Listening to the news reporters, the political pundits and political commentators talking about Canadians being upset to be heading for yet another election it struck me that the ‘experts’ were out of touch with the average Canadian.

A view supported later in the same broadcast when the ordinary citizens interviewed were not lamenting about facing another election, but about how they were offered no candidate, no choices, they wanted to vote FOR

If Canadians were offered something or someone to vote FOR, as to opposed to the current choose the least evil situation, Canadians would stampede to the polls with Joy..

Since it began to look that a spring election was a sure bet, the number of people who have expressed support for either the Conservatives, Liberals or NDP are in the minority of those I have heard address the question of who should win.

Should win, not will win.

The majority find themselves with no one to vote FOR.

Part of what the ‘experts’ see as anger at having another elections is the frustration this majority of Canadians are experiencing at finding themselves disenfranchised.

To disenfranchise someone or the citizens of a country does not require denying them a vote; a person is disenfranchised when there is a vote but they are not offered a way to express their opinions through a choice they WANT to vote for.

Asking Canadians trapped in Libya whether they want to die by friendly fire from Canadian jet fighters or to die by friendly fire from the rebels who the Canadian (and other foreign) government is supporting or to die from fire from Gaddafi’s forces disenfranchises those Canadians when they are not offered the choice they wish to choose – not to die at all.

What emerges from listening (not polling or questioning or employing other ways of limiting Canadians ability to express their thoughts) is that the majority of Canadians are unhappy with the way Canada is heading; want to vote and have a say about the future of the country, what Canada is about and what it means to be Canadian; but have no one to vote for who will represent them, their thoughts and views.

This majority are expressing their frustration, their feeling of being abused by politicians and the electoral system – not at having an election – but at having an election where their vote does not count, has no effect on policy, because none of the parties or their candidates are addressing their important issues and priorities.

For the majority of Canadians the choice of either Harper, Ignatieff or Jack Layton might as well be the choice of either Gaddafi, Hu Jintao or Ahmadinejad.

Which has led to more and more Canadians expressing the desire for “None of the Above” to be a choice available to them on the ballot.

Of course none of the current federal (or provincial) parties or politicians are going to give Canadians a choice they can vote FOR when their party’s politics, strategy and campaign are built on fear and getting votes from voters who are voting against the other parties – rather than FOR the party that gets their vote.

Whether offered the choice of Gaddafi, Hu Jintao, Ahmadinejad and ‘None of the Above’ OR Layton, Harper, Ignatieff and ‘None of the Above’, ‘None of the Above’ is the choice that reflects the reality that for the majority of Canadians none of the current choices, candidates or political parties represent the best interests, needs and thoughts of these Canadians.

When ‘pundits’, ‘experts’, politicians and the media speak of the need for electoral reform to promote fairness they are speaking of each riding having the same number of constituents, based on the fact that under the current riding distribution rural ridings contain less constituents that municipal ridings.

The ‘pundits’, ‘experts’, politicians and media fail to see that the true unfairness, is that the majority of Canadians are disenfranchised.

Electoral fairness is the ability to say No to bad choices instead of being forced to choose ‘the lesser evil’. Being forced to choose the lesser evil is still being forced to choose evil – forced to choose against your best interests. The majority of Canadians currently are forced to make the choice that does them the least harm, rather than being able to make a choice that benefits them.

The majority of Canadians are faced with the need for Electoral Reform – or Revolution – in order for them to be able to cast their vote for a choice that benefits them and enhances their future.

The disenfranchised majority of Canadians have every right to demand adding ‘None of the Above’ to the ballot. Serving notice to the politicians that those disenfranchised by being denied representation by what has become ‘business as usual’ in the politics and governance of Canada and Canadians..

In pursuit of Election Reform to return a meaningful vote to the silenced majority Canadians should be holding up ‘None of the Above’ signs at all political rallies and functions; when asked the most important issue by pollsters or media Canadians should reply that adding ‘None of the Above’ to the ballot is the number one issue; Canadians should take advantage of any situation that presents an opportunity to raise having ‘None of the Above’ on the ballot as a choice to vote FOR as an issue.

As noted, the vested interest of the politicians together with the vested interests of all those who benefit from the current system (and thus support the current system and politicians) make it highly unlikely that ‘None of the Above’ will be appearing on a ballot – since it would pose a major threat to current politicians and thus those who benefit from them. Which is why Canadians need to consider Revolution.

When I use the word revolution I am speaking of a revolution in keeping with the essence of what it is to be Canadian.

Did you know that the nominations deadline for the election is March 15, 2011? Remember anyone who meets the criteria set out in the election act (and they have not been able to change the criteria to exclude the majority of Canadians – at least not yet) can file and run before that date.

Canadians in ridings across the country need to find an individual (or two) to stand for election. Once people in the riding have talked these individuals into running – they must then get out, knock on doors, encourage friends, family and coworkers to join, with all working, supporting, voting for and electing this candidate to represent their issues and best interests – rather than those of the wealthy, executives, banks and other corporations.

Sounds like an impossible mission does it not?

It isn’t because you would not be starting from zero. There are people in ridings and communities across Canada who are involved in discussions of the issues that affect their communities, province and Canada.

Look at them and see who has, first and foremost ethics and integrity as well as common sense, belief that leadership can bring about positive change, believe in financially responsible behaviours, believe in transparency and answering why they made the choice they did and are willing to say No – we cannot afford that and Yes – we must discuss this and set priorities.

We may not elect enough of these individuals to form a government but even a few will have a profound effect as they bring commons sense to Ottawa and parliament. Should we succeed in electing sufficient independent representative to parliament to form the government we would achieved a particularly Canadian revolution

We have the right to be able to vote FOR ideas, policy, issues and priorities, to be represented by someone working for our best interests rather than the interests of themselves, the wealthy, corporations and over paid executives.

Get out and exercise your right to free speech, to be heard and to vote for a choice that is in your best interests.

While politics as usual may be ever decreasing our choices for how we are governed and the policies and behaviours of our – OUR – government, we still live in enough of a democracy that we can – should we so choose – throw ‘the bums’ out and replace them with fellow Canadians who would represents the best interests of all Canadians – not just those wealthy enoug to buy access and influence.

Canadians complain that their votes do not make any different, don’t count.

Be engaged, get out, participate, be the change you want to see – strike fear into the hearts of politicians around the globe – join the Canadian Governance Revolt, become dedicated to nonconformity and creative maladjustment..

“The saving of our world from pending doom will come, not through the complacent adjustment of the conforming majority, but through the creative maladjustment of a nonconforming minority.” Martin Luther King

In sending Canadian war planes to Libya Steven Harper is at least being ethically consistent. Of course consistency is not really a good thing for Canada or Canadians when it is UNethical behaviour that is the constant.

From the Conservatives ‘moral superiority’ on MP’s golden pensions (which quickly disappeared when it was time to put their money where their ‘moral superiority’ was as all the Conservative MPs bellied up to the trough to pig out on taxpayer funded golden pensions) to Mr. Harper’s promises and ‘moral superiority’ on appointments to the Senate (until it was convenient to Mr. Harper to appoint Conservative Senators and control the Senate) to International Cooperation Minister Bev Oda’s changing a document and then lying about it to a parliamentary committee and the in-and-out illegal election spending (done to get around the law on election spending limits) both of which Mr. Harper has indicated he sees no problem with – Mr. Harper and the Conservatives have been consistent in not letting ethics interfere with how they behave.

There was no reason for Canadians to expect Mr. Harper to let questions of ethics interfere with an opportunity to curry favour with the Americans by sending warplanes off to join in another war.

And Mr. Harper did not disappoint – rushing to get his increasingly brown nose firmly and deeply affixed betwixt the checks of the American heinie.

Yes I know that those who are engaged in blowing the *bleep* out of Libya have laid claim to ‘moral superiority’ (why is it that those who claim ‘moral superiority’ so often behave without ethics?) citing Mr. Gaddafi for shooting civilians.

Of course these civilians were armed, attacking and capturing cities. Which sounds remarkably like a rebellion and civil war, not peaceful demonstrations…….as long as you are a friend of the USA. If you are someone the USA would like to see gone…….well the armed rebels are freedom fighters and must be protected.

Ethically based behaviour has a consistency that behaviour based on self interest lacks.

If the actions against Libya had been a matter of ethics……

At the time the aggressor nations began blowing the *bleep* out of Libya, in Bahrain Saudi Arabian troops were shooting unarmed demonstrators. Where is the outrage for those actions, the military action to protect unarmed civilians who were peacefully demonstrating? Of course Bahrain is considered a friend of the US and the Saudis have lobbyists and over the years have spent billions buying the US government.

At the same time the Iranian government was cracking down and killing its own unarmed demonstrators. Where is the outrage for those actions, the military action to protect unarmed civilians who were peacefully demonstrating? Nowhere – the Iranians, as much as the US would no doubt like to be bombing the *bleep* out of Iran, can shoot back.

Even if you overlooked the evidence that that what is occurring in Libya is a matter of convenience rather than ethics and believed that enforcing a no-fly zone was the right thing to do….

Shouldn’t Libya have been violating the no-fly zone before the invading force attacked? Instead the attackers pounded Libya with cruise missiles and followed that up with attacks using aircraft.

News reports were full of the film as Canadian jets hit munitions stores. Hopefully none of the Canadians in Libya become ‘collateral damage’ of the Canadian planes.

What the news didn’t have is any report of the no fly zone being violated. Yet the pounding of the portions of people of Libya loyal to Gaddafi continues unabated.

Among the targets hit in ‘enforcing the no-fly zone’ were tanks. I know the modern tank is a piece of advanced technology but I hadn’t realized they could fly.

The actions in Libya are not about enforcing a no-fly zone. If one wants to know what it is all about one merely needs to read reports of what is taking place in Libya:

“Libyan rebels backed by allied air raids say they have seized control of the frontline oil town of Ajdabiya from Colonel Muammar Gaddafi’s forces.”

We are pounding Libya with ordinance and supporting rebel attacks on Libyan cities. Actions that kill civilians. It seems that Mr. Harper is going to protect Libyan civilians from Mr. Gaddafi – even if he has to kill them to ‘save’ them from Mr. Gaddafi.

Canada and Canadians were once respect and listened to by the world community because we were a voice of reason and balance.

Now we behave just like any other bullying warmonger. Not surprising since Canada has a head of state who has repeatedly demonstrated his disdain for letting ethics interfere in any way with his or the party’s behaviour.

Mr Harper has tarnished Canada to the point where we should be ashamed. Not of being Canadian or of Canada but that Mr. Harper was not been handed his walking papers.