Global Research

Once again Canada’s Foreign Minister, Chrystia Freeland, jumps on the anti-Russia bandwagon, mimicking the rhetoric stemming from Hillary Clinton’s failed presidential run and the fabrications of the DNC, the FBI, CIA, Christopher Steele, and a whole menagerie of other elements.  It is not surprising given her historical background relationship with Ukraine and her support of the US supported Maidan coup. While she insists “rule of law” is not a “smorgasbord” from which to pick and choose, she and her cohorts in the Liberal party appear to do just that in many cases ranging from Huawei, Venezuela, and Israel on the international scene to the recent SNC-Lavalin affair for domestic policies.  But that aside, this is greater than the rule of law, it is all about foreign meddling, not by the Chinese, nor the Venezuelans, but by her favorite, Russia.

At the recent G7 meeting one of the man topics was Russian interference.  During that discussion, Freeland stated,

“Our judgment is that interference is very likely and we think there have probably already been efforts by malign foreign actors to disrupt our democracy.”

British Foreign Secretary Jeremy Hunt, added some nuance,

“We know that states like Russia have got a very active, planned, thought-through strategy to interfere in democratic processes in Western countries and [to sow] dissension and chaos wherever they can.”

So it is not the actual vote being meddled with – it is me, the voter – they are trying to mess with my head and create dissension and chaos wherever I can.  Okay, part of that is true, I am a dissenting voice to the status quo, but don’t blame the Russians, I did it all on my own…I think.

What the nature of this chaos is I am not sure.

• Is it the truckers rally/drive across Canada to protest the lack of a pipeline?
• Is it the indigenous people blocking a road on their unceded territory?
• Is it electing populists like Doug Ford who rant on about the carbon tax?
• Is it the many women who turned their backs on Trudeau during the recent Daughters of the Vote who sat in Parliament for a day – or that some of them actually rose and left when opposition leader Scheer was to speak?
• Is it the barrage of anti-identity issues put forth by the conservative right wing?  Without their definition of chaos and dissension, it is hard to tell.

Voter’s dilemma

But for me and the Russians, it all boils down to whom will I give my vote.

The Liberals are not doing what the Liberals promised to do and are obviously hand in hand with the corporations and financial benefactors rather than with the environment, voting changes promoting democracy, and any real movement on indigenous affairs, especially concerning the Indian Act of 1867, not to mention using “rule of law” as a smorgasbord.  Further, their foreign policy is so in line with U.S foreign policy I wonder why we bother pretending to be an independent state.  So I don’t want to vote for them.  Sunny ways have given way to cloudy days.

I might as well vote for the Conservatives as then at least I know what I am getting – a business oriented neoliberal government that sides with the U.S. on all foreign affairs issues.  However, their domestic policies and slash and burn budgets – some call it austerity – that feed the rich and ignore the poor are something I cannot countenance and obviously I do not accept their foreign policy either.

Next is where some might think my natural tendencies might lie, with the supposedly socialist NDP.  Yet again their foreign policies line up neatly with the two main parties, meaning they also support all the foreign policy garbage emanating from the U.S.    Even their domestic policies do not add up to expectations about workers or the environment although they are pretty good when it comes to the group of issues labelled ‘identity politics’ – as are all other parties to some degree including the Conservatives if one can avoid the more right wing grass roots rants.

The Bloc Québecois are out as I am not a Québecer leaving me with the lowly Green Party, a party I should have strong affinity for as well.  While Elizabeth May does not want a coup in Venezuela she does want regime change, although disguised as a peaceful change with fair elections.  Nothing about U.S. sanctions causing the majority of the problems.  She calls for an “honest broker” and says the Vatican, as a member of the UN,  that “the Office of the Holy See could be the right institution to calm the waters”.  Nice image…but an honest broker?  The Catholic church?  The ones that destroyed the liberation theology of its own clergy in Latin America?

As well, Ms May had to be voted down by her own party for her condemnation of the BDS movement against Israel, a peaceful action defying the colonial-settler state.  As with all other Canadian parties, the Greens still support the now impossible two state solution – a solution that was never in the cards from the beginning anyway.  It has always served as a talking point diversion while creating more settlements and an apartheid state.

So what am I to do?  I do not at this point like any of them.  Do I hold my breath and vote for the least offensive, hoping something might change?  Do I simply look at the local candidates and see how far they have swallowed the party line?  Do I choose not to vote (and yes I would still have the right to complain)?

So carry on Russia, keep messing with my head.  Perhaps one day I can use that as an excuse within the “rule of law” – by way of insanity – for the choices I make.

*

Note to readers: please click the share buttons below. Forward this article to your email lists. Crosspost on your blog site, internet forums. etc.

Jim Miles is a frequent contributor to Global Research.