Gone for a Month, but not Forgotten

Hello, everyone:

I’m moving across provinces from British Columbia over the next month.  Life will be a little chaotic in the next few weeks so I’ve put my blogs on hold until nearer to Christmas.  I am still reachable, but have limited time to write.


All the best until a month from now!


The Contrarian

Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Comments


Let’s discuss corruption of the banks, the banking system and the people who run these infamous institutions.  In my contrary opinion to the status quo, this means discussing the greed and ego of all bankers, the boards of directors and the share holders. This also means the avoidance by the Federal, Provincial, Municipal Governments and People to charge the banks and their boards of directors with the Crime of Usury.

Usury, defined by the Criminal Code of Canada, at §347, defines the crime of usury (called ‘criminal interest rate’) as follows:

‘Criminal rate means an effective annual rate of interest calculated in accordance with generally accepted actuarial practices and principles that exceeds 60 pr cent on the credit advanced under an agreement or arrangement.’

 Believe it or not people, every bank in Canada is – and always has been – guilty of the CRIME of Usury. This means they are also guilty of FRAUD, deceit, grand theft, misappropriation of private funds (citizens’ private monies). God, I could go on and on.

Example – Purchasing a Home

Each and every home owner purchases his/her home with a mortgage. That mortgage, paid over time (Say 30 years for this example), ends up costing far more than the value of the house plus the 60% Usury-limit.

How the Criminal Code of Canada Views Usury

Condo $300,000.00
60% interest – the most allowed under the criminal code of Canada: (note this is not compounded interest, but a set 60%) $180,000.00
TOTAL: $480,000.00

How The Banks Really Work

Condo $300,000.00
Best Mortgage Calculators:Homeowner will spend $21,555.80 a year over 30 years

($21,555.80 X 30 years)

TOTAL: $646,647.00

*The % of INTEREST charged by the Bank/Mortgage broker = 216%

Basic Math Figures

216% is a far cry from the Criminal Code of Canada’s 60%. This is Usury. So can anyone tell me why the politicians and the police, the legal system itself does not take all the bankers, their boards of directors, their share holders and force them to turn over all their money and everything they own? Better yet, true justice based on ethics of right and wrong for the majority is seizing all their personal belongings, including all their clothing and making them and their families serve hard time. Usury is a crime against humanity. Hell, make it a capital crime with a few hangings or shootings and bankers will get the picture. Throw in all the politicians for their non-action and we’ll quickly clean up the system.

The Defense

Any broker, banker or lawyer will break down the cost for you and call it ‘fees’. Let’s be honest here – these figures are not fees. Interest charges are disguised as fees to mask the fact the banks are stealing citizens’ money. The problem here is about ethics. Lawyers and brokerages, banks and politicians don’t have any, in my opinion. They have no wish to support or create a system that works, that’s fair, that’s responsible to the people. These people care about their personal agendas. When federal elected officials in Canada earn over 150,000 a year plus bonuses, why should they care what lesser people think? When bankers earn top dollar, why should they care for lesser people? Instead of acting responsibly, they hide behind manipulation and coercion, sit in their seats of advantage and force others – usually those who are less fortunate – to bend to their will.

Is that morally correct? Not at all. Once again, I suggest you view my earlier articles about replacing our oligarchic system with a better designed system. (Struggle For Democracy, Part I and II).

Until next week, remember, these are my opinions and point of view on the subject. That doesn’t make them right for anyone else. It doesn’t make them wrong, either. That stated, if any errors or omissions have occurred, please let me know. I’d be grateful for your point of view.

Warm regards,

Jason Smeraka

Posted in Political Change / Discussion | Tagged , , , , , , , , | 2 Comments

Revolutions – Soft and Hard


Arab Spring, Walk on Wall Street, et. al. Let us not forget the civil disobedience movement in India throughout the early to mid 20th century. Mahatma Mohandas Gandhi led that large movement.

These are all examples of dissatisfied people. The silent majority of people who have finally begun to voice their disapproval of the corruption of big business, the wealthy, the so-called political leaders. Arab Spring and Walk on Wall Street are a repeat of the last century’s protests for independence. Granted, these protests and protestors are not crying for national independence (as Gandhi had protested), but for independence and freedom from tyranny, greed and control-oriented people in power whose interest is self-interest.

These protests are soft revolutions. They are an act of civil disobedience. They are a protest against the system and, more import, the people who govern the system. These protestors should be listened to. Their grievances voiced, listened to and weighed. If necessary, acted upon (and not violently against the protestors).  These concerns need to be addressed and valued.

I know what you think. ‘These people are street protestors’, ‘The hoi polloi are acting up, making a scene. This isn’t my problem.’ I hate to tell you, but you’re correct – and you’re incorrect. This is not your problem, but this is your issue. It is everyone’s issue. Apathy is not an option any longer. Look out your window. Look at the corruption of government and multi-nationals. Look at their record of true achievements. Look at their spin-doctoring. Look at your self. You complain over the late-night news or bitch across the breakfast table to whomever will listen. While you sit in your house with your two vehicles, your out-of-control and astronomical debts to banks, you are telling the bankers and politicians that they are right in their choices. You do this by not voicing your concerns and acting upon them. This is apathy.

It is fine to gripe and complain – and offer alternatives! Complain to the politicians and the media, get your alternatives in print. Make the politicians listen!

‘Gasp! I can’t do that! That means I’ll have to think, I’ll have to act, I’ll have to be responsible. I’ll have to work. I’ll have to become a shit-disturber’.

How much you wish to speak out is up to you. Recall though, that silence has brought us to this current state of affairs. Protestors have continued to voice the concerns. Yes, fringe groups exist. There always will be such groups. However, the silent majority of people who wish to live in peace and quiet, own their home and vehicles, raise their children – and all with little interference… I hate to tell you, but you have to earn it. Apathy will only allow the corruption to continue indefinitely.

As for the protestors – they are in the midst of the 21st Century’s first soft revolution. Soft Revolutions are only half of the revolutionary process. I suspect that, with the civil disobedience, these soft revolutions are the kinder approach. As big business, as board members and share holders, politicians and bureaucrats continue to ignore the soft revolutions, as they allow the police to protect them from the people they are, in their silent apathy, giving the masses the right to create the hard revolution.

What is the Hard Revolution? Violence, protest, physical action. Civil War and terrorism, sometimes known as freedom fighting. People lashing out against the incompetent system and ego-driven persons who are supposedly in positions of power.

Hard and soft revolutions have been continuous throughout history. They are part of the pattern of growth. Gandhi used soft revolutionary tactics. The IRA, after years of soft, altered tactics to serve their hard revolution. The original colonists in the United States, tired of being oppressed by those in power, turned to the use of hard revolutionary tactics. They became traitors to their country (Great Britain). They became terrorists. They spoke out and brought about a civil war. The colonies won. Only in hindsight did the USA label their founders as freedom fighters. If the colonies had lost, the ‘founders’ would have been hanged as terrorists.

(Now that is something for the people of the US to consider during their run up to President Election. The Republicans have always been fond of using the Founding Fathers of the USA as their heroes. Politicians across the US have done so. If we think this trough logically, that means candidates claim they value the beliefs of the founders – terrorists… yet the current-day candidates are a part of a corrupt system the founders would have labeled as oppressive. Today’s governments are the exact level of greed and corruption the colonies fought against! Yet here are the candidates spouting praise for the founding fathers who fought against oppression – when the candidates really support oppression and status quo. This is a great example of the double talk all politicians and bureaucrats use.)

In summary, soft revolutions are occurring now. They have occurred repeatedly in the past. Political leaders need to recognize the need for them and listen to the people they took an oath to serve, then act in the best interest of the majority, not the wealthy minority. Now is the time for the silent majority to voice their concerns and then force those in government and in business to bow to what is right, ethically and socially, environmentally and financially. That means taking responsibility for their share of the challenge. I have yet to witness a single banker, businessman, oilman or politician speak the truth. The next step, if healthy action is not taken, will be the hard revolutions and the system will change.

I say it’s about time. We could change – change our system, improve out democracy, clean up our environment – via soft revolutions. But the politicians would need to take serious effort to do so. However, having met many bureaucrats and politicians, I have serious doubts they will listen. The result will be the hard revolution. That is an inescapable outcome as we continue down this path without true leadership. In my way, I have more pity and sympathy toward all those who play the system as it is than I do contempt. They’re spoiled children who care nothing for others, nothing for what is best for the world. They think of their careers and self-interest. That leaves me to wonder where we as a species is going.

Until next week, remember, these are my opinions and point of view on the subject. That doesn’t make them right for anyone else. It doesn’t make them wrong, either. That stated, if any errors or omissions have occurred, please let me know. I’d be grateful for your point of view.

Warm regards,

Jason Smeraka

Posted in Political Change / Discussion, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

Choosing Leaders

How corrupt and horrible it is when leaders are appointed in our so-called democracy of Canada and not elected. Stephen Harper, Brian Mulroney, Kim Campbell and every other Prime Minister was appointed. In the latter, doubly so. This has occurred, too, at the Provincial level. Gordon Campbell, Ralph Klein and Christy Clark. Christy, like Kim, was doubly appointed. Neither was selected in an election.  I’m not stating they were not elected in their riding to represent their riding.  I’m stating that none of these individuals was elected by the majority in either a Province or the Nation.

The challenges with the current political system is the design and the leadership within it. As mentioned in earlier blogs, we live in an oligarchy, not a democracy. When the rule of the minority outweighs the rule of the majority, an oligarchy reigns. The system itself works for what it was intended – maintain the status quo, keep the people in line and let the minority rule. Democracy? I don’t think so. What is needed is a complete rewrite. In other words, dissolve the constitution and write a new one that is up to date, poignant and able to adapt. If it doesn’t, review it in ten years and write a new one. It is a document, a guideline, not some holy writ. Holy writs should also be examined on a regular basis – why? Because they were written by men and women out of the need for control of the masses.

Choosing federal leaders should be a national act – and mandatory. Choosing a provincial leader should be a provincial act – and mandatory. Both must be a majority vote. If you have no wish to take part in a true democracy, then leave the country or take a financial hit. (See my earlier blogs on Struggle for Democracy)

No leader should be appointed when someone steps down. No leader should be appointed after an election. They should be chosen by the people. In the case of appointments when leaders resign, an immediate election should be called – for the leadership seat. Once again I state that I don’t believe in a party system. It doesn’t work. However, if we must change things in stages, then let us have a leader elected by the people, not a party that I didn’t vote for in the first place.

The largest, most unethical and corrupt act of modern political systems is the appointment of leaders. Don’t believe a thing about democracy. The so-called leaders of nations are appointed. The President of the United States is appointed by an Electoral College, based upon the votes by the people. In Canada, the leader of the majority party is appointed as the Prime Minister. Premiere’s of each province are appointed by same rule – majority party leader becomes the Premiere. In all these cases the leaders (or should we use the word Ruler or Oligarch?) is appointed, not elected. That makes the difference.

Think about it from a mathematical stand-point. In Canada, a member of parliament (federal) is elected to a seat. The same system is applied to members of legislative assemblies in each province. Yet, with a majority party elected – or even a minority party with the most votes, the leader of that party is chosen by the politicians to run the country. This is appointment, not a recognized vote.

For simplicity’s sake, let us say that each riding in Canada has 100,000 citizens. There are 308 Ridings in Canada (therefore 308 Members of Parliament). Let’s say the leading party receives 155 seats, marking them as the majority party. Their leader is appointed as leader of the country, yet he received, perhaps, 30% of the vote of his riding. That means the leader of the country was elected by 33,000 people, in a riding i’ve never heard of or lived in. This, of course, is valid if all 100% of the people of the riding voted. This does not take in to effect the lack of interest in people to actively vote, or the apathy these same people feel that the system doesn’t work. (In the last Federal Election the voter turnout was 61%. Stephen Harper, then was elected by no more than a third of that turn out in his riding – that makes a 3rd of 61,000 people. That equals 20,000 people elected the Prime Minister. By legal definition, that marks the appointment of the Prime Minister an Oligarchic act, not Democratic – and therefore treasonous.

The same is true of provincial politics. Every Prime Minister was appointed, not elected by all the people of the province. What is needed is a vote for leader. If the majority of people do not want to dissolve the party system, then a vote must be made for the leader of the country or province, and this must be a majority vote. Since this is such a critical post, it should be mandatory to vote. By keeping the party system (of which I disagree), then the leaders of all the parties should be held in a second election (once again: mandatory). The majority vote – and only the majority vote – will decide who the leader of the country/province is. At the very least, if the Prime Minister/Premiere chosen is in a separate party to the majority of seats, the politicians will have to begin to work together. Any and all in-fighting and backstabbing should be met with capital punishment to keep the politicians in line.

To sum up, the leaders of Canada and her provinces should and must be elected by the people. Not by an oligarchic rule of appointment masked as a practice of democracy. Do I recognize Steven Harper or Christy Clarke as leaders? Do I view any provincial Premiere as a leader? No, I do not. They were not democratically or ethically chosen by the people. In my opinion, they are guilty of treason against the people and against the true spirit of democracy.

Until next week, remember, these are my opinions and point of view on the subject. That doesn’t make them right for anyone else. It doesn’t make them wrong, either. That stated, if any errors or omissions have occurred, please let me know. I’d be grateful for your point of view.

Warm regards,

Jason Smeraka

Good Reading:

Excellent look at Elections and Riding information in Canada:

Wikipedia’s article on Electoral Districts in Canada:


Voter turnout in last Federal Canadian election:


Posted in Political Change / Discussion, Uncategorized | Tagged , , , , , | 2 Comments

Control and Leadership – What’s The Difference?

In today’s political climate (and I mean the last 30 years) I have grown more aware that there is no leadership in governments of any size, particularly Provincial and Federal (or State and Federal in the USA) anywhere in the world. As a Historian, this lack of leadership, bureaucratic sloth and corruption have endured since civilization began. This behaviour is completely unacceptable. The question no one seems to be asking (and therefore taking responsibility and action over) is not can we change this; but how do we change it?

Let us be honest with ourselves. We have to. For the good of the planet, the good of the next generations. Above all, though, we must change this for us, so that we can live and breathe and be happy in our lives in the here and now. Our immediate happiness is the reason we must change our political structures. No one is happy with the system, expect those who run it. That’s a given. Rulers (not leaders) and the bureaucracy that follows them are always concerned with personal ego and maintaining the status quo.


What is the Status Quo?

It means keeping things as they are. Another word is stagnation. Governments and Bureaucracies are unconcerned – and terrified – with change. Why do you think they move so slowly. Change is, from this point of view evil and something not to be thought of. Instead, the politicians and high-level bureaucrats run everyone around in circles and never do anything. You don’t believe me – pick up a newspaper or watch the evening news and listen to the jargon and state of affairs in any govt. ‘We’ll get to it after we have a meeting scheduled after the committee when it is formed. Expect an answer in about 30 years time.’ this means the politicians are doing everything in their power to ignore the issue and get on with their personal agendas.


True leadership is about the act, skill, and talent of listening. It is about hearing and observing what other people need. It is about doing whatever it takes. Lead from behind or even the middle, of the group. It’s a better perspective. This is not about Rulership in war where the generals tell everyone what to do, not actually get involved in fighting. Leadership is about taking charge and providing others with the tools to carry out their goals. In the political arena, this should be about assuring everyone has a quality of life that is acceptable, not about feeding the rich or special interest groups; that is rulership.


In politics, this is the current state of affairs; the status quo of corruption. Rulership is about the personal agenda, of accomplishing what I/my party/special interest groups wish. This is not about harmonization or the good of the people or even the good of the land. This is about greed, corruption and self-interest. Take a look at politicians and political parties, even tyrants the world over. They’re interested in one thing – themselves. In my opinion, Steven Harper (the ‘esteemed’ and ‘honourable’) does not appear to care a whit about the people. He cares about his personal agenda, his immediate family, his party. He, like every other politician in federal government, cares nothing about the opposition party point of view. There is not listening done, no compromise, no willingness to work together for the greater good.

In provincial politics, Premiere Gordon Campbell (British Columbia) behaved the same way, in my opinion. His party even appointed someone to replace him.  This was not a vote across the province! These, to me, are examples of bepotism and corruption at the very best. The system itself is about rulership, not leadership. (see Choosing Leaders blog, next week)


In the political landscape (by this I mean both the politicians themselves and the high-level bureaucrats) control is another word for ego. It isn’t influence. Control is about forced direction, not going with the flow. It’s about serving the self, not the good of the most. Control equals Agenda, one controlled itself by the ego. Control is about having your way no matter what the cost, usually with the pleas of having others proved wrong and you right. Control is manipulation and it has run rampant across the globe. Control and Greed go hand in hand. Influence and honesty, integrity, justice and respect – these ethical requirements for a good society do not exist when control and ego rule.


Influence is the opposite of control. True influence is about integrity, awareness, and a willingness to express opinion with the sincerely hope that others will learn from that opinion and chose to follow it. There is no control involved. Nor is there judgement when and if others chose to go their own way. Influence is the acceptance that, while your opinions and thoughts, your concerns and suggestions for improvement are voiced, you are accepting others opinions and willing to bend with them as well to generate and create something even better.

Examples of Control and Rulership:

BC Harmonized Sales Tax (HST)– while it might have been a good thing for British Columbia’s economy, the ethics on how it was achieved displayed a lack of respect and a great deal of fear and mistrust of the public. The HST was rushed through with limited consultation and no vote by the people. As this was a topic that effected everyone province-wide it should have been discussed above-board and voted in a provincial referendum. By this lack of trust and respect, the leading political party is immediately guilty of treasonous acts – treason against the people.

Appointed Premiere, not elected – Yet another example of traitorous acts is the appointment by politicians of politicians. Here in British Columbia, Canada, Premiere Gordon Campbell stepped down. His successor selected by him and his party was Ms. Christy Clarke. Certainly she was elected to her riding as a member of the legislative assembly, yet she was appointed, not elected to the post of Premiere. Neither was Mr. Gordon Campbell elected to the post of Premiere by the majority of citizens. Nor was any predecessor. (see next week’s blog, Choosing a Leader). This shows a need to keep up political custom, not democratic or constitutional law and certainly not ethics and morality of a democracy.

In summary, control and rulership are not leadership. They are ego-driven and not ethically and morally driven to meet a better way of life for all concerned. Yes, leadership can be about making the hard decision – but in communication and talks with everyone concerned, not by making a decision based on the needs of a party or lobby group. We have a long way to go to create a true democracy. We need to start by putting trust back in the hands of the people, of acting on good-faith and the interest of all concerned, not just party-politics and ego.

Until next week, remember, these are my opinions and point of view on the subject. That doesn’t make them right for anyone else. It doesn’t make them wrong, either. That stated, if any errors or omissions have occurred, please let me know. I’d be grateful for your point of view.

Warm regards,

Jason Smeraka

Posted in Political Change / Discussion, Uncategorized | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

The End of Governments?

The riots in London mid-August, the violent upheaval in Libya, the Egyptian experience; all these leave me asking a pertinent question – as Government officials come across more and more restless citizens, do they have the social and ethical right to control the people?

In the end, the answer is really NO.

While this answer can be viewed in a shocked manner, with opposers believing that this rash belief in the complete dismissal of power and structures may lead to chaos, let’s look at this from a common-sense approach.  I’ll focus on the UK riots and the western democracies, not focus on the East.  This is arbitrary, but bear with me.  Here in the West, the people elect Ministers (congressmen, politicians, et al).  Currently, a minority population votes these elected officials to office in a no-longer-viable voting structure.  Parties are appointed as ruling governments (see my very first blog, The Struggle for Democracy, Part I) to serve the majority.   In reality, however, they are in office to serve themselves and their party; they are there for self-aggrandizement and their party/members betterment.  In any case, if the people riot (for whatever conscious reason – I will return to this later) they are expressing their frustration and anger, their fears and anxieties.  Everyone has a basic human right; a natural right to express their concerns and feelings.  We can call this the Natural Law of Self-Expression.  This law goes far beyond any legal recourse.  Our modern world and our obfuscated systems of politics and laws refuses to take our emotions and this natural law into account.  This is an extremely Victorian view that is so outmoded it makes our civilization – particularly our governmental and bureaucratic structures – look idiotic and not balanced.  Riots are a release valve from the unbalanced system.  They are, in the grand view, this natural law of self-expression in action.  All natural laws flow freely.  We cannot prevent them from doing so for long.  Pent up by communities and legal-political structures, these restricted natural laws must vent for the sanity of the human race, or worse will happen.  Alleviating the pressure prevents the entire system from exploding from within.

Let me return to the act of rioting and the rights of the government officials during these times.  People riot, expressing their subconscious need to vent.  Elected Officials in turn send in police forces (in the UK 6,000 police became 16,000 strong) to curb the riots.  In the end, this means the hired employees (the government officials) revolted against their employers (the people) and committed acts of violence against them.  In truth, the government officials are admitting in public that they view themselves and their positions as more important than that of the people whom hired them to do a job; to look after them.  When riots happen, this is a sign that politicians, elected governments and the bureaucracies have failed.  Period.  End of story.

As soon as a riot begins, an elected government (including all elected officials from all parties) should resign and all members within that elected term must never be permitted to work in bureaucracy or run for elected office ever again.  It’s about competence.  If you cannot deal effectively and efficiently with the true challenges, then you have no right being there.  The average worker can be (and is) hired and fired for far, far less than the mistakes of any elected official.  Where did elected officials suddenly get the privilege and right to sidestep their responsibilities and failures? How and when did they suddenly become above the laws they manage/govern?  Is this not hypocrisy at work?

Riots:  Are indicative that those elected in office are not listening to the needs of the majority and these ministers/elected officials have utterly failed at their posts.  If any society gets to this point, resignation and dissolution of the political parties in so-called power is the one common-sensical step to take.  Granted, the announcement must be made that an election will take place in a month.  (I’ve expressed my opinions on mandatory elections/voting in my earlier blogs.  If you want my opinion on healthy acts of people-power, get out there and vote, express your opinion).

If any society reaches a point when riots occur in such a spontaneous fashion (not terrorism.  Terrorist acts are planned acts of violence) then something is seriously wrong with the system of governance in its historical and current state.  Release valves are necessary.  Released pressure prevents even more intense explosions.  While I understand the personal horror and suffering to business and home owners, riots are a safer bet; a necessary cultural release that helps reduce what could become a civil war.

For those who disagree, let us look at a similar, natural process:  volcanism.  When a volcano burps or vents lava flows as a less intense eruption, it bleeds off the pent-up pressure and alleviates what could have been a greater disaster.  When a volcano explodes without lesser eruptions, the effect is catastrophic.  The smaller pressure-release eruptions are not as harmful or dangerous when examined from this point of view.  The volcano (people) will continue to erupt, yet with the lesser eruptions or ‘controlled flow’, the pressure is lessened and the worst prevented.  Now, this is a natural process, and volcanoes pressurize repeatedly.  Every time their eruptions grow in intensity.  Finally, a catastrophic explosion may occur.  This is true of the human/riot effect; our natural law of self-expression.  However, the lesser eruptions (riots) are necessary.  We are intelligent beings.  With enough effort, enough dedication and awareness, we can make use of these lesser ‘eruptions’, allow for the release of pressure then take stock and do our best to redirect the course of our human volcano (our civilization/system).

Individual rioters may claim they riot for this-or-that reason, yet the subconscious reasons behind the acts must be examined.  It is within this examination we discover the true reasons that are the weaknesses of the state and civilization.  Then we can take decisive and healthy, right action.  Reacting against the people, tossing up punishment in the courts is a band-aid for the governing structure to look good after the fact – it solves nothing other than as a soap box for politicians to tell the people that they are dealing with the problems.  It isn’t even used as a delaying tactic.  In the end, it shows everyone that the elected politicians and the bureaucracy is reactive, willing to punish its true employers (the people), while doing nothing to deal with the real issues in a proactive way.  Rather than engaging their employers, the system itself enforces outmoded rules, looking to curb riot-looters and riot-leaders, when it should engage these people.  Worse, still, it fails to discuss the very pressures that need vented.  The system seems to want to contain and hold these pressures within itself until it explodes.  Does that not come across as a form of sociocultural suicide?  It certainly does not make any sense from a common sense point of view.

Reasons for Rioting:  What are the real reasons for rioting?  Subconsciously, it’s a reaction to fear, anxiety, and an unhealthy society.  Something is inherently wrong.  These days, tis obvious what that wrongness is; there is a growing gap between the  upper and lower classes.  The middle class has all but disappeared.  The economy is dying and no one is truly willing to fix it (See my earlier blog, the Creation of Democracy – Part IV on how to do just that.)  People do not trust their elected officials (this is an obvious, yet sad truth).  Employment, taxes – I could go on, although I believe the point is given.  These, plus homelessness, plus a personal sense of purpose within the culture/society need addressing.

These are the factors politicians and the bureaucracy (and the people, too) must examine.  They must be dealt with, faced and appreciated for what they are.  Viewed by leaders, people, followers, doers, business people, politicians, scientists and everyone – collectively and without judgement on the self or others – these factors should be embraced, accepted, then worked through.  It can be – and must be – done.  I’m not saying tis an easy act.  I’m stating tis a necessary one.

Until next week…

Posted in Political Change / Discussion | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

The Creation of Democracy – Part IV


This entry will shatter and hopefully offend a few people.  My aim here is to push buttons, pull strings, and unravel the stupidity of those who are running the economy.  Hell, I could do better.  Everyone would get a good, solid spanking, bankers would serve severe prison time, CEOs and larger corporation Shareholders, Boards of Directors and the Chairs would be tarred and feathered for their stupidity.  Then everyone would be met with a fellow named Riff… and I’ll leave that image there for you to enjoy.

Granted, this blog entry ties into my other Creation of Democracy blogs; of what I will do when I gain power; of what changes should be done for a civilization to go forward in a healthy, wealthy, collective way into a brighter future.

Let us admit one truth; and perhaps even a fact:  Big Business and the entire corporate design is a failure to the person and to the state.  I’m not saying getting rich is wrong.  I’m not saying being wise, a risk-taker, a champion of a business cause, or being organized, being a go-getter, having intelligence, a dream, a goal and determination to see it through are wrong.  In fact, all these are absolutely commendable strengths.  I believe we all have them to different degrees and in different proportions.  I believe they are of key importance to us as a species, to our civilizations, to our history; they help define us as human beings.

BUT Changes are needed.  The business people in the larger corporations desire one thing; the making of money.  That focus isn’t enough,has caused untold suffering as ‘wealth’ has been hoarded.   We need reparations; a refocus on new outcomes need reshaping.  I laud businessmen for their commitment.  Yet they need be cautioned for their greed.  Often the two go hand in hand; drive and greed.  Yet a balance can be achieved.

I’m not attacking merely business people, I’m attacking the model of business in the 21st century; born in the 19th during the Industrial Revolution.  Victorian attitudes have permeated the business world ever since.  We need to drop the 19th century outlook of two-faced hypocrisy and allow our morals to catch up with our industrial-technological Age of Wonder.  Without further ado…


Abolish Business as an Individual.  No business will be allowed to be treated as an individual.  If you want to run/own a company, you are responsible for that company.  So are the captains of industry who run it.  The owner, the Chair, the Board of Directors and their personal fortunes are 100% responsible to their employees, the environment, their shareholders, their clients.

None of this crap the banks or big business do these days.  “Oh, the business is at fault, not the people in positions of power (which really should be positions of responsibility)  who say ‘it wasn’t my fault.  It was a bad business decision of the company and therefore insurance will deal with it.”  Bankers and investors who created bad-debt and eliminated their risk of loan should be shot.  Al they were thinking of was their personal interest.  None show remorse.

Corporate board members in oil companies in or toy-making factories or any other that make use of resources; what you take out you put back.  you balance the debt; economically and environmentally.   The wonderful oil/tar-sands in Alberta, Canada’s north are a good example.  I laud the companies for developing technology that can produce a workable product – but at what cost?  How much fresh water is used that can be used for direct consumption of living organisms?  What you take you, you put something else back.  This is called a Sustainable Environment.  I don’t think big business officials have ever heard the term.  If they have they do not understand the meaning.  I dare you to prove me wrong.  I’d gratefully accept my error.  As for the people at the heads of these corporations, if you will not (it is not can not, no matter what the point of argument), you face imprisonment or even charges of crimes against the human race and the planet.  Punishment should be severe. perhaps someone out there  has a suggestion as to punishment; perhaps drinking the sludge left; or drinking the toxic water in rivers from run-off.

Devaluate and De-Power Businesses:  With the stripping of legal security, companies themselves should not be allowed to own other companies.  This obfuscates the issue of ownership.  Worse, it dilutes responsibility.  Those in positions of ‘power’ (if it can truthfully and honestly be called that) dilute their risk, getting rich while not taking accountability for their direct actions and decisions.  Nope.   This ends immediately.  Multi-nationals must be broken up.  Basic rule:  IF they’re too big to fall without causes harm to others, they’re too big.  Make them fall in a controlled way.  It’s easy.  Just put effort and focus into it.  If you want to own more than one business, you take responsibility for both those businesses on a personal level.  What’ the rule today?  “show me the money”, well, I put that responsibility back on the table.  You show the money, the wisdom that you can be responsible for both, then by all means.  No business can own another business.  It’s proven not to work.

Land and Ownership Reorganization:  Businesses will not be allowed to own land.  Business owners have to rent the land from farmers and land owners.   Businesses and people are not allowed to own foreign land.  If you are a non-national wanting to buy in a foreign country until you had best be ready to live their for nine months or more a year.   If you and a friend want to swap houses instead, go for it.  There is no need for owning more home-land.  Real estate should not and must not be treated as a commodity of wealth.  It should be treated as a commodity for community growth.  land will be here long after we die.  Land will go on. Why not treat it with respect than fighting over it?  Until everyone is housed, until farming becomes a community oriented drive; until each and every community realizes they have to clean up their area; become self-sustainable in their own right, land should be only valuable for what it has the capacity to grow.  If we need to clean up unhealthy land caused by multi-nationals, then guess who pays?  The owners, chair and investors of that.  It’s called responsibility.  Land, therefore, must go back to the people on the ground.  Individuals, communities, farmers, locals.  People who are there and are able to make immediate decisions.  If you own land 200,000 miles away, where’s the common sense in you being able to make a good decision without being there? There is something to be said for tactile and local awareness.

Abolish the Unions:  None of you expected this to appear here.  Deal with it.  Unions are another form of big or mid-sized business.  Once again, I’m all for organization.  I’m not for bureaucracy or bullshit.  I’m all for fairness, equality and respect. Liberté, égalité, fraternité.  Why not?  I’m all for community ideals and goals that lift up the human species.  I’m not for taking business owners to the cleaners and creating an “us versus them’ mentality.  I’m not for politics – big P or small p.  This way of thinking has permeated the Industrial Age (Industrial Revolution until 21st century) and has to stop.  We’ve gone so far in our egos we’ve left morality, kindness; basic respect behind.  There is no need for that.  As for the unions; If you really want to support your workers, teach them, guide them, voice their concerns.  Business Owners, too – listen and learn to work together.  A further distribution of wealth won’t hurt anyone in the long run.  Money is made to flow.  Let it flow.

Shared Responsibility:  As JFK’s speechwriters put it ‘we all breathe the same air.  We all drink the same water.  We all live on the same planet’.  JFK had another speech, too.  His commencement address to the American University, Washington DC (June 10, 1963). (http://www.humanity.org/voices/commencements/speeches/index.php?page=jfk_at_american)  It was full of sage advice, and realistic to. It boiled down to responsibility – to one’s self, one’s community, one’s country, one’s world.  Read it, then think and feel on it.

The same intention as behind that speech is the aim of these blog entries. Not only to scold, to give us a slap on the back of the head; a wake-up call.  Be reasonable.  Be sensible.  Be kind.  Be willing to listen.  Be willing to take risks and make mistakes.  Be willing to admit you’re wrong.  I remind myself of these guidelines every day.  I’d rather be wrong, and gain experience (and hopefully wisdom), than to be right all the time.

Until next week,

Be Good to Each Other

Posted in Political Change / Discussion | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Loud Asian Girls (on a topic suggested by J. Bartusek)

Location:  Murchies Tea Room, Victoria

Topic; edits for my current book.  J is a University about-to-graduate and needs experience in the real world.  So do I.  I offered her the first 3 chapters of my novel Ten Lost Days to edit as I want – and need – a professional eye on the story, someone who will tell me what’s crap, what’s good and what’s weak.  I need that;  want it, too, for the purpose of self-improvement as a writer.  J. is willing and intrigued about editing a manuscript.  Her background is non-fiction.  A body of creative work like mine will make her decide if editing and/or fiction is an interest.  For the record, my tome is 150,000 words.  That’s the reason I need her editorial skills.  I cut it by 35,000 words already.  An outside eye will be able to point out what further can be dealt with.

With Ten Lost Days aside, with my Query letters being sent out once a week, I’ve begun to focus on research and outlining my next book.  It will be the first in a pentalogy set across the Victorian and Edwardian eras of England, Great Britain, Ireland and Europe, set in a world where magic was real, science in her infancy, and the great powers on the path to World War I.

Enough Of the Advertising!  Let me get to the point of this blog entry.

As J and I meandered through some amazing topics of discussion, a table across the room erupted into rather loud tittering.  A group of young Asian girls huddled around a smart phone.  Ah, teenagers.  I don’t mind youth, I mind the loudness of youth.  (Gods, I never thought I’d be writing or saying those words).  It’s true.  teenagers and young adults are LOUD.  Me, I NEVER SHOUT.  NEVER.  I NEVER RAISE MY VOICE EITHER.  NOT ONE BIT.

Truthfully, I felt annoyed.  More to the point, I was surprised at myself for feeling that.  Sound and background wa-wa are normal for any eatery.  Perhaps it was the conversation I was in.  Rather in-depth, full of wisdom on both sides; meaty topics in an English tea house.  Perhaps it was that plus the environment.  In any case, I expected to have everyone behave as a respectable Victorian.  Foolish me.

I learned.  This blog is really a reminder to me on self-flexiblility.  A reminder to the self to remain open and accepting of other people’s behaviour…As long as their behaviour commits no harm.   The golden rule applies.  I only wish politicians and bureaucrats and richer fat-cats than I (and poorer bums, too) would follow it.  The world would be so much better off.

Cheers – and good evening.

Posted in Commentary on Life's Little Adventures | Leave a comment

The Creation of Democracy – Part III


What is expected of the citizen?  What should a citizen expect of his/her true Democracy and structure of governance?  This post will analyze these two very intense questions.

Expectations and Self-Responsibility:  These are the two decisive points in any right belonging to a citizen.  People have expectations of their government, their representatives and of other citizens.  Yet everyone must realize with those expectations comes an equal amount of self-responsibility.  Very few willingly accept the responsibility that comes with the rights and privileges gifted or receive from their constitutions and human rights acts.  This is the saddest realization of all, this lack of self-responsibility.  It reflects a lack of desire for self-empowerment.  Worse, it reflects ignorance of self-empowerment.  By that definition, the entire education and political systems have failed the very people they should serve – to teach and support the self-empowerment of the person.  The education system fails because of its design, to make everyone at the same level, it fails to take into account each person, their personal gifts, talents, and skills.  It fails because the political decision-making behind it is self-absorbed in power, misrule and misdirection.  This is corruption of power and not self-empowerment.   Granted, this may all be subconscious as other, surface-level factors are always involved; money, bureaucracy, logistics, time, number of employees (teachers, assistants, organizers) versus number of students, union(s), etc.  In the end, it comes down to a simple human trait.  We’re lazy.  We do what is convenient for us over what is right or just, every single time.  Our laziness has grown into greed.

Without judging the issue (although like everyone, I’d love to) but raising it, rather, let us look at rights and freedoms.  Every right and freedom, every privilege granted every citizen comes with a level of self-responsibility.  They have to.  For example:

Driving is a privilege, not a right.  When you receive your learner’s then your driver’s licenses, how often do you retake the driving training sessions?

the answer: Never.  I don’t see any responsibility being taken.  Governments update traffic laws all the time, yet drivers never update their knowledge or retake training.  How many weak habits do we pick up in the driver’s seat out of shear convenience?  Talking/texting on cell-phones, drinking, driving single-handed.  I’m all for having less laws and more independence – yet are people willing to accept responsibility for the latter?

For example, you choose to drive home drunk and end up injuring another person, or killing them – you then should and must take full responsibility for your actions and the others’ wellbeing.  But will you?  It’s rather a horrifying thought, being responsible to another person you don’t know.  Having to feed them, take care of their medical, their needs and the needs of their immediate family if you cause enough damage.  The very concept makes everyone uncomfortable.  So I ask – why not take the responsibility and allow yourself to keep abreast of the laws of the road, and perhaps learn to leave the vehicle at home when you go out for a night of alcohol and entertainment.

I’m all for mandatory driver retraining every 3 years; including cyclists.  I’m both a driver and a cyclist and watching the good and the bad on the roads, I think this a marvellous idea of self-empowerment and responsibility.  You have 1 license; covering all types of vehicles you drive; including the bicycle.  In your retraining, if you fail at driving, you lose the right to drive for the next 3 years.  That doesn’t stop you from cycling if you passed that.  In 3 years time, you will be permitted to retake the driver training and test and in the duration you are ‘off the road’, you are permitted to take as much driver training as you want to improve your chances at your retesting.

Failure of responsibilities and duties must be met with infringements.  If caught driving within those 3 years you are banned from driving and lose your license for life.  If caught after that, you will then be working on the roads and other infrastructure that you will never be permitted to drive on again.  (within reason and common sense.  For example, if someone is badly injured and you’re driving them to the hospital to save their life, you’re committing an act of the good Samaritan)

Some might argue that this takes away their right to work, etc.  No, it doesn’t.  If you fail a test, you obviously failed to support the level of responsibility required to be a safe promoter of yourself while behind the wheel.  There are other ways to get to work and support your family life.  Car share, bicycle, etc.  People adjust, they always do, and it makes us greater.

A bonus to this 3-year cycle is this.  I promise you that over 50% of licensed drivers will lose their license the first time.  That means 50% fewer vehicles on the roads, 50% of the gas not consumed, less road maintenance, more money directed to other things.  50% less toxins in the air, thus helping the environment by the removal of such a large carbon footprint.  In business, it will push carmakers and designers to rethink and re-plan the marketplace.  With less drivers on the road, the need for vehicles is down; so redesigning vehicles to be even more appealing – passenger size, better gas consumption – all bonuses to the bigger picture.

Voting is another great example.  I suggest everyone over the age of 16 be permitted to vote.  However, by voting you must prove your knowledge of the issues at hand.  That means proper education and awareness and this responsibility falls into the hands of parents and schools.  Young adults must be aware of what is really going on, and then be permitted to take a strong hand in contemporary politics on all levels.  Why?  because adults are merely passing on and handling this world for the next generation.  Each generation must be held accountable for its actions and be judged by the next.   By educating the young, empowering them to make choices and encouraging them to raise their voices in concerns in an intelligent way, the shaping of the country for the next generation has finally begun.  Additional steps to this power of responsibility is the education of history and local/national current events.  While I love the idea of mandatory participation, that won’t fly as there are introverts, extroverts, intelligent, wise, ignorant and rather busy lives.  But voting itself should be mandatory.  There should be an option to abstain within the vote – especially if you are unaware, or don’t care about an issue or the candidates involved.

The failure of self-responsiblity must be firm, also.  If you are eligible to vote and don’t the repercussion must be your ‘donation’ of a set amount of local community hours and or pay a fine in exchange for your lack of participation in the voting booth.  Refusal there and it will be jail time.  Third refusal would be exile.  If you don’t have a wish to take part even in  simple vote, then you are showing no interest in your community and are not part of the community.

In ancient Greece, citizenship was more than as a duty.  It was tied to your physical participation at all levels of the city-state.  Your participation defined you in the eyes of your peers and, I suspect, within yourself.

I understand very few of us want to get involved due to our busy lives.  note, though, I’m only discussing your active participation in voting, not in deep-action participation within the government.  Voting where and when you can, that is a responsibility and is, sadly, not a right, but a privilege.  By this I don’t mean legally. I mean by the examples we show each other.  with so few people voting, the few who do turn out look like a privileged class.  Perhaps they are.  the privileged minority of intelligent, caring beings.  But then, I think we all have it within us.  So vote, municipal, provincial, and federal.

I shall end this blog here.  I could go on forever, hence the delay in bringing this to the WordPress site.  It’s taken me a while to collect my thoughts.  That being noted, I shall add and discuss other rights and privileges as they pop into my mind.

Good night and warm regards,


By the way; if you have an interest in the action and role of Greek Citizens in the heyday of Attic Greece, check out the following.  They are both amazing books and will lead you into many others:

Joint Association of Classical Teachers (2008) The World of Athens: and Introduction to Classical Athenian Culture: chapter 5:  Athenian Society

Cartledge, P. (editor) (2007) Cambridge Illustrated History of Ancient Greece:  Chapters 4-6

Posted in Political Change / Discussion | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment

The Creation of Democracy – Part II


With a change-over in government/bureaucratic powers and the shape of the constitution, the laws themselves and their protectors and promoters must come under scrutiny.  Effective immediately, every judge, lawyer and police officer is suspended of duty.  With the entire legal system under review the legal profession will likely collapse and be reborn.  Have no doubts.  The profession will change and the legal profession potentially eliminated as a career.

First:  The Clean Up of the Current Legal Affairs

The military will act as a policing agency, with suspended police officers serving temporarily under military jurisdiction.  With all laws suspended, so too, is the court system.  Serious crimes – life threatening crimes (either imminent or previously committed (i.e.: murder)) and maintaining order will be a temporary measure.

The Clean up of all laws.  Organize a randomly selected group of 100 citizens across the country.  Their purpose is to check all federal laws with the intent to cut 90%.  Each Province will select Other groups of 100 citizens.  Theirs will be the responsibility to clean up provincial Acts/Laws.

In the review:

  1. If the citizens cannot/do not understand the written code of an Act or Law after two paragraphs that Act/Law is expunged.  This is an act of common sense.  If the layperson can make no sense of the wording or meaning of a document, it is of no value.  Therefore it cannot be used as it is open to as many interpretations as there are people.  (this is one of the challenges with the legal state today – legal matters are too incomprehensible and thus open to interpretation and not citizens and lawyers using their common sense on each case)
  2. If the citizens’ do understand and comprehend the language they must then decide if the Act or Law possesses common sense, has some real strength  and value.
  3. If Acts/Laws exist on both levels of government, a handful of Federal and Provincial clean-up citizens will switch offices and review the other level’s laws.  If they are exactly the same the federal law will dominate.  If the provinces have Acts/Laws that are more detailed, and are proven to have value and common sense, they will replace the federal law.  In either case one Act or Law remains.
An example of elimination:  Jay-walking.  There is a fine for taking your life into your own hands.  How ignorant is this?  Granted, you may put someone else in danger (such as a driver of a vehicle, but please common sense is – a vehicle will win out against flesh and bone every time.)  This law is ridiculous and a waste of staffing requirements.  It also fails to allow the citizens to take responsibility for themselves.  For example, without a jaywalking law, anyone can choose to jay-walk.  If they sustain an injury or cause an injury due to their jaywalking, the responsibility falls upon them, including all medical bills.  If a driver of a vehicle chooses not to stop and strikes the jay-walking pedestrian, they share equally. Granted accidents to happen, but the jay-walker’s intent was clear – thus the responsibility falls upon them.  Do we need a law for that?  Why not just educate citizens from a young age on responsibility and the fact that all actions have consequences and outcomes.
Example 2:  the Mandatory 2011 Canada Census.  Is it just or fair to punish a citizen for not filling out a form?  That is absurd and, more direct, asinine.  There is no common sense in this law.  Expunge this law immediately. (Note:  as far as I’m able to discover the Conservative leading party in Canada has plans to act on this).  Shoot the idiotic bureaucrats and politicians responsible for coming up with such mandatory paper filing nonsense.  Ignorance is forgivable.  Stupidity is not.
Second: The Need of Common Sense

All Acts and Laws need common sense as a foundation.  Common sense incorporates self-empowerment, self-responsibility, the good of the many and the good of the person in all cases.  The goal is to support a healthy balance between all these factors.  The need to remove the victimization within the legal state is a large issue.  In our current nation-state, we designed most laws to protect victims.  We are a nation of citizens and therefore equals.  None is a victim.  The very term indicates a segregation and abuse of power not self-empowerment to the person.

Common Sense in a court of justice (or a court of law depending on how the society chooses to set it up) will bring up strong feelings on either side.  For example the act of rape.  This itself is a monstrous act by the rapist – but what of the rapist’s history?  Are they victims of their upbringing?  If we choose to see them that way, we must take their history into account.  Granted, the victim may want the man imprisoned, castrated, or even killed.  These judgements and desires may be right for retribution and personal justice, but what of the rapist’s justice for his/her life?  Common Sense has to take in all these issues and hopefully come up with a fair treatment of all parties concerned.  Should the rapist be responsible for all medical bills and repatriation of some kind – certainly.  Should they go to prison?  That must be a case by case decision decided by a group of his/her local peers who are aware of the entire history.

Third: Creation of New Laws (if Necessary)

How many Acts and Laws are necessary to govern a nation-state?  The answer is an astonishing very few, and perhaps one (that One Law being to never make another law).  The less Acts/Laws that are in place, the more responsibility, self-empowerment and self-governance are in the hands of the individual citizens.  To secure these factors the education system must inform citizens from a very early age of their rights, responsibilities and privileges. (See next Blog – Citizens’ Expectations)

Mentioned in an earlier Blog (Creation of a New Constitution) power and decision-making must fall in the hands of the citizens.  Members of Parliament must take all Acts/Laws back to their constituents.  If the constituents choose to not accept legislation being drafted, their representative must vote in favour of the majority.

Example:  Capital Punishment for Impaired Drivers who Main or Kill While Driving Impaired.  A Federal Bill is drafted.  Representatives take it to their constituents.  There is a clear split across the nation.  At this point, every vote taken into account.  If entire ridings or a clear majority (more than 80%) of a riding is in favour, that riding may accept the ruling and turn the Bill into a local law.  Other ridings that refuse would not recognize the law.  The responsibility, enforcement and interpretation of the law falls into each riding.  The analysis of the vote must be taken down to the level of townships within ridings.

The Responsibility of all parties (citizens, representatives, bureaucracies) – Every ACT/LAW reviewed every 7 years and either discarded or updated.

Fourth: Enforcement and Punishments

Is punishment necessary?  Is Enforcement?  These are not easy questions to answer.

Example of a Judgement decided by a Jury in Ancient Greece:  In ancient Greece, courts were held without judges or lawyers.  the defendant and plaintiff would ‘plead’ their cases before a jury.  A water-clock of duration no more than one hour timed statements.  At the conclusion, the jury of their peers listened to each party’s desire for punishment or repatriation.  Juries would normally take the lesser damaging one. The example shows a much cleaner system, where parties defending themselves before a randomly selected jury were prone to ask for retribution that was agreeable and sensible to all concerned.

What I’m really raising with this Fourth section is fairness of shared responsibility on any issue or wrong-doing.  There are as many punishments (let us call these Karmic Debts) as there are incidents, each Debt decided upon by the factors of the incident(s) and people involved.  Some Karmic Debts are necessary and need not be mean nor harsh.   Most incidents occur by accident or my emotional responses and lashing out, such as a bar fights or a driving mishap.  In these cases, most people learn their lesson immediately, without the need for any punishments.  The Karmic Debt will be their’s for their lifetime.  Punishment enough, depending on the incident.

Circumstances are measured case by case.  A good repayment of debt might be to have the person do community service twice a month for the next five years where they teach school children the dangers of drunk or impaired driving, or what can happen in a bar fight.  Paying for another person’s medical bills, or property damage where it hurts the pocket-book is an equally effective punishment.  What we should not do is treat people as less than they are.  By throwing someone into a prison system that serves to segregate and cause even harsher treatment of people we are showing ourselves we do not respect ourselves or our society.  There are always better ways to re-educate and repair past mistakes and damages.  Once again, I must stress how important it is to look at each case individually, look at each person’s history and ask what type of repayment of debt will benefit all concerned.  (Not an easy question to answer.  However, if the question exists, the answer exists also.)

The debate on punishment and enforcement can continue ad infinitum.  At this juncture I’ll end this blog.  Next week, I shall look at the Citizens’ Expectations – their rights, their privileges AND their responsibilities.  I shall also expound on the rights and expectations of the bureaucracy.

Posted in Political Change / Discussion | Tagged | Leave a comment