Happiness vs. Money, [2005] Osgoode Reports 1

--------------------

Facts:

The cost of getting a professional degree in Ontario soared in the wake of deregulation, with the tab for medical school quadrupling and law-school fees nearly tripling, according to Statistics Canada. In a new study looking at the impact of rising tuition fees, the government agency also said the sharp increase also went hand-in-hand with changes in who was attending professional schools during the period, with students from families in the middle of the socio-economic spectrum less likely to pursue those career paths. According to the findings, tuition fees in undergraduate programs across Canada rose by 50 per cent on average between 1995-1996 and 2001-2002. In law, however, tuition fees surged 80 per cent, while costs associated with medical school jumped 160 per cent. “These increases were largely the product of trends in Ontario, where fees in professional programs were deregulated in 1998,” Statscan said.

Issues:

A study published in the Osgoode Hall Law Journal by law professor Iain Ramsay in 1999 included a demographic breakdown by age of who filed for bankruptcy in Toronto over a one-year period: 23.5 per cent were 18 to 29; and another 23.5 per cent were 30 to 39. The two were by far the largest groups. But contrary to what many people think, Farber says student loans aren't nearly as much of a factor in youth bankruptcy as credit card debt.

"Young people go to a baseball game and a credit card company is giving away a T-shirt to fill out an application," Alan Farber says. "They will start with a $500 credit limit and, like in the case of both of my kids who are under 25, will soon have it raised to around $10,000 if they make their payments. That can get anyone in a lot of trouble." The numbers back him up. A report compiled by an agency of Industry Canada, showed that in 2004, just 10.3 per cent of bankruptcy filers listed student loans as their most significant debt. However, 87.4 per cent listed credit cards.

One of the main reasons student loans are not listed as a cause of bankruptcy as often is legislation that was passed in 1998. The law prevents recent grads from claiming student loan debt as part of a bankruptcy for 10 years after they leave school. That stopped recent grads from declaring bankruptcy upon graduation, walking away from debt they never had any intention of repaying. A 1999 study by Carleton University public policy professor Saul Schwartz showed that although a small number of students abused the bankruptcy laws prior to 1998, the vast majority who filed for bankruptcy did so as a last resort.

A bill to reduce the student loan bankruptcy period recently passed its first reading in the Senate. If it becomes law, students would be allowed to wipe out their student loan debt by declaring bankruptcy no sooner than seven years after school. "Prior to that legislation, many recent grads were declaring bankruptcy," Laurie Campbell says of the 1998 law. "We are still certainly seeing a growing group of young people going bankrupt.

Ratio:

If you want to be super rich, you might want to take a look at Forbes' website for some helpful clues. In Forbes' list of this year's 400 wealthiest Americans, two clear patterns emerge for the top 10. What those ranking sixth to tenth have in common is their last names are Walton — the same surname as that of Wal-Mart's late founder, Sam. If your relatives are living paycheque to paycheque, this route to riches probably isn't for you.

But don't give up — except, that is, on the idea that a fancy university diploma will make you super rich. It will, no doubt, make you a very nice living, but as four of the five wealthiest Americans will attest, time spent in class is also money forgone. All four of these self-made billionaire computer geeks — Bill Gates, Paul Allen, Michael Dell and Lawrence Ellison — are university dropouts who were more interested in building empires than in academia. But if you don't know Windows from Linux, you enjoy school, and your parents aren't rich, cynics say there's always a job in government. Ask Ellison. As he sees it, "(if) a corporation's primary goal is to make money, government's primary role is to take a big chunk of that money and give it to others." To some, that's a swell idea.

Obiter:

Students of philosophy and theology are the most satisfied in higher education, results of an official survey suggest. They recorded the highest median "overall satisfaction" level: 4.3 out of a maximum possible five points. History and archaeology, physical science, biology and English-based studies all rated 4.2. Art and design ranked lowest, 3.7, with media studies, computer science and technology on 3.8, in results leaked to the Times Higher Education Supplement. They are understood to be preliminary findings from an unprecedented survey of 285,000 final year students on every large course in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. It was carried out by the Higher Education Funding Council for England, which said the full results would be published on 20 September 2005 on the Teaching Quality Information website.

--------------------

oh, see? eyes!

--------------------

We just found out this week about 1st-round on-campus interviews.

No need to get excited though.

I still would have to get an "official" 2nd round interview at the firm office.

And then I would have to get a call back after that.

This is what I'm up against (as explained by one of the firms):

"We typically receive about 800 applications for summer student positions. This year, we have decided to see a total of 180 students Canada-wide at OCIs. Of the 180 students we meet in October, we will invite between 60 and 70 students to the firm in November for a second interview. We usually hire 13 to 15 summer students."

I have no idea how this is going to go.

To say that I'm nervous doesn't even begin to tell the story. Between now and November, you'll understand why I'll be quite distracted. Please don't respond with "good luck" or "you'll be just fine." Not that I don't appreciate it, but I think I would just throw up from anxiety.

--------------------

re: grades

--------------------

it was only until i got to law school that i became obsessed with grades...

the transformation has been quite revealing...

if only more educators were as innovative and supportive as Benjamin Zander...

a lot of law students (and professors) might be well served by this model...

in light of the upcoming cattle call for summer jobs, this is all the more poignant...

--------------------

"After teaching for 25 years at a music conservatory, I still run into the same obstacles. In class after class the students are so chronically worried about evaluations of their performances that they shy away from taking musical risks. I started asking myself how we could reduce students’ fear of failure. Completely doing away with grades would only make things worse; the students would get the feeling they were being cheated out of their chance at stardom and would continue to fixate on their place in the rankings. In discussing the issue with my wife, we came up with the idea of giving them all the only grade that would bring peace of mind-not as an assessment tool, but as a means to allow them to become open to any possibility. What would happen if you gave everyone an A in advance?

'In this class every student will get an A for this part of the curriculum,' I always tell my students. Then I let them know they have to comply with one condition to earn the grade. Within two weeks they have to write me a letter dated 'May next year,' which should begin with the following words: 'Dear Mr. Zander, I got an A because…'

In the letter they tell me in as much detail as possible what has happened to them in the interim that merits this exceptionally high grade. In writing their letter they have to project themselves into the future, then look back and report on all the insights they have gained and milestones they have reached — as if all those successes were already behind them. Everything should be formulated in the past tense.

'But what I’m mainly interested in,' I tell them, 'is the person you will have become next May. I’m curious about how this person looks at life, their view of the world now that they’ve done everything they wanted to do, or become everything they wanted to become.'

I got the following letter from a young flutist, who raised several very heavy questions that performing musicians face in a culture marked by value judgements and competition:

Dear Mr. Zander, my teacher,

I got an A because I worked hard and thought deeply about myself as a student in your class — and the result was truly magnificent. I have become a whole different person. I used to be negative about nearly everything, before even trying. Now I’m much happier than I used to be. Around one year ago I couldn’t accept my mistakes. I got mad at myself after every mistake I made. But now I actually enjoy my mistakes and I really learned a lot from those mistakes. There is more depth in my playing than there used to be. At first, I only played the notes, but now I’ve discovered something about the real meaning of all those compositions. Now I play with more fantasy. I’ve also discovered my own worth. I’ve discovered that I’m a special person because I saw that I can do anything if I believe in myself. Thank you for your lectures and classes because they made me understand how important I am and the true reason why I make music.

Thank you.

Best regards,


Esther Lee

— from The Art of Possibility, by Rosamund Stone Zander and Benjamin Zander

--------------------

a better way...?

--------------------

You have no idea what money is.

Bernard Lietaer is too friendly and modest a man to say it that way, but this is the easiest possible way to sum up his message. If you did know what money was, then you — we — would see to it that we had a different monetary system.

Everything revolves around money.

It is more than a cliché; it is the daily experience of just about every world citizen not part of an indigenous tribe in the Amazon rainforest. And this daily experience involves, above all else, a continuous shortage of money. There is not enough money to send the children to school. Not enough money for hospitals, or to care for the ever greater numbers of old people who are getting ever older. Not enough money to clean up the environment and keep it that way. There is a lot of work to do, but no money to pay for it. The sad conclusion: If we just had more money, the world and our lives would be better.

Lietaer, however, recommends another solution: We could immerse ourselves in the meaning of money. He sits on the edge of his chair and poses this question: "Have you ever thought about how much time you spend earning money, and managing or spending the money you've earned? And how often have you thought about what money actually is? We expend an enormous amount of energy — and frustration — on something we understand surprisingly little about. Money wasn't created by God. We have forgotten that it's a system designed by people. And I believe that this design, which dates from centuries ago, is at the root of most problems in our society. And the good news is that, with a small change to the money system, we can make an important contribution to the solution of a number of those problems."

Lietaer's idea is to introduce — alongside the existing national currencies — complementary money systems on a large scale. Based on barter, these systems would fulfill needs and make transactions possible when "normal" money is unavailable. His idea is less revolutionary than it appears. In history, as well as in the world today, there are many successful examples of such systems — from the construction of European cathedrals in the Middle Ages and temples in Bali today to the present-day care systems for the elderly in Japan and airlines' frequent-flyer programs. What these systems have in common is that they do not promote competition but, rather, co-operation; they support community instead of undermining it; and they make possible important and valuable work.

"Complementary money systems put us in a position to be ourselves — to literally cash in on our talents," says Lietaer. "Even when there's no official financial market for them. I'm not saying reformation of the monetary system will solve all our problems. But I know that money is one of the key functions. There is actually nothing that doesn't have to do with money. It is an extremely vital element. I am convinced that within a generation we can realize great positive changes."

According to economics textbooks, money is value-free. It is nothing more than a means of exchange and is regarded as having no effect on transactions. Lietaer contests that view. "Money isn't at all value-free," he argues. "The monetary system is programmed — albeit not deliberately — to cause certain behaviour. It promotes competition and short-term thinking; it forces economic growth, and it undervalues care, education and tasks crucial to maintaining a society. Economics theory teaches us that people compete for markets and raw materials; I think, in reality, people compete for money."

This competition is a direct consequence of the manner in which money is created. Banks put money into circulation by means of loans. For example, as soon as someone negotiates a $100,000 mortgage, money is created and begins circulating in the economy. The bank then expects the recipient of the loan to pay back a total of $200,000 in repayment and interest over the next 20 years. But the bank does not create the second $100,000. The receiver of the loan must get hold of that money — the interest — one way or another, and this forces him or her to compete with others. It's simple: Some people must lose money or go bankrupt in order to put others in the position to pay off their loans. At the same time, this collection of interest results in a concentration of wealth: those who have money "automatically" get richer.

In addition, the system forces society into an endless loop of economic growth: new money must constantly be put into circulation to pay off old loans. "My conclusion," Lietaer says, "is that greed and the competitive drive are not inherent human qualities. They are continuously stimulated by the kind of money we use. There is more than enough food and work for everyone. There is merely a scarcity of money."

A monetary system driven by interest payments also blocks progress toward a sustainable economy. "The environment is a time problem," Lietaer says. "A company like Shell undoubtedly has a better idea of the next century's energy needs than any government. But within the current monetary system, we cannot entrust Shell with the future. Shell has to make a profit today. A government bears the responsibility for the future of the society." Business investments today are weighed against interest rates. This continually leads to short-term choices. "It is financially attractive to cut down trees, sell them and put the money in the bank. Through interest, the money in the bank grows faster than the trees. Solar panels, by contrast, require investments that are only earned back over longer periods. The long repayment period makes these investments no match for the growth of money you can put in the bank today to earn interest."

Businesses are trying more and more often to avoid expensive, competition-promoting money. Barter now accounts for almost 15 per cent of world trade. And it's increasing every year by 15 per cent, while trade conducted with money is growing at just 5 per cent annually. Barter is also the basis of the complementary money systems Lietaer advocates as a solution to the social and ecological disruption our current money system causes. "Complementary monetary systems are no longer marginal solutions," he says. "It is true that they have no macroeconomic impact, but they have proven that they work and can change people's behaviour. What else are frequent flyer miles besides a currency issued by an airline? Initially they were mainly meant to commit customers to a certain airline, but over time you could use them to buy groceries in the supermarket, book hotel rooms, and pay your phone bill. And you can earn miles without even flying."

In Japan, complementary systems have been developed for care of the elderly. People can earn credits by running errands for elderly people or helping them with housework. They can use the credits to buy extra help if they get sick, or send credits to their aging mothers. "This is an example of how a complementary system can be used to solve a social problem. Almost 20 per cent of the Japanese population is older than 65, and that percentage is rising. It is unthinkable that the care for this growing population of old people can be paid for under the current social-security system. Japan is solving this with a new complementary currency, which in addition supports the social structures in the country."

In Germany, authorities are collaborating with banks to develop a complementary money system for a million participants. In Brazil, a plan is afoot to finance education for poor families using a complementary currency. Lietaer enthusiastically offers example after example. "Money is nothing more than an agreement to use something as a means of exchange. Money is not a thing. It is an agreement, like a marriage or a business contract. And that means you can always make a new and different agreement."

"I choose to remain optimistic," Lietaer says. "I can see how a crisis in the dollar could cause the global economy to collapse. Don't forget that in the last 25 years, almost 90 countries have suffered severe currency crises. But I also know that together we have all the knowledge and means we need for a peaceful evolution. I want to help liberate that creativity. To design money that works for us, instead of us working for it."

— JURRIAAN KAMP, The Toronto Star (2005/09/18)

--------------------

making eye contact with Africa

--------------------

I have often wondered why, when I meet a homeless person or beggar in the streets of Toronto, with his or her hand out for money, I give to some and bypass others, trying desperately to avoid eye contact with the latter. If you do make eye contact, it is much more difficult to avoid helping, as then a personal bond, albeit a minor one, has been established. The response to a request for money usually is dependent on many factors: How close do you feel to the problem? Is the cause worthy of support? How do you feel personally that day? Do you know the person asking for support and his or her status in the community? There are a myriad of other factors, mostly less important, but on a special occasion perhaps all-important.

In some instances, a particular condition can play differently for different people, or play differently for the same person at different times. I give as an example a request for a handout in the pouring rain. You might hurry away without giving to avoid getting wet, or alternatively feel so sympathetic toward someone out in the rain that you stop and help. When a major charity is looking for a person to head its organization, it usually chooses a person with money, someone who has had a relationship with the cause being promoted. Self-interest is the great motivator in human affairs, and raising money for charity is no different. Raising money is not an exact science in the Western world. It does not have to be. We manage with the majority of citizens being looked after one way or the other. We call it charity, not perfect but functional.

Africa presents a unique problem. Today and tomorrow, thousands of children will die of starvation and curable diseases. The pictures fill our newspapers but nothing really changes in a permanent way. Even if the money is forthcoming, there are other major problems. Many African leaders are dictators who funnel the money into their own pockets, or give the aid only to their supporters. A solution might be found if outside agencies were allowed to administer aid without interference. The United Nations would have to act in this regard.

Western pharmaceutical companies have a major part to play in curing sickness in that sorry continent. Ninety per cent of research is done on illnesses that affect 10 per cent of the global population. Very little research is done on sleeping sickness, trachoma, river blindness, rotavirus, malaria and other illnesses not common to the industrialized world. Tax incentives, as an act of charity by our governments, should be given to drug companies that do this type of research. The price differential for goods and capital between rich and poor countries is between 50 and 100 per cent. The wage differential is between 500 to 1,000 per cent. It would help these countries if unskilled workers were allowed to work in the West for designated periods of time, with their return to their home country guaranteed. The money would be going to the most needy.

Who among you reading this article has not felt a pang of guilt about this continuing situation? What have you done? What have I done? Relatively nothing! We come from countries and religious creeds that talk about helping the sick and needy. In the end it is all lip service. This is not about bringing food to a food bank so Canadians can get a little more to eat. Nobody is starving in Canada. Nobody is dying of untreated AIDS in Canada. Whole countries in Africa will soon collapse because the community leaders and health-care workers are sick and cannot function. We cannot allow this to continue. There will be a price to pay in the West.

Maybe I am a naive do-gooder but the most important need of any people in any nation is justice. The oldest recorded version of this precept stems from the 6th century B.C.. "What I hold good for self, I should for all." How long would a Western government last in power if it allowed its people to die of AIDS and starvation? We cannot allow this injustice to continue.

I want to make eye contact with the people of Africa. I personally want to make a difference. I cannot do it on my own. I feel helpless to contribute in a meaningful way. So add a line to our tax returns titled "For Africa," and tax Canadians based on a percentage of how much tax they pay now and send the money to Africa, not from the Canadian government but from the people of Canada. That would put me directly in the loop and I believe most Canadians would feel good about the process.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Murray Rubin is a former member of the Toronto Star's community editorial board.

lawyers and their woes

--------------------

What happened, professionally, to lawyers in New Orleans and the surrounding area is not as tough as loss of life, loss of loved ones, maybe loss of medical records, but tough and heartbreaking nevertheless. The following is taken from a letter by Professor Michelle Ghetti, Southern University Law Center, Baton Rouge, Louisiana:

"5,000 - 6,000 lawyers (1/3 of the lawyers in Louisiana) have lost their offices, their libraries, their computers with all information thereon, their client files - possibly their clients, as one attorney who e-mailed me noted. As I mentioned before, they are scattered from Florida to Arizona and have nothing to return to.Their children's schools are gone and, optimistically, the school systems in 8 parishes/counties won't be re-opened until after December. They must re-locate their lives.

Our state supreme court is under some water - with all appellate files and evidence folders/boxes along with it. The 5th Circuit Court of Appeals building is under some water - with the same effect. Right now there may only be 3-4 feet of standing water but, if you think about it, most files are kept in the basements or lower floors of courthouses. What effect will that have on the lives of citizens and lawyers throughout this state and this area of the country? And on the law?

The city and district courts in as many as 8 parishes/counties are under water, as well as 3 of our circuit courts - with evidence/files at each of them ruined. The law enforcement offices in those areas are under water - again, with evidence ruined. 6,000 prisoners in 2 prisons and one juvenile facility are having to be securely relocated. We already have over-crowding at most Louisiana prisons and juvenile facilities. What effect will this have? And what happens when the evidence in their cases has been destroyed? Will the guilty be released upon the communities? Will the innocent not be able to prove their innocence?

Our state bar offices are under water. Our state disciplinary offices, located on Veteran's Blvd. in Metairie, are under water - again with evidence ruined. Those of you who have been watching the news, they continue to show Veteran's Blvd. It's the shot with the destroyed Target store and shopping center under water and that looks like a long canal.

Our Committee on Bar Admissions is located there and would have been housing the bar exams which have been turned in from the recent July bar exam (this is one time I'll pray the examiners were late in turning them in - we were set to meet in 2 weeks to go over the results). Will all of those new graduates have to retake the bar exam?

Two of the 4 law schools in Louisiana are located in New Orleans (Loyola and Tulane - the 2 private ones that students have already paid about $8,000+ for this semester to attend). Another 1,000+ lawyers-to-be whose lives have been detoured.

I've contacted professors at both schools but they can't reach anyone at those schools and don't know the amount of damage they've taken. Certainly, at least, this semester is over. I'm trying to reach the Chancellor's at Southern and LSU here in Baton Rouge to see if there's anything we can do to take in the students and/or the professors. I think I mentioned before, students from out of state have beens stranded at at least 2 of the other universities in New Orleans - they're moving up floor after floor as the water rises. Our local news station received a call from some medical students at Tulane Medical Center who were now on the 5th floor of the dormitories as the water had risen. One of them had had a heart attack and they had no medical supplies and couldn't reach anyone - 911 was busy, local law enforcement couldn't be reached, they were going through the phone book and reached a news station 90 miles away. It took the station almost 45 minutes to finally find someone with FEMA to try to get in to them.

And, then, there are the clients whose files are lost, whose cases are stymied. Their lives, too, are derailed. Of course, the vast majority live in the area and that's the least of their worries. But, the New Orleans firms also have a large national and international client base.

For example, I received an e-mail from one attorney friend who I work with on some crucial domestic violence (spousal and child) cases around the nation - those clients could be seriously impacted by the loss, even temporarily, of their attorney - and he can't get to them and is having difficulty contacting the many courts around the nation where his cases are pending. Large corporate clients may have their files blowing in the wind where the high rise buildings had windows blown out.

I woke up this morning to the picture of Veteran's Blvd. which made me think of my students who just took the bar. My thoughts wandered from there to the effect on the Disciplinary Offices. Then my thoughts continued on. I'm sure I'm still missing a big part of the future picture. It's just devastating. Can you imagine something of this dimension in your state?"

--------------------

all i ever really needed to know i learned in kindergarten

--------------------

Most of what I really need to know about how to live, and what to do, and how to be, I learned in kindergarten. Wisdom was not at the top of the graduate school mountain, but there in the sandbox at nursery school. These are the things I learned:

• share everything
• play fair
• don't hit people
• put things back where you found them
• clean up your own mess
• don't take things that aren't yours
• say you're sorry when you hurt somebody
• wash your hands before you eat
• flush
• warm cookies and cold milk are good for you
• live a balanced life
• learn some, think some, and draw and paint and sing and play and work everyday, some
• take a nap every afternoon
• when you go out into the world watch for traffic, hold hands, and stick together
• be aware of wonder
• remember the little seed in the plastic cup - the roots go down and the plant goes up, and nobody really knows how or why, but we are all like that
• goldfish and hamsters, and white mice, and even the little seed in the plastic cup, they all die, so do we
• and then remember the book about Dick and Jane, and the first word you learned, the biggest word of all "Look!"

Everything you need to know is in there somewhere. The golden rule, and love, and basic sanitation, psychology and politics and sane living.

Think of what a better world it would be if we all, the whole world, had cookies and milk about three o'clock in the afternoon, and then lay down with our blankets for a nap.

Or if we had a basic policy in our nation and other nations to always put back things where we found them, and always clean up our own messes.

And it is still true, that no matter how old you are, when you go out into the world, it is best to hold hands and stick together.

--------------------

united nations... united humanity...

--------------------

This week the United Nations will undergo its most difficult test, the largest summit meeting in history, with world leaders gathering in New York to endorse — or reject — a reform program that affects every aspect of U.N. operations. The U.N.'s future is in the balance: whether it emerges as a stronger, co-operative institution capable of dealing with serious challenges, or one weakened and pulled apart by competing agendas.

The Toronto Star asked a number of well-known statesmen, politicians and authors if the U.N.'s day is done. And while none felt the institution was perfect, all believe overwhelmingly that it is vital to our existence on this planet.

--------------------

It is hard to avoid the sense that the United Nations itself is on the edge. Just as the League of Nations failed to stop the aggressions of Germany, Japan and Italy in the years after 1930, and proved unable to make itself the centre of the cause of collective security, so too we now see an institution whose strength and credibility have been damaged. "The U.N." is really two things: the place the countries of the world come together to address (or not) the world's problems; and a series of institutions, some well run and efficient, some decidedly not, that are the institutional embodiment of this elusive world opinion.

And yet, the simple fact is that if the UN were to disappear, something like it would have to be re-invented. It is the interdependence of the world, and the tragic consequences of intensifying conflict, that require an international institution of some kind to provide a space for the rule of law, to extend assistance to those in greatest need, and to deal with our common challenges as fellow citizens of the world. Some of the U.N.'s flaws can be readily fixed — the reform agenda that Canada has been so strong in championing is on the right track. But we must also recognize that for others the flaw is not in the institution, but in ourselves, in the political structures of individual countries, in the inability of governments to transcend short-sighted self-interest, in the way the forces of greed, hatred, and the unvarnished pursuit of power for its own sake continues to corrupt the globe. And righting those wrongs is not the job of institutional change, but something more profound, and more far-reaching. Our progress will be difficult, but we have no choice but to keep trying. The fault lies not in the vision of those who wrote the Atlantic Charter or the U.N. Declaration of Human Rights, but in our own imperfections.

— Bob Rae, The Toronto Star (09/11/2005)

--------------------

a lost opportunity for forgiveness

--------------------

While the passing of four years has mitigated our shock and sadness, one sensation remains strong: the sense that the world around us has changed — for the worse. Simply, our world is now a more fearful and hateful place. On the evening of that fateful day, when President George W. Bush spoke to his nation and promised that those responsible for the horrific destruction would be pursued with "unyielding anger" his goal was to reassure the American people. He wanted them to be comforted knowing that justice would be done; that retribution would be swift and severe.

But what if he had made a different choice that evening?

What if instead of launching the first salvo in his so-called "War on Terror," Bush had actually let his Christian faith (of which he so often speaks) guide his actions? What if his first message to those responsible for the evil acts was not "we will find you" but instead "we forgive you"?

Critics will argue that such a declaration would have led to riots in the streets. Fired by revenge and fear, Americans would have screamed for Bush to be removed as head of state; the more extreme would have advocated for the removal of Bush's head itself. And even if reaction from those at home could have been quelled, critics will argue that reaction from hostile forces abroad would have posed a more serious threat. Enemy nations and rogue states would have viewed the President's offer of forgiveness as a sign of weakness and assumed that acts of terrorism could be committed with impunity. Attacks would have become more numerous and heinous.

That's what critics will argue.

I believe that had President Bush, leader and spokesperson for the most powerful country in the world, offered forgiveness to those who planned and carried out the attacks of Sept. 11, it would have led to the most significant shift ever toward world peace.

Instead of riots in the streets of America I believe there would have been a revelation in the hearts of Americans. Psychologists, communication and cultural theorists have long been aware of a phenomenon known as cognitive dissonance, which refers to the mental and emotional discomfort people feel when confronted with a discrepancy between what they say they believe and the actions they are performing. The discomfort of this discrepancy is alleviated only when the person either changes his belief to better fit with his actions or changes his actions to better fit with his beliefs. Most humans have a strong need for consistency between their beliefs and their actions and cannot stay in a state of cognitive dissonance for long.

About 85 per cent of Americans call themselves Christians and nine out of 10 say their faith is "very important" or "fairly important in their lives." While many of these professed Christians don't have a deep understanding of their own faith, the doctrine that Christians must forgive those who do harm to them is something even new converts know. It is one of Jesus' central teachings. In the Gospel of Matthew, for example, Jesus makes it clear that one's own salvation is contingent on one's ability to forgive others saying, "For if you forgive men their transgressions, your heavenly Father will also forgive you; but if you do not forgive men, then your Father will not forgive your transgressions."

According to the principles of cognitive dissonance, had the Christians in America heard their President offer forgiveness to the 9/11 terrorists, they would have been compelled to support and join in his action or abandon the very essence of their spiritual beliefs. Since 90 per cent of Americans say their faith anchors their life, it seems highly unlikely they would have cut the rope that holds them secure. Instead, I believe Americans would have begun to take their faith much more seriously; they would have moved from being only "hearers of the word" to "doers of the word." In particular and most important, Jesus' controversial message of love even for one's enemies would finally have been accepted at face value. There is no telling what miracles would have followed.

To argue that an offer of forgiveness from President Bush would have been perceived as weakness and thus would have led to more attacks overlooks some key facts. Terrorists are not like serial killers and other mass murders who commit their crimes simply for the emotional rush. Most terrorists have a strong ethical code. They know and respect the value of human life — at least as it applies to their family, friends and members of their own communities. They are able to perform the evil deeds because they have convinced themselves that those they kill are, in fact, less than human.

Had words of forgiveness been on the lips of President Bush he would have proven the terrorists wrong: he would have invalidated their rationale for murder. It's said that one is most human when one is most humane. Next to selfless compassion, forgiveness is the greatest example of humanity. Around the world enemies of the United States would have been incapacitated by their own case of cognitive dissonance as they were forced to admit: Americans are human after all. As their beliefs about Americans changed, so too would their actions have changed.

While I don't think one offer of forgiveness four years ago would have solved America's security problem once and for all, had such a declaration been made I am convinced the world would have been greatly changed for the better.

Forgiveness is to hate as water is to fire.

The U.S. claim to world military superiority has not been enough to keep it safe. Sadly, we will never know if a genuine claim to moral superiority would have proven more effective.

--------------------

David Haskell is an assistant professor of journalism at Wilfrid Laurier University.

be careful what you ask for...

--------------------

--------------------

1. "Move over, Whoopi... meet the Osgoode Squares!"
2. "Establish another bursary? Ha! Let's bust some walls!"
3. "Not as crooked as they look."
4. "Haven't done this much hard work since..."
5. "Osgoode Hole[s]"
   

--------------------

random thoughts from class

--------------------

• is being an "eminent jurist" better than a "learned judge"?
• the only sincerity left is sarcasm
• can one "clearly indicate" from a "wide range of principles"?
• what's the best recipe to cook pot-bellied pigs?
• "little bits of Latin floating around" sounds really gross
• i miss my pet rooster
• msn messenger is incredibly distracting
• sometimes judges have common sense
• never let the facts get in the way of a good story
• there's no such thing as public international "law"

--------------------

dis-orientation?

--------------------

Let me start with a disclaimer: I don’t intend in any way, shape or form to detract from the efforts of the Orientation Committee. In fact, I commend them for doing a great job in organizing the activities and events for the class of 2008. I think the “Return to Osgoode High” theme was pretty clever in itself, and no one can take away from the leaders’ enthusiasm.

However, I think it’s time we re-evaluate the purpose of Orientation Week and think about the image we’re building for ourselves during this crucial point of our legal careers. Dictionary.com defines the transitive verb “orient” as “to align or position with respect to a point or system of reference,” “to make familiar with or adjusted to facts, principles, or a situation,” or “to focus toward the concerns and interests of a specific group.” The obvious rhetorical question then becomes, “What do wearing itchy leis and yelling incoherent cheers at the top of one’s lungs have to do with entering a prestigious professional programme and commencing one’s legal education?” To what exactly are we orienting these new students?

Law students and lawyers are accused of many things – taking themselves too seriously perhaps being the foremost – but then maybe it’s not such a bad thing to take certain things seriously. There’s a time and place for everything, and I don’t intend that OW should become joyless or soulless. But we still need to distance ourselves from the “frosh week” mentality that pervades OW. As one distinguished professor put it, I can’t imagine that this is how Masters and PhD students would start their academic year (for the record, I have neither, and perhaps those of you with post-graduate degrees who have partaken in such activities will forgive me for my presumptuousness). In any event, I’m taking my cue from other fellow students who have expressed the same reservation about participating in OW activities because – to quote one – “that seems so undergrad.” Pretentious as that may sound, I think it’s a valid point.

The truth is, I like the idea of orientation. I like the idea of having pomp and ceremony about this significant event in our lives. We all worked hard to get to where we are, and it’s nice to have the Dean and all the Professors and even the Chief Justice of Ontario tell us that we’re good enough, we’re smart enough, and doggone-it, people like us. When I was a first-year, I enjoyed the opportunity to meet new people and make new friends and to acquaint myself with the faculty. What I truly enjoyed about it, however, was the idea that I was taking my place amongst serious scholars and great advocates, the present and future “movers-and-shakers” of society.

It is that feeling that I hope Orientation Week would truly seek to impress upon each incoming class. This is more than just a diatribe of self-importance, but a serious call to the next generation of legal professionals to understand and accept their place in the community. If each incoming class, as the Committee wrote in the Orientation Guide, is to be instilled with a sense of pride and a sense of purpose, then we ought to examine whether our orientation activities actually facilitate that goal. Maybe it’s Osgoode, not “Osgoode High”, that we should be returning to.

--------------------

a culture of blame

--------------------

i was taught as a child that pointing a finger always meant that the other four were directed back at me... in light of these opinion pieces from the toronto star and the bbc, perhaps it's time we re-examined our culture of blame and found more constructive - and more co-operative - ways of addressing social issues...

--------------------

What is it that Canadians have got against other Canadians?

Why are we so suspicious of each other, so certain that other Canadians are out to get us, to exploit us, to take advantage of us?

"What? Complete nonsense! We Canadians all love all other Canadians," will be the response of most readers.

Why, then, is it that there is not a single part of this country where people do not claim that money is being taken from them in order to benefit other parts of the country? Or that, in various ways, they are being discriminated against; or that, even if being treated more or less fairly because of their own watchfulness and determination, they are being patronized and looked down on by other Canadians?

Try to think of a single province where its representatives — political, media, academic — do not regularly claim that their society is suffering from inequities, inattention or exploitation [...] Yelling and jumping up and down about unfairness and discrimination amounts to a way of saying "hello" to each other across our vast distances and all our cultural differences. In a backhanded, negative way we're saying that other Canadians matter to us. Still it is all, surely, pretty tacky and tiresome.

Why not try silence for a time and see if we can hear each other better?

--------------------

Before modern times, great catastrophes served to underline the transient quality of human existence and the futility of all purely human ends and acted as a stimulus for religious contemplation. Even in today's secular times, disasters are often invested with some hidden meaning. They are rarely perceived as just an accident - disasters appear as events of profound significance.

Traditionally, catastrophes were attributes to supernatural forces. Throughout most of history they were seen as an act or God or of fate. As an act of fate, catastrophes were portrayed as an inevitable occurrence, whose destructive power could not be avoided.

The rise of secularism led to an important shift in the way society conceptualised disasters. The development of science as the new source of knowledge altered people's perception of disasters. They were increasingly defined as an act of Nature. Though science could explain why and how it occurred, a natural disaster has no special meaning. In recent times we still talk about natural disasters but we increasingly look for someone to blame. As a result the view that disasters are caused by acts of nature is being gradually displaced by the idea that they are the outcome of acts of human beings.

In the aftermath of a disaster today, the finger of blame invariably points towards another person. Government officials, big business or careless operatives are held responsible for most disasters. Today, floods are less likely to be associated with divine displeasure than with greedy property developers recklessly building in flood plains.

Events like last week's catastrophe in New Orleans are seen as destructive events that could have and should have been avoided. How people perceive a disaster has an important impact in the way in which it is experienced. However, perceptions regarding causation are shaped by cultural attitudes that endow events with meaning.

[...]

Today, the meaning of a catastrophe, like the one unleashed by Hurricane Katrina, is fiercely contested. There is no one moral story that we are all prepared to accept. That means we are in danger of facing a double disaster. One that is about physical destruction and loss of life, and the other which is the legacy of bitterness, confusion and suspicion. Instead of a powerful story that we can learn from there is a risk that we will become disoriented by an obsession to blame.

--------------------

la la la la . . . law law law law . . .

--------------------

"We must never forget that the record on which we judge these defendants today is the record in which history will judge us tomorrow." -- Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson


as america and the world write epitaphs romanticizing the legacy of the late chief justice rehnquist, we too must bid farewell -- to the summer... we wait with bated breath to discover "who will survive" the acrimony of those legendary confirmation hearings... and we wait with bated breath to discover "who will survive" the acrimony of the legendary OCI application proess... and though we're more hopeful about the prospects of this new academic year than who the great G.W. is going to appoint to the bench, it's still kinda bittersweet to say goodbye to a summer that seemed -- as always -- too short, and to go back to hitting the books and not being able to come up for air until... well, not for a long time anyway...

so, yeah... la la la... law law law... here we go again!

--------------------

on youth violence

--------------------

If you wanted to write a recipe for a lethal spike in youth violence, it might look something like this:

1. Slash funding for after-school programs, leaving kids in high-risk neighbourhoods with no place to go and nothing to do in the evenings, on weekends and in the summer.
2. Skimp on English-as-a-second-language classes, raising the frustration level and failure rate among kids struggling to adjust to a new culture.
3. Lay off school youth counsellors, depriving troubled kids of a ready source of help.
4. Impose a zero tolerance policy in the province's schools, mandating teachers to expel kids they can't discipline.
5. And throw in cutbacks to municipal recreation programs and social services.

"What shocks me," says Cathy Dandy of the Toronto Parent Network, "is that people are shocked that we're having problems in this city."

--------------------

the opinion piece in the toronto star is especially poignant not only because of the recent spate of gun violence in the city, but because of things i've come across in my work this summer... and as disasters and catastrophes take hold of media attention, it's easier to forget the issues right here in our own backyard... as school starts for kids across the country, i hope the policymakers and budget balancers take seriously their responsiblity to help create and support a social fabric that puts opportunities -- instead of guns -- within the reach of our youth...

--------------------

aftermath

--------------------

well, it's been a month in the new place...
and what an interesting month it's been, to say the least...

reflecting on this and dorothy's ditty, "there's no place like home", i can't help but feel sympathy for those involved in the tragic situation in louisiana... the BBC appropriate called it a "grim diaspora"... just when the world has turned its attention from the tsunami of 2004, nature again provides us with a powerful reminder to put us in our place...

and as if this situation couldn't be more unbelievable, there are armed looters on the ground! of all the underhanded, exploitative (and morbidly waggish!) things to do... just goes to show how desperate this situation is...

--------------------