Mastodon THE FIFTH COLUMN: Search results for justice
Showing posts sorted by date for query justice. Sort by relevance Show all posts
Showing posts sorted by date for query justice. Sort by relevance Show all posts

2026-04-24

Thoughts on Education

This is not intended to be a comprehensive treatise on education but some thoughts on certain aspects of the education system. It is written within the context of the Ontario education system but it’s ideas are intended to be universal.

Education should not be political but in reality some of the policies governing our education system will have to be political decisions, hopefully based on expert advice.

The first political education decision I would make is to have one single education system that teaches Canadian values. I would go beyond just one secular publicly funded education system and establish one system overall, no religious or private schools, nor home schooling at the elementary and secondary level. Students should not be segregated by religion or wealth in school and home schooling is often just a means for parents to teach their own particular version of bigotry or hate to their children free of a counterbalance of Canadian values from the school system.

School boards are perhaps the most obvious political factor in the education system but what purpose do they serve as education is a province wide system governed by province wide standards with policies such as curriculum, class sizes, etc. set provincially and teacher and education worker salaries and benefits being negotiated on a provincial basis.

The one thing local school boards seem to get most involved in is school boundaries and school closure decisions. These are decisions that should be based on the facts of the situation and not politics and that is how they usually start out with reports provided by the experts. Then the community activists/lobbyists get involved, perhaps not a bad thing, but the result is usually in favour of the best organized who more often than not are the most affluent communities.

Though some school board members are indeed concerned with education many run for school board to gain political experience and campaign experience in order to run for what they are really interested in, municipal politics.

It is time to leave education to the experts and leave politics out of it as much as possible.

The most important education system decisions are curriculum decisions, which of necessity at the highest level are going to require political decisions. These are decisions such as: which courses should be offered provincially, the decision to stop streaming students into non-university and university levels courses at grade nine, and the decision to stop making Latin a compulsory high school course. The content of courses should be left to the experts, however they should reflect Canadian values.

Canadian values are the perceived commonly shared ethical and human values of Canadians.[3] The majority of Canadians believe they share specific values,[4][5] with a plurality identifying human rights, respect for the law and gender equality as collective principles.[6][7] Canadians generally exhibit pride in equality before the law, fairness, social justice, freedom, and respect for others;[8] while often making personal decisions based on self-interests rather than a collective Canadian identity.[9] Tolerance and sensitivity hold significant importance in Canada's multicultural society, as does politeness.[9][7] (Source: Wikipedia)

As far curriculum is concerned let’s start with teaching religion. The school system should not teach religion, but because religion is an important cultural and historical factor in the world schools should teach about religion, but should do it the same way we were taught about Greek, Roman and Norse gods, as cultural mythology.

Continuing the discussion of curriculum, I believe one way to engage students is to include room in the provincial curriculum for localized units in all subjects. This will provide students with local information they can relate to as well as an opportunity to do research using locally available original sources, like local newspaper archives, as well as an opportunity for field trips to local historical sites or distinctive local geographic and natural features.

The first and most obvious use of this is to learn about the first indigenous inhabitants of the area their school is located in, but it could also include the history of early local settlements. There will of course be localized study opportunities for all subjects, but particularly the social and natural sciences, as well studying local authors and writers in literature and other fields should also be included.

Beyond curriculum, there is a trend to an increased emphasis on testing and exams. I was lucky enough to start secondary school just after the province ended departmental exams, which were exams set and marked in Toronto so every student in Ontario wrote the same exam. There is an argument being made now to increase reliance on exams partly because AIs cannot write exams like they can papers. However, increased reliance on exams can lead to teaching that which can easily be tested by exams and marked by machines. Exam-based teaching can quickly become teaching students to pass tests rather than to understand the subject matter. I always learned more by writing papers than by trying to memorize facts. I would personally eliminate or make exams \optional as we did at Laurentian University for a few years in the 1970s.

I have not written about the hot button issues of sex education, or accepting students sexual orientation and gender identities because enough has been written about those issues and, as I wrote, this was not intended to be a comprehensive treatise on education policy.

2026-03-18

Bonus – The Lambda Editorials

In addition to writing the Fifth Column during my time on the Laurentian University student newspaper, Lambda, I was also news editor and was occasionally asked to write the editorials. Below are those editorials, as well as an analysis article and a book review.

 

Opinion (1970-10-22)

Richard W.

The civil rights of the Canadian people have been suspended! This is due to the action of the Trudeau government in invoking the War Measures Act. This is an unjustifiable action.

Prisons in Quebec are now being filled with political prisoners. Hundreds of Quebecois are being persecuted for their political views. The F.L.Q. (Fronte de Liberation Quebecois) has been declared an unlawful organization and there ‘s a five year jail term provided for:

a person who

(a) is or professes to be a member of the unlawful organization.

(b) acts or professes to act as an officer of the unlawful organization.

(c) communicates statements on behalf of or as a representative of the unlawful organization,

(d) advocates or promotes the unlawful acts, aims, principles or policies of the unlawful organization.

(e) contributes anything as dues or otherwise to the unlawful organization or to anyone for the benefit of the unlawful organization.

(f) solicits subscriptions or contributions for the unlawful organization or

(g) advocates, promotes or engages in the use of force or the commission of criminal offences as a means of accomplishing a governmental change within Canada.

In one rash act of totalitarianism the government has eliminated the basic freedoms of association, assembly, expression and thought.

The government has made membership in a political organization a crime and the holding of “undesirable” political views a crime.

Regardless of the policies of the F.L.Q. they should not be subject to the violation of their civil rights. Neither should other separatist groups. Neither should the Canadian people,

All members of the F.L.Q. have been declared criminals, regardless of whether they have committed any criminal acts. Hundreds of Quebecois have had their civil rights violated simply because they express the same aim as the F.L.Q. - an independent socialist Quebec, They do not necessarily believe in the use of violence to obtain that objective.

However, since some members of the F.L.Q. have been involved in terrorist activities, and since the aim of the F.L.Q. is the same as that of other separatist groups, all separatists have become suspect. Because of this they have had their civil rights violated in a manner never before seen in Canada. In a manner contrary to the principles of “justice” which our government supposedly believes in and claims to practice.

The government says that its action is necessary to protect the freedom of the people of Canada.

However it has been said that if one citizen has his freedom violated all the people lose their freedom.

We are now in a position where the freedom of all the people of Canada is subject to violation; and in fact the freedom of the Canadian people has been lost!

 

EDITORIAL (1972-02-29)

By Richard W. Woodley

There are a number of questions that you should ask yourself before voting on the proposed new constitution. A constitution is a philosophy. The philosophy behind the proposed constitution consists of a number of principles. These are:

(1) Decentralization, and a committee system to lessen the executive’s power,

(2) Representation according to academic division,

(3) An executive based on function,

(4) A bilingual SGA (however without language representation on the council),

(5) A free student press,

If you agree with these principles then you should vote for the proposed constitution. Probably few will agree with every clause in it, but that will never happen. No one will come up with the perfect constitution agreeable to every student.

The basic principles behind the constitution are the important things. If you cannot agree with them you cannot agree with the constitution. But if you do agree with these principles then you should vote for the constitution. Amendments to details can be made later.

The point is that if people vote against the constitution because they do not agree with every single clause in it, it probably wouldn’t receive any votes. Or, if people voted for it because they agreed with only one clause, it would probably pass unanimously.

What you are voting on are the principles behind the constitution.

As well one should consider what a defeat would mean. It would mean that we would still continue to operate under the old constitution, which everyone must agree is archaic. The new constitution is a definite improvement and hopefully it will be improved in the future.

But it is a start. A new philosophy of decentralization. A point to begin in making the SGA truly relevant to the student body. It will only be as good as the students make it.

But the SGA cannot move forward under the old constitution. It is imperative that students approve the proposed constitution.

Two-thirds of at least fifty per cent of the student body must vote in favour of the proposed constitution for it to be ratified.

It is your SGA! Your future! Your choice!

 

EDITORIAL (1972-03-21)

By Richard W. Woodley

Mysterious happenings have occurred in and around the SGA this year, centring to a great extent around the business operations of the organization and the dismissal of Frank Reynolds, former SGA business manager.

A number of questions and charges have been raised by some students and an organization calling themselves the Students for a Democratic Laurentian (SDL).

This organization, and its charges, we first tended to dismiss as a political front used by Mr, Reynolds for his own political purposes, A number of their charges directly contradicted the SGA Executive, whom we tended to give more credibility to than the SDL. Many were quite strong. Many were misleading, And many we felt to be incorrect or unjustified.

Yet, upon talking with people in SDL and having the other view, along with a number of interesting facts and recollections, brought to our attention we began to question.

We can no longer dismiss the SDL as a small group of people out for their own political ends using whatever tactics possible.

We no longer know who to trust. We know that the SGA has not been open. We begin to feel that they have lost a certain amount of credibility. And they have, And that is the most unfortunate thing of all.

There is a new executive and a new Council now, They must decide whether they will be open with the students, They must let the students know what they are doing and why they are doing it. There must be no room for doubt.

They cannot count on the students’ faith and trust in them to remain, no matter what, They cannot count on absolute trust, for this is what the past executive and council expected from us. We no longer have that absolute trust in them, We question their actions.

The new Council and Executive must not let this happen. For if it loses credibility the whole SGA will be placed in jeopardy.

It is up to them to decide how they will run their affairs, but we will be watching them much closer than we have in the past, We have learned from this year, and we have our friends, who we thought were our enemies, to thank.

 

editorial (1972-10-03)

(by rww, authorship not attributed)

A free press is essential to a free people. True freedom of the press, however, involves more than an absence of controls by outside interests. It means all must have access to a press. It means that the press must not be solely in the hands of the establishment, as the bourgeois press of this country is.

The student press in Canada prides itself in having this freedom to present all the views of the student population, without editorial or financial control, even if these views oppose the official student government. They pride themselves in being guaranteed the ability to do this by being financed by the student governments they may, themselves, oppose.

The Statement of Principles of the Student Press in Canada (Canadian University Press) to which Lambda adheres, guarantees to the student press the non-interference of student governments in the editorial, advertising, and financial policies of the student press.

The Students’ General Association of Laurentian University has seen the need for such guarantees and has made constitutional provisions to guarantee the freedom of Laurentian’s student press.

The Lambda Publications Brief (A Bylaw to the SGA Constitution) provides that the editor may be removed only by a referendum of the student body.

The Brief also guarantees Lambda a minimum SGA grant of $3.00 per student ($5,850) as well as all revenue from advertising in Lambda. The Brief also states that this revenue, from student fees, will be paid directly to Lambda Publications and that any surplus incurred by Lambda shall be used by Lambda for the purchase of equipment.

However, despite the constitutional provision of such financial guarantees, the present SGA Council has disregarded the constitution.

The SGA Council has passed a budget limiting the Lambda grant to $3,900 ($1,950 below the constitutional guarantee) as well as limiting the amount of advertising revenue Lambda may receive to $3,100 and at the same time putting the uncollected Lambda advertising revenue into the general SGA budget (rather than allocating it to Lambda for equipment purchases as provided in the constitution).

These are not “trifles”, as Yvon Lachappelle calls them, but are a flagrant interference with the freedom of the student press on this campus. These guarantees are provided to ensure that the student press can operate without financial pressure from a student government, that it may often be critical of.

The effect of the SGA’s disregard for these guarantees will mean that the quality of the paper (and possibly its ability to be critical) will suffer and that it will possibly be forced to cease publishing before the end of the year.

The SGA, or rather Yvon Lachappelle, claims that it is acting in the students’ interests. But how can the SGA be impartial in limiting the freedom of a press that is, at this time, highly critical of it.

A Constitution is a set of rules set up to ensure that those with power within an organization serve the wishes and interests of the members of that organization, When the SGA Council ceases to follow the Constitution they lose all legitimacy and cease to be responsible to the student body as a whole, When this happens all hell should break loose!

 

NORTHERN DEVELOPMENT (1973-10-09)

By Richard W. Woodley

Northern development is a concept that is coming under increasing discussion. It is seen by many as the natural fulfillment of the Canadian dream (and by others as necessary to serve the needs of a North American, i.e. Amerikan, community).

It is referred to in terms of bringing the resources and beauty of the great Canadian northland to all Canadians.

The reality, of course (as with most aspects of Capitalism), is the opposite.

What the development of the north refers to, in actuality, is the transformation of the north from serving the needs of the people of the north to serving the needs of the Amerikan dominated corporate elite of this colonial state.

It means the radical transformation of the ecology from one which served the needs of a northern community based on hunting and fishing, to one which simply serves the needs of southern industry. It means the alienation of the people of the north, with the subsequent economic and social problems which occur as a civilization, hundreds of years old, attempts to adapt to changes imposed from the outside.

The answer to this problem is provided by assimilation - and the dominant southern culture prides itself in its few successes in assimilating northern natives through educational and industrial training programs imposed from the outside.

These programs. and their resulting assimilation of the native population into the southern culture, would, of course, be unnecessary if the northern people were allowed to keep their own culture, A culture far superior to the southern culture, a non-alienated culture based on people helping people (not on the southern god of economic and industrial development).

The examples are numerous: The James Bay power development in northern Québec will flood huge areas of northern Québec, forcing the population out of their homes and altering the ecology in a way that could destroy their way of life forever.

The Mackenzie Highway, which is being fought by the northern natives, will bring more southern-type development to the north, forcing native peoples from their traditional way of life to a culture based on alienating work in factories.

This form of industrial development has its critics - mainly among northern natives and environmentalists.

Less criticism has been aimed at the development of the north from tourism. Perhaps because plans for this sort of development are not as extensive or advanced as those concerning industrial development. However, suggestions have been made that tourism be developed extensively in the north. This is said to be required to serve the employment needs in the north where southern imposed industrialization has destroyed the traditional way of life, forcing the northern natives to become alienated wage-labourers.

The development of the north for tourism would again entail a transformation. The beauty of the north is a special beauty, appreciated by the people of the north. The imposition of tourist resorts designed mainly to serve the Amerikan tourist market would bring all the conveniences necessary to ensure the huge flow of tourists. They would see the north through the windows of resort hotels. The northern tourist areas would be transformed into circuses for Amerikan tourists.

The far north is not the only area threatened by this development mentality.

Northern Ontario is indeed threatened. But in this case of Northern Ontario it is threatened from within, It is the threat of a southern mentality adopted by the political-businessmen of Northern Ontario, we see development as a god - more development equals more people equals more money equals more PROFIT! —

Northern Ontarions are a special kind of people who prefer space to convenience - a people who would rather walk in the bush than drive on a superhighway - a people that would rather camp alongside a lake than stay in a luxury hotel with a heated pool.

Northern Ontario, with its lakes & rivers, and undeveloped land can serve these people well. An attempt to bring this life to southern Ontarions on a mass scale, through luxury hotels or crowded trailer parks in the north would only transform the north. It may serve the needs of southern Ontarions looking for diversions from the big cities, but it would destroy the type of life that Northern Ontarions have found far superior to the convenience of the south.

Anyone who has been on the Polar Bear Express should understand what this is all about. Moosonee and Moose Factory are invaded every day during the summer by the hundreds. Invaded to the extent that the tourists outnumber the residents during the day. The culture of the communities has been transformed, from one in which the native population provided for their own needs, to one where they serve the needs of southern tourists. Native art is no longer an expression of culture, but a commodity to be sold to the tourists. Life is no longer satisfying, but alienated. Northern Ontario is a special community and Northern Ontarions are special people.

Imagine two lovers walking along the shore of a Northern Ontario river, crossing the current together to a rock island over-looking the beauty of rapids. Imagine the same scene, this time with rows of camper-trailers parked along the shore of the river. It just isn’t the same. Love

 

The thought of Karl Marx (1973-10-23)

By Richard W. Woodley

Today, one-half of the world’s population - is governed under political systems based on the ideas of Karl Marx.

Yet the other half of the population has a very poor understanding of Marx’s actual ideas. The association of Marxism with the ‘‘enemy” of communism during the cold war era, presented the western public with a distorted view of Marxism. Anti-communist groups invariably presented a negative view of Marx’s philosophy, more often based on the acts of those who claimed to be his followers, than on his actual philosophy.

On the other hand, certain left wing groups present Marx’s philosophy more in a manner designed to show that they are the real Marxists, than to explain what Marx really said.

With the decline of the cold war, there was a more objective interest shown in Marx and his philosophy by academics. But a clear understanding of Marx’s philosophy required a great deal of study of his writings and his life.

In an attempt to bring Marx’s ideas to the general public, numerous books of selections from his writings became popular. But all too often these were just collections of disjointed specimens of his work presented one after another with no reference to the context within which they were written.

In “The Thought of Karl Marx’’, David Mclellan manages to overcome this major problem, without giving us the feeling that is is his ideas and not those of Marx that we are reading,

He does this, not simply by using selections from Marx, but by placing them in the context of Marx’s life and the historical conditions of the time they were written.

In the first section of his book, Mclellan divides Marx’s life into periods based on historical events and the development of his writing. He gives a historical sketch of Marx’s life and the period followed by selections from Marx’s writings. To this he adds a brief out line of the historical events and influences on Marx at the time of writing & reasons for writing each particular piece of work.

This approach to Marx does a lot to discredit the many charges of contradiction levelled at Marx, by showing how Marx’s philosophy and writings changed and developed. It also puts Marx’s writings into the context of why they were written - as a philosophic treatise, economic theory, political pamphlet, or journalism - a very important distinction when interpreting them.

In the second section of the book, Mclellan deals with Marx’s writings by subject (e.g. Alienation. Labour, Class, etc.) He follows a pattern similar to that used in the first section, describing the influences on Marx’s writings on each subject followed by selections from his work.

The book is an excellent introduction to Marx’s ideas, for someone who does not have the time or inclination to read a great deal of Marx’s original work.

It does, by its nature as a book of edited selections, suffer from the influence of the author’s interpretations. However, the author’s intent appears to be to given an outline of Marx’s ideas as free as possible from his own personal prejudices.

 

For more from Lambda see Laurentian University student newspaper Lambda - Internet Archive

Next post back to our regular programming

2026-01-30

ICE is Not Law Enforcement

So why, you ask, am I writing about what is probably the most obvious thing to all sane people. The answer is: to put a reasoned argument on the record.

Law enforcement investigates crimes and apprehends suspected criminals and puts cases before prosecutors that decide whether there is sufficient evidence to put them before the courts. Law enforcement also enforces arrest warrants issued by the courts.

Law enforcement arrests specific individuals where there are reasonable grounds to believe they committed a crime or where a court order has been issued.

The courts decide whether suspects should be detained during trial and whether they are guilty what the punishment should be. Judges also issue arrest warrants for suspects or convicted criminals at large. This is what we call due process.

Law enforcement wears badges with  identification numbers so that they can be held accountable. 

Law enforcement officers, the police, are constrained by the rule of law and must obey the law and must not mistreat suspects or prisoners. In the case of police misconduct there are provisions for consequences and due process procedures that must be followed. We may not always agree with the findings of said due process but it exists.

Law enforcement does not round up groups of people based on their appearance or the colour of their skin, or the language they are speaking, or the fact they are participating in legal protests or because they swear at them.. Law enforcement does not routinely engage in masked thuggery or murder people without consequences. Law enforcement does not detain in concentration camps and even deport. people without due process or court orders (or in some cases in contravention of court orders). Law enforcement are not told by their superiors that the law does not apply to them. Law enforcement are not encouraged by their superiors to mistreat people and break the law. Law enforcement are not told they may do what they please and that they will suffer no consequences because the highest offices in the land have their backs.

ICE is no more law enforcement than the Gestapo or the SS, the KGB or the Stasi, ICE is NOT law enforcement and should not be treated as such by actual law enforcement agencies. They are not their brothers but are the criminals they are paid to pursue and bring to justice.

2025-11-23

On Reforming Capitalism

 These are the conventional definitions of capitalism.

Capitalism is an economic system based on the private ownership of the means of production and their use for the purpose of obtaining profit.[1][2][3][4][5] This socioeconomic system has developed historically through several stages and is defined by a number of basic constituent elements: private property, profit motive, capital accumulation, competitive markets, commodification, wage labor, and an emphasis on innovation and economic growth.[6][7][8][9][10][11] Capitalist economies may experience business cycles of economic growth followed by recessions.[12] (Source: Wikipedia)

What is capitalism?

The Editors of Encyclopaedia Britannica

Capitalism is a widely adopted economic system in which there is private ownership of the means of production. Modern capitalist systems usually include a market-oriented economy, in which the production and pricing of goods, as well as the income of individuals, are dictated to a greater extent by market forces resulting from interactions between private businesses and individuals than by central planning undertaken by a government or local institution. Capitalism is built on the concepts of private property, profit motive, and market competition. (Source: Encyclopædia Britannica)

Capitalism

A term coined to describe the use of private capital to finance economic activity. Investors and entrepreneurs use their money to create businesses, hiring workers, renting property and buying equipment as needed. Any surplus, or profit, belongs to the entrepreneur or investors. Communism is seen as the obverse of capitalism, as all economic activity is controlled by the state. (Source: The Economist)

However a more to the point definition of capitalism can be expressed this way.

Capitalism: an economic system designed to transform the labour of the working class into the wealth of the owning class. (Source: The5thColumnist)

Capitalism started unrestrained until workers organized and at the cost of thousands murdered by capital (and the Pinkertons) forced employers to bargain with them, arguing for amongst other things a fair day’s pay for a fair days’ work. Workers union organizing also led to political victories including collective bargaining and labour standards legislation, as well as workplace health and safety legislation, and of course the weekend and extending the middle class beyond, doctors, lawyers and merchants.

The capitalist class was not content with earning a fair profit and invented the belief that corporations must seek the maximum return for shareholders with no regard to the workers, the community, or the environment and found ways to do this.

It included moving production abroad to countries with lower or no labour or environmental standards and where jobs could not be moved such as the service industry converting wage jobs to piece-work jobs or co-called “independent contractor” jobs in the so- called gig or app industry.

The result has been unprecedented inequality .

So what is the solution

A purist Marxist would suggest we just wait for (or hasten) the inevitable collapse of capitalism and then “bring to birth a new world from the ashes of the old”. But such a strategy esquires the collapse of society as we know it and it will not be just the 1% (or 10%) of the wealthiest that may deserve to suffer but everybody in the middle. Only those with nothing to lose will lose nothing in this scenario.

This leaves the dreaded incrementalism as a practical solution that may even be able to achieve the political will to make it happen if done strategically.

Let us look first at the issues we want to address and I see two main issues.

Corporate concentration

The first being, despite capitalism’s claim of promoting competition, the reality is that it has lead to economies of monopolies and oligopolies with increasing corporate concentration driving the small businesses it was suppose to encourage out of business. Government regulation has been continuously weakened regarding corporate concentration particularly as it applies to the media, weakening one of the main pillars of democracy, an independent press.

This needs to be addressed and it is not a radical idea to go back to legislation and measures that existed previously while capitalism was thriving.

Economic and Political Inequality

The other being that, along with this, it has lead to massive personal economic inequality, and this massive economic power held by a few has become political power where even in so-called democracies the concept of one person one vote has been replaced one dollar one vote as far as the reality of political decision making is concerned. See: Economic inequality leads to democratic erosion, study finds | University of Chicago News.

One of the easiest ways to address inequality and redistribute wealth is through the income tax system and again I suggest we start by going back to taxation levels that existed while capitalism was thriving.

Marginal Tax Rates

Today in 2025 the marginal tax rate on the highest earners in the United States is 37% while in Canada it is 33%, but it has not always been that low.

  

Source: Comparing Income Taxes: Canada vs. USA in 2025

 Between 1951 and 1963 the United States marginal tax rate on the highest earners was over 90%, while in Canada during the same period the marginal tax rate on the highest earners varied between 90% and 75%. Capitalism was thriving over that period, albeit without the ridiculous levels of income and wealth inequality we see today. As a first (incremental) step in tax reform I propose we go back to those levels.

Source: Bradford Tax Institute

Source: Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives

Wealth Tax

The next (incremental) step in tax reform to address excessive individual income and wealth inequality should be a wealth tax. As of 2021, five out of 36 OECD countries implement a wealth tax on individuals. The New Democratic Party and Canadians For Tax Fairness both propose a modest wealth tax of 1% to 3% depending on level of wealth. The United States Democratic Party does not appear to have a consistent policy on wealth taxes, but both Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren have proposed wealth taxes of 2% to 3% depending on level of wealth. I would propose we start with a wealth tax similar to those proposals.

Final Stage of Tax Reform

The existence of billionaires (and now trillionaires) is, to put it bluntly, immoral. The final stage of (incremental) tax reform, after people have been eased into the idea of a wealth tax, is to use the tax system to tax back all income over a million dollars a year and all wealth over 100 million dollars. I consider this to be modest proposal as it still allows for a considerable level of inequality but not the blatantly excessive and immoral levels we currently have.

Reigning in Capitalism

Render unto the public sector the things that are the public sector’s, and unto the privater sector the things that are the private sectors

There may be a place in the economy for capitalism and the private sector but it should not dominate our lives and society as it currently does. It needs to be put in it’s place.

Health Care

Nobody should profit from someone else’s misery. It is a simple matter of ethics and morality. Health care should not be provided for profit but should be funded and delivered by a single-payer public system that provides is better health care and better economics.


Source: Canadian Medical Association

Water

Water is essential for human survival so our access to it should not be dependent on someone else making a profit. As water becomes scarcer it becomes vital that governments protect our vital water supplies and not sell them off to the highest bidder. Our water supplies should not be put at risk for data centres to store the high tech industry’s (or even government’s) surveillance data on us and certainly not for it’s ill fated so called artificial intelligence dangerous LLM bullshit. Local water supplies should not be privately owned but preferably be municipal utilities. Water resources should only be made available to the private sector when there is a surplus to public needs.

Food

Access to food should also not be dependent on monopolistic corporations making excessive profits. Something needs to be done about the corporate concentration in the oligopolistic corporate agrifood industry.

Corporate Control of Agriculture – Farm Aid

GRAIN | Top 10 agribusiness giants: corporate concentration in food & farming in 2025

The Monopoly Problem at the Heart of Canada's Food System | Perspectives Journal

Corporate concentration | Food Policy for Canada

The best way to do that is to support family farms as well as agricultural cooperatives (agricultural cooperatives in Canada) and the supply management system including marketing boards

At the retail end of the food chain, the grocery sector. there is a similar oligopoly corporate concentration problem.

Canada's grocery business doesn't have enough competition — and shoppers are paying the price, report finds | CBC News

5 takeaways from the Competition Bureau’s study into Canada’s grocery sector - National | Globalnews.ca

Increasing Retail Monopoly Power Poses a Threat to Canada’s Post-Pandemic Economic Recovery [Op-Ed]

Walmart’s dominance of groceries should receive antitrust scrutiny, group says | CNN Business

The best way to counter that is for consumers to have a real choice to not support the monopoly grocery industry. Governments can best aid that by supporting non-profit food food co-operatives to ensure all consumers have a choice.

Grocery co-ops an alternative to corporate grocers amid anger, mistrust: experts

Co-Ops, Mutual Aid, and the Movements Against the Grocery Industrial Complex | Loose Lips Magazine

Toward fair and sustainable food systems: The role of food cooperatives and solidarity grocery stores – Food Secure Canada

Housing

North America’s dependence on the private sector for housing has not helped the current homelessness crisis, indeed it probably contributed to it. On the other side of the ocean in Finland at the end of 2021 long-term homelessness only affected 1,318 people and that is considered unacceptable under Finland’s Housing First Initiative which is not only the right thing to do but less costly than providing the social programs need to deal with homelessness.

North America needs to adopt a more European approach to public and social housing where public housing is not just for the very poor but also for ordinary working people.

Canada is facing a housing crisis. Could it take a page from Europe? | CBC News

What European housing models could do for Canada’s affordability problems

Europe’s affordable housing revolution: The power of leading by example - Affordable Housing Initiative European Partnership

We need to provide enough public or co-operative (being preferable) housing so that all Canadians that want to can access affordable housing on a rent geared to their income without being forced to deal with the predatory private market. The private market can still compete in niche and higher end markets and of course home construction will still be dominated by the private sector. Governments should also provide incentives and assistance for families that want to purchase their own modest homes.

Energy Choices and Climate Change

No discussion of capitalism would be complete without dealing with energy policy and climate change. We built an economy based on planned obsolescence and waste because that was good for capitalist profits. And we powered that economy with fossil fuels. The result:

  • Climate change is real.

  • Climate change is caused by human’s energy choices.

  • Climate change has done irreversible harm, and

  • Climate change s poised to do catastrophic harm.

All of this is true and highly documented. I am not going to insult the intelligence of those of you who choose to be informed by citing pages and pages of proof. Those who choose to be wilfully ignorant of the facts will not be swayed by any proof.

We need to act. The solutions are known. We need to phase out fossil fuels. No new projects. Governments that continue to support fossil fuels are putting private profits (and short term economic indicators) above the health of the planet and it’s human population.

We need to put a “price on carbon ” and disincentivize it’s use while providing support and incentives for the development and use of renewable energy. We also need to build a more sustainable economy that does not depend on waste and planned obsolescence. But that is a whole other book.

Failure of High Tech as Saviour

This section will be primarily informed by my own personal experience and observations (and research) over the last 60 years or so from first using punch cards to program Statistical Package for the Social Sciences on the Laurentian University mainframe, as part of my Techniques of Political Inquiry course, to my first personal computer, the Osborne 1 accessing Bulletin Board systems and freenets up to today’s Windows 11 machine accessing the Internet. For this reasons it will not include many, if any, citations and because doing so could overwhelm the user once I started. I was considering making this a separate blog post but I believe it belongs here.

There was a time when we made things in North America, even electronics and computers, and then the capitalist owners of the means of production thought it would be more profitable to make everything abroad in low wage countries with lax labour, health and environmental regulations. But don’t worry they assured us we were becoming a post industrial society with a knowledge economy and an information super highway. We would no longer work in factories with our hands but in offices with our minds. High tech was the new thing and it was going to save us all. It was great for awhile for a few who got the new high wage jobs, but many of the jobs turned out to be lower wage tech support jobs that did not replace the higher wage manufacturing jobs that were lost, and that they soon discovered could be sent overseas as well.

However it was a boost to planned obsolescence, with a twist that the electronic waste created was much more hazardous than broken down furniture and appliances in our landfills. Computers had to be replaced ever 18 months and smartphones every two years. At the beginning there probably were enough computer advances to justify that, though I got away with upgrading every three years but lately it has been more like every 7 years. However it was remarkable how capable those early PCs were. The Osborne 1 or original IBM PC, were capable of running full office software like Wordstar and Supercargo and even Dbase II. Programmers worked hard to get every bit of capability out of the software and hardware. Lately it seems the goal has been to bloat software and add unnecessary options to force users to upgrade their hardware. This is even more so in the smartphone industry where a new phone is needed so you can have rounded coiners.

At one point, because of a few successes, people were blindly investing in any company based on the web, regardless of any actual earning potential and then the “dot com bubble” burst. We are seeing the same thing with AI now, billions being thrown at to produce a massive GIGO machine that just makes stuff up, resulting in a massive waste of water and power and environmental degradation, not to mention the suicides caused by AI addiction or the AI directly telling them to kill themselves. Of course when the “AI bubble” bursts it might take the rest of the economy with it.

And high tech gave us the corporate and government surveillance state with the corporations saying they are doing it to make our lives better and the state saying they are doing it to make us safer, when in reality it is to consolidate their wealth and power.

Facebook, Twitter, Amazon, no need to detail the harm caused by them. Then we have the so-called gig industry which is just a way to avoid unions and exploit workers and the high tech billionaires exercising their political power to the point of buying the United States Presidency. More could be said but let’s leave it at that for now.

High tech saviour, my ass, just a better way to exploit workers, destroy the environment, and buy politicians,

Necessity of Government Regulations to Protect Workers Rights, Public Heath and The Environment

Deregulation is the darling of the capitalist media that argues all our economic problems would be solved if we did not have those pesky government regulations and just trusted corporations to put workers rights, public safety and the environment ahead of maximizing profits. They like to claim the market will regulate everything but the only thing the market regulates is maximum profit in the short term. It cannot even ensure a corporations’ long term growth or success. The market is very shortsighted and focused on profit only. So fuck the market.

The best proof of the need for government regulations to protect public health, the environment, and workers rights (including a minimum wage that is a living wage ), it is what happens when we deregulate.

10 Unforeseen Effects of Deregulation - UMA Technology

Disaster in the Making: he Quiet Erosion of Canada’s Regulation System

The Dangers of Deregulation – State of the Planet

The deregulation gamble: When worker safety becomes a political pawn | HR Law Canada

Trump’s crusade against health and safety regulations endangers workers, hobbles the environmental justice movement, and sets the stage for our next public health crisis | Economic Policy Institute

Public Ownership and Worker Co-operatives

The best way to counteract the power of the wealthy capitalist elites is to not give them the power that private ownership of the means of production gives them The best way to do that is to turn that ownership over to the actual workers that, to put it obviously, use the means of production to produce, whether that is things, services or information. The best way to do that is through worker co-operatives.

Worker cooperative - Wikipedia

What is a Worker Cooperative

History of Worker Cooperatives

Canadian Worker Co-op Federation

U.S. Federation of Worker Cooperatives

That being said, there are situations where centralized public control is preferable for strategic national interests, such as the creation of a nationwide electricity grid, or a nationwide electrified rail system, although I am sure there are others. There may be other sectors where a public presence, but not dominance, is desirable, including a public broadcaster, a public renewable energy agency and likely others.

Universal Basic Income

Capitalism’s secret (well maybe not so secret) weapon is maintaining a level of unemployment that forces workers to take underpaid exploitative employment. Universal Basic Income is the counterbalance to that. While Universal Basic Income does not deter people from seeking employment it empowers then to refuse to be exploited.

(Source: UBI Works - Canada's advocate for Basic Income)

Further references on Universal Basic Income:

Universalbasic income program could cut poverty up to 40%: Budget watchdog |CBC News

Universal Basic Income In Canada 2025 - Active Programs And Pilots You Should Know About

Why UBI Works: Hard Evidence of its Impact on Poverty

People kept working, became healthier while on basic income: report | CBC News

Universal basic income is having a moment. What is it?

The Final Stage: Workers Control

In the final stage of reforming capitalism we give workers the right to seize the means of production and take control of their workplaces.

Workers of the world, unite!