Why I don't support Bennett
At an event Carolyn Bennett stated that "it is time to get non-liberals out of the Liberal Party." I was struck by this comment. A leadership candidate so oblivious to how politics work, how and why politics is the way it is. On the face some may not notice her misconduct; I use misconduct as the gravity of the term well suits the error, as I will go on to illustrate.
To begin then, excuse the obvious premises as they gradually build to unmistakenable conclusions. A political party is engineered to represent the interests of people. A proper political party is organized and composed in such a way that majority ultimately makes the decisions. Therefore a political party represents the majority's interests in each relative decision.
Now let's build from Bennett's claim; suppose she is right, there are non-liberals in the Party. What harm does it do? Does it do any? I'll argue no and on the contrary it makes the Party better.
Addressing having non-liberals in the Party, what harm could they do? Well they could misrepresent the Liberal Party or seem opportunistic. Philosophically I hope it is impossible to misrepresent the Liberal Party as a Candidate or MP on any issue; because to me the Liberal Party encompasses all views. And through this encompassing, there is debate; thus from the trails of fire from the competing points of view, the policy victor is the stronger for having it's impurities casted aside. Practically it is possible to misrepresent the party but that's in regards to slips of the tongue not issues of concern. For a candidate or MP was chosen from their riding association, thus a more conservative MP may not represent the Liberal Party directly, but by representing his or her conservative liberal riding he or she does indirectly represent the Liberal Party of Canada.
So what harm can a non-liberal do within the party? Well that member could have their democratic say, is that bad? They could fight for what they believe in, is that bad? They could be opportunistic (by switching parties for political gain) but fault lies also with the people who would vote or accept such an individual too, thus that argument collapses.
The one argument that could supply Bennet with her justification is that non-liberals are ruining Liberal values by distorting them either too left or too right. But the quick resolution to this argument is to reply, values and policies are decided by a majority, as the majority changes, alas so does our values and policies. That is how the Party changes. That is how it stays current.
It is clear by Bennett wanting non-liberals out, she merely is stating she doesn't want the Liberal Party to change. Because the Liberal Party needs change, and it can be easily seen that Bennett wants to keep the Liberal Party the same, I do not support Carolyn Bennett to be the next leader of the Liberal Party of Canada.
To begin then, excuse the obvious premises as they gradually build to unmistakenable conclusions. A political party is engineered to represent the interests of people. A proper political party is organized and composed in such a way that majority ultimately makes the decisions. Therefore a political party represents the majority's interests in each relative decision.
Now let's build from Bennett's claim; suppose she is right, there are non-liberals in the Party. What harm does it do? Does it do any? I'll argue no and on the contrary it makes the Party better.
Addressing having non-liberals in the Party, what harm could they do? Well they could misrepresent the Liberal Party or seem opportunistic. Philosophically I hope it is impossible to misrepresent the Liberal Party as a Candidate or MP on any issue; because to me the Liberal Party encompasses all views. And through this encompassing, there is debate; thus from the trails of fire from the competing points of view, the policy victor is the stronger for having it's impurities casted aside. Practically it is possible to misrepresent the party but that's in regards to slips of the tongue not issues of concern. For a candidate or MP was chosen from their riding association, thus a more conservative MP may not represent the Liberal Party directly, but by representing his or her conservative liberal riding he or she does indirectly represent the Liberal Party of Canada.
So what harm can a non-liberal do within the party? Well that member could have their democratic say, is that bad? They could fight for what they believe in, is that bad? They could be opportunistic (by switching parties for political gain) but fault lies also with the people who would vote or accept such an individual too, thus that argument collapses.
The one argument that could supply Bennet with her justification is that non-liberals are ruining Liberal values by distorting them either too left or too right. But the quick resolution to this argument is to reply, values and policies are decided by a majority, as the majority changes, alas so does our values and policies. That is how the Party changes. That is how it stays current.
It is clear by Bennett wanting non-liberals out, she merely is stating she doesn't want the Liberal Party to change. Because the Liberal Party needs change, and it can be easily seen that Bennett wants to keep the Liberal Party the same, I do not support Carolyn Bennett to be the next leader of the Liberal Party of Canada.
posted by Daniel Mosely at 8:19 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home