Author sees Trudeau as master of deception

Liberals run to the left and govern from the right.

That enduring platitude — or axiom — of Canadian politics falls short of depicting the full extent of the Liberal con game, at least as it’s explained and amplified by journalist and author Martin Lukacs in his recently released book, “The Trudeau Formula: Seduction and Betrayal in an Age of Discontent.”

The central tenet of Lukacs’s argument, as I understand it, is that the Liberal Party succeeds in propagating the false notion that it is a progressive force for change, even as it advances the agenda and protects the interests of Canada’s so-called corporate elite.

And while it has always been thus, Lukacs finds in the current Liberal leader, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, a master of the game.

“Shedding tears about the injustices of the country’s past, inveighing against the inequalities of the present, pledging a dynamic politics of the future,” Lukacs says. Justin Trudeau simulates defiance against the established social and economic order that he ultimately defends.

The Liberals talk a good game about transforming society to benefit “the middle class and those working hard to join it,” even as their policies and programs maintain the inherent inequality of the status quo.

There is danger in this deceit. Disaffected and alienated Canadians, betrayed by the party that promises change, could seek and find refuge in the nationalistic populism of the far right.

Lukacs paints a picture of Trudeau tossing scraps from the nation’s table to mollify the majority, while reassuring the party’s true constituency — the wealthy and powerful — that the Liberals will protect their place of privilege and all its trappings.

He notes that even before images of Trudeau in black-face and brown-face surfaced in the fall of 2019, “his carefully cultivated image as a champion of progressive causes was looking tattered.”

The Liberals’ 2015 promise to end the first-past-the-post electoral system with sweeping democratic reforms was reversed when it became clear that proportional representation would not favour the incumbent Liberal government.

The Liberals’ climate change agenda was shown to be a sham when the government bought the Trans Mountain pipeline and spent more on that single piece of fossil-fuel infrastructure than on any renewable energy projects.

“Each year since his government had signed on to the Paris Climate Accords in 2016, the gap between Canada’s official carbon reduction targets and its spiralling emissions has grown wider,” Lukacs writes.

As for reconciliation with Indigenous people, Lukacs says the Liberals helped to construct “a new public consensus” that made overt racism taboo while embracing and promoting Indigenous cultural expression. But missing from the Liberal reconciliation agenda was any intent to share land, resources or power with Indigenous people.

“What appeared to be a sweeping transformation was, in fact, a skilful technique for managing the status quo; everything would appear to change in order for things to remain the same. It was the changeless change that the Liberals so excelled in.”

Lukacs sees a glaring contradiction in Canadian politics. At a time when polls suggest Canadians support ambitious new social programs, serious climate action and a more equitable distribution of wealth, they are stuck with “establishment liberalism” and the absence of a “bold left-wing alternative.”

That vacuum, he says, could be filled in Canada by the farright populism that’s on the rise elsewhere in western liberal democracies.

“The question is what sort of politician, offering which flavour of radical options, will step into the breach?” Lukacs asks.

The federal Liberals’ cozy relationship with Canada’s wealthy and corporate elite is a long-established fact, as is the party’s political motivation in obscuring that association. The party has always been everyman’s champion at election time, but careful not to alienate its rich friends once in office.

That’s where the old adage about running to the left and governing from the right originated.

While I’m unconvinced that this time-worn Liberal tradition is any more nefarious than it ever was, Lukacs hit on something when he identified the dangers inherent in Liberal posturing on today’s polarizing issues, like climate change and wealth inequality.

He draws from Marx to illustrate what he calls the “shape shifting” character of the federal Liberal Party. “These are my principles, and if you don’t like them, well I have others.” If it’s not obvious, he’s quoting Groucho not Karl.

If the Liberals are as disingenuous on critical issues during their second term as they were during their first, when next given a chance, Canadians may well answer Lukacs’s question about which option, radical or otherwise, will step into the breach.