Kenney, I contend, is an emblematic figure in modern right-wing politics who manipulated populist sentiment to implement policies that strengthened elKenney, I contend, is an emblematic figure in modern right-wing politics who manipulated populist sentiment to implement policies that strengthened elite rule, exclusively benefiting those in positions of authority. That is a consistent thread throughout Kenney’s political career. He was by no means the first political leader to pursue this project, but in the Canadian context he was one of the most successful figures to do so.
A book on a Canadian politician is admittedly a tough sell. Good luck finding any high drama, and once they're out of office the public's goldfish memory resets––people don't care about yesterday's news.
But what author Jeremy Appel does here is special. He drives home the horror and cruelty of Kenney's lifetime mission, provoking a visceral reaction that the media often overlooked while Kenney was in office. And in fact, Appel has this great way of demonstrating how it works. Kenney is a man who craved mainstream respectability, and Appel starts most chapters and policy discussions with Kenney's stated aims--always something that sounds vaguely reasonable, boring, the stuff of CBC hourly reports. But then Appel dive in to assess the damage: the AIDS patients separated from their loved ones, the immigrant workers unable to make a home in this country, the Cargill workers dead of Covid.
The book also does a great job of building the case for why Kenney had to step down from the Alberta premiership, why he couldn't parlay that into the prime minister's office. In short, Kenney wanted two irreconcilable things: populist appeal and elite respectability. When push came to shove during the covid crisis, he made the wrong bet and his voters turned on him.
One hopes that this is more than just a book, that it's the nail in the coffin of a vampire....more
A sweeping history of Nova Scotia. Manages to cover more ground and answer more questions than what I remembered of high school history. Also manages A sweeping history of Nova Scotia. Manages to cover more ground and answer more questions than what I remembered of high school history. Also manages a broader scope, including Nova Scotia's prehistory, the idea of a Greater Nova Scotia and the area's role in the wider region, and a larger focus on Acadians, Blacks, the Mi'kmaq, and a sectarian breakdown of settlers. That said, just as in high school history, the Mi'kmaq tend to disappear from the narrative once Nova Scotia becomes decidedly British in terms of demographics, with just a few remarks about their increasing isolation, poverty, etc. The stuff on Confederation is boring, with too many capsule biographies, but it's hard to fault the author for that (that drunken brawl in Ottawa did sound interesting).
I appreciated the way the author broke down different groups of settlers by their demographics and when they arrived. Most histories tend to elide these things but there was a world of difference in the experiences people had in coming to Nova Scotia. Some groups were supported, some weren't, and it's not always the ones you would think. There's a good look at Nova Scotia's history of and with slavery, something that until recently has been completely ignored. And something that really surprised was the look at the creation of Nova Scotia's school system, something people take for granted today. But the author really manages to convey what a progressive idea it was at the time and also how petty sectarian squabbling managed to continually sabotage the project.
There's a nice afterword that left me longing for a second volume, looking at Nova Scotia's role in Canada. We got ripped off federally, it's true, and our capitalist class sold us out and turned Nova Scotia into a 'branch plant economy,' but the briefest of counterfactual exercises suggests the province would probably be in the same position today whether it had joined the United States, formed a Maritime Union, or stayed dependant on Britain.
The author does tend to make sweeping statements that left me wondering how she could justify certain claims, particularly in the early chapter on Mi'kma'ki before European arrival. But then, this is a sweeping history and there's not a whole lot of space to dive into things. A couple of minor errors bothered me: 'the sixteenth century' is used once to refer to the 1600s, and the author claims that Sydney, Nova Scotia, is 'named, like the capital of Australia, after Lord Sydney,' except that Canberra is the capital of Australia, not Sydney. But don't get me wrong, this is a well-researched book and not one of those cheap things you sometimes see put out by regional presses....more
Loading...
