Letters  

Dear Republic:

The quality of the writing in The Republic has its ups and downs, but is at its best when reviewing and revealing history.

Michael Nononen's encyclopedic mind reminds me of Noam Chomsky's. His ability to synthesize historical events into recognizable patterns is as awe-inspiring as his recollection of important historical events. In his "Investigations of terrorism spotty at best" (Republic issue 141), he manages to remind and instruct the reader of such things as the use of moles to infiltrate citizen groups (used by so-called intelligence agencies in the US and Canada), the transgressions of the Canadian government during the FLQ period (which made Watergate look even more amateurish than it was), CSIS's appallingly wrong use of power, and the RCMP's so-called anti-terrorism activities that are now an unmatched extension of power without any increase in the oversight powers of it's monitoring watchdog. Then, in a sweeping finish, he ties them all together to reinforce his main point: anti-terrorist activities are often only covers for advancing political agendas largely concerned with scape-goating minorities to draw attention away from real concerns, such as the loss of basic legal rights. The only quibble I have with the article is that it defines Kabul as the Afghan "green zone" when the reality is worse: only part of Kabul is truly under control of the occupying forces 24 hours a day.

Then I turn to Dan Adleman's piece "Neo-conservative roots were first planted by Rockefeller" (Republic issue 141) in which I was stunned to read (and learn) that JD had planned his economic invasion of the west via God, or what passes for God in Christian missionary circles. As we used the Mounties to "tame our west," sending them in before settlers, I read Rockefeller used missionaries to "soften up and gather intelligence on the native American communities that inhabited oil-rich land" through the outright lie of "AID." Carrying cynicism to it's extreme, I read the US government then used AID to fund SIL to destroy indigenous cultures in South America. All of this puts a whole new meaning to the words of a song popular when I was a kid: "How low can you go?" I tend to think the environment will collapse before our political systems, but that's just me.

Which brings me to Kevin Potvin. He hits many nails squarely on their heads when he wrote "In defense of conspiracy theories" (Republic issue 141). History is both recent and not-so-recent and it is a fool who rules out an idea before he hears evidence for and against it. But I want to differ on the subject of "venting." While it is likely true that ruling elites allow the "working" class to vent with booze and sports and the "higher brow" class to vent with heady, apparently status-quo smashing films and plays ("bread and circuses" for each class) and there is a lot of mix-and-match within these two groups, may it not be said that these things can also stimulate thoughts people may not have had without this exposure? Parties and sports can bring out mob mentality states, but they also bring out co-operative states of being as well, where well-wishing and good deeds toward strangers exists, even if it is only for one's own group. As for the effect of such popular films as Syriana, it is sometimes necessary to meet strangers in a dark hall to discover that many share the curiosity, at minimum, in what might be going on in the world beyo

nd corporate news, even in the stylized, compressed fashion of a Hollywood movie. Circuses can be two-edged blades. And your own graceful, tongue-buried-firmly-in-cheek ripping into Falcon over Eagleridge Bluffs

may find resonance in more than just me. I'm going to write the Premier about the idea. All in all, a magnificent issue. Keep it up.

—John William, Vancouver

Dear Republic:

Excellent article! (“Oops, they did it again,” Republic issue 141). The only difficulty I see is that Campbell has no doubt bought into Falcon's plans as well, as it means money to them and payoffs for their financial backers: the construction industry and developers. Look at financial contributions to the Liberal party, it follows! They have also padded the way by purposefully gutting environmental legislation, weakening agricultural land protection, increasing their powers to push "significant" projects, and weakening the capability of municipalities and communities to fight provincial plans (and even to access vital information). It has been a carefully orchestrated plan. Quite dictatorial actually.

By giving in to Eagleridge, the liberal government creates an even bigger problem for themselves, that of building civic confidence in being able to side-rail Gateway, an even bigger project (and even bigger mistake!). We are in the process of re-creating the traffic nightmare that started in the north of Toronto in 1960. The only difficulty is, with a fraction of the land mass available for sprawl, and walls around that landmass called mountains, we'll reach our maximum density far faster than they did in the east.

Toronto's 401 has traffic jams across 18 lanes of traffic now and no east-west rapid transit to help offset the volume. How many lanes do you foresee on Highway 1 until it is maxed out with a valley chock-a-block full of houses, high rises, traffic and smog?

Our mainstream media isn't doing their job of investigative reporting on this issue, but I'm glad to see some others are.

—Sue Rowan, West Vancouver

Dear Republic:

If "Portland Blazes New Trails for the Peak Oil World" (Republic issue 141), we're in trouble. I don't speak from ignorance; my family and I immigrated to Canada from Portland less than a year ago. While Portland is indeed more progressive than most American cities, there's a dark side Mr Crawford either missed or chose to deliberately ignore.

First of all, I'm willing to bet that the Peak Oil meeting was comprised of nothing but white faces. Portland is the whitest city of its size in the US. There are substantial numbers of blacks and latinos in the city, but the former are severely restricted to ghettos (i.e., next to no "mixed" neighbourhoods). Latinos, and issues regarding immigration, are pretty much ignored, and attempts at pro-immigrant actions are often met with hostility by the self-described anarchist crowd who yell most loudly about bikes and peak oil. This provincialism extends to those of us who attempt a more pragmatic approach to holding back the terror of Bush and company; anyone who dared to espouse a reluctant vote for Kerry to beat Bush in the 2004 election was labeled an "SUV-loving, ass-licking Kerry-lover."

As to public transportation, yes, the MAX streetcar line has bike racks, since the trains are of very recent vintage; Skytrain would do well to follow suit. But aside from the airport route taken by Mr Crawford, one must usually wait a half hour for these slow behemoths at non-peak hours, and that goes for the bus system as well. Slavish attention to posted schedules is mandatory to get anywhere, and these are often ignored, especially in poorer neighbourhoods. Give me the more European-styled Skytrain, with trains every few minutes, any day. Also, I wonder if Mr Crawford spent time on any of Portland's many freeways, which often resemble huge, linear parking lots a great deal of the day.

Again, Portland has admirable pockets of innovation and progressive thought, and currently has an imaginative city leadership team. These efforts, though, are usually insular and self-congratulatory, and have little effect on the daily lives of most residents. While Vancouver has many, many flaws, we're happy to live in this vibrant city, able to walk or take quick public transport to almost anywhere, in an atmosphere of inclusiveness which is lacking in most American cities.

—Jon Scoop, Vancouver

Dear Republic:

I just read Dan Crawford’s piece on what's special about Portland Oregon, and there seemed to be one thing missing.

Yes it's a bike friendly town, yes it has Powells bookstore, etc etc. But the jewel in Portland's crown has to be the community-owned FM radio station KBOO. That's the nearly forty-year old basis for progressive support for bikes and for the other good things—it's also the basis for having earned Portland the name "little Beirut"

You can pick up the KBOO stream on the Web if you wish to hear their radio stuff live.

—Michael P, via online

Dear Republic:

I read with interest Dan Crawford's account of his recent trip to Portland, as I visited that "peak oil" city myself two years ago and was also impressed by its ecological progressiveness. Though Dan's focus seemed to be mainly on cycling infrastructure, I was surprised he didn't mention what was to me the most significant feature of Portland's public transportation: Free transit in the downtown core!

Anyone can hop on or off the modern light rail trams serving the city, without having to bother with fares, transfers, and of course without their cars. Since I was visiting Portland by car myself, and not knowing the city, I spent about 30 minutes looking for long-term parking. I subsequently left my car parked for the next two days while I happily explored the city by free transit and on foot. Compare that to Vancouver's struggling transit system, which is inadequately funded, and continues to take a back seat to automobile investment (e.g. the Gateway plan). We could be going the way of car unfriendly Portland, or continue as we are, using the Seattle model of sprawl and congestion. Of course, only a sea change politically on both the municipal and provincial levels will bring about any true change of approach.

—Charles Leduc, Vancouver

Dear Republic:

In response to your piece about police powers, monitoring and surveillance [Police state looms, Republic issue 139], if the authorities are serious about preventing crime, they might consider reading some history and looking in the mirror.

Normal people don’t do their dirty work on camera. Take the London tube bombings, for example. About all they accomplished with their “omnipresent” camera was to piece together who did the deed, after the fact. They were not able to prevent the crime.

The more ubiquitous the technology gets, the smarter the bad guy gets, as we all know. But what’s more to the point is the oppressive measures we come up with in response, and the inevitable reaction against them, and the resulting vicious cycle with its breathtaking ability to run out of control. If we don’t want archetypal monsters coming out of the woodwork, then we need to stop giving them the opening.

“If you’re doing nothing wrong you’ve got nothing to worry about” is like a schoolyard taunt, the sweet-talk of the bully who’s going to change the rules the moment you comply. Like the one sided politicians who shift the very ground beneath us.

But let’s be white about this. It’s our mistakes that make us, our misjudgments that give us our bearings. We can hope. To prise out the odd idiot who commits a crime in view of a camera is like the Bazooka Joe cartoon where some dude asks him why he’s looking under a streetlamp for something he lost over there in the shadows. Because the light’s better here, was his reply.

—R A Strandquist, Vancouver