SQYD.studio

Hi all! Three weeks of off topic, but I gotta write what I fixate on. There isn’t anyone in charge of my thoughts, certainly not me. My geopolitical anxiety has been riding around 8/10 for a hot minute now- for reasons I’m not getting into here. So I figured the best way to feel like I’m involved in the flows of power of politics (without actually doing anything- I’m no activist) was to sit down and watch the entirety of the Canadian English Language Leaders Debate .

If you don’t know, we are based in Canada. Specifically in Ottawa, our national capital. It’s a government town so federal politics is always important here, but I think- again for obvious reasons I’m not getting into here- there are a lot of Canadians tuning in to this campaign who wouldn’t normally. Moreover, most Canadian’s have STRONG OPINIONS this go around. Almost like people are realizing that democratic governance has real impacts and isn’t just a game for the rich and powerful.*

So I figured why not throw my take out there. Here’s what I think of the major political parties represented in the debate. As we go I’ll try to unwind why I think the choice this election is both obvious and deeply weird. Let’s go in order of the projections from 338Canada from most likely to win to the least likely.

Liberal Party of Canada – Leader: Mark Carney

Mark is new to the Canadian political scene, but not to the international scene. He’s run both the Bank of Canada and the Bank of England. Money people seem to think he’s hot shit- and your mileage on that is entirely based on how much you trust money people. During the debate Carney was attacked from all sides (makes sense as his party is leading the polls). I think a lot of these shots landed, at least the ones coming from a progressive positions. Carney’s net worth isn’t super clear, he seems willing (at least in his time as a private investor) to make use of tax loopholes to avoid paying Canadian taxes, he inexpertly doges using the G-word to refer to a certain strip in the middle-east, and some of his first acts as prime-minister were to make tax cuts that would primarily benefit the wealthy. In terms of platform, the Liberals seem keen on keeping the programs in place that have proved popular (child care, dental, and pharmacare) while pushing for more government money for housing and energy development.**

Here’s the thing, I’m currently reading Mark’s book Values which was published in 2021. I’m a bit over the halfway mark, but I think I’ve read enough to get a solid idea of the guy. He obviously understands the dismal science, and I think he truly believes in the power of markets to shape the morals of society. He is, in my opinion, a true institutionalist. As a friend of mine put it, Carney is “the final boss of liberalism”. If elected I’d expect to see a spirited defense of the status quo and and attempt at honouring international agreements (e.g. carbon targets, NATO spending)- all with a slight tilt towards long-term stability in the financial sector (so sexy). The rich will continue to get richer- but in a very stable way.

This is weird because on the debate stage Carney was the only one who didn’t look like a politician. He got flustered, at times exasperated, but always felt like he was speaking from the heart rather than a prepared list of talking points- even when he was trying to duck out of the tough questions. This is strange right? To have to the outsider candidate be the stanch defender of business as usual? We live in zany times folks.

Conservative Party of Canada – Leader: Pierre Poilievre

If Carney is an outsider defending the establishment then Poilievere is the career politician representing change. Yet more proof this election is from the mirror universe. I’m just not sure what the Conservatives represent here is change for the better. Their platform seems to be tax cuts, deregulation, and maximizing oil and gas development. They talk a lot about cost of living for ordinary Canadians- but nothing to me suggests they have a plan to address it. Pierre has proven himself willing to wade into the (very dumb) culture war from time, but only when he thinks only his base is watching.

In my opinion, he’s running the political playbook of a certain american president***. Here’s the catch- the guy he’s trying to emulate is a political outsider. The orange dude is shameless, doesn’t care what he says, and talks to the media all the time. Mr. Poilievre is a politician to the core. He cares deeply about his image, he speaks only in talking points that have been approved by an army of campaign staffers, and he’s been hiding from the media his whole campaign. Point is: you can’t be a populist demagogue if you are a charisma-less clown of a man. I don’t like this guy- and it seems like Canadians broadly agree. There’s only one poll that maters though, so we will find out on April 28th.

Canada’s New Democratic Party – Leader: Jagmeet Singh

Here’s a tragic story: it’s clear from the debate that the NDP does not have a plan for Canada. Every time Singh got a chance to speak he’d do one of three things:

1. He’d talk about how he empathizes with the struggles of working Canadians, and about how much things suck in Canada right now.
2. He’d attack Mark Carney.
3. He’d attack Pierre Poilievre.
   Never once did he lay out a policy to address any issues. Never once was he a leader. Jagmeet was playing for third place in a race with only two trophies. It was sad. The NDP could have a clear identity. They could be the party of real change in this election. There’s wide open space to the left of the Liberal party where they could plant real progressive policies. If they stood for something- even something many Canadians would see as radical- the NDP would gain vote share.

Unfortunately, from the debate (and the NDP campaign overall), they don’t have a plan for Canada. It’s fucking sad.

Bloc Québécois – Leader: Yves-François Blanchet

The Bloc is a Québec nationalist party. They don’t run candidates outside the province, but they get enough vote share within the province to get invited to the debates. I don’t have much to say here because they aren’t really running for leadership**** , so how’s this: Blanchet seems like a good guy, I like his style. He’s the one who challenged Mark Carney more than anyone else on stage by posing direct questions that the Arch-banker couldn’t answer easily. If I was a Quebecker I’d consider voting Bloc. Good job Yves.

And that’s it. The Green Party didn’t get invited to the debate, and they are so far down in the polls they aren’t even worth talking about (another tragedy). Who care about climate change anyway- that can’t be a problem anymore can it? It will probably go away on its own.

Sarcasm aside, my voting choice was pretty clear. It was a compromise that left me unhappy, but that’s how you know it was a good compromise. I’ve already dropped my ballot today at an advance poll (which was crazy busy) so don’t bother trying to change my mind on anything. Maybe now I can stop thinking about it. Hopefully? We will see.

If you are Canadian I really hope you vote on or before April 28th. I don’t care much who you vote for- but now more than ever we want to support our democracy. Regardless of outcome, I’ll consider this election a success if we blow though voter turnout records- which I’m optimistic is going to happen.

I’ll be back next week with some on topic updates about game dev. I just have politics brain this week. Horrible curse really- but sometimes you have to spread it around, like a werewolf. Until next time folks.

---

* It is a game for the rich and powerful- but it has real consequences for everyone and, at least in Canada, average folk are still a part of the conversation.
** Which would be, obviously, pushed to the private sector.
*** For proof of this see the party slogan: “Canada First, for a Change”. Catchy!
**** Nor are the NDP- did I mention how upset I am with them?