Dear Mr. Poilievre:

Not to get all conspiratorial, here, but we need to talk. About, you know, conspiracies.

All cards on the table, big guy: the country has had its fill, and then some, of Justin Trudeau. From coast to coast, old to young, male to female and all points in between: we want Justin to leave. Go cobble together a ghost-written memoir in time for the Xmas season, Lucky Sperm Club guy, and hit the WE lecture circuit. Go.

See, Pierre? We’re not necessarily against you. We know that, if Justin doesn’t leave of his own accord, you are the figurative bailiff: you’re the only guy with the wherewithal to move Justin and his sock collection onto the sidewalk on Sussex.

But, Pierre: we’re not necessarily for you, either. The jury is still out on you.

Because of you.

For quite some time, the country has been saying: Trudeau, go. But the country has also been saying: Pierre? No.

There was a bunch of reasons why the country didn’t embrace you right away, most of which you’ve now addressed. You used to be pro-life, now you’re pro-choice. You used to dislike gay marriage, now you do. You used to be seemingly against a bunch of things – more immigration, Indigenous reconciliation – that you are now for.

You hung out with Covid-denier convoy types who occupied bridges and major Canadian cities, but not anymore. You used to talk a lot about vaccinations, but no longer. You used to wear glasses and look a bit nerdy. No more: you’ve ditched the glasses and started using Brian Lilley’s former trainer.

It’s all good, Pierre. Except…conspiracies. They’re back, apparently. Like a stain on the rug in the sitting room, the WEF one is back. And everyone can see it.

CTV (no Lefty bastion) was the first to circulate the Canadian Press (owned by newspapers, not the CBC as you falsely claimed) story. Here’s the lede:

“Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre has been hitting the summer barbecue circuit with ramped-up rhetoric around debunked claims that the World Economic Forum is attempting to impose its agenda on sovereign governments.”

Big allegation, one that CP knew would be damaging to your ambitions. So they backed it up. They quoted a Conservative Party fundraising appeal you sent to thousands of people: “It’s far past time we rejected the globalist Davos elites and bring home the common sense of the common people.”

“Globalist elites.” We’ll get back to that one in a minute. 

CP then quoted you at a Penticton, B.C. rally: “I will ban all of my ministers and top government officials from any involvement in the World Economic Forum.”

So, you’re back at it, on the WEF nonsense. 

What is the World Economic Forum, anyway? Well, on its web site, it defines itself in this way: “The World Economic Forum is the International Organization for Public-Private Cooperation. The Forum engages the foremost political, business, cultural and other leaders of society to shape global, regional and industry agendas.”

The Britannica people say this: “The World Economic Forum (WEF), international organization (https://www.britannica.com/topic/international-organization) that convenes (https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/convenes) an annual winter (https://www.britannica.com/science/winter) conference, traditionally in Davos (https://www.britannica.com/place/Davos), Switz., for the discussion of global commerce, economic development (https://www.britannica.com/topic/economic-development), political concerns, and important social issues.”

Your former boss, Stephen Harper, used to go and speak there. So did your cabinet colleagues, including one who chaired your leadership campaign. You yourself used to be found on a WEF web site. Big deal. 

Crazy people think the WEF secretly rules the world. Crazy people have always believed stuff like that, just like the things they used to believe about the Freemasons or the Illuminati or the Trilateralists or the Learned Elders of Zion. 

Personally, I’ve always thought the Davos gatherings are awful, too, Pierre. But not for the same reasons as you. 

I opposed them because they were wankfests of rich, pompous, wildly-out-of-touch jerks who talked a lot but did precisely nothing. You, however, leaned into the conspiracy theory that the WEF has boundless power over the lives of “common people,” quote unquote. 

It doesn’t. It actually doesn’t do anything, and you know it. 

In fairness, Justin Trudeau regularly dabbles in untruths, too. When he does, we call it “lying.” When you do it, we call it “conspiracy theories.”

I prefer “lying,” myself. That’s a better way of describing it. 

Oh, and the “globalist elite” thing? The American Jewish Committee says that’s a trope “used to promote the anti-Semitic conspiracy that Jewish people do not have allegiance to their countries of origin.” 

The Anti-Defamation League says “white supremacists and other anti-Semites frequently use the term as an anti-Semitic dog whistle.”

I know quite a bit about white supremacists and anti-Semites, Pierre, and you are decidedly not one. Nor are you stupid. 

But the stuff you’ve again started spewing about the WEF and “globalist elites,” Pierre? It’s stupid. It’s beneath you. And it’s unnecessary. You’re way ahead in the polls, and you didn’t get there by peddl
ing crap to knuckle-dragging mouth-breathers. 

Smile more, Pierre. Be upbeat. Talk about your ideas to help people. Tell the truth. Do all that, and you’ll win. 

But keep it up with the conspiracy theories, and you’ll lose. Guaranteed. 

Sincerely,

Etc.

Comments (79)


Weird, weird, weird.

“For the well-being of our children, we ask that you respect our and their privacy.”

That is a quote. That is what Justin Trudeau and Sophie Grégoire wrote, in both official languages, when they announced their separation on August 2.

Some commentators, this one among them, strongly urged everyone to heed those words. Justin Trudeau is Prime Minister of Canada, yes, and a public person. Criticism of his votes, his quotes and his spending of bank notes are always fair game, we said.

But not Sophie Grégoire or their three kids, all aged 15 and under. They’re unelected. Leave them alone, we said. (We still say it.)

The “respect our privacy” request is heard a lot. Sometimes couples – separating, divorcing or “consciously uncoupling,” per the vagine visionary, Gwyneth Paltrow – add: “at this difficult time.”

Couples who have used those words, or a variation on those words, recently include TV star Sofia Vergara, Yellowstone lead Kevin Costner, movie star Reese Witherspoon and Oasis guitarist Noel Gallagher. Usually, the call for “privacy” during “this difficult time” happens when kids are involved, but not always.

Sometimes the paparazzi and the press respect the request for privacy, often they don’t. It depends.

What about those occasions, say, when a famous person requests that everyone “respect our and their privacy,” and then – a few days later! – does the exact opposite, themselves? What happens when they preach one thing on one day, and then practice another thing the next day?

We speak, here – reluctantly, regretfully – of one Justin Trudeau, he of the “respect our privacy” statement, issued on Instagram on Tuesday, August 2.

Who then posted, on Sunday, August 6, a photo of himself on Instagram with his son Xavier, 15, going to see the movie Barbie. And who posted a photo of himself with his daughter Ella, 14, going to see the movie Oppenheimer on Tuesday, August 8.

They were nice photos, and everyone looked happy. The kids look like great kids.

Except this: the person who put those photos up on Instagram – the person who did not respect the kids’ privacy – was the person who asked everyone to “respect their privacy” less than one week before.

Do you get that? I don’t. Does that seem wildly, bizarrely contradictory to you? It does to me.

It is arguably vintage Justin Trudeau, however: say one thing, do another. Preach Indigenous reconciliation, then hit a beach where he likes to surf. Promise ethical governance, then get caught breaking conflict of interest rules not once, but twice.

Condemn racism, get seen wearing racist blackface. Pledge to reform elections, balance budgets and finally end boil-water advisories and…anyway, you get the point. The guy is (in)famous for saying one thing and doing another. It’s practically in his DNA.

And, in fairness, you can say the same thing about most politicians. They break promises all the time. They get in power, and are persuaded – by bureaucrats, by lawyers, by circumstance – that what they said they’d do before they won the election isn’t very practical after the election.

Things happen beyond their control, in other words, and they have to reverse themselves. They have to flip-flop. Happens a lot. Happens too often. But the reversals aren’t always solely their fault.

However, in this bizarre instance, it’s pretty hard for Justin Trudeau to blame someone else for violating his kids’ privacy, when he’s the one who did it first. Him.

Is it possible the kids themselves said they were okay with being photographed, and memorialized, on Dad’s official Instagram account? It’s possible. God knows teenagers aren’t strenuously opposed to social media.

But, until someone produces exculpatory evidence, it looks very much like the guy who requested their privacy is the selfsame guy who violated their privacy.

Which, as we say, is weird.

And typical.

Comments (14)

Comments (1)

BEST BIRTHDAY WISHES EVER #gabbagabbahey https://t.co/Bdrnp05bQt

— Warren Kinsella (@kinsellawarren) August 11, 2023

Comments (2)

One has been caught making remarks that are intolerant and sexist. He’s facing multiple criminal prosecutions.

The other has similarly gotten into trouble for words and behaviour that are sexist and racist – and he’s been found guilty of violating two federal statutes while in power.

We are speaking, of course, about Donald Trump in the first instance, and Justin Trudeau in the second. And what is remarkable isn’t that both men committed misogynistic and racist acts — and broken the rules.

What’s remarkable is that their partisans — MAGA with Trump, TruAnon with Trudeau — have stayed with them. Even when both have revealed themselves to be the worst kind of politician.

Regrettably, politicians are regularly caught doing awful things: Racism, sexism, breaking the law. Happens all the time. It’s been happening since Jesus was a little fella, in fact.

But why — why, why, why? — does a segment of voters stick with two men who are so clearly unfit for any public office? Why do TruAnon and MAGA forgive every sin committed by their cult leaders?

It is bizarre and frustrating, to be sure. Most of us don’t understand it.

In Trudeau’s case, a majority voted against him in 2019 and 2021. In Trump’s case, a larger number of Americans also voted against him.

But their hard-core supporters remain stubbornly committed to Trudeau and Trump, arguably more than ever before. Despite the overwhelming evidence that has been marshalled against them.

Paradoxically, it is that evidence — allegedly breaking the law, breaking moral and ethical codes — that seems to have strengthened, not diminished, the loyalty of Trump and Trudeau’s partisans.

The very things that have pushed the majority away from Trump and Trudeau are the same things that have consolidated their grip on their respective parties. How can that be?

Three reasons.

One, scandals have little to no impact on many voters these days. We in the media and other politicos are mainly to blame. Citizens have seen the media — and political adversaries — cry “scandal” far too often. And, as in the parable about the boy who cried wolf, that cry just doesn’t change many minds anymore.

Unless Trudeau and Trump’s core see their man led away to a cell, wearing an orange pantsuit and handcuffs, they don’t believe what they’re hearing. Even if the evidence is overwhelming.

Two, social media. In the good old days, before Twitter and Facebook — which, in the latter case, is now actively censoring any Canadian news — it was harder to identify and organize partisans. It was hard work.

In the social media era, however, hardcore Trump or Trudeau fanatics can find each other — instantaneously, for free — just by typing in a hashtag. When they do, the committed partisans tend to stay within their own echo chamber, disregarding any evidence that is critical of their leader.

They start to regard disagreement as treason. They start to believe in conspiracies. And they see those on the other side as the literal enemy, who must be destroyed at all costs.

Three, and finally, Trudeau and Trump lead movements, not political parties. Trump has literally called MAGA a movement — and Trudeau has repeatedly called his TruAnon base the same thing.

In real political parties, control comes from the bottom up. In a movement, power comes from the top down. And, so, the leader at the top needs to be defended at all costs.

Which is why Canada and the United States remain saddled with Justin Trudeau and Donald Trump.

And it’s why both men — despite the evidence, despite what the majority think — aren’t disappearing anytime soon.

Comments (64)

Comments (40)