Rex Murphy: Trudeau's wokeism is a dismissal of everything that counts
February 7 2023
Rex Murphy. Re-printed without permission.
So now we have, at least for the time being, a state-sponsored “representative” to combat Islamophobia.
I say for the time being only because there are concerted mutterings out of Quebec that the advocate-activist so appointed is an ill choice. And as all know Justin Trudeau has an eagle’s eye for alarms coming out of his home province.
So representative Amira Elghawaby’s elevation may rest on a pillar of sand. Her pre-appointment (shall I term them Franco-phobic?) comments, that the “majority of Quebecers” are swayed by “anti-muslim sentiment,” may not have been fully erased in the minds of most Quebecers by her post-appointment apology for them.
They were — those comments — rather stern. As is almost always the case with advocate-activists for any cause.
I know I’m wandering a bit but advocate-activists — think of the entire tribe of woke inquisitionists — almost always adopt the tones of Jeremiah (minus his eloquence) when they spy what they endow as a breach of their code. They shake with wrath and denounce with fury. Their certitude, a thing of wonder. However time and circumstance may work wonders.
When Ms. Elghawaby wrote of Quebec — and for that matter spoke as she did of dear honoured Queen Elizabeth, denouncing the monarchy as a symbol of “racial oppression” and her dismissal of Canada Day — she spoke with a heart and mind unmixed with the hope of elevation to appointment and salary of being Canada’s “official” rapporteur — state-endorsed authority — on the cause that was her mission.
There were no cross-winds then. No provocation then to interrogate her own language, to give second reflection to her own possible — is this word permitted — biases?” A further side-thought: can one who lives to combat bias, have a bias?
A further rabbit-hole, could some “anti-bias” campaigners, like their fellow “anti-racist” campaigners proceed and harbour from biases of their own?
Is it a heresy to ask this question?
I appreciate the patience of those who think I may be leading up to a point here. Well, actually, a couple.
What “triggered” (a term from the woke) the apology? Answer: the appointment. The reaction from Quebec. And — wonder of wonders — from some Liberal cabinet ministers (has Mr. Trudeau relaxed the reins?) dearly frightened of what the appointment might do to their chances in the next election in Quebec.
The understanding of Ms. Elghawaby that she might be invited to the arrival of the punitive Liberal bus (this is a metaphor) always on call to place beneath its tires anyone who may distress the fortunes of leader Trudeau and his obedient team.
Was there any merit, or better, any depth of sincerity to the apology?
Could it at least have been as much about Mr. Elghawaby’s attempt to salvage her appointment as a real change of mind? The kernel question, of course, does come to this: was she really sorry for what she said because she said it; or because having said it, without public prostration and apology, the job would be lost? A hard question, but fair.
Did no one ask whether the PMO, or the many of its minions advise, instruct or order the apology?
Of course there was no one — that’s what political panels, and the famed warriors of the Ottawa press gallery are for — to not ask the only interesting and relevant questions.
However, all is well. We, Canada, now have a special representative to combat Islamophobia. Disregarded by Quebec.
This is a massive comfort to those unable to meet mortgage payments as interest rates rockets. A massive comfort to Alberta under threat to its most vital industry. A great gift to low-income Canadians feeding their beaters — that Honda Civic will last forever — with insolent carbon-tax levies (the Lincoln limousines of Trudeau and his meek cabinet will never not feel them).
A solace to people in injury and pain sitting for anxiety-draining hours in hospital emergency rooms waiting for their names to be called. their children to be cared for. A solace to veterans of our armed forces, who answered the call of our government, now still waiting for dignified attention.
Congratulations. I have finally fixed upon the definition of progressivism.
It means the dismissal of everything that counts, unconcern with what makes life hard for most, and a scorn for the realities of day to day; instead shepherding to very particular political interest groups.
Well done. We now have a Special Representative to Combat Islamophobia. An activist-advocate, whose whole function will depend on finding what she most wants to see.
Canada is not broken. That’s an idle statement. Canada is much stronger than the government so mis-leading it. There will come a day when the comedy of woke-progressivism will be looked back upon as a terrible, sad, joke.
コメント