“Archbishop Bannon” versus “Unelected President Musk”

 If you had any illusions about MAGA having taken on cult-like traits, you only need to read some of Bannon’s statements in this article.

He instructed Musk to “sit back and study” to understand MAGA’s - and what supporters believed was Trump’s - America First stance to keep U.S. jobs for Americans.

“They’re recent converts,” Bannon saidTuesday on his War Roompodcast, referring to Musk and other tech-world Trump supporters.

“We love converts,” Bannon noted. “But the converts sit in the back and study for years and years and years to make sure you understand the faith and you understand the nuances of the faith and understand how you can internalize the faith.”

This is Bannon putting himself in the place of being the high priest of MAGA, and setting up for quite the “palace power struggle” once Trump is sworn into office.  Interesting stuff.  

While it’s been clear for quite some time that MAGA is very cult-like, deliberately avoiding facts for whatever conspiracy theory of the day has been ladled out to them through the disinformation networks.  The idea that Trump has been “persecuted” by the Biden administration because of the criminal prosecutions that stem from his actions both before becoming President in 2016, and leading up to the Jan 6 storming of the capitol.  

Bannon talking about “new converts” is very interesting all by itself - speaking quite directly to the quasi-religious nature of MAGA as a system of beliefs.  I might disagree that there is anything systemic about MAGA beliefs, but then Bannon goes on to talk about “studying” the faith for “many years”.  That itself is also very intriguing language.  

MAGA is, at best a collection of conspiracy theories and counter-factual narratives - it hardly has a coherent narrative that one would expect from a formal religion.  However, Bannon seems to be positioning himself as the “Speaker for MAGA” in Trump’s circle - and that all by itself is interesting.  Clearly he sees himself in the role of the cleric at the shoulder of the king, advising the king on how to keep the peasants happy.  

To the extent that he can do that, it makes Bannon potentially quite politically powerful - and certainly a rival to players like Musk and Ramaswamy in the Trump White House.  However, it’s also a dangerous conceit for Bannon to think that a volatile rabble like MAGA is going to obey his word.  The issue will come to a head when Trump and Bannon disagree on something that Musk / Ramaswamy want to do.  

At its most fundamental level, MAGA is about self interest and deifying ignorance and feelings over knowledge and evidence.  Musk is ultimately about his own self-interest, but his self-interest is not going to align with that of most individual MAGA followers - the ones who currently believe Bannon - but will they believe Bannon when Trump aligns himself with Musk?  Or will they pivot to following Trump’s word?  

Bannon might be the high priest, but Trump is their putative saviour … 

About “Forced Treatment” and Homelessness

I need to comment on the political pressure to force people experiencing addiction into treatment. Superficially, it seems to address a problem in society, but the reality is that this is a political approach to the wrong problem. 

Is addiction (and the deaths resulting from a toxic drug supply) a problem?  Absolutely.  Is this a solution to the social issues that are being assigned to addicts?  No.

Let me explain myself. 

Let’s assume for a moment that forced treatment will actually work, and produces a stream of people who are now former addicts.  Most of the people we are going to push into these programs are likely homeless, and therefore living fairly rough lives.  If they’re “lucky” they might be able to sleep in shelters, or have a room in a decrepit old hotel now being used as housing.  (Neither environment is exactly a good place to live - and a lot of the same factors that lead to drug use exist in both). 

At the end of the treatment program, we (theoretically) are going to release these newly sober people back into society.  Guess what?  You’ve just released a “newly sober” homeless person back into the same environment they were in before.  How long do you think it’s going to be before they relapse when suddenly all their old buddies are around, and urging them to participate in the same activities?  

Sure, creating these “shiny” facilities that we can sweep the homeless people into makes all the suburban types happy -  they don’t have to look at the people who have ended up at the bottom of the social and economic ladders any more. 

But, unless you are addressing all of the issues that lead to homelessness in a constructive manner, guess what?  You’re just creating the same “revolving door” problem that we complain about in the criminal justice systems.  Once that door starts spinning, not only do you have problems with relapse, but the risk of overdose goes up as well.  Oh, and let’s not ignore the effects of “institutionalization” that happen when someone spends extended periods in an environment where they have little or no control over their daily existence.

There are a myriad of issues that need to be addressed:  housing, income, mental health, addiction, socialization (including integration with society), and a dozen other factors.  Treatment for addiction is but one facet of a much more complex problem that we need to think about intelligently.  Reactionary politics aimed at people freaking out over seeing a discarded syringe somewhere is missing the point, entirely.  

These problems didn’t appear overnight, and they won’t “go away” overnight because suddenly we give police the ability to round people up and force them into treatment.  At best you’re sweeping things under the carpet and hoping they’ll go away on their own after that.  They won’t.  They don’t.  The solutions to these problems require all of us to take notice and realize that the systems we live in aren’t working the way they should and major change is needed. 

When a person working full time can’t afford a decent place to live, we have created a problem - and no, the “invisible hand” of the free market isn’t going to fix that.  There are fundamental problems in our society that are the precursors to homelessness and addiction.  

Alberta's Anti-Trans Legislation

So, now that the UCP has rolled out their anti-trans legislation, we can take a long look at it.  Yesterday, they tabled 3 related bills and earlier in the week they tabled their amendments to the "Alberta Bill of Rights".  I'm not the fastest read of law, and I suspect that some of the legislation has been created to tangle the courts up.  So ... this is probably part 1 of a series.  

Anyways, let's dive in.

The UCP AGM Resolutions - Part 2

 Yesterday, I talked about how fully 1/3 of the resolutions in the upcoming UCP AGM were distinctly anti-transgender.  Today, I want to look at the picture that the overall resolutions document paints about the UCP in its current form. 

Broadly speaking, the policy resolutions fall into a few big categories:  (Note: I have summarized the resolution in my own words - so you'll find a significant amount of snark in there)

Separatist / Ottawa Is Evil Grievances

Resolution #5 - Ban carbon taxes 

Resolution #6 - Ottawa is asserting too much control over Alberta  

Resolution #10 - Ban on agreements with Ottawa by organizations that exist under the jurisdiction of the Alberta government.  (Expansion of the "municipalities can't take money from Ottawa w/out Alberta government approval)  

Resolution #15 - Alberta has to have control over immigration (honorary additional placement under racism - because we all know that this is about keeping Alberta white too) 

Resolution #21 - Alberta should further distance itself from Ottawa (go Separatists!) 

Conspiracy Theories / Hate Mongering / Racism

Resolution #1 - Eliminate Diversity Equity and Inclusion

Resolution #2 - Banning transgender women from washrooms/change rooms/etc. 

Resolution #4 - Banning minors from "sexually explicit performances" (e.g. Drag events?)

Resolution #7 - Parental rights (anti-trans/anti-2SLGBTQ)

Resolution #8 - Parental rights / parents dictate curriculum

Resolution #12 - CO2 is really good for us!  

Resolution #13 - Elected officials should not engage with WHO, WEF, or the UN (apparently) 

Resolution #14 - Defund treatment for transgender people  

Resolution #15 - Alberta has to have control over immigration (honorary additional placement under racism - because we all know that this is about keeping Alberta white too)  

Resolution #16 - There can only be two sexes!!!!  

Resolution #19 - Protect crown lands from seizure by the UN(? - clearly aimed at aboriginal rights, so it goes under racism.)  

Resolution #23 - Hold the AHRC accountable for the decisions they make (Because apparently religious freedoms are being suppressed?) 

Resolution #25 - No digital ID!!! (Uh - okay - why?)

Resolution #27 - No vouching for other voters!  (because electoral fraud is rampant? I guess?)

Resolution #31 - DEI is evil and it creates reverse racism!

Resolution #32 - Force the so-called "Chicago Principles" on universities (because they're too left wing, donchaknow!)

Cheap Political Shots At Opponents

Resolution #2 - Banning Unions from donating monies to political parties 

Resolution #24 - The ATA is too powerful, so membership should be optional 

Resolution #34 - Recall should be easier to accomplish! (Because they couldn't overthrow Gondek last winter) 

Possibly Reasonable Stuff

Resolution #9 - Disclosure of funding sources for groups lobbying / protest against the government (This one also has tinges of conspiracy theory)

Resolution #11 - Utility Fees  

Resolution #17 - Force municipal plebiscites on land use changes (might be reasonable - but I doubt it)

Resolution #18 - Hey, we should do something about getting better at managing our forests and dealing with fires. (Ya think?!) 

Resolution #20 - Eliminate retention bonuses in the government bureaucracy.  (Watch the exodus as long term staffers up and leave for private sector roles that pay better...)

Resolution #21 - Promoting trades and technical training in schools. (could be reasonable, although we know conservatives hate education in colleges and universities ... so ...)   

Resolution #26 - We need to train more doctors in Alberta (No argument there - but don't bank on them hanging about afterwards any longer than they have to) 

Resolution #28 - Ban cell phones in schools. (Ill informed at best, unrealistic in any real sense) 

Resolution #29 - Rejig the food supply system to suit small production farms (Sure?  Realistic? Nope)

Resolution #30 - Modify the flat tax structure (a bit - not nearly enough) 

Resolution #33 - Landowner Rights - basically let's hamstring any kind of development or change by giving landowners a complete veto - that'll go well. 

Resolution #35 - Build reservoirs to ensure a dependable water supply (sure ... but let's ignore the pollution that strip mining mountains is going to create?) 

About 1/3 of these resolutions are topics that I would say are "legitimate matters of policy" - which is to say that it might be possible to have a meaningful and fulsome debate around the merits of the position being taken.  The rest is either thinly veiled separatist rhetoric, or nonsense that is rooted in hate, fear, and ignorance.  Think about that for a moment:  2/3 of the resolutions have nothing to do with reasonable and legitimate matters of government.  

In the world of conspiracy theories and suchlike, the resolutions are outright attacks on "out groups" (them who isn't us - basically), whether that is attacking transgender people or First Nations doesn't matter.  Attacking DEI is basically a claim of "reverse racism" (which isn't a thing - bias against minorities most definitely is).  Throw in a few random grievances about "free speech", and you have a good picture of what is going on here. 

The UCP isn't a party interested in making Alberta "better".  This is a party that is interested in suppressing those it dislikes, poking a stick in Ottawa's eye at every opportunity, and generally being difficult on everything else.  What does pass for serious(-ish) policy topics are often overly simplistic solutions to problems that are guaranteed to either fail or be impractical to implement.  

This is a party that has been overtaken by single-issue zealots who have agreed to mutual support as long as they don't have to compromise anything with the target of their ire.  

 

 

 

 

 

The 2024 UCP AGM Policy Resolutions

The UCP's policy resolutions were published on the party website the other day.  It's about as bad as you might expect, worse if you're a transgender person.   

Let's take a look, shall we? 

Dear Marlaina (Danielle)

So, you say you want to “depoliticize” the debate over your proposed horrors you wish to inflict on Alberta’s transgender youth?

The answer to that is “drop the legislation”. Do not proceed with it.  Do not attempt to restrict transgender people through legislation.  

To me, this is no different than your recent pandering to the fools who think “chemtrails” are a thing.  You need to stop giving oxygen to the frothing lunatics who have detached themselves from reality.  Not a single thing you have said about transgender people is true and making laws based not on evidence but misinformation is simply wrong. 

I’m sure that the discourse within the UCP is that all this “hate” coming from “the left” is entirely just “politics” - after all “the left” is never willing to be “reasonable”.  (Or so it seems to go within UCP circles). 

Who did you consult with?  You didn’t consult with the professionals who work with the transgender community, nor did you consult with the community itself and its organizations.  Consulting with a handful of trans folk who happen to belong to the UCP (and apparently believe the same nonsense you’re spouting) isn’t consultation.  

You want to talk about protecting trans youth?  How about protecting them from the bullying and harassment that they are subjected to constantly?  How about doing something to promote their humanity?  Instead, you make them out as some kind of threat to society.  

The UCP Hates You

The Alberta “United Conservative Party” hates you - and it’s with a level of visceral loathing that is inexplicable.  Live in an urban centre?  Well, the cancellation of the Green Line is one of many examples of their loathing for anyone that isn’t “them”.  

Then the National Post published some of the policy proposals that the party is looking at for this fall’s convention.  To call it ‘hate-filled’ is perhaps the kindest thing I can say about it.  The levels of ignorance and hatred contained in the motions is stunning, but also telling.