Also, people who think that "From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free" is a perfectly acceptable chant should ask themselves how they'd feel about protesters worldwide chanting, "From shining sea to shining sea, Turtle Island will be free." And if those same people would by okay with protesters defending the beheading, rape and murder of 8,000 residents of the Annex an act of resistance aimed at decolonizing Turtle Island of white settlers.
(If only we could get rid of DEI's dehumanizing "oppressor/oppressed" framework, with genocide as its logical endpoint, and scrap terms like "decolonization" for old liberal terms like "mutual respect and accommodation.")
And maybe we could chastise the Sociology professors who came up with the "decolonization" "colonialism" formulae (likely with a hope of getting some paper of theirs published in some journal no-one reads but the like-minded) that underpins much of the social tensions today?
Well stated. No, normally one can't hold a large group responsible for the vile actions of a few, but I think you can hold the organizers responsible for what the speakers say, and this is where a whole group can be smeared. The example of Natalie Knight in Vancouver praising the murder of Israeli civilians on 10/7 is a clear example of one person tainting a protest. Not only that, but she was cheered by some. Not only that, she's being defended by various academics. What she said may not be illegal, or reflective of the majority, but for me it rightfully strips some of the legitimacy of the cause.
Matt, great column and great commentary on the Roundtable this morning. I had the misfortune of being downtown on Saturday (a friend was visiting Toronto and staying there). What struck me about the demonstration was that it felt like an actual festival of hate directed at Jews, not Israel. The chant “From the river to I the sea” can only have one meaning. The swarming of Jewish businesses and the view that Hamas is essentially not criminally responsible for its acts because of Israeli oppression goes too far for me. I cannot help but wonder how worldwide demonstrations are organized and who is funding all of this. I am a former student radical. The resources required for this type of endeavour are significant. Demonstrations are a good thing, targeting Jews or any other identifiable group is not.
Another one I really scratch my head over is where are all the "cultural appropriation" screams about white kids draped in a Kufiyas at the protests ? "My culture is not your costume." I guess we are done with that rejoinder for now....
I don’t think anyone has a hot effing clue how deeply social trust has been obliterated in this country. I see the same people who called Amy Hamm a Nazi cheering Hamas, the actual Nazis. What’s that other than a projection that tells me the people I share this country with are deeply demented and mentally disturbed. Anyway. Whatever.
Great article Matt. I agree with you. As will occur from time to time my inner Lyle will be reflected in my comments. It flows from being an opinionated human - and as the saying goes, you’ve gotta stand for something or you’ll fall for anything - and theres been lots to fall for on the left side of the political spectrum of late.
I think, however, you missed a distinction between Lylian tendencies of individuals and that of governments. Whether I choose to support/join convoy protestors and decry the Hammasers is of no consequence. The actions taken by the Trudeau government against the Convoyors are indeed Lylian hypocritical compared to the support (or implied support through silence) protesting for indigenous, climate, gender, Palestinian rights. (No frozen bank accounts for the latter).
One thing we need to be watchful for and consistent on is taking a stand against authoritarianism - ie when a government picks a side - even if democratically elected - like in Canada or in Gaza.
I’d also like to make a distinction about how much protest/free speech should supported/permitted/allowed to disrupt - for issues outside our borders vs internal differences - that has been a bit of a limits to free speech for diasporas conundrum to me – perhaps I’ll address that at some other time or maybe you or Jen can think about it.
I like to think of myself as someone who's been rather consistent for 20+ years, but I will say that with the politicisation and polarisation of everything in the last few years, it's a real challenge to stay ideologically and morally consistent, even for someone who's been distrusting of politics and politicians of any stripe - politically orphaned if you will. The urge to take sides is strong, but it's people like you who are consistent who help us keep a level head.
Oh my goodness yes. Common sense and consistency! There is a collective disconnect and an attempt to bend over backwards to justify what your team does and why it is okay when it was not okay when 'their' side does it.
I am opposed to the naked denigration of statues for political gain, regardless of who is doing it.
Ironically, Terry Fox was an admirable Canadian who inspires us to find the courage to take on difficult challenges. However, his message is apolitical, which should be a clue even to the ignorant amongst us to leave his legacy alone.
I think it's really easy for people to have their first reaction - which comes without much thought, it's just what we think when we see something, and then stop there, instead of asking ourselves "why do I feel this way."
I will offer this for my observation - the last few years has "gifted" me the experience of being "othered" and treated with disdain. I have consciously had to work on finding empathy for others again because my response to being othered was to believe nobody was safe, nobody could be trusted, and to be constantly on guard everywhere I went, believing that most people were believing the worst of me. It's a horrible way to live. It has had lasting effects on my mental health. And it absolutely does influence how I react to things because now my FIRST reaction when I see someone getting some of what they've so gratuitously dished out, has been to feel like it's about time they get what they served. Now - big caveat here. This isn't an emotionally mature reaction, and I'm not claiming that it is. It's one borne out of years of being othered. Of being denied access to stores, to health care, and more because I was medically unable to mask. People believed the worst about me every time they saw me for all the years masks were mandated. (I had interactions with bylaw enforcement due to regular medical appointments where people who felt judgement was a better course of action than benefit of the doubt complained to hospital security about me not being masked. I carried medical documentation with me everywhere and the places where I was allowed to enter, I had to accept that a stranger could butt their nose into my business at any time and I had no choice but to share my personal health information.) I realize this is maybe tangential - but the point I'm making, is that I was not regularly "othered" prior to the pandemic, but just a few years of being actively othered and treated as unclean and having all sorts of assumptions made, has altered both how I perceive others and my willingness to give benefit of the doubt. Imagine if I'd lived my whole life feeling that way? I wouldn't even realize there was a different way to feel. I can't undo the last few years or the changes it's caused - but what I can do, is take a second pass at information after my first reaction has happened, and ask myself what is causing/motivating my reaction.
Sometimes this works - sometimes it doesn't. I won't claim to be consistent - though I will put some additional level of thought into it. But one thing I do know with certainty? Most of the people that I know don't even do the second pass at something before becoming very opinionated and certain of their opinion.
I didn't like the ultimatum approach the freedom convoy took when they reached Ottawa, but I did like that they went to Ottawa. I've never really thought in depth about whether the PM should or shouldn't meet with protesters - I just think that the PM should be consistent whatever the decision may be. (This is a slippery slope - we wouldn't want anyone with a complaint to just set up camp in Ottawa, and this is why I opposed the freedom convoy saying they were going to stay indefinitely until they got their way. Go - have your say, show your numbers. And then go back home to your families knowing your point has been made.) I didn't think the confederate flag tarnished the freedom convoy - but that was because it didn't seem to reflect the actual goals of the convoy but struck me more as someone looking to create trouble. I think I would have consistency there that if the pro-palestine protests are overall not being anti-semitic and it's one rabble-rouser in the crowd, then the whole protest shouldn't be tainted by that one person. BUT I also think it is an organizer's responsibility to denounce things like that. So if those anti-semitic things aren't being denounced, then that's an issue. (I did see the freedom convoy denounce the flag person) And if someone given the floor to speak at a protest says things that support Hamas, then I think that does taint the protest. (I don't for a minute believe that Hamas is pro-Palestine and I think Hamas has no interest in building up Palestine. So anyone who pretends Hamas and the Palestinian people are the same thing, has lost me.)
I think humans are fickle creatures and one problem with asking for consistency, is it requires that our beliefs about a topic already be well formed and certain. Terry Fox statue - I didn't have any opinion on it prior to reading this column. Now? I'm still unsure what to think. I have taken photos of my family in front of statues before for memory sake. Those photos just haven't ended up as images of a protest. I think in principle, I support people being able to take photos with statues because it keeps history alive - BUT - I can see how people would think it's bringing something from the past into a political movement of the present. I guess I don't really like the idea of photos like that being used to promote political movements (I am quite an absolutist about not destroying statues of historical figures, regardless of whether we agree or disagree with them - I think history is important, and the worse parts even moreso.) But I also don't think a photo is disrespectful in and of itself.
So I guess my point is - and if you've made it this far, thank you, but my point is that people are complex, and limited in how consistent they can be by their own experiences that have led to bias. Even when someone takes steps to try and consider that bias, they're still going to be imperfect. And when it's a topic that opinions are less developed on, perhaps changing an opinion (as long as the change results in a new point of consistency) isn't the worst thing ever? I think it's important that people be able to change and grow and this includes re-thinking biases and opinions as new inputs come in. I guess I would have more concern if someone flip-flopped based on the political views of the topic at hand though - which is really what the Lynes slope is getting at. This is tough too, because my political views have not been steady through my adult life - I've voted for many different parties, and have fully believed in the party I was voting for when placing those votes. Then I learned additional information - and the party I supported changed. Life has a way of doing that - we're all in constant flux. It can be hard to find consistency in the middle of constant flux.
So I guess while I think the request for consistency is good in theory - and I think these conversations are really important to have, I also wonder - how do we develop a consistent perspective? How do we think these things through when society at large isn't all that serious about discussing these issues without the partisan politics entwined in the middle? When our first opinion is generated based on a political belief, I think that makes it really difficult - and in today's sound bite society where people take a single clip or headline and run with it, I think that adds further challenges. I don't have the answer - I think I'm just saying that consistency sounds great, but how do we actually get there when our information is imperfect and often colored by the views of the people providing the information?
Oh, the irony! Funny you should quote your colleague Jen Gerson from her column in which she did exactly what you are asking people not to do -- she characterized Left progressive views as generally hypocritical (their "mask-off moment"), basing her assertion on just the radical views of the extremist minority glorifying the Oct. 7 Hamas atrocities as legitimate resistance.
Well, I'm on the left and she was right. The new illiberal left aka "woke" is boundlessly hypocritical as one can see from its sudden discovery and denunciation of cancel/consequence culture
Back in 2016, when Donald Trump got elected, I watched as a lot of reasonable and principled Conservatives lost their moorings: some of them simply couldn't come to terms with the ideology and populism that had infected their movement, and remained in denial about the state of Republicanism for a long time. Some did come to terms with it and distanced themselves from that form of "conservatism," and some eventually went over to Trumpism, either out of ideological land tribal loyalty, or out of sheer self interest.
I see a similar thing happening on the "left" (however you wish to define that affiliation) right now. A lot of sane, principled and compassionate progressives appear to be struggling with how much of their movement has been hijacked by an illiberal and vocal minority. "That's not *me*! That's not my movement! That's not what I believe!"
And I believe you. But you can't look at what is happening on campuses and in streets and dismiss the pro-Hamas side as some kind of fringe minority: it very clearly isn't. The rise of the pro-Hamas movement is inextricably connected to en vogue leftist discourse on oppression, intersectionality, and decolonialism. This has been compounded by a lack of education on major historical events, like the Holocaust. These concepts, ideas, and trends have legitimized extremist positions in a way that would not have been possible ten years ago, particularly among young people, who disproportionately lean left. (Ie; Polling has shown that more than *half* of those under 24 support Hamas, and feel the violence against civilians was justified. https://www.newsweek.com/insane-number-gen-zers-support-hamass-slaughter-innocent-israelis-opinion-1837422. Overreliance on social media like TikTok certainly plays into this as well.)
For some who are not as ideologically committed, this is, indeed, a "mask off" moment. But for others, for whom these observations represent a cognitive threat to their value systems and sense of self, I see a lot of denial, and a lot of anger, and a lot of lashing out against the people who are pointing out the (very) obvious. Just like 2016. For everyone's sake, I hope that the sane majority that considers itself broadly "left" doesn't make many of the mistakes of now-Trumpian captured right. -JG
I appreciate you taking the time to provide what seems to me to be a more thoughtful attempt to substantiate your argument (especially after having "moderated" out a similar comment I had made in support of Bratt's Flipping the Line post).
Nonetheless, your argument still suffers from slippery generalizations, conflations, and unsupported assertions (e.g. that progressive theory/talk is what causes this leftwing extremism), even all at the same time (e.g. American campus youth are left-leaning and therefore their (far from clear) majority views on Hamas represent the Left as a whole).
It seems to me that you are seeking to blame the Left (however defined, as you say) for a polarization that you explain as also having happened to conservatism under Trump, which would suggest that, rather than it being something inherent to progressivism, it is a broader societal dynamic with respect to politics/ideologies.
However, while we can still be civil enough, and agree to disagree, I can only reiterate my concern at the insidiousness of an argument that ultimately serves to dismiss the legitimacy of progressive views that condemn Israel's historic and ongoing commission of war crimes and crimes against humanity against Palestinians, just as they condemn Hamas atrocities.
I think the final paragraph there gets us much closer to the point you're trying to make: pro-Palestinian views are valid, and shouldn't be dismissed as extremist, or pro-terrorist. You see criticism like mine as an attempt to delegitimize your views by labelling them all as extreme or anti-Semitic.
Would it surprise you to consider that I, too, am sympathetic to Palestinian civilians caught in the middle of this situation? That Matt and I have repeatedly condemned Israel's actions in the West Bank? That neither of us have much time for Netanyahu? And have said so, openly, on our podcast?
It's entirely possible to criticize Israel and express sympathy for Palestinians without being anti-Semitic. However, when gleeful street protests celebrating Palestinian "resistance" erupt literally hours after 1,400 Jews are killed, and many more are raped, burned alive, children are killed in front of their parents etc; when virtually all of these pro-Palestinian marches chant "from the River to the Sea" or call for another intifada; when these same protests start targeting and intimidating patrons of Jewish restaurants; when countless individual academics, student associations, departments, and even universities respond to Oct. 7 by effectively blaming the Israeli colonizers; and when majorities of certain demographic groups are openly pro-genocide in credible polls, then, I feel justified in making some hard observations about your ideological fellow travellers. The hypocrisy on display *has* been glaring, and I'm far from the only commentator to have pointed it out.
I am assuming your good faith, compassion, and good intentions. But I do think many good, rational progressive types are in denial about how common these positions have become, and like many good, sane people on the left -- you don't want to hear a baddie like me point out that viewpoints that have been commonplace in the discourse (particularly academic discourse) over the last six years are, in fact, highly illiberal and have clearly had the effect of normalizing and legitimizing extremist positions. Including anti-Semitic ones. I don't wish to belabour the point any further than that, but thank you for reading, subscribing, and contributing your thoughts. -JG
But those examples you give are not "countless" nor is everyone attending a pro-Palestine march necessarily one of my "fellow ideological travellers", and there is just as much talk of genocide on the Israeli side as on the Palestinian side. I am, though, indeed glad to hear that you and Matt are sympathetic to Palestinian civilians, don't have much time for Netanyahu, and have condemned Israeli actions in the West Bank, and I hope that this will be better reflected in your future posts on this crisis.
I thought Jen's takes were unfair as well, but this isn't irony - Matt has a different take on the situation (and in my view, a more principled one), and if anything, I'm reading Matt's piece as a very welcome counterpoint to Jen's.
Plus, it's nice to know that based on their differing takes that The Line isn't the Borg like some other publications.
So, you’re saying..( I learned this in a HOW TO ARGUE curse at York U) you’re saying we should consistently be Pro Israel or Pro Palestine? I am.
What I am inconsistent on is welcoming refugees from Gaza knowing indoctrination starts at toddler age to Kill the Jews or Palestinians who just want peace. I want all children safe but not only is our cupboard bare but I don’t have the energy to ask them not to drape the Palestinian flag over Terry Fox.
if a protest is expressing some message, and others show up with a different message, the main protest needs make it clear where they stand - if they do not ask the others to leave, or at least repudiate the new message, they become complicit by association.
In the case of the "pro-Palestine" protests, the main protest is pro-terrorism and antisemitic.
The protest in Toronto where they were intimidating patrons at the Jewish cafés - Cafe Lander and Aroma - was organized by Toronto4Palestine. In a post on the group’s Instagram page advertising its first rally on the day after the October 7 slaughter of 1,400 Israeli men women, and infants, the mass raping of women, and the kidnapping of more than 200 innocent people, Toronto4Palestine asked attendees to bring their flags and said, “Let’s celebrate.”
Toronto4Palestine also noted that some people might give out sweets. This is what Hamas does in Gaza whenever they succeed in killing a Jew.
Similarly, the Palestinian Youth Movement {PYM} has been organizing rallies across Canada. The advertisement for their first pro-Hamas rally in Toronto read:
An unprecedented series of events has taken place by our heroic resistance in Gaza – with over 30 Zionist hostages captured.… The resistance’s offensive attack has shaped a new precedent for our national liberation struggle and we remain steadfast in our right to resist by any means necessary. We call on our people in the far diaspora in Toronto to uplift and honour our resistance and our martyrs. Join us this Monday, October 9 at 2 pm at Nathan Phillips Square and celebrate!
For the PYM, every inch of Israel is occupied; “settlements” means every town, city and kibbutz in Israel; and “free Palestine,” means wipe Israel off the map; they're not subtle.
The PYM is closely aligned with the grown-up group Samidoun, recognized by Germany and Israel as a terrorist group, and which also is organizing pro-Hamas demonstrations across the country, and helping to coordinate others.
Samidoun in turn is *very* closely aligned with the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, which everybody recognizes as a terrorist group.
The absurdly named Canadians for Justice and Peace in the Middle East {CJPME} brought their "pro-Palestinian" message to Chrystia Freeland's office and then turned their attention to the Jewish community centre across the street. It houses a daycare centre and a kindergarten. I will quote one of the kids: "Daddy, why do they hate us?"
The CJPME Board Member at this protest with a megaphone leading chants of from the River to the Sea, outside a Jewish Community Centre, was Ghada Sasa. In an interview, she claimed that Hamas was not trying to kill any civilians – that it was the Israeli army that murdered all those kids at the music festival in southern Israel.
For confirmed Jew-haters, it's not possible Jews can be the victim of evil; only perpetrators. That's how you get Holocaust denial, and it's how we're instantly getting widespread denial of the atrocities committed by Hamas
Consistent? As of Oct. 7th Canada is in a new world.
We live in a country that bends over backwards to try to do and say the right thing about everything. What is missing is clear vision that says we are not all equal. We do not all believe the same thing. Every word we say that you do not agree with is NOT racist. You probably see where I am going. There are bad people out there. There will always be bad people out there. Let’s be kind and nice when we are dealing with kind and nice people. Let’s rethink our relationship with bad people like terrorists and murders. They will not change, but Canadians may have to change (or be consistent).
Maybe the problem here is the relatively recent belief that one must have an opinion on everything!
To me, the whole point of protest is to raise awareness for your cause and either persuade people of your opinion or at least convince them that your opinion can't be ignored. But a LOT of modern protests don't really seem to be good at this. Either they don't really have an 'ask' or the 'ask' is pointless or not terribly viable. Or, it's an issue that most people already have an opinion on -- or don't really feel strongly about (they aren't open to pursuasion).
My observation is that change comes from a long, tedious process of policy advocacy. You need to have a policy worked out that you are proposing, talk to key stakeholders, build consensus, etc. Sure, maybe a protest fits into that work to demonstrate public support, but without a compelling story to tell, it just becomes part of media noise.
All of which to say, I suspect there are large swaths of Canadian who are only somewhat aware and interested on protests on either side of the Lyle Slope. Maybe that's a good thing!
Protests that are organized by well meaning (at least in their own minds) but amateur organizers are very susceptible to being infiltrated by the hardest edges of society. This reality is attractive for a few reasons:
- Someone else is doing the hard work to organize and gets to wear the ugliness created by the shit disturbers.
- The media are attracted to seek out the trouble makers so they get 400% more media exposure than they deserve.
- Sometimes, there is a money angle, which bit the Freedom Convoy. Having a $10 million dollar stash attracts lots of moths to a bright light of easy money.
I like The Line position of consistency regarding protests. I also would appreciate consistency of the media position of how protests are covered. The Freedom Convoy coverage by much of the media was embarrassing. Falsehoods were amplified with little cross checking and political actors were more than happy to regurgitate some of these problematic statements as the Gospel Truth.
Darcy, I agree with you, but these "pro-Palestinian" protests aren't organized by well-meaning amateurs. The protest in Toronto where they were intimidating patrons at the Jewish cafés - Cafe Lander and Aroma - was organized by Toronto4Palestine. In a post on the group’s Instagram page advertising its first rally on the day after the October 7 slaughter of 1,400 Israeli men women, and infants, the mass raping of women, and the kidnapping of more than 200 innocent people, Toronto4Palestine asked attendees to bring their flags and said, “Let’s celebrate.”
Toronto4Palestine also noted that some people might give out sweets. This is what Hamas does in Gaza whenever they succeed in killing a Jew.
Similarly, the Palestinian Youth Movement {PYM} has been organizing rallies across Canada. The advertisement for their first pro-Hamas rally in Toronto read:
An unprecedented series of events has taken place by our heroic resistance in Gaza – with over 30 Zionist hostages captured.… The resistance’s offensive attack has shaped a new precedent for our national liberation struggle and we remain steadfast in our right to resist by any means necessary. We call on our people in the far diaspora in Toronto to uplift and honour our resistance and our martyrs. Join us this Monday, October 9 at 2 pm at Nathan Phillips Square and celebrate!
For the PYM, every inch of Israel is occupied; “settlements” means every town, city and kibbutz in Israel; and “free Palestine,” means wipe Israel off the map; they're not subtle.
The PYM is closely aligned with the grown-up group Samidoun, recognized by Germany and Israel as a terrorist group, and which also is organizing pro-Hamas demonstrations across the country, and helping to coordinate others.
Samidoun in turn is *very* closely aligned with the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, which everybody recognizes as a terrorist group.
The absurdly named Canadians for Justice and Peace in the Middle East {CJPME} brought their "pro-Palestinian" message to Chrystia Freeland's office and then turned their attention to the Jewish community centre across the street. It houses a daycare centre and a kindergarten. I will quote one of the kids: "Daddy, why do they hate us?"
The CJPME Board Member at this protest with a megaphone leading chants of from the River to the Sea, outside a Jewish Community Centre, was Ghada Sasa. In an interview, she claimed that Hamas was not trying to kill any civilians – that it was the Israeli army that murdered all those kids at the music festival in southern Israel.
For confirmed Jew-haters, it's not possible Jews can be the victim of evil; only perpetrators. That's how you get Holocaust denial, and it's how we're instantly getting widespread denial of the atrocities committed by Hamas.
It’s important to try to distinguish between professional agitators who are adroit at getting media coverage and amateurs.
Professional agitators who know a thing or two about media coverage also know that salting a peaceful protest with placard or flag wavers that embarrasses the nature and tone of the event will get outsized coverage. The transcripts of the recent union exercises planning strategy to counter the pro parenting rallies illustrated a dark side of professional agitators. Sending supporters out to compile license plate numbers of the parents rights group is reprehensible in my opinion.
Well said.
Also, people who think that "From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free" is a perfectly acceptable chant should ask themselves how they'd feel about protesters worldwide chanting, "From shining sea to shining sea, Turtle Island will be free." And if those same people would by okay with protesters defending the beheading, rape and murder of 8,000 residents of the Annex an act of resistance aimed at decolonizing Turtle Island of white settlers.
(If only we could get rid of DEI's dehumanizing "oppressor/oppressed" framework, with genocide as its logical endpoint, and scrap terms like "decolonization" for old liberal terms like "mutual respect and accommodation.")
And maybe we could chastise the Sociology professors who came up with the "decolonization" "colonialism" formulae (likely with a hope of getting some paper of theirs published in some journal no-one reads but the like-minded) that underpins much of the social tensions today?
Well stated. No, normally one can't hold a large group responsible for the vile actions of a few, but I think you can hold the organizers responsible for what the speakers say, and this is where a whole group can be smeared. The example of Natalie Knight in Vancouver praising the murder of Israeli civilians on 10/7 is a clear example of one person tainting a protest. Not only that, but she was cheered by some. Not only that, she's being defended by various academics. What she said may not be illegal, or reflective of the majority, but for me it rightfully strips some of the legitimacy of the cause.
Matt, great column and great commentary on the Roundtable this morning. I had the misfortune of being downtown on Saturday (a friend was visiting Toronto and staying there). What struck me about the demonstration was that it felt like an actual festival of hate directed at Jews, not Israel. The chant “From the river to I the sea” can only have one meaning. The swarming of Jewish businesses and the view that Hamas is essentially not criminally responsible for its acts because of Israeli oppression goes too far for me. I cannot help but wonder how worldwide demonstrations are organized and who is funding all of this. I am a former student radical. The resources required for this type of endeavour are significant. Demonstrations are a good thing, targeting Jews or any other identifiable group is not.
Another one I really scratch my head over is where are all the "cultural appropriation" screams about white kids draped in a Kufiyas at the protests ? "My culture is not your costume." I guess we are done with that rejoinder for now....
I had that very thought. Funny how it's okay for some but not for others.
I don’t think anyone has a hot effing clue how deeply social trust has been obliterated in this country. I see the same people who called Amy Hamm a Nazi cheering Hamas, the actual Nazis. What’s that other than a projection that tells me the people I share this country with are deeply demented and mentally disturbed. Anyway. Whatever.
Great article Matt. I agree with you. As will occur from time to time my inner Lyle will be reflected in my comments. It flows from being an opinionated human - and as the saying goes, you’ve gotta stand for something or you’ll fall for anything - and theres been lots to fall for on the left side of the political spectrum of late.
I think, however, you missed a distinction between Lylian tendencies of individuals and that of governments. Whether I choose to support/join convoy protestors and decry the Hammasers is of no consequence. The actions taken by the Trudeau government against the Convoyors are indeed Lylian hypocritical compared to the support (or implied support through silence) protesting for indigenous, climate, gender, Palestinian rights. (No frozen bank accounts for the latter).
One thing we need to be watchful for and consistent on is taking a stand against authoritarianism - ie when a government picks a side - even if democratically elected - like in Canada or in Gaza.
I’d also like to make a distinction about how much protest/free speech should supported/permitted/allowed to disrupt - for issues outside our borders vs internal differences - that has been a bit of a limits to free speech for diasporas conundrum to me – perhaps I’ll address that at some other time or maybe you or Jen can think about it.
I like to think of myself as someone who's been rather consistent for 20+ years, but I will say that with the politicisation and polarisation of everything in the last few years, it's a real challenge to stay ideologically and morally consistent, even for someone who's been distrusting of politics and politicians of any stripe - politically orphaned if you will. The urge to take sides is strong, but it's people like you who are consistent who help us keep a level head.
Oh my goodness yes. Common sense and consistency! There is a collective disconnect and an attempt to bend over backwards to justify what your team does and why it is okay when it was not okay when 'their' side does it.
I am opposed to the naked denigration of statues for political gain, regardless of who is doing it.
Ironically, Terry Fox was an admirable Canadian who inspires us to find the courage to take on difficult challenges. However, his message is apolitical, which should be a clue even to the ignorant amongst us to leave his legacy alone.
I think it's really easy for people to have their first reaction - which comes without much thought, it's just what we think when we see something, and then stop there, instead of asking ourselves "why do I feel this way."
I will offer this for my observation - the last few years has "gifted" me the experience of being "othered" and treated with disdain. I have consciously had to work on finding empathy for others again because my response to being othered was to believe nobody was safe, nobody could be trusted, and to be constantly on guard everywhere I went, believing that most people were believing the worst of me. It's a horrible way to live. It has had lasting effects on my mental health. And it absolutely does influence how I react to things because now my FIRST reaction when I see someone getting some of what they've so gratuitously dished out, has been to feel like it's about time they get what they served. Now - big caveat here. This isn't an emotionally mature reaction, and I'm not claiming that it is. It's one borne out of years of being othered. Of being denied access to stores, to health care, and more because I was medically unable to mask. People believed the worst about me every time they saw me for all the years masks were mandated. (I had interactions with bylaw enforcement due to regular medical appointments where people who felt judgement was a better course of action than benefit of the doubt complained to hospital security about me not being masked. I carried medical documentation with me everywhere and the places where I was allowed to enter, I had to accept that a stranger could butt their nose into my business at any time and I had no choice but to share my personal health information.) I realize this is maybe tangential - but the point I'm making, is that I was not regularly "othered" prior to the pandemic, but just a few years of being actively othered and treated as unclean and having all sorts of assumptions made, has altered both how I perceive others and my willingness to give benefit of the doubt. Imagine if I'd lived my whole life feeling that way? I wouldn't even realize there was a different way to feel. I can't undo the last few years or the changes it's caused - but what I can do, is take a second pass at information after my first reaction has happened, and ask myself what is causing/motivating my reaction.
Sometimes this works - sometimes it doesn't. I won't claim to be consistent - though I will put some additional level of thought into it. But one thing I do know with certainty? Most of the people that I know don't even do the second pass at something before becoming very opinionated and certain of their opinion.
I didn't like the ultimatum approach the freedom convoy took when they reached Ottawa, but I did like that they went to Ottawa. I've never really thought in depth about whether the PM should or shouldn't meet with protesters - I just think that the PM should be consistent whatever the decision may be. (This is a slippery slope - we wouldn't want anyone with a complaint to just set up camp in Ottawa, and this is why I opposed the freedom convoy saying they were going to stay indefinitely until they got their way. Go - have your say, show your numbers. And then go back home to your families knowing your point has been made.) I didn't think the confederate flag tarnished the freedom convoy - but that was because it didn't seem to reflect the actual goals of the convoy but struck me more as someone looking to create trouble. I think I would have consistency there that if the pro-palestine protests are overall not being anti-semitic and it's one rabble-rouser in the crowd, then the whole protest shouldn't be tainted by that one person. BUT I also think it is an organizer's responsibility to denounce things like that. So if those anti-semitic things aren't being denounced, then that's an issue. (I did see the freedom convoy denounce the flag person) And if someone given the floor to speak at a protest says things that support Hamas, then I think that does taint the protest. (I don't for a minute believe that Hamas is pro-Palestine and I think Hamas has no interest in building up Palestine. So anyone who pretends Hamas and the Palestinian people are the same thing, has lost me.)
I think humans are fickle creatures and one problem with asking for consistency, is it requires that our beliefs about a topic already be well formed and certain. Terry Fox statue - I didn't have any opinion on it prior to reading this column. Now? I'm still unsure what to think. I have taken photos of my family in front of statues before for memory sake. Those photos just haven't ended up as images of a protest. I think in principle, I support people being able to take photos with statues because it keeps history alive - BUT - I can see how people would think it's bringing something from the past into a political movement of the present. I guess I don't really like the idea of photos like that being used to promote political movements (I am quite an absolutist about not destroying statues of historical figures, regardless of whether we agree or disagree with them - I think history is important, and the worse parts even moreso.) But I also don't think a photo is disrespectful in and of itself.
So I guess my point is - and if you've made it this far, thank you, but my point is that people are complex, and limited in how consistent they can be by their own experiences that have led to bias. Even when someone takes steps to try and consider that bias, they're still going to be imperfect. And when it's a topic that opinions are less developed on, perhaps changing an opinion (as long as the change results in a new point of consistency) isn't the worst thing ever? I think it's important that people be able to change and grow and this includes re-thinking biases and opinions as new inputs come in. I guess I would have more concern if someone flip-flopped based on the political views of the topic at hand though - which is really what the Lynes slope is getting at. This is tough too, because my political views have not been steady through my adult life - I've voted for many different parties, and have fully believed in the party I was voting for when placing those votes. Then I learned additional information - and the party I supported changed. Life has a way of doing that - we're all in constant flux. It can be hard to find consistency in the middle of constant flux.
So I guess while I think the request for consistency is good in theory - and I think these conversations are really important to have, I also wonder - how do we develop a consistent perspective? How do we think these things through when society at large isn't all that serious about discussing these issues without the partisan politics entwined in the middle? When our first opinion is generated based on a political belief, I think that makes it really difficult - and in today's sound bite society where people take a single clip or headline and run with it, I think that adds further challenges. I don't have the answer - I think I'm just saying that consistency sounds great, but how do we actually get there when our information is imperfect and often colored by the views of the people providing the information?
That should apply to our city government and police. Apply the law…consistently and with no exceptions.
Oh, the irony! Funny you should quote your colleague Jen Gerson from her column in which she did exactly what you are asking people not to do -- she characterized Left progressive views as generally hypocritical (their "mask-off moment"), basing her assertion on just the radical views of the extremist minority glorifying the Oct. 7 Hamas atrocities as legitimate resistance.
Well, I'm on the left and she was right. The new illiberal left aka "woke" is boundlessly hypocritical as one can see from its sudden discovery and denunciation of cancel/consequence culture
Back in 2016, when Donald Trump got elected, I watched as a lot of reasonable and principled Conservatives lost their moorings: some of them simply couldn't come to terms with the ideology and populism that had infected their movement, and remained in denial about the state of Republicanism for a long time. Some did come to terms with it and distanced themselves from that form of "conservatism," and some eventually went over to Trumpism, either out of ideological land tribal loyalty, or out of sheer self interest.
I see a similar thing happening on the "left" (however you wish to define that affiliation) right now. A lot of sane, principled and compassionate progressives appear to be struggling with how much of their movement has been hijacked by an illiberal and vocal minority. "That's not *me*! That's not my movement! That's not what I believe!"
And I believe you. But you can't look at what is happening on campuses and in streets and dismiss the pro-Hamas side as some kind of fringe minority: it very clearly isn't. The rise of the pro-Hamas movement is inextricably connected to en vogue leftist discourse on oppression, intersectionality, and decolonialism. This has been compounded by a lack of education on major historical events, like the Holocaust. These concepts, ideas, and trends have legitimized extremist positions in a way that would not have been possible ten years ago, particularly among young people, who disproportionately lean left. (Ie; Polling has shown that more than *half* of those under 24 support Hamas, and feel the violence against civilians was justified. https://www.newsweek.com/insane-number-gen-zers-support-hamass-slaughter-innocent-israelis-opinion-1837422. Overreliance on social media like TikTok certainly plays into this as well.)
For some who are not as ideologically committed, this is, indeed, a "mask off" moment. But for others, for whom these observations represent a cognitive threat to their value systems and sense of self, I see a lot of denial, and a lot of anger, and a lot of lashing out against the people who are pointing out the (very) obvious. Just like 2016. For everyone's sake, I hope that the sane majority that considers itself broadly "left" doesn't make many of the mistakes of now-Trumpian captured right. -JG
I appreciate you taking the time to provide what seems to me to be a more thoughtful attempt to substantiate your argument (especially after having "moderated" out a similar comment I had made in support of Bratt's Flipping the Line post).
Nonetheless, your argument still suffers from slippery generalizations, conflations, and unsupported assertions (e.g. that progressive theory/talk is what causes this leftwing extremism), even all at the same time (e.g. American campus youth are left-leaning and therefore their (far from clear) majority views on Hamas represent the Left as a whole).
It seems to me that you are seeking to blame the Left (however defined, as you say) for a polarization that you explain as also having happened to conservatism under Trump, which would suggest that, rather than it being something inherent to progressivism, it is a broader societal dynamic with respect to politics/ideologies.
However, while we can still be civil enough, and agree to disagree, I can only reiterate my concern at the insidiousness of an argument that ultimately serves to dismiss the legitimacy of progressive views that condemn Israel's historic and ongoing commission of war crimes and crimes against humanity against Palestinians, just as they condemn Hamas atrocities.
I think the final paragraph there gets us much closer to the point you're trying to make: pro-Palestinian views are valid, and shouldn't be dismissed as extremist, or pro-terrorist. You see criticism like mine as an attempt to delegitimize your views by labelling them all as extreme or anti-Semitic.
Would it surprise you to consider that I, too, am sympathetic to Palestinian civilians caught in the middle of this situation? That Matt and I have repeatedly condemned Israel's actions in the West Bank? That neither of us have much time for Netanyahu? And have said so, openly, on our podcast?
It's entirely possible to criticize Israel and express sympathy for Palestinians without being anti-Semitic. However, when gleeful street protests celebrating Palestinian "resistance" erupt literally hours after 1,400 Jews are killed, and many more are raped, burned alive, children are killed in front of their parents etc; when virtually all of these pro-Palestinian marches chant "from the River to the Sea" or call for another intifada; when these same protests start targeting and intimidating patrons of Jewish restaurants; when countless individual academics, student associations, departments, and even universities respond to Oct. 7 by effectively blaming the Israeli colonizers; and when majorities of certain demographic groups are openly pro-genocide in credible polls, then, I feel justified in making some hard observations about your ideological fellow travellers. The hypocrisy on display *has* been glaring, and I'm far from the only commentator to have pointed it out.
I am assuming your good faith, compassion, and good intentions. But I do think many good, rational progressive types are in denial about how common these positions have become, and like many good, sane people on the left -- you don't want to hear a baddie like me point out that viewpoints that have been commonplace in the discourse (particularly academic discourse) over the last six years are, in fact, highly illiberal and have clearly had the effect of normalizing and legitimizing extremist positions. Including anti-Semitic ones. I don't wish to belabour the point any further than that, but thank you for reading, subscribing, and contributing your thoughts. -JG
But those examples you give are not "countless" nor is everyone attending a pro-Palestine march necessarily one of my "fellow ideological travellers", and there is just as much talk of genocide on the Israeli side as on the Palestinian side. I am, though, indeed glad to hear that you and Matt are sympathetic to Palestinian civilians, don't have much time for Netanyahu, and have condemned Israeli actions in the West Bank, and I hope that this will be better reflected in your future posts on this crisis.
I thought Jen's takes were unfair as well, but this isn't irony - Matt has a different take on the situation (and in my view, a more principled one), and if anything, I'm reading Matt's piece as a very welcome counterpoint to Jen's.
Plus, it's nice to know that based on their differing takes that The Line isn't the Borg like some other publications.
So, you’re saying..( I learned this in a HOW TO ARGUE curse at York U) you’re saying we should consistently be Pro Israel or Pro Palestine? I am.
What I am inconsistent on is welcoming refugees from Gaza knowing indoctrination starts at toddler age to Kill the Jews or Palestinians who just want peace. I want all children safe but not only is our cupboard bare but I don’t have the energy to ask them not to drape the Palestinian flag over Terry Fox.
if a protest is expressing some message, and others show up with a different message, the main protest needs make it clear where they stand - if they do not ask the others to leave, or at least repudiate the new message, they become complicit by association.
In the case of the "pro-Palestine" protests, the main protest is pro-terrorism and antisemitic.
The protest in Toronto where they were intimidating patrons at the Jewish cafés - Cafe Lander and Aroma - was organized by Toronto4Palestine. In a post on the group’s Instagram page advertising its first rally on the day after the October 7 slaughter of 1,400 Israeli men women, and infants, the mass raping of women, and the kidnapping of more than 200 innocent people, Toronto4Palestine asked attendees to bring their flags and said, “Let’s celebrate.”
Toronto4Palestine also noted that some people might give out sweets. This is what Hamas does in Gaza whenever they succeed in killing a Jew.
Similarly, the Palestinian Youth Movement {PYM} has been organizing rallies across Canada. The advertisement for their first pro-Hamas rally in Toronto read:
An unprecedented series of events has taken place by our heroic resistance in Gaza – with over 30 Zionist hostages captured.… The resistance’s offensive attack has shaped a new precedent for our national liberation struggle and we remain steadfast in our right to resist by any means necessary. We call on our people in the far diaspora in Toronto to uplift and honour our resistance and our martyrs. Join us this Monday, October 9 at 2 pm at Nathan Phillips Square and celebrate!
For the PYM, every inch of Israel is occupied; “settlements” means every town, city and kibbutz in Israel; and “free Palestine,” means wipe Israel off the map; they're not subtle.
The PYM is closely aligned with the grown-up group Samidoun, recognized by Germany and Israel as a terrorist group, and which also is organizing pro-Hamas demonstrations across the country, and helping to coordinate others.
Samidoun in turn is *very* closely aligned with the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, which everybody recognizes as a terrorist group.
The absurdly named Canadians for Justice and Peace in the Middle East {CJPME} brought their "pro-Palestinian" message to Chrystia Freeland's office and then turned their attention to the Jewish community centre across the street. It houses a daycare centre and a kindergarten. I will quote one of the kids: "Daddy, why do they hate us?"
The CJPME Board Member at this protest with a megaphone leading chants of from the River to the Sea, outside a Jewish Community Centre, was Ghada Sasa. In an interview, she claimed that Hamas was not trying to kill any civilians – that it was the Israeli army that murdered all those kids at the music festival in southern Israel.
For confirmed Jew-haters, it's not possible Jews can be the victim of evil; only perpetrators. That's how you get Holocaust denial, and it's how we're instantly getting widespread denial of the atrocities committed by Hamas
Great post Brian.
Consistent? As of Oct. 7th Canada is in a new world.
We live in a country that bends over backwards to try to do and say the right thing about everything. What is missing is clear vision that says we are not all equal. We do not all believe the same thing. Every word we say that you do not agree with is NOT racist. You probably see where I am going. There are bad people out there. There will always be bad people out there. Let’s be kind and nice when we are dealing with kind and nice people. Let’s rethink our relationship with bad people like terrorists and murders. They will not change, but Canadians may have to change (or be consistent).
My protest.
Good protest or bad protest.
Maybe the problem here is the relatively recent belief that one must have an opinion on everything!
To me, the whole point of protest is to raise awareness for your cause and either persuade people of your opinion or at least convince them that your opinion can't be ignored. But a LOT of modern protests don't really seem to be good at this. Either they don't really have an 'ask' or the 'ask' is pointless or not terribly viable. Or, it's an issue that most people already have an opinion on -- or don't really feel strongly about (they aren't open to pursuasion).
My observation is that change comes from a long, tedious process of policy advocacy. You need to have a policy worked out that you are proposing, talk to key stakeholders, build consensus, etc. Sure, maybe a protest fits into that work to demonstrate public support, but without a compelling story to tell, it just becomes part of media noise.
All of which to say, I suspect there are large swaths of Canadian who are only somewhat aware and interested on protests on either side of the Lyle Slope. Maybe that's a good thing!
Protests that are organized by well meaning (at least in their own minds) but amateur organizers are very susceptible to being infiltrated by the hardest edges of society. This reality is attractive for a few reasons:
- Someone else is doing the hard work to organize and gets to wear the ugliness created by the shit disturbers.
- The media are attracted to seek out the trouble makers so they get 400% more media exposure than they deserve.
- Sometimes, there is a money angle, which bit the Freedom Convoy. Having a $10 million dollar stash attracts lots of moths to a bright light of easy money.
I like The Line position of consistency regarding protests. I also would appreciate consistency of the media position of how protests are covered. The Freedom Convoy coverage by much of the media was embarrassing. Falsehoods were amplified with little cross checking and political actors were more than happy to regurgitate some of these problematic statements as the Gospel Truth.
Darcy, I agree with you, but these "pro-Palestinian" protests aren't organized by well-meaning amateurs. The protest in Toronto where they were intimidating patrons at the Jewish cafés - Cafe Lander and Aroma - was organized by Toronto4Palestine. In a post on the group’s Instagram page advertising its first rally on the day after the October 7 slaughter of 1,400 Israeli men women, and infants, the mass raping of women, and the kidnapping of more than 200 innocent people, Toronto4Palestine asked attendees to bring their flags and said, “Let’s celebrate.”
Toronto4Palestine also noted that some people might give out sweets. This is what Hamas does in Gaza whenever they succeed in killing a Jew.
Similarly, the Palestinian Youth Movement {PYM} has been organizing rallies across Canada. The advertisement for their first pro-Hamas rally in Toronto read:
An unprecedented series of events has taken place by our heroic resistance in Gaza – with over 30 Zionist hostages captured.… The resistance’s offensive attack has shaped a new precedent for our national liberation struggle and we remain steadfast in our right to resist by any means necessary. We call on our people in the far diaspora in Toronto to uplift and honour our resistance and our martyrs. Join us this Monday, October 9 at 2 pm at Nathan Phillips Square and celebrate!
For the PYM, every inch of Israel is occupied; “settlements” means every town, city and kibbutz in Israel; and “free Palestine,” means wipe Israel off the map; they're not subtle.
The PYM is closely aligned with the grown-up group Samidoun, recognized by Germany and Israel as a terrorist group, and which also is organizing pro-Hamas demonstrations across the country, and helping to coordinate others.
Samidoun in turn is *very* closely aligned with the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, which everybody recognizes as a terrorist group.
The absurdly named Canadians for Justice and Peace in the Middle East {CJPME} brought their "pro-Palestinian" message to Chrystia Freeland's office and then turned their attention to the Jewish community centre across the street. It houses a daycare centre and a kindergarten. I will quote one of the kids: "Daddy, why do they hate us?"
The CJPME Board Member at this protest with a megaphone leading chants of from the River to the Sea, outside a Jewish Community Centre, was Ghada Sasa. In an interview, she claimed that Hamas was not trying to kill any civilians – that it was the Israeli army that murdered all those kids at the music festival in southern Israel.
For confirmed Jew-haters, it's not possible Jews can be the victim of evil; only perpetrators. That's how you get Holocaust denial, and it's how we're instantly getting widespread denial of the atrocities committed by Hamas.
These are the people organizing the protests.
Excellent comments.
It’s important to try to distinguish between professional agitators who are adroit at getting media coverage and amateurs.
Professional agitators who know a thing or two about media coverage also know that salting a peaceful protest with placard or flag wavers that embarrasses the nature and tone of the event will get outsized coverage. The transcripts of the recent union exercises planning strategy to counter the pro parenting rallies illustrated a dark side of professional agitators. Sending supporters out to compile license plate numbers of the parents rights group is reprehensible in my opinion.