‘Since I first wrote about this new level of occupational hazard for Policy last June, the threats have multiplied,’ writes NDP MP Charlie Angus.

‘Engaging with the public is a fundamental part of being a democratic representative,” writes Charlie Angus/Raul Rincon

 

By Charlie Angus 

November 3, 2022

The recent, brutal attack on Nancy Pelosi’s husband, Paul, in their San Francisco home has touched off a serious public debate in the United States as to whether political violence will upend the democratic process. The man who broke into the Pelosi home was deep into online conspiracy theories and made the move into real-time violence with his plan to kidnap and torture the Democratic Speaker of the House of Representatives. On the eve of midterm elections that US law enforcement agencies have warned could be a target for violent, overwhelmingly right-wing conspiracy theorists, Joe Biden has warned that Americans can no longer take the survival of democracy for granted.

Last year alone, Capitol Police logged 9,625 threats against members of Congress. This is not simply an American problem. Political threats are becoming as Canadian as a red and white flag hanging upside down from the back of a pick-up truck. The man who broke into the Pelosi home was a Canadian.

Thankfully, Canada isn’t facing anywhere near the same level of polarization as the United States, but threats and intimidation are becoming embedded in our political landscape. The potential that someone in public life will be hurt is very real. But even if the proliferation of threats remains simply part of the toxic cloud of online life, it is having a corrosive impact on democratic engagement

Over the past two years, my staff have become old hands at logging death threats and giving statements to police. This is something that neither I, nor they, ever signed up for. Until recently, in my 19 years of political life, I have only felt the need to call police on one or two occasions. Those cases were about trying to contain aggressive constituents who had been denied compensation or EI and were facing serious mental or financial stress.

Threats based on toxic propaganda and ludicrous conspiracy theories are of a whole different nature.

In the first wave of the pandemic, I became the focus of a serial stalker spouting QAnon-style threats. I found myself calling police on an almost daily basis. My family and staff had to provide witness statements. I attended two days of court hearings. For a time, it was an absolute nightmare.

As I write this, I am preparing for another court date with a man from my riding who has been calling in a number of threats. When the police issued a restraining order, he called to say he was ready to use ‘extreme deadly force’ if the police called him again.

When I first engaged parliamentary security and regional police about the stalker, they told me there was not much to be done unless he made a physical attack. As things escalated, the police and Crown Attorney began to rethink the form of menace they were seeing as this was considered a direct attempt to obstruct my parliamentary work with constituents. In the end he was charged and convicted of the rarely used charge criminal libel. We agreed to a two year restraining order. The judge said that based on the evidence he would have preferred a stronger sentence.

We log many harassing calls and only refer to police if they show a pattern of escalation or direct threat. Local police have stepped up on dealing with one local threat. However, it seems much harder to get a coordinated response to threats that come from other regions or through anonymous forums.

Since I first wrote about this new level of occupational hazard for Policy last June in a piece headlined Being an MP in the Age of Conspiracy, Theoretical and Not, the threats have multiplied. This year alone, I have logged seven separate death threats, some by phone, some online. There were two phone threats against my wife and daughters. As I write this, I am preparing for another court date with a man from my riding who has been calling in a number of threats. When the police issued a restraining order, he called to say he was ready to use “extreme deadly force” if the police called him again. Here is just a small audio sample of some of the recent threats received by phone against me and my staff. The one characteristic they share is an apparent aim to intimidate through gratuitous, irrational, menacing hatred.

My situation is far from unique. An article in the Ottawa Hill Times makes a blunt and convincing argument that “death threats are becoming routine for politicians”. And the kind of threats I get as an older white male politician are nothing compared to the abuse, menace and hate faced by young women politicians or any public figure from a racialized background.

This is not simply a problem for politicians. The other day, I spoke to a woman who is a by-law enforcement officer in a small town who has been targeted on a local Facebook page where people gather to complain about local issues. She has received death threats and had her car vandalized twice.

At a time of growing alienation and mistrust of the political system, it isn’t healthy to let an even bigger gulf develop between the public and their elected representatives.

You can shrug off threats. You can carry on. After all, what is the chance that some angry troll is actually going to carry through with the threat? But at a certain point it starts to take a toll. I know some very good and dedicated public officials who are weighing the decision of whether it is worth putting themselves or their family at risk by serving in public office. At a time when we need to be encouraging young, racialized and women candidates to broaden the voices of democracy, the threats and harassment are working to drive them away.

The other insidious element is that it is making candidates second guess themselves when engaging with the public. I have a thick skin but I’m much less willing now to take certain calls or deal with troublesome constituents than I used to be. Engaging with the public, especially when they are angry or frustrated, is a fundamental part of being a democratic representative. At a time of growing alienation and mistrust of the political system, it isn’t healthy to let an even bigger gulf develop between the public and their elected representatives.

So, what can be done?

It is absolutely essential that threats are taken seriously and investigated. Over the last year, Parliamentary security has picked up their game and, in my experience, local police have also stepped up vigilance. This is a good first step.

But addressing the corrosive nature of violent rhetoric is going to require a much more engaged response from politicians, activists and online commentators. Canadians must recognize that we are not immune to the toxicity that is undermining democracy south of the border. Politicians of all parties need to do a better job at reminding people that we can disagree with one another while still accepting that those on the other side of the political divide also share a belief in a better Canada.

Dial back the rhetoric and learn to listen more. Democracy is a fragile thing, and it is well worth protecting.

Charlie Angus has been the NDP Member of Parliament for Timmins-James Bay since 2004. He is also frontman for the Grievous Angels, and a regular Policy contributor. His latest book is Cobalt: Cradle of the Demon Metals, Birth of a Mining Superpower.