Saturday, January 4, 2025

Happy Gregorian New Year 2025

I have seen quite a few people doing a year in review of 2024. As I read one from NeuroDivergent Rebel, I convinced myself I should share as well.

I have been an Open (source, government, access, etc) type of person for much of my adult life. There are thoughts of mine that I posted to networks since the 1980’s which are available in online archives  (Article referencing something I posted in 1992). I’m a lifelong learner, so I’ve even written articles focused on how my ideas have changed over the decades



2024 was emotionally rough for me, a continuation of the changes of the last few years. I’m spending much of my time reading, trying to get a handle on what is me and what was my mask now that I’ve finally accepted I’m Autistic. I had finally accepted earlier, but received an official assessment of my Neurotype in July 2024.


I did something last year that I don’t remember ever doing before:  I deleted some of my published articles. Normally I want to maintain my changing thoughts as part of my history, but after an emotional spring last year (reliving in my own mind what happened the previous year), I decided in early June to delete articles that discussed my former workplace.


  • September 26, 2023: End of an Era: My resignation from CRKN
  • October 3, 2023: Still spinning? My time at Canadiana.org prior to the CRKN merger
  • October 4, 2023: Still spinning? The merger of Canadiana.org with the Canadian Research Knowledge Network
  • October 6, 2023: Still spinning? My time at the Canadian Research Knowledge Network
  • March 6, 2024: Observations about (a review of)^2 Autism Employment


My intention was to share my observations in order to improve the organization, as the Canadiana project had become what I now know is a special interest. My focus was on the digital archive part, but also the public access to that archive. I saw the huge public value of this service, and more than anything else I wanted to see the Canadiana project succeed and flourish. I had noticed from other people who left (or were also pushed out) that CRKN didn’t do exit interviews, and I believe there is considerable organizational value to such information.




I received some feedback about the articles I posted in September and October that surprised me. I was being told that the postings would end my career. I didn’t understand how what I wrote related to me as an individual, or could be taken as a critique of some other individual. I think in terms of policies, cultures, and other systems – not in terms of individuals. Systems can always be improved, and I don't understand how some people personally identify with specific revisions of systems.



As I continued my reading, I came to recognize that what I was intending is not how others might see it. If CRKN's management were interested in my systems (computer, network, software, policy, social, etc) experience and observations, it would have been solicited (or even accepted when shared) while I was an employee. As someone specifically pushed out of that workplace for not fitting into that corporate culture, I should have been able to accept that any feedback I could have offered was destined for /dev/null .


As I learn about Autism, I’m really learning about Allism. I’ve been told my entire life about how “human nature” is somehow universal. Believing that notion caused me to mistake the rest of humanity as having similar motivations and desires as I do. The reality is that I’m Autistic with a specific Autistic profile, and we Autistics are a minority. What was true of me and why I think and do things could not be transposed onto others.


Tuesday, October 29, 2024

Asking Autistics: What advice do you have for employers?

A post in the Embracng Autism Facebook group asked a few questions of Autistics that included "What advice do you have for employers?".  This was in relation to the USA's National Disability Employment Awareness Month (NDEAM), which some Canadian governments also recognize.



I never had what I believe are thought of as accommodations. Until I reached the Autistic Burnout phase, by ability to mask meant I didn’t even need any support relating to noise or lighting.


What I always needed was understanding: understanding that “human nature” is not universal, and that my brain is wired such that my thinking and motivations for doing things will be different.


I’m Autistic. It is not something separate that I have, but a core part of who I am. If there was a pill that would eradicate Autism in me, I wouldn’t want it as some of the things I am most proud of myself for are related to being Autistic. That doesn’t mean I don’t struggle, and that struggle is huge while I’m dealing with burnout. It is the lack of understanding and bigotry against anyone who is different that dis-ables me, not something relating to my specific form of Autism.


I’m speaking and thinking in a different dialect of English.


I ask questions to get clarity as I have noticed humans can be playing “broken telephone” even with only two people when assumptions are being made and people are trying to “read between the lines”. When I am asking questions I am not trying to challenge your authority: I am really just trying to ensure accurate communication.


I don’t see social hierarchies the way an Allistic or otherwise non-neurodivergent person might. I am an outsider to those social norms.

I believe all living things are deserving of respect. To me respect is like treating all humans with dignity. If you believe “respect” is about treating you as an authority figure because of some social hierarchy like an organisation chart, and that your treating me and others with basic decency is dependent on us treating you as an authority, then we aren’t going to get along well.


Please don’t require that I do immoral things as part of my job. I had an employer who wanted me to take broken parts from when I fixed computers, put them in a brand new computer, and ship it back to the manufacturer as “dead on arrival” (Note: that employer and manufacturer no longer exist, so I'm not sharing something about current entities). If you feel the desire to reprimand or fire me because I don’t put your profit above all other considerations, then that is on you and not on me. Chances are I will only tolerate those types of requests for a short period of time, and will resign on my own.


Please be specific about priorities. If everything is a priority, then nothing is a priority. If you get upset at me for not “guessing” which thing should be the top-top-top priority, or you constantly contradict or block priorities previously set, that is on you and not on me. Your lack of ability to set and communicate priorities, especially any changed priorities, is a management and organisational problem and not a problem with any individual employee.


If you say one thing, and do another, I will learn not to trust you. Please don’t engage in “social lying” on my behalf as I strongly value truth.


Recognize that Autism is also not universal, including whether an individual considers Autism part of their identity or not, and what level of support they may need at any given moment. While I am an Autistic person with Canadian citizenship, there will be other people who are Canadians with Autism.


Monday, July 15, 2024

Worldview stuck in the past, self-called "progressives" walking blindly into failures.

For many reasons, I'm removing my participation on Twitter.  This includes looking at and deleting old messages.

Looking over older messages from 2022, I noticed something that I wanted to highlight: The same discussions are ongoing in 2024, with predictable outcomes.




There was an Ontario provincial election in 2022 where there was so much talk from partisans about how "critical" that election was (like nearly every election in my lifetime), and how a specific "bad leader" needed to be kept out because of the damage this individual could do.

I fully expect Trump to be elected as President of the United States again, and for the Conservative party of Canada to win sufficient seats for Pierre Poilievre to become Canada's next Prime Minister.


For those who think this will be disastrous, who should they be trying to change the minds of?

I believe the problem lies with the alleged "opposition" party partisans (often who call themselves "progressives") who remain only concerned about their corporate brands winning.  They are largely uninterested in (or actively opposed to) putting policies into place that would make our democratic institutions less vulnerable to corruption. (Example policies include: ranked ballots, ensuring leaders are decided by caucus members and not people who buy a ballot from a corporation, ensure party affiliation is deemphasized as being only one demographic trait of candidates, etc).

Hyper-partisans wanting party lists (or proximations to Party Lists using their Gallagher index) continue to block attempts to make parliament less corrupt(able).

"Just vote for the other guy" is never a valid answer to critical discussions of systemic flaws in democratic institutions.




Discussion of NATO expansion and the ongoing proxy war in Ukraine.

When the USA violated the UN charter multiple times (Afghanistan in 2001, Iraq in 2003, etc), it opened the doors to Russia to do the same in defense of ongoing NATO expansion.  NATO expansion is seen by Russia and several other nations as a threat to basic rights of self-determination of any non-Western nation since NATO was created as part of the launch of the cold war after WW2.

Discussions of the clearly racist nature of how Ukrainian land defenders are discussed in Western media and by Western politicians compared to any of the other ongoing global conflicts (including how Indigenous land defenders are covered).  This was also seen in the racist coverage of refugees.




There was quite a bit of talk about Zionism, and how Zionism continues to be used to justify violence against the existing inhabitants of Palestine since the 1920's.

Contrary to those who believe history started on October 7, 2023, I was reading in 2021 and 2022 from many people of a variety of Indigenous nationalities on this continent how familiar the colonial techniques Zionists were using against Palestinians are.

There was related talk about how Zionism has been at the root of many antisemitic views/actions as well, and how Zionism has made all Jewish peoples less safe since its formalization in the late 1890's.




Then there was the related and far to common denialism by Canadians about the historical and ongoing genocidal policies of the settler-colonial Dominion of Canada since it was imposed by the British Empire in 1867.


In 2022, representatives of the Roman Monarchy (Absolute Monarch of Vatican City, Pope Francis) and the British Monarchy (Charles, then Prince of Wales, and Camilla) visited land claimed by the Canadian Crown.




Wednesday, July 10, 2024

I'm cisgender : Inclusion vs attempted erasure of the diversity of the human experience.


I’m an Autistic white cis-heterosexual male settler, claimed as a citizen by the Dominion of Canada at birth in 1968. I have lived on lands of Anishinaabe peoples my entire life.


I say all of this as an introduction for a very specific reason, which is to offer myself as a SAFE person for people who are ostracized by this society (some to the point of reduced lifespans, such as #MMIWG). I have been granted unearned privilege in this society because of many of those demographic traits I have (all but being Autistic).

Some of my traits are visible and some are not. Suggesting people to try to hide any normally invisible traits (neurotype, gender, sexual orientation, etc) is in my mind no better than saying out loud that being non-white is a bad thing that people should try to hide if they can.

The tendency to prejudge people negatively if they don’t match specific hierarchies of demographic traits is a feature of specific cultures. It is not universal, and not part of “human nature”. That negative judgment is something that needs to be corrected in specific cultures, and making people realize that this isn’t universal (by outing yourself as a safe person) is a critically important tool in ensuring that this type of conversation happens.

If we hide the reality of diversity and intersectionality, those who want to crush diversity or impose social hierarchies where they put themselves as superior will always win (white supremacy, Androcentrism/misogyny, etc). Only by recognizing and embracing who we actually are as intersectional and diverse beings can we move forward.

I feel it is important to point these issues out. After trying to erase someone for discussing their being nonbinary, claiming caring about “labels and differences” of demographic traits shouldn’t be a focus, the person in the above exchange wanted everyone to focus on their gender and age to try to claim that calling out their behaviour was a form of bullying. It feels obvious that what they meant is they believe their demographic traits matter, and they are part of “shared humanity”, but other demographic traits are not part of shared humanity and should remain hidden and never mentioned. It is unfortunate that those who uphold such divisive ideologies will regularly claim it is those who are inclusive that are focusing on what divides us.

Sunday, July 7, 2024

Autistic Adults, Autism Parents, and why we seem to be arguing

I recently read I Will Die On This Hill: Autistic Adults, Autism Parents, and the Children Who Deserve a Better World by Meghan Ashburn and Jules Edwards.

I am a late diagnosed Autistic Adult, and not a parent. While I can’t understand the experience of being a parent, I do have memories of my own childhood and interacting with adults that have only made sense in recent years as I've learned about Autism (and Allism).

When I heard about the book in July 2023 I added it to a goodreads list. I had what turns out to be a misconception that the book would be a debate between an “Autism Mom” (Allistic parent who thought of Autism as a disease that took their child, and who wanted sympathy for themselves and their hardships) and an “Autistic Mom of Autistic Children'' (who can remember how it felt to be treated as diseased by others). 

As an Autistic Adult I was going to read feeling like I was rooting for one of the "sides".

Spoiler: I was wrong!

I will keep this strong book recommendation as brief as I can, given there are many ways this book intersects with other learning I have been doing in the past few years.

My journey


My understanding of my own autism came in a very fortunate and privileged way. Starting in 2020 I started what I have come to understand as a “special interest” when I recognized I didn’t actually understand what Racism was.

Learning about Racism led me to learning about Anti-racism (Ibram X. Kendi), anti-colonialism/decolonization and intersectionality. I am a systems person, so I wasn’t stuck on individuals and individualism (and the myth racism is about individual racial prejudices) once I had done sufficient reading.

I had opportunities to learn, but being White has the privilege of racism being academic as real racism (as opposed to individual prejudices) will privilege rather than target individuals included in “Whiteness”. I am now aware so-called “Reverse Racism” isn’t a real thing.

While I have been in a so-called "mixed marriage" since 1997 (different races, different genders, etc), that lived experience does not in any way ensure someone understands what Racism is.

I had quite a bit of unlearning to do.



When I started to learn about Autism and other neurotypes I immediately recognized it as fitting within an intersectionality lens.

I do not accept the “medical model” around Autism any more than I accept the “medical model” around Race (IE: the pseudoscientific beliefs around scientific racism, eugenics, etc), gender or sexual orientation. (Note: Conversion Therapy for gender or sexual orientation was only outlawed under Canadian law in 2022, but similar techniques are still the most common alleged "treatment" for Autism) 

Depending on the audience, I see value in discussing two different models of understanding Autism.

  • The Social model of disability. I don’t see my Autism as what disables me, but how my differences aren’t accommodated in a society that incorrectly presumes there is only one “correct” way of being a human. This is what reduces my ability (dis ability) to participate.
  • Neurodiversity Paradigm, which sees neurotypes as being as a natural form of human diversity. Problems are generated by supremacist societies who "other"/exclude individuals and groups with different demographic traits.

The Authors


I believe intersectionality and specific lived experience meant that while these two mothers seemed to disagree at first, that neither actually represented the “Autism Mom” which I have observed online.


While one of the authors is a White Allistic mother, she is a mother in a mixed race family and knows what it feels like to be extra worried about police and other “authority” interactions with brown and black children. She taught elementary school for six years, and was already well-versed in developmentally appropriate practices. The other author is Anishinaabe, and has lived with cultural teachings that are quite different from Eurocentric colonial teachings.

Both authors approach this topic with an intersectionality lens.


Why the disagreement?


The book brings to the foreground something that everyone, regardless of their neurotype or if they are parents, should become aware. The problem isn’t that one of these mothers was Autistic and the other was Allistic, and that this would suggest they had different goals.

The problem is that everyone in society, but especially parents, are inundated by special interest groups (political and economic) who have ideological biases towards the Medical model of Autism. They will frighten parents into believing that there is something wrong with their children (and sometimes themselves) that needs to be fixed. As with the Medical model of Race, otherwise known as scientific racism and eugenics, there are even those looking for measures to prevent additional births of Autistic people.

I believe once we recognize the common problem, that we can all work together to make the lives of Autistic children better. This will allow them to grow up without the trauma some Autistic adults constantly live with.

Eternal September


“Eternal September” is a slang term I’ve been aware of since the early 1990’s. In the early days of the Internet (and Usenet, that I participated in using UUCP) it was filled with technical people and students, where new batches of students would join in September and would need to learn how to (appropriately) interact online. In the early to mid 1990’s (depending on location), the Internet became available to the general public and thus there were “newbies” joining all the time and the need to bring these new people up to speed on how to use the tools and interact was needed.

This is going to be a fact of the Autism community for the foreseeable future. New parents of newly diagnosed children, newly diagnosed adults, and fairly often both in a short timeframe (parents learning they are autistic because of their children) will always be finding the Autism community. They will most often be coming with harmful misinformation they have been offered by the medical profession and the horribly wrong and harmful information from The Autism Industrial Complex.

We need to remember they aren’t the enemy, even if they will use words that will be very hurtful to Autistic people. As hard as it will sometimes be, especially for us Autistic members of the community, we need to help them unlearn misinformation in as welcoming a way as we can.

I continue to see similarities between affirming Autism advocacy and support, and similar supports in gender affirming, sexual orientation affirming, and even Anti-Racism work. In fact, it all feels as if the problems come from the same place: vested interests in creating a hierarchy of humanity that puts specific (often extremely arbitrary) demographic traits above others.

Saturday, July 6, 2024

An acquisition means a new job, not merely a different name on paychecks.

I wish to be open about a mistake I have made in my career, in case it helps someone else avoid something similar.

For most of my career I was brought into organizations (as an employee or contractor) by someone who knew me, what I could do for them, and how I worked.  An exception was when I was part of an acquisition. The new management team didn’t know who I was, only what was written in my job description.

I have had many job titles and descriptions, and none of them have been very meaningful. I work by trying to figure out what the project needs to get done, and then apply any skills I have towards whatever is the highest priority goal.

While I had the title of “Lead Systems Engineer” at the pre-merger organization, I was also actively involved in managing an OAIS preservation system (lead developer, support, data and metadata manager, etc), and lead developer of the metadata management system (we called it the “metadata bus”) for Canadiana.org's Access system.

After the merger I was told that I should continue the work that I was already doing, but I should not have taken that literally. I should have ceased any software development, data management, metadata management, or anything else not explicitly understood by the new management team as part of my job.  While the previous employer encouraged me to help anywhere in the organization I could, the new employer focused much more on social hierarchies, organization charts, and jurisdiction described in job descriptions.


At the time of the merger I had been given a choice:  Do I want to accept the reduced scope of this *new* job, or resign and look for a better matching job.

Instead of making an informed choice, I incorrectly believed nothing had changed. This only generated confusion and conflict between my style of working and the hierarchical corporate culture of the new organization.

I eventually resigned, but only after I had been pushed into Autistic Burnout. I have learned from this mistake, and I hope other people can as well.

(Reposted from LinkedIn)

My Autism Burnout story

Embrace Autism is creating an "Ultimate Guide of Autistic Burnout", and asked their online community for their Autistic Burnout stories. This was limited to 350 words, and I focused on what lead up to my burnout.

In later posts I will likely discuss what I have learned to help reduce Autistic meltdowns (autonomic storms) and hopefully avoid future Autistic Burnouts (crossing fingers, toes, etc, etc).

See also: Embrace Autism articles on Burnout




I’m a white cis-gender heterosexual male born in 1968, formally assessed Autistic in 2024. 

I have been part of the high-tech sector since my teens. In 2000 I was told there was quite a bit of Autism in the sector, and I should look into it.  I saw the ways Autistic people were alleged “defective”, so assumed that had nothing to do with me.

My mother’s death in 2018 caused me to see a psychotherapist, and after seeing me for several months I was asked if I had considered I was Autistic. I had doubts, partly because of the concept of an Autistic mask. I was bad at acting.

I never had regular job interviews, and was brought into organizations because someone knew my skills and way of working.  An exception occurred when I was part of a merger in 2018 of an organization I had been at for 7 years. The new employer was a strict hierarchy with a strict chain of command, which saw job titles as exclusive jurisdiction.  While I was focused on trying to get high-priority work done, working the way I had at the previous employer, all some people saw was me violating a social hierarchy.

In summer 2022 I contracted Lyme Disease. Fatigue meant I didn’t have the energy to mask, and thus I finally accepted I had been masking. Accusations of being rude and condescending to an allistic coworker were made. I would respond explaining Autism, and with logic and data, but that only made things worse.


By spring 2023 I was accused of workplace harassment and placed on sick leave. That threw me into a full-on burnout, unable to manage regular life tasks. I lost all personal doubt I had about Autism. When sick-leave ran out at the end of the summer I resigned, not seeing any room for me in that organization. 


As I write this in summer 2024, I’m much better, but still recovering. I believe learning I’m Autistic, and learning about spoon theory, will help me avoid similar situations in the future.  Learning about Autism includes learning about Allism.


Thursday, November 30, 2023

Is there a religious war in Western Asia? It certainly isn’t a war between two “countries”.

I want to encourage people to gain the context of these events rather than believing what happened this year is new or surprising.

This is what I do: I analyze policy like I analyze software, and look for interactions between policies as well as operating systems and other aspects of the environment. I don’t blindly accept what I’m told by marketing material, but analyze the actual policy/code. I look for logical fallacies in claims being made, and try to figure out the truth under those fallacies.

A previous LinkedIN connection wanted to talk about “Hamas” and the most recent skirmish, rejecting that there could be any context required to understand what was happening. They were responding to a post that suggested, “If you have ever wondered what you would do during The Holocaust, Slavery, or the Civil Rights Movement: You’re doing it NOW.”

The previous LinkedIN connection posted: “What do you believe the appropriate response to the Hamas war crimes, as you admitted they are, should have been?”

This is a pretty typical loaded question logical fallacy.

This is the nature of most discussions on this topic: loads of logical fallacies. There is a desire for this to be black-and-white (it isn't even close), that it is clear what "started it", for there to be "two sides" to pick from, and so-on.


It is possible to recognize and mourn the deaths of people on all sides of today's borders between land declared the jurisdiction of a UN created UN member (Government of Israel) and those in the Gaza Strip and West Bank where self-determination has been blocked by external forces for over a century.

Any attempt to "two sides" discussion of this centuries-on Holy War is false, as this is not a "war" between two countries, and has been ongoing since long before “Hamas” was founded in 1987. While I strongly condemn the violence from all belligerents, I rightfully hold UN member states – especially those which claim to be democratic and protective of human rights – to a higher standard than angry mobs or terrorist groups.

I am aware that the “Change and Reform list“ that “Hamas” campaigned within was “elected” in 2006 under a Plurality Block Voting system. I have been critical of claims that brand-centered “elections” are representative of populations for a very long time. However, to claim that Gaza is currently under a democratic government, or that residents of that region (not “citizens”) should be held accountable in the same way for actions carried out under the “Hamas” brand as citizens of a “democratic” UN member state branded "Israel", is a total misrepresentation of reality.

I’m not a fan of the electoral system or other weak democratic institutions of Israel any more than I'm a fan of Canada’s weak democratic institutions. However, I do not believe this is about Benjamin Netanyahu or any other individual. If Israeli citizens feel their government doesn’t represent them and is inducing violence and making them less safe, they have mechanisms to fix that which residents in regions that don’t have an alleged “democratic” government claiming jurisdiction do not. If citizens of other nations recognize the Israeli government is in violation of International Law, they can push their governments to hold the Government of Israel to account (including holding governments like the US, which regularly blocks accountability, to account for regularly disrespecting International Law).


The previous LinkedIN connection suggested this is about “Radical Islam”. The Government of Israel was created via “Radical Zionism” and “Radical Christianity”. The then-Christian Empire dominated United Nations (formed 1945) created the Government of Israel in 1947 via partitioning British occupied Palestine.

We should discuss the Balfour Declaration of 1917

We should discuss the Likud Party Platform (such as from 1973) and its genocidal call for "between the Sea and the Jordan there will only be Israeli sovereignty". We should talk about Irgun/Etzel, the political predecessor to Likud, which operated between 1931 and 1949. It was generally recognized as a terrorist group before rebranding.


We should discuss how the United States (or sometimes Britain) will veto any resolutions to try to hold the Government of Israel accountable at the more modern United Nations.

We should discuss oil under the Gaza Strip.

We should discuss how Evangelical Christians believe Jews having exclusive control over that land will lead towards the Rapture / Second Coming of Christ. From that randomly chosen article: "What happens to the Jews and Palestinians is, to put it very mildly, collateral damage."

It is obvious that the United States and other parts of the Christian Anglosphere are as much a part of the violence in the region as “Jews” and “Arabs” (including Arab Jews, given those aren't distinct categories). This is not what we under Christian Anglosphere governments are indoctrinated to believe are the only belligerents.

Thursday, June 1, 2023

Anthropocentric Environmentalism, Anthropogenic Climate Change, and All Our Relations.

I've been (or was) part of what was called the environmental movement from an early age, having a respect for plants and animals that I was told was kinda weird by family and friends growing up. I worry about the mental state of people's pets, and never felt comfortable with the idea of "owning" an animal (no judgment on anyone else -- this is only a personal discomfort).

I eat animals, but prefer to do it in what in my mind is respectful. The closer plants and animals look like themselves the better -- fish have just always "tasted" better to me if the head and tail are still all there.

When I moved from Sudbury to go to Carleton University, I met up with "fellow" environmentalists that connected me with the Peace and Environment Resource Center and from there to the Green Party, etc, etc.


Fast forward to the early 2000's and I started to not see myself in the Green parties, and started to not see myself in PERC. I saw interconnections between the Open (source, access, government, science, etc) movements and Climate Change and other "peace" and "environmental" policies which they did not.They would regularly tell me it was the wrong priority and to stop talking about anything outside narrow silos of thought.

I had to move my activism elsewhere.

Green Party leadership would say things such as "the Economy is a wholly owned subsidiary of the environment" and the GPO even said it would abolish the provincial Environment ministry as all of the government is subservient to the environment and those policies should be core to every operation of government and every department.

They would say these things, but not believe it or echo it in policies: they were apparently brand slogans, nothing more.


Increasingly in the 2000's I became depressed. I didn't think "humanity" was ever going to change, as "humans" were simply too disconnected from the real physical living reality to understand how to protect their own species, let alone any other.

Logically I felt the big problems wouldn't happen in my or Rina's lifetimes: we don't have children, so I simply have to stop caring about these things at all. I'll be long dead before things get really bad. It was a very hard and depressing way for me to try to think, but that is what I was actively trying to do : to distance some of my emotions from my Godkids/etc, and what their lives might be like.


Then in 2020 I finally/properly bumped into anti-racism, from there anti-colonialism, and to learning about domestic (meaning Indigenous) nations.

My stress levels dropped considerably. I felt hope for the first time in an extremely long time.


The "problem" wasn't humanity or human nature, but specific problematic worldviews. Worldviews can be changed by reversing ongoing colonial/genocidal policies (Save the Indian, Save the Man ; Save the Indian in the Child ; protect Indigenous languages/cultures in the Constitution/Charter rather than English or French ; etc) .


The "Conservationist" movement I had believed in was based on the notion that all humans were Anthropocentric and Androcentric, which is simply false (and is in fact part of White Supremacy).


I see connecting to local Indigenous Communities (such as can be found via the Native Friendship Center movement -- Odawa NFC for me) to be critical for any actual Climate Action. These are groups connected to peoples who have had worldviews/laws/etc that help deal with Climate Change -- and these laws were put in place on this continent long before European contact. Domestic (meaning Indigenous) law itself is a form of Climate action policy, long before Climate Change became a visible problem to anyone.

Westerners aren't going to be leaders and should never stand in front of Indigenous peoples. We must show up and be willing to be students, followers and helpers. We still need to unlearn the very worldviews and mindsets which are the cause of existential problems such as Climate Change, and this will happen through interacting with and helping the community.

I don't actually believe in "Anthropogenic Climate Change" as it is not "human activity" in the generic sense which is the problem, but activities originating from a very narrow set of worldviews which have been extremely colonial/genocidal in spreading across large parts of the planet.




There is an extremely common belief that there is no way to solve this problem, or that "democracy" is too slow to deal with it. That policies to deal with Climate Change could somehow hurt "the economy" (however subjectively that term is used). Etc, etc... Over the decades I have heard so many excuses for inaction.

  • One of the "slowest" forms of democracy is participatory democracy, where all citizens with near-universal suffrage have a say in decision making.
  • This is in contrast with representative democracy where a small subset of people make all the decisions.
  • This is in contrast with a Constitutional Monarchy where all the power is actually vested in the crown through a crown created/authorized/etc Constitution. Canada's constitution has only received minor amendments since the first of 11 British North America Acts was passed in 1867 by the British Parliament -- against the wishes or even awareness of the VAST majority of the relevant stakeholders on this continent.
  • This is in contrast with a Monarchy/Dictatorship/etc where one person (with the help of their chosen aids/etc) make all the decisions. The Westminster Parliamentary System was first designed as a debating club to advise the Crown. (And the Senate? )

The Haudenosaunee Confederacy is the oldest participatory democracy on the planet, with non-western scholars generally agreeing that it was likely founded in 1142 (For comparison, John II Komnenos /  Comnenus was the Eastern Roman/Byzantine emperor at the time).

The English called them Five Nations and then Six Nations when the Tuscarora joined this advanced democratic League of Nations in 1722. (which predates the European League of Nations, later called the United Nations, or the European Union, by quite a bit). Their Constitution is generally called the Great Law of Peace in English.

For Comparison, Britain only had comparable suffrage for its weaker democratic Constitutional Monarchy in 1928.

When did the Haudenosaunee confederacy start advocating for policy changes in reaction to climate change? From what I've heard from a few people who are citizens of one of the six nations, their elders started in the 1970's.

Canada, on the other hand, is one of the weaker forms of "Democracy" as a colony with a Constitutional Monarchy, and still actively lobbies internationally for PRO-Climate Change Policies (policies which are universally understood to make the issue worse).


Democracy isn't the problem. In fact, if Canada more closely resembled a democracy, it would not be engaged in so many horrible activities (on this continent and beyond). These are not activities "Canadians" have approved of, but activities they aren't even accurately informed about.

For me, the #LandBack movement and the restoration of Indigenous self-determination (as should be protected under the UN charter as well as UNDRIP) isn't only a matter of "the morally right thing to do". It is a key policy to help protect life on this planet. Global Indigenous peoples saving themselves can serve as examples to teach those that still hold harmful/shallow anthropocentric and androcentric worldviews how to survive, as westerners have totally disconnected themselves from life itself.


Some other potentially interesting links:

Monday, May 22, 2023

Heteronormative sports and fitness, and workplace (sexual) harassment

I have been abruptly sent on a journey of exploration and acceptance of myself. I will finally be going through a process to get an official "diagnosis" about Autism. So many people around me suspect, and so much of what I read/hear/watch resonates with me.


I am an open (source, government, access, etc) type person, and this blog is all about sharing and exploring thoughts (well -- my thoughts -- after all, it is all about me, me, me -- ya, right. Please share your thoughts in comments, as long as they aren't Austism Rejection).



At the moment I am at Movati waiting for a class. The classes are amazing, but the environment regularly reminds me of how I didn't fit into specific aspects of high-school and earlier.

I am not individually competitive, and I hate team sports as I always felt like I am causing the team to lose. I'm awkward, both in my sometimes overly expressive movements as well as my communication. I don't like watching sports as it is the fun that matters to me, so I don't care who wins or loses. I don’t see the point of picking favorite teams, brands, whatever. I enjoy watching my godchildren play -- but it is the play and their having fun that I enjoy, and I can't remotely get excited about who scored/won/etc.

I strive to be my best self, but my concept of best most often doesn't match the concept of best or the expectations of other people around me.





I find the change rooms at these types of venues very problematic. I am aware of my cis-heterosexual privilege. So many people are walking around naked/etc, and these environments are designed based on the oddball notion of a heterosexual gender binary.


I have had to train myself to accept the classes. For Zumba classes I even felt the need to ask permission of the instructor to be learning the moves from her. Other instructors will demonstrate a pose or the use of a ball/foam roller/etc on their own bodies or touching someone that they ask to be a "model". All of this is declared fine, but I have to get used to that.


For Zumba I didn't want to try to learn dance moves from fellow students. Even in the co-ed section of Movati (they have a “women’s” only section), classes are female dominated. Not 50%+1, but more like 90+% women. It feels creepy to me to be looking at a female student as closely and as long as I would need to in order to learn the moves from them.




Some of the discomfort is the physical environment, such as the offensive cis-hetero-normative design of change rooms, bathrooms, etc.

Other aspects are social norms. My brain has a hard time figuring out the magical line someone else has drawn between being your happy friendly self in a multi-gendered environment, and what someone might consider to be sexual harassment.



When I was younger I was able to help girls/women in my age range. I was a good listener, and could offer logic in response to questions. I was perfectly willing and able to tell them how beautiful they were on the inside and on the outside. In some cases I learned at a young age how many females are victims of various forms of rape. That reality of women's lives is far more common than I believe most of the general public is willing to admit.


I have a (married, family, etc) male friend that made the "mistake" of trying to do the same type of comforting interaction as an adult. A female co-worker was feeling very depressed, including feeling they were ugly. My friend mentioned that she was attractive and should feel more confident in herself. No problem in the moment, but later this became a whole workplace sexual harassment accusation. The lack of trust grew between him and his workplace, and eventually he had to leave what had become a toxic workplace for a growing number of reasons.




It was only in 2012 that I became aware of so-called "Workplace Harassment" policies. This is when Ontario added the grounds "gender identity" and "gender expression" to the human rights code.

The closer I looked at the policies of my workplace, the more I knew I would eventually be slapped and possibly even terminated for violating that policy. And this was a full 7 years before the concept of Autism became real to me, as well as the possibility it could apply to me.



Let's clear up something that should be obvious: women are treated horribly in the workplace under the "Canadian", "United States" and similar governments/cultures. I don't mean some Mad Men misogynist past, but ongoing today. Androcentrism, Capitalism and Colonialism are core to what Canada is, and I would suggest that misogyny is a core part of Canadian identity, values, and culture.


However, workplace policies rarely (if ever) take an intersectional approach. In order to harm-reduce in one area caused by Colonial Canadian culture, policies generally involve harm-increases in other areas.

There is a whole concept of TERF, which is an acronym for trans-exclusionary radical feminist. Rather than taking an intersectional approach, we have activists focused on the needs of their specific demographic trait to the exclusion of the other. This issue is not one-sided, as some trans activists simply don’t care about the ongoing reality of misogyny and rape culture. These trans activists speak as if those issues are somehow in the past because -- well -- likely some man on the TV said so.


These workplace policies are WASP (White Anglo-Saxon Protestant), which means there are subjective definitions of nearly all aspects of the policy: using the phrase "known or ought reasonably to be known" is extremely culturally specific. Who subjectively decides what is reasonable?



As a likely autistic person, these "workplace harassment" policies essentially put a massive target on me. They are all effectively about rejecting people like me, and many other forms of diverse people, as valid persons in the workplace. In my case they are seeking to ensure my autistic mask remains thick to retain what some call "collegial" or "professional" work environments.. If my mask ever slips and my true Autistic self is exposed in the workplace and a non-Autistic person gets "offended", then I will be disciplined.



There are ways to orient policies and workplace cultures that don't generate offense, but those are rarely (if ever) how these Western European worldview imposing workplaces are set up.

Recommended videos:

Sunday, February 26, 2023

Why it is dangerous to use Artificial Intellegence as an editor.

While I'm not a fan of this Eurocentric colonial document, the so-called "Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms" (part of Canada Act 1982) lists as a fundamental freedom:

(b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication;


I received an automated message from Blogger (Owned by Google) indicating an article titled "Evidence suggests broadcasters like the BBC don't want our money" written in January 2015 was unpublished.


From the email:

Why was your blog post unpublished?

Your content has violated our Spam policy. Please visit our Community Guidelines page linked in this email to learn more.

 

The Blogger Community Guidelines contains the following:


Spam
Do not spam. This may include unwanted promotional or commercial content, unwanted content that is created by an automated program, unwanted repetitive content, nonsensical content, or anything that appears to be a mass solicitation.



The first paragraph is a good summary of the article I wrote:


Some copyright holders and their lobbyists claim the reason people infringe Copyright is because they don't want to pay, and that copyright infringement is the largest single problem reducing their revenue potential. Evidence I've seen in my decades involved in the copyright revision process suggested neither are true, and that barriers put up by the copyright holders are the largest incentive to infringe and the largest barrier to revenue potential.


(Full article with original links available via the Wayback Engine).


There isn't anything in that article that could remotely be considered SPAM.  Sure, there were links to the BBC and their iPlayer (pages that no longer exist), but that wasn't as a promotion of their product or service but a critique of the corporation.

To get the article back up I have done some link checking (removing broken links), and removed any links to BBC.

I don't know if it was an employee at the BBC (or a devotee of the corporation) that flagged the content for review by a Google bot, but I have a hard time understanding the potential motivations of anyone else.

First rule of BBC club is that you can't talk about BBC club?

Sunday, January 29, 2023

"I am Canadian", and I engage in "Nice Racism"



I've been reading "NICE RACISM: How Progressive White People Perpetuate Racial Harm" by Robin DiAngelo.


As I read, I can't help but have that "I Am Canadian" Molson slogan and commercial from a few decades ago in my mind.

 

  • I'm not a lumberjack, or a fur trader, but I support unrestricted resource extraction no matter what the harm
  • I don't live in an igloo, or eat blubber, or own a dogsled, and I have no concerns about the genocidal policies by Canadian Governments against the people who do. (This ramped up in the 1950's, even after Europe started to grapple with the concept of genocide in the late 1940's)
  • I live under a Constitutional Monarchy, not a self-determined responsible democracy
  • I believe it is perfectly reasonable to require someone to "swear (or affirm), That I will be faithful, And bear true allegiance" to a White Supremacist institution as a condition of becoming a Canadian Citizen, or to hold a wide variety of positions of authority (member of parliament, senator, etc).
  • I partly define my identity by thinking I, as a Canadian, am better than a citizen of the United States -- That Canada is better than the United States
  • I believe Canadians are polite people
  • I believe Racism is a US and not Canadian problem
  • I believe Canada is a "just society" and respects human rights domestically and internationally, even thought I have never read the Canadian Constitution, Canadian Charter, or the reports of any Human Rights body discussing Canada
  • I believe all Indigenous Nations on the northern part of this continent lost a war and ceded all their land to Britain and/or Canada in some distant past (that has nothing to do with today), even though nobody can name the wars, offer dates, or provide any documentation for these alleged events
  • I believe "We are a multicultural society"
  • I believe "We pay respect to Indigenous people"
  • I believe "Canada never had slavery"
  • My name is Russell, and I am Canadian!!!


The last three (before my name as the expected finale) were taken from page 98 of "Nice Racism", in a chapter discussing the moves to innocence of White progressives.

As a generalization, Canadians think of themselves as more "progressive" than citizens of the USA. Rather than this being a reason for Canadians to believe this book by a US author has nothing to do with them, it is actually part of what makes this book (as a percentage of the population) more about Canadians than US citizens.

US citizens tend to be more loud and proud patriotic people : Canadian identity includes the belief we are more "nice" and "polite".

I could go through each of the bullets I threw in above, but the ones from the book are a good start.

We are a multicultural society?

The Dominion of Canada is a bi-colonial (Britain, France) series of institutions.

During the P.E. Trudeau era, bi-colonialism was rebranded biculturalism (meaning English and French), and then dishonestly marketed as multiculturalism.

Even the notion that Canada is a "just society" was used as a rhetorical device by the Trudeau government as part of the marketing of what was essentially racist bi-colonial policies.

Culture is narrowly defined as food, clothing/fashion, and other more superficial things which people are allowed to maintain. When it comes to less superficial things it is made clear in the new so-called "Charter of Rights and Freedoms" passed as part of Canada Act 1982 that the official languages, worldviews and laws of Canada remain British and French.

Even though this continent has been a polyglot for tens of thousands of years, with many nations and worldviews, two foreign European worldviews are aggressively imposed by the Dominion of Canada governments.

While Canadian loyalists are quick to call Quebec's Bill 96 racist, they are generally unwilling to recognize that Canada's Charter and most of the core policies of the Trudeau government are far more racist. The Charter isn't a temporary provincial bill that can easily be changed, but part of the racist Canadian legal framework that other bills (including Bill 96) are judged by.


If you have done some of the work to learn about Racism and White Supremacy (systems, not about individuals), you will notice what qualifies as "Rights and Freedoms" has a clear White racial frame that is narrowly focused on the concerns of peoples that emerged from the unique history of Western Europe (a focus on Britain and France).

We pay respect to Indigenous people?

Also during the P.E. Trudeau Era, Trudeau's Minister of Indian Affairs, Jean Chrétien, tabled what ended up being called the "1969 White Paper". This was the then Liberal government's "final solution" to the so-called "Indian Problem". It would be a final "Kill the Indian, Save the Man" policy that wiped out any respect or recognition of Indigenous peoples.

The Trudeau Government tried this again in the 1980's during the so-called "patriation" of the Constitution, and required the Constitutional Express to ensure that the Trudeau's governments Racist/Genocidal ideology wasn't fully encoded in Canada Act 1982.

I mention P.E. Trudeau as many Canadians believe he was a "progressive" Prime Minister. His attitude towards Indigenous Peoples, who he regularly claimed were a conquered people and his support of many genocidal policies, is actually quite informative for understanding what qualifies as "progressive" by Canadians. The younger Trudeau uses more careful and "politically correct" language, but upholds the same general policy goals of his father's government.

I was born in 1968, the same year P.E. Trudeau first became Prime Minister. I believe that P.E. Trudeau was the most visibly racist Prime Minister during my lifetime, as the marketing of racist policies has radically changed over my lifetime even if the overall policy goals have not.


Some individuals may have stopped openly calling for "Kill the Indian, Save the Man" genocidal policies, and some believe in "Diversity, Equity & Inclusion" of Indigenous peoples into Canadian society.  They may not recognize that advocating for inclusion into colonial "Canadian" law/society is itself disrespectful, and is in fact the goal of most of Canada's "Kill the Indian, Save the Man" genocidal policies.


There are some individual Canadians who are advocating the recognition of the Right of Self-Determination of Indigenous peoples. This is a right recognized in the UN Charter that Canada has aggressively opposed starting before the (Eurocentric) League of Nations became the United Nations. Canada was one of the 4 offensive nations that voted against the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (UNDRIP) which also recognizes the Right of Self-Determination.

As punishment for sending a representative to the League of Nations in 1923 to have their Right of Self-Determination recognized, Canada sent in the RCMP in 1924 to forcibly depose the Haudenosaunee Confederacy -- the oldest Participatory Democracy on the Planet. Canada still refuses to recognize the right of self-determination, or allow any responsible government to be seen to represent Indigenous nations to the Canadian government under Section 35 of Canada's own constitution. Opposing democracy and responsible governments, Canada still relies on the fundamentally racist section 91(24) of Canada's Constitution to determine who to limit "consultation" of Indigenous individuals to.

Imagine for a second if Germany had a section of their constitution that granted Power to a specific level of government for "Jews, and Lands reserved for the Jews". Once you do, you can begin to understand how Racist Canada's Constitution and laws derived from it are.


Note the "s" in peoples: This isn't related to individuals or Canada's alleged multiculturalism. This involves many different nations/peoples and not some pan-Indigenous concept. Canada was one of the Eurocentric "nations" that opposed the rights of "peoples" being protected in the so-called "Universal Declaration of Human Rights", which itself constituted a rejection of the notion that UN UDHR is universal. Rights recognized in that declaration are focused on individuals.

These are basic Human Right of peoples that Canada actively denies: Canada is not respectful of Indigenous peoples or their rights, and many genocidal policies are ongoing.

Some individual Canadian genocidal policies like Residential Schools have recently (within my lifetime) ended, but the overall genocidal policy goals simply moved to the child welfare and other systems.

Most Canadians, however, believe the myth that Canada (the system, the governments, etc) are a force for good and justice in the world, and do not feel any personal responsibility for ongoing genocidal policies that these governments do in their name (and thus they DO have responsibilities, even if they are unaware of the harm from their individual action or inaction).


Canada never had slavery?


I have heard this my entire life, and even when growing up the dates never matched up in my head. I assumed, because of what I now recognize as Autism, that I was somehow wrong and didn't understand.

In 1833 Britain started on a gradual project to abolish slavery. It was not made immediately illegal in the entire of the British Empire, and Britain even compensated so-called "owners" for this gradual policy change.

The USA claims they abolished slavery in 1865, at the end of what they called the "American Civil War", the second of such civil wars where British colonies on this continent fought each other to separate from each other.

Britain unilaterally created the Dominion of Canada in 1867: without the permission or even awareness of the vast majority of inhabitants of the lands that were alleged to be governed by "Canada" at the time. There was then the massive violent colonial expansion of Canada on this continent that happened after that date. (The gc.ca map shows the dates, but the explanations are pretty much propaganda.  Canada never legally acquired "Rupert's Land and the North Western Territory", etc).


A component of the belief Canada never had slavery is that anything that these individuals or their colonial governments did prior to the passage of the first of 11 BNA Acts doesn't count. Somehow what people in these colonies thought and did magically changed between that bill receiving Royal Assent on 29th March 1867 and going into effect 1st July 1867.


The Underground Railroad went both ways across the imaginary line drawn between colonies who remained loyal to Britain and the 13 British colonies that launched the first civil war between British colonies on this continent to separate (what the USA labels a War of Independence 1775-1783).

The primary differences between the United States, Canada, and the Confederate States was not morality, but economic: The economies of the most southern British colonies on this continent were more dependent on cheap labor (slavery is primarily an economic policy), while the more northern regions were moving into other industries.  Where the south relied on cheap labor, the north relied on cheap resources (and thus more aggressive dispossession of Indigenous jurisdiction over land from which these resources would be extracted without concern for any future consequences).



 

As I discuss each of these aspects of Canadian Culture, I am including myself. I have been part of and indoctrinated by Canadian Culture. It is only recently that I have become aware of and capable of questioning some of those myths.

One of the book chapters is titled "Let's talk about shame".

DiAngelo included a quote from an article by Joseph Burgo Ph.D..

Although many people use the two words "guilt" and "shame" interchangeably, from a psychological perspective, they actually refer to different experiences. Guilt and shame sometimes go hand in hand; the same action may give rise to feelings of both shame and guilt, where the former reflects how we feel about ourselves and the latter involves an awareness that our actions have injured someone else. In other words, shame relates to self; guilt to others.

DiAngelo discusses how White people are often more comfortable expressing shame than guilt as guilt suggests we are personally responsible and that they need to do something (do better, be better). Shame doesn't suggest there is anything to do -- you are what you are, and that's it.

I have realized that I don't feel shame or guilt when it comes to my Whiteness. It is possible that the way that I think might help fellow White people move away from trying to protect their personal comfort/feelings/reputation/etc and move on to helping fix structural problems.


I look at Racism and other systems/policies like I do technology.

What I am, my phenotype including my lack of melanin in my skin, is hardware. Biology is hardware.

Isms, like Capitalism, Socialism, Colonialism, Racism, Androcentrism, Anthropocentrism are software.



I personally categorize some of these systems as malware, and societies with these systems are in need of anti-virus and other anti-malware work.



I know for a FACT I'm deeply personally infected with Racism. This malware causes me to have harmed and continue to harm other people, and I have further infected other people because Racism is contagious.

I am publicly admitting I have engaged in Racist activities. For most of my life I have actively upheld Racist policies because I had not yet recognized this set of software/policies as malware.

It will take a long time, if it is even possible in my time remaining alive, to entirely rid myself of the impacts from the malware infection of Racism. That is not an excuse to do nothing, but a recognition that I must put considerable time into anti-malware work.



These systemic/software problems are not about biology/hardware, and they are not something that we are. This is all software which can (an in the case of malware, must) change.

We should not feel shame, and we should never feel like there is nothing we can do.

I am quite angry with "Canada" (A set of policies, not a place or a group of people) which not only actively spreads and enforces malware, but seeks to make it illegal to work on anti-malware strategies. There is so much funding to spread Canadian malware, including entire Canadian Federal government departments.





I Am Canadian, but not a loyal, patriotic or proud Canadian.