Saturday, May 21, 2011

Who Should Be The Liberals' Interim Leader

Where some people are at their unsurest, where the future is the most uncertain, it is at that time when who should lead the Liberal Party is the most clear. There is no competition, there is no speculation, the interim leader of the Party should be Bob Rae, Marc Garneau, Dominic LaBlanc, Justin Trudeau, You.

The interim leadership of the Liberal Party must not, cannot, and will not be in the hands of one person, the Party cannot be created otherwise. This is not semantics or rhetoric, this is the future of the Liberal Party and to represent all of its members in this creation process, to respond and to change, that leadership must come from all or it is nothing.

The question of who should be the Interim Leader presumes a foregone conclusion that is antithetical to the very reconstituting process that the Liberal Party seeks to undergo. Asking which one person should take the helm presumes the ship doesn't change, just its captain. The question must not be which one person takes the wheel, but which vehicle is it that we are all building.

It is granted and not denied that there will be one person who eventually assumes the title of Interim Leader, but it must be emphasized, it must be actualized, that the real title of Interim Leader is shared, donned, and fulfilled by every Liberal. The Interim Leader should be every Liberal who wants to build a Liberal Party that not just has a place in the future of Canada, but is the future of Canada.

The real Interim Leader who creates the Party must be all of us or the Party is none of us.

2 comments:

Volkov said...

You know, the rhetoric is fine and all but lacks some substance.

I mean, what exactly is it that you mean by "every Liberal must share the Interim Leader's job." What does that entail, exactly? Is it just a rhetorical call-to-arms for participatory democracy inside the party? Or does it actually mean something? Do we actually get positions here?

thescottross.blogspot.com said...

In your terms I would argue rhetoric is substance. I would strongly counter that it is not one or the other. It is not just words or just substance, at the time of idea generation there is no clear and defined separation.

The act of publicly declaring that Interim Leader is but a title and the real responsibilities lie with the membership contributes to the creation process.

Some may want clear defined policies or ideas on what it means for every member to be interim leader, and perhaps I will write on that in the future, but there are members who just need to know that they have the job and that alone will motivate real change.