What do George Soros, the Canadian union movement, the Canadian media, left-of-centre political parties, various activist groups and Quebec have to do with each other in the 2011 election?
Quite a lot, it seems. All are conducting "Anything But Conservative" (ABC) campaigns in this election. And many of these organizations are coordinating their activities to a high degree. For different reasons.
It's rather odd that so many special interest groups are allied in the 2011 election against one political party at the same time. People and groups are usually "for" a polical party, than massively "against" one. So why is this happening? It's my contention that their motivations are different, but their goal is the same. To prevent the Conservative party from winning the next election, particularly with a majority. But why?
To answer that question, it's helpful to understand the key actors, or elements, involved in this massive effort. And to get that, we need to lay out those principal organizations that are currently arrayed in the ABC campaign:
- the full range of opposition parties, including the Greens, and not necessarily for their power aspirations alone;
- "progressive" friendly media led, as always, by the CBC and the Toronto Star;
- new "progressive" friendly media elements typified by the Globe & Mail (rabidly pro-Liberal this time), CTV NewsNet, and the Canadian Press (owned by G&M, TorStar and LaPresse); I wonder if Bell Canada's hand is in this, still smarting at the Conservatives' elimination of Income Trusts, which Bell was about to convert to immediately after the 2006 election;
- Canadian Auto Workers (has website devoted to targeting 50 ridings against the Conservatives);
- Public Service Alliance (running an underground ABC campaign);
- United Food and Commercial Workers (Their slogan is: "Goodbye Steve");
- Canadian Health Coalition (and provincial offspring);
- Council of Canadians: Maude Barlow of Think Twice fame is still at it; is Margaret Atwood still with them?
- Catch 22: vested interest ABC site; linked with Project Democracy and Avaaz?
- And so on ... AVAAZ, Dogwood, For the Public Good (theirs, not ours), "Project Democracy" (theirs, not ours), Professional Institute of the Public Service of Canada, and others.
George Soros is an extremely rich American (see Wikipedia entry) who is credited with establishing "MoveOn" in the U.S. which, in turn, seems to have played a successful role in mobilizing citizens, unions, and vested-interest groups to elect Obama to the Presidency. Soros' other activism thrusts are global and broad in nature, and often engage in political events in other countries. The vehicle used is often Avaaz, a creation of MoveOn.
Avaaz has been highly active in Canada during this election. (We should be thankful that Kevin Libin wrote this article; it has filled in many of the missing pieces of a puzzle). Registered with Elections Canada as a Third-Party, Avaaz's activities have been quite visible if you really know what to look for. They opposed the recent establishment in Canada of SunTV, a station with a conservative view of politics as opposed to the leftist, "progressive" views of the rest of the media in Canada. John Baird's "take" on Avaaz, through the eyes of a rather shallow reporter, is also worthwhile reading. Googling on Avaaz's activities and partnerships within the past 30 days turns up some interesting political activity and links too.
The Canadian Media (see below for further information)
The Canadian union movement (see below for further information)
My personal view is that there are a number of different motivations behind the actions of each of the ABC lobby. If it is true that Soros' prime objective is to destabilize the world's currency and markets, for either enrichment or socialization purposes, then destabilization of major political jurisdictions can be thought of as events necessary to achieve that goal. The U.S. is a basket case and Obama is more and more beginning to behave like a socialist. The U.K is already a basket case. Russia, China and other similar regimes will be, and have been, harder for Soros to crack. Are "spontaneous uprisings" in the Middle East part of his strategy? Some have suggested so.
A strong, coherent, fiscally robust and stable Canada must present itself as quite a target to people like Soros. Especially since we are a nation immediately north of the U.S, with considerable natural resources, including water, and unrealized Artic potential. Is this why Avaaz and its "friends" are so active, some might say pulling the strings from the background, in this election?
Unions: The motivations of the Canadian union movement are easier to discern. Keeping their lifestyle, entitlements, and movement together. Taxpayer uprisings in Wisconsin and other U.S. states must be of great concern to them, because of the possibility to spill over into Canada. The union movement here has always favoured the NDP and Liberals as their "friends", and the Conservative government must be considered by them as a potential threat downstream for them to be so highly involved in ABC campaigns. You should note that the CAW, at a minimum, has been working against the Conservatives since at least the 2006 election.
It is interesting to note that union support for re-election of the McGuinty Liberal government in October 2011 has already begun. A major Teachers' Union has created a $3 million fund for "education" purposes. That's all we see on the surface right now, but it's likely that other union support is marshalling in the backrooms of Ontario already. Will we see Soros-backed elements involved there too? I don't know. We should be worried if they do show up there.
Media: The motivation of the Canadian media is both easier, and harder, to discern. The Toronto Star has always (and I mean always) supported Liberal parties. The CBC has too, but in this election their political favouritism has broadened to include any left-of-centre party, i.e., the NDP in addition to the Liberals. Interestingly, the CBC has been almost saint-like neutral about the Bloc. Almost, but not quite.
In previous elections, my impression was that the Globe and Mail, and CTV, were fairly unbiased in coverage and support of all parties. In fact, the Globe indorsed the Conservatives in the 2008 election. This is no longer the case. The Globe has been rabidly pro-Liberal, and disparagingly anti-CPC this election, but is now giving very favourable coverage to the NDP instead of the Liberals. Is this just another ABC campaign? Likewise, CTV has been unabashedly pro-Liberal this election. By the way, the "Canadian Press" is a news gathering organization wholly owned by Globe & Mail, TorStar and LaPresse jointly. Media concentration, eh?
Trying to balance, or oppose these media heavyweights are the much smaller National Post, Sun newspaper chain, and SunTV (News). Literally the Davids of Canada up against the Goliaths. Note that Soros-backed forces intervened strongly against a license for SunTV last fall; there's nothing quite like a monopoly on GroupSpeak, is there? The media is always the first casualty of any assault on democracy. In fact, it's essential ... to shape the minds of its readers/viewers.
Political Parties: It's obvious to me that the NDP, Liberals and Bloc have been pursuing a coalition track since at least before 2008, in the event that one of these left-of-centre parties was unable to secure a minority decision in the two subsequent elections. So there was competition, but all were united behind an ABC political action if competitive activities failed to produce a favourable result.
We know what happened in the 2006 election, and in the 2008 election, and the subsequent "Coalition Fiasco" in December of 2008. By the way, that coalition accord is still in effect until June 30, 2011. The 2011 election has been anything but dull in its latter stages, with the Liberal party's support declining now, and the NDP's campaign coming on stream after the televised debates. And thereafter rocketing due to two unrelated events that occurred in Quebec about the same time. To the NDP's unplanned, I'm sure, delight.
First, Jack Layton "connected" with younger, non-Separatiste-supporting Quebecers in the debate. But the catalyst for the beginning of the NDPs rocket ride was the following weekend's PQ leadership review/convention, and the subsequent vision of Marois and Duceppe, arm-in-arm, talking about setting "winning conditions" for another vote on sovereignty. Suddenly, this non-aligned group of Quebecers, who had taken a shine to Layton decided en-masse that they had had enough of this separation bullplops and just wanted to get on with their lives. And there was Jack. We are still waiting to see how this new love-in will manifest on May 2nd. And, by inference, the degree of stability of the resultant parliament.
[Update Apr 30/11 - Apparently the Separatistes think Jack is going to be such a good deal for them, that they are now endorsing the NDP and urging their members to do so too! Methinks what is good for the Separatistes, can't be very good for the rest of Canada.]
Where I'm Going on This ...
In many ways, a perfect political storm has occurred this election, never before seen. It looks, feels and smells like a "groundswell populist wave", but it's not. The Quebec rocket ride is a one-off in my view, and Jack Layton will have to ride that rocket with great care. The normal media bias is explainable and expected, but the intensification of support for left wing parties as well as an increase of such in the media ranks, is a cause for concern. It is fair to say that these left-supporting media outlets GroupSpeak the same views, policies, and dislikes. A disheartening and dangerous situation for those who may not GroupThink or GroupSpeak like the "progressive" media and similar-minded public.
Sun newspapers, SunTV and the National Post are the only media that non-GroupThinkers, who comprise 40% of Canada's population, can turn to. But these media outlets have vastly smaller coverage and resources. Particularly compared to the CBC which receives over $1.1 billion a year from taxpayers of all political stripes. Allied with this issue of media representation and scale, though, is the issue of the concentration of the media in a few, very powerful hands. This media consortium is essentially "locked" against different views being transmitted to the broad Canadian populace.
And the interference of Soros-backed elements in our political processes and in this election has to be of great concern . This is a U.S. based assault, whatever they claim. Their Canadian "office" is an office of convenience only. There is no "Canadian Wing"; it is "here today, gone tomorrow". They move on from here to ... where? Zimbabwe? Another Middle East country? The 2012 Presidential election in the U.S., to work their destabilization magic afresh?
No, the Soros assault on our country should be troubling to each and every Canadian. Our sovereignty, our lifestyle, our "Canadian-ness" is what is under attack. By someone who doesn't give a damn for Canada, if you look at this in a critical manner. Using our own wide-open free speech election laws against us.
I fear that if we subsequently find out that we have made the wrong ballot choice on May 2nd, we may then find out that these very powerful forces remain entrenched, even more so, and prevent us from pursuing an alternate path later on. Ever.
You may look at this situation and come to a different conclusion. Fine, at least I presented to you what I believe are the critical issues facing us on May 2nd. You decide for yourself. I can only, as the saying goes, "lead a horse to water, not make it drink".
If, however, you see the situation in the same light as I do, I urge you to take real, positive action NOW. There is no time to lose. There are only 4 days left to get the word out, by every means at your disposal.
After all, it's only the future of Canada that we are talking about.
Resources: My two previous articles, here and here, are admittedly written in a highly-partisan tone. They do, however, provide much additional information and links which will fill in your knowledge of the comprehensive nature of this assault.