Good2Golf said:
So we share voting for Martin. Had Manley followed Martin (although it wasn't a «tête carée's» turn yet), we would have likely voted similarly again. My base reasoning would likely be different (Blue Grit or Red Tory is my preference) than your's (you seems more aligned to party than the leader himself), but the end result would have been the same. Once Dion showed up, my choice was easy...Red Tory it was and Harper was still playing nice(-ish) with MacKay (and the re-named PC clan).
You seem to mistakenly assume that military members will overwhelmingly (and mindlessly) vote Conservative for rather simple, dogmatic reasons. Perhaps some do, but others do so for pragmatic reasons based on worth of the leadership, warts and all, vice ethereal, genetic/branding reasoning. Many see Trudeau Jr. as a front offic piece being driven by the back room, like GW was by the Old Man and Dick Cheney. Gerald Butts and Kathleen Wynne's = Canadian George Bush Sr. and Kathleen Wynne.
Hopefully you find time to vote and don't repeat 2011.
G2G
This got me to thinking ...
A few days ago a member PM'd me and said something like:
"Tell me your own political opinion. You say you're a Conservative but you bad mouth the CPC on a regular basis; you obviously
hate (his word, my emphasis) the Liberals
and the NDP. So, where do you stand?"
I replied, initially, that I would think about his question. What
G2G said, above, has persuaded me to respond to my interlocutor in public, which I told him I would do.
First: I am a card carrying member of the Conservative Party of Canada. I am also a regular donor to that party and I donate enough to be a member of its so-called "Leaders Circle" (there's no apostrophe in "Leaders Circle" so I can only assume that it is a just circle of undefined "leaders," not a circle of rich people around the party leader). I plan to vote for the CPC candidate in my riding this election, even though I think he is the second best candidate and he may even be the third best; he is, still, an acceptable candidate for me because I rate party (platform and record) as being at least as important as individual attributes. Thus, although I think Paul Dewar (NDP) is a
better person, all round, to be an MP, my CPC contender, Damian Konstantinakos, is, certainly, a "good enough" individual and when I then weigh the parties I find that I favour Mr Konstantinakos over Mr Dewar on the whole mix of
person + policies.
Second: I don't
hate either the Liberals or the NDP. In fact I admire both movements. But I think the NDP went wrong, right from the start, from the
Regina Manifesto, and especially from around 1960 when the Canadian Labour Congress took over and converted the old CCF into the NDP. I believe that the Liberals went off the rails in 1960, at the "Kingston Conference" where journalist/public intellectual Tom Kent proposed, and the party, led by Lester Pearson, agreed to take a sharp, economically unsustainable, left turn. I didn't break with the Liberal Party until 1967, when Pierre Trudeau took over as leader, I could not then and cannot now abide M Trudeau. He was, in my opinion, a sadly misguided, deeply flawed human being, and the worst prime minister in Canadian history, likely the worst leader of any liberal democracy in the 20th century.
I do
hate, not too strong a word,
Marxism and Marxist-Leninist-Maoist communism.
I believe that Karl Marx was a fool.
I think he totally misunderstood what he saw in 19th century England; Blake was right, the mills
were "dark" and downright "satanic," but while Marx sat in the Reading Room of the British Museum proposing socio-economic rubbish, real, smart people were out, "on the ground," making real changes to British society. Marx proposed a silly theory to solve a non-problem. We should study Marx to understand folly, not society or economics; he knew nothing about either. I reject any political party or movement that subscribes to any Marxist principles.
But, and don't get me wrong,
I think Marx's dictum of
"from each according to his ability, and to each according to his needs," is a wonderful, even beautiful idea ... there's only one problem: it requires perfect people and to my certain knowledge there are none alive, today, and I doubt any perfect person ever did exist. I understand the
dream,
I wish it could come true; it cannot; it requires the perfectibility of mankind; that's never going to happen; Karl Marx was a fool; so is everyone who believes in him.
That being said,
I believe in government and
I believe in the
liberal, democratic political process.
I believe that good, democratic government is "Government with the (
informed) consent of the governed."
I also believe that the most important foundation stone for good government is respect for the rule of law and another, almost as important, is a body of
sound public institutions, starting with public libraries and elementary schools and going all the way up to great universities and law courts, but, always being conscious that it is the community that makes the institutions, not the other way 'round.
I am,
I suppose, a
Confucian when it comes to government.
I don't think we need anything like a
much government as we, in Canada, have in 2015, but I think the (much smaller) government we do need should be wise and just and should expect the cooperation of the people.
I self identify as both a
classical, 19th century liberal and as a
utilitarian. I believe in the notion that the high duty of the state is to protect the
sovereign individual from the depredations of all collectives, including religions and governments, themselves. When, much less than now, government is necessary,
I believe it should try to do
"the greatest good for the greatest number."
Another great duty of government is to secure an protect a few absolute rights for every individual: the rights to
life,
liberty and
property, as defined by John Locke in 17th century England, and the right to
privacy, as defined by Brandeis and Warren in late 19th century America. Of course there are other rights, important rights, but they are all limited and circumscribed ~ only those four are,
in my opinion, fundamental.
As you can see I do not "fit" well into (agree with) any of our political parties, and I would not start my own party because so very, very few people would ever agree with me.
I am a Conservative despite most of the party's platform and policies and most of the people in it. I am a Conservative for two reasons:
1. It is the party that is least far from my positions on the key issues; and
2. I believe that responsible citizens ought to participate, however they can, in shaping public policy. The best way for me to participate is to support one political party and to try to temper its platform and policies by making my view known.
I also
believe in our,
Westminster form of democratically elected,
responsible (as opposed to being just
representative) government. I think our, Canadian system of government has many, many flaws, beginning with an unelected chamber and going through serious inequality of representation in the other chamber and on to a badly drafted, written Constitution ... but none of those flaws are beyond the wit (and goodwill) of man to fix.
I believe I have
not missed voting in any federal election since I started voting well over 50 years ago; I know I have missed a few (not many) provincial elections and rather more civic ones, but, finally,
I believe that we, citizens, have both
rights and
duties and our most important
duty is to vote for those who would govern us.
Edited for clarity (I said "Finally" twice, I deleted the first "finally") :-[
