Dear Editor:
Re: Urban(e) Voters

Klaus Rohrich, purposefully or not, distorts the urban nature of the Canadian population. While, yes, geographically only 10% of Canada’s geography is urban, 80% of the population live in urban areas < http://www40.statcan.ca/l01/cst01/demo62a.htm?searchstrdisabled=population%20canada%201961&filename=demo62a.htm&lan=eng >. This article seems to be a knee-jerk rant against Toronto. (For the record, I live in Hamilton, which is outside of the GTA; neither Toronto nor Torontonians are very well-liked here either.)

“I think the predominant problem with urban voters is that they have come to believe that they are the centre of the universe.” Is this a joke? It’s not journalism, it’s a rant based on the fact that people in Ontario are distrustful of the Tories as a result of Mike Harris’ policies as premier. (Note: I’m not taking positions on whether this bias is legitimate or not.)

“Liberal voters seem to believe that their view is the only acceptable Canadian view and that any other view has no legitimate place in the body politic.” Surely he’s joking? Throughout the article, it seems that he’s equating Toronto with urban, and urban with Liberal. The view of many people I know is that a Tory minority a good thing for Canada (despite the fact, unbelievably or not, that the NDP won 3 ridings in Hamilton). I understand his frustration with righteous-minded liberals unwilling to listen to differing points of view. But this faulty logic is utterly transparent. It seems that this journo is bent on emulating a Paul Wells-style of writing. For the record, Paul Wells provides a refreshing point of view in pointing out legitimate problems he finds with Canadian liberalism. But I find this article unenlightening at best. It’s not even insulting, which I’m sure the author is trying to be, because of how plainly stupid it is. It is provocative though, in that the baseless accusations against “urban” voters are able to be published at all, albeit “online”. This article makes me wonder whether he’s ever been to anything resembling a town or city anywhere in the country.

Add to that the conspiracy theorizing at the end. A nice touch of paranoia was like the icing on the cake. I think this journo needs to be “iced” (in a professional sense, of course).

Nevermind the hyperbole of a statement like “we are arguably the most exclusive and intolerant society after Iran”. Is Toronto’s viewpoint representative of the rest of the country? This guy is a nutjob. In fact, he seems to be intolerant of any viewpoint other than his own. How un-Canadian.

“Urban voters have shown that they prefer a much more nuanced government, a government familiar with root causes and able to meet the needs of the needy, a government that assures the stability of the status quo. And to Torontonians, Montrealers and Vancouverites, that’s a Liberal government.” Looking back, this excerpt is like an oasis of clarity and reason that seems to absent elsewhere in the article. Urban voters have shown that they feel threatened by a Conservative government in that it will upset the status quo which favours those cities. This myopia in the major urban centres is a threat to Canada’s ability to “move ahead” and be a favourable place to do business…

But I digress. On the whole, this guy does nothing to further the conservative agenda in Canada. He won’t be converting anybody over to a more conservative approach to politics and government, nor does he clarify to easterners the mindset of the West, both of which a skilled writer like Paul Wells is able to do.

Do yourself a favour and get rid of this guy; you can do better.

David McKenna

This entry was posted on Sunday, January 29th, 2006 at 10:46 am and is filed under Canadian Politics, Federal Election, Letters. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.