Skip to main content
letters
Open this photo in gallery:

Former senior White House adviser Steve Bannon speaks during the Red Tide Rally supporting Republican candidates, Wednesday, Oct. 24, 2018, in Elma, N.Y. Mr. Bannon is scheduled to debate David Frum in Toronto on Friday about populism's role in shaping politics in the future.Jeffrey T. Barnes/The Associated Press

Letters to the Editor should be exclusive to The Globe and Mail. Include your name, address and daytime phone number. Try to keep letters to fewer than 150 words. Letters may be edited for length and clarity. To submit a letter by e-mail, click here: letters@globeandmail.com

..................................................................................................................................

Populism, un/debated

Run, hide, fight. That’s the order of operations for the best chance of survival in an active shooter situation, derived from a depressing amount of North American data.

What Robert Bowers, fuelled by hate bolstered on a “free speech” social media platform, allegedly did in Pittsburgh should challenge anyone’s defence of free speech. Hate speech is killing us. Literally (Thousands Mourn Victims Of Synagogue Shootings – Oct. 31).

So it’s understandable that allowing Steve Bannon to defend his views at Friday’s Munk debate seems unacceptable (Critics Call For Cancellation Of Munk Debate Set To Feature Steve Bannon – Oct. 31). Who gave Mr. Bannon a platform? Not the Munk Debates.

He was a strategist for the President of the United States. The debate topic is populism. Mr. Bannon is a public figure because populism made him one – but we’re not talking about that, all the while accepting that Robert Bowers had a right to free speech. It’s a complicated irony.

When hate advances physically, we run, hide, fight. But when hate advances ideologically, the order isn’t the same. There is no order. No run, hide, fight. We fight first. We only fight; we don’t stop fighting. Pretending Mr. Bannon is neither mainstream nor influential is hiding. Ignoring the underpinnings of the populism that made him that, is hiding. Cancelling the debate is running. The debate is not providing him a platform; it is providing a ring for the fight against that platform.

Elizabeth Bernhardt-Bates, Caledonia, Ont.

...............................................

“Populist” has become journalistic code for “racist” (William Jennings Bryan must be turning in his grave). Most so-called populist parties are fundamentally racist. Steve Bannon is racist. That’s why giving him a platform like the Munk Debates is a huge mistake.

Surely the organizers could have found someone more truly populist than Mr. Bannon.

Jeremiah Allen, Hillcrest Mines, Alta.

...............................................

There are no “conclusions” to be drawn by providing Steve Bannon with an opportunity to spout his hateful views on such a prestigious platform.

We deserve thoughtful discussion by Canadians on world views. It’s not too late to cancel.

Grace Brooker, Toronto

Discord, on full boil

Re The United States Nears Its Boiling Point (Oct. 29): I served for 35 years in Canada’s military and swore to defend our nation. It pains me to see the degradation of public discourse. The U.S. is a cautionary tale; do not think Canada is immune.

Making political parties the equivalent of sports teams, competing for fan loyalty, demonizing and dehumanizing the other team through simplistic slogans and rants is at the core of the problem. In an age of permanent information overload, only the most extreme messages get through.

What results is a race to the bottom – public discourse becomes shallow, abusive and polarized. This dark path will lead to perpetual conflict and hardship.

Political parties need to tone down the rhetoric; the citizenry needs to demand better from their public representatives; the media – in all its forms – needs to understand the explosive nature of its medium.

As leaders, politicians need to understand that their words can incite violent action. Dehumanizing and bullying language, misogynistic comments and inciting fear for political gain energizes bad actors who believe that because their political leaders talk that way, they can act on those sentiments, to the point of physical violence.

Political parties should not be treated as sports teams: An unwavering “loyal base” whose members won’t hold their politicians accountable to standards of conduct, transparency and honesty only promotes extremism.

David Neasmith, Major-General (Retired), Nepean, Ont.

...............................................

Is Donald Trump anti-Semitic? Of course not. He just wants to create chaos and violence. He doesn’t really care who gets killed.

Linda Peritz, Vancouver

Bulger: no justice at all

There will be those who will cheer the prison beating death of 89-year-old James “Whitey” Bulger, and conclude that he got what he deserved (Notorious Boston Mobster And Informant – Obituaries, Oct. 31). I will not be one of them.

Whitey Bulger was a career criminal, a murderer many times over. And yet, the death penalty was not the sentence he received for his crimes. Indeed, had he been on death row, he would have been separated from other prisoners and on suicide watch to ensure he lived until the state was ready to call his number.

Instead, it appears that an elderly man, unable to protect himself in the confines of a notoriously violent institution, met his end at the hands of other convicts within hours of his transfer there.

That sort of mob-rule, vigilante justice is no justice at all, not in a country that espouses to have a justice system that other nations should emulate.

I will not mourn James Bulger, but to cheer his brutal death would be to condone and applaud the frequent violence that goes on behind prison walls in the United States and many other correctional facilities around the world, and that is something I will not do.

Trevor Amon, Victoria

Blame-the-media tactics

Re Is Andrew Scheer Itching For His Own War With The Press? (Oct. 31): Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer seems to be declaring war on the mainstream news media, promising to “stand up to … the media and the privileged elite.” This is red meat for the Conservative base.

I can’t tell you how often over the years I’ve heard conservative complaints about the media having a liberal-left bias. The real problem, however, is that for the past 35 or 40 years, conservatives have been billing right-wing ideology as mainstream thinking and “common sense.”

They’ve now reached a point where they’ve bought into their own press releases. So they automatically see anything not specifically carrying conservative viewpoints as having a liberal-left bias, no matter how hard writers and commentators work to be fair, and any criticism as “evidence” of bias, no matter how well-deserved that criticism is.

Conservatives who think they’re always entitled to unconditional positive news coverage are the real elitists.

Petra Seyffarth, Regina

...............................................

Conservatives, at both the provincial and federal level, have stated they want to protect us from the “elites.” Both Ontario Premier Doug Ford and federal Conservative Leader Andrew Scheer, among others, have made this assertion.

Several sociological studies over the past 50 years have identified these “elites” by using objective scales of power, privilege and income. Being an elected politician ranks you pretty high on this scale, higher still if you are a party leader or premier. That means that both Mr. Ford and Mr. Scheer, by any objective measure, are members of the “elites” class. So, if I have this right, they want to save all us from themselves.

Well, maybe they have something there.

Tony Falsetto, Ottawa

Follow related authors and topics

Authors and topics you follow will be added to your personal news feed in Following.

Interact with The Globe