In his 2013 address to the National Jewish Fund, Prime Minister Harper vocally embraced Israel as “a light of freedom and democracy in what is otherwise a region of darkness,” insulting outright all other nations in the Middle East. When asked about settlements during his visit to Israel earlier this year, Harper refused to “single out the state of Israel” by offering any criticism, and was again quick to paint the region with the same orientalist brush, alluding to forces of terrorism and darkness.
Nary a Supreme Court decision nor a woman desperately yelling her pleas in a committee room can stop this government from barreling through. Soldiering on. All of the clichés that come to mind seem to be violent in some way. Perhaps that’s worth noting and chewing on, given the circumstances.
Voter turnout across the country is hitting all-time lows, polling shows Canadians lack confidence in their political institutions and our Prime Minister is among the least trusted leaders in the Western hemisphere. The past year’s numerous spending scandals and a third prorogation of Parliament only add fuel to the fire of public discontent many Canadians expressed by mobilizing en masse like never before — Occupy, Québec’s Printemps Érable and Idle No More saw thousands hit the streets. In this age of rapid communication, some believe Canadians are losing patience with traditional institutional channels of political engagement, turning to more individualized and informal activities instead.
Science is supposed to be the objective arbitrator between ideological extremes in our democracy.
Some people readily consume information at face value. Others regard anything disseminated from what may appear to be an authority figure with such a high degree of skepticism (contempt, even) that they trust nothing.
The best bridge between these two camps is science — quantifiable or qualifiable facts.