Doug Ford claims he's a populist. But, Linda McQuaig writes, he spouting hogwash:
While the word “populist” is bandied about to describe plain-talkin’, right-wing politicians, that description tarnishes the reputation of real 19th-century populists in the U.S. (and Canada) who actually championed the interests of ordinary folk over the wealthy elite. Pressure from populist ranks helped put in place the U.S. income tax in 1913, as a way to tax the rich.
Doug Ford is no more a populist than my grandmother was a stage-coach. Like Donald Trump, Ford got his start by inheriting wealth, and his policies favour the rich, not the poor.
In fact, Ford is walking in the footsteps of his predecessor, Mike Harris -- who waged class warfare:
The new premier has already signalled he’s gearing up to revive the nasty class war against the poor waged by former Conservative premier Mike Harris.
What makes this revival particularly insidious is that Ford didn’t campaign on it; he refused to reveal where he’d wield the knife to produce $6 billion in spending cuts, and specifically denied he would end the Basic Income Pilot Project.
But one of his first acts was to cut off that pilot project, ignoring promises of extra income that had been made to 4,000 poor people, many of whom went back to school excited by the dream of improving their difficult lives.
Another clear signal of the Ford government’s class-war intentions was its decision last month to cut in half the scheduled increase in benefits for social assistance recipients, including those with disabilities.
The people who are in Ford's sites are an army of a million poor people. But they are voiceless and powerless:
Their powerlessness is illustrated by the fact that, after Mike Harris slashed their benefits by a whopping 21.6 per cent in 1995, they never managed to recover. Twenty-three years later, their benefits are actually slightly lower today, having been whittled away further through inflation.
Just before the June election, the Liberals pledged to increase those welfare benefits by 3 per cent, which would have raised them roughly to the level where Harris had left them.
But Ford quickly jumped in, quashing any budding hopes among the deprived that there might be a tiny bit of progress — for the first time in 23 years! Instead, the Ford government cut the planned increase from 3 to 1.5 per cent, thereby snatching $150 million from the poorest citizens in the province — and then having the impudence to call its action “compassionate.”
This is likely just a foretaste of the assault on the poor that’s coming. The Ford administration is conducting a 100-day review of social assistance, which will probably lead, among other things, to a clampdown on welfare fraud, even though the province could collect far more revenue by clamping down on the tax fraud routinely committed by lawyers and businesspeople deducting sports tickets as “business entertainment.”
Ford's brother Rob used to show up drunk at Leafs games, make an ass of himself, and claim he was never there. It's clear Doug has as much acquaintance with the truth as his dead brother.
Things are going to get rough -- under the banner of populism.
Image: CBC
6 comments:
When I read McQuaig's column this morning, Owen, all I could think of was how much the electorate debased itself in choosing Ford. We now all have to live with the consequences of that poor choice, one that has shaken my faith in the intelligence and critical-thinking skills of our fellow Ontarians.
I wholeheartedly concur, Lorne. As the old saw has it, "Cheat me once, you're stupid. Cheat me twice. . ."
McQuaig is right to point out that there is positive populism and negative populism just as nationalism can be positive or negative.
Positive nationalism can best be understood in the context of our centennial year, 1967. We took deserved pride in our nation - our past, our present, our future - without seeking to diminish any other nation or people, much less subordinate others to our will. Nationalism, in the context of mid-20th century Germany or Trump's America is rooted in primacy at the expense of others.
By rendering these terms as one-dimensional we may be obscuring the positive alternative to both dynamics.
My wife and I were in Montreal in 1967, Mound. For us, that summer was all about the World's Fair -- Man and His World. We were looking outwards and welcoming universal diversity. It was a summer when anything seemed possible.
We are now hamstrug by the conventional wisdom that diversity is the enemy and little is possible.
if people didn't think Ford wasn't going to go the "class warfare" route they weren't thinking. How else did they think Ford was going to "balance" the books. Remember he has Gordon Campbell as his 'advisor' and living in B.C. I can tell you from experience that the attacks on the "poor" will be devastating. you will see more poverty, more kids dropping out of school, you will need school food programs which volunteers will raise money for and run, teachers will start feeding the kids in their classes, seniors will become homeless, as more people become homeless you will have more drug addicts and prostitution will increase. All of this happened in B.C. while el gordo and his ilk ran this province. There is nothing to depraved that Ford and Campbell will not sink to.
Now for those who think that's O.K. because they aren't on social assistance. I've got a surprise for you. One bad accident, an illness which causes you to have to cease working, divorce, etc. you too could be on welfare or disability.
Part of the problem is those who are "poor" frequently don't vote. Then their are those who think that their leaders won't stomp all over them to make their financial supporters happy.
AS I used to write in the Campbell years in B.C. You voted for him, and now you can live with it or in some cases die because of it.
Populism is misused word and it leads people to think the politicians is in their court. What it really means these days is populism within the wealthy community, not the rest of the population.
Just wait until the assault on the education and health system starts. You haven't seen anything yet.
Nicely put, e.a.f. These days, populism is for the wealthy.
Post a Comment