A few brief thoughts:

1. While it was great to reconnect with the many old faces present in the room, developing new relationships with the young/emerging leaders in the not for profit sector from across the country was incredibly invigorating. I’ve forgotten how passionate that leaders in the not for profit world can be; especially with respect to the general population.
2. Whoever chose the speakers at the conference knew what they were doing. I was especially appreciated the talks by Alan Gregg, Naheed Nenshi (Mayor of Calgary, who I am comfortable calling Canada’s urban mayor) and Shawn Atleo (National Chief to the Assembly of First Nations, and by  leaps and bounds the most thoughtful speaker). I have made a Bundlr of the content of each speech as observed by the Twitterverse, but will do a followup critique of the speeches later.
3. From my conversations, I truly believe there is a major disconnect between what the leaders of the non profit sector want as solutions to the problems that ail the sector and the practical solutions that reality makes available. Finding a way to bridge that gap is a problem that I feel will be the responsibility of the newer generation.
4. The working groups that I participated in were very productive; so much so that I look forward to seeing the next steps. I truly hope that next steps are taken; I would not want to see the recommendations proposed fall by the wayside.

Over the past few months, the Young Canadians Peace Dialogue on Sri Lanka has given participants a greater insight into the opportunities and challenges facing Sri Lanka today. In particular, our last session, “Making Peace Personal” highlighted the importance of possessing a life-long dedication to acheiving a fair and just peace in Sri Lanka.

Today, the Organizers of the Dialogue invite you to share in the same commitment exemplified by our speakers by being part of our legacy project, BuildChange.

Aims of BuildChange

BuildChange demonstrates to the world that communities in conflict can identify and work towards shared and common interests. Over the next four months, BuildChange shall ensure that a number of war-affected communities will gain access to clean drinking while showcasing the incredible potential awaiting Sri Lanka if our people can learn to work constructively and respectfully with each other.

BuildChange Details

Our BuildChange project will fund the construction of 25 wells in Mullaitivu, Killinochi and Vavuniya districts. The main beneficiaries of the project shall be former Internally Displaced Peoples who have returned home to find that they lack proper water and sanitation facilities. Preference for the beneficiaries will be the most vulnerable i.e. women- headed households, senior citizens and the disabled.

The water wells will change the lives of 50 families, improving their access to clean drinking water, increasing the level of household sanitation and reduce the risk of waterborne diseases. In addition community members will also be trained on well maintenance and repair.

BuildChange Supporters

BuildChange is privileged to have support of two major Canadian institutional supporters. The Mosaic Institute, the think-tank that has been the driving force behind the dialogues, shall continue to provide critical logistical and institutional support to our efforts.

In addition, our success will be built on the support and goodwill of the Canadian Rotarian Water Foundation. An organization affiliated with Rotary International, the Foundation has a particular specialty in providing sustainable water delivery solutions in developing countries. The Foundation has done the due diligence on the project and will issue tax receipts for collected funds.

All funds collected shall be forwarded to the Rotary Club of Colombo South who in turn will build the wells.

…

Conclusion

Much of the history of post-independence Sri Lanka has been defined by communal grievances and misunderstandings. These events escalated into a violent and brutal war that encompassed most of my life and I suspect the vast majority of people in this room. The consequence of this war still scar our parents and our grand parents generation, with the current policies of the Sri Lankan government and global Tamil separatist movements only being a reflection of these wounds.

However the future of Sri Lanka cannot continue to be dictated by the events of our past. We are not destined to live apart and in fear of each other. We in fact can learn to respect, honour and love the contributions and experience of different communities, as these dialogues have demonstrated.

However it is up to each of us to make the individual and personal commitment to do what is necessary to build the future we all want to see in Sri Lanka. Our BuildChange project gives us that chance to lay one more brick to build that future.

We look forward to your participation.

The Problems of Multiculturalism

Linking the root of British Islamist extremism to state multicultural policies, Mr. Cameron asserted that these policies not only failed to provide a common vision of society but also tolerated the segregation of communities behaving in ways that run counter to Western values. Outlining the importance of having shared values to form the basis of a national identity, Cameron argues that multiculturalism undermines this national identity, so much so that Muslims are not aware of their duties or responsibilities that come with being British. A more effective replacement to this passive state policy is to actively promote liberal values that would look like ensuring all immigrants speak the language of their new home and ensuring that people are educated in elements of a common culture and curriculum.

Practical Implications of Shared National Identity

Mr. Cameron’s concerns and remedies are certainly not new; the same concerns have been repeatedly expressed. What is absent in his account of multiculturalism is a reflection of a modern nation without some form of multicultural policies. Take Sri Lanka, the country of my birth. Upon gaining independence in 1948, the initial priority for successive Sri Lankan governments was to enact very similar policies to what Mr. Cameron espouses: namely the promotion of one common Sri Lankan identity within both the Sinhala and Tamil  populations. The Sinhala Only Language Act for instance was designed to ensure that all members of the population can speak one language. During the 1970’s, state organs strived to ensure that minority populations adapted to the traditions and customs the majority Sinhalese population. While these nationalist policies were eventually reversed, these policies exacerbated the existing misunderstandings and tensions between the majority Sinhalese and minority Tamil communities. These tensions eventually led to the rise of the brutal Tamil Tigers terrorist group and a 25 year old civil war that only recently ended.

Whether it be the Tamil Tigers in Sri Lanka, the Chechen rebels in Russia, or the Egyptian, Libyan and Tunisian demonstrators in the Middle East: all these groups are, in their own unique way, demanding liberation from a ‘common national identity’ that excludes those falling outside the identity  from both the public square and view. Young Muslims turn away from British identity, not because of a lack of attraction to British identity, but because those articulating the ‘common British identity’ are commonly spouting  xenophobic and racist virulence. In fact I would argue the more existential threat to British national identity are not  Muslim extremists – who will never be English in the first place – but rather are British nationals who harass and marginalize all those not born in Mother England.  Take a bow, English Defence League.

Conclusion

Contrary to Mr. Camerons opinion, state multicultural policies are not efforts to segregate communities or to build a society full of cultural differences but no unifying ideal. Multiculturalism is as Charles Taylor calls ‘a politics of recognition’: asking the state to not only tolerate the presence of diverse cultures,  but to positively engage these cultures in an honest but respectful dialogue that informs all citizens -  regardless of origin – of their duties and responsibilities to their country and their neighour.

Childlike makes a great scientist; Childish produces tantrums.

Childlike brings fresh eyes to marketing opportunities; Childish rarely shows up as promised.

Childlike is fearless and powerful and willing to fail; Childish is annoying.

Childlike inquires with a pure heart; Childish is merely ignored.

Very close to something that the Big Guy who lives upstairs said. Responding to “Who is the greatest?”, He pointed to a child and said

“Truly, I say to you, unless you turn and become like children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven. Whoever humbles himself like this child is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven.

“Whoever receives one such child in my name receives me, but whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a great millstone fastened around his neck and to be drowned in the depth of the sea.

While I am still working through my own questions of faith in the aftermath of the election and the behaviour of supposed ‘Catholics’, it is fascinating to read these passages extolling the virtues of being a child in a world where children strive to grow up way too soon. As Tinker Bell put so succinctly:

“..children know such a lot now, they soon don’t believe in fairies, and every time a child says, ‘I don’t believe in fairies,’ there is a fairy somewhere that falls down dead.”

Or in my words:

children know such a lot now, that they soon won’t believe in being children. And every time a child says, ‘I dont believe in being a child,’ there is a one more (metaphorical) child that falls down dead.

May God bless you with discomfort
At easy answers, half-truths, and superficial relationships,
So that you may live deep within your heart.

May God bless you with anger
At injustice, oppression and exploitation of people,
So that you may work for justice, freedom and peace.

May God bless you with tears
To shed for those who suffer pain, rejection, hunger, and war,
So that you may reach out your hand to comfort them
And turn their pain into joy.

And may God bless you with enough foolishness
To believe that you can make a difference in the world,
So that you can do what others claim cannot be done
To bring justice and kindness to all our children and the poor.

Amen.”

Got to love the Franciscans.

Like the first dialogue, this event featured Sri Lankan speakers who  were acutely aware of the challenges as journalists and media representatives in the country. Panellists included:

• NIGEL NUGAWELA – Co-Editor, Groundviews, Colombo, Sri Lanka
• V.V. GANESHANANTHAN – Novelist (Love Marriage), Blogger and Journalist, Ann Arbor, MI
• ARJUNA RANAWANA – News Manager, OMNI TV Alberta, Edmonton
• MARTIN REGG COHN – Deputy Editorial Page Editor, The Toronto Star

Video and comments follow after the jump.

I was particularly struck by the contributions of Nigel Nugawela from Groundviews.org, who I soon discovered, was a former school mate and who shared common friends from my youth (ha!). As I mentioned to Nigel, he really needs to find a pipe, monocle and English top hat; far too gentlemanly to be dressing in a manner suited to the heat and humidity of Colombo. Providing an engaging grassroots view of the challenges facing those who seek to provide an alternate perspective of local politics and issues, Nigel summarizes the three duties of the media in a post-conflict societies:

1. Promoting awareness of critical political and social issues in public;
2. Peace promoter or bridge builder to mitigate the polarization between ethnic communities; and
3. Policy maker to influence the outcome of policies or to shape their development.

Both “Sugi” Ganeshananthan and Arjuna Ranawana also provided some interesting insights as well, though I must confess I was less interested in the views of the diaspora as it pertained to Sri Lanka.  However I have to say that Sugi is truly one of the most eloquent people I have ever met from the Sri Lankan diaspora. Author of “Love Marriage“, I had the privilege of sharing a few words with Sugi at a reading of her book on Friday. I must say I am tremendously envious of her constant ability to articulate concerns and ideas I have always expressed in words far more beautiful and evocative than mine. While Arjuna was previously unknown to me, I look forward to hearing more from him in the days, months and years to come.

Not much more needs to be said, other than that the stories afforded by these speakers were incredibly inspirational, reconnecting me back to the land and people that I continue to care for deeply. Even though my mind was a slightly distracted due to the election, I must say that their contributions have given me a new found appreciation for the work that journalists do, particularly in areas of limited freedom of speech and media. Hopefully the future will provide some opportunity to learn more from – and perhaps contribute to – their respective experiences.

Why I was running

A couple of weeks ago, a friend asked me “why do I do what I do?” In response, I wrote:

I do what I do because at some point in time I want to have children of my own. But before I do, I need to ensure that they grow up in a world that enables them to succeed and enjoy their lives… And that is why I do what I do.

Similar principles grounded my campaign approach. I wanted to run a campaign that my children would love to see and would love to be proud of. I promised myself to:

• not take credibility for things I haven’t done;
• develop a strong educational platform that is realistic and empowers children;
• run according to personal convictions and beliefs;
• never malign or attack another candidate; and
• treat voters with the honesty and respect they deserve rather than lie to obtain their vote.

In short, I wanted a campaign I would be proud to lose rather than a campaign that I am ashamed to win.

As a result of these promises to myself, hours of work and walking around, I got a little over 150 votes and a last place finish.

Lessons Learnt

While I would be lying if I said I am not disappointed with the results (given the amount of work I put in and the number of doors I knocked on, I really thought I would have got over 1,000),  I remain so proud of a principled campaign and the outpouring of love from my family and friends. But perhaps most importantly, this experience gave me an incredibly rare insight into three major challenges of modern democracy:

1. Voter Apathy

About a third of the voters I met had little interest about the municipal election, even though municipal issues are far more relevant to daily living than either federal or municipal politics.  Youth who answered the door had an almost universal disinterest in the election, expressing little to no desire to learn more about the different campaigns or to vote.

2. The Politics of Passion

Given a culture of voter apathy, politicians have incredible incentive to practice wedge politics that inflame the passions of their tribe of voters to put them into office. Targeted political messaging and flashy sound-bites become easy replacements for well-researched but lengthy policy creation and discussion mechanisms (Take a bow, Mayor Rob Ford and your “I’m going to stop the gravy train”). Wedge politics forces electoral decisions to be made on a shared relationship or identity with a candidate rather than any concrete electoral platform. “Truthiness” as it were.

Same happened in both electoral discussions. Two of my fellow candidates were incredibly vocal about the ‘dilution of the Catholic faith’ in our schools… so much so that if elected that they would exclude non-Catholics from attendance. Re-elected Trustee Thomas Thomas continues to proclaim his status as a ‘soldier of God’ neglecting to mention that his past conduct is anything but.

Legal realities of a publicly funded education system aside, the self-righteousness and entitlement of certain individuals in both debates was pretty nauseating. With the debates quickly turning into a competition of who was the better Catholic, I was  reminded of the image of the Pharisee who proudly extolled his virtues to anyone in earshot and the taxpayer beating his heart asking for forgiveness. I am pretty ecstatic that I publicly expressed my discomfort at what was going on (the words ‘disturbing’ and ‘hypocrites’ may have left my mouth in some fashion and combination).

Note to the churched audience:  youth generally do not react positively to having religion stuffed down their throat. Nor do they appreciate yelling, screaming and cajoling.  They do appreciate patience, teaching and tolerance for mistakes. As many Catholics more faithful than myself can attest, any religious faith is a life-long relationship; an understanding that grows and develops till the end of days.

Unfortunately such expressions of nuanced faith tend to get lost in the ignition of religious passions.

3. The Complicity of Institutions

A little known fact: I may have been a major reason why the debates above actually happened. In September, I sent numerous emails to every principal and vice principal of local high-schools and secondary schools, practically begging for opportunities for trustees to talk about their duties to the voting population. Eventually my requests were directed to the Archdiocese and the School Board. Sadly neither institution believed they had the requisite mandate to organize such events. It was left up to the Catholic Community of Malton and Father  O’Brien of St Francis Xavier to agree to try and arrange something.

In the two debates that did occur, no representative from either institution attended to clarify the roles and responsibilities of Trustees or to provide some advice of what a faithful Catholic trustee should look like.

Consequently:

• both debates featured characters that had little understanding of the role that School Board Trustees play in education and the limits of our responsibility;
• incredibly uncharitable expressions and speeches by both candidates and the audience;
• the public and private ridicule of my own personal faith (most memorable example: one “Catholic” adult actually approached my parents and snickered “When did your son convert? Five months ago?”)

Suffice to say my response to the latter idiots idiocy mirrors the opening of Hilaire Beloc‘s campaign speech in anti-Catholic England (as recounted by George Wiegel in Letters to a Young Catholic):

“Gentlemen, I am a Catholic. As far as possible, I go to Mass every day. This is a rosary. As far as possible, I kneel down and tell these beads every day. If you reject me on account of my religion, I shall thank God that He has spared me the indignity of being your representative.”

As for the Archdiocese and the School Board, they fully deserve the inclusion of Thomas Thomas in their fold, the incumbent trustee convicted of election fraud in 1989. Not only does Trustee Thomas have  difficulty in coherently communicating ideas in English, he is incredibly adept at speaking about Board accomplishments as if they were his own and publicly lambasts parents who tearfully criticize his lackadaisical record. The fact that not many voters were exposed to his unbecoming behaviour is a direct result of the ‘hands off’ approach adopted by the Archdiocese and School Board.

Conclusion: Consequences for Young Leaders

If you want to believe that this post is my personal gripe about the results, please go right ahead… However you should also know mine was not a solitary experience; many other young leaders lost their respective campaigns which were based on substantive and productive platforms:

Louroz Mercader, 27 – Founder of MYGames, endorsed by the Mississauga News – lost the Ward 7 City Councillor race to the incumbent Nando Iannicca.

Parthi Kandavel, 27 – Masters in Education, endorsed by the Toronto Star – lost his campaign to become a Toronto District School Board Trustee to Elizabeth Moyer, former school board trustee.

Ashwin Balamohan, 27 – currently in law school – lost his campaign to become a Toronto District School Board Trustee to Jerry Chadwick, retired educator.

Hazel McCallion, 89, wins.

No matter the extent of our qualifications, our education or our leadership, the accomplishments of young leaders will likely continue to be undervalued so long as voters continue to be apathetic and cast decisions based on their relationships with a candidate or a shared identity.

My biggest fear continues to be that future generations will continue the traditions of the past and buy out of a system that ceases to be relevant to their voice or that accommodates their needs. If this happens on a mass scale, I fear that politics will no longer – if it ever did – cater to the needs expressed by many but privilege the ideas and wants of a few. Abstract and immaterial arguments of privileged haves will ignore the absolutely concrete necessities of the have-nots. Our environment and the quality of our lives will continue to degrade beyond recognition while our elected representatives fight for a past that is long gone.

In an era of globalization and constant change, I have always argued that the last thing voters should do is elect the “sane” politicians of yester-year.

Given the results of this election, I pray I am wrong.

Highlights of the Campaign:

• Finding a way to use business cards as campaign material;
• A fascinating conversation with V. and her mother about the difficulties that special needs children face in publicly funded schools (V. was easily one of the most beautiful spirits that I met on the campaign trail);
• Researching the reasons as to why parents are forced to teach math to children and why peanut butter is banned for school;
• Conversing with a parent about the impossibility of teaching students how to budget effectively;
• Defending the legitimacy of my Catholicism in a debate (apparently I did not do a great job… one participant approached my parents to ask how deep my faith was);
• Hours of walking around and getting lost in beautiful communities; and
• Helping an old lady get her cat inside the house (no joke).

So in sum, whatever happens tomorrow, this campaign has been a lot of fun and a period of tremendous personal growth. I am pretty proud of the fact that I did not run a dirty campaign that brought another candidate or incumbent down.  I hope that I will have the privilege of  devoting more of my time to our youth.

One more night!!