Christian's Blog: Canada is the Most Democratic Country in America

On Sunday morning I heard the caw of crows and then saw two of them flapping west over Queen Street to veer southwest before Jameson. It's so rare to see my favourite bird in the downtown area that it always makes me feel good.

Weird argument on Facebook with someone claiming that Canada is just as bad as Iran politically because of such situations as the SNC Lavalin affair. To me it’s a mistake to make the claim that Canada is “just as bad”. I would accept some degree on all points of similarity but not sameness. Then it was said that Canada is equally responsible for the way things are in Iran because of its actions in the world. Again, I would accept a degree of responsibility for Canada but I fail to see the logic of it being equal. To top it off I got Terry Trowbridge responding to me in defence of Bänoo with an eye roll emoji as if we were at a pyjama party. The thing is I suspect that he was defending her in a patronizing way and that he would never make the statement that she made. He certainly didn’t put her argument in other words but rather spoke of it as if it was a higher truth beyond what she’d written. We probably all agree that Canada shares some blame but I don’t get this insistence on the disproportionate claim:

Banoo- For me, it is the similarities between Iran and Canada that are disturbing in this case, not the differences. I am disillusioned that Canada is not as different from Iran as it would like to pretend it is.

Me -What's the similarity?

Banoo - In both countries, principled politicians are threatened into silence and removed from office. In both countries, corruption is rampant, and the thirst for money and power is what drives those in power. In both countries, it is only to improve their self-image if and when politicians show some regard for values. In both countries, the powers that be conveniently ignore the promises they have made after they are elected. And none of the two countries is a democracy, though both pretend they are. Iran is a theocracy and Canada is a constitutional monarchy.

Me -I see no evidence that anyone was threatened here. But what country does not have the similarities that you see?

Banoo - The fact that corruption and intimidation happen in other countries' political arena is not a justification they should happen here. And if this is good enough line of reasoning, then all discrimination should be accepted including homophobia, Islamophobia, xenophobia, sexism and ableism. All activism should stop and we should accept whatever atrocities, human rights violations, censorship, etc. Because, those happen in other places as well.

Me -You made a comparison between Iran and Canada and said they are politically similar in terms of their flaws. I guess you don't have another country in mind as an ideal but you are saying that both Iran and Canada fall short of the objective ideal. But the comparison between Iran and Canada seems to be a dramatic stretch. Canada is the most democratic country in the Americas. Norway (also a constitutional monarchy) is considered to be the most democratic country in the world. There is probably less chance that an issue like the SNC situation would occur in Norway, so yes there is more progress to be made for us in all of the areas you've listed. But not thinking that Canada is as undemocratic as Iran or the United States is not an impediment to progress. it's probably more productive to compare Canada and Norway to show what needs to be done than to compare us to Iran.

Fabian McGill - Christian is right, Banoo. Or rather, Christian is more right than you are. Your point, as I understand it, is fair enough in principle but is somewhat overstated and would seem to imply a false equivalency. Canada is not Iran and it is, at best, mistaken to suggest it is; at worst, it is dangerous - as is all extreme rhetoric and the distortion of truth. I know you and so believe I know your intentions and that, in this instance, am convinced you are using exaggeration to make a point - a point worth making, I might add. But still, and for the record, it must be said that categorical and unqualified statements of this sort don't help the discourse.

Banoo - I see the similarities because I have lived in both countries.

Trowbridge - Yes, for sure!

Me - The way you worded your comparison conveyed equivalence. The fact that you are here and not there suggests the similarities are of drastically different degrees.

Banoo - You asked about similarities and I answered you. This is a colonialist mentality to expect immigrants and refugees (btw, you are as much a settler as I am) to feel gratitude and not to voice their criticism. I am not going to continue this thread, as it is not going anywhere.

Banoo - The West and Canada collaborate with the dictators in our part of the word to oppress and torture us and drive us away from our homelands. And as collaborators they are as much to blame as perpetrators.

Me - Again you are playing with degrees here and yet blanketing it all with equivalence. To say that Canada is "as much" to blame for oppression in other countries is just not mathematically accurate. Your way of making comparisons could be applied to every person on Earth. We are all by that logic to blame. I would accept that there is some culpability on the part of all countries, including Canada. It's not really communication to throw an ideological blanket over an argument. To talk about to what degree Canada is to blame would say more and teach more.

Trowbridge - “The way you worded your comparison conveyed equivalence.”
“The fact that you are here and not there suggests ...”

It suggests that we born here people have an opportunity to listen to a friend who is ringing a bell, telling us that they have seen this before in another time and place.

Me- But that is not what she said.
This argument is like saying, “I am wet in the shower and therefore I am like a fish”.
This has nothing to do with being born here or not. I was addressing Banoo's specific case as a point of argument.
If Banoo is pointing out that all of the problems with Canada that she has listed exist to the exact same degree as those in Iran, I doubt very much if even you would agree with that.

Trowbridge – omg! Stop! CC, I debating you anymore. I was, in good faith, telling you how you have missed the point several times. You seem to invite bluntness, and I thought you were like me in that you like to parse everything. Alas, you're not making friends at this point. I am sorry I mistook your posts for actual curiosity and honest attempts to engage. I'm out. Sorry BZ.

Me - Your response is extremely arrogant. It says you tried to teach me what you know better and failed and so you are out. I never claim to know the truth about anything.

I tried to take a siesta twice in the afternoon but both times I was too full of argument and could not sleep.

I finished my review of Shab-e She'r and posted it. I also sent it to K.J. At newz4u.ca.

I grilled some frozen ground chicken and had half in a sandwich made from one slice of bread cut in half with a beer while watching an episode of Rawhide.

This story begins with the herd being panicked from the sound of nearby explosions. Gil and Rowdy go to look for the source in order to ask them to stop blasting for a day so they can get the herd through. They find a town made up of some small shacks and some tents and populated entirely by women. Gil and Rowdy are directed to the place of the blasting and it turns out that it’s a prison work camp where the convicts have to work in a mine. The tent and shack town nearby is where the wives of the prisoners live while they wait for their men to get out. Tod, one of those convicts has a month left in his sentence but the warden tells him that he will not get out until he tells him the location of the money that he stole. Tod plans an escape with some of the other prisoners. The warden refuses to stop the blasting and so Gil is forced to try to drive the herd through at night. When they are doing so they hear more explosions. This time it’s because of a prison break as the men have gotten hold of some dynamite. The escapees need horses and they plan on stealing them from the drovers. Gil knows they want his horses and so he decides to confront the convicts directly by going with some men to the wives town. When confronts Tod in front of his wife Ann she learns for the first time that Tod has the stolen money. She’s a Bible reading type and she thinks Tod has committed a grave sin by having stolen the money and now she wants to die. It seems more than a little obsessive. When Tod sees his wife's reaction he gives up on the money. Planning to give it back to its original owners he goes out to tell the other convicts that he lied and that there was never any money. He’s shot and killed. Gil uses the dynamite to take out the convicts.

Ann was played by Phyllis Avery.