A Deceptive Democracy: Harper From Pugnacious to Dangerous

A CULTURE OF DEFIANCE: History of the Reform-Conservative Party of Canada

With a possible election on the horizon, and a new Governor General at Rideau Hall, it's important to review what happened during the 2008 coalition attempt; a perfectly acceptable and legal alternative in a Parliamentary democracy.

It's also important to understand how Stephen Harper operates, so we can prepare ourselves for the next campaign.

Canadian journalist Michael Valpy has referred to the Harper government as the "most pugnacious" in memory, but I think he was too kind.

From manuals on how to disrupt committees to attack ads outside of an election, Mr. Harper came to Ottawa ready for a fight. He never intended to work with opposition, only to make it go away.

In other words, he never intended that 2/3 of Canadians, speaking through their elected MPs, would have a voice. And yet almost five years later he is still there. And in fact, has only gotten worse. How is that possible?

There are a lot of reasons I suppose. A corporate media and a disinterested public would certainly be near the top of the list. Photo-ops instead of taking questions, allows him to control the message and his image. That would also be up there.

But I see something else.

Laura K on her blog American by Birth, Canadian by Choice, posted a piece: Canada for the people, not the conservative party. It was originally going to appear in the Mark News as part of a series, "Who owns Canada?" but too many edits prompted her to instead post it on her blog.

It is excellent and everyone should read it. Well researched and to the point.

But I had one criticism found in this comment.

"A majority of Canadians did not vote for Stephen Harper's Conservatives. Yet we are held hostage to his anti-democratic agenda because he has so successfully exploited an antiquated, first-past-the-post electoral system and a pitifully weak opposition."

Every time a progressive journalist claims that we have a "weak opposition", Harper's polling numbers rise and more and more Canadians are turned off the political process. Because the piece that gives all the right reasons for getting rid of the wrong government, bursts into flames. The message to readers is "what's the point?"

We'll go with the devil we know, or just stay home, and continue to be "held hostage to his anti-democratic agenda." We have to call out all journalists who continue to resort to the theory of a weak opposition. They are weakened after a full frontal assault on the democratic process, but they are far from weak or unworthy.
In fact in 2008, they were stronger than ever. As Elizabeth May reminds us:

Great moments of flux and crisis allow innovations to occur. The fact is that the prime minister lost the confidence of the House in December 2008, whether or not the matter was put to a vote. His spectacular miscalculation led to something that would have been impossible to imagine even weeks earlier. Arch-enemies put aside their distrust and ancient hatreds. The Bloc has an intense dislike for Stephane Dion, who, as champion of federalism, was the author of the Clarity Act. Stephane Dion has always been similarly hostile to the Bloc .... Now, here was Dion ready to work with Duceppe. And more amazing, Jack Layton was prepared to assist a Liberal to become prime minister. The NDP's hatred of Liberals was once described to me by an NDP friend who labels himself as a "fundamentalist." No matter how much it might make sense to cooperate, he assured me, NDPers could never and would never cooperate with Liberals. A coalition was simply the stuff of fantasy only days before it became a reality. (1)

I remember reading one comment that said Stephen Harper had not only united the right, but also united the left. Not exactly true because the PCs were never really that right-wing. However, semantics aside, the opposition was ready to forget their differences and work for the common good.

But I don't think they anticipated what happened next, as even the media started referring to it as a "crisis".

The Invisible Hand of Karl Rove

Michael Valpy has called the 2008 election campaign "one of the most uncivil in modern Canadian history." It was pure Karl Rove. And while the mud slinging dirtied the political landscape, Stephen Harper kept his hands clean, more or less. And that's because he was never in the trenches. His entire campaign was in a bubble.

No handshakes on street corners or rallies in the parks. Only highly staged backdrops for his daily political message, and assemblies where Tory staffers and security officers closely monitor the crowds ... The Harper campaign keeps a short leash on national and local media, limiting questions and access to local candidates, sometimes calling on RCMP security to block reporters from doing their jobs. Harper "hides from Canadians. He lives in a bubble." (2)

This allowed him to avoid having any of the ugliness pinned on him. The only exception was when cohorts Steve Murphy and Mike Duffy helped to engineer Dion's demise.

And when Stephen Harper realized that he had failed to get his majority, he promised to play nice.

In his election-night victory statement in Calgary, he pledged to fulfil his party's election platform, but also to govern for Canadians who had voted for other parties. And he offered cooperation with opposition MPs. 'This is a time,' he said, 'for us all to put aside political differences and partisan considerations and to work cooperatively for the benefit of Canada. We have shown that minority government can work, and at this time of global economic instability we owe it to Canadians to demonstrate this once again. We stretch out a hand to all members of all parties, asking them to join together to protect the economy and weather this world financial crisis. (3)

And the same conciliatory tone was reflected in the throne speech. But then all hell broke loose.

Seeing an opportunity to crush the opposition, Stephen Harper again went on the attack, gambling on what he perceived as a weakened opposition: "The government's plans to suspend women's rights to seek legal redress on pay-equity issues and the right of federal civil servants' to strike were seen as unalloyed ideological actions ..." and "The plan to eliminate parties' vote subsidy was labelled provocative and a partisan attack aimed primarily at the money-straitened Liberals."

And all of these changes "were concocted in the Prime Minister's Office, sent over to the Finance Department at the last moment, and not presented to the Conservative cabinet or parliamentary caucus for prior discussion." (3)

And in the ensuing uproar Jim Flaherty challenged the opposition to "Bring it on" while Peter Mackay "boasted to the Halifax Chronicle-Herald on Thursday that, when the subsidy measure came before Parliament, the opposition would blink. 'When they play chicken,' he said, 'they wind up looking like chickens."' Except they didn't." (3)

Then when the coalition was presented, Stephen Harper and a compliant media turned it into a "crisis", and when things heated up, rather than assuming the role of prime minister, asking that calmer heads should prevail, Harper continued to fan the flames.

Dennis Pilon, a political scientist at the University of Victoria, stated that : "I do not mean to be an alarmist in suggesting that we may be heading for violence. But the actions of this prime minister are coming dangerously close to inciting mob rule." (4)

All of this speaks to the lengths that this man will go, just to hold onto power, and they speak to the fact that he cannot be trusted.

This book, Parliamentary Democracy in Crisis is a warning to us, that we are indeed in crisis. Every action of this prime minister is moving us closer to a dictatorship.

That is not hyperbole but fact. He has challenged the supremacy of Parliament more than once, and even threatened to go to the Queen if he didn't get his way. These are not the actions of a sane person.

And if we exercise our democratic rights and vote him out, we can be sure of one thing. He will not go quietly.

Previous postings on this topic:

1. Coalitions and a Knowledge Deficit

2. Drama on the High "C"'s. Coalition, Coups, Crisis and Conspiracy

Sources:

1. Losing Confidence: Power, Politics and Crisis in Canadians Democracy, By Elizabeth May, McClelland & Stewart, 2009, ISBN: 978-0-7710-5760-1, Pg. 233

2. Harper a man who 'lives in a bubble': Tory campaign goes to extraordinary lengths keeping him from public, By Richard Brennan, Tonda McCharles and Joanna Smith, The Toronto Star, September 25, 2008

3. Parliamentary Democracy in Crisis, By Peter H. Russell and Lorne Sossin, University of Toronto Press, 2009, ISBN: 978-1-4426-1014-9, Pg. 6-11

4. May, 2009, Pg. 226

Is Christian Paradis Travelling Through History With Bernhard Rust?

A CULTURE OF DEFIANCE: History of the Reform-Conservative Party of Canada

Two Germans were eyeing a burly lout in the Nazi uniform who was striding through a university hall. First man: "What is the policeman doing here?" Second man: "Sh, sh. That is the man selected to succeed Einstein."

That joke was published in a 1933 Time Magazine, as part of a story entitled 'Science: Jews Without Jobs':

Two German-Jewish winners of Nobel Prizes were without jobs last week. Both are full of years and distinction. Dr. James Franck, 51, was a professor at Gottingen University. He won his Prize in 1925, for experimental physics. Professor Fritz Haber, 64, was director of the Kaiser Wilhelm Institute for Physical & Electrical Chemistry in Berlin. He invented the important synthesis of atmospheric nitrogen and hydrogen into ammonia which supplied Germany with explosives and fertilizers during the War. Like Nobel Laureate Albert Einstein, Laureates Haber and Franck resigned their German jobs to avoid Adolf Hitler's white pogrom. (1)

Since coming to power 4 1/2 years ago, Stephen Harper has also been engaged in a "white" extermination of knowledge, especially scientific.

So while recent news has revealed that Canadian scientists have now had their muzzles tightened even further by Stephen Harper and his faithful officer, Christian Paradis; it should not be surprising to anyone.

However, it should be extremely alarming to everyone.

Now I know that Dimitri Soudas will immediately cry foul, suggesting that I'm comparing this latest attack on science to the extermination of six million Jews, but this was 1933, when Time assumed that the Holocaust would be benign, and limited to loss of rights.

But it was a period when the Nazis were trying to centralize power, or as Hitler's science/education minister Bernhard Rust remarked, "The whole function of education is to create Nazis."

Besides, Ezra Levant has accused the wonderful Margaret Atwood of collaborating with Al-Qaeda, so the bar has been set pretty low. And in the case of attacks on the scientific communities, then and now, the facts speak for themselves.

Time Travellers

"Our national policies will not be revoked or modified, even for scientists." Adolf Hitler

Christian Paradis is not a scientist. His degree is in corporate law. And yet:

Natural Resources Canada scientists were told this spring they need “pre-approval” from Minister Christian Paradis’ office to speak with national and international journalists. Their “media lines” also need ministerial approval, say documents obtained by Postmedia News through access-to-information legislation. The documents say the “new” rules went into force in March and reveal how they apply to not only to contentious issues including the oilsands, but benign subjects such as floods that occurred 13,000 years ago.

They also give a glimpse of how Canadians are being cut off from scientists whose work is financed by taxpayers, critics say, and is often of significant public interest — be it about fish stocks, genetically modified crops or mercury pollution in the Athabasca River. “It’s Orwellian,” says Andrew Weaver, a climatologist at University of Victoria. The public, he says, has a right to know what federal scientists are discovering and learning. (2)

Bernhard Rust was not a scientist. His degrees were in linguistics and philosophy, and yet:

World great is Max Planck because he conceived the quantum theory, an exploit of pure science. Last week he listened with other German scientists in smoky Diisseldorf to Nazi Minister of Science, Art and Education Dr. Bernhard Rust, who felt called upon to deny that Hitlerism is hostile to Science.

"We are not! Nein!" cried Nazi Rust, "but we do not believe in Science divorced from the people. Nein! They are false scientists who believe that scientific life of a higher order can exist for itself alone while questions of the day are solved somewhere in the lower regions." (3)

So why does this matter? Lets hear the rest of the story of Nobel Prize winning physicist Max Planck:

That night Max Planck's scientific peers made him feel that he must make a bold reply to Bernhard Rust. Sad-faced Max Planck did not fail Pure Science. Next day at the Congress of the Kaiser Wilhelm Society for Advancement of Science he made what was considered a daring speech indeed. To have praised live Jew Albert Einstein would have been madness, but he did praise dead Jew Heinrich Hertz, discoverer of "Hertzian waves." And bold Max Planck said: "History proves that the greatest and most vital discoveries were made by scientists who worked for the sake of pure science only."

Indulgently Nazi Rust did not crack down on Professor Planck, but as president of the Society Herr Planck dolefully reported that 85 scientists have sent in their resignations and are suffering "economic difficulties" under the Nazi regime.

Same day in Munich, home of dark beer and darker Adolf Hitler. German artists were assured that Hitlerism is not opposed to art by Dr. Paul Joseph Goebbels, Minister of Propaganda & National Enlightenment. "Since National Socialism looks upon itself as the Art of Politics," crowed Cock Goebbels. "it feels a natural kinship with the other arts and artists." (3)

"Arts and artists" ... "scientists"... has a familiar ring, doesn't it?

"We are not! Nein!" cried Stephen Harper.

In another interesting co-incidence:

Citing actions taken by the Conservative government since winning a minority government in 2006, 85 scientists across Canada have signed an open letter to all national party leaders calling on them to state how they will 'improve Canada’s track record' regarding the objectivity of science. This is the second such initiative within the week, the letter on 7 October being signed by 120 scientists.

The scientists signing the latest letter represent hundreds of researchers such as Deans, Department Heads, Research Chairs, and research team leaders. They come from academic fields of Anthropology, Atmospheric and Oceanic Sciences, Biology, Community Health and Epidemiology, Criminology, Earth & Ocean Sciences, Educational Psychology, Environmental & Engineering Sciences, Land Resource Science, Medicine, Nursing, Philosophy, Physics, Psychiatry, Social Work, and Sociology.

"85 scientists across Canada" ... "Herr Planck dolefully reported that 85 scientists have sent in their resignations." Are we going to let it get that far?

Sources:

1. Science: Jews Without Jobs, Time Magazine, June 05, 1933

2. Ottawa’s media rules muzzling federal scientists, say observers, By Margaret Munro, Postmedia News, September 12, 2010

3. GERMANY: False Planck? Time Magazine, June 18, 1934

4. Canadian scientists protest Harper's attacks on science, Wikinews, October 13, 2008

Guy Giorno Promises Fall Election if His Omnibus Bill Doesn't Pass. Yeah!!!!

A CULTURE OF DEFIANCE: History of the Reform-Conservative Party of Canada

That is what is so offensive about changing the rules to reinforce the continual power in the executive branch of this government. Even their own backbenchers, as I quoted, agree with that. There's too much power in Mike Harris's office. I think that's why they're complaining. I think the frustration of the member for Durham was really about that, that they have nothing to do because everything is orchestrated from the back room by the whiz kids. They decide what they say, when they say it, where they go. Everything is decided by, as I said before with the ommissions, unelected, appointed mercenaries that nobody sees. Who has ever seen this person Guy Giorno? Here's the guy making all the decisions around here. Who has ever seen this person? Is there such a person? (1)

Unfortunately there was and is such a person who is once again trying to push through an Omnibus Bill that will be just as devastating to this country as his Omnibus Bill was for Ontario during the Mike Harris years.

This time he's promising an election. Dare we dream? Can we finally get rid of Harper and his puppet master?

The Tories are threatening a fall election after opposition senators stripped contentious provisions from the Harper government's massive budget implementation bill. Senator Doug Finley, the Tory campaign director, said a fall election is a distinct possibility if senators refuse to pass the bill as is. "Absolutely," Finley said in an interview moments after opposition members on the Senate finance committee voted to erase four controversial measures from the budget bill.

"I can't think of anything more important than what's in that budget bill." The full Senate could vote to overturn the changes made by the finance committee but it's not certain the Conservatives have the numbers to do that. While the Tories now dominate the upper chamber, they do not have an absolute majority.

Giorno wants to sell our atomic energy. In most countries that would be an act of treason. He also wants to privatize Canada Post. This man must be stopped. We stopped him in Ontario, though not before he almost destroyed us.

Last election Giorno kept Harper in a bubble. He so loves to play 'daddy'. He dressed up Mikey too.

But Guy Giorno, who runs the government from the back rooms, decided that he wanted to see rule changes in this House. You see, the House was working too democratically to suit the backroom boys and the government, the people who are impatient with the democratic process, the people who feel the opposition is just some irritant to be shoved out of the way, the people who believe that if there's any opposition out there, they must be misguided or misled people. They wanted to see the rule changes brought through the House instead of dealing with legislation.

In the dying days of the spring session, which started last January, by the way, and ended in June some time, I can well recall those of us in opposition saying, "Bring forward your legislation." But no, the government House leader of the day, Mr. Johnson, was instructed by Guy Giorno and those who have the real control in this government to deal with changing the rules of the Legislature to grease the skids for the government to get its legislation through. So we saw what can only be referred to as draconian and drastic changes to the procedural rules of this House, rules which, as the member for Scarborough-Ellesmere says, restrict the debate in the Legislature. (2)

It's time Giorno either ran for office or got the hell out of town. This Omnibus bill must be stopped. Period.

Sources:

1. Legislative Assembly of Ontario, Hansard, June 17, 1997

2. Legislative Assembly of Ontario, Hansard, December 11, 1997

Chapter Thirty-One Continued: Flirting With Fascism

A CULTURE OF DEFIANCE: History of the Reform-Conservative Party of Canada

Aberhart's plans for Alberta seemed focused on anti-politics: reducing the role of the elected opposition and blurring the lines between party and state. Politics-as-usual was suspended during Alberta's war on scarcity, and an authoritarian political culture flourished. Bible Bill's charisma mixed populist rebellion with paternalism in equal parts, pushing the need for benevolent authority onto a weary, anxious electorate.

Aberhart's plans for Alberta seemed focused on anti-politics: reducing the role of the elected opposition and blurring the lines between party and state. Politics-as-usual was suspended during Alberta's war on scarcity, and an authoritarian political culture flourished. Bible Bill's charisma mixed populist rebellion with paternalism in equal parts, pushing the need for benevolent authority onto a weary, anxious electorate. (1)

Though Social Credit monetary theories were never really implemented in Alberta, it created a unique style of government for Canada. Based very much on the popularity of fascism at the time, which was viewed as the best way to combat Communism, Aberhart adopted the notion of a strong leader and a compliant populace.

After his death Ernest Manning was content to simply pick up where his mentor had left off, but when oil was discovered and members of caucus saw an opportunity to implement real reform, Manning saw it as a threat, and began cleaning house.

Alf Hooke Explains:

It disturbed me, however, after my return to Edmonton, to learn that Mr. Tanner had visited the home of Mr. [Dennis] Byrne, and called him from his bed where he was suffering from a bad case of flu, to inform him that the Government was no longer desirous of his services. It seemed to me that a man who had given up what undoubtedly were prospects of a successful and lucrative business career in England and who had come to Alberta to render assistance to a strife-torn Social Credit government at nothing more than a subsistence allowance of twelve dollars per day and who had become a close confidante of Premier Aberhart, had risen to the post of Deputy Minister and had proven that his adherence to Social Credit was uppermost, was worthy of more considerate treatment.

This episode had come to the notice of the British papers, the February 22 issue of the Sunday Times of London reporting as follows: "Sacking in Alberta. The Premier of Alberta, Mr. E. C. Manning, announced yesterday," say Reuters, "that Mr. L. D. Byrne, British-born Deputy Minister of Economic Affairs and Mr. Earl Ansley, Education Minister, had been dismissed from office because their policies 'were at variance' with those of the Province's Social Credit Government." Social Creditors are unalterably opposed to Socialism, knowing that, under a program of Socialism, individual freedom is reduced to a minimum. (2)

Byrne was proposing a populist style of direct democracy, where Manning, like Aberhart, wanted control. And to maintain this control he instead, like Aberhart, gave the people the illusion of democracy.

Both Aberhart and Manning believed that the ordinary citizen was incapable of actually making policy: participatory opportunities lay strictly in the areas related to winning elections, spreading propaganda, and building the party organization. Once the general will of the people had been expressed, experts chosen by the party and leader would be used to determine how that would be achieved.

The illusion of democracy was created by a number of political techniques, including "straw votes" and "voice votes." At his huge rallies, Aberhart would call for voice votes on the general results desired by the people — usually very broad universal goals such as "prosperity" or the end to insecurity. Thousands of people, already mesmerized by Aberhart's oratory, shouting out their desire for particular goals, created the feeling of participation even if the goal was predetermined by Aberhart.

Within the party, the straw vote was used extensively at the constituency level and was presented as a test of their support for Social Credit candidates. But it was also a subtle way of making supporters feel that they were genuinely involved in movement building — as well as a method of repeatedly endorsing Aberhart as the leader. The straw votes never failed to achieve the desired objectives. Aberhart would also ask his constituency organization, by radio broadcast, to direct him to carry out a certain course of action, convincing them that he wanted to know their feelings on an issue when he was simply orchestrating support for his own plan.

Laycock describes two other important aspects of Aberhart's leadership: his authoritarian style and the control exerted by his party organization and "...
the portrayal of [his own] leadership and organizational activity as transcending the sordid world of `politics.' "

By the time Ernest Manning took over the Social Credit League in 1943, it had already been transformed from a mass-based, populist party and movement to a party electoral machine dominated by an increasingly autocratic leader and premier. Ernest Manning perpetuated that autocratic leadership and also moved the party further to the right. Realizing that the party was widely ridiculed as the "funny money" party because of its preoccupation with monetary policy, he replaced it with what J.S. and J.T Osborne, in their guide to Social Credit, describe as "the paranoid rhetoric of 'free enterprise and anti-socialism.' (3)

Much has been made of Manning's anti-Semitic purge, and I'm going to get into that in a separate chapter, but the purge was more for political expediency. While neither Aberhart nor Manning were overtly anti-Semitic, the elements remained and helped define the Party throughout it's history. But for now it served Manning's purpose.

In 1948, he purged the party of its openly anti-Semitic elements, which had allowed critics to attack the league as a Nazi party in disguise. This faction included not only neo-Nazis, but a group called the Douglasites, who were named for the intellectual hero of the League and the advocate of wealth redistribution. The Douglasites denied being anti-Semites, claiming only to be against "a cutthroat gang of thugs known as the International and Political Zionists."

Manning moved decisively to block the Douglasites at the 1948 convention and most of them left the party. "The departure of the Douglasites left Manning in complete control of the party and government ... he had used their views to push out the socialist-leaning elements of the party ... Now ... that the Douglasites' public views had become too extreme, he used them as the lever to push them out of the league." (3)

Alf Hooke also discusses another method that Manning used to create the illusion of democracy.

I have seen this Manning magic working at the annual Social Credit convention year after year. Resolutions were often hotly debated while Mr. Manning sat passively in the front row, as though completely unconcerned, yet listening to every word. Always careful to impress upon the delegates that the decisions of the convention would form the basis of government policy, he was more astutely careful to see the vote upon any resolution was in keeping with government policy already decided upon.

The same kind of thing would happen with the Reform Party, which was supposed to be a form of direct democracy. The people were given the illusion of their opinion mattering, while most decisions were made by what was referred to as the 'Calgary Clique', which included Preston's lieutenant, Stephen Harper.

Continued: Manning, Aberhart and the Stain of Eugenics

Sources:

1. Slumming it at the Rodeo: The Cultural Roots of Canada's Right-Wing Revolution, Gordon Laird, 1998, Douglas & McIntyre, ISBN: 1-55054 627-9, Pg. 47-48

2. 30+5 I know, I was There, A first-hand account of the workings and history of the Social Credit Government in Alberta, Canada 1935-68, by Alfred J Hooke, Douglas Social Credit Secretariat

3. Preston Manning and the Reform Party, By Murray Dobbin, Goodread Biographies/Formac Publishing, 1992, ISBN: 0-88780-161-7, Pg

Will This Past Weekend's Events Become the New Norm?

A CULTURE OF DEFIANCE: History of the Reform-Conservative Party of Canada

"In keeping with the lurch towards American right-wing politics, the focus is on the 'enemy within'" Brooke Jeffrey, Hard Right Turn: The New Face of Neoconservatism in Canada

Murray Dobbin posted an excellent piece on Canada's new Police State, as it is becoming painfully clear that the one billion dollar price tag for the weekend's security, was not intended to provide "security", but silence dissent.

The Black Bloc, which undoubtedly included several police provocateurs, were allowed to rampage for an hour and a half, while innocent civilians and the media; the true 'enemies of the state'; were beaten up and arrested.

There was no spontaneous “over-reaction.” There were no cops “out of control” – the obvious fact is that were always in control. This was a very strategic operation from beginning to end. The decision to allow the Black Bloc to do its destructive work without any intervention at all was strategic as the police and their political masters knew the media would play their pre-assigned reactionary role and focus on the destruction of property. The mass arrest of 900 people was a message to those willing to take a stand: you could be next, and a criminal record is no laughing matter. There is no question that amongst the mob of window-breakers and car-burners were a significant number of agents provocateurs. How many we will likely never know as this time around none were exposed as they were in Montebello at the SSP Summit. (1)

The puppet prime minister needed those destructive images to justify the "over reaction", while his puppet master, Guy Giorno, scored a victory on two fronts. He has cleverly manipulated the situation to allow the Toronto police and the McGuinty government to take the fall.

This accelerates the west's contempt for Toronto, and shores up Harper's base, while helping Tim Hudak, the Mike Harris protegee; who would like to become premier of Ontario to finish the job started by Giorno, when he was pulling the strings for Mike Harris.

From 1998:

I tell my friend from Brampton that if he wants to get into the cabinet, like his colleague, he should be good to Guy Giorno and Deb Hutton. Deb's now been with the Tory caucus 10 years; celebrating her 33rd birthday in mid-August. She has all kinds of power .... All these people advise, so what I'm saying to the members of the Conservative caucus who want into the cabinet is, yes, be nice to Mike, laugh very loudly at the jokes, lead the applause when Mike speaks and give an answer that zaps the opposition, but the most important thing is to ingratiate yourself with Guy Giorno and the whiz kids. (2)

For those who don't know, Deb Hutton is now married to Tim Hudak.

Meanwhile, Deborah Hutton, who remained as the premier's legislative assistant, was given the nickname "Jabba the Hutt" by ministerial aides terrified of her legendary tantrums. One of these aides, like those working for the Conservatives, was willing to be more specific, only on the condition of anonymity. According to the disgruntled staffer, Hutton was and remains "a one-person Blitzkrieg against party morale. She guards her access to Harris jealously, and frequently speaks on his behalf." (3)

In 1999 when Mike Harris toured the province with a jar full of loonies, which some of us referred to as the Harris caucus, (the only time they were allowed out in public, but still silenced) Hutton followed him around polishing his jar. Not a euphemism:

Reporters like Robert Fisher remember the loonie tour with a little less reverence but concede that it was one of the more successful publicity stunts. "It became a bit of a joke really. He lugged this damn jar of loonies everywhere he went," says Fisher. "And Deb Hutton, one of Harris's senior advisors, it became her job to polish the jar. So help me, this woman - probably the most hated woman at Queen's Park, but very powerful - had a cloth and she would take the fingerprints off the jar and shake the loonies so they looked all even. Talk about being obsessive-compulsive." (4)

And this obsessive-compulsive wants to be the wife of a premier, while the other obsessive-compulsive, Guy Giorno, is now bent on destroying our country, rather than just a province. That was merely the opening act. Back then:

Guy Giorno himself continued to play a crucial policy role as director of strategic planning. Viewed by ministerial aides as a "true believer who toiled at the centre of the web, he could be rigidly inflexible if departmental initiatives failed to conform to his expectations and/or the CSR priorities. It was not long before he was given the nickname, "Rasputin" by Frank magazine and opposition MLAs. (3)

And today after learning that Giorno was behind the prorogation:

While discussing this jaw-dropping revelation with other Conservatives, one said he was not surprised. "Guy Giorno has been an unmitigated disaster. I'm amazed we're still leading in the polls," he said. "We're governing from crisis to crisis, managing issues as opposed to managing Parliament."

Guy Giorno-- or Double G, as he's known in government circles -- is probably the most powerful man you've never heard of. The 44-year-old former lawyer is the Prime Minister's chief of staff, a position he also used to fill for former Ontario premier Mike Harris. He is closer to the Prime Minister than any other individual in government and his counsel is sought on decisions that affect millions of people and billions of dollars. (5)

Those words were written by John Ivison and it's interesting that back in the Harris days, Ivision also had an opinion:

"They would also, in their more strident moments, convey the sense of ideological fervor, of harshness, of lack of compassion or forethought, that would darken the government's record and alienate some of its core supporters." (6)

And for more Deja Vu, Again and Again and Again:

Brooke Jeffrey opens her 1999 book, Hard Right Turn, by saying that in Toronto there were rallies and demonstrations at Queens Park because of Mike Harris' cuts to health care, education and social services. Her cab driver volunteered the information that he had been fooled into voting for Mike Harris' "Common Sense Revolution", which he learned made no sense at all. "I didn't expect them to pick on blind people and little old ladies."

Not long after she was in Alberta and found the same demonstrations and rallies targeting Ralph Klein. "The premier and his controversial treasurer, Stockwell Day (now our treasurer (7)), were adamant the cuts would go forward as planned. They didn't need to, because Alberta was in the middle of an oil boom and had money to burn ... "The striking thing about Klein's comments was his choice of language. It was almost identical in tone and content to arguments Mike Harris had used to defend his actions in Ontario a few months earlier. Klein's refusal to consult in any meaningful way with the affected groups was equally firm." (8)

Now this may have been striking to Jeffrey, but there is a simple explanation. Two words: Guy Giorno.

We know that he pulled the strings and pulled them tight for Mike Harris and is pulling them just as tightly for Stephen Harper. But what wasn't as well known was that he often put words into the mouth of Ralph Klein. Wearing his other hat as emperor of lobbying:

... cabinet ministers partied last week with Kyoto-bashers the Canadian Coalition for Responsible Environmental Solutions, a lobby group with close ties to both Ralph Klein and the energy industry .... it was interesting to learn that this meeting was organized by Guy Giorno, Mike Harris’s old chief of staff and ultimate Tory party insider. Giorno now works with National Public Relations (NPR), the coalition’s high-priced lobby firm. Two days after the meeting, Giorno sent every MPP at Queen’s Park an e-mail suggesting what they might say in op-ed news pieces or letters to their constituents about Kyoto. (9)

Wow, huh? Deja Vu over and over and over again. And as Murray Dobbin writes:

Will this increasing pressure on Canadians’ quality of life and economic security be the trigger that creates the conditions for social unrest? There is no way of knowing that ahead of time but it will certainly present the conditions for a rejuvenation of social movement efforts to mobilize against the corporate state. Labour will be forced from its self-imposed slumber and have to take a real stand – and not just show up a single demonstration.

When resistance does increase that corporate state hopes to have created a new a normal where demonstrating is seen as vaguely threatening, the demand for civil liberties is the recourse of scoundrels, and criticism of governments naïve at best and dangerous at worst. Economic insecurity does not necessarily lead to greater resistance. It can also lead to passivity out of fear that things could get even worse. That passive part of the population is the classic ground for fascist politics and the desire for a “strong” leader, in the mode of a father figure. Harper, of course, has always played that role. (my emphasis) (1)

Richard Bessel in his book Germany After the First World War, suggests that the German people were looking for a father figure amid so much chaos. (10) While many had supported the overthrow of Kaiser Wilhelm, they felt like orphans with no one to protect them. In this way the time was ripe for someone to play the role. And they found that someone, or thought they did, in a man by the name of Adolf Hitler.

Many mistakenly believe that Hitler was a socialist, but he hated socialists. He only added the name to entice the masses. Prior to 1933, all newspapers and magazines referred to the party as the "fascist Brown Shirts". (11) Author of Hitler: Profiles in Power, Ian Kershaw, also reminds us that the communist party of Russia always referred to Hitler as a capitalist, and accused him of selling out to big business. (12)

But let's hope that this does not become Deja Vu:

"In a few weeks time brown shirts will again dominate the streets of German towns. ... Correspondents who dashed about Berlin while the speech blared from loud speakers reported that it seemed to be received by the populace with unusual apathy. (13)

Sources:

1. Is this what a police state looks like? By Murray Dobbin, June 29, 2010

2. Official Records for June 23, 1998, Legislative Assembly of Ontario, Discussion Bill 25

3. Hard Right Turn: The New Face of Neo-Conservatism in Canada, Brooke Jeffrey, Harper-Collins, 1999, ISBN: 0-00 255762-2, Pg. 170

4. How Mike Harris and his minions manipulate TV news, By Kali Pearson, Ryerson Press, June 2000

5. Judging Giorno, By John Ivison, National Post, February 2010

6. Jeffrey, 1999, Pg. 169

7. PM makes Stockwell Day chief cost-cutter: Cabinet shuffle hands ex-Alliance leader job of directing which programs are to be cut, By Les Whittington and Bruce Champion-Smith, Toronto Star, January 20, 2010

8. Jeffrey, 1999, Pg. 1-6

9. Big Oil's Kyoto Party: Harris whiz kid pulls strings at wine and shrimp fete, By Josh Matlow, NOW Magazine, October 24, 2002

10. Germany After the First World War, By: Richard Bessel, Clarendon Press Oxford, 1993, ISBN: 0-19-821938-5

11. Including here: GERMANY: Strap Helmets Tighter! Time Magazine, September 29, 1930

12. Hitler: Profiles in Power, by: Ian Kershaw, Longman House UK, 1991, ISBN: 0-582-08053-3

13. GERMANY: Purge Speech, Time Magazine, July 23, 1934