Monday, August 23, 2010

You never really know when a question is going to offend somebody.


We were all sitting at the dining room table on some family occasion when my aunt – the one who kept the journal and solved the riddle of my little brother’s birthday – turned to me and asked, “How old are you Danny?”. “Twelve,”, I replied, “how old are you?”. The assembled multitude gasped. Everybody knew I had offended against propriety by asking a personal question of an elder. There was nothing wrong with the question per se, just that the age of my mother’s sister was none of my business. And my aunt replied, chuckling, “I’m forty-nine.”


I discovered two things that day. First, intrusiveness, like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder. My mother and most everyone including me, thought I’d overstepped the line, but my aunt didn’t mind a bit. And second, big people can ask little people anything they like. No one had been shocked at my aunt’s question.


Now, I understand that some of you are tired of the subject of the long form census. Well, I’m tired of people who tire so easily, but I won’t mention it if you don’t. And I will try to make this my last comment on the subject, though I have requested to appear before the House of Commons Committee that’s considering the matter, and might want to let you know how that goes.


Anyway, in 1996 I declined to answer the question about my race, and I would like to explain my reason for doing so. It’s generally assumed that privacy is the only consideration in refusing to answer a question, but this is a case where privacy was not the concern. The truth is, I am offended that our government continues to attempt to sort Canadians into racial groups.


I believe race is an ancient superstition that has persisted into modern times. It has caused untold suffering throughout the ages, culminating in the most genocidal century in history. And it is high time that we put an end to this meaningless and offensive way of sorting people.


Of course the genes for skin, eye and hair colour, and for facial features and head shape, are not evenly distributed throughout the world’s population. But these differences tell us nothing of any importance about an individual. If they matter at all it is only because they are ancient caste marks used to stratify society. As such, they should be of no more significance than one’s astrological sign or whether one was born in the year of the monkey or the pig. Race and astrology are fine for small talk at a party, but not for governing in a modern, liberal democracy.


It can be interesting to learn that this or that person is descended from sub-Saharan Africans, the people of China or South East Asia, the Celts of Northern Europe, or Australian bushmen. But I don’t need to know these things to serve you or treat you with respect. And neither does the Government of Canada. And besides, with all of the mixing that’s gone for millennia, when it comes to our race, many of us are just guessing.


But if we really must ask, how about this for a question? On a scale of 1 (black) to 100 (white), what are you? Personally I think I’m about a 55 in the summer and a 63 in the winter. But, then again, what do I know?.


If you are interested in the subject of race and have an hour or so to spend stretching your mind, click on THE CONCEPT OF RACE by Richard Lewontin. It’s a lecture about genetics, with lots of challenging numbers, but very enlightening.



Thursday, August 12, 2010

THAT OLD FEELING

Today is my little brother’s 111th birthday. I think that’s pretty special, so I sent him a birthday greeting. It’s hard to find a card for an occasion like that, so it had to be an email. And in a few days I’ll have an opportunity to say happy 112th. Allow me to explain.


When he was a young man, sixteen or seventeen I suppose, he sent away for his birth certificate and received a little card from Statistics Canada informing him that he’d been born on August 12. Well, my mother knew better, we all knew better, his birthday was the 17th and always had been. Mom complained bitterly, but she soon discovered you can’t beat Stats-Can. Eventually my Aunt Eleanor, who had kept a detailed journal for years, came to the rescue and established beyond a doubt that he’d actually been born on the 12th. O well, Mama had eight kids, so we all laughed, teased her mercilessly, cut her some slack eventually, and moved on. And my little brother became the only person I know of, besides the Queen of England, who has two birthdays every year.


Well, when he responded to my greeting he reflected a little upon the feeling and lack of feeling of ageing, and he asked me an interesting question. “How old do you feel?” My response was in two parts as follows:


OLD – I think age is a "useful" statistic that doesn't really tell us very much. It's like all the other "useful" labels: race, ethnicity, religion, orientation, etc. They tell others a lot of very "useful" stuff about us, but much of it isn't true.

FEEL – Sometimes I feel a little: stiff in the mornings, tired in the evenings, lost in restaurant conversations, nervous on skates, inspired by young people, frustrated by people my own age, sentimental about pictures of my kids when they were little, fulfilled by my grandchildren, astounded that I'm married to a grandmother, and amazed at how good she still looks after all these years. But I never feel 62. As far as I'm concerned 62 is not a feeling, condition, limitation or value. It's just a number, albeit a somewhat humbling number, as it reminds me just how long it has taken me to learn so many simple and obvious things.


Now it’s your turn.


How old do you feel?


Submit a comment and let’s learn a little bit about one another.




Monday, August 9, 2010

Just what is the matter here?


The second question Anonymous raises, “Why don't you focus on things that actually matter?”, is also worth pondering. The obvious answer is, “It does matter to me.” And that, together with the fact that it doesn’t matter to Anonymous, tells us more about me and Anon than about what matters. Personally I think it’s baseball and ballet that don’t matter, but they’ve mattered to millions of people for a long time -- baseball for decades and ballet for centuries -- so I’m clearly the oddball. But that’s not the end of it.


There was a time, not all that long ago, when neither baseball nor ballet mattered to anyone. Then they mattered to a few people, and now to millions. All because the people who thought they mattered encouraged others to think so too. It’s the story of human development and civilization.


On November 8, 1946, Viola Desmond, a 32-year-old Halifax beautician, went to a movie theatre in New Glasgow, Nova Scotia, and took a seat in a section reserved for Caucasians. When she refused to move or leave the theatre she was arrested, spent the night in jail, and was fined $20 plus $6 court costs.


Now, some people at the time probably felt, and likely said, that she was making a big deal out of nothing. Who cares where you sit in a movie theatre? Why not just move as dozens have before you? Why lose a night’s freedom and $26, embarrass your friends and family, and cause a big scene over something that doesn’t matter. But because she did this, and because others did similar things, no one would say that today. Today it obviously matters, because it first mattered to her.


Seat belts, ingredients on food packaging, universal health care, sterile surgical practices, rock ‘n’ roll, universal education, childproof lighters and pill bottles, habeas corpus, picking up your dog-droppings, and a hundred thousand other things that make our lives better today started with a few people thinking they mattered when most people didn’t.


We need to understand that the long form census is not what matters here, any more than getting a good seat for that movie was what mattered to Ms. Desmond. The census is merely the event that has raised the concern; actually two concerns.


1. Who decides where to draw the line between your public life and your private life?

2. Do we have a right to expect that the state will provide clear and compelling reasons for the use of coercion on it’s citizens?


If the concept of privacy means anything, YOU must be the answer to the first question. If the concepts of freedom and security mean anything, YES must be the answer to the second.


Privacy is essential to the development and maintenance of an independent citizenry, and, therefore, to a democratic society. Serious limitations on the coercive powers of the state are essential to freedom and security. And the development and maintenance of a free and democratic society matters.



Wednesday, August 4, 2010

MORE IMPORTANT THAN THE CENSUS


First, a little housekeeping matter:


If you’ve been following the comments portion of the blog you will know that not everyone agrees with me on this census thing. This is as it should be. Discussion is all about the exchange of opinion and I welcome dissenting points of view. That said, however, I would appreciate it if we could avoid becoming too personal in our responses. An open forum needs to feel like a safe place or people will not participate.


If, in the course of discussion, you feel you need to get more personal, please feel free to drop me a note (dan.colborne@gmail.com). I’m sure we can have a loving and respectful disagreement via email, or even meet for coffee if you’re in the Edmonton area, but it’s hard to conduct a personal exchange, in a public forum, with an anonymous contributor.


Now, some things that matter more than the census.


“Anonymous” has raised a couple of interesting points that warrant a little more discussion. First, “Why don't you focus on things that actually matter.” And second, “Do you have a better idea of a country to live in than Canada?”. I’ll take the second first.


I trust my reply made it clear that I am a loyal Canadian, and that there’s nowhere else on earth I’d rather live, but there’s more that should be said. When someone criticizes a government policy, or confronts what they perceive to be a national problem, they are not disparaging the country. If Canada is a great place to live – and it is – it’s largely because so many people have loved it enough to support the things that make it better and oppose the things that don’t. If we fail to recognize this we will marginalize legitimate opinions, and the country will be poorer for it.


In the US, the expression “un-American” was common at one time, and still turns up occasionally. It’s function was to delegitimize opponents and opposing points of view, and to serve notice that those who support these persons or views will be similarly marginalized. I’m sure it occasionally expressed a sincere concern about the motives of some people, but eventually it was used as a tactic against just about anyone who challenged the status quo: preachers, presidents, students, professors, unions, management, entertainers, and politicians of every stripe. Pretty much anyone who was opposed to anything for any reason could be shut down by the charge of un-Americanism.


Our Canadian practice has been similar, but it has its own nuances. In Canada our politicians don’t say an opponent is “un-Canadian”, but rather that they are promoting “American-style” health-care, law enforcement, cultural activity, etc. It then becomes unnecessary to demonstrate how a given proposal is bad. It is enough to know that it’s “not-Canadian”.


And our politicians use the subtle phrase “Canadian values” to imply that their opponent’s values are not Canadian, or they say “Canadians believe”, suggesting that those who don’t believe are somehow less Canadian. To question the loyalty of an opponent, or the essential Canadian-ness of an idea, marginalizes these people and proposals. It excludes them from the discussion and deprives the county of good people and new ideas.


One of the reasons so many politicians in Ottawa are howling so vociferously right now is that the recent political realignment – the Reform/Alliance merging with the Progressive Conservatives to form the new Conservative Party, and the subsequent rise of the Conservatives to power – has resulted in some new voices being heard; voices that have been ignored for decades in Canada. These are the loyal “not-Canadians” who dare to question the value of some things that have been deemed “Canadian values”, and presume to openly doubt some of the things that “Canadians believe”. These voices are disruptive to the status quo, but that’s democracy.


Of course, some good and loyal Canadians fear that recent changes are the beginning of a gale that might scuttle the ship, while other good and loyal Canadians hope they’re the beginning a gale that might empower the ship. And I think both are right because the outcome of a storm is not in the storm. Rough weather will come from time to time no matter what we do, but the secret to sailing is seamanship; a competent crew, that works as a unit, for the welfare of all.


So, all together now...


“...Haul on the bow line”, we sang that melody,

Like all tough sailors do, when they’re far away at sea. – Bob Dylan’s 115th Dream