Perhaps Canada’s biggest political parlor trick of all occurred with the Liberal Party’s appointment of Mark Carney as its leader going into the snap election to be held on April 28. With that move, win or lose, the Liberal Party definitely cut its losses from whatever else might have been expected under Trudeau against a growing Conservative support.
To most on the Right, Carney is seen as being utterly toxic to Canada and while this is undoubtedly true, Carney has recaptured the votes of many disillusioned-by-Trudeau Liberal supporters. Simultaneously, his ‘toxic’ presence has also succeeded in once again persuading relatively principled voters on the Right to abandon their own professed principles.
Nowhere is this better illustrated than with those struggling with the choice of voting for Pierre Poilievre (CPC) or Maxime Bernier (PPC). By voting for Bernier they believe they are ‘wasting their vote’ in the effort to counter Carney, but by voting for Poilievre, they know they are voting for the ‘lesser evil’ between the two leading electoral contenders. And that’s exactly what most do.
Why do they do this? – in order to deal with a ‘crisis’ – the one manufactured by their opponents on the Left. It’s a political parlor trick, and until those on the Right quit falling for it, our political journey will continue to be one headed Leftward, towards the tyranny so idealized by the Left.
In predictable fashion, it is argued that “this is the most important election in our history” as if that justifies abandoning one’s own principles. What is forgotten is that Canada has endured many such ‘crisis’ elections, and that elections are not an end to any political conflict; they are a mere marker along the way.
When frustrated voters wonder why their politicians and political parties are not listening to them, they are asking a question that reveals a fundamental misunderstanding about the democratic electoral process. The relevant question to ask is the reverse: why aren’t the people listening to their politicians and political parties?
Political parties and politicians don’t establish their agendas based on ‘what the people want.’ They establish their agendas based on how they think a government should be run, and then appeal to the public for a consensus.
In contrasting Poilievre with Bernier, the choice is not between the ‘lesser of two evils,’ but between an unprincipled and untrustworthy ‘Conservative-in-name-only’ party, and a party of principle that has always been Just Right since its founding.
If you found this presentation valuable please consider supporting us:
🧡 PayPal
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.