a blog about news and politics by steve janke
 

Klander backblast: Going too far

[Update: I've delved deeper into the meaning of the strange phrase David Emerson used, and now I'm wondering if perhaps this is worse than it first appears.]

Thanks to Bourque, we have this charming bit from BC Liberal Party President Jamie Elmhirst, recalling the words of Industry Minister David Emerson:

Jack Layton had a great weekend in BC. First he managed to find something nice to say about Svend Robinson, although the performance struck me as a touch insincere, even for Jack Layton. How did Minister Emerson describe his style at our Convention dinner? Oh yes, he said that Jack Layton had a boiled dog's head smile. That would have made even me wince if I hadn't have been laughing so hard.

First, I'm certain David Emerson would like to to have a chat with Elmhirst about what is to be kept in confidence, and what is to be repeated on a public website, assuming that phone call hasn't already been placed.

But are either Emerson or Elmhirst guilty of pulling a Klander?

I don't think so. The description of Jack Layton having a "boiled dog's head smile", as unappealing as that is, is descriptive but not racist or homophobic. It does not draw an identifiable group into the insult, to be used as part of the insult, thus insulting both that group and the original target.

For instance, when Stephen Harper is described as looking "gay" in a cowboy suit, Mike Klander was clearly relying on stereotyped views of homosexual appearance, as if there was such a thing, as a basis for the insult. The offends homosexuals as well as Stephen Harper, and so is deemed unacceptable. The Olivia Chow insult was keyed on Olivia Chow's name and her Asian appearance, and in doing so cast the insult on all Asian women, and so it also goes too far.

Basically an insult should endeavour to avoid too much collateral damage, as it were.

That isn't the case here with the "boiled dog's head smile" insult. But in the aftermath of the Klander incident, we might be too willing to take every puerile (or even elaborate) insult flung by the Liberals and try to turn it into a firing offense.

That would be a mistake.

First, it is unlikely to work, since people will be able to tell when an insult goes too far, and when it doesn't. A constant bleating about every insult will sound foolish and petty. No one likes a crybaby.

Second, on the off chance that it does work, and yet another insult results in yet another firing, the chilling effect can do more harm than good in stifling legitimate political discourse.

The bottom line here is that any insult that is based on physical appearance, whether specific to an individual (probably acceptable) or based on gender or race or some other broadly applicable characteristic (almost certainly unacceptable), is a weak and ineffectual insult, no matter how cleverly constructed. Physical appearance is not something we can alter all that dramatically, and almost never provides real insight into the thoughts of the person.

It is the ultimate ad hominem attack, and reflects poorly on the person making the insult.

So David Emerson made fun of Jack Layton's smile, at least according to Jamie Elmhirst. Not a big deal in of itself, in my judgment. But it is indicative of a recurring pattern within the Liberal Party of slinging insults, whether it is against parents who want to be entrusted with their own children, or against Asians, or against homosexuals, or against people who don't vote Liberal, or against people who don't live in Toronto, or against men with thinning hair and toothy grins.

At this rate, just about everyone is going to be at the receiving end of an insult from a senior member of the Liberal Party before January 23. Some insults will cost people their jobs, others won't. But either way, the people being insulted are going to have think long and hard if it was their intention to vote Liberal.

And if you weren't insulted, look around at your friends and family. Were any of them collateral damage from a Liberal attack? How did they feel? Then look at your ballot again. It is a secret ballot, of course, and with reason. But if it wasn't, would you still feel comfortable voting Liberal, and then facing your friends and family, insulted and angry as they are? I know I would factor that into my decision.





Skew my story on Skewz.com
Rate political news for their bias, read related stories, and leave your own skewed commentary


Search for more opinions from Canadian bloggers on these related keywords


Sphere presents related news articles and blog posts
Sphere It!


Trackbacks
URI: http://haloscan.com/tb/agwnblog/147224

Trackback Submission Form



 

Comments

Good thing Klander, er Emerson, er Elmhirst, did not use "boiled pig's head smile".

Those eyes!... unblinking, staring at one from the boiling pot..... Head cheese. Pork producers would be offended.

Posted by: maz2 at December 28, 2005 07:23 PM



These Libranos are dummer than I thought.

Posted by: taxpayer at December 28, 2005 08:56 PM



Angry, I agree with you completely - it would be difficult to come up with something as offensive as Klander, and he was rightly taken to task by anyone who cares about civility.

At the same time, one can always gain a little insight by reading the words of someone as careless with his words as Jamie Elmhirst. Everyone will have already had the opportunity to link to the link you posted. There are at least a couple of other campaign updates that are interesting. The first is at: http://www.teambc.ca/cgi-bin/new_news.pl?newsID=244
and it has cheerleader Elmhirst jumping up and down like a giddy schoolgirl over the Prime Minister's gun announcement.

The second is at
http://www.teambc.ca/cgi-bin/new_news.pl?newsID=248
where a considerably chastened Elmhirst reflects on the enormous backlash he has apparently received from his first posting.

Always fun to see what happens when politicos meet the real world.

Posted by: Patrick at December 28, 2005 09:12 PM



"If French Canadians even today have learnt so little about democracy, if they twist its rules so shockingly, if they are constantly tempted by authoritarianism, it is to a large degree because the Liberal Party has been miserably remiss in its simple political duty. Instead of educating the French-speaking electorate to believe in democracy, the Liberals seemed content to cultivate the ignorance and prejudice of that electorate." Pierre Trudeau 1958

Yea that is nineteen fifty eight. And Adscam(/Abotech?) has stereotyped Quebecers and the Liberal party just like Trudeau's analysis in his pre-Liberal days.

The thing Ontario cannot grasp is how little this country has progressed under the leadership of the crooked Prime Ministers from Quebec. 40 years of PMs from Quebec has dragged English Canada back into the Duplessis style garbage years of government. Gee, if it wasn't for the 'ignorance and prejudice' of the electorate in Toronto and Quebec, where would the Liberal party be?

Posted by: rockyt at December 28, 2005 11:57 PM



Well, speaking on behalf of the boiled dogs' head community, I found those remarks offensive...

Posted by: ebt at December 29, 2005 06:18 PM