The reason jurisdiction matters is that elected Members of Parliament routinely mislead the media, and the public by making accusations of the impossible
Lazy journalists and lazy politicians have eroded the Canadian political system. The likes of Skippy and Smith further add to the decay of decency and respect. I believe that the majority of Canadians understand the lessons coming from the US. However the Cons have bought into the propaganda of the self pitying right wing fascists in the US and marched that out during their last campaign to disastrous results.
‘Mulroney said history will not be concerned with “the trivia and trash” or with the “rumours and gossip” that are heard in Parliament.’ Remember that Skippy?
A very clarifying article and one I was well aware of. That said, your time as leader of the MB Liberals has obviously disillusioned you. But, I guess modern politics is now a lot more performance art than it used to be and a lot less about doing what is right for the country and its people. This is especially so for the rise of populist, primarily RW leaders, whose sole purpose is to gain and maintain power, irrespective of what the process of gaining that power does to that self same country and its people. So, I guess I can understand why the cynicism!
There’s a lot of truth in this piece. As noted, they’re not new truths, but Dougald weaves them into the present moment in a way that helps us understand—and then dissolve—some of the fakery many of us live inside. That alone is very valuable; it can help people gain the perspective needed to see through it all.
That’s where I’d love to see a part two: how to see past it—because it’s possible. There are people, invisible to many, who aren’t entirely caught up in the performance. They aren’t trying to appear to solve the “issues of the day” as framed by headlines or talking points—they’re actually out there doing the real work: running institutions, managing crises, building things that last. They aren’t necessarily fighting the narrative—they’re simply not captive to it. And if you seek out these spaces, you can still find real conversations, and a real world, grounded in substance.
A part three might explore how talented, well-meaning people become absorbed into the performance. Many elected officials begin with strong records of service, idealism, and commitment. They are often better than average—yet many succumb to power or a sense of inevitability. Understanding how that happens can have significant value. If we can define the problem more clearly, at a level where practical and impactful change can happen, we might illuminate a path less travelled—and more often avoid the descent into empty theatre. Small system improvements can help attract and retain the right people—without turning them into performers in a flying circus. It’s not that we don’t have this sort of exploration and analysis available but nothing, that I’ve seen, that ties it to our current context as well as this piece does.
Dougald—given your approach here, I’d love to see this become a three- or four-part series. It feels timely, and unusually grounded.
It would be great to have a daily report available of these many types of instances. Most of us have such superficial knowledge of how it all rolls out.
You have to wonder if politicians attend seminars on effective gaslighting and “look over there”.
I wonder if there's any point of commenting directly on my MP's LinkedIn video which he recently posted. The House was almost empty. It appeared that there was nobody interested in what he had to say. And yet there he was, standing up and asking the federal government to build better and more housing in Hamilton. |
Yes, it truly seemed to be just theatre. Or him earning some pat-on-the-back.
My god, how much of our Parliament is nothing more than useless theatre? It's so discouraging to be given the impression that you are being informed, that you are "in-the-loop", when you're really just being fed horseshit.
Exactly - and yet, to the author’s point “fixing housing” was one of the main federal election issues. Nobody batted an eye. Seems like the media and the politicians believe we all drank the koolaid.
Again, in our community newspapers, a disparaging and negative judgement of the Royal visit and any efforts Mark Carney is making towards protecting us from an American takeover.
Harper had controlled the news media since he became PM, running non-stop, tax payer attack ads against Trudeau. Our Canaadian media is now owned by PostMedia, newspapers, several TV stations, community newspapers whose editorials are all written by tha American, Trump-friendly hedge fund corporation with Harpers agenda written all over them.
Thank you for writing this. It is badly needed, not only for politicians and journalists but for Canadian voters who don’t necessarily understand our federation. But what really scares me is whether some of the politicians and journalists making these comments and accusations actually know about the intricacies of the separation of power. If they do, then they’re freeking hypocrites. If they don’t, what are they doing in those jobs.
However I disagree that the Conservative & NDP unparliamentary language episodes are equivalent.
Poilievre's comment & followup was per his standard disruptive—and yes, performative—MO. If he truly wanted to focus attention on a drug policy he disagreed with, he could have easily chosen to substitute e.g. "irresponsible/negligent" instead of his preferred "extremist/radical". But that would be off-brand from the derogatory sloganeering which is his political bread and butter.
Singh was responding to a single individual preventing a unanimous vote on a motion which would have allowed the government to take meaningful action on a persistent human rights issue:
"It was this brazen act of one MP to not just say no but to say no loudly and to kind of gesture like this," Singh said later, waving his hand like someone trying to brush off a fly.
"In that gesture, I saw exactly what has happened for so long. People see racism as not a big deal, see systemic racism and the killing of Indigenous people as not a big deal, see Black people being the subject of violence and being killed as not a big deal, and in the moment I saw the face of racism.
"That's what it looks like when someone dismisses the reality that people are going through. And so I had a moment of anger in seeing that."
Excellent detailed article. Nuance is rather important. I do believe - after many conversations with folks - this misinformation does begin with a lack of basic CDN civics knowledge. Too many citizens seem a bit clueless as to which level of government is responsible for what. Media - including the G&M take advantage of that. They are most interested in views/subscriptions. Of course, this also begs the question ... are politicians also clueless (I'd say yes, about a number of them) ... or are they just taking advantage of clueless citizens? Likely. Premiers (most) are famously misleading. So, does this equate to governance by ignorance or convenience? Don't ask PP. You're likely to get a slogan in response.
A good analysis of the various levels of power and how it gets distorted by ALL parties. Just flawed by focusing on the CP and NDP while ignoring the Liberal BS!
Lazy journalists and lazy politicians have eroded the Canadian political system. The likes of Skippy and Smith further add to the decay of decency and respect. I believe that the majority of Canadians understand the lessons coming from the US. However the Cons have bought into the propaganda of the self pitying right wing fascists in the US and marched that out during their last campaign to disastrous results.
‘Mulroney said history will not be concerned with “the trivia and trash” or with the “rumours and gossip” that are heard in Parliament.’ Remember that Skippy?
I expect they get a lot of help from US right wing media and financial resources. They give themselves away so blatantly.
A very clarifying article and one I was well aware of. That said, your time as leader of the MB Liberals has obviously disillusioned you. But, I guess modern politics is now a lot more performance art than it used to be and a lot less about doing what is right for the country and its people. This is especially so for the rise of populist, primarily RW leaders, whose sole purpose is to gain and maintain power, irrespective of what the process of gaining that power does to that self same country and its people. So, I guess I can understand why the cynicism!
Small point of note;
MISinformation is a matter of ACCIDENTAL use incorrect facts
DISinformation is the INTENTIONAL use of incorrect facts to confuse and manipulate.
Thanks for this. There’s a lot of both.
There’s a lot of truth in this piece. As noted, they’re not new truths, but Dougald weaves them into the present moment in a way that helps us understand—and then dissolve—some of the fakery many of us live inside. That alone is very valuable; it can help people gain the perspective needed to see through it all.
That’s where I’d love to see a part two: how to see past it—because it’s possible. There are people, invisible to many, who aren’t entirely caught up in the performance. They aren’t trying to appear to solve the “issues of the day” as framed by headlines or talking points—they’re actually out there doing the real work: running institutions, managing crises, building things that last. They aren’t necessarily fighting the narrative—they’re simply not captive to it. And if you seek out these spaces, you can still find real conversations, and a real world, grounded in substance.
A part three might explore how talented, well-meaning people become absorbed into the performance. Many elected officials begin with strong records of service, idealism, and commitment. They are often better than average—yet many succumb to power or a sense of inevitability. Understanding how that happens can have significant value. If we can define the problem more clearly, at a level where practical and impactful change can happen, we might illuminate a path less travelled—and more often avoid the descent into empty theatre. Small system improvements can help attract and retain the right people—without turning them into performers in a flying circus. It’s not that we don’t have this sort of exploration and analysis available but nothing, that I’ve seen, that ties it to our current context as well as this piece does.
Dougald—given your approach here, I’d love to see this become a three- or four-part series. It feels timely, and unusually grounded.
Fantastic piece. Thank you so much for this.
It would be great to have a daily report available of these many types of instances. Most of us have such superficial knowledge of how it all rolls out.
You have to wonder if politicians attend seminars on effective gaslighting and “look over there”.
I wonder if there's any point of commenting directly on my MP's LinkedIn video which he recently posted. The House was almost empty. It appeared that there was nobody interested in what he had to say. And yet there he was, standing up and asking the federal government to build better and more housing in Hamilton. |
Yes, it truly seemed to be just theatre. Or him earning some pat-on-the-back.
My god, how much of our Parliament is nothing more than useless theatre? It's so discouraging to be given the impression that you are being informed, that you are "in-the-loop", when you're really just being fed horseshit.
Why is the MP calling on FEDS to build housing? Housing is Provincial and Municipal in all but emergency (ex:,post-war) circumstances.🤔
Exactly - and yet, to the author’s point “fixing housing” was one of the main federal election issues. Nobody batted an eye. Seems like the media and the politicians believe we all drank the koolaid.
I wasted a lot of breath arguing that point to lunatics ranting about housing and blaming the Feds.
Too many people don’t think for themselves and just go with whatever BS Poilevre’s band of idiots spew out.
Again, in our community newspapers, a disparaging and negative judgement of the Royal visit and any efforts Mark Carney is making towards protecting us from an American takeover.
Harper had controlled the news media since he became PM, running non-stop, tax payer attack ads against Trudeau. Our Canaadian media is now owned by PostMedia, newspapers, several TV stations, community newspapers whose editorials are all written by tha American, Trump-friendly hedge fund corporation with Harpers agenda written all over them.
Thank you for writing this. It is badly needed, not only for politicians and journalists but for Canadian voters who don’t necessarily understand our federation. But what really scares me is whether some of the politicians and journalists making these comments and accusations actually know about the intricacies of the separation of power. If they do, then they’re freeking hypocrites. If they don’t, what are they doing in those jobs.
Excellent article, thank you!!
However I disagree that the Conservative & NDP unparliamentary language episodes are equivalent.
Poilievre's comment & followup was per his standard disruptive—and yes, performative—MO. If he truly wanted to focus attention on a drug policy he disagreed with, he could have easily chosen to substitute e.g. "irresponsible/negligent" instead of his preferred "extremist/radical". But that would be off-brand from the derogatory sloganeering which is his political bread and butter.
Singh was responding to a single individual preventing a unanimous vote on a motion which would have allowed the government to take meaningful action on a persistent human rights issue:
"It was this brazen act of one MP to not just say no but to say no loudly and to kind of gesture like this," Singh said later, waving his hand like someone trying to brush off a fly.
"In that gesture, I saw exactly what has happened for so long. People see racism as not a big deal, see systemic racism and the killing of Indigenous people as not a big deal, see Black people being the subject of violence and being killed as not a big deal, and in the moment I saw the face of racism.
"That's what it looks like when someone dismisses the reality that people are going through. And so I had a moment of anger in seeing that."
Excellent detailed article. Nuance is rather important. I do believe - after many conversations with folks - this misinformation does begin with a lack of basic CDN civics knowledge. Too many citizens seem a bit clueless as to which level of government is responsible for what. Media - including the G&M take advantage of that. They are most interested in views/subscriptions. Of course, this also begs the question ... are politicians also clueless (I'd say yes, about a number of them) ... or are they just taking advantage of clueless citizens? Likely. Premiers (most) are famously misleading. So, does this equate to governance by ignorance or convenience? Don't ask PP. You're likely to get a slogan in response.
A good analysis of the various levels of power and how it gets distorted by ALL parties. Just flawed by focusing on the CP and NDP while ignoring the Liberal BS!