Our website is best viewed using any internet
browser besides Mozilla Firefox versions 6.0 and later (some
users don't have problems). We recommend Google
Chrome, Internet Explorer, and earlier versions of Firefox
(go to "Help
- About Firefox" to know your version).
So, Victor... I agree... if you are talking about them ALL, including
the immoral bastards that precipitated the whole thing by being politically
stupid and strategically moronic and insensitive to the ways of the
British Parliamentary system.
They are ALL curs.
And Canadians who are reacting in a partisan way and ignoring the
whole burden of responsibility do not know what they are doing.
There is enough sin to go around to all of them.
I am sick of them all.
William Munsey
(Green Party)
Victor's reply:
Hi Will,
First of all, let me commend you for caring about
the environment. We care too; we have an organic farm – see
it at harvesthaven.com,
or better still, come and visit, seeing you are not all that far
away.
I must agree that there is sin everywhere. The Bible is clear
on that point and you are simply quoting the Scriptures, know it
or
not. We
are not naïve on that point.
However, sinners or not, God has
set in place those whom He has ordained. Allow me to avoid inventing
the wheel again. I will quote
what I
wrote to another, a colleague of yours:
“We observe this most common error being
made in this debate. While there were more votes for the coalition
parties than for Harper, there
were not more Canadian votes for them than him. By this I mean
that the Bloc Quebecois tips the balance in favor of the coalition,
but it was not elected
by Canada General, only Quebec, as avowed separatists. Therefore,
how can you and so many others fairly claim that a greater portion
of the
general Canadian electorate chose the coalition? It simply
is not true.
It has been a marvel to me from the start that
Canada would give antiCanadians power to legislate and decide the
future
of proCanadians. Now we have
a complication arising from the shortsightedness of those
who designed or tinkered with British Parliamentarianism. Personally,
it does not
matter to me if Quebec separates or not, and I do not see
them
as villains for wanting to do so. Of course, if men were
to unite, in righteousness,
unity would serve far better than division, duplication,
and competition, but it is the nature of man to be selfish and
self-centered until God
changes that, and He is and will.”
Here is where
the votes need to go now, Will (the Only Answer):
This is strange
and unreasonable to men, but true.
Victor
Will's first reply:
Dear Victor,
Thanks for your reply and unique analysis of the situation and for
your invitation to the farm. I'd be very interested in visiting.
Like you, I do not accept the concept "more people voted against
Stephen Harper and the Conservatives than voted for them" as a
moral basis for supporting this coalition. Does that surprise you?
I think when we get into the idea of voting AGAINST something, we
destroy democracy. It ought not to be about voting against ideas we
do not like, but voting for what we believe in. So here we are in agreement.
However, I don't see things purely your way either. I do not see coalition
governments as inherently wrong. What troubles me is that the Liberals
and New Democrats showed visceral hatred for one another during the
last election and the time running up to it. They gave NO indication
to Canadians that they could ever form a coalition and therefore, the
shock of them doings so feels like deception and opportunism to many
of us.
In fact, I believe coalitions--when we accept them as possibilities--are
good things. The possibility that parties may need one another in the
future will lessen the partisan animosity and childish behaviour our
political parties now exhibit. This difference will also prepare voters
for the idea that Party A and Party C have common ground. Party B must
then be slightly cautious not to outrage the others, even if it knows
it is stronger than either separately... but not stronger then the
combined opposition parties. Party B must then reach out to other participants
in the proces... or to either Party A or Party C.
Northern European countries often run by coalition. Denmark, Sweden,
Norway, Finland, Germany... these are examples where coalitions work
very well and result in stable governments. Switzerland has been run
by a coalition government since the 1950's and no one can say Switzerland
is unstable.
I can agree with your point about the Bloc. I do not want the Bloc
to be any part of any national coalition that has a final say in the
governance of the whole country. That said, I do not actually see the
Bloc as 'real' separatists but rather as a sort of "pressure valve" that
has helped us avoid increased separatist fervor. Quebecors get to vote
for a party they feels protects their interests in Canada and therefore
they do not have to actually seek sovereignty. Still, I cannot accept
them being part of a national coalition until they come out and say, "We
are not a sovereignty party anymore, but a Canadian party that simply
looks out for the interests of Quebec... WITHIN CANADA.
Don't get me wrong, I don't like the idea of regional parties. I believe
strongly in a united Canada, where our common bonds are stronger than
our regional differences and I hope our political parties will begin
to see that building us up as one nation is better than constantly
pitting us against one another.
My Canada includes Quebec. My Canada includes Alberta. My Canada includes
any and all with the desire to make this country better... more compassionate...
more inclusive... fairer... GREENER... more sustainable... on the national
front and the international front.
But when we refer to "anti-Canadian" interests, I also believe
what the Conservatives are doing RIGHT NOW is not in the best interests
of our collective future. A minority government MUST govern from the
centre. the three pieces of legislation they tried to pass in the Financial
Update were clearly partisan issues:
1) public political funding... while an issue for debate was a power
play to rid Canada of an opposition. Opposition is a intricate part
of our democracy and a way to allow even poor people who cannot donate
to political parties to have a way to contribute financially to the
government they believe in at the same time as exercising their franchise
to vote. It is actually a noble attempt to involve all levels of society
in our democracy. The argument that the money comes from "our
taxes" is erroneous. It comes from each and every individual vote
cast by Canadians for the party they believe in. Valuing a vote doesn't
seem wrong to me. $1.95 for democracy seems like good bargain. Some
countries pay voters to vote. Many in our country consider doing the
same thing. We might want to talk about the value of the vote, but
I think $1.95 is a good deal. In comparison to having a premature $350
million election (and breaking a law to call it)... them perhaps forcing
a new one less than two months later seems much more provocative and
wasteful to me than $1.95 for an actual vote.
2) taking away the collective right to negotiate wages and working
conditions for public servants. I know many conservatives feel the
right to strike is a terrible thing, but when no one in this country
has the right to act in concert with others who feel the same way about
issues, the danger of authoritarianism increases many folds. The right
to strike is a fundamental right in democracy and in a balanced capitalist
system. It is NOT socialism. It is not communism. It is democratic
and capitalist. That very right exercised over the last 120 years has
given us a five-day work week, fair and livable wages, retirement benefits,
the right to protest unjust firing... and many more things we consider
standards in employment policy.
3) the right for women to use the constitution to seek equal pay for
equal work. The idea that a government would seek to restrict the use
of the constitution for women to pursue this goal is absolutely frightening
to me and that is without even saying whether I even agree with the
goal. Stopping anyone from having access to the argument is WRONG and
uncharitable.
What caused this crisis is not the idea of coalition. What caused
this crisis was the aggressive behaviour of a government that simply
miscalculated what its minority government could get away with. It
was partisan politicking at its very worst.
The true crime here is that the idea of coalition is being spun by
some in this country as illegal... unconstitutional, undemocratic.
It is none of those things and in spinning it that way, the Conservatives
divide this country and set all sorts of ugliness in motion. Again,
we are being pitted against one another rather than being brought together.
All this wasted energy is so pointless.
You and I agree that the proposed coalition is unpalatable. We differ
(perhaps) in that I do not see coalitions as some sort of evil. I continue
to believe that this UNNECESSARY crisis was precipitated by Stephen
Harper and his party. His new tone proves to me that he understands
his mistake. I like the new conciliatory Stephen Harper. Where was
this charitable man two weeks ago? I like him better now, but the problem
is that you don't get "do-overs" in democracy. Sometimes
you have to wait for next time.
Now that they have realised their mistake, they have withdrawn the
three provocative pieces of legislation (an admission of the mistake)
and want another chance at governing. They went to the Governor General
and asked for a break and she gave it to them: a "do-over!" I
am of two minds whether that was a good idea and hold judgement off,
but the precedent of cancelling parliament when the government loses
trust with the majority of the ELECTED MPs in the democracy is a VERY
VERY scary thing. A list of countries that would do such a thing does
not read like a list of countries we really want to be compared to:
Zimbabwe, Algeria, Liberia, Poland (20 years ago under communism)...
AND yes, the comparison is apt.
When you write of "short sightedness" in potentially giving
the Bloc power over Canadian law, I wonder to myself why you don't
also refer to the short sightedness of failing to see the chaos all
this would cause or the coming divisiveness we will suffer as the country
tries to recover from the new feelings of separatism... both in Quebec
and the west. That is an equal (perhaps greater) short sightedness.
Finally, Victor, I know you are a man of strong Christian belief.
I believe myself to be a Christian as well. I think what we share is
a desire for Canada to be a fairer, more charitable nation. I do not
believe we can do that with the continued political partisanship we
now have from our political leaders.
While I do not support this coalition, I think coalitions are potentially
very good... depending on their make up. I think political brinksmanship
is our problem here. I think in this chaotic mess, we have seen clearly
that our collective political leadership (on every front) has lost
touch with what is best for Canada. If we are lucky,, patient and forgiving,
we will learn from this and become better.
I will visit the websites you gave me and look up your farm. Perhaps
we can have tea one day and try to convince each other in a civil and
Canadian way.
Thank you for your time, Victor.
William Munsey
Will's second reply:
Victor,
I've looked at your website. Wow, you have really built something
great on the land and I am definitely coming down... in the spring
probably.
I have great interest in the dandelion (didn't know that meant teeth
of lion). I loved the metaphor of the Dandelion and Jesus.
I'm glad to have stumbled across you, Victor, even if it took a political
crisis.
Again, I can't wait to come down and see your farm and learn about
dandelions. You will be happy to note I don't put chemicals on them
either... but haven't yet learned to love them. Maybe your metaphor
will help.
Regards,
William Munsey
Victor's reply to Will's first reply:
Hi Will,
I cannot help but agree with you on many points in your letter,
not because I am Canadian, but because I simply agree. However, we
have
some clarifications to make here.
You write: “You
and I agree that the proposed coalition is unpalatable. We differ
(perhaps) in that I
do not see
coalitions as some sort of
evil.”
Agree on the first statement, but I do not
differ with you at all about coalitions. I do not see coalitions
in principle as being
evil,
and I do not think it necessarily wrong for them to exercise
their power of numbers. You misunderstand, and no doubt others have
as well.
God has simply cursed this particular coalition at this particular
time.
One can speculate on why. I would say that above the fact
that the coalition began with the Bloc Quebecois, which is not there
in Canada’s
best interests as a whole, there were devious motives and hypocrisy
on the
parts of the others, but cloaked in a self-righteous garment
of selflessly serving Canada’s best interests.
As a man
of God, I felt His indignation within me and was moved to
curse, which rarely happens. Two others in the Lord immediately
agreed
with me. As Jesus said:
“Again I say to you that if two of you shall agree on earth
as regarding anything that they shall ask, it shall be done for them
by
My Father in Heaven. For where two or three are gathered together in My Name,
there I am in their midst” (Matthew 18:19-20 MKJV).
The
day the curse came forth (December 1), the situation turned
on a dime - one might say, miraculously. And it was a
miracle, if one defines a miracle as “something happening
with design, quite unexpectedly in many cases, beyond the
understanding, power, or will
of man.” Up to that time the Conservatives and Harper
were, for all intents and purposes, defeated, deflated,
sick, and finished. If
not openly, at least secretly they were wishing they had
never done what they did.
You write: “I
do not believe we can do that with the continued political
partisanship
we now have from our
political leaders.”
You are so right, and you
will never see that change for the better with men. The
Bible clearly teaches that all
men are
corrupt, Green
Party included. For the past six millennia, men have had
their opportunities to try their hand at governing themselves.
Nearly
three millennia
ago, the Hebrew prophet Jeremiah said this by the Spirit
of God:
“I know, GOD, that mere mortals can't run their own lives, that
men and women don't have what it takes to take charge of life. So correct
us, GOD, as You see best. Don't lose Your temper. That
would be the
end of us. Vent Your anger on the godless nations, who
refuse to acknowledge You, and on the people who won't pray to You--
The very ones who've
made hash out of Jacob, yes, made hash and devoured him
whole, people and pastures alike” (Jeremiah 10:23-25 MSG).
That
says it all, Will. And that is why we now preach not voting red,
blue, or even green, but White, the color that
Biblically
represents the holiness and righteousness of God in Christ
Jesus our Lord.
He is the Answer.
Read the links I gave you previously.
The Solution to all our troubles and problems is clearly expressed
in
those
articles. There is no
other way. You can also read our stories at
the site and see how we came to believe and know what
we do.
Victor
Victor's reply to Will's second reply:
Hi Will!
I am glad you appreciated what you discovered about us and our farm
- and about the dandelion! Yes, we have a veritable carpet of medicine
under our feet nearly everywhere, and people are treating it as one
of their worst enemies.
Did you notice that we process a dandelion root powder that people
have found and claimed to help them with many ailments, often times
many forms of cancer? Just half a teaspoon a day of dandelion root
powder with a bit of water helps cleanse the liver in one of the most
effective, natural ways known. Everybody can use a liver cleanse, many
most urgently. The powder is full of nutrients, many of which are not
found elsewhere, certainly not in the same combinations and ratios.
The leaves are great for salads – the Italians have used them
regularly in their culture – full of good stuff. Back
to basics, Will.