I am definitely a tourist in Montreal; much more so than I was in America. Not really because the things I have been doing are different. I think it is more that I was on the lookout for interesting anecdotes and sociological moments in America. And, I realise now, looking especially for those which would reinforce my preconceptions of the country.
In contrast, here I have walked past a fair number of people begging, and met a guy selling books of his jokes on the street, while essentially refusing to let them colour my picture of Canada as a civilised country with universal health care and few social problems.
Which is obviously only half true (the universal health care...). Even museum exhibits frequently refer to the city's divided nature (both in terms of income and of ethnicity - French and English, as well as various more recent immigrant groups) and various social problems. It has been a lesson to me in the power of unexamined prejudice to influence the way one sees things.
Showing posts with label Inequality. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Inequality. Show all posts
Tuesday, 25 November 2008
Thursday, 2 October 2008
Boulder, Colorado V
VP debate tonight. And it has left me a lot more optimistic than the Presidential one last week (which is a shame, since most pundits seemed to think it was unlikely to have any impact on the outcome of the election).
Palin did ok. She had much better eye contact with the audience (i.e. the camera) than Biden, whose eyes were fixed on the moderator (and therefore downwards, as he and Palin were on a raised stage) for at least the first 15 minutes. And she did a creepy winking thing which some people might like. Her strongest card seemed to be on taxes... which it shouldn't be, given that in fact the Republican tax proposals favour the wealthy minority, while the Democrat ones favour the middle classes (no one cares about the poor, perhaps because even the poorest Americans consider themselves middle class - the opposite phenomenon from the UK). But everyone hates taxes, and the Republicans are the traditional party of tax cuts - regardless of who they actually benefit.
But asked about anything other than taxes or energy policy (she considers energy her strong suit because of being from an energy producing state) she mainly avoided the question. In contrast, Biden had a well informed, and to the point, answer to every question thrown at him. He did not hesitate, as Palin did, faced with difficult questions. He was specific where she was general and woolly. He even managed to choke up when talking about having seen his son severely injured and wondering if he would pull through. On all the important issues - the economy, health care and Iraq - I think he won, both on content and on delivery. He was likeable, believable and passionate.
Perhaps the most striking thing was one significant area of agreement between the two candidates - that the Bush years had been a failure, and that things needed to change. People watching the debate with me wondered aloud if Palin was going off message on this one, because she showed no reluctance to admit, and detail, these failings and then to present herself and McCain as "mavericks" who would do things differently. This seems like dangerous territory, especially as, as Biden emphasised, they are setting out few specific policies to distinguish themselves from the current administration. Their rhetoric is about change, but the policies are not there.
Finally, I was disappointed by Biden on foreign policy - which is his area of expertise and experience. Perhaps he was playing politics, but his attitude seemed cynical, it seemed realpolitik-al... When talking about Iraq, he argued for American withdrawal on the basis that the Iraqis have a budget surplus and a huge army trained by the Americans - why should taxpayers be paying to protect Iraqis when they should be doing for themselves. Nothing about the greater legitimacy of an indigenous army, or the preferences of the democratically elected government. Similarly, on Palestine, he said he had consistently argued against elections in the West Bank, because he knew Hamas would be elected - essentially denying others the democracy he celebrates in America.
Palin did ok. She had much better eye contact with the audience (i.e. the camera) than Biden, whose eyes were fixed on the moderator (and therefore downwards, as he and Palin were on a raised stage) for at least the first 15 minutes. And she did a creepy winking thing which some people might like. Her strongest card seemed to be on taxes... which it shouldn't be, given that in fact the Republican tax proposals favour the wealthy minority, while the Democrat ones favour the middle classes (no one cares about the poor, perhaps because even the poorest Americans consider themselves middle class - the opposite phenomenon from the UK). But everyone hates taxes, and the Republicans are the traditional party of tax cuts - regardless of who they actually benefit.
But asked about anything other than taxes or energy policy (she considers energy her strong suit because of being from an energy producing state) she mainly avoided the question. In contrast, Biden had a well informed, and to the point, answer to every question thrown at him. He did not hesitate, as Palin did, faced with difficult questions. He was specific where she was general and woolly. He even managed to choke up when talking about having seen his son severely injured and wondering if he would pull through. On all the important issues - the economy, health care and Iraq - I think he won, both on content and on delivery. He was likeable, believable and passionate.
Perhaps the most striking thing was one significant area of agreement between the two candidates - that the Bush years had been a failure, and that things needed to change. People watching the debate with me wondered aloud if Palin was going off message on this one, because she showed no reluctance to admit, and detail, these failings and then to present herself and McCain as "mavericks" who would do things differently. This seems like dangerous territory, especially as, as Biden emphasised, they are setting out few specific policies to distinguish themselves from the current administration. Their rhetoric is about change, but the policies are not there.
Finally, I was disappointed by Biden on foreign policy - which is his area of expertise and experience. Perhaps he was playing politics, but his attitude seemed cynical, it seemed realpolitik-al... When talking about Iraq, he argued for American withdrawal on the basis that the Iraqis have a budget surplus and a huge army trained by the Americans - why should taxpayers be paying to protect Iraqis when they should be doing for themselves. Nothing about the greater legitimacy of an indigenous army, or the preferences of the democratically elected government. Similarly, on Palestine, he said he had consistently argued against elections in the West Bank, because he knew Hamas would be elected - essentially denying others the democracy he celebrates in America.
Sunday, 28 September 2008
Boulder, Colorado
I am afraid Boulder has disappointed me. I was hoping for something along the lines of Hebden Bridge / Todmorden, but bigger, since everyone says it's the best place in the US to live, is totally right on and wonderful in every way.
It is true that the place is full of cyclists, ethical furniture shops and stoner-ish students. Sweetly, its bus lines have names like hop, skip and jump. But it's also the yuppiest city I've ever been to - so it is full of oxygen bars, smug people, over-priced restaurants and travel agents specialising in Nepal and Tibet.
And the most beggars I've seen since I arrived in the states - with signs saying things like "way beyond hungry" and "punched (in the face!) and hungry".
It is true that the place is full of cyclists, ethical furniture shops and stoner-ish students. Sweetly, its bus lines have names like hop, skip and jump. But it's also the yuppiest city I've ever been to - so it is full of oxygen bars, smug people, over-priced restaurants and travel agents specialising in Nepal and Tibet.
And the most beggars I've seen since I arrived in the states - with signs saying things like "way beyond hungry" and "punched (in the face!) and hungry".
Sunday, 21 September 2008
Tuesday 16th September 2008 – 23:15 GMT, Ziemia Cieszynska
I've finished The Audacity of Hope and maybe later on I will write a bit more about it. For now, two thing particularly struck me.
Firstly two facts that really shocked me:
1. In some high schools in America, the students are sent home every day at 1:30 “because the school district couldn't afford to keep teachers for a full school day”
2. “Each year more than twenty thousand workers are fired or lose wages simply for trying to organise or join unions” (unfortunately, no reference given)
Secondly, I was surprised to find a couple of areas of common ground between Obama and Morris/McGann – on performance related pay for teachers (a good thing), and on the obscenity of current levels of executive pay, especially the fact that the richest people make most of their money as capital gains (taxed at 15%) rather than income (taxed at 30%), meaning they pay less tax as a proportion of their total earnings than those anywhere else in the income spectrum.
I'm not sure exactly what this means. It could just be chance that some issues overlap between the two books. But I wonder whether these small areas of common ground are actually really important, as some of the few things that people from across a seriously divided political spectrum can agree on. They could perhaps provide the basis for some non-partisan work of the kind Obama is so keen on.
Monday 8th September 2008 – 17:05 GMT, Ziemia Cieszynska
Social organisation on the ship is extremely hierarchical, and I'm not sure why. For example, all of us eat the same food, at the same time, in the same room, but crew are obliged to sit at one end, closer to the kitchen, while officers and passengers sit at the other end.
Indeed, it is pretty much only at meal times that we see anyone other than the captain and the three officers who live on the same floor as us and take shifts steering the boat. Everyone else is clearly elsewhere working, but on what, and where, we have no idea.
Just as in some countries the fine gradations of race are a reliable marker of social standing, here elevation serves a similar purpose. The most senior officers work on the top deck, and live on the level below (with the passengers). Below them live the less senior officers, and below them the other members of the crew. The majority of the crew's work appears to take place at the bottom of the ship – in the engine room, , outside on the lowest deck, with the cargo or in the kitchen. It reminds me of one of those dystopian novels (HG Wells?) or films in which an entire servant race lives below ground, rarely seen and hardly appreciated by those above.
Indeed, it is pretty much only at meal times that we see anyone other than the captain and the three officers who live on the same floor as us and take shifts steering the boat. Everyone else is clearly elsewhere working, but on what, and where, we have no idea.
Just as in some countries the fine gradations of race are a reliable marker of social standing, here elevation serves a similar purpose. The most senior officers work on the top deck, and live on the level below (with the passengers). Below them live the less senior officers, and below them the other members of the crew. The majority of the crew's work appears to take place at the bottom of the ship – in the engine room, , outside on the lowest deck, with the cargo or in the kitchen. It reminds me of one of those dystopian novels (HG Wells?) or films in which an entire servant race lives below ground, rarely seen and hardly appreciated by those above.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)