Ramblings

Another Good Cause

2007-05-29T00:38:00.000-03:00

I've just been made aware of another friend who is making a major fund raising trek. Ramesh Ferris is going across the country in order to raise money to eradicate Polio. I knew Ramesh when we were both growing up in the Yukon. Polio never stopped him, but then he had the advantages of the Canadian Health Care system. This is a great cause. Please show your support

Cycle to Walk

A Fine Rawlsian Post

2007-05-29T00:30:00.001-03:00

For the truly die hard reader of this site: You will know that I am a fan of John Rawls - the great American liberal philosopher. Go check out the following post. It sheds some light on a part of Rawls' career that doesn't normally get a lot of attention.

Crooked Timber » » Pre-Early Rawls

Technorati Tags: John Rawls, Crooked Timber, Philosophy, liberalism, politics

Goal: Aid in Afghanistan

2007-05-21T23:01:00.001-03:00

I want to spread the word about the goal of a friend of mine. He has quit his job, sold his possessions and is planning to ride his motorcycle around the world. He is doing this because he cares about justice and equity in the world. Check out his website. I will try to keep this site updated as his project continues.

Technorati Tags: charity, afghanistan, aid, women's rights, literacy, development, canada, canadian forces, mitch rivest

Charles Taylor wins a Prestigious International Prize

2007-03-15T15:32:00.000-03:00

Vote for this Post

One of my favourite philosophers and most likely the greatest philosopher Canada has ever produced (Sorry George Grant fans) has won the Templeton prize.

I was introduced to his work in 1998, and have been reading it ever since; I find it to be unique in the world of contemporary philosophy. Even a cursory reading of something by Taylor will show that he has a a vast knowledge of Western Civilization and its literature. As you read, Taylor weaves the stories and ideas of the last 2500 years while simultaneously producing some of the most unique and original ideas I've ever read in academic philosophy. Yet, he writes to a wider audience as well. His Massey Lecture The Malaise Of Modernity, is an accessible yet multifaceted account of the virtues and vices of the Modern World. Despite a long career in the academy he has always argued from a perspective that includes spirituality and God with the ubiquity of folks like Richard Dawkins, Taylor is an anomaly but an important one and one of the most brilliant.

Here are some links

CANOE -- CNEWS - World: Cdn philosopher wins Templeton religion prize

"The reason why human beings are violent has something to do with their responding to or looking for answers for really deep questions about the meaning of life, the nature of the ultimate good, and what really gives worth to human life, and so on. As long as people are looking for answers to that then they're open to, among other things, selecting answers that have this property of pushing them to violence.

Canadian philosopher captures Templeton Prize | csmonitor.com

Taylor helped inspire some of his students to become leading political scientists and philosophers. "We'd be teaching a course in the history of Western philosophy, and Taylor would get so wrapped up in the author he was lecturing on, he'd pick the book up and say, 'Now just listen to what the author says here.' He'd be reading it out in Russian or Greek or whatever," says Jim Tully, professor of philosophy and political science at the University of Victoria, British Columbia, who taught with Taylor at McGill and edited a book critiquing his work. "I think what moved the students was his intensity of engagement. It certainly moved me."

Bloomberg.com: Canada

``Throughout his career, Charles Taylor has staked an often lonely position that insists on the inclusion of spiritual dimensions in discussions of public policy, history, linguistics, literature and every other facet of humanities and the social sciences,'' said John M. Templeton Jr., the foundation's president, in a statement.

Charles Taylor Bibliography - Research - Department of Politics & International Relations - University of Kent

Technorati Tags: Charles Taylor, Templeton Prize, Canada, Philosophy, Philosopher, Modernity

Good and Bad from Angry

2007-03-12T18:20:00.001-03:00

Fighting inefficiency is a good thing and it will reduce the volume of CO2 going into the atmosphere. However, though I support environmental initiatives I am upset by the attempts by many environmentalists to put an end to a rational and scientific discussion of climate change.

Science Technology : NDP wants to ban the incadescent light bulb

An NDP MP is putting forward a bill to phase out incandescent light bulbs. Bravo!

News Opinion : Canadian "denier" threatened with death -- and it is not reported in Canadian news

A Canadian scientist questions the science of climate change, and he begins receiving death threats. I read about it in a British newspaper. Isn't this newsworthy in Canada? I found this in a British paper:

Technorati Tags: Timothy Ball, Canada, Climate Change, death threats, New Democratic Party, NDP, Kyoto

Day Care

2007-03-02T04:31:00.001-04:00

I've been flooded with e-mail from loyal readers asking "CMM where have you been? I require wisdom and guidance, will you please make a post so that I can get on with my life."

I will explain: about a week ago we received a telephone message from our daycare provider saying "the spot that you had booked in October is no longer available and here is the number to Pacic Care." From then on my wife and I have been looking for daycare. We found a place, so life and stress is returning to normal.

I don't fully understand daycare economics and am a bit intrigued. There is very little price difference between providers which is problematic. Good places are within $40 of very nice places so the market is not keeping those who CAN pay more from taking spots from those who cannot. Strange. I wonder if there is legislation involved (comments anyone?) I would have thought that with the demand that clearly exists there would be a greater diversity of pricing.

The other thing that I was surprised to find out is that there have been very few people who have withdrawn from daycare even though federal subsidies have been reduced so dramatically. I guess that will come.

This is just a warm up post. There will be more to come!

MMM Beer and Popcorn

2007-02-14T19:17:00.001-04:00

- Vote for this Post

The other night, after putting my 10 month old daughter to bed I cracked open a nice refreshing Granville Island Gastown Amber Ale and put a bag of WalMart popcorn in the microwave! It was quite a pleasant evening. The beer was extra fizzy and popcorn more salty because I had just received $100 from the federal government - basically my snack was free.

The child care cheque that comes around once a month is getting a lot of attention now that tax time is coming around. People are upset to learn/realise that the money is taxable. This will be my first tax year with a kid, so I can't comment on the taxation aspect. Instead I want to loosely defend the cheque.

There are a lot of things in Canada's Social infrastructure that are good, but they tend to eliminate some aspect of choice from the lives of Canadians. Health Care, for instance is great but there are not many places to shop for the best health care - shopping is essentially illegal. It is also a large bureaucracy that concentrates on health care delivery. This may be the right model for health care in Canada, but I'm not sure it is the right model for child care. Parents have a lot of emotion invested in their children and want to make sure that they are doing the right thing for them. Part of that concern translates into ensuring that their children are left in the hands of the "right" daycare. Whatever that means - it might mean a religious daycare or perhaps one that serves organic soy beans for lunch.

I like the idea of giving parents the means to choose what is right for them and their children even if that means staying home. A monthly cheque in theory makes it easier to stay home because it doesn't discriminate between stay at home parents and those that work; by providing cash it can increase demand for child care that will create supply over the long term; it allows the market to create niches that cater to parent's demands; and finally because it is taxed by a progressive tax system the subsidy is progressive benefiting lower income Canadians more than higher income Canadians.

Now, all of the critics will point out that after taxes I can afford only 48 bottles of beer and a dozen bags of popcorn - probably true; I would also be able to afford 60 bottles of beer if I went with NDP approved and subsidised beer (Lucky?) and could likely get an extra six bags of popcorn if I went to Giant Tiger. But I prefer Granville Island and find WalMart convenient. And, as I am about to find out day care is more expensive than I would like to contemplate. I agree with these criticisms, which is simply why I say that in order to meet my need for quality beer (like Granville Island Beer) I need more money every month. I will let the bean counters in Ottawa figure it out, but individuals in the lower tax brackets must not see an increase in their child care bills because of a switch in how child care is subsidised. If that means a monthly cheque of $400 is required in order to ensure that the after tax cash infusion matches the subsidy that has been removed is required, then so be it.

No Tory child-care plan as parents face long waits, rising fees

there’s uncertainty mixed with alarm across Canada over looming fee increases
and program cuts since the Tories dropped the $5-billion Liberal plan to build a national early learning system.

In other words, the Tory plan is good and doesn't go far enough. One of the principles that underlies, to my mind, a liberal society, is that changes to the structure of society, and a redistribution of wealth for child care is part of that structure, says that such changes when they further inequality ought to improve the lot of the least well off.

Here is what others are saying:

A BCer in Toronto: Conservatives clawing back "day care" cheques

Conservatives clawing back "day care" cheques

As Liberals predicted at the time, the chickens are now coming home to roost on the Conservatives' $100/month “child care” plan. More evidence now that Harper is clawing back the tax on the cheques and that for many families that $100 will be closer to $65.

EXARO: can't say they weren't warned

The income tax consequences or the CPC’s $100/month childcare grants, which some of us wrote about during last year’s federal election, are becoming clear to Canadian families. As a fellow blogger writes, the government now is mailing notices of the tax liability to those who have been cashing the $100 cheques.

My Blahg » TIME TO PAY THE FIDDLER

This is going to upset and anger a lot of people over the next two months.

Here's what they said a year ago:

Tories promise new child-care allowance

Stephen Harper unveiled a Conservative plan on Monday that would give parents of young children $100 a month for child care.

The Tory leader made the announcement at a noisy day-care centre in Ottawa. "This is just like a caucus meeting," he said on a campaign stop for the Jan. 23 federal election.

Child care advocates alarmed at Conservative proposals

Ottawa (11 Jan. 2006) - The Child Care Advocacy Association of Canada says a Stephen Harper Conservative government will roll back the clock on hard won progress toward a national child care program.

Technorati Tags: Child Care, Benefit, Canadian Politics, Day Care, Conservative Party of Canada

CFS and Tuition

2007-02-10T17:33:00.001-04:00

With all of the hullabaloo from the Canadian Federation of Students this week regarding the costs of education:
CFS - Media

From St. John’s to Victoria, thousands of students and other Canadians are participating in rallies and events as part of the Canadian Federation of Students’ campaign for affordable, high-quality post-secondary education.

I would like to point out that a recent study conducted by Statistics Canada has pointed out that the cost of education is not the barrier that many people believe it is. It is more likely, according to the study

"school marks reported at age 15, parental influences, and high-school quality account for 84 per cent the gap"

Only 12 percent of the "gap" (between the prospects of lower and higher income high school student for university education) is attributable to income. So, this tells me that the "size of your wallet" as the national chairperson of the CFS calls it, is not really that much of a factor when it comes to ensuring equal access to university education. So, with this survey, it is now up to the CFS to argue why public dollars ought to spent on lowering tuition.

On the face of it, there would seem to be little marginal gain in investing money in lower tuition fees when that money could be spent on any number of the following things that would likely achieve the putative aims of the CFS more effectively than by reducing tuition:

Educating lower income high school students about budgeting and the true costs of higher education,
Ensuring that lower income high school students are more likely to succeed,
Creating a national or uniform provincial standard of high school education regardless of neighbourhood,
Educating middle and upper income families about the importance of trades and non-university post-secondary employment [I think a survey of lower and upper income families will show that the progeny of upper income families are under represented in non-university employment], and
Educating parents of lower income families about the true possibilities of university education.

My suspicions are that the CFS will not respond to this survey by answering any of these questions. Instead I think it will try to discredit the survey in the hopes of lowering tuition to a point where demand far surpasses supply or the capacity of society to absorb all of the high expectations of university graduates. The CFS in my experience is predisposed to pointless political agitation and not at all concerned with practical public (and personal) parsimony.

Technorati Tags: Canadian Federation of Students, tuition, university, education, equality, politics, Canada

Climate Change and The Decline of Reason

2007-02-08T03:53:00.000-04:00

I want to start off by saying that I firmly believe that we need to reduce our consumption of fossil fuels and pump less crap into the air, as well as cut down fewer trees, throw less garbage into the oceans and be cleaner better people. I don't think that the Canadian Government is doing enough, nor do I think the liberals will do enough.

Now, onto my main point:

Since the release of the IPCC report last week I have seen a form of zealotry normally associated with middle eastern politics. Headlines in my local weekly papers have read that "The debate is Over," "Global Warming Verdict is In" "Climate Change is a Fact". [I wish I still had the papers and could cite them properly. Alas, they have been recycled] Generally the past week has seen normally rational people call for an end to any discussion, debate or conversation regarding the science of climate change. Appeals to the "consensus" of scientists and the credentials of an international panel have all been designed to halt the debate. I understand that the good intention behind these headlines is to prod those people who wish to go on with their polluting lives as they have for decades, but the result of these headlines is to ignore the very roots of our great Western Civilization.

Undeniable Global Warming (washingtonpost.com)

Many people have the impression that there is significant scientific disagreement about global climate change. It's time to lay that misapprehension to rest. There is a scientific consensus on the fact that Earth's climate is heating up and human activities are part of the reason. We need to stop repeating nonsense about the uncertainty of global warming and start talking seriously about the right approach to address it.

My concern is the decline in the willingness of rational people to permit debate, doubt and scepticism. The ideas of human caused climate change (HCCC) are considered to be so sacrosanct that I worry that should someone find evidence against it that it would go completely unnoticed. The concern within the ~~scientific~~ climate-change "community" is not with empirical fact, but with coming to a formulation scientific data that will be sufficient to force political change. In this way it bears greater resemblance to a lobby or a political-religious movement than a group of dispassionate observers of the natural world.

There seems to be a general trend against funding scientists that are sceptical of HCCC. Sceptics are not given a voice further stifling debate and other theories are not explored.

Leading scientific journals 'are censoring debate on global warming': Telegraph

Two of the world's leading scientific journals have come under fire from researchers for refusing to publish papers which challenge fashionable wisdom over global warming. A British authority on natural catastrophes who disputed whether
climatologists really agree that the Earth is getting warmer because of human activity, says his work was rejected by the American publication, Science, on the flimsiest of grounds.

The ideas of deniers are often given little credence and dismissed. Take the example of Dinner Table Donts, who is often very rational and conscious of what makes a good or bad argument. In this post he dismisses a statistical argument with a list of facts that may or may not point towards HCCC. He should know that the fact of a pine beetle infestation has no bearing whatsoever on what constitutes a significant statistical sample. In fact they are just more small samples and do not address the thrust of the sceptics argument.

Dinner Table Donts: Denying Climate Change

"Whatever age of the earth you pick, data collected on weather patterns in 100 years is almost entirely meaningless and cannot be used to predict future patterns." [Source]
Never mind the fact that entire forests in British Columbia are being destroyed by the pine beetle, a direct result of warmer winters. Or the fact that the polar caps are melting, resulting in the destruction of natural habitat.

It seems odd that in Western Civilization with our experience of Galileo, Inquisitions, and Darwin that we would be so willing to shut-down debate.

Moreover Western enlightenment and the edifice of science has been build upon the ideas of people like Rene Descartes

The first precept was never to accept a thing as true until I knew it as such without a single doubt. (The Discourse on Method)
Doubt is the origin of wisdom. (Principles of First Philosophy)

David Hume (from WikiQuote):

A wise man's kingdom is his own breast: or, if he ever looks farther, it will only be to the judgment of a select few, who are free from prejudices, and capable of examining his work. Nothing indeed can be a stronger presumption of falsehood than the approbation of the multitude;
In our reasonings concerning matter of fact, there are all imaginable degrees of assurance, from the highest certainty to the lowest species of moral evidence. A wise man, therefore, proportions his belief to the evidence.

John Stuart Mill

If all mankind minus one were of one opinion, and only one person were of the contrary opinion, mankind would be no more justified in silencing that one person, than he, if he had the power, would be justified in silencing mankind. (On Liberty)

Headlines you may have heard (if you were around):

1970: "The Earth is Cooling: Prepare for an Ice Age"
prior to 1610: "Scientific consensus: The Sun Orbits the Earth"
Circa 360 BC: "Leading Scientist Says Women by Nature Inferior"

Is HCCC of the same magnitude as the issues above - maybe. I am sceptical of the arguments, the data and spin; however, I do not believe that nothing should be done about our emissions of CO2. On the contrary, but stifling debate, and silencing sceptics is not the way to go. Our great traditions of science and analytic thought are based on scepticism and doubt. It would be a shame to see those traditions thrown out with the bathwater in an attempt achieve the political points.

Some good places to start learning about what the sceptics are saying:

Wikipedia:

Sourcewatch

The National Post

UPDATE: Here's a good headline: Climate Change - From “Inconvenient” to Incontrovertible

Technorati Tags: climate change, politics, sceptics, deniers, environmentalism, global warming, deniers, science

Remember Soldiers in the City

2007-02-05T13:27:00.000-04:00

I would just like to recall, in fairness, that it was the unspoken implications that the add made that made them so offensive. It was the ominous drum beat that seemed to say "hide your children, their next game of street hockey will be played under the watchful eye of men in jackboots."

My Blahg » THE SOLDIERS, THE CITIES AND THE LIBERAL ADS

I’m surprised this isn’t making big waves in the Liberalsphere. Remember those ads by the Liberals accusing PMS of wanting to put soldiers, with guns in our cities? Well he is planning to do just that.

RT: Soldiers with guns. In our cities. In Canada. `

Today we learn that the Harper government plans to boost military presence across the country with new units in 14 cities. According to the Conservative government’s own “Canada First Defence Strategy” just leaked to the Ottawa Citizen, before 2016, the army will establish “territorial response battalions” in Victoria, Vancouver, Calgary, Edmonton, Regina, Winnipeg, Niagara-Windsor, Toronto, Ottawa, Montreal, Quebec City, Saint John, N.B., Halifax and St. John's, N.L. So there you go… Soldiers with guns. In our cities. In Canada. The Liberals did not make that up.

The adds were offensive regardless of whether or not the Conservatives plan to deploy troops was true. If the Canadian Forces are deployed to more cities, there is nothing to fear in those cities. Winnipeg, Halifax or Edmonton are not less free than other Canadian Cities because they house significant numbers of Canadian Forces.

Technorati Tags: Canadian Forces, Conservative Party of Canada, Liberal Party of Canada, Politics, Canada, Election 2006, Advertising, Political Advertising, Canada

Charles Taylor on CBC

2007-01-29T18:04:00.000-04:00

Found this one out late! Give it a listen before it's off the list. Charles Taylor if probably Canada's greatest philosopher, and the author that got me into philosophy.

CBC Radio | Ideas | The Best of Ideas Podcast

Modern Social Imaginaries

What makes modernity different from all previous ways of life? Canadian philosopher Charles Taylor talks to IDEAS producer David Cayley about what makes us modern.

Technorati Tags: Charles Taylor, podcast, Canada, CBC, philosophy

Just War and Retribution

2007-01-29T17:50:00.000-04:00

Here are some thoughts about the idea of a just war and retribution, prompted by the Hon. B Gen Gordon O'Connor:

Canadian war against Taliban is "retribution" for 9/11 attacks

Speaking at a symposium about Afghanistan, O'Connor said Canadian soldiers are in the country because Afghanistan's democratically elected government wants them there, because Canada has a responsibility to help as one of the world's richest countries and because the war is in Canada's own interest. "When the Taliban or al-Qaida came out of Afghanistan, they attacked the twin towers and in those twin towers, 25 Canadians were killed. The previous government and this government will not allow Canadians to be killed without retribution," O'Connor told his audience of roughly 200 people, many of them military personnel.

Definition of retribution - Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary

Main Entry: ret·ri·bu·tion Pronunciation: "re-tr&-'byü-sh&n
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English retribucioun, from Anglo-French, from Late Latin retribution-, retributio, from Latin retribuere to pay back, from re- + tribuere to pay -- more at TRIBUTE
1 : RECOMPENSE, REWARD
2 : the dispensing or receiving of reward or punishment especially in the hereafter 3 : something given or exacted in recompense; especially : PUNISHMENT

Classically the justice of a war is assessed using three criteria: legitimacy, just cause and just intention. The Afghan mission as it has been sold to the Canadian public has met all three of these criteria. It has legitimacy in the legal sense that it is sanctioned by international law and a supranational body. It is the new articulation of our cause and intent worries me.

The very idea of retribution cannot be a just cause; as a cause of military action retribution implies that the original injustice that has been perpetrated against one's self deserves to be met with deadly force. There is no reason for military force other than military force. The argument slips into a deadly circle with terrible consequences. It is the applicability of the same flawed argument to the enemy's circumstances that makes this kind of reasoning so pernicious and dangerous. Moreover it inverts the normal labels of innocence; for If our innocents were lost in an attack, then retribution would seem to demand that their innocents must pay too. No justice can come from the death of innocents.

The attack of the 11th of September 2001 may serve as the basis of a just cause for military action. That day may have demonstrated the existence of a threat or that the Al-Qaida/Taliban coalition represents the kind of oppressive hate inducing regime that is both a danger to our security and the rights of Afghan people that requires immediate action. It may have been the case a week prior, but that attack could be a just cause to bring one nation to action.

When a state is spurred to military action and whose intention is to seek retribution there can be no end to the bloodshed. Military action requires an objective in order to focus the application of force; and this is why I do not believe the defence minister. Objectives in Afghanistan seem, from this distant perspective, to be focused on securing infrastructure from terrorists in order to provide security for reconstruction. To my mind that is not punishment or a form of blood lust that would expected from a mission of retribution. My faith in the justice of our war in Afghanistan would be severely shaken if not for the actions of our troops speaking louder than the words of their Minister.

[ed. Incidentally I do not necessarily endorse the theory of Aquinas that I linked to above, he is just one of the early proponents of a tripartite and very popular theory of the justice of wars.]

Technorati Tags: just war, afghanistan, canada, retribution, politics, conservative party of canada

Pure Genius!

2007-01-27T00:33:00.000-04:00

I've always thought that the whole "set your watch 5 minutes ahead and you won't be late" thing was retarded. I believe that it is impossible for a rational person to deceive him/herself. Thus a rational person who intentionally sets his/her watch will compensate and not fall act as though it was on time. Of course you can get a friend to pick a random time, but that can be easily defeated and you are back to square one. So here is a new solution:

David Seah : A Chindogu Clock for Procrastinators

Enter the Procrastinator’s Clock. It’s guaranteed to be up to 15 minutes fast. However, it also speeds up and slows down in an unpredictable manner so you can’t be sure how fast it really is. Furthermore, the clock is guaranteed to not be slow, assuming your computer clock is sync’d with NTP; many computers running Windows and Mac OS X with persistent Internet connections already are.

H/T Crooked Timber

Schools and Gangs

2007-01-09T20:51:00.000-04:00

Over the holidays I had a chat with an old friend who is a schoolteacher in Ontario. He mentioned a theory of his that seems to make sense to me. The idea is that by making the school year a year we would help to reduce the ability of gangs to recruit high school aged children. Idle hands are the devil's workshop and by insuring that high school hands are not idle for long, the more sinister will have difficulty influencing them.

I remember those long summer breaks. They could be quite boring and I could get into a lot of trouble if there wasn't anything organised for me. The idea of a long summer break has come and gone. Children are not required to work on the farm any more and the two parent household has to fork out a lot of money to entertain children over the summer. Moreover the children forget so much of what they have learned over the summer that a long break seems a bad idea from a pedagogical point of view.

I am neither a teacher nor a criminologist, so I am not really in a position to speak in much more detail, but, the idea seems sound and worthy of further investigation. It doesn't need to be applied universally, but only where it makes more sense and there are a lot of different ways of applying the idea. The same number of school days can be maintained just spread out differently or another trimester can be added to make busy curricula less so.

There are a lot of ideas out there for dealing with youth and crime, many of them involve programmes, and money. Schooling is one of the biggest and most effective such programmes, why not see if it can be used more effectively.

Technorati Tags: school, school schedules, gangs, crime, youth crime, education, canada, politics

powered by performancing firefox

Gee Mom I want to go back to Ontario

2007-01-04T15:43:00.000-04:00

We are back in Ontario for the Holiday season and I am reminded of what seems to be the greatest difference between life in Ontario and life on the Island. DRIVING. We have spent a lot of time on the road already and the differences are stark. First there are the design differences. On the island the highways have low speed limits and even the divided highways have traffic lights: not so in Ontario, ofcourse. But the most significant difference to my mind is the culture of highway driving that seems to exist out East. There is a set of behavioural expectations that motorists have of eachother - whether it is to yield lanes or speed up/slow down in certain circumstances. This culture seems well entrenched. You can tell that people follow it and expect others to follow it. It is a truly amazing thing when compared with the kind ofdriving out West. In Ontario there are few old duffers cruising in the left lane, doing the speed limit and shaking there fists at passing cars because nobody should be overtaking a car doing the limit. Funny, though the more I travel the more I notice how the culture changes a little with each highway.

Ahh, and then there is that lttle piece of commuting heaven called the 407!

Truth Revealed by Quiz

2006-12-04T17:58:00.000-04:00

Your 'Do You Want the Terrorists to Win' Score: 83%

You are a terrorist-loving scoundrel who hates our dear leader and the values he defends. There are few redeeming qualities about you. You most likely celebrated when the evil-doers hit us on 9/11, then opposed the Iraq war when we tried to pay them back. You hurt us at every step and cause troops to die in the field by questioning Bush's decisions. You are most likely a lost cause, doomed to be a brainwashed victim of free thought and liberalism forever. No dose of Ann Coulter's prose can save you now.

Do You Want the Terrorists to Win?

Quiz Created on GoToQuiz

When will we focus on reconstruction?

2006-12-04T14:07:00.000-04:00

An excellent post:

The Torch: Why Canadians don't know the trivia that's not trivial

Quickly now - no Googling: can you name three projects Canada's Kandahar Provincial Reconstruction Team (KPRT) has undertaken in the past year? The first wiseguy to spout off that "they dug a well" gets a slap in the head for his trouble.

H/T Tart Cider

DRM

2006-11-29T19:04:00.000-04:00

The other day I formatted my C Drive and installed Windows XP again. This was the first time that I did that after having downloaded a couple of LPs from the Future Shop sponsored Bonfire (Puretracks) download site. I had also upgraded to Windows Media Player 11.

Well, I thought I should back up my Licences before formatting. Well WMP 11 doesn't allow you to back up your licences. (unlike 10) I had a backup from a while back so I continued. Anyway, I am now operating WMP 10 again and half of my legitimately acquired songs DO NOT work. I have tried downloading the songs again, but they won't download with the licenses. So because Microsoft Windows needs to be re-installed every so often, and Microsoft's Media Player doesn't allow you to backup DRM licenses I am stuck with unusable music. The situation is garbage. I am NEVER going to frequent a download site again.

I object to the whole DRM system. With the large levies that we pay when we purchase recordable media there is no excuse to have such restrictive software. Moreover, all the portability and network playing restrictions that are built into the DRM scheme infringe on fair use. It is perfectly reasonable for me to store all of my music on one computer and want to listen to the song on a networked computer, or let a friend listen to my music via a wireless network on his/her wifi enabled laptop. These are not unreasonable uses, yet the DRM programme is intent on hamstring my ability to use the songs that I have legitimately acquired. I am all for legitimising the trade in digital music but this kind of crap forces reasonable people underground. We need to decriminalise and resurrect the original spirit of Napster.

Technorati Tags: DRM, Windows Media Player, Bonfire, Puretracks

Nation! - Me Too

2006-11-24T01:14:00.000-04:00

I think that enough has been said about the Quebec nation debate, so I will change the subject.

I would like for everyone to look back at the history of British Columbia. I believe that when they do, they will come to the inevitable conclusion that the province of British Columbia was founded by TWO Colonies: The Colony of Vancouver Island and the Rest of British Columbia (ROB). While Vancouver Island was an organized bastion of colonial civilization, ROB was an unorganized backwater of fur traders and prospectors. And yet, since joining, ROB has has garnered all of the attention, money and political power. Certainly most of the premiers of the Province have represented ROB (There hasn't been a Vancouver Islander since the election of Premier Byron Johnson in 1947).

Most importantly, as a founding colony of British Columbia, Vancouver Island deserves some recognition for its unique historical and sociological contributions to the Province. Vancouver Islanders have a unique culture and way of life that deserves formal recognition - in a sociological sense. Anyone who has ever visited Vancouver Island will notice that older cars are driven and at slower speeds; we complain about Toronto; and we believe that every four lane divided highway should have stop lights and overpasses are for pedestrians. Moreover, as a people we have distinct tastes: Starbucks and Serious Coffee are preferred over Tim Hortons. We have a distinct way of talking: When we complain about snow in February or March we are referring to the petals falling from the flowering cherry trees.

To this end, I urge you to help convince the Provincial Government of British Columbia to "Recognize that Vancouver Islanders form a nation within a united British Columbia."

Sign the petition here!

Technorati Tags: Nation, Canada, British Columbia, Vancouver Island, Politics, Nationalism

Response to CDNTARHEEL

2006-11-18T00:51:00.000-04:00

CDNTARHEEL commented on my post about Ignatieff's statement on China. Here is a response:

Fair enough, here is a bit more explanation. I was quite excited to hear that Ignatieff was running. I saw hope for a liberal party that put deep thought and principle into their policies - in contrast to the liberal party of Mr Martin. I may not agree with all of his pronouncements, but I was hoping he would stick to his guns with a little more steadfastness.

The statement that I quoted in the original post makes human rights sound like something a father would lecture a teenager about - say, coming home after 11pm. That wouldn't be a problem were he Jean Chretien, but Chretien did not write a book like The Needs of Strangers. Of course, he goes on in the interview to argue for a softer approach to China. This isn't the human rights professor strategising about the best way to help the Chinese, but the work of a political hopeful trying to earn the respect of Bay Street while appearing to remain committed to the principle of Human Rights. He seems to be pandering when I hoped he would stand on principle.

Technorati Tags: Michael Ignatieff, Politics, Canada, Liberal Party of Canada, China, Human Rights

Something Feminism has done for Me

2006-11-17T18:12:00.000-04:00

Here is an interesting post:

Pieces of a Whole » Blog Archive » Stay at home dads

The post sets forth two arguments:

I am saddened by this post for a couple of reasons. If I can assume that this person is a member of the so called "Christian Evangelical Right" then how does this kind of an attitude "focus on the family". I would have thought that anything that would build good strong families would be welcome, especially ones that seem to reinforce the importance of males in the rearing of children. There are some that say that fathers are no longer essential for modern families. Oh well here are some thoughts on the post:

The first is an ideal of strict gender roles that are based on some conception of scriptural hermeneutics apparently from 3 Genesis. There is a lot to be said against this kind of straight-jacketing. Few fathers regardless of whether they stay at home or not would accept the kind of gender roles for their daughters so why should they accept it for themselves? So, unless you are willing to raise your daughter to believe that they have one purpose in life that is predefined by her gender then so might the fathers. But, I think most fathers are willing to raise their daughters to believe that their daughters can play many roles in life, and what better way to show that to them than as a father who too is willing to have many roles.

The second argument is one that is much easier to agree with: More fathers ought to spend time with the kids even if that means taking a pay cut. My problem is that by railing against stay at home dads the post is removing the one option that might best achieve that aim. Parental leave taken by fathers is one of the ways many men (including yours truly) get the opportunity to stay at home. And here is the rub it often comes with legal protections against job loss and discrimination - unlike taking a 10% pay cut as the post suggests in order to work less and play more.

REVISED 21 Nov to reflect a post made elsewhere.

Technorati Tags: Stay at Home Dad, fatherhood, parenting, feminism, christian

Ignatieff vs Harper & China

2006-11-17T17:42:00.000-04:00

There are a lot of things that I dislike about what Harper is doing with respect to China and the diplomacy of trade and human rights. There is one good thing that can be said about Harper that cannot be said about Ignatieff is that at least Harper knows what he is supposed to say to Canadian electors about Human Rights. The quotation from Ignatieff, who I had a lot of hope for about 2 years ago, demonstrates a total amateurism that reminds me of the kinds of things I saw at the height of the Stockwell Day carnival.

There is a lot to criticise Harper on the China file. He didn't send Mackay to meet with their ambassador and he hasn't visited China himself. (Does anyone have a source for this, I heard it mentioned on a CBC radio interview with Dr Byers of UBC). In a world of symbols these things mean a lot. It is no wonder that China was not too willing to meet at APEC.

Ignatieff blasts Harper's 'megaphone' diplomacy with China

"Mr. Harper, I think, believes you can go to one of the greatest civilizations on earth, a superpower of the 21st century and give them a little lecture on human rights," Ignatieff told CBC News.

Hat Tip to: AC

Technorati Tags: Canada, China, Ignatieff, Liberal Party of Canada, Conservative Party, APEC, Harper

Kyoto - International Law

2006-11-16T01:42:00.000-04:00

I want to put aside the very important issue of the state of the environment and how that relates to the Kyoto Protocol. Another issue of profound importance to the Canadian National Interest is being missed entirely.

One of the things that I've blogged about in the past is the importance of international law to the Canadian foreign policy. Quite simply put: as a small power in the presence of an American Super Power and an Asian Uber-Factory if we are ever going to have an international presence that punches beyond our weight class, then we will have to rely on an effective and respected system of international law. The alternative to relying on the civilising effect of law is using dangerous international military missions to get seats at tables and to earn favours. I am not willing to endorse such a foreign policy as the price is too high, the policy is unsustainable and the whole thing is morally reckless.

I think that most can guess where I am going with this post. It is believed that Canada will be the first state to withdraw from the protocol. The fact that there probably are some withdrawal clauses in the treaty is not important. Leaving treaties and/or ignoring the commitments that have been made on the international stage is precisely the kind of thing that will weaken Canada's place in the world. Imagine how we would feel if the United States started to ignore the provisions of NAFTA or simply withdrew from the agreement - imagining itself not bound by its obligations? Where would we stand and what could we do about it? The point here is that a policy of strengthening the norms of international law and the expectations among nations that treaties will be upheld is the kind of foreign policy that Canada ought to be advocating at every turn. We don't want to have to use our economic weight (which is waning against Asia) or to veiled threats of military force (which we cannot back up). We can get what we want on the international stage by being a good global citizen and working to ensure that others will be too. If we don't get what we want, we will at least have the consolation of knowing the system by which we didn't get what we want was fair (or at least agreed to).

The kind of publicity that we have been getting c/o Rona Ambrose and the Canadian delegation to the conference in Nairobi is a disaster. The example that Canada is setting is entirely hypocritical. I won't start on my thoughts on the politics of blaming the previous guys.

Technorati Tags: Kyoto, Canada, Politics, International Law, Rona Ambrose, Conservative Party, Foreign Policy, Environmentalism, Conservative Party, Treaties

West Coast Life

2006-11-09T18:26:00.000-04:00

When I was doing my undergrad, I thought that it would be very cool and studious if I had a bust of some famous person on my desk - it would make me look smart and that is what school is all about. The only one that I was able to find (I didn't look very hard) was a bust of the victor of that glorious battle of Omdurmann - Lord Kitchener. Now, that bust would become the bain of my existence as it got tossed out of windows and photographed in compromising situations.

Now that I am on the West Coast it would seem that the tradition continues. This past week I woke up and found an e-mail urging me to sign a great petition urging a state funeral for the last Great War Veteran. I wrote that article and then went to see how I could get a code to have it voted on at Progressive Bloggers. Their I found A Post by Lord Kitchener at the top of the Voting List! Then the next day I found a post over at My Blahg about a White Poppy. I went for a morning walk to think about this idea and came to some conclusions. When I sat down to write the post I found it almost idea for idea written by Lord Kitchener.

So, I blame the three hour time difference. If I was operating on Ontario Time my greatness would be more fully realised and accepted throughout the world. However, I'd rather not move back to the land of snow and ice, so I'll just sit back and read Lord Kitchener's blog (now on my blogroll) whilst plotting his demise.

Technorati Tags: Blogging, West Coast

Rumsfeld Resigns:

2006-11-08T14:33:00.000-04:00

What did it take?

Rumsfeld resigns as U.S. defence secretary

Technorati Tags: Donald Rumsfeld, Politics, Canada, Election

Petition - Last Great War Veteran

2006-11-07T16:41:00.000-04:00

This is an important historical issue and a great milestone in Canadian life, and marks the passing of a foundational era. Canada was rose out of the ashes of the Europe leftover from this great struggle. Please sign this petition and never forget the great sacrifice of those who purchased freedom for us on the fields of France and during the Great War.

The Dominion Institute - Memory | Democracy | Identity

Canada's Last Great War Veteran
"We the undersigned feel enormous gratitude for the sacrifice made by all the Canadian Armed Forces through the ages in defence of this country and its values; acknowledge the very special nature of the sacrifice made by those who fought in the First World War in appalling conditions and with terrible loss of life; note that only three First World War veterans remain, and urge the Prime Minister that their sacrifice, and all of those they served with under arms from 1914-1918, be celebrated by offering a state funeral to the family of the last veteran of the First World War resident in Canada." The Dominion Institute will send the petition on behalf of its signatories to the Prime Minister of Canada on December 11, 2006.

UPDATE: The movement is afoot in the UK too:
The Observer | UK News | Calls grow to grant last Great War veteran a state funeral

Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers!

UPDATE: I will link to any other blog that encourages people to sign the petition:
Kitchener's Own
Socialist Gulag
Responsible Government League
Small Dead Animals
The Screaming Pages
Halls of Macadamia
Andrew Coyne

Technorati Tags: Remembrance Day, First World War, WW1, State Funeral, Canada, Dominion Institute, Canadian Armed Forces

Not an Issue of Naturalism/Religion/Cleanliness etc... it is about Rights

2006-11-06T16:16:00.000-04:00

And so, my faithful reader, I deliver unto you links to a rather bizarre conversation taking place mainly on the comments page of the Red Tory. The first quotation is from a counterpost to the original thread, the second is a counter-counterpost and the third is the original post.

Defend Canada: A Debate on Homosexuality

Further, it demonstrates that those promoting this so aggresively, outright refuse to recognize that if I have to accept their rampant over-promotion of Homosexuality, then churches across the country should be able to send out flyers promoting Homosexuality as "unnatural", without resistance.

RT: We Get Mail
RT: Sexually Immoral Conduct

As I have explained before (Ramblings: April 2005) the whole issue surrounding the acceptance in society of homosexuality and all of the trappings that come with is not a matter of anything other than equality rights. And, because we are talking about equality rights (everyone has them) a diminution of one person's rights is a weakening of everyone else's.

For instance if, because of an argument about the naturalness of something, one is able to restrict the behaviour of homosexuals - restrict marriage rights or permit ad campaigns against that conception of how to live, then one would have to accept the opposite. Again, for instance, it may be true that the traditional definition of marriage is un-natural. Anthropologists may determine that humans were ever meant to live together for more than seven years - they might cite the "seven year itch" and demonstrate overwhelming scientific evidence. Would we then wish to legislate marriage to restrict it to seven year renewable open term contracts (you know - like mortgages).

You can substitute the the terms of the above argument for most anything: unpopular, socially destructive, not-true-because-my-religion-says-so, unscientific, backwards etc... But, what you cannot do is substitute a rights based argument.

My point is this by couching the terms of the debate in rights and ensuring that recognition of homosexuality is done in terms of rights churches and other organisations are strengthened. A equal rights based argument makes it more difficult to threaten the place of churches in society.

Technorati Tags: Gay Marriage, homosexuality, politics, canada, conservative, rights, equality,

More on Trusts

2006-11-03T15:23:00.000-04:00

It looks like I am not the only one saying that some warning would have been nice. There are a lot of pissed off people out there - and a lot of them from the demographic that the Conservatives should be courting. Again, I do think that in the long run this was a good decision, but the whole process by which the Conservatives have done this strikes me as piss poor.

Cherniak on Politics: On Income Trusts

If they had warned people to be cautious, then this would not have happened. How might they have done that? It is simple. The day that BCE made its announcement and after the markets closed, Flaherty could have said "this sort of extremity was not our expectation when we set our policy a year ago". Would that have been misleading? Perhaps as far as the motivations for the policy last year. However, at least it would have informed the markets that something was up.

The Progressive Right: Income Trusts

Garth Turner had a better solution to handling the income trust closure: I think the minister of finance could have declared a moratorium on new conversions, struck a blue ribbon panel to study the industry and eased in regs over the past few months making it crystal what direction the feds were going in. That would have allowed for a more orderly, less panicked correction, and kept from scaring the crap out of a few million seniors. It would have been a kinder blow.

Technorati Tags: Income Trusts, Politics, Canada, Conservative

The Worth of Freedom

2006-11-03T03:30:00.000-04:00

As pointed out here:
My Blahg » A TALE OF TWO COLUMNS

Two columns in which both authors say the conjoined Simms’ twins should have been aborted.

The two columns are very similar in their arguments:

The Gateway | Tuesday, 31 October, 2006 | Volume XCVII Issue 15

Furthermore,
being on government assistance and with two other children to care for
already, she knew she would have to rely on Canada’s health-care system
to pay for an operation that may or may not work on little Tatiana and
Krista.

globeandmail.com: Twin sides of the coin

The
twins' mother, Felicia Simms, is a 21-year-old single woman on social
assistance. She has two other children, ages 4 and 2. She is unable to
work, she has said, because she has severe scoliosis — curvature of the
spine — and a panic disorder.

NO, I will not make a comment on any arguments for or against abortion, be drawn in to said arguments or even touch the arguments about this case. However, I will use this as an opportunity to point out the emptiness of of libertarian conceptions of freedom against liberal equal freedom.

Ms Simms' case, to me, is a shining example of how a guarantee of freedom is meaningless without some sort of system to ensure that such freedom is actually worth something to the individuals to whom it is guaranteed. Without a redistributive system whereby individuals have the means to make choices (like Ms Simms did) a guarantee of freedom is in fact meaningless. Had there not been a health care system in place she may have been forced by her circumstance to do something she would not otherwise have chosen to do.

The two columns, I presume, would be made quiet if Ms Simms won the lottery and moved to the United States. To this end, it seems that the columns are saying that certain of our freedoms ought only to apply to those capable financing their decisions; to the rest of us, we are doomed to be slaves to the contingencies of necessity. But, such a world is not fair as it privelleges some above others and punishes others for things wholly beyond their control. For this reason, a charter that guarantees rights and freedoms is of no value unless it is coupled with a system that ensures that those freedoms can be exercised to some degree by all people.

To those not swayed because they feel that they will always be in a position to have the resources to exercise their freedom: imagine that one day, out of the blue, the minister of finance makes a decision and your net worth is suddenly reduced... oh sorry, still a little bitter.

Technorati Tags: Politics, Canada, Abortion, liberalism, libertarian, health care, freedom, rights, choice

Furious over Income Trusts!

2006-11-01T22:17:00.000-04:00

Well I'm pissed! The decision to tax income trusts has me fuming for several reasons. For one it has cost me a lot of money, so I am obviously unhappy about that. However, Flaherty's righteousness over the way he handled the announcement is completely unwarranted. The nature of coporate taxation and the pandering that is going on towards the NDP has got me going and finally so to is the bribing of seniors!

The first two points are one and the same really. Me losing a lot of money all of the sudden is a direct result of how Flaherty decided to handle this issue. He wanted to contrast how the Liberals did it:
Flaherty imposes new tax on income trusts

"Well, the last government did nothing but muse about it and that was the problem," said Flaherty. "There's still an RCMP investigation of the Department of Finance in Ottawa about leaks arising from that."

But the problem with how the Liberals handled the affair was that they leaked the decision before the announcement to folks on Bay Street. It was known generally that an announcement was going to be made, but not what that decision was going to be. Contrast Flaherty and the Conservatives who showed absolutely no intention to deal with trusts until last night. As a result the market has to absorb this shocker the instant the doors open in the morning. If you are planning on screwing with the market you warn people that you are thinking about it so that the market can deal with it rationally when you announce the decision a month (or whatever) later. Today was a mad scramble. In addition if you warn, you can consult.

Then there is the nature of corporate taxes, capital gains and dividend taxation. As Andrew Coyne points out "No corporation ever paid a dime of tax. All taxes are paid by people: the people who own the corporation, or the people who work for it, or the people who buy its products. A corporation is just a piece of paper, a legal document on file at the registrar's office." So why the hell are people getting double taxed left right and centre? And then, depending on the source of the money taxed at different rates. Income is income is income - tax it once and all at the same rate. (keeping it progressive of course). By making the move at the corportate tax level is an attempt to placate the NDP who don't understand Coyne's point and are always going after corporations to pay more taxes.

Lastly, I am not a senior and ther was nothing in Flaherty's announcement that was designed to soften the blow of the announcement. He was abviously sucking up to that demographic, but they are not the only people who have invested in income trusts. Why the hell must I bear the full brunt of the blow while others get deliberate cushioning?

Looks like I'm not the only one who lost, looks like some lost BIG:

globeandmail.com : globeinvestor.com : Surveying the fallout from the trust bombshell

Income trust investors suffered more than $20-billion in paper losses on their portfolios as some of Canada's best-known companies — from telecom giants BCE and Telus to Yellow Pages, CI Financial, Canadian Oil Sands and Aeroplan — were battered by the rush selling following Mr. Flaherty's surprise announcement that trusts will be taxed.

Technorati Tags: Income Trusts, Conservatives, Taxation, Canada, Politics, Conservative Party of Canada,

Republican Ad

2006-10-26T01:21:00.000-03:00

Look at all of the apoplectic Liberals:

U.S. campaign ad critical of Canada yanked

"Is this what Canadians should be expecting as the outcome of cozying up to Mr. Bush by the prime minister and his Conservatives?" said Alghabra.

RT: Republicans Suck (Part XXVIII)

Aside from my own parochial resentment at this thoroughly despicable advertisement, is it any wonder that right-wing is held in such profound contempt these days?

Assuming the comment about Canada was the one non-sarcastic comment in the ad, it is unbelievable to see Liberals going off their rockers at an an election advert that lobs a pot-shot over the border for domestic gain. Such things are beneath the high standards of Liberal election discourse.

At least some wise soul figured this whole thing out:

Tart Cider: So very, very stupid

For the love of god, it's a joke. It's a bad joke, but it's not at Canada's expense. If anything the good old boy's sarcasm implies that Canada is busy.

Technorati Tags: Liberals, attack ad, Republican, Harold Ford, Politics, Canada, USA

Cops for Coffee

2006-10-24T16:13:00.000-03:00

Today I was in a Starbucks and heard the employees talking about the practice of coffee shops giving police officers free coffee when they come in. The employees all looked down on the practice. Though, it appears that the practice is alive and well in Nanaimo It reminded me of my fabled time spent as a late night doughnut jockey in an sub standard suburban sweatshop turned coffee and doughnut joint outside of Ottawa. The owner basically told me that he expected me to give cops free coffee and doughnuts because that way they would spend more time in the area and keep the undesirables away. Of course, I relished being the only employee who charged the cops as they strolled in expecting a ~~bribe~~ free coffee.

Of course this practice is completely contemptible and when examined as coffee for protection the whole practice stinks to high heaven. We look down at countries where bribes are expected and criticise places that are corrupt, but the difference is a matter of degree and not category. That is to say the cops and coffee shops that take part in this practice are in the same category as those places that we criticise for corruption because the cops accept cash for increased protection; cash or coffee is a matter of scale.

Technorati Tags: Police, corruption, Nanaimo, Ottawa, coffee, bribes, protection

OIfficial Secrets

2006-10-23T02:10:00.000-03:00

This is an old issue and one that did not seem to get a lot of attention. It is also an issue to which I have no answer, but one that does not seem to be adequately resolved.

globeandmail.com: Secrecy law quashed, RCMP admonished

"Increasingly, the courts are recognizing that in order to have a healthy and vigorous media, governments simply have to respect the rights of journalists to have their sources." Hurriedly enacted after the Sept. 11 terror attacks, the anti-leakage provisions were used by the RCMP in 2004 to seize documents from the home and office of Ottawa Citizen reporter Juliet O'Neill, after articles she wrote caused the Mounties to suspect that she was receiving leaked material.

Here is the problem: If it is ilegal to divulge some secrets, it should not be permitted to harbour those individuals who break the law. The fact that a secret was divulged to a reporter does not make the breech permissible. Protecting the source is at least morally equivalent to harbouring a criminal - if not worse. When you harbour a criminal you are not furthering a crime. When a reporter reports a state secret they are compounding the security breech. What privellege do reporters have? In order to have protection must one find a national reporter? How 'bout a small town reporter? student paper? blogger? man on a soapbox at the corner?

I have no doubt that there are times when secrets out to be revealed, but often secrets MUST be kept secret and a legal situation that gives protection to those who break the law permits the exploitation of national secrets for partisan purposes. And here is my dilemma: without risking legitimate national secrets, or elevating certain ordinary citizens to be public confessors how does one ensure secret whistle blowing? Maybe a few judges have to be actual confessors with security clearences to hear whistle blowers [which would also protect the whistle blower from reprisals]. I don't have the answer, but airing national secrets to reporters is probably a bad idea.

Technorati Tags: Freedom of the Press, Arar, politics, canada, journalism, national security, secrets

Taiwan

2006-10-19T13:31:00.000-03:00

If this is true it is a worrisome.

Cherniak on Politics: Harper: Taiwan "an integral part of China"

In today's Vancouver Sun, Barbara Yaffe reports on comments that Stephen Harper made to Mary Yang of the Sing Tao Daily. This paper is widely read in Canada's Chinese community. Mr. Harper said: We believe it [Taiwan] is an integral part of China. Yes. Mr. Harper, a man of supposed principle, believes that democratic Taiwan is an integral part of authoritarian China. As Taiwan consular official Brian Su explained, the Liberals "never so bluntly referred to Taiwan as an integral part of China".

Technorati Tags: China, Taiwan, world, politics, international relations, CPC, Harper

Times Colonist Letter:

2006-10-17T04:45:00.000-03:00

One of ~~today's~~ yesterday's letters to the editor in the Victoria Times Colonist was classic:

Stop glorifying violence, war

The recent display by the Armed Forces at Odgen Point and the prior military parade in downtown Victoria is false advertising and disguised militarism.

The forces, with total impunity, continue to solicit and peddle their trade without disclosing the entire picture to unsuspecting "customers," mainly youth.

Joining the Armed Forces can be fun, entertaining and perhaps lead to a prosperous career; this may be so, but it may also lead to premature injury, psychological illnesses and possible death.

I just can't believe that people can say these things when the armed forces are seeing so many comrades as casualties on teevee. The letter writer goes onto claim that there is a:

a general drive to glorify violence and the corporate war machine, in a slow descent to hell.

I'm not sure what this means and I'm not sure what kind of policies would be the result if one were to take this kind of thing seriously. In my dealings with folks in the military there are few serious people who repeat the old lie, but that doesn't mean that the need for armed forces is a lie or that armed forces are not needed. To me it means that, in the end, the work is
more tragic.

My friend, you would not tell with such high zest
To children ardent for some desperate glory,
The old Lie: Dulce et decorum est
Pro patria mori. [Link]

Technorati Tags: Newspapers, letter, Victoria, MSM, pacifism

Political Discourse on the NET

2006-10-17T04:15:00.000-03:00

I love reading political commentary both amateur and professional; I enjoy reading My Blahg. Sometimes they are a bit hard to take and today I just had to shake my head and make a comment. I guess it is difficult to criticise and to be conscious of your foibles. No doubt I and most people are similarly guilty.

Recently the guys over at the Blahg have been on a "Uncivil Discourse" theme. Ironically enough, repeatedly refering to the Prime Minister of Canada as PMS and calling conservatives "whories" is an incredibly elevated form of discourse.

My Blahg » UNCIVIL DISCOURSE II

A few examples of how the rightwing corporate media is leading the charge to make Canada’s political discourse less civil.

My Blahg » THE BLOGGING WHORIE POLICE STRIKE AGAIN

Heehee, more trouble in blogging whorieland

My Blahg » GUILTY UNTIL PROVEN INNOCENT

PMS is going ahead with his guilty till proven innocent law.

Technorati Tags: Blogging, Civil Discourse, Canada, Politics, Commentary

Rawls Socialism and Liberalism:

2006-10-13T17:58:00.000-03:00

Just a quick note on Rawls... I don't have any of my books here so please forgive the vagueness of this post:

Rawls ends up as a socialist only if you don't understand or accept the priority of liberty. By that I mean that you end up with a strong redistributive society that provides equality of outcome (as opposed to opportunity) if you do not give the first principle of justice (the one that guarantees equal basic liberty) priority over the second principle of justice (the difference or redistributive principle).

The point I am trying to make is one about liberalism and its concern for the individual above its concern for the overall outcome or end-state of the society. I believe that this is one of the big differences between liberals and socialists. Where the one is concerned with affording individuals opportunities equally (say to become a philosopher) where the other is concerned that the society has not produced an equal number of pink and purple, male or female philosophers.

Technorati Tags: Rawls, philosophy, politics, liberalism, socialism

Progressive Bloggers

2006-10-13T02:38:00.000-03:00

So, I'm joining the "Progressive Bloggers". This group does seem to be a nicely organised bunch of political blogs. They claim to attract bloggers who are:

Liberal or liberal, New Democrats or democrats, Green voters or voters
who want a green country, or even Red Tories searching for a home,

There is no mention of "Progressive-Conservatives", or Conservatives (regardless of capitalisation). I've always considered myself a conservative, but also a liberal. That is I believe strongly in the principles that constitute the liberal democratic tradition from Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, Burke?, Kant, Hegel?, Mill and to their greatest expression in the work of the late John Rawls. I understand Canada to be (or have been) one of the greatest examples of this tradition. So, to my mind, a conservative in Canada ought to wish to conserve the institutions of liberal democracy. Now, to be a liberal in the sense that I am so rooughly referring is to be progressive- that is concerned about the progress of the individual in society.

To make a long story short that is how I rationalise my attempt to get more hits at Ramblings.

Technorati Tags: Politics, philosophy, liberal, conservative, individual, progressive bloggers, canada

Sites I link to: Dinner Table Dont's

2006-10-11T02:55:00.000-03:00

So Dinner Table Donts won the contest to identify the person that is on my profile and I promised to link to his site. He already has a link so I thought I'd start explaining why I link to the sites that I do - starting with his.

I strumbled across his site by way of various links throughout the blogosphere. I was looking for a leftward leaning political blog. I liked the fact that he is philosophical in outlook and yet still interested in actual political affairs. There are few blogs that will discuss both proofs of god and the NDP convention. He has a nice range and is clearly interested in engaging in civil conversations about the things that he posts to his site. There are not enough sites with well reasoned posts and a desire to engage others and that's why his blog is worth reading.

Technorati Tags: Politics, Favorites, NDP, Canada, Philosophy, Politics

Good Link

2006-10-03T14:30:00.000-03:00

I have really enjoyed most of Jordan Coopers contextless links. Here is a phenomenal set of stories out of Afghanistan. Read them and think about what the guys in Afhanistan are going through, trying to accomplish and the attitudes of the Taliban foot soldiers.

jordoncooper.com: Contextless Links [Jordan's Site]

An account from the front in Afghanistan [The Link]:: "We had to manoeuvre across open ground for 200 metres. The scene was like a human abattoir. We fought off the Taliban, but were too late to save the French guys. All of us were shaking when we were flown back to base. One of the Afghan survivors said the French had been tied up, then gutted alive by the Taliban. It was one of the most shocking things I had ever heard."

Not Entirely Satisfied

2006-10-03T01:46:00.000-03:00

I'm not fully satisfied with the tone and ambiance of this blog yet, so I may change the name in the near future. The postings, I hope, will continue apace but with less focus on Afghanistan.

I am uploading a profile picture. I was inspired by Red Tory and Aeneas the Younger. Guess who it is, I'll link to your site!

The Court Challenges Programme

2006-09-26T14:45:00.000-03:00

The folks over at My Blahg have been going on about the cancellation of the Court Challenges Programme. (Site). Lorne Gunter of the National Post provides this explanation:

The Bear Blog » The root of all evil ?

Not only did left-leaning interest groups want to keep CCP cash flowing into their legal departments, they understood that if they controlled the CCP granting process, they could keep groups opposed to their viewpoints from receiving equal funding, thereby giving their own causes an unfair advantage in court.

This seems a perfectly good reason for axing a programme. Consider this: if the NDP were to form a government and found that the Fraser Institute had been receiving most of its funding from the Federal Government, then, I would suspect that they'd axe that funding. It would seem reasonable of them to do that.

All that being said, the principle for which the CCP was formed is an excellent one. The idea is that freedom and equality belong to us all. The courts are an instrument that help to insure that equality. But since the freedom to challenge legislation in the courts is meaningless without the financial power to do so, the CCP is an essential element of our system of freedoms. Because no one knows when they might be without the resources and with the need to challenge legislation, we are all less free now than we were before. This is a disappointing state of affairs. A non-biased CCP-type mechanism needs to be established in the wake of these cuts.

More on Afghanistan

2006-09-26T02:02:00.000-03:00

Idealistic Pragmatist: The NDP's real position on Afghanistan

So again, in point form and rephrased into plain language, the reasons for the NDP's official stance on Afghanistan are as follows:

[1]* like the war in Iraq, the Afghanistan war is poorly planned
[2]* also like the war in Iraq, too much money and effort is being poured into combat while the humanitarian side is being neglected
[3]* we're following the U.S.'s lead in a mission that's supposed to be Canada's
[4]* it's impossible to win a war when we don't have a clear statement of what winning would entail, and
[5]* as things now stand, we're not doing any long-term good over there.
[Numbers courtesy of Ramblings]

Though I am eagerly awaiting response on my previous post I would like to quickly comment on the quotation above.

1. Upon what information is this statement based? What kind of planning are we talking about? I doubt the average Dipper/Blogger is privy to war planning.
2. Is the humanitarian side being neglected? Remember we were asking for more combat troops recently? The reason was not that NATO countries have not participated in Afghanistan, it was because they are only participating where it is safe to do reconstruction. So, in reality it is the combat side of the house that is suffering.
3. The US is withdrawing more troops every year:

The U.S. force in Afghanistan will be drawn down from 19,000 to 16,500
this year, although both military and civilian leaders have promised an
American presence in the country for years to come.

We have substantial command positions in ISAF and the operation is a multilateral NATO run affair. (See "Which countries are contributing")
4. Winning would certainly not be made easier by withdrawing troops. This is an argument for better analysis and communication. What would be a clear definition of success? How about when the Taliban are no longer capable of fielding an army? The definition is not up to me, but when you think about this question it is not so easy to answer, but that doesn't make the war unwinnable, just unpredictable... much like the way war has been for a long time.
5. Is that what Karzai thinks? Do you really think that what we have done so far is going to have only a limited long term impact?

Enlightened Moderation

2006-09-21T17:10:00.000-03:00

This is good...

Gen Musharraf at the UN on Tart Cider: Around the World in 80 Canapés

We also need to bridge, through dialogue and understanding, the growing divide between the Islamic and Western worlds. In particular, it is imperative to end racial and religious discrimination against Muslims and to prohibit the defamation of Islam.

Afghanistan

2006-09-21T16:28:00.000-03:00

There has been a lot said about the situation in Afghanistan, but I think Scott Brison said it best:

I am fortunate to live in a country that has allowed me to become an elected Member of Parliament and a Cabinet Minister. In the Taliban-led Afghanistan, I would be thrown in prison or executed for being gay. The same fundamental human rights that we enjoy in Canada are no less important than the rights of the people of Afghanistan. We have a responsibility to defend those rights, at home and abroad. Those rights should be the basis of a values-based, principled Canadian foreign policy. Our country must be willing to stand up for the values that we espouse. I don't take these rights for granted. (Link)

Yesterday, and for the last couple of years we have been a witness to the price that has to be paid when you stand up and stand for something. The price of believing in equality, is understanding that everyone is equal, not just our countrymen. Human rights and freedom is about equality.

The Taliban is probably one of the most despicable governments we've seen in a long time. It has no inclination towards rights, equality or freedom let alone any idea of an equal right to basic liberty. So, since we are engaged in combating the scourge of the Taliban any talk of disengagement will involve, in all likelihood, strengthening the Taliban's position. Ipso facto one is strengthening the hand of inequality and repression.

So, my question is: Why would the NDP, whose leader has said:

I do not subscribe to the view that human rights are a buffet from which one can selectively choose. (Link)

Urge the Government of Canada to do the following:

1. Take the necessary measures to ensure the safe and immediate withdrawal of Canadian troops from Afghanistan; (Link) [I'm lazy and didn't search the NDP site for its version... I trust this guy... he's a philosopher]

Clearly it is not out of pacifism because in the same resolution they want to send our troops to Darfur:

2. Increase significantly our resource and financial commitments to United Nations led multilateral Peacekeeping and humanitarian initiatives such as Darfur; (Link)

So why commit to Darfur and not to Afghanistan? This looks like picking and choosing from the smorgasbord of failed states and human rights catastrophes.

I will not debate the relative merits of these tragedies. The criticisms that seem to most often be made against staying in Afghanistan is a) Americans are involved and b) the casualties in Afghanistan are too high.

The first argument is absolutely ridiculous (from principles). The fact that you have Americans helping you in your goal does not make your null or void.

The second argument needs to be argued. The fact that the rates are high or higher than others is not a reason in itself for disengagement (See Tart Cider, Wonder Dog and Wrangler). The argument has to made with respect to the objective that high casualties are interfering with or making the objective unattainable. Understand that a commitment to use military force is a commitment to take casualties however unfortunate or tragic. When the armed forces are deployed in operations there is always a risk of casualties. The fact of casualties is not an argument against ceasing an operation. One may argue that the operation was never worth anyone's life in the first place, but I haven't heard that, yet.

This leads to the last point in the NDP resolution:

Support the continuation of development assistance to Afghanistan and democratic peace building in that country so that reconstruction efforts and good governance are achieved;(Link)

I am a bit confused about this point given that point 1 would pull all of our troops out of the country. That being said a UN force would have to face the same problem, namely, the Taliban grip on the South. How do you do point 3 when the Taliban can field fighters in a pitched battle in certain areas? Unless you ride on the coat tails of NATO - expecting them to continue to fight and die while you get the accolades at home for saying "look I'm reconstructing and not fighting". My point is that an argument for democracy building cannot be made without a plan for security. Remember the NATO mission does have UN blessing and that as a member nation it is entirely within the rights of the US to contribute troops.

Lastly, Dinner Table makes this point:

It calls for a continuation of development assistance for Afghanistan and democratic peace building so that good governance is achieved, not merely a fake democracy where the interests of human rights abusers and war lords are best served.(Link)

This is a legitimate concern. However, neither the drug nor the imperfect democracy point necessitate disengagement on the scale envisioned by the NDP. The drug issue was faced early on in the operation and was, to my recollection, a conscious decision. [Commanders, I believe, thought that it would be better to fight just the Taliban and not the poppy growers and the Taliban... I know the Taliban dislikes opium... but my enemy's enemy is my friend]. As far as Democracy and Human Rights are concerned, remember, it takes a long time to get them right. Remember the Florida recounts and Residential Schools? Perfect democracies and Human Rights regimes don't happen over night they require people with the courage to stand up with conviction and the strength to remain standing.

NDP Values

2006-09-20T19:41:00.000-03:00

Something I was working on and shelved for a couple of days:

It is now official NDP Policy:

Members of the federal New Democratic Party on Saturday overwhelmingly endorsed party leader Jack Layton's call to pull Canadian troops from Afghanistan.The vote came during the national party's convention in Quebec City, where the mission in Afghanistan has dominated discussions and debates.

However at the same convention a lady going by the name "Jane Doe" spoke. As reported by Dinner Table Donts:

Jane Doe urged Youth Delegates to stand up and speak out againt sexual violence against women, to treat it with the same distaste as racism, sexism, agism, and all other destable practices.

The implication is, and I think it to be true, that the NDP is against all of those detestable practices. In addition, the NDP is in favour of some form of equality. So, what about working to insure that some people in Afghanistan begin to be afforded shelter from those detestable practices?
Well, a strategy of disengagement from that country when the foe stands as the antithesis of equality and the champion of dispicable tactics seems to call into question any principles of equal access to rights. The principles of equality, particularly a principle of equal access to rights and freedom would seem to demand some kind of engagement in Afghanistan.

More to come...

Liberal Attack Ad

2006-01-12T01:20:00.000-04:00

So a couple of things came to mind when I saw the now famous attack ad here are a couple of those thoughts:

There are soldiers in my city and the liberals are in power
Maybe the liberals don't expect soldiers to have guns?
if the liberals start saying "we aren't making this up" what are they doing when they don't say that?

Just a few thoughts...

CBC

2005-09-22T02:30:00.000-03:00

This has been bugging me recently:

The CBC is on strike - locked out really - and being a good Canadian I don't really care too much about the issues. What bugs me about the whole thing, however is that there is very little coverage of the dispute in any of the other papers and media. This fact brings out a few issues:
1. The most commented issue is that allowing the strike to continue gives us taxpayers very little value for the subsidies that we are providing the public broadcaster. But, of course, settling a labour dispute hastily provides little value either

The next two issues area bit sinister and really bug me - from an ethical perspective:

2. The lack of coverage of the dispute makes it more difficult for the public to be informed about the issues and put pressure on the CBC. This keeps the CBC (competition) from producing their traditional product allowing other broadcasters to compete with an advantage.

3. Again, by not keeping the public aware of the lockout the other broadcasters are given an advantage because the CBC workers' cause will gain little sympathy from the public and will thus be at a disadvantage at the bargaining table. This, of course is an advantage for other broadcasters because their employees are members of the same union and any agreements favourable to guild members will be an advantage for any future bargaining.

NAFTA and Canada's National Interest

2005-09-12T01:57:00.000-03:00

Many people are talking about revisiting NAFTA these days. The conservatives have mentioned that they would consider renegotiating the treaty. Kinsella comments on that here (Sept 8).

What really started the whole topic was the issue of softwood lumber. The trade in softwood is of course covered by NAFTA and so the trade should be free. In the event that one party to the agreement is unhappy with the other's trading practices then the treaty ought to stipulate how the disagreement is to be resolved. Of course, the treaty does just that and since Canada and the US have been disagreeing we have sought to have the issue resolved using the NAFTA framework. Unfortunately the US has not felt bound to resolve the issue in that manner preferring a negotiated settlement.

This all goes to show something that I have been arguing for some time. Namely, Canada's primary national interest lies in achieving a system of fair and effective international law. With effective mechanisms in place and respect for international institutions Canada is capable of punching far beyond its weight, but without such a system it is doomed to negotiate settlements that may not be as advantageous to the Canadian economy.

There are of course other more important, more idea-listic-logical, reasons why international law is good. These are the advantages that accrue to Canada and the world when right and justice have a greater sway on the goings on of the world than does might and power. But, these advantages cannot come about if governments are unwilling to live up to their bargains and would rather sacrifice their word for an extra $1000 going to domestic builders for every new home.

If I may finish this by pointing out that for these reasons avoiding the Iraq entanglement was good. It was obvious at the outset of that affair that international law would suffer. Now with the insurgency, and the American prison scandals the cause of international law is at a nadir. I would hope that Canadian politicians would strive to adopt a foreign policy that seeks to strengthen the traditions of international law at every moment.

Same Sex Marriage Not a Religious Issue

2005-04-11T14:51:00.000-03:00

I was watching CBC Newsworld this afternoon when a member of the Muslim Canadian Congress wasn interviewed and said that he and his organisation support the SSM bill. I checked out their website and pulled this from their mission statement:

Muslim Canadian Congress/Mission Statement: "Members of the Muslim Canadian Congress come from all parts of the world with diverse ethnic and racial backgrounds. We are proud of our Muslim heritage and the great contribution of Islam to human civilization. As Muslim Canadians we believe in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and the Canadian constitution as our guiding principles. "

The individual and this mission statement seems to be very wise. The individual articulated a position that separated the SSM issue from religion as religion. What the issue really is, is a matter of individual freedom as equal freedom. The freedom that individuals have to participate in their religion as they see it depends fundamentally on the extent to which the state treats individuals as free and equal. This means that the state ought to treat the personal and spiritual lives as a place where legislation ought not to intrude. That is, legislation ought to only intrude on that area only to the extent that it serves to make individuals equal.

So long as the legislation does not require religions to perform the marriages or endorse them, then I think this legislation is an improvement on our current state of affairs. Legislation that strengthens equality strengthens the abilities of individuals to live according to their religion. I believe that this idea is what was underlying the statements I heard on CBC because he stated that his support was out of respect for the plight of others to garner respect and recognition. Respect is what equality is all about!

National Post

2005-04-06T14:46:00.000-03:00

The National Post mentioned that the University of Western Ontario is giving Dr Morgantaller an Honourary Doctorate. The Globe and Mail reported on Saturday that the Bank ofMontreal has been providing an anti-abortion group with access to its charity Mastercard. Both stories expressed indignation and anger that the Bank or the University would associate themselves with the person or organisation in question.

It is hard for me to believe that in Canada these stories run and that people get into such states over these things. I understand that the issue is extremely important to many people, and I would suggest that you wouldn't be a very thoughtful person if the issue did not elicit any response. It is for that very reason that I wonder why people must call for the boycoting of the bank and the denunciation of the University.

In a democracy the facilitation and the promotion of dialogue on issues - especially ones of such personal importance - is a good in itself. Providing means for legitimate groups to raise money for their causes is an important public service that banks are in a unique position to perform. Banks would cease to perform that function the moment that they begin to discriminate between which causes are worthy of support and which are not. To discriminate in this manner would be to hurt the ambitions of individuals in the pursuit of their legitimate ends. Moreover, working to stop banks from supporting charities in this manner hurts the charities that one might support. If the Bank decided against supporting the anti-abortion group, then what would they do with an application from a pro-abortion group.

As for the University, the line may be a little bit more blurry, but not fundamentally different. The honouring of individuals does not necessarily mean the endorsement of that person's opinion. Universities give degrees honourary or otherwise to people who disagree with eachother. The conferal ofa degree ought to, and for the most part does, represent a contribution to knowledge, the community or educated discussion.

In the interest of of disclosure: I have a BMO Card affiliated with a charity, but not the one in question.

The BC Election

2005-04-01T16:07:00.000-04:00

So there is an election coming soon to BC. For various reasons I am not in a position to comment too much on BC politics right now. I have, however had some time to go over some of the things with respect to the referendum on electoral change. So far, I have not come to a decision on the merits of the proposed system, however, I have some thoughts.

Often people say: "if it ain't broke, don't fix it." I am leaning towards support of the old system, but I am not convinced that it is without flaws. Here are some reasons why the First Past the Post (FPP) system that we have is not ideal:

The proportionality problem: This is the problem of electing members by plurality instead of majority and consequently having a house whose numbers of sitting members do not reflect the proportion of votes the member's parties received.
The independence problem: Members of a house are not independent enough of their parties to vote in the interest of what they see as the best interest of the province. This is a symptom of a system that requires candidates to staple their fortunes to the party ticket.
The constituency problem: With a clearly defined constituency members are always able to fall back on the will of their constituency in order to avoid making hard decisions - that is right decisions that may seem unpopular.
The Paucity of Parties Problem: Perhaps a side-effect of the proportionality problem the FPP system seems to discourage the establishment of new parties because of the difficulty in breaching the entrenched blocks of power. Federally this problem seems to have been beaten because 2 things: 1. The ready to hand blocks of voters that come by way of regional parties; and, 2, the large numbers of seats that are up for grabs that disperse the size of blocks that need tobeestablished in order to elect members.

I am not saying these are are the only problems or the most pressing, or even that one system can solve all of these problems and be attractive. Simply, I am saying that any opportunity to revise a system as important as our electoral system ought to be seized and the system examined for its merits. That opportunity ought not be wasted because of a smug satisfaction with a system that has worked and continues to work though is not perfect.

Blogger's Code of Ethics

2005-04-01T15:51:00.000-04:00

I saw this the other day on Warren Kinsella's blog. I will endeavour to follow it.

Warren Kinsella: "A BLOGGERS' CODE OF ETHICS" Originally the Code Came from CyberJournalist.Net

A BLOGGERS' CODE OF ETHICS

Be Honest and Fair
Bloggers should be honest and fair in gathering, reporting and interpreting information.
Bloggers should:
• Never plagiarize.
• Identify and link to sources whenever feasible. The public is entitled to as much information as possible on sources' reliability.
• Make certain that Weblog entries, quotations, headlines, photos and all other content do not misrepresent. They should not oversimplify or highlight incidents out of context.
• Never distort the content of photos without disclosing what has been changed. Image enhancement is only acceptable for for technical clarity. Label montages and photo illustrations.
• Never publish information they know is inaccurate -- and if publishing questionable information, make it clear it's in doubt.
• Distinguish between advocacy, commentary and factual information. Even advocacy writing and commentary should not misrepresent fact or context.
• Distinguish factual information and commentary from advertising and shun hybrids that blur the lines between the two.

Minimize Harm
Ethical bloggers treat sources and subjects as human beings deserving of respect.
Bloggers should:
• Show compassion for those who may be affected adversely by Weblog content. Use special sensitivity when dealing with children and inexperienced sources or subjects.
• Be sensitive when seeking or using interviews or photographs of those affected by tragedy or grief.
• Recognize that gathering and reporting information may cause harm or discomfort. Pursuit of information is not a license for arrogance.
• Recognize that private people have a greater right to control information about themselves than do public officials and others who seek power, influence or attention. Only an overriding public need can justify intrusion into anyone's privacy.
• Show good taste. Avoid pandering to lurid curiosity.
Be cautious about identifying juvenile suspects, victims of sex crimes and criminal suspects before the formal filing of charges.

Be Accountable
Bloggers should:
• Admit mistakes and correct them promptly.
• Explain each Weblog's mission and invite dialogue with the public over its content and the bloggers' conduct.
• Disclose conflicts of interest, affiliations, activities and personal agendas.
• Deny favored treatment to advertisers and special interests and resist their pressure to influence content. When exceptions are made, disclose them fully to readers.
• Be wary of sources offering information for favors. When accepting such information, disclose the favors.
• Expose unethical practices of other bloggers.
• Abide by the same high standards to which they hold others.

Conscientious Objectors as Refugees

2005-03-24T16:36:00.000-04:00

Today the refugee board ruled against Jeremy Hinzman. Mr Hinzman applied for refugee status in Canada because he objected to the war in Iraq.

Before I continue, let me say a few things about my approach: I don't want to get into the particulars of any cases. Rather I would like to examine the principles and ideas that certain cases bring to light.

So, here we go...

Is in inconsistent to be a conscientious objector and to remain a member of the armed forces?

I don't think it is.

One may have joined the armed forces under certain political conditions. After some time those conditions change and what may have been inconceivable at one time may be a politically possible. Under such conditions it seems consistent to remain dedicated to the principles that brought one into the military and hope that the objectionable possibilities don't materialise.
The obligation one has to one's military contract is of a fundamentally different category than a moral obligation. A military obligation is highly contingent. That is it relies on certain things: being paid, receiving a uniform, being provisioned. A moral obligation not to participate in unjust wars has no contingencies. In this sense it would seem that until something trumps one's military contract that obligation holds.

Welcome

2005-03-24T16:21:00.000-04:00

Here we go, the first post. expect more.