Category Archives: Canada

Identity Politics

Where was the Toronto Star three months ago, when I needed them to back me up? Now, after facing a small amount of backlash for my repeated arguments that the Conservative Party of Canada was able to win in my riding of Thornhill by attracting the votes of Jews who would vote for whichever party looked like they supported Israel more, Thomas Walkom – National Affairs Collumnist – has penned an article on ethnic voting and identity politics that backs up the very arguments I postited. Here’s an excerpt:

…In a world where no single party can command a majority of MPs, individual ridings become even more significant. And among some voters in some ridings, support for Israel is a make-or-break issue… Identity politics predates Confederation… In ridings where there is a significant Jewish population, this matters. Kent, for instance, may back Israel as a matter of deeply held principle. But if he did not, this might well hurt him in Thornhill, a riding that he narrowly won last year…

While this is pretty much a closed issue that I hadn’t intended on revisiting, the situation in the Israel and Gaza has brought it to light again. So thanks, Thomas. I couldn’t agree with you more!

Extra Terrestrial

I had an encounter at the airport coming back to Toronto on Wednesday. For those of you familiar with my travel history, this should come as no surprise to you. I travel a lot, and as a result, I often have lots of stories to share. These stories are often delightfully fun for the listener, yet traumatic for the protagonist (me). They range from being interrogated in “the room” at the airport, to being told that the airplane “needs to be control, alt, deleted.”

Wednesday’s story was slightly different. No interrogation room, and no technical worries.

As I was going through customs in Toronto, I handed in my immigration form. On it, I had listed my home address as my home address here in Toronto – my parents’ house. This is the house I grew up in, the house where I “reside” when not in New York, and the house where I currently have a bed. It’s still home. Every time I’ve crossed the border, I’ve always listed it as my permanent residence. Seeing as my time living in New York has an explicit expiry date stamped in my passport (October 2011 I get kicked out of the USA!), New York certainly can’t be my permanent residence (although, I wouldn’t complain if it were.)

So I handed in my immigration form. Here’s the encounter that followed:

Canadian Border and Customs Agent (CBSA): “Were are you coming from, sir?”

Me: “New York.”

CBSA: “What do you do there, sir?”

Me: “I work there.”

At this point I was prepared to launch into the longwinded explanation of what I do, why it has to be done in New York, what exactly Jewish Camp is, and what the hell the Union for Reform Judaism is. I’m used it . But that didn’t happen.

CBSA: “So why did you list this address in Thornhill as your home address?”

Me: “Because that’s my home address. I’m a non-resident alien in the United States. I live there, but I don’t permanently reside there.”

CBSA: “Well that’s fine and dandy, but you don’t reside in Canada either, so you can’t list that as your home address.”

Me: “Pardon?”

CBSA: “You don’t reside in Canada. You can’t list yourself as a resident of Canada when you don’t reside here. This isn’t your permanent address.”

Me: “But when I cross in to the US, they don’t let me list my New York address as my permanent address, either… So where do I live?”

CBSA: “You’ll have to figure that out on your own. For now, I’m stamping you as a visitor to Canada.”

Me: “But I’m a citizen! I have a passport and a house in Thornhill!”

CBSA: “You don’t live there. You don’t have residency in Canada.”

Me: “Well shit.”

And with that encounter, apparently I became a drifter. An alien in the US, and a visitor to Canada. Although this seems humourous on the surface, I’m actually slightly troubled by this loophole. It creates a sub-status of individuals somewhere in between refugees and political deserters, and I am neither of those.

So here I am, an alien. Awesome.

I’m just saying, is all…

canadiantire1Remember during the past few weeks of political turmoil when Stephen Harper repeatedly insisted that what Canada really, really needed during “the most difficult global economic crisis in many decades” was stability — a stability only Harper’s Conservative government could provide?

Yeah, I remember that, too.

My how times have quickly changed, haven’t they Mr. Harper? Maybe I should be a little more sympathetic… I guess it’s pretty hard working to stabilize our country from the front seat of the roller coaster ride you’re leading Canada on.

After all, the zigzaging, pessimism, and uncertain depression might just be the side-effects of riding on this coaster.

Except these aren’t side-effects… they’re effects. I’m a flat-out dunce when it comes to math and money, but even I can see that Harper’s not exactly cultivating a sense of economic stability. Because I’m a little dyslexic when it comes to the math side of economy, I’ll refer you to some brilliantly damning words from Doug McArthur:

[the current goings on is an] indication of really how kind of badly organized they are right now. It’s funny that a government who has prided itself — at least so they say on controlling the message and keeping the message controlled out of Prime Minister’s office — has perhaps done worse than any other government I can remember in terms of messaging about the state of the economy and I think this is bad for the economy. I think to have inconsistent messages, constantly changing messages, an apparent failure to understand what’s going on in the economy with that is a bad thing in terms of the overall all the actors in the economy.

If you need a good primer on why Harper is an impediment to stability and democratic clarity, I highly suggest you check out the full article at the Globe. It’s worth it.

Contempt: Simply Stated

For some of us, looking at the past week’s events is actually quite a simple matter. Painful, but simple.

While faring much better than the rest of the world, Canada is indeed confronted with a worsening economic situation. And in the midst of this crisis, immediately following a campaign predicated on restoring stability and workability, Stephen Harper and the Conservatives have shut down Parliament. They have flatly rejected the concerns of the majority of the elected officials, and shown themselves to be incapable or unwilling to engage in civilized discourse.

The Toronto Star’s Carol Goar surrounds her dismay with quirky and effective rhetoric:

“The Prime Minister whom voters re-elected seven weeks ago to provide a ‘firm hand on the wheel,’ seized the first opportunity to veer wildly into the oncoming lane, gambling that he could damage his adversaries more than he hurt himself.

Stephen Harper miscalculated. He is now struggling to save his discredited government.”

Worst of all – Harper’s given our elected officials a two month paid vacation from their jobs during which he will no doubt spend an exorbitant amount of funds on anti-coalition propaganda. Fiscal responsibility? Economic stability? Productive parliamentary discourse? Are we truly going to sit back for two months while this goes on?

Is there a Doctor in the House?

Do the Conservatives pledge a hypocritic oath when they take office? You might assume so, given this juicy item emerging from the dark pages of parliamentry history…

“Bloc part of secret coalition plot in 2000 with Canadian Alliance”

You might also assume that they take such an oath given what Harper had the gall to say yesterday. These were his words:

presser-62“Mr. Speaker, yesterday, as part of the culmination of the machinations of the leader of the NDP, we had these three parties together forming this agreement, signing a document, and they would not even have the Canadian flag behind them. They had to be photographed without it.

They had to be photographed without it because a member of their coalition does not even believe in the country. As Prime Minister it is not my responsibility to turn the keys of power over to a group like that.”

Those are his words. And how about that picture? Well that would be the photograph that Mr. Harper was referring to. See those things in the background? Yup. Flags. Canadian flags. Provincial flags, too.

It’s actually amazing that we can interpret anything the Tories are saying these days, given that they’ve taken to new stretches of doublespeak. The CPC is now saying one thing in English to the Anglos, and a diametrically opposite thing in French to the Francos. Do they think that there aren’t those of us who are bilingual? That line of thought would fall in line with their black and white view of the world, though.

To round off today’s vomit-inducing news, I prescribe reading the Toronto Star’s Q&A’s about Coalition governments. Here’s an excerpt of extreme importance to my fellow (temporary) ex-pats:

Is this a coup d’état?
That’s the way the Harper government would like to portray it. But it’s fundamentally confusing a Republican system with a Parliamentary system. In essence, we have an indirect election of government – rather than a direct election. In a Republican system, voters in the U.S. got to decide, `Do I want McCain or Obama.’ And then secondarily: `Who do I want as my local rep or my state rep?’ Whereas in the Canadian parliamentary system, like the British parliamentary system, you only get to vote for whoever your local rep is, and then the majority of members of that legislature then get to decide who forms that government. And they’re free to change their minds over the course of a parliament…

Until tomorrow night…

It’s Demo-crazy!

bron1180lMy, my, my how things have changed up North. There are indeed moments when I long to be back in Canada. This is one of them. Things are heating up in the true north strong and free, although I imagine that Stephen Harper would argue that things are a little too strong and too free for his liking.

In case you’re living under a rock (read: If you’re an American and don’t get any news beyond the borders of your country), you can enjoy a sampling of Canadian news here, here, here, and here.

I imagine that I’ll have much to say over the next week as this coalition comes to fruition and our “strengthened” government (Stephen Harper’s words) collapses. What I’d like to focus on is not the news itself… there are enough people getting paid to rant and rave about all that. Instead, I’ll direct my own rants at the inevitable hypocrisy that will emerge from the Conservative camp as they attempt to quash any attempt at upholding the notion of checks and balances in our parliament.

To get the ball rolling, let’s put to rest a few of the lies that have already emerged from the Conservative party:

LIE: The coalition is an “undemocratic,” attempt at seizing “unearned” power.

TRUTH: If the ruling party in parliament loses its majority support in the House of Commons, the Governor General will either call for a new election, or if the viable option exists for a coalition government to be formed, can allow them the opportunity to govern. More on that here, for you non-believers. This is a minority government, folks. It’s constitutional. It’s the very definition of democracy. It’s called checks and balances, people.

LIE:This is a “backroom deal that would usurp the elected government without the people’s consent.”

TRUTH: See above. Also note that anything that happens on the floor of parliament (where the no-confidence motion will take place) is hardly in a “backroom.” And also note that almost everything the Harper government has done has been in the “backrooms” and boardrooms of the country, without the people’s consent. Moreover, both the Grits and the NDP have been undeniably public and transparent with regards to their “deal”. Anyone with access to Google can tell you that.

LIE: “Voters certainly offered no mandate for the Liberals and NDP to form a formal coalition with the separatist Bloc Quebecois”

TRUTH: There is no “formal” coalition with the Bloc. They will receive no seats, no cabinet positions, and no change of status in parliament. They are no more in a formal coalition with the Libs and the NDP than they are with the Conservatives. The Bloc will continue to decide on their own what to support and what not to. If it happens that they disagree with the current Conservative agenda and agree to a progressive coalition between the Liberals and the NDP – that’s hardly a formal coalition.

AND, let us not forget that IF the Bloc were included in a formal coalition – as the Tories suggest – that would negate the Tory statement that they were not offered a mandate. Anyone with a calculator can tell you that the Liberals, NDP, and Bloc hold more seats together than the Tories. Sounds like a mandate to me…

So folks, please remember the following. What is transpiring in the Canadian Parliament is:
1. Legal.
2. Democratic.
3. Representative of the majority of the Canadian electorate.
4. Not a separatist government.

And just to round things off with an additional dose of Conservative propaganda, check out what John Ivison at the National Post has to say about the state of affairs back home:

…the most likely scenario will see Mr. Dion become Prime Minister at the head of an alliance so unholy it would have been burned at the stake for heresy in the Middle Ages.

Ivison’s statement is the definitive representation of the ideological abuse of power that pervades Harper’s Conservative party – anyone who disagrees with Harper’s view of Canada is a heretic who deserves to be consumed by fire. On that note, let me be blunt. If you are a politically and socially conservative person – I have no fight with you. We may disagree on policy, but hopefully we can agree on the foundational principles of Canadian democracy. But Harper and his Tories are trying to run government by their own rules and are trying to shut down anyone who gets in the way. Ivison’s suggestion of an unholy alliance smells as though it were lifted from the pages of the Spanish Inquisition, not a modern Canadian newspaper. Let’s try and move past that, folks.

Until the next juicy tidbit emerges…

One of those moments

A little over a month ago – at the conclusion of the most recent Canadian federal election – I posted an article expressing great disdain for the Jewish electorate in my hometown riding of Thornhill. I made no attempt to hide my affiliation with the Liberal Party and my disdain for the Conservatives. I did, however, lay out a relatively objective argument against the elections and the Conservatives’ tactics.

In my rants, I placed the blame squarely on my fellow Jews for electing in Peter Kent – the Conservative Candidate. Given that Thornhill is about 50% Jewish, and that Kent campaigned largely on a platform of “support” for Israel and “I’m not Susan Kadis” (herself a Jew!), it isn’t hard to see how the connection can be made. Also given that Thornhill has been solidly Liberal for all but 5 years of its lengthy history, there had to be an identifiable tipping point in the change. And I identified it as being among the Jewish electorate.

Apparently I struck a sour chord with some, as I was accused of being an offensive racist. As an ardent pluralist (and an ardent Jew!), I refuted these remarks, but basically, I let the issue slide. Clearly my argument was not meant to imply that there was some conspiracy among us Jews, rather it was a demographic observation (coupled with my admittedly Liberal philosophy) attempting to shed light on the matter of one-issue voting. Plus, I was angry – so I ramped up the rhetoric.

Well… Turns out Peter Kent is thanking the Jewish community by making one of his first public speaking appearances at a breakfast at the BAYT (the largest Orthodox shul in Canada, and a really nice community). In last week’s Jewish Tribune, the president of the BAYT’s brotherhood was quoted as saying:

“When I first heard Peter Kent speak to us at BAYT [Beth Avraham Yoseph of Toronto Congregation], I said to myself, here’s someone who understands the security challenges that Israel and the Western world are facing today and is willing to do something about it,”

This just reinforces my earlier point… it seems that by and large, the Canadian Jewish community is more concerned with one foreign policy issue than with Canadian domestic policy. As I iterated earlier, I have a great concern for this type of voting. Setting aside the fact that Canada has little to no role whatsoever in Israeli or Western security — these remarks illuminate the obsession amongst Canadian Jews with expecting the Canadian parliament to focus on one issue.

As a pluralist, I can entirely appreciate someone who aligns him or herself with Conservative values and believes in the Conservative Party’s overall agenda (something that was almost impossible to do this year given the CPC’s lack of a formally platform presented in time for Jews to vote). I would never assume to dictate what beliefs someone should uphold. But it seems that for much of the Canadian Jewish community, the qualification for getting elected is whether or not you say nice things about Israel.

There are moments when I’m actually thrilled to be living outside of Canada. This is one of them.

“Stephen, the arts is the economy, stupid…”

So says Karl Pruner, president of ACTRA Toronto to PM Stephen Harper. Well said, Karl.

In the midst of Harper’s sniper fire at Canadian Arts and Culture, it is easy to forget that arts and the economy are greatly intertwined. See what I mean here and here and here. And especially here. Or maybe if you want a clear visual of the inseparable ties between the arts and the economy, just whip out your wallet. Find a twenty dollar bill and take a look at the back of it…

Harper and the Conservatives have created a black and white scenario where it’s arts and culture vs. the economy. This is typical conservative polarizing at its worst. But let’s pretend just for a moment that this is actually how life works… The Arts vs. The Economy… What would you choose? Actress Leah Pinsent, has this to say:

“We don’t visit Rome, Japan or Africa to learn about their economies. We go to experience their culture… It is culture, not economics, that truly makes a nation. If we as Canadians are left only with other people’s stories .. then what can we be proud of? There will be nothing left to be proud of…”

The only thing that Pinsent misses is that the arts are part and parcel of the Canadian economy. And yes, the economy should clearly be of paramount importance. But arts and culture – like every other industry – are entitled to be supported by the very government and country that they themselves support. Canadian music and theatre are no more part of a niche industry than the Ford auto plant in Windsor is. Pruner bluntly evokes the question that I’ve been pondering:

“Why is it we talk about investing in the auto sector, investing in the energy sector, and handouts to the arts? Are we tired of this? I think so.”

So while Harper would like you to believe that “ordinary folks don’t care about arts,” (his words) let’s stop pretending that arts and culture aren’t intermingled in the genetic makeup of Canada’s economic infrastructure. Let’s stop pretending that this is a black and white issue and that Harper’s already made the right choice for us. And while we’re at it, let’s stop pretending that there’s such thing as an “ordinary” Canadian. Because there isn’t, anymore than there’s such a definable thing as “Canadian arts” or “the Canadian economy.”

Mr. Harper: Canadian arts, the economy, and Canadians themselves are complex things, not reducible to single lines in a budget as you would have the electorate believe. Try expanding your mind a little.

Penniless for the Arts

An addendum to my previous post on Arts funding in Canada. Lest you think I’m just a raving “artsy” lunatic upset that government “handouts” are being scaled back due to “budget” constraints… look at this August 2008 report from the Conference Board of Canada. The Conference Board is an economic and corporate research organization. They are not a government organization. They are not a lobby group of any sort. They are objective and non-partisan. This is what they have to say:

The Conference Board estimates that the economic footprint of Canada’s culture sector was $84.6 billion in 2007, or 7.4 per cent of Canada’s total real GDP, including direct, indirect, and induced contributions. Culture sector employment exceeded 1.1 million jobs in 2007.

I’m not a numbers guy (remember I failed math), but this is pretty compelling. Arts and culture industries play a vital role in attracting people, business, and investment, and in distinguishing Canada as a dynamic and exciting place to live and work. Apparently these just aren’t issues the Conservative party seem to be concerned about.