Bill C-24

I recently found out about Bill C-24.

Here is a Globe and Mail article explaining Bill C-24, and here is the government's take on Bill C-24. Basically, it boils down to an increased ability on the part of the federal government to confiscate and restrict Canadian citizenship. Anyone holding duel citizenship and anyone who has emigrated from another country can have their rights stripped, with little to no oversight.

For anyone interested, here are a few other articles and links for information on C-24:

http://news.gc.ca/web/article-en.do?nid=832299 

http://www.ourwindsor.ca/news-story/4605503-immigration-experts-say-bill-c-24-discriminatory-and-weakens-citizenship/

https://bccla.org/2015/06/its-official-second-class-citizenship-goes-into-effect/

http://www.sfu.ca/education/cels/bilingual/bilingual-corner/bill-c-24.html 

This bill is, frankly, incredible. As someone who feels very strongly about certain issues and discussion points, immediately this raises red flags for me. However, I also have a personal stake in the discussion. My entire family holds duel citizenship and because of that we are "second class" citizens? My mother is Canadian, born a bread. My father has spent seventeen years married to a Canadian woman, and became a citizen himself last year. My sister and I have had duel citizenships since we were born. I've spent almost half my life in this country, and my sister even more than that.

And now the door is opened for us to potentially have our rights stripped?

Bill C-51 is bad enough, but C-24 is blatantly discriminatory and xenophobic in a way that has the potential to affect anyone in their day to day lives. For a country that was founded by immigrants and, to this day, advertises itself as a multicultural haven, Canada sure seems to be trying to wheedle out any kind of diversity in its population. Citizenship and Immigration Minister Chris Alexander defended the bill by saying that citizenship is a "privilege, not a right". This is a dangerous precedent to set, besides being downright wrong. If you are going to enfold someone into your country, it should be on an equal basis. If anything, make a firmer entry process, but once a person is in... that's it, there should not be potential for eviction.

I am a second class citizen, with the potential to be ejected from the country at a moment's notice, simply because I happened to be born on a different lump of rock on the other side of a giant puddle?

This bill disgusts me. Are people so brainwashed by the semi-mythical threat of terrorism that they actually buy into this? I could write a whole essay on my opinion about terrorism, but, effectively, it amounts to this... terrorism is not a threat to the average person. You and I aren't going to get blown up on our way to the Seven Eleven across the street. The average person--especially somewhere like Canada--is more likely to drown in their bathtub than be killed by "Jihadi Terrorists." We don't see any anti-bathtub laws, do we?

Okay, I'm being facetious. But the point stands that terrorism really is not a valid threat. With a few exceptions, there have been very few terrorist attacks against western nations, particularly in Canada, and the vast majority of those threats were home brewed. People are afraid of terrorism because that is how the media and the government tells them to be. A population in fear is far more submissive.

This is a link to a petition to try to stop Bill C-24. I am begging you, anyone who reads this post, please sign the petition. Not for me, but for yourselves, as people who believe in and are willing to uphold the principles of democracy, something the current government is simply failing to do.

"Future Library"

I heard about the Future Library a few months back, and thought it was quite an inspired idea. Basically, every year a different author is selected to write a manuscript that will be placed in a time capsule and opened in the year 2114; the manuscripts will remain unread by the public until they are all published in that year. One thousand trees have been planted near Oslo, near where the manuscripts are to be kept, and will provide the paper for the books to be printed on.

I think this idea is beautiful.

I tend to be a cynic who thinks the worst of people and human society in general, but the optimism in this idea strikes me quite profoundly. It assumes that humanity will still be around in a hundred years, in some form, and it assumes we will be in a state to publish books and reflect on what would, by then, be history.

The more I thought about it, the more I thought about the people involved. Margaret Atwood, the first author to be selected, will be long dead by the time anyone reads her book. She will never know what people think of her book, never see the reception it receives. The pioneer behind this idea, Katie Paterson, will--unless some kind of medical miracle happens between now and 2114--almost certainly also be dead by the time her idea comes to full fruition.

These individuals, and those who will become involved in the project over the years, are placing their hopes solely in the art they produce, ignoring the insignificance of their own lives and allowing their creations to exist in their own rights. In the end, the 100 manuscripts of the Future Library will function as a yardstick by which to measure the progression of human writing and expression, reflecting the society and species as a whole.

Though I usually cringe when I hear people say phrases like this, I think that the Future Library represents the best of humanity. It represents hope and optimism and it represents art existing beyond a single individual. The idea struck a pleasant chord in the heart of this hardened cynic.


Here's the future library's website and a Guardian article on the project.


As a side note, I feel obliged to mention that I have only ever read one Margret Atwood (gasp!) though I've had the Handmaid's Tale on my shelf for a while. I'll get to it at some point. It's also ironic that I'm listening to Radiohead's OK Computer as a write this post. The album is somewhat of a contrast to the optimistic nature of the Future Library.

Also forgive any spelling or grammar mistakes. It's been a long day.

Maybe soon I'll work up the courage to start telling people about this blog and I'll get some readers other than my family. I've been working on rewriting some of my old short stories to post on here, under the "Writing" section, though I'm deathly insecure about them. Most of my writing has only been read by a select few individuals.

Alcohol Art

http://www.iflscience.com/chemistry/amazing-photographs-alcoholic-drinks-under-microscope

This is really cool. I like alcohol, I like art. Alcohol to make art (and not in the way you think)? Fantastic.

Science is cool

Writing Excuses

So I've been listening to the Writing Excuses podcasts a lot recently. It's a really cool little series, only fifteen minutes long, where a couple of authors discuss their approach to various aspects of writing and the creative process. They are certainly geared towards genre fiction - fantasy and science fiction particularly - just given the background of the authors, but the tips they give about drafting, planning, structure, etcetera are universally useful.

I found about the podcast via reading Brandon Sanderson, who is rapidly becoming one of my favourite authors, but I am ashamed to admit I haven't read any of the other three podcasters' books. I've had one of Dan Wells' books on my shelf for a while but I haven't gotten around to reading it, and I hadn't even heard of Howard Taylor or Mary Robinette Kowal until a few weeks ago.

Even without knowing the authors' works, though, the podcasts are still very helpful and enjoyable. If you're a writer looking for some tips, give them a go!

http://www.writingexcuses.com/

Alberta Elections

This week is really big for me: my first election. Where my friends were excited for their eighteenth birthday because they could now legally do all the same things they were already doing illegally, I was excited for voting (sad, I know). I think this picture nicely sums up my feelings about being eighteen (also because feel like cat photos are the sort of thing you obliged to do on the internet).

Anyway, I've always had a fairly active interest in politics and current events, and I'm certainly very opinionated. Finally being able to actively participate is a really exciting prospect. Naturally, I swing towards the left end of the political spectrum and am, therefore, naturally inclined towards the NDP and the Liberal Party. Living in Alberta, this makes me a minority. I actually really dislike party politics, and I think that continuously voting for the same party because "that's what I've always done" is closed minded and is the sort of mentality that leads to a situation like we've had with the Progressive Conservatives.

I don't care who you are--whether you're Liberal, PC, NDP, or the goddamn Marijuana Party-- no party should be allowed to hold a majority government for 44 years, at a municipal, provincial, or federal level. This very election, and, indeed, Albertan mindset as a whole, is a prime example of the dangers of having one group in power for too long. The PCs have had the run of the place for so long, they feel absolutely no accountability. It is the height of arrogance to complain about a lack of money only to call an election that costs nearly $30 million, especially when polls show that nobody wanted it. This was a blatant attempt to monopolize on the troubles of the only half decent opposition, and pure dirty politics.

The fact that the election is coming back to bite them in the ass is quite satisfying. I'll admit, I was expecting another PC walk in the park. I expected people to complain to one another in their living rooms but, on election day, vote exactly the same "because they always have." No one thought the Wildrose would hold out as well as they have and nobody was even thinking about the NDP as a serious contender. But Prentice overestimated his strength, and I underestimated Albertans' level of frustration. I don't usually like to admit that I am wrong, but I gladly do so here.

The Herald wrote a good article on how this campaign came back to bite the PCs in the ass: http://calgaryherald.com/news/politics/sleep-walk-campaign-has-turned-into-a-fight-to-save-a-dynasty

I really, really hope that the NDP gets in. I really, really hope that the PCs are sent packing (I actually even thought about voting Wildrose for a while, when they looked like the front running "opposition"). As I said, I don't like party politics. I will vote where I find myself intellectually and philosophically aligning. This Tuesday, I'm voting for the first time, and I'm voting NDP. Even if they don't succeed in unseating the Conservative dynasty, I am at least fairly confident of a strong opposition.

I'll end with this picture. I think it sums things up quite nicely.

A Dance with Dragons

So I'm finally caught up with the Song of Ice and Fire books. While A Dance with Dragons certainly wasn't on par with A Storm of Swords, it absolutely was not as bad as fans would lead you to believe. Also, I'm sick of fans whining about the wait time between books. As Neil Gaiman said, George R.R. Martin is not our bitch. He doesn't owe us anything.

Here's my review for the fifth book in the series
https://www.goodreads.com/review/show/1257993405?book_show_action=false

First Post and Ex Machina

I've been agonizing  for a few days now over what my first post should be (months, if you count the time I spent procrastinating about actually setting up the blog). I'm usually a fairly quiet, understated person, and I do my best to go unnoticed. For this reason, having a blog does seem somewhat... counter intuitive. Why should people care what I have to say? Who is even going to read it? What would they think if they did?

Then it clicked. I realized it really didn't matter who read it. Why? Because, at least as of right now, there is nobody reading it! The only people who know about this page as of right now are my family (hi mom!).

They say dance like nobody's watching. I say write like nobody's reading. This is the only way to write. As with all art, writing must come from the heart. Write for yourself, whether you're writing fiction, poetry, essays, or blog posts.

Continuing on this tangent, I decided to share one of the best examples I've read recently of a writer following his own heart, breaking many a convention in the process. Jonathan Ball's Ex Machina examines the nature of fiction, dissecting the relationship between author and reader. Written in the manner of a choose-your-own-adventure, the book is a narrative poem of interconnected philosophical statements and rhetorical questions that act with the reader to create three separate stories. In Ball's book, the reader is as key to the creation of these stories as the author.

Admittedly, I found it very difficult to discern three distinct narratives. The book is short. I read the book cover to cover abut half a dozen times in one sitting, and found a different story each time. There are hundreds of ways to read Ex Machina. The end result is the same. Ball highlights the inherently contrived nature of fiction, by removing the human element. Deus Ex Machina translates from Greek to "god from the machine". Ex Machina removes the god, leaving us with the machine running rampant; we are given half the story, forced to act as god, fulfilling the missing link in order to create a story.

Ex Machina is an incredibly bizarre and unsettling reading experience, but a supremely satisfying one. In my opinion, anything that draws an emotional reaction in the reader, either good or bad, is a success in my mind. Ex Machina is a short book, one you could easily read several times in an afternoon. Seriously, give it a try. You'll thank me for it.