podcast friday

[sabotabby]

 Welcome to Podcast Friday. Unusually for me, awash in excellent content, I come today not to praise but to condemn. Not the podcast itself, but the ways in which alternative and independent media occasionally has the same blind spots as mainstream media when it comes to critical analysis.

Yeah yeah I know Canadaland has sucked lately and this is not actually about Jesse's stance on Israel and Palestine (or lack thereof). Though hoo-boy maybe we can talk about yesterday's bizarro episode as well. No, the one I want to highlight is "The Conservative Decade Ahead."

Like every mainstream media source including the, presumably, soon-to-be-defunded-and-turned-into-single-family-housing CBC, this episode assumes that Pierre Poilievre will be Canada's next Prime Minister. Literally everyone I know thinks this as well. I don't know why we bother having elections in this country—everyone seems to be sick of them anyway—we might as well go with the guy appointed by a handful of radicals and endorsed by the kind of people who answer the phone for a call from an unknown number. Definitely the kind of people we want deciding the fate of this country. It goes a step farther, though, and assumes that not only will Poilievre have the top job, but like his ideological predecessor Stephen Harper, he will be in a majority government for a decade.

Now, I don't think that this is a particularly far-fetched assumption. We have been told for years that we're all sick of Trudeau (personally I was sick of him before he got elected the first time) and that it's time for a change, and this is certainly A Change. Canadians are, as a people, deeply stupid. The Conservatives are a big tent party consisting of everyone from first-generation bourgeois immigrants who don't want their taxes raised to neo-Nazis who want the former group deported at best, put into a concentration camp at worst. Among the leadership, though, they're very united by how they work—defund all public institutions until they break, then transfer that money into the pockets of their bestest friends. Every Conservative government in living memory has the same strategy, which is to steal and defraud the public, enshittifying and making you pay more for things you should get for free, and then handing you like $200, patting you on the shoulder, and telling you that they're the friend of the working class, the little guy, just like you. Because we are a nation of placid, stupid little toddlers, we fall for it every time.

So okay why does this annoy me so much? For a number of reasons—first, it is maybe the job of journalists who are not far-right (whatever else you can say about Jesse Brown, he's not an extremist) to suggest pathways through which we might avoid the worst possible outcome. Maybe it's not. I don't know. Or at least to expose the truth of these fuckers, which doesn't really happen here either. Definitely it's not to suggest that eh, we'll probably still be okay and things will be pretty much the same. Maybe it might be nice to revisit what happened under Stephen Harper's regime, how the bloody scientists had to get out and protest with placards and everything to be allowed to present a modicum of truthful information to the public.

Certainly it is not responsible journalism to gloss over the people who will be most screwed. Refugees, including the ones we are directly responsible for creating, such as the many people forced into desperate flight by our policies throughout the Global South. Homeless people. Jesse and his guests correctly identify the fact that Poilievre's housing strategy will definitely not work, and that he will be forced to do what every other politician does—bulldoze the unsightly tent cities that exist everywhere now in the name of law and order, and eliminate the safe injection sites that are the only thing slightly blunting the edge of the opioid epidemic. What happens next though? These people have to go somewhere, and obviously a lot of them will die, but at least a few minutes of air time ought to be devoted to whether we think they'll go to already overcrowded prisons or forced into camps or what? The environment: Canadaland has always been a bit weak on that beat, but the consequences for the entire planet if Canada continues its dependance on oil and gas are obviously dire. Disabled people, whose numbers are already on the rise due to covid let 'er rip policies, and we can expect that no support or research or financial aid will be available to the millions of people who will be thrown out of work and public life by long covid.

And of course, queer folks. There's a lot of time devoted to this idea that everyone is sick of "woke" policies, which is baffling to me as hardly anyone is actually materially affected by "woke" policies, if there even is such a thing. Trudeau has been shamefully weak as three provincial governments have now undermined the Charter of Rights and Freedoms to murder more trans kids. Poilievre has declared that he will be even more extreme to ensure that no trans kids make it to adulthood. So...can we talk about the consequences of that? Because I don't think "woke" is the problem here. I actually don't think that most people here care about "woke." I think people hate Trudeau because he, like every other politician, is corrupt as hell, and because people imagine some kind of fantasy world where no one made them wear masks or stay home and it was somehow better than what we ended up with. And of course inflation, but a cursory look around at the rest of the world suggest that this is a problem everywhere.

One thing that's not mentioned much, given that Poilievre campaigns on housing and affordability, is the fact that his whole plan was bitcoin and this guy should in no way be trusted with the national economy. I feel like that's an important thing to point out, that had he been elected last tie, he'd have gambled on fake money and we'd be even more screwed.

There's a chilling bit near the end where they play a bit of a Poilievre speech. I usually read what politicians say rather than listen to them, because I'm more interested in policy than verbal flourishes. So this is the first time I've had to listen to the guy in awhile, and it's terrifying. Obviously the guy is a straight-up fascist, in the RETVRN TO TRADITION sense of the word, but...it's compelling, this lullaby that your life could be better with magical access to home ownership and small businesses on Main St. and clean, safe streets. It's not really my thing but it sounds nice, even to me, and I don't think the fact that he's a far-right demagogue ought to go uncommented on. It's a very soothing vision: Wouldn't it be nice if you didn't have to be concerned about climate catastrophe and plague and economic policy and all these new changes around you and your mom never told you when to go to bed and you just got to live in a Norman Rockwell* painting all the time?

Media, including Canadaland, consistently predicted Conservative victories (or at least stronger showings) under O'Toole and Scheer, and were wrong. It's not impossible that they're wrong this time, given the polling problems I mentioned earlier. It's also probable that they're right (given that Boomers who pick up the phone are also more likely to vote) but. Look. I'm not a liberal. I don't actually believe that representative electoral democracy is all that good. But maybe we should think a little harder about replacing it with fascism before we just throw our hands up and say welp and let this absolute maniac take over.

* Never mind that Rockwell was cool, actually, and would have hated these guys.

Comments

[ioplokon]

The "wokeness" point seems pretty clueless, at any rate. Polling shows that people either don't know what woke means, or think it's good? It seems like it's more the last ditch effort from politicians who know they're going to lose (like the Tories in the UK; they know they will lose no matter what, so they're just looking for something for the papers to write about other than them blatantly looting public services). I don't necessarily think people care enough that anti-trans or anti-lgbt rhetoric would put them off voting for a candidate they like for other reasons, unless it becomes the dominant feature in the campaign. But also, the right have proven themselves unable to moderate on these things, like, at all. And once you start doing book bannings, most people recoil because they're like, this is movie villain stuff.

And this may be a point where Canadians' obsession with US politics at the expense of their own could play into the left's favor. If you're able to pain tthe Conservatives as the northern branch of the Republican party, my impression is that would put a lot of people off them...

[sabotabby]

My fear is that he's maybe too smart to campaign on anti-woke alone. I think anti-vax is still kind of a winning issue, and definitely the economy and housing are. One thing the episode correctly points out is that he will not be able to fix the housing or affordability crises, and then he'll need something to blame it on, which is when the anti-woke/anti-immigrant stuff will happen. If he campaigns on it, I think he'll lose, but if he uses it to bolster flagging approval ratings after he's made an even greater hash of the economy, I could see it working.

A lot of these politicians also campaigned as moderates. I don't think anyone was quite silly enough to believe Marlaina as moderate, but she was pro-same sex marriage at one point, so people acted surprised when she turned out to be anti-trans-children-being-alive.

[frandroid]

> There's a lot of time devoted to this idea that everyone is sick of "woke" policies

I hate that Canadaland perpetuates this right-wing trope. What I'm tired of is Conservatives talking about how they're tired of "woke" policies. This should be identified as a wedge issue. But of course liberals like Brown walk right into the trap.

[rdi]

Neil Gaiman's observation about "political correctness" being “treating other people with respect” seems equally applicable to any discussion of "wokeness"

[frandroid]

Yeah! That's just code! And yes, new categories of people assert themselves and demand to stop being the butt of jokes and be treated fairly with regards to employment and overall social acceptance. And sometimes we need to uncomfortably look at our own prejudices and learn to how behave better! Crazy idea!

[sabotabby]

Agreed.

[sabotabby]

I'm disappointed because while Brown is wrong on a good number of things, he's not actually stupid, and I genuinely don't think he wants trans kids and homeless folks and Indigenous folks to die just so that he can have more material to have got takes on. So why let himself be manipulated by this?

[lokifan]

Seriously. Here in the UK at least there's a ton of evidence that people, even those willing to vote for the Tories, don't actually care that much.

[sabotabby]

I think for a lot of people who have a genuine sense that something is wrong with the world and would like to see something different happen, culture war bullshit is something that you can latch onto more easily than, say, the economic policy that could make material changes in your life. I mean, I find that too—I nerd out about economics sometimes, but if I want a really good meaty discussion with a lot of people participating, I know I'll get more engagement if I post about culture war stuff.

[dissectionist]

I hate that we’re left with a choice between firm dogshit and dog diarrhea. But firm dogshit is slightly easier to clean up, so I’ll be holding my nose and voting for the Libs yet again. I don’t understand folks who are like, “I’m tired of firm dogshit, let’s try having diarrhea everywhere for the next four years for a change.”

I wish the NDP were a viable third party federally. Not that they’ve been great either, but I hate that my options are as effectively curtailed as if I lived in the US. At least the NDP is _sometimes_ more aligned with my goals than the Libs.

[frandroid]

Which riding/area do you live in?

[dissectionist]

York Centre. NDP gets under 10% of the vote and often there’s only a couple thousand (sometimes only a little over 500) votes’ difference between the Conservative and Liberal candidates for federal elections. Often there’s an even smaller margin than that for provincial. (Currently our provincial rep is that shitbag Roman Baber, who is such an asshole that Dougie kicked Baber out of the provincial Conservatives.) It’s not a riding where any “anybody except Conservative” voters can risk throwing a vote away on an unviable NDP candidate.

[frandroid]

Oh hey that's the MP I went to protest the other night!

[dissectionist]

I have left so much hate mail at his office. Well, it didn’t start out as hatemail; I tried to reach him diplomatically for a good while. But the dude doesn’t have a single decent bone in his body, so eventually I just gave up and then let him know how much he sucks.

[sabotabby]

Part of it is that the media does a poor job about explaining policy (and, tbh, economic policy is boring to most people) so it becomes:

Candidate T, who is demonstrably doing a bad job.
Candidate P, who is a fresh face and speaks well. Sure he says some kooky things, but you know he doesn't really mean them. Just throwing red meat to the base!
Candidate S. Lol, you know that guy doesn't stand a chance.

So T and P seem interchangeable even when they're wildly different. Like, don't get me wrong, they're both absolute dogshit, but can you imagine P in charge of the covid response?

[dissectionist]

I wonder if it’s a neurodiversity thing that I tend to take people at their textual and subtextual words. So the whole “don’t worry about the kooky stuff, they’re just saying that!” doesn’t work on me because I’m like, “Well, this person either wants to do this kooky thing or values people who want them to do the kooky things enough that they’re likely to give in to pressure to do the kooky thing. Ergo, this person is dangerous as hell.”

[sabotabby]

I think overall you should have a healthy mistrust of any stated proposal that will actually materially improve people's lives, and assume that anything that is going to make the world worse is what they actually mean.

[blogcutter]

So tell me more about Norman Rockwell - I only know of him and his art in terms of his stereotypical picture-postcard idyll of the perfect family, home and world!

[sabotabby]

OH MAN definitely Google Murder in Mississippi and The Problem We All Live With. Dude was a New Deal lefty who supported the Civil Rights movement and opposed the Vietnam War. Four Freedoms was indirectly about Vietnam and he refused to do American imperialist propaganda even though he was asked to.

People who idealize Rockwell now absolutely would have considered him a screaming socialist by today's standards. Anyway here's an article about him and politics.

[agoodwinsmith]

Yes. While I can't listen to podcasts (I stop paying attention five words in), I *do* agree that much media in Canada has been agitating in favour of PP for ages. It is so obvious cherry-picked nuggets that I am continually astonished that the reporters aren't blushing and squirming in shame. *WHO* are people polling, and what questions are they asking? I mean: even the reports out of Quebec paint PP as the most succulent of tasty bonbons. Really?

Okay, yes, Trudeau the Younger is a jerk - but at least he's willing to use his jerky powers on Canadians' behalf, if it doesn't inconvenience him too much. PP is all pancake makeup slogan and, just like Harper, would pee on something he doesn't want rather than share it.

Okay, yes, I'm a boomer, but PP is so obviously a narc that *nobody* I know would invite him to a party, or even let him know where it is.

[sabotabby]

They also claim that there's an increase in conservatism amongst young people and like...I don't see it? I mean young people tend to be anti-tax, which I guess is a conservative issue but more a result of the fact that Civics is only a half-semester course in Grade 10 and taught int the most boring way possible, so the overwhelming majority of kids don't know what taxes are or that they generally get money back if they file returns, which they don't. But socially they are far less conservative.

[smhwpf]

Gaaaah. Everywhere you look in the Anglosphere it's shitty centrists who support genocide versus a right-wing party that was always really bad but just about sane, that has now embraced outright fascism.

What could be done to beat Polliviere? Really go all out to scare people with the reality of just how bad he is? Combined maybe with grassroots-based tactical/strategic voting - i.e. not the Libs' version of "Liberals are the only ones who can beat the Tories", but clearly identifying and publicizing where Libs have no chance and you need to vote NDP, where NDP has no chance and you need to vote Lib, where neither has a chance and you need to vote for the Parti/Bloc Quebequis, God help us (I can never remember which is the provincial and which the national), and where it doesn't matter because one party is light years ahead, or where two of the non-Tory parties are equally well-placed, so you should just vote how you want.

There have been such grassroots tactical voting efforts in the UK, which have definitely had some effect, but unfortunately never enough to change the outcome. (Tactical voting seems to have been most successful in 1997, when the Tory government was totally hated, Labour were miles ahead anyway, so it just meant that the Tories were left with even fewer seats, which was nice from a schadenfreude point of view, but didn't really change the politics).

Any other ideas? Trudeau suddenly discovers a spark of firebrand popular rhetoric and ideas that are actually vaguely good and wins back the hearts of the Canadian public? Singh does something similar and sweeps to an unlikely victory?

Summon Ian Mallory from the Land of Story to rig things with magic???

[sabotabby]

I'm actually very torn because I might end up voting Liberal for the first time in my life. My MP is...genuinely, shockingly good. If he were elected Liberal leader at either level I would back the party as much as it would feel like a betrayal (it would also signal that they had substantially swung to the left, which is why he didn't win the provincial leadership). My riding doesn't matter and will never go Conservative though.

(To give you an idea, 32 MPs called for a ceasefire and restoring funding to UNRWA and he was one of them.)

But yeah I think the Libs need to really hit the "Trump-style" branding hard with Pollievre, and they need to scoop him on some of his policy points before the election. Which they're already doing in terms of things like funding municipalities based on construction targets. People barely remember what a shitshow 4 years of Trumpism was.

Summon Ian Mallory from the Land of Story to rig things with magic???

HAH.

[greylock]

Like every mainstream media source including the, presumably, soon-to-be-defunded-and-turned-into-single-family-housing CBC, this episode assumes that Pierre Poilievre will be Canada's next Prime Minister. Literally everyone I know thinks this as well.

I've noticed this across western democracies. We get 2-3 terms into a government (usually closing in on a decade) and everyone just decides there's an "It's Time" factor and the "undecideds" flip.

It ignores a few hard truths: polling is increasingly inaccurate; election upsets happen frequently, and the electorate has the attention span of a gnat. It also ignores the potential for strong third party/independent/hung parliament scenarios.

My best metric for a mood for change is if MPs from an incumbent government decide not to re-contest. Usually, but not always, rats know when to get off the ship.

assumes that not only will Poilievre have the top job, but like his ideological predecessor Stephen Harper, he will be in a majority government for a decade

Unless you have a history of one-term governments, it's not a bad bet. Conservative governments tend to be sticky.

. There's a lot of time devoted to this idea that everyone is sick of "woke" policies, which is baffling to me as hardly anyone is actually materially affected by "woke" policies, if there even is such a thing.

I think everyone is sick of the woke culture wars from the right. I'm sure it's a variant of the gish gallop. I'm lucky, I can just roll my eyes and wait to see what fuckery they come up with next. Because, by the time I have even started to understand what the issue is with Niche Group X they have moved onto Small Group K.

I usually read what politicians say rather than listen to them, because I'm more interested in policy than verbal flourishes.

You've missed a trick there. Words are a small fraction of communication (10-20% or something).
If you looked at the SOTU or response yesterday, you'd probably not get a sense of just how different they were. One of them was downright creepy.

It's increasingly important in the 24/7 news cycle that shapes perceptions.

I am starting to think that Canada is further along the fascist arc than here. And we're both behind the US.

[sabotabby]

We're pretty far along, yeah. Fascism is one of our big exports and we've also been importing it back for awhile.

So I know about the communication style thing—that's why I avoid watching or listening to politicians speak. It's an inoculation against demagoguery, which I'm as likely to fall for as anyone else.

[greylock]

We're pretty far along, yeah. We're pretty far along, yeah. Fascism is one of our big exports and we've also been importing it back for awhile.and we've also been importing it back for awhile.So I know about the communication style thing—that's why I avoid watching or listening to politicians speak.

You need to balance it.

[sabotabby]

There's enough pollution in my head already. I owe these fucks nothing.

[wlach]

I hardly ever listen to Canadaland either but for some reason I tuned into that one too. Was equally frustrated as you were, what a waste of time.

I feel so let down by the journalistic class in Canada. Feels like the "news" devolved into a game of who can most artfully repeat conventional wisdom while sounding like they're saying something novel or edgey. It's gotten really old.

Canadaland used to feel like an exception to that, but less and less lately.

[sabotabby]

I'm still a subscriber, because besides the main show there's Canadalandback, Commons, and Wag the Doug, all of which are better than what Jesse's doing right now. But yeah, it feels like there's absolutely no difference in coverage from the CBC, the Star, or the National Post, and even the SUN is not that indistinguishable besides the breathless tabloid reporting of the exact same political line. If it wasn't for the Tyee, Narwal, and the goddamn Beaverton, I'd lose hope altogether.

[frandroid]

Okay so I'm listening to the episode, can we start commenting on the guests? Wells is fine but Marche and Gerson? Why does Brown give the time of day to these sacks of shit? They're taking about "ideological capture" of the CBC as if it's been taken over by the NDP, which, like, holy cow.

[sabotabby]

I do like that he has right-wing people on, because to be fair my podcasts are mostly from my own ideological bubble, and I want to know how the other side thinks. But he should push back more, especially on things like "ideological capture," which are blatantly untrue.

[frandroid]

Right? Not pushing back on that is basically acquiescence. And Wells was silently on board as well.