My Neighbour: Shattering the Abuser Protection Society from A to Z

Education. Business. Entertainment. Sports. Religion. Child Welfare. Politics. Persons with Disabilities support systems. Justice System.

Jesse Stone: Men may know somethings.

Molly Crane: Rape is something women know.

-Jesse Stone: Stone Cold T.V. Movie (2005)

#Timesup. #Metoo.  On one night…January 24, 2018 3 prominent Canadian politicians went down as the lid was blown off the badly kept secret of abusive misogyny in politics. I state badly kept, because the greater country may act like they did not know, but that is because they have been ignoring that which they did not want to know. They have ignored the voices that are being called out for complicity—that were ones shouting from the rooftops. The signs were so easily there, from a premier in 1934 booted from office; to how such Canadian politicians as Sheila Copps and former PM Kim Campbell were treated to name but a few.  This past week a Claresholm town Councillor having her life threatened in her own home by an invader for being political, check any female politicians twitter feed to note the abuse and stalker-like behavioural patterns.

Many astute commentators pointed out it is not a partisan issue, but rather an institutional issue.

Yet, sadly,  it does not surprise me. For the same power over people structures that allow this abuse to be ingrained generation over generation that it is acceptable and our voice does not matter. That perpetuates forced silence of the abused. The #Metoo movement is re-telling an ancient, and modern story. We saw it with the bravery in Sheldon Kennedy breaking the silence over sexual violence in hockey. In the persons with disabilities world silence breakers. We first saw it with the monsters revealed preying on our daughters in classrooms, and now showing that predators come in both genders (although how Riverdale got away with putting forward Archie-Miss Grundy as a relationship and not what it was—teacher rape of a student, though there was some minor redemption with the Black Hood story-line of season 2. But be honest with yourself, it could not have been played off as a relationship or affair if it had been Veronica and Mr. Weatherbee).

Spotlight and the breaking of silence around Cleric abuse in the Roman Catholic Church. That we know statistically is the same within all religious systems, where power works to silence the abused (regardless of gender or sexuality). We can hypothesize the sexual violence against women based on report versus non-report, against males it is harder because of the societal constructs working against it (note the Archie-Grundy myth perpetuating). But the story is not different it is the use of power.

It is a multi-generational trauma highlighted in the TRC in Canada; yet we need to understand it is a generational trauma passed down through thousands of years of conquering/colonialism that stretches at the very least back to the Roman Empire, but probably pre-dates that.

It is a society knowing homelessness, addiction, violence, mental illness and crime are symptoms of something deeper but would rather deal with the symptoms than the actual cancer.  Root cause missed in entertainment with stars blowing out, crashing mentally, overdosing, or doing 180’s that made no sense…the bread crumbs were there if we only wanted to know…

Same as the pain from acting out athletes, or the children of religious sexual violence.

But it is a system that allows Bountiful, B.C.’s pedophile community to declare themselves polygamous. A system where the person is commodified, and not seen as truly a whole person.

Yes, we are more open about talking about sexual violence than we have been in the past. In the past, though there were those in families or communities that worked hard to try to protect the young from it being passed on. Even as simple as a matriarch or patriarch refusing the grandchild to sleepover knowing the other was a predator. Neighbours that would become sanctuaries for children or others in need.

            Why does it continue?

Because we allow our voice to be divided. We allow the command, power and control to continue setting the story. We can speak of #timesup, but without unity of those abused by the corrupt structures of power …speaking as one to shatter them…it will all to easily be lost as a news story and relegated to just another news cycle ala school shootings in the U.S.A., or the annual story that churches should really do something about misogyny.

I wish I could say this is a problem of the last 100 or so years. Yet it is a problem heightened in the social media world of Millennials and Generation Z where they see the power abuse structure as so normative that social media is used to terrorize, commodity individuals until they believe their only option for safety is death. Let that sink in for where we are at in human history.

For I have contemplated these verses many time in my ministry. Told time and again that they were to be read in light of his Easter Resurrection, yet today in history I am convinced more than ever they speak to our world transformation. The foundations we are to shake:

…18On account of this, the Jews demanded, “What sign can You show us to prove Your authority to do these things?” 19Jesus answered, “Destroy thistemple, and in three days I will raise it up again.”20“This temple took forty-six years to build,” the Jews replied, “and You are going to raise it up in three days?”…

-John 2:18-20 (Berean Study Bible)

The Temple of Jesus’ day was corrupted: used by the powers to be to oppress, abuse, commodity of human beings and use the people. Sound familiar?

His Mother, Mary of Nazareth and his earthly father, Joseph, led the way in showing what could exist with true equality and a new way. The way Jesus taught. One of full inclusion, equality and love for all in the human family and creation.

That is what verse 19 is truly about. Shattering the corruption. Tearing down the temple and rebuilding what is truly meant to be. Or in our hashtag world to the monsters and predators in one unified voice: #timesup.

And the response is the one that is still heard today by the command and control power structure—this took so long to build what are you going to do in 3 days.

Well according to ancient myth poetry of Jesus’ people, in the first 3 days of creation the Holy Mystery, well, she birthed the very good foundation of the cosmos.

Today, let us join voices together across all those who have been abused. Let our voices that are new to the fight, or have been battling longer unheard than any not lose sight of the goal. Let us join our voices together without labels, in the truth that we need to stand firm in. Let us shatter this corrupt temple, and yes…let us build the world where we all belong, we are all honoured, and we know true love of self and neighbour.

Join in tearing down…so that together we can birth the new hope that this light is shining.

The statement for this day is not do we believe. But rather do we stand firm that this must end.

Is it not time to build a world we keep paying lip service to.

A world where all are safe and belong.

A world where the true cause of pain has been exorcised and light truly reigns?

Are we ready to stand with our neighbour against those that prey?

UPDATE with Gratitude EI Medical Resolution

A few days back I wrote about the challenge of accessing the social contract in Canada. I still stand by for accessibility we could do more to make the system easier navigated for those in distress.

But this is to thank Service Canada, Rt. Hon. Trudeau (our PM); Hon. Duclos (minister over EI) and Hon. Deepak Obhrai (MP Calgary Forest Lawn) for their response to my communication, and once the missing documentation was submitted with support the expediting of my claim.

Here are some pointers for those accessing Medical EI:

1. There is an Employer/Employee Portion.
2. The Employee portion is to be done online and is quite lengthy, if you are in medical need ensure you get support as there is a lot of questions to be answered.
3. Always follow up, if you cannot reach through Service Canada, contact your MP. I found that they have release forms available to look into your claim, and it never hurts to contact the minister responsible for the issue. Use e-mail for the communications, include your phone number and address to ensure follow up and as much of your story as you are comfortable sharing.
4. When working through any medical issues and paperwork it is helpful to have that second set of ears and hands to ensure things are followed up promptly, so ensure if you have that someone you trust the proper releases are on file with the government and public health to allow for ease of communication.

When something is resolved, thank those that aided you, but also suggest some constructive improvements. As I sent the thank you to the Parliamentarians I did point out that in a system with someone in medical distress perhaps a simpler system where the employer submits the Medical ROE and the Doctor’s certificate/letter that kick starts the claim and begins payment. A more accessible social contract for all.

That is all for now, feeling some gratitude to have a supportive work network that helped out as well with investigation because the old noggin’ ain’t what it used to be most days.

EI Medical has failed my family

We enter a social contract in Canada when we become citizens through whatever channel that takes. In the 1970’s and 1980’s it was dubbed the “Just Society”. But the rules are simply outlined in our Constitution Act 1982, Charter of Rights and Freedoms; and Canadian Laws. Over the past two decades the party’s that have formed Government have been bending and breaking the simplest of social contracts by not preparing for the lean times or the times of medical need. They have prepped our social safety net for health, not for what they are designed for. A prime example of this is Employment Insurance (renamed from Unemployment Insurance during Chretien’s tenure as PM). During the latest economic downturn Canadians have been hard pressed to access in a timely manner, thus driving up debt loads and creating a burden of poverty cycles upon citizens who wait or are denied that which they have paid into for their working life. These payments were for us in need, and our fellow citizens—our end of the social contract with the other end being from the government for prompt pay out when necessitated.

Part of this EI process is the medical portion, for a short 15-week duration so workers do not have to fear losing everything while this percentage of income comes in to cover costs of living while medical teams figure out what next steps are. This unfortunately has not been being dispensed promptly. I have waited 15 weeks for a 15-week payment program on a medical claim that has not been answered by EI yet, I have not been able to get through the call banks (which we know 70% of calls go unanswered). Below is excerpts from an e-mail communication I sent to the Members of Parliament listed, with Hon. Duclos being the minister over EI, and Hon. Hehr being the minister over disabilities. I encourage each person who has had an unanswered EI or EI Medical claim that has gone unanswered and is providing hardship to contact these ministers and your local MP to get answers and the support our social contact is to provide.

Please Note: This is not an ideological pissing match—both federal parties that have formed governments over the last 20 years have left EI ill equipped to fulfill its obligations to the citizen. This is about renewing the contract, and the other signee-the Government, respecting their end and ensuring the contract does not remain broken.

(once I have received my EI Medical there will be an update on lapsed time so others who need to apply can try to secure credit debt accordingly).

I also want to acknowledge being brain fog, stabbing pain into brain and undiagnosed seizure disordered subsided enough today for this communication-but how I paid after dinner for it (excerpts of e-mail sent January 16, 2018 to government):

_____________________

Dear Rt. Hon. Trudeau, Hon. Duclos, Hon. Hehr, Hon. Obhrai, and Hon. Angus:

October 2, 2017. That was 15 weeks ago when my employer filed for EI Medical coverage for me as I had to leave work due to stress induced unknown seizure disorder (40 noticeable events a day—that is someone else saw it happen to me) that was triggering neurological, physiological and post-traumatic stress disorder symptomology. It is only a 15-week program, so that is 15 weeks without income into my household. I am happily partnered with my wife who has health challenges; our two children (my daughter is termed “typically developing” and my son is blessed to experience life with tri-spastic cerebral palsy, legally blind, epileptic, and ADD with a global delay). We elected as a family to have one parent remain at home to aid with our son’s appointments and specialists, so yes, my wife is a stay-at-home Mum. But it was not my family’s personal stressors that brought me to need EI Medical (or even EI for the first time in my working life).

I serve in the non-profit sector attempting to eliminate homelessness within our great nation, have worked hard my entire life in peace, human rights, and poverty reduction—which has included work within dementia wards, youth outreaches, addictions/recovery, child sex trade (now called human trafficking) elimination on the front lines, emergency shelters, life and vocational skill coaching for persons with disabilities, and community and housing first housing programs. I have also taught post-secondary students from diploma through post-doctorate work and have mentored many a practicum student… I made a conscious choice to be on the frontlines in the working class to make change for those that fall between the cracks of our society….

How and why EI will not pay out what is owed? And they are unreachable (thanks to the CBC we know that 70% of calls go unanswered) …I await a prompt and positive resolution to my filing for EI Medical 15 weeks ago with the full back pay swiftly.

 

Progressives Unite?

I admit I am all for cooperation, and have been an advocate for merger, but then I reflect on my own political journey being left out in the cold as the “Progressive” wing of the old Progressive Conservative Party of Canada when they were backroom shanghied by McKay-Harper and taken over by the Canadian Alliance. Yes, almost 10 years on they are the majority government, but they took a schlacking to get there post-merger, and then they had to rebroaden the tent and attract different red Cons to big tent their party a bit, and borrow heavily from the American-style attack party, but the merger ended in the wanted political result, from 2 seats (from majority government in 1993), and then a Western based official Opposition circa 1997 with the Reform Party, and 10-12 PC’s to now 2012 a majority government.

But is this the route the progressives need to take in one party?

Would a big enough tent be able to bring together:

Provincially: Alberta, Evergreen, Communist, Liberal, NDP, Social Credit

Federally: Bloc Quebecois (take away the seperatist piece and they are socialist); NDP, Liberals, Greens, Communist, Marxist-Lenninist, First Nations, Animal Alliance/Environment Party, Radical Marijuana Party, Progressive Canadian Party of Canada, Peoples Political Power, Pirate, and Canadian action

Because let us be honest, if all are not in, then the one that is left the disaffected (ones who lose the referendum vote) will bleed there, or simply go and create a new party if we manage to unite all.

What would be best is an offical Memorandum of Understanding between all the Progressive Parties to let the party with the highest poll numbers run the candidate against the incumbent, so yes, if the incumbent is progressive, then there will be 2 progressive candidates, if it is Conservative, then there will be one strong “Rainbow Coalition” candidate.

But here are some thoughts from the Alberta Political Landscape, the Liberal house to be exact:

Uniting Progressives: Liberal MLA Kent Hehr Calls For Liberals, NDP, Greens To Merge

From:http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2012/12/10/uniting-progressives-liberals-ndp-greens-merge_n_2273135.html (please note the President of the Alberta Liberal Party’s thoughts follow Mr. Hehr’s).

The Huffington Post Alberta |                                                                                     Posted: 12/10/2012  6:17 pm EST  |  Updated: 12/11/2012  9:25

Prominent MLA and former Alberta Liberal leadership hopeful Kent Hehr is calling for progressive parties to put aside their differences and work in earnest towards unification. (Flickr: JMacPherson).

Prominent MLA Kent Hehr is calling for progressive parties to put aside their differences and work in earnest towards unification.

In a post on daveberta.ca, Hehr, a Calgary lawyer and popular Liberal MLA, said that bringing the Liberals, Greens and NDP together under one umbrella will give the coalition enough thrust to defeat the uninterrupted Tory dynasty that’s been at the helm of the province for the last 41 years.

And the idea of uniting the three parties isn’t that much of a stretch when one looks at the core values of each of the parties and realizes that the differences keeping them apart aren’t that profound, he states.

Commenting on what he learned from the Calgary Centre byelection, Hehr says the three candidates, like him, branded themselves as fiscally responsible, socially progressive and with a deep concern for the environment.

“What keeps us apart is rugged tribalism that leads to infighting between us and keeps our guns pointed squarely at each other instead of focusing our fire on the right-wing in this province,” he says on his daveberta.ca post.

“We tend to identify with our brands and not necessarily the values that we share. Let me be the first to say, I’m putting down my gun, and am open to all conversations with no preconditions.”

Huffington Post political blogger Alex McBrien says the benefits of uniting the three parties are obvious and points out how progressive voters greatly outnumbered the Conservatives in the Calgary Centre contest. Tory contender Joan Crockatt received only 37 percent of the vote.

“Such results are symptomatic of the Canada’s first-past-the-post system, which tends to reward the party or candidate who is able to put together a voter coalition capable of obtaining a plurality, not a majority, of the votes,” he said.

“When the progressive vote is split between three candidates, as it was in Calgary Centre, the Conservatives win.

“Anyone looking for further proof of this argument can look at the overall federal electoral results of the past 6 years.”

 

 

The idea of merging the centre and left has gathered momentum in the last year, as many see a progressive wave slowly overtaking the Conservative bastion that is Alberta.

The election of Calgary Mayor Naheed Nenshi – who was seen as one of the more progressive candidates on the ballot, and Premier Alison Redford, who is widely believed to have won her majority thanks to votes from progressives fearing a Wildrose Party majority, are seen as clues that a political shift is afoot and that centrist parties can capitalize on the shift.

But the idea of a merger is far from being just that, an idea, says McBrien, citing that federally, the NDP are the closest to snatching government from the Tories and have no need for such coalition – being so close to the price – and won’t want to share the piece of the pie with the Liberals and Greens if they do win the next election.

“Much of this is wishful thinking. Both parties (Liberals and Green) are a long way off from any type of formal cooperation..  a lack of respect from both sides towards the differences in policy, brand, ideas, and political culture that the other embodies may ensure that a merger option stays off the table as talks progress on what needs to change,” he says, adding much of that bleeds into the provincial arena.

This is not the first time the idea of a union has been brandied about in Alberta, however.

During the run up to the Calgary Centre byelection, 1calgarycentre.com attempted, through discussions, debates and forums, to convince voters to put their support behind one progressive candidate but the initiative failed to achieve that aim and the vote was split.

It could be argued that the one time the Progressive voters were successful in recent months was during the last provincial election, when initiatives such as the YouTube video – I Never Thought I’d Vote PC – which asked voters to prevent a Wildrose majority by voting PC, despite of political stripes, may have swayed the popular vote. The majority predicted for the Wildrose, until mere days before the election, disappeared and the WRP came in a distant second. Voters gave Redford the majority that not a single poll had predicted.

In an interview with the Calgary Herald, NDP Leader Brian Mason said despite Hehr’s best intentions, the concept just won’t get the traction it needs from the membership of the parties.

“The memberships of both the Liberal party and the NDP have been quite clear that that’s not a direction they want to go,” Mason said.

“I sympathize with (Hehr’s) intent. But having been around for awhile, I know what the political reality is.”

Former Alberta Liberal leader and current MLA David Swann also told the Herald the idea’s been tried before but it didn’t go anywhere.

“We worked at that for a couple of years. And I certainly took a lot of hits over it,” Swann said.

“But there’s no question in my mind that the New Democrats are fully entrenched in their particular point of view and they’re not about to change.”

CORRECTION: A previous version of this story stated incorrectly that MLA Kent Hehr was a former Alberta Liberal leadership hopeful. Hehr did not run for the Liberal leadership.

From: http://us5.campaign-archive1.com/?u=409ac47d9e70600da358a3245&id=928b749be1&e=1b698f30ed

(Text here):

Lib-NDP Merger: Not likely, says Todd Van Vliet

If you have been following the news in the media about MLA Kent Hehr’s idea of a merger between the Alberta Liberals and the Alberta NDP, you will want to read our president’s response below. As Liberals we should pride ourselves in being able to have open and forthright discussion about issues that matter to Albertans. FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE A response from Alberta Liberal Party President, Todd Van Vliet, regarding merger (EDMONTON, AB) A merger of the Alberta Liberals and the NDP? Won’t happen. Why not? Because politics isn’t simply about math. Politics is mostly about what voters will actually do, and combining polling numbers rarely works when it comes to mergers. In politics, adding 10 percent support to another 10 percent support never totals 20 percent. In fact, it could add up to far less (or more!) as voters make their real-life choices. That’s exactly what happened to the ‘left’ in the last election when Liberal voters slipped over to the PCs to stop a potential right-wing Wildrose avalanche. And what about all the voters who weren’t motivated to get out to the polls in the last election? This is a bit of math that Mr. Hehr has forgotten to count. Who’s going to speak for their uncounted numbers? So, what’s really going on when a Liberal MLA starts calling for a merger with another party? Not so much. MLAs have their own opinions and even can choose to cross the floor and join another party if they disagree with their own party’s directions. While Mr. Hehr may be working in good faith to create a stronger alternative to the PCs, working to eliminate one’s own party would not seem to be the best way to do that. Yes, the quest for power and to create a winning team is the business of all political parties. But politics has always been more than that. Politics, at its best, is about higher principles, about advancing values, which differ greatly from party to party. Yes, policies can be similar, even identical. But the paths are markedly different. And those paths matter. The means and the ends are never truly separate. The NDP used to be the party of labour, unions and social justice. It was and perhaps still is “solidarity forever.” But over the past few decades the party has worked diligently to move itself into the ‘centre’ with some success. The Liberals, on the other hand, have had a broader mission from the outset. The introduction to our bylaws states that it is “dedicated to the values that have sustained the party since 1905: public good, individual freedom, responsibility and accountability,” and that it puts “people first.” That is significantly different than putting labour first, or business first, as other parties do. Today’s Liberals work hard to represent the needs of real Albertans and work for their future. As we said during the last election, it’s not so much about “right” or “left.” It’s more about “right” and “wrong.” And we definitely think this province should be doing a lot better in that regard. So yes, even though both Liberals and NDs oppose the PCs, there are profound cultural differences between the two. For instance, it’s telling that the Liberal bylaws are open to the public. What do the Alberta NDP bylaws say? We don’t know. They’re not published. To be even clearer, the Liberal bylaws state that membership in the party is open to those who “subscribe to the principles, aims and objectives of the party.” Mr. Hehr, more than anyone, should understand that eliminating this party through a merger would not be within the objectives of the party. At the very least he must know that such talk would create uncertainty. So what’s actually going on with Kent Hehr and his advisers? Well, the idea of a merger certainly isn’t news. It has been raised at the last NDP annual general meeting and dismissed, and raised again at the last Alberta Liberal board meeting, and again dismissed. So who does this “merger” actually benefit? One would have to say, the PCs. The only logical outcome of a merger is a widening canyon between the party on the so-called left (whatever it might be named) and Wildrose on the right—with the majority of dispossessed Liberals moving to the nominal ‘centre’ with the PCs. Without the Liberals to balance the centre, the PCs gain a real possibility of staying in power for decades longer. As president I have regular discussions with party members, and I can say that nothing leads me to believe a merger option is wanted by our members. Nor would it benefit the Alberta public in the least. As a final aside, one can’t help noting that the former Alberta Liberal executive director helping Mr. Hehr is a PR professional working with the local branch of one of the world’s larger PR firms. And one of his closest colleagues recently worked as Alison Redford’s leadership campaign manager and former Chief of Staff. Coincidence? Well, maybe. At the end of the day this merger talk isn’t news. It’s just more back-room political engineering. To date, neither party’s leadership has picked up the phone to talk merger face-to-face, and I won’t be doing that. The real math is engaging Alberta voters. Our job is to attract existing voters, motivate new voters to exercise their democratic rights and to show Albertans that the Liberals have a lot to offer. The rest is just noise. Anyone interested in what we stand for should visit us at albertaliberal.com. Todd Van Vliet President, Alberta Liberal Party – 30 –

Related articles

• Liberal MLA Kent Hehr calls for merger of the left in bid to defeat Tories (calgaryherald.com)
• Tories heavily favoured in coming federal byelection (calgaryherald.com)
• Tories limp to top spot in year-end poll (sunnewsnetwork.ca)
• Losers in Calgary Centre byelection face tough questions (calgaryherald.com)
• Tory win in Calgary centre exposes opposition weakness (thestar.com)
• First NDP government faces chorus of complaints (cbc.ca)
• Alberta Liberals launch ‘values-driven’ rebranding featuring new logo (calgaryherald.com)
• Liberal Party needs Alberta Liberals (theglobeandmail.com)
• NDP support dropping as Liberals, Conservatives gain ground in new poll (news.nationalpost.com)
• Honeymoon over for Mulcair?: Trudeau’s leadership bid shifting support from NDP to Liberals, poll suggests (news.nationalpost.com)