5 Things To Know Before Partying In Toronto In 2021
We’re still in the midst of the largest known health crisis of the modern world, but we’re slowly, but surely, getting past it. One of the most obvious signs that we’re ready to come back to living life as we used to know it is the fact that many countries across the world are lowering the restrictions on movement and social gatherings and also restarting some of the activities that were put on hold due to the global pandemic.
One of the cities that have entered the reopening phase is the city of Toronto. Ontario’s capital, Toronto, as well as the entire state of Ontario, had entered the reopening stage only a few days ago. Reopening Ontario Act has been instated and many have started wondering what that means when it comes to parties that we all dearly miss. Well, there are some good and some not-so-good news, but hey, baby steps.
Here’s what you need to know when it comes to partying in Toronto.
1. Clubs Are Still Shut Down
If you were hoping to go out and have some fun in some of Toronto’s world-renowned clubs, well, you’re out of luck. While it is inevitable that clubs will be reopened in the near future, it’s still uncertain when that is going to happen.
As of now, the clubs are still closed. There’s little to no chance that you’re going to be popping bottles in the following month or two, so if that’s your idea of partying and having a good time, we’re sorry, you’re going to have to wait for a few more months. However, don’t lose hope. Various countries across the globe have already opened their nightclubs for people to party in and we feel like it’s only a matter of time before clubs open up in Toronto, too.
2. Live Shows And Concerts Are Still Not Permitted
If you were planning on visiting www.TorontoClubs.com, and booking a ticket for a live show in Toronto, you might have noticed there is only one ticket to be purchased and that is for a music festival taking place in 2022.
As you might’ve guessed, live shows and concerts are still not permitted in the Toronto area, or anywhere else in Ontario for that matter. For now, you’re still going to have to wait before you listen to your favourite performer live and on stage. On the bright side, this could change in the near future if the health situation continues to get better.
On the other hand, concert venue, theatres and cinemas are allowed to open outdoors, but only for the sake of rehearsing or performing a recorded or a broadcasted event without any spectators. Also, there can only be ten performers on stage, all of them maintaining at least 3m of the distance between each other. It’s not much, but at least you might be able to enjoy a concert from the inside of your home.
We still have to wait and see the results of the Reopening Ontario Act before we can make any assumptions and predictions about when will live shows and concerts with the audience be permitted again. For now, you’re going to have to settle for some of these fun activities and try and turn them into a party of sorts.
3. Fun Activities You Can Do In Toronto Today
With certain restrictions in place, primarily physical distancing, these outdoor recreation activities and facilities have reopened:
- Parks and playgrounds
- Baseball diamonds and batting cages
- Basketball, football and other sport courts
- Skate park
- Outdoor picnic sites
- Horse riding facilities
Now, none of these scream party and you are limited to groups of under ten individuals, but it’s how you spend your time, not where, is what makes a party.
A solid game of pickup basketball can be just as fun as a night out in the club. You could even listen to music while playing. Also, an outdoor picnic can quickly turn into a party-like gathering, provided that there are less than ten people in the group and you’re all practising safe social distancing. The same thing applies to all the other activities and facilities on our list.
The most important thing you should know how is to keep your distance and stay safe. The better you do that, the sooner the clubs and venues will open.
4. Weddings Are Back – Sort Of
Weddings are always an excellent place for a party. However, they’re still not back in full swing.
As of now, both indoor and outdoor wedding ceremonies are allowed, but the keyword here is ceremony. Religious services are permitted, both indoors and outdoors, naturally, with certain restrictions, but the receptions and parties are still off, both indoors and outdoors.
This means that you can get married with your family and household members present, albeit at a safe distance, but you can’t party with them afterwards.
5. Facemasks Are Still Required
For any indoor activity, a facemask must be worn at all times. How long will that last – we’re not sure, but for now, you still have to cover up your face when indoors, regardless of the event you’re attending.
Naturally, there are exceptions to that rule. For instance, individuals with certain medical conditions that make mask-wearing difficult aren’t required to wear a mask. Children under the age of two are also not required to wear a mask.
Furthermore, the city of Toronto strongly urges its residents to wear a facemask or a face covering even in the outdoors, in case they can’t maintain a safe physical distance.
As you see, not much has changed when it comes to partying like in the old days. The clubs and shows are still not permitted and we still don’t know when they’re going to be. However, we’re optimistic. It could very well happen in a few months if all goes according to the plan. For now, you just have to be patient and wait.
Until it all opens back up, have your party in your home with your household members or enjoy some of the other fun activities that have been made possible a few days ago.
Top US admiral bristles at criticism of ‘woke’ military: ‘We are not weak’
Adm. Michael Gilday, chief of Naval Operations, rebuffed pointed interrogations by GOP lawmakers who grilled him over his decision to recommend sailors read a book deemed by some conservatives as anti-American.
The U.S. Navy’s top admiral also defended moves to address and root out racism and extremism in the forces as well as its efforts to bolster inclusion and diversity, which have prompted criticism from some conservatives and Republican lawmakers.
“Do you personally consider advocating for the destruction of American capitalism to be extremist?” Rep. Jim Banks, R-Ind., asked Gilday during a House Armed Services Committee hearing Tuesday, referring to a passage from Ibram X. Kendi’s book “How to Be an Antiracist,” which argues capitalism and racism are interlinked.
Banks continued to interrogate the admiral over specific quotes from Kendi’s book, which was a No. 1 New York Times best seller in 2020, and statements he had made elsewhere in the past.
Visibly distraught, Gilday fired back:
“I am not going to sit here and defend cherry-picked quotes from somebody’s book,” he said. “This is a bigger issue than Kendi’s book. What this is really about is trying to paint the United States military, and the United States Navy, as weak, as woke.”
He added that sailors had spent 341 days at sea last year with minimal port visits — the longest deployments the Navy has done, he said.
“We are not weak. We are strong,” Gilday said.
Rep. Doug Lamborn, R-Colo., also challenged the admiral by citing specific quotes from the book and asked him how those ideas laid out by Kendi would further advance or improve the Navy’s power.
Gilday responded by arguing the importance of transparency and open dialogue about racism.
“There is racism in the Navy just as there is racism in our country, and the way we are going to get out of it is by being honest and not to sweep it under the rug,” he expounded, adding that he does not agree with everything the author says in the book.
The key point however, he said, is for sailors “to be able to think critically.”
The exchange was the latest in vociferous complaints from some conservative leaders and lawmakers who suggest the armed forces are becoming a pawn for the country’s culture wars and “wokeness” ideology, as the military takes steps to address issues of racial inclusion, extremism, racism and white supremacy.
And only last week, Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., accosted Secretary of Defense Lloyd Austin about Kendi’s book, which Cotton said promoted “critical race theories” at a different Senate Armed Services Committee hearing where Austin was testifying.
Days earlier, Cotton and Rep. Dan Crenshaw, R-Texas — two combat veterans — launched a “whistleblowers” online platform to report examples of “woke ideology” in the military.
“Enough is enough. We won’t let our military fall to woke ideology,” Crenshaw, a former Navy SEAL, said in a tweet.
Also in February, Austin instructed a one-day stand-down across the Defense Department pausing regular activities to address extremism and white nationalism in the ranks — an issue Austin declared as a priority after a number of rioters at the U.S. Capitol in January were found to have military backgrounds.
The stand down completed in April was an effort to better understand the scope of the problem of extremism in the ranks, Pentagon press secretary John F. Kirby said in a briefing then.
Earlier, Austin had revoked a ban on diversity training for the military.
More recently, in May, a U.S. Army animated ad focused on soldier diversity — featuring the real story of a soldier who enlisted after being raised by two mothers in California — drew criticism and political backlash from some conservative lawmakers.
“Holy crap,” Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, said in a tweet. “Perhaps a woke, emasculated military is not the best idea. . . .”
Cruz was referring to a TikTok video that compared the U.S. Army ad with a Russia campaign that showed buff soldiers doing push-ups and leaping out of airplanes, adding that the contrast made the American soldiers “into pansies.”
The confrontation Tuesday is also the latest in reproaches by Rep. Banks, who is a Naval Reserve officer, and other GOP members over Gilday’s recommendation to include Kendi’s book in the Chief of Naval Operations Professional Reading Program.
In February, Banks sent a letter to Gilday arguing that the views promoted in the book are “explicitly anti-American” and demanded Gilday explain the Navy’s decision to include it on the reading list or remove it.
Gilday responded to Banks in a letter obtained by Fox News saying that the book was included on the list because “it evokes the author’s own personal journey in understanding barriers to true inclusion, the deep nuances of racism and racial inequalities.”
Lamborn and Rep. Vicky Hartzler, D-Mo., also wrote a letter to the admiral to convey their concern about the inclusion of Kendi’s book as well as Michelle Alexander’s “The New Jim Crow” and Jason Pierceson’s “Sexual Minorities and Politics.”
The GOP lawmakers argued the books “reinforce a view that America is a confederation of identity categories of the oppressed and their oppressors rather than a common homeland of individual citizens who are united by common purposes,“ Lamborn and Hartzler wrote, according to Fox News.
Looking back on the 1991 reforms in 2021
Our understanding of events refines with time. New developments reframe the issues, and prompt reassessment of the solutions applied, their design and outcomes. What does looking back on the 1991 reforms in 2021 tell us?
For three decades, India celebrated and criticised the 1991 reforms. The reformers of 1991 say that the idea wasn’t only to tide over a Balance of Payments (BOP) crisis; the changes they brought in went beyond the International Monetary Fund’s (IMF) conditionalities for the bailout. The reforms, they insist, were ‘home-grown’. In the years leading up to 1991, technocrats in government had been thinking and writing about how India’s economic policies had been blocking the country’s rise to potential and the structural changes needed. If the broad range of reforms—including tearing down the industrial license permit raj, an exchange rate correction, and liberalising foreign direct investment and trade policies—could be launched within a matter of days of a new government joining office, they argue, it is because the blueprints were ready, waiting for the go-ahead from the political leadership.
The reformers of 1991 say that the idea wasn’t only to tide over a Balance of Payments (BOP) crisis; the changes they brought in went beyond the International Monetary Fund’s (IMF) conditionalities for the bailout.
At least two well-regarded technocrats that were important in the 1991 reforms disagree—publicly and in off-the-record conversations. In a media interview last month, one of them, the economic adviser in the reforms team, Dr Ashok Desai, suggested that if there were any reformers in government before the IMF “forced” India to liberalise in 1991, “they hid themselves very well”. According to him, after the BOP crisis was resolved, finance minister Dr Manmohan Singh turned “dead against reforms”.
The multiple versions of the reforms story make it difficult to separate fact from romance. It cannot be disputed, though, that the 1991 BOP crisis was a turning point for the economy. India had tided over BOP crises earlier with loans from the IMF, repaid them prematurely, and avoided going through with the bailout’s conditionalities. 1991 was singularly different because India was on the brink of default, which is likely to have forced politicians to set politics aside and listen to technocrats. Any default on external obligations would have meant hurting India’s credibility grievously and an inescapable sense of national shame. The government probably took the view that there was no choice other than to take corrective steps. Prime Minister PV Narasimha Rao named Dr Manmohan Singh, who had been a technocrat in government and was well regarded in global policy circles, as his finance minister. Dr Singh clearly had the Prime Minister’s, his party’s and the IMF’s trust. Records irrefutably show that the Congress party’s acceptance of the reversals in the interventionist economic policies of the first four post-Independence decades was not secured by the Prime Minister. He had delegated the task of tackling doubts and resistance within the party to his ministers, in particular, the finance minister and the commerce minister, and an aide in his office. The finance minister defended the reforms on the floor of the house in Parliament.
Taxpayer-funded NPR mocks ‘CaPitAliSm,’ prompting calls to ‘defund’ media outlet
National Public Radio (NPR) ignited a social media firestorm Thursday night over a tweet that appears to mock capitalism, despite taxpayer dollars accounting for much of the organization’s annual budget.
The outlet posted a story titled “And Now, Crocs With Stiletto Heels” that explores a curious new collaboration between luxury fashion brand Balenciaga and Crocs, the rubber slipper company responsible for fashion faux pas among the millions of comfort-clinging owners nationwide.
The caption accompanying the article, which was written in both uppercase and lowercase letters, appears to mock the collaboration: “CaPitAliSm bReEds InNovAtiOn,” it reads.
The tweet’s language sparked outrage on social media, with figures like conservative Tim Young calling out the irony in NPR’s three-word post.
“You wouldn’t exist without capitalism, clown who is tweeting on behalf of NPR,” he wrote.
“Job at public news station wouldn’t exist wo capitalism,” another user echoed. “Are you guys ok?”
“Our tax money shouldn’t pay for this,” one person expressed.
“It’s still a hell of a lot better than communism at breeding innovation, even if some of the products are silly,” one woman fired back.