fbpx
Connect with us

Opinion

CLEMENT: NDP birtherism borders on bigotry

David Clement writes that the Alberta NDP are bizarrely obsessed with where conservatives or libertarians are born.

mm

Published

on

The debate over paid blood plasma donations is heating up, with opposition critics reducing themselves down to nativist, and downright false, claims about the experts supporting the government’s plan. 

In the committee review process for this legislative change, NDP MLA Sarah Hoffman embarked on what can only be described as a nativist line of questioning for Ethics Professor Peter Jaworski. After eloquently explaining the need for paid plasma donations in Alberta, MLA Hoffman questioned Dr Jaworski with the following: 

“I’m just wondering, as a professor in the United States I think you’re our only international person here today- and i’m wondering what your interest is in paid donations in Alberta and why you want to bring this style of collection into a canadian province?” 

For those who have followed the paid plasma debate, and the work of Dr Jaworski, this line of questioning didn’t just seem awkward, it seems downright inappropriate. Yes, Dr Jaworski teaches at Georgetown University in the United States. That said, he’s also a Canadian, and has been a Canadian since his family claimed refugee status here in 1987 when they fled communist Poland. Hoffman’s line of questioning seemed to be implying that because Dr Jaworski is an “international person” and a professor based in the United States, that somehow his opinion is invalid, or that his interests need to be questioned. That, or she is just lazy when it comes to researching the background and qualifications of whom the committee (which she is a part of) invites to present. Assuming that Hoffman’s question was a genuine one, and not thinly veiled xenophobia, Dr Jaworski promptly explained that he is in fact, a Canadian.

“I am a Canadian. I have been since 1987 when I immigrated from Poland. So I am a Canadian and that is my interest. I happen to be working at a university in the United States, but I am a Canadian, thank you.” 

You would think that after Dr Jaworski’s polite response to having his allegiances questioned, on the official record, that this line of questioning would be done away with and that MLA Hoffman would avoid this nativist, ad hominem, and false line of questioning/critique. Unfortunately for those who care about civil discourse, MLA Hoffman doubled down when speaking on the floor of Alberta’s legislature later that day. 

“The UCP tries to refute the fact that they are Americanizing our healthcare, but today they invited an American based professor to speak to the committee about American style corporate model for blood” 

It is incredibly unprofessional and unbecoming for a sitting MLA to reduce a Canadian refugee success story down to nothing more than “American based”. Imagine if Premier Kenney took to the floor and accused the NDP of “Mexicanizing” a portion of the Alberta economy, and was critical of them citing a “Mexican based professor” despite the fact that said professor was a Canadian. The word to describe that would be bigotry, and that is exactly what MLA Hoffman is guilty of. 

Nativism, and even birtherism, is bizarrely widespread on the Alberta left. Regularly, NDP and other leftist activists raise the Ontario birthplaces of Alberta Premier Jason Kenney, former prime minister Stephen Harper, and former Wildrose MLA Derek Fildebrandt, as being alien imports to the Alberta body politic. They argue that there must be some dark reason that intra-Canadian (conservative) immigrants to Alberta would seek to be a part of its public life.

MLA Hoffman’s shameful actions show that the arguments against paid plasma are weak, and can’t be made in any serious or rational way. It clearly demonstrates that the UCP is right in its move to legalize paid plasma. Rather than engage in debate on the subject, the NDP have reduced themselves down to petty, nativist, ad hominem attacks. For a party that rightfully prides itself on combating bigotry, in all its forms, it might be time to take a look in the mirror.

David Clement is a columnist for the Western Standard and the North American Affairs Manager of the Consumer Choice Center

Opinion

GRAFTON: Trudeau cannot lead a nation that he doesn’t believe in

“Distrust in government, a disproportional electoral system, mass immigration, and other factors are poised to meet at the polls next election in a perfect storm of disunity.”

mm

Published

on

In November 2015, newly elected Prime Minister Justin Trudeau gave an interview to the New York Times. It was an historic interview, during which the Prime Minister signaled his disdain for Canada as a nation with any kind of unique cultural identity. He said that Canada has no core identity, and that it is “becoming a new kind of country, not defined by our history or European national origins, but by a pan-cultural heritage”. He went on to say that he sees Canada as the “first post-national state”. 

Almost six million Canadians – mostly east of Manitoba – supported his vision at the polls in 2019.

The critical take-away here is the clear statement of a “post-national” goal. Post-nationalism involves the global replacement of national identities and nation-states with multicultural supranational entities such as NATO, the UN, the EU, and multi-national corporations.

Disunity now threatens Confederation.

DART poll conducted on February 24th shows that an alarming sixty-nine percent of Canadians believe “Canada is broken”. Eighty-two percent of Canadians believe that politicians represent their own partisan interests rather than those of Canada. 

The Electoral Map resembles a cancerous MRI scan, vividly coloured tumours highlighting patches of tribal discontent from coast to coast. 

poll conducted for the Western Standard in May found that between 45 and 48 of Albertans back independence, depending on how the question was put. Soon after, Wexit Alberta and the Freedom Conservatives merged to form the Wildrose Independence Party, also with a credible leader in the original Wildrose’s first leader, Paul Hinman. 

The Bloc Quebecoise holds 32 seats in the House of Commons, giving it the balance of power on national legislation. 

What led to this great divide?

We could attribute it to a lack of national leadership, however blaming it all on Trudeau would be too easy. There are other causal and contributing factors.

One is the electoral system. The “plurality system”, also known as “first-past-the-post”, is responsible for the 2019 re-election of the Trudeau government, with only a third of the popular vote. More Canadians voted for Andrew Scheer and the Conservatives. This marginalized the West – which had voted solidly Conservative – and contributed immediately to the formation of the Wexit Party federally, the Wildrose Independence Party in Alberta, and the Buffalo Party in Saskatchewan. Trudeau had campaigned in 2015 on a platform promising electoral reform, but abandoned his promise after taking office. Of course, had he followed through with electoral reform, he would have lost to Scheer in 2019 and we would have a Conservative government in Ottawa, or at the very least, a Conservative plurality of seats. 

The reality of the first-past-the-post system is that Ontario (121 ridings) and Quebec (78 ridings) can  determine who wins an election. With 338 ridings across the country, a plurality of 199 seats invalidates the other eight provinces and three territories (with only 139 seats combined). The electoral system therefore sows disunity.

Another causal factor may be found in demographics. A 2019 poll conducted for CBC showed that while indigenous voters were abandoning the Liberals, immigrants overwhelmingly support Trudeau and the Liberals. According to the poll, “Forty-five per cent of new Canadians polled say they voted for the Liberals in 2015 and 39 per cent say they currently intend to vote for the party in 2019.” Under the Trudeau government, immigration levels have soared to record high levels, with the 2022 annual target set at 361,000 (comparable to adding a city the size of say London or Halifax every year). Using the CBC numbers, that represents an influx of 141,000 to 162,000 new Liberal voters annually to Canada. 

The 2011 National Household Survey revealed that most immigrants (86 per cent) are from non-European countries, and that 20 per cent of the population (6.8 million) were born outside of Canada. Almost all (95 per cent) move to Ontario, BC, Quebec, and Alberta; most (91 per cent) in large cities, and most of these in Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver. Unfamiliar with Castor canadensis, new immigrants are a large voting block inhomogeneous with national voting trends. Toronto, Montreal and Vancouver voted Liberal in 2019. Forty-five of fifty ridings in the GTA alone elected Liberal members. For comparison, there are only thirty-four ridings in all of Alberta. This trend will continue to marginalize the West.

Contributing to national disunity is an erosion of trust in the democratic process. Globally, voters are disengaging from mainstream politics and polarizing toward niche parties serving special-interests (Bloc Quebecoise, Green Party, and Wexit

Distrust in government, a disproportional electoral system, mass immigration, and other factors are poised to meet at the polls next election in a perfect storm of disunity.

 It may be a tipping point for Canada’s future.  

Canadians awoke on the morning of October 22nd, 2019 to a crisis of disunity. The prime minister cannot recognize a national crisis if he does not recognize the nation. 

Ken Grafton is a freelance columnist

Continue Reading

Opinion

LETTER: BLM mural is expensive virtual signalling

A reader says that Calgary’s mayor and councillors that want the BLM mural can pay for it themselves, and shouldn’t paint over what’s there already.

mm

Published

on

This BLM [Black Lives Matter] progressive virtual signalling by Calgary City Council has gone too far.  Look farther into BLM and you will see a well organized political movement. Now, funded by City Council to the tune of $120,000 of our taxpayers dollars for BLM murals in Calgary that helps this political movement. How does that help taxpayers Mayor Nenshi? 

 A respected Calgary artist, Doug Driediger, gave us (1995) Giving Wings to the Dream. Which in my opinion deserves respect from a virtual signalling city council. Our city is in a financial crisis, but city hall seems to find cash for pet projects that make little sense to hard working people who are just making it.  

Why are we, as a city funding this mural? It’s not public art, but it is a political statement from a BLM political movement! If BLM wants to paint murals, then BLM can fund that themselves and I hope not erase (paint over) a mural that may Calgarians have enjoyed over the years in downtown Calgary.  

Easy to virtual signal for a cause when it comes out of the taxpayers pockets Mayor Nenshi. You and city council want BLM murals then chip in and pay for it yourselves.  

It’s time for a change at City Council, time for a change from progressive virtual signalling councillors to fiscal responsible councillors who won’t get caught up in political movements and then pass the bill onto the taxpayers so they can pat themselves on the back. 

Respect of cultures all cultures.  

Steven Ruthven
Calgary, AB

Continue Reading

Opinion

CLEMENT: China’s Hong Kong crackdown comes to Canada

China isn’t just extending its iron rule over Hong Kong, but now charging non-Chinese citizens in the West for supporting the democratic resistance.

mm

Published

on

Hong Kong’s National Security Law is just over a month old and the Chinese Communist Party is already wreaking havoc in what was once one of the freest places on earth. The law – which effectively silences almost all criticism of the government in Beijing – has quickly been used to arrest pro-democracy voices in Hong Kong.

What started with the rounding up of pro-democracy students and political leaders has now turned to arresting prominent Hong Kong business figures, including Apple Daily’s founder Jimmy Lai. Lai was arrested this week on charges of “colluding with foreign powers,” when in reality his crime is that Apple Daily is a wildly popular source of pro-democracy news and commentary in Hong Kong. 

To make matters worse, the National Security law is also being used to target anti-communist voices abroad. The CCP formally charged a handful of pro-democratic leaders who have successfully sought asylum abroad. In addition to that, the CCP extended itself to charge Samuel Chu, who has been a naturalized US citizen for over 25 years. When asked about the charges laid against him, Chu stated “I might be the first non-Chinese citizen to be targeted, but I will not be the last. If I am targeted, any American and any citizen of any nation who speaks out for Hong Kong can, and will be, too”.

A foreign power charging non-citizens for violating laws in a country they don’t live in shows that in the eyes of Beijing’s CCP, their reach knows no bounds. That overreach, and persistent threat, landed on Canadian shores just this week. Sing Tao – Canada’s largest Chinese language newspaper – rejected an advertisement that spoke out against Hong Kong’s National Security Law. 

While the paper is free (in Canada) to run whatever ads it likes, and reject whichever ads it doesn’t, it does raise questions as to why the paper would turn away several thousands of dollars in advertisement money. It isn’t baseless speculation to assume that the paper rejected the pro-democracy ad because it would put those involved on Beijing’s blacklist. The CCP has already signaled that it will charge US citizens for supposed crimes against the Chinese state, so naturally that same adventurism would extend to Canadians guilty of promoting democracy in Hong Kong.

This over-step by Beijing demonstrates that the CCP won’t just oppress their own citizens, which adds more fuel to the fire regarding how Canada should treat companies like Huawei or Tik Tok. Beijing’s 2014 Counter-Espionage law and their 2017 National Intelligence Law mandates that individuals and firms must support state intelligence work when asked, which pretty much guarantees that your data could be handed over to the Chinese government if Beijing were to ask for it. While these companies may claim that they are independent from the Chinese state, it’s incredibly unlikely that these companies wouldn’t comply if asked for data. If these companies didn’t comply, it is certain that the Chinese state would simply take what it requested, and reprimand those who didn’t comply. 

Regardless of what mainland owned firms want to be, their ties to the CCP are undeniable. Coupled with the fact that Beijing will not hesitate to charge non-citizens with crimes against the state makes for a toxic cocktail of privacy violations and state oppression. 

That’s why in liberal democracies, we must remain vigilant and support our fellow democratic voices who end up in the CCP’s crosshairs. Because at one point or another, this could affect people in our nations.

David Clement is a columnist for the Western Standard, a Director at 21Democracy and the North American Affairs Manager with the Consumer Choice Center.

Continue Reading

Sign up for the Western Standard Newsletter

Free news and updates
* = required field

Trending

Copyright © Western Standard owned by Wildrose Media Corp.