Dell on Using Your Brain

Shelley was here early this morning. My grand-daughter told me her visit was an opportunity to bring out the heavier stuff before Canada Day weekend, but when we sat down for a coffee on the deck, right off the git go she mentions an "unusual phenomenon", and I knew it wasn't about the lawn chairs and tables.
"Unusual phenomenon" is a term Shelley uses when she's talking about her online experiences [see Dell on Dating & Fishing]. Shelley's an IT wizard and finds her way into all sorts of places [legally, she assures me].
"Be specific, Shell," I said, wondering if she was about to say I had done something wrong on my blog.
What she told me was certainly food for thought. You see, Google Analytics, which has something to do with bounce rates [see Dell on Getting It: June 19th], is apparently so sophisticated, a blogger can check his analytics to learn which blogs were read, on which day, the depth of each visit and location by city, around the world.

Her unusual phenomenon was something she found out using Google Analytics for my blog. She said there had been an unusually high number of visits from Bracebridge and North Bay, Ontario, together with in-depth viewing and serious time spent reading my blog posts. I was all set to strut around the deck like a peacock when she stopped me cold with this:

"I queried Google using those two cities and the word "G20" and up comes a link to a page with the banner: G20 Security Guards - Private Investigations - North Bay Huntsville Bracebridge Orillia Gravenhurst."

"Back up," I said,"are you saying I do or I don't have a following in Bracebridge and North Bay?"
"Well, it is odd that this unusual phenomenon should occur within hours of your post on The Truth Behind Toronto's G20 Summit Costs, and only from those two cities. And remember that Anonymous email comment, Grampa?"
"I suppose now you're going to tell me my one and only comment isn't from a follower?"
"Well, I wouldn't go that far, but it is unusual that only that post has been commented on."
"Are you telling me that this anonymous person was sending me a comment in order to find out where I am actually located?"
"It's possible, Grampa, if you are something of an expert, to do just that, and to cover your trail," she went on,"In your case, I'd call tracking like that a form of covering your Canadian tail."
"C'mon, Shelley," I responded,"you sound as paranoid as Buzz, with his three plant grow-op."
"I am definitely not going to accuse this security service of anything," Shelley said,"but I will say this, I find it very interesting that your one comment drew an attack crying foul and innuendo. Using the facts at hand is exactly the sort of thing that Google Analytics is basically about: drawing conclusions based on the information provided. Not much point having analytics if you don't apply them."
"Rather like having a brain but refusing to form an opinion. But then accusing someone of innuendo is typical of the bully who will try to gag those who disagree with him. I saw it in action this week with the posts at CBC news' online. The comments sections, below the articles on the Toronto G20 and violations of citizens' rights, were peppered with individuals crying fascist at commenters who supported the Civil Liberties groups or were outraged at the treatment of Canadian citizens protesting peacefully," as an afterthought, I asked her," Am I going to live long enough to see the return of the Canada I remember?"
"I hope you don't mean that literally," Shelley replied.
"You've forgotten my post on Win/Win, already?" and we laughed, but not for long.

Dell On Criminalizing the Canadian Citizen

I was playing around in blogspot earlier and all hell broke loose. Well, maybe it wasn't that bad. I finally figured out what I did wrong, all by myself. Not bad for an old guy.

Anyway...I'm back, with part two of my thoughts on Canada's tough on crime policies.

A decaying society typically includes the criminalization of its citizens: tough laws, more jails and jail time, more police state behaviour. Now why is that?

It always comes down to money. As the gap widens between the haves and have-nots, the necessity to control those at the bottom, requires a heavy hand. Take a look through history if you think I'm making this up.

Who is usually targeted for criminalization? the poor, minority races and anyone who threatens to end the gravy train. You might be surprised to find it's you next in line. Nonsense  you say. Consider this:

Over the last decades, Canada's family and criminal laws have changed. The system of agencies meant to provide supports and assist the severest cases of family problems, have instead become the power tool in the systematic and endemic criminalization of Canada's citizens.

Prior to these changes, if a marriage was in trouble, family, friends or a church minister stepped in and talked to the couple. People who actually knew the couple helped them through their troubles. Only in truly difficult cases would the police or social services be called in to work with a family. 

Family matters are now routinely dealt with by government services. These agencies almost always claim a mandate to keep families together. In practice, almost without exception, they have the exact opposite effect. Intrusive, manipulating, controlling and punishing, they exhibit the hallmarks of bullying: police, mental health services, the legal system, social welfare, child protection services and the list just keeps growing.

A typical scenario now goes like this: John and Mary get married, have a couple kids and all is well for some years until the local manufacturer closes down and John is out of work. Stressed out and worried, John who was never been a big drinker begins regularly having a few beers. Mary is concerned but figures once John gets back to work he'll be fine. After some months of this, John's drinking is beginning to become a real problem. When his EI cheque fails to show up one week, he gets in a foul mood, proceeding to get really drunk. He's hollering, banging doors and Mary is yelling at him to settle down. The kids are upset and one of them runs outside crying. The next-door-neighbour has seen the crying child and heard Mary yelling and calls the police. The police arrive and can hear Mary yelling, "Don't....don't...John...don't!"

The police officer knocks on the door. John answers and is asked to step outside. Quite drunk, John tells the officer to, "Go f**k himself!" and proceeds to head back in the house. Before he can figure out what's happening, he's on the ground, knee in the back, cuffs on and out to the cruiser. Mary and the children are in shock at this. The police officer takes down the particulars of the situation as he sees it. Mary says John didn't hit her, but the officer notes a bruise on her arm. Mary says she got it moving a table out of the dining room. She insists John has never been violent with her or the children. She is informed that John is going to be charged with assault. They don't know if an assault actually took place. That's what court is for. One officer takes the oldest child aside and asks, "Has your Dad ever hurt you or your mother?" Not sure what the officer is asking, the child says nothing. Within the hour a Children's Agency worker shows up wanting to interview the children.

Mary and John are now under the thumb of the system. They will spend the next couple years paying for lawyers or rely on legal aid. They will have to jump through hoops to get the Children's Agency worker out of their lives. Mary will be required to see a family counsellor who will then recommend she see a psychiatrist for depression. The psychiatrist will put her on medications and refer her for ongoing mental health evaluation. John will have to see an alcohol and anger management counsellor. The children will be assigned a counsellor at school. Not surprisingly, the children will  begin having all kinds of school troubles. John will keep losing jobs because he misses so much time for court ordered counselling, anger management, and court hearings that keep getting put over. Eventually the charges are withdrawn...but not before John and Mary's marriage breaks down.

A formerly okay family, who might well have managed, given time and family support, to gresolve issues surrounding John's unemployment and drinking, is demolished by the very system that claims to serve them. Who is gaining from all this? It sure isn't the families.

More on this subject in tomorrow's post. Right now, Dorg needs outside, then I'm headed for the sack.

Dell on Native Identities

Ron boated over to the camp last night and was out of here at dawn with a sky that threatened to empty all over him. He was home about an hour [gave me a head's up using the two-way radios]  when the sky let loose with rain that formed a wall of water moving across the lake. Intellicast [my trusted online long range weather forecast] had noted thunder-storms were possible. The generator is outside doing its thing, so I'm good to go.

What I want to share today is something Ron and I were talking about last night. Have you been following the CBC National? This week they featured stories from Canada's Four Nations' survivors of residential schools: they suffered because of government policy at the time that attempted to eradicate the native culture and replace it with the "white man's" ways: they suffered emotional, physical, spiritual, and every pain known to man while most folks looked the other way. Ron and I got talking about the native identity.

Ron reminded me about Long Lance. Now there's a documentary you might want to watch. Canada's National Film Board has archived, and continues to add to its archive, projects produced over it's lifetime [a great use of the tax dollar].

Long Lance [55 mi.] , a documentary by Bernie Dichek, based on the book, Chief Buffalo Child Long Lance: The Glorious Impostor by Donald Smith, is the story of a young man who hid his black heritage behind a native identity. He became so well known, following the 1928 publishing of his autobiography,  that Long Lance starred in  Silent Enemy a 1930 movie that almost didn't make it to release, because Paramount was told one of its stars was not native but in fact of black descent.  Long Lance: The autobiography of a Blackfoot Indian chief had plenty of truth in it, but it wasn't Long Lance's history. He had taken the true tales of a Blackfoot and made them his own identity.

The original movie, Silent Enemy, had a voice over introduction and depicted the life of the Ojibway native. It was a box office failure in 1930: talkies were the latest thing; however, many who have seen the remastered movie, believe Silent Enemy may well have influenced the making of Dances with Wolves : Kevin Costner's 1990 award winning movie. Canadian native actor, Graham Greene, was nominated for an Oscar for his role in the film.

The social and cultural issues surrounding identity are thought provoking material and, to my way of thinking, should be discussed in Canadian schools. Now that Canada's National Film Board is finally making its documentaries available to the public for purchase, I have put together my own collection on the subject. My experience has been "It's hard to see where you're heading in this world, if you don't know where you've already been."

I've got to stop here. One perfect cup of coffee is waiting for me.