skip to main |
skip to sidebar
Put aside the stereotypes we often reserve for the people of the Middle East: violent and extremist; the civil unrest in Egypt should serve no other purpose than as an inspiration and a validation that liberty is a cause many will die for.
What I am witnessing in Egypt will most likely be the largest demonstration against a political ideology in my lifetime. Rich and poor, doctors and teachers, men and women, Christians and Muslim, the people of Egypt have united together to end the regime of Mubarak. This isn't just about dethroning the president and sending him into exile; it's a stand for equality. It could very well be as big as the Womens' Rights and Black movements so infamous in American history. Symbols and voices of hope have not yet emerged from Egypt which commonly accompany massive geopolitical shifts either, but I hope the lack of one does not hinder the chances of change.
And we're seeing such change crossing the Arab states. Tunisian leaders have left for exile and news feeds suggest Yemen would be the next state where the government could be toppled by the people. It's a grassroots movement, a revolt against the tyranny. The British of the 16th century would never have dreamed of such an attack on its monarchs.
It takes circumstances like this for Westerners to fully appreciate democracy. Although highly justified, we as Canadians, Americans, and Europeans often criticize our governments for the messes they have created with rhetoric and red-tape, but then we see countries like Tunisia, Egypt, and Yemen where the people live in the shadow of one iron-fist ruler and only dream of "terrible" democratic governments. It showed me that even in a system devoid of liberties and rights, a fear many Americans have voiced concerns about to their own government, the power of change truly does rest on the shoulder's of its citizens.
What we have in Canada are freedoms that we have become accustomed to. It's the same freedom that so many billions of people envy all around - silently because of restrictions on speech, silently because they know no other way, silently because they believe they are alone on the front. But these events in the Arab world have shined a light onto a hidden matter and it is us living in the Western world that must collectively embrace our own governments while supporting those who want the same basic rights we take for granted every day. What good can arguing against democracy and its ideals do for the estimated three hundred that have already died and hundreds more to follow?
The steps that the Egyptians have taken is a giant leap forward for mankind. It is unfortunate that it has become so violent, but for those that sacrifice their lives for such a noble cause, millions will one day be grateful.
A few weeks ago, I expressed my delight at Google's decision to leave China in an article titled "Ideals of Humanity Should Over Rule." I didn't plan on making the title a recurring blog theme, but clearly, there are enough serious (and even irrational) issues that must be brought to the attention of my friends and anonymous readers. So today, I proclaim that the Ideals of Humanity Should Over Rule will be a recurring feature on my blog, which will continue to touch the more human side of life.
There is no doubt the U.S. Health Care Reform (and Student Loans) Bill has created controversy in America, but last night I was watching "The Daily Show with Jon Stewart" and found to my dismay American Health Insurance Companies trying to find loop holes that would allow them to deny coverage to sick children.
The original law states, "A health insurance issuer offering group individual health insurance coverage may not impose any preexisting condition exclusion with respect to such plan or coverage." Section 2704, Clause A. In other words, an Insurer can not use pre-existing conditions (maybe terminal cancer, etc.) to deny a child health care coverage. But guess what loophole they found? It doesn't say they can't deny coverage to the child.
The spirit of the law required insurance companies to provide health insurance to children, even if they already have diseases or conditions that might render them unprofitable to big firms, but because it does not state they must cover the child, they technically do not have to cover the entire child plus the illnesses. What a joke!
Now, as a proponent of capitalism, I can see where they are coming from, but as a proponent of human beings and life, I do not agree with what these Insurance Companies are trying to do. The burden that is faced in America when a family member is sick is enormous, something I can not empathize with since I am Canadian. But, as your friendly neighbour, I share the anger that most Americans feel regarding this loophole hunt.
It is not surprising to me to find companies trying to find loopholes. They want to preserve their profits, but individuals siding with Insurers ticks me off even more. I found this comment on a news article from the Huffington Post.
"But dems put in the loopholes not the insurance co... comedy for simpletons ... I guess" [Posted 02:18 PM on 4/06/2010]
Wow! Does this person get his rationale from O'Reilly or something? With that logic, if you asked me not to punch you in the face, and then I asked a friend to punch you, then it is really your fault. Clearly, the spirit of your request was to prevent injury to your visage, but of course, I found a loop hole. What a ridiculous sense of logic you carry. I agree that loopholes derive from poorly written rules or laws, especially if misinterpretation is prominent, but in a situation like this, how dare someone argue that a loophole exists.
Insurance was born under a common thread that participants all pool their money to assist their colleagues during times of disaster. Where are the "good hands" of the "good neighbour" that I see on television ads?
The enemy of your enemy is not always your friend. For anybody who supports what the Insurance Companies are doing, consider finding a family with a disabled child. See the uncertainty, the turmoil, the fear the family endures to keep their loved one alive and tell me that you still believe what the Insurers are doing is right.
To everyone including politicians, CEOs of Insurance Companies, Conservatives, Libearls, everyone: Do not be blinded by your political affiliations. Take a look at the situation and step back for a minute, realize that the debate you are about to raise includes the lives of thousands, maybe millions of individuals who need support more than you ever will.
Today, US Congress praised Google for their actions on leaving China. I was under the impression that the majority of people had the same beliefs, until I read many of the posts on CNN's story. To my surprise, there were many people opposed to what Google was doing, with many angry at Google's supposed attempt at world domination.
I wrote the following post on my Facebook link discussing my belief that Google did the right thing.
"Congress, although they do have more important issues to work on, did the right thing. People need to see the bigger picture here. Congress is supporting a US company going against the grain by sacrificing huge market share and profits in China for their company's values, morals, and integrity.
Google is standing up for what they believe in. Many conglomerates stands up for their employees and ideals by choosing to donate to great charities, bettering the environment, and providing aid to Third World Nations. These countries are often praised for their work, yet when Google just leaves a country, without breaking any laws, they are shunned? That is absurd.
Anybody who shuns Google for leaving China has no idea what they are talking about. Google did not disobey any laws while they were there. And the fact that the Chinese government supposedly hacked their systems to oust or obtain Human Rights Activists information is itself illegal, at least in North America.
People often disassociate corporations and human beings. Do we need to remind people that corporations comprise of hundreds or thousands of employees? I believe it is fair to say that a large majority of Google staff, along with the rest of world, would like to see Freedom of Speech imposed positively in every nation. The ideals of democracy are taken for granted here."
Those who do not support what Google has done should provide me with a strong argument for your side. I believe that any company should do what they believe is best for them. Money may be a big factor in business, but it is not the only thing now.
If you opened up a company in a country and found out they were hacking your systems or stealing from your warehouse, would you honestly consider staying in that nation? I hope not. Your beliefs should trump money.
Christine Jones, executive vice president of GoDaddy.com, also told the commission today that China had asked for copies of photo identification and signatures of all registrants to their website. Privacy is an important matter to Americans. How can one argue for China in this situation?
Google is clearly standing up for the Freedom of Speech and Information. To be fair, there are 25 countries that block Google, and 40 censor the Internet. Now that a precedence has been made, Google should continue to spread this into other natinos as well. But regardless of the laws in China, they are doing what they believe is right. Would people be angry if Google donated millions of dollars to Cuban aid relief if there happened to be a natural disaster? The US does not trade with Cuba, but that should not stop people from believing in humanity and caring for others.
I for one am glad to see Google become the poster-child for Human Rights in China. This may be controversial, but China has become obsessed with growing their country with greed, with a lack of care for human and environmental rights. Those that built China into a super power in international trade will leave and subsequently submerge China back into the last century.
