The Freedom Convoy numbers may be small but politically, this writer postulates that their impact may affect Canada's future politics.

"Some of the key organizers of the Freedom Convoy are connected to the Wexit movement- aka, Maverick Party (https://www.wexitmovement.com/). Western separatism and vaccines wouldn’t seem to have anything to do with each other, but have nevertheless become entangled."

"How many people seriously think there’s any non-arbitrary rationale behind keeping restaurants open in airports but closed everywhere else? And how many small business owners will see these kinds of rules and not be rightfully enraged? How many people have found themselves wondering about the absurdity of having to wear a mask in a restaurant when you’re going to the washroom, but not when you’re sitting down?"

OPINION

Ben Woodfinden: The long-term effects of COVID have nothing to do with health

As governments and public health officials increasingly start talking about “learning to live with COVID,” part of what we’re going to have to figure out is how to live with, and respond to, the way COVID is going to change our politics.

It’s possible that a year from now, we’ll basically be back to normal, having put the last two years behind us. But watching the passions and intensity that have been ignited by the pandemic, and more specifically the response to it, it’s hard to believe that this won’t be impacting our politics in unpredictable ways for years to come.

In the run-up to the trucker convoy’s arrival in Ottawa, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau declared that, “The small fringe minority of people who are on their way to Ottawa, who are holding unacceptable views that they are expressing, do not represent the views of Canadians.”

If these “unacceptable views” are outright anti-vax, then he’s right about it being a fringe minority, as over 80 per cent of eligible Canadians are vaccinated. But if these “unacceptable views” are opposition to things like vaccine mandates, passports and other COVID-related restrictions, that’s a different story.

Significant majorities still support restrictions — a recent poll found that 71 per cent of Canadians believe “we need to slow the spread of Omicron to prevent hospitals from being overwhelmed” — but opposition to them is not a fringe issue anymore. The longer restrictions remain in place, the more this is likely to grow.

However, polling only tells part of the story. The “small fringe minority” that Trudeau has fixed his fire upon may be relatively small, but they are an intense group of people, and it’s unlikely that this intensity just disappears. The political alienation and dislocation these people feel, and the political organization that has begun to take shape around them, is likely here to stay.

If you’re truly convinced that Canada is no longer a free country and that it has imposed medical segregation and forced people to take experimental vaccines, chances are that you aren’t just going to forget this once things get back to normal (assuming they do).

Winning elections isn’t the only way to influence politics. Smaller parties, and movements, can punch above their weight, whether by putting new or neglected issues onto the agenda, or forcing larger political parties to shift and absorb parts of their agenda. This doesn’t mean we’re going to see a major political party become anti-vax, but politics works in strange and unpredictable ways.

If you’d told someone a decade ago that it would be right-wingers, not left-wing soccer moms and academics, who would be warning about the dangers of Big Pharma in 2022, that person would probably have thought you were crazy.

Similarly, some of the key organizers of the Freedom Convoy are connected to the Wexit movement. Western separatism and vaccines wouldn’t seem to have anything to do with each other, but have nevertheless become entangled. Fringe ideas and movements can often migrate or mutate in ways we don’t expect.

But the real long-term effect COVID has on our politics might be a bit more subtle, and even harder to predict. Polling might consistently show support for COVID restrictions, but it gives us a good lesson in the limits of polling.

Broadly speaking, people might support restrictions, but that doesn’t mean they actually follow the rules. Most of us will know of examples of this. We have certainly seen politicians who fit this description, preaching one thing and doing something else. This may well breed broader feelings of cynicism and distrust that manifest politically down the road. People might generally follow the rules when they need to, but arbitrary and silly restrictions, of which we have many, contribute to this low level of cynicism.

How many people seriously think there’s any non-arbitrary rationale behind keeping restaurants open in airports but closed everywhere else? And how many small business owners will see these kinds of rules and not be rightfully enraged? How many people have found themselves wondering about the absurdity of having to wear a mask in a restaurant when you’re going to the washroom, but not when you’re sitting down?

And then there’s the random assortment of traumatic things people have had to endure that will stay with them. Some people weren’t able to be with their loved ones in their final moments. Kids have lost out on their education and we have no idea what the long-term effects on their social development might be.

We have a portion of the population that seems like they are never again going to be able to leave their houses without being terrified that everyone around them could be carrying a virus that will kill them. And we have a whole generation that has effectively been priced out of the housing market in major cities.

Hopefully this column looks stupid a year from now. Hopefully we enter a new roaring ’20s, put the pandemic behind us and get on with our lives. But don’t count on it. Chances are we’ll still be feeling the effects of the pandemic for many years to come, and in ways none of us will see coming.

Photos courtesy of Unsplash

Ben Woodfinden is a doctoral candidate and political and constitutional theorist at McGill University.

— National Post