If Canada Doesn’t Choose Justin Trudeau


If Canada doesn’t choose Justin Trudeau in Election 2019, the following will help to explain why I’m with Elon on his next spaceship out of here:

  1. Trudeau is a globalizer(aka ‘statesman’ just as his father was known). He not only inherited his dad’s determination to swim in the direction of his own choosing, no matter which way the river happens to flow, but his dad’s visionary capacity as well: he knows where we are at, where we need to be, and how to get there. Walking to the beat of one’s own drum while keeping to the tune of a  progressive soul-song are qualities greatly needed, but rarely found in combination, in today’s national leaders. Trudeau is reconciling Canada’s aspirations with that of the global community, articulated by the U.N. A true leader in today’s world cannot do more than ‘young Justin.’

The greatest of aspirations is to ensure a viable future for future generations of Canadians and humankind. To that end, the United Nations has authored a series of resolutions. The Prime Minister et al appear to be the first sovereign government to actually understand and commit to the U.N. resolutions, to wit: to the future we leave for humanity’s children:

  1. UNDRIP – Indigenous Rights
  2. Climate Change
  3. Children’s Rights
  4. Women’s Rights
  5. Desertification
  6. Palestinian Rights
  7. LGBT rights

… and these are but a few. So much of our Liberal government’s platform and policies map to what our United Nations aspires to- how is it anyone could have anything bad to say about that? Apparently Andrew Scheer, Doug Ford, and the rest of Canada’s provincial Chicken Little-ish harbingers of doom have plenty to say about it.

  1. Trudeau is a ‘practical visionary.’ In his case, the terms are not mutually exclusive. He has a vision for the future, one that is hardly unique, if you can listen above the raucous din of the alt-right folks. It is a vision of diversity and inclusiveness. This is practical. From Nature’s and humankind’s perspective, resistance is futile.[i]
    1. We have been for too long pursuing a model that modernization-technology has caused the world to outgrow like teenagers outgrow their clothes. Times have changed. The world has become very small and our present numbers are unsustainable. There are too many people obliged to live in poverty and on scraps in the world of today, for the societies they are in to remain viable.
    2. Inclusiveness means involving people who are different from you in some way, most especially if they are ‘poorer’ than you, but in other ways just as significant. If you, as a community member, persist in focusing on differences, you cannot help but miss out on opportunities to improve and grow your community and to make it safer.[ii]

As an example, many believe homosexuality to be a sin. Ninety percent of LGBTQ folks are mistreated at school. The homosexual you condemn as sinful, or the LGBTQ person you are loathe to talk to, hire, or march with in a Pride parade, is no less likely to provide all of the skills, human qualities you and your community need than any ‘straight’ might be. What has their sexual orientation or configuration have  to do with any of that? There may not be anyone else at the precise moment and place in your community whose skills so precisely provide resolutions that are urgently required. Still, when we focus on exclusion (how we are different) rather than inclusion (how we are the same and how our differences are in fact additions to our community’s toolset, whether the context is local, ethnic, national, or global), we’ve likely just missed out on a grand opportunity to help ourselves out of our current difficulty.

When we are driving, if we were to focus solely on the road ahead of us, we would miss our turnoff and never get to our destination. We must be aware of what is in front of us, behind us, and all around us. The road we are on is conducting us toward the future. We need to be on the correct road at all times. We cannot afford to ever miss turns, or we will suddenly find ourselves headed in the wrong direction. Persisting in ignorance and suffering the consequences of it, simply because we choose to focus on our reaction to LGBTQ folks, when it is something we needn’t concern ourselves with at all, unless we are ourselves ‘confused’ about our own sexuality. If, say, we choose not to include an LGBTQ individual, we deny ourselves their humanity and their wherewithal- the which our communities have need of, as much as from any other human source.

This is the real price of our stubborn ignorance, and for what? What is between the individual and god, must remain between the individual and god. It is the same rule, no matter what your sexuality. You will have your feelings about same-sex of course. No one is asking you to change that; most folks just want to be respected and liked. Because the neighbour happens to be gay, say, doesn’t mean you have to be too. You are first and foremost neighbours, existing in a human relationship. The expectation that naturally forms here is to be treated as a neighbour. That is what is natural. What is not natural is condemning folks for behaviours and activities that have as much to do with you as you do with initiating the Big Bang. To behave properly with respect to being human, before anything else, you must cultivate a human, respectful, relationship with any and all other humans and their communities. The attitude of neighbourliness is all that is required. The rest we may safely leave to the god who created us.

      3.Diversity-no need to say a whole lot here, because diversity in and among human-constructed societies simply mimics and extends god’s creative genius: there’s always going to be backup; no matter what happens to society, its citizens have got it covered! We can’t know or anticipate everything that might come down the pipe. It is the oddball who will have been born and in possession of the attribute which not only makes him/her ‘odd’ but guarantees the continuance of our species. On this particularly significant point, Robert Ardrey has written a thesis of ‘scriptural’ authority.

If ‘diversity’ wasn’t desirable, why did god make more than one kind of tree, or flower, or vegetable, or fruit, or animal, or insect, or….human? One day, the entire race of humans may depend on an attribute possessed by only a few of them-resistance to a pestilence, the ability to survive certain environmental conditions, the knowledge or skills which are necessary to survive an emergent, existential challenge of one kind or another?

  1. Trudeau is determined not to allow the egotism of the ‘superpowers,’ – among them I would number today’s multinational corporations—to hold sway in shaping humankind’s future, but rather a world governed by inclusiveness, respect for diversity, and RULE OF LAW. This is about Canada’s role as leaders of global ethics and the rule of law and peacekeeping. Trudeau is being tasked by the Chinese government’s Chairman Xi simply for respecting the RULE OF LAW, specifically, for holding Meng Wanzhou and considering the U.S. demand for extradition. Trump was also tasking Trudeau. Both of them would rather deal with an authoritarian, utilitarian mindset such as that sported by the likes of Scheer and Kenney, and the alt-right, that is, if these folks had any ‘mind’ at all: they behave as if thoughtlessness which comes of reaction is something to be cultivated.

What Xi and Trump have in common is an attitude that the dollar and the Yuan are more valuable than the American or the Chinese citizen,[iii] if the person cannot make money for them (and for them, it doesn’t seem to matter how they actually do it, or what laws, international, domestic, or those of Nature, they might be violating, btw).[iv] Their world is business. They are CEOs of corporations, not leaders of sovereign nation-societies. Their measure of progress is in dollars and cents. They would turn their nations into profit centres even as the Earth becomes a dump.

As I was saying, young[v] Trudeau appears determined to not allow the shameless egotism of the superpowers to dictate the form globalization takes: they are wilfully depleting resources all around the world to support their own short-sighted, knee-jerk and rapacious agendas; they are rendering lands uninhabitable to the indigents after the international corporations have left, and they are preparing for war with each other over what remains of the world’s resources. This of course is a war no one will win, because everyone is bent on removing their competition, and the means to do this will render the Earth largely uninhabitable for a very long time. After two devastating world wars one would think we might have learned. Putin, Xi, Trump, MBS…they are the dregs of an old and outdated ruling order. Scheer would join us to a dying regime and drag us down into an abyss even the Bible cannot fully qualify…

Our Trudeau would rather cut the anchor to the old ways, permitting us and the world to break free of a perspective that is dragging us all down along with a group of cantankerous old men who are invested in it.

I am, at the moment, a member of the economically vulnerable sector—aka unemployed. I am looking for work. I am unable to retire and, it appears, too old to be hireable. I don’t know how much PM Trudeau can help me with my situation; I will have to allow for the contingency of being homeless. When the time comes, my only recourse is that Elon has had his fill of things life on Earth has to offer and decides to haul off to Mars…and doesn’t mind company…

For me, it is just as well to live on inhospitable Mars, because as a Canadian, I would rather be catapulted into Space rather than live in the sort of Canada that would elect a Scheer instead of a Trudeau -then having to watch it morph into the very thing it isn’t in spirit.


[i] Alright, I’ve let slip my true colours: I’m a Trekkie. And I am inclined to map the Borg to the alt-right; who can think of doing nothing, creating nothing, of their own imagination; they can only steal from others while they imagine a past full of virtue, where ‘whites’ are at the top of the social hierarchy. Why, any of the poor from those days who happened to be ‘white’ would tell you that they were treated no better by their fellow ‘whites’ than brown skinned folks of today are by the alt-whites. I am ‘white.’ It never, ever occurred to me that brown skinned folks were anything but people like ‘whites.’ They were just different colour. As an imaginative 4 or 5 year old, I once broke away from my parents while skating and ran smack into a brown skinned family. Right away, and before my mother arrived on the scene to bring my back to the group, I asked the father, ‘Are you made out of chocolate?’ I remember looking way up and seeing the biggest smile and hearing the most cheerful laughter coming from him.

[ii] ‘Safer’ because when you talk to folks, you get to them know them and they get to know you. If you extend kindness, even simply a kind word, to strangers, it is unlikely you will receive angst for a response. If you do, you will know this is someone with an attitude issue which has nothing to do with you, and you will know to give them their space and keep at arm’s length. There is something they would need to work out and you will know to accord that individual the time and understanding to do that.

[iii] In the U.S. and among some right wing elements in Canada, the attitude and activities of Jewish Voices for Peace is being demonized as anti-Semitic, even though they are Jews. Hello? If you are not familiar with JVP, check them out. I cried when I discovered they actually existed. God bless them for their love of god and their love of Peace.

[iv] I would further qualify their attitude as being supportive of corporations having the rights of individuals, that Chinese, American, and global society is effectively a society of corporations, of which they are chairpersons of the board, and the citizenry is a labour pool, where, if you are needed by them, you will be tolerated, that is, until they feel you are no longer needed by them…hmmm….

[v] I say ‘young’ because Trudeau has the aspect of someone progressive and forward looking, and not stuck in and on the past, like the cons are. Whose vision is most likely to succeed? The one which entrenches the misery we are already in, or the one which is pursuing a way out of it? Hmmm?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *