WHICH WAY FORWARD: SOME THOUGHTS
There are a number of ways the country is being led that I feel need to be debated in a very wide raging and free way. There are too many things we are told are the “right way”. But told by whom and who gave them that authority? No one asked me. Did they ask you?
It is becoming clear to some of us oldsters that we are losing what was good in the past on too many fronts to be coincidental. More obvious to old folks who remember when the governments were less corrupt, and times were good for more people in Canada.
We are heading up dead end alleys in a number of fields.
Certainly the most obvious is a failure of democracy! Can we even be sure our votes are counted properly? At the moment Canada still has paper ballots. However at one stage these are crunched into computers. I would suspect that this point might be critical: if we had a recount of the paper ballots, would they really correspond to the stated election results? But can we do that or do the paper ballots disappear once “counted”?
I believe there was a program in one of the recent US elections where the computers were programmed to toss a certain% of votes to a given party that was meant to win, from the other party. Here in Canada’s last election some TV viewers noted that a minor party slipped from leading in a riding to zero votes. Seems strange, doesn’t it?
Seems even our votes may not be secure!
The 2 party system we have doesn’t work with 4 parties.
It didn’t work with 2 parties either actually. In BC we sometimes had a winner with less than 50% of the votes.
Pro-rep is in use in most if not all of Europe, other than the UK, indeed they never had the first past the goal post system! Time to change ours is long overdue! Of course the first action has to be to make sure the votes are bona fide!
While our senior government’s power is getting more centralized to Ottawa, it represents Canadians less and less! This started in the days of papa Trudeau, who said at least on one occasion that he could write a better constitution than the BNA Act. Seems he tried to do that in 1981, and only concerted opposition from the Provincial Premiers stopped him. Thankfully we still have Brian Peckford alive to tell the tale! But Pierre was never a man to take no for an answer, so he strengthened the PMO to be more powerful, instead.
Actually, we need to have regional/Provincial, indeed local power that is greater than Ottawa’s. (with Fiscal powers rearranged to allow this). Only that way can Canadians have their democratic rights truly protected. The Indigenous nations of this country had more truly democratic decision making than we do! All proposals whether regional or national had to be ratified by citizens of local communities! And the binding decisions had to be arrived at by consensus. So much for those wild savages!
With the current centralization of power, we Canadians have lost the right to intelligently debate and vote locally on some very important initiatives. Let’s look at a few that I find important for our grandkids future survival!
The Bright Green Agenda
Ask yourself: What is really green? Frankly, almost nothing the government tells us is green, and necessary for our survival! Au contraire!
Take one specific example: Even items like EV’s have dirty, and very ungreen secrets, only they have been “somewhere else”, and we don’t see them on a daily basis! Like the lithium mines, for example. But with lithium mines now planned for Canada, that may change. Out of sight is no excuse! Contaminating our earth anywhere is a serious no-no, and tells us we need to look for another way!
Lithium mine.
Another ungreen project is wind turbines! Enough is now known to send this project back to the drawing board! Apart from being noisy, they emit very high electromagnetic radiation that is harmful to life around them, whether marine or on land. On land that means people and animals. Marine it means whales in particular.
In addition the turbines don’t last as long as hoped, and create more waste. Certainly an interesting concept, if the problems can be eliminated.
Similarly solar power has issues! There is the same disaster in the production of batteries, as for EVs, and I would wonder about loss of productive land under the panels, and once again excessive EMFs!
These problems should have been resolved before large scale installations! Why were they not?
Other initiatives mislabeled as green, to my mind are the 15 km super megacities promoted by some. I have even heard some promotion of just 11 such monstrous mega projects in North America (US & Canada?) to house everyone!
Apart from my belief that living in a manmade environment is inherently soul destroying, on a practical basis here are a few more negatives of these modern concentration camps.
Local climate change: Heating, wind, rain — concrete absorbs heat more than turf or forest cover. That’s why it is hotter downtown than out in the woods. High rise walls created in city centres act as wind tunnels that can be uncomfortable in Canadian winters.
The rain causes run-offs, does not absorb into the soil, because there is none. It goes through storm sewers and picks up all sorts of contaminants then dump them into some water body, polluting the water.
Apart from these types of physical negatives there are other issues. Here are just a couple:
Services, eg.: Supplies like food, have to be driven or flown in from a substantial distance, because nearby farmland’s now been paved over and built on. More air pollution from vehicle exhausts!
Likewise massive amounts of wastes & garbage need to be disposed of, and is often shipped great distances to areas that don’t want them because they pollute their land & waters, and often air. Again, transport, burning more petroleum products.
The inescapable conclusion here his that the individual is completely dependent on some outside force for his/her survival!
Strategically also, dense megacities are a tragedy waiting to happen! Consider only items like a prolonged power outage! How does an 80 year old resident on the 50th floor get to the store or doctor? How does she survive with no heat, or air-conditioning?
But what about an earthquake — think Greater Vancouver where over 2 million people could be isolated, or have to be evacuated via essentially 2 routes: north (via Whistler) and east. In case of an earthquake US #5 south would probably also be unusable.
Even if the exit routes were not themselves damaged (land slides on #99?), they would turn into a 100 + mile parking lot. No service trucks and probably no rail transport would be able to bring in food and evacuate the injured.
We are told — repeatedly — about “the big one” coming any time, but keep merrily adding to the problem by building more and more shiny high-rises.
The short conclusion: mega cities are not green, and won’t stop climate change! In fact they create their own unpleasant micro climates.
The claim is sometimes made that the afore mentioned initiatives will stop climate change. This leads me to another topic. I just want to share an observation of recent weather here in the Shuswap area.
On several occasions recently, we were supposed to have rain and cooling temperatures. There was then an increase of chem trail (aerosol spraying) activity, and presto storm clouds disappeared, and so did cooling temperatures. Might the hottest summer on record be part of someone’s plan to show dangerous climate change? Who knows!
Let’s just remember President Johnson saying “he who controls the weather, controls the world!”
But if climatic warming were actually an unassisted phenomenon, we need to be sure we have identified the real cause. We seem to be going from the sublime to the ridiculous, lately accusing the farts of cows, and excess food production as causing climate change!
Might we not be witnessing the grossest form of manipulation of humanity for the economic benefit of corporations who plan to enforce the sale of artificial food
made from their patented GM produce no one wants?
Some very reputable scientists have long been connecting climate changes to sun activity. I would really like to see more discussion of this research. As a geography major in my undergraduate degree, I also recall a theory that major warming precedes ice ages.
A belief in human causes of climate change may be an example of excessive conceit, or a deliberate secret agenda.
There is enough evidence by now to prove that the daily aerial sprays do not cool the climate, as hoped, but have a number of very negative effects once the sprayed nano particulate metals fall back to earth. Quite apart from the effect on the soils, waters and vegetation, there is also likely to be an effect on our health. So what is the real name of the game, and who is playing it, and us?
Talking about our health, let me digress a bit into comments on Canada’s once famed Health Care System.
Back in the 1970’s we had an excellent system, where every person who wanted to have a family physician could have one. If one of my children got sick in the night I could be sure one of the local team of doctors had night duty and would come to our home.
How times have changed! Today our doctor who is part of a walk in clinic tells her patients to go to emergency at the hospital if they feel sick. There you will wait for at least an hour to be seen. And in rural areas medical service is practically non existent!
And yet when covid 19 appeared, suddenly there were even drive through injection facilities! Suddenly all sick and healthy had to quarantine, and take untested injections, in spite of the fact that many doctors had already found several off patent drugs that were a quick and safe cure! Unsurprisingly perhaps, profits of the Big Pharma manufacturing the injections rose by $ billions! As a result of this global effort, deaths from the injections are now much higher than deaths from the disease itself! And yet many governments, medical associations, hospitals and universities seem to still require these dangerous shots! What does that tell us about our medical system today? I would say Big Pharma has taken over.
Now how about some immediate, practical solutions for climate change? Of course, assuming that climate change is not a man made strategy to install a world dictatorship, but primarily due to increased activity of our sun, and to a lesser degree our industrial way of life!
Let’s take petro-chemicals, especially as relates to gas powered vehicles. This is a popular “cause #1 of climate change” argument. If we go back to the 1970s we had a sudden scare that oil sources were depleting, and cars that were guzzling gasoline at 25 cents a gallon suddenly were replaced by vehicles running perfectly well on much less fuel!
Then it was discovered that more petroleum resources were available and any further research and development on lower gas consumption engines stopped. This is where we need to start again! I bet engines could be developed that burn a lot less petroleum products, and so create less air pollution. Sounds like a win win solution to me!
There is another fact – never mentioned in the MSM propaganda – about petroleum products. They are essential to the industrial economies. So much is totally dependent on this resource that it cannot be stopped cold turkey without starving millions of humans round the world and crashing all economies. I doubt that even proponents of a small global population have thought this one through!
Some authors writing on this topic (Bright Green Lies) have calculated that solar panels ( as for EVs) can never produce all the energy required, even if they covered every inch of the earth! A topic worth impartial public debate I’d say.
Perhaps we need to proceed on space energy development? But then this technology as explained at the congress “Climates of Change” in Victoria in 1999 by a young physicist from Seattle, would make people independent of all the corporations providing electricity, petroleum driven power, electricity transmission lines, etc. Besides, the military seem to be studying it closely, keeping it secret.
As the professor explained it, with space energy every person could own a small box of clean energy that would power our electricity, run our cars, heat and cool our homes, and much more! All this without earth destroying mines! Let’s hope he’s right! He said space is not empty, but a “plenum”! I wonder if in the intervening quarter century since that lecture any work has been done on this exciting source of limitless amounts of clean energy? Not that I have heard. Instead we are enforcing technologies that are hazardous to our and the earth’s health through raising the already too high man made EMR fog, creating more scars on the earth’s surface, more toxic wastes, and calling it all Green!
In the meantime, while all this questionable activity is going on, we are failing to take any practical action to mitigate climate change, regardless of cause — human, or solar flares.
Let’s start by asking ourselves: What did earlier, pre-industrial cultures do, how did they respond to heat through city planning and architecture?
When I was doing my masters degree in landscape architecture at Harvard in the mid 1960s the program devoted a large block of study to investigating traditional housing designs in different climatic zones. We identified 4 main climatic zones, globally, of which one in particular seems to apply to our current situation. We looked at
the ”Hot dry” climate as seen in the Mediterranean area.
The aim there was to prevent or delay solar heating in people’s living quarters.
Most people will be familiar with the traditional Spanish style, still seen in some buildings even in California. Through clever design covered balconies ensured the sun never shines into interiors when high, in the summer, but in winter a low sun provides warmth through passive solar heating.
There was a somewhat different traditional building style in Greece, and the Middle East. While different in specific design, both relied on thick masonry walls, painted white, windows facing an interior court, with some cooling water surface.
Today’s gleaming glass high-rises in the Middle East are
the opposite of this tradition, and display the hubris of new oil wealth. Given the energy they must use for air conditioning alone, they are not green. Are they future ghost towns?
In terms of the larger scale, namely regional planning, I believe that the concept of satellite communities that we discussed in the days of my City & Regional Planning program long ago were more green than today’s massive conurbations!
I would also say they were more human scale, and less spiritually destructive allowing interaction with rural nature! In addition they were much more strategic. Each urban “village” was to be surrounded by areas of farmland and woodland, supplying its needs, making long costly food transport unnecessary! This would, of course also reduce emission pollution from vehicles required to haul supplies from distant agricultural regions. Also the green belts acted to cool the air blowing over the urban communities. In fact the historic European villages were mostly like this in pre-industrial times!
I have always felt that the idea was abandoned in haste, possibly because the greater independence of these communities did not agree with a globalist plan for total control. With more time we could have developed very workable solutions! If the will was there, we still could!
Above all, we need to forget the “one design for the whole earth” Globalist goal! It will never succeed because it wouldn’t work! The most desirable solutions need to arise at the community level, because every community, in every region is unique.
We keep hearing claims that the world needs to have fewer people. Over-population is unsustainable, the argument goes! Canada’s birth rate is pretty stable, providing pretty much zero growth. That should be welcomed, given these claims. However, the argument made by all recent governments has been that Canada needs more people. Very high immigration rates are to a significant degree the reason why we are building over farmland which we need in order to be food self sufficient. Even today that goal of self sufficiency is no longer met. We import especially produce from the US and elsewhere. So why bring in half a million new mouths to feed every year?
Logically, the carrying capacity of the land to feed the resident population could be calculated, but has never been tried. I believe that this should be what ought to determine our immigration numbers! At present the determination is purely political, since every Party knows immigrants tend to support the Party that brought them to Canada. It was certainly true for my parents. They voted Liberal for years!
So in closing let me say what concerns me the most. I can see that all the initiatives pushed on us as beneficial and life saving plans are nothing of the sort. So what are we to conclude? If you think about it clearly, you’ll see that all the various directives seem to end up in a single point, namely financial benefit for very few, as well as transfer of power into even fewer hands! And all this at the cost of any benefits to the rest of us!
Is that what you want for your grandchildren?
EL
