The Gift of Institutionalized, Bureaucratized Daycare
When Conservatives try to win voters in an electoral landscape filled with people who prefer the statist status quo, they generally try to appeal to non-tax and spend issues - stuff like transparency, corruption, etc.
All stuff that is fine and good, but it doesn't really involve the crux of what governments do. A government without corruption would be excellent, but at least in Canada, the perception and presence of corruption is not that big a deal in terms of what results the government can offer. Getting rid of corruption would be more emotionally satisfying than anything else. It would not rapidly make government more efficient, it would not make the results of our state much more impressive.
The Conservative game plan at least until earlier this year, particularly in April/May seemed to be to feed solely off the emotional anger caused by the sponsorship scandal. This plan, at least according to the polls, failed. Emotion can only keep people going for so long.
It's best to win voters by actually converting them to your ideology, though this is not always easy. It's best to help people to see through the big-government idea of the state that they've grown used to all their life. It's tough to do this through health care, especially on a large and public scale. In private, it is easy to tell friends that the lack of a private option in health care is tyrannical and unjust, but it's impossible for a political party to carry that message without being unfairly tarnished as Americanizers of the Canadian system (something that no one in Canada really wants. A private-parallel system would be good - for now.)
Daycare is different though. It's not the status quo. Institutionalized daycare has not been around before. It's not "part of the identity". It's not something that people have become dependent on. And because of all these reasons, it's the perfect tool with which to create ideological converts.
I've already convinced a few people to vote Conservative based on this issue alone. It's easy to play to people's feelings of self-reliance, of independence - and this may be non-PC to say, but this is especially true with males. I've ranted to a number of guys over the past 2 weeks about how small government makes much more sense than big government, how high taxes for high spending isn't necessary, how the Liberals approach all issues based on weakness, and how the Conservatives theoretically approach those issues based on strength (less hand-outs, less institutionalized social service bureaucracies, a stronger military and so on.)
If the issue of daycare wasn't out there, it wouldn't be possible for me to get those people riled up. It would be harder for me to get those people to question their pre-conceived notions on the rightful role of government.
The proposal to introduce a brand new bureaucracy which plans to institutionalize kids from the time they're a year old is a gift only because it's awakening people to the irrationality and patheticness of big government.
All stuff that is fine and good, but it doesn't really involve the crux of what governments do. A government without corruption would be excellent, but at least in Canada, the perception and presence of corruption is not that big a deal in terms of what results the government can offer. Getting rid of corruption would be more emotionally satisfying than anything else. It would not rapidly make government more efficient, it would not make the results of our state much more impressive.
The Conservative game plan at least until earlier this year, particularly in April/May seemed to be to feed solely off the emotional anger caused by the sponsorship scandal. This plan, at least according to the polls, failed. Emotion can only keep people going for so long.
It's best to win voters by actually converting them to your ideology, though this is not always easy. It's best to help people to see through the big-government idea of the state that they've grown used to all their life. It's tough to do this through health care, especially on a large and public scale. In private, it is easy to tell friends that the lack of a private option in health care is tyrannical and unjust, but it's impossible for a political party to carry that message without being unfairly tarnished as Americanizers of the Canadian system (something that no one in Canada really wants. A private-parallel system would be good - for now.)
Daycare is different though. It's not the status quo. Institutionalized daycare has not been around before. It's not "part of the identity". It's not something that people have become dependent on. And because of all these reasons, it's the perfect tool with which to create ideological converts.
I've already convinced a few people to vote Conservative based on this issue alone. It's easy to play to people's feelings of self-reliance, of independence - and this may be non-PC to say, but this is especially true with males. I've ranted to a number of guys over the past 2 weeks about how small government makes much more sense than big government, how high taxes for high spending isn't necessary, how the Liberals approach all issues based on weakness, and how the Conservatives theoretically approach those issues based on strength (less hand-outs, less institutionalized social service bureaucracies, a stronger military and so on.)
If the issue of daycare wasn't out there, it wouldn't be possible for me to get those people riled up. It would be harder for me to get those people to question their pre-conceived notions on the rightful role of government.
The proposal to introduce a brand new bureaucracy which plans to institutionalize kids from the time they're a year old is a gift only because it's awakening people to the irrationality and patheticness of big government.
posted by Japnaam Singh at
11:45 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home