On Intimacy vs. Games Playing

Intimacy hides beneath abstractions, games playing, 'fencing', seduction, power plays, projections, avoidances, withdrawls, and 'allusions to immediacy'...
This can be fun for awhile, or it can steer us away from conflict and areas of discomfort but if we really want to know each other, we have to show some mutual trust -- and move into a deeper and more honest playing field...

-- dgb, July 26th, 2008

On God, Nature, Man, and The Path of The Homeostatically Balanced, Multi-Integrative Dialectic

If you think -- or try to argue the existence -- of God in terms of epistemology, rationality, and/or empiricism, then you are probably on shaky grounds. Because God, for the most part, or the most common-sense part, defies rational-empirical epistemology.

Better instead, to argue the existence of God in terms of 'religious and/or spiritual idealism'.

In this scenario, it is better also to take personal responsibility for the contents and direction of your self-projected spiritual idealism.

My form of self-projected, spiritual idealism comes mainly from the influence of such philosophers as Heraclitus, Spinoza, Hegel, and Schelling -- a romantic form of integrative (homeostatically balanced) dialectical negotiation, integration, unity, and wholism (the different spiritual parts of Man, Nature, and God all coming together into one 'multi-dialectic-humanistic-existential-unified whole'.

By this 'Heraclitean-Spinozian-Hegelian-Schellian' interpretation of the romantic integrative spirituality ofo Man, Nature, and God -- there are parts of God, Nature, and Man in all of us -- and we all need to 'triangulate the respective energies of these three life forces -- 1. God (Transcendence, Creativity, Becoming, The Wish to Soar High in the Universe...); 2. Nature (Being, Here and Now, Groundedness, Beauty, Homeostatic Balance, Multi-Dialectic Unity, Harmony and Wholism, Evolution...); and 3. Man (The Bridge between Man, Nature and God seeking elements of everything above -- a romantic-spiritual unity between these three sets of life forces).

In a nutshell then, according to my DGB vision of romantic-spiritual idealism...

Man must homeostatically balance elements of God, Nature, and his/her own creative needs of freedom, being and becoming within a social-political-natural environment of multi-dialectic-negotiation and integration.

-- dgb, July 25th, 2008.

On Contradictions in Human Behaviour

I write about narcissism being out of balance in our culture. And yet the devil I write about is at least partly the devil in me. We shouldn't dissociate ourselves from the people and the transgressions we point fingers at when we are are at least partly practising them ourselves.

Hypocrisy is not admitting our contradictions - our bi-polarities -- or even worse, not seeing them. Contradictions abound in human nature, and hypocrisy abounds in people who cannot or will not see and/or admit their contradictions, and their ethical transgressions from these contradictions.

In Gestalt Therapy, they used to say you can't - or won't - change until you first know and accept who you are now.

But in the mean time, even if we are not prepared to change, we can all work harder at not throwing stones if and/or when we live in glass houses.

- dgb, July 20th, modified, July 26th, 2008.

On The Unpredictability of Being and Becoming

It's like you've got yesterday, today, and tomorrow all in the same room. There's no telling what can happen.

-- From the movie, I'm Not There

On Freedom

People believe that freedom means being able to live a certain life
without being kicked around.

Of course, the more we live a certain life, the less it feels like freedom.

-- From the movie, I'm Not There

The Higher We Soar...

The higher we soar the smaller we appear to those who cannot fly.
-- Nietzsche

(However, those who don't return to earth may end up in mental institutions.)

-- DGB, July 19th, 2008.

On Clarity

Don't talk about clarity -- and leave me here chasing the moon.

Many philosophers do this - talk about clarity and then hit the outer stratosphere of abstraction (eg. Wittgenstein).

The same goes with many of us, ordinary, day-to-day, people who may or may not live in ivory towers but who talk about being intimate while running away from what we really feel, and/or who talk with a suit of armour around our heart. (I couldn't be talking about myself, could I?)

- dgb, July 19th, modified, July 26th, 2008.

On Humanism

People before money.

-- dgb, July 18th, 2008.

On The Dialectical Paradox Between Man's Stagnant Classification Systems and Life's Phenomenal -- Always Changing -- Processes

Man loves similarities, associations, and generalization because these breed consistenceis, predictabilities -- and 'psychological securities'. However, if life 'zigs' where man's thought process 'zags', then all consistencies and predictabilities go out the window.

In the meantime, man is left humming along with a 'false sense of psychological security' until the day or the moment that there is a loud or soft 'crash' -- and often, with it, a very unpleasant 'shock to man's psychological as well as physiological system' between what man 'thought was consistent and predictable', and what in the end -- wasn't. Advantage -- life. Disadvantage -- man.

We must remember this when we are going 'hog-wild' trying to 'classifying the similar and different reductionistic pieces of life' becasue classifying is always aimed at achieving generalizations, consistencies, and predictabilities. Life isn't. Life is often geared towards defying and defeating these same man-made classfication systems.

The moral of this min-essay is this: Life processes preceed -- and should always take precedence over -- man-made classificaiton systems.

Think 'life processes' first -- and 'classification systems' second -- with an important 'caveat emptor' at the end of every man-made classificatio system which I borrow and extrapolate from what I learned from studying Heralclitus, Korzybski, Hayakawa, and Perls -- a combination of General Semantics and Gestalt Therapy:

This classification system is always flexible and subject to change, contingent on another better classification system that will inevitably come along, created by some new classifyer, scientist, and/or philosopher on the meeting ground of dialectical freedom, humanistic-existentialism, narcissism (money, greed, selfishness..), and/or evolutionary functionality.

Man -- and science -- seeks consistency and predictability while life is based on a combination of consistency-predictability (Parmenides)-- and its opposite: 'You can never step into the same river twice.' -- Heraclitus. Don't get so caught up in the philosophical lessons of Parmenides that you miss the philosophical lessons of Heraclitus, Korzybski, Hayakawa, and Perls:

'Life is always subject to change.'

July 18th, 2008.

On Classifying, Life Processes, and Man's Number 1 Evolutionary Tool -- His/Her Brain

Let me be clear on this point. No one will ever find a perfect classification system. Life will always defeat your classification process because life doesn't care about classifications systems. Life just -- is. Life is biologically diverse -- infinitely diverse -- because with every step of evolution, there is a new mutation, or conversely put, with every new mutation, every new combination -- by design or by accident -- evolution proceeds in a new and different way. Classification processes and systems can and will never keep up because life will always be one, or a hundred, or a thousand steps ahead. You think that bacteria and viruses are not 'smart'. Then why do we now have 'drug-resistant bacteria and viruses'. Because they mutated, they they compensated, they evolved -- they 'outsmarted' the drugs -- and man. And man is left scratching his head, saying: 'Bacteria and viruses are not supposed to be this way. They are not supposed to be able to defeat our wonderful, all powerful anti-biotics?' But they do. And for man -- and science -- it is back to the drawing room, back to the continual game of adjustment and re-adjustment, compensation, and further compensation...

Man's number one evolutionary tool rmaains his 'brain', and to maintain this evolutinary advantage, man has to continually stay on top of life's changes -- as well as its consistencies and its similarities until these consistencies and similarities break off and become something 'nwe' -- then again, man has to stay on top of these changes, and follow with 'life's new program'. Where life goes, science and philosophy need to follow right behind, like a 'stotm tracker' or a 'tornado chaser' follows a storm/tornado with all its twists and turns, and changes in directon. If a storm tracker or a tornado chaser, misses a tornado's sudden turn -- somebody could die (including the tornado chaser him or hsrself). Science's functionality/usefulness/value to mankind depends on it catching all of life's new twists and turns. The job of philosophy is mainly to keep science on the right track, and to keep it ethically honest, so that, for example, science doesn't start chasing money rather than what it is supposed to be chasing -- i.e., the 'truth' about life with all its different twists and turns.

-- dgb, July 18th, 2008.

On Narcissism, Ethics, Hypocrisy, and Ideology...

From Hobbes', Schopenhauer's, Marx's, and Freud's line of philosophy...


A gemeralization in human behavior (nature?)...a cynic's and/or non-naive person's interpretation...

Narcissism and the 'pleasure-power principle' rule; ethics and ideology fool...

-- dgb, July 17th, 2008.

On Sharing

To extrapolate on Shakespeare (Hamlet)...

To share or not to share important thoughts and feelings: that is the question.

dgb, July 16th, 2008.

On Passion and Compassion

Don't ever lose your passion and compassion for people. The more we lock people out, the more we lock ourselves in. The more we push people aside, the more we push ourselves inside. Some people need more lone time than others -- a time to reflect -- but again a dialectic is needed to establish a homeostatic balance: a balance between the type of creative growth we get from being alone, and the type of creative growth we get from being others. Either polarity by itself establishes a one-sided existence. And sometimes people who spend a lot of time with people can be the loneliest people. We avoid and defend against the questions and answers that take us closest to our heart. No adventure -- no loss. No passion. No compassion. A life above our necks and/or below our belts. Our heart beats for no one and hides from everyone.

-- dgb, July 15th, 2008.

On The Relationship Between Lobbyism and Power

In order to cure the ills of North American Democracy and the Government War on The 'Average, Middle Class Citizen' (meaning a citizen who does not have a powerful lobbyist person and/or group working for him or her), we need to recognize and cure the problem of 'Covert, Left and Right Wing, Special Interest Politician and Lobbyist Meetings and Collusions'. Let me explain...

...............................................................................


1. Look after the rich and the rich will help to keep you in power...That is basically the philosophy/relationship between corrupt -- and/or 'politically expedient' -- Conservative/Republican Right Wings politicians and their powerful, rich Corporate Lobbyist Special Interest Supporters...

2. Look after the 'Left-Wing, Socially Active, Special Interest Groups' and these left-wing special interest groups will help to keep you in power...That is basically the philosophy/relationship between corrupt -- and/or 'politically expedient' -- Liberal/Left Wing politicians and their Left Wing, Special Interest Supporters...

Political/Economic Lobbyism -- Left and Right Wing both -- is basically the 'killer of North American Democracy and Equal Rights'. And it all starts along 'the campaign road to the President's/Prime Minister's Office. Political candidates need money -- a lot of money -- to run for the President's/Prime Minister's Office. This democratic problem is much worse -- meaning much more expensive -- in America than in Canada but it is still relevant money. When campaign runners start to run short of money, they start looking for lobbyist financial supporters -- and the bigger the better as a general rule. The money required to run a campaign for the Democrat/Republican nomination -- and then the President's office -- as seen in this current American election, is staggering, in the millions and millions of dollars. Not even most of the richest people in America can afford it unless they are willing to take on a staggering debt in the process -- witness Hillary Clinton.

So underhanded, covert, non-transparent, collusive 'deals' or 'promises' are struck up between politicians looking for money and lobbyists looking for power. That's the essence of the 'Un-Democratic Political/Economical Lobbyist Deal' -- money for power.

American/Canadian Democracy crumbles in the process. You can start to hear more and more about it on CNN, the Lou Dobbs Show, in new books coming out and being promoted on this show such as -- 'Free Lunch'.

Solve the American/Canadian Political/Economic Lobbyist problem and you go a long way towards solving the problem of 'The Un-Democratic Lobbyist-Pampered American and Canadian Democracy'. This is what Lou Dobbs essentially describes as 'The War on The Middle Class'. That is -- the 'pampering' of Left and Right Wing Special Interest Lobbyist Groups.

Get rid of covert, non-transparent political-economic lobbyism in America and Canada -- or at least make it politically transparent to the general public -- and you go a long way towards 'curing the ills of North American Democracy'.

Obama has been one of the first politicians to seriously speak out on the issue -- although I do not even believe that he is entireley 'lobbyist-free'. Obama has shown his 'politically expedient' side of his character -- for example, when he found out that he could raise much more money than his political competitors -- Clinton, McCain, and others -- through internet campaign donations: i.e. many, many more smaller donations by your average middle class citizens with no serious lobbyist intentions -- or threats -- to the American people behind them.

This should be the way of raising campaign donations in the future...unless the American people want a basically 'equal economic footing' for Presidential candidates which is probably more or less impossible to enforce...such as so much of American tax money being used for campaign purposes equally for all Presidential candidates...or the two last candiates standing (the Republican nominee and the Democratic nominee -- Obama turned down going this route because he knew he could raise more money than McCain through his 'internet donations'.)

In the meantime, both America and Canada need to find a way to get the thousands and thousands of 'collusive' lobbyists in Washington/Ottawa out of Washington/Ottawa or change the laws so that these people do their business in 'transparent, general public, open forums -- not behind 'closed, narcissistic doors, in restaurants, bars and/or alley ways, or on the phone -- and definitely no 'cash envelopes'.

-- July 13th, 2008.

On Marx, Idealism, Ideology, Integrity and Character

In a Marxian sense, there is a very critical difference between 'idealism' and 'ideology'.

'Idealism' pertains to the values that a person professes to believe in.

However, Marx, probably more than any other philosopher in Western history could and did see through man's hypocrisy -- the internal lack of congruence between a person's professed idealism and the true underlying nature and extent of their individual and/or collective narcissism.

Thus, Marx created a second concept -- 'ideology' -- to account for this idealistic/ideological hypocrisy and the true underlying narcissism in his nature.

Thus, the name that Marx used to account for this human hypocrisy between 'professed belief' and 'real belief' was -- 'ideology'. Ideology represents a person's/politician's/businessman's professed set of beliefs but not his real set of beliefts. To get to his real set of beliefs, Marx believed that you had to cut through a person's professed and hypocritical ideology to get to their real underlying narcissism -- especially, in his eyes, as it was/is exasperated by Capitalism.

Little did Marx know or realize that two of the worst examples of human ideology and hypocrisy at its worst would be played out by two of the most anti-humanistic, anti-Capitalist leaders in the history of man -- Lenin and Stalin.

Thus, hypocrisy and hypocritical ideology has nothing to do with Capitalism -- although the two are often found hand in hand. Rather, hypocrisy and hypocritical ideology is more connected to the wish to hide human/government/corporate/individual narcissism -- and the wish to hide human narcissism is not limited to what set of economic and/or political and/or religious beliefs you believe in -- whether this be of Capitalist, Socialist, Communist, Conservative, Liberal, Republican, Democrat, Protestant, Catholic, Muslim, and/or Jewish perspective.

Human narcissism and hypocrisy -- like a very sharp knife -- cuts through any and all human perspectives -- and ideologies...

Thus, much of the congruence, honesty, and integrity of a person can be judged by the degree to which his or her professed beliefs and values can be seen and experienced by himself/herself, and/or others as matching with the real idealistic beliefs that the person actually lives his or her life by -- or doesn't.

When idealism matches ideology and demonstrated action -- you have a congruent, honest person who is living her or her life with integrity and ethical/moral transparency.

When idealism does not match ideology and demonstrated action -- well then, we still have some significant work to do to improve the integrity of our character.

And when this hypocrisy and hypocritical idealism/ideology is serious enough -- well then, we deserve to be called an ethical fraud.

-- dgb, July 12th, 2008.

On Character and Faith -- Reliigion, Atheism, and Humanistic-Existentialism

It is not a man's faith or religion that determines the quality of his or her character -- although in the best of circumstances it can certainly help; rather, it a man's character that determines the quality of his or her faith, religion, non-faith, and/or non-religion.

There are humanistic Protestants, Catholics, Anglicans, Muslims, Jews, Mormons, Hindus, Budhists, Pantheists, Deists, Agnostics, Atheists...And there are narcissistic, nasty, evil people in the world who call themselves by any of the same names...

The key is not their God, their Faith, their religion -- or their lack of it.

Rather, the key is a combination of self-assertiveness, self-responsibility, self-accountability which included honesty and integrity -- and a certain element of narcissism, hedonism, sensuality, excitement, egotism, and self-confidence...held in check and balanced by the other side of the 'self-social equation' which includes: social compassion, caring, sensitivity, empathy, love, generosity, altruism...

The last part of the self-social equation I refer to as: 'humanism' (social compassion); the first part of the self-social equation I refer to as 'existentialism' (self-assertiveness, self-responsibilitiy, self-accountability...).

In short form, I call the self-social equation -- 'humanistic-existentialism'.


So re-worded, my self-social formula can be presented in this manner:


It is not a person's God, Faith, Religion, or non-Religion that determines his or her character; but rather, the extent of his or her 'humanistic-existentilism' -- whether that be 'religious humnistic-existentialism' on the one end of the religious bi-polarity spectrum, 'pantheism' and 'deism' somewhere in the middle of the religious bi-polarity spectrum, or 'atheist humanistic-existentialism' on the other far end of the religious-non-religious bi-polarity spectrum.


Simplied, the extent of a person's humanistic-existentialism is more important to the make-up of his or her character than the religion or non-religion, Faith or non-Faith, that he or she follows -- or professes to follow.

That is why freedom of religion/non-religion remains so importnat to the constitutinal rights of any citizen -- and to his or her rights in the military, govenrment, and/or any other social and/or business organization.

And that is why I give my vote of support for the rights of 'The Atheist Soldier'. (See the CNN article on this most important constitutional issue.)

dgb, July 12th, 2008.

On The Seemingly 'Tragic Impasse'....

If you can get by the seemingly tragic impasse between thesis and anti-thesis, employer and employee, husband and wife, boyfriend and girlfriend...there is a creative resolution, a creative solution, that is waiting for you...It just takes one creative open-minded person, two creative, open-minded persons, or a group of creative, open-minded persons -- utilizing a combination of self-assertivenesss and social sensitivity, narcissism and altruism, and the 'democratic-dialectic' -- to get there...Unilateral, one-sided solutions don't generally work unless your sole purpose is to hammer your opposition into submission and you have the power to do it...These types of solutins tend to be very unstable, breed more conflict, resentment, anger, hate, and war...and what goes around generally comes around...live as a unilateralist, dictator, die as a unilateralist, dictator...If you don't have compassion for people, then people are not going to have compassion for you. -- dgb, July 11th, 2008.

'Even the President of the United States sometimes has to stand naked.' -- Bob Dylan ('It's Alright Ma, I'm Only Bleeding')

On Good and Bad Days, Good and Bad Humanistic Values...

Some days I feel like I can change the world; other days I want to hide from the world. Some days I feel in charge of my life and moving in a direction that I like; other days I feel like walking into work and handing in my resignation slip -- changing jobs, changing provinces, or even changing countries...Some days I feel proud of my day's accomplishments; other days I feel beaten and battered by the stress of my job and not being able to keep up with its continuous minute to minute demands; some days I feel like I have made a positive impact on the corporate values of the company; other days I feel carried away in a tidal wave of corporate pathology...Sometimes I ask myself if the paycheque I bring home is that imperative to my survival in the middle class that I can continue to work in a place where the corporate values make me...well...not want to work where I work...

I make mistakes in my job for sure, but generally not mistakes in human values...Businesses often need to be tough in order to survive; they don't need to gouge and make windfall profits at the expense of their customers and/or employees. Win-win solutions breed succesful companies and corporations; win-lose solutions in the end usually mean that everyone loses...but perhaps not as long as the balance of power remains untoppled...

There is a difference between 'dialectic-democratic resolutions' and 'unilateral-dialectic powerplays'. The first breeds 'dialectical unity, integrationsim,wholism and peace'; the second breeds 'dialectical divisionism, righteousness, anger, hate, rebellion, and war'.

That is, unless the unilateral, dialectic powerplay is so powerful as to be esentially uncontested until the balance of power finally swings..and the old power sources are toppled...Machiavillian philosophy wins some of the time...but I have faith in the eventual strength and the power of the people to topple oppressive dictators and/or corrupt, narcissistic leaders...

-- dgb, July 9th, 2008.

On Narcissistic Dictators -- Goverment and Corporate

Dictators are often paradoxical, hypocritcial people -- actually all personality types are often paradoxical, hypocritical people. But we will talk about dictators here for a moment.

1. The most rebellious, anarchists are often covert dictators -- or overt dictators once they seize power. Their hate of dictators seems to be at least partly a jealousy, envy thing. In the end, it is they who want to be the dictator.

2. Dictatorial leaders often say that they hate being around 'weak, yes-people' yet they will often kill, maim, jail, and/or torture those who disagree with them. In the business world they will simply fire the serious disagreeers and especially the 'employee rights social activists'.

3. Dialectical-democratic leaders seek to negotiate win-win resolutions with their employee-workers.

4. Unilateral, dictatorial leaders seek to squash and intimidate their employee-workers.

5. In a corporate sea of narcissistic, unilateral, dictatorial businesses, governments and labour boards do precious little to protect the rights of employees and control the use and abuse of power by dictatorial corporate leaders.

6. Is it any wonder employees usually have to resort to looking for 'unions' to protect them from narcissistic, abusive corporate leaders. The problem is that union leaders are often just as narcissistic and abusive. But they are the best of two evil worlds.

7. But even getting to a union is very tricky business for most un-unionized companies. Companies will often seek to fire the 'union-activist-ring-leaders' of a company before they grab a good hold of a union with serious power. The labour board or government is usually no where around when this happens -- or looks the other way.

8. I've seen what can happen in a company that has two sets of employees -- unionized and non-unioned -- during a period of downsizing. The non-unionized workers usually get obliterated while the unionized workers remain solidly protected from firings and drops in pay. The drops in pay wouldn't seem so bad if everyone was taking the same kind of hit. But most businesses are run by narcissistic leaders -- not fair ones. Here's what often happens. The top managers fire -- or 'downsize'/eliminate many of the 'mid-manager positionss'. The mid-maanagers may fire many of the regular workers. The workers who are left over have to do twice as much work -- with no extra pay. The mid-managers left over have to do twice as much work -- with or without no extra pay. The top managers will then give themselves all 'fat raises' for all the money they saved the company and the fact that they all now have 'extra responsibilities'. This is the law of the jungle -- I mean -- the law of 'corporate downsizing'.

Cheers everone! Take your demotion, your extra work-load -- and put on a 'happy corporate face for company and your top company leaders' Be happy -- they could have fired you -- unless you were protected by a union -- and/or some sort of government 'equal rights/affirmative action' program.

dgb, July 9th, 2008.

On Democracy

As long as there is dictatorship or collusion and/or lobbyism going on behind the scenes in a democracy, then a democracy is not a democracy -- at least until election time. Rather, it is a 'pseudo-democracy' or to put it more bluntly -- a fake democracy.

dgb. July 9th, 2008.

Our Seniors and Their Paltry Pension Plans...

Our seniors deserve to be treated 'preferentially' -- they have worked their whole lives for our country and deserve to retire in dignity without having to be scared about not having enough money. Indeed, the Canadian government needs to do something bout those seniors who are falling underneath our current social safety net. This should not be construed as an act of altruism but rather as an act of 'squaring things up and turning an unfair situation into a fair one'. Most of our current seniors -- plus the thousands of upcoming seniors from the 'baby boom' years will, by the time they have retired, put thousands and thousands of dollars more into The CPP than they will ever see back from it...This, in my opinion, is a government crime...How many billions of dollars are there in The CPP -- that is either still there or has been syphoned out of it -- that belongs to seniors today who are living a retirement life of fear and axiety about not having enough money, or have had to keep working through their retirement years, because they have been cheated out of anything close to the amount of money that they put into The CPP...They trusted their government -- or were forced to give CPP money to their goverment without trusting it (most people have some idea by now what kind of scam is going on, and/or has been going on, with their CPP money) -- and their government duped them just like they duped our native aborignals in days gone by.

We, the Canadian people, if we want to retire with proper respect and dignity, need to fix our CPP until the money we get back from it much more accurately reflects what we put into it. Our politicians -- from every party -- have made sure that their own deep pension plans will allow them to retire in anxiety-free luxury; this is noxious and repugnant when compared to the paltry pension plans that the rest of our seniors are getting who don't have the luxury of such pension plans, or any type of private one; and the fact that so many millions or even billions of dollars have basically been taken from them under false pretenses. Money coming out does not come anywhere close to money put in. Where did the rest of it go? And what is the remaining excess 'baby boom pension money' now being used for other than as a government 'slush fund'? If it is being taken out of the CPP for other reasons, then this is fraud, unless the Canadian people know about it -- and why. This is an example of government coversion and narcissism at its worst...A democratic, uncorrupt government is honest with its people and transparent with the use of its tax money; it doesn't take tax money -- overtax people -- and then use this money for other, undeclared purposes...such as overfilling their own pension funds and leaving the rest of the country dry and economically scared and/or miserable during their retirement years...

Furthermore, our seniors -- particularly the ones making under $30,000 should not be taxed at all...Take away their GST and PST...Take away their property tax...and maybe then our seniors will have more time to relax and breathe easier without cringing at every dollar spent...Again, they deserve it...they have worked hard for Canada and their children...it is time for our government and the generation below our seniors to give back to them...

-- dgb, July 2nd, 2008

On Equal Rights, Equal Opportunity, Discrimination, Preferentialism, and Reverse-Discrimination

'Sexual stereotyping, discrimination, and profiling (targeting)' is no different than 'racial stereotypeing and profiling (targeting)' and can be used manipulatively and pathologically against either sex and/or any race against either sex and/or any race.

This is an imperatively important point to make because many so-called 'equal rights' groups have somehow come to the conclusion that equal rights for 'customarily discriminated against groups' -- meaning so-called 'minority ethnic groups' and 'women' -- should involve 'preferential rights' and 'preferential treatment' for these groups in order to 'offset the customary disadvantage' of the 'customary discrimination'.

This logic is full of holes...such as:

1. It believes that somehow 'two discriminatory wrongs make a right';

2. It is reverse-discriminating against 'so-called non-minority ethnic groups (meaning 'whites')' and 'men';

3. It believes that given 'equal rights' and 'equal opporunity' by the government -- even if it is legally bound in 'The Canadian Constitution', that somehow this is still not enough, that employers will still discriminate against these groups, and that therefore these still need an extra 'handicap push' ('affirmative action' programs, government (guilt?) handouts, special free training programs, etc.) from government in order to offset 'the residual of old discriminatory habits and practises by employers, white males, private citizens, etc... These so called 'equal (narcissistic, preferential) rights' groups don't talk about the possibility -- indeed, inevitability -- of these 'reverse-discriminatory practises on the part of government' inflaming new racial and sexual tensions (and not of the pleasurable, pleasant type)...Furthermore, they don't talk about the fact that this idea of 'preferential pushing' is simply another form of discrimination -- not only against the other groups in society that are not getting the preferential treatment but also against the 'pampered groups' groups as well, because it is treating them like they are 'handicapped' and 'need government help'...in effect, it is a backhanded insult to the particular race, culture, and/or ethnic group involved 'that they need help' because given equal rights and equal opportunity is still not enough to help them progress up Western society's (economic) ladder, and similarily, it is an insult against women...Plus, these types of benefits are going to be used narcissistically, manipulatively, and unfairly...In the meantime, for example, there are thousands of women and members of so-called 'ethnic minority groups' that have more money at their disposal than I will ever see in a lifetime...The goal of 'equal rights' and 'equal opportunity' should be nothing more, and nothing less. If there are going to be any 'economic handouts' then these 'freebies' should be equally available for any and every race, culture, religion, and both sexes -- otherwise, the government is practising the same type of discrimination that it is trying to get rid of...Things like 'free seminars for women who want to start their own business' should be equally available for men -- at the same price, i.e., 'free'; otherwise, it is discriminatory against men. And this is just a very small starting point. The type of 'reverse-discrimination' is systemically rampant in Canadian Goverment and in the Canadian Domestic/Family Courts...


As a white, Canadian male dispatcher, I would sooner work beside any man or woman of any colour from any cultural, religious, and/or racial background that knows what they are doing in the job they are doing than to 'stereotype, profile, and target' someone who is a 'white, male' -- and doesn't know what he is doing. And I am only surmising here, but I believe that in the end, most employers in Canada today want someone who can do the job they are hired to do -- properly and well -- not 'stereotype, profile and target' someone who can't do the job they are hired to do... This is not to say that 'discrimination' is not still happening in Canadian society because most definitely it is -- but it is happening in all directions against 'whites' and 'males' as well as against all other forms of the currently government 'stereotyped, profiled, and targeted' forms of discrimination...

I have no problem with 'social safety nets' in society for the poor and for our seniors but this has nothing to do with race, culture, religion, colour, or sex...I'm a liberal as well as a conservative working to integrate the two -- 'liberal-conservatisim' -- in a dialectical union.




-- dgb, July 1st, Canada Day, 2008.