Recently in the international media, we have been treated to a hilarious, yet cringe-inducing array of embarrassing faux pas and missteps from Canadian Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau. Chief of which was his recent Indian debacle which brought utter shame to most decent Canadians. Being as I am the resident Leaf at New Media Central, I feel it is my duty to offer a brief primer on what Trudeau is all about, and what his less than competent reign as PM means. I am no fan of him personally, so I shall remain as objective as I can, which is not saying much really.
Justin Trudeau, born into the Canadian media and political mainstream, is a fitting example of western leadership tailored for the international “end of history”. Justin was, by-and-large, elected for His namesake as the son of the most well-recognized PM in Canadian history, but more importantly because he was presented in the Can-media as a “compassionate” contrasting image to the “Americanesque” economy-obsessive neo-conservative style of Stephan Harper. You see, there is not a grand chasm between the major political parties in Canada, not ideologically at least. The Liberals have for decades presented themselves as the “natural governing party of Canada”, so all was inevitable. Trudeau appealed to the sensibilities of a largely millennial and urbanite audience that voted for him in droves, promising token gestures of marijuana legalization, and crafting policy-based on a certain segment of the population’s (largely myopic) concerns. Trudeau, of course, loves endlessly declaring his politically correct and progressive-left wing social bona-fides. He emphatically states His love of state-enforced feminism, such as making a totally gender-even cabinet one of his first decisions (forsaking merit for ideology, as his critics would say), and taking up his father’s legacy of stating that “diversity” and “multiculturalism” are what truly constitutes Canadian identity; going to great lengths to state that “diversity is our strength” every chance he gets. Trudeau does not seem like a cerebral type of person (unlike his father) to even explain why Diversity™ is inherently a good national policy, let alone debating the philosophic merits of such an unquestioned fundamental societal criterion. Trudeau loves diversity so much that he even meets in private with people who are subject to ongoing criminal investigations, insults U.S. domestic policy over Twitter (Canadian Anti-Americanism is a topic worthy of another article) and stating that he would not revoke Canadian citizenship to terrorists. Let us not forget his infamous PC revocation of the phrase “barbaric cultural practises” regarding such things as honour killings and female genital mutilation.
The litany of embarrassing statements and gestures from Trudeau seems to be endless, but the revitalized “Trudeau-mania” 2.0 seems to have grinded to a halt lately because of his mannerisms, and misjudging the very limits of celebrating diversity on the world stage; Trudeau on his recent state visit to India decided to wear the traditional Indian festival garb, reserved for special occasions such as weddings, and even then most important meetings and celebrations, especially political ones, look the same as a western affair in terms of dress. Trudeau danced along to Hindi popular music and made quite a show of trying his hardest to appeal to his enlightened multicultural sensibilities. This was all very cringe-inducing, and even boarding on the culturally insensitive. Trudeau’s team did not even go through the trouble of vetting their guests on the trip, inviting a former convicted Sikh extremist to make an appearance at an official meeting. Even the very Pro-Trudeau state-funded CBC news called his judgment into question.
The one revealing statement that summarizes the Trudeau worldview is his infamous statement that Canada is the world’s first “post-national country” which lacks a “core identity” unlike the other, more historically-minded nations of the world. Canadian history, its foundations within the British and French powers, its cultural roots with the indigenous populations, and in the anglosphere are seemingly irrelevant to the end-of-history vision that Trudeau holds dear. Canada is an open economic zone, a cultural waystation, like an airport or tourist shop nation, a global bedroom community that places no predicates upon the hearts of its citizens besides “inclusion” and “equality. The world however, does not share Trudeau’s grand neoliberal vision of progress; in fact a major foreign policy journalist states that Trudeau is perceived as a naive lightweight on the global stage, and one who looks the foresight to separate prescient issues from the issues stemming from his own modernist (and some would say “Post-modernist”) worldview.
Quote: “In the same way, the prime minister’s lofty notions about social engineering and subjects such as the treatment of minorities are non-starters with China and India. There is no chance that Xi Jinping or Narendra Modi will permit Trudeau to preach to them about any of this, let alone allow such ideas to be enshrined in trade agreements.”
The supreme assurance and near blindness to the traditions, cultural considerations and diverse political practises of various nations is exactly the type of character that modern politicians and world leaders in the west have come to model themselves after. Trudeau may be a laughing stock to many, but the Trudeau worldview is a barometer for what the establishment class wishes to promote and sanction in the west in terms of political leadership. Trudeau may be ignorant of the fact that other peoples and nations around the world are not as willing to give up their identities, cultures, and ways of being in the same manner as Canada has (at least the Canada that He wishes to see only), but make no mistake, Trudeau does not need to be aware of such things.
Trudeau is a figurehead of the end of history politician, and in his view of politics and culture, to hold onto anything of old, be it cultural ties, identity, etc, is retrograde. His view of liberal open society statecraft that wishes to mold itself into a post-national and fully globalized or ” integrated” world, is a foregone conclusion. Trudeau is a representative of the global citizen leader, a managerial functionary among many of the coming globalized technocracy, one that seeks full maternal control over a homogeneous and faceless citizenry. To be against any of Trudeau’s in vogue social causes is to be against the tides of history and “progress” itself, or so he and his fiercest media defenders would have us believe. To have a unique identity or to forsake global integration, be it economic or otherwise, for any loftier notion above that of atomized individualism and an unrealistic sense of inclusion is simply verboten. That is not to say a degree of pluralism and tolerance is not needed in society, but the media and bureaucratic functionary class in Canada seem to willfully ignore such tensions and complications with their post-national and post-cultural zeitgeist.
The irony of the Trudeau-mindset is it really does not respect or celebrate diversity at all. A persistent and solid criticism of the Canadian experiment in state-enforced multiculturalism, and of the multicultural worldview taken as a given among the globalist technocratic class is that it does not properly respect difference enough; the recent India trip blunder is the perfect example of where multiculturalism flattens cultural differences among people, and even breeds a virulent ignorance among its ideological hosts. We no longer must care about deeply held religious, cultural and political sentiments, for we presume from the outset everyone is just like us anyways. Culture becomes a tourist trinket, a way of dressing in funny clothes and chanting funny things, and on a more brazen level, a form of liberal colonialism in a sense. The promoters of multiculturalism really do not respect difference, but prefer sameness, and as a rendition of the old colonialist statement goes “inside every foreigner is a cosmopolitan Canadian waiting to crawl out.” In the attempt to be sensitive, as Trudeau has demonstrated, we have only demonstrated a cultural insensitivity and hubris, presuming that our values as modern liberal westerners are the global default position.
 In reference to Kojeve and Fukayama’s work on the subject, defined as “the political and philosophical concept that supposes that a particular political, economic, or social system may develop that would constitute the end-point of humanity’s sociocultural evolution and the final form of human government”. In other words, the uni-polar (American), neoliberal post-cold war mainstream view of the world order.
(artwork done by Me, entitled “Justin’s Tower”, mixed media on paper, 5×9, Feb, 2018. https://www.facebook.com/giantartproductions/photos/a.1258791580825653.1073741836.1254797357891742/1706280329410107/?type=3&theater ).
- The Post-Tragedy Politicization of Language. The Media gaslights certain political terms. - October 27, 2018
- The Mind of Trudeau 4/18/18, by Gio - April 18, 2018
- Google and The Societies of Control - October 22, 2017
- The Politics of the Persona in the Matrix. A Warning against Insincerity. - August 12, 2017