Promises, physics and the parallel universe

Russell Wangersky
Send to a friend

Send this article to a friend.

“I think we have a good record here of delivering on what we’ve said we would do,” Stephen Harper said during a campaign stop in Conception Bay South last Thursday.

“We have a good record of serving the people in Newfoundland and Labrador.”

Forget partisan politics in dealing with that little chestnut — let’s talk quantum physics.

Because there’s got to be a way to make sense of the peculiar world where Stephen Harper, during the last election, promised to exclude non-renewable resource revenue from the federal equalization formula, reversed himself (costing this province’s treasury some $1.6 billion in the process), yet still thinks his party has “a good record of delivering on what we said we would do.”

The simplest answer?

String theory, and the concept that the Stephen Harper who was

in C.B.S. was actually a different Stephen Harper than the one who made a clear and definite promise to do one thing and then went ahead and did something quite different.

String theory is a sort of physics that’s meant to explain one of those most major of physics problems, i.e., how quantum physics and gravity dovetail. To quote the self-styled Gypsy punk band Gogol Bordello, it’s a “supertheory of supereverything.”

Living in a limited dimension

Anyway, among other things, string theory suggests that we’re kind of stunted in this world of ours — that while we live in a paltry three dimensions, there might actually be many more dimensions, including the possibility of parallel dimensions that we’re not only unaware of, but unable to test for. (I could, at this point, move off into a more bizarre description of how the strings in string theory attach to dimensional panels known as branes, but that’s more painful and head-twisting than listening to back-to-back campaign debates.)

But an alternate dimension could explain — without simply suggesting that Harper believes members of the electorate are short-memoried fools — why Harper thinks a written and signed promise broken is actually a promise kept.

Perhaps we’ve swapped Harpers. Somehow, the wrong strings were pulled and this Harper is actually from a different dimension — one where we actually received the promised non-renewable resource revenues Harper and Finance Minister Jim Flaherty snatched away.

(Maybe Premier Kathy Dunderdale came from the same dimension. That might explain why she believes Harper’s mere word that a Conservative government will provide loan guarantees for the Muskrat Falls project is good enough.)

Believe it or not, string theory postulates that there is a concept known as supersymmetry, where particles in our universe have a related superpartner. And that also lends some credence to the theory.

For particles known as fermions, the superpartners are identified by having an “S” added to the front of their names — so that electron superpartners are selectrons, quark superpartners are squarks.

So perhaps the Harper superpartner — the one now postulating that, in his particular alternate universe, the Conservatives have always kept their promises — would be a Sharper.

Strangely fitting, hey? Physics: it just blows you away.

Another explanation

But to get serious here for a moment: perhaps a more frightening examination of Harper’s comments about the Conservative record is that he might actually believe that what he’s saying is true. He might actually believe that his government did deliver on its promises.

What makes that concept the most frightening of all is what it would mean for any promises he’s making now.

The Conservatives have tried to make electoral hay with the concept that, while all three of the major parties have promised loan guarantees for the Muskrat Falls project, only the Conservatives (with the stipulation of having to have a majority government) would be able to deliver.

But deliver what? The provincial government here used to provide loan guarantees for business ventures — but it also instituted a percentage-based loan guarantee fee. The same could apply federally, raking in cash for the federal loan guarantee “service,” and Harper could still walk the fine line of “delivering on what we’ve said we would do.”

Now, a loan guarantee fee has not been mentioned by anyone — I’m using it as an example of one of possible caveats (and there are many) that could be added to allow a government to claim it had “delivered” without ever doing anything of the kind.

You know you’re in trouble when you can’t decide which is worse: a politician who knows he’s telling a lie to your face, or one who actually believes that lie to be the truth.

Perhaps the parallel universe really would be a more palatable explanation.

Russell Wangersky is The Telegram’s editorial page editor. He can be reached by email at

Organizations: Conservatives

Geographic location: Newfoundland and Labrador, C.B.S.

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Thanks for voting!

Top of page



Recent comments

  • David
    April 30, 2011 - 15:38

    I don't care if he actaully DOES drink the kitten blood such as the media have been spewing for 5 years now.....if he's not stealing my tax money and handing it over in brown envelpoes to his "bon amis", he'll get my vote every time. And I hope the CBC's Terry Mi-Left-Ski will finally get that job he so deserves....being self-employed.

    • Taxpayer
      May 03, 2011 - 14:09

      No Davie he is going to spend it all on cottage in Ontario.

  • Mark
    April 30, 2011 - 09:43

    Finally, something of substance comes from all the hot air expelled during this election: Gogol Bordello! I just finished downloading a couple of their albums from iTunes and am rocking out as I get lunch ready for the kids. Funny, but Gypsy-Punk Rock seems to capture the tone of this election perfectly. Thanks Russell.

  • W BAgg
    April 30, 2011 - 07:46

    The worst trait anyone can have is to not see REALITY, or at least see stuff from others point of view. I am of the belief that Harper doesn't believe he lied. I'd feel much better if he new he was lying. Let this election be a wake up call to ALL politicians especially our MHAs. With our system we vote an MHA/MP and the leading party gets to pick the leader of the prov/country. That's why the PCs had so much success, Williams and likewise the Cons have so little, Harper. Sullivan & Manning are good people but don't stand a chanc because of HArper. I hope the prov MHAs haven't forgot this. Dudnderdale won't get most of them re-elected. I'd be careful who they hitch their wagon to, most have turned away voters by supporting Harper already

  • MBC
    April 30, 2011 - 06:57

    What NL, having a limited knowledege of Harper, would ever vote for him.? The ABC campaign should be on as long as Harper is in power. I would have like to hear or read an article by Danny Williams giving reasons why we should not vote for Harper. It should be usefull information not just to the general public but to our PC MHAs. With limited time before we vote, he should call the Open Line shows to give his comments.

    • mary
      May 01, 2011 - 12:20

      Please, lay off the Danny stuff. Who cares what Danny thinks? I can decide who to vote for without Danny giving me a list of his opinions. What a disservice to the people of NL to suggest they can only make up their mind if Danny gives them his opinions.

    • Taxpayer
      May 03, 2011 - 14:14

      Mary based on your comments Mr.Williams is much better informed than you and it would thus would be of benefit to you to listen to them or you will stay misinformed.