Those who read Listen Up! on a regular basis will know that I have written more than once about my concern related to cancel culture. I have not changed my opinion about that.
Growing populism in Canada and much of the Western world has elevated the pace of change in our society.
Much of it relates to individual freedom, the call for fewer restrictions on our lives, and the ability to plot our own course without interference. Many Canadians can embrace those things. But other changes brought about by the rise of populism in recent years are more concerning. We are less inclined to listen to those whose views differ from ours, and it is more difficult for people to speak their minds without fear of retribution.
In recent days, a guest editorial writer in the Toronto Star, Catherine Corriveau, said in part, “Our democratic foundation is cracking. The double dichotomy of winning over government and confrontation over compromise has shifted our public discourse from a marketplace of ideas to a battlefield.” She goes on to say, “It not only breeds cynicism and disillusionment, it undermines the public trust that is essential for healthy democratic governance.”
I think all of that is true. But in this day and age, and perhaps as a result of this, there is a movement to redefine our history through cancel culture or “alternate facts.” Some believe that the standards of today are those on which we should judge the standards of the past. I disagree.
Cancel culture has resulted in the tearing down of statues, renaming roads and some communities, desecrating our monuments, and tarnishing the reputation of many of our forefathers.
One of our forefathers, in particular, Canada’s first Prime Minister, Sir John A. Macdonald, as a result of cancel culture and “alternative facts,” is largely known today as the architect of the horror of residential schools for Indigenous Canadians. That is simply wrong.
Did Macdonald have his warts? Of course, he did. Name me a prime minister who didn’t. Was he a little too fond of imbibing the wobbly pop? Apparently. Did he govern according to the standards and morals of the time he lived in, rather than the standards of today, more than a century and a half later? Without question.
Sir John A. Macdonald was Canada’s primary founding father and its first Prime Minister. He built the foundation on which our country stands today, including uniting Canada by building a coast-to-coast railroad. That is his legacy, not the legacy related to residential schools promoted through cancel culture and “alternate facts.”
Macdonald did not create residential schools for Indigenous Canadians. They were established well prior to him becoming Prime Minister. Further, during his entire tenure in that office, attendance at residential schools for Indigenous Canadians was voluntary and not obligatory. These are facts that all the cancel culture in the world cannot change.
To place the blame for the horror of residential schools solely at the feet of Sir John A. Macdonald is not just inaccurate but also unfair to Indigenous Canadians who endured the negative and controlling aspects of these institutions throughout the tenures of many prime ministers, both Conservative and Liberal, right up until the time of Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau. It is interesting to note that most, if not all, of their statues remain standing.
Cancel culture and “alternate facts” have, in my view, irrevocably tarnished the reputation of Canada’s first Prime Minister. There have been many other examples in recent years, and I continue to believe that cancel culture is harmful both to our history and to our future as Canadians.
Imagine my surprise and discomfort, therefore, when a recent conversation with a good friend reminded me that I, too, may have been guilty of cancel culture.
Many will remember that in June of 2010, what was then known as the annual G8 Summit for international leaders was held at Deerhurst Resort in Huntsville. Russian President Dmitry Medvedev was in Huntsville for these meetings.
Subsequently, as part of the recognition that this event was held in Huntsville, a small park was created to display the flags of the eight countries that participated in this meeting, including the flag of Russia. They all flew proudly for a few years. But then Russia, now with Vladimir Putin back as President, undertook a number of cruel initiatives, including the annexation of Crimea in 2014 for which it was kicked out of the G8 and, as well, ultimately a unilateral invasion of Ukraine.
There was much debate in Huntsville as to whether the Russian flag should remain flying. If my memory serves me correctly, it went up and down a few times until the atrocities in Ukraine became overwhelming. Now, it is down for the foreseeable future, an empty flagpole among seven flags proudly flying.
I was fully supportive of that.
But my friend pointed out to me the other day that the removal of the Russian flag was another example of cancel culture. The flags in the park were there to indicate that all of these countries were here as part of the G8 Summit. Russia was a part of that, and to deny its presence is to deny the facts.
This hit home to me because as much as I believe that cancel culture and the denial of facts are very harmful, it also distresses me to see the flag of a despotic and invasion-prone country proudly flying in our town.
I have learned a lesson here.
If we really believe that cancel culture is wrong and harmful to our society, as I do, then we cannot have it both ways. I now believe that the Russian flag should go back up. However, I also believe we can send a real message by only raising it to half-mast. In that way, we can recognize the fact that Russia was part of the G8 Summit here and, at the same time, reflect our mourning and concern over their unwarranted war against Ukraine and what that could mean to their further territorial ambitions to invade other countries.
Cancel Culture, to me, is simply the diminishment or complete erasure of truth and fact. Truth and honesty are a big part of the foundation of a democratic society.
Sometimes it may hurt, but we should never forget that.
Hugh Mackenzie
Hugh Mackenzie has held elected office as a trustee on the Muskoka Board of Education, a Huntsville councillor, a District councillor, and mayor of Huntsville. He has also served as chairman of the District of Muskoka and as chief of staff to former premier of Ontario, Frank Miller.
Hugh has also served on a number of provincial, federal and local boards, including chair of the Ontario Health Disciplines Board, vice-chair of the Ontario Family Health Network, vice-chair of the Ontario Election Finance Commission, and board member of Roy Thomson Hall, the National Theatre School of Canada, and the Anglican Church of Canada. Locally, he has served as president of the Huntsville Rotary Club, chair of Huntsville District Memorial Hospital, chair of the Huntsville Hospital Foundation, president of Huntsville Festival of the Arts, and board member of Community Living Huntsville.
In business, Hugh Mackenzie has a background in radio and newspaper publishing. He was also a founding partner and CEO of Enterprise Canada, a national public affairs and strategic communications firm established in 1986.
Currently, Hugh is president of C3 Digital Media Inc., the parent company of Doppler Online, and he enjoys writing commentary for Huntsville Doppler.
Don’t miss out on Doppler!Sign up here to receive our email digest with links to our most recent stories.
Local news in your inbox three times per week!
Click here to support local news
Thank you for the great opinion piece on cancel culture.
A few years ago I attended a talk on John A. MacDonald by Prof. Patrice Dutil of Toronto Metropolitan University (aka Ryerson). Dutil has written extensively about MacDonald and is the foremost authority on our late and greatest PM.
Contrary to the anti MacDonald revisionism (and Ryerson revisionism) , MacDonald was a great proponent of helping the indigenous peoples. Spending on indigenous went up dramatically during his reign (I believe about 400%) and was the fourth largest budget item. The Liberal leader at the time, Alexander MacKenzie (who later became PM) wanted the native indigenous starved. Literally. MacDonald wanted them educated and fed.
MacDonald made considerable efforts in 1883-85 to expand the franchise and broaden the right to vote to women and Indigenous peoples.
To quote Dutil: “Indigenous people were being murdered from the south pole right up to the 49th parallel in the last half of the 19th century. It is precisely “in context” that Macdonald must be judged, in his own time. In his day, his policies were the envy of every progressive-minded inhabitant of the Western hemisphere. Of course, other policy choices could have been taken (the ones of any reasonable inhabitant of the 21st century easily come to mind), but they were not options in the later half of the 19th century. To judge past actors by the standards of today is simply bad history.”
MacDonald did not end up the drunk that he’s frequently referred as. Quite the contrary.
MacDonald reached out to the Québecois and with Cartier forged the country we have and love. A democratic Canada from coast to coast to coast.
I asked Professor Dutil what would be of Canada if not for MacDonald. “Quebec would survive in some way but the rest would probably be part of the United States.”
The cancel culture is something deeper than it appears and much more dangerous. George Orwell’s 1984 is alive and well.
Your use of “alternative facts” to try to dismiss what are really an expanded understanding of our history and the negatives our forefathers and our country sewed in addition to the positives is what’s disrespectful of those that were the victims of those experiences.
The examples you cited are not mutually exclusive; it’s ok to recognize that Sir John A was both an architect of Canada AND a supporter and expansionist of the residential school system. They’re not “alternative facts”, they’re context.
On another of your points, statues are for celebrating great people, not necessarily their creations. If they were, we’d have a statue of the flag, not Pearson, or a statue of a train, not John A. Sure it’s difficult to separate the good from the bad, but just because you can still enjoy Michael Jackson’s music doesn’t mean you need to keep statues of him around.
If you have concerns about invasion prone countries, then the US and probably the UK flags should never be flown anywhere. We have short and selective memories if we feel that Russia is worse than those two countries when it comes to illegal wars. Painting Russia as the bad guy in the G8 is laughable in the larger context. But some people need a target to vent their anger and Russia is often in their sights. They should open their eyes and look at the bigger picture here. Putin is not a good guy, but when it comes to the Ukraine conflict people should broaden their perspective.
Flying a Russian flag at half mast honours the death of a prominent Russian.
Like a Russian general killed in the invasion of Ukraine, for example.
How it could possibly be interpreted any other way is beyond comprehension.
Absolutely not.
The Russian flag stays down.
It would be distressing to see “the flag of a despotic and invasion-prone country proudly flying in our town.”
And is also disrespectful to Ukrainian Canadians.
Even at half mast.
The fact is history can’t be cancelled.
Whether or not a flag or a statue is up or down.
In spite of the latest trendy buzzword.
It’s never been easier to find out historical facts and put them in context.