Friday, January 20, 2006
Almost there.
Paul Martin is a disgusting demagogue. Like that race-baiter Al Sharpton, Martin is a prov-baiter: he will intentionally make every effort to divide the country into with-me's and against-me's, because he hopes to be on the right side.
It is one thing to attack your opponent on the basis of his personal flaws or mistakes: he is corrupt, she is wrong-headed, he is weak, she is hypocritical, etc. It is quite another to attack an entire region of your own country, as Martin and his monkey Buzz have been doing. When Martin's monkey tries to carve up this country into Good Toronto and Bad Alberta, he no doubt thinks that he is doing his master a favour--if Good has more votes than Bad, after all, then Master may win!
But such a victory can only come at incalculable cost to the nation as a unitary state. How many times do Albertans and other westerners have to be told we are Unwanted, before we finally shrug like Atlas?
[UPDATE: want an example of what I mean? Read this. And it's not even from Martin's monkey. It's from the Great Man Himself.]
This should be a sobering piece for any Liberal who thinks he can save Canada by pushing the knife into Alberta just one more time.
Personally I am not overly emotionally invested in "Canada" as a nation. Don't get me wrong: I like it here. We're a pretty free people, albeit with a pretty corrupt and increasingly statist government. Compared to most of the world's crapholes, this is a pretty great place to live. But I can easily envision a better country: one with all of Canada's freedoms, and more. One with less government, fewer taxes, a stronger economy, better universities. A well-armed, if modestly sized, armed forces. A foreign policy more grounded in values and liberty, and less in schoolyard anti-Americanism. A country worth keeping.
The Conservative Party is hardly a libertarian's dream. To call their policies "watered-down" is to do a disservice to water. But it is a start: they make an effort, in tiny, pathetic ways, to enlarge the sphere of my liberty. My taxes would be lower under their rule--if only slightly. The role of government in my family's life would be smaller--although you might need a micrometer to prove it. The government might finally do just one of the three things a government actually should do, namely defend our borders--if only a little bit better. But I accept that the only way Canada will improve is incrementally. We are not going to wake up one morning and find ourselves in Galt's Gulch. But we may just wake up next Tuesday with the tiniest flickering ember of hope.
All of this is a long and wordy way of saying something very simple.
If Canada's voters let Martin's demagoguery win the day again, for the second time in as many elections, then I will finally see the light. If my values are bad for Canada, if I'm not only wrong but actually harmful to this country, then it will be time to go. For me, my Canada does not include Buzz Hargrove. But if Canadians decide that they'd rather have his values than mine, that's their right. Farewell, no hard feelings, see you later, here's your toothbrush and robe. Goodbye.
Splitsville.
It is one thing to attack your opponent on the basis of his personal flaws or mistakes: he is corrupt, she is wrong-headed, he is weak, she is hypocritical, etc. It is quite another to attack an entire region of your own country, as Martin and his monkey Buzz have been doing. When Martin's monkey tries to carve up this country into Good Toronto and Bad Alberta, he no doubt thinks that he is doing his master a favour--if Good has more votes than Bad, after all, then Master may win!
But such a victory can only come at incalculable cost to the nation as a unitary state. How many times do Albertans and other westerners have to be told we are Unwanted, before we finally shrug like Atlas?
[UPDATE: want an example of what I mean? Read this. And it's not even from Martin's monkey. It's from the Great Man Himself.]
This should be a sobering piece for any Liberal who thinks he can save Canada by pushing the knife into Alberta just one more time.
Personally I am not overly emotionally invested in "Canada" as a nation. Don't get me wrong: I like it here. We're a pretty free people, albeit with a pretty corrupt and increasingly statist government. Compared to most of the world's crapholes, this is a pretty great place to live. But I can easily envision a better country: one with all of Canada's freedoms, and more. One with less government, fewer taxes, a stronger economy, better universities. A well-armed, if modestly sized, armed forces. A foreign policy more grounded in values and liberty, and less in schoolyard anti-Americanism. A country worth keeping.
The Conservative Party is hardly a libertarian's dream. To call their policies "watered-down" is to do a disservice to water. But it is a start: they make an effort, in tiny, pathetic ways, to enlarge the sphere of my liberty. My taxes would be lower under their rule--if only slightly. The role of government in my family's life would be smaller--although you might need a micrometer to prove it. The government might finally do just one of the three things a government actually should do, namely defend our borders--if only a little bit better. But I accept that the only way Canada will improve is incrementally. We are not going to wake up one morning and find ourselves in Galt's Gulch. But we may just wake up next Tuesday with the tiniest flickering ember of hope.
All of this is a long and wordy way of saying something very simple.
If Canada's voters let Martin's demagoguery win the day again, for the second time in as many elections, then I will finally see the light. If my values are bad for Canada, if I'm not only wrong but actually harmful to this country, then it will be time to go. For me, my Canada does not include Buzz Hargrove. But if Canadians decide that they'd rather have his values than mine, that's their right. Farewell, no hard feelings, see you later, here's your toothbrush and robe. Goodbye.
Splitsville.
