Sister Sage's Musings

This is a post borne almost certainly out of political naivete, but I’ve always thought in rather simple terms of the Conservatives representing the right of the spectrum with the Liberals as the left, and the NDP a little further to the left. But with Ignatieff as the Liberal leader, I find myself thinking of the Liberals now as a party representing the middle and not so much progressive values.

I suppose my coldness towards Ignatieff is mostly because of the Liberal leader’s own centrist views; he has not been shy about characterizing his party as such. His views on Israel and marijuana are just two of those views that seem to be on the wrong side of progressive politics.

Like with Obama, my instincts tell me that Ignatieff is less liberal than his more recent predecessors and much more interested in staking out a position between liberal central and conservative lite. While Ignatieff’s embrace of the US is harmless and well documented, his history doesn’t help to separate him from the far worse Conservative lust for a US style culture and government in Canada. To the progressive community, that is sacrilege.

Perhaps my suspicions about Ignatieff’s tenuous grasp on progressive politics goes back to his stance on Iraq. While I understand his empathetic point about the tragedy of the Kurds at the hand of Saddam, I will never figure out how that could cloud his judgment to support the American/British invasion of that country, considering the overwhelming evidence contrary to such a foolish and fearful act. Ignatieff’s later explanations have proven to be lacking and engender little solace to those who were on the enlightened side of history.

Hans Blix and other international weapons inspectors on the ground in Iraq had been yelling loudly that there were no WMD’s. Wars of the recent past conducted by US forces proved to be wasteful, bloody and costly. There was nothing in George Bush’s history that indicated he had the basic competence to wage such a war in compassionate conservative manner. Any school kid knew this was a humanitarian disaster of epic proportions in the making. But Ignatieff failed to see this. It’s not so much his failure of judgment that concerned me and concerns me now, it was his approval of the conservative mindset of belligerence and unaccountable recklessness that stunned me then and stuns me now.

When Ignatieff was pronounced leader of the leaders, I was immediately disheartened. With time, many of my fears have been allayed somewhat by Ignatieff’s education as leader. He has come a long way. But I still lack any trust that he will come through for us progressives. He is fighting against a monstrous Bush-like regime in the Conservatives, which requires a strong counter from the left. I don’t always feel Ignatieff is with us when push comes to shove. Perhaps it is my long ago fears that cause me to distrust the Liberal leader. Perhaps it is his centrist message. Or maybe, like Obama, it is his seeming dismissal of the left that is worrisome.

Perhaps I am wrong. Like I wrote earlier, hopefully I’m just naive. Ignatieff is proving to be more of a force than the Conservatives expected. Maybe he will learn that the way to beat the Cons is not just by fighting for the middle but by embracing progressive values of freedom, equal rights and fighting for the little guy. He won’t be the first Liberal leader to occupy the middle. We now have a relatively stable economic basis, thanks to Liberals. He has the luxury of bringing a fight to the party. I don’t think Ignatieff wants to do that. And that’s a shame and I hope I’m wrong.

Cross posted at Let Freedom Rain

4 Responses to “Can the Liberals under Ignatieff be considered progressive any more?”