Canada’s Debate

If I were to ask you what the one thing that is universal in male-to-female courtship, I’d probably get a dozen different answers. Of course the girls would notice different things, as would the guys. (Note: I’m not speaking of homosexual courtship for the simple reason that I’ve never engaged in one… my ‘wealth’ of experience is somewhat limited.)

But lurking in the back of the heads for all the guys there would be one answer that they probably wouldn’t say out loud. Now I understand that everyone exaggerates themselves when they are dating, and to a certain extent we all “hide the crazy.” But for men (women, pipe up if this is true for you too) there is something else going on. We all “fake it.” This fakery can take the form of someone who always sucks in their chest a bit like, not to hide a gut so much as to make my chest look more impressive; or it could be pretending that you graduated on the Dean’s list when in reality you limped across the academic finish line. Some guys casually brush of the most traumatic/embarassing experiences of their lives, and others behave in ways that would shock their friends and family.

Contrary to popular belief, this isn’t just a part of the pursuit for boobies. We as people genuinely need to create a perception of ourselves that is completely divorced from reality; not so that they will sleep with us, so that they will respect us. Here’s where I draw the distinction between this behaviour and simple exaggeration…

Simple fact is that this behaviour is the key to politicking. More and more I’m noticing in politics that people ascribe traits to their politicians based on their behaviour, and that is disappointing because if nothing else is true of politics, it is a fact that the behaviour of ANYONE in a position of power is not an adequate reflection of the people that they are. Yes, we know for a fact that Brian Mulroney was a pompous ass, and no, I wouldn’t fuck Margaret Thatcher with a stolen dick, lest it freeze and I die of hypothermia. These observations however are extremely limited.

The reason why I am writing about this, when it is probably already apparent to just about anyone who follows politics is because I’ve finally had it with Canadian politicians. I mean, we expect our politicians to hide behind a veneer of some sort (except for Stockwell Day, who was every bit the waffling, ignorant fuck he acted.) But Paul Martin is a different sort of creature. He happily plugged along as finance minister making decisions that he was not hugely in favour of… he made nice with Jean Chretien, who he no doubt despised, and he did everything he could to avoid riding on his father’s coattails.

What I can’t figure out is why all of a sudden Canada’s politicians, writers, and even voters are trying so hard to pretend that Paul Martin pulled the wool over our eyes for so long. We all knew exactly who he was and what he would do despite the fact that the modus operandi in Ottawa is “fake it ’til you make it.” And now we are coming down on the guy for two reasons: doing exactly what we voted for him to do, and not doing things that we never asked him to do. Sure the minority government has been stalled… we all knew it would be. Sure there has been allegations of corruption and waste in the government; we all knew there was. But for some reason we all have our hate on for Paul Martin and his government for not advertising what we already knew was hidden. I don’t get the point of it all. I probably wouldn’t vote for Martin if I had a choice, but not for these reasons. Of course, I don’t have a choice… but it wouldn’t be a modern democracy if I did.