Steyn: Retreat into Apathy
Willie Whitelaw, a genial old buffer who served as Margaret Thatcher’s deputy for many years, once accused the Labour party of going around Britain stirring up apathy. Viscount Whitelaw’s apparent paradox is, in fact, a shrewd political insight, and all the sharper for being accidental. Big government depends, in large part, on going around the country stirring up apathy — creating the sense that problems are so big, so complex, so intractable that even attempting to think about them for yourself gives you such a splitting headache it’s easier to shrug and accept as given the proposition that only government can deal with them.
Take health care. Have you read any of these health-care plans? Of course not. They’re huge and turgid and unreadable. Unless you’re a health-care lobbyist, a health-care think-tanker, a health-care correspondent, or some other fellow who’s paid directly or indirectly to plough through this stuff, why bother? None of the senators whose names are on the bills have read’em; why should you?
And you can understand why they drag on a bit. If you attempt to devise a health-care “plan” for 300 million people, it’s bound to get a bit complicated. But a health-care plan for you, Joe Schmoe of 27 Elm Street, didn’t used to be that complicated, did it? Let’s say you carelessly drop Ted Kennedy’s health-care plan on your foot and it breaks your toe. In the old days, you’d go to your doctor (or, indeed, believe it or not, have him come to you), he’d patch you up, and you’d write him a check. That’s the way it was in most of the developed world within living memory. Now, under the guise of “insurance,” various third parties intercede between the doctor and your checkbook, and to this the government proposes adding a massive federal bureaucracy, in the interests of “controlling costs.” The British National Health Service is the biggest employer not just in the United Kingdom, but in the whole of Europe. Care to estimate the size and budget of a U.S. health bureaucracy?
[More]
Popularity: 28% [?]
Male, retired and the rest is of little interest to anyone. The site keeps me busy and if it helps others to stay abreast of daily events then my time is well spent.
Jema54 Says:
Once again Mr. Steyn has hit the nail with the hammer. Apathy is the enemy of good health and prosperity; essential for the sucess of any nation or civilization.
Independant, prosperous people are generous with their time, money and compassion.
Posted on June 13th, 2009 at 7:38 pm
Philanthropist Says:
It is very annoying to hear people say ‘politicians are all the same’ because they are not. Politicians choose different paths for us, it makes a huge difference. In Ontario, people should remember or look up how fast Bob Rae drove us toward bankruptcy for example. But that’s just it, the people who want socialists like Rae in power are the same people who want everyone else to think ‘it doesn’t make a difference’ who’s elected, so through apathy they get their big government socialists elected.
Posted on June 14th, 2009 at 1:02 am
Cynapse Says:
All politicians are subject to the game of power and beholden to the same circle of influences (industry, economics, voting blocs). The only real difference seems to be whom a party courts at the beginning, an dhow resolute the politician is when the “storms” hit.
Most do govern from the center though.
Posted on June 14th, 2009 at 1:25 am
UV Says:
Ask Canadians why they dont vote and many will say ‘their all the same’. For example, many Canadians dont see much difference between the two main federal parties with their recent left of centre political views and favortism towards Quebec.
Posted on June 14th, 2009 at 11:30 am
Mac Says:
If the politicians are all the same, why do the leftards keep accusing PMSH of trying to turn the government hard-right?
Posted on June 14th, 2009 at 12:46 pm
Cynapse Says:
For the same reason righttards complain the Liberals are turning the country hard-left even when they eliminate the deficit – employment. As in, you only get paid when your man is in office.
If you meant just the general public, well religion is just like that – exaggerate the small differences and ignore the large common factors just to justify your existence.
Posted on June 14th, 2009 at 1:26 pm
Mac Says:
Clearly, I’ve been mistaken about the Liberals.
The Liberals bravely overcame the deficit which their demagogue Trudeau created by a combination of diverting funds from unemployment insurance funds & pension plans and deliberately underfunding the Armed Forces, the RCMP, the Coast Guard & pretty much every aspect of government which doesn’t involve social engineering. The Liberals are heroes… and if they happen to “accidentally” award a whole schwack of contracts to friends in exchange for kickbacks, well, that’s just one of those things that happens…
I’m sure the Conservatives would do exactly the same kind of things, given half a chances… After all, it’s not like they’re going to cut the GST by almost a third (from 7% to 5%) or start doing critical infrastructure renewal for the Armed Forces or anything. I’m sure they’re just waiting for a chance to scoop any surplus funding from pension plans and… well, actually, they changed the rules so that can’t happen anymore…
I’m sure it’s only tiny simple differences…
“All the greatest things are simple, and many can be expressed in a single word: Freedom; Justice; Honour; Duty; Mercy; Hope.”~ Sir Winston Churchill
Posted on June 14th, 2009 at 1:54 pm
Cynapse Says:
I think you realize that was not the era I was referring to.
Yes, Trudeau ruined your chance at Latin America style social elitism, I get it. That has nothing to do with the fact that Chretien/Martin turned a deficit into a surplus – something Harper hasn’t even tried to do since getting into office (particularly since money is no object when it comes to your pet projects, like military spending)
Moreover, if the actual party policies are measured objectively, there is very little difference between present day Liberals and present-day Conservatives.
http://www.politicalcompass.org/canada2008
Posted on June 14th, 2009 at 2:11 pm
UV Says:
Then, just like the lieberals do, especially now with Iggy’s many flip-flops, HM PM has done his flip flops like taxing income trusts; calling an election before the required date, hiring Tories for various positions; running huge deficits; scandals; virtually left EI rules unchanged from the lieberals screwing it up; didnt lower gas tax when retail prices hit .85 cents as he once mentioned; continues to kiss butt with Quebec; lowered the GST when he should have lowered income tax; convinced the Ontario government to combined both the GST and the PST there by taxing items previously excluded in Ontario.
But with all that being said, would definitely not vote LIEberal. Their no better!
Posted on June 14th, 2009 at 2:58 pm
UV Says:
Then, just like the lieberals do, especially now with Iggy’s many flip-flops, HM PM has done his flip flops like taxing income trusts; calling an election before the required date, hiring Tories for various positions; running huge deficits; scandals; virtually left EI rules unchanged from the lieberals screwing it up; didnt lower gas tax when retail prices hit .85 cents as he once mentioned; continues to kiss butt with Quebec; lowered the GST when he should have lowered income tax; convinced the Ontario government to combine both the GST and the PST there by taxing items previously excluded in Ontario.
But with all that being said, would definitely not vote LIEberal. Their no better!
Posted on June 14th, 2009 at 3:01 pm
Mac Says:
Cynapse, I didn’t realize our discussion was constrained to certain eras. My apologies.
Social elitism is the hallmark of the Liberals… I’m surprised you hadn’t noticed… Professor Dion? Professor-Count Iggy? Conservatives are much more “grassroots” types. All those thousands of common folks making donations… much to the chagrin of the Liberals who still haven’t figure out how to make do without those big donations from their corporate friends.
Yup, just tiny little differences… hardly remarkable whatsoever…
Military spending is hardly “my” pet project and I do wish you would stop falsely attributing words like “money is no object” to me since I’ve never said anything like that…
It’s true I would rather spend on our Armed Forces than to send Canadian artists to Cuba or to force “official bilingualism” on the rest of the country while Quebec remains staunchly unilingual French. I tend to think in pragmatic terms. If I want a roof over my head, I need to pay for my housing. If I want food on the table, I need to pay for groceries. If I spend so much money on social causes that I have to shuffle my finances and/or take out a loan to pay for my housing and groceries, there’s a problem.
Canada keeps using our military force for a variety of roles throughout the world and here at home, so it seems reasonable to provide the equipment they need to do the job. Chretien sent our troops to Afghanistan in green camo uniforms without helicopters. Tiny little differences.
Posted on June 14th, 2009 at 9:17 pm
Cynapse Says:
And as we’ve discussed before, conservative elitism comes from the tyranny of the mob. Before HRC’s, before affirmative action, before right policies, what did you have? Gross tribal discrimination by millions of “grassroots” types. This still happens in Latin America. If you’re not Spanish, you can’t get into certain dance clubs or have certain jobs. Unsurprisingly, it’s taken government action to outlaw these practices and of course the Spanish “grassroots” aren’t reacting well. There needs to be a force capable of inflicting the same pain on the mob that the mob would otherwise inflict on the minorities. It’s a zero sum situation.
Furthermore, as far as counts and professors are concerned, since when is being a high achiever a negative thing? Human talent is unequally distributed. If someone can contribute more to society because of their special talents, what is the harm? We don’t mind that Einstein didn’t wait inline for the local tinkering hack to have his say before sharing the theory of relativity. The fact we are in a democratic system allows for the zero sum – if people don’t like that Iggy has to say, they won’t vote him in.
The things you want in life are the things I want in life and the things most people want in life. Sending a few artists to help out Cuba isn’t going to invite terrorist attacks on our soil and comparatively does not cost much so unless we’re in a financial crunch (i.e. now) I don’t see the problem. I like paying tax as little as you do, but then I’ve been to countries were taxation and government support for those not fortunate enough to be born rich and in the right social class is very low. Gated neighbourhood, armed escorts and helicopter surveillance aren’t my cup of tea, thanks. That’s not worth saving a few tax dollars.
Posted on June 14th, 2009 at 9:30 pm
Mac Says:
How can you fail to see the oxymoron of describing conservative elitism as being the tyranny of the mob? Does elitism mean something different in your lexicon? Is Canada noted for it’s lack of “rule of law” or mob mentality? Hardly! Canada’s first “Bill of Rights” didn’t come from a liberal; it was written and enacted by a conservative… long before the HRCs and other special interests took root…
I don’t have any problem with high achievers going into government. I do have a problem with smug elitists like Dion and Count Iggy trying to treat Canada as if they own it… and I sincerely hope the fact that the self-entitled self-appointed “natural ruling party of Canada” keeps picking “leaders” like these two will convince keep that self-same party out of power. Can you imagine the arrogance of the Liberal power brokers to appoint Count Iggy as their new leader without a leadership campaign? Just another one of those tiny little differences…
Posted on June 14th, 2009 at 9:49 pm
Cynapse Says:
I see no oxymoron when the mob membership itself is elite. Tribalism is elite by nature.
We’ve discussed this several billion times and you still don’t get it – you don’t need a small, tight hierarchy of leadership to have an elitist environment. “The people” weren’t doing anything about the ethnic elitism in Canada so it took actions by a small number of forward thinking government types – first Dief then Trudeau. The “mob” has been battling their advances ever since, in the form of reducing these government measures, increasing their gun rights (to re-establish their own social order), disabling commissions, etc.
If you doubt this … go to Latin America and tell me that disabling the government will lead to increased harmony, freedom and equality. Start with Peru, then try Brazil. Sure, Canada is fine and calm right now but there is nothing that says this will last forever – it must be actively maintained.
Posted on June 14th, 2009 at 10:01 pm
Brian S Says:
I have to say that I have never seen your point on this either Cynapse. What you seem to be saying is that in order to keep the peace South Africa needs kangaroo courts that protect the minority white population by enforcing conjured up laws that only apply to the majority black mob. What could go wrong with that?
In a democracy such as ours, the mob you speak of puts the forward thinking government types into power where they do the mob’s bidding or get voted out of power. Trudeau was voted out of power because he adversely affected the economy and the mob was sick and tired of stagflation.
Do you actually believe that it is the state that maintains social order in Canada? How, through the police? Although I will admit that there are a few rural towns in Canada that seem to have a bad karma about them, it usually applies to anyone new who intrudes and not just to minorities, so how do minorities survive (and I personally know several who are quite happy living in smaller towns like Bancroft and Baysville) where the police are always at least an hour or so away? The violence that is often prevalent in areas of South and Central America or even the suburbs of Paris would just seem to prove that the state is powerless to control a mob intent on doing violence, so how do you expect thousands of police in Canada to control millions of citizens, many of whom are armed, unless we are of a population that is more or less inclined to be in control of ourselves in the first place? Besides, the police around here usually seem to have all they can handle keeping the minorities from killing each other.
Posted on June 14th, 2009 at 11:28 pm
Brian S Says:
I will also add that if it wasn’t for the supposedly forward thinking liberal types who keep letting them out of jail, the troublesome element of the mob that seems to worry you would remain behind bars where they belong.
Posted on June 15th, 2009 at 12:45 am
Mac Says:
First, I don’t see “big tent conservatism” as equating to the “tyranny of the mob”, especially since one of the defining aspects of conservatism is a powerful emphasis on the rule of law… another one of those “tiny little differences” between conservatives and liberals.
Secondly, tribalism, elitism and “tyranny of the mob” (or more precisely the tyranny of the majority) are three separate definitions.
Next, comparing the oligarchies of Latin America (offspring from a series of revolutions) to a mature constitutional monarchy like Canada is worse than an apples & oranges comparison.
Finally, I find it fascinating to read your suggestion that Dief’s Bill of Rights which were designed to protect and empower individualism (and worked quite well doing so) somehow led to the incipient nanny state we’re now enduring. I will give this more thought…
Posted on June 15th, 2009 at 3:05 pm
Brian S Says:
No answers about this mob yet so I’ll try to ask this then: Keep in mind that I am not saying that there are no violent racist types on the right, but why is it all of the sudden assumed that all racism and threat of violence comes from the right when the Democrat party has such a long and colorful history of involvement with the KKK? And when the highest concentrations of violent, drunken, coke-addled, welfare-addicted, liberal-justice-benefiting, lowlife types found around here live in places that actually vote overwhelmingly on the left, such as Hamilton Central or Windsor or Regent Park in Toronto? And when the biggest and most destructive domestic organizations whose members are actually deemed to be terrorists, such as ELF and ALF, are all on the left? After all, although the MSM has hardly taken any notice, David McKay and Bradley Crowder of the left-wing terrorist group “Austin Affinity” were just convicted for being part of a larger group that attempted to firebomb the Republican National Convention last September. Are we to believe that such an attempt on the Democrat National Convention by someone on the right would go largely unnoticed by the MSM?
If Canada is the violent racist tinderbox that our HRCs seem to want us to believe it is then you would think that our like-minded left-wing MSM would be able to report on many more than just the occasional trivial case about some bad-mouthed schoolyard bully, and that HRCs would be as numerous and as busy as our traffic courts. However our HRCs do somehow seem to find the time and resources to take several months to prepare for each case and can’t be too overwhelmed given some of the the seemingly ridiculous cases they have have been taking on lately. Mostly, I just don’t see how it is possible that any and all discrimination that does take place in Canada can be put on the right, so how is it that our HRCs can justify persecuting conservative types exclusively?
I have no doubt that discrimination in hiring practices can still be found in the nepotism of unions and the backroom dealing of our bureaucracies, but since when have they ever been on the right? I have always worked for or alongside visible minorities and although it never troubled me to be the only white person working at otherwise all Chinese and Muslim organizations, it did become apparent that companies owned and operated by visible minorities very often discriminate when they are hiring. I have noticed that most people seem to be having a much harder time as of late finding full time permanent employment ever since companies of any size have had to start hiring exclusively through Human Resource departments so as to protect themselves from the myriad of pertinent new liberal nuisance laws, but apparently that is progress.
Being from Toronto, it seems to me that visible minorities have not had much trouble finding accommodations alongside whites, affordability being an entirely different matter, although I have no doubt that they might not be made to feel welcome amongst the Rosedale area liberal types, unless of course they arrive via Ruby Dhalla’s servants entrance. Most immigrants settle in liberal Toronto, Montreal or Vancouver so it follows that if they are being discriminated against then it is most often done by liberal types, so once again, how does it make any sense at all that only conservatives are ever persecuted by our HRCs? Under the circumstances I believe that the HRCs are for the most part a self serving liberal tool to be used to discredit conservatives and cover their own tracks while providing lucrative jobs so they can hire more of their own.
Posted on June 16th, 2009 at 12:00 am
Cynapse Says:
All of Canada is not Toronto, Brian. I’ve only been here 5 years and it’s been long quite clear that Toronto culture is markedly different from the R.O.C. (except maybe Montreal). Is there discrimination? Of course, but no group can totally dominate another thanks to relative numbers, sub-cultures and an increasing tolerance between members of various groups. I’d say many of the laws wouldn’t be needed in Toronto.
Not so for a +80% ethnically uniform place with a long history of systemic racism. That is much of the R.O.C. and they do not want to change. Conservative language like “political correctness” is basically in bitter reference to how the “liberal types” are forcing them to respect people they don’t want to respect. And human ingenuity can get around any law.
As for the Republicans and Democrats, I’m sure you know as well as any that the roles of these parties changed during the civil rights movement. The Dixie Democrat party turned pro-civil rights while Barry Goldwater dragged the party of Lincoln in the opposite direction. The odd holdover like Robert Byrd does not detract from the fact that the Democrats turned very liberal over the last 40 years and at the same time turned very pro-minority. The GOP, conservative vote seeking, launched the Southern Strategy, which sought to divide and conquer on the basis of race and race alone. Very few conservatives complained.
Yes, there are many liberal wolves in sheep’s clothing (and I’ve written about Rosedale on this board in the past). However, if you’re a conservative then your mandate is to preserve what society was like previously. Society was even more racist in the past, therefore the racists would be most attracted to …
ALF and ELF are an entirely different type of terrorism and I’ve seen them on the FBI list. Environmental attacks are new and considerably rarer. Also, none of been fatal (yet).
Posted on June 16th, 2009 at 7:06 am
Brian S Says:
How convenient that all is: laws aren’t needed in Toronto where it is only lefties and immigrants doing the hating and Christians, Jews and conservative whites types being the targets, Democrats are the ones with the long history of racism so lets switch it all around and make them honorary Republicans so we can start buying the minority vote with affirmative action and welfare, our terrorists are better than yours. Sorry I’m calling BS. I have lived and worked for years in places outside Toronto, with liberals, conservatives and visible minorities, and no one group is any better than any another.
Have you ever spent any time in an NDP stronghold like Regent Park or perhaps Hamilton Central, populated by a quarter million trailer trash types? If you ever bothered to ask one of these welfare-addicted racist white trash types you like to refer to as rednecks what they think of their monthly cheque from the government, they will invariably tell you that the government needs to tax the rich more because it isn’t doing nearly enough for them. Does that sound at all conservative to you? You may believe that liberals are proponents of a helpful big nanny state government, but when you leave the room, liberals actually believe that people of your kind shouldn’t be let out of the house without a nanny. Take the time to look at a picture of Dalton McGuinty’s cabinet at some point, it can change but always has one of each, a token black face, a token yellow face, and a token brown face in an otherwise sea of white. I’m not even going to get into how much immigrants can hate each other with a passion.
It is nothing more than the politics of non stop smear. Harper is scary, Bush is evil, Palin is nuts, conservatives will send you all back to where you care from, watch out for those Christian terrorists, only a racist would disagree with Obama…. However, when it comes down to it are Harper’s politics really that much more oppressive than Ignatieff’s? Are Bush’s policies that much different from Clinton’s? Are the crimes of thousands of Catholic priests that much more evil than those of the hundreds of thousands of secular school teachers, social, and day care workers, who have been similarly charged? No, no, and no they are not, but it is always night and day in terms of how they are treated my the left wing media. Some nut who hates everybody opens up on a Holocaust Museum is automatically labeled a right wing terrorist by the MSM regardless of the fact that his politics are all over the map.
So, we conservatives are now all about conserving are racist ways. That’s rich. Imbecilic but rich nonetheless. The worst part about constantly being called a racist, warmonger, anti-intellectual by a left that is in no way more tolerant or intelligent than you are is that they actually believe that they are making a winning point of argument. I must be right because you are a conservative warmonger, end of discussion. My position is superior because you are a conservative racist, end of discussion. Well, I guess if you are on the left, that is better than thinking for yourself. It must be true because the collective says so.
Posted on June 16th, 2009 at 11:54 am
Brian S Says:
I should add this since you seem to have a high regard for Toronto and a great disdain for most of the rest of the country. Much like the city itself, the Toronto riding that I grew up in was a longtime Christian conservative bastion when the first waves of visible minorities started trickling and then rolling in. Sorry to disappoint you but they were not greeted by any mobs of torch bearing Christian conservatives. I recall being in grade school when the first black, Chinese, and south Asian kids entered our classrooms, and they were received well enough to soon be among the most popular kids in our school. Their parents, my neighbors, had some adjusting to do as did the neighborhood, but were well received by the local church that my parents attended, and soon were building their social networks at charity fundraisers alongside all the other parents. Did some kids eventually get picked on or even bullied? Yes, as always happens with school children, but no more so by white kids than by any of the other groups of visible minorities. Sure there was the odd grumbling about change, but nothing more. It took a little time but people adapted. I am not saying that such change always happens the same way, but this idea that liberals seem to have that the changes that happened in places like Toronto could never be recreated anywhere else in the country does seem ridiculous to me.
Posted on June 16th, 2009 at 3:09 pm
Cynapse Says:
Rather than nit-pick I’ll point out the obvious – your definition of left and right spans only ecnomics, which is somewhat irrelevant to ethnic social attitudes. Indians and Caribbeans come from very right-leaning economies while Russians and Chinese come from left-leaning economies. Doesn’t really make a difference.
We’re talking about SOCIAL attitudes of the left and right.
Posted on June 16th, 2009 at 4:06 pm
Cynapse Says:
are Harper’s politics really that much more oppressive than Ignatieff’s?
Harper’s politics aren’t much different than Obama’s. But that didn’t stop his followers from echoing the fear-mongering of their GOP inspirations.
we conservatives are now all about conserving are racist ways. That’s rich. Imbecilic but rich nonetheless
Then maybe you don’t know what you stand for. If you’re conserving something the it obviously was there before. You don’t want change because change scares you – that’s conservatism. Right-wing bible folks were not marching with MLK – they were protesting against integrated schools. Don’t believe me? Look it up yourself.
Being against large government and taxation just makes you libertarian, which is the opposite of authoritarian but has precious little to with left or right. You can have different combinations:
Authoritarian + Left = Stalin
Authoritarian + Right = Palin
Libertarian + Left = Gandhi
Libertarian + Right = Jesse Ventura
Furthermore, folks such as yourself like to point out that extremist parties like the BNP are “left wing” because they support collectivist economics. True in that sense, but socially they won’t be marching next to MLK any time soon. Moreover, they’re arch-enemies of the socialists you equally hate and in Europe the two groups are at war.
This recent attempt by the right to left-ize all of their no-longer-fashionable movements is quite dishonest they way it throws rivals into the same camp.
Posted on June 16th, 2009 at 4:15 pm
Brian S Says:
I would never let the left-wing collective define social left and right for me as you seem to have. Otherwise “right” would automatically equal violent racism regardless of how racists actually vote, and “left” would equal sunshine, happiness, and all that is good in the world, regardless of how much pain and suffering that the left has inflicted on the world. Many on the left never discover this on their own because it is deeply embedded in their programming, but those of us who have made the effort not to be assimilated, find that it is really not all that hard to fight off the liberal progressive mind tricks.
Posted on June 16th, 2009 at 4:36 pm
Cynapse Says:
The left wing collective did not make those rules up. It’s easily observable in the general groups of people. I refuse to believe you’re that daft so you just must be putting me on. Taking a check from the government doesn’t make you a left-winger. Having come from a rural area, I’ve met plenty of people who live on government assistance and still have the confederate flag flying high with complaints galore about immigrants etc. Commies they are not. If anything, it’s the government’s fault for not setting the neediness bar a little higher. Alas, offer a loser money and (s)he will take it – regardless of political stripe.
Your battle against the left and assimilation has nothing to do with racial politics. You’re merely ascribing all of what you consider to be your best personal qualities to the side you’ve identified with – regardless of the doctrine of your mates and about 3 or 4 centuries of history. Most people know who is targeting them and minority voting patterns (again, regardless of the economy they emigrated from) should tell a story that not even you can refute. Left-leaning parties get the lion’s share and it’s not because all minority groups are communists in training.
Posted on June 16th, 2009 at 4:49 pm
Cynapse Says:
Point: Most economic systems are socially neutral, and should be separated from the social definitions of “left” and “right” (which vary from country to country)
Posted on June 16th, 2009 at 5:05 pm
Brian S Says:
“If you’re conserving something then it obviously was there before.” Let me see if I get this right, according to the collective: conserving racism is bad so it must be a conservative trait, and therefore all conservatives must be bad racists? Then, isn’t conserving energy bad so it must be a conservative trait, and therefore all conservatives must be bad energy misers? What if the idea is to conserve democracy, the rule of law, capitalism, broader education, etc.? Is that all bad to then? Does that make Trudeau a conservative for conserving our British heritage within our constitution? If I hand a confederate flag to a lefty will they instantly become a small government conservative, or does it take a little time?
I cant seem to decide if you are being way too simplistic or just overly complicated, but your reasoning does have the beginnings of a Monty Python sketch in it.
Posted on June 16th, 2009 at 5:09 pm
Cynapse Says:
How can you conserve something that didn’t exist, Brian?
Are you trying to tell me with a straight face that if you were an abolitionist you’d be considered a conservative?
If you marched for women’s suffrage you’d be considered a conservative?
If you march for gay marriage today, would you be called socially conservative?
If anything, my point is simple. Conservatives are not the ringleaders of change in the sphere in question - that goes against the very nature of wanting to conserve.
Good and bad is a personal point of view. Few people actually come out the gate and say “we’re the bad guys”. Maybe you’re being too simplistic. You’re too hung up on being lumped together with a group of people who’ve been in your midst the whole time – your fault for not seeing it. What I’m trying (with very limited success) to tell you is that your basic assumption about economic systems being tied to social viewpoints is wrong. As I’ve argued with Mac about often, overall labeling of “left” and “right” are simplifications and few people are entirely one way or the other. If you choose to label yourself one way or the other then it is a natural consequence for you to be lumped in with everyone associated with all aspects of those labels. That’s why I don’t do it, as much as many of you try to label me “left” for not supporting every yahoo who calls themselves “right”
(over) Simplification is not your friend in this case, Brian.
Posted on June 16th, 2009 at 5:20 pm
UV Says:
Cynapse – its what extremists on both sides do. If your not with us – then you agin us.
Yahoo’s are every where.
Posted on June 16th, 2009 at 5:24 pm
Cynapse Says:
UV:
Agreed
Posted on June 16th, 2009 at 5:26 pm
Brian S Says:
Conservatism to me is about conserving things that I believe are important such as democracy, the rule of law, capitalism, broader education, etc. As time moves forward, the things that we conservatives deem important enough to preserve changes just as it does for the left. We do not all progress at the same rate so we may differ on some things that we may not all consider as important, such as religion and the institution of marriage etc.. Conservatism is not about conserving everything, it is not and has never been about stopping time in its tracks.
You seem to have been conditioned to see everyone with a swastika tattoo or a confederate flag as being on the right. Sorry to disappoint you again but I don’t identify with people that I rarely come into contact with any more than you do. It is actually pretty rare to see a swastika flag tattoo while attending church, or working in an office for instance. I rarely see them at a polling booth either because most likely those who have swastika tattoos or fly confederate flags don’t vote, do not know their left from their right, would never identify with either of us, and would “change” more than a few things themselves if they could. They or those they most identify with, joined the Aryan brotherhood in an act of self preservation upon entering prison after stealing from the rich to give to the poor. The fact that you would lump me in with such people, can only come from your broken programming
Growing up, my father was in a union and the whole of my extended family was on the left up until such a guy with such prison tattoos was let out of penitentiary early on a liberal mandatory release program, and raped and murdered my cousin the same night. It was at this point that my whole family moved over to the right, as my uncle, her father, ran for the Reform Party in a bid to put an end to such mandatory release programs. Do you figure that it was at this moment that I became a racist? Am I supposed to identify with swastika tattooed ex-cons who wave confederate flags on your say so? Not at all sorry to disappoint you, but I believe that it is you who is being way too simplistic.
Posted on June 16th, 2009 at 6:20 pm
Cynapse Says:
Ok so we’ll take your crime story at face value and not challenge its implications/motivation in any way.
So your family got involved with an early incarnation of the Reform party. Can I assume Toronto chapter or some chapter close to it? Who was working the door for security? Did you not notice their affiliation?
See, even if the shoe does not fit for Brian S, there should have been some signs that it would have fit many around Brian S. I don’t mean that as a reason not to join a political movement, but your utter disdain for and surprise at the idea that the Reform-minded conservatives may have had genuine rednecks in their midst is … puzzling to say the least. The Heritage Front admit their own involvement with the party. There were numerous articles in the news on extremism within Reform. Did you miss every single one of them?
Posted on June 16th, 2009 at 11:37 pm
Brian S Says:
Jerry Amernic was a journalist for the Toronto Sun at the time and wrote a book about my family’s ordeal entitled : Victims: The Orphans of Justice
Jerry Amernic on early release of prisoners – September 2008
http://www.realjustice.ca/articles/081015Amernic.htm
“My first book was published in 1984. Victims: The Orphans of Justice was about a man whose daughter had been murdered by a perfect stranger, an offender just released from federal penitentiary on mandatory supervision. Today it’s called statutory release, and it means that just about anyone – lifers side – who are doing federal time get out after 2/3 of their sentence, whether they had qualified for parole or not.”
Do you need more proof? Will this do? Mark Shannon, was convicted of the crimes and was himself murdered while in custody a few years later.
When my uncle ran for the Reform Party in Ontario he received little if any support from out west, and got to meet Preston Manning maybe one time I believe. He lost a close race, but continued the fight against mandatory supervision until his health began to fail, forming Victims of Violence that eventually spread nationwide.
http://www.victimsofviolence.on.ca/rev2/index.php
Sorry but I didn’t realize that I was supposed to believe everything in the MSM. I have tried to understand where you are coming from Cynapse, but I just don’t and probably never will, so I must admit that I am having difficulty seeing the point in even trying.
Posted on June 17th, 2009 at 12:59 am
Brian S Says:
I had a comment awaiting review here Jack. What happened to it? Was there something wrong with it?
Posted on June 17th, 2009 at 8:11 am
Cynapse Says:
The links stopped your post from being approved automatically.
As for seeing it my way, you just have to imagine yourself minus that family tragedy, black and in a rural area during the 1970′s / 1980′s. Reform party membership is no longer a single-issue decision, is it? No, you’ve got to watch your back because the problem isn’t riding down from the ivory tower with some far-fetched scheme. The problem is next door or down the street. People who are able to worry about things like government redistribution can do so because they have no potent predators nearby. Most of the world does not have that luxury. North Americans of northern european origin have only been able to enjoy such dominance for less than 100 years. My point is your speaking from a frame of extreme social luxury when you are able to nitpick over whether the government lets a criminal out a couple years early or gives a welfare check to a single mother. It suggest your hierarchy of needs is being well met.
My father is a former-gun-owner, taxpayer, supreme tax hater, decent job, pro-military (it’s in the family tradition) mistrust of government type individual. I don’t think he voted Conservative once because depending on your demographic there are different considerations.
Probably we will never come to a full convergence because I really can’t imagine what it would be like to Brian S or vice-versa. This is not to say you don’t have a point with the crime – many of us just don’t have the luxury of voting in any group of yahoos that claim they can fix it.
Posted on June 17th, 2009 at 8:27 am
Brian S Says:
You still have no idea what you are talking about Cynapse. Do you really believe that “the war against poverty” has anything to do with helping the poor? What do you know about me? Since when is my hierarchy of needs being well met by big nanny Ontario? I grew up poor living in what amounted to a tar-paper shack in a high density area of Toronto. Put myself through technical college twice, worked hard enough to warrant receiving a further education paid for by the likes of IBM, Microsoft, Banyan, Sun, SCO, Novell etc., that I would have otherwise not been able to afford in four lifetimes, continued on working hard enough to pay loads of taxes, and then with more than a little help from our negligent “healthcare” system, blew the back of my heart out(dissected aorta). I have been collecting my $10,000 per year CPP disability for a couple of years now while both recovering and awaiting an operation from which I will have only a small chance of surviving, and at the age of 47 I am still somewhat poor with very few options.
Do you really believe that my first thought was or should have been, I don’t need to sell the house, Cynapse has a job so he should pay for it? Of course, if I had never worked and saved my money, and had instead sat around drinking away my welfare money, I would be eligible to collect a more lucrative Ontario disability. Not much of a safety net for my kind though when it comes down to it. Still fighting with the province for help with my prescriptions. CPP helps, but I did pay into it and am not expected to reach old age so as to be able to collect it then. For all the taxes I have paid, I am now eligible for the help of a “liberal with a union job”. Well, more like the empathy of a “liberal with a union job” really, since they aren’t very helpful even when not on one of their day long coffee breaks.
Posted on June 17th, 2009 at 9:56 am
Cynapse Says:
What I think is you have tunnel vision on this topic and we’ll never reach an agreement. I’m not going to back some hang-em-high party or ideology with a dubious past for reasons you will never have to contemplate. End of story. I don’t know about you and probably never will via the internet.
I’m not about to spill my life story but it certainly hasn’t been a smooth road and right now I’m putting my own aspirations on hold to put someone else through school. It’s the only way we’ll get by in this economy. From what I can tell mine will be the first generation in quite a while to have less than the previous one, as my friends who do have the flashy things are doing so at tremendous future cost (interest) and the more frugal like myself are living in poorly maintained apartment buildings alongside subsidized bums and ex convicts. Not exactly the cushy existence we were hyped up about in University.
Posted on June 17th, 2009 at 10:03 am
Brian S Says:
Well, I do get tired of having you constantly insinuate that I have a silver spoon in my mouth because I am white.
Posted on June 17th, 2009 at 10:11 am
Cynapse Says:
You have to realize that you do have that social advantage. This has nothing to do with economics, and I wouldn’t imply that it did. My town was surrounded by 5 trailer parks, and the drama related to not having money / being fashionable played itself out every week on our high school grounds (we all had to go to the same school)
Posted on June 17th, 2009 at 11:04 am
Brian S Says:
Those waves of immigrants came in pretty fast. Do you really believe that it is a piece of cake with a cherry on top to be a white kid in a high school of mostly blacks in a high density area of Toronto? If I lucked out at all it was only in being big enough to hold my own in a fight. Thinking back, it was really the Asian and south Asian kids who took the brunt of it.
Posted on June 17th, 2009 at 11:24 am
UV Says:
Brian – you may not have a silver spoon in your mouth but you do seem to be wearing dark coloured eye glasses that is negatively affecting your eye sight. No offense but the world is not simply ‘black & white’ Remember, poverty sucks!
Posted on June 17th, 2009 at 11:29 am
Brian S Says:
Do you really believe that we conservatives want to abandon the poor on an ice flow UV? What I want is more opportunities for poor people, but that will never come in a province whose only real plan, the same one they always use for every social problem, is to hire more of their liberal friends into soft unionized positions?
What is so wrong about wanting to cut back immigration a little in hard times when there are few jobs to go around for those already here? Does that really make me a racist? If EI isn’t working, how about instead of 52 weeks of handouts, 26 weeks and the rest in a lump some for those who want to try running their own small businesses? Does that really make me an evil capitalist? My problem with liberals is that they are almost always berift of ideas, and are always too politically reluctant to change much of anything once in power? The province is going downhill so do we really need more of the same?
Posted on June 17th, 2009 at 11:49 am
Cynapse Says:
Those waves of immigrants came in pretty fast. Do you really believe that it is a piece of cake with a cherry on top to be a white kid in a high school of mostly blacks in a high density area of Toronto? If I lucked out at all it was only in being big enough to hold my own in a fight. Thinking back, it was really the Asian and south Asian kids who took the brunt of it.
Outside of school … who will be working for whom? Who will get the mortgage with the good rate? Who will be seriously shown houses in a good neighbourhood or taken on tours of good apartment buildings instead of being told “sorry, we’re full”? Who will receive proper service in restaurants every time?
The brawn and aggression that serves those young black kids (and I assume you mean Jamaican, since the African students air complaints similar to yours) so well in the school-yard won’t help them one bit when they face systemic racism … which will start in earnest the first time they visit the school career counselleor.
The Asians and South Asians are forming a pseudo-majority in Toronto. Their future is bright. It makes more sense to learn Mandarin than French in this city.
Posted on June 17th, 2009 at 12:33 pm
Brian S Says:
As I have stated earlier, I have worked for otherwise all Chinese and Muslim businesses, and have lived amongst, befriended, and had bosses and coworkers of all kinds. If you want to believe that I considered myself above them go ahead, but when it came my turn to take part in interviewing others for jobs, those who showed up in clown clothes or their pants around their ankles, speaking Ebonics or something, did not get hired regardless of their race.
Posted on June 17th, 2009 at 12:48 pm