Not that long ago, while deep in the throes of a conversation about the world as we currently know it, my friend offered up a statement that immediately struck a chord of comprehension. “I think I’m just politically homeless,” she said, before continuing on to explain how lost and conflicted she’s felt over the last two years, quietly slipping back and forth from one perceived side to the other, unable to find a space or a group that seemed to genuinely reflect what she believed in, both in theory and in practice. This is something I’ve come to understand, myself, as I’ve struggled to identify where exactly on the political spectrum I land. If I’m being honest, prior to the pandemic, I gave politics a wide berth. If pressed, I would often describe myself as “socially liberal and fiscally conservative,” but in my heart of hearts I knew there had to be more to it. Yet, even despite that nagging feeling, I was impartial, uninformed and unencumbered enough by most political matters to keep running from the conversation – until I crashed straight into a wall. That wall, as you might have guessed, was the critical impasse presented by the COVID-19 pandemic. To begin, I think it’s important to note that, despite my limited understanding of politics for much of my life, many of my quiet ideologies were more liberal, in nature. I think this is fairly common amongst young people who are rife with somewhat marxist ideas about how the world should operate socially, seemingly unaware that social and economic considerations are two sides of the same coin. What I didn’t understand at the time, was that it was never really a matter of liberal vs. conservative, democratic vs. republican, good vs. bad, or social morals vs. economic acuity. This was a gross and stereotypical oversimplification of the complex issues which act as a cornerstone to our political landscape. And sure, this might have been easy to ignore when I was constantly excusing myself from the conversation but, as the world was introduced to the “new normal”, it was time for critical thinking, logical reasoning, and careful discernment to enter the chat.
So, why does it feel like the opposite happened? I understand that politics are complicated. I understand that we live within an age of digital connectivity where emotionally charged topics are given more air-time than ever before, and where extremism is often awarded on the basis of shock value and morbid engagement. I understand that the pandemic was an unprecedented event played out on a global scale, with countless lives at stake. I understand that there was no “right” or “perfect” way to handle these circumstances and, no matter what we did, conflict and loss would be an inevitable byproduct. But somewhere along the line, it feels like we completely derailed. From where I sit now, my view of the world (specifically, Canada) feels utterly, heartbreakingly fragmented. Most days, I feel simultaneously activated and disengaged, practically vibrating with a need to speak openly and honestly, whilst also paralyzed by fear of dogmatic backlash and social cruelty/dismissal. I’ve never once assumed I would get everything right – surely, none of us should be disillusioned enough to occupy such an ideological pedestal – but I’m also not sure how to exist within such a binary landscape. And so, I’ve continued to share my thoughts across public forums, knowing with heart wrenching certainty that it would likely cost me some friendships and invite some degree of volatility into my world, both online and offline. But what has become increasingly apparent, at least via my lens of the world, is that we aren’t arguing politics anymore – the wars we wage online, with neighbours, family members, co-workers, and friends aren’t often centred on logic, evidence, or even science. Instead, we’ve entered an era of identity politics: an approach wherein people of a particular gender, religion, race, social background, social class, environmental, or other identifying factors, develop political agendas that are based upon these identities. We have attached a moral hierarchy and class system to decisions that were meant to be scientific and logical in nature. Discussions of political policy are, after all, complicated – and many of us are currently too busy trying to desperately regulate our fried nervous systems to really dig into the more convoluted details of all available arguments. So, oftentimes, our consumption of information isn’t only convenient and passive – it’s lazy and underqualified, at a time when censorship disguised as the noble elimination of “misinformation” reigns supreme. What’s worse, is that we are paving the path to political consensus with arguments of identity, morality, and polarized stereotypes. We might not be familiar with the intricacies of liberal versus conservative platforms, but we do know that we want to be considered a good and moral person, right? We do know that we want to be viewed as someone who cares for their neighbours, who isn’t selfish, racist, misogynistic, extremist, or cruel… right? And so, we attach our very identity to political beliefs that we often haven’t appropriately vetted, and when faced with any hint of opposition, we self-destruct. We don’t interpret that opposition as an opportunity for nuance or reasonable debate and productive discussion, we view it as a personal attack on our idea of the world and our individual place in it. We subscribe, as I’ve said before, to a dangerously dogmatic way of thinking where moral superiority and political righteousness are grounds to not only dismiss someone else, but to seek out or celebrate their destruction. In a sense, we have replaced politics with ideological religion. Now, when we look at our current leadership, it’s not hard to see how we arrived at this point. It’s brilliant, really. Canada has always been praised for its democracy, and now our Prime Minister has identified and condemned a “fringe minority” as the common enemy to that democracy. To do this, he has leveraged increasingly divisive and inflammatory rhetoric that, simply put, has poured gas on the embers of national discontent, fear, and grief. And whenever he is faced with opposition, he quickly inserts emotionally-charged, divisive issues into the conversation to create a smokescreen. He is essentially preying on our desire to be good, moral people who are “on the right side of history”, by conflating our current circumstances with historical trauma and social issues that he knows will inflame the masses and skew arguments in his favour. He’s using hot-button accusations to silence and destroy anyone who he interprets as a threat to his position of political power and authority. As a Twitter user recently shared, “Cancel culture is authoritarianism from the establishment disguising itself as social justice. It’s really that simple. It’s not to help you.” This is our Prime Minister's trump card, and it seems to be the only card he has left to play. And so, with each passing week, Trudeau is increasingly hellbent on holding his perceived enemies accountable for discrepancies that he, himself, has committed, along with members of his political camp. The irony and hypocrisy is not lost on me, and it shouldn’t be lost on you, either. As the saying goes, “The sheep spend its whole life fearing the wolf, only to be eaten by the Shepard.” We are the sheep, the virus is the wolf and, right now, Trudeau’s government is the Shepard. We’ve been told to follow the science and “trust the experts”, and yet, even now as the “science has changed” (even according to his own, approved experts), Trudeau continues to dig his heels in deeper. If you’ve spent any time watching the debates unfold in the House of Commons, you would see his (arguably delusional) refusal play out in real-time. He skirts any and all critical questions about a plan out of this pandemic, and instead he hurls insults and doubles down on the same, broken script. It’s like watching the Titanic sink, in a sense – but if it’s up to him, none of us will get off the ship. And while I do not wish to debate conspiracy, I would urge you to, at the very least, take a hard look at his political track record (hint: it’s rife with nepotism, failed policies, misplaced spending and a complete lack of economic caution, unjustified personal spend, gross contradictions, ethics violations, financial scandals, and conflicts of interests). Trudeau’s team, as described by the World Economic Forum, is “focused on creating good middle class jobs, making life more affordable, keeping Canada’s communities safe, fighting climate change, and moving forward on reconciliation with Indigenous Peoples.” Trudeau is also celebrated as a proud feminist, having appointed Canada’s first gender balanced Cabinet. And yet, his handling of the pandemic response (extensive lockdown measures and mandates) has essentially desecrated the middle class and done irreparable harm to the economy, especially small business. In fact, the federal deficit skyrocketed from less than 1% of GDP in fiscal 2018-19, before the pandemic, to 15% in fiscal 2020-21, and the consolidated federal and provincial books showed a $326-billion deficit in 2020. Just this week, it was announced that Canada's inflation rate will rise to 5.1% under Trudeau's government, Our communities, which he assures us he wants to keep safe, are amore divided than they ever have been. On the National Day of Truth and Reconciliation, Trudeau faked his itinerary (claimed private meetings) and took a private plane to Tofino to go surfing. And despite his claim to be a proud feminist, it’s also important to note that the pandemic response has been disproportionately detrimental (economically and socially) for women. Not only that, but just this week, Trudeau wrongfully accused Conservative member Melissa Lantsman (who is, herself, a descendent of Holocaust survivals) of "standing with people who wave swastikas." What's worse, is that he has since refused to apologize for it, or retract his comments, despite being asked to do so on more than one occasion. I do not mean this to be an unfairly scathing review of Trudeau's character or time in office; I realize being the Prime Minister is a difficult job. But is this really someone who has appropriate grounds to express complete “intolerance” for members of the Canadian population who dare to disagree with his divisive policies? I would also urge you to consider what he has to gain here – why is he so unwilling to abandon these talking points which, we now know, are not founded in logic or justified by science? Could it be his ties to powerful groups, like the World Economic Forum and their proposal of a 'Great Reset'? Could it be related to a desire to transition Canada to a digital ID system and social credit system? Could it be his gross over-commitment to pharmaceutical companies and a continued vaccine and booster roll-out (despite emerging findings regarding the efficacy of the vaccines, evidence of adverse reactions, and the validity of PCR tests)? Lest we forget that big tech, mainstream media, and many trusted politicians and ‘experts’ dismissed the “lab leak theory” as dangerous conspiracy and misinformation for over a year, before admitting that the theory is more than likely true. What other information, that was once vehemently dismissed and disregarded across mainstream channels, could emerge in the coming months, and what would it mean for our government? I don’t claim to have these answers, but I think it’s always worth considering what motivations could be influencing bizarre, extreme or seemingly unjustified behaviour. While we’re at it, let’s take a quick trip down memory lane. In January of 2021, Trudeau said, “Vaccine mandates are extreme measures that could have real divisive impacts in Canada. There are a broad range of reasons why someone might not get vaccinated.” In 2017, he said, “The measure of a just society is not whether we stand up for people’s rights when it’s easy or popular to do so, it’s whether we recognize rights when it’s difficult, and when it’s unpopular. We are a society that stands up for people’s rights, and when governments fail to respect people’s rights, we all end up paying.” And yet, today, Trudeau is on an increasingly deranged crusade to destroy the lives of anyone who does not fall in line with his narrative – a narrative which has failed to evolve, even slightly, in the face of new information and expertise. He isn't standing up for people's rights – he is actively revoking them. And so, now we find ourselves at a very scary turning point in modern Canadian history. In response to the trucker convoy and related protests in Ottawa and around Canada, Trudeau has enacted the ‘Emergencies Act’ for the first time in history (it was formerly known as the ‘War Measures Act’), which allows the government to completely bypass ordinary democratic processes. If you are unfamiliar with what exactly the Emergency Act entails, I encourage you to look into it. And as Pierre Poilievremp has aptly pointed out, this extreme measure was not used in the wake of 9/11, or when a gunman entered parliamentary buildings and shot a Canadian solider, and was not used in response to the blockades of the pipeline in British Columbia. So, why now? If the use of the Emergency Act in this instance does not bother you, because you disagree with the protests or simply feel unaffected by continued mandates, I urge you to consider the bigger picture and look beyond this particular moment in time. Just because a political decision doesn’t negatively impact you right now, doesn’t mean it won’t pose a threat to you somewhere down the line. This move is a direct threat to Canada’s democracy – freedom to speak, freedom to assemble, freedom to work, freedom to travel, freedom to remain politically and ideologically autonomous – it all currently hangs in the balance. And, interestingly, as Trudeau has continued to justify his decisions as an integral measure to protect the lives and wellbeing of Canadians, any mention of the threat of COVID-19 itself has seemingly been abandoned. He’s clearly more interested in exposing the names of donors, and freezing the bank accounts of anyone who has defied him (according to Chrystia Freeland, anyone who donated more than $25 to the convoy could have their accounts compromised by the government) than discussing the current realities of the virus which got us here in the first place. Isn’t that curious – especially at a time when Canadian Premiers are actively dropping restrictions and passport systems and insisting it’s time to move on? Is this not a severe and bizarre over-correction and example of continued government overreach? Are we at war with the protesters requesting an end to divisive mandates that are no longer justified by science and are increasingly devastating to our social and economic landscape? Or is Trudeau at war with us? Whether you are right, left, moderate, or feel politically homeless right now – whether you voted for Trudeau in the midterm election, or the time before that – I hope you can at least consider the insanity and outrage of our current position. Around the world, political leaders and media personalities are all beginning to ask the same questions: What is going on in Canada? Has Trudeau completely lost it? Even Nayib Bukele, the 43rd president of El Salvador, recently tweeted, “Are these the people who like to give lessons to other countries about democracy and freedom? This is one of the top ranking countries in the “democracy index”? Your credibility on these topics is now worth 0.” If that wasn’t enough, even China has called attention to this insanity, with Chen Weihua recently tweeting, “Hong Kong cannot invoke National Security Law against violent petrol-bomb-throwing mobs but Canada’s Trudeau can invoke Emergency Powers to crack down on peaceful protesters. Where’s the logic?” You might not buy into the concept of “mass psychosis”, but it’s hard to deny that there is some sort of psychosis happening here, if we are still content to follow and align with a leader who is exhibiting the tendencies of an unchecked and unapologetic, egotistical dictator. It seems to me, if we’re not careful, the very political party which is supposed to champion and protect democracy, will destroy it before our eyes. This may be Trudeau’s Canada – but it’s certainly not mine.
Comentarios