The Fascination Of Politics

It always astounds me that more people are not interested in politics. Far too many dismiss it as an arcane pursuit that has no relevance in their lives, apparently confusing the recondite measures involved in the development of public policy with the human dynamics at the heart of pursuing and maintaining power. Greed, duplicity, manipulation, nobility, passion and compassion, all this and much more is at play. To dismiss politics is to dismiss any interest in the human animal. It is to sit on the sidelines of life.

That being said, I'm not sure that even as ardent a follower of human machinations as I am is ready for an 11-week campaign. The messages will get quickly repetitive, and the attacks will grow increasing dark and dispiriting. I may take the odd break from this blog to recover my equilibrium.

But since Dear Leader saw fit to visit the Governor-General yesterday as the prelude to spending even more of our money to try to cling to power, I would be remiss not to offer a few of the media's early observations. The Toronto Star sees the call as a blatantly cynical move:

Although Harper positioned the move as “fair,” designed to level the playing field for all parties at a time when the leaders were already out drumming up votes, it’s anything but. As the Conservatives well know, only they are in a position to fully capitalize on the much higher spending limits that come along with a longer campaign. Both the Liberals and New Democrats will struggle to keep up – and that of course is exactly the idea.

This shameless move is yet more evidence – if any was needed – that the Harper Conservatives are long past their sell-by date.

Despite the tremendous spending advantages the Conservatives have, the editorial reminds us of a few facts that no slick strategy can conceal for long:

Over the next two and a half months, voters will have a chance to consider Harper’s record and decide if they want more. Among other things, they should keep in mind:

The Conservatives’ regressive social policies, pandering to their “base” at the expense of the least well-off.

Harper’s absence of national leadership on such crucial issues as health care, aboriginal issues and climate change.

The government’s misguided “tough on crime” laws that do nothing to enhance public safety.

The Conservatives’ divisive approach on national security and the dangerous measures in its “anti-terror” bill, C-51.

There’s much more, and thanks to Harper’s decision to call a vote so early, lots of time to debate it. The real issue is what’s the best alternative to this badly flawed government.

Here in Ontario, a key battleground, Premier Kathleen Wynne is wasting no time in reminding people of the contempt with which Harper is treating the province:

Voters should turf Prime Minister Stephen Harper for showing Ontario “blatant disrespect,” Liberal Premier Kathleen Wynne urged Sunday in one of her strongest attacks yet on the federal Conservatives.

Wynne accused the Harper administration of naked partisanship over refusals to smooth a path for her Ontario Retirement Pension Plan and for not doing more to help develop the rich Ring of Fire mineral deposit in northwestern Ontario.

She zeroed in on the pension plan, noting Harper’s government allows the Canada Revenue Agency to provide services to provincial pension plans in Quebec and Saskatchewan.

“For him to then turn around and say, ‘Yeah, well, we have agreement with other provinces through the CRA and we’re not going to do that for you’ … it’s blatant disrespect for the people of Ontario,” Wynne said. “That has to stop.”

There is much to consider in this election, and the fact that Thomas Mulcair is now leading in the polls is one indicator this will be a hotly-contested and vigorously-fought battle. But what is true today may not be true later in the campaign. Observes Tim Harper:

The test for the NDP this time is whether Mulcair has staying power — and the betting here is that he does — but the Conservative calculation is clearly that increased scrutiny will expose a leader of a party viewed with skepticism on the economy in uncertain economic times.

Finally, here is some good advice from Harper's main cheerleader, The Globe and Mail, about the campaign:

Be a part of it. Make sure to vote. Turnout in federal elections is inexcusably low in Canada: Almost four out of 10 people don’t bother. While the leaders are doing their jobs, make sure to do yours. You can’t control the weather, but you can choose your government.

On Encouraging Political Participation

The other day I wrote a post on John Cruickshank's TED Talk about the low level of political participation among young citizens. His thesis was that as a society, we are losing our news-reading and news-watching habits thanks to the myriad options offered by our current technologies. Asserting that news reading is a skill, the devolution of that skill has affected our ability to think critically and be civically engaged.

A well-considered letter to The Star, however, argues that without structural changes in our political system, measures to encourage participation will be ineffectual:

Re: What's the big threat to democracy? Distraction, Insight Oct. 11

I read the dissertation by John Cruickshank on the threats to our democracy. Unfortunately, the analysis and subsequent conclusions are flawed.

The real threats to our democracy come not only from a disengaged younger electorate (understandable given the hardships they face relative to older generations in income, housing and equality of opportunity), but rather from a perversion of the existing democratic institutions by our current plutocracy.

Political parties have “gamed” the system to their advantage. Our current body politic is often about demagogues using power seized through campaigns of fear or misinformation to obtain power; with little recourse for voters if perverse and discriminatory policies ensue.

The newly elected representative quickly finds out that they are merely trained seals, told what to say and when, with little chance to have their views fairly considered on important matters.

To just encourage people to vote no matter what is not the answer. I would proffer that an uninformed voter is more dangerous to our electoral system than one who is informed but chooses not to participate. It could be argued that the uninformed who choose to exercise their right to vote are willing participants to the demagoguery that is pervasive.
Merely asking relatively uninformed citizens to go out and vote once every four years in the current antiquated system is not the answer. The answers will begin once we seriously consider measures to not only encourage civic engagement, but with an accompanying corollary of institutional reform.

This will include some type of proportional representation to better reflect the views of all voters, greater use of plebiscites, allowing recall votes, and having party leaders chosen by their caucus to make them more accountable to the members, rather the reverse. The guise of greater voter turnout will not lead us there.

However, if a major political party were to propose such visionary reforms, then we might experience a sea change in civic involvement.

David Dos Santos, Mississauga

If Only We Could All Take This To Heart

Then where would the Harperites be?

Gone, But Never Forgotten

Each year, George Carlin's acerbic commentary and observations become more and more relevant.



If we don't want a repeat of what happened last time, then it's up to us to educate those who wilfully or otherwise do not know that Harper & the CONservatives have sold us out.

H/t Politicked - Stop The Harpocrisy

I Am Nobody

Something for all disheartened Canadians to keep in mind, eh?

All It Takes Is One Ant

H/t Occupy Canada

More Thoughts On Muzzled Scientists

Last week I wrote a post on David Schindler, the retired scientist who wrote about the pernicious effects of the Harper regime's muzzling of government scientists.

These letters from today's Star offer readers' thoughts on the issue:

Re: Remove the muzzle from government scientists, Opinion Sept. 20

In this incisive article Dr. David Schindler has essentially said to our governments: “J’accuse.” Is there any doubt that our federal government is actively encouraging the dumbing down of Canada by following the principle that the less the people know, the better for the government?

To paraphrase the famous two rules about moms: Rule 1. Your government is always right. Rule 2. In case your government is wrong, refer to Rule 1.

Jaggi Tandan, Hamilton

Scientists, remove your own muzzles. Find the courage to speak freely; act together. Stephen Harper can’t fire you all. He would be an international laughing stock.

Terry Watkinson, Toronto

David Schindler is correct that science is being compromised because of political and ideological opposition. Those consequences do not apply to environmental issues alone, but also to scientific facts taught in our schools in regard to evolution.

I agree with the National Centre of Science Education (Scientific American, Oct. 23), which states: “Evolution is one of the most important ideas in human intellectual history and students have the right to learn it. The common ancestry of living things and the mechanism of inheritance explain why the things are the way they are. Students and adults deprived of this knowledge are scientifically illiterate and ill prepared in a global, competitive world.”

Our world is in fatal competition among the various religions. There should be a few restrictions. Those who are intolerent creationists or those who display a specific religious garb should not teach science in our schools because of their own distorted influence on our small innocent children in Canada.

Kurt Heinze, Scarborough

A Friday Evening Thought

Words to live by from our friends at Occupy Canada:

I Believe This With My Whole Heart

"Either you taste, feel and smell the intoxication of freedom and revolt or sink into the miasma of despair and apathy. Either you are a rebel or a slave."
-Chris Hedges



H/t Occupy Canada

Looking for Democracy

I am sure that like me, many despair over the state of democracy in Canada. Not only is it under continuous assault by a federal government that has repeatedly and consistently shown its contempt for the concept, but it also suffers from widespread citizen disengagement.

Probably the two are inextricably connected.

In an interesting column today entitled Canadians need a forum to raise their voices against undemocratic leaders, The Star's public editor Carol Goar writes about a public trust called The Carold Institute, whose mission is to promote active citizenship, democratic participation and social change.

A recent panel discussion hosted by the institute stressed three essential observations and lessons that put our present perilous state into perspective:

- those with power — politicians, police and bureaucrats — don’t think they should have to share it. “They don’t like citizens and they don’t think they have any role.”

- governments are quick to slap pejorative labels — violent, dangerous, anarchic — on people who challenge them.

- citizens have to use the tools they have — solidarity, the willingness to stand up to authorities, the ability to reach beyond their own ranks — to keep democracy alive.

These are lessons we all would be wise to remember and take to heart in the long hot summer of discontent ahead.

The Cost of Political Disengagement

Thanks to LeDaro's link, I was able to catch up on the At Issues panel that I missed on Thursday night. While the discussion revolved largely around the F-35 debacle, the point I found most discouraging was the statistic that only 30-35% of Canadians follow politics at all. It is a shockingly low number for a democracy, one that, of course, has allowed Harper and his acolytes to begin to wreak havoc on our traditional way of life.

It is indescribably sad that the majority of Canadians see politics as something distinct from and essentially irrelevant to their lives, rather than one of the main determinants of its quality. Those of us who write political blogs are very much aware of this fact, but the conundrum with which we perpetually wrestle is how to communicate that to the wider population.

Perhaps part of the answer is implied in Tim Harper's column today in The Star. Entitled Conservative government fights to keep budget cuts in the ‘back office’, the piece examines the ramifications of the elimination of civil service jobs while the government paradoxically insists that no front-line services will be affected. This past week, both the public service unions and Tom Mulcair have rather effectively attacked this risible assertion.

Perhaps if enough scrutiny is given to the issue, we can see an increase in the abysmal statistic I mentioned at the start of this post.

Social media and Political Activism

There is a good article in today's Star entitled The revolution will be digitalized that looks at the role social media may play in political engagement and mobilization. It contains some links worth checking out as well.

Are Young People Becoming More Engaged In The Political Process?

A story in today's Globe suggests they are, in part thanks to a Rick Mercer rant from the end of March. While I have written previously about why I think it is crucial to increase voter turnout over that of the 2008 election to have any chance of defeating the Harper agenda, perhaps Mercer says it best in this video:

Help Get Out The Vote – Election 2011

Much has been written about the badly damaged state of our Canadian democracy; not only has the Harper Government, for the past five years, shown its contempt for Parliament, but also for the people of Canada, who have the right to expect responsible, representative and transparent government from all of our elected representatives.

The level of citizen engagement in our democratic society has dropped to dangerously low levels; the federal election of October 2008 saw a turnout of 58.8% of eligible voters, the lowest participation rate since Confederation, resulting in the second Harper minority government. The distribution of those votes means that we are allowing a minority of people to determine the direction our country takes, the policies that are enacted, the treaties that are signed, etc. Given that a good portion of those who vote are 'true believers' of one political stripe or another means that we are essentially allowing special interests to determine our collective fates.

Does this sound fair? Does this sound reasonable?

I believe there is a way to begin to remind those who govern that they are accountable to us, not to those monied interests who can employ expensive lobbyists agitating for more and more targeted tax breaks and other policies that may work counter to our collective interests. That way is to have a much larger proportion of average citizens exercising their franchise.

That is the reason I have created a Facebook page entitled Help Get Out The Vote – Election 2011. And while I may have a political philosophy that runs counter to someone else's, I invite people of all political stripes to participate in order to help increase political awareness and to discuss ways to significantly increase voter turnout in the upcoming federal election.

It is my hope that people who like this page will extend invitations to their family and friends to visit and contribute to it; the more ideas, discussion and plans that people can offer, the better will be our results.

My only role as moderator, as I see it, is to try to keep discussion on a respectful level; diverse views are welcome. I will only delete comments that are slanderous, rude, racist or otherwise inappropriate.

So let's use the power of social media to achieve something important. Let's work toward building a better, more democratic Canada!