Jacob Schiff
Chicago, Illinois
James Laxer responds:
Sean Carrie contends that my goal is to convince Americans that they should entrust their “imperial” project to the United Nations. To the contrary, my starting point is that such projects constitute a dead end for humanity. I believe that the American imperial project is unsustainable in its present form, in part because the American ruling class is unwilling to bear its burdens, and that the American empire delivers neither democracy nor material wellbeing to the Iraqis and others that it claims to liberate. We need to shed the temptation to think, as do Michael Ignatieff and others, that the American empire can play a civilizing, nation-building role in places like Iraq. Where missions to rescue peoples from ethnic cleansing, genocide, and other crimes against humanity are needed, it is to the United Nations that we should turn, not to America or its would-be imperial successors. I am hopeful that Canadians, and others in second-tier countries, may be willing to make the large investment needed to underwrite such a role for the UN. It is my further hope that many Americans, who recognize the existence of an American empire as Jacob Schiff does not, will organize for a non-imperial future for their country, seeing in this the last, best hope for American democracy.
The Happy Minority
I was pleased to read Paul Adams’ views on the efficacy of a minority government in Canada (“Revenge Of The Small,” September). That we’ve managed to thwart an early election, get a budget passed, and pass breakthrough legislation on same-sex marriage is a sign that the government is working. We are the inhabitants and stewards of a rapidly dwindling resource base; a new and sometimes messy minority government is just a benign start to what Canadians face in the twenty-first century.
To push the political envelope further, the day may come when our first-past-the-post system changes to a form of proportional representation. While this prospect frightens some, it is key to increasing diversity within governments. Imagine a Canadian government that includes a First Nations coalition or a Green Party coalition or even gender parity among cabinet ministers. Now that would be a sweet revenge.
Nina Pruesse
Midland, Ontario
Paul Adams wishfully predicts that under a minority parliament, Bloc MPs might start “breaking ranks with their party to take positions important to their constituents.” This misses the fact that the Bloc actually has a strong, united vision that does not have to be questioned by their constituents: the Bloc’s vision for Canada is a Canada without Quebec. If the separatists win the next election in Quebec, Canadians can expect another referendum. Faced with such an event, a minority government in Ottawa will likely not have the strength or consensus to combat such an attack.
If anything, Adams’ article is evidence of the problem that neither Liberals nor Conservatives have guiding visions for Canada. After all, the Liberal minority government was quite willing to accomplish some of the ndp’s goals this past session. The fractured political leadership of the country’s two largest parties only reflects the lack of a coherent plan for our future. Taken alongside the Green Party’s increased funding in the last election, our present political period seems one of party building and rebuilding, or fighting for time until the conclusion of the Gomery Inquiry, rather than a successful experiment in minority governing.
Peter Ryan
Fort Erie, Ontario
Comments