Monday, September 09, 2019

What Does Politics Mean When You Choose Science Instead?

If you want a cynicism overdose just compare what science shows us to what politicians tell us. It's not pleasant.

For some time now I have chosen science over politics whenever the two conflict and that's becoming a near constant these days.  The more they clash the more obvious that political blather today is mainly a few cherry picked facts plastered over with a thick layer of horse shit.

Andrew Scheer is a blatant, unrepentant liar. At least Justin Trudeau can't be called a shameless liar if only by virtue of the lengths he goes to in his efforts to conceal it. I think he's deeply ashamed and so he should be.  Those who have watched American Hasan Minhaj take Justin apart get the point.

I realize this is going to offend the JT fan boys but isn't it his own doing? 

Are lies and broken promises to be ignored, forgiven and, if so, why? Didn't Teddy Roosevelt tell us that politicians who get elected on promises they don't keep should be 'hunted out of office'? Doesn't that describe Justin Trudeau? Of course it does.

We only get that one say every four years and if we're duped into voting by false promises we don't get any say at all. Neither do the three out of five who turn out to vote only to watch a guy they didn't support get away with a powerful majority that winds up catering to powerful special interests, domestic and foreign, some of them none too wholesome.

The JT glee club like to applaud their guy's progressive record yet overlook that the string of broken electoral promises - democratic restoration, the environment, social licence, First Nations reconciliation, 'follow the science' - were the most progressive of them all.

I choose science which means I do not choose Justin Trudeau's Liberals or Andrew Scheer's Conservatives or Jagmeet Singh's greenwashed NDP.  I'm not entirely onside with Elizabeth May's Greens either but, then again, I won't be voting that the Greens might form government. I want them in Parliament to hold the winner, Scheer or Trudeau, accountable.

Kim Campbell got raked over the coals for saying that an election campaign was no time for discussing serious issues. At least she was honest. The others concur but they'll never admit it. I could add that politics in our deeply flawed democracy is no place for dealing with the great existential threats of our day. Our corrupted politics seeks reward, not solutions. It is at odds with the people and especially the future.

And so I choose science over politics. At least science can point to the path we need to follow even if politics works overtime to see that we don't take it.

No comments: