#All Canadian Property Services

[reasonsforhope]

"In a historic “first-of-its-kind” agreement the government of British Colombia has acknowledged the aboriginal ownership of 200 islands off the west coast of Canada.

The owners are the Haida nation, and rather than the Canadian government giving something to a First Nation, the agreement admits that the “Xhaaidlagha Gwaayaai” or the “islands at the end of world,” always belonged to them, a subtle yet powerful difference in the wording of First Nations negotiating.

BC Premier David Eby called the treaty “long overdue” and once signed, will clear the way for half a million hectares (1.3 million acres) of land to be managed by the Haida.

Postal service, shipping lanes, school and community services, private property rights, and local government jurisdiction, will all be unaffected by the agreement, which will essentially outline that the Haida decide what to do with the 200 or so islands and islets.

“We could be facing each other in a courtroom, we could have been fighting each other for years and years, but we chose a different path,” said Minister of Indigenous Relations of BC, Murray Rankin at the signing ceremony, who added that it took creativity and courage to “create a better world for our children.”

Indeed, making the agreement outside the courts of the formal treaty process reflects a vastly different way of negotiating than has been the norm for Canada.

“This agreement won’t only raise all boats here on Haida Gwaii – increase opportunity and prosperity for the Haida people and for the whole community and for the whole province – but it will also be an example and another way for nations – not just in British Columbia, but right across Canada – to have their title recognized,” said Eby.

In other words, by deciding this outside court, Eby and the province of BC hope to set a new standard for how such land title agreements are struck."

-via Good News Network, April 18, 2024

[stephobrien]

Is your pro-Palestine activism hurting innocent people? Here's how to avoid that.

Note: If you prefer plain text, you can read the plain text version here.

Over the last few days, I’ve had conversations with several Jewish people who told me how hurt and scared they are right now.

To my great regret, some of that pain came from a poorly-thought-out post of mine, which – while not ill-intentioned – WAS hurtful.

And a lot of it came from cruelty they’d experienced at the hands of people who claim to be advocating for Palestine, but are using the very real plight of innocent Palestinians to harm equally innocent Jewish people.

Y’all, we need to do better. (Yes, “we” definitely includes me; this is in no small part a “learn from my fail” post, and also a “making amends” post. Some of these are mistakes I’ve made in the past.)

So if you’re an advocate for Palestine who wants to make sure that your defense of one group of vulnerable people doesn’t harm another, here are some important things to do or keep in mind:

Ask yourself if you’re applying a standard to one group that you aren’t applying to another.

Would you want all white Americans or Canadians to be expelled from America or Canada?

Do you want all Jewish people to be expelled from Israel, as opposed to finding a way to live alongside Palestinian Arabs in peace?

If the answer to those two questions is different, ask yourself WHY.

Do you want to be held responsible for the actions of your nation’s army or government? No? Then don’t hold innocent Jewish people, or Israelis in general (whether Jewish or otherwise), responsible for the actions of the Israeli army and government.

On that subject, be wary of condemning all Israeli people for the actions of the IDF. Large-scale tactical decisions are made by the top brass. Service is compulsory, and very few can reasonably get out of service.

Blaming all Israelis for the military’s actions is like blaming all Vietnam vets for the horrors in Vietnam. They’re not calling the shots. They aren’t Nazis running concentration camps. They are carrying out military operations that SHOULD be criticized.

And do not compare them or ANY JEWISH PERSON to Nazis in general. It is Jewish cultural trauma and not outsiders’ to use against them.

Don’t infuse legitimate criticism with antisemitism.

By all means, spread the word about the crimes committed by the Israeli army and government, and the complicity of their allies. Criticize the people responsible for committing and enabling atrocities.

But if you imply that they’re committing those crimes because they’re Jewish, or because Jewish people have special privileges, then you’re straying into antisemitic territory.

Criticize the crime, not the group. If you believe that collective punishment is wrong, don’t do it yourself.

And do your best to use words that apply directly to the situation, rather than the historical terms for situations with similar features. For example, use “segregation,” “oppression,” or “subjugation,” not “Holocaust” or “Jim Crow.” These other historical events are not the cultural property of Jews OR Palestinians, but also have their own nuances and struggles and historical contexts.

Also, blaming other world events on Jewish people or making Jewish people associated with them (for instance, some people falsely blame Jewish people for the African slave trade) is a key feature of how antisemitism functions.

Please, by all means, be specific and detailed in your critiques. But keep them focused on the current political actors – not other peoples’ or nations’ political or cultural histories and traumas.

Be prepared to accept criticism.

You probably already know that society is infused with a wide array of bigotries, and that people growing up in that environment tend to absorb those beliefs without even realizing it. Antisemitism is no exception.

What that means is, there’s a very real chance that you will screw up, and get called out on it, as I so recently did.

If that happens, please be willing to learn and adapt. If you can educate yourself about the suffering and needs of Palestinians, you can do the same for Jewish people.

Understand that the people you hurt aren’t obligated to baby you. Give them room to be angry.

After I made a post that inadvertently hurt people, some were nice about it, and others weren’t. Some outright insulted my morals and intelligence.

And I had to accept that I’d earned that from them.

I’d hurt them, and they weren’t obligated to be more careful with my feelings than I had been with theirs.

They weren’t obligated to forgive me, trust me, or stop being mad at me right away.

I’ll admit, there were moments when I got defensive. I shouldn’t have. And I encourage you to try not to, if you screw up and hurt people.

I know that’s hard, but it’s important. Getting defensive only tells people you care more about doubling down on your mistake than you do about healing the hurt it caused.

Instead, acknowledge that they have a right to be angry, apologize for the way you hurt them, and try to make amends, while understanding that they don’t owe you trust or forgiveness.

Be aware that some antisemites are using legitimate complaints to “Trojan horse” antisemitism into leftist spaces.

This is a really easy stumbling block to trip over, because most people probably don’t look at every post a creator makes before sharing the one they’re looking at right now.

I recently shared a video that called out some of the Likud and IDF’s atrocities and hypocrisy, and that also noted that many Jewish people are wonderful members of their communities.

I was later informed that, while that video in particular seemed reasonable, the creator behind it is frequently antisemitic.

I deleted the post, and blocked the creator. I encourage you to do the same if it’s brought to your attention that you’ve been ‘Trojan horse’d.

EDIT: Important note about antisemitism in leftist spaces:

While it's true that some blatant antisemites are using seemingly reasonable posts to get their foot in the door of leftist spaces, it's also true that a lot of antisemitism already exists inside those spaces.

This antisemitism is often dressed up in progressive-sounding language, but nonetheless singles Jewish people and places out in ways that aren't applied equally to other groups, or that label Jewish people in ways that portray them as acceptable targets.

If you want to see some specific examples, so you can have a better idea of what to keep an eye out for, I suggest reading this excellent reblog of this post.

Fact-check your doubts about antisemitism.

Depending on which parts of the internet you look at, you’ve probably seen people accused of antisemitism because they complained about the Likud and/or IDF’s actions. So you might be primed to be wary, or feel unsure of how to tell what counts as real antisemitism.

But that doesn’t mean antisemitism isn’t a very real, widespread, and harmful problem. And it doesn’t mean many or even most Jewish people are lying to you or being overly sensitive.

So if someone says something is antisemitic, and you aren’t sure, I encourage you to:

A. Look up the action or thing in question, including its history. Is there an antisemitic history or connotation you aren’t aware of? For best results, include “antisemitic” in your search query, in quotes.

B. Understand that some things, while not inherently antisemitic, have been used by antisemites often enough that Jewish people are understandably wary of them. Schrodinger’s antisemitism, if you will.

C. Ask Jewish people WHO HAVE OFFERED TO HELP EDUCATE YOU. Emphasis on WHO HAVE OFFERED. Random Jewish people aren’t obligated to give you their time and emotional energy, or to educate you – especially on subjects that are scary or painful for them.

@edenfenixblogs has kindly offered her inbox to those who are genuinely trying to learn and do better, and I’ve found her to be very kind, patient, reasonable, and fair-minded.

Understand that this is URGENTLY NEEDED.

In one of my conversations with a Jewish person who’d called me out, they said this was the most productive conversation they’d had with a person with a Palestinian flag in their profile.

THIS IS NOT OKAY.

I didn’t do anything special. All I did was listen, apologize for my mistakes, and learn.

Yes, it feels good to be acknowledged. But I feel like I’ve been praised for peeing IN the toilet, instead of beside it.

Apologizing, learning, and making amends after you hurt people shouldn’t be “the most reasonable thing I’ve heard from a person with a Palestinian flag pfp.”

It should be BASIC DECENCY.

And the fact that it’s apparently so uncommon should tell you how much unnecessary stress and fear Jewish people have been living with because of people who consider themselves defenders of human rights.

By all means, be angry at the Likud, the IDF, and the politicians, reporters, and specific media outlets who choose to enable and cover up for them.

But direct that anger toward the people who deserve it and are in a position to do something about it, not random people who simply happen to be Jewish, or who don’t want millions of people to be turned into refugees when less violent methods of achieving freedom and rights for Palestinians are available.

Stop peeing beside the toilet, people.

[quasi-normalcy]

So, to summarise this case, for those who haven't been paying attention: Indigo is the major bookstore chain in Canada. It's billionaire owner, Heather Reisman (together with her husband, Gerry Schwartz, who's also a dick, but that's not important here) is the founder of a "charity" called the HESEG Foundation, which pays for foreign volunteers in the Israeli Defence Force to settle in Israel after their terms of service is up. Naturally, this attracted major political controversy and calls for boycott after the IDF started its genocide in Gaza last year. Last fall, a group of protesters defaced an Indigo storefront in Toronto with red paint and posters accusing Reisman of funding genocide. This was immediately and near-uniformly decried in the Canadian media as an "antisemitic attack", even though the posters did not even mention Reisman's Jewish heritage. The Toronto Police Department announced that it was investigating it as a "hate crime", and a few days later, 11 protesters, including several university professors, were arrested by more than 70 Toronto police in pre-dawn raids normally reserved for drug busts and organised crime. Since then, all charges were dropped against 4 of them, and the strongest charge, criminal harassment, was dropped against all of them (due, of course, to how utterly, obviously insubstantial it was); meaning that there's a massive, well-publicised trial complete with predawn raids and over 70 police officers, to hold seven people to account for public mischief.

Now it's come out that Reisman spoke to the Toronto police chief twice on the day of the attack, and the defence wants the police chief to testify as to what these conversations were about. They also want the court to order Reisman to produce records as to the exact nature of HESEG's activities. Naturally, her lawyers are now accusing them of trying to turn the trial "into a political soapbox".

Anyways, the long and the short of it is, billionaires can apparently just ring up the chief of police and get predawn raids by over 70 officers conducted in cases of misdemeanour defacement of property. Also, if you're in Canada and you're buying books for anyone this holiday season, for God's sake, get them at an independent bookstore.

[allthecanadianpolitics]

[...] The N.W.T. Human Rights Commission's annual report for 2023/24 — released last year — details that 22 of the 26 new complaints it received that year included an allegation of discrimination based on disability.  The areas most included in those complaints are employment and public services. In 2022, the human rights panel found grounds for discrimination by businesses in Yellowknife such as Midwest Property Management, Subway and Fatburger, all surrounding inadequate accessibility. Calls for N.W.T. accessibility legislation have been happening for years. Charles Dent, the N.W.T.'s human rights commissioner, said in the Canadian Human Rights Act, public services are an area where equality is expected. [...]

Continue Reading.

Tagging: @newsfromstolenland

[barkbait]

previously werebearbait. 🔁 to find old posts n moots. <3

minors and blank blogs are blocked. age in bio.

call me sam. or june. or mutt. <3

gnc transmasc, twospirit, queer t4t (masc pref)

native + canadian alterhuman

wannabe bear (3 years on t, 1 year post top surgery)

ptsd + anxiety + audhd sufferer

switch vers, mainly a service mutt

owner n property of august <3

!! inbox open ; dm’s are open for mutuals, but pls do with caution !!

taken anons; 🪐

likes/kinks

petplay (pup+bear), heavy praise, mild degradation and humiliation, sadomasochism, cnc, intox (🍃🍹), primalplay, bondage, voyeurism, exhibitionism, breeding, somnophilia, boots, frotting, size differences, cowboys, anal, overstimulation, medplay, rough housing, wrestling, royalty, hair pulling, marking/claiming, monsters, free use, corruption

dislikes/limits

feedism, weight/fat humiliation, getting urinated on/inside of, coprophilia, emetophilia, detrans, misgendering, actual pregnancy, feet, diapers

titles/anatomy

(general) dog, mutt, bear, cub, fag/got, pervert (dom) sir, knight, cap/tain, boss (sub) pup/py, boy, fuck/toy. most pet/nicknames n whatnot are good to use! any/all anatomy is also free to use (minus tits/breasts/boobs and clit)

tags;

• mutt barks🐶 (horny posts)

• sam says🐻 (non horny posts)

• mutts treats🐾 (intox posts)

• mutts bones🦴 (inbox replies)

• <my pup3 (boyfriend posts)

• old posts. (says on the tin)

• mutts media🩸 (pics n gifs)

[rjzimmerman]

The agency that carries out this "program" is called the Wildlife Services of the U.S. Department of Agriculture. I hate this agency with all the passion I can generate, and have ever since I learned about it and what it does 15 years ago. It exists to murder wildlife, particularly to benefit farmers and ranchers. Long ago, someone put handle on the agency, calling it the "gopher chokers." The name fits. I have done more than a fair amount of yelling to my dead representatives in Congress and senators to dismantle the agency or change its purpose and mission.

My favorite statistic. I don't remember the year, but let's just say 2014. In that year, Wildlife Services killed about 350,000 red-winged blackbirds. Why? They were eating sunflower seeds in sunflower farms. You'd think that a sunflower farmer should be taking that risk rather than causing us taxpayers to make his profit for him, right?

Other stats. We're starting to believe that beavers need to be returned to the wild to help us with floods and drought resistance. Wildlife Services killed 24,603 beavers in 2023. Other stats for death: 525 cardinals; 68,562 coyotes; 430 black bears; 17,109 mourning doves; 6,952 cattle egrets; 1,292 red foxes; 24,744 Canadian geese (even though they are protected by the Migratory Bird Treaty Act); 1,209 jackrabbits (four species of them); 1,981 possum; 905 robins. I could go on, but I'm going to puke. Here's the link to the chart.

Sorry about the length of this post, but it takes a while to describe pure evil.

Excerpt from this story from NPR:

The United States Department of Agriculture's [USDA’s] Wildlife Services program is a holdover from the 1930s, when Congress gave the federal government broad authority to kill wildlife at the request of private landowners. In that era, government-sponsored extermination programs for native wild animals, like wolves and grizzly bears, were common.

After the Endangered Species Act was passed in 1973, federal agencies were required to change course and start helping some of those wild animal populations recover. But today, Wildlife Services employees still kill hundreds of thousands of noninvasive animals a year, data from the agency shows. Even species considered threatened under the Endangered Species Act, like grizzly bears, are not exempt. So long as livestock or human life are threatened, federal rules allow Wildlife Services to kill those animals, too.

Conservationist groups have long protested the program, saying the government is killing animals at the request of private livestock owners without first presenting enough evidence to show that the management methods aren’t harming the environment, as federal law requires.

“One of the biggest issues that comes up with Wildlife Services, and where we've beaten them in court multiple times in multiple states, is the controversy of the science,” said Lizzy Pennock, an attorney for the nonprofit WildEarth Guardians. “We need to get out of the framework of the 1800s and 1900s where it's like, kill any carnivores that might be inconvenient.”

Wildlife Services officials say that with the exception of invasive species, employees only kill wild animals that attack livestock or cause damage. But data obtained by NPR indicates the program often kills native wildlife that didn’t kill or injure livestock.

NPR obtained and digitized thousands of Wildlife Services work orders from Montana, created from 2019 through 2022, and built a database that shows that the program’s employees frequently kill native wild animals without evidence of livestock loss. The documents reveal that during those three years, employees killed approximately 11,000 wild animals on Montana properties where no wildlife was recorded as responsible for killing or injuring any livestock. In those cases, only a "threat" from those wild animals was logged in the records.

The agency frequently used helicopters and planes to shoot large numbers of wild animals at a time, the documents show, a method activists consider cruel and scientists say can lead to local eradications.

Although some livestock organizations financially support part of Wildlife Services' work, individual livestock owners do not pay a fee when federal employees come to their properties. Employees are allowed to kill wild animals on those private areas as well as on public land, like state forests and parks.

“That’s a bloodbath,” said Collette Adkins, a lawyer who leads the Carnivore Conservation program at the Center for Biological Diversity. “That just seems like yahoos with rifles killing everything they see that moves. It’s horrible to imagine the amount of suffering involved there.”

“Of all wildlife encountered in FY 2023, Wildlife Services lethally removed 5.14%, or approximately 1.45 million, from areas where damage was occurring. Invasive species accounted for 74.2% (1,079,279) of the wildlife lethally removed,” a representative wrote.

An NPR analysis of those reports shows that Wildlife Services killed more than 370,000 noninvasive animals across the country in the 2023 fiscal year. And over the past nine years, Wildlife Services killed 30 threatened grizzly bears and at least 1,500 gray wolves in states where they were otherwise supposed to receive protection under the Endangered Species Act, like in Minnesota and Wisconsin.

But the reports don’t reveal the names of the livestock owners that use Wildlife Services. That’s to protect the privacy of people in the agriculture industry, the agency has said. Wildlife Services also doesn’t disclose in those reports how many wild animals were killed by federal employees on public land.

[novankenn]

Small Packages... BIGGER Problems

(A "Better Ring Roman AU" Snippet)

(A/N - So for this AU Neo is 20 years old. Weiss is as previously stated is 17 years old. Now as per Canadian law... age of sexual consent if 16. So there is legally no "underage" in this story. Personal opinion is another matter, and if the thought of Neo-x-Weiss bothers you that is understandable and perfectly valid.)

Roman was closing on the safe-house that the Malachite Family had "gifted" to Roman for his personal use when in Argus, when one of the three scrolls he carried rang. It was his private-private line.

"Torchwick. Your dime for my time."

"Roman... why is there a... Schnee in my house?"

"Good afternoon Little Miss. It's always a pleasure to hear you voice, but I believe I misheard you." Roman responded, rolling his eyes as the first of a dozen or so headaches appeared. "Did you say... YOUR house?"

"You damn well know what I said Roman!"

"Sorry, I just wanted to make sure... we're on the same page, because I distinctly remember have signed paperwork transferring title and deed to my firm. I also recall having receipts for paid property taxes... but IF this is your house..."

"You wouldn't dare." Little Miss growled. "Don't start threatening your little legal actions..."

"Oh, this wouldn't be little." Roman cut her off. "I think I'd have to subpoena all your current financial holdings and tax returns to prove that you had the means to cover all costs associated with the building in question... which means by making me THINK I was legally obligated to cover those costs..."

"I don't like having a Schnee here." Little Miss Snapped. "She's trouble. Big trouble, and I don't like trouble that can cause me personal problems."

"Then stay away. Ms Schnee is a client in need of my LEGAL services, and that is all I need to divulge to you." Roman cradled the scroll in the crook of his neck as he twisted the knob to the front door. "So unless there is a LEGAL matter you require assistance for, I have a client waiting for me."

"Keep her on a short leash, Roman. Her and your imp." the line call disconnected before Roman could utter another word.

"Rude." Roman collapsed the scroll and stuffed it into it's proper pocket before pulling off his trademark bowler hat and hung it on the coat rack.

"Gods damn it Neo!" Roman snapped as he stepped into the main sitting area to find Weiss Schnee curled up on Neo's lap, openly crying. "What did you do?"

Neo shot Roman an extremely hateful glare before adjusting herself so she sign. Her hands flew through the gestures, and Roman was having a little difficulty keeping up.

"Okay. Sorry. I jumped to conclusions." Roman countered Neo's silent comments. "Is there a reason for this?"

Roman watched as Neo's hands flew through another sequence of hands signs.

"Okay. Okay." Roman sighed as he dropped ass first into the overstuffed armchair across from the cuddled pair. "She's a client, remember that."

Neo replied with several rather rude expressions.

"She's a client of OUR firm, which means she's your client as well, and NO you can't quit. I'm going to need you on this." Roman responded.

Neo threw a few more hand signs, though with nowhere near the vitriol that first sets had contained.

"I'm not going to comment on that." Roman replied. "Be that as it may. This ALL has to be above board for it to work, which means you have to be on your best behavior... is she asleep?"

Neo nodded as she gently ran her fingers through Weiss snow-white locks.

"Can you get her into on of the rooms, or do I need to carry her?" Roman asked as he pulled out a cigar and prepped it for lighting. "Are you going to tell me what set her off?"

Neo shook her head.

"I see... is it going to complicate the Emancipation Suit?"

Neo once again shook her head.

"Okay." Roman flicked open his lighter and puffed a few times before snapping the gold plated flip-top closed with a flick of his wrist. "Get he settled. Make sure you stay close."

Neo looked at Roman, one of her eyebrows raised.

"The Malachite know she's here. I don't think they're stupid enough to risk what I know about their operations against a shot at a Schnee... but you never can tell." Roman took a couple of puffs, letting the thick smoke slowly drift up into the air past his face. "I have some calls to make."

Neo nodded, and as Roman continued to puff and mentally sketch out his next moves, Neo roused Weiss and escorted the emotionally drained young woman to the nearest bedroom. Roman waited until the pair vanished through the door before pulling out his business scroll.

"Here's hoping Prismeya is in a good mood." Roman muttered as he hit the call icon.

(A/N - I have no idea what's going to happen in this portion of these combined AUs. SO bear with me while I try and juggle ideas and hopefully due justice to the ideas of the other contributors when I link to their stories.)

[rayneisnotwet]

Well that isn’t what we expected is it? Trump winning the white house. In the salient words of Miss Juicy, ”What the hell we gon’ do now?”. Everyone has a different idea. “We need to engage in our communities!” , “I’m moving to Canada!”, “I’m doing c*ke in the bathroom!” some cry out. Others are disengaging from the zeitgeist, and with it, apparently, social media. But when people announce these reactionary ideas of theirs, it feels more like a child yelling that they hate their parents because they got their Xbox taken away than a serious strategy to avoid oppression. I get it though, everyone just wants a change now. The hottest new accessory is going to be a poorly thought out style choice. Short haircuts with clumsy dye jobs and a trashcan full of “I’m with her!” memorabilia is how everyone dealt with this last time. But what is really the answer to this feeling?

Well, you’re all in luck. Because as a Trans drag queen in the midwest with an enhanced ID, I have the insight into all these coping methods. I write this while smoking a skinny cig. sitting on a picnic table in my childhood backyard, on property that’s interest rates doubled so fiercely it convinced both my parents to vote Trump and pushed me farther left than I thought was possible before I just detransitioned into Mao Zedong. I doubt that social media breaks announced via Instagram story or a vote for a failed businessman turned reality star or a jar of Manic Panic Amazon Primed to your door is going to make any of us feel any better, or bring the dollar menu at the drive thru back.

The Canadian immigration website crashed in 2016 after Trump won the first time, and to be fair I can see why. Everytime I visit, a feeling of relaxation washes over me. Not just because it's where my boyfriend lives, but because it's a genuinely very easy place. People stroll instead of scurrying through the streets. Even in Toronto, the largest city. The food is fantastic as well. The cosmopolitan-and just like that, I started ordering them-attitudes lead to a huge mix of cultures that seem to coexist in a much more mixed fashion than the notoriously segregated US. Sure, there’s the french-speaking Quebecois, but every country has annoying people. The friendliness is no joke either (as long as it’s not a service worker), people ask you how you are as a question, rather than a greeting.

Canada isn’t a liberal wonderland though, despite what Justin Trudeau might lead you to believe. During my Toronto visit, I checked out Dundas Square, the canuck equivalent of Times Square (there was no one in knockoff Elmo costumes). As soon as we stepped out of the subway station it was awash with the sounds of protest. A First Nations demonstration played out, with people chanting “LET HIM GO!” while drum beats punctuated the cries. A woman sat on a speaker holding a microphone, telling the heart-wrenching story of her son who had been shot during a wellness check by police in the midst of a mental health crisis. I wanted to support and join in the chanting, but my boyfriend advised not to, warning me the TPS were just as brutal as any American police department, especially to Trans women. Moments later a man, middle aged, bald, and white, started hitting on me aggressively. My boyfriend immediately shielded me from him, but he wouldn’t take no for an answer and made a scene. Another man chimed in, “That's not a ‘She’ bro!”

We got out of there fast.

So while Canada may have a more charismatic leader on the world stage, and policies that protect its vulnerable communities slightly better than the US, it’s not a utopia for Queers. Least of all Trans women or Two Spirit people. The truth is there is no such thing as safe spaces. As long as tribalism is baked into our monkey brains, we will find something to point at and feel superior about over someone else. I’ve actually felt more disrespected in some majority white gay male bars than I have in dives in my hometown of bumfuck Jackson playing the UofM game on their tv. A word of advice to The Dolls, don’t underestimate the cruelty of men. 🚬 or not. That isn’t to say I hadn't found community in a lot of Queer parties.

I had started my post-election-pity-party at Necto in Ann Arbor for the finale of the UofM-student-powered drag competition reality show Runway Rumble. Michigan’s best and brightest new talent (and others) battling it out for the belt. Those of us that had been eliminated were doing a group number with the finalists and accepting awards. The energy was electric, people were excited to see each other and drinks were flowing. I can't speak for coke in the bathroom because I was in an outfit that didn't allow for bathroom visits, and frankly a bank account that didn't allow for coke.

With all the excitement and nerves in the air about who would clinch the win, it felt like our community’s political turmoil was dead and gone. Although, some people were drinking so much I thought they might go the same way.

Spoiler alert, Belladonna won the competition, and for me that was such a relief. To see a Trans woman win a competition like this and receive the recognition she so rightly deserved as a fixture in the Detroit scene was vindicating as a Doll Supremacist. Shoutout to you diva, you did that shit. Big shoutout also to one of the judges, Pineapple Honeydew, for finger-waving my look that night. I hugged Bella and joined in on the rest of the cast and crew who were inundating her with congratulations, and that's when I realized something. In this bar, on this stage, in THIS moment, Trump wasn’t president. He’ll never be president of Necto, or president of drag. This place, these people, were presidentless. This country may have elected him with the popular vote, but that didn’t matter here. His political success couldn’t take away Belladonna’s Drag excellence. Or Portia’s for creating the show. Or mine for leaving my mark on the show as Drama Diva and holder of the Golden Boot. No. Our community, its survival and ability to thrive, was entirely dependent on US, not THEM.

So yes, things will be much more difficult now. This will be a tough time for Trans kids, for immigrants, especially mexicans. A tough time for the elderly on social security, a battle for young mothers and young women trying NOT to become mothers. For blue collar workers in unions, for their families. Entire classes of people, communities, towns, families, they’ll be ripped apart. We’ve already seen how populism injected into right-wing politics can create the perfect siren’s song to attract members of our family, turning them into strangers. But at the end of the day, the days gotta end. Will we all take this lying down? Or with a smile on our faces, a tequila sunrise in one hand and our loved ones hand in the other? Our community, no, we protest and sing and dance and drink and dress up and be gay! Openly! Loudly! Until they realize we really aren’t going anywhere.

[wanderingmind867]

My Interpretation of the Justice League Pt. 2:

Part 2: Justice League Detroit: Now that J'onn is the new leader of the team, he moves to Detroit and sets up a private detective service there (possibly with his brother ma'alefa'ak as junior detective or something). From Detroit, J'onn goes looking for new members for his team. He finds them without too much hassle, and the Justice League Detroit is born!

The Justice League Detroit consists of six members: Martian Manhunter, Commander Steel, Gypsy (whose name probably really needs some reworking), Vibe, Vixen and J'onn's brother Ma'alefa'ak. The team is quite dysfunctional at first, since most of the team's members are young and impulsive. But with Martian Manhunter's careful guidance, the team slowly begins to come into their own.

The team is sadly still dealing with reputation issues from that civil war thing, and no amount of good press seems to be able to fix the problems inherent in the team around this time. Even though they get some big name allies or members (like Hawkman or Captain Marvel/Shazam or Green Lantern John Stewart), the team can't beat their bad reputation.

And sadly, everything comes crashing down around 2-3 years into this teams history. When J'onn's brother Ma'alefa'ak feels like he's been discriminated against by the people of earth, his already unstable mind (we can cover that in a seperate note), snaps and leads him to go on a rampage all throughout the globe. In order to stop him, the Justice League Detroit has to team up with all the members of the original Justice League (except Batman) and hunt him down.

And while this brave team of around 20 manages to subdue Ma'alefa'ak and make him see reason, the team still comes out of this looking bad. Ma'alefa'ak was technically a member of the Justice League, so some people are quick to blame the league for this conflict even occuring in the first place. Besides, Ma'alefa'ak and the league caused so much property damage across the world that they're pretty much broke by the time this adventure is over.

Part 3: Justice League…Canada? Originally conceived when the Justice League Detroit gets a mission in Canada. The mission goes well, and the Justice League gets some contacts in Canada. A year or two after this, the Justice League has the whole Ma'alefa'ak incident and their public reputation sinks even lower. Knowing that the United States has turned on them, the Justice League use their connections in Canada to keep the team running. Only one requirement: the team will have some oversight by the canadian government. Nothing too severe. But there will be some oversight and guidelines.

This new team is dysfunctional but shockingly more cohesive than any team before or after. Despite it all, this Canadian team slowly begins to recover the team's reputation after years of trauma. Who knew a team with members like Red Tornado, Blue Beetle, Booster Gold and others would be the team that leads the league back to greatness? Or well, as close to greatness as you can get after 4-5 years of awful publicity.

[ask-a-native]

Do Native Americans pay taxes?

Let me add a qualifier that this is not my field of expertise, either by experience or education, but I'll answer in a general sense. Keep in mind I'm speaking on Canada, not the US. But to my knowledge the US has the same complexity to the matter.

Short Answer: Yes

Detailed Answer: It's complicated

From a brief article on the matter:

Most income, sales and property tax exemptions only apply to status Indians (637,660) who live or work on a reserve. Less than half of all registered status Indians live on reserve so the number who are actually eligible for tax exemptions amounts to about 314,000 people. [1] To put it in perspective, somewhat less than half of all registered status Indians live on reserve so less than 1% of the total population of Canada are exempt from paying certain taxes.

All other Indigenous people – Inuit, Métis and non-status Indians - pay taxes on the same footing as non-Indigenous people.

Back to my own words.

"Taxes" is pretty broad so let's get specific:

Sales Tax

Some natives are entitled to some sales tax exemptions that vary case to case. In Canada, you need to be enrolled with a specific First Nation to be eligible for certain exemptions.

Because I'm a Métis citizen that means I don't have "Status" and am not enrolled with a (colonial constructed) First Nation, so I don't have much first-hand knowledge on the subject. But I know enough from others that it's a pain in the ass "privilege" to attempt to invoke in the cases you're actually entitled to it.

Keep in mind this (complicated) exemption is not actually a "privilege." First Nations are considered to fall under the domain of the federal government, not provincial. And many of the government services a non-First Nations Canadian (or American) citizen would expect from municipal and provincial governments are instead provided by the band or let's say, by the "reserve," that don't receive provincial or municipal funding. Those services are funded by revenue generated by the band's own enterprises, or from a fund generated by resources "owned" by First Nations, sometimes according to treaties, but generously managed by the federal government.

In my experience, the only significant, reliable sales tax exemption is if you're a member of a First Nation buying goods from a business located on reserve. Unfortunately, the business is still expected to pay the total of those owed taxes and wait upon a refund that often comes after a delay. Which is a headache for businesses owned and operated by band members who mostly service band members.

Income Tax

Yes. The only exemption is if you're a "Status Indian" (legal term) working on reserve. Any income earned off-reserve is taxed.

Property Tax

Functions the same as the others. There are exemptions for Status Indians living on reserve. I reiterate, if you own property on reserve. But otherwise you pay what everyone else pays.

Well that was an interesting start.

[stephobrien]

Is your pro-Palestine activism hurting innocent people? Here's how to avoid that. (Plain text version)

I kept getting "needs pt" tags on the original post, so here's the plain text version:

Over the last few days, I’ve had conversations with several Jewish people who told me how hurt and scared they are right now.

To my great regret, some of that pain came from a poorly-thought-out post of mine, which – while not ill-intentioned – WAS hurtful.

And a lot of it came from cruelty they’d experienced at the hands of people who claim to be advocating for Palestine, but are using the very real plight of innocent Palestinians to harm equally innocent Jewish people.

Y’all, we need to do better. (Yes, “we” definitely includes me; this is in no small part a “learn from my fail” post, and also a “making amends” post. Some of these are mistakes I’ve made in the past.)

So if you’re an advocate for Palestine who wants to make sure that your defense of one group of vulnerable people doesn’t harm another, here are some important things to do or keep in mind:

Ask yourself if you’re applying a standard to one group that you aren’t applying to another.

Would you want all white Americans or Canadians to be expelled from America or Canada?

Do you want all Jewish people to be expelled from Israel, as opposed to finding a way to live alongside Palestinian Arabs in peace?

If the answer to those two questions is different, ask yourself WHY.

Do you want to be held responsible for the actions of your nation’s army or government? No? Then don’t hold innocent Jewish people, or Israelis in general (whether Jewish or otherwise), responsible for the actions of the Israeli army and government.

On that subject, be wary of condemning all Israeli people for the actions of the IDF. Large-scale tactical decisions are made by the top brass. Service is compulsory, and very few can reasonably get out of service.

Blaming all Israelis for the military’s actions is like blaming all Vietnam vets for the horrors in Vietnam. They’re not calling the shots. They aren’t Nazis running concentration camps. They are carrying out military operations that SHOULD be criticized.

And do not compare them or ANY JEWISH PERSON to Nazis in general. It is Jewish cultural trauma and not outsiders’ to use against them.

Don’t infuse legitimate criticism with antisemitism. By all means, spread the word about the crimes committed by the Israeli army and government, and the complicity of their allies. Criticize the people responsible for committing and enabling atrocities.

But if you imply that they’re committing those crimes because they’re Jewish, or because Jewish people have special privileges, then you’re straying into antisemitic territory.

Criticize the crime, not the group. If you believe that collective punishment is wrong, don’t do it yourself.

And do your best to use words that apply directly to the situation, rather than the historical terms for situations with similar features. For example, use “segregation,” “oppression,” or “subjugation,” not “Holocaust” or “Jim Crow.” These other historical events are not the cultural property of Jews OR Palestinians, but also have their own nuances and struggles and historical contexts.

Also, blaming other world events on Jewish people or making Jewish people associated with them (for instance, some people falsely blame Jewish people for the African slave trade) is a key feature of how antisemitism functions.

Please, by all means, be specific and detailed in your critiques. But keep them focused on the current political actors – not other peoples’ or nations’ political or cultural histories and traumas.

Be prepared to accept criticism. You probably already know that society is infused with a wide array of bigotries, and that people growing up in that environment tend to absorb those beliefs without even realizing it. Antisemitism is no exception.

What that means is, there’s a very real chance that you will screw up, and get called out on it, as I so recently did.

If that happens, please be willing to learn and adapt. If you can educate yourself about the suffering and needs of Palestinians, you can do the same for Jewish people.

Understand that the people you hurt aren’t obligated to baby you. Give them room to be angry. After I made a post that inadvertently hurt people, some were nice about it, and others weren’t. Some outright insulted my morals and intelligence.

And I had to accept that I’d earned that from them.

I’d hurt them, and they weren’t obligated to be more careful with my feelings than I had been with theirs.

They weren’t obligated to forgive me, trust me, or stop being mad at me right away.

I’ll admit, there were moments when I got defensive. I shouldn’t have. And I encourage you to try not to, if you screw up and hurt people.

I know that’s hard, but it’s important. Getting defensive only tells people you care more about doubling down on your mistake than you do about healing the hurt it caused.

Instead, acknowledge that they have a right to be angry, apologize for the way you hurt them, and try to make amends, while understanding that they don’t owe you trust or forgiveness.

Be aware that some antisemites are using legitimate complaints to “Trojan horse” antisemitism into leftist spaces. This is a really easy stumbling block to trip over, because most people probably don’t look at every post a creator makes before sharing the one they’re looking at right now.

I recently shared a video that called out some of the Likud and IDF’s atrocities and hypocrisy, and that also noted that many Jewish people are wonderful members of their communities.

I was later informed that, while that video in particular seemed reasonable, the creator behind it is frequently antisemitic.

I deleted the post, and blocked the creator. I encourage you to do the same if it’s brought to your attention that you’ve been ‘Trojan horse’d.

EDIT: Important note about antisemitism in leftist spaces:

While it's true that some blatant antisemites are using seemingly reasonable posts to get their foot in the door of leftist spaces, it's also true that a lot of antisemitism already exists inside those spaces.

This antisemitism is often dressed up in progressive-sounding language, but nonetheless singles Jewish people and places out in ways that aren't applied equally to other groups, or that label Jewish people in ways that portray them as acceptable targets.

If you want to see some specific examples, so you can have a better idea of what to keep an eye out for, I suggest reading this excellent reblog of the original post.

Fact-check your doubts about antisemitism. Depending on which parts of the internet you look at, you’ve probably seen people accused of antisemitism because they complained about the Likud and/or IDF’s actions. So you might be primed to be wary, or feel unsure of how to tell what counts as real antisemitism.

But that doesn’t mean antisemitism isn’t a very real, widespread, and harmful problem. And it doesn’t mean many or even most Jewish people are lying to you or being overly sensitive.

So if someone says something is antisemitic, and you aren’t sure, I encourage you to:

A. Look up the action or thing in question, including its history. Is there an antisemitic history or connotation you aren’t aware of? For best results, include “antisemitic” in your search query, in quotes.

B. Understand that some things, while not inherently antisemitic, have been used by antisemites often enough that Jewish people are understandably wary of them. Schrodinger’s antisemitism, if you will.

C. Ask Jewish people WHO HAVE OFFERED TO HELP EDUCATE YOU. Emphasis on WHO HAVE OFFERED. Random Jewish people aren’t obligated to give you their time and emotional energy, or to educate you – especially on subjects that are scary or painful for them.

@edenfenixblogs has kindly offered her inbox to those who are genuinely trying to learn and do better, and I’ve found her to be very kind, patient, reasonable, and fair-minded.

Understand that this is URGENTLY NEEDED. In one of my conversations with a Jewish person who’d called me out, they said this was the most productive conversation they’d had with a person with a Palestinian flag in their profile.

THIS IS NOT OKAY.

I didn’t do anything special. All I did was listen, apologize for my mistakes, and learn.

Yes, it feels good to be acknowledged. But I feel like I’ve been praised for peeing IN the toilet, instead of beside it.

Apologizing, learning, and making amends after you hurt people shouldn’t be “the most reasonable thing I’ve heard from a person with a Palestinian flag pfp.”

It should be BASIC DECENCY.

And the fact that it’s apparently so uncommon should tell you how much unnecessary stress and fear Jewish people have been living with because of people who consider themselves defenders of human rights.

By all means, be angry at the Likud, the IDF, and the politicians, reporters, and specific media outlets who choose to enable and cover up for them. But direct that anger toward the people who deserve it and are in a position to do something about it, not random people who simply happen to be Jewish, or who don’t want millions of people to be turned into refugees when less violent methods of achieving freedom and rights for Palestinians are available.

Stop peeing beside the toilet, people.

[mermaidsirennikita]

I just finished Between the Devil and Desire and would love any recommendations for similar class/upbringing difference historical romances.

Def have some of those! I focused on "upper class lady/lower class man" to run consistently with Between the Devil and Desire.

Duchess by Day, Mistress by Night by Stacy Reid--Similar dynamic. Widowed icy duchess hires this lower class powerful fixer man to help find her son's governess when she goes missing. Eventually, he'd rather something other than money as payment. It's super big on the class difference, and very hot.

For My Lady's Heart by Laura Kinsale--Medieval classic, heroine is a widow and a literal princess known for her icy nature, hero is a knight who pledged himself to her service thirteen years earlier but is only truly meeting her now, when he escorts her on a dangerous journey. Funny, angsty, very romantic.

How to Tame a Wild Rogue by Julie Anne Long--Heroine is a spinster refined lady who runs into a roguish privateer in the middle of a huge storm; they end up sharing a suite at an inn while pretending to be a married couple. A bottle episode kind of romcom with a bittersweet edge (heroine feels very undesirable and like she's wasted her life).

Pippa and the Prince of Secrets by Grace Callaway--My favorite Callaway (thus far). A widowed countess reconnects with the man who gave her her first kiss when they were teens; he leads this underworld spy network type thing, and he's super scarred, so he wears a mask. It's REALLY hot (especially if you like some exhibitionism/voyeurism) and angsty and tender. The scene where he finally lets her see his face is so emotional.

Her Protector's Pleasure by Grace Callaway--Widowed lady (baroness, I think?) is looking for her daughter, who was taken from her years ago. She was pregnant by another man when she married her husband, and he became abusively resentful. She hires a lower class lawman to help her find the kid, and obviously he's INSTANTLY drawn to her.

Glory and the Master of Shadows by Grace Callaway--Heroine is the daughter of a duke, and the hero is a Chinese immigrant who becomes her mentor as she seeks to become a better... vigilante? (This series is like, Charlie's Angels but Victorian--it's GREAT.) It's so hot; there's some age gap vibes, master/pupil vibes. Grace is Chinese-Canadian, and she wrote the book with like, a wuxia inspiration in mind. Like I said, Wei (the hero) is Chinese; however, the heroine's father is actually half-Chinese as well, so there's a level of her learning about this background she's felt disconnected to.

The Prince of Broadway by Joanna Shupe--Heroine is the upper class daughter of an extremely influential man in New York, hero is a casino owner who hates her father and plans to use her for vengeance when she asks him to become her mentor. Actually, all three Uptown Girl books have this (the first one is the eldest daughter and their father's lawyer/fixer who came from nothing, third is the youngest daughter and a gangster).

Dearest Rogue by Elizabeth Hoyt--Heroine is a duke's sister; she's blind, so her brother hires this ex-soldier/captain of the guard type as her bodyguard. They have to go on a road trip to escape this guy who wants to kidnap her, and fall in love in the process.

Thief of Shadows by Elizabeth Hoyt--Heroine is a widowed lady, hero is a younger man/virgin/orphanage master. He's a masked vigilante, and she ends up picking him up after he's been injured; at first, there's this Zorro vibe where she doesn't know who he is, which is super cool.

Dreaming of You by Lisa Kleypas--Sara isn't super upper class but she is like, gentry; Derek was born in the slums, and their class difference is a huge obstacle (for him) when she begins shadowing him as she researches her book.

The Leopard Prince by Elizabeth Hoyt--Heroine is a fine lady who's inherited a property, and the hero is the steward of the property. They begin a passionate, secret affair.

Again the Magic by Lisa Kleypas--Heroine is an earl's daughter, while the hero is a servant on the property who grows up alongside her. They fall in love as teens, but her father makes her break his heart and send him away. Years later, he returns BENT ON REVENGE!!! So good.

Butterfly Swords by Jeannie Lin--Heroine is the emperor's daughter who escapes her wedding entourage after it's attacked. A mercenary begins escorting her across China, and they fall in love. Includes a fab scene wherein she's wearing a blindfold while doing some sword stuff with him and he toooouches her.

[if-you-fan-a-fire]

"THE BOLSHEVIK HAD many faces. There was the cartoon image of the Red—the wild-eyed radical with a bomb in one hand and a political tract inthe other—but there were many others as well. In the popular imagination the Reds were usually foreigners; that is, they weren’t “like us.” They were irresponsible, cowardly, and lazy. They might be misguided dreamers, as the humorist Stephen Leacock argued, or they might be determined terrorists. Some were disrespectful of women, but others were women themselves, feminists who wanted to achieve a dangerous equality between the sexes. Some people even thought that Red ideas were so extreme they were a sign of mental illness. This chapter takes a look at the multiple images of the Bolshevik that evoked so much fear and suspicion among Canadians during the Red Scare.

"It is becoming the habit in this country to designate every one a Bolshevist with whom we cannot agree,” said wounded war hero and Liberal Member of Parliament Charles “Chubby” Power scolding some of his seatmates in the House of Commons on June 2, 1919. Power was right. The definition of Bolshevism that emerged from all the Red Scare propaganda was infinitely elastic; it could be applied to almost anyone whose political views strayed from the straight and narrow. Some people believed that Bolshevism was essentially an economic doctrine proposing the abolition of the wage system and the transfer of the means of production from employers to workers. Others thought of it as a social doctrine promoting free love and the abolition of the family. To others it was nothing more than organized terrorism on a grand scale. For instance, the Liberal federal minister of public works, F.B. Carvell, defined a Bolshevik as

a wild-eyed anarchist looting a bank, shooting down all the Bourgeois or property owners in the country and carrying off their wives and children.

Despite the imprecision, there were certain recurring elements in the image of the Bolshevik that inhabited the collective nightmares of Canadians in the years 1918 to 1919. For one thing, Bolsheviks were usually aliens, immigrants from one of the poorer nations of Europe: Germans, Italians, Finns, and Slavs of all sorts. “The country has been stripped of much of the good old Anglo-Saxon stock,” explained Thomas Fraser in his Maclean’s article of January 1919, “and its place has largely been taken by workmen of foreign extraction, many of them of enemy nationality. That is the root of the whole matter.” Even when it was admitted, as it had to be, that most of the radical leaders responsible for widespread labour unrest were from Great Britain, and therefore very much of “Anglo-Saxon stock,” it was argued that this leadership only succeeded in spreading its dangerous ideas by exploiting the large immigrant population. It was not solid Canadian working men and women who fell into step behind the radicals, but ignorant “bohunks” and other undesirables from the teeming slums of Europe.

Much of the resentment expressed against Canada’s Reds stemmed from the strong animosity against those who were seen as shirkers of their military duty. Supporters of the war despised and ridiculed any able-bodied man who had not gone to fight, and for the most part the labour radicals fit into this category. From their own point of view, radical pacifists had refused to fight the boss’s war. But most members of the public did not see it that way. The shirkers were cowards who had remained in the safety of home while others had paid the ultimate price to defend western civilization. As Jonathan Vance points out in his book, Death So Noble, the call to service was a test of character, and those who did not answer, or who answered no, had none. Communities took enormous pride in their young men who had answered the call in the affirmative, and took a correspondingly dim view of young men who did not. Part of the image of the Bolshevik, therefore, was that he was a spineless snake in the grass, too cowardly to fight for his country, a man who had done nothing to protect Canada at its moment of peril. Why now, in the post-war world, should they be allowed to have a say in its future development? Much of the vehemence with which the Reds were treated had to do with this sense that they had betrayed Canada’s men and women in uniform. To accept that the Reds might have something to contribute to postwar reconstruction was somehow to endorse this betrayal.

Often, Bolsheviks and Germans were confused or conflated in the public mind. Because they had double-crossed their allies by withdrawing from the war, Russian Bolsheviks were seen as no different than the “Hun.” The Allies had defeated Germany on the battlefield, but now it was suspected that German agents were working clandestinely in foreign countries to foment revolution. In some people’s minds, the war against the Reds was an extension of the war against Germany. John Newton, vice-president of the Winnipeg branch of the Great War Veterans Association, explained how it worked. The conspirators’ plan, he wrote in a newspaper article, was to stir up trouble among labour groups, ignite a series of strikes to disrupt the economy, raise the cost of living, and set social class against social class, all of which would eventually result in civil war and the creation of a Soviet-style government in Canada. The Reds, he said, were “only the cat’s-paw of the still worse gang behind the scenes who are carrying out the orders of their overlord, the Hun.”

Bolshevism was considered to be an alien philosophy, profoundly un-Canadian, as anyone would know who truly understood the country. W. F. Cockshutt, another Member of Parliament, declared:

It is time that the laws of Canada should be enforced against those who come over from the old lands, have found sanctuary here and do not appreciate it any more than to preach doctrines so subversive of all law, order and decency as the Bolsheviki have done in Russia, and as they will do here if permitted. In a free country like Canada no such doctrines as those are justified.

What were these alien doctrines which the Reds allegedly would impose on Canada if their revolutionary plans were successful? Some of them were laid out in an editorial in the Toronto Globe in April 1919, titled “Bolshevism in Canada.” First of all, said the Globe, all private property would be seized and given to the state. (“The home, the very foundation of civilization, is swept away …”) Next, all civil liberties, all courts, all laws would be abolished. “Force takes the place of justice.” And third, manual workers would take over the government of the country; everyone else would be excluded from positions of power. “The time comes for the taking of defensive measures of a drastic sort against those who would reproduce in Canada the conditions now existing in Russia,” warned the Globe.

What most alarmed mainstream Canadian opinion-makers was the doctrine of class warfare, and the violence it implied. “They announce a doctrine which says that you shall shoot down every man who wears a white collar, or a white shirt,” exclaimed Cockshutt in the House of Commons. By setting one class against another, the Bolsheviks seemed to advocate a complete breakdown of civil authority. The result would be chaos and anarchy, and to prove the point one only had to look at Russia where, according to the stories regularly appearing in the Canadian press, murderers and thieves ran amok.

Early in 1919 the Manitoba Free Press reported in a front page article that conditions were so bad in Russian cities that peddlers were selling human flesh on the streets to eat. Most middle-class Canadians agreed that there was no need to preach class warfare in Canada. Canada was a democracy, they said, not some brutal dictatorship. Even if revolution might have been necessary in Tsarist Russia, in Canada freedom already existed, guaranteed by the very institutions—the family, private property, elected government— that the Reds sought to destroy. Bolshevism was not simply wrong to propose a reorganization of Canadian society along socialist lines, it was treasonous. It went against everything the country stood for, and as a result had to be suppressed with all the force at the state’s disposal.

Sexual licentiousness, indecency, and a lack of respect for women played a large role in the Bolshevik identity as many Canadians imagined it. Garbled reports from Russia described the “socialization of women” that went on there. Respectable opinion warned that the Reds had the same thing in mind for Canada. The “defilement” of women was a constant theme, though it was usually expressed in the allusive manner of this report by a police spy in Brandon, Manitoba:

Another deplorable thing has occurred here on several occasions, when several highly respectable married women have been grossly insulted in their homes by draymen and deliverymen. I could not find out what was said, but I am led to believe that it was of a very immoral nature and about what one might expect to come from men of ignorant Bolshevik ideas.

If the Bolshevik was believed to be gross and uncouth, he was also believed to be devious and ruthless, without any sense of fair play. Russia had proven this, after all, by withdrawing from the war so precipitately early in 1918. Abandoning its allies, it had come close to costing them the war. It was hard for many Canadians to forgive this act of betrayal, and it seemed to indicate how thoroughly all Bolsheviks lacked loyalty and honour. Without these virtues, Bolshevism could be nothing more than the rule of terror. The Reds might talk about the legitimate grievances of working people, but this was a front for their real intentions, plunder and robbery. “Bolshevikism [sic] is a remarkable manifestation of malice and ignorance and murderousness combined,” wrote the editor of the Ottawa Journal. In theory, the Montreal Star explained to its readers, Bolshevism appeared to be a Utopian-political theory. In practice, it was nothing but “brigandage,” the forcible transfer of wealth from those who had earned it to a small number of idlers, thieves, and murderers. The Winnipeg activist Sam Blumenberg was not exaggerating when he told the audience at the Walker Theatre meeting in December 1918:

Nine-tenths of the people accept the newspaper portrait of a Bolshevist as a man who never had a shave nor a haircut in his life, with a knife in his mouth, a torch in one hand and a bomb in the other, and Bolshevism is considered as something similar to ‘Flu’ or ‘black itch’.

Laziness was another common attribute of the “Imaginary Bolshevik.” Reds allegedly wanted to steal from the industrious rich and give to the indolent poor. “Broadly speaking,” H.F. Gadsby told the readers of the Toronto weekly, Saturday Night,

the Bolshevists in all countries are those who do not fit in with the age-old formula—that man lives by the sweat of his brow. They want to reap where they have not sown. They are the inept, the idle, the vicious—the semi-loafers who are half in and half out of a job, or who prefer no job at all. They have not the get-up to climb the tree and pick the fruit, so they want to shake the tree and bruise everything.

Middle-class Canadians imagined Bolsheviks to be furtive and conspiratorial, meeting in dark basements, sharing secret passwords and handshakes, spreading their poisonous messages in codes and subterfuge. The radical leaders who spoke openly at public meetings were just the tip of the 'Bolshie' iceberg; the majority of the movement carried on its revolutionary work below the surface. This shadowy world of Bolshevik intrigue was evoked in a memo from a police agent on the subject of “secret writing,” which reported that when “foreign agitators” communicated with each other they engaged in devious tradecraft. For example, first, the Bolshevik wrote an inoffensive letter on one side of a sheet of paper and then, on the other side, wrote a secret message “with a pointed stick dipped in milk.” The result was invisible until the recipient brushed some fresh ash across the page, making the milk writing reappear clearly. The wily Bolshevik was assumed to have many tricks every bit as ingenious as this one to avoid detection by the authorities.

This was the image of the Bolshevik then: a ruthless, secretive terrorist dedicated to the forcible dispossession of the employing classes and the socialization of wealth and property. “Professing to be democrats, the Bolsheviki attack democracies,” wrote the Ottawa Journal; “professing to be champions of the poor, the Bolsheviki murder the poor; professing to champion the progress of humanity, the Bolsheviki trample on education, the chief hope of humanity.” Socialists and labour leaders in Canada did not seem to fit this profile, but it did not matter. They were believed to be either the unwitting dupes of hardcore revolutionaries who created and manipulated social unrest from the background, or dedicated revolutionaries themselves who cleverly disguised their real intentions behind a screen of feigned moderation. Either way, mainstream opinion considered them to be an extreme threat to the Canadian way of life, a threat that had to be stopped by almost any means.

- Daniel Francis, Seeing Reds: the Red Scare of 1918-1919, Canada’s First War on Terror. Arsenal Pulp Press, 2011. p. 111-115.

[beardedmrbean]

French farming unions are taking aim at the European Union’s free-trade agreements, which they say open the door to unfair competition from products arriving from overseas. At a time when the EU is urging farmers to adopt more sustainable – and sometimes more costly – agricultural practices, unions say these trade deals are making it hard for them to stay solvent.

French farmers say that one of their biggest fears is that Chilean apples, Brazilian grains and Canadian beef will flood the European market, thereby undermining their livelihoods. France’s farmers continued to demonstrate on the country’s motorways on Wednesday, protesting against rising costs, over-regulation and free-trade agreements –partnerships between the EU and exporting nations that the farming unions say leads to unfair competition. 

The EU has signed several free-trade agreements in recent years, all with the objective of facilitating the movement of goods and services. But farmers say the deals bring with them insurmountable challenges.

"These agreements aim to reduce customs duties, with maximum quotas for certain agricultural products and non-tariff barriers," said Elvire Fabry, senior researcher at the Jacques Delors Institute, a French think-tank dedicated to European affairs. "They also have an increasingly broad regulatory scope to promote European standards for investment, protection of intellectual property, geographical indications and sustainable development standards."

South American trade deal in the crosshairs

Some non-EU countries – such as Norway, Liechtenstein and Iceland – maintain comprehensive free-trade agreements with the EU because they are part of the European Economic Area. This allows them to benefit from the free movement of goods, services, capital and people.

Other nations farther afield have signed more variable agreements with the EU, including Canada, Japan, Mexico, Vietnam and Ukraine. The EU also recently signed an accord with Kenya and a deal with New Zealand that will come into force this year; negotiations are also under way with India and Australia.    

However, a draft agreement between the EU and the South American trade bloc Mercosur is creating the most concern. Under discussion since the 1990s, this trade partnership between Argentina, Brazil, Uruguay and Paraguay would create the world's largest free-trade area, a market encompassing 780 million people. 

French farmers are particularly concerned about the deal’s possible effect on agriculture. The most recent version of the text introduces quotas for Mercosur countries to export 99,000 tonnes of beef, 100,000 tonnes of poultry and 180,000 tonnes of sugar per year, with little or no customs duties imposed. In exchange, duties would also be lowered on exports from the EU on many “protected designation of origin” (PDO) products. 

At a time when the EU is urging farmers to adopt more sustainable agricultural practices, French unions say these agreements would open the door to massive imports – at more competitive prices – of products that do not meet the same environmental standards as those originating in Europe. French farmers are calling out what they say is unfair competition from farmers in South America who can grow GMO crops and use growth-promoting antibiotics on livestock, which is banned in the EU. 

Trade unions from various sectors went into action after the European Commission informed them on January 24 that negotiations with Mercosur could be concluded "before the end of this mandate", i.e., before the European Parliament elections in June.      

The FNSEA, France’s biggest farming union, immediately called for a "clear rejection of free-trade agreements" while the pro-environmental farming group Confédération Paysanne (Farmers' Confederation) called for an "immediate end to negotiations" on this type of agreement.   

A mixed record

"In reality, the impact of these free-trade agreements varies from sector to sector," said Fabry. "Negotiations prior to agreements aim to calibrate the opening up of trade to limit the negative impact on the most exposed sectors. And, at the same time, these sectors can benefit from other agreements. In the end, it's a question of finding an overall balance."

This disparity is glaringly obvious in the agricultural sector. "The wine and spirits industry as well as the dairy industry stand to gain more than livestock farmers, for example," said Fabry. These sectors are the main beneficiaries of free-trade agreements, according to a 2023 report by the French National Assembly.

"The existence of trade agreements that allow customs duty differentials to be eliminated is an 'over-determining factor' in the competitiveness of French wines," wrote FranceAgriMer, a national establishment for agriculture and maritime products under the authority of the French ministry of agriculture in a 2021 report. The majority of free-trade agreements lower or abolish customs duties to allow the export of many PDO products, a category to which many wines belong.

However, the impact on meat is less clear-cut. While FranceAgriMer says the balance between imports and exports appears to be in the EU's favour for pork, poultry exports seem to be declining as a result of the agreements. Hence the fears over the planned treaty with New Zealand, which provides for 36,000 tonnes of mutton to be imported into the EU, equivalent to 45% of French production in 2022. France,however, still has a large surplus of grains except for soya. 

‘A bargaining chip’

Beyond the impact on agriculture, "this debate on free-trade agreements must take into account other issues", said Fabry. "We are in a situation where the EU is seeking to secure its supplies and in particular its supplies of strategic minerals. Brazil's lithium, cobalt, graphite and other resource reserves should not be overlooked."

The agreement with Chile should enable strategic minerals to be exported in exchange for agricultural products. Germany strongly supports the agreement with Mercosur, as it sees it as an outlet for its industrial sectors, according to Fabry.

"In virtually all free-trade agreements, agriculture is always used as a bargaining chip in exchange for selling cars or Airbus planes," Véronique Marchesseau, general-secretary of the Confédération Paysanne, told AFP.

Michèle Boudoin, president of the French National Sheep Federation, told AFP that the agreement with New Zealand will "destabilise the lamb market in France".  

"We know that Germany needs to export its cars, that France needs to sell its wheat, and we're told that we need an ally in the Pacific tocounter China and Russia. But if that is the case, then we need help to be able to produce top-of-the-line lamb, for example," she said.

Finally, "there is a question of influence", said Fabry. "These agreements also remain a way for the EU to promote its environmental standards to lead its partners along the path of ecological transition, even if this has to be negotiated," said Fabry. 

Marc Fesneau, the French minister of agriculture, made the same argument. "In most cases, the agreements have been beneficial, including to French agriculture," Fesneau wrote on X last week, adding: "They will be even more so if we ensure that our standards are respected."

Mercosur negotiations suspended? 

As the farmers’ promised ��siege” of Paris and other major locations across France continues, the French government has been trying to reassure agricultural workers about Mercosur, even though President Emmanuel Macron and Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva relaunched negotiations in December. "France is clearly opposed to the signing of the Mercosur treaty," Prime Minister Gabriel Attal acknowledged last week.

The Élysée Palace even said on Monday evening that EU negotiations with the South American bloc had been suspended because of France's opposition to the treaty. The conditions are "not ripe" for concluding the negotiations, said Eric Mamer, spokesman for the European Commission. "However, discussions are ongoing." 

Before being adopted, the agreement would have to be passed unanimously by the European Parliament, then ratified individually by the 27 EU member states.