I generally don't like to write about politics; it is too shifting and ephemeral, but over the past decade, I've seen troubling trends in politics in the western world, especially in the USA and Canada, but also in Europe. Politics these days seems unsettled at best and largely dysfunctional at worst. In any case, what I have to say is unlikely to be affected by events over the next year or two. Entrenched systems do not quickly change.
Given the universal interest in the American presidential election this year (2024), I'll begin there. Most people seem concerned that both candidates (Biden and Trump) for the highest office in the land (and some would say the world) are too old to take on the authority and responsibilities for the next four years. Ageism aside, there are valid reasons for doubting that 80 year old men make good Presidents.
What's worse, is that both of these men seem to be hated or at least strongly disliked by most of the electorate! What is wrong with the US system when these two, clearly poorly-qualified and largely unwanted men should rise to the top for election? It is not just a one-time anomaly either, the same happened in 2020, and before that in 2016, between Clinton and Trump. Surely the two major political parties could find better presidential candidates? I'm just glad that, as a Canadian, I do not have to vote in that election.
Then there is the extreme polarization. The left-leaning media and related pundits display an extreme animus against Donald Trump, so much so that they have earned the TDS epithet: Trump Derangement Syndrome, wherein the Donald is seen as the epitome of evil, a totally bad person incapable of doing any good, and to whom all manner of nasty things, whether true or false, can be attributed. The same leftward media is unable to see any faults in Joe Biden, despite his own questionable record, and they even dismissed, denied or repressed negative facts about him in 2020.
Meanwhile the right-leaning media (a much smaller contingent) tolerates most of Trump's idiosyncrasies, while lambasting Biden in every possible way, for his age, his track record, his lack of action, or even his son's behaviour and connections. It is so bad that it has become difficult to tell truth from fake news, and you need to study several sources from across the spectrum to get a clear (or at least clearer) picture of political reality.
The presidential election itself seems fraught with variable rules, uncertain procedures, and doubtful methods. The barrage of evidence offered by some Republicans after 2020, pointing to election irregularities was never properly investigated by the courts, most of whom denied their own standing to avoid looking into it. Meanwhile an infamous Time article, The Secret History of the Shadow Campaign That Saved the 2020 Election, describes all manner of biased tactics used to skew the election process and its results: mail in ballots, massive private funding, big-labour and big business backing, high-tech censorship, voting rule changes, shutting down dissent, etc. While this was all done in the name of a fair and honest election, most of the players were left leaning and most of the efforts undertaken tended to support Biden and the Democrats in one way or other.
Once the ballots are counted (whether properly or not), there is the Electoral College that actually determines who won the presidency. It is not good enough to just count all the ballots and see who got the most votes. No, they have to go state by state, each with its own time-line and details, to determine which way ALL their electoral votes will swing. So for example, in 2000 we got Florida, where a handful of votes between Bush and Gore, along with court decisions - about valid ballots, "hanging chad", and other doubts and issues - determined where ALL the votes for that state would go. Would it, do you suppose, be too much to say, let's divide the electoral ballots according to the ratio of actual votes? No, that would be too simple and fair. Hence, a few swing states and recounts determine the final outcome, sometimes after many days of waiting.
With these issues and processes, it is no wonder that Clinton complained that the election was stolen in 2016, and then Trump did the same in 2020. What will happen this year remains to be seen, but everyone seems testy and worried. It is strange that, while western democracies monitor elections in third-world countries closely to make sure they are "fair and honest", they don't peer as closely at the most important election in the most powerful country. Or perhaps I just don't see the behind-the-scenes checking?
Overall, it seems to take the Americans more than a year to elect their president. And then there are all the other elections in the USA: governors, senators, congress, at both the state and federal level. Locally they even vote for sheriffs, judges, and I don't know what else. In the USA it seems everything is politics, and there are always some elections going on or in preparation; more fodder for the polarized press and the divided nation.
But enough of that; let's now turn to Canadian politics! We here are not a republic, but a constitutional monarchy with a Parliamentary system. Thus, the Governor General, representing the Monarch (now King Charles III in Britain) is the nominal head of state, but has no real power, even though she must sign all federal legislation into law to make it legal - go figure. Vestiges of monarchy abound in Canada: federal laws, government public actions, lands and properties refer to "the crown" as their authority, source, or owner.
The real power supposedly lies with Parliament where each Member of Parliament (MP) represents his or her geographical area or "riding" somewhere in Canada. In principle, each MP has the same "power"; one vote on proposed bills and legislation. In reality, the Prime Minister (PM), as leader of his political party in Canada, holds most of the power! Woe to any back bencher who dares to question the PM's opinion, the party position, or any party-proposed legislation. Many have been ejected from the party or thrown under the bus for such questioning, or daring to represent their constituents' view which may differ on some issue. No, what the PM says goes and all government MP's tow the line.
The PM is surrounded by a "cabinet" of ministers, each with a different portfolio, supposedly acting to head up that particular government department, but in reality, largely mouth pieces for the positions set by the party and the PM, with the help of unelected, appointed, high-level officials and advisors in the back rooms. The PM, as the "first among equals" is not supposed to be a king or president, but in recent decades he has acted that way, and usually with impunity. Even the media rarely questions this mode of operation, and the electorate has become used to it.
So why do we have MP's to represent their constituents? They do a lot of visiting, photo-ops, hand shaking and smooth-talking in their ridings, promoting the party policies, whether for the government or against it when in opposition (the minority parties in Parliament); generally keeping to the party line in all important matters. Perhaps they have a voice in party caucus meetings, but I suspect even there they are mute if not supportive of their great leader.
When it comes to federal elections in Canada, we each get to vote for who will represent us from our riding in Parliament. The various parties appoint - via another arcane and sometimes secretive process - their candidates, and we peons get to vote for whichever one we like best (or as often as not, dislike least). The one with the most votes (same process across Canada!) gets to go to Ottawa as our MP.
However, it is not quite that simple. It seems some ridings have smaller populations, and there is one province that has been guaranteed a certain percentage of ridings regardless of its population. Thus, some votes in Canada are worth more than others, sometimes by a large factor. For example, a northern riding with 30,000 people gets one MP, the same as a riding of 130,000 in a large city, so it seems each northern vote is worth up to four city votes! We are not quite equal, but what can you do?
As in any parliamentary system with multiple parties and several candidates in each riding, it is possible for the government to "win" a majority (more than 50% of seats in the House of Commons) with less than 33% of the popular vote. Simply by getting the most votes in the most ridings, they win. Given that only about 60% of eligible voters actually bother to cast a ballot, it is therefore possible (in principle, if not practice) in a three-party system for a government to win a majority in parliament with only 11% of Canadians voting for them! (60% vote, 34% needed for each winning candidate, in 50% plus one of the ridings.) It's a good thing this has never happened that way, but the current federal government got fewer votes than the opposition in both of the last two federal elections, so go figure!
Finally, there is the issue of unelected people determining public policy and law in our countries. Both the SCOTUS and the Supreme Court of Canada have been quite "active" in the past few decades. Not happy to just rule on the constitutionality of legislation passed by the government, they have often gone beyond precedent or the actual words of the constitution, and created new rulings that impose their view of the world on both the government and the people. Examples abound of new "rights" being found in the constitution, or "emanating" from prior laws and rulings to suit some progressive cause or political perspective. Complaints about the politicization of the courts are widely voiced.
And finally, there are the unelected government officials behind the scenes: the cabinet secretaries, the assistant deputy ministers, the departmental analysts and upper management, the myriad advisors and aides, along with the behind-the-scenes lobbyists, corporate interests and public influencers. The "deep state" is everywhere, skewing the application of laws, the determination of benefits, the interpretation of court rulings, and so on. With all this widespread influence and huge bureaucracy, both the USA and Canada still manage to muddle along as countries. And truth be told, despite all these concerns, I am glad I live in Canada! I wouldn't want to live anywhere else.
All in all, it may be a wonder that we are still considered democracies. We get to vote every few years, based on incomplete and misleading electioneering, skewed by the media, and then we sit back and watch the circus, with barely a peep offered when things go astray or off track. Yes, this is democracy, but it surely is messy! We get what we deserve I suppose. And yes, I am cynical about politics in general. At best we can say with Churchill (echoing others) that, "Democracy Is the worst form of government, except For all others which have been tried". So enjoy your democracy; get out and vote when given the opportunity, pray for your representatives and governments, and then trust in God to actually keep the world from going completely off the rails.
Update: Wow, as I said ephemeral and shifting! Less than a week after I posted this, one US presidential candidate survives an assassination attempt and the other one steps down, handing the baton to a totally different candidate. Those Americans surely know how to run a circus election.
Later: And now Americans have a Trump - Harris choice: once again two candidates that few wanted for their president, but both of whom somehow got on the ticket! Whatever happens in November, the USA is in for a rough ride. Meanwhile, here in Canada, the minority Liberal party holds on to power despite their abysmal ratings due to 3rd and 4th party support, not because those parties like the Liberal government, but only because they don't like the 2nd party - the Conservative opposition. What a way to run a country!
