To say that political extremes are increasing because of immigrants themselves is incorrect. And fundamentally unfair.
But to claim that political decisions – or non-decisions – can contribute to the emergence of extremes, even if that is not the aim, goes without saying. It is obvious.
The two young leaders in Québec politics, Gabriel Nadeau-Dubois and Paul Saint-Pierre Plamondon, have been insisting on this since yesterday.
GND accuses PSPP of only seeing immigration as a negative issue. PSPP believes that GND is cheerful.
Both share some of the blame.
GND on land
On the part of the PQ leader, his statements lack clarity. We launch an affirmation – a “threatened social peace” – without being too specific as to what we mean. Is social peace threatened by our current thresholds? Are we headed for a crisis linked to our immigration model? We don’t really know.
On the side of the solidarity leader, we stand in politics rather than in good faith. We read selectively what PSPP said. And we combine Jean-François Lisée’s insane proposal to transport immigrants from Roxham to Ontario by bus, Prime Minister Legault’s words in the campaign and the pronouncements of the PSPP.
The solidarity leader talks to his members first.
He knows that a vote of confidence is hanging by his nose, and that the division in Saint-Henri-Saint-Anne is coming – and that this speech will speak to voters of that riding.
political extremism
But back to the original question: What contributes to the rise of extremism?
If there is a worrying rise of the far right, particularly in Europe, it is primarily because of far right politicians. These “identity entrepreneurs” point to immigration as the cornerstone of all problems and use it as political fuel.
But ending our analysis with that is brief.
These politicians are needed because the soil is fertile.
A European example: In Germany, the extreme right is rising from its ashes. Angela Merkel herself acknowledged that the admission of two million Syrians in 2015 may have fueled social tensions and contributed to the emergence of xenophobic parties. The newcomers are certainly not to blame, but rather political decisions. You have to be able to recognize it.
I wrote last week that progressives, including QS, should stop fleeing identity fears like the plague. I would go further: by looking down on all claims of identity and always associating them with xenophobia, we end up creating even more intolerance.
Roxham
Will the Roxham Road situation eventually spark a backlash – as PSPP seems to be saying? We must not exaggerate: that is not the case at the moment, even if our public services are under pressure.
But the situation in Roxham fuels the impression that our governments are allowing a situation to dwindle. And this can help fuel a particular xenophobic discourse.
Another example raising tensions is the recent appointment of Amira Elghawaby by the Trudeau government to a post in the fight against Islamophobia.
In the column “Quebec bashing,” a specialty of Anglo-Canadian newspapers, she estimated that “the majority of Quebecers harbor anti-Muslim sentiments.”
A nomination of this nature – always acceptable in Canada’s highest offices – creates identity tensions and fuels resentment. And yes, it contributes to the rise of extremes.
