Dispatch Lite: Don't pull a Kenney, Pierre
We think that Poilievre is ahead for a reason. On the general sweep of the state of politics, we suspect he's got the best grasp of his electorate.
Hello, free readers. Happy Saturday. Our full version of the dispatch went out to our paying readers last night, and it was a good one. If you’re experiencing any FOMO and want to enjoy the whole thing, which includes our thoughts on the disaster in Texas this week (and in American culture generally), how our own Liberals are exploiting it, looming famines and, uh, soccer, hit the little blue button below.
We were asked recently by a reader what’s in it for them if they subscribe. It’s a fair question. The answer is honestly “Not much.” Most of what we publish we publish for all to read. You can comment on articles, if that’s your thing, and you do get the full version of the dispatch. We have a no-bullshit policy here and that forces us to tell you the truth: we benefit from you subscribing more than you do. We aren’t trying to beat you over the head with a hard sell or pull a fast one on you. If you subscribe, for a few bucks a month, you allow us to sustain (and grow!) an outpost of independent journalism amid the collapse of our industry, and at a time when journalism is desperately needed. The growth we’ve already experienced in recent months has allowed us to recruit some excellent writers and to launch a podcast — those things are directly thanks to our readers supporting us.
We aren’t promising you the deal of a lifetime. We’re offering you a chance to, in a small way, help stem the ride of journalism failures that are leaving us all poorer.
So it’s that, mainly. And like the commenting thing, if you’re into that.
Hey, maybe we should work on our marketing, and really make a hard pitch for why subscribing today would be The Best Money You Ever Spent or something. We aren’t salespeople, though. We’re just journalists. And if you think what we do is important, we’re asking you to help us keep doing it.
Also: we did want to give a bit of early warning re: housekeeping. Your Line editors chatted this week and agreed that we are now well into political silly season. It’s earlier than normal — it normally lands in mid-June — but we think everyone is fried and exhausted and as the weather warms, people are understandably and probably even necessarily taking a break. Our plan here is to continue a regular publication schedule for June, largely because we have a ton of stuff that’s banked and also because we’ll have an Ontario election to cover, assuming anything interesting happens. (An admitted long shot at this point.) In early July, we’ll take a vacation, and after that, we’ll return on a reduced publication schedule — three days a week instead of the usual five. We’ll continue that until reality returns to normal around Labour Day.
We weren’t able to totally stick to this schedule last year. The Afghanistan situation, plus a federal election, made it important for us to keep working. We are hoping for a more tranquil summer this year. So that’s the plan. But, sigh, yes, if news breaks, we shall cover it.
And now, on with the dispatch.
Here’s this week’s Line editors’ video. It’s a sad one, if we’re being honest. It’s hard to be cheerful when the news is so grim.
Oh, and if you’d prefer the video in audio form, we’ve got you covered!
We at The Line are going to preface this little blurb about CPC leadership contender Pierre Poilievre with the following two points; firstly, we suspect he's going to win the leadership race. Secondly, we suspect he's probably on a trajectory to become prime minister. The usual caveats apply: campaigns matter, polls can be wrong, it’s a long time to go and anything can happen. Of course, of course. But at this godforsaken moment, PP's got the mo. The gatekeepers are down at heel, and the populists are on the march. We don't have to agree with any of this, or even like it, to acknowledge that we can feel the current of the wind.
So take these critiques with those expectations in mind. Still: Skippy had a bad week.
Look, the general assumption of the Canadian punditocracy to date has been that Pierre Poilievre is not only dangerous and corrosive — but that he's also full of shit, that he's disingenuously stoking populist anger in order to win the leadership of the CPC. Most — who happen to think he's too smart to actually fall for any of his own rhetoric — genuinely believe he'll slip back to some kind of sensible, slightly more tribal, but still broadly sane centrist form of conservatism after he scores the leadership mandate. Win from the right, govern from the centre: this is generally a winning formula for Conservatives.
We have a different take.
What if Poilievre is 100 per cent genuine in his beliefs about bitcoin, central bankers, the WEF, banning foreign oil, the lot of it? We've said it here at The Line before: COVID has driven everybody a little bit nuts. What if this week, we really just started to see the mask slip?
Because if that's the case, this is what we could be looking at by 2025, or sooner: a prime minister who probably doesn't respect imperfect institutions well enough to leave them alone, whether those institutions be the central bank or the Supreme Court. We'd have a prime minister more inclined to take his financial cues from Robert Breedlove than Tiff Macklem; we'd have a prime minister who seems to genuinely believe that the World Economic Forum is some kind of sinister cabal of (((globalists))) led by Klaus Schwab, and is pulling the strings of government because the forum bestowed ego-stoking titles like "Young Global Leaders" on a bunch of up-and-coming Canadian politicians — including Conservative politicians. And it means we're looking at a prime minister who thinks that banning the import of foreign oil, potentially cutting ourselves off from the global market and forcing western producers to supply energy resources to Canadians first, sounds like a dandy idea. (Does the term: "integrated North American Energy Market" hold any sway, here? You know how much a refinery costs? Just don't call it a National Energy Program, we guess.)
Look, we think that Pierre is ahead for a reason. On the general sweep of the state of politics, we suspect he's got the best grasp of his electorate. He's young, he's smart, and he's willing to litigate serious problems and entertain novel ideas to solve them. We're heading into a period of increased inflation, war, and potentially global famine, and Poilievre could use his considerable intellect to identify Canada's crucial problems, and steer us in a credible direction.
But not if he's acting like a goddamn lunatic. Because nothing says "conservatism" like protectionist economic policies, conspiracy theories, and railing against norms and institutions, right?
So Poilievre, Jenni, if you're listening (are you listening?) don't make the mistake that Jason Kenney did in Alberta. Don't win on promises you can't deliver on and by talking about problems you only half understand. Don't insulate yourself with people who don't challenge you intellectually. If you're going to actually be prime minister, you're going to need to work with the very experts and gatekeepers that you hold in such obvious contempt. You're going to need to network with major global leaders — perhaps even at major global conferences hosted to discuss economic and geopolitical issues — without being beholden to said fora's attendees and organizers. You're going to need to be able to determine fact from fantasy and critique from conspiracy.
We don't doubt Poilievre's ability to win. Rather, we're getting awfully nervous about his ability to govern once/if he does.
ROUND UP
Okay, everyone. That’s it. We leave you to the weekend. Take good care.
The Line is Canada’s last, best hope for irreverent commentary. We reject bullshit. We love lively writing. Please consider supporting us by subscribing. Follow us on Twitter @the_lineca. Fight with us on Facebook. Pitch us something: lineeditor@protonmail.com