Archive for the ‘SPECIAL INTEREST POLITICS’ Tag

JOHN CHUCKMAN COMMENT: A FURTHER WORD ON THE THOUGHTLESS ENDING OF DIPLOMATIC TIES WITH IRAN – NOT THE WAY CANADIANS TRADITIONALLY DO THINGS – HARPER’S LEGACY   Leave a comment

 

 

 

JOHN CHUCKMAN

POSTED RESPONSE TO A COLUMN IN TORONTO’S GLOBE AND MAIL

This was the act of an extremely foolish and impetuous man.

Canadians traditionally are people who try to resolve issues through diplomacy, and you can’t have diplomacy without diplomats, a point I would have thought rather obvious, but apparently not so to all, judging from a sampling of mindless comments.

There is not one good thing that can result from this act for Canada or Canadians, with the sole exception, if you are a Conservative, of the Conservative Party’s campaign coffers owing to special interest donations.

Then there are the hollow cheers from the little mob of unofficial representatives for Israel’s interests (interests as defined by the three madmen currently running the place: Netanyahu, Barak, and Lieberman) who swarm like flies on any story of this nature, trying to bury thoughtful comments and prevent meaningful discussion.

You can tell them, almost to a person, despite the pseudonyms used in almost every case, by their tone: it lacks all logic and is devoid of ethics.

They never argue the genuine merits of one side or the other: they just call names, advocate the destruction of millions of innocent people, and offer limp efforts at frat-boy jokes.

What is Canadian about such behavior? Just as what is Canadian about Baird’s utterly foolish act?

Nothing, unless your idea of being Canadian is to sound and act like America’s Republican buffoons, the pathetic likes of Newt Gingrich or Sarah Palin or Rush Limbaugh or indeed Mitt Romney.

None of whom ever uttered a thoughtful sentence, and all of whom regularly go out of their way to say obtuse and abusive things that create conflict and division.

Divisiveness and conflict – that literally defines Stephen Harper’s legacy to Canadian politics.

The audience you draw does tend to define the nature of your acts, and you’ve only to read a sampling here to understand what Harper and Baird have achieved, and it is not something in the interests of the vast majority of Canadians.

But then Harper is a 39% prime minister, isn’t he?

And our democracy is badly bent when that kind of support allows acts and words that will do damage for years to our long-term interests.