On the political spectrum, I consider myself a centrist. I don't subscribe to the views of any particular political party, but I make no secret of the fact, given our current choices I identify most closely with the Liberal Party of Canada. The point is, I can and will change my vote because I won't be loyal to a party, that would make me a partisan, leading to the need to defend things I don't agree with because of my affiliation.
I wondered, if I'm not a partisan, am I an idealogue? I pondered the idea for quite some time, but I came to the realization in order to be an idealogue, I 'd have to subscribe to a single ideology, and when I take stock of my views on individual areas of policy, I realize I'm slightly or very liberal on some of the issues, yet somewhere in the moderate right on others.
Since I can't seem to pigeonhole myself into either of the accepted political categories, I have no choice but to consider myself a centrist. Perhaps even, in the words of the sitting Prime Minister, an arch-centrist. I understand his feeling the need to demonize we centrists, there are a hell of a lot of us, a vast majority of us and should we ever find a way to coalesce our similar, yet diverse, values, Mr Harper has a massive challenge on his hands.
Right now, arch-centrists like myself are agonizing. We're feeling a little alone in the Canadian political wilderness. The mostly moderate have come to the precipice. Backing the Conservative Party, even under a different leader is not within the realm of possibility. We prefer that our Canada is not "Made in America". Ditto for the NDP, we arch-centrists may have a sense of social justice, but not at the expense of taking policy directions that would hurt us on a wider global scale, we're just a little more pragmatic than that. Unless we are willing to wait a century, our X on the ballot will not be for the Green Party candidate, their name is an anchor around them, for a generation or more of us, the Green Party is inexorably tied to a lot of very suspect people in Europe and you can't call yourself the Green Party without claiming ownership of the origins, no matter how different you may be, your name is an albatross. By now, one would think the Liberal Party faithful would be standing on the chairs cheering as team Arch-Centrist marches into the arena, but hold your applause, we are seriously questioning whether you can deliver on the absolutely most volatile group of voters, that huge mob of Arch-Centrists. Perhaps the group most likely to influence the outcome of any kind of vote but far more difficult to please, or to fool, than any other voting bloc.
I'm getting to know a lot more people of a similar sentiment. We've disengaged ourselves from narrow party politics, generally preferring to vote (or not) for the party that is advancing the platform that comes closest to our personal feelings. In the past it has generally meant we decided the outcome of elections by using our considerably powerful ability to swing a vote. We've had some close elections in the past, where we either had a tough time discerning which party had the better platform at the time, or the issues were such we truly were divided by which side of the line we sat on, red or blue. Orange just wasn't a factor, that was the reality and I remain unconvinced it is the new reality. I congratulate them on their success, I believe they absolutely must be heard in any Canadian debate, however I refuse to pass judgement on their performance in the most recent election. I spoke of volatility earlier and the NDP were the net beneficiary of that. The Quebec electorate faced a dilemma. It took a while, but mainstream public opinion changed on the value of sending members to the parliament of Canada who would never be in a position where they could actually advance their interests since it would be impossible to form government. Worn out by shallow pandering, power grabs, and plenty of corruption for over 100 years, Quebeckers, who have always shown themselves to be engaged, intelligent voters who understand what it takes to advance their particular interests and agendas and I respect them, even if we perhaps differ on our views of what would be best for Quebec and for Canada, absolutely hate Harper and have lost their trust in the Liberal Party as well. The difference between Quebeckers and non-Quebeckers, is, historically, they will go to the polls with a steely determination to deliver Quebec as a huge prize to a single party. Not unanimously, mind you, just overwhelmingly. In an election where everyone took the Quebec vote for granted, it was a perfect opportunity for a "carpe diem" moment, and Jack Layton's NDP team seized the day. They campaigned hard on Quebec issues and spent a lot of time in the Province while others made their courtesy visits as they criss-crossed the country. Blissfully ignorant because both parties are so used to being the only choice, they dismissed evidence something was amiss in Quebec. I don't envy opposition leader Jack Layton, he is going to have to try to do what no other person has been able to. Layton will have to figure out how to keep the Quebec base while growing in the rest of Canada, a balancing act I'm not sure his party is up for. Not that any of the current parties are up for it, at this time and place in our history. The volatility that vaulted the NDP to opposition status is very fragile, to put it kindly, and could just as easily come back to bite them, hard.
Hence the dilemma of the centrist in Canada today. Quebec is a bit of a microcosm, not for the rest of the country, but for centrists and arch centrists alike. The difference outside of Quebec is we don't have anyone speaking to us we have a reason to want to commit to. While can all agree on our desire for social justice and a better country for the strong and the weak alike, where we stand in the centre still seems to be problematic. The dilemma faced by Jack Layton in Quebec is the same one, to great extent, as that faced by those who seek to define the centre. We are an extremely hard bunch to label. For the most part we are moderate in just about every sense of the world, however we do have some diverse things we are passionate about, but we aren't all passionate about the same thing, so we tend to fall to one side or the other, or not vote at all as it has become far to difficult to decide who to back. This is as delicate a balancing act as any. I believe there are plenty of people who can appeal the the innate moderate views of the centrists, while balancing the needs of those who still feel centrist but happen to fall father from the middle to one side or the other than the rest of the pack.
I know what it will take to capture my vote. I have an idea I know how to capture more than just my vote/ Unfortunately, I've not found a politican willing to sit and actually take in why I don't consider any of them to be an extremely palatable choice. I guess if I call myself a think-tank or a consultant and charge a hefty fee for my ideas I may be taken a little more seriously by the people who would have me install them as ruler. Maybe that's the ticket, although, I suspect something far different.
I suspect the party that will recapture the hearts and minds of the 60%'ers, the moderates, the centrists, does not exist at this time. Unless the Liberal Party gets the kind of earth moving massive change that will be required, they aren't it. The jury remains out as I am willing, for a short time, to give the benefit of the doubt, although judging from the attitude I've had from some Liberals, I don't think they understand 1970 left.
As ludicrous as it sounds, it may be time for a party, from scratch, built by the massive percentage of Canadians wandering in the vast wilderness of the centre. Just as I give the benefit of the doubt as to the ability of Mr Layton to retain Quebec while building across the nation, and extend the same to the idea of the rejuvenation of the Liberals, I must also extend the same courtesy to the idea the party of the centre may not yet exist.
My patience has lasted a couple of decades. It won't last forever. I suspect I am far from alone in my nearly unbearable dissatisfaction with the status quo. I know I am not alone in believing we can build a better Canada. The kind of Canada our veterans fought and died for. Not this Canada.
You'll forgive my anguish, I feel as though I've lost my voice and can't find the right doctor to cure me.
Thought provoking ideas. Comments/arguments welcomed, abusive comments unceremoniously deleted.
Showing posts with label canadian politics. Show all posts
Showing posts with label canadian politics. Show all posts
Saturday, 18 June 2011
Sorry Harper, Conservative values are American values.
The latest conservative slogan is cheesy, and for their believers, the sheeple as I lovingly refer to them, it works. I'm talking about the new "talking point" which will be continuously rammed down your throat by every partisan hack in sight. Canada will be flooded with the "Conservative values are Canadian values" which would be okay if there were an atom of truth to the statement. This catchy little slogan will be picked up and repeated to people so often they will come to believe they actually believe it.
It's no different than phenomenons like urban myths, or using viral video hoaxes as a marketing tool. Anything perceived to be true, is true, until proven different, but only in the case of people who are open minded. There are many people out there who think it is some kind of shame to admit when they are wrong. People who will continue to cling to absolute proven lies because they see it as some kind of defeat to accept they've been mislead. It's because of the sheer numbers of these kind of people that society continually takes one step back for every one or two forward.
Almost all Canadians I've come in contact with are generally glad to be Canadians rather than Americans. Traditionally, there have been similarities, but also marked differences. Americans tend to be relatively boastful and highly jingoistic. They're known world wide as being rude, boorish, and overbearing. They have more braggadocio than the rest of the world's population combined. Don't get me wrong, there are plenty of wonderful Americans, but the image of those people is never projected. Like the voice of moderates in Canada today, they are marginalized, however they've had to endure it far longer. American is known as a global bully, whether it is militarily or economically. The majority of Americans I interact with are shockingly inward looking, they believe, because they have been indoctrinated to believe since birth, the America is the greatest country in the world, which naturally means everything should go the way America wants it to go and if it doesn't, you take the chance of being bombed into the 12th century.
Americans are the first to criticize repressive countries who openly control their populations, you know, countries where the leader's name is preceded by the word "general" or places you see with gigantic murals of the leader for life and massive military parades which serve two great purposes: showing off your might to the world, and reminding your domestic population who's in charge.
The sole reason America can be such a vocal and sometimes violent critic, is because they have found a way to do the exact same thing without the bad optics. From birth, everything in America is about indoctrination. Waving an American flag commands a lot of attention, because even little children are taught to pledge their homage to the flag of their country, which, not incidentally, get the "G" word in at the end. From the time they are babies they are repeatedly told America is the greatest country in the world. As for the military parades, not required when you have made the military a viable religion. If you think I'm fooling, just watch any number of live events, sporting events, etc. The US Military is keenly aware of the value of having their "colour guard" appear on camera. No problem at all in arranging a fly past by some impressive aviation killing machines, or a display of military vehicles and weapons at your even or festival. They don't just have a single memorial for veterans, they have memorials spread far and wide because they are immensely personal and touch many lives. They remember veterans on several national holidays. No matter what the public event, you'll see two things. The flag, and men/women in uniform. This folks, is deep integration at its best. To the point where you are vilified if you even attempt to criticize even the most heinous actions of the military.
Unfortunately, in this country, many people are still deeply confused over the conservative party. They believe they know what conservative values are, after all, for many, their families have voted conservative for generations. This was the coup of all coups for Harper and his small circle of friends and advisors. Keeping the word conservative to identify their party, and a carefully thought out logo which is purpose built to make former progressive conservatives believe this is still their party.
Make absolutely no mistake about it. Stephen Harper is nothing like a progressive conservative. He sees them as weak, and soft on his agenda, however, in order to set his agenda in place he needs those people, or perhaps, past tense, he needed those people to get his majority. Why do you think he convinced his minions they "needed" a majority in order to have "stability" and get rid of the "shenanigans" going on in parliament. Nice line, people figured that's plausible, there have been plenty of badly run conservative governments in the past and we've survived them, what's so different about Harper's conservatives? Truth is, plenty.
Stephen Harper is a republican. He only began to somewhat hide that when the time was right to wrest control of a much-weakened progressive conservative party, not because he cared about the fate of that party, he needed the brand name. That's it. Prior to his initial run to become PM, Stephen Harper made no secret of what he thought of Canadian values, especially when his audience was full of American ears. This man was unabashedly apologetic for everything Canadians held (and I hope still do) dear. He called Canada a "Northern European welfare state in the worst sense of the word". He attacked everything from medicare to bilingualism to being a nation more partial to peace than war. All his words, not mine. I've never believed Stephen Harper had or has a hidden agenda. Until he became an important figure in Canadian federal politics he never hid the fact he believed that not only should Canada be more like America, but Canada should reflect a far-right republican America. Canada should be a country where, if you can't or won't survive on your own, too bad, hopefully someone will help you out but it would probably be better if you were dead. We should ensure our good friends, the Americans, have access to all of our resources, on their terms, as long as his backers would benefit financially from it. Governments should not run the country, corporations should. He'd love nothing more than an injection of good old convenient Christianity into our society as well, ergo, the slashing of funding for women's groups, because women should be a lot more like women in other countries, at home, having kids, married and staying that way even if you need a beating to know your place once in a while. Of course he never would have dropped that one publicly, but their policies are geared toward encouraging women to be quiet and most certainly out of the boardrooms of the country. One only needs to examine the "income-splitting" proviso promised when they balance the budget by cutting funding and programs for anyone who openly opposes them. Who will benefit? Not the people who really need help. Not single parents, or anyone with a family income less than $42,500. How many people are immediately exempted by just those 2 conditions alone? Mostly, Stephen Harper is all about government for the few, by the few, and fuck you.
Because of the lack of foresight of the over 20% of Canadians who offered up Harper's coveted majority, I am going to take great delight from your anguish at what you've done. With 4 years of absolute power a lot of things can change, and they will. Too bad for you sheeple, you see, I'm interested enough in people and politics I've been preparing myself for this for a decade. I'll be fine. On the other hand, your family and friends are going to be hurt in ways you never bothered to think of because you see politics as some kind of sporting event, whereas I see politics as the jerks who run my life. I don't fear the Harper agenda because I know the Harper agenda. I generally don't wish anyone ill will, but I will say to the ignoramus' out there who didn't bother to understand what you were voting for, I hope the policies implemented over the next four years really put the screws to you personally, or at least to someone you care deeply about. It's what you deserve for your intransigence. It's the price you pay for ignorance. In four years the Canada you've lived in all your life, or the Canada you came to for a better life will not be recognizable. Stephen Harper promised that, many years ago. I have no reason to suspect he will not follow through. At the end, he'll still be rich and getting richer, you'll be screwed, and frankly, people like me will smile and say, it looks good on you.
Welcome to America Lite.
To Stephen Harper I say, conservative values are your values. You've openly expressed you hate the things that made us uniquely Canadian, now, for a time, you will get your way. By the time you're exposed to the willingly blind, you'll be gone, the damage will be done to a great extent, but you'll never be remembered as a great Prime Minister by anyone but yourself and your friends. Congratulations. You've proven Canadians are embarrassingly naive.
To my fellow 60%'ers: Stop thinking about today and start thinking of how we are going to restore a once great and respected country. We'll have a lot of work to do. There isn't a shred of doubt in my mind that the political party that will be tasked with bringing Canada back does not exist today. That's just my opinion.
Canadian values are Canadian values. They're not conservative values or liberal values or NDP values. No single party represents Canada or Canadians. I know the Prime Minister doesn't care, but I do. A majority of others do too, chances are we aren't going away.
It's no different than phenomenons like urban myths, or using viral video hoaxes as a marketing tool. Anything perceived to be true, is true, until proven different, but only in the case of people who are open minded. There are many people out there who think it is some kind of shame to admit when they are wrong. People who will continue to cling to absolute proven lies because they see it as some kind of defeat to accept they've been mislead. It's because of the sheer numbers of these kind of people that society continually takes one step back for every one or two forward.
Almost all Canadians I've come in contact with are generally glad to be Canadians rather than Americans. Traditionally, there have been similarities, but also marked differences. Americans tend to be relatively boastful and highly jingoistic. They're known world wide as being rude, boorish, and overbearing. They have more braggadocio than the rest of the world's population combined. Don't get me wrong, there are plenty of wonderful Americans, but the image of those people is never projected. Like the voice of moderates in Canada today, they are marginalized, however they've had to endure it far longer. American is known as a global bully, whether it is militarily or economically. The majority of Americans I interact with are shockingly inward looking, they believe, because they have been indoctrinated to believe since birth, the America is the greatest country in the world, which naturally means everything should go the way America wants it to go and if it doesn't, you take the chance of being bombed into the 12th century.
Americans are the first to criticize repressive countries who openly control their populations, you know, countries where the leader's name is preceded by the word "general" or places you see with gigantic murals of the leader for life and massive military parades which serve two great purposes: showing off your might to the world, and reminding your domestic population who's in charge.
The sole reason America can be such a vocal and sometimes violent critic, is because they have found a way to do the exact same thing without the bad optics. From birth, everything in America is about indoctrination. Waving an American flag commands a lot of attention, because even little children are taught to pledge their homage to the flag of their country, which, not incidentally, get the "G" word in at the end. From the time they are babies they are repeatedly told America is the greatest country in the world. As for the military parades, not required when you have made the military a viable religion. If you think I'm fooling, just watch any number of live events, sporting events, etc. The US Military is keenly aware of the value of having their "colour guard" appear on camera. No problem at all in arranging a fly past by some impressive aviation killing machines, or a display of military vehicles and weapons at your even or festival. They don't just have a single memorial for veterans, they have memorials spread far and wide because they are immensely personal and touch many lives. They remember veterans on several national holidays. No matter what the public event, you'll see two things. The flag, and men/women in uniform. This folks, is deep integration at its best. To the point where you are vilified if you even attempt to criticize even the most heinous actions of the military.
Unfortunately, in this country, many people are still deeply confused over the conservative party. They believe they know what conservative values are, after all, for many, their families have voted conservative for generations. This was the coup of all coups for Harper and his small circle of friends and advisors. Keeping the word conservative to identify their party, and a carefully thought out logo which is purpose built to make former progressive conservatives believe this is still their party.
Make absolutely no mistake about it. Stephen Harper is nothing like a progressive conservative. He sees them as weak, and soft on his agenda, however, in order to set his agenda in place he needs those people, or perhaps, past tense, he needed those people to get his majority. Why do you think he convinced his minions they "needed" a majority in order to have "stability" and get rid of the "shenanigans" going on in parliament. Nice line, people figured that's plausible, there have been plenty of badly run conservative governments in the past and we've survived them, what's so different about Harper's conservatives? Truth is, plenty.
Stephen Harper is a republican. He only began to somewhat hide that when the time was right to wrest control of a much-weakened progressive conservative party, not because he cared about the fate of that party, he needed the brand name. That's it. Prior to his initial run to become PM, Stephen Harper made no secret of what he thought of Canadian values, especially when his audience was full of American ears. This man was unabashedly apologetic for everything Canadians held (and I hope still do) dear. He called Canada a "Northern European welfare state in the worst sense of the word". He attacked everything from medicare to bilingualism to being a nation more partial to peace than war. All his words, not mine. I've never believed Stephen Harper had or has a hidden agenda. Until he became an important figure in Canadian federal politics he never hid the fact he believed that not only should Canada be more like America, but Canada should reflect a far-right republican America. Canada should be a country where, if you can't or won't survive on your own, too bad, hopefully someone will help you out but it would probably be better if you were dead. We should ensure our good friends, the Americans, have access to all of our resources, on their terms, as long as his backers would benefit financially from it. Governments should not run the country, corporations should. He'd love nothing more than an injection of good old convenient Christianity into our society as well, ergo, the slashing of funding for women's groups, because women should be a lot more like women in other countries, at home, having kids, married and staying that way even if you need a beating to know your place once in a while. Of course he never would have dropped that one publicly, but their policies are geared toward encouraging women to be quiet and most certainly out of the boardrooms of the country. One only needs to examine the "income-splitting" proviso promised when they balance the budget by cutting funding and programs for anyone who openly opposes them. Who will benefit? Not the people who really need help. Not single parents, or anyone with a family income less than $42,500. How many people are immediately exempted by just those 2 conditions alone? Mostly, Stephen Harper is all about government for the few, by the few, and fuck you.
Because of the lack of foresight of the over 20% of Canadians who offered up Harper's coveted majority, I am going to take great delight from your anguish at what you've done. With 4 years of absolute power a lot of things can change, and they will. Too bad for you sheeple, you see, I'm interested enough in people and politics I've been preparing myself for this for a decade. I'll be fine. On the other hand, your family and friends are going to be hurt in ways you never bothered to think of because you see politics as some kind of sporting event, whereas I see politics as the jerks who run my life. I don't fear the Harper agenda because I know the Harper agenda. I generally don't wish anyone ill will, but I will say to the ignoramus' out there who didn't bother to understand what you were voting for, I hope the policies implemented over the next four years really put the screws to you personally, or at least to someone you care deeply about. It's what you deserve for your intransigence. It's the price you pay for ignorance. In four years the Canada you've lived in all your life, or the Canada you came to for a better life will not be recognizable. Stephen Harper promised that, many years ago. I have no reason to suspect he will not follow through. At the end, he'll still be rich and getting richer, you'll be screwed, and frankly, people like me will smile and say, it looks good on you.
Welcome to America Lite.
To Stephen Harper I say, conservative values are your values. You've openly expressed you hate the things that made us uniquely Canadian, now, for a time, you will get your way. By the time you're exposed to the willingly blind, you'll be gone, the damage will be done to a great extent, but you'll never be remembered as a great Prime Minister by anyone but yourself and your friends. Congratulations. You've proven Canadians are embarrassingly naive.
To my fellow 60%'ers: Stop thinking about today and start thinking of how we are going to restore a once great and respected country. We'll have a lot of work to do. There isn't a shred of doubt in my mind that the political party that will be tasked with bringing Canada back does not exist today. That's just my opinion.
Canadian values are Canadian values. They're not conservative values or liberal values or NDP values. No single party represents Canada or Canadians. I know the Prime Minister doesn't care, but I do. A majority of others do too, chances are we aren't going away.
Sunday, 5 June 2011
The Polarization of North America
People don't usually want to talk about controversial subjects. That's fine, if you wish to hide from reality feel free to do so, just don't expect me to be shy when it comes to talking about things that are ugly realities in life. I really don't care if you agree with me or not, I'm interested in opening a dialogue or debate, or just getting you thinking.
I've always had an interest in geopolitics, in societal makeup, in the interaction and reaction of populations and a tremendous amount of other geeky stuff. I'm not going to be one of those goofs who pretends to be an expert on anything other than my own opinion. I do my research, I think about things and apply them to what I've learned in life, I test my ideas and I'm willing to alter them if someone proves me wrong.
No longer do I have the ability to muster any faith in government or the media to look out for anything other than their own narrow interests. Societies are proving neither can keep up. Social media and bloggers are fueling revolution and evolution worldwide. Communications technology has outstripped their ability to keep up in the real world where thoughts and ideas no one would have ever known of are routinely shared globally. Like minded people in Canada are finding each other the same way like minded people involved in African and Arab uprisings. As we become more connected the world gets smaller. The pace of change within our former trusted institutions has been overrun creating intense friction among competing ideas. As more people become unprepared to be ruled by a minority of elites, or to be dictated to by the controllers of wealth, governments will increasingly struggle to deal with keeping peace, not in some far off country, but in their own land.
Apparently no one warned Governments and corporations of the dangers of globalization. They didn't imagine the possibility of opposition to their agenda being shared globally as well. Fail.
If you, like I, still find the stomach to watch/read mainstream media and/or anything that broadcasts political things from any perspective, you may have noticed how they've been making light of Brigette LePape when she mentions the uprisings of the Arab Spring. If they really thought about it, they wouldn't scoff when someone says that. After all, how many people would think a wave of change would sweep the middle east in such a forceful and sustained manner, even at the cost of untold numbers of lives? A sea of change is upon us and for the most part, Governments are reacting the only way they know how, by trying to stop the will of the majority through violent means and superior armament. Human spirit is not so easily crushed, especially now, when we have all learned there are people across the globe who share our aspirations.
That may be a lot of preamble on my part, but these are the most recent things that have pushed me to think a lot more deeply about the state of affairs in North America, and how our situation can both be compared to that in other countries across the globe, and how it differs. Lately I've been thinking much more about the serious ramifications of the situation we face on this continent. I guess this is where I get to talking about the kinds of things others don't want to. Hidden things are generally not good, protections on freedom of thought and expression have generally been the foil of the worst in society. When it becomes taboo to talk about things, those things will generally morph into the ugliest problems in society. History has proven this over and over and over. Racism, homophobia, sexism, sectarian violence, you name it and the ills of society we have tried to address were all at one time or another (or even today) subjects that are taboo to talk about. In this day and age we still suffer a culture of shame, blunted mostly because of open communication. I hope we can come to our senses before we reach the ultimate consequence of where I think we could be headed, and faster than I had previously considered when the fleeting thoughts initially came under my focus.
North America is becoming increasingly polarized. While it is most pronounced in the United States, the pace of change in society no longer requires decades. If the previous election taught you absolutely nothing else, you must at least note that a sea of change can be executed before your very eyes. In 30 days the Bloc virtually disappeared from a map it dominated for 20 years, replaced by a roundly unknown group of candidates for Canada's traditional third party, the NDP. If you tell me you predicted that before the writ was dropped I will personally climb to the highest peak in Canada to declare you Canada's biggest bullshitter (or at least I am willing to die trying). I see the speed with which my country is becoming polarized as, perhaps, slower than that in America, but more mature than that of Mexico where their polarization issues are a bit out of step with those of Canada and the United States.
In the last 20 years I've watched an increasing hardening of positions in our fairly like-minded societies on this continent. Increasingly, the wide groupings referred to as the "left" and the "right" are entrenching and becoming more and more antagonistic. Every time one or the other gets some kind of leg up it turns into the new bloodsport. No longer do we seem interested in finding common ground, only in blindly advancing the agenda we embrace. The deeper one side digs in, the deeper the other side digs in and I feel as though I am somehow watching a silent movie that explains the psychology that led to two sides digging hundreds of miles of trenches directly across from one another and bombing the shit out of everything like World War One. Both sides, not willing to give an inch of ground, fighting for their idea of what was right even if it meant destroying everything in their path. Willing to fight to the death over 3 feet of ground. Willing to fight to the death over the same three feet of ground, back and forth, over and over, for years. They both believed they were fighting for what was right. As we do today.
We've been broken down into 2 groups, or so it would seem. No different than warring factions throughout history. As a self-described "centrist" I am recoiling in horror as I watch events unfold at an unprecedented pace. As I previously stated, it no longer takes decades for events to unfold. I've never been one of those melodramatic fools who seem to see every little issue as a reason to run off screaming like chicken little, but I have to admit I am wondering if we all ought not be even more concerned than we previously thought we should.
I'm not talking about uniting the right, or the left. I'm crying out to unite the sensible before we have no choice but to take sides in this insane polarization of our society. It's not too late to call off the all-or-nothing attitudes that are rapidly entrenching themselves in public opinion in Canada and the United States. I blame a lot of it on lack of any kind of vision, but to say that's the cure all would be completely naive. All I know is if we do not find a way to force these two sides to find some common ground there is going to be a very predictable, yet highly unpredictable consequence. The two sides will turn on one another violently. I always believed civil wars happened in unsophisticated countries. Lately I've been forced to entertain the possibility it could happen here. Not Canada specifically, more of a pan-continental thing. When I first began to ponder this, even I thought it was crazy. I thought of every reason possible why it wouldn't happen, but they just do not align with the reality I see around me.
I see people who try to talk sense being vilified by both sides. I've felt this myself when I have expressed my own views. As both sides entrench it becomes more difficult to remain in sensible territory. The most partisan vitriol has become the norm. No longer do people pay more than lip service to anything that looks like compromise. For both sides it has become a "my way or the highway" scenario. You're in all the way or you are the enemy. The intensely vocal minority on both sides, the truly unreasonable wackos, command almost all of the attention, which serves to perpetuate the idea you have to join the "good" side, depending on what you perceive as being good. Middle ground is becoming increasingly muffled and if we allow it to be snuffed out I shudder to think of what might happen when two groups of radicals who will disagree to the death duke it out, forcing even the moderates among us to choose sides or die, or perhaps worse, choose sides and die.
Don't think it could happen here? Think I'm some kind of nut? Great, go back to the website of your favorite celebrity or sports hero or maybe check out a reality show. I'm sure every time societies reached a danger point people scoff at those who suggested there could be a bad outcome.
I think we have a dangerous divide in North America, and I think it is deteriorating faster than many people realize. It's more convenient to ignore such an ugly possibility than it is to think about it, but if no one talks about it because it is uncomfortable, it will get far worse before it can ever get any better. I, for one, do not want to wait until it's too late to talk about it.
We are so busy arguing over what divides us, we've forgotten what binds us together. We are not so different as to render us immune to violent division. It's hard work to compromise. Will we really allow history to repeat itself right in our backyard?
I don't know. I do know I don't like what I see. Sometimes the bigger picture is so ugly I long for tunnel vision.
I've always had an interest in geopolitics, in societal makeup, in the interaction and reaction of populations and a tremendous amount of other geeky stuff. I'm not going to be one of those goofs who pretends to be an expert on anything other than my own opinion. I do my research, I think about things and apply them to what I've learned in life, I test my ideas and I'm willing to alter them if someone proves me wrong.
No longer do I have the ability to muster any faith in government or the media to look out for anything other than their own narrow interests. Societies are proving neither can keep up. Social media and bloggers are fueling revolution and evolution worldwide. Communications technology has outstripped their ability to keep up in the real world where thoughts and ideas no one would have ever known of are routinely shared globally. Like minded people in Canada are finding each other the same way like minded people involved in African and Arab uprisings. As we become more connected the world gets smaller. The pace of change within our former trusted institutions has been overrun creating intense friction among competing ideas. As more people become unprepared to be ruled by a minority of elites, or to be dictated to by the controllers of wealth, governments will increasingly struggle to deal with keeping peace, not in some far off country, but in their own land.
Apparently no one warned Governments and corporations of the dangers of globalization. They didn't imagine the possibility of opposition to their agenda being shared globally as well. Fail.
If you, like I, still find the stomach to watch/read mainstream media and/or anything that broadcasts political things from any perspective, you may have noticed how they've been making light of Brigette LePape when she mentions the uprisings of the Arab Spring. If they really thought about it, they wouldn't scoff when someone says that. After all, how many people would think a wave of change would sweep the middle east in such a forceful and sustained manner, even at the cost of untold numbers of lives? A sea of change is upon us and for the most part, Governments are reacting the only way they know how, by trying to stop the will of the majority through violent means and superior armament. Human spirit is not so easily crushed, especially now, when we have all learned there are people across the globe who share our aspirations.
That may be a lot of preamble on my part, but these are the most recent things that have pushed me to think a lot more deeply about the state of affairs in North America, and how our situation can both be compared to that in other countries across the globe, and how it differs. Lately I've been thinking much more about the serious ramifications of the situation we face on this continent. I guess this is where I get to talking about the kinds of things others don't want to. Hidden things are generally not good, protections on freedom of thought and expression have generally been the foil of the worst in society. When it becomes taboo to talk about things, those things will generally morph into the ugliest problems in society. History has proven this over and over and over. Racism, homophobia, sexism, sectarian violence, you name it and the ills of society we have tried to address were all at one time or another (or even today) subjects that are taboo to talk about. In this day and age we still suffer a culture of shame, blunted mostly because of open communication. I hope we can come to our senses before we reach the ultimate consequence of where I think we could be headed, and faster than I had previously considered when the fleeting thoughts initially came under my focus.
North America is becoming increasingly polarized. While it is most pronounced in the United States, the pace of change in society no longer requires decades. If the previous election taught you absolutely nothing else, you must at least note that a sea of change can be executed before your very eyes. In 30 days the Bloc virtually disappeared from a map it dominated for 20 years, replaced by a roundly unknown group of candidates for Canada's traditional third party, the NDP. If you tell me you predicted that before the writ was dropped I will personally climb to the highest peak in Canada to declare you Canada's biggest bullshitter (or at least I am willing to die trying). I see the speed with which my country is becoming polarized as, perhaps, slower than that in America, but more mature than that of Mexico where their polarization issues are a bit out of step with those of Canada and the United States.
In the last 20 years I've watched an increasing hardening of positions in our fairly like-minded societies on this continent. Increasingly, the wide groupings referred to as the "left" and the "right" are entrenching and becoming more and more antagonistic. Every time one or the other gets some kind of leg up it turns into the new bloodsport. No longer do we seem interested in finding common ground, only in blindly advancing the agenda we embrace. The deeper one side digs in, the deeper the other side digs in and I feel as though I am somehow watching a silent movie that explains the psychology that led to two sides digging hundreds of miles of trenches directly across from one another and bombing the shit out of everything like World War One. Both sides, not willing to give an inch of ground, fighting for their idea of what was right even if it meant destroying everything in their path. Willing to fight to the death over 3 feet of ground. Willing to fight to the death over the same three feet of ground, back and forth, over and over, for years. They both believed they were fighting for what was right. As we do today.
We've been broken down into 2 groups, or so it would seem. No different than warring factions throughout history. As a self-described "centrist" I am recoiling in horror as I watch events unfold at an unprecedented pace. As I previously stated, it no longer takes decades for events to unfold. I've never been one of those melodramatic fools who seem to see every little issue as a reason to run off screaming like chicken little, but I have to admit I am wondering if we all ought not be even more concerned than we previously thought we should.
I'm not talking about uniting the right, or the left. I'm crying out to unite the sensible before we have no choice but to take sides in this insane polarization of our society. It's not too late to call off the all-or-nothing attitudes that are rapidly entrenching themselves in public opinion in Canada and the United States. I blame a lot of it on lack of any kind of vision, but to say that's the cure all would be completely naive. All I know is if we do not find a way to force these two sides to find some common ground there is going to be a very predictable, yet highly unpredictable consequence. The two sides will turn on one another violently. I always believed civil wars happened in unsophisticated countries. Lately I've been forced to entertain the possibility it could happen here. Not Canada specifically, more of a pan-continental thing. When I first began to ponder this, even I thought it was crazy. I thought of every reason possible why it wouldn't happen, but they just do not align with the reality I see around me.
I see people who try to talk sense being vilified by both sides. I've felt this myself when I have expressed my own views. As both sides entrench it becomes more difficult to remain in sensible territory. The most partisan vitriol has become the norm. No longer do people pay more than lip service to anything that looks like compromise. For both sides it has become a "my way or the highway" scenario. You're in all the way or you are the enemy. The intensely vocal minority on both sides, the truly unreasonable wackos, command almost all of the attention, which serves to perpetuate the idea you have to join the "good" side, depending on what you perceive as being good. Middle ground is becoming increasingly muffled and if we allow it to be snuffed out I shudder to think of what might happen when two groups of radicals who will disagree to the death duke it out, forcing even the moderates among us to choose sides or die, or perhaps worse, choose sides and die.
Don't think it could happen here? Think I'm some kind of nut? Great, go back to the website of your favorite celebrity or sports hero or maybe check out a reality show. I'm sure every time societies reached a danger point people scoff at those who suggested there could be a bad outcome.
I think we have a dangerous divide in North America, and I think it is deteriorating faster than many people realize. It's more convenient to ignore such an ugly possibility than it is to think about it, but if no one talks about it because it is uncomfortable, it will get far worse before it can ever get any better. I, for one, do not want to wait until it's too late to talk about it.
We are so busy arguing over what divides us, we've forgotten what binds us together. We are not so different as to render us immune to violent division. It's hard work to compromise. Will we really allow history to repeat itself right in our backyard?
I don't know. I do know I don't like what I see. Sometimes the bigger picture is so ugly I long for tunnel vision.
Sunday, 29 May 2011
Where did Canada Go?
For quite some time now, I've been searching for my country. This is getting serious, I'm about at the point I think I should report to authorities it is missing. I put the blame squarely on myself, while I was distracted Canada must have wandered off and recently I've been in a panicked search for it.
Of course that may seem like babble, but I have a particular affinity for babbling, eventually I get to the point.
I'm sure we all have our own ideas of what Canada is. Sure there are differences, but it's the similarities in our hearts and minds that define us as something different that people who live in other nations. If it weren't for these kinds of definitions there would be no need for countries or borders, if we all felt the need to run our affairs exactly the same as others do.
My Canada, the one I am searching for, had much sharper definitions from its neighbour to the south, and I liked that. My Canada was a country founded on cooperation of a small population spread over a massive geographic location, unlike the "every man for himself" attitude which turns my stomach in so many ways. My Canada was different because it cared about the disadvantaged, the disabled, to those whose voices would otherwise never be heard. My Canada welcomed immigrants and refugees and didn't expect them to become us, rather learn more about their cultures to enrich ourselves, a welcoming attitude that made them more determined to be good Canadians and adapt to our way of life without having to discard their own. My Canada had a stellar reputation globally, it was a honest broker, it wasn't a war monger or blind follower of the "great powers" in their military misadventures, it was often leading the charge for social and environmental change, friend to most, defender of the opressed, and it was a badge of honour to carry the Canadian Maple Leaf proudly displayed on one's attire.
In short, I'd say we were "lovable Americans" (sic). Hear me out, if you've travelled outside the country you will often hear what people think of Americans, and it ain't pretty. Years ago, many Americans would go so far as to sew Canadian flags on their gear to escape the shame a bad country can bring to good people. Conversely if people knew you were Canadian, while they knew little about the country itself, they were always welcoming and held a special affinity for Canadians.
That Canada has become mysteriously absent. I'm sure I am not the only one alarmed by this trend, and not the only one dedicated to rebuilding and repairing the mess we're faced with now. I'm not going to pick this apart in any great detail at the moment as I intend, over the next while to look at some of the politics and geopolitics on an issue by issue basis. We need to talk about these things, or we risk becoming a homogenous "American" society.
What would lead me to think that way? Just look where we are today. Canada has absolutely no national interest, other than being a source of commodities and toadying up to the US/UK agenda. Not only has an economy that should have been poised to lead developed nations started on a steady downward slope, by electing a Harper majority, Canadians have guaranteed themselves 4 years of people who don't have a clue how to handle the economy of a country. They might be great at a business, but running a country comes with considerations no business has to take into account and these guys don't get it at all. Add to that our absolutely abysmal record on the environment which has had the effect of turning a once respected nation into an international pariah, and our blind following of other countries into military adventures that are not well thought out, where we don't know what our goal is or how to end these things and the spiral went from gradual to cliff-like in a few short years.
If you want your Canada to be exactly like the train wreck south of us, you're probably over-the-moon happy right now. If you want your Canada to do a U-turn and try to redeem ourselves in the eyes of the world then join me in sharing this blog with your friends. Join me in speaking up about a better, kinder, Canada. There is a lot of work ahead, we're either up for it, or giving up.
I want my Canada back.
Of course that may seem like babble, but I have a particular affinity for babbling, eventually I get to the point.
I'm sure we all have our own ideas of what Canada is. Sure there are differences, but it's the similarities in our hearts and minds that define us as something different that people who live in other nations. If it weren't for these kinds of definitions there would be no need for countries or borders, if we all felt the need to run our affairs exactly the same as others do.
My Canada, the one I am searching for, had much sharper definitions from its neighbour to the south, and I liked that. My Canada was a country founded on cooperation of a small population spread over a massive geographic location, unlike the "every man for himself" attitude which turns my stomach in so many ways. My Canada was different because it cared about the disadvantaged, the disabled, to those whose voices would otherwise never be heard. My Canada welcomed immigrants and refugees and didn't expect them to become us, rather learn more about their cultures to enrich ourselves, a welcoming attitude that made them more determined to be good Canadians and adapt to our way of life without having to discard their own. My Canada had a stellar reputation globally, it was a honest broker, it wasn't a war monger or blind follower of the "great powers" in their military misadventures, it was often leading the charge for social and environmental change, friend to most, defender of the opressed, and it was a badge of honour to carry the Canadian Maple Leaf proudly displayed on one's attire.
In short, I'd say we were "lovable Americans" (sic). Hear me out, if you've travelled outside the country you will often hear what people think of Americans, and it ain't pretty. Years ago, many Americans would go so far as to sew Canadian flags on their gear to escape the shame a bad country can bring to good people. Conversely if people knew you were Canadian, while they knew little about the country itself, they were always welcoming and held a special affinity for Canadians.
That Canada has become mysteriously absent. I'm sure I am not the only one alarmed by this trend, and not the only one dedicated to rebuilding and repairing the mess we're faced with now. I'm not going to pick this apart in any great detail at the moment as I intend, over the next while to look at some of the politics and geopolitics on an issue by issue basis. We need to talk about these things, or we risk becoming a homogenous "American" society.
What would lead me to think that way? Just look where we are today. Canada has absolutely no national interest, other than being a source of commodities and toadying up to the US/UK agenda. Not only has an economy that should have been poised to lead developed nations started on a steady downward slope, by electing a Harper majority, Canadians have guaranteed themselves 4 years of people who don't have a clue how to handle the economy of a country. They might be great at a business, but running a country comes with considerations no business has to take into account and these guys don't get it at all. Add to that our absolutely abysmal record on the environment which has had the effect of turning a once respected nation into an international pariah, and our blind following of other countries into military adventures that are not well thought out, where we don't know what our goal is or how to end these things and the spiral went from gradual to cliff-like in a few short years.
If you want your Canada to be exactly like the train wreck south of us, you're probably over-the-moon happy right now. If you want your Canada to do a U-turn and try to redeem ourselves in the eyes of the world then join me in sharing this blog with your friends. Join me in speaking up about a better, kinder, Canada. There is a lot of work ahead, we're either up for it, or giving up.
I want my Canada back.
Monday, 23 May 2011
Hoodwinked? I think not!
I haven't said a lot post election, regarding the outcome of the 41st election, which has delivered to us a Harper majority. This was purposeful, as I wanted to take a bit of time to pay attention to what others were saying. The media, the various social media, and people I take time to talk to at the various place I go.
I'd like to say it's laughable, but it isnt.
My feeling that people aren't very bright most of the time has been heavily reinforced. Before you think I am some kind of big-feeling pompous ass, I want you to know I also include myself in the same category, since I find many times when I realize I should have put more thought or more research into something before coming to a conclusion. This often leads to me changing my mind, which, I believe, differentiates me from the majority, in that, when I find I am wrong, I am willing to admit I was wrong and alter my thinking and actions accordingly. For many, this is a step they just won't take. When they find they're wrong, rather than admit they may have been incorrect in their thought process, they entrench. They ignore facts and evidence and cling to their mistaken beliefs in order to not have to admit they were wrong. I see it every day, because I engage a lot of people in discussion. Usually it works like this: Person 1 makes a statement of "fact" (in quotations because they've only stated what they believe to be true). At this point, I will generally call them out on their statement, presenting what I know through research and experience to be the truth of the matter. This inevitably leads to my being called all kinds of names, right up to being threatened by "internet bullies" who somehow think acting like a 6 year old has suddenly reversed the truth and made their point magically become reality. Generally, I won't stoop to this level since it makes absolutely no sense to a grown up to behave that way, so I will either continue to try to engage them with fact (only if I see a glimmer of hope they may have a common sense bone somewhere) or I'll just stop responding (when I see it's absolutely hopeless to continue to try to talk sense to them).
Which leads me to this, my latest diatribe on the Jerk referred to as Stephen Harper. I like most people. Even some who are relatively jerky, I will try to find good qualities rather than dwell on the bad. When it comes to Stephen Harper I harbour a great distate for this individual. I'd have no problem telling him to his face what I think of him, I would probably derive great pleasure in doing so.
What really galls me is what I've been seeing since the day Harper appointed his bloated cabinet, then walked away before a release was issued that he had appointed to the senate three of his cronies who had lost on election day. I have to admit, I was taken by surprise, not that Harper had done what he did, but by the reaction from conservative supporters. The same morons who voted for this asshole, indeed many of the same "so-called" journalists who endorsed him and encouraged others to give this clown the ultimate power he so craved, expressing some kind of "moral outrage" at these indefensible senate appointments.
I'm not new to Harper bashing. I took notice of this punk in an expensive suit long before he was ever leader of his party, let alone Prime Minister of what once was a great country. Many years ago I took note of the things he was saying publicly, I recognized him as a flat out US-style far right republican (however, I've revised this with the advent of the Tea Party because that is where he fits) and being the kind of person that actually cares about others and thinks government can play a constructive roll in the lives of citizens, I began to pay attention to him. I followed his rise to prominence, watched as his various power plays gained traction and how he destroyed the Progressive Conservative party and turned it into republican north. He's not a stupid man, just shallow, small minded, and the ultimate playground bully. He's managed to cloak himself in the "conservative" name, which is rather clever on his part, because many of his supporters somehow cling to the mistaken belief this is the same party as the progressive conservatives they voted for all their lives, that their parents and their parents before them voted for. Nothing could be further from the truth, which reinforces my belief that most people are just plain dumb or too lazy to look at the facts.
What else could possibly explain Canadians handing absolute power to this fascist? In the face of all of the evidence of his dictatorial tendencies, in the face of him surrounding himself with criminals as his top advisors, in the face of fraud, faked reports, mad-whore spending that would put the most left wing socialist to shame, contempt for parliament, contempt for the media, contempt for Canadians, 2 prorogations of parliament to keep himself in power, and all of the other disgusting crap this power hungry freak has rained down upon us, morons flocked to the polls to give him more power than someone like him should ever have. Now they're whing. Publicly crying foul because he is doing what he has always done.
I wonder if they think this forgives them for what is going to happen to this country over the next few years. I certainly don't forgive them. I don't feel the least sypathy for any of these people, who are bemoaning the first moves of our new dictator, they're directly responsible for giving him the power to do whatever he wants to do, and what he wants to do is make Canada into America North. Make no mistake about it, you will hear wailing and gnashing of teeth from the same blithering bastards who did everything they could to give this man what he wanted. Dictatorship of Canada.
Laughingly, they pontificate as though this is some kind of surprise. That, somehow, by giving this small minded creep a majority, he would change his ways. Stephen Harper is going to change, just not in any way that is positive for this country. The most unfortunate thing about it? People are so stupid they ignored every bit of evidence the worst thing that could happen to Canada in the entire history of the country would be to put ultimate power into the hands of this freak.
I don't find any of this funny. For years I have watched in horror as this piece of garbage consolidated his power, then gained power, then proved though a multitude of actions he is an irresponsible and dangerous man, and in return was given ultimate power in this country. If he wants to recall parliament and enact his radical right agenda, there is nothing short of revolution to stop him. If he wants to gut medicare, he can. If he wants to make abortion illegal, he will. If he wants to remove the rights of marginalized people who fought long and hard to gain a bit of understanding and acceptance, he is going to. Fact is, Stephen Harper is our dictator. Just like Franco, or Stalin, or Hitler, or any of those people I will be villified for comparing him to, Stephen Harper is your supreme ruler and he does not give a damn about your wants, needs, opinions or anything else for that matter. It's too late to whine, it's too late to moan, and far too late to pretend you had no idea what the Harper agenda was.
No one should be surprised. Stephen Harper has not had a hidden agenda. He's been clear for 2 decades where he wanted to go, and where he wanted to take this country. Because plenty of the irresponsible media types chose to ignore this, we got what they wanted, only now, they are crying about it.
To read their crap, listen to their crap, you whould think they'd been hoodwinked. If I've known and spoke out against this man and his agenda for over a decade, how is it these so-called journalists with all of the access and resources available to them, are now screaming as if they had no idea Harper would move immediately to show his contempt for all?? I submit they are either incredibly naive and stupid, or perhaps, seeing all the other losers who pretended they were journalists being appointed to the senate, they were angling for their own plum job for life.
Hoodwinked? I think not.
I'd like to say it's laughable, but it isnt.
My feeling that people aren't very bright most of the time has been heavily reinforced. Before you think I am some kind of big-feeling pompous ass, I want you to know I also include myself in the same category, since I find many times when I realize I should have put more thought or more research into something before coming to a conclusion. This often leads to me changing my mind, which, I believe, differentiates me from the majority, in that, when I find I am wrong, I am willing to admit I was wrong and alter my thinking and actions accordingly. For many, this is a step they just won't take. When they find they're wrong, rather than admit they may have been incorrect in their thought process, they entrench. They ignore facts and evidence and cling to their mistaken beliefs in order to not have to admit they were wrong. I see it every day, because I engage a lot of people in discussion. Usually it works like this: Person 1 makes a statement of "fact" (in quotations because they've only stated what they believe to be true). At this point, I will generally call them out on their statement, presenting what I know through research and experience to be the truth of the matter. This inevitably leads to my being called all kinds of names, right up to being threatened by "internet bullies" who somehow think acting like a 6 year old has suddenly reversed the truth and made their point magically become reality. Generally, I won't stoop to this level since it makes absolutely no sense to a grown up to behave that way, so I will either continue to try to engage them with fact (only if I see a glimmer of hope they may have a common sense bone somewhere) or I'll just stop responding (when I see it's absolutely hopeless to continue to try to talk sense to them).
Which leads me to this, my latest diatribe on the Jerk referred to as Stephen Harper. I like most people. Even some who are relatively jerky, I will try to find good qualities rather than dwell on the bad. When it comes to Stephen Harper I harbour a great distate for this individual. I'd have no problem telling him to his face what I think of him, I would probably derive great pleasure in doing so.
What really galls me is what I've been seeing since the day Harper appointed his bloated cabinet, then walked away before a release was issued that he had appointed to the senate three of his cronies who had lost on election day. I have to admit, I was taken by surprise, not that Harper had done what he did, but by the reaction from conservative supporters. The same morons who voted for this asshole, indeed many of the same "so-called" journalists who endorsed him and encouraged others to give this clown the ultimate power he so craved, expressing some kind of "moral outrage" at these indefensible senate appointments.
I'm not new to Harper bashing. I took notice of this punk in an expensive suit long before he was ever leader of his party, let alone Prime Minister of what once was a great country. Many years ago I took note of the things he was saying publicly, I recognized him as a flat out US-style far right republican (however, I've revised this with the advent of the Tea Party because that is where he fits) and being the kind of person that actually cares about others and thinks government can play a constructive roll in the lives of citizens, I began to pay attention to him. I followed his rise to prominence, watched as his various power plays gained traction and how he destroyed the Progressive Conservative party and turned it into republican north. He's not a stupid man, just shallow, small minded, and the ultimate playground bully. He's managed to cloak himself in the "conservative" name, which is rather clever on his part, because many of his supporters somehow cling to the mistaken belief this is the same party as the progressive conservatives they voted for all their lives, that their parents and their parents before them voted for. Nothing could be further from the truth, which reinforces my belief that most people are just plain dumb or too lazy to look at the facts.
What else could possibly explain Canadians handing absolute power to this fascist? In the face of all of the evidence of his dictatorial tendencies, in the face of him surrounding himself with criminals as his top advisors, in the face of fraud, faked reports, mad-whore spending that would put the most left wing socialist to shame, contempt for parliament, contempt for the media, contempt for Canadians, 2 prorogations of parliament to keep himself in power, and all of the other disgusting crap this power hungry freak has rained down upon us, morons flocked to the polls to give him more power than someone like him should ever have. Now they're whing. Publicly crying foul because he is doing what he has always done.
I wonder if they think this forgives them for what is going to happen to this country over the next few years. I certainly don't forgive them. I don't feel the least sypathy for any of these people, who are bemoaning the first moves of our new dictator, they're directly responsible for giving him the power to do whatever he wants to do, and what he wants to do is make Canada into America North. Make no mistake about it, you will hear wailing and gnashing of teeth from the same blithering bastards who did everything they could to give this man what he wanted. Dictatorship of Canada.
Laughingly, they pontificate as though this is some kind of surprise. That, somehow, by giving this small minded creep a majority, he would change his ways. Stephen Harper is going to change, just not in any way that is positive for this country. The most unfortunate thing about it? People are so stupid they ignored every bit of evidence the worst thing that could happen to Canada in the entire history of the country would be to put ultimate power into the hands of this freak.
I don't find any of this funny. For years I have watched in horror as this piece of garbage consolidated his power, then gained power, then proved though a multitude of actions he is an irresponsible and dangerous man, and in return was given ultimate power in this country. If he wants to recall parliament and enact his radical right agenda, there is nothing short of revolution to stop him. If he wants to gut medicare, he can. If he wants to make abortion illegal, he will. If he wants to remove the rights of marginalized people who fought long and hard to gain a bit of understanding and acceptance, he is going to. Fact is, Stephen Harper is our dictator. Just like Franco, or Stalin, or Hitler, or any of those people I will be villified for comparing him to, Stephen Harper is your supreme ruler and he does not give a damn about your wants, needs, opinions or anything else for that matter. It's too late to whine, it's too late to moan, and far too late to pretend you had no idea what the Harper agenda was.
No one should be surprised. Stephen Harper has not had a hidden agenda. He's been clear for 2 decades where he wanted to go, and where he wanted to take this country. Because plenty of the irresponsible media types chose to ignore this, we got what they wanted, only now, they are crying about it.
To read their crap, listen to their crap, you whould think they'd been hoodwinked. If I've known and spoke out against this man and his agenda for over a decade, how is it these so-called journalists with all of the access and resources available to them, are now screaming as if they had no idea Harper would move immediately to show his contempt for all?? I submit they are either incredibly naive and stupid, or perhaps, seeing all the other losers who pretended they were journalists being appointed to the senate, they were angling for their own plum job for life.
Hoodwinked? I think not.
Saturday, 21 May 2011
Doing something sensible (for a change)
How out of touch are we? Very much so it appears, but thanks to the efforts of more and more people tired of this theatre of the absurd, it appears the movement to move drug policies forward into the 21st century could be gaining some traction. Don't get me wrong, I don't for a minute believe victory is imminent, because common sense is so very uncommon and almost no politician actually has the common sense gene.
What got me thinking about this today is a twitter link to the website of Avaaz, an organization I quite frequently agree with. Especially in the case of this petition to end the "war on drugs" which, when looked at with any degree of critical thought has been an utter failure, has cost taxpayers and the economy untold billions of dollars, and will never be effective. Never.
Most, if not all of the people who read this will not remember the successful prohibition of alcohol, well, that's because the prohibition on alcohol was a success, in a lesser degree, in the same way the war on drugs is. That is, utter failure with far worse consequences to society than the benefits that may have been gained by some form of orderly success.
Most of the informal reasearch I've done traces the use of alcohol back to at least 10,000 BC, and the use of marijuana back a minimum of 12,000 years. Who in their right mind would believe that substances that have been in use for millenia would suddenly stop being used because some overly-righteous asshole decided they were bad and should be illegal. The second the penstroke hits the page making things like this illegal, it sets off a chain of events that causes horrific consequenses. If you haven't put much thought into this subject, please read on for a discussion of what these prohibitions do, to individuals and to society.
The second someone came to the realization that they could ingest or inhale something that made them feel good it was game on. People like to feel good, some get it through adreneline rushes, some bask in accomplishments and accolades, others like to have a drink, or a few, or way too many. Some like to smoke weed, others prefer some other substance. The point is, most human beings crave outside stimulation that makes them feel good, and it is probably more convenient to achieve through 10 bucks worth of grass or a six pack or beer than it is through parachuting off the Eiffel Tower.
That said, I won't go into any kind of long history lesson on the prohibition of alcohol, most are aware it happened, it was a disasterous failure, it ended, liquor is now sold on a mostly regulated basis and puts billions of dollars of revenue into government coffers every year. Even if they banned it again tomorrow, people would still drink, they would find ways to make or get alcohol, and would share it with like minded people either for camaraderie or for profit. The truth is, people will never stop drinking alcohol.
Those are history lessons we know. Have you ever thought about what the consequences of the alcohol prohibition were? Worse, it didn't last near as long as the drug prohibition so the damage, while substantial, was nowhere near what the war on drugs has cost societies across the globe. Because these things are rooted in populist ideas, they are widely supported by influential segments of the population who have absolutely no idea what they are talking about and no capacity to think of the far ranging societial consequences of prohibiting anything that is widely used across the global population. From a law enforcement perspective, causes like alcohol prohibition and the war on drugs are popular and are great PR for policing agencies as they always garner headlines and the majority of them heap praise on these organizations for their crime fighting abilities. The unfortunate part is how it takes people and resources away from crimes that really matter. The prohibition of alcohol can clearly be linked to a more than substantial rise in crime and boosting the prominence of the mafia. As it is now with drugs, while prohibited, people still wanted alcohol and were willing to pay a premium to get it. Being entrepreneurs, criminals were interested in cashing in on that premium by providing the product. Greed is also a factor, in that, it will draw in people who otherwise would never have committed a crime in their lives to cash in also. This leads to huge profits for organized criminals who can use it to fund their other, more sinister criminal enterprises, thus the prohibition itself actually creates more powerful criminal orgnizations which contribute to a worsening crime situation by funding other illegal activities with the fortunes they make from selling a product everyone wants but some dumbass got elected by opposing it. Along with this, we create another whole class of criminals, those who use, posess, and minimally distribute the prohibited substance to others. A person who could have lived an entire lifetime without any stain on their reputation could be followed forever by a criminal record for merely catching a buzz. Not to mention how many people died from drinking something they shouldn't have, something they thought was the same as the illegal alcohol they'd been buying but turned out to be something poisonous. This is not great policy. This does not make society better. Prohibiting food will not make people lose weight.
So now I come to the sustained, yet absolutely useless war on drugs. Think about the consequences of alcohol prohibition as I summarized it above, then multiply it by about 1000. That's probably somewhere close to the havoc the lengthy and continued drug prohibition has caused. Now the "law and order" industry has figured out how to milk this thing like a cow. Billions of dollars annually are pumped into the industry and the result is minimal effect. It doesn't work and never will work. Sure, they orchestrate drug busts to look big and sensational, they'll expend hundreds of thousands, even millions of dollars to bring down 15 or 20 small and medium players and it gets headlines and publicity for months on end. The truth is, if they managed to intercept more than 10% of the supply they'd be over the moon. I'll guarantee you I could leave my house right now and go buy anything I want, from weed, to extacy, cocaine, prescription pills, heroin, whatever I want in a city of about 130,000. I can also find most of that in just about any small community I visit, whether I know anyone or not. That's the reality.
There is minimal funding for services to help victims of crime. Unlimited funding to stop that guy with a bag of weed. No one can be bothered devoting resources to looking for missing women or children but they'll happily spend thousands of dollars and a ton of man hours doing surveillence on someone who may or may not be trafficking in one one-trillionth of the drugs sold and consumed daily on this planet. There is a whole lot wrong with this picture, and the bigger the picture you look at, the more you can find wrong with it.
I was born near the end of the baby boom. I was a teen in the 70's. I know a lot of people who tried drugs, a lot who used for a time and have stopped and many who continue to recreationally enjoy putting various substances into their body for the sheer enjoyment of it. Some of these people are regular everyday working stiffs, others are wealthy business people, still others hold esteemed positions in our society. I believe it is their business what they enjoy in their spare time, we are all responsible for our own conduct. I do know some people who have had problems with addiction, however I will qualify that by saying they are pretty much the same people who, if they weren't addicted to drugs, would engage in some other kind of self destructive behaviour. I know many people who have had their lives stained with a criminal record that will follow them forever and cause them to be excluded from working in places they would be an asset, who otherwise are decent, upstanding citizens who wouldn't think of breaking a law. I will also admit, I know a few people who never grew up and I continue to see their name in the paper because they've made a living selling drugs and have no other skills and the occasional stint in jail is just a cost of doing business.
The worst of the war on drugs is not just the criminal enterprises it has spawned, but the idea that most people do not understand they connection between prohibition and creating powerful criminal organizations. Not the guy down the street who sells a few bags of weed to suppliment his income, these people are ruthless, organized, monetized, and their interests do not stop at drugs. Drugs are a cash cow to fund other operations, and the lengthy prohibition on drugs, their use and possession, has created something that makes the mafia look like a freaking joke in comparison. This has gone on long enough that many of these drug kingpins are richer and more powerful than most countries in the world, many of them have their own private armies, they have important figures in their pockets. These people are not unsophisticated in their operations. If they need to spend a billion dollars on a new way to smuggle more of their overpriced product into a place where millions of people are more than willing to buy it, they will, as a cost of doing business. Just the fact it is illegal and so many people want it raises the stakes, and inevitably, leads to turf wars and violence. With the mafia, it was generally held to mob family on mob family violence. The length of time drugs have been prohibitied have led it to become something else, something far more sinister, where rivals now engage in violence for violence sake, and it's no longer targetted hits but random drive by shootings or bombings or whatever kind of violence they prefer at the time. It's no longer just the serious organized criminals, the idea of the "gangsta" life has been glorified so much so that an entire generation is growing up to the realization even if you don't bother to try hard to be a productive citizen you can have piles of money and piles of fun by engaging in various criminal activities, even if that includes spraying a crowd of your percieved rivals with automatic gunfire at the age of 15, or 13, no different than the child soldiers in countries we condemn for human rights abuses. As long as these substances are prohibited by force of law, yet wanted by such a significant proportion of the population, the situation will continue to worsen.
The time has come to be sensible about how we deal with intoxicating substances. People are not going to stop using them. Period. Fact. Thousands of years of history teaches us this yet we ignore that because it doesn't conveniently fit the argument for the status quo. Rather than being a massive cost monetarily and societally, sensible regulation will create benefits we should have been taking advantage of for a long time.
First and foremost, it cuts a massive source of funding for criminals off. It also allows the better allocation of resources to the prevention of crime, it frees up police to deal with crimes that are under funded, to purchase better and more modern equipment and advanced training, and allows for more effort to be put into victim services. It takes a huge load off the court system and allows more serious crime to be put through the system in a more expedient fashion, possibly leading to less plea bargains and more convictions for the serious ills of society.
Economically, the war on drugs makes no sense. I've said before and will say again people are never going to stop using intoxicating substances, so we are continually flushing money down the toilet trying to enforce the unenforcable. Under regulation, producers would become legitimate tax paying businesses in an industry that is instantly worth billions of dollars a year in this country alone. Then there would have to be a retail system, also made up of tax paying business people who would require employees, who would also be tax payers. Add to that the spinoffs available to equipment manufacturers, distribution and transportation networks, packaging designers, and everyone else who would now be doing legitimate business within the legal system. Finally there would be tax revenue, and plenty of it. It would probably be a conservative estimate to say they'd take in a couple of billion dollars a year and the product would still be less expensive at the retail level than it is today on the black market.
I submit we should stop the madness, it can only get worse if we continue to do what we are doing. The negatives of prohibition are many and varied. This is not an issue of morals. It's an outdated and misguided policy that has no basis in fact or reality. We rightly express outrage at countries that think it is acceptable to allow men to legally rape their wives yet we have no problem with ruining a 19 year old kids life forever because he had a couple of bags of grass in his car. That criminal record will exclude him from work, from travel, from many of the things most people take for granted.
The time has come for a stop to the damage of the war on drugs. The collateral damage is far too great to accept once someone begins to explain exactly what it is.
Thanks, comments for and against are most welcome.
What got me thinking about this today is a twitter link to the website of Avaaz, an organization I quite frequently agree with. Especially in the case of this petition to end the "war on drugs" which, when looked at with any degree of critical thought has been an utter failure, has cost taxpayers and the economy untold billions of dollars, and will never be effective. Never.
Most, if not all of the people who read this will not remember the successful prohibition of alcohol, well, that's because the prohibition on alcohol was a success, in a lesser degree, in the same way the war on drugs is. That is, utter failure with far worse consequences to society than the benefits that may have been gained by some form of orderly success.
Most of the informal reasearch I've done traces the use of alcohol back to at least 10,000 BC, and the use of marijuana back a minimum of 12,000 years. Who in their right mind would believe that substances that have been in use for millenia would suddenly stop being used because some overly-righteous asshole decided they were bad and should be illegal. The second the penstroke hits the page making things like this illegal, it sets off a chain of events that causes horrific consequenses. If you haven't put much thought into this subject, please read on for a discussion of what these prohibitions do, to individuals and to society.
The second someone came to the realization that they could ingest or inhale something that made them feel good it was game on. People like to feel good, some get it through adreneline rushes, some bask in accomplishments and accolades, others like to have a drink, or a few, or way too many. Some like to smoke weed, others prefer some other substance. The point is, most human beings crave outside stimulation that makes them feel good, and it is probably more convenient to achieve through 10 bucks worth of grass or a six pack or beer than it is through parachuting off the Eiffel Tower.
That said, I won't go into any kind of long history lesson on the prohibition of alcohol, most are aware it happened, it was a disasterous failure, it ended, liquor is now sold on a mostly regulated basis and puts billions of dollars of revenue into government coffers every year. Even if they banned it again tomorrow, people would still drink, they would find ways to make or get alcohol, and would share it with like minded people either for camaraderie or for profit. The truth is, people will never stop drinking alcohol.
Those are history lessons we know. Have you ever thought about what the consequences of the alcohol prohibition were? Worse, it didn't last near as long as the drug prohibition so the damage, while substantial, was nowhere near what the war on drugs has cost societies across the globe. Because these things are rooted in populist ideas, they are widely supported by influential segments of the population who have absolutely no idea what they are talking about and no capacity to think of the far ranging societial consequences of prohibiting anything that is widely used across the global population. From a law enforcement perspective, causes like alcohol prohibition and the war on drugs are popular and are great PR for policing agencies as they always garner headlines and the majority of them heap praise on these organizations for their crime fighting abilities. The unfortunate part is how it takes people and resources away from crimes that really matter. The prohibition of alcohol can clearly be linked to a more than substantial rise in crime and boosting the prominence of the mafia. As it is now with drugs, while prohibited, people still wanted alcohol and were willing to pay a premium to get it. Being entrepreneurs, criminals were interested in cashing in on that premium by providing the product. Greed is also a factor, in that, it will draw in people who otherwise would never have committed a crime in their lives to cash in also. This leads to huge profits for organized criminals who can use it to fund their other, more sinister criminal enterprises, thus the prohibition itself actually creates more powerful criminal orgnizations which contribute to a worsening crime situation by funding other illegal activities with the fortunes they make from selling a product everyone wants but some dumbass got elected by opposing it. Along with this, we create another whole class of criminals, those who use, posess, and minimally distribute the prohibited substance to others. A person who could have lived an entire lifetime without any stain on their reputation could be followed forever by a criminal record for merely catching a buzz. Not to mention how many people died from drinking something they shouldn't have, something they thought was the same as the illegal alcohol they'd been buying but turned out to be something poisonous. This is not great policy. This does not make society better. Prohibiting food will not make people lose weight.
So now I come to the sustained, yet absolutely useless war on drugs. Think about the consequences of alcohol prohibition as I summarized it above, then multiply it by about 1000. That's probably somewhere close to the havoc the lengthy and continued drug prohibition has caused. Now the "law and order" industry has figured out how to milk this thing like a cow. Billions of dollars annually are pumped into the industry and the result is minimal effect. It doesn't work and never will work. Sure, they orchestrate drug busts to look big and sensational, they'll expend hundreds of thousands, even millions of dollars to bring down 15 or 20 small and medium players and it gets headlines and publicity for months on end. The truth is, if they managed to intercept more than 10% of the supply they'd be over the moon. I'll guarantee you I could leave my house right now and go buy anything I want, from weed, to extacy, cocaine, prescription pills, heroin, whatever I want in a city of about 130,000. I can also find most of that in just about any small community I visit, whether I know anyone or not. That's the reality.
There is minimal funding for services to help victims of crime. Unlimited funding to stop that guy with a bag of weed. No one can be bothered devoting resources to looking for missing women or children but they'll happily spend thousands of dollars and a ton of man hours doing surveillence on someone who may or may not be trafficking in one one-trillionth of the drugs sold and consumed daily on this planet. There is a whole lot wrong with this picture, and the bigger the picture you look at, the more you can find wrong with it.
I was born near the end of the baby boom. I was a teen in the 70's. I know a lot of people who tried drugs, a lot who used for a time and have stopped and many who continue to recreationally enjoy putting various substances into their body for the sheer enjoyment of it. Some of these people are regular everyday working stiffs, others are wealthy business people, still others hold esteemed positions in our society. I believe it is their business what they enjoy in their spare time, we are all responsible for our own conduct. I do know some people who have had problems with addiction, however I will qualify that by saying they are pretty much the same people who, if they weren't addicted to drugs, would engage in some other kind of self destructive behaviour. I know many people who have had their lives stained with a criminal record that will follow them forever and cause them to be excluded from working in places they would be an asset, who otherwise are decent, upstanding citizens who wouldn't think of breaking a law. I will also admit, I know a few people who never grew up and I continue to see their name in the paper because they've made a living selling drugs and have no other skills and the occasional stint in jail is just a cost of doing business.
The worst of the war on drugs is not just the criminal enterprises it has spawned, but the idea that most people do not understand they connection between prohibition and creating powerful criminal organizations. Not the guy down the street who sells a few bags of weed to suppliment his income, these people are ruthless, organized, monetized, and their interests do not stop at drugs. Drugs are a cash cow to fund other operations, and the lengthy prohibition on drugs, their use and possession, has created something that makes the mafia look like a freaking joke in comparison. This has gone on long enough that many of these drug kingpins are richer and more powerful than most countries in the world, many of them have their own private armies, they have important figures in their pockets. These people are not unsophisticated in their operations. If they need to spend a billion dollars on a new way to smuggle more of their overpriced product into a place where millions of people are more than willing to buy it, they will, as a cost of doing business. Just the fact it is illegal and so many people want it raises the stakes, and inevitably, leads to turf wars and violence. With the mafia, it was generally held to mob family on mob family violence. The length of time drugs have been prohibitied have led it to become something else, something far more sinister, where rivals now engage in violence for violence sake, and it's no longer targetted hits but random drive by shootings or bombings or whatever kind of violence they prefer at the time. It's no longer just the serious organized criminals, the idea of the "gangsta" life has been glorified so much so that an entire generation is growing up to the realization even if you don't bother to try hard to be a productive citizen you can have piles of money and piles of fun by engaging in various criminal activities, even if that includes spraying a crowd of your percieved rivals with automatic gunfire at the age of 15, or 13, no different than the child soldiers in countries we condemn for human rights abuses. As long as these substances are prohibited by force of law, yet wanted by such a significant proportion of the population, the situation will continue to worsen.
The time has come to be sensible about how we deal with intoxicating substances. People are not going to stop using them. Period. Fact. Thousands of years of history teaches us this yet we ignore that because it doesn't conveniently fit the argument for the status quo. Rather than being a massive cost monetarily and societally, sensible regulation will create benefits we should have been taking advantage of for a long time.
First and foremost, it cuts a massive source of funding for criminals off. It also allows the better allocation of resources to the prevention of crime, it frees up police to deal with crimes that are under funded, to purchase better and more modern equipment and advanced training, and allows for more effort to be put into victim services. It takes a huge load off the court system and allows more serious crime to be put through the system in a more expedient fashion, possibly leading to less plea bargains and more convictions for the serious ills of society.
Economically, the war on drugs makes no sense. I've said before and will say again people are never going to stop using intoxicating substances, so we are continually flushing money down the toilet trying to enforce the unenforcable. Under regulation, producers would become legitimate tax paying businesses in an industry that is instantly worth billions of dollars a year in this country alone. Then there would have to be a retail system, also made up of tax paying business people who would require employees, who would also be tax payers. Add to that the spinoffs available to equipment manufacturers, distribution and transportation networks, packaging designers, and everyone else who would now be doing legitimate business within the legal system. Finally there would be tax revenue, and plenty of it. It would probably be a conservative estimate to say they'd take in a couple of billion dollars a year and the product would still be less expensive at the retail level than it is today on the black market.
I submit we should stop the madness, it can only get worse if we continue to do what we are doing. The negatives of prohibition are many and varied. This is not an issue of morals. It's an outdated and misguided policy that has no basis in fact or reality. We rightly express outrage at countries that think it is acceptable to allow men to legally rape their wives yet we have no problem with ruining a 19 year old kids life forever because he had a couple of bags of grass in his car. That criminal record will exclude him from work, from travel, from many of the things most people take for granted.
The time has come for a stop to the damage of the war on drugs. The collateral damage is far too great to accept once someone begins to explain exactly what it is.
Thanks, comments for and against are most welcome.
Wednesday, 18 May 2011
Why "Uniting the Left" will fail.
Since I've seen a lot of chatter about uniting the "left" recently, I thought I might weigh in on the subject while the topic is still fresh.
Many pundits and regular folk have been musing about what needs to be done to allow the majority of the population to have the majority say in the affairs of the nation. Many varied pieces have been written in the aftermath of the election that gave Stephen Harper's conservatives a majority in the House of Commons, with the support of only 40% of the 60% of eligibile Canadians who took the time to vote. There are variations on several themes, and some very good ideas, most of which imply the opening of the constitution which is fraught with many dangers I will surely discuss at some point, but for now, I'd like to focus on the people who believe the solution is to "unite the left".
Our current difficulty stems from the catch 22 situation that exists in the Canadian political landscape. The system we operate under is equipped to allow for any number of political parties to participate, but the process of government is actually designed for "mano-a-mano" government versus opposition two party rule. The more parties involved, the less influential and effective they will be, especially when facing a majority government. This is our reality. The NDP went from a position of power to being the mouse that roared. Enough of that, let's get to the meat of the discussion.
As I see it, the left is already just about as united as they get. The left, of course, would be Jack Layton's NDP. For most of the Liberals I know personally, and many I discuss ideas with, any kind of merger with the New Democrats is neither a probability nor a possibility. The NDP is a separate party for a reason, that reason being they are too uncomfortably left for people who have considered themselves as socially progressive over the last half century. While I suspect many NDP supporters may fall somewhere on the right hand side of the official party position, they have a certain populist appeal which will draw some people in, and, like supporters of any party, will ignore the areas the party might tend to go further than they like in order to support a narrower agenda they do want to see moving forward. This is the same principle that allows conservative supporters to ignore the horrificly bad things the Harper Government has done and proudly support them, and the one that allows Liberals to somehow not notice their party stopped standing for anything in particular some time ago.
I'm not going to self-aggrandize and say I know the answer to what ails Canada right now. I do know that the heart and soul of the Liberals and the heart and soul of the NDP are camps that sit father apart than one would think on the surface.
Looking at things in a smaller context, perhaps defeating Stephen Harper and his band of merry-men is the be all and end all and that if that other 60% of voters all joined in a big group hug we'd chase those bullies from the playground once and for all and Canada would live happily ever after. To which I give the "Bev Oda ^NOT Award".
This is not what I'm asking myself after this election. I never dismiss anything on its face, so of course I pondered the option of some kind of coming together of the left, however, it isn't an option I would dwell upon for any great length of time. If the rift is too wide for me, I know it will be far too wide for a mass audience it really needs to appeal to. What I'm expending much of my thought process on is a far more complex and compelling question. A question that really goes to the root of what you or I personally see as what it means to be Canadian. It truly can be a defining moment for the future of the country.
I'm asking this: Do I want a Canada that more closely resembles America, and the politics that go with that? With a harshly defined right versus left that is exactly what we'll get. 20% hard to the right, 20% hard to the left and the remaining 60% who are either forced to hold their noses and vote for whichever is the lesser of the two evils at the time, or just not bother to vote at all. I find it appaling, but some people think it's just dandy.
Is there room for a political centre in Canada? I believe there is. I actually believe there is a very bright future for "centrists" in this country. It may sound odd, when one looks at the unfortunate drubbing of the Liberal party in the election just past, but I will tell you why, where others see abject failure, I see glorious opportunity.
The reason for hope begins with time. Most of us who are tuned in realize what a Harper majority has the potential to do. Nothiing can be done about that, except to do our level best to provide vocal opposition to the bad legislation they are going to pass during this term in office. Time also will help those in the centre by showing Canadians what the NDP is really about. Never before have they had to undergo the kind of scrutiny the "official" opposition will have to. Before, they were written off by a lot of very content people as a bunch of unelectable 3rd party wackos and when they said something dumb or had policies that didn't really stand up to scrutiny, it didn't really matter because they were the "other" guys. The also rans. Now they will matter. Moderate Canadians will get a much closer look at who they are and what they stand for, and in my estimation will find it not to their suiting.
Time also benefits the centre in that many of the old progressive conservatives, and indeed, many in the reform party will come to the stark realization the Stephen Harper is to Canada what the Tea Party is to the US. He is right. Right-of-right. At this moment Stephen Harper has done exactly what he and his closest backers had planned. Destruction of the progressive conservatives using the reform party as a vehicle, then the takeover of reform and a "merger" with the much weakened progressive conservatives, then consolidation of power within the party itself, and finally, drop most of the pretense and move to US-style junkyard dog politics to annihilate your most serious opposition, to the point where you've jacked the system enough to form a majority government and enact the policies you intended to enact and vocalized two decades previously. Moderate conservatives are in for a shock since many of them still mistake Harper's conservatives for the ones of their past.
These are some of the things that bode well for those of us who still believe that Canada can be a country known for its compassion, known for its fiscal good sense, and known for exhibiting good character in all of our global dealings. Now what the centre really needs is to identify the people who can articulate the truth. The truth that when we ask ourselves what it means to be Canadian, it means sitting somewhere on the line of sanity between the factions. To be Canadian is a lot about moderation, and there's nothing wrong with that.
Will the voices of Canada, please speak up.
Many pundits and regular folk have been musing about what needs to be done to allow the majority of the population to have the majority say in the affairs of the nation. Many varied pieces have been written in the aftermath of the election that gave Stephen Harper's conservatives a majority in the House of Commons, with the support of only 40% of the 60% of eligibile Canadians who took the time to vote. There are variations on several themes, and some very good ideas, most of which imply the opening of the constitution which is fraught with many dangers I will surely discuss at some point, but for now, I'd like to focus on the people who believe the solution is to "unite the left".
Our current difficulty stems from the catch 22 situation that exists in the Canadian political landscape. The system we operate under is equipped to allow for any number of political parties to participate, but the process of government is actually designed for "mano-a-mano" government versus opposition two party rule. The more parties involved, the less influential and effective they will be, especially when facing a majority government. This is our reality. The NDP went from a position of power to being the mouse that roared. Enough of that, let's get to the meat of the discussion.
As I see it, the left is already just about as united as they get. The left, of course, would be Jack Layton's NDP. For most of the Liberals I know personally, and many I discuss ideas with, any kind of merger with the New Democrats is neither a probability nor a possibility. The NDP is a separate party for a reason, that reason being they are too uncomfortably left for people who have considered themselves as socially progressive over the last half century. While I suspect many NDP supporters may fall somewhere on the right hand side of the official party position, they have a certain populist appeal which will draw some people in, and, like supporters of any party, will ignore the areas the party might tend to go further than they like in order to support a narrower agenda they do want to see moving forward. This is the same principle that allows conservative supporters to ignore the horrificly bad things the Harper Government has done and proudly support them, and the one that allows Liberals to somehow not notice their party stopped standing for anything in particular some time ago.
I'm not going to self-aggrandize and say I know the answer to what ails Canada right now. I do know that the heart and soul of the Liberals and the heart and soul of the NDP are camps that sit father apart than one would think on the surface.
Looking at things in a smaller context, perhaps defeating Stephen Harper and his band of merry-men is the be all and end all and that if that other 60% of voters all joined in a big group hug we'd chase those bullies from the playground once and for all and Canada would live happily ever after. To which I give the "Bev Oda ^NOT Award".
This is not what I'm asking myself after this election. I never dismiss anything on its face, so of course I pondered the option of some kind of coming together of the left, however, it isn't an option I would dwell upon for any great length of time. If the rift is too wide for me, I know it will be far too wide for a mass audience it really needs to appeal to. What I'm expending much of my thought process on is a far more complex and compelling question. A question that really goes to the root of what you or I personally see as what it means to be Canadian. It truly can be a defining moment for the future of the country.
I'm asking this: Do I want a Canada that more closely resembles America, and the politics that go with that? With a harshly defined right versus left that is exactly what we'll get. 20% hard to the right, 20% hard to the left and the remaining 60% who are either forced to hold their noses and vote for whichever is the lesser of the two evils at the time, or just not bother to vote at all. I find it appaling, but some people think it's just dandy.
Is there room for a political centre in Canada? I believe there is. I actually believe there is a very bright future for "centrists" in this country. It may sound odd, when one looks at the unfortunate drubbing of the Liberal party in the election just past, but I will tell you why, where others see abject failure, I see glorious opportunity.
The reason for hope begins with time. Most of us who are tuned in realize what a Harper majority has the potential to do. Nothiing can be done about that, except to do our level best to provide vocal opposition to the bad legislation they are going to pass during this term in office. Time also will help those in the centre by showing Canadians what the NDP is really about. Never before have they had to undergo the kind of scrutiny the "official" opposition will have to. Before, they were written off by a lot of very content people as a bunch of unelectable 3rd party wackos and when they said something dumb or had policies that didn't really stand up to scrutiny, it didn't really matter because they were the "other" guys. The also rans. Now they will matter. Moderate Canadians will get a much closer look at who they are and what they stand for, and in my estimation will find it not to their suiting.
Time also benefits the centre in that many of the old progressive conservatives, and indeed, many in the reform party will come to the stark realization the Stephen Harper is to Canada what the Tea Party is to the US. He is right. Right-of-right. At this moment Stephen Harper has done exactly what he and his closest backers had planned. Destruction of the progressive conservatives using the reform party as a vehicle, then the takeover of reform and a "merger" with the much weakened progressive conservatives, then consolidation of power within the party itself, and finally, drop most of the pretense and move to US-style junkyard dog politics to annihilate your most serious opposition, to the point where you've jacked the system enough to form a majority government and enact the policies you intended to enact and vocalized two decades previously. Moderate conservatives are in for a shock since many of them still mistake Harper's conservatives for the ones of their past.
These are some of the things that bode well for those of us who still believe that Canada can be a country known for its compassion, known for its fiscal good sense, and known for exhibiting good character in all of our global dealings. Now what the centre really needs is to identify the people who can articulate the truth. The truth that when we ask ourselves what it means to be Canadian, it means sitting somewhere on the line of sanity between the factions. To be Canadian is a lot about moderation, and there's nothing wrong with that.
Will the voices of Canada, please speak up.
A National Dream?
I've been wondering. Pondering. Questioning. Reading. I just don't see it.
A main theme of mine continues to be vision. Leaders with vision, even a narrow, partial vision, either don't exist or are totally unable to articulate a vision that could appeal to Canadians from coast to coast.
I long for someone with an idea or ideas on a grand scale. Ideas that improve the lives of Canadians from every corner of the country. Early on, it was coast to coast rail, then the Trans Canada Highway, medicare, public pensions, repatriation of the constitution, the charter of rights and freedoms and since...well...nothing. I mean, free trade was not an inspiration and did nothing for our national identity. I haven't even heard anyything from anyone I'd think of as an up and comer in any party express any kind of new ideas.
I'm not sure what other Canadians are looking for. I think many would agree it wouldn't hurt for someone to come out with some kind of idea that unifies us, that mends some of the horrific devisevness heaped upon us in the last couple of decades.
I have my own ideas of important things we might be able to do on a national scale, and I'd be tremendously interested to hear from others what they think might be a tonic for the region versus region, province versus province, provinces versus feds, feds versus provinces, urban versus rural crap that's been used for partisan political gain for far too long in Canada.
If it were me, I'd advance an agenda of making Canada the greenest country on the planet. A comprehensive strategy that utilizes the resources of each and every Canadian, from the householder to the heads of the largest corporations.
This is not one of those, cap and trade, carbon tax advocacy papers, rather it is the idea of an entire country making the committment to become the world's environmental leader in every way. For business, it's incentives to get greener and about paying your way for the harm you do. It's about programs to encourage the development of greener technologies, about new support businesses that will become reality to service new technologies which can be exportedall over the world. It's about more money for research for our Universities for programs that develop and enhance methods and new technologies to benefit Canadian industries, it's about finding new markets for recyclable materials and better methods of recycling. It's about public education, what can be done at home and at work and money for programs that encourage citizen science groups who have become increasingly successful in providing a wealth of reliable data that couldn't ever be compiled without the dedication of people who care about various aspects of the world around them. For the provinces, incentives to close old, inefficient power generating plants and replace them with greener energy sources.
Canadians are concerned about the environment and rightly so. More than anything I can think of in this day and age, I believe our concern for the environment could be a unifying factor and a source of pride for a Canada which has been wandering in the wilderness, unable to see the forest for the trees.
I'd love to hear your thoughts on national dreams. As always, I'm searching for the bigger picture.
A main theme of mine continues to be vision. Leaders with vision, even a narrow, partial vision, either don't exist or are totally unable to articulate a vision that could appeal to Canadians from coast to coast.
I long for someone with an idea or ideas on a grand scale. Ideas that improve the lives of Canadians from every corner of the country. Early on, it was coast to coast rail, then the Trans Canada Highway, medicare, public pensions, repatriation of the constitution, the charter of rights and freedoms and since...well...nothing. I mean, free trade was not an inspiration and did nothing for our national identity. I haven't even heard anyything from anyone I'd think of as an up and comer in any party express any kind of new ideas.
I'm not sure what other Canadians are looking for. I think many would agree it wouldn't hurt for someone to come out with some kind of idea that unifies us, that mends some of the horrific devisevness heaped upon us in the last couple of decades.
I have my own ideas of important things we might be able to do on a national scale, and I'd be tremendously interested to hear from others what they think might be a tonic for the region versus region, province versus province, provinces versus feds, feds versus provinces, urban versus rural crap that's been used for partisan political gain for far too long in Canada.
If it were me, I'd advance an agenda of making Canada the greenest country on the planet. A comprehensive strategy that utilizes the resources of each and every Canadian, from the householder to the heads of the largest corporations.
This is not one of those, cap and trade, carbon tax advocacy papers, rather it is the idea of an entire country making the committment to become the world's environmental leader in every way. For business, it's incentives to get greener and about paying your way for the harm you do. It's about programs to encourage the development of greener technologies, about new support businesses that will become reality to service new technologies which can be exportedall over the world. It's about more money for research for our Universities for programs that develop and enhance methods and new technologies to benefit Canadian industries, it's about finding new markets for recyclable materials and better methods of recycling. It's about public education, what can be done at home and at work and money for programs that encourage citizen science groups who have become increasingly successful in providing a wealth of reliable data that couldn't ever be compiled without the dedication of people who care about various aspects of the world around them. For the provinces, incentives to close old, inefficient power generating plants and replace them with greener energy sources.
Canadians are concerned about the environment and rightly so. More than anything I can think of in this day and age, I believe our concern for the environment could be a unifying factor and a source of pride for a Canada which has been wandering in the wilderness, unable to see the forest for the trees.
I'd love to hear your thoughts on national dreams. As always, I'm searching for the bigger picture.
Friday, 13 May 2011
If Bigpicguy Was Your Prime Minister
Funny how sometimes an innocent conversation gets you thinking, and sometimes the thought doesn't go away, it builds over time. Which leads me to this particular blog post. I'm going to ignore what anyone else has as a platform, and talk about what I would do with my fantasy majority government.
Of course, getting elected by being honest with people would never work, so this will always remain a fantasy, but for fun I'll share.
Of course, first things first, I'd have to choose a cabinet. My process would be different. Normal conventions go in the toilet. Cabinet Ministers in my Government of Canada would not be chosen by power or party influence or location, they would be chosen by their understanding of the issues of their portfolio and their willingness to work for all Canadians, not their province/territory or region or ethnicity or anything else other than carrying out their duty to make this the best damned country in the world. From coast to coast to coast as they love to say. A minister serves at the pleasure of the Prime Minister, and under my administration fairness and competence are a must or you get assigned a different seat, on in the back, because everyone can be replaced.
Next order of business, a budget. Since I would not be the finance minister, I wouldn't presume to think I could detail this for you, only assure you there would be no sudden shock for the average Canadian, no big anti-business hit, and that my Government's budgets will aim to advance my agenda for change, including far more open information on actual spending, and finding sensible ways to live within our means and to include payments on our debt in every budget. There must be measures put in place where only extrordinary measures could trigger deficit spending. More accountability for tax dollars is an absolute must.
Now we have to get down to a legislative agenda. MP's can expect to be working a lot more. As one who firmly believes if you're going to lead, you do it by example. So long recesses would be an exception rather than a rule, there's a country to improve. Number one on my agenda is clarity on how every penny of your money is spent. I don't think any Canadian would object to setting up an agency that provides them the ability to go online and see every payment released from every Government account, to be able to see scanned images of every invoice, to know how their tax dollars are being spent so they are able to make an informed judgement on how their tax dollars are being spent. As a starting point, I think it's a good one. It forces people to be more careful when they know someone can immediately see they just bought 150 golf balls or 60 bottles of pricey Champagne. I'm not saying there aren't times those may be good investments, but if people can see it you'd best be able to justify it. It also opens opportunities for smart businesses. If I can go online and see an opportunity to supply the Government with a product or service at a lower price and still make money, the law would ensure their case gets a hearing. This is the 21st Century, so let's move into it.
My agenda is reform of a system that has served us so poorly for so long. What once worked well (maybe) no longer is sensible in this day and age. Government has to change so Canadians have the kind of faith in their institutions required to open their minds to change.
All my life I've listened to politicians say they have to have all the pay and perks and platinum pensions and on and on and on and to that I say "Up Yours". I don't know many starving politicians, especially former PM's, Premiers, Cabinet Ministers, Opposition Leaders and critics, these people have many new doors opened to them through their political careers. Most of them make far more money after they leave office than they could ever have made prior to it.
Your job in parliament is about to become just that, a job. Since you are paid a salary, if you work extra hours, too bad. Yes, you'll have a fair amount of sick days but, like any other Canadian, if you miss too much time it will have to be taken from your pay. You'll also have a fairly generous vacation allotment, it's a difficult and stressful job, but if you aren't using that vacation time and the house is not sitting you are required to be in your constituency office 8 hours a day or attending a public function where you can account for your time, or take more unpaid time and explain it to the voters. It's about work ethic. It's about real public service. About setting the example. Just like every other Canadian who gets up and goes to work.
Now we're going to set an example when it comes to pay and perks and money fountains of all kinds that can be eliminated or have the funds redirected to things that actually help Canadian people and business to flourish. Since I like personal accountability, MP's, Ministers and the PM will have their level of compensation tied to the average wage in Canada. The average + a set percentage, so you have an incentive to find ways to improve the standard of living and you pay if you're irresponsible. If the economy goes bad and everyone hurts, you do too.
When we get to the pension thing, over baby. MP's will recieve an annual contribution to the RRSP of their choice and when they go it goes along with them. I wish them well, they're better off than many.
I also wouldn't be taking a knife to perks and personal budgets, rather I have a chain saw and know how to use it. Get used to working like most other people. Drive your own car to work. If you use a government vehicle it will be comfortable but economical, no chauffeur but I promise a GPS so you can find your way. No one subsidizes a working Canadian's daily lunch, and you'll be paying full price for your own too. You won't fly if you can use a train, you won't use a train if you can drive, just like Joe Blow who voted you in. Just think of me as the guy who made the country club a little more like the sweat shop for politicians. You'll be surprised how much you can accomplish by showing up to work and not tripping over too many servants. If there is an occasion a limo is required, very few will be available to anyone, so it better be an important requirement.
Since parliament is a workplace, Question Period will revert to Question Period. Where questions are asked and answers to the questions are given, or deferred for more information with a specified period of time to provide said answer. No more disorderly conduct, hollering, thumping of desks, etc as that will get you removed from the house for a time out as it were. Running the country is a business and it's about time we got down to it.
MP's will be tasked with consulting extensively with Canadians on what their spending priorities are. Finding acceptable ways to stop spending frivilously and either save the money, redirect it, or a little of both. Let's not go off in a direction without determining priorities first, then finding ways to improve our health services, to prioritize continuing education so our youth have opportunity to grow, not to be buried in debt. We need to foster an atmosphere of hard work and results that improve the lives of all of our people. To concentrate on the things that unite us as Canadians, so we can work to find a fair concensus on things that divide us.
That's how I would start. From the top. Of course I'd need to make the blog a zillion miles long to expound on all of my policy ideas but, this is a pretty good start.
As always, I value your comments and suggestions for topics you might like to hear more of my views on. Thanks for visiting, come back often!!
Of course, getting elected by being honest with people would never work, so this will always remain a fantasy, but for fun I'll share.
Of course, first things first, I'd have to choose a cabinet. My process would be different. Normal conventions go in the toilet. Cabinet Ministers in my Government of Canada would not be chosen by power or party influence or location, they would be chosen by their understanding of the issues of their portfolio and their willingness to work for all Canadians, not their province/territory or region or ethnicity or anything else other than carrying out their duty to make this the best damned country in the world. From coast to coast to coast as they love to say. A minister serves at the pleasure of the Prime Minister, and under my administration fairness and competence are a must or you get assigned a different seat, on in the back, because everyone can be replaced.
Next order of business, a budget. Since I would not be the finance minister, I wouldn't presume to think I could detail this for you, only assure you there would be no sudden shock for the average Canadian, no big anti-business hit, and that my Government's budgets will aim to advance my agenda for change, including far more open information on actual spending, and finding sensible ways to live within our means and to include payments on our debt in every budget. There must be measures put in place where only extrordinary measures could trigger deficit spending. More accountability for tax dollars is an absolute must.
Now we have to get down to a legislative agenda. MP's can expect to be working a lot more. As one who firmly believes if you're going to lead, you do it by example. So long recesses would be an exception rather than a rule, there's a country to improve. Number one on my agenda is clarity on how every penny of your money is spent. I don't think any Canadian would object to setting up an agency that provides them the ability to go online and see every payment released from every Government account, to be able to see scanned images of every invoice, to know how their tax dollars are being spent so they are able to make an informed judgement on how their tax dollars are being spent. As a starting point, I think it's a good one. It forces people to be more careful when they know someone can immediately see they just bought 150 golf balls or 60 bottles of pricey Champagne. I'm not saying there aren't times those may be good investments, but if people can see it you'd best be able to justify it. It also opens opportunities for smart businesses. If I can go online and see an opportunity to supply the Government with a product or service at a lower price and still make money, the law would ensure their case gets a hearing. This is the 21st Century, so let's move into it.
My agenda is reform of a system that has served us so poorly for so long. What once worked well (maybe) no longer is sensible in this day and age. Government has to change so Canadians have the kind of faith in their institutions required to open their minds to change.
All my life I've listened to politicians say they have to have all the pay and perks and platinum pensions and on and on and on and to that I say "Up Yours". I don't know many starving politicians, especially former PM's, Premiers, Cabinet Ministers, Opposition Leaders and critics, these people have many new doors opened to them through their political careers. Most of them make far more money after they leave office than they could ever have made prior to it.
Your job in parliament is about to become just that, a job. Since you are paid a salary, if you work extra hours, too bad. Yes, you'll have a fair amount of sick days but, like any other Canadian, if you miss too much time it will have to be taken from your pay. You'll also have a fairly generous vacation allotment, it's a difficult and stressful job, but if you aren't using that vacation time and the house is not sitting you are required to be in your constituency office 8 hours a day or attending a public function where you can account for your time, or take more unpaid time and explain it to the voters. It's about work ethic. It's about real public service. About setting the example. Just like every other Canadian who gets up and goes to work.
Now we're going to set an example when it comes to pay and perks and money fountains of all kinds that can be eliminated or have the funds redirected to things that actually help Canadian people and business to flourish. Since I like personal accountability, MP's, Ministers and the PM will have their level of compensation tied to the average wage in Canada. The average + a set percentage, so you have an incentive to find ways to improve the standard of living and you pay if you're irresponsible. If the economy goes bad and everyone hurts, you do too.
When we get to the pension thing, over baby. MP's will recieve an annual contribution to the RRSP of their choice and when they go it goes along with them. I wish them well, they're better off than many.
I also wouldn't be taking a knife to perks and personal budgets, rather I have a chain saw and know how to use it. Get used to working like most other people. Drive your own car to work. If you use a government vehicle it will be comfortable but economical, no chauffeur but I promise a GPS so you can find your way. No one subsidizes a working Canadian's daily lunch, and you'll be paying full price for your own too. You won't fly if you can use a train, you won't use a train if you can drive, just like Joe Blow who voted you in. Just think of me as the guy who made the country club a little more like the sweat shop for politicians. You'll be surprised how much you can accomplish by showing up to work and not tripping over too many servants. If there is an occasion a limo is required, very few will be available to anyone, so it better be an important requirement.
Since parliament is a workplace, Question Period will revert to Question Period. Where questions are asked and answers to the questions are given, or deferred for more information with a specified period of time to provide said answer. No more disorderly conduct, hollering, thumping of desks, etc as that will get you removed from the house for a time out as it were. Running the country is a business and it's about time we got down to it.
MP's will be tasked with consulting extensively with Canadians on what their spending priorities are. Finding acceptable ways to stop spending frivilously and either save the money, redirect it, or a little of both. Let's not go off in a direction without determining priorities first, then finding ways to improve our health services, to prioritize continuing education so our youth have opportunity to grow, not to be buried in debt. We need to foster an atmosphere of hard work and results that improve the lives of all of our people. To concentrate on the things that unite us as Canadians, so we can work to find a fair concensus on things that divide us.
That's how I would start. From the top. Of course I'd need to make the blog a zillion miles long to expound on all of my policy ideas but, this is a pretty good start.
As always, I value your comments and suggestions for topics you might like to hear more of my views on. Thanks for visiting, come back often!!
Sunday, 8 May 2011
What many don't understand
I've taken a few days after the election to really pay attention to what Canadians are saying across a wide variety of media. Newspapers, radio, television, blogs, and social media can be a good source of the pulse of public opinion if you retain a vigilance when you follow public commentary. Not all public commentary is true public commentary, quite often political parties and interest groups will encourage like minded followers to dominate a topic to make it look like it has more support than it does. They're all guilty of it, so no one gets to feel superior here.
I deal in reality. Ugly, horrific reality. Face it, we all hate having to look at reality but I thrive on it as it's the only way to move forward. As much as I would like things to be a different way, they aren't, and the sooner I see it for what it is, the sooner I can move forward to do my part to effect change.
The world has changed. In our society, while we have the resources to be educated beyond what previous generations were, we use it for garbage, like tracking what celebrities do, or how our favorite "reality" show is doing, or some such drivel. I'm not dissing anyone's hobbies, but I encourage people to at least educate yourself about politics, our system, our history, and don't do what you've just done again. Even if you take a couple of hours a weekend to read a variety of news, to ask some questions, to use your search engine, library, reference library, any resources available to you to become involved in what is probably the next most important thing in your life next to your family.
Yes. Politics is that important. These are the people who make the rules you have to live by, and with. They decide your level of taxation. They decide how your money will be spent and how much of it and where. Over the 41st parliament it is concievable the majority government of Stephen Harper will spend in the vicinity of a quarter-trillion dollars, plenty of it borrowed from your children, and their children.
I will be very frank. I welcome comments. I welcome questions. I welcome discussion. This is my assessment. You can believe it or not, like it or not. This is my "reality show" for the very confused people I see making comments.
A majority government in Canada means you live under a dictatorship for the next 4 years minimum. Opposition means nothing. Like dogs barking in the distance, they can neither change any proposed legislation nor stop it. Canada has handed Stephen Harper carte blanche to proceed with his (and that of his inner circle) agenda. I've seen many naive comments about how he'll have to take other people's concerns into account now that he has such awesome responsiblility. Rainbows and puppies covered in a thick layer of fantasy. The Harper governement fell because of their contempt of a minority parliament and people think rewarding him with a majority will correct bad behaviour? This argument is about as good as one that says if the kids won't eat the healthy meal you made at home, you can teach them a lesson by taking them to McDonalds or Boston Pizza or wherever.
I've followed Stephen Harper since the early 90's. I recognized him as someone driven to remake the institutions of Canada in the image of the republic of the United States of America. I don't like the man, I don't like what he stands for, I believe most Canadians do not want a Canada that's America with oil. If you'd really like a glimpse of what the mindset of Stephen Harper et al is, and the agenda he has that some would argue is hidden, but I would argue has been very clear all along, read (and even bookmark to reread) the text of his Montreal speech, as President of the right-wing National Citizens Coalition lobby group. It's telling these are the right wing Americans he is addressing. It's full of disdain and vitriol for Canada, it's politics, it's parties and it's institutions. This is what Stephen Harper hates. Probably all of the things you've been proud of most of your life. All of the things that make us different than Americans. From this point forward, only ugly dirty politics will win elections in Canada. Everything will be played out to capture the lowest common denominator. Fear. Attack ads. Bogus media reports. Obfuscation of fact. Spin. In order to change it, we either have to engage in it or die, whether it goes against the grain of everything we may stand for or feel inside, the longer we try to be principled in a system skewed totally in the other direction we shall wander in the wilderness until it is virtually impossible to tell the difference between America and Canada. If this is what you want, feel free to remain blissfully ignorant of reality.
Here is what Stephen Harper thinks of Canada many thanks to the Tyee.ca for the reprint of the text. Gravol may be required.
For those of you unaware of what you've let yourself into. Stephen Harper, hated as he may be, seriously is your supreme ruler. What he says goes. Experienced Liberals have been left to 3rd party status leaving Jack Layton as opposition leader. He had more power prior to the election. He has nothing but a pulpit now, from which he can preach anything he wants knowing it doesn't make a lick of difference. He also is going to have serious internal problems to deal with. Much of his caucus is from Quebec, inexperience, idealisitic, and expected to carry the Quebec vs Canada message to Ottawa within a national party. This is a very unenviable position to be in and will consume much energy. Whether Jack Layton ran the same campaign across the country is debatable, but moot, as Quebeckers certainly are not, and I predict, will not be marching to the beat of the same drummer.
It's not the time for those of us who make up the centre of the spectrum to sit crying in our beer. There is work to do on many fronts. We need to make use of a century of experience, and listen to how Canadians define themselves domestically and internationally. Whether the Liberals take advantage of this opportunity or someone else does, I am of the opinion most Canadians are of the kinder, gentler persuasion and prefer not to get radical on either direction. The fact the next 4 years everything will go the way of the right wing is reality. Our job is to expose the coming, leaner, meaner Canada and educate everyone you can that things need to change. Not in a small way. This will not be easy. My best advice is to remove emotion from the equation. Emotion will cloud your judgement and force you to take a narrower view, foiling your attemps to appeal to a broader base. I'm not saying you can't have emotions, just that they can't apply to anything but the selling of the solutions.
I'm not happy. I'm disappointed in the lack of understanding of what just happend. I'm saddened by people who think it's a reason to give up when the exact opposite is true.
I will continue to speak out for a just Canada, where public service means serving the public rather than your political masters, and for change in democracy so it reflects the realities of the 21st century. Tradition is cute and all that but it's not working. If it's broke, fix it.
Let's git R dun.
I deal in reality. Ugly, horrific reality. Face it, we all hate having to look at reality but I thrive on it as it's the only way to move forward. As much as I would like things to be a different way, they aren't, and the sooner I see it for what it is, the sooner I can move forward to do my part to effect change.
The world has changed. In our society, while we have the resources to be educated beyond what previous generations were, we use it for garbage, like tracking what celebrities do, or how our favorite "reality" show is doing, or some such drivel. I'm not dissing anyone's hobbies, but I encourage people to at least educate yourself about politics, our system, our history, and don't do what you've just done again. Even if you take a couple of hours a weekend to read a variety of news, to ask some questions, to use your search engine, library, reference library, any resources available to you to become involved in what is probably the next most important thing in your life next to your family.
Yes. Politics is that important. These are the people who make the rules you have to live by, and with. They decide your level of taxation. They decide how your money will be spent and how much of it and where. Over the 41st parliament it is concievable the majority government of Stephen Harper will spend in the vicinity of a quarter-trillion dollars, plenty of it borrowed from your children, and their children.
I will be very frank. I welcome comments. I welcome questions. I welcome discussion. This is my assessment. You can believe it or not, like it or not. This is my "reality show" for the very confused people I see making comments.
A majority government in Canada means you live under a dictatorship for the next 4 years minimum. Opposition means nothing. Like dogs barking in the distance, they can neither change any proposed legislation nor stop it. Canada has handed Stephen Harper carte blanche to proceed with his (and that of his inner circle) agenda. I've seen many naive comments about how he'll have to take other people's concerns into account now that he has such awesome responsiblility. Rainbows and puppies covered in a thick layer of fantasy. The Harper governement fell because of their contempt of a minority parliament and people think rewarding him with a majority will correct bad behaviour? This argument is about as good as one that says if the kids won't eat the healthy meal you made at home, you can teach them a lesson by taking them to McDonalds or Boston Pizza or wherever.
I've followed Stephen Harper since the early 90's. I recognized him as someone driven to remake the institutions of Canada in the image of the republic of the United States of America. I don't like the man, I don't like what he stands for, I believe most Canadians do not want a Canada that's America with oil. If you'd really like a glimpse of what the mindset of Stephen Harper et al is, and the agenda he has that some would argue is hidden, but I would argue has been very clear all along, read (and even bookmark to reread) the text of his Montreal speech, as President of the right-wing National Citizens Coalition lobby group. It's telling these are the right wing Americans he is addressing. It's full of disdain and vitriol for Canada, it's politics, it's parties and it's institutions. This is what Stephen Harper hates. Probably all of the things you've been proud of most of your life. All of the things that make us different than Americans. From this point forward, only ugly dirty politics will win elections in Canada. Everything will be played out to capture the lowest common denominator. Fear. Attack ads. Bogus media reports. Obfuscation of fact. Spin. In order to change it, we either have to engage in it or die, whether it goes against the grain of everything we may stand for or feel inside, the longer we try to be principled in a system skewed totally in the other direction we shall wander in the wilderness until it is virtually impossible to tell the difference between America and Canada. If this is what you want, feel free to remain blissfully ignorant of reality.
Here is what Stephen Harper thinks of Canada many thanks to the Tyee.ca for the reprint of the text. Gravol may be required.
For those of you unaware of what you've let yourself into. Stephen Harper, hated as he may be, seriously is your supreme ruler. What he says goes. Experienced Liberals have been left to 3rd party status leaving Jack Layton as opposition leader. He had more power prior to the election. He has nothing but a pulpit now, from which he can preach anything he wants knowing it doesn't make a lick of difference. He also is going to have serious internal problems to deal with. Much of his caucus is from Quebec, inexperience, idealisitic, and expected to carry the Quebec vs Canada message to Ottawa within a national party. This is a very unenviable position to be in and will consume much energy. Whether Jack Layton ran the same campaign across the country is debatable, but moot, as Quebeckers certainly are not, and I predict, will not be marching to the beat of the same drummer.
It's not the time for those of us who make up the centre of the spectrum to sit crying in our beer. There is work to do on many fronts. We need to make use of a century of experience, and listen to how Canadians define themselves domestically and internationally. Whether the Liberals take advantage of this opportunity or someone else does, I am of the opinion most Canadians are of the kinder, gentler persuasion and prefer not to get radical on either direction. The fact the next 4 years everything will go the way of the right wing is reality. Our job is to expose the coming, leaner, meaner Canada and educate everyone you can that things need to change. Not in a small way. This will not be easy. My best advice is to remove emotion from the equation. Emotion will cloud your judgement and force you to take a narrower view, foiling your attemps to appeal to a broader base. I'm not saying you can't have emotions, just that they can't apply to anything but the selling of the solutions.
I'm not happy. I'm disappointed in the lack of understanding of what just happend. I'm saddened by people who think it's a reason to give up when the exact opposite is true.
I will continue to speak out for a just Canada, where public service means serving the public rather than your political masters, and for change in democracy so it reflects the realities of the 21st century. Tradition is cute and all that but it's not working. If it's broke, fix it.
Let's git R dun.
Saturday, 7 May 2011
My Favourite Word: Vision
I'm waiting. Provincially, federally, I'm waiting for someone, anyone, who has a vision.
Politically, we've become all about the agenda of electability. As the freshly minted parliament shows, elections going forward will be less and less about issues and more about which campaign is safest. The winner is the team with the best short soundbites and the catchiest of catchphrases. We're a poorer people for it.
People talk about leaders. We don't have many. We have an assortment of the most popular guys in their individual parties, or the most powerful. When the liberal party attempted to advance a leader who may have been a leading thinker, he was villified and marginalized so badly he couldn't even get his message across during a campaign. If anyone believes this is a one-shot deal they're nuts. Once politics descends into the level of sport we will get increasingly bad government. We get the equivalent of the WWE, except the ticket costs us a hell of a lot more and we can't choose not to attend.
Because of managed, win-at-all-costs politics, Canada has slowly evolved (or devolved) into a group of angry regions. Because of political expediency, long standing grievances have been used as goldmines of support. In every region of the country, in modern elections, people bring up things that happened decades ago, maybe centuries ago. Truth and reality don't matter, it's how you manage the message. While, in the short run, this crap will allow you to gain power, it disregards the degradation of the natural things this country absolutely must depend upon to survive as an independent nation.
By geography, Canada is the second largest nation in the known universe. By population, we're California, dude. Unlike smaller countries that can succeed with division because of population density, we don't have that luxury. Canada has succeed most in the times we've all had to compromise. It led to confederation. It led to western expansion. It led to a national railway. It led to a trans-Canada highway. It led to a Canadian identity. It led to Canadian health care. It led to repatriation of the constitution. It led to the charter of rights and freedoms. It led to rights for women, for recoginition the gay community were not freaks who were waiting to prey on our children, it led to recognition that we have two founding populations who have much to learn from each other.
What have recent, and what do modern politics bring to us? Marginalization of Atlantic Canada (unless we keep finding oil whereupon we will become quite important). A whipped up frenzy in Quebec that, somehow, the rest of Canada is "the man" and we are "keeping them down". If they really honestly look at the situation, if they think French is marginalized in Canada, imagine going it alone, floating in a sea of people who no longer need to accomodate an increasingly small minority. People in Quebec have been led to believe if they "choose" soverignty, it's just a "sign the papers and we're off" deal and everything remains the same. Naive in the extreme. I'll get hate mail for saying it, however, it is the truth. In the West, they've spent years whipping up the "east is out to get us" sentiment, with a great degree of success I may add. This ignores the fact there are things east of Ontario and Quebec, however we in the east are used to that. Ontario now is being whipped up with the cries of "we've fallen on hard times and everyone is ignoring us" which seems to be successfully catching on (welcome to the world of Atlantic Canadians, but not really). As soon as they can figure out a good reason BC should be pissed off at everyone else, the fracturing of the nation for partisan political gains will become something historians will marvel at for generations to come.
From the moment of confederation, one part of the country has received more of the benefit than another. As different resources become more important, economic activity can shift, fortunes can change, haves become have nots and vice versa. The only thing that will allow this vast, diverse, sparsely populated country to survive and thrive is to come together, to cooperate, to share our good fortunes when we have them and know we can depend on others to give us a hand up when it's our turn to need it.
While the politics of division work well for the sole purpose of gaining power, the polarization of the population will be the ultimate downfall. If you spend all of your focus on what divides us the ultimate result we be an inability to agree and where does that lead? Not where the builders of this country had ever envisioned. Not what I envisioned. But vision seems to now be something one should heap scorn upon.
When was the last time a leader had an idea or ideas that worked for Canadians from coast to coast? Who has tried to advance Canada above their own personal lust for power? If convincing people to vote for you to "teach those other bastards a lesson" works you can bet it's a tactic that will be used for immediate gain without a care for the long term consequences.
Maybe I'm alone in wanting a different Canada. Maybe we Do want to be like Americans, living in a polarized society where ideology means you should hate your neighbour and distrust everyone. It's not the Canada I grew up in and it certainly isn't the Canada I want to grow old in.
My kingdom for a visionary.
Politically, we've become all about the agenda of electability. As the freshly minted parliament shows, elections going forward will be less and less about issues and more about which campaign is safest. The winner is the team with the best short soundbites and the catchiest of catchphrases. We're a poorer people for it.
People talk about leaders. We don't have many. We have an assortment of the most popular guys in their individual parties, or the most powerful. When the liberal party attempted to advance a leader who may have been a leading thinker, he was villified and marginalized so badly he couldn't even get his message across during a campaign. If anyone believes this is a one-shot deal they're nuts. Once politics descends into the level of sport we will get increasingly bad government. We get the equivalent of the WWE, except the ticket costs us a hell of a lot more and we can't choose not to attend.
Because of managed, win-at-all-costs politics, Canada has slowly evolved (or devolved) into a group of angry regions. Because of political expediency, long standing grievances have been used as goldmines of support. In every region of the country, in modern elections, people bring up things that happened decades ago, maybe centuries ago. Truth and reality don't matter, it's how you manage the message. While, in the short run, this crap will allow you to gain power, it disregards the degradation of the natural things this country absolutely must depend upon to survive as an independent nation.
By geography, Canada is the second largest nation in the known universe. By population, we're California, dude. Unlike smaller countries that can succeed with division because of population density, we don't have that luxury. Canada has succeed most in the times we've all had to compromise. It led to confederation. It led to western expansion. It led to a national railway. It led to a trans-Canada highway. It led to a Canadian identity. It led to Canadian health care. It led to repatriation of the constitution. It led to the charter of rights and freedoms. It led to rights for women, for recoginition the gay community were not freaks who were waiting to prey on our children, it led to recognition that we have two founding populations who have much to learn from each other.
What have recent, and what do modern politics bring to us? Marginalization of Atlantic Canada (unless we keep finding oil whereupon we will become quite important). A whipped up frenzy in Quebec that, somehow, the rest of Canada is "the man" and we are "keeping them down". If they really honestly look at the situation, if they think French is marginalized in Canada, imagine going it alone, floating in a sea of people who no longer need to accomodate an increasingly small minority. People in Quebec have been led to believe if they "choose" soverignty, it's just a "sign the papers and we're off" deal and everything remains the same. Naive in the extreme. I'll get hate mail for saying it, however, it is the truth. In the West, they've spent years whipping up the "east is out to get us" sentiment, with a great degree of success I may add. This ignores the fact there are things east of Ontario and Quebec, however we in the east are used to that. Ontario now is being whipped up with the cries of "we've fallen on hard times and everyone is ignoring us" which seems to be successfully catching on (welcome to the world of Atlantic Canadians, but not really). As soon as they can figure out a good reason BC should be pissed off at everyone else, the fracturing of the nation for partisan political gains will become something historians will marvel at for generations to come.
From the moment of confederation, one part of the country has received more of the benefit than another. As different resources become more important, economic activity can shift, fortunes can change, haves become have nots and vice versa. The only thing that will allow this vast, diverse, sparsely populated country to survive and thrive is to come together, to cooperate, to share our good fortunes when we have them and know we can depend on others to give us a hand up when it's our turn to need it.
While the politics of division work well for the sole purpose of gaining power, the polarization of the population will be the ultimate downfall. If you spend all of your focus on what divides us the ultimate result we be an inability to agree and where does that lead? Not where the builders of this country had ever envisioned. Not what I envisioned. But vision seems to now be something one should heap scorn upon.
When was the last time a leader had an idea or ideas that worked for Canadians from coast to coast? Who has tried to advance Canada above their own personal lust for power? If convincing people to vote for you to "teach those other bastards a lesson" works you can bet it's a tactic that will be used for immediate gain without a care for the long term consequences.
Maybe I'm alone in wanting a different Canada. Maybe we Do want to be like Americans, living in a polarized society where ideology means you should hate your neighbour and distrust everyone. It's not the Canada I grew up in and it certainly isn't the Canada I want to grow old in.
My kingdom for a visionary.
Thursday, 28 April 2011
Scary stories~Best left to Hollywood.
With apologies to politicians, partisans, and oodles of professional and amateur journalist/blogger types, I don't buy into the many end of the world scenarios being dangled in front of me pre-election day.
A number of scenarios are playing out and it will be up to Canadians to decide how they want the country to run over the next months and years. What is clear is a lot of people are coming to the realization it isn't difficult to vote, that voting is important, and they are thoroughly enjoying the idea they actually have some power for a change.
In the last few days you can expect plenty of drama flying in all directions. I put some thought into it and I've come up with my own scenario, which, is really a concoction of many years of observation, mixed with way too much reading while watching every news program going, following twitter, all jumbled up in my big bag of things I think about and I will guarantee this scenario is valid for at least another 6 hours or so.
Based on my own knowledge of things political, conservatives took out a very large hammer this morning and firmly smashed the "break glass in case of emergency" thingie. This will result in a flood of John Baird-like hollering about all the world ending events that are about to rain down upon us.
The conservative strategy will require us to carry steel umbrellas for the next few days as they throw every scare tactic, including the kitchen sink, at us. You won't have to listen hard to hear the world is coming to an end. The banks will fail. Cows will not give milk anymore. Provinces will float out into the ocean. Raging camels will overrun the Arctic. Your children will have to give candy to adults on Halloween. You get the idea. The only thing they can do now is try to: a) scare people into voting FOR them, or, b) scare people into NOT voting. Key message will be anything that remotely sounds frightening.
This is the payback for their arrogance. Ignoring Canadians, ignoring reporters, ignoring how distasteful Canadians found issues like G8/20 porkbarrelling, the hiring of convicts to top positions, appointing senators charged with fraud, trying to ruin the life of Helena Guergis and not even speaking her name, let alone apologizing for what they'd done when it came to light the astounding charges that were 100% unsubstantiated. I'm not the only one who almost lost my lunch when, in a single day, the party wrote to Elections Canada asking student votes in Guelph be voided, then congratulated Elections Canada publicly when their request was denied. Come on. This doesn't even touch on dozens and dozens of examples of poor judgement, someone (bit players) getting fired every day, the list makes me gag. As it does for many Canadians who are tired of this garbage. All along they have smugly believed we would just ignore all of that, we'd ignore their record, we'd buy into their "violent torpedo of sound bites". It's not too late for these people to save themselves from themselves, however, since every single day has brought us another new, ugly conservative revelation, they've removed the rose coloured glasses a bit late.
So the question upon us. Harper must go, where should I mark my 'X'?
I guess since Jack Layton is the flavour of the day, I should start there. While he looked as though he was off to a slow start, Jack is the current Justin Bieber of Canadian Politics. I'm not sorry people are running away from Stephen Harper, I just hope they are sure of themselves where they stop. Now, before I get wildly attacked by NDP supporters, I'm not going to launch into some kind of a vote for Jack is a vote for Karl Marx or something so stupid. That tactic is best left to conservative idealogues.
I believe in social programs designed to better the society I live in. I am in a position and prepared to pay to provide certain services, even if I don't use, or may never need them. Someone else does. I'm ok with caring about others, even the ones I don't know. One thing I do know, people who vote NDP can count on at least having a leader who will listen and work with others.
I do still have some serious reservations about the NDP. In my opinion, they are still unable to develop a program to advance their agenda in a way that doesn't rock confidence in the economic fundamentals of the country. No, Canada will not be mysteriously bankrupted overnight due to some mad give-everyone-everything spending spree, rather, when one scrutinizes some of what is being put forth, as popular as it may seem in the heat of the moment, it gives me troubling pause.
As populist a promise as it is, the credit card relief idea should worry you. Aside from the unwanted side effect of capital fleeing to somewhere profits aren't being cut is part of the equation, leading banks to have less money to lend, but the bigger problem is they will find other fees, rates, etc to recoup those losses. There are ways to get relief for families but regulating it is asking for more trouble than any Canadian really wants.
Today Jack is talking about regulating gas prices. This will be seen as a direct attack on the oil and gas industry, which is super in the eyes of the average joe but once again very bad policy when you look at the wider ramifications, not the least of which is the cost to the environment of artificially low gas prices which lead to higher consumption.
Those are two examples of policy that is not mature enough to govern this country. This is almost Anti-Harper to the max, without the criminals of course. Harper has tried to move us to an uncomfortable right-hand corner of the room and my only fear of the NDP is they will just shift me uncomfortably to the left-hand corner of the room.
I'm going to make no secret about it. I am not happy with any of the existing parties. None of these people show me a vision of Canada other than replacing one colour party with another. In order to maintain a sense of stability, and remove this 5 year stain on our country that has been "The Harper Government", I believe one needs to go to the polls on election day and vote for the Liberal candidate. This rids us of Harper and his stable crew of convict yes men (women to the back of the bus) and does not set the financial community to alarm.
I don't say the NDP will never be ready to lead, I don't know that. I know they can't at this juncture. Were I to offer advice, it would be to start in the centre and introduce yourself to the world. Don't announce yourself with an earthquake that could take a lengthy period of adjustment that would ultimately hurt the people who trusted you.
I've found it difficult to write this. I like Jack Layton, I like the many friends I have who are NDP members and supporters. I just have too many red flags to justify taking the chance.
I won't say the Liberals have always been the best. Perhaps people don't find their message inspiring enough. I tend to believe we've been so poisoned by the centuries long Ignatieff attack we may be trained not to hear his message. Partly his fault for believing we're adults and want to hear someone talk when really we're towel waving morons who want to hear the loudest shouter.
Nevertheless, I, Mr Bigpicguy, endorse the Liberals in this election and on May 3rd I am rounding up a posse that wants to change the game, not just the players.
I'll end this diatribe by urging you to elect anyone but Harper. We will still be alive on May 3rd and 10 times more Canadian than we were the day before. It may be the end of the Harperian calendar, it won't be the end of the world. I just choose to choose some stability while my plan to change it all gathers steam!
PS~if you're reading this is BC please do something to get Elizabeth May elected so we can actually hear what she has to say.
A number of scenarios are playing out and it will be up to Canadians to decide how they want the country to run over the next months and years. What is clear is a lot of people are coming to the realization it isn't difficult to vote, that voting is important, and they are thoroughly enjoying the idea they actually have some power for a change.
In the last few days you can expect plenty of drama flying in all directions. I put some thought into it and I've come up with my own scenario, which, is really a concoction of many years of observation, mixed with way too much reading while watching every news program going, following twitter, all jumbled up in my big bag of things I think about and I will guarantee this scenario is valid for at least another 6 hours or so.
Based on my own knowledge of things political, conservatives took out a very large hammer this morning and firmly smashed the "break glass in case of emergency" thingie. This will result in a flood of John Baird-like hollering about all the world ending events that are about to rain down upon us.
The conservative strategy will require us to carry steel umbrellas for the next few days as they throw every scare tactic, including the kitchen sink, at us. You won't have to listen hard to hear the world is coming to an end. The banks will fail. Cows will not give milk anymore. Provinces will float out into the ocean. Raging camels will overrun the Arctic. Your children will have to give candy to adults on Halloween. You get the idea. The only thing they can do now is try to: a) scare people into voting FOR them, or, b) scare people into NOT voting. Key message will be anything that remotely sounds frightening.
This is the payback for their arrogance. Ignoring Canadians, ignoring reporters, ignoring how distasteful Canadians found issues like G8/20 porkbarrelling, the hiring of convicts to top positions, appointing senators charged with fraud, trying to ruin the life of Helena Guergis and not even speaking her name, let alone apologizing for what they'd done when it came to light the astounding charges that were 100% unsubstantiated. I'm not the only one who almost lost my lunch when, in a single day, the party wrote to Elections Canada asking student votes in Guelph be voided, then congratulated Elections Canada publicly when their request was denied. Come on. This doesn't even touch on dozens and dozens of examples of poor judgement, someone (bit players) getting fired every day, the list makes me gag. As it does for many Canadians who are tired of this garbage. All along they have smugly believed we would just ignore all of that, we'd ignore their record, we'd buy into their "violent torpedo of sound bites". It's not too late for these people to save themselves from themselves, however, since every single day has brought us another new, ugly conservative revelation, they've removed the rose coloured glasses a bit late.
So the question upon us. Harper must go, where should I mark my 'X'?
I guess since Jack Layton is the flavour of the day, I should start there. While he looked as though he was off to a slow start, Jack is the current Justin Bieber of Canadian Politics. I'm not sorry people are running away from Stephen Harper, I just hope they are sure of themselves where they stop. Now, before I get wildly attacked by NDP supporters, I'm not going to launch into some kind of a vote for Jack is a vote for Karl Marx or something so stupid. That tactic is best left to conservative idealogues.
I believe in social programs designed to better the society I live in. I am in a position and prepared to pay to provide certain services, even if I don't use, or may never need them. Someone else does. I'm ok with caring about others, even the ones I don't know. One thing I do know, people who vote NDP can count on at least having a leader who will listen and work with others.
I do still have some serious reservations about the NDP. In my opinion, they are still unable to develop a program to advance their agenda in a way that doesn't rock confidence in the economic fundamentals of the country. No, Canada will not be mysteriously bankrupted overnight due to some mad give-everyone-everything spending spree, rather, when one scrutinizes some of what is being put forth, as popular as it may seem in the heat of the moment, it gives me troubling pause.
As populist a promise as it is, the credit card relief idea should worry you. Aside from the unwanted side effect of capital fleeing to somewhere profits aren't being cut is part of the equation, leading banks to have less money to lend, but the bigger problem is they will find other fees, rates, etc to recoup those losses. There are ways to get relief for families but regulating it is asking for more trouble than any Canadian really wants.
Today Jack is talking about regulating gas prices. This will be seen as a direct attack on the oil and gas industry, which is super in the eyes of the average joe but once again very bad policy when you look at the wider ramifications, not the least of which is the cost to the environment of artificially low gas prices which lead to higher consumption.
Those are two examples of policy that is not mature enough to govern this country. This is almost Anti-Harper to the max, without the criminals of course. Harper has tried to move us to an uncomfortable right-hand corner of the room and my only fear of the NDP is they will just shift me uncomfortably to the left-hand corner of the room.
I'm going to make no secret about it. I am not happy with any of the existing parties. None of these people show me a vision of Canada other than replacing one colour party with another. In order to maintain a sense of stability, and remove this 5 year stain on our country that has been "The Harper Government", I believe one needs to go to the polls on election day and vote for the Liberal candidate. This rids us of Harper and his stable crew of convict yes men (women to the back of the bus) and does not set the financial community to alarm.
I don't say the NDP will never be ready to lead, I don't know that. I know they can't at this juncture. Were I to offer advice, it would be to start in the centre and introduce yourself to the world. Don't announce yourself with an earthquake that could take a lengthy period of adjustment that would ultimately hurt the people who trusted you.
I've found it difficult to write this. I like Jack Layton, I like the many friends I have who are NDP members and supporters. I just have too many red flags to justify taking the chance.
I won't say the Liberals have always been the best. Perhaps people don't find their message inspiring enough. I tend to believe we've been so poisoned by the centuries long Ignatieff attack we may be trained not to hear his message. Partly his fault for believing we're adults and want to hear someone talk when really we're towel waving morons who want to hear the loudest shouter.
Nevertheless, I, Mr Bigpicguy, endorse the Liberals in this election and on May 3rd I am rounding up a posse that wants to change the game, not just the players.
I'll end this diatribe by urging you to elect anyone but Harper. We will still be alive on May 3rd and 10 times more Canadian than we were the day before. It may be the end of the Harperian calendar, it won't be the end of the world. I just choose to choose some stability while my plan to change it all gathers steam!
PS~if you're reading this is BC please do something to get Elizabeth May elected so we can actually hear what she has to say.
My Election View 2011
In a few days it will be over and Canadians will have elected the players who will provide the drama we will refer to as the 41st parliament of Canada. Congratulations, Canadians have their day.
It's an honour really. Many Canadians, mostly the youth of the nation, gave their lives to give you the opportunity to choose who you want to run your country, rather than be told who should run your country. The one day in our country when a homeless person has the same voice as a party leader, a CEO, or billionaire. Your day of power, so don't forsake it, don't allow friends and family to forsake it. Don't just vote but do all you can to encourage everyone to vote, no matter how they intend to mark their ballot, it's just that important.
I make no secret I chose to vote for the Liberal candidate in this particular election. I think they have a platform I can live with, one that changes the priorities to more of what I like about Canada. The idea we can help each other. I also know the liberal party not only created the conditions that allowed Canada to ride out the worst of a bad situation, the same minds that made Canada the envy of the world are still Liberals. I've also been impressed to learn of the intelligence, passion and committment of Michael Ignatieff. As a man it would be difficult to equal the amount of dignity he has handled himself with in the face of years of personal attacks, attacks on his family, his wife, his integrity. I've listened to a man who speaks, not from a teleprompter, not from notes, but from a sense of disgust at what Canada has become, and a sense of amazement that Canadians don't seem to realize that very slowly, quietly, the society we have always been so proud of is changing and by the time we open our eyes we will not even recognize ourselves in the mirror.
As for Stephen Harper, what more can I say about this man. I, being engaged, knew enough about this man in 1995 I realized his ideology was very different, that he is a very shrewd and tightly controlled man who has a plan to remake Canada into a very different country. If you look at his pre-government record, what he has done since he came to power (not to mention how he came to power), and the unbelievably questionable people who populate the highest positions within his inner circle I find it very difficult to imagine a sensible person could support this man. One can argue the local candidate is a superhero, but in this conservative party he's lower than a nothing unless Stephen Harper says so. What he says goes. Cross this man and you will feel wrath you never imagined. He doesn't care if he ruins your credibility, your reputation, your family or your life depending on his level of hate at the time. He is unmistakably a man driven by his hate of everyone who would dare to oppose his views. The most vitriolic of his hate is directed toward his opposition. I've dealt with people like Stephen Harper in my professional life. They don't intimidate me. I have no problem staring them down or telling them exactly how much value I place on their opinion. No matter how much they'd love to think they are better than me, sadly for them, they're not. The small-minded, small-hearted of the world instill no fear in my heart. Garbage is garbage no matter what title they hold or how big their bank account is. No human is better than any other and too bad for Stephen Harper, the emporer has no clothes. You might scare others, to me you're a playground bully, a glorified punk. I'd had more than enough of you, Mr. Gotti wannabe, the teflon is gone, and now we know you have a fondness for fraud it's high time we kicked your ass to High River.
Jack. Love ya. Hope you do very well. Every policy you have will need to be blunted, if you don't realize that you're not yet smart enough to be PM, but congrats, the NDP is getting there. I'm sorry you haven't concentrated your efforts more on what kind of government Harper has given us, especially right now when more people are listening to you. The election really is more important than whether you can relace liberals, it's about ridding ourselves of a very bad government. By the way, the credit card thing is false hope and not well thought out. Reality is, as PM you can still help people without punishing the market which hurts people's retirement savings. It's only a free ride until the scrutiny hits.
I sincerely hope Elizabeth May gets a seat to add that refreshing voice. Unfortunately the name Green Party associates them with a fringe that got a bad name early in their history elsewhere and you could provide policies that would create utopia in the country and good luck getting a seat. Sorry, I just try to speak the truth. Whether the truth seems right or wrong it's still the truth.
No matter what the outcome of this election, I made a promise to my 23 year old daughter. That once the election ends I will start working to drag our 19th century system into the future. No matter how many elections we have, no matter who we elect, we have structural problems with the way our democracy works and many changes need to be made so democracy becomes relevant to every citizen. I will be seeking all kinds of Canadians to work with me and will be inviting those who want a vision for their children's future to dialogue with me to create a firm vision of the Canada we want. My promise is for concrete change by 2019.
In the meantime. My endorsement is, vote for your Liberal candidate for change we can realistically afford. NDP policies are good, but currently unattainable and the credit card thing may be cute but will cause havoc in financial markets where the medicine could end up far worse than the cure.
As always, try to examine the big picture. Make up your own mind and vote. Please comment on my blog I appreciate all comments for and against.
If you're interested in engagement you can follow me on twitter @bigpicguy or email me bigpicguy@hotmail.ca thanks for sharing a piece of my mind.
It's an honour really. Many Canadians, mostly the youth of the nation, gave their lives to give you the opportunity to choose who you want to run your country, rather than be told who should run your country. The one day in our country when a homeless person has the same voice as a party leader, a CEO, or billionaire. Your day of power, so don't forsake it, don't allow friends and family to forsake it. Don't just vote but do all you can to encourage everyone to vote, no matter how they intend to mark their ballot, it's just that important.
I make no secret I chose to vote for the Liberal candidate in this particular election. I think they have a platform I can live with, one that changes the priorities to more of what I like about Canada. The idea we can help each other. I also know the liberal party not only created the conditions that allowed Canada to ride out the worst of a bad situation, the same minds that made Canada the envy of the world are still Liberals. I've also been impressed to learn of the intelligence, passion and committment of Michael Ignatieff. As a man it would be difficult to equal the amount of dignity he has handled himself with in the face of years of personal attacks, attacks on his family, his wife, his integrity. I've listened to a man who speaks, not from a teleprompter, not from notes, but from a sense of disgust at what Canada has become, and a sense of amazement that Canadians don't seem to realize that very slowly, quietly, the society we have always been so proud of is changing and by the time we open our eyes we will not even recognize ourselves in the mirror.
As for Stephen Harper, what more can I say about this man. I, being engaged, knew enough about this man in 1995 I realized his ideology was very different, that he is a very shrewd and tightly controlled man who has a plan to remake Canada into a very different country. If you look at his pre-government record, what he has done since he came to power (not to mention how he came to power), and the unbelievably questionable people who populate the highest positions within his inner circle I find it very difficult to imagine a sensible person could support this man. One can argue the local candidate is a superhero, but in this conservative party he's lower than a nothing unless Stephen Harper says so. What he says goes. Cross this man and you will feel wrath you never imagined. He doesn't care if he ruins your credibility, your reputation, your family or your life depending on his level of hate at the time. He is unmistakably a man driven by his hate of everyone who would dare to oppose his views. The most vitriolic of his hate is directed toward his opposition. I've dealt with people like Stephen Harper in my professional life. They don't intimidate me. I have no problem staring them down or telling them exactly how much value I place on their opinion. No matter how much they'd love to think they are better than me, sadly for them, they're not. The small-minded, small-hearted of the world instill no fear in my heart. Garbage is garbage no matter what title they hold or how big their bank account is. No human is better than any other and too bad for Stephen Harper, the emporer has no clothes. You might scare others, to me you're a playground bully, a glorified punk. I'd had more than enough of you, Mr. Gotti wannabe, the teflon is gone, and now we know you have a fondness for fraud it's high time we kicked your ass to High River.
Jack. Love ya. Hope you do very well. Every policy you have will need to be blunted, if you don't realize that you're not yet smart enough to be PM, but congrats, the NDP is getting there. I'm sorry you haven't concentrated your efforts more on what kind of government Harper has given us, especially right now when more people are listening to you. The election really is more important than whether you can relace liberals, it's about ridding ourselves of a very bad government. By the way, the credit card thing is false hope and not well thought out. Reality is, as PM you can still help people without punishing the market which hurts people's retirement savings. It's only a free ride until the scrutiny hits.
I sincerely hope Elizabeth May gets a seat to add that refreshing voice. Unfortunately the name Green Party associates them with a fringe that got a bad name early in their history elsewhere and you could provide policies that would create utopia in the country and good luck getting a seat. Sorry, I just try to speak the truth. Whether the truth seems right or wrong it's still the truth.
No matter what the outcome of this election, I made a promise to my 23 year old daughter. That once the election ends I will start working to drag our 19th century system into the future. No matter how many elections we have, no matter who we elect, we have structural problems with the way our democracy works and many changes need to be made so democracy becomes relevant to every citizen. I will be seeking all kinds of Canadians to work with me and will be inviting those who want a vision for their children's future to dialogue with me to create a firm vision of the Canada we want. My promise is for concrete change by 2019.
In the meantime. My endorsement is, vote for your Liberal candidate for change we can realistically afford. NDP policies are good, but currently unattainable and the credit card thing may be cute but will cause havoc in financial markets where the medicine could end up far worse than the cure.
As always, try to examine the big picture. Make up your own mind and vote. Please comment on my blog I appreciate all comments for and against.
If you're interested in engagement you can follow me on twitter @bigpicguy or email me bigpicguy@hotmail.ca thanks for sharing a piece of my mind.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)