.jpg){kind=link}
Charlie Kirk was not a political person I had a lot of time for. Given what I know of his positions, and of the company he kept, I’m fairly confident I would have struggled to find common ground with him.
It doesn’t matter what kind of activist he was. He did not deserve to die for his beliefs. Nobody does. Not even those who are strong proponents of gun rights. Hell, I don’t like guns myself, and neither do I agree with how far people have taken the second amendment, but I don’t think you fight those battles with violence.
Not ever.
It is gruesomely ironic that he was shot in the neck in the middle of a discussion about mass shootings. But not improbable. It appears this was a subject about which he often spoke.
No matter how much I oppose the views he defended, Charlie Kirk was a human being with a family and people he loved. People who will miss him. Nobody has the right to shoot anybody else for their beliefs.
Like you, I’ve seen some disturbing comments from assholes who celebrate his death. They are part of the problem.
Maybe there will always be violence in a society full of imperfect humans. I don’t pretend to know what the magic solution to this problem is. But I am absolutely certain that celebrating events like the shooting of Charlie Kirk only contributes to making it worse.
May he rest in peace.
It is somehow fitting that the piece I wanted to write this week was about fear and anxiety, the difference between them and the shame those who exploit them ought to feel but don’t.
Fear is in the present, and it’s about something reasonably identifiable. For instance, fear that a wildly unpredictable American president might threaten to annex an entire country by force. Anxiety is more fuzzy, and usually about the future. Like worrying about your kids’ ability ever to buy a house.
For a while there, peaking sometime during the early part of the last federal election, fear of annexation was reasonably common in this country. And the rest of us who weren’t scared, were mad about it. Elbows up is not the response of calm, serene people. It’s a defence mechanism.
Recent opinion polls show, clearly, that this fear is receding. We’re still pissed, for sure. But at this point nobody thinks annexation is a serious threat. So our old anxieties about whether we’ll be able to afford groceries (never mind a home) in this economy are coming back in force. Along with other anxieties related to perceived safety. Stories of home invasions and car-jackings have a way of giving people a diffuse but very real sense of doom.
Tell us a story
I hate to quote George W. Bush at Mark Carney, but it must be said: You don’t want to be book smart and sidewalk stupid. He’s still enjoying the confidence of a majority of Canadians that he’s doing the best that can be done to strengthen the economy in ways that would benefit the largest possible number of Canadians. Also that he’s (still) the best among available options to deal with international affairs, starting with Trump.
But this won’t last forever. This post is long enough already so I’ll keep the rest of the lecture for another day. But here is my memo to the Liberal team: Remember that you need to present a narrative that works at the level of most people — something simple, clear, transparent and uncomplicated. Did I mention simple? Also something that addresses this pervasive economic anxiety without looking disconnected from it.
In the absence of such a narrative, the red team is leaving the field to demagogues who exploit people’s deep-seated worries to gain more power for themselves. The Democratic Party in the United States showed us what happens when politicians speak in long paragraphs complete with subordinate clauses to technocrats and the think tank crowd, and neglect — or worse — look down on average people.
Be sidewalk-smart, please.