Skip to main content

“I am a Canadian, free to speak without fear, free to worship in my own way, free to stand for what I think right, free to oppose what I believe wrong, or free to choose those who shall govern my country. This heritage of freedom I pledge to uphold for myself and all mankind.” ~~ John G. Diefenbaker

Noah Arney -- So, what does this have to do with echo chambers?

Because we keep hearing about "echo chambers" I feel I need to talk about pie. A specific event I attended with pie in fact.

When I lived in Calgary my area of the city had a tradition at election time of having an all-candidates meeting where the candidates would bring pie, enough pie for all.

During the event there was the normal answering questions asked of everyone, or of specific candidates, but then there would be a break, and the attendees would try all the pies and judge who brought the best pie. It was a fun event and helped everyone see that no matter how different, we all liked pie.

One year we had six parties there - this is central Calgary, so we all know that only two of them really have a shot at winning - but for that night it doesn't matter, we'll get to hear everyone's platform. As I'm looking around the room, I realize one of the parties didn't bring pie.

The pie stations are all stet up at the back for during the first break when we go around and try them all, but one of the setups has no pie. They have their election material, but no pie. The three major parties all have pie, two of the minor parties had pie, but one of the minor parties didn't.

So, I'm listening to the candidates talk and hearing about their platform, and the party who didn't bring pie, I think it was the Christian Heritage Party or some offshoot of it, is taking several minutes longer answering their questions than their allowed time.

Okay, so that's two rules broken, no pie (the more egregious one IMO), and going over time. They get reminded of the time limit, and instead of saying "right we agreed to that rule" they say that following these rules is like living under fascism and the moderator is taking away their rights.

They finally relent and allow another candidate to answer the question. 

Then it comes back to them for a question and rather than answering, they again complain about the event rules, and how oppressive they are, and ignore the request to stay on topic. In fact, their staff get out a silver tray with bibles on it. The moderator tells them that 1) their time is up 2) they are off topic and 3) the rules said they couldn't have props. The candidate calls the moderator a fascist, and his staff then start trying to hand out bibles to the people attending.

They're reminded that they are not allowed to hand out anything during the debate; everything has to be kept at their pie table for distribution during the break. In response two other staffers get out a banner proclaiming something about how true Christians need to rise up against this fascism.

As the candidate is ranting about how evil everyone else is, the moderator has the microphone cut. The candidate doesn't stop, he's now yelling, his staff trying to hand out the bibles are yelling (because people aren't accepting them), and the moderator calls a break for us all to go try the pie.

The candidate continues to yell at everyone as they turn their backs on him and go to try the pies. And the pies were delicious.

There was a great apple pie, I think brought by the NDP, the Conservatives brought a phenomenal rhubarb, and the Liberals brought the best peach pie I've ever tried (I said this story was about pie).

The yelling candidate has finally stopped yelling, but he and his staff are now taking over all the mic spots, which leads the moderator to announce they won't have the second half of the questions.  Instead, everyone can go and talk with the candidates of their choice.

At this point the police are called, not to arrest the candidate, but to make sure that his staff stop harassing people who are trying to talk with each other or the other candidates.

So, what does this have to do with echo chambers?

If someone refuses to follow the rules they agree to, so as to be part of a space or to follow social conventions, there is usually a reason. And that reason is because they have no interest in hearing others, only in being heard. They are not interested in communion with others, but domination of them.

If you have conventions, or expectations, for participation to encourage community, then allowing the person to break the conventions means you will not be able to have your community.

And that candidate is the perfect example. (side note, their party was never invited back).

They were rude, broke the rules, harassed attendees, and had no interest in allowing anyone but them the ability to speak. But, and this is key, the absolute worst thing ...they didn't bring pie.

They signaled from the beginning that their goal was not participation in community.

It's not about "echo chambers", it's about identifying people who don't want to participate in your community and stopping them from breaking it.

And, if you ever worry that you're doing something wrong, just remember ... If someone didn't bring pie, they don't get to participate in the pie bringing event.

 

Labels:

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

BC’s Forestry Decline Is a Policy Failure, Not a Market Reality -- Forestry Critic Calls for Accountability and Urgent Policy Reset

Conservative Party of BC Forestry Critic, and Kamloops - North Thompson MLA,  Ward Stamer As the Truck Loggers Association convention begins today, BC Conservative Forestry Critic Ward Stamer says British Columbia’s forestry crisis is the result of government mismanagement, not market forces, and that an urgent policy reset is needed to restore certainty, sustainability, and accountability. “For generations, forestry supported families and communities across BC,” said Stamer.  “Today, mills are closing, contractors are parking equipment, and families are being forced to leave home, not because the resource is gone, but because policy has failed.” Government data shows timber shipment values dropped by more than half a billion dollars in the past year, with harvest levels falling by roughly 50 per cent in just four years. At the same time, prolonged permitting timelines, unreliable fibre access, outdated forest inventories, and rising costs have made long-term planning impossib...
Post a Comment
Read more

BC cannot regulate, redesign, and reinterpret its way to a stable forestry sector. Communities need clear rules, predictable timelines, and accountability for results.

Photo credit:  Atli Resources LP   BC’s Forestry Crisis Continues with Closure of Beaver Cove Chip Facility   As industry leaders, Indigenous partners, and contractors gather this week at the BC Natural Resources Forum in Prince George, the gap between government rhetoric and reality could not be clearer. Just hours after the Eby government once again touted reconciliation, certainty, and economic opportunity under DRIPA, Atli Chip Ltd, a company wholly owned by the ’Na̱mg̱is First Nation, announced it is managing the orderly closure of its Beaver Cove chip facility. The closure comes despite public tax dollars, repeated government announcements, and assurances that new policy frameworks would stabilize forestry employment and create long-term opportunity in rural and coastal British Columbia. “British Columbians are being told one story, while communities are living another,” said Ward Stamer, Critic for Forests. “This closure makes it clear that announcement...
Post a Comment
Read more

Eby government signs another land-use agreement, as they say one thing and do another, during DRIPA chaos

While promising to fix DRIPA, the Eby government continues to quietly sign binding land-use agreements that fundamentally alter how Crown land is governed in British Columbia. On January 15, 2026, the government signed four ministerial orders advancing the Gwa’ni Land Use Planning Project with the ’Na̱mg̱is First Nation, amending the Vancouver Island Land Use Plan and changing how more than 166,000 hectares of Crown land can be accessed, developed, and managed. “This is Land Act reform by stealth,” said Critic for Indigenous Relations Scott McInnis. “British Columbians already rejected these changes once. In 2024, public backlash forced the NDP to pull its Land Act amendments. Instead of listening, this government has gone underground, signing individual deals behind closed doors, just like we’ve already seen in places such as Squamish, Teẑtan Biny, and across Northwest BC.” “The Premier admits DRIPA ( the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act) is creating ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Labels

Show more