Monarchist clean-up

I actually dealt with most of Walsingham's post in my previous post, it seems, but I'll do a little bit of cleanup now.  I'll post again regarding a comment he made that I think is also quite instructive.

The Monarchist: An olive branch - and rebuttal part N: And do not say it is because not every Western Canadian is a Reformer/contemporary CPCer, and you just want to keep their poor little souls in good old Canada. No tyranny of the majority can be without casualties – but it should respect the actual wishes of the actual majority.

Despite the fact that any separatist push is, um, rather hypothetical, I do not have a necessary attachment to Canada in its present form.  In fact, if I felt that there were grounds for separatism, then I would be a separatist.  I think there have been, from time to time, grounds for serious resentment of aspects of the central Canadian establishment by parts of the Western provinces. And there will be again.

But if there is to be a separatism, it should be on correct grounds.  Obviously, I disapprove of separatisms on grounds I disagree with, more than I would otherwise.  And, reading carefully, that is really all that you are accusing me of doing.  And, if so, then I am guilty, but it is not such a great charge.

And a separatism based on a particular choice has consequences for all involved, including the victims of that policy in the putative entity.  So yes, I am also concerned for those left behind.  But there are so far sufficiently many of them that, like I said, the discussion of separatism itself is hypothetical. 

No, I think it is because the splintering of Canada would represent a failure of your ideology – clearly more closely approximated by Liberal power than by CPC power - to convince everyone in this land of its merits; and the end of your ability to see your ideology manifested - or imposed, as the case may be - in a grand, contiguous and continental-scale implementation.

In fact there is a large conversation on the "left" end of the political spectrum, particularly among people who claim to be more radical than I, as to whether or not a large central state is actually beneficial in the larger picture, or harmful.  There's an argument to be made that the distance an alienation of the central state makes it easier to...surreptitiously implement neoliberal policy (if you are familiar with that use of "liberal"), as well as impeding local movements by developing an unhealthy and distracting dynamic exploited by the likes of Ralph K. 

For various reasons, I'm not totally sure I agree with them.  And that is a whole other discussion, which elsewhere I am presently having!  (It is part and parcel of the internal conflict of the NDP over asymmetrical federalism and the like which manifested itself publicly in the last election).  But perhaps you can see that the blanket categorization of "[my] ideology" may not be quite appropriate.  It is a matter of methodology, not an ideological commitment.  So at the very root this is not even a very relevant accusation, but instead once again instructive as to the misconceptions that have prompted your epiphany.

In a sense, it would represent the end, or at least the truncation, of a system that you hold very dear. I am not mocking (at least the philosophically worthy aspects of) that system, or your allegiance to it. But I am saying that I will not countenance the sacrificing of the rights of others to hold their own beliefs, to live their lives they way they choose, to structure their “systems” the way they see fit; in order to maintain the illusion of a harmonious Canada under the soft-singing Trudeaupian banner – especially when I detest that banner myself.

This is rather hyperbolic.  I am not going to force anything on anyone.  Nothing of the sort has occurred except through the normal processes of elections.  It is, in fact, changing the subject.  My original criticism of you focused on  your characterization of the motives of those who would not choose the CPC.  And the CPC and its supporters are no strangers to telling people how to live their lives, and what to think. So this is simply a bit of rhetorical fluff to cast me as aggressor rather than defender. Medice, cura te ipsum.

I certainly will not do it just to keep my map of Canada nice and pretty, or because I’m afraid of the future of a re-constituted Canada. And I will not feel the least bit embarrassed that it is the horrors of the conduct of the now purely disgraceful Liberal government of Canada that have pushed me to fully examine the real situation, and the full range of available alternatives.

It is not a matter of a "reconstituted Canada."  It is a matter of which reconstituted Canada.  This is once again nothing more than accusing me of having a particular opinion as to national outcomes.  Guilty!

What is to me least responsible, though, is to make use of Adscam as a vehicle to make a sudden! realization! that conveniently gets the policies that you want implemented into the doorway.  That isn't politically very...up front.  And, to bring this back to where it all began, Canadians (meaning people across this country, not just Ontario), suspect this.  And to paraphrase Yoda, that is why you fail.

Comments

[Walsingham]

Mandos, I see you have a thunder of comments in reply to your post. Too bad, actually you deserve better.

Please, just do me - and everybody else - one small favour: stop using the "word! word! word!" notation. It is really silly and bizarre, and very annoying.

I will reply to this, though:

"And the CPC and its supporters are no strangers to telling people how to live their lives, and what to think. So this is simply a bit of rhetorical fluff to cast me as aggressor rather than defender. Medice, cura te ipsum."

I don't think I need curing, and as it happens, neither do I think you need curing. I'm not sure how you missed it, but it was not you that I was accusing of exercising under-handed influence in other people's affairs. That accusation I level at the Libranos. Adscam was a giant attempt to subvert democracy in Quebec. That's what so disgusts me about it.

[Mandos]

"Mandos, I see you have a thunder of comments in reply to your post. Too bad, actually you deserve better."

This is an expression with which I am not familiar. "Thunder of comments"? I'm not sure if you think I got too few or too many.

"Please, just do me - and everybody else - one small favour: stop using the "word! word! word!" notation. It is really silly and bizarre, and very annoying."

That is because you are reading it wrong. It is meant to be read in a breathy, shocked, and appalled voice, with wide, wide eyes clutching a little fan. Hyperventilation is a bonus.

"I don't think I need curing, and as it happens, neither do I think you need curing. I'm not sure how you missed it, but it was not you that I was accusing of exercising under-handed influence in other people's affairs. That accusation I level at the Libranos. Adscam was a giant attempt to subvert democracy in Quebec. That's what so disgusts me about it."

OK. I misunderstood because that way of putting things is a common strawman attack against those on my end of the spectrum by those on yours.

The actual content of the sponsorship program minus the scandal is a topic for another day.