Judgment & Strength: Do We Have It?

Most yes, but there is a worrying minority of cowed simperers without any judgment who need to be reminded of their pathetic record and have their heads set straight and their spines stiffened. Who are they? That misguided minority of anti-coalition Liberals who were wrong. They are the same suspects who imposed a Leader without a leadership race, with the known consequences. They are the same suspects that turned their backs on a golden opportunity to rid Canada of Harper's autocracy, contrary to the judgment of such canny folk as Chrétien, Rae, Kennedy, Dion & Reid, because they lived in a Toronto-centric fantasyland where the next majority/hefty minority was months away. They are the same ones who were so foolish as to support the Con budget and through their genius "on probation" strategy, give Cons multiple opportunities to blow their own horns, on Government dime. They are the same ones who claimed, all independent observers to the contrary, that Iggy was indeed vigourously campaigning through the Summer, that despite having approved the Con agenda in the budget, the LPC should indeed suddenly defeat the Govt in the Fall, a completely incoherent, unjustifiable and, when considered in the context of the long preceding period of dead air, almost unbelievably foolish. They are the same ones who have been reticent about the torture issue from the beginning ("it's icky! We don't wanna be accused of being anti-military!"), who try to diminish the significance of Harper's quite literally unprecedented refusal of Parliament's Order, who play down prorogation as an issue, and who really want nothing more than a quiet political life, with an election years from now, where we can win a mythical majority by being a whisker less conservative than the Cons, despite McGuinty's 1999 & every Liberal attempt at being Blue-Lite having failed, always & everywhere.

Since in each of the examples I've cited, I held the opposing view, and I've been proven right and they wrong, again and again, think back to just how much in the minority I was in the Liberal blogosphere. Why? Because to decently analyse situations, you have to have thought through (and felt through, to an extent) who you are, what you want, and how you can get there. Similarly, this is to remind everyone that winning political parties respect their principles, promote coherent policies & platforms based on those principles, and are willing to fight for their most cherished values.

Is there any more basic value than democracy? Until the Cons' recent actions, one could declare all parties the inheritors of different strands of the liberal revolution(s) and liberalism's (liberalisms'?) evolution(s?). But there is only one party in Canada that out and out identifies itself as Liberal. Should we not be the most resolute in our defence of parliamentary democracy? It is our liberal system, after all.

Exceptional times call for exceptional measures. It worries me when I hear of this aforementioned misguided minority within the LPC feeling squeamish about actual out and out passionate defence of democracy. When Coyne cited the Tennis Court Oath he was making an apt point about the kinds of actions that are required if one is serious about liberalism & democracy. But oh, no, it might seem like a stunt, we might be, horrors!, mocked!, after all this perogy business (tee-hee) is all a bit of a joke, isn't it, I mean, real, smart, cool Tranna Liberals know we have to play the long game, and wait for our majority to appear...and do we really want to band together with all these scruffy passionate pro-democrats - there's a very really chance that we might suffer the absolutely worst fate possible, LOOKING UNCOOL! Much better to go through the motions of defending democracy but not commit to it, rather quiet, civilised teas with old ladies and pre-approved "thinkers"expressing themselves in a staid "Thinkers Conference", that's the way to go. AArrgh! For Gods' sakes, just how many Tranna Liberals went to UCC?! That can be the only explanation for such a counterproductive attitude, more obsessed with reviews than results, spin over principles.

I know it's the view of a minuscule minority within the party, but as noted at the beginning, in the recent past this minority seems to have had a disproportionate and noxious influence over the LPC. And so it is necessary to nip their wrongheadedness in the bud. Hence I've reminded them, to start with, how wrong they've been, repeatedly, when they placed superficialities over fundamentals, not just because they betrayed liberal ideals, but in so doing, they actually achieved the opposite of their aims in political popularity.

Not only do I think Coyne was right, but I've suggested one process for making our democratic commitment clear, which I hoped might represent a happy medium between those fixated on appearance and those stern in their defence of the real, and the values that give our lives meaning. But mine is just one, there may well be better suggestions. It seemed to me that locked doors and the posting of protesting documents on them had a deep resonance in our culture, touching the depths of our subconscious. However, I could be wrong and there could be better ways. But one thing is for sure, it is not enough to just show up for, essentially, a televised caucus meeting, and then skidaddle. I was an early and passionate promoter of a national campaign using all means. But to do so effectively, one has to stop worrying about whether it's cool or not, and just follow one's idealism. It was this attitude that allowed us, the LPC, to make the Opposition strategy re. torture non-partisan and effective. By declaring from the start we would favour an inquiry that went back to 2002, hence including the Liberal Govt years, we demonstrated our good faith and this allowed us to be the most effective of all critics: we showed everyone we were willing to put ourselves on the line, something the NDP & Bloc couldn't claim, and demonstrated this was an issue beyond partisanship.

So it is with the Govt's refusal to obey Parliament's order and now to shut down Parliament. By remembering the principles we purport to hold dear, and showing how willing we are to fight for them, we make ourselves more credible, more effective, and more popular. Having made it abundantly clear we don't want an election, should one arise, we will have the strength of our apparent weakness: "we're behind in the polls, we have all these disadvantages the media have pointed out many times, and yet we still feel that this budget/Government is unworthy of confidence, given how fundamental the issues at stake. Believe us, we'd like nothing better than to avoid an election, you know we would, we're behind, and the plan was to play a patient long game, but these issues are so fundamental to our democracy, to our country, that we simply can't let things go and live with ourselves. If this party, the LIBERAL party, this democracy, this country, mean anything, then fight we must and fight we will. We freely admit the odds are against us, but given the stakes, a Liberal's gotta do what a liberal's gotta do. We can only do our best, for our party, democracy & country, and hope the electorate heeds us."

It is notable how the Liberal MPs who have been the most effective critics of the Govt and the most sure-footed in their instincts and reactions are those who are generally identified, rightly or wrongly, with the more reddish sympathies of the majority of the Liberal electorate & membership. Rae, Kennedy, Cotler & Dosanjh, in particular. It makes me reflect on Rae's explanation for his decision as a youth, to leave the LPC for the NDP, due to the LPC's perceived smugness & complacency. It may be that those who are used to fighting uphill battles for human rights & social justice, who are used to actual popular involvement, who are accustomed to the chaos of underfunded political-social street fights, have best developed the quick feet and sharp teeth needed to take on autocrats like Harper, and they wield their skills so effectively because they act out of genuine, rather than feigned or half-hearted, conviction. Many Liberals came of age politically during the Chrétien-Martin years and their views and character were shaped by the pleasures of power. They lack the sharp edge needed to take on a Harper. Those who came to the party from a more difficult political-social education have proven lucky in their earlier unlucky travails, which gave them the necessary abilities to face down autocrats. And I think one could sum up their wisdom by saying one should trust in one's best instincts, and one should appeal to the better angels of others' natures, while remaining prepared to respond to stubborn injustice with the fierceness of avenging angels.