{"id":1828,"date":"2008-07-06T20:31:00","date_gmt":"2008-07-07T00:31:00","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.calgarygrit.ca\/?p=1828"},"modified":"2008-07-06T20:31:00","modified_gmt":"2008-07-07T00:31:00","slug":"whats-in-a-name","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.calgarygrit.ca\/?p=1828","title":{"rendered":"What’s in a Name?"},"content":{"rendered":"

The highest profile discussions about the future of the Alberta Liberal Party<\/a> have focused on one word \u2013 \u201cliberal\u201d. In fairness, there are more important debates to be had on structure, organization, and ideology, and I fully intend to look at them as part of this yet-to-be-cleverly-named post series on the future of the ALP. But, talking about the name is so gosh darn fun that it\u2019s worth a post (or two) of it\u2019s own.<\/p>\n

I figure the best way to approach this is to first look at the arguments against<\/em> a name change, which I\u2019ve lifted from the \u201cNew Liberal<\/a>\u201d document, as it makes the most compelling case against a name change I\u2019ve read anywhere.<\/p>\n

[Note: For the purposes of this post, I\u2019m equating a name change to founding a new party which, of the two, I think is the better option.]<\/p>\n

1. \u201cFor many Albertans [a name change] will likely seem overly simplistic and possibly even insulting. While trying to fix the problems with our party, we fall prey to one of our biggest: this elitist sense that voters somehow just aren\u2019t getting it, and are shallow enough that if we change the name, we\u2019ll fool them into giving us a second look.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

Agreed, but only in the sense that a name change must be part of something larger. Simply changing from \u201cReform\u201d to \u201cCanadian Alliance\u201d didn\u2019t do the right any favours in Canada because it was seen to be a hollow move. A name change can, however, be an effective vehicle for drawing voters\u2019 attention to a shift in attitudes and focus.<\/p>\n

2. \u201cIt is also a complete capitulation. We are giving credence to every Progressive Conservative attack against liberalism they\u2019ve ever made. If our upheaval ends at a name change, we may come out the other side seen as a party of liberals so ashamed of what they are that they hide it \u2013 hardly a positive step forward.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

Maybe it would be admitting defeat but, then again, most people are willing to admit defeat after losing for 87 years (Hillary Clinton being the exception). Admittedly, it would somewhat reek of desperation and the media\/PCs\/NDP would certainly try to exploit it. So I guess it depends whether or not people believe it has reached the \u201cdesperation\u201d stage yet.<\/p>\n

3. Even if a philosophy shift was not the intended goal, it would be very difficult for the Liberal Party to stay philosophically liberal should its name be changed. Our name is our compass. People coming from any other jurisdiction in this country immediately know what our core philosophy is.<\/em><\/p>\n

This debate is probably better reserved for another post on the topic of philosophical shifts but isn\u2019t this argument the definition of an \u201celitist sense that voters somewhat just aren\u2019t getting it\u201d? If people aren\u2019t buying what you\u2019re selling and it\u2019s not an image problem, then you better change what you\u2019re selling. And \u201cour name is our compass\u201d might just be the most eloquent argument in favour of a name change I\u2019ve heard as of yet.<\/p>\n

4. Logistical problems: You need 75% approval to change the name. If you created a new party, an ALP rump would siphon off 10% of the vote. [paraphrased]
<\/em>
Logistically, it certainly would be difficult to orchestrate which is why I\u2019m skeptical this will actually happen. Having been actively involved in the ALP for quite some time, there are a lot of people suffering from NDP syndrome \u2013 \u201cI\u2019ve lost as a Liberal for 40 years and I\u2019d rather keep losing as a Liberal than compromise<\/em>\u201d. I do question the claim that the \u201cold\u201d Alberta Liberal Party would be a vote drain on the new party if<\/strong> it achieved a critical mass of support \u2013 that reminds me a lot of the \u201cProgressive Canadians<\/a>\u201d movement started by disgruntled federal PCs after the merger. However, I do think that there would be some backlash from federal Liberals that would, at least initially, cut into the volunteer and donor base of the new party. So unless the new party drew a few disgruntled PCs in, it wouldn\u2019t be worth the effort.<\/p>\n

5. \u201cThe Alberta Liberal Party survived having no seats through the late 60s to the mid 80s. For a brand supposedly so toxic, it has amazing longevity, and an uncanny ability to bounce back where other parties have been forced to fold. Its resiliency is a strength and must be seriously considered in any proposition that asserts it can simply be willed out of existence.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

Umm\u2026I\u2019m not sure if \u201csurvived having no seats\u201d should necessarily be the shinning achievement of any political party. Do we really want to be the Toronto Maple Leafs of the political world?<\/p>\n

To that list, I\u2019d add the following arguments against a name change:<\/p>\n

6. \u201cDecore nearly won in \u201993 as a Liberal, with the NEP a lot fresher in the collective minds of Albertans.\u201d<\/em> This is probably proof enough that winning as a Liberal isn\u2019t impossible<\/u> \u2013 although the economy tanking certainly helps.<\/p>\n

7. \u201cVictory would be a lot sweeter, if it was a Liberal victory<\/em>\u201d. And the resulting book about that election would sell a lot more.<\/p>\n

Tomorrow, I\u2019ll look at some of the arguments in favour of a name change and offer my opinion. Although this post probably had a heavy pro-change tone to it, that\u2019s more for the sake of debate than anything else; I\u2019ll try and poke as some holes in the pro-change arguments tomorrow.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

The highest profile discussions about the future of the Alberta Liberal Party have focused on one word \u2013 \u201cliberal\u201d. In fairness, there are more important debates to be had on structure, organization, and ideology, and I fully intend to look at them as part of this yet-to-be-cleverly-named post series on the future of the ALP. […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_active":false,"_monsterinsights_sitenote_note":"","_monsterinsights_sitenote_category":0,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-1828","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-uncategorized"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.calgarygrit.ca\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1828","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.calgarygrit.ca\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.calgarygrit.ca\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.calgarygrit.ca\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.calgarygrit.ca\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcomments&post=1828"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.calgarygrit.ca\/index.php?rest_route=\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1828\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.calgarygrit.ca\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fmedia&parent=1828"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.calgarygrit.ca\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Fcategories&post=1828"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.calgarygrit.ca\/index.php?rest_route=%2Fwp%2Fv2%2Ftags&post=1828"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}