One nation under Ignatieff
The Liberal interim leader has enough magnetism to fix Canadian politics
Published on January 08 2009
Thanks to that YouTube video, “Yes we can!” has become an immensely popular phrase, even a slogan for Obama’s campaign. The catchphrase united Americans from radically different demographics, opinions, and viewpoints towards a single goal.
If only the Liberal Party had the same electricity. That Liberals, and left-leaning Canadians as a whole, are divided is an understatement. Over the years we’ve witnessed incapable leaders, backroom deals, in-fighting, plenty of bickering, and a general dissatisfaction.
Harper’s Conservative party, an amalgam of substantial right-wing groups, has capitalized on this division. Having created a false sense of solidarity, the Tories are raising dough and hammering into Liberal and NDP territory. Although the majority of Canadians disapprove of Harper, his opponents have become increasingly apathetic.
The left is fractured. But it isn’t broken.
On December 10 2008, Michael Ignatieff was formally declared interim leader of the Liberal Party, after Dominic LeBlanc and Bob Rae pulled out of the race. Although Ignatieff’s leadership will not be ratified until the May convention, it matters. The Liberals had scrambled to find a party head to replace Dion and lead the country in case the proposed coalition took over parliament.
Although some are upset that Ignatieff was not voted into his position, Iggy might be the only one to save the Liberal Party, the Left, and even Canada.
Harper is definitely unwanted. He has done little for our troubled environment, called elections despite laws and public opinion, mismanaged our economy, and created a dictator-style communication structure. Harper has led us to voter apathy, increased economic risks, less freedom of information, and a crippling environmental crisis.
Ignatieff “gets” Canadians. Unlike Harper, Ignatieff supports freeing Omar Khadr and giving American soldiers fleeing Iraq refugee status. He opposes ballistic-missile defence and advocates for better immigration policies and gender equality. And unlike Dion, he communicates well in both languages.
Ignatieff is who we need to bring environmental concerns back to the forefront of public policy before it’s too late. The Liberals are the right party to manage the economy. Many economists believe, in spite of the financial crisis, that Conservative spending will be the main cause of federal deficits.
Some have criticized Ignatieff for living abroad for over 30 years. But one can just as easily say he gained insight by experiencing other forms of government. Not only is he knowledgeable, he is free from the corruption that infects so many politicians as time passes.
At present, the Liberal Party is broke, divided, and bickering. If Ignatieff can find a way to unite his party, managing Canada should be a breeze. The upcoming months will prove just how willing his party is to come together for a common goal. Clashes between Rae and Ignatieff supporters escalated in recent weeks, just as Obama and Clinton camps waged war for months. This conflict has haunted the image of the party and affected their support. If they can heal this division, the Liberals may face the same victory as the Democrats.
Although no one will be able to match the excitement and emotional impact of Obama’s victory for decades, Ignatieff is a similar force. Both are intelligent, excellent speakers, with the ability to motivate others. Both have a fresh vision to share with their nations. And both would work together to figure out environmental solutions and reexamine trade agreements rather than bargain for Alberta’s tar sands like Harper.
In September 2007, Liberals were disappointed when the party won only one of three by-elections. Amid much finger pointing, Ignatieff urged his party, “united we win, divided we lose.” He is the leader who can unite the divided. But can we, after so much toil and frustration, come together as one? “Yes we can.”
Comments