What it takes


 

Jim Travers speculates on the possibility of change.

Where we’re headed is more opaque. As former Ontario NDP premier and now federal Liberal Bob Rae pointed out earlier in this Star series, Canada is badly in need of a selfless champion. There’s an immediate opening here for a leader who cares deeply enough about democracy to willingly peel away powers stealthily taken and ferociously guarded…

None of this will happen until someone more saint than politician makes it the prime minister’s business to roll back the office’s extraordinary authority. Barring that, followers that leaders have been pushing around for so long will have to declare that enough is more than enough. In the absence of one or the other, democracy will continue its slide into sham-ocracy.


 

What it takes

  1. And the non-voting movement will be seen for what it is, resistance against a corrupt system.

    • For goodness sake. Take a look at Iran, and you will witness resistance against a corrupt system. Non-voting is not a movement, in that it's "participants" are a group of varyingly lazy, apathetic,, cynical, selfish free riders who cannot be bothered to read a bit, think a bit, make a judgement and spend a few minutes in a booth.

      There may be the odd delusional soul who honestly agonizes about not voting, and is sufficiently narcissistic to think that somehow a message is being conveyed. But that ain't most of the goofs who would hate to miss twenty minutes of precious couch time in front of the television. Heck, even if all the non-voters were seriously trying to effect change, the fact is the erosion of democracy noted by Travers has increased alongside decreased voter turnout.

      • Amen, Sean. For all we moan about the constant elections, at least we have free and open elections, and it is an honour and a privlege to vote in them. If you are honestly so dissulusioned that you feel that the best way you can make your point is not to vote, stand for office yourself. Otherwise, get your arse into the polling booth and make a mark on a piece of paper.
        It's the least you can do.

      • A +1 doesn't seem to do this justice. Somehow, though, it seems unlikely that someone who thinks being too lazy to get off their couch constitutes "resistance" would actually get that.

    • For goodness sake. Take a look at Iran, and you will witness resistance against a corrupt system. Non-voting is not a movement, in that it's "participants" are a group of varyingly lazy, apathetic, cynical, selfish free riders who cannot be bothered to read a bit, think a bit, make a judgement and spend a few minutes in a booth.

      There may be the odd delusional soul who honestly agonizes about not voting, and is sufficiently narcissistic to think that somehow a message is being conveyed. But that ain't most of the goofs who would hate to miss twenty minutes of precious couch time in front of the television. Heck, even if all the non-voters were seriously trying to effect change, the fact is the erosion of democracy noted by Travers has increased alongside decreased voter turnout.

  2. Hmm…are we ready yet for "Trudeau Part 2: This time, it's personal?"

  3. None of this will happen until someone more saint than politician makes it the prime minister's business to roll back the office's extraordinary authority.

    Translation – back benchers and cabinet ministers are bitterly disappointed that they are unable to steer nearly as much money and power to their cronies as they would like.

    Non-voting is not a movement, in that it's "participants" are a group of varyingly lazy, apathetic, cynical, selfish free riders

    You're mixed up. It's the free riders who show up in droves to vote themselves other people's money. It's their victims who disdain the process.

    who cannot be bothered to read a bit, think a bit, make a judgement

    I read about Airbus, HRDC, BDC, and many other deeply and fundamentally corrupt government programs. Based on the plain facts I judged that access to nearly unlimited amounts of money and power will thoroughly corrupt any person or organization which seeks to get their hands on it. Therefore the best thing for honest people to do is to refrain from voting because it gives the winners of election an arrogance and perception of legitimacy which they would not otherwise possess.

    Since you're such an avid reader you should check out "Democracy – the God that Failed". Read, and think.

    • Actually, if you are choosing NOT to vote for any of the Candidates available… or making a statemment, if you will… you can go in and register that you did in fact come to vote… and then refuse the ballot. This is the legitimate way that your message is sent through EC that voters do not like what they have been offered.

      You can bet that any serious amount of refused ballots (like 40%of registered voters, for example) would get the attention of ALL the Parties.

      Not bothering is what has brought us to this point.

  4. Well, Bob Rae's second Party wouldn't let him even run for leader. Guess who Bob Rae thinks is a "selfless champion" – he's in Bob's mirror every time he looks.