by Paul Conway

In Nonsense Novels, his second collection of stories, therefore likely to be funnier than most if not all of the later ones, Stephen Leacock invents the Great Detective (“Maddened by Mystery”), who has a remarkable talent: “With the Great Detective to think was to act and to act was to think. Frequently he could do both together.” What a man!

Our electioneering politicians want to convince us of their readiness to act. Every action they propose we interpret as a “promise”. Woe betide the politician who finds himself in a position to make good on one of these “promises” and does not do so, even if for very good reason. He or she is immediately revealed as someone who acted, or proposed to act, without thinking. “Promise” first, think later, and believe you can get away with it. The Great Detective would never fall into such a trap. Of course, the situation is not entirely one-sided. Perhaps when we interpret these statements of benevolent vote-attracting intention as “promises” we too are falling a little short in the thinking department.

Be that as it may, I have been saying lately in several contexts that I am trying to find new ways to think about Social Justice. It is interesting to be doing that in the midst of an election campaign. When we listen to the pronouncements and read the platforms it becomes possible to believe that Social Justice in some form is the goal of all parties, presumably reflecting the desires of a broad swathe of voters. It used to be taken for granted that Social Justice lay in the arms of The Economy. Politicians were supposed to be yelling at themselves, "It's The Economy, Stupid!"  This year it appears the cry is, "It's Climate Change, Stupid!" As no doubt it is. I wonder, however, how much traction there would be for action on Climate Change if The Economy were to turn sour. I think it entirely possible we would be back to "It's The Economy, Stupid!" in the blink of a news cycle.

The cry of Social Justice herself is, I think, "It's Everything!" She would never call anyone 'Stupid'. It's the whole inter-connected matrix of Both-Ands: The Economy and The Environment and The Social Safety Net and The Culture and and The Health and The Education and The Infrastructure and The Present and The Future and The Old and The Young and The Middle-Aged and The Families and The Individual and The Collective and The Finances and all the other The's that could legitimately be added to the list.

In any discourse that reflected and respected the sheer mind-boggling complexity and diversity of the contemporary Canadian political challenge perhaps the word 'hypocrite' has no place. What we really demand, or should demand, of our politicians is that they present us with fresh ideas and fresh resolve in all parts of the matrix, with creative ways to resolve the polarities we thrust at them with such whole-hearted enthusiasm, along with routes to progress in all aspects. To practise "Both-And" politics under these circumstances is not hypocrisy, but a cardinal demand of the job.

Such, in any case, is part of what I mean by new ways to think about Social Justice.

This morning I wrote some lines that I put into the mouth of Social Justice herself. The conversation concerned practical measures that would advance the Cause. I urged her to say, “If I were to choose one measure out of the vast array of possibilities, I would ask that people learn to think in complex ways. Everywhere and every day we see people grasping at simplicities and urging promotion of their own pet simplicities at the expense of others. All these simplicities are true in themselves and false by themselves. I believe that statement is valid not only for the respectable simplicities, but even for some that are not considered respectable, as long as they are not violent or repressive. Violence and repression, wherever found, are evil. For people to see both the truth and the falsehood in simplicities, those favoured both by themselves and by others, would be a huge step towards comprehension of the complexities.”

Would she really say that?