Jean Crowder defends funding for the CBC

Below is a message from Jean Crowder, sent in response to my letter regarding the funding of CBC. Re-printed here with permission:

Good Morning,

Thank you for your recent correspondence concerning the future of CBC/Radio-Canada, and for your continued advocacy on behalf of a vigorous public broadcasting system. Heritage Minister James Moore’s recent musings about a 5% cut to CBC/Radio-Canada’s total budget represent the latest in a series of statements and actions which confirm his government’s ambivalence to public broadcasting.

In contrast, my New Democrat colleagues and I believe strongly in the importance of public broadcasting to help promote Canada's cultural identity and linguistic and regional diversity, both at home and abroad. Today’s unprecedented deficit may not permit immediate large-scale funding increases, but my colleagues and I are committed to provide stable, long-term funding for CBC/Radio-Canada, and to depoliticize the funding process by making permanent the Corporation’s annual funding allocation.

CBC/Radio-Canada took action to address a persistent deficit in 2008/09, reducing overhead costs by $171 Million – an ambitious voluntary reduction in excess of 10% of the Corporation’s annual operating budget. Even before this display of fiscal accountability, per capita spending on CBC/Radio-Canada lagged far behind that in other developed nations. For instance, the UK spent over $124 CAD per citizen on the BBC, while France’s public broadcaster received $77. In contrast, CBC/Radio-Canada’s allocation of $33 per Canadian is woefully inadequate.

My colleagues and I have proposed the following plan to enable CBC/Radio-Canada to strengthen critical components of its operations:

· Strengthening accessible local news service in rural Canada, vigorous regional programming and minority language broadcasting

· Revitalizing infrastructure to compete in the media marketplace of the 21st century

· Supporting the expanded production of compelling original Canadian content, and

· Continuing efforts to ensure transparency and fiscal accountability to taxpayers.

 As we move into the new session of Parliament, the New Democrats will redouble our efforts to protect and build upon the legacy of this important Canadian institution.

 You may be interested in a recent petition I presented to the House on September 28, 2011 :

 Mr. Speaker, the second petition has to do with the CBC.

The petitioners say they love the CBC and call on the Prime Minister to reaffirm the importance of the national public broadcaster.

Further, they call on the Prime Minister to provide the CBC with adequate financing by raising the CBC's parliamentary grant from the current levels to $40 for every citizen, in keeping with the recent recommendations of the House of Commons Standing Committee on Canadian Heritage.

 Thank you for taking the time to share your concerns with me. With your continued support, we can ensure that when CBC/Radio-Canada celebrates its centenary in 2036, it remains the strong, vigorous and dynamic national institution Canadians overwhelmingly want it to be.

 Sincerely,

Jean Crowder, MP Nanaimo-Cowichan
101-126 Ingram St., Duncan, BC, V9L 1P1

www.jeancrowder.ca

Self-Esteem

I remember hearing something on CBC radio a couple of weeks ago, about or from a teacher, who said that marking students' work is fraught with conflict and difficulty because they feel entitled to get good marks from the institution their parents support with their dollars. The school, in an unregulated capitalist society is a commodity, and the teacher is a servant. Following this idea another comment claimed that self-esteem is something to be earned - that it was not a right or an entitlement.

So in this brief discussion where I cannot remember the program or cite the source, and for which I apologize, it seemed that entitlement and high self-esteem were linked. Maybe just by me, but the thought has remained even though the source has been forgotten.

Does high self-esteem threaten the quality of education and other social institutions? Certainly billions of dollars are spent in entertainment and advertising that tell us we are special and we deserve the best. And we are surrounded by devices–little genies that pop out of laptops, cell phones and electronic games, whose purpose in their short lives, is to please us. We learn how to press the  buttons to win. Millions of imaginations in the western world can easily believe, in the privacy of their small rooms, that they are in control. Millions of egos who watch endless examples on TV, internet, and game-boys, of how to succeed, without ever having to deal with other people, may think they already have all the answers.

Civil society is under threat from many things but I don’t think self-esteem is the biggest.

Do those who have the drive to lead others always have high self-esteem? Do those who have learned the tricks to get ahead, to come out on top, who are well groomed and good looking, have high self-esteem? Do celebrities have high self-esteem? In short, do the people we hold up as good examples of success have a grounded sense of their worth beyond beauty, money and status, so that when they wake at four in the morning, they feel satisfied?

It seems to me that the drive for material success is more an instinct of survival, in a hierarchical society that marginalises those who don’t play the win or lose game. No room on this planet for the ones who don’t consume. Who refuse, as Reggie Perrin says, to hand their balls over to the corporation. Even the meagre shelters that enable these souls a bed and a toilet at night are closing down for lack of funding.

Commodities really are a cosmetic application to self-esteem that is continually under threat from the competition. Self-esteem has to arise from a sense of worth that comes from being loved and wanted as a child, to loving as an adult, and belonging to community.

It’s poor self-esteem that is destructive. The inner voice that abuses the conscience after any achievement. The bully who endlessly looks for someone to hurt because she is unable to acknowledge the abuse received when she looked for love. The addict who keeps looking for his chosen fix because he can’t find that permanent intrinsic worth.

In reality, the commercial world assigns no intrinsic value to us. In the hierarchical, political realm  there is no esteem for the self because life has no value. No more than a global virus, we serve or die alone.

Self-esteem doesn’t exist outside of the self’s participation in a community that is radical enough to love life more than power and profit.

Challenging the Looming Threat of Fascism

In the alternative press there are many thoughtful articles and essays on the current state of this planet. Mostly, they target specific issues: democracy, health care, justice, poverty, homelessness, crime and the environment.

It's as though these issues stem from different sources, but when you read them day after day, you can't help but feel they are connected, leading to a vague feeling of dread. A disturbing sense that something much deeper and bigger is going horribly wrong, and that shadow, perhaps, belongs to the looming threat of fascism.

So what if we took on the big picture - the supposed cause, instead of the symptoms? 

Using a commonly posted list of fourteen defining signs of fascism (listed in black text), attributed to a Dr. Lawrence Britt, (whose bio is hard to locate and who may even be a fictitious character) I  suggest corresponding actions we can take to challenge them (in blue text). 

1. Powerful and Continuing Nationalism: <creation and documentation of national forums that enable citizens to be heard as they express their concerns in a respectful, safe, environment.

2. Disdain for the Recognition of Human Rights: <vigilant defense of human rights for all.

3. Identification of Enemies/Scapegoats as a Unifying Cause: <determined and sustained defence of diversity, and equality.

4. Supremacy of the Military: <balance between military and civic powers in training and law.

5. Rampant Sexism: <reverence for the feminine and masculine natures within all.

6. Controlled Mass Media: <public and financial support for alternative, small media outlets, and transparent regulations that keep all media bound by laws of ethics.

7. Obsession with National Security: <democratic world government that sustains human rights by challenging abuses.

8. Religion and Government are Intertwined: <study of comparative religion as part of public education while upholding freedom of religion and separation of religion and state.

9. Corporate Power is Protected: <regulated corporate power for the protection of consumer and indigenous peoples rights.

10. Labour Power is Suppressed: <protected labour through labour laws, livable minimum wages and safe working places.

11. Disdain for Intellectuals and the Arts: <support and promotion of the arts and intellectual development.

12. Obsession with Crime and Punishment: <focus on prevention through early intervention, support for those at risk, and rehabilitation for those who are in the criminal system.

13. Rampant Cronyism and Corruption: <transparency in all systems of appointment.

14. Fraudulent Elections: <citizen based checks on media election coverage, polls and ballots.

Certainly any action has to be followed by a large portion of our population in order to be effective, but all of these actions are being tackled through various non-governmental agencies; they are viewed as different problems rather than symptoms of a larger threat to our future.

What would happen if, somehow, the majority of those who believe they are living in free democratic societies were able to see these movements as defending the freedom of all rather than a collection of special interest groups? And what if, those who are already in the trenches fighting poverty and discrimination, could see their work as having a larger, more profound impact?

What has become clear to me since 9/11

9/11 mostly consolidated what I had suspected as I witnessed changes in media, politics and behaviour patterns since arriving in Canada in the sixties.

In the years since that day I have come to see two parallel operating systems and all that is reported in the public domain fits into one or the other of those two. Power-over and power-from-within. These systems govern our feelings and emanate out towards our thoughts, actions, and relationships. So it could be said that 9/11 has either clarified my beliefs or that I have become a victim of my own ideology.

 

Watching the evolution of leadership in North America, Canada and Europe, the wars and crises in the Middle East and Asia, I perceive that those who organized 9/11, those who organized the war in Iraq, the rise of the Taliban, the rise of the Nazi's, the assassination of Archduke Ferdinand, and the illicit drug trade - are the same tribe. They may have different names and different ancestors and believe they have a unique role to play in the scheme of things, but they are committed to the goal of absolute power over all. All political, financial and ideological investment leads to the zero sum notion of power that decrees people must be kept away from their innate power and centralized into the realm of the ruling elite.

What is increasingly apparent in Western capitalist societies is that consumerism replaced civil society. The huge influence of the entertainment media has filled our lives with structural violence that informs us we should be scared of our community, that we are too fat, too ugly, don't know enough; and no matter how hard we try or wish to believe in ourselves, we are reduced to our fleeting appetites looking for the next fix. Whatever our true nature might be, we lock our doors, get in our cars, and compete for the most of what each of us wants. We have consumed our future and given up our imagination to corporate services. So when we are faced with countless images of crumbling towers, bomb shattered cities, we believe we must choose sides.

In the power-from-within world I have witnessed more determination, more strength in character, more insight and more organization to create community that reveres and sustains life. Theatre, health, music, support for those in crisis, along with the new examples of human nature. The strength of those who organize these events is often heroic.

 

Ten years after 9/11 I realize our greatest threat is our collective illusion of power. All the wars in our history  have not been about the enemies we have been told to fear, but about the power within we are asked to sacrifice, for the insatiable egos of those who have built their fleeting empires on the blood of others.

Hope and Optimism

Hope and optimism requires our attention to the current state of affairs. The dark side of power.  That is, we need to look at the events that normally disturb the comfortable and lead the disturbed to despair and pessimism.  We need to address this relationship to our world, our place within it and find a way of being that challenges injustice.

Ish Teilheimer of Straight Goods,  reporting on a study that reveals a psychological difference between rich and poor (indicating that the rich don't see a need to help others, whereas the poor understand that they depend on mutual support) goes on to say "It's good to be loving, hopeful, and optimistic, but it's also important to point out that many of the bad things happening to people today are happening because some very wealthy people wanted things that way."

Wealth is power, and those who have power-over sometimes feel more secure by creating systems that make it very difficult or impossible for the masses to gain a healthy standard of living.

"The export of good jobs to sweatshop countries, for instance, was their idea. It's not unfair or overly negative to ask about new ideas in politics and government "Does this help everyone or just the rich?" and to consistently expose the shameless voices of wealthy self-interest."

History is full of examples of how brutal some are willing to be in order to maintain power in their zero-sum game. It was wealthy interests who supported the Nazi's murder of millions of Jews, gypsies and others, causing a war across Europe that destroyed hope and optimism for most. It was wealthy interests that plummeted the lives of Africans into despair and alienation during apartheid.  It is wealthy interests that prop up despotic military governments in the Middle East and Asia.

It is wealthy interests that have destroyed the most powerful nation in the world by creating a dysfunctional hysteria among its citizens. Michael Moore in his 2003 Academy Award acceptance speech said "We like non-fiction, yet we live in fictitious times. We live in a time where we have fictitious election results that elect a fictitious president. We live in a time where we have a man sending us to war for fictitious reasons." 

For expressing his opinion he received incredible harrassment and publicly televised death threats.

America, the self-promoted defender of democracy and human rights is currently being crippled by an old strategy - divide and conquer and divide, divide, divide.

So it's apparent that the atrocities that have become familiar in our collective sub-conscious are not caused by the masses as much as they are designed and organized by a powerful few for their own benefit, not ours. However, they have been enabled by a majority who have kept silent for fear of being punished, or have given up on their own perceptions for fear of gazing into the monster.

The trouble with this 'analysis' is that it leaves us feeling powerless, in despair, pessimistic, putting us into the blaming camp of us and them. The observation itself removes any inspiration to respond by anything more than apathy.

While facing up to the fact that most of the globe's economic interests have been gathered into a very small gated community, leaving the masses without much to hope for, we need to invest in something else and rebuild the world by the natures we possess, that have not been corporatized: to witness change as it unfolds, wherever it unfolds, and ask ourselves how we can influence that change.

Hope and optimism without effort may be naive, but getting our selves engaged in the process of evolution is hard work. Hope and optimism ask us to invest in them, they don't promise us happy endings. Hope and optimism need us to be honest with ourselves and one another. Hope and optimism rely on our search for truth and not just the many generalizations trotted out by institutions and heresay.  When it comes to the truth of our lives and our future, even statistics and science need not stop our questioning.

The future we are destined to endure depends upon what we feel, and how we interrogate our feeling with thinking, and how that guides what we say and what we do, and the societies we build from character and vision.