- Ms Kaye is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Mary Carlisle is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Prem Gill is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Nancy Flight is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Justin Everett is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- John Westover is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Nora Etches is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Edward Henderson is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Bharadwaj Chandramouli is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Dean Chatterson is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Marius Scurtescu is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Robert Parkes is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- James Murton is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Susan Doyle is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Vincent Strgar is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Helen Spiegelman is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Subir Guin is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Kimball Finigan is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- Joanne Manley is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
- David Leach is a Tyee Builder. You can be, too.
Where Have All the Voters Gone?
Millions of Canadians stay home on election day. Samara think tank asked them why.
Cartoon by Ingrid Rice.
In the last federal election, considered by many commentators to be one of the most significant electoral upsets in recent Canadian history, more people chose not to vote than cast their ballot for any one political party. If Democratic Malaise had run a slate of candidates, it would now have a majority government.
The results are progressively lackluster as you work your way down to the local level of government. In the last B.C. election, only half of registered voters took the time to exercise that right. Last month, a dismal 35 per cent of Vancouver voters decided it was worth the trouble.
Who are these non-voters? Lazy, uninformed, and apathetic, the caricature of this silent plurality is of a class of people who do not participate in the rites of citizenship because they have no interest -- perhaps no respect -- for what it means to be a citizen.
But according to a new study by the Toronto-based think-tank, Samara, people are not born disengaged from the political process -- they are taught to tune out by a political system and government bureaucracy that has in turn tuned them out.
First of its kind
"Disengagement is a lot more complicated than people just not caring," says Alison Loat, co-founder and executive director of Samara. "In fact, it's the opposite: it suggests that people do care, but that the system hasn't been responsive to them."
The footwork for this study was conducted in August and October of this year when Samara researchers identified seven demographic groups who disproportionately view themselves as outsiders to the political system. These are lower-income Canadians, Francophone and English-speaking women living in Quebec, urban Aboriginal people, new Canadians, the less-educated, and those living in rural areas. By putting together a series of focus groups in cities and towns across the country, the think-tank was able to suss out the opinions, values, and attitudes of these characteristically disengaged groups on issues of politics and democracy.
In this respect, says Loat, the study is the first of its kind.
"Most research in the area of democratic participation focuses on elections and on the behavior of voters," she says. "As a result, we have a lot of discussion during the 40 days before and after an election about what did and didn't happen at the ballot box. But we spend no time talking about the 1,200 days in-between elections -- when people experience politics and democracy every single day."
Learned powerlessness
People do not form their views of the political process and establish their trust in the political system at large in the immediate run-up to an election, she says. According to the study, people are driven towards their disillusionment while waiting in line at a provincial employment office or in the middle of a frustrating telephone conversation with a disinterested city employee or while watching the contrived bickering of MPs, MLAs or city councilors on the nightly news.
Frequently failing to distinguish between different levels of government on the one hand and politicians and public servants on the other, these are perceived failures of a monolithic and nebulous "system." According to Loat these minor grievances can build up week after week until election day when an exhausted and demoralized voter simply decides to stay home.
Silver lining
If political disengagement isn't a character flaw, but the result of personal experience, the erosion of political participation in Canadian society is, at least in theory, reversible. This is the "silver lining" identified in the study. By making both political parties and public services more accountable, the Samara report argues, the political system will reap the dividends of higher participation rates.
On the one hand, says Loat, because the participants in the study put so much emphasis on their commonplace interactions with public service, a much higher priority should be placed on the provision of transparent and reliable public service. Correctly or not, she says, because public services and electoral politics are so frequently conflated by potential voters, improving results from the former will increase interest and participation in the latter.
Second, she says, political parties should spend less energy drawing out their respective political bases and opt for more inclusive campaigning strategies.
Not so simple
If only because it identifies a solution to what many political scientists see as the inevitable decline of voter participation across Canada and the rest of the democratic world, Samara's report offers a compelling diagnosis of the problem.
Compelling, say some, but not particularly convincing.
"I wouldn't trust what people say in a focus group," says Fred Cutler, a professor of political science at UBC. "When a human is asked why they did or didn't do something, they tend to come up with a reason."
In other words, while many of the participants in the Samara study consistently blamed their political inactivity on the inefficiency of government bureaucracy or the small-mindedness of politicians, the decision whether or not to participate may be the result of socialized behavior and disposition -- factors much more difficult to articulate or rationalize.
Take a committed voter. He or she is presumably aware that voting is almost guaranteed to have no effect on an electoral outcome, just as signing a petition is unlikely to sway a politician, and just as following closely the day-to-day happening on Parliament Hill is unlikely to effect what takes place there. Instead, Cutler argues, a politically active citizen is (and is likely to always remain) engaged because he or she derives some, often not totally rational, satisfaction from participation.
Likewise, though habitual non-voters may search for some concrete reason why they do not participate in political affairs -- for example, by pointing to all-too-common interaction with a government service that left them frustrated -- that may be because it's much more difficult for a person to explain why he or she simply doesn't care about something.
Generation Meh
Pointing to the gradual decline in political engagement across the democratic world since the mid-1980s, Cutler doesn't buy Samara's argument that this could be reversed with more efficient pubic service or more inclusive political parties.
Instead, he sees a much more profound shift in cultural attitudes from one generation to the next. Perhaps we are now more likely to take our democratic institutions for granted. Perhaps our schools and popular culture no longer espouse the virtues of electoral participation and political literacy as vociferously as they once did. Perhaps we as a society have become more resistant to behavioral socialization and, to put a positive spin on things, we are more likely to assess the value of things for ourselves.
"I wouldn't necessarily call that dire -- I'd call it inevitable," says Cutler. "We should be amazed that as many people still take the time to vote as they do."
Healthy indifference
When we bemoan the decline of Canadian voter turnout, says Cutler, we are referring to a drop from the mid-century average of roughly 75 per cent to the current slump of around 60 per cent.
"We're only talking about 1 in 6 voters who might have voted previously out of a sense of obligation and duty, not voting now," he says. And that is not necessarily a bad thing. While people now seem less inclined to actually vote, there is less evidence to suggest that Canadian society as a whole is less politically informed. Perhaps, says Cutler, we now tend to vote -- or not vote -- for better reasons.
"Half a century ago, a person would often vote in a way that was almost assumed by their ethnic background, their class position, their religion," he says. "Nowadays, particularly among the younger generation, people feel like if they don't understand or if they don't want to invest the time to distinguish between their options on the ballot, then not voting is actually the right thing to do."
Taking the democracy's temperature
If turnout figures are not the most reliable metric by which to measure the health of our democracy, Samara is hoping to develop a working alternative within two years. With a team of 24 academics, the think tank plans to produce a democratic health index, a kind of GDP figure for civil society, that will assess the state of Canadian democracy between election cycles.
"We want it to assess not only how parliament and parties work, but also media and public discourse, citizens and their behavior and perceptions," says Alison Loat.
Loat says she hopes the first index will be ready in 2013. Maybe just in time for the next B.C. election. ![[Tyee]](http://thetyee.cachefly.net/ui/img/ico_fishie.png){kind=small}
- BC snuffs out AirCare test program
- AFN national chief Shawn Atleo to launch re-election bid
- Citizens group releases video to fight undead Bill C-30
- Conservative MP says he might vote against budget, then 'clarifies' his position
- Genetically modified plants won't take root with councillors in Richmond, BC
- Hundreds at Vancouver rally to support Quebec students
- Could Fort Mac become an eco-tourist hotspot?
- Rick Hansen's Man in Motion anniversary tour concludes in Vancouver
- The Gem of Canadian Science that Harper Killed
- Who Mowed Down the Premier?
- Canada's Economy, Deconstructed (by a 12 year-old)
- Death in Remand: a Tyee Inquiry
- Now Is the Time to Talk up Big Ideas
- Bill C-38: the Environmental Destruction Act
- 'A Gut Feeling'
- Sexism Tinges Criticism of Teachers' Job Action
- Bias in BC's Pesticide Decision? Follow the Bouncing Verbs
- Why Blackberry's Embrace of HTML5 Is Good Karma
- The Gem of Canadian Science that Harper Killed
- Sexism Tinges Criticism of Teachers' Job Action
- Now Is the Time to Talk up Big Ideas
- The Ethics of Addiction Studies
- Bill C-38: the Environmental Destruction Act
- Alberta Fills Pipes with Corrosive Denial
- Bias in BC's Pesticide Decision? Follow the Bouncing Verbs
- Does BC Stand for Ban Clotheslines?
- BC biotech company seeks approval for GM apple
- What's Behind BC's Doors?
- Bias in BC's Pesticide Decision? Follow the Bouncing Verbs
- Death in Remand: A Jail Crammed with Risk
- The Ethics of Addiction Studies
- What's Behind BC's Doors?
- The Gem of Canadian Science that Harper Killed
- Sexism Tinges Criticism of Teachers' Job Action
- Should You Run from that Medical Test?
- 'The Dictator'
- Death in Remand: Stacked Deck
- 'Moonrise Kingdom'
- Double lung recipient dances on Ellen show
- ISS astronauts grab DragonX space capsule by the tail with Canada Arm
- Metro Vancouver gas prices peak at record levels
- Ottawa posts $9-billion deficit in March despite pledge to avoid spending spree
- BC phases out AirCare to focus on fighting bigger vehicle emissions
- Tsunami senors to be dropped into deep sea off of Vancouver Island
- Student groups file court challenge against Quebec protest law
- ...while on the streets, pirates and ninjas put aside mutual animosity to join student protests
58
Login or register to post comments
siamdave
24 weeks ago
if it smells like spin, and sounds like spin ...
Not a compelling article. I *know* I am not alone in my reasons for disengaging from the voting system - that it does not matter who I 'vote' for, all parties are controlled by Bay St in a tweedledee-tweedledum game - and not a hint of this idea in the article. But we do have a lengthy 'rebuttal' from some obvious NWO sycophant/apologist who suggests people not voting is fine - it means they think the country is ok, so why vote!?! I do not know anyone like this, although I suppose there are a few out there who never think about such things and could be sort of sneakily shoved into this 'category' by apologists like Mr Cutler - but I know a LOT who think the system is so rigged there's no point the way things are now. Interesting, to say the least, that this aspect is never mentioned. Good propaganda, though - take an obvious problem, and spin it somewhere not dangerous. I think there are a lot of Tyee readers who are somewhat more aware than this piece takes them for. A more accurate portrayal of what is going on, and what we might do about it, here - What Happened http://www.rudemacedon.ca/what-happened.html
ofoab
24 weeks ago
respect
Respect is earned , like a reputation!Voters are easy, politicians are counting on that fact .The star making machinery behind the popular politician gets us the voter , style no substance!So next time you are having a cold one with 10 friends,Only 4 voted! Blame the rest for this mess!
hg
24 weeks ago
Voter turnout
Active participation should be a mandatory subject taught in all schools as part of the social sciences. It must be showing how important is and what influence active participation has on the political process. Active participation is not just a protest or a march or a sit-in. It is actually the duty of a citizen in a democratic society to participate. People are very quick to insist on their rights, but neglect their duties as citizens. It is a shame that our Charter of Rights and Freedoms does not also include the obligations of citizenship.
Grumpy
24 weeks ago
Why people don't vote?
Simple, they realize Canada is an autocratic country where its "showcase" elections don't change a thing.
Canada is so corrupt, with all major political parties on the take, voting doesn't matter, as it won't change a thing.
In Canada, the politicians role has morphed from serving the people, to serving cronies and corporate/union friends. Why vote, because all you are going to get is tweedle Dee or tweedle dumb.
The taxpayer has no power and unless a major effort is made, such as the HST recall. The only reason Campbell stepped down was that his corporate friends arranged a golden parachute with the Prime Minister, for the disgraced premier, with a plum job in England, so he will be out of sight and out of mind in BC.
The municipality Grumpy lives in is totally corrupt, where major developers openly bribe politicians and senior bureaucrats with lavish gifts, tickets to major events, underwriting politically prestigious events, etc. The taxpayer gets screwed if he complains about ill built buildings or building code violations. The fine art of graft lives on in my muni!
The plain brown manila envelope stuffed with cash reigns supreme. Why vote, it don't matter at all.
On all three levels on government in Canada, voting has become irreverent as all politicians and political parties are corrupt and when elected, they have 3 to 5 years to grow fat with the never ending pork barrel. Why vote, it will not change a thing.
ofoab
24 weeks ago
Grease my palm.
Please sir, I would like some pork!A proposition for voters, if you vote in elections and have a history of voting the voter gets a pension!A recognition of civic duty with a nice pension, just like politician!The chance to put a little gold in my nest.If you can't beat them , join them at the trough !
Grumpy
24 weeks ago
I would like to see............
.........in an election that if 49% of the electorate do not vote, that the election is declared null and void and a by-election is held in two weeks
Those running in the first election are barred from running in the by-election and a portion of what they spent on the election, (say 10%) is paid into holding by-election.
By not voting, would give the electorate a powerful and punishing tool!
I would also like to see a $20,000.00 cap on candidates running in municipal elections.
Fiat lux
24 weeks ago
Some people should have the
Some people should have the experience of living in real dictatorships for a few years to teach them to run to vote the next time they have a chance.
Ed Deak.
boondoggle
24 weeks ago
Dysfunction
Clearly people feel their democracy is so dysfunctional elections are nothing more than a charade unworthy of their attention. When we elect a fascist Neocon government whose leader has a profound hatred of democracy the corporate elite win and the rest of us lose so "mission accomplished!" We are one of the last western democracies to retain the ridiculous "first past the post" electoral system and our corporate overlords will ensure it remains. A balanced, independent media, which is an essential, key component of a functioning democracy would be necessary to inform people of this systemic failure and promote change. Unfortunately we handed the key to democracy to our corporate overlords years ago.
raging senior
24 weeks ago
WHY PEOPLE DO NOT VOTE!!
To me it is quite simple, it is called the MAIN STREAM MEDIA, which is a monopoly of Right Wing Capitalists that print and broad cast only what they want to make a Right Wing Government look good no matter what they do. Take for instance the CTV having cameras at Glen Clark's home before the raid and for what, alleged bribe taking in the form of a deck on his home and one on his cabin in the Okanagan, Glen Clark was found not guilty. Compare that to John Les when he was under investigation for taking land out of the ALR under questionable terms, a couple of mention in the paper and that was that, by the way he was not found not guilty, there was not enough evidence to get a conviction. These are only 2 examples, there are many more. Now to meat of the subject, in BC the Liberals and before them the Social Credit were treated with kid gloves but the NDP were demonized. People still refer to the decade of ruin in the 1990's, what happened then is virtually nothing compare to the LIES, GRAFT & CORRUPTION OF the 2001 to the present. So what do people think, the NDP are bad (I read or heard) but the Liberals are good money managers and will lead us into the land of milk and honey - nothing could be further from the truth, so why get out and vote we will be taken care of by the Right Wing Carpetbaggers.
Skywalker
24 weeks ago
Missing from the good cartoon above...
...is the hint that the special interests also control the media which puts people to sleep.
snert
24 weeks ago
Ed Deak
Sorry, Ed but that's just so much hot air. It does not matter, one iota, just how many people get out to vote. The number of voters is no guarantee that the election result would turn out any different.
There seems to be a belief amongst those who worship at the altar of the 'Church Of The Anti-Harper' (haven't quite figured out if the Anti-Harper is a person or an object) that if more people got out to vote that things would be different. Well, be careful what you wish for because the apathetic voters you scorn may no all vote for your cause.
Ren2
24 weeks ago
Everyone I've talked to
Everyone I've talked to (under 45) would like to vote but either:
a) is out-voted by the older generations based on sheer demographics & _huge_ POV differences.
b) noone to represent us (and they're kept out on purpose, like David Orchard).
Whether it's Machiavellian or not, it is orchestrated.
Fiat lux
24 weeks ago
Snert... it does matter how
Snert... it does matter how many people vote, because then the winner can at least claim to represent some form of democracy.
Unlike the sick dictator we have now , who claims that "Canada is now a conservative country" with 39% of the votes, representing a small minority of the overall, yet claiming "majority" so they can dismantle and sell off everything .
Reminds me of the "people's democracies" where people were forced to vote, but only for the candidates appointed by the dictators.
Ed Deak.
Granville
24 weeks ago
Abstainers are the wankers of the world!
People who abstain from election three times should be struck off the voters lists forever, sine die. And why not? The don't vote because they are unhappy. So sad, isn't it?
"No one represents me". "It is rigged". "The demographics offend me". "There is SO much wrong with society that voting makes no difference"
The above are actual reasons given by people who didn't bother to vote. The real reason is that THERE IS NO MONEY IT IT FOR THEM. There ought to be. Property owners who vote should be given a $100 tax rebate, paid for by those who don't vote. The municipality would make money, because the abstainers are in the 74% majority.
Millions of people have died in the past for democracy. WWI, WWII etc. etc. Billions of people are still not free to vote even today, in other countries. Canadian abstainers are the scum of the Earth and they should be treated like the dirt they are.
We are one of the wealthiest nations on the planet but we have serious decisions to make about spending an the future direction we need to go.
Abstainers vote, de facto, for whoever wins most votes. That is a fact. Abstainers deny this, but that is because they live in a dream world where their wishes are granted by a fairy godmother.
In reality, they are allowing the Wicked Witch of the West (Harper) to run amok in the world, destroying our nation's reputation for honesty and fairness.
Personally, I would like to see municipalities print a list of chronic abstainers so they could be put in the stocks and used as target practice for three days each.
To be free is nothing. To become free is everything. Amen to that.
alive
24 weeks ago
Bloody sheep!
Ed is perfectly correct!
Everybody enjoys bitching about governemnt (any government), but feel it is of no use to do anything about it.
Take away the right, and you will see them line up in droves when free voting is allowed again.
happy
24 weeks ago
52% voter turnout for HST referendum
I don't hear anybody complaining about that low participation. In fact all I hear is what a geat day for democracy it was.
Granville
24 weeks ago
Raging senior: Thanks for the meaningless rant
You prove my point. Abstainers are wankers.
"WHY PEOPLE DO NOT VOTE!!
To me it is quite simple, it is called the MAIN STREAM MEDIA, which is a monopoly of Right Wing Capitalists that print and broad cast only what they want to make a Right Wing Government look good no matter what they do. Take for instance the CTV having cameras at Glen Clark's home before the raid and for what, alleged bribe taking in the form of a deck on his home and one on his cabin in the Okanagan, Glen Clark was found not guilty. Compare that to John Les when he was under investigation for taking land out of the ALR under questionable terms, a couple of mention in the paper and that was that, by the way he was not found not guilty, there was not enough evidence to get a conviction."
wanderingraven
24 weeks ago
Voting is the result of
Voting is the result of democracy, not the cause of it.
The real democratic deficit is the loss of participation in public affairs that is happening, and the impotence of people in the important decisions that govern our communities.
Indeed the whole idea of community and shared needs has been discredited by a steady stream of think tank propaganda favouring extreme libertarianism, in a form which actually favours commercial organisations and their agendas.
It's important that we take back decision making power for communities, in every important part of our lives.
Perry
24 weeks ago
Would compulsory voting make a difference in the result?
Ed Deak: "Some people should have the experience of living in real dictatorships for a few years to teach them to run to vote the next time they have a chance."
How do you explain the results in the recent first stage of the Egyptian election where turn out was only 62 percent?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-16007705
That is considered a fairly good turn out in most democracies, but in an Egypt that has suffered from dictators for decades you would expect people to be eager to vote and turnout for the first election in a generation would be at the level of a democracy that makes voting legally cumpulsory, like Australia where turnout can be as high as 95 percent.
It seems to me many non-voters in Canada have something in common with many non-voters in Egypt and elsewhere, which is a profound mistrust of politicians and deep despair that true democracy is undermined by corrupt political processes.
As I previously commented on these pages, I vote, but now I always spoil my ballot. I exercise my right and my duty to vote, but none of the options ever appeal to me so I choose none of the above. And that is exactly how I would vote if I was legally forced to.
Troutsky
24 weeks ago
Win with Diebold
I have always voted, but now that the Diebold machines have been installed in BC (if you turned out for the municipal elections you saw them being used here for the first time),
I'm beginning to wonder if there is a point in showing up any more.
Anyone else concerned about this ?
happy
24 weeks ago
boondoggle
The NDP won the 1996 provincial election with a lower percentage of the popular vote than the liberals BECAUSE of the FPTP electoral system.
So was that a systemic failure and handing the keys of our democracy over to our corporte overlords as you assert above?
Did you, or anyone else here demand electoral reformm over that injustice?
No, there wasn't a peep was there. And if the NDP wins the next election it will then be business as usual won't it, and everyone here will be fine with it.
Fiat lux
24 weeks ago
Perry.... You have to
Perry.... You have to experience the dictatorship mentality, installed into people's minds for hundreds, or thousands of years, enforcing the beliefs, in many cases by priesthoods, that a certain sector has been "created by God", or by some ideological prophets taking over from religions, to rule.
Egypt is now also a prime example of this why the Muslim Brotherhood came out on top.
I grew up in a strong royalist, fascist household and was forced to believe that royalty and aristocracy were created by God to rule. Luckily, I ended up at Cambridge at 21 and woke up to what life and democracy are about.
My mother was a very intelligent person, just about at a genius level in certain creative fields. She lived in England for the last 37 years of her life, became a British citizen and voter, but to her last breath she maintained that the PM goes to the Queen every week, not to sign papers, but to receive orders on what laws she wanted the Parliament to pass, because she was brainwashed with the birthrights of ruling classes from day one.
Now look at Harper's actions, including of today.
A judge declared that the farmers are supposed to vote on the fate of the Wheat Board, but "democratic, conservative" Harper just declared that he'll wipe out the Board anyway, to "give Western farmers a choice".
Is this the action of a person who accepts
democracy, or of a madman, determined to rule?
And there are billions around the world who believe in submission to such maniacs, regardless, who or what they are, because a dictatorial, ruling system frees them from making decisions.
Ed Deak
snert
24 weeks ago
alive
Sorry, but Ed is not perfectly correct. It's not about the winner it's about the people. Just because a lot of people vote for someone does that make him more or less of a "sick dictator", I think not. If most people are happy or at least ambivalent then things have worked as they should. Just remember, not everyone will be happy in a democracy.
Further, taxpayers have just as much, if not more right to bitch as any voter. Not only that they can usually go to court for to rectify some problems whereas the poor voter must wait until the next electoral opportunity.
igbymac
24 weeks ago
Sorry, Fiat lux, but you romanticise the issue
Like our resources, our corporatocracy's dictatorial excesses are exported. This way Canadians do not have to bear their stench and filth firsthand. But the excesses of our regime occur all the same: theft, rape, torture, cold-blooded murder. They are all there as a direct result of our government if we dare look,
The horrors are mounting fast and furiously, Let's start with the genocide of 1/3 of the indigenous population of East Timor. Canada's role? It profitted from sales of military supplies to Indonesia, and by turning a blind eye, as a sovereign nation and as a member of the silent UN as the people cried out to the world for help. Today, we have Afghanistan, Libya, Iraq, Palestine ... Out of sight, out of mind; the Canadian delusion.
Canada's political problem is institutional. And that is not going to change by anyone's attendance to a polling booth. The staged show of scripts, sound bites and politician's acting lessons; of a duplicitous and shape-forming media; of dogma instead of ideas; of political attack ads of the 'enemy' instead of offering solutions, these all help ensure the self-perpetuating institution remains intact.
We have a complicit media, not a watchdog media. And a democracy needs a deep and diverse media more than it needs a government. Today our media, government and corporations are ensnared together, and act with one over-arching, selfish interest: their own power and finance.
Democracy is always, and has always been,found at the grass roots. The stronger the roots, the further the democratic plant grows upward. Our culture relies on the individual, of promoting an alienation among the people - relentlessly pitting one against the other, to allow for easy, exploitative pickings.
Of all the available ways of affecting democracy, voting in our culture is, at best, the very least important of them all.
Personally, I refuse to support with my vote a government which uses and supports warfare as an economic policy. Slaughtering other people in far off lands to make a buck is nothing I endorse.
But as long as it's the 'bad guy' being slaughtered (along with his his wife and children), while his nation is often brought to such ruin that securing the simplest of life's needs becomes a challenge most of us dare not look at in earnest, we are not responsible for our acts. Is that it?
What a sickness of mind that allows such rot to remain inside, that a person thinks his or her vote is so important but its impact elsewhere is immaterial. Just what do we think our vote does if we refuse to account for its gravest impact of all?
igbymac
24 weeks ago
addendum to Granville
While you are removing my right to vote, Granville ...oh, hang on, is it my right or yours?
If voting is my right, then STFU, I'll invoke my right as I please.
Alternatively, if it's my duty, then my not-voting is my small, political protest secured by my right to free speech so, again, STFU.
snert
24 weeks ago
Granville
Ummm, who said everybody who doesn't vote is unhappy. It's also interesting that you equate the right to vote with the ability to hold your nose while blindfolded and throw darts at a board to make a selection just because some idiot feels you are a lesser person if you opt not to vote.
Gotta love democracy even if some people have a pretty weird concept of how it should work.
bdawe
24 weeks ago
Turnout Stats are BS
Turnout in Canada is quoted as a percent of registered voters, which since 1992 has not been automatic, which also means that comparisons across that year are increasingly irrelevant. Turnout of registered voters was 61.4% in May. By that standard, the 2004 registered voter turnout for the American presidential election exceeded Canada 2011 for all but one state. The US always quotes voting age population, rather than registered voters, so it only appears to have lower turnout.
OwlRol
24 weeks ago
Council meetings, OCPs and democracy
Every municipality in B. C. is required to have an OCP (Official Community Plan). This would provide a vision and guidelines to direct the community's direction for the next 10 or 20 years, no matter who gets elected during that time, although they can make alterations for well founded reasons.
Ours decided to open the OCP up to all community members for input. Evening meeting times and daytime workshops were well advertised in the local media for months ahead of time.
It was an opportunity to have some input on very specific issues, not just political parties and coalitions.
I realize that people are very busy and stressed nowadays, but only 3%, many from special interest groups, showed up.
Democracy must be more than just going to vote once every few years, hoping that the council will do what you want.
Most people don't pay attention to council meetings (they can be truly boring) unless its about an issue that specifically affects them. A few muni project heads, developers, NGO reps, reporters and keeners, that's it.
And then the whining starts when a project, debated and decided on long ago, is implemented.
Saw a small group come in to a council meeting to complain that their view and property values would be negatively affected by a project, to which the mayor asked "Where were you 5 years ago when research was done and reported, the project was discussed and then the company was given permission to move forward? Too late now."
Perhaps rotating neighbourhood reps could go to council meetings and report back, although these days friends are often dispersed and many folks are so alienated that they don't even know their neighbours.
Democracy tends not to work so well in those situations. Nothing like a little crisis to bring people together.
Fiat lux
24 weeks ago
Snert... I didn't say that
Snert... I didn't say that somebody is a sick dictator because people voted for him, but because he's a visible mental case who's been giving me the creeps ever since I first saw his photo as one of Manning's right hand men.
Unfortunately I saw that face and eyes too many times under Totenkopf and Red Star caps
all my life and know what to expect.
As we'll all find out within the next year.
Ed Deak.
Skywalker
24 weeks ago
It's the MSM.
For people to vote they must think the vote makes a difference. If people vote they should be voter smart. They need a media that questions, exposes, honestly tells the truth without bias. Otherwise the masses will vote in ignorance and the people will discover that their vote makes no difference at all. It all comes down to the media sector.
The other day I heard more about one celebrity idiot doing a flame out on an airplane flight than any other news story. I couldn't help wonder if the media think we are all morons. This happens all the time. No wonder that folks think that their one thoughtful vote in a sea of stupidity isn't going to change anything.
Eduard Hiebert
24 weeks ago
Great question! Now to pin-point the hole and do-it-yourself fix
First, unlike many of the commentators, I did find the portion of the article based on a study, including what I read of the report interesting but essentially long-winded and short on answers as acknowledged by the study itself! The study claimed “Fixes to the system can be found in many different places“ only to conclude with the drivel of more delay (now there’s a tip-off) and that more study is required: “our system... should be monitored... and examined“ but honourably fessing up that “it is beyond the scope of this study to decide... what specifically we must do to fix the political system“. And without ever pin-pointing any problem, one can not fix what is not known to be broken. However once you know where the hole is in your bicycle tire, no “expert” can sell you a fix of snake-oil!
How can a handfull of people empower the 99% to take back our democracy from the 1%?. First pin-pointing the hole, an example of how bad it really is, followed by a solution that is within your and your neighbour’s grasp within the very next election or by-election!!!
Our single-mark ballot is very vulnerable to vote-splitting which divides the voice of the majority into being shut-out. Consider any Canadian election. Oftentimes, a clear majority of five out of nine voters will divide their vote in a three-candidate election between two similar candidates. So A gets 2 votes and B gets 3, while C, not approved of by the five (the majority) yet receives 4 votes, in “our” system C is declared elected!
Specific to the 2011 fed election, not even 30% OF ALL CANADIANS WHO VOTED, which was but 18.3% of the total electorate, actually voted for the 167 MPs, including Harper, that now form what he calls a “majority”.-- truly a phony majority. In 2008, in 64% of the electoral districts (198 out of 308) an honest majority of voters went home without their candidate elected. Seven MPs were elected with less than one in five citizens on the voter’s list getting up and voting for them!
The fix? A pre-emptive preferential vote123 ballot, conducted by the electorate itself prior to election day, would show who are the candidates A, B, C... and then permit effective tactical voting in every district on voting day, eliminating the risk of minority supported candidates being returned and instead of the parties or party leaders, empowering a majority of the 99% to elect whosoever they wish!
Beyond a community’s elbow grease, a low cost outline of the methodology using a paper secret straw-vote ballot is available at:
http://www.eduardhiebert.com/ereform/v123p.htm
Colin65
24 weeks ago
Voter Turnout
Unfortunately, low voter turnout benefits professional politicians. The fewer voters that turn out to vote, the fewer votes they require to get elected. This is true for all parties. With a committed support base and "donations" from the right "special interest groups", getting elected has become easier and easier as voter turnoust have fallen.
A major step in improving democracy, at least in BC, would be to bring in new rules around political donations. Ideally, Corporate, Union and Association donations should be banned and individual donations capped. Large donations by Unions and Corporations lead to the appearance of special treatment. This might make politicians serve the interests of the wider public, rather than their supporters and might encourage people who have not voted in the past to do so.
igbymac
24 weeks ago
Diebold? You bet it is a problem!
QUOTE: Troutsky - "Win with Diebold ... Anyone else concerned about this?"
Absolutely. It's indicative of the contempt for democracy which our government exhibits routinely.
Don't we know that George W Bush was appointed president in 2000 on the back of the gamed Diebold voting machine? How, you ask?
Aside from brother Governor Jeb Bush's and Katherine Harris's inteference, along with the largely Republican-appointed Supreme Court's decision to stop actually counting the votes, it came systematically through the corrupted Diebold Voting Machine's software.
The Diebold machine's software determines whether a vote is unreadable, damaged, invalid, or accepted in the actual count. The acceptance or rejection of the vote cannot be verified independently, and Diebold holds a proprietary right on the software as a trade secret which stymies even cursory investigation.
http://www.gregpalast.com/index.php?s=diebold
Greg Palast exposed this scam amply in his book
The Best Democracy Money Can Buy back in 2003. I'm pretty sure there is a movie, too.
Is it possible that our government doesn't know this is the case? What a dark, dark comedy our fraudulent and fascist governance has clearly become.
But,yeah, voter turnout is our problem; The institution is golden. /sarcasm
igbymac
24 weeks ago
Skywalker, blaming the MSM for being dis-informed
... is like blaming McDonald's for being fat or Molson's for your drinking. It the typical scapegoat cited, I understand, but the problem is elsewhere. The problem is in a population which, for various reasons, does not take the time to educate themselves on our state of affairs.
Typically, the citizen forms an initial opinion -- most often it comes from the schools or news outlets or state propaganda or their own parent's learned stupidity -- and then he or she seeks the narrative which gives it support: "It is true because he said it is true and he told me he always tells me the truth"
Let's consider WW II, for example. We all agree WWII was unavoidable. The diabolical Hitler, the Nazi movement and the rising Japanese militarism had to be stopped. Every sane person knows this, no?
So why is the western world's economic oppression of Germany and our disregard for its dignity after WW I omitted from the common narrative? What role did that play? Could the west have done anything to alleviate matters, to head off WW II, long before it ever erupted?
This part of history is effectively lost. It's as if it never happened. Suggesting we somehow contributed to the rise of Hitler, or provoked the German citizenry, is off the collective radar. "Just look at what the Nazi's did!" -- that's all we need to know.
(Con't below)
igbymac
24 weeks ago
(Con't from above)
(Con't from above)
To now explain what verifiably happened more fully cannot be easily done. Nor can it be accomplished in a news clip or sound bite. It is this systemic reality that the corporate media uses with precision to shape the news, to give us the palatable narrative over and over, until it becomes the only truth we know.
[Meanwhile the Bankers and high-capitalists were making too much money extorting Germany to act prudently and in the interests of the people -- much like they are today with the global ecological destruction being conducted under their watch.]
The corporate media feeds on its designed need for concision, for a sound-bite or a discussion that fits between commercials. In turn, this need for concision becomes our own. We tell ourselves we only need the 'facts' but neglect to add, 'only the facts which fit our narrative which makes sense of matters'.
Ultimately this keeps the other side of the story, which has to overcome our national biases, from being heard. And without a well-informed public, democracy cannot exist.
So going back to the example, today there is no honest accounting whether WW II was truly unavoidable. And we don't much care. We know the truth, everyone agrees. And with this truth which we gladly accept, we move forward.
But I do not blame the MSM for making a buck at our expense. We accept the economic paradigm which gives a right to capitalistic predatory practices. Buyer beware. It's only business, nothing personal, right? (Capitalism is the best form of economics, we all know that, everyone agrees.)
I am saying however, that this scenario of where we all allow biased-information to be accepted as truths is the tragedy of our broken democracy.
We did not care what our government, or its collusive acts, did to Germany after it emerged from WWI. We did nothing wrong. And the song remains the same. We no more care today about our acts abroad than we did nearly a century ago. It's just that today we no longer even care about our neighbours or our own yard unless there is a buck in it.
What you learn matters.
Voting for a PM in this nation doesn't.
the real ODB
24 weeks ago
If you don't vote, don't bitch
I think Cutler is way off mark on this one. The Samara study comes close to be right on. The apathy of voters began in the early '80's when the neocons and their corporate moneybags grabbed power under Reagan, Thatcher and Mulroney (scumbags, one and all!). They began dismantling public institutions and services because as Maggie "the iron bitch" Thatcher screamed out in one of her psychotic rants "THERE IS NO SOCIETY!". It was the age of me me and the gimme gimme's. People, who are social by nature were being forced into the realm of an individual pursuit of personal wealth. Society and its collectives, like voting, were frowned upon. Harper relies on a core of right wing, mostly religious fundamentalists for power. This is approx. 35% of the electorate. He can do pretty much what he wants to (like a dictator) and this bloc will always support him. Ed, you're right on again. Snert, go see some of the world. Maybe you'll learn something. Of course you'd have to open your eyes first.
Eduard Hiebert
24 weeks ago
Are we ready for a fix that already exists at our disposal?
Democracy is not a spectator sport.
To make more clear from my earlier post, some may prefer PR as in mixed PR while others prefer STV as a fix to the single-mark system dysfunctional to the 99% but increasingly more functional for the 1% due to the tweedle-dee factor defined above regardless of which party is elected. After all, with 70% of Canadians per my earlier posted statistic being unhappy with the fed election outcome, how was it that both Harper and Layton were extremely happy with the outcome?
However re PR or STV, bracketing any critique of them, to amplify the point made earlier, a voluntary vote123 can be implemented now already by the 99% while any other identifiable fix requires the thick-eared in government to grant the 99% a different voting system.
Vote123 and its positive effects are available now already in the next election. For what are we waiting? That people like Harper, Rae, May... will do the right thing and improve a voting system that got them elected?
CanadianLatitude
24 weeks ago
The problem is not enough
The problem is not enough people want to change the system (yet those that do can not agree on how to do it) and neither do political parties except for the NDP and Greens..The FPTP has always benefited the Libs and Cons and giving them so called 'majorities' with under 40% of the vote.
yet we will never get real change if people do not get out and vote. My life it has always been the same old same old two parties in power in Ottawa.
I often wonder if mandatory voting should not be the norm?
I would also think schools need to do a better job maybe? I would also suggest lowering the voting age to 16. If you can be tried as an adult at 16 and join the Military reserves at 16 you should be able to vote.
Changing from FPTP might help too but I doubt that will ever get changed.
Term limits for MP's would be good too. Two terms that is it. If government has a minority and government falls twice in a year or two, too bad too as your two terms are up. Time to end professional politics. Politics should be an honour not a life long living.
More votes on important issues by the public would be great too from Free Trade deals to massive legislation like crime law and the new border rules should go to the people. Sure Harper has a majority but over 60% did not vote for him either. The governments job is to represent and do the peoples business not big corps and personnel agendas.
it is sickening how politics has become and it was bad before Harper but out General Secretary Harper added fuel to the flames by making politics more divisive than ever. Harper is a very very sick man who needs mental health help asap.
snert
24 weeks ago
Fiat lux
Ed, your are sounding rather like what it is that you are trying to prevent. That creates a huge credibility gap in my books.
Speaking of books, do you regularly judge books by their cover?
Fiat lux
24 weeks ago
Snert....Books are not people
Snert....Books are not people and I have about 1,500 on my shelves, plus many years of experience in characters and intelligence work, apart from being a portrait artist.
In Harper's case, his history and actions match his looks. That`s why his handlers put glasses on him, to cover his eyes. An old and well known trick
E.g. The judge said his determination to wipe out the Wheat Board was illegal, because the farmers didn't vote on it.
Harper was on TV last night saying that he'll go with the wipe out "to give Western farmers a choice"
Brilliant logic!!!!!
Just watch what he`s planning for next year and you`re welcome to remind me a year from if I`m wrong.
To put it simply, he`s a nutcase without conscience.
Ed Deak.
Skywalker
24 weeks ago
@ igbymac
You analogy won't work. McDonald's does not dominate the food sector as the MSM dominates the news sector. There are many other options. Not so with the media. Certainly not on cable. We may have one PBS or KNOW type network constantly begging for money as opposed to the proliferation of MSM networks which have no ethical standards for reporting that isn't determined by corporate interests.
I the search for truth, so you can vote intelligently, is so hard to conduct and the information you need so hard to uncover people will give up. So if you are going to argue which came first apathy or the dumbing or corruption of the MSM. I think it is the MSM that decided to cater to morons with a medium that once had great potential because the corporate interests learned from Hitler and the Nazis all about swaying mass opinion simply numbing it with crap.
snert
24 weeks ago
the real ODB
Well, there goes your credibility.
igbymac
24 weeks ago
Skywalker, of course the analogy works
It's very simple to follow: You have a choice to enter McDonalds and eat or to eat elsewhere. You have a choice to watch mainstream media or get your news elsewhere. McDonalds is easy to access, as is the MSM. McDonalds and a handful of other corporations dominate the fast-food market. The MSM is comprised of more than a handful of corporate owners, (but convergence is occurring all the time).
There are so many alternative media options, it is ridiculous to suggest there aren't other options. Let me just cut and past from my browser and see what I get and read routinely:
The Tyee
Rabble.ca
ZNet
democracyNOW
Common Dreams
TheRealNewsNetwork
ActivistPost
Alternet
Truthout
Truthdig
Salon
The Walrus
The Nation
Anti-war.com
The Progressive
Daily Kos
Mother Jones
The Bullet
TomPaine.com
Home of the Crow
Veterans Today
AE911.org
The Envirolink Network
Triton Environment
Tavistock
PNAC
AmpedStatus
UBC Archives
Black Agenda Report
Chomsky Info
William Blum Killing Hope
Linda McQuaig
TomDispatch
Norman Solomon
Greg Palast
Glenn Greenwald
George Monbiot
Ralph Nader
Gwynne Dyer
Jim Hightower
BlackListedNews
Harper's Magazine
New Socialist
Third World Traveller
Global Research.ca
Global Trends
Sam Harris
Joe Bageant
Molly Ivins
Alternet
howardzinn.org
IF Stone
George Orwell
The Great Thompson Hunt
Kevin Gosztola's blog
YayaCanada
The Red Menace
Laila Yule
John Stuart Mill
The Thoreau Reader
Consensus 911
Keiser Report
Reality Sandwich
FAIR
Seymour Hirsch
The New Yorker
Garrison Kellor
Steve Keens Debtwatch
FireDogLake
Thom Hartmann
Brain Pickings
Habeas Corruptus
Amnesty International
Pullitzer Center
Lawyers' Right Watch Canada
PRESS Core
Canadians.org
Seriously, Skywalker, obviously we are overwhelmed with alternative information if we even try to look. But we tend to not be too interested in moving away from the narrative of our times. It is our choice to remain uninformed, fat and big drinkers ;)
siamdave
24 weeks ago
- another POV
- from WSWS - a bit more honest overall - http://www.wsws.org/articles/2011/dec2011/cana-d10.shtml
igbymac
24 weeks ago
Thanks, siamdave for the read
Of course there are other reasons people may not vote, equally legitimate, which were not presented. But that is not what I would like to address from the article, which says:
Here the presumption is, and I paraphrase, that for the people to flourish democratically and effect significant social change, they will have to organize and operate within the existing paradigm of politics. True, but not the only possibility.
The alternative is a revolution brought on by the time constraints of global economic collapse and its impending Depression which will far outreach the Great Depression of 1929, coupled with the looming threat of ecological destruction and a global security state being assembled as we speak.
So, if one were to hedge a bet, are the people going to organize and play ball with The Man, on The Man's terms, within the next couple years or will it be something far more democratic?
snert
24 weeks ago
ed Deak
Not sure how your assessment squares with the scrapping of the gun registry. I think I know but I'll let you tell me.
igbymac
23 weeks ago
A December 10, 2011 Robert Fisk article
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/fisk/robert-fisk-bankers-are-the-dictators-of-the-west-6275084.html
Not that this truth will enter many minds, but it is from a reputable source of information.
For a better world
23 weeks ago
Ed , don't take the bait
Don't worry about Hagar's dog Ed. He's feeling a little braver since GWest has not been around to pin his ears back.
Frank
23 weeks ago
Interesting article
I don't see any reason to be concerned about non-voters believing we live in a dictatorship or whatever.
Grumpy, if you believe that your municipality is run by and for the 1% then having even less people than the 25% that vote in municipal elections now isn't going to solve that problem.
And having a new election every 2 weeks until the people that vote stop voting seems like a wasteful exercise too.
When non-voters really do believe their society sucks they'll turn out to vote. Until then I'm happy they're happy.
OwlRol
23 weeks ago
Lots of good thought, but not often in our faces
Right on igbymac, although I think that the CCPA Monitor and Canadian Dimensions might be of more current value than classics like Mill, Thoreau and Orwell (or Huxley), as much as I love these.
Alternatives to the mainstream media are out there for those willing to do critical searches.
But where is it on visual broadcasting, a few PBS, CBC and Knowledge network docs, BBC debates, a taste of 60 minutes or W5, a touch of Space or History, the odd Much Talks, and then, mostly a vacuum. Beyond that, one really needs to search YouTube.
But it is near impossible to build general consensus on such fragmented YouTube sources.
In today's world, visual literacy, delivered in rapid video pulses, is more important to most, for better or worse, than written text, beyond manuals.
Text has much more relevance for records and research purposes, but it helps little for the most stressed or functionally illiterate population. (reading requires beying able to read between the lines, then again, so does video.)
The messages these folks mostly receive are mainstream, soothing or fear mongering pablum, unless cracks are noticed. (Such is the talent of comics, John Stuart and Stephen Colbert, in the U.S.A., where is the Canadian equivalent?)
The sophisticated reader will find all sorts of issues and debate, the stressed out worker and partner are much less likely to connect in a meaningful manner. I'm sure that the powers that be are quite content with that arrangement.
Then again the 99% occupation movement could provoke more thought, discussion and action, disturbing to the complaced as it may be. Or not, something some are counting on. We'll see.
snert
23 weeks ago
For a better world
Do you always tell people how to think?
OwlRol
23 weeks ago
Excesses of capitalism recognized
Guys, not everything the pundits and politicians say work out the way they want.
Consider Toronto mayer Rob Ford's back room team arriving in the GVRD to try and manipulate Vancouver politics. It surely backfired.
Consider the very Christian, very Conservative voting, Abbotsford community.
Despite Stephen Harper's Ottawa office of P3 development (using our tax money to promote such privatization schemes), those folks kikked out the mayor and every pro P3 councillor, in order to keep their drinking water public, as did Vancouver and Whistler some years ago.
It is my understanding that the new council are requesting those funds that the Con feds would have turned over to the private corporation, as a similar sum to be provided to the muni for the development of the public water treatment plant, (of course with transparent financial oversight included, something not required in the private sector).
Should be interesting to see how the Harper government responds to this request, after all, it has been and is a Conservative stronghold for the next election, or not.
Tony Clement's, central Ontario riding got a similar such grant amount prior to the G8 in 2010 for far more questionable but less beneficial projects than this one, then with John Baird's blessings, despite no proper administrative sign off.
Love those mostly unanalyzed media reports. The decision is likely to be much unreported except for curious Abbotsford residents, but we all need to observe political justice at work, or not.
Werthit
23 weeks ago
Uncle Sam, Moriarty and the Queen Bee
Recall the date of the last federal election - a few days after the flag-waving Royyal Wedding. Remember that media mogul Murrdoch (Moriarty) has a working relationship with both Cameron in the UK and Harper.
Cut to the day before the election. Death of Osama bin Laden announced by the U.S. but where's the body? Buried at sea.
On election day, the PM requests and receives airtime on local radio to talk about the capture of OBL. He tells listeners on-air to vote Conservative. I haven't heard of any repercussions for him doing this, to date.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KrT8K49fyuo
igbymac
23 weeks ago
OwlRol
I simply cut and pasted what I have in my browser, it was not meant to be comprehensive. That said, thanks for the contemporary contributions you suggested. :)
However, I read the classics because clear thinking is clear thinking. I suggest the classics most importantly because our general depth and breadth of understanding is contracting.
For example, the collective seems to have no idea about fundamental political theory. The proof is that the media propagandizes the NDP as left-wing or socialists; Obama as a moderate or a socialist; welfare-state capitalism as some leftist, communist plot; our warring adventures in terms of our safety and national pride; that politics is about controlling the economy; and even that representative government is democracy itself. Not only do they sell this drivel to the masses, but they get away with it because most people know little else -- including the politicians themselves.
Simply put, if we don't know where we've been politically, it's hard to chart a course to where we want to go.
Cheers.
RockyRacoon
23 weeks ago
How about the mis-education system? There to instill conformity
instead of creativity and independence. And the workplace how democratic is this? How democratic is a society that insists that before you recieve anything you must pay for it with something called money or you don't get in. Come on people the entire structure of our society is designed to limit democracy not expand it and the little say we do have was won and granted begrudgingly under threat of revolution. Even though these revolts and incremental increases in "freedom" took place hundreds of years ago nothing has changed the Queen is still the richest woman in the world, naturally.
humbug.
RR
OwlRol
22 weeks ago
Agreed 100%, but
igbymac, I agree with you 100%. Two items though.
1. There are issues that these wonderful thinkers could not well deal with, such as the power of modern media or the global environmental crisis (something that ecosocialism is trying to come to grips with).
2. High quality visual media is out there, but lacking in the mainstream, except for sports, entertainment and corporate consumer ads.
Those Roman circuses, their republic produced thinkers, but other than perhaps Marcus Aurelius, hardly so their empire.
I recall seeing low budget, 20 minute clips on Adam Smith & Marx and Engels. These actually had the potential to be very interesting films, but could raise corporate issues, so funding would be difficult to come by. The Che, Motorcycle Diaries was a week attempt.
A few science character histories and developments are more available these days, but hardly mainstream. CBC Nature of Things or PBS NOVA, Knowledge Net and then what.
If people, especially students saw these, it may get them to read, to find out more about such characters. Or not, its difficult to boil down their concepts to a 12 year old perspective.
What a joke TLC (the Learning Network) evolved into.
Nietche or Marx and Engels were well read across Europe, as was Thoreau or Mark Twain in America at the end of the 19th. century.
It boggles the mind to see how many of today's critics voice their opinions without ever having seriously read any of the works they criticise.
Much of these great thinkers' writings is dry but enlightening logic, rather than adrenalin pumping emotion.
I think that Chris Hedges adressed this issue, but what percentage of the population even knows who he is (beyond long time Tyee readers or CBC Ideas' listeners :-), let alone take the time to debate his notions?
Many would rather argue about who the best goally, rap artist, sit-com character and such, are.
Tough to compete with that shallow thought. Even as I sometimes also indulge in such banter with friends, it is essentially little more than a distraction, and an expensive one for fans (fanatics).
Machiavelli, Descartes, Smith, Kafka, Verne, Hesse, et al, fans are few and far between.
More like the Sedins, Trumps, Cardashians (not listed on any comparable abilities), these have far more fans because they are so VISUALLY, easily available on the networks.
How could our long gone, master thinkers really anticipate changes that could alter some of their logic, aside from the timeless pieces?
Freedom Bound
22 weeks ago
Vote? for what ? WTFU !!!
Not sure why anyone would want to vote as both the Federal & Provincial Governments are de facto. They are nothing more than Limited Liability Corporations (LLC's). Canada Corporation is listed on the SEC in Washington DC and it's main source of revenue is taxpayers. If you have a Canadian Birth Certificate and a SIN# you are nothing more than a slave owned by the Corporation of Canada and your regional Provincial Government, also a Corporation. I would just as soon not vote and not consent to being governed by Corporations with limited liability. Why give any legitimacy to Governments by voting for them when they are not legitimate ? As well we have a Governor General and Lieutenant Governor's in Canada that are also de facto. Our Government would rather borrow money from private chartered banks with interest attached rather than borrowing it from the Bank of Canada at no or very little interest, thus adding to the National Debt being past on to future generations to pay. We have been told from an early age in school that we live in a free and democratic country but I don't see it. We have a Constitutional Monarchy / Parliamentary Democracy with Queen Elizabeth II as our Head of State. Seeing as the Monarch aristocrats of England have not been ruling sovereigns since the reign of King John, circa 1215 when it was handed over to Pope Innocent III. All royal sovereignty of the British Crown since that time has passed to the "Crown Temple" in Chancery. The Crown Temple use the world wide Banking and Judicial system run from the "City of London" a sovereign and independent territory which is not part of Great Britain much like Washington DC is not a State or part of the United States. The rabbit hole goes deep and heads straight to Vatican City and the Roman Church were the Mother of all Ponzi schemes is run from. Church and State are not separate they are one and the same and legally own everything even though it is not lawful. Non of these people have our best interests in mind and never have. This New World Order seems a lot like the Old World Order if you ask me. Until we have: #1- A real Canada (country) not a Limited Liability Corporation. #2 a real Constitution and not a Constitution Act (Act=Fiction). #3 A legitimate Banking system with real money backed by something of value and not Debt Notes created from thin air backed by nothing but faith. #4 Real Court's based on Law instead of the legal policy enforcement piracy scheme we have now. #5 Someone that has at leased half a brain, a little common sense and some honor would be a good thing. I think I will stay clear of voting until then.
sheojuk
15 weeks ago
none of the above option
I support the idea of a required % of eligible voters casting ballots to validate an election. Also support barring those running for office from the ensuing byelection if that minimum is not met.
The individual voter has zero leverage in the current system, but giving not-voting some power would result in real change.
Which is why it will never happen.