Confessions of an Election Hawk and Red Tory
I'll confess it. I'll admit it and put it on my sleeve. I was one of the election hawks in March. I did not get the government I voted for, nor the representative, but I got the men and women I deserve. A right wing neoconservative majority that effectively and efficiently turned down the volume on policy debate and our core values as Canadians by ducking and dodging anything that resembled taking a principled stand.As a self described Red Tory the defeat of the Liberal Party looked a lot like my former party of choice, the Progressive Conservatives. A party that was declared "irrelevant" by the media and thereafter accepted as such with no shred of criticism or reflection by the Canadian public. What came of that was a radical Reform party and even crazier Canadian Alliance. A take over and an election later the Canadian public nodded along with their conservative overlords as each time they were asked to select a parliament returned greater gains for the "centrist" Harper.
Two nights ago Jack dodged the ultimate bullet that could destroy the luster and attractiveness of the NDP -- the chance to govern a minority parliament and the inevitable loss of confidence which would stamp the party with a big #Fail. But, thank God, Jack does not have to fail at doing his job of incessantly opposing without actually being able to propose and execute his platform.
In his victory speech Jack talked a lot about protecting pensions. Protecting health care. Protecting Canadian families and jobs. He said nothing about merging. He said nothing about cooperation with the LPC. He said he would "propose" to the CPC rather than "oppose" anything and everything. Well, that's convenient seeing as how he has no choice but to accept the will of Stephen Harper which he is perfectly comfortable with as it keeps the mystery of what an NDP government would look like alive for another election.
I'm only hearing rumblings of an NDP-LPC merger from Liberals. No New Democrat has even contemplated such an act. After all, they are now the govenrment-in-waiting. And I suspect the possibility of said merger would only become viable if in 2015 the Conservatives are given another majority mandate: extending their streak in power to a sickeningly long 13 years. Moreover, even if the NDP did muse about a merger during this parliamentary session in preparation for the 42nd CDN Election, why should the LPC do it? What is to gain?
I know what real Canadian conservatives -- the Red Tories -- thought and hoped for when the Canadian Alliance aggressively over took the party. Big promises of a Red Tory Council! Big leadership hopefuls and party leaders like Belinda Stronach, Tony Clement, Jim Prentice and Peter MacKay. Where are they now? Under Harper, there is no Deputy PM. Sorry Peter. Under Harper there is no progressive policy on the environment or social issues. Sorry Belinda, sorry Jim. Under Harper politics trumps ideology and best practice. Sorry Tony.
And so it would be within a "merged" NDP-LPC. Only a Harper supermajority of Mulroney proportions would make things so bleak that both parties would look at each other and reconsider their options. Today, tomorrow, and the days after that; the attractiveness of a merger is 1-sided and only the weakest and most desperate Liberals will advocate for it. Only those who think that there is nothing left. If that is the case, join the NDP yourselves and get out of the way of change.
I took three calls last night from friends. Friends who said they were proud of the work that I did despite a devastating loss at the local and national level. Friends that told me that they were stunned with the election results and that they have never been ones for party politics, but they are close and extremely interested in joining the Liberal Party and being a part of a new beginning. These are the people who the party brass should welcome with open arms. We can embrace one another and be champions of our values; or we can get in line and knock on the door of Stornoway. I choose to fight for my values.
There will be no Liberal-Democrat party, it would be the Democratic party. And centrists would find themselves in deep conflict with the vast majority of a left-wing party. Out of fear centrists would be marginalized because to speak out against the "united" message would mean even greater weakness than if we had been on our own and one more defeat would be "unbearable" to "the country." I didn't buy that when the Alliance shoved a sock in the mouth of centrist PCs in late 2003 and early 2004 and I won't buy it now.
I'm not a party man. I'm a principled Canadian. And as such, I have been wandering the political landscape for most of my life. I am not against cooperation. I am not opposed to a coalition. I am not unwilling to compromise in a merger. But the conditions have to be right. And today they are not. We must stand up. We must dust ourselves off and get to work. I did it once before and as a result came this blog. I'll do it again and the result will be not words floating in cyberspace, but shoes on the ground.
Will you join me?
Two nights ago Jack dodged the ultimate bullet that could destroy the luster and attractiveness of the NDP -- the chance to govern a minority parliament and the inevitable loss of confidence which would stamp the party with a big #Fail. But, thank God, Jack does not have to fail at doing his job of incessantly opposing without actually being able to propose and execute his platform.
In his victory speech Jack talked a lot about protecting pensions. Protecting health care. Protecting Canadian families and jobs. He said nothing about merging. He said nothing about cooperation with the LPC. He said he would "propose" to the CPC rather than "oppose" anything and everything. Well, that's convenient seeing as how he has no choice but to accept the will of Stephen Harper which he is perfectly comfortable with as it keeps the mystery of what an NDP government would look like alive for another election.
I'm only hearing rumblings of an NDP-LPC merger from Liberals. No New Democrat has even contemplated such an act. After all, they are now the govenrment-in-waiting. And I suspect the possibility of said merger would only become viable if in 2015 the Conservatives are given another majority mandate: extending their streak in power to a sickeningly long 13 years. Moreover, even if the NDP did muse about a merger during this parliamentary session in preparation for the 42nd CDN Election, why should the LPC do it? What is to gain?
I know what real Canadian conservatives -- the Red Tories -- thought and hoped for when the Canadian Alliance aggressively over took the party. Big promises of a Red Tory Council! Big leadership hopefuls and party leaders like Belinda Stronach, Tony Clement, Jim Prentice and Peter MacKay. Where are they now? Under Harper, there is no Deputy PM. Sorry Peter. Under Harper there is no progressive policy on the environment or social issues. Sorry Belinda, sorry Jim. Under Harper politics trumps ideology and best practice. Sorry Tony.
And so it would be within a "merged" NDP-LPC. Only a Harper supermajority of Mulroney proportions would make things so bleak that both parties would look at each other and reconsider their options. Today, tomorrow, and the days after that; the attractiveness of a merger is 1-sided and only the weakest and most desperate Liberals will advocate for it. Only those who think that there is nothing left. If that is the case, join the NDP yourselves and get out of the way of change.
I took three calls last night from friends. Friends who said they were proud of the work that I did despite a devastating loss at the local and national level. Friends that told me that they were stunned with the election results and that they have never been ones for party politics, but they are close and extremely interested in joining the Liberal Party and being a part of a new beginning. These are the people who the party brass should welcome with open arms. We can embrace one another and be champions of our values; or we can get in line and knock on the door of Stornoway. I choose to fight for my values.
There will be no Liberal-Democrat party, it would be the Democratic party. And centrists would find themselves in deep conflict with the vast majority of a left-wing party. Out of fear centrists would be marginalized because to speak out against the "united" message would mean even greater weakness than if we had been on our own and one more defeat would be "unbearable" to "the country." I didn't buy that when the Alliance shoved a sock in the mouth of centrist PCs in late 2003 and early 2004 and I won't buy it now.
I'm not a party man. I'm a principled Canadian. And as such, I have been wandering the political landscape for most of my life. I am not against cooperation. I am not opposed to a coalition. I am not unwilling to compromise in a merger. But the conditions have to be right. And today they are not. We must stand up. We must dust ourselves off and get to work. I did it once before and as a result came this blog. I'll do it again and the result will be not words floating in cyberspace, but shoes on the ground.
Will you join me?
Labels: Canada, CPC, Jack Layton, LPC, LPC-NDP Coalition, Michael Ignatieff, NDP, PC/CA Merger, Red Toryism, Stephen Harper, Unite the Left
posted by Dylan at 5/04/2011
6 Comments:
It seems to me that the NDP would only agree to a merger on terms that were favourable to them -- they're the bigger party now, after all.
And the Liberals, whose current mantra is to campaign left but govern right, are never going to agree to be second fiddle in a merged party led by people who run even farther left but would probably govern centre. They're still clinging to their "natural governing party" heritage.
A merger is predicated either on the assumption that the NDP decide this is the best they'll ever do and undergo a series of major concessions to join the Liberals, or the Liberals abandon their own heritage and agree that they're now only a has-been. You know, like the REAL Conservative party did back in 2003 when they joined with Reform.
Now we have Reformers pretending to be Conservatives.
Bigger is an odd word to describe the NDP vis a vis the LPC.
Bigger in seats? Sure. Organization? Tradition? Moreover, how long will it last? Is this really a new era in the Canadian political landscape?
What was so fundamental about the PC collapse under Mulroney and then Campbell was that the Bloc and Reform were offshoots of it. Disenfranchised politicians, thinkers, party stalwarts and leaders of these different factions chose to go their own way. Voters, on the other hand, are far more fluid in their loyalties. Especially those in Quebec. If you need a case in point, think about the ADQ rise at the expense of the PQ in 2007 and their collapse and resurrection of separatism in 2008 after new leadership was elected in Marois.
Moreover, the media has done a great job at promoting the "natural governing party" line. The only people I hear talking about the Liberals being the "natural governing party" are Cons and Dippers and critics in the MSM. Thanks for doing your part in promoting this myth that is as "clung to" by the party as is "socialism" in the NDP. We looking at a political landscape that, for the most part, rejected the LPC because of Ignatieff. Not the REAL Ignatieff, but the one painted as an American; an opportunist; a turncoat -- started by the CPC and ended with the NDP. Policies from both he LPC and NDP on CPP, health care, EI, environment were not irreconcilable. In fact, they were pretty close and I think two Dippers and two Grits could compromise and put together a collaborative platform on these issues that all four could vote for. But the CPC wasn't keen on policy debate and the LPC didn't abandon that message until too late. The NDP did shortly after the debates and began to ride the popularity of their "happy Jack." Who know, you must admit, has no reason to NOT be happy since he doesn't have to actually change much of his strategy from when he was first elected leader in 2003.
Next election, should the results stay the same for the LPC, the calls for merging would be louder and the ideological concessions given up would more radical. Incidentally, this is Harper's grand strategy. And we would be playing into it.
But for now, Dippers will ignore that part of it all and gleefully strut on the Hill. At on time they would have spit venom against the FPTP system, now it is their best friend. At one time they would have decried Ottawa political elites who snub their noses at third parties. Now their heads (with noses attached) are firmly placed towards the sky.
"Poor, poor Liberals. Why won't you just crawl in a hole and die?" is the message I'm hearing from everyday Dippers. Well, I hope they count us out. Because the LPC didn't give the NDP a hope in hell and look where that got 'em.
There is more than a little truth to the lines about the LPC thinking it is "the natural governing party" and Ignatieff's "opportunism". The Liberals have totally misread the political climate these past 8-10 years. Every time the Conservatives made a gain, it was dismissed as an aberration. Of course the LPC would soon be restored to their rightful throne. How else can one explain the litany of quick-fixes adopted by the LPC? Here is the narrative of the LPC's last decade, as seen through one outsider's eye:
First, they supplant Chretien with his formerly loyal finance minister. But Adscam doesn't go away, and Martin is outed as Mr. Dithers. Solution? Kick Martin to the curb and hire the Professor. Add in a well-intentioned but poorly delivered Green Shift, we get a second Conservatiev minority. Solution? Ride the coalition wave back to the government benches. Surely the Canadian people would prefer US to those ignorant rednecks in the CPC? Oops, that didn't go over well. Better get rid of Dion. It was all his idea. And all the better, this gives us the perfect conditions to introduce the Messiah. By the divine right of kings, Iggy will reconquer the political landscape with his worldy charm and good looks. Doesn't have the slightest hint of political intuition? That's ok, we're the Liberals. A mystery to most of the Canadian electorate? That's ok, we're the Liberals. Whoever we appoint, the Canadians will accept. Wait, what just happened?
The problem with the Liberals is that they just didn't get it. They may not openly subscribe to the "natural governing party" line, but their actions certainly reflect it. Every setback has been met with a short-term solution. A new leader, or a rehased version of some old red book idea. There was no time to formulate longer term vision, because soon enough the LPC would be back in charge. When was the last time the LPC seriously considered it's raison-d'etre? What new thing can it offer? What purpose does the LPC have in the 21st Century? It's still living in the last one, still running on old achievements.
I, for one, would be happy to see a strong Liberal party, firmly rooted in its centrist values, operating in this country. But their not essential, and that's a fact that must first be absorbed and accepted. For the LPC to rise from the ashes, they must accept that they have been rejected, they must retreat in their humiliation to rediscover their purpose, and they must return a humble party, not one convinced of its inherent greatness.
"Liberals just didn't get it."
This is the line I have been battling with for the last week.
Did not get what?
IT.
Ok. It. It being, the fact that Canadians wanted 4 years without an election? So Canadians wanted a majority in 2008? Dion's resignation was perhaps premature? Well, maybe. But given the fact that he had no resonance with Anglophones, that might be something to consider. On coalitions, I thought Ignatieff was perfectly clear during the election. But that wasn't taken at face value. Constitutionally coalitions would be legitimate but on the ground, with the electorate, it is not.
It wouldn't be accepted in my workplace to doctor a budget document or inter-departmental budget request after the fact. And to most Canadians, this is not a good thing to do. However, it's not worth having an election over. So, let them be! It also wouldn't fly to withhold budgetary information from my colleagues and then expect them to pay the bill. I doubt most Canadians would accept that in their homes or workplaces either. But in parliament? Who cares. I suppose that was the "opportunism" you state? And you are right. The Liberals didn't "listen" to the people. They acted on the people's behalf on a subject: ethics; that they, along with the unblemished NDP, believed the people would understand. But the Attack Machine had done its job and discredited the LPC leader before he even brought the government down, putting him - and the party - firmly behind the 8 ball.
I won't shoulder all the blame on the CPC. Any party would incessantly attack their opponents and create an environment of perpetual electioneering in order to gain advantage with the electorate. Well, maybe not ANY party. But particular parties.
But most of all, the one thing that I cannot accept is that Ignatieff and the LPC did not "listen" to Canadians and therefore did not "get" it.
In Winnipeg I had 2 pre-writ chances to meet and speak with Michael Ignatieff in a town hall setting. No opportunity to ask Jack Layton or Stephen Harper any question I wanted or could think up. Only Michael Ignatieff and the LPC came to Winnipeg. He came another 3 times during the election, twice to do more town-halls and hear the concerns of ANYONE -- not just party members or insiders. Anyone off the street.
But that's what people apparently consider "vote buying" from a "nobody" who feels "entitled" to govern. Well, go figure.
Is the Liberal brand dead? Is that it? Is there nothing left for the party to contribute? Those questions you posed are extremely valid and ought to be taken seriously. The people have their precious stability. At last. And now we'll have four years to see what we can offer the electorate. As I said, after the 2015 vote, the LPC will be faced with a buoyed caucus or will need to seriously consider merger propositions (something the NDP has no interest in at the moment, but a second CPC majority and QC beat-down might push them off of their high horses). The GPC also has some very hard questions to ask themselves even though they finally have their seat.
If anyone, if you KDS, knows and can articulate what "it" was that the LPC and Ignatieff didn't get but what Jack and Harper apparently know like the back of their hands, please. It's time to let someone in the party know.
There's no more "short-term" today. It's long term planning. But the goal of long-term planning, or even election campaigning, isn't to come in 2nd or 3rd place. It is to win. Top spot. And if that isn't honourable then I don't know what the fuck to think. Jack ran to be PM, but is comfortable in 2nd. No 2015 LPC campaign will be "We're #3!" Or "Stornoway 2015!" That's not feeling entitled. That's being political. And you'll see guns blazing. And that will be the last test as to whether or not the damage is permanent.
What is the unique and positive purpose of the LPC vis-a-vis Canada?
Whatever it is, that's "it".
But looking at the last decade, I find it hard to determine the Liberal "it". I have a pretty good idea of what the CPC stands for, and a pretty good idea of what the NDP stands for. But I'm a bit cloudly on the LPC. At the rate they are switching messages and messengers, I'm not sure they know either.
The fact is Harper never believed in red toryism and said it was essentially watered-down conservatism. I think the merger was all about giving blue tories the main keys to the party and red tories are not given a voice at all. there needs to be a new party between the liberals and conservatives for business liberals and blue liberals, red tories or moderate conservatives and old progressive conservatives and there needs to be a place for the purple tories who believe in small government, some privatization while at the same time wanting to keep the social order. that is the direction a new party should offer. also a new party between the liberals and conservatives must try to win over the people i have listed but try to form policies on a strong law and order policy. therefore, the party must liberal conservative in nature to win over liberals and conservatives and make sure it governs at the centre to centre-right to gain the people in the spectrum who want strong economic policies, social progressive policies, and social conservative policies but not abolishing gay marriage or abortion and law and order policies that are truly balanced. if a party used these policies then i feel people would turn away. also in the most recent election atlantic canadians and quebeckers are not being given a voice since harper just wanted to win ontario and the west so they would not be given a major voice. i think we need a moderate conservative voice for those in eastern canada with no voice in this government.
This has to be a future or the Conservatives will dominate Canada forever so there needs to be a party of business liberals and red tories with a compassionate sense of government or the Conservatives will do what they please without any checks and balances.
Therefore a party replacing the old PC party is needed to bring balance to the system.
I would say the best way to make sure Canada goes down the road to centrism which has guided this country since confederation is to help form a party on the right side of centre like the old PC party. The current Conservative party is the Reform Party, the Canadian Alliance party and the blue tories of the old PC party but where is the home for the business liberals, the red tories, the purple tories and the conservatives who believe in the social order while at the same time wanting fiscal solutions to our problems. It can exist and it would unite these factions I listed and it would give a home for blue liberals, red tories and purple tories to unite the centre to centre-right and it would make sense to call it the Moderate Party of Canada.
Post a Comment
<< Home