Columnists
Flashback to the ’60s
You won’t want to mess with me on this, because I am a child of the ‘60s. I didn’t take drugs, and the whole concept of ‘free love’ never banged on my door, so I have a pretty clear memory of the chaos of the late era.
In one of those waking hours, when my body clock says, “Wake up Steve, it’s writing time,” I started to see a connection between what happened then, and what is happening now, right here.
Let me stage this in the manner of the time. You will know where I’m headed with this:
1968: People were upset. Many books have been written on how upset we were. Young people were screaming in the streets, and forming protests, against a government that would not hear their voice. Bad things happened, because the more the government turned away from its people, the more violent it got.
Basically, there’s nothing more frustrating than trying to send a potent message to a government that refuses to listen. I watched this crazy, undefinable insurrection of people versus government from the comfort of my County home—rooting like a football game for my home team, while watching it spiral into a big ball of pain.
GOOD THING GONE BAD
That peaceful movement of protest quickly evolved into a dozen different factions. From simple anti-war protests, it grew into the Black Panthers, the Weathermen, groups of people lured into taking action. That ended at Kent State, the burning of an Army recruitment centre, and the occupation of University admin offices. Lockdown, and more pain.
All this because no one would listen. The point here is that things tend to escalate. At the time, Nixon and his ilk just carried on and, when this didn’t work, sent in the National Guard. [We don’t have one, so that’s okay.]
CONTROVERSY
Sorry for the long preamble, but time to bring it home. I read a lot. I listen a lot. It occurred to me in the middle of the night: What happens when a government doesn’t listen to its people?
Sure, we don’t have a Nixon, may he rest in peace, having been exonerated for his sins, given a thumbs up and a mighty ex-president pension.
But I’m troubled by the similarities to our little County today.
BRIEF INTERLUDE
In case you didn’t get it, the Peace Movement lost its way because it fragmented, and lost the original unified message. Peace. Pretty simple. Those who joined had their own agendas, and adulterated the original concept: Listen to the people. And that brings us here.
USING YOUR VOICE
That’s what started my chain of thought. People are talking; no one is listening. I felt that back in 1968. I was a kid then, but nothing has changed.
Strange isn’t it? Nothing has changed though everything has changed. But no, it hasn’t.
FRAGMENTATION
I’ve said this so many times, I can’t believe I need to say it again: The County is not united.
This is important. We all do what we do. We all have our personal windmills to tilt at. This is a good thing. Protect Picton Bay? Gotcha. Crazy multi-million dollar water scheme? Gotcha. Protect the North Shore … that’s a new one, but Gotcha. Save the South Shore? Well done. Stop the wind turbines? Gotcha. They gained the power to do what needed to be done, and did it. Crazy building development on a massive scale? Don’t get it.
Simply, we fight to save the things that are important to us, but we—the residents of the County—are suffering that thing from 1968. We are fighting our private battles alone. That’s not enough. As individuals, and groups, we state our case to governments. But, as a County influence, we have no united voice.
We will need one.
Flashing back to 1968, we do not have the collective power to say, “STOP.” Here we are again. We can win our chosen battles, and revel in our success, and maybe go home satisfied or disappointed, but we can’t win the war.
WHAT WE WANT IS NOT WHAT WE GET
The whole concept of democracy has lost its meaning. I wrote about this before. We rave about democracy— the ability to have governments follow the will of the people—but it is a joke.
In Canada, this concept of democracy was lost years ago. Not with our government leaders, but with a change in attitude around the 1950s.
Then we would elect leaders, for whatever crazy belief system drove us to vote. And we would trust them to run things. Things were simpler then: I vote Tory, because I’m a Tory, and so on. Cast your vote, go home, having done your civic duty.
THINGS CHANGED
Used to be people voted Conservative, because they believed in the Conservative platform. Ditto with the other parties. That was before television coverage and internet and ‘fake news’ and IT creations of events that never actually happened.
The concept of a solid platform: “This is what we stand for,” is long gone. Polls tell the parties what they need to stand for. Debates tell us who won and lost, like results from a football game.
I look around the County, and I see a pile of groups defending their own thing: Saving birds and turtles; protecting the shore; protecting our water; protecting our land from invasive development; protecting that place in the country you love, threatened by huge proposals for mega-resorts, right next to your chosen idyllic dream home retreat.
And all we get to do is watch.
We have wins and losses but, like the ‘60s, we choose our ground and stand on it.
I talk to a lot of people. They have concerns I don’t understand, because they are not really my concerns. But they really are. Fawcetteville? Wellington water? Picton Terminals? They all combine to say one thing: Where we are headed is not where we want to go. Ask anybody.
In short, our leadership is not delivering what we want, what we live for.
A WORD ABOUT COUNCIL
Council is an entity. We hear what ‘Council’ has decided. But Council is a group. What Council decides can be a seven to six edict. To me, if you have a 7/6 response there is more to explore. But no. Seven to six is not a decision—it is a ‘not quite sure’, in which six people have concerns, and seven do not. Blaming ‘Council’ does not say everyone agrees, and goes out for beers to celebrate. Watch how your councillors perform. Do they act on the will of the people, or devote themselves to a scheme which puzzles us?
Comments (0)