SLOBINSKY: We can disagree without making comparisons to the Nazis

On April 23, Independent MLA Tara Armstrong compared the K’ómoks Treaty Act to “Blood and Soil theory.”

The phrase “Blood and Soil” was used by the Nazis to evoke the idea of a pure 'Aryan' race and to justify the seizure of territory.

Reconciliation is complex, especially as our province wrestles with the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act. However, comparing well-intentioned efforts to rectify historical injustices against Indigenous peoples in Canada with a malicious ideology that resulted in the Holocaust clearly crossed a line.

Thankfully, many agreed with me: Several MLAs raised concerns, and ultimately, Speaker Raj Chouhan requested that MLA Armstrong retract her remarks.

According to a study from the Azrieli Foundations and Claims Conference, almost 80% of Canadians do not believe “people should be allowed to use Nazi slogans or symbols.” Yet, MLA Armstrong’s comments are part of a concerning trend in our political discourse.

During the COVID-19 pandemic, I published an op-ed asking the public to refrain from comparing vaccine passports to the yellow stars used by the Nazi regime to “segregate, humiliate, and mark Jews for murder.”

Whether you agreed with public health decisions, equating measures intended to save lives with policies designed to dehumanize entire groups of people is not only inappropriate but also diminishes the historical reality of what those symbols represent. 

Free speech is a fundamental Canadian right, but we all share a responsibility to keep public discourse grounded, civil, and historically informed. We can disagree without being disagreeable.

More importantly, we cannot afford to dishonour the memories of the victims of the Nazi regime and the lived experiences of its survivors.

With each passing year, fewer survivors can provide firsthand accounts of the atrocities that took place more than 80 years ago.

A decade ago, I would be accompanied by a crowd of Holocaust survivors at the BC Legislature to commemorate Yom HaShoah (Holocaust Remembrance Day). This past April, only three were able to join me.

At the same time, Canada’s Jewish community is under attack: Nearly two-thirds (62%) of our community reported experiencing at least one antisemitic incident in a Jewish Federation of Greater Vancouver survey.

Many of these victims were Holocaust survivors forced to relive the trauma of the past.

Frivolously invoking the words used to dehumanize them more than eight decades ago cheapens their impact, erodes our collective understanding of history, and numbs the public to the very real antisemitism our community faces today.

This is why our community has striven to preserve the memory of the victims and survivors of the Nazi regime, including by advocating with the B.C. government to make Holocaust education mandatory in the K-12 curriculum.

Measures like these help future generations understand the weight of terms used by the Nazis to justify the murder of 6 million Jews and other minorities. However, the current generation of elected leaders also plays a role.

Much has been said about the tone of debate at the BC Legislature, where the intensity of exchanges often surprises the public. 

Our parliamentary traditions are built on the use of words rather than violence to balance the interests of vastly different communities that call our province home.

Those words may be passionate or hyperbolic, but they often represent the voices of those who may feel left behind despite the best efforts of our elected leaders.

But this past week’s events are a reminder that words have power. What is said in the heat of debate can have real-world consequences.

Our community knows all too well how slogans and rhetoric can lead to exclusion, dehumanization, and, ultimately, violence. As society grapples with increasing division, our leaders must model debate that brings us together.

Nico Slobinsky is the Vice President – Pacific Region for the Centre for Israel and Jewish Affairs.