The town of Barrhead has a population of 4320 people. Only 10% (correction, 16%) of the town petitioned for this as-yet-unpassed bylaw. Those individuals don’t even represent the town of Barrhead, much less the entire province.
I don’t mean this personally - I’m surprised that someone who is as vocal about proportional representation as you are would be insensitive to the demographic facts of this matter.
“Those individuals” who raised this are undoubtedly tied back to Take Back Alberta - or at least, the organizers are.
They will do the same thing that Westlock did: Present this as a neutral “no special interests” policy, and then advertise the shit out of their rational opinion, attacking the woke extremists for forcing their issue on what should be neutral territory.
Then they’ll get about a 51% vote - not representative of the entire town, but enough to ban pride symbolism in the town.
Then they’ll move onto the next town - maybe Rocky Mountain House or Didsbury or Sexsmith or Brooks. Actually, scratch that - they won’t touch a town in Smith’s riding for now.
But over time, they’ll get the same bylaw passed in another town and another and another, until they can claim most of the rural electoral districts. Then - maybe after getting a few larger towns or even cities (Lethbridge), they’ll petition the government. “Clearly the majority of Albertans support this neutrality, so let’s make it a provincial law.”
And David Parker will sit back, chuckling in his white robe and hat, as he destroys the lives of LGBTQ2+ people, and finishes his second front - banning abortion in the province.
For the record I don’t like what the UCP are doing in Alberta right now either, and I don’t think their approach represents acceptable governance.
You didn’t infer this, but I want to say for the record that it would be incorrect to infer, that just because the UCP received 54-ish% of the popular vote in the last provincial general election, it doesn’t follow that 54% of the population of Alberta is anti-trans. The UCP as a political entity takes aggressive stances on a bundle of issues that rationally-minded conservative voters would (and do) find unappealing. The fact that a Conservative stronghold like Barrhead could only get 10% (correction, 16%) of its citizens behind this petition goes to show that the exclusionary thinking at the core of the petition is overwhelmingly not the norm here among the citizens.
that just because the UCP received 54-ish% of the popular vote in the last provincial general election, it doesn’t follow that 54% of the population of Alberta is anti-trans.
It does mean that 54% is willing to promote UCP even though UCP as an institution is supportive of anti-trans politics. So while not everyone in those 54% might be anti-trans themselves, they are consciously supporting anti-trans politicians, and are effectively helping the anti-trans ideology.
I’m not sure there is really any vote that a thoughtful person could make that doesn’t involve some sort of moral compromise. There are things in the AB NDP platform that I really like, and there are some things that I’m indifferent to. There are some things I wish weren’t there, and some things that I really wish they made a bigger deal about. Despite that, I’m inclined to vote for them because I align more closely with them than any other provincial party. I think a lot of conservatives feel the same way about the UCP.
Again, I’m not trying to justify UCP policy in any way whatsoever. Kenney and Smith are both fools, and have made the province measurably worse for almost everybody. Despite that, I don’t think Alberta should be written off in a casual way. And I don’t think even a UCP voter should necessarily be written off. No matter what side of the aisle you’re on, a political choice is a balancing act of competing interests and aims.
There are things in the AB NDP platform that I really like, and there are some things that I’m indifferent to. There are some things I wish weren’t there, and some things that I really wish they made a bigger deal about.
When you both-sides like this, though, it trivializes one important contrast: there are ideas the NDP have that I don’t agree with, but there are ideas the Cons have that are actually harmful. The different between “what I prefer” and “what allows people to live” is hard to paint with that both-sides brush.
Sure that wasn’t the plan, and I’m picking nits; I would totally agree if you said that. But our language may help contrast the two better by focusing on those differences, and sway the vote or bring more to the polls.
That’s fair. Actually I don’t think you’re nit picking, you’re pointing to something that gets to the heart of a critical issue with politics.
The AB NDP aren’t far enough left for my taste, and I wish they would have made more meaningful investments and reforms to the education and healthcare systems to make those systems more robust, inclusive, and responsive to the people who use those systems. In not doing that to the degree that I think is fair, I believe they caused harm.
I’m not a policy wonk, and I know that only so much can be accomplished during a single term in office. And as we’ve seen in AB, much work can be undone by a new administration. But in Alberta, to still have private schools that receive public funding, household declarations allowing tax dollars to funnel into special, separate schools where religious dogma is part of the program of studies, and class sizes being what they are - all these things, according to my values and interests, cause measurable harm. Allowing monopolistic privatized telecom and insurance industries who collude to keep prices high, makes it harder for struggling families to eat and live. Going further, it’s arguable that not having a provincial sales tax that directly funds hospitals to improve their ability to efficiently administer emergency care, leads to unnecessary suffering and death. Yet, I have to accept that other citizens with different values and interests than mine will have different, yet still rational and reasonable views about these points.
I don’t mean to sound like I’m ‘both sides’-ing. I’m just making a comment that political choices are complex. I don’t think it’s fair to look at 54% of the votes cast for the UCP, and use that as a justification to make sweeping statements about the mindsets of those voters. The petitioners in Barrhead are a good example of the fact that even in a hardcore conservative area, anti inclusive mentalities remain a minority view. I think it’s troubling that there are 712 people in Barrhead willing to sign their name to a petition to eliminate pride crosswalks. But the fact that there are only 712 is honestly a relief, in the bigger picture. But the media takes a different angle. And then people say “fuck Alberta, that place is full of crazy people”, when the evidence actually suggests that Albertan citizens might be more caring and inclusive than they get credit for. That’s all I’m trying to say.
I think the less we write each other off, & the more we actually talk to each other in good faith about issues, values, and ways forward, the better we can be as a society. Political parties are designed to grind whatever axe they think will get or keep them elected. But, every citizen can and should be doing the hard work of honest discourse, regardless of their political stripe.
The town of Barrhead has a population of 4320 people. Only
10%(correction, 16%) of the town petitioned for this as-yet-unpassed bylaw. Those individuals don’t even represent the town of Barrhead, much less the entire province.I don’t mean this personally - I’m surprised that someone who is as vocal about proportional representation as you are would be insensitive to the demographic facts of this matter.
First off, 851 people (20%) signed the petition.
“Those individuals” who raised this are undoubtedly tied back to Take Back Alberta - or at least, the organizers are.
They will do the same thing that Westlock did: Present this as a neutral “no special interests” policy, and then advertise the shit out of their rational opinion, attacking the woke extremists for forcing their issue on what should be neutral territory.
Then they’ll get about a 51% vote - not representative of the entire town, but enough to ban pride symbolism in the town.
Then they’ll move onto the next town - maybe Rocky Mountain House or Didsbury or Sexsmith or Brooks. Actually, scratch that - they won’t touch a town in Smith’s riding for now.
But over time, they’ll get the same bylaw passed in another town and another and another, until they can claim most of the rural electoral districts. Then - maybe after getting a few larger towns or even cities (Lethbridge), they’ll petition the government. “Clearly the majority of Albertans support this neutrality, so let’s make it a provincial law.”
And David Parker will sit back, chuckling in his white robe and hat, as he destroys the lives of LGBTQ2+ people, and finishes his second front - banning abortion in the province.
Sorry, thank you for the correction on the number of petitioners. I didn’t read the article carefully enough. From the article:
I’m just cranky that 54% of Alberta supports conservative and has the most anti-trans stance. Yes, its true Albertans are not a monolith.
For the record I don’t like what the UCP are doing in Alberta right now either, and I don’t think their approach represents acceptable governance.
You didn’t infer this, but I want to say for the record that it would be incorrect to infer, that just because the UCP received 54-ish% of the popular vote in the last provincial general election, it doesn’t follow that 54% of the population of Alberta is anti-trans. The UCP as a political entity takes aggressive stances on a bundle of issues that rationally-minded conservative voters would (and do) find unappealing. The fact that a Conservative stronghold like Barrhead could only get
10%(correction, 16%) of its citizens behind this petition goes to show that the exclusionary thinking at the core of the petition is overwhelmingly not the norm here among the citizens.It does mean that 54% is willing to promote UCP even though UCP as an institution is supportive of anti-trans politics. So while not everyone in those 54% might be anti-trans themselves, they are consciously supporting anti-trans politicians, and are effectively helping the anti-trans ideology.
I hear you.
I’m not sure there is really any vote that a thoughtful person could make that doesn’t involve some sort of moral compromise. There are things in the AB NDP platform that I really like, and there are some things that I’m indifferent to. There are some things I wish weren’t there, and some things that I really wish they made a bigger deal about. Despite that, I’m inclined to vote for them because I align more closely with them than any other provincial party. I think a lot of conservatives feel the same way about the UCP.
Again, I’m not trying to justify UCP policy in any way whatsoever. Kenney and Smith are both fools, and have made the province measurably worse for almost everybody. Despite that, I don’t think Alberta should be written off in a casual way. And I don’t think even a UCP voter should necessarily be written off. No matter what side of the aisle you’re on, a political choice is a balancing act of competing interests and aims.
When you both-sides like this, though, it trivializes one important contrast: there are ideas the NDP have that I don’t agree with, but there are ideas the Cons have that are actually harmful. The different between “what I prefer” and “what allows people to live” is hard to paint with that both-sides brush.
Sure that wasn’t the plan, and I’m picking nits; I would totally agree if you said that. But our language may help contrast the two better by focusing on those differences, and sway the vote or bring more to the polls.
That’s fair. Actually I don’t think you’re nit picking, you’re pointing to something that gets to the heart of a critical issue with politics.
The AB NDP aren’t far enough left for my taste, and I wish they would have made more meaningful investments and reforms to the education and healthcare systems to make those systems more robust, inclusive, and responsive to the people who use those systems. In not doing that to the degree that I think is fair, I believe they caused harm.
I’m not a policy wonk, and I know that only so much can be accomplished during a single term in office. And as we’ve seen in AB, much work can be undone by a new administration. But in Alberta, to still have private schools that receive public funding, household declarations allowing tax dollars to funnel into special, separate schools where religious dogma is part of the program of studies, and class sizes being what they are - all these things, according to my values and interests, cause measurable harm. Allowing monopolistic privatized telecom and insurance industries who collude to keep prices high, makes it harder for struggling families to eat and live. Going further, it’s arguable that not having a provincial sales tax that directly funds hospitals to improve their ability to efficiently administer emergency care, leads to unnecessary suffering and death. Yet, I have to accept that other citizens with different values and interests than mine will have different, yet still rational and reasonable views about these points.
I don’t mean to sound like I’m ‘both sides’-ing. I’m just making a comment that political choices are complex. I don’t think it’s fair to look at 54% of the votes cast for the UCP, and use that as a justification to make sweeping statements about the mindsets of those voters. The petitioners in Barrhead are a good example of the fact that even in a hardcore conservative area, anti inclusive mentalities remain a minority view. I think it’s troubling that there are 712 people in Barrhead willing to sign their name to a petition to eliminate pride crosswalks. But the fact that there are only 712 is honestly a relief, in the bigger picture. But the media takes a different angle. And then people say “fuck Alberta, that place is full of crazy people”, when the evidence actually suggests that Albertan citizens might be more caring and inclusive than they get credit for. That’s all I’m trying to say.
I think the less we write each other off, & the more we actually talk to each other in good faith about issues, values, and ways forward, the better we can be as a society. Political parties are designed to grind whatever axe they think will get or keep them elected. But, every citizen can and should be doing the hard work of honest discourse, regardless of their political stripe.