liberal party

Letter to Liberal Markham-Unionville Liberal representive

October 14, 2015 Incoherent ramblings , ,

Hello Mrs Jiang,

I’m interested in your position on two topics that probably rule out my vote for the liberal party.  Before the vote, I am giving you a chance to defend or justify your stance on these policies.

The first is the party whip.  This is, in my opinion, a destroyer of democracy, and effectively ensures that local constituents have no possibility of representation.  A meaningless vote every four years is made further meaningless by requiring that “representatives” vote the party-line.  Even school children realize the absurdity of such a policy, but such absurdity appears to be not only tolerated but desired by Canadian politicians.

The second is the Liberal vote for bill C-51 required by the party leadership.  I’ve appended correspondence that shows my position on this bill to the incumbent “representative” for Markham-Unionville.  His reply was voting for the bill, which did not surprise me.

Peeter Joot

please note that I make a copy of all political correspondence (or lack thereof) available online.
Appended copy of my “take a firm stand” letter to John McCallum, incumbent Markham-Unionville “representitive”.

more correspondence with Markham-Unionville Green Party rep., Elvin Kao

October 9, 2015 Incoherent ramblings , , , , ,

I’d asked of Elvin Kao, the local green party candidate

It is refreshing to hear of this party position on whipping votes, and on bill C-51.  Can you please provide me a reference to the location of your party documentation where that no-whip policy is stated.
Asking CSIS for conclusive data that supports their funding is like asking somebody “would you like a raise?”.  You will surely be returned data that will support the case for more and more invasive policing.
I also asked about your position on Canada’s military.  My logical expectation that the Green party position on offensive military would be severe, since Military forces everywhere are easily argued to be the most flagrant and blatant polluters in existence.  Consider, for example, the environmental damage of all the nuclear bombs that have been deployed and tested, the all-species genetic damage due to depleted Uranium deployment in Iraq, and the intense carbon footprint of so many air, ground, and water fleets.  Does your party take an explicit position on the scale and deployment of Canada’s military forces?
What is your position on the Canadian bombing of Syria?  Recalling other such targets like Serbia, it is easy to see that Canada has been historically complicit as acting as a proxy for the United States in its zeal to bring peace with bombs.  I find it odd that there is lots of coverage in the Canadian press on the Syrian refugee crisis, but nothing on our direct contribution to that crisis.

His response:

The Green party does not have whipped votes.

We want government reform that will end all whipped votes, so that MPs can represent their constituents.

In terms of CSIS and showing results for the allocation of resources should not be a proposition they should be shocked at and is the kind of oversight that should be mandatory so that we do not have unnecessary government overhead.

The Green party believes that Canada should be a peace keeping country, and will only engage in war as a last resort. Any strike on a nation or group should have approval from UN Security Council. Canada for the first time has disappeared from international stage as it has lost its seat from the UN Security Council. In terms of scale of Canadian forces deployment based on environmental impact, there is no policy. With Canadian and other lives to consider during those moments, I do not believe we should consider the environmental impact in those instances and we should make sure that our Canadian troops are well equipped. The environmental impact is small compared to Canadian industries, producing everyday, and other polluting problems.

Canada has lost its touch as a peace keeping country and has blindly followed all US led missions. I do not believe that air strikes in that region are helping, and creates more radicals for western hatred. There is too much conflict between multiple groups in the Syrian civil war and it would be difficult to choose sides.

Thanks for the questions,

I have a lot of trouble with anybody that bandies about the putrid peace keeping doublespeak when it really means warfare, often blatantly offensive warfare.  Elvin is already working hard at speaking in the meaningless way of a politician despite being really new to the game.

Just because the UN, effectively a puppet organization for the United States, sanctions the oppression of the current enemy de-jour, doesn’t mean that it is something that I want to be funding with the taxes that are collected from me like it or not.

It appears that I am left without any representation in the current collection of candidates for my riding.  The liberal and conservative parties are for all intents and purposes the same despite the different colours that they use in the advertising.  When push comes to shove a leader from on-high, serving interests that we’ll never know the full details of, sets the party policy and party members who choose to deviate will be expelled.  Most probably wouldn’t care to rock the boat and are willyfully ignorant to the fact that they are meaningless and purposeless.  The NDP is a communist party want-to-be, and I can’t vote for them.  Collective socialism has killed hundreds of millions of people so far.  How many more people have to die before people finally realize it’s a bad idea?  I don’t believe that a vote for the NDP means we’ll have any immediate prospect of such death here in Canada, but taking any steps in that direction doesn’t seem prudent.

I don’t trust the language that this Green party rep uses.  He appears to be is trying too hard to be a politician, which essentially means a liar.  Perhaps he’s the least evil of the options around, but I may just explicitly vote none of the above.

Toike politics

October 1, 2015 Incoherent ramblings , , , , , , ,



Kudos to the Toike once again.  They really nailed the conservative ad.  I’m not old enough to know what Trudeau senior’s politics were nor how they compare to junior, so that’s hard to comment on.  What I do know of Trudeau is that he has demonstrated the same will to institute an unbounded police state, by voting and forcing Liberal voting for C-51, as Harper and head KGB want-a-be Minister Blainey.  That’s score zero for votes from me for the blue and the red.

Since I don’t like a policy of unbounded tax hikes the NDP won’t get my vote.

The only option left for my riding is the Green party.  The Toike’s description of “fuzzy” is exactly what the Green party platform looked like last go round, so unless they’ve improved that really leaves “None of the Above” as my only option.

I expect that all the parties are playing the same game, seeing who can “promise” the most for “free”, where free means funded out of taxes extracted from us and future generations … like it or not.  What a sham this election farce is!  How can people delude themselves into thinking that one vote every few years to a representative that will probably ignore you once elected, or not be elected, is somehow representation.

Ontario elections are done. Did you choose your oppressor?

June 13, 2014 Incoherent ramblings , , , , , , ,


How is it that this election farce is viewed as “Civic Duty”?  How is it that “Democracy” and our bloated cancerous Government is viewed with almost religious overtones?  How is it that a once every four years pick between two or three identical oppressors is perceived as representation?

In Canada, we have what is effectively a three party system, the PC, the Liberals, and the NDP parties.  All of these want to continue the status quo, and steal your money at gunpoint.  If you object to having your money stolen, then you can go to jail, or have your wages stolen at the source, or have your property taken.  It would be somewhat amusing to itemize all the ways that government steals from me, but actually thinking through the details of that is a very depressing road to walk.

The PC party portrays themselves as pushing for limited government, and will bandy about terms like privatization to support that claim.  However, this is privatization as implemented in the USA, where it means that they will continue to steal from you, but will give your money to their friends.  They do occasionally promise less taxes, but I’d be surprised to see numbers that demonstrated this ever occurred while they were in power.  If they did ever manage to reduce taxes, was there a corresponding increase in debt spending?

The NDP doesn’t hide it’s goals.  More government, less freedom, more taxes, less personal choice.  They know better how to use your resources than you ever can.  It’s basically a weakened communist party, with socialist ideals that have been shown to fail again and again and again.  Reward the unproductive, feeding the welfare system that feeds on itself.  Impose central planning, making decisions on how to spend the money they steal from you, from their ivory tower positions of power.

The Liberal party is the middle ground between the two, positioned to deceive people into thinking that they have a choice between the two radical extremes.

My partner is very happy (perhaps overjoyed?) that the Liberal party has won the election (in our riding as well as provincially).  It is surprising to me to observe enthusiasm over results that I consider meaningless.  I don’t want the government ruling over me, no matter who the puppet figurehead is.  I don’t want my money stolen to pay the debt on past and continuing warfare.  I don’t want my money stolen from me to support a welfare system that hurts the people it claims to support, while ensuring that they can never break their dependency.  I don’t want to support an insane health care system that is in the pockets of the big pharma companies, and introduces idiotic government policies that doctors have to comply with at every step.  To get my daughter’s skin condition looked at, we have to first see a GP, so that he can get paid to refer us to a skin doctor.  It makes sense to the GP because he gets paid for it.  No doctor or public service worker will object to big government, since they have a vested interest in big government, because that is where their pay check comes from.

It necessary to consider this pay check bias, to make sense of any enthusiasm for the liberal party election win.  She works for the university, an institution that receives their funding from monies stolen from me, from you, and even from her.  Nobody is likely to vote for loosing their job, and perceived the PC party as a potential threat to job security.  The government provides the universities with an educational cartel, setting both the regulations that allows them to rubber stamp useless degrees, as well as the funding they require to operate.  Calling most university degrees useless is not a bias against that poor sucker that comes out of school with debt in exchange for the double major in politics and art history, and minor in psychology.  I also consider my own undergrad engineering degree largely useless.  Almost everything that I learned for my job I learned on the job, and suspect that is the case for the bulk of people that do work their way through university.  If the government wasn’t propping up these bumbling institutions with the money they take from us, I am sure that more targeted and effective job centric learning institutions would have an incentive to establish themselves.

People vote for the “free” stuff that governments claim to give out, but the argument is a weak one.  Vote for us and you can have one unit of “free” stuff.  Sure, but they’ll take 1.2 units of stuff from you, but do so in a way that makes it seem like they are taking 0.7 units from you and 0.5 units from somebody else.  Free things from the government are like the “free” in popular commercial marketing, only free if you also buy two of equal or greater cost.  If you think that the free stuff promised by some specific political party happens to help your specific financial situation, you will still lose when all is said and done.  Government and bureaucracy will always continue to grow, manufacturing its own demand for itself.

I don’t believe that any elected government, especially with the party system that forbids individual choice, can ever be representative.  Democracy embodies the insanity of decision by committee.  How many times have you ever observed a meeting with more than ten people come to any sort of reasonable consensus, or even make progress?  How can we fool ourselves into thinking that this will work when scaled to hundreds of people.  How can we fool ourselves into thinking that this works when so many politicians are bought and paid for, and will work for their buddies and their financiers.

No person that I would ever vote for will win a seat, and even if they did there’s no way that they could fight the institutional inertia of government once in place.  I’ve voted before for the Green party as a statement of “none of the above.”   This time I noticed that there was a Libertarian running in my current riding, and ended up voting for him.  I had very mixed feelings about voting at all, since not voting expresses dissatisfaction with the system in a way that is perhaps stronger than voting anti-strategically.   While the Libertarian party is in many ways consistent with my anarchist views, they will never get elected.  Too many people are busily sucking on the public sector tit, and a fundamental shift in attitudes would be required to get enough buy in for any Libertarian to ever win an election.  This vote was therefore yet another vote for “none of the above”, one made knowing full well that it was completely pointless.

I don’t get any more representation having done my civic duty than anybody else. </rant>