Thursday, December 31, 2009
Monday, December 28, 2009
Sunday, December 27, 2009
Canada warms to idea of a tougher ‘perimeter’ –Star Dec. 27th
[Letter to the editor]
And it’s about time. The days of defining ourselves as “not American” belong to another era.
We Canadians have always been ambivalent about our relationship with the US – a kind of sibling rivalry with our bigger brother to the south. We pretend that our “culture” is different and must be protected –at any cost. We worry about being swallowed up by the huge entity south of our borders, all the while selling them everything from soup to nuts; and hollering “uncle” when they balk at buying our stuff, as in “Buy American”; or put an import duty on our lumber export. We often act like spoiled brats, wanting all of the benefits but none of the responsibilities that go with a fair, neighbourly relationship. We gladly take the protection the American can give us, as long as they don’t step on our “toes”, or as we say, “sovereignty”.
Prime Minister Harper had that one right: “Threats to the Unites States are threats to Canada”. Let’s take our fair share of the burden of defence; we are two democracies with much in common, both economically and culturally. A common defence perimeter and an open border is a good start.
Yankee gun boats off Newfoundland? What about Portuguese and Spanish trawlers cleaning out the cod on the Grand Banks? Guns flowing northward –who are we kidding? They are flowing now, nay, it’s more like a torrent.
If Europe, with its many languages, different cultures and history of wars can get together with a common border and currency; should not we, North-Americans, with a common language ( mostly) and history, manage to do as much? What do you think would happen to us if Americans really closed the border? They can do without us –we cannot do without them. Sell more to Europe? Trudeau tried that and failed miserably, and he did not even have the European Union to contend with. Get real, Canadians; remember the old adage “you cannot have your cake and eat it too!” Be grateful that we have a strong, peaceful neighbour to mollycoddle us and let us have our vaunted Medicare and social safety net, while giving pittance in return.
And it’s about time. The days of defining ourselves as “not American” belong to another era.
We Canadians have always been ambivalent about our relationship with the US – a kind of sibling rivalry with our bigger brother to the south. We pretend that our “culture” is different and must be protected –at any cost. We worry about being swallowed up by the huge entity south of our borders, all the while selling them everything from soup to nuts; and hollering “uncle” when they balk at buying our stuff, as in “Buy American”; or put an import duty on our lumber export. We often act like spoiled brats, wanting all of the benefits but none of the responsibilities that go with a fair, neighbourly relationship. We gladly take the protection the American can give us, as long as they don’t step on our “toes”, or as we say, “sovereignty”.
Prime Minister Harper had that one right: “Threats to the Unites States are threats to Canada”. Let’s take our fair share of the burden of defence; we are two democracies with much in common, both economically and culturally. A common defence perimeter and an open border is a good start.
Yankee gun boats off Newfoundland? What about Portuguese and Spanish trawlers cleaning out the cod on the Grand Banks? Guns flowing northward –who are we kidding? They are flowing now, nay, it’s more like a torrent.
If Europe, with its many languages, different cultures and history of wars can get together with a common border and currency; should not we, North-Americans, with a common language ( mostly) and history, manage to do as much? What do you think would happen to us if Americans really closed the border? They can do without us –we cannot do without them. Sell more to Europe? Trudeau tried that and failed miserably, and he did not even have the European Union to contend with. Get real, Canadians; remember the old adage “you cannot have your cake and eat it too!” Be grateful that we have a strong, peaceful neighbour to mollycoddle us and let us have our vaunted Medicare and social safety net, while giving pittance in return.
Friday, December 25, 2009
BEING FOREIGN
When I first arrived in Canada in 1960, I was sometimes called a DP. This was an appellation attached to European refugees, or "displaced persons", which I was not. Being young and with little command of the English language, it went "over my head."
As a European , I did not face the cultural shock that today’s immigrants from places such as Asia face; but I was still in a strange land with a different language, foods and customs. I too, felt a disconnect between the old and the new country’s culture.
Though the pull of the “old country” waned as time went on, I still had the feeling of being a foreigner, even as I integrated with the culture and language of my chosen home. I travelled “back home” less and less often, especially after my parents died, and old friends died or moved away. I began to feel like a tourist in my own country, a sense of not belonging there, while at the same time I felt more “Canadian” –although there was still a piece missing; that of my childhood in the “old country”.
My connection with other expatriates became less frequent as my identification with native Canadians grew stronger. Yet, there was always that “missing link” of childhood experiences, a kind of duality that still lingers; a feeling of them, instead of us. Yes, as a “willing foreigner”, with extended family “back home”, I could have returned. I chose not to. After many years away, you cannot go back again; the adjustment would be too great; the roots in the new country too deep.
Of course, Canada is a kaleidoscope of cultures and races, so no one needs to feel like an outsider in this happy human alphabet soup. However, immigrants of all kinds will always be a little schizoid; with one foot planted in the new; the other tentatively in the old. In my case, this was especially wistful, as I lost my Norwegian citizenship when I bcame a Canadian citizen in 1965. Norway does not recognize dual citizenship, so I had no choice if I wanted to fully partake in Canadian society. Most Norwegians here retain their Norwegian citizenship, leaving the door open for a return, even after years of life in Canada. I sometimes resent it when I hear these people critizise our government, yet they do not care enough to become citizens.
The first generation of immigrants, no matter how integrated, must live with the dichotomy of “being foreign” it in all its many manifestations, theough they might have little or no connection with the country they left.
In the end, what's important is not whence you came, but where you are going.
As a European , I did not face the cultural shock that today’s immigrants from places such as Asia face; but I was still in a strange land with a different language, foods and customs. I too, felt a disconnect between the old and the new country’s culture.
Though the pull of the “old country” waned as time went on, I still had the feeling of being a foreigner, even as I integrated with the culture and language of my chosen home. I travelled “back home” less and less often, especially after my parents died, and old friends died or moved away. I began to feel like a tourist in my own country, a sense of not belonging there, while at the same time I felt more “Canadian” –although there was still a piece missing; that of my childhood in the “old country”.
My connection with other expatriates became less frequent as my identification with native Canadians grew stronger. Yet, there was always that “missing link” of childhood experiences, a kind of duality that still lingers; a feeling of them, instead of us. Yes, as a “willing foreigner”, with extended family “back home”, I could have returned. I chose not to. After many years away, you cannot go back again; the adjustment would be too great; the roots in the new country too deep.
Of course, Canada is a kaleidoscope of cultures and races, so no one needs to feel like an outsider in this happy human alphabet soup. However, immigrants of all kinds will always be a little schizoid; with one foot planted in the new; the other tentatively in the old. In my case, this was especially wistful, as I lost my Norwegian citizenship when I bcame a Canadian citizen in 1965. Norway does not recognize dual citizenship, so I had no choice if I wanted to fully partake in Canadian society. Most Norwegians here retain their Norwegian citizenship, leaving the door open for a return, even after years of life in Canada. I sometimes resent it when I hear these people critizise our government, yet they do not care enough to become citizens.
The first generation of immigrants, no matter how integrated, must live with the dichotomy of “being foreign” it in all its many manifestations, theough they might have little or no connection with the country they left.
In the end, what's important is not whence you came, but where you are going.
Wednesday, December 23, 2009
“Creba killer was police tipster” –Star Dec.23rd
“Valentine was raised by his single mother, Marcia, in the Jane-Finch area.” This could be the standard epithet for all young, mainly black criminals in the Jane-Finch corridor, and perhaps also Regent Park. But, it’s not endemic to only Toronto; it is a problem in many North-American cities, such as Chicago. Even Barack Obama made reference to the young black men who take no responsibility for their offspring. Perhaps he should have included the mothers, who go along producing children who will grow up without a father, live in poverty and frustration; without hope and social station. They face an identity crisis which is usually only abated by joining violent gangs. In fact, it’s almost a requirement for survival in their circumstances.
In some cases, immigration hopefuls marry a Canadian citizen and stay just long enough to produce a child and obtain landed status; in other cases they are homegrown sperm donators, and in most cases, the result is youth without purpose, guidance and social mores.
The solution is not more money, more social programs or more police. This problem can be solved only by the community itself, accepting responsibility; and by educating the parents in social norms (socializing). Otherwise, we will only perpetuate the vicious circle. “Political correctness” encourages social blinders that prevent proper intervention and change in behavior patterns.
In some cases, immigration hopefuls marry a Canadian citizen and stay just long enough to produce a child and obtain landed status; in other cases they are homegrown sperm donators, and in most cases, the result is youth without purpose, guidance and social mores.
The solution is not more money, more social programs or more police. This problem can be solved only by the community itself, accepting responsibility; and by educating the parents in social norms (socializing). Otherwise, we will only perpetuate the vicious circle. “Political correctness” encourages social blinders that prevent proper intervention and change in behavior patterns.
Sunday, December 20, 2009
Saturday, December 19, 2009
Youth and moral relativism
In case you're worried about what's going to become of the younger generation, it's going to grow up and start worrying about the younger generation.
--Roger Allen
What do the ravages of time not injure? Our parent’s age has produced us, more worthless still, who will soon give rise to another vicious generation.
--Horace; 65-8 BC
The older generation has always complained about the younger generation, from time immemorial. A certain amount of rebellion is normal as the young are finding their own stride. However, if we have infused them with good values, mores and beliefs while young, this should help them get through the rebellious youth without too much damage; and develop their own independent character and personality.
Today there are more diversions and choices, good and bad, for young people. The drug culture is a problem today as it was for the earlier generation, and it is getting worse, with more dangerous drugs and more general acceptance of it.
There are, as I see it, two diverse problems our society faces with the young today, and both are largely caused by bad parenting:
First, there are the spoiled brats; the product of over - parenting. The child is coddled and overindulged; over- managed and overprotected, and they come to think of themselves as the centre of the earth. As a result, they show little respect for others, including adults. If disciplined at school, the parents spring to their defence, whether or not they deserve defending. And these are just the good parents.
I recall a young man I had hired as a salesman for my firm. It was his first “real” job, and he was not cutting it. I had several talks with him, trying to steer him in the right direction, but I finally had to let him go. He was rather upset, and told me that his father had died a couple of years ago while taking him to a ball game, and he now felt that I had a duty to assist him, as a mentor; to help him becoming a success, since he was fatherless. I should mention that this was not a young man form a poor family; he lived in a upper class neighbourhood, Lorne Park, in a large house, and his mother was a business executive. This young man had a high sense of entitlement and of expectations –of me.
Second, at the other extreme are those whose parents don’t care; like some the children of single mothers who have no time for them. One of my young workers told me that when he was growing up, he had a new “father” each year.
What runs through much of these families are a serious lack of morals and mores, with parents who themselves are operating in a moral vacuum. Our society is one of entitlement and rights, without the concomitant responsibilities and social commitment. When leaving the nest, the child is bewildered and confused; lacking direction and goals. This hits home, in particular, to the poorer who often drop out of school early, but the upper classes also often get their wings clipped in the world of work.
Our generation, the baby-boomers, started this downward spiral. It might have to be up to the next generation to discover that moral values and a sense of duty are worth having. The chickens are coming home to roost, and the present severe recession is only the harbinger of what to come if we don’t come to our senses.
What people today lack is a sense of shame. A sense of shame is generated by a cohesive community with common mores, and is policed by the community by shaming (and even shunning) the offenders. It is an effective in censuring and restraining the culpable. What we lack now is a community with common mores and practices. We are bombarded with news about politicians and sports heroes who commit the most outrageous acts, both criminal and amoral, often with impunity. What we are developing into is a relativist society –moral relativism –where everything goes as long as it does not directly hurt another person. Without a clear moral beacon, young people are navigating in the dark; and when they flounder, there is no one to hold then to account, and it is someone else’s fault that they fail.
The disdain of a cohesive moral society is a stronger control of behaviour than any police force can muster. It’s also much cheaper. It’s a shame we don’t do more shaming.
--Roger Allen
What do the ravages of time not injure? Our parent’s age has produced us, more worthless still, who will soon give rise to another vicious generation.
--Horace; 65-8 BC
The older generation has always complained about the younger generation, from time immemorial. A certain amount of rebellion is normal as the young are finding their own stride. However, if we have infused them with good values, mores and beliefs while young, this should help them get through the rebellious youth without too much damage; and develop their own independent character and personality.
Today there are more diversions and choices, good and bad, for young people. The drug culture is a problem today as it was for the earlier generation, and it is getting worse, with more dangerous drugs and more general acceptance of it.
There are, as I see it, two diverse problems our society faces with the young today, and both are largely caused by bad parenting:
First, there are the spoiled brats; the product of over - parenting. The child is coddled and overindulged; over- managed and overprotected, and they come to think of themselves as the centre of the earth. As a result, they show little respect for others, including adults. If disciplined at school, the parents spring to their defence, whether or not they deserve defending. And these are just the good parents.
I recall a young man I had hired as a salesman for my firm. It was his first “real” job, and he was not cutting it. I had several talks with him, trying to steer him in the right direction, but I finally had to let him go. He was rather upset, and told me that his father had died a couple of years ago while taking him to a ball game, and he now felt that I had a duty to assist him, as a mentor; to help him becoming a success, since he was fatherless. I should mention that this was not a young man form a poor family; he lived in a upper class neighbourhood, Lorne Park, in a large house, and his mother was a business executive. This young man had a high sense of entitlement and of expectations –of me.
Second, at the other extreme are those whose parents don’t care; like some the children of single mothers who have no time for them. One of my young workers told me that when he was growing up, he had a new “father” each year.
What runs through much of these families are a serious lack of morals and mores, with parents who themselves are operating in a moral vacuum. Our society is one of entitlement and rights, without the concomitant responsibilities and social commitment. When leaving the nest, the child is bewildered and confused; lacking direction and goals. This hits home, in particular, to the poorer who often drop out of school early, but the upper classes also often get their wings clipped in the world of work.
Our generation, the baby-boomers, started this downward spiral. It might have to be up to the next generation to discover that moral values and a sense of duty are worth having. The chickens are coming home to roost, and the present severe recession is only the harbinger of what to come if we don’t come to our senses.
What people today lack is a sense of shame. A sense of shame is generated by a cohesive community with common mores, and is policed by the community by shaming (and even shunning) the offenders. It is an effective in censuring and restraining the culpable. What we lack now is a community with common mores and practices. We are bombarded with news about politicians and sports heroes who commit the most outrageous acts, both criminal and amoral, often with impunity. What we are developing into is a relativist society –moral relativism –where everything goes as long as it does not directly hurt another person. Without a clear moral beacon, young people are navigating in the dark; and when they flounder, there is no one to hold then to account, and it is someone else’s fault that they fail.
The disdain of a cohesive moral society is a stronger control of behaviour than any police force can muster. It’s also much cheaper. It’s a shame we don’t do more shaming.
Saturday, December 12, 2009
Prisoner issue turns into dangerous test of wills –James Tavers in The Star, Dec.12th.
I am disappointed and chagrined to see the Afghan prisoner transfers problem turn into another political standoff in our Parliament. Prime Minister Harper seems to have a penchant for brinkmanship, but this issue could become a constitutional debacle.
We are at war in Afghanistan, and these things happen in war. If an error was made, it can be corrected for the future, without using it as a political football. Talk of an inquiry is as foolish as is Harper’s intransigence. It ought to be possible for men of good will to resolve this tempest in a teapot and get on with solving real problems.
We are at war in Afghanistan, and these things happen in war. If an error was made, it can be corrected for the future, without using it as a political football. Talk of an inquiry is as foolish as is Harper’s intransigence. It ought to be possible for men of good will to resolve this tempest in a teapot and get on with solving real problems.
Wednesday, December 9, 2009
Tuesday, December 8, 2009
Millions wasted in welfare programs –Toronto Star, Dec.8/09.
Dalton McGuinty and his fellow Liberals are leaving a trail of ill conceived projects and mismanagement of the public purse. Following such scandals as eHealth and the OLGC, we now have waste and fraud in its welfare system (Community and Social Services Ministry), and sloppy management of other areas of responsibility.
While governmental waste is nothing new, McGuinty’s government, which came in with promises of responsible and honest government, seems especially prone to financial missteps and carelessness in managing its economic affairs. While expanding the civil service, it has relied excessively on overpaid consultants in many of its agencies, while picking the consumer’s pockets with the harmonization of the PST/GST.
I am not implying that Premier McGuinty is dishonest. I am saying that he is a poor manager. He needs to demand better performance and greater accountability from his Ministers, and the various agencies that seems to be doing their own thing without much accountability.
While governmental waste is nothing new, McGuinty’s government, which came in with promises of responsible and honest government, seems especially prone to financial missteps and carelessness in managing its economic affairs. While expanding the civil service, it has relied excessively on overpaid consultants in many of its agencies, while picking the consumer’s pockets with the harmonization of the PST/GST.
I am not implying that Premier McGuinty is dishonest. I am saying that he is a poor manager. He needs to demand better performance and greater accountability from his Ministers, and the various agencies that seems to be doing their own thing without much accountability.
Monday, December 7, 2009
John Stuart Mill vs. Michael Ignatieff
I am reading, with much enjoyment, a biography of John Stuart Mill. I particularly enjoyed the chapter on his time in the British Parliament ( 1865 -1868 ).While he was not the Liberal party leader ( Gladstone was ), there is much our current Liberal leader could learn from his trials and tribulations as a new MP. His erudition and fame as an intellectual, while helping to elect him, was no advantage, as he was criticized for his “superior tone”, “too clever for this house” and lamented by newspapers as the “lost philosopher”.
He soon found his stride, however, and left us with some memorable quotes, viz. after being taken to task for a derogatory statement in his Representative Government, he rose in the house and said:
What I stated was that the Conservative party was, by their own constitution, necessarily the stupidest party. Now, I do not retract this assertion; but I did not mean that Conservatives are generally stupid; I meant, that stupid persons are generally Conserative.
Where is Mill now that we need him.
He soon found his stride, however, and left us with some memorable quotes, viz. after being taken to task for a derogatory statement in his Representative Government, he rose in the house and said:
What I stated was that the Conservative party was, by their own constitution, necessarily the stupidest party. Now, I do not retract this assertion; but I did not mean that Conservatives are generally stupid; I meant, that stupid persons are generally Conserative.
Where is Mill now that we need him.
Saturday, December 5, 2009
An American in Italy, guilty of murder –The Star, Saturday Dec.5th
Amanda Knox, in a drug, alcohol and deviant sex frenzy, took an active part in the killing of her roommate Meredith Kercher. Only the killer’s identity was ever in question, and is now, beyond reasonable doubt, established.
I find it incongruous that the American media, in unison, are excoriating the Italian court, police and society in general, while defending and excusing the accused and now convicted killer. Little is heard about the victim and her family, and their pain caused by this evil trio.
I cannot but think how this story would have played out if the “shoe was on the other foot”; if an Italian citizen had murdered an American girl. The press would no doubt be then extolling the fairness and impartiality of the American justice system, after which they would find her guilty and sentence her to death.
I find it incongruous that the American media, in unison, are excoriating the Italian court, police and society in general, while defending and excusing the accused and now convicted killer. Little is heard about the victim and her family, and their pain caused by this evil trio.
I cannot but think how this story would have played out if the “shoe was on the other foot”; if an Italian citizen had murdered an American girl. The press would no doubt be then extolling the fairness and impartiality of the American justice system, after which they would find her guilty and sentence her to death.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)