Insomnia, Sickness, and Hypothesizing

I haven't been sick like this in a long time. Of course, I woke up in the middle of the night and can't fall back to sleep. I am therefore going to write the most rambling, pointless post in the long, long history of bloggery. I will then read my blah-gpost, and promptly and simultaneously kickstart my immune system and fall soundly asleep. How's that for a hypothesis?

Ok, so I thought up the most boring topics that I would like to consider: Justin Trudeau running for the federal parliament in the riding of Papineau.

Why is he running in Papineau? My answer would be that it rhymes with Trudeau, but that seems too obvious. Everytime the Speaker of the House would call on the heir presumptive of the Trudeau throne, he would say "the honorable member from Papineau"... and everybody would subconsciously be reminded of his famous last name.

Perhaps Justin Trudeau chose the riding because the name Papineau is associated with legendary Québecois political leaders of eras past? Joseph Papineau founded a political legacy in Canada East, where his two sons Louis-Joseph and Denis-Benjamin, and his grandson, Denis-Émery all held seats in legislature during their lifetimes. Louis-Joseph led the les patriotes rebellion of 1837 (and was banished from the Canadas) which led to the Durham Report, which recommended the union of Canada East and Canada West, which later lead along with various other forces to the Confederation of 1867. His brother, Denis-Benjamin, on the other hand became co-premier of the united province of Canada after the Act of Union. Peas from a different pod? Who knows. Québec families have often been rent betwixt red and blue, patriotes and vendus. One thing is certain though... When we read the bios of the decendants of great legacies, we cannot help but notice that the subject matter gets thinner and thinner the further down the line. Of course, this is no slight on the potential of todays' legacy bearers. May they lead great rebellions, or alternatively, make excellent personal compromises to achieve positions of great influence! Either way, Christmas dinner is bound to be interesting.

So hypothesis no. two is that JT is positioning himself to take on the mantle of one of Canada's greates political legacies (take your pick).

Hypothesis no. three is that the JT is making an excellent gamble... He knows that he is widely seen as riding on his fathers coat tails. He needs to shake the image of playboy, rich kid, easy life etc. He can shake that image, either by winning or losing valiantly, a difficult fight against the separatists in Papineau. Either way, he takes on the mantle of street-fighter and separatist slayer in English Canada (where the Trudeau legacy lingers, loved). This is all he needs to cement his political image and pick his seat anywhere in the country, waiting for one of the Stephens to eat the other.

Forget all the hocus hypotheses: Why not go straight to the source and consider what Justin Trudeau said in a CBC radio clip aired tonight? JT explained that "Papineau is one of the poorest ridings of the country." I did not actually catch why one of the richer Canadians should represent this poor, downtrodden riding... but I inferred that it must because the poor like being told what their opinions are by their social and economic betters.

A last and final thought. Great Britain is honest enough to admit that it has both a monarch and an aristocracy. I don't use aristocracy in any pejorative sense. But we are fooling ourselves if we think our backdoor aristocracy much different.

There, I have truly put myself to sleep.

Parent Rearing

There are a lot of young people out there who are struggling with the same issue: How to properly raise and train your parents for that big, mean world out there. As someone who has spent many years working on this file, I feel less than qualified, but more than eager, to attack this baffling question.

Parents need structure. It is important to keep parents occupied with various and sundry activities, such as work, grocery shopping, etc. As soon as they break loose from this structure, they get into trouble.

Parents need supervision when on the internet (self-explanatory).

Parents need to be active. It is important to take your parents on walks and give them the necessary exercise. Teaching good habits can have lifelong benefits.

Parents need active encouragement and support. Ignoring your parents will inevitably stunt their social growth and contribute to adaptive disorders and the like. Medication should be used sparingly to control hyperactivity. Positive reinforcement should be used to encourage social interaction with their peers (this relieves the pressure of supervision).

Parents need to think they are in control. It is important to set boundaries within which they believe that they are making their own choices.

Set a good example. I can't stress this enough people. Your parents are always watching you, and the slightest thing can leave a deep impression. Make sure that its the impression you want.

More to follow on this important file. As we struggle with properly rearing our parents, its important to share the challenges and opportunities that this stage in our life brings about. Your thoughts?

The Aristocratic Logic of Parliamentary Selection

It is remarkable that the only way to hold elective office in federal politics is for thousands upon thousands of individuals to line up in community centres and schools to write your name down on a piece of paper. Once compiled, if you have the most supporters, you are elected. Why then are the chosen ones held in such contempt and neglect by the choosers?

The term democracy is thrown around a lot, and we have a tendency to speak of western governments as though they were democracies. A democracy is a political organizing principle whereby the people exercice the power of decision making. Since the "people" as a unit do not actually exist in real life, the only way that the "people" can articulate their decisions is by division (ie. vote). If this is theoretically possible, it is far from the state of things in Canada or anywhere else in the world. I hope that I am not being to controversial if I point out that most politicians are lawyers, from the educated, professional or wealthy class, and represent entrenched political organizations known as parties that aggregate the dominant views of the loudest and most mobile segments of the population.

It was my professor Gilles Labelle who taught me, and I think that he is right, that parliamentary selection is based on an aristocratic logic. Think about the choice being made. Each person is asked to select: not an idea, not a policy, not a platform, not a doctrine, but a name. This name is supposed to be the best person, in the eyes of the elector, to legislate or govern (we never know at the time of selection whether the person we are selecting will legislate or govern, sit in the back or the front bench). Thus the question, in principle, becomes one of merit, a logic of supremacy over inferiors. Instrinsic and unspoken is the idea that some are more fit to legislate than others. And here is the truth that belies the democratic pretension of the parliamentary selection system: We all implicitly accept the aristocratic idea that some are more fit to govern than others. If we saw all as equally fit, we would see random selection processes (such as for jury duty) as an entirely plausible way of selecting parliamentarians.

Why do we randomly select persons for jury duty? Why do we entrust questions of judgement and condemnation to the randomly selected citizen, but not the laws that govern him? How about a role reversal: Let us nominate only lawyers for jury duty, and let us randomly select parliamentarians. Imagine the death of the polling firm, the bagman, the lobbyist, the strategic counsel firm, the patronage grant, the access and influence game within the political party, all those dark and sinister institutions that grow from our perpetual competition for aristocratic success at the ballot box. Can a brighter future be contemplated?

A democracy would be founded on the principle that all are equally fit to make the laws. By deduction, random selection processes would be the simplest and cheapest way to provide for a law-making body in a country as large as Canada. Does it scare you that you or your neighbour would be called to Parliament, by a poor telemarketer at 6pm on a school night? In the meantime, let us confess our aristocratic ideology and shake the hypocrisy of calling our parliament a democracy.

The Arrogance of Hérouxville

Published by the principal instigator of L.T. Smash on Cyberpresse, 6 february 07

Orgueil mal placé

Pourquoi présenter un code de conduite que tout le monde dans le village respecte déjà? Pourquoi élaborer un code qui déclare que les crimes ne sont pas tolérés? Il y avait un doute? Le conseil municipal de Hérouxville a déposé son manifeste politique contre les cultures étrangères afin de lutter contre un phénomène qui leur fait peur. Le manifeste déclare l’égalité homme-femme, entérine des coutumes locales, et interdit des crimes de violence religieuse. Le manifeste, guère destiné aux immigrants du village (il n’y en a pas), non plus destiné aux villageois (qui respectent déjà ces règles), est destiné aux décideurs politiques et aux administrateur dans les institutions montréalaises. Voilà l’orgueil mal placé du conseil.

Vu de loin, les changements, adaptations et accommodements faits entre certains groupes et au sein de certaines institutions au Canada peuvent sembler un phénomène menaçant la pureté culturelle. Ce n’est pas juste le Québec qui vit cette réalité. Des petits villages en Amérique du Nord vivent aussi la même réalité homogène. La peur de l'inconnu survient lorsque nos valeurs semblent incompatibles et irréconciliables. Or, cette peur naît d’une réaction viscérale, et non pas de considérations réfléchies.Il y a un fort risque de perdre le contexte, la subtilité et le sens de chacun des cas où différents groupes doivent s’adapter pour partager l’espace public. Il ne faut pas voir une menace à la culture québécoise dans une université ou un hôpital.

Et si on s'entendait...

Si un juif orthodoxe ne sent pas à l’aise (ou n’accepte pas, ce qui revient au même) de se faire traiter par une femme médecin, il doit tolérer son malaise et son inconfort, selon le conseil municipal de Hérouxville. Sinon, il accepte le traitement de la part de n'importe qui. Ceci simplifie à l’outrance la question. En fait, aucune femme médecin ne voudra traiter un patient qui ne consent pas volontairement au traitement. Donc la solution de Hérouxville est une des suivantes : 1) l’homme ne se fait pas traiter; 2) l’homme se fait traiter, mais en tolérant son malaise et celui qu'il engendre chez la femme médecin; ou 3) l’homme renonce à sa religion et ses valeurs culturelles. Aucune de ses options ne me semblent satisfaisantes. Il me semble plus logique d’arriver à une entente qui va satisfaire le patient. Mais si on y arrive, ce n’est guère une renonciation à nos valeurs d’égalité homme-femme. Ce n’est qu’un compromis entre trois de nos valeurs : soit le droit à l’accès aux soins de santé, l’autonomie et liberté de croyance de l’individu, et l’égalité homme-femme.

Réduire ce dernier cas à une question d’accommodement raisonnable est dangereux. En fait, la vaste majorité des hôpitaux au Québec n’auront presque jamais à vivre cette réalité. En raison des tendances des immigrants à se regrouper dans des centres cosmopolites et l’attitude cloisonnée et réactionnaire de certains au Québec, l’accommodement entre culture québécoise et culture de nos minorités religieuses ne touche pas la majorité au quotidien (sauf par l’entremise des émissions radios !). Les compromis que font certaines institutions à Montréal, ce n’est tout simplement pas l’affaire du conseil municipal de Hérouxville. Que le conseil énonce ses principes est bien. Que le conseil de Hérouxville manifeste son désaccord par rapport aux affaires du métropole, on s’en fout carrément.

Amateur Mistake

Please ignore my last post. I realize that debating the merits of the dear professor's points only serves to suggest that there may be some. This seems highly unlikely.

Never Cry Wolf

University of Ottawa professor Amir Attaran has made some very strong non-allegations this week, publicly speculating about the possibility of Canadian Forces members mistreating Afghan detainees.

It is important to note that Attaran has not actually alleged mistreatment on the part of Canadian soldiers. He has only alleged at best by insinuation. He has virtually no evidence to suggest that anything other than reasonable force in the course of detention was used on detainees. Furthermore, he has alleged that, although there is no evidence of mistreatment, that the military police failed to investigate.

Attaran has vey little situational awareness of this issue. He is basing non-allegations on partial documents. He seems to be unaware that when people resist detention, they tend to get a little banged up. Soldiers detaining people in Afghanistan have to worry about a lot of things that police in Canada do not. For example, nobody in Canada has ever blown themselves up deliberately with an explosive belt strapped to their chest while being arrested. Canadian Forces soldiers are highly trained, well-briefed on rules of engagement, and very disciplined.

I would also suggest, crassly, that there is no comparison between a few bruises, and what the freedom fighting islamicists tend to do with their "detainees" (I don't need to link this comment to a beheading video, do I.).

Although Attaran is obviously alarmist and probably crying wolf, the CF needs to do due diligence, take seriously the non-allegation, and investigate. This of course reflects very badly in the news cycle, because all you hear is Attaran and the news of internal military investigations.

Those who cry wolf risk losing whatever credibility they pretend to have. The public won't be fooled twice.

An Improbable Parable

The small desire crept up the winding staircase to the tower where the grey bearded man held court in front of yellowing old book. He had made it all the way up from the basement and was somewhat out of breath. A bead of perspiration trickled down from his brow onto his metal framed glasses that hugged his nose. The sound of his footsteps was light an

He knocked on the tall wooden door, barely reaching the hand knocker and letting the ring slip from his hands once. Once was all that was necessary.

"Enter," said the auditor-wizard.

The desire opened the door quietly, entered with trepidation. He stood, as though at attention, and waited to be seated. There was no use being nervous, because he had had a year to think of this interview.

"Sit down. You are slightly late. What kept you?" asked the auditor-wizard.

"Oh, I simply underestimated the time it would take to climb the stairs," squeaked the small desire. "I could swear that you add 2 more flights of stairs every year to your tower."

"And why shouldn't I? Every year, I see a little bit further over the horizon. But don't worry, you will not be here next year to see the new stairs. Now, to the point. Let me verify your standing. You are Gin, and you are in the Vices department, is that correct?"

"I am Gin, but I object to being in the Vices department. I am most comfortable with the virtues, and the Vice department is shrinking every year. I would like to be considered for the new position opening up in Virtue."

"Do you know what it takes to be a virtue?" asked the auditor-wizard gravely.

"Virtues are what you say they are." said the small desire.

"Virtues bring in other virtues. They interact with one another, and bond easily." explained the grey-bearded man.

"So do vices! That means I could be a virtue too!" said Gin slyly.

"I'm sorry my young desire, you have not fully understood. You were brought here by another vice, I believe that it was Rebellion, and you fit in quite nicely to the mix. Especially with Vermouth and Olives. But I'm afraid that the time has come for us to move on. We have begun to let your colleagues go, and we have only held on to the most essential and pleasing vices. Your work is costing more and more, and bringing in less and less. Moreover, the more vices we have here, the less virtues we are able to bring in. They simply won't be easily associated with your kind."

Gin's heart was sinking by the minute. He was only a young desire, and he had only been around for a few years. He really had not had the chance to make a good impression.

"I think that if I was given more chance to prove myself, that you would be surprised." said Gin hopefully.

"The problem is that you surprise us everytime you are around. Many of these surprises have cost us dearly. One of our virtues, Reputation, was severely put out by your performance last time. I believe the incident had something to do with..."

"Oh, that. That was really quite unexpected. I was very inexperienced at that time, and I simply needed more practice and confidence," explained Gin.

"We are shrinking the Vice department, very slowly but surely. We need the office space down there to reinforce the foundations. We will be continuing with renovations, and adding some positions in the Virtue department. The best offer I can give you, because you are such a small desire, and you take up so little room, is that we will place you on probation and offer you six month contract. In the mean time, I suggest that you keep a low profile and make friends with the Virtues."

Gin frowned. Job security as a vice is usually a sure thing. He sure didn't like the idea of working for Virtues such as Reputation, or worse yet, Patience.

"Thank you Mr. Auditor. I believe the time has come for me to pursue other opportunities and spend more time with my family."

"I knew that we could come to an agreement, my young desire."

Worry

As long as you have someone to worry about you,
you have nothing to worry about.
As long as you have someone to worry about too,
you have nothing to worry about.