In Part 1, I discussed how Alberta’s ultra-conservatives have taken control of the political agenda in Alberta. It was a 10- to 15-year process. I don’t think there was a master plan for this outcome. It came about mostly by 15% of the Alberta population exerting a constant political pressure to make things work in their favor. That 15% will be setting the Alberta agenda for the next five years, maybe longer. The moderate conservatives will yield to this demographic.
Other Tails Wagging Other Dogs
Quite a few Medium articles have chastised the election of Kevin McCarthy as Speaker of the House. As you know, Mr. McCarthy made concessions to about 20 ultra-conservatives in the House to get this job. It’s not hard to see that 5% of Congress will be setting the agenda, not Mr. McCarthy.
When a political demographic gets more political power than the size of that demographic, I call it political leverage. A good analogy is the expression “when the tail wags the dog.”
When the other side uses its political leverage to its political advantage, we see this leverage as something bad for democracy. But when our side has leverage and uses it, then it’s OK. Right?
Another good example of political leverage is the American Aristocracy.
The 10% of Americans who belong to the upper-middle and moderately-wealthy classes have been setting the political agenda since 1970. Since they are more liberal in their outlook, that is OK, right?
This American Aristocracy may be more liberal, but they care more about their own demographic than American society at large. Otherwise, the USA would better serve the needs of average Americans. Should I mention public health care that could have been implemented if the American Aristocracy had used its former political muscle to that end?
Many Medium contributors like to blame racism and Christian nationalism as the reason for the rise of the ultra-conservative movement. Yes, these societal forces are there, but they have been around for a long time. Why are they prominent now? Why not before? Somehow, they have learned how to unite with moderate conservatives to form a stronger political movement. It will be hard for all three groups to surrender the leverage they have recently gained. In other words, they have developed more political unity than their adversaries, who are divided.
Part of their power comes from enough of its members being willing to do some crazy stuff to undermine democratic decisions. To think that American decision-makers are not affected by January 6, 2021 is naïve. To think that Canadian decision-makers are not affected by the Freedom Convoy of a year ago is naïve. The threat of massive civil unrest is real. It has to be managed.
For those of us not on the front lines of democracy, maybe we should just let the more responsible media outlets, the more responsible political leaders, and the more responsible back-room political players do their jobs. They don’t need more armchair fire chiefs telling them what to do. They don’t need more undisciplined firefighters trying to save the house on their own.
Maybe our job is to build a new democracy while firefighters are working on this fire. I have an alternative democracy that could be ready in a decade or two. You should consider working for this democracy—instead of yelling at the players on the football field.
In this new democracy, there won’t be any tail wagging the dog. Nor will there be any other dog part looking for political leverage to become the top dog part. Rather all parts of the dog will be working together, bringing their unique attributes together — to give us a well-functioning and wonderful dog!
Isn’t that what we want?
The Story Within the Story
The idea to show the similarities of political trends between Alberta and the USA came to me about a month ago. As I was formulating this article in my mind, it became big enough to make into two articles. And, in this way, I would get double the exposure for the same work.
I wrote Part 1 and submitted it to Politically Speaking. Part 2 was still between my ears.
The main editor of Politically Speaking, Scott Tarlo, did his usual round of fixing small things for the article. He then mentioned something like: “This article has a weak title and weak introduction. Consider revising.”
My initial thoughts were: “This article is likely not going to go very far regardless of how well the hook is written. Spending the effort to revise is not going to pay off.”
I told Scott that I needed time to digest his comments.
After a day of thinking, I did find a better title, subtitle, and introductory paragraph. It was not that much extra effort. I made the changes. Scott published.
Despite the better hooks, Part 1 did not go above usual Medium average. It seems I was right that spending the extra effort was not going to pay off. I then went to work on Part 2. And this is where the real change happened.
I had Part 2 pretty much finalized in my head. But when words were moving from brain cells to keyboard to monitor, Part 2 went in a different — and better — direction. I was able to see the historical transfer of political leverage from one demographic to another. The better hooks for Part 1 opened my mind to see this political change.
For those of you familiar with my writing, I am often preaching about the importance of consultative decision-making. This is where we combine knowledge, experience, and wisdom from several people into one unified decision.
I was annoyed with Scott’s suggestion to change my Part 1 hooks. This shows that I am still a long way away from mastering consultation myself. If I am admitting weakness, what about you? Are you as open-minded as you say you are?
And there is a second takeaway from this story. Both Scott and I thought the revisions would help the exposure of Part 1. But what we got was a better Part 2. When we are in a consultative spirit, we will find ourselves going in directions we could not have imagined by ourselves.
Our culture admires those champions who can charge ahead with rigid opinions to get their “good” agenda done. We really need to deliberately and consciously change that thinking. I am still learning.
Published on Medium 2023
