An open letter to Stéphane Dion
October 22nd, 2008 at 9.27am (Misc, News)
(a slightly modified and probably improved version of something sent to the man himself, which you can also do if you are so inclined.
I also just noticed that my election post was entitled “straight talk,” which was supposed to be a Sarah Palin reference — but in an amusing coincidence, it is also the English title of Dion’s book about Canadian unity. Excellent.)
Mr Dion:
I want to apologise for this country.
I’m nineteen years old, and a completely starry-eyed idealist. I’ve been awaiting my turn to vote in a federal election for years, and allowed myself the slight ridiculous hope that the country might decide to kick Stephen Harper out to the curb. You know better than most, of course, that that didn’t happen. It was a real defeat, I think – not just for your party, or Mr Layton’s or Ms May’s either. It was a defeat for most Canadians, the ones who didn’t vote blue. There were a few of us, or perhaps more than a few, who were hoping we’d hear someone shouting “Prime Minister Dion” at the end of the night; instead, I turned off the TV before all the polls had finished reporting.
I’m not a card-carrying Liberal. I’m actually not a card-carrying anything. I’m a student, an artist, a supporter of equal rights and freedoms. I’m the kind of voter everyone probably wants – the one who reschedules plans in order to go to the all candidates’ debate, the one who reads every party’s pamphlets and platforms in an effort to really determine where her one vote should go. I have a hopelessly idealistic view of politics, and I have a hard time getting my head around attack ads, mudslinging and generally childish behaviour. I do understand that politics isn’t a party, and people don’t just sit around and offer each other tea and cake and work out compromises; sometimes, though, I think a tea-and-cake approach might be what this country needs.
Forgive me if I’m jumping to conclusions, but I think you might be a tea-and-cake sort of prime minister if you got the chance, and I mean this in a good way. You’re a nice guy, Mr Dion – a really nice guy. Headlines these days say things like “Dion bows out with grace”. No one uses the word grace to describe Mr Harper, and with good reason. The Conservative campaign was dirty and unfair, and they portrayed you badly; that CTV interview fiasco was absolutely awful. I think a lot of people felt bad for you by the end, even if they weren’t Liberal supporters. Of course, no leader wants people to feel bad for them – you wanted people to rally behind your cause and get the Conservatives out of office. It didn’t work, but we’re left with an image of the real Stéphane Dion: gracious, honourable, and absolutely unwilling to stoop to Mr Harper’s level.
I’m not saying the Liberal campaign was perfect, nor that it was terrible; my point here isn’t to criticise or offer advice on what’s past. What I am saying, though, is that you and yours ran a cleaner and fairer campaign than the current ruling party, and I respect all of you for that. Perhaps I am too childish in my expectations, but sometimes I wonder how Mr Harper’s advertisers can sleep at night. In my eyes, you had conviction; you thought about it and said “the Green Shift is what I want for Canada; the carbon tax is going to make their lives better”. Then you tried your very best to sell it. You didn’t back down, even when it meant your party suffered serious destruction at the hands of the Conservatives and the left-wing voter split. Of course, looking back on that might yield the wisdom that it wasn’t the best strategy, but the point is: you did what you believed. This is the sort of politics I believe in, stand behind, and wish there was more of. In other words, even though I don’t live in your riding, I felt like I was represented in some way by your actions.
I’m sorry it had to end this way, with you accepting your fate and watching the Liberal party get out their knives. I genuinely hoped you might be prime minister for a while, even if just to affirm that yes, nice guys make it. I’ve never had the honour of meeting you, but I think that if I did, you would pay attention to what I had to say and remember it later in Parliament. I appreciate that kind of thing, and I’m sure the constituents of St-Laurent-Cartierville who voted for you these past six elections do too.
So thanks: for showing Canada that there are still good men in the House of Commons, and for proving that not all politicians are dirty and underhanded. Maybe nice guys do finish last, but you made it pretty far. You might not be our Prime Minister, and pretty soon you won’t be the Liberal leader anymore either, but I have a lot of respect for you — that’s a victory in itself.
Tags: canada, editorial, politics
Steven from Callow said,
October 22, 2008 at 1.44pm
Well said Ruhee. I am pleased to see a young person declare their convictions – and very well! We need idealists – perhaps more than ever these days.
jay said,
October 22, 2008 at 4.04pm
I must say this is a lovely post. I must admit that I didn’t support the Liberals but if the party were more like Dion I might have considered it. I chose not to support the Liberals in large part because I have watched the party throw progressive values under the bus (and sometimes leaders too) for a couple of decades. I am a little older than you
I chose the New Democrats because I felt and feel that they offer the real progressive alternative. Unfortunately, the Liberals get the talk right (Kyoto, child care, gay rights, etc.) but don’t act at all or only when required to either by the courts (same sex marriage) or child care (when NDP required it as a condition of their support of Martin minority).
My folks were very active Liberal Party members and they are quite disappointed to see these constant leadership battles which mean that the party is never focused on what Canadians most need.
Anyhoo…I really wanted to mainly encourage you to keep being idealistic and to say that your letter was truly lovely.
Bruce from Surrey said,
October 22, 2008 at 11.14pm
Awesome words !! Pretty much describes how I feel too. Ten years from now I think a lot of Canadians will see that it was a mistake going down the neoConservative road that we are now on. We need only look south of the border to see where that road leads. Let’s just say that Dion and his idea of Canada was ahead of it’s time.
Ruh said,
October 22, 2008 at 11.27pm
Steven — thank you! I’m glad you enjoyed it. I agree … maybe if there were more idealists out there, the voter turnout wouldn’t be so discouraging. 59% is appalling.
Jay — thanks for the kind words. I agree completely: the leadership races mean that the party has little time to actually serve the people of Canada, which is its job. It’s going to be a tough couple of years before we see the Liberals get back on track (hopefully it’s not longer). I’m glad you enjoyed reading this, though!
Bruce — you’re right, of course. Dion had a lot of ideas that would have served Canada well, if only the economy hadn’t gotten in the way. He believes wholeheartedly in everything he said, and you can tell how much he loves this country. I only wish the rest of the country had realised that too.
MS said,
October 23, 2008 at 10.32pm
To judge what we have not seen is to judge something prematurely. I say this because it is at least my belief that people like Mr. Harper have been given a tool box with only half the tools required to fix the machine called Canada. A crappy minority government, with parties like PDQ that steal the votes and remove the functionality of the government before the game even begins. If Harper was given a majority, and then screwed up and made a mess of things, then it would be fair to judge him for being a failure. But when he can’t do his job properly, how can we say it is his fault that we are where we are?
Still kudos to you and your idealistic ideas. I agree that politics are sometimes better off being played in a sand box and maybe someone will eat the mud that was just served.
Ruh said,
October 23, 2008 at 11.38pm
MS — That’s a fair point, and I agree, somewhat. It’s true that Harper wants a majority, and that most prime ministers in his situation would as well. However, the country has voted twice for something that is not a majority, and a truly good leader would accept that and work with it. Harper is trying to run a minority government like a majority one, and then complains of it being “dysfunctional”. To make them run, minority governments have to be treated as they are, not forced into being something else.
I don’t think I claimed that it was his fault that we are here, and if I did, I didn’t mean to. I criticized his campaign, which I think I can do in fairness. I think the interesting thing about the Canadian system, though, is that minority governments can function well if they are given the opportunity. There have been some pretty successful ones — and not in part due to the need for compromise and discussion in a minority situation. That seems closer to helping the country out to me.
Of course, they are not perfect, and their instability is usually a negative, not a positive. I agree that perhaps Harper doesn’t have all the tools he may need, or think he needs, but that’s all he has and he should try to work with them as best as he can instead of telling us that it’s dysfunctional and calling an election again.
Back to the sandbox.
MS said,
October 24, 2008 at 11.40pm
A point well made, but match is not set…Now my query is did we Canadian’s only settle for Mr. Harper and his plans? Or was it that he had the most logical outlook for the country?
I guess the question lies with the current situation in the markets and the election to south of us, which will most likely be historic in nature.
Would having a government other than Mr. Harper’s be a good choice? Was is not proposals like Mr. Layton’s idea about re-establishing the automotive industry, by increase tariffs on imports and similar idea that ran the Coolage government into the ground, along with the world into a deep depression? Is it not basic economics, that by the basic laws of comparative advantage, that industries like the automotive sector, be slowly dismantled, the workers re-trained or re-distributed into the sectors of the economy that are producing the majority of the output?
Mr. Harper did make a good point in his English debate. We may have lost 80K jobs in the automotive industry but we have made at least 100k in other sectors.
As for Mr. Dion. Though he did not propose such drastic changes, I still wonder if his Green-Shift plan was being proposed at the right time.
In a country drive by oil, is proposing higher taxes on oil companies a good idea, when we all know that they always shift the cost onto the consumer. Does this make any sense when most people this year will be counting their pennies for Christmas to make ends meet?
I leave for now, but as the cliche goes, time will tell.
Gareth said,
October 24, 2008 at 11.43pm
Ruhee, I think you know me well enough to realize that I’m not quite the pure idealist that you are. However, I think that the way the race is going in America is proof that mudslinging doesn’t always work. I mean, that disgusting hoax perpetrated today by a McCain volunteer shocked even me, but it gets clearer every day that Obama will be the next president.
That is to say, that while politicians who really want to win have to take out the knives every once in a while, it’s nice to see that it isn’t always the party who plays dirty (or dirtiest, I suppose) that wins.
PS: I think you know that I believe that Dion wasn’t ever the right choice for the Liberal leadership, nor do I believe that the focus of the campaign should have been the Green Shift. I still think both of those were mistakes, but your letter made the faithful Liberal in me proud.
PPS: You should consider becoming a card-carrying Liberal. I think it’s relatively cheap, and you’ll get to vote in the upcoming leadership race.
Ruh said,
October 25, 2008 at 1.11am
MS — Perhaps he did have the most logical outlook in the minds of most voters, and certainly if every voter pays attention to policies and ideas and votes with their mind and their heart, then yes: this is what Canada wanted. I’m not opposed to that idea by any means, but I do wonder.
Perhaps it is also true that the other party leaders did not have a logical plan for the country. Economic issues are not my forte, and from a research standpoint I am ill equipped to discuss the nuances of each leader’s economic platform, but commenting as a whole, I am not a Harper fan. That isn’t to say that everyone who is one is wrong, because the beauty of this country is the coexistence of opposing viewpoints and the ability to vote for whomever you wish.
I do think there were many flaws in the Dion campaign, both in his approach to it and in the Green Shift specifically. It wasn’t the right time to introduce that idea, and it was marketed very awkwardly; more Canadians might have bought into it if it was packaged and sold a little differently. As it stands, they did not, and Dion has seen what happened. It’s too bad, but that’s the way things go, I guess. It could have been good, but it didn’t end up coming out correctly.
Gareth — It’s nice to know that even in the States, known for long drawn-out nasty races (well, this has been one of those as well), good and honest tactics can indeed come out on top. I won’t count those chickens yet, but I’m crossing my fingers Obama wins and we can breathe a little easier for at least the next four years.
I do know that you believe those things, and I fully understand why. Like I said to MS, I don’t think the Green Shift was a great idea at this juncture either, but he did what he believed and has seen what happened. Obviously I am a fan of Dion in the leadership, but I’m not blind; there are a lot of things he should have done differently, and did not. Still, I admire his conviction.
I think your comment about pulling out the knives to win is interesting, because I’ve been tossing around ideas like that in my head as well. More specifically: how much did Dion want to win? I don’t know. Harper really wanted his job back. Layton really wanted to be Prime Minister. I don’t honestly know if Dion was really like “YEAH I REALLY WANT TO BE PRIME MINISTER,” or whether he was simply trying as hard as he could to push things that he thought were best for this country. I don’t know. Perhaps that was his weakness — everyone wanted to win more than he did.
You know, you’re right about the party membership, too. I just looked and it’s $6.50 for a 1-year youth membership! I am pretty sure that my life will be able to afford one less sandwich for the opportunity to vote for the next Liberal leader. Capital idea.
catherine said,
October 26, 2008 at 4.53pm
Lovely post. I’ve been voting for a couple decades and still felt very idealistic about this election. Not enough young people vote so I applaud your involvement and hope you pull in other young people – no matter what party they support. An involved and engaged population is absolutely necessary for a good democracy.
I have been an NDP supporter for many years, but voted Liberal because of Dion and the Green Shift. Layton’s attacks on a carbon tax means I won’t be returning to the NDP. I’ve studied carbon pricing in a fair amount of detail, know that cap and trade and carbon tax are very similar, but a carbon tax will actually cost consumers less than the fixed caps the NDP proposed. Either system is regressive and this needs to be corrected for, which the Green Shift did, while the NDP ignored this and the aid to low-income from other parts of their platform was insufficient to correct this.
I found Dion’s integrity and commitment to the environment inspiring. I think it would have helped our businesses and industry to have the tax cuts and incentives to start moving toward a greener technology. Some forward-minded industries in the US are actually pushing their government to price carbon now, so we may end up following the US lead. Perhaps Dion was just a few years ahead of the time when Canadians will see this need too.
Gareth said,
October 26, 2008 at 8.56pm
“I don’t honestly know if Dion was really like “YEAH I REALLY WANT TO BE PRIME MINISTER,” or whether he was simply trying as hard as he could to push things that he thought were best for this country.”
Yeah. However, I don’t think those two are mutually exclusive. There is a certain characteristic in voters down here where they really want to see their leaders fight for what they believe in. That no one else is qualified to lead the country but them. And out of that springs mudslinging and all that, but that’s the characteristic people like Stephane Dion don’t really have.
Ruh said,
October 27, 2008 at 4.46pm
Catherine — thank you! Sometimes it feels like those of us “young people” who are passionate about political issues are completely and hopelessly outnumbered by those who don’t care. It’s a frustrating thing to ask a friend on election day if they have voted, and get a response along the lines of “I never vote, I don’t really care about it”. Ouch. Imagine how different the country might look if they did.
Perhaps Dion was just a few years ahead of the time when Canadians will see this need too.
That’s a problem most good leaders face, I think; they have a vision, but it takes many years for it to come to the point where the rest of the population will get it. Trudeau faced a great deal of backlash for his ideas (many of which are still incredibly controversial today, but the point is: he knew where he wanted to go). Unfortunately, Dion didn’t get the chance to prove to the nation that his ideas were valid because of the difficulty in selling them in the first place. You still need to have a decent number of people supporting you to get an opportunity, and he didn’t.
Gareth — I don’t think they are exclusive at all, and I think they’re more effective when combined in healthy doses. The problem was that Dion did seem to treat them as mutually exclusive characteristics, and so it was either the Hillary Clinton “I just want to be the leader, dammit” approach, or the Stéphane Dion “This is just what I want for everyone”. That’s what he was criticized for — not being a fired-up inspirational leader.
When our elections are placed against the backdrop of American politics (which they completely were, this time around), the differences are pretty obvious. American elections are massive, dramatic, and full of excitement in every direction, and the people are rallying around a man with great conviction and the power to inspire hundreds of thousands of people to come to a rally (and to inspire his opponents to get pretty fired up). Canada wants this sort of inspiration, but no one has given it to us, and that’s probably the biggest disappointment out of this election.
Even the Conservative populace has never admitted that Harper is an inspirational leader, because he’s not. He isn’t mobilizing the masses to do something about this country. The Conservative flyers said “We’re better off with Harper”. What kind of message is that? The lesser of five evils? Canada is sorely lacking in the will to fight for a country we love, and it is beginning to show.
Ruh said,
October 28, 2008 at 12.08pm
Gareth, I wanted to bring this CBC article to your attention (about Dominic LeBlanc announcing his candidacy for Liberal leadership), and particularly a couple of paragraphs that highlight this discussion:
The political scientist said the next Liberal leader must deal with the Barack Obama factor in that Canadians will demand their political leaders combine political experience with youth, dynamism and charisma of the U.S. Democratic presidential candidate.
“They will be looking for a fresh face but you can’t be stupid and embrace someone like [MP-elect] Justin Trudeau who has zero experience and zero credibility. Justin Trudeau would be another [U.S. Republican vice-presidential candidate] Sarah Palin,” Myers said. “LeBlanc probably is one of the few people who would have the right balance.”
Aside from the obvious curiosity of Canadian politics referencing the American election more than ours, this will be an interesting race.