Todd: Do women, people of colour get fewer votes in Canada? New studies say no

2024/08/12 Leave a comment

Interesting US study, broadly applicable to Canada:

Given the Olympics are up and running, it’s fitting to reflect on how the image that cartoonists most often use to show that women and ethnic minorities have a disadvantage is one of the hurdles.

The illustrations recur: Of women and people of colour literally having to jump over more and higher hurdles than white people or men to reach victory in their fields, particularly politics.

Now that U.S. Vice-President Kamala Harris, whose mother was born in India and father in Jamaica, is the Democratic Party’s candidate for president, media outlets are especially filled with talk about gender and racial barriers.

But the clichéd metaphor of an unfair hurdles race is in need of an update in light of studies showing that in almost all cases and places women and people of colour compete evenly.

Last month, researchers at the University of Oxford unveiled the findings of the most extensive analysis yet performed on how people vote in view of candidates’ ethnicity and gender.

Lead by Sanne van Oosten, the team looked for the patterns in 43 different sociological experiments in the U.S., Europe and Canada of voter preference over the 10-year period ending in 2022.

The experiments typically involved presenting respondents with profiles of fictional political candidates, while randomly varying the candidates’ race or ethnicity. There were in total more than 310,000 observations of respondents’ preferences.

“Our meta-analysis concludes that, on average, voters do not discriminate against minoritized politicians,” van Oosten said. “In fact, women and Asians have a significant advantage compared to male and white candidates.”

Van Oosten, who had earlier been appalled by gender-based criticism of Hillary Clinton and the race-based undermining of Barack Obama, considers the results good news — for Harris and other candidates who are female and/or of colour.

The researcher has been surprised by the dearth of media interest, however, given that her earlier study of how the public can stereotype Muslim candidates as homophobic received international coverage.

“One journalist at a very highly esteemed newspaper even literally said to me: ‘People aren’t interested in good news’,” van Oosten said on social media.

The study by van Oosten, Liza Mügge and Daphne van der Pas doesn’t deny that there is a small minority of voters who have racist or sexist attitudes. But it does find most voters aren’t negatively impacted by a candidate being female or a person of colour. Indeed, it’s often perceived as a positive.

Here how the authors put it in their meta-analysis:

• “Voters do not assess racial/ethnic minority candidates differently than their majority (white) counterparts.”

• In regard to Asian candidates in the U.S.: “Voters assess them slightly more positively than majority (white) candidates.”

• “A meta-analysis on gender demonstrates that voters assess women candidates more positively than men candidates.”

• When voters from minority ethnic groups share the same ethnicity as the candidate, they positively “assess them 7.9 percentage points higher” than white candidates.

• Even in “patriarchal” societies, such as in Jordan, men will vote for a female candidate over a male if she shares the voter’s ethnicity.

The comprehensive Oxford study also cites the work of Anthony Kevins, of Utrecht University, who found across the U.S., Britain and Canada there is no sign that voters will refrain from marking an X on a ballot for a candidate because of their gender or ethnic background.

In Canada, Kevins found only one distinct bias: That members of the Canadian political left have, all other things being equal, “a higher likelihood of voting for the East Asian candidate.”

The University of Toronto’s Randy Besco, author of Identities And Interests: Race, Ethnicity and Affinity Voting, said in an interview that on average racial minority candidates don’t get fewer votes in Canada.

However, in one specific category, “racial minorities running for the Conservative Party do get less votes.”

The broader finding in the work of Besco and others is about significant so-called “affinity voting,” in which people elect members of their same identity group.

“Chinese and South Asians showed preference for their own ethnic group compared to a white candidate,” Besco said. And they also preferred to vote for members of other minority groups over white candidates. “But this preference was weaker than same-ethnic preference.”

Asked whether Canadians who are white also engage in affinity politics, by tending to mark their ballots for Canadians who are white, van Oosten said in an interview there is no indication white majorities in Britain and Canada make a point of voting for their ethnic in-group. But in the U.S., she said there is an inclination for some white people to do that.

In regard to Canadian voting trends around gender, Besco pointed to the work of his colleague, Semra Sevi of L’Université de Montréal, whose team wrote a paper titled, Do Women Get Less Votes? No.

Sevi et al studied the gender breakdown of over 21,000 candidates in all Canadian federal elections since 1921, when women first ran for seats in Parliament.

The researchers determined, in the 1920s, women were at a 2.5 percentage point disadvantage to men.

But in recent decades, Canadian voters have shown no anti-female bias.

What then explains the disparities on gender and ethnicity among MPs in the House of Commons?

In 2023, about 31 per cent of MPs were female, even though women make up half the Canadian population. Jerome Black and Andrew Griffith also wrote in Public Policy that MPs of colour comprised about 16 per cent of House of Commons members in 2021, while visible minorities made up about 20 per cent of all citizens.

Virtually all the researchers cited in this article maintain that such variance, in Canada and around the world, is not the result of voters being prejudiced against women or members of ethnic minorities.

It’s more about who decides to test the political waters.

The researchers strongly suggest the widespread incorrect belief that voters are prejudiced contributes to fewer minority and female candidates putting their names forward, or being supported, at the nomination stage.

As van Oosten puts it, “the demand” is definitely there for women and people of colour in office. But “the supply” often isn’t, she says, in large part because of misplaced fears about racist and sexist attitudes among the electorate.

In other words, as a society we need to stop discouraging women and people of colour from running for politics — and we can start by throwing away outdated images meant to show they have to jump over extra hurdles.

Source: Do women, people of colour get fewer votes in Canada? New studies say no

Filed under Multiculturalism, Politics Tagged with , , ,

Snyder: Both sides

2024/07/23 Leave a comment

Good critical commentary on both sides-ism:

Our media people do not see it this way, of course.  The restoration of the mystical equilibrium of Both Sides brings our priests a pious satisfaction, visible on the red faces of correspondents in Milwaukee this last week.

If pressed, the shamans of Both Sides insists that their dualistic dances are nothing other than correct method to describe the universe.  The cult and its performance is protected from critique by the totemic terms “objectivity” and “balance.” 

All shamans do this: they insist that their dogma must be our reality.   But when we allow the cult of Both Sides to shape our own minds, ethical judgement and factual investigation disappear, and with them any chance for constitutional order and democracy.

Ethical judgement would involve a notion of right and wrong, which the activity of the priests erodes.  The worse the evil of one side, the more artfully it must be forgiven, and the more viciously the other side must be berated.  Believers in the cult of Both Sides experience this as moral action, whereas in fact the performative relativism erodes all morality.

Factual investigation would involve identifying other perspectives which the cult of Both Sides disregards.  It would necessitate separating the two aspects Both Sides from each other and confronting their words with the facts of the world.  To believers in the cult of Both Sides, it is a relief clothed in righteousness never to have to perform such labor.

Earlier dualistic faiths were no more outlandish than our own cult of Both Sides.  Indeed, they had something to say about foundational issues.  The Indo-European, Near Eastern and East Asian beliefs, to which I briefly referred above, generated stories about the world that inspired philosophy and science.  The cult of Both Sides is the dogmatic distraction from the bloody sacrifice of a republic.

Source: Both sides

Filed under Politics Tagged with ,

More than half of recent Senate appointments have ties to Liberal Party

2024/07/13 Leave a comment

Of note. Haven’t done a political linkages analysis but the table below contrasts senate appointments by PM from a diversity perspective:

Despite Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s promise to rid the Senate of partisanship and patronage, most of the senators appointed to the upper house over the past year have ties to the Liberals.

Since July 2023, Trudeau has nominated 12 senators, eight of whom — 66 per cent of the total — have donated money to the federal Liberals or have worked with the federal party or a provincial Liberal party.

That’s a significant jump in the number of Senate appointees with partisan Liberal ties — up from about 30 per cent of all senators appointed between January 2019 and July 2023.

“I think it is a disturbing trend,” said Emmett Macfarlane, a political science professor at the University of Waterloo who wrote a draft document that became the basis for the advisory committee on Senate appointments.

“The appointment of the occasional partisan or person with a partisan history is completely, I think, valid,” he said. “What is troubling is to see a slew of partisan appointments, particularly those that match the government stripes. This actually goes against the whole spirit of the reform.”

In 2014, as the Senate was mired in an expenses scandal, then-opposition leader Trudeau expelled senators from the Liberal caucus.

As prime minister, he created an independent and nonpartisan advisory board for Senate appointments in 2016. Since then, he’s named only senators recommended by the board. Trudeau has named more than 80 senators since taking office.

Source: More than half of recent Senate appointments have ties to Liberal Party

Filed under Multiculturalism, Politics Tagged with ,

Nicolas | Sommes-nous prêts?

2024/07/05 Leave a comment

Agree en principe but don’t see how any political party will embrace serious analysis over slogans and shallow arguments. Kim Campbell may have been ahead of her time when she said, “An election is no time to discuss serious issues:”

Je vous avoue que j’ai beaucoup de difficulté à me sentir émotionnellement investie dans le cycle de nouvelles canadien (surtout anglophone) qui tourne largement autour de la crise de leadership de Justin Trudeau depuis la défaite libérale dans Toronto-St. Paul’s. Vu mon travail, cette désaffection mérite d’être interrogée.

Ce n’est pas que je me foute de la politique fédérale, bien au contraire. C’est plutôt qu’il y a cette manière habituelle, voire culturelle, de cloisonner l’intérieur et l’international dans l’analyse politique qui déclenche chez moi une réaction viscérale de plus en plus proche de la claustrophobie.

Pour décrire ce côté profondément insulaire de la politique canadienne, on parle souvent de la « bulle » d’Ottawa. Cette bulle me fait de plus en plus l’impression d’un bunker. Je ne sais pas comment on fait pour regarder les Américains sélectionner pour nous l’homme politique le plus puissant du monde entre un criminel mythomane et un homme qui peine à formuler des phrases complètes — et ensuite parler de politique canadienne comme si nous vivions dans une autre galaxie, complètement hermétique. Je ne sais pas comment on peut regarder l’extrême droite non seulement prendre d’assaut la France, mais prendre de l’ampleur partout en Europe — et ensuite commenter notre théâtre partisan comme si les démocraties du G7 n’étaient pas sous tension comme jamais. Je crois que d’un point de vue éthique, il devient de plus en plus irresponsable, voire inexcusable, de se complaire ainsi dans la « bulle ».

Si les mots sont durs, c’est parce que la situation est grave. 2024 est une année électorale historique : plus de la moitié de la population mondiale vit dans des pays où on se sera rendu aux urnes avant la fin décembre. La crise des médias traditionnels ainsi que la montée en puissance des médias sociaux et de l’intelligence artificielle influent sur notre rapport à la vérité et sur la capacité des démocraties à subsister dans un espace de rationalité. Durant cette année électorale, les conséquences de ces transformations prennent forme sous nos yeux. Et on voudrait parler de l’impopularité de Justin Trudeau et de la montée de Pierre Poilievre en faisant abstraction du reste de la planète ?

Mardi, le collègue Jean-François Nadeau était en pleine forme. Il nous a donné un bel exemple du calibre d’analyse dont on a besoin pour donner un sens à notre monde en 2024 : parler d’idées et pas seulement des derniers « développements », et tracer les liens nécessaires entre le passé et le présent, l’ici et l’ailleurs. En bref, on pète la « bulle ».

Nadeau a notamment écrit que Poilievre « profite en partie d’un contexte mondial délétère pour s’autoriser à multiplier des coups de gueule dignes, parfois, de chats de ruelle ». On présume qu’on parle ici du climat au parlement en général, et du ton — nommons bien les choses — absolument dégueulasse à la période de questions. Le mépris envers les journalistes ouvertement affiché et le refus grandissant de s’adresser aux médias traditionnels annoncent une fissure profonde dans la santé du débat public canadien.

Mais il y a plus. Mardi, dans le Toronto Star, Bruce Arthur a mis en lumière les attaques personnelles grandissantes de Pierre Poilievre contre des citoyens dont l’expertise contredit des propositions conservatrices. Si des médecins, des fonctionnaires, des professeurs d’université peuvent devenir la cible d’insultes s’approchant du harcèlement de la part du probable futur premier ministre du Canada, le coût de l’expression et donc de la participation citoyenne libre vient d’augmenter radicalement.

Bien sûr, ce sont là des procédés qui minent déjà la démocratie américaine, le débat public français, et bien d’autres nations encore. C’est pourquoi la bulle d’Ottawa me semble si dangereuse. En éteignant la partie de notre conscience qui s’intéresse au monde le temps de parler de politique canadienne, on se garantit de reproduire les erreurs américaines, françaises et autres, avec quelques années, voire quelques mois de décalage. On s’arrange pour devenir — ou rester ? — une piètre succursale du bloc des démocraties libérales en déclin.

Pour donner du sens à ce qui nous arrive, il est impératif de rehausser le niveau moyen d’analyse, sur toutes les plateformes. On ne peut plus se permettre de parler de politique avec le détachement et la rigolade bon ton qui seraient de mise si les partis étaient des équipes de hockey dont on cherchait à faire le pronostic pour les séries éliminatoires. Pas lorsqu’on patauge dans le mensonge, les attaques contre les droits et libertés de la personne, ou la défense d’une guerre qui tue, mutile et affame les enfants à un rythme record.

Il nous faut faire bien plus de place à l’analyse profonde, et bien moins à l’anecdote du jour et à nos prédictions sur l’anecdote du lendemain — à l’écrit, à la radio, à la télévision, sur le Web. Les médias eux-mêmes traversent des transformations qui ne rendent pas la tâche facile. Mais nommons tout de même l’un des principaux obstacles à la hauteur du débat public, soit l’idée, trop répandue chez nos élites culturelles, que « les gens », « la madame au Saguenay », « le monsieur pogné dans son char à Terrebonne » n’ont pas envie de se « casser la tête » avec du contenu trop complexe. Le mépris de classe suinte de partout.

Je suis plutôt profondément convaincue que « les gens » ont envie, non, ont fondamentalement besoin de comprendre le mieux possible le monde qui les entoure. Alors que les démocraties se fissurent, cette routine du nivellement par le bas nous mène à notre perte. L’habitude de la pensée critique, c’est ce qui fait s’entraîner les peuples à résister à la manipulation, au mensonge, à l’assèchement de la compassion et à la mort de la conscience de notre humanité partagée.

Je profite de l’été pour le rappeler, au cas où il serait encore temps — à la manière des démocrates américains — de se faire des rencontres stratégiques d’urgence, et me demander si l’on est vraiment si prêts que ça pour la rentrée médiatique et politique de l’automne.

Source: Chronique | Sommes-nous prêts?

Filed under Politics Tagged with

Nadeau | L’extrême droite n’existe pas

2024/07/03 Leave a comment

Sobering:

Lorsqu’il débarque à Montréal en 1937 pour exposer les dangers de la montée du fascisme dans le monde, l’écrivain André Malraux raconte, à ceux qui viennent l’écouter, comment un avion de son escadrille a été abattu en Espagne. Il parle de la nécessité de combattre, « pour le peuple et pour un idéal de dignité humaine ». Il fait, au passage, l’éloge de Norman Bethune, ce docteur qu’incarna Donald Sutherland au cinéma, à qui l’on doit des avancées en médecine.

Le Devoir, dans ses pages de l’époque, considère l’auteur de La condition humaine, prix Goncourt 1933, comme un vulgaire propagandiste. Les auditoires de Malraux sont à majorité anglophones, écrit Le Devoir, comme si cela discréditait sa pensée. Le quotidien Le Canada, qui assiste aux mêmes événements, offre un compte rendu différent.

Nous le savons aujourd’hui : devant la montée de l’extrême droite en Europe, qui gronde dans l’Espagne de Franco comme une répétition générale du pire, André Malraux ne se trompe pas sur la nécessité de combattre le fascisme.

Le monde canadien-français que Malraux découvre, il en parle, dans un discours prononcé à Madrid, le 7 juillet 1937. « Dans un pays des plus pauvres, plutôt dans une des contrées les plus pauvres, qui ressemble tant à l’Espagne, au Canada français où se trouvent la même misère et le même courage, j’ai parlé pour l’Espagne. » Malraux raconte encore comment un simple ouvrier canadien-français lui offrit sa montre, sa seule richesse, pour financer la lutte contre la montée de l’extrême droite.

Dans cette société canadienne-française que connaissent mes grands-parents, les revendications sociales et politiques s’accumulent en un terrible fatras. Au milieu d’une crise générale, comment s’en sortir ? Le monde d’en bas se trouve écrasé par ceux d’en haut. Pour remédier aux faiblesses du système politique dont ils font les frais, plusieurs souscrivent à l’idée de l’affaiblir davantage, au nom d’élucubrations qui montrent du doigt des boucs émissaires.

Toute ressemblance avec ce passé, il est interdit de la noter, professent aujourd’hui les nouveaux administrateurs des mêmes vieilles peurs et des mêmes vieux ressentiments qu’autrefois. Ceux-là mêmes qui affirment que l’extrême droite n’existe pas, malgré des évidences qui nous préviennent du contraire, voient en revanche poindre partout, à les en croire, les doigts crochus de mouvements de gauche.

Les néofascistes cavalcadent de nouveau, en toute liberté, dans les prairies décomplexées de la haine des étrangers et des minorités. Ils chevauchent des rhétoriques usées, où il est toujours question de culture et de civilisation, comme s’il s’agissait de statues de marbre immuables. Ils préconisent des mesures coercitives, le renforcement des pouvoirs exécutifs. Leurs mots servent à labourer un champ de bataille plutôt qu’à cultiver un espace commun. Mais surtout, n’allez pas dire que leur idéologie, leurs obsessions d’une régénération chantée sur des airs identitaires, leur volonté de stigmatiser des minorités, c’est du déjà vu, du déjà connu ! « La plus belle des ruses du Diable est de vous persuader qu’il n’existe pas », écrivait Baudelaire.

En mai dernier, les partis d’extrême droite se sont rassemblés à Madrid, à l’invitation du parti ultranationaliste Vox. À la tribune se sont succédé la cheffe de file du Rassemblement national (RN) français, Marine Le Pen, le déjanté président argentin Javier Milei, lequel est désormais appuyé par le milliardaire Elon Musk, ou encore André Ventura, le dirigeant du parti ultranationaliste portugais Chega. Les voix de la première ministre italienne, Giorgia Meloni, du premier ministre hongrois, Viktor Orbán, ainsi que d’autres figures de la droite radicale se sont aussi fait entendre. Tous clament combattre les mêmes ennemis : les minorités, les immigrants, les étrangers, les mouvements sociaux. Vladimir Poutine, après tout, ne ressemble-t-il pas beaucoup, par plusieurs aspects, à ces gens-là ?

En voyant la Bolivie échapper, la semaine dernière, à un coup d’État, comment ne pas penser à l’assaut du Capitole aux États-Unis, le 6 janvier 2021, alors que Donald Trump, malgré ses mensonges en série, risque bel et bien de revenir à la tête du pays ? Cette situation mondiale fragile favorise, dans son ombre, la croissance de populismes de toutes sortes. Au Canada, la montée d’un Pierre Poilievre profite en partie d’un contexte mondial délétère pour s’autoriser à multiplier des coups de gueule dignes, parfois, de chats de ruelle. Du jamais vu, en tout cas.

En France, le RN du clan Le Pen a beau battre des records d’absentéisme au Parlement européen, c’est à lui que l’électorat a confié une large part de sa représentation lors du scrutin du 9 juin. Ces mêmes élus risquent maintenant de faire des gains sans précédent lors du second tour des élections législatives du 7 juillet. Le RN promet de repousser les immigrants, tout en diminuant les taxes sur les carburants, ce qui revient à amputer les revenus de l’État tout en augmentant les profits des compagnies pétrolières. Le RN affiche par ailleurs la volonté d’exonérer les moins de 30 ans d’impôt. Âgé de 28 ans, le président du RN, Jordan Bardella, pourrait ainsi ne pas verser un sou à l’État s’il devient premier ministre, tout comme d’autres jeunes loups fortunés de son entourage. Dans un cadre où l’équité est mise de côté, la nouvelle extrême droite, soutenue par des milliardaires et des possédants, propose dans les faits de prendre le relais du néolibéralisme en assurant le renouvellement de son hégémonie, en profitant d’un moment mortifère où la crise de la démocratie atteint des sommets.

La montée des droites extrêmes témoigne d’un effondrement des systèmes de représentation politiques, dans un déni de démocratie de plus en plus généralisé, à une époque où les politiques néolibérales encouragent au chacun pour soi. Quoi qu’on en dise, les néofascistes et leurs partisans ne représentent pas, devant ce désastre, une menace pour le système, mais son pur produit.

Quand une démocratie est malade, disait Albert Camus, le fascisme se presse volontiers à son chevet. Et ce n’est pas pour prendre de ses nouvelles…

Source: Chronique | L’extrême droite n’existe pas

Filed under Politics Tagged with ,

Coyne: In a country where immigrants are the majority, anti-immigration politics are obsolete

2024/07/02 Leave a comment

Or counter productive. But still room for lots of debates and discussions over numbers of both permanent and temporary, priorities and programs and the like:

….Indeed, we are about to cross a significant threshold. As of the 2021 census, 23 per cent of Canadians were immigrants – a record. Add to that the 17.6 per cent of the population with at least one foreign-born parent, and more than 40 per cent of the population were either first- or second-generation immigrants.

That was three years ago – before the current great wave of immigration. By now that number must be at least 42 or 43 per cent. Add to that the 6.8 per cent of the population, as of April 1 of this year, made up of non-permanent residents, and we are very nearly at 50 per cent.

That proportion is only likely to grow. Two years ago – again, before the great wave – Statistics Canada projected first- and second-generation immigrants would make up 52.4 per cent of the population by 2041. But that was on the basis of a projected total population of 48 million. It is already at 41.4 million.

There is no going back from this. We have crossed the immigration Rubicon. It’s easier to campaign against immigration in a country with little experience of it. But in a country where immigrants, and their children, make up the majority? It is not going to happen.

Source: Opinion: In a country where immigrants are the majority, anti-immigration politics are obsolete

Filed under Immigration, Politics Tagged with

USA: Newly naturalized citizens could theoretically swing the election: Report

2024/06/29 Leave a comment

Tends to assume that new voters are potentially monolithic in their voting intentions:

The number of foreign nationals in the U.S. currently eligible for naturalization outnumbers the 2020 presidential margin of victory in five battleground states.

A report released by the American Immigration Council (AIC) on Thursday concluded that if some or all of the country’s 7.4 million not-yet-naturalized-but-eligible residents got their citizenship before November, they could swing the 2024 election.

That’s unlikely to happen, as the naturalization process for eligible foreign nationals takes roughly eight months from application to receiving a certificate of citizenship.

But the report highlights the disconnect between the size of immigrant communities, their economic impact and their political power.

It says immigrants make up 13.8 percent of the U.S. population, but only 10 percent of eligible voters.

And potential citizens could in theory sway both battleground states and a couple of key red ones.

The researchers found that 574,800 immigrants in Florida are likely eligible to naturalize, while former President Trump’s margin of victory there was 371,686 votes.

In Texas, the naturalization-eligible population is estimated at 789,500, and the 2020 presidential margin of victory was 631,221.

The margin of victory in some battleground states pales in comparison to the number of potential new voters.

In Arizona, 164,000 people can apply for citizenship, and the vote difference was 10,457, about a 16-to-1 ratio; in Georgia, the ratio is about 13-to-1.

Pennsylvania, Nevada, North Carolina and Wisconsin all show up on the list, with naturalization-eligible resident to 2020 victory margin ratios of around 8-to-1, 3-to-1, 2-to-1, and 5-to-2, respectively.

The report also found that immigrants paid 16.2 percent of all taxes paid by U.S. households in 2022, despite having less political representation.

Source: Newly naturalized citizens could theoretically swing the election: Report

Filed under Citizenship, Multiculturalism, Politics Tagged with , ,

Christopher Dummitt: Four ways Pierre Poilievre and the Conservatives can fight woke ideology 

2024/06/19 Leave a comment

Suspect some of these ideas are being seriously considered by the Conservative Party in planning for a likely change in government. In an ideal sense, this would lead to a new thesis, anti-thesis and synthesis, reversing some of the excesses of the current government while recognizing that greater attention to diversity and inclusion issues was needed to address representation and other gaps.

However, it is more likely that the temptation will be to wade into such “cultural war” virtue signalling given its appeal to their base and the lesser importance of these issues to Canadians compared to housing, healthcare, infrastructure, foreign interference etc. Checking and rating candidates for political viewpoints raises any number of issues whether with respect to right or left-wing views.

But Kaufmann and Dummitt should know better the risks of simply replacing one dominant ideological tendency with another rather. Interesting that they choose that approach rather than arguing for a “merit-based” or more balanced approach., suggesting the intent is as much ideological than arguing for of …Kaufmann outlines a 12-point plan but I’ll simplify it to four points and a coda.

I have sympathy for the view that the pendulum has shifted too far and that a rebalancing is needed but not convinced that some of these ideas are workable or lead to an improved syntheses:

Insist on politically neutral institutions

Conservatives should take the high ground and insist on politically neutral institutions. In everything from the CBC/Radio Canada to university research funding and heritage institutions, the government should enshrine political neutrality. This means not disseminating politically divisive concepts like “white privilege” or claiming that psychological “harm” can override free speech.

Even though some conservatives might not agree, the BBC in the U.K. could be a model. I used to live in London and attend live tapings of topical radio comedy shows. For every joke they did about one political party or idea, they had to have another taking on the other side. It was sometimes over the top—certainly, the comedians poked fun at it—but the emphatic insistence on equal treatment mattered. Right up and down the public service, a new conservative government should insist on politically neutral institutions and the end of spreading woke ideas “on the sly” through the seemingly neutral dissemination of leftist ideas. If an overwhelming majority of the public accepts these ideas—only then should they be taken up by public institutions.

Redo DEI to include political viewpoints

Kaufmann thinks that while it might be tempting to get rid of DEI this probably isn’t feasible. What is possible is to insist that it be done right. Any institution that wants to hire based on categories of identity must include political viewpoint as an equity category. Many of our institutions, especially but not only universities, are now left-wing monoliths. A Conservative government should insist that this obvious lack of diversity be tackled right alongside other issues.

A Conservative government should also insist that DEI be done accurately. That is, it can’t be done by comparing the share of a certain group’s place in a profession, like engineering, with their share in the general population. It should instead be based on that group’s share in the applicant pool. We should try to identify where the problem arises. Are discrepancies happening because of actual discrimination in hiring or are there just not enough applicants? If there aren’t enough applicants, deal with that problem (if indeed it is a problem). We shouldn’t expect every group’s share of the population to be exactly replicated in every field of work. Only if we have evidence of discrimination should discriminatory hiring quotas be implemented.

Focus on national belonging

Different groups of Canadians will find different parts of the Canadian story more meaningful. Maritimers will likely be more interested in our seafaring heritage. African Canadians might take more pride in Canada’s place as one part of the Underground Railroad (though others will of course be fascinated too). But our national heritage institutions should stop focusing on what divides us and instead embrace what brings us together.i

It doesn’t mean overlooking our blind spots. However, it does mean interpreting them correctly. A Conservative government should insist that those dark places in the Canadian record be considered from a global perspective. We should get rid of woke parochialism which exclusively focuses on Canadian and Western sins. When dealing with issues like colonialism and violence, heritage institutions must be made to interpret these parts of our history in line with the existence of worldwide non-Western forms of slavery, imperialism, and violence including among pre-contact Indigenous peoples.

This means embracing a “retain and explain” cultural policy where the assumption should be that names, statues, and other honorifics are retained except in very exceptional circumstances. What’s more, explanations cannot be one-sided accounts but must interpret figures and events within their global context.

 Remember it’s about the people

Given that so many of our institutions have been taken over by woke activists and their liberal sympathizers, a new Conservative government should make it a priority to restaff the boards and institutions to achieve political diversity. Time and again, conservative governments are stymied because the actual people in the public service align with non-conservative beliefs. This means working on two fronts.

First, find and appoint non-woke political candidates to cultural and public service institutions across the country. The goal is political balance. Second, and this is where Kaufmann really focuses, conservatives need to build pipelines to ensure that when a government goes looking for people, they can find qualified and trained individuals. This means creating a Federalist Society for the public service—the equivalent of that highly influential American conservative legal organization that funnels law students and ideas into the American legal system. Similarly, we need an Austrian School for culture—a conduit for woke-critical ideas in our university world that can generate an idea base that can serve as the cultural equivalent to what the Austrian School did for economic liberalism.

Coda

Finally, a coda. All of the above will help and can be put into action. But Kaufmann also has one final and important bit of advice that can be done right now. Stop using the woke language. Rip off the velvet glove and expose the radioactive illiberalism that lies beneath.

This means insisting on using evocative words and images. Unless there is specific evidence that a particular institution has been discriminatory, when that institution hires based on DEI quotas this should be called out for what it is: anti-White or anti-Asian or anti-male or anti-heterosexual prejudice. Unmask the language of equity to show the discriminatory and vengeful impulse at its heart.

Don’t accept the language of “gender-affirming” care when we are talking about giving adolescents drugs that might chemically castrate them. When people want to bind young girls’ breasts or surgically remove them, describe it for what it is: gender-based violence. Use vivid imagery like pictures of the outsized prosthetic breasts of the Toronto area teacher who caused such controversy recently. Canadians support liberal non-discrimination. They want a country that accepts all its citizens. But they also can smell when something is foul and conservatives need to be sufficiently brave and clear to point out when woke ideas are illiberal.

What all of this means is that modern social conservatism can look a lot different from the Liberal attack-ad caricature. A new Conservative government could stand for policies that treat all Canadians equally, could enshrine politically neutral public institutions, and could show pride in our national history and culture. These aren’t just defensible shield issues; they are worth going on the attack to promote.

Source: Christopher Dummitt: Four ways Pierre Poilievre and the Conservatives can fight woke ideology

Filed under Multiculturalism, Politics Tagged with , , ,

J.J. McCullough: How you’re supposed to talk about immigration in Canada—and how Poilievre is poised to capitalize 

2024/06/19 Leave a comment

Another late to the party commentary.

I agree, however, that the Conservatives have greater licence to engage in immigration policy, not only because of the various commentary noting the need for a more measured approach but also because the Liberal government has largely accepted (or ceded) the arguments and is walking back some of its more ill-advised policies.

And even the Century Initiative appears to be flailing around, trying to remain relevant, when their fundamental premises are largely discredited:

…All this puts the Conservatives under Pierre Poilievre in an interesting position. The Canadian press, and thinky class more generally, has created a permission structure for him to run for prime minister on a platform of reducing immigration without fear of being characterized as a racist fearmonger. Polls suggest over 60 percent of Canadians both want and expect him to do this. Yet Poilievree himself has so far avoided articulating the extent to which he agrees; at his tightly scripted rallies he has no standard immigration-related applause line.

It’s possible his party is still captive to the legends of the Harper years—that they believe immigrant voters are “their” constituency to lose, and Conservatives must therefore tread lightly on rhetoric that could be seen as anti-immigrant. Despite a clearly changing tone in media coverage, the party might also simply not trust the press to accurately characterize a restrictionist Conservative immigration plan, and thus feel there’s no PR incentive to spend much time talking about the issue when they’re already enjoying such a solid lead in the polls.

Or, and perhaps most likely, Poilievre simply wants a restrictionist immigration agenda to be something he can roll out at a more politically opportune time—closer to the official fall 2025 election campaign when Canadians will be paying the most attention, and will be most aware of his promises.

Yesterday’s political taboo could be tomorrow’s ace in the hole.

Source: J.J. McCullough: How you’re supposed to talk about immigration in Canada—and how Poilievre is poised to capitalize

Filed under Immigration, Politics Tagged with

Open letter to Canada’s political leaders calls for greater civility in public discourse

2024/04/03 Leave a comment

Worthy initiative but will any currently serving politicians follow their advice?

Dozens of former politicians, academics, artists, religious leaders and human-rights advocates are calling on Canada’s political leaders to improve civility in public discourse and mend divisions that they say are undermining peace and security in this country.

They argue in an open letter published Tuesday that many Canadians are afraid because of their identities or beliefs, as public aggression and overt hatred have increased alongside geopolitical events, such as the Israel-Hamas war, and domestic issues that include the trucker convoy protests that erupted in response to pandemic-related health restrictions. The letter argues the phenomenon is part of a worrisome trend in which Canadians are “unwilling, unable or ill-equipped” to interact with people who have divergent views.

The letter has 51 signatories – a list that includes former Quebec premier Jean Charest, former Bank of Canada governor Mark Carney, film director Deepa Mehta, former federal finance minister Bill Morneau and screenwriter Karen Walton, as well as groups such as the Ghanaian Canadian Association of Ontario. The letter urges political leaders to put aside their differences to research the cause, scale and impact of various tensions across Canada and take action through law enforcement, education and personal accountability to foster a safer country.

They propose a number of recommendations, from better enforcing existing laws around hate crimes to updating school curricula and postsecondary programs. They want more research into the root causes of such disunity. And they say politicians need to lead by example by changing their own behaviour.

“Perhaps a growing number of us no longer consider it part of a common Canadian value system to put aside our differences and work alongside those with whom we disagree in the broader interests of Canada. Or perhaps such negative tendencies were always present in Canada and it has taken the increasing ubiquity of social media to reveal them fully,” the letter reads.

“Whatever the reasons for the increasingly belligerent nature of many of the current interactions between Canadians with different perspectives on hostilities in the Middle East or other divisive issues, we believe that no Canadian should ever be fearful because of their identities or their beliefs.”

Many Jewish and Muslim Canadians have expressed heightened fear since the Oct. 7 surprise attack by Hamas that left about 1,200 Israelis dead and Israel’s subsequent bombardment of Gaza that has killed tens of thousands of Palestinians. Police agencies in Canada have reported a steep increase in hate crimes, while the war and questions about how this country should respond have fuelled heated debates in Parliament and revealed divisions within political parties.

The letter also acknowledges divisions whose origins are rooted in Canada, such as the violent dispossession of Indigenous people or racism targeting Black communities.

Barry Campbell, a former Liberal MP, said he began brainstorming ideas for the letter last summer after violent clashes between Eritrean groups at community festivalsand the killing of a Sikh separatist leader in British Columbia that heightened India-Canada tensions. He said the group is not suggesting that people can’t disagree vehemently but rather that citizens should be able to engage in complex and difficult conversations without intimidation, violence or expressions of hatred.

“I think political leaders have to take responsibility for where we find ourselves now as a nation and if, in that examination, they consider that they’ve contributed in some fashion, either knowingly or unknowingly, then it’s time to take stock,” he said.

The open letter makes eight recommendations, principal among them that politicians do everything they can to “address hate at its origins” and speak out about the “values that bind us together as a country.” It implores political leaders to partner with academic and civil society to research the root causes of issue-driven tensions and conflict in Canada, support national and local initiatives to confront hate, and strengthen awareness of what constitutes hate speech under the law.

The group also wants politicians to fund the development of curricula in primary, secondary and postsecondary institutions to “foster greater intercultural competency” and “increase community-level empathy.” They are urging politicians to review whether laws that penalize hate-motivated harassment, threats or intimidation are sufficient, while also ensuring that such laws are consistently enforced and do not obstruct the right to freedom of expression.

Lori Lukinuk, an expert in parliamentary procedure, said decorum in the House of Commons and provincial legislatures has been deteriorating for some time. Elected officials, she said, are more concerned with finger pointing across the aisle and reciting partisan speaking notes than engaging in healthy debates on issues affecting the citizenry.

While federal politicians are supposed to be setting an example, she said, their bad behaviour is filtering into other levels of government and society at large. Ms. Lukinuk said there appears to be an unwillingness, generally, for people to follow proper and respectful avenues to push for change. Instead, people are “yelling and screaming” and picking fights in person and online, even on issues as mundane as the weather.

“We’re always looking for the arguments that support the way we presently think. We’re not looking for those arguments that might be as strong or stronger that might persuade us otherwise,” she said. “That’s a cardinal rule, to have a willingness to be persuaded, and you don’t see that because in politics – those political realms – it’s often toe the party line.”

Art Eggleton, who previously served as a senator, federal cabinet minister and Toronto mayor and is a signatory of the open letter, said the anger, aggression and toxic politics currently on display in Canada are threatening democracy. He said American politics have played a role in Canada’s undoing and hatred is on display in the House of Commons.

“Throughout [my] lengthy career, I have taken considerable pride in Canada being a beacon of civility in the world – a place where people of different origins, faiths, beliefs could come together and live in peace and harmony. I see that as is being threatened,” he said. “We need a call to action.”

Source: Open letter to Canada’s political leaders calls for greater civility in public discourse

Filed under Multiculturalism, Politics Tagged with ,

← Older posts

Newer posts →