ALMOST EVERY DAY, I hear someone talk about how terrible things are right now. Whether itā€™s the crushing cost of housing, the escalating climate crisis, misinformation and rabid disinformation, the ongoing effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, or the humanitarian crisis in Gazaā€”the list is endless. Older family members on both sides of the Canadaā€“US border shake their heads and make comments about how terrifying and screwed up their country is. My ninety-two-year-old great aunt has said sheā€™s glad she wonā€™t be around much longer, while others in their seventies have put it more bluntly: itā€™s a good time to die. These are off-the-cuff statements, but they always leave me with a sinking feeling.

These days, whatā€™s considered terrible is often a point of contention. What I think is terrible about our current situation isnā€™t necessarily what others think, nor do we agree on who or what can rectify it. And yet, across the political spectrum, across demographics and borders, thereā€™s a palpable sense that things are broken and we need real changeā€”fast. Itā€™s as if critical aspects of the world we thought we lived in have finally started to crumble. Chronic instability is at the heart of it, the recognition that weā€™re living through a turbulent time in history.

This desire for change is one reason why calls for US president Joe Biden and Canadian prime minister Justin Trudeau to not seek re-election feel so similar, though there are major differences between the two. Bidenā€™s biggest liability is his age. At eighty-one, heā€™s part of the so-called Silent Generation, while Trudeau is quintessentially Gen X. Bidenā€™s only been president since 2021, but he was vice president from 2009 to 2017, under Barack Obama. Trudeauā€™s been leading this country since 2015.

But both Biden and Trudeau embody an ethos and vision that are in stark contrast to the reality weā€™re facing. Both display a breathtaking confidence in their political prospects that borders on entitlement, as well as an inability to meaningfully address the severity of our current polycrisis. In Bidenā€™s interview with ABC News on July 5, an interview that was supposed to calm nerves after his catastrophic appearance in the first presidential debate, Biden rejected any claims of pessimism. The New York Times called it ā€œan exercise not just in damage control but in reality control.ā€ Trudeau and his inner circle have similarly dismissed the storm brewing, especially after the recent by-election loss to the Conservatives in Toronto-St. Paulā€™s, previously a safe Liberal riding. As investigative journalist Justin Ling put it in an article for this publication, ā€œif this government hopes to heal itself, Trudeau himself will need to appreciateā€”not explain away, or deflect, or tamp downā€”the anger that people are feeling.ā€

  • girlfreddy@lemmy.caOP
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    2
    Ā·
    4 months ago

    Ok. Please describe what you believe ā€œliberalā€ means in this context.

    • eldavi@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      5
      Ā·
      4 months ago

      itā€™s shorthand for neoliberalism and hereā€™s a wiki article on it.

      tldr:

      Historian Elizabeth Shermer argued that the term gained popularity largely among left-leaning academics in the 1970s to ā€œdescribe and decry a late twentieth-century effort by policymakers, think-tank experts, and industrialists to condemn social-democratic reforms and unapologetically implement free-market policiesā€

      • girlfreddy@lemmy.caOP
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        Ā·
        4 months ago

        Thank you.

        Please use neo-liberal in future comments instead of the vague ā€œliberalā€.

        • floofloof@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          arrow-down
          1
          Ā·
          4 months ago

          To me ā€œneoliberalā€ implies something more strongly and consciously right-leaning than ā€œliberalā€, which includes all the wishy-washy centrists who think a little bit of tinkering around the edges and an appeal to decency and fairness can fix the problems of capitalism, without ever recognizing them as basic features of capitalism itself. So thereā€™s a purpose to using the term ā€œliberalā€: itā€™s broader, and includes ideological neoliberals as well as those who think theyā€™re leftish but actually cooperate with and facilitate all the exploitation around us.

          • girlfreddy@lemmy.caOP
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            3
            Ā·
            4 months ago

            How can you say ā€¦

            ā€œneoliberalā€ implies something more strongly and consciously right-leaning than ā€œliberalā€

            the contradict yourself with ā€¦

            So thereā€™s a purpose to using the term ā€œliberalā€: itā€™s broader, and includes ideological neoliberals as well as those who think theyā€™re leftish but actually cooperate with and facilitate all the exploitation around us.

            ???