Our entire country has shifted to the left with the election of Justin Trudeau's Liberal government in October, 2015. Even earlier, Alberta went further to the left when Alberta chose to reject 40 years of right-wing PC government in favour of the New Democratic Party under Rachel Notely in the spring. Her leftward swing has been extremely controversial - Bill 6 (extending worker safety rules to farms), new carbon taxes to combat climate change, a government review of royalty rates for oil companies, making distracted driving a demerit offence and the increase of the minimum wage to $15 per hour among others. All of these issues raise questions about how much influence the government should have on us socially and economically.
The election of Donald Trump and the exit of Barack Obama in the U.S. has left a hugely divided America - with the divisions crossing all sorts of ideological lines - economic, social, political, racial, religious... The future looks very uncertain (but lots of fun to watch from the sidelines!).
For this last entry, I'd like you to comment on how liberal you believe our society should be. You may discuss political liberalism (democracy), social liberalism (personal freedom to act as you wish) and/or economic freedom (capitalism). What should the limits be on our freedom? What is justified in the name of order and security? What role should the government have in our lives?
I believe our society should be liberal, but not blindly liberal. We should listen to and watch for progress but not blindly commit to progress simply because it is progress. Not all progress is good progress. I feel that sometimes people think “we need change and progress” but they do not consider what type of change, they just want any change from the status quo. I think this is what we saw in the last US election – people wanting change, and blindly following the candidate that promised it, despite his obvious faults and extremely concerning elements. However, in Canada, we seem to have taken a more rational choice to delivering change – at least so far. We voted for parties that were committed to achieving rational and beneficial change, parties that are still professional and democratic in discussing how this change should happen. If humanity is to survive the threats of the next centuries, we need to continue to be open to new and revolutionary ideas, or simple small changes that will have a resounding impact. Change is something we should always consider – I think a “how can we improve this” attitude is necessary – but that change needs to always be rational and thoughtful, not blindly followed with a mob-like mentality. People need to be open to this change, not stuck in their old ways. We see a conflict now in the US about firearm ownership, with one side wanting unlimited access to all firearms with no restrictions, and the other side wanting to severely restrict firearms. While you have to literally be brain dead to not realize that the US has a firearm issue, nothing has been able to change because so many people are opposed to change, simply because it is change. This is where I draw the line for individual freedom and government control. As an owner of multiple firearms, I do not understand this paranoia of the phrase “gun control”. Gun control does not mean that you are no longer able to own firearms, it just means that the types of firearms are controlled by the government (for example, in Canada, you need a special licence to own hand guns, and fully automatic firearms are prohibited except in certain non-civilian jobs), and all firearms are registered. I think we should have the freedom to do whatever we may want, as long as it does not harm others. Firearm control is to limit access to firearms that one can harm many people with. Distracted driving laws are to try to dissuade people from driving distracted and harming others. A life sentence for murder is to make it clear that there are consequences for murder and one should not commit it. I could go on. In conclusion, our society should embrace the liberal values of change and progress, but always question it critically and rationally. The government should limit our freedoms when it is clear that we cannot stop one another from harming ourselves.
ReplyDeleteThroughout the course of the year, knowledge about how ideologies are made and what makes an ideology have impacted how I perceive things. From learning about the communist state in the Soviet Union to the fascist state in Nazi Germany, it all comes down to the beliefs and ideas you have. Through these beliefs and interpretations you can be placed on a spectrum (political, economic, etc.). Early on in the year I was very individualistic and right wing. Not to the extent of a fascist but to that of a laissez faire capitalist. I believed in very little government control and the principle of self-reliance. My parents are well-living skilled workers which allows them to find much success in a society that allows for more individualistic policies. Studying the Cold War I learned about mixed economic theories such as Keynesianism and Reaganomics. Both come from a conservative perspective and look at the intervention done by a government on the economy. I believe I side more with the demand-side than the supply-side. The creating of more jobs and help in social programs sounds more appealing to me than lowering taxes and increasing spending. Along with the idea the wealthy’s greed will bring the economy out of a recession. I think a mixed economy is the most ideal economy. It doesn’t fall too far to the left where you’d see communism and ideas such as collectivized agricultural and everyone being equally poor. Alongside with it not being too far right to where the main focus of the economy is complete privatization of enterprise and a humongous class conflict. I believe because of this where our government stands economically and socially in it’s policy and beliefs has great influence on how we live and rightfully so. Canada is a very liberal country based off of mixed economics and support for modern liberalism. There should be universal suffrage, guarantee of civil liberties and democracy in a state. In other states such as Mussolini’s Italy the first fascist state, numerous freedoms and rights were wrongly violated. Elitism would drive dictators to believe that without use of force and terror there would be no order and security of the nation’s ideological belief in the state. In modern day the violation of peoples liberties still takes place in democracies even. The question of “What is justified in the name of order and security?” arises. The Anti-Terrorist Act is an example of the government having to violate citizens rights and freedoms if they are suspected of a terroristic threat. I believe the chance to stabilize a terroristic threat should be taken if given. It is the government’s job to keep me safe from this threat and I support their efforts in doing so. However, I do not support the unlawful discrimination of minorities. Particularly individuals that reside from the middle east. In a modern liberal state, the rights and well-being of its citizens comes first. Through all this I believe the government should have a very strong impact on our lives.
ReplyDeleteThis year has been influential for me to learn not only about how different governments chose to govern a society, like the Soviet Union adopting communism and America practising capitalist ideals but also why these governments resorted to very differing ideologies. It was important for me this year to learn about the perspectives of each side on the political spectrum in order to form my own ideologies without any biased influence from the media, family, or peers. I believe that everyone has a right to personal freedom while the government can still institute a significant amount of influence on the economy like in Sweden and Norway. The amount of taxes and social programs keeps individuals working towards a progressive economy that benefits the entire society. The same benefits are present in Canada today with the creation of free public health care. Social 30 has led me to recognize that some people believe that less government involvement allows more money in their pockets to spend but I also see that more equality in a society allows for less conflict and division among classes and a better understanding for tolerance and change. For example, in the US election Donald Trump appealed to interests of less change and adopt a more isolated America to nearly half of Americans while the rest believed in the opposite point of view which still divides the US. In the beginning of the year I imagined that people were inherently good but realized that some evils like greed are unavoidable in any government whether it is an authoritarian regime or a democracy. Therefore some regulations are necessary to keep a government accountable like the constitution. I chose to accept change that drives society to evolve and become more efficient and connected with the rest of the world.
ReplyDeleteBilly Beresnak
ReplyDeleteLeft wing ideologies are toxic to the well-being of a developed society. Socialism and left-wing ideologies operate in the same way; "I am here, I am breathing, therefore give me money". These left ideologies represent many things, but primarily what strikes me is this concept of 'equality of outcome' not 'equality of income'. Meaning, I am in a room with another person and I have $2 and they have $10. Most people at a first glance will imagine that the person with more money has exploited the corrupt system in order to produce this vast difference in personal value. My dislike from the left stems from the left's desire to take from the rich (who in most cases have worked honestly and passionately to make it to where they are) and hand this to the less-fortunate (who often are in their position because of poor personal decisions) instead of working towards facilitating a process to increase or begin collecting an income based on the amount of labour you work. Income of personal value do not determine your employment choice or how well you exploited the system, but how many voluntary economic transactions and services you have provided in return for a reward, and I think that is a major misconception about the gap between high income and low income recipients. This is why the Iron Lady is such a hero of mine, her methods of privatization of crown companies played a big part in lowering levels of poverty in the United Kingdom and her desire to dismantle social programs which also has a direct influence on decreasing the level of employment in the United Kingdom. The left also equates inequality with inequity. Inequity meaning unfairness and inequality essentially realizes a more honest truth that we are all different. We all have equal rights, we all have equal access to those rights but not everyone is equal. Some people and tall, some people are short. Some people are smart, some people are stupid. Some people are great basketball players, some people are 5'5" white boys that nearly get winded by walking up a flight of stairs. There are a lot of inequalities in life but it doesn't mean a large inequity has taken place. I mean, you're being naive if you ignore the fact that the NBA is largely dominated by tall black men. Why should economics be an exception to that? It should not be inequity for smarter people who have provided more services and transactions to be payed more, these people are not exploiting a system or hurting anyone. The left believes that these differences need to be rectified by our god-government-nanny state. Life tends to create a relationship between cause and effect, in that - for example, the choices I make now and the choices I make in university are responsible choices and I will be rewarded with such in the future. Responsible decisions equate a better outcome. For a lot of young leftists, they believe that poverty is something you look into which is incredible untrue and troubling especially in a country where we have massive income mobility for most people. I'm nearly 100% sure that the top 1% was not the top 1% 10 years ago and will not be ten years in the future. If you believe that cause and effect occurs on a daily basis than you must acknowledge that this inequality is a necessary ramification. This is what I have learned and accepted as a larger truth this year through the Social Studies 30-1 course. Social and economic liberalism make sense because they encourage the fact that "if you work harder, you get more" and "nobody controls your actions but yourself". It should not be the government telling you how to make money or giving you money. Marin phrased it perfectly; "liberal, but not blindly liberal".
I think “Our” society, collectively speaking reciprocates the fact that Canadians are afraid of a right wing or left wing dominate society, this however presents us with a modest and much more centralist way of governance. Consequently there has been questions as to what the level of leadership will be in the long-term due to the radical shift of government (conservative to liberal) and now whether that is a lack of apathy or a challenge Canadian politician’s will have to face, this does concern a majority of Canadians throughout all societal and economical classes (low, med and high tax brackets) simultaneously it also poses a threat to blue collar workers as their job opportunities close but also white collar workers as well due to increased taxation. As we still obtain the economic freedom as the United States does (Capitalism) we blend social liberalism to an extent where people do not feel confined or isolated but rely on the government to aid during dry economic times. Socially we are all one under the constitutional laws that ensure our safety. Although there is a figment of conservative’s imaginations that socioeconomically we are falling apart due to the reduced amount of freedom, be it that economically the government intervenes, this is too regular which defeats the purpose of having a market economy, if an individual works hard they can achieve greatness in the form of social ranking or economical standing otherwise if another individual feels that their lack thereof contributions deserves a high pay as well then what has the government come down to. Have we generated a false sense of security for those who have no gumption to work hard? In retrospect the personal freedoms have become much more relaxed, which is good due to advocating for equality, if there was no fight for social rights and freedoms it would engulf our society, thus leading to reactionary movements which in no way is positive for a growing society. Last of all the government should have no place to manipulate the economy but rather aid and help in social systems such as healthcare, workers unions and security. I believe that the government should only intervene in individuals lives when necessary and for only strict security reasons otherwise, let the people mold society as they see fit.
ReplyDeleteWith the election of Justin Trudeau's Liberal government and the defeat of incumbent Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s nine year term, as well as the New Democratic Party’s shocking victory over the Progressive Conservative party in Alberta after a forty year reign, we are beginning to see Canada shifting more leftward on the political spectrum, creating more government control over the economy and punishing carbon tax levies. Justin Trudeau recently went to several town hall meetings in Ontario, and claimed “We can’t shut down the oil sands tomorrow; we need to phase them out”, which struck fear into the hearts of millions. Not only is the oil and gas industry the main reason why our economy is unique and superior to other socialist economies, but it’s also created and maintains millions of jobs throughout Western Canada and represents trillions of dollars of future wealth for Canadians. The reason I don’t like socialism is because it is flawed from its inception. Karl Marx’s theory had a good understanding of money, but his theory lacked a basic understanding of human nature; he didn’t understand that people are born selfish. Individuals don’t want to give away their money to others who are lazy, and don’t work as hard as they do, to fund the other person’s lifestyle. What is the Charter of Rights and Freedoms worth, if we don’t have a choice over our personal assets? In order to protect our freedoms, we must constantly be vocal in defending ourselves against those who wish to take them away from us.
ReplyDeleteI believe in capitalism because it is the most efficient and productive way to run an economy; humans naturally place priority on themselves, meaning they instinctively want to do better than their peers. This results in people being competitive, which is truly the engine of capitalism. The United States of America is the most capitalist country in the world; this results in the US having the largest gross domestic product (GDP) in the world as well as being one of the best countries to trade with. I have changed my opinion slightly this semester, as I now believe that although I prefer limited government in our lives, there needs to be some regulatory agencies that are government-run or non-profit that have the authority to regulate such industries as financial, banking, stock exchanges and currency. During the financial crisis of 2007 agencies that people trusted in, like Standard and Poor’s, failed to properly rate mortgage back securities due to their profit concerns and the SEC failed to oversee the credit rating agencies and the investment banks that were selling CDOs as AAA rated but were really junk bonds. Canada kept their strict banking regulations and mortgage down payment requirements, and had far fewer mortgage defaults and was able to weather the 2008 recession without any of our banks failing.
Coming into Social 30, I knew that my political leanings were already firmly established on the left of center side of the political spectrum, and I can confidently say that after consideration of all we have learned about liberal principles, and the political and economic spectrum, including several case studies, my position has not changed. If anything, I feel that I may have even moved further left. I feel very strongly that our society, and the government we choose should uphold and protect modern liberal principles, including the protection of civil liberties, as well as social and political equality for all members of society. I recognize that people do have the right to pursue their own self-interests, and should be encouraged to do so. Many successful and innovative thinkers have done so, and because of capitalism have brought their ideas, goods and services to society and we have all benefited. However, it is my fundamental belief that there will always be members of society who require support and assistance, often because of circumstances beyond their control. I disagree with and reject the idea that "poor personal decisions" alone will place people in a compromised economic situations. Consider refugees fleeing war-torn countries, or persons challenged with mental illness, or members of Canada's First Nations who are often born into a cycle of abuse and poverty . . . and the list goes on. It is absolutely the responsibility of the governments we choose to ensure that these persons, along with all society,will be guaranteed a basic standard of living, with access to education, health care, the freedom to make choices that will better their situation. Donald Trump, as he is on the cusp of taking power in the US, has clearly expressed his intent to repeal Obamacare. Leaving millions of people without quick and easy access to healthcare should be an outrage to their country. Today the Edmonton Journal reported that the two richest men in Canada have wealth greater than 30% of the poorest or least advantaged Canadians. This is shocking to me. And the world's 62 richest people have wealth greater than the poorest 3.6 billion people worldwide. A socialist, or left leaning liberal government needs to ensure that policies do not contribute to the rich getting richer and the poor left to a lifetime of struggle. A modern liberal government should be working to establish and maintain social programs that will benefit all of society. I admire Sweden's socialist government that has created a society with 100% literacy rates, low unemployment rates, and free education and health care for all. Government regulation is not intended to control business, but rather to protect the national economy from global fluctuations and to ensure good standards of living for the nation as a whole. Sweden enjoys one of the top 3 standards of living worldwide, top 10 GDP per capita as well as being one of the top 10 competitive nations. To me it is not shocking that Sweden is considered one of the best places in the world to live. Equality for citizens, achieved through a government that will support social programs will be a goal that I will forever support.
ReplyDeleteI believe in having a liberal society but there must be some limits, I would say I am a modern liberal. A liberal society should be embraced because many aspects of a liberal society are deeply valued. It is due to a liberal society that we have political,social and economic freedom. Examples are the right to vote, which allows the people to posses the power to support a leader who they feel represents their point of view. The freedom to dissent allows for the people to hold the government accountable and question the government’s decisions. Capitalism also allows for the profit motive which encourages people to work hard for their money. These freedoms and rights are important but there must be limits. These limits are put into place so that there isn’t a great inequality where lower class people are exploited by the wealthier. Regulations such as those on worker’s safety ensure that workers are safe and not being abused. Some government control in the economy such as investments, public works and social programs allow for the government to help raise the people at the bottom so that they do not keep sinking further and further down. Some may argue that social programs only mean that the people are getting taxpayer money without having to do any work and becoming reliant on the government. I argue that because not all of the people in need of these social programs are at fault for their condition. These people could include refugees or workers laid off because of economic recession. An example of this would be the recession in 2008 and the current situation in Alberta for the oil industry. Workers are being laid off due to the lack of work and can not find other work because there is none available. This is not their fault and social programs such as unemployment insurance ensures that they are able to meet basic needs. I believe that the five principles of liberalism : individualism, freedom, tolerance, justice and reason are the foundation to a successful society. They allow the citizens to express themselves freely through various ways, such as voting and freedom of speech, while also respecting others . If the citizens do violate the rules than they will have to be punished fair and equally. I strongly believe in a liberal society where there is some government control so that the people of the country are safe and have a good standard of living.
ReplyDeleteIt is important for a country to be liberal in a social sense, and a bit of economic sense. In a socially liberal environment, personal freedom, freedom of speech and other rights such as those, are vital to a democratic government. Being able to choose who gets to represent you in high level government position displays the principles of liberalism in its highest extent. Saying how you feel about anything not only shows where you stand in society, but also can bring up other points to other people who thought a completely opposite way as you. This also allows people to criticize moves made by the government. This allows the majority government to be opposed by and to be criticized and challenged on what they wanted to do. Unlike the situation due to the most recent presidential election in the U.S.A., where the Republican party controls the House of Representatives and the Senate. Other than that, the government positions are usually opposed by opposite parties. Capitalism is important because it allows a lot of economic freedom which in results helps political freedom. Capitalism also creates efficiency. For a producer to make a profit, they have to keep up with the demand, so more goods plus more demand equals a profit for the producers which increases and helps create a stable economy. An extremely liberal country might not be a great idea but the majority of liberal ideas are important for a fair and healthy country. Ronald Reagan said that the "government only exists to protect us from each other" and I agree in that is how it should be. Too much government involvement restricts the freedom individuals have because if the government watches everything you do, how truly free are you. Most liberals would sacrifice their rights for security. I do not agree with that part because if liberalism is really about freedom then why sacrifice your right for that? In a liberal world, you get to choose what you want to do, where you want to go, when you want to do it, and why you want to do. When people give up those rights just to feel safe, it is not a liberal country. Of course it is people's right to be protected but, I say that is not worth giving up the rights many people fought for and created the world that we live in right now. Liberalism is important for most situations in a country, but certain aspects are not needed.
ReplyDeleteDemocratically I think we should stay similar to now, albeit it I would like to see a more proportionally representative system where every vote mattered more than it does now. Of course the problem with that is that we would most likely never have a majority government again which would mean watered down polices and inefficiency. Economically we should stay as free as we are now, I do truly believe that if people get to keep the money they work for they will be more happy with the government and more likely to buy things which stimulates the economy and trickles down. I agree though that not everyone Is equal, they are by law but not in practice. I'm really torn when it comes to social liberalism, on one hand I have a very libertarian view and think that everyone is rational and can make the decisions they want, on the other hand I think that it ends up being us tax payers who pay for the mistakes people make to their health and life and I don't want to be responsible for that. I think that if these fentanyl addicts are going to be treated 8x a day then they should be contributing back to the state. In terms of order and security, I thinks it's alright if the government tracks suspicious people, but they should get rid of useless measures like shoe removal at airport security. My political leanings didn't change in Social 30-1. I still consider myself a relative centrist with certain rightist values.
ReplyDeleteAfter studying this course, I feel like my ideology shifts a little to the left and I am now a modern liberal. I think that the Canadian society is a quite perfect modern liberal society because it is moderate and good enough to make most people accept to live in such a society happily. Unlike communism which people only have limited freedom and desire to grab wealth from the rich or capitalism which people who need help cannot get help. In a liberal society, individualism and political, social and economic freedom are guaranteed, therefore, people have opportunities and environments to achieve their goals. Also, a liberal society provide social welfare and support for people who need help like homeless people.
ReplyDeleteHaving a liberal society with freedom and individualism does not mean no limits or government control. Laws and regulations on many different sides to protect the interests of people in different classes and to stop people from harming others are fundamental conditions to a liberal society. An accountable and legitimate government that can rationally listen to the rational dissents is also important. In conclusion, I believe that in a society with a legitimate and accountable government, laws to protect people and freedom that allow people to choose their lives and develop their potential, people are safe and all have a great standard of living.