Leadership Under The Microscope

 

I need ammunition, not a ride - Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky

With those six words, the Ukrainian President has put leadership under the microscope. His is the kind of courageous example that most people would long for in their politicians, but have likely long ago dismissed as a fond notion best confined to fantasy.

Juxtapose someone of great moral courage with a cruel dictator heedless of human life; one will inspire, and one will repel. And in the process you might just stir the world to at least a semblance of unity.

While everyone's attention is rightly rivetted by the terrible tragedy underway in Ukraine, one can also be heartened by the collective action much of the world is taking against the monstrous and calloused choices being made by Vladimir Putin. While not perfect by any means, the sanctions are the expression of strong condemnation of the war crimes underway. 

All of which has led to me thinking about the potential of leadership to unite a country. I would say that, especially in the early days of the pandemic, Justin Trudeau provided such leadership, appearing daily outside his cottage for updates, quarantining when necessary, and letting his hair and beard grow somewhat unruly, something many of us could relate to in those times. By these measures, he conveyed a message of shared pain and sacrifice. While obviously of an entirely different magnitude than that shown by Zelensky, it was what we needed at the time.

Then I think about the man who "wants to be your next prime minister," Pierre Poilievre. As described in The Breach, he is an ideologue who wants to replace social programs with a “tiny survival stipend”. It is a small part of his model of leadership that will inspire the mean-spirited and repel the fair-minded.

Althia Raj offers some thoughts on the options open for the Conservative Party as they ponder who should next lead them. Will they continue down the road to Trumpism or attempt to appeal to a wider part of the electorate?

The only declared candidate, Carleton MP Pierre Poilievre, is a polarizing figure with a “take no prisoners” attitude. He recently called Europe’s response to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine shockingly “weak,” embraced the so-called “Freedom Convoy,” and called COVID-19 public health measures a purposeful attempt by governments “to try and take away our freedom and give themselves more power.”

In the past, Poilievre has attacked the media, made derogatory comments about Indigenous peoples, left the door open to a niqab ban in the public service, and broken the election law. Elected at age 25, the career MP is a forceful opposition critic who has railed against elites, placed the blame for rising inflation and house prices at the feet of the Liberals, and promised more energy projects. His campaign launch through a social media video on Feb. 5 garnered more than seven million views on Twitter, Facebook and YouTube. At least 26 Conservative caucus members have endorsed him.

While the vote-getting allure of the demagogue is tempting to many, others aren't so sure, seriously considering other potential candidate like Jean Charest and Patrick Brown, both moderates and from the progressive wing of the party. 

None of these choices inspire in the way that Zelensky does, but Poilivre's no-holds-barred strategy, which includes courting supporters of The People's Party, does offer some increasingly clear choices: 

In choosing a leader, the Conservatives must ask themselves what their winning formula will be —do they want to take votes from Bernier’s far-right party or from Justin Trudeau’s Liberals?