It’s great that Canada’s biggest names came out to support a policy discussion at last night’s Munk Debate. And it’s great that Canada’s biggest newspaper believes a policy debate merits twenty-eight photos on its website. In a country whose annual output of serious political essays can barely fill half a shelf at Chapters, intellectuals need all the help they can get. But does anybody find it odd that when Canada’s best and brightest get together, in Canada, to fête public thinkers and talk about their ideas, both the thinkers and their topic are American? (As a footnote, yes, Charles Krauthammer grew up in Montreal. But he left after university and never came back.)
Not that the topic in question, “The world is a safer place with a Republican in the White House,” isn’t a fun one. And not that the participants aren’t impressive. But this debate is old hat in the country that can actually do something about it; the arguments are established, the attacks and counterattacks well known. What’s the point of having this debate again in another country—a country that would overwhelmingly vote Democrat anyway, if it could—when it happens often enough in the United States?
Entertainment? Sure, but that’s not all of it. (Though Richard Holbrooke does have a lovely singing voice.) The stimulation of political engagement? Maybe, but it’s a stretch—the polis isn’t ours, and our engagement doesn’t have any greater significance than loyal fans in a stadium, who paint their bodies and unfurl colourful banners but still can’t score any goals.
There’s a cultural strain in Canada that automatically resents the perceived influence of American trends and ideas north of the border. It’s an ugly strain, and I don’t want to be confused with someone who supports it. But when was the last time Canadian luminaries put on their evening best and crowded into the ROM, or anywhere else, to listen to a debate over our own war in Afghanistan, or Arctic sovereignty, or our role in NATO?
Maybe that’s too much to ask—it’s a global village, after all, and you can’t fault us for peeking eagerly over the doorstep of the biggest hut. (Or even living in it.) But political voyeurism can be distracting. And if anyone can convince Canadians that their own country’s foreign policy is worth paying attention to, it probably has to start with the same people who were in the crowd last night.
To the credit of the series’ sponsor, the Aurea Foundation, the next debates sound like great topics. Here’s hoping they get the same high-watt crowd and blowout coverage.
best seo forums: Thanks for sharing such an brilliant post. I make sure to visit this post regularly. keep sharing more and more..
Seenloitering: The “gender analysis” in this article is upside down. Marie Calloway is a threat to the status quo because she threatens the myth that women are morally superior, above...
Jefry: I do not really like to read a story like a novel or a real story but I think this is very interesting and need to be read
Legong: I know I am replying to this pathetic, racist statement a little late and the whole ignorant rant probably doesn’t even deserve a reply. Wanhenglo, if we were all to generalise about...
Legong: I know I am replying to this pathetic, racist statement a little late and the whole ignorant rant probably doesn’t even deserve a reply. Wanhenglo, if we were all to generalise about...
Sky Goodden: This is startling, refreshing, overdue, and damn good. Thank you, Shary.
Mark: It’s not just in Canada, it seems all over artists don’t get the local recogtnition they should. I was in Malaga where Picasso was born and it is much different, but then he is...
Guest: I didn’t want babies or a period any more. I KNEW without a doubt I did not want children so I had been asking for a hysterectomy since I was 19. I finally got it at 39. My...
Djzklj: Pretty interesting article, despite that I don’t wanna make a voyage there
Sanyo Seiki: I love this game! Very addicted! Sanyo Seiki