Skip to main content

“I am a Canadian, free to speak without fear, free to worship in my own way, free to stand for what I think right, free to oppose what I believe wrong, or free to choose those who shall govern my country. This heritage of freedom I pledge to uphold for myself and all mankind.” ~~ John G. Diefenbaker

Silence is accelerating Alberta’s democratic decline


Fear of repercussions is driving moderates away from participating in public debate in Alberta


Democracy in Alberta is eroding not because extremists are loud, but because too many people who consider themselves reasonable, moderate and pragmatic have gone silent.

Too many Albertans in the political middle ground assume that staying quiet, staying neutral or staying out of politics preserves civility. It does not. Silence is accelerating the decay of democratic culture in this province.

Politics and democracy are inseparable. To disengage from politics is to weaken democracy itself. Voting every four years is not enough. Democracy requires ongoing participation, public expression and civic courage between elections.

The political middle ground in Alberta once anchored civil discourse. It was a space where disagreement was tempered by respect, humility and reason. That middle ground is now eroding beneath our feet. It is fracturing, fragmenting and being paved over by polarization and fear.

Joni Mitchell captured the danger decades ago. “You don’t know what you got … til it’s gone.” Alberta is learning that lesson in real time.

What is driving this erosion is not indifference alone, but fear. Fear of professional repercussions. Fear of social backlash. Fear of online harassment. Fear of being labelled, targeted or isolated.

These sentiments surface repeatedly in conversations across Alberta’s private and public sectors. People who privately express concern about the province’s political direction decline to speak publicly. They believe engagement is futile. They believe the costs outweigh the benefits.

“I don’t post about politics because I’m worried about repercussions at work.”

“There’s no point trying to have a discussion anymore.”

“The far right/far left shuts everything down.”

Whether every fear is justified is beside the point. The fear itself is real, and it is shaping behaviour. That behaviour has consequences.

Democracy cannot function when participation retreats behind closed doors. Private agreement is politically meaningless. Civic life does not respond to silent approval. It responds to visible, sustained engagement.

I speak from experience. I once had an employer instruct me to remove media commentary critical of United Conservative Party (UCP) policy that I believed was harmful to Alberta’s energy sector. I refused. That policy was later withdrawn. I am no longer with that employer, and I am better off for it.

The episode reinforced two realities. First, political engagement often carries personal and professional risk. Second, free expression matters more than comfort, particularly as democratic norms erode elsewhere, including in the United States.

A culture that stifles public expression is incompatible with a healthy democracy. Nor should anyone accept it.

This erosion is now evident in the rise of separatist rhetoric in Alberta. Calls for Alberta separation have gained renewed visibility in recent years through organized advocacy groups, public rallies and online campaigns. The movement presents itself as economic realism, but it collapses under scrutiny. It is a hollow performance that exploits grievance while undermining democratic cohesion.

The loudest voices dominate because too many reasonable ones have withdrawn. Social media rewards extremity. Silence creates a vacuum. That vacuum is being filled by the loudest and most extreme voices.

Ironically, my inbox tells a different story. Messages of private support arrive regularly from professionals, executives and community leaders who reject polarization and oppose separatism. Yet many of those same individuals will not speak publicly. They calculate the risk and opt out.

That is the tragedy. Democracy does not fail only when bad ideas win. It fails when good people decide not to contest them.

If you believe the political middle ground has served Alberta well, then it must be defended. Not privately. Not passively. Publicly and persistently.

Democracy does not survive timidity. It survives participation.


Bill Whitelaw is a director and advisor to many industry boards, including the Canadian Society for Evolving Energy, which he chairs. He speaks and comments frequently on the subjects of social licence, innovation and technology, and energy supply networks.


© Troy Media

 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

FORSETH -- Given the noted infractions of this agreement with OneBC leader Dallas Brodie, I request the Party immediate suspend the leadership campaign of Yuri Fulmer

I have personally emailed the following to the Board and Administration of the Conservative Party of BC:   TODAY (03/30) Yuri Fulmer, a candidate for the leadership of the Conservative Party of BC, made a pact with ONEBC leader Dallas Broldie, that if he is elected will commit the Conservative Party to the following. Specifically, the pact states : This Memorandum of Understanding outlines the definitive electoral and governing alliance that will be executed upon Yuri Fulmer’s election as Leader of the Conservative Party of British Columbia OneBC Party commits to not nominating or authorizing candidates in 88 of British Columbia’s 93 electoral districts. In exchange, the Conservative Party of BC, under the leadership of Yuri Fulmer, commits to not nominating or authorizing candidates in five (5) specific electoral districts . OneBC will be the sole standard-bearer for the right in those five districts. The specific ridings will be determined through mutual negotiation and fin...

Delays to the replacement of the Red Bridge? Kamloops North Thompson MLA Ward Stamer says they are, “Totally Unacceptable.”

I think it’s totally unacceptable that on one hand the Ministry of Transportation and Transit (MoTT) is saying they’re going to be responsible for putting together multiple replacement options with public engagement, and then in the same breath they're saying, ‘Oh, and by the way, we're going to start our geotechnical environmental and archaeological site assessments on both sides of the river, possibly beginning this summer.’ According to Stamer, that should already have been done. “Obviously, we're pretty sure it will be in the same location because there's really no other place to put it. So, if you're going to put in a bridge, you think that at least you'd be doing the archaeological assessments first off”, stated Stamer.   “If it's determined it has to be a free-span bridge, and it can't have anything or very minimal impact in the riverbed, they should already be determining that. It would help in the design, wouldn't it?” Stamer indicated...

Your government has a gambling problem (Troy Media)

Provinces call it “revenue,” but it looks a lot like exploitation of the marginalized The odds of winning Lotto Max are about 1 in 33 million. You’re statistically more likely to be struck by lightning than to win it. But your government is betting that statistics won’t hold you back; they’re counting on it. Across Canada, provincial governments not only regulate gambling, they also maintain a monopoly on lottery and gaming by owning and operating the entire legal market. That means every scratch card is government-issued, gambling odds are government-set, casino ads are government-funded and lottery billboards are government-paid. And these are not incidental government activities. They generate significant revenues that governments have powerful incentives to expand, not constrain. It would be one thing for our governments to encourage us to engage in healthy activities. We can quibble about whether the government should be trying to convince us to be more active or eat more vegetabl...

Labels

Show more