Monday, October 26, 2026

Born Into a Storm:

 ✨ Born Into a Storm: A Legacy of Hope, Heartbreak, and Becoming a Rebel ✨

(A future-dated reflection by Tina Winterlik / Zipolita)

I’ve been thinking lately about the world I was born into — a stormy, electric time in history. The year I arrived wasn’t quiet. A hurricane swept through, politics were in upheaval, and a whole generation was holding its breath. No wonder I turned out to be a rebel — I came into this world with thunder shaking the windows.

Sometimes I look back and try to understand the weight my parents carried. They lived through moments that changed the world forever — the rise of JFK, the hope of Camelot, the heartbreak of his assassination, and then the devastating loss of Robert Kennedy just a few years later.

I was only five or six, but I remember that day.
I was at a friend’s house when my brother came to get me.
He said something bad had happened… something on the TV…
And when I walked in the door, my parents and my older sister were crying.

You never forget the sound of adults crying over something too big to explain to a child.

My mom adored Bobby Kennedy. She believed in what he stood for — fairness, justice, hope for families like ours. She used to dress us like the Kennedys. She made all our clothes, right down to the little pillbox hats she crafted for our Easter outfits. I didn’t understand the symbolism then, but I do now.

She wasn’t just dressing us up.

She was dressing us in the future she wanted for us.
A future that felt bright, promising, dignified — the kind of world the Kennedys talked about.

And then those dreams were shattered, twice.

It’s only as an adult that I realize how deeply those losses shaped my parents’ generation… and shaped me too, even as a baby in the middle of the storm.

Maybe that’s why I fight the way I do now.
Maybe that’s why injustice hits me so hard.
Maybe that’s why I speak up, even when it costs me.
Maybe that’s why I write.

I’m a rebel not because I chose to be — but because the world I was born into made me one.
A storm baby with a heart full of my mother’s hope and my parents’ courage.

History repeats.
So does resilience.
And maybe… so does the dream they believed in.


Note: I was savig this to publish but I think niw is good time.

the revolution will not be televised — but what about the internet?

 

the revolution will not be televised — but what about the internet?


https://youtu.be/90zm9DCBbXo?si=rUfrW6esSiEPB2_f


I was a huge Bernie Sanders fan, and this is an important video I want people to watch.

Back in 2016, more than 1,000 people reportedly protested outside CNN's Los Angeles headquarters over what they called the Bernie blackout. After Bernie Sanders won caucuses in Hawaii, Washington and Alaska, protesters questioned how much attention the mainstream media was giving his campaign.

Cenk Uygur of The Young Turks breaks down the controversy in the video featured in my original blog post.

Here's what I want people to think about: television isn't the internet, but the same questions about who controls the message still matter.

Television networks decide what makes the news, how much attention a story receives, and which voices get heard. Online platforms have their own gatekeepers, algorithms and corporate interests. Information can be buried, overlooked or removed from view.

We need independent journalism. We need people who question powerful institutions. And we need audiences willing to look beyond the headlines and ask difficult questions.

When the media becomes part of the establishment it is supposed to scrutinize, who holds the powerful accountable?

I wrote this in April 2016. Nearly evearything about how we consume information has changed since then, but the question remains worth asking.

Watch the video and tell me what you think.

https://youtu.be/90zm9DCBbXo?si=rUfrW6esSiEPB2_f


πŸ”— https://tinawinterlik.blogspot.com/2016/04/the-revolution-will-not-be-televised.html

Help Tina Get Back on Her Feet

❤️ Help Tina Get Back on Her Feet

I'm an independent artist, writer and blogger trying to find stable housing and get back on my feet.

For years, I've shared my art, stories, photography and writing with you. Now I'm reaching out to ask for a little help with housing and basic living expenses.

If my work has ever made you smile, inspired you, taught you something or simply brightened your day, I'd be grateful if you could give a little back.

Every contribution, no matter how small, is appreciated. Thank you for your kindness and for helping me continue creating.

πŸ’™ Support Tina through PayPal:

https://www.paypal.com/paypalme/Zipolita

Please note: My QR code doesn't seem to be working, so please use the direct link above.

Thank you for being part of my creative journey.

Tina Winterlik aka Zipolita 🎨

huge step in the right direction: time to abolish the indian act

 

a huge step in the right direction: time to abolish the indian act

By Tina Winterlik aka Zipolita

Sometimes, a political conversation takes a turn that deserves our attention.

Today, I learned that Manitoba Premier Wab Kinew has called for the abolition of the Indian Act. And I think this is a huge step in the right direction.

The Indian Act has shaped the lives of First Nations people in Canada for generations. It is part of a colonial system that gave the federal government enormous control over Indigenous peoples, their communities and their affairs.

How can we talk about reconciliation while maintaining a system rooted in government control over Indigenous lives?

Kinew has raised an important question: can Indigenous nations have genuine self-determination and strong nationhood without the paternalism and barriers imposed by the Indian Act?

I believe this conversation deserves our full attention.

what comes next?

Abolishing the Indian Act cannot simply mean replacing one set of rules with another imposed by Ottawa. First Nations must have a meaningful role in deciding what comes next.

That means serious conversations about Indigenous citizenship, self-government, treaty rights, land, sovereignty and the future of First Nations as distinct nations.

It also means listening to Indigenous people who are asking difficult questions about lateral violence, internal divisions and the challenges communities face when trying to build healthier futures.

These are not simple issues. There will be different opinions, different experiences and different visions for the future. Those differences deserve to be heard.

But imagine what could become possible if First Nations had the freedom and authority to build governance systems that reflect their own peoples, laws, cultures and aspirations.

Imagine a future in which Indigenous citizenship is determined by Indigenous nations themselves, rather than being defined by a colonial law.

Imagine reconciliation moving beyond words and ceremonies into meaningful changes in power and responsibility.

this conversation belongs to all of us

Canada's history cannot be changed, but the systems we carry forward can be questioned, challenged and transformed.

I have spent years researching family history, including connections to Indigenous ancestors. I do not claim First Nations citizenship or speak on behalf of Indigenous people. I believe, however, that learning about our shared history means paying attention when people call for meaningful change.

We should be able to discuss these questions without shutting down the conversation or assuming that everyone who disagrees has the same motives.

And we must remember that Indigenous peoples are not one single political community with one single opinion. First Nations must be able to determine their own futures.

Wab Kinew's call does not solve everything, and a declaration is not the same as action. His position on pipelines and environmental protection remains a separate, important conversation.

But calling for the abolition of the Indian Act opens the door to a much bigger discussion about what genuine self-determination could look like.

The next step is to listen, learn and make sure First Nations have the power to shape what comes next.

Reconciliation cannot simply mean asking Indigenous peoples to fit into the systems that were imposed upon them.

Perhaps it is time to build something different.

What do you think should replace the Indian Act, and how can Canada ensure that Indigenous nations—not Ottawa alone—decide their own futures?

Let's have that conversation.

— Tina Winterlik aka Zipolita

I blog about nouns — people, places and things. Even when the subject is difficult, I try to put a positive spin on it.

#IndigenousRights #AbolishTheIndianAct #SelfDetermination #FirstNations #IndigenousSovereignty #Reconciliation #TreatyRights #IndigenousCitizenship #SelfGovernment #Canada

stand with canada’s courageous young climate plaintiffs

 

seven years of waiting: stand with canada’s courageous young climate plaintiffs

fifteen young Canadians. Seven years of perseverance. One enormous question: who is accountable for protecting our future?

Today, October 26, 2026, history is being made in Vancouver.

Fifteen young Canadians are finally getting their day in Federal Court in a landmark case challenging the federal government's response to climate change. Their lawsuit, La Rose v. His Majesty the King, was filed on October 25, 2019. These young people have spent seven years navigating a legal battle just to have their case heard. Imagine that. Seven years of waiting for your day in court while the climate crisis continues to unfold around you.

I want everyone to know what these courageous young people are doing. They deserve our attention, our respect and our support.

why are these young people taking canada to court?

The plaintiffs argue that the federal government's failure to adequately address greenhouse gas emissions is contributing to climate-related harm and violating their constitutional rights to life, liberty and security of the person under Section 7 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

This isn't simply an argument about political promises or whether we like one government's policies more than another's.

It is a legal challenge asking whether the government has constitutional responsibilities to young people whose lives, health, cultures and futures are being affected by climate change.

Their lawyers argue that Canada's repeated failure to meet its emissions targets has consequences. Wildfire smoke, extreme heat, flooding, displacement and the psychological burden of climate anxiety are not abstract concepts to the people living through them.

The government will have an opportunity to present its own evidence and arguments. The court must consider the case before reaching a decision.

But these young people have fought for seven years for that opportunity to be heard.

seven years. Let that sink in.

The original lawsuit was filed in October 2019.

In October 2020, the Federal Court dismissed the original claim. The young plaintiffs appealed.

On December 13, 2023, the Federal Court of Appeal allowed part of their appeal, giving them an opportunity to amend their constitutional claim. They subsequently filed amended claims in 2024 and 2025.

And now, on October 26, 2026, their trial has begun.

These plaintiffs were children and teenagers when this journey started. They have grown older while waiting for the legal system to reach this point.

Think about what seven years means when you're young. Think about the summers, the wildfires, the floods, the heat and the changes to the world around you. Think about having to keep pushing forward with a case that challenges the decisions of your own federal government.

They didn't give up.

That persistence deserves recognition, regardless of what the eventual judgment will be.

this is about the generations who come after us, too

Climate change does not respect political boundaries. It doesn't care who we voted for, how much money we have or whether we can afford to move somewhere safer.

We depend on the same natural systems: clean air, clean water, healthy forests, functioning oceans, fertile soil and the extraordinary diversity of life on this planet.

When those systems are threatened, our communities are threatened, too.

Young people will live with the consequences of decisions made today long after many of the people making those decisions have left office.

Shouldn't their voices count?

Shouldn't they be able to ask difficult questions about the future they are inheriting?

And shouldn't governments be expected to explain their decisions when young people argue that those decisions are putting their constitutional rights at risk?

That is why this case matters beyond the courtroom in Vancouver. It raises important questions about climate accountability, constitutional rights and the responsibilities governments have to the people they serve.

show these young people that they are not standing alone

Supporters gathered outside the Federal Court building in Vancouver today. A public viewing session and a rally at the Vancouver Art Gallery were also organized to bring people together in support of the plaintiffs.

West Coast Environmental Law is part of the legal team supporting the case, alongside Arvay Finlay and Our Children's Trust.

I had hoped to bring my paintings to show my support. I was advised that the art gallery would be a better location because the rally was happening there. Although I couldn't be there in person today, I can still use my art, my blog and my voice to help spread the word.

Artists, writers, photographers, educators, parents, grandparents, students and concerned citizens all have something to contribute.

You don't have to be a lawyer or a climate scientist to care about the future.

You don't have to agree on every political issue to recognize the importance of young people having their day in court.

And you don't have to be in Vancouver to show your support.

Read about the case. Share reliable reporting. Follow the court proceedings. Listen to the young plaintiffs and the evidence presented. Talk about climate accountability with your friends, family and community.

Most importantly, don't let this historic trial disappear from public attention once today's headlines move on to something else.

The proceedings are expected to continue into late November, with closing arguments anticipated in February 2027.

This is not a one-day story.

my message to the young plaintiffs

To the fifteen young Canadians who have carried this case forward for seven years:

Thank you for refusing to let these questions disappear.

Thank you for persevering through the legal challenges, the waiting and the uncertainty.

Thank you for standing up for the right to have your concerns heard.

You should never have had to spend so much of your young lives fighting simply to get your case before a judge. But here you are, finally being heard.

Whatever the outcome, your determination has already brought an important national conversation into a federal courtroom.

You are asking difficult questions about responsibility, rights and the future we are leaving to the next generation. Those questions deserve serious consideration.

I hope you feel the support of the many people who care about this planet and the people who will inherit it.

You are not alone.

everyone, please share this story

If you have children, grandchildren, nieces, nephews or young people in your life, think about the world they will inherit.

If you care about the forests, the oceans, the salmon, the orcas, the wildlife, the land and the communities we call home, take a moment to learn about this case.

And if you have ever wondered whether ordinary people can challenge powerful institutions and demand accountability, pay attention to what these young Canadians are doing.

Fifteen young people began this journey in 2019. Seven years later, they are standing before a federal court.

That is courage. That is persistence. And that is a story worth telling.

Please share this post. Let these young people know that their efforts matter. Let Canada know that people are watching. And let us keep asking the questions that future generations deserve answers to.

Our future is not somebody else's problem.

It belongs to all of us.

— Tina Winterlik aka Zipolita

Sources and further reading:

#ClimateJustice #LaRoseVCanada #YouthClimateAction #ClimateAccountability #ClimateRights #WestCoastEnvironmentalLaw #OurChildrensTrust #ProtectOurFuture #ClimateChange #YoungPeopleMatter

who is accountable for bc's prescribed drug supply?

 

calling for an independent investigation: who is accountable for bc's prescribed drug supply?

We need investigative journalists, university researchers, public institutions and people with lived experience to help us uncover the facts.

I recently came across a troubling discussion about Dilaudid (hydromorphone), prescribed safer supply, pharmacy payments and allegations involving more than 60 pharmacies in British Columbia.

The more I read, the more questions I had.

I am not a medical researcher, an investigative journalist or a public-health expert. I am a concerned citizen who believes that public money, pharmaceutical interests and the lives of vulnerable people deserve serious scrutiny.

This story is too big for one person to investigate alone.

are we learning from the oxycontin crisis?

North America has already witnessed the devastating consequences of opioid-related corporate misconduct, inadequate safeguards and failures of accountability.

We cannot assume that the circumstances surrounding Dilaudid are identical to those surrounding OxyContin. But we should be asking hard questions about financial incentives, public spending, prescribing practices, patient safety and the availability of treatment.

In February 2025, the B.C. government announced allegations involving more than 60 pharmacies and changes to its prescribed-alternatives program.

What happened next?

Were the allegations substantiated? Were any pharmacies disciplined or referred for prosecution? How much public money was involved? What independent evaluations have been published?

These are questions that deserve documented answers, not speculation or political talking points.

is there a war on people who use drugs, harm reduction, or both?

We need to look beyond the headlines and examine what is happening to human beings.

If someone depends on prescribed medication and that prescription is discontinued, what happens next?

  • Can they access treatment promptly if they want to stop using drugs?
  • Are detoxification, opioid agonist treatment, residential rehabilitation and long-term recovery support genuinely available?
  • What happens to people who return to the unregulated drug supply?
  • Are changes to prescribing policies reducing harm, increasing harm, or producing different outcomes for different groups?
  • Are people being treated as individuals who need care, or as numbers in a system of prescriptions and payments?

Preventing diversion matters. So does preventing overdose deaths. Neither objective should be used to dismiss the other.

We need independent research that examines both.

who can help investigate?

I am calling on:

Investigative journalists, including the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists (ICIJ), to consider whether the financial arrangements, public payments and allegations warrant deeper investigation.

University researchers, particularly in public health, epidemiology, addiction medicine, pharmacy policy and health economics, to examine the available evidence and identify what remains unknown.

Public accountability institutions, including the Office of the Auditor General of British Columbia, to consider whether public spending and oversight arrangements merit further examination within their mandates.

Frontline workers and people with lived experience to share documented evidence, research, and experiences that can help explain what is happening beyond official announcements.

We need to hear from pharmacists, prescribers, outreach workers, people receiving prescribed alternatives, people in recovery and families who have lost loved ones.

Their experiences matter. So do reliable data, independent analysis and the presumption that allegations must be investigated fairly before conclusions are drawn.

this is bigger than one medication

The question is not simply whether Dilaudid is good or bad. It is whether our systems of healthcare, addiction treatment and public funding are delivering the outcomes they promise.

Who benefits financially? Who is accountable when safeguards fail? Who measures the consequences when policies change? And who ensures that people are not abandoned when they need help?

We should not have to choose between protecting vulnerable people and demanding financial transparency.

We need both.

If you are a researcher, investigative journalist, healthcare professional, frontline worker or someone with relevant lived experience, please share credible sources, published research and information that could help move this discussion forward.

Please distinguish verified facts from allegations and personal opinions. Protect the privacy of patients and other vulnerable people. We are looking for evidence, not scapegoats.

I may not have the expertise to uncover this story myself, but I can help ask the questions and bring attention to the people who do.

Sometimes the first step toward accountability is refusing to stop asking questions.

Who is willing to help investigate?

— Tina Winterlik aka Zipolita

Sources to begin with:

  • B.C. government: https://news.gov.bc.ca/releases/2025HLTH0008-000127
  • B.C. prescribed-alternatives program: https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/health/practitioner-professional-resources/pharmacare/pharmacare-substance-use-disorder-hub/pa
  • International Consortium of Investigative Journalists: https://www.icij.org/
  • B.C. Centre on Substance Use: https://www.bccsu.ca/
  • Office of the Auditor General of British Columbia: https://www.oag.bc.ca/

#Dilaudid #OxyContin #SaferSupply #OpioidCrisis #PharmaAccountability #PublicHealth #AddictionTreatment #InvestigativeJournalism #PatientSafety #BritishColumbia

we are the world 🌎🌍🌏

 A little note before you read: My kid was born in the early 2000s, and when We Are the World came out in 1985, I was about the age my kid is now. I'm 64, and this song genuinely inspired me and gave me hope. ❤️🌎 I wonder how many young people today have even heard it, and how many of us older folks have forgotten what it meant. Maybe it's time to pass that hope along.

we are the world —πŸŒπŸŒŽπŸŒπŸŒπŸ—Ί when music brought us together

January 28, 1985. Forty-one years ago, some of the biggest names in music came together for one extraordinary night. The result was We Are the World, a song that reminded the world what we can accomplish when we put our differences aside and work together for the greater good.

The idea began with Harry Belafonte, who wanted musicians to use their fame and influence to help people suffering from famine in Africa. Michael Jackson and Lionel Richie wrote the song, and legendary producer Quincy Jones brought an incredible group of artists together to make it happen.

After the American Music Awards, 45 musicians gathered at A&M Studios in Los Angeles. Think about that for a moment! Stevie Wonder, Bruce Springsteen, Tina Turner, Diana Ross, Bob Dylan, Ray Charles, Cyndi Lauper, Billy Joel and so many others, all in one room, donating their time and talent to a cause bigger than themselves.

Quincy Jones famously placed a sign at the studio entrance that read, “Check your egos at the door.”

And they did.

The single was released on March 7, 1985, as part of USA for Africa, raising millions of dollars for famine relief.

more than a song

Man, a lot has happened since 1985. The world has changed in so many ways, and many young people today may not even know the story behind this remarkable collaboration.

But watching or listening to We Are the World today reminds me of something we should never forget.

When people work together for the greater good, good things can happen.

Boy, did this take vision, luck, timing and love. Someone had to imagine what was possible, bring all those different personalities together, and convince them to put aside their individual interests for a common purpose.

That is no small achievement!

We don't have to be famous singers to make a difference. We can contribute our time, our skills, our creativity, our compassion or whatever we have to offer. Sometimes a small act of kindness becomes part of something much bigger than we ever imagined.

Look around us today. There is so much division, so much suffering, and so much emphasis on what separates us. Meanwhile, people everywhere are struggling to find housing, feed their families, escape conflict and simply get through another day.

Imagine what we could accomplish if we put even half as much energy into helping one another as we put into fighting with one another.

We are not all the same. We don't have to agree on everything. But we are sharing this planet, and we have a responsibility to care about what happens to one another.

That is what makes this song special to me, even after all these years.

It is a reminder of what humanity can do when we choose cooperation over competition, compassion over indifference, and love over division.

We are the world. We are the people. And we still have the power to make a difference.

What a beautiful thing to remember.

Put a little love in your heart. The world could use it.

— Tina Winterlik | Zipolita

from the amazon to canada

 

from the amazon to canada: why i still believe we must speak up

(I need to edit a bit, but posting now)

Proud of the people who keep fighting for the land, the water, the people and the future.

I remember when I first became interested in environmental destruction in the Amazon. I read Savages by Joe Kane, a book about the struggle of the Huaorani people in Ecuador against oil companies threatening their ancestral lands, forests and way of life.

That book stayed with me. It opened my eyes to what was happening to Indigenous communities and the natural world in the name of oil and money. .

I remember thinking that if enough of us spoke up, we could stop it. If people understood what was happening, surely we could make a difference.

How naive I was about the power of money, politics and corporate interests.

I have learned that speaking up does not automatically stop destruction. Awareness does not always lead to action. And even when people fight for years, the forces working against them can be enormous.

But I have never stopped caring.

a dream of the amazon

I always wanted to travel to the Amazon with my camera. I wanted to photograph everything — the incredible colours, the wildlife, the forests, the rivers and the people. I wanted to see it for myself, not simply read about it or look at photographs taken by someone else.

I wanted to witness that extraordinary world and share it through my photography.

I may never get there. Mexico has been the closest place I have found to that dream, but right now, even getting back there is difficult.

There is sadness in having dreams that circumstances may never allow us to fulfil. But loving a place, caring about its people and standing up for its future should not depend on whether we can afford to visit.

We can care from wherever we are.

i love canada, too

I love Canada. That does not mean I cannot see the damage being done here.

Our forests, rivers, coastlines, salmon, orcas and communities all need protection. Indigenous peoples continue to fight to have their rights, knowledge and relationships with their territories respected. Housing, clean water and the basic dignity of human beings should never be treated as expendable.

I have spent years using my art, photography and writing to draw attention to the things I believe matter. My Water Is Life paintings are part of that commitment. Mermaids, whales, otters, waves, forests — these are not simply subjects to paint. They represent the living world we depend on.

I cannot solve every problem. I cannot personally stop every pipeline, oil spill or act of environmental destruction. But I can refuse to pretend that these things do not matter.

And I can keep speaking up.

remembering shane pointe

I also want to remember Siem Te’ta-in (Shane Pointe), the respected Musqueam Elder and Coast Salish Knowledge Keeper, who passed away on April 8, 2026.

Shane generously shared his teachings with communities, schools and institutions throughout British Columbia. One of the teachings associated with his work was Nutsamaht — “We are one.” His words reminded people of the connections between human beings, our ancestors, the land, the water, the sky and all living things. .

We need to remember people like Shane, not only for what they taught us, but for the responsibility those teachings leave in our hands.

I also remember the words “Class Action Lawsuit.” To me, they represent the importance of people coming together to seek accountability when individuals or communities believe they have been harmed by powerful institutions. Legal action can take years, and bringing a case does not guarantee justice, but collective action can give people a way to have their voices heard.

Shane's teaching that we are one is a reminder that we should not have to face every struggle alone.

why i am still proud

Today, I am thinking about Brazil, the Amazon and everyone who continues to defend the natural world and the rights of the people who have lived in relationship with it for generations.

I am thinking about Canada, too. Loving our country should mean wanting it to do better. It should mean asking difficult questions, protecting what is precious and holding those in power accountable.

I am proud of people who stand up, even when the odds are against them. I am proud of artists, photographers, writers, knowledge keepers, community members and ordinary people who refuse to look away.

I once thought that speaking up would be enough to change the world.

I understand now that it is not that simple.

But silence will not make the problems disappear, either.

I still have my camera, my paintbrushes and my words. I still have dreams, even if some of them remain out of reach.

And I still believe that every living thing matters.

Nutsamaht. We are one.

Water Is Life. Protect the land. Respect the people. Keep speaking up.

— Tina Winterlik / Zipolita

#WaterIsLife #AmazonRainforest #IndigenousRights #ShanePointe #Nutsamaht #EnvironmentalProtection #Canada #Brazil #FightBackWithArt #WarriorUpWithArt

under pressure: brazil, canada, and the fight for our future

 

under pressure: brazil, canada, and the fight for our future

“This is our last dance…” — David Bowie and Queen, Under Pressure

Have you seen the video of the enormous crowds in Brazil, with David Bowie and Queen singing Under Pressure?

I watched it and felt something I haven't felt in a while: a sense that ordinary people still have the power to stand together, raise their voices, and demand something better.

After Canada's last federal election, I have been feeling sad about the direction our country is taking. I worry that people are being influenced by one-sided messaging, political spin, and misinformation circulating through WhatsApp and social media. When people hear only one version of a story, how can they make a fully informed decision?

Democracy needs more than an election every few years. It needs people who ask questions, check facts, listen to one another, and think beyond the next headline. It needs a public that understands what is at stake.

And it needs us to remember that our neighbours are not our enemies simply because they vote differently.

looking beyond our borders

A friend in Mexico recently mentioned BRICS, and it reminded me how much the world is changing.

BRICS originally stood for Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa. The group has since expanded to include other countries across Asia, Africa and the Middle East. Canada is not a member.

BRICS is a forum for economic, political and diplomatic cooperation. Although there have been discussions about alternatives to the US dollar in international trade, BRICS does not currently have a single shared currency used by all its members.

What interests me is the bigger question: how will countries cooperate in a changing world, and will those relationships improve life for ordinary people?

Economic power means very little if people cannot afford a home, feed their families, access healthcare or imagine a future for their children.

Those are the things I want our leaders to be talking about.

today, young people are taking canada to court

Here in Vancouver, fifteen young Canadians are beginning a landmark climate trial against the federal government.

In La Rose v. His Majesty the King, they argue that Canada's actions on climate change violate their constitutional rights. They are asking the court to hold the government accountable and require a science-based Climate Recovery Plan.

Their case has taken years to reach trial.

Think about that. Young people have had to fight for seven years just to get their arguments heard in court.

They are asking questions that affect every generation: What kind of planet are we leaving behind? Who bears the consequences when governments fail to act? And do young people have a right to a safer future?

Today, people are gathering at the Vancouver Art Gallery to watch the proceedings, and a rally is planned for this evening.

I had considered going downtown myself, perhaps even taking some of my paintings. But the weather is cold, and my paintings are already taking part in the Eastside Culture Crawl. So today, I will be supporting these young people from home.

You don't have to be physically present at every demonstration to care about what is happening.

You can share information. You can tell someone about the case. You can listen to the young plaintiffs. You can refuse to look away.

solidarity is not just a word

I think about those crowds in Brazil, the young people standing up in Canada, and people everywhere who are worried about their homes, their livelihoods, their rights and their children's future.

We may live in different countries and speak different languages, but many of our concerns are the same.

We want clean water, breathable air, safe communities, affordable housing, dignity, and a future that isn't sacrificed for somebody else's profit.

We want governments to listen before the damage becomes irreversible.

And we need to be careful about the information we share. A video can inspire us, but we should also investigate its context. A message repeated thousands of times doesn't automatically become true. Before forwarding political claims, let's ask who created them, what evidence supports them, and what might have been left out.

That applies to every political party, including the ones we support.

Democracy is not about surrendering our judgment to a politician, a billionaire, an algorithm or a viral WhatsApp message. It is about exercising our own judgment.

the world is watching

I am an artist, a writer and a blogger. I have spent years using words and paintings to encourage people to think about the world around them.

My Water Is Life paintings celebrate the living things we have a responsibility to protect: mermaids, whales, otters, waves, forests and hummingbirds.

Art cannot solve every problem. But it can remind us what is worth protecting.

So, to the people in Brazil raising their voices, to the young Canadians walking into court today, and to everyone working toward a fairer, more peaceful and sustainable world:

You are not alone. Keep asking questions. Keep speaking up. Keep imagining something better.

And to everyone watching from home, as I am today: don't underestimate the power of paying attention, sharing reliable information and standing in solidarity with people who are trying to make a difference.

Perhaps that is what the music is reminding us.

We are under pressure. The question is what we choose to do with it.

Let us choose compassion over contempt, facts over misinformation, cooperation over division, and a future worth leaving to the next generation.

From Vancouver, with solidarity for everyone working toward a better world.

— Tina Winterlik / Zipolita
Emily's 2nd Act | Art, words and a little hope

Learn more:

#Brazil #BRICS #Democracy #ClimateJustice #YouthClimateAction #LaRosevCanada #UnderPressure #Misinformation #WaterIsLife #Emilys2ndAct

fake captcha scams:

 

fake captcha scams: when proving you're human becomes a security risk

A little online awareness can go a long way. Please share this information with someone who might not know.

Yesterday, I was trying to access my PayPal account. Because I rarely use it, I had to go through extra verification and make several phone calls before I could get things sorted out.

That got me thinking about something I recently saw in a video: fake CAPTCHA scams.

First, let's explain what a CAPTCHA is.

You have probably seen a box on a website asking you to click “I'm not a robot” or identify pictures containing traffic lights, bicycles or other objects. It's a way for websites to distinguish human visitors from automated computer programs.

Usually, this is a normal security measure.

But criminals have found a way to exploit our trust in it.

how the fake captcha scam works

A scam known as ClickFix tricks people into believing they need to complete a security check to access a website, watch content or prove they are human.

Instead of simply clicking a checkbox or selecting pictures, the fake verification page gives additional instructions.

For example, it might tell you to:

  • Open a command window on your computer.
  • Copy and paste something into it.
  • Press Enter to complete the verification.

The problem? Those instructions can cause you to execute a malicious command that downloads or runs harmful software.

Depending on the attack, criminals may be able to steal passwords, account information or other sensitive data.

You think you're proving you're human. You could actually be helping criminals compromise your computer.

but what if you're using a phone?

This is where things can get confusing.

I watched a video demonstrating keyboard shortcuts such as Ctrl + R, Ctrl + V and Enter. Those instructions are intended for a computer environment, and some versions of this scam specifically target Windows users.

On a phone, the process can be different. That doesn't mean phones are immune to scams.

A fraudulent page might instead try to persuade you to download an unfamiliar application, install an APK file, grant excessive permissions or enter your login information.

Simply seeing a suspicious CAPTCHA or clicking an ordinary verification checkbox does not mean your device is infected. The danger comes from what the page subsequently persuades you to do.

how to protect yourself

Here are a few simple rules worth remembering:

  1. Stop if a CAPTCHA asks you to do something unusual. A verification page should not need you to execute computer commands.

  2. Never paste a command into a computer terminal just because a website tells you to. Don't press Enter to run something you don't understand.

  3. Don't install unfamiliar apps to prove you're human. Be especially cautious about downloading APK files from websites.

  4. Don't give a website unnecessary permissions. Be wary of requests to enable accessibility services, install certificates or disable security protections.

  5. Check the website address. A familiar logo doesn't prove a page is genuine.

  6. Use official apps and websites. If you're concerned about your PayPal account, open the official PayPal app or type its address yourself rather than following a suspicious link.

  7. If something seems wrong, stop. Close the page and verify the request through the service's official support channel.

If you have already followed suspicious instructions, don't panic. Avoid further interaction with the page, run the appropriate security checks, and change potentially exposed passwords from a trusted device. Contact your bank or payment provider if financial information may have been compromised.

a final thought

Not everyone grew up using computers. Not everyone understands browser settings, command windows, malicious downloads or the difference between a legitimate security check and a convincing imitation.

And that's not a criticism. The internet changes constantly, and scammers deliberately take advantage of people who are simply trying to do something ordinary.

I don't claim to know everything about technology. I'm learning, asking questions and trying to understand what I see online. That's why I think these conversations matter.

Yesterday, I was simply trying to access PayPal. Someone else might be trying to pay a bill, contact family, make a donation or buy something they need.

We shouldn't have to become cybersecurity experts just to use the internet safely.

Think before you click. Never run a command you don't understand. And if a supposed security check asks you to do something that feels wrong, stop.

Please share this post with friends, family members and anyone who might benefit from knowing about fake CAPTCHA scams.

A little knowledge can prevent a great deal of trouble.

Sources for further reading:

  • U.S. Federal Trade Commission: https://consumer.ftc.gov/
  • Microsoft Security: https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/security
  • Google Safe Browsing: https://safebrowsing.google.com/

Stay curious. Stay cautious. Help each other stay safe online.

Sunday, October 25, 2026

ai security concerns

 

ai security concerns: what is happening, what could happen, and how to prepare

There have been some unsettling reports about artificial intelligence and cybersecurity recently. I've seen people sharing videos about security procedures, emergency food supplies, backup power and generators.

Some of these warnings sound frightening. I think people deserve a clear explanation of what is happening, what the risks are, and what we can reasonably do to protect ourselves.

First, let's separate what we know from what we fear.

What is happening?

Artificial intelligence is becoming much better at finding weaknesses in computer software. These weaknesses, called vulnerabilities, can sometimes allow someone to break into a computer system, steal information or disrupt a service.

The same technology can help security researchers find and repair those weaknesses. However, criminals can also use AI to search for vulnerabilities, develop attacks and create convincing fraudulent messages.

Recent reports have described serious software vulnerabilities and disruptions to some online services. Security teams are working to identify and fix problems.

This is a legitimate cybersecurity concern. It does not mean that every computer system has been compromised or that a major disaster is inevitable.

What could happen?

Depending on the vulnerability and whether it is exploited, possible consequences include:

  • Websites and online services temporarily going offline.
  • Problems accessing some government or business services.
  • Attempts to steal personal information, passwords or financial details.
  • More sophisticated phishing emails, fraudulent messages and impersonation scams.
  • Disruptions to organisations that rely on vulnerable computer systems.

A cyberattack against critical infrastructure could have more serious consequences, depending on the systems affected. However, we should not assume that a software vulnerability will automatically cause power outages, food shortages or the collapse of essential services.

Those are different scenarios, and claims about them need evidence.

What can ordinary people do?

We don't need to panic or spend money we cannot afford. We can take some sensible precautions now.

1. Protect your digital life.

  • Install software and security updates from legitimate sources.
  • Use unique passwords and multifactor authentication where available.
  • Back up important photographs, documents and other files.
  • Be suspicious of unexpected links, urgent requests for money and messages asking you to reveal security codes.
  • Don't install software or follow technical instructions from an unverified video or message.
  • Keep some important telephone numbers and contact information written down in case your phone or internet connection is unavailable.

2. Prepare for an ordinary emergency.

Canadian emergency preparedness guidance recommends keeping essential supplies available so households can manage for at least 72 hours.

Consider gradually putting together:

  • Drinking water.
  • Non-perishable food that you can eat without electricity.
  • A manual can opener, if needed.
  • A flashlight and spare batteries.
  • A charged power bank for your phone.
  • Necessary medication and a basic first-aid kit.
  • Some cash in small denominations.
  • Warm clothing, blankets and essential supplies for pets.
  • A written list of emergency contacts.

You don't have to buy everything at once. Use what you already have, and add a few items when you can.

3. Think about food and water.

A temporary power outage can affect refrigeration, cooking and access to some services. Having a modest supply of shelf-stable food and drinking water is useful for many reasons, including storms and other routine emergencies.

Keep food that suits your needs and that you actually eat. Rotate your supplies rather than spending money on expensive emergency products.

British Columbia recommends planning for at least three days without power, with more supplies where practical. https://www2.gov.bc.ca/gov/content/safety/emergency-management/preparedbc/know-your-hazards/power-outages

4. What about generators and backup power?

A generator can be useful in certain circumstances, but it isn't something everyone needs to buy.

Never operate a fuel-powered generator indoors, in a garage, or near doors and windows. Its carbon monoxide exhaust can kill. Barbecues and camping stoves must not be used indoors for heating or cooking either.

If you need backup power, consider whether a battery power bank or another suitable battery system would meet your needs. Any generator installation should follow the manufacturer's instructions and applicable electrical safety requirements.

5. Know where to get reliable information.

During a genuine emergency, follow instructions from local authorities and emergency services. Check official government announcements rather than relying on anonymous social media accounts.

A person speaking urgently in a video may be sincerely concerned. Their concern alone, however, does not establish that every prediction they make is correct.

Ask three questions:

  • What specific event has actually been confirmed?
  • What is a possible consequence, rather than a proven or imminent one?
  • What practical action is recommended by a reliable source?

Preparation is not panic

I understand why people are concerned. We have experienced a pandemic, economic pressures, extreme weather, increasing dependence on digital services and a rapidly changing technological landscape.

It is reasonable to think about how we would manage if the internet went down, our phones stopped working, or a power outage lasted longer than expected.

But there is a difference between preparing for possible disruptions and telling people that a catastrophe is coming.

We should take cybersecurity seriously. We should also protect ourselves from misinformation, unnecessary fear and people trying to profit from our anxiety.

Prepare for the possibilities. Verify the warnings. Don't let fear make your decisions for you.

A little practical preparation, shared knowledge and neighbours helping one another can go a long way.

the abenaki of wΓ΄linak

 

the abenaki of wΓ΄linak: a history of dispossession, resistance and survival

They defended the land alongside Canadian troops. When they returned home, they discovered that their own territory had been divided up and given to white settlers.

Imagine fighting to defend a place you call home, only to return and discover that others have taken your land. Imagine being told that you no longer have the right to live where your community has existed for generations.

For the Abenaki of WΓ΄linak, this was not an imagined injustice. It was part of their history.

a homeland before colonization

The Abenaki are among the Indigenous peoples associated with the Wabanaki Confederacy, a network of northeastern Indigenous nations whose histories and territories extend across what are now parts of eastern Canada and the northeastern United States.

These nations had their own communities, political relationships, cultures and systems of governance long before European colonization. Their histories did not begin with the arrival of French or British settlers.

During the colonial period, the Abenaki developed relationships and alliances with the French, in part amid the growing pressures and conflicts created by British expansion. These relationships included trade, diplomacy and intermarriage. But alliances did not erase the Abenaki's own identity or their relationship with their ancestral territories.

As colonial conflict, famine and displacement affected Indigenous communities, some Abenaki families moved into the BΓ©cancour region of what is now Quebec.

building a community, then being expelled

In 1708, an agreement was formalized to establish an Abenaki settlement on Montesson Island, near BΓ©cancour. The community established roots there and lived on the island for approximately thirty years.

According to the historical account by Serge Rousseau, relations deteriorated when a new seigneur took control of the BΓ©cancour estate. He challenged the Abenaki's right to occupy the land and expelled them from the island.

The community was forced to relocate, first to another island in the BΓ©cancour River and then to a second location. Disease and flooding drove further displacement.

By 1735, the Abenaki had established themselves on the land where the WΓ΄linak community remains today.

Consider what these repeated moves meant. People had to leave familiar places, rebuild their homes and community, and adapt to circumstances they did not control. Their survival required extraordinary determination, but the need to demonstrate that resilience was itself a consequence of the injustice they faced.

even their church became a source of conflict

The Abenaki built a wooden church that served their community. At a time when BΓ©cancour did not yet have its own church, local French Canadian parishioners also attended Mass there.

Even after a church was built in BΓ©cancour in December 1757, some settlers continued to use the Abenaki church.

The historical account describes growing jealousy and tension between the communities. The Abenaki church was subsequently destroyed by fire in late December 1757. The original author records suspicions that some settlers may have set the fire to encourage the parish priest to reside at their own church. However, this allegation should not be presented as proven fact.

The church was never rebuilt.

This episode is a reminder that the history of colonization was not simply a matter of different communities living side by side. Relationships could involve cooperation and shared institutions, while also being shaped by unequal power and competing claims over land and authority.

fighting for canada, losing their own land

One of the most disturbing episodes in this account occurred after the War of 1812.

According to Rousseau's text, Abenaki warriors fought alongside Canadian forces against the American invasion. When they returned home after the conflict, they found that their territory had been divided into parcels and distributed to white settlers.

They had participated in defending the country, yet their own community was being deprived of its land.

The account describes the Abenaki resisting the dispossession, including destroying houses built on their village land. Through this resistance, they reportedly managed to retain two small islands in the BΓ©cancour River and approximately sixty arpents of land.

That was all that remained of their former territory, according to the account.

Think about the contradiction. Indigenous people were expected to help defend the country against invasion, while their own rights to their homeland were disregarded. Their contribution did not protect them from dispossession.

They were not asking for someone else's homeland. They were fighting to retain their own.

asking for justice

The injustice continued long after the war.

On March 3, 1858, the Abenaki addressed a letter to the Canadian legislature protesting the loss of their property. A committee was reportedly established to help alleviate their poverty, and an annual pension of $200 was granted. Their original territory, however, was not restored through this measure.

Financial assistance could not undo the loss of land, community resources or autonomy. Nor could a small pension make the original dispossession fair.

The account does not establish every legal detail of the land claims, and the surviving historical record should be examined carefully. But its central narrative is unmistakable: the Abenaki of WΓ΄linak repeatedly faced displacement, struggled to retain their territory and sought redress from authorities who did not restore what had been taken.

resilience should not obscure injustice

The original historical text celebrates the admirable resilience of the Abenaki of WΓ΄linak. Their determination to survive, maintain their community and defend their rights deserves recognition.

But we should be careful about how we use the word resilience.

When people repeatedly lose their land, are forced to relocate, see their property distributed to others and struggle to obtain justice, calling them resilient is not enough. It can unintentionally shift attention away from those who caused the harm and the institutions that permitted it.

The Abenaki should not have had to demonstrate extraordinary resilience to retain their homeland.

Their story is not simply one of hardship overcome. It is a story about power, dispossession, resistance and the failure to provide justice.

And it raises an uncomfortable question for Canada: how can a country celebrate its history and its defenders while overlooking the Indigenous people whose lands were taken in the process?

The Abenaki of WΓ΄linak survived. Their community endured. Their history deserves to be told, not as a footnote to colonial settlement, but as part of the history of this land itself.

Before we judge Indigenous communities today, we need to understand what happened to them yesterday.

Their history did not begin with European arrival. Their rights did not originate with colonial permission. And their survival should never be mistaken for proof that the injustices they endured were acceptable.

Historical basis: Serge Rousseau, for the CAR SΓ©minaire de Nicolet, drawing on Charles Wawanolett's history of the Abenaki, SociΓ©tΓ© d’Histoire RΓ©gionale de Nicolet, F238 / E12 / 9. Specific dates, land transactions and allegations in the original account warrant verification against archival records.

historical sources

This article is based on the historical account by Serge Rousseau for the Centre d’Archives RΓ©gionales du SΓ©minaire de Nicolet, drawing on Charles Wawanolett’s Histoire des AbΓ©nakis, as well as historical information published by the Abenaki Museum at Odanak and the National Assembly of Quebec.

The events described reflect the historical sources cited. Details of individual land transactions and the 1858 petition are attributed to the original historical account.

Sources:

- "Abenaki Museum — History of WΓ΄linak" (https://fort-odanak.ca/musee_abenakis-abenakis_museum-eng)

- "National Assembly of Quebec — Historical account (French)" (https://www.assnat.qc.ca/Media/Process.aspx?MediaId=ANQ.Vigie.Bll.DocumentGenerique_206929&process=Default&token=ZyMoxNwUn8ikQ+TRKYwPCjWrKwg+vIv9rjij7p3xLGTZDmLVSmJLoqe%2FvG7%2FYWzz)

- Rousseau, Serge, Les AbΓ©nakis de WΓ΄linak, Centre d’Archives RΓ©gionales du SΓ©minaire de Nicolet, referencing Charles Wawanolett’s history.

should i be locked up because i can't afford an apartment?

 

should i be locked up because i can't afford an apartment?

Let's take this conversation a little further.

If British Columbia decides to get tougher on homelessness, addiction and public disorder, what exactly are we proposing to do with all the people who are struggling to survive?

Build more prisons? More hospitals? More institutions to contain people who don't fit into the picture of the society we want to present?

Let's imagine 5,000 homeless people are suddenly taken off the streets.

Problem solved?

Where do they go when they're released? Have they found a home? Has their addiction been treated? Has their mental health improved? Do they have an income, food and somewhere safe to sleep?

Or have we simply hidden the problem from public view?

Now let me ask you something.

Should I be locked up because I cannot afford an apartment?

I have not committed a crime by being poor. I have not committed a crime because my income is insufficient to pay Vancouver's rents. I have not committed a crime because I need help.

Yet people experiencing homelessness are often discussed as though they are a problem to be removed rather than human beings whose circumstances deserve consideration.

Not everyone experiencing homelessness has an addiction. Not everyone has a mental health condition. Not everyone is dangerous. And people living on the streets are also vulnerable to assault, theft, exploitation and death.

Yes, communities have legitimate concerns about violence and public safety. People who commit crimes must be held accountable. Nobody should have to feel unsafe in their own neighbourhood.

But we need to ask what happens when services are reduced, treatment is inaccessible, housing remains unaffordable and people are left with fewer options.

Where do those people go?

What happens when someone who needs help cannot get it? What happens when someone loses their housing and has nowhere to turn? What happens when the only response comes after a crisis, an overdose, an assault or a criminal charge?

Are we going to keep building institutions to deal with the consequences while failing to address the circumstances that bring people there?

And who pays for all of it?

Prisons require buildings, employees, security, food and medical care. Hospitals require beds, doctors, nurses and treatment. All of these services cost money.

What would it cost to prevent some of these crises through housing, accessible treatment, mental health care and ongoing support?

We should be asking those questions before making decisions that affect thousands of lives.

Because here's the uncomfortable part.

Homelessness isn't always something that happens to someone else. It can happen when work disappears, rent becomes impossible to manage, a relationship breaks down, illness intervenes or the people you thought you could count on can no longer help.

You can be a contributing member of society and still find yourself without a secure place to live.

So I ask again: should I be locked up because I cannot afford an apartment?

And if your answer is no, then what are we prepared to do about a society in which people can work, struggle, grow older and still be unable to afford a safe place to call home?

We cannot keep talking about removing people from the streets without talking about where they will go.

We cannot talk about public safety without considering what happens when people are abandoned without support.

And we cannot call a problem solved simply because we can no longer see it.

A prison cell is not a home. An institution is not a substitute for a functioning social safety net.

Being poor is not a crime. Being homeless is not a crime. And being unable to afford an apartment should never, by itself, be a reason to lose your freedom.

Think about it.

What kind of society are we building — and what happens when the person who cannot afford a home is you?

genocide, colonization, privilege, and being an immigrant in your own land

 

My family tree

genocide, colonization, privilege, and being an immigrant in your own land

I want people to stop for a moment and think about their family histories.

Think about your parents, grandparents, great-grandparents and everyone who came before them.

How EXACTLY did you get here?

Who was already living on the land when your ancestors arrived? What happened to those people? What did your ancestors witness? What opportunities did your family receive? And what do you know about the people whose land became the country you now call home?

I have been asking these questions for more than 20 years while researching my own family history.

Recently, APTN Investigates brought attention to the 1862 smallpox epidemic and the devastating impact it had on Indigenous peoples in British Columbia. The investigation, Weapon of Genocide, examines historical evidence and accounts suggesting the disease was deliberately spread.

The BC Centre for Disease Control also acknowledges historical evidence that infected materials were deliberately distributed and that colonial authorities forced Indigenous people from Victoria, burned their homes and sent people back to their home communities while infection was spreading.

This was not simply a story about a disease arriving and people dying. It was a story about colonial power, displacement, land and human lives.

The epidemic devastated Indigenous communities. The Tsilhqot'in, Haida, Heiltsuk, Stó:lō and other Nations have their own histories and accounts of what happened. Their experiences deserve to be heard and taken seriously.

And we cannot separate this history from the wider colonization of the land that became British Columbia and Canada.

my own family history

My great-great-grandfather arrived in Victoria in 1862.

My great-great-grandmother, Eliza, was Songhees.

My great-grandfather was born in 1867, nine years before his parents married in 1876 — the same year the Indian Act was passed.

Those are the facts I have uncovered.

Why did they marry when they did? What was happening in their lives? What did Eliza experience as a Songhees woman during that period? What happened to her family during the smallpox epidemic?

I can ask these questions. I can search the records. I can listen for what my ancestors may still have to tell me.

But I will not invent answers simply to fill the gaps.

I have spent more than 20 years researching my family history, and there is so much I still don't know.

My great-grandfather's 1881 diary records ordinary activities: pulling turnips, digging ditches, killing a panther and hunting deer with someone identified as Indian John.

I have fragments of their lives, but I want to understand the people behind those fragments.

My Portuguese grandfather left home at just 14 and worked aboard a whaling ship. Portugal has its own long history of maritime conquest and colonialism. What did he know? What did he witness? How did he understand the world he entered?

I don't know all the answers.

But I am willing to ask the questions.

That is what researching family history should do. It should make us curious about the lives our ancestors lived, the decisions they made and the histories that shaped them.

It should also make us look beyond our own family trees.

the Indian Act was not the beginning

The Indian Act was passed in 1876, but colonization and the dispossession of Indigenous peoples had begun long before that.

The Act consolidated earlier legislation and gave the federal government sweeping powers over First Nations lands, resources, governance and legal identity. It became a central instrument of colonial control and assimilation.

Indigenous peoples already had their own laws, governments, economies, cultures and relationships with their territories. They did not need Europeans to bring them civilization.

Yet colonial governments treated Indigenous peoples as populations to be controlled, displaced and assimilated.

The consequences were profound: loss of land, restrictions on cultural practices, interference with families and communities, residential schools, and generations of harm.

We cannot discuss Canadian history honestly without acknowledging the violence and the policies that helped establish the country.

And we cannot pretend the effects ended when the laws were written or when the people responsible passed away.

now think about privilege

I want people to consider something uncomfortable.

You can come from a family that struggled. Your grandparents might have arrived with very little money. They might have worked hard, experienced discrimination themselves and sacrificed to give their children better opportunities.

Those experiences matter.

But they do not erase what happened to the people whose lands your family settled on.

You can recognize the struggles of immigrants and acknowledge Indigenous dispossession at the same time.

You can love your ancestors without pretending they lived outside history.

You can be proud of your family's achievements while asking how the society they entered was established and who paid the price.

Privilege does not mean that every person has an easy life. It does not mean that every newcomer is wealthy or that every descendant of settlers has been handed a comfortable existence.

It means looking honestly at the opportunities, protections and advantages that some people receive while others are denied them.

And it means recognizing that the history of this land is not simply a story of newcomers arriving and building a country.

People were already here.

immigrants in their own land

Here is what particularly troubles me.

Indigenous people have lived on these territories since time immemorial. Their descendants are still here, yet they continue to face racism, discrimination, poverty and the consequences of colonial policies.

Meanwhile, people born and raised in Canada are increasingly being treated as though they are the problem when they cannot afford housing, find secure work or make ends meet.

People who have lived here their entire lives are struggling to find a place to live. People who worked, paid taxes, raised families or contributed to their communities can find themselves priced out of the places they call home.

Some feel like strangers in their own neighbourhoods. Some feel abandoned by the country they grew up in.

And Indigenous people have experienced the dispossession of their own territories on a far deeper historical scale.

These are different histories, and we should not pretend they are identical. But both demand that we ask difficult questions about who has power, who gets access to resources, who is pushed aside and who is blamed when systems fail.

We should be able to discuss housing, immigration, wages and public services without turning vulnerable people against one another.

Newcomers are not collectively responsible for Canada's housing crisis. Indigenous people are not responsible for the poverty imposed on their communities. People struggling to survive should not be treated as disposable simply because they have less money or less power.

The real questions concern the policies, economic decisions and inequalities shaping our lives.

Who benefits? Who is excluded? Who has a voice? And who is expected to carry the consequences?

what do we owe one another?

I am not writing this to tell every person alive today to feel guilty for having ancestors who came from somewhere else.

We did not choose the circumstances of our births.

But we can choose whether to learn the history honestly.

We can choose to listen when Indigenous people tell us what happened to their families and communities. We can learn whose territory we live on. We can acknowledge the violence of colonization without dismissing it as ancient history.

We can also refuse to accept a society in which people who are struggling are blamed for their circumstances while those with the greatest power and resources escape scrutiny.

We need to stop treating human beings as problems to be removed.

Whether we are talking about Indigenous communities, immigrants, people experiencing homelessness, people living in poverty or families who can no longer afford the cities where they grew up, we should be asking what has gone wrong and what we can do to make things better.

A person's worth is not determined by the size of their bank account, the colour of their skin, the country their parents came from or whether they have a permanent address.

i want people to think

Look at your family history.

Ask where your ancestors came from, why they left, what they experienced and how they came to live where they did.

Then look at the history of the people who were already here.

Learn about the 1862 smallpox epidemic. Learn about the Tsilhqot'in chiefs who were hanged in 1864–1865. Learn about the Indian Act, residential schools and the policies that attempted to break Indigenous connections to land, family and culture.

Consider what your ancestors may have witnessed and what opportunities became available to their descendants.

You don't have to reject your family to acknowledge the truth.

You don't have to deny the struggles of immigrants to recognize the genocide and dispossession experienced by Indigenous peoples.

And you don't have to accept a system that treats people born and raised here as disposable when they fall into poverty.

We cannot change the past, but we can stop pretending it never happened.

We can stop blaming the people with the least power for every problem we face.

We can listen. We can learn. We can question the stories we were taught. We can make room for histories that were ignored or deliberately silenced.

I am still searching for the story of my great-great-grandmother, Eliza. I want to understand her life, her family and the world she lived in.

Her history matters to me because she is my ancestor.

And the history of Indigenous peoples matters to all of us because it is part of the history of this land.

Before you decide who belongs, who deserves help, who is privileged or who is the problem, take a look at the history that brought us here.

Who was here before your ancestors arrived? What happened to them? What advantages do you have today? And what are you going to do with what you learn?

Those are questions worth asking.

Not to divide us, but to help us understand one another, confront injustice and build a country where nobody is treated as an unwanted person in the place they call home.

the hypocrisy of immigration, privilege and who gets to belong

 

the hypocrisy of immigration, privilege and who gets to belong

I am so sick of the ignorance surrounding immigration in Canada.

I keep thinking about the people who immigrated to Canada from England in the 1970s. Some arrived with a job offer, had a relatively brief interview, settled here, built their lives and eventually became very successful, even wealthy.

And now some people who benefited from immigration are complaining about other people coming here.

Does anyone else see the irony?

Of course, not every immigrant had an easy journey. People arrived under different circumstances, and immigration rules have changed over the decades. But the point remains: many Canadians have an immigration story somewhere in their family history.

People came looking for work, opportunity, security and a better future for their children. They wanted a home, a job, an education and a chance to get ahead.

So did their neighbours. So did the people already living here.

And that brings me to something else that seems to get lost in this debate.

what about the people already here?

What about the Canadians who were born and raised here, went to school here, worked hard, paid taxes and did everything they were told would lead to a decent life?

What happened to their opportunities?

Housing has become unaffordable for so many. Rents consume much of people's income. Young people struggle to leave home. Workers cannot necessarily afford to live in the communities where they work. People are struggling to access education, find decent jobs and get the basic services they need.

Some people have worked their entire lives and still cannot afford a secure place to live.

And some of us are now facing homelessness.

Where is the outrage for them?

Population growth can increase demand for housing, jobs and public services when supply doesn't keep up. That is a legitimate issue to discuss. But immigration is not the only factor. Housing policy, insufficient construction of affordable homes, wages, public investment and political decisions all play a part.

We can have an honest conversation about immigration levels and the resources needed to support a growing population without blaming every problem on the people who arrive.

The question is why governments have failed to keep opportunity and basic necessities within reach for so many people.

and especially if you're brown

Let's talk about the double standard.

If you are brown, Indigenous or from another racialized community, you may find yourself having to defend your belonging in ways that other people never experience.

You might have been born here. Your parents might have been born here. Your family might have been part of this country's history for generations.

Yet someone can look at you and question whether you belong.

Meanwhile, someone whose family immigrated from England decades ago may be regarded as simply Canadian, with their family's own immigrant history long forgotten.

Why does one person's family history become part of Canada's story, while another person's becomes a reason to question their right to be here?

Why are some people treated as though they naturally belong, while others are expected to prove themselves?

And why does the colour of someone's skin still influence how their struggles, contributions and opportunities are viewed?

Indigenous peoples have their own distinct histories, rights and relationships to this land. Those histories cannot simply be folded into a general immigration debate. Recognition of that fact matters, too.

We should be able to discuss immigration, housing, employment, education and public services without turning people against one another because of their origins or appearance.

who benefits when we fight among ourselves?

Here is what troubles me most.

Ordinary people are competing for housing they cannot afford, jobs that may not pay enough to live on, and public services that are stretched thin.

People who were born here are struggling. Newcomers are struggling. Seniors are struggling. Families are struggling. People living with disabilities and people experiencing homelessness are struggling.

Instead of asking how we build a country where people can live with dignity, we end up arguing over which group deserves less.

That doesn't build more homes. It doesn't raise wages. It doesn't improve schools, create affordable education or provide the support people need.

It just creates more resentment.

And when that resentment turns into racial hatred, the consequences reach far beyond an argument on social media.

We can hold governments accountable for immigration policies. We can demand realistic population planning, affordable housing, fair employment practices and properly funded public services. We can ask difficult questions about the number of people coming here and whether our infrastructure can support that growth.

But we should also ask why so many people who already live in this wealthy country cannot afford the basics.

Those questions belong together.

opportunity should not be a privilege reserved for the lucky

Someone who immigrated to Canada in the 1970s deserved the opportunity to build a good life.

Someone who immigrates today deserves to be treated with dignity, too.

And the Canadian-born person working full-time who cannot afford rent deserves a future.

These things are not mutually exclusive.

We should not have to choose between welcoming people and looking after the people already here. We should be demanding a system that plans properly, distributes opportunities fairly and refuses to abandon people who are struggling.

If you got your opportunity, why would you want to deny everyone else the chance to have one?

If you found a home, why wouldn't you want other people to have a safe place to live?

If you benefited from education, employment and a stable community, why wouldn't you want those things to remain possible for the next generation?

And if you know what it means to be judged because of where you came from, why would you do that to somebody else?

The colour of your skin should never determine whose struggles matter, whose opportunities count or who gets to call Canada home.

I am tired of the ignorance. I am tired of the hypocrisy. And I am tired of watching ordinary people being encouraged to blame one another while the bigger questions about inequality, housing and opportunity go unanswered.

We need less hatred and more accountability.

We need fewer scapegoats and better solutions.

And we need to remember that behind every statistic, every immigration debate and every argument about who belongs are real human beings trying to make a life.

That should not be such a difficult thing to understand.

— Tina Winterlik

#Canada #Immigration #Racism #HousingCrisis #AffordableHousing #Homelessness #Inequality #HumanRights #SocialJustice #OpportunityForAll

what if canada ran deportation flights 24/7?

 

what if canada ran deportation flights 24/7?

One day after the election, this was shared.

“Should we run deportation flights 24/7 until all illegals leave?”

😬😬

Let that sink in for a moment.

What if Canada actually did that? What if we decided that the solution to our problems was to put people on planes, one after another, until everyone deemed to be here illegally was gone?

Would we stop to ask who these people are? Why they came here? Whether they have children, jobs, families, or legitimate reasons to be seeking safety? Would we care about due process, human rights, or what happens to the people being sent away?

Or would we simply count the flights and congratulate ourselves on getting rid of them?

There is a difference between enforcing immigration laws and talking about human beings as though they are unwanted cargo.

And the timing of this post matters. It was shared one day after the election. Whatever the person intended, it landed in a moment when many Canadians are already worried about what comes next.

I also noticed that the person who shared it was Indigenous.

I don't know their reasons for sharing it. They may have agreed with the statement, or they may have been criticizing it. I won't pretend to know. Indigenous people, like everyone else, have different political opinions.

But it does make me think about Canada's history.

First Nations people were here long before Canada existed, before the borders we know today were drawn. Indigenous communities experienced outsiders arriving, taking land, imposing rules, and deciding who had the right to belong.

That history should make all of us cautious about treating belonging as something the powerful can grant or take away without considering the human consequences.

And this is bigger than immigration.

We are already struggling with homelessness, poverty, housing costs, and people who cannot afford the basics. We have people living outside while others argue about who deserves help. We have families struggling, communities divided, and a growing tendency to blame vulnerable people for problems they did not create on their own.

When did compassion become a weakness? When did cruelty become something people could share with a few clicks and a couple of laughing emojis?

You can support immigration rules without celebrating mass deportation. You can want a functioning immigration system while recognizing that every person affected is a human being.

A country reveals something about itself by how it treats people who have the least power.

So, one day after the election, I have a question for Canada.

What kind of country are we becoming?

Because once we get comfortable talking about removing one group of people around the clock, we should ask ourselves who might be next to be labelled a problem, a burden, or someone who doesn't belong.

History has shown us where dehumanization can lead. We should not need to repeat its worst lessons to recognize the warning signs.

I don't want a Canada that measures its success by how many people it can force out.

I want a Canada that can enforce its laws without losing its humanity.

Is that really too much to ask?

#Canada #Immigration #Deportation #HumanRights #IndigenousHistory #Compassion #Politics #Election2026 #SocialJustice #Humanity

Decrease the surplus population

 

surplus population: who gets to decide who matters?

Yesterday, I was thinking about money, homelessness, family, grief, and a question that has followed me for much of my life.

What happens when people need help, but the people who could help decide they are not worth the trouble?

I keep coming back to Charles Dickens and A Christmas Carol.

When Ebenezer Scrooge is asked to donate money to help the poor, he asks whether the workhouses and poor laws are still operating. When told that some people would rather die than go there, he replies:

“If they would rather die, they had better do it, and decrease the surplus population.”

Read that again.

Decrease the surplus population.

Imagine looking at another human being and deciding they are surplus. Unnecessary. An expense. Someone the world could manage without.

Dickens was exposing the cruelty of that attitude. Yet here we are, more than 180 years after the story was first published, still arguing about who deserves help.

The price of being poor

We live in expensive times. Cars cost thousands. Phones cost hundreds or thousands. People go on cruises, travel to New York for Christmas, attend big weddings, and enjoy lives they have worked hard to build.

There is nothing inherently wrong with enjoying your money.

But what happens when someone in your own family cannot afford a safe place to sleep?

I have been trying to find a way out of my housing situation. I asked two financially comfortable people if they could lend me $4,000 to help me get to Mexico, where I have connections and possible accommodation. Neither answered.

I told my sister I had asked for help. She said that was too much money and nobody had that kind of money.

I have three siblings, as well as nieces and nephews who appear to have comfortable lives. I found myself wondering whether, collectively, they could help me get through this difficult period.

I am not saying anyone owes me their savings. I am saying that when you are frightened about where you will live, watching other people spend money on holidays and celebrations can make you wonder where you fit into their priorities.

My sister asked whether my room was ready. I thought perhaps she was going to offer to help me.

Instead, she said that if I could get the $4,000, I could live there and apply for income assistance and BC Housing.

I deleted the chat.

I was angry. I wanted to shout, “Fuck you!”

Not because I believe someone else should solve my entire life, but because I wanted someone to say, Let's figure this out together.

Sometimes the money is only part of the story.

Sometimes what you really want is to know that somebody has your back.

When home disappears

My parents are gone.

My dad died when we were children. He struggled with alcoholism, and there were frightening times growing up. He was building a business, lost the money, and died by suicide.

When he died, the fear stopped. That is a difficult thing to admit, but it is true. I lost my father, and I also no longer had to live with the same fear.

My mom became the person who held our family together. She was often sick, had heart problems, and worried about money. I worried about her, too.

After she died, I grieved for years. I remember sitting on a couch with my brother, crying. I knew something fundamental had changed.

My mom was the glue.

After she passed away, the family relationships deteriorated. People fought. I fought with family members. Grief does strange things to people, and sometimes we hurt one another when we are already hurting ourselves.

I also felt relief that I no longer had to worry about my mom being sick.

That does not mean I didn't love her.

We can grieve someone terribly and still feel relief when years of worry come to an end. Human emotions are complicated. We can love someone, have arguments with them, stop speaking for a while, miss them desperately, and wish things had been different.

When my mom's housing situation changed, I lost the security of having a place I could call home. I had been grandfathered into a condo arrangement, but it came with restrictions on how I could live. I couldn't simply build the life I wanted there.

Later, I lost housing several times. My daughter couldn't come home to me. My sister wouldn't let her stay at her place. Over time, my relationship with my daughter became estranged, and other family relationships fractured, too.

My daughter and I are no longer close. I have wondered how much of that is my fault, how much comes from circumstances, and how much comes from the things that happened between us.

I know I have sometimes blocked people when I was hurt or angry. I know I have made mistakes.

But I am still a human being who needs a home.

I miss my mother. I miss the home I thought I would always have. I miss the idea of a family that could come together when somebody needed help.

Those are different losses, but they are connected.

When family feels like strangers

What hurts is watching family members spend large amounts of money on holidays, cruises, weddings and other celebrations while I struggle to find somewhere safe to live.

I remember being sent to Disneyland with my daughter. There have been moments of generosity in my family's history. I don't want to erase those.

But I haven't been invited to family gatherings for years. I wasn't invited to a big wedding. My niece goes to New York every Christmas.

I watch the family carry on together, and I feel left behind.

I don't know what everyone thinks of me. I cannot read their minds. Perhaps they think I have made poor decisions. Perhaps they believe they have helped enough. Perhaps they simply don't understand how desperate my situation has become.

But the experience of being excluded, especially when you need help, can leave you feeling as though you matter less than everyone else.

I don't expect to be invited to every holiday or to have someone pay all my bills.

I want to feel that I still belong somewhere.

I want someone to ask how I am doing and listen to the answer. I want someone to recognize that a person can have made mistakes and still deserve a helping hand.

I want home to mean something again.

The people we lose, and the people we leave behind

My dad died by suicide. Because of that, death is not an abstract subject in my life.

I think about mortality. At 64, I sometimes wonder what comes next, whether there is another level, and why so many of us are frightened of death after being taught that it is sinful or something to fear.

Sometimes, when life becomes overwhelming, death can appear in thought as an escape from pain. I can acknowledge that thought without saying I intend to act on it.

I am sad. I am exhausted by the uncertainty. I worry about what happens if I cannot find housing.

And I know there are many other people living with these same fears.

People are sleeping outside. People are losing their homes. People are struggling with illness, addiction, grief, isolation and poverty. Some die before they get the help they need.

Their families grieve. Sometimes their families feel relief that the suffering is over. Sometimes relationships were complicated long before the person died.

None of that means those people were surplus.

We need to be able to talk honestly about death, grief and the feelings we don't always like to admit. Silence doesn't make these experiences disappear.

And we need to stop treating the suffering of others as evidence that they have failed at life.

Who gets to decide who deserves help?

We have charities asking for donations. We have thrift stores selling donated goods to fund charitable programs. We have governments providing funding for social services.

We have people volunteering, cooking meals, donating clothing and trying to help their neighbours.

There are people who care.

But there is a difference between providing emergency assistance and ensuring that people have somewhere safe and permanent to live.

There is a difference between raising money for a cause and measuring whether that money actually changes someone's circumstances.

And there is a difference between saying we care about the poor and treating a person in poverty with dignity when they ask for help.

I want to know how we can have so many resources in this country and still leave people wondering where they will sleep tonight.

I want to know why asking for help so often becomes an interrogation about the choices someone made years ago.

Why must people explain their entire lives before they are allowed to be struggling?

Why does having a child without a husband, losing a job, experiencing grief, or making a financial mistake become a reason to judge someone rather than help them?

We cannot undo every mistake people make. We cannot promise everyone the life they imagined.

But we can decide whether our response to human suffering will be compassion or contempt.

We can decide whether the measure of a society is how comfortable its wealthiest citizens are, or whether the most vulnerable can find safety and dignity.

We can decide whether someone without a home is a problem to be managed or a human being who needs a home.

Hang on until tomorrow

Today, despite everything, I still have hope.

Not necessarily the hope of a great big miracle. I am not expecting someone to suddenly arrive with all the answers.

But I have this feeling that my parents and ancestors are somewhere behind me, waving me forward, saying, Hang on, kid.

Maybe tomorrow something will happen. Maybe someone will offer a room, make a phone call, answer a message, or know someone who can help.

Maybe it will be a small thing rather than a miracle.

Maybe things will get worse before they get better. I cannot promise myself a happy ending.

But I can leave room for the possibility that something good is still ahead.

That is what I am trying to do: hang on until tomorrow.

And I want other people who are struggling to know that they are not the only ones who feel this way. You are not required to pretend that everything is fine. You are allowed to be angry, frightened, disappointed, grieving and uncertain.

You are allowed to ask for help.

You are allowed to be a complicated human being.

You do not have to earn the right to exist by being rich, healthy, productive, cheerful or convenient to your family.

Scrooge's words were meant to expose a terrible way of thinking. They should remind us to question every system and attitude that treats people as disposable.

Nobody should be considered surplus population. Nobody should have to prove they are worthy of a home. And nobody should have to reach the edge of despair before someone notices they need help.

Perhaps the miracle we need is not one person arriving to save us.

Perhaps it is a world in which we stop leaving people to face everything alone.

Hang on until tomorrow. Sometimes tomorrow is where the possibility begins.


If you are struggling with thoughts of suicide or feel you may be in danger:

In Canada, call or text 988 for suicide crisis support, 24 hours a day, seven days a week.

If you are in immediate danger, call 911.

You do not have to wait until things become unbearable to reach out.