Category: Miscellaneous

Currently listening to: “Camping Ste-Germaine” – Les Cowboys Fringants

In my previous post, I mentioned reading two books lately, one of which was reviewed and discussed in the last entry. After having rambled about blogging earlier, today’s entry focuses on university education…of sorts. Having briefly flipped through The Unlikely Disciple at work the other day, I was intrigued. The concept is simply quite funny in and of itself. Kevin Roose, previously an Ivy League university student, takes on a semester at Liberty University, America’s holiest evangelical Christian university, in order to gain an insight into this growing youth demographic, and writes this tell-all exposé of his exploits there.

I find this book particularly fascinating because it opens up an entirely different can of worms altogether. Consider this: an entire university where courses, residence guidelines, students’ behaviour, even political affiliation, is based on fundamentalist Christian doctrine. Founded by Dr. Jerry Falwell (who holds socially reprehensible views on issues such as terrorism and homosexuality – Google him, he’s either adored or despised), Liberty University is a veritable bastion of the Christian Right (in fact, one part of the book mentions how not a single liberal or socialist is hired there). If any other religion tried to open up a school in the States proclaiming that the purpose of the school was to encourage fundamentalist [whatever-religion-it-is] doctrine, espousing specific political views, it would probably meet with intense disapproval and scrutiny from most parts of government and society. Yet here Liberty University stands, every aspect of the institution linked to Christian moral and doctrinal views. Roose starts off the book with a bleakly humourous anecdote about a dorm mate who risks expulsion for partying. Yes, all aspects of students’ lives, including hair length, relationships, and political affiliation, are to adhere to “Christian doctrine”. Failure to meet “expectations” results in demerits and monetary fines. Now that’s not even quite as terrifying as a particularly frightening chapter, where Spring Break takes the students proselytizing at Daytona Beach to Spring Break partiers from other universities, ranting about their souls and eternal damnation (a very reluctant Roose follows along and endures reprimands from his fellow students about not being hardcore).

Roose then goes into descriptions of some of the courses he is taking – a mixture of Christian morality and Western philosophy, Creation Studies. And then some. Add to that residence life – dorm RAs who give reprimands for using the word “hell” in a non religious context, gay-bashing en masse, and the rush to get married within the undergraduate population – but wait, he is torn! How can all this co-exist with perfectly delightful people who have ambitions of their own, and who have done nothing but treat him with utmost kindness? And most importantly, does Roose return to Brown University with a changed perspective? Read the book to find out. It is brilliantly-written and articulate – not to mention terrifying and hilarious, all at the same time. Yes, you will rant and you will rave; you will laugh and cry and maybe you might be so irate you’d throw down the book in a fit of rage. But oh, so funny.

Currently listening to: “The Fear” – Lily Allen

Two books I’ve read in the past bit, the first on blogging, and the second one on university education (of sorts). Both rather appropriate for this medium, I think. Today I’ll talk about the first one; in a few days, I shall blog about the second.

Sheeple: Caucus Confidential in Stephen Harper’s Ottawa

As a blogger, it comes without saying that I am wholly responsible for the material I choose to post on my blog. In this age where everyone is a writer and critic by virtue of ability to read and type, bloggers can face opposition from varied sources, ranging from your neighbour’s twelve-year-old trawling on the Internet to politicians crying foul. Yes, whatever I choose to post has implications, and I should be held accountable for what I choose to write. But keep in mind that I have the freedom to speak my mind, say what is my own opinion, unfettered by others. I’m not torn between being responsible to two (sometimes very conflicting) parties.

But what about politicians? Should politicians’ blogs be held responsible to the ideas of their fellow party members, or to the electorate? Follow Garth Turner, ex-Conservative MP’s story as he is the “first politician in Canada, possibly the world” to be fired for his blog. Detailing caucus meetings, the Conservative Party’s stance on various subjects, Turner’s book presents a perspective which is unabashedly his own, unrestrained by the Party Whip – and sometimes entirely contrary to the opinions championed by the rest of his party – which leads to “talks” with the Prime Minister, being called “dangerous” and “renegade” by his fellow Conservative MPs, and the eventual judgement by his peers to have him kicked out of caucus. Subsequently, follow his exploits as an Independent, and later a member of Stephane Dion’s Liberal campaign.

On one hand, politicians are bound to the gears and cogs of, well, partisan politics. There isn’t enough room for renegade ideas. The need to present a unified front in the media is pressing. Meanwhile, democracy is undermined in the process – we’re supposed to be representing people here, real live citizens, not simply ideals built out of roundtable talks! On the other hand, politicians should be representing their electorate’s wishes. Blogging enables politicians to engage with the grassroots base – just look at the massive numbers of politicians with Twitter (congresspeople in the US Twittering at the State of the Union, what) – and the number of people who follow their accounts, engaging with them in real time, giving them feedback – blunt, honest feedback about laws being passed, ideas being tossed around, et cetera. But what happens when the wishes of the people run contrary to political motivations? More often than not, it seems that political games are being played at the expense of ordinary people who try to encourage change. And for a politician to engage in that – well, in Mr. Turner’s case, it would appear that the price to pay for going contrary to the well-oiled political and media machine was termination.

For the most part, I enjoyed this book for its political relevance and straightforwardness. There are definitely moments where Turner seems to drop into martyred self-pity, but for the most part, it is highly relevant and provides an insider’s perspective of partisan politics at its ugliest.