I have said before that I think we Canadians owe our Sovereign, now His Majesty Charles III, although when I made the remark originally it was our late Sovereign Lady of blessed memory, Elizabeth II, an apology for the incompetent, utterly corrupt, and insanely evil clown who, through our abuse of our voting privilege, has been Prime Minister of this Commonwealth Realm for the last eight years. Now I would add that the Canadians of my province, Manitoba, owe a double apology for putting the only politician in the Dominion worse than Captain Airhead himself into the premier’s office, with a majority in the Legislature behind him.
When the
evil New Democratic Party led by the execrable Wab Kinew won the provincial
election on 3 October, I was disgusted but not surprised. When Lee Harding of the Frontier Centre for
Public Policy, a local think-tank here in Winnipeg, published a piece on 29
September calling for the re-election of the Progressive Conservatives, I could
not agree with his title as much as I desired that outcome. The title was “Manitoba
PCs Deserve Another Mandate”. No,
they did not. The reason for voting PC
this election was not that they deserved it but that the alternative was much,
much, worse.
The
Progressive Conservatives, led by Brian Pallister, won the provincial election
of 2016 and governed well enough in their first term that Harding’s title would
have been true had he written his article in 2019. That year they won re-election and at the
annual New Year’s Levée hosted by the
Lieutenant Governor I shook Pallister’s hand and congratulated him on his
victory. Within a few months of this,
however, Pallister’s governance went south badly and I came to loathe the
man. In July of 2021, a short time
before he resigned as PC leader and premier, I expressed this in these words:
Brian
Pallister is an ignorant fool!
He’s a
stupid, ugly, loser and he smells bad too!
His one and
only virtue,
I hate to
say it but it’s true,
His one and
only virtue is –
He’s not Wab
Kinew!
It was Pallister’s
handling of the bat flu scare that had so soured me on his governance. He had imposed a particularly harsh
lockdown, had done so earlier than many other provinces, and had done so in an
arrogant, in-your-face, manner. Wab
Kinew and the NDP criticized Pallister’s handling of the pandemic, but their
criticism went entirely in the wrong direction. They criticized Pallister for not imposing
lockdowns sooner, not making them harsher, lifting them too early and this sort
of thing. They should have been
criticizing Pallister for trampling all over the most basic rights and freedoms
of Manitobans, that is to say our ancient Common Law rights and freedoms not
the useless and empty guarantees of Pierre Trudeau’s Charter, and acting like
there are no constitutional limits to the power of government in an
emergency. Their mishandling of the bat
flu panic under Pallister is the reason the PC’s don’t deserve another
mandate. Kinew’s criticism of the same,
which amounted to a demand that Pallister do more of what he was doing wrong,
is one reason why the NDP do not deserve to replace the PC’s as government and
are a much worse alternative.
It was not the
botched job he made of the bat flu that ultimately brought about Pallister’s
resignation as PC leader and premier at the beginning of September 2021. This was 2021, and the crazy progressive
leftists who dominate so much of the Canadian mainstream media, envious as
always of their counterparts in the United States, decided that Canada needed her version of the George Floyd controversy that had been
manufactured by the BLM Movement – the movement for whom the lives of American
blacks matter the least because their target is the American police who protect
American blacks from the violent crime that costs so many blacks their lives
each year – and so jumped on the discovery of ground disturbances – and that
was all that were discovered – on the site of the Kamloops Indian Residential
School, which the band interpreted as the discovery of unmarked graves – not “mass
graves” as falsely reported – and began claiming that this “proved” the version
of the Indian Residential Schools narrative that defrocked United Church
minister and conspiracy theorist Kevin Annett has been spouting since the
1990s, i.e., that children were murdered by the thousands in the schools and buried
in secret graves. Imagine if the mainstream
media in the UK were to start reporting David Icke’s theory that the world is
controlled by reptilian shapeshifters from outer space and you will have an
approximation of the degree of departure from journalistic standards and integrity
that was involved here. Their claim has
since been thoroughly debunked, which is why leftist politicians now want to
criminalize debunking it, but it had its intended effect. That summer saw the biggest wave of hate
crimes in Canadian history as Church buildings – whether the Churches had any
connection to the residential schools or not – were burned or otherwise
vandalized all across the country. On
Dominion Day, Year Zero, Cultural Maoist terrorists, toppled the statues of
Queen Victoria and Queen Elizabeth II on the grounds of the Manitoba
Legislature. No society can afford to
tolerate this sort of violent, seditious, assault on her history and
civilization and Brian Pallister appropriately condemned these acts. In doing so he made positive statements
about the previous generations of Canadians who settled and built the country and
who are now constantly being defamed by progressive academics and journalists,
in violation of the fifth and ninth commandments. The provincial Indian chiefs decided to take
offense at this – take offense is the operative phrase, as none was given,
Pallister had not said anything about them, negative or otherwise – and demanded
that Pallister apologize. Pallister
should have told them to go suck an egg and stood his ground. Instead, about a month later, he cravenly
gave them the apology they didn’t deserve, and in the event didn’t accept, and
shortly thereafter resigned.
Kelvin Goertzen took over as interim party leader and
premier until the party held its leadership vote on 30 October. Now, I am not a fan of this method of
choosing a party leader. I think that
it is far more consistent with our parliamentary form of government for the
party caucus – the party’s sitting members in the House of Commons or
provincial legislative assembly – to choose their leader, and that selling paid
memberships in the party with a vote for the leader attached smacks of the
American republican system. I also
dislike the way our elections, Dominion and provincial, are now treated by
almost everyone as if we were directly voting for the prime minister or
premier, rather than voting for our local representatives in a larger
parliamentary assembly, for the same reason.
This is a consequence of being inundated with too much American culture
in the form of television and movies.
That having been said, if the party leader is to be chosen this way, it
should at least be open and honest.
That is precisely what the vote that put Heather Stefanson in as leader
of Manitoba’s Progressive Conservatives and premier of the province was
not. Stefanson was the candidate
supported by the sitting members – had the party chosen its leader according to
my preferred method she would have still become leader. She was also, however, the candidate that
the backroom bosses of the party wanted as leader, and when they ultimately got
their way their new leader had a huge cloud of suspicion of shenanigans over
her head. Stefanson won the leadership vote
by a narrow margin – 51.1% over the 48.9% received by Shelly Glover, which looks
even narrower in total vote count – 8, 405 for Stefanson, 8, 042 for Glover. Glover, who had formerly been a member of
the House of Commons representing St. Boniface, based her campaign in part on dissatisfaction
with how Pallister, with whose government Stefanson had been associated, had
handled the bat flu. The party’s former
CFO, Ken Lee, had also sought the leadership, in his case making opposition the
Pallister lockdowns his sole issue, but his candidacy was disqualified for
reasons that never really were made clear.
This looked shady, as did the fact that over 1200 members had not
received their ballots in time to vote, and when Glover lost by such a narrow margin
- less than 400 votes - she contested the outcome, but her challenge was
quickly dismissed. This had all the
appearances of a backroom fix.
When this happened I realized that it would take a miracle
for the Progressive Conservatives to win the next election. You cannot treat your voting base this way
and expect them to turn up in sufficient numbers to support you come election
time.
It was apparent during the short election campaign, and the
longer pre-campaign leading up to it, that Stefanson’s PCs were not remotely as
committed to their winning the election as their enemies were to their being
defeated. I say enemies rather than
opponents because it is not just their rivals in the legislature that I am
talking about.
The unions have been determined to take down the PCs since
pretty much the moment Brian Pallister became premier and have really stepped
up their game in the last couple of years.
They have spent a fortune on billboard ads all over Winnipeg attacking
the PC government. Then there are the
yard signs that began popping up like mushrooms all over the place long before
the party campaign signs came out. These
couldn’t explicitly endorse candidate or party, but everyone knew what they
were getting at. The most common such
signs were from the Manitoba Nurses Union and the Manitoba Teachers Society.
Allied with these unions in their quest to bring down the
PCs and put Kinew’s NDP into government, was the media, especially the CBC,
which as Crown broadcaster by rights ought to be neutral, and the Winnipeg Free Press.
These media, along with the Manitoba Nurses Union and the
NDP, have been using health care as a club to bash the Progressive
Conservatives with ever since Pallister, early in his premiership, indicated
his disagreement with them that health care spending needs to keep going in one
direction only, up, converted the Emergency Rooms at Seven Oaks and Victoria
Hospitals in Winnipeg into urgent care centres, and closed the Concordia
Hospital ER refocusing the hospital to transitional care for the elderly and
those undergoing physical rehabilitation.
The PCs dropped the ball on this one.
They should have hammered back, just as hard, pointing out that the
consultant’s report on whose recommendations they did this had been commissioned
by the previous, NDP, government, and that at the same time they expanded the
capacity of the three remaining ERs – Health Sciences Centre, St. Boniface, and
Grace. They should also have emphasized
that health care has usually fared much worse under NDP governments in rural
ridings. The ER in Vita, a rural
community about an hour and a half south-east of Winnipeg, closed three years
after Greg Selinger became premier. Two
years later it was still closed, with eighteen others along with it. ERs in many other rural communities remained
open, but on a basis somewhat like a multi-point parish, with the same doctor
serving several ERs, being in the one the one day, another the next. In the
second last year of Gary Doer’s premiership, the ER in Virden, a rural
community along the TransCanada Highway near the Saskatchewan border was
temporarily closed, mercifully for only about half a year. These examples are representative, not comprehensive,
and while the rural doctor shortage is a chronic problem regardless of who is
in government, rural areas always fare worse under the NDP. Not coincidentally, these same areas rarely
if at all vote NDP. A rural ER closure,
even a temporary one, is worse than an ER closure in Winnipeg, for while there
are more people in Winnipeg, the transit time to the next ER, especially if the
ER to close is one that serviced a very large area, like the one in Vita, is
increased that much more in the country.
The media also found another club to bash the PC government with
in the Indians’ demand that the Prairie Green Landfill be searched for the
remains of two murdered women that the Winnipeg Police believe to have ended up
there. This demand was expressed in
protests, blockades, and something that is probably best described as a riot,
earlier this year. Here again,
Stefanson’s PCs shot themselves in the foot.
Not so much by refusing the demand – their grounds for doing so were
sound, and certainly not the “racism” of which idiots accuse them – but by
bringing the issue into the election campaign.
No matter how sound the case for not conducting this just under $200
million search of an area laced with toxins, there was no way Stefanson could
argue her point without appearing heartless.
It would have been better to stay silent.
So, no, the Stefanson PC’s did not deserve another
mandate. The problem is that those who
won deserved it even less.
Let me spell it out for you. At the moment, people all across the
Dominion of Canada are experiencing an affordability crisis. The price of food has gone through the
roof. Many Canadians are skipping
meals, many others are buying less healthy processed food than they otherwise
would, because the prices at the grocery stores are too high. At the same time rent is sky high and houses
are selling at obscene prices.
Transportation is also that much more expensive. Much of this is the direct consequence of
bad action on the part of the Dominion government. The price of gasoline has gone up
considerably due to the carbon tax, which in turn increases the price of
everything that needs to be transported using fuel. The housing shortage is a direct consequence
of Captain Airhead’s decision to use record immigration, with apologies to
Bertolt Brecht, to elect a new people.
While Captain Airhead seems to think that food prices are high because
of price fixing on the part of the big grocery chains, a notion he borrowed
from the man propping his minority government up, federal NDP leader Jimmy
Dhaliwal, the fact of the matter is that he has been spending like a drunken
sailor since he got into office. When
governments spend more than they take in in revenue, this is not a contributing
factor to inflation, it is
inflation. The extra they spend
increases the supply of money, the means of exchange, which decreased the value
of money per unit, and causes the price of everything else to rise relative to
it. When you spend the way Captain
Airhead did over the last few years, paying people to stay home for long
periods of time and not go to work – decreasing the production of goods and
services and thus causing their cost in currency to go up – you increase
inflation exponentially. Manitoba just
elected a premier who has the same sort of attitude towards spending as Captain
Airhead.
Last month, in the Million Person March, organized by Ottawa
Muslim activist Kamel El-Cheik, but supported by many faith groups and people
just concerned about the rights of parents, Canadians across the Dominion
expressed what polls already had indicated to be the overwhelming majority opinion
of Canadians – that schools should not be keeping parents out of the loop about
what is going on in the classroom with their kids about gender identity and
that sort of thing. While leftists have
tried to spin this as an alphabet soup issue, accusing those protesting of
various sorts of hatred and bigotry, and spinning the reasonable insistence
that teachers entrusted with the education of children report back to the
parents who so entrusted them, as “forced outing”, they are being absurd. There is a word for someone who tells kids
to keep stuff having to do with sex a secret from their parents. The policy that schools and school boards
have been following in recent years seems tailor-made to accommodate such
people. Heather Stefanson had promised
in her campaign to protect parental rights.
The promise would have been more credible had she introduced the
legislation to do so earlier when the New Brunswick and Saskatchewan
governments were doing so. However,
this much is clear, if someone wanted to protect perverts in the schools rather
than the rights of parents, he would be cheering the outcome of this election.
The province already has a huge problem with drug abuse and related social evils. The CBC reported in April that provincial Chief Medical Examiner had told them via e-mail that the number of drug-related deaths per year has "risen dramatically here in recent years" and that "the deaths are only the tip of the iceberg". 407 Manitobans died from overdoses in 2021, 372 the year previously, both record numbers. It was at least 418 in 2022. At least 228 involved fentanyl and/or related drugs. The city of Winnipeg also saw the largest jump in crime severity of any Canadian city in the same period. These two facts are not unrelated, nor is the size of the homelessness problem in Winnipeg. The left, in recent years, has been obsessed with the "harms reduction" approach to this matter, an approach that tries to lower the number of deaths due to overdose and contamination by providing a "safe" supply of drugs and "safe" places to use them. It is usually coupled with decriminalization or outright legalization of some or all narcotics. This approach is concerned more with the effects of drugs on those who (ab)use them and less or not at all with the effects of drug abuse on the surrounding community. It was tried by the NDP in Alberta in the premiership of Rachel Notley, and more dramatically in British Columbia, where the provincial NDP government introduced this approach on a provincial scale earlier at the beginning of this year, despite it having proven a failure when the city of Vancouver tried it, causing overdose deaths to rise. The NDP are incapable of learning from their mistakes on matters such as these. Expect Kinew to try and imitate BC's mistake, not avoid it and look elsewhere, like, for example, Singapore's "harm prevention" approach, for a successful model. This problem is about to get much worse in Winnipeg and Manitoba.
It will not be long before we in Manitoba rue the outcome of
this election.
I have this internal debate. Are Western democratic elections so manipulated and corrupt that they might as well be rigged? Or are the people so rotten and psychologically engineered that they more or less support the system's game? Obviously there is a combination of the two, but to what extent, I can never decide.
ReplyDeleteA flaw in the democratic electoral process is that the person or group who wins a popular election proves by this merely that they are better than their opponents at winning elections and not that they are better than their opponents at actually governing. Douglas Adams, in his Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy series, illustrated the point by depicting a fictional galactic government that operates on the principle that the person capable of getting elected president of the galaxy is the last person who should be entrusted with the power of actually governing it, and so the position of president is entirely empty, while the real job of administration is assigned to somebody noone has ever heard of. While Adams' work was comedy, the point is valid. People as collectives, can be either smarter or very much dumber, than they are as individuals. Russell Kirk liked to quote Edmund Burke as saying the individual is foolish, but the species wise. This would be one example of where the collective is smarter, and the reference is to tradition, prescription, the accumulated wisdom of the race handed down from time immemorial. The case where the collective is far stupider than the individual is when the collective is the crowd, the herd, the masses. Unfortunately, this is the collective to which those seeking popular election appeal. This is yet one more reason why I am careful to say I support Parliament - the concrete institution - rather than democracy, the abstract idea. Parliament's worth has been proven over the course of generations, but the more its value is measured in terms of conformity to the democratic ideal, the more that same value is diminished, because the more the ideal of democracy comes to dominate the institution of Parliament, the more the instrinsic flaw of democracy manifests itself in the institution. There is also, of course, the factor of the mass communications media, which has exponentially enhanced the ability of the worst sort of people to manipulate the psychology of the masses. The chapter "The Great Stereopticon" in Richard Weaver's "Ideas Have Consequences" is essential reading on this.
DeleteAnother debate I have is whether the rest of the Anglosphere is worse off in the decline of their founding stock than the Americans. Captain Airhead and people like Jacinda Ardern and Boris Johnson really underscore this point. But then the American leaders are similarly declining, too. Everyday Americans seem to have more fighting spirit than the rest of the Anglosphere (or maybe this is a universal rural/urban divide?), but far less cohesion and far worse physical and mental health. I can't really decide who is worse off!
ReplyDeleteI think that the universal rural/urban divide that you refer to is an important explanatory factor and one that is not often given the consideration it is due. Consider the "elites". One reason why people like Captain Airhead in Canada and J. Brandon Magoo in the United States are so much worse than the political leaders of even a generation ago is that they are that much more urban cosmopolites. In Canada, the left-right, liberal-conservative, divide is widely thought of as falling along East-West lines. This is a huge mistake. The provinces of Manitoba, Saskatchewan, and Alberta have traditionally been the most conservative, because they are the most rural, not because they are the furthest West (British Columbia, further to the West than Alberta, is somewhat in the same position in Canada, poltically, that California is in the United States, has elected some of the most right-wing governments in the countries history, but is widely, and not entirely inaccurately, thought of as the most left-wing, and the craziest kind of leftpwing). Alberta, mistakenly thought of as Canada's most conservative province, has some of the most left-wing cities in the country. The same principle applies in the United States. The South and the Mid-West are traditionally regarded as the most conservative areas in the United States. This is less a regional matter, however, than the fact that they are also traditionally the most rural areas. In the case of the South there is a regional aspect to it in that the Southern culture was less influenced from the beginning by Puritanism than by healthier forms of Christianity. I think, however, that the factors contributing to the decline in the Anglosphere are pretty much across the board. I have made the point in the past, that most if not all of the left-wing lunacy up here in Canada, began in the United States, but its imitators in Canada keep trying to take things much further than their American models ever have. The two World Wars which ended with America taking what had been the United Kingdom's place of primacy within the Anglosphere has had a terrible impact all around. America simply does not have the roots in pre-Modern tradition that the UK has to provide an anchor to the rest of the Anglosphere. Worse, its taking the position of primacy, has caused it to go far off from the better elements in its founding liberalism. Patrick Buchanan's "A Republic not an Empire" makes this case, calling the United States back to her roots. George Grant, in "Lament for a Nation", outlined the consequences that the USA's taking first spot over the UK have had for the traditionally conservtive Canada. Older Tory writers like Sir Peregrine Worsthorne, Auberon Waugh, and the humourist Michael Wharton (Peter Simple) used to decry the deleterious impact of American culture on British culture.
DeleteThank you, sir, for such thoughtful and detailed replies. Very well said!
Delete