Please feel free to comment on APOV. However, remember to keep in check your tone and respect for all here. Let rational, reasoning, enthousiastic and passionate conversations and discussions rule first and foremost in our participatory democracy, so as to facilitate the free exchange of reality-based facts and ideas. In between, do not forget to have fun and enjoy yourselves ... in other words: keep on rockin'! - Mentarch
Just a friendly
Alliance of U.S.
and Canadian
Bloggers,
The Another Point of View blog is licensed by Mentarch (Pierre H. Vachon) under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 2.5 Canada License.
Oh please, don't sugar coat it!
ReplyDeleteIt is amazing, isn't it? Just when the world ought to have had its fill of impulsive, arrogant, autocratic leaders, the Libs get their very own.
(LOL)
ReplyDeleteAnd yeah - damn depressing, if you ask me ...
Well said. Iggy is Harper Jr. I thought Iggy's political nature would be an improvement over his philosophical nature. He's a Con in disguise through and through. The disguise is melting away.
ReplyDeleteDamn good point there, Jymn.
ReplyDeleteAnd what the hell is a disgruntled, unrepresented voter to do when the choices come down to Stevie, Stevie Not-So-Lite, Jarring Jack and Loose-Lips Lizzie?
ReplyDeleteYa know, before Dion and his communications team imploded, I was seriously, seriously thinking of voting Liberal for the first time in my life. I LIKED the Green Shift, I LIKED what Dion was trying to do. But then things fell apart.
Am equally serious that I'll NEVER vote for a party that is led by His Igginess or, for that matter, a party which permitted the undemocratic crowning of same.
And I'll NEVER vote for the lesser of evils. Never have and never will.
Which means I'll likely not vote in the next federal election.
Seriously. We need an all-out voter boycott. These flimflammers have got to go.
Sorry, CO - while I echo the sentiment fully, I've always maintained that removing ourselves from the process altogether is more damaging to our democracy.
ReplyDeleteWe need to take it back - some way, somehow.
Maybe a fourth party - something like "The Progressive Party of Canada"?
Now here's a thought ...
This description of Ignatieff still stands today as it did in 2005:
ReplyDeleteIgnatieff, while running what is essentially a marketing program for America at the forty-billion dollar endowment called Harvard, has kept in touch with Canada. Every once in a while he is interviewed by someone at the CBC or the Toronto Star. The interviewer's tone typically is toe-scrunchingly along the lines of, "Here is one of the age's great intellectuals, and he's from Canada!" Certain Canadians do have an embarrassing tendency that way.
So I am familiar with Ignatieff's quietly arrogant tone. Oddly, it is almost the tone of a minister of the Gospel, educated and polished to be sure, one of those New England clerics safely ensconced in a sinecure at some dignified pile of stones where he only has to address a small, blue-haired congregation once a week to earn his keep, but a preacher none the less. Ignatieff doesn't give speeches or write essays, he gives sermons, rather dull sermons with just a hint of suppressed rage under the surface. The rage, perhaps regarded as appealing or even sexy by some, if you listen carefully, is directed at people who do not embrace his views.
http://www.asiantribune.com/oldsite/show_news.php?id=16316
Good recall there, BY - thanks ;-)
ReplyDeleteThere is no Progressive Party of Canada, so I'm with CO, no votey vote.
ReplyDeleteAnon@5:47 - I know such a party doesn't exist (duh!) ... my suggestion implied the question "how about we make one?"
ReplyDeleteAs for that "no votey" thing - I suggest that you read this older tirade of mine. Hopefully, you will realize how disastrous such a course of (in)action is and therefore reconsider ...
Addendum: btw - we all saw the result last elections when most folks do *not* get out and vote, eh?
ReplyDeleteYes I understood there isn't a progressive party in place (duh), when one is in place I may change my mind. I've taken my responsibility seriously forever and I'm still not liking the results.
ReplyDeleteI will not be guilted anymore into voting by being called apathetic or I'm part of the problem. That argument just doesn't work for me anymore, something has to give and I've given.
Anon - so, how about doing *something* about it, instead of "opting out"?
ReplyDelete;-)
Mentarch, you're coming across as preaching. Please don't assume that people who don't vote or are considering not voting haven't thought things out. People of good conscience may decide either way. You insult those who choose other than you do when you call our choice "opting out." That's almost as bad as labelling all who don't vote as lazy or apathetic.
ReplyDeleteSimilar arguments have been used, pro and con, regarding strategic voting, especially during the last federal election. What I wrote then could equally apply to this situation.
You don't understand. He's just saying all this stuff so that some Canadians will think he's GREAT and vote for him and then, after he becomes Sir Ignatieff,Count, or is it King, well, PM then, then he will say, we have had to redefine some of our positions taken in pre election mode as a strategic approach. I have been quite forthright since the beginning about being a maybe so or maybe not person and a gentleman can or again MAY need to change his mind accordingly.Grimace. Grimace.And more eyebrow action.
ReplyDeleteI shouldn't gossip but.... some rookies were treated so poorly during the elections that they were almost in tears.
Before the tarsand endorsement of last week, I was arguing with people about this person acting as chief for the Libs. They were talking as tho' he was Canada's Obama. I wonder what they have to say about him this week. Maybe I'll volunteer for the Convention just to get a free ticket to the show in Vancouver.
I happened to catch the last convention on TV and thought, ooo... I hope that guy doesn't win, and he didn't.I liked the guy with the dog named Kyoto.
I actually think his English was better.With Mr. Ig I have to ask: what did he just say?And I can't make out his expression.His facial lanquage is strange.
Oemissions: hehe ;-)
ReplyDeleteSay ... are you the one who put up this very funny, interesting (and *revealing*) and quite à propos blog about our "Iggy"?
;-)
CO: well, then, it would seem that you are easily insulted/offended ... It's a shame, because I *do* respect and appreciate your opinion *very* much.
ReplyDeleteHaving said that - to me, there can't be any justification (nonetheless) to support the contention that "opting out" of the democratic process of our society constitutes a positive, let alone a constructive, option in any way whatsoever.
To me, this is a simple as 1 - 1 = 0.
Folks can justify anything logically - and I do mean *anything* (remember the torture memos? It's an extreme example, yes, but nonetheless a valid one) to conclude that "opting out" of the democratic process actually constitutes a valid option.
Once again - sorry, CO, but in my mind's eye this constitutes nothing more than a cop out - just one reason to excuse not living up to our responsibility as a citizen of a democratic society ... meaning that a) you do get out and vote; and b) you hold the feet of those elected "to the fire" - whether those be ones of a party you voted for or not.
That is a plain, simple verity that goes with living in a democratic society. Period.
And if you are not satisfied with what's "available" out there, then you nevertheless have the option to a) create your own party; or b) dive in to the party that suits your principles the closest and do your best to muster momentum to change things to your liking within said party.
I tried to do this in the LPC years ago - and was essentially thrown out (although I *did* resign before this happened). Thereafter, I sought to join (tentatively) the NDP and do the same (as best as I could) to make it more pragmatic and realistic - without sacrificing its basic progressive values.
I was likewise shut off.
Hence I gave up, resigning myself to vote nevertheless (i.e. do my *duty* as a citizen) for "lesser evils", because *at those times*, it seemed to me that I was alone in wanting to enact change ...
Things *should* be different now.
Hell ... if I am indeed *not* alone, then I will damn well (and gladly) try again to change things from within the LPC - or even the NDP for that matter - as long as other progressives get along for the ride!
Because we *now* have the techonology and, therefore, the means to enact changes *from the ground up* - altogether!
If we get together and commit ourselves to do so - of course.
On the other hand, how the hell a plain and simple "cop out" can carry any *meaningful/significant* message to those politicos (and/or parties) we are dissatisfied with?
Absolutely *nothing* whatsoever - and I know that you know better than this.
Hell, our silence will only be interpreted as *approval* by those incompetent, self-centered morrons we are dissatisfied with!!!
So - here we are, you and I (and so many others), wondering for which party we should invest our interests in, time and dedication with, if any ...
And I agree - so far, the political landscape of our country looks like, well, the plain, drab and bleak rocky landscape of our moon.
But guess what? It turns out that our moon holds much, much more than useless rocks and dirt!
Hence my point - perhaps we progressives should pull together to either change the LPC (and/or the NDP).
Barring this, then we should make our own damn party - the Progressive Party of Canada - and not only be *real* as concerned citizens but actually *do something* tangible (and in direct line with our responsibilities as citizens living in a democratic society) to enact change ...
Either way - don't you think it would be way more proactive than simply recusing ourselves from our democracy altogether?
All I'm doing here is extending my (good-intentioned and willingly proactive) hand to you, CO, and those like you who have decided to opt our of our democracy ...
Or is nihillism the fad du jour?
I still hope not ....
So - what say you, CO? And all other folks who feel the same way as you do?
(And I do hope that you see now that I am not preaching, by simply trying in earnest to drive the vital point across that opting out of our democracy can, and does, and will, only make things worse down the line ...)
I'm rather new to politics... Hell, I'm 24. But I have the strong feeling that ever since the age of 18 (legal age for voting...), the choice is always for the least worst.
ReplyDeleteAny advice on how not being depressed?
I "feel your pain" (really) ;-)
ReplyDeleteMy suggestion, as always, is to get actively involved as much as possible, in order to try to change things - either within your party of choice or, as I keep naively promulgating, help start a new party like the "Progressive Party of Canada" ...
There are already so many political parties that in our FPTP system, adding another Progressive party will only serve to dilute the effort that could be used to hijack an existing successful party.
ReplyDeleteGood point, SB - how about then a merging and/or unification effort of some of these parties?
ReplyDeleteHell, if the séparatistes managed to do it back in the late 60's-early 70's in order to form the PQ ...
Mentarch, why don't you try the NDP again. I find it very positive and enclusive with layton as the Leader. Anyway, it is a thought.
ReplyDeletethe more I read your posts, the more I thought, wow he sure thinks and sounds like a social democratic.
jan: heh ;-)
ReplyDeleteThe first and foremost problem that I have with the NDP is that they never justify how they will pay whatever that they say they will dish out money into.
Or, their first and foremost solution to *anything* is more government spending.
(Current economic crisis aside, mind you - this is precisely an instance whereby a government must intervene, and not just "lightly", or without strings attached, as Harper and his Harpies are doing - ugh)
Now, don't take this the wrong way - there are many things I think a society should pay for (welfare, social security, health care, etc.). But a society has no business in paying for everything ...
Then, there are excesses by unions - however much I agree that unions are needed to counterbalance the "nature of the beast" of employers to take advantage of, if not outright exploit, employees. But the blatant pandering that the NDP has always done to unions, without talking to them about *responsibility*, has always annoyed me.
And last - although Jack Layton can have his moments, he keeps coming across to me a someone without any true vision for our country.
So, in many ways - yes, I am a center-leaning social democrat. A "Trudeau liberal", if you will (although P.E.T. greatly disappointed me with his utter recklessness regarding the Meech Lake accord saga).
Now, if Dion had shown himself to be a decisive, capable leader, with a vision ... but alas, that did not happen. And it's too bad, because he was indeed in many ways more social-democrat than his predecessors (Martin, Chrétien). And I will add that I did support Martin (but not Chrétien).
And now, with Iggy, the LPC is veering off into outright neo-liberal/neocon territory.
Hence why I am stuck more or less "in-between": still unconvinced that I should join the NDP and more than ever repelled by Iggy's LPC ...
(sigh)
Having said all that - I am always open to sound arguments in order to sway me around to the NDP ... or the LPC, once Iggy is discarded (if that actually ever happens)
;-)
I hear you on the NDP front. I have consistently voted for the party and worked on a number of campaigns but mostly because I am further left than any party at offer.
ReplyDeleteThat said, I am a pragmatist and a former fed worker, so I really do recognize that what is most important is not the Party that rules but the policies that get placed. For the most part, Canada scored big on that front through the 60s and 70s comparatively speaking.
I was not an NDP member when Layton took a successful run at the leadership. I just didn't get him. I was surprised by the accolades he got from a very respected activist friend of mine who had seen him at work in his previous incarnation. I was also shocked when I bumped into and made the acquaintance of Stephen Lewis' sister and her husband on an architectural boat tour in Chicago. They were just thrilled with Jack Layton. I still didn't get it and tried to see him more positively. It still hasn't worked.
I love Ed Broadbent and I know he's not perfect either. But there was something genuine about him as leader that Layton hasn't captured. Right now there are two NDP MPs that I really admire - Bill Siksay and Libby Davies.
All that to say that I don't feel inspired to promote the NDP. In fact, if I lived in Quebec, there's a good chance I would vote for the BQ. Of all our current federal party leaders, I think he is the most competent and intelligent. Seriously, how can you not love a guy who describes Harper's proposed changes to the Young Offenders Act as the "fresh meat" amendment. LOL, that was brilliant.
BY:
ReplyDelete"I really do recognize that what is most important is not the Party that rules but the policies that get placed."
Hear, hear - a-b-s-o-l-u-t-e-l-y!!!
"I love Ed Broadbent and I know he's not perfect either. But there was something genuine about him as leader that Layton hasn't captured."
I did vote for Broadbent back in the elections when Mulroney won his first mandate (can't remember the year exactly and too lazy tonight to search for it - heh). And I agree that he was genuine. But in the end, he was still too much of a "union boss".
In Québec, we've experienced (and still experience) too many excesses from unions. Let's not forget that these unions (still talking about those Québec ones, such as the CSN - Centrale Syndicale Nationale - and the FTQ - Fédération des Travailleurs du Québec -) were founded on avowed marxist-leninist principles and, even to this day, tend to follow in their promulgation of said principles.
Hence nowadays janitors in hospitals can actually earn more than a beginning professor (assistant professor) with a BSc, MSc, PhD and 3-6 years of post-doctoral additional training.
That is, simply put, unacceptable, to me.
(and in this sense, I do support the idea of a "meritocracy" - based on a leveled playing field, yes, but on choice nevertheless. As one example: if one doesn't want to go through all these years of school, college and university, but would rather work as a maintenance janitor, or any other hourly-paid job, then all the more power to you. But don't expect ever to earn as much as, say, an accountant or nurse or physician or scientist (etc), though)
Hence why I am for unions, but I stand definitely against union excesses.
"a guy who describes Harper's proposed changes to the Young Offenders Act as the "fresh meat" amendment. LOL, that was brilliant."
Heh - agreed ;-)
However, I would (and never have) vote for the BQ - even as a protest vote. And that is because they remain all about séparatisme. That was quite on display on the past election night when Duceepe gave his "concession" speeh - the BQ hard-core followers kept chanting "le Québec aux Québecois" (the PQ/séparatiste mantra) and even Duceppe's speech had a definite Québec sovereignty to it. I knew that the BQ in these last elections willfully downplayed the sovereignty card in order to get as many CPC-dissatisfied votes as they could in Québec. And such obvious political duplicity (ok - non sincerity, at the very least) was plainly and unabashedly displayed on election night ...
I am a Québec nationalist, yes - meaning that I want a strong Québec within a strong Canada. But I remain nevertheless Canadian first.
Overall, that is why I am still looking for a "Progressive Party of Canada", which would take the best, pragmatic ideas and left-of-center progressive (or center-leaning social democratic) principles of both the LPC and NDP ...
(One can always wish, can one?)
;-)
Duceppe - not Duceepe - and speech - not speeh - of course.
ReplyDelete(damn typos) ;-)
I have very much appreciated the comments here, particularly the last two at length exchanges between you and Bejing. I agree with both of you.
ReplyDeleteI signed up with the Broad Coalition in Victoria,BC a few years ago but neither the Greens or NDP would budge on their differences and finger pointing.Paul George went to the Greens he says, because of his passion for forestry issues and found the unions to be too power propelled for him.
The NDP has had some wonderful people and still does.
When I expressed my inability to connect with Jack Layton,a veteran NDPer and organizer where I live she said: Is it because he comes off like a used car salesman? " I guess that's it ,said I.
In my view it is not leadership that is important to me. I don't need an idol, a hero, a star, a saviour. I need discussion and a leader who is basically a good spokesperson for issues.
With the state of our technology, it would seem that the old style ways of conducting government,issues and even voting on bills and budgets could be transformed.
During the elections here on Saltspring Island, the person who got the greatest applause at the Town Hall All Candidates meeting was the CAP candidate.
David Orchard is someone I like to listen to. He has recommended strategic voting for the next election.Our very bright Red Green candidate running for the Liberals, Briony Penn,a high profile environmentalist with Phd in Geography lost by a few votes to Gary Lunn,new Minister of Sports and quite a twit.
The Ndp candidate, a former Green ,had to withdraw because of his nude appearance at a camp where young women were about several years back. This exposure was front page.
Briony Penn, a former Green was courted by the Liberals and NDP but chose to run for the Liberals. Many of us joined the party to support her. She was acclaimed in the nomination process but in the end lost to Lunn.by about 3000 votes. Turns out, even tho the NDP had no candidate, 3600 people voted for him.His name was still on the ballot.
Also, the night before the election,a robot call was sent out asking people to vote for him.
NDP office was as surprised as any one else. Interesting because those of us supporting Briony, the Lib candidate looked at the figures from last election, and Briony should have won it, by a quite a margin of votes.
Econews editor and author, Guy Dauncey had been urging people to vote strategcally and Ms Penn is Ms Environment here.
Yes, I would like a union of Progressives but the Liberals are focusing on Leadershipt .Seems there is a general agreement here about Mr. Ignatieff.
Putters and flutters and who knows?
I don't have the patience to wait for proportional representation or whatever more representative system is chosen.
It would seem easier to just give up with a meh,'ey ,but we can't do that either.
Oemissions: nice (and much appreciated) rundown of some of the notable misshaps (and outright ludicrous situations) that occured in our last elections ...
ReplyDeleteThese made me think again of the utter absence of the NDP and LPC candidates in my riding (other than on posters hung on street lights and traffic lights).
"In my view it is not leadership that is important to me. I don't need an idol, a hero, a star, a saviour. I need discussion and a leader who is basically a good spokesperson for issues."
Agreed absolutely - and I would add: someone who genuinely strives for the betterment of all his/her fellow citizens - and definitely not about wanting "power" and/or the title of the job. In short: a true, genuine leader.
That is what altogether I reproached of Dion, for example, and what I usually mean by "decisive, clear leadership with a definite vision for our country".
I likewise am not looking for an idol, or some such.
"With the state of our technology, it would seem that the old style ways of conducting government,issues and even voting on bills and budgets could be transformed."
A-b-s-o-l-u-t-e-l-y.
And in this respect, Obama and his campaign showed the way on how it can be done, in the last U.S. elections.
"I don't have the patience to wait for proportional representation or whatever more representative system is chosen.
It would seem easier to just give up with a meh,'ey ,but we can't do that either."
Once again: agreed, absolutely.
Which brings us back to the initial alternatives: do we A) band together to invest in the LPC (or NDP) in order to change them for the better (and suited for our aspirations); or B) do we band together to form our own Progressive Party ...
(Oh - and if you think you appreciate the exchanges going on in this post - then make this triple for me! This is in large part what I've always wanted from "running" a progressive blog - not just "documenting the atrocities" as it were - but actual enthousiastic, involved, pragmatic/practical discussions ... such as the current one on what are our alternatives as to how we can make thing better for all of us, despite the current, bleak political landscape)
;-)