The Rise and Slow Decline of Jason Kenney

In 2014, Jason Kenney was the heir apparent to Steven Harper. Though there were a few others vying for the crown, Kenney was the leader of the pack. Already the most powerful minister in the federal government, he had shown a particular gift for wooing minority groups to the Conservative cause (he was dubbed “Curry in a Hurry” by his colleagues for his frequent appearances at community banquets across the country).

Kenney’s road to the top was a somewhat winding one. After attending a Jesuit university in California (he didn’t finish his degree) where he became a noted anti-abortion and anti-gay campaigner, he returned to Canada and briefly served as executive assistant to Ralph Goodale, the Liberal premier of Saskatchewan. Very shortly thereafter, he was hired to run the Alberta, then Canadian, Taxpayers’ Federation, a small but influential conservative lobby group. He entered federal politics, winning as a Reform MP in the 1997 election at the age of 29.

Eight years later, the path to the Prime Minister’s office seemed clear. They would easily win the 2015 election against the solid but uninspiring Tom Mulcair. The Liberal party was dead and the insult machine was already taking aim at new untried leader, Justin Trudeau, expecting to destroy his chances the way they had the previous two party chiefs. A few years later, Harper would retire and Kenney would be king.

 By 2015, things were not so clear. The NDP was climbing in the polls and it became clear the Conservatives were in for a fight. They responded by rolling out massive advertising buys in advance of the longest Canadian election campaign since 1872. The party’s coffers were full and they were sure they could easily outspend and outlast the opposition. It was the first of several key strategic errors, Harper and his crew would make.

The second was to underestimate Justin Trudeau. It was if they had come to believe their own propaganda. Trudeau had already won a seat (when Liberals all around were losing theirs) in Papineau, which had long been a stronghold of the separatist Bloc Quebecois. He then united a party that had been split into two factions for nearly twenty years. Yet, the Conservatives largely ignored him to take on Mulcair. Then came the first leaders’ debate, where Trudeau didn’t merely survive but was the consensus winner.

By the end of the campaign, the Conservatives were growing a little desperate. After taking a hardline against Muslim women wearing head scarfs when swearing their oath to Canada, a small bounce in the polls lead them to go all-in with the announcement of a “barbaric practices hotline,” to encourage Canadians to snitch on fellow citizens. Instead of wide popular approval, the proposal was widely condemned and ensured both the defeat of the Harper government and the entrenchment of a solid group of very conservative MPs and activists in the federal party. Kenney, always a loyal solder, had come out swinging in defense of the idea, saw much of his work with minorities washed away.

In the aftermath of the defeat, Harper resigned as leader and most leading Conservatives, convinced Trudeau would be invincible for at least 8 years, found something else to do, mostly in the cozy confines of corporate boardrooms. The federal party was left in the hands of a dozen lightweights who vied for the leadership. The final winner was Andrew Scheer, a pale version of Harper with a thin resume and few ideas. Maxime Bernier, who finished a close second, left in a snit to form the far right Peoples’ Party of Canada.

Jason Kenney had other ideas. The NDP shocked Canada by winning the 2015 provincial election in Alberta, leaving the right fragmented and fighting among themselves. Rather than pursue the federal party head in 2017, he chose to run for the Progressive Conservative leadership and, having won that, launched a campaign to “unite the right.” By 2019, he was solidly entrenched as the leader of the United Conservative Party, despite allegations of questionable (and perhaps illegal) tactics in the leadership campaign. In the subsequent election, he won a landslide victory.

It is difficult to know what Kenney had in mind at that moment. Was he satisfied to be premier of the 4^th largest province when the Prime Minister’s job had seemed so close? Did he see the premiership as a step back to Ottawa (despite the fact that no Canadian premier has ever become Prime Minister)? He had defied conventional wisdom before, why not again?

It hardly matters now. Oil prices that had peaked at over $100 a barrel in 2014 had fallen below $60 and remained stubbornly low, falling to just over $50 weeks after Kenney, a strong defender of oil and gas, was sworn in as Premier. Although Kenney had no control over the world price of oil, he claimed credit for its rise toward the end of 2019. Then COVID-19 struck and the price of oil collapsed, falling as low as $12 in April, 2020. Although the price has risen again as the world economy re-opens, the damage to the government’s finances, which had frequently relied on oil to keep provincial taxes the lowest in the country, was already done. Crippling budget cuts in the midst of the pandemic—while federal coffers were wide open—started the party’s slide.

The subsequent inconsistent and often dangerous handling of the pandemic infuriated both left and right in Alberta (though for very different reasons) and soon Kenney saw his personal popularity collapse (he is now the most unpopular elected leader in the country) and his party fall behind the NDP in the polls, as new extreme parties began to nip at his right flank. Having no room to maneuver on the left, he is now fighting a read guard action to preserve his leadership of the United Conservative Party. It is rumoured (though he denies it) that he even allowed some backbench MLAs negotiate with recent blockaders of the US border, a move that backfired when a cadre of well-armed extremists bent on murder was discovered in their midst.

Like most provincial premiers whose polls are sagging, Kenney is now trying to point the finger of blame at the federal government in Ottawa, with growing levels of cynicism and unreality. First came the absurd and pointless referendum on the equalization program, which Kenney (who had a major hand in designing the latest version) knows full-well is fully in the power of the federal government. Now, he is proposing to sue over the invocation of the Emergencies Act (which was passed by the government of Conservative PM, Brian Mulroney), although the basis for such a suit is utterly unclear.

Will it be enough to keep Mr. Kenney his job? He might well stave off a challenge by the right to remove him, though only by moving farther to the right himself. I know some of my progressive friends in Alberta are wondering how he possibly could go farther right. Just watch him.

He might decide that it is now or never and re-enter federal politics, but I think the well has been poisoned for him in the federal party. A failed provincial premier is unlikely to be a palatable option for the increasingly divided federal party. Ironically, Trudeau was not as invincible as they all thought and Kenney may now rue avoiding the federal leadership race in 2017, when the mantle might well have been his for the asking.

A year is an eternity in politics. Kenney may retain his leadership though winning a subsequent election when most urban areas in the province now solidly reject the far-right blandishments of their rural cousins, seems unlikely.

The political road may be ending for Jason Kenney but don’t shed too many tears for him. He has a career with his corporate friends to look forward to and, at the end of the day, a fat federal pension to retire on.

Photo by Jason Blackeye on Unsplash

Return to the Parapet

I have completed my time of reflection and retreat; I am refreshed and strengthened by it. Still, the continued presence of the occupying force is disturbing despite the waning of their numbers. The prince has declared that this occupation cannot abide and has moved forcefully—despite the opposition of certain factions—to end it.

His vizier and her tax collectors have commanded the banks to stop the flow of gold to the occupiers, especially sums being secretly carried across our borders. Bit by bit, it is being seized and held fast. Many of the leaders of the invading force have been taken into custody and are being held under bar or bond until they can be judged. Some have eluded capture but the chief spymaster declares he knows their habits and habitual haunts and his long arm will reach for them in due course.

Today, our forces have won a great victory, seizing many of the siege engines and driving others away but I fear they have not gone far and will regroup to test our mettle once again. Some of the occupiers have lost heart or have discovered the duplicity of their masters and departed. Others are determined to remain, hurling taunts and insults at our loyal troops and even, it is said, using their children as a shield against capture. Condemnation has rained from all quarters at such dangerous abuse.

The old Captain of the Guard has given up his office and been replaced by a more forceful figure who has promised to being the occupation to an end. The bell is tolling now for those who still remain, unrepentant in their defiance. There are those who worry that the prince has moved too forcefully while others bitterly complain he should have done so sooner. Such is the burden of leadership, assailed on all sides while trying to find the judicious path to peace.

I was disturbed to find that some in our fair city have given succor to the occupying force, despite the assault on the livelihood (and ears) of their neighbours. Some have even joined the horde and demanded the overthrow of our lawful government. Such, of course, is the price of freedom in a peaceable kingdom: everyone has the right to be wrong.

Everyone also has the right to resist the law but must suffer the consequences if they do. The philosophers disagree on much but most accept that there can be no freedom without responsibility.

In happier news, the plague that has scoured our land these past two years has begun to recede, though it may, as it has before, arise again. Still, the coming of spring may bring release to a people grown tired of hiding from the world and from each other. It seems odd that at the moment of our salvation, brought on by the diligence of our people in following the prescriptions of our physics and barbers, the horde chooses to cry out inchoately as if their sacrifice was greater than ours.

For myself, I find my return to the parapet both gratifying and yet fraught with anxiety and distraction. Some of our seers warn that this is the beginning of the end for our way of life, while others dismiss it as nothing untoward. I do know that it has silenced other voices, calling out for justice and pleading for action to save us from a changing Nature. Perhaps that was the aim all along, to turn us from the proper course with noise and contradiction. It is no surprise that those who support the horde and its presence in our city also shelter hateful men of vile opinions and deny the need to curb the present behavior. This may ultimately make everything else we do or think mere sound and fury signifying nothing.

All things must pass. Both the trivial concerns of the moment and the greater tribulations to come will pass and the world will go on as it must. But, I fear, unless we attend to larger matters, it may go on without us.

Photo by Rémy Penet on Unsplash

Freedom

Man is born free but everywhere he is in chains. So said Jean-Jacques Rousseau in the opening line of his book The Social Contract. Of course, he then goes on to propose a set of rules which constrain individual actions which we all agree to in order to live in a civil society.

Karl Marx didn’t merely turn Hegel on his head, he also tried to subvert Rousseau with the opening lines of The Communist Manifesto: Workers of the world unite, you have nothing to lose but your chains. He argued that only when you became conscious of class oppression could you understand the necessity of change. Karl was big on necessity as the foundation of freedom.

 Wikipedia, the fount of all knowledge in the modern world, defines freedom “as either having the ability to act or change without constraint or to possess the power and resources to fulfill one’s purposes.” Check back tomorrow, it might have been edited to say something else. The freedom to edit is the very basis of Wikipedia.

Some argue that freedom belongs only to those who can seize it, with force if necessary. It is the law of the wild west—a fundamental myth of American life, which like all myths is mostly divorced from the truth. It did give us the axiom that no matter how fast you are with a gun, there is always someone faster (which carried far enough suggests the means for faster-than-light travel). In such a world only one person can ever be free, which makes everyone else what?

Others, like Nelson Mandela, argue that freedom is not merely casting off one’s chains but to live in a manner that respects and enhances the freedom of others. Freedom ends when it impinges on the freedom of others. That sounds like what the majority of Canadians would consider accurate. A free society is one that allows everyone as much freedom as possible but not all the freedom in the world.

Freedom without responsibility to me is mere license, the ability to do whatever you like no matter what the cost to others. License is only freedom to those who are unconstrained; to others, it can seem like brutal repression.

The other aspect of license that seems to appeal to so many is choice without consequence. Yet, many philosophers and rebels both would beg to disagree. Freedom is not the power to do as we like but to do as we ought. That is, freedom can only be understood and attained through moral action and the acceptance of personal responsibility for doing what we choose to do.

Of course, like most things in our lives, freedom is a social construct, one that is highly malleable and can be bent and twisted to serve anybody’s agenda. Wrapping yourself in freedom excuses the oppression practiced by racists, homophobes and misogynists. The trick for the rest of us is to see through the pretty shiny wrapping at the reality that lies beneath.

To return to Rousseau, we find a fatal flaw in his argument. Freedom did not predate the social contract but grew out of it. There is no state of nature where man existed as a solitary figure, totally free from constraint. Such feral creatures could never survive. If we are born free, it is only because we are born into a society that recognizes, encourages, supports and limits our freedom.

Anything else is nothing but a happy lie we use to justify our selfishness.

Photo by Hussain Badshah on Unsplash

Unity

Unity is either a glorious aspiration or a pretty illusion, depending on who you ask and how you define unity. Canadian and Canadian politicians are frequently obsessed with the idea and much of our history revolves around it.

The railway is the first myth of the “ties that bind.” The construction of a railway from coast to coast, culminating in the driving of the last spike is often portrayed as one of the great nation-building projects of our past. It was what first unified us, right?

It’s true that an east-west rail line was a condition of British Columbia entering into Confederation but the project itself predates 1867 and is mostly a tale of entrepreneurs and, sometimes, governments building lines here and there, either to make money or stimulate the economy. More often than not, the ventures ended in bankruptcy. The national railway consisted mostly of linking these failed projects together (at least where the gauges matched up) while millionaires schemed and corrupt politicians aided and abetted them. Never mind how it impacted indigenous communities and Chinese immigrants, it was good for those who counted at the time.

The resulting Pacific Scandal has lived on in Canadian lore. Every case of government malfeasance, big or small, has been called the greatest scandal since… well, you know the rest. One must find one’s symbols of unity where one can.

Of course, the question of national unity has infused every discussion of the relations between Quebec and the Rest of Canada (ROC) since at least the Quiet Revolution. Talk of Quebec separation is fairly quiescent now (only about 35% of Quebecers support it) as the two, like couples stuck in an unhappy but financially beneficial marriage, stay together because it is better than splitting up. The unity of economic desperation.

Let’s not forget the west. Every time things don’t go their way, a few folks in western Canada will immediately suggest they would be better off as a separate country or as part of the USA or at least in a more autonomous part of Canada. These movements have been more successful in spawning political parties (Progressives, CCF, Social Credit, Reform, etc.) then in actually fostering independence. Unity Through Division is a good way to go. Of course, most Westerners can’t quite agree on what is and is not part of the club (not Winnipeg or Vancouver, for crying out loud).

What do we mean by unity anyway? For centrists ( of the left or the right), unity means we all share the same basic values and we have no differences that can’t be resolved through reason and discussion. Well, except for massive income inequality spawned by the class divisions of a capitalist society or the persistent impact of racism and misogyny on all of us (though the burden on white males seems remarkably light).

The right has a different take on unity. Do what you’re told and we’ll all be one big happy family and if we catch you doing anything un-Canadian (whatever that means), well, there will be consequences! Anyone got the number of the Barbaric Practices snitchline?

The left is more nuanced (or is it more disunited?) in their definition. Unity is only achieved through inclusion. Everyone needs to feel that are part of something bigger while retaining every possible distinction in their personal life. It’s a different kind of happy family based on tolerance and acceptance. Well, except for those guys over there.

As usual, I’m being a bit cynical, there are lots of good people, with different views, who have every right to call themselves Canadian. We are united on so many things – love of hockey (never watch it), Tim Horton’s (can’t stand their coffee) and not being American (except for the dudes in Ottawa waving the USA and Confederate flags).

And we are also united in real ways, at least most of us are. We believe in the rule of law (if not always the police or the courts), we believe in helping our neighbours (even if they are sometimes annoying), we are united in having strong feelings about Toronto (and about vaccines). But no matter what the topic is, there will always be some who disagree and sometimes that minority means me and sometimes it means you.

Unity through shared dissatisfaction. Better than nothing I guess.

Photo by Riccardo Ginevri on Unsplash

The Ikea Syndrome

Yesterday I tweeted: I have passed into a weird state of mind. The #OttawaConvoy no longer troubles me. They have become like furniture–really ugly uncomfortable furniture that needs to be hauled to the dump–but nothing more than that.

My friend, Mike, kindly diagnosed me as suffering from the Ikea Syndrome, hence the title of today’s blog. If all goes according to plan, this may be the last time I write about the dunderheads that continue to clog our city’s streets.

They have quite literally ceased to matter to me. I got their initial protest—they were upset about the restrictions forced on us by the global pandemic. I get that. Guess what—WE’RE ALL UPSET! The difference between me and the vast majority of my friends and acquaintances and them (and sadly, a small minority of my social circle) is that we accepted the reasons for the restrictions and tried, at the very least, to understand the science behind them.

Could the government have done a better job at communicating? Sure, though to be truthful, there wasn’t one government involved and some did better than others. Could our politicians collectively been less partisan in their discussions, less willing to pander for political advantage? Yes to that too, but that’s politics, the dumber cousin of good government.

But, so what? I’ve grown tired of the protests around my home not because they are inconvenient or annoying or restrict my, oh, for want of a better word, freedom, but because I’ve increasing come to see them as irrelevant. They are no longer here to protest anything meaningful or to demand anything comprehensible or remotely achievable. They are here to cause trouble, to party hearty and basically feel like they matter. Every one wants to feel like they matter, don’t they? Even if their complaints are trivial—and most of theirs in the bigger scheme of things (climate change, income inequality, the possibility of war in Europe) are utterly trivial—they still want to be heard.

Let me assure you, as it is with God so it is with government, all prayers are answered but sometimes the answer is no.

Of course, the pandemic will run its course. Even the Black Death, during a time there was no science or treatment, ran its course. It killed a third of Europeans but it did come to an end. When it is safe, restrictions will end, mostly because enough people will have been vaccinated and new treatments will emerge to keep those who persist in refusing the jab out of our ICUs and graveyards. Some provinces have already lifted restrictions (perhaps or probably prematurely) and others plan to do so by the end of March. Even the federal government has promised some immediate relaxation of travel rules but only for the fully vaccinated.

The protesters will eventually go home, I suppose, claiming victory, I am sure. Who cares? If they want to claim victory in a fight that was never serious enough to merit the name, let them. They will go home and hang their tickets and rap sheets on the wall as souvenirs and tell their grandchildren they went to Ottawa and annoyed its residents until they got tired and stopped. It’s hard to imagine but so is the present occupation and the increasingly futile response of local authorities to it.

I guess the only thing that really bothers me about the on-going noise and the stupid and ugly symbols they display is the emotions they now evoke. What started as an acceptance of their right to protest and even some sympathy for their plight, has turned, at best, to indifference for their welfare and, at worst, a nearly uncontrollable rage at their self-satisfied narcissism.  

Nearly.

Sure, I’ve fantasized about dropping water balloons or flower pots on their heads. I’ve imagined how water cannons, rubber bullets or tear gas could be best deployed. In my weakest moment, I googled how to make the most effective Molotov cocktail. It’s not as easy as you think.

And I hated myself for it. I am hope that none of my neighbours descend into similar fantasies, or worse, actual behaviors.

I value kindness, peace, justice and democracy above all else. Those are the mountains I would die on, not the molehill of rejecting public health rules that protect us all. I refuse to abandon my values because of noise, inconvenience and the persistent threat of violence, which is, so far, little more than the growling of a caged dog, with all due apologies and sympathy for those who have actually been assaulted.

These are trivial people fighting for trivial things, while their puppet-masters pull their strings. They will stay until they go and the puppet-masters, the monsters of the far right, will find another dumb show to stage.

But I am done with them. At least for now.

Photo by Bernardo Lorena Ponte on Unsplash

Lowering the Boom

For those who think that police action and violent confrontation is the only way to deal with disruptive, dangerous or illegal blockades, Canada seems to be finding another way. The courts and the financial system are both being deployed to break up the current convoy craziness. The next week or so will see how well it works.

It started when a young POC woman and two smart lawyers launched a class action suit and, simultaneously, sought an injunction against the noisy horn-blowing that had plagued the people of Ottawa for more than a week. The injunction was granted on Monday and a blissful silence descended over downtown. The injunction worked because it separated those willing to be arrested from those who aren’t. The real test will come this weekend when (or, perhaps, if) the number of vehicles increase.

The police in Ottawa, roundly criticized for inaction, have begun to slowly increase the pressure on protestors with over 20 arrests and nearly 1000 tickets issued for in the last week. Another 80 criminal investigations are underway. The convoy members, or rather their supporters outside Ottawa and, for the most part outside Canada, responded by trying to crash our 911 system, endangering everyone who might need an ambulance or fire truck this weekend. I think that says all that needs to be said about the character of the leaders of the convoy and their foaming-at-the-mouth far-right supporters.

A quick aside about the police response. This protest is different from most that have occurred in Canada. The presence of semis (basically giant battering rams) changes the situation dramatically. As well, credible reports suggest that there are dozens or more likely hundreds of protestors with police or military training who are, as the mayor of Windsor pointed out, willing to die in any confrontation. They are more than willing to take police officers and civilians with them. Living right downtown, my enthusiasm for being caught in a riot is quite minimal.

In any case, we have other options. The federal government is clearly preparing a coordinated response with other levels of government. If they have been silent, they have not been absent, keeping their cards hidden to make it difficult for the convoy leaders to plan for contingencies. The recent offer by US Homeland Security to help with border blockades may be part of the federal strategy.

Yesterday, the Conservative caucus apparently decided they have more to lose than gain by cozying up to the convoy (the math is not complex but I’ll save it for another day). They are now telling the occupiers that their message has been heard and it is time to go home. It is not an insignificant shift; the convoy now only has political allies in the People’s Party of Canada, a hard-right party that has, in two elections, failed to elect a single MP, not even their leader.

On the same day, the provincial Conservative government effectively froze the ability of the convoy’s largely American funders to get cash into the country. I’m sure they will find other routes but it will be slower and more of a trickle than a gush. FINTRAC, the federal agency that monitors money transfers to control criminal or terrorist funding activities have indicated they have some new tools as well. I’m sure the Canada Revenue Agency, the good folks who collect our taxes, are, at this very momen,t taking down the names and addresses of those involved in these protests. I expect to see a big employment opportunity for tax auditors next spring.

Today, the provincial government declared a state of emergency in Ontario in response to the various blockades, ranging from international border crossings right down to pedestrian walkways. Fines of up to $100,000 and one year in jail are promised for the worst or most persistent offenders. The Premier is also suggesting that both commercial and personal drivers’ licenses could be revoked, and though that won’t impact out of province drivers, it will likely hit one-third to one-half of those currently engaged in these now-illegal protests. I’m sure the Premier is talking to his counterparts in other provinces to extend such measures Canada-wide.

By the way, the declaration of a state of emergency by the province is far more significant that that declared by the City of Ottawa earlier this week. Whereas the city’s declaration only impacts its own operations, the provincial government has a wide range of laws and administrative measures it can invoke to impact the convoy leaders and followers directly.

It also allows the province to call for federal aid, including the military, and may give the Prime Minister the political precedence he needs to declare a national emergency and all that that entails.

Personally, I hope it doesn’t come to that. I was only fifteen and living in small town Nova Scotia in October 1970 but I still feel the shock and dismay I experienced to see Canadian troops in Canadian cities. I don’t want to see it again.

Photo by Jason Hafso on Unsplash

Constitutional Hijinks

The vast majority of the people currently blocking traffic and harassing local businesses and citizens in Ottawa know exactly nothing about how government works or what the Canadian constitution says. Unfortunately, their leaders seem to know less than nothing—that is, they are either deluded or are propagating deliberate lies about “how things work.”

Let’s start with the simplest error. The first demand was to end vaccine mandates at the border which required truckers to be fully vaccinated (2 doses but not 3) or face quarantine when entering from the USA. The American government requires something similar (their quarantine requirements less strict but do exist) for truckers entering from Canada. It is a bilateral agreement and while the federal government could (but won’t) cancel the Canadian requirement, it can do nothing about the US one. Go blockade Washington and good luck to you.

They convoyeurs are also demanding the end to vaccine mandates of all kinds across Canada. The Trudeau government must agree before they will leave. Well, even if they did agree, nothing would happen. Public health orders are provincial matters and just as the federal government can’t make Alberta keep theirs, they can’t make Ontario end them. You’re in the wrong city, go home.

Being wrong about international relations and the division of powers is not all that serious an offence given the whole lack of education about civic and politics in our schools. It’s not like it is something you can pick up from the media or casual reading. While the US constitution runs under 7500 words including all amendments, the Canadian Constitution is over 70 pages long (plus endnotes). Even if you only read the English version (the French is equally compelling), you are faced with something in the order of 50,000 words. And it’s not exactly a thrilling read likely to keep you up at night (quite the opposite from my experience—nothing like a quick read of the BNA Act to cure insomnia).

Still, summaries are available, although there is no Canadian Constitution for Dummies book (there is one for the US constitution—you can draw your own conclusions). Even a cursory review of one of those should liberate your mind from some of the whackier proposals put forward by the current occupation force. The one I like most is the suggestion that the Governor General (along with the Senate—I’ll get to that) should dissolve all the legislatures, federal, provincial, territorial, even municipal I guess and set up a new government made up of the GG, the Senate and members of a Citizen’s Committee which of course would consist mostly of, well, the Convoy leaders.

The GG is a strange but not unusual choice. The far right have always had a weird attraction for the monarchy. French fascists in the 20s were always wanking on about the return of the king (with apologies to J.R.R. Tolkien). Father figure images run throughout both monarchist and fascist mythologies. I’ve always ascribed it to unresolved daddy issues.

I have met Mary Simon casually once or twice. She is a smart, determined woman but I can’t quite see her as the Führer. Besides, aren’t they aware that she was appointed on the recommendation of their most beloved politician, Justin Trudeau? As for the Senate, it is a diverse group of people, some chosen on merit, some older ones as a political reward. The current group probably leans a little left. Also they all were appointed, the majority, you guessed it, by the current Prime Minister.

One thing I can tell you about the Canadian Constitution, it is that of a democratic country, first and foremost. But, it seems clear to me, the leaders and, probably, most of their followers aren’t remotely interested in or supportive of democracy. And when they talk about freedom what they really mean is license: freedom embraces responsibility and is guided by reason and virtue; license is choice without restraint.

Choice without restraint – the freedom of the four-year-old and of the narcissist and of the party of the wreckers.

 I could go on but I have other work to do, other responsibilities to fulfil. Perhaps these so-called freedom fighters should go home and do the same.

Photo by Jakayla Toney on Unsplash

The Grindstones of Justice

The blissful silence that has gripped the city remains, proving, once again the power of the law. It is often said that there is both law and order. But order without law is tyranny and law without order, mere chaos. But now law and order have joined hands as they must in any civil society. The peaceable kingdom is peaceful once more.

Missives have arrived from near and far, some praising my reportage and others condemning it. The heralds of the horde have done their work well, persuading (often through the use of symbols of piety) the kind-hearted and the gullible alike of the purity of their cause. I note that the greatest condemnations come from those who are at farthest remove. I pray that my correspondents should weigh carefully the news that is brought to them and question whether is only wears the lovely garments of verisimilitude or is, in reality, the truth.

The judgement of the law has fallen lightly on the leaders of our invaders but it is enough to quell their raucous trumpets and silence their foul oaths. Mark my words, it is but a temporary peace and now depends upon concurrence among our kingdom’s leaders to make it permanent. Will they accede to the requests for reinforcements for our city guard and fall into disputatious discourse and do nothing? Will they stop the flow of foreign gold sent to topple our lawful government?

Some have said to me that the leaders are good people and should be included in the councils of the state but they have shown their true colors, hiding, beneath the pennants of our kingdom, the symbols of our hated and defeated foes. Any attempt at discourse with the horde that is not fawning is met with curses, epithets and threats, if not outright violence.

Indeed, a friend of mine, a chaplain at the local cathedral was assaulted with blows to the head for no other crime than he wore protection against pestilence. It is true that he was saved from further harm by more kindly members of the horde but they did nothing to apprehend the assailant or to ban him from their number. Another neighbour had to rely on assistance of four stout masons to arrive safely at her door.

These actions cannot be excused or dismissed. My mother warned me from when I was but a lad until her dying day that I would be judged by the company I keep. It was true then and it is true now.

Judgement is coming. It may not be swift, it may not even be harsh, but it will be certain. The guilty who hide among the innocent shall be winnowed as wheat is from chaff. They cannot escape the reach of the conjoined hands of Law and Order and the millstones of Justice shall grind them fine.

As for the innocent, not quite bystanders but not villains either, I wish them peace and prosperity and a safe return to their homes, in whatever province or, indeed, country they may lie.

Photo by Jason Blackeye on Unsplash

Cracks in the River Ice

First let me make my most sincere apologies for the tardiness of this missive, but, glory be, I slept past my time this morn with no blaring trumpets to rouse me up.

On better days, it was my wont to walk along the river path. I would gaze in wonderment as the vast sheets of ice rubbed against each other. At any moment, a seemingly solid stretch of white would crack and reveal the dark water beneath. I still venture forth betimes but the glory of winter has been spoiled by the smudge of smoke that clouds our city’s air and the growing piles of refuse from this foul occupation.

Mayhap the river is not the only thing that cracks this February morning. Yesterday, the Lord Mayor stirred himself to make a proclamation, declaring what every citizen already knows, that the city is in a state of siege. The distant Duke and nearby Prince immediately pledged their aide and sent members of their guard to assist.

Last night, under the watchful eye of master archers, the guard staged a raid on the supplies of the horde, hauling away food and fuel for their malodorous siege engines and dismantling some of their rude structures. Despite their howls of outrage, only two of the invaders dared resist and they were hauled away to face some uncertain fate. The guard has vowed that any who attempt to bring succor to the intruders will be treated in like manner. The disparate and uncertain leaders of the horde have braved fierce words but the rest sit in silence, though that may not last.

The carters have declared it will be difficult to remove the siege engines blocking our byways if the horde refuses to cooperate. Some citizens have hinted darkly that the army might be called but the sound of hobnails on city paving stones is not a sound I wish to hear. Hopefully, it will not come to that.

In the meantime, lawyers argue before the assembled judges, seeking redress from oppression while the leaders of the horde squabble among themselves and whinge about their virtue.

Other cities have fared better in dealing with invading forces, perhaps learning from the mistakes our guard have made. The Captain of the Guard has been roundly chastised for his approach of “Slowly, Slowly” and much advice has been give as to what he should have done or should do now. I for one have no idea, having never served among the guard, nor dealt with an unruly mob (except for a brief skirmish in a tavern long ago in which I did not produce a brave account). Still, I’m sure his critics would have well foreseen the sudden events of ten days ago and acted in a more perspicacious manner.

Fire seems to be a new tool for the occupying force, a dangerous development in the crowded streets of the city’s heart. Flames have been ignited in metal caldrons throughout the passageways, giving off clouds of smoke and fouling the air. Worse, reports of attempted arson have begun to be reported though as yet the guard has not confirmed the details. The law will be harsh if it be proved against the perpetrators.

I think today I will walk by the river again and watch the shifting ice. While all may seem frozen and immobile now, time will pass and the river’s waters will flow again. It will be as if this winter of discontent was nothing but a fleeting dream. The losses we have suffered shall be repaid; the injuries inflicted will be made good. The righteous shall triumph and the angry, seething, hateful mob shall be dispersed and their memory erased from the chronicles of this time.

Photo by Gerald Berliner on Unsplash

A Tea Party Moment

Our medieval scholar has taken a day to contemplate the state of the city and has asked me to fill in. I’ll do my best to enlighten if not entertain you.

Some pundits, and I’m sure some within the crowd now occupying downtown Ottawa, think that this could be the beginning of the Canadian equivalent of the Tea Party, a radical right-wing movement from the 1990s that eventually took over the American Republican party. The support for the convoy expressed by a significant portion of the Conservative parliamentary caucus certainly gives one pause.

However, even if a radical movement were to arise from the current protests—highly unlikely given the lack of a cohesive message or agenda—it would find itself stymied by our parliamentary system. Currently, there are five political parties with seats in the House of Commons with a sixth knocking at the door. Others may arise over time but few will disappear. This diversity of voices almost certainly contributes to the generally centrist politics of Canadian federal governments.

The Tea Party could take over the Republican Party precisely because the presidential system of election constantly re-enforces a two-party system. While significant third-party candidates have on occasion made the ballot, they have never won. In fact, the last one to come second was Teddy Roosevelt in 1912 and he had the advantage of being a former president. Because, frequently, voters only had two realistic choices, the tea party could use the primary system to take command of the Republican party without having to first convince the majority of Republicans of their views. Once ensconced, they drove out more moderate voices and relied on voter loyalty to the brand to make their policies the central polices of the GOP. Now, as demography turns against them, they are fighting a read-guard action of voter suppression to maintain power, aided of course by the ridiculously undemocratic allocation of Senate seats where every state gets two Senators.

Other countries with presidential systems avoid the two-party trap by having run-off elections where multiple candidates run for the office and the two with the most votes then run against each other a week or two later. Because most of these countries also have a form of proportional representation, whoever wins the presidency will not have a majority in the legislature and must form broad alliances to advance their agenda. Run-offs have their own issues. In France where an ultra-right movement became strong enough to come second in the last few elections, their success forced voters to vote for the alternative, assuring a centrist or centre-left president. This will likely result in the re-election of Macron, a not particularly popular president, in this year’s vote.

Canada’s protection comes precisely from an element of our political landscape that many people decry – the fragmentation along regional lines (such as the Bloc Quebecois or even the Green Party with its BC base) or between urban and rural voters even within the same region or province; urban areas tilt left, rural ones, right. Radical parties, on the federal level, seldom succeed in getting elected in significant numbers and, if they do, have very limited power or even influence. It should be noted the last Conservative PM succeeded in winning 3 elections (with only one majority) by largely suppressing or silencing the far right in his party. The last two leaders of that party largely failed because they lacked the authority to do the same.

If the leaders of the Conservative party now embrace the radical right, they may find that they not only diminish their chances of forming government but may also see their ability to influence either governments or the general population. That has generally been the fate of ultra-right parties in Europe, elected to legislatures only to be ostracized and ignored. Strange coalitions of traditional opponents have sometimes resulted from determined efforts to keep the fringe on the fringe.

Of course, one sure way to keep them under control is proportional representation, wherein the far right (and left) has a voice without any real access to power. But that’s another story.