Armstrong has himself to blame for being face of societal ills

Les Armstrong’s reposting of a “White Lives Matter” video may not put him on par with the retweeter-in-chief Donald Trump, but he deserves all of the criticism that’s come his way.

Aside from some unsavoury views, Armstrong’s posting and subsequent less-than-convincing apology – one that came late in the game – is indicative of questionable cognitive skills and poor judgment.

His actions show him to be largely disconnected from the tenor of public opinion just now, a lack of awareness that calls into question his fitness to be an elected official.

Armstrong obviously wasn’t bright enough to a) realize his thinking is off, b) avoid posting the link in the first place, c) apologize when he was called out, and d) realize what it all meant in today’s political climate.

Whether deemed a symptom of racial bias or simply a faux-pas, his actions opened him up to the backlash we’ve seen in the past week. There’s really no defense, even among those who see him as some kind of martyr to social justice warriors, the kind of people intent on a pogrom, a purity test, to rid the world of its ills.

Though we don’t see the kind of culture wars commonplace in the U.S., Armstrong has made himself the poster boy for localizing issues – systemic racism, inequality – that started protests fanning out across the globe from Minneapolis following the murder by police of George Floyd.

Unlike the protests that erupted following previous police killings, or even the wider societal protests against inequality such as the Occupy movement, the current public pushback against the systemic woes in society appears to have some staying power. That’s why we’re seeing some effort on the part of the established powers to marginalize those advocating for change – those in control today are fine with the status quo.

That we’re seeing the kind of public support for movements in Canada and, specifically, here in the region is ideally a sign that we’re collectively prepared for systemic change. Armstrong, seemingly caught unaware and stumbling through the situation he created for himself, may be seen by some as a victim of an overzealous response, but such acts of public backlash are often the only recourse the otherwise powerless have to make themselves heard.

We’ll certainly see overreaching examples of public shaming, so-called cancel culture and identity politics, but that may be what it takes to elicit a real shift in governance rather than shortterm bromides.

Populist politicians have been known to foment culture wars in order to avoid the need to address the real underlying issues. Real solutions would be uncomfortable to right-wing types in particular, as well as their investors, their donors and the corporate establishment. The system is broken, though not in the way that authoritarian, lawand-order advocates would have us believe. The solution is more fairness, more economic opportunity, services that benefit the many rather than the few, not the regressive and repressive policies that got us into this mess.

Today’s protestors give lie to the notion that our system of government – our democracy

– is based on the consent of the governed. Government policies that run contrary to the public interest – an increasing proportion of its actions – surely are the opposite of what we’d consent to. They benefit the one per cent at the expense of the 99, as the memorable slogan reminds us.

Who is responsible for that? Certainly those who’ve benefited have fostered an unending propaganda campaign that’s been every bit as effective in sweeping aside citizenship as the corporate marketing has been in turning us into consumers. We’ve happily abdicated power and responsibility for the comforts of our lives. Excuses about being busy are just that. Still, we’ve opted for the distractions, and can’t even be bothered to show up at the voting booth for five minutes every four years. As a result, we’ve got the government we deserve, one that acts against our interests and against the common good.

Now, some of us are waking up to the reality of the situation, the result of decades of neglect and outright assault on progressive measures that grew from the post-war years.

Taking to the streets, calling out the offenders and advocating for condemnation of those who refuse to do what’s right are all valid techniques for trying to restore, in some small way, the massive power imbalance in our society that has seen control taken by very few hands.

The wave of protests began with the mortal danger presented by systemic racism in the U.S., where Black citizens are far more likely to be harassed by police, arrested by police and killed by police. From that point, there are clear lines drawn to societal racism, to economic injustice, to poor public policies in regards to pay, housing and health care, among a host of societal ills.

In the U.S., the protests, coming at a time of economic turmoil due to COVID-19, have fuelled discussions about universal health care, a living wage and better education. None of those problems is newly discovered, but the public outpouring has brought discussion of them into the mainstream.

That the protests quickly spread to other countries indicates that racism is not just a U.S. issue, and that even more progressive countries suffer under the yoke of corporatism and creeping authoritarianism.

The sight of diverse groups of people in the streets and elsewhere banding together to take on not just the symptoms but the underlying illnesses shows that we are caring, social beings, not just the divided, self-involved individuals decades of neo-liberal policies have attempted to foment.

Collective action makes us think about what exactly is it that we owe each other as humans, citizens and residents? It’s a question that goes back millennia, and forms the basis of social contract philosophy, from the ancient Greeks through Hobbes, Locke and Rousseau. The topic flows naturally from a discussion of today’s movements and the subsequent police responses. The movements’ real purpose is to call attention to inequities and to challenge the rest of us to

think about a political and economic system that in essence encourages us to be selfish and not to take into consideration what we can do for each other as a community – to forego our humanity.

The local conversation around Les Armstrong certainly has little to do with such philosophical issues. While he’s not the oppressor, to his chagrin – at least one hopes he’s feeling contrite – he’s a stand-in for those who are. If he hasn’t realized the trail of mistakes by now, then he’s got another problem. As do the people of Wilmot Township.