FROLITICKS

Satirical commentary on Canadian and American current political issues

Jul 27

Republicans Facing Several Major Serious Issues Within Party Before Mid-Terms

by bcurry

Well, I just learned from a Washington Post report that former President Trump’s actions are now being investigated by Justice Department prosecutors as part of an inquiry into efforts to overturn the results of the 2020 election.  Recent testimony before the January 6th House committee also appears to suggest that there is enough evidence to conclude that the former president and some of his allies might have conspired to commit fraud and obstruction by misleading Americans about the outcome of the 2020 election and attempting to overturn the result.  The Republican Party establishment must be greatly disturbed by what is coming out of the committee’s public hearings, although many Republicans in Congress are still boohooing the hearings as a Democrat plot to malign Trump’s reputation.

However, Trump is not helping his case by his recent speeches where he continues to claim that the election was stolen.  What’s worst is the fact that a recent poll of Republican voters taken by the New York Times/Siena College showed that 49 percent said they would back Trump if he ran for the 2024 Republican presidential nomination.  This compared with just 6 percent who said they would vote for former Vice-President Mike Pence and 25 percent who supported Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida.  The Trump vs. Pence public squabbles has caused many Republicans’ to have frustrations and reservations about a possible 2024 Trump campaign, suggesting that it could cause large numbers of Republican voters to defect from the party in a general election.  Donald Trump and his rowdy supporters won’t just go away!

In addition, it has been reported that online fundraising has slowed across much of the Republican Party in recent months, an unusual pullback of small donors that has set off a mad rush among Republican political operatives to understand why — and reverse the sudden decline before it damages the party’s chances this fall.  Exacerbating the fundraising problems for Republicans is that Trump continues to be the party’s dominant fundraiser.  Indeed, pro-Trump super PACs had amassed more than $100 million by last summer.  Yet virtually none of the tens of millions of dollars he raised has gone toward defeating Democrats.  The money has instead funded his political team and retribution agenda against Republicans who have crossed him.  Of course, money alone does not win political races, but any lack of funds can hamper party campaigns.

Then there has been the recent decision by the primarily conservative Supreme Court in overturning Roe v. Wade that has set off an array of attacks by women’s groups over the withdrawal of abortion services and the banning of abortion practices in Republican governed states.  Take this issue into consideration and the potential attack by Republicans on LGBTQ+ issues, including same sex marriages, there is a growing movement against what are being depicted as extremist right-wing policies.  The Democrats may be able to use the far right Republican platforms in their mid-term campaign to galvanize their rank and file and to secure the support of frustrated interest groups.  Much will depend on how Congressional Republicans handle certain initiatives in the coming months, including that which would protect the legitimacy of same sex marriages.

At the state level, there is little doubt that in those governed by Republicans there are still enough conservative votes to win the day and maintain their power.  However, at the federal level, the Republicans definitely appear to be in trouble, especially if Donald Trump is capable of riling up his base.  It will be interesting to see if the Republicans can resolve their evident split within the party before the mid-terms and most certainly in time for the next presidential election.  To the distress of the Republican establishment, Donald Trump and his allies are continuing to schedule events and are raising money for initiatives intended to make the former president a central player in the midterm elections, and possibly to set the stage for another run for the White House. 

One would love to be a fly on the wall at behind-the-scene discussions among leading Republican strategists.  I’m certain that they have a lot of serious issues to talk about!

Abortion Conservative Political Groups Donald Trump US US Politics

Leave a comment »
Jul 21

Incredible Scenes of Democratic Representatives in Congress Being Arrested During Protests

by bcurry

Earlier this past week during an abortion rights protest over the Supreme Court’s recent decision to overturn Roe v. Wade, at least 17 Democratic lawmakers were among the 35 people arrested by the Capitol Police for blocking traffic outside the courthouse.  The arrest of lawmakers in this manner is something almost unheard of in Canada.  Canadian legislators tend to be somewhat docile when outside the House of Commons in Ottawa.  The most that Members of Parliament (MP) will do is to attend peaceful protests on the front lawn of Parliament’s centre block, sometimes to speak in support of some cause or another.  I can’t remember the last time that an MP was arrested as part of any protest in Ottawa.  However, back in March 2018, two federal politicians, including Green Party Leader Elizabeth May and New Democratic Party (NDP) MP Kennedy Stewart, were arrested at a protest against Kinder Morgan’s Trans Mountain federally approved pipeline expansion in Burnaby, British Columbia.

On the other hand, in Washington, such incidences among House Representatives appear to have happened in other cases.  Indeed, it was reported that Rep. Judy Chu, D-Calif., was arrested last month outside the Supreme Court for protesting.  In July 2021, Rep. Joyce Beatty, D-Ohio, chairwoman of the Congressional Black Caucus, was arrested at the Hart Senate Office Building for protesting in favor of voting rights legislation.

Protests are protected by the First Amendment of the American Constitution, but like in Canada, there is still the need for protesters to abide by laws.  In the most recent incident, the U.S. Capitol Police tweeted about the situation: “Demonstrators are starting to block First Street, NE. It is against the law to block traffic, so officers are going to give our standard three warnings before they start making arrests.”  In light of the minor violation, those arrested were later released at the scene, with police telling the ABC News they were likely to face a $US50 ($72.48 Canadian) fine.  Among those arrested was Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, D-NY, who became the youngest woman elected to the House of Representatives, and has rocketed to political notoriety.  The arrests of Rep. Ocasio-Cortez and the other Democrats resulted in coverage by a large number of news media outlets and extensively by social media sources.  There is little doubt that this type of media coverage involving lawmakers gives a protest a good deal of press, good and bad.

Former charismatic Prime Minister Pierre Elliott Trudeau, who was PM from 1968 to 1979 and from 1980 to 1984, once exclaimed to the house speaker that opposition MPs were nobodies once they were “50 yards from Parliament Hill”.  Of course, that was before social media and daily digital news.  Most recently, several opposition Conservative MPs, including leadership contender Pierre Poilievre, met with the illegal Trucker Convoy which had occupied the streets in front of Parliament for over three weeks in February of this year.  The New York Times wrote that the Conservatives, the only other party to form a government in Canada, were readying for a fight and saw the truckers and their followers not as outcasts but as political currency that can bring in votes — and money.  With his photo-op, Poilievre was depicted as the protesters’ political champion at the time, although as the illegal occupation continued Conservative support was condemned by many Canadians, and most certainly by those living in Ottawa at the time.  No other party MPs met with the protesters, viewing the occupation as being unlawful, eventually being removed by the police and leading to the arrests of dozens of protesters.  The social and economic impact of the occupation ultimately led to the federal government’s invocation of the Emergencies Act to facilitate the removal of occupying vehicles from streets within the Parliamentary precinct in Ottawa.

In general, Canadian legislators tend to avoid participation in protests, many of which occur in the capital on a daily basis.  Even members of the left-wing NDP are normally careful not to participate in protests outside of the legislature, particularly those involving extremists.  The one big difference in Canada is the more apolitical system used for appointing federal justices, including those appointed to the Supreme Court.  With the highly politicized recent decisions of the U.S. Supreme Court — comprised of four conservative-leaning justices who were appointed during the Trump administration — it is not surprising that protests have erupted outside the Supreme Court.  What’s surprising is the participation by members of Congress in such protests and their subsequent arrests by Capitol Police!  This is something that is unheard of in Canada — perhaps somewhat regrettably in certain cases.  However, time will tell for our “nobodies”.

Abortion Canada Donald Trump Federal Government Federal Government Media Social Media US US Politics

Leave a comment »
Jul 18

Potential for Insurgency Grows Everyday in U.S. and Canada

by bcurry

Two recent events in the U.S. and in Canada have clearly illustrated the growth of insurgent groups: the January 6th attack on the U.S. Capitol and the three week occupation by a Trucker Convoy in Ottawa, Canada, in February of this year.  In both cases, various groups, including radical right extremists, proclaimed openly their intention to overthrow the current governments and forcibly replace them with another regime of some sort.  What these two events clearly illustrated is that these groups have become well organized, funded and are led openly by radicalized leaders.  What is even more clearly evident is that the insurgents are still operating despite many of their leaders and members having been arrested and imprisoned following the above two events.

What is common between the American and Canadian movements is that they are continuing to recruit, especially among ex-military and police veterans.  Several veterans played a significant role in Canada, attempting to garner support and credibility among the public for their causes.  In addition, these individuals bring training and military/law enforcement experience to the movements, as well as contributing intelligence for a movement.  The next inevitable stage is one that leads to the formulation of an armed quasi-militia capable of carrying out a few isolated attacks.  Weapons and explosives were seized in the Capitol attack and at the unlawful Coutts, Alberta, border blockade, with subsequent charges being laid in each case.  Four persons arrested with weapons in Alberta were tied to Canada’s Diagolon far-right extremist militia group, well known to the authorities.  In January 2021, a 22-year-old Canadian man crossed the border into Detroit where the U.S. Customs and Border Protection’s “tactical terrorism response team” found an assault rifle and two other guns, plus extremist white-supremacy material on his cellphone.  Connections among American and Canadian white-supremacy groups have been well documented, a number of whom are hoping to promote race and civil wars.

These movements are allowed to grow until you have more open insurgency, when you start to have a series of consistent attacks, and it becomes impossible to ignore.  What is clearly evident is that potential insurgencies tend to be much more decentralized, often fought by multiple groups.  There is not one overall governing group within both countries.  Leadership can most often extend to more local community levels, making recruitment a lot easier and training and planning a lot more difficult for authorities to monitor.  Cases of violent activity are deemed to be isolated cases by local authorities and even ignored, often by law enforcement.  However, when one adds up such events involving threatening protests, one cannot help but conclude that they represent a much larger campaign, organized and funded by extremists.

There will be those who will claim that alluding to insurgency movements is no more than another form of fearmongering.  However, such arguments cannot explain away that certain groups believe that democracies are backsliding.  There’s a clear sense that they firmly believe that governments are not that legitimate.  These are angry people who are unhappy with governments and open to being exploited by insurgent groups.  Unfortunately, some more ‘populist’ politicians, ala Donald Trump, have taken advantage of the situation for political gain.  Some observers claim that this is what is happening inside the Republican Party in the U.S. and among certain leadership hopefuls within the national Conservative Party and in the Peoples Party in Canada.  Unfortunately, appearing publicly alongside or among members of extremist groups can only give more legitimacy to such movements in the eyes of the public at large.

One thing is for certain, democratically elected governments can no longer give a blind eye to the growth of insurgency movements in either country.  Recent events have shown that such movements are openly promoting deliberate and organized attacks on our democratic institutions.  If citizens and their elected officials don’t recognize the potential danger to our democracy, than they are playing a very dangerous game.  We can no longer ignore the growth of these movements, both locally and nationally.  To do so, is to invite even more future violent and unlawful attacks.

Canada Donald Trump Extremist Groups Extremist Groups US

Leave a comment »
Jul 5

Throughout History, People Have Explored the Meaning of Politics

by bcurry

Politics is defined in the Oxford English Dictionary as “the activities associated with the governance of a country or area.”  In the 1800s, Otto von Bismarck, a German leader, was quoted as saying that: “Politics is the art of the possible.”  Other notables have commented on the art of politics, including the Chinese leader Moa Zedong who stipulated that “Politics is war without bloodshed while war is politics with bloodshed.”  Abraham Lincoln suggested that “The ballot is stronger than the bullet.”  Emma Goldman, a Russian anarchist in the early 1900s, was quoted as sarcastically saying that if politics could change anything, they would make it illegal.  For those who are new to the so-called discipline of political science, there are plenty of reference materials dealing with the question of politics.  For the grand total of $13.95 on Amazon, one can get a paperback entitled The Art of the Possible: An Everyday Guide to Politics by Edward Keenan and illustrated by Julie McLaughlin, that even 10 to 14 year olds can read and hopefully understand.  For aspiring politicians, there are most likely various versions of “politics for dummies.”

At various times in American and Canadian history, there have been periods where people questioned our system of governance.  Life may have been somewhat simpler when we had theocracies, trusting in the guidance of a higher power, as interpreted by the clergy.  However, with the separation of church and state, one now has to rely almost entirely on the collective wisdom of politicians and their political platforms.  The problem emerges when the people begin to loose faith in the political system and the trust in government is on the decline.  One can safely say that we are now in one such period.  We have to ask ourselves what brings us together and what divides us?  I would have thought that the pandemic would have brought us together in collectively battling this global disease.  Instead, especially in the U.S., the measures brought about by governments to minimize the associated deaths and illnesses, including vaccine mandates, appear to have polarized the population even more.  We remain seriously divided on several of the other major current issues, including climate change, abortion, gun control, capital punishment, to name but a few.

As a democracy, debate is essential to develop policies in order to effectively and efficiently tackle the issues of the day, often seeking middle ground on those issues.  However, for some reason, politics today has become so polarized as to hinder the normal and reasoned discussions that should take place.  Instead, there appears to be a growing wave of anger and dissatisfaction among a segment of the populace, leading to what has become known as “populism” in both the U.S. and Canada.  Donald Trump took advantage of this apparent rage and its accompanying attraction to extremism and reducing the role of government. 

In politics, reasonable debate has to be encouraged.  By reasonable, I mean that opposite sides have to introduce indisputable facts, with clear rationale and no dogma attached.  This continues to be difficult in an era when “expertise” and “science” is increasingly under attack, as clearly shown during the pandemic.  In addition, arguments simply based on religious beliefs should not be used as the sole basis for a position, unless one believes we are living in a theocracy. 

Yes, politics can be the art of the possible when all parties work together in collaboration and with common goals to tackle some of the most important questions of our time.  Simply adhering to one’s party lines is not going to get us anywhere fast.  Simply relying on past political beliefs and jurisprudence is not going to help us achieve what we need to achieve in the Twenty-First Century.  Significant change is needed, but difficult to reach if one continues to arrive at political stalemates.  Yes, I believe that all voices have to be heard as part of any democratic society.  Our rights only extend to that place where they don’t infringe on the rights of others.  This is why we have statutory protections and the rule of law.  The fundamental principles of our political system rely on the people continuously defending our democracies to the fullest extent, not by violence but by the ballot.

Canada Populism US US Politics

Leave a comment »
Jun 29

How Bans On Abortions Have Implications For American Companies And Canadian Health Care

by bcurry

The recent overturning of Roe v. Wade by the U.S. Supreme Court has wide-reaching implications for major American corporations and for the health care system in Canada.

The New York Times reports that American employers are scrambling to prepare for possible legal challenges to their health care policies, as well as responding to scrutiny of their past political donations to politicians who supported abortion bans.  Some companies are exploring whether abortion-related travel costs would be reimbursed through medical plan providers, and employees can use their time off without noting the reason.  In addition to travel for primarily surgical abortions, new health care policies could also cover lodging, meals and child care.  Companies mentioned in the article include Disney, Macy’s, H&M, Nordstrom, Nike, Dick’s Sporting Goods, Goldman Sachs, Bank of America, Snap, Starbucks and Yelp.  Salesforce and Google have both said they would even move employees who want to leave states where abortion is banned.  In some states, companies providing such assistance will most likely face political backlash from anti-abortion groups and possibly from state governments themselves.

For these companies, besides the extra expenses, what their support for employees seeking an abortion implies is that the potential impact on a woman’s privacy is a great concern and one possibly affecting her future employment.  Medical plan providers are certainly aware of privacy concerns, as they would be for any other personal health matters.  In addition, while there are currently no states with bans prosecuting women who travel out of state for an abortion, some legal experts think that those laws could be possible in the future.  As well, companies will have to be aware of state government attempts to use existing laws to prosecute abortion travel.  Apparently, Republican legislators in Texas have already said they plan to introduce legislation penalizing companies that pay for out-of-state abortion travel. 

In Canada, although we have legalized abortion under the federal Health Act, access to abortions services is limited in certain provincial and territorial jurisdictions which are responsible for the actual provision of health services.  For Canadians, the costs of an abortion are covered under Canada’s universal health insurance.  It is anticipated that many American women will be forced to travel across state lines to access abortion — barring those who can’t leave family, jobs or can’t afford to.  Some will even travel across international borders to Canada or Mexico in order to have the medical procedure done.  It is uncertain whether the health insurance providers of American companies will pay for surgical abortions performed in other countries such as Canada.  According to Action Canada for Sexual Health and Rights, the three provinces that may be most affected are Québec, Ontario and British Columbia.  Other provinces and the territories are less able to accept Americans for abortion-related services.  Any foreign increase in demand for such services will no doubt put a major strain on existing services.

According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), abortions using medications made up about 42% of procedures in 2019, while surgical abortions accounted for 49%.  In addition, American women with family incomes less than 100% of the federal poverty level accounted for almost half of all abortion patients in 2014.  It is therefore very unlikely that these women, especially poorer Black and Hispanic women, would hold good paying jobs in any of the American companies noted above.  The additional problem for American women is that abortion medications are much harder for women to access, and unaffordable unless covered by health insurance providers.  It has been reported by one of Canada’s primary abortion pill manufacturers that it is increasing supplies of Mifegymiso amid growing demand in this country and questions over what the impact of overturning Roe v. Wade will be.

In general, it is suggested that Canada should prepare for what is referred to as an increase in ‘abortion tourism’ out of the U.S.  There is little doubt that there will greater costs to American companies and Canadian abortion services, not to forget the tremendous physical and mental health costs to affected American women.

Abortion Abortion Canada US

Leave a comment »
Jun 25

Far More Political And Societal Division Among Americans Than Among Canadians

by bcurry

In July in both the U.S. and Canada, people will be respectively celebrating the birth of their countries.  However, these past few years have demonstrated a concerning growth in divisive politics, much more so in the U.S. than in Canada.  Most recently, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned Roe v. Wade allowing states to ban abortion.  This is despite the fact that polls have shown that only one in ten Americans want an absolute ban on abortion.  In Canada, the right to abortion is supported by all major political parties and the vast majority of Canadians.  When it comes to restrictions on accessibility to guns, the majority of Americans support increasing restrictions to gun ownership, while the gun lobby holds sway in Congress and many states.  Supported by the majority in Canada, there are restrictions on guns, especially handguns and military-style weapons — a number of the latter are outright banned.  Although numerous American organizations and groups have lobbied to eliminate the death penalty in half of the states where it exists, Canada did away with the death penalty decades ago.  It is now believed that the recent Supreme Court’s decision could also lead to a reconsideration of Americans’ right to same sex marriage, something which has been legalized in Canada for sometime now.

A new poll of Canadians by the U.K.’s well known pollster Lord Michael Ashcroft showed that Canada, rather than the polarized society on display in America, is described as a nation that is proud and hopeful.  He concluded that most Canadians are a lot more confident, empathetic, proud and trusting of their own democracy and national identity, frequently seeking a middle ground on controversial issues.  Fully seven in ten Canadians think Canada is one of the best places to live and multiculturalism is a healthy and important element of Canadian society and thus encourages immigration to the country.  Yes, there are some small vocal dissident groups who surface from time to time in Canada, but nowhere near the numbers of American right-wing and social conservative groups who even emerged to contest the results of the 2020 U.S. presidential election.  Thankfully, there is no equivalent to Donald Trump in Canada.

The current infringement on the rights of American women with the overturning of Roe vs. Wade will further increase the division among Americans across the country.  This will become a highly contentious issue in the upcoming November elections, with pro-life and pro-choice candidates slugging it out on the hastings.  When a draft copy of the decision was leaked in May, even Donald Trump began telling friends and advisers that it would anger suburban women, a group who helped tilt the 2020 race to President Joe Biden.  He felt that would lead to a backlash against Republicans in the November midterm elections.  However, as per the New York Times, with the decision Trump put out a statement taking a victory lap, including applauding himself for sticking by his choice of nominees.  On top of which, the court’s decision is unfortunately expected to disproportionately affect minority women who already face limited access to health care.  In addition, for those women who can afford to come to Canada, Canadian abortion services are currently examining the potential impact in welcoming these Americans.

With respect to another grouping, our indigenous people of North America, both the U.S. and Canada in the past had used residential schools in an attempt to assimilate indigenous populations by eliminating their culture and languages.  However, unlike in the U.S., Canadians began a national reconciliation process reflecting honestly on the darkest parts of history and attempting to move forward to correct past abuses.  Canadians of all backgrounds have come forward to fully support the truth and reconciliation initiatives at all levels of society.  The same issue has barely been recognized in the States.

All in all, one cannot but conclude that there is far more political and societal division among Americans than among Canadians.  The next decade could prove to be one of the most explosive in American history, with the current polarization of American society almost as great as that preceding the American Civil War between the North and South over the abolition of slavery.  Only time will tell.  Not a great time to be living in the States!

Canada Donald Trump Extremist Groups Gun Control Indigenous Issues Populism Populism in Canada Presidential Election 2020 Republican Party US US Politics Women's Issues

Leave a comment »
Jun 18

American Public School Teachers Facing Several Challenges Depending On Where They Teach

by bcurry

For decades now, many American primary and secondary school teachers have faced low wages and poor working conditions.  When adjusted for inflation, the national average salary for teachers has only somewhat increased over the past decade, according to the National Education Association, the nation’s largest teachers’ union.  This is unlike in Canada where most teachers are members of strong provincial unions and are considered to be well paid and to have excellent benefit and retirement plans.  In many instances, there are long waiting lists for recent graduates from Canadian teachers’ colleges to become fulltime teachers.  In the U.S., several states are apparently loosing teachers for a number of reasons — low salaries being among the most important.

However, what has become more of a concern in American schools is the evident attempt within certain states, such as Florida, to inject politics into the state’s non-partisan school boards.  For example, under Governor Ron DeSantis, the Parental Rights Education Act was passed into law.  It has been dubbed by some critics as the “Don’t Say Gay” bill for its restrictions on what teachers can say about sexual orientation and gender identity.  Then in 2021, DeSantis signed an executive order banning school boards from enacting mask mandates during the pandemic and threatened to strip state funding from ones who did.  Such measures have encouraged some parents to replace school board trustees with more conservative members and to launch book bans within the school district.  Teachers perceived as teaching anything related to politics, race, history, gender identity and sexuality are often attacked and frequently forced to resign.  Teachers in some states believe that they are caught in the crosshairs of the current culture wars, and are increasingly being forced to leave their jobs at a time when good teachers are in short supply.

In recent years, administrators, teachers and school staff are facing increasing threats of violence to themselves and their students.  Mass school shootings, such as the most recent tragic one in Uvalde, Texas, appear to be on the increase.  Recent research by The Washington Post reveals that more than 300,000 children have experienced gun violence at school since the Columbine High School massacre of April 20, 1999.  They found that last year there were 42 school shooting incidents – more than in any year since 1999.  Already this year alone there have been 24 acts of gun violence on K-12 campuses during the school day.  Since Columbine, the total amount of children, educators and other people killed during such traumatic incidents stands at 185, with another 369 injured.  Disconcertingly, in some states, they are putting forward arguments that teachers should be armed to protect themselves and their students.

For years, many school boards and administrators supported racial equity programs in their school districts.  However, more recently, even such programs are being challenged by conservative factions to the point where plans to beef up recruitment of a diverse teaching staff, to address the implicit biases of teachers and to overhaul discipline practices are all now dead or in limbo.  The Washington Post reported that, across the U.S. last year, school board elections became the epicenter of a culture war over race.  Conservative victories led many boards to fire superintendents and curtail racial justice initiatives.  In some districts, white teachers continue to far outnumber black teachers disproportionately to the schools’ black populations.  Discussions of “systemic racism” are even no longer permitted within the school districts.

All in all, although several states have given wage hikes and signing bonuses to teachers, the ability and freedom to teach within the curriculum has been greatly restricted.  In this day and age, it is not easy being an American in the teaching profession.  They must feel that they are constantly under attack and their teaching methods questioned at every turn.  No wonder so many are contemplating leaving this worthy profession.  A sad commentary for sure!

Education Education in U.S. US

Leave a comment »
Jun 8

When It Comes To Violent Crime In North America, All Is Not Well

by bcurry

The recent mass shootings in Buffalo, New York and Uvalde, Texas, and multiple shootings across the U.S. this past month, have once again raised the anger of Americans on both sides of the political spectrum.  The Democrats are being attacked by Republicans for being soft on crime and the Republicans are being accused of blocking proposed measures to restrict the sale and ownership of guns.  In Canada, the federal government has introduced legislation to further restrict access to handguns, including stopping the illegal trafficking of guns across the border with the U.S.  As recent polls have indicated, there is little doubt that Americans are feeling increasingly less safe.  With an increase in gun violence in some of Canada’s largest cities, Canadians are not far behind in their perception of growing violent crime.

The fact of the matter is that the issue of violent crime, like other social-economic issues, is a divisive one no matter how you look at it.  Conservatives will accuse liberals of letting criminals off the hook, while liberals will declare that conservatives have no other policy than putting everyone in prisons and increasing police powers.  Police shootings have also garnered the attention of both political groups, especially in the U.S.  Now, there is at least a belief that the police have to find better ways to deal with persons with mental health conditions and members of minority groups, incorporating social and health services available in the community.  There is also a need to deal differently with drugs and drug addicts, recognizing that addiction is a health issue and should be dealt with accordingly, especially in light of the current epidemic of overdoses in both countries.

Radicalization of youth, especially young men, has increasingly become a source of violent behaviour, often associated with hate crimes.  More needs to be done to deal with the spread of hate literature, disinformation and conspiracy theories over social media.  Surely, both conservatives and liberals can agree that more education has to be available and supported to prevent such influences.  The current division of beliefs and values based on racial, ethnic, religious and sexual orientation has to be dealt with in no uncertain terms.  The situation is eating away at the very core of our democratic societies.

There are no easy solutions to dealing with violent crime as a social issue.  Many factors have to be considered, including socio-economic matters.  Unemployment is a major one, wherein people are prevented from making a living wage and securing affordable housing.  Increased opportunities for an education aimed at preparing people to enter the labour market with applicable skills and attributes is another issue.  Communities need to be encouraged and supported in order to develop local initiatives aimed at reducing criminal activities.  Improvements have to be made to increase timely access to mental health and social services at the community level.  Localized addiction programs have to be improved, with the aim of tackling drug problems and preventing their associated health issues and fatalities.

Whether taking a hard-line approach or preferring a more progressive approach, neither alone offers one-size-fits-all solutions.  A multi-approach strategy is what is required, and political sloganeering is not going to do anyone any good.  Simply de-funding the police in support of promoting social measures is not the answer.  Retraining and re-educating the police in how to better deal with such issues as domestic violence, racism and mental disabilities would appear to be a much better idea.  In Canada, several municipal mayors have called on the federal government to ban the possession of handguns.  However, despite Canada’s already strict handgun control measures, there continues to be violent crimes committed with the use of illegal or stolen handguns.  Members of drug gangs and radical factions have little problems in accessing such weapons.  One day our prisons will be overflowing with their convicted felons.

Until we deal with the underlying socio-economic factors in both countries, one can only conclude that we will see increased waves of violent crime.  This outcome doesn’t depend on whether you have conservative or liberal governments.

Canada Gun Control Gun Control Gun Laws Race Relations US US Politics War on Drugs

Leave a comment »
Jun 5

Weapons Sales by Canada and the U.S. Complicit in Supporting War Crimes by Saudi Arabia

by bcurry

Saudi Arabia and its regional allies, mainly the United Arab Emirates, entered the Yemeni government’s war against the Houthi rebels in 2015, and began a wide-ranging aerial bombing campaign involving more than 150 airstrikes on civilian targets in Yemen.  The United Nations calls the situation in Yemen the world’s worst humanitarian crisis, as it is estimated that the war with Yemen has killed more than 230,000 people as a result of the fighting or its indirect consequences, such as hunger and outbreaks of disease.  The war has pushed the impoverished Yemen to the brink of famine.  During this nearly decade-long war, both the U.S. and Canada fournished weapons, including F-15S/SA planes and Canadian-made light armoured vehicles (LAVs), artillery systems, and heavy machine guns.

In 2021, the Biden administration in 2021 announced an end to U.S. military support for “offensive operations” carried out by the Saudi-led coalition and suspended some munition sales.  However, aircraft maintenance contracts fulfilled by both the U.S. military and U.S. companies to coalition squadrons carrying out offensive missions have continued.  Canada’s military exports to Saudi Arabia actually increased in 2021, making the Saudi kingdom Canada’s top export destination for such goods after the U.S. —  64 percent of the total value of non-US military exports that year.  In 2020, a review was undertaken by the Canadian government of weapons sales to Saudi Arabia, which concluded there was “no substantial risk” such transfers of military goods were “used to commit or facilitate violations of international human rights law, international humanitarian law, or gender-based violence”.  However, Amnesty International and Project Ploughshares have declared that the Canadian government’s review misinterpreted, or ignored, key pillars of the 2013 Arms Trade Treaty, an international agreement signed by Canada regulating the international trade in conventional arms.  Contrary to what the federal government has said, they believe that Canada continues to ignore its international obligations to the Arms Trade Treaty.  On the other hand, the U.S., under Donald Trump, dropped out of the Arms Trade Treaty in 2019 for obvious misplaced domestic reasons.

Despite the fact that both countries have supported the kingdom, there have recently been signs of discontent with Saudi actions in Yemen and human rights violations by the Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman.  The murder of Washington Post journalist Jamal Khashoggi in Turkey in 2018 by the Saudis did not help.  Nevertheless, we now have a planned trip by President Biden to Saudi Arabia to discuss increasing their production of oil, thereby helping his administration to lower gasoline prices in the U.S.  Although the U.S. helped diplomatically to arrange for a truce in the conflict between the Houthi in Yemen and Saudi Arabia, the horrendous damage was already done in both civilian casualties and infrastructure, including homes, hospitals and communication towers in Yemen.  Since 2015, human rights groups investigating the airstrikes on Yemen have identified more than 300 that violated or appeared to violate international law.  Even as early as March 2015, Internal State Department documents noted that U.S. officials worried that coalition airstrikes may have violated the rules of war.

While the world is paying close attention to possible war crimes by the Russians in Ukraine, countries such as the U.S. and Canada have been probably aided, through the provision of weapons to the Saudis and their allies, similar atrocities in Yemen.  In addition, within the kingdom of Saudi Arabia there are a number of alleged human rights issues, including the imprisonment of political activists.  However, these concerns have not been enough for the U.S. and Canada to cease their military support to the country.  One has to believe it’s more about the oil than it’s about the revenue from exports of military weapons and maintenance contracts.  Alas, there are no comparable bans on the export of oil from the region compared to existing European, U.S. and Canadian bans on the import of oil and gas from Russia.  Despite unresolved diplomatic disputes between the Saudis and both our countries, access to oil reserves unfortunately continues to drive our immediate foreign policies in the region.

Arms Trade Arms Trade Treaty Canada Foreign Policy Oil and Gas Oil and Gas The Middle East US

Leave a comment »
May 29

When It Comes To Domestic Gun Violence, The U.S. Leads The Way

by bcurry

This May, the New York Times noted that, according to the first comprehensive federal tally of gun commerce in two decades, the U.S. is in the middle of a great gun-buying boom.  The data shows no sign of the boom letting up as the annual number of firearms manufactured has nearly tripled since 2000 and spiked sharply in the past three years.  No surprise there, even during the pandemic.  According to a 2018 survey conducted by the non-partisan Switzerland-based Small Arms Survey, there are today around 400 million guns in the U.S.  Again, according to the Small Arms Survey, the per capita number of guns in the U.S. has continued to rise to about 1.2 guns for every person by 2018.  According to the Congressional Research Service it had roughly doubled from 1968 to 2012, from one gun for every two people to one gun per person.  The majority of these guns are manufactured in the U.S.  However, historical surveys from the University of Chicago research center NORC show that the percentage of American households that own guns has decreased from about half in the 1970s to about a third in recent years.  Otherwise, certain households possess multiple weapons, and it is those households that support gun ownership with few if any government restrictions.

Recent tragic mass shootings have once again raised the issue of so-called ‘gun control’ among supporters of the National Rifle Association (NRA) and those wanting increased restrictions on the sale of guns, most particularly assault-style long guns.  However, assault weapons are rarely used in the crimes, where the weapon of choice is a handgun.  Nevertheless, the ability to purchase an assault rifle has become easier, especially after the 1994 federal assault weapons ban was lifted in the U.S.  What is crazy is that many on both of the two sides tend to support increased background checks on persons purchasing guns, hoping to reduce the chances of guns getting into the hands of persons with known violent or radicalized behaviour. 

Still, gun makers like Daniel Defense, the manufacturer of the assault rifle used in the Uvalde, Texas, school shooting, continue to aggressively market their products using its direct-to-consumer business model.  The approach is aimed to make it easier to buy military gear by simply ordering it from Amazon.  Their on-line marketing is geared to appeal to young people, especially teenage males who are “Call of Duty” video game enthusiasts.  Starting off initially with contracts to produce weapons and accessories for the American and British militaries, by 2009 Daniel Defense had expanded to make guns for consumers.

However, according to the New York Times, the aggressive marketing by the gun industry has hit some companies.  Earlier this year, gunmaker Remington settled a $73 million (U.S.) settlement with the families of children killed in 2012 at the Sandy Hook school in Newtown, Connecticut.  The families claimed that Remington marketed its assault rifles improperly, including weapons appearing in the “Call of Duty”, which both the Connecticut and Texas school killers often played.  One can only assume the parents of the latest school mass shootings will most likely take Daniel Defense to court under tragically similar circumstances.

What is so sad is the fact that buyers have openly capitalized on the loosening of gun restrictions by the Supreme Court, Congress and Republican-controlled state legislatures.  The Republican Party is clearly aligned with the interests of gun lobbyists and the NRA, as evidenced by the appearances of former President Trump and Republican Senator Ted Cruz at the NRA’s totally inappropriate convention in Houston, Texas, just a few days after the May 24th school shooting in Uvalde, Texas.  Not surprisingly, they defended gun rights, all be it with some obvious misleading claims about the efficacy of gun restrictions, gun ownership trends and school shootings.  Unfortunately, after every mass shooting, driven by fear and calls for increased restrictions on gun ownership, gun sales often go up in certain states.  As I’ve blogged in the past, this is a cycle that tragically never seems to end.

Gun Control US US Politics

Leave a comment »
«Older Entries
Newer Entries »
Blog at WordPress.com.