Fear and Consumption :Updated with Letter to City Council

I have been wanting to write on this topic for a while now, but things haven't gelled in my head enough to do so. I've had a post on the back burner for almost a year that I rework now and then, but I'm never happy with. Today I'm going to write about the topic anyway, from scratch, because I heard something on the CBC's Edmonton AM this morning that really, really ticked me off.

The radio host was interviewing the owner of a company that proposes to put huge, double sided video screens on several major thoroughfares around Edmonton. These dozens of screens would post emergency information or other urgent information in the public interest, such as amber alerts (when a child may have been abducted), extreme weather warnings, etc. The idea is that putting this information out near the driving public would be the best way to get the information disseminated quickly. Apart from the fact that this info is already broadcast on radio and tv stations already, it sounds pretty good so far, right?

Well, when there isn't an emergent or urgent situation happening, the screens would be filled with commercial advertising. When the radio host asked the company owner what the expected proportion of advertising to emergency information was, the owner dodged the question, saying that the screens would be dedicated to emergency information only for up to 7 days when an emergency occurred. The host pressed for the information again, saying that surely the expected proportion would have to be known so the owner could guarantee advertisers a certain amount of 'screen time' for their money. This is where it gets good: the owner then said, with quite a lot of defensiveness in his voice, that surely 'saving the lives of one or two little girls' outweighs every other consideration and makes the proportion of advertising time irrelevant. The radio host then made the comment that he expected the owner would be making that point in particular when he goes to City Council to pitch his idea.

Deep breath. Ok.

How dare he. How dare that man play on fear to sell the idea of his advertising business!!! And how dare he mix fear and consumption in the first place!!! Can you imagine this: driving down the road and seeing, say, a tornado warning on the big screen, and then shortly afterward being shown an advertisement for emergency equipment? Or being shown that the road is slippery ahead and then being shown an advertisement for snow tires? Or how about being shown an amber alert, with the emotional sight of a missing child's face, and then after the amber alert is lifted, having the ads be heavily weighted for house and car security systems, or the government's latest pre-election "get tough on crime" spot?

Fear and advertising should never, NEVER, be mixed. They are mixed, all the time though. Maybe its not as blatant as these screens would have it mixed, but all the time we are bombarded with messages in the media that danger/discomfort/hardship exists everywhere and wouldn't this nice (insert your choice of consumer produce or service here) make everything better/nicer/easier for you. Don't worry your pretty little head about the tough stuff, just keep consuming yourself into a soporific state and we the multinational corporation/paternalistic government will take care of everything. Just get comfortably numb and let the 'invisible hand' of the market work its magic.

One of the worst parts of the whole radio interview was that the business owner seemed to think that there was no problem with this approach. And, the radio host's comments seemed to imply that the owner's argument could be expected to have good leverage with City Council. Nothing like 'business as usual,' eh?

You can bet that the owner of this business will be receiving a letter from me. I doubt it will have any effect, but I'm not afraid, and I'm certainly not comfortably numb.

(Repeated bailout schemes, varying terror alerts, new psychiatric 'disorders', 'catastrophic health emergency insurance,' they're all good for business aren't they? Has anyone else seen any blatant or subtle examples of the mixing of fear and the corporate push to consume?)

Image courtesy this website.

Update, January 26, 2009

The following is the letter I submitted via email to Edmonton City Council today. I received email confirmation that it has been distributed to the councilors for their review:

Hello Council Members:

A recent story on CBC Radio talked about a businessman who would be pitching his idea of having large video screen billboards on various high-traffic routes around the city. These would carry emergency information about 1% of the time and advertising the other 99%. I am writing to convey my dismay and disgust with such an idea.

First, such changeable advertisements would be extremely distracting to drivers, making city streets even more hazardous than they already are. Second, and this is where my disgust comes from, these screens would provide a venue for advertisers, and this businessman, to profit from fear. Imagine that an amber alert has just been lifted, and the screen goes back to advertising, say for home security systems, or self-defense classes, etc. The fact that an amber alert had just been in effect could well be used to scare or intimidate people into buying such products. This would be an insidious and sickening use of advertising.

I strongly urge city council to reject this businessman's proposal when he pitches it to you. Surely our city will not stand for such coercive and manipulative tactics.

Sincerely,

Theresa XXXXXXXXXXXXX

To Harp or Not to Harp

Earlier today I ready Sharon Astyk's predictions for 2009. If you've read her site at all you may recall that she was pretty bang on with her 2007 predictions, and today's post outlines that she was correct in most of her predictions for 2008 as well. She is the first to point out that she is not a soothsayer or psychic, and rightly so, but even when she's been off on a few details, the general gist of her predictions have been in the correct direction. All of this means that I pay reasonably close attention to what she's saying, evaluate it against what my experience is, and then decide if what she says seems reasonable and choose my actions accordingly. So far, I've been glad I've listened, because it's meant that I've curbed my spending in favor of debt reduction and the purchases I've made have been practical and with a view to their future utililty. Gord and I also weren't suprised by the speed or the degree of the downturn in the economy, since Sharon has been talking about this for a couple years now.

All this brings me to my current dilemma: how much do I harp to friends and family about this stuff? After all, part of why I started this blog was to have a place to put ideas "out there" without subjecting family and friends to these ideas ad infinitum. That being said, I do try to bring up the topic when it seems appropriate, but try not to go overboard and have every single conversation revolve around my apocalyptic angst and/or preparations for TEOTWAWKI. But more and more I feel I need to say: Plant a garden! Don't buy that! Store some food! Fix it or do without!

But also more and more I feel that I'm starting to sound crazed and desparate. The world situation seems to be worsening at an increasingly rapid pace, and so the things I mention can seem more extreme. I don't want to be written off by my family and friends as a nutcase who is taking things far too seriously, but yet I don't want to avoid saying something that might have been just the thing to kick-start their own preparations for a world that will be different. Not necessarily worse, but different. And these differences require some mental and physical preparations. A lot of preparations, actually.

So do I send family an email with a link to Sharon's predictions for 2009, or to Ilargi and Stonleigh's analysis of the financial situation? Or do I just keep planting, saving, storing, fixing and making do, and hoping it gets noticed and is enough? And from a Buddhist/Taoist point of view, how much of my ego is mixed in here? How much of my wanting to talk about these things is because I want to be seen as "right" or at least have people come over to my way of thinking? And why would something I say be "just the thing" anyway? I have no special communicative or pursuasive powers over and above anyone else.

So, to harp or not to harp: that is my question.

EPCOR and Foreshadowing

Beware: sarcasm ahead!

While listening to the news on the way home from work yesterday, and while driving to work this morning, spokesperson for the local electricity company, EPCOR, warned us all that power outages were a certainty sooner rather than later. He stated that our population has doubled and Alberta absolutely needs more transmission lines immediately, preferably yesterday, and that without them we'll all be in the dark in short order. His sound bites on the radio were full of urgency and anger, saying haughtily that Alberta shouldn't conduct itself this way -- it's like continuing to drive your car around when the low fuel light is blinking and you just keep ignoring it. The implication being that you should stop and fill up, you idiot! And, that we should just stop and build more transmission lines you idiot! Or we're all going to be freezing/boiling in the dark/light here any minute!! Be afraid, be very afraid!

Now, am I just suspicious and cynical or is EPCOR laying the groundwork for Nuclear Power! to come in and save the day? Ya sure, they're talking about transmission lines now, but with all that population growth it isn't just new transmission lines that we're going to need is it? It's more electrical capacity, to send down those bright shiny new wires. A few brownouts and blackouts or, horror of horrors, being asked to cut down your own personal power use, will convince people that of course we need more power plants, and thank goodness there is this nice power company just waiting patiently to build us a nice new power plant. And not a coal power plant, oh no. Alberta is way too 'green' for that, we'll build a nuclear plant, right here where we've been considering putting one all along, while we go through this open and transparent consultation process with the good sheeple of Alberta.

Whew, that was close! We almost had to cut down our consumption of something! Good thing we finally woke up and saw that metaphorical fuel light blinking and whipped into the nearest filling station before that last drop of fuel ran dry (or maybe that blinking warning light ain't so metaphorical?). Thanks Mr. EPCOR man, for scaring me into realizing that I need a nuclear power plant! Don't those come with hundreds of years worth of toxic waste though? Oh, don't worry my little head about that? Oh. Ok then.

Picture courtesy the Humble Narrator

'Compassionate' is the new 'Cool' - is it only a dream?

Warning: long, rambling and somewhat atypical post ahead.....

Lately I've been doing more and more thinking about why it has become 'cool' to be angry, greedy and mean.

Cars and trucks are bigger and meaner-looking with their big grills and downward slanting headlights. Motorcycle manufacturers make their products look angry on purpose, so other drivers will pay attention to them. Vehicle headlights are aggressively bright and who needs a muffler anyway? Something that makes an ordinary diesel truck sound like an '18 wheeler' is way more cool. Especially when you throw your cigarrette butt or McWhatever garbage out the window - garbage cans are for wimps, after all.

Pictures of celebrities seem more likely to show them frowning and with 'attitude' than smiling openly. Even the phrase, "with attitude" implies that the attitude itself is a negative one. You never hear anyone refer to someone with a friendly disposition as having 'attitude.' Swearing and crude language are more and more commonplace everywhere you go (and I work in a jail so I have a fairly high tolerance for these things). Letting someone else into traffic or into a parking spot is seen as wimpy and weak. Cell phones are depicted in TV commercials as being more 'cool' if they are so razer sharp, they can be used as a weapon and cut someone's clothes. Sports commentators and business writers speak of 'dominating' the other team, and 'aggressive positioning' in the investment market.

I don't think I'm imagining all of this, am I? How did we get to this point?

I think it may have something to do with society's glorification of psychopathic tendencies*. Think about who is seen as valuable and important in today's mainstream western society: it is the detached, strongly independent person who can separate emotions from the task at hand and get things done. Someone who isn't afraid to win at all costs. The 'thick-skinned' person who can exert power and control over others without worrying about how it affects anything but the financial bottom line. It is the charming, charismatic person who can make everything seem alright and who can sweep others up with their visionary goals and ideas. The person who can make the complicated things seem black-and-white again and who is quick to make decisions and act on them. The person who can carry on, or even thrive, in the face of adversity. Those who can turn any situation to their advantage. (Think about some bosses, politicians, or media moguls whom you may know.)

The problem with this is that people with these qualities usually have a few others to go along with them, and these are quite a bit less positive. For example: being self-centered and shallow, being able to lie well and often, lacking the capacity for empathy, being impulsive and impractical, and seeing themselves as above the law, or as a law unto themselves. In short, such people often have no appreciation or understanding of the reciprocal connection between themselves and the rest of the world. They see other people and things merely as means to their ends. Fortunately, there are not that many true psychopaths around, but there sure are a lot of unintentional wanna-bees, it seems.

When will it stop being cool to be mean, to each other and to the planet? When will the word 'power' come to be associated with consideration, discretion, moderation and wisdom instead of with domination, exploitation and control? When, and how, will compassion and kindness be the new cool?

With psychopathy, the essential problem as I see it is disconnection on all sorts of levels. A psychopath doesn't care if what he or she does affects anyone else, positively or negatively. It just doesn't matter one way or the other to them. In contrast, the compassionate person can see connections between everything and everyone all over the place.

So if disconnection is part of the problem, then connection is at least part of a solution. After that it comes down to how to foster such connectivity in a world where the media, corporations and government want us all to remain disconnected, and therefore afraid of, each other, the world and ourselves. Divide and conquer, don't ya know.

Ok, so maybe I'm getting a little paranoid there. Or maybe not.

I know that for myself it was that "eureka" moment where I felt a direct connection between myself and the natural world that my entire world view and priorities changed. I wasn't especially psychopathic before then, I don't think, but I was certainly unaware of a lot of things and disconnected from the very breath that keeps me alive from moment to moment. (And I had my episodes of being mean and uncaring too. Still do. I'm working on it, but I still do.) But this "eureka" moment I had was completely unexpected, and I'm not sure the planet has time to wait for everyone to have one of these experiences.

I still have so many questions: Is a feeling of inter-connection really essential to compassionate action? If so, how could these connective experiences be fostered? If they can be fostered, can large-scale changes in society's values and actions be made in a relatively short period of time, so that we don't kill ourselves off and ruin the only planet we have?

I'll end by saying that this is one of my most-pondered things, and my ponderings remain a work-in-perpetual-progress. I welcome all thoughts and ideas on this topic!


*For those of you who don't know, I'm a forensic psychologist and so I have occasion to work with psychopaths on a fairly regular basis. It was a colleague who works in the same field who pointed this out to me some years ago, and it has really stuck with me.

This is Democracy?

I was speaking with our local Alberta Green Party candidate a few days ago: our conversation was both inspiring and frustrating for me. The inspiring part was speaking with someone who, apart from living an ecologically connected life herself, has the conviction and motivation to bring the principles of ecological wisdom and sustainability into the sphere of public life and run for public office. This isn't easy, especially in our rural riding, which has had largely Conservative representation since 1971. But she is out there, campaigning diligently so that people know they do have a choice to vote for someone who, unlike the Conservative Party, actually knows what it really means to 'conserve.'

Phyllis was talking to me about some of the challenges she has faced while campaigning, and this is where my frustration set in. She spoke about talking to business people who said that while they would like to vote for her, they "couldn't" because if they didn't vote for the party in power, their area wouldn't get any government grants or other favorable financial consideration. She also said that business people were afraid that if it were to become known that they voted Green, people would stop patronizing their business. Think about that: people are afraid to vote for someone other than who is already in power. Afraid that their infrastructure or community grant needs will be turned away if they don't tow the line. Afraid that they will be ostracized.

Does this sound like Canada? Does this sound like a democratic process? NO! No, it does not. It sounds like the tyranny of an arrogant, elitist group of people who think they are entitled to continue ruling this province how they see fit, bullying citizens by partisan disbursements of their own tax money. Maybe they don't go around overtly bullying and intimidating people (just covertly so far), but we all know how bullies operate: through creating an atmosphere of perpetual fear and uncertainty. A bully doesn't have to actually hit you to get your lunch money, a bully just has to have a reputation that makes you afraid enough that you give it up 'willingly' and say thanks for the opportunity. Pretty soon you just get used to handing it over. We've been handing it over for 37 years -- it's time to stop.

So, Albertans, get out and vote! Vote for who you believe in. Vote for who will do the right thing, do right by this generation and the ones to come. Do right by the only planet we have to live on.

Oh, and vote while you still can. Not all Albertans are getting an equal opportunity to vote, because there aren't enough returning officers to go around - just part of the "Alberta Advantage" I guess. Some ridings that had polling stations in the last election will have to go without this time. But apparently The leader of the Conservative party, Mr. Stelmach, doesn't think this is an urgent concern:

"After the election is over we want to make sure that every area has an equal opportunity to cast their ballots," Stelmach said. (emphasis mine)

Ah, democracy: Alberta style.

Near-constant companions: Irony and Anxiety

Since I've been on this journey of seeing myself as part of the oneness of all things, I've had the experience more often of being either struck by the ridiculous irony of something, or of being overcome with anxiety, or both. I had two recent examples of this that I thought I'd share.

1) Back in the summer I had posted about the central square in my city and how the powers that be had redesigned it so it now had more concrete and fewer trees. One day I noticed people writing on the concrete in chalk, commenting on the lack of trees and remembering when the City Square was full of grass and trees. I added my two cents worth on the concrete that day and felt a bit hopeful.

Now it's winter, with Christmas time approaching. While walking through the City Square earlier this week, what do I see but a tree there. A huge evergreen tree. You guessed it: a Christmas tree. A 50+ foot tree that had been cut down and brought into the otherwise concrete-laden Square, and decorated with lights, and sponsored by EPCOR even. (After all, what's a tree without an official sponsor?)

So, not only have the numerous CO2-absorbing, O2-producing trees that were in the Square originally cut down, but this tree was cut down too, and brought back to the denuded location as a supposed symbol of the Seasonal sentiments of Love, Hope, Renewal and Goodwill. Ironic, yes?

2) Also earlier this week, I was at the hairdresser's having my increasingly numerous grey hairs dealt with once again. On my way out I bought some 'product' (a habit which I will have to ditch one of these days, but don't have the guts to do it just yet). The hairdresser remembered that I didn't want a plastic bag with my purchase, and I didn't want a paper appointment reminder card either. I thanked her and said it was nice that she remembered those things. She replied that it wasn't that hard since, "You're the only person I know who's going green." I made some feeble attempt to smile and say that I would just have to keep talking about it to more people. Meanwhile, my heart sank and my anxiety level escalated.

I worry. I worry that people look at the cut-down Christmas tree and don't see the irony, and I worry that people just think that 'going green' is a fad or an affectation or an eccentricity.

Remember that "doomsday clock" from the mid-1980's that represented how close humanity was to global thermonuclear war and utter annihilation? That 'clock' has recently been expanded to include the effects of climate change on humanity. That's right: climate change is now seen as having just as catastrophic an effect on the planet as would global thermonuclear war.

It's time to see the irony. It's time to wake up and feel the anxiety and do something about it. Because we're at 5 minutes to midnight again.

What to do?

There are days when I get so confused and disheartened about the state of the planet. Then there are other days where I have hope and think, even believe, that humanity will get its act together and actually do something to stop us all from hurtling down this apocalyptic slope. On those kinds of days I think Al Gore is right, if we all just get together and change our light bulbs, turn down the furnace and stop using plastic bags, maybe we'll be ok. But then there are the other days, like today, where I can't help but think along the lines that this guy does, and that it's too late to do anything but brace ourselves for frying in the dark.

And no matter what kind of day it is for me on this front, I wonder what should I do about it? Should I talk to people about my concerns or shut up because they're getting tired of hearing it already? Should I worry about the privately-owned nuclear power plant they're probably going to build a couple hundred miles north of here, or be thankful it's not another coal mine? Should I keep trying to grow my own food or quit because there's not enough time for me to learn how to grow enough and preserve it properly anyway? Should I just keep politely telling people I've become vegetarian for health reasons or scream out loud that factory farming is one of the most horrific and cruel things we humans do to the species with whom we share this one planet?

Some days, like today, I just don't know what to do.

Image courtesy: www.masternewmedia.org

Afraid to look weird

I have a bit of a dilemma each time I take my canvas bags out of my trunk to bring into the grocery store.

I have a nice denim Green Party bag, which I really like, but I worry about whether or not I should take this bag into the store with me. If I do take it, I usually make sure it's stuffed inside the other, less politically inclined, canvas bags. When I take the bags out at the checkout, I will usually try to put the Green Party bag with its sunflower symbol facing down.

The bravest I've been with "the bag" so far was this weekend, when I went with my neice to what I fondly call the "hippie store" -- the Earth's General Store on Edmonton's Whyte Avenue. I was relatively sure that the bag wouldn't garner any strange looks in that store and in that area of town, but at the Safeway or the Sobey's store I'm less convinced. It also helped that my niece was carrying a BullFrog Power bag around with her at the same time.

Which brings me to my point: I am afraid to look weird. Even though I talk jokingly about being weird and not caring about if people think I am weird, I do care.

The next point is, why should I feel afraid to carry a Green Party denim bag around? I do live in uber-conservative Alberta, yes, but my area of the province is relatively liberal, for Alberta that is. And the Green Party actually does reasonably well around here in elections these days, garnering about 5- 11% of the popular vote, neck-and-neck with the NDP.

But I guess this is what being a minority feels like: always being a little bit afraid. I know that in this country and in this province I have the right to my political and other beliefs, but what I don't know is if I will be subject to ridicule, derision or dismissal if I say something about them. And while I know I shouldn't let that stop me, it does sometimes. I rant and rave around 'safe' audiences like my family, but I'm fairly chicken once I get outside those boundaries.

What would happen if all the people like me who were a little bit afraid said something anyway? What if instead of just not putting up a Conservative sign on the lawn in the next election, we took the plunge and put up a Green Party (or other party of your choice) sign? What would happen if all of us polite, non-controversial middle class people decided to let our opinions be known? That we are tired of being seen as consumers instead of people, as grist for the economic mill instead of stewards of the earth. As billboards for products instead of people who care about each other. As test subjects for big oil and big pharma instead of human beings with minds of our own.

I hope I can get up the courage to do my part towards finding out.