Quote from pushed to the left and loving it Sept 1
Not one to leave a Republican quote unplagiarized, Stephen Harper wrote a piece for the Globe in March of 1995, in which he defined his Reform Party as being based on "three g-issues"- guns, gays, and government grants." (10)
10. Where Does the Reform Party Go From Here, By Stephen Harper, Globe and Mail, March 21, 1995 and from an article in the Walrus, called the Outsider by William Johnson, in March 2009 Harper shows more of his true colours
Characteristically, Harper didn’t complete his first mandate as a member of Parliament. In January 1997, he dropped out to take a position as vice-president (later president) of the National Citizens Coalition, where he could agitate for policies concordant with the organization’s slogan: “More freedom through less government.” His decision stemmed mainly from differences between his and Manning’s visions. He had gone public with his views in the spring of 1995, in a Globe and Mail article with the headline, “Where Does the Reform Party Go from Here? To be credible as the logical alternative to the Liberals, says a Reform MP, the party can’t just fight elections on the popular protests of the day.” When his plea to Reform’s rank and file failed, Harper quit.
A reminder that Harper follows Leo Strauss, who is, in my mind, a scary thinker.
Rick Salutin published the following article Stephen Harper – the last Straussian? From Friday's Globe and Mail Published Last updated
Leo Strauss was a German-Jewish thinker who escaped Hitler for the U.S. but despaired over the depravity that liberalism might lead to there as it had in Germany, after the liberal 1920s. He felt almost any means were valid to save Western civilization but, due to liberalism’s strength, the strategy had to be cautious, secretive, even duplicitous, with the truth confined to an elite. This rarefied vision became highly influential when it was spread by his students (and theirs) in government, think tanks and media during the Reagan and Bush years. It’s a prominent force at Mr. Harper’s intellectual home, the University of Calgary. What does it illuminate in his behaviour?
Secretiveness, an aura of manipulation and a sense of hidden agendas. From a Straussian view, these are good things as means to noble ends. When I studied in the U.S., Straussian students used to lurk, literally, around antiwar protests or demos. Some sneakiness is routine in politics but here it gets a high-minded intellectual justification. It’s almost romantic.
Religion. Leo Strauss felt most people will never do the right thing for rational reasons; they need to be motivated by the myths and emotionality of religion. So his neocon disciples, many of them Jewish, built strong links to the Christian right. Stephen Harper attends an evangelical church, yet he doesn’t seem much of a fit; he shows none of the passion there that he has for politics. Perhaps it just goes with the Straussian territory.
Nationalism. The PM may have shown his real feelings about Canada in 2000 when he called it “a second-tier socialistic country.” Still, for Straussians, nationalism ranks alongside religion as a way to motivate people to great things beyond the vapidity of liberalism. This may help explain the Harper Arctic sovereignty initiatives, or even his curious focus on hockey.
Populism and democracy. Leo Strauss (like his man, Plato) never liked democracy much but his disciples are ready to use it against the real villain, liberalism. To this end, they appeal to the “anti-liberal” impulses of ordinary folk against the “liberal elites,” via “wedge issues” like gun control, abortion or attacks on high art. (That one was especially self-destructive in Quebec.)
Contempt. There seem high levels of this, even for politics, among the Harperites (John Baird, Jason Kenney etc.). But Straussianism requires a strong sense of Us v. Them, to overcome the lassitude created through what it views as liberal notions such as tolerance and cultural relativism.
By way of comparison, take Preston Manning. His Christianity seems deeply felt, like his populism. They aren’t elements of strategy. He appears to believe he can actually persuade voters, not just fool and control them. He’s a conservative but he’s no Straussian (unless he’s a very devious one).
One can see the appeal of Canada to Straussians. The U.S. always had so much fevered religiosity, hypernationalism and paranoid individualism, you hardly needed to seed them there by stealth. Here, though, we still have liberals, Liberals, even social democrats. We may be Straussianism’s happy hunting ground.
Creative Revolution have a couple of real interesting links on the Wall Street Occupation with a link to We are the 99 Percent
From their Website:
We are the 99 percent. We are getting kicked out of our homes. We are forced to choose between groceries and rent. We are denied quality medical care. We are suffering from environmental pollution. We are working long hours for little pay and no rights, if we're working at all. We are getting nothing while the other 1 percent is getting everything. We are the 99 percent.
Brought to you by the people who occupy wall street. Why will YOU occupy?
Creative Revolution stated and since this is something I have also talked about as well, in my blog, I am sharing his post here, because I believe he makes the point very strongly:
Want to know the ONE thing that separates us from our U.S. brothers and sisters? The one thing that is keeping us partly solvent and off the streets?
The ONE thing that if we lose it will dump us into the toilet personally and collectively as a country?
Healthcare.
This drum is one I have been beating for a long time. And I have a hard time understanding why it is not talked about more often.
There are still a few around who will tell you straight faced that the Harper Administration would not dare touch this sacred cow. Those are the Naive ones.
Because incrementally, piece by piece with a mahjoritay, and a rubber stamp senate? With Provinces who are getting more and more strapped for cash, and with the apathy of a sleeping public, this is an easy agenda to slide in
Watch Harper start to move in this direction over the next few months and use the issue of Provincial rights to move away from supporting Health Care. The debate of the right of women to have an abortion has already started in Canada check out some of the information at Dammit Janet,
No comments:
Post a Comment