Gone are the norms for decorum and political process. Swept away by constant bloviating, obstructionism, open disrespect, disinformation and personal smears.
While politics has always been fraught with conflict, generally reality wasn’t debated or created through discourse.
Democracy is a tricky concept to define. A few believe it’s limited to free and fair voting. Voting makes up a tangible part of democracy, but overall, democracy is a belief system. So it’s abstract in nature and difficult to fit into a narrow universal definition.
Democracy can be interpreted several ways by people with vast differences in ideology & values. And that ability to shift the meaning of democracy to reflect ideological belief systems always makes defining democracy tricky.
But in Canada, the definition was stable for decades.
That is until support for conservatism began to wane.
Canada started off as a conservative offshoot of the British Empire. Staunch, rigid, Eurocentric, and categorically British in nature.
Over time, the cultural zeitgeist became more liberal, humanist, moderate.
After WW2, Canada was defined by its banality, politeness, explicit humanism and its hodgepodge social safety net.
Known as the globe’s peacekeepers and for our conciliatory and moderate nature.
Who knew this branding was objectionable to the conservative far right?
There have been Prime Ministers that have redefined Canadian culture. Many would say for the better. Lester Pearson & Pierre Trudeau come to mind. They shared a vision of Canada that was a democratically robust, pluralist, mosaic of people with shared citizenship & human rights.
Democracy in Canada was defined by mid 20th century Liberals. Secular, with freedom for all faiths. Principled, with flexibility to adapt to modern needs and pressures. Stable, with defined rights and freedoms to encourage individuals & communities affirm their values & beliefs.
This was the Canada I grew up in and knew, loved and appreciated. For all its warts of past errors in judgement, Canada became almost an ideal. A refuge for all and a safe stable democracy to work towards social equality and democratic ideals.
But what were those ideals. What was the democracy Canada offered?
Intangible and abstract, we took them for granted and they are now under severe threat.
Democracy is fragile. It’s a narrow set of beliefs and behaviours that reflect those beliefs.
Trust is crucial to democracy. There’s no democracy if there’s no trust between citizens & leaders.
Democracy is entrusting elected representatives to govern in the best interests of all citizens. We may not agree on how, but we trust the greater good is the guiding principle.
Compromise is also foundational to democracy. If the best interests of all are the benchmark, compromise is a requirement. You know walking in you won’t get everything you want, but you’ll get enough to keep society functioning & peaceful.
Cooperation is required. Conflict is a part of politics and pluralism only aggravates the potential for conflict. So agreeing to ultimately cooperate for the good of all is essential.
Rule of Law is an extension of cooperation. We must all agree that the rule of law is paramount to ensure peace and stability. The laws apply to all equally. And we agree to uphold the laws to ensure reliability and consistency to all citizens. This reduces conflict.
Political Agency is afforded to every individual. Not just those who qualify to vote. Every resident of Canada, regardless of age, gender, race or sexuality has the ability to voice opinions, call for political action and seek to have their individual and community’s needs met.
Fairness is required for democracy. Inequities, hierarchies, special privileges, inconsistency in rule of law, all put pressure on a society. Reducing those pressures are conducive to strong democratic norms being adopted. Increasing pressures reduces commitment to democracy.
Facts are required for democracy. Democracy cannot function if reality is not established.
We can disagree on how to address reality, but if we don’t agree on what is fact and what is fiction, democracy is impossible to be established.
Concession to decision making is required to achieve democracy. Every political group (political party, special interest group, lobbyist, community) must agree to concede when a decision is made. Society can’t function if decisions aren’t made. All must respect final decisions.
Consideration is also a required element of democracy. Unless all individuals, groups and special interests acknowledge and tolerate plurality, democracy cannot be achieved.
Political Dissent is a crucial element to establish democracy. The ability to provide feedback to decisions made by govt is essential. But there are defined limits to methods of dissent. Obstruction isn’t dissent, it’s impeding a decision. Dissent is persuasion not coercion.
If these elements are observed and supported by the citizenry and elected leaders, a democratic society exists. In the absence of any one or more, it is a variation of autocracy.
So it’s always a curiosity to me that some people argue that because they continue to believe in democracy, that makes our province or nation democratic.
But that’s not how democracy works.
If the people in power don’t explicitly support democracy, it no longer exists.
Regardless of your personal beliefs and values, the absence of democratic beliefs by leadership negates any belief the citizenry has.
You cannot continue to call dictatorial leadership democratic. Well you can, but that is called deluded thinking. Refusing to accept reality.
And that is Alberta’s current situation.
UCP has destroyed trust, refused to compromise or cooperate with opposition, mocked rule of law and political agency, eliminated fairness and facts, refused to concede to public pressure, rejected plurality, & tried to eliminate dissent.
You’re deluded if you continue to believe Alberta continues to be a democracy. The party elected has attacked democracy on every front. Alberta has significantly shifted to autocratic governance.
Examine your own beliefs and stop trying to define your own reality.
People continue to think CPC’s behaviour is to cause an election.
It’s not.
For the past two years PP and CPC have been undermining Canadian democracy by attacking LPC and PMJT with false accusations. After the Ottawa occupation, LPC negotiated with NDP.
NDP got their requested policy. What did LPC get? They got to deliver policy promised during the 2021 campaign for the federal election.
Not just LPC policy, but also some NDP policy.
What was happening in committees during LPC’s 2nd term?
CPC was obstructing ALL policy.
They also got time to investigate the convoy and Coutts.
How likely do people think the Coutts 4 convictions would have been if there were a federal election? We already saw Smith try to interfere with Pawlowski’s trial. Convoy supporters consider Coutts 4 political prisoners.
@patriciaorpat @PeterHRatcliffe Canadian legal documents are not like American indictments.
Different systems. Typically, reporters & investigative journalists tell the story in Canada, while in the US, allegations are specifically listed in the indictment.
@patriciaorpat @PeterHRatcliffe Investigative journalism has been effectively shut down in Canada.
But even before that was completely in place, details of criminal charges have been kept quiet when charges are dropped or criminals plead guilty to lesser charges.
@patriciaorpat @PeterHRatcliffe For example, SNC-Lavelin corruption details are a mystery because so many of the accused pleaded guilty to lesser charges and the extent of the crime is now closed for public scrutiny.
Interesting to note, the details would have been made public had SNC-Lavelin signed a DPA.
I’m getting really tired of pundits calling for PMJT to step down.
Now that we KNOW it has been Russia poisoning the well and maligning PMJT’s character with fake accusations, conspiracy theories & outright lies, Canadians expect better from pundits, journalists and politicos!
The minister assessed the situation and called it a fundamental impasse.
There is no middle ground. The demands by both parties are so disparate, a stalemate was declared by the minister since the impact of the inability to move forward in negotiations impacts all Canadians.
Note that the minister is invoking his legitimate codified authority to secure peace and impose short term and long term solutions. Those solutions will be in the national interest of all Canadians.
Meaning the govt will not be siding with one party or another.