By Noah Fry, McMaster University; The Conversation
Poilievre also claimed Canada has among the “highest taxes in the world.” (File Photo: Pierre Poilievre/Facebook)
Pierre Poilievre’s recent 100-minute interview with the psychologist and right-wing media commentator Jordan Peterson provided some clues about the Conservative leader’s political ideology heading into a federal election year.
Peterson’s podcast episode, hosted by DailyWire, was a rare opportunity to learn about Poilievre, currently the overwhelming favourite to win the election.
To date, Poilievre hasn’t done many media interviews. Like United States president-elect Donald Trump, Poilievre views mainstream media as an adversary. His interviews are selective and infrequent, often on friendly platforms.
Peterson’s podcast apparently qualified. Throughout the interview, Poilievre made a series of questionable claims and received little to no pushback from Peterson.
Fact-checking Poilievre
The Conservative leader made reference to “anglo-saxon language” — a term many experts consider a nod to racial grievances pitched especially to white men.
Poilievre also claimed Canada has among the “highest taxes in the world.” In terms of the tax-to-GDP ratio in 2023, however, Canada actually ranked 20th out of 38 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries.
He accused Prime Minister Justin Trudeau of advancing “authoritarian socialism” where the state “controls every aspect of your life” and “all of industries.” However, even the Fraser Institute, a right-wing think tank, ranks Canada as among the world’s 10 most economically free countries.
Poilievre also alleged Trudeau deprives “single mothers of food for their kids.” While on the upswing, Canada’s child poverty rates remain lower today than they were during Stephen Harper’s Conservative government. The same can be said for children with single mothers.
He argued socialist policies “redistribute to the wealthy” and he “can prove it.” Peterson did not press him to do so. It raised questions about whether Poilievre was making reference to Medicare and what that could mean for the Canada Health Act.
Race in Canada
Poilievre was also critical of so-called “wokeism,” urging society to “put aside …this obsession with race.” While he correctly identified a sharp rise in race-related hate crimes, he placed the blame for that rise on “wokeism” — a heightened awareness of social justice and racism.
In fact, experts point to a rise in populist rhetoric, anti-immigrant sentiments and the COVID-19 pandemic as reasons for the rise in hate crimes.
Poilievre argued wokeism “invented in many ways” race. It “seeks to divide people into different groups.” This was a follow-up comment to Peterson saying race “was imported” to Canada. Poilievre did not refute this.
But race and racism is a part of Canada’s story. Canada’s growth as a country was a direct result of Indigenous dispossession. This dispossession was reinforced through treaties and legislation like the Indian Act, which exists to this day.
As British colonies, pre-Confederation Canada benefited from imperialism. Thousands of slaves were a part of that story.
This story continues after Confederation. Up until 1962, Canada’s immigration system explicitly used race to discriminate.
As the Truth and Reconciliation Commission report outlined, residential schools facilitated the “cultural genocide” of Indigenous Peoples. The Missing and Murdered Indigenous Women and Girls Commission’s report also concluded that Canada was sponsoring an ongoing genocide.
Today, many in Canada are still reeling from the discovery of Indigenous children’s unmarked graves.
There is much more to the story of race in Canada. Readers may want to consult accounts like Pamela Palmater’s Warrior Life, Debra Thompson’s The Long Road Home or Don’t Call Me Resilient’s episode on unmarked graves in Kamloops, B.C.
Keep your stories, lose your politics
Poilievre also promised to reduce immigration. He wants immigrants to “leave the war behind” when they come, and to “bring your tradition and stories but leave your problems at the door.” He added: “We’re going to be grateful again.” Poilievre did not identify who he believes is ungrateful.
Both in the interview and elsewhere, Poilievre has committed to reducing immigration. But he was also a key voice in the Harper government, which increased immigration targets by 15 per cent from 2007 to 2015.
The Harper government has a challenged legacy on race. As one element of that legacy, the Zero Tolerance for Barbaric Cultural Practices Act identified particular cultural practices as barbaric. The policy notably targeted Muslim immigrants. The government proposed a hotline in 2015 that would allow concerned citizens to report their neighbours.
Nostalgia and grievance conservatism
Poilievre’s ideas aren’t in fact very new. They advance globalism ideals that Poilievre claims to reject. His main pitch is to “unleash the power of the free market.” Poilievre argues the state needs to get out of the way and favours free trade.
Where he differs from his predecessors is his identity politics. Poilievre mobilizes nostalgia to galvanize voters.
He has said “everything is broken in this country right now,” suggesting it was better before. Donald Trump offers a similar appeal in “Make America Great Again.”
Nostalgia, as a political tactic, often requires erasure. The past is much less attractive if we acknowledge historical injustices.
Poilievre’s and Trump’s brand of nostalgia takes aim at marginalized groups. It rears its head in anti-DEI and anti-immigrant sentiments. It also blames elites, though rarely holds them accountable.
Dog whistling allows grievance politicians to express these sentiments while maintaining plausible deniability. But at some point, it stops being subtle. Trump’s appeals ring loud like a blaring horn. There are many examples to choose from, including his false claims about the Vice-President’s racial identity.
In Poilievre’s case, he doesn’t need to appeal to racial grievances. He could win without it. He chooses to embrace it anyway. And that’s loud enough.
Noah Fry, PhD Candidate, Political Science, McMaster University
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
