SpiralTruth

Elizabeth May just about won my vote (and may still) with this statement:

We believe, as in the recent theories of Richard Florida, that there is such a thing as a creative class. And the creative class leads to investment, leads to greater economic activity, leads to community health.

It isn’t just that she shares my taste in sociological reading. The Green Party’s entire platform, on everything from the economy to the environment to foreign policy, rewards and protects creativity, which is often undervalued by the powers that be.

We’re becoming a culture of managers in North America, but to be good and effective, managers have to manage something. Every society needs a sustainable level of production to support the managerial class. Florida’s book looks at the emerging creative class, which represents a refreshing middle ground between a factory worker and a manager.

The classic structure has been that the factory worker works his way up into various levels of management. The emerging creative class adds another option for movement, one where instead of moving up or down on a ladder, you tend to move laterally. Creative jobs are generally more fun and higher paying than assembly line work, but unlike management, they involve creating something, which ensures that our economy is fueled by real production. And, as the managerial class adjusts to handle this new style of worker, I think we’re getting better managers.

It’s also just nice to see someone recognizing a sector that many of my friends and I have chosen, and it looks like the Green Party would make it easier, not harder, for us to do what we love, and for society at large to benefit from it.

Jack Layton went on to propose another interesting idea: to make the first $20,000 of what an artist earns on copyright and residuals tax free. I think this is a great idea, and I’d even like to see it replace classic funding models. One thing I don’t agree with is artificially supporting the arts with excessive grants, etc. I think it doesn’t reward arts so much as it rewards those who are good at applying for grants. Art should change with the times and too much separation between artist and patron results in artists being out of touch and an ever narrowing mainstream for the average patron. Giving a tax break like this recognizes the inherent risk involved in being an artist while still rewarding artists in a way that is proportional to the demand for their art.

I was planning on voting strategically, but after watching these debates, I might try just one last time that noble practice of voting for my hopes, not my fears.