Quebec is doing what it can to prevent women from wearing niqabs (face covering garments that leave only the eyes exposed). The Quebec Immigration Department has booted two recent immigrants out of French-language classes for covering their faces. At the same time the government has introduced Bill 94, which would prevent provincial employees from wearing niqabs and limit how much effort public employees would need to put into accommodating veil-wearers.
Why has Quebec suddenly decided that niqabs are bad? To “protect equality between women and men” and to “stress the values that unite [Quebecers]“
In other words:
- Quebec has decided to bar women from language training to protect their equality with men.
- Quebec is targeting immigrants and minorities to promote inclusiveness.
I agree with the premise that niqabs are ambulatory prisons that can be used to drive a wedge between women and society.
But saying “you musn’t wear a niqab” is pretty close to saying “you must wear a niqab.” It removes a woman’s right to self determination. In both cases she’s not quite as equal as the man who gets to choose his own duds.
If I were to draft my own Bill 94, it would look something like:
- The only time someone’s face needs to be shown is when they are being authenticated. Women will have to show their faces to bankers, police, doctors, and pharmacists. If a woman can complete her studies with her face covered, then the only time she need show her face at a school is when she’s taking a test or examination.
- Make school uniforms mandatory. Adults have already formed habits and ingrained behaviours that many Quebecers find distasteful. Let them be and concentrate on the next generation. If niqabs are as onerous as their critics suggest, children should jump at the freedom afforded by their uniforms.
“Reasonable accommodation” is a two way street: immigrants will have to adjust to showing their face when necessary and Quebecers will have to adjust to seeing people with different customs. It’s reasonable to expect immigrants to respect our laws and other codified norms, but we can’t expect them to entirely discard their native culture. Similarly, recent immigrants should be able to expect that they will be treated in the same manner as other citizens, as a society we realize that their history is part of who they are and we accept that. Even if have decided we don’t like its origins.
Image by leeno.
“Sitting in the dark,” is associated with poverty, losers, and psychopaths. Which is why I don’t get Earth Hour. In case you haven’t heard of it, the idea is that people should turn off their lights for one hour at 8:30 on March 27 to show that they support action on climate change. The “support action on climate change” part makes sense. I get that. I support that.
But I don’t get the “turn off their lights” part.
If we’re trying to convince Canada’s population that we should do something about climate change, we aren’t going to win any converts by telling them they have to reduce their quality of life. People associate lighting with being modern. In our society, you only sit in the dark if there’s something wrong with you. If we want to actually do something, we should try to show how easy it is to live green. We should point out that we waste a crap-load of energy on inefficiency. We should point out that our energy consumption has risen by 10% between 1990 and 2003, but our standard of living hasn’t changed (while our real incomes have fallen).
If I got to design a replacement for Earth Hour, it would go something like this: A bunch of my fellow hippies would gather on Parliament Hill on Saturday morning with batteries and generators. We’d build a stage, and invite a bunch of acts to come out an play. Come 8:30 we’d start the show. It would be powered by generators running on non-food sourced biomass (such as agricultural waste) and batteries charged from renewable sources. Everyone who could produce a valid bus transfer, or a piece of ID with an address within two kilometers of the event would get a free drink. Everyone who brought their own drink container would get $1 off booze ($2 if the container still had the skanky remains of their morning coffee). Anyone who drove would have to stare into Fat Cat’s unblinking eye for ten minutes.
And now for a numbers rant: the bizarre part about Earth Hour is that lighting really is the least of our problems. In 2003, Canada produced 10,477,207 terajoules (TJ) of energy from green house gas emitting sources. 15.3% of that was converted to electricity. In 2003, we used 63,000 TJ of electricity for lighting. That’s 3.9% of our total green-house-gas emitting electricity use, or .6% of our total energy use.
It’s a pity that snarling crowds at Ottawa U prevented Ann Coulter from speaking.
Conservative types are holding this up as an affront to free speech. Last night’s “John Counsel” show on CFRA had the usual suspects: various flavours of little-”c” conservatives complaining that the Man is holding them down.[1] And, on the small scale, they’re right.
But I’m not so sure about the bigger picture. Anyone who wants to find out about Ann Coulter’s ideas can do so. You can find her on TV. You can find her in the library. You can find her on Youtube and on the Fox website. One could say that there’s a Coulter surplus in the mediasphere. Assuming she’s towing the Republican/Conservative party line, there are plenty of blogs and websites pushing the same ideas.
Now I’m going to embark on some speculation. I assume that the pitchfork wielding mob protesters that shut down the talk last night were the people that Ms. Coulter allegedly bashes: Muslims, the educated, homosexuals, people who read, Jews, and political moderates. If I wanted to hear the counterpoint to Ms. Coulter’s tirades, I would have to do a lot more work, as there’s no single socially progressive media outlet on the scale of Fox news, and no think-tank with Fox’s reach.[2]
That doesn’t justify shutting down a talk. That doesn’t justify barring hundreds of people from hearing Ms. Coulter speak. But it’s worth remembering.
Image by Gage Skidmore.
—
1. I stopped listening to the show when John Counsel started shouting down a caller that said “I agree, but what Ann Coulter says isn’t true.” Apparently freedom of speech is only important when it echoes your opinion.
2. You could argue that the BBC or CBC would approach the scale of Fox’s reach, but neither conglomerate pushes a single viewpoint in quite the way that Fox News does.
The problem with social media is it makes you read new things. Here’s my response to a post that bubbled up in my Buzz feed:
The premise of the post seems to be that religion alters “traits” rather than current state, and that these altered states are a good thing.
I disagree with both of these assumptions.
Did good ol’ fashioned religions cause people to “radically re-think the social order”? Not really. When religions are adopted by the state, they preserve the social order. Think of Islam or Catholicism. Universal suffrage, the (US ethnic) civil rights movement, and abolitionism were artifacts of their time that were adopted by populist religious groups.
When religions are used as tools to change the social order, are the results necessarily positive? No. Just take a look at the crusades or Iran’s Basij (volunteer religious vice squad). We can toss Afghanistan’s Taliban or any number of other self appointed moral police forces throughout history.
The West’s move away from organized religion probably has more to do with the US anti-establishment backlash of the 60s and the Christian church’s failure to keep up with current morality (viz the Catholic church’s various sexual abuse cover ups, and the spasms of hate reacting against gay marriage and the ordination of women). At the same time, less and less of our lives need a mystical explanation, and people are finding it easier to operate without the small scale mutual aide that religion once provided.
Religion isn’t falling to mysticism, established religions are creaking under the weight of an open and accepting society. As time goes on, either religion will become more personal (meaning fewer organized religions) or organized religions will adapt to our progressive social landscape. Or we’ll fall into a spasm of social conservativism and the old-skool religions will suddenly be relevant again.
PS: Is the “the Market” a religion? No, not really. Fervent belief isn’t a religion any more than believing in Santa Claus or cheering on a sports team.
“Innocent until proven guilty.” Remember that phrase? As of Monday afternoon, it seems to have gone out of style.
I’m referring, of course, to the allegations that Col. Russell Williams killed Jessica Lloyd and Cpl. Marie-France Comeau, and sexually assaulted two others. The Citizen has trumpeted the story on their front page for three days this week. The CBC radio news has found reasons to mention it in most of their news casts, going to far as to refer to it as the colonel case. Coverage has been heavy enough that General Walter “there-are-no-allegations-of-torture-whoops-yes-there-are” Natynczyk gave a press conference yesterday about an anti-military backlash.
Amid this rash of coverage, it’s easy to forget that the accused hasn’t been convicted. We don’t know what the evidence is. We haven’t heard anything more than allegations. We must consider Williams innocent until he is proven otherwise.
For that to happen, our news outlets have to learn some self control. The case has everything an editor could ask for to boost ratings: beautiful women, sex, violence, a fall from grace, and a small-town celebrity. But that doesn’t excuse the feeding frenzy going on right now. Williams may turn out to be innocent: the police may have made a mistake, new evidence may come to light, or the evidence provided may be insufficient.
Now, don’t get me wrong. I assume that the police are doing their job, and that they have strong evidence, and are likely to win a conviction when this comes to court. If Williams is guilty of these horrific crimes, then I hope he is prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law and his life is ruined. But until he has his day in court, we must give him the benefit of the doubt.
In case you’re looking for some podcast action, here’s the Pie Palace endorsed list:
Highly recommended:
Planet Money (by NPR) – I can’t recommend this podcast enough. It’s a lay-person’s economics show, covering current issues relating to the US economy. The hosts are to economics what ninjas are to kicking ass. And they do it without being boring.
The Age of Persuasion (by CBC and Pirate Radio) – An insider’s view of advertising. Given that it’s produced by an advertising writer, it’s not surprisingly that it’s really, really fun to listen to. A little short on content, but the production value makes up for that.
Recommended:
Search Engine (by TVO) – A current affairs show dealing specifically with internet-related issues. It’s pretty geeky, which is probably why CBC dropped it, but the host is knowledgeable and (kind of) funny.
This American Life (by NPR) – A general interest show. Each podcast features four or five stories relating to a theme. It’s kind of humorous, but occasionally dips into serious topics. About half the episodes are too saccharine for my taste.
White Coat, Black Art (by CBC) – A current affairs program about health related issues. The host, an ER doctor, interviews doctors and other health professionals for their perspective on various issues. The show is interesting, but rarely looks at the public policy side of medicine (such as lowering cost, improving quality of service). Worth listening to, nonetheless.
Recommended with reservations:
Shot of Jaq – A show about open source from a couple of Ubuntu employees. Each show covers a specific topic, and is intended to get listeners talking on the show’s website. The shows are quick (which is probably the best thing about them) but tend to ramble. The hosts rarely offer much insight into the issue they’re talking about.
The Current (by CBC) – A middling current affairs program. Each podcast is about 20 minutes long, in which the host tries to conduct at least two sets of interviews. The interviews usually sound rushed, and the guests are of variable quality. At the end of each program, I feel like I’ve been given a quick overview of the given topic, but without any real depth. I’m not sure why I keep listening to this.
Quirks and Quarks (by CBC) – I really, really want to like this show. It’s CBC’s sole science show. It features interviews with various boffins about their latest discoveries. But it’s really, really dry. As much as I try to listen to it, I find myself tuning it out. Which is too bad, since the quality of reporting is top notch, and the host does a great job at making complex information accessible.
Terrible:
The Moth – Imagine the worst whackjobery of CBC’s Ideas, mixed with the bland self-adulation of CBC’s Tapestry. Each relatively quick episode is supposedly a true story from some egoist’s person’s life, being told on-stage without props or a script. It’s like nails on a chalk-board. I suffered through four episodes before I finally unsubscribed. Why did it take so long? Because I’m a masochist.
How do you define success when it comes to a protest? Two weeks ago, when I hooked up with Canadians Against Proroguing Parliament (CAPP), I would have defined a successful protest as having a bunch of people show up.
4000 people attending the anti-prorogation rally in Ottawa
In that case, today’s protest against Stephen Harper shutting down Parliament was epic. Sorry,
. 3,500+ folks turned out. Speakers spoke. Fists were shaken. Signs were waved.
So what?
Let’s geek out a little bit here. Why hold a protest?
- To scare the bejesus out of your opposition. Imagine your company pays kids in Sri Lanka to chew asbestos to make iPhones. Everyone likes iPhones, nobody cares about cancer kids overseas. Life is good. Until one day when you show up at work and there are a thousand people burning you in effigy. You may start to consider other ways of making iPhones.
- To impress the pundits. Media, commentators, bloggers, and other self-declared arbiters of importance will pooh-pooh your cause when they think it’s just you and your mom who care about it. When you and your mom organize a rally that brings a couple of thousand people out, those commentators will change their position. And if they think you’re important, that helps scare your opposition all the more, and draw more folks into your movement.
- To attract more supporters. It’s really disheartening to feel like you’re the only person who feels something. A rally can help solve that. It’s shows potential supporters that they aren’t alone and they have a group to plug into. Hopefully, it will swell your ranks, and enable future (metaphoric) asskicking on your issue.
Harper effigy beside a protester's sign
All of this said, we’re in a weird place. We have certainly have an opposition: Harper and every power-grubbing prime minister from the past 30 years. But we don’t have an “us”. Yeah, there are 213,178 people in a Facebook group, and three opposition parties doing everything they can to ride our momentum; but there’s nobody at the head of
CAPP waving a sword and yelling “CHARGE!”
So what did our protest accomplish?
- Scared the opposition? Hard to tell. Intrepid PiePalace reporters are busily peeking in the windows of 24 Sussex to see if a night-light was left on. When we find out, you’ll be the first to know.
- Impressed the pundits? Maybe. Mostly? Definitely.
- Attracted more supporters? Again, hard to tell. The Facebook membership seems to have plateaued, but it seems unlikely to grow, since it was explicitly aimed at this weekend’s protest.
A sympathetic observer might call that two out of three. An unsympathetic type might call that one out of three. Either way, it’s better than a fail. We’ll know the real result when we see the responses from MPs, the government, and the public.
I just got home from
Ottawa anti-prorogation rally.
3,500 braved sub-zero temperatures for two hours to show their support for our Parliamentary democracy. Nothing short of awesome. Well done, Ottawa! (I’ll post pics once I warm up)
To be “winning”, for once. I started refreshing the
anti-prorogation Facebook group’s web page. Every few seconds, when I refresh, another few people have joined the group. It’s gone from less than twenty thousand when I saw it on Monday, to 98,840 now.
Yeah, it’s just a Facebook group. But it feels nice to be part of something verging on a majority.
Another year, another prorogation.
In December 2008, Stephen Harper faced a united opposition willing to vote his government down. He prorogued Parliament.
In December 2009, Stephen Harper faced questions about his government’s policies in Afghanistan and an unfriendly Senate. He prorogued Parliament again.
When Parliament is prorogued, all of the government legislation working its way through the House is discarded. Committees are disbanded before they’ve reached a productive resolution. Harper’s action costs taxpayers money and slows down the work of government. Worse, it’s an abuse of the law: Harper appears to be shutting down our legislature for partisan reasons. Instead of taking his lumps, Harper is taking his ball and going home.
Happily, the story seems to be gaining traction. A Facebook group protesting the move has doubled in size in the last 24 hours: it’s now up to over 40,000 members. Comments on CBC seem to universally damn Harper’s decision. There’s talk of a rally on January 25 23 to protest the prorogation.
In some senses, a rally won’t have any effect. Parliament won’t reconvene until March, regardless of how many rallies are held. But it may remind our Prime Minister that he is a public servant, and as such, he should be working on our behalf. To quote Mr. Harper:
When a government starts trying to cancel dissent or avoid dissent … is when it’s rapidly losing its moral authority to govern.
UPDATE: I had the wrong date for the rally. As RG mentions in the comments, it’s January 23, not January 25.
“The problem is TransFair can’t limit the usage of ‘Fairly Traded.’ They can & rightfully do frown upon...” 
“Just for your information “Fairly Traded” and “Fairly Traded Certified” are two different things....” 
“Bevans, I think you need this plugin http://wordpress.org/extend/pl ugins/time-machine/ It lets you do hourly.” 
I have two...” 
“you don’t have a clue unless you’ve went through it or know some one who has.My daughter was 7 of age when she...” 
