldest terms possible is that O.J. Simpson did kill his former wife because the thinking and feelings behind that crime are very much the same as those behind this stupid escapade. That is, O.J. Simpson was so filled with rage at losing what was "his" that he was willing to do anything to get her back or to prevent anyone else from having her. The racial aspect of it all only serves to intensify the emotions.

There is always a point where a normal feeling becomes pathological; where it leaves the realm of reason and ordinary emotions and becomes obsessive and delusional. Sometimes great things come of that pathology but, more often, terrible things come of it.

I don't think O.J. Simpson could have been clearer in declaring his guilt than by engaging in this crime. He admitted everything but with the self-serving excuses that are typical of this type of mentality. He may end up behind bars after all.

O.J. Simpson and "What's Mine is Mine" Syndrome, The Way It Can Be, Louis Evan Palmer, http://twicb.blogspot.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright 2007 Louis Evan Palmer lives in Ontario Canada. His short stories have appeared in numerous publications.

BUY BOOKS BY LOUIS EVAN PALMER

Tuesday, September 04, 2007

Baseball, Statistics & Disappeared Histories by Louis Evan Palmer

It's apparent that Barry Bonds took steroids and as a result of that there is a steady chorus from those who wish to ostrasize him and to asterisk his record. They are probably the same folks who wanted to put an asterisk beside Hank Aaron's home run record. But really if you want to scratch the surface of these records you'll find that we should putting asterisks beside all the records because there's something wrong or peculiar with all of them.

Babe Ruth's home run record of 60 was set in 1927 not long after rules were introduced that resulted in a harder baseball and shorter outfields. That's one asterisk. In Babe's day, there were no brown-skinned players in the majors yet teams from the negro leagues won about half of the exhibition games they played against the white majors teams. There were also no hispanic players. In other words, many of the best players were not in Babe's major league. That's two asterisks. There also can be no doubt whatsoever that the calibre of player back then was lower than the calibre of player now. Just looking at the Olympic records will confirm that observation. That's three asterisks. In 1920 the spitball was banned but pitchers who were using it could continue. That obviously had a huge impact on hitters and home runs. Asterisk #4. Scuffed balls or foreign substances like pine tar were also banned in later years.

In light of the above, statements to the effect that "the 1927 Yankees was the greatest baseball team ever" are unadulterated balderdash.

The other glaring truth of the matter is as Mark McGwire stated, in baseball it was not specifically against the rules to use steroids. That came in 2002. Steroids are legal for medical purposes. In 1990 in a very politicized debate, the USA put steriods on its schedule III even though it did not meet the requirements of that designation - that is, being addictive. In 2005, "prohormones" were added to that prohibition. In most other advanced countries, steroids are legal with a prescription but if found in possession of them without a prescription, it is not a serious offence (no jail time involved). Barry Bonds started his major league career on May 30, 1986. Mark McGwire started his career in 1987.

The other truth is that you can put all the muscles you want on someone without talent and it will not enhance their performance enough for anyone to notice - their physique but not their ability.

Barry Bonds deserves his records just as much as Roger Maris and Hank Aaron. It's doubtful Babe Ruth would have been very successful today with all his drinking and womanizing, he probably wouldn't have gotten the chance. Also, against much better players from all over the world and from the old negro leagues, he definitely wouldn't have fared as well.

The rules and evironment of a given sport are always in flux - in baseball, for example, the composition of the balls, the bats, the dimensions of the field, permitted and banned substances. We care about these things because we care about the games we play and watch and we care about their histories. Yet, vast swaths of them are illusions. The negro baseball leagues had many of the best players and yet records are hard to come by and while they are getting cobbled together, it's painfully slow. It's another of the disappeared histories of which we as a society seem to bury with remarkable frequency.

Barry Bonds and Mark McGwire were caught up in the heavily politicized and phony war on drugs. Steroids is not even close to crack. However, it's a convenient way to denigrate a current player's achievement and to harken back to a misrepresentation of a past.

Baseball, Statistics & Disappeared Histories, Louis Evan Palmer, The Way It Can Be, http://twicb.blogspot.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright 2007 Louis Evan Palmer lives in Ontario Canada. His short stories have appeared in numerous publications.

BUY BOOKS BY LOUIS EVAN PALMER

Saturday, September 01, 2007

Why Iconic Cities are under Threat by Louis Evan Palmer

Everyone has a soft spot for certain places - the city you grew up in, the location of a particularly memorable vacation, your years at university and that sweetly familiar Alma Mater; but aside from those highly personal attachments, there are other places that seem to rise above all that; places, often cities, which merit attention from all quarters for a variety of reasons - those unique cities that are considered "iconic" and are also referred to as "world" cities or "global" cities, sometimes as "Tier 1" cities or "Alpha", "Beta" or "Gamma" cities although this article would argue that "iconic" is a category all on its own.

Typically, it is a feeling that we have that a city is iconic (or vital or magical) even though the definition of "iconic" will vary and the usefulness of the term itself will be disputed. Without that feeling, most of us would not consider a given city to be iconic.

What then makes for an iconic city and why can that make it a target?

A key quality of an iconic city is that it evokes emotion. You immediately feel something. For example, merely the word "Paris" is powerful. The book "Is Paris Burning?" used the power of that city and its name to great effect in its title and the true story of the German General in charge of the city's occupation who could not bring himself to destroy that great city as they retreated. This evocation calls to mind the belief of the ancients in a city's spirit - that a true city is more than a collection of buildings and public places. It touches the collective soul. Its inhabitants are a marriage of person and place. You can tell if someone's from there, from Madrid, Montreal or New Orleans.

Another quality of an iconic city is that it exudes a personality and a philosophy. Cities like "Venice" or "Vienna" come to mind. You feel as if you've made an acquaintance with a sentient being. You sense the "being" of the place and you like it, you want more of it. There is a sense that things are different here and that difference is important to the world consciousness and that it is precious and to be protected. This spirit of guardianship ties one to the iconic city.

An iconic city will also embody an attitude and an approach to life. Cities like "Rio", "London" or "Barcelona" exemplify this. A city like "Rio" conjures up an intoxicating carefree approach to life with an emphasis on energy and fun - exuberance! A city like "London" projects its zeitgeist of cultured, duty-bound, world-weary administrators of empire - the usually faceless accountants and bankers and soldiers while "Barcelona" radiates that it is radical and ferociously artistic and independent and unpredictable.

So we have the proposition that iconic cities evoke emotion, exude personality, and embody an attitude. To that we should add "on a grand scale". This scale would manifest itself in architecture and public places such as parks and plazas and in public events and displays. A bonafide iconic city will also give "something" to the world on a continuous basis. While it is uncommon, this "giving" can mean that an iconic city could include ancient unearthed cities like "Pompei" or "Troy" or even a lost city like "Atlantis" (especially if it's ever found) - cities which have critical physical connections to our shared past and which have made seminal contributions to our present psyche and mentality.

The other aspect of iconic cities worth touching on is their reach. While this focus is on cities that have a global impact, there can be situations where a city is iconic within a given country or region but doesn't impact much outside of that sphere of influence - say, cities like "St. Petersburg" or "Dresden". Or cities or places that affect followers of a particular religion or belief but not others - for example, "Jerusalem", "Medina", or "Chartes".

Another crucial factor in the impact of a given city is how many expatriates hail from there, proudly claim roots from there, or still have relatives there. This is relevant for cities like Hong Kong, New Delhi or Dublin.

The big four of global cities are typically listed as: New York, London, Paris and Tokyo. Another listing of cities that matter posits: Milan, Vienna, Paris, Shanghai and London. A city like Rome has many claims - the former capital of an important empire, the current headquarters of a large religion, the cultural and philosophic fount for much of the western world. Other cities associated with successful empires both more recent and ancient: London, Paris, Madrid, Vienna, Moscow, Beijing, Venice, Istanbul, Mexico City, Athens, Baghdad, Cairo.

What does any of this have to do with iconic cities being targets?

Psychological warfare is action that attacks an enemy's resolve and attempts to paralyse their will and demoralize. It aims to increase defeatism and negativism and to impair judgement. It wants to induce fear, excite tensions to the point of dysfunction, and produce widespread and continuous anxiety.

Pyschological operations, or PsyOps, strives for economy of effort and would like to present no inkling of their secret directed forces. PsyOps also wants to maximize the effect of a given operation. To do all those things, it must choose the most suitable target. Those types of targets are invariably "iconic". Attacking icons produces the largest dislocation in the target populations. This is why iconic cities (or places or people) are under threat - they are the best targets for PsyOps.

The countries of most interest at this point are those that are at war either as aggressors or as resistance groups. This would bring up the USA, the UK, Afghanistan and Iraq as key flash points. If planning groups were aiming at the USA and attempting to figure what types of attacks would have the most impact and be the most demoralizing, they would consider "iconic" American cities. New York and Washington would fit that designation but have been attacked. They may be subjected to more attacks but if fresh cities were desired then other cities would have to be selected. New Orleans is iconic but it also has been "attacked" in a way. Other iconic American cities that have not been attacked as yet - San Francisco, Miami, Houston, Los Angeles and Boston. Of these cities, probably only San Francisco would be considered to have a signficant impact outside the US as a world-level city.

Fortunately and unfortunately, psyops is an inexact art. It also requires a lack of morals or ethics and the ability to turn away from the deaths of thousands by your remote-controlling hand.

Society must reject these pseudo-scientific assaults on decency and outlaw attacks on non-miltary targets and non-belligerent opponents. To embedded objectors, collect evidence and go public. To the general public, support authentic whistle-blowers.

Why Iconic Cities are under Threat, Louis Evan Palmer, The Way It Can Be; http://twicb.blogspot.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright 2007 Louis Evan Palmer lives in Ontario Canada. His short stories have appeared in numerous publications.

BUY BOOKS BY LOUIS EVAN PALMER

Sunday, August 19, 2007

Homeless (and Sleepless) in Toronto by Louis Evan Palmer

Homeless in Jakarta is a reflection of abject poverty and high-level thievery.

Homeless in Toronto is a reflection of wilful neglect and high-level thievery.

The main difference between "have" countries and "have not" is that there's enough left over after the elite has taken their cut to fund a sizable middle class. However, when the middle class disappears, as is happening in the USA, then the gap will close and there is no more vicious animal than one whose sustenance has been taken away.

The great lie in the debate about homelessness is that they are on the streets by choice. It is obvious to even a casual observer that many homeless people have mental problems. Estimates run as high as one third of the homeless being mentally unbalanced to the degree that they are impaired. Another major issue for the homeless is drug and/or alcohol addiction. On its own, or as a result of the above, many of the homeless have physical health problems.

There is risk and danger to the homeless and to the people around them. Living on the street is a health and hygiene issue, a law and order issue, a public safety issue. To leave these people to the ministrations of angels of mercy and/or organs of the city health department is short-sighted and negligent.

To have levels of government haggling over the costs of necessary services - these are NOT frills! - is disheartening and maddening. The address is Toronto, Ontario, Canada. Each of those jurisdictions has a role to play.

While respecting their rights and dignity, the homeless cannot be allowed to jeopardize themselves and others, laws should be passed that will enable various authorities and agencies to remove people from the streets. Some belong in mental health facilities, others in hospitals or clinics. All need free or cheap (but decent) housing.

There are sufficient resources given the political will. We need effective management of the housing, strict security and safety for the tenants, access to programs and make-work programs as required. We've got to break the cycle and just leaving people on the streets won't do it. From a purely selfish point of view, society is only hurting itself by not dealing with homelessness.

Homeless (and Sleepless) in Toronto, Louis Evan Palmer, The Way It Can Be, http://twicb.blogspot.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright 2007 Louis Evan Palmer lives in Ontario Canada. His short stories have appeared in numerous publications.

BUY BOOKS BY LOUIS EVAN PALMER

Saturday, August 18, 2007

Bets & Debts - Market Money "Phones Home" by Louis Evan Palmer

The despicable financiers have had their day again. Note how the bulk of the money flow is back home to the corporations and their (mainly American) home bases. So much for "act locally".

Obvious obligations have been brazenly neglected: bond agencies have suddenly discovered that the ratings they gave to bond packages containing subprime mortgages were misleading, maybe even criminally erroneous; complex misunderstood derivatives funds have been allowed to operate and even grow by regulators and banks; hedge funds have been permitted to grow and expand and disrupt the market. All of the forgoing in the pursuit of obscene profits and zero oversight.

What is the disguising of subprime mortgages except fraud? It is a form of money laundering where one hides bad debt in with the good, divides it up and spreads it around so it can't be found, and then turns that risky debt into AAA debt and sells it globally. It was never about spreading the risk around, it was always about hiding the risk, adulterating good debt with bad and making millions before the scheme crashed as it must.

What is the cancerous growth of hedge funds and derivatives anything other than greed triumphant and out-of-control speculation?

The regulation and oversight of financial institutions is woefully inadequate. We don't have the required expertise in place or the political will. We need much more control of financial instruments especially those that constitute the creation of credit. We need to implement tax-based controls on the movement of money and credit and strict regulations to limit and civilize speculation. To quote Richard C. Cook: we need the "recognition of credit as a public utility, part of the societal commons, not the private playground of the financiers.." There is good speculation and there is bad (most) speculation! It is suicidal for societies to allow rampant "bad" speculation and its associated accoutrements to reign supreme. Boom and bust is the inevitable result where the short boom is for the few and the long bust is for the rest.

Bets & Debts - Market Money "Phones Home", The Way It Can Be, Louis Evan Palmer, http://twicb.blogspot.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright 2007 Louis Evan Palmer lives in Ontario Canada. His short stories have appeared in numerous publications.

BUY BOOKS BY LOUIS EVAN PALMER

Friday, August 10, 2007

Globe & Mail's Neil Reynolds calls on birds to protect Canada by Louis Evan Palmer

"Birds, after all, have economies, too."

The United States will not have to look hard to find its slavish supporters in the journalistic corps as Neil Reynolds continues his misleading fusillades in favour of the Security & Prosperity Partnership (SPP). There is little doubt that a fully implemented SPP would cement into place a one-sided, disadvantageous relationship in favour of the US and would lead to the dissolution of any Canada recognizable to its current citizens. It's clear to anyone with a dollop of sense (or not blinded by ideology) that a 98 pound chimp will enjoy few, if any, rights in the house of the 800 pound gorilla.

Mr. Reynolds, although it most certainly caused him great discomfort, called on the restive spirit of John Kenneth Galbraith to support his grovelling on the part of his SPP masters. Mr. Galbraith, Reynolds asserts "never wavered in his conviction that economic globalization was an essential advance". Since Mr. Galbraith lived until he was 97 and wrote and was interviewed extensively, you could probably get almost any quote you want from him. Like the following in conversation with Asimina Caminis, Senior Editor of Finance & Development, Mr. Galbraith was quoted: "I'm an advisor to the American Heritage Dictionary on language use and I will not allow the word globalization. It is a very ugly term! That we will have closer international relationships in such areas as economics, culture, the arts, travel, and communications I strongly hope..." Hmmm? Maybe it was another John Kenneth Galbraith that Mr. Reynolds had in mind? But no, Mr. Reynolds go on by putting these further words into Mr. Galbraith's mouth "globalization simply expanded and extended co-operation among countries". Yes perhaps, except without the word "globalization"! I'd say that Mr. Galbraith was fairly clear on that.

Mr. Reynolds continues his parade of misquotes and faulty logic by claiming (one must assume with a straight face) that "economic integration in no way necessitates political integration". I guess all those other commentators and political leaders (and basically the whole world) got it wrong. The absurdness of this statement is breath-taking. Of course, economic integration leads to political integration. That's precisely what it leads to.

Professor Branislav L. Slantchev of the Department of Political Science, University of California, says in a lecture in his course "Introduction to International Relations" that: "The highest state of economic integration is the common market, which adds the free movement of labor and capital to the customs union freedom of goods and unified external tariffs. A common market is deepest and involves the largest loss of sovereignty, eventually requiring the relinquishment of important policy tools for controlling financial flows and stimulating the economy. Common markets are very rare." Don't be fooled by Mr. Reynolds rantings, SPP is no other than a different name for "common market".

Mr. Reynolds' trust in international institutions is as touching as it is naive and misplaced as John Perkins has made abundantly clear in his expose "Confessions of an Economic Hit Man". Institutions like the World Bank and the IMF (International Monetary Fund) have been co-opted, mainly by US interests, and are mainly used to indebt third world countries. David C. Korten elaborates on this in his widely-acclaimed book "When Corporations Rule the World": "The World Bank has served as an export-financing facility for large Northern-based corporations. The IMF has served as the debt collector for Northern-based financial institutions. GATT has served to create a corporate bill of rights protecting the rights of the world's largest corporations against the intrusions of people, communities, and democratically elected governments."

As befits a manifestly beneficial endeavour, the SPP has not been brought to Parliament, has not been debated or brought to committee. It has been snuck around in luxurious hide-aways attended by invitation-only members of the elite. Its shadowy Orwellian name "Security & Prosperity Partnership" calls to mind the raft of similarly falsely named laws & campaigns from Bush-Cheney's Amerika like Iraqi Enduring Freedom and Patriot Act.

When Gordon Laxer, a professor of political economy and director of the Parkland Institute at the University of Alberta, tried to address the energy aspects of the SPP "at a meeting of the House of Commons' international trade committee earlier this month, Leon Benoit, the Conservative chairman, ordered me to stop my presentation as an invited witness. My remarks, he ruled, were not relevant. When his decision was successfully challenged by other members of the committee, Mr. Benoit adjourned the meeting and left the room.

"For example, in researching how Canada's energy security would be affected by exporting more energy to the United States, I learned that Canada has no plans, or enough pipelines, to get oil to Eastern Canadians in the event of an international supply crisis. I asked if Canada, as a member of the International Energy Agency, will establish a Strategic Petroleum Reserve. The IEA was created to counter OPEC's boycotting power; its 24 members are supposed to maintain 90 days of emergency oil reserves.

"The NEB replied that Canada 'was specifically exempted from establishing a reserve, on the grounds that Canada is a net exporting country whereas the other members are net importers.' But that doesn't make sense. Canada may be a net exporter, but it still imports 40 per cent of its oil - 850,000 barrels per day - to meet 90 per cent of Atlantic Canada's and Quebec's needs, and 40 per cent of Ontario's.

"Of course, we don't even have the pipelines to fully meet Eastern needs and, rather than address that domestic deficiency, five more export pipelines are planned."

The above appeared in an article in the Globe & Mail in May of this year.

Yes, Mr. Reynolds, the SPP sounds just fine if you're content to see Canada disappear. In the meantime, please leave the birds out of it.

Globe & Mail's Neil Reynolds calls on birds to protect Canada, Louis Evan Palmer, The Way It Can Be, http://twicb.blogspot.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright 2007 Louis Evan Palmer lives in Ontario Canada. His short stories have appeared in numerous publications.

BUY BOOKS BY LOUIS EVAN PALMER

"Nothing to Hide" and Torture by Louis Evan Palmer

Recent revelations about the rendition of Maher Arar by the CIA confirm what many people who have a modicum of knowledge about so-called "intelligence" services already know: that the various intelligence operations have more than their share of wildmen, incompetents, blowhards and cover-up artists. The frightening component of this though is that unlike others of their faltering, stumbling ilk, they can abuse secrecy and other laws to block oversight and accountability and to torment and punish alleged "threats" into silence.

However, to zero in on the salient point, people like Mr. Arar shouldn't be complaining because as we well know if he has "nothing to hide" then he has "nothing to fear". The torture will exonerate him - why else would we do it unless it really worked, unless it was quick and effective? Yes, it might hurt temporarily but that would be gone and forgotten soon enough. Right? Can't seem to recall why we don't torture people ourselves though - at least not officially since the days of the Inquisition?

There is something ludicrous and malevolent about people who dwell in the shadows, who obscure their identities, their work, their whereabouts, and, who invoke secrecy and "need to know" at every turn, claiming that there is something wrong with personal privacy and people who need some privacy.

These individuals, safely hidden away, insist that we need to torture selected persons so that "we" can quickly confirm that they truly have "nothing to hide" or, if not, that we know what they know. If you're innocent, you'll be released albeit with some "bad" memories which will diminish over time, in most cases.

There is so much that avails itself to the "nothing to hide" argument.

If you have "nothing to hide" then you can have no bonafide objections to security forces tearing your place of residence apart. Or, tearing your luggage apart at the airport. Or, subjecting you to a strip search or a body cavity exploration or an x-ray. After all, you're innocent so you have "nothing to fear". Maybe we'll extend the same courtesy to your family especially as they, in turn, also have "nothing to hide".

With the new paranoiac, "reasonable doubt" and habeus corpus are unwelcome, and seemingly to many in the enforcement and investigative branches, not understood. This lack of knowledge and understanding about core democratic values and beliefs could prove to be its undoing.

"Reasonable doubt" was a key restraint on the search and seizure powers of the police and quasi-police agencies.

As Gwynne Dyer has amply demonstrated in many of his recent writings, the threat of terrorism is minuscule compared to other violent threats. In addition, other much more serious and daunting threats present themselves which we conveniently ignore: curable and preventable diseases, malnutrition, poor water, war, car and industrial accidents, pollution and massive climate change.

We have a phony threat being callously used to increase the power of the executive branches of government and certain investigative and enforcement arms and employing coercive techniques and propaganda such as "nothing to hide" to pry away the hard-won protections of a democracy.

As many a former agent will tell you, the biggest threat to an intelligence agency is other intelligence agencies. We need people who understand that and act appropriately to protect Canadians, and their rights, first and their "relationships" with other intelligence services well down the list.

The answer is less power, less scope, and a smaller mandate.

"Nothing to Hide" and Torture, Louis Evan Palmer, The Way It Can Be, http://twicb.blogspot.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright 2007 Louis Evan Palmer lives in Ontario Canada. His short stories have appeared in numerous publications.

BUY BOOKS BY LOUIS EVAN PALMER

Prisoners and The Right to Vote by Louis Evan Palmer

A surprising number of countries deny the right to vote to prisoners. Some, like America, make it dependent on the severity of the sentence, others like the UK apply it across the board although the UK recently lost an EU court case and must restore this right as soon as possible.

The denial of voting rights is not something that typically appears in a judge's statement along with the length of incarceration. It is more like a common practice that is assumed but may come as a shock to a given prisoner who had expected to be able to cast a ballot in a federal election.

In ancient Athens, losing your right to vote was a possible outcome of a conviction along with exile, death or a fine. It does highlight the fact that deprival of the right to vote has long antecedents. But then, when the "state" was a city, the reasoning behind denying this right was clearer, it was part of excluding a person from the city and the affairs of the city. Now it's less clear as exile is not an official remedy and the convict will remain a citizen and within the borders & jurisdiction of the state. And we hope that the theory and administration of the law has advanced somewhat in the intervening centuries.

In a challenge argued before Canada's Supreme Court, the reasoning, or lack thereof, was outlined and debated. The Court stated that "the government must show that the infringement achieves a constitutionally valid purpose or objective, and that the chosen means are reasonable and demonstrably justified". The Court found that the government did not show or prove their case - "The government has failed to identify particular problems that require denying the right to vote..."

Jack Layton, the leader of the New Democratic Party (NDP), captured part of the government's logical dilemma when he asked "The courts don't sentence by taking away citizenship, and citizens have a right to vote in this country". Of course, in George Bush's Amerika, taking away a person's citizenship is exactly what will be done. Then we're thrown on the gentle protections of human rights. But, a government that has cast away its own citizenship protection will likely not be put off by human rights either.

In the political arena, prisoners might, at the least, be interested in criminal justice systems issues and have valuable insight and input. The size of the prison population is most countries would not be a factor in elections, especially in cases where the ballots may not count in a single jurisdiction.

However, this leads us to a disturbing observation. If a faction within a given country decided that they wanted to disenfranchise a group of people and they could manipulate issues and events towards that end, they could use a prison system that denies the right to vote as a way to accomplish that goal. As a bonus, while significantly increasing the prison population, a plantation-type economy could be imposed on them and a lot of money made with a cheap, captive labour force.

This is another unexpected reason why preserving the right to vote for prisoners is important. To preserve their voice in the electoral process and the law and order issues that get attention.

The United States currently has the largest prison population in the world and is serving as an example of how to wage an undeclared war on a nation's poor and minorities. While the crime rate decreases (since 1992), the arrest and incarceration rates increase. Cheap drugs deluge poor neighbourhoods, a phony War on Drugs targets them, a biased law enforcement and justice system arrests and convicts them. This is how you must do it to get the really big numbers - over two million!

The United States has a large number of vast, plantation-style private prisons that are run as low-wage, non-union shops that unfairly compete with other companies and sweet-talk and bully their way into lucrative state and federal contracts.

Typically, none of these American prisoners can vote. This is a sneaky way to re-introduce slavery and disenfranchise Afro and Hispanic Americans at a single stroke. In Canada and Austrailia, aboriginal peoples were/are similarly disenfranchised.

Yes, there are truly dangerous people who must be jailed, some for life. But, the current prison situation in the United States is far beyond that, there it's a class war where more than half the prison population has been convicted of non-violent crimes and, to a very large extent, represents poor or minority groups.

Let's not forget that the justice system is far from perfect with widespread corruption, wrongful convictions, flawed judicial proceedings. In many respects, the war on drugs which is the main source of new prisoners is the lashing and flailing of a prohibition-style campaign that's never going to get repealed until there's no one left to imprison.

The current American model of justice serves as a cautionary tale and vigilance must be renewed in other countries to not allow that type of factory prison farm to become established. Giving prisoners to right to vote is a step in that direction away from quasi-slavery and disenfranchisement. After all, most prisoners will rejoin society at some point and being engaged politically can only help in that re-integration and in dealing fairly with criminal justice issues.

Prisoners and The Right to Vote, Louis Evan Palmer, The Way It Can Be, http://twicb.blogspot.com
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright 2007 Louis Evan Palmer lives in Ontario Canada. His short stories have appeared in numerous publications.

BUY BOOKS BY LOUIS EVAN PALMER

Wednesday, August 08, 2007

Neil Reynolds leads Globe & Mail charge into SPP oblivion by Louis Evan Palmer

In today's Globe & Mail, another of G&M's bully boys for fascism rails against opponents of the Security & Prosperity Partnership (SPP) such as the Canadian Action Party (CAP) and the New Democratic Pary (NDP). He succinctly terms their opposition "nonsense" while less obviously and between the lines, he is also trying to categorize all opposition to the SPP as "nonsense".

In a fairly short article, Mr. Reynolds neatly demonstrates most of what is wrong with columnist-driven news: unsubstantiated statements & claims, slanted news bites and facts, opinion-driven conclusions disguised as fact-based reporting. Ever so convincing, Mr. Reynolds says on more than one occasion, "..it might be a good thing".

He argues that the CAP is no good (and its claims & opinions) because it has very little support. The NDP is no good because some of its claims as to the real disposition of power in Canada and elsewhere are similar to CAP. And, by the way, the NDP are not in power so how can they be right about anything? In Mr. Reynolds' universe, power is the balm that salves any problem.

Mr. Reynolds does not appear to have read any of Chalmers Johnston's last three books about the American Empire and its corporate and military leadership. Nor, John Perkins and his expose of the tactics and legacy of Economic Hit Men and the various agencies and institutions like the World Bank which work hand-in-hand with the "corporatocracy". It sounds a lot like SPP, Mr. Reynolds.

Mr. Reynolds pleads for rationality and "the market" without any inkling as to how fraudulent and malleable these forces really are. They are part of their very own "reality" that the current Bush regime is making. Mr. Reynolds seemingly has not heard of the Plunge Protection Teams, Hedge Funds, Currency Traders, secret Tax & Bank havens and other anti-market forces that operate with a frightening scope & frequency and breath-taking impunity. This is today's real world where unrestricted cash flows is the new piracy.

Mr. Reynolds is very much like the belligerent but rational Flat Earthers - it made perfect sense but it was wrong. People like Mr. Reynolds have no problem with Robert Nardelli, the former CEO of Home Depot, getting a severance package of $210m USD but let anyone suggest that these nouveau robber barons might have ulterior motives and plans - like the SPP, well, that is "nonsense".

It's lucky for Canadians, and those looking in on Canada from the outside, that we have Mr. Reynolds to patiently explain the true lies of what we think we see.

Unhappily though, there are those who see Mr. Reynolds as another G&M apologist for the demise of Canada which is the certain consequence of an SPP union. It would take about as long as it takes for Mr. Reynolds to write "it might be a good thing"!

No thanks, Mr. Reynolds! I'll take the CAP and NDP before that happens.

Neil Reynolds leads Globe & Mail charge into SPP oblivion, Louis Evan Palmer, The Way It Can Be
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Copyright 2007 Louis Evan Palmer lives in Ontario Canada. His short stories have appeared in numerous publications.

BUY BOOKS BY LOUIS EVAN PALMER

Saturday, August 04, 2007

Stephen Harper & Michael Ignatieff no longer support Adolph Hitler by Louis Evan Palmer

Or the War in Iraq.

Saying the equivalent of "oops" is not enough.

For many reasons, there are long-standing rules & laws governing international relationships. Among them, Justice, Fairness, the preservation of the Peace. One of the most prominent of these governance strictures is the rejection of using "might makes right", or its camouflaged little brother "pre-emptive strike", as a justification for aggression.

Throughout history and continuing to this day, self-defence in its various guises has been used as a cover for military action and the thrust of a "no-one can stop us" realpolitik from the "just do it" and "bring it on" crowds. To prevent its fraudulent use, the only unassailable justification for military action is bonafide self-defence where it's an action against an aggressor who is physically threatening your actual borders.

Not a future threat. Not a potential threat (if this and that and that and that... then). Not a threat to an ideal like "democracy" in a given country or to a given group of people like the "Kurds" or the "Baluchi". Not the threat posed from an ideology or tactic as in the "War on Terror". Not any of these, or other, nebulous and easily conjured up reasons.

For example, an oft-used causi belli is where the people under threat are your own nationals placed, or having placed themselves, in a foreign country - then military action in that foreign country to protect and extract y/our citizens might be justified but only where the foreign country itself is not in control of the region in question or is not considered legitimate. If it goes forward, it would become a police action to rescue your nationals and would end with their safe extraction. It does not become the launch pad for outright aggression and occupation.

This highlights an important consideration, the proportionality of the response. This is typically the first clue as to the real intentions of the aggressor. When the response versus the "problem" is hugely disproportionate and would normally require significant preparation and pre-positioning, it strongly indicates that the "problem" is a pretext.

Harper and Ignatieff stood "shoulder-to-shoulder" with Bush & Blair & company in supporting and promoting a war of aggression. That decision resulted in war crimes and death and destruction for the nation of Iraq and instability and the threat of an expanded war for the entire region. This is a decision from which one cannot walk away.

This is why these decisions and statements by Harper and Ignatieff cannot be minimized or explained away. The various assertions about democracy and tyranny are stunningly threadbare. Advanced democracies do not support democracy by waging wars of aggression under whatever contrived names they care to devise. Period.

To then focus solely on this or that "tyranny", especially ones which received substantial (often surreptitious) "aid" is the height of hypocrisy. Calling a war of aggression, part of the "War on Terrorism", or a "War for Democracy", or whatever, does not change its moral wrongness and comes to be seen for what it is, self-serving propaganda.

Both Harper's and Ignatieff's diminishing support for the war now and their lukewarm repudiation of it ring false and hollow. They back away because it's not going well. They back away because the Canadian people don't support it. Poor execution, lack of popularity - these are not positions of principle to which both these men constantly point to as a distinguishing characteristic.

They and the armchair Generals who were crowing for war and about realism and facts on the ground and hard decisions and sacrifices are bellowing now about what's wrong with Iraq and Iraqi society and outside interference and the "situation" and not about the deep-seated illegitimacy of foreign intrusions into sovereign countries. Some of them also complain about the unfairness or lack of balance of their critics. Or, more ominously, the lack of patriotism of their critics.

Decisions like this prove that Harper and Ignatieff are not qualified for Canadian high office. The fact that they are better, smarter persons than Bush or Blair underscores how deep of a moral quagmire we're all in.

Stephen Harper & Michael Ignatieff no longer support Adolph Hitler, Louis Evan Palmer, The Way It Can Be

Sunday, October 28, 2007

BUY BOOKS BY LOUIS EVAN PALMER

Sunday, September 23, 2007

BUY BOOKS BY LOUIS EVAN PALMER

Saturday, September 22, 2007

BUY BOOKS BY LOUIS EVAN PALMER

Tuesday, September 04, 2007

BUY BOOKS BY LOUIS EVAN PALMER

Saturday, September 01, 2007

BUY BOOKS BY LOUIS EVAN PALMER

Sunday, August 19, 2007

BUY BOOKS BY LOUIS EVAN PALMER

Saturday, August 18, 2007

BUY BOOKS BY LOUIS EVAN PALMER

Friday, August 10, 2007

BUY BOOKS BY LOUIS EVAN PALMER

BUY BOOKS BY LOUIS EVAN PALMER

BUY BOOKS BY LOUIS EVAN PALMER

Wednesday, August 08, 2007

BUY BOOKS BY LOUIS EVAN PALMER

Saturday, August 04, 2007

BUY BOOKS BY LOUIS EVAN PALMER

BUY BOOKS by Louis Evan Palmer

About Me

Blog Archive

LINKS

technorati

stat counter

BlogTopList