Friday, February 22, 2008

The Elites Have Spoken

We are in Afghanistan to stay. No change in direction, no discussion about strategy, no discussion about cost. While it is safe to say we have a "consensus" between the two biggest parties in parliament, I seriously doubt this "consensus" extends to a majority of Canadians. The only things the two big parties have going for them is the first past the post electoral system, which makes any alternative party or viewpoint uncompetitive and ignored and the unflinching loyalty of the corporate press. Canadians will rightly conclude that the game is fixed and retreat yet further into cynicism and apathy.

I am sure however about two things. Eventually, after we have sacrificed many more lives and enormous amounts of money on this adventure, someone in one of the two big parties will conclude it is a loser and will withdraw from Afghanistan. Second, the MSM will suddenly be flush with stories about how stupidly the whole mission was conducted and will congratulate themselves for their bravery for "telling a story that must be told". If nothing else, this affair proves Nietzsche was right about the existence of an eternal recurrence.

Ya, what JimBobby said.

Update 2: Travers comes closer than most, in today's Star, to questioning the utility of our continued presence in Afghanistan. Then he gets to the last paragraph and says, in essence, never mind our international reputation is more important than common sense.
Recommend this Post


  1. Well... if it's an important enough issue that people will vote on it, it's a boon for the third national party in a FPTP system.

  2. And my proof of that is what happened in the West in 1993 to the Progressive Conservative Party.

    The Red Tories locked out the Blue, and the result wasn't good for the party.

    These things take care of themselves, when it's important enough and public opinion solid enough. It may move slower than you'd like, but it does move.

  3. Well... if it's an important enough issue that people will vote on it, it's a boon for the third national party in a FPTP system.

    Unfortunately, the MSM now considers the matter "settled" or "off the table". Now, whenever Layton brings it up, he will be dismissed as either irrelevant, or wasting his time talking about something that is "settled".

  4. Media bias? Now you're sounding like a conservative, Greg. :p

    No, but seriously, they (and I) sneered at Preston Manning and Deb Grey (especially when she was the lone Reform MP from 1989-1993), and look at how it ended up.

    If there is significant public opinion left open for a political party to mine, it will be.

    So if people are that concerned about Afghanistan (or can be convinced to be), no matter what the mainstream media narrative may be, there's gold in them thar hills.

    (Me, I think anti-Af'stan war sentiment is a way for many to stick a finger in George Bush's eye, and he'll be gone come next January anyway. But we'll see come 2010, after the next election.)