The Do's and Don'ts of Political Behaviour

We are now aware Canada had a federal election around two weeks ago. The results came to an end as the CBC announced that Canada has a liberal majority government. Canadians including myself are all excited for what Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has in store for our country and while most of us are on the edge of our seats there are some people that are not too impressed with the results. That is completely fine because as a country with a democratic political system citizens have the freedom to have different political morals but with being said I have noticed the bashing of our new prime minister in a poor matter in terms of how they are stating their view point. What I have noticed is the act of Canadian citizens attacking Mr Trudeau as a person and not basing their argument on the liberal parties mandate. I find this astonishing because this style of debate is an example of poor argumentative skills. To have a sound and valid argument is to have this formula:

This formula is called Modus ponens. In logic it is a formula that creates valid, simple argument form or rule of inference. How this is related to what some opposing citizens are saying is their 'argument' does not follow this formula thus, their argument is not sound. What they are actually using is a fallacy called the straw man fallacy. They are using the opposing political views, comparing to the liberal parties mandate and using it to attack Prime Minister Justin Trudeau as a person and not towards liberal party mandate. They are bashing Mr. Trudeau on behalf that he is going to do a poor job running the country because he supports views/ideals that are not equal to the opposition. An example would be the legalization and regulation of marijuana. How they use this to attack him as a person is they found out his past work experience and the degree he received in post secondary school and combine all three to form an argument. They think that base on this ground he will perform poorly as a prime minister of Canada which in my personal opinion is not a solid argument. I can understand why people would think that he would not perform as well because having prior experience related to his new role would have a better outcome. What is I find unprofessional about this form of argument is Mr Trudeau has not have a chance to act as a Prime Minister of Canada. His views are very new and scary to some citizens but give him a chance to get comfortable in this new power position. I am not saying that the political morals of the opposition because I find no wrong in having different views politically. What I am proposing instead is the idea of having an open mind which is something that we all need to work on.

Having an open mind is a powerful skill to possess because it allows for the freedom to think freely and discuss various topics with the opposition in a civilized manor. It allows the prevention of possible racist comments towards minorities and/or majorities of any race, colour and gender. It allows for the prevention of oppression to happen within communities and it allows for the prevention of the act of positionally and bias to take place nationally and globally. In order for the country of Canada to develop on good grounds is to allow for our new prime minister to perform successfully as a representative of the liberal party and Canada is for us Canadians to not simply attack him as a person but to raise questions that we believe should be heard all under the umbrella of an open mind.