Alexandra Constantinidis: Canary for Culture Change

Indeed, Raynolds said he was suspicious that the woman was up to something from the outset of the Canmore meeting, in part because he was sure he'd seen her at an earlier meeting in Airdrie — although he says she told him that was her look-alike cousin.

 

 

A post I previously wrote about Constantinidis' encounter with Andrew Leslie is being much viewed today - probably due to the post above.  In my previous post, I framed that encounter as a positive thing, an example of agonoism - tough questions meant to further dialogue and explore all facets of an issue, ensuring robust conclusions and appropriate policy as a result.

 

I'm experienced and/or jaded enough to know that wasn't the intent, mind you - our politics is all about the gotcha moment where foes are concerned and circling the wagons in political omerta where our own tribe is concerned, throwing someone under the bus as a last ditch effort to maintain the status quo.

 

But that's not a frame that's sustainable and not one I want to reinforce.  Unlike some out there, I actively don't want to add fuel to our burning platform.  I'd like to think we can think far enough ahead, plan far enough ahead and be agile enough now to avoid the complete collapse of our system.

 

Then again, I'm no delusionally-confident partisan pitbull.  I'm the sort that fully expects aggressive tactics like the ones apparently employed by Constantinidis and built on by Kenney and co to blow up in everyone's face.

 

So let's step back a bit and look at this in context.

 

It looks like Constantinidis has intentionally gone in looking for "gotcha" moments to embarrass Liberals.  She's ready to record.  She's asking questions designed to solicit answers that can be positioned as negative and passed on to Sun News to trumpet to the world.

 

From one point of view, this is fine, as democracy should be - we theoretically want to be having an open conversation in which representatives and would-be representatives who impact policy decisions state their opinions so we can get a sense of who they are and how they think.

 

Of course, this frame of politics is naïve.  It implies that politicians want to be judged on their own merits and be chosen by the people only if they measure up.

 

That's nonsense.  Politicians want to win.  Political Parties want to be government.  They want to frame themselves for the win, not for public interest.  They want to control the narrative, not passively accept the public's choice.  There's nothing laissez-faire about politics.

 

Which leads to the other point of view - that the more we play gotcha politics, the more real opinions go underground.  We end up with carefully controlled messaging, spin and opaque policy conversations that lead to things like in camera committees and omnibus budget bills. 

 

These are all anti-democratic - but then, so is focusing on wins at all costs.

 

According to the version of the story now being circulated, Constantinidis lied to a public official so as to carry out her clandestine mission; she faked her name to get in and even said she was her look-alike cousin when called out.  It's not clear that Raynolds was the person who issued the "beer and popcorn" statement, but this fact has been ignored by the Brian Lilleys and Jason Kenneys of the world. 

 

From their perspective, it's not their job to tell the other side of the story - that's the Liberals' job.  Their job is to make their side stick, to frame the narrative, etc.  It's war-room politics, full stop.

 

Think about that for a second.  They don't feel responsible for the truth, only their version of it. 

 

I would argue that goes against the basic premise of individuals being self-contained rational actors, as it implies truth can only be achieved by collaborative action.  I'm fine with that.  But there's something else that I do find troubling.

 

How old is Constantinidis?  She looks like she's in her 20s.  Her LinkedIn profile suggests she's a student until at least 2017, provided it's a match.  Her Facebook, surprise surprise, isn't so accessible right now.

 

Are we to assume she acted entirely alone, lying, playing gotcha politics, etc?  If so, where did the idea of lying for a gotcha quote come from?

 

Are we to assume Michael Sona acted alone with the Robocall scam?  If so, where did he get the notion that such actions were acceptable?  Do we blame mommy and daddy, or is there a suggestion he's just a bad seed?

 

What of Sebastian Togneri?  I actually know his parents - they are kind, honest people who are active in their community.  They would never condone abuses of power, nor instil such values in their children. 

 

If we are to accept that these three young people were self-contained in their bad behaviour - or, better framed, bad behaviour they were caught out on - how did they get to positions of influence?  Where Constantinidis is concerned, why would she have assumed that acting in such a manner was a way to build her brand and get ahead?  Is she right on this?  If so, when did loyalty to Canada via a partisan party become more like Mafioso omerta?

 

Clearly, this has nothing to do with riots on the streets in Ferguson; what's happening there has nothing to do with a culture of entitled insiders playing the game for internal wins at the cost of social sustainability.  There's no need to ask hard questions about the failings of our culture; not when we don't believe in culture.

 

We keep hearing that politics is broken.  In fact, it's a line being parroted by tough political alphas to define themselves and hammer their opponents with (just don't look behind the curtain).  It's not their fault; nothing is their fault.  They're just playing the game as it's designed - and playing to win.

 

When we see youth pushing the envelope of political dark arts, it's time we step back and consider how we've gotten here, where it's going to lead, and if it's a place we're prepared to go.

 

Because, mark my words - this is no longer a "kick the ball down the field" to another generation thing; those leading the charge of our democratic decline are going to be alive and kicking when the consequences of their actions come home to roost.

History's actors, indeed.

Does the CPC Owe Warren Kinsella Royalties?

The game plan, laid out in Conservative party documents obtained by the Star, spells out the objective in three words: "drive, disrupt, disunity."

The party says it wants a "Conservative voice" in all stories that come out of the Liberal convention"

Lots of chatter among the political classes about the leaks today.  Is this a resentful staffer slipping secret documents to the enemy MSM?  Is it an attempt by the CPC to smoke out resentful staffers?  An effort to deflate Liberal morale?  Are they simply fucking with Liberal heads?

The latter seems most likely.  There's something the Tory war roomers should know, though - when you fuck with people's heads, you risk catching something contagious.

There's a line about messing with opponents' heads in Warren Kinsella's manual for campaigners, The War Room.  If you haven't read it, you should.  It's pretty clear Dimtri Soudas has.

"So?" he said.  "Why do we need one of these war room things?"

"Because it can help us win," I said.  "If we have something like that, we can sort of become part of the news media."  - P. 23

"The way I looked at it, our job wasn't dirty tricks or smears or smears or that sort of thing; our job was to dominate the communications landscape, leaving no room for our opponents to breathe."  - P. 26

Personally, I find this funny in the ironic sort of way.  The Liberals innovate new approaches to stop the Conservatives which the Conservatives then copy literally word-for-word and then put more money and vindictiveness behind.

Except there's something the CPC War Room folk seem to have missed.

The MSM (MainStreamMedia) began relying heavily on fed info because their industry was at the start of it's decline.  As is the case with the collapse of any body, when the centre starts reducing resource distribution, the organs start to work harder, hastening system-wide collapse.

These days, even the media questions the media about the content of its stories.  The majority of people who get their news through anything other thank radio, the evening news or gossip are doing so online via social media, where non-journalists who are less harried rule the roost.

The CPC War Room gang may be high-fiving each other around the conniving brilliance of their adaptation of a Liberal Strategist's tactics, but they're doing so exactly when those tactics are coming to the end of their heyday and newer approaches are starting to dominate.

But that's what happens when you mine instead of getting creative, isn't it?

Even when cribbing from their opponents, the Harper Conservatives are one step behind.  That may make them winners in the short-term, but as Kinsella could probably tell them - it's not the strongest who survive, but those best able to evolve with the times.

But Team Harper are probably gonna have to wait for his next book to figure that one out.  

#TorontoIs - For or Against?

This is an amazing piece of work, sent by an acquaintance of a friend.  I don't know the author's name.  But if they're reading this, I say: do more stuff like this.  This is really, really powerful.

I have been told, repeatedly, that Warren Kinsella is really good at what he does.  It's unquestionably true; he's the man that brought the War Room to Canada.  It could be argued that he in large part shaped a whole generation of politicing in this country.

He's right, too - the video (you'll have to follow the link to his site to see it) is powerful.  It provides a fascinating contrast between some of the diverse landmarks that are so integral to Toronto's identity and the divisive, small-minded politics of Rob Ford.

The point of this video is to demonstrate to Toronto how the world sees this city - not as one of the most diverse places on earth, not as a centre of art, business and culture, but as the playground of Rob Ford, the crack-smoking Mayor.

The video is designed to incite strong, reactive emotions of discomfort, fear, even anger.  This is how the world sees us, it says; we need to do something to change that.

By and large this is how politics functions - we define ourselves as being different than our opponents and work hard to define our opponents as the devil incarnate.  

We have to fight against, the message goes, often with the tagline only Candidate White Hat can defeat/prevent Candidate Black Hat from bringing us down. 

We don't vote leaders in; we kick bums out.

But there's another way.

Instead of inciting kick-the-bums out re-activeness, we could have leaders that define themselves by their vision, authenticity and commitment to walking the walk.  Calgary has become cool in ways previously unimaginable in no small part due to its Mayor.  

Where Rob Ford talks about promises made and kept that are anything but, Naheed Nenshi is better known for what he does and how he communicates.  We don't need boastful statements; his deeds speak louder than worlds.

No less than Kinsella himself has wistfully wondered, "wouldn't it be nice to have a leader who things big, and does big things, once again?"

I think so.  I know lots of other people who feel the same way.

Being angry and resentful all the time is tiring.  Eventually, disaffection settles in and people come to accept that things won't be any better and that fighting is only going to make things worse.  It's why Canada is suffering through a winter of discontent, complete with hoarding behaviours typical of hibernating creatures.

It's true that Toronto's international reputation is largely being defined by Rob Ford, but it doesn't need to be.  If the people living here, or the people living across Canada were to see amazing, heroic deeds and hear inspirational stories of what we're really about, we may be shaken out of our misanthropic complacency and catalyzed into positive action.

A quote I'm sure Kinsella would be familiar with fits the bill: "People don't look to us, as leaders, for despair; they can despair on their own.  They look to us for inspiration."

That's the kind of leadership I could get behind.  Don't tell me what's wrong and who's to blame; tell me who's making a difference and give me a vision of how together, we can make our community a place to be proud of.  

Lead, for god's sake.

If you think it's powerful how people will fight when they collectively stand against, you'd be amazed by what they can do when they are united for.

The War Room On War: An Opportunity for Sun Media?

 

I doubt there's a single War-Roomer in this country who would consider themselves qualified to offer advice on conduct in combat (or conduct-after-capture, which might be the front-line military equivalent to crisis management).

 

Yet the idea of politics as war has proliferated in Canada, thanks largely to the influence of one man - Warren Kinsella (haven't read The War Room yet? You really should).  The role of War Room or, more politely, Strategic Operations has become an essential part of modern political campaigns.

 

There remains a massive difference between the standard rules of engagement in politics vs. in the theatre of war (though in both, those rules are being trampled on) but as political combat becomes more strategic and employs more and more technology, there is definitely overlap.  The need for solid messaging and counter-offensive communications measures is pretty much the same.

 

More to the point, Canada's political chattering class spends more time listening to folk like David Akin and Tim Powers discussing the implications of Trudeau's pot admission than they do following Al Jazeera's reportage on Syria.

 

I think it would be a fascinating exercise - as well as a way to draw viewers and encourage Canadians to get informed - to have some of Canada's preeminent War Roomers debate what they would do in Syria, were they in charge.  Particularly as it stands to reason some of these back-room folk will probably be adding their two cents to government strategy, anyway.

 

Looking to draw viewers and unafraid of generating controversy, I think Sun Media would be the right outfit to host it.

What do you think?  Would the public be interested in hearing how War Roomers would conduct an actual war?