Will the Real Bad Guy Please Stand Up
(*Shamelessly edited post publication to include more righteous indignation.)
Here’s how impressionable I am.
Last night I read a weekend column by Andrew Coyne in which he mocked with disapprobation the failure by the West to intervene militarily in Syria to stop Assad from killing Syrians.
I don’t use the expression “killing his own people” because it’s never used by pundits to describe policies enacted by our own politicians that lead to the deaths of citizens here and abroad.
For instance, no pundit here in Canada, that I’m aware of, has accused his leader of “killing his own people” even when he has deliberately, and with an ideologically-driven zeal bordering on madness, deregulated the marketplace, leading to the deaths of scores of innocent civilians out enjoying an evening at the local pub.
That’s just one small example, of course.
Also, “killing his own people” ascribes a kind of superpower to one individual that denies the personhood of everybody else, and absolves his supporters of responsibility for their actions.
Hence, I was “just” following orders. I don’t know about you, but it’s the “just” that really sticks in my craw.
In that same vein of leading expressions, some time ago I realized Stephen Harper always uses the word “regime” to describe governments of countries he doesn’t like for religious reasons. (And by “reasons”, I mean “excuses”.)
So I started referring to the Harper regime.
It didn’t catch on. The media in this country really is absurdly respectful of whoever manages to be first past the post + cheating to form the regime of the day. It’s also very reluctant to acknowledge political hypocrisy, even after it’s been widely exposed, but that’s another entry.
Suffice it to say that the relationship between journalists and politicians often isn’t much different from the relationship between cops and criminals.
That is to say, not for reporting, nothing to report on here, move along and stop sticking your nose in where it doesn’t belong, ladies and germs of the public.
The column was as full of passion as any in which Andrew Coyne has mocked with disapprobation the failure by the Conservative Party government of Stephen Harper to show even a modicum of respect for Parliamentary democracy.
Yes, he’s written quite a few, and I’m as surprised as you are every time he does, which is a bit unfair now that I really stop and think about it.
And I agreed with his column about Syria, just as I have agreed with all of his columns on Stephen Harper vs Canadian parliamentary democracy. Yes, we should… do something… because… well… it was a stirring call to arms and I’m impressionable.
Today I read another column (this pundit posts it on his website) that was also an impassioned plea to act, with the added point that we only aren’t because Bush/Blair proved to be such liars.
Hard not to blame Bush/Blair for the quagmire of Iraq, for sure. Easy, in fact. Although I’ve read arguments by pundits here that if Stephen Harper had been Prime Minister at the time Bush/Blair made the decision to invade it, Canada would have actively supported it, too, and maybe then Iraq would not have become the quagmire that it did.
Cripes, maybe we even would have found the weapons of destruction Bush/Blair invaded Iraq to find. Supposedly.
Of course, those same pundits like nothing better than to mock with disapprobation the notion that Canada matters at all in the world, thanks to pussy-whipped flower-power Trudopia.
What did Stephen Harper call Canada? “A Northern European welfare state in the worst sense of the term.”
In my dreams, Daddy-o.
Fortunately, because his is a website, there were comments critical of the entry that weren’t instantly deleted or, even better, altered to make it look as though the commenter was offering up an opinion critical of herself, not the blog entry, which I read and agreed with even more.
And every single comment posited essentially the same even more compelling opinion (delivered without any of the seemingly requisite mocking disapprobation, too) that the insanity of war has to stop somewhere and it may as well be now, when the truth is finally being realized/accepted/admitted that we don’t really know who or what to believe because our leaders have been proven liars over and over and over again.
*And never mind that they have deliberately, and with an ideologically-driven zeal bordering on madness, killed their own people, too, not been held at all accountable for it by our media, and then assumed the moral mantle of drawing red lines in the sand about when they should start killing another leader’s people. If seemingly never crossing their Western minds.
Assad’s an amoral dictator, agreed, but what’s their excuse? Or should that be reason…