This email is going out to all 350 supporters in Canada regarding a global action taking place this Saturday, June 18th being coordinated by several of our partner organizations.
Dear friends,
The Candian tar sands are the largest industrial project on the planet, and one of biggest threats to a safe climate future.
Right now, we're at about 392 "parts per million" CO2 -- way over 350, what scientists say is the safe level of carbon dioxide in our atmosphere for maintaining a safe climate. That's why we're already seeing record-breaking storms, floods, wildfires, and droughts. If we burned all the oil that's stored in the the Canadian tar sands, we'd add about 200 ppm CO2 -- thinking about a world near 600ppm is downright terrifying.
Our best hope of defusing this carbon bomb is a groundswell of people speaking out and taking action. That's why we're spreading the word about a big event happening this weekend: "The International Stop the Tar Sands Day." There are events happening all over the world, and in almost every major city throughout Canada.
Why now? Major efforts are underway to expand the amount of tar sands oil exported from Canada to refineries in the United States, so we’re teaming up with our allies to make sure this that carbon stays in the ground.
On June 18, take part in a tar sands action near you and show your support for a safe climate: www.350.org/june18
Extracting and burning tar sands oil is dirty and dangerous - a barrel of tar sands oil contributes 15% more CO2 per barrel to our atmosphere than average crude oil. The extraction process in Alberta is destroying Canada’s forests, trampling indigenous rights, poisoning our atmosphere and river systems, threatening community health, and contributing to global climate change.
To find an action in a city near you, or organize your simple event with a banner or sign, please click here: www.350.org/june18
We know to get to 350ppm, we need to move past fossil fuels -- and stopping the tar sands is a key step in moving to a clean energy future for Canada and the whole planet. We hope you´ll join in the action this week -- and use this weekend's energy to get fired up and inspired for Moving Planet international day of climate action coming up on September 24th.
Stay tuned for further ways to get involved!
Thanks for all you do,
Kelly Blynn for 350.org
350.org is building a global grassroots movement to solve the climate crisis. Our online campaigns, grassroots organizing, and mass public actions are led from the bottom up by thousands of volunteer organizers in over 188 countries. You can join 350.org on Facebook by becoming a fan of our page at facebook.com/350org and follow us on twitter by visiting twitter.com/350. To join our list (maybe a friend forwarded you this e-mail) visit www.350.org/signup. To support our work, donate securely online at 350.org/donate.
What is 350? 350 is the number that leading scientists say is the safe upper limit for carbon dioxide in our atmosphere. Scientists measure carbon dioxide in "parts per million" (ppm), so 350ppm is the number humanity needs to get below as soon as possible to avoid runaway climate change. To get there, we need a different kind of PPM—a "people powered movement" that is made of people like you in every corner of the planet.
Thursday, June 16, 2011
Sunday, June 5, 2011
A Memo to David Akin
On the Hill: Memo to Brigette: There are no shortcuts in politics. It takes long, dull, dreary work http://bit.ly/mC2SsL
Everything you argue is based on the premise that political activity should take place within the system, with established institutions and its rules of law, and you're arguing that this is the only method of moving forward if one wants to enact change - with a little hard work, of course. But, as anyone who has ever been involved in wide grassroots political movements - protest or otherwise - knows, one is not obliged, on any grounds, to work within the system. In fact, it's very difficult to hollow things out from within because one is always bound by the structures of the system and its institutions. One can and might have to work against the system, and, as the 60's remind us, sometimes civil disobedience is necessary --even for its own sake without an immediately achievable goal. Sometimes disruption is a good thing.
Obviously DePape chose the latter on her recognition - shared by even those who do work within the system - that our system and its institutions aren't as democratic as they could be, especially in terms of the democratic principle of representation, a principle that some see as the very bedrock of democracy. We are, as many have noted, one of the four western countries which continue to believe in the illusion that a first-past-the-post electoral system is really democratic, whereas in fact the most one can say about such a electoral process is that it's somewhat but not competely democratic in the representational results it yields.
In the end, with your respect for the system and its institutions, you're not much different in your perspective than May or Rae, and I'm sure you work just as hard.
Everything you argue is based on the premise that political activity should take place within the system, with established institutions and its rules of law, and you're arguing that this is the only method of moving forward if one wants to enact change - with a little hard work, of course. But, as anyone who has ever been involved in wide grassroots political movements - protest or otherwise - knows, one is not obliged, on any grounds, to work within the system. In fact, it's very difficult to hollow things out from within because one is always bound by the structures of the system and its institutions. One can and might have to work against the system, and, as the 60's remind us, sometimes civil disobedience is necessary --even for its own sake without an immediately achievable goal. Sometimes disruption is a good thing.
Obviously DePape chose the latter on her recognition - shared by even those who do work within the system - that our system and its institutions aren't as democratic as they could be, especially in terms of the democratic principle of representation, a principle that some see as the very bedrock of democracy. We are, as many have noted, one of the four western countries which continue to believe in the illusion that a first-past-the-post electoral system is really democratic, whereas in fact the most one can say about such a electoral process is that it's somewhat but not competely democratic in the representational results it yields.
In the end, with your respect for the system and its institutions, you're not much different in your perspective than May or Rae, and I'm sure you work just as hard.
Saturday, May 28, 2011
Harperites Tax Policies Aggravate Gap Between rich and Poor
Toronto Star The full story
In addition to the weaknesses noted below in Les Whittington piece, one could also ask how effective is an accelerated reduction of the federal debt in creating jobs for Canadians? Since the Harperites are already shrinking tax revenues through the measures outlined below, wouldn't a focus on job creation combined with a modest pace in reducing the federal deficit be more prudent? People who work pay taxes and businesses who employ them also pay taxes. Many Harperite candidates in the recent election claimed publicly that jobs in and of themselves and the economy as it relates to jobs were the big issues at the door. If that is so, where indeed IS the focus on jobs, the heart of any economy?
"According to Toronto research agency Investor Economics, the richest 3.8 per cent of Canadian households controlled 66.6 per cent of all financial wealth (not counting real estate) by 2009, up from 60.6 per cent in 2005, just before Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s government came to power. Looking ahead, the agency predicts the portion of financial wealth controlled by this richest group of Canadians is headed for 70 per cent by 2018.
And some analysts say the economic strategies being pursued by a re-elected Harper will only make matters worse, leading to a further expansion of the income gap between the very rich and others in Canada.
The crux of the issue concerns the Conservatives’ plan to continue implementing corporate income tax cuts and to eventually bring in other tax breaks, such as expanding deposits in Tax-Free Savings Accounts and allowing two-income couples with children younger than 18 to split their income for federal tax purposes.
While these measures have been promoted as ways of creating jobs or helping average Canadians, some economists say the benefits to the rich from these tax breaks will far outweigh anything seen by other members of society."
In addition to the weaknesses noted below in Les Whittington piece, one could also ask how effective is an accelerated reduction of the federal debt in creating jobs for Canadians? Since the Harperites are already shrinking tax revenues through the measures outlined below, wouldn't a focus on job creation combined with a modest pace in reducing the federal deficit be more prudent? People who work pay taxes and businesses who employ them also pay taxes. Many Harperite candidates in the recent election claimed publicly that jobs in and of themselves and the economy as it relates to jobs were the big issues at the door. If that is so, where indeed IS the focus on jobs, the heart of any economy?
"According to Toronto research agency Investor Economics, the richest 3.8 per cent of Canadian households controlled 66.6 per cent of all financial wealth (not counting real estate) by 2009, up from 60.6 per cent in 2005, just before Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s government came to power. Looking ahead, the agency predicts the portion of financial wealth controlled by this richest group of Canadians is headed for 70 per cent by 2018.
And some analysts say the economic strategies being pursued by a re-elected Harper will only make matters worse, leading to a further expansion of the income gap between the very rich and others in Canada.
The crux of the issue concerns the Conservatives’ plan to continue implementing corporate income tax cuts and to eventually bring in other tax breaks, such as expanding deposits in Tax-Free Savings Accounts and allowing two-income couples with children younger than 18 to split their income for federal tax purposes.
While these measures have been promoted as ways of creating jobs or helping average Canadians, some economists say the benefits to the rich from these tax breaks will far outweigh anything seen by other members of society."
Sunday, May 22, 2011
Politicizing the Twitterverse | The Mark
Politicizing the Twitterverse | The Mark
These findings, especially the correlation with voting in particular districts, is not surprising in the least. And this report contradicts effectively the comments of the established media. See my earlier post: Media insiders, experts criticize emphasis on political distractions in media’s election coverage
"When we overlaid social-media usage (the volume of tweets, YouTube videos, Facebook fan pages, and blog postings with news-media comments) over an election map, we found some interesting trends. It appeared that more left-wing Canadians were inclined to use social media than right-wing Canadians, and that the electoral districts with the highest use of social-media tools had a higher percentage of Liberal and NDP voters than ridings with low social-media usage. Are Conservatives afraid of social media? We’ll let you draw your own conclusions.
But then, isn’t social media all about the youth vote? Actually, no. Youth certainly made very good use of social media during the recent election, but, as we looked at all the data, we found that the average age of Canadian citizens participating in social media is actually 38. The average age of Twitter users in Canada is 39, and that of Facebook users is 43. Political parties in Canada tend to view social media as the domain of those under 30, and that is an unreliable demographic for guaranteeing votes. The reasoning for this is that once you are over 30, you are far more predictable in your habits. At that point in your life, you are more likely to own a home, have at least one child, and have aging parents. That means you likely have mortgage payments and a car, which, in turn, translate into a predictable set of concerns pertaining to your lifestyle. Therefore, parties tend to focus on the concerns relative to the +30 demographic, because they are relatively stable and easy to pinpoint."
These findings, especially the correlation with voting in particular districts, is not surprising in the least. And this report contradicts effectively the comments of the established media. See my earlier post: Media insiders, experts criticize emphasis on political distractions in media’s election coverage
"When we overlaid social-media usage (the volume of tweets, YouTube videos, Facebook fan pages, and blog postings with news-media comments) over an election map, we found some interesting trends. It appeared that more left-wing Canadians were inclined to use social media than right-wing Canadians, and that the electoral districts with the highest use of social-media tools had a higher percentage of Liberal and NDP voters than ridings with low social-media usage. Are Conservatives afraid of social media? We’ll let you draw your own conclusions.
But then, isn’t social media all about the youth vote? Actually, no. Youth certainly made very good use of social media during the recent election, but, as we looked at all the data, we found that the average age of Canadian citizens participating in social media is actually 38. The average age of Twitter users in Canada is 39, and that of Facebook users is 43. Political parties in Canada tend to view social media as the domain of those under 30, and that is an unreliable demographic for guaranteeing votes. The reasoning for this is that once you are over 30, you are far more predictable in your habits. At that point in your life, you are more likely to own a home, have at least one child, and have aging parents. That means you likely have mortgage payments and a car, which, in turn, translate into a predictable set of concerns pertaining to your lifestyle. Therefore, parties tend to focus on the concerns relative to the +30 demographic, because they are relatively stable and easy to pinpoint."
Saturday, May 21, 2011
Nobel Laureates Host a Conference on Sexual Violence in Countries in Conflict
This extremely important conference takes place next week at Montebello.
More information: http://nobelwomensinitiative.org/blogs/newsecurrity
------------------------
Most if not all of the metals in our mobile phones, computers, and automobiles come from these conflict countries, especially from the DRC. Several electronic corporations are trying to trace their minerals in an effort to be conflict free and have formed an industry association. (What shocks me is the absence of 5 major electronic companies in this association: Canon, Panasonic, Toshiba, Sharpe, and Sandisk). But the most successful company, HP, has only been able to track 32% of their products' minerals. Every time you use your cell or laptop you may be inadvertently contributing to the problem since rape is the intimidation weapon of choice in controlling the mining of these minerls in the DRC.
Is Your Favorite Tech Company Conflict-Free
Commit to Purchase Conflict-Free Products
Some Telling Statistics about the Democratic Republic of Congo:
200,000
Number of rapes recorded by UN in conflict zones of the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) since 1996.
400,000
Number of rapes in the DRC in 2006-07, according to a public-health study, which breaks down to .
1,152
Number per day.
48
Number per hour.
4,311
Number of women treated for rape at Congo's Panzi Hospital, 2004-08.
458
Number who were over 65.
568
Number of vaginal-tear surgeries for 2009-10.
250,000- 500,000
Estimated number of rapes in 1994 Rwandan genocide.
35
Number of people charged by International Criminal Tribunal for sex crimes in Rwandan genocide as of 2010.
12
Number of total sexualviolence charges laid by the International Criminal Court.
0
Number of people convicted by the ICC.
Sources: UNIFEM, Harvard Humanitarian Initiative, International Peace Research Institute, Stony Brook University School of Medicine
Read more: http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/Rape/4820012/story.html#ixzz1N0JNFvGJ
More information: http://nobelwomensinitiative.org/blogs/newsecurrity
------------------------
Most if not all of the metals in our mobile phones, computers, and automobiles come from these conflict countries, especially from the DRC. Several electronic corporations are trying to trace their minerals in an effort to be conflict free and have formed an industry association. (What shocks me is the absence of 5 major electronic companies in this association: Canon, Panasonic, Toshiba, Sharpe, and Sandisk). But the most successful company, HP, has only been able to track 32% of their products' minerals. Every time you use your cell or laptop you may be inadvertently contributing to the problem since rape is the intimidation weapon of choice in controlling the mining of these minerls in the DRC.
Is Your Favorite Tech Company Conflict-Free
Commit to Purchase Conflict-Free Products
Some Telling Statistics about the Democratic Republic of Congo:
200,000
Number of rapes recorded by UN in conflict zones of the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC) since 1996.
400,000
Number of rapes in the DRC in 2006-07, according to a public-health study, which breaks down to .
1,152
Number per day.
48
Number per hour.
4,311
Number of women treated for rape at Congo's Panzi Hospital, 2004-08.
458
Number who were over 65.
568
Number of vaginal-tear surgeries for 2009-10.
250,000- 500,000
Estimated number of rapes in 1994 Rwandan genocide.
35
Number of people charged by International Criminal Tribunal for sex crimes in Rwandan genocide as of 2010.
12
Number of total sexualviolence charges laid by the International Criminal Court.
0
Number of people convicted by the ICC.
Sources: UNIFEM, Harvard Humanitarian Initiative, International Peace Research Institute, Stony Brook University School of Medicine
Read more: http://www.ottawacitizen.com/news/Rape/4820012/story.html#ixzz1N0JNFvGJ
Friday, May 20, 2011
The NDP in Quebec: ‘What do we do now?’ - The Globe and Mail
The NDP in Quebec: ‘What do we do now?’ - The Globe and Mail
"In most Quebec ridings, the NDP has next to no organization and the shallowest of roots. Combine that with the possibility that many Quebeckers voted for them in a disengaged, almost casual, manner and you may end up with a majority of Quebec seats bearing mute witness in the House of Commons, a political vacuum growing wider by the day.
The implications of either of these scenarios are not pretty for the democratic process, and even starker for Mr. Layton, who runs the risk of becoming a one-election wonder in Quebec. At worst, this may end up further alienating Quebeckers from federal politics, making Quebec even more irrelevant for other Canadians, or Canada more irrelevant for Quebeckers."
"In most Quebec ridings, the NDP has next to no organization and the shallowest of roots. Combine that with the possibility that many Quebeckers voted for them in a disengaged, almost casual, manner and you may end up with a majority of Quebec seats bearing mute witness in the House of Commons, a political vacuum growing wider by the day.
The implications of either of these scenarios are not pretty for the democratic process, and even starker for Mr. Layton, who runs the risk of becoming a one-election wonder in Quebec. At worst, this may end up further alienating Quebeckers from federal politics, making Quebec even more irrelevant for other Canadians, or Canada more irrelevant for Quebeckers."
Wednesday, May 18, 2011
Media insiders, experts criticize emphasis on political distractions in media’s election coverage | The Hill Times - Canada's Politics and Government Newsweekly
Media insiders, experts criticize emphasis on political distractions in media’s election coverage | The Hill Times - Canada's Politics and Government Newsweekly
These journalists must have been watching some other election, not #elxn41. The Twitterverse during #elxn41 was not about what politicians said, and the focus was not on "distractions." It was about the sharing of information and perspectives by journalists and ordinary concerned citizens. And assuming social media was going to pump up voter turnout is just that: an assumption. That failure is not social media's. The weak turnout has the same root cause it did in 2008: indifferent, apathetic, uninformed Canadians. (Is Hebert losing her edge? This is the fourth or fifth time in a month she's been out to lunch. ) #cdnpoli
These journalists must have been watching some other election, not #elxn41. The Twitterverse during #elxn41 was not about what politicians said, and the focus was not on "distractions." It was about the sharing of information and perspectives by journalists and ordinary concerned citizens. And assuming social media was going to pump up voter turnout is just that: an assumption. That failure is not social media's. The weak turnout has the same root cause it did in 2008: indifferent, apathetic, uninformed Canadians. (Is Hebert losing her edge? This is the fourth or fifth time in a month she's been out to lunch. ) #cdnpoli
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)