The popular anti-populism of a radical moderate
Fringe Quebec MNA Amir Khadir, who once threw a shoe at photo of George W. Bush, insists that dissent must not be criminalized
Les Perreaux
Montreal — From Wednesday's Globe and Mail
Every few months, it seems, Amir Khadir gets into trouble. At least by the standards applied to conventional politicians.
In December, 2008 – the very month he won a surprise victory to become the member of the National Assembly for Montreal’s Mercier riding – he threw a shoe at a photograph of George W. Bush to protest war. He’s donated money to a fringe sovereigntist group, and most recently he posted $5,000 in bail in Toronto for activist-provocateur Jaggi Singh, who was jailed at G20 protests.
Each act has provoked plenty of critics who say he doesn’t take his responsibilities as an elected representative with sufficient gravitas. Yet Mr. Khadir, a member of the fringe Québec solidaire party, is one of Quebec’s most popular politicians and has become a go-to MNA for cogent criticism of Jean Charest’s Liberal government.
Born in Iran in 1961, Mr. Khadir migrated to Canada with his family 10 years later. The entire family protested the regimes of the Shah and then Ayatollah Khomeini. Mr. Khadir became a fixture in Quebec’s left-wing activist clique while becoming a physician, leading some to call him a champagne socialist. (It’s a label that could apply to much of the gentrified Plateau Mont-Royal neighbourhood of Montreal, where he lives.)
Staunchly pro-Palestinian and anti-capitalist, Mr. Khadir runs counter to Quebec consensus on a few fronts. He has stood against asbestos mining and the seal hunt, and has called for an end to mining subsidies in the regions – all issues rarely questioned within the province.
How does a radical agitator like you end up being the most popular member of the most establishment of Quebec institutions? One pundit even pronounced you “rookie legislator of the year.”
Well, it was actually quite easy. There is a very cynical political culture that has been entrenched for a long time, and it’s most pure incarnation can be found in the Harper government. It’s a culture that incorporates and demands low blows, lies as modus operandi and offers mealy-mouthed evasion when one wants to avoid the lie. Just by avoiding that trap, by giving myself the freedom to speak, which most people don’t have, by acting out of a little good faith and sincerity, I look like something unusual. It seems to me it should be the norm.
But when Montreal Gazette calls you one of “24 Quebeckers we love,” don’t you risk losing your cred among your activist pals?
One of my friends told me: “Amir. Beware. If the establishment and mainstream media start singing your praises, you’d better take a good look in the mirror.” He was joking, but it’s true I don’t talk like the hard-line leftists who are always complaining and assuming our adversaries are full of bad intentions. I recognize there are a lot of people in the political machinery who wish things worked differently. There are a few people in politics, who I won’t name, who operate in bad faith, and they know it. But I understand someone like Jean Charest has to consider a complicated equation of loyalties and allegiances before he can act. On calling an inquiry into corruption, for example. There’s another solution, of course. If it was me, I’d resign. But it’s not always simple. You can have radical goals and be moderate in your tactics.
Not everyone considers throwing a shoe at an effigy of George W. Bush or bailing Jaggi Singh out of jail to be the moves of a moderate.
Dissidence must not be criminalized. People who call the entire system into question also deserve protection from the heavy hand of authority, even if I disagree with their tactics or some of their aims. Listen, I’ve never been an anarchist. But 25 years ago, we were encouraging such dissidence against the Soviet Union. My entire family has always fought for democracy in Iran the same way. We shouldn’t be hypocrites. You notice Jaggi Singh almost always wins in court? That’s because the rule of law in a democracy finally prevails after political powers and the police illegally crack down on people like him.
Do you miss medicine?
Actually, I still practise in a clinic half a day every two weeks, and for a few weeks in the summer. I keep my hand in it because I’m afraid that if I lose it, I’ll be too vulnerable to compromise. We’re human, a person has to make a living. I’m married, I have three children, I have commitments. If I become too dependent on politics, I’ll have much less freedom.
Have you drawn any new lines in the way you act since becoming a politician?
When I used to take road trips and I needed to take a leak, I would stop and piss in a farmer’s field. I can’t do that any more. If the police arrest me for peeing in public, well … you do lose a certain liberty. I don’t run red lights on my bicycle any more. At least, not very often. I know people are watching me. I’m also a better driver. Somebody wrote me a letter for telling me I was obstructing him on the freeway for driving too slow! He said, “Now we see the true nature of the politician.” I couldn’t get over it. Politically, I’m determined to stay true to what I believe. I’ll listen to my [teenage] daughters when they think a certain protest might turn out badly. But it doesn’t happen very often.
This interview was edited and condensed.
