Liberalism - Shaped By One's Foes

This series on the rethinking of Liberalism was only started on Canada Day but the comments have been coming in at a furious pace.  As mentioned at the outset, no comments will be posted for the duration of the series for the simple reason that the subject matter was bound to attract those anonymous types who hide behind that anonymity, not to protect themselves but to conceal the fact they are part of a broader group working in conjunction with the Conservative party in an attempt to crush opposition.  Indeed, in attempting to respond to their messages, they inevitably bounce back because they use fake names and addresses. We now possess a database full of such individuals. They are tenacious and organized but hardly friends of open thought or respecters of other opinions.On the other hand, many Canadians of all stripes have commented for or against my thoughts.  All have been helpful in that they have obviously given time to consider their responses. Many are Liberals, looking for a more grassroots reality within the Liberal Party.  I’ve been surprised at the sheer number of others who opted out of politics in these last years but who desire to get back in once legitimacy is back in the process. An MP’s life is furiously busy, but I’ve attempted to respond to as many of these as possible.One of the Conservative anonymous types wrote in saying that I shouldn’t be mentioning Stephen Harper or his party in my musings on Liberalism. The problem is that there is little other choice.  A philosophical or political concept is often at odds with those of other views. Harper has made no secret of his desire to stamp out the Liberals and has unleashed his mega-forces in an attempt to do just that.The problems within the Liberal Party are there for all to see and they must be dealt with.  Given that the Conservatives continue to languish in the polls, they must go through a similar process as well. But when your opponent spends millions of dollars in attempting to define the Liberals or their respective leaders, it makes the ability to assess the Liberal performance objectively well nigh impossible. Regardless of what the PMO puts out about Michael Ignatieff, it’s just not the truth that he’s “just visiting” or “just in it for himself.” These are untruths, carefully crafted by a political propaganda machine in hopes that Canadians will believe it. The problem is that Ignatieff is deadly serious in his commitment to Canada, as most commentators will admit. His troubles have more to do with connecting with a message that resonates with Canadians. Harper was in this same position for years in opposition; it’s just part of politics.Wherever the Liberals go from here, they won’t be reforming in a vacuum; attempts at renewal will always be met by the opposition with derision. But when such opposition is of the gutless, anonymous, mindless kind as those using fake email addresses in their comments to this blog, they have no place in the public discussion – the spam folder is a great place for them.Because of its belief in a broad tent philosophy, liberalism will always be attacked by those finding it too loose, too trusting.  It has been this way from the beginning. Therefore, as a concept, it must work out its reasonings in a competitive context. This not only makes sense, it helps to define its precepts. For those who have written in and made their critiques in an up-front and transparent manner, thank you. I’ll get back to as many as I can by email. Your ideas are being gathered in a file that we be sent to the Party once the series is concluded at the end of July. And as for the digital hit men, there’s no place for you in this discussion.