again with Harmonic and Imitative Analysis.
again with Harmonic and Imitative Analysis.
(Everybody is free to toe the party line)
In an email leaked today to the Ottawa Citizen, the federal government has plans to increase surveillance of Canadians to include all demonstrations and protests:
“The Government Operations Centre is seeking your assistance in compiling a comprehensive listing of all known demonstrations which will occur either in your geographical area or that may touch on your mandate […] We will compile this information and make this information available to our partners unless of course, this information is not to be shared and not available on open sources. In the case of the latter, this information will only be used by the GOC for our Situational Awareness.”
The Government Operations Centre is a federal agency tasked with managing strategic planning for situations affecting national interests, such as pandemic and natural disaster planning, and also acts as an intelligence clearing-house. It was involved with compiling information on Aboriginal protestors against fracking, but apparently now it’s interested in everybody who disagrees with federal policies and cares enough to make a sign and go marching around with it.
Remember, Canadians: freedom is for businesses, not for people.
An excerpt from The Feminist Battle After the Isla Vista Massacre by Rebecca Solnit:
“Six years ago, when I sat down and wrote the essay “Men Explain Things to Me,” here’s what surprised me: though I began with a ridiculous example of being patronized by a man, I ended with rapes and murders. We tend to treat violence and the abuse of power as though they fit into airtight categories: harassment, intimidation, threat, battery, rape, murder. But I realize now that what I was saying is: it’s a slippery slope. That’s why we need to address that slope, rather than compartmentalizing the varieties of misogyny and dealing with each separately. Doing so has meant fragmenting the picture, seeing the parts, not the whole.
A man acts on the belief that you have no right to speak and that you don’t get to define what’s going on. That could just mean cutting you off at the dinner table or the conference. It could also mean telling you to shut up, or threatening you if you open your mouth, or beating you for speaking, or killing you to silence you forever. He could be your husband, your father, your boss or editor, or the stranger at some meeting or on the train, or the guy you’ve never seen who’s mad at someone else but thinks “women” is a small enough category that you can stand in for “her.” He’s there to tell you that you have no rights.
Threats often precede acts, which is why the targets of online rape and death threats take them seriously, even though the sites that allow them and the law enforcement officials that generally ignore them apparently do not. Quite a lot of women are murdered after leaving a boyfriend or husband who believes he owns her and that she has no right to self-determination.”
Go read the rest.
This is what we get for not changing the system that is killing us – a half-assed, piecemeal romp toward oblivion.
“Richard Smith, in a tour de force paper published in the Real-World Economics Review, “Green capitalism: the god that failed,” summed up the dilemma:
“[T]he problem is not just special interests, lobbyists and corruption. … [Under] capitalism, it is, perversely, in the general interest, in everyone’s immediate interests to do all we can to maximize growth right now, therefore, unavoidably, to maximize fossil fuel consumption right now — because practically every job in the country is, in one way or another, dependent upon fossil fuel consumption. … There is no way to cut CO2 emissions by anything like 80 percent without imposing drastic cuts across the board in industrial production. But since we live under capitalism, not socialism, no one is promising new jobs to all those … whose jobs would be at risk if fossil fuel use were really seriously curtailed. … Given capitalism, they have little choice but to focus on the short-term, to prioritize saving their jobs in the here and now to feed their kids today — and worry about tomorrow, tomorrow.” [page 121, March 2011]
“Green” enterprises will not be granted an exemption. They, too, will be pushed by market forces the same as any other enterprise. Dr. Smith writes:
“Biofuels, windpower and organic crops — all might be environmentally rational here or there, but not necessarily in every case or forever. But once investments are sunk, green industries have no choice but to seek to maximize profits and grow forever regardless of social need and scientific rationality, just like any other for-profit business.” [page 142]
All the more is that so for the capitalist system as a whole. Fred Magdoff and John Bellamy Foster, in their book What Every Environmentalist Needs to Know About Capitalism, write:
“ ‘Green capitalism,’ even if products are produced using the utmost environmental care and designed for easy reuse, offers no way out of a system that must expand exponentially and thus continue to ratchet up its use of natural resources, its chemical pollution, its contaminated sewage sludge, its garbage, and its many other toxic substances. Some of these ‘fixes’ will probably slow down the rate of environmental destruction, but the magnitude of the needed changes dwarfs these approaches.” [page 120]”
The intro to an article I wish I had written.
How is that a man can leave a 140-page manifesto describing, in explicit detail, how much he hates women, why he hates women, why he thinks women deserve to be punished, and precisely how he plans to punish them — and then his subsequent killing spree is attributed to everything but misogyny?
Honestly, I’m sure it’s tempting to shy away from that painful truth. It’s comforting to pretend that future killings can be prevented just by making mental health care more easily accessible, or by locking up all the guns. Just like it’s comforting to pretend that rape can be prevented if women just wear modest clothes and cover our drinks. Acknowledge that Elliot Rodger’s killing spree was grounded in misogyny, and we have to acknowledge that preventing such tragedies isn’t about changes in laws —- it’s about changes in society, in a culture that supports the idea that women are objects and sex with a woman is a man’s god-given entitlement.
Misogyny is the issue.
Mr.Chang is the author of the 23 Things They Don’t Tell You About Capitalism. It is a accessible book on Economics and economic theory that really, everyone should read. This brief twenty minute talk on understanding Economics is both necessary and enlightening.
Letting women die because of unsafe abortions is awesome!
Isn’t is cute when our politicians decide that keeping the zany religious fruit-bats in their ‘base’ happy is more important that saving women’s lives? Just ask our lovely PM Steven Harper all about appeasing the religious zealotry that makes up a portion of his base on how the blood of women will appease their ignoble quest to save ‘life’.
“According to the World Health Organization, 21.6 million women experience an unsafe abortion worldwide each year. The 47,000 who die make up about 13 per cent of annual maternal deaths.
As part of Millennium Development Goal No. 5, which aims to reduce the maternal mortality rate by 75 per cent from 1990 to 2015, the United Nations secretary general came up with a global strategy for women and children’s health. Among other things, it includes saving the lives of women who experience unsafe abortions.”
Letting 47,000 women die from unsafe abortions is par for the course for our noble “pro-life” constituency (because they love fetuses more that women). I may have already commented on this untidy dilemma our pro-life friends find themselves in.
Now what is our besieged PM to do?
Step One – Waffle with vague generalities about consensus.
The PM:
“We’re trying to rally a broad public consensus behind what we’re doing, and you can’t rally a consensus on that issue, as you know well in this country,” he said.
“It’s not only controversial here, it’s controversial and often illegal in many recipient nations.”
Harper doesn’t agree with the suggestion that he is exporting his beliefs abroad to other countries by not funding abortion services.
“We’re really not taking a position on that. We have taxpayers’ money and we have great needs,” he said to Thibedeau.
Step Two – Concede that the anti-choicers have a large home in his base and pissing them off makes Harper have a sad.
“And frankly, there’s more than enough things that we can finance, including contraception, without getting into an issue that really would be extremely divisive for Canadians and donors.”
Step Three – Say that supporting contraception is enough and to those bitchez that do get knocked up, so sorry about your luck… luv Canada.
Melinda Gates:
“One of the things we don’t invest in enough, as a world, are contraceptives. We put women in that situation because they don’t have access and when you talk to them in the developing world, they say, ‘I want that tool, I want that shot I used to get,'” she said.
“We can work upstream on these issues to help women where they are, so you don’t ever put them in that situation, and to me, that’s the smart investment to make.”
So yah, enjoy your unsafe abortions wimmenz cause Canada just ran out fucks to give about your situation.
The NDP Hélène Laverdière critic rightly lambasted Harper and his anti-choice concerns.
“Well, there’s 47,000 women who die each year from unsafe abortions,” she said in an interview with CBC News.
“So, if we want to save every woman, we have to address that issue too.”
According to the World Health Organization, 21.6 million women experience an unsafe abortion worldwide each year. The 47,000 who die make up about 13 per cent of annual maternal deaths.
This from a letter sent to Harper on May 28th:
“Global parliamentarians recommend that women’s reproductive health can only be achieved when the human rights of women, girls and youth are realized.
So if the abortion debate is over in Canada and abortion is a legal and reasonable part of the umbrella of women’s reproductive health, then what exactly is your problem Stephen? Or do women get their rights only when it is politically expedient?
[Source for Quotes: cbc.ca]
bleatmop
Mystro
Dead Wild Roses 
Your opinions…