With nine days to go and advance polling taking place this weekend, it's a perfect time to look back on a strangely muted, bloated, and distracted election season. Will there be a revival of youth voting? Will the Conservative Party of Canada, despite dozens of instances of bad-faith governance, retake the majority? Will apathy win? Is there any hope for Canada to break out of mediocrity and return to something of prominence and respectability in the global arena? Find out in this loosely researched, kind of lazy blog post!
1. It's Easy to Hijack and Distort Public Debate (Whoa)
If anything, the Niqab Discussion went so far out of bounds that it summoned such specters as Terrorists, Terrorism, Al-Qaeda, ISIL/ISIS/DAESH, and the shooting death of one corporal and vehicular death of a warrant officer in 2014... it brought out the absolute worst in mainstream, main street Canadian thought about international policy and immigration and hasn't stopped. If the operators of political discourse wanted to steer attention away from Conservative misdeeds, they succeeded admirably. Even people I spoke to (in various bars) who 'don't give a shit' and 'couldn't' bring this up as a reason for voting conservative or abstaining completely.
What's the big deal? Somebody brought up the idea of an immigrant Muslim wearing a niqab (a garment covering the face) to the swearing-in ceremony as an example of where rigorous and maple-pure Canadian Values are being challenged by swarthy, terroristic Bad Otherness - because her face would not be visible, this so-called woman could be two children pretending to be an adult, or a man with a bomb or gun under the shapeless garment! Or not even a human at all, but a physical manifestation of the Prophet's desire to see the West burn for its unbridled freedoms! Donning the face-obscuring niqab during the ceremonial swearing-in of a new citizen was found to be 'anti-Canadian' and set dangerous precedents. This emphasis on transparency is rather ironic, seeing as it was made by a ruling government noteworthy for its own lack thereof.
I call bullshit, but evidently 'lots' of Canadians want an excuse to be afraid of other people - especially Muslims, due to Recent History. Also, it grants the current government good reasons to be tardy about refugees from Muslim Syria (because the people trying to escape conflict are all profiteers and potential terrorists), which they and other Western actors have destabilized with well-meaning arms shipments and other guaranteed-to-fail machinations. It's not a coincidence that the issue was brought up in September, when everyone recalls and tells their story about 2001 in a mimicry of the unending replays of the WTC attack the public was subjected to in the wake of 'the attack'. Just thinking about this brings up a lot of murky reasoning and dismal years and bad decisions, and the unending madness surrounding modern terrorism (in which the solutions of withdrawal, deescalation, and non-interventionism have not been attempted, evidently in the name of stability and security).
2. 'The Media' is Useless, Biased, and Manipulative (Sigh)
Largely? Not really. But specific examples will always exist of vigilante editorials written by ideologues in foxholes, resistant to the last of attempts at moderation and rational examination. What's really bizarre about the election cycle is how social media have made it seem so subdued, while blowing 'issues politics' further out of proportion than ever before... it may just be the perspective of this outsider, or a perceptual contrast to the bombast of the United States pre-elections, but it often doesn't even seem like an election season is ongoing. There's just more political facebook posts than usual. People are rather subdued on the streets of Canada City, USA – the 'average person' does not want to talk politics, but will deign to post about it online.
Since I don't watch TV (because the 24 hour news cycle is engineered to cause paranoia and psychosis) and because I haven't read a newspaper in two months, I have no idea if traditional media are even attempting to provide a nuanced, unbiased, whole picture of the election. I'm sure – despite the collapse and retreat of journalism in its failed attempt to compromise with the internet, the eTarded Generation, Buzzfeed, Advertorialism, and The Simple Narrative – that some good work came out of this era. I missed it completely, however. Sorry, all: I'm not a paid journalism critic/expert and won't pretend to be one. I am assuming the majority of coverage was truthful but of limited scope, and mediocre despite the best efforts of those involved. Why yes, I am hedging my bets and trying to be respectful and also realistic, thanks for noticing.
From the outside it seems like the usual 'per-story/per-issue' reportage that paints a picture of meaningless infighting among the politicians about issues they will not be bothered to solve once in power. What's worse are meaningless debates engineered to give the public 'an idea' of the leader they are buying with their vote, by creating a 'reasonable spectacle' which mimics debate, where talking points are endlessly circled and nothing meaningfully new comes to the surface, while the performances of the debaters and their bridled personal stabs are over-analyzed by an etherized army of safely familiar and doctrinaire commentators. These are safe events with unnecessary rules that serve only the interest of political operators and the market which sells information to the public. The Green Party, as usual, got snubbed and ignored, because the fragile illusion of democracy isn't endangered enough by the day-to-day.
The media are, as usual, neither a piece of shit nor not a piece of shit, on a per-case basis that is best left to paid analysts. And if you'd like a quick overview by a much more well-spoken and, dare I say, Canadian observer than I, check out Rick Mercer's Rant on the subject. If it leaves you uncertain, welcome to 2015 Canada.
3. It's Always Hard to Say Who Will Win (Duh)
The honest truth is that a large number of Canadians are going to vote for the Conservative Party like they always do. Bad fiscal policy, poor governance, hypocrisy, and reductive arguments don't count as negatives for a 'large swath' of Canada's population. The idea of conservatism (even if its spirit is absent) will always be attractive to disparate groups desiring stability. What matters is that nobody gets more than they deserve, that the lowlifes and 'losers' are kept down, and that Canada doesn't get used by lying foreigners who want a slice of the good life. Taking into account that all three major parties will leave the status quo intact, what then becomes the reason for selecting the CPC? Simple prejudice might be a substantive reason, but I'd be more willing to blame the kind of partisanship that has plunged North America into their own dark ages. The 'outsiders' have refused to work together which is a bad sign, and everyone who pays attention knows how combative the current 'insider' is.
However, another highly likely scenario is a Liberal or NDP minority. In fact, the only real probability is that the ensuing government will be a minority. None of the parties have extremely forceful platforms, all are pledging to make things better without much regard for specifics, the populace is exhausted of the election season and their flagging will means even more emotional and/or apathetic voting, and one has to wonder which party stands to benefit most. It's two 'progressive' parties versus one 'regressive' party, and I can't wait to see which wins, and what kind of boneheaded craziness will ensue. Or maybe things will turn around for Canada, and I will turn my jaundiced gaze to another country, perhaps a bigger, louder, zanier country not far away...
4. Canada as a Nation is in Trouble (OK...)
The takeaway is that despite the appearance of economic and social well-being, there are many unaddressed and ongoing problems. Canada has ceased to be the peacekeeping nation it once was, its statesmen seem ludicrously impotent, its domestic government seems incompetent and contemptuous of its populace, its judgements on international human rights issues are hypocritical, and its populace seems 'too well-off to care' about anything beyond personal prejudices and gain. Its politics are increasingly a stark reflection of the fast food politics that rule the United States. Its economy is premised on extraction and there is plenty of well-publicized evidence of collusion between private companies and the government (see: The Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers, etc) which serve to enrich the much-lauded and strangely untouchable elite of the country. But who cares? If it's going to be fast-food politics and partisanship, then hating other people based on their shallow political affiliations will be more important than reaching for a brighter tomorrow.
Truly, the number one measurement of how much trouble Canada is in will be the voter turnout numbers. If the numbers decrease from the abysmal turnouts of the past, it will serve as a clear sign of danger, of a disenfranchised populace too apathetic to utilize their democratic voice. If the numbers are significantly higher, the era of indifference may be coming to an end, and the increased public engagement in governance could be a good thing, and could keep in check the backsliding and prominence of private interests, and see the country through its growing pains. Voter turnout could well be the most important statistic of this election, perhaps more important than which party wins, or what their flaccid policies entail.
No comments:
Post a Comment