I think some remarks by way of an overview of the situation are in order.
By and large the people who run things in any jurisdiction in the world are loathe to run a political campaign on real political issues. Just thinking
of it is to chuckle. Running a political campaign on the actual pertinent political issues of the day would be to allow ordinary voters to have a say
in determining where considerable amounts of money flow.
That is the sort of thing that very powerful financial and political operators take great pains to avoid. The real political fights go on behind the
scene among groups of the powerful. The outcomes of these battles, fought in the realms of business and finance, between combinations
powerful interests, ultimately determine who is going to be elected . . . most of the time.
Once in a great while, when the elected puppets of the financial and industrial oligarchs or powerful trade unions become too corrupt and too free and
self indulgent in the way that they spend taxpayer money, it becomes impossible for the string pullers in the background to control the outcome of an
election, no matter how slavishly and unscrupulously one or more media outlets may cooperate in vilifying one candidate to the advantage of
This was the situation during the electoral campaign that brought Rob Ford to the Mayor's office and some degree of power
. Try as they might,
with media help, the powers that be could not keep him from being elected.
Toronto had long suffered the results of a culture of entitlement that had grown like fungus or mold among the elected representatives of the people,
over a period of time. The incumbent Mayor, David Miller
, was seen, rightly or wrongly, as indecisive, capricious and overly reliant on tax
levies as the solution to all problems of funding.
Miller was someone who came out of the left wing of Canadian politics.
, if she were to run, would be operating out of the same New Democratic Party (the party of big unions) political support structure
as David Miller. Olivia Chow, like Miller, would be beholden to big unions in the aftermath of an election.
This is very important to keep in mind, the relationship between big unions and candidates of the left.
It is the key to understanding why
there is little difference between a candidate of the left and a candidate of the right, particularly in a Toronto mayoralty race
is a candidate of the right. He is a member of the Progressive Conservative Party of Ontario. He was a cabinet minister when that
party formed the provincial government. The "Conservative" party is the party of big business. It is the party to which financial and industrial
oligarchs look, to further their interests.
The interests of the big unions and of big business are one and the same.
Both groups want to obtain large amounts of tax dollars (my money and yours) through government spending on all manner of projects, but mostly on
building and maintaining infrastructure in the Toronto metropolitan area.
Rob Ford regards himself as a candidate of the right but also as a candidate of the people
I think he is probably a "conservative", in terms of party politics, but I am not sure that he truly understands his position vis a vis
conservative establishment in the province. Nobody on the right came to his rescue as the center/left newspaper, The Toronto Star
ridiculed his campaign and his supporters day after day leading up to his, and the people's
victory on election day.
That, more than anything else, should confirm in people's minds that Ford is indeed a people's candidate, who is trying to serve the city as a whole,
not a special interest group whether on the right or on the left.
We had a mayor like that once. He was considered both "tiny" and "perfect". During his time, Toronto started to think of itself as "New York run by
the Swiss". His name was David Crombie
Rob Ford is neither "tiny" nor "perfect", but he comes out of the Crombie school of thought that regards a city as greater than the sum of it's
special interest groups. This is dangerous thinking for people who like the way things had been going in Toronto. Ford's appearance as a candidate was
a major threat to those groups and might and main was moved by the Toronto Star to keep this man from altering the flow of tax payers' money out of
city coffers into the hands of people who had got used to getting their "taste".
I think John Tory, is seen, in the halls of the mighty, as a compliant figure who will restore the status quo ante bellum
, that is, the
situation as it existed before The First Fordic War
, in which the Toronto Star was left with elephant footprints all over its sorry editorial
corpse. The paper, as Torontonians know, has been screeching ever since.
The Second Fordic War
, this current electoral campaign, will be much different because The Star has carried on a continual succession of
assaults on the Mayor's conduct of his public and personal life in its pages since he took office. This has been most damaging.
Against the background of artificially inflated emotional turbulence a bland, picturesquely charming, jodhpurs wearing, riding tack toting social
anachronism, like radio wave airhead, John Tory, might be just what a frayed electorate will vote for. Having him in office will be like having a
Currier and Ives print on the wall or fondling an Hermes scarf while sipping a glass of Madeira and trying to decide whether to fire the gardener or
bang the pool boy, not that those two examples are equivalent.
(Note to self from cerebrum: The above paragraph is a disgrace, though true in spirit.)
Ford is trouble because Ford does not represent any particular special interest group. Those groups, both on the left (Olivia Chow) and on the rght
(John Tory) want Ford gone.
This brings me to the most important point. Both Right and Left want the city to spend money, because both Right (contractors
) and Left
) get paid with city (taxpayer
Toronto has a history of bad planning. That is why we are in the transit fix that we are in.
This next bit is very, very important, so, dear reader, open both eyes WIDE OPEN. (Torontonians, that's the "lids up" position.)
BAD PLANNING IS IN THE INTERESTS OF BOTH CANDIDATES OF THE RIGHT AND CANDIDATES OF THE LEFT.
(Re-read until it sinks in.)
The reason is that both contractors (right) and unions (left) are paid whether you are building it or whether you are tearing it down or whether you
are fixing it.
If you are a candidate representing one of the major special interest groups, whether financial services (right), contractors (right) or unions
(left), bad planning is better for your
constituents than good planning.
That, in a nutshell, is why Toronto is the way it is. That is why transit is the way it is. That is why all the things that don't make sense about
Toronto are the way they are. Bad planning pays certain politically influential pressure groups
better than good planning.
That is why certain groups tried to prevent Ford from being elected and why they want him out of office.
Ford serves all of the people and the city as a whole and that is bad for the business of people whose business is profiting from an endless cycle of
edit on 4-3-2014 by ipse
edit on 4-3-2014 by ipsedixit because: (no reason given)