Excited Delirium

Reposted on request

Ron Love, organizer of the ‘United Alternative’, explained in this article how his efforts to unite the right paid off in 2000 and how they continue to pay off as Stephen Harper comes closer and closer to a majority government.  He shares his wisdom for the ‘left’ and demonstrates what ‘we’ need to do in order to mount a force that could oppose the ‘right’.

Read it.  Digest it.  Critique it.

And then you’ll realize that his basic premise couldn’t be more wrong .

I don’t think the ‘left’ should subject itself to the same kind of ham-fisted tyrannical forces that the right did.  What allowed the right to unite is that they had common ground that could arguably be found outside the political spectrum, such as religious dogma.  As a result, their basic political program (that which they revealed to Canadians in their public platform) was easily agreed upon by all of the founding members.  Examples:  neo-con economic policies (including disclosure of what they would do if they had a majority, like sell off public assets and allow banks to merge), tough on crime policies and money for defense.  The ‘Progressive’ part of the Conservatives disappeared.  Even Mulroney looks like a socialist compared to some of the ex-Harris brown shirts.

However, in this process of consolidating the voters of the ‘right’, the right did something that only the right seems capable of doing:  they put a lid on democratic process.  Yes, the process of choosing their leader was ‘democratic’, but it was also negotiated through a number of concessions, many of which I’m sure Peter Mackay is still stinging from.

You see, too much has to be surrendered in order to ‘unite’.  At least if you’re with the ‘right’.

On the ‘left’ – or what I prefer to call ‘progressive’ – side of the country, we have become the ‘bucket’ for everything that the Conservatives are not.  Green.  Socialist.  Marijuana Party.  Liberals.  Without speaking for anyone else, I feel that putting such a divergent range of political viewpoints into a single ‘bucket’ would destroy my sense of democracy.

Someone like Ron Love might argue that the ‘left’ would need to find a steady middle ground as we face media pressure and scrutiny, but I think that can only lead to failure because so many opinions and views would be left scattered at the perimeter.

More importantly, this viewpoint doesn’t reflect the Long Tail of politics, where everybody should be able to have an opinion and these opinions are negotiated (however long it takes) rationally in a legal setting, such as the House of Commons.

It fails to reflect the ’socialization’ of politics, where everyone should be entitled to an opinion and a voice at the table.

At the core of my opposition to this kind of ‘ramming of the right’ comes the notion that people need to be able to express their point of view and they need to do it within a democratic framework.  The Harper campaign has and continues to focus on leadership.  A single person.  Anything else would be tantamount to anarchy.

So, Mr. Love, you’re wrong to assume that progressive voices in Canada want to be silenced or marginalized into a single voice.  We represent an orchestra.  A choir.  All singing different parts, hopefully in great harmony.

In the short-run, this would take shape as a coalition that represented a balance of progressive opinions.  It would take the form of many people making many educated and informed decisions, with a lot of discussion taking place.  In public and not behind closed doors.

The long-run it’s Proportional Representation where the single angry voice of the right is muted by the rising swell of an entire chorus.

And now for some really good news.  Well, I tried.

This article offers a fairly complete list of reasons why we should at least expect zero growth for the next three years.  When our MA in Economics leaders claim that they couldn’t see it coming, I’ll feel like I’ve fulfilled my public duty by warning them here first.

It’s the least I can do.

Now, when they go to re-write their economic statement, maybe they can address maybe one, hopefully two of the 30-odd issues / reasons listed in the article cited?

Last week, the people of Iceland broke into riot in protest of the direction that their government was taking in wake of the ‘financial crisis’.  More here . I think they reached the tipping point in being told a spew of BS about the need to tighten our belts etc etc etc.

I think sometimes we give neo-cons for thinking too far ahead.  In fact, maybe that’s their problem:  it’s impossible for them to live in the here and now.

The Harpocrisy made a similar mistake in mis-judging the will of the people.  In the case of Canada, our politicians, motivated by self-interest finally started acting in the interest of all Canadians, lest we find ourselves in complete civil unrest.

Since Friday, the Conservatives have backed down, so what was the point of the statement in the first place?

Now what happened probably won’t occur in Canada.  At least, let’s hope not.

Compare this:

"The opposition has every right to defeat the government but Stéphane Dion does not have the right to take power without an election," Harper said. "Canada’s government should be decided by Canadians, not backroom deals. It should be your choice, not theirs."

Stephen Harper, November 28, 2008

To this:

"We respectfully point out that the opposition parties, who together constitute a majority in the House, have been in close consultation. We believe that, should a request for dissolution arise this should give you cause, as constitutional practice has determined, to consult the opposition leaders and consider all of your options before exercising your constitutional authority."

Stephen Harper, September 2004

Which is true Steve?  Which truth benefits you the most and which lies will you tell them Canadian public in order to preserve your lock on Canadian power?  Is ruining democracy in Canada that important to you?

And when you talk about backroom deals, Steve, are you talking from experience, where you let Canada’s corporate elite dictate our economic strategy as you head into talks with the other 19 countries of the G20 ?  Why were you pimping yourself (and Canada without our permission) in this fashion?  Did you consult with other public institutions in a public manner before going to the G20, lying about how you and the Cons would spend our way out of economic crisis only to have you come back and deliver a round of cuts ?  Just curious.

Backroom deals abound, yes, but I’m pleased to see that the representatives of the majority of Canadian voters are taking the lead.  From you.

Author’s Note: The following is Chapter 30 of the my online book "Excited Delirium". Please post comments. Please tell your friends about this story. If you’ve missed a chapter, please click here for Chapter 1 (Prelude) or here for the full index .

She’d been beaten. She was wounded emotionally and spiritually. She had no moral compass guiding her through this nightmare. She felt used. She was tired. She was no longer a woman.

Heather decided that it was time and she decided to do it when the kids weren’t around.

It was a rare moment when she could foist off all of her children, so she had to wait until the little ones were napping.

She thought to herself that sleeping pills would work best, but she didn’t have access to them. The thought of jumping to end her life would work, but there was nothing tall enough in Heresford to throw herself from.

As these thoughts raced through her mind, she sang a sweet lullaby that no one would ever hear again to her two smallest ones.

Heather spent her last moments tidying her room and organizing her bedroom. As she cleaned, she found her wedding dress. It was a lovely, simple dress made of cotton and some silk, with small opalescent beads sewn into the neckline and cuffs.

She thought for a few moments that she’d wear this dress in her last few moments, but she realized that even in this moment, it would be inappropriate. Instead, she took a few moments to cut it up into small pieces and layer it into the sheets, a small surprise for Matthew when he returned to his bed.

The only real option for her was to cut her wrists. She filled the bath with hot water, eased into it and did what she felt must be done to end her misery on this planet. Even hell seemed better than this.

As her life flowed from her, and the steam rose in a cloud, looking like a spirit rising from the tub, she decided to make sure that simple plan worked absolutely. She got out of the tub, grabbed a radio from the bedroom, not caring about the mess that she had made and then plugged it close to the tub. Long ago, she might have used that plug for her hair dryer as she prepared for a dance or social, something very popular in these parts, but today it served an important purpose in ending her life.

Heather Harken eased back into the tub and as her senses slow to an end, she kicked the radio and her troubles come to a close.

(Note: "Excited Delirium" is a work of fiction. Any person, place or thing depicted in this work of fiction is also a work of fiction. Any relation of these subjects or characters to real locations, people or things are an unintentional coincidence.)

Read more with Chapter 31

Did you miss a chapter? If so, click here to see all chapters or click here to go to Chapter 1: Excited Delirium.

Excited Delirium by Liam Young is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 2.5 Canada License .
Based on a work at www.exciteddelirium.ca .

I’ve pasted my comments from this article .  I’m very annoyed with the Conservative response to the efforts to form a coalition.  Back room deal?  Since when was Harper ever transparent with Canadians?

——

Wow.  Lots of comments.  I’m not sure if I’ll be repeating what’s already been said, but here are some thoughts:

1.  62.4% of Canadians does not want the Conservatives to run this country, at least according to the popular vote.
2.  The Conservatives do not have a plan.  They did not have one during the election and they obviously do not have one now, since they are not doing what the rest of the world is doing:  stimulating a failing economy.  Tax cuts didn’t work, Jim.
3.  A coalition is perfectly legal and within the rule of law in Canada.  Saying it’s not is a bold-faced lie.  Saying they’re working behind closed doors is the extreme in hypocrisy, given the complete media shut-out that we’ve had to tolerate over the last 2.5 years of Conservative ‘leadership’.
4.  Stephen Harper and Jim Flaherty and the rest of the Cons hate democracy.  Cutting $30 million from the public financing of campaigns will not prove anything.  Try cutting a few billion from the Department of Defence instead.
5.  It’s time the Conservatives accept their fate:  their belief structure and ideology is outdated and destructive.  Leaving them in charge to repair what faces us in Canada would be a disaster, as it has been in the US and the UK.
6.  In light of these observations, allowing the Conservatives to continue to run our country would be a grave mistake, given that they are ideologically different than the newly-elected Obama government in the US.

The level of anger mystifies me from the Conservative camps.  You act with a sense of defiance and entitlement.  It was decided that, using our antiquated voting system, the Conservatives would lead, but you’re entitled to nothing if you can’t cooperate with the rest of Canada.

Shame on you.

Hi folks,

This is do/die time.  The CBC has posted a poll about the public finance.  Please post your support for public finance of political parties here:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/polls/political-subsidies.html

Years ago, the Liberals took the high road and made an important first step in institutionalizing democracy in Canada by creating a public subsidy of $1.95 per vote that every Canadian casts at the ballot box.

This simple move extended a financial life-line to all Federal political parties and has prevented the Conservatives from obtaining a majority in Canadian politics.  It also became a financial gesture and substitute for something more desparately needed:  proportional representation.

Today, Jim Flaherty will likely cut this off.

Today, the Conservatives will show their disdain for democracy and prove that they loathe discussion, dialogue and concessions with the rest of Canada.

Today, we will lose democracy in Canada.

Today, they will prove that they hate Canadians that do not vote Conservative.

Even the possibility or rumour of this threat is hard to stomach.  And yet, it’s there.

Now, if they want to save a mere $30 million, look around at where you’re forking out cash to your buddies.  In the last Federal budget (2007), Jim Flaherty and the Conservatives announced some of the following expenditures:

• $60 million in wage increases to the Canadian Forces.
• $300 million in funds to friends as a subsidy for an unproven drug for children (HPV virus).

But that’s just the tip of the iceberg.  Check out these increases:

• $14.3 billion:  2004 Dept of Defence budget (6.8% of federal spending)
• $14.6 billion:  2005-06
• $18.9 billion:  2008-09
• $15 billion in spending announced by Stephen Harper in June 2006 to be spread over several years, mainly for planes, trucks and other transportation
• Government pledge to increase spending by 2% every year for the next 20 years

In other words, the annual Department of Defence budget will be tens of billions of dollars, while Canadian voters are getting shafted by not having their preferred politic parties get funding.  Our Defence budget will grow, on a per-capita basis, to one of the largest on the planet, and yet we won’t be able to get a few bucks to the opposition.

Nice.

THIS IS WRONG.  IT MUST STOP.

Join this group to remind the Conservatives that we ALL do not tolerate this trash:
http://www.facebook.com/home.php#/group.php?gid=41244607422

Please join this group on Facebook:

http://www.facebook.com/home.php#/group.php?gid=41244607422

The Conservative government is about to show its true disdain for Canadian democracy.

Let’s remind them that it’s not 1939 and this is not the Weimar Republic.

Do you work for a company on this list ?  Is so, are you re-evaluating your employment with them?  You should.

But … I could be wrong.  Maybe the truly awful are the ones who will continue to be rewarded in these upside-down times where banks are run by governments.

For those of you with ADD, here’s the short list:

1. AIG
2. Cargill
3. Chevron
4. Constellation Energy (Nuclear Power)
5. Chinese National Petroleum Corportation (CNPC – fueling issues in Darfur)
6. Dole
7. GE
8. Imperial Sugar
9. Philip Morris International
10. Roche

I’m sure there are others out there doing their worst to get on the list.