I didn’t mean to
get into an ideological Twitter battle with the National Citizens Coalition, but
I did.
It all started
when I wrote a column criticizing the conservative advocacy group for its
decision to actively support the Sun News Network’s application for a “mandatory
carriage” license. My point was that such support runs counter to the NCC’s
stated conservative principles.
To me, it’s
obvious: forcing citizens to pay for a TV channel they may not want to watch
violates an individual’s right to free choice. Conservatives are supposed to
support free choice.
At any rate, a few
hours after my column appeared, NCC director Stephen Taylor responded to my
argument with a well-reasoned, thoughtful defence of his group’s
action.
Ha, just kidding!
What Taylor
really did was go on Twitter and lob personal
insults my way.
That didn’t
surprise me. After all, on page one
of the Big Book of Cheap Political Tricks
it says: if you can’t
attack the message, attack the messenger.
But there was one
Taylor tweet in
our exchange that did astonish me.
After I suggested
the NCC was betraying its principles, Taylor responded thusly: “Keep up the good
work. You're making us less free by holding reality-based pragmatic actors to a
fruitless idealistic standard.”
When I read that,
my jaw dropped. Here was a senior officer in the NCC basically saying his
group’s core mandate was a “fruitless idealistic standard.”
Amazing.
I wonder if NCC
fundraising letters start something like this:
Dear
NCC supporter:
Please send us
your hard-earned money so we can waste it trying to achieve a fruitless,
idealistic standard.
Anyway, to my
mind, Taylor ’s
odd tweet confirms what I have long suspected: the NCC has lost its original
motivational spirit, not to mention its sense of
purpose.
I happen to know a
thing or two about the NCC’s original spirit, because I worked for the
organization for 22 years.
And when I worked
for the NCC, we were proud to set “idealistic” standards. We fought unabashedly
for free markets, smaller government and individual
freedom.
Nor did we think
fighting for our values was “fruitless”, even though we often faced overwhelming
odds.
As they say in
hockey: it’s not how many you win — it’s how many you show up
for.
But sadly, today’s
NCC is apparently less about fighting for principle and more about pursuing what
Taylor calls “reality-based pragmatic” goals.
So I suppose that
means on one day the NCC will push for less government and on the next it will
push the government to limit consumer choice.
Come to think of
it, that’s not reality-based or pragmatic. It’s just
confused.
The question is,
does Canada really need a confused
organization like today’s NCC? I say that because we already have plenty of
reality-based, pragmatic organizations that spurn principle.
We call them
political parties.
What
we do need is an organization
that has the courage to push political parties to do the right thing, even if
the right thing is unpopular or difficult to
achieve.
We need what the
late libertarian academic Benjamin Rogge called “an island of sanity in an
increasingly insane world.”
Oh well. I suppose
I shouldn’t be too surprised that the NCC has dramatically changed since my
time. It’s the nature of any organization to evolve. And the NCC has clearly
evolved into a kind of organizational zombie.
It still staggers
along from issue to issue and reacts from time to time, but it no longer has a
soul.
This article originally appeared in Ipolitics.