Search the Community

Welcome to the discussion thread for CJ’s series. All things CJ are fair game, I simply ask you be respectful of others. I will actively participate in the discussion. Ask questions, speculate about what’s coming, or bitch about what happened. We’re now open for business!

This is kind of an old video but since I can't sleep, I'm browsing content on Upworthy just for shits and giggles, and I stumbled across it and rewatched it. John Green is a really intelligent guy who knows a whole lot, and it occurred to me while watching this video that if I lived in the US, odds are I would be unable to pay for my antidepressants, and that would seriously suck. For 98 10mg tablets, of which I take two a day, I pay 74NOK, which is $12 US. That is roughly $7 per month. I don't know what the 20mg tablets cost, but odds are I'll switch to those on my next prescription and that they'll end up being cheaper per month. According to sources I've found, the same drug seems to cost roughly between $40 and $120 per month in the US, presumably depending on health insurance and the like. To me, that would be a pretty bad sum to have to pay just to function. Anyway, here is John Green explaining to his brother Hank what is wrong with healthcare in the US:

Personally, I'm boycotting the olympics this year. Sadly, the gay rights aspect isn't even the worst of it. There's corruption at the very heart of the whole thing, more than a third of the money spent is unaccounted for, and guest workers from Kazakstan had their passports stolen by their employers and were deported without getting paid. Basically, the whole thing stinks. But given the nature of this website, the LGBT issue is the most relevant, so I thought I'd share this little thing I found. To Russia With Love is a sort of petition. The site's subtitle reads, 'Say no to abuse of basic human rights. Let's paint Russia in rainbow colours and tell Putin the world supports equality.' If you click 'read more', you'll find the following text: At time of writing, there are 263583 supporters who have painted 21.9% of the map. You don't have to give them your e-mail address or even your name. You simply fill in your age, gender (with options 'trans' and 'other' available) and country, and then you've filled in a tiny square on the map. It's pretty neat. I don't know whether it actually does and good, but with any luck it raises awareness, and in any case it shows solidarity with Russian members of our community. And it only takes thirty seconds, so if you've already read this whole post, you might as well. To Russia With Love

I'm proud to be Canadian, but I'm currently not proud to be a Canadian, at least not domestically. Why? Well: Federal Government 1. There's the ongoing Senate scandal. Senators on suspension are having criminal charges placed against them for, effectively, stealing tax payer money. Many things have happened as a result of this: a. The NDP want to abolish the Senate completely. They feel as if it's a complete waste of time and energy. The Senate is so muddled by party politics that nothing is getting done, so just get rid of it. b. The Liberals kicked out all their Senators from the party. Two things arise from this: i). If you think they're not still Liberals in everything but name, you're silly. ii). If you think Justin didn't see criminal charges coming against Liberal senators and is distancing himself, you're silly. 2. Harper. I don't even know where to begin. He just needs to go. His time is up. Period. 3. Justin. Firstly, he's riding on his father's coattails politically, I think. He came out of nowhere and suddenly he's federal leader? What? How did this happen? The other thing, is he doesn't know the difference between his opinion personally and his opinion as a politician. When asked what country he admired most, he said China. Why? Their dictatorship-like structure allows them to move quickly and get stuff done. Words do not describe. Provincial (Ontario) Government 1. Kathleen Wynne. I don't even know where to begin. Unelected. Scandals. No regard for tax payer money. Just... wow. 2. Andrea, the provincial NDP leader. Proping up Wynne's government. Why?! I'm embarrassed - ashamed - to consider myself an NDP because of this. Municipal (Toronto) Government 1. Leave Rob Ford the fuck alone. He was elected to be the Mayor of Toronto, for which he is doing a fine job. He was not elected to be the Moral Compass of Toronto. If he doesn't want to go to Pride? Fine, no problem. I don't blame him, I don't want to go either. Norm Kelley is a tool, also. --- Our government, on all levels (I image other municipalities and provinces have it just as ad) is so broken it's embarrassing and laughable. Can we hurry up and just have the entire system crash, so we can start over? Pretty please, with a cherry on top.

Disclaimer: In no way, shape or form does this blog entry advocate for or against the use of controlled substances. This blog entry discussed the use of controlled substances and the fallout of the closure of a marketplace that distributed controlled substances. Do not mistake the call for legalization as a call for use, it is not. The author of this blog entry feels that it's the individuals decision to engage in this activity or not, and it's not the government's decision to determine the legality of the individual's choice. TOR is an interesting concept. It stands for The Onion Router and basically what it does is 'bounces' your signal across so many different servers globally that it's almost impossible to trace your activities back to you. This allows for another interesting concept to emerge. It's called the Deep Web and is not indexed by any search engine. Their domain names end in the .onion top level domain and can only be accessed by the TOR browser. These sites can only be accessed by those that are using the TOR browser and since no search engine can index the site, you have to know the exact web address to view the site. Naturally, this had lead to some very unusual and highly illegal activities on the Deep Web. It's also worth noting that the Deep Web is approximately 4 to 5 times larger than the regular web, but there's no way to know, for sure. This is a very broad topic and can go in many interesting directions, but I want to talk about one site in particular, and the implications surrounding it: Silk Road. Development for this Deep Web site began in the second half of 2010 and the site was launched in February of 2011. Silk Road has been described as the Amazon or eBay of (illegal) drugs. The vast majority of the drugs sold on the site were illegal, but not all. Some were prescription medication that (from my understanding) was sold at a cheaper price than was commercially available. It wasn't a free-for-all, either. Buyers were able to make an account, for free. Sellers, on the other hand, had to purchase a "seller's account" from an auction, which had a limited quantity. This ensured that the seller was legitimate and serious with their intentions. If someone was looking to flood the market with poor quality or incorrect drugs, they're far less likely to do so when they had to purchase their account. There's an extra level of protection involved, because the entire site operates on the BitCoin currency, with the owner taking a cut. If you don't know what BitCoin is, it essentially boils down to this: an anonymous, decentralized, purely digital and global currency. BitCoin isn't something that world governments are particularly fond of, and countries like Thailand have already outright banned it. No BitCoin can be used in the country, enter or exit it anymore. On the 2nd of October of this year, the FBI seized control of the domain for Silk Road and arrested the owner of the site, Ross William Ulbricht. This came as an alarming surprise to most, especially the buyers of the site. Supposedly, the FBI has obtained a bit-for-bit copy of the server(s) that host Silk Road, therefore having all the information on the site, including addresses where product was sent. It hasn't been said if the FBI will be using that information to press further charges against more individuals or not. The sting that brought about Ross's arrest is bizarre and not entirely relevant to the intent of this entry. The more disturbing issue is the drugs and the buyers. The FBI has noted that the quality of the drugs sold on Silk Road is impressive. Upwards of 70% of the drugs they purchased (in over 100 purchases) were of 'high quality', which is practically unheard of. As well, the FBI seized all BitCoin deposits in the system when they took control of the site. Buyers had no option of withdrawing their BitCoins once they made a deposit into their Silk Road account. This has created a host of issues for buyers. Many had made deposits valued at hundreds of dollars moments before the shut down of the site. Some had made deposits worth thousands. Even worse, many buyers have stated that the money they deposited into their account wasn't even theirs - it was being fronted to them by other individuals, to make purchases on their behalf. With the FBI closing the site, all that money is gone. Suddenly, hundreds, if not thousands, of people have lost large sums of money and are being held personally responsible to reimburse the lost funds, with money they don't have. The fall out of this will never be properly measured or known, but could be widespread and catastrophic. Supposedly, there's a mechanism in place to return all deposited BitCoins to buyers, in case of a situation like this, but no such mechanism has been triggered... yet. Atlantis was considered to be Silk Road's competition. However, that marketplace was closed by their owners some time ago for 'security reasons'. As it currently stands, buyers and sellers have no viable fall back marketplace to turn to, to provide the services they desire and need. This has created a very dangerous situation for the buyers, some of whom suffer from an addiction and don't enjoy the luxury of stopping their purchases. The only place they have left to turn to now is the streets. Before this, they had Silk Road. They had a controlled, quality-driven marketplace where they could pick and choose exactly what they wanted from trusted and vetted sellers. Their drug of choice was purchased anonymously and sent directly to their home by mail, with no one aware of the content of their package. Now, without that service available, they need to turn to the outside world. It's no secret that the streets are not safe. Both from the people roaming it and the drugs that they sell. One former Silk Road user made a post, explaining the quality of MDMA (commonly referred to as Molly) in comparison between Silk Road and the streets. She had a sample from Silk Road, which she tested and found to be pure. She took two samples, each from independent vendors in New York City and found that both had been 'cut'. The MDMA had been diluted with another substance (sometimes other drugs, like heroin or tranquilizers designed for horses, etc.). Both samples were unpure and contained unknown third party chemicals. Even if the now ex-Silk Road buyers survive the violence of the street, the drugs their buying are now killing them, and much faster than before. Silk Road sold illegal substances. No one is disputing that. The services that Silk Road provided were incredibly illegal. No one is disputing that. However, while the intentions of the FBI were good (they dealt a harsh blow to the drug cartels that were using Silk Road to distribute their products safely), they've done far more harm then good. They've forced untold numbers of buyers to turn to the streets to seek the drugs that they need. Once again, the fall out of this will never be properly measured or known, but could be widespread and catastrophic. The owner of Atlantis has written a post mortem, from their experiences. The most striking quote from what they had to say is this, in my opinion: (source) That really is interesting, isn't it? Ulbricht made some mistakes in how he conducted himself and his business, but it's undeniable that he was smart and knew what he was doing. Why would someone with so much future potential throw it all away? He'll probably never see the light of day, with the charged laid against him. Snowden is forced to reside in Russia, in temporary asylum. He doesn't know what his future holds or where he'll end up. All he knows is that he'll never be able to step foot into his native country or allies of his native country ever again. Manning, whose prison sentence ensures they won't be released until they're old enough to be a grandparent - their life is effectively over. All these people's lives are effectively over. They also knew this when they chose to do what they did. But why? They all feel, whether correctly or incorrectly, that the government is over-stepping it's bounds, from within the law and the Constitution that created the country. They feel that the government is out of control and they felt they were playing their part to reign that control in. To put a stop to the injustices committed by the government. The FBI has started an arms race that they have no hopes of being able to win. Look at The Pirate Bay, which is still alive and kicking. They're on the regular web, and they make no attempt to hide what they do and they're still around. Silk Road v2.0 is coming and soon. It'll be bigger and better and far more secure than ever before. If that's taken down, then another one will appear and another one and another one. The people have spoken, the demand is there and capitalism is doing its thing. This will not go away for the FBI or anyone else. Drugs will not go away, they're here to stay. On a similar but unrelated note, the Ontario Liberal government launched a site to crowd-source suggestions for their next election platform (which is a hint that an election is coming, but that's another blog entry). One of the suggestions was for the government to set up a crown-corporation (of sorts) that produces Methamphetamine. It was immediately dismissed, of course, but is it such a bad idea? Since the war on drugs was started, the quality of drugs has dramatically improved and the price has dramatically fallen. To me, at least, this seems like the exact opposite of what should be happening. As one former police officer put it, to win the war on drugs, it seems reasonable to completely remove every trace of drugs from the face of the Earth. That would constitute a "win" for the war, wouldn't it? Of course it would. But it is also entirely unrealistic and impossible to do. The government's problem is that they're too involved with the lives of the individual. I say this as someone that is incredibly socially left-wing. One of the major arguments for the legalization of same-sex marriage is for the government to get out of the bedroom. The same case can be made here. As long as the drug user isn't harming anyone, let them do whatever they want. If they want help, give them the help they need. "But that'll cost money!" you say. However, they'll be doing the drugs anyways, and if they want the help to get better, it should be available to them. You shouldn't put a price on a human life and they'll become a productive member of society (assuming they aren't already, but chances are, if they need help, they aren't). The government needs to legalize drugs and put an end to the pointless and expensive war. More importantly, instead of trying to squash the drug marketplace sites on the Deep Web, the government needs to open their own site and provide the services themselves.

Here's some things that the United States government doesn't consider essential: Safety inspections for foods and drugs.* * Operating in emergency status. Details here: http://www.hhs.gov/budget/fy2014/fy2014contingency_staffing_plan-rev2.pdf Public housing. No new social security applications are being accepted. The CDC and flu shots. The Environmental Protection Agency. The Head Start program. For those of you that don't know what that is, it provides education, health & nutrition to approximately 1 million low-income children. Approximately 3,200 preschoolers have already been affected. Disability benefits in general and disability benefits for veterans. Public assistance for women and children near the poverty line. (Source)

It is necessary to see death. It is necessary to see death, stark naked, lurid and wild, Death as it pisses in the dark alleyways drunk and ecstatic on the jumps of drugs that are hard to name and harder to pronounce, it is still necessary to see death face to face. In a breach of society sanctioned lucidity hardwired in our brain, It is still very necessary to see death, To see the violent vandalism of civilization, Of ashes and nuclear death of atoms and atom bombs, Billions of flashlights burning up the sky, Smell of rotten carcass evaporating in sterile perfume of laboratory engineered poisons, Gases and liquids and solid whites of the eyes of the dead and the suffering of millions upon millions of innocence of ruthless greed of narcissist wankers. It is necessary to see death as it is, for the spring of flowers is nearly over and now we make war. 02/09/2013 ©asamvav111

The Saga Continues.... The Dick & George Puppete Show! A Saga Series:Part I This is a Saga Series about the Bush Administration that was like Holocaust complete with a new Adolph Hitler who took away a majority of the Help Agencies and Assistance to those in need for their lively hood,health,and money. He took away the sole income of families, disabled, elderly,and retired. What does one do when your only source of income is taken away from with nowhere to go for help? Where does one go for food after a great number are closed or run out food for a week or longer? What does one do when they can't get the medications that they need to combat the terminal illness that they have? Necessaries of our well being were taken away by the Rich who wanted to rid the World of the poor,sick,and needy. This series is told through the eyes of a Black Gay Man who's HIV+. With the help of the Corrupt and rotten to the core Corporate America and Dick Cheney conspired to get his

Twenty years ago today, on December 1, 1998, the Miami-Dade County Commission approved the addition of sexual orientation to the county’s human rights ordinance. The battle many had fought over the past year culminated in victory. A temporary achievement since the hateful Christian Coalition worked to place the decision on the ballot the following year. They lost. For over a year, I helped increase awareness, raise money, conduct outreach, lobby politicians, debate homophobes, and granted countless interviews to the media. I was called vile names by those professing their Christianity often enough my dislike for the religion became permanent. To this day, any mention of Christian values makes me frown. On that fateful morning, my boyfriend and I awoke in darkness and were in front of the Commission chambers by sunrise. With hateful chants as background, I spoke to National Public Radio, The New York Times, the Voice of America, Armed Forces Radio, and who knows how many more outlets in both English and Spanish. My fifteen minutes of fame thanks to the marketing people thinking I spoke well and came across as a level-headed individual. Ha! Seeing my name on the front page of the Times and listening to the NPR report the following morning was a thrill. I still have the newspaper and a cassette of the radio show. However, the most wonderful part of the experience was working with the men and women who made the day’s events possible. Maybe it was not on par with the promise made by the signers of the Declaration of Independence to “mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our Sacred Honor,” but to me it was close. The time and financial commitment made by many propelled us to victory. Liebe Gadinsky stands out amongst all. The mother of two and her husband became friends, and although we rarely communicate these days, I will treasure the time I spent with them for as long as I live. Liebe and Seth were proof that the fight for our humanity was not limited to GLBT community members, but encompassed caring individuals who felt discrimination was unjust. Many of you dislike and dismiss political involvement, I read the comments often enough when I posted a story revolving around a presidential campaign. As an aside, my involvement back then influenced much of what I wrote in that book. I would like you all to remember that without drag queens fighting in front of the Stonewall Inn in 1969 or volunteers canvassing throughout Miami in 1998, most of us would be hiding in the back of a closet too scared to live. Go out, give money, volunteer, make phone calls, write letters; do whatever it takes to elect individuals who will not treat us as second-class citizens. It was the experience of a lifetime and I am grateful I was part of such a momentous event. My participation also allowed me to keep a promise I made when the Anita Bryant-backed forces led to the overturn of a similar ordinance in 1977. I swore that if the issue arose again, I would not remain quiet. I am glad I did not. I’ll close with Margaret Mead’s words: “Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world; indeed, it's the only thing that ever has” https://www.nytimes.com/1998/12/02/us/2-decades-on-miami-endorses-gay-rights.html

To preface: This is my blog, I have posted about politics and philosophy on it before, and I will continue to do so. I welcome discussion in the comments, but I ask that you keep it civil. Misogyny and transphobia will be reported, even if it means that this blog post is taken down. If you put words in my mouth, you will be summarily ignored. This is a personal and important subject to me. Please respect that. Today is International Women's Day. I've always considered myself a feminist. I firmly believe that the same societal structures that are to blame for misogyny are also to blame for homophobia, transphobia, and the oppression of many other marginalised groups. You can call it the patriarchy if you like, but that word tends to rub some people the wrong way. You could also call it toxic masculinity, but that one just pisses people off. So I'm not going to call it either of those things. I am simply going to call it culture. We exist within a culture, a social framework, that teaches us certain established truths. I'll preface my argument by pointing out that individuals are not to blame for this. It's not the fault of straight, white men. It's not the fault of Donald Trump or Harvey Weinstein or Brett Kavanaugh. It is an insidious culture that has grown as the result of centuries of social norms. While the actions of individuals and groups continue to perpetuate it, these people are not to blame for the culture (though they should still be held responsible for their own actions, as should anyone). Religion holds a great deal of responsibility for spreading this culture, Abrahamic religions in particular. Many older religions and cultures from around the world have no problem with homosexuality, operate with multiple genders, and have large degrees of gender equality. But even today, people use religion as an excuse for bigotry. It has been, and continues to be, a very effective form of social control. And countries where these bigotry based religions have grown strong roots, have spread the culture further via colonialism. India had no sodomy laws before the British arrived. Most African countries had no sodomy laws before the British arrived. Yet today, homophobia runs rampant in many of these countries. A lot of homophobia is based on the premise that gay men are effeminate and therefore lesser. Some gay men internalise this and feel that if they were to bottom they would lose some of their masculinity. The submissive role is the 'female' role. Conversely, gay women and other women in same-sex relationships are often asked which one of them is the 'man' in the relationship. For some lesbians this is also internalised; many butch lesbians think less of lipstick lesbians, that is to say gay women who dress and act in a more traditionally feminine way. How anyone can deny that these aspects of homophobia were born from sexism and misogyny is beyond me. Sexism and homophobia are steady bedfellows. They perpetuate one another in the culture. I said I wasn't going to call it toxic masculinity, but toxic masculinity is a symptom of the culture. And again, it has nothing to do with individuals. Nor is it saying that masculinity in and of itself is toxic. It isn't. But there are certain conventions within the culture that are harmful to men and women alike, and toxic masculinity is one of them. Toxic masculinity is when people laugh at men who are sexually assaulted by women. Toxic masculinity is when a man feels ashamed because he cries. Toxic masculinity is when we say 'boys will be boys' when a child hurts another or when young men sexually harass. Toxic masculinity is when a man reacts to strong emotions with aggression instead of facing them head on. It's when a man takes up so much space that it infringes on the space of other people. Many women also perpetuate these ideas, by demanding that men be strong, and by teaching their sons different values than they teach their daughters. And all that is also a symptom of culture. Another symptom is cis-sexism. This comes in many forms, and often from within the LGBTQ and women's movements. Many gay and straight people are downright rude, sometimes even violent, if they find out that a person has other genitalia than they expected. When I began my journey in earnest, one of my friends who's a lesbian said to me, 'I accept that this is who you are, but I don't get how wearing men's clothes makes you not a woman. I wear them all the time because they're comfortable and I like them.' Certain women's rights activists will use a similar argument. They'll say that girls think they're boys because they prefer dressing like them. Why do our daughters think they want to be men? And, conversely, they say of trans women that they're perpetuating stereotypes by conforming to traditional beauty standards and femininity. The truth is, in order to pass as the gender we are, we have to. I like pretty dresses and heels and make-up, but I don't feel comfortable wearing them right now because I would be immediately read as female. A friend of mine who's non-binary trans and on hormone replacement therapy, didn't dare cut their hair until they had facial feminisation surgery. Because they felt like they would have looked too masculine. Gender expression is a way to make our outward appearance match what's inside us. These are all symptoms of culture. Of homophobia, sexism, and cis-sexism. And they go hand in hand. Because we are taught from birth what we are supposed to be like, based on our genitalia. Girls are meant to like pink and play with dolls and like princesses and frilly dresses. Boys are meant to wear blue and play with soldiers and play war and like action movies. We are taught this to the point where it becomes hard-wired. We're not necessarily taught this by individuals, but by the culture that we live in. Many women experience internalised misogyny, where traditionally 'girly' things are shunned. How often don't we hear, 'Oh, I was always a tomboy, I preferred hanging out with boys, girls are just so much drama.' And there is value placed on that, on being less feminine, because being feminine is being lesser. Culture teaches us so, even if we don't realise it. Even if we don't believe it. Nobody lives in a vacuum. It's easy to think, oh no, I'm too smart to be affected by advertisement or TV or books or the news. You're not. You are affected, whether you're aware of it or not. The dominant culture in which you live will always affect your morals, your thought patterns, your feelings. The way we're raised affects us, and we're not solely raised by our parents. We are raised by culture. We can break free of that. We can learn to tell ourselves, this thing that I'm feeling or thinking right now, it's not true. But teaching yourself not to feel it at all is extremely difficult. I know I've never been able to, as aware as I am of why I feel that way. Anyone who's ever suffered from depression, for instance, can tell you how hard it is to unlearn internalised basic truths that we've learned about ourselves based on our experiences, truths that aren't true, but that's a topic for another day. One of the ways of making yourself aware and ridding yourself those thoughts and feelings is to deconstruct. To ask why. 'It's just the way things are' is not an answer. Things that are 'just the way things are' are born out of centuries of building a social framework. They are agreed upon truths that we simply accept. Deconstruct them. Pull them apart and look at the individual parts of these structures. Try to understand them, and you'll find that they don't make much sense. As a person who straddles the gender divide, I probably feel these things more strongly than most. I'm in a unique position to notice. I didn't make a choice not to conform; I innately don't. It's the same for other members of the LGBTQ community of course, but for trans people it's something we're reminded of daily, and something we are forced to be acutely aware of if we want to live as anything like who and what we are. And we need every tool in the toolbox to do so. I was going to march today, but I have a very persistent cold and don't feel well enough for that, sadly. I usually march every year, with the sex workers and the trans lobby; the feminists the traditional women's movement don't want, because we break with their established truths; that being a woman is a fact of gender assigned at birth, and that anyone who sells services of a sexual nature is a victim (also a debate for another day, and one I don't want in my comments today, please). It's an odd contradiction, to first deconstruct the idea that women are inherently unable to do the things that men do—that they are innately nurturing and are supposed to give birth to and raise children, that they can't do what they want with their own bodies, and so on—only to turn around and perpetuate the idea that chromosomes is what makes a woman and to dictate what others do with their bodies. It also utterly erases the existence of intersex people. In spite of this, I continue to consider myself a feminist, just as much as I consider myself an LGBTQ activist. I don't have to be a Woman™ in order to do that, and even though I'm not, I'm still a person with a vagina and many things that the women's movement stands for are important to me. My feminism is about deconstructing a culture that hurts women, men, intersex people, non-binary trans people, binary trans people, gay and bisexual people; in short, everyone. It's nobody's fault, but it is everyone's responsibility, so that we can all be free. I kind of went off on a tangent I hadn't planned for this, and went way more philosophical than I had planned. Like I said, I welcome discussion if anyone has anything to say, but keep it civil, consider arguments put forth before you react, and don't put words in people's mouths. In short, don't be a dick. The more likely scenario is that no one will comment at all. Happy International Women's Day. PS: I wrote this little batch of poems a while back, and it seems apt to share it with you today. You can also read it here. #NotAllMen 1. misandrist you said i hated men and i said that would be weird since i’m transmasculine you said there was nothing masculine about me that if i wanted to be a man i should act like one and i said if being a man means being a dick, then i know few men you said fuck this and went home 2. incel she said no so he took a gun and shot three people for the crime of being women who wouldn’t have sex with him 3. feminists on the eighth of march you said when is men’s day? and the feminists said it’s on the nineteenth of november on the nineteenth of november you said fuck this and went home 4. traps are trans women traps? are traps gay? is it wrong to be gay? is it, though? 5. masculinity as the women aired their grievances you said what about the men? and the women said fine let’s talk about the men let’s talk about men’s rights paternity leave male birth control domestic abuse against men men who are sexually assaulted, by other men and by women let’s talk about why men can’t wear dresses about homophobia about aggression and anger let’s talk about why men get depressed why men kill themselves why men don’t report rape why little boys don’t cry let’s talk about why men are afraid to be vulnerable let’s talk about masculinity and which parts of it are toxic and you said fuck this and went home 6. man what makes a man a man? why am i not a man? or am I? it doesn’t matter but it does and sometimes i wonder do i want to be? when i know that most men will not accept me as one of their own not as long as i look like this 7. activism you said do something help us fix our problems and lists were made ideas shared we said here, these are things you can do to fix your problems and make your lives better here are your tools organise protest march fight like we have done but you said fuck this and went home

On may 9th, 2017 British Columbians voted for change. Today, they have finally gotten it. The Legislature voted 44-42 in favour of the NDP amendment to the Throne Speech expressing no-confidence in the Clark government. Because of that vote, Premier Clark and her cabinet have resigned. Later today, after meeting with both Premier Clark and Opposition Leader Horgan of the NDP, the Leftenant-Governor has invited John Horgan to form a government and Cabinet, accepting the resignation of the Clark government. Today is the end of a long, 16 year nightmare. Leftist, progressive citizens in British Columbia have been crying out for change from massive infrastructure projects that serve no purpose. We've cried out against the shortchanging of children in order to pursue a fossil fuel industry that won't be competitive. We've demanded an education system that's funded properly, a welfare system that provides a fair payment to our least fortunate, and a health care system that works for everyone. The NDP-Green coalition will not be perfect. They'll fight. It will be hell to get through a Legislature that is deadlocked 43-43 on all votes, with the Speaker needing to save every piece of legislation from the abyss. But we have a chance to make life better for millions of people right here, right now. Every single thing this government does will come under attack by the media, and it's unlikely that this government will serve a second 4 year term in 2021. But in the four (possibly less if the Greens abandon us or someone gets sick) years we have to us, we're going to change this small part of the world for the better. Universal child care, a basic income pilot project, billions of dollars in education funding and the expansion of the tar sands required by federal law. We're going to protect our environment and put thousands back to work on environmentally friendly infrastructure. Welcome back, New Democrats. You've been given a chance to govern. Follow our principles, and when you see yourself starting to waver, remember that over one million British Columbians put their hopes in you. Don't let us down. Now, it's time to go celebrate, every bar in town is hosting an NDP victory party tonight!

For those of you who read my #BCPoli election blog, thanks. It was fun, never doing it again. This is a postscript for those of you who read through everything. The BC Liberals nominally won the election with 43 of 87 seats. However, the NDP won 41 seats and the BC Green Party won 3 seats, and they have agreed to a written accord (not a coalition, which is a formal governance agreement in Canada) whereby the NDP will govern with the tacit and supporting votes from the BC Greens to achieve a majority. It is not a coalition, in that the Greens reserve the right to sit in Opposition to the NDP government they are propping up, and have agreed only to vote with the NDP on matters of budget or confidence in the government. Having said that, this government may die in a few weeks since there's an impasse on who will serve as the Speaker of the House. A liberal Speaker would preserve the Accord's majority, but an NDP or Green Speaker would lead to legislative deadlock. The Speaker, by unwritten convention going back 7 centuries, can only vote to continue debate or preserve the status quo. This means that legislation will die in Third Reading, including budgets, throne speeches and other matters of confidence in the government. Which means that as soon as the NDP attempts to table any such documents, it will die unless the Speaker is willing to repeatedly defy precedent for the next 4.5 years. Such a position would be absolutely unprecedented in Canadian electoral history. Liberals have unanimously declared that if elected, they will not serve as Speaker (something that they can apparently do in spite of the secret ballot used to elect the Speaker). So it's entirely likely that I'll spend my summer working a second election campaign, which would be an immense relief to me since I'm going insane from boredom. A summer election would end the boredom very quickly. But it's time to figure out what I want to do politically. Anyone who knows me knows that I harbour political ambitions, and I have the connections needed to make a good showing when I choose to make my run. Given the NDP sweep of my hometown and all of the surrounding districts, it's not advantageous for me to contest a provincial seat (which is what I would truly like), nor would I be well-situated to win given my lack of real-world experience at the moment. I'm also not likely to succeed at present in the federal seat I reside in. It has a history of electing NDP representatives, including very young gay New Democrats, but I think it unlikely that I would be their first choice, given the high profile of the seat and the fact that the party controls every other elected position in the city EXCEPT this one federal seat. That leaves city council or the school board. Both have vacancies due to the provincial election, which guarantees an opening for me to run in that doesn't explicitly mean that I have to face the city council directly in a nomination battle. Given the absolute virulence that some on Council have shown me (and I've shown them repeatedly in exchange), that's probably a good thing, since they would deal with me in short order in a head to head election, but may not play favourites for the open council seat. The alternative would be to contest the open school board seat, where I have broadly strong relations with all of the major players, and would be seen as less of a public frustration than the current school board trustee blabbing about internal discussions to the local paper. I have the benefit of having worked with the school board on policy in the past, having pushed them into creating and working through an explicit anti-homophobia and anti-transphobia policy that includes resources for including pro-LGBTQ material into the curriculum. So... they know me, and they like me enough to invite me to be a keynote speaker at a district event. Both options appeal to me. Council desperately needs my voice on housing issues, and even as the council reluctantly starts to take my activist viewpoint on expanding housing in the city, winning a council seat with that as my main platform issue would certainly boost the effectiveness of my critiques. In spite of their past anger towards me, they would be loyal and help elect me if I was part of the slate. I wouldn't be able to guarantee success on expanding housing options in the city, but those issues would have a voice and champion. It would also allow me to continue and expand my work on the city public safety committee where I've spent the last six years improving police awareness of youth crime issues and ensuring that stays on the radar. Councillors have seen me there, and they appreciate my work on those files, so they may also appreciate my diligence on other issues before council, should I get there. The school board interests me as well. Obviously as a teacher I couldn't teach in a district where I served as a trustee, but with my master's degree coming I may not be teaching anymore anyways, and may shift entirely into a research career, which would free me up to serve as a trustee at home. I already know that I can work well with the current trustees, and it's a lower profile position that would allow me to get used to actually governing before becoming a councillor or something with more clout and public profile. There are things that I would want to accomplish at the school board as well, including the expansion of additional Mandarin language classes, and expanding the Advance Placement capstone program to all eight high schools in the district. Increasing public knowledge about the ACE-IT program for early trades certification would also be a priority issue for me. So there are things that I can do, and I wouldn't be choosing school board because of its potential as a springboard to alternative elective offices. There's also the fact that the open Council seat is likely to be more interesting to potential candidates than a school board seat. Better perks and the like, and I'm not entirely in it for the perks. All of which is a long way for me to say that I don't know what I want for myself. I have a meeting with the local party's treasurer in the next few days, and I plan to sound him out a bit before I go too much further. I'm also considering talking to a current city councillor and a school board trustee that I have strong connections to, in order to better grasp what their views would be. I feel like they'll suggest I wait. It's what they Mayor said when I asked for his blessing to run federally in 2015, and I ignored his advice. The result was being squished like a bug by the powers that be. What a learning experience that was. Perhaps waiting another election cycle until I've more thoroughly rebuilt the bridges I've burned all to hell from my public comments. Perhaps hearing from my superiors will give me an idea of what my options are.

In two months, my home province of British Columbia will be heading to the polls. I'm looking forward to the campaign, and hopefully in displacing the long-ruling BC Liberal government, which has had a continuous legislative majority since the 2001 elections that obliterated the BC New Democratic Party. Now, politics in British Columbia are different from the rest of Canada, so here are the important players. BC Liberal Party - Their leader and the current Premier is Christy Clark, who became Premier after winning the party leadership after former Premier Gordon Campbell was appointed High Commissioner to London. Premier Clark was, at the time, a radio host and former member of the Legislature, and won the leadership after a protracted leadership campaign. The BC Liberals, contrary to their name, are the main 'conservative', free enterprise party in British Columbia. Their membership reflects a combination of national Liberals and Conservatives, and is the direct successor to the Social Credit Party as the leader of the capitalist, free enterprise coalition in British Columbia. The Liberal Party vote has a floor of around 40% that does not leave the party, no matter what. BC New Democratic Party - Like their federal cousins, the New Democratic Party is the progressive, social democratic party in British Columbia. Our (Full disclaimer/disclosure: I'm a paying member of the BC NDP and have served as a party officer since 2009) leader is John Horgan, who won the leadership in late 2013 after our previous leader surrendered a 25 point lead in the polls. The party and its predecessor the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation have been the main social democratic party in British Columbia since 1933, and has been one of the top two parties in terms of vote share and seat count since the party's inception. With the exception of 2001's massacre, the party can consistently expect around 38% of the vote in any given election. BC Green Party - A progressive leaning Green Party that focuses on sustainable development and environmental protection as their main policies. The Green Party is lead by Andrew Weaver, an environmental scientist from the University of Victoria, and he is currently their only elected member of the Legislature. The party has been experimenting with new policy ideas, including a proposed pilot project for a universal basic income. The BC Green Party was created by dissident New Democrats in the 1990s, angry that the NDP government of the decade opened up part of the Great Bear Rainforest to development. Some recent polling has shown the Green Party surging in support across the province, taking around 20% of the popular vote. BC Conservative Party - The BC Conservatives are a new party, fighting their second election in their newly constituted form. Parties with the name 'BC Conservative' have come and gone, with the party being de-registered as an active party at several points over the last seventy years. The party currently has no leader after the previous leader, Dan Brooks, resigned the leadership for the second time in as many years. The party is not currently included in many election polls. With all of that contexty stuff out of the way, let's get to the interesting bits, the actual campaign! This year's election is being fought over the context of a number of different economic strains on the budget. Last November, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled that the BC Liberals unconstitutionally destroyed the teachers' contracts and required the government to reduce student-teacher ratios and class composition (the number of students with individualized education plans) back to the 2002 ratios. This necessitated over a billion dollars in new funding to the public education system and the subsequent hiring of over three thousand new teachers (a process that is still ongoing). This is a particularly black mark for Premier Clark, as she was the Minister of Education that initially destroyed those contracts. Adding to the financial strain on the government is the Ministry of Children and Family Development, which has been repeatedly under attack by critics for allowing children in care to die, and without even ensuring adequate care for the children. As a case in point, the most recent investigation covered an 18 year old in care who was placed into a motel as his housing by the Ministry. Additional funding has been promised, which has impacted the budget projections for the government. The Liberals have also been rocked by various ethics controversies, including accusations made against Health Ministry workers that directly led to the suicide of an accused graduate student who was later found to be innocent of the accusations. Finally, the government has been frustrated in its attempts to create a liquefied natural gas industry in the province, and failed to halt federal approval for the Kinder Morgan pipeline expansion leading to the Pacific Ocean. In the government's favour is the fact that the NDP hasn't won an election since 1996, and has only won three times in all of its history in British Columbia. The Liberals have much more money to spend on the campaign, and most of their incumbents are running again. Many of them also remember that at this time before the last election, they were trailing by 25%, so being in a tied election right now is a far more comfortable position for them than they faced the last time they faced the electorate. The NDP, traditionally supported by the labour unions, is facing an internal revolt as private sector construction unions are beginning to endorse the anti-union Liberals, thanks to the Liberals support for massive construction projects that would lead to more union jobs in the province. This has sapped the organizational strength from the New Democrats going into the election, at a time where they could potentially be capitalizing on Liberal failures. The New Democrats also face renewed strength in the BC Green Party which shares an electoral base, especially on Vancouver Island where nearly a third of the NDP caucus is elected. My home district is a bellweather riding that normally votes with the overall provincial winner, though in 2013 we backed the NDP thanks to superb organizing and volunteer efforts. I'll be interested to see whether the parties can break out of their traditional bases. The Liberals have strength in rural and suburban British Columbia, but face difficulties in some of the inner suburbs and the main cities, as well as Vancouver Island. To win, the NDP has to start performing in rural British Columbia and sweeping the suburbs along with its traditional progressive coalition. For the Greens, winning more than just the leader's seat will be seen as a successful campaign, though some Green insiders are hoping to supplant the NDP as the main opposition party to the Liberals. That's a lot to take in about the BC Politics scene, so let's all take a quick break before I start talking about my favourite subject - my political career. In 2018, the municipal elections will be happening (In Canada, different levels of governments have elections in separate years from each other). I'm planning on contesting the local school board elections in my hometown. The place I live is one of the few communities in British Columbia with organized municipal political parties, and my relationship with the dominant party would be considered strained at best. They have accepted me again as a paying member of the party, but in the past years I've attempted to defend my seat on the executive and was defeated for opposing the party stance on affordable housing. Since that's an issue of Council and not the school board, I'm hoping that it will not be used as a weapon against me in any potential nomination contest. For those who don't know, I'm currently a private school teacher teaching in Downtown Vancouver. Now that I've been on the teacher side of the field, I see the importance of strong leadership in education, and I'm hoping that my past experiences in policy formation and execution will help me as a potential school board trustee. Beyond the negative publicity of attacking my own party, the members who turn out for nomination races do otherwise have a favourable opinion of me, particularly those who have served with me in the leadership. There's also residual support in the LGBTQ community in the city due to my organizing and lobbying in favour of a local anti-discrimination school board policy that was enacted in 2011. Passing the policy over vocal objection both on and off the school board garnered lots of positive media coverage, but after seven years those views are unlikely to have remained with the electorate. Which is fine, I'm not running to defend the policy or even to expand it. While I'm proud of the work I did to create the policy and defend it in the election of 2011, I'm not focusing on it as a campaign platform. My focus is to be on expanding access to trades training programs and advanced placement programs. The province, in partnership with the local school boards, offers a program known as ACE-IT, which provides students with practical experience and their first year trades training in a trade of their choice. The program is entirely funded by the district, and helps reduce the time needed to become a journeyman tradesperson. However, there's a lack of knowledge about these programs being available, and each school only offers a few of the programs, creating a patchwork where students in some parts of the city do not have access to the ACE-IT program at all. Expansion of the College Board's Advance Placement Capstone program is another goal of mine. It's currently being run as a pilot program in two of the eight secondary schools in the district, and I'd like to expand that program to all students in order to provide that additional benefit to students pursuing post-secondary educations. Of recent issue is the idea of the district being a 'sanctuary district'. While I'm supportive in principle, I'm interested to see what happens with the new policy and how the district staff interact with federal immigration authorities over the next year. This is service for me. I believe in giving back to the community and the schools that helped shape me, and while I have no quarrel with any of the school board trustees currently on the board, I feel that many of them have served their community for long enough, and that new voices are needed to replace those individuals seeking their eleventh term on the school board. Changing educational technology and new pedagogical practices necessitates the need for new voices at the board of education to ensure that the students of my city are best served, especially with the rollout of new provincial curriculum guidelines and additional provincial funding to uphold the Supreme Court ruling. As a new teacher who's recently obtained my teaching certificate, I feel that I would be an articulate voice for the new generation of educators that is not being heard at the board level right now. Whew. That's all of it. I'll write another one of these soon, but I'd love to hear what people think about the BC Political scene, or any advice for a campaign I may or may not end up running. For the record, this won't be the first campaign I've run or worked on. I've been a past campaign manager, past candidate and past paid staffer for a few campaigns, so I already know what kind of costs are going to be involved. See you later blog buddies!

Forty years ago today, on January 20, 1977, I stood on the grounds of the Capitol freezing my butt off. The same weather system which had brought snow to my hometown of Miami the previous day had dumped inches of the white stuff on the nation’s capital; the cold seeped through the soles of my shoes making me shiver and bringing my group of friends into a huddle seeking warmth. Try having your feet stuck in snow for hours, when you’re used to warm South Florida winters, and you’ll know how uncomfortable I was. But we were not about to move; we were there to watch the inauguration of Jimmy Carter as the 39th President of the United States. As a freshman at Georgetown University I’d made friends with connections. Those contacts scored me tickets to the Gerald Ford Victory Celebration on election night the previous November. My friends and I milled about the hotel ballroom that night, drinking overpriced cocktails, watching the election results displayed on a screen behind the stage. We returned to our dorm disappointed our candidate had lost. The same congressman who gained us admission to the party on election night, came through with tickets for the inauguration of the man who I’d not voted for. But in the politically charged environment which was a university campus in Washington, DC it made no difference: we were witnesses to the peaceful transition of power from one party to another. An event our nation took for granted after almost 200 years and which many around the world envied. Today I find myself in a similar situation: a man I did not support will be inaugurated as president. I won’t be in Washington this time around, but I’ll be watching Donald Trump’s swearing in as the 45th President from home. Yes, I’ll be watching. No, I’m not happy it’s him taking the oath of office instead of his opponent. Yes, he’s my president. I’m an American first. My concern is for the nation as a whole. I may disagree with Mr. Trump in many areas, I may cuss at him and his policies, but he has my best wishes. If he fails, we all suffer. Some may suffer if he succeeds, but he won the election and he deserves an opportunity to show us what he can accomplish. I will support him when I agree with him, and I will speak out against him when I don’t. But I will continue to believe in the American system of government, flawed as it may be, and will continue to participate to the best of my ability. Because if I don’t, if I abdicate my responsibilities as a citizen, I give up the right to speak up and complain. Change is coming and I hope it surprises me. I hope our nation and our people are better off in four years than they are today. Good luck, Mr. Trump.

God, I hate that I am going to talk about politics so soon. But today calls for it. Today, I saw something that shocked, hurt, and pained me. So, I left a long comment on it. I have no idea if it will be posted... so I am posting a similar piece on here. I am a young man that champions the "Freedom of Speech" and I live by Voltaire's "I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." but what I saw really tested my resolve. I do not merely disagree with what I saw, I absolutely disagree with it and I cannot, nay will not, defend it. It pains me to write that. To not defend a person's right to say something is anathema to me. Having to think that is so disheartening. I was offended by what I saw. Now, if I had seen something like this two months ago, I would have thought it was meant out of a certain brand of humor. I understand, that their are humorists, satirists, and comedians that say and do offensive things for the sake of humor and comedy, But what I saw, along with previous things by the same person, I can therefore say it was offensive for the sake of being offensive. I try to look at the good in everyone, no matter their faults, but this post just pushed me beyond my limit. It grieves me, that I don't have the will to defend it, but... **sigh** I wash my hands of it.

So what is Steve doing writing a blog outside of the Weekly Wrap Up? Well, once every four years something happens that affects our site in an unusual way. It overtakes a lot of the US of A as well as the rest of the world. What am I talking about? The US Presidential and Term Elections is what. Now before you hit the report button and report me for talking about politics outside the Pit, please read on. As many of our long-term members know, and I imagine new ones as well, politics can be very divisive and polarizing to everyone on our site and in some of our lives. They also can be a joining of ideas and learning how others see things opposed to our own views. Outside of the US you may feel what does this have to do with the day-to-day running of GA? The reason for this blog is that unfortunately in US Presidential Election years, the negative side of politics can rear its ugly head and the few can ruin things for the majority. We, unfortunately, have lost long-term and new members over their ambitions to make GA politicized with their ideas and how they posted them. Sometimes members don't have ambitions, but they can also get swept up in the environment and don’t know where or how it is best to express those ideas. The site’s wish is to have everyone here today and here next year at this time, and hopefully that no one leaves the site due to something political said on the site by someone else or themselves. We've tried different approaches over the years, from the wild west of the early years where anything went, to absolutely nothing on the site anywhere about politics at any time. I want to particularly acknowledge all the people who participated in debate of the recent Brexit and UK elections. These participants have kept discussion to the Pit and been respectful of the people and took issue with only the opinions. I do not believe the Site Moderation Team (SMT), had to review any issues of this political hot potato in Europe. This goes out to all our members, UK and elsewhere. I thought I would highlight for everyone the political pit falls that could lead to you having an interaction with the SMT. · Politics are only allowed in the Pit or in personal blogs. · Status updates on politics are not allowed, nor status updates to visit a blog with some reference of the topic of the blog. · When engaging others in the Pit or a blog, you must address the issues brought up, not the person bringing it up. Doing so will be considered a personal attack. If you so choose to join the Pit, it is a closed club and when your request to join is approved I strongly suggest you read Myr’s pinned topic: The Pit Rules. This will give you guidance to how to positively engage in this area where politics are okay. The SMT will monitor the Pit, and we do have some members who actively participate in there. We will investigate if someone reports someone else for a personal attack, but if we investigate and find someone made a false accusation, we will also suspend the reporter from accessing the Pit. In other words, don’t report someone just because you don’t like their view. The SMT is monitoring around the site for Political Content, and we also rely heavily on members to report political posts outside the Pit or blogs. Your anonymity will be kept private and only the SMT will be aware of your report. The biggest suggestion here is to hit the Report button at the top of every single post on the boards if you find one with political content, rather then hit the reply button to call out the original poster. Usually hitting the reply button will bring yourself into the review by the SMT. As mentioned earlier, some may have received a verbal warning in the past for political content, but as we ramp up toward November, we will in most cases have to take a stronger stance in warnings. Whereas a verbal warning is 5 points for 3 days or until they expire, we will be using the warnings for Political Content outside the Pit or Blogs as well as the Abusive Behaviour for personal attacks. These are progressive warnings that get more severe with the number of instances and/or severity of the offense. Sometimes these are just points but as the severity or repetition of warnings increases, it could include site suspensions even up to a site ban. Just so everyone knows, just like all the membership here, we do have different political leanings on the SMT especially as the team is global. At times, I wonder if we should have a Pit for the SMT discussions What I’m trying to say is that we do address all reports or findings and we talk as a group. Seldom does anyone dig in for their political beliefs, and we can usually come to a mutually agreed upon plan of action. If you feel that the SMT has left or right leaning people only, I can assure you that isn’t the case. All of us are middle of the road when it comes to politics and can put that aside when looking at the issue. To be honest, I’m proud of our team and how we address politics on the site. All of us, as in the whole site, would like to see less of the SMT having to deal with issues that can be avoided as the year progresses. That is entirely up to you though. If we can go through the next year or so like we have with the current UK issues, then the SMT can sit back and do what we enjoy so much, reading, interacting and enjoying everyone here on all of our site.

I've been censoring myself. We all do, here on GA, those are the rules. No political discussion outside The Pit. But what's political? When someone complains about a public figure bringing politics into what they're doing (like Wil Weaton's fans losing their shit when he posted a picture on Instagram of his hand giving Trump Tower the finger), what they're really complaining about is them bringing the wrong kind of politics into it. There's no such thing as apolitical. Everything's political. Whether you see it that way is just a question of what your own views are, because we all like to think of ourselves as unbiased. Queer identities are inherently political. We fight daily for our rights, and if not for our own then for those of our siblings elsewhere. We've always been able to talk about homophobia on GA, we've been able to talk about Pride. There have been posts in The Lounge about marriage equality. And that's not because these things aren't political, but because they're politics we agree on. But I censor myself on things to do with my own identity. There are issues trans people face that I don't feel like I'm allowed to post about because it might violate the rules of no politics. We don't talk about transphobia the same way we talk about homophobia here. We talk about Pride, because of course we do. But Stonewall was a riot, and Marsha P. Johnson, a transgender sex worker of colour, threw the first brick. Marsha's entire existence was political. Pride is at its core political activism, but it's okay to talk about because it's all pink washed and dressed up in glitter. Can I talk about Marsha in The Lounge? This isn't a dig at GA. The rules are there for a reason, and I understand that. But some of these lines are pretty blurry. When do queer issues become too political to be talked about in a queer online community? Which prominent LGBTQ+ individuals throughout history have to be excluded because they were too political? A while back, a quote by Harvey Milk was shared in The Pit. I wanted to share it in the quote thread in the lounge but was cautioned against it. Because even though it was a message that literally all of us can agree on (can't remember exactly what at present, but it was lovely), Harvey Milk is in and of himself political and someone might take issue with that. Better safe than sorry. I exist as a trans person in a world where people want to deny people like me the right to go to the bathroom that corresponds with our gender. Where trans people are being excluded from protections against discrimination. Where trans people (especially trans women, especially trans women of colour) are murdered just because they're trans. I exist as a trans person in a world where many modern, developed countries won't let trans people change their legal gender without being sterilised first. Where in many more countries they can't change legal gender at all. I exist as a trans person in a world where prominent figures defend their right to misgender me because 'I can't tell them which words to use'. Which of these things can I talk about? Which of these things are political? The answer is, all of them. These things and everything else to do with every other queer identity. Everything about existing as a queer person is political because the world has made it so. Everything, everything is political. It's only a question of to whom.

Hi everyone, This is my urban adventure story - attempting to be something along the lines of a British Tales of the City (at least i'd like to think so). It's a bit of a comedy, mystery, political, love story. But urban adventure is probably how i'd describe it. Set in Manchester, UK, 2009. Would really love to know what you think of it, if you'd like to take a look! I'm about two thirds of the way through and aiming to complete by Christmas. https://www.gayauthors.org/story/stuyounger/lostinmanchester Stu x

With how badly things are going in the world since the great disaster a new political party has arisen. They have decided you will be their main spokesman. What is it your party is promising to do and what is their main agenda?