This week’s Saturday Globe and Mail, Canada’s national newspaper (in my opinion), dedicated its Opinion section to the U.S. election (with some exceptions, as you shall see). I could not resist the temptation to comment, given that its columnists, for the most part, appear to the left of CNN’s most vociferous ranters.
The Lord of the Star & Stripes
The front page is devoted to a piece penned by Adam Gopnik (born in Canada, a citizen of the world), a novelist and writer for the New Yorker (among other things, no doubt). In this somewhat hyperbolic essay, Gopnik posits the election as an instance of the age-old battle between good and evil (no less), casting Donald J. Trump as Sauron, and Joe Biden as Aragorn (or Frodo perhaps?). In a theme that runs throughout the section, he projects it as the most consequential election since that of Abraham Lincoln during the civil war. This article is all Biden all the way!
Parliamentary Blackmail?
For a change of pace, Andrew Coyne’s article is focused on Canadian politics, specifically how the Trudeau government is “making a mockery of our parliamentary democracy”. In short, it examines the Liberals’ declaration that an opposition (Conservative) motion to create a committee to investigate government corruption in the WE scandal was a “matter of confidence”. In other words, a NO vote would dissolve the minority government and force an election. While not quite as exaggerated as Gopnik’s argument, Coyne claims that this was an act of extortion, forcing the other major opposition party (NDP) to either prop up the government or take the blame for precipitating an election during a pandemic. Given that this type of negotiation is a matter of course for minority governments in a parliamentary system, it is difficult to lay much credence to this contention. The crux of his argument is that the Liberals cannot make a ‘simple’ vote to create a committee into a matter of confidence. Why not extend this to all votes then? Yet, it is a stretch to think that the NDP would not clue into this strategy quite quickly, like right away, one would think. Moreover, later in the article, Coyne makes the argument that the Prime Minister’s original action was an ethical breach that has necessitated a coverup of the underlying corruption. Either the contention is that the government is corrupt is what is at stake here or it is not. Coyne cannot have it both ways.
What’s up, Toobin?
Elizabeth Renzetti’s column on the misery that is Jeffrey Toobin (another New Yorker writer and esteemed CNN commentator) and his colossal lack of judgement. Once one gets passed wondering what in the world he was thinking (well, i guess we know more or less what but not why?) by engaging in an act of self-gratification while on a zoom call with fellow writers and intellectuals, and how did he manage to get himself accidentally caught out. Despite the evident opportunity for black humour, in the end it is just another sad example of males acting out without regard for other people. And now, is it possible to watch those news network talking heads and wonder what is going on beyond the surface?
The U.S. Election - What’s at Stake
This next section comments on the various major issues of the election, each by a different contributor.
The Pandemic
Matt McCarthy rightly focuses on the issue of mask-wearing, given that it has the potential to reverse the terrible upward trajectory in the infection rate that the U.S. is currently traversing. President Trump has politicized the matter, projecting the notion that mask wearing is for wimps and cowards (and of course Democrats). The writer recalls that science got it wrong at first, calling for the general public to avoid masks for various reasons (avoid shortages, unlikely to help, etc.). However, when the experts reversed this stand, Trump and his minions did not follow. In fact, Trump is constantly referring to Dr. Anthony Fauci’s original statement to not wear masks as confirmation of his position, despite the fact that Dr. Fauci repeats the necessity to wear them at every opportunity. Biden’s stance is the polar opposite, following the scientist recommendations to the letter. This is unlikely to be a wedge issue between the two already polarized sides in the election.
Racial Justice
Mychal Denszel Smith recalls that Trump’s pitch to non-wihite voters in 2016 was basically “What do you have to lose?”, implicitly implying that the Democrats have taken that voting segment for granted. Since then, Trump has upped the ante from birther conspiracy and labelling Mexicans as rapists and murderers to encouraging white supremacist vigilante groups and condemning left-leaning protesters as rioters, thugs and antifa insurgents. The writer correctly points that Biden has a checkered history with racial issues, as Kamala Harris aptly pointed out in one of the Democratic debates. Yet, with the act of picking Ms. Harris as his vice-presidential candidate, Biden has hopefully added an extra incentive for Blacks to vote in greater numbers than they did in 2016.
The Environment
Catherine Coleman Flowers uses almost her entire article to rail about the issue of sewage in poorer areas of the South, where inferior funding of infrastructure allows backflow in homes - which is especially problematic in the era of COVID-19. While this problem is no doubt serious, it really feels more a symptom of the inadequacies of racial justice in the U.S. (it reminds one of the lead in the water fiasco in Flint, Michigan) than environmental. The larger issues of climate change and the demolition of the EPA are only mentioned in passing, while fracking and the future of the oil and gas industry is ignored completely - the one issue that perhaps might be moving voters into the Trump camp.
The Economy
Jeffrey D. Sachs’ article is a diatribe against Trump’s precious economy, labelling it a fraud from the get-go, based on an unsustainable supply of Fed money into the consumer market and immoral tax cuts for corporations and the one percent. And then the economy tanked, propelled into oblivion by an alternately mismanaged and ignored pandemic. While Trump's base won’t believe a word of this, Biden at least offers a sort of sane way forward.
Health Care
Ezekiel J, Emanuel gets right to the crux of the healthcare crisis in the U.S., itemizing issues such as the missing (10% of the population) and tenuous (lost jobs, pre-existing conditions) medical insurance, high costs for services and drugs, and racial disparities. Trump and the Republicans tout their vapour-ware plan, while plotting to eliminate the ACA via a backdoor Supreme Court ruling. Biden, on the other hand, has to fend off accusations that he will capitulate to the left and institute socialized Medicare For All (the horror!) on an unsuspecting America. Stay tuned for the next installment of “How the Health Care Boondoggle Turns”.
Diplomacy
Kim Ghattas has an easy job chronically the Trump era of (non)diplomacy, pulling out of the Paris accord and the Iran treaty, bashing the WHO during a pandemic, cozying up to dictators, denigrating allies and basically plummeting the worldwide reputation of the U.S. into something resembling the emperor’s new suit. She even compares Trump unfavorably to Geroge W Bush, but fails to mention that he has also blown up the state department personnel and rendered the Secretary of State position into a revolving door spinning in circles. Somewhat unbelievably, the writer gives Trump credit for not starting any new wars, threatening NATO dissolution to get more money, and giving a “blank cheque to Saudi Arabia’s Mohammad Bin Salman”. He has gotten some new peace agreements for Israel in the Middle East, but I am sure the full story on those negotiations will be interesting reading one day. For sure, four more years of Trump will bring more of the same and worse, while Biden promises to return America to its former standing (if that’s even possible). The question is: does anyone care?
The Culture Wars
In an already divided country, President Trump has pummeled the Twitter-verse with racist proclamations and countless lies, feeding his base the sugar to soothe their aggrieved wihite privilege and cleaving the U.S. into ever siloed partisan camps, like Moses parting the Red Sea. In an uninspired article, Phoebe Maltz Bovy notes lamely that the worse Trump behaves, the better he does (with his base), and that if he loses to the milk-toast, apple pie Biden, the base will be resentful (to say the least). She fails (badly) to mention the potential for outright violence that hangs in the air surrounding this election.
Canada-U.S. Relations
Of all the topics covered, this is definitely the one that will have the least impact south of the border. But this is a Canadian newspaper, and so Roland Paris has his assignment. Trump consumed better than a year of Canadian politics with the negotiations on the deal to replace NAFTA, to end up with an agreement only vaguely different. Amidst the threats, insults and sanctions, Canada emerged relatively unscathed, Four more years of Trump promises more turmoil on the global stage, while Biden is campaigning with a “Buy America” bent to his economic plan. Neither will be great for Canada. Surprisingly, Mr. Paris barely mentions the ‘bullying by China’ (e.g. two innocent Canadians imprisoned as political capital), and does not even broach the role that the U.S. played in precipitating the arrest and pending extradition of Huawei's deputy chair and CFO Meng Wanzhou.
National Security
In the only article written by a Republican (having worked under the George W. Bush administration), William Imboden posits a series of questions but never ventures any answers. He paints a ‘grim picture’ of the international landscape facing the next president, but loses all credibility when he quotes, seemingly unsarcastically, Donald Rumsfled’s unforgettably surreal “unknown unknowns”. Enough said!
Reproductive Rights
Lyz Lenz’s gloomy article depicts a country where, state by state, a woman's rights over her own body are on a downward spiral to nothingness. Now-confirmed Supreme Court Justice Amy Coney Barrett is another firm nail in the coffin. Four more years of Trump, she posits, will dig the grave and bury Roe vs. Wade in that tomb for the foreseeable future. The only (faint) hope is that a Biden win will enable a legislative fix this morass of male privilege and evangelical bias. This, like so much else, depends on the Democrats winning the Senate and more importantly,, holding onto it for more than a couple of years.
No comments:
Post a Comment