On Green Island
Some commentary and letters from outside the box about what gets reported - and what doesn't get reported - in the Canadian MSM. The Canadian MSM never prints the missives, which is understandable, of course - the last thing any con artist needs (or any gatekeeper will allow) is some educated guy telling the marks about the game. But you can read it all here - and for free. Keep your money for beer, it's liberating. In vino veritas. In veritas libertas.
Creative Commons License
Green Island
Some Essays on the General Situation

How Democracy Works on Green Island

Managed Elections In Canada

The Canadian National Debt Scam

911 Thought Experiment

Get Rid of the Beancounters! - Fixing the Canadian Health Care System

PEI Revival Plan
(historical document)


Wayback stuff

other 'outside the box' readings

"Rather than love, than money, than fame, give me truth." - Henry David Thoreau

It's every man for himself, the elephant said as he danced among the chickens.
- Tommy Douglas

In this world, we are all butterflies and we need to be mindful of what can happen when we flap our wings
- David Suzuki

Democracy is comin...
What Canada looks like from outside the Walls of Indoctrination

Case study: Canada - a managed democracy

Jan 11 CBC
In the box: - - CBC Charlottetown morning show, in which they did a report on a 'going away' party for a few PEI reservists heading for Afganistan in a few days....

Out of the box: - this was most enlightening to hear, if somewhat depressing. I understand much better now that those who oppose the Canadian military activities in such places as Afghanistan have close to zero hope of persuading any majority of the 'average people' of the country that we should not be there. In a way, although undoubtedly not intended that way, a demonstration by those who run the country that they DO run it, in the sense that they control as near to completely as will ever matter what people think about things that are important to them (the rulers). The event was attended by the Premier of the province and many other MLAs, all authorities on the Island supported it, the media obviously supported it completely, no questions about anything else allowed or even considered - the atmosphere was that any questioning about the 'mission' here would be sort of like letting off a loud smelly fart at a funeral or something. Just not done, old chap. And the participants, well, the couple they interviewed were the very cream of our youth, of course, fine upstanding young men, facing danger bravely, leaving their young families to do their duty for their country. One was going to miss his young kid's first birthday, which was a bit sad, but you do what you gotta do, you know. And the wives were similar in their reactions, tough stuff, but when your country is at stake, well, if you gotta go, you gotta go, brave lads off to fight the heathen in far off lands, to protect Our Way of Life and Good Stuff Like That. The kid has a teddy bear, and Dad and the kid will both somehow use that teddy bear as a reminder of each other's undying love for the other, it's all just so sad. It was a good show, altogether - and very, very few people, I suspect, could be utterly old assholes who stood back and dared to say things like, well, like you read here.

Which was, no doubt, if not the central purpose of it all, certainly part of the purpose.

Because, of course, none of us who oppose this invasion of other people's countries, now or at other times, have any quarrel (or not much, generally) with the young innocent soldiers or their families, but, when we get down to the street fighting about 'the missions', this is where we will wind up, rather than in any discussion of what the hell we, as a country, are doing rampaging around in OTHER people's countries - and we who oppose will lose, at least until a lot more people start waking up to what is really going on here, which doesn't really seem likely to start happening any time soon. That was the sort of central thing I noticed about the whole thing, how shallow and stupid most of the people talking on the show were, the 'dumbed down' nation that the rulers have been working towards for decades, in full exhibition on this show. I've been having some serious thoughts about the unfairness of calling citizens 'sheep' or 'sheeple' and other derogatory things the last couple of years, as most people I know seem at least a little smarter than that, just terribly indoctrinated into bad things, with ongoing propaganda to keep them there - but sheep-like seems to be the end result of this indoctrination and propaganda, if you had to judge by the comments of both 'soldiers' and their wives in this broadcast - stuff right out of some civics book for young people, parroting jingoistic slogans, we the good guys vs some enemy we won't even talk about, Orwell's society in action. One can easily imagine this is the kind of thing we would have seen in Hitler's Germany, the Hitler Youth, off to fight the enemy and Do Good Things in the Name of the Fatherland!!! - or Bush's Babies, Fighting to Protect Glorious America!!!!

Oh well, maybe more later. Maybe not - why bother? If you're reading this, you probably understand what I'm talking about without a lot more words, if you don't understand, then it would probably take a lot more words than I want to write or you want to read, if you've even bothered to read this far.

Jan 8/07 At the Movies
In the box: - - The Sentinel

Out of the box: - watched the movie the last couple of nights - maybe a 5/10 on the scale, watchable, good escapism - but the people in Hollywood do love the propaganda. As always, the Pres and other leaders of (friendly) countries we saw were just such good and decent people, dripping integrity and sincerity and a true belief, almost tangible, to do the very best for their people and countries in the midst of a difficult world - and although the movie wasn't themed around any sort of globalisation, the G8 meeting at the end where the big finale took place (in Toronto) was really just a prop for the last bit of action and shooting, the movie makers just had to get in some more prop - we got one shot for a few seconds of a big crowd of G8 protestors behind a big fence, cops all over the place, waving signs and shouting like a bunch of frothy-mouthed trolls doing nothing but causing trouble for the good pres and other good leaders doing the best etc - you could just tell they were the bad guys here, protesting all the really good stuff the really good leaders wanted to do for the poor citizens of their countries (but by golly, this is Democracy, so the people have a right to do this, misguided though they are!!). There was a small dig earlier on, when the President's secret service people (interesting how that is SS) were talking about the venue, and how those Canadians let protestors get right up to the edge of things like the meeting, so dangerous (which is somewhat less than true, more propaganda, remember the big fences erected around inner Quebec a few years ago, and the path cleared of people in Vancouver for the Asian summit before that, and cops with pepper spray and batons beating on people all over the place....) - anyway, this is part of the full spectrum propaganda of the New World Order, little bits and pieces all over the place - you just have to get the minds of the people to a place where they accept this sort of thing automatically, no questions asked - and then when other people do ask questions, on web sites such as this or in other ways if we get a few bucks together to publish something, the people just automatically react negatively - they remember the really good president and other leaders in movies like the Sentinel, and the really badass protestors, and by golly they know which world they want to live in!!

(??? Which world is that you say? Why, fantasy island, of course, where Gregory Peck is president and Darth Vader leads the bad guys - hey, we all know that!!)

Jan 7/07 Toronto Star
In the box: - - Don't discount the positive side of globalisation and Globalization column touched a raw nerve

Out of the box: -
Dear Mr Crane,
Just a couple of comments on your recent Globalization column touched a raw nerve column; I had not seen the first, Don't discount the positive side of globalisation, but have read it now, and just feel I ought to say something.

I think, first, you are misunderstanding the entire 'globablisation' goal. You seem to believe the popular fiction (as many do) that this is actually being undertaken to benefit all people of our country and the world, truly a noble goal, but about as believable as G Bush 'really' wanting to 'bring democracy' to Iraq and them other poor countries. 'Globalisation' is simply a process intended to increase the profits and power of the worlds's major players, at the expense of whoever they can steal some more money from - it's an old dynamic with a new face, nothing more nor less, but the powers of propaganda have been increasing, as those who would be king learn from earlier mistakes and setbacks. The workers of the so-called 'developed' world happened to be on the early firing line, as their jobs were shifted to other countries where labour could be had a great deal cheaper - the 'free' trade agreements were necessary to stop any governments from undertaking any kind of protectionist measures to protect their workers against this sort of thing. It is, I think, the most rampant Pollyannism to assume that the western governments can somehow compensate for the lost jobs by creating other jobs - as we are seeing with electronics, for instance - although the cheap-labour southeast Asia countries used to be considered as places where you got a cheap price but cheap products as well, nowadays, they have learned their lessons, and southeast Asian countries not only provide cheaper labour than the west, but in most cases equivalent or even superior products, quality-wise. There is no reason at all to believe this trend will not continue with your machine parts or Blackberries or whatever. Why would a Canadian manufacturer pay $40 per hour for good help making his Blackberries if he could get the same labour in India for a tenth of the cost? No reason at all - and that level of quality is quickly becoming available, as you well know.

You and others opine that it is great that tens or hundreds of thousands of workers in India or China or Mexico or other places can find jobs now where they work for 60 hours a week and can afford a hovel and a bit of rice each day for their labour rather than living in a cardboard box and slowly starving to death (I know, you normally avoid these details, but such are the general conditions of these new jobs) - but is it so great that on the other side of the world (back here in Canada that is to say), tens or hundreds of thousands of workers who once enjoyed a decent middle class lifestyle are finding they are having to sell their houses and can't afford decent medical care anymore at their new mcjob if they are lucky enough to find one? If globalisation was actually for the good of the people, this would not be happening - nor would the amazing hypocrisy of the CEOs and investors be continually in our faces, telling the workers of Canada that they must accept lower wages and less security and fewer government services - in order that (although they never actually make this connection out loud, only a fool doesn't see it) their 'investments' can maintain the highest ROI possible, and we ain't talkin 3-4% here, which used to be fine, when investment meant something rather than greed, and so that CEOs can make tens of millions per year, and downsize workers all over the place for doing so. You must be as aware as I that all over the western world the gap between the 'really haves' and everyone else is growing faster than anything else and reaching truly obscene levels - thanks to globalisation, among other things.

You note that as sort of an offsetting 'bonus' or something, the closing of the clothing industry in Canada, and shipping those jobs overseas, means Canadians (including, I guess, all of those who once had decent jobs but must now shop, when they can afford it at all, for the clothes at thrift shops) now have cheaper clothes to buy - but I would remind you, first, that in this case 'cheaper' does mean 'cheaper', and most people, if they can afford it, prefer to buy some clothes with some quality that will last a decent length of time, rather than the cheap stuff that wears out in a few months; and also, the price of 'decent' clothing hasn't gone down at all the last few years, but with the advent of brand marketing as gloabalisers sell their stuff all over the world, brand name stuff sells for extraordinary prices - which means extraordinary profits for the brand name suppliers, as their labour costs have plummeted, but the cost of your brand-name product has not. As I said at the first - this is a perfect example of what globalisation is all about - maxing the corp profit, while screwing the workers as much as possible along the way.

I think it is a very, very short-sighted plan of the globalists, as (if they aren't stopped, at any rate, as many of us are trying to do) eventually they are going to impoverish the majority of the world's workers to where they cannot buy enough products to provide the corps with profits and the whole system will collapse or go through some major 'adjustment', but long-term planning has never been known to prevail over short-term greed with these people - there always seems to be the feeling that 'they' can bail anytime with some big payoff, and they'll just leave the mess for someone else to clean up. The potential collapse of the entire environment as the growth of the human population eventually causes the whole planet to crash environmentally is also an important factor here - but again, something that simply does not figure in their short-term, grab grab grab 'philosophy'.

There is NOTHING positive to be said about this globalisation stuff, at least as it is currently being pursued, from the standpoint of the average person of the world, although it is certainly great for the corporate owners and investors, and the CEOs who understand the system and know how to play the game during this window to max investor profits and their takings from it all. You know, for instance, that our environment, the environment of the entire planet, is suffering greatly - and yet you say it is a good thing to be shipping clothes (and many other things) to Canada from overseas rather than making them here - all so the corporate investors can make a bit more money - the hell with the environment, the hell with the decent jobs in Canada those clothing makers used to have.

It COULD be a good sort of thing, if it actually was a progression to truly better things for most people rather than a race to the bottom for most everyone in the western, developed world - but that is quite obviously not the plan of those controlling the way the world is being run these days.

(And yes, I am aware that some capitalists and investors are well-meaning people and try to do good things and so on - but these people are not running the show - the show is being run by 'the bad guys', to keep it simple, as I have expressed in this letter - and until we do something about taking control of the entire world economy away from these people - well, we all are in a race to the bottom, and your optimism is, I fear, very, very misplaced)

Well, I'll leave it there, I don't think from the sound of the column I am responding to you are about to change your mind about what is happening, any more than I am - but one writes because just maybe we can reach some people some time. I would urge you to take a bit of a more expansive and thoughtful look around, and think about some of the things I have said. There is hope, and a 'people's globalisation' could indeed be a positive thing if it meant we got together to get rid of these capitalist rulers whose only goal is enslaving the entire world, but We the People are going to have to keep fighting if we want to see a better future as we fight off the corporate version of globalisation which has a lot more to do with feudalism than bringing a good life to the people of the world - and apparently well-meaning but seriously misguided people such as yourself are certainly not helping.

Jan 6/07 McLeans
In the box: - - Fleeting fame As a floor-crossing backbencher, Wajid Khan finds himself in some rather dubious company

Out of the box: - in the other MSM as well, of course - what puzzles some of us who actually think and care about this fleeting thing called 'democracy' is how this kind of thing has anything to do with that at all? Although the whole electoral system is rigged, at least a sort of majority of the people of this guy's riding apparently wanted a rep from the Liberal party - and I don't see how he can just 'cross the floor' and still pretend 'democracy' is functioning. It's a lot easier, I suppose, when nobody in the CMCM does anything other than try to turn it into just another day's news, something else to entertain the peasants with whilst the real business of the nation is conducted in the towers high over Bay St where they do NOT want you looking ever, except perhaps to bow reverentially sometimes. That is to say, of course, if, for instance, the owners of the CMCM want Canadian troops in Afghanistan, then we get the day after day after freaking day propaganda we've been getting for the last year about what great guys they all are, and what wonderful things they are doing there, even though most Canadians are still pretty skeptical of the whole idea. If the CMCM do NOT want Canadians thinking about where money comes from and why we should borrow our money supply into existence, questions of some moment considering the half trillion dollar national scam and the trillion or two dollars Canadians have already forked over to 'investors' for the great privilege of borrowing their money into existence - well, you try to remember the last time you saw anyone in the CMCM talking about that. You're gonna need some long memory. So if the Canadian media think people voting for a rep who then crosses to the other party fukyallhaha is no prob, then so shall it be decreed in their pages.

Kind of reflective of the whole idea of 'democracy' in Canada, though, I'll give it that - a complete farce. But if 'the people' don't complain, then I guess they got nothin to complain about.

In the box: - - New Canadian soldier markedly different than stereotypes of past

Out of the box: - and we can't start the new year without some good ol fashioned propaganda, let's not forget the important stuff. (CSIS has already been at it, of course, Canada's spy agency warns of dirty bomb (although once again I note that McLeans mag seems to have some secret editor who occasionally comes up with something a little odd for the CMCM, trying to add just a smidgen of common sense to the whole propaganda effort by the gov etc ???? - well, imagine that, gone already from the net version (I had originally wrote, whilst waiting for the site to find its way to me here on Green Island, a long ways away from PropCentral in TO there (or is that Winnipeg where a certain family with a name very similar to a certain small but very deadly snake lives??) '...we'll just see how long they're allowed to get away with this anti-CSIS stuff, I bet there's a few agents over there right now talking about how we have to be careful what we say when we're at war, and not cause confusion among the sheep ha ha excuse me people, etc and etc)...' - and there you go, didn't take long at all.) Anyway, the point is not how full of great moral principles and college degrees our soldiers are, I am sure many of them are very nice folks and can even use multi-syllable words ('terrorist scumbags, cutandrun' etc - as is your leader, so shall ye be, or something) - the point is whether or not they should be doing their killing and being killed in Afghanistan, and for any civilized, intelligent person, there can only be one answer to that question, and that is no, no, no and no again.

The whole thing is based on false premises, as it has become quite clear to most intelligent people that the official 911 conspiracy theory of the US government, swallowed in totality by lesser entities such as the Canadian gov and media, has about as much likelihood of being true as, oh, the god myth or something like that. And that being the case, the case for invading Afghanistan, very shaky to begin with, has no legs at all. Trying to change the optics from 'catching damned terrorists who caused 911' to 'bringing freedom and democracy to them poor, poor people' really doesn't work, either, when laid out on a table in the cold light of day and looked at clearly. Nor does 'well, ya see son, we gotta fight em there so we don't gotta fight em here!' - if we weren't tagging along at the heels of the Americans doing real bad things to various people all over the world, why, them various people wouldn't have any desire at all (not to mention means) to be 'over here' doing bad stuff to us. No - the 'real' reason we are in Afghanistan, under the auspices of both major Canadian political parties and with caveated support of the others, traitors or dupes to an MP, is to keep on the good side of the US, which is busy trying to establish a world empire, focusing a good deal of attention on areas where the oil supplies are, as there is no empire in the modern military world without oil and we just don't have enough here in Canada to keep that monster fed. And to some extent, as well, I suppose, the Canadian military people have some ambitions of being 'players' in the US hegemon, which they surely will not be if they are not somewhere in the vicinity of the action. And various 'business' leaders also understand that the military of the empire is about as good a business opportunity as they're likely to find in this world, and since money has no morals (and neither do they), they don't want to miss out either.

And you ain't gonna read any of that in the Canadian media, I tell you straight. There are other sources, of course, as long as we have the internet (man, talk about the dog comin back to bite ya - if the American military had any idea at all that the internet was going to turn into what it has, it would never have got borned, for sure, at least with their help and DARPA) - if you are new to this, for some more reasoned analysis (I get sick sometimes of pointing out the obvious or spending time writing about it in detail to people who really should be figuring out this stuff for themselves), you could try Afghan MPs Predict "Very Big War" and just read around that site for more, or perhaps a Canadian called Yves Engler who never manages to make it into the Canadian mainstream media for some reason, who is watching the actions of the Canadian gov and military in a place called Haiti, that the CMCM doesn't want you thinking about much, for instance Responsibility to protect, which gives a somewhat different perspective of the Canadian gov perspective on 'helping them poor downtrodden masses' etc (Yves is actually somewhat more likely to find himself in jail for trying to talk about these things - Canada takes a dim view of 'free speech' about certain things when they want you to think a certain way - you can get away with quite a bit on the net, but somewhat less in public.) [[here's a couple of links I pilfered from a discussion on The Tyee.com following a story called Afghanistan: Wrong Mission for Canada - other stuff you won't find in the mainstream media - Various from policy alternatives.ca; From Project Ploughshares, Afghanistan: From good intentions to sustainable solutions by Ernie Regehr; or check out The Coalition to Oppose the Arms Trade.]]

Jan 3/07
In the box: So everyone prefaces their unhappiness with the murder with some form of 'sure, he was a horrible monster but...' - but why not look a bit deeper? Remember, for instance, that one of the few things we actually do know for sure is that the mainstream media lies a lot, and their lies are most deep when they really want to demonize someone, as they've been doing with Hussein for lo these 15+ years - does anyone in mainstreamland know anymore that for 20 years prior to 1991 or so, Hussein was a great friend to the US, one of their good buds - they actually supplied him with most of the weapons he used to 'kill his own people' (and at least a lot of that killing was done with the knowledge and approval and even at the instigation of the US - you can start your history search here - Justice not served but denied - if you want a bit more info - all of which was why, of course, the 'trial' was the farce it was - the very last thing the Americans could afford was for Hussein to be allowed to talk about the actual history of their relationship).

But that is not really why I write. Something I haven't seen any of the pious politically correct protesters talk about is how what Hussein was doing appears to have been little different than what most gangs get up to as they assume power - removing the opposition. This naturally involves killing some people, which certainly isn't nice for those getting killed, but is equally certainly nothing unusual in the history of the world - including the US. It is quite a different process than wantonly running around shooting and torturing at random, which is the impression the MSM likes to try to create, a true monster. But the US is about one of the last entities that ought to be talking about this kind of thing (the reason, I suppose, they try to avoid any details as much as possible) - from day one, the US gov was involved in murdering great numbers of people to consolidate its power - the genocide of the original inhabitants of North America being the first in a long line of mass killings to get and keep power. How many Africans did they kill a bit after that, in order to establish their power to make and keep slaves of 'lesser' races? What was the US Civil War, if not a turf war between two groups who wanted power in the country - and how many tens of thousands of civilians were brutally murdered during that little escapade, by both sides? One could go on and on through US history, as never has there been a time they weren't engaged in some form of murdering others for their own power - arriving eventually at Iraq, I suppose, where the US has now killed god alone knows how many civilians over the last 15+ years, but think big numbers with 7 digits and no decimals - there's that famous interview with Clinton's SecState Madeline Albright where she says that the killing of at least half a million Iraqi civilians was worth it, and the Lancet report of last fall indicates that probably well over another half-million Iraqis have been killed just since this most recent invasion.

It's just really unbelievable to see all the US gov and media people pretending to be so upset at the terrible Hussein killing 150 or so people, after their past and current history of killing of millions and millions, often for exactly the same reasons Hussein had these people killed. And even more unbelievable that so many people seem to go along with it with no protest at the lies and hypocricy.

It's a pretty strong indication of the totality of the brainwashing of the average American, and Canadian, that nobody out there (beyond a handful on the net, of course) appears to be bothered much by this - or making any noises at all about war crimes and war criminals in the US gov needing to be brought to justice for these horrific deaths, hundreds of thousands of them, all unnecessary, all caused by the US playing turf war games with other people's lives exactly the same as Hussein was playing turf war games with his rivals on a smaller stage - yet they seem to applaud the execution/murder of Hussein for doing the same thing, albeit in a very much smaller way, all inflated garbage in the MSM aside. Also, none of the reports I read of the Hussein 'trial' (kangaroo court of the worst sort, in reality, of course, fixed from day one) actually tried to make the 'case' that Hussein did the killings himself, he just ordered them. So by precisely the same logic, one G Bush is responsible for the deaths of some half million Iraqi civilians (and his daddy for a lot more, and Clinton would have to be in the dock as well for the deaths caused by the 'sanctions' etc) - pretty much every US president, I expect, and most British PMs, and you could probably round up most Canadians as accessories of one sort or another.

But these things would only be an issue in a world where 'the truth' had any presence which, of course, outside of Green Island, it does not, any longer.

Dec 28 Toronto "Propaganda 'R' Us" Star
In the box: - - NEWSMAKER OF THE YEAR - 'Canadian Soldier' most notable of 2006

Out of the box: - well, one might beg to differ. Mightily. As always, the Canadian Corporate Propaganda Media, employing propaganda tricks - this time, of course, the old favorite "Misdirection" scam - Look here, son!! Look here!! - when actually, you should be looking pretty much anywhere but where the con artist is telling you to look - you all know the old card tricks, shell game stuff, etc. And in this case, it's actually quite clever - we have to look at the story - and then, as another old saying has it, the best place to hide something is right in plain sight - and of course, the REAL story this year (and for many years in the past, really) is the Canadian Propaganda Gatekeeping Media themselves!!!!! - but of course, if they TOLD you that, then the game would be up, so they aren't too anxious to get into that particular discussion. Here on Green Island, of course, one of the things we want is educated, intelligent citizens, so we are careful to be sure they question things like this.

The Star, and the rest of the CCPM, have been hyping the Canadian participation in the American invasion of the mideast vAfghanistan pretty much since its inception, with nothing more than the merest words of protest (or truth) allowed about the whole thing, rah-rah 'support our troops' jingoism day after day. Most people are pretty disinclined to say anything bad about the Canadian military itself, given the memories of its role in WWII especially, and its reasonably honorable role as part of the world's peacekeeping force the last bunch of years, but they aren't too happy either about joining the Americans in their militaristic boot-in-the-face approach to world politics the last bunch of years. So they do an end run around the second of those feelings by appealing strongly and repeatedly to the first. And a lot of people, it seems, are going along with this ploy. Which is exactly, of course, the role of the media, in a 'modern' corporate pseudo-democracy such as Canada. A barrage of propaganda, a dearth of debate.

Dec 29 - Captain Capitalism
In the box: - - Captain Capitalism - a bit old, but I just found it, and thought I ought to respond quickly -

Out of the box: - Just call me SocialistMan, fearlessly challenging evil Capitalism wherever it raises its lying, thieving head.

Capitalism isn't an economic 'system' any more than totalitarianism or 'kings 'n' peasants' are. Capitalism is simply a big scam, a big propaganda system, designed to keep the people of whatever area calls itself 'capitalist' working away producing as much as they can, with the elite 'capitalists' skimming off as much of the 'fruits of the labor' of the people, to use a pretty accurate Marxian term, as possible. If the capitalists are a bit smart, as they learned to be through necessity after various popular and very bloody revolutions through the last few centuries quite painfully and bloodily deposed various of their antecedents who called themselves different things but believed in the same sort of system whereby most people worked to produce wealth and the elite skimmed (i.e. stole) as much of that wealth as they could get away with, they allow the people who produce the wealth to keep enough of it to make them believe they are a bit happy consuming the largely worthless consumables they produce, and combine that with massive amounts of propaganda through the elite/capitalist-controlled media to convince them that what they are living in is the best of all possible worlds - when this media control is combined with control of the government and education system (as it is in most of the modern western capitalist world), the whole 'many work few skim' system, under its present guise of 'capitalism', functions very well, as we see in America and other 'capitalist' countries. At least, it functions well for the elite who do the skimming - I think you paint a far, far rosier picture about how happy and content people are in, for instance, America, the center of modern capitalism, than reality actually suggests - it's the endless propaganda emanating from the capitalist media that suggests this very untrue state of affairs. Just one for instance of a long list I could easily assemble, poll after poll after poll shows that most of your countrymen/women would vastly prefer a single-payer state-operated health care system (such as every other modern western country has) to the hodge-podge of HMOs etc you have now, as a great majority of your families are either under-insured medically or have no insurance at all, and most are only a serious medical illness away from bankruptcy - unpayable medical bills are one of, if not the, greatest cause of bankruptcy in your capitalist haven. Oh happy citizens!! (point being, if you are missing it, that such people are not really very happy, with that kind of axe hanging over their heads - they might put on a happy face at the mall, but you know it's a mask... Or yes, people are happy enough to have computers and the internet - but they would be a whole hell of a lot happier if they had a lot less stress in their lives - stress caused by the capitalists skimming so much of the wealth they produce that they are forced to live on a treadmill that seems to be spinning faster every day, running faster and faster just to stay in one place.)

You credit 'capitalists' with producing this great wealth that much of the modern world enjoys - in truth, as you seem to vaguely recognize, it is the people who produce the wealth - the capitalists are simply stealing as much of it as they can, and justifying this theft through progaganda and scam games.

You are mistaking systems of 'economics' with systems of 'ruling the masses' here, which is a common problem, but encouraged by the rulers for obvious reasons - it is quite enlightening, in a framing sort of way, that when some of the original thinkers were dissecting this stuff and writing about it, the whole thing was called 'political economics', but has now been separated, to make linkages more difficult, one must assume. Evidently the capitalists didn't care to encourage people to think about such things together (actually, capitalists prefer the average people to think as little as possible, as we see everywhere - thinking leads to looking under slimy rocks (curious people, that is to say people who think, like to look everywhere), and that's where capitalists hide when the lights are turned off and they return to their true homes). (If you need that metaphor opened up a bit, think about the people who make drugs illegal and then make billions from selling them, and billions from running police forces and jails to chase them, and related things such as prostitution and the mafia - don't go shouting out 'the government does this!!!!' - the capitalists own the government (their first great act of 'privatisation'), and thus are responsible for all of this; this pointing out of an unpleasant truth will probably draw great indignation and denial, but think about the source of many modern 'respectable' capitalists' fortunes; or think, then, of the arms industries and wars and the huge amount of death and suffering caused by such things - it's pretty hard to deny that Boeing is not a great capitalist?? - or think about your current great capitalist-loving president, and his grandfather Preston, and various others such as Henry Ford who fully supported Hitler during the 30s and even into the WWII - fascism itself was the brainchild of Mussolini, as you must know, and means simply the marriage of Big Business and the State - and do you want to tell me that Big Business isn't Capitalism in the office towers and the modern US isn't a union of corporation and state, fascism incarnate, and not in any way a pretty sight to behold when held up to the bright light of day? - and etc. Wherever slimy things grow, you find people who want to rule over others and force others to work so they can live lives of ease, and the modern version of those who succeed in these dreams are the ones called Capitalists. Yes they have been wildly successful in the modern age, and control the propaganda machinery very effectively to make many people such as yourself and those who are yelling 'rah rah!!' on this discussion pretend to believe they live in a great happy free society - but as the old saying goes, to paraphrase, put some pretty face paint on a capitalist and call him Beauty if you want - but you still have a slug underneath.

Well, I could go on at length, but we both know you're not going to change your tune as Captain Capitalist. I just wanted to let you know that some of us - a growing number, actually, thanks to the de-indoctrination enabled by the internet - are able to see through what you are doing. If you actually want to try to debate these things, I'd be more than happy to accomodate you - I've been looking for someone to talk about these things for awhile, but nobody wants to, for some reason. Or if you just want some more explanation of how your 'road more travelled' has been a deceptive and false path and my words have helped your 'Saulian epiphany' - I'm open to helping you find your way back to the true path of social democracy.

Dec 27 Toronto Star
In the box: - - Girl wasn't buckled up in crash: OPP - "...Two young girls were thrown from their SUV in an early-morning Etobicoke collision, leaving police wondering what it will take for drivers to buckle up...."

Out of the box: - propaganda again, something that seems quite important to the rulers, this seatbelt stuff. I really think there's a psychological thing going on here, the symbolism of being strapped in to the vehicle against your will, with cops running around immediately in your face if you dare to disobey the masters - symbolically submitting to the entire "DO AS YOU ARE TOLD, CITIZEN, AND ALL VILL BE VELL!!" or something like that. I know, I know, you think I'M the psycho for thinking that. Time will tell. But they really seem to be irrational to me with this, and many others things - the end does not justify the means, I am thinking (actually, that works on a couple of levels - for the rulers, the end (compliant citizens) certainly does justify the means (symbolic strapping in your 'freedom' vehicle) - but the idea that this makes people safer, which is justifiable as an 'end', does not, if you actually think about this and look at stats, justify all the cops and chasing down of people and courts etc that they devote to this seatbelt stuff - there would be far, far, far better ways of achieving this end - if 'saving people' really was 'the end'). And they certainly lie with their stats a great deal in pursuit of their goals. If they were really neutral about all of this in any way, in a "here, citizen, we are your government, and here are some facts for you to look at as you consider whether or not to support this proposal" - they would do a real analysis, rather than the junk 'science' stuff they throw around to support their desired policy - that is, why don't we see some fairly straightforward numbers to look at - you know, number of driver/passenger miles driven in Canada, number of accidents, number of injuries and deaths, people with or without seatbelts, and various other related important factors about the accident (general situation - did the driver drive his/her car off a 1,000 foot cliff, or run a stop sign, age and sex of driver, weather and road conditions, etc and etc) - allowing the reader to come to some useful conclusions him/herself. I can tell you why they don't do that - because it would indicate that the usefulness of seatbelts is a whole lot less than they make it out to be, because of the way they manipulate the stats.

For instance (I have done this sort of thing - getting some of the figures is difficult, but it can be done - these numbers are from a few years back, but there is nothing I have seen or read to make me think they don't still generally apply) - did you know that the average driver/passenger miles per accident is about 75,000 (I'm pretty sure it's miles not km, if it's km the difference won't be particularly meaningfull for this analysis), the average injury accident is about 300,000 miles, and the average death about 3,000,000 miles. Ballpark figures, but think about how far you drive each year, and what the odds are of you getting in an accident. And then add a layer of thinking - averages aren't always that useful when you're mixing up apples and oranges - it is also a fact that the by far highest number of accidents, serious and otherwise, is the result of males under the age of 25 doing some idiotic thing (I speak from experience here, too, believe me, I have not forgotten those exciting but stupid days) - so if you are not in that particular category, and are a fairly sane sort of driver, the odds of your being in an accident get waaaaaay lower than if you use the 'average' figures. So low, in fact, that they are in the same range of probability as winning a lottery of some sort.

Have you ever heard any of that stuff from the gov? Not actually - from the way they talk, you would think that every time you get in your car, it's like 50-50 you're going to be in an accident, and if you don't have that wonderful seatbelt on you're gonna get hurt or killed you freaking idiot!!!!! - propaganda, brainwashing, indoctrination, call it what you want. But don't tarnish the words 'democracy' or 'freedom' by including them in anything you say.

And it's all bullshit, of course. But BY GOD YOU VILL DO AS YOU ARE TOLD, CITIZEN!!!!

That's really all it's all about - the sheep dogs make the rules, and the sheep run around where and how they are told.

And note also - the media, pretending to be a neutral provider of 'news' is, as always, central in the propaganda function - this is really a minor story, another small accident of which there are thousands every day, nobody killed - but let's get that big headline right up there in a prominent place, reminding people that the rulers, (and their media), demand this seatbelt compliance of the citizens - and hand in hand with the cops, not a word about dangerous driving etc. I mean the headline mentions 'not wearing seatbelt' - why doesn't the headline read 'driving too fast for conditions - why aren't we testing drivers properly?' or something? Or 'driving above competence level - we need to take steps to make sure drivers know what the hell they are doing before we allow them to go barrelling around our highways with several-ton chunks of metal which are lethal weapons' ?? - but no, instead of protecting me from these a**holes who don't know how to drive safely and are skidding all over the road when there's a bit of snow or running stopsigns or passing where they shouldn't etc, the cops are chasing ME around for not wearing a seatbelt - and I'm (now haha) one of the safest drivers you're going to see out there.

(And I won't even start on the 'democratic' aspects of the whole thing - were YOU ever asked to vote for a politician who promised to force you to wear a seatbelt??? I sure as hell wasn't ......)

And note how they talk about the driver of the vehicle which was in the accident - ...The driver of the SUV was accelerating onto the highway, "driving too fast" for the snowy conditions, Woolley said.... - ????????? Not even a verbal slap on the wrist!!!! - just a brief 'statement of fact' as it were. Strange, that seems to me - the accident was caused by this guy driving carelessly or dangerously, but we'll just overlook that, and make a big issue of how his kids weren't weaing seatbelts - which wouldn't have been a problem if he hadn't been driving like an idiot...

I'm just so out of touch with everything these days. Me, now, I have no liking for pain, don't want to die, enjoy life - I dislike seatbelts and choose not to wear them (it is actually one reason I prefer to live in places where the cops aren't chasing me all over the place for not wearing that thing) - I figure the best way to stay alive etc is to drive defensively and safely, and not get into accidents in the first place - and I figure if the cops and lawmakers just concentrated on that, that we'd all be a lot safer - I wouldn't object at all to an 'educational program' (haha otherwise known as propaganda) about how terrible these people are who insisted on speeding everywhere, and running stop signs, and passing where they shouldn't be passing, and not slowing down in bad weather, and various other really dangerous driving things - but no, no - our 'serve and protect' guys seem to figure they'll put up with idiot drivers like this person who was driving too fast for the conditions, but lay on the guilt for them kids not wearing seatbelts, or you or anyone else.

Crazy, man, just crazy.

- and the same idea here - Police forces eye 'name and shame' tactic for drunk drivers - so if I happen to go through a roadblock after a couple beers with some friends, and 'fail' the breathalyser, they'll try to 'shame' me by accusing me of being some sort of 'drunk' (which I wasn't at all, not driving dangerously or anything) - but the idiot above, who is obviously incapable of driving safely but the cops don't seem to care about that, can drive too fast and have an accident, and cause his kids to be injured - and nothing.

Doesn't anybody out there besides me see what they're doing?!?!?!?!?!

Dec 26 'The Star'
In the box: - - Surviving mom ready to forgive

Out of the box: - Editor - the picture on the front page of the internet version of your paper today, Dec 26, of the mother and her daughter holding a picture of their family killed in Pennsylvnia, is one of the most disgusting things I have ever seen featured in a 'mainstream' Canadian paper. This is the stuff of the crappiest tabloids. You are supposed to be above this kind of thing. The mourning of these poor people should be private, and you are showing the crassest sensationalism to feature this picture this way. Merry frigging xmas to all of you - and may someone come and hold your face up for the world to stare at in crass, stupid curiosity during your saddest moments - you deserve it for helping to create the kind of society that engages in this sort of thing for lack of a real life.

And if you're still feeling insomniac, there's more here

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.5 License.