Tag Archives: politics

Unapologetically Political – It’s time to Smart Vote

2 Replies

I haven’t voted yet but my oldest daughter sent us a photo of her walk to her nearest polling station today. My youngest daughter lives at home and will either vote early or vote with my wife and I when we go. They have been going to the polls since they were in strollers. They checked boxes for us before they were old enough to vote themselves. And both of them have voted in every election since coming of age.

I don’t know who they have and will vote for, but I know who they won’t vote for. They did not, will not, vote for the Progressive Conservatives. Not because their parents told them not to, but because they agree with us that the principles of the party do not align with the free and open democracy we want to live in.

I am unapologetic for my influence on this.

The global conservative wave, literally at our doorstep, is not creating a political environment I’m comfortable with. Pierre Poilievre does not share social or political values that I have. I believe he will undermine Canada’s multicultural and socially progressive values and he will weaken our country.

I cannot stay silent. Decades of non-partisan promoting of voting as a civic duty are over. I’m not just saying ‘Go Vote’, I’m asking anyone who reads this to Smart Vote. Go to the polls, find your riding, and choose the party most likely to beat the Conservative Party in your riding.

The only party likely to beat the Conservatives in this election is the Liberal Party. I would love to see them win a majority because this is not the time for a weak minority government. However, if you are in a riding where the NDP is more likely than the Liberal candidate to beat the Conservative candidate, then vote NDP. Same for a Green Party candidate. Smart Voting.

I see some of the non-democratic decisions being made south of our border and they scare me. Pierre Poilievre is a populist, slogan peddling, empty-promises spouting lifetime politician who has done almost nothing to better Canada. He rode the right wing wave to the south and only started backpedaling when he realized that this was going to potentially cost him the election. Unprincipled, shallow, and weak. Not what our country needs right now.

I’m not planning on sitting silent and then wondering why our country voted the way they did. I can’t. I won’t.

Don’t just vote this election, Smart Vote.

New era

Leave a reply

What’s happening now might be the biggest change in global politics that has ever happened outside of weapons of war being used. The shift in finance, the collapse of friendly trade, the forming of new trade alliances, and the political and economic alliances that are currently in the works could not have happened in the last 100 years without missiles or guns being fired.

Yet here we are. Empires fall. New superpowers emerge.

The question now is, can this happen while remaining a political and economic battle, and not one that requires force, might, death, and destruction?

I hope so. I want to believe so.

Ever since I read ‘The World is Flat’ about 20 years ago, I could see that the path forward was going to be about economic strength being based on countries focussing on their competitive advantages. I could see that protectionist policies, tariffs, and isolation would be the demise of even the greatest economies. And that the future powerhouses would be those that have natural resources that the entire world would need.

We are approaching a new era, and the countries that will prosper are the ones who recognize their strengths and are ready to negotiate the way they share those strengths with the rest of the world. Let’s hope we can have peace to go along with our prosperity. The looming question is, can we enter this new era without violence? Can we be a civilized race? Or are we just warring monkeys who happen to wear clothing and buy expensive accessories?

How gullible are we?

Leave a reply

“… it is entirely possible that future generations will look back, from the vantage point of a more sophisticated theory, and wonder how we could have been so gullible.”

— Closing sentence of Introduction to Quantum Mechanics by David J. Griffiths.

I came across this quote today and it made me wonder just how gullible we are as a species? Not just because we don’t understand quantum mechanics, not just because we don’t understand the gap between Newtonian Physics and Special Relativity, but for so many more simple and less profound reasons.

We fight over imaginary lines we call borders. We spend a considerable amount of our existence working for money… pieces of paper that only have value because we believe it has value, while our governments (we also make up silly rules for) print that money in mass volumes to keep our economies afloat.

We break into tribes based on heritage, relative strength, socioeconomics, and even skin colour. And we spend a tremendous amount of the global economy to create weapons to protect ourselves and also threaten ‘those who are not like us’.

We fight over false Gods. Why do I say false Gods? Because there are literally thousands of them, and even the largest, Christianity, doesn’t agree with who gets into heaven. So the vast majority of believers are believers in the wrong religion or wrong sect. Yet hate, discrimination, and wars are all byproducts of people of faith fighting people of different faiths, very often ‘in the name of their God’.

Human beings are playing the game of life with imaginary boundaries, imaginary political structures, imaginary currencies, and imaginary Gods. We are gullible. We are blinded by unimportant things, and in 100 years humankind will look upon us like we were as backwards as we perceive cultures and societies that did barbaric and stupid things 100’s of years ago.

Smart Voting

Leave a reply

For most of my adult life I have been someone who has pushed the idea that it is our civic duty to vote and have tried to stay non-partisan in that messaging. I’ve voted for three different parties in elections in the last 20 years and so I am not a cardholding member of any party, and can be influenced by policies and principles, be those the principles of the party or the candidate.

The reality that we are in right now in Canada has me choosing to vote ABC, ‘Anyone But Conservative’. But the key here is that I’m choosing the party in my riding that is most likely to beat the Conservatives.

My reasoning for this Smart Voting strategy is simple, the Conservative patry sits on one side of the political spectrum and the other two (or three if you count Green) parties all sit on the other side of the spectrum… competing for the non-conservative vote. The reality is that in the past this split has allowed the Conservatives to get into power.

With the turmoil and instability of US politics, and the wave of conservatism globally, I don’t see a Canadian conservative government under its leader as remotely good in any way for Canada. Polling suggests a Liberal win this year, which under the current leader, Carney, would be great…. As long as it is a majority government that can actually get things done. So this year I would want to vote Liberal (something I haven’t done in a while).

However, I’m going see where the polling is in my riding and vote ABC, because as important as a majority government may be at this time, preventing a Conservative government is more important to me.

It feels weird to be so open about my politics. I truly prefer to be a proponent of civic duty, encouraging people to take advantage of living within a free and open democracy, in a non-partisan way. However, I can’t stay silent when I think that one of our political parties will take us down a path that is undermining the very democratic freedoms and rights I believe in.

So it’s Smart Voting for me. I’ll vote to make sure that the Conservatives don’t get in.

As a side note, I’ve had some interesting conversations with a conservative voter. I don’t believe anything I’ve shared with him is going to change his mind. I’m disappointed, but also respectful of his opinion. Our conversations are civil and respectful, though a little animated. I wish more public political conversations could happen like this. Discourse is healthy, and necessary for a democracy to not just survive, but thrive.

What it means to be literate?

Leave a reply

Can you read? Can you do basic math? Is that enough?

The critical thinking required to make sense of the world today is ever increasing. We have a world leader using magical math to make a trade deficit calculation into a reciprocal tariff calculation, and claiming that this is, “Kind reciprocal, not full reciprocal.”

What? Help me make it make sense?

Meanwhile, I saw a video that someone created using AI. He uploaded a pdf article for two AI‘s to discuss, one of the AI’s was a version of himself, with his voice, and the other was a female at a desk. The only thing that suggested to me that the conversation was between two AI’s was some awkward hand gestures. Take those movements away, or make them a bit more natural/realistic and I would have no idea that I was watching an AI conversation.

Meanwhile, in Egypt, there are some wild claims about structures under the great pyramids, and while the evidence is unclear, I’ve seen many videos explaining these not-yet-proven structures. These claims include that they are a network of power sources connected to other structures around the world, and another theory claiming that aliens created them.

And speaking of aliens, wasn’t it just a few short months ago that we ‘discovered’ aliens living in our oceans? What ever happened to that story?

It’s becoming almost impossible to be informationally literate today. By the time you have time to seriously fact check something the story is already old, and there are new crazy claims that require your skeptical attention. What’s the source of this information? Where did they get their data from? What’s the bias of the news source? How is this data being manipulated? Who paid for the study? Is this a real quote? Is this video real, or CGI, or AI?

Who is fact checking the fact checkers? Meanwhile, here in Canada, a fact checker hired by one of our news stations was let go because trolls that don’t like their favourite political party being fact checked brought so much negative attention to her that the news station let her go.

What? Help me make it make sense?

The reality is that reading and writing and doing basic math is not enough to be functionally and informationally literate today. The critical thinking required to simply consume the information being thrown at us is overly demanding. I think the way forward for the short term is to find trusted sources and rely on them… and yet that’s the very thing that has seemed to get us into trouble. How many people get their news from just one or two biased sources? I’m literally now suggesting to find an echo chamber to sit in… hopefully you can find one that echoes facts, common sense, and some semblance of the truth.

Dire consequences

Leave a reply

The inability to process the consequences of your thoughts, words and action is a good definition for stupidity. The thing about stupidity is that even intelligent people can perform acts of stupidity. But repeatedly doing stupid things suggests a lack of intelligence.

I watched a video yesterday of people doing stupid things and getting hurt. One example was a guy standing on someone’s shoulders on a diving board and trying to dive, but slipping while pushing off and landing face first on the diving board. I don’t know if alcohol was part of the decision making, and I don’t know how smart that person might be, but this is a good display of stupidity with dire consequences.

If I said that there’s currently a display of stupidity on a global scale by a political administration, you would automatically know exactly which administration I’m talking about. The difference between the stupidity of the guy on the diving board versus this administration I mention is the scope of the consequences. The diving board guy was the sole sufferer of his stupidity.

I honestly feel like when I am listening to the words and watching the actions of this administration, I am watching a blooper reel of accidents. I’m watching a repeated display of stupidity with dire consequences, and yet the bloopers keep coming: Insulting and even threatening allies, slashing support programs, dissolving institutions, and making economic blunders, all of which are alienating not only global friends, but dividing their nation, and harming their citizens.

This blooper reel isn’t going to be fixed with stitches on a forehead, needed because of an impact with a diving board. The suffering for this stupidity won’t be felt by a single person. This is going to hurt a lot of people, and it’s going to take a long time to recover. The question is, when will the stupidity stop?

I don’t think the guy on the diving board is going to try to repeat that stunt. The question is if he’ll do something equally stupid again… it’s the repeated behaviour that truly moves someone from making a stupid choice to actually just being stupid.

Propaganda hyperbole

Leave a reply

I remember visiting Dandong, China and going to a museum about the Korean war. Our tour guide translated the name of the museum for us: “The Museum to Commemorate the War Against American Aggression”. To the Chinese, the loss of that war meant the US having access to North Korea, dangerously close to Chinese land and major ports.

In broken English there were translated signs describing pictures of American prisoners of war holding up peace signs, with a description that even the Americans knew the war was wrong. This was an excellent display of blatant propaganda. But it also made me think about what I knew about that war, and I realized my view would have been filled with American propaganda.

Our perspectives truly vary depending on where we live, and the media and information we are privy to. With that, I have to say that the US propaganda machine is currently spewing hyperbole as if it should be taken seriously.

This is US Vice President JD Vance sharing the American Administration perspective on Greenland, “Our message to Denmark is very simple: You have not done a good job by the people of Greenland.”

And here is a perspective from outside the US: On TikTok, or saved here.

I’ve been avoiding news more than consuming it recently, but I can predict what Fox News versus MSNBC would have said about JD Vance’s Greenland speech. I just wish both broadcasts would spend a bit less time on myopic hyperbole about how they see their political leadership, and maybe, just maybe share some perspectives from other parts of the world.

Our global economy does not benefit from the rest of the (free) world perceiving the US as weak, or threatening, or laughable. No one is buying the current messaging, no one is blindly accepting the propaganda, no country is going to be bullied into thinking the US should have sovereignty over them.

The US either has to drop the propagandized dogma, or align it with their allies. Their current messaging isn’t just off brand, and offensive, it’s laughably embarrassing.

Appropriate Protest

1 Reply

I’ve written that we should have ‘Intolerance for bad faith actors’. And I’ve also written about ‘Free speech in a free society’. In both cases civil decisions are being made, so that we can live in a civil society.

It’s time to draw some pretty clear lines:

Creating a subversive anti-ad campaign against Tesla is an absolutely brilliant way to protest.

Vandalizing cars and dealerships is an embarrassment to the civil society we should be living in.

Holding a protest at a rally, and speaking out against someone you disagree with is the foundation of an open and free society. Shouting and throwing things at a speaker is immature and inappropriate behavior. Even if the person is spewing hate… in which case they should be dealt with legally, not with vigilante violence.

We need a society that allows disagreement. We need to be civil about how we protest. Because there is no civil society where violence and damaging property works one-way… only the way upset people think it should. Societies that tolerate inappropriate protest are inviting responses that are less and less civil. And nobody wins.

Morality police

Leave a reply

I have regularly created AI images to go with my blog posts since June, 2022. I try not to spend too much time creating them because I’d rather be writing blog posts than image prompts. But sometimes I try to create images and they just don’t convey what I want them to, or they come across as a bit too much in the uncanny valley, feeling unnatural. That happened with my post image 4 days ago, and I used the image anyway, because I was pressed for time.

(Look carefully at this image and you’ll see a lot wrong with it.)

I made 5 or 6 attempts to adjust my prompt, but still kept getting bad results, so I made do with the only one that resembled what I wanted.

And then for the past couple days I had a different challenge. I don’t know if it’s because of using the version of Bing’s Copilot that is associated with my school account, but my attempts to create images were blocked.

And:

However, Grok 3, a much less restricted AI, had no problem creating these images for me:

And:

I’m a little bothered by the idea that I am being limited by an AI in using these image prompts. The first one is social commentary, the second one, while a ‘hot topic’, certainly isn’t worthy of being restricted.

It begs the question, who are the morality police deciding what we can and cannot use AI to draw? the reality is that there are tools out there that have no filters and can create any image you want, no matter how tasteless or inappropriate they are, and I’m not sure that’s ideal… but neither is being prevented from making images like the ones I requested. What is it about these images requests that make them inappropriate?

I get that this is a small issue in comparison to what’s happening in the US right now. The morality police are in full force there with one group, the Christian far right, using the influence they have in the White House to impose their morality on others. This is a far greater concern than restrictions to image prompts in AI… but these are both concerns on the same continuum.

Who decides? Why do they get to decide? What are the justifications for their decisions?

It seems to me that the moral decisions being made recently have not been made by the right people asking the right questions… and it concerns me greatly that people are imposing their morals on others in ways that limit our choices and our freedoms.

Who gets to be the morality police? And why?

McBean and the Propaganda Machine

Leave a reply

I used to think that Dr. Seuss’ Sneetches was about discrimination. Either you have a star on your belly or you don’t… and the book was about learning a lesson that superficial traits really don’t matter.

I’ve come to realize that I was wrong.

The book is about being grifted. It’s not about the Sneetches, it’s about Sylvester McMonkey McBean putting Sneetches through a propaganda cycle, which in turn leads them through the machine, again and again and again until they are broke and disillusioned.

I also realize that we are all Sneetches right now.