Kindergarten: why this is bad for kids – and for society

November 18, 2009 — xanthippa

This is not an easy explanation – please, indulge me.  I promise to make sense of it at the end.

For a century or so now, many experts have argued about what is more instrumental in determining a person’s fate:  their nature (genetic predispositions) or nurture (the environment in which they are raised).  Many experts today agree that there is some sort of a mixture of the two.  I am not attempting to determine where this balance lies:  I am simply making some observation that when very different social expectations are placed on young people, their very sense of ‘self’ – as defined with respect to society, how they belong, and so on, will be very different.  And, that these grown ups will have very, very different expectations of their role in society and the role of society in their lives.

Let me use some examples…

Imagine a life in a village.  Life is not so easy, and ‘everyone’ has to pitch in to help.

Most childcare is done through family:  depending on the birthrate, either through immediate (nuclear) family, or by extended family.  In these scenarios, the children would (usually) be in a group of 5-10 kids, either siblings, or siblings and cousins – looked after by their mother or a close female relative.  Within this group, there would be kids of varying ages:  from infants on up.  It would be unusual for this group to have ‘many’ kids of exactly the same age.

Because the kids are of varying ages, there are differing expectations placed on them:  the older ones are expected to help/be protective of/mentor the younger ones. This is very important, for several reasons.

It set up a ‘natural pecking order’ – one that was clear, obvious and acceptable:  the older kids were higher up the social ladder than the younger ones.  The expectations of them were higher – but, this went hand-in-hand with their increased prestige and social status within the group.  Yes, the kids were all expected to learn skills – from the adults, as well as from the older kids.  Not wanting to be surpassed in skills by the younger ones was an important motivator for learning and perseverance…

But, and this is perhaps most important, there were small, incremental successes.  Every time a child held a younger sibling or cousin to calm their crying, every time they would feed the younger ones, or change diapers, or teach them to throw pebbles at the birds eating the harvest, or how to make a whistle from a willow twig – this would be an accomplishment.

These accomplishments will each – taken separately – be very small.  But that does not make them unimportant!  Together, these accomplishments add up.  And

It is precisely through these small accomplishments that the person will self-define:  each one builds the child’s self-confidence, confirming their important role in their social group, giving worth to their membership in that group. It gives them a sense of ‘ worthy belonging’.

And let’s not kid ourselves – we all have a need to belong, we all feel better when we know we are needed!

Of course, if one’s skills in a particular field are great, that individual may ‘skip up’ a few rungs in the social order.  And, some societies only open specific roles to boys or girls, which may be detrimental to specific individuals.  I do not deny that, nor do I claim this system is ‘perfect’.  I simply comment on it, observing that in a small social group of children of varying ages, the social hierarchy/order is relatively easy to establish and learn for a young child, and that one’s expectations of ‘how to live and fit in’ are in accepting help/guidance from those ‘higher up’ the hierarchy, and in being protective of and being expected to help those lower down on that ladder.  This develops both a sense of worth and reciprocity towards the group, but also of empathy with the other kids who will grow up into one’s peers.

In other words, this child grows up expecting society where reciprocity is the social norm and each individual is expected to be an active participant in the giving and receiving and will have a healthy sense of self-worth and connectedness with their society.

Now, let us consider another child, growing up in a society which is structured very differently….

Parents are expected to work in a structured environment, away from home.  From an early age, children go to nursery school/kindergarten.

There, in order to facilitate ‘learning’ at ‘age-appropriate level’, they are grouped by age:  each group of 15-50 children of the same age are put together into a ‘class’ and assigned one or more ‘teachers’, possibly with several ‘assistants’ or ‘helpers’.  Thus, the adult-to-child ratio may be only slightly higher than in the previous scenario (it may even be the same), but the group itself is homogeneously composed of ‘peers’.

This sets up a very different social dynamic…

They are all peers!

There is no ‘easy’ way to establish a ‘pecking order’.

This, in itself, is rather disturbing to even young kids who generally need to understand where they fit in, socially.  Interacting with a large number of ‘peers’, introduced and maintained as equals, is not natural to our psychological development – at least, not at the age of 3-5 years!  So, this can be very, very confusing and instead of ‘age’ or ‘achievement’, social order in such a group (and there is always a social hierarchy in every group of humans) is decided by innate ‘dominance’ or ‘aggression’.

In addition, ‘mentoring’ or any attempt at ‘helping’ from one student to another is actively discouraged by the ‘teachers’ and their assistants as ‘bossiness’, ‘interference’ or even ‘bullying’ – even if it is offered with the best of intentions, in the most positive manner.

Instruction – of every student, in every aspect – is the exclusive domain of the teachers and their assistants, usually at a ‘common time’ and in a ‘common way’.  It is simply ‘not the job’ of any child to help another – and such empathy-building activity is discouraged or even punished.  Only ‘the teacher’ is permitted to ‘teach’, only ‘the teacher’ or ‘assistants’ are allowed to help!

This creates an environment where each child is a passive recipient of care and instruction.  They ‘receive’ – and are punished for any attempt to ‘give’.  Their self-worth is derived exclusively from their obedience to the adults in authority and their completion of ‘assignments’.  Even the skill level at which the assignment is completed is often not evaluated on the grounds that this would stigmatize the less-competent students and thus discourage ‘learning’:  simple obedient completion of the task, even in a sub-standard manner, in complete compliance with authority, is rewarded in todays kindergartens.

What is more – due to fears of accusations of sexual improprieties, teachers and their assistants are now (in Ontario Public School Kindergartens) not permitted to touch the students – even if the child falls down and is bleeding – beyond slapping on of a band-aid.  If the child is upset, no hug is permitted to help calm him or her down. It is truly ‘an institutional experience’!

How different an adult will this child grow up to be, from the one in the earlier example?

‘Common Sense’ is often defined as ‘everything we learn before the age of 16’.  Similarly, ‘everything we learn before the age of 5’ defines our ‘self-perception’, especially with respect to the society we live in, and our expectations of the ‘proper’ way to relate to it.

Thus, as the child who could expect protection and help from his/her older siblings/friends/family members – but who was equally expected to help and protect the younger ones – grows up, he or she is, on some sub-conscious level, expecting that in order to be good members of society, he/she needs to both take and give.  In return for this reciprocity, they feel needed and connected…they know how they ‘fit in’ – even if only on a deep, non-verbalized level.

Similarly, the child who grows up, from an early age, strictly as a passive recipient of instructions and who is expected to be rewarded for obedience, or ‘performing assigned tasks’ rather than actively interacting in a social give-and-take (often being severely punished for trying to establish a socially reciprocal relationship with other kids) has, at a deep, subconscious level an expectation that  they have to perform the minimum – and nothing beyond the minimum – designed tasks and that all else will be done for them.  This programming is so deep in the sub-conscious, it is not consciously perceived.  Rather, these are the ‘natural expectations’ children raised this way have.

At least, most of them do.

Which is why children raised in ‘kindergartens’ do not have the same perception of what constitutes their ‘self-worth’ as children raised in family or extended-family-type settings.  It is not that they are somehow bad or lazy:  just that from their earliest age, they were taught that reciprocity is punished and doing the minimum effort and passively accepting having all their physical needs taken care of is what society wants them to do.  And, being the social creatures we are, we get ‘primed’ this way – and it never even occurs to us that there is something to question….

To the contrary:  we see all people who behave in other ways as ‘needing to be punished’.  After all, when we tried to be different, to help others, to hug a friend, to be ourselves, to show we can do something better than everyone else around us – we were punished!  We were punished for ‘showing off’ or for ‘being bossy’ or for ‘not obeying’ or, just, for ‘not being passive’!

Is is any surprise that we have grown up into a generation which has strong feelings of entitlement – entitlement to be taken care of, to be passive recipients of care – and of great resentment towards anyone who tries to ‘show everyone up’ and succeeds?  And that we are not even aware that these are ‘programmed’ values, because they seem so ‘natural and ‘universal’ to us?

Yes, I have not expressed my meaning very eloquently, perhaps not even as accurately as I tried to.

Still, please, think about it….

Posted in education, freedoms, human nature, opression, philosophy, society. Tags: , , , , , . 7 Comments »

Meep! MEEP!

November 16, 2009 — xanthippa

One of the most embarrassing episodes in the history of the USA are the ‘Salem Witch Trials‘.

The very home of one of the people executed for practicing ‘witchcraft’ , Rebecca Nurse, has been turned into a museum.  It stands in today’s town of Danvers, MA, which was originally settled as ‘Salem Village’.

It seems that, once again, trouble is brewing in this quaint little town.

This time, it is not the Devil who is afflicting young people, but none other than the lovable-appearing Muppet, Beaker!

The affliction of the town’s young people – which causes them to exclaim ‘Meep!’ without provocation – has become so severe that the administrators of the Danvers High School have been forced to resort to banning the word, both written and spoken!

So, when such a posession by evil (?)  Muppet begun to sweep through the youth population (some students even said ‘Meep’ AT a teacher!), how was the school to protect the students not yet infected into channeling this spirit?  Obviously, the school had to take the strongest possible steps!  According to news reports, the school instituted a rule (clearly communicated to all parents) that any student who utters this sound ‘Meep!’, or even wears an article of clothing with the word ‘Meep!’ on it, will face expulsion from school!  Oh, and the police will be notified, too…

After all, what else could they do?  Now, even MORE young people were affected than the LAST time – and they had to resort to ‘witch trial’ and executions then!!!

Could they learn a lesson from history?

Or, perhaps, educational professionals might have some of them ‘professional educational tools’ they could employ?

…don’t be ridiculous – that would mean actually doing their job!

They did what any authority in power these days seems to think is the ‘best’ way to deal with something they don’t like:  BAN IT!!!

Of course, this hit the blogosphere pretty fast:  I read about it on Dvorak Uncensored.  They carry a quote from a lawyer who says she sent an email stating ‘Meep!’ (the address is publicly available on the school’s website, right margin) to the principal, vice principal and administrator, only to get a reply from the VP that her email has, indeed, been forwarded to the local police department….

This is serious matter:  curbing the freedom of speech of students is nothing to Tinker with!  The only circumstances – according to the US Supreme Court – that a student’s right to free speech may be abridged on public school grounds is if the ‘speech’ is ‘sexually explicit’ or if it ‘promotes the use of illegal substances’….  Of course, I am no lawyer, but, in my never-humble-opinion, the word ‘Meep!’ does not do either!

Despite the clear rules of law, the school leadership has deemed this offensive word, ‘Meep!’, to be such a danger and such a disruption, no amount of force is unjustified in getting rid of it!

Welcome to the Salem Muppet Hunt!

When I told my own kids about this situation, both my sons shouted out (simultaneously) “Reason!” and “Common Sense!”  The point being, if the teens in Danvers High switched to saying ‘Reason!’ or ‘Common Sense’ in the same manner they are now using the term ‘Meep!’, would the school ban ‘Reason!’ and ‘Common Sense!’ ?

Some clever people (sorry, I lost the link) have suggested that, perhaps, the students might stop saying ‘Meep!’, but each and every one of them could, say, accidentally drop a textbook at 10:45 each and every day…. accidents DO happen….

Personally, I think they ought to continue the behaviour, but change ‘Meep!’  sound to ‘Baaaaaaaaah!’  After all, if the school WANTS them to behave like sheep, they might as well SOUND like sheep!

Now, I did not grow up with the Muppets:  right generation, wrong continent.  But, my husband did.  And, he likes Beaker!  He has the audacity to think that Beaker, contrary to the Danvers High administrators, is not actually evil!  He asked me to send them this message (I recommend you turn the volume down – the music is seriously ‘wussy’, to the point of ‘ear-bleed-causing’, but the video does make the point):  DON’T FEAR THE BEAKER!!!

Of course, there are those conspiracy-minded folk who think that the reason that the school had banned ‘Meep!’ is because during the 2008 US Presidential election, the Muppet Show endorsed Beaker for President – against Obama-Kermit!  And that this is just political payback by Obama-Kermit cronies…  Personally, I don’t believe a word of that!  Though, if you would like adirect  confirmation that this ‘conspiracy theory’ is ludicrous, perhaps you could ask the Danvers High School principal, Thomas Murray, directly.  His email is murray@danvers.org )

All I have to say to the pedagogues of Danvers High:

TEACHER!  LEAVE THOSE KIDS ALONE!!!!

Oh, and:  Meep! MEEP!

Posted in education, freedoms, opression, politics, society. Tags: , , , , , , . 4 Comments »

Segregating boys in schools will do more harm than good

November 9, 2009 — xanthippa

A while ago, I wrote a post opposing sexual apartheid as the solution proposed to ‘fix’ our educational system.

To recap:  the ‘problem’ – as it is presented to us: there are too many female teachers, so the classrooms are geared towards ‘girl learning’ and the boys are falling by the wayside….and the proposed fix is to establish boy-only classrooms or schools, staffed preferably by male teachers, so ‘boy learning’ can take place.

On the surface of it, this sounds like a relatively reasonable solution.  One of my wisest readers/commenters, CodeSlinger, thought it might be and said so in the comments.  And, we also exchanged a few lively emails on the topic, too… because, frankly, I think segregating boys in schools will do more harm than good.

Don’t misunderstand me, please.  I agree that our education system is broken and the way it is failing is more quickly and easily visible when one looks at the ‘statistics’ of our ‘boys’…. but I think these stats are just the tip of the proverbial ice-berg.  I propose that ‘our boys’ are the ‘canaries in the mine‘ and that  moving them into a ‘canary-only tunnel’ will not help things.

Where to begin….there are so many reasons!

For the sake of the discussion (and to keep this post at least somewhat focused), let’s put aside the facts that:

  • Segregation of a specific segment of our population has never, ever, in human history, resulted in ‘a good thing’ (for the segregated segment, that is).
  • Some ‘girls’ have more ‘male’ brains and way of thinking/learning than many ‘boys’, and vice versa – and these kids would really become victims in a segregated educational system: not just of not being able to learn in the manner presented, but also through social ostracism of ‘being like the other’ which is so different, it must be segregated.  Again, boys would suffer greater damage from being considered ‘effeminate’ or ‘girlie-boys’ than girls would for being considered ‘tom-boys’.
  • A segregated system focuses on ‘gender-specific’ subjects (the expert-designed plans even boast of it),necessarily leaving out others, which denies students opportunities bef0re they are even discovered…
  • It hides the problem, instead of fixing it.
  • It is unconstitutional!  And just plain wrong, immoral and ( insert a strong derogatory word of your choice here)!

Instead of re-stating my position, I’d like to quote from an email I sent to ‘CodeSlinger’ when he – quite rightly – pointed out we must do SOMETHING to help ‘our boys’!  I wrote:

The only thing that strikes me about this is that it makes you appear a little idealistic: do you think that the very same people who have so successfully and, I think, quite intentionally marginalized boys in the integrated classrooms – and it WILL be the SAME people who will be in charge of the segregated system – do you think they will not use the opportunity the segregated system will provide them to even further damage our sons?The goal is to marginalize anyone who would have the backbone to stand up against ‘the system’. If the boys are segregated, in the name of ‘helping them’, they will be given ‘physical activity’ to help them ‘burn off their energy’, but not the skills to become educated enough to be listened to if they speak out. It will be the beginning of creating an underclass of men: either too whipped to dare stand-up, or effectively indoctrinated to think they are not competent to pay attention to anything beyond sports. It’s their nature, you see….

 

Can you see what I mean?

Do you not see how ‘segregating’ boys would be an incredibly useful way to ‘weed out’ any who have the backbone to ‘stand up’ for ‘themselves’ or for what they think is ‘right’ – to more effectively marginalize  the very people most likely to stand up to an oppressive authority?  In a society which is completely reliant on listening to ‘experts’ and pays little heed to self-taught or self-educated individuals, or people who are not academics, this would prevent any such ‘independent voices’ from being given any credence.

There has already been talk that ‘boys’ would likely ‘benefit’ if, from early on, their education were geared towards ‘trades’, because ‘boys’ are ‘better’ with ‘hands-on’ learning than ‘book learning’…

Can you not see how this would be the first step to creating an underclass?  As if my point needed further proof, one of CodeSlinger’s own links (in the comments) is to an article which sums up a Dr. Spence’s document, which he prepared for the Toronto school board to engineer these ‘all-boy-learning-environments’:

His vision document calls for a “less is more” approach to goal-setting …

How much more proof do we need that this is – whether by design or error – going to result in raising a generation of boys to be our society’s underclass?

Of course, there will be a group of boys who will be ‘protected’ from this psychological destruction:  Muslim boys. They will be the only males in our society who will be insulated from this psychological destruction from kindergarten on – and they will be the only males who will dare to speak up and affect the evolution of our society.  But, that is a different story…

Yes, our educational system is broken.

Yes, it is failing boys more than girls.

But we ought not presume that co-incidence implies causality – or, that change for the sake of change will be a good thing!  We could make things much, much worse…. and that is a gamble we cannot afford to take.  Not with our sons….

Posted in education, opression, politics, society. Tags: , , , , , . 5 Comments »

My MP’s reply to my letter

October 29, 2009 — xanthippa

A little while ago, I wrote to my MP (Member of Parliament) with some questions and concerns regarding the CHRC (Canadian Human Rights Commission).

This afternoon, I received this reply from my MP:

Thank you for taking the time to write to me with your question. I looked into it for you, and have this information from the Ministry of Justice:

· The Canadian Human Rights Commission and Tribunal are independent agencies that administer the Canadian Human Rights Act without interference from the Government.

· The Member of Parliament from Westlock-St. Paul (Brian Storseth) brought forth a motion this Parliament asking the Standing Committee on Justice and Human Rights to study the Commission’s mandate, operations, and its application and interpretation of section 13.

· The Committee adopted this motion. I look forward to the committee’s study of these issues, as well as the study of Professor Moon’s report.

With respect to the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal decision, Warman v. Lemire, we cannot comment as the matter is before the court.

Warman v. Lemire:

At issue is whether the hate messages prohibition in s.13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act is inconsistent with freedom of expression and other Charter rights, and whether the 1990 judgment of the Supreme Court of Canada in Taylor , which held that s.13 is constitutionally valid, should

be reconsidered as a result of the evolution of the Internet and legislative amendments.

On September 2, 2009 the Human Rights Tribunal ruled s. 13 unjustifiably infringed on the Charter, which guarantees the freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression.

Sincerely,

Pierre Poilievre, M.P. Nepean-Carleton

Parliamentary Secretary to the Prime Minister

and to the Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs

LP

Posted in freedoms, opression, politics, society. Tags: , , , , , , . 2 Comments »

‘Cap and Trade’ – a bedtime story (revised)

October 28, 2009 — xanthippa

Hat tip: The Reference Frame

P.S.  The original outrageous ad can be found here.

Posted in opression, politics, science, society. Tags: , , , , , . Leave a Comment »

A new voice for Freedom of Speech

October 25, 2009 — xanthippa

Before I started my blog, I joined a debating site (ConvinceMe) to improve my skills in presenting my point of view.

OK – so I never learned how not to be long-winded…but, I did meet some interesting people there, of all backgrounds, viewpoints and ages. One of them was a kind teen who went by the name of LoneWolf.  As the years went by, I have watched LoneWolf grow from a promising, idealistic teenager into a fine, responsible man.

People like LoneWolf give me hope for our future! Recently, LoneWolf has been in touch with me through another channel.  With his permission, here is a message he sent me (I inserted the links for clarity):

About the free speech arguements, great!! I have been leading a small, yet pretty effective underground within my community. Basically, anybody who feels the way America is forming is BAD for America has joined. Once I get proper funding, I’m hoping to make it into an interest group which can effectively lobby at congress and get RID of the corruption which plagues my fine country.

One of the things thats been on my mind as of late is the controversy of Obama bringing the fairness doctrine back into effect.( I don’t know if ever was in effect?) Anyway, me and a few friends got together in front of our city hall building and gave a few speeches, about the freedom of speecha nd what our founding father’s reallt intended for this country.

It amazes me that people feel that the best way to be safe is give more power to the government. Agh! I’m called a Christian Neo-Conservative because of both my religious beliefs and my political beliefs, but I’m really not. I’m actually a 18 year old male who really wants life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Call me a freedom fighter but without the violence some bring with the title. America’s first amendment does give us the right to assemble but peacefully.

Which reminds me! Did you hear about the college in Pittsburg that had a protest in which they vandalized shops to get the point across that our government was being unfair and should put caps on how much a person can make?! I was amazed at this. Sadly, I feel America is falling more and more down socialist avenue, and our new Captain, Barrack Obama, is the most ideal candidate to bring that sort of change to the fray.

When it comes to my studies, I’m at a crossroads with what to do. My biggets calling is the seminary. I love to preach and try to make the Word clear and understandable. However, I love law. I love understanding and practicing law. I would love to be a lawyer or even a judge. Then the final branch of the crossroads is I love politics. I really believe the current state of our government is full of old familiar corrupt faces that really need to get out of office. (I do in fact believe in term limits of senators and representatives). However I believe its time to put Sara Palin’s words last election campaign into action when it’s time to clear out the government corruption that has been stagnating within the government.

Anyway, I rant too much when I’m in the mood of a political discusion, but I really must be doing work so I’ll talk to you later.

Take care Xanni!

Lonewolf, or Will…(this really isn’t convinceme lol)

OK – I cannot help myself but to feel proud…even though I know the accomplishment is not mine, but LoneWolf’s.  Reflected glory, and all that…

Now that I found out that LoneWolf – I mean, Will – has started a blog of his own, I am glad to share it with you.  The opinions in it are honest, heart-felt, and well thought out – and not even a little bit cynical.

A breath of fresh air!

Without further ado, I give you ‘People For A Free America’!

Posted in about, debate, freedoms, opression, politics, society. Tags: , , , , . 1 Comment »

Pat Condell: Wake up, America

October 25, 2009 — xanthippa
Posted in atheism, freedoms, opression, philosophy, politics, religion, society. Tags: , , , , , , , , . Leave a Comment »

Race, religion and gender: the new apartheid in Ontario’s Education System

October 22, 2009 — xanthippa

This issue has me so angry, I apologize ahead of time for the inevitably undisciplined rant I am about to unleash on you!

Why?

Because MY Canada is colour-blind, when it comes to race!

MY Canada is gender-blind, when it comes to sexism!

AND – MY Canada is all inclusive, when it comes to children!!!

And, in my Canada, religious affiliation is irrelevant when it comes to judging a person’s record as a human being!   Thank you very much!

During the last Ontario election, I could not bring myself to vote for the Conservatives….  Their leader, John Tory, proposed a public education system which was fully segregated on the basis of religion!!!

The very suggestion that a child’s religion – or any other ‘protected grounds’, as per our Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, ought to determine what school that child may or may not attend is so offensive and un-Canadian that it makes me see red!

The Conservatives lost that election:  and rightly so!!!

Aside:  Of course, before the election, I emailed my local Conservative candidate (now my MPP – Member of Provincial Parliament), Lisa MacLeod, asking her if she was indeed in favour of religious apartheid in our schools.  I still have her reply:  it angered me to no end to read that if her leader said so, she totally backed it…  (Perhaps this is the source of my dissatisfaction with my MPP – the ‘first impression’ she made on me, is rooted in this blatant sell-out of our most cherished freedoms, taking our precious children and sorting them by the accident of their birth!  I cannot trust anyone who would sacrifice our children to a doctrine or political party policy!)

And now, the Liberal Premier, Dalton McGuinty, is planning to segregate our schools by sex!  You know, like they do in Saudi Arabia!!!

OK – I need to calm down.  Perhaps it’s ‘definition time’:

Apartheid:

Any policy or practice of separating or segregating groups.

A policy or practice of separating or segregating groups.

Separation, segregation <cultural apartheid> <gender apartheid>

A policy or practice of separating or segregating groups.

Do I need to go on?

Yes.  Ever since the British North American Act, there has been a religious apartheid in Ontario’s education:  one system for the Catholics, another for the Protestants.  Still, over the years, the ‘Protestant’ system has morphed and become secularized, separating the State from the Religion and keeping it out of the classroom.  The story is quite different when it comes to the Catholic system:  it has become known in Ontario as the SS – Separate Schools!

In my never-humble-opinion, the initials tell the story.  The very first public protest/demonstration I ever participated in was to protest the existence of the SS in our schooling!

Even the corrupt UN had recognized – and ruled – that the SS system in Ontario was in breech of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and Freedoms.

Predictably, the people of Ontario would not be complicit in this enslavement of our kids to their parent’s religious heritage.  The Liberals did not ‘win’ the election – as unbelievable it was that the universally reviled Dalton McGuinty could be re-elected, the Conservatives carefully and systematically LOST IT!

So, now, Dalton McGuinty (whose kids attend SS schools, and whose wife was a teacher in this corrupt system where government-funded religious indoctrination pollutes the minds of our children) is in power.  Complete control.  And, in no uncertain terms, he is instituting apartheid in our schools!  Apartheid of HIS own choosing!!!

Yes, he is very clear:  religious apartheid has no part in his plan.  That is how the Conservatives LOST EVERYTHING!!!

Instead, on his ‘watch’, we have seen the institution of religious apartheid in at least one school – a ‘pilot project’.

More like a ‘Pilate project!”

Unfortunately -yes.

Our school system now has – and enforces, as its ‘core policy’ – racial apartheid!!!

Here, in Ontario!

I wonder what would people like Martin Luther King, Jr. say about this policy of ‘Equal, but separate‘!!!

But, that is not evil enough for Black Boss McGuinty!

Now, he has decided that sexual segregation ought to become the norm in our schools!!!

OK – I had better stop now – I am just so angry, I cannot put a coherent sentence together.  Let me just say:  fixing our broken school system – but for boys only – is so evil, I don’t know where to start my chain of insults!!!  Sorry.

Still …

A person’s a person – no matter how small!!!

Or, how female!!!

Posted in atheism, education, freedoms, immigrants, opression, politics, religion, society. Tags: , , , , , , . 5 Comments »

More corporate fascism for squashing freedom of speech

October 19, 2009 — xanthippa

In my short post yesterday, Thunderf00t’s video demonstrated how easy it is for a large corporation – specifically Google, which controls how the vast majority of information on the internet is accessed – could easily collude with politicians for their own benefit…and to the detriment of us, the ‘little people’.  In addition, Thunderf00t demonstrated how, through YouTube, Google had already demonstrated that they do censor (by not allowing their search engines to ‘pick it up’ and thus making it ‘virtually dissappear’) information which is critical of them…

The desire, means and ability:  it’s all there!

Sadly, that is just the tip of the iceberg!!!

From Michael Geist:

… the Electronic Commerce Protection Act comes to a conclusion in committee on Monday as MPs conduct their “clause by clause” review. While I have previously written about the lobbying pressure to water down the legislation [to protect consumer rights] (aided and abetted by the Liberal and Bloc MPs on the committee) and the CMA’s recent effort to create a huge loophole, I have not focused on a key source of the pressure. Incredibly, it has been the copyright lobby – particularly the software and music industries – that has been engaged in a full court press to make significant changes to the bill.

…

The DRM [Digital Rights Managament] concern arises from a requirement in the bill to obtain consent before installing software programs on users’ computers. This anti-spyware provision applies broadly, setting an appropriate standard of protection for computer users. Yet the copyright lobby fears it could inhibit installation of DRM-type software without full knowledge and consent. Sources say that the Liberals have introduced a motion that would take these practices outside of the bill.

…

Even more troubling are proposed changes that would allow copyright owners to secretly access [personal] information on users’ computers.

(my emphasis and notes)

OK – let’s sum up:

Large multinational corporations are lobbying (and succeeding, with Liberal and Quebec PMs) to allow changes to the proposed  Electronic Commerce Protection Act which will permit – in the name of protecting their copyright – manufacturers of products (from video games to music CDs to just about anything else that is ‘electronic media’) to install and run programs on your computer, which would gather personal data about you and your computer use.  And, it would allow them to do it without your permission – and even without your knowledge!!!

If there really are people out there who think this is something that only concerns people who steal music or movies, please, think twice.

Do we permit the police – who, at least, are accountable to the citizenry – to wiretap our phone ‘just to make sure we are not breaking the law’?  NO!  They must prove, to the satisfaction of a judge, that there is a cause for surveillance, get a court order, and only then can they listen in.  If it ever gets to court, the police are obligated to disclose all that they have.  And, so it should be.

This lobbied-for change would, in effect, permit private corporations – who are not accountable to anyone but their own BOD and shareholders – to ‘wiretap’ your computer, monitor every keystroke, access data in every bit of memory.  Without any judicial oversight, without any requirement that they disclose the information they collected – or what it was they were collecting in the first place.

This would permit corporations to install ANY SPYWARE  THEY WANT on ANY computer… and this software could attack any program or data it deemed to be in breech of DRM.

And, you have no say in it.

Remember what happened to all those Kindle users, who woke up one day and found books they legally purchased deleted, because somewhere higher up the chain, people were bickering about digital rights?

Well, this would become the norm:  anyone who had any claim to a copyright could install software on your computer – without you even knowing about it – and if this found anything it considered breeched its DRM, it would delete it.  Even if you bought it legally.  Because if there were any dispute anywhere along the line, their ability to delete ‘the content’ would be supreme.  Really.

Is this reasonable?

Is this the fair balance of rights?

And if you don’t think this is happening already, you are wrong!

Even Canada’s Privacy Commissioner, Jennifer Stoddart, warns of the impact these changes would have to the privacy rights of Canadian citizens:

Technological advances hold out the promise of greater convenience, but sometimes at a cost to human rights such as privacy and the ability to control our personal information.

Meanwhile, governments and businesses have a seemingly insatiable appetite for personal information.

Governments appear to believe – mistakenly, I would argue – that the key to national security and public safety is collecting mountains of personal data. Privacy often receives short shrift as new anti-terrorism and law enforcement initiatives are rolled out.

Personal information has also become a hot commodity in the private sector. Our names, addresses, purchases, interests, likes and dislikes are recorded, analysed and stored – all so companies can sell us more products and services.

Adding to our concerns is the fact many businesses fail to adequately protect this sensitive information – leaving it vulnerable to hackers and identity thieves.

And if you thought THAT was not enough….

This idea has been ‘rumbling about’ for a few months, but recently received publicity when Eugene Kasparsky openly stated that each internet user should have an internet passport.  This would, presumably, document their every click and keystroke, which could then be monitored through increased internet regulation.  I dare reach this conclusion because Mr. Kasparsky also said that there must be no anonymity on the internet, and any country which refuses to regulate and monitor its citizens should be cut off the net.

Oh, and this should all be enforced by ‘internet police’!

I’d like to change the design of the Internet by introducing regulation—Internet passports, Internet police, and international agreement—about following Internet standards. – Eugene Kaspersky,
CEO of Russia’s Kaspersky Lab

OK – this idea is radical now.  You may shake your head and say this will never be possible.

But, 40 years ago, did anyone think that, once accused, the ‘truth’ could not be used as ‘defense’?

Posted in opression, politics, society, technology. Tags: , , , , , , , . 3 Comments »

Just imagine all the … oppression?

October 14, 2009 — xanthippa

We are used to being able to display our political views on our property.  During elections – municipal, provincial or federal – we are used to being able to display a sign on our front lawn, or in our window, which proudly proclaims which candidate we are supporting.  One election, my in-laws each supported a different candidate:  and proudly displayed two political signs on their front lawn!

Now, imagine a place where doing this:  displaying your political views (either on your front lawn or inside your window) would earn you a $10,000.00 per day fine… and 6 months in jail!  Plus, the police would have the power to come onto your property, inside your home, and remove the ‘offensive’ sign.

Where is this place?

Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada – 2010!!!

We are used to being able to protest – publicly – for or against any cause or issue.  Sure, we ought to get a permit and obey rules of public order.  That is the civilized way to do it.  A government has the right to regulating the ‘HOW’ – but only in the respect that the protest does not interfere with public order and safety (like, say, shoving your kids into the middle of a busy highway, to make your point…).  It does not, and MUST NOT, have the right to regulate THE SUBJECT of any protest.

Now, imagine a place where all protests regarding a specific subject were 100% banned!  A place where people were forbidden to express a specific, non-violent, non-hate-mongering point of view!  Where any expression whatsoever which contravened the ‘official line’  was forbidden.

Where is this place?

Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada – 2010!!!

Any and all signs (including private ones!) which ‘do not celebrate’ the Olympic Games are banned.

Any protest which might mar the festivities is banned.

Any commercial ‘in, on or above’ the official venues – but whose sponsor had not paid the incredibly high IOC ‘sponsorship’ extortion money (and, they only allow for one ‘sponsor’ in a particular field:  if you are a small, local business – how will you compete with the multinationals?) … any such sign is, predictably, banned.  (Consider a scenario where you have two restaurants in one building:  one sells Coca-Cola, the other a small, local gourmet-made-in-small-batches Cola – and both have neon signs advertising their beverage of choice.  If the business below became ‘official venue’ of the Olympics, because ‘their’ drink became the ‘official sponsor’, that business would be allowed to display their signs and attract customers.  The business above would be forced to remove or cover up their sign (at their own expense) and would not be allowed to even try to attract customers….  Some law!)

Oh, and just in case you were wondering, non-IOC approved ‘voice amplification equipment’, from private boomboxes to megaphones, are – banned.

These are the rules which the International Olympic Committee (IOC) is imposing on Vancouver while it is hosting the 2010 Olympic games!

Oh – and while they’re at it:  they have exclusive ownership of such specific words like ‘winter’ and ‘2010’ !

OK – I have been a very vocal critic of the Olympic Games.

For a long time, I have ranted on and on that this abomination ought to be abolished.  And, prior to the Bejing Olympics, I have written about it.  Now that they are being held in Canada, I have not changed my mind.  To the contrary:  I wish this corrupt and corrupting organization stayed out of my country!

In addition to my objections to the Olympic Games on that  whole unbelievable institutional corruption basis, I also object on the grounds that it degrades sports and diminishes the spirit of sportsmanship.  Sports are supposed to be about being healthy:  healthy body, healthy spirit and all that.  A balance in life.

Yet, today’s top athletes push their bodies way beyond the point of what is healthy!  In their attempt to be the best of the best, athletes do thing to their bodies (both legal and illegal – but, I am focusing on the ‘legal’ bit here) way past what is actually healthy or good.  From microfractures in many bones – including the spine (like, say, gymnasts whose pursuit of Olympic ideals delays even the onset of their puberty by years, if not a decade…a summer sport, true, but it is just the tip of the iceberg) which spell a future racked with arthritis to pushing their tendons and muscles well beyond their healthy limits.  In a very real sense, we have taken what ought to be a healthy hobby and turned it into a self-destructive, government-funded job.  No more, no less…

And as for sportsmanship….please, don’t make me laugh!

It is no longer about a friendly sports game!  Winning is now a matter of national pride!  How many medals a country wins – or looses – somehow becomes a measure of the whole nation’s worth! No, not how they treat each other, not how well they treat and educate their kids, not how good their economy or how excellent their science programs.  No.  These things no longer matter.  In a very real way, Olympic athletes are turned into weapons in a war!

But, those are not the reasons for this particular rant.  No, my fear here is about something much, much greater than some public funding of private hobbies or glorification of physical self-mutilation…  I speak of nothing less than our freedom of speech!

The IOC – an organization which has, over and over and over, been demonstrated to be corrupt to its core – is now in charge of what free citizens of a supposedly free country may – or may not – express!  On their private property, none the less!

If I am still not making myself as clear as I ought to (and, I do know that is my weak spot), let me approach it from a different angle…

Some people have experienced how the ‘Patriot Act’ south of our boarder had, in the name of security, taken some serious ‘liberties’ with the American citizens freedoms (pun intended), as guaranteed them in the US constitution, see how the ironically named Human Rights Commissions are trampling over real human rights in Canada (and other places, too), and  fear that ‘governments’ are a serious threat to our freedoms in general, freedom of speech in particular.

Others have pointed to the oppressive copyright laws – the ones which treat all consumers as criminals, before any evidence is even gathered – and other corporate ‘protections’ will be the greatest  threats to our freedom of speech and expression to us in the future.  Frankly, I agree with this point of view:  the evidence is overwhelming…

In the Olympic Games, the worst aspects of both of these are rolled into one:  there is a political body which is suppressing all opposition to itself, silencing all criticism of it.  At the same time, this same political body had sold exclusive rights for commercial activity and advertising to a select group of large multinational corporations and is willing and able to persecute any and all small businesses (or, indeed individuals) who refuse to submit to its ‘regulations’.

There is a word which defines collusion of government with big business in order to control the marketplace and silence opposition.  That word is fascism.  By definition.

And I, for one, do not want any fascism in Canada!

UPDATE: Canadian Centre for Policy Studies launches Free Speech petition:

We the undersigned call on lawmakers at all levels of government in Canada to: A) Examine all legislation within their jurisdiction intended to protect and promote human rights, and

B) To amend said legislation to remove those provisions that prohibit or otherwise limit the free and sincere expression of opinion.

(via BCF)

Posted in freedoms, opression, politics, society. Tags: , , , , , , , . 2 Comments »
« Older posts
Newer posts »