Morality – A tricky business

The contemplation of morality for me starts by considering the presence or absence of harm that may accrue to me or others by a given action I may take.  The complication comes when one is required to contemplate the degree and nature of harm an action may have relative the degree of necessity for a given action. The goal of administering morality in this fashion is to permit me to live my life in a relationship of beneficence with humanity or in benign coexistence and to avoid inflicting harm or pain on others.  Please note the absence of outside reference for direction in relation to morality, this process at once drives good and right social discourse and liberates.

Morality is a means by which to ensure that members of a society can interface harmoniously, it is a set of rules we voluntarily adhere to. While morality and law often find themselves in league with each other they are separate and apart – or they should be.  Our legal system has emerged from a long-standing Judeo-Christian moral complex and then to a lesser degree perhaps Cannon Law.  As this moral complex has greatly influenced the development of our legal system, the legal system has come into conflict with secular imperatives; the primary secular imperative is the FREE and autonomous individual – in Canada this finds expression in law in the Charter of Rights and Freedoms as the right to life, liberty and security of person.  The correct application of this law is to permit free people to do as they please absent harm to others – this is an interpretation that is absent moral consideration in Section 7’s application save the presence or absence of harm.   

A moral-complex that harms is in conflict with the purpose of having morality. By way of example, there is a clear direction in the Bible to stone homosexuals to death, in modern society regardless of your view toward homosexuality, the prospect of stoning someone to death is preposterous.  One offers this example as it is extreme and clear. One can see the harm this example illustrates and in the same way, as an 8000-year-old moral-complex comes up against an increasingly informed society, one sees adherence to old moral imperatives doing harm.  Worse, however, we see harm accruing to people in direct contradiction of generally accepted morays, sexual abuse by people in a position of authority for example, or matters of consent as it relates to one’s inherent right to the domain over one’s own mind and body.

The morality I suggest - based on the contemplation of the presence or absence of harm - is also supported by honour and integrity. That is to say, we are allowed to define our association with others as we please – so long as our association is based on consent – honour provides the imperative to adhere to our agreed association and integrity ensures we develop the agreement in good faith. This approach to moral concern permits another’s truth to be as valid as your own and when there is a conflict between one or more individuals’ or groups’ approach to life, they can live in benign coexistence, with harm being the only justification for state intervention.  

2018 Christmas Letter

Please Click Here for my 2018 Christmas Letter

Peace Initiative.

Click here: MY PROFESSIONAL WEBSITE
Click here: FOR MORE THOUGHTS ON POLITICS

There needs to be a concerted effort made to communicate the values of liberal democracy, secular democracy and free market-based democracy. Efforts in this regard have been wanting for decades and we're paying a dear price for our negligence. We need to take the initiative to propagandize our very positive worldview and social values. Nowhere, is this effort more important than in the Middle East, where extremism has ravished so many innocent people's lives.

So how then, might we go about the task of improving communications in a manner that is sensitive to religious and cultural concerns, yet promotes our worldview and national values. It is possible, I believe, with a concerted effort over the course of perhaps 20 or 30 years to greatly harmonized the worldview and or narrative across all cultures and jurisdictions of concern. The means by which to do this is to establish a partnership with like-minded nations and begin the concerted effort. In a similar manner that we finance NATO, we could finance this concern. In fact, it could be an extension of NATO, save that it might be viewed in a different light than if it were an actual independent entity. 

Click Here: CHINA'S PROGRESS - LESSONS FOR THE WEST

There could be a joint venture created between the major public broadcasters, the BBC, the ABC, CBC, the public broadcasting Corporation in the US etc. All these entities would be brought together and their considerable in-house talent brought to bear on communicating the values of secularism, free-market liberal democracy and to promote peace.

Contemplate if you will, some trillion dollars spent in Afghanistan, the other military spending and other resources to go to military concern. What I'm suggesting in terms of dollars and cents might be a 40 billion dollar effort. A 40 billion dollar effort with opportunity for cost recovery if we manage the structure of the communication entity properly. This is a pittance when one considers what is at stake. Look into the eyes of your grandchildren and know that our mismanagement will leave them with pain, perhaps death, we may see violence on our own streets unless we attend to the growing challenge of global discord. 

OTHER THINKING ON THE SUBJECT

Islam More Pain or More Solution

Isis - Russia Dark Clouds are Forming

Islam & West Contemplations on way forward

Ottawa-shootings rational response, please

Better to Jaw than War - If war comes, we need the tools to confront aggression

A surging China, a somewhat strident Russia and discord in the Middle East, in combination with other disquieting events in the world, drives the impetus for us to communicate our point of view. 
No one begrudges China its success, in fact, one takes a good deal of satisfaction in seeing China's adoption of market modalities grow their economy and their well-being at such a rapid rate. One marvels at China's ingenuity, its infrastructure programs, it's new and progressive stance on the world stage; the new Silk Road for example and so many other initiatives. They have, however, indicated by their actions from time to time, that they are wanting to do more than merely assert their own interests, they seem at times to be challenging the Westphalian imperatives. We need to talk to them, not just their leadership, but to their people too. We need to talk to Russia and  Valimere Putin so as to build a good relationship with them, a working relationship. We need to talk to the Middle East in a concerted and effective way. 

If we fail to get our message across with words, with music and what other peaceful tools we have at our disposal; then we'll be forced back into the situation we're trying to get away from now, more violence in the Middle East possible confrontation with China and possible confrontation with Russia.

Click Here - Past Thinking on the Afghan Challenge

None of these entities want confrontation, we are without the desire for confrontation.  When the world order is unstable, as it is now, confrontation tends to come by surprise over what may be a trivial event and escalate very rapidly, as was the case in WW1. Confrontation happens like this when people forget to keep a wary eye on the horizon. The West needs to keep its head up and at present, it seems the West is sleepwalking. It is time to be proactive and actively invest in peace. 

Click Here - Past Thinking - Refugee Crisis - How many children have to pay the price.

Click here: MY PROFESSIONAL WEBSITE

Electoral Reform - People want it - so do it - this is a democracy

If there is one thing I’ve noticed about business people, and it bugs me, they hate competition. Everyone in business seeks a monopoly; monopolies are good for monopolists and bad for society.  I love the open market and the good it does, it is the only medium that seeks every day to figure what I want and how to get to me as inexpensively as possible.  The market only works properly when there is open access to it with low barriers to entry.  When markets are healthy there is dynamism, disruption and wealth distribution – markets stop working when a few players get a hold of control.

If there is one thing I’ve noticed about politicians, they hate democracy – they would rather dispense with it and do what they want – the less democracy we have is better for power mongers and worse for society.  Right now, we elect dictators for four years and then we kick the bums out – and with the new bums comes a massive policy change and wasted money. When the government is constantly “under public pressure” policy continuity begins to emerge and over time we get stable long-term policy.

The hype that is being thrown and accumulating into the biggest, smelliest, mass of BS ever deposited on the field of political debate is the fear of extremist campaign on the NO side. Unbelievable that we have sunk to these sort of fear tactics, less unbelievable when you see who is doing it, the profiteers in the form of long-term political players who quake at the thought of having a full range of representation. 

  

Right now a full third of the electorate is unrepresented, big business is, big labour is, big government is – everyone one else is being taxed without representation.  Farms, ranchers, independent business people, the gig economy, artisans, tradespeople, small business people all out in the cold. The way this vital sector gets represented is through electoral reform. We need lower barriers to entry in the political space, more people in the game and democracy. 

I am in the Rural-Urban Proportional camp. Could this have been done better – most certainly? Are we being asked to buy a bit of pig in a poke – yes? If we are diligent, however, we can nurture this along and make it work. Avoid listening to the unmitigated horse excretion being delivered regarding the “extremists”, political boogiemen are like stray cats, all fear mongers have one and all power mongers use one. 

Healing Fissures - The Path to Finding Social Harmony

Society it seems is plagued by a thousand fissures – and like a thousand cuts that kill, they are killing us or at best wounding us all. There are religious fissures – Protestant v  Catholic v Judaism v Islam, with the people of Abraham all in possession of a jealous god. Then there are the polytheists, the secularists, free lovers, and the atheists. Layer on the “haves” and “the have-nots”. Layer on top of that political fissures.  Layer on top of that challenges that emerge from feminist concerns. Layer on top of that long-standing class divides.  Layer on top of all this, the power mongers who play it all for control for control sake. When one begins the task of unpacking it all and then brings a rational mind to finding the path to harmony, it seems impossible, even within the borders of Canada. 

No one understands the draw to tribalism better than I do; it is innate in us all. I often find myself coming to the defence of the culture I was raised in, an Anglo / Scottish protestant culture – I am so proud of our contribution in forging Canada and yet it seems the only thing finding its way into modern discourse is our mistakes. It is my sense that many of “us” feel this way and are eager to preserve what we’ve accomplished.  The temptation for me is to run to the ranks of my own, rally the troops and commence a mass effort to maintain and enhance our place in society.  That is the very approach, however, that has weakened us in the past. With our British roots – and the manner in which the Protestant Reformation came to lite on the British Empire and the cultural inclination toward exclusionary social discourse which is a part of being British,  we have left in our wake a good deal of disgruntlement; some justified, some less so.  

Exclusionary societal tactics tend over time to concentrate power to the point where a given mass of influence is insufficient to maintain a given order and so another set of actors take control – invariably, it is at the least costly and often in the course of history, it has been very bloody. It was these exclusionary social practices that caused massive disgruntlement through the course to the industrial revolution when Marxism emerged. It was bad Torism (Conservativism) that provided the genesis of Marxism.   

The barrier to developing harmony really is rooted in what is at risk for any given social group in acquiescing to the whole.  If the risk to acquiescing to the whole is genocide then no one is going to move off the established social structure. If the risk of acquiescence to the whole is a measured decline in influence absent any significant change in lifestyle then people are going to be more willing to move to a reconfigured social order.  So the search for a solution lies in the analysis of various social groups interests and protecting them. So, by way of example, if you say,  in order to fix wealth disparities government is going to take half highest wage earners income and all the wealth people accumulated to pass on to their family – you’ve created some losers in the process who will resist efforts and another fissure is formed.  There are solutions to wealth disparities that negate the need to take someone’s money and give it to someone else – in fact, they enhance the life of established actors – do that, and you’ve created an interest-based solution that people will find harmony with.

These fissures find expression in damaging ways in our society.  As various actors in civil society compete for dominance, they often lose sight of moral, ethical and legal boundaries.  As people exist in the ”us and them mentality” they become sociopathic toward the other group. There are no honest brokers at play, making efforts to heal the fissures that cause so much pain and discord.  The governments of the country are supposed to manage in a manner that generates harmony; they have been inept at quelling the very damaging effects from these competing entities because they are besieged by them – this process corrupts government, in that, there is a lack of fidelity between what is ostensibly being done and what is actually happening. As the resolution of this social phenomenon expands to larger and larger portions of society – discord will ensue.  It is incumbent on government to take steps to heal fissures in society and move us to a harmonious existence.  Integrity is the place where words and action merge, we should govern with integrity.

In the process of moving Canada under the umbrella of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms there needs to be acceptance of the present order of things – for change to happen people will need assurance that their present state of being will be respected and that as the process evolves there will be no personal toll that falls to various players in civil society. The goal should never be to TAKE from anyone, the goal should be fidelity to the ideals we expound as our core values;  the first of which is Liberty – for it is the one that guarantees all the rest.   

Dangerous Trend - Power Concentration in Canadian Society

State paternalism is a disease – that’s the only way to describe it. The state has a function, to facilitate human enterprise in a harmonious way. The challenge is, a relatively simple mandate gets highjacked by various powerbrokers – powerbrokers with one interest, to control. It isn’t so much the yearning for power that drives them, it’s the omnipresent self-interest that does.  There is a coalescence of state power and interest groups which merge the desire for interest groups to secure economic and other interests and the state to secure power (any given government at any given time); this makes state paternalism both powerful and lucrative.  The reason that state paternalism is a disease is that it steals freedom, quashes the individual and turns the state away from facilitating liberty to effecting control over people.

CLICK HERE FOR MY PROFESSIONAL WEBSITE

For every action there is an equal reaction, one sees this play out often when observing nature, physical phenomena and in human discourse. So, it is logical to assume that when the state offers up a service that there is a reaction, or perhaps a cost. Or, when the state grants monopoly to a group to offer a service via regulation, that there is a reaction or a cost. It is often the case that under the pretence of “public protection”  regulatory frameworks come into place that restrict the supply of a service or offer a monopoly to a group for service provision; when this happens there is no competing offering and the cost of a given service rises. There are many examples of this throughout Canadian governance from medical services delivery, agriculture supply management, various professional groups bolstered by legislation – this list is endless. The fact that costs rise is punishment enough, it gets worse though because one's ability to choose whom to associate with is limited, one's choice of how to associate with others is limited and by extension control over your personal life is taken away and put into institutional hands. Please stop and contemplate your life and ask yourself, what part of your daily life is unaffected by government legislation and ask yourself what aspects of your life you retain control of.  In British Columbia, even something as personal as medical records are outside one's control, they are in public hands in a manner that fails to protect people’s privacy – with privacy goes freedom.

CLICK HERE FOR - TRANSCENDENCE - WHY IT MATTERS

At some point, we have to limit the power of these monopolies over our lives because everyone knows that absolute power corrupts absolutely. The regionalization of the medical system in British Columbia is a classic example of the undue and unnecessary consolidation of power.  Regionalisation puts $13 Billion into the hands of 5 people in the province. Health Regions have become the sole provider of healthcare in areas so large that going to another region for healthcare is very difficult. The health regions are operated by crown corporations that have become very large and very powerful and nearly inaccessible to the average citizen relying on them for care. The health regions are just one example of many government (regional) monopolies. The education system is another; we have a single choice for the provider of education to our children. The CRTC, having been co-opted by the telecoms has effected an oligopoly in the telecom space and as a result, our telecom costs are some of the highest in the world.  We have the CRTC allowing policies that erode internet neutrality – the most democratising force to have ever come into play in human history is being challenged.

This trend toward the “totalitarian state” via the institutionalisation of society is very troubling because the “side effect” of the trend is the disempowerment of the individual.  This is in no way a call to end government support for people in need or to stop funding, it is a call to defuse power and to bring government to the point of facilitating people – that is to say,  to put power where it belongs with the individual. Increasingly, the power structures within these institutions are self-serving and they always seek to consolidate influence. 

CLICK HERE FOR - SEEDING PROSPERITY - WHY IT MATTERS

The trend toward consolidation of influence, if left unchecked, is very dangerous, especially in our legal system, law enforcement and military. The RCMP, for example, is a far-reaching organization in Canada with a rank structure that is antiquated because it concentrates power to an apex of a person, rather than cellularizing or defusing power so that the apex of leadership is a creed.  

Most of our institutions preclude the existence of a competing entity and as a result, power concentrates.  This reality spills into the “real economy” in damaging ways as institutions pick winners, obstruct access to markets, reduce economic efficiency, increase transaction costs and create a Peruvian like economic structure. A Harvard Business School MBA class decided to do a case study on the Peruvian economy, they discovered it took 125 steps to licence a hotdog stand – turned out it was just easier to give the corrupt cop half your money.  We need to avoid this ever happening in Canada – unfortunately, it has; in many cases, when it comes time to do something, obstructive regulations are omnipresent - red tape is the arch-enemy of enterprise and innovation. 

CLICK BELOW - More Thoughts on the Subject

Tax Policy - KISS - Keep it Simple Stupid
CANADA - ECONOMIC STAGNATION NATION
Thoughts on - Counter Cyclical Spending

Senate - Government Financial Monitor?

Government Resource Revenue Dependence

Government - Ensuring Optimum Size

Senate Spending & Restructuring

                               Government Scale & Accountability 

Kinder Morgan Pipeline Expansion - Necessary for the Environment & the Economy

As a person concerned with the environment, a lifelong resident of British Columbia and a lover of the outdoors – I want to care for my province. As a person empathetic to first nation issues, I want to work toward a resolution of the challenges facing them – many of which funding is the cure. As a person that understands the value of enterprise generally, I want to create an operational environment that is predictable and recognises the realities of the world around us. As a Canadian, I am angered, by the fact, that people can malign one of our industries with impunity.

CLICK HERE FOR MY PROFESSIONAL WEBSITE

What matters, are the concerns British Columbian’s regarding the Kinder Morgan Pipeline as opposed to non-Canadian actors with an axe to grind. There are two primary concerns British Columbian’s have – firstly, the safety and care of our coast and secondly, many believe that by stopping the pipeline they will stop the Oilsands from expanding and by extension mitigate global warming. Our own government officials, professionals in their own right, have stated that it believes the risk to the coastline is acceptable. As for mitigating climate change, the truth is, whether the Oilsands operates or not, the consumption of fossil fuels will continue unabated; I can demonstrate this clearly, and any rational mind can see it in a second if they take the time to look.

Click Here to Read

PIPELINE OBSTRUCTION EQUALS OILSANDS MORATORIUM
GET REAL ON CLIMATE POLICY & NO IMPACT FOSSIL FUEL USE

Jeffrey Sachs makes this statement in a recent Globe and Mail piece -

“… the truth is that Alberta oil sands have absolutely no place in a climate-safe world. Investing in them is almost surely to be investing in a future bankruptcy.” JEFFREY D. SACHS CONTRIBUTED TO THE GLOBE AND MAIL

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/article-the-sustainable-way-forward-for-canadas-energy-sector/

If I were a company or a company organization or a government involved in the Canadian Oilsands, I think I would be pursuing this comment through the courts. Firstly, Mr. Sachs should know that whether the Oilsands were to continue or not, there will be no affect on world fossil fuel consumption – NONE – so by extension, their continued operation would have no effect on “climate safety”.  Mr. Sachs stopped being an academic with this statement and took up the mantle of the purveyor of BS – damaging BS. The companies that have invested in the Oilsands, were at the outset, innovative pioneers that entered into the endeavour at considerable risk to themselves. Yes, at the start the Oilsands were a speculative space, now, thanks to the men AND WOMEN, employed there, who’ve developed cutting edge technologies – both the environmental and economic picture is getting close to par with conventional sources.

Mr. Sachs touts renewables as the solution, they are to a degree, however, we are nowhere near at the point of at par fungibility between fossil fuels and “renewables”. He also fails to acknowledge methods related to the carbon-neutral use of fossil fuels.  

   

There are many dangers with distorting the public’s perception of the challenges related to climate change, most importantly, however, is that we get a policy that fails to even address the issue of climate change and leaves other considerations like economy damaged.   The widespread use of Carbon Taxes in Canada is an example of a policy choice that will never change usage patterns of fossil fuels, is regressive and hurts marginal energy-dependent industries like agriculture. There are better options for climate policy that protect our present economy and provide capital for the new energy economy.

Click Here to Read

COP 21 REALITY CHECK

CARBON TAX V CAP & TRADE

Canada is a responsible producer of fossil fuels with an industry that produces a good deal of social surplus. It is offensive in the extreme that entities exterior to Canada can gain such influence over our policy choices. The only reason Mr. Sachs comments are so damaging, for example, is that we allow environment input into our industry and someone may actually believe is propaganda. In Saudi Arabia a country that provides 13% of the oil imported to Canada or in Russian Federation a country that provides 12% of the oil imported to Canada – there is little or no place for input from the environmental movement or for sniping “intellectuals” peddling their own agendas. Most importantly, if Canada’s industry is subdued, like Mr. Sachs and many like him are seeking to do, then producers with no progressive social imperatives will prosper. Worse, however, is that Canada’s ability to help move the world to a responsible place in respect to carbon emissions will be weakened.

Click Here to Read

CANADIAN OIL V WORLD OIL   

PLEASE ALSO SEE INFOGRAPHIC BELOW  

The first nations people deserve a better life, a life at par with the rest of Canadians. The environment movement perpetually highjacks the empathy any caring person has for their needs and misdirects it, leaving first nation people wanting and no closer to the solution. The first nation’s people would be better to divorce themselves of the environmentalist agenda; environmental protection is critical, it is just that activists have been ruthless in pursuit of their agenda at the expense of furthering the socio-economic interests of the first nations people.

Click Here to Read

Tsilhqotin Nation v British Columbia - Review and Comment

Stopping the Kinder Morgan Pipeline achieves nothing except harm for all the reasons stated above. As important, is the fact that rail transport will be forced to fill the gap to get our oil to market, a much less secure option than pipeline transport. So the oil will get to the coast and the limited risk that tanker travel represents will be the same, negating any effect whatsoever on coastal safety. The fact is, all the opposition to the pipeline, even if successful only serves to exacerbate the things British Columbians are concerned about. The entire foray on the part of the BC Government and environment activists is and was pure folly.

Some more thinking on the subject:

THE CARBON TAX MYTH

MY PROFESSIONAL WEBSITE