“Being spiritual but not religious can lead to complacency and self-centeredness,” says Martin, an editor at America, a national Catholic magazine based in New York City. “If it’s just you and God in your room, and a religious community makes no demands on you, why help the poor?”

via Are there dangers in being ‘spiritual but not religious’? – CNN.com.

Um, thanks but no thanks, CNN. I’m going to go out on a limb here and suggest that the relationship between community giving and religious affiliation was decoupled long ago. Articles like these are what I call “pandering” not journalism. Who’s asking “Is there danger in being Religious but not Spiritual?” I think that question should be higher in the minds of the quoted catholics and Jesuits.

Tony Blairs “cool Britannia,”epitomized by hedge fund managers, Russian oligarchs and media stars, offered little to the working and middle classes. Despite its proletarian roots, New Labour, as London Mayor Boris Johnson acidly notes, has presided over that which has become the most socially immobile society in Europe.

via The Future Of Americas Working Class | Newgeography.com.

A very interesting perspective on how economic growth in the post-millennial western world is defined by a hollowing out of the middle, the consolidation of the super-wealthy, and the growth of a large, working-poor class. And, all of it is wrapped up neatly in a bow of complete social immobility.

It might be cliche to sound the call of the “rich get richer while the poor get poorer,” or it might be anti-conservative to suggest that there’s a policy agenda that should speak to mobility. But, having spent time in places like Bangladesh, Indonesia, or Mexico, I can attest to the value of social mobility. In fact, I would go so far as to say that the notion of “freedom” to which we vigilantly cling as conservatives is best reflected by social mobility, or “opportunity.” The freedom to take risks and strive for a greater future, the freedom to take risks, fall flat on one’s face, and be able to pick themselves up again. Each of these freedoms is dependent on access to capital, healthcare, and education, and a social net to some degree – making the each of these – capital, health, education, and welfare – fundamentally conservative values, in as much as they support the most conservative value of all – freedom of social mobility.

There’s a fine line, of course, between creating a state in which social mobility is a driving force, and creating a welfare state. Britain appears to be struggling to find that balance, with immigration and the widely available dole wreaking havoc on their social contract.

Perhaps worse that the effects of immigration and welfare policy, however, is the corrosive dissolution of manufacturing industries. This is something that I’ve observed in my travels. The Middle Class, as we know it, is the product of reasonably well-paid manufacturing jobs – a class of employment that drove our economies through the fifties, up until the late eighties. Countries that have never had such an industrial leg up on creating a middle class inevitably stagnate at an equilibrium comprised of a wealthy elite and impoverished masses. That’s where our western economies are headed today – the loss of those jobs is corrosive to our social contract and mobility. When the middle class can no longer afford to perpetuate itself, you’re left with Bangladesh, or Rio de Janeiro.

That’s not to say that western cities are going to turn into Rio over night – though some might argue that its happening already (see: Safer in Baghdad than Chicago). Regardless, I believe as conservatives we have an obligation to forward a policy agenda that cognizant of the value of small government, but also not forgetful of the “freedoms” on which our continued success, failures, happiness, and mobility are dependent.

SANDY SPRINGS, Ga. – A fourteen-year-old autistic boy is facing terrorist charges after a sketch he made in school.

via Autistic Boy Charged With Making Terrorist Threats Over Stick-Figure Sketch.

So far this year, 113 people have been killed across Chicago, the same number of U.S. troops killed in Iraq and Afghanistan combined in the same period, Fritchey said.

via 2 Chicago state reps: Bring in the National Guard – Chicago Breaking News.

Wow – every once in a while, a well-framed statistic will put the plight of America into perspective. The poor areas of Chicago are the perfect storm of urban decay, neglect of social services, poverty cycles, and violent sub-cultures. Given how rarely the worlds of the poor and affluent overlap in the States, perhaps a call to action as severe as inviting in a branch of the armed forces is what it takes to galvanize the people with the political and financial resources to effect change.

Karokhail is one of many Afghan women who see a double standard in efforts by some European nations to outlaw face veils and burqas — a move they say restricts a Muslim woman's choice in countries that otherwise make a fuss about personal rights.

via European push to ban burqas appalls Afghan women | Reuters.

Its complicated, I know. I don’t want to ban balaclava’s either. That being said, when an immigrant culture’s tradition erodes the traditions of a nation’s incumbent culture, is there a point where banning a such tradition would be considered OK?

What does a burqa represent to you?

“A newspaper article gives you such a shallow understanding of the events that occurred at City Hall,” said recently elected Tuscaloosa, Ala., mayor Walter Maddox. “A television story is 30 seconds if you are lucky. Through our website, through Facebook, through MySpace and Twitter, we can provide a more detailed and compelling message to the voters of why we are making a certain policy decision. [PBS]

I found this PBS article on the blog of a fellow Manitoban, which I stumbled across on Twitter:

“During my commute this morning, I noticed a section of our street “under construction”. The street was closed off. I have no idea what they are doing. And why. It occurred to me that I’m no longer satisfied in “letting things happen to me”. Perhaps I’m influenced too much by participatory technologies, but I like to know what’s happening my community. Who decided this road should be repaired? Why? How long will it take? What other priorities were shelved as a result? Not-knowing is not acceptable.” [Elearnspace]

That’s a powerful statement: not-knowing is not acceptable. That’s an audience of ready-made evangelists and tech-savvy, politically-engaged voters that the CPC should be working to connect with. They’re in your community, down your street, in the car next to you on the morning commute. You don’t see them doing it, but they weild weight in their communities, online and off. How are we reaching them?

Edit: I shared Scary’s post on Reddit, which is always seems to stir up good debate.

There are many arguments in support of banning the burka that, at first blush, are convincing. The burka is not proscribed by the Koran or mainstream Islam. Many consider the garment to be symbolic of oppression; the woman within has no identity, no contact with the outside world. Some call it a “prison”, enslaving its wearer to her husband. These are an affront to the values of Western nations, Canada included.

None of these arguments, though, present a transgression of recognized human rights as long as burka fashion is voluntary. In other words, if someone wants to wear it, why shouldn’t she (or even he) be allowed to? More importantly, if someone truly feels that they have a religious duty to wear it, then we also risk trampling on another freedom, that of religion…

…Sarkozy has the right to condemn the Burka, even when speaking as the representative of the French people. I would even argue that he has the duty, since a vast majority find the practice to be repulsive. He should not, however, seek to use the powers of the state to compel women to dress a certain way in public, contrary to their religious beliefs…

…For that would be forcibly taking these women from the only prison they know, and in the process subjecting all of us to a bigger prison – that of the nanny-state.

[Scary Fundamentalist]

I’m thoroughly against the nanny state. But – I’m aslo for effective, lightweight policy making to achieve meaningful social goals that the market might otherwise disregard.

The bottom line is that the to-the-consumer cost of bottled water will never adequately reflect the externalities that stem from its production, transportation, and disposal of waste – thus an opportunity for policy. Similar situation with catalytic converters on cars, or low flow shower heads.

I know that policy-making that restricts choice doesn’t comfortably fit into small-c conservative ideology, but as I’ve noted elsewhere, I’d argue that were at the juncture where “conservatism” needs to replace small government with smart government that serves conservative goals better in the longer term.

That is to say, I see something like banning bottled water as inherently conservative because it uses a simple policy tweak today to offset a future policy nightmare (environmental degradation).

[RodEdwards.ca]

…and because politics seems to speak so little to what they are going through – because they understand that politics today is a business and not a mission, and what passes for debate is little more than a spectacle – they turn inward, away from the noise and rage and endless chatter. [Barack Obama, The Audacity of Hope]

If the Liberals trigger an election Monday, I imagine even more Canadians will be alienated from our increasingly self-referential, navel-gazing, game-playing political system.

[Click it to expand]