Site Administrator Of:

Supporter Of:


Stating the obvious

Shorter Jeffery Simpson: Harper is the biggest control freak in Canadian history.

No kidding. I think most of us who are politically aware had come to that conclusion already.

On that same theme, go read Steve to see who Harper may have picked his control freak tactics up from.


11 comments to Stating the obvious

  • TG

    Harper; ?ethical ?control ?freak, ?Dion ?and ?the Liberal ?team, ?200 ?plus ?scams, all ?verified ?in ?Canadian ?press ?such ?as ?The ?National ?Post. ?And ?now ?one ?more ?*current* scam…

    Now Judy Sgro*s daughter. Just google *Small Dead Animals*, and;

    Yet I am with you on the *GREEN* side of things. AlGore and Mr. *Fruitfly* trying to bring some enviro-awareness to the unthinking masses.

    Pollution is the culprit of course, however *Global Warming* [snowing in Brazil today], is a good ploy to get people*s attention. ?[Brazil: 85% on ?Bio-fuels]

    Personally, I can*t wait for an efficient EV or compressed air automobile. No more $400 a month for dangerous smelly Exxon-Mobile fuel that I pump into my car while staff sit in the store, warm and dry.

    Did you know that Paris taxis run on compressed air? Like a steam engine with no heat and no steam. Did you know that Tata Motors India produce the compressed air car for Indians at three to $4000 each?

    Did you know that good battery technology exists and Chevron holds the patents? We could have been driving electric cars since 1992 since the GM EV-1. Ever watch *Who killed the Electric car?*

    Is it possible that Chevron, Exxon and General Motors have common shareholders? Interesting that Exxon-Mobile produce a special polymer film for modern lightweight Lithium -Poly batteries. The very basic requirement for a firesafe large format power pack for automotive use. = TG


  • I would say Harper gets some of his ideas from Strauss although he is like a more extreme version in terms of control compared to Trudeau and Chretien who both generally were more controlling than Martin, although not nearly as controlling as Harper.  His idea might be since the above two were more successful than the last one, he should follow their approach.  Off course he forgets more Canadians are by nature liberal philosophically than conservative, so fair or not fair, Liberals can get away with things Conservatives cannot.

    Still I must say I find his level of control rather disturbing.  In fact I've argued the Conservative Party is really more of a Harper party since rather than being a team and based around a certain set of values, the party seems more to about Harper and nothing else.  When it comes to ideology, whatever ideology he subscribes to is the party's values rather than the party have a set of values and those with similiar values joining.

  • "So why don't you answer my question directly?"

    I don't answer your question directly, because there is now way to verify that I'm telling the truth–so any assertion would just seem very silly.

    Besides, at this point my posts in assertion of Leo Strauss's signficance here are starting to look more and more pretentious all the time.  And I have found that appearance is everything.
    Better not say more.   Anyway, I think I pose an interesting question about Strauss in one of the Blogs Canada comment boxes. I ask whether Strauss saw Hobbes as a political hedonist.

    Written too much already. I don't want to clutter up Scott's comment boxes.

    Glenn Fitzgerald.

    P.S: really sorry about the double post, folks.

  • Not really. Strauss encouraged scholars to go back and read the original texts.

    But your point is well taken. It just seems that alot of people are content to learn everything they want to know about Strauss from Drury and left-wing columnists.

  • Sometimes, Aaron, secondary sources are a good thing, especially if they can tease out hidden meanings and assumptions that the primary author may not be aware of, or may not wish to admit openly.

    After all, wasn't that the whole point of Straussian analysis?

  • Umm, okay. I've read both pieces and don't understand why they would lead me to be certain that you do read Strauss. So why don't you answer my question directly?

    If you want to know what Strauss think, read Strauss. Not Drury. Drury is not completely off base, but she deals with only a miniscule bit of Strauss' vast writings. I'm assuming that you, as a fervent reader of his original texts, know this and that you were therefore just kidding when you claimed that she was "the world's foremost expert on Strauss"?

  • Aaron, visit two of my recent posts at Blogs Canada, and then ask me whether I've read Strauss.


    P.S: I wouldn't stop at reading Strauss, though, I consider Shadia Drury (Professor of Political Philosophy) the world's foremost expert on Strauss.  So Drury comes highly recommended.

  • Dear Glenn, have you ever read any of Strauss' books? Just wondering. Alot of people nowadays amazingly become Strauss experts without ever reading anything he wrote.

  • I agree with Burlivespipe. Probably Harper has dabbled in more than a few, "ideas and plots from a variety of sources."

    But there's the central idea of Straussian philosophy which over-arches all those ideas. That central idea is the idea of an absolutely powerful elite which exists in the class of philsosopher god-kings relative to the ordinary citizen.

    All roads to tyranny, whether Stalin or Hitler, eventually lead to Leo Strauss's ideal of the all powerful philosopher God-Kings—just as the old adage goes about how all roads lead to Rome.

    Glenn Fitzgerald

    PS: I don't know WHAT happened to my previous post—all the typing got garbled.

  • I agree with Glenn that Straussian themes are everywhere. But Harpor has adapted many ideas and plots from a variety of sources, stalin, strauss, rove.
    Note that none of these people ever make it on People's Most Liked List, or Harrowsmith's Most Trustworthy and Kind charts.
    Give the stiff, stuffed shirt some credit, tho. He has his robot chickens truly well trained. While the CONs have lost 2 backbenchers to a variety of scathing ethical quandries, they also found a few opportunistic Liberals who seemed to have no qualms over changing their tune — Emerson, Comuzzi, Khan.
    That the silent brigade of blue, which includes those in cabinet unless spoken to, remains fairly intact is an amazing feat. But I won't bet against the fact that cracks are starting to show…
    After all, he is no closer to a majority government now than he was when Martin had his campaign meltdown.

  • Scott, here is what Steves says:

    “…who said that Stephen Harper’s political mentor was Joseph Stalin.”

    or If you made a mistake or see something you wish to change, you may click on your name and/or comment to edit. You haveDon’t you think it’s far more likely that Harper has taken his cues on leadership from Leo Strauss, the philosophical father of neo-conservatism?? After all, Harper does maintain quite close (some would say admiring)?ties to the Bush Administration.

    Strauss, I’m sure,?believed in the god-like status of the state and its leadership. He also subscribed to the notion that?the elites whom govern?require secrecy about their real goals from any electorate.?

    I think the Stalin comparison is a lot less realistic than the neoconservative one.?

    Here is one piece which delves a lot more deeply into the neoconservative movement:

    Glenn Fitzgerald. ?

unique visitors since the change to this site domain on Nov 12, 2008.