Two Sentiments That Will Resonate With Many

Today's Star brings two letters, one on despotic rule and the other on electoral reform, that many would find hard to argue against:

Harper’s on a lonely road to political isolation, April 15

Aristotle once remarked that all forms of government — democracy, oligarchy, monarchy, tyranny — are inherently unstable, all political regimes are inherently transitional and that the stability of all regimes is corrupted by the corrosive power of time.

To prolong the viability of democratic form of government, his advice had been constant turnover of leaderships to renew the political process.
After eight years in power, Prime Minister Stephen Harper is clearly showing the signs of “the corrosive power of time,” as evident from the litany of problems outlined by Chantal Hebert.

He should, therefore, stand down, allowing a new leader to renew the political process. Time for change and renewal has arrived in Canada.

Mahmood Elahi, Ottawa


Why does anybody call Canada a democracy? It has taken nearly eight years for Stephen Harper’s stranglehold on his party and the country to start to loosen – and in all that time he has never enjoyed majority voter support.

We still can’t be sure Harper and Co. will be removed from office in 2015. It’s only a majority faint hope. Canadians will pay many millions to finance the federal election in 2015 — and then watch the pre-democratic voting system deliver, as usual, a House of Commons that bears no predictable relationship to what voters actually said and did. It could re-elect the Harper Conservatives with even less public support than they had last time.

The country needs new leaders who show real respect for citizens and taxpayers – by making a firm commitment to equal effective votes and proportional representation in the House of Commons. Representative democracy in Canada is 100 years overdue.

John Deverell, Pickering

Citizenship on the Sidelines

Being on holiday has induced in me a certain mental torpor, so please forgive me if this post states the obvious. Those of us who write politically-oriented blogs are, of course, engaged intellectually and emotionally in the machinations of those we elect. And I suspect it is to our regular consternation and disappointment that more people do not recognize the vital role that the political realm plays in so many aspects of our lives, from the taxes we pay to the physical, social, and economic conditions in our cities, provinces, and the country as a whole. Failure to recognize those facts can lead us into some very dark situations.

While many many people have pointed out the flaws of our current first-past-the-post democracy, the larger problem, it has always seemed to me, is the failure of vast swaths of the population to even bother to vote. We all know, for example, that less than 40% of those who voted federally in 2011 had the power to elect a Harper majority. But perhaps a more current and even more telling illustration is the soap opera continuing to unfold in Toronto, one that had its genesis long before Rob Ford became its mayor, a result which has made Ontario's capital city the subject of international derision.

Was the election of Rob Ford a failure of our system? Obviously not. Those who voted for him had every right to choose as they did, as did the almost 50% who refused to vote. However, that latter choice, as the choice of almost 40% not to vote federally in 2011, means the we all have to endure the consequences of disengagement/citizen inertia.

These thoughts occurred to me upon reading a story in today's Star by Catherine Porter, in which she went to the Toronto suburb of Etobicoke, described as the heart of Ford Nation. Porter went there soliciting comments about how the people feel about Ford, and the overwhelming majority 'stand by their man.' Unlike the right wing, which tends to be exceptionally intolerant of progressives, I say they have every right to feel as they do and to vote as they do.

But I guess you can see the problem I am getting at here. Diversity of view is great, but if one part of the electorate is active and engaged, even in policies and orientations with which we do not agree, and too many others just yawn, look the other way or go back to the latest in reality television, the larger society suffers. So please don't tell me there is no one to vote for or your vote doesn't count. That is only a self-fulfilling justification tantamount to an ignoble and deeply injurious abdication of the responsibilities of citizenship.

'Where Is The Outrage?' Asks Alex Himelfarb

I have written two previous posts about Alex Himelfarb, Director of the Glendon School of Public and International Affairs at York University, former Clerk of the Privy Council, and fellow blogger. He is a man whose passion for democracy and societal fairness I deeply admire.

I was therefore pleased to see him sharing his thoughts on the state of our democracy in today's Star as part of a series that began yesterday with a piece by Allan Gregg entitled In Defence of Reason.

Today, Himelfarb begins with an observation with which I think most of us would agree:

We ought to be outraged. Almost daily our media provide new accounts of the decline of our democracy: the inadequacies of our electoral system and allegations of electoral fraud; the high-handed treatment of our Parliament through inappropriate prorogations and overuse of omnibus legislation; a government ever more authoritarian and opaque, resistant to evidence and reason, and prepared to stifle dissent.

But he also cites a sad truth when he asks why so many Canadians do not seem to care; it is one that I know many of us have pondered in frustration as the abuses of democracy under the Harper regime continue to occur on an almost daily basis.

Himelfarb goes on to discuss how the market mentality, the notion that material gains made under a philosophy of minimal government 'interference' has, in many ways, supplanted traditional notions of democracy, resulting in large benefits for the few and growing inequality for the many.

However, he does see some hope for change and renewal in the Quebec student protests:

Student leaders from Quebec have launched a cross-Canada tour to promote activism and the creation of social movements that provide a richer democratic experience than offered by contemporary politics, but also to explain to those who feel disenfranchised why voting and political participation still matter. They understand the dangers of leaving any government to its own devices, unconstrained by a vigilant citizenry.

Himelfarb's article, as was Allan Gregg's piece yesterday, deserves to be read and disseminated widely.

Canada's Interest In Burma Explained

Those of us who think within a certain political context were probably struck with the irony, if not the outright hypocrisy, of John Baird's visit to Nobel laureate Aung San Suu Kyi in Burma last month. After all, here was the Foreign Affairs Minister for what is probably Canada's least democratic government in history calling upon an icon known worldwide for her selfless fight for democracy in her home country, a fight that has exacted a price few of us would be willing to pay, including being separated from her family for over 16 years and not being able to see him when her husband was dying.

However, it appears that Baird's brazen visit was prompted by more than a desire for a photo-op with this martyr. Thomas Walkom explains all in his column today.

Hint: Burma is resource rich and has a population willing to work very cheaply.

Is that the sound of corporate predators I hear howling at Burma's door?