i feel obligated to respond to this, although i'd actually rather not.
first, i'll reiterate that i'm not a supporter of justin trudeau or the liberal party. there happened to be a relatively good liberal candidate running in my riding, and i did vote for her because i thought she had a good chance of getting rid of the rather useless ndp back bencher that we've had here for far too long, but i spent months insisting i'd vote for the greens, and would have if it weren't for the strength of the local liberal candidate. i didn't vote for him, i voted for her - both technically and symbolically.
so, trudeau can't lose my support because he doesn't have it in the first place.
but, the issue of homosexual oppression in africa is extremely widespread and baked directly into the culture, there. there aren't even really substantive allies to connect with. i need to be able to present an alternative course of action before i can criticize somebody for doing something, and there really isn't much of one, here.
if the implication is that trudeau sold out queer rights for a security council seat, then that would be deplorable and worthy of condemnation in the starkest terms possible, and possibly even grounds to demand an immediate resignation. i would hope that other countries would look at something like that and vote for norway instead, as we clearly wouldn't be worthy of sitting on the security council if we were going to behave in such an undignified manner as that. as a canadian, that would leave me feeling ashamed and embarrassed. but, i don't think that's what actually happened.
what can canada do with these countries like senegal that just refuse to modernize around this issue, and so many others? well, pulling investment isn't going to help anybody. nor is boycotting them. as an anarchist, i completely reject the premise that market theory is a force for social change. this is a longstanding liberal position, though, that is challenged mostly by conservative zealots on the fake left that insist on upholding these purity tests in who they interact with - that's not a position i'd ever advance or advocate. so, for example, i'll follow chomsky on his criticism of bds, in arguing that it's likely to backfire. and, while a bds movement against africa on queer rights might feel good, it's not likely to materially aid any queer people in africa; i might support such a thing abstractly, but i'd never actually advocate it, as i'd expect the outcome to be terrible for the people i'd be trying to support.
nor is trudeau standing there and saying things going to mean anything to anybody. nobody cares.
we could slaughter the leadership in the hopes of an uprising, but that would never work in africa. i've been very careful to point to iran as a specific example where there is a lot of opposition to the state, and a powerful modernizing force on the ground, and i've tried to frame the issue around the likelihood of critical mass. i would never argue for a second that slaughtering the african leadership would lead to a modernizing uprising, so the justification for doing so wouldn't exist. i am cognizant of the fact that the self-righteous moral zealots will call me a hypocrite, but that's rooted in the fact that they're too stupid to understand the argument i'm presenting. if you read this post and conclude i'm a hypocrite, you're an imbecile - but you might, and i expect as much from a certain collection of people that think with their hearts instead of their heads.
the best thing we can do is try to provide support and hope it helps to change attitudes on the ground in the long run, and my understanding is that that's actually what we're doing. i may have other criticisms for the economic projects that exist beyond this, but i would reject the explicit argument that they should be pulled to help the queer movement get off the ground - i do not think that this is a well thought through argument.
likewise, i'm hardly going to have a melt down about the prime minister attending a meeting with the iranian foreign minister. i've been clear that i'd support a very tactical strike to remove the religious leadership, explicitly, in the hopes that it would lead to a secularist uprising, if the likelihood of such a thing could be established beforehand. zarif is actually a part of the civilian leadership, and not really representative of the theocracy. again: what can canada do in or with iran? and, if you believe that it should be seeking to prop up secularist voices and minimize religious ones then isolating or excluding the civilian leadership would not be consistent with any kind of progress, even if it makes you feel good about yourself for doing it. in context, there are clearly some discussions that need to be had between the countries, and i don't see any value in preventing that.
i would support a targeted strike against the ayatollah, though. that's the source of oppression here, the religion; the civilian government, if anything, is a buffer against that.
i hope i've clarified any confusion that might exist.
https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/pm-defends-not-publicly-supporting-lgbtq-rights-in-senegal-photo-with-iranian-minister-1.4812426
first, i'll reiterate that i'm not a supporter of justin trudeau or the liberal party. there happened to be a relatively good liberal candidate running in my riding, and i did vote for her because i thought she had a good chance of getting rid of the rather useless ndp back bencher that we've had here for far too long, but i spent months insisting i'd vote for the greens, and would have if it weren't for the strength of the local liberal candidate. i didn't vote for him, i voted for her - both technically and symbolically.
so, trudeau can't lose my support because he doesn't have it in the first place.
but, the issue of homosexual oppression in africa is extremely widespread and baked directly into the culture, there. there aren't even really substantive allies to connect with. i need to be able to present an alternative course of action before i can criticize somebody for doing something, and there really isn't much of one, here.
if the implication is that trudeau sold out queer rights for a security council seat, then that would be deplorable and worthy of condemnation in the starkest terms possible, and possibly even grounds to demand an immediate resignation. i would hope that other countries would look at something like that and vote for norway instead, as we clearly wouldn't be worthy of sitting on the security council if we were going to behave in such an undignified manner as that. as a canadian, that would leave me feeling ashamed and embarrassed. but, i don't think that's what actually happened.
what can canada do with these countries like senegal that just refuse to modernize around this issue, and so many others? well, pulling investment isn't going to help anybody. nor is boycotting them. as an anarchist, i completely reject the premise that market theory is a force for social change. this is a longstanding liberal position, though, that is challenged mostly by conservative zealots on the fake left that insist on upholding these purity tests in who they interact with - that's not a position i'd ever advance or advocate. so, for example, i'll follow chomsky on his criticism of bds, in arguing that it's likely to backfire. and, while a bds movement against africa on queer rights might feel good, it's not likely to materially aid any queer people in africa; i might support such a thing abstractly, but i'd never actually advocate it, as i'd expect the outcome to be terrible for the people i'd be trying to support.
nor is trudeau standing there and saying things going to mean anything to anybody. nobody cares.
we could slaughter the leadership in the hopes of an uprising, but that would never work in africa. i've been very careful to point to iran as a specific example where there is a lot of opposition to the state, and a powerful modernizing force on the ground, and i've tried to frame the issue around the likelihood of critical mass. i would never argue for a second that slaughtering the african leadership would lead to a modernizing uprising, so the justification for doing so wouldn't exist. i am cognizant of the fact that the self-righteous moral zealots will call me a hypocrite, but that's rooted in the fact that they're too stupid to understand the argument i'm presenting. if you read this post and conclude i'm a hypocrite, you're an imbecile - but you might, and i expect as much from a certain collection of people that think with their hearts instead of their heads.
the best thing we can do is try to provide support and hope it helps to change attitudes on the ground in the long run, and my understanding is that that's actually what we're doing. i may have other criticisms for the economic projects that exist beyond this, but i would reject the explicit argument that they should be pulled to help the queer movement get off the ground - i do not think that this is a well thought through argument.
likewise, i'm hardly going to have a melt down about the prime minister attending a meeting with the iranian foreign minister. i've been clear that i'd support a very tactical strike to remove the religious leadership, explicitly, in the hopes that it would lead to a secularist uprising, if the likelihood of such a thing could be established beforehand. zarif is actually a part of the civilian leadership, and not really representative of the theocracy. again: what can canada do in or with iran? and, if you believe that it should be seeking to prop up secularist voices and minimize religious ones then isolating or excluding the civilian leadership would not be consistent with any kind of progress, even if it makes you feel good about yourself for doing it. in context, there are clearly some discussions that need to be had between the countries, and i don't see any value in preventing that.
i would support a targeted strike against the ayatollah, though. that's the source of oppression here, the religion; the civilian government, if anything, is a buffer against that.
i hope i've clarified any confusion that might exist.
https://www.ctvnews.ca/politics/pm-defends-not-publicly-supporting-lgbtq-rights-in-senegal-photo-with-iranian-minister-1.4812426