Individualist Individualist:
One thing I've noted since the end of the election is just how poor, ungracious winners some people can be. It seems Harper Derangement Syndrome will long outlive the Harper government.
The hatred, schadenfreude and bitterness I saw welling up from the Toronto Star editorial staff and from Canadians on various comments boards has really taken me aback. The irony of such people celebrating the "end of nastiness" at the federal level is breathtaking. It's almost like they didn't hear Justin Trudeau refer to Conservatives as neighbours rather than enemies, or simply chose to ignore him.
Unfortunately, there will always be little people who engage in this kind of crap.
Two wrongs don't make a right, but there was a fair amount of gloating and bashing of 'Count Chocula' here on CKA after the 2011 election.
I didn't like it then and I don't care for it now. Harper, like his policies or not, served his country and at the very least deserves credit for doing that. I thought Trudeau did very well in his victory speech on Monday night when he said, "Conservatives are not our enemies, they are our neighbours."
Individualist Individualist:
It always seemed to me that much of animus towards Harper as a leader was driven not by his policies or even his style of governance...
No, it was his policies that pissed lots of people off.
As soon as he got a majority, he began throwing meat to his base, getting rid of the long form census, long gun registry, brought in tax cuts that favoured the wealthy, created new ways for the wealthy to dodge taxes (TFSAs, income splitting ,etc) and so on.
While a solid 30% of the country liked those changes, much of the other 70% didn't, and that was a huge factor in the Conservative defeat.
Individualist Individualist:
This is not in any way to minimize the legitimate criticisms people have over Harper and his style of governing. But throwing around words like "fascist" just cheapened the public debate, just as people using terms like "Tommunist" is respect to Mulcair or the NDP's policies did so. As you know, I'm no stranger to over-the-top rhetoric myself, but there are limits.
I'll certainly agree with that.
I thank Thanos for teaching me Eisenhower's thoughts on the extremists (the far right and left of the road are in the gutter and unusable - the only worthwhile part is the middle) to teach me not to go down the "Harperite' road like some others here did.
Individualist Individualist:
However toxic the relationship between federal parties is, I think most professional politicians realize that their opponents are just as sincere in their pursuit of public service as they are. They just have different ideas about how best to serve the public. It's mainly us armchair commentators who get all tribal and vicious about it.
Here I have to disagree with you.
One of the first things Harper did after getting his majority was get rid of the vote subsidy. While he and supporters are argue it was a 'waste of money', I and many other Canadians saw it as a crass attempt to destroy his political opponents, who at the time did not have anywhere near the fund-raising ability of the Conservatives.
Individualist Individualist:
Justin Trudeau, to his credit, clearly took the scolding he got from his father on separating the ideas from the person when he mocked Joe Clark to heart. He ran a good campaign, and very importantly for me, admitted that his father made some damaging mistakes, particularly with regard to Western Canada and Alberta in particular. His comments in that interview years ago about how Canada is better off when Quebecers are in charge and how Albertans are unfit to govern still don't sit well with me, but people do learn and grow, and I'm hoping he's done so in this case.
Given the blue prairies and red Ontario and Quebec, I'm sure he will be tempted to listen to the ghosts of Keith Davey and his own father (and the not yet ghostly Jean Chretien) in terms of how to deal with Western Canada. I hope he can resist those voices and continue reaching out to those regions of the country that didn't send MP's this way. If he can do that, he will not have necessarily won my vote, but he'll have won my respect.
The litmus test will be when he names his cabinet. If he excludes the MPs from Alberta and Saskatchewan, you can be sure we'll be enemy number 1. However, I think he will do what Chretien did and make at least one of them a cabinet minister to assuage those fears and give us a sat at the table.
Individualist Individualist:
Likewise, I'm hoping he can be similarly broad-minded when looking at those groups outside of his urban base, given the new "Downtown Consensus" reality I've described elsewhere. That means he'll have to keep a tight rein on Adam Vaughan and his "only (big) cities count" agenda.
Living in a city, I'm somewhat biased, but the fact is that more than 70% of Canadians live in cities, and they face financial hurdles that rural areas don't (big ticket items like transit and infrastructure).
He has to place more emphasis on cities simply due to demographics. Frankly, I was kind of surprised that Harper didn't do more - if he had, he might have won this election. Rural votes can only take you so far in this country...
Individualist Individualist:
Seeing the ugly media (both proper and social) response to the defeat of Harper and the Conservatives has brought me to a "Physician, heal thyself" moment. I am giving up my long-standing hatred of Pierre Trudeau. I do this without whitewashing or downplaying the harm I felt he caused to many Canadians, particularly in Western Canada, or his aloofness from both of the great moral struggles of the 20th century - World War II and the Cold War. But he sincerely pursued public service in accordance with his values, achieved significant things while in power, and probably did not intend to cause much of the harm he did to Canadians outside his geographic and ideological base.
I grew up in Alberta in the 70s and 80s and it was a rough time here - and like many I hated PET too (his Salmon Arm salute didn't do him any favours either).
However, time has given me the gift of introspection and while I didn't like many of his policies, I now see the necessity of many of them.
The biggest thing I think that many people don't realize is that PET was one of the only PMs in recent history to really look at Canada as a while and make decisions on what he felt was best for the entire country.
While he may have kneecapped Alberta with the NEP, it wasn't out of any malice, but what he thought was best for the country. Same goes for declaring martial law and enacting the War Measures Act to deal with the FLQ. Both were dangerous precedents but he did both on what he felt was best for Canada, not this region or that region.
Individualist Individualist:
The absence of property rights, while unfortunate, does not invalidate the Charter, which is a remarkable document. Someone who cherishes individual rights as much as I do cannot but celebrate their enshrinement in a constitutional document.
I will continue to disagree passionately with much of what that man did, much as I will no doubt disagree with many of his son's policies and actions. But the Harper-haters have taught me some valuable lessons. The next time the pendulum shifts more in my direction, I will endeavour to be a gracious winner. And I will try more to focus on the ideas rather than the people.