Editorials - July 26, 2024

The electoral race in the United States continues to have more twists and turns than a cheap garden hose. Donald Trump barely had time to complete his nomination acceptance speech, resplendent in his ear bandage thanks to an unhinged gunman, before President Joe Biden suddenly decided that he would withdraw from the race and throw his support behind Vice-President Kamala Harris.

 

As a mixed-race woman, Harris is at a crossroads for America. Will she be able to overcome the historic and persistent sexism and racism that has thwarted every previous attempt? It looks like the Democrats are willing to stake their claim, and she will likely gain the nomination, but who she selects as her running mate could secure her future.

 

Just weeks after attending a celebrity-studded fundraiser for Biden, George Clooney wrote an impassioned op-ed piece for the New York Times calling on him to drop out of the race. On Tuesday, Clooney threw his support to Harris, endorsing “her historic quest”. He should do even more. A Harris-Clooney ticket would be unbeatable. The star power that Clooney could bring to the campaign would blow up the election. Men love him, women adore him, Trump hates him. He would bring far more charisma to the role than any of the run-of-the-mill Democratic governors that populate the potential candidate lists of the pundits on the 24-hour news stations. If Kamala Harris could give the nod to George Clooney, the election would provide very interesting media fodder. – DS

In the early days of the corporate aspect of the Pride movement, your favourite businesses or stores would either make a point of raising a Pride flag or celebrating the LGBTQ community - with varying levels of sincerity, it’s fair to say - or they wouldn’t. Some would read into the silence of those who didn’t speak up in June, others wouldn’t, but those that didn’t want to support Pride just stayed out of it.

 

Last week, John Deere, unsolicited, issued a statement detailing the end of its participation in “external social or cultural awareness parades, festivals or events” and diversity quotas. Several stories have chalked this statement up to backlash on social media, which has played a role in other companies, such as Budweiser, scaling back efforts to celebrate Pride. However, those companies just backed away or quietly ended efforts that seemed to clash with its core demographic of customers. Deere has made a production out of it.

 

The company seems to be banking on its customers being impressed by this kind of statement in the hopes that it will boost sales and calm the waters on social media. Whether it will pay off or if the social media din represents actual paying customers remains to be seen. But, for now, the company has backed away from everything but tractors.

 

While Deere and any other company most certainly has the right to endorse or not endorse whatever it likes, this appears to be a victory for the bullies and the time-honoured tactic of intimidation.

 

As companies step away from Pride and scale back diversity, equity and inclusion practices, it can feel like hard-earned progress is being tossed away company by company. After such a bold statement from Deere, people will no doubt have their say with their wallets. – SL 

Last week, North Huron Council voted to eliminate the public’s opportunity to make comments at open meetings. Reeve Paul Heffer, whose notice of motion initiated the demise of public comment, vacated the reeve’s chair at last week’s meeting to advocate for scuttling the imperfect, yet symbolic democratic convention. This demonstrates a disappointing lack of interest in leadership. It’s a reeve’s responsibility to chair council meetings, which includes keeping speakers on topic. Respectful civil discourse is a cornerstone of democratic governance. 

 

Some individuals have abused the opportunity to effectively be heard by their elected officials, but this doesn’t justify removing the option for everyone else who wants to voice their reasonable concerns regarding important municipal decisions. Quelling the discourse of all citizens just to avoid potentially uncomfortable confrontations is like burning down the house to get rid of a few pesky flies. Some councillors argue that forming a delegation provides a better opportunity for dialogue. However, delegations are approved and scheduled at the discretion of an unelected clerk. With agendas posted midday on Fridays and meetings happening on Mondays at 6 p.m., there is very little time for community members to effectively organize themselves into delegations and write letters when an issue crops up that will directly affect them in some way. Why take agency away from the people, when council could look to improve the process rather than shutting the whole thing down?

 

Removing public comment from meetings risks silencing the voices that need to be heard the most. Council should reconsider its choice and find a way to balance orderly proceedings with the fundamental right of citizens to speak out. Democracy is not designed to be this quiet. – SBS