Thursday 25 April 2013
Good morning folks,
I will be working in Montréal today.
This is number two in a two part series of cynicism in politics.
Let there be no mistake. Japan invaded Korea. Not just once or twice, but since the 16th century it was a bit of a pastime. Korea was a battle ground between the Chinese and Japanese forces in Feudal times, and served as a source of labour and 'comfort women'. By the end of the 19th century Japan had tried to rub Korean culture off the map by requiring Koreans to take on Japanese names, cultural rituals and banning the Korean language from being spoken.
And Japan certainly invaded and occupied Korea during the Second World War. It is the reason why there is a North and South Korea today, when Japan surrendered in 1945 it ceded control of Korea north of the 38th parallel to Russia while Allied forces remained in Korea south of the 38th.
Japan also invaded and occupied China during WWII as part of the Japanese Imperialist plans to dominate the Far East. That was the second Sino-Japanese war, the first being at the end of the 19th century. In 1931 Japan invaded Manchuria after a false flag attack known as the Mukden Incident and over the next few years worked its way through China and occupied the Chinese capital Nanking in 1937.
Yes, but Uncle Daniel why are you telling us this?
Because in a remarkable bit of revisionist history story telling, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe has suggested that it didn't really occur, at least not as an aggressive action --say whaaaa?
"What constitutes aggression has yet to be established in academia or in the international community... things that happen between nations will look differently depending on what side you view them from." Seems Abe is trying to distance his gov't from an apology made by 1995 Japanese PM Tomiichi Murayama to Korea and China for "colonial rule and aggression".
Or perhaps Abe would like us to believe the 20 million Chinese that were killed during Japan's brutal WWII occupation were not killed in aggression but as peaceful protest?
This stance by Abe is likely adding fuel to the dispute between China and Japan over Senkaku (J) Diaoyu (C) islands in the East China Sea which China has long historical claim to and which has sent 8 ships to on Tuesday to backup it's claim, Abe has stated that Japan will retaliate with force if China lands any personnel on the islands.
What I don't know is if Japan is precluded from retaliating by its post WWII constitution which prohibits acts of war and .. aggression. Ah! Abe sees a redefinition of 'aggression' as a quick way to sidestep Japanese law. Beware of hawks on all continents.
See previous missive on cynicism and politics.
Have a good day --keep and eye on the east.
Thursday 18 April 2013
Good mornings folks,
I will be working in Ottawa today.
Sorry about the glaring absence of any pulp last week. I ended up not flying to Montréal on my regularly scheduled flight as there was freezing rain, locusts, and the river turned red. Figured I would work from my Toronto desk. As such, I didn't sit on a plane and so I didn't write anything. Without much further ado.. Today's pulp:
Folks, I am confused. well.. Not really, actually I am annoyed. The NDP has abandoned me. In 1961 after a few years of formation processes the NDP was created and the late great Tommy Douglas was its first leader. the NDP was formed to provide essentially a political party to represent the interests of labour and Canada's political Left which is and was social justice and social democracy.
That's why it was formed. Note that the objective was not to provide an avenue to get a bunch of ppl into seats in Parliament.
Sidebar here, it is not too important to get into much discourse on the difference between non-authoritarian socialism, democratic socialism and social democracy, just be certain that they NDP has never been on the side of authoritarian or state socialism, Stalin or Maxist or Leninist or Maoist style.
But now, the current leadership seems to have taken the entire new philosophy that the function of the party is to gain seats, to gain political power. < that was a period.
The party, under new leader Thomas Mulcair, has voted to delete the word 'Socialism' from the preamble to their constitution because they wish to present a more centric position.
Catherine Hame spoke in favour of the change: "Today, in supporting this preamble massively, we would be giving ourselves the tools necessary to unite behind our leader Tom Mulcair and beat the Conservatives in 2015."
This is serious shit, this means that the party has voted to move away from its ideals to focus on the new goal of getting elected. And ppl wonder why the populous has such a cynical view of politics and politicians.
And now onto the Liberals. The same group that brought Iggy now gives us Trudeau 2.0. That's right kids, the Liberals have a brand new leader, fresh out of the box and never used --zero miles on him..
I ask you, how can a fellow regardless of good lineage but without any experience, never sat in Cabinet, never carried a portfolio, never sat in committee.. Great hair though lead a party into victory AND lead the country?
The AND part is the most fundamental to the question. The lead into victory may be possible if the electorate is fooled by this blatant positioning for the sake of popularity. Remember when the GOP in the U.S. tried the same thing by grabbing a gal as Senator John McCain's running mate.
They went for popularity and flash instead of substance. In their exuberance they neglected to notice that Sarah had about as much understanding of world events as a goldfish.
And ppl wonder why the populous has such a cynical view of politics and politicians.
Have a good day and don't worry about what's right, just do what's popular :p
Thursday 4 April 2013
Good morning folks, I will be working in Ottawa today.
Two topics of fun and equality.
The first, Samoa Airlines re-price strategy, flying by the pound. The SA has changed their pricing model to be a rate per kilo, one submits their rate and obtain a price to their destination and on check-in get weighed with the airline having the option to adjust prices accordingly. Canadian airlines are not expected to follow suit, and Westjet's Robert Palmer (no, the Robert Palmer you are thinking about died in 2003) said it could never be considered fair in anyway, Porter Air also followed WJ's line and added that the Canadian Transportation Agency has moved the other way to ensure equal treatment for all.
But wait! The airline sells a service where they pick you up, that is, they provide a service that counters the effect of gravity and transport you to a distant location. The costs associated with such a service is all about gravity.
For a very quick refresher, gravity is that natural force or phenomena that causes physical bodies to be attracted to each other with a force proportional to their masses. In order to separate the bodies, one must apply a counter force equal to that proportional force. To really dummy it down, the more a body weighs, the more energy the airline must apply, the more jet fuel to be burned. An plane filled with anorexic flat chested Joe Fresh models burns far less fuel than one burdened down with sumo wrestlers. So why should the Joe Fresh model pay the same, or more precisely why should she subsidize the cost of his flight.
Equal treatment, bah!
And now the second topic. Dodgeball bans in schools.
Or holding hands in Tennessee schools --seems its a gateway activity that leads to sex. Um.. I think that puberty is a gateway activity that leads ultimately to having sex.
I read recently of the move to ban the use of red ink for teachers marking quizzes and tests, seems the red ink is 'too confrontational'. This of course means that the first time that young adults will encounter red ink in the real world such as on credit card statement, parking ticket, job evaluation they may fly into a fit of uncontrollable rage in reaction to what will no doubt be perceived as an unprovoked attack own their person.
BFFs. it's about time, nothing more annoying that having to hear about it, and after all making best friends is by its very nature an exclusionary process, accordingly several schools have banned the process in order to save the feelings of the other kids stuck in the 'friend of friend' or worse the 'okay friend' categories.
And lastly, a Brampton Ontario school has banned hugging. It was a logical extension of their zero tolerance on hitting and shoving.
Have a good day, and please treat everyone exactly the same. Um.. right after I eat my breakfast in my e-upgrade point business class seat.