Paradoxes and Polemics

I've always assumed, wrongly as it turns out, that the myopia, mania, and mismanagement of Dangovt were fairly obvious to anyone with a Grade 10 education.

But it seems that for some faith-based observers, this regime is clouded in paradoxes -- so let's unravel some of them:

1) Why is it that DW gets all of the credit when something goes right -- even things completely beyond his control, like the price of oil -- but he gets none of the blame when something goes wrong?

2) If DW is as brilliant a manager and thinker as he is purported to be, why have several of his most important Departments -- especially Health and Education -- failed so miserably?

3) If DW is so smart and on top of everything, why do his defenders invariably insist that he could not have remembered critical events or have known about serious problems in provincial Departments?

4) If DW is such a brilliant negotiator and political leader, why have federal-provincial relations sunk to their lowest ebb ever?

5) If DW is such a brilliant negotiator and political leader, why is NL almost completely isolated among the provinces?

6) If DW is such a great deal-maker, why has he failed to sign a deal on Churchill Falls?

7) If DW is so good at the hard game of politics (delivering "elbows," as he likes to put it), why did he lose his showdown with Harper and get "shafted" and "sledgehammered"?

We all know the Wingnut answer: it's all someone else's fault. Everyone else is a complete idiot. The problem, as this regime drags on, is that such assertions beggar logic.

I guess the Wingnuts have never heard of Occam's Razor, which is surprising because DW says that he knows everything about principles. Occam's Razor is the principle that the simplest, most straightforward explanation of a particular phenomenon is usually the right explanation. The upshot is this: if you have to explain all your failings by insisting that everyone else is always wrong and everyone else is a complete idiot, sooner or later it's going to dawn on even the most dim-witted observer that a more plausible explanation is that the problem is you.

DW seems baffled by the principle of wielding power. He seems to believe that exercising power is solely about achieving maximum, immediate noise, spectacle, and immediate domination. He seems to be unaware that walking softly and carrying a big stick is far more effective than hopping around shouting all the time in a manic rage. He seems entirely unaware of the principles of Sun Tzu's Art of War, let alone the adage of keeping your friends close and your enemies closer.

So let's try an analogy. Imagine that you're in charge of a regional office in a much larger corporation. Your boss is a jerk and you hate him, but you have to work with him nonetheless. You may despise the little creep, but you have to work with him to ensure that your regional office gets its fair share of funding and support. So what's the best way to achieve your goals?

You could throw a fit during a meeting, froth at the mouth, call him every name in the book, and launch a scorched-earth war against him. You could do this right away, before you have lined up sufficient support from the other regional offices, and while your boss is in a relatively strong position.

Alternately, you could smile when he jerks you around, bide your time, keep him in the dark, and maximize your short-term position while you pursue your long-term goal of removing him. You could wait for the right moment to act decisely when conditions are ripe for success.

I leave it to you to decide which tactic is the dumb one.


Take me to your leader update:
http://www.thetelegram.com/index.cfm?sid=228931&sc=86

DW's Excellent European Adventure

Not content with spilling ink in the national media, Dangovt wants to take its special-effects show overseas. Offal News was one of the very few commentators to link to the media story:
http://www.calgaryherald.com/Business/Canada+trade+talks+despite+opposition/1320863/story.html

And Labradore picked up on some curious semantics:
http://labradore.blogspot.com/2009/02/pater-familias.html

So let's parse DW's Europrattle:

Executive Council February 20, 2009

NL Expressed Concern with Canada – EU Trade Negotiation Process

While Newfoundland and Labrador fully supports improved trade with the European Union, any actions taken [by whom?] in that regard must address priority areas of concern for the province said the Honourable Danny Williams, Premier of Newfoundland and Labrador.

[It appears that Harpoid has now descended into a Dan-te-style ring of hell where he is now he who shall not be named.]

In particular, the province is extremely hesitant to allow the Federal Government to head these negotiations, given past actions that question their commitment to issues of importance to the province.

[Dangovt has, evidently, usurped the right of the federal government to enter international negotiations.]

"At this point, we are not willing to sign on to support the negotiation of a new and comprehensive economic agreement with the European Union," said Premier Williams. "This decision should not be confused with a lack of support for an improved trade relationship between Canada and Europe. Indeed, Newfoundland and Labrador values and respects its trade relations with Europe which have existed with the province for over 5 centuries and does not wish to jeopardize those relations. From traditional relationships within the fishing industry to our newer partnerships with EU companies in the oil and gas industry and beyond, we appreciate the value of developing mutually beneficial policies with the EU."

[I guess DW's legal dictionary has no entry for non sequitur. Between the first and second sentences, and again between the second and third, DW falls off the logic wagon.

In the first instance, saying that he opposes negotiations for new economic agreements does, in fact, indicate that DW does not support improved trade between Canada and Europe. Since any improved trade between Canada and Europe will, by logical necessity, entail negotiation between the federal government and the governments of Europe, DW's stated opposition to such negotiations is, ipso facto, opposition to improved trade. In the second instance, DW conflates, as he is wont to do, Canada and NL. NL's economy comprises about 2% of Canada's GDP; DW says that he supports Canada-EU trade; ergo, he supports the 98% of the Canadian economy outside NL that sustains that trade.]

The province has centuries-old trading relationships with the EU and is positioned geographically as a natural trading partner to the EU. However, other concerns [other than what?] prevent the province from giving unqualified support [what about qualified support?] for the Canadian Government’s process [nonsensical: policies and processes are not the same thing] as it moves forward on the basis of a joint Canada-EU scoping document [presumably involving a shaft] which describes the opportunities for enhanced trade and investment between the European Union and Canada [another apparent conflation of NL and Canada] and identifies numerous potential areas of discussions for a possible deepened economic agreement.

"The Government of Newfoundland and Labrador is unable to support this at this [what, exactly?] time on the basis of very [DW's favourite vapid modifier] genuine concerns that our province’s issues [which ones?] may not be safeguarded or dealt with in an appropriate way by the Federal Government," added Premier Williams. "In particular, long standing issues such as custodial management of our [whose?] fishery, a proposed ban on seal products into the EU and prohibitive tariffs on seafood products entering the EU represent significant issues of concern that have been left unaddressed by the Federal Government for far too long. Newfoundland and Labrador has not received any assurances that a [as yet non-existent] Canada-EU agreement would include protection for measures such as the Atlantic Accords and Fish Inspection Act. Additionally, a track record of a lack of substantive and inclusive consultation on federal-provincial issues gives Newfoundland and Labrador great cause for concern, particularly in light of the far reaching implications of a possible Canada-EU trade agreement."

Premier Williams said he will continue to monitor the progress of this process [by boycotting the process?] and government officials will continue to provide full representation on issues of importance to his province [by boycotting the process].

[Aside from the turgid syntax and lousy grammar, the red sections comprise ignoratio elenchi, aka red herrings, which seem to be the favourite snack on the Eighth Floor. Either that, or DW figures that having so much surplus herring on hand will give him a strong bargaining position with the fish-hungry Europeans.]

For a description of this seafood delicacy, see http://www.fallacyfiles.org/redherrf.html

Finally, it's fascinating to learn how much Dangovt can accomplish by boycotting things. Perhaps their next step will be to boycott governing altogether.


The Excellent Adventure Continues Update:

Today's (March 7th) Tely has an updated story on DW's foreign policy. It's not available on their web site, but the front-page has the first section:
http://thetelegram.newspaperdirect.com/epaper/viewer.aspx


Prof Puzzled Update:
http://www.thetelegram.com/index.cfm?sid=230092&sc=79

Guess no one else at MUN would talk.