FROLITICKS

Satirical commentary on Canadian and American current political issues

Jan 4

Strange Situation In Republican Primaries For Their Presidential Nominee

by bcurry

As a Canadian political observer, there is little doubt that the current situation south of the border involving the Republican Party (GOP) and their selection of a presidential candidate to run in the election later this year is all very strange.  You have former President Donald Trump who is currently under indictment in four different civil and criminal cases.  Despite this, the majority of GOP supporters continue to back Trump, with the polls showing that he is still leading the other GOP candidates by a substantial margin.  Trump’s primaries’ platform to date has reflected his desire for “personal retribution” against those who opposed him following his failure to get re-elected in 2020, and to implement an “autocratic” regime.

In addition, one of the indictments pertains to the January 6, 2021 attack on the Capitol by a violent mob and Trump’s alleged role in the conspiracy to keep himself in power by overturning the election results.  Recently, both Maine and Colorado had decisions to throw Trump off the ballot over 14th Amendment’s ban on “insurrectionists”.  Given this unprecedented situation, Trump is expected to appeal and both cases are likely to end up at the U.S. Supreme Court.  On top of which, Trump’s main GOP primary rivals, Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis and former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley, have declined to attack Trump with regards to any of the indictments for fear of upsetting Trump’s GOP base and thereby loosing their potential support.

Given his apparent continuing political support among the MAGA Republicans, Trump has declined to even participate in the recent candidate debates, something unheard of in Canadian politics.  When leadership conventions are held in Canada, current party leaders or aspiring party members to lead the party are required to present their platforms in front of party members as part of the voting at the party convention.  As well, open candidate debates are held prior to the leadership convention.  In the case of Trump, the other candidates are at a disadvantage since they cannot debate him in an open forum, subsequently being left to mainly attack each other in his absence.  Trump, on the other hand, has simply continued to carry out his usual style of campaigning in public and through media coverage, openly attacking his GOP rivals in his traditional style of vicious name calling and spiteful insinuations about their character.

What is even crazier, a new poll recently taken by the Washington Post with the University of Maryland indicated that MAGA has not only stuck with Trump on the questions of January 6th, but a few who even believed that he might have done something wrong at the time have now come back to his side.  Still, they apparently aren’t many.  However, Republicans loved Trump then and they appear to continue to love him now.  Nevertheless, there is little doubt that should Trump be convicted of a criminal indictment, the majority of American voters nationally, especially independents, would choose President Biden over Trump in the next presidential election.  On the other hand, polls indicate that Republicans don’t seem to care.  They’re even starting to warm to the idea of Trump serving from a jail cell, which legal experts believe is constitutionally possible.  This result would really be bewildering to say the least!

For this reason, NBC News reported in December 2023 that Trump’s campaign believes the January 6th trial was specifically timed to take him off the campaign trail at a crucial stage. They further believe that they can outsmart the prosecutors by wrapping up the primaries early.  At this time, much is up in the air when it comes to trial dates surrounding the indictments.  Observers also correctly believe that Trump doesn’t want the particular January 6th trial to happen anytime soon.  It’s pretty much self-evident that he really doesn’t want to be convicted, despite his lawyers’ assurances about an appeal.  Obviously, they further believe that should he win the election, Trump would simply pardon himself and be done with it.

Anyone, including myself, watching this “circus” from afar is left scratching their heads.  Democracy had taken a serious beating in light of Donald Trump’s ridiculous accusations that the 2020 presidential election was stolen by Joe Biden.  His continuing attacks on the judicial and democratic processes in public forum, culminating in the terrible attack on the Capitol, have resulted in major blows to the state of American democracy.  His disposition for autocratic leanings is of great concern to other democracies, including that in Canada.  In the coming months, Canadians need to more closely watch the strange situation flowing from the GOP primaries.  One way or another, the results will affect us all!

Donald Trump Joe Biden Presidential Election 2024 Republican Party U.S. Primaries US US Politics

Leave a comment »
Dec 19

Impact of Social Media on How We Perceive Foreign Wars

by bcurry

A very recent poll by the New York Times indicated that American youth are more inclined to oppose President Biden’s handling of the Israeli-Hamas conflict in Gaza.  For example, the poll noted that voters between 18 and 29 years old, traditionally a heavily Democratic demographic, jump out.  Nearly three quarters of them disapprove of the way Mr. Biden is handling the conflict in Gaza.  On the other hand, older voters were far more sympathetic to Biden’s efforts.  Fifty-two percent of registered voters 65 years and older approve of Biden’s actions on Israel, 12 percentage points more than those who disapprove.  Biden’s administration has refused to officially call for a cease fire, while pushing Israel to allow more humanitarian aid into Gaza.

In Canada, the governing Liberal Party under Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has take a more moderate stance, now calling for a cease fire to allow more aid for Palestinians into the devastated region along with the release of the hostages held by Hamas.  In either case, there is no win-win scenario for President Biden or Prime Minister Trudeau.  Pro-Palestinian protests in both countries are continuing, with a good deal of growing support on university and college campuses.  One of the main factors influencing the youth in both countries is the daily rapid access to scenes in the war zone, especially violent imagery of civilian casualties and hospital bombings, often through social media such as TikTok and Instagram.  Young people who use social media primarily to get their news find such images as being horrific and merciless. 

The same result can be seen in the Ukraine-Russia conflict.  Besides mainstream media, social media is also being used by both sides to influence our opinions of the war.  In some cases, recorded events are most likely going to be used to support allegations of war crimes against the Russian forces.  News media tends to slip between both conflicts, reporting mainly on the most significant and often horrendous events involving loss of life and mass destruction.  Everyday, terrible scenes of innocent civilians fleeing the war zone are propelled across our television screens and onto our tablets and cellphones.  At no other time in history has so much instant coverage occurred, influencing viewers and policy makers alike.  The most affected of course are young people who did not live through 9/11 or the Iraq war.

As more time goes on, the initial causes behind conflicts are often forgotten and become less important than the most recent revelations of atrocities and humanitarian crisis.  The longer the conflicts continue, support for current foreign policy positions will take a hit.  We see this among European Union countries, most notably Hungary, where support for Ukraine may be waning and opposition growing.  The same can be said for the Israeli-Hamas conflict which increasingly is turning into a broader conflict with the Palestinian population, not only in Gaza but also in the West Bank.  Israel still retains healthy allegiances in the U.S.  However, as the above noted poll indicated, the future of such sentiments is unclear.  Among young voters, 46 percent sympathize more with the Palestinians, against 27 percent who favour Israel.

There is little doubt that the opposing parties will continue to use social media in order to win over support their causes.  Especially by young people, it’s 24/7 and it’s readily accessible and most often not authenticate or corroborated.  Whether or not you think that it’s a form of propaganda, the use of social media will continue to play a very important role.

Foreign Policy Israel Justin Trudeau Media Social Media The Middle East The News Media US

Leave a comment »
Dec 12

History Has Shown That Protests On Campuses Are All Part of Supporting Free Speech

by bcurry

Recent attacks by politicians and others against the heads of major American universities resulting from conflicts in the Middle East are examples of how we confuse the exercise of free speech with that of hate speech.  They have forgotten the history in both the U.S. and Canada of incidences where students in particular have protested against a government’s foreign policy and its subsequent actions abroad.  For example, I recall in particular the student-led protests against the American government’s military operations in Vietnam and Iraq.

For the most part, protests on campuses against the war in Vietnam were peaceful.  However, they were often met with violent actions by the police or national guard, as in the deadly case of Kent State, Ohio in 1970 where four unarmed college students were killed and nine protestors and bystanders were injured by gun fire.  In Canada, student protests also happened in major cities, led by an organized youth movement against the war in Vietnam.  Protesting the war did not suggest that these students were “anti-American” in general, but reflected on their legitimate opposition to the American government’s foreign policy at that time.  There is little doubt that the growing movement became one of the reasons why the U.S. finally decided to withdraw from Vietnam, unfortunately having suffered many Vietnamese and American casualties and injuries.

The same position can be taken in the student opposition to the American occupation of Iraq.  After 9/11, in a highly emotional context, there was no doubt any opposition to President Bush’s foreign policy was viewed by the average American as being “anti-American”.  However, the initial rationale for invading Iraq was the false assertion that Saddam Hussein was behind 9/11, had ties with al-Qaeda and had “weapons of mass destruction”.  All of which were proven to be false.  Alone with a majority of students, I opposed Bush’s actions which ended up in devastating Iraq, destroying its infrastructure, promoting government corruption and severely punishing its people.  Also, the occupation upset the political balance among the Arab countries, allowing Iran to gain a greater foothold in Iraq through the Shi’a militia.  With the decision of Prime Minister Jean Chrétien, Canada fortunately did not participate with those U.S. allies who did so in the occupation.  This was not because we were anti-American, but because Canadians had varying concerns about the objectives of the U.S. government’s foreign policy at the time.  Canadian student movements and their protests reflected those concerns.

Today, it is concerns over the historical American support, both political and military, for the Israel government and its treatment of the Palestinian population of Gaza and the West Bank.  In recent years, the Israel administration has been moving more to a right-wing position, particularly under Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.  In July 2023, Netanyahu’s government enacted a major change in law to weaken the judiciary, in particular the role of the Supreme Court.  Throngs of protesters outside the Israeli Parliament and opposition lawmakers inside shouted that the change was a grievous blow to the rule of law, to the rights of citizens and to democracy itself.  The fight over the law prompted the most widespread demonstrations in the country’s history, reflecting a deeper split between those who want a more explicitly Jewish and religious Israel, and those who want to preserve a more secular, pluralist society.  In addition, the continuing growth of Israeli settlements in the West Bank and subsequent displacement of Palestinians in herding communities, often by aggressive methods, forced many to abandon their villages.  Condemned by the United Nations, the settlement issue has caused much controversy within Israel and the world community.  

While no one can support Hamas terrorism and its attacks on Israeli citizens, the fact is that for years debates have been ongoing in the U.S. and Canada over the status of the Palestinian territories.  Even the American and Canadian governments believe that there has to be a two-state solution — Israelis and Palestinians living side-by-side in their own sovereign countries.  However, Netanyahu, who is in a coalition with right-wing partners, has openly disdained the idea of a Palestinian state.  Raising these issues on campuses and the current devastating state of Palestinian civilians as a result of the Israel-Hamas conflict is not being “anti-semitic” in itself. 

Protests related to the current conflict are directed more at the recent policies of the Israeli regime and not at the Jewish people in general. Young people, and particularly students, in both the U.S. and Canada need to have a means to express their points of view, as long as they are done peacefully and are avoiding elements of hate speech and violent actions.  Just as we survived protests on campuses in the past, we will survive them today.  Simply declaring protests as being “anti-American” or “anti-semitic” doesn’t reflect the fundamental principles on which our democracies are based.  Coercion to shut down free speech on our campuses doesn’t do anything to promote these principles and would actually damage them.

Canada Israel Israel US

Leave a comment »
Nov 27

Are Emerging Office Designs Really Enough To Encourage Return to Workplaces?

by bcurry

Recently, the New York Times published articles about what the writers referred to as the new “Envy Offices”.  The U.S. Green Building Council in recent years espoused the benefits of green buildings, including environment, economic and health and community benefits.  In other studies, various office designers declared that open-plan spaces are actually lousy for workers.  Nevertheless, in the last couple of decades, employers across industries embraced creative open floor plan offices as a way to convey their culture and attract fresh talent.  However, among employees, especially introverts, open office concepts became an increasing source of frustration as the lack of privacy, noise and other distractions made it harder for workers to concentrate.

For those of us who worked in offices where the use of cubicles was common place, the biggest issue tended to be related to poor “air quality” due to inadequate ventilation systems and the resulting volatile organic compounds captured in enclosed buildings.  Such buildings constructed during the seventies and eighties were fully enclosed and pressurized due to the focus on “energy conservation” and associated costs at the time.  As a result, it became clear that such buildings have a higher percentage of workers reporting symptoms such as irritated eyes, nose and throat, fatigue, headache and respiratory symptoms.  In 2007, a U.S. survey found that one quarter of office workers perceived indoor air-quality problems in their offices, and about 20 percent reported their work performance was hampered by air quality.  Experts suspected those figures were conservative, and I fully agree.  Employing modular office furniture, space usage was given a priority whereby a maximum number of workers were squeezed into cubicles, again further reducing air quality.  The use of cubicles also reminded people of their place in the power structure, with higher-ups typically allocated more space and enclosed offices.  People would even tussle over having a cubicle near a window, especially given bad, glare producing and predominately fluorescent lighting found in many buildings.  However, with cubicle walls one at least had the perception that one had some privacy.

Subsequent to the pandemic, all that has changed.  With more employees working remotely from home and the arrival of “hybrid working arrangements” requiring workers to be in the office a specified number of days each week, employers are having to reconsider office designs.  Open office concepts may actually offer a better alternative under current circumstances given a more itinerate workforce and the need to reduce required costly work space and associated expenditures to the employer.  Mobile technologies have greatly facilitated the use of new office designs, which did not readily exist two or three decades ago and initially were very costly.

Historically, the evolution in office designs has been governed by many different considerations over the years, most related to the perceived needs of organizational hierarchies and their priorities.  This often meant that worker needs and the impact on their health and safety were often overlooked.  Studies have shown that poor office building design and poor air quality leads to poorer productivity.  For this reason, it will be interesting to see what office designers have in store for workers in the coming years.

Hopefully, employers and office building designers can learn from their past mistakes and experiences.  Today’s younger workers may not be so forgiving.  With skilled labour shortages across North America, recruitment and retention issues are even more significant.  The first thing that a potential employee will see is the building and its interior workplace design.  With more prevalent remote working arrangements available, making the office more inviting, healthy and aesthetic has become even more important.  This will help determine how one views work and one’s relationship to it.  Think about it, when it comes to today’s workplace, where and how would you want to work?

Canada Labor Force New Technologies Remote Work Remote Work US

Leave a comment »
Nov 23

U.S. Cover-up of India’s Assassination Attempt of Sikh American Citizen

by bcurry

Why is it that we are just now learning that U.S. authorities thwarted a conspiracy to assassinate a self-proclaimed Sikh separatist on American soil?  Apparently, in his most recent discussions with India’s Prime Minister Narendra Modi, President Biden issued a warning to India’s PM over concerns that India’s government was involved in the alleged plot.  It appears that the target of the plot was Gurpatwant Singh Pannun, an American and Canadian citizen who is general counsel for Sikhs for Justice, a U.S.-based group that is part of a movement pushing for an independent Sikh state called “Khalistan”.  Making matters worst, the Indian nationals suspected in carrying out the plot have supposedly fled the U.S.

The alleged plot follows the murder of Hardeep Singh Nijjar, a Canadian Sikh separatist killed in Vancouver in June of this year.  In September, Canada’s Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said there were “credible allegations” linking New Delhi to Nijjar’s fatal shooting.  According to the Financial Times, separate from the above noted diplomatic warning, U.S. federal prosecutors have since also since filed a sealed indictment in a New York district court against at least one alleged perpetrator of the plot.  According to the Times, the U.S. Justice Department is debating whether to unseal the indictment and make the allegations public or wait until Canada finishes its investigation into Nijjar’s murder.  The U.S. Justice Department and FBI declined to comment.

Now, given this recent allegation, it is surprising that no one has yet been arrested by American authorities.  After all, this would have been a case involving a “conspiracy to commit a crime” on U.S. soil.  Even though the assassination was prevented somehow, there is nevertheless the possibility of charges being laid in light of the intent to commit a crime.  In the case of Nijjar’s murder, Washington urged India to help in the Canadian investigation, but avoided being too critical of New Delhi in public.  The question now for the U.S. government is why they haven’t been more forthcoming with information about the plot and its confidential warnings to the Indian authorities, unlike the full public disclosure of the Canadian Prime Minister?

Any threat to an American or Canadian citizen on American or Canadian soil is a direct and serious challenge to our sovereignty.  What we are seeing in the Pannun case is an attempt by the American authorities to cover-up the plot for political reasons.  They do not want to upset the Indian government which, as a member of the Quad security group along with Japan and Australia, is a viewed as a critical part of a broader strategy to counter China.  However, what would have happened if the assassination plot had been successful on American soil?  This may have been a different story!

What the situation does highlight is the fact that the current Indian regime is willing to sponsor attempts at murdering any active members of the Sikh separatist movement living abroad.  Sounds familiar to what Putin is doing with respect to Russians living abroad whom he deems to be challenging his rule.  European countries, most notably the United Kingdom, have publicly and without hesitancy condemned such Russian criminal activities and placed those involved on their most wanted lists.

The Pannun case demonstrates that the alleged plot involving the murder of Hardeep Singh Nijjar in Canada was not an isolated incident.  If proven, India should be held accountable for its actions, and those responsible should be brought to justice in Canada or the U.S.  The question now is whether the Indian government will willingly agree to participating in the respective investigations surrounding these two incidents?  Both the Canadian and American authorities must continue to pressure India to do so, and to provide whatever information they may have.  Given the attitude of current regime of India’s Prime Minister Modi, this may be easier said than done.

Canada India India US

Leave a comment »
Nov 19

Issues Surrounding Remote Working From Home Continue To Surface

by bcurry

Back at the start of the 2000s, telework or remote work was in its infancy.  One American 2010 report about telework within the federal government noted that only 8.67 percent of the total eligible federal workforce teleworked in 2008.  In 2010, legislation was signed by President Obama that requires federal agencies to develop policies that allow eligible employees to work remotely and to include telecommuting options in emergency contingency plans. Several government positions — including law enforcement officers, park rangers, lab technicians, medical doctors and nurses — are exempt because of the nature of the jobs.  By 2011, a report by the U.S. Office of Personnel Management indicated that 32 percent of federal employees were teleworking. 

A 2020 study by Statistics Canada noted that approximately 4 in 10 (39%) Canadian workers are in jobs that can plausibly be carried out from home.  The corresponding estimate for the United States is 37%.  Then came the pandemic which further accelerated the move to telework or so-called hybrid work where employees are required to come to the workplace a certain number of days each week.  Physical distancing measures to stop the spread of COVID-19 resulted in a large number of Canadians and Americans working from home, many for the first time.  This sudden transition in how the economy is operating raises questions about how many jobs can reasonably be performed from home.

While governments led the way during the pandemic, private sector corporations also needed to examine their alternative working arrangements, leading as well to a significant increase in telework and hybrid work weeks.  Subsequently, there have been further studies about the impact on productivity, office space and physical location costs, employee morale, work-life balance, attrition rates, commuting times, etc., etc.  More recent studies this past year have found that remote work and hybrid work arrangements appear not to have any detrimental impact on productivity, and in some cases may actually increase productivity.  In certain cases, employers preferred the hybrid model as a means to ensuring the orientation of new employees, mentoring opportunities and simply facilitating interaction between employees and supervisors in the workplace.  In today’s tight labour force environment, some employers have promoted the possibility of remote work and hybrid arrangements as a means to attract and retain workers.

However, the growth of these alternative arrangements, which are here to stay, has resulted in major impacts on urban centers where many employers are located, especially in the downtown core.  Businesses that serviced employees while at work have seen significant declines in demand for their services in the core.  Public transit in some communities has also seen significant declines in ridership, as fewer people are commuting to work.  Those who decided to live outside the core because it was less costly in terms of housing will more than likely prefer to continue their alternative work arrangements.  Female employees in particular have been affected as they tend to work in jobs where telework can be accommodated.

All in all, there has been a major impact on the world of modern work which both the public and private sectors will have to adjust to.  What this means for the workforce has to still be further studied.  There is little doubt that employers will be experimenting with various ways in which to better accommodate their needs and those of there employees.  With the current shortages of skilled labour in both countries, they will have little choice but to adapt.

Reducing overheads, improving customer satisfaction, increasing productivity and staff retention are the core business benefits that stem from alternative working arrangements such as telework.  Furthermore, governments and firms are also starting to recognise that their environmental responsibilities can also be better addressed, with teleworking helping to decrease the ever burgeoning congestion problems and cut carbon emissions.  Everyone is affected, whether you’re an employer, employee, customer or community leader.  Remote working is here to stay in one form or another.

Canada Remote Work Remote Work US

Leave a comment »
Nov 13

Environmental Groups Cut Programs as Funding Shifts to Climate Change

by bcurry

When it comes to non-profit environmental groups, many of us are familiar with Greenpeace because of its activist actions from time to time which capture the attention of mainstream media and the authorities.  However, in both Canada and the U.S., there are numerous other lesser known groups that have concentrated on more specific environmental issues.  For example, in the U.S. you have such groups as the Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), The Sierra Club, Defenders of Wildlife, the Environmental Working Group, the ClimateWorks Foundation and the Union of Concerned Scientists.  For a long time, such groups focused on particular environmental issues such as nuclear power safety, environmental toxins, and nearly extinct wildlife or threatened species in North America.  However, in recent years there has been a significant shift in donor contributions to nonprofits fighting climate change, leaving some of the both nations’ biggest environmental organizations facing critical budgetary shortfalls in existing programs.

According to a survey released in September by the Indiana University Lilly Family School of Philanthropy, global spending to fight climate change by environmental groups and other nonprofits reached $8 billion (U.S.) in 2021, most of it in the U.S. and Canada.  Reportedly, leaders of some legacy environmental groups now largely agree that climate change, given its wide range of increasing global effects, is the top priority.  Since these organizations depend extensively on funding contributions from different sources, including from some of the world’s richest individuals, they have had to realign their goals to reflect policies and practices designed to tackle specific concerns around climate change.  This also means increasing support for government and industry initiatives promoting green technologies, including those related to solar, wind and thermo energy projects.  Even nuclear energy appears to be making a comeback as an additional means to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.  For example, the NRDC is eliminating its longstanding program promoting nuclear safety and cleanup as its donors focus on the climate crisis.

Facing unsustainable budget deficits, some of the largest non-profit environmental organizations are being forced to announce layoffs among their staffs.  This will result in the lost of a good deal of environmental expertise and program support for some time to come.  In addition, younger donors now tend to increasingly support those initiatives targeting climate change.  After all, younger people really view that climate change is the most immediate challenge affecting their lives in so many ways. 

The shift in priorities is also reflected in government policy, with climate change winning the lion’s share of some agencies’ budget increases. The number one strategic goal among declared priorities in the U.S. Environment Protection Agency’s list of seven priorities in its five-year strategic plan is to tackle the “Climate Crisis”.  The use of the term “crisis” is an important recognition of our need to focus on climate change sooner rather than later.  Interestingly in Canada, formally known as Environment Canada, the department’s name was recently changed to Environment and Climate Change Canada (ECCC).  ECCC is the now the department of the Government of Canada responsible for coordinating environmental policies and programs, as well as preserving and enhancing the natural environment and renewable resources.

Environmental groups, like governments, have no choice but to adapt their policies aimed at tackling the consequences of climate change, both short-term and long-term.  There is only so much donor funding available in both countries, and failure to adapt could result in their eventual demise.  Somehow, marketing of existing programs and policies have to be reoriented to tie into climate change issues in some way.  No organization is immune from the current shifts in peoples’ priorities in the environmental field.  Unfortunately, failure to effectively adapt could eventually mean their very extinction.

Canada Cimate Change Climate Change Climate Change US

Leave a comment »
Nov 5

What Is The Value Of Teaching “Humanities” In Our Universities?

by bcurry

For the last two decades there has been a lot written about the value of a post-secondary degree in the “humanities”.  Now, the debate has once again risen in the U.S. and Canada as a number of universities, facing budgetary declines, appear to have taken steps of cutting back or even eliminating certain humanities programs.  Part of the reason is that students increasingly are fleeing to majors more closely aligned to employment, with degrees in business and commerce being the most popular.  Let’s face it, most universities love to market career oriented disciplines.  The humanities on the other hand normally covers such programs as French, Spanish and German, American or Canadian studies, art history, classical studies, philosophy and religious studies.  In the past, such disciplines had been the bread and butter for so-called “liberal arts” colleges.

There have been plenty of arguments given for maintaining humanities programs, particularly when it comes to their ability to evoke critical thinking.  Some would argue that if you want simply to work towards a career, go to MIT or a community college specializing in employment-oriented foundations.  Camille Paglia, a social critic and professor of Humanities and Media Studies at University of the Arts in Philadelphia, was quoted in 2010 as to the value of the contemporary social science course.  Paglia argued at the time that the current trend toward hyper-focused humanities courses (Women’s Studies, African-American Studies, etc.) has eroded the overall purpose of higher education, which she noted is to provide a “broad overview and foundation for overall learning.”

In addition, it’s no secret that most universities tend to lean left, especially when it comes to teaching the humanities and social sciences.  For this reason, there has been a backlash against any form of suspected “ideology” driven teaching.  Such concerns of course don’t normally exist among business and law faculties, considered as safe havens from “leftist” ideologies as they tend to stress support for the “status quo”. 

There is little doubt that in today’s economy and labour market, students are increasingly considering more career-oriented programs in both Canada and the U.S.  After all, the high cost incurred toward certain degrees is perceived as eventually leading to good-paying jobs. Two decades ago, scholars were still confident that the availability of liberal arts would still be there in the future.  Now there are those who believe that the liberal arts, once fairly robust, are seeing a more imminent decline.  The situation certainly leads one to question the role of universities as institutions of higher learning and preserving our society’s historical, cultural and linguistic attributes.

In studying the humanities, one is given an opportunity to reflect on the evolution of a society and where it may or may not be going.  There is a real need to question so many aspects of modern society as it has evolved.  For this reason, the sheer joy of learning has to be instilled in tomorrow’s leaders, keeping an open mind to all the possibilities.  One key is the ability to quickly react to changing times and to be flexible in accepting the possibility of multiple answers and thinking outside the box.  Governments and corporations need to have people equipped in critical thinking so as to provide different ways of thinking about the issues of the day, be they related to climate change or social-economic policies.  It also helps to know how we got here!

Where are the writers and thinkers of the future coming from, if not from universities and the humanities?  Can we really simply leave our future to the engineers, programmers, lawyers and business leaders?  Back in 2010, University of Chicago philosopher Martha Nussbaum released her book Not for profit: Why Democracy needs the Humanities.  I would suggest that anyone interested in this issue take the time to read her book, especially since our democracies appear to be constantly under attack by oligarchs and promoters of authoritarian rule. 

Canada Education Education in U.S. US

Leave a comment »
Oct 22

The Power of the American Military Industrial Complex Continues to Grow

by bcurry

Lester B. Pearson, a former Canadian Prime Minister, was quoted in 1955: “The grim fact is that we prepare for war like precocious giants, and for peace like retarded pygmies.”  As you may know or not know, as a diplomat Pearson was largely responsible for encouraging the formation of the League of Nations after World War II, which in turn became the United Nations.

Former U.S. President Dwight D. Eisenhower warned in 1953: “In the councils of government, we must guard against the acquisition of unwarranted influence, whether sought or unsought, by the military industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous rise of misplaced power exists and will persist.”  As a former general during World War II, Eisenhower clearly understood the power of the military industrial complex in the States, a power that has continued to grow from this day forward.

The U.S. is the world’s biggest arms exporter.  As of last year, according to the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute, the U.S. controlled an estimated 45 percent of the world’s weapons exports.  This is nearly five times more than any other nation and its highest level since the years immediately following the collapse of the Soviet Union.  That is up from 30 percent a decade ago.

The current conflict between Israel and Hamas is just the latest impetus behind a boom in international arms sales that is bolstering profits and weapons-making capacity among American suppliers, especially with respect to Israel’s military.  The U.S. already provides Israel with more than $3 billion in military assistance every year, and Congress is now apparently being asked to increase funding to Israel to the tune of $10 billion in emergency aid due to the conflict.

Even before Israel responded to the deadly Hamas attack, the combination of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and the perception of a rising threat from China was spurring a global rush to purchase fighter planes, missiles, tanks, artillery, munitions and other lethal equipment.  Other countries such as Turkey and South Korea are also increasing their military equipment exports, giving purchasers more options at a time when production shortfalls in the U.S. mean it can take years for orders to be filled.  During the Biden administration countries such as Poland, Saudi Arabia, India, Indonesia, Vietnam, Australia, the Philippines, Singapore, South Korea and Japan have signed military equipment deals with the U.S.  Even some small Pacific island nations have done the same. Taiwan alone has a backlog of American weapons orders worth as much as $19 billion.  Canada recently signed an agreement with Lockheed, the world’s largest military contractor, to purchase F-35 fighter jets worth billions of dollars.

Economically, there is little doubt that foreign-based wars can stimulate certain sectors of a country’s economy.  One only has to recall the impact of the Vietnam and Iraq wars to witness the role of American military hardware providers who benefited from the billions of dollars spent in support of American actions in both countries.  Unfortunately, thousands of American lives were loss and thousands more were injured in these two nebulous conflicts.  Military equipment is being sold to all sorts of regimes, several non-democratic, simply to garner support for American foreign policy initiatives in their respective region.

Sadly, there are those who note that the Pentagon and the State Department are continuing to work to find ways to accelerate approval of foreign military sales to keep up with the rising global demand.  The industry has declared that the main bottleneck remains manufacturing capacity, requiring an industrial base capable of meeting these requirements.  Yes, there will always be those that argue if the U.S. industry doesn’t fulfill such perceived needs, then other countries will simply step in to do so.  Regrettably, this appears to be a winnable argument in Congress, with the military industrial complex taking full advantage at the expense of American taxpayers since it is often combined with foreign aid and foreign policy.

Arms Trade Canada Defence Economy Foreign Policy Military Prowess The Middle East Ukraine US US Politics

Leave a comment »
Oct 15

Overriding Canadian Human Rights Legislation Via Use of Notwithstanding Clause 

by bcurry

Section 33 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms is part of the revised Constitution of Canada created back in 1982.  It is commonly known as the “notwithstanding clause”, sometimes referred to as the override power and was included at the time so as to have the majority of provinces agree to the new constitution.  The clause allows Canada’s Parliament or provincial legislatures to temporarily override certain sections of the Charter when introducing new legislation.  It is unique among the constitutions of democratic countries and gives federal and provincial governments the ability to ignore most of the constitutional rights of Canadians other than the right to vote, the seating of legislatures and the House of Commons, mobility rights and language rights.  One extraordinary provision is that no explanation for such a move is required.  The U.S, Constitution gives no such powers to the states, but it does authorize Congress to remove jurisdiction from the federal courts.  However, not since World War II has Congress mustered the requisite majority to do so.

For much of our new constitution’s history, it was rarely used by provinces (the federal government has never invoked it) and was politically regarded as an option of last resort.  However, the notwithstanding clause has since been used by Alberta in 2000, and Quebec in 2001 and 2005.  In addition, most Canadian provinces, including Quebec and Alberta, have their own human rights Act, which protects people in a province from discrimination in certain areas, such as employment, accommodation, and access to services, based on specified grounds (‘protected characteristics’).  Recently in 2022, Ontario’s Premier Doug Ford of Ontario threatened to invoke the clause to take the right to strike from teachers but subsequently abandoned his plan due to political pressures and the threat of future court challenges.

More recently, invocation of the notwithstanding clause by provinces has to do with the introduction of so-called “parental rights” legislation, similar to that found in Florida and some southern U.S. states’.  Such laws primarily govern the use the preferred names and genders of schoolchildren.  In June of this year, the premier of New Brunswick, Blaine Higgs, introduced legislation which requires teachers to get the permission of a child’s parents if the child is under the age of 16.  Now the issue has surfaced again in Saskatchewan.  Following the lead of Mr. Higgs, Premier Scott Moe recently recalled his province’s legislature to introduce a similar bill.  If passed, it will mandate parents’ consent for a number of things including the use by any pupil under 16 of a new gender-related preferred name or gender identity at school.

One expert observer noted that provinces tend to use the notwithstanding clause to feed their base the idea that we’ve gone too far in human rights and that the courts have been leading us in the wrong way.  The belief is that elected officials need to capture back their power.  It’s also suggested that its use has resulted in more “wedge politics.”  Remember that introducing such legislation will take away the individual rights of those directly affected, such as in the above cases involving the rights of a child.  Psychiatrists and social workers have noted that there are potential harmful consequences of forcing teachers to contact parents regarding such matters, especially where the child may fear a hostile reaction by their parents to gender-related matters.  Where once before a child could turn in confidence to a teacher or school counsellor for information and assistance, the child may now be much more hesitant to do so.  The detrimental result may be the potential emergence of social and mental health issues.

It has been suggested that in some cases the courts might ultimately end the ability of premiers and prime ministers to preemptively set the constitution aside when it comes to human rights legislation.  This was the most recent case in Ontario over the right to strike by teachers.  Never-the-less, the concern over the use of the Charter’s withstanding clause by provinces should remain a serious concern among Canadians.  After all, who’s next to have their individual rights taken away by a government?  Where does it all end?  The continuing use of this provision will ultimately water down those protections afforded to us under both federal and provincial human rights laws.

Canada Charter of Rights and Freedoms Civil Rights Quebec's Bill 21 US

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