Politics, Canadian Politics, Technology, Social Issues

Archive Page 4

16
Jul

Podcasting: Toronto News on ITunes

Thanks to the Internet, waiting for the latest news is a thing of the past. Most credible web news sites provide RSS feeds and are updated 24 hours per day, allowing important stories to propagate across the entire web in mere minutes. The resulting consumer desire for immediacy and the wide availability of internet connections has presented a challenge for traditional media like newspapers (which are forever condemned to slow periodic releases) and television (which precludes fast searches for specific content). Many major news services in Canada have attempted to bridge the gap between old and new media via podcasting, releasing creating just-in-time audio and/or video broadcasts of news content for download onto IPods and alternative MP3 Players. Apple’s Itunes contains one of the largest collections of free audio and video news content – perfect for making that daily trip to work just a little more pleasant.

CBC leads the way for Toronto and Canada with a comprehensive selection of weekly, daily and even hourly news podcasts. Provincial, national and international programs are available for download as well as specialty programs like Quirks & Quarks and The Hour (the latter provided in video format) Music fans will be happy to hear that several Classical, Jazz and Pop music programs from Radio 2 and Radio 3 are also available for download, though some require a modest fee (most likely to keep CIRA quiet).

CanWest Global provides a worthy alternative to CBC for more conservative listeners. Its Global TV news station provides a daily video podcast of the 6:00 news. The catch is that the news segments are posted the morning after the TV broadcast, so avid watchers may not gain from this content. For editorial content, CanWest’s National Post newspaper offers two podcasts - Full Comment and Posted Toronto. Full comment topics are usually political and patterned around editorials on the Full Comment section of the NP website. Posted Toronto deals strictly with GTA matters and uses an informal talk radio format. Both NP podcasts are approximately weekly.

CityNews provides a daily web-only podcast with rotating news presenters. Unfortunately, the podcast is rarely longer than five minutes and contains no sports, weather or entertainment.

The Toronto Star provides several weekly special-interest podcasts. John Sakomoto’s Anti-Hit List takes on added relevance when one can actually hear the music being described, while Linwood Barclay manages to be more entertaining audibly than in print. YouDoc podcasts are less than two minutes long and offer quick health tips that straddle between info and advertisement. The auto racing podcast features decent speculation and debate but probably would have packed more punch in video format. Strangely, the Star doesn’t offer any news or editorial content, despite being Canada’s most prominent newspaper.

At the rear the pack, Sun Media appears to have no ITunes presence at all, while a search for the Globe and Mail revealed only one discontinued tech podcast. This is surprising considering the Globe was one of the first newspapers to allow user comments on its web content while the Toronto Sun’s columnists excel more than any other paper at covering local issues. Hopefully these two entities join the podcast party soon.

15
Jul

Empty Controversies

The New Yorker, known for its satire in both words and illustration, seems to have crossed a critical line with a recent issue’s illustration of Barack Obama and his wife Michelle.

The illustration shows Obama clad in the traditional Muslim garb giving a fist tap to a rifle slinging Michelle New Yorker Illustration of Barack Obama(presumably dressed to look like a member of the Black Panther Party). The couple smiles devilishly while an American flag burns in a nearby fireplace underneath a portrait of Osama Bin Laden. Titled “The Politics of Fear”, the controversial magazine cover has ignited debates across the nation concerning what’s in poor taste. Both Obama’s camp and Republican rival John McCain’s camp denounced the sketch as offensive.

It must be asked – why the outrage? Surely, with a title like “The Politics of Fear” it should be clear that The New Yorker’s real target is the ignorance among Obama’s detractors rather then the politician himself. Animated TV shows like South Park and Family Guy have thrived making similar light of human prejudices, mostly without incident. Moreover, a president Obama would surely expect to be targeted by unflattering cartoons likely to attack everything from his inexperience to his unusually large ears – without any context belittling the intelligence of his detractors.

Got Milk?

The second Obama-related controversy this week concerned comments by archaic political pundit John McLaughlin:

On the edition of the syndicated program The McLaughlin Group that aired the weekend of July 11-13, while discussing recent comments made by the Rev. Jesse Jackson about Sen. Barack Obama, host John McLaughlin said: “Question: Does it frost Jackson, Jesse Jackson, that someone like Obama, who fits the stereotype blacks once labeled as an Oreo — a black on the outside, a white on the inside — that an Oreo should be the beneficiary of the long civil rights struggle which Jesse Jackson spent his lifetime fighting for?”

Again, controversy erupted over McLaughlin’s use of a slur against blacks accused of acting white. Once again, the context of the question is lost amid the concentration on the words – McLaughlin was indirectly referring to Jesse Jackson’s recent off-air-yet-on-air tirade at Fox News where he berated Obama for “talking down to blacks” and states the desire to “rip his nuts off”.

If you happen to be black and have done more than one of the following…

  1. Enjoyed music not found in the “Urban” section of the record store
  2. Written an essay in proper English that did not deal with oppression or slavery
  3. Spoken several consecutive sentences deemed coherent by the average Kiwanis Club member
  4. Refused to beatify any black poorer than yourself as the epitome of cultural legitimacy

then there’s a strong chance someone has called you can oreo and/or sellout behind your back, if not to your face. Blacker-than-thou hyperbole is a staple in black intraracial political debates (one poster at black political blog Booker Rising made quite a reputation for himself by referring to myself and anyone else to the right of Stokely Carmichael as boot-licking uncle toms ready to re-sell ourselves into slavery to win the affections of the massa’). John McLaughlin was simply stating in plain words what is frequently implied of the half-white Obama’s refined persona and his propensity to appeal to white audiences rather than demonize them.

The Easiest Route to Presidency - Martyrdom

Both of these so-called controversies are mostly noise and the Obama camp knows it. Their swift reaction, along with the terse reaction from high-profile supporters seems designed to draw his opponent into a losing debate. The McCain camp -often expected to deal in race identity politics to energize to their southern and Evangelical base- were wise to quickly distance themselves from the New Yorker image, which could be taken literally by the less intelligent among our southern neighbors to be literal commentary. Had the Republicans not distanced themselves from the implications, swing voters could revolt via voting for Obama just to prove America is not a nation of knuckle-draggers.

Alas McCain did not take the bait and will make every effort to avoid being drawn into a racial debate. Most of the sniping seem so far has come from conservative partisans and entertainers, with most of it being no more serious than harping on Obama’s highly cosmetic relationship with Rev. Jeremiah Wright (who was summarily dismissed once Obama needed to appeal to a different audience) and constant iterations of his full name: Barrack HUSSEIN Obama. Get it? Hussein? Like Saddam! Obama’s middle name proves his ties to radical Islam and points to a secret vendetta against America!

Sadly enough, some people actually buy that reasoning. Thus, one can’t blame Obama for attempting martyrdom.

08
Jul

Nova Scotia - Dixie Digby

That pesky word that activists like -alienation- comes to mind:

Nathaniel Fells, 19, and William Drummond, 20, claim they were leaving a bar after closing time when Fells noticed a group of men beside a large vehicle.

The van was filled with off-duty officers from out-of-town RCMP detachments, Halifax Regional Police and other Nova Scotia police forces who were in town for a charity golf tournament.

But Fells said he didn’t know that.

He said when he and Drummond looked toward the van they heard someone yell a racial slur.

“I heard someone say ‘What are you looking at, n……?’ “

Recall Nova Scotia is the home of Africville, that black settlement that was legislated and underserviced out of existence by the fine people of Nova Scotia. Old habits die hard. Acknowledging that this post may get me into trouble with a few good friends in blue (who hopefully remain so going forward) …

Observations:

  • It’s futile to complain about lack of respect for the law when the law chooses to show no respect for civilians. I’ve seen this first-hand in Central America and the United States - once the police prove themselves untrustworthy and unprofessional they simply become another group of combatants in the eyes of most civilians.
  • This is hardly a convincing argument for black youth to put down the guns - in fact some clever activist may attempt to legitimize the practice as a form of 60’s-style self-defense. Given the higher volume of native/police incidents, it’s surprising that native youth haven’t armed themselves more. Perhaps these “politically correct” efforts to diversify police forces aren’t quite as useless as some would have us believe?
05
Jul

Afrocentric Schools: A Further Perspective

The issue of Black-focused schools took Toronto by storm just under a year ago and culminated in the January 2008 decision to establish Afrocentric educational institutions in this city. The first such school is set to open its doors in the fall of 2009. Nonetheless, the controversy surrounding the subject is far from over. Proponents claim that by employing a preponderance of Black teachers and emphasizing African (and Afro-Caribbean) history and culture in the classroom, these schools will raise Black students’ marks and lower the high dropout rate among them, which currently stands at a troubling 40%. Opponents on the other hand have likened Black-focused schools to the racially segregated educational systems of pre-Martin Luther King Alabama or South Africa before the abolition of apartheid (of interest, one contributor to the White Supremacist site Stormfront praised the creation of Afrocentric schools on the grounds that if Blacks could have a school all to themselves, so could Whites). In reality Black-focused schools in Toronto , Canada cannot be equated to the “separate but equal” schools of the Old South or the separate but openly unequal ones of South Africa under apartheid. No Afro-Canadian student would be forced to go to a Black-focused school, and Whites would be welcome to attend as well – though it’s hard to imagine too many White or other non-Black parents enrolling their children in such a school. To my mind, however, the most important question about Black-focused educational institutions is not whether they amount to segregation but whether they will achieve their stated goal of improving Black students’ academic performance and helping them stay in school.

Of course it’s too early to tell whether or not Black-focused schools will manage to meet the above-mentioned objectives. On the positive side, if the (presumably Black) teachers there are truly committed to helping the Black community and encouraging its youths to get an education, perhaps these schools really can make a difference in the lives of their students. Hopefully they will do so by focusing on the “basics:” English, math, sciences, French and so on. I am not saying that teaching students about African history is wrong – as I stated in a previous essay, I believe all children, including Whites, should learn more about non-European history than they presently do at our public schools – but I feel that Black students should first and foremost acquire the skills they will need to further their education and succeed in the so-called real world.

I admit to being somewhat sceptical of the argument that being taught by teachers of their own race will boost Black students’ marks because they (the students) will identify more with them than they would with a White educator. There does not seem to any overrepresentation of teachers of East Asian descent in Toronto ’s educational system, yet in terms of grades, high school graduation rates and post-secondary enrolment East Asians appear to surpass even Whites. On the other hand, for an Afro-Canadian child born to a teenage mother on public assistance in a neighbourhood plagued by drugs and violence, a teacher of his or her own race may be the only positive Black role model he or she ever sees on a regular basis. Such a child may thus be motivated to emulate the educator in question and remain in school.

Now for the bad news: I worry that students at an Afrocentric school may fall in the grips of what has been called the “Black peer group.” According to psychologist Judith Rich Harris, many Black kids neglect their studies because they are taunted by their peers about “acting White” if they apply themselves in school. She cites a study done in Germany involving children fathered by American soldiers during World War II. Half of the fathers were Black, the other White. Contrary to the notion that Blacks were genetically inferior to Whites, the mulatto children showed no difference on intelligence tests from their unmixed White peers. Harris speculates that the former children lacked a Black peer group because there were never enough of them at any one single school, so they didn’t feel pressure not to “act White.” I have to say that my nephews, who are biracial (their father is Black; my sister is White), are A students – and I can’t rule out the possibility that this is because they identify more with their White than their Black side. So perhaps in a Black-focused school Afro-Canadian children and teens would be more likely to experience this pressure than they would at a school with a more racially mixed student population.

Again, it is impossible to predict what the outcome of Black-focused schools will be. I personally suspect that in and of themselves they will not have much effect either way on Black students’ academic achievement. The outcome also depends on the type of students who enrol in them. If they consist of children who are sent there as a “last resort” because they are failing in the mainstream system, obviously the schools’ rankings will reflect this through lower grades. On the other hand, a student population made up of children of academically oriented parents who feel a Black-focused education is the best way for their sons and daughters to succeed will enhance the school’s performance. Hopefully a study on the matter in the next ten years or so will help answer this question.

02
Jul

Dual Citizenship: A Two-Sided Issue

The question of dual citizenship in Canada is somewhat of a controversial one. While at the moment it is not the hot-button issue that Black-focused schools or same-sex marriage is, the matter continues to rear its head from time to time. For example, many people have asked whether the federal government should have spent $85 million to evacuate approximately 12,000 Canadian citizens from Lebanon during that country’s conflict with Israel in the summer of 2006. A number of these citizens had not lived in Canada for years, but by virtue of their Canadian passport they were provided with free transportation out of the war-torn nation. To add insult to injury in the minds of many, a considerable proportion of the evacuees eventually returned to Lebanon .

Suggestions poured in as to how to prevent similar situations in future. One radio talk show host said that Canadian citizens living outside the country should be required to pay a $500 fee upon renewing their passport every five years. If they failed to do so, they would lose the privileges that possession of the passport entitled them, such as rescue from disaster zones at no charge. Some Conservative members of government talked about abolishing dual citizenship (this proposal was vigorously opposed by Liberal Member of Parliament Mario Silva, who has among other things spoken out against the rule that no Catholic can marry a member of the British royal family).

Dual citizenship is an issue of interest to me personally. My mother is an American citizen and Canadian landed immigrant. When my parents came to Canada in the late 1960s (they met in California but moved to Ontario because my father found a job here) they were not sure whether they would stay in this country or go back to the United States . They figured that in the event of the latter it would be good to have at least one American citizen in the family. As at the time neither Canada nor the States permitted dual citizenship, my mom remained an American (my siblings and I are trying to convince her to sit down and fill out the paperwork to become Canadian, but we joke she’s too lazy to do it).

By dint of my family background, if I wanted I could be a citizen of the United States . Doing so would allow me to migrate there more easily and, even if I remained where I am, vote in that country’s elections. However, neither possibility appeals to me. Not only are my chances of ever leaving Canada extremely remote at present, but I see little point in electing a government of a nation in which I don’t reside and whose political decisions will have no effect on my life. Furthermore, I question the fairness of giving my vote equal weight to that of an individual who actually lives in the US and contributes to it through his or her taxes, labour, volunteer efforts, and so on.

I do not necessarily advocate eliminating dual citizenship. Still, I believe we must address some issues surrounding it. For instance, should people who have ceased to reside and pay taxes in Canada for years be automatically granted free rescue services in times of crisis, as happened in Lebanon two summers ago? Such questions will probably never be resolved to everyone’s satisfaction (and I myself don’t claim to have all the answers), but they nevertheless deserve to be asked.

30
Jun

Movie Review: Off the Chain

Title: Off the Chain
Release: 2005
Genre: Documentary
Run Time: 52 Minutes
Studio/Publisher:
Bobby J Brown
Rating: 73%

The American Pit Bull Terrier has become synonymous with viciousness and danger in North American culture. Once admired as intelligent family pets and used to advertise a variety of products from phonographs to children’s clothing, Pit bulls are now associated with fatal human attacks and the shadowy world of dog fighting. The latter has spawned the equally controversial derivative industries of pit bull supplies and Pit Bull training, as well as a fierce sect of activists dedicated to pit bull rescue and fighting the growing number of laws blindly restricting the ownership of Pit Bull Terriers.

A Pit Bull Terrier Lunges at the CameraOff the Chain is a graphic hour-long documentary detailing the origin and evolution of both the dog breeds collectively referred to as “Pit Bull Terriers” and their human admirers. The film begins with a historical overview of the use of bulldogs for bull baiting, a popular form of British entertainment during the 18th and 19th centuries. Once England banned the practice, dog vs. dog fights were arranged and Bulldogs were subsequently bred with Terrier breeds to produce the Pit Bull family.

The documentary follows the migration and breeding of the American Pit Bull Terrier, its short-lived status as an all-American dog and eventual decline into violent status symbol. In the latter [present-day] stage, the film-makers give equal air time to the breeders who engage in dog-fighting and the activists / police who oppose them.

The dog-fighting participants wear disguises and defend their activities as sport. After proclaiming his love for the breed, Dog Man Tucson – a participant in and strong advocate of dog fighting as a sport - explains in detail the ad-hoc surgeries dog owners perform on injured pit bulls. Dog training, which begins with the mild baiting of baby pit bulls, can be as innocuous as treadmill exercises or as extreme as standing on a dog mid-fight or filing teeth to a sharp point. Steroid injections have also become popular among breeders, though even the breeders in the film admit that it is easy to damage or kill the dog by administering the shots improperly.

The mid portion of the film is extremely gory and will not appeal to most viewers. Hidden camera video clips of fatal fights and post-match executions are interspersed with still shots of dead and mutilated dogs.

Dead Pit Bull Terriers discovered during a raid on a pit bull fighting ringFortunately, Off the Chain moves beyond the carnage to explore the fascination with and motivation for dog fighting. Most people correctly identify the macho aspect of Pit Bull ownership – having the baddest dog on the block can be good for street cred. However, money seems to be a greater motivator for dedicated breeders - American dog fighting events take place in remote or secluded areas, charging entries fees between $20 and $50. Owners have waged upwards of $500,000 on a single match (which can be as short as 5 minutes) while tournament-winning dogs can provide further revenue through breeding. Dog fighting is a billion dollar, worldwide industry with a mild level of social acceptance in Mexico, Japan and Italy. The latter nation’s matches can take place in an arena with a seated audience dressed as though they were attending an opera.

The last word goes to the Pit Bull activists, who challenge the “love” professed by the pit bull trainers and detail their efforts to adopt the [very few] rescued dogs who represent a minimal risk to society. The featured advocates (including Pit Bull Rescue Central) offer recommendations on curbing malicious dog training such as breed-specific, graduated licensing for dog ownership.

Off the Chain requires a strong stomach to watch and will not be to everyone’s taste. If there is a bias in the film it is against the dog fighting industry, but observing the brutal training and disposal of young pit bulls makes pure objectivity impossible. Watch with caution.

15
Jun

The Duggars and the “Full Quiver” Movement

In September 2004 the Learning Channel ran a feature on the Duggars, a family that at the time had fourteen children. In the four years since, the Duggars have added three more children to their brood (and expect another in January 2009) and appeared on a number of other television shows, including one as far away as Italy . The family has captured the popular imagination, bringing on themselves praise, criticism, and plain interest.

First of all, who are the Duggars? The family consists of a father and mother - Jim-Bob and Michelle - and ten sons and seven daughters. The children range in age from one year to twenty and include two sets of twins. All the kids’ names begin with the letter “J:” the name of one girl, “Jinger,” is pronounced as “ginger” and does not rhyme with “singer” or “ringer.” The entire clan lives in Springdale , Arkansas , where the children are home schooled by their mother. Though on account of their family size they are often thought to be either Mormon or Catholic, the Duggars are actually Baptist. They do not attend a church in the community however but practise what is called “home churching,” with religious services held in their own house.

Michelle and Jim-Bob did not originally set out to, as one commentator put it, create their own baseball team. When they first married, Michelle took the birth control pill. They had their first child, a boy named Joshua, four years later. Afterwards Michelle went back on the pill but got pregnant anyway and miscarried. Upset, she and her husband came to believe that the pill was actually an abortifacient and had caused the loss of the fetus. They then resolved to let God decide the size of their family and stopped using contraception altogether. The rest is history: they now have a total of seventeen children, one more on the way, and two dogs.

The Duggars are part of a trend called the Quiverfull movement. Members of this movement have, like the Duggars, decided to leave their family size up to God and thus avoid contraception. They oppose induced abortion as well. They cite the Bible’s Psalm 127:3-5 in support of their choice: “Lo, children are an heritage of the LORD: and the fruit of the womb is his reward. As arrows are in the hand of a mighty man; so are children of the youth. Happy is the man that hath his quiver full of them: they shall not be ashamed, but they shall speak with the enemies in the gate.” They have sometimes been described as more Catholic than the Catholics, as the Catholic Church, while at least in theory against artificial birth control, allows so-called natural family planning, which Quiverfull adherents also reject. The only protection from pregnancy “full quiver” women would get is that afforded by breastfeeding, which is not foolproof past about six months (Michelle Duggar herself mentions in an article in Parents Magazine that she was pregnant and nursing a child at the same time). The Quiverfull, most of whom live in the United States , are not a denomination in themselves but generally belong to various Protestant fundamentalist churches.

I have read a great deal about the Duggars and watched them on television. My feelings about this family generally run on the neutral to positive side. Though I myself would not have seventeen kids, what is right for me might be wrong for somebody else and vice versa. The family seems to be very close and loving and the children extremely well-behaved without being “little robots.” Their closeness is shown by the fact that even when they moved to a larger house the girls and boys still chose to stay in a single room respectively. The Duggars are not collecting any money from the public purse (I am not against welfare per se in the case of, for instance, a mother of preschoolers who leaves an abusive husband and cannot pay for day care, but I do consider it irresponsible to deliberately have children while on social assistance). Nor despite their religious fundamentalism are the Duggars “holier than thou:” for example, in her Parents article Michelle states that her life is not for everyone.

Some things I am less comfortable with about the Duggars: their “buddy system,” whereby an older child is given responsibility for dressing, feeding and otherwise helping a younger sibling. Some believe the job of taking care of the kids should fall to the parents themselves, not a brother or sister. In theory, I agree – though the Duggar “buddies” claim not to mind this role and though such a situation could arise in a two-child family as well. I also wonder whether the parents have enough time to spend with each individual child. Of course one might state that what the children lack in parental attention they compensate in time with their siblings. Moreover, look at how many kids in small families today are starved for their parents’ attention because the latter are too busy doing other things or are spaced out on alcohol or drugs. I am not saying that the buddy system or the reduction in one-on-one time is wrong; perhaps I am just projecting what I would want for myself and my own family.

How do I see the Duggar family theologically? Within my own denomination, there is a group of Lutherans known as the Laestadians (after their founder, a man named Lars Laestadius) who eschew modern forms of birth control. Most of them live in Scandinavia, particularly Finland . They frequently have big families, sometimes over ten children. Interestingly, Laestadian children appear to be very well-adjusted. A study in the journal Acta Paediatrica found that Finnish children in 10+ families had a lower rate of psychological problems than their peers with fewer siblings. Thus a large family size per se does not seem to hurt children.

As I stated above, the Duggars and other Quiverfull followers cite Psalm 127:3-5 for their decision to shun contraception. I personally don’t believe that verse necessarily implies that all couples should choose to have as many children as they are physically capable of having. It must be remembered that in Biblical times children were prized for reasons typically not held today. More children guaranteed the survival of the nation of Israel at a time when war, famine and epidemic diseases threatened its numbers. In a largely agricultural society, kids also could contribute to the family economically by doing chores on a farm. Some pro-choice advocates point out that the Bible never mentions induced abortion directly. However, this does not mean that the Israelites condoned the procedure. Rather, abortion probably was not widely practised by Hebrew women because they had great motivation to have children. (Note: in my opinion the Bible on its own can’t really be used to justify either a pro-life or pro-choice position.)

While I myself would never follow the Duggars’ path, I respect them. I find it ironic that some people who talk about a woman’s right to have an abortion, use birth control, not have children at all, etcetera, are not always so tolerant of women who make choices like Michelle Duggar’s. From what I hear about the Duggars and read about big families in journals like Acta Paediatrica, the Quiverfull folks aren’t spawning a bunch of delinquents or psychopaths. Their children in some ways seem to enjoy more love, structure and concern than average from their families. So I think the Duggars and the Quiverfull movement as a whole are a force for good in today’s society.





Further Research




Categories


Archives