Those of you who visit this space regularly know the salamander. His comments are always insightful, tightly argued, and a pleasure to read. He sent this comment on yesterday's post which suggested that it's hard to find a true progressive in the House of Commons these days. His response was much more than a comment. And so, this morning, I turn this space over to him:
.. I am ill informed regarding some of the various regions of Canada.. I speak mainly of the economic forces, opportunities or threats facing the regions and their inhabitants. Humans being but one species of inhabitants.. and of course we do rely on our habitat, last I looked.
There are 'layers' if you will.. to habitat, and one can 'map' these layers in many many ways.. but one of them can be 'politics' - whether progressive or liberal or failure or enlightened. And the boundaries are essentially provincial borders, invisible aside from road signs or the American border etc.
Last week I looked at Alberta & British Columbia from the 'habitat' point of view.. while thinking of the politics, election campaigns, promises, candidates, names, jobs jobs jobs, the wild claims, the public serpents, the snake handlers, the lobbying.. I guess that's all part of the foliage, the flora & fauna of governments, political parties and wannabe politicians. I look at Notely, Horgan, Kenney, Wynne etc.. and the johhny cum latelys Patrick Brown, Singh.. The Left, the Right, the Extreme Right.. the libtards, Greens.. and I wonder.. Yes I truly do wonder
My current context is environment & species.. that's the only reason I became involved.. or weighed in.. or waded into 'politics' - It was Stephen Harper winning a majority government that was my personal trigger. My perspective is how does Left or Right or Liberal or United Conservative Party navigate or initiate or perceive 'environment' ? How do they see 'habitat' - habitat being partly or heavily influential in how they get votes, get alected, or run out of town.
So.. take a navigational map of Alberta & British Columbia showing inland and coastal waters, and to some extent, terrain such as mountain chains. Then overlay the Western Canadian Sedimentary Basin, then overlay the identified energy deposits, resources, whether tar sands, natural gas, shale oil, coal, lumber, potash etc.. Bingo ! You are looking at the habitat of captured politicians, lobbyists and all too often, foreign owned resource stripping and exporting corpoations. There really is no LEFT or RIGHT.. Conservative, Green or NDP, UCP etc.. Progressive ? Those are just the cutesy hockey style sweaters of political 'brands' - Harper and Kenney sure prove that.. and they can wear several team sponsor patches too.. even the same sponsor for the different team brands !
All I see is what will become the largest, toxic desert in North America. Follow the same 'habitat mapping' in South America & you will see how the forests, waters and air will be trashed.. Apply any projection or map reflecting Climate Change & the situation becomes compressed, extremely dire. Fatal. What 'jobs' will exist in Alberta if my scenario unfolds. Where all those resources in Alberta are removed via British Columbia or the North West Territories? Or via pipelines to Galveston, Texas? Or to New Brunswick 'tidewater' ?
Extirpation or extinction ? Complete system failure.. of wild creature food chains.. No salmon, no polar bear, no caribou or bald eagles. No bobcat or raven, no steelhead, no orca or other cetaceans.. just supertankers and pipelines for Asia.. and no 'Energy Security' for Canadians as Notely, Kenney, Joe Oliver, or Christy Clark proclaim.. its all wonderdust political posturing for 'power' & that is the only 'direction' you will find on the compass rose of my political mapping exercise.. We need a new political model.. even disease can be progressive.. then fatal for the creature .. I think we need a 'jury selection' style model now.. three years local, prov or fed 'duty' random selection of course & you're gone.. done.. 'thank you for your service' & yes there is a useful but hardly large 'pension' as added incentive.
Thanks, sal. Your contributions are deeply appreciated.
14 comments:
good observation but what are the remedies? Humans have a greed gene thats there from the start. To overcome this you must offer a wonderful solution, and make it so.
The salamander is suggesting a three year limit on office holders, Steve. A least it would limit the damage they could do.
Not to be cynical but a three year limit would accelerate theft of the public purse. On the other hand maybe easier to track down.
It would make it harder to for corrupt politicians to continue rewarding themselves, Steve.
The focus of Salamander's post underscores the reason for my deep disaffection from politicians these days. They will ultimately represent the constituency they see as their route to the achievement and maintenance of power. They have betrayed the majority of us, and, of course, as Sal points out, the larger world of which we are a part.
As for a new political model, our best chance was with electoral reform, but Trudeau betrayed that promise as soon as he realized that his and his party's current political power would be compromised.
Nice smile, nice style, but ultimately he is the same kind of politician as most of the others.
Politicians remind me of that old saying, Owen: "Cheap but not easy". I like that 3 year limit for another reason. They (at least in BC) at least have to have 6 years as an elected official before they qualify for a FULL pension when they achieve the minimum retirement age. Not only that, they contribute minimally toward that pension as Greedy Gordo set it up so that the taxpayer contributes the major portion.
The second problem is that at one time we had a media that at least gave the impression of giving us balanced reporting but that has long gone by the wayside.
I don't purchase or read newspapers any more and haven't done for years. I don't even watch anything Canadian TV puts out purporting it to be news either.
If I want to really know what's going on, I watch PBS for a broader look at the world and look to the internet (CBC but pick and choose what is important) and numerous blogs, including yours. There are so many voters out there who have no idea who their rep is, what party they belong to, nor what any of the parties say they stand for. During the recent BC provincial election, one of my nieces didn't even know who the leader of the NDP was, and I'm sure that's because wherever she does get her news from basically failed to give him any print or air time.
As a friend of mine from Arizona says: "Unfortunately, we've seen the best of times already".
"The same kind of politician," Lorne. It appears that it's very hard to break the mold -- or mould.
These days, Lulymay, you can't help but think that the wealthy have captured out legislatures -- and that the less we know about it, the better off they'll be.
I disagree on the suggested term limit. Ask yourself how well Lester Pearson or Pierre Trudeau would have fared, how much good they would have achieved for Canada, had they been term limited out after three years. We would not even remember their names today much less be able to enjoy the results of their considerable efforts to build a better Canada.
Our problem isn't people hanging on too long but our inability to hold them accountable at the ballot box through electoral reform. That surely is the best way to curb the excesses of power that so infuriate us today.
Term limits are one kind of accountability, Mound. I suppose we think of them as a last option in terms of dealing with politicians who don't do as promised. But I agree that electoral reform is the best way to make democracy viable.
While living in a small island in the Grenadines many years ago I happened ask a question of a friend of mine who wrote a satirical column in "The Vincention". I asked him why the populace continued to vote for the same Prime Minister over and over and not to try another party and leader. His reply was simple. The present leaders pockets were already full.
That observation suggests that we know what kind of leaders we elect, zoombats -- and we keep hoping we'll do better.
.. as always, merci beaucoup Owen..
as I warmed to my morning thoughts
I knew i was tracking for a long 'comment'
& i always email such verbosity
Just in case.. to myself.. for later contemplation
(or regret)
Mound is right (or left, or dead center)
but my 3 years 'jury duty'
is just an off the top of my head WAG (wild ass guess)
But.. I can't but wonder if great policy
nationhood, stateswoman/statesmanship
vision, coherence, representation
can't carry over..
or should not easily be defended
via new pools of exemplary 'politician jurists'
taking over from those just serving..
Why can't government.. be just that
Why does it have to be an extension
of a humungous entrenched,
vested primitive entity?
Why does it need a 'Whip'
or even a name..
i thought this was canada .. eh
Not 'something Party of Canada' Inc LLP
We human beings are territorial creatures, salamander. We have a desperate need to put our mark upon a place. And then, to protect that mark, we build walls and moats, afraid to yield that place to others.
The irony, of course, is that we can't take it with us -- and someone else will move in and take our place.
Post a Comment