The Agenda with Steve Paikin (Audio) - The Dawn of Another Trump Presidency

Episode Date: November 9, 2024

The Agenda's week in review looks at the evolution of Holocaust education, the return of Donald Trump to the presidency, one woman's crusade against intimate partner violence, and the complicated meaning behind the term "Black Excellence".See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Last year the Ontario government announced that they wanted to expand mandatory learning about the Holocaust for grade 10 history that will come into effect next year. Give us some of the background. How did that come to be? Well back in 2020 we did a motion at the Toronto District School Board for the importance of genocide education. It really is important in our diverse system to speak about the inclusion and have kids learn history. So we frankly learn how to combat hatred

in all its forms in our schools. And it started with the grade six. We were really pleased about that, and we're looking forward to grade 10 as well. How did you convince the Minister of Education to do it? Well, it wasn't my personal convincing of the Minister of Education. If that was the case, I would have had a long list of what I would have asked of the minister. But I really think it was a combination of just what was happening in the States at the time.

It was a Trump election and it was a combination of what was happening here too, as issues of anti-Semitism continued to rise. Dara, grade six, learning about genocide. How much detail can you get into? So we introduced the Holocaust in age-appropriate ways and really in grade six we're introducing who Jews are, who Jews are as Canadians, and how did Canada respond to the Holocaust during that time? And how did the survivors who ended up building their lives in Canada contribute to Canadian society? So we really don't go into the detail of the genocide.

It's really who Jews are, anti-Semitism in Canada during that time in the 1930s. But we don't go into great detail about concentration camps. It's more about separation from family and introducing it in ways that make sense for a 10, 11-year-old. Which raises the question for Marilyn. How young is too young to start learning about this?

We like grade six, although there are many organizations that will teach about the Holocaust in younger grades, particularly in the United States and a couple of the states. But they do it in very sensitive ways. Like Dara said, talking about separation of parents and children, sometimes talking about the separation of a child and their dog. So, for instance, USC Shoah Foundation has a great program called Lala that they start in grade two.

And it really hinges on that experience of a boy with his dog. But we think that grade six is a really good place to start Holocaust education. Your group's called Liberation 75. What do you guys do? We teach about the Holocaust. Our priority is really the supporting the grade six curriculum this year, educating the teachers about how to teach about this challenging subject.

We really want the teachers to teach about it. There is no curriculum police, so even though they're supposed to teach about it, they don't have to, technically. So what we have done is we've launched a book program. We actually use Cathy Kaser's book to hope him back, which is the story of the St. Louis, which is very good for grade 6 audience. And it talks about who Jews are, their immigration policy in Canada during World War II. You need to take another 30 seconds and just tell everybody who doesn't know about the story of the St. Louis, which was a ship with a tragic story.

Yes. In 1938, about 900 Jews were on a ship from Europe to come to a safe, had a safe passage to Cuba where they had entry visas. Cuba decided not to honor the entry visas and the ship, the captain of the ship who was later honored as a Righteous Among Nations, tried to find a port that would take the ship, including Canada. And Canada at that time's immigration policy, when it came to Jews, was none is too many. They sent the ship back. One third of the passengers of the ship ended up dying in camps and in various situations in Europe.

And Canada since apologized for not allowing the Jewish refugees into Canada. So this was a wonderful story about the Jews who were on the ship through the eyes of the children so that the children in our school system can relate to them and through the eyes of the captain who worked very, very hard to save this boatload of Jews against the Nazi regime. Michelle, tell me about Carrying Holocaust Testimony. What's your mission? Our organization is, it empowers descendants of Holocaust survivors to share their family

history in schools. We film an interview between the survivor and the descendant and they use that interview in combination with their own personal history of growing up in the shadows of the Holocaust and photographs and artifacts that they have to go into schools, share the survivor testimony, and it's really a program designed to fill in for survivor testimony in a world where we no longer have survivors. And we feel it's very important to enhance Holocaust education with that survivor testimony

to really allow students to get a meaningful understanding of what happened, to make sense of the numbers of the Holocaust, and to really understand the importance of learning that history. David, one of the things that I heard on one of the channels I was watching was somebody making the following point. Okay, you Democrats, you keep talking

about pronouns and trans rights, and meantime, this other guy, who is a completely disreputable candidate, has been eye on the prize on the economy and what he's going to do for you, and that's why he won. Do you think this is the death of identity politics in the Democratic Party, given the results last night? Donald Trump's economic message was a chaotic mess.

He said he's going to abolish all sorts of taxes, he's going to extend his 2017 tax cut indefinitely, but he's going to, while delivering this giant increase in the deficit, he's going to somehow restrain the growth of prices. And oh, by the way, he's going to stop international trade. So, and anyway, most of the time, he was not talking about the economy, most of the time he was talking talking about the economy most the time He was talking about his grievances and his his plans for vengeance. So the idea that he had a coherent message of any kind Connected and that was a message that was connected to real things in the economy the that that that's not true Now the Democrats did collapse for many reasons

They govern a messy coalition many parts of which don't like each other. And I think one of the things that we have seen is it's going to be very hard to hold Latinos and African-Americans in the same coalition into the future. And I've been writing about this for a long time. The idea in the early 2000s that there was this concept called people of color who were all going to get along. Well, the history of the European continent is to show that people of the same ethnicity, the same race,

are very able to fight World War I and World War II against each other, and you shouldn't expect that people of other backgrounds are going to be any more harmonious. But, and of course, it was Republicans who talked much more about the trans issue in the Democrats. That is something that is happening. The trans issues are happening very much in the culture, in schools, not at the federal level where I don't know the government of the United States has done anything about

it one way or the other. Martha, can you follow up on that? Do you think this is a shot across the bow of the progressive wing of the Democratic Party? Well, so certainly the Democrats are this, they like to say there's large umbrella. And Harris's strategy was largely based on white suburban women. And so women's identity, women's protection of women's health. And I think it's pretty clear that that strategy was not that successful for her. And so, I mean, I think this raises a question for women and gender politics. You know, when are we

going to have a women, woman president? And can we, can women come behind a woman politician to support her to put to the presidency? We certainly didn't see it in 2016. We didn't see it this last year with Nikki Haley, and we didn't see it further on. So in that sense, you know, I think women are going to have to that identity anyway is going to have to stick around. As far as identity politics, we were talking about race. I mean, I certainly think that I mean, Harris didn't do

too badly. I mean, she actually held on fairly well, at least my quick first look at the exit polls. As for you know, gender and identity, gender identity, that's just a tough one. And I'm not sure what that's going to mean for the Democrats moving forward. Let me follow up with Laura on something you said in the midst of that answer, which is the abortion issue clearly was not the vote winner or vote getter for the Democratic party as they thought it would be. Laura, do you have any theories on why that is?

Because they certainly had enjoyed a number of referendum victories in a row after the Supreme Court threw out Roe versus Wade. It wasn't the vote winner last night. How come? I think they focused on it. It was important to do so. I know here in Georgia it was a very important issue and they had this the Post-It Note campaign where you would go into a ladies room and on the back of the stall So I know here in Georgia, it was a very important issue. And they had this, the Post-it Note campaign, where you would go into a ladies room and on the back of the stall, there would be information saying, you can vote for Kamala Harris.

It's about women's reproductive rights. Your husband doesn't have to know. So they were definitely doubling down on that issue. But in some respects, I think women were saying, yep, I don't want my health to be dictated by a man. But I think there may be other options through state-based opportunities. And I really think it is immigration and the economy that were the primary drivers of voters of all genders last night.

And Matthew, let me follow up with you in this regard. Many had made the point that after Trump lost the presidential election to Joe Biden, and then the Republicans did worse in the midterms, it looked like the Republicans and Trump were on an inexorable downward decline. And yet, last night took place. I want to know whether you think gender is still, well, let me just put it this way.

Is it impossible for a woman to get elected president in the United States these days? Well, you know, if we compare what we think might have happened if Joe Biden was on the ticket, yeah, Joe Biden would have gotten some votes that Kamala Harris didn't. But there were some votes that she got that he wouldn't have got.

And really, I think the underlying factor is that it's a very evenly divided country. More people identify with the Republican Party now than identify with the Democratic Party. Having an incumbent Democratic Party just naturally increases people's, you know, identification with the out party. And so by just being out of office, people naturally tend, you know, their dissatisfaction leads them to the out party. And so the balance now favors Republicans. And 2022 was, you know, Donald Trump wasn't on the ticket. You have really a midterm election where the people who are voting are the ones who are

most interested in politics. Last night, a lot of people, you know, who don't vote in midterms are less interested in politics but are unhappy. They go to the polls and so that also tips things away from the incumbent. David, can I get you on that as well? Because we remember in 2016 people said it wasn't that they didn't want to vote for a woman, they didn't want to vote for that woman, Hillary Clinton. Well, now this is two female presidential candidates

that have been rejected by the American people. And apparently, this time, you could argue, a female candidate had her best shot ever to win. Is this country not ready for a female president yet? I think we are seeing, in the United States and across the developed world, a widening polarization between the sexes. They're much less likely to be married to each other.

They're much less likely to live together. There is a lot of, you see it in the way young people talk about each other in social media. There is a lot of mutual bafflement. And I think Donald Trump was a candidate who mobilized a lot of male resentment. He's a candidate who spoke about violence in a way that many men found exciting and women found more threatening. So I wouldn't dismiss this as a real problem.

That gender politics, maybe in the 21st century, the story's going to be that race will matter less, sex will matter more, and gender politics will be polarized. ["The New York Times"] Why, despite decades of work on this subject, politics will be polarized. Why, despite decades of work on this subject, does intimate partner violence still exist? I think we've failed somehow to create first the public will, which then leads to the political will, to address it. And in part, that's because it is such an entrenched and insidious situation. It can happen to anyone.

It can happen in any economic grouping of people, any racial grouping of people, any religious grouping of people. And so I think for a lot of people, it's just too big to think about. When we start thinking about it in those terms, then we're forced to think to ourselves, well, I must know somebody who's a victim. Maybe I know someone who's causing harm to someone else. And that's hard for us to think about when we consider our families and our social circles. And so we back away from it.

I wonder if part of it as well, you see this with climate change, you see this with poverty. There is so much coverage and we are inundated by discussions and programs and features and so on that we may tend to tune it out. Is that part of the story here? I would have said no if you'd asked me that question five years ago, four years ago, because this was a topic that didn't get a lot of media attention. But because the rates of intimate partner violence went literally through the roof during the pandemic, this issue has had a huge amount of media attention and very good media attention, I have to say. Very intelligent, well

informed media attention. And so maybe now that is the case. It's a bit like, oh yeah, another woman got killed. I just see that headline in the paper so often, I'm not even going to think about it. That's terrible, isn't it? Well, it is terrible because we do want media covering the issue and I think the death of any person deserves the honor and respect of being paid attention to. But we certainly don't want to numb people to the fact that this is very real. You're a lawyer. Thanks to Perry Mason. Thanks to Perry Mason, yes. What is it about the legal system, however, that makes it challenging for women to navigate

getting out of an abusive relationship? There's really two legal systems we have to talk about when I answer that question. One is the criminal law, of course, because some kinds of intimate partner violence are criminal offenses. Sometimes women report what has happened to the police and sometimes that results in the partner being charged. But there's also the family law system. And in fact far more women who leave relationships where they were subjected to abuse find themselves in that family law system because if they've got kids they've got issues to work out and with an abusive partner

It's unlikely they're going to be able to work those issues out themselves So the two systems both have present significant barriers in the family law system There still is not a good enough understanding by lawyers, by judges, about what family violence is, about how serious it is and how common it is. The structure of the law and the structure of the court system act as though in the majority of cases the two people are equals and they're coming in there to argue out some differences that they have. When in fact the majority of people who have to turn to that law are not in situations of equality. They're in situations where one person has much

more power and control. But presumably judges and lawyers and you know the stakeholders in the justice system have some training over the years to recognize and understand this. Do they not? Not enough. not nearly enough. And this has been a big advocacy issue for many years. That we would like to see mandatory components in law schools, in bar admissions courses and so on for lawyers. And it's different for judges.

Judges have autonomy, they can't be told, they have to be educated on a particular topic. But we are beginning to see, and in fact it comes out of a tragic story about a young girl actually, we are beginning to see some more attention being paid to the need for judicial education. Ontario and Canada within a few months of one another passed laws that are known as Kira's law, named after young Kira Kagan, who was killed by her father. And those are laws that say, judges, you need to know more about this, because not only are bad decisions being made, but sometimes women and children are dying because of those decisions. Well, as long as we're doing examples here, how about Dawn Walker?

Can you tell us her story? Dawn Walker has, I think, a really interesting story, a terrible story, a story that has a lot to teach us. And I think before I talk about Dawn, I just want to say I think that we learn best from stories. You know, I could sit here and rhyme off statistics to you, but when we hear a story... You want to put a face to it. And we can often find a piece of ourselves in that story. So we think, oh, I can understand that. And it is a story that helps us learn a little bit about how desperate a mother can feel if she has been in a relationship

where there's been abuse. And she's trying to protect her child but nobody seems to be hearing her and this is when we see women I say in quotation marks you know take the law into their own hands and despite the fact that there was a court order about the arrangements for the child Don didn't feel those arrangements were safe for her child and so she removed her child from the situation. Well, she went to the United States. She did.

She crossed the border. She did. She crossed an international border. She took her child. She was deceitful in how she did that. But she did what she did believing for herself that this was the only way to keep her child safe. And what ultimately happened?

Of course, they were found. You know, it's very difficult to disappear nowadays. Even harder when you have a child. They were found, returned to Canada. She was charged with a number of criminal offenses. The child is now residing full time with the father, which was the very thing she was trying to prevent. She's dealt with the criminal matters.

The family law matters are still underway. Did she do the right thing? Did she do the wrong thing? I'm not in a position to answer that question because I wasn't living in her shoes. But I've certainly worked with women who have had that same desperate feeling. I've tried everything. I've gone to the police. I've done this.

I've gone to children's aid. I've gone to the police. I've done this. I've gone to children's aid. I've gone to the family court. My child's not safe. I just don't know what to do. Weigh in on this, if you would, from the standpoint of the following. I wonder if the lack of comfort I'm hearing around this literal and metaphorical table

about black excellence is because there's somehow a view out there that it's so rare we have to put a label on it. Do you feel that from time to time? Not at this stage. When I think of black excellence, I think about who is it for? And oftentimes it's really an aspirational notion that is put out there. And it does recognize that it's challenging. It's challenging to exist in society, to be a woman, to be a black woman, to be a black

boy, a black man, because there are impressions that are put upon us that may not reflect the reality of who we are. Put upon you by whom? Society. Everybody else. There are biases. I mean, many of them are well documented.

Just look at policing. You know, it was recognized and reported. Anytime you look at disaggregated data of any kind, health, education, employment, whatever statistic, prison records, anything, you recognize that there are biases in the society that are disproportionately affecting people. And so the notion of black excellence is a counter to that. And I think of young people and making sure that they feel that they can live in existence in society and to live up to their full potential and to exist without barrier. Does part, Tracy, does part of your unhappiness or taking offense at this term relate to the thing

I just mentioned in that there's this sense that black excellence is not commonplace enough in our society and therefore we have to call it something and name it so that one can take pride? I think from our perspective I understand where the notion came from. We are not recognized in the wider society. And our achievements aren't recognized. And our inventors and our scientists and our doctors and our history and our legacies aren't recognized. So I understand where the notion of black excellence came from.

And I'm sure it came from inside our community. Am I right? So if it comes from inside of our community, it is something that was supposed to be aspirational, as both of you have mentioned, and something that's supposed to make us feel a sense of pride. You need the self-esteem, you need the pride

in order for us to be able to go forward in life. But I think what it's become now is it's become something that feels almost like it is from the white gaze looking at us. And if that is the situation, then we need out. Save it. We need out. What I'm saying is we need to come up with our own notions

of what we feel are success, and they are not necessarily going to be Serena Williams and Simone Biles. I should be able to get through life and achieve whatever I want to achieve or not much at all and still be respected as an individual and not be harassed in the streets and be able to stand in the mall and maybe not spend any money without being chased out by a security guard. Like we have to be able to move through life like other people can move through life. Well, that relates to excellence versus exceptionalism.

Exactly. And that's what I was going to say. The reality is black people are excellent. Take any field, right? You can see excellence in any field, any age, right? That's not the problem. Really, black excellence for me is like a code for black exceptionalism. So they take the exception and now they want to hold that person and say,

this is the standard that now we're going to sort of measure every black person up against. Or conversely, they say, it's because you're so exceptional why you got here. So you're like a different black person. Right? Like, how did you do this as a black person? You're so exceptional. And it's like, well, I went to public school. I had black parents and black friends. I did the same things that everyone else did,

just like my white colleagues who are exceptional. So this is where it gets into that tricky difference between excellence and exceptionalism. I want to be excellent. I don't want to be exceptional. I don't want to be exceptional. I don't want to be this outlier. And I feel sometimes, especially in academia, the black person who wins awards and is always,

their name is everywhere, they become this unicorn.