LP_468x60
ontario news watch
on-the-record-468x60-white
and-another-thing-468x60

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, I think we can all agree, has a genius flair for the dramatic.

Whether he's inspiring us with his heartfelt declarations about loving Canada to his very "bones", or making us tear up with one of his weepy, public apologies for our country's past sins, Trudeau has always found a way to inject passion into his politics.

Yet strangely, all that "Justinian Passion" was noticeably absent when Trudeau recently suggested the conservative movement was threatening to upset Canada's social peace.

In case you missed it, here's what he said: "I think one of the things that we've seen in terms of what conservatives have been saying, is that they are playing not just here in Canada, but around the world, a very dangerous game around the politics of fear, the politics of division, of pitting Canadians against each other."

Now, let's put aside the obviously glaring irony of how Trudeau is basically saying we should fear conservatives because they are sowing the "politics of fear."

Also, let's not focus on Trudeau's rhetoric, which is pretty much standard political fare.

Indeed, terms like "playing a dangerous game" and "pitting Canadians against each other" and "politics of division" are all hack clichéd phrases, which can be found in any Political Handbook, under the heading "Standard Ways to Demonize Your Opponent."

What I'd like to focus on instead was Trudeau's delivery of those clichéd phrases, which was so flat and uninspired he might as well have been reading off his grocery list (although admittedly that might be sort of interesting, as his list would likely include things like "fat-free organic yogurt, kale supplement and the latest Yoga Weekly magazine").

At any rate, my point is, where was the usual Trudeau panache and flamboyance and over-the-top emotionalism?

I mean, if any Trudeau statement deserved a strong injection of emotion, this was it; after all, he was alerting us that millions of our fellow citizens (i.e. conservatives) were nefariously plotting to engulf the entire country into some sort of ideological civil war.

Wouldn't it have added drama to his message if Trudeau's voice was trembling with self-righteous anger or with moral outrage?  Wouldn't that have helped drive home his point about the danger of conservatism?  Wouldn't the CBC have played that up for all it was worth?

But instead, all we got from Trudeau was emotional blandness; he didn't even manage to shed a single tear.

So what's wrong?  Why didn't Trudeau employ his usual emotional tricks in this instance?

Well, the answer, I think, is pretty simple: Trudeau is just incapable of emoting negative feelings like anger or moral outrage because he's never personally experienced such primal emotions.

Yes, I know that might sound a tad unbelievable, but keep in mind Trudeau enjoyed a privileged upbringing.

So what did he ever have to get angry about?

Oh sure, maybe he experienced slight annoyance at the snobby attitude of a rude Maitre D', or perhaps he got miffed when a helicopter taking him to a posh resort in the Bahamas was a little late, but overall his life has probably been pretty much free of hostile emotional encounters.

Consequently, his personal dramatic range only goes from maudlin sorrowfulness to joyful happiness to unrelenting cheerfulness.

This probably explains why if Trudeau ever does need to shoot off an insult to an opponent, he outsources the dirty work to one of his cabinet ministers or to one of his friends in the media, or to his Principal Secretary Gerry Butts (who has seemingly taken on the role of Trudeau's official Twitter enforcer.)

Mind you, luckily for Trudeau, he's never really had to rile up negative emotions, since he could always rely on his overwhelming "adorableness" to win over voters and to awe the media.

But if this cuteness advantage is wearing off, and if he needs to turn into a brawler (and his comments about conservatives suggests he might at least be considering such a change) then he'll have to quickly learn the fine political art of whipping up public anger.

I suggest he contact Donald Trump for pointers.

The views, opinions and positions expressed by columnists and contributors are the author’s alone. They do not inherently or expressly reflect the views, opinions and/or positions of our publication.