Epigenetics, the misunderstood science that could shed new light on ageing

Illustration by Philip Lay.

The study of the epigenome came with claims that trauma could be inherited, but now researchers are more excited about its potential to measure the risk of disease


Laura Spinney
Sun 10 Oct 2021

Alittle over a decade ago, a clutch of scientific studies was published that seemed to show that survivors of atrocities or disasters such as the Holocaust and the Dutch famine of 1944-45 had passed on the biological scars of those traumatic experiences to their children.

The studies caused a sensation, earning their own BBC Horizon documentary and the cover of Time (I also wrote about them, for New Scientist) – and no wonder. The mind-blowing implications were that DNA wasn’t the only mode of biological inheritance, and that traits acquired by a person in their lifetime could be heritable. Since we receive our full complement of genes at conception and it remains essentially unchanged until our death, this information was thought to be transmitted via chemical tags on genes called “epigenetic marks” that dial those genes’ output up or down. The phenomenon, known as transgenerational epigenetic inheritance, caught the public imagination, in part because it seemed to release us from the tyranny of DNA. Genetic determinism was dead.


A decade on, the case for transgenerational epigenetic inheritance in humans has crumbled. Scientists know that it happens in plants, and – weakly – in some mammals. They can’t rule it out in people, because it’s difficult to rule anything out in science, but there is no convincing evidence for it to date and no known physiological mechanism by which it could work. One well documented finding alone seems to present a towering obstacle to it: except in very rare genetic disorders, all epigenetic marks are erased from the genetic material of a human egg and sperm soon after their nuclei fuse during fertilisation. “The [epigenetic] patterns are established anew in each generation,” says geneticist Bernhard Horsthemke of the University of Duisburg-Essen in Germany.
The study of epigenetics seems to reinforce the case that it’s not nature versus nurture, but nature plus nurture

Even at the time, sceptics pointed out that it was fiendishly difficult to disentangle the genetic, epigenetic and environmental contributions to inherited traits. For one thing, a person shares her mother’s environment from the womb on, so that person’s epigenome could come to resemble her mother’s without any information being transmitted via the germline, or reproductive cells. In the past decade, the threads have become even more tangled, because it turns out that epigenetic marks are themselves largely under genetic control. Some genes influence the degree to which other genes are annotated – and this shows up in twin studies, where certain epigenetic patterns have been found to be more similar in identical twins that in non-identical ones.

This has led researchers to think of the epigenome less as the language in which the environment commands the genes, and more as a way in which the genes adjust themselves to respond better to an unpredictable environment. “Epigenetics is often presented as being in opposition to genetics, but actually the two things are intertwined,” says Jonathan Mill, an epigeneticist at the University of Exeter. The relationship between them is still being worked out, but for geneticist Adrian Bird of the University of Edinburgh, the role of the environment in shaping the epigenome has been exaggerated. “In fact, cells go to quite a lot of trouble to insulate themselves from environmental insult,” he says.

Whatever that relationship turns out to be, the study of epigenetics seems to reinforce the case that it’s not nature versus nurture, but nature plus nurture (so genetic determinism is still dead). And whatever the contribution of the epigenome, it doesn’t seem to translate across generations.

All the aforementioned researchers rue the fact that transgenerational epigenetic inheritance is still what most people think of when they hear the word epigenetics, because the past decade has also seen exciting advances in the field, in terms of the light it has shed on human health and disease. The marks that accumulate on somatic cells – that is, all the body’s cells except the reproductive ones – turn out to be very informative about these, and new technologies have made it easier to read them.

A model of DNA methylation – the process that modulates genes. The influence of environment or lifestyle on this process is being studied. Photograph: Laguna Design/Science Photo Library

Different people define epigenetics differently, which is another reason why the field is misunderstood. Some define it as modifications to chromatin, the package that contains DNA inside the nuclei of human cells, while others include modifications to RNA. DNA is modified by the addition of chemical groups. Methylation, when a methyl group is added, is the form of DNA modification that has been studied most, but DNA can also be tagged with hydroxymethyl groups, and proteins in the chromatin complex can be modified too.

Researchers can generate genome-wide maps of DNA methylation and use these to track biological ageing, which as everyone knows is not the same as chronological ageing. The first such “epigenetic clocks” were established for blood, and showed strong associations with other measures of blood ageing such as blood pressure and lipid levels. But the epigenetic signature of ageing is different in different tissues, so these couldn’t tell you much about, say, brain or liver. The past five years have seen the description of many more tissue-specific epigenetic clocks.

Mill’s group is working on a brain clock, for example, that he hopes will correlate with other indicators of ageing in the cortex. He has already identified what he believes to be an epigenetic signature of neurodegenerative disease. “We’re able to show robust differences in DNA methylation between individuals with and without dementia, that are very strongly related to the amount of pathology they have in their brains,” Mill says. It’s not yet possible to say whether those differences are a cause or consequence of the pathology, but they provide information about the mechanisms and genes that are disrupted in the disease process, that could guide the development of novel diagnostic tests and treatments. If a signal could be found in the blood, say, that correlated with the brain signal they’ve detected, it could form the basis of a predictive blood test for dementia.

Details about smoking habits can be detected from the epigenome – researchers are working on a clinical application for these observations. 

Photograph: Chris Rout/Alamy

While Bird and others argue that the epigenome is predominantly under genetic control, some researchers are interested in the trace that certain environmental insults leave there. Smoking, for example, has a clear epigenetic signature. “I could tell you quite accurately, based on their DNA methylation profile, if someone was a smoker or not, and probably how much they smoked and how long they had smoked for,” says Mill.

James Flanagan of Imperial College London is among those who are exploiting this aspect of the epigenome to try to understand how lifestyle factors such as smoking, alcohol and obesity shape cancer risk. Indeed, cancer is the area where there is most excitement in terms of the clinical application of epigenetics. One idea, Flanagan says, is that once informed of their risk a person could make lifestyle adjustments to reduce it.

Drugs that remodel the epigenome have been used therapeutically in those already diagnosed with cancer, though they tend to have bad side-effects because their epigenetic impact is so broad. Other widely prescribed drugs that have few side-effects might turn out to work at least partly via the epigenome too. Based on the striking observation that breast cancer risk is more than halved in diabetes patients who have taken the diabetes drug metformin for a long time, Flanagan’s group is investigating whether this protective effect is mediated by altered epigenetic patterns.

Meanwhile, the US-based company Grail – which has just been bought, controversially, by DNA sequencing giant Illumina – has come up with a test for more than 50 cancers that detects altered methylation patterns in DNA circulating freely in the blood.

Last month the NHS launched a trial of Grail’s Galleri blood test, designed to detect epigenetic modifications that identify more than 50 types of cancer. 

Photograph: Grail

Based on publicly available data on its false-positive and false-negative rates, the Grail test looks very promising, says Tomasz K Wojdacz, who studies clinical epigenetics at the Pomeranian Medical University in Szczecin, Poland. But more data is needed and is being collected now in a major clinical trial in the NHS. The idea is that the test would be used to screen populations, identifying individuals at risk who would then be guided towards more classical diagnostic procedures such as tissue-specific biopsies. It could be a gamechanger in cancer, Wojdacz thinks, but it also raises ethical dilemmas, that will have to be addressed before it is rolled out. “Imagine that someone got a positive result but further investigations revealed nothing,” he says. “You can’t put that kind of psychological burden on a patient.”

The jury is out on whether it’s possible to wind back the epigenetic clock. This question is the subject of serious inquiry, but many researchers worry that as a wave of epigenetic cosmetics hits the market, people are parting with their money on the basis of scientifically unsupported claims. Science has only scratched the surface of the epigenome, says Flanagan. “The speed at which these things happen and the speed at which they might change back is not known.” It might be the fate of every young science to be misunderstood. That’s still true of epidenetics, but it could about to change.

Sequencing the epigenome

Until recently, sequencing the epigenome was a relatively slow and expensive affair. To identify all the methyl tags on the genome, for example, would require two distinct sequencing efforts and a chemical manipulation in between. In the past few years, however, it has become possible to sequence the genome and its methylation pattern simultaneously, halving the cost and doubling the speed.

Oxford Nanopore Technologies, the British company responsible for much of the tracking of the global spread of Covid-19 variants, which floated on the London Stock Exchange last week, offers such a technology. It works by pushing DNA through a nanoscale hole while current passes either side. DNA consists of four bases or letters – A, C, G and T – and because each one has a unique shape in the nanopore it distorts the current in a unique and measurable way. A methylated base has its own distinctive shape, meaning it can be detected as a fifth letter.

The US firm Illumina, which leads the global DNA sequencing market, offers a different technique, and chemist Shankar Balasubramanian of the University of Cambridge has said that his company, Cambridge Epigenetix, will soon announce its own epigenetic sequencing technology – one that could add a sixth letter in the form of hydroxymethyl tags.

Protein modifications still have to be sequenced separately, but some people include RNA modifications in their definition of epigenetics and at least some of these technologies can detect those too – meaning they have the power to generate enormous amounts of new information about how our genetic material is modified in our lifetime. That’s why Ewan Birney who co-directs the European Bioinformatics Institute in Hinxton, Cambridgeshire, and who is a consultant to Oxford Nanopore, says that epigenetic sequencing stands poised to revolutionise science: “We’re opening up an entirely new world.”

EPS defends police actions during U of A encampment clearing

Story by Nicholas Frew

 • CBC

Edmonton's police chief is defending the police's clearing of a pro-Palestinian encampment at the University of Alberta last weekend, saying that safety concerns, signs of entrenchment and local police intelligence were among the factors that led to the dismantling of the camp.

On Friay, the Edmonton Police Service (EPS) gave a detailed timeline of the encampment and the police response, starting from when the encampment was erected and ending with ongoing investigations that, officials said, could result in criminal charges. 

"We hope we never have to do it. We hope people comply with the orders and they just leave," said police Chief Dale McFee during a news conference on Friday.

"I wish people would have just left peacefully when they were asked — not maybe the first or second time, but at least the third to the sixth time. It would have been a little easier for everybody."

The encampment was set up in the main quad of the U of A on May 9. Two days later, at the university's request, police cleared it.

The response, including the force used, has come under public scrutiny.

The Alberta government announced this week that it plans to ask the Alberta Serious Incident Response Team — which investigates incidents where police may have caused serious injury or death — to examine the U of A and University of Calgary encampment clearings. 

Related video: Campus encampments: Freedom of expression or trespassing? (cbc.ca)

Duration 4:50  View on Watch

The Edmonton police commission is also asking for more information about EPS policies regarding protest management and wearing name tags.

"The choices police make in these complex public safety environments are not ones that we make haphazardly," said Deputy Chief Devin Laforce, of the EPS investigations bureau, at the news conference.

"These are based on significant expertise and reviews, and paying attention to similar events that occur in other major cities."

Demonstrators warned 6 times, police say

Demonstrators ignored six official trespass and eviction warnings, police said, and campus peace officers first informed organizers they could not stay overnight when the camp was built in the early morning of May 9

Signs were installed around the camp and peace officers told demonstrators they were trespassing several more times. The final eviction notice came Saturday morning while police were on scene.

The camp grew over those two days. The number of people fluctuated depending on the time of day, but police believe it peaked at 120 people and 40 tents on the evening of May 9.

University officials grew concerned, as encampment organizers made calls to action, such as "Protect our students," and requested various supplies, police said.

The assumed intent was that the encampment would try to entrench itself, garnering greater support so it could overrun U of A peace officers, Laforce said. 

Devin Laforce, Edmonton deputy police chief, left, was one of the officers
who explained the chronology of events that led to an encampment at the Unversity of Alberta being dismantled. (David Bajer/CBC)© Provided by cbc.ca

"If the camp were to become very entrenched, then this would subsequently require a more dynamic and resource-heavy response, that could result in the potential of more people being hurt and certainly a greater threat to public safety," Laforce said.

On May 10, campus peace officers posted more trespass notices and organizers received several deliveries of wooden palettes — which Laforce described as "occupation supply," as they have been used to, among other things, fortify camps, build structures and fuel fires in other places.

University and EPS officials were in touch for several days before the U of A called in police to clear the camp, Laforce said.

The university tries to balance freedom of expression with community safety, but safety is "always foremost in our decision-making," as was the case when deciding to disperse the camp, a university spokesperson told CBC News in a statement Friday.

Police, aware of similar encampments at other Canadian university campuses, knew there were "escalating activities" at the U of A, Laforce said

Nour Salhi, centre, is a university student who has acted as a spokesperson for the pro-Palestinian encampment that erected at the University of Alberta on May 9, 2024. (Craig Ryan/CBC)© Provided by cbc.ca

Police said at the news conference that intelligence suggested that many students were afraid and intimidated, and that many people at the encampment were not students.

EPS was unable to give reporters an estimate of how many at the camp were U of A students. Previous statements from university president Bill Flanagan suggest about one quarter were students.

People who attended the encampment have said many demonstrators were pegged as having no ties to the university, although they may have been faculty members or U of A alumni. They also said the encampment was respectful.

"Our encampment had no violent behaviour for them to police in the first place," Nour Salhi, a student who acted as a spokesperson for the encampment, told reporters Friday.

"We were praying together. We were sitting together, making art together. I don't understand how that is a policeable action."

Sweep took about 20 minutes: police

Police arrived at the U of A around 4:45 a.m. on May 11. Officers witnessed some demonstrators acting as sentries, cycling back to the camp to warn about incoming police, Laforce said.

At the camp, some demonstrators had formed a row by linking their arms together, he said.

At 4:55 a.m., campus peace officers read the final eviction notice, at which point about half the camp left.

Shortly after 5 a.m., officers performed a measured advance — a law enforcement tactic used throughout the continent, according to Insp. Lance Parker.

Police shouted, "Move," to demonstrators consistently while stepping forward in unison, he sai

People gather on the legislative grounds for a pro-Palestinian protest in Edmonton. The previously scheduled protest on May 11, 2024,
happened hours after police cleared an encampment at the University of Alberta that was in support of Gaza. (Emily Fitzpatrick/CBC)© Provided by cbc.ca

By 5:25 a.m., the encampment was fully cleared and no serious injuries were 

reported, police said. Demonstrators, however, have said four students were injured, including one who was sent to hospital.

Police arrested three men, one of whom was previously known to EPS through other protests over the past several years. Police said they were charged with assault of a police officer and assault at an obstruction.

Two of the men were arrested during the initial clash after they resisted police and reached for officers' batons, police said.

"This clash with the protesters, all things considered, was incredibly minimal," Parker said.

Use of force

Videos taken by demonstrators last Saturday, which were posted to social media, showed some officers using batons and, at one point, gas started forming during the sweep.

Police showed video surveillance footage of the initial clash, when police used their batons, offering a different angle than the videos on social media. Parker suggested that, after police used their batons, the crowd became more docile, which allowed police to use less force from then on.

"Behaviour will always dictate actions from police," he said.

Parker reiterated that tear gas was not used. But officers fired 10 to 15 pepper balls — non-lethal ammunition filled with pepper spray, similar to a paintball — toward the ground to deter people from trying to break up arrests.

A muzzle blast containing pepper spray was also used, he said.

ID tags will not include officer names

Photos have circulated online of some of the police officers at the university last weekend, which, police say, has led to behaviour akin to bullying, harassment and intimidation such as doxxing — searching for and publishing private or identifying information of someone online.

Police are investigating 11 incidents in which people shared officer names, address information and social media posts from officers' relatives, Laforce said. 

Some of the visuals that have circulated showed officers without name tags while wearing their chest guards — although some still had their regimental number. 



Police Chief Dale McFee backed the actions officers took to clear the pro-Palestinian encampment at the University of Alberta on May 11, 2024. (David Bajer/CBC)© Provided by cbc.ca

McFee said that EPS should be changing its identification policy within two weeks.

The change will see officers wear ID tags that only feature their regimental number, he said, adding that it will be enough for EPS to know who attended a scene like the U of A last weekend, given the amount of visual evidence.

"We have to go to all ends to protect, obviously, our officers and their safety, but at the same time be accountable and transparent to the public, which we believe strongly that this will," McFee said.

University president out-of-country

While the encampment clearing occurred, university president Bill Flanagan was out of the country, a U of A spokesperson confirmed to CBC News.

Flanagan is on a previously scheduled work trip to Cortona, Italy, to mark the 25th anniversary of the university's satellite campus there, the spokesperson said.

"While there he is engaged with the situation back home and is attending important meetings virtually," the spokesperson said, adding that Flanagan is still working closely with senior leadership on campus.

University officials have met with members of its students' union and staff and alumni associations, and the school is trying to "move forward collaboratively and meaningfully" with them, the spokesperson said.

It is clear members of the U of A community are "hurt and in turmoil," they said, adding that further discussions will occur.

NOT JUST NFL & LAB FISHERS

War on seals: The ‘cruel measures’ used by Tasmania’s salmon farming industry

Long-nosed fur seals' fate at the hands of salmon farmers is particularly cruel. Photo: Getty

Richard Flanagan
May 16, 2021

The profound and perverse environmental imbalance created in Tasmania by industrial salmon production, the ways in which ecosystems are flipped to their detriment by salmon farming, are no better exemplified than by the example of long-nosed fur seals.

Hunted to the point of near extinction in the 19th century, classified as a rare, threatened species in Tasmania and protected under state and federal law, the fur seals’ fate at the hands of salmon farmers is particularly cruel.

While in South Australia fines of up to $100,000 can be imposed for killing a long-nosed fur seal, in Tasmania what is termed the ‘management’ of fur seals by salmon companies long ago crossed over into programs of systematic cruelty.

Seals represent one more insoluble problem for the salmon industry as they damage nets (and get trapped inside them), kill salmon, and interfere with divers. Yet offering a permanent food source, the floating feedlots that proliferate along the south-east Tasmanian coast are attracting fur seals in ever-growing numbers – in areas where they have not been known in living memory. The industry’s war against the seals is never-ending: all that changes are the weapons used as one scandal begets another.

When the salmon farmers were found to be shooting and killing seals on a large scale, dumping their rotting bodies on local tips, the industry resorted to trapping and relocating the animals to north-west Tasmania. By 2017 over two thousand seals a year were being trapped, sedated and transported for several hours. There, the creatures established colonies that in turn became a major problem for local commercial fishermen. One, Craig Garland, in a submission to the Fin Fish Inquiry run by the Tasmanian government in 2019, claimed that the seals were rendering the fisheries of the north-west small-mesh fishermen uneconomical and “resulting in mental health issues for those fishermen”.

The practice so incensed Garland that he ran for federal parliament on an anti-salmon industry platform in the critical 2018 Braddon by-election. In spite of spending no money on his campaign Garland still garnered 11 per cent of the vote, his preferences delivering the seat to the ALP candidate in what had been expected to be a Liberal Party victory.

As always with the salmon industry, many details of the trapping program are secret. A recent Right to Information request by Environment Tasmania revealed that in 2016 Tassal came under criminal investigation for animal cruelty after wildlife rangers found twenty seals in a pen at a Tassal lease and it was subsequently discovered the seals might have been there for several days without food or haul-out space.

Yet instead of pursuing prosecution, the Tasmanian government quickly acted to cover up the scandal. Tassal was retrospectively granted an extension to the time it could keep the twenty seals captive – from six hours to seven days. All charges were dropped and a Marine Farming Branch bureaucrat advised Tassal on how to spin the story to the media, should it become public.

In recent years the salmon industry has hit upon seal deterrents more suggestive of suppressing a civil uprising than responsible environmental management. One of its method is to fire ‘blunt darts’ at the animals, another is to shoot them with what the international industry trade publication Salmon Business identified as riot guns, using beanbag rounds – a cloth sock enclosing 40 grams of lead pellets fired from 12-gauge shotguns. According to Right to Information documents, in 2016 alone 3770 beanbag rounds were used

.

Richard Flanagan investigates Tasmania’s salmon farming industry in ‘Toxic’. Photo: Getty

Though described as non-lethal, such ammunition has been associated with deaths and severe injuries to humans in the US, Hong Kong and Europe. As well as poisoning the marine environment with 150 kilograms of lead every year, in 2018, according to an ABC report, “two industry insiders who work in aquaculture in Tasmania … independently claimed that on a number of occasions they had personally witnessed beanbag rounds blinding seals and hitting them in the head at close range”.

In the view of Malcolm Caulfield, founder and principal lawyer of the Animal Welfare Community Legal Centre Tasmania, “What we are seeing is an industrial-scale use of cruel measures against a protected species in Tasmanian waters.


“What it clearly highlights to me is that the Government isn’t doing its job. The fact of the matter is this is an unacceptable use of these very violent tactics against these marine mammals which have a high level of protected status under the law.”

All of this is ignored by Tasmanian politicians and regulators. The war simply goes on. The state government – which once paid Tasmanians to hunt the thylacine to extinction – continues to permit the trapping and sedation of seals, while allowing their killing as ‘a management option of last resort’.

Tassal is reportedly now trialling a new deterrent, again borrowed from riot control, that of water cannons, which it describes as spraying seals with a ‘low-pressure, high flow’ water stream.

“This is still a noxious deterrent that has potential to injure seals,” the RSPCA’s chief executive Dr Andrew Byrne has been quoted as saying. “The RSPCA would prefer investigating options that may encourage the seals to move away from pens or the holy grail of seal safety, better pen designs.”

Like so many unfixed, unresolved and ultimately unresolvable problems with salmon farming, the Tasmanian salmon industry has been talking about seal-proofing nets for almost as long as there has been a Tasmanian salmon industry. The companies do invest significantly in improving their net technology because loss of stock represents loss of profit, but a failsafe design remains elusive and the war between Big Salmon and the marine environment continues to escalate.

In that war, the most common weapon used against seals is the innocuously named ‘seal cracker’. In the US it is more accurately called a seal bomb and is classified as a ‘high explosive’ by the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives. Either lit and thrown into the water, or set up as booby-trapped underwater devices, seal bombs ‘have been shown to shatter bones of marine mammals and to kill fish within the blast vicinity’. In one instance, a seal bomb killed a human swimmer. The victim was found to have “ruptured both eardrums, herniated brain tissue through ruptured areas in the cribriform plates, fractured cranial bones including the wings of the sphenoid and the left petrosal, and caused a 1.5 centimetre deep wound above the scapula”.

In 2016 the Tasmanian salmon industry used 39,024 seal bombs, and yet no research has been conducted on their actual physical impact on fur seals, nor is there any consideration given or science being undertaken on their consequences on the surrounding marine environment, though it may be grave. Dead seals are often found washed up near Tasmanian salmon farms.

This is an edited extract from Toxic by Richard Flanagan. $24.99. Copyright 2021. Available from all book retailers now.

Making Lemonade Aid

It seems that I was correct about Canadian Blue Lemon. Despite comments to the contrary. When you find yourself attacked by your fellow Blogging Tories for making disparaging comments about the Harpocrites and their Calgary School pals you end up self censoring.

Brian Lemon has done just that on his website Canadian Blue Lemon. He has eliminated his 'offending' post criticizing Flanagan and Finley and the old Reform leadership he claimed has taken over the Conservative party. He has reposted this bit of historical revisionism. After the fact and post-dated.

Of course this is natural for conservatives and right wingers they love to revise history to fit their ideology. And when they are caught they whine they were misquoted.

So much for the principles of free speech on the right. The echo chamber that is the Blogging Tories have their own principles of Political Correctness and clearly Lemon violated those and suffered the consequences.

Lemon not only censored himself, shame, shame, but by posting his revised article and eliminating his original post, he has engaged in the old Stalin School of Falsification. Ironic that. Giving into peer pressure from his pals on the right Lemon is not only lacking in principles but gutless as well. No matter how he spins it.

"And note to all readers and Mssrs Flanagan and Finley who seem to lay claim to Tory Blogs. I am an independent observer of the political scene in Canada that has an allegiance to conservatism in its best form and to the Conservative Party as its manifestation. But I do not receive and would not welcome any direction of my content by any party official. I will criticize our party without losing faith in the importance of our party leading the Canadian political agenda."

Blah, blah, blah. LOL. Stop it you are killing me.

Leon Trotsky. Now you see him. Now you don't. After he ran afoul of the Communist Party, Trotsky was eliminated from photos where he mingled with other officials. In other manipulated photos, the Soviets painted in the gaps for added realism.

Find blog posts, photos, events and more off-site about:
right wing blogs, Canada, Blogging Tories, blogs, blogging, Canada, Blogging Tories, Tories, political correctness, political blogs, Canadian Blue Lemons,

THE UNIVERSITY OF THE TAR SANDS

Opinion: University of Alberta playing a key role in helping Canada meet its climate commitments

Opinion by Bill Flanagan • Yesterday 

Bill Flanagan is president and vice-chancellor of the University of Alberta.

Last week, I was honoured to attend COP27, the UN Climate Change Conference in Sharm El Sheikh, Egypt. Along with our vice-president (research and innovation) Aminah Robinson Fayek, we represented both the University of Alberta and the Worldwide Universities Network (WUN) of which the U of A has been an active member since 2008.


Egypt's Foreign Minister Sameh Shukri (L), heads the closing session of the COP27 climate conference, at the Sharm el-Sheikh International Convention Centre in Egypt's Red Sea resort city of the same name, on November 20, 2022. (Photo by JOSEPH EID / AFP)© Provided by Edmonton Journal

Proud of the U of A’s record as Canada’s leading university advancing research on energy transition, new energy solutions and climate change, Aminah and I had the opportunity to meet with a wide variety of key decision-makers from Canada and beyond, along with the opportunity to explore research links with universities worldwide.

As a member of Team Alberta — a broad cross-section of governmental, academic, NGO and industry partners from Alberta — we met with the provincial minister of environment and protected areas, Sonya Savage, and her staff, along with Emissions Reduction Alberta and Alberta Innovates, sharing a message of Alberta’s commitment to advancing energy solutions for the world and taking action on climate change. We also met with Canada’s ambassador for climate change, Catherine Stewart, and Canada’s minister of environment and climate change, Steven Guilbeault, sharing that same message and highlighting the vital role of university research in finding the solutions that will enable Canada to meet its ambitious climate change commitments.

In our conversations, we shared some of the leading U of A research programs relating to energy solutions and climate change. Launched in 2016, the Future Energy Systems (FES) program, supported with $75 million from the Canada First Research Excellence Fund (CFREF), is helping Canada transition to a low net-carbon energy economy. FES addresses a full range of energy fields, from sustainable development of fossil fuels to research on carbon capture and storage and renewables such as biomass, geothermal, wind, solar, and grids and storage. Using interdisciplinary approaches, FES tackles technical questions on energy; examines consequences for our society, economy, and environment; and addresses mitigative and reclamation measures.

Understanding climate change and advancing energy solutions requires a broad range of interdisciplinary approaches. These approaches will involve technology and innovation, but will also need to address policy, social impacts and social innovation solutions. And we are doing just that with the Ărramăt project, supported with a $24-million grant in 2022 from the federal government’s New Frontiers in Research Fund.

Canada places 58 out of 63 in climate change performance ranking

The project brings together more than 150 Indigenous organizations and governments from around the world, with researchers at 19 Canadian universities, two Canadian colleges and 14 international universities. They will carry out 140 Indigenous-led, place-based research projects to examine the links between the loss of biodiversity and the decline in Indigenous health. Working in more than 24 countries and speaking more than 30 languages, the diverse team will develop policy roadmaps for practical solutions in 10 areas, including strengthening Indigenous food systems and re-establishing healthy relationships with wild species.

Building on this record, the U of A has put forth the most ambitious research proposal we have ever undertaken. With our strong foundation of energy and climate research, the U of A is leading an application to the Canada First Research Excellence Fund for a research program entitled Energy Systems Transitions, Resilience and Climate Change (ESTRCC) . ESTRCC is an unprecedented, interdisciplinary, pan-Canadian initiative involving 12 Canadian post-secondary institutions, international partners, industry and government.

It brings together leading experts from diverse disciplines to deliver research results that will solve practical challenges in aiding resilient energy transition, climate change and energy systems resilience in northern cold-affected climates. ESTRCC will contribute to solutions that support under-represented and vulnerable communities in Canada’s rural and remote areas, and will support the goals of reconciliation with Indigenous communities.

The outcomes of the proposed program will lead to the development and piloting of new technologies to achieve net-zero targets; environmental, social and policy innovations; commercialization of technology; and training of highly qualified personnel. At COP27, Aminah and I had the opportunity to share details of this proposal with some key decision-makers, with the goal of building both provincial and federal support.

We had one central message in all these conversations: Alberta — and the University of Alberta — are at the forefront of developing the solutions that will enable Canada to advance energy solutions for the world and meet Canada’s climate change commitments.

I also participated in a panel discussion on Universities as Key Solutions Providers: Leveraging our Local and Global Networks for Innovation. My fellow panellists included representatives from Northwestern University, the University of Edinburgh, Université Côte d’Azur and the University of Toronto. We had a wide-ranging and engaged discussion of how universities working together can help address the many challenges posed by climate change and help find sustainable solutions for the planet. The discussion considered how the university networks represented on the panel, including the U7+, UC3 and WUN, could be leveraged. With almost half of its 24 university members from the Global South, WUN is particularly well-placed to address the differential impacts of climate change around the world.

COP27 was a massive and somewhat overwhelming event, drawing more than 45,000 people from nearly 200 countries worldwide. Although the details are still being released, there was progress on at least one major initiative: developed countries agreed to establish a loss and damage fund to assist vulnerable countries affected by climate change-related disasters.

But COP27 was much more than its final protocol. It was an opportunity for an enormously wide range of governments, NGOs, industry and academic partners from around the world to come together and share innovations and ideas, all of which are urgently needed if the world is to meet its climate change ambitions and secure a sustainable future for the planet.

Blogging Tories Payola

I once defended the Blogging Tories from charges that they were in the pay of the Conservative Party. Now I find my faith misplaced. After the Harprocrites were elected Blogging Tory founder Stephen Taylor was proudly 'leaking' Conservative memo's.

And it's spelled Janke not Jank. And he too has been a pit bull for the Conservatives in Ottawa.

And last week they were outed as being in Harpers back pocket during the election.

In his new book, Harper's Team: Behind the Scenes in the Conservative Rise to Power, party strategist Tom Flanagan notes the Tories' innovative use of blogs in the 2006 election campaign.

He cites in particular two members of the Blogging Tories, Steve Jank and Stephen Taylor, who write highly partisan blogs on federal politics.

Mr. Flanagan writes that campaign manager Doug Finley "appointed people to monitor the blogosphere and to get out stories that were not quite ready for the mainstream media."

These bloggers "amplify and diversify our message," he wrote.

Except the payola to Blogging Tories did not after the election was over, it continued this year.

The Harper government gave a contract for communications consulting on Parliament Hill, worth up to $20,000, to an outspoken Conservative Internet blogger.

Privy Council Office records show Joan Tintor, author of a popular weblog or "blog," in June received the one-year contract for "communications professional services not elsewhere specified."

The government says Ms. Tintor was not paid to write a blog and has so far received only $350 for work performed under the contract.

She was contracted to provide writing and other communications work on an as-needed basis to the office of government House leader Peter Van Loan.

Ms. Tintor did not return an e-mail requesting comment and, when reached by telephone, she said she would have to call back. She did not.

Her strongly opinionated blog focuses on provincial and federal politics and is listed on the web page of the "Blogging Tories," a collection of conservative Internet commentators. Her blog, joantintor.blogspot.com

Joan has been silent on this particular matter. In fact she has not blogged since Saturday.

So add Joan to the list of Blogging Tories accepting payola from the Conservatives.

And like Tory race car driver and news aggregator Pierre Bourque these Tory Bloggers relish the idea of being close to power.


Find blog posts, photos, events and more off-site about:
right wing blogs, Canada, Blogging Tories, Angry in the Great White North, Steve Janke,blogs, blogging, Canada, Blogging, Tories, Harper, Government, PM, PMO,
payola, Pierre Bourque, Bourque News, Bourque, race cars, NASCAR, Canada, politics, media bias, new media, news agreggator, internet, Ottawa, Tories, blogs, buying headlines

First Nations partner with U of A to 'pave the way' for more Indigenous doctors

Hamdi Issawi 

Six First Nations northeast of Edmonton have partnered with the University of Alberta to train more Indigenous doctors.

© Provided by Edmonton Journal On Dec. 15, 2021, the University of Alberta and Tribal Chiefs Ventures Inc., which represents six First Nations northeast of Edmonton, signed a memorandum of relational understanding to train more Indigenous doctors.

During a virtual ceremony Wednesday, the university struck an agreement with Tribal Chiefs Ventures Inc., which represents Cold Lake, Frog Lake and Heart Lake First Nations, as well as Whitefish Lake First Nation No. 128 and the Beaver Lake and Kehewin Cree Nations, to recruit, retain and produce more Indigenous health-care practitioners.


Cameron Alexis, chief executive officer of Tribal Chiefs Ventures Inc., told ceremony attendants that First Nations need more than just physicians, but all types of medical professionals, such as dentists, nurses and psychologists to break down cultural and language barriers affecting Indigenous access to health care, especially elders for whom English is not a first language.

“They’re not heard when they try to explain what their ailments are,” he said of those elders. “That’s one of the reasons why it’s very important to have our people working all-inclusive in the fields of medical science.”

The initiative will also help Indigenous youth see medical professions as viable career options, Alexis added.

“It allows us to drill down to the nations, upon successful completion of Grade 12, that this kind of career path is not impossible,” he said.

Brenda Hemmelgarn, dean of the university’s faculty of medicine and dentistry, said that students recruited and trained from First Nation communities are more likely to return to those communities and practice their professions.

“It’s not just about bringing them in and training them to be doctors,” she said. “It’s recruiting them from their home communities, it’s supporting them while they’re here, and then it’s helping them to transition back to practice in the various communities where they’re located.”

The day also marks six years since the Truth and Reconciliation Commission released 94 calls to action that recommends measures for governments, organizations and all Canadians to redress the legacy of residential schools.

Bill Flanagan, the university’s president and vice-chancellor, said the partnership will honour several of the calls to action, such as increasing the number of Indigenous health-care providers, improving cultural sensitivity and anti-racism training for health-care workers, recognizing the value of traditional healing practices, and closing the gaps in health outcomes between Indigenous and non-Indigenous people.

“We recognize that the University of Alberta has been part of historic systems that have created barriers to Indigenous health,” Flanagan said, “and we want to move forward by increasing the number of Indigenous doctors and other health-care professionals, as well as honouring and respecting traditional health knowledge.”

Recalling the barrier that curbed his own dream of working in health care, Frog Lake First Nations Chief Greg Desjarlais spoke from personal experience when telling ceremony attendants about the value of access to education, particularly for younger generations and the future of First Nations.

“I wanted to be a dentist, and I had given up a long time ago because I didn’t have the education — the math,” he said. “That’s where we have to push our children — our grandchildren — and we have to open these doors for them and pave the way for them.”

hissawi@postmedia.com

Canada believes Flight PS752 was shot down by Iran: Trudeau

Ryan FlanaganCTVNews.ca Writer

@flanaganryan Contact

Published Thursday, January 9, 2020 9:36AM ESTLast Updated Thursday, January 9, 2020 2:47PM EST

TORONTO -- Prime Minister Justin Trudeau says the plane that crashed in Iran Wednesday morning, killing all 138 people aboard, was shot down by an Iranian missile – perhaps by accident.

“We have intelligence from multiple sources, including our allies and our own intelligence. The evidence indicates that the plane was shot down by an Iranian surface-to-air missile. This may well have been unintentional,” the prime minister said Thursday afternoon at a news conference.

U.S. President Donald Trump has suggested that he also believes Iran was responsible for the plane going down.

Ukraine Airlines flight PS752 when crashed near Tehran shortly after taking off. Sixty-three of its passengers had Canadian passports, and many others were living in Canada as permanent residents or on visas.

Foreign Affairs Minister Francois-Phillippe Champagne has talked to his Iranian counterpart about the crash. According to a summary of the phone call released Thursday by Global Affairs Canada, Champagne pressed Mohammad Javad Zarif to allow Canadian officials into the country to take part in the investigation, help identify the victims and provide consular services.Iran has said that it has invited Canadian investigators to take part in the probe.

Canada and Iran have not had formal diplomatic relations since 2012, when Canada labelled Iran a state sponsor of terrorism.

This is a breaking news update. More details to come.

With files from The Canadian Press

Opinion: University of Alberta's system of governance under threat

Opinion by Carolyn Sale - 

In the last few years, the University of Alberta has faced twin attacks that pose a threat to its future as one of Canada’s top research universities. It has had hundreds of millions of dollars lopped out of its budget by Alberta’s UCP government. These cuts have been devastating. But equally troubling internal developments are threatening the university’s system of governance.


University of Alberta campus.© Provided by Edmonton Journal

When the university was incorporated under The University Act of 1906, it had only one governing body, with members appointed by the government. But in response to the recommendations of the Flavelle Commission , which sought to prevent political interference in public universities, the university joined all other universities in Canada in embracing a bicameral model of governance under which the senior academic body of the university has responsibility for academic affairs and the board of governors has responsibility for financial and administrative matters.

This was formalized in the revision to The University Act in 1910 and has been a cornerstone of all revisions since. The current law specifies that the university’s general faculties council (GFC), “subject to the authority of the board, … is responsible for the academic affairs of the university.”

Since 2020, GFC’s ability to fulfill its statutory role is being undermined. On his first official day on the job in 2020, President Bill Flanagan announced he had laid off the person responsible for safeguarding the university’s governance processes, university secretary Marion Haggarty-France. Across the fall of 2020, the GFC faced considerable obstacles to it playing something that resembled its proper statutory role even as the university community experienced a shallow consultation process about the radical restructuring forced by the UCP’s cuts.

Then, when GFC, responsive to the strong message it had heard from the university community, did not agree to recommend that the board create new senior administrators called “college deans,” President Flanagan refused to represent the GFC’s position to the board.

The outcry from the university community at his choice to “recuse” himself from the board’s decision-making was tremendous. Formal expressions of concern included a letter from department chairs claiming a breach of trust and the establishment of an ad hoc committee of GFC to review what had happened. That committee’s final report in March 2022, declared that “[t]he events of fall 2020 demonstrated the need to reinvigorate bicameral governance at the University of Alberta and to take seriously the role of GFC as the body responsible for the academic affairs of the university.”

Despite these developments, just three months later the university community had to learn from a student reporter’s tweets that the president had decided to bypass GFC altogether and take his recommendation for how these new college deans are to be selected straight to the board.

Nothing could possibly have more impact on the academic affairs of the university over the next five years than the work of the college deans who will be appointed under the new selection procedure, but GFC could not make a recommendation in regard to a proposed policy item about which it was kept in the dark.

At its September meeting, the board chair informed GFC that the board had “pressured” the president to bring the recommendation straight to the board. Both she and the president are now claiming that the board has an “exclusive jurisdiction” over the appointment of senior academic officers that allows them to circumvent GFC’s right under Section 26.1(o) of the Postsecondary Learning Act to make recommendations to the board on any matter.

To ensure GFC could exercise that statutory right, the president was advised a motion would be brought to the next GFC meeting calling on the president and provost to notify GFC in advance of any policies they were planning to bring to the board. At the Oct. 3rd meeting of the GFC executive, the president declared he would rule any such motion out of order. He added that if someone wishes to take the matter to judicial review he will be happy to see them in court.

It is a very sorry day for a treasured public institution in which generations of faculty, students, alumni, and taxpayers have invested for its president to seek to defeat the GFC’s statutory right to play its proper role in the development of policies relating to the academic affairs of the university.

Perhaps it is time for a 21st century successor to the Flavelle Commission. An independent investigation of what has been occurring could be the opportunity for recommendations to strengthen the bicameral system of governance not just at the University of Alberta, but across Canada.

Carolyn Sale is an associate professor, Department of English and Film Studies, University of Alberta.

AFRIKA DOMINATES

Boston Marathon results: Kenya's Benson Kipruto, Diana Kipyogei win 2021 race


By Steve Buckley and The Athletic Staff
October 11, 2021


Kenya's Benson Kipruto and Diana Kipyogei swept the men's and women's races at the long-awaited 125th Boston Marathon on Monday morning as the event returned for the first time since April 2019.

Kipruto won in 2:09:51, 46 seconds ahead of second-place finisher Lemi Berhanu of Ethiopia. Kipyogei won in 2:24:45, 24 seconds ahead of Kenya's Edna Kiplagat.

Marcel Hug of Switzerland finished in first place in the men’s wheelchair division with an unofficial time of 1:18:11. But even though “The Swiss Silver Bullet” easily beat second-place finisher Daniel Romanchuk of the United States by nearly seven minutes, there was still some last-minute drama.

Racing to break his own course record for the Boston Marathon, which he set in 2017 with a time of 1:18:04, Hug missed a late turn as he neared the finish line. Hug was on pace to set a new record — and win a $50,000 bonus — before missing the turn.

Just 24 hours earlier, Hug and Romanchuk competed in the Chicago Marathon, with Romanchuk finishing first with a time of 1:29.06.

Switzerland's Manuela Schär won the women's wheelchair race with an unofficial time of 1:35:21, her third Boston Marathon victory after winning in 2017 and 2019. Five-time winner Tatyana McFadden finished second, one day after winning the Chicago Marathon.

The 2020 marathon was canceled due to the COVID-19 pandemic. This year's race was moved from its traditional April date to October.

Shalane Flanagan, an Olympic silver medalist and New York City Marathon winner, ran in Boston a day after racing in the Chicago Marathon. With her fourth marathon in three weeks, Flanagan moved closer to running all six of the world's major marathons in the span of six weeks — Berlin, London, Chicago, Boston, Tokyo and New York. The Tokyo Marathon is virtual this year after the in-person event was canceled. The New York City Marathon is on Nov. 7.

(Photo: Jessica Rinaldi / The Boston Globe via Getty Images)

Jump to
Were there any surprises among the race winners?
How was this year's race different?
What went wrong for Hug at the end?
What happened to American C.J. Albertson, an early leader?

Leo Strauss and the Calgary School

Critics of the neo-conservative movement in the U.S. White House have identified the philosopher Leo Strauss as their mentor . Strauss however has his most ardent followers in the neo-conservative movement not in the U.S. but in Canada. The real Straussian School is at the University of Calgary.

They are political advisor's to the Alberta Government and to the Federal Harper Conservative Government. Both governments which practice a Straussian politics of secrecy and elitism combined with a Schmitt authoritarianism of the strong man as leader. They are known as the Calgary School of right wingers who teach political science, and military history etc.at the University of Calgary; Barry Cooper, Tom Flanagan, David Bercuson, Ted Morton, et al.

The Calgary School has both European and American roots and sources. Three leading Europeans have done much to shape and form the Calgary School. Those of us who spend a good deal of time teaching political theory cannot avoid the names of Leo Strauss, Eric Voegelin and Frederick Hayek. Hayek and Voegelin were Austrians. Hayek was a great fan of free trade, and Voegelin was an opponent of Hitler. He fled Austria when Hitler came to power; he came to the USA and taught there for much of his life. Leo Strauss fled Germany, like Hannah Arendt, when Hitler came to power, and both came and settled in the USA. These Austrian and German refugees, for different reasons, saw the USA, as the great and good place. It was, was it not, the country that defended liberty and freedom against the totalitarianism of Germany, Italy, Japan and Communism. The Calgary School is very much indebted to those like Strauss, Voegelin and Hayek for their inspiration, and many within the Calgary School are well known scholars in the area of Strauss, Voegelin and Hayek. The point to note here is that the Calgary School does not take its lead from the indigenous Canadian tradition. They turn elsewhere for their great good place. Such is the nature, DNA and way of the compradors. But, there is more to the tale than this.

The Calgary School also has strong American roots. Again, the comprador way comes to the fore and front stage. Tom Flanagan is well known in Canada for his revisionist read on Louis Riel. He was also born and bred in the USA, and he has strong American republican leanings. Barry Cooper is yet another of the clan. He is a Canadian, but he did his graduate studies in the USA, he did not find much support for his republican leanings at York University, hence he turned to the political science department at the University of Calgary. Cooper is a well-known Voegelin scholar. David Bercuson, Ted Morton and Rainer Knopff fill out the ranks quite nicely. At a more popular level, of course, Ted and Link Byfield have played their roles in shoring up and defending the American republican way. The comprador class in Alberta did much to both bring Preston Manning to power and to dethrone him. Stephen Harper was more the ideologue that served their purposes; hence he was offered the crown he now wears.

In the dance of the dialectic the most ardent critic of Strauss and Straussian politics of the neo-con right is also a graduate of the University of Calgary; Shadia Drury. Her work the result of being in a school dedicated to real Straussian politics.

As with Strauss the Calgary School is well versed in Marxism and critiques of Marxism as we can see in the publications of its major proponent Barry Cooper. Cooper admire's Leo Strauss, Carl Schmitt and Eric Voegelin and see's them as the political alternative to Marxism, and ironically these political philosophers are far more statist than Marx was.

It was very difficult to read Leo Strauss (1). But I did manage to wring out some ideas. He says if political philosophy wants to do justice to its subject matter, it must strive for "genuine knowledge" of "true standards" (2). This absolutist idea may be at least in part the reason Straussians (and neoconservatives) are willing to force a political system on countries, using war, lies, and the like. He begins to discuss Machiavelli (3) and says Karl Marx was a Machiavellian, which moves me toward the edge of my seat (even though this is no surprise) and this movement continued as I read more of Strauss on Machiavelli. The latter continually made me think of Bush and his neoconservatives.

Leo Strauss, and Eric Voegelin are Anti-Hegelian, like Karl Popper, declaring that Hegel is the end of history, that philosophy thus needs to return to its ancient sources. In Hegel they see Gnosticism, and attack his and Marx's dialectics as heresy, embracing the fundamentalist and literalism of the evangelical Christian right.

There are four major periods in Hegel’s life during which he seems to have been strongly under the influence of Hermeticism, or to have actively pursued an interest in it. First, there is his boyhood in Stuttgart, from 1770 to 1788. As I shall discuss in detail in chapter 2, during this period Württemberg was a major center of Hermetic interest, with much of the Pietist movement influenced by Boehmeanism and Rosicrucianism (Württemberg was the spiritual center of the Rosicrucian movement). The leading exponents of Pietism, J. A. Bengel and, in particular, F. C. Oetinger were strongly influenced by German mysticism, Boehmean theosophy, and Kabbalism.

This is no abstract philosophical debate, the social conservative protestant right wing has a new political theology. It opposes liberal society as Gnostic, and blames liberalism, relativism, values laden education, etc. as the basis for Totalitarianism. Strauss, Voegelin and Schmidt argued that Hegel was the source of the Nazi's political power and thought, as did Karl Popper, then the same argument was applied against Marx, Marxism and the Soviet Union during the Cold War. Today their followers like the Calgary School and others use it against the pluralistic social democratic polity in Canada, they indeed loathe Canadian society as it is.

Hegel is known largely through secondary sources and a few incriminating slogans and generalizations. The resulting myth, however, lacked a comprehensive, documented statement till Karl Popper found a place for it in his widely discussed book, The Open Society and Its Enemies. After it had gone through three impressions in England, a revised one-volume edition was brought out in the United States in 1950, five years after its original appearance. Walter Kaufmann


Hegelian Dialect is a perfect example of what J. Budziszewski (What We Can't Not Know, pp. 187) termed the "black magic spells of imposture and unraveling." Hegel's form of dialectics is itself an impostor. It effectively unravels truth and norms and then replaces them with a 'new truth' which is yet another impostor.

Whence came the deformed conceptions of anti-Constitutional, regulatory government and judicial activism?

American liberal-socialism is the gnostic descendant of the French Revolution and its Reign of Terror. The genealogical connection begins with Henri de Saint-Simon, the French intellectual who codified the doctrine of socialism in the first decades of the 1800s, shortly after the Revolution.

His colleagues and followers, including Auguste Comte, formed a body of disciples known as the Saint-Simonians. They spread the Gnostic gospel to German universities, where it became mixed with the philosophies of Fichte and Hegel.

Hegel studied alchemy, Kabbalah (caballa, kaballa, etc.) and theosophy. He "read widely on Mesmerism, psychic phenomena, dowsing, precognition and sorcery. He publicly associated himself with known occultists.... He believed in an Earth Spirit and corresponded with colleagues about the nature of magic.... He aligned himself, informally, with 'Hermetic' societies such as the Freemasons and the Rosicrucians" and embraced their symbolic systems of sacred circles, mystical triangles and astrological signs.[3]

Considering Hegel's occult connections, it's not surprising that his teachings would undermine Biblical faith and all opposing facts. Nor is it strange that the postmodern generation has been largely immunized against genuine Christianity. After all, Hegel's revolutionary dialectic process was the center-piece of Soviet brainwashing. It effectively purged God's unchanging truths and filled the vacuum with evolving "truths" and enticing dreams.

While Communist leaders embraced Hegel's process, they ignored his occult beliefs. In contrast, the Western world began to restore those pagan roots long before revolutionary baby-boomers began shouting their demands for sensual freedom and earth-centered spirituality. In other words, the sixties didn't initiate this radical change; the turmoil of the sixties was the result of the psycho-social program of "re-learning" which had begun to transform America decades earlier.

These are the arguments of the Cold War, which while now over, remains the bugaboo of the right. One does not invest fifty years of constructing anti-liberal, anti-socialists, anti-secular, anti-humanist arguments to abandon them with the mere collapse of the Berlin wall. Today the arguments used against socialism and liberalism by Strauss, Voegelin and Schmitt are now used in day to day editorials and arguments from the Right.

In Terror and Civilization: Christianity, Politics, and the Western Psyche, Drury regards the contemporary political problem as "thoroughly Biblical." "Each (civilization) is convinced that it is on the side of God, truth and justice, while its enemy is allied with Satan, wickedness, and barbarism."

"A civilization can .. advance and decline at the same time-but not forever. There is a limit towards which this ambiguous process moves; the limit reached when an activist sect which represents the Gnostic truth organizes the civilization into an empire under its rule. Totalitarianism, defined as the existential rule of Gnostic activists, is the end form of progressive civilization." Eric Voegelin.

In the realpolitik's of Cooper and the Calgary School the fundamentalist protestant right wing are the foots soldiers in their cynical attempt to restore a new age of Plato's Philosopher King through the creation of right wing populist political movements and parties. They created it in the autarchic leadership of Preston Manning over the Reform Party and now in the autarch in Ottawa who rules in the name of a reborn Conservative party, which is the ultimate Big Lie.

Strauss taught that an elite, wise ruling class must rule the unsophisticated masses by telling them noble lies for their own good.

Strauss loved Plato, interpreting his teachings to mean, “... true democracy is an act against nature and must be prevented at all costs.”

“Because mankind is intrinsically wicked, he has to be governed,” Strauss wrote. “Such governance can only be established, however, when men are united - and they can only be united against other people.” Leaders must always provide an enemy.

Straussian teachings spark delusions of grandeur in neocon intellectuals, who imagine themselves as the wise ruling elite, set free of the bonds of honesty and equality.

While publically declaring themselves libertarians of the right, they are anything but, again the Straussian deception and lies that cover their realpolitik. They want Plato's Philosopher King, the supreme ruler, and they see him sanctioned by the politics of social conservative Christianity.

What are we to think of Strauss? Murray Rothbard addressed this question more than forty years ago, in several reviews of Strauss’s works, written for the William Volker Fund. The situation that Rothbard confronted differed entirely from the present. Strauss did not then appear, whether rightly or wrongly, as the supposed mastermind behind an aggressive American foreign policy. Quite the contrary, to most American conservatives in the 1950s and 1960s, Strauss seemed a valiant battler against positivism and historicism in political science. In their stead, he wished to revive the study of the Greek classics; and he appeared to defend natural law against its modern detractors. Would Rothbard, himself a champion of natural law, find in Strauss a welcome ally?

Rothbard located a fatal flaw in Strauss’s work. He was no friend whom libertarians should rush to embrace: his view of natural law was entirely mistaken. Further, his mistake was not a mere theoretical failing, of interest to no one but a few scholars. The misunderstanding of morality that ran through Strauss’s work might lead, if applied in practice, to immense harm. Strauss wished to replace the ironclad restrictions on the state, imposed by natural law rightly understood, with the "prudential" judgments of political leaders who aim to enhance national power.

Murray N. Rothbard – writing over forty years ago – had Strauss's number:

"As Strauss sees matters, classical and Christian natural law did not impose strict and absolute limits on state power; instead, all is left to the prudential judgment of the wise statesman. From this contention, Rothbard vigorously dissents. 'In this [Straussian] reading, Hobbes and Locke are the great villains in the alleged perversion of natural law. To my mind, the 'perversion' was a healthy sharpening and development of the concept.' … Strauss's rejection of individual rights led him to espouse political views that Rothbard found repellent: 'We find Strauss . . . praising 'farsighted', 'sober' British imperialism; we find him discoursing on the 'good' Caesarism, on Caesarism as often necessary and not really tyranny, etc... he praises political philosophers for yes, lying to their readers for the sake of the 'social good'…. I must say that this is an odd position for a supposed moralist to take.'"

The Calgary School promotes the politics of Leo Strauss, Eric Voegelin and Carl Schmitt, secrecy, power in the hands of a strong man, power must be held at all costs, and the cynical use of the religious right/ social conservatives as your base. Even if it means lying to the public and hiding your real agenda. Harper fits that bill as much as Bush does.

In fact I would argue that Harper has taken the ideological political formula that the right has devised from the works of Strauss and Schmitt to heart more so than his Yale counterpart. For an analysis of the influence of Carl Schmitt on the Harper autocracy see my; Post Modern Conservatives.

Despite the Conservative five priorities, their economic or environmental policies, Harpers regime comes down to two key right wing elements; Militarism and increasing the power of the Police and the Security State; Heil Hillier, Maintiens le droit.

The secrecy of the state, the rule of elite, the mobilization of your base against perceived enemies is the neo-conservative politics of the Reform/Alliance/Conservative party in practice. Which was ok to gain power, but now that they are in power the continuation of the secret strong man state has shocked it's conservative base speechless.

Strauss's thinking seems in important respects tailor-made for a rising elite that wants, on the one hand, to justify its own claim to power and, on the other, to discredit an older elite that it is trying to replace.

Under Harper the Reform Party populist democratic renewal project is but a shadow of itself; take Senate Reform, still a matter on the agenda, but it is not the Triple E Senate of the Reform Party. The Reform shadow play is there to satisfy the base that this is still Manning's old party, which of course it isn't.

Beginning almost twenty years ago, "the Calgarians" cultivated a relationship with the nascent Reform Party. Although the latter was perhaps too populist and plebiscitary in tone for their comfort, both Calgarians and Reformers were possessed of a conviction that the western provinces were being shortchanged within confederation as successive governments in Ottawa concentrated so heavily on the festering Québec issue.

Harper, unlike Preston Manning, was a student of the Calgary School. Harper's political practice is influenced more by this than Manning was. Hence Harpers surprise; the recognition of Quebec as a nation, giving it the separatism it wants within a decentralized federal state. That is more the nuanced politics of the Calgary School than the Reform Party demand that the West Wants In. The old anti-bilingualism of the Reformers is replaced with the subtle Two Distinct Languages policy of the Conservatives. Which again appeals to Quebecois nationalism, while also keeping the rest of Canada happy with one language; English.

And it is clear that the Calgary School influenced the Conservatives Environmental policy more so than Green Conservative Calgarians; Preston Manning and Joe Clark, since Barry Cooper is a founder of the climate change denier group the Friends of Science (sic). Science has nothing to do with it they are Friends of the Oil Patch. And in typical Straussian fashion all the Conservatives discussions with stakeholders on the environment were held in secret.

Also see my;

Whigs and Tories

Right to Life = Right To Work

Leo Strauss and the Grand Inquisitor

by Shadia B. Drury

There is a certain irony in the fact that the chief guru of the neoconservatives is a thinker who regarded religion merely as a political tool intended for the masses but not for the superior few. Leo Strauss, the German Jewish émigré who taught at the University of Chicago almost until his death in 1973, did not dissent from Marx’s view that religion is the opium of the people; but he believed that the people need their opium. He therefore taught that those in power must invent noble lies and pious frauds to keep the people in the stupor for which they are supremely fit.

Not all the neoconservatives have read Strauss. And those who have rarely understand him, for he was a very secretive thinker who expressed his ideas with utmost circumspection. But there is one thing that he made very clear: liberal secular society is untenable. Religion is necessary to provide political society with moral order and stability. Of course, this is a highly questionable claim. History makes it abundantly clear that religion has been a most destabilizing force in politics—a source of conflict, strife, and endless wars. But neoconservatives dogmatically accept the view of religion as a panacea for everything that ails America.

Leo Strauss

By John Gueguen, 13 May 2003. A memo in which Gueguen provides background for anyone wanting to investigate whether there may be substance to the allegations of Leo Strauss's complicity in the political work of contemporary “Straussians”.

1. The past decade has produced a ferment of critiques and defenses of Strauss in respect to several themes having to do with the general tenor of his work and of its particular aspects. I maintain a substantial file on this part of Strauss research, along with a larger collection of materials that extend back to my own study with him at Chicago in the early 1960s when I was pursuing the Ph.D. there.

2. This memo will consist primarily of a bibliographical review of the most interesting pieces I have collected that may have some relevance for this topic, at least to provide a sense of direction by indicating what has been done in recent years.

3. The leading critic of Strauss in N. America has been a sprightly young lady whom I met at a conference about a dozen years ago in Chicago—Shadia B. Drury, of the Univ. of Calgary. She came to the notice of colleagues with a substantial article in the journal, Political Theory (13/3, August 1985), “The Esoteric Philosophy of Leo Strauss” (pp. 510-535). It was followed two years later by a second article in the same journal (15/3, August 1987, pp. 299-315), “Leo Strauss’ Classic Natural Right Teaching.” This time the editors asked two prominent political philosophers to append their comments: “Dear Professor Drury” (by Harry V. Jaffa, one of Strauss' former students and major allies), pp. 316-25; “Politics against Philosophy: Strauss and Drury” (by Fred Dallmayer, who had been a critic of Strauss), pp. 326-37. Drury's severe critique was judged to be of sufficient potential to upset the standard perception of Strauss that it could not be ignored, even though it was by a relatively young and inexperienced author. She presents the case that Strauss was a dangerously deceptive ally of the modern philosophers he himself had spent his life criticizing because he elevated the philosopher above justice, thus making himself unaccountable.

The full-length critique Drury was working on at the time appeared at the end of 1987 as The Political Ideas of Leo Strauss (N.Y.: St. Martin's Press, 288 pp.). I quote from the publisher's notice: “This is the first book-length study. . .. In a portrait of the philosopher at odds with his general image, Drury maintains that Strauss has presented his thoughts wrapped in a veil of scholarship because he believes that the truth undermines religion and morality, and so is bound to wreak havoc on political society. . ..[She reveals] the extent to which Strauss' ideas are indebted to Nietzsche, Freud, and Machiavelli. . .and challenges many accepted beliefs about ‘the founder of a movement, a school of thought and even a cult.’..[and the] increasingly important influence [of the “Straussians”] on the present-day political thought. . ..”

This book generated many thoughtful reviews (mostly by Strauss' students and defenders), of which I have a collection. One says: “Drury means to convey that the reputation of Strauss as a natural right political philosopher with a high-minded approach to political life is simply false in all its essentials.” One reviewer admits that “as a philosopher, Strauss was moved by the sting of the awareness of lacking an adequate answer to the question of questions: Should I live theologically (morally-politically) or philosophically (serious questioning of the morality-piety informing my ‘cave’)?” The most substantial reviews include: Rev. Ernest Fortin A.A., “Between the Lines: Was Leo Strauss a Secret Enemy of Morality?”, Crisis (Dec. 1989), 19-26 (a vindication of Strauss which was rebutted by a letter in the March 1990 issue by a Drury supporter); and Marc Henrie, “The Ambiguities of Leo Strauss,” which reviews the Strauss “legacy” from his death in 1973 up to 1988.

Drury had a chance to rebut her critics in a review of Strauss' The Rebirth of Classical Political Rationalism: Essays and Lectures, ed. Thomas L. Pangle (Univ. of Chicago Press, 1989). It appeared in the same journal which carried her original critiques, Political Theory, 19/4 (Nov. 1991), 671-675.

Critics of Strauss also accuse him of elitism and anti-democratic sentiment. Shadia Drury, author of 1999's Leo Strauss and the American Right, argues that Strauss taught different things to different students, and inculcated an elitist strain in American political leaders that is linked to imperialist militarism and Christian fundamentalism. Drury accuses Strauss of teaching that "perpetual deception of the citizens by those in power is critical because they need to be led, and they need strong rulers to tell them what's good for them." Drury adds, "The Weimar Republic was his model of liberal democracy... liberalism in Weimar, in Strauss's view, led ultimately to the Nazi Holocaust against the Jews." However, Strauss was hardly alone in arguing that liberalism had produced authoritarianism. Many German émigré, most notably among them Hannah Arendt, Theodore Adorno, and Max Horkheimer, made similar claims.

Strauss’ students are aware of the impression their admiration for him makes on outsiders. Allen Bloom was the best known of those students thanks to his best-selling 1987 anti-egalitarian diatribe The Closing of the American Mind, and more recently to his having been “outed” by his old friend Saul Bellow in Bellow’s novel, Ravelstein. In his tribute to his former teacher, published after Strauss’s death, Bloom observed that “those of us who know him saw in him such a power of mind, such a unity and purpose of life, such a rare mixture of the human elements resulting in a harmonious expression of the virtues, moral and intellectual, that our account of him is likely to evoke disbelief or ridicule from those who have never experienced a man of this quality.”[i] Bloom’s rhetorical strategy here of appropriating a projected criticism—the fawning admiration Straussians have for their teacher/founder and turning it around—also has the effect of demarcating an “out-group” that does not understand from an in-group that has experienced the truth, which is another characteristic feature of the style and substance of what makes a Straussian.

It is partly the aura that emanates from Strauss that gives credence to the claims of conspiracy when Straussians are involved in something, if that is in fact the claim that people make. More particularly, the prominence given to the notion of a charismatic founder within the Straussian fold means that it quickly begins to look like a cult.

		Faith and Political Philosophy The Correspondence between Leo Strauss and Eric Voegelin, 1934-1964 Peter Emberley and Barry Cooper, eds. 1993 Political Theory, Political Philosophy Hardback ISBN-10: 0-271-00883-0 ISBN-13: 978-0-271-00883-7 Out of Stock Indefinitely
Leo Strauss and Eric Voegelin were political theorists of the first rank whose impact on the study of political science in North America has been profound. A study of their writings is one of the most expeditious ways to explore the core of political science; comparing and contrasting the positions both theorists have taken in assessing that core provides a comprehensive appreciation of the main options of the Western tradition. In fifty-three recently discovered letters, Strauss and Voegelin explore the nature of their similarities and differences, offering trenchant observations about one another's work, about the state of the discipline, and about the influences working on them. The correspondence fleshes out many assumptions made in their published writings, often with a frankness and directness that removes all vestiges of ambiguity. Included with the correspondence are four pivotal re-published essays-Jersualem and Athens: Some Preliminary Reflections (Strauss), The Gospel and Culture (Voegelin), Immortality: Experience and Symbol (Voegelin), and The Mutual Influence of Theology and Philosophy (Strauss)-and commentaries by James L. Wiser, Hans-Georg Gadamer, Stanley Rosen, Thomas J.J. Altizer, Timothy Fuller, Ellis Sandoz, Thomas L. Pangle, and David Walsh.
Peter C. Emberley is Associate Professor of Political Science at Carleton University and editor of By Loving our Own: George Grant and the Legacy of Lament for a Nation (Carleton, 1990). Barry Cooper is Professor of Political Science at the University of Calgary and author of several books, including The End of History (Toronto, 1984) and Action into Nature: An Essay on the Meaning of Technology (Notre Dame, 1991).

BARRY COOPER
B.A. (UBC), A.M., Ph.D (Duke), F.R.S.C.

Political theory and Canadian politics, political thought and public policy.

Author of Merleau-Ponty and Marxism, Michel Foucault: An Introduction to His Thought; The End of History: An Essay in Modern Hegelianism; The Political Theory of Eric Voegelin; Alexander Kennedy Isbister, A Respectable Critic of the Honourable Company; Action into Nature: An Essay on the Meaning of Technology; Sins of Omission: The Making of CBC TV News; The Klein Achievement; and Eric Voegelin and the Foundations of Modern Political Science. Co-author of the controversial best seller, Deconfederation: Canada Without Quebec; and of Derailed: The Betrayal of the National Dream. Articles have appeared in several philosophy and political science journals.

Dr. Cooper is affiliated with the Friends of Science. They have produced a video called "Climate Catastrophe Cancelled: What You're Not Being Told About the Science of Climate Change". In addition, Dr. Cooper hosts the McNish Lecture Series for the Advancement of Western Civilization. The inaugural lecture was given by His Excellency, Martin Palous, former Czech Ambassador to the USA, and Czech Ambassador Designate to the United Nations. The lecture was entitled Freedom of Expression in the New Europe.

Leo Strauss and the neoconservatives

By Shadia B. Drury

The Straussians are the most powerful, the most organised, and the best-funded scholars in Canada and the United States. They are the unequalled masters of right-wing think tanks, foundations, and corporate funding. And now they have the ear of the powerful in the White House. Nothing could have pleased Strauss more; for he believed that intellectuals have an important role to play in politics. It was not prudent for them to rule directly because the masses are inclined to distrust them; but they should certainly not pass up the opportunity to whisper in the ears of the powerful. So, what are they whispering? What did Strauss teach them? What is the impact of the Straussian philosophy on the powerful neoconservatives? And what is neoconservatism anyway?

Strauss is not as obscure or as esoteric as his admirers pretend. There are certain incontestable themes in his work. The most fundamental theme is the distinction between the ancients and the moderns - a distinction that informs all his work. According to Strauss, ancient philosophers (such as Plato) were wise and wily, but modern philosophers (such as Locke and other liberals) were foolish and vulgar. The wise ancients thought that the unwashed masses were not fit for either truth or liberty; and giving them these sublime treasures was like throwing pearls before swine. Accordingly, they believed that society needs an elite of philosophers or intellectuals to manufacture "noble lies" for the consumption of the masses. Not surprisingly, the ancients had no use for democracy. Plato balked at the democratic idea that any Donald, Dick, or George was equally fit to rule.

In contrast to the ancients, the moderns were the foolish lovers of truth and liberty; they believed in the natural rights to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. They believed that human beings were born free and could be legitimately ruled only by their own consent.

The ancients denied that there is any natural right to liberty. Human beings are born neither free nor equal. The natural human condition is not one of freedom, but of subordination. And in Strauss's estimation, they were right in thinking that there is only one natural right - the right of the superior to rule over the inferior - the master over the slave, the husband over the wife, and the wise few over the vulgar many. As to the pursuit of happiness - what could the vulgar do with happiness except drink, gamble, and fornicate?

Praising the wisdom of the ancients and condemning the folly of the moderns was the whole point of Strauss's most famous book, Natural Right and History. The cover of the book sports the American Declaration of Independence. But the book is a celebration of nature - not the natural rights of man (as the appearance of the book would lead one to believe), but the natural order of domination and subordination.

In his book On Tyranny, Strauss referred to the right of the superior to rule as "the tyrannical teaching" of the ancients which must be kept secret. But what is the reason for secrecy? Strauss tells us that the tyrannical teaching must be kept secret for two reasons - to spare the people's feelings and to protect the elite from possible reprisals. After all, the people are not likely to be favourably disposed to the fact that they are intended for subordination.

But why should anyone object to the idea that in theory the good and wise should rule? The real answer lies in the nature of the rule of the wise as understood by Strauss.

It meant tyranny is the literal sense, which is to say, rule in the absence of law, or rule by those who were above the law. Of course, Strauss believed that the wise would not abuse their power. On the contrary, they would give the people just what was commensurate with their needs and capacities. But what exactly is that? Certainly, giving them freedom, happiness, and prosperity is not the point. In Strauss's estimation, that would turn them into animals. The goal of the wise is to ennoble the vulgar. But what could possibly ennoble the vulgar? Only weeping, worshipping, and sacrificing could ennoble the masses. Religion and war - perpetual war - would lift the masses from the animality of bourgeois consumption and the pre-occupation with "creature comforts." Instead of personal happiness, they would live their lives in perpetual sacrifice to God and the nation.

Arendt and Strauss

She appears to have been genuinely uninterested in acquiring or counseling power, another virtue increasingly scarce among our "public intellectuals." Witness her long-running feud with fellow-émigré Leo Strauss, who became a colleague of Arendt's at the University of Chicago. Besides rebuffing his amorous advances (what minor nightmares they must been), Arendt saw in Strauss' careful attitude toward the Nazis all the signs of a sniveling opportunist, especially when, as a Jew, he could hardly expect any favors. In the 1960s, Arendt became a grossmutter of sorts to many student radicals, while Strauss helped concoct the intoxicating blend of powerlust and esoterica that evolved into neoconservatism. His intellectual spawn now occupy editorial offices, university faculties, and the Bush Administration, and their Platonic noble lies, having issued in a needless and protracted war in Iraq, have stoked the flames of hatred and recrimination throughout the Arab and Muslim worlds. Having seen the Master in action, Arendt would have known what to make of the Straussian cabal of sycophants and mediocrities.

Darwinian Conservatism by Larry Arnhart: February 2006

As I indicate in Darwinian Conservatism, the arguments for "intelligent design theory" as an alternative to Darwinian evolution were first stated in Book 10 of Plato's Laws. Leo Strauss's book on Plato's Laws raises questions about intelligent design in Plato's political theology. Those questions suggest the possibility that there might be a natural moral sense in at least some people that does not depend on the cosmic teleology of Plato's intelligent design theology. And if so, that suggests the possibility of justifying natural right as rooted in a moral sense of human nature shaped by natural evolution, which would not require an intelligent design theology.

In Plato's dialogue, the Athenian character warns against those natural philosophers who teach that the ultimate elements in the universe and the heavenly bodies were brought into being not by divine intelligence or art but by natural necessity and chance. These natural philosophers teach that the gods and the moral laws attributed to the gods are human inventions. This scientific naturalism appeared to subvert the religious order by teaching atheism. It appeared to subvert the moral order by teaching moral relativism. And it appeared to subvert the political order by depriving the laws of their religious and moral sanction. Plato's Athenian character responds to this threat by developing the reasoning for the intelligent design position as based on four kinds of arguments: a scientific argument, a religious argument, a moral argument, and a political argument.

Leo_Strauss Archive

Find blog posts, photos, events and more off-site about:
Stephen Harper, gnostic, HegelReform Party, Conservatives, Conservative Party, politics, philosophy, Barry Cooper, University of Calgary, Canada, Leo Strauss, Calgary School,Carl Schmitt,Eric Voegelin,Shadia Drury