Just thought I would share with you the comments I added to this when sharing it on Facebook.
There is more poignancy to some of what is written here than maybe even Mr. Potter knows.
If the world gets images of "19th-century aristocrats in wigs and hose, demanding satisfaction and challenging one another to a meeting over some best-forgotten offence," when they think of "honour" - then they never really understood honour at all. That wasn't genuine honour.
There is an honour based in an aversion to shame - that's the kind of honour that result in Western duels and Asian seppuku (the feudal Japanese practice of self-disembowelment). Then there is the sense of honour that has reference to character. This is a higher sense of the word. It is this honour that values principles, not reputation, ethics, not appearances. It is this honour that might walk away from some fights (because the fight itself degrades the fighter) or in toward others (because the principles at stake demand personal sacrifice).
For all and whatever faults the Ukraine has experienced and exhibited over the years (and I understand there are serious criticisms of the ways they and their leaders have been) it is this latter kind of honour that they appear to be exhibiting now. The honour that is not, I think, about what Potter describes as "the very old 19th-century idea of nationalism," per se. Nationalism is there, but it is not about the nation, so much as its people; and it seems not so much about "the people" as about their freedom (that's a principle by the way), their humanity (another principle), and their dignity (yet another principle). And, in the end, it is also about their homes, and their families, and the rights of them and their society to safety and self-determination, which are about as honourable a set of purposes as a bunch of fighters can have.
Whether Zelensky was a good president or leader before this war happened or not, deciding to stay and face the risks of the fight because his life is not his own, as president of the country, is also about as honourable a thing as any leader can do. Most of us will never have to make that kind of decision. God help us that we never do.
Wow. Thank you for this. The courage of a nation fighting for its right to exist takes my breath away. If only the West could find such courage and leadership
As well as the leaders being embarrassed, I think a good many of us feel embarrassed that we've not joined the fight. I know I feel like a voyeur watching the absolute horror on TV but just sitting on the sideline as if it's a sports event. We're being cast as cowards! Surely the time is well nigh that we should be screwing up our collective courage and saying damn the consequences ...
Andrew, I agree with your assessment of our leaders, here in Canada and the West in general. It truly makes one feel ashamed to witness the horrors Ukraine is enduring, essentially on our behalf, while we sit on the sidelines.
And yet… what more can we do? Do we truly believe that Putin will bring out the nukes if we enforce a no-fly zone? If so, do we have the right to take that risk? Most mornings when I read about the latest atrocities I wonder if maybe we should step up. But I honestly don’t know.
But anyway, if we’re talking about honour, perhaps I have more faith in us supposedly effete Canadians than many in this forum. I believe that if we were faced with a truly existential crisis we would draw upon reserves of courage and resolve that we don’t know we have. Fortunately we haven’t been tested – yet.
And BTW, it’s a shame to see how quickly some of the threads in this forum degenerate into name-calling. One of the things that attracted me to The Line was the respectful tone of debate. That’s a rare commodity these days, and I hope it continues here.
A sharp and excellent critique of people in Canada and other countries who had apparently decided that fighting (and sacrificing) for our freedoms and rights was passé.
I think your criticism of Mr Trudeau was entirely fair... nonetheless, his failure is our failure. We live in a democratic state where the people get to choose who it is they support. The fact that the opposition parties have failed (miserably) to propose credible leaders in response to the Liberal Party's embrace of Mr Trudeau speaks volumes about how lost they--and we--are.
We are a convening country. What that means is that we are weak, unable to contribute or believe in anything of value but we can talk you to death. God forbid we hurt anyones feelings or have conflict over something as silly as freedom when we can all have safety. After all, are we are the first Post National state in a new transnational world. Borders are to keep people in, and any sign of pride in a once brave country has been diminished purposefully to destroy any thought of nationhood. There shall be no flag waving allowed in Ottawa as Canada , as a country, no longer exists. There is nothing to fight for, nor reason to take up arms. Only countries with an identity, pride, and who believe in freedom, ever need to fight a war. Sending Ukraine strength, honour (we no longer have need for any) and praying for a victory in your quest for sovereignty.
I remember reading that during the Cuban Missile Crisis, Robert Kennedy told his brother, the President: "Canada will give all aid short of help." I've never been able to find a source for that quote & so I have no idea whether it's true or not (and if not, it should be). If it is true, than it shows that nothing much has changed in the last 60 years or so either regarding our foreign policy or how it is genuinely viewed by decision-makers away from the cameras and microphones.
The other thought is that it wasn't too long ago when President Zelensky was not regarded very seriously either inside or outside his country. Indeed, many of the charges flung at Trudeau bear some resemblance to those flung at Zelensky. I'd like to think that if Canada was ever faced with an existential threat that our leadership (from any party on any level) would step up in similar fashion. Sometimes circumstances shape true leadership that was previously well-hidden but, hopefully, Canadians never have to find out because while I'd like to believe such a call would be answered with courage, I rather think it won't be...
When the day finally comes that I give up on The Line, it will be because of Marylou Speelman's unacceptable comments. Her outrageous nonstop hatred makes me sick to my stomach.
Great article. But I must quibble with sweeping statement like "the West doesn't know what to do..." Perhaps *some* parts of the West don't. But I hypothesize it is not alien to people who are "back row" - to use the lingo of Chris Arnade. For those not familiar with Arnade (who also has his own substack), back row people are those who value family, faith and place. In contrast, front row people value education, credentials and consumerism.
Just thought I would share with you the comments I added to this when sharing it on Facebook.
There is more poignancy to some of what is written here than maybe even Mr. Potter knows.
If the world gets images of "19th-century aristocrats in wigs and hose, demanding satisfaction and challenging one another to a meeting over some best-forgotten offence," when they think of "honour" - then they never really understood honour at all. That wasn't genuine honour.
There is an honour based in an aversion to shame - that's the kind of honour that result in Western duels and Asian seppuku (the feudal Japanese practice of self-disembowelment). Then there is the sense of honour that has reference to character. This is a higher sense of the word. It is this honour that values principles, not reputation, ethics, not appearances. It is this honour that might walk away from some fights (because the fight itself degrades the fighter) or in toward others (because the principles at stake demand personal sacrifice).
For all and whatever faults the Ukraine has experienced and exhibited over the years (and I understand there are serious criticisms of the ways they and their leaders have been) it is this latter kind of honour that they appear to be exhibiting now. The honour that is not, I think, about what Potter describes as "the very old 19th-century idea of nationalism," per se. Nationalism is there, but it is not about the nation, so much as its people; and it seems not so much about "the people" as about their freedom (that's a principle by the way), their humanity (another principle), and their dignity (yet another principle). And, in the end, it is also about their homes, and their families, and the rights of them and their society to safety and self-determination, which are about as honourable a set of purposes as a bunch of fighters can have.
Whether Zelensky was a good president or leader before this war happened or not, deciding to stay and face the risks of the fight because his life is not his own, as president of the country, is also about as honourable a thing as any leader can do. Most of us will never have to make that kind of decision. God help us that we never do.
Wow. Thank you for this. The courage of a nation fighting for its right to exist takes my breath away. If only the West could find such courage and leadership
Thanks for all the comments everyone. I really appreciate the discussion here. Happy Easter to all of you. Glory to Ukraine.
Such a shame our PM has so little of that quality, if at all. Well, most of our politicians, to be honest.
Wow! You've said it so well.
As well as the leaders being embarrassed, I think a good many of us feel embarrassed that we've not joined the fight. I know I feel like a voyeur watching the absolute horror on TV but just sitting on the sideline as if it's a sports event. We're being cast as cowards! Surely the time is well nigh that we should be screwing up our collective courage and saying damn the consequences ...
Andrew, I agree with your assessment of our leaders, here in Canada and the West in general. It truly makes one feel ashamed to witness the horrors Ukraine is enduring, essentially on our behalf, while we sit on the sidelines.
And yet… what more can we do? Do we truly believe that Putin will bring out the nukes if we enforce a no-fly zone? If so, do we have the right to take that risk? Most mornings when I read about the latest atrocities I wonder if maybe we should step up. But I honestly don’t know.
But anyway, if we’re talking about honour, perhaps I have more faith in us supposedly effete Canadians than many in this forum. I believe that if we were faced with a truly existential crisis we would draw upon reserves of courage and resolve that we don’t know we have. Fortunately we haven’t been tested – yet.
And BTW, it’s a shame to see how quickly some of the threads in this forum degenerate into name-calling. One of the things that attracted me to The Line was the respectful tone of debate. That’s a rare commodity these days, and I hope it continues here.
A sharp and excellent critique of people in Canada and other countries who had apparently decided that fighting (and sacrificing) for our freedoms and rights was passé.
I think your criticism of Mr Trudeau was entirely fair... nonetheless, his failure is our failure. We live in a democratic state where the people get to choose who it is they support. The fact that the opposition parties have failed (miserably) to propose credible leaders in response to the Liberal Party's embrace of Mr Trudeau speaks volumes about how lost they--and we--are.
This brought tears: our shameless, feckless leaders are being schooled by the Ukrainian people.
We are a convening country. What that means is that we are weak, unable to contribute or believe in anything of value but we can talk you to death. God forbid we hurt anyones feelings or have conflict over something as silly as freedom when we can all have safety. After all, are we are the first Post National state in a new transnational world. Borders are to keep people in, and any sign of pride in a once brave country has been diminished purposefully to destroy any thought of nationhood. There shall be no flag waving allowed in Ottawa as Canada , as a country, no longer exists. There is nothing to fight for, nor reason to take up arms. Only countries with an identity, pride, and who believe in freedom, ever need to fight a war. Sending Ukraine strength, honour (we no longer have need for any) and praying for a victory in your quest for sovereignty.
I agree with you and appreciate your analysis except that you just couldn't resist a dig at Trudeau, takes down the tenor of your article.
Two thoughts:
I remember reading that during the Cuban Missile Crisis, Robert Kennedy told his brother, the President: "Canada will give all aid short of help." I've never been able to find a source for that quote & so I have no idea whether it's true or not (and if not, it should be). If it is true, than it shows that nothing much has changed in the last 60 years or so either regarding our foreign policy or how it is genuinely viewed by decision-makers away from the cameras and microphones.
The other thought is that it wasn't too long ago when President Zelensky was not regarded very seriously either inside or outside his country. Indeed, many of the charges flung at Trudeau bear some resemblance to those flung at Zelensky. I'd like to think that if Canada was ever faced with an existential threat that our leadership (from any party on any level) would step up in similar fashion. Sometimes circumstances shape true leadership that was previously well-hidden but, hopefully, Canadians never have to find out because while I'd like to believe such a call would be answered with courage, I rather think it won't be...
And Zelensky does not see himself as a hero
Thanks for your write up today. The Line gives me opinions I don’t find anywhere else. DG
When the day finally comes that I give up on The Line, it will be because of Marylou Speelman's unacceptable comments. Her outrageous nonstop hatred makes me sick to my stomach.
This is outstanding.
Great article. But I must quibble with sweeping statement like "the West doesn't know what to do..." Perhaps *some* parts of the West don't. But I hypothesize it is not alien to people who are "back row" - to use the lingo of Chris Arnade. For those not familiar with Arnade (who also has his own substack), back row people are those who value family, faith and place. In contrast, front row people value education, credentials and consumerism.
(PS any wonder why Jordan Peterson has appeal?)