[An email I didn’t send]
Interesting conversation.
The neocons would turn our parliamentary democracy into a monarchist-feudalist empire where the charity whims of powerful Lords decide whether the starving live or die.
[No Blaming. No Guilt. Just an year-end analysis, from a quite conservative actually, perspective. :) ]
All three major Canadian political parties have signed on to this 'partners' Faustian Bargain. This legal framework of charity status is the structure by which the state continues to apply the neo feudal vision today towards a un-gloved autocracy in the future (as power corrupts - absolute power corrupts absolutely; by 'partnering' with transnational corporations our governments forfeit their power - the root of all which is a plurality of the people's will - to the global financial plutocracy).
As we are now beginning to see more clearly every day - we are not 'partners' with financialized transnational corporations; they pretend to join our sustainability movements but only apparently - only in order to slow down the change that impacts their business models. We win here, but then lose here and here - and in the end* - we always lose.
Good Governance is the management of tensions between societal forces - the people represented by their elected government acting to mitigate the power of the most powerful - there cannot be a 'partnership' between the lion and the lamb.
When one breaks down a little bit of that which I have described above one discovers that ownership of an entity vs working for an entity is a defining thread which consistently and reliably describes the reason why one side of the argument always seems to win or draw - and the incremental progress we 'win' has us headed for a deadly head-on collision with reality.
One last thing I'll note ... Since I began this more radical (intersectional?) tactics - with the Climate Emergency connection to biking advocacy that I began to take last year, and here, applying an equity lens to the transportation infrastructure discussion - I know (small 'l') liberals pretend to want a big tent - but as soon as Class or a Marxist view is offered as a catalyst towards a truth - the tent all of a sudden seems to suddenly involuntarily constrict - like a guttural spasm that results is expectoration. :)
This division of progressives into a infinitely fragmented nit-picking, is a function of cold war psychological operations messaged upon the people by our governments who implement this policy in order to protect private property interests in the plutocracy from increased state ownership that does not benefit them (socialism for the corporations; rugged individualism for working people; capitalist boss: 'I am against any bailout that don't bailout our company').
I hope this doesn't proceed that way. (Not that I see that happening in this group - just a new year's overview of trends :)
Progressive IT philosopher and book publisher Tim O'Reilly, owner of O'Reilly Media puts it this way: "Create more value than you capture." (-> view pop-up video off their font page - https://www.oreilly.com/)
Ref: * "And in the end, the love you take, is equal to the love you make ..." - Beatles | Abbey Road | The End | link
Happy Holidays,
Michael H