New York Times on Harper and the willful ignorance of Canadians

[GLASSJAW]

NYT tells it how it is. People who vote for Harper are dummies: http://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/16/opinion/sunday/the-closing-of-the-canadian-mind.html

THE prime minister of Canada, Stephen Harper, has called an election for Oct. 19, but he doesn’t want anyone to talk about it.

He has chosen not to participate in the traditional series of debates on national television, confronting his opponents in quieter, less public venues, like the scholarly Munk Debates and CPAC, Canada’s equivalent of CSPAN. His own campaign events were subject to gag orders until a public outcry forced him to rescind the forced silence of his supporters.

Mr. Harper’s campaign for re-election has so far been utterly consistent with the personality trait that has defined his tenure as prime minister: his peculiar hatred for sharing information.

Americans have traditionally looked to Canada as a liberal haven, with gun control, universal health care and good public education.

But the nine and half years of Mr. Harper’s tenure have seen the slow-motion erosion of that reputation for open, responsible government. His stance has been a know-nothing conservatism, applied broadly and effectively. He has consistently limited the capacity of the public to understand what its government is doing, cloaking himself and his Conservative Party in an entitled secrecy, and the country in ignorance.

His relationship to the press is one of outright hostility. At his notoriously brief news conferences, his handlers vet every journalist, picking and choosing who can ask questions. In the usual give-and-take between press and politicians, the hurly-burly of any healthy democracy, he has simply removed the give.

Mr. Harper’s war against science has been even more damaging to the capacity of Canadians to know what their government is doing. The prime minister’s base of support is Alberta, a western province financially dependent on the oil industry, and he has been dedicated to protecting petrochemical companies from having their feelings hurt by any inconvenient research.

In 2012, he tried to defund government research centers in the High Arctic, and placed Canadian environmental scientists under gag orders. That year, National Research Council members were barred from discussing their work on snowfall with the media. Scientists for the governmental agency Environment Canada, under threat of losing their jobs, have been banned from discussing their research without political approval. Mentions of federal climate change research in the Canadian press have dropped 80 percent. The union that represents federal scientists and other professionals has, for the first time in its history, abandoned neutrality to campaign against Mr. Harper.

His active promotion of ignorance extends into the functions of government itself. Most shockingly, he ended the mandatory long-form census, a decision protested by nearly 500 organizations in Canada, including the Canadian Medical Association, the Canadian Chamber of Commerce and the Canadian Catholic Council of Bishops. In the age of information, he has stripped Canada of its capacity to gather information about itself. The Harper years have seen a subtle darkening of Canadian life.

The darkness has resulted, organically, in one of the most scandal-plagued administrations in Canadian history. Mr. Harper’s tenure coincided with the scandal of Rob Ford, the mayor of Toronto who admitted to smoking crack while in office and whose secret life came to light only when Gawker, an American website, broke the story. In a famous video at a Ford family barbecue, Mr. Harper praised the Fords as a “Conservative political dynasty.”

Mr. Harper’s appointments to the Senate — which in Canada is a mercifully impotent body employed strictly for political payoffs — have proved greedier than the norm. Mr. Harper’s chief of staff was forced out for paying off a senator who fudged his expenses. The Mounties have pressed criminal charges.

After the 2011 election, a Conservative staffer, Michael Sona, was convicted of using robocalls to send voters to the wrong polling places in Guelph, Ontario. In the words of the judge, he was guilty of “callous and blatant disregard for the right of people to vote.” In advance of this election, instead of such petty ploys, the Canadian Conservatives have passed the Fair Elections Act, a law with a classically Orwellian title, which not only needlessly tightens the requirements for voting but also has restricted the chief executive of Elections Canada from promoting the act of voting. Mr. Harper seems to think that his job is to prevent democracy.

But the worst of the Harper years is that all this secrecy and informational control have been at the service of no larger vision for the country. The policies that he has undertaken have been negligible — more irritating distractions than substantial changes. He is “tough on crime,” and so he has built more prisons at great expense at the exact moment when even American conservatives have realized that over-incarceration causes more problems than it solves. Then there is a new law that allows the government to revoke citizenship for dual citizens convicted of terrorism or high treason — effectively creating levels of Canadianness and problems where none existed.

For a man who insists on such intense control, the prime minister has not managed to control much that matters. The argument for all this secrecy was a technocratic impulse — he imagined Canada as a kind of Singapore, only more polite and rule abiding.

The major foreign policy goal of his tenure was the Keystone Pipeline, which Mr. Harper ultimately failed to deliver. The Canadian dollar has returned to the low levels that once earned it the title of the northern peso. Despite being left in a luxurious position of strength after the global recession, he coasted on what he knew: oil. In the run-up to the election, the Bank of Canada has announced that Canada just had two straight quarters of contraction — the technical definition of a recession. He has been a poor manager by any metric.

The early polls show Mr. Harper trailing, but he’s beaten bad polls before. He has been prime minister for nearly a decade for a reason: He promised a steady and quiet life, undisturbed by painful facts. The Harper years have not been terrible; they’ve just been bland and purposeless. Mr. Harper represents the politics of willful ignorance. It has its attractions.

Whether or not he loses, he will leave Canada more ignorant than he found it. The real question for the coming election is a simple but grand one: Do Canadians like their country like that?

[GLASSJAW]

er, this probably should have just gone in the election thread - mods can move it. and I just realized it's a few days old, so maybe already discussed.

[DeNiro]

Sadly though the older generation are the ones that will make the decision because young people are too lazy or unwilling to vote.

So our next prime minister will be decided by a bunch of 70+ year olds who "like the cut of Harper's jib" (whatever a jib is...) or will vote conservative because they always have.

[Cerridwen]

Sadly though the older generation are the ones that will make the decision because young people are too lazy or unwilling to vote.

So our next prime minister will be decided by a bunch of 70+ year olds who "like the cut of Harper's jib" (whatever a jib is...) or will vote conservative because they always have.

40 year olds........50 year olds......60 year olds...don't vote? Who knew....

Believe it or not, "older generations" do have knowledgeable, rational and valid reasons for voting for someone other than for 'the cut of their jib'. After all, they were once the 'younger' generation who wanted to effect change.

[Odd.]

Damn straight article.

[Brad Marchand]

I usually don't say much about Canadian politics, but Harper's willingness to cut funding to and silence scientific researchers has always bothered me. Just one reason why I'm not voting Conservative.

Every demographic will contain their share of uneducated voters, including perceived naive millenials like me. It doesn't make their voices less important or somehow less valid.

[TOMapleLaughs]

This country is currently worse than the US. In every regard. Including IQ levels of the population, if Harper retains power.

That's unacceptable.

[DeNiro]

40 year olds........50 year olds......60 year olds...don't vote? Who knew....

Believe it or not, "older generations" do have knowledgeable, rational and valid reasons for voting for someone other than for 'the cut of their jib'. After all, they were once the 'younger' generation who wanted to effect change.

Of course they do. Typically older generations vote conservative though (just look at the numbers.) Conservative values typically line up with what the majority of older people believe in (which actually fights change ironically).

They're the ones who swing the vote for conservatives if younger people don't get out and vote. Sad reality.

[KeslerPlaysLikeACanadian]

Well this observation was made outside of Canada and will be ignored by smiling Canadians, so yes, I guess you could say we are happy in ignorance. The only thing that writer misunderstands is that Canada has always been Singapore with a smile.

[KeslerPlaysLikeACanadian]

They're the ones who swing the vote for conservatives if younger people don't get out and vote. Sad reality.

The sad reality is that if I would like to vote, I can choose between morons and criminals, and that's on a good year.

[YEGCanuck]

This country is currently worse than the US. In every regard. Including IQ levels of the population, if Harper retains power.

That's unacceptable.

Really, "worst than the US" that's a low bar to set for our "home and native land".

While Harper has clearly exceeded his best before date, how the American election is shaping up is nothing short of a total gong show.

[DeNiro]

The sad reality is that if I would like to vote, I can choose between morons and criminals, and that's on a good year.

True enough. That's politics for you though.

The illusion is that we have a real choice in the first place.

[ckamo]

Sadly though the older generation are the ones that will make the decision because young people are too lazy or unwilling to vote.

So our next prime minister will be decided by a bunch of 70+ year olds who "like the cut of Harper's jib" (whatever a jib is...) or will vote conservative because they always have.

I am volunteering for a campaign for the first time and was actually very impressed at the level of participation by a few young volunteers (I agree though that they are the minority in their age group). One girl was not yet 18, but was canvassing for our candidate, another young lady was finally old enough to vote for the first time...I think she said this was probably the 4th or 5th campaign she has worked on when you include provincial and municipal elections.

I tend to get really upset at the general low levels of care my generation (and younger ones) has for politics, but seeing how active and passionate some of them are gives me hope for the future.

The sad reality is that if I would like to vote, I can choose between morons and criminals, and that's on a good year.

well...

[inane]

This is the thing about Harper,I could respect him as a leader if he had conservative values and owned it and backed it up with transparent knowledge and data. But he is willfully and intentionally ignoring and purposefully staying ignorant so he can just run with his conservative ideology. It's frankly disgusting. He's just a coward and entirely unfit to lead.

[Dazzle]

The Conservative Party isn't really practicing conservative politics. It's right wing politics, ala fascism.

The negative ads turn me off. Harper's a guy knowing that he could possibly lose and is going for broke.

Remember the title "Herr Harper" that a famous poster here once threw around?

[Sedintwinpowersactivate]

Choosing between our candidates is like trying to choose your method of death while on death row. Hanging vs Lethal Injection... They all lead to the same conclusion.

[Dragonfruits]

Stan said it best on South Park in regards to politics

No, I think voting is great, but, if
I have to choose between a douche and
a turd, I just don't see the point.

[messier's_elbow]

This country is currently worse than the US. In every regard. Including IQ levels of the population, if Harper retains power.

That's unacceptable.

Harper needs to go we need fresh blood. Plus he's conservative

[Wilbur]

Well this observation was made outside of Canada and will be ignored by smiling Canadians, so yes, I guess you could say we are happy in ignorance. The only thing that writer misunderstands is that Canada has always been Singapore with a smile.

Singapore with a smile? Heh, I wish we had a manufacturing industry... but I guess that's an issue long before Harper came to power. Just an issue further stressed with him in power.

[Mustapha]

40 year olds........50 year olds......60 year olds...don't vote? Who knew....

Believe it or not, "older generations" do have knowledgeable, rational and valid reasons for voting for someone other than for 'the cut of their jib'. After all, they were once the 'younger' generation who wanted to effect change.

We aren't just talking about 'someone'. We are talking about Stephen Harper, and his reputation is far from stellar. Is there a rational reason to vote for Harper? I don't care what age you are....I have yet to see one.

The guy is surrounded by criminals....the only skill that has impressed me is his ability to evade being charged for all the disingenuous practices his party engages in.

Here's several reasons NOT to vote for Harper: (just a few of many)

-Selling off resource interests to China

-Giving away our softwood lumber

-Subversive tactics to guarantee success in the last federal election

-Failure to reform the Senate despite making that very act an election promise

-Muzzling of scientists

-Participation in overseas conflicts that ultimately paved the way for ISIS

-Cutting social programs including support for war veterans

-Lying to the public, claiming to be a stalwart fiscal manager, despite running up Canada's debt dramatically during his tenure

I am not 100% convinced by Mulcair or Trudeau, but it would be hard to do worse than Stephen Harper at this point.