René Leblanc
My politics? Not a short answer, but what else is new.
Freedom, justice, and equality, just as most Canadians aspire towards, I would think.
Live and let live! Absolutely.
Well, Almost.
Political life today has become complicated with contradicted radical opinions, values, and beliefs based on fact or fiction, truth or lies, real or speculative.
Canadians live in a free society, or we like to think we do. Sure, when we compare ourselves to the majority of countries in the world our quality of life is in the top percentile I would think. But as a country we are somewhat fractured, Quebec wants distinction or separation, Alberta wants recognition or secession, while the other two prairie provinces want to be left alone as do the Maritimes ( as long as the rest of Canada bails them out if need be) Ontario seeks to be the voice of the nation and British Columbians well, they want it all. What about our indigenous brothers and sisters in the north, the territories? Why are they territories and not provinces like the other ten? After all they were there before Canada was born. The small number of inhabitants over a large land mass has a lot to do with this no doubt.
A mosaic of needs, goals, differences, and cultures within a geophysical boundary. Respectful of each other’s differences. United by a symbol .
Well, maybe more than just our flag.
In general, we are a polite society. ( I still apologize when one one walks into me but then wonder to myself why I asked to be excused?) We care for each other, most of the time. We recognize that Mother Nature and our planet need more protection from polluters and environmental scavengers.
Foreigners see Canadians as ‘nice’ people.
Then, why is there so much inequality, injustice, and polarization?
Inequality in gender discrimination, have’s vs the have-nots wealth differences, income spread, social and even our national Medicare system, now a two or three tier system.
Injustice for victims of violence, tolerated homelessness, child and women abuse, child hunger.
Polarized politics. What happened to the moderate approach? Where did the middle class go? Black and white, not much grey anymore. You’re either for or you’re against. Compromise is often perceived as a lose-lose result.
Here’s what I think.
Society needs rules. Individuals may not like these, but we have to abide by a given set of laws otherwise chaos inevitably results. If you live alone, on an island you own, you can choose to do what you want , almost.
Freedom and liberty. Yes. Absolutely, No.
Again there have to be limits.
As a homeowner I want to do whatever I like in my home? Sure. But not if what I choose to do affects my neighbour. I like my music loud, but my neighbour is sleeping , not anymore.
There is a price to pay for freedom. We must defend it, respect its fragility, and share it unselfishly.
And we should/must vote.
Most important values to live by?
The world population is expected to reach almost 10 billion by 2050, a growth of two billion people from today.
This is by far the greatest issue our planet has to cope with and climate change is a close second.
Love you my family.
Be kind to each other.
Learn as much as you are able.
Share your abilities.
Should voting be compulsory, as in Australia? Penalize those who don’t vote? Or should we be free to exercise our freedom?
When you think that most of our leaders, premiers, mayors are selected by minority numbers of our populations, the winners hold power over the entire population even if a small percentage elected them.
Here’s an example.
A city of 100,000 voters.
Mayoralty election. 4 candidates.
40% voter turnout ( average in many elections)
Candidate A = 18,000 votes
Candidate B = 12,000. votes
Candidate C = 6,000 votes
Candidate D = 4,000 votes
Total votes =40,000 ,,40%
Winner with 45% of votes BUT only 18% of total voters.
I think it was the French philosopher Jean Jacques Rousseau who said that if a political candidate would win an election with close to 10% of the total voters, expect a dictator-in-waiting.
You can understand why in the recent US elections the republican president candidate’s strategy was to discourage people from voting. The base was solid, but they underestimated the opposition mobilizing so many young people turning out to vote.
In the past two- or three-decades people have been voting ‘against’ rather than ‘for’. Why is that?
A number of reasons I think.
With the availability of internet, social media, and data it’s easier to get the ‘skinny’ on someone than promise stuff that you will most probably never deliver. Result , we end up with the lesser of evil rather than the better candidate.
The marketing or public selling of a candidate has become an art just as the cheapest hamburger can attract almost a trillion buyers. I read a novel about an advertising genius who bet that he could make the least qualified actor win a presidential election. I bet it’s not fiction in a number of countries.
So you can understand why elections are costing more and more money which most goes towards advertising and buying the vote. The recent US elections cost well over $14,000,000,000.
Numbers and demographics. That’s what wins an election.
Giant computers will describe consumer behaviour for banks, insurance companies, and this data is available for a price. Age, income, gender, race, religion, and a lot more. Who votes, who doesn’t? Where are these voters? What are the local or regional issues?
Analysts then point their marketing and candidates towards the numbers needed to win the election. Believe me, it works.
Sound cynical enough? Probably lost some of the idealism I had during my time as city councillor or managing election campaigns.
I continue to believe however in democracy as the best type of government either in republic or parliament form.
The American ‘checks and balances’ that the founding fathers incorporated into their constitution makes so much sense, but then party politics took control.
If anything harms the democratic process long term it will be the political parties that control the elected people’s representatives.
The party selects, supports, and seduces the member and thus controls. Just like any other gang
Where does loyalty to the voting public begin?
First, to the party.
Second, to him/herself.
Third, to local financial or organization supporters.
Finally, maybe,,to the voter.
Yeah, I guess I have become more than a bit cynical.
But we can fix this.
Financial donations have to be eliminated.
Elections to be paid by taxpayers.
Elected representatives have to become sovereign and vote their conscience , or at least their voters’ needs and not by party affiliation.
Prime ministers should be elected and not chosen because he or she represents the biggest gang to win an election.
Electoral promises must be delivered or accounted for.
Vary term periods for half of House of Parliament, with priority on delivering policies rather than focusing on re-elections, the day after an election as I witnessed in Montreal.
Senators should be elected.
Compulsory voting in federal, provincial, and municipal elections.
You want democracy? Pay for it.
And cherish it , cause it’s easily lost , like trust following a betrayal