I'd agree that right, centre, and left are not helpful to many people. They never were. Every poll ever done on the subject suggests that the majority do not understand what these words mean when applied to politics. I'm not sure however what language will get things across. We all tend to think in cliches and to avoid certain issues. The big one that almost everyone seems to try to sidestep nowadays is fiscal policy. If we are to have a consistent set of social policies for people rather than to determine need on the basis of whether the economy is up or down at a given moment, then we need a taxation policy that makes sure that the funds are always available. That also means looking at how wealth is redistributed in society. Who gets money and power are the real issues in politics that never go out of style. Ambrose Bierce, in The Devil's Dictionary, a century ago defined politics as a “parade of interests masking as principles.” So, people and parties need to be clearer about what their interests are, who will get what as a result of the policies they propose, and how the province/world will be any different if they are elected rather than the same old gang.

Whatever happens in Alberta, I hope it will be a more intelligent and more inclusive debate than has occurred in the past. For years now Albertans, asked by pollsters to express their values and what they want from governments, have come off as more progressive than the governments that they vote for (when they vote). How that disconnect can be broken, if it can, would be a very interesting project for everyone interested in reform in Alberta.

I'd agree that right, centre, and left are not helpful to many people. They never were. Every poll ever done on the subject suggests that the majority do not understand what these words mean when applied to politics. I'm not sure however what language will get things across. We all tend to think in cliches and to avoid certain issues. The big one that almost everyone seems to try to sidestep nowadays is fiscal policy. If we are to have a consistent set of social policies for people rather than to determine need on the basis of whether the economy is up or down at a given moment, then we need a taxation policy that makes sure that the funds are always available. That also means looking at how wealth is redistributed in society. Who gets money and power are the real issues in politics that never go out of style. Ambrose Bierce, in The Devil's Dictionary, a century ago defined politics as a “parade of interests masking as principles.” So, people and parties need to be clearer about what their interests are, who will get what as a result of the policies they propose, and how the province/world will be any different if they are elected rather than the same old gang.

Whatever happens in Alberta, I hope it will be a more intelligent and more inclusive debate than has occurred in the past. For years now Albertans, asked by pollsters to express their values and what they want from governments, have come off as more progressive than the governments that they vote for (when they vote). How that disconnect can be broken, if it can, would be a very interesting project for everyone interested in reform in Alberta.

Political parties are pretty creepy frankly. Sometimes I think the majority are right in simply not voting.

How such unity is to be achieved is harder to say. But I do cut the existing parties more slack than you do. They think that they are operating in Canada and can offer the same degree of choice as people in other provinces get. But they are actually operating in a half-Canada, half-US jurisdiction in terms of attitudes of the residents. That calls for a different strategy but it has to be realistic and not apocalyptic. A new party, if it is going to form, would do best to join the DRP to endorse candidates from existing parties (including the Greens, who temporarily do not exist but can certainly put up Independents in promising seats) so that in each seat there is one credible candidate. If it puts up candidates of its own, it will simply feed into the public perception that all political parties are the creations of crooks and potential crooks who want to establish public careers at voters' expense.

As for WAP, it demonstrates what a party that receives a gazillion dollars from En Cana and other big oil companies can do in a petro-state with a huge conservative population. The Western Canada Concept did the same in the early 1980s. The Tories are largely following the WAP lead (as with the WCC, the strategy of Big Oil is to remind the Tories that it can control other political forces if the Tories get uppity) and it will be interesting to see if the newer ultra-right party can actually displace them. I think it's encouraging that there is disunity on the right but if the left continues to be equally incapable of unity, it will be a sideshow in the next election which will focus on the far right versus the ultra-right much like the 1993 election gave us the choice of “massive cuts” and “brutal cuts,” a choice that Albertans liked enough to provide one of the highest turn-out elections in the province's history.

Alvin

Far better to work inside the Liberal and NDP organizations to push for a non-compete agreement in the next election. This already has the support of the Liberal caucus and a growing group within the NDP. Few of these people however will leave their parties to join a new party, and voters will be even more confused and apathetic if the centre-left becomes more crowded.

Check out the Alberta Democratic Renewal Project website for more about this.

Alvin Finkel,
Co-Chair,
Democratic Renewal Project