Just became I happen to be slightly less enthralled of Layton doesn't mean I play the role of the stupid right-winger who ruins every thread about a dead left-wing politician with a snide stupid comment about how he was a socialist and how socialists are devils. I made it quite clear that I liked Layton personally and I was saddened and moved by his death. His funeral was beautiful and respectful. But just because I happened to be mildly cynical about a few things doesn't mean I need to be the evil boogeyman.
I can't deny that Layton represented something good, something different and something better for a lot of people. If I did I'd be denying reality and I'd also be denigrating a man who did a lot of good and who, rarely in politics, stood for something and wasn't a grubby selfish man out there only for himself and for power. That's so rare in politics, it's something which is refreshing to see whatever the ideological convictions of that man. I'm happy that he motivated cynics to participate in politics in the belief and hope (quixotic as far as I'm concerned) that politics could be different. I say that they're in for disappointment, but I'm happy that somebody out there managed to motivate them to get involved. Maybe if we all get involved, maybe if we all wake up someday and truly revolt - yes, revolt, not in the voting booths but in the streets, then maybe we'll change the world like Jack wanted. Again, the rogue page was right when she said that democracy and political participation cannot be limited to voting every four years. That's useless in the wide realm of things. If we want to change the world, we need to take it upon ourselves to go out there, wake up like nations have done in the past and change the world. People like Jack Layton are needed as they can inspire these people to do such things. But I fear it's all a distant hope.
Layton wasn't a cult leader. But I'm merely saying that those who saw in him some fabulous beacon of hope were misguided. They're like those who saw in Obama a visionary leader who could make things different. Like those who saw in Nick Clegg something different than the two old parties and a refreshing alternative. Like those who saw in Nicolas Sarkozy a new, different, younger way of doing politics and breaking with the corrupt, archaic senile politicians. Like those who saw in the Spanish Republic on April 14, 1931 a beacon of hope which would eliminate all the problems of the country and miraculously make it a wonderful place. I may be cynical, but sadly I'm realistic. I've seen way too much already, and studied way too many countries. I'm cynical, but it's all about power. Grubby realpolitik. All about national interest. All about the economic interests of the entrenched few and those with money. I may be wrong, hell, I hope and pray to Collor that I'm wrong, but the politicians don't run the show. Those who run the show from behind are the big businesses, those with money which gives them undue influence and power. They don't care if it's the left or right which wins the elections because they basically fund both. Why do you think Obama hasn't been the reformer he should have been. It's partly because of the power of those entrenched few. Why do you think that the great reforms of the Spanish Republic were never accomplished? Why do you think the changer la vie ideals of Mitterrand in 1981 turned to bust? Why do you think the DPJ has turned out to be an unmitigated failure in government? Why do you think that nothing has changed in the world financial system since the meltdown and why such a meltdown is prone to happen again in 15-20 years? Some of it stems from the incompetence of the leaders. A lot comes from the opposition and resistance of those with power who run the show. What I mean is that I may be cynical, but from my experience, I think I'm realistic. I can't be very hopeful of even the few best intentioned, honest and very willing politicians who really want to change stuff. They can't do it. I'm sorry to rain on the parades, be such a cynic and expose such a conspiracist-Marxist view on the world, but I'm a pessimistic realist. And that is why I feel the only way to change this sad order of things, this sad World Order, is for people to wake up and revolt - because if they do so, then yes, they can do stuff. People like Jack may not to me have been able to change the system themselves but they can be elements in my quixotic impossible dream of engaging people in politics and encouraging them to wake up and change the world. And that is why yes, it is indeed a pity that his death will discourage so many. They're perfectly correct to be discouraged, but in doing so they render the 'awakening' I dream of impossible for another decade again. I may be cynical, pessimistic and hopeless but I feel, personally, and people will disagree with me, that it is the non-naive and realistic view of the world.
Frankly, the Liberals in opposition were terrible. I liked Ignatieff and I hold the weird view that he might have been a good Prime Minister, and I liked Dion because I saw in him an hopelessly uncharismatic man who was nonetheless honest. But they both performed terribly in opposition and it would be stupid for Liberals to blame - in part - anybody but themselves and their knack for choosing two incompetent leaders as leaders. It is sad, but it's the sad truth.
I may find it frankly insulting, yeah, insulting that you believe that I'll just become one of them Harper Conservatives in the future. If I did so, I'd need an ideological 180 and totally reneging all I've held since 2008. If I'm engaged since then in Canadian politics it is frankly because I hate Harper. I like the Liberals, but they're not the ones who engaged me in politics and participating in the political process like I did in May. I was driven more than anything by a real, heart-felt desire to rid myself and Canada of his dangerous cronies. I've taken the time, remember, to write out a long rant about all my disagreements with him. I'm a cynic and pessimist, but besides that I do hold convictions and I'm a progressive (feel free to disagree) and if you think that my dislike of Harper is nothing more than mere political posturing and for show, then that's insulting and makes you entirely wrong. I've done my part locally in a small, personal attempt to defeat Harper and his local vassal. Unsuccessful. But I've done my part, and engaged in the political process and will continue to do so. Feel free to disagree with my engagement and the path I've chosen to do it on, but I'd ask you to be level-headed enough and respectful enough to realize that while I may not be a Dipper, I am not an opportunist who just hates Harper as part of a big show and that I don't just re-hash talking points from "my" party. Hell, I don't even know their talking points because I've barely been to any Liberal rallies, never been on their website and rarely watch Liberal leaders on the telly. Please respect at least my engagement against Harper and don't treat it as if it's just cynical posturing for opportunity's sake and putting on my own little show.
It's amusing how your dislike of the right is only beaten by your visceral, passionate hatred of 'centrism' which you seem to portray as some evil ideology of moderate heroes who do nothing. I understand why you're so viscerally anti-centrist, because in the US what are called 'centrists' are those right-wing Blue Dogs who are indeed not interested in doing things. But it would be refreshing if you expanded your horizon beyond those right-wing whores and realized that 'centrism' is not in fact some some delusional ideology. I'm a centrist, a progressive centrist with a slight lean to the left, and despite by cynicism about politics, I actually do hold convictions and ideals and I do care about "doing things". But apparently your definition of political engagement only includes doing so with your parties of choice and none other, which is an amusingly sectarian definition of political engagement. I'm not asking for you to understand my ideology (as if anybody ever can) or my convictions but rather I'm asking for you to minimally respect them. If you're capable of such respect.
Poll
