The Politics of Polarization
I am normally not the first person to suggest that Canadians look to American politics to see how we can overcome the problems we face. The war in (or on) Iraq, a broken healthcare system, a closer relationship between church and state, and fierce partisan battles have defined and diminished American politics over the last seven years, but there are signs of change.
The presumptive Republican and Democratic nominees for President, John McCain and Barack Obama, have, thus far, proven that politics is a game that can be played differently. While their competition has not been devoid of partisan barbs or the clash of ideas, it has also featured discussion of the candidates doing joint town halls, respect and conversation as they sat side by side at Tim Russert’s funeral, and toning down of the fierce partisanship seen in the last two Presidential elections.
The campaign may not stay this way as it heats up in the fall, but, thus far, there is a lesson for Canadians – abandoning the politics of polarization for pragmatism energizes citizens and renews faith in the political process. While this can be seen in both campaigns, it is especially evident in the campaign of Senator Obama who has based his campaign on the promise of change. This vision has led to an increase in first time voters and youth turnout while filling stadiums with tens of thousands of people wanting to hear his message. Canadian politicians should be taking note.
Many dismiss Obama’s words as empty rhetoric, or claim that he is offering false hope, but such responses to his brand of politics justify the theme of his campaign. We may not have been given many reasons to trust politicians, whether in the U.S. or Canada, in recent years, but this does not mean that our system is beyond repair or that all politicians are dishonest. It means that Canadian citizens must demand a new style of politics – less partisan and more thoughtful.
We should punish those politicians who prefer derogatory comments to debate and attack ads to solutions. Canadian politicians of all stripes are failing us by adopting the politics of polarization. Former Prime Minister Paul Martin won in 2004 mostly by claiming Stephen Harper would take away a woman’s right to choose or dump the Charter of Rights and Freedoms. This has all taken place while Jack Layton has sat by idly calling the Liberals corrupt and comparing Harper to George W. Bush.
Such comments may appeal to partisan supporters but they create a divisive gap among Canadians who are not strong fans of any of the leaders of major Canadian political parties. Not surprisingly, a recent Strategic Counsel poll conducted for CTV and The Globe and Mail, showed Canadians prefer Barack Obama to any of their own political leaders. This poll, along with a continued deadlock between the Conservatives and Liberals in national polls, indicates that Canadians are both dissatisfied and divided. Unfortunately, many Canadians now claim to be too turned-off to partake in the political process. Apathy is just as much of a problem as fierce partisanship.
But Canadians have always risen to the occasion — as peacekeepers and the defenders of what is right in the world. In times of crisis across the globe, Canada has played an important role in bringing peace to conflict and helping those who cannot help themselves. Well, the time has come where we must call ourselves to action again. This time the challenge is in our own backyard — to help those who cannot seem to help themselves, our elected officials. There is only one way to get politicians to change their act – use our voices and votes to reject those politicians who embrace overzealous partisanship.
I hope that as we all continue to watch the presidential election in the U.S. we will demand change. We will see that just as our political process is deteriorating, the process in the United States is, in fact, healing.
In The Audacity of Hope, Senator Obama stated his belief about what Americans seek in their politics: “I imagine they are waiting for a politics with the maturity to balance idealism and realism, to distinguish between what can and cannot be compromised, to admit the possibility that the other side might sometimes have a point,” he wrote.
I hope that Canadians are not only waiting for the same kind of politics, but will start to demand it.
Filed under: politics. | 1 Comment
I am a fan of Obama’s and I agree that for the most part both he and McCain have run campaigns that (thus far) have focused more on their policy differences than on personal or highly partisan ad hominem attacks. I don’t know if I agree entirely with your analysis of the current Canadian political scene. I think there is no question that Harper and the Cons have taken a Rovian approach to governing (permanent campaign) and that some of their tactics are reprehensible (unfortunately they likely will have some success). Where I most disagree with you is in you assessment of Layton and the NDP.
We live in a multi-party democracy. The Liberal party likes to portray itself as progressive and too often convinces voters that they are a left of centre party. They are NOT a left of centre party and never have been. The last time that the Liberal Party governed from the left was in the late 60s and early 70s when there were two successive minority governments and the NDP had a strong presence in the House of Commons. The Liberals governed left to try and shore-up their left-leaning support. I mention this history because I am tired of LPC activists whining that the NDP critiques them and their policies. It is the job of the NDP to critique the policies and actions of all the other parties not just those of the governing party. God knows the Dion Liberals have done enough that is deserving of criticism. The NDP should be demanding that the LPC account for their lack of a progressive track record when they were in power for 13 years (much of that time with super majorities). The NDP should also be demanding they be held accountable for their abysmal performance in opposition (supporting a regressive budget, not voting against anti-democratic immigration legislation, allowing Harper to push through his conservative agenda, etc).
Unlike Dion’s Liberals, the NDP has stood up to the Conservatives and Harper. Layton and the NDP caucus has voted against the extension of the counter-insurgency mission in Afghanistan (the Liberals voted for the extension), Layton succeeded in passing legislation that requires Green House Gas emission reductions that are based on science. The NDP has also presented their proposals for carbon pricing (cap and trade) and have said they would welcome a substantive debate on the issue. The NDP has been fighting for copyright legislation for the 21st century that balances the needs of consumers, artists and industry and has been at the forefront in the fight for Net Neutrality. To name only a few of the issues tackled by the NDP in the last session. Layton stood daily in the House and focused on issues and legislation instead of gotcha politics.
Has Layton criticized the Harper government on their lack of an environmental policy? Absolutely. Does Layton want to convince the electorate that NDP policies are better than any other party? That’s his job. Is it his job to defend Dion or the LPC from nasty attack ads by another party? No.