Beyond The Commons

 Beyond The Commons

Aaron Wherry covers all the goings-on in and around Parliament Hill. Follow Aaron on Twitter: @aaronwherry

Categories: Beyond The Commons, Capital Read

The war at home

by Aaron Wherry on Friday, November 26, 2010 9:44am - 13 Comments

Alex Himelfarb suggests we can’t export democracy if our own democracy is lacking.

This is partly about electoral reform, as hard as that has proved, and partly about institutional reform and we have seen some of the first modest stirrings across partisan lines.  It is partly about new tools, new technologies that create new possibilities for engagement, open government and networks of state and non-state actors.  It is also about greater civic and social equality without which democracy cannot flourish.  And it is about leadership  across all sectors.  If we are looking for the next big national project, why not revitalising our democracy.  What could be more important – and more difficult?  Export democracy?  Maybe.  Renew our own democracy?  For sure.

Tags: , , , , ,

Bookmark and Share
  • Cats

    What a ridiculous statement.

    Why abandon first past the post ?? To create instability ?

    We've seen the results of trying to create European style pizza parliaments in Iraq and Afghanistan and its been a disaster.

    Real democratic reform means giving the west their fair share of seats in the HOC and the senate !!

    Reform Cats.

    • tobyornotoby

      I didn't see anything about abandoning first past the post in either Wherry's post or the one he linked to by Alex Himelfarb.

    • LdKitchenersOwn

      Real democratic reform means giving the west their fair share of seats in the HOC and the senate.

      For the record, Ontario is pretty badly underrepresented in the HoC too. I'm also not sure what a "fair share" of Senate seats is for the West, given that the Senate was never meant to be "fair" in a rep by pop. sense.

      • kcm

        He who has the geld, or she in this case. Note there's no room in her world for reform in AB where the regional vote is overrepresented. There's also the little matter of going on 40 years of one party rule.

  • hollinm

    Its interesting the Liberal party has been in power most of the past century.

    During that time there was no concern for real changes to our democractic institutions. They were quite fine with the first past the post electoral system. They were quite fine with an appointed Senate that was in place to rubber stamp their legislation. They were quite fine with proroguing parliament as they saw fit. They were quite fine in sending our unequipped troops to war without a parliamentray vote and they were quite fine when they set up a system which saw the party steal money from the taxpayers of Canada.

    All this and now suddenly people like Himelfarb, Rae and their ilk think that our democracy needs to be improved. Hypocrites.

    • gottabesaid

      Defensive much? I read that article and a) didn't get the impression that he was calling for the dismantlement of the first-past-the-post system, b) didn't get the impression that it was a missive against the Conservatives. Maybe try re-reading it with your partisan blinders down — you might not find it so threatening. Why can't a guy suggest looking at improving our democracy without having somebody jump down his throat? It's the all-partisan, all the time crap that causes people to throw up their hands and give up on the system entirely.

    • Stewart_Smith

      You say funny stuff hollinm. The Constitution, the Supreme Court, equalization, national programs in health, education…
      These are all real, major changes to our democratic institutions. Feel free to argue that those changes are insufficient or bad, but they are big, significant structural changes.

    • LdKitchenersOwn

      What's interesting to me is not so much that the Liberal party became fine with all of those things during their decades in power, it's that it only took Harper a mere four years in power to catch up! I've always said that what impresses me most about this government is how Harper turned into Chretien in less than half the time it took Chretien to turn into Mulroney. If the trend continues, I expect the next band of reformers who sweep out a corrupted and stale government with slogans of transparency and accountability to start reversing themselves on the very first night, as the election results start rolling in.

    • SamDavies

      So….(brushing through the partisan rhetoric), in your opinion then, everything is super awesome?

  • Mike T.

    NO PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION NO PEACE!!!

    I dislike equating the details of how a democracy works with the fact that it is a true democracy, especially when talking about it being adopted in failed states. It's not the poor oppressed groups that the West gives lip service to when justifying military occupations say "if we don't get an Upper House with some actual teeth, then let's stick with our dictator."

  • bergkamp

    Of course we should continue trying to export democracy to rest of world. Westminster system of government has provided to be more stable, wealth creating system than any other political system. There is nothing wrong with our institutions. Pols and the bureaucrats, on the other hand, are profoundly witless and should all be fired. We need new people/culture, not institutions.

    And reading Himelfarb and his thoughts on " … new populism we see developing to the South …" remind me that progressives are misanthropes who only like humanity in abstract ways but can't stand actual people.

    "Definition of a marxist: “Someone who loves humanity in groups of one million or more.” Jay Nordlinger

  • gottabesaid

    'Pols and the bureaucrats, on the other hand, are profoundly witless and should all be fired.'

    Thing is, people have the same choices every election. The current government was elected with the general promise of changing the culture. They haven't changed the culture, and you could argue that they've made it worse. Bureaucrats are as powerful as ever (and, you'll note in the original article that Himelfarb bemoans the layers upon layers of bureaucrats). If there's nothing wrong with the system, then how come we keep ending up with useless elected and unelected officials? What's the solution?

  • craigola

    Definition of a bergkamp: "Someone who derides humanity in groups of one million or more." Craigola

Previous

Next

From Macleans