Some Thoughts on the Feast of Corpus Christi

I grew up as a privileged white male Catholic in Apartheid South Africa. In my senior high school days I slowly started to become politically aware, increasingly so through my student days and into adulthood. Outspoken critics of apartheid such as Desmond Tutu, Anglican Archbishop of Cape Town and Eugene Hurley O.M.I., Catholic Archbishop of my home town, Durban, inspired me and others to try to live with integrity as a Christian in the context of that place and time. 

There were also a few priests who dared to interpret and apply the Sunday mass readings to the social context and unjust laws of that time. These were all branded by politicians and by many in the white congregations as "meddlesome priests" and "churchmen meddling in politics who should stick to religion," even though there was nothing partisan in their homilies. Some were arrested and deported. Others were detained for 72 hours for questioning, released as required by law, and then immediately detained again for another 72 hours of 'questioning', all within the law. A close priest friend of mine, Fr Cosmas Desmond O.F.M., was banned and placed under house arrest. Another close friend, Fr Casimir Paulsen cmm, was arrested and then deported. Author, Catholic theologian and National Chaplain of the Young Christian Students (YCS) Albert Nolan O.P., went into hiding for a period.

More deafening, however, was the pious and devout silence of the majority of Christian and Catholic preachers. As happened in Germany after the Second World War, so after the fall of apartheid, the Catholic Church scrambled to find names of priests and bishops who had 'grasped the nettle' and spoken out against the evils of the previous regime.

With this as background, I recommend to your reading pleasure the Sunday Scripture Reflection for the Feast of Corpus Christi this year from the Catholic Theological Union by Scott C Alexander. I believe that this is an excellent example of "grasping the nettle".

Archbishop Desmond Tutu on Climate Change

Climate change is a moral, human rights issue as was apartheid! Climate change deniers are not merely on the same, wrong side of history as flat earth proponents, they are also morally culpable and must be held to account for the damage and suffering they are causing.

This culpability and need for accountability is even greater for those who acknowledge climate change but continue to invest for profit in industry that is exacerbating the problem.

 We desperately need research to find more economical ways to store wind and solar energy. If one-fifth of the money spent on oil exploration had gone into this research imagine where we could be today!

The UN's De Schutte: an academic or ill-informed (but not both without contradiction)

In 1966 Senator Robert Kennedy visited South Africa at the invitation of the then National Union of South African Students (NUSAS.) When Senator Kennedy was criticized in the government- controlled media for daring to comment on South Africa's problems when he had only been in the country a short time, Alan Paton responded with a parable where he compared South Africa to "a room full of people with all the doors and windows closed, and all the people smoking and drinking and talking. And a stranger from outside opens the door and exclaims- Phew What a fug in here ! And they shout at him: How do you know ? You only just came in." (In: Peter Alexander. Alan Paton: A Biography. New York: Oxford University Press, 1994, p. 343.) - quoted in http://www.rfksafilm.org/html/back.php
Of course, the apartheid regime in South Africa (and their lackey media supporters) was not the first government in the world to get prickly in response to criticism from *outsiders*, nor the only one. Hitler didn't like it either. George Bush hardly welcomed outside criticism and more recently one thinks immediately of Robert Mugabe in Zimbabwe, Gaddafi in Libya, and the governments of China, Cuba, North Korea, Egypt, Afghanistan, India and Pakistan.
Sadly, the present Canadian Government in the persons of Immigration Minister Jason (the UN is out of line) Kenney and Health Minister Leona (He's an ill-informed and patronizing academic) Aglukkaq has shown itself to be just as prickly toward the United Nations Special Rapporteur on the Right to Food Olivier De Schutter who recently blasted Canada for tolerating inequality and lack of access to nutritious diets among its poor and First Nation citizens.
Olivier De Schutter, whose damning report is based on an 11-day visit to Canada, says the country's rate of food insecurity is "unacceptable" and called on the federal government to adopt a national right-to-food strategy.
"What I've seen in Canada is a system that presents barriers for the poor to access nutritious diets and that tolerates increased inequalities between rich and poor, and aboriginal and non-aboriginal peoples," De Schutter told reporters in Ottawa Wednesday.
See CTV News:: http://m.ctv.ca/winnipeg/20120516/UN-Right-to-Food-monitor-De-Schutter-120516.html
The funny thing about truth is that it stands on its own through the shifting sands of time even though some powerful people think it can be decreed or established (or not) by majority vote. The judgement of history has never been kind to such as these.
I cannot help thinking that De Schutter is about as ill-informed about the subject of his speciality as was Bobby Kennedy or as the scientists whose jobs have been cut by a government finding its ideology at odds with the evidence from their research.
Sent from my BlackBerry

Uncomfortable reading and viewing - Apartheid in Canada?

Susan Delacourt tweeted: If you can only read one column today, http://bit.ly/s8iB9J by @ChantalHbert, on Jekyll&Hyde government. Hyde side isn't pretty. #cdnpoli

I read the column and am grateful for the recommendation from Delacourt. I agree. This is a must read: Hébert: Expanded Parliament, better governance? Not likely

Canada: Apartheid Nation?
I also came across a few YouTube videos on the subject of Attawapiskat and First Nations living conditions. Coming from South Africa and having lived through apartheid days, albeit as a White Umlungu, it hits a raw nerve for me when people equate what is happening here in Canada with apartheid in South Africa. There was lots of inequality in the world in the days of apartheid. What made apartheid so repulsive and odious was the fact that the inequality was enshrined in the laws of the land. If the law cannot protect a statistically significant proportion of the general population identified, in the case of Canada, as First Nation then one could make a case for apartheid. I don't know enough about it to make a judgement, but watching these videos it seems one could make a case for calling this apartheid.

I'm not going to blame the Conservatives alone although their current performance is worse than pathetic - possibly criminal. This is clearly something that has been piling up for decades. First Nations issues have been conspicuously absent from all the Federal elections since I have been eligible to vote. It's always been about the economy. Ingrid and I were listening to a talk show in the car today. The talk show host mentioned that poverty is not only in the "remote" communities and wondered aloud who was remote; is it the people on Hudson Bay, or us?

Canada: Apartheid Nation (2011 - Official Trailer)
"Canada: Apartheid Nation" is a documentary short which sheds light on the devastating situation that many Northern First Nations people in Canada are forced to live in.
Canada: Apartheid Nation





ATTAWAPISKAT HOUSING-CRISIS - Charlie Angus
Footage from November 2011 site visit by MP Charlie Angus.

The Commonwealth and South Africa's Shame

When I was a teenager, South Africa left the Commonwealth and stepped into isolation because of the 'shaming' action and condemnation undertaken by other member nations of the Commonwealth.
Once again, South Africa is 'shamed' in the eyes of all in the world who value human rights. South Africa has chosen to join with those Commonwealth countries where human rights are being trampled upon - forced marriages, laws against homosexuality, political repression - in objecting to a proposal for a rights commissioner.
A shame on you, South Africa.
I wonder if there is any moral relevance to the continued, not inexpensive existence of this no longer august body which is the Commonwealth?

Asbestos: I am embarrassed, ashamed and sorry - and so should all Canadians

On Thursday, 28 April of this year I posted a blog entry, Stand up for your reputation or face the judgement of history.

So no surprise, then, that on Friday, June 24, the Canadian Government once again embarrassed our country on the international stage. Canada alone prevented the United Nations from adding chrysotile asbestos to the global list of hazardous substances.

Here in Canada we won’t allow asbestos in our homes and offices. We are spending millions to remove it from our Parliament buildings. Here in Canada, we know asbestos is hazardous. Yet our government refuses to let the world officially recognize it as hazardous because they want to continue to export it to countries whose non-existent health regulations have not caught up with modern environmental health and safety realities - without even a warning label.

I am convinced that the judgement of history will weigh very heavily on this action of our Canadian Government last Friday. Some political decisions are just that - political ideology with little or no great moral component. For example, should toll roads be publically owned or privatized? Other political decisions have such a huge moral component that the political element, over time, continuously diminishes until all that is left is the moral component. Consider slavery, apartheid, the Holocaust as obvious, if extreme, examples. At this stage nobody has any idea how historians will view a government that knowingly chose short term balance of trade gains, and vote garnering in one riding in Quebec, over the health and safety of millions of unwitting people in the Third World. I am pursuaded that the judgement will be such that I want my grandchildren to know that I did not agree with it, was not a part of it, and stood up against it.

Whether or not you voted for Stephen Harper in the last election, for the sake of your conscience and your reputation with your children and your grandchildren, let your voice be heard. Here are two ways that you can do this. The Green Party of Canada is inviting all Canadians to join in saying “We’re sorry!”

Firstly, if you have a FaceBook account, you can post a message of apology on the Asbestos Facebook page by clicking "Like" and then entering your message. I have posted the following:
Dear World. I am so sorry that Canada has let you down. As someone who has cancer and who has a close family member who is a cancer survivor, I deeply regret and am ashamed of the cancer that is going to bring so much needless suffering to so many people as a result of the nationally selfish decision that was made by our government that does not have the courage of its convictions to allow asbestos in its own parliamentary halls of power. I wish these words and these apologies could undo the harm that is going to come. I am truly sorry for this immoral action.

Secondly, you can send your own email of apology to imsorry@greenparty.ca and the Green Party will forward your email to the General Secretary of the United Nations.

If you are not a Green Party supporter and so are not comfortable doing something associated with the Green Party that is understandable, but for goodness sake, do something to distance yourself from this shameful, immoral action of our government and that will let Stephen Harper know that he has crossed the line of moral acceptability.

Photos on this page can be found on a blog called Mesothelioma Information.

Apartheid was propped up by first-past-the-post elections

I voted a number of times in South Africa in the aprtheid era including, and especially, the last three or four elections before the fall of apartheid. Even allowing for the fact that only whites had the vote, I was painfully aware that in the last few elections less than 50% of (white) voters were maintaining the apartheid government in power. The reason for this was a gerrymandering of electoral districts that was enabled by a first-past-the-post system of voting. Voting districts with mainly opposition voters, largely in the cities, had electorate numbers close to the upper limit allowed. Those supporting the regime, mainly in rural areas, had fewer voters, close to the lower limits required. The first-past-the-post system ensured we had "stable," majority government elected year after year by a minority of voters. It was no accident, but a very deliberate decision that was made, to conduct the first democratic elections in South Africa using a system of proportional representation.

The big fear that many Canadians have expressed over proportional representation is the "instability" of minority government or, horror of horrors, a "coalition". Quite honestly, I have to ask which is worse, minority or coalition government on the one hand or a democratically unrepresentative, winner takes all, government that often as not results in two parties with not dissimilar vote counts having a vastly different number of seats in parliament as illustrated in Canada by the Bloc Québécois and the Green Party after the last election? Why should somebody whom 63% of voters have voted against be the one to represent them because the vote was split 37-33-17-13? Why should smaller parties be made to feel guilty for "splitting" the vote on the left or on the right? Is this a democracy or isn't it? I am all for the protection of minorities but why do the democratic rights of the 37% trump the democratic rights of the 63%?

In the riding where I live, the outcome of an election, year after year, is a foregone conclusion. Peter Van Loan will return to Parliament as surely as night follows day. Why should I even bother voting? I know my vote won't count for anything other than to put $2 into the Green Party coffers. On the radio this evening I heard a young immigrant Canadian quoted as saying, "Dad, don't vote. A choice between bad and worse is no choice at all."

I honestly and strongly believe that our winner-takes-all style of voting coupled with our reluctance to see the political parties representing "us" trying to find middle ground with "them" is what has us mired in the point-scoring, negative politicking we have witnessed for the last seven years. It is also hugely responsible for people who do not believe that their vote counts for anything staying away from the ballot boxes.

I found the following list of 82 countries currently using some variation of proportional representation.

Here are a few references:
Wikipedia - Proportional representation

Wikipedia - First-past-the-post voting


Or do your own search: proportional representation pros and cons

This smacks not just of prejudice, but of apartheid.

These words were written by Toronto Star columnist, Christopher Hume, in today's edition of the newspaper under the headline: Is citizenship now defined by the colour of your skin.

Mohamud's case is a perfect example; her nightmare began when a functionary in the Canadian High Commission in Nairobi agreed with a Kenyan airport official and decided she wasn't the woman whose photograph appears in her passport. We were told, incredibly, that it had something to do with her lips. She was immediately declared an "imposter" and Kenyan authorities were asked to prosecute her.

Although she produced all kinds of identification – including a driver's licence, OHIP card, social insurance card and a Canadian citizenship certificate to boot – her fate was sealed. The poor woman even spent time in a Kenyan jail, the horror of which one can only begin to imagine.

Conclusion? Nothing in Canadian law stops the government from "picking and choosing" which Canadians it will help and who it will abandon, a former senior diplomat warns.

I still find it incredible that: 1) Canadian authorities would hand over a purportedly Canadian passport to the authorities of another country, even after they have stamped it void; 2) Canadian authorities take your finger prints and then "destory" them.

I'm also curious to know what they did with the OHIP card, SIN card and Canadian citizenship certificate. Did they hand them over to Kenyan authorities too or give them back to the supposed Imposter?

Ja, well, no, fine.

Racial Bias in Canada?

As a white South African old enough to remember Diefenbaker and Trudeau's campaigns against apartheid and my parents' disparaging remarks about Canadian "hypocrites" who should mind their own business (I didn't agree with them but that's another story,) I was naively surprised when I first learnt about the unresolved issues in Canada around First Nations' treaties and quite shocked upon first hearing about the forced removals of Inuit and Métis children from their families and being placed in "civilised" residential schools. Given these issues and after being raised on a diet of race and human rights in South African politics I am amazed at how insignificant a role race actually plays in Canadian politics, at least judging by the amount of silence raised on these subjects in political rhetoric.

Although not registering the same levels of shock on the Richter Scale as the above, I was still surprised on reading Rosie Dimanno's column in The Star on Saturday which opened with the following words: In a Hamilton courtroom recently, a mistrial was declared – in large part – because too many potential jurors declared themselves to be intrinsically biased against the black defendants.

I don't automatically agree with everything Rosie Dimanno writes and there are some issues where we are far apart, but this article is worth reading. Click here for the article.

Helen Suzman, R.I.P.

Helen Suzman has always been an inspiration for me, confirmed by the wisdom of hindsight, that a single, lone voice speaking out in opposition to injustice, is better than no voice - even if you do not seem to be effecting any change. I remember reading many newspaper reports where she was ridiculed and vilified by both United Party and Nationalist Party M.P.'s because of her opposition to apartheid - and this went on for years and years; credit to the despised "upper" classes of Houghton who voted her back in year after year.

May Helen Suzman rest in peace and may her memory long be an inspiration to all who hunger and thirst after justice who are tempted to give up in the face of overwhelming odds.

Links: 

Helen Suzman Foundation

Wikipedia

Photos

Canada votes in October 2008: Taxes, benefits and the environment.

The first time I was able to vote I was a young nineteen-year-old in South Africa and I voted differently to my parents. They and their generation voted for apartheid. Clearly, they were thinking about themselves, their job security, their retirement, and their taxes. I loved them and I love and respect their memory, but I have to be honest and say that this was the case. 

My parents refused to see that the system they voted for could not last forever and that their children and grandchildren would have to pay for and fix the mess that their politicians created. They turned deaf ears to or castigated the people who were warning them - and who turned out to be right - notably, for me, Helen Suzman and Helen Joseph. (Albert Lutuli and Nelson Mandela were far too "radical" for me in the late 50's and early 60's.)

My family (wife, 5 children) and I came to Canada a little over 10 years ago in 1998 and we came with almost nothing. We have been Canadian citizens for about 5 years and are proudly so. My family and I owe Canada and, in particular, its taxpayers a huge debt of gratitude especially when I think of the subsidized education (elementary, high, college and university), the hip replacement surgery, the post-surgery unemployment benefits, the cancer treatment and other healthcare benefits we have received.

I am approaching "senior" age and am very grateful that Ontario law changed a few years ago so that I will no longer be obligated to retire when I turn 65 because, quite frankly, I cannot afford to retire after being in the Canadian system for only 13 years. Nevertheless, I cannot, in all conscience, repeat the mistakes of my parents and vote with only myself and my retirement in mind. There is a whole generation of children under 18 who cannot vote and who rely on us to vote on their behalf.

I will not attempt to suggest what political party anyone should or should not vote for.  However, I would urge my family and friends and any Canadian reading this blog to think beyond the time between this election and the next. What kind of a world do you want for your children and grandchildren when they are adults? 

Our economy is built on the shrinking foundations of dwindling natural resources which are destructive in our use of them. The world as we know it and abuse it cannot last for even another generation any more than apartheid could have lasted forever. Are we going to start fixing our mess - and paying for it ourselves - or are we going to leave our debt for our grandchildren to pay off for us in between visits to our retirement home or graves?

This, I believe, should be the acid test for a political candidate to get my vote. 

Dear politician, do you have any idea as to what kind of a world, and a Canada in particular, today's three-year-olds should be inheriting from us when they vote in 15 years time? What in your party's platform today is ensuring that we get there and what measureable milestones do you have in your schedule for four years' time, eight years' time?