As you likely know, I have been quite critical of Jamil Jivani’s trip to Washington, D.C. While billed as an effort to help with impending CUSMA negotiations, Jivani instead repeated Trump Administration rhetoric by placing blame on Canadians rather than the Trump Administration. Most egregious was when Jivani talked about Canadians “fanning the flames of anti-American resentment in Canada” with zero mention of why such resentment exists:
“Third, Jivani’s claim that Canadians are “fanning the flames of anti-American resentment in Canada” echoes the Trump narrative that Canadians should just sit back and accept Trump’s attacks on our economy and sovereignty and say thank you for being mistreated. Trump said Canada’s borders were fake, denigrated the sacrifice of NATO troops in Afghanistan, imposed tariffs on Canada with the intention of using economic pain to annex us, has referred to our Prime Minister as“Governor,” and continues to issue threats and insults against us. As a result, Canadian opinions towards the U.S. have grown far more negative, a trend seen almost everywhere in the world (even in places that were once extremely pro-US, like Poland). Claiming this is a result of Canadians “fanning the flames of anti-American resentment”, rather than a result of Trump’s actions, is absurd. And by making that absurd claim, Jivani is insulting the Canadian People and carrying water for an Administration that has treated Canada like garbage.”
Jivani also passed along a message from the U.S. President, with Trump saying, “tell the Canadians I love them,” a message followed not long after by a new economic attack on Canada as Trump threatened to prevent the opening of the Gordie Howe Bridge. Had Jivani done more than gaslight Canadians and serve as a messenger for Trump, the visit may have had some merit. Jivani could have used the opportunity to push back on the many lies Trump has spread about Canada, or point out that negative Canadian sentiment owards the Trump Administration is fully justified given that Trump and his Administration is seeking to harm our economy, regularly questions our sovereignty, threatens to seize territory from one of our close allies, and is announcing support for movements designed to break up our country.
But Jivani didn’t do any of that, and his trip has unsurprisingly faced significant criticism. However, while most of that criticism is right on point, one Liberal MP went over the line. Speaking in the House of Commons, Liberal MP John-Paul Danko referred to Jivani as “Unity Mitford,” a British socialite and fascist who supported fascist Germany and formed a friendship with Germany’s dictator:
There are many ways to criticize someone without immediately going for a comparison to fascist Germany, and dialling it up to the most aggressive criticism immediately not only squanders political capital, but also runs counter to the ‘we’re all in this together attitude Canada needs at this moment of crisis.’ Of course, that doesn’t mean avoiding criticism when you feel it is justified. I think Jivani’s visit was not in good faith, and I will continue to criticize actions that I feel undermine Canada. But a little bit of restraint can keep criticism within constructive bounds. I think MP John-Paul Danko was right to see Jivani’s trip in a negative light, but he went about conveying that view in the wrong manner.
A little bit more Canadian politeness, even in the midst of real disagreements, could serve all of us well.
Spencer Fernando
Image – YouTube
If this piece left you clearer than it found you, that's the point. I write for readers who want to think past the week, to see the longer pattern beneath the daily story, and to come away steadier rather than more agitated.
That longer view gets built somewhere. On Patreon, essay by essay, I'm constructing The Long Work, a body of analysis meant to outlast the news cycle that prompted it. The readers there make it possible. No subsidies, no strings. The work answers to them.
$8/month to read it as it's built, and to have a hand in building it.