Creative Commons License

Green Island

Ch 13: Gullible's Travels in Neoconland: The Corporate Reactionary Revolution of the 70s

They're Building a Box - and You're In It

Ch 4: The Democracy Scam

Banketeering
Sept 2008

The Canadian Media and the 2008 Election: Reporting or Managing?
Sept 2008

911 Thought Experiment

'Experts'

PEI Revival Plan

The Onward Rocinante archive, for those interested in earlier commentary, and also recent longer missives to the CBC and others, and yet even more other stuff going waaaaaay back.
G'wan, I'm a dying breed, everybody else 'twitters' with 100 character max, and are well along the way to developing brainpower to match - but if you're one of the few looking for longer, thoughtful correspondances - this is one of the last places you're going to find any....


contact


Pogo - what if the 10,000 is wrong and the one guy is right and the one guy is right?


"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...


Orwell BBC pic
It's a pretty nice farm - but don't confuse being a cow with being a farmer... (no, GO didn't say that, I did, but it goes good with the pic)



...the most destructive form of untruth is sophistry and propaganda by those whose profession it is to report the news... - Walter Lippmann


martin luthor king I have a dream ...
I have a dream ...


Gandhi - be the change
Be the change you want to see in the world ...







picasso's don quixote

Onward Rocinante
Green Island Awaits ....


Monday Dec 8 2008

CBC Island Morning starting the week off right (note sarcasm there - 'right', right) with lengthy coverage of the pro-Harper people having a rally on the weekend, denouncing the coalition etc, lots of quotes, explaining what they claim, tape of the Island Con MP (who stands to lose a pretty cushy job) telling untruths about what is going on. More repetition of the con talking points later, with no chance for anyone to point out what nonsense they are. It's not even 'fine' for people to have beliefs like this - why do they have beliefs like this? Because they believe the crud they hear in the media. If the media was doing it's job, without taking sides, they would at least be explaining to people that, for instance, when the con talking point says 'an unelected coup' or something, this is simply not factually correct, because of the parliamentary system and the way it functions, after-election coalitions have often formed in Canada, there is no such thing as 'declaring you plan to have a coalition before an election (that's just plain idiotic, if anyone ever stops to think about it), the simple lie that 'separtists will be running the country'etc. Of course, if your job is to support Harper and the cons, and make sure the coalition does NOT come to power, you wouldn't want to spend much time doing this kind of honest reporting. Our CBC in action. All neocon spin, all the time.

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

And on Ottawa Morning we have the lady economist from the CCPA, and Tom d'Aquino, and Kathleen, all chatting buddy buddy about the economy. General agreement that maybe the government will have to go into deficit to keep the Cdn economy humming, or at least from totally collapsing. From outside the box, you just have to be suspicious when a leading 'leftist' think tank is agreeing with d'Aquino and the CBC. None of the 'lefties' who get onto the CBC ever talk about the money supply, or how we got into the mess we are in because of bank-created debt-requiring money - either they just don't understand the situation, which stretches the imagination a bit, or else they understand the situation and are part of the elite plot to keep Canadians from understanding it - which, given the mostly good work these think tanks do, also is a bit difficult to believe. I've been hearing things the last while, maybe I just am more open to hearing them, about 'progressives' just not understanding much about economics, which may be true for the mid level foot soldiers, but those at the top? Hard to believe - but maybe. But there is lots of stuff out there in places progressives should be reading, that leader types should be smart enough to be paying attention to, and thus if they did not know at some point in time, they should quickly catch on. But apparently not. This is puzzling.

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

And the Current - leading off by reading the names of the military people killed in Afghanistan. You people get with the mission now, y'hear? How can you NOT support what these brave people who died for our country (with suitable 'rememberance day' pipes in the background, tweak them emotions!!) eh?!? It's not unfitting that the national broadcaster acknowledge and even honor Cdn soldiers killed in the line of duty - but it should also be doing a hell of a lot more to publicize what is really going on there, and giving voice to the many Canadians, apparently a majority, who do not feel we should have gone there in the first place, and should not be there now. If this country was a democracy, the national broadcaster would not be acting as a booster for the minority of people who do stuff like invading other countries without any sort of debate amongst the citizens. And then the obligatory few minutes this week with a couple of 'learneds' dissecting the Lib mess. Spin, spin, spin spin. No wonder everyone is so dizzy they can't think straight.

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

Tuesday - Island Morning - again, Karen et al doing their best to denigrate the coalition (Dion couldn't believe his luck!, etc) and Liberal leadership process, with noone to put their side of it. What is amazing is that when it is so blatantly obvious that the CBC, along with most media people in Canada, are so pro-neocon, there is still so much whining about 'lefty lib press' etc. - Hlinka preaching extreme capitalism - now the stock market has melted down, taking along a lot of people's savings who were planning on retiring, we don't want to go after systemic flaws that caused the meltdown, or people who engineered it, or even talk about any protection for all those who got suckered - no no no, we go after the victims!! - that's right - you people have no right to think about retiring at 65 anyway, you know, there's too many old people and you just got to be ready to push your retirement off a few years, eh?!! And anyway, it's easier, you see - in olden days manufacturing was the main type of work, but now we have a service economy, and the work is easier, so you can do it longer !! (right on , you damned lazy peasants!!). Our democracy loving Michael notes we could do this by legislation, but heck, you workers could just agree to working these last few years of your life yourself, and make it easier on your masters, eh?? A very, very serious attack on Canadian workers - presented with no response by our corporate broadcasting corporation.(lookee here, they took the time to add it to the website - this is the opening of a new neocon initiative, guaranteed - Rethinking retirement )

And I said ..... Canada's Questionable "Coalition" - as are the Harper cons, this writer is somewhat dishonest with his 'protestations of convenience', which is what tends to happen when working from a neocon talking points memo. He complains that the Libs and NDP have less seats than the Cons, making their proposed coalition illegitimate from the get go, trying to stifle the true intentions of the Canadian voters. Unfortunately for our writer, however, if we look at votes rather than seats, their 'true' intentions before getting mangled in the outdated first-past-the-post electoral system this country still uses, it turns out that the Libs and NDPs got between them something over 6.1 million votes, to Harper's 5.2 million (and if we add in the Green vote, which it is highly probable would be reflected within the coalition rather than siding with Harper, then we have over 7 million voters to Harper's 5 million. Without even thinking about the Bloc). If the writer was truly concerned about seeing that the wishes of Canadian voters were met, rather than justifying the Cons' quite blatantly undemocratic manoeuvering and inflammatory, dissembling 'justifications' for what they are doing and misrepresentations of the proposed coalition, he would be joining a lot of the rest of us in demanding some form of PR in this country, so the actual intent of the voters en masse was reflected in the people going the Houses of Parliament in Ottawa. The writer talks about a bad smell with the coalition - it's a lot smellier to see the leader of a minority Canadian parliament running to the Governor General and demanding a prorogue for no other reason than to avoid a vote of no confidence (which he had already promised, one might note) which he knows he is going to lose. That too may be 'constitutional', but it very demonstrably does not reflect the will of the elected MPs of Canada, when considering either the direct vote or the number of seats. The writer notes in his bio he is studying law - might I recommend he checks out a course or two in 'intellectual honesty' as he continues his studies. (of course, that would make a corporate law job pretty much out of the question)

{{and they said "Please shorten your comment, you only get 300 words!" - to which I replied "What the hell can you say in 300 words?!?!? - go to Onward Rocinante - http://www.rudemacedon.ca/onward.html for the full comment." or something like that. And I haven't heard back from them. Gatekeepers everywhere. trillions of bites on computers and they say 300 words.

And I said ..... Assuming you're not yet tired of historical/constituional analyses of the Liberal-Ndp-(PQ) coalition .. - chuckie, are you actually recommending that we govern the country by poll? You might be getting into waters you'd rather avoid here - for instance, most Canadians don't want to be in Afghanistan, most Canadians would rather raise corporate taxes and save our health care system, and a LOT more Canadians read the Toronto Star than the NP. Just for starters. I think if you want to go around polling Canadians for what they feel or want or believe, you guys on the NP discussion list are going to be getting a lot of bad news. LOL.

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

Ottawa Morning - Kathleen has an interview with a couple of Lib riding presents, making sure everyone knows about the infighting in the Libs about choosing a new leader. This stuff is of some interest, of course, although it would be more interesting for some real journalists (if we had any, of course) to be checking behind the scenes a bit to get some insight on who in the hell the backroom traitors are trying to tear the Lib party apart, and their co-conspirators in the media (we know the Cons are involved). And it is very, very noticable that, although there have been a few rumors here and there, there is nothing at all about the behind the scenes unrest with Harper's crazy challenge about cutting party funding that caused this whole mess. As always, it is all spin, all the time - the media could be accepting the coalition as the natural response to a crazed, power hungry wannabe dictator and doing stories and talking to people to encourage people to think like that - or they could do what they do, support the Harperites etc, and attack, attack, attack anyone who opposes them.

And AM on the Current doing more 'Get with the Afghanistan mission you people!!' boosterism again, a full half hour about a heroic soldier who returned home wounded badly - how can you not support the mission this brave guy got hurt fighting for, you damned traitors!!! They never stop. All propaganda 24/7.

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

{{I don't usually include stuff from others, but this fits - it's from an email sent out by a lady name Marjaleena Repo, who works with David Orchard}}: "... Couple of hours later we had CBC Cross-country checkup where Rex Murphy saw fit to invite five guests to speak against the coalition (Jim Travers from the Toronto Star, Andre Pratt from La Presse, Janice MacKinnon, former NDP finance minister in Saskatchewan —who is worried that the Coalition might move the Liberals to the left! — John Manley who publicly attacks Stephane Dion and the Coalition, and Roger Gibbins of the Canada West Foundation, with MacKinnon and Gibbins claiming to speak "for the west" — a laughable claim, to say the least. Not ONE guest to speak for the Coalition, to explain it and advocate for it!.. Some balance from the CBC! .... "

So I'm not alone, thinking the CBC is just a tad prejudiced. (you can keep up with David Orchard stuff by googling his site and joining, if you're inclined. He's a 'real' Canadian, in that he thinks we can do better than following the US, or joining it, etc, which is why the neocons really, really don't want him anywhere near Ottawa. An intelligent, engaged Canadian. Far, far too few like him in this country.)

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

Coalition aiming to 'steal the government:' Shea - just another example from the CBC sites I browse - nothing visible from anyone from any 'pro-coalition' POV, or (even more unlikely) anyone explaining rationally any of the other stuff I talk about above. That would be honest journalism, reporting the various sides of a story. Which you don't do when you are involved with propaganda. masters voice - reporting news or writing on blank slate!







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



{{What Came Before}} Monday Dec 1 08

David Frum: Only the losers will survive Ottawa's game of competitive suicide - hahaha it's always amusing to see the frustration and shock and faux-outrage of a bully set back on his heels as the mice get together and sock him in the nose. It's all a parlor game, of course, as it's only a badcop-goodcop charade for the tv watchers and life goes on as always with the Bay St Party ruling all from behind the scenes, but still, in the pantheon of the myths we live by in modern Canada, this is somewhat more amusing than the normal fare. But sometimes one must interject a bit of reality into your frustrated ramblings, just so you know the adults are still watching. You must keep in mind, for instance, no matter how you rail at the 'socialist hordes', that, indeed, most Canadians are 'socialist' in inclination, rather than 'capitalist' - consider, for instance, the Canadian health care system, which is supported by, oh, a conservative (heh heh) estimate would say 80-90% of us, no matter how much the idea makes the neocons and 'Look after yourself!!!' capitalists froth, or how the constant barrage of lies and propaganda from the rightwing media steers them away from voting for the people they really should be voting for (the lower and lower turnouts in Cdn elections since the neocons became ascendant is a sure sign that many people see what is happening, but don't know what to do about it). Mr Frum and his ilk also seem unaware, as does their bullying leader Mr Harper, that, unlike Americans whom they all admire so, Canadians do not vote for their president, that is to say, Prime Minister, directly - they vote for a local MP, and collectively the MPs choose their party leader and which of these leaders shall be PM, a calculus which can be changed without an election. And to whine that Mr Dion was rejected by most Canadians is to pretend to be unaware of the fact that Mr Harper was rejected by almost as many - obviously Canadians aren't that happy with any of their wannabe leaders today. Which ought also be a message to many, but is undoubtedly going unheeded in the heat of partisan battle. Back to reality - but it's always amusing to observe the fantasyland of the NP and it's contributors.

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

Tuesday
- CBC news - full of opposition to the proposed coalition from Western Canada, the CBC playing some tape from a right wing talk show complaining etc - and an interview with another 'prof' talking about how unhappy people are, and why - and not a WORD from anyone who supports the coalition idea ... and not a word from anyone pointing out that although there are few MPs in the west, there is still a lot of support for the NDP and Libs, and just maybe this is another reason for thinking about some form of PR with the new government (Harper got 65% of the vote in Alberta, 53% in Canada, and less than 50% in BC and Manitoba)- not to mention all the complaining about the Bloc in the coalition - if we had PR, they would have many fewer MPs to start with - but the Greens would then be involved ... and Harper would have been much less likely to have formed the government in the first place - and etc - but not a single word about such things on the CBC or the rest of the Cdn mainstream media - just a bunch of shocked right wing whining about whether or not this is legal, etc ... more dog and pony show stuff, with not a word of useful discussion.

- the island Morning coverage of the coalition is almost entirely negative in spin, jokes about 'monsters' etc, a friendly interview with the PEI Con MP, etc - and a quite noticable contrast with a later interview with Wayne Easter, who is attacked all through (is your 30 bill proposal responsible policy??, seems to be part of a talking points memo from someone, as later Anna Maria will be using the same points attacking Bob Rae) etc - 'if this ends in an election - what is your fiscal responsibility then? etc etc] - attack, attack, attack. Amazing. Not.

- later interview with Rob Russeau from Ottawa - 'these men would not even talk to each other a month ago, now they're in bed' etc - CBC impariality on view for all to see .... Rousseau complains that the NDP have a 'well detailed plan' already, the fiends, well beyond fiscal stimulation - even legislative plans, maybe (a plot from the NDP socialists!!) - the question is, what price was exacted to get the support of the NDP and Bloc??? (this is thematic in the coverage - remember people, this is the SOCIALIST NDP!! DO YOU WANT THEM IN POWER OMG???? - but why is a 'neutral' broadcaster so one-sided in the 'coverage'?)) - they say that many people say they have no right to govern because they were not elected - and etc, all the Con spin, part of the CBC talking points

- the thing is, the spin - they COULD come from the other POV entirely, is this a good move for Canada? Did Harper go too far? and etc - but no, they come at it from the negative, entirely -

- then Hlinka, maybe doing a 'shock doctrine' thing, does his bit to get out the message that CONSUMER debt is pretty much the reason for the current world financial crisis, you irresponsible peasants - and we're not even going to talk about the big guys - it's YOU!! Right, Mikey. CBC - on message, 24/7 etc.

- and then onto the Current, which wastes no time telling us where they are coming from spinwise - during the election, the Bloc was a wasted vote, now they're a valuable ally etc - is this a democracy? A Coup??? - will Dion, soundly rejected by Cdns two months ago, be a PM 'imposed unelected' on Cdns?? (16% of Cdns voted for Harper, not quite so soundly rejected, I guess (maybe 20% of 'eligible' voters)...) - and the opening 'humor', get the message off on the 'right' foot - cannot mix beef, chicken and fish, generally mocking the idea of the coalition -

first 'guest' Con Baird giving his spin - (Lib and a separatist)- then Bob Rae, doing quite a good job, with AM attacking him about whether Cdns have 'a plan' to tell Cdns etc (isn't that up to Cdns?) -

halfHour 2 - opens with more tape from Alberta saying how bad it all is, even from NDP supporters saying how undemocratic this is, etc - spin spin spin spin .... and some comments from people in Newfoundland saying it was ok, to be fair - but later in the 2rd hour she again plays tape from somebody in Calgary promoting the idea that it is illegimate, with no alt view from someone saying it is fine - the guests speak ok to a point, but CBC/AM are pushing the POV that it is not legitimate -

- and finishing the show with another 'comedy' piece mocking the coalition - CBC, on message 24/7, telling you how 'the people who know, and who you follow' think about what is happening here.. - it's a big joke, folks, this '(haha!!) coalition'. (why not a comedy piece mocking Harper and his bullying attitude??) (Me? I don't much care, the whole thing is a dog and pony show, the 'coalition' is at best a good cop side of the story, and no major Bay St policies will change, but the propaganda annoys me).

In the final half hour, the discussion with the constitutional 'experts' is interesting - they are completely boxified - they talk about the rules, and how we must obey the rules - 'democracy' in the box - there are rules we must obey as if they were handed down by God - and they are, I think, sincere, they never think beyond this - who do the rules favor, etc? Democracy, or pretend-democracy? etc

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

Wednesday - somebody reigned them in, the CBC morning news is considerably more fair than yesterday, a few people actually trying to talk sensibly about the legality of the proposal, and some people from a Quebec radio show indicating they actually supported it. Maybe they're reading this. haha. More yet to come, of course. - but 'Ottawa correspondent' Susan Lund is still giving place of preference to the Harper spin - and although AM talks to Ed Broadbent who makes his case well, she pushes again all the Con talking points - appearance of fairness having Broadbent on, obvious bias with her attacks .

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

And the lesser evil is - inflation - Actually, it's time for all of us to start realising that ALL of our financial problems have one root - private banks create almost all of our money supply as debt, for which they expect to be paid interest every year - and that's a lot of money - around 3 trillion outstanding in debts in Canada alone. When you have to pay interest on effectively all of your national currency each year, just for the making of it, inflation is inevitable, with all that entails in terms of falling living standards (average incomes NEVER keep up with inflation, think about the difference in anything between now and 30 years ago and how well the average family copes) - and allowing essentially unregulated private banks to create money at will, when their primary purpose is maxing 'investor' takings rather than a stable national economy - and you have the mess we have today. They learned this lesson big time following the crash of 29, but then during the 60s and 70s people forgot those lessons and allowed a corporate-lobbied government to start deregulating - and now 30 years later, bubble - bust time again. He who forgets, or never learns, history and all that. More here - Banketeering http://www.rudemacedon.ca/banketeering.html .

God knows I try.

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

Thursday - CBC news starting right off (Susan Lund, intrepid CBC history maker) with their 'impartiality' as the reader notes that Harper spoke with a Canadian flag behind his back, while Dion's presentation was 'out of focus', and gets ONE comment from someone saying Harper was 'a clear winner'. History in the making, the creation of the narrative - this is what will be in the history books, as written by the CBC (alternatives? of course, there are always alternatives, spin one way or another or just do it neutrally - for instance, if the spin was in Dion's favor, they could ignore the quality of the tape and concentrate on content. Or just be neutral, report 'what happened' with no editorializing from the reporters or readers - get a comment from a few people on each side sort of thing - this is not something 'all decent people' would see in one way (terrorist attack on Mumbai, for instance) and thus 'fairness' is not expected - but in Canada, many, many people, quite probably a majority, do not care much for what Harper is doing, so the attempt to form a non-Harper coalition, well within constitutional possibilities, should just be reported neutrally, and let Canadians decide for themselves without the prodding one way or another about what is going on). Way to go CBC. - other comments, but generally more in support of Harper, or denigrating Dion etc. The pattern is that the CBC will by itself repeat the Con 'talking points' as if they were 'news', but the others can make their own points, at whatever time the CBC allows, and, if needed, suitable attacks from the 'hosts' etc to make sure the points don't get too strong.

- Ottawa Morning - Kathleen is stressing that this political crisis is emotional and divisive, and unnecessary!! - people need to calm down!! (take a valium and get back to that tv and do what your Leaders on the CBC tell you to do!!) - nobody is saying that maybe something that gets people involved in their own damn politics with some emotion might be a GOOD thing for a change! (even if it is all a dog and pony show ... )

- 9:00 news (Ch'town) - interviews with people from BC about why the attempt to bring down the gov is a bad idea ... then an interview with some people at a meeting in Ottawa who think the new coalition is not a good idea ... not a WORD from anyone supporting it - such 'neutrality' of reporting we get from the CBC ....

the Current - AM has almost fair interviews with a Con and a couple of Lib-NDP people in the first hour, even some almost hard questions for the Con guy, but then with the letters, the bias comes deep, with a great preponderance of letters mocking the coalition

- it's also interesting that the media is painting this as a 'national crisis' - it's just another sideshow -

- AM asks one guy about the vid, and attacks him as he explains, 'yea but...'

- and ALL the people allowed to speak talk about the east-west split, emphasized here - not a single speaker trying to bring people together, through the coaltion, and etc - all spin, spin, spin, and what is chosen to emphasize or ignore (as in gatekeeping) - choices are made. The media can report - or herd.

On Green Island - in our society, we are raised - indoctrinated really - to believe in a certain way of life - going and working all week, and having a bit of free time at night or weekends for 'personal' stuff. A lot of people are bothered by this, some quite a lot. Many are passive enough by birth that they accept it. But the only reason for this is to produce what Marx termed (accurately enough) 'surplus value' - value that is approriated (to use a polite term - stolen would be more accurate) by the 'owners of production' - capitalists, in the modern world. But what if we had a real democracy, and people had a choice about things like this> There are payoffs, of course, in capitalist land - a lot of creature comforts, for those who are good enough workers - but what about the people who would like a decent sort of life, but with less toys and more free, quality time? Not many options for them around a capitalist society, which demands a great deal of conformity in its workers. What if, for insatnce, Canada was divided from east to west - in the west, work work work, lots of toys, but in the east, work less, and have more of a pioneer life - still the main modern things, electricity, health care, etc, but maybe only 2 or 3 kinds of soap or cereal to choose from, but a lot more free time, a lot more safely in a largely rural environment, etc. And people just chose where in that broad spectrum they wanted to live. You could imagine two scenarios - the eastern places became more western as people opted for more meaningless working hours every week so they could buy more meaningless consumer items, or the reverse - people opted for less work and a smaller choice of consumer products. Well, to ask the question is to answer it - the east would spread, the west would shrink. And so would the capitalist bank accounts, so that choice will never be given to you. You could take it, though.

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

- the prorogue - no need to comment. dog and pony show writ large. nothing changes. apparently the powers that be felt it was time for a major demonstration or something. reality tv. but still in the box.

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

And I said ..... ((Thank you, your comment will show up once it is approved.))
Dear neighbour, about what's going on in Canada - The CBC again reading from the neocon talking points and spreading them around as if they were anything but spin - notably in this case "..they formed a surprise coalition and now they want to take power without consulting voters again.." - this is complete nonsense. With 4 major parties in the country, 5 really, 10% of the vote, as the Greens got, is not insignificant, even if they got no seats due to our highly unfair electoral system, coalitions of one sort or another are very much in play after any election, but impossible to predict before the election. The most popular MP in any riding gets elected, and after the dust settles the parties take stock of their relative situations and talk with another, and a coalition may result. It is nonsense to say that a proposed coalition should then suggest another election to see if the electors agree - the electors have already spoken in electing the MPs - knowing full well that a minority government may result, requiring cooperation amongst 2 or more parties to get anything done. This 'argument' is just more smoke thrown out by the Cons desperately trying to cling to power - the simple fact is that a majority of the MPs have indicated they do not have confidence in the party with the most seats, but no majority, and are willing to form a temporary coalition the represents a majority of Canadians. To spin this some other way is simply disingenuous at best, and should be left to party hacks and rightwing newspaper commentators rather than supposedly intelligent commentators on the country's national broadcaster. Especially one supposeldy feeding this misleading spin to our American friends, who already have enough stupid ideas about Canada.

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

And I said ..... ((Thank you, your comment will show up once it is approved.))
John Turley-Ewart: The party in power is up to Canadians to decide - Rampant partisan BS. If the writer actually cared about Canadians being governed by people they voted for, he'd be using his space to demand we junk this first-past-the-post voting system that so distorts the seat allotment in Parliament and turn to some form of Proportional Representation - of course, this would ensure the neocons NEVER got anywhere near majority territory, so elite-dominated, gerrymandered FPTP is the system of choice for those who back neocon policies supported by a minority of Canadians, for now and evermore. Secondly, to say that parties wishing to form a coaltion need to take that idea to the people is just nonsense, and only the most ideologically (or is that idiotlogically? For some reason the words seem to run together when wandering through the NP comments section) blinded person could wander around spouting such crud - nobody can know ahead of an election how the seats are going to be divided among the parties, it is only AFTER an election that the different parties can start talking about who they might align with - this is nothing new in Canadian politics, and it's only the grossest stupidity that is trying to say that three parties, who find after an election that they represent a majority of Canadians who want to form a government on common policy grounds, should take that proposal back to the people for another election. But logic or truth never got in the way of rightwing whingeing or justifications for stupid ideas, as we have seen so much the last few days, esp in the NP. (doesn't say much for the Canadian 'education' system either, that someone of as little intelligence as this writer obviously has about the Cdn political system could get a PhD in political history)

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

And I said ..... From the global crisis to Canada's crisis - CM, you need to get a grip on yourself - nobody EVER voted for a 'they' in Canadian politics, because 'they's only happen AFTER elections. By definition. That this 'they' threatens your beloved neocons does not change history nor present realities, and you only show your own shallowness of thought by passing on neocon talking points without thinking about what you are saying.

To the main point, it is frustrating to once again see a leading 'progressive' commentator so un-knowledgable about modern economics - it's not 'banks' we need to be thinking about nationalizing or anything, it is the money supply that needs to be democratized - currently, we allow private banks to create almost all of our money supply as interest-bearing debt (that would be around 98% in Canada, some three trillion dollars) - and as long as we have to pay interest on 'our' money to a private business (es) every year, the financial problems we have been encountering for the last 30 years are absolutely inevitable, and are going to continue getting worse until we understand where our money comes from better, and get it under democratic control. A place to start is here - Banketeering http://www.rudemacedon.ca/banketeering.html . (and don't start complaining about governments printing money being inflationary - that is another neocon talking point as stupid and lacking in truth as the one about coalitions having to ask the people for permission etc. Read the article first. Then (intelligent) comments welcome.) {{ C M from Calgary, Canada writes: Dave, do you even know what a neocon is...? Neocons don't complain about printing money out of thin air. Neocons are guilty of printing money out of thin air -- as are liberals across the spectrum. Libertarians are the only ones who really understand the roots of this mess. Until the country figures that out your coalition is going to exacerbate the problem all the faster.]]}} CM, as I said, you need to work on some thinking-before-speaking skills. Of course neocons love printing money out of thin air - who do you think controls the current banking system? The outraged complaints usually arise when someone dares suggest that maybe 'we the people' ought to control our money democratically, then they start screaming all sorts of nonsensical lies. As for libertarians having any understanding of anything, mindlessly running around telling people they need to get on a 'gold standard', which you must be referring to as 'the roots of this mess', is just another sort of problem, but equally as big - either we let the people who already own the gold control our money, which is just changing from one group of rich people running the place to another, or we propose that the government nationalize all the gold - and I am sure you would agree that would be met with some considerable screaming and resistance (and it would not be a solution anyway). As I said, read the article. Or not. If you already know everything, I suppose there's not much left to learn. As for knowing what a neocon is - there are many definitions, but generally a neocon is one who supports American style laissez-faire, look-out-for-yourself capitalism, with the attendant lies and justifications for taking over governments and enacting policies that allow their greed free rein, and screw everyone else who isn't as strong or free of ethical restraints. And their flunkies who have been taken in by the adolescent fantasies of Ayn Rand.

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

Friday (as Karen on Island Morning says, as she does every Friday, 'It's Friday!!', with the cheer loud and clear in her tone - she works for the capitalists, but I bet she'd be happier on Green Island where your time is much more your own and life much less stressful, not having to devote half your working life to the capitalist beast, or do propaganda a lot, some at least of which you have to be aware of, being intelligent enough to host a radio show in the first place ...

CBC 'news' - opening story - "Can the coalition survive?!?" - CBC again working for the neocons, against Canadians - If the Libs can't handle a simple videotape, can they handle a national government? etc etc. (always alternatives - i.e. anything about 'Did the GG do the right thing?' - With opinions from various people about the body blow delivered to Canadian democracy by Harper and the GG, and how the coalition remains determined to Stand Up for Canada!!! - etc etc - you choose your spin in any story, the CBC has obviously chosen Harper.) - and in later versions, once again telling everyone how the coalition is falling apart already - the Harper spin doctors, disguised as the CBC, in action already. A media should report news - in bigbrotherland, it creates it.

- and the Current - 20 minute interview with W Johnson, explaining with no argument why the coalition is against the wishes of Canadians, and should not be allowed, and etc and etc. Way to go neutral CBC. And again the hourly news telling everyone the coaltion is collapsing, infighting, etc. ARE YOU PEASANTS GETTING THE MESSAGE?!?!?!? We are NOT going to talk about what could easily be seen as a much more important story - was it right for the GG to accept Harper's request to prorogue parliament to avoid a no confidence vote???? What does this mean for the future of 'democracy' etc in Canada? Nothing good ..... but then there wasn't much of it left, so it doesn't take much killing. Et tu, CBC??

And I said ..... Peter Foster: The Mugabe solution - the guy looks nice in his suit, but obviously there's little other than neocon indoctrination behind the smile. To say "...that is, where the value of money depends on the prudence, or otherwise, of governments... That was one of the main reasons for the universal trend in the 1990s to make central banks independent of possibly feckless democratically-elected governments..." is just completely wrong, a rewriting of history to suit neocon justification of the mess they have made of everything, and anyone with an actual understanding of history would understand that. Following the crash of 29, caused by out of control banks creating far, far, far too much speculative money, much as they have over the last few years, governments put serious controls in place concerning the power of banks to create money, and from the time the western countries got back on their feet again through and following WWII, the currency was stable, inflation minimal. During the 70s the people forgot the lessons of the Great Depression, the corps and banks bought enough governments and media to arrange for the governments to turn over the money creation power once again completely to private banks, and it's been a roller coaster ever since, bubbles and busts and bailouts. An accountable, democratic government is a MUCH more reliable controller of the money supply (1935-75) than private banks (pre-29 crash, 1975-today) who are much more concerned with maxing their own invester ROIs and creating great amounts of speculative money for currency gambling and derivitave speculation and suchlike than maintaining a stable economy for average citizens. Get some more understanding here Banketeering http://www.rudemacedon.ca/banketeering.html and here The Corporate Reactionary Revolution HREF="http://www.rudemacedon.ca/greenisland/ex/gw13.html .

As far as inflation hurting the few for the benefit of the many, more capitalist perverse lies, the actual reverse of the real situation - systemic inflation, the result of having to pay interest on our money supply every year, benefits the banks and the wealthy few at the expense of everyone else. Think of life back in the 70s and before, before the banks started creating all of our money, and too much of it, essentially unregulated, and charging interest for it - one working adult in most households could provide a decent life and cover expenses, own a house, pay for the kid's university, etc - now it takes two adults, and people continue to fall behind, and stress is up and savings down and the economy on a roller coaster - all because of the high and inevitable inflation caused by bank created money. Bank investors profit, of course, as do large businesses, as we all know that cost of living inevitably increases faster than average incomes, thus the continual falling behind.

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

And I said ..... No one voted for a mess like this - very disappointing from Goar, usually more level-headed than to be spouting rightwing talking points - Dion 'eager for the prize he hadn't won'?? Cheap shot, ad hominem, juvenile; 'can't communicate with 3/4 of the electorate'?? simply not true - he is very eloquent, comes across as MUCH more sincere than Harper; 'unequivocal repudiation'?? he was rejected by 75% of voters, yes - but Harper by 65% - not a lot of difference. we aren't impressed with any of them right now ... and not impressed with the media much more, either ...

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

And I said ..... Governor General boxed in by Harper "...the legitimacy of a Prime Minister Canadians recently elected, and quite decisively so ..." ????? Of Cdns who voted, Harper got 37%, of Cdns of voting age, make that maybe 20% - 'decisive'???? More people did not vote for anyone than voted for Harper - I would say the most decisive message from the last election is that most Cdns are not very happy with what's on offer politically.

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

And I said ..... A letter to the Governor General - A 'distinguished' law prof at Canada's most prestigious law school says that a signed contract has no legal import. My my.
And he seems to be unaware of the primary question here - is it a good idea to set the precedent that a PM can prorogue parliament for no other reason than he faces a confidence motion he knows he will lose, but wishes to retain power?
Amazing Canada. Indeed. Amazing Canadian 'law'. Amazing Cdn 'jurists'. Lewis Carroll. Alice. We aren't in Kansas anymore, Toto.

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

And I said ..... Public panel: What does the political crisis mean for Canada - I'm just wondering which of you neocon talking points bots wants to direct me to letters or whatever you wrote four years ago when Harper was trying to convince the NDP and Bloc to join him in bringing down Martin - "Mr Harper, it's a good plan, but don't forget, you have to demand an election and see if the people of Canada support your plan with the damned socialists and even more damned separatists before actually doing this ...' and etc. Anyone? Your ignorance of parliamentary procedure is stunning, but I suppose that's to be expected in people who take their marching orders from Talking Points memos whose only purpose is to obfusticate the actual situation they do not wish to acknowledge and lead people astray. I am so frustrated with you people because there is indeed a coup underway here, but it is not Dion et al who are behind it, it is Harper et al, refusing to acknowledge the majority of MPs who have stated they no longer have confidence in his MINORITY government, which is perfectly normal in any minority situation. Harper has, if you do some math beyond your talking points, the support of approximately 20% of the Canadian voting public. By the same standards, of course, the other three have only about 25% support - but that is still more than Harper. The whole system needs some serious overhaul, starting with the PR that pumpkinhead (apt name) denigrated - what it does not need is 'fixing' by the Harper-Bay St-Mainstream Media coalition by driving yet another big nail into what little is left of 'democracy' in this country by closing parliament rather than allowing the majority to speak.

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

And I said ..... Liberals pitch Dion exit plan There's a kind of feeding frenzy going on here, and some day a lot of people are going to wake up and think, OMG, were we really that stupid? Driven, of course, by the media and cons, with apparently a handful of 'lib' backroom traitors, for some reason that is less than clear, although it is known that the Cons and Harper would dearly like to see the end of the Liberal party altogether, perhaps as some kind of revenge for what they did to themselves with Mulroney in 93, or perhaps just to increase their own chances of getting a majority, which is something most Star readers would, I think, **really** regret. You're gonna regret this someday, folks. Act in haste, repent in leisure, as the old saying goes. I have no particular fondness for Dion, but I do care what happens to Canada, and you're all lookin pretty bad here.

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

Sunday - Enright - sounding a bit more level headed than most CBC stuff, maybe the few remaining oldtimers put their foot down about the blatant bias or something of the last few months, or years really, reacting in some shock to the state to which they have helped bring the country. Enright talked to Ignatieff and some Con senator, and the difference was striking - Egnatieff sounding very intelligent and concerned and like somebody who actually cared for the country, and the Con senator sounding like every other Con supporter we've been hearing, Con talking points trying to mislead and lie about everything, and 'we're really wonderful, they're all terrible', and etc. To think about how so many Canadians have been suckered in by these people is really depressing.

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












The Onward Rocinante archive can be found __here__, for those interested in earlier out-of-the-box commentary, and also recent longer missives to the CBC and others, and yet even more other stuff going waaaaaay back. the tv abyss is watching





Einstein - cannot solve a problem with the same consciousness you created it with - come to Green Island



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