Showing posts with label Michael Ignatieff. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Michael Ignatieff. Show all posts

Wednesday, February 24, 2010

The Wandering Count

As we await the Canada-Russia hockey game this afternoon, most Canadians will be thinking of Jarome Iginla when they hear the name "Iggy". But I was struck by thoughts of someone else when reading last night a passage from Yuri Slezkine's book, The Jewish Century. Slezkine was discussing the turn in 1930s Soviet policy from the earlier 1920s identification of the ideal Soviet citizen as an internationalist, to the growing reliance of the Stalin regime on the promotion of Russian nationalism.

On pages 279-80 we find Slezkine illustrating this development with a passage from the Jewish writer Lev Kopelev, then still, in the 1930s, a true believer in the Commmunist system:
The young Lev Kopelev had not been alone in being impressed by Stalin's "We do not want to be beaten" speech. "It was then that I, a convinced internationalist, a Soviet patriot, and a representative of the newly formed multinational Soviety people, began to feel an acute sense of hurt and injustice on behalf of Russia, Russian history, and the Russian word."
I was very pleased with this new turn in political propaganda and historical research, this decisive rejection of national nihilism. The party confirmed and affirmed what I had felt since childhood and became conscious of in my youth.

Such concepts as the "Motherland," "patriotism," the "people," and "national" were being restored. And I mean restored - because previously they had been toppled, overthrown....

I enjoyed the films about Peter the Great, Alexander Nevsky, and Suvorov; I liked the patriotic poems by Simonov, the books by E. Tarle and the "Soviet Count," Ignatiev; I reconciled myself to the return of officers' ranks and epaulets.
The "Soviet Count" Ignatiev? This line shocked me as in my limited knowledge of Russian history I had always associated the Ignatiev family solely with the Czarist regime (and indeed they became refugees from the Bolsheviks which is why today the "Soviet Count's" great grandson, Michael Ignatieff, has been able to grasp for power as the unelected leader of the Liberal Party of Canada).

I have seen on occasion Canadian bloggers with an anti-Michael Ignatieff agenda pointing out that Michael's great grandfather, the Count Ignatiev, was the Czar's Minister of the Interior at the start of the violent pogroms in 1881, which some historians believe he tacitly encouraged, and the man who headed the introduction of the May Laws which aimed to limit Jewish settlement in rural areas while at the same time limiting Jewish access to higher education in the urban centres. This was the start of the period of the three great Jewish migrations away from their former homes in the Russian empire's Pale of Settlement - to the Americas, to Israel, and to the cities of the Russian (and later Soviet) empire, the last being the focal point of Slezkine's book.

Now I understand there is some difference of opinion about the antisemitic intent of Count Ignatiev's policies. Some would see them as anti-Jewish only to the extent they were a way of trying to keep peace and order among an antisemitic peasantry and thus actually to protect Jews from pogroms. But, as I also understand it, the more dominant line of interpretation from Western historians is less sympathetic to the Count.

So it is not surprising to me that the politically-calculating Michael Ignatieff makes very little of his Russian ancestry in public. But that the Soviets rehabilitated the memory of Count Ignatiev when they sought to promote Russian nationalism in the 1930s was news to me. I have done a little Googling today and have not yet found more information on this phenomenon. Perhaps the sources in English on the internet will prove too limited for a relatively small historical concern. But I did find an interesting portrait of Michael Ignatieff in a 2008 paper by Valery Tishkov that is discussing, among other things, the worldwide Russian diaspora as an aspect of Russian influence and power in today's global village. Tishkov writes:
If one were to exclude from the total number of historical emigrants from Russia and their descendants all those who are completely assimilated and cannot speak Russian—all those who consider themselves to be French, Argentine, Mexican, or Jordanian and have no sense of connection to Russia—even so the number of “overseas countrymen” would remain large and difficult to define through objective” traits. Membership in a diaspora depends upon self-identity and reflects emotional choice.

Here is a personal example. I was acquainted with the late George Ignatieff, the famous Canadian diplomat and rector of Trinity College at the University of Toronto. He not only considered himself Canadian but, precisely, a “Russian– Canadian” (which was what Nikita Khrushchev had taken him to be when they met at the UN and when Ignatieff went to the USSR in 1955 as part of the official Canadian delegation). There is no question that Count Ignatieff should be considered to be part of the Russian diaspora.

Almost 20 years later I met his son, Michael Ignatieff, a well known journalist and writer, who did not know a single word of Russian, and considered himself part of the Canadian diaspora in England, stating that, “For me, being a Canadian,” he said, “is simply one of those privileges that I received as a birth-right.” To categorize the younger Ignatieff as a member of the Russian diaspora would have been an obvious usurpation of his right to choose how to live his own life. In 1987 he wrote a marvelous book called The Russian Album, about his journey to a childhood to which he could no longer return and his connections to family heirlooms.

For a reader in Russia the book is a historical and cultural document created by a member of the Russian diaspora despite the fact that Michael himself would not grant this. However, during a meeting with him in his bohemian apartment in old London in January 1997, he did not look like a representative of the Russian diaspora, unlike his father, whom I had seen in Toronto.

However, Michael wrote the following curious words about him: “At the same time he always kept himself apart from the Russian emigration, with its fractional intrigues and antediluvian politics. When I was a child he always seemed more Canadian than Russian to me. Even today he remains a more patriotic and sentimental Canadian than I am myself. For him Canada was the country that gave him a new life.” In London Michael told me that he was first of all an Englishman because his mother was English.

However, in 2006, when he decided to run for prime minister of Canada as a Liberal Party candidate, he emphasized his “Canadianness” as his sole and unquestioned identity. Which of the two Ignatieffs was part of the diaspora, and which of them belonged to the “Russian world?” There is no clear answer. Identity drift of an individual or a group can be situational and, in any event, dynamic. A great deal depends upon instrumental (or personal) calculations and also on the economic and political influences of the country of exodus and that of emigration.
So one wonders what Valery Tishkov would make of Michael Ignatieff's current siding with the enemies of Israel lodged in Canada's so-called "Rights and Democracy" agency/bureaucracy. Are his Russian roots showing, or perhaps his aristocratic prejudices? Or is this "Englishman" just being pulled around by the prejudices of the party that allowed him to become their unelected leader? Many have wondered, just what is this latest version of the Counts Ignatieff. In any case, let us rest easy for the moment, knowing that when Canada plays Russia, it's safe to cheer for Iggy.

Thursday, March 05, 2009

Michael Ignatieff on Israel Apartheid Week

Carl in Jerusalem has a bit of video from Arabic al-Jazeera, an interview with Hamas terrorists in Gaza. One of them says
"...Then the [Israeli] forces started entering the town, and our fighters moved back in there as well, setting up booby traps. Each man booby-trapped his own home, so all of Gaza was set to explode. We were ready to die on our own soil in our very own houses. I was ready to fight from my home."
So what does one say about people who would sacrifice their own families and then look to the world to rail against Israeli atrocities? Here's Michael Ignatieff, unelected leader of the Liberal Party of Canada in today's National Post (HT Catfur):
Throughout our history, Canadians have strived to understand each other across the solitudes that have broken other countries to pieces. Our common national purpose has been built on our diversity.

We respect differences — of opinion, nationality, race and creed. We abandon that respect at our peril.
“Israel Apartheid Week” (IAW), now underway on university campuses across Canada, betrays the values of mutual respect that Canada has always promoted.

International law defines “apartheid” as a crime against humanity. Labelling Israel as an “apartheid” state is a deliberate attempt to undermine the legitimacy of the Jewish state itself.

Criticism of Israel is legitimate. Attempting to describe its very existence as a crime against humanity is not.
IAW is part of a global campaign of proclamations, boycotts and calls for divestment, which originated in the World Conference Against Racism, Racial Discrimination, Xenophobia and Related Intolerance held in Durban, South Africa, in 2001. Like “Durban I,” IAW singles out one state, its citizens and its supporters for condemnation and exclusion, and it targets institutions and individuals because of what and who they are — Israeli and Jewish.

IAW goes beyond reasonable criticism into demonization. It leaves Jewish and Israeli students wary of expressing their opinions, for fear of intimidation.

No Canadian should ever have to fear for their safety in a public space because of who they are or what they believe. All Canadians should condemn any attempt to intimidate anyone in the legitimate affirmation of their beliefs and identity.

The Ontario wing of the Canadian Union of Public Employees has joined the chorus of denunciations of Israel on our campuses. The CUPE Ontario resolution passed last week to boycott Israeli academics is an unacceptable violation of academic freedom.

Canada enjoys strong academic, economic and cultural ties with Israel and Israeli institutions, and these relationships benefit both our countries. Collaborative research between Canadian and Israeli academics is mutually rewarding, and should be encouraged. The CUPE resolution is an attack on the free exchange that is at the heart of our university system.

The Liberal Party of Canada condemns the CUPE resolution in the strongest possible terms.
[...]
Political leaders should also take care not to deepen the distrust between Canadian communities over the Middle East. Politicians who use the ongoing conflict in the Middle East as a wedge to divide Canadians for their own political gain can succeed only in accentuating acrimony and deepening tensions.

The Israeli-Palestinian conflict evokes passionate disagreement. It should not damage academic freedom and it should not divide Canadian communities. We can move forward if we work together to promote the common objective of Canadian policy ever since 1948 — a secure Israel living side-by-side in peace with an independent Palestine.
Is that moral clarity, two-faced hypocrisy and moral relativism, unrealistic wishful thinking? You be the judge. I would ask, how can you not divide Canadians, to some extent, if some of them support the likes of Hamas, as some do?

Thursday, February 12, 2009

Squeeze me!

We've all heard the stories of how Obama's popularity is in good part due to his ability to provoke sexual and romantic desire in his followers. And we Canadians have often had to suffer a media trying to make fawning comparisons of Michael Ignatieff and Obama. But Ignatieff is clearly one step ahead of Obama because he managed to take charge of his party by eliminating the need for a leadership vote, amidst the obviously contrived fears that if the Liberals didn't get a leader presto, Stephen Harper could do untold damage in the months it would take for the Liberals to get their man.

Anyway, as I've noted before, I'm on Ignatieff's email list and today came this sickly sweet missive, supposedly from Iggy's wife (though I'd guess few Liberals in the leader's office would have scruples about using her in such a way):
Dear Liberal Friend,

While we look forward to spring, Valentine’s Day is almost here to help us fend off winter’s chill. If you are still looking for the right gift for your Valentine, I have a cozy red suggestion:

Make a donation of $100 or more by midnight on Saturday, February 14th, and you will receive a limited-edition red fleece scarf, embroidered with the name of my favourite Liberal Valentine, to help keep you or a loved one warm until spring arrives.

Winter may be with us a while yet. Let’s weather it together.

Warm regards and hope to see you in Vancouver,

Zsuzsanna Zsohar

Note: the market value of the gift item will be deducted from the receiptable amount of your donation.

Thursday, November 13, 2008

Freudian slip?

I received a second letter in as many days from Michael Ignatieff. I think it's no secret Iggy was in a hurry to see Stephane Dion go. So I chuckled at the spelling of the following:
Now more than ever, we need a Liberal Party that can counter Stephan Harper's conservative agenda for our country.
Well, they do say he hates to be called Steve.

By the way, once again Mike's letter makes the ritualistic nod to bilingualism in English, but not in French.

Wednesday, November 12, 2008

Monsieur Iggy

During the last Liberal Party of Canada leadership campaign in 2006, I wrote Michael Ignatieff to ask what he had to say about his Quebec lieutenant, Denis Coderre, attending what was a de facto Hezbollah rally in Montreal. Iggy's office gave me the run around, and put me on their mailing list (figuring, I guess, that there must be a few genuine Liberals pissed off about Hezbollah).

So, I received a note an hour ago telling me that Michael wanted me to be among the first to know he was again throwing his hat in the leadership ring. I have always thought it strange that a man who has spent most of his adult life outside of Canada wants to be our Prime Minister. Then again, maybe it is his mission in life to save us from Bob Rae. Anyway, I see Iggy is giving off signs that he has initiated himself into the Liberal Party view of Canada. To quote from the letter:
...we need to listen to each and every Liberal. Indeed, we need to listen to each and every Canadian. [OK MIKE: no more sucking up to terrorists, or even just ideological Islamists!] We must let everyone know that this campaign is really more about them than it is about me.
[...]
Tous ensemble, riding by riding, person by person, we can renew our Party and bring Canada back.
That's the last paragraph of the letter. The French version follows. Here's the last paragraph of that:
Tous ensemble, comté par comté, personne par personne, nous pouvons renouveler notre parti et retrouver notre Canada.
I'm just curious, is it normal in the Liberal worldview to make the ritualistic nod to bilingualism only in the English version? There's no English in the French version.