tonight was really truly exasperating.

i'm supposed to call somebody a little after18:00, and i get a machine. so, i take a random guess at one of the places nobody picks up at - and get through to somebody.

this is a big basement for cheap; it seems like it's what i want. so, i'm excited to get down there.

when the landlord shows up, i take a quick run through, and it's clear i want to sign the lease. but, he seems intent on putting me through a "stress test" to ensure i'm not schizophrenic.

in some sense, it was like having an interview with a lewis carroll character - not because it was patently absurd, but because it was clearly unserious. he's trying to bait me on things like the moon landing, and jew-hating - things i actually have subtle perspectives on, subtle perspectives that can be easily smeared or misconstrued. i have no idea whether we actually went to the moon or not, and i'm not about to make an argument one way or another - but, see, this is the correct argument, because it's almost impossible to make a reasonable deduction, due to the difficulty of the evidence, all around.

i'm not really interested in the arguments against the moon landing - they've mostly been debunked. but, that doesn't prove we went; that's a classical fallacy. try to convincingly prove we did land. you can't.

i actually caught him in a few contradictions.

see, at the end of it, he's the one that sounded nuts - but i'm not sure if it was serious or not. and, i'm kind of left unsure of how to walk away from it.

if this was an honest representation of the guy, he seemed like he belonged in an asylum. but, i don't think it was; and, if he was fucking with me for some strange reason, it doesn't change the fact that i liked the unit - and that i need to move asap.

he gave me a lease with something incoherent scribbled on it and asked me to call him later on. i sent him some links, instead. i may follow-up in a day or two.

i have never been diagnosed with schizophrenia, and i'm not sure why he'd be convinced i have it based on such a brief encounter, and no evidence - but perhaps trying to work through conspiracy logic is a little bit pointless, too.

in the end, i listened to this guy rant for almost an hour.

i checked my messages when i got home just before 21:00, and the initial guy asked me to come in sunday morning.

i knew this was a trick, but i definitely don't want a christian landlord. so, i took the bait with intent. and, predictably...

"sorry. unit's been rented."

fuck.

i can't police this.

i don't want to.

i just hope we don't end up with an outburst of the plague.

i'm beginning to understand that the reason these ads say STUDENTS ONLY is not that they want students, but that they want to overcrowd the housing, and charge by the head.

white people won't tolerate these kinds of living arrangements.

but, if you can cram sixteen people into a house made for four, and the people living there have always lived that way anyways, then you've made four times as much money as you would be by following the standards of privacy we take for granted in western civilization.

the reality is that this city is quickly becoming a slum, in the third world meaning of the term.

so, i saw a small two bedroom apartment this afternoon, or tried to - a group of five indian males had beat me to it, and i walked into the negotiation.

i was hoping to secure a two bedroom apartment for $800, which was the list price. but, he decided that, if there are going to be five people living in the two bedroom apartment, he should charge them $300 each.

for utilities.

so, they got there first and put down an offer of nearly twice as much. i didn't waste my breath arguing the point. but, it helped me understand the situation a little bit better.

regardless of the size of the apartment or of the number of people in the party, i cannot compete against this. if a two bedroom is listed at $800, and they come in with a party of five at $300 each, i lose. even a party of three at $300 each beats me. if a one bedroom apartment is listed for $700, and they want to come in with a party of three at $350/person, i lose, too.

but, how did we get these thousands of indian students, all of a sudden? this is crazy.

we shouldn't be having people living in close quarters like this, but so long as they keep offering these kinds of payments to landlords, the landlords are going to take them.

they also carried forward without a lease, which is telling. these kids don't know what they're doing. and, the landlord didn't want to tell them.

to a certain extent, they're being taken advantage of. the problem here is the landlord - he should not be renting out a two bedroom apartment to a group of five students. that's irresponsible and greedy.

but, if this is what is happening, i cannot compete with it. i need to find the right kinds of landlords, instead...

and, fwiw.

i do believe i still have until the 10th to file an appeal that the rent reduction was too low. that would void the eviction notice.

i would rather leave, but i'll make a choice in two weekends.

if i do that, i will pay $525 rent on october 1st.

the reason the rent was reduced is because of the severity of the second-hand smoke - $700 was not a fair market value to pay in order to live in somebody else's filth. and, i actually believe that the court underestimated this. but, i made the best argument i could.

i think i did this once before, but let's understand what my court order actually did.

i signed a lease for $700 + hydro. i paid first & last's. and, i paid that rent for six more months.

but, the court order then did three things:

1) it ended the lease on sept 30th.
2) it reduced my rent to $525 for the last six months of my tenancy.
3) it ordered the landlord to pay moving costs.

so, the amount i owe the landlord is no longer $700/month, for ten months - but $700 for the first four months and then $525 for the last six months.

that means that i overpaid rent from april-june, by 3*175 = $525. this is the same as the amount of rent i didn't pay in july. so, i was entitled - by court order - to stay here for free in july.

as i paid last month's rent in december, i am also entitled to stay here for free for the month of september, with a balance of $175 - which i overpaid. so, that would reduce my august rent by a further $175, to $350. subtracting awarded moving costs, i have a balance of $50 to pay.

so, i am not withholding rent, at all. rather, my rent has been reduced by court order.

fwiw, the landlord has listed this unit on the market for $775, oblivious to anything that just happened. and, i hope the next tenant does the same thing.

the reason i did not pay the $50 for august is that i was hoping to move by september first, in which case the landlord would need to return my deposit - and the balance would be $650. and, if i can plan an escape in the next few days, still, i will place the landlord in collections for the balance owing - minus daily fees for however long i'm here.

if this situation is being presented differently, the people presenting it to you are being dishonest about it. it's one thing to disagree with the ruling. but, it's another to ignore it exists altogether.

it is very likely that i will pay the $50 in the next 72 hours, in which case the landlord and i will be even. the exception to this possibility happens if i sign a lease in the next 72 hours and vacate the unit promptly, in which case they will actually be required to return the remainder of the deposit.

i can have a judge explain this to you, if necessary.

http://dsdfghghfsdflgkfgkja.blogspot.com/2016/06/j-reacts-to-polling-for-greens-and.html

http://dsdfghghfsdflgkfgkja.blogspot.com/2016/06/j-reacts-to-smoke-and-mirrors-around.html

well, the federal government didn't write the court ruling, rachel.

regardless, i've always thought the carbon tax should be federal, anyways.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trans-mountain-federal-court-appeals-1.4804495

how many jobs might alberta have created if it had taken all the money it's wasted pushing 20th century technology and invested it into 21st century technology, instead?

and, i thought the canadian pseudo-left was supposed to actually understand that....

hey rachel...

oil pipelines are stupid.

renewable energy is good.

give up!

regards,
dtk

windsor - like detroit - is being absorbed back into the ignorance of rural conservatism, brought on by a combination of religious immigration and capitalist decline.

what was once an opportunity to build a new communist society, here, has been lost due to the high levels of immigration, designed to return the working class to the ignorance of religion.

we're going to wake up one day soon to a blue sweep here.

the empirical deduction is that windsor is no longer a good place for a queer artist to try and eke out an existence in.

rather, it is a good place for conservative families to come and raise families.

and, is that really what windsor wants to be known as?

a haven for the religious to breed in?

i'd like to think that windsor would rather be known as an escape for a queer artist to exist in. but, if that was ever true, it appears to be too late to reassert it, now.

and, i am now the refugee, aren't i?

islam is not a culture, it's an ideology - and one of the ways that ideologies enforce their control is through the abolition and subjugation of all culture. this was as true under stalin as it was under saladin.

there is no self-expression in islam. no individuality. no questioning of revealed wisdom. no revolution. no democracy. no deviation from the norm. it's just violently enforced conformity. and, nothing we can meaningfully refer to as a culture can exist under these kinds of oppressive circumstances.

if this place goes full muslim - and if this mess around nafta gets bad, it very well might - they're going to convert the nightclubs into madrassas - or, perhaps, harems. any venue that promotes free thinking will be dismantled.

and, you can't fight against a majority.

i have a few more weeks to figure this out. but, if the end result is that a starving artist can't find a place to live here, then the proper conclusion is that it is not a good cultural fit for a starving artist to live, is it?

the discrimination in housing in ontario is not something i'm the first person to draw attention to. the appropriate boards have drawn attention to it - and argued it's too big of a problem for them to police.

it's the kind of thing that needs an education campaign.

you see it in every ad.

STUDENTS ONLY.
FEMALES ONLY.
BOYS ONLY.
INDIANS ONLY. and, they'll even specify -
GUJARATI ONLY, HINDI ONLY, PAKISTANI ONLY.
SENIORS ONLY.
WORKERS ONLY.

and, those are only the ads i can see - in english, and for public view.

the big thing right now is students. and, it's about to flip. a few more days.

and, they're starting to do things like mark their ads with URGENT.

yeah, well, maybe you should stop discriminating against your prospective tenants, if you want to fill the vacancy urgently?

this is an emergency. there's people lined up to live here. but, they're all white people with jobs. somebody find me a 19 year-old female, muslim pakistani student immediately! i thought canada was a free market?

ugh.

but, what's increasingly concerning to me is that there's no bohemian escape in this town. there's no art district. there's nobody that gets a call from a composer/activist on the dole and says "you sound interesting. the neighbours will like you.".

for a supposedly left-leaning town, the people here seem to be remarkably conservative.

there's no time for the disabled, no time for queers and no time for artists.

again: it's increasingly clear that i don't want to live here, that the culture is dead here and it's time to get out.

there's no hipsters. no art village. no gay district. no culture....

it's just korans & capitalism, everywhere you turn.

we can fix this, though.

what i want to see is an ad for a non-smoking apartment with these wonderful words in the body:

ARTISTS ONLY.

a reasonable compromise proposal would be to replace the existing process with something that has a democratic mandate. these judges should be accountable to the people, not to head office.

you could set up a process where cases need to be put before regular judges, and subject to rigorous due process, by setting up an appointment process that is agreed upon by all three countries. so, a judge would potentially need to be approved by houses in all three countries. these would need to be learned judges, able to cite the laws and precedents in all three countries and able to come up with rulings that balance the interests of the laws in all three jurisdictions.

and, you're not going to figure that out by friday.

but, a good first step would be to throw the existing process out the window.

chapter 19 sets up these goofy kangaroo courts, with "judges" bought and paid for by corporate interests, in order to overturn the democratic mandates of either country. it's a total subversion of democracy. and, when you hear the media say it works in canada's interest, what they mean to say is that it works in the interests of international capital with offices in canada - and at the expense of american democracy.

it is trudeau that is working for head office here, and trump that is standing up for democracy.

very similarly, taking away supply management would be something that would help these big corporate farming conglomerates, at the expense of actual farmers. and, don't believe the hype around prices, either. remember when they told you that privatization would reduce energy costs? that's nonsense. the price of milk is not determined by supply management.

it's just a constant across this government - it works in the benefit of international capital, and doesn't care about actual people. trudeau's strange brand of liberalism is just another type of crony capitalism that puts profits, and investors, before actual people.

if the media is right and he attacks farmers in order to win concessions for bankers, he should be widely indicted for it.

see, i never supported the isds - i agree with trump that it is an attack on sovereignty. or, i should say that i agree with naomi klein, or noam chomsky, that it's an attack on sovereignty. this is a position most frequently presented by the hard left.

i think it's the things we're not hearing in the media we're not going to like.

but, if i was representing my country at that table, i would be looking to "compromise" on the isds (i'd have volunteered getting rid of it...) in order to save the supply management - not the other way around.

as i've said repeatedly, if i find myself forced - forced - to work at some point, i would prefer mindless drone labour over anything difficult, because i don't want to waste my brain at work - i have better uses for it than that.

i would rather work part time as a cashier.

i really would.

sorry.

i'd rather be a housewife, i guess.

maybe that's the truth of it, isn't it?

*shrug*

no kids.

i might compromise on the partner thing.

no kids.

but, if you have a cool basement for me to hang out in and create while you're at work, i might consider fucking you in exchange for access to it.

i've decided that my purpose in life is to make art.

and, while i acknowledge that i have been less productive than i'd like, i don't want to waste my time making money.

i want to get back to making art.

i just got an email offering me a job for $30/hr.

i'm assuming it's bullshit. but, here's the funny twist - i have been headhunted, and i've been headhunted by...

...csis.

that's the canadian cia.

i told them to fuck off. at the time, i was working, but i didn't want to work for the government - that was a rejection on moral grounds. i just didn't want to work for an organization that does what csis does. i was hoping to get something a little less heavy, in the private sector,

in the long run, i learned that there isn't really a private sector in canada, or not in the way you'd imagine it. the dominant contractor in the private sector is the state. that is, you can work for the state directly, or you can work for the contractors that the state hires, but you're working for the government, in the end - or you're working in a coffee shop.

i would have preferred the coffee shop, but they never called me back.

at this point in my life, the idea of sitting in an office is not acceptable to me. i'd be terrible at it, really. i just wouldn't want to be there. my skill set may seem appealing from a distance, but i just don't have the patience to bullshit it any more - i wouldn't want to be there, and i wouldn't pretend i do.

but, you might imagine my life would be different if i made $30/hr. that's, what, $60,000 a year? what the hell would i do with that?

buy a car!

nope...

buy a house!

eh. probably not.

buy a boyfriend!

definitely not.

i could maybe buy a few guitars.

you know what i'd actually do with it?

i'd get the cheapest apartment i could find, bicycle to work and then dump the money into stocks. if i can dump $100,000 into the market after a few years, it shouldn't take long to live off of the dividends.

because that's what i want. i don't want a mortgage. i want a guaranteed annual income.

and, this is what i've been saying for years and that i've tried to escape from - and sometimes succeeded in it.

capitalism is just a waste of fucking time.

every second you spend in capitalism is wasted doing some stupid triviality to balance a spreadsheet. even when you're trying to get out of it, it is impossible to enjoy your life - you're working, or you're avoiding working, you're trying to sell something, or you're trying to buy something, or you're trying to rent something, you're just constantly lost in these pointless market mechanisms that gain you nothing substantive at all - you're just doing the same stupid thing either way, which is throwing away any concept of creativity or meaning in the finite amount of time you have before you start decomposing...

there's no way to make capitalism meaningful.

there is no task within it that is worthwhile.

it is millions of people wasting their lives away doing nothing of any meaning or importance, because they can't find anything better to do, anyways.

and, if i have to fucking die like a dog on the street to avoid wasting what time i have left, then so be it.

all i can muster up is a general fuck you for being oppressive.

i would rather be dead than employed.

and, i'll prove it if you force me to.

what's really going to piss me off, in the end, is that i've wasted the last year on this, and reached no meaningful conclusion - that all of this struggle for a healthy escape has been a waste of time, and that i couldn't have even spent it better, due to the deplorable conditions in the unit.

what is the difference between wasting your life homeless and wasting your life working?

it's wasted either way.

but, wealth does not provide for escape; only poverty provides for actual freedom.

poverty is superior because it provides hope - a hope for escape from the wastefulness.

i grew up on welfare in a housing project in the southern part of ottawa.

and, while i didn't come to terms with it until later, i have been transgendered my whole life.

i've spent my whole life evading violence and living in fear.

these are lessons i've actually learned very well, and are at the crux of what i already am. i don't need somebody to tell me what it's like to be poor. i don't need somebody to tell me what it's like to be marginalized. i'm well aware of this. it's at the core of my existence, and a defining component of my life choices.

if i hadn't been through such levels of poverty in the past, i might have been more keen on wasting my life in the triviality of capitalist labour. it is because i know the pointlessness of existence that i know the pointlessness of capitalism.

you can take notes if you want.

but you're honestly just wasting my time.

let this be a condemnation of capitalism to whomever is taking note of it.

i just want a smoke-free space to work on my art.

and, i'll fight through whatever means necessary until i find one.

the most important thing that i've learned from my previous time spent homeless is that this is a state where trust is impossible.

you cannot meet friends when you're homeless.

you cannot trust the kindness of strangers when you're homeless.

and, you do not want other people to know that you're homeless, when you're homeless - especially not other homeless people.

when you're homeless, everybody you meet is a potential thief, a potential thug and a potential rapist.

you consequently do not want to stay in the same place for more than a few days, lest you draw suspicions to yourself. and, whenever possible, you want to take yourself to areas that are away from other people, as they can only possibly do you extreme harm.

homelessness is a condition where extreme paranoia is a precondition for your own safety, and naivete is a one-way ticket to certain death.

i've been aware for a while now that there appears to be something weird happening here.

there were two places i was in the process of putting something down on, and they both mysteriously evaporated.

i don't know what the purpose of making me spend some time on the streets is. but, you're bound to learn more about me than i am to learn about the process.

the fact is that i actually have been homeless before, on a couple of occasions. this experience is not likely to be different than the other ones.

i am not going to rely on the kindness of strangers, or interact with the other people on the street at all. i will be spending my time in libraries and coffee shops. i will be straight edge during the process. and, i will have a singular focus on getting out of the city and setting the studio back up somewhere else.

anybody that approaches me during this process and offers me drugs or alcohol is likely to be met with physical violence. i have no interest at all, whatsoever, in being inebriated while homeless.

i'm not going to go on a wild adventure, either. this is not the time for that. i will stick very close to very safe spaces, and be concerned very strongly about my safety as i'm doing it.

i'm not a wild party person. i am not a "free spirit". i am a nerd. and, a homeless nerd is still a nerd.

see, this is actually a good example of the pitfalls of understanding hierarchy through the prism of identified groups, rather than through the prism of class.

it was true, in the twentieth century, that seniors were at a relative disadvantage in society, as each successive generation on this continent continually increased it's share of the wealth. that was a constant up until the 70s. see richard wolff as one good source on this topic. but, the fact of the matter is that, since that relation has flipped, wealth has actually begun to correlate with age. - and, in today's society, seniors are actually the people with the most amount of wealth, influence, property and power.

so, a rule that allows for age discrimination in order to benefit seniors is absurd. "seniors only" restrictions are now protecting the most advantaged and most privileged group in our society. if the idea is that discrimination is ok when it protects a disadvantaged group, that group is no longer the elderly, but the young - and the discounts should be provided to millennials, instead.

as of right now, it feels like seniors have simply legislated themselves above the law.

fifty years from now, the situation may reverse itself, again. and, we're left with a constant we should have realized in the first place - we should have focused on class all along.

the idea of seniors-only housing in 2018 is not a tool to help the disadvantaged, but a means for the wealthy to keep the poor away.

http://www.ohrc.on.ca/en/policy-discrimination-against-older-people-because-age/4-general-principles\

http://dsdfghghfsdflgkfgkja.blogspot.com/2016/06/19-06-2016-j-reacts-to-silence-about.html

http://dsdfghghfsdflgkfgkja.blogspot.com/2016/06/19-06-2016-j-reacts-to-clinton-machines.html

and, they may become angry when you question the superiority of their ignorance.

but, they are barbarians. that is expected.

and, you must be as patient as you are careful.

and, yes, my fellow liberals - we are going to have to go back to mill and make the argument from the start, for the debates we are to have in the upcoming decades are going to be the same debates that our great-great-great-grandparents had, all those many years ago, with christianity replaced by islam.

the barbarians will not spontaneously discard their religion.

we must help them out of ignorance, and help them to discard their nonsense and learn philosophy, instead.

and, mill is the blueprint, as he was before.

because, they might be wrong. right? just a little doubt, is the right way to start.

i have better things to do, too. but, this is our task, whether we like it or not - because, if we fail. the consequences are potentially catastrophic.

so, we live in a liberal democracy.

and, we have elected a member of the liberal party to be our prime minister.

what does that mean, exactly? what is with this world liberal?

well, it's a complicated word. truly.

but, in canada, when we use the world liberal in a social or political or even an economic sense, we almost always refer to it in the sense of the term as it was understood by js mill, who was a dominant figure in the british liberal party, of which our own liberal party derives from.

mill wrote a classic text - on liberty. this is very much the foundational text of what we call canadian liberalism.

i read it in first year law, myself.

you can access it here:
https://www.gutenberg.org/files/34901/34901-h/34901-h.htm

and, it would, indeed, be quite useful if you were to read it and understand it, if you insist on throwing this word liberal around - even if you ultimately disagree with it.

after all - he might be wrong.

fwiw, though, my sexuality doesn't affect anybody.

you can't get sick from a queer neighbour - unless, perhaps, you have sex with them. but, second-hand smoke kills lots and lots and lots of people every single fucking day.

it's a dumb comparison.

it's not that i'm not acknowledging that you might not like my sexuality. it's that it doesn't matter, because it doesn't affect you - whereas your smoking does matter, because it does affect me.

...which is why the correct solution is to get people to smoke away from the house, where it doesn't affect anybody.

i need to be as clear as i can about this.

my lifestyle does not allow for me to live in a rooming house. and, i'm not talking about my sexuality - i haven't had sex in years, and have been under chemical castration for nearly the entire period. i'm just not sexually active. at all. i mean the hours i keep, and the way i spend my time.

any roomate would instantly feel snubbed, as i basically wouldn't talk to them. i'm often up all night. i eat at 3:00 am. i shower randomly. i'm in and out at all times of the day and night. etc.

and, i'm not going to change to conform to somebody else's schedule. i'm not going to pretend i care about their lives. and i'm not going to spend any time with them.

there is a 100% chance that i'm going to get into a fight with any roomate.

i would rather live in a coffee shop for a few months than force myself into a schedule and a lifestyle that i don't want.

i was in denial, because i did like the place and i didn't want to move.

but, now that i've been removed from the situation, i can see i'm better off looking for something else, anyways.

even if it takes me out of the city...

the owners basically took the money i gave them for rent and used it to ruin the place.

it would have been better if they would have just left it how it was...

it would be nice if i could find a replica of that space, but the way it was when i found it - with electrical heating instead of gas heating, without smokers next door or outside, without electrical interference issues from messing with the electrical, without cats shitting everywhere and without an overbearing air conditioner coming in from upstairs.

i could have probably even dealt with the smoke in the hallway.

the fact is that the fans worked just fine, cost nothing and bothered nobody.

there's no question that i liked that basement apartment a lot, but there were health problems attached to it, i believe as a result of the gas furnace. i was getting frequent migraines. aphasia. auras. that has completely stopped since i moved out.

the headaches i've been getting here are different. it's the smoke.

they replaced the upstairs smokers with an outside smoker, which in a lot of ways was worse, as it hung over the property. there were neighbours smoking outside the window. the main floor upstairs neighbour was smoking in the laundry room, which was right outside my inside door. it was as unhealthy as where i am now, if a little less intense at times.

and, when you combine the gas with the smoking...

the floors were structurally unsound, which i could deal with if it weren't for the fact that the tenants were all obese. they destroyed light fixtures. and, the cracks in the floors were legitimately frightening.

and, even if i could deal with that, the owner was throwing cat shit at my window, entering my apartment illegally and broadly harassing me to leave - because she wanted her mom in.

it was unhealthy and unsafe, and i was unwanted. my pushback was warranted. and, the reaction was just a reflection of why it wasn't a good place for me to stay.

i could have outlived the old guy on top of me. but, the gas furnace was there to stay. and, the new owner was actually less concerned about the smoke than the previous one.

it was the change in ownership at the root of the situation, not my fully justified behaviour.

and, as bad as the smoke is here, i'm at least not getting overwhelming headaches.

more rules for local content is a good step forward.

but, now, is that $16/hr us, or $16/hr in the country of origin? because the minimum wage in most of canada is currently $15/hr, which is about $11-12/hr us. $16/hr us would be about $20/hr canadian. or, am i missing the point - is this meant to move with measures to bring in parity (or even a common currency?), to mess with this manipulation charge?

but, i've argued loudly that the way to stop companies from moving factories to mexico is to increase wages in mexico. and, it sounds like that's what the general crux is.

i'm sure there'll be plenty of analysis in the upcoming weeks.

but, the few details i've seen sound good.

now, we'll find out what it does to help investors, right...

i think a 16 year sunset clause is about right, and proposed something like that in this space a few months ago.

the last time we went through this, we signed a bad deal to avoid being cut out.

and, we just fucked this up terribly. this is going to be a terrible legacy for the sitting prime minister, regardless.

but, we should not repeat that mistake - we should learn from it.

we should have come in trying to isolate mexico; instead, we tried to isolate the americans and foolishly ended up isolating ourselves. now we're better off pushing for a return to the fta.

i want to be clear: i would prefer bilateral deals with the two different countries. and, i think that's what trump wants, too.

but, i want to see what's released before i jump to further conclusions.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/nafta-us-mexico-progress-monday-1.4800182

capitalism is boring.

it's simply not an acceptable means of existence, regardless of where you are in the hierarchy.

in the broader scheme of things, you have to understand that i'm not a businessperson.

i don't want to run a business. i don't want to be a ceo. i don't want to sell tshirts. it's just not how i want to spend my time.

i want to create. i want to think. i want to write. and, i don't want to spend any more time worrying about how to pay the rentiers than i'm absolutely forced to....

my biggest argument against capitalism has never been that it's unfair, or that it's oppressive, or that it creates inequality. my biggest argument against capitalism has always been that i have a finite amount of time to exist in, and i don't want to waste it being a fucking capitalist. it's a quality of life argument - this is not a pleasurable way for a free person to exist.

a better way to understand what i do is to look up the term culture jamming. and, the term agitprop.

remember: i'm a communist.

what i'm trying to do is take control of the medium. i'm not trying to actually use it.

but, yeah, i need to pay my bills, too - and i need to find somewhere to live. so, buy the art. treat it like a donation, if you want. that's how this is supposed to work.

to be clear.

i have never cashed a check from youtube ad revenue, and i do not run ads on my blogs.

my writing is not a revenue stream.

if you would like to send me money, please go to the bandcamp site (http://jasonparent.bandcamp.com) and buy my art. it is the only way to pay me. and, that is by design; it is the only thing i'm selling.

i am actually deeply philosophically opposed to the idea of selling ad space on the internet. the blogs are a kind of a compromise, because they're pointless, anyways. but, i don't want ads on my art. i don't want my third symphony to be brought to you by mcdonald's. and, i don't want ads on my writing, either, as it voids them of any seriousness. serious writing is not clickbait.

the only thing i've monetized are my blogs, because it's not really an art form, it's an ad in itself. putting an ad on an ad is a different thing than putting an ad on an artform. but, the purpose of the ads is to direct you to the music, not to act as a revenue stream, in itself. so, this is the total sum of money that i've made from ad revenue and streaming media, for my entire life.

i've considered setting up a patreon site. but, if you're going to donate, why not get some files at the website while you're at it?

when you live in an oecd country in the twenty-first century, actively assuming atheism and a secular value system on first impression is a matter of providing a level of base intellectual respect - which can, of course, be withdrawn upon further evidence.

"if you're not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people who are being oppressed, and loving the people who are doing the oppressing."

no, listen.

it would be racist if i were to tell you that you have to be a certain way because you are of a certain ethnicity, or i were to treat you a specific way based on the statistical majorities present in groups you may identify with. assuming you must be religious because you're an arab is an example of racism.

i don't do do that: i assume you're innocent. that is, i assume apostasy. and, then i wait for you to incriminate yourself, or demonstrate otherwise.

but, criticizing a religion itself is not racist. generally, liberals have been exceedingly critical of religion, and sought to minimize the public influence of religion in society. nor is treating you differently because you subscribe to certain religious beliefs in any way discriminatory, as those beliefs are legitimately things i do not like - and that i have every intent to stand up against.

speaking out against islam is not racism, it's liberalism.

but, making generalizations about your beliefs based on your ethnicity is racism, and i won't do that.

so, i'm not being two-faced. i'm giving you the benefit of the doubt. and, if you remove it, you can be sure that my attitude will change rather quickly.

...because i'm fully aware that the problem, here, isn't whether i accept you or not, but whether you accept me or not. and, i'm fully cognizant of the reality that, if you're a practising muslim, then you don't - and that this is where the discrimination actually exists, at the heart of the religion, itself.

05/2016 is updated.

& i left off midway through june, so i'm actually back where i started.

that took longer than i wanted it to, but i think the outcome is meaningful, and, as mentioned, it's not like i had anything better to do.

i don't know when i'll pick up the politics site in the alter-reality, but if i can find some old usenet posts, it could be relatively early.

to be clear: my politics blog now exists, solid, from aug/2013 to june/2016. i just need to fill in about five more months. & my music blog now exists solid from aug/2013, although i'll be updating it as i continue, as well.

these documents will be used to create liner notes for inri000-inri074, and to close the aleph discs. the first set of liner notes should close when i finish rebuilding up to the end of 2016 - when i can finally get back to catching up in the alter-reality.

that's right. this has all been a part of the process. as should have been obvious.

04/2016 is updated.

03/2016 is updated...

as mentioned repeatedly, i decided against getting a driver's license as a teenager, as i was an environmentalist that opposed the fossil fuel industry.

i repeat: at 16 years old, i was more concerned about doing what i could to prevent climate change than i was about getting a car. and, even then, i was already an avid bicyclist.

my opinions have not changed.

my father did kind of order me to get a g1, but he didn't push the point beyond it. some cops actually confiscated this g1 when they wrote me a bicycle ticket for riding on the sidewalk. i don't think that was legal, but i never bothered to get it back.

i'm sure, at this point, it's long expired, anyways.

i held various jobs in various call centres from 2000-2010.

i have one ex-girlfriend in ottawa & a handful of ex-friends and family members scattered around various places.

i do not have a passport. i have a nexus card. and, in fact, before moving to windsor, i had only ever previously left canada to go to florida with family as a young teen, in the 90s.

i have never been to a third country.

if you are having difficulty finding information on me, it would be because i have no criminal background, and have lived an introverted lifestyle. there's very little information of any value to find.

i went to st. pius x high school & carleton university.

i did not play sports, join clubs, go to church or participate in the community.

i was sporadically involved with some left-wing activism.

i'm obviously not going to post my birth certificate on the internet, no.

but, i was born at the civic hospital, in ottawa, on the morning of january 13th, 1981.

my mother was from a military family and born in western canada, of finnish-irish background.

my father has roots in ottawa, and is of unclear ancestry, but probably at least part italian, for sure.

this is legitimately stupid.

i can show you my birth certificate, if you'd like.

02/2016 is updated...

let's try to get this done tonight.

01/2016 is updated.

almost there.

again: there's not anything more productive i could be doing right now.

i'd might a well get this over and done with.

fwiw, my understanding is that "students only" would be age discrimination, under the human rights code.

of course, if you go to any city anywhere, there are ads for student housing. and, there are some caveats.

as with gender and religion, you can largely put these conditions down in rooming houses. you can have a girls only student house. you can even have a muslim only student house.

but, you can't have a girls only apartment building, or a muslims-only subdivision, or a student only housing unit.

i don't want to live in a rooming house, but there are some apartments that are being advertised as student only. this is something i'll take a closer look at in the upcoming weeks, as the units fill up.

all of 2015 is now updated, and doublechecked, which is what i did last night.

i'm also now - excluding the smoke from downstairs - at three months, straight-edge.

so, apparently smoking pot is good for you because it lowers blood pressure.

smoking cigarettes lowers blood pressure, too.

you might want to look up why.

it's not so good, actually.

it's a fear of the unknown - an inherently conservative position.

and, as such, it's a kind of right-wing populism....

the science for gmos has been in for a very long time, and they're not dangerous.

skepticism around gmos is an anti-science position that belongs along side anti-vaxxers and climate change denial.

the left should not be associating itself with this kind of nonsense, and i will have nothing to do with it.

listen.

the ndp candidate in my riding is pro-nafta and anti-gmo. the liberal candidate in 2015 was anti-nafta and pro-gmo.

which is more reflective of an enlightenment worldview based on principles of human rights and scientific inquiry?

...and i have cash.

i have an income source.

i can buy lots of coffee.

i remain defiant about the wisdom of what i'm doing.

you can't smoke at the all night timmies.

i mean, there's stuff available.

but, you don't move to windsor to take a new job, expecting to pay 70% of your income on rent.

and, the less affordable the town gets, the less attractive it becomes to investment from young people moving in from out of town.

it's a mess.

and, it's mismanagement....or, more like non management.

i just want to be clear on the point.

it is true that i'm passing over housing because it's not non-smoking - but, i mean, getting out of the smoke is the point of the exercise. and, it's not a triviality. second-hand smoke is a dramatic risk factor for all kinds of diseases.

and, it is true that my income is lower than minimum wage.

and, it is true that the fact that i'm surrounded by idiots has left me without good references - due to no fault of my own.

but, i'm hardly the only person in this situation.

some of the ads i saw come up at the beginning of the month have taken a different turn. "working professional seeks apartment downtown for new job" has turned into "IN URGENT NEED OF HOUSING FOR SEPT 1ST".

and, this is kind of exposing a different problem altogether.

because it's one thing if a disabled person can't find an apartment here. i'm just a net drain on resources anyways, right? i think what i do has greater value than can be measured monetarily, but i concede that i don't pay taxes.

it's another thing altogether if the housing shortage (driven by the high number of refugees...) is actually making it difficult or impossible for new taxpayers to take up residence here, to take jobs or whatever else - as that creates a structural problem at city hall, and a one-way ticket to bankruptcy.

are we in such a bizarre situation that somebody coming here to take a job can't find housing because welfare recipients are sitting on all of the housing?

apparently.

but, there's plenty of brand new houses sitting empty in the suburbs.

what do you do to survive when you're surrounded by idiots?

when the average iq is barely above the level of mental retardation?

and you're being persecuted as a consequence of it?

we have to interact with the people around us in some way or another. so, the intelligent must conform to the majority opinion - no matter how stupid it is - in order to survive.

but, what if you just can't do it?

what if you just can't deal with them?

again: stupidity usually wins.

it's a historical constant.

kerosene & diesel.

great.

welcome to the dark ages, canada.

https://www.theweathernetwork.com/news/articles/nova-scotia-government-gives-green-light-to-plastics-to-fuel-plant-environmental-assessment/110043/

john mccain's legacy will not be positive. and, i think we all need to avoid congratulating him for often choosing decency over nihilism, and confusing it for good will, in a society warped by bad faith.

but, i'll let somebody else write this essay.

getting an education will not necessarily get you where you want in life, whatever that is.

but, you're highly unlikely to escape wage slavery without one.

it's necessary, but not sufficient.

even in my chosen vocation of "starving artist", my legal background has been of some assistance. i don't know how comfortable i would have been in launching these court battles if i didn't have a good understanding of how the system works.

hey - at least the liberals will be able to claim they have a principled opposition.

i mean, it wasn't that long ago that i heard paul martin reject "normative value systems" in upholding the same-sex marriage equality ruling at the supreme court.

and, that was the right answer.

it's remarkable how fast and how far we can fall.

"we hold ourselves to a higher moral standard."

well, ok.

but, that's not the kind of thing you expect to hear from a liberal - that's the kind of thing you expect to hear from a conservative.

in fact, it's the kind of thing liberals are supposed to reject pretty vehemently.

so, you can hold yourself to your moral standards if you want. i don't even want to argue with you. it's like debating with a creationist. it's 2018, and you're talking about morality. yikes.

go have fun at church if you want.

i'll go vote for somebody else...

i liked the old liberals better.

sorry.

if i were running for office, and my opponent were dying of cancer, i would do everything i possibly could to ensure that voters were aware of the facts in the matter - so they don't vote for a terminally ill person that is unable to carry out their term.

"you should not vote for her because she has stage 4 cancer" is an absolutely valid argument. and, if you think there is something wrong with that because it harms your moral dignity or something, you're an irrational buffoon - a bleeding heart, even.

fwiw, it is entirely rational to take all possible steps to prepare for a byelection in a seat where the sitting member is terminally ill.

and, anybody who prioritizes reason over passion would see no reason to get upset about it.

it's hardly a policy position, and hence hardly a reason to support the conservative party. but, the reaction is reflective of everything that is wrong with the new liberal party - this is base emotionalism at the expense of logic.

it was disturbingly close, though. 53-47.

i think lisa is fighting a losing battle on this, in the long run. but. it's not sure in which direction it ends up in.

i don't think that maxime bernier is likely to attract much support in ontario or alberta, for the precise reason that he's not this kind of christian conservative. quebec is a different question, where the immigration issue is more cultural than ideological. alberta has a separatist movement, but it isn't about language or identity.

the abortion thing is a giant fundraising ticket for the conservatives. how long is their base going to continue to delude themselves into thinking this is the right vehicle for their goals?

if bernier ends up recreating a bloc-like force in quebec around immigration, it is going to be abortion that acts as the catalyst for a new reform movement. and, what we call the conservative party is going to have a perpetual struggle against an eventuality: either the christian (and increasingly muslim.) right of the party is going to leave, or the centre is going to cave in.

i was arguing that the centre was bound to cave in, as the liberals took over the center-right. but, the ndp have evaporated from the spectrum altogether. and, this is giving the tories a chance to hold the centre - but only at the expense of losing their right.

one way or another, it's the socred-conservative coalition that is unstable. and, we'll see in the end if the way it collapses is by the conservatives returning to their socred roots, or by the right striking out on their own.

and, abortion is the likely catalyst.

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/politics/article-great-thing-for-conservative-party-that-abortion-proposal-failed/

my dad worked in student loan collections when i was young, eventually moving up to being one of the guys that goes after corporations that don't pay their taxes, and he'd tell me these stories all of the time.

people would take out student loans to buy sports cars, then crash the car in a night of partying.
they'd gamble it all away in one night.
they'd go out of town on trips.
they'd spend it on drugs.

he saw all of this first hand - he was the guy that had to do the investigations, which often involved kind of pseudo-detective type work, write the reports and ultimately explain to the government where the money went. he'd call the car dealerships. he'd find the receipts from the travel agencies. he'd get the police reports.

his stories were outrageous - often crowd pleasers at parties.

and, these were people that got admitted into good schools, in many cases.

it's a fact of life: when you take a poor person and give them a chunk of cash, there's a high chance they're going to blow it on beer and popcorn.

canada is a clean, healthy place to live - if you have wealth.

otherwise, it's as dirty and impoverished as anywhere else in the world, with the caveat that the rent is a lot higher.

see, and this is the trick that you need somebody like me to tell you: they are promising refugees the life of new immigrants. and, that is not realistic. it's a trick as old as colonialism is itself, but it's no more realistic now than it ever was.

i like to cite the study on bone morphology that they did on italian immigrants to new york in the early twentieth century, where they found that the malnutrition these migrants suffered from in america was creating bone deformities that were not present in the ancestral population. they were something like a foot shorter, on average. but, the advertisements said america was prosperous...that emigrating would bring your family great fortunes...

in truth, immigrants have always been intended to be cheap labour. this is true at every point of both american and canadian history. the dream was always a lie - and never a naive lie. it was a malicious lie. a lie with intent.

so, they get this chunk of cash and think it's the start of a new life. they think they're going to use that couple of thousand dollars and live the same type of life that the engineers and doctors we're admitting are - because that is the international perception of canada. and because that's more money than they've ever seen before.

that startup money is just the first instalment. the start. or, so, they think.

from what i can see, based on my eyes, something that is happening is that these refugees are using their startup money to buy sports cars. immigrants wouldn't do that - because they'd be educated people that know how to invest. but, when you give these refugees a stash of free cash, it's just like giving any other uneducated person a stash of free cash.

would you give the guy at the homeless shelter a $20,000 check? no - you'd argue he'd fuck it up. but, we give these refugees - who often have lower education levels - these huge checks, and don't think they're going to waste it, for some reason.

so, they buy a new car with it. or they gamble it. and, i've been propositioned for cash on the street. while that is a constant around here, and has happened from people of multiple backgrounds, it's reflective of the reality of where the money is going.

that money will dry up in 12 months, which, for the first batch, should be relatively soon. and, then, we're going to have a problem on our hands....when the dream crashes and the reality sets in...

i have five weeks, not 12 months.

but, i might not want to be here then, either.

i'll fuck with them once in a while.

"how are you today?"

"i'm having an absolutely fucking terrible day. first, i ran over my dog on the way out of the house. then, the teacher called to tell me my kid committed suicide in class. and, my partner has blamed it all on me, and left me as of a few minutes ago. so, i decided to come buy some broccoli. debit. no bags, please."

but i usually just ignore them.

i actually think cashiers should be fired on the spot for engaging in small talk.

do you really care about how i am? then why are you fucking asking, then? it's patronizing. it drives me nuts...

i can deal with questions about the transaction. but, i don't want to chit chat. i want to pay and be gone asap.

weird showing this morning. almost seems like a trick, although every dwelling has an entrance, and every landlord has access, anyways. it's more the proximity that's weird to me - enough that i could potentially just use the "bedroom" for storage.

i would normally go through the back door. but i came in through the front door on this day, through the kitchen and through this kind of trap door into the unit, which consists of a bedroom on the main floor, a staircase downstairs and then a kind of semi-basement, in the sense that it's more like the house is on a hill.

so, my bedroom is upstairs and the rest of my apartment is downstairs. and, while there is supposedly a locked door separating the units, this is demonstrably strange to me. i don't expect that the fireplace works, either.

but, this place is actually explicitly non-smoking, in the lease requirements - so i applied for it, because it's so rare to find.

as mentioned, i'd probably use the upstairs space for storage rather than for living, which reduces the unit to a big bachelor apartment. it is a legitimately big room, though - about the size of my entire existing apartment, with the walls knocked down. like 700 square feet. so, it's like a basement loft, even.

that might be my last serious option before sept 1st, when the market is going to change. i looked it up and classes start on the 6th, here in windsor.

there's still hundreds of rooms available for the less wealthy students.

and, the wealthier kids that grew up here and want actual apartments will have already moved by then, too.

well, i tried to plan this to get in BEFORE students. but, the process slowed down over the summer. and i didn't realize how many of them there are, or how much the market is really focusing on them....

listen: i have pure intelligence in the form of aptitude. but, i don't have infinite information. i'm very good at processing information. that doesn't mean i have an advanced ability to predict the future.

i could have done a little more research, but i don't think it would have changed how i planned this - except perhaps to ask for november.

and, i'm back to wondering if the woman downstairs has left or not.

that's something else i'll know in a few weeks. and, if she's gone, i could potentially appeal - to buy time.

as of right now, i intend to pay the balance of my rent on sept 1st, which is $50. and, if i appeal, i will pay rent for oct 1st, too.

their balance is about to be paid down.....

nope.

i'm falling asleep.

fuck :(.

11/2015 is updated...

i'm going to try for an all nighter tonight. i'm sick of living normal hours, which i've been doing for weeks to conform to normal scheduling for viewing and whatnot. i want to see the sun come up this morning...and i want life to start getting back to normal...

i will always stand up for the oppressed, and against the oppressor.

i'm just more clear-eyed as to what that means than you are.

you'll get it, eventually.

somebody do me a favour and ask trudeau a question about the conscription crisis.

i suppose the dauphin doesn't think there are any pure laine liberals - that the whole laurier backlash over conscription wasn't the fundamental base that the party is built on in the province.

he doesn't understand the history of his own culture.

the fact is that the liberal party in quebec relies heavily on quasi-nationalist, francophone white voters. that is their actual base. and, the more scorn that trudeau tosses at them, the harder he's going to find his path to re-election.

if bernier can tap into that, he can play spoiler.

i'm an advocate of supply management, myself.

i think i've made that clear.

max and i are pretty much exact opposites. and, we don't actually agree with each other on immigration, either - while i am absolutely concerned about the rightward slant of recent immigration to canada and it's longterm policy implications, my concern is that this will help people like bernier, and what i really want is more money spent on more housing.

in quebec, though?

the numbers are crazy. and a 3-5% swing to a xenophobic fifth party could cost trudeau the government.

a quebec-centered neo-socred conservative party is actually quite likely to eat into liberal support in the province.

see caq.

it's the article that is stupid, not the study. the study is actually believable - because it upholds the idea of risk from constant exposure.

the same thing is true of second-hand smoke, for example. you're probably not going to get cancer from sitting in a smoky room a few times a year. but, if you sit in a smoky room every single day for an extended period, then you actually have a very high risk of developing cancer from exposure to other people's smoke.

and, that is both why the stipulation that they studied daily use makes the study very believable and the headline very stupid, as daily use is not at all the same thing as casual use.

the headline should say "no amount of habitual use is safe". which is kind of like saying "there's no such thing as a moderate alcoholic".

if, like me, you have a drink once in a while, or even a few once in a while, you're not in the category that is being studied, here.

https://globalnews.ca/news/4406827/no-amount-of-alcohol-safe-study/?utm_source=Other&utm_medium=MostPopular&utm_campaign=2014

windsor doesn't really have a chinese district. the downtown is heavily arabic. and the university region is overwhelmingly indian. it might be because they've moved out - i know i remember something like that in ottawa, where i lived on the edge of a chinatown that was being taken over by hipsters. the chinese are increasingly just living in the suburbs. and, i'm noticing a lot of nigerians moving into downtown, too.

there aren't any hipsters here, either, really - or not in large numbers, anyways. well, it's too poor. it never gentrified, because it was too run down.

and, i guess i'm kind of just realizing that.

i've lived in the italian area since i got here, and that's turning over, too.

i'd be less irritated about living in the intersection of chinatown & mexicantown, or something. these are largely secular cultures. they're insular, but that's kind of better, you know? and, i'm not likely to be dealing with the same kind of ostracism or open homophobia as i am when living amongst indians, arabs and nigerians.

i think that's something to keep in mind as i'm looking elsewhere.

the culture matters. it's not trivial...

people are individuals and everything. but, the statistics are clear enough, too. there's no contradiction in speaking in generalities, and then giving people agency. and, i don't feel i need to explain this every time i post.

the chinese are different, because they're so often atheist. they tend to be pro-capitalist, but that's a different kind of evil than being a religionist. and, they're not pushing the same kind of regression, or threatening the same kind of backwardness. you don't get these absurd debates over established science. and, it's a reflection of the fact that china is an advanced second world economy - and nearly an advanced one, altogether.

it's the religion that is at the root of the barbarism. and, it's just an accurate statement - an astute observation.

well, they are barbarians.

look at their laws. their customs. their religion.

this is exactly the same set of problems that the greeks faced in the collapse of hellenism: irrationality, a contempt for science and an attack on sexual freedom, in favour of this primitive society centred around the tribal unit, the family.

it's not rhetorical. it's descriptive.

i don't pretend i can fight them, or something. that's never been how you deal with barbarians. what you need to do is find a way to get in their minds, and then get them to fight each other. so, you try to create division between christians and muslims - then they leave the academy alone. or, you hire one type of barbarian as mercenaries to expel some other kind. & etc.

but, for right now, when the prime minister is a retard, and the culture is itself regressing, you just have to find a place to hide from them, and wait it out.

but, i mean...

i'm not a nationalist.

i'm not going to wrap myself in a flag, or sing jingoist slogans, or cheer on one country as superior to another.

and, this idea of national pride based on arbitrary characteristics is just reflective of the collapse into primitivism that we're undergoing.

i can point to the country's history and traditions as setting precedent, and then argue in favour of this as some kind of ordering. but, i'm not going to elevate them to the status of myth, or pound them into anybody's faces.

and, it's not because that would be uncanadian - although it would be. it's because that would be uncivilized.

i can't leave the country; i was born here, i have citizenship here, and i don't have citizenship elsewhere.

and, i survive on the social assistance that i'm entitled to, as a citizen of this country - i'd die very quickly, otherwise.

in fact, i can't even leave the province.

like, i'm not denying the point. i'm the first person to point it out. i fully understand that i don't have the business skills required to survive in any sort of economy. i've spent my life focusing on my intellect, not on my survival skills. i have no interest in living that kind of lifestyle. i just want a quiet corner somewhere where i can read.

so, where would i go?

i don't know.

i'd generally prefer europe to america, but europe is going through the same kind of problems we are.

i'm not sure that there's really anywhere in the world right now that is dedicated to building a science-based society on enlightenment principles. canada certainly isn't. the scandinavian countries have abandoned this. the british are hopeless. the germans and french are in collapse, too. & , broadly speaking, america has never even pretended to want this - it's always been a backwater of puritanism and imperial ambition.

it's not the first time in world history where there isn't an obvious way out.

the chinese may be the right answer, in the end, but it's going to be decades before they have anything seriously approaching first world living conditions for disabled people. and, i've always had a soft spot for the pacific northwest, but the systems don't currently exist.

this is really a period where the academics need to lock themselves in the library and close the doors, and wait for the barbarians to pass. i just need to find a new space to hide in for a few years...

so, i spend years railing against free markets, and you idiots think i want to move to a society with a for-profit health care system?

nope.

it may be true that america is moving in the right direction right now, while canada is moving in the wrong direction. but, i wouldn't survive more than a few weeks in the united states before i was crushed by the intolerance of market capitalism.

i'm a disabled person.

i can't exist in a market society.

and, frankly, i wouldn't want to, either.

but, seeing that woman in the hallway today affirmed to me that i'm making the right choice.

this city is collapsing under a strain it can't handle, and it may be a difficult process to get out.

but, being homeless for a few weeks is a better choice than staying here and dying of cancer.

i don't want oxygen tanks to help me breathe - i can and should run away from here while i am strong enough that i still can.

this is across the street from the 7/11 in my vlogs.

there was a surplus of housing in this city a few years ago.

and, i wonder what happened....

https://windsorstar.com/news/local-news/death-investigated-in-windsor-neighbourhood-with-homeless-problem

this afternoon, i checked out a place that i had high expectations for in terms of location and size - but was apprehensive about regarding smoke. and, my concerns were immediately met with my expectations, enough that i initially walked away.

there was a woman sitting in the doorway of the apartment, in a wheelchair, with a pack of smokes in front of her - and an ashtray across the porch. i nearly vomited, and walked away rather quickly.

my intuitive diagnosis was ms. she was shaking, barely able to speak. it just seemed like an advanced kind of muscular problem; maybe she even had an accident. i didn't ask, as it wasn't really my place. i just decided it was not a good place for me, and walked home.

when i got home, i second-guessed myself. maybe the reason she was sitting outside was that she was moving out. maybe she was moving to a long-term care centre, with family...who knows...

so, i went back and noticed the signs on the window - no smoking, due to the presence of oxygen tanks.

this woman has lung cancer. she can't smoke inside because she has oxygen tanks to help her breathe. but, she's smoking two packs a day outside, still.

it would be the unit directly downstairs.

and, so i made the only deduction that i can - that the smoker downstairs will be gone soon. and, after confirming with the owner that they will be seeking non-smoking tenants in the future, i put down an application for the unit.

it might be the best chance at smoke-free living that i can find in this city.

you want to do an esl?

don't bother moving to asia.

move to toronto.

you show up, and it's dozens of white people.

consistently.

i've been bitching that the migration is reducing the vacancy rate, and that seems to be true, but you go to these open houses, and everybody applying is white.

it seems like it's less that i'm competing with a bunch of migrants, and more that a lot of the housing has been taken off the market, leaving a reduced supply for local residents, who are left to fight over it - with students. i see students...

...which is worse.

i mean, i'm not one to throw around market theory. i think housing is a human right. but, that's supposed to be the argument: equality of opportunity. let everyone loose at each other, and let the market sort it out. again, i don't advocate that, but that's the "liberal" position here - that if i lose, i got outcompeted, and too bad. ok. but, the more i'm experiencing what's happening here, the more i'm realizing that this isn't actually reflective of reality.

if there's tens of thousands of migrants here, and they're reducing vacancy rates, why don't i see them applying for the housing i'm applying for? and, the answer seems to be that they have contacts that are helping them avoid competing on the market for spots - that they have workers helping them get in.

i mean, i see them at the grocery store and on the street and stuff. but, i've been to a lot of open houses, and i don't see them there.

maybe, the way out of this is to go live in a shelter and ask them to find me something. that seems to be the ticket.

otherwise, i'm fighting for substandard housing with dozens of other people...

it's just: can we be consistent? fuck markets. thoroughly. but, it's screwy to argue in favour of equality of opportunity, then game the market in favour of a specific group. i don't really want free markets - i want equality of outcome. but, that's kind of an incoherent position.

are we in favour of free market housing or not?

i'm not.

are you, or are aren't you? pick one, and be consistent about it.

'cause i kind of think i could probably outcompete a couple of these folks, actually.

canada's really become an absurd place to live.

"property owner offering reduced rent in exchange for english lessons from local resident."

quiet seems to have too many vowels, or something. it's throwing off people that speak other languages rather badly.

"quite apartment for rent" has a kind of quaint, english feel to it. apartment for rent? mmm. quite.

but, "quit apartment for rent" seems more like a command that anything else. it's like i'm being evicted before i apply.

the article doesn't do a good job of explaining what happened to the socreds, though.

the bc wing actually became the bc liberal party, crazily enough - and it is the socred history that is the root cause of the bc liberals' right-ward slant. the alberta wing became the reform movement (ernest manning is preston manning's father). and the quebec wing, which was more focused on the monetary aspect, turned into the quasi-socialist bloc quebecois.

this is an important part of actual canadian history - not the canadian history that you imagine exists, but the one that actually happened in objective reality. and, it's not like they went away.

reform is a fundamental constant on the right. i don't know if it's tied to the history of protestantism or what, but it's always been there, and it will likely always be there.

the tories are the party of urban conservatives & old money. they're not the party of farmers, or of the rural poor. and, they've historically generally faced stiff resistance from populist movements in the countryside.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_Credit_Party_of_Canada

what we call the conservative party in canada actually represents a coalition between two different political ideologies: toryism (which in canada has tended to be moderate) and social credit, which was an odd philosophy that merged a kind of theory of value with a lot of hard right-wing social views, and was prominent in the west and in quebec. until 1980, social credit regularly elected mps in canada. this was always a strange marriage, one that erupted in the 1990s as a consequence of the collapse of toryism, and a resulting shift to the hard right in the prairie provinces. what happened was that social credit eclipsed toryism (under the 'reform' brand), and then launched a hostile takeover of the conservative party, a takeover that ended in much of the conservative intelligentsia moving to the liberal party.

stephen harper was both the culmination of the reform movement and the architect of a slow return of toryism to the conservative party. today, the conservatives are still struggling with this, but the old tories seem to have the upper hand, again.

what maxime bernier represents is consequently relatively easy to understand. he's representing a strain of the canadian right that has historically tended to exist outside of the conservative party. there is a place in the canadian discourse for this - it is an important part of the country's fabric. it's always been there, and any stable party system will acknowledge that. the centre needs to get their heads around this.

but, a more interesting question is whether the quiet tory takeover of the conservative party, this counter-revolution on the right, is reflective of the views of voters or not.

people like michelle rempel live in a bubble of upper class tory media. she doesn't have to spend a lot of time talking to her constituents, because she has no meaningful opposition in her riding. and, she's consequently likely very out of touch with them.

does it make sense for bernier to start his own party? i think the stable spectrum in canada has four parties in it, and one of them is on the right of the conservative party. so, i'm going to argue that it does - and that this is all very canadian. our spectrum has been unstable for much of the last 40 years; the re-establishment of social credit could stabilize the party system..

but, the tories might want to re-evaluate the level of support that exists for a reform type party.

again: i've been to like 100 places, and the smoke is just endemic.

i couldn't tell, today, if i was smelling paint or pot. paint dries. &, if it was pot, it's not obvious where the source was - this was a semi-basement without neighbours and no shared entrance, the kind of space that should be shielded fairly well.

but, i was smelling something.

and, there really has appeared to be no escape from this, up to this point. we'll see what tomorrow brings...

so, 10/2015 is updated.

i'm making progress. slowly.

i put an application down on something today, but i'm again not really stoked on it. i really haven't found the place i want, yet. but i'm running out of time, too.

there's a few more showings in the next few days.

actually, i still think cell phones are a fad.

i just could never figure out why you need both a phone and a laptop. and, why would you want a phone instead of a laptop?

that said, i acknowledge that the way that might work itself out is that the next generation of phones might find itself without voice capabilities - and function more as a traditional computer. you could see them merged into a unified concept.

well.

this is the thing i voted for - not for legal drugs, not for more muslims, but for massive state expenditures to reduce carbon emissions and transition the economy to sustainable energy sources.

i didn't really vote for justin trudeau; i voted for stephane dion.

and, this is not what i was expecting in terms of how the thing would finance.

but, it is in the scope of a reasonable mandate. and, it's some movement, anyways.

https://business.financialpost.com/news/economy/canada-infrastructure-bank-announces-first-investment-as-gaps-persist-in-ottawas-186-7-billion-spending-plans

good.

let's get this rolling.

https://business.financialpost.com/commodities/agriculture/union-calls-for-canada-to-buy-back-canadian-wheat-board-from-saudis-over-spat

and, for the hundred millionth fucking time: i do not have anything in common with what is being called "right-wing populism".

the fundamental position at the core of my politics is that i am opposed to private property. that is the literal opposite of anything under the umbrella of the new right - which includes what we call neo-liberalism.

i self-identify as a left-anarchist. and, my positions on immigration are fundamentally marxist.

i have neither been informed of the accusations against me nor given a forum to defend myself in.

if you would wish to assign me guilt without so much as an unfair trial, you are yourself guilty of the most right-wing charlatanism definable - and history will condemn you for it.

i have never been charged with a crime in my life.

and, i do not believe that i am guilty of any meaningful offence.

i acknowledge that that question would be up for a court of law to determine -  but no charges have ever been filed to create a trial around.

again: this is what being a liberal society means - upholding the rule of law, not the rule of the jungle. accusation is not proof. and, all claims of wrongdoing require due process of law to determine the veracity of, and a reasonable and proportional punishment for.

we are very quickly lapsing into backwardsness and mob rule, under this banner of so-called "progressivism", which is just a synonym for populist puritanism.

what does it mean to live in as liberal society, if not to uphold the law, as established by the liberal class?

there's nothing "liberal" about turning a blind eye to safety standards, about jettisoning reasonable lease requirements or about ignoring human rights rulings under some kind of argument of cultural relativism.

for, these are the things that define a liberal society, in the first place.

and, if you take them away, we will not have a liberal society any more - we will have the authoritarian, hierarchical and unequal society that our laws were designed to prevent.

"but, my culture..." is not an argument against the application of the rules of liberalism -  it's what these rules exist to prevent in the first place.

health & safety laws exist for good reasons, and need to be enforced.

& it is imperative that we uphold the human rights code.

these are the reasons we have checks on immigration. and, it is when these things start failing that the society begins to collapse.

but, i'm starting to feel like a greek philosopher arguing against the spread of christianity. it is clear that this is not reversible, and that my best option is indeed migration - or, as it may be, escape.

people can say what they want, but the fact is that only one case has gone to trial, and i won a $1350 settlement on it.

any claims that are untested in court should be treated that way.

my landlord is dishonest - they have lied to me, they will lie to you and they will lie in court if they can get away with it. they lied on the n5s. they're liars, flat out.

and, if they have a claim, let them bring it to court - or cease and desist the defamatory statements.

i cannot defend myself against unclear accusations that exist in fora that i'm unaware of the existence of. but, i assure you that i will defend myself rigorously in a court of law.

as of right now, only one case exists, and i posted the order - any further accusations are here-say and untested, and if not taken out of context then probably flat out wrong.

there's no question that i shouldn't be going to concerts in detroit right now.

this is the only one i've seriously considered going out for, since may. i had it pencilled in a long time ago...hoping i'd have this shit worked out by now....

the tunnel is still closed; i'd be out all night. and, i'm frankly not thinking i'm missing much.

i don't want to pan this, exactly. it has the potential to grow. but, the record is just not in a style i spend much time exploring. and i'm not expecting a particularly exciting concert.

under different circumstances, i would go solely out of solidarity. i'd get some eggs. i'd tough it out. but, whether my paranoia is real or not, i fear my landlord would throw me out on short notice if he could only get the chance. while the fact is that he owes me $650, he thinks i owe him $1400, and will only obey the logic of force, on the point. and, so i'm stuck here protecting my belongings until i can find an escape path in an impossible market, and hoping for the best...

there's a good chance that this might have been my last concert in detroit.

if the place is void of bodies, fill it up with emotion.

the line will also accept complaints against science teachers that teach evolution, according to leaked documents.

welcome to the darks ages - up here in alabama north.

https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2018/08/22/ontario-teachers-parents-tattle-complaint-line-sex-ed-curriculum_a_23507402/?utm_source=spotim&utm_medium=spotim_recirculation&spotim_referrer=recirculation

so, this is a laundry area listed as a two bedroom apartment.

for $900.

pakis only. sorry white kids - you'll have to pass on this great offer.

and, "females or families only"....meaning NO FAGS.

yup.

welcome to the dark ages, canada.

https://www.kijiji.ca/v-2-bedroom-apartments-condos/windsor-area-on/2-bedrooms-basement/1378576575?enableSearchNavigationFlag=true

we are about to lose our preferential trading status with the united states, because we tried to approach the negotiations as building a common front with mexico, who then stabbed us in the back, because they realized we were being fucking idiots about it.

any political leadership with the slightest bit of knowledge and experience would have realized that we should have gone into this trying to  isolate the mexicans.

and, why didn't we do it?

because trudeau didn't want to lose the votes of hispanics by appearing as though he was racist, which is an important voting block in california, but one that simply doesn't exist in canada. it's like 4%.

everything about this is utterly moronic. i screamed and yelled - look at my posts. but, there's little evidence that they have the slightest idea of what they've done wrong.

trudeau's individual lack of intelligence aside, what the fuck happened to the party?

and, if you're living in canada, it's hard to overstate the importance of this trading relationship. if trudeau goes down in history as the guy that ended free trade with the united states, that's going to create some pretty brutal biographies. that is an astronomical fuck up. and, from what i can see, it appears to mostly be his own fault.

that's one example.

i'm not writing this essay right now. but, there's a lot of examples. and, it's becoming clear enough that the more time you give him, the more examples he'll create.

i never thought he'd be making decisions - i never thought he'd be the decider. he was reading fucking cue cards at the debates. he seemed totally scripted. i would have voted for mulcair, if i knew the party was going to bail, or be purged, or whatever happened - and that isn't yet at all clear.

he's a complete idiot, he doesn't realize it and he's running the country into the ground by making stupid errors that shouldn't be being made by the holder of the office he holds.

if you want the deep, surreal analysis, the actual truth is the following: justin trudeau is canada's george w. bush.

actually, that doesn't appear to be the building i thought it was. google was a little presumptuous.

bad google.

i actually don't see any information about this building online anywhere at all, other than that it's recently been up for sale.

you know, i tried to get these people to call me back several times, and this is what they get for being stupid.

four sweaty indian guys in a one bedroom apartment.

bet the floor smells great.

& they wonder why disease spreads so quickly in india, right?

management is unlikely to allow this. what a headache, though.

hey, they had a good long term tenant interested but they picked this instead.

the thing is that i only have a finite amount of time - and a finite amount of space - to wait for people to grow up in.

https://www.kijiji.ca/v-room-rental-roommate/windsor-area-on/room-for-rent-from-october-1st/1378479928?enableSearchNavigationFlag=true

i am a liberal on speech, this is true - it is possible to create harm with words, but the bar needs to be set extremely high.

and, it's frankly a little concerning to hear a liberal prime minister show such disdain for basic civil liberties.

i'm not exactly sure that trudeau should apologize for what he said. that bar is set higher than what he said, too. but, i think he should review the response by his security team.

i think this issue is a distraction, so i'm not going to get into it too much.

i actually agree that trudeau sounded like an idiot - but he has always sounded like an idiot. he has this kind of airheadedness to him that what you could call 'cultural liberals' (frequent liberal voters that don't know much about policy, but hold to a core of hat could be called libertarian values) see as a virtue - but almost everybody left of centre, from the liberal base to the anarchist fringe, has always found horribly cringey. this was as bad as any of the cringe we've heard from trudeau over the last ten years or so. but, i think we might, to an extent, be getting used to it.

they talked about low expectations during the last election. we may have internalized these expectations as startlingly low...to the point that this kind of thing doesn't phase us any more...to the point where he can sound like the tenth grade drama queen if he wants and people will just shrug it off.

but, i want to push back against this:

"I think Mr. Scheer should be careful of who he chooses as a champion for free speech. You don't want to choose the alt-right, you don't want to choose white supremacists and white nationalists and anti-immigration racists as your flag-bearer for free speech."

i'm going to take a chomskyian view on this - these are exactly the people you need to stand up for, because if they don't have free speech, then nobody else does, either.

and, on this point, you need to look at the action. there was no organizing, no marching, nothing of the sort - it was really legitimately a harmless question, and she was really legitimately roughed up for it.

it is the most unpopular speech that needs the most protection.

and, his father would have understood that.

i had 09/2015 just about updated before i fell asleep, and have now finished it, as of this morning.

again: minimal updates.

hopefully, i can keep this rate up.

barring an act of god, it seems like i'll be here until oct 1st.

08/2015 updated very quickly as well....

07/2015 updated quickly. there were like two or three new posts...

there's too many poor people and not enough housing for us.

what i don't like is religion.

and, i will fight for secularism to the death....

but, i don't care about race. at all. sorry.

...and, i'm not the first leftist that has pointed out that liberals are broadly quite racist.

again: i'm a leftist.

i'm not a liberal....

the conservatives are legitimately stupid.

but, the liberals are legitimately racist.

"but, they're brown. they can't vote conservative. they're not pre-disposed to it."

the liberals are going to sit there looking at the results in 2023 and shake their heads.

"i just don't get it. we brought hundreds of thousands of religious conservatives into the country, and they voted us out, in favour of a socially conservative agenda. how did this happen? what did we do wrong?"

the difference is that when the conservatives increase immigration, they do it to shift the culture to the right, and are correct about the outcome - whereas when the liberals do it, they do it because they're racist idiots that think immigrants don't understand politics, when the truth is that they themselves don't understand the difference between a democrat-voting mexican migrant worker that is trying to avoid being deported and a deeply socially conservative muslim refugee that the canadian right welcomes with open arms, because they want to help them shape the culture in their image.

the liberals have become utter idiots on this file. and, their own policies are going to result in their own decline.

welcome to the dark ages, canada - where a right-wing coalition of multiple religions gives the conservative party a cultural majority, and liberals can barely get a word in.

i mean, you don't think the conservatives are going to decrease immigration, do you?

they're the ones that increased it in the first place.

it's their policy. it's their social engineering.

and, do you think all these gay bashing, women-hating muslims and nigerians are going to vote liberal?

it's a farce.

the two parties have the same policies.

i still think it's very important that i see some substantive movement towards building new housing.

....and, that if this mess carries on for a few more months, he's going to have a problem with low income voters.

i need to repeat: they had a very good platform.

and the other parties were awful...

voting liberal in 2015 admittedly required a little naivete, or a little cynicism, and it's funny how that sometimes works out, but it was the right choice - given how bad the other options were.

and, it is equally clear that voting for the liberals is the wrong choice in 2019 - now that they've proven that all they intend to do is carry on with the same set of neo-liberal policies as the conservatives, except on overdrive.

the ndp still have a chance to make a case, but the right choice this election is going to be to vote for a protest party - and shrug it off as irrelevant if the conservatives win, because there's not any meaningful difference on any substantive file, anyways.

that's why he's running on the largely irrelevant issue of immigration. well, irrelevant, so long as you're not now competing with refugees for resources...

the sad truth is that stephen harper was a better choice for the environment than justin trudeau.

and, he was better for poor people, too.

so, the neo-liberal oil gigolo wants to run on environmentalism and fighting inequality.

emissions are up, justin.

and, equality is down.

you had your chance to promote that narrative and you made a horrific mockery of it.

maybe he can ride into parliament on a white unicorn while he's at it. he'd look good in tight pants, at least.

i am going to vote in favour of the environment and in favour if equality - and that means voting against the oil dauphin, and his band of merry neo-liberals.

https://www.thestar.com/news/canada/2018/08/19/trudeau-says-2019-canada-election-is-fight-against-polarization.html