Der Angriff von Doug Ford auf Speed -Kameras zeigt, wie gut Politik für miese öffentliche Ordnung sorgen kann
https://www.thestar.com/opinion/contributors/doug-ford-s-attack-on-speed-cameras-shows-how-good-politics-can-make-for-lousy/article_06fef8b0-9195-4fc1-8010-86f37176e047.html
2 Kommentare
It’s hard to take progressives seriously when they are frequently morally opposed to punishing crime (instead insisting on rehabilitation, not punishment) or using harsh consequences as a form of deterrence when it comes to violent crime yet insist on punishing provincial offences like speeding and using harsh consequences as a form of deterrence.
How do you explain it other than ideological capture? Punishment and deterrence through consequences magically work to stop provincial offences but somehow not criminal offences? The only way I can explain it is progressives live in urban centres, don’t own cars, care a lot about making the streets safer for them crossing the road or biking to work, yet (for reasons I don’t understand) don’t care nearly as much about victims of violent crime.
The author of the articles derides Ford for caring about public safety when it comes to violent crime but not as much for speeding. Does he not recognize he himself has been an advocate for the opposite, which makes even less sense?
Well, yeah. That’s literally what populism is all about. Screw inconvenient facts or data, just govern based on your feelings — even if it doesn’t solve people’s problems, or actually makes them worse.
Ideas that get low-information voters excited are usually bad policy, and good policy is rarely popular. It is what it is.