"Active paternalism", i.e. vestigial imperialism

David Brooks wrote an article in the New York Times basically stating that Haitian culture is "progress-resistant" and that this "resistance" is making the Haitian earthquake disaster worse. He says that throwing money at the problem is not going to help and that an "active paternalism" is needed to tell Haitians what to do to improve.

Mr. Brooks' article receives the tongue-lashing it deserves over at thwap's.

Brooks ignores the fact that the Haitian government right now is just an inept puppet government set up with external influence by the usual suspects. The West is already actively interfering in Haiti to no one's benefit. "Active paternalism" on how to use money is basically a form of economic imperialism, telling the Haitians what to do through economic means. Perhaps the Haitians would be better off if the West actually listened to what they say they need and then actually worked with them to help them achieve their goals, not the West's. Still, Haitians continue to do their best with the little that they have.

I never thought I would have to say this, as it should be obvious after an earthquake, but please donate if you can. Don't worry about what David Brooks says about money being wasted. Money is needed, and NGOs generally know what they are doing (unlike meddling foreign governments).

Peace and long life.

Harper's antics: The concise and detailed versions

Well, one knows of the importance of the spirit of the law. All languages are inherently imprecise, and different people often interpret words differently. This is why there is such a thing as "legalese": it attempts to make language as precise as possible. Still, people are inherently flawed, and even the best attempts at removing all ambiguity often leave holes that can be exploited by those who are unscrupulous.

This is the argument of this open letter, signed by 175 academics, with regards to the repeated prorogation of Parliament by Harper. Legal, but not in the spirit of the system. One person should not hold so much power over the only elected body on the federal level of government.

For those looking for a much longer (yet still incomplete) list of specific actions by the Conservatives, here are is one. (H/t to Dr. Dawg.)

Peace and long life.

One possible (and easy) way to give the House of Commons authority...

... over its own prorogation or dissolution is described in this article (h/t to Impolitical).

According to the article, all the House of Commons would need to do is pass a motion stating that any Prime Minister who would prorogue or dissolve Parliament before a vote in the House of Commons would do so in contempt of Parliament. (I would presume that this wouldn't be the case when an election is required by the Constitution, though.)

Of course, Harper has already done a lot in contempt of Parliament (such as refusing to turn over documents relating to the Afghan detainee issue despite the passage of a motion in Parliament)... Still, the precedent would be set to move the power to Parliament (where it should have been in the first place).

Hopefully, such a motion is passed by the Opposition immediately after Parliament reconvenes.

The larger issue of the more powerful-than-expected Governor General will require much more work (and effectively unanimous support) to resolve, though...

Peace and long life.

Somehow, I doubt the world is a safer place...

... now that eight 11 to 17-year olds are dead after a secret American-led operation in Afghanistan (h/t to wmtc). Six high-school and two elementary-school students were shot at night by American-led troops, five of them after being handcuffed (and thus, no longer "threats") in one room. Two more adults were shot in the operation.

No arrests were made (despite the handcuffing of five of the soon-to-be-victims), just a lot of killing. The American-led soldiers acted as judge, jury, and executioner here, which is just inexcusable.

In addition to not accomplishing anything for the sake of "security", the operation only resulted in far greater anti-American sentiment and renewed hatred toward NATO troops:

The allegations of civilian casualties led to protests in Kabul and Jalalabad, with children as young as 10 chanting “Death to America” and demanding that foreign forces should leave Afghanistan at once.

It's not worth it. NATO may be superior militarily, but it doesn't hold the moral high ground. NATO troops (including Canadian soldiers) are risking their lives and being ordered to commit war crimes (h/t to thwap) by their governments tens of thousands of kilometres away, only to foment hatred and make new enemies. In the meantime, Afghan civilians die either as collateral... or in this case, in a very deliberate act.

War is good for absolutely nothing, and horrific for absolutely everything else (h/t to Mentarch).

Peace and long life.

Baby steps toward reconvening the Opposition part of Parliament

Liberal Party leader Michael Ignatieff has ordered his caucus to meet on January 25. It is a symbolic gesture so far, with discussions with experts to be held on various issues.

He just needs to take it one step further. Just meet with all of the Opposition. The Conservatives have been able to act like a majority government simply because of the divided Opposition. Understandably, different parties will approach issues differently, and the Opposition does not have to always walk in lockstep. However, with regards to the premature prorogation of Parliament, this is one instance where all of the Opposition must act together. If prorogation is used too frequently, the legislative branch of the federal government will be rendered much slower, more inefficient, and less responsive.

Harper has already scuttled over 30 bills before Parliament, including the government's own anti-crime legislation. He has also disregarded the convention of proroguing Parliament only at the end of a legislative session.

In order to show Harper (and future Prime Ministers) that this will not be tolerated, the Opposition should act in unison and meet. It may only be symbolic. It may end up that they end up working together and preparing for the next Parliamentary session in order to move more quickly (under threat of more frequent prorogation).

Either way there is no harm in all of the Opposition meeting. At worst, nothing is accomplished. At best, public goodwill may be generated, and real work is done in preparation for the next legislative session.

As Wayne Gretzky once said, you miss one hundred percent of the shots that you don't take.

Peace and long life.

BeautifulPeople.com? What the deuce?

BeautifulPeople.com is a dating site consisting of - you guessed it - "beautiful" people as rated by others on the site. In order to sign up, people must meet certain physical appearance criteria as judged by other members of the site.

The site has banned 5000 people who displayed photographs of themselves after gaining weight during the Christmas break. In my opinion, that seems to be quite ugly behaviour. I'm sure the newly-banned people who showed their photographs were just looking for a laugh or two with their friends.

The site founder said that the site's high standard of beauty needed to be maintained. To be fair, it is his site, and it is exactly what it says on the tin (well, external beauty, anyway). Furthermore, it is ultimately up to individuals to decide what they want.

Still, it is a good time to consider what is important in looking for a long-term significant other. External beauty (already subjective as it is) is ultimately fleeting. People grow old. Finding someone who is a good fit personality-wise seems to be the key. Unlike external beauty, people will also grow wiser over the years, hopefully increasing their "inner beauty", so to speak.

People don't grow old into their thirties anymore, as they did for our ancient ancestors. People now live well into their eighties or more. It might be a good idea to think about the long haul and place less importance on subjective external "beauty" (as judged by people on BeautifulPeople.com, anyway) that lasts only a fraction of a person's lifetime.

Peace and long life.

Something to do while waiting...

... for the prorogation of Parliament to end.

It is anticipated that Prime Minister Harper will fill the remaining vacancies in the Senate with Conservatives, giving Conservatives a majority in the Senate. Here is a suggestion: write to independent (and other) senators to lobby them to cross the floor to join the Liberal senators. Given that senators are appointed and not elected, there should be no fuss from their "constituents" (not that a senator represents any constituents).