Archive for the ‘Parliament of One’ Category

July 14, 2007
Filed Under (Parliament of One) by Mad Morten

Marijuana Leaf

On Tuesday, Senator Larry Campbell stirred the pot once more by proposing a reduction in the penalty for possession of marijuana. This because under current laws, the over 5 million Canadians who smoke marijuana are considered criminals, and if you are caught with the illicit substance, you get a criminal record, which prevents you from entering the United States. In his view, simple possession should be punished by a fine alone. Campbell also said that the government should take over the production and sale of marijuana: “Legalize it, tax the hell out of it and put the money into health care” was his bold suggestion. And with that, my respect for this otherwise wise man took a big blow. I’ll tell you why.

Read the rest of this entry »



July 07, 2007
Filed Under (Parliament of One) by Mad Morten

On the day of Al Gore’s global Live Earth Concerts, I thought it fitting to address a growing problem in modern politics, exemplified perfectly by the battle over global warming and the environment. I call it The Battle Between Ideals and Reality, but you might as well call it The Inconvenience of Science.

Unless you’ve been living in a cave for the last several years, you know what global warming is. You probably also know that there is an overwhelming consensus amongst scientists that our excessive CO2 emissions are largely to blame for climate change. One would think that with such conclusive evidence, everyone would be clamouring to buck the trend. Yet an alarming number of people still trivialize the issue and often contest the science with more or less dubious claims of conspiracies, alternate theories and blatant misinformation.

Plato looking smartThe battle over global warming is a perfect example of the clash between political ideals and harsh reality. The word “ideal” was used by the Ancient Greek philosophers Plato and Aristotle to define perfection itself. In their minds, the human quest was to get ever closer to that ideal in all aspects of life. Today’s definition is pretty much the same, although the principle of constantly evolving one’s theories to get closer to the ideal has been lost. Today’s idealism – political, religious or otherwise – has become dogmatic and those that follow it are more like a creed than a group of independent thinkers.

Political theory – or idealism – is not necessarily founded in reality and will not necessarily lead us toward a perfect world.

Read the rest of this entry »



June 30, 2007
Filed Under (Parliament of One) by Mad Morten

Last night, I watched the Val Kilmer and Robert Downey Jr. film Kiss Kiss, Bang Bang where this exchange took place:

Kilmer: If you open a dictionary and look up the word “Idiot,” do you know what you find?
Downey: A picture of me?
Kilmer: No, stupid. You find the definition of the word “Idiot!”

PollThat reminded me of something. When I was studying philosophy, my Greek professor told me the true meaning of the word “Idiot,” and based on that definition, over half of us are exactly that.

The title of this entry was originally “You’re an Idiot” because based on the last election, there is more than a 50% chance that you are one. Being called an Idiot is insulting isn’t it? It should be. Today, being an Idiot means you have bad judgment – that you are stupid. But that wasn’t always the case.

As in present day, the word “Idiot” was an insult to the ancient Athenians. The word stems from Greek and literally means “person lacking professional skill,” “a private citizen” or “individual.” The Athenians used it to label those who chose not to participate in the political decisions of their city – those so concerned with themselves they didn’t take the time to focus on the common good. The selfish. The egoists. The politically disinterested. And it is from this definition we find a label that fits more than half of us because over 60% of those eligible to vote, don’t.

There are many reasons for this, but most prevalent is the argument that it’s pointless; a waste of time. “One vote doesn’t make any difference” is the classic excuse. How horribly misinformed. In the 2000 US Presidential election, a couple of thousand votes were enough to set in motion what will go into the history books as the most disastrous political reign in the country’s history. In that election, the majority of US citizens stayed home, leaving others to decide their future. As a result, when George W. Bush put his hand on the Bible to take the office for the people, by the people, he was really only there representing half of one third of them. The remaining majority’s political views were ignored, not because they were black or poor or old or Democrats, but because they chose not to vote.

Our society and political system is built on the principle that instead of everyone participating in all political decisions, we elect representatives to do it for us. This is what’s called Parliamentarism – a group of people elected by the people are put in power to represent the views, ideals and principles of the people and make decisions on their behalf. But what happens when those in power are elected by a minority? We get a situation where the majority feels disconnected from the political decision making. This is what we have today. At the core of this problem lies not political corruption or apathy, but the simple fact that when the majority refrains from voting, the minority rules. And the minority usually has an agenda.

Choosing not to vote is like handing a wad of cash to a complete stranger and expecting a good return on the investment. An act only an Idiot would ever consider. Yet the majority not only do this, but feel that their action (or rather their lack of action) is justified. They claim that politicians are corrupt, that they don’t represent the people, that they do stupid things no matter what you vote for. Of all these claims, only one is true, and only because people are too self absorbed or ignorant to make their voices heard. What would happen if the entire adult population showed up at the polls and voted for the person they thought would do the most good for the country? It’s hard to say. But one thing is for sure: The political landscape would not look like it does today.

Mad Morten has no political affiliations and is in no way, shape or form, an Idiot. In an effort to convert all those who are, he will be offering a weekly step-by-step guide to full de-Idiotization.