The Book of Laws

In an attempt to establish a coherent worldview, I am going to try and write down a comprehensive summary of my political beliefs. I hope I can build on this is a Cartesian sort of way, and find where the inconsistencies lie. This list is intended to state my positions on issues are are currently contentious in Canada and around the world. It is not exhaustive, and does not include any of the issues on which there exists substantial agreement in Canada (such as the right to private ownership of land or the wisdom of inflation-targeting monetary policy).

Blair's Manifesto circa 2008:

The ultimate goal of all governments should be to act in the best interest of humanity.

The process of globalization should be directed as much as possible toward enabling the creation of a sustainable, global and democratic meritocracy.

Program spending should never exceed revenues in developed countries except in times of national crisis.

Governments should try to avoid over-regulation and keep themselves as small and efficient as possible.

The world's democracies should work tirelessly to spread liberal democracy to other nations, and defend any liberal democracy attacked by a non-democratic state. Israel is a liberal democracy and deserving of our support against its authoritarian enemies.

True free trade is a non-zero sum game: all parties benefit and therefore its development should be advanced as much as possible.

The current system of international trade disproportionately benefits developed countries and can be improved.

The European Union provides a useful, if imperfect, model for a future global federation. I therefore strongly support its continued development.

National and ethnic identity is an important cornerstone of human culture, and should be encouraged and maintained. This should not be seen as inconsistent with political integration.

Nationalism and international competition have the potential to foster great achievements and should be fostered. Again, I don't believe there is inconsistency here.

The long term exploration and eventual colonization of space is ultimately necessary to secure humanity's survival and should be supported accordingly.

The UN is currently a mostly irrelevant international body. A complete overhaul is necessary for it to survive.

Homosexuality is naturally occurring and is not wrong in any way. Equal rights must be afforded to GLBT's, including the right to marry, adopt, and pursue any career they wish without discrimination.

Affirmative action programs that are based on barriers that restrict an applicant's ability to achieve the otherwise necessary qualifications (primarily poverty or socioeconomic status)are good because they promote equality of opportunity. Racially, ethnically or gender based programs aimed at atonement do not have the same effect.

The current procedures for creating GMO foods do not pose a significant risk to health or the environment. GMO's should continue to be used to increase agricultural effectiveness.

Health care of the highest standard should be available free of charge to all citizens. Exceptions should be made in cases where personal choice places undue burdens on the system (smokers who get lung cancer should have to foot their bill).

With regard to non-urgent medical procedures, people should be able to pay at private clinics to lower wait times. This is a win-win situation as it shortens lines at public facilities as well.

It is a great irony that societies who value freedom and democracy so highly have so many citizens who spend a majority of their waking hours operating in a authoritarian environment at work. Increased transparency, accountability and democratization of corporations should be encouraged, and tax incentives should be given for the development of cooperative enterprises.

Climate change will have severe negative consequences for the earth, and the current warming has, at the very least, been exacerbated by human activity. It is of vital importance to limit the production of greenhouse gases in order to mitigate these effects.

Humanity is close to reaching a peak in oil production capacity. The peak for conventional sources will probably occur by 2020, and the overall peak a few years afterward. With growing demand, this will present severe problems, and will necessitate a shift away from fossil fuels.

The majority of resource wealth should be invested in programs that will provide long-term economic security to their region, so that stability can be maintained once the resources run out.

Protection of the earth's biodiversity will continue to be a key challenge for humanity. Programs that reduce land use should be pursued, with the eventual goal of providing for stable populations of all animals and plants.

Generally, I support tax policy that tends toward the taxation of negatives, like consumption and pollution, and tends away from taxing positives, like income.

I would support a heavy estate tax on estates valued above a certain amount, with exceptions for owners of family businesses and farms. I would not be averse to offsetting revenues from this tax by making income tax less progressive, allowing people to have more of what they legitimately earn.

Government is more effective when it is more participatory, and with new technologies this is easier than ever. Soliciting ideas and opinions with regard to public policy can provide a good starting point for policymakers.

Governments should provide incentives for couples to have relatively small families, especially in developing countries.

Quebec, although it has a distinct cultural and societal identity, is a vital part of Canada, and should remain so. However, the threat of separation should not be used to extort Quebec-friendly decisions from the federal government.

In the event of Quebec secession, federalist areas, especially the Aboriginal-dominated north, must be given the option to remain in Canada.

The current arrangement whereby First Nations people pay no taxes to the Canadian government should be amended to include an exception for taxes on alcohol and tobacco.

The current system of relations between the governments of the western hemisphere and the indigenous people of the Americas is unacceptable as a long term solution. Alternatives and modifications should be explored.

Corporations, lobby groups and unions should not be allowed to contribute to political campaigns. Only citizens should have that right, and the maximum individual donation should be capped.

Israel should have the right to exist peacefully, within its 1967 borders except where demographics make this illogical, and provided it provides gradual right of return for Palestinian refugees and their first-generation direct descendants.

Existing alongside Israel should be a democratic and peaceful Palestinian state, comprising the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, as well as a connecting thoroughfare.

The Old City in Jerusalem should ideally be a democratically governed, sovereign city-state that provides for the worship of all faiths. Its current citizens should have the option of Israeli, Palestinian or Jerusalem citizenship at the outset.

Researchers should have license to use stem cells in projects designed to enhance medical knowledge and treatments, or other worthwhile scientific goals.

Those people who are able to work, and refuse the opportunity, should not expect financial support from the government.

Abortion should be available on demand at any point before the fetus reaches viability.

States should have the right to limit immigration based on their economic needs, and discriminate based on the skills of applicants.

In densely populated areas, it makes more sense to group students in schools based on their needs rather than their location.

The legalization of marijuana, subject to the same restrictions and taxes as tobacco, would divert revenue from drug dealers to the government, and would likely decrease, rather than increase, usage.

I support Canada's current gun laws, with the exception of the long gun registry, and think they strike a good balance between individual rights and public safety.

I agree with Stephen Harper's statement that the Senate must either change, or face extinction.

The concept of offering prizes to private groups for certain technological innovations has proven to be successful in stimulating innovation and should continue.

Fission power, though imperfect, should be a part of the short-medium term energy strategy of developed nations. The development of fusion power should be a focus for nuclear policy.

I do not believe in capital punishment. However, I believe that inmate work policies can help to reduce the cost of the prison system.

Canada's policy of official bilingualism is a good one. On the other hand, parts of Bill 101 in Quebec should be modified, as they are discriminatory.

Canadian troops should remain in Afghanistan for as long as it takes to establish a peaceful, democratic state.

Education systems should be designed around a uniform curriculum, supported by subject-specific standardized testing, consistent throughout both public and private schools.

Special-needs students should have the option to attend private schools which better serve their needs, and should receive some financial support to this end. School voucher programs for non-special needs students are unnecessary in Canada.

Government funding for amateur sport should be increased, and divided more evenly among internationally prominent sports.

A great strength of Canada is our ability to create consensus out of disunity, to find solutions that may not work out in theory, but that work just fine in practice. We should apply this strength through increased involvement in global problems.

Canada should not be afraid to engage enemies as well as friends diplomatically. There is rarely harm in talking.

Canada should view the United States as a great friend and partner, but not as a model for development, and not as a superior whose wishes should be complied with unconditionally.

Immigration to Canada should be evaluated based on the skills of the applicant (compared with Canada's economic needs), and their potential contribution to Canadian life, rather than how long they have been waiting or what country they are from.

Proportional representation in the House of Commons is not the answer to calls for Canadian electoral reform. Perhaps it would be better applied to the Senate.

Some kind of carbon-reduction program, be it a carbon tax or a cap and trade system, is likely necessary in the fight against climate change. Any such program must not be used to redistribute wealth among regions, as the current Green Shift program would do.

I'm sure more issues will arise and some of my opinions may change. Nonetheless, every journey has a beginning...

A More Civilized Age (Jul. 31, 2006)

There is something about the past, isn't there? I am a student, and a lover, of history and I've never been quite sure why. I had guessed it had something to do with the lessons one could learn from the past, and also something to do with wanting to understand concepts such as virtue, courage and innovation. Then it hit me. The thing which draws me to history more than anything else, I think, is elegance.

After this revelation, I started thinking. It turns out that many of my interests and passions are of things that are suprisingly elegant in different ways. Despite their differences, I think it is the elegance that calls to me. In history, the things that I love to study the most are among history's more elegant moments. Bismark pulling the strings of Europe to unite Germany in the 1860's and 70's, Nelson's brilliance at Trafalger in 1805, the construction of so many of the world's wonders which are stunning in their simplicity (the pyramids, the Great Wall, Albert Speer's planned Berlin), the list goes on. Even Nazi Germany, a towering monument of evil, was evil with style, and the elegance of their early campaigns, the blitzkrieg etc, is only rarely challenged in the long history of civilization. This makes it fascinating to study.

Elegance is closely tied to efficiency, which I had previously known to be something I aspire to. For something to be beyond the normal level of efficiency there is a necessary element of elegance to it. Branching out from history, there are a myriad of other examples where elegance underlies my passion for something. In film, the films that I consider truly great express a mountain of detail and intrigue in a simple, dare I say elegant, sort of way. Chariots of Fire is one of the most refined movies I have ever seen, Star Wars gives us a picture of an entire, fabulously detailed galaxy silloutted against the backdrop of a very simple tale of a fall from grace and subsequent salvation and Casablanca, well, there is no word that describes it better than elegant.

The same is true of the Lord of the Rings. Those books are written magnificently (aside from about 200 pages in Fellowship) because they express so much detail and grandeur in mere words. Elegance in writing and speaking is called eloquence, and that too, has always be something I have striven to achieve. To give further examples, sailing is a tremedously elegant endeavour and I think that is why it so interests me.

The men, fictional and real, who I strive to emulate, live their lives with tremendous elegance. Three of the fictional are Thrawn, Thomas Crown and Jack McCoy. The cars I like are expressions of elegance, just take a look at the Aston Martin DB9. Sports? Track is the simplest of all of them, and watching El Guerrouj unleash a 300m kick to defeat Lagat is like watching elegance in motion. Soccer is called "The Beautiful Game" for a reason. Many other sports too, can be elegant and that is one of the reasons I love them. Macs? I don't even have to say it. Even in a relationship sense..the most beautiful women are always elegant. Romance itself, in its purest form, is certainly an elegant art. This revelation thrilled me, but also filled me with a little disappointment. I think the world is losing its elegance. Much of the modern world is complicated, convoluted and fragmented. I have few present-day heroes, I think in part because men lack the eloquence of their forebearers. It always irks me a little to read a poorly written email or novel or paper, even if it effectively conveys its message. Similarly, the key ingredient of good music is an ability to convey knowledge, ideas and emotions in a beautiful way. I feel as if that has become rarer over the years. Wow. This is a cool line of thought. And the beauty of this idea is that it is very all-encompassing, and extremely simple. Dare I say that it's quite an elegant explanation for a big part of who I am?

Man of Science, Man of Faith (Jan. 15, 2006)

In my younger days, I was a champion of rationality. I was never a determinist, and I still don't think I believe in fate, but i certainly believed that there was a rational way to solve even the most irrational of problems. However, it occured to me that most of the legends of mankind acquired their status preciseley because they acted without regard for sensibility. If I had been Leonides, I never would have stood at Thermopylae. If I had found myself in Magellan's place, I would have said it was foolish to brave the strait. I wonder if being a man of science, I have limited myself to doing what I believed was reasonable. Have I closed doors for myself by analysing and planning every step, every race, every word? Have I made things impossible by believing that they were impossible?

"It's the hardest thing in the world, believing in something" That's a good quote. Everyone dreams, perhaps I more than most. Nonetheless, I feel like I haven't always believed in those dreams. i feel like I have analysed and analysed and overanalysed, and taken the safe route more than maybe I should have. I've thought a lot about this lately, and I think that there are situations where a leap of faith might be the most rational course of action, as paradoxical as that sounds. The situation where i have come the closest to doing that is in the matter of personal values and personal conduct. For as long as I can remember, I have been an outsider in that area. I was among the last to start drinking, I remain 19 years drug-free, and in other, "personal" areas, I have shown far more prudence than most.

I have always believed that a moral existence would, in the end, make me a better man. I couldn't give a rational justification for that though. I could talk about health risks and so on, but in the end, I am the way I am because I believe in those values. And true to the earlier quote, it has been a hard thing, believing in that. In school too, I have faith. I have always believed that high academic achivement was within the reach of anyone who was willing to put in the requsite effort.

People don't agree with me, I know, and Sara opened my eyes to the fact that I am quite alone in that opinion. I am among the few who believe that a 4.0 is achiveable. I am among the few who believe that no test is so hard that it is impossible to get an A. I quoted Roger Ebert, who, when talking about Chariots of Fire, said, "It reminds us of a time when men believed they could do anything if only they wanted to badly enough." I stand by that when it comes to school, and to some extent, when it comes to careers. This has gotten me in a little bit of trouble lately, which is one of the things that got me thinking about this whole conundrum. I have always tried to be the "nice guy" but lately I feel like I havent been modest enough about my academic achivements, and I feel like this had alienated and intimidated people whose friendship I value.

After thinking about these questions for a few days, I have narrowed them down to a few, specific matters for thought. First, would it help me in some areas, specifically athletics and relationships, to be more of a man of faith? Second, in the areas where I have have put my faith in a specific path. how do I avoid trying to press that path onto others and/or seeming arrogant and elitist? Third, why, in the areas where I have strong beliefs, such as personal conduct and school, does planning and detail seem to provide excellent results, whereas in other areas, like the aforementioned athletics and relationships, does analytical breakdown usually fail to provide satisfactory results? Fourth, what exactly is the relationship between faith and reason? Can I be a man of science and a man of faith? At present I have only partial answers to these questions.

I found two quotes that have helped begin to formulate the beginnings of answers to at least some of the questions. "And three remain: faith, hope and love. But the greatest of these is love" That helps a little. But most significantly, i have begun to see some glimmers of understanding when it comes to the last question. The passage from Lost that mentions the quandary is a revealing one.

Locke: I think... that's why you and I don't see eye-to-eye sometimes, Jack because you're a man of science.
Jack: Yeah, and what does that make you?
Locke: Me, well, I'm a man of faith. We were brought here for a purpose, for a reason, all of us. Each one of us was brought here for a reason.
Jack: Brought here? And who brought us here, John?
Locke: The island. The island brought us here. This is no ordinary place, you've seen that, I know you have. But the island chose you, too, Jack. It's destiny.
Jack: I don't believe in destiny.
Locke: [pause] Yes, you do. You just don't know it yet.