'Most people don’t walk around with labels on' - Macleans.ca

‘Most people don’t walk around with labels on’


Chris Selley profiles Jack Layton.

Still, it’s hard to envision anyone better suited to the job than a self-denying socialist with a history of both compromise and getting what he wants out of people. Indeed, that’s what the NDP hoped Mr. Layton could do when they chose him, in 2003, as their leader: Just win, baby … And for Mr. Layton, it’s not just a personal and professional triumph — a place in the history books, if nothing else, as one of Canada’s most popular politicians in an age of crippling apathy. It’s a thumping repudiation of the sneering tactics his political opponents have confidently used against him throughout his career. Call him a pinko; call him a Taliban stooge; call him a waste of Canadians’ votes, if you want. You can reach him at Stornoway.


‘Most people don’t walk around with labels on’

  1. “…Call him a pinko; call him a Taliban stooge; call him a waste of Canadians’ votes, if you want. You can reach him at Stornoway…”

    None of the those labels ever meant much to me. I’ve never listened much to the labels one’s enemy foist upon a leader, since obviously they’re self serving.

    I’ve voted NDP a couple times in my life, specifically for Ed Broadbent who was my riding rep and whom I considered a man of great integrity.

    And that sums up my problem with Layton. On several occasions, rather than use his position to enact NDP policy, he’s chosen instead to advance the cause of the CPC, while grabbing bits of the pie for himself. The lack of integrity is astounding to me.

    So you all can be as excited as you like about the NDP “ascendancy” but frankly, I think he got there by becoming what the NDP has always stood against, and in doing so, made his party no different than the rest.

    The worst of it all is that he’s help ensure that his ideological nemesis will enjoy years of majorities against an unelectable socialist party.

    And he has to know that his party is unelectable as government. I can’t imagine he doesn’t understand that, and thus again put aside the ideals in favour of the power.

  2. Layton is like a wild card,will fit wherever it works, he is a fine leader!

     I don’t like his policy and I am sure will piss me off more times than not with his new position in Quebec.

    And I love Chris Selley!!

  3. Thanks to Wells and Cosh I read that Selley article on weekend and thought it was terrific as well. Layton is an ideologue, tho he likes to pretend he isn’t, and he should be asked more about his ideologies. 

    I wonder if msm reporting will change now that we have two ideology driven parties in charge while the amoral cretin party are irrelevant and lost up their own arses.

    From Selley article: “This extraordinary document framed almost literally every social issue — housing, wages, food additives, nuclear proliferation and traffic jams, to name but a few — as a health problem afflicting a sort of municipal Gaia figure.”

    Virginia Postrel, Creating Nature:

    Eden is in Western myth the unchanging and pristine paradise, lost through overreaching and lamented ever since. In the biblical story, however, Eden is more complicated ……

    Of course, no sooner has God created man, animals, and woman than the creator loses control of his creation. Genesis is the original Frankenstein myth. That man and nature could defy God has provoked theologians for centuries. We can leave the theological puzzles aside, however. Genesis suggests truths that do not depend on a particular religious tradition: Even in Eden, humanity occupies a garden, a place between static order and wild nature, a place we both work and keep. And no creation is completely under its creator’s control. The world changes almost as soon as it is formed, and so does humanity. They change each other.

    Yet the ideal of the untouched paradise, of orderly nature undisturbed by human action, still shimmers in many imaginations. Nature is a source of moral authority for some, of security for others. It offers standards and models.” 


    Only a progressive, and their belief in tabula rasa, could claim that people don’t walk around with labels on because it is not remotely true literally or figuratively. 

    “Tabula rasa: 

    is the epistemological theory that individuals are born without built-in mental content and that their knowledge comes from experience and perception. Generally proponents of the tabula rasa thesis favour the “nurture” side of the nature versus nurture debate, when it comes to aspects of one’s personality, social and emotional behaviour, and intelligence.”

  4. Poor Jack’s gotten ‘rudest MP’ score in a recent analysis, but the researcher concedes the difficulties of the opposition in the current Question Period format.
    Optat civilis esse?

    I hope so. He’s a great guy with a tough job.