Matt Gurney: Calling out Carney’s ‘fancy’ education is loser talk. No wonder the Conservatives doubled down on it
https://www.thestar.com/opinion/contributors/calling-out-carneys-fancy-education-is-loser-talk-no-wonder-the-conservatives-doubled-down-on-it/article_db1eb4e6-3e14-4de9-840e-a7692b7279ab.html
18 Comments
Super rich how the guy who said bitcoin was a way to “opt out” of inflation said a guy with an Oxford Economics phd was “badly educated” and wrong about all economic topics.
[removed]
It’s really rather amusing how much restraint Carney has had in not responding to Poilievre at all. I think it’s good for Carney’s image (and for the country) that he resists the urge to dunk on poor ol’ Pierre, but it must be tough because he’s certainly throwing up alley-oop after alley-oop for him.
It’s beyond farcical that Poilievre of all people could claim Carney is “poorly educated” in economics. Maybe next Poilievre should say that Carney has no life experience outside being an MP.
It’s clear that their anti-intellectual strategy is now mask-off. They know their supporters are often uneducated and resent educated people and technocracy so it’s exactly the sort of thing their base wants to hear. Unfortunately most people would disagree with this take which Poilievre should know by now, so it’s obvious he is disinterested in expanding the tent at this point, possibly because he needs to shore up support among the base to keep his hold on power.
The era of anti-intellectualism has arrived. People used to recognize that spending years and years on a subject tends to make you understand it better than some rando watching a Tiktok reel, but here we are.
I was just watching a discussion in another sub where a couple of posters are making fun of university-educated people because they make really good money in the trades. Apparently the only barometer of success is how big your paycheck is.
I don’t know why it’s so hard to come up with something like “Mr. Carney is intelligent and well educated in neo-liberal economics. But his education and expertise are largely grounded in the old world order that simply isn’t working anymore. He’s rightly pointed this out for geopolitics, but seems unable to realize the same applies to the economy.”
I don’t even agree with what I just wrote, but it’s a hell of a lot more productive than trashing education.
In that interview, PP said the NZAB was Mark Carneys and was bankrupt; it was created in 2021 and is still alive and well today. He then said money printing, I’d love to see the money printing data. Then he said he supports carbon taxes, but Carney’s government has cut the carbon taxes more than once, and carbon credits are saving green tech consumers money every day. And fourth he said Carney opposed a pipeline to BC’s coast, but he signed an MOU with Marlaina Smith in support of such a pipeline.
Am I missing something, guys?
So does Avi Lewis get a pass from liberals now or his he still considered too much of an urban academic elite for public tastes? Somehow that never gets framed as anti-intellectualism.
This talk has always been nonsense. Politics certainly skews more educated than the general population but the solution is to provide more education to the general population. It has really nothing to do with whatever level the individual leader reached and much more to do with who gets to be in the coalition.
The Conservatives showed they were anti intellectual back under Harper when they were muzzling scientists and trashing the fisheries and agriculture libraries. Literally throwing centuries of records into dumpsters as a “cost saving” measure. I’ve never been more disgusted at politicians than I was at that point. I can’t see myself ever voting for the CPC party after that.
I always found talking about someone’s education once they’re deep into their career weird anyway. I got my MA when I was 24. I didn’t know shit. Now, after having worked for 20 years, basically everything from my MA is a distant memory. Was it a good foundation? Yes. Does it matter much now? Not really.
Anyone who is worth their salt is contently learning and adapting. Talking about a degree (or degrees) people got 40 years ago is worthless, petty, and imo makes you sound like a country rube.
The CPC is not a serious party under PP. The opposition has a very important job in parliament and that is holding the government to account. The CPC doesn’t seem to understand the difference between “holding the government to account” and “undermining the government”. The former benefits all Canadians and the latter only benefits the CPC.
Broadly, I support the Carney Liberals at the moment but no government should be able to act with impunity. That includes co-operation across party lines, not just constantly poking holes in the boat. This game the CPC keeps playing does a disservice to everyone.
“Experts” have taken some well deserved credibility damage in recent years, not that I’m a fan of the anti-intellectualism that is sometimes on display, but it’s not hard to find well credentialed individuals spouting nonsense and I’m probably as annoyed by an insistence on credentials over substance. Alan Dershowitz was recently in the news for instance. Similarly, I don’t know people are feeling about the American supreme court but every individual on it is an extremely educated lawyer with prestigious degrees and experience.
Carney’s supporters often point to his background and experience as positives so I’m not surprised it’s a point of contention. Now I think a better line of attack would be pushing back on how that experience actually translates to anything meaningful, a tough position to for Conservatives to be credible on I know, but the world of economics is nebulous enough for nuance. The whole gas tax situation has attracted plenty of criticism from an [economic lens](https://www.thestar.com/opinion/contributors/mark-carney-has-promised-a-gas-tax-cut-theres-a-better-solution-to-our-energy-cost-woes/article_bac865d0-420e-453c-98f8-baaa61e2caa5.html).
Anywho, I admire the author’s restraint in not using the words “slammed”, “dunked” or other such phrases but that’s all this piece really is at the end of the day.
My wife went bananas when Poilievre sniped that on TV the other day, and she’s extremely conservative. His credentials are about as iron clad as humanly possible.
A lot of these people (both sitting CPC MPs, CPC voters and aligned commentators) were the same ones citing Harper’s economics degree when he was Prime Minister while also ignoring that Harper had asked Carney to run for the Conservatives in 2011 so he could be Minister of Finance etc. (both due to his track record in the job and overwhelming qualifications etc.) Floor crossings were also something they cheered on when Liberal MPs were crossing the floor to Harper (and also Scheer in 2017), but now suddenly it’s anti-democratic etc.
Consistency has never mattered to these types. The only thing they truly value is “owning the Libs” and winning the culture war. Literally everything outside of that is secondary.
I get a good giggle when someone who was stupid enough to say “nazis were socialist, it’s in the name” judges anyone else’s education.
Dude really is a one note wonder. It’s like he thinks he’s still campaigning against Trudeau using most of the same talking points against Carney
May not be a popular opinion, but I want my politicians – especially the PM to have a “fancy” education. Not a job for a high-school drop out.
I really do think they’re more afraid of a PPC resurgence than they are of the Liberals. They’re doubling down on the voters they don’t need to win…because if they don’t, they bleed support in all directions and collapse entirely.
Also, does this not mean, by their logic, that the 2008-2010 financial recovery THEY facilitated was ill-informed?