March 6, 2017: Spinning the results of a misleading poll

By Michael Regenstreif

A headline, February 22, on the Canadian Jewish News (CJN) website – and presumably in the new print edition of the paper – jumped out at me. “46 per cent of Canadians negative toward Israeli gov’t: poll,” it read.

The poll in question was a survey conducted by EKOS Research on behalf of two organizations and two individuals well known for their opposition to the State of Israel and for their support of the goals of the boycott, divestment and sanctions movement against Israel; organizations and individuals whose actions have sought to delegitimize the very existence of a Jewish state in the Middle East.

Like many polls, the questions in this one were designed specifically to elicit the kind of responses the sponsoring organizations and individuals were looking for and could interpret – or misinterpret – for their own purpose.

For example, the lead question in the poll was, “Generally speaking, do you have a positive or negative opinion of the Government of Israel?”

A plurality of 46 per cent said they had a negative view of the Israeli government, while 28 per cent said they had a positive view and 26 per cent said their view was neither positive nor negative.

The CJN quoted a spokesperson for one of the anti-Israel organizations, who said, “The poll shows that 46 per cent of people polled, who had an opinion, had a negative view of Israel.”

Actually, the poll showed nothing of the sort. The poll did not ask about views of Israel – only of the government. The spinmeister knew this, but was purposefully misinterpreting the results.

To be sure, a recent poll I saw showed that 48 per cent of Israelis had a negative view of the Israeli government, while 43 per cent had a positive view. So the negative view of the Israeli government is even higher in Israel than it is in Canada.

And a poll in the United States released on February 23 showed that the current U.S. president had an approval rating of just 38 per cent (and a disapproval rating of 55 per cent), while here in Canada, a January poll showed an approval rating for the current prime minister at 48 per cent (and a disapproval of 42 per cent).

The CJN also quoted Martin Sampson, director of communications and marketing at the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs, who correctly asserted, “The questions appear to be designed to elicit answers that support the perspectives of the anti-Israel activists who funded the research.”

How someone views a country – one’s own country or another country – is not the same as how one views that country’s government.

Opposition to specific government policies or to a particular government, or its leaders, is basic to democracy. And that distinguishes Israel from virtually every other country in the Middle East.

February 20, 2017: The worst form of democracy ‘except for all those others’

By Michael Regenstreif

“We are committed to ensuring that 2015 will be the last federal election conducted under the first-past-the-post voting system,” said Liberal leader Justin Trudeau during the last federal election campaign. A commitment that was reiterated after the Liberal Party formed a majority government and Trudeau became prime minister.

Trudeau charged his minister of democratic institutions, Maryam Monsef, with finding a consensus that would allow for an alternative system. Trudeau, it was said, favoured a ranked ballot in which voters would somehow rank the candidates so that votes for candidates who don’t cross a threshold would be redistributed to the voter’s second choice.

Conventional wisdom had it that Trudeau favoured a ranked ballot on the theory that the Liberals would be many voters’ second choice thus almost guaranteeing Liberal majority governments in the future.

Meanwhile the New Democratic Party and the Green Party favoured some sort of proportional representation so that parties would hold the number of seats in Parliament reflective of their share of the popular vote. The theory being that the NDP and Greens would see their share of seats increased in a system of proportional representation.

And the Conservative Party, it seems, was OK with first-past-the post, the system in which the candidate receiving a plurality of votes in a riding wins the seat and the party with the most seats is given the opportunity of forming government.

Monsef – who was moved out of the democratic institutions portfolio in last month’s cabinet shuffle – did not find that elusive consensus, and it was left to her successor, Karina Gould, to announce that the search for an alternative to first-past-the-post was over. Despite Trudeau’s oft-stated commitment, the first-past-the-post system will endure for the next election and, likely, well into the future.

But, most Canadians, it seems, are fine with first-past-the-post.

Count me among them. I’m reminded of Winston Churchill’s famous quote from 1947, when he said, “No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.”

That’s the way I think of first-past-the-post. It’s probably the worst form of democracy “except for all those others.”

A ranked ballot system that would permanently favour one party doesn’t seem like a democratic ideal, and I fear that proportional representation would not serve us well.

I say that because I pay a lot of attention to Israeli politics, and the system there is proportional representation, a system that encourages many small, often single-issue parties rather than the kind of big-tent type parties that have to appeal to a broad electorate.

Because the parties are small, it is virtually impossible for any party to win a majority of seats in the Knesset. Coalition governments are always the rule. In the 2015 Israeli election, Benjamin Netanyahu’s Likud was first among the many parties with 23.4 per cent of the vote, and he was able to form a coalition by making deals with the small parties. Thus, we see the two religious parties, which together received just over 10 per cent of the vote, able to impose haredi Orthodox control on many aspects of Israeli society – from who may marry and divorce, to what kind of prayer services may be undertaken at the Western Wall, and much more.

And, when Netanyahu sought to strengthen his weak coalition, Avigdor Liberman – leader of a party that received just five per cent of the vote – was able to demand and receive control of the Defense Ministry, Israel’s most important department.

I’m relieved we won’t be seeing small parties in Canada wheeling and dealing and taking control of important ministries.

February 6, 2017: On International Holocaust Remembrance Day, we remember

By Michael Regenstreif

I’m writing this column on International Holocaust Remembrance Day, marked annually on the anniversary of January 27, 1945 when the Soviet army liberated Auschwitz-Birkenau, the largest of the Nazi death camps, a place where more than a million Jews were murdered in a genocide that killed six million.

In cities around the world solemn ceremonies are being held to mark the day – including here in Ottawa where a ceremony is being held at City Hall as I write.

Throughout the day, I’ve read statements from political and communal leaders commemorating this day of Holocaust remembrance. Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, for example, issued a moving statement:

“Today, on the 72nd anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz-Birkenau, we remember the more than six million Jews murdered during the Holocaust and the countless other victims of Nazi brutality.

“The Holocaust serves as a tragic reminder of the horrors that can be born of racism and hate. We must always remember those who experienced the worst of humanity – in ghettos, cattle cars, and Nazi death camps – and never forget our collective responsibility to prevent the seeds of intolerance and hate from taking root in our communities, country, and world.

“As we take time today to reflect on the haunting legacy of the Holocaust, let us pay tribute to the strength and spirit of the Jewish people and the many others who persevered during one of the darkest periods of human history.

“Today, and every day, we reaffirm our commitment to stand against antisemitism, xenophobia, and prejudice in all its forms. It is through this commitment that we remember those we have lost and honour those whose stories must never be forgotten.”

I’ve also read several sad – if not disturbing – reports in recent days of things that serve to trivialize the Holocaust. For example, some young people were taking selfies at Germany’s national Holocaust monument in Berlin and then posting them with mean-spirited or goofy captions on social media.

Another example, from the Czech Republic, was an “Auschwitz game” in which players are trapped in a room simulating a “gas chamber” and have to use game clues to figure a way out. “You are waiting for your last shower! But you can stay alive if you get out,” was one of the game’s marketing slogans.

When faced with criticism from the Federation of Jewish Communities in the Czech Republic, the game’s promoters claimed their intent was to promote Holocaust education. They offered tickets to the game at a special price for International Holocaust Remembrance Day.

And in Milan, Italy, the first installation there of Stolpersteine (stumbling stones), commemorative cobblestones marking the homes of Jews murdered during the Holocaust, were covered over with black paint within a day of their installation on January 19.

Such stories – and others like the week-long spate of antisemitic, racist and Islamophobic graffiti we experienced here in Ottawa in November – underscore the need for ongoing Holocaust commemoration and, particularly, for effective Holocaust education in our schools.

And, to that, I will add that the trivialization of the term “Nazi” must stop. Too many people throw that term around for almost any reason – particularly, it seems, on social media.

But this kind of thing began long before Facebook and Twitter came along. About 25 years ago, I wrote an op-ed in the Montreal Gazette about the scourge of second-hand smoke and called for smoking to be banned in restaurants and in bars during concerts. I was called a “health Nazi” for that column. After mass shootings, I’ve seen people calling for gun control referred to as “gun Nazis.” I’ve even seen people who want folk music or jazz festivals to actually centre on folk music or jazz called “folk Nazis” and “jazz Nazis.” And that’s not to mention sitcom soup vendors who want their line-ups to flow in a prescribed way.

Such use of the word “Nazi” is offensive and cheapens its meaning. On International Holocaust Remembrance Day, we remember what real Nazis did.