foolish, or misled. !
is that Canadian slang for being intelligent and informed ?

On Dec 8, 9:33 am, margareth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Harper, unlike Bush, has not been allowed a long leash. The economic
> update, blatantly dishonoured the collective agreement with the
> government's own employees, and removed the right to strike.  It
> sought to eliminate the tibunal which governed job and pay equity for
> women. And he also challenged the opposition with the removal of a
> subsidy to all the parties for election expenses.  He forced the hand
> of the Opposition, and thus at least has temporarily united them.
> What has also become apparant is that Harper believes his own spin.
> That when the issues are presented to Canadians, they will all agree
> with them. Hah!
> Some of the material that seems to come from the neo cons starts to
> make sense, in an unwelcome sort of way. They have come to believe
> that they have all the answers. and if the press and the citizenry
> don't see it that way, they are either foolish, or misled.
>
> On Dec 8, 9:06 am, Liberal mike 532 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Naomi Klein: The Shock Doctrine Got Shot Down in 
> > Canadahttp://www.alternet.org/democracy/110809/
> > Canada's Bush-imitating prime minister gets a political smackdown for
> > trying to ram through radical policies.
> > Kim Elliott: As you outline so well in your book and in various
> > interviews in the U.S. media, the current financial crisis holds the
> > possibility of being one of those moments when the shock doctrine can
> > best be applied. Can you comment on both the Harper government's
> > economic and fiscal statement introduced last week, and on the
> > Opposition's response to that -- that is, the formation of a
> > coalition
> > -- in the context of the shock doctrine?
>
> > Naomi Klein: Yes, absolutely. What I think we are seeing is a clear
> > example of the shock doctrine in the way the Harper government has
> > used the economic crisis to push through a much more radical agenda
> > than they won a mandate to do.
>
> > At the same time we are seeing an example of what I call in the book
> > a
> > "shock resistance," where this tactic has been so overused around the
> > world and also in Canada that we are becoming more resistant to the
> > tactic -- we are on to them -- and Harper is not getting away with
> > it.
>
> > What I think is really amazing about this moment is whatever happens
> > next -- whether we end up with this coalition or not, we will have an
> > extremely chastened Harper. So the attempted shock doctrine has
> > failed. I think we can say that decisively.
>
> > Just to be clear, what I mean by the shock doctrine, as you know, is
> > the use of crisis to push through unpopular pro-corporate policies.
> > This bundling of a whole package of policies: denying the right of
> > public sector workers to strike, the attack on public financing of
> > political parties, with the economic program -- that is what failed,
> > and people were offended by the opportunism of it.
>
> > This is what so many of us were worried about during the election --
> > the context of a Tory victory in an economic crisis, because we know
> > that there is this pattern of using an economic crisis to push
> > through
> > policies that were nowhere during the campaign.
>
> > KE: This coalition gives us lots of opportunities, but it also poses
> > some risks if it is successful. I'd like to ask you about that. In an
> > interview you had on Democracy Now!, you said that part of the reason
> > that Obama was appointing a host of neo-liberal economists was
> > because
> > there was a lack of "intellectual honesty" among progressives about
> > the real legacy of the Clinton years. Does the Canadian left, in a
> > Liberal-led coalition, risk losing our understanding of the neo-
> > liberal legacy of the Liberals, who during those same Clinton years
> > were ripping up Canada's welfare state, cutting social spending etc?
>
> > NK: I think it is really important to remember, and I've written
> > about
> > this in the book, and Linda McQuaig has written about it extensively,
> > that it is the Liberals who actually implemented what I'm describing
> > in Canada.
>
> > They were elected on an economic stimulus platform in 1993, with a
> > huge mandate. The Tories were wiped out in those historic elections.
> > And then they caved to pressure from Bay Street, from the corporate
> > media and from the right-wing think tanks in the face of the debt
> > crisis. They turned around and broke their election promises when it
> > came to NAFTA, when it came to job creation, and the famous 1995 Paul
> > Martin budget came down which did so much damage to unemployment
> > insurances (which makes it particularly interesting that a key piece
> > of the agreement for the coalition is about strengthening
> > unemployment
> > insurance). So we need to have long memories about the Liberals,
> > because they have done exactly what Harper has just done, in terms of
> > using an economic crisis for a neo-liberal about turn.
>
> > That said, what I find most exciting about what is going on right now
> > -- beyond just getting rid of Harper, which is exciting in and of
> > itself -- is that we have this opportunity to show what proportional
> > representation (PR) would look like, because all of this talk that
> > this is a coup is a joke.
>
> > What is being proposed by this coalition is much closer to
> > representative democracy than what we have right now, which is a
> > government that has [slightly more than] 35 per cent of the popular
> > vote in a turnout that was historically low, of 59 per cent of
> > Canadian voters, which means that even though the Tories won more
> > seats they had fewer actual votes than in the last election.
>
> > 123Next page »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/  
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. 
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to