Cynicism, populism two separate entities
Ihave major worries about Donald Trump’s presidency. But I’d like to call into question the increasingly popular refrain that “distrust of government” is what put Trump in the White House — and that this same “distrust of government” will lead to similar results in Canada.
Here is what the CBC had to say about a recent poll showing that just 43 per cent of Canadians now trust their government: “Populist anger is moving politics in Canada.”
This may be the correct conclusion. (Federal Conservative leadership candidates Kellie Leitch and Chris Alexander certainly seem to be banking on it.) But remember that though populism and distrust of government may often go hand in hand, they aren’t exactly the same thing. Did the voters who elected Trump based on his apparent support for the concerns of ordinary people really distrust government? Or were they simply fed up with the choices the thengovernment was making about on whom to bestow its favours? The folks at Trump’s rallies weren’t — and aren’t — calling on the invisible hand of the market to make America great again. They seem to have full confidence in government doing the job — as long as the job is focused on sheltering U.S. industry from external competition and building walls.
I’m insisting on the distinction because pandering to populism is a lot more dangerous than pandering to “distrust of government.” Are Canadians developing a healthy cynicism about govern- ment’s ability to solve all their problems and to keep its own promises? That would be cause for celebration, not concern. It would also be a reassuring indication of Canadians’ ability to learn from experience, given the shameless and financially wasteful flip- flop the federal Liberals just made on election reform after endless promises and consultations. Populism, on the other hand, leads to embarrassments — and assaults on dignity — like the Harper Conservatives’ last-ditch attempts to win the past federal election by declaring war on Canadian stores charging a higher price for Barbies than outlet malls in Buffalo.
Speaking of embarrassments, consider the painful and divisive kerfuffle over Liberal MP Iqra Khalid’s private member’s motion M-103. M-103 is essentially a toothless symbolic statement condemning “Islamophobia,” racism, and religious discrimination. Angry populists expended a great deal of energy and verbiage vehemently denouncing the thing as a curtailment of free expression — or vehemently denouncing the denouncers as racists; it all depends on whose version of “ordinary people” you use to define a populist. The point is, neither group was expressing any sort of genuine “distrust of government”; rather they were battling bitterly over shallow figurative expressions of philosophy and morality. ( Those who truly distrust government were just happy to have politicians distracted by a non- binding motion rather than doing real damage by passing actual bills.)
But there’s another way to look at it.
Ironically, the ideological left in the United States and the ideological right in Canada are both currently paying the price for not distrusting government enough. Have you noticed the vitriol and disgust with which the former group speaks of Trump and the latter group speaks of Trudeau? The conviction that the respective leaders are destroying their respective countries? ( Incidentally, I wonder if Trump is making the left rethink all the insulting superlatives it used to describe George W. Bush, leaving nowhere further to go with its rhetoric when circumstances demand it.) The panic and catastrophizing come from the knowledge that the President of the United States and the Prime Minister of Canada, along with their governments, really do have the legal power to bulldoze civil liberties and/or bankrupt their nations. Which suddenly seems a lot scarier when you’re literally scared of the person running the show.
So I say to the 43 per cent of Canadians who don’t trust their government: good. And now I would like to ask them to view all laws and all proposed new laws through that very same cynical lens: that is, pretend that ( insert your worst political nightmare here) is in charge and then see if you’re still comfortable with the actions they are empowered to take. If you aren’t, the real problem is with the law, not the nightmare.
I’m tired of being told by moralizing op- eds that a distrust of government is ruining our civic institutions when in fact a distrust of government is the perfect opportunity to channel money, time and good faith away from politics and towards voluntary institutions better suited to actually enriching lives — the charities, the churches, the synagogues, the mosques, the universities, the libraries, the museums, etc.
Distrust of government didn’t put Trump in power and it won’t ruin Canada. But sacrificing freedom and respectful discourse to assuage the masses just might.
A DISTRUST OF GOVERNMENT IS THE PERFECT OPPORTUNITY ... (FOR) ACTUALLY ENRICHING LIVES.