Freedom Flyer 6

To: The (News) Editor of the Oracle

Regarding Deanna Wolf's article, Candidates Speak Out" in the May 20/85 edition of the Oracle, I would like to make clear my position on the London South Election of 1985.

First of all, I think the meeting of the candidates at South Secondary was a useful and educating experience. What I object to is the school's response to Robert Metz and the Freedom Party. I think a label such as "anarchistic" is a harsh way of putting things when it comes to talking about the Freedom Party. While Robert Metz certainly is a "self-confident, good-speaking individual who knows what he's talking about," the part about anarchy could not be further from the truth. "Anarchy" has bad connotations. One thinks not only of an absence of government, but also of a state of political unrest, and a society of rebels.

Too many people regard the Freedom Party as a joke -- they compare it to the Rhinocerous Party. What they don't realize is that the Freedom Party is a serious group of people fighting for what they believe in, not a bunch of dreamers who make up fancy slogans (as was brought up in the auditorium to the applause of many). In fact it is the political leaders of the other three parties that waste time and money making up such eye-catching euphemisms like PETROCAN.

What struck me most, though, was the speaking abilities of each of the candidates. Joan Smith, Dave Winninger, and Gord Walker all spoke as true politicians would -- as if we (the audience) didn't exist. One could easily picture each of them practising their speeches in front of a mirror at home -- and seeing only themselves. Any good ideas they might have had were lost in a maze of political jargon. Robert Metz, on the other hand, talked to us openly as a person and was more of an M.C. who literally had to translate what the other parties were saying.

It is obvious from this, that most politicians don't care about who they're talking to -- they just want your vote.