Thursday, September 10, 2009

Harper: J. Edgar Hoover on crack. . .

The recent secret speech given by Stephen Harper is reminder of why this man is so sinister and so frightening. He says we wants to ‘teach us a lesson,’ and if he gets his vaunted majority I am sure he will. It will be a scary lesson about how quickly people in a supposed democracy can lose their rights and freedoms and how well a Conservative government can devastate a modern society and turn the clock back to the ‘good old days’ when children worked in factories. Harper’s suggestion that the judges in Canada constitute a radical left-wing conspiracy demonstrates what he really thinks of this country. Unfortunately, too many Canadians are profoundly ignorant of actually event and hold the same kind of antiquated, cold-war era notions.

If these are the kinds of things that Harper says in a semi-public meeting imagine the kinds of things he says in genuine privacy. Oh for one video tape of Harper speaking to John Baird and Pierre Poillievre behind closed doors as they engage in their homophobic, sexists, racist, right-wing conspiracy theories! Such a transcript would finally expose Harper for what he really is and end his political career once and for all. The funny thing is that people are so often excoriating left-wingers as being crazy, conspiracy-minded, whackos. Yet few people seem to mind that Canada’s Prime Minister is like J. Edgar Hoover on crack. So it goes. . . 

Wednesday, September 9, 2009

My political naivety . . .

I think that I suffer from a certain degree of political naivety. I grew up in the US amidst the Vietnam war and eve as a kid I had a sense of how people were appalled by what they saw as an unjust, neo-colonial escapade. Yet when the first gulf war began and I was involved in the anti-war protests, I was just monumentally shocked that the West was able to perpetrate another such all-out war less than 20 years after the war in Indo-China had ended. And then I was still shocked when the US was able to instigate the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan which were so obviously more blatant efforts by the West to control geo-politics through a brutal war effort.

In the past year I have done a great deal of research for my book which has involved reading about the French Revolution and the British reaction to the events in France. Such research demonstrates that the same types of ideological efforts at defending war and oppression have been going on for centuries. Yet I am still shocked that average people are largely uninformed and utter incapable of seeing through the lies of the rich and powerful who perpetrate wars in their own interests while average people do the fighting and dying.

But my naivety continues because I am totally shocked that any Canadians are willing to support a government that is not only incompetent but self-interesting, mean-spirited, and profoundly corrupt. It just shocks me and I can’t get past it. I continue to be amazed that people will let their biases allow them to stand up for the most shockingly atrocious actions as long as those actions are committed in the name of their ideology.

So it goes . . . 

Tuesday, September 8, 2009

Harper and the Election Law. . . .

Anyone who doesn’t think that the Prime Minister selfishly broke his own law by calling the election last year must be far too partisan to have any sense of reality. The law passed by the Conservatives was quite clear and he broke the law in a crass partisan effort to benefit from circumstance, the very thing that the law was supposed to circumvent. But this is just typical Harper attitude, he cares little for the law or even for respectable fair-play. Rather, he cares about power and how to get it. The truth of the matter is that the court should not only resolve that the election was illegal but that the results should be overturned and a new election held with Harper being disqualified from running or holding a seat. This is exactly what Canadians would demand if the same thing had happened in a foreign country and we should demand no less from our own laws and constitution! 

However, don’t look for the Court to recognize the serious breach of law that has occurred here. Few people within the establishment have the courage to call members of parliament to the same standards to which the rest of us are held. And they don’t want to be responsible for the messy clean-up that would have to take place when thousands of Canadians sue Harper and the Conservative party, holding them to financial account for what was an illegal election. And given that we usually can’t get our Courts to hold our own government officials to account, is it any wonder that governments in countries like Iran or Sudan can get away with almost anything?  

If I am wrong, by the way, about what the court will decide, I will happily eat crow. 

Monday, September 7, 2009

New Liberal Ads from a Left perspective. . .

I haven't really seen how other leftists are looking at the recent ads by Ignatieff and the Liberal party but I think the ads were a fairly good way to go for the Liberals. By keeping it fairly positive and trying to say that Canada needs a government that tries to build rather than tear down the Liberals are certainly creating a different image than the Conservatives have created in recent years. Even though I am not a big fan of Ignatieff, the country could certainly benefit from a leader who is not so quick to poison the political well. 

There is, of course, an irony in this portrayal of Ignatieff being sold in the new ads. Ignatieff's now famous support for the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, as well as his stated support for "indefinite detention, coercive interrogation, targeted assassinations, and even pre-emptive war," place Ignatieff squarely in the realm of Harper and Bush on some pretty significant ways. But it also demonstrates Ignatieff as what he is, a child of the traditional noblesse oblige, cold-war, centrist who is quick to stand up for Liberal Values at home but not so quick to stand up for them elsewhere. Let us not forget the history of Western imperialism folks, it was perpetrated with the support of even the left wing parties in many countries, parties that knew that they and their working-class supporters stood to benefit from many of the imperialist escapades. Of course, the Conservative party can hardly attack Ignatieff for political positions that they themselves hold with even greater fervor. 

Still, given my basic political disagreements with Ignatieff, I will still give him a fairly high score for political strategy and a willingness to de-poison the political discourse. 

Ignatieff, the NDP and Election Scenarios. . . .

It took me a few days to  realize what the Liberals must have been thinking when they decided to finally attempt to bring down Harper and his government. I guess I am a little slow this week. Ignatieff and his inner circle are surely thinking that even though they are not particularly high in the poles, with the economy slowly improving (at least by the traditional numbers) this is their best time to go to the poles. But they are not trying to force an election because they are thinking they must win. On the contrary, all they have to do is have a strong showing. If the Liberal Party were to win a minority they figure they can govern for a couple of years with only moderate cooperation from the NDP and the Bloc. But if Harper  wins a small minority (and I am sure that this is the best he can expect) he will once again find himself in a untenable position, unable to govern in part because of his epic ego and partisanship and in part because it will be his forth election and it will be clear at that point even with his own party that he cannot win a majority. So I figure Ignatieff is thinking if Harper wins a minority and tries to govern they can vote down the Thrown Speech and then go to the governor general and ask for their own chance to form the government. Such a request will be almost impossible to deny and the Liberals will find themselves in government by default. Then all Ignatieff  has to do is to make the Parliament function better than Harper was able to do (which should be easy) to maintain his government for a good while. At this point the Liberals can take credit for any recovery that may take place as well as for having smarter government and improving the tone of politics and they would have a good chance at a majority. 

Now given the reasonableness of this scenario, the only thing I can't figure is why the NDP changed their tune so suddenly. If this scenario panned out they would surely benefit and all the polling indications suggest that they could actually gain seats in an election. The only thing I can figure is that they actually want the election but don't want to appear that the want the election. Seeing Anne Magrath on CBC last night suggesting that the Liberals are being irresponsible by edging toward an election and running advertising at a time of economic uncertainty must be an attempt to position themselves as a sober and cautious alternative to the Liberals. Now this is probably a stupid and hypocritical game on the part of the NDP, unless it is specifically designed, with the blessing of Ignatieff, to distance the NDP from the Liberals during an election campaign in order to undercut any talk of a coalition by the Tories who want to continue to milk that cow because it is one of the only weapons they have left. 

By the way, wasn't that a bizarre news conference held by Mr. Kenney in which he unveiled a strange and inexplicable tape of what they say was Ignatieff saying nothing significant? It was sort of sadly pathetic. Of course if they realize the scenario outlined above, and they surely must,  they must be in a state of utter panic. If the only way they can continue to govern is to win a majority they have to know they are really in trouble. 

Thursday, September 3, 2009

The NDP shows its Hypocritical side . . .

As promised I will be among the first to call the NDP hypocritical when circumstances demand it. The NDP has, of course, not supported the government, nor will they, I believe, when the time comes to actually vote in the House of Commons. But Brad Lavigne is being deeply hypocritical recently by suggesting that the NDP will take events on a “case by case” basis and could support Harper if he is willing to do something about EI, credit card fees, etc. Well I presume that parties always take it on a case by case basis, however only last spring the NDP said they would not vote for Harper’s budget even before they read it because it didn’t really matter what was in the budget because Harper could not be trusted, period. I happen to agree with that position. However, what has changed Mr. Lavigne? Has Mr. Harper suddenly become more trustworthy? Why suddenly is it possible for you work with the government now? Hypocrisy, pure and simple. 

Wednesday, September 2, 2009

Why Harper should not be reelected. . . .

Here are a few reasons why the Conservative Government should not be reelected. 


Total contempt for parliament. The Harper Government has consistently shown that it has nothing but contempt for parliament. It has said on more than one occasion that it will simply ignore certain bills that have duly passed through the House. The most outrageous of course was the directive for the government to abide by the Kyoto standards. Remember also the creation of a hand-book of for committee chairs to shut down discourse and even shut down entire committee hearing if the Conservatives don’t like the direction that the committee is going. The government also broke its own election law for political expediency. This kind of contempt to parliament and open discourse should make us reluctant to elect any Tories to the House let alone let them act as the government of the nation.

Contempt for citizenship. The Harper Government has proven over and over that it has no respect for the principle of citizenship (particularly if you are a person of color). It has even used the courts to attempt to avoid living up to its responsibility to protect our citizens abroad. No party that fails to respect its citizen’s human rights or stand up to defend them against arbitrary abuse of power by foreign governments deserves to be reelected.

Contempt to the Constitution. Harper’s government has shown that it has no respect for Canada’s Constitution. The proroguing of parliament just to avoid losing power was a terrible and dangerous precedent. But the misrepresentation of the constitution to the people of Canada by suggesting that a coalition was tantamount to a coup was an egregious perversion of the constitution. As anyone who understands the British parliamentary system knows, a majority of the representatives in the House elect the Prime Minister and it has been so for hundreds of years. This misrepresentation of the Constitution should preclude the Tories from governing.

Contempt for the Law. Harper’s government ended the court challenges program because it strives to subvert the legitimate role that the courts play in a parliamentary democracy. Though they are happy to use the courts to their own advantage, when courts make decisions that they don’t like they suggest that judges are ‘legislating from the bench.’ However, the courts are an essential part of a democracy and they play the role of checking the power of the legislative branch of government from instituting laws that violate the principles as set out in the constitution.

Contempt for Opponents. The Conservatives have no respect for the basic principles of political discourse and fair play. Instead Harper runs a government of extreme bullies who prefer to belittle and divide than actually discuss political issues. The chief bullies are Pollievre, Kenney, Baird, Flaherty, Van Loan, and Harper himself. They run a constant stream of personal attacks on any and all opponents and their attacks almost never have anything to do with actual policy issues.

Contempt for the environment. The Harper Government has continually been uninterested in any actual environmental policy. It all began with their first environment minister Rona Ambrose. Ambrose has long been a friend of the oil industry in her native Alberta and consistently denied the existence of any kind of global warming. She is also a long time fan of Ayn Rand who consistently claimed that cut-throat, unfettered capitalism could never lead to environmental disaster, and that selfishness is a virtue. (Do a quick google search to see the wacko Randism streak against any kind of environmentalism)

Contempt for Democracy. When facing the threat that the majority of the people’s representatives might actually rule the House of Commons the Conservatives showed their true colors by not only suggesting that the majority had no right to rule but they spent much of their energy marginalizing many of the people’s representatives by labeling them “separatists” and “socialists.” They made it very clear that some people who are duly elected by the people have no business being in the House simply because the Conservative  don’t  like them.

 

Harper’s government is not just a poor and incompetent government; it is has poisoned the country and subverted the principles of democracy and human rights. Harper poses a genuine threat to our rights and the future of the country and don’t deserve to be reelected.