Justin Trudeau Suggests 78% of Canadian Parents Are Aligned with "Far-right Political Actors" and Haters
Justin Trudeau Suggests 78% of Canadian Parents Are Aligned with "Far-right Political Actors" and Haters
Because I realize nuance and humour are difficult to convey and very often outright lost in print, and because I know there are some readers who are just waiting to pounce on any perceived inaccuracies in what I write, please allow me to offer the following disclaimer:
The above title, though somewhat click baity, is pretty much exactly where we're at in the country of Canada at the moment.
Now, on with our story…
According to a recent poll by the Angus Reid Institute, 78% of Canadian parents would like to be informed if their child is changing genders in school. This number actually increases to 82% among parents with children under the age of 18.
The inspiration for this poll was undoubtedly the decision by New Brunswick premier Blaine Higgs and Saskatchewan premier Scott Moe that transgender and non-binary students under the age of 16 must get their parents’ consent before requesting that teachers refer to them by different preferred names or pronouns at school.
The New Brunswick legislation was also the inspiration for this comment by our Prime Minister:
“Far-right political actors are trying to outdo themselves with the types of cruelty and isolation they can inflict on these already vulnerable people. Right now, trans kids in New Brunswick are being told they don’t have the right to be their true selves, that they need to ask permission… We have to stand up for the freedoms we believe in and continue our work of letting love be louder than hate.”
Are these 78% of Canadian parents truly aligned with the “far-right political actors” Justin Trudeau is referring to?
It's entirely possible, since back in July he also told a Muslim parent in Calgary that his concerns (about this exact issue) were merely a product of misinformation from the “American right-wing”. He went on tell this guy that these were the same people “on the far right who have consistently stood against Muslim rights and the Muslim community.”
If there's one thing Trudeau has proven to be very good at, it's stoking division between people groups. Remember how he once said, “diversity is our strength”? We thought “our” was referring to all of us, but I think what he was really referencing was his government. Now he's been using that diversity against all of us for the last eight years.
Maybe the most concerning aspect of this speech (and one that has become all too common recently) is the conflation of a parent’s concern for their children with the “far-right” (whatever that is) and then the association of that with “hate”. Yes, it's fine to let “love be louder than hate”, but it seems like there is a huge and increasing number of things being labelled “hate” these days and a rather curious insinuation of what “love” means.
Why is it that any criticism of topics related to gender is now deemed hateful? And more importantly, why is a parent's concern for their child now looked upon as “far-right”?
When did school boards come to this realization that they know better than parents how to raise other people's children? And what happened to make society okay with this?
As for the first two questions, I can postulate that perhaps the easiest (and laziest) way to assert the validity of one’s views in the absence of empirical data (or even sensible reasoning) is to call someone a hater in the hopes of shutting them down. Also, the term “far-right” has become a catch-all for anyone who disagrees with mainstream orthodoxy. This has been the tactic employed by the “far-left” most of the time the “hater” label has been applied.
The third question regarding school board antics is a little tougher to pin down, but as to what makes society “okay” with it - I think that's largely the same answers as the first two, namely that no one wants to be called a far-right hater.
I’ve never actually believed that most people are okay with it at all, and this poll appears to confirm that.
With the rise of hate legislation , there is an endless array of things that could be called “hate”.
While there are likely legitimate examples of “hate crimes”, most of these are simply regular crimes that now require speculation as to what the person was actually thinking at the time, which brings it ever more snugly into the arena of thoughtcrime.
I believe the reason certain people like to throw around the H-word so liberally is that it obfuscates and confuses the real issue, which is that they wish to insist their “rights” trump everyone else's rights. The word racist is used in much the same manner today - again, I'm not saying racism doesn't exist, just that most of the time the word is used nowadays it's a stretch to make it apply.
The background to all of this is of course the transgender issue, and the activism that surrounds it. Some would say that the activism is the real issue.
My position on this is pretty much the same as it is on every other issue, which is that people should be allowed to do whatever they want as long as they're not hurting anyone while they're doing it. In the case of the transgender issue, I don't believe anyone should be required to agree with any of it, any more than one should be required to agree with someone else’s religion. I definitely don't believe some of these ideas should be taught in school as though they're scientific fact. I believe this hurts our kids. There's also the much more harmful issue of “gender affirming care” of minors which, though couched in benevolent terms, has caused real and irreversible harm to many young people. Both of these things violate the one and only rule I have for going along with it.
None of this means I hate anybody, even though I keep hearing that it does mean that. Honestly, I would have no problem hanging out with any of these people because I'm pretty sure we've got way more in common that we have differences, but that still doesn't mean I should feel the need to fully agree with them on this issue. I presume the vast majority of people labelled as haters and transphobes feel precisely the same as this, because most people really just want to be left alone.
I obviously have no idea how hard it is for young people to "come out" to their friends and family, nor do I need to fully understand the dynamics to realize it has got to be scary as shit. I can empathize with the feeling even if I disagree with the premise.
I look at this issue much like I do the Mormons or the Jehovah's Witnesses whenever they come to my door, and I really don't care if you think that's a poor comparison. I never shoe these people away, and I'm never rude to them. One of the first things I tell them is that they will very likely never see me in their church. And I don't say it in a demeaning sort of way, but simply as a matter of fact, because I'm just not into it. They usually then tell me about the good stuff they're doing in the community, and that they'd love to help mow my lawn or whatever, and then they hand me a business card and leave. It's not awkward and it's not unpleasant. Nobody is hating on anyone and we've each had a chance to say our piece and it's all good, even if we disagree.
The reason it's important to me to let them know where I stand right off the bat is because from that point on, each of us knows where the other one is coming from and there's no hidden agenda. I know they are there to recruit me and they know it's not going to work but they also know that they don't need to worry that I'm going to swear at them or chase them off my lawn.
The bottom line is this: no one likes to be accused of being a hateful person - especially when the accusation is false. The more these accusations are levelled against regular people, the more regular people are going to start to push back against those levelling the accusations. It's a bit of a vicious circle. Until somewhat recently, most people have seemingly just gone along with it, but you can see they're now getting tired of it, which draws more accusations of hatred and intolerance.
This is what a few courageous politicians have now stepped into in the name of properly representing those who elected them. Not only have they had to endure criticism from the trans activists (which was to be expected), but they've also taken fire from our own Prime Minister.
Even though schools are under provincial jurisdiction, this hasn't stopped Marci Ien, Trudeau's Minister for Women, Gender Equality, and Youth from stating that she is “watching closely as this develops” since it is a “life-or-death situation” for trans youth. She also said the government has not ruled out “taking action”, whatever that means.
I would strongly suspect that more premiers will be joining the ranks of New Brunswick and Saskatchewan before too long, as this is hardly a “fringe” position, regardless of what some would have us believe.
One would hope that the leader of a progressive country like Canada would not have to think too long and hard in deciding between the desires of 78% of his electorate and what is literally a fringe ideology, but this is precisely the kind of battles he loves to take on. Lucky for us, it's looking more and more like it’s a battle that he’s eventually going to lose.
Well put. I found myself agreeing with a lot, and on the points of disagreement, you made me empathize. Trudeau does seem to be taking an unnecessarily divisive tone, but in his defense, you guys do align with extremist nut bags on many issues, so it gets hard to separate the reasonable from the unreasonable on your side of the fence.
There was a slight misrepresentation of the study you provided though. The New Brunswick policy requires schools to get ‘parental consent’, to have their names/ pronouns changed, which actually goes against the wishes of the majority of the parents, according to that survey (except in SK, where it was 50/50)
Jewish people were approximately 0.7% of the German population in the 1930s. In some senses Judaism was a fringe ideology; would you say Hitler "won" that battle... or?
What battle do you think is being fought here? No private citizen has ever been "required" to believe or say anything in Canada since her inception.
As usual, you've gotten it completely wrong.