An article in the University of Western Ontario's WESTERN NEWS by professor Bernie Hammond in praise of the “eloquence of the Occupy movement” http://tinyurl.com/7tsuqqu prompted psychology emeritus professor Heinz Klatt to compose a response: http://tinyurl.com/86qkw3h.
Professor Klatt, who has taught the study of political correctness at UWO in recent years, but not without controversy, it would seem (http://tinyurl.com/6pv85mf) writes, with a somewhat jaundiced eye, that he does not remember “encountering a political movement as inarticulate and vapid as the one that now stains and soils our central city parks.” He was speaking of OCCUPY London (ON), which lasted until Mayor Joe Fontana ordered them out. http://tinyurl.com/7fnypfq
Klatt admits he is not an economist (neither am I), so he has only a “vague understanding” of what the numbers quoted by Hammond mean, but he offers some numbers of his own. “...the vilified 1 per cent pays 38 per cent of all income taxes and the bottom 50 per cent pay no more than 3 percent of taxes collected, (so the omission of these numbers makes reprehensible propaganda of the analysis of my colleague. I am afraid,” he adds, “this form of political, leftist activism is representative of the thinking in the social justice and peace studies that professor Hammond co-ordinates.”
Personally, I don't want to get caught up in quoting numerical statistics, because I really don't understand any of them.
However, what I do understand is that there have been a number of people over the past two months or so who have come together to say, loud and clear, “we're mad as hell and and we're not going to take it any more”.
That's not very sophisticated language, I'll admit, nor does it seem like the sort of thought-provoking idea that would create reverberations within the ivy walls of academia, but I think it is authentic language in use at this moment by people who have begun to realize that they are being sold a bill of goods by others, and they are determined to find a better way. (Also not clear academic language, but it's a beginning of something worthy of recognition.)
I'm willing to accept that not everyone, including professor Klatt, wants to enter into dialogue with me or others on this somewhat nebulous subject, and perhaps that will change as some of us become more articulate, providing people like the professor are willing to listen with open minds.
However, I must call Klatt on his statement concerning “aboriginals in Caledonia”. “Nobody should be allowed to violate our laws, neither the Tamils in Toronto, nor the aboriginal in Caledonia and elsewhere ... , for whatever cause.”
If we are going to talk about violating laws, then we must consider the Canadian government's neglect of Indigenous treaty rights over the many years of our relationship with the First Peoples of Turtle Island. It is this ignorance of the reality of that relationship which the Truth & Reconciliation Commission was mandated – under Canadian law - to investigate through listening to and recording the truth-telling in which we are currently engaged. I would recommend that Professor Klatt take some time to inform himself of this reality.
I can appreciate that there are many frustrations among many Canadians who do not seem to be able to hear what OCCUPY participants are trying to say at this moment. But I would suggest that it is time for us to take the time to try to listen.
If we are now living in warm houses, able to eat nutritious and delicious food, wear fashionable clothes, pay all our bills at the end of the month, and reflect on our retirement plans with pleasure, then I suggest it wouldn't be too much to ask to try to listen to our neighbours who are not in the same position.
Politically correct or not, it is the neighbourly thing to do.
(end)
