-
Role models
Published by
on
My reading continues, of heavy psychology books moreso than current events. The few news bits I’ve gleaned include that people have repeatedly shot at one of Kamala Harris’s campaign offices, it’s increasingly likely that Russia will use nuclear weapons, climate catastrophes abound globally, and the Canadian House of Commons is spending its time on multiple non-confidence motions.
I can’t do anything about any of that. I tried. I burned out learning that the issue isn’t that politicians don’t know, it’s that they don’t give a shit.
So I’ve mainly been reading psychology, and what’s really sticking with me is how other people react to seeing harm: the people whose role is to protect, but who turn away and refuse to listen; the people who are paid to help but don’t ask the question because the answer could mean work; the people who knowingly cause harm and refuse to stop.
It got me thinking about role models, because of course we learn this behaviour somewhere. We learn how others think we deserve to be treated, and it affects how we see and treat ourselves and others.
What I keep having to relearn is that while I have very little influence over anything else, I can choose to treat myself better than what I was taught. New poem: Role Models.
-
Federal political slogans
Published by
on
I already unintentionally made up slogans for two of the federal political leaders, so let’s flesh that idea out.
Justin Trudeau: “I’m not as bad as the other guy.”
It infuriates me that after 9 years this is the best he can do. We should have had electoral reform. In criminal justice, we should have moved in the direction of Charter rights and economy. We should have had demonstrated environmental improvement, not just regulatory reporting requirements while oil and gas companies get subsidies to pollute. Every single person under Justin Trudeau’s Canadian jurisdiction should have access to clean water by now. Dare to dream of a world in which his star shone so brightly that we didn’t end up in year five of people potentially catching a miserable and disabling disease every time they go to work or access health care.
But that’s not the universe we live in, and the best he can muster, over and over, is “I’m not as bad as the other guy.” All while capitulating in advance to the guy who is worse. Great leadership, dude. Thanks for the weed.
Pierre Poilievre: “I will bring you The Handmaid’s Tale. I’m open to discussing The Purge.”
I’ve mentioned that I’m doing a year-long compassion course because it seems important to me to develop the capacity for empathy. That does not seem to be what drives Poilievre. It bothers me how much of the population seems motivated to try to control and punish and exploit other people when there are other choices that can be made, some of which would be more consistent with, you know, Jesus’s teachings or whatever.
Jagmeet Singh: “I, too, love the middle class.”
Noticing that Trudeau had moved right, Singh moved right too, detecting a juicy electoral void in the “middle class” centre. This is disappointing, when another strategic possibility was to leverage rage and principle in favour of a better world than the very bad status quo the NDP used to be aware of.
Yves-François Blanchet: TBD.
Until recently, the main impression I had was that Yves-François Blanchet was trying to dissociate from all this bullshit, and I would have opted for “I don’t know them” as his slogan.
But now he seems quite interested in holding the balance of power, pushing the Liberals to support two Bloc PMBs as the cost of delaying an election. Bill C-319 definitely sounds like a bill the Liberals would support in rhetoric and thwart in budget, and I look forward to seeing the Bloc’s procedural manoeuvres to avoid that trap. Bill C-282 I would have thought had no chance since it binds the discretion of the Minister strangely, but I see it’s already at committee in the Senate. I guess that’s how we feel about supply management.
(“YFB: PMB; TBD” appeals to me acronymistically, but it is far from bilingual.)
Green Party: “I think it’s Elizabeth May again.”
Bonus points if Elizabeth May herself actually said this.
|
-
Update notes
Published by
on
I’m making good use of the new “announcements” section in the sidebar, for non-post content. For example, I’ve started a project of sources / references / inspirations, for accountability and because it’s good shit that I’m going to end up recommending to everyone I know at some point anyway.
On the current reading list are three heavy psychology books:
- (I’ve already mentioned) Set Boundaries, Find Peace. It’s so fundamental, I think this is my third time reading it since it came out in 2021.
- Good Morning Monster: A Therapist Shares Five Heroic Stories of Emotional Recovery, which a friend mentioned looks interesting to her so I suggested we start a mini-book club. It has given me an idea for a poem.
- The Body Keeps the Score, which I’ve been reading slowly over some number of months but it seems more urgent now, as I wait to see if my latest symptoms are long covid or years of neglect catching up to me.
This may affect the focus of future posts, TBD. Making shit up as I go.
(The tech person reminded me repeatedly to write a blurb for Google and I couldn’t anymore than I could figure out what words to get printed on business cards. (… Although actually “Making shit up as I go” appeals to me as a placeholder.))
I’ve also figured out next steps on two big projects, I’m pilot projecting a third, and I’ve started using my professional new email address to selectively contact people I don’t know. Progress!
-
A “corrupted bastard” with a jiu jitsu background
Published by
on
There is video today of NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh confronting a protestor who may or may not have called him a “corrupted bastard” and it is worth watching.
Singh walks like a martial artist. He ducks his head and moves in to force eye contact with the guy who seems desperate to avoid it. He looks genuinely ready to throw down and I’ll be honest: if the NDP ditched “We, Too, Love the Middle Class” for “It’s Time to Start Punching Fascists,” they’d be a lot more politically interesting.
What I’d like to know is what security service protocol says for when a Parliamentarian is within spitting distance of a fight. There are at least three security professionals in the vicinity, hanging back to watch; one actually seems to walk away, based on the shadow at 0:33.
To be fair, this was an angry politician approaching a constituent, not an angry constituent approaching a politician, so the intervention calculus would be different. But I still wonder if they ought to have gotten closer faster, and if they ought to have, why they did not.
I hope the answer isn’t because the Parliamentary Protective Service is “friendly to the cause.”
|
-
So, how many federal employees caught covid this week?
Published by
on
I’ve been pondering what to write. I’ve been following political news only enough to be confirmed in my opinions that (1) the NDP is abandoning principles and veering right and (2) Justin Trudeau’s post-retreat governance strategy remains “I’m not as bad as the other guy.”
What’s of most importance to me day-to-day at the moment is the federal government’s “return to office” policy. What it means for workers. For their time, and for their health. For their futures if they just keep their heads low now. I’m terrible at history, but I’m good at patterns.
Among the books I’m currently reading is Set Boundaries, Find Peace by Nedra Glover Tawwab, which also applies in the employment context. Saying no to unreasonable requests is a way of standing up for yourself. The reading I’m doing on fascism also seems to confirm the importance of learning not to comply in advance, nor to comply easily against your own interests.
What unions are reportedly doing
The “three days in office” policy started this past week, and I wonder how many federal employees caught covid. I have no insider information on what unions are up to (despite repeated efforts), but I’ve been reading the news coverage and I’d call it mixed.
The better story is about unions complaining about pests in public buildings. This is a good move. Obviously employees shouldn’t have to commute to worse conditions when they can do their job at least equally well in better.
Consider the health and safety standards employers thought were reasonable to expect of you in your own home when you’re teleworking. Employer work spaces – which are communal and publicly funded – should have better working conditions than that. At minimum the employer should be meeting the standards they required for remote work. There’s no reason office conditions should be worse, unless federal employers are massive hypocrites who just want to download costs and don’t actually care about your well-being.
I assume “flood management with complaints” is a deliberate union strategy, and I love it. Submit insect and wildlife complaints. Submit plumbing and HVAC complaints! Submit ergonomic complaints while you’re at it. I wouldn’t even call this “malicious” compliance when the complaints just require the employer to provide a safe workspace. It’s just good boundary-setting.
The worse story is whatever the fuck PSAC thought it was doing by targeting third-party businesses downtown instead of federal employers and politicians. Do unions not stand for solidarity and punching up? Appalling.
If unions are lacking in ideas for effective campaigns…
I will reiterate, if unions are lacking in ideas for effective campaigns, that employees could be encouraged to start tabulating the costs of this unnecessary commute, including actual expenses and quantified time (by my calculations: 4-8 weeks per year of vacation). How much is this policy costing each employee individually? What is the total cost to all employees under the collective agreement? What legal right does the employer have to conscript this wealth when it’s not even necessary for the job?
Those expenses should be compensated by the employer who is imposing the in-office requirement as a condition of employment. There’s a non-zero chance a chaos judge would accept the argument that federal employers will have to reintroduce mileage payments and per diems if they’re going to require a commute that is (1) unrelated to productivity, (2) imposed outside of contractually agreed-upon hours, and (3) an actual risk to employee health (due to government failures in public health and infrastructure). I see a pretty strong Bedford-style argument sitting right there.
If even unionized employees just go along politely, at their own expense and at potential detriment to their health, what lessons do employers learn?
Let me know if anyone wants to borrow my C02 monitor for data collection.
|
-
-
About the author
CKirkby
- earned degrees in language / literature and law (but is not currently a lawyer or a journalist);
- worked for over a decade on Parliament Hill;
- misses writing; and
- appreciates thoughtful comments, en anglais ou en français. (Email addresses are not published.)
October 2026 S M T W T F S 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 Categories
Archive