Guaritore

One of the most frequently asked questions...

2007-12-07T01:38:00.000-05:00

Below is a word-for-word post of Elizabeth May's latest blog entry found at http://greenparty.ca/en/node/3360.

______________________

I am often asked how the Green Party differs from the other parties.

For a quick spot check, I put this little list of “ONLY’s” together. We are the ONLY party calling for the following:

A carbon tax, an indispensable step in getting the prices right in energy choices and allowing reduced income and payroll taxes.
“Income-splitting” to reduce the tax burden on middle class couples.
A continuing role in Afghanistan but within a transformed U.N. mission, legalizing and regulating the poppy trade for medicinal use, and bringing in more Islamic nations into the peace-keeping, security efforts in Southern Afghanistan through the U.N.
An end to asbestos mining and export to developing countries. (truly outrageous that for all the talk about asbestos, only the Green Party is prepared to call for banning mining and export.)
The phase out of nuclear power and uranium mining.
The reform of the Divorce Act to make family law less of a battleground.
To launch a national dialogue toward a Guaranteed Livable Income.
The legalization of marijuana, to be controlled, regulated and taxed.
The six month notice to get out of NAFTA with immediate re-negotiation of key provisions.
Support for open source software and net neutrality.
National shift to GE-free, organic agriculture and regional food self-sufficiency.
A moratorium on new projects in the tar sands.
Creation of a federal Department of Tourism
Protect drinking water at its source (no other party will do this--the BC NDP jailed citizens for trying to protect drinking water).
Amend the Charter of Rights and Freedoms to enshrine the right of Canadians to an ecological heritage that includes breathable air and drinkable water.
Pass federal legislation to prohibit bulk water exports.
Establish a National Parks completion budget; protect at least half of Canada's Boreal Forest in a network of large interconnected protected areas as called for in the 2003 Boreal Forest Conservation Framework
Zero waste, including laws requiring lifetime stewardship of products
A cancer prevention strategy that includes a toxic-free Canada -- taxing toxics and pollution; ending the production and use of the most dangerous toxic chemicals by 2012.
Pan-Arctic waste management strategy.
Shift funding from mega-freeway projects like Pacific Gateway that encourage urban sprawl and use the funds instead for public transit.
Implement Genuine Progress Indicator (or Index of Well-being)
Enact "living will" legislation to give a person the choice to die with dignity.
Explore establishing a new crown corporation to bulk purchase and dispense generic drugs - to bring down the costs of pharmacare.
Pass pay equity legislation; immediately implement full pay equity for women employed in the federal sector and develop tax incentives for companies to meet gender and pay equity.
Press professional societies to remove unnecessary barriers recognizing the professional credentials of immigrants.
Canada must support and implement the UN Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.
Revamp CIDA to focus on developing community-based green economies, poverty alleviation and programmes to combat and adapt to climate change.
Declare Canada a nuclear free zone.
Reform WTO, IMF and the World Bank, placing these under the authority of the UN General Assembly and shift the direction of international trade away from free trade to fair trade.
Scrap the SPP (Security and Prosperity Partnership).

Although there are many other commitments, I hope this is helpful short list of where we stand alone. We urge other parties to advance our policies.

______________________

In pursuit of education...

2007-10-08T19:49:00.000-04:00

Dear friends and fellow Ontario voters,

I recently received an email which really angered me because it was so narrow minded and wrong. It was clearly written by a Conservative supporter which is why my response has a section entitled "Why Conservatives should vote for MMP." I spent quite a bit of time writing a response and have decided to post it online for all to see, because I believe everyone can learn from it. Pretend when I say "this email" I really mean "this post." Here it is...

I have written this email to you out of a sense of duty to properly inform as many people as I can of the choice they will be asked to make. It is quite long as I explain extensively each point that is brought up. You can choose to read it, or ignore it, as you see fit.

Recently you were sent an email regarding the referendum that coincides with the election this October 10th, 2007. Unfortunately, this email was poorly researched and is extremely misleading in the point of view it advocates. I have written this email in the hope that I can correct the misinformation from that email and help inform you as to the real underlying reasons that the referendum is happening. I have included the original email below for your reference. For your convenience I have separated this email into several sections, which I have listed below in a mini table of contents. While I believe that every section is important for you to read, feel free to skip to which ever sections you wish. The sections are as follows:

1. Background on the MMP issues brought up by the original email
2. A bit about who I am and the role I play
3. Why Conservatives should vote for MMP
4. A paragraph by paragraph response to the original email (by far the longest section)

And for good measure:

5. How McGuinty has misled Ontario voters
6. How John Tory has misled Ontario voters

SECTION 1: Background on the MMP issues brought up by the original email

It is clear from reading the original email that it was written by someone who does not like Dalton McGuinty (by “original email” I am referring to the email send out a few days ago that clearly does not support the new “MMP” electoral system; the same email included below). I do not disagree with that opinion, as I have never voted for the Liberals, nor will I in the future. However, the nameless author seems to believe that this referendum was conceived by McGuinty and the Liberal government to erode democracy in Ontario and waste taxpayers money. In fact, as I will cover in section 4, McGuinty had very little to do with the idea and has even taken steps to make it very difficult for it to become law. Contrary to eroding democracy – something I also cover in section 4 – MMP was in fact conceived in order to do the opposite, to strengthen democracy – something that if passed, it will most certainly do. I did some research and found that the original email was “passed on” to www.freddiep.ca by someone named Joe McLean. However, Mr. McLean is not the original author.

SECTION 2: A bit about who I am and the role I play

My name is Jason, I am a Canadian citizen and I have been a resident of Ontario almost my entire life (since I was 1 ½ years old). I am not a supporter of either the Liberal Party or the Conservative Party. I am however a supporter of the new electoral system proposed and have made an effort to educate as many people as possible as to the issues and facts surrounding this undertaking. The author of the original email neglected to leave their name, perhaps because their opinion is clearly biased, and poorly researched. I however, am not afraid to take credit for my work because I have nothing to hide, and take pride in helping others understand this critical decision before us.

SECTION 3: Why Conservatives should vote for MMP

Andrew Coyne of the National Post wrote an interesting article about why the “political right” and “conservatives” should vote for MMP. The article can be found at http://communities.canada.com/nationalpost/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2007/09/21/andrew-coyne-on-the-ontario-election-campaign-and-the-merits-of-pr.aspx.

SECTION 4: A paragraph by paragraph response to the original email

This section involves the original paragraph bolded, followed by my response.

“A point of view on the upcoming referendum!”

That is all the original email is – a point of view. I offer another point of view. One that is significantly less distorted by partisan interests.

“Did you know a referendum was taking place on October 10, 2007 as well as an election? Have the implications of this referendum been explained to you? Well, I i'm in shock!”

Many Ontarians have not heard about the referendum, nevermind been informed of the issues involved. It is true that there has been little promotion of this referendum. Below, it is insinuated that this has been a deliberate action by the McGuinty government. In my subsequent responses, I will explain why this is not the case, and why, in fact, it was not McGuinty’s idea in the first place. I agree that it is unfortunate that more was not done to educate the public properly.

“On October 10, 2007, as part of the next Provincial election, the people of Ontario will be asked if they want to replace the current electoral system. In essence, they will be asked if they want to shift the power from the people of Ontario (local voters and ridings) to the politicians at Queens Park. There has been no education on this referendum and its timing, coinciding with the October 10 Ontario election, may allow for an easy pass by sheer overshadowing.”

The question proposed is not whether voters want to shift power from the people of Ontario to Queen’s Park, but rather, the question is, “do you want your vote to count?” Under the current first-past-the-post electoral system, if the candidate you vote for does not win the riding, your vote does not count. For example, if you vote for the Conservative candidate, but the Liberal candidate wins, your vote does not count for anything. If the winning candidate receives only 35% of the vote, but the next closest candidate receives less than that percentage, then the remaining 65% of the votes do not count – a situation that is rather UNdemocratic. In a more general example, the party forming the government may win only 40 percent of the votes, but gain 60 percent of the seats, meaning the party's leaders hold 100 per cent of the power. How is that fair? How is that democratic?

MMP tries to remedy this situation. Instead of voting only once, voters will be asked to vote twice – once for a local candidate, and once for the party of their choice. In my response to the following paragraph, I explain how the seats in the Ontario Legislature will be allocated based on this voting system.

As I agreed above, there has been no education on this referendum. As I will explain in my response to the following paragraph, this is not because the Liberals are trying to be sneaky, but in fact, it is because it was not even the Liberals idea in the first place. Why would the Liberals promote something they didn’t create? They don’t need MMP to remain in power. In fact, MMP would probably hurt the Liberals (not by much, but it would) more than it would help them.

With regards to it being passed “by sheer overshadowing,” this is hardly the situation. The Liberals have in fact made it harder for it to pass by requiring not one, but TWO, SUPER majorities for it to become law. This means that in addition to needing at least 60% of all voters to vote in favour of the change, it is also required that 60% of all voters approve the change in AT LEAST 60% of all ridings. If it were merely a simple 50% plus one referendum then perhaps it would pass easily, but alas, this is not the case.

“The Liberals want to decrease the current number of ELECTED MPP's from 103 to 90....well, that's about time! But then they want to incorporate a new NON-ELECTED number of MPP's to enlarge the number of MPP's to 129, 90 MPP's will be Elected by us the people and 39 MPP's to be Selected or Appointed by the politicians, not democratically elected, just Party elites......this I have a problem with!”

First of all, it was not the Liberal’s idea. It was the idea proposed by the Citizen’s Assembly on Electoral Reform. Below I will explain how, contrary to the opinion of the original email, this Citizen’s Assembly was in fact chosen fairly.

The 39 new MPPs are still going to be elected, they are simply going to be elected differently. Remember that second vote you will get, the one where you vote for the party of your choice? That vote will determine which of those 39 MPPs are from which party. For example, of those second votes, consider a situation where the Conservative party receives 40% of the vote, but only receives 35% of the seats. Then, the Conservatives would be entitled to “top up” their number of seats by allocating some of those extra 39 seats so they would have 40% of the total seats. For more information on how exactly MMP works, you can go to www.voteformmp.ca, or more specifically, http://www.voteformmp.ca/en/how_mmp_works#more_choice.

Those 39 MPPs will not be selected or appointed by politicians, they will be nominated democratically through their respective political parties in advance of the election, and selected based on how Ontarians vote. Each party’s “list” of who will be selected, and in what order, will be available prior to the election. Voters will be able to judge each party’s selections and vote accordingly.

“…this I have a problem with…” Of course the author has a problem with their incorrect view of what will happen. It sounds like lunacy, because it is ill-informed, and just plain wrong.

“What will this mean for our government? Elected members have local riding issues to manage and are directly accountable to their constituents. Will the appointed MPP's be responsible to the people? Will Brokerage Politics make positive change more difficult? Did you ask for this referendum and the associated costs? This proposed two-tier government system is called "M ixed M ember P roportional".”

It will mean that the government we elect will be more representative of how Ontarians vote. It will mean better democracy because the people sitting at Queen’s Park will better reflect who Ontarians want to be there. In addition to electing local candidates, political parties will have roughly the same proportion of MPPs as the proportion of the vote they receive. Individual votes will no longer be wasted.

In fact, Ontario voters DID ask for this referendum and the associated costs. The Citizen’s Assembly on Electoral Reform was created due to public pressure for our voting system to be reformed. There were several petitions that were circulated and presented to the government. Individual citizens lobbied their local MPPs from all parties. This wasn’t the Liberals’ idea, it was requested by the voters of Ontario.

“MMP is the Liberal government's solution to reduced voter turnout in the current electoral system. There is a risk that this referendum question will be overshadowed by the debate of who will form the next provincial government and could result in the people giving up their historic power in the way we govern ourselves.”

Contrary to what this paragraph states, it is not the Liberal government’s solution. It is not an attempt to remedy reduced voter turnout, it is a response to a public demand for electoral reform.

“…people giving up their historic power in the way we govern ourselves…” Blah, blah, blah! The only point of this sentence is to scare the reader into believing the author’s point of view. As explained above, the Liberal government has made it difficult for the referendum to be approved, and made into law. The people will not be giving up their “historic power”, they will still have all the power they did in the past, and will now be given the greater power of actually electing a legislature that they want, instead of the unfair, unrepresentative, legislatures of the past.

“The government spent millions of our dollars on a Citizens Assembly on Electoral Reform. Purportedly, the members of the Citizens Assembly were chosen randomly but no one can establish which database or what information was used to determine such random participation, or history making participants.”

Questionable grammar aside, this paragraph is the one that most clearly displays the author’s lack of research. If the Citizen’s Assembly website had been consulted, it would have been clear how participants were chosen.

To quote http://www.citizensassembly.gov.on.ca/en-CA/About.aspx, “The Assembly was independent of government. It was made up of 103 randomly-selected citizens – one from each of Ontario's electoral districts. With the Chair, 52 of the members were male and 52 were female. At least one member was Aboriginal… Members of the Assembly were selected at random by Elections Ontario from the Permanent Register of Electors for Ontario. Every registered voter was eligible to participate, with a few exceptions, such as elected officials [who were ineligible to participate].”

“The people of Ontario did not ask for this referendum. The people of Ontario want more accountability. not less. They do not want paid MPP's that have no accountability: not to ridings or constituents or any other defined entity or channel. The people of Ontario want more transparency of their various tax dollars, at all levels of government. They want to eliminate misuse, abuse and squandering of their tax dollars and will not tolerate monies provided for apparent immoral means. Shifting the people's power will not help suppress scandals such as the most recent Cricket club affair. ($100,000 requested and $1,000,000 one million paid for no apparent benefit to the people of Ontario).”

As explained above, the people of Ontario DID ask for this referendum. This will give the people of Ontario more accountability, just like they want. Tax dollars will not be misused, abused and squandered, they will be spent in order to enact the will of the people. Regarding the “Cricket club affair,” the author does not offer any supporting evidence, further information, or references. No link between this “affair” and electoral reform is made. It is simply thrown in there as an irrelevant example of misspending and is irrelevant to the issue of the MMP referendum.

“1. A more elite legislature 2. Reward for faithful service 3. Delivery of votes 4. Financial help 5. Decreased accessibility to politicians 6. Less Democracy”

Re: 1, not true, the legislature will be more representative. Re: 2, faithful service will not be rewarded, the leaders of all 4 major parties have promised their parties will follow a democratic process for the selection of list candidates. For more info, see http://www.voteformmp.ca/en/party_leaders_on_list_formation. Re: 3 and 4, it is unclear what the author means by either as they are not explained. Re: 5, politicians will still be accessibile. They will still have phone numbers and email addresses that the public can use to contact them. Re: 6, the process will then be more democratic, not less.

“If the people of Ontario are to make an informed decision, they must have the opportunity to hear more than the Liberal government's side of the debate on electoral change. Some will vote in favour and some will vote against this change. But, if these Liberal politicians win this referendum on the strength of voters who do not realize the implications, we may never get our government back!”

To educate yourself as much as possible, please visit www.voteformmp.ca, and www.yourbigdecision.ca. This is not the Liberal politicians’ referendum, this referendum was requested by Ontarians, for Ontarians.

“Using our tax dollars to pay for 39 politicians and their staff at Queens Park, and without any sense of what they will be doing or to whom they will be accountable, suggests that we, the people of Ontario are weak, indecisive and need decisions made for us or are basically ignorant and will give up our power to slide into a form of government that we may live to regret.”

This paragraph is pure hogwash. Nobody has suggested that the people of Ontario are weak, indecisive, and need decisions made for them. The people of Ontario asked for the Citizen’s Assembly to be created, they asked for this referendum, and now they are getting the opportunity to vote on what the Citizen’s Assembly proposed. The lack of publicity surrounding it is because the current government really doesn’t care seeing as it wasn’t their idea in the first place.

“Please pass this on to those on your friend list so that we can keep our friends informed!”

Here here!! Pass this on to as many of your friends as possible so they can hear more than one point of view.

SECTION 5: How McGuinty has misled Ontario voters

Dalton McGuinty promised not to raise taxes. Then after gaining power, he did. What is often forgotten is that he only had to raise taxes because of the Harris/Eves government that preceded him. The Conservative government he followed lied to voters about Ontario’s financial situation and even after slashing the budgets of almost every ministry, was still managing to run a deficit in the billions of dollars. Nonetheless, he lied.

Dalton McGuinty also promised to close coal fired power plants. Then after gaining power, he went back on his promise. This happened because he promised to do something that was actually impossible. Coal fired power plants cannot simply be closed without another source of energy to replace them. Shame on voters for believing him.

SECTION 6: How John Tory has misled Ontario voters

Throughout this election I have heard much talk of “getting tough on crime.” I personally don’t remember McGuinty’s promises regarding this issue but in reality, all arguments are moot. The government of Ontario does not have the power to get tough on crime. The type of violent crime referred to by John Tory in his ads is governed by the Criminal Code of Canada, legislation created and administered by the FEDERAL government, not the Ontario government. Further, the decision on whether those accused of crimes get out on bail is left to judges, not elected officials. Often, past judicial decisions made for similar crimes and situations are followed, as per our judicial tradition of past precedence. So, what exactly does Mr. Tory expect to accomplish upon taking power? Will he magically steal power from the federal government or the judiciary? Either way, making crime a serious provincial issue misleads Ontario voters into thinking that something can actually be done by their provincial government. If McGuinty promised to get tough on crime, that’s his shortcoming. If John Tory points out McGuinty’s shortcomings and promises the same thing, that’s his mistake.

If you have actually read through this entire email and made it to the end, congratulations. I hope you got something out of it. If you would like to discuss this further, please leave a comment.

More importantly, make sure you educated yourself as to what is really happening. Please visit www.voteformmp.ca, and www.yourbigdecision.ca to learn more.

Regards,

Jason

Sometimes I feel so helpless...

2007-02-27T13:38:00.000-05:00

I just finished chatting with a friend of mine who's getting married in a year and a half or so. One of her best friends who was supposed to be a bridesmaid backed out on her because her boyfriend made her. It seem that she's in a financially dependent situation.

Such situations are the kind that I HATE. She's a woman who's my age for cryin' out loud. I hate hearing about women being controlled by men. I hate feeling like I can do nothing to help them. I know that education and action are needed but what can I, a single man do?

It's a less serious version of what James Blunt talks about in his song "No Bravery," about women being casualties of war. War happens because of men. Women don't do stupid things like kill each other needlessly. The patriarchy hurts all of us. Men need to grow the fuck up and stop being so childish.

This is why I support the Miss G_ Project for equity in education. The masses need to know the situation of women. In Canada, EACH AND EVERY MINUTE a woman or girl gets assulted. EACH AND EVERY WEEK another woman is killed by her MALE partner. These are REAL problems in our society. We need to work to ensure this evil theme in our society is eliminated.

I leave you with the lyrics from James Blunt's "No Bravery." My little sister is a huge fan of his but she in her youth, doesn't understand what the song's actually about.

There are children standing here,
Arms outstretched into the sky,
Tears drying on their face.
He has been here.
Brothers lie in shallow graves.
Fathers lost without a trace.
A nation blind to their disgrace,
Since he's been here.

And I see no bravery,
No bravery in your eyes anymore.
Only sadness.

Houses burnt beyond repair.
The smell of death is in the air.
A woman weeping in despair says,
He has been here.
Tracer lighting up the sky.
It's another families' turn to die.
A child afraid to even cry out says,
He has been here.

And I see no bravery,
No bravery in your eyes anymore.
Only sadness.

Big Questions

2007-01-29T20:50:00.000-05:00

“The important thing is never to stop questioning.” – Aristotle

David DeAngelo is an up and coming personal life coach who focuses on human interactions and psychology. The following questions were taken from David DeAngelo’s Mastery program. He compiled them, they are his words. I share them with you now with the hope that you can use them to help change and/or reframe your own life.

Ask these questions, answer them, and focus on them.

To be or not to be?
That is the question. You can choose to live, or choose not to live. Choose to be alive consciously.

Is the universe a friendly place?
What do you believe? Why? If the universe IS a friendly place, think about the implications that has for you life. If the universe IS NOT a friendly place, think about the implications.

Scarcity or abundance?
Do we live in a world of scarce resources, where we have to fight for them, try to get what we can, or do we live in abundance where we can get as much as we can create?

Am I a cause or an effect?
Do you cause things to happen, or are you affected by things primarily?

Fear or Love?
Are you going to approach everyone, and your life, with fear, or are you going to approach everyone with love? With scarcity, or abundance? Are you going to lead?

Internal or external frame of reference?
Are you going to have an internal frame of reference or are you going to have an external frame of reference? Are you going to walk through life looking at what everybody else wants for you life and what they’re doing to figure out what to be doing or are you going to look out for yourself independently?

Pessimism or optimism?
Which do you choose? Do you choose to be optimistic in approaching situations or do you choose to be pessimistic? Pessimists say “If I’m not pessimistic then I won’t be disappointed if things don’t work out.” However, the cost they pay, the trade off, is huge. It’s a bad deal. When you’re optimistic you make more positive things happen. You get further. Therefore, you can deal with things when they arise because your life is better.

Stay still or evolve consciously?
Evolution has only been conscious of itself for the last hundred years or so. It’s only been recently that we’ve been able to understand this process. You’ll notice most people don’t evolve consciously. They want things to stay as they are and want nothing to be different unless it sounds moderately interesting.

Instant gratification or long-term success?
Do you choose instant gratification or do you choose long-term success. What strategy are you going to take with life? 10 years from now if you choose long-term success, chances are you’ll be in a much better position. Instant gratification is good once in a while, but which will be primary strategy?

Security or Risk?
Are you going to approach life from the point, “I want security,” or are you going to take some risks? Helen Keller once said, “Life is either a daring adventure, or nothing.” Pretty deep stuff for someone who was deaf, dumb, and blind.

Closed to change or open to change?
People don’t like change, we like to keep them the same. Evolution is speeding up and our lives are changing faster than ever with technology and communication. Will you be open to change and ask, “How can I make change fun?” How can I get a different model or paradigm so change is great? You’ll move faster, further.

Comfort zone or uncertainty?
Will you be drawn to uncertainty or will you be drawn to stay in your comfort zone? If you constantly seek out uncertainty, go looking for it, find paradox, you’ll grow, you’ll change, and you’ll expand your mind.

Hand In Hand

2007-01-25T15:56:00.000-05:00

I was only 5 during the 1988 Olympics in Seoul, Korea. To help us understand the meaning behind the Olympic spirit, the teachers at my elementary school (Centennial Road Jr. P.S.) decided one year to hold "Olympics." I believe the year was 1992 because we (grades 4-6) made up a song with the assistance of some guy (I can't remember who he was), that started out, "To Barcelona, from Olympica, come the people, of the world."

We also sang the official Olympic song from the 1988 Olympics in Seoul. I have posted the lyrics because it has recently been on my mind. The final line of the chorus apparently isn't what I remember it to be, but I've changed it to fit my memory. Here it is:

HAND IN HAND
(Official Seoul 1988 Olympic Games Song)
(Tom Whitlock / Giorgio Moroder)

See the fire in the sky
We feel the beating of our hearts together
This is our time to rise above
We know the chance is here to live forever
For all time

CHORUS:
Hand in Hand we stand
All across the land
We can make this world
A better place in which to live
Hand in Hand we can
Start to understand
Breaking down the walls
That come between us for all time
For all time

Everytime we give it all
We feel the flame eternally inside us
Lift our hands up to the sky
The morning calm helps us to live in harmony
For all time

CHORUS:
Hand in hand we stand
All across the land
We can make this world
A better place in which to live
Hand in Hand we can
Start to understand
Breaking down the walls
That come between us for all time
For all time

Hand in hand we stand
All across the land
We can make this world
A better place in which to live

Hand in Hand we can
Start to understand
Breaking down the walls
That come between us for all time

Hand in hand (Breaking down the walls between us)
Hand in Hand (Breaking down the walls)

Je me souviens.

2007-01-23T22:32:00.000-05:00

I just spent the past few minutes briefly chatting with an acquaintance of mine who happens to be overseas doing NGO work in Asia. I marvel at how great he is at expressing his thoughts as I review his blog. One entry from October 4th tells of a trip to a genocide museum. As I read I am moved by the power of words. “Only seven out of the fourteen to twenty thousand academics, activists, teachers, lawyers, civil servants, bankers, farmers, peasants and children imprisoned there survived to speak about it.” Holy shit. SEVEN?!?? I am told that he "left out alot of very touching comments from those survivors."

Damn. We definitely have great lives here in North America. The only genocide to happen on our soil was of the Aboriginals. We have had no oppressive regimes (though we have had prison camps).

He tells me that he’s so used to writing “cord length” articles that he keeps everything below 1000 words. I tell him how I don’t seem to post much anymore and he tells me that I should write down all the important things I want to say in an article, and just write it all down in paragraphs. It sounds obvious of course, one should write out the structure of their writing and then elaborate. But somehow, hearing (reading) it explicitly spelled out for me causes it to resonate with me.

I repeat to him advice given to me by Nicki, partly anecdotal, partly seeking confirmation: I should keep my posts shorter so more people will read them. He replies, “if you're having trouble keeping your posts shorter, just write everything important and then find a way to string the paragraphs together. Once you pick up on a theme or common thread, it makes you 'throw out' some of the important parts and keep what fits the mould.”

I really hope I put this advice to use. Without this man I would have not learned of the horrific crimes committed against the Cambodian people. I ALMOST FORGOT how great I have it. I almost forgot that history is rife with examples of brutal wars and other needless killing.

Thank you Bryn. Without much effort you have inspired me to post again and through your words you have taught me that which the survivers of the Khmer Rouge’s massacre want us never to forget. It is because of people like you that we can all remember.

The ZoomQuilt

2006-11-14T02:59:00.000-05:00

I recommend the Flash version! After it loads click and drag your mouse either "up" or "down." I was so impressed I downloaded it as my screensaver (which I can conveniently do right from the first page.

THE ZOOMQUILT

Canvass, Colour, & Keller

2006-11-03T19:38:00.000-05:00

We start out like a blank canvass, our own personal picture being created as time goes on. When we are young great wide spaces are washed with solid colours with no real detail. Then as we age the picture gets more and more complete.

At the beginning each one of us has the potential to end up as any number of almost infinite possibilities; there are almost endless pictures that could ultimately be one's finished self. As time goes on the possibilities are restricted by what is painted on our canvass. Though events like going to university we gain the opportunity to paint over certain parts of "us" to create the picture we envision and ultimately create.

Each child is a canvass with near infinite possibilities, so the important thing is to ensure that their background base colours get painted properly so their picture can end up being as spectacular and impressive as possible. Some are not so fortunate though and only get the brush water spashed haphazardly upon them.

To refocus, it seems to me it is a given the survival of the human race depends on each generation surviving to create decendents. Further, the health of each generation depends on the education and development of countless individuals. I recall a slogan that read, "The years before five last the rest of their lives." That slogan was the tagline for a public service announcement urging parents to seek out information about educating their newborns during the critical first years of life. Why then is it so difficult in reality to ensure every person grows up healthy, happy, educated, and fulfilled? If we are to continue to progress, it is imperative we take every bit of new knowledge and apply it to ourselves and our existence.

Helen Keller once said:

Security is mostly a superstition. It does not exist in nature, nor do the children of men as a whole experience it. Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. Life is either a daring adventure or nothing.

If a woman who is deaf, blind, and dumb can conceive of life as a daring adventure how come more "normal" people cannot find such inspiration and motivation? "I am only one; but still I am one. I cannot do everything, but still I can do something." (also Hellen Keller) This point of view would greatly enrich the lives of countless people who travel to work each day and allow themselves to view this task as suffering rather than living.

Simple wisdom has been passed down from previous generations and is literally waiting to be learned and painted onto our picture. The Earth is a gallery and we are the pieces on display. Together we make an endless mosaic representing all that humanity has to offer. No matter how random or insignificant your picture may look, these days, with a little effort and creativity, nearly anything can be genuinely considered to be great art.

Where have all the flowers gone?

2006-10-17T23:37:00.000-04:00

I'm sure everyone reading this knows what a flower is and is aware that different species come in several shapes and colours. Flowers can be decorations, aromatic, sacrificed for slightly illogical but none-the-less traditional courting rituals, or even a combination of those -- and more. Flowers can also cause pain. Just ask anyone with pollen allergies.

Just like flowers, people can be very expressive too. Of course, some peoples' expression can also cause pain.

Regardless, I have noticed there are some people who choose to express themselves on a regular basis and others (the majority I would say) who choose to express themselves either very little, or not at all. Ignoring the fact that those two extremes are different ends of the same continuum, why do more people not blog? Or in the case of Facebook, "note"? Using my own "profiles" on MySpace(.com) and Facebook(.com) as sources for observations, I can see that as far as social networking sites go, the amount of deep-more-than-token-status-quo-'wall-writing'-profile-comment-leaving-expression appears to be lacking. There is a minority of people from both of my data sources that express themselves a lot (quips about the statistical validity of my sample notwithstanding), and a majority who do so very little, or not at all. Generally, our individual flowerbeds of expression seem to be as empty and overgrown with weeds as those outside our student housing.

Isn't blogging and other expression really kind of pretentious though? There really can't be enough smart people in the world to support the idea that everyone should express themselves through writing. I mean, who really wants to be inundated by what other people think? Who are they to presume that I would want to read something they wrote? Where do they get off thinking they're so intelligent and insightful that people would actually enjoy what they write?

There is clearly something wrong with the way we are socialized. Being smart, or intelligent (etcetera) is always thought of as being undesirable, which is a ludicrous idea. Every person is intelligent, almost as much so as the next person. Somebody with an IQ of 120 is still not really significantly less intelligent than someone with an IQ of say, 140. Sure there are differences, but human beings all have essentially the same predisposition and ability to be as intelligent as other human beings. Compared to all other animals and inanimate objects, every person is a genius. So express yourself already. Why let everyone else shape the word around them and not you? A whole field full of flowers may yield some that are more brilliant than others but essentially every one is as beautiful as the next.

Perhaps for these reasons, some people are scared of expressing themselves. After all, writing down what one thinks for all to read is a pretty scary task. What if people don't like my ideas? What if they disagree? What if (heaven forbid) they don't like me? Well, so what? Could it be that our society has raised huge chunks of the population to be socially anxious and fearful of what the mob-like majority thinks of them? What if those people think of themselves as being allergic to social rejection?

Perhaps maybe people are more like me. They choose not to write out their thoughts because inside their mind is this idea that writing is a huge, daunting, and difficult task. Similar to the way school work is portrayed by our peer socialization groups early on in life, actually sitting down and writing what one thinks is considered to be "nerdy," "boring," or generally undesirable. Though I hesitate to suggest that the majority of us are actually lazy, maybe we're all allergic to work?

Well I ask you this: how does anything ever get accomplished? How does any work ever get done? Have we all been trained socially to think that any time we have to do work, we are actually suffering? It seems to me that doing work is actually more normal than not doing work. Everyone goes to school, and many people pursue it by choice after high school. Furthermore, it seems to me that the majority of us humans actually choose to get a job and work. Granted, we all need money to live, but why are we told that working is such a horrible existence to endure?

I know FOR A FACT that every single person out there has thoughts inside their head. There have to be dozens if not hundreds or thousands of great ideas and intriguing problems just waiting to be let out. Am I the only one who actually mourns a great idea that I knew that I had but just can't seem to remember?

What are you waiting for? Soak up some sun and bloom.

Hmmmm... a little too short?

2006-09-21T14:32:00.000-04:00

That last post was really short. I seem to have a habit of beginning thoughts and leaving them unfinished. Oh well. You readers can deal with it.

Back from hiatus...

2006-09-21T14:21:00.000-04:00

Today I walked down to the store to buy some more, **GASP** cigarettes. I never did quit after my post about quitting. But as I walked down a neighbouring street, I felt the breeze on my face and found myself happy to be alive.

On my way home I passed through an undeveloped area to take a short cut. I marvelled at how much everything had grown in since I had last been there. There were trees, and insects, and even TWO rabbits who sat frozen as I passed.

As I sit here now at my kitchen table and write this I can see how the leaves on the maple tree behind our house have begun changing. Other trees around it haven't though. Intersting how different plant species hold onto their chlorophyll longer than others.

Well, following pixie's advice I need to finish this post off (so more people will read it). I need to start writing an assignment so I guess I'll stop procrastinating.... right... now.

I am slowly going crazy, 1-2-3-4-5-6 switch (I can't sleep)

2006-07-22T06:29:00.000-04:00

So after spending the past 6 hours trying to get to sleep I have decided to give up and get up for work early. I find it amazing that sometimes your mind can just continually think up more and more semi-random/semi-connected thoughts of the worst/best case scenario variety. I even tried in vain to use sound to coax my mind into dreamland (or rather, into deep sleep first, then into dreamland a.k.a. R.E.M. sleep). In case you've made the mistake of thinking that I simply listen to soothing music or nature sounds to fall asleep, you're wrong. How on Earth do I use sound to help fall asleep (when my mind cooperates that is)? The program I use is called Brain Wave Generator and frankly, it may just be one of the most useful and ground-breaking inventions since we learned to buy our bread presliced. It uses binaural beats to work its magic.

It is too bad that more people don't read these posts. I aspire to one day be as cool and widely read as everybody's favourite bird nerd, Nicki, or as touching and deep as Sonal, but for some reason I'm skeptical that people will be interested. I suspect that if people read what I type they'd sometimes find a little diamond in the rough to take away. Though, come to think of it, that means I'd have to start writing a whole lot more...

The rest of my family is still sleeping. This posed a problem for me because to drink coffee, I would need to (clearly) use my coffee-maker. Unfortunately, my coffee-maker, when finished brewing, beeps SUPER SUPER LOUD 4 times. So what did I do? I brought our old coffee-maker upstairs from the basement and used it to make my coffee, solely because it doesn't make the same obnoxious beeps. That's how much I love my family.

I remember last night before going to bed, my mother's cell phone was beeping intermittently somewhere, crying out in thirst for some electricity. Now that I'm up again 6 hours later, it's still beeping somewhere. Poor thing. If it were alive I might care more but since it's super old and ghetto-styles and will survive a couple hours more without power the damned thing can just suffer.

Nipples are queer little things. Do you think that I have nipples solely because the human template doesn't account for male/female differences? I mean, females need nipples presumably for nursing at some point. Could they possibly serve a double (or triple?) function? Maybe they exist because it's difficult to get skin to come together seamlessly on rounded surfaces. For a second (just now) I entertained the question of why then we don't have nipples on our buttocks, but then I realized that they're slightly differently shaped. Deep thoughts, I know.

When I first turned on my computer this morning, the first thing I did was check my e-mail. I was delighted that I had some up-to-the-minute news stories coming in through RSS. None of them interested me though. Did you know that blogspot blogs can be read using RSS? Did you know that Flickr photos can be viewed? It's easy. Unfortunately, I'm still not fully awake and don't care to spell it all out for you. Use your researching skills (as in google it) and make a half-hearted attempt to learn on your own. If you have trouble, and you want to know how to do it, e-mail me. If you don't know my e-mail address, get it from someone, and then e-mail me. If you don't know anyone who has it, or don't even know who I am, then you're SOL.

One of these days I'll have to personalize this blog with my own colour scheme and links to friends' blogs.

Crazy going slowly am I, 6-5-4-3-2-1 switch.

The day I got addicted/The 1st Day of Forever

2006-07-17T14:09:00.000-04:00

The date was March 17th, 2000. It was the evening of the Lakeridge Ski School Party and I was driving. I was not yet old enough to drink anyway and I was not into smoking marijuana and driving so I decided on another way to enjoy myself. I was not yet a 'confirmed' smoker and still got a head buzz every time I had a smoke. So I had the 'ingenius' idea of buying a small pack of du Maurier light king size, and proceeded to smoke all of them throughout the night.

The next morning I felt like crap. I was lethargic and spaced out. I remember the surprise I felt when the first thought upon waking was, "I need a smoke." That was when it began. From that day forth I was a smoker and have been destroying my health and wasting my money ever since.

Until today.

Today is my first day being a non-smoker. I had my final cigarette last night. I know it sounds pretty sketchy. How can I be so sure that I am never going to smoke again?

I am currently half way through Allen Carr's Easy Way To Stop Smoking. The book was recommended to me by a guy I met at my friend's stag party 4 weeks ago. He said that after reading it he honestly never wanted to smoke a cigarette again. My friend Joey also heard that the book actually works from a couple he met at a bar during his friend's birthday. Both of them quit and never want to smoke again. Most smokers who try to quit never really rid themselves of the desire to smoke again. When they see someone light up they feel an urge to have one themselves. The beauty of Allen Carr's book is that it debunks all of the myths smokers (and non-smokers for that matter) are taught.

Almost everyone believes that it is difficult to quit smoking. This is simply not true. Since we have been taught that it is hard regardless of whether or not we smoke, we inadvertently trick ourselves into suffering when we really don't have to. Cutting down only increases the time between cigarettes, so more time is spent suffering. What is even more incredible, is how hard one has to try to actually get addicted; nobody actually enjoys their first cigarette so they believe they can stop whenever they want -- and they continue to smoke. I don't have enough time or energy to summarize the entire method of stopping. If you smoke and you want to quit, I recommend you buy a copy of Allen Carr's book. I bought my copy for $11.35 at Chapters. For just over the price of a pack of cigarettes you can get a book that will help you rid yourself of the need for cigarettes. I bought my copy 3 weeks ago. So why has it taken 3 weeks to quit? I didn't actually begin reading it until a few days ago. (oops)

I'm excited and looking forward to getting my sense of smell and taste back. I am going to have more energy and slowly but surely, my lungs are going to begin repairing themselves. I have no problem with people who are smokers since I was one for so long. Nor do I think that every smoker should listen to me; they should only listen if they want to quit.

Cross your fingers for me and wish me luck. With a little effort, I will succeed. What's next on my list of self-improvement initiatives? Cutting down or eliminating my intake of marijuana. Anybody know of an easy way to do that?

Breaking the ice...

2006-06-23T23:49:00.000-04:00

For my first post I suppose I should write something meaningful and profound here so that readers can feel entertained and stimulated, but I realize that this is the public domain and you could be literally anyone in the world with internet access. Do I really want to reveal my deepest inner self to absolute strangers? "Hi! I'm Guaritore. Here's some of my dirty laundry for you to ponder." I think not.

However, I will have the courtesy to give you a little bit of a glimpse.

I loathe living within a bubble and aspire to inquire and learn as much as I can about the world both around me and afar. I love both the element of randomness and unorthodox "things" because of the break from life's monotony they provide.

I whole-heartedly believe that "those who forget the past are doomed to repeat it," and as such us humans seem to be addicted to going around in circles. If we always do what we have always done, we will always get what we have always gotten. Accordingly, if you are of conservative ideology then you and I will likely find ourselves opposed in a war of words (the only acceptable form of war) -- unless you care about the environment. That is one thing that does need to be protected.

If you like what you just read, great. If it ruffled your feathers, even better! Either way you are exactly the person I want to talk to.

I think I will leave it at that. I'm starting to get lippy.