Saturday, January 29, 2011
The dignity of the believer: An illusion?, by Tania Tokarski
The dignity of the believer:
An illusion?
Some movies show the human misery, The Passion of Christ and Spartacus to name a few. They remind me of that period, shortly before the end of the Roman Empire, the Romans threw the Christians in the Colosseum to feed the lions. Not only are these traitors in Rome continued to defy the order and with their beliefs, despite their plight, but more and more fans subscribed to their religion. "Religious belief is it a consolation for the weak?" The sick, the poor and unfortunate they drew their courage against Rome with a promise of a better world after death? Even today, many people continued to keep the faith when everything goes wrong. Well, I think, as Dr. Sigmund Freud, that religion is a fiction drawn from the mind of a group that wants to better live the harsh reality. Religion is a sedative, it can not be reality.
First, Freud explains the purpose of religion:
"Human beings working together in large numbers to ensure happiness and protection against suffering through a fanciful distortion of reality. But the religions of mankind must be regarded as collective delusions of this kind." (The concepts of human being, p. 74)
Indeed, when everything goes wrong, the man thinks about God, her protective father, and the joy he will experience when he joins. Freud explains that there are three types of sedatives which are used to reduce human suffering: strong diversions such as work, the subjective satisfactions that might be the practice of an art and drugs that affect the body chemistry (morphine, etc..) Religion is in one of these categories. It explained the reason for the existence of human, because it would be untenable to think that the only purpose of existence is survival. The human, after all, sucking the happiness and ways to achieve this are, first, to find more sources of enjoyment possible (eg a family, learning to play an instrument) and secondly, reduce the sources of discontent by the use of sedatives, named above. After all, in the words of Freud, to think that our existence is protected by a father that no one sees can only dream of "children" in need of consolation. For this purpose, religion can not be anything but a consolation for the weak.
However, John Paul II has a different opinion. The teachings of the Bible hold the truth. The Bible can not be fiction as it brings wisdom. The wisdom it speaks introduces the concepts of "human dignity" and "pity" and "equality." The human being is worthy, because God has willed for itself. A responsible person can not be weak. According to the Bible, there exists no weak or strong, because all men are equal before God. The human being is worthy and his ability to think for himself he was left, making sure he can use his intelligence to good or bad choices and travel to learn and exploit its potential. The Bible also reveals that human beings have been created in respect of life. Thus, it mentions solidarity, communication to each other and give what belongs to him, because "God has created in his image." For all these reasons, it can not be weak and religion could not be fictional. Finally, religion is no consolation for the weak as it is one explanation of the mystery of life. Just as valid as the theory of evolution, it remains inécartable.
Now, what concept is most valid? Make a brief return. Freud believed that religion is a sedative for humans, who did not experience the difficulties that life offered him. Man is created a "chimera" collective, ie, religion. It would be a comfort to him. The consequence it (the vision of Freud) results, in my opinion, is good: it encourages the subject to become aware of the means available to it to be happy (ie to find a better job) rather than joining a religious group (which encourages more sharing of experiences as the action on the problem.) However, the ideology of John Paul II is also attractive: all men are equal before God, there is no strong or low. Religion is not a consolation, she teaches the virtues of selflessness, equality and respect for life. It is not fiction, because it is one explanation for the purpose of life. To this end, it brings great value to humans in addition to the hope of life after death. When I think back to what has made the great religions, like Christianity, I integrate the theory of John Paul II. Religion is no consolation for the weak, because it brought about many times. When Rome fell, the Christians have built a new order. Charity to the poor is born of religion (selflessness). Schools, hospitals and other public institutions also started bridge with religion. After these achievements, it would be unfair to compare the weak believers. Persons who perform such great and beautiful things as well as education, health care and public charity (an ancestor of welfare) can not but be strong.
In conclusion, I am, after all, agree with Freud who think religion is a sedative for the people. Religion provides the contrary, explanations of the mysteries of life. It sends fine values and social systems parties such as schools, hospitals and charity. Of course, the religious zeal has had unfortunate consequences, including the genocide of Native Americans or the enslavement of Africans. However, properly used, maybe that religious beliefs could restore hope and zest for life to suicide, often atheists, Quebec. Our statistics on suicide seem to correspond well with the release of religion from our government. Now, if a new religion should be adopted that would best meet the human needs? Christianity, Buddhism or any new religion approaching agnosticism? One day will we know perhaps.
Labels: Atheism, Christianity, Religion and fanaticism, Tania Tokarski
Monday, September 06, 2010
The modern philosophy and the modern project, by Tania Tokarski
Introduction
In the seventeenth century, there has been various changes in the world of thought. We then challenged the authorities of the past and the tradition. In this context, religious beliefs and superstitions take a new dimension. Now, they relate only to personal life. Accordingly, the dogmas of faith have more to intervene in the development of thought. This revolution is the result of a long and slow process that begins in the late Middle Ages, and specifying accelerating the Renaissance, and he led some modern thinkers to oppose those who want to remain faithful to ideals of the past.
Key Features
Chronologically, the modern successor to the Renaissance. The word "modern" comes from Latin and means modernus: that is recent. The intellectual approach that characterizes modern thinking still plays a dominant role in our society. But modernity is primarily a cultural phenomenon characterized by a major intellectual revolution, itself spurred by unprecedented technological development. Advances in transportation, the emergence of printing and urbanization will facilitate knowledge flows. Therefore, the reference to tradition is taking a new meaning. Thus, the modern thinkers are explicitly opposed to religious or traditional ideas that dominated the previous era.
Open to new ideas, we will attempt to construct a representation of the world from a new foundation, new paradigms (paradigm: model). For example, we leave the representation of the geocentric cosmos System (Ptolemy) for construction of the heliocentric universe (N. Copernicus). In short, the land is no longer the center of the world.
The technological advances that characterized the birth of modernity will also promote the transformation of the economic, social and political. Gradually, an industrial economy will grow. This form of production and distribution is based on a principal values of modern thought: efficiency. On the purely philosophical, the relatively new concept of rational, autonomous individual, claiming more and more freedom of conscience (Luther) and action against feudalism primarily religious, political, then, is a breeding ground for the Vision and capitalist world.
Modern thought will find new bases for those values of technical efficiency and instrumental and freedom. It will particularly enhance the powers of our particular reason. So in itself that modern thought will find the new metaphysical foundations it seeks. This means that assigns a fundamental role of subjectivity in the process of knowledge. In other words, the truth does not correspond either to a divine revelation or mystical, or a very ancient belief. Now, we accept as truth only what can be critically examined by reason, by following a strictly rational demonstration. The philosophical concept of modernity means that new way of thinking and the new hierarchy of value that follows. We can say this time it is the era of triumphant reason.
Think of Rene Descartes (1596-1650), Thomas Hobbes (1588-1679), John Locke (1632-1704), Baruch Spinoza (1632-1677), Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz (1646-1716), David Hume (1711 -1776) and many others, modern philosophers were concerned with a very high degree by the sense of their approach and the thoroughness and accuracy of their system. In this context, mathematics and the sciences of nature are often monopolize energy. The modern feel, sometimes blindly, in the liberating power of science. That is why this last one will be asked to produce a society of free individuals of all constraints.
Reason
Because they no longer take account of revelation, faith and religious belief as a criterion of truth, modern thinkers no longer consider the universe as a world of unfathomable mysteries. Specifically, modern thought only accept explanations that are rational. The autonomy of reason is the main characteristic of modern thought. The world is no longer a sacred structure, but an intelligible reality which we can discover the laws by careful observation and methodical. In short, we believe that the universe obeyed rational laws. That is to say that the laws that determine the nature conform to the laws that determine thought. Moreover, modern thinkers believe that every human being has the ability to reason. Everyone, in principle, can therefore understand the laws that govern nature. To do this, simply take the trouble to think rationally because his drive well to find some truth, "as Descartes.
Since every individual has the ability to reason properly, the modern thinkers will believe that all humans are equal. Consequently, they will invite each human to use their minds to free themselves of the power of any form of arbitrary authority. By reason, therefore, the individual has a dignity of its own and under which it no longer required to be sacrificed in favor of powers that are beyond him. For the modern thinker, the self (or the individual or subjectivity) and everything connected with it is therefore a paramount value, almost sacred.
However, do not believe that intellectuals have invented modern reason or rationality. Do not forget that since birth, philosophy and science promote rational thought. But whether the reason was a tool among others, the reason obeyed, at least in part, other than its own principles. What is distinctive of modern thought is the invention of a new intellectual attitude that reason exclusively obeys the rules it has imposed itself strictly in order to establish links indubitable between causes and effects observable in nature or between ideas and realities to which they correspond. We call this approach intellectual rationalism and it will generate great enthusiasm for a class of thinkers. Rationalism leads the thinker to look for certainties that can be explained rationally beyond a reasonable doubt, whereas in past centuries, thinkers often sought by both the use of reason as other tools, truths revealed type interpretation.
For Cartesian rationalism, nature is composed only of matter and it works like a machine, that is to say that the universe is strictly governed by mechanical forces which are also subject to the laws of reason. We can say that the reason seems to have taken possession of everything in the universe as conceived by the rationalists. They also discover that the laws of nature can be expressed in mathematical language. In other words, we realize that the material and mechanical forces at play in nature are measurable. Thus, thanks to mathematics, we will be able to read the great book of nature.
The modern project
Nicolas Copernicus (1473-1543), Johannes Kepler (1571-1630), Isaac Newton (1642-1723), Galileo (1564-1642) and all modern scientists seeking to understand the universe in a very specific purpose. It's about becoming, in the words of Descartes , master and owner of nature by the use of reason, that in order to improve the lives of human beings. We can speak of the modern project: the progress of science and art, modern thinkers wanted to liberate the human suffering and what alienates. It therefore influences the development of productive forces for domination of natural phenomena by science and technology. The philosophers and modern scientists believe that this development of knowledge and technology must necessarily produce an improvement in our social and political conditions. The modern project is at once philosophical, scientific and sociopolitical. This desire for liberation through the benefits of science and technology gives rise to an unprecedented scientific renewal. Three elements characterize this revival:
a) A work of methodical observation: to understand and control nature, we must work rigorously, which means the systematic observation of natural phenomena. Added to this is the validation of theories and assumptions by meticulous experimentation. The accuracy of theoretical concepts must allow to dominate any natural or social process that enslaves human beings.
b) The unity of science: by the common use of mathematics, modern scientists consider science as a tree. Thus, since the sciences share the same language, we come to imagine a hierarchy of knowledge and science, mathematics form the core which is connected with various branches of science.
c) Multiple advances and inventions: with the systematic observation and rigorous work, we see many important theoretical discoveries that often lead to various practical inventions designed to improve the lot of the human condition. Here is embodied the idea of the modern project, that of a "Progress Liberator". In this context, efficiency and productivity values are extremely positive. The modern thinkers did not conceive the dehumanizing side often attributed to these values today.
Do not forget that it is the rigorous use of reason which alone can make this progress possible liberator. It now uses the concept of instrumental rationality to describe this attitude of mind which is exclusively oriented towards the development techno.
Conclusion
Finally, modernity will transform the lives of Western policy. Since all are able to use their reason, everyone should have the right to speak and must share the reigns of power. The moderns are thus gradually try to replace the forms of power based on violence and arbitrariness by democracy.
In almost all scientific, artistic and intellectual of this period, we will witness a fierce battle between those who uphold the traditions and those who promote new ideas. This opposition culminated in literature in what historians have called the quarrel between ancients and moderns. On the side of Veterans include Nicolas Boileau (1636-1711), Jean de Lafontaine (1621-1695), Jean Racine (1639-1699), Jean de la Bruyere (1645-1696), while we can classify Charles Perrault ( 1628-1703), Thomas Cornelius (1625-1709) and Fontenelle (1657-1757) in the ranks of the Moderns.
Briefly, we can say that the modern era ends at the beginning of the twentieth century. However, early in the nineteenth century, philosophers will reject the modern project. During the twentieth century, critics will become increasingly radical. The so-called postmodern thinkers sometimes will try to show that if rational thought has produced the promised progress, however, this progress has not proved liberating that reason can not be totally reliable, trustworthy ; that modern thought has made our world a dull gray, it is responsible for the disenchantment of the world.
Labels: Tania Tokarski
Monday, July 26, 2010
Phyllis Lambert and Serge Joyal defend the Muslim Brotherhood at the expense of freedom, par Tania Tokarsky
In a letter published by Le Devoir on July 13th 2010, Phyllis Lambert* and Serge Joyal** ask the Charest Government to reconsider its decision to purchase the building that the Muslim Association of Canada (MAC) was going to acquire in downtown Montreal in order to establish a mosque and a community center. They stated that there was nothing in the MAC's project that would threaten the historical and architectural qualities of the building and thus concluded that the Government's decision had the appearance of excluding the Muslim community.
By neglecting to discuss the aspects of the MAC's program as well as the other organisations involved in the project, Ms. Lambert and Mr. Joyal are making those who are opposed to the project look like bigots. As for Point de Bascule, our opposition to the MAC's project has never been motivated by a hostility towards a new Muslim house of worship. From the very beginning, PdeB made it clear that the problem was the political program of the organisation behind the project.
We believe that an opposition to a MAC-led mosque based on an in-depth examination of its political goals and objectives demonstrates a responsible attitude and a commitment towards individual freedom rather than closed-mindedness.
The Facts
The mosque project that was to be implemented inside the historical Grey Nun's building was launched by the Muslim Student Association (MSA) branches of both McGill and Concordia Universities. The MSA was founded in 1963. It was one of the first communication channels that the Muslim Brotherhood established in North America. The affiliation of both Montreal universities to the MSA is explicitly mentioned in their respective constitution available on the Internet.
To manage their mosque project, the McGill and Concordia MSA branches constituted the Montreal Community Center (MCC). Eventually the MCC entrusted the management of the project to the MAC, the Muslim Brotherhood arm operating in English Canada. Présence Musulmane Canada (PMC) headed by Salah Basalamah acts as a counterpart to the MAC in French Canada. The MAC and PMC jointly organised the April 2010 conferences of Tariq Ramadan when he visited Montreal.
On its website, the MAC declares that it "adopts and strives to implement Islam, [...] as understood in its contemporary context by the late Imam, Hassan al-Banna. MAC regards this ideology as the best representation of Islam as delivered by Prophet Muhammad."
A summary of Hassan al-Banna's doctrine is available in the 50 point manifesto that he sent to several political leaders of the Arab world in 1947. The manifesto promotes the abolition of political parties and the establishment of a single party system; the modification of the laws so that they conform to shariah; the multiplication of associations dedicated to promoting the spirit of jihad amongst the youth; the closure of dance halls and the censorship of movies and plays and so forth. In his manifesto, al-Banna stated his intention to impose a unique dress code to the entire population. Faced with the Egyptian authorities' refusal to implement al-Banna'sprogram, his organisation multiplied acts of terror in Egypt, including the assassination of the Prime Minister in 1948.
In one of his essays, On Jihad, al-Banna explains that "it's an obligation for us [Muslims] to fight against them [the infidels] after inviting them [to join Islam], even if they do not fight against us. (Five Tracts, Translated by Charles Wendell, Berkeley, University of California Press, 1978, p. 147)
To inspire his troops, Hassan al-Banna recalled in his essay To What Do We Invite Humanity? that in history many leaders experienced modest beginnings before finally achieving "success and fortune". He mentioned several Muslim warlords who inspired him. Only one was non-Muslim. It was Adolph Hitler. Today, the spiritual leader of the Muslim Brotherhood, Yusuf al-Qaradawi, frequently reminds us through statements made in the Arab media that the Islamist organization is still a fierce enemy of individual freedoms.
In recent years, al-Qaradawi promoted the killing of apostates from Islam [islamonline.net] and homosexuals [video 5:27], he introduced Hitler as a messenger of Allah who came to punish the Jews [video], he urged Muslims to conquer the West [video], he favoured female genital mutilations and so forth.
When the Islamist militants behind the Montreal downtown mosque project declare that they will "adopt and strive to implement Islam, [...] as understood in its contemporary context by the late Imam, Hassan al-Banna", they are announcing that they will devote their efforts to make these principles triumph.
During the two trials having lead to the conviction in 2008 of several members of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood network for financing terrorist activities in the Middle East through the United States, the prosecution presented as evidence an internal memorandum of the organization. A list attached to the main document confirms that the MSA, which coordinates the activities of its McGill and Concordia chapters is indeed part of the North American network of the Brotherhood.
The internal document also clearly mentions the goal pursued by the organisation in North American. The excerpt reads as follows:
"The Ikhwan [the Brotherhood] must understand that their work in America is kind of a grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and sabotaging its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God's religion is made victorious over all other religions. [...] It is a Muslim's destiny to perform Jihad and work wherever he is and wherever he lands until the final hour comes."
A Diversified Opposition to the Muslim Brotherhood
If we needed a convincing proof that opposing the Muslim Brotherhood does not equate to the ostracising of Muslims in general, it came from none other than Muslims themselves on the very day that Le Devoir published Phyllis Lambert and Serge Joyal's letter.
In the July 13th edition of La Presse, an article from France-Presse reports that several groups of Jordanian women opposed a bill promoted by the local Muslim Brotherhood branch which seeks to allow the marriage of 15 year old girls while maintaining the minimal age to 18 for boys. The Jordanian women opposed to the bill argue that legalizing the marriage of very young girls equates to legalising rape. Hamman Said, the local Jordanian Muslim Brotherhood leader, replied that "shariah law allows marriage under the age of 18 if the spouses have reached a certain level of maturity." He also added that "disastrous consequences" await women who "adopt the ways of Western education".
It was also by invoking shariah law that in the past the Muslim Brotherhood opposed criminal penalties for fathers who kill their daughers. These reforms were promoted by Queen Rania of Jordan. It is a recognized principle of shariah law [notably in the Umdat al-Salik, Ahmad ibn Naqib al-Misri, Beltsville, Amana Publications, 1994, pp. 583-584] that a father cannot be punished for the murder of his children. This principle constitutes an endorsement of honour killing. Applying Islam as it was understood by Hassan al-Banna, applying shariah leads to this as well.
Several opponents of the totalitarian ideals of the Muslim Brotherhood are Muslims and former Muslims who have seen firsthand the damage caused by the application of Islamist principles. At Point de Bascule, Muslims like Tarek Fatah and Salim Mansur have helped us understand the subtleties of the Islamist threat.
The Mosques, Our Barracks
In his book Auspices of the Ultimate Victory, Youssef al-Qaradawi explains that the success of his variety of Islam in the West was the result of the groundwork brought about by the Muslim Brotherhood and the contributions in petrodollars by Gulf state billionaires. The mosques used as advance bases for the Muslim Brotherhood in order "to destroy from within the Western civilization" are often built with the financial backing of governments that domestically persecute those who do not share their religious beliefs. It is likely that the Montreal project has benefited from such foreign contributions.
In these circumstances, we must keep in mind that the opening of a mosque controlled by the Muslim Brotherhood in downtown Montreal is part of the program that was laid out by their ally, the Turkish Prime Minister, Recep Erdogan who declared a few years back: "The mosques are our barracks, the domes our helmets, the minarets our bayonets and the faithful our soldiers..."
* Phylllis Lambert is an architect and the founder of the Canadian Center For Architecture based in Montreal.
** Serge Joyal is a senator and a former minister in the Canadian government.
Link
Labels: Islam, Montréal, Tania Tokarski
Sunday, July 11, 2010
The most insidious racial attacks, one you probably never see, by Francis Chartrand
The most cunning of racial attacks, one you probably never see.
Well, my comment now.
Saturday evening July 3, me and my wife went to see the fireworks at La Ronde in Montreal. We were at Bellerive Park, along the St. Lawrence River, and the performance was given by Portugal, a 45-minute fireworks show. The crowd was large as 300 000 people at the Park, 200 000 on the Jacques Cartier Bridge.
On the way back we walk on St. Catherine, for at Papineau and Beaudry metro stations, there is an hour wait to enter the subway too many people, of course. So we thought that would do better to join the Berri UQAM station.
In return, Tania I expressed it a craving. She hesitates between the Pizza Pizza, corner St. Catherine and St. Timothy and St. Hubert restaurant, corner St. Catherine and Amherst. We want to sit comfortably, we opt for the second option. We ordered a "hot chicken" each, plus a line of wine. A very good Chardonnay from Argentina, which I do not remember the name unfortunately. Everything is going well so far, and we pay our bill to 23: 45.
Later, she seeks a McDonald's, we later found corner St. Catherine and St. Christopher, to buy a McFlurry, you know, the blizzard at Dairy Queen. It is used by a ... how should we say? A girl, color, black. She served in what can probably deduct the fifth containing the normal, saying that it is the normal serving, plus she said she has stirred.
Me, I almost never go at McDonald's, too busy to go get something to eat at Harvey's restaurant, the Dairy Queen, restaurant 25th at St. Eustache or the concession stand of Deux-Montagnes, but hey, I did not know not even know what was a McFlurry. So I do not know how to treat her: dirty fucker, cursed woman, fucking thief full of shit, fucking bitch, fucking dirty immigrant, not there I'd be racist.
In this McDonald's, there were many blacks and gays, so I had to shut the fuck up, because you know, I go often to the barricades, when I do not jump it. I preferred whining two blocks away, once we would leave the Gay Village, because I do not know what to say in the restaurant. I imagined, these African-Americans turn into cannibals and these gays turn into cannibals gays, just across from the Circus After Hour, making us spit in the ass, Tania and I, we crunching an apple the mouth, singing "Hakuna Matata" and trampling the flag of Quebec.
I do not even silly. That's what happens when you see hordes of wild African Americans, when we know that now, street gangs from the east of Montreal practice voodoo rituals in addition of deviants of religion of origin, which on behalf of their sexual orientation, practice neo-paganism. When I think of all those hordes of Haitians who fled Papa Doc and Baby Doc and have integrated less than 5 years ...
But hey, times change and people too. Therefore, the next day I decided to contact McDonald to get information or to make clarifications on the nature of this incident, willing or unwilling, or lack of productivity to my girlfriend.
I call in late morning. And I speak to the manager of the service in question, explaining that when I was in a restaurant, a girl asked a McFlurry, and the waitress at the counter serves in what can probably deduct the fifth containing the normal saying that it is the normal serving, plus she said she has shaken.
He answers the most amazing thing ever heard at McDonald:
- Ah yes, the damn fucking white trash girl, wah, wah, wah, she made shit and she wanted more, too bad the girl was frustrated. In addition, she made a delay made all the customers.
I replied:
- Because, you see, the damn fucking white trash girl in matter is my wife, fucking tabarnac! To treat my wife as 'white', you're what color?
- Haiti, why?
- Because you've just been busted in the act of racism, anti-white racism but racism is the same. In addition, according to you, there are two races, two colors of people, in Montreal, Quebec and Haiti? To say that I gaved to your country after the earthquake, that I marched against the coup against Jean-Bertrand Aristide, say that I walked for the family of Marcellus François. Don't call me a racist.
- I don't give a fuck, man, it don't prevent you to be a race full of shit, you're never happy, you always want more, more, and more. And you want us to integrate into your culture, when you're unable to see that you live in North America? Fuck you, goddamn Quebec!
- I never said that, I'm talking a proper service with an adequate amount, I will not talk about your roots, you have been racist against my wife.
- Go get it in Laval, your proper service with an adequate amount. You seem shit for me. And you think Canadians and Alouettes are sports, man. Fuck you, man, I am anxious that you go fuck yourself in reserves that we can sterile yourself. You Quebecers will be the only people exterminated in self defense.
- That's the respect you give to your home land?
- I don't give a shit of my home land, I don't give a fuck of borders, "No one is illegal" you know? It does not exist illegal immigrants. Fuck borders. And people who do not deserve to live, I'll kill them!
- Hmmmr hmmmr!
Then comes a moment of silence after I coughed a bit to calm him, and I quote:
- You've just been busted in the act of racism, anti-white racism, but racism is the same for the second time. I'll hang up and I'll call the police.
I contacted the police of the City of Montreal (CMPS), and tell me that I was right to complain. I spoke to two policemen, one from Quebec and one of Haitian descent, who is of Haitian origin advised me not to visit the McDonald's in downtown Montreal, or even Burger King or Buffalo Wings, as he says, the "Negroes" who work there are sometimes racist.
He told me that often the Haitian community make him shame with his gang and I quote again, his "escaped from the container" spitting on the Quebec because we do not walk the streets with 12 gauge and machetes, as Haitians in Montreal is no longer found in their community, like the time when Haitians were rescued from the murderous regime of Papa Doc and Baby Doc.
He also said that I had to hold my ground and do not let me walk around by whatever the ethnic community, for having built the police as well as his family and, in less than a generation, other immigrants can do it is only a matter of will.
He even found a philosophy that I share, it is not Quebecers that should be assimilated to multiculturalism. Multiculturalism is not so bad, but mainly leads to sectarianism and ethnic isolationism. If all immigrants fit to Quebec nationalism with the help of Quebecers, not just ethnic families will experience a better fate, but the people of Quebec will be more appreciated and respected throughout the world. We could all go out a united nation.
Labels: Francis Chartrand, Haiti, Montréal, Tania Tokarski
Wednesday, June 30, 2010
The well-being, by Tania Tokarski
The well-being. This translates into several factors. Ensuite, on atteint le second palier qui est… It must meet the physical, such as, eating, sleeping, drinking, shit (haha, I took this joke to you, professor.) Then we reached the second level which is ...
Oh, damn! I will speak again of love. That's why I started with the well-being. Mutual love = happiness, is not it? But me, I'm happy. You make the link?
His name is Francis.
He is interested in politics, history. He lectures to children. He always has something interesting to say. He has strong views and has not stopped the language in his pocket, which earned him many problems that persist today. I try to advise as best I can. It helps me feel more useful. He is a man whose problems stem in part from his mouth too much, but perhaps especially his lack of interest in his personal appearance. The advice that I lavished on him will increase its social image, I'm sure. The first impression is often important when doing interviews or being acquainted with a stranger. That's what I managed to make him understand. In turn, he teaches me to be less sensitive. It also support me in difficult times. When I was in love problems, he advised me with kindness. He did not give the kind of negative sentences whose goal was to make me lose interest in the person that I coveted to see only my interlocutor. He was not trying to make me really love. He wanted above all my well-being, and advised me to this goal.
I love him. I have great hope in him. We are both keen to make our society better, through the intervention, of course. Not only our career is something we have in common, but we also want to have children one day.
I love you, Francis.
Labels: Tania Tokarski
Love, by Tania Tokarski
Well, this week, I still want to let off steam, so, let's go, since it makes me feel good. The subject this time is love.
Love. * Sigh * It's so beautiful. It is made into songs, in fact poems (which is just the same as in the songs, there's poetry. D'uh!) We make a lot of other things, books, soap operas, we found in adventure movies. Besides, I do not know if it's Leonardo da Vinci himself, who said "A life without love is no life." Ouch! If we are not loved, hello suicide. That said, I know friends who lack love to cause havoc in their lives. I will elaborate in the next paragraph.
My life has not been easy, but as I discovered, you can say the same for the life of most people. My main problem with me was my integration in the school. In kindergarten, I was a child friendly, but shy. I liked being with other children, but I had probably not the right technique to approach them. This has continued throughout my high school, with its complications. A person who in misery to make friends will be alone, alone it is more vulnerable. And teens attack vulnerable children. All my high school I was ridiculed. I was afraid to go to school, I threw food, and when I defended myself and was angry, it made things worse, I looked ridiculous to carry me in any stuttering against several teenagers agile lips. Result: I fell back on myself. I was afraid to say my word. I was afraid to be noticed. In life, I came to believe that I would never have friends, probably being socially incompetent in a world that does not want me. That thought changed when I known love. Someone noticed me. A friend first, made in secondary 2. She loved video games, too. Then, a boy who liked me a lot and I liked that too, secretly, over time. Love, its acquisition and research have always thrilled me something. And that's what keeps me busy. But it has not been the same for everyone.
My other friend, whom I will not name the name here, has had a life, perhaps even harder than mine. Unwanted child, he sought love and approval of his father. In vain. This caused havoc with his approach to love. The love he sought and which caused him much trouble by his absence has made him a being who has learned to live without. They say we can not give what we have not received. Well, despite his efforts, his girlfriend could not receive what she was willing to give.
She had heard that the evils of the heart could be healed only by the intervention of another. For the love be a give and receive. Knowing that love had made a great fool for his opinion, this girl tried to give and to receive his friend. But in vain. However, she remained confident managing to open a small window to another (or herself) tries again to heal this young man, one day, when he would be ready. Hopefully he will accept to trust this person and she does not destroy.
Labels: Tania Tokarski
Monday, March 08, 2010
Humor, by Tania Tokarski
I want to start this diary speaking of humor.
Humor is not the same for everyone; some who find jokes about "not pretty" fun, other drug funny ... that worse, some may not like being ridiculed in any class in favor of the joy of others! No, but it's true! Be challenged by someone you do not know, because three minutes late, and get yelled at as if it was a major fault status is beyond me. How can I find it funny? How can we ask to see, or to undergo such a 'show'? The purpose of humor is also to make people laugh, and laugh, he must be happy. However, we can not laugh when we try to integrate and be accepted as the first reception one receives is that of a bear licked badly in need of teacher attention!(Sorry, dear teacher. You said that you could insult. Hi hi, I apologize.)
Following this unfortunate episode, I met a student who had had a similar experience unfortunately because it was, too, arrived late in the course. This is understandable when we do not yet know the College and it is in its first week in which he must locate themselves. Having each recounted our misfortunes to another, we decided, although I felt some discomfort, to complain to the Head of Department of Sociology. He was very attentive to our requests and assured them that the professor was not at all bad, but did not argue the fact that he had perhaps gone too far. (After a joke that hurts, usually you apologize, he did not.)
In any case brief. In short, this story ends where I wanted not to have gone to see the teacher talk with him before coming to his 'boss', so to speak. So, chance would have it sometimes, we met the teacher and I arrived toward the elevator. He was unaware of the harm he had done and assured he would try to be calmer in his outbursts of passion. *laugh*
Finally, I like it. Fortunately, the communication exists.
Labels: Tania Tokarski
Wednesday, February 24, 2010
Sexual Abstinence: side effects?, by Tania Tokarski
Abstinence and chastity shade
According to the Web encyclopedia Wikipedia, sexual abstinence (or abstinence) is the "non-use of the genitals for sexual activity." The significance of the most usual being in a relationship with another individual, but also includes masturbation. They do not necessarily choose abstinence. Chastity, she wants a lifestyle choice, religious conviction or desire for spiritual uplift, for example.
Implications
In terms of sexuality, there are very few standards. Therefore it is difficult to establish a precise list of "harm" that may result from lack of sexual activity with a partner. For although some studies claim that sex is good for health, sleep quality and even IQ, we must keep in mind that sexuality is not lived only two: an orgasm solo bring the same benefits biological an orgasm for two. Must still be comfortable with the pleasures alone! Psychologically, however, abstinence can have some impact will vary from one single to another. "In periods of prolonged abstinence, I feel tense, and this, both physically and psychologically," says Cynthia, 30. "I have less concentration, I feel more anxious or aggressive. "
But all women do not react as Cynthia. According to Josée Leboeuf, clinical sexologist and psychotherapist, sustained abstinence can bring out in each person the "weaknesses" already present in his personality. For example, if you tend to depreciate, depress, to get excited or isolated, abstinence is likely to amplify these traits. One thing is certain: we forget the belief that persons abstinent for a long time might develop deviant!
Other consequences: some women are afraid of not knowing what to do, believe that their talents are lovers lost forever. A belief can be a real obstacle. "I'm afraid to resume a sex life and that hinders me in my efforts to meet somebody," said Nathalie. Finally, physically, a woman may be more difficult to lubricate and feel pain during penetration after several months of abstinence.
Link
Labels: Sex, Tania Tokarski
Thursday, February 11, 2010
The height of the doubt, by Tania Tokarski
4 brothers visit Australia for the first fois.En dismounting, they perceived their first sheep he is black.
The first said: "All sheep in Australia are black."
The second responds: "But no! We have not seen the others. It simply means that there is a majority for a few black sheep white sheep in Australia. "
The third fix: "Having not seen the other sheep, may have only conclude that there is at least one black sheep across Australia."
The fourth said: "I, all I can say is that I saw in Australia, a sheep whose left side is black."
-----
Believe it or not, is the fourth method adopter.Ensuite need a site has been submitted and it is titled "Skeptics of Quebec." Where several items are discussed in all their corners.
While it is true that we should not believe everything you read, and to always push the research further (to check with several sources, the veracity of the facts on which it falls) it is an exaggeration that we can not simply rely on the logic of things.
Labels: Human mistake, Tania Tokarski
Monday, November 23, 2009
Subsequently, by Tania Tokarski
Well this week I still feel like venting so let them, because it makes me feel good. The subject this time is love.
Love. * sigh * It's so beautiful. We made songs, in fact poems (which is just the same as in the songs, there's poetry. D'uh!)
It also makes many other things, books, soap operas, we found in adventure movies. Besides, I do not know if Leonardo himself who said "A life without love is no life." Ouch! If we are not desired, hello suicide. That said, I know friends who lack love to wreak havoc in their lives. I will elaborate in the following paragraph.
Me, my life has not been easy, but as I discovered, we can say the same for the life of most people. My main problem with me was my integration in schools. In kindergarten, I was a child sociable but shy. I liked being with other children, but I'd probably not good technique for approaching.
This has lasted throughout my high school, with its complications. A person in misery to make friends will be alone, only she is more vulnerable. Then teens attack vulnerable children. All my high school I was ridiculed. I was afraid to go to school, food was thrown at me, and when I defended myself and get angry, it made things worse, I looked ridiculous to carry me all in stuttering against several teenagers agile lips. Result: I fell back on myself. I was afraid to say my word. I was afraid of being noticed.
In life, I came to believe that I would never have friends, probably being socially incompetent in a world that does not want me. That thought changed when I had known love. Someone noticed me. A friend first, made in secondary 2. She loved video games, too.
Then, a boy who I like a lot and who liked me too, secretly, over time. Love, its acquisition and research have always thrilled me something. And that's what keeps me busy. But it has not been the same for everyone.
My other friend, I will not name names here, had a life, perhaps even harder than mine. Unwanted child, he sought love and approval of his father.
In vain. This has caused havoc on his approach to love. The love he sought and which caused so much harm by its absence has made him a being who has learned to live without. They say we can not give what we do not have. Well, despite her efforts, his girlfriend has not got what she was willing to give.
She had heard that the evils of the heart could be healed through the intervention of another. By the love that somebody give and receive. Knowing that love had done good for her self esteem, this girl tried to give and to receive from her friend. But in vain.
However, she remained confident managing to open a small window that another (or herself) can try again to heal this young man one day when he would be ready. Let's hope that he will accept to trust this person and that does not destroy him.
Tania Tokarski
Labels: Tania Tokarski
Thursday, November 12, 2009
I have much to say, by Tania Tokarski
What kind of future stakeholders will be trained to deal with our drug addicts, prisoners and elders? It is a question whose answer I am afraid.
At CEGEP du Vieux Montreal, it teaches students to break down prejudices as the belief that the poor is his fault, or track information converged. While this is commendable CVM other prejudices are encouraged.
It maintains and reinforces these beliefs:
Women are the only victims of society (feminization and victimization.) According to the study books, men and today still prevents their female counterparts to reach the pinnacle of their rights. Presumably, it encourages women to hate men rather than trying to become their equal.
Moreover, in all the paperwork done for women, speaks very little trouble experienced men. Women, although they have still not equal pay to men, were undoubtedly many benefits, women are much more community resources than men, they will be welcomed and heard much more easily in a center for battered women. They may also have access to more choices of life to stay home or work. Unless you want to go for soft-side, men do not have that choice.
Of course, it remains only 33% of men in our College, and the CVM (Cégep du Vieux Montréal) recognizes that it is partly due to the type of education provided. Maybe if they favored an approach for the men, we would find more of them in our classroom.
Another prejudice, the speaker should not create links with its customers because they would mix his private life. Sniff-sniff ... I feel contempt towards helping? A young student, to my question, even launched "There is not a dating agency!" Wow. What a diplomacy. Bravo to the touch, my dear! What will happen when a senior will ask you a question, while looking confused? You mock him?
Another said to the class: "Of course, we can not be friendly with the people because it should be treated ... not as numbers, but ... uh ... you know what I want say! *laughs*" If you can not find your words, my dear, I must say that your answer does not really reassure me.
Then, only one graduate from the university can not only judge, but can suppose that a person is suffering from a psychological illness. A graduate who is not from the University will be persued to have said his professional opinion. Aah! So before it was the church that was right about everything now, it would be the University. I do not know about you, but I do not imagine that a Stakeholder who had special relationships with people experiencing suicidal thoughts - that people would confide in workshops to exchange and meeting individual - that the Stakeholder, therefore, may not set the probability of depression, only a psychologist can do this verdict.
Worse! A family whose father is isolated with him for years, who rub shoulders every day and knows his temper better than anyone can say that his father suffers from depression. Worse! The person himself who suffers, can not say to her employer that she was depressed "without consulting the psychologist." Between you and me, who knows best which bugs we live with, most of the time? Us or another? This is not only problematic for the right of speak.
Let us not forget that the stakeholder, even if he chooses his words well, will be persued for saying the possibility of a depression to his client. The problem is also time to file transfers. How long does it take to make an appointment with a Stakeholder? Months? Good.
And then, when we had this meeting with Stakeholder, him, after hearing our story, he referred us to a psychologist. It will take months before the first appointment with Mister Shrimp. And Mister Shrimp, of course, will charge, while the CLSC will not. We must not only be fucking patient to be treated, but we must pay. Forgive me, but people have time to get fed up and drop the proceedings pending, and / or worsen their situation with all that lost time. Think about it. Offer more flexibility to Stakeholders and makes you less time waiting, because there will be more caregivers.
The victim is totally innocent. While it encourages the victim to exonerate himself, as in a rape, it also directs the thought of "everything is white and everything is black" - there is only one culprit. I feel frustration at dawn the enemy, and more frustration leads to more aggressivity, resulting in more violence.
Physical violence is worse than emotional abuse. Ooh. Believe me, this is not true. Physical violence is simply less subtle than psychological abuse, both are scars, the first external scars, the second internal wounds which sometimes leads to suicide or murder. Be treated any time good for nothing by anyone, do you think is less worse than receiving a punch in a boxing match? I let you think about it.
A person who cries all the time, who never leaves her house, who has suicidal thoughts, but has not committed the act of suicide attemp is not a priority. I know from experience that these signs are a harbinger of depression. So, will it always wait until the situation worsens to intervene? But then, the risk of being too late increases. And indeed, in our courses, they have taught us that in general if a young person is abandoned by his parents in the care and affection they lavished on him, if he does not receive help before the adolescence, it can not create any links with anyone. His sense of commitment will be irrevocably dead.
Knowing this, why then create a priority list? It seems that encourages people to maintain their sores to keep jobs in the health system. More the sore becomes, the more it is long to heal, the more Mister Shrimp The Little Fucker psy will fill the pockets with long hours of rehabilitation.
After hearing these statements, I tried to discuss the matter with the teachers and see them I just did not understand. Unfortunately not. Though encouraging among stakeholders the right for error, one of the values we are taught with the assistance and commitment, teachers have refused to glimpse the possibility that they are wrong to think so.
If this offends me as much, it is because we are taught to think before you swallow the information that seem plausible, but when consideration is made, we must believe what the authority figure says. I just do not understand.
That was all from me. - Other reviews will follow.
Sincerely,
Tania Tokarski, future stakeholder among other branch full of shit.
Labels: Bottle state, Human mistake, Québec, Tania Tokarski
Subscribe to Posts [Atom]