A Resilient Insanity: Expecting Different Results from People and Elections

We don’t have a Conservative government, and although some would point and laugh and call us losers, we don’t feel that way. It’s not because we gained ground that David Cochrane can try to label us nastily and fail. It’s because Cochrane’s core attitude is showing as he argues with Sheer over the application of the label.

Government should be a game of finding common ground, not deciding winners and losers.

Shared Needs for Common Ground

We form a government out of everyday needs. We wouldn’t need the government if we didn’t have these everyday needs.

Protection from thieves, roads to get places, healthcare when life doesn’t go our way, and schools to prepare us for making a living are just a few fundamentals. For these needs and more, we elect people and provide them with money and resources to get it done. Politicians work for the people because we hired them and pay their wages and expenses.

If you haven’t paid much attention to the goings on at the House of Commons, let me fill you in, as a casual outside observer.

Abusing Power to Hide Proof

From my perspective, it doesn’t appear that collaboration for Canadians is what has been happening; it is a competitive game of “can’t catch me.” Jennifer O’Connell sums it up when she says, “Boo-hoo, get over it,” talking over the opposition and attempting to learn more about potential foreign interference.

The Liberals fight against releasing information that should be transparent to Canadians. You only hide something if there is something to hide, so what is it? Hidden information holds up many ongoing issues, including foreign interference, the SDTC payouts, and more.

My election issue was trust. I don’t trust a Liberal government, nor does Jagmeet Singh, who said, “Never trust a Liberal.” If you campaigned on “being the most transparent government ever,” why did redacted papers drive us to the polls?

Proven Grounds of Poor Behaviour

We head back to the House of Commons with two almost equal sides, expecting one side to cozy up to the same neighbour it did last time to force things through that much of Canada doesn’t want. I have never felt more abused in my life, and that’s saying a lot.

At least Jennifer O’Connell isn’t headed back, and I wish that attitude were hers alone, but as I watched Carney dance at his victory party, my hopes dashed. In an abusive situation, separation is the only answer. That dice may have started rolling, and I don’t blame Alberta or Saskatchewan.

I don’t want to have to move again, though. I’m already at address number thirty, an irony for someone who only yearned for home, deep roots, and the relief that comes from feeling settled.

Despite what I’ve seen, felt, and read, I’ve attempted to reconcile the notion that human beings are social. Witnessing exclusion, division, and the worst in humans makes me wonder about the root of those social needs. To dominate? To feel smug, better, and like a winner?

When it comes to what I expect of human beings, I have to believe I’m past the realm of hope and entrenched in the realm of insanity.

As a child, I felt no drive to connect with others. My mother tried to push me into relationships, and I resisted even more. She became a Girl Guide leader and forced me to participate. When I asked to stay home instead, she threw a days-long temper tantrum about her and her unmet needs. Defeated, I submitted well into Pathfinders.

My father tried to force me into team play as his roundabout way of achieving the same goal. I was in my late teens when I pointed out to my dad that everyone smoked and struggled through school with thin grades, and was finally dismissed.

As I unwind my desire for connection with my history of seeking and failing, I uncover beliefs such as “If you want to hang out with other people, you have to do what they want to do.” This was verbalized to me several times, including quite recently. If that were true, you would only get to do what you want when alone.

Who are these lucky people who win? The ones who get to do what they want to do, and other people comply for the sheer benefit of the company? If I might advise, I was not one of these people.

To hang around with my mom, I needed to sew. I needed to help with his chores if I wanted to hang around with my dad. My older sister would allow me to tag along, but only to a certain extent. It seemed I was the only one who chose my company.

I choose my own company over submission as often as I can.

Unbalanced Relationships

Last week marked twenty years since I met my significant other. We hit it off right from the start, so I thought. He always came to my house; he constantly asked me what I wanted to do, as if he were choosing to be with me. It was a first for me. I was being treated like the alpha, and I fell for it.

Slowly but surely, that changed. The pendulum swung the other way and stayed there. I’d always hoped for one constantly in motion. Instead, it became the type of relationship I had with everyone else, where I had to do what they wanted if I wanted to spend time with them.

Slowly but surely, I tend to decide nah, I’d rather hang out alone.

Just a handful of years ago, my dad visited from a few provinces away, where he’d recently moved. His wife sent me an email delineating my responsibilities and expectations. It wasn’t a request but a demand, and I went along with it.

On the second day of the visit, I wrote on a sticky note, “I am FUCKING INTERESTING,” and I stuck it to my monitor. I’d felt like an ignored doormat in their company, and I couldn’t wait for them to leave. Never again, I promised myself.

To be treated like a usable commodity is not my goal in life, yet, smack, if that’s not exactly where I’ve landed.

Invisible Exclusions

A few weeks ago, my significant other lost his grandmother. I was asked to run the family business so everyone could attend the funeral. I agreed, as I saw it as the least I could do.

When I saw the commemorative card that was handed out after, I was gutted. It mentioned everyone and their significant others, but my significant other might as well have been single.

I wondered if I was excluded because we were living in sin. No, there was another couple in print who were cohabiting unmarried.

Whether it was a mere oversight or systemic of larger issues, I wonder where all my time went.

Like university graduation, I had every right to be included in print, yet I was not there. Did I not participate appropriately? What did I do wrong? When and where did a door close, and I didn’t hear it?

Well, I’ve heard it now, and it’s utter insanity to seek a new start, to try to find a group that will act and feel like a family for me, when I am a party of one over fifty? Oh, and did I mention female, too? Yes, the useless invisible in society. The rare university-educated Conservative voter.

How do you find another when we are all invisible and excluded, strewn about among rural properties, self-sufficient, keeping to ourselves?

Swinging Pendulums

The key to resilience is not to expect it to work out differently; instead, focus on accepting the expected outcome. There will be a connection. It will feel like relief. The shine will come off as assumptions are revealed, and then it’s all hurt, anger, pain, and remorse until peace and predictability look preferable.

Until peace and predictability are the permanent choice, accepting the reality that no one will save you from anything.

I was raised to be a follower, but my older sister was not—there was no one for her to follow. She was raised to be a leader and have followers to draw upon. I was told to look, watch, and behave, while she was taught to think, try, and learn.

However, this deficit can be corrected; it has long since been corrected in my own life. I taught myself to think, try, and learn, and I’ve attempted to share what I’ve learned not just here in these posts but in goal-oriented ways, as compiled in a book format for you to download. As you will see, I’ve had more than a few goals along the way.

In my life, a pendulum swings from follower to leader. I’ve tasted the other side, but I am firmly in the process of correcting the natural resting position, or its ability to swing on demand.

Entrenched beliefs are difficult to shake, but the first trick is spotting them.

As someone whose career was built on spotting the tricks and creating systems to prevent them, I see ways to liberate democracy from the current federal election system. Take my thoughts for what they are worth, as someone external to the system and not an expert.

First, I heard from Unacceptable Fringe that we can and should take a pen to vote. I read Election Canada’s defence of pencils with unease. Then, I arrived and noticed a pencil taped to the voting booth. I’d forgotten my pen in the car, but someone had left one. With relief, I used the donated pen to vote and passed it over to my partner to use as well.

Pencils? That wasn’t allowed in my university engineering exams, which were often complex math problems spanning multiple work pages.

Later, I learned that the problem wasn’t having your vote erased and changed as I’d feared—it was having it disqualified.

Ballot Review

Votes got rejected because additional marks were on the ballot. It’s not enough to have a pen; it’s about ensuring that no one else adds anything later. Moose on the Loose suggests that the review process be recorded on video so we can all see it. Northern Perspective states that the process involves someone presiding over the count to verify the name on the ticket.

That’s fair in a room with four people representing the names and one counting. In a room with a hundred people, it’s an event to televise.

It sounds expensive, and in my experience, this is the standard, dismal improvement route. As you add more and more control, things become increasingly out of control. I learned this lesson intimately on my snowmobile as it started to spin out of control, then faster and faster, until I was flung off.

I’d watched it in engineering videos and learned about the need to let go and let things settle in an airport conference room while learning lessons about process improvement. Once, I met a man who told me that the reason for his divorce was because he’d “learned that you can’t control other people.” I bet there were numerous fights leading up to the legal proceedings.

Some ballots didn’t make it through the entire process. Votes cast in advance were lost because Elections Canada did not know its own postal code.

Other ballots were left behind because Elections Canada didn’t follow their processes.
When processes obviously fail, it’s a question of what else is going unnoticed.

Relying on people to follow a process instead of their initiative is a matter of carefully and mindfully created systems.

Ballot Automation

Instead of better transparency, I propose automation. Of course, it’s an obvious suggestion. Once, I witnessed a colleague make such an obvious suggestion with nothing to add, and everyone patted him on the back and gave him a raise.

This colleague/competitor of mine looked like Magnum P.I. and had an accent. The women swooned when he spoke and acted as if he embodied brilliance. This opposed the cattiness they exhibited when any woman talked.

I expect no praise for my electoral automation suggestion, but I would like to elaborate on my vision for you, the one who might be able to spread support for it.

We don’t want to argue over who decides what was intended on a ballot. I want as much clarification as possible from the individual who cast the vote, and if these follow-up clarifications cannot be found, that alone is data I want to know.

We should want to know what percent of ballots cast didn’t count due to Elections Canada’s errors. I expect an external firm to measure, monitor, and report that number, and Elections Canada is responsible for driving it to zero.

I would want them responsible for driving all measures related to uncounted votes, including uncast votes, to zero.

Ballot Traceability

Automating and measuring means being able to track. Just like in the grocery store, I receive a receipt that I can punch in later, and it contains all the related data: when and where it was cast, and I have a number to prove that the ballot was mine.

After the count, I should be able to enter the number on my receipt/ballot and verify that my vote was counted and recorded in the intended category.

Of course, you must be able to weed out individuals who use the system to change their minds later and who want to keep the window open for opportunities. Some people study the gamification of systems, and others learn how to code it – tap their expertise before letting procurement source the contract to their friends.

The primary concern is to make the system unhackable, detect any potential breaches immediately, and stop them promptly. Because it’s already happening in person, and moving the system into a machine won’t be enough to stop the potential interference.

In the meantime, it’s time to update the will. To die in peace is to go knowing that I didn’t cause more problems or suffer further contortions by someone exerting their will over mine. I don’t want this for my money, resources or Canada; for that, I want an electoral system I can trust to accurately and precisely count the votes for each candidate.

How must we ensure that votes are protected, respected, and valued equally in the electoral process? Who reliably and accurately reports on the failures of the current system?

Please let me know in the comments, as I will be focused on this topic, and any assistance you can provide will be greatly appreciated. Thank you!