It's a Remarkk-able life

    • Edit
    • Delete
    • Tags
    • Autopost

    Declaring war on Canadian complacency

    Stephen Harper is counting on Canadians’ complacency as he rewrites the rules of his country’s politics to weaken legislative scrutiny


    Reuters
    via economist.com

    This shocking piece from The Economist is much more blunt than most Canadian media has dared to be on the threat to Canadian democracy implicit in the Harper government's cynical prorogation ploy.

    In this new and frightening re-interpretation of Canadian democracy, Parliament sits at the pleasure of the Prime Minister. In this new world, black is white and up is down. It is a horrifying affront to democracy, regardless of your ideological or partisan leanings.

    In Iran, the Green Revolution swept the streets of its major cities in response to a threat to the democratic processes of their constitutional Islamic Republic in a vast ongoing struggle for the future. Where is the equivalent Canadian movement? In Canada, I'm afraid, we just take it. We are a country of learned helplessness. Canada is a polity suffering from collective Stockholm syndrome. Call it democracy's death by a thousand cuts.

    I don't know how this will all play out, but I'm fed up. I'm angry. I'm afraid for the future of democracy in the country that I love. But I also know that I am all the more motivated to do something about it. Others will have their own analyses and prescriptions, this is mine.

    This is not a rant against Harper, the Conservative Party, Ottawa or politicians as a class. This is not me advocating to elect Liberals, Greens, NDP, or to talk about electoral reform, constitutional law or parliamentary procedure.

    I blame us.

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/kuznicki/4255196509/

    It is the particular Canadian culture of complacency that has empowered a skillful and cynical tactician to remake the political landscape in a way that other parties are jealous of more than horrified at. Voting the bums out and putting in new bums won't change this fact.

    I don't actually believe that Canadians are apathetic. Canadians care deeply about many issues. They engage in their own quiet and private ways on many issues outside of politics and elections.

    Complacency is not apathy. We care, we just don't do anything about the things we care about. Our actions don't match our words.

    Canadians are disconnected from each other, their sense of citizenship and from civic life in general. I believe this disconnection is the legacy of the 20th century and the modern industrial welfare state. It is disconnection and the absence of a public life for the majority of Canadians that is the source of complacency. We don't know each other. We can't see each other and as a result we can't find common cause or mobilze to take action around the things we care about in a way that is relevant to our politics.

    Into the vacuum of a disengaged electorate, we have allowed cynical tactical opportunists of all political stripes to restructure our democracy in a way that keeps Canadians as silent and disconnected clients of the State. Mainstream media, political tacticians and socio-economic realities work to maintain and reinforce this disconnected and defanged democracy.

    So, before we will ever see real change in our politics, I believe that the electorate needs to reconnect to itself, one individual to another and from individuals to their communities, one community at a time. Thankfully, we have the technologies and the methods to do this. We just need the individual and collective will to take on a major project of civic re-engagement.

    This is the work of our age: to restore community, rebuild our civic institutions and reinvigorate our democracy so that we can transform our communities and society to face the very serious and difficult challenges that lie ahead.

    So, to my ChangeCamp colleagues and collaborators across the country, let me offer a proposal about the change that I believe we seek.

    The change we seek is two-fold:

    1. To make government more open, transparent, innovative, participatory, accountable, effective and efficient
    2. To reinvigorate the public sphere, re-engaging ourselves, our neighbours, our colleagues and our loved ones with each other around our civic passions

    This is what we mean by "Reimagining government and citizenship in the age of participation".

    We are doing this not because we love technology or social media, but because we need a better democracy, a restored sense of community and a society that works for us and the historical moment we find ourselves in.

    The moment demands our urgent efforts to reverse the tide of a culture of complacency. Now is our time. 2010 is the year it begins. The alternative is unthinkable.

    Tags » Canada ChangeCamp community politics work
    • 7 January 2010
    • Views
    • 27 Comments
    • Permalink
    • Tweet
    • 27 responses
    • Like
    • Comment
    about 2 years ago AB responded:
    well, good for you for writing a blog and tweeting about it. i'm sure that'll get things moving.
    about 2 years ago Mireille Bo responded:
    A powerful message. One that should be read by every Canadian
    about 2 years ago jenhassum (Twitter) responded:
    Me_me_normal
    Yes, yes yes: this is a great call to arms.

    And since you asked… I do take issue with some of the assumptions on which the call for change is sought. I don't know what you mean by 'the 20th century,' so I'll focus on the 'the welfare state' as a potential catalyst. If it is what has caused disconnection, (which in turn makes people into some kind of liberal lumpen), then the change we seek is take power away from the welfare state and then we will see a blossoming of self-empowerment.

    This prediction is just not supported by empirical evidence. In fact, evidence might point to the contrary: the government cuts to welfare state programs since the mid-70s occurs in the same era when we see a retreat of traditional forms of political participation. In places where the welfare state is quite strong, the population enjoys a higher percentage of electoral participation (http://www.idea.int/vt/countryview.cfm?CountryCode=SE). In the US, where more of the market governs services, it is the opposite. The welfare state isn't the isolated variable that you can blame. But my point isn’t to re-hash some old school right vs. left debate about the welfare state but to illustrate that it might be something more. For me, I've been caught up thinking about what have we done to the idea of democracy.

    Check out Arundhati Roy's awesome questions:
    "What have we turned it into? What happens once democracy has been used up? When it has been hollowed out and emptied of meaning? What happens when each of its institutions has metastasized into something dangerous? What happens now that democracy and the free market have fused into a single predatory organism with a thin, constricted imagination that revolves almost entirely around the idea of maximizing profit?"
    http://www.commondreams.org/view/2009/09/28-0

    If people have stopped believing in "democracy" as it exists in our country, then it makes it that much more difficult to argue against prorogation. End prorogation for what? To return to power MPs who were elected by the lowest voter turn out. Government for what? For the self-interest of politicians, companies, lobbyists and individuals? To many it seems like a game played for aggrandizement and opportunity. Making people believe in democracy again I think rests in people feeling a sense of control and ownership over decision making.

    about 2 years ago AB responded:
    Who says there is anything is wrong with democracy? Public opinion is swaying against Harper and he's likely to pay a price for prorogation.

    On the other hand, the Official Opposition is cautious against taking action because the last time they proposed something "democratic" (the coalition), it was massively rejected by Canadians.

    Right now, Canada is in one of those positions where there is no majority rule and a bunch of minority interests are playing poker. This is democracy. The time to hold Harper and his government to account is coming.

    about 2 years ago Mark Kuznicki responded:
    Mark Kuznicki
    Jen, thanks for your comment. When I say that the modern industrial welfare state is responsible for our disconnection, I am not saying get rid of welfare as a social program. (Although it is in dire need of re-imagining, but that's beyond my pay grade)

    What I'm saying is that the structures of industrial society, both private and public sector, have damaged social capital and civil society. This is a Robert Putnam inspired idea of social capital's decline in the 20th century. I would agree with Phillip Bond's analysis, that the combination of the neo-liberal market, an overbearing State and individual atomization has damaged civil association: http://www.respublica.org.uk/articles/phillip-blond-talks-cabinet-office-strategy-unit

    We hyper-professionalized everything. We turned government into an organization that took its lessons from Ford's assembly line. We separated work from life. We built cities around the car, cities that separated us from each other and reduced the importance of public space in our daily lives. A good citizen is one who works, pays taxes, goes home, obeys the law, watches TV, and buys stuff. This is modern industrial society.

    The agora was both a marketplace and a space to exchange ideas. The modern State and industrial corporatism have absorbed that space into themselves.

    We need a new agora. We need a new basis for civil association.

    about 2 years ago Mark Kuznicki responded:
    Mark Kuznicki
    AB, if you think that we have a well functioning democracy right now, then we have nothing to talk about.

    A government that was being held to account for its actions in committee was just able to suspend Parliament in order to maintain power and buy time. In so doing, it up-ended months of the nation's work. And as a tactic, it might work out well for the government.

    This is just a symptom, but to me it is evidence of something deeper. If you think it's just another tactical skirmish and an opportunity to throw the bums out to install other bums, than you and I have a very different read of the nature of the problem. The problem isn't Harper or the Conservatives.

    The deeper problem is the decline of our institutions, the centralization of power in the PMO and an electorate that sees this episode as just another political game.

    about 2 years ago Faramarz Hashemi responded:
    Faramarz Hashemi
    Thanks for making the reference to Iran's crises, I couldn't agree more. We take so much for granted in this country that we cannot even fathom giving our life in struggle for a free vote, as is the case in Iran today.

    This Government needs a harsh reminder that it has to answer to the People not the other way around.

    about 2 years ago Faramarz Hashemi liked this post.
    about 2 years ago jenhassum (Twitter) responded:
    Me_me_normal
    I did think that your pejorative use of the term welfare looked at first glance like a Bond/Cameron statement. I love reading about the British Conservative 2.0 policies and theories and often find myself nodding along to the theoretical idea of a 'post-bureaucratic state' and calls for localism. But, their policy proposals often confuse the freedom and choice which I agree people need more of a Thatcher-like idea that consumer choice some how equals greater democracy. (See for example their education policies). Of course, Britain has already tried this path in the 80s and it did not yield increased civic participation.

    This take me back to the question of democracy. And, again, instead of wanting to do a back and forth on the idea of a welfare state, let me agree with your vision. Democracy can not be used as a short hand for unraveling social projects, but something more meaningful experienced collectively by Canadians on their own terms.

    "To make government more open, transparent, innovative, participatory, accountable, effective and efficient."

    This is an increadible vision of government which I whole heartly agree with, will include reforming social services, and I will join in advocating with you for. In order to win this, we will need to make spaces of organising that are like this first. It is easy for a few people to abide by these ideals. But we need more then a few people. To compel this kind of game-changing reforms from government will mean that these organising spaces must reflect the population. That will be the hardest task. It will require empowering voices which do not enjoy the privileged position of currently being at the forefront of this discussion. Asking people will not be enough because it will involve having to inspire people to move beyond the barriers of contemporary "democracy" to believe once again that they have the ability to successfully advocate for something better.

    about 2 years ago jenhassum (Twitter) responded:
    Me_me_normal
    Yikes: I missed a comma in a pretty important place!

    "But, their policy proposals often confuse freedom and choice, which I agree people need more, with of a Thatcher-like idea that consumer choice some how equals greater democracy."

    about 2 years ago fjf responded:
    Is it our complacency that motivates Harper to "remake the political landscape" or is it that Harper's strategies impose a sense of complacency or helplessness on all of us? Or maybe a bit of both.

    You make a good point differentiating between complacency and apathy. I agree something has to shake up the masses so they make the system accountable to them because politicians sure aren't going to do it.

    Talk to those politicians who have left only after one term in office because they entered politic honestly believing they could/would be able make a difference. The system gobbled them up and spit them out. Those who stayed learned very quickly how the system worked.

    In an interview the other night on TV with the author of a book about Stephen Harper written a couple of years ago (I didn't catch the author's name) hie was all praise then but he sure has changed his mind now, especially the vindictiveness Harper has shown towards his opponents and his disdain for parliament. An interesting point he mentioned was Harper will survive this latest blunder. He's not worried. He reasons that those people who are creating the stink aren't going to vote for him anyway so who cares, write them off.

    The problem is we are getting blindsided every other week by Harper and his unelected mandarins in his PMO. While editorials in every newspaper across Canada have been critical of his recent antics the silence from the other 141 Conservatives elected to represent their citizen has been deafening.

    about 2 years ago Mark Kuznicki responded:
    Mark Kuznicki
    Thank you Jen and fjf for your comments.

    Jen, I think you have just helped tremendously in terms of focus about what we're trying to do. We are trying to change government and in doing so need to model the change we want to see in ourselves.

    Creating spaces for dialogue and spaces for organizing seem like two related functions needed in this emerging movement.

    Dialogue does not equal social media, but social media can enhance dialogue. Organizing doesn't mean joining a Facebook group, but a Facebook group can help us organize.

    How do we design and hack physical and online spaces in a way to engage the full diversity of citizens? This is a critical design problem that we need to solve and will be the focus of a ChangeCamp design event in Toronto on February 9th. If you're able and interested in joining us, please get on the list: http://bit.ly/5LyOLy

    about 2 years ago Renjie Butalid liked this post.
    about 2 years ago AB responded:
    Mark:

    That is democracy. Right now, Canada's democracy is functioning exactly as it was designed and as it was intended. Legitimately elected representatives who enjoy the confidence of the House make decisions that are authorized by law, and by the Constitution. Prorogation is a perfectly legal & democratic thing to do, even if legislation and committees come to an end, and even if the government is doing it to solely save itself from embarrassment.

    In our democracy, much like other democracies, Canadians have an opportunity, at least every five years, to evaluate the decisions made by our elected representatives. Democracy is the product of the opinions of the people. All people, interested or uninterested, have a voice in democracy.

    You and I may not agree with every decision the elected representatives make (and certainly on prorogation, a number of us disagree), but that doesn't render the decision, or the decision-makers, undemocratic.

    If you want a different system, one where elected representatives are not permitted to make decisions that are authorized by the Constitution, that's fine. Or perhaps you want a system where only "knowledgeable" Canadians can vote, or where every voter is forced to be knowledgeable about the issues. You can certainly structure a system of government in that way, but it would not be democracy.

    Democracy is likely not the "best" form of governance conceivable. It's a relatively new evolution in the history of the world. Perhaps we do need a different model. But do not confuse the issue by saying our "democracy is broken" because it is not. The real problem may be that democracy itself is proving inadequate in a modern world.

    about 2 years ago Mark Kuznicki responded:
    Mark Kuznicki
    Followers of the conversation on my "Declaring war on Canadian complacency" post my find these links of interest:

    Rex Murphy: Crocodile tears for the "dignity" of Parliament - http://bit.ly/5JxP5K

    John Ibbitson: Few countries can claim such a pathetic Parliament - http://bit.ly/85PrvJ

    Norman Spector: Prorogation: Jean Chrétien did it too - http://bit.ly/7jNAPq

    Andrew Coyne: The real issue - http://bit.ly/6RRY2q

    about 2 years ago Mark Kuznicki responded:
    Mark Kuznicki
    AB, I am in no way advocating for anything other than democracy and I take issue with the logic of your argument. The fact that prorogation is legal and constitutional is not questioned and beside the point. At issue is the health of our democracy, not whether we have one or not, as if democracy were a binary.

    The real question, as Andrew Coyne framed it in the post linked above, is: How can we work together to improve our democracy?.

    about 2 years ago AB responded:
    Mark, to characterize a democracy as "unhealthy" because certain controversial but legal tools are used is incredibly biased. To suggest that our democracy is unhealthy because voter turnout is low is also pointless. There is no set, absolute ideal voter turnout which democratic governance systems must achieve to be "healthy." They simply, inter alia, put the right to vote into the hands of the citizens. There is never a guarantee that everyone will choose to vote. In fact, most Canadians are "generally" happy with our country. All the parties are very close on the spectrum and generally say the same things (for a good example of this, see Spacing's article where they map our the mayoral candidates). There's nothing wrong with this reality. It means that all politicians have carefully catered their opinions and policies to match general public opinion. Democracy works!

    The status of our democracy is incredibly healthy. Adult citizens of the Canadian democracy have the right to vote. Our Constitution guarantees that everyone has the right to freedom of expression. Elected representatives are accountable to the citizenry. The press is free. The judiciary is independent and holds government to account (the Khadr case being recent examples). We are free of serious corruption or fraud.

    One must avoid criticizing the entire democratic system with a micro lens.

    about 2 years ago Patrick Keenan responded:
    Its amazing really that living in such an interesting "new world" that we have trouble applying this creativity to our institutions. Just reading the article about Design Thinking & Roger Martin / Rotman in the New York Times: www.nytimes.com/2010/01/10/business/10mba.html

    We have the tools to think about this stuff, but really its about complacency.

    Any Canadian musician will tell you that to respected you have to go abroad and get famous. Happened to McLuhan. We have amazing people, but we don't use them, we don't enable them, and maybe we don't "need" them.

    Another great Canadian thinker, John Raulston Saul talks about what's really Canadian, and its important to realize that we're not about BIG change, we're about negotiation and pluralism. We tell stories, and invite others to do the same.

    http://www.tvo.org/TVO/WebObjects/TVO.woa?video?BI_Lecture_20090516_834123_JRSaul

    Change is a want, so how might we make it attractive, beautiful, seductive, and delightful? Probably by doing what we do: tell a wonderful story and include people.

    about 2 years ago Mark Kuznicki liked this post.
    about 2 years ago Mark Kuznicki responded:
    Mark Kuznicki
    @dchartier writes on prorogation and participation: http://bit.ly/5vIsvI
    about 2 years ago AB responded:
    democracy is alive and well:

    http://www.theglobeandmail.com/blogs/bureau-blog/prorogation-hammers-conservative-support-in-polls/article1430143/

    10 months ago Roger liked this post.
    10 months ago caro aprisio liked this post.
    10 months ago Robert liked this post.
    10 months ago resultat bep liked this post.
    8 months ago Catherine liked this post.
    2 months ago Anna Longreen liked this post.
  • Mark Kuznicki's Space

    The adventures of a seeker trying to figure it out.
    Blog: http://remarkk.com/
    Twitter: http://twitter.com/remarkk/

    Archive

    2011 (10)
    November (2)
    July (1)
    June (1)
    May (2)
    April (1)
    February (1)
    January (2)
    2010 (81)
    December (1)
    November (1)
    October (9)
    September (3)
    August (3)
    July (3)
    June (4)
    May (8)
    April (9)
    March (16)
    February (10)
    January (14)
    2009 (58)
    December (21)
    November (10)
    October (4)
    September (3)
    August (2)
    July (16)
    June (1)
    May (1)
  • About Mark Kuznicki

    The adventures of a seeker trying to figure it out.
    Blog: http://remarkk.com/
    Twitter: http://twitter.com/remarkk/

  • Subscribe via RSS
  • Sites I Like

    • Remarkk!

    Follow Me

      TwitterFacebook

Theme created for Posterous by Obox