You are currently browsing The Arbourist’s articles.

Definitional clarity is key in understanding the conflict between women’s rights and gender ideology. Dr. Jones, as usual, brings clarity to the matter at hand.

Neo liberal capitalistic societies tend to promote narratives that reinforce their preferred system of rules and expectations. Examining counter examples and counter-narratives is a necessary task of those who not only want to change society, but also for those who wish to improve the societal conditions in which they exist. The assumption in question is the animal dominance idea. It goes like this:
“Mammals tend to have “alpha” animals – leaders. Doesn’t this prove that monarchies are more biologically normal that self-sacrificing or consensus-based or egalitarian democracies? [..] It turns that dominace-based political and economic systems are the exception, not the rule, in the arc of human history, and they have a nasty habit of imploding every century or so, so as a succession of European, African, South American, and Asian empires show.”
[…]
“The prevailing assumption has always been that because there are identifiable “alpha” members of animal groups – from alpha males amount gorillas to alpha females among wolves – these alpha members must also exercise despotic rules over the other in the tribe, pack, or community”
[…]
“Conradt and Roper discovered that democracy always trumps despotism, both over the short and the long term. When a single leader(despot) or small group of leaders (oligarchy) make the choices, the swings into extreme behaviour tend to be greater and more dangerous to the long term survival of the group. Because in a despotic model the overall needs of the entire group are measured only by the leader’s needs, wrong decisions would be made often enough to put the survival of the group at risk.”
“With democratic decision making, however, the overall knowledge and wisdom of the entire group, along with the needs of the entire group, come into play. The outcome is likely to harm anybody, and the group’s probability of survival is enhanced. ‘Democratic decisions are more beneficial primarily because they tend to produce less extreme decisions,’ they note in the abstract to their paper.
-Hartmann, Thom. Threshold: The Crisis of Western Culture pp. 118 – 120
So, these biologists (see L. Conradt and T. J. Roper’s original article here) putting forward a set of assumptions that contradict the neoliberal “despotism is the way” set of ideas about how animals organize and work (and how it ‘naturally’ occurs in human affairs as well). The democratic impulse, at least according to this paper, is alive and moderately pervasive in the mammalian kingdoms (for a quick summary check out James Randerson in the New Scientist).
I’m quite happy with these results. But that is not to say that they are necessarily the correct interpretation of all the facts of the matter. Our species tendency to pick the fact and narratives that support our own preferences is the bigger lesson to be aware of. I urge my readership to look into both accounts and judge the facts for what they say, not what we wish to them to say.
However, if we continue with democratic animal narrative we can reasonably say something along the lines of what Thom Hartmann says in the closing paragraph of that chapter.
“Those who advocate a dog-eat-dog, “survival of the fittest at the expense of society as a whole” approach to economics and governance are advocating, essentially, for cancer in our body politic. They are ignoring the surrounding environment [see corporate ‘externalities’], which demands a balanced, homeostatic, and altruistic culture. On every continent in the world we find living cultures and cultural remnants that knew this well and that developed elaborate and successful ways to prevent sociopathic individuals whose obsession centred on acquiring wealth at the expense of others, keeping others from being successful at growing and metastasizing.”
-Threshold: The Crisis of Western Culture p.125
I think that there is a fair chunk of evidence that we have let the anti-democratic factions exercise too much control and power in our society. The ruthless exploitation of people and the environment in the name of progress under capitalism reveals a tendency toward the despotic cancerous nature that has typified much of capitalistic theory and practice as of late. We need to be able to explore and understand different methods of organizing our societies and perhaps swinging the pendulum more toward a society that is more altruistic and more democratic in nature.
Some decades ago on a daytime TV talk show – I’ll never find it – the African-American public intellectual, Cornel West, was seated next to some Ku Klux Klan members, and the host said something about the KKK representing white people. West gestured at the white supremacists next to him on the stage and replied, “These people don’t represent white people; they represent morons.” That encapsulated the norm in anti-racist discourse in the post-1960s trajectory (post-MLK/post-hippies). It was not black vs white but, as Dr. King called it, a “coalition of conscience” on one side and racists on the other, “for many of our white brothers, as evidenced by their presence here today, have come to realize that their destiny is tied up with our destiny . . . that their freedom is inextricably bound to our freedom” (“I Have a Dream,” 1963).
How times have changed. Many in the…
View original post 597 more words

Statistics are a part of our lives. Sadly, most people do not have a clue how they work and how they are to be interpreted. Our conservative government here in Alberta continues to find unique and exciting new ways to drop the ball when it comes to dealing with the pandemic. The government has set up mass vaccination clinics in Calgary and Edmonton and both are ghost-towns.
Why?
(**edit – It has been brought to my attention that this comparison is more like orange to apples than oranges to oranges – The type of clot and severity are on quite different scales. However, a better comparison would be the possible chance and complications from the AstraZenca vaccine versus the chance and effects of being infected with Covid 19 or one of its variants and the complications involved. The vaccine is the better choice.)
Because people don’t want to die of AstraZeneca vaccine related blood clots. How likely is that to happen? Roughly the risk is 1 in 250,000.

Scary, right?
The risk of getting blot clots from another injection – Between 3 and 9 people out 10,000 will develop blood clots on the birth control pill.

Yet Birth Control pills are still widely prescribed and used in society with not a great deal of hoopla. That being said, this what the vaccination centre looked like here :

“The mass COVID-19 vaccination clinic at the Edmonton Expo Centre can administer 7,000 shots per day, if operating at full capacity.
On Wednesday, it did 280.
The rapid-flow clinic is solely offering the AstraZeneca vaccine and only to Albertans aged 55 to 64. An Alberta Health Services spokesperson said the Expo clinic did not run at full capacity this week because a slow uptake was expected for the shots.
On its opening day on Monday, the clinic administered 1,632 doses. That dropped sharply the next day to 520. As of Thursday mid-morning, AHS said around 400 people were booked for the day.
Another mass clinic at the Calgary Telus Convention Centre is also facing low appointment numbers after it opened last week.
“The first day we were doing about 5,000. Right now, we have bookings for between 500 and 1,000 people,” Dr. Cheri Nijssen-Jordan, AHS’s vaccine task force co-lead, said in an interview with the Calgary Eyeopener on Thursday.”
The targeted people in the demographic are small in society and are afraid of the AZ vaccine – because blood clots(?).
“Nijssen-Jordan said part of the issue is hesitancy brought on by reports of extremely rare blood clots occurring in people who have received AstraZeneca, also known as Covishield.
On Wednesday, Health Canada announced it had completed a safety review and found that AstraZeneca is safe, and that Canadians over 18 shouldn’t hesitate to take it if offered.
Eligibility is still limited to those over 55 for the time being as the National Advisory Committee on Immunization (NACI) is still reviewing research and hasn’t updated its recommendation. An Alberta Health spokesperson confirmed Wednesday that the province is following NACI’s recommendation and will continue to only offer AstraZeneca to Albertans aged 55 to 64.
Dr. Deena Hinshaw, Alberta’s chief medical officer of health, said Thursday that the province’s Alberta Advisory Committee on Immunization would discuss expanding the age eligibility this week.”
So because of statistical illiteracy we have viable vaccinations sitting on the shelf while not all essential and front line people have been vaccinated.
The UCP government has added fruitless dithering to its already terrible record of dealing with the pandemic in this province.


Your opinions…