I am sick and tired of all conservatives being lumped into one category by progressives who feel their world and political views are the only ones that are acceptable.
Andrew Coyne mentioned this very problem in a column last week that caught my attention. He wrote that it was unfortunate that social conservatives were not allowed to have an opinion. The thing is, just as not all progressives believe the same things, neither do conservatives.
Regardless, many conservatives, whether they were so-cons (Coyne’s descriptor) or not, were glad to have Sun TV because it allowed a variety of views to be heard, in particular the many conservative ideas that were not covered by mainstream media. And, they were sad when it was shut down.
But, for the progressive notion of conservative views, check out rabble.ca. This week, for example, they were raising money based on the fact that Ezra Levant’s Rebel Media was doing well in a crowdfunding campaign.
Talk about feeling threatened!
Rabble staff wrote: “Please become a monthly supporter at $8 each month, or make a special, one-time gift of $45.00 using our secure donation page. Thank you for supporting independent, ethical, and progressive media.”
The assumption is that only a progressive media like Rabble is ethical. Pardon me?
Then, there is a section on the Rabble link that says Levant was already “attacking” sex education, woman’s equality and freedom of religion and he had only been online for a few days.
Attacking? Or, simply having a difference of opinion?
However, speaking of attacking, check out a recent Michael Harris column at iPolitics. The title of his piece says it all. Talk about hate speech! More red meat for the hang’ em high crowd! Really. Hang’em high crowd? Red meat? Not all conservatives live in beef country, code for Alberta. And, who said anything about capital punishment?
So, again I ask: Why do progressives see conservative views as unworthy or worse, evil?
It certainly can’t be because conservatives are in the minority. I mean, the Stephen Harper Conservatives won a majority government in May of 2011 on the basis of a 40% (39.62% to be precise) win. However, if you compare it to the Jean Chretien Liberal win in 2000 at 40.85%, it’s not all that different.
Oh, I know, progressives love to lump Liberal and NDP votes together. But, they are not together. The voters represent completely separate political entities with some very different sociological views about a lot of things — such as the role of the military.
Or, is it simply that a 40% majority is only a problem when the winners are conservative?
Whatever the reason for the view that Conservatives ideas and policies are not legitimate or, that differences of opinions are nothing short of an attack on progressives, it is poisoning and polarizing political debate in Canada.
Surely, that can’t be good for our democracy!