Wednesday, March 2, 2016

Whores, bitches, and fucking, Part 1 of 2



Whores. Bitches. Fucking... Without those words you just couldn't talk about about the Manitoba provincial election today.

Well... you could have. But it would have taken some effort.

For you see today a candidate for the Manitoba Liberal Party, Jamie Hall, had some old sexist tweets sent to the media and he responded to them. Want the details? Want more drama in your life? Want to have a slightly better understanding of what I'm blogging about? Then take a look below, and better yet actually read the CBC.ca article that has more details.




Twitter's great for having things taken out of context but from what the CBC article dug up it there's some fishy stuff there. I mean, those tweets above are awful. Like even the comedy part is awful let alone the needless "whore" references". The book seems weird to me, too, but then again.... I haven't read it. I'm not going to go into further detail on this since I just don't know the details but Hall appeared before reporters today and faced some tough questions. Watch:


Meanwhile, NDP's star candidate Wab Kinew's own use of sexist language drew attention as the Liberals pointed out that the pot was calling the kettle black. Apparently, while he was a rapper, around the same time as Hall's tweets, he called women "bitches" and "whores". This was when he was 30 and an admin at the U of W.

But that of course is different than Hall's tweets because.... well because Kinew changed his ways and started speaking up about MMIW and wrote down his apology in a book that he wrote before he started trying to be a politician. Well, either that or he knew it was going to be a problem and would-be politicians need to get image manicures every so often. I'm going to embed a bunch of tweets (there's like twenty) below because I think it raises some good points. The tweeter is conservative but if you comment on this please deal with the arguments not personal attacks.


















I have more thoughts on this and want to do it justice in wrapping it up so I'll finish this up tomorrow. Til then, thank you for reading (and possibly getting pissed off, since this is a contentious topic).


Posted by at No comments:

And one more thing (on Trump)



He's starting to transition from someone campaigning ultra right in the primaries to someone who has an interest in winning the general election. The good news is it gives credence to the idea that he's not as stupid and racist as he's shown while appealing to Republican primary voters. The bad news is that he's a political chameleon more than willing to do those things, an establishment outsider, and up against Hillary Clinton who may be in for a hell of a fight against Trump.





"Anyone but Trump".... "Never Trump"... "Make Trump Drumpf again" (ugh....) and still he wins. Those campaigns probably help him in a way. The plot thickens.




Posted by at No comments:

Monday, February 29, 2016

Beware the foul fiend



What if being disgusted by Donald Trump isn't nearly enough?

The very question has the assumption we Canadians often fall prey to, which is that what we think about American politics matters at all. It's a nice "from the sidelines" thought exercise for a people that just chose the establishment party - and chose it big time - in their last election. But hey - it's fun!

Anyways, the question at the top is spurred by a Rex Murphy take on Trump that I found quite thought-provoking and on point. In it he acknowledges that Trump is a dangerous, "easy answers" candidate but also that he is born out of a political system that has been failing for years. If you haven't watched it yet, check it out below:




From Rex Murphy's take:

"Donald Trump is a real threat to "rational, measured political action." Deploring him is the easy part. Seeing him as a clown, a dangerous one, as an opportunistic, hyper-rich, egotist, all-mouth-little-brain and easy conscience can make everyone feel good and superior.... The rise of Trump-ian style and the failure of normal politics are one."

I wonder, just what the "failure of normal politics" he describes might be? The first point Rex raises is money. Obama spent a billion dollars. Every election goes to the candidate who spends the most money. Politics are controlled by those with money. Probably the best imagining of this is by Bill Hicks, who figures politicians do what they're told. Worth a listen for the first minute or so:



But money ain't all. Politicians' lying is being seen less and less as something that's okay to let slide with a wink and wag of the finger. It's becoming revolting to pretty much everybody but especially the American demographic that supports Trump. Sure, if they see Trump as The Honesty Candidate they're allowing themselves to be duped, but Trump's straight-shooting style has resulted in some pretty cool moments of substance, be it telling a room full of potential Jewish donors he didn't think Israel always bargained in good faith to openly declaring that politicians can be bought - because he's bought them before. This door was opened by a political system that was more than willing to lie to the electorate.

One subject that likely motivates many Trump supporters is race... and I'm not sure how to address this one. Trump has been more than happy to express racist sentiments against Hispanics and Muslims and that undoubtedly wins him fans. At the same time he also does not have a Mein Kampf on his resume and - to me at least - seems to be spouting the racism or allowing the allegations to linger as a sort of dog-whistle to get and keep attention. In a wonderfully friendly and thoughtful society these actions would have ruined him. But they haven't. A large segment of the population apparently agrees with what he has said, or will at least give him a break because he's telling it like it is. Okay, it would be really crappy if he became the next Hitler but I don't think Trump is a racist (or the next Hitler for that matter). Frankly I'm surprised Trump didn't blast the KKK as only he could. Wouldn't it have won him some legit respect for the general election?

I'll need to stop it there for tonight. Basically the thought that sticks with me is that Trump didn't emerge out of nowhere. If people felt that politicians acted remotely in the interest of the people, if there was a healthy debate on issues that mattered to people - even if it's difficult, like race - then he probably isn't running away with the Republican nomination.

There are forces far more powerful than Trump at play, which is the actual reason to be afraid of his success. He's not the next fucking Hitler but the signs are there that the human soul continues to be open to one, as it always has. A people that feels embarrassed economically, disrespected or threatened globally, and ignored by their leaders will act in surprising and potentially ugly ways. And we have always allowed the state to use violence. Which is why being disgusted with Trump isn't enough. The narratives that he is responding to are what must be defeated.... and that doesn't seem easy at all.





* * * * *


PS: Extra special bonus from The Golf Channel. Trump as prez: good or bad for golf? (Actually)



Posted by at No comments:

Sunday, February 28, 2016

Top 10 Twitter Tweets of the Week



I'm a pretty big fan of Twitter. It's my favorite website by far and it has a lot of good content. The internet is a wonderful place.

Speaking of good content, here's some that I've collected from other people and put together in this blogging first: a Top 10 Twitter Tweets of the Week. So here we go. In no particular order but numbered so you can tell I'm not screwing you over, trying to get away with just nine or something.

Full disclosure: apart from the animal videos and general funny .GIFs I also really dig what's called "weird twitter". It makes me laugh a lot. Naturally there will be some of those mixed in to something like this.

Anyhow, here goes!


10.


9.
8.


7.

6.


5.

4.


3.


2.


1.




Posted by at No comments:

Saturday, February 27, 2016

There wasn't much of a U.S. Army at the beginning of the Civil War




As I've read about the U.S. Civil War, one of the things that struck me was how both sides were creating armies out of scratch, essentially.

It is noteworthy just how unprepared America was to fight a war... even one against itself. Sure, Americans had guns and knew how to use them, and had just eighty years before beaten off the British in their War of Independence. But they were nowhere near being any sort of military power. They distrusted standing armies, keeping only the tiniest numbers of soldiers employed - around 16,000, spread out in forts near the Indian territory. They had created the military training academy of West Point, but that produced perhaps a few dozen soldiers a year.... and those men were expected to be engineers building public works during peace time.

When the Civil War broke out that needed to change... but they were almost starting from scratch. Men were excited and wanted to be soldiers and almost immediately the States, North and South, were flooded with volunteers and were creating more regiments than they were asked for. They had to buy guns from Europe since most of the guns in America were fine for hunting but obsolete as far as military use goes. There were no officers so they were often elected from among their peers, or they were appointed by the State's political leaders. Neither of these ways of getting officers are in any way good.

Basically, I marvel that each side was able to raise an army and actually make it fight. Men and guns were two key ingredients, but required an incredible amount of materials and a system of supply to actually make it an army. Both sides raised armies of a little over 100,000 men at first. It took 600 tons of supplies each day for an army that size, plus well over 35,000 draft animals, and apparently the horses and mules had a life expectancy of only a few months. Little known fact: the need to get uniforms for all these men is when standard sizes were born - before clothing would have been homemade or otherwise tailored by hand.

Nowadays it seems ludicrous to imagine America as anything other than an armed-to-the-teeth military power.... but it definitely wasn't back then. That was a more recent development. One that wouldn't take hold until the Second World War. Even then, most soldiers were volunteers. The large, professional U.S. Army would only happen recently during the Cold War. It'll probably be a thing until soldiers get replaced with robots.
Posted by at No comments:

Friday, February 26, 2016

The forgotten contentment of a good Happy Hour





I'd just like to share a simple pleasure with you that I think we forget about, a lot of the time: the after-work beer at the neighborhood pub.

I ended up doing it two times this week, both times after working at my dad's accounting office, helping him get T4s completed and out the door. The first time I was hanging out with my brother who had a few days in between stints up North working on the census. The second time was my girlfriend and another good friend. It's good to catch up with people you care about and there's something nice about doing it after work.

Both times I was there early, sat down at one of the big wooden tables, put my phone away, and just... drank a beer. Nice and slow.... cue the beer commercial!

Ha... I think there is something that psychologists would back me up on here, which is the benefits of having a "third place" - be it for socialization or contemplation - between work and home. A lot of time we can move from one work area, where we make our money, to another, where we prepare our food, do chores, etc. The neighborhood pub (or coffee shop, etc) fills a need then. And "after work" occupies a cool space temporally: it's not really at a time that we will schedule in advance like our evenings or afternoons... or creates a transition point from "working" to "now my time is for me".

Anyways, this was something that I remembered this week. And remembering simple pleasures is a thing quite worthy in and of itself, and good for our mental health, too.
Posted by at No comments:

Wednesday, February 24, 2016

Thoughts on the Middle East's Reformation




So profound and disruptive are the changes or growing pains experienced in the Middle East right now that many believe the best historical comparable is none other than the Protestant Reformation. That is not a good thing. At least in the short term.

If the Protestant Reformation is only a vague memory from school years past then we may be forgiven for remembering the Reformation as a quaint time of religious hipsters wanting to "do church a little more local" and cool priests posting their ideas on rustic solid wooden doors that their also cool friend reclaimed from another older, church.

So... anyways. The Protestant Reformation was well over one century of chaos, violence, and new religious ideas. If you were to attribute the cause of the Reformation into one idea, it would be Luther's famous solo scriptura which meant rejecting the central interpretations in favor of direct study of the Bible by local churches and individual parishioners.

This would lead to an enormous struggle between the Catholic Church and the splintering Protestants. There would have been economic, political, and historical aspects to the civil war that ensued as well, but it was certainly a religious war... which are always the messiest. And it was long, too. Martin Luther posted his 95 Theses in 1517while one suitable enough end point for the period is the end of the Thirty Years' War in 1648... 131 years. Read the excerpt below and see how easy it would read today replacing a few words with Shia, Sunni, Iran, Saudi Arabia, etc:
Initially a war between Protestant and Catholic states in the fragmenting Holy Roman Empire, it gradually developed into a more general conflict involving most of the great powers of Europe, becoming less about religion and more a continuation of the France–Habsburg rivalry for European political pre-eminence.
The more you read about the Reformation, the less comforted one feels about the Middle East, at least for the next few generations. Huge religious societal shifts in thinking can take a very long time and be very violent. 30% of Germany died in the Thirty Years' War alone; deaths were in the tens of millions. Finally, though the Reformation ultimately led to positive change in Europe there is no guarantee that what is going on in the Middle East will leave the society better off.

Some questions to think about:

1. When was the "95 Theses" moment for the current reformation? Tunisian uprisings? Birth of Wahhabism in the late 18th century?
2. The world now is far more connected. Does that affect things? How did unaffected neighboring countries behave toward the conflict in Europe?
3. If both reformations can be viewed as a "return to scripture" does it matter that the two books in question are different?


Sources:

http://www.meforum.org/4740/islam-protestant-reformation
http://www.christianpost.com/news/how-isis-is-similar-to-the-protestant-reformation-140470/


Posted by at No comments:
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)