‘Support the troops.’

That’s a recurrent and deafening refrain south of the border, in the United States. It’s become increasingly shrill over recent years, what with Operation Enduring Freedom, the Iraq War and the subsequent Surge.

Alas, “Support Our Troops” has become something of a refrain and issue here in Canada as well.

Traditionally, this kind of unquestioning rah-rah patriotism stoked by pro-war types in the US has helped Canadians differentiate themselves — culturally and politically — from their neighbours to the south.

(This differentiation game is sometimes a case of distinctions without much difference: to live in Toronto, as I do, is to live in a sometimes wannabe New York.)

This rah-rah American patriotism has been perceived by many Canadians — and not just those woolly types on the left — as akin to jingoism.

There are Canadians who revel in a series of self-comforting stories about how Canada is different — kinder, more tolerant, more European — than the US: healthcare, multiculturalism, secular-toned politics, political party choice, unions, public broadcasting, etc. Some of these stories have been worn thin, and even disputable.

But…

Historically, when it’s come to foreign and defence policies, Canada really has stood apart. Beyond its own borders, the Canadian government could not be accused of imperialism. In fact, we Canucks are still rather proud of our country’s peacekeeping record last century, post-World War Two.

And, right up to a few years ago, when the Bush administration was heading to war in Iraq, our leaders in Ottawa — then led by our Shawinigan tough-guy prime minister, Jean Chrétien — had the temerity to resist Washington’s pressure to join the pro-war march.

There was a general feeling that Canadians were immune to that sort of patriotic siren song. When Dubya & Co. warbled their ‘With us or against us’ jingle to the US electorate (and the world), I think most Canadians shook their heads in condescending disbelief.

When Dubya pronounces that anyone who disagrees with his administration’s Iraq policy “hates freedom,” I’ve seen many Canadians frown with some apparent smugness. Canadians, you see, are more nuanced than that: we’re multicultural, tolerant, and we don’t deal in such black-and-white distinctions.

When our (then) opposition leader Stephen Harper criticized Chrétien’s decision to keep Canada out of Mess O’ Potamia — implicitly criticizing Chrétien on US TV, too — it slapped many of us as pathetic pandering to Washington. Canadians were above such saber-rattling.

Well, so much for that self-comforting myth.

These days, those on Canada’s right — our own ostensible patriots — are singing American-style hymns to the tune of ‘support the troops’ and ‘with us or against us.’

You see, while Canada may not be in Mess O’ Potamia (Iraq), Canada does have combat troops stationed in Kandahar, in southern Afghanistan, alongside other NATO forces. They are there as a contribution to the ‘Enduring Freedom’ fight against terrorism.

In Afghanistan, the ‘terrorists’ exist in the form of the predominantly homegrown Taliban — the fundamentalist Sunni Muslim movement that’s waging a guerilla war against the Afghan government and NATO troops.

For the past several months, Toronto fire trucks and ambulances have sported yellow-ribbon decals with a familiar pronouncement: “Support Our Troops.” The decals were to be removed by September. And Toronto Mayor David Miller — a generally progressive politician — was initially for the removal.

But news of the decal removal caused an outcry. ‘Toronto the good’ was decried as unpatriotic during a time of war. Right-leaning politicians pounced.

As Adam Vaughn, a Toronto councilor, put it:

“It’s being used in a political way to say that you’re either with us or against us. You either support the troops or you don’t support the troops and if you don’t put a yellow ribbon on your car, what does that say about you?”[1]

Then, as ever, events intervened:

Three Canadian soldiers were killed in Afghanistan on June 20 — sadly, a recurrent news story on CBC (Canadian Broadcasting Corporation) and CTV.

Thus, Mayor Miller and other progressives backed off their decal-removal position: the decals would stay, stuck in place.

Miller said:

“I think it’s important that Toronto demonstrate its support for the troops given the perception that some how the city wasn’t supportive, which was never true.”[2]

The Afghanistan mission has also become a central issue for the Canadian government, which is now led by Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper. Polls show that most Canadians want the troops home by 2009, when the mission expires. But, when the parliament ended its session earlier this month, Harper spoke about seeking a consensus for extending the mission.

And, as Canadians received news reports about Canadian soldiers being killed in Afghanistan, we’ve also heard the odd grieving family member or friend saying or writing something eulogistic about the killed soldier’s dedication to democracy and freedom in Afghanistan.

Only an insensitive dick would pollute their grief with political disputation.

Yet, Canada’s right-leaning pundits — like their American counterparts — use this to mangle and muffle debate.

As Sun columnist Peter Worthington writes on June 26 about the death of those three Canadian soldiers by a roadside explosive device:

“The really ‘unfortunate’ thing, is that [description of the deaths by one Canadian general as no ‘unfortunate accident’] will likely be used by those who dislike the military, or think we shouldn’t be there, or want us to immediately get out, to reinforce their argument.” [Emphasis added] [3]

For Canadians like myself — who treasure this country, care about Canada’s foreign/defence policies, mourn the unnecessary death of young soldiers — this muffling of debate is extremely distressing.

Of course, this is nothing new, as it’s been the patriotic impulse since time immemorial. And this is an impulse I do kind of understand: most of us want our country to win; we don’t want our troops to die; and most of us dislike the prospect of admitting that our country’s policy was wrongheaded, or even unjust.

Yet, ’supporting the troops’ unquestioningly is equally wrongheaded. Canadians deserve a debate over the question: ‘Why are we in Afghanistan?’ The answer’s not a given. (And I’m not in the answer business — at least not during this blog.)

Yes, I can and do concur with those who point to the Taliban as an unsavoury and brutal movement that’s bad for human rights, women’s rights and security in that ravaged land. But that’s no plain reason for NATO to be there, propping up an Afghan government that governs but by the grace of Washington DC. There are many unsavoury regimes and movements around the world — but that does not mean that Canadian or NATO troops should be there.

Before the start of the Iraq War in 2003, I recall Eric Alterman — one of those woolly progressives from The Nation magazine — articulating his opposition to the democracy-building arguments of American hawks: He was blunt in saying that he cares more about the welfare of US democracy than democracy in Iraq. And that’s the point: An electorate deserves proper debate — not patriotic piffle.

Fortunately for Canadians, democratic dissent is still in prospect:

The NDP, our left-wing opposition party, has been unequivocal and vocal in demanding a Canadian withdrawal from Afghanistan.

And, recently, in Quebec, there were anti-war protests on the eve of Quebecois troops going to Kandahar.

(Quebec Premier Jean Charest channeled Bushismo in his encouragements for the troops: “You are the acting arm of Quebec pacifism. You are liberators.” [4] Of course, Quebeckers’ opposition to entanglement in Canadian military adventures has a long history, so I doubt Charest’s words resonated too widely in la belle province.)

All of this is a longwinded way of expressing my dismay over the resurgence of this unquestioning rah-rah patriotic sentiment in Canada, where it’s always felt out of context (to me and my ilk, anyway).

When I hear and see that imperative “Support the Troops,” I cannot help but think of an equally unthinking command that used to appear on signs outside some ashrams and certain cult retreats:

‘Shoes and minds must be left at the door.’


______________

[1] “Toronto to keep ’support the troops’ decals,” CBC News, June 20, 2007. Link: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/toronto/sto...n-toronto.html

[2] Ibid.

[3] Peter Worthington, “Support never more important,” Edmonton Sun, June 26, 2007. Link: http://www.edmontonsun.com/Comment/2...90894-sun.html

[4] “Protesters Rally as Soldiers March in Quebec City,” CBC News, June 22, 2007. Link: http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2007/...2.html?ref=rss

______________

~ by arkahar on July 7, 2007.

3 Responses to “Do Canucks hate freedom?”
Damned good blog. I am frightened by the Americanization of our political discourse.

J. Sears said this on July 9th, 2007 at 8:10 am

“Support the troops” is one of those phrases that has been stripped of any meaning. It’s as silly as God Bless America (as if we could tell God what to do). But some anti-war types do use it. And personally I DO support them, if they want the support. With a referral to counselling, with grief support, with conscientious objector resources or information on how to get a discharge, etc.
But yeah, I can only imagine what it must feel like to see this playing out as a Canadian. Heck, even I as americano cringe when I read stuff like Hudson’s Bay Company sold to Yanks.

Rikken said this on July 10th, 2007 at 5:48 am

About This Post
This entry was posted on Saturday, July 7th, 2007 at 1:48 pm and is filed under Parlour Tricks ['POLITICS'], Media stuff, TANGENTS, Blogroll, Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Navigate
Previous: New Yorker cartoons
Next: Gore’d out of our skulls: Live Earth