#elxn42 breakdown - Part 4

In part 1 of this post we focused on the need for exponential growth and the monetary system behind our need for this type of growth. We learned that the monetary system in it's current form is a textbook definition of a Ponzi-scheme requiring ever growing production to meet ever growing debt at the top because at any given time there is always more total debt with interest than there is actual currency to pay for it and the only way to conjure up the currency needed to pay outstanding debt is to borrow even more currency resulting in a never ending cycle where the debt load and subsequent "growth" required are perfectly exponential.

In part 2 of this post we looked at the resource wars currently going on with a focus on it's relation to peak oil and pipelines. The 14 year 'war on terror' has really been a resource war for the U.S. empire to position itself as the first and last global empire that is to be succeeded by corporations as we learned in Michael C. Ruppert's presentation.

In part 3 of this post we looked at the macro effects and purpose of the TPP and free trade in general. Now the TPP has been signed though it still needs to be ratified by the incoming government (it wasn't even supposed to be negotiated during the election anyway and the (Harper) government has so far pledged $5.3 billion dollars of your tax dollars for the auto and agriculture industries to counter their expected losses).

I was originally going to dedicate this post to the final category of issues "governmental issues" however time is growing short before the election now and with the quickly developing geopolitical situation I can't be sure I'll have enough time before the election to write part 5 and this section was really just to complete the context for this post but it is really the summary of what I think about all of this and how it ties into the election which is most important so we are going to skip most of that right to my summary. However, first I would like to touch briefly on the senate because my view on what is going on with it ties into a lot of what I'll be touching on in my summary.

The Senate

I started this post discussing my top issue: that we basically don't properly respect the way our parliament is supposed to work. Most people in this election are going to be voting for their "favourite party", or even worse their "favourite prime minister". A recent clarification by Justin Trudeau on the T.P.P. demonstrates the issue clearly:

OTTAWA — Liberal Leader Justin Trudeau will not allow his MPs a free vote on the massive Trans-Pacific Partnership trade agreement. 

Asked about it Wednesday morning, Trudeau was cautious with his answer.
"We're a long way from that," he told reporters. 

"We have a very clear policy on free votes that says elements that are in our platform, elements that go to the heart of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and elements that are confidence matters, that is, matters of budget, people would be expected to vote with the Liberal Party," Trudeau went on to say. 

"On other issues, they would be expected to stand up for the interests of their constituents right across the country because that is what we elect people to do."

Trudeau's gift for double-speak never ceases to amaze me. No Trudeau, they're elected to represent their constituents on every single fucking issue. "That is what we elect people to do". Look at the issues he's left to be voted on in your interest dear constituent: "other issues". Like the Niqab? Abortion? All those other divisive 'people issues' I was talking about? But matters that regard your civil liberties? The charter of rights and freedoms? "matters of budget" aka economy and spending, confidence matters; these things will not be voted on in your interest rather they will be voted on with the interest and platform of the Liberal party in mind. And people wonder why our political system is fucked?

Same thing goes for the senate, all the talk about the senate is on what is essentially considered "accomplishing the impossible" so that the corrupt individuals we put in there can't abuse their great power and freedom of the public purse. But is there any talk about maybe, you know, not appointing such corrupt useless partisan fuckwits to the Senate? How can we ever expect anything different regardless how "reformed" it is when we Canadians who are so eager to "get Harper out" are so fooled by this election? Most are so anxious to get rid of Harper they can't see that his replacements are simply replicas.

'First past the post' isn't broken, the problem is we're not using it properly. The senate isn't broken either, it's that the actors you "trust" and vote in then appoint their crony friends to the Senate. That's not a problem with the design of how the Senate should work, it is a problem with our corrupt politicians. Likewise the problem with our politicians isn't our voting system it is that our voting system has been perverted in a faux presidential race that is easily manipulated by public relations teams that can make any politician look exactly how they want to the public. We can reform the various "political systems" all we want, but until we as Canadians reform our politics it will all be an exercise in futility.

The senate should be reserved for distinguished Canadians, as it was meant to be, not washed up federal candidates or partisan hacks. Every appointment should be non-partisan with a clear defined reason. When I say distinguished Canadians I mean Canadians like Chris Hadfield. You know, the types of people like we used to honour with naming our public infrastructure after them before we started naming it after corporations.

The Canadian Trends election summary


Now before I start on my summary I once again want to remind people my summary here isn't partisan, it's not meant to vouch for one party or another. I also want to say that despite what you read here these aspects I've described don't have to be true for each and every individual candidate. The problem with our political system is that Canadians will be voting in now 338 MPs largely based on the performance, and appearance of a single candidate: the party leader. Of course this isn't true across the board, there's the coveted "undecided" vote, and naturally many Canadians do base it on their MP but it can not be denied it is mostly influenced by the leaders of the major parties and "who people want to be Prime Minister".

It suffocates the creativity that different ideas brought together can have to solve challenges and replaces that creativity with a sad partisan sports arena where people have teams and ideology and low-brow attacks rule all. Like, my God folks, the fucking Niqab? THIS IS WHAT IS DOMINATING OUR DISCUSSION? Dividing and conquering is how these people win.

Anyway, lets get to it.

Conservative Party

The Conservative Party is a contender but I don't believe Stephen Harper really wants to win. I haven't talked about the Conservatives much in this post and that is for a reason which I will describe here shortly. I anticipate that should the Conservatives not win a majority Stephen Harper will resign his seat and exit politics and probably already has some cushy gig lined up.

I believe this for several reasons:

First, despite the Conservative's campaigning might they've run a substandard, despicable, and slightly odd campaign. In fact as far as I can tell much of the Conservative campaign has been designed to give Justin Trudeau support. I know, it's been a nasty campaign against him so let me explain.

Let's start with prior to the election. The Conservatives all year have been running 'attack ads' against Justin Trudeau. But Justin Trudeau was the leader of the third party. Yes he was popular but not enough to warrant a sustained campaign against him. Of course a sustained campaign has the interesting side effect of exposure. It gets people asking things like 'why is Harper so scared of Justin Trudeau?'. Etc, etc. Trudeau was in your face all year, not because of Trudeau, but because of Harper.

Let's look at the Niqab: despite Harper's 'fear of Trudeau' Harper has chosen to spend the remaining portion of the election largely focusing on this pointless divisive debate. But it's interesting that this debate largely affects the NDP, not the Liberals. The NDP is bleeding support which has brought the Liberals into first place. Hmm, that's odd isn't it? Why would the Conservatives want to make the Liberals stronger, especially at a time they are already doing quite well at least if the polls are to be believed.

During the first portion of the election Harper was largely aloof. Which was especially strange considering what a strong campaign against Trudeau he had launched all year. There were reports of him keeping only his closest advisers near and "mutiny" within the Conservative ranks. But again I have to point out the Conservatives have always shown a phenomenal ability to mold public perception. Money is no object in their campaigns and I find it hard to believe they were actually caught so off guard.

Now that Harper has brought in his new Australian master advisor he's been doing other weird stuff like the Niqab, and using the saying 'old stock Canadians' during a debate. I mean, maybe it was just a slip of the tongue like Press for Truth shows in the introduction to this video:

Or, maybe it wasn't.

The word in political circles is Harper is playing to his base, but he doesn't need to play to his base his base is going to vote for him no matter what. These issues that 'play to his base' also happen to push those who are not in his base, or are not the target (IE: Quebec), away from him.

To my knowledge he hasn't yet once talked about getting a majority.

There is one final piece of the puzzle regarding Harper's probable intentions: the number of ministers that have left him. Such as John Baird:

LEAKED: Baird had secret meetings w/ Barrick Gold during Fahmy & Gov't trip. Resigned 5 days later. #cdnpoli #elxn42 pic.twitter.com/VwOd81BugS

— D. Matthew Millar (@dmatthewmillar) September 9, 2015

During their departures I noticed many progressives saying they are "fleeing the sinking ship" but what I don't think Canadians yet understand is Harper completed his voyage. The damage is done with his finale of selling Canada out to the TPP. Everyone is worried about Harper, I believe so strongly in this theory now that I'm not. As Kathleen Smith (@kikkiplanet) said 'this is his farewell tour'.

Liberal Party

I believe the status-quo wants Justin Trudeau to become Prime Minister. He is a master actor, political royalty, bred from the ground up for this position. If you were a puppet master Trudeau would be the perfect puppet, he's Canada's Obama.

You may have noticed throughout this post that I have focused on what it is Trudeau is saying, or not saying, or saying but not have you believing, whatever you want to call it. The purpose of this is to show you that Trudeau is just as invested in the status-quo as Harper is. There is no difference.

Having Trudeau and the Liberals win is important to the status-quo, not just because the Liberals have always been in the pockets of the big banks, but because Trudeau will be elected with a mandate to keep bills like C51 and just supposedly repair them. Remember back before C51 when the media was pushing the narrative that 'the vast majority of Canadians support bill C51'? As I attempted to show back then it's not that Canadians discovered how bad the bill was, but rather it was that the 'vast support' didn't exist in the first place. They were manufacturing consent.

But it didn't work. Trudeau came out supporting the bill and his support dropped off a cliff and the media has been building him up ever since. Manufacturing consent around bills like C51 is necessary because they can not really be used and abused without the public's consent. Push the people too far, or take too much for granted, and they may revolt. Having C51 on the books isn't good enough, the next incoming government must have a mandate to use it. Justin Trudeau just happens to have such a mandate and his meaningless "repairs" are simply whitewashing a dangerous bill.

We've covered a lot about Trudeau this series so I'll leave you with this:

New Democrat Party

The NDP are a bigger question mark in my mind. I don't trust Mulcair - like at all - particularly since he seems to have morals for hire. He seems like a plant to me, much like Ignatieff was to bring Harper his majority, and the NDP are running a weak campaign.

However, on the flip side I don't believe the NDP are as thoroughly corrupted as the Conservative or Liberal parties and if you care about your civil liberties, or Canada's sovereignty, and actually hope your vote has some effect as to repealing or withdrawing from these types of activities then they are probably the best bet.

I think Mulcair's economics, like all of their economics, are bullshit, but until Canadians address our exponential growth fiat monetary system the "economy" is going to suck so don't expect any changes on that front. Unlike my forecasts for Alberta's NDP I am not as confident the federal NDP will direct tax dollars where they need to go either in attempting to future proof Canada.

Outside of that I don't have much to say about the NDP, they probably represent the closest thing to "real change".

Conclusion

Soooooo.. ya. Slim pickens.

But as I said, if we as Canadians reclaim our democracy and use our political system properly none of this shit matters. The leader is only as strong as those under him and I'll take a house filled with honourable people who will stand up for the interests of their constituents even if that fuckwit Trudeau says vote with the party over the partisan free for all we have now. That's what we need and we're really the only ones who can do that for us.

So with all that in mind, I leave you with this question: Of the three videos shown above how many displayed an ad for Justin Trudeau (if you're Canadian), and how many for Harper, or Mulcair?

Used with permission originally posted at Canadian Trends.