My typo-corrected online comment, which the pollster allows you to make when taking it’s poll asking Canadians whether they’d still like Trudeau’s government to do the electoral reform he promised when he wanted our vote, follows. I don’t know who, exactly, sees the comment, but let’s let you see it:
“We needed [electoral reform] long ago, before special interests hijacked the election machinery (along with governments). It’s a big boat. You can turn the wheel on a gigantic ship whose crew sees an ice berg off in the distance, but the ship is so big, and the effect of the turning of the wheel so slight, You stand a good chance of still hitting that berg. One can’t say ‘no’ to the question, Do we want a new voting system?, of course. But realistically, I don’t expect this government to even allow meaningful options in that regard. Which speaks to other problems, including gangster politicians whose job is to manage the people so that their private sectors friends and allies can get on with people- and planet-destroying business as usual. Other issues include: dark money in donations/ money means free speech legislation/ electronic voting machines, by rightwing companies, that play tricks/ no real options, by design, in the electoral market place which is no more ‘free’ than our economic market/ and the biggest problem of all, namely the willingness of the neoconservative/neoliberal crowd to break all written and unwritten rules (lying, like Trump, for example about all the voter fraud so as to make the case for voter suppression rules) in order to maintain power and sideline the people.”
As for Nathan Cullen and his neoliberal Party, They are all acting. His government would act the same way as Trudeau’s is acting if it was in power. Of that, I have no doubt. These opposition politicians say the most clever, correct things when criticizing the government in power. But it’s all a show and one that we the people have seen over and over. My experience is that generally, the less in power a Party is, the more it ‘talks’ a good line. It speaks, unlike the disdainful managers of government who don’t really care whether they make sense and whether we know that they don’t make sense, a little more carefully, respectfully and sanely. They do like winning and wouldn’t mind getting elected. Let the abused people give them the power if they want ‘change’. Of course, There’s limits. Real power expects the political class that it has bought to see to it’s interests and that’s generally what happens. In the last federal election, one leaders’ debate was sponsored by tax evading Google, whose next atrocity, it has developed, will be assisting the police state in it’s efforts to kill free speech! See the links to relevant articles, below.
It’s a balancing act for the opposition. Speak plainly, and accurately, to the people, but make it as empty as possible. And lie, of course. Elites know, mostly, that people-friendly rhetoric from their partners in politics is hot air. Sometimes. Or they just say clever stuff to look busy and to look like they should continue to keep their paid work – getting affectionate with the dog if you like – that, when you think about those statements, you start to see are empty. To wit: Cullen said abandoning the electoral reform promise would be “immoral.” To which I say/said (in response to the below linked-to article by Jeremy Nuttall) “Cullen said that bad people doing bad things would be bad, unless they put on a white helmet.”
“The “N” In NDP Now Stands For Neoliberal” by Yves Engler
“Google’s Jigsaw: Undermining Alternative Media” by Kurt Nimmo
“This Election Is Being Rigged – But Not By Democrats” by Ari Berman (The Nation magazine is a fake progressive organization. Their raison d’être is getting ‘their’ neoliberal/ neoconservative (Democratic) Party into power. Nevertheless, What Ari relates here about Trump is correct.)
See my previous post titled “The Corporatocracy’s NDP.”
“Electoral Deformed? Things Getting Weird On Committee Studying Reforms, Says NDP” by Jeremy J. Nuttall
An excerpt from the above linked-to article by Jeremy Nuttall follows:
In the interview with Le Devoir, Trudeau said Canadians are less interested in changes to the voting system since his election. The desire for electoral reform might have been linked to the unpopularity of the former government of Stephen Harper, he said.
Jeremy refers to a clever line from Nathan Cullen about Trudeau’s principles: “Trudeau “is essentially saying the system was only broken until they elected me.”” Indeed, Now that he has the power, Trudeau can talk to us like an idiot, for fun, basically telling us that we were idiots for electing him, which in fact is somewhat fair. I think people who don’t care and are okay with inequality, whether they are well educated and well off or not, are idiots. And then there are people who don’t care enough to know, who get their knowledge of the world from corporate-owned media – no bias there of course – and actually thought the past federal election was useful, to the ‘whole’ country, who voted for Trudeau. They are idiots in the conventional sense. People have willingly made themselves dumb, gladly accepting the 1%’s brain-killing device, known as a television set, into their homes. Could anything be more effective at pacifying the population than television, which mixes entertainment (sorely needed in this hellish world) with propaganda?