A Strong Mayor Might be Just What We Need

Like the notwithstanding clause, I had been leery of strong mayor powers, but after watching and listening to a council that seems to do whatever it can to slow or stop development, on what sometimes appears to be personal vendettas, I have come to the conclusion this sort of power may be needed in PEC.

Aside from the anti-development bent of the Times, there are many in the County who will go out of their way to stop any change, using sometimes dubious claims about the environment, the weather, or people from “away.” I know people dislike change, but some of the arguments ring hollow. And whether some like it or not, the aging infrastructure of the County needs to be dealt with efficiently. Wasting time and money doing “another study” isn’t the way to move forward, but it certainly is great if you don’t want things to change.

Of course the power needs to be used sparingly, but like the notwithstanding clause, it is a power that is needed from time to time.

Richard Pearse, Picton 

Thoughts on the U.S. Election — and our own

Some thoughts concerning the U.S. election, Trump’s chaos (for which there are insufficient negative adjectives in any language), and what that American experience should be teaching us:

The election played out within an intellectual framework of deep-seated American chauvinism, borne from an earlier revolutionary spirit, and ingrained by two centuries of widespread sublime indoctrination. For current examples, nationally televised weather reports which do not identify geography beyond U.S. borders, and the teaching of exclusively American history, come to mind. The list is long, very long, and longstanding.

The effect of this thoroughly chauvinistic political culture was evident in a conversation I had once with a seemingly-intelligent twenty-something Floridian store clerk who pleasantly asked where I live. 

Assuming that she would not be familiar with the County, I told her we were from a small community east of Toronto. She responded with a brief, blank stare, then said she had never heard of Toronto. I replied that it is a large Canadian city on the north shore of Lake Ontario. Another puzzled stare. Same response when I tried to help by adding that Lake Ontario is one of the Great Lakes. She acknowledged that her schooling did not include any geography, at any stage, although she did recall a teacher mentioning something about geography in a class one day. (I would have pursued this discussion more deeply, but my wife, overhearing us, quickly emerged to whisk me out of the shop — something about Americans and guns.)

These citizens with such a cloistered intellectual background do, justly, have a right to vote.

Within this intellectual framework, a very substantial proportion of Americans conduct their day to day activities — and their infrequent political considerations.

This also directs their attitude toward the world beyond the USA, as well as considerations of the future — and short is that horizon.

Those characteristics combine among the least educated and less economically advantaged  — the majority of the U.S. electorate. Democrats, and many Republicans — seemingly better educated, more economically advantaged, and more broadly experienced — failed to recognize those characteristics of their voting audience, whereas Trump, and more importantly, his exceptionally successful campaign manager  —Susie Wiles, now the White House Chief of Staff — recognized, embraced and thoroughly exploited them.

The election was a battle between emotional appeal and thoughtful reflection. Fear at every turn versus concern for democracy.

An aphorism within military theory goes something like this: those who have the most bullets win. It applied to the American election. Emotionally-driven voters overwhelmed those more thoughtful.

Democrats, and a large swath of the Republican party, now sit, dazed, bewildered, and quiet, wondering what happened. God help us all if they don’t start asking themselves what to do about it!

Canadian political strategists need to reflect upon the outcome of those polarized campaign strategies.

The Trump playbook fostered a win at the expense of a painfully fractured civil society. Here, the national Conservative machine has chosen the same playbook. Their strategy presumes the same political culture is in play.

But Canadian social, economic, and political history, the structure and function of our governing institutions, our education systems, and our social safety nets have created a fundamentally different political culture from that of our southern neighbours, one far less vulnerable to their stark polarization, one characterized by a cohesion of interests sufficient to offset polarizing forces. Now Trump, with his tariffs, has handed us a huge bottle of glue with which to bind ourselves, and to see ourselves, together — in spite of those forces which threatento pull us apart.

Garry Lester, Bloomfield