This is pretty cool. It’s interesting to see participant’s reactions to touch and human skin contact morph from awkward to curious to excited. (video below)

One week ago I attended a Green Party Candidate and Campaign Manager Training weekend at Wilfred Laurier University.  Speaking at this was the Leader of the Green Party; Elizabeth May, Deputy Leader; Adriane Carr, and former Green Party Leader now adviser; Jim Harris.

Elizabeth shared many stories of her political life including the one below which made my heart hurt.  Please read it in it’s entirety.  Here is another story to read as well which is along the same lines

Model Parliament

Submitted by Elizabeth May on 26 January 2008 - 10:14pm.

A week ago Friday I served as Speaker of the House for the Queens University Model Parliament. It was a wonderful opportunity to be with bright and engaged young people – several hundred of them. And, as often as I have been in the House of Commons, I have never before spent an hour in the Speaker’s Chair. The Queens annual model Parliament runs for several days in the period when the House is not in session.

It was a “model” Parliament in many ways. About half of the MPs were women, as opposed to the 20.8% women in the real – and far from model – Parliament. As well, there was a substantial block of Green Party Members of Parliament. The debates were, for the most part, respectful and language was appropriate. No cross-species references occurred and I only rose to call for Order once or twice.

What may have been the most fascinating part of the afternoon was my time in the Government Lobby. Behind the curtains that run along the last row of benches on both sides of the House, are doors to long skinny living room areas. One is called the Opposition Lobby; the other the Government Lobby. In my pre-Green Party leader life, I have spent a lot of time in both. The Government Lobby was a frequent work space when I was Senior Policy Advisor to the federal Minister of Environment back in the mid-1980s. And I frequented both lobbies when I was with Sierra Club of Canada from 1987-2006. It did not strike me until I walked into the Government Lobby to await my turn as Speaker that I had not been in there since Stephen Harper became Prime Minister.
It used to have some paintings on the wall. Past prime ministers, certainly a formal portrait of the Queen. Landscapes. I know there was the occasional photo of current Prime Ministers, but when I walked in this time, I felt chilled to the bone. Every available wall space had a large colour photo of Stephen Harper. Stephen Harper at Alert. Stephen Harper in fire fighter gear. Stephen Harper at his desk. Stephen Harper meeting the Dalai Lama. Even the photo of the Queen showed her in the company of Stephen Harper. None were great photos. None were more than enlarged snapshots in colour. They didn’t feel like art.

The student with me said it was the same in Langevin Block, the Prime ministers Office. Photos of Stephen Harper everywhere.

I will advance no theories as to what this means. Why the Conservatives have chosen not keep any space for art. Is it triumphalism? That they have finally broken down the doors and stormed the castle. Why must the images of Stephen Harper be ubiquitous. Is he afraid his caucus will forget who is in charge? Not likely.

Semiotics is the study of signs and symbols. Someone can figure out what it means that these images dominate. The one thing I know is that it means something.

Me and Ron debate about the existence of right or wrong. Feel free to comment.

Ron and I ring in the new year with the first of many intellectually stimulating “vlog”. Or rather, trite rhetoric from two nobody’s.

As citizens of a “democratic” society, it actually scares me how quickly our natural human rights are vanishing at such a frightening rate. While watching what has happened in New Orleans (and other examples) before and after the flood has made me more embittered towards any positive outlook on
something called “democracy”. Is the light at the end of the tunnel only a mirror reflecting our view? As discouraging as this may be, I think that we will be fighting this battle our whole lives.

For those who have read Naomi Klein’s Shock Doctrine, the following scenario will be all too familiar.

• First came the shock of the original disaster. The flood and the traumatic evacuation.

• Next came the “economic shock therapy”. By using the window of opportunity created by “a random act of God” (with little help of prevention from the federal government) many of the corporate lobbyists and wealthy developers have since been in a mad rush to privatize the city’s public services and spaces. This applies to most notably the homes, schools and hospitals. This is accomplished by lowering taxes, deregulating the private and corporate interests, and lowering wages all in the name of a “smaller, safer city”. This translates into plans to level the public housing projects in New Orleans and replace them with condos.

• And now, after “petitioning the government for a redress of grievances”, the residents of New Orleans have been Tasered, pepper sprayed, and hit with batons while attempting to be part of a public New Orleans City Hall council meeting determining the bulldozing and displacing of their homes.
• (video below)

So here’s how this whole thing makes my heart hurt real bad.

The government is put in power by “we the people”. The government should not really hold any more power over “we the people” (unless we allow it) as we are the government. In the publicly owned spaces and institutions, the government allows “…the free exercise…of the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances.”.

However, as the privately owned lobbyists begin replacing our representatives, the government has been turning all of it’s assets over to privately owned and funded entities. An entity that is legally bound to make decisions that will create a profit for it’s shareholders. An entity that is not responsible to the people who democratically voted for them, but rather to the privately funded campaign donations (read: INVESTMENTS).

The line between public and private has been blurred. Now, instead of our free vote counting towards being a part of the democratic process, it is our own personal wealth that makes the true difference.

As this Free Market Economy is being used to proclaim a “Free Democracy” by the people, for the people, the public sphere is being bought out by the ballooning private sphere.

First, our public squares and open air spaces have been replaced by climate controlled shopping malls which attempt to recreate our streets and sidewalks with one glaring difference; We, the people, are not allowed to express the freedom of speech or of the press or the right to peacefully assemble on these premises unless we are paying money to do it.

Next, our schools. The continual goal by the private sector is to raise up a generation that is taught that their sole function is to buy and consume and watch TV and most of all, not exercise their rights. (There is much more to be said on this)

And third, our public servants. Namely; the police. As we surrender our rights over to fear of terrorism or jail or planned hijackings because we are told this is “necessary [for] the security of a free state”, we allow for the further predicament of police to be paid by the government (Corporately owned lobbyists) to “protect” the wealthy private interests from “we the people”. (I do not envy their job)

For more read this and this.

A year and a half ago Adrienne asked Steph and I to come over for a bonfire in her back yard and help entertain some guests from Florida who’s father was a friend of Adrienne’s father. So I put on my “entertaining” face and went in with “guns-a-blazing”. Often in a social situation, if I think that my job is to engage conversation I will find out as much things as I can about the guests and then direct the conversation into the taboo realms of religion, politics, or sex based on what I think their interests are. So in the process of our conversation we began discussing their lifestyle. There was one guy and two girls. All were roughly my age and all of them had degrees in Anthropology.

The guy explained how they were in the process of “re-wilding” themselves. This is a process of rediscovering the basic needs of survival by returning to a hunter-gatherer lifestyle. But they also took it one step further. Rather than just retreating from society into a cave, included into their lifestyle was the reusing of the byproducts of our consumer-driven society. Any animal that had been killed by a car would ultimately find it’s way to their dinner table. Also they would routinely go dumpster diving and rescue the excess food that had been thrown out by grocery stores. He also told me about his website called Green Anarchy which is a treasure chest of resources on many different aspects of life.

So later that night I asked them if they could “introduce” me to dumpster diving. (Adrienne and Steph weren’t really into it but they came along anyway) After traveling around to most of the grocery stores in Sarnia we realized that most of them have locks on their dumpsters which was pretty discouraging. Below is a video which shows a successful dumpster diving outing. (video below)

Another cool video I came across was a promotional video for a type of house called an Earthship. This is a house that is completely self sustainable by using tires, sand, bottles, and cans for the walls and many other post consumer recycled materials to build with. This company is based in New Mexico but there is also an earth ship being built here in Southern Ontario by a guy named Tom Wolf as a reaction to the August 2003 Blackout. (video below)

What I really like about both these types of lifestyle revolutions, is the necessary co-dependence on a group of people (a community) to attain the goal of survival. Namely: Food and Shelter. We, as a consumer driven, one-stop-shopping culture need to begin taking back control of our food and shelter away from the for profit corporation and back into our hands. The time that we could be using to produce our own food and create our own roof is spent working to pay off the debt incurred by my (each individual) consuming things that are not absolute necessities.

Each individual person needs to realize that we the people, are the government. Without each individual person, there is no government and without the government there is no corporation. Some use the word Anarchy and others the word Socialism and others, Conscious Capitalism. Either way, more and more people are discovering that strength in numbers at the polls and being on the winning political team is not the sole agent of change.

Rather, it is the need for enabling each individual to be consciously concerned about the people around them and become involved in the decision making that affects the lives of themselves, their families, and their friends.

How do I educate and inform people who say that they have no interest in anything?

I believe that I’ve found a new love in a percussive instrument. I generally am not one to be very expressive about a musical instrument despite people’s expectations. However, it probably has something to do with how rare the Hang Drum is to obtain and that it has only been around for seven years. Below is a video of Manu Delago demonstrating what I consider to be a beautiful fusion of rhythm and melody using a Hang Drum. Many musicians are only able to focus on one aspect (rhythm or melody) while playing their respective instrument but through this piece in particular, Manu Delago accomplishes a beautiful blend of both. (video below)

Today, December 26th (and the rest of the week) the temples of consumption are filled with people consuming more stuff simply because they can. Consuming because it feels really, really good to buy something new with a new bank account balance. Consuming because they have a pocket full of gift cards to places that they would never buy from, but it’s free money and buying without a guilty conscience. Consuming because they are already so far into debt from all of their “giving” that “a little more won’t hurt”. Consuming because they actually believe that they are saving money by buying more things that are *advertised* as a SALE. I thought the point of Boxing Day was to get rid of all of the Christmas-themed products at a discounted price. I saw a few places that were having a pre-Boxing Day sale in the middle of December. None of this surprises me of course but rather disappoints me when I look up the original meaning behind the name.

Boxing Day is a traditional celebration, dating back to the Middle Ages, and consists of the practice of giving out gifts to employees, the poor, or to people in a lower social class.

Well, in Ontario Boxing Day is a statutory holiday which perhaps is a way to live up to the true definition. However, generally it is the “poor people in a lower social class” (RETAIL) that end up having to work on this day to sell products to the rich who have the day off.

Boxing Day is comparable to the United State’s “Black Friday”. This is the day after the American Thanksgiving which turns out to be the season’s busiest. Below is a clip of one of my favourite performance artists. Reverend Billy performing outside of Macy’s and other retailers with his Stop Shopping Gospel Choir.

And this is Reverend Billy out of character with a really good message about creativity and capitalism.

More of his videos can be found here, here, or check out his movie directed by Morgan Spurlock called What Would Jesus Buy.

Steve responds to the video above. I whole heartedly agree with him.

I have a suggestion for Christians.

He’s really better off on his own without you.

There seems to be a new theme that has permeated the “gift giving” season recently.  Does the phrase, “We’re GOING GREEN!” sound familiar to anyone?

*insert tongue firmly in cheek*
Now, not only can I save money, I can save the environment too.  Plus, if I go for the “Buy 2, get one free”, I can save even more of the environment.                                                        *removing tongue from cheek*

The one question that I haven’t really found an answer to yet is one that is related to the same over-arching adage.

What came first? The chicken or the egg?

Life influences Art?  Art influences Life?

And my question…What influenced this newest “green” advertising?  The “consumer” demand which seems to steer the direction of advertising?  Or the advertising which seems to be one step ahead of consumer demand?

As a society of people striving toward individual empowerment, it seems that we are surprisingly the antithesis of this label.  We state boldly that, “the decisions that we make daily will affect our children and grandchildren” but we live as though the long term outcome is controlled by “the MAN”.  We would rather not take on the responsibility of changing our lifestyle to inconvenience us to the point of discomfort.  The “big box” retailer offers a much more comfortable option.

This option involves a simple addition in branding to add key phrases like, “eco-friendly”, “organic”, and “Green” to the packaging of the product.  There are pictures of happy children dancing in meadows of green.  It makes you feel really good just looking at it.  It feels so good in fact that you just have to buy it.  “I’m doing it for future generations” we say.

The “consumer” is never encouraged by the retailer to stop using her purchasing power so she can make an actual difference in the most inactive act of all.  An act of self control that involves us asking ourselves before every purchase “Why am I buying this?”

In school we are all taught the three R’s of responsible living.  (Reduce, Reuse, Recycle).  Recycling has become easy to us with curb-side pick up (even though the capture rate is around 24%).  Even less so is the act of reusing .  But the “R” that constantly eludes our grasp is how to Reduce.

We are taught that we save money by buying a fuel efficient car.  So we buy two and go on longer trips.

We are told that we save money by outfitting our house with energy efficient light bulbs.  We leave them on longer and buy lamps that can hold more of them.

We are told that riding the bus is a green decision.  So we leave our bike in the garage and watch the cloud of smoke rise from the smokestack of the bus every time it stops for us.

We go to the grocery store, library, and department store and buy a “green” bag because each store is selling it.  We now have three bags which quickly multiply as we forget them at home. And so we buy more “green” bags.

These products are marketed as helping “reduce your carbon footprint”.  But in the end we simply create more waste by buying more things labelled “green”.

My purpose in writing this is not to discourage anyone from actually making an effort to change their lifestyle.  Rather, I am challenging myself to look for ways to specifically inconvenience myself and others by changing my lifestyle and making a positive difference.

Anyone can compare their previous inaction to their current action.

But how about a bit of pro-action?