Talk Turkey Josie Luetke
If the mainstream media treated Justin Trudeau the same way they treat Donald Trump, I wouldn’t need to remind you that Trudeau once responded that the national administration that he most admired was Red China’s because of how “their basic dictatorship” has grown their economy. You wouldn’t be allowed to forget.
Over the past year, the absurdity of this answer has become increasingly obvious, with the treatment of Hong Kong protesters, internment of Uighurs, and retaliatory detainment of Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor.
Just for the record, though, pro-lifers have long been raising alarm over the injustices perpetrated under the rule of the Communist Party of China. Reggie Littlejohn, founder and president of Women’s Rights Without Frontiers, has done yeoman’s work drawing attention to the millions of sex-selective and forced abortions in China largely thanks to their one- (now two-) child policy. Steven Mosher, president of the Population Research Institute, has also been criticizing the population control efforts of Beijing for decades. Both have spoken at Canada’s National March for Life. Pro-life publications like this one and Lifesitenewshave highlighted these same evils and condemned the persecution of Chinese Christians.
Between these ongoing problems and more recent headlines about the COVID-19 cover-up, it’s becoming near impossible to avoid the elephant in the room that is Beijing’s totalitarianism, although Canada, the World Health Organization, and the United Nations Human Rights Council are giving it the old college try (bless their hearts). Most of the rest of the world, meanwhile, is opening their eyes (if they weren’t open already), and acknowledging what we pro-lifers know: The Communist Party of China is very dangerous.
While they’ve thrown us all into chaos, they’ve also afforded us an indispensable opportunity for self-reflection. Rather en vogueright now is speculating about how our post-COVID-19 world will look like. With the revelation of the fragility of our geopolitical equilibrium and our resultant vulnerabilities, has come a surprising turnabout on globalization; there have been growing calls for and predictions about countries becoming more self-reliant and political leaders are suggesting an openness to this option.
Alberta Premier Jason Kenney retweeted a National Post statement from former Saskatchewan premier Brad Wall focusing on Canadian oil and gas: “We have an opportunity as a nation to become more self-sufficient, more agile and innovative, stronger on the other side of (COVID-19).” In my home province, Ontario Premier Doug Ford has stated: “We can never, ever be put in the position again that we are relying on countries around the world to support us with PPE (Personal Protective Equipment).” Trump had already been on this path to more independence, and his suspension of WHO funding only indicates that he’s doubling down. The push for greater self-sufficiency, be it in the production of personal protective equipment and other medical supplies, agriculture, the development of natural resources like fuel, etc., has spanned across the globe—from the United Kingdom to France, Russia, India, Australia, and so on. The more that nations turn inward, the more others will be forced to do the same.
I’m interested in this possibility, particularly as it pertains to human rights. Certainly, there’s something to be said for maintaining a relationship with a country (or intergovernmental organization) in hopes of influencing it for the better. However, the status quo of routinely turning a blind eye to human rights violations for the sake of economic interests, as we do with China and Saudi Arabia, is wrong. If we do become more self-sustaining, we will have an improved ability to rebuke countries and organizations that are complicit in gross human rights abuses, as we could afford to weaken or sever ties with them. Being able to withstand the repercussions of frankly communicating that some actions (like forced abortions) are beyond the pale is necessary to create a Culture of Life.
That said, looking even further down the road, we must be prepared for the prospect that Canada might be on the receiving end of this censure. After all, we are a non-communist country wit\hout any law on abortion. Most people find Canada’s embrace of abortion in any and all circumstances abhorrent (and that’s not to mention our tolerance of infanticide, promotion of euthanasia, and the LGBTQ indoctrination and exploitation of children). This prospect, though, should be welcomed by us pro-lifers. Hopefully this pressure would prompt an honest examination of the irrationality of these positions, and a subsequent change in behaviour. Maybe in an indirect and winding way, Beijing’s mishandling of COVID-19 will be what it takes to stop Canada from becoming the next China.
