We have a Centralized Government where all the Governing powers are CENTRALIZED in key centers - Victoria for the Provincial Government and Ottawa for the Federal Government. Concentrating the power of Government in these centers greatly disenfranchises the CITIZENSHIP from their own Government.
It is this CENTRALIZATION of the Government that encourages the West vs East in our Federal Government, where the West feels that its interests are not represented by the Federal Government. Even in the Provincial Government being centered in Victoria the citizens of the province feel that the larger populated areas are the only concerns of the Government - one needs to live in the Lower Mainland to have their interests considered by the Government.
This CENTRALIZATION of our Government is only beneficial to the Politicians and the Bureaucrats. It is easier to keep control over the Government when it is Centralized in this manner and the Bureaucrats can all be centered in the more popular centers. The average Citizen becomes so removed from the Government that they do not see any REAL connection with the Government, it becomes some sort of a different entity that has little or no connection to them.
In order to bring DEMOCRACY to our Government we need to DE-CENTRALIZE the Government. We need to bring the power of Government to a more LOCALIZED form, where the CITIZENS can actually partake in their own Governing.
Tuesday, November 1, 2011
Sunday, October 30, 2011
Citizen's Assembly
The last two posts talks about Minority Governs and the issue of Electoral Reform. In these discussion was mentioned the creation of the Citizen's Assembly. I want to focus on this idea of a Citizen's Assembly.
The idea of forming a Assembly of regular Citizens with a variety of ages and a mixture of politically aware and political novices to focus on a social issue is awesome. To have the findings of such a Assembly put before the CITIZENSHIP in a referendum is truly DEMOCRACY in ACTION. In order for such Assembly to truly work there can be no POLITICIANS OR BUREAUCRATS included in the Assembly, the members must have a true representative of the young, middle age, and the elders and a true mixture of experience.
Such a Assembly would do more than to deal with social issues, it incorporates the CITIZENS in the actual GOVERNING of our society. It could function in much the same way as Juries are selected. Such a system would go along way in the general public reclaiming their social governing, it goes to OWNERSHIP of our governing system. Currently the general public only have a vote every 4 years and 40% of the public do not even vote then. The general citizenship does not feel a true part of or have any real affect on our GOVERNMENT. This type of Assembly will go along way in the CITIZENS reclaiming their GOVERNMENT.
The idea of forming a Assembly of regular Citizens with a variety of ages and a mixture of politically aware and political novices to focus on a social issue is awesome. To have the findings of such a Assembly put before the CITIZENSHIP in a referendum is truly DEMOCRACY in ACTION. In order for such Assembly to truly work there can be no POLITICIANS OR BUREAUCRATS included in the Assembly, the members must have a true representative of the young, middle age, and the elders and a true mixture of experience.
Such a Assembly would do more than to deal with social issues, it incorporates the CITIZENS in the actual GOVERNING of our society. It could function in much the same way as Juries are selected. Such a system would go along way in the general public reclaiming their social governing, it goes to OWNERSHIP of our governing system. Currently the general public only have a vote every 4 years and 40% of the public do not even vote then. The general citizenship does not feel a true part of or have any real affect on our GOVERNMENT. This type of Assembly will go along way in the CITIZENS reclaiming their GOVERNMENT.
Minortiy Governs 2
In the last post I talked about the BC-STV Electoral Reform referendum that took place in 2005. In the last post I mentioned INCORRECTLY that there had never been any further referendum on this in the last 6 years. On further research I have found that this same Electoral Reform was again put before the voters in a 2009 referendum. The result of this referendum was only 39.9% in SUPPORT of the BC-STV.
I was very surprised to discover this 2009 referendum on BC-STV. I have no memory of the BC-STV being apart of the last election. I do not know why I have no memory of this. I was very much aware of the 2005 referendum and remembering when it just failed to pass and wanting it to return in a future referendum. How I could have missed the 2009 referendum when I was looking forward to it surprises me. If I missed it how many others missed it too? From the results of the 2009 referendum 39.9% vs 57.69% would indicated a few others may have missed the 2009 referendum.
Why did I miss it?
In the 2005 referendum there was a lot of buzz about it and a level of excitement in possibly making some serious changes to our Governing System. I admit that I do not see the BC-STV as the savior or a perfect system or it may not be all that good of a system. However, to make such fundamental change to our system needs to begin somewhere and the BC-STV would have been a perfect beginning. The Citizen Assembly that was setup to make such a change is something that is also important in bring TRUE DEMOCRACY to our system. Where a Assembly of CITIZENS, not politicians or bureaucrats but a wide range of CITIZENS are EMPOWERED to make recommendations to the CITIZENSHIP. It was the PROCESS that is important here, almost more important than the BC-STV itself.
In 2009 the BC-STV was buried, very little or no publicity on it, other political issues were hyped up and it became the old 'shell-game'. The POWERS THAT BE moved the focus away from the BC-STV and quietly put the issue on the ballot without much ado. The fact that in 2005 the BC-STV almost passed scared the hell out of the POWERS THAT BE.
Why did the BC-STV fail?
There are 3 main reasons that I see why the BC-STV failed in 2005 and in 2009:
I was very surprised to discover this 2009 referendum on BC-STV. I have no memory of the BC-STV being apart of the last election. I do not know why I have no memory of this. I was very much aware of the 2005 referendum and remembering when it just failed to pass and wanting it to return in a future referendum. How I could have missed the 2009 referendum when I was looking forward to it surprises me. If I missed it how many others missed it too? From the results of the 2009 referendum 39.9% vs 57.69% would indicated a few others may have missed the 2009 referendum.
Why did I miss it?
In the 2005 referendum there was a lot of buzz about it and a level of excitement in possibly making some serious changes to our Governing System. I admit that I do not see the BC-STV as the savior or a perfect system or it may not be all that good of a system. However, to make such fundamental change to our system needs to begin somewhere and the BC-STV would have been a perfect beginning. The Citizen Assembly that was setup to make such a change is something that is also important in bring TRUE DEMOCRACY to our system. Where a Assembly of CITIZENS, not politicians or bureaucrats but a wide range of CITIZENS are EMPOWERED to make recommendations to the CITIZENSHIP. It was the PROCESS that is important here, almost more important than the BC-STV itself.
In 2009 the BC-STV was buried, very little or no publicity on it, other political issues were hyped up and it became the old 'shell-game'. The POWERS THAT BE moved the focus away from the BC-STV and quietly put the issue on the ballot without much ado. The fact that in 2005 the BC-STV almost passed scared the hell out of the POWERS THAT BE.
Why did the BC-STV fail?
There are 3 main reasons that I see why the BC-STV failed in 2005 and in 2009:
- Our political climate is very much in a polarized state. The mere fact that Gordon Campbell had organized the CITIZEN ASSEMBLY and the focus on Electoral Reform would have turn a percentage of the citizenship against the whole process. It did not matter what the issue is, just that Campbell was responsible for it would be enough to turn some away.
- Fear of Change. The old saying - 'Better the devil you know than the one you don't' - is always a issue when making such fundamental changes.The 4 years that separated the two referendums (2005 - 2009) caused some to concede to their FEAR.
- Down playing and burying the BC-STV on the 2009 referendum and the distraction of the voters onto other issues allowed the referendum to slip through with a minimum of exposure.
Friday, October 28, 2011
Minority Governs
In our current system the MINORITY GOVERNS. In a TRUE DEMOCRACY the MAJORITY GOVERNS. This last election is not the only sign of this system of the MINORITY GOVERNS, with the 39% voting for the Conservatives that formed a MAJORITY in the HOUSE with 54% of the seats.
In May of 2005 there was a referendum for Electoral Reform that was the BC-STV and 57% of the voters voted in SUPPORT of the Reform (It needed 60% to actual come into being, which I support as a large Majority should be required to make such a fundamental change) and 97% of the constituencies were in SUPPORT. In the Throne Speech in September 2005 the government promised to bring this referendum on Electoral Reform back to the people. It has been over 6 years and this Electoral Reform has not been heard of again.
The POWERS THAT BE do not want any Electoral Reform they are very happy with this Minority Governs system. I believe that the BC-STV scared the hell out of them and want the whole idea of REFORM dead.
I do believe that we need a LARGE MAJORITY (60%) in order to make fundamental changes to our system. With a SIMPLE MAJORITY we can alienate too many and it can seriously divide the citizens of the country. Saying this the showing of the Majority in the BC-STV referendum was enough that it needed to be brought back before the citizens for another vote. The fact that it has been buried and no one wants to hear of it demonstrates a very strong DISRESPECT to the MAJORITY OF THE CITIZENS.
In May of 2005 there was a referendum for Electoral Reform that was the BC-STV and 57% of the voters voted in SUPPORT of the Reform (It needed 60% to actual come into being, which I support as a large Majority should be required to make such a fundamental change) and 97% of the constituencies were in SUPPORT. In the Throne Speech in September 2005 the government promised to bring this referendum on Electoral Reform back to the people. It has been over 6 years and this Electoral Reform has not been heard of again.
The POWERS THAT BE do not want any Electoral Reform they are very happy with this Minority Governs system. I believe that the BC-STV scared the hell out of them and want the whole idea of REFORM dead.
I do believe that we need a LARGE MAJORITY (60%) in order to make fundamental changes to our system. With a SIMPLE MAJORITY we can alienate too many and it can seriously divide the citizens of the country. Saying this the showing of the Majority in the BC-STV referendum was enough that it needed to be brought back before the citizens for another vote. The fact that it has been buried and no one wants to hear of it demonstrates a very strong DISRESPECT to the MAJORITY OF THE CITIZENS.
Thursday, October 27, 2011
Defining Government
We need to REDEFINE what Government IS and above all the LIMITATIONS of Government.
If the economical activities in Europe have any lessons to learn we need to come to the understanding that the Government cannot DO EVERY THING. It is too costly and has a LIMITED ability to do EVERY THING. In order to define the LIMIT of Government we need to also define the ROLE and the RESPONSIBILITY of the INDIVIDUAL.
As an example of what I mean lets look at the issue of HEALTH. In Canada we have a UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE system. We expect and even demand that ALL of our HEALTH issues should be paid for by the Government. It has gotten to the point where the Government is spending almost half of their total income on HEALTH CARE, and it is not enough.
I worked in the Health Field for 18 years and active in my Health Care Union, with the NDP, Liberal and the old Social Credit party in power. Every single year we were screaming that more money needed to be spent on HEALTH CARE. There was never enough money! It did not matter what Political Party was in power. One thing I learned over these years is that MONEY is not the answer, what we need to do is to refine what the Government is responsible for in HEALTH CARE, and what is the INDIVIDUAL'S responsibility.
We need to UNDERSTAND the Government is not responsible for ALL of our HEALTH ISSUES, our wants and desires. We need to reach a understanding of what the Government should be responsible for and what can be reasonably expected. LIFE THREATENING Health Issues needs to be supported by Government UNIVERSAL CARE. This is a good place to start and how far it is expanded is the subject of discussion.
The issue of HEALTH CARE is just an example of what I mean by REDEFINING the role of Government. This needs to be expanded to every area of Government.
If the economical activities in Europe have any lessons to learn we need to come to the understanding that the Government cannot DO EVERY THING. It is too costly and has a LIMITED ability to do EVERY THING. In order to define the LIMIT of Government we need to also define the ROLE and the RESPONSIBILITY of the INDIVIDUAL.
As an example of what I mean lets look at the issue of HEALTH. In Canada we have a UNIVERSAL HEALTH CARE system. We expect and even demand that ALL of our HEALTH issues should be paid for by the Government. It has gotten to the point where the Government is spending almost half of their total income on HEALTH CARE, and it is not enough.
I worked in the Health Field for 18 years and active in my Health Care Union, with the NDP, Liberal and the old Social Credit party in power. Every single year we were screaming that more money needed to be spent on HEALTH CARE. There was never enough money! It did not matter what Political Party was in power. One thing I learned over these years is that MONEY is not the answer, what we need to do is to refine what the Government is responsible for in HEALTH CARE, and what is the INDIVIDUAL'S responsibility.
We need to UNDERSTAND the Government is not responsible for ALL of our HEALTH ISSUES, our wants and desires. We need to reach a understanding of what the Government should be responsible for and what can be reasonably expected. LIFE THREATENING Health Issues needs to be supported by Government UNIVERSAL CARE. This is a good place to start and how far it is expanded is the subject of discussion.
The issue of HEALTH CARE is just an example of what I mean by REDEFINING the role of Government. This needs to be expanded to every area of Government.
Wednesday, October 26, 2011
Political Parties
Political Parties are the major roadblock to true Democracy. Political Parties in ALL their many strips serve only to divide the citizens of the country. ALL of the Parties have their own focus that is to promote their own philosophy and objectives. None are concerned with the GREATER GOOD of the country and the citizens. This is not knew or of a revelation as one can observe their behavior in the HOUSE and how DISRESPECTFUL they are to each other, their is no attempt at UNITY.
A true Democracy UNITIES the citizens in a manner that focuses on the GREATER GOOD of the country and the individual citizen. The different philosophies and objectives are able to find common ground where everyone can unite behind. We occasionally see the possibility of working in a common manner when we have a minority government.
A true Democracy UNITIES the citizens in a manner that focuses on the GREATER GOOD of the country and the individual citizen. The different philosophies and objectives are able to find common ground where everyone can unite behind. We occasionally see the possibility of working in a common manner when we have a minority government.
Tuesday, October 18, 2011
We Want Democracy!
We want a Democracy that is TRUE REPRESENTATION. The last Federal Election the Conservative Party won 39.6% of the votes BUT received 54.2% of the House Seats - HOW IS THAT ANY SORT OF REPRESENTATION? This is what has to STOP.
As long as we continue to have the MINORITY of the population GOVERNING the MAJORITY we will continue to have inequity in the system.This inequity is even more pronounced when we look further into the last Election. The 39.6% that the Conservatives received was of the number of Votes cast and only 61% of the eligible voters actually voted. This means the Conservative Government is only supported by 25 - 30% of the population. The question is - How can this in any way be considered DEMOCRACY and it certainly is not any sort of REPRESENTATION.
As long as we continue to have the MINORITY of the population GOVERNING the MAJORITY we will continue to have inequity in the system.This inequity is even more pronounced when we look further into the last Election. The 39.6% that the Conservatives received was of the number of Votes cast and only 61% of the eligible voters actually voted. This means the Conservative Government is only supported by 25 - 30% of the population. The question is - How can this in any way be considered DEMOCRACY and it certainly is not any sort of REPRESENTATION.
Monday, October 17, 2011
What we Want?
I have asked coworkers if they have been to the Demo and they have ALL said what Demo? When I tell them Occupy Vancouver there response is - Oh...the ones who do not know what they want!
It is the BEGINNING that is important here. We are so conditioned that we MUST KNOW EXACTLY WHAT WE WANT. We know what we want - Freedom, Fairness, Security, Health and Representation. How do we get these desires and how we define them needs to be discussed in a open form - Occupation Vancouver.
The O-V is the beginning in defining these desires and how to achieve them. It is the first time I have seen or participated in such a process. The NEWNESS of this opportunity is EXCITING. With no single AGENDA to control or direct the process.
It is the BEGINNING that is important here. We are so conditioned that we MUST KNOW EXACTLY WHAT WE WANT. We know what we want - Freedom, Fairness, Security, Health and Representation. How do we get these desires and how we define them needs to be discussed in a open form - Occupation Vancouver.
The O-V is the beginning in defining these desires and how to achieve them. It is the first time I have seen or participated in such a process. The NEWNESS of this opportunity is EXCITING. With no single AGENDA to control or direct the process.
Sunday, October 16, 2011
Occupy Vancouver
I was at the Demo on Saturday and was inspired by the turnout (5000) and hope that the Occupation continues. It was like walking down memory lane, with the same sort of speeches and the same mentality of "Us vs Them". In some way it is very Limiting and Dis-empowering, as we blame the Capitalists, Governments and other Powers as the source of our problems and very little in the way of resolving the problems except to battle each other. This keeps us divided as US against THEM and what we need to do is to UNITE.
Capitalism vs Communism/Socialism is a old concept dating back to the 1800s. We need to bring our Mind-set to the 21 Century and out of this constant struggle that has no end. This is why we need something NEW. A method where the Capitalist and the Socialist can unite to build a community that respects all views, with a set of STANDARDS that everyone can respect and live and prosper from.
I do not have the answers but I am searching for possibilities. This blog will be for discussions on how we search for the answers we need.
Capitalism vs Communism/Socialism is a old concept dating back to the 1800s. We need to bring our Mind-set to the 21 Century and out of this constant struggle that has no end. This is why we need something NEW. A method where the Capitalist and the Socialist can unite to build a community that respects all views, with a set of STANDARDS that everyone can respect and live and prosper from.
I do not have the answers but I am searching for possibilities. This blog will be for discussions on how we search for the answers we need.
Tuesday, September 27, 2011
WAR
This economical time we are in, I have to worry about another World War on the horizon. With the countries in Europe on the verge of bankruptcy and the USA not far behind them it is a worry time. In the past such world troubles have lead to World Wars. It was World War 2 that brought the Great Depression to an end. With China and India the developing powers and the West on the verge of collapse. This is a scary time and with China the major holder of the USA debts.
Can we find our way through these times without falling back on our past solutions of WAR?
Can we find our way through these times without falling back on our past solutions of WAR?
Thursday, July 7, 2011
Taxes, taxes and more taxes
The HST or PST & GST and now they are talking about adding another .02 on the price of gas to pay for some more rapid transit. When does the taxation stop? We are now paying more in taxes than we have ever paid and we are getting less in services than we ever have, this does not compute. The teachers are now bargaining and are wanting more, next the health care workers will be bargaining and wanting more.
Our whole taxation system needs a desperate restructuring. We need to restructure our Income Tax, Property Tax, Sales Tax and all the government fees and licenses. The different levels of taxation is also in need of restructure, Municipal, Provincial and Federal. Without a restructure of our Taxation system there is no end in how much we will be paying in Taxes. We already pay half our income to some form of Taxation, it is not until June each year that we reach the point of paying our taxes. At this rate it will not be long until we will be paying taxes until August each year.
Most of the argument of the increase in Taxes is that we need to pay for all the government services that we demand of government. We continue to pay more but the education system is worse than it has been, the health system is also worse than it has been, we pay more but we do not see any improvements. It is time to understand that throwing more money (more taxes) at the government does not mean that we have better government or better services. Money is not the issue here.
In the old days the individual taxes were allocated to specific services - Gas Tax was dedicated to Transportation, road maintenance, bridges, new roads, etc. - Tobacco and Alcohol Taxes was dedicated to the Health system - Income Tax was to general revenue. Now everything goes to General Revenue and there is no accounting for any section of government. Every section of government has to fight for a share of the General Revenue if they need it or not. Whatever section of government is better at getting a bigger share of the pie, if they need it or not, robes another section that may need the funds more. This leads to some sections of the government being over funded and others under funded. The under funded yells about needing more tax dollars that is passed onto to us. This system does not work!
In order to begin to restructure our Taxation system we need to come to terms with what we demand of the Government and the services the government provides. The first thing to evaluate is the general 'universality' of the major government services. In order to explain what I mean by 'universality' of these services lets look at the government's pension services - CPP and Old Age Security plans.
Everyone who has worked in Canada has paid into the CPP funds, as it is a government retirement payment program that is universal to all individual's working in Canada. When the individual reaches 65 years old they can retire and collect a pension from CPP, this includes EVERYONE. This pension is not that much as it maxis to about $12,000 per year or just under. However, EVERYONE is entitled to this even if they do not need this income. Recently in the news there is a report of a top government corporation executive was given a pension of $300,000 per year. This I find to be high, but the real crime comes when the executive reaches 65 and starts to collect $312,000 per year. There is no reason for this executive to draw upon the funds of the CPP, to do so is pure GREED.
CPP was set up to create a minimum base for retirees, so individuals that reach the retire age can have a minimum to support their elder years. I am setting a arbitrary rate of $60,000 per year, anyone with a pension of $60,000 or more should not be entitled to the CPP plan, it is not needed. Most individuals in our society do not make enough income in their working life to create a pension plan, this is what CPP was created for. It is this that the plan should be used for.
This is just an example of what I mean of the 'universality' of the majority of the government services and the whole concept of 'universality' needs to be re-evaluated before we can start to restructure our Taxation system. We also need to re-define what we expect of Government and what is the responsibility of the individual. The question is - do we have the courage to do what is needed? Or are we going to continue on the path we are on until it completely fails (Greece and other countries that are close to bankruptcy).
Our whole taxation system needs a desperate restructuring. We need to restructure our Income Tax, Property Tax, Sales Tax and all the government fees and licenses. The different levels of taxation is also in need of restructure, Municipal, Provincial and Federal. Without a restructure of our Taxation system there is no end in how much we will be paying in Taxes. We already pay half our income to some form of Taxation, it is not until June each year that we reach the point of paying our taxes. At this rate it will not be long until we will be paying taxes until August each year.
Most of the argument of the increase in Taxes is that we need to pay for all the government services that we demand of government. We continue to pay more but the education system is worse than it has been, the health system is also worse than it has been, we pay more but we do not see any improvements. It is time to understand that throwing more money (more taxes) at the government does not mean that we have better government or better services. Money is not the issue here.
In the old days the individual taxes were allocated to specific services - Gas Tax was dedicated to Transportation, road maintenance, bridges, new roads, etc. - Tobacco and Alcohol Taxes was dedicated to the Health system - Income Tax was to general revenue. Now everything goes to General Revenue and there is no accounting for any section of government. Every section of government has to fight for a share of the General Revenue if they need it or not. Whatever section of government is better at getting a bigger share of the pie, if they need it or not, robes another section that may need the funds more. This leads to some sections of the government being over funded and others under funded. The under funded yells about needing more tax dollars that is passed onto to us. This system does not work!
In order to begin to restructure our Taxation system we need to come to terms with what we demand of the Government and the services the government provides. The first thing to evaluate is the general 'universality' of the major government services. In order to explain what I mean by 'universality' of these services lets look at the government's pension services - CPP and Old Age Security plans.
Everyone who has worked in Canada has paid into the CPP funds, as it is a government retirement payment program that is universal to all individual's working in Canada. When the individual reaches 65 years old they can retire and collect a pension from CPP, this includes EVERYONE. This pension is not that much as it maxis to about $12,000 per year or just under. However, EVERYONE is entitled to this even if they do not need this income. Recently in the news there is a report of a top government corporation executive was given a pension of $300,000 per year. This I find to be high, but the real crime comes when the executive reaches 65 and starts to collect $312,000 per year. There is no reason for this executive to draw upon the funds of the CPP, to do so is pure GREED.
CPP was set up to create a minimum base for retirees, so individuals that reach the retire age can have a minimum to support their elder years. I am setting a arbitrary rate of $60,000 per year, anyone with a pension of $60,000 or more should not be entitled to the CPP plan, it is not needed. Most individuals in our society do not make enough income in their working life to create a pension plan, this is what CPP was created for. It is this that the plan should be used for.
This is just an example of what I mean of the 'universality' of the majority of the government services and the whole concept of 'universality' needs to be re-evaluated before we can start to restructure our Taxation system. We also need to re-define what we expect of Government and what is the responsibility of the individual. The question is - do we have the courage to do what is needed? Or are we going to continue on the path we are on until it completely fails (Greece and other countries that are close to bankruptcy).
Friday, May 27, 2011
Laws
The first thing to make clear is the difference between Laws & Rules. Laws are somewhat more fundamental and not easily manipulated. Rules are much more flexible and manipulated. We can see this issue of Laws when we apply them to the area of Science – Law of Gravity, Cause & Effect, and other Laws that govern our Physical Reality. These Laws that govern our Physical Reality are Laws that we ALL know and knowing these Laws allow us to function in this Physical Reality safely and effectively. These Laws define our Physical Reality.
The Laws of Society need to be at this same fundamental level. The Laws of Society need to define the Society. This definition of Society can only be established by the MEMBERS of the Society, not from the LEADERS. It is the INDIVIDUAL MEMBERS of Society that need to establish these Laws, in order for the LEADERS to have their Leadership defined. Once these basic Laws are set they can only be changed or altered by a LARGE MAJORITY of the Members of Society (at least 80%). The reason for such a large majority is that the Laws define the Society and EVERYONE in the Society. Such a fundamental change to the Society needs to be supported by a LARGE majority or the society may splinter and become fractured.
Laws of Society:
The Society is built by the INDIVIDUAL MEMBERS of the Society. It is with this understanding that a strong and productive Society is only possible with strong and empowered INDIVIDUALS.
Normally when we talk about Laws we think of the Laws that the police enforce and the courts enforce. These are NOT the true Laws of our Society. In Canada the Laws of our Society are found in our Charter of Rights & Freedoms, in the USA it is the Bill of Rights. The reason I refer to these documents as the Laws of our Society is the fact that these documents override any Laws passed by the politicians. Any Law that is passed by the politicians that violates the Charter of Rights & Freedoms the Law is NULL AND VOID AND HAS NO AUTHORITY.
The Laws that the police and courts deal with are more associated with the RULES of Society and will be blogged about in the next blog topic. This blog topic on LAWS is more associated with the issues of our Charter of Rights & Freedoms. Our Charter of Rights & Freedoms is a good place to start but it needs more work and to be more prominent in our Society.
Canadian Charter of Rights & Freedom:
This is a good starting point as it outlines the INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS & FREEDOMS within Canadian Society. It deals with – Fundamental Freedoms, Democratic Rights, Mobility Rights, Legal Rights and Equality Rights – for ALL CANADIANS (MALE AND FEMALE). The major defect resides in the RESPONSIBILITY of each CANADIAN to the Society.
In order for the INDIVIDUAL to feel a part of the Society there needs to be some RESPONSIBILITY of the Individual in active participation within the Society. This is where the Charter of Rights & Freedoms is silent.
In order for the INDIVIDUAL MEMBER of Society to actually take a level of ownership in the Society there needs to be a level of RESPONSIBILITY on the MEMBER for the Society. The Members’ Responsibility is in how the Society is Governed.
Every Society needs a mechanism for operating as a united group with a common interest and intention, this we call GOVERNING (GOVERNMENT). Each Member of the Society NEEDS to have a level of direct involvement and responsible for this GOVERNANCE. This is how the MEMBERS define their OWNERSHIP of the Society. Without this OWNERSHIP the member begins to feel disenfranchised from the Society and the Society becomes fractured.
The LAWS of Society is not just the Rights & Freedoms of the Individual, but also the DUTY that is required by the Individual to the Society. There is another document that speaks a little on such DUTY.
Declaration of Independence – states in part “...it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government ...” in another part of the same document “...Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed- ...” In the first quote it refers to “their duty” their – referring to the members of the society and duty – as their responsibility. In the second quote it talks about how it is only with the “consent” of the members of society that authorizes the Governing Powers the power to govern. Without the approval of the Members of Society the Governing Power has no Power. This document also mentions some of the basic rights of all the Members of Society – “...Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness...” – for ALL MEMBERS and balanced with the MEMBERS’ DUTY.
Purpose of these LAWS:
There are many different TYPES of Societies. These LAWS define the TYPE of Society the MEMBERS want to CREATE. These LAWS address the RIGHTS & FREEDOMS of the Individual within the Society PLUS the DUTY of the Individual to the Society.
The next subject is RULES...
The Laws of Society need to be at this same fundamental level. The Laws of Society need to define the Society. This definition of Society can only be established by the MEMBERS of the Society, not from the LEADERS. It is the INDIVIDUAL MEMBERS of Society that need to establish these Laws, in order for the LEADERS to have their Leadership defined. Once these basic Laws are set they can only be changed or altered by a LARGE MAJORITY of the Members of Society (at least 80%). The reason for such a large majority is that the Laws define the Society and EVERYONE in the Society. Such a fundamental change to the Society needs to be supported by a LARGE majority or the society may splinter and become fractured.
Laws of Society:
The Society is built by the INDIVIDUAL MEMBERS of the Society. It is with this understanding that a strong and productive Society is only possible with strong and empowered INDIVIDUALS.
Normally when we talk about Laws we think of the Laws that the police enforce and the courts enforce. These are NOT the true Laws of our Society. In Canada the Laws of our Society are found in our Charter of Rights & Freedoms, in the USA it is the Bill of Rights. The reason I refer to these documents as the Laws of our Society is the fact that these documents override any Laws passed by the politicians. Any Law that is passed by the politicians that violates the Charter of Rights & Freedoms the Law is NULL AND VOID AND HAS NO AUTHORITY.
The Laws that the police and courts deal with are more associated with the RULES of Society and will be blogged about in the next blog topic. This blog topic on LAWS is more associated with the issues of our Charter of Rights & Freedoms. Our Charter of Rights & Freedoms is a good place to start but it needs more work and to be more prominent in our Society.
Canadian Charter of Rights & Freedom:
This is a good starting point as it outlines the INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS & FREEDOMS within Canadian Society. It deals with – Fundamental Freedoms, Democratic Rights, Mobility Rights, Legal Rights and Equality Rights – for ALL CANADIANS (MALE AND FEMALE). The major defect resides in the RESPONSIBILITY of each CANADIAN to the Society.
In order for the INDIVIDUAL to feel a part of the Society there needs to be some RESPONSIBILITY of the Individual in active participation within the Society. This is where the Charter of Rights & Freedoms is silent.
In order for the INDIVIDUAL MEMBER of Society to actually take a level of ownership in the Society there needs to be a level of RESPONSIBILITY on the MEMBER for the Society. The Members’ Responsibility is in how the Society is Governed.
Every Society needs a mechanism for operating as a united group with a common interest and intention, this we call GOVERNING (GOVERNMENT). Each Member of the Society NEEDS to have a level of direct involvement and responsible for this GOVERNANCE. This is how the MEMBERS define their OWNERSHIP of the Society. Without this OWNERSHIP the member begins to feel disenfranchised from the Society and the Society becomes fractured.
The LAWS of Society is not just the Rights & Freedoms of the Individual, but also the DUTY that is required by the Individual to the Society. There is another document that speaks a little on such DUTY.
Declaration of Independence – states in part “...it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government ...” in another part of the same document “...Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed- ...” In the first quote it refers to “their duty” their – referring to the members of the society and duty – as their responsibility. In the second quote it talks about how it is only with the “consent” of the members of society that authorizes the Governing Powers the power to govern. Without the approval of the Members of Society the Governing Power has no Power. This document also mentions some of the basic rights of all the Members of Society – “...Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness...” – for ALL MEMBERS and balanced with the MEMBERS’ DUTY.
Purpose of these LAWS:
There are many different TYPES of Societies. These LAWS define the TYPE of Society the MEMBERS want to CREATE. These LAWS address the RIGHTS & FREEDOMS of the Individual within the Society PLUS the DUTY of the Individual to the Society.
The next subject is RULES...
Tuesday, May 24, 2011
Laws, Rules & Regulations
The next few subjects that I will be blogging on here is on "Laws, Rules & Regulations". Each of these topics have enough attached to them that they need a blog entry of their own. We often see Laws & Rules as the same thing, that there is not much that is different in these two. I suggest there is a world of difference between these two.
Laws - in short is what defines our SOCIETY and needs to be at a minimum and completely known and fully understood by EVERYONE.
Rules - are most effective when EVERYONE can use them to support themselves and be able to use the Rules as a guideline. If Rules are used to LIMIT the individual the Rule is no longer effective.
Regulations - are how our Laws and Rules are implemented in the most effective manner.
The following blog posts will go much deeper into each of these topics with the first being the topic of Laws.
Laws - in short is what defines our SOCIETY and needs to be at a minimum and completely known and fully understood by EVERYONE.
Rules - are most effective when EVERYONE can use them to support themselves and be able to use the Rules as a guideline. If Rules are used to LIMIT the individual the Rule is no longer effective.
Regulations - are how our Laws and Rules are implemented in the most effective manner.
The following blog posts will go much deeper into each of these topics with the first being the topic of Laws.
Wednesday, May 4, 2011
2011 election results
Here are the results of the election with the number of seats in the House, % of the seats won, and the popular vote %. I have bolded the number of seats and the % of the House in the first colume, The last colume I bolded the % of the popular vote. The link will take you to the sfu.ca website.
National election results 2011
Polls reporting: 71,486/71,513 Voter turnout: 14,720,580 of 23,971,740 registered electors (61.4%)
The number of registered electors shown in this table does not include electors who registered on election day.
I always ask myself how can we call this a REPRESENTATION GOVERNMENT? The Conservative Party received 39.6% of the Popular Vote and holds 54.2% of the HOUSE SEATS. When we count the Citizens that did not vote, the Consservatives only have about 25% of CANADIANS and yet they have the RIGHT to GOVERN the whole of CANADA.
A true REPRESENTATION would be if the Popular Vote % equaled the House %. In the case of the Conservative Party with 39.6% of the Popular Vote should have 39.6% of the HOUSE SEATS.
National election results 2011
- Party Party standing % Popular vote %
- Animal Alliance/Environment Voters 0 0.0 0.0% 1,451 0.0 0.0%
- Bloc Québécois 4 1.3 1.3% 889,788 6.0 6.0%
- CAP 0 0.0 0.0% 2,030 0.0 0.0%
- CHP Canada 0 0.0 0.0% 19,218 0.1 0.1%
- Communist 0 0.0 0.0% 2,925 0.0 0.0%
- Conservative 167 54.2 54.2% 5,832,401 39.6 39.6%
- FPNP 0 0.0 0.0% 228 0.0 0.0%
- Green Party 1 0.3 0.3% 576,221 3.9 3.9%
- Independent 0 0.0 0.0% 63,340 0.4 0.4%
- Liberal 34 11.0 11.0% 2,783,175 18.9 18.9%
- Libertarian 0 0.0 0.0% 6,017 0.0 0.0%
- Marxist-Leninist 0 0.0 0.0% 10,160 0.1 0.1%
- NDP-New Democratic Party 102 33.1 33.1% 4,508,474 30.6 30.6%
- No Affiliation 0 0.0 0.0% 9,391 0.1 0.1%
- PC Party 0 0.0 0.0% 5,838 0.0 0.0%
- Pirate Party 0 0.0 0.0% 3,198 0.0 0.0%
- Radical Marijuana 0 0.0 0.0% 1,864 0.0 0.0%
- Rhinoceros 0 0.0 0.0% 3,819 0.0 0.0%
- United Party 0 0.0 0.0% 294 0.0 0.0%
- WBP 0 0.0 0.0% 748 0.0 0.0%
Polls reporting: 71,486/71,513 Voter turnout: 14,720,580 of 23,971,740 registered electors (61.4%)
The number of registered electors shown in this table does not include electors who registered on election day.
I always ask myself how can we call this a REPRESENTATION GOVERNMENT? The Conservative Party received 39.6% of the Popular Vote and holds 54.2% of the HOUSE SEATS. When we count the Citizens that did not vote, the Consservatives only have about 25% of CANADIANS and yet they have the RIGHT to GOVERN the whole of CANADA.
A true REPRESENTATION would be if the Popular Vote % equaled the House %. In the case of the Conservative Party with 39.6% of the Popular Vote should have 39.6% of the HOUSE SEATS.
Saturday, April 30, 2011
Revolution
Revolution can have different meanings for different situations and for different people. It can and often does mean “Revolt” or to rise-up against the status quo. It can also mean “Transform” or to evolve the status-quo into something more appropriate. It can also refer to “Rotation” where it revolves around and we are always facing a new REVOLUTION.
To revolt there are two sides and each are trying to dominate the other. Usually there is little or no respect between the two sides and a fair amount of hostility. Where one side is violently dominating and suppressing the other side there is often little option but a violent revolt. In a violent revolt the two sides become very entrenched in their positions. The issue with such revolts is the outcome of the revolt. When one side has put down the other side, what happens? It is what happens after the violent revolt that is critical.
If the dominating side puts down the revolt of the suppressed does anything change? If nothing changes then a revolt in the future is inevitable. If the suppressed succeeds in revolting against the dominating side, what changes? If the side that was being suppressed then starts to suppress the losing side that was the dominating side, has anything really changed or is there just a reversal of roles.
Two large and successful revolts in history are the “American Revolution” and the “India Revolution”. In both of these revolutions it was a revolt against the British Empire. The reason these two Revolutions are seen as successful is that each side arrived at a “Mutual Respect” of each other.
The “American Revolution” produced one of the most profound document about REVOLUTION and the bases for such revolts.
This document forms the foundation to REVOLUTION. That the Government is only able to rightly govern with the “consent of the governed” and when this is not the case it is the RIGHT AND DUTY of the governed to replace such government. It goes further to say “...should not be changed for light and transient causes...” and explains “...when a long train of abuses and usurpations...” it is the RIGHT and DUTY of the PEOPLE to throw off such government. This document begins with the statement that everyone is equal and has a NATUAL RIGHT to LIFE, LIBERTY and HAPPINESS. It also recognizes the LAWS OF NATURE AND NATURE’S GOD.
I am not aware as much of the “India Revolution” and the work of Gandhi, Roshini has more on this Revolution.
These are forms of Revolution where one culture of PEOPLE is revolting from another culture PEOPLE. Another form of Revolution is internal revolts – Civil Wars.
Civil Wars are another form of REVOLUTION that is much more complicated than EMPIRE REVOLUTIONS. There is much more PASSION AND OBSESSIONS involved with CIVIL WAR REVOLUTIONS.
Another great example of this type of REVOLUTION is the United States Civil War. The United States is the only country that I know of that went to WAR WITH THEMSELVES in order to FREE SLAVES (not considered to be Americans or citizens). What made this REVOLUTION successful is not just the FREEDOM OF THE SLAVES, but also how after the North had won the WAR. The North started the process of uniting with the South. After the REVOLUTION both sides were able to become a united country again. The ability of a country to recover from a Civil War type of REVOLUTION and can still be united and respecting each side of the violent revolt is critical.
Revolutions happen and need to happen when there is a lack of RESPECT and there is a presence of ABUSE. The goal of successful REVOLUTIONS is to re-establish a mutual respect and to end the abuse. If at the end of a REVOLUTION there is still a lack of RESPECT and the continuation of ABUSE the REVOLUTION is not successful and the REVOLUTION will revolve around again and will be repeated. This will happen regardless of which side “wins” the violent revolt.
Revolution by its self is not a desirable objective. Revolution is a tool to achieve a objective that units a People in a fair and equitable union. Revolution is often the result when one side tries to suppress and abuse another and there is a loss of RESPECT. The side that is experiencing the abuse will revolt to regain their RESPECT. The danger comes when the WINNER of the revolt continues the abuse on the loser.
PAY-BACK is often the distraction at the end of a violent revolt. In order for a REVOLUTION to be successful there must be a method where the two sides can resolve their differences. Both sides need to understand that each are part of the whole and that there needs to be mutual respect in order to work together. Without this understanding the REVOLUTION will revolve around again and the violent process will continue.
I was active in the Vietnam anti-war movement in the 1960s. The US did not lose that war because of the Chinese or the Vietnamese but they lost the war based on the US citizen’s REVOLT to that war. It was not always a peaceful revolt either, remember Kent State. What came out of this is the US Government is much more AWARE (RESPECT) of the US citizen’s support or lack of support for any future conflicts that it gets into.
I bring the “Cold-War” here because it demonstrates what I mean by RESPECT. The USA and the USSR were on the verge of WAR for close to three decades. The two sides HATED each other and would have loved to kill the other. However, both sides were nuclear powers and both had the power to destroy the other. This stalemate in the power game meant that both sides had a RESPECT for the other. Through the YEARS the HATE mellowed to a strong DISLIKE and both sides started to RESPECT the other’s commitment, even if they did not agree.
In the 1970’s a strong world-wide PEACE movement of the PEOPLE started to press both sides to negotiate a PEACE and to reduce the amount of NUCLEAR WEAPONS as these WEAPONS were a threat to the SURVIVAL OF ALL. I remember participating in a PEACE DEMONSTRATION calling for the reduction of NUCLEAR MISSLES with close to 100,000 marchers, with PEOPLE from ALL POLITICAL PARTIES, and from all walks of life joining.
It was the PEACE MOVEMENT that was a form of REVOLUTION, but in the form of “Transform” as opposed to a “Revolt” that got the USA and USSR to sit down and negotiate the SALT II agreement. This could not have taken place without some level of MUTUAL RESPECT between the USA and USSR.
Revolt:
To revolt there are two sides and each are trying to dominate the other. Usually there is little or no respect between the two sides and a fair amount of hostility. Where one side is violently dominating and suppressing the other side there is often little option but a violent revolt. In a violent revolt the two sides become very entrenched in their positions. The issue with such revolts is the outcome of the revolt. When one side has put down the other side, what happens? It is what happens after the violent revolt that is critical.
If the dominating side puts down the revolt of the suppressed does anything change? If nothing changes then a revolt in the future is inevitable. If the suppressed succeeds in revolting against the dominating side, what changes? If the side that was being suppressed then starts to suppress the losing side that was the dominating side, has anything really changed or is there just a reversal of roles.
History:
Two large and successful revolts in history are the “American Revolution” and the “India Revolution”. In both of these revolutions it was a revolt against the British Empire. The reason these two Revolutions are seen as successful is that each side arrived at a “Mutual Respect” of each other.
The “American Revolution” produced one of the most profound document about REVOLUTION and the bases for such revolts.
Declaration of Independence:
IN CONGRESS, JULY 4, 1776
The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America
When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.
This document forms the foundation to REVOLUTION. That the Government is only able to rightly govern with the “consent of the governed” and when this is not the case it is the RIGHT AND DUTY of the governed to replace such government. It goes further to say “...should not be changed for light and transient causes...” and explains “...when a long train of abuses and usurpations...” it is the RIGHT and DUTY of the PEOPLE to throw off such government. This document begins with the statement that everyone is equal and has a NATUAL RIGHT to LIFE, LIBERTY and HAPPINESS. It also recognizes the LAWS OF NATURE AND NATURE’S GOD.
I am not aware as much of the “India Revolution” and the work of Gandhi, Roshini has more on this Revolution.
These are forms of Revolution where one culture of PEOPLE is revolting from another culture PEOPLE. Another form of Revolution is internal revolts – Civil Wars.
Civil Wars:
Civil Wars are another form of REVOLUTION that is much more complicated than EMPIRE REVOLUTIONS. There is much more PASSION AND OBSESSIONS involved with CIVIL WAR REVOLUTIONS.
Another great example of this type of REVOLUTION is the United States Civil War. The United States is the only country that I know of that went to WAR WITH THEMSELVES in order to FREE SLAVES (not considered to be Americans or citizens). What made this REVOLUTION successful is not just the FREEDOM OF THE SLAVES, but also how after the North had won the WAR. The North started the process of uniting with the South. After the REVOLUTION both sides were able to become a united country again. The ability of a country to recover from a Civil War type of REVOLUTION and can still be united and respecting each side of the violent revolt is critical.
Revolutions happen and need to happen when there is a lack of RESPECT and there is a presence of ABUSE. The goal of successful REVOLUTIONS is to re-establish a mutual respect and to end the abuse. If at the end of a REVOLUTION there is still a lack of RESPECT and the continuation of ABUSE the REVOLUTION is not successful and the REVOLUTION will revolve around again and will be repeated. This will happen regardless of which side “wins” the violent revolt.
Revolution by its self is not a desirable objective. Revolution is a tool to achieve a objective that units a People in a fair and equitable union. Revolution is often the result when one side tries to suppress and abuse another and there is a loss of RESPECT. The side that is experiencing the abuse will revolt to regain their RESPECT. The danger comes when the WINNER of the revolt continues the abuse on the loser.
PAY-BACK is often the distraction at the end of a violent revolt. In order for a REVOLUTION to be successful there must be a method where the two sides can resolve their differences. Both sides need to understand that each are part of the whole and that there needs to be mutual respect in order to work together. Without this understanding the REVOLUTION will revolve around again and the violent process will continue.
Recent History:
I was active in the Vietnam anti-war movement in the 1960s. The US did not lose that war because of the Chinese or the Vietnamese but they lost the war based on the US citizen’s REVOLT to that war. It was not always a peaceful revolt either, remember Kent State. What came out of this is the US Government is much more AWARE (RESPECT) of the US citizen’s support or lack of support for any future conflicts that it gets into.
COLD-WAR:
I bring the “Cold-War” here because it demonstrates what I mean by RESPECT. The USA and the USSR were on the verge of WAR for close to three decades. The two sides HATED each other and would have loved to kill the other. However, both sides were nuclear powers and both had the power to destroy the other. This stalemate in the power game meant that both sides had a RESPECT for the other. Through the YEARS the HATE mellowed to a strong DISLIKE and both sides started to RESPECT the other’s commitment, even if they did not agree.
In the 1970’s a strong world-wide PEACE movement of the PEOPLE started to press both sides to negotiate a PEACE and to reduce the amount of NUCLEAR WEAPONS as these WEAPONS were a threat to the SURVIVAL OF ALL. I remember participating in a PEACE DEMONSTRATION calling for the reduction of NUCLEAR MISSLES with close to 100,000 marchers, with PEOPLE from ALL POLITICAL PARTIES, and from all walks of life joining.
It was the PEACE MOVEMENT that was a form of REVOLUTION, but in the form of “Transform” as opposed to a “Revolt” that got the USA and USSR to sit down and negotiate the SALT II agreement. This could not have taken place without some level of MUTUAL RESPECT between the USA and USSR.
Tuesday, March 1, 2011
Evolver
Last Sunday (Feb. 20) I attended an event with a friend hosted by Evolver and the local spore group that had a discussion on the lack of "Rite of Passage" ceremony in our modern society. I found it very INTERESTING but I found it to go around the MAIN POINT. We talked about addictions, death, adolescence, menstruation, menopause, and a lot of the different stages of LIFE. We talked about COMMUNITY about SUPPORT and about how SOME get stuck in the different STAGES OF LIFE.
There is nothing that I heard during the event that I would disagree with or even to do differently. In ALL of the discussion I never heard any mention of SPIRIT. I do not mean RELIGION or any similar topic, but the realization that LIFE is more than the PHYSICAL. We did mention SHAMANISM and the use of PLANT MEDICINES, but without some anchor in the SPIRIT part of LIFE it is very LIMITING in the benefits.
I believe we need to approach LIFE with a broader understanding than just the PHYSICAL. We can go through these Physical Passages with extreme difficulty when we are only focused on the Physical. In some aboriginal cultures when one comes of age, they are no longer children of the adults that raised them. At this time Father Sky and Mother Earth adopt them, in this way they are never alone. Today we would see this as very SYMBOLIC and of very little real value. In the ancient ways this was more than symbolic, there was a much more REAL relationship with Father Sky and Mother Earth.
It is this RELATIONSHIP that we have lost. We lost this relationship when we abandoned our BELIEF and replaced it with PHYSICAL KNOWLEDGE. For the last 200 years or more we have followed the adage “Knowledge is Power” and this knowledge has replaced our BELIEF. In our haste for knowledge we have demoted our BELIEF to religion and/or superstition. I have been told “Facts are more REAL than Belief”. Do you find it interesting that you can have a number of labelled “Specialists” debating over the interpretation of FACTS? Does this not signify that our FACTS are not as absolute as we may BELIEVE they are?
It is not a matter of one or the other (Knowledge or Belief) both has a critical part to play in our Life, one does not trump another. There is a good example where both have a place to play;
A California medical doctor was in a skiing accident and broke his lower spinal cord. The prognosis was that he would be paralyzed from his waist down, for the rest of his life. He was a medical doctor and knew the medical science and the knowledge that the spinal cord does not heal itself. It was over two years later when the doctor was interviewed on the NEWS because he was actually walking around his doctor’s office visiting his patients. In the interview he was asked how he explained his incredible recovery. The doctor responded “Life always overcomes difficulties” he went on to say “He kept sending the message from his head to his legs ‘to move’ and that LIFE would find a way to connect the message to his legs.” He continued sending the message for 2 years before he had any sign the message was getting through.
What is so amazing with the story of the Doctor is that his BELIEF in LIFE took him beyond the FACTS and the KNOWLEDGE that SCIENCE is consumed with. He knew the SCIENCE and it was his BELIEF that took him beyond that KNOWLEDGE. He kept his BELIEF in spite of the KNOWLEDGE and even with everyone (physiotherapist, other paralyzed patients, friends and co-workers) around him BELIVING he would be in a wheelchair for the rest of his Life. To keep his BELIEF up even with no sign of him walking again for 2 years, it is truly incredible.
We know that Medical Science has immense value, but when we put all of our BELIEF into this KNOWLEDGE we can only go so far. When we can respect Science for what it can do and we put our BELIEF in LIFE we can do the IMPOSSIBLE. The doctor KNEW the knowledge of medical science and KNEW the limitation of this knowledge, he also had a RELATIONSHIP with LIFE and this RELATIONSHIP was his BELIEF that LIFE always overcomes difficulties.
What has this to do with “Rites of Passage”? When we go through the many different phases of our Life in a strictly PHYSICAL aspect it becomes a lot more difficult. We NEED to have a very fundamental RELATIONSHIP with LIFE and then we can truly appreciate the many different PHASES LIFE has for us, to enjoy. Without this relationship we become fearful of what we are losing and what is ahead. We see our self in isolation and more vulnerable to being a VICTIM OF LIFE, and not a intricate part of LIFE.
It is this RELATIONSHIP WITH LIFE that I found to be missing in the discussion on Sunday (Feb. 20).
There is nothing that I heard during the event that I would disagree with or even to do differently. In ALL of the discussion I never heard any mention of SPIRIT. I do not mean RELIGION or any similar topic, but the realization that LIFE is more than the PHYSICAL. We did mention SHAMANISM and the use of PLANT MEDICINES, but without some anchor in the SPIRIT part of LIFE it is very LIMITING in the benefits.
I believe we need to approach LIFE with a broader understanding than just the PHYSICAL. We can go through these Physical Passages with extreme difficulty when we are only focused on the Physical. In some aboriginal cultures when one comes of age, they are no longer children of the adults that raised them. At this time Father Sky and Mother Earth adopt them, in this way they are never alone. Today we would see this as very SYMBOLIC and of very little real value. In the ancient ways this was more than symbolic, there was a much more REAL relationship with Father Sky and Mother Earth.
It is this RELATIONSHIP that we have lost. We lost this relationship when we abandoned our BELIEF and replaced it with PHYSICAL KNOWLEDGE. For the last 200 years or more we have followed the adage “Knowledge is Power” and this knowledge has replaced our BELIEF. In our haste for knowledge we have demoted our BELIEF to religion and/or superstition. I have been told “Facts are more REAL than Belief”. Do you find it interesting that you can have a number of labelled “Specialists” debating over the interpretation of FACTS? Does this not signify that our FACTS are not as absolute as we may BELIEVE they are?
It is not a matter of one or the other (Knowledge or Belief) both has a critical part to play in our Life, one does not trump another. There is a good example where both have a place to play;
A California medical doctor was in a skiing accident and broke his lower spinal cord. The prognosis was that he would be paralyzed from his waist down, for the rest of his life. He was a medical doctor and knew the medical science and the knowledge that the spinal cord does not heal itself. It was over two years later when the doctor was interviewed on the NEWS because he was actually walking around his doctor’s office visiting his patients. In the interview he was asked how he explained his incredible recovery. The doctor responded “Life always overcomes difficulties” he went on to say “He kept sending the message from his head to his legs ‘to move’ and that LIFE would find a way to connect the message to his legs.” He continued sending the message for 2 years before he had any sign the message was getting through.
What is so amazing with the story of the Doctor is that his BELIEF in LIFE took him beyond the FACTS and the KNOWLEDGE that SCIENCE is consumed with. He knew the SCIENCE and it was his BELIEF that took him beyond that KNOWLEDGE. He kept his BELIEF in spite of the KNOWLEDGE and even with everyone (physiotherapist, other paralyzed patients, friends and co-workers) around him BELIVING he would be in a wheelchair for the rest of his Life. To keep his BELIEF up even with no sign of him walking again for 2 years, it is truly incredible.
We know that Medical Science has immense value, but when we put all of our BELIEF into this KNOWLEDGE we can only go so far. When we can respect Science for what it can do and we put our BELIEF in LIFE we can do the IMPOSSIBLE. The doctor KNEW the knowledge of medical science and KNEW the limitation of this knowledge, he also had a RELATIONSHIP with LIFE and this RELATIONSHIP was his BELIEF that LIFE always overcomes difficulties.
What has this to do with “Rites of Passage”? When we go through the many different phases of our Life in a strictly PHYSICAL aspect it becomes a lot more difficult. We NEED to have a very fundamental RELATIONSHIP with LIFE and then we can truly appreciate the many different PHASES LIFE has for us, to enjoy. Without this relationship we become fearful of what we are losing and what is ahead. We see our self in isolation and more vulnerable to being a VICTIM OF LIFE, and not a intricate part of LIFE.
It is this RELATIONSHIP WITH LIFE that I found to be missing in the discussion on Sunday (Feb. 20).
Monday, February 14, 2011
How we pick our LEADERS
NDP & Liberal LEADERSHIP?
It is a strange time with both of the major provincial political parties are searching for a new LEADER. In the current political scene both the NDP and the Liberals are searching for a LEADER that can UNITE the different fractions within each of the PARTIES.
The NDP are searching for someone that can UNITE the far LEFT of the SOCIALISTS and the more MODERATE members that are part of the PARTY. The LIBERALS are searching for someone that can UNITE the more conservative members with the more Liberal members that are part of the PARTY. Is this ability to UNITE the PARTY a key component for a LEADER?
In the last few months we have seen both of these PARTIES sabotage their own LEADER. The question is - can any party govern when the party is so internally splintered? The governing of our Province becomes secondary to govern their party. I am not much for POLITICAL PARTIES as they become too focused on their own PARTY issues and the SOCIETY is secondary to the PARTY.
I think it is a starting point to understand how we define what a LEADER is before we elect a LEADER. A true LEADER is a lot more than just someone that UNITIES the different fractions of SOCIETY or a PARTY. The biggest sole component that describes a LEADER is TRUST! In today's political climate this attribute is sorrily lacking. In the old days LAWYERS were always viewed with skepticism, the LAWYER has been replaced by the POLITICIAN.
TRUST:
Why has our TRUST in POLITICIANS become so low? POLITICIANS have changed from being mainly promoting a philosophy of how we should be governed, to a single objective of being ELECTED. It is their OBSESSION to being ELECTED into POWER that trumps any philosophy they may have.If we take Harper as an example, our Federal Leader (Prime Minister). Harper is the leader of the Federal Conservative Party and is generally known as a Conservative with a capital "C", meaning his philosophy is far right. In order to be elected (even a minority state) he needed to compromise on his Conservative philosophy. In order to stay in POWER Harper needs to compromise his far right philosophy closer to the middle of the political philosophy. The question is - How much TRUST can we have in a LEADER that compromises his philosophy in order to stay in POWER?
Another more local example is the NDP leadership. One of the main reasons given for disposing of their LEADER - Carol James - is that she has been unable to lead the NDP to WIN the seat of POWER in the last 3 political elections. The issue of her philosophy being too Left or too Right was not as important as her inability to WIN. The NDP membership is solely interested in WINNING POWER! How much TRUST can we have with this type of obsession to WIN?
This OBSESSION is the reason why I have much more TRUST in INDEPENDENT candidates when it comes to political support. The INDEPENDENT candidate can win a seat but not the POWER OF GOVERNMENT. This gives me some TRUST that the candidate is running for office for the RIGHT REASON.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)