White poppies. Sometimes something rings a little bell amid the gloom, like a bird singing after a catastrophe, or a light in a raging storm. It's a symbol of peace, first introduced in Britain by the Co-operative Women's Guild in 1936. The notion that hope for peace might live, however, is apparently so outlandish that the symbol is little known and only makes rare appearances, as it did in P.E.I. this Remembrance Day, and always seems to upset someone.
Written in the form of a submission to an imagined " Truth and Reconciliation " commission about Canada's foreign policy past, Lester Pearson's Peacekeeping: The Truth May Hurt will change how you think about this country's most famous statesman. This book challenges one of the most important (and useful) Canadian foreign policy myths.
Yves Engler has been dubbed "one of the most important voices on the Canadian Left today" (Briarpatch). In addition to six published books, many of Engler's writings have appeared in the alternative press, as well as mainstream publications such as The Globe and Mail , Toronto Star , Ottawa Citizen and Ecologist . His six books have been praised by Naomi Klein, Noam Chomsky, William Blum, Rick Salutin and many others.
In his new book, Yves Engler sets to demolish the near saintly status of Lester Bowles ("Mike") Pearson in the public sphere, Canadian foreign policy circles and even on the social democratic left. And in the process, he takes on the much repeated slogan that "the world needs more of Canada."
Much like Noam Chomsky who provides a forward to Lester Pearson's Peacekeeping, the author relies mostly on the excellent but largely unread scholarship plus the former PM's own statements in Parliament and in memos to successfully establish a case.
The many Canadians who support our country's role as a peacemaker in the global community are likely to remain frustrated for the next four years. For the past two decades there has been an unheralded shift in emphasis towards war fighting and preparing for irregular war on an ongoing basis.
Given the ascendancy of militarism, it may now seem pointless to try to make the case for peace, the prevention of armed conflict and the protection of civilians. On the contrary, it is vital during these dark years that we keep these goals alive, and not succumb to the notion that it is a naïve and impossible dream.
As a Canadian paratrooper in the former Yugoslavia, Pascal Lacoste learned to hold in his pain. But even today, sometimes the pain is just too great.
"I need someone now," he writes on his Facebook profile one summer morning, leaving his address and phone number for the world to see. "I'm half-conscious."
He gets $50 a week from the Canadian government to pay for homecare, and for the rest he must rely on his friends. "It's hard for my social life, because my friends say, 'Pascal always wants something from us.'"
He wishes it didn't have to be that way.
I've been trying to wait for the official start of 2012 before mentioning the War of 1812's 200th birthday, but the Harper government has jumped the gun and I can't help wondering why. It's not as though they do things spontaneously, without calculating the politics involved. So last week, Heritage Minister James Moore laid out some of their plans for marking that war, along with the reasons: chiefly, that it "led to 200 years of peace." Ah, there you go.