The more complex the issue, the more politicians are eager to simplify for their political advantage.
In its most extreme, we see Donald Trump of dutifully trying to capitalize on the recent shootings at an Orlando, Fla. gay bar by making it all about “radical Islam”. It’s a narrative that neatly fits his policy of banning Muslims from immigrating to the U.S.
Trump’s argument conveniently leaves out the reality that the gunman was born in Queens, N.Y.
And notwithstanding the shooter’s stated motivation and pledges of loyalty to ISIS) there was really likely a series of complex mental health and other factors that caused this Muslim man (who had a penchant of hanging around gay bars) to gun down 49 innocent people.
However, mentioning “radical Islam” as much as he can does simplify things for Trump’s support who want to believe there is a simple way to end such threats.
Of course, such over-simplification by politics isn’t always so dramatic.
But it does consistently happen.
And it happens rather close to home where politicians will take a nugget of logic and pound on it until it fits their purposes.
Take the 1990s NDP government that decided to close 52 rural hospitals and the Plains Health Centre in Regina in response to the massive debt and structural deficit left behind by the Progressive Conservative government of the 1980s.
Logic suggested something had to be done, but what was less logical was closing the best hospital facility in Regina and spending $100-million-plus to renovate the oldest hospital facility in Regina.
Even less logical was leaving vast swaths of rural Saskatchewan without emergency care. (If the NDP felt the need to close these hospitals, should they not have considered the value of STARS ambulance?)
But logic in politics doesn’t work that way.
Instead, it is the nature of politicians to take a complex issue, strip away a lot of logic from the discussion and leave voters only with what politicians think voters want to hear.
In a very real way, this was exactly what Premier Brad Wall is now doing in his bid to convince supporters that the oil industry is under siege from the left.
Now, don’t get me wrong.
The logic part is that there isn’t much logic in the “Leap Manifesto” now being explored by the federal NDP. In fact, it’s rather nuts, starting with its rush to end all fossil fuel usage and to abandon large-scale commercialized farming in favour of boutique small (read: organic; non-GMO farming).
Wall is right that such notions can be beaten with facts. And it is fact that converting Canada to a carbon-less economy would be ridiculously unaffordable.
It is also a fact that it makes more sense for Canadians to build pipelines — especially the Canada East pipeline — than to import oil from Saudi Arabia.
But let’s face it: This Leap Manifesto notion is not going anywhere.
And Wall is just over-simplifying matters to point of absurdity by suggesting the Leap Manifesto or Hollywood crowd (including the likes of 1980s star Darryl Hannah) are a threat to the oil industry.
Wall is doing his job by defending unemployed oil workers, but they are out of work because oil is less $50 US a barrel — not because of the Leap Manifesto, Darryl Hannah or the notion that investors are bailing from oil because of massive environment concerns.
Work on convincing people in the east of the validity of building pipelines for Western oil rather than importing from disreputable regimes in the Middle East.
Help put oil workers back to work by pressuring the federal government to offer financial help with abandon wells.
But don’t insult voters’ intelligence by simplifying a complex issue like oil. This problem deserves more thoughtful consideration.
Murray Mandryk has been covering provincial politics for over 22 years.
