Yes, I’m a “Nanny Stater,” and it’s your fault.

I blogged a while back about how pissed off I was about how the right wing jerkoffs of the world–well, of the US and some of their deluded fellow travellers in Canada like this guy (the subject of the post, not the blogger)–have made a huge symbolic issue out of the NON-issue of “Merry Christmas.” Around that time was the predictable flood of letters to the Calgary Sun about how “we’re not allowed to say ‘Merry Christmas’ anymore” because of the evil lib-left. And it never ends. Being conservative now entails inventing threats to our “freedoms,” and then, having spread word of this threat, to make it clear that the blame lies with liberals, secular humanism, multiculturalism, feminism, and every other positive aspect of our post-stone-age society.

Now that Christmas is over (even for those lucky Orthodox Christians who celebrate it in January- when I was a kid I always envied them) and “Happy Holidays” has been stored in the basement until the FOX news crowd can trot it out next year to remind everybody that liberals’ desires to be culturally inclusive are worse than the capital crimes being committed by Bush and Cheney every fucking day of the year, we have the new old “threat,” and it’s this phantom called “the nanny state.” This term has been rearing its ugly, ugly head with annoying frequency lately with two important, and absolutely wonderful and celebration-worthy, recent changes in our “regulatory climate” here in Calgary and elsewhere (to varying degrees). The first concerns smoking bans, and the second concerns the recent near-ban of “trans fats” in restaurant foods and (I think) other food for purchase in the city of Calgary, the first regulation of its kind in Canada.

All over the world, regulations concerning smoking in public places have been getting increasingly stringent since the late 1990s. I remember my first visit to a “smoke free” (as in, smoking isn’t even allowed in bars) city: San Francisco, November 2000. It was a complete delight to be able to enjoy a beer in a bar–a BAR!–without having to contend with the stench and respiratory issues (I’m asthmatic) that had been a part of my life, my entire life. Such laws have become commonplace in Canada; Calgary was the last major city to go smoke free (mostly) in January 2007, and the whole province is, as of three weeks ago, smoke-free end to end without the loopholes that existed for “workplaces,” a loophole that, honest to God, let people smoke in taxis since the taxis were a “workplace.” No more.

Now, while Canada is pretty much a nonsmoking zone coast to coast to coast–they’ve even phased out glassed-in smoking pens at airports, which are federally regulated–in the US, it is much worse (if you’re a nonsmoker or a smoker with a conscience); in some states, there are no smoking regulations anywhere. Alabama is one such state. So is Indiana, my home state, where the only municipality that has anything close to what we have everywhere in Canada is Bloomington. In the northwest part of the state, where I was born and raised, only one community even has the watered down “no smoking with minors present” law that was mocked and derided in Calgary (that was the extent of the smoking bylaw, 2003-2007) as being pathetically weak. Not so in Amurrica, where “smoking” and “freedom” are apparently equivalent, and, yes, efforts to just make it so that little kids aren’t seated in smoking areas are seen as the trappings of the encroaching NANNY STATE.

And yes, I know that there are smoking laws with teeth all over the US, but to say that the regulatory landscape is “patchwork” is an understatement, and the fact remains that the US is still a smokers’ paradise relative to other countries. Yet the “smokers’ rights” vitriol is very strong there and so is the whole “anti-nanny-state” discourse, the central claim of which is that the government is sticking its nose where it doesn’t belong and–this is just too damn rich–”protecting people from themselves.”

Okay, stop right there. “Protecting people from themselves”? Let’s make this clear: WE don’t give a rat’s ass what diseases you get from your own CHOICES. That’s your problem. You make it OUR problem because you DON’T only smoke in your own private space; you DO litter the world with your despicable butts; you DO burn down houses and apartment buildings and you DO kill innocent people in the process; you DO (some of you) force kids to breathe in your second-hand poison; you ARE bullies and assholes way, way too often. If you didn’t make the world an intolerable place by your choices, we wouldn’t be having this conversation. But we’ve put up with your shit for more than a century. You brought this on yourselves.

I could go on and about the “why don’t they just ban cigs then?” nonsense (yeah, I can just bet that smokers really want that)… let me just say that most governments understand, really, that prohibition doesn’t work and that wars on weed, opiates, coca derivatives, and meth are plenty, thanks, without having to deal with what nicotine addicts would resort to if tobacco where prohibited.

But let me save all of that for another time. For now, I just have to say that I am sick of this very important public health effort, one that is intended first and foremost to protect EMPLOYEES and not the smokers, being reduced to a stereotyped example of the “nanny state” going overboard. We NEED these laws, and so I’m going on record as a proud nanny stater.

Oh, about that trans fats ban. For some reason a lot of pundits and average joes took their stupid pills when learning about this one and decided that this was another example of government deciding what’s best for us and that–this is the really stupid part–the government was taking away a delicious, delicious ingredient from our food. “What next, ban bacon?” was the reply.

No, you idiots. Trans fats are not analogous to bacon or eggs or butter or chocolate or any of the little culinary pleasure that we eat even though they make us feel naughty. Nobody has ever said, “let’s have a trans fat pigout,” and that’s because you couldn’t just head to the 7-11 and grab some trans fats from their freezer case. This is a nasty, engineered substance that is DANGEROUS to humans; it saves restaurants and food manufacturers money, but it is easily replaced with more expensive, but NOT as dangerous, products. No restaurant owner has ever selected trans fats for their lovely taste profiles. He chose them to save money.

And again, the “nanny state” bullcrap has emerged in this “debate” and predictably so. The misunderstanding here is perfectly clear: People think that their “choice” of trans fats has been taken away from them, when in fact they were never given a choice to begin with. A “choice” for trans fats is not one anybody would make anyway, any more than would somebody choose lead paint, or mouse droppings in their cereal. The government is acting to ban a substance that is dangerous and superfluous, and neo-con morons are complaining about this.

Incidentally, Alberta’s “nanny state” told me, until 2005, that I would never be able to legally marry my partner in this province. We’re grown-ups. Where were the complaints about the “nanny state” then?

If I say “Merry Christmas,” it’s not because I’ve copped to all the right-wing bullshit, just so you know.

One thing I love about having lunch, as I did today, at the Calgary Farmers’ Market is that unless you’re really lucky (or unlucky, you figure it out), you’re going to be forced to share a table with a stranger or two. I used to be really bothered by this, but I’ve had some really nice, lucid conversations with strangers and it’s almost like the scene at the film festival when people in the queues strike up these emergent, sometimes really energetic, conversations. It’s nice. There’s something old fashioned and comforting about it, like what it must have been like to eat at the big communal tables in diners way back when.

Anyway, I had a great lunch of chicken schnitzel and two knishes (mushroom and sauerkraut) from Margarita’s (no website unfortunately) and did indeed have a nice accidental convo with a nice lady who teaches at SAIT,  and on departing wished her and her friend a “Merry Christmas.” And then I thought about the unfortunate mess surrounding this expression.

If I say “Merry Christmas,” it can be taken one of several ways:

A. It is an appropriate salutation this time of year.

B. I’m a Christian and am saying it to commemorate the birth of Christ, and I expect that you’re a Christian too and feel the same as I do.

C. I’m saying this as a defiant protest against the evils of secular humanism and  multiculturalism, which are conspiring to take away our Judeo-Christian traditions and replace it with something that stripped away all vestiges of those traditions.

And for me, the correct answer is “A.” I like Christmas, pretty much, and I also like its secular and Pagan trappings. I am thrilled this time of year to celebrate the solstice and the return of light, and fortunately or unfortunately, that symbolism (with lights, I mean) has become part of Christmas. It’s as much a secular holiday as a religious one, and that’s how I choose to think of it. Go ahead and condemn me. Christmas for me has no religious meaning at all, because I’m not religious.

“But,” you protest, “you’re not celebrating the true meaning of Christmas.” Oh, shut up, neither are you. The three wise men didn’t bring Jesus an iPod, and they didn’t come back every year to deliver a Bed Bath and Beyond gift card. Regardless of its religious trappings, Christmas borrowed from Pagan traditions and it has evolved as a holiday that the non-religious and non-Christian can celebrate. And you know what? For the most part, all of these groups–Christians, the non-religious, and non-Christians–celebrate it almost identically. Christmas is both one of the most spectacular marketing successes AND failures of Christianity. Isn’t that amazing? I think it is.

Anyway, getting back to “Merry Christmas.” There’s been all this hand-wringing lately among the O’Reilly and Hannity and FOX News crowd about how degrading and “politically correct” it’s become for people to eschew “Merry Christmas” in favour of “Happy Holidays” or something like it.  I hate–I FUCKING HATE–when petulant, stupid bullies like the hate-filled ignoramuses that FOX hires pull this “politically correct” out of their asses whenever they disagree with something. I’m sick, sick, sick, sick, sick, sick, sick of it. If you disagree with something, come up with a response, don’t pull out this one-size-fits-all “politically incorrect” label and act as if you’ve refuted something. It reminds me of uses of the word “racist” when I was in grad school: “You’re racist, end of discussion, I win.” For the neo-cons, it’s “You’re PC, end of discussion, I win.” This isn’t discourse, it’s not debate; it’s bullying and I just blow up when anything gets labelled “politically correct” anymore.

That said, horror stories and urban legends aside, all this complaining about the disappearance of “Merry Christmas” is complete crap. COMPLETE CRAP. EVERYBODY still says it, NOBODY is offended by it, and if Canadian Tire (or whoever) wants to be more inclusive by using “Happy Holidays” in an ad, really, is this hurting anyone?

No. There is no crisis. There is no anti-religious defamation. There is nothing going on here. AT ALL.

Heute hier, Morgen dort

Back in Frankfurt. Three days here and three days of rain, but the warm muggy rain of early October is supplanted with cold rain today. Still, I could get used to this city. Great skyscrapers and logical street plan, manageable size, convenient to a lot of cool places (too many), and really, despite what I said about Berlin being multicultural, Frankfurt (and Köln, really) are more diverse, more like an American or Canadian city in the presence of huge numbers from OUTSIDE Europe. This was not as observable in Berlin, the parts I saw anyway.

So I go home tomorrow having completed this way-too-late-in-my-life vision quest to try, among other things, to recapture some of what made the world bigger and more inviting to me when I came to Germany at 17. It´s worked; I feel like I have a big demanding monkey off my back. The bloom is a bit off the rose though, not that this is a bad thing. Specifically, I found myself sick of Berlin as I was departing yesterday. Despite its being an improvement over Köln in the smoking area, it was still horrible and became unbearable the last few days when temperatures plunged (we even saw a tiny bit of snow), and eating outside was much less inviting. Germany has to contend with this. To have so many places of employment that specifically employ young people–bars, restaurants, and coffeehouses–100% smoking is forcing them to work in HAZARDOUS ENVIRONMENTS, especially in a country with a double-digit employment rate. Don´t send me crap about “choice” because most employees have no choice on this matter there. Germans can be so progressive in so many ways but for Christ´s sake, this is a no-brainer, and with some exceptions (Frankfurt is mostly smoke free as of the day before I arrived), Germans smoke with a sense of obnoxious, ignorant entitlement.

I´ve also reached the limits of my tolerance with hipsters, and my neighbourhood in Berlin was practically pure hipsters. White 20-somethings who all look like Tegan and/or Sara (men as well as women). They all look alike, they ALL EFFING SMOKE, and they all carry themselves with this trust-fund air that I just cannot be around anymore. Also, their clothes look so damn uncomfortable, too-tight ugly-ass jeans, too-tight ironic t-shirts, all bundled up even when it´s hot, the damned detestable cigarette as fashion accessory. I am so over this world-weary pose. There were fireworks the other night in Berlin, not sure why but it was spectacular, and while I´m taking it in on the street this group of typical Prenzlauer hipsters were gabbing away on the sidewalk making an obvious point of not even LOOKING at the fireworks that were exploding all around the Fernsehturm. That´s the kind of pose that I´m talking about. Too cool for fireworks. “Puff puff, what club are we going to, puff puff, what are all these idiots looking at,” repeat.

Of course none of this is to say I haven´t had a great time, but it´s important not to idealise every place you visit. I could live in Berlin (if Brian could learn German), but it would have to be on my terms and all that. That´s all.

I´ll miss a lot: bread that puts ours to shame, their amazing take on doner, trains, the resplendant green of this country, the parks, the buildings of course, the opportunity to speak the only foreign language I ever learned formally. It´s been a tremendous experience, my first visit back to Europe since 1981. But I want to go home now.

Next post from Calgary, with lots of pics!

More on the “redemption” theme

Here is the quote, MY quote, that I want to be buried with:

“Redemption is more important than forgiveness.“

And moreover: Forgiveness without redemption is meaningless. Forgiveness of persons who don´t ASK to be forgiven–this being the most trivial and cheapest form of redemption–isn´t saintly. It´s simply pathetic.

That entry about Berlin (which is still amazing and everything, although the bloom is a bit off the rose with the smoking thing, which while an improvement over Köln has really been getting on my nerves increasingly, espcecially when an asshole, a cute musclebear type but an asshole nonetheless, lights up not one but TWO Gauloises seriatim sitting next to me at a sushi bar the other day) has has me pondering this whole theme of redemption and why and how I am so very atttracted to it. I love movies where characters are redeemed. I loved the stage version of Tommy because evil cousin Kevin is redeemed in the end (not so in the film version). I love this. But unilateral “forgiveness,” especially when, say, the villain escapes by dying without any trace of attempted redemption? No.

Back to the regularly scheduled vacation, which is going superbly.

Whither, fair loonie?

The loonie reached and briefly exceeded parity with the US dollar today.

Loonie, I love you, I love your shape and your colour and your face and everything about you, but your timing is crappy. Where was your robustness when I was paying back $20,000 of $25,000 in student loans- AMERICAN student loans- in your stunted currency starting when I emigrated in 1997? That was hell- I spent a lot of time behind the wheel back then, driving from teaching contract to teaching contract all around the Toronto area, and every day I’d listen to the financial news in the car and break into a cold sweat around dollar news. I remember it breaking 70 cents (from above, I mean). I remember it touching 62 cents. I remember having to deposit something like $500 a month Canadian into my TD US dollar account just to cover that month’s US$300 and change student loan payment… and then there were the US credit cards, too. I used most of my share of proceeds from two property sales, tens of thousands of dollars, to pay off all my US debts in muscular US dollars, having to buy those fat dollars with anemic Canadian ones.

And now you’re even with the greenback. And you might go higher.

Oh, loonie, your timing! Not only did I miss the boat (and lose thousands of dollars) by paying off my loans and bills when I did, but now I’m getting paid for work in the States, and my most recent cheque was worth FEWER Canadian dollars, after transaction fees. We’re talking nary a cent on the dollar, so far, but when I think that this check would have paid me something like 1.50 per US dollar a few years ago, it really confuses me. Sure, this is a point of national pride, and I’m enough of a Canadian now to feel it. But there are so many downsides to your strength, loonie. And as I say, your timing is terrible.