On fundamental laws of politics and hypocrisy in a "progressive age"

Once again Dr. John Robson http://www.thejohnrobson.com/ has inspired this blog. I am an unabashed disciple of Robson for the following reason. In an age of pundits who often wax with vitriol and venom against whatever flavour of governmental tomfoolery is the most current, Robson resists such temptation. He expresses himself reasonably and logically while founding his discourse upon our legacy of government limited by law. Historical revision and cultural relativity have no place in his arguments. Being a professor of history he understands history too well to engage in such. I quote Antonov's Observation on Santayana's Law: ‘There is a mistaken proverb which tells us that those who are ignorant of the past are condemned to repeat it. In fact, they're lucky if they're allowed to repeat it. More probably, they're condemned to something even worse than the past. This is doubly true of those who believe that their ignorance somehow makes them morally superior to those who don't share it.' (Spoken by the fictional Admiral Ivan Antonov in David Weber and Steve White, "In death ground".) Robson seeks to empower his readers so that we as a society will not repeat our past errors. There is no wringing of hands in desperation nor talking down to the ignorant plebes, rather he identifies areas of concern and suggests solutions. He believes that we can and should do better.

In Full Comment from Sept. 6th's National Post Robson wrote an article entitled, ‘John Robson: Apple tax decision shows that Britain was right to leave the EU'. Pournelle's Iron Law explains the point Robson made in his article: ‘In any bureaucratic organization there will be two kinds of people: those who work to further the actual goals of the organization, and those who work for the organization itself. Examples in education would be teachers who work and sacrifice to teach children, vs. union representative[s] who work to protect any teacher, including the most incompetent. The Iron Law states that in all cases, the second type of person will always gain control of the organization, and will always write the rules under which the organization functions.' The E.U. is run by unelected oligarchs in Brussels while its parliament cannot even veto their decisions. Robson wrote: ‘Remember Robert Conquest's Third Law of Politics? "The simplest way to explain the behaviour of any bureaucratic organization is to assume that it is controlled by a cabal of its enemies."' Case in point: the European Union recently ordered Ireland to collect €13 billion ($18.72 billion) in taxes that Apple doesn't even owe." Remember Muggeridge's Law?: ‘Satire can never compete with real life for its sheer absurdity.'

On the falseness of progressive oligarchies such as the E.U., Sumner's Law explains why progressivism is undemocratic: ‘The type and formula of most schemes of philanthropy or humanitarianism is this: A and B put their heads together to decide what C shall be made to do for D. The radical vice of all these schemes, from a sociological point of view, is that C is not allowed a voice in the matter, and his position, character, and interests, as well as the ultimate effects on society through C's interests, are entirely overlooked. [A and B] ignore entirely the source from which they must draw all the energy which they employ in their remedies, and they ignore all the effects on other members of society than the ones they have in view. The State cannot get a cent for any man without taking it from some other man, and this latter must be a man [C] who has produced and saved it. This latter is the "Forgotten Man". [The title of Amity Shlaes' book about the Great Depression and the New Deal pays homage to Sumner.]'

In my previous blog entitled, ‘The truth is stranger than fiction in a "progressive age"' I made the point that there is no need to exaggerate or prevaricate in order to cite concrete examples of the utter madness of ‘progressive' politics. The current flood of rhetoric from Trudeau's government regarding, ‘Canada is back' is a case in point. The Liberal government's constant attempt to paint our Canadian identity in the "progressive" image of the Liberal Party is not only false, it is dangerous. Canada and its people cannot, nor should not, be defined by the politics of any particular political party. We should be defined by the values of liberty under law expressed by a functional constitution which recognizes that our rights are inherent to our person. As importantly, no matter what party is currently in power, our elected representatives represent all Canadians, not merely those who voted them into power. They were elected to represent all their constituents irrespective of who they voted for. The assumption that the citizen must adhere to the values of whatever party is in power in order to 'be Canadian' is patently false. Moreover, that party has no right to define who we are as a people. Their job is to represent their constituents in parliament, period, and uphold the constitution. It is we the people who define what values we shall embrace and what values we shall eschew. Ottawa and many provincial legislatures throughout Canada are completely out of touch with the real needs of their citizens and therefore are failing to serve the public good. They need to be reminded that they are not our masters but our servants.

Finally, regarding public good, I wish to cite a speech given by Rex Murphy at a conference held in Alberta back in November of 2013. Rex spoke on how vital western oil is to the nation. I can state without fear of contradiction that if a traditional liberal like Rex can deliver such a scathing indictment of progressive stupidity one would assume the party faithful would have listened. Sadly, they have not. Canada needs a pipeline. We need ethical oil, not Saudi oil. Everything we use is made from it. Even the keys on the laptop I am currently punching like a madman were made from petroleum. With Wynne pricing electricity ever higher due to her so called ‘green initiatives', oil is even more important to the economy. Wynne's initiatives don't even look at the real environmental hazards behind the use of electric vehicles. Few mention the hazards posed by the lithium batteries required to power them. I will save that topic for next time, though. Please watch the video of Rex's impassioned plea. Listen to him tell how vital Alberta was to the nation's economy and in particular in helping lessen the blow on Newfoundlanders after the collapse of their cod fisheries. Listen to Rex tell about the greening of the oil sands projects. Listen to him speak on the environmental miracles he witnessed when he visited the oil sands.  And read how the 'oppressive progressives' tried to silence one of their own for doing so.

As Professor Robson has so often demonstrated, there is no need for us to wring our hands in desperation. We require solutions. Namely, demand that your elected representative support building a pipeline from Alberta to the east to renew use of Canadian ethical oil. Canada can and should do better!

http://www.vancouverobserver.com/news/rex-murphys-pro-oil-sands-speech-prompts-cbc-review-journalistic-rules

https://youtu.be/erh8Ew8ImP8