Remembering the chair...

Hi everyone,

I saw today that June 2nd was the anniversary of the coronation of Queen Elizabeth II. It reminded me of an awful blog post that I wrote in 2007 on my first blog and I thought I'd re-post it for the heck of it...my sincerest apologies. Below is also a link to a video of the 1953 coronation ceremony...CBC archives has come through for me again!

"Now children gather round and hear a faithful tale resound, for from the lips of a historian flow, the wonder that only history can bestow. Haha, I’m a geek, ok here’s my, I’m sure long anticipated, blog on the British Coronation Chair, otherwise known as King Edward’s Chair. This is a subject that has fascinated me for quite some time and my admiration goes out to the protectors of the chair over the centuries for so carefully preserving not only a piece of British history but a piece of history that has had such an impact on Europe and the World as a whole; for upon the chair almost every English, then later British monarch have been crowned since 1308. For 700 years the royals of England have been crowned upon its seat.

The chair is made of oaken wood and originally did not have the four lions at its feet. They were added in the early 16th century (1500’s) by the Tutor dynasty and the four gold lions presently at the bottom of the chair where put in place of the originals in 1727. The space above the four lions was the former permanent home of the Stone of Scone. I will come back to speaking about the stone later on. Originally, the stone was completely enclosed by a decorated wooden panel, but over the years the panel was worn away thereby exposing the stone when it is set in place beneath the seat.

As mentioned, every monarch in England since Edward I in 1308 has been crowned upon the chair at a coronation ceremony, but there are a few exceptions. The 12 year old Edward V was proclaimed king in 1483 but his throne was quickly usurped by Richard III and Edward was placed in the Tower of London; and never seen again. He therefore was never officially coronated. That makes me want to study the War of the Roses more…it’s so hard to keep all these monarchs straight!!! There was one other monarch who was king but was never crowned; this being Edward VIII who abdicated in 1936. Both instances there were proclamations of kingship but never coronations. There are two other interesting facts that I feel would fit quite nicely in this section. The first is that in 1689 when a joint monarchy of William III (William of Orange, a Dutch royal) and Mary II was created. At the coronation ceremony a second chair was made for the Queen. Thus, in 700 years there were really only three monarchs of England who were not crowned upon King Edwards Chair. There is one more interesting bit of information, in 1653 Oliver Cromwell was proclaimed Lord Protector and the sat in King Edwards Chair for the ceremony. It should be noted though that Cromwell was not proclaimed a monarch, he did not want to be a king and was surprised even when Parliament wanted to give him power, and therefore the ceremony was not held in Wesminter Abbey, but in Westminster Hall. The ceremony had always been held in Wesminster Abbey to, I assume originally, go along with the idea of the divine right of Kings.

As a quick note Cromwell was head of the military and jointly ruled England with a Council of State and Parliament.

The Stone of Scone is surrounded by many legends. First it is said to be the stone that Jacob rested his head against "And Jacob rose up early in the morning, and took the stone that he had put for his pillows, and set it up for a pillar, and poured oil upon the top of it" (Genesis chapter 28, verse 18). O, I’m just going to paste straight from the site here to tell you the legends behind the stone, “Legends abound concerning the Stone of Scone and tradition identifies it with the one upon which Jacob rested his head at Bethel - "And Jacob rose up early in the morning, and took the stone that he had put for his pillows, and set it up for a pillar, and poured oil upon the top of it" (Genesis chapter 28, verse 18). The legend then says that Jacob's sons carried it to Egypt and from thence it passed to Spain with King Gathelus, son of Cecrops, the builder of Athens. About 700 BC it was said to be in Ireland, whither it was carried by the Spanish King's son Simon Brech, on his invasion of the island. There it was placed upon the sacred Hill of Tara, and called "Lia-Fail", the "fatal" stone, or "stone of destiny", for when the Irish kings were seated on it at coronations the Stone groaned aloud if the claimant was of royal race but remained silent if he was a pretender. Fergus Mor MacEirc (died 50l?), the founder of the Scottish monarchy, and one of the Blood Royal of Ireland, received it in Scotland, and Kenneth MacAlpin (d.860) finally deposited it in the monastery of Scone in Perthshire (846).” (http://www.westminster-abbey.org/tour/coronation_chair/index.html).

Now, here’s the really interesting part of the story. The original purpose of the chair was to enclose the Stone of Scone, and the stone being under the seat of the British Monarch was a symbol that England was “over” Scotland and its throne. You see, up until 1292 every Scottish king had been crowned upon the stone (and before the Scots, Irish monarchs had been crowned upon it). So, British monarchs, when crowned upon the King Edwards Chair were essentially proclaiming England’s power of Scotland and Ireland.

There is an ironic twist to this story though. Upon the stone is carved:

Ni fallat fatum, Scoti, quocunque locatum
Invenient lapidem, regnare tenentur ibidem

[If Fates go right, where'er this stone is found
The Scots shall monarchs of that realm be crowned]

Basically it says that whatever kingdom the Stone is found in that a Scot will be the ruler of that kingdom. This came true in 1603 with the crowning of James VI of Scotland (James I of England). So, the original purpose of the Stone was to show English rule over Scotland and then a Scot takes the British throne and once again puts a Scot ruler over Scotland…AND England. Isn’t that a kick in the pants?????

Oh, and for the record the Stone weighs 336 pounds and is composed of sandstone. Also, I tried to think of something funny/qwirky/clever to type here but failing to do so I will continue onto the next section.

There have been a few instances when the chair has been removed from Westminster Abbey. In WW2 the chair was moved and the Stone was placed in a vault. This was for their protection from the German bombing raids. On the last point I am not 100% sure, I just remember reading it. Please correct me if you know it to be false or would like to add information to it. In 1887 the chair didn’t actually left the Abbey but it was used for something other than a coronation. Queen Victoria used it for her Golden Jubilee services. As mentioned before the chair was moved to West Minster Hall where Oliver Cromwell was declared Lord Protector.

In 1950 the Stone was actually stolen from the chair by four Scottish nationalists and brought back to Scotland. It was retrieved again after negotiations with the nationalists and was promptly put into the vault that it was placed in during WW2 and wasn’t returned to the chair until 1952, in time for the coronation of Elizabeth II in 1953.

There is speculation that the current Stone is not the original. Some say the Scots hid the real stone and replaced it with another in anticipation of the invasion of Edward I circa. 1296. Also, there is speculation that the nationalists in 1950 didn’t give back the stone they stole, but replaced it with another one. The truth may never be known. Sometimes there is great wonder and tension when thinking about historical mysteries of such nature. Regardless, the current stone represents England’s rule over Scotland.

In 1996 the then Prime Minister of the United Kingdom, John Major, had the Stone returned to Scotland where it resides today in Edinburgh Castle. The Stone though was returned on the condition that it is restored to the chair when a coronation occurs in England.

Well, that’s my blog about the Coronation Chair of Britain and the Stone of Scone. I have no idea why it interests me so much. Maybe because it’s a representation of so many things, patriotism, deceit, power, honour, cruelty, pride (both good and bad), all of these things have characterized English monarchs over the centuries. These monarchs of England jointly have had perhaps the most influence on the world than the monarchs of any other nation throughout history, and for 700 years they have been crowned upon one chair, over one stone. The nation has changed much in 700 years but the Chair has remained.

Here is a link to a video clip of Queen Elizabeth II being crowned in 1953 at her coronation ceremony. There are several spots in the clip that show her on the Chair:

http://archives.cbc.ca/on_this_day/06/02/


Ok, that’s it. Frig….I love history.

-a history student"

Cheers,

Random Uni Student

The Stubborn Ounces of History

A thought...though by no means a new one...

no turning point in history occurs or significant historical personality makes their impact in a vacuum. Indeed, each is necessarily supported by many intentional and unintentional acts of other people; people who seem insignificant in the shadow of the event or the historical actor.

This is, of course, a very general and simple idea, but nonetheless warrants expression. In a moment of clarity while enjoying the sunshine on my campus this thought occurred to me while I was reading. In Tom Warner's book "Never Going Back: A History of Queer Activism in Canada" he writes about the evolution of gay and lesbian/feminist (closely linked during the gay liberation movement of the 1970's-1980's)in that a good number of small liberation organizations and publications were started and failed within a few years or less. These initiatives were constantly failing and yet more would be formed, fail, and more would be formed after those. Finally, in the late 1970's and onward gay liberation groups generally gained a more permanent status as circumstances changed. They would go on to have serious legislative, legal and social impacts upon Canada and Canadians. But, these impacts would not have occurred if it were not for what I'm going to label as stubborn ounces. These early groups and publications, now largely forgotten, paved the way for the stability of gay and lesbian political and social activist groups and publications that we see today. Each one added more weight to a movement which eventually would tip the scales of Canadian society. No matter how many failures the groups and publications continued to be formed...again...again...and again.

The gay and lesbian liberation movement is just one example of many that fits this historical pattern. It could easily be applied to any movement or occurrence, past or present. But perhaps I could nuance this common sense thought with a quotation from the late Tommy Douglas, former leader of the Saskatchewan and federal CCF/NDP parties between the 1940's and the 1960's...

"You say the little efforts that I make will do no good; they never will prevail to tip the hovering scale where justice hangs in balance. I don't think I ever thought they would, but I am prejudiced beyond debate in favour of my right to choose which side shall feel the stubborn ounces of my weight"

The acts of many INDIVIDUALS and SMALL groups working towards a goal are the "stubborn ounces" which far outweigh the importance of the significant events or historical actors as it is these stubborn ounces that provide the weight and thus the the power to create the inertia that is inherently present in the evolution of every epoc of human society.

Every vote counts, every e-mail, every petition signature, every Fscebook status, every link passed along etc. etc. are the stubborn ounces which tip the scale of justice and social evolution.

And here's some union and civil rights songs to complement. Also a video of the farewell speech of Tommy Douglas upon his resignation as leader of the NDP in 1971...I find it inspiring :)I do wish the NDP would its roots again as a movement rather than a party, but this may impossible, and is of course terribly idealistic.

Solidarity Forever:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kYiKdJoSsb8

We Shall Overcome:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QhnPVP23rzo&feature=related

Douglas steps down:
http://archives.cbc.ca/politics/parties_leaders/topics/851/

Cheers,

Random Uni Student

First Gay Rally

This is a news clip of the first gay liberation movement rally in Canada. There are several other interesting clips grouped with it in the "Gay and Lesbian Emergence: Out in Canada" section of the CBC online archives. For context see my previous blog on history as a human right. The rally took place in the same movement that gave birth to The Body Politic. A few short weeks after this rally a gay liberation group (Gays of Ottawa) was formed in the capital.

Enjoy a brief glimpse into Canada's gay liberation history:)

http://archives.cbc.ca/politics/rights_freedoms/clips/3227/

If you're interested in more context check out this link from the Canadian Lesbian and Gay Archives...

http://www.clga.ca/Material/Records/docs/wedemand.htm

Random Uni Student

The human right to history

While reading for an essay I came across an anthology of articles from an early Canadian gay liberation movement called The Body Politic. This was one of the very first gay liberation publications in Canada, being first published in 1971. In sum, the last gay liberation wave began in Canada in the late 1960's, moreso in the early 1970's. This movement advocated for a positive public visibility of gays and lesbians and pushed for their legislative/political, social, occupational, and legal rights.

In the introduction one section stuck out at me. It's a quotation, which to me, gives a shining example of the modern western human's need, and thus their right, to have a legitimate history. Anthropology and the study of nationalism tell us that humans naturally form into groups. These groups form identities, and each individual within that group conforms, in some aspects, to that group identity. This identity, as personal though bound to a group, is the right, the right to personally belong to the group to which ones feels most suited, or to more than one groups that ones feels suited. This can only be done if such a group has some sort of historical foundation, for a group cannot define itself in the present, or its vision for the future with an historical background by which to relatively compare its present and future against.

Gerald Hannon here explains his reasoning for contributing to The Body Politic over a number of years:

"I got hooked, I guess, on empowerment, the transformation of The Helpless Queer with no history and an unlikely future into Someone, into a group of Someones, who uncovered a history, who found heroes, who grabbed today and shook it till tomorrow fell out of its pocket and there was a place in it for us."

This individual in being part of the gay liberation visible gay identity helped to pull back the layers of society to reveal a distinctly queer history ("who uncovered a history") and how that history aided in its present identity ("grabbed today") and helped to focus upon its future ("shook it till tomorrow fell out and...there was a place in it for us").

Peronsal history, group history....social history...is a human right...deny it to no one.

It was once denied to Women, Canadian Japanese (only examples of many) as it was denied to Homosexuals. It has been denied in gender, race, and sexuality. Though it is not the start, NOW is the day to uncover the histories of those to who it is denied.

Maybe ask yourself, who are we denying today?

Random Uni Student

Ps. It can be a worthwhile thing for a group to understand its history, only to be ashamed of it and use that shame to redirect their role in the future to be as positive of one that's possible within their present perspectives.

pps. The quotation can be found in Flaunting it!: A Decade of Gay Journalism from The Body Politic.

"Democracy Canadian-style: How do you like it so far?"

This is an article from the Globe and Mail about the then upcoming prorogation of Parliament. Such prorogation at the whim of Stephen Harper and the Conservative Party has occured and once again his and his parties contempt for Canadian parliamentary convention and democracy is painstakingly evident. I fear a Conservative majority government and I this is a mistake on their part, the Liberals force an election, and at least reduce the Cons to a smaller minority. I really hope this move bites the Cons and Stephen Harper square in the ass.

Random Uni Student


Democracy Canadian-style: How do you like it so far? - Globe and Mail by Lawrence Martin

Link:
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/democracy-canadian-style-how-do-you-like-it-so-far/article1403148/


Published on Wednesday, Dec. 16, 2009 6:15PM EST Last updated on Thursday, Dec. 24, 2009 2:23AM EST by Lawrence Martin

When you think about it, the way to make governing easy is to dispense as much as is possible with the demands of democracy. The d-word is a drag. It gets in the way of the exercise of power. Ways need be found to circumvent it.

There are a variety of such ways. One is to limit the voice of the bureaucracy, the public service, making it more submissive and partisan. Ditto the foreign service. As well, you want to dispense with agency or commission heads who don't follow your thinking. If some agencies get particularly meddlesome, such as Elections Canada, take them to court.

There's an old-fashioned idea, once a Reform Party thing, that regular people – those grassroots folks – should have a sniff of the action. As nice as it sounds, don't go there. You need to amass unparalleled executive power so everything is top down and put through the filter of politics. For your own caucus, you enforce such tight discipline that no one dare cast an independent vote. You issue your members a secret handbook on how to disrupt parliamentary committees. For Question Period, you instruct your members to answer most queries with a putdown of the previous government's record.

A key facet of a downgrading democracy campaign has got to be cutting off access to information – so much so that you leave the Information Commissioner appalled, especially with the stonewalling at the Privy Council Office. Some sensitive documents are going to get out no matter how hard you try. So the strategy is to use national security as a cover to black out all potentially incriminating paragraphs. You may also wish to eliminate a huge government information registry (the Co-ordination of Access to Information Requests System) because the fewer the tracks, the better. You may also wish to prevent the publishing of departmental studies, especially ones that don't reflect well on your law-and-order proclivities.

It is said that a hallmark of democracy is the toleration of dissent. Best leave that one in the church pew. Exceptional measures need be used to crush the opposition. Stuff such as taking the unprecedented step of launching personal attack ads between election campaigns. Or trying to push through a measure that would effectively cut off financing to the opposition.

A heavy dose of demagoguery also can go a long way. Play on simple prejudices by accusing opponents of not supporting the troops or of being anti-Israel. If nothing's working, if the going gets really tough, don't hesitate to bring out the heavy timber. Just after Parliament has reopened, have it shut down.

If your campaign is waged effectively, you will enfeeble the checks and balances in the system and give the d-word a good clubbing, emerging very much in control.

That's effectively what's happened in Ottawa over the past four years. The Prime Minister is now in such command that he can get away with pretty much anything. And he is lauded for his conquests.

A test case of his powers is the re-emergence of the Afghan detainee controversy. The government is knee-deep in allegations of a cover-up, of obstruction of justice, of treating Parliament, as this newspaper said in an editorial, with contempt. The censoring of documents on the basis of national security – which also happened in the income trust controversy – is being met with great skepticism. The way the Military Police Complaints Commission has been blocked from probing the affair is unseemly. The treatment of diplomat Richard Colvin has spawned a letter of reproach from no fewer than 71 former ambassadors. William Johnson, a biographer of Stephen Harper, says flatly that “the government has subverted Canadian democracy.”

If true, it likely won't matter. The key is that once you've established such a pronounced degree of control over the levers of power, you're in position to strong-arm your way past anything. And so the government has halted hearings on the detainee file by boycotting them. And so the government is threatening to prorogue Parliament again so it doesn't have to face more detainee music.

It's more evidence from a stockpile of how the system's been brought to heel. It's democracy Canadian-style.

Blinded

Hi everyone, I'm trying to read through Paradise Lost over the holiday break from classes and I forgot how much I love reading it. One passage that strikes me everything time I read it I thought was worth sharing. Paradise Lost is an epic (really friggen long) poem written in the later half of the 17th century by John Milton. By 1652 Milton was completely blind when he wrote the poem (or rather recited it) and in one passage in particular he laments the loss of his eyesight. The passage tears at my heart when I try to emphasize with Milton and comprehend what it must be like to no longer be able to witness sunshine or know the changing of the seasons by have no vision of them, or to never again see the face of any person. However, I am at least solaced by the fact that Milton, at least according to the poem, didn't dwell in depression but found strength in his faith, as seen in the last 4 lines.

Paradise Lost - Book 3, lines 21-55

(Milton here is talking to the Holy Spirit - his 'muse" for the poem)

thee I revisit safe,
And feel thy sovran vital Lamp; but thou
Revisit'st not these eyes, that rowle in vain
To find thy piercing ray, and find no dawn;
So thick a drop serene hath quencht thir Orbs, [ 25 ]
Or dim suffusion veild. Yet not the more
Cease I to wander where the Muses haunt
Cleer Spring, or shadie Grove, or Sunnie Hill,
Smit with the love of sacred Song; but chief
Thee Sion and the flowrie Brooks beneath [ 30 ]
That wash thy hallowd feet, and warbling flow,
Nightly I visit: nor somtimes forget
Those other two equal'd with me in Fate,
So were I equal'd with them in renown,
Blind Thamyris and blind Mæonides, [ 35 ]
And Tiresias and Phineus Prophets old.
Then feed on thoughts, that voluntarie move
Harmonious numbers; as the wakeful Bird
Sings darkling, and in shadiest Covert hid
Tunes her nocturnal Note. Thus with the Year [ 40 ]
Seasons return, but not to me returns
Day, or the sweet approach of Ev'n or Morn,
Or sight of vernal bloom, or Summers Rose,
Or flocks, or heards, or human face divine;
But cloud in stead, and ever-during dark [ 45 ]
Surrounds me, from the chearful wayes of men
Cut off, and for the Book of knowledg fair
Presented with a Universal blanc
Of Nature's works to mee expung'd and ras'd,
And wisdome at one entrance quite shut out. [ 50 ]
So much the rather thou Celestial light
Shine inward, and the mind through all her powers
Irradiate, there plant eyes, all mist from thence
Purge and disperse, that I may see and tell
Of things invisible to mortal sight. [ 55 ]

Following the trends...

Just a quick note, I'm sitting in the library studying the trends of historical theory and thought and a thought came into my mind that has come and gone before. The farther I go on in university the more I see my thinking as following trends already laid out. This doesn't concern me, I don't see it as a bad thing and I still feel myself to be an individual, but it's both comforting, interesting, and disconcerting at the same time to realize that you are intimately linked to the trends in the atmosphere and community you live in...without you even realizing it. The more I read the more I realize, for example, that my historical thinking is deeply based in the inclusiveness and diversity that is present in post-modern historical thought....and I didn't even realize it was happening! I count it as a good thing that I feel that all fields of history are relevant in some respect and that all fields (both historical and non) are important to the study of history; an inter-disciplinary approach to history is necessary. This is why I love social history (very much a product of post-modernist thought) because it seeks to include EVERYONE AND EVERY GROUP so that nobody's history will ever be forgotten. Take a look at your own life, what trends and ways of thinking in your lifetime are you intimately affected by....maybe without realizing it?

Bye for now,

Random Uni Student

"Questions from a Worker Who Reads"

Hello Everyone, a poem was brought to my attention that grabbed at something in my history soul. Social history is the history of ordinary people in everyday life as opposed to the history of great people and leaders etc. I think this poem shows the contrast between the two and brings out the importance of social history. I may have a new favourite:) Everything else is doing fine, have had a few ideas for posts but havn't had the chance to sit and write them. Maybe soon. I've already placed it up
beside this picture in my office - see images.


Questions from a Worker Who Reads

Who built Thebes of the 7 gates ?
In the books you will read the names of kings.
Did the kings haul up the lumps of rock ?
And Babylon, many times demolished,
Who raised it up so many times ?
In what houses of gold glittering Lima did its builders live ?
Where, the evening that the Great Wall of China was finished, did the masons go?
Great Rome is full of triumphal arches.
Who erected them ?
Over whom did the Caesars triumph ?
Had Byzantium, much praised in song, only palaces for its inhabitants ?
Even in fabled Atlantis, the night that the ocean engulfed it,
The drowning still cried out for their slaves.
The young Alexander conquered India.
Was he alone ?
Caesar defeated the Gauls.
Did he not even have a cook with him ?
Philip of Spain wept when his armada went down.
Was he the only one to weep ?
Frederick the 2nd won the 7 Years War.
Who else won it ?
Every page a victory.
Who cooked the feast for the victors ?
Every 10 years a great man.
Who paid the bill ?
So many reports.
So many questions.

Bertolt Brecht 1935

Tim Horton's Canadian Again....wait....nm

So I heard on the CBC this morning that Tim Horton's has registered to and became Canadian based again. We were all a little perturbed when Tim Hortons became a an American company. This sounds like good news right? This sounded great to me to until I began to question that the company still might be american owned...and I'm right. I have nothing solid to go on because I havn't researched it and the only news report I did find was the news about the registration and not the finalization (which should come out within the day online)but I did find this as a comment on the story,

"What a bunch of crap. Its still isn't 'Canadian', its still owed by a US corporation, moving the head office to Canada DOESN'T make it Canadian. Wendy's parent company still owns it.

Countrystyle and Second Cup ARE Canadian.

Submitted by rroarrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr at 7:32 PM Monday, June 29 2009"

Canadian IN NAME ONLY! Fake nationalism. I do hope though that the food gets back to the quality (less fast food and more restaurant style) it was before it was sold to the US company...but I doubt it.

The story from June can be found here as well as on the CBC website.
http://www.thestar.com/business/article/658256

Random University Student

Ignatieff = brilliant academic, probably selfishly motivated, and grinch look-a-like

Hi everyone,

So, no matter how much I think Michael Ignatieff looks like the Grinch who stole Christmas (the resemblance is uncanny...it's his grin!!) and keeping in mind that John Kerry looks like the wicked witch of the west and Paul Martin looks like the gopher from the Winnie the Pooh cartoon series, AND no matter how much I believe (though it kills me to say it) the Conservatives when they accuse him of being in Canadian politics for his own self or his careers promotion, I still like him( more on his probably motives later)

To be honest, I don't care what his motives for running for PM are, as long as they're not malicious. Selfish doesn't bother me all that much. I don't believe it is his only motive, but I'm sure it's there. Let's be honest, MP's are human, and even the most well meaning and genuine MP's know that they've got a damn good job and that they're guaranteed almost any job if they losr their seat....it's kind of a perk of the job. I'm not trying to trash MP's...many of them I know are working very hard and on behalf of their consituents and their own personal and political values/beliefs. But, I digress.....ya, I ramble a lot...what of it????

Regardless of his motives, whether they be ethical or unethical, Mr. Ignatieff has, beyond measure, proved himself in a field I trust...academia (specifically history). His academic record, even if you don't agree with his opinions, proves that he is a capable, intelligent, sobre thinking, hard working,and politically/socially clever man (you don't become a leading professor at Harvard or Oxford by intelligence alone). This may sound a bit naive, but I just can't help but respect a man who has received such internal acclaim and respect from the academic community...

This biograpgical excerpt was taken from...
http://www.international.gc.ca/odskelton/ignatieff_bio.aspx?lang=eng

"Michael Ignatieff was born in Toronto on 12 May 1947. He graduated from the University of Toronto with a B.A. in History. After earning his Ph.D. from Harvard University, he was elected a Senior Research Fellow at King's College, Cambridge. He has taught at Harvard, Cambridge, Oxford, the University of California, the University of London and the London School of Economics.

For several years Dr. Ignatieff lived in England, where he was a regular broadcaster and critic on television and radio, including feature programmes on Channel 4 and the British Broadcasting Corporation...Michael Ignatieff (was) the Carr Professor and Director of the Carr Center for Human Rights Policy at the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard University..." In addition and including the beforesaid..."In 2005, Ignatieff was appointed a senior fellow at the University of Toronto’s Munk Centre for International Studies. Prior to that, he served as Director of the Carr Center for Human Rights Policy at Harvard University for five years. In 2001, while at Harvard, Ignatieff was appointed as a Canadian commissioner on the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty, which helped guide a United Nations response to humanitarian crises seen in Kosovo, Rwanda and Darfur."(Taken from: http://www.mapleleafweb.com/voter-almanac/michael-ignatieff).

Also keep in mind, contrary to Conservative ads, it's not like Ignatieff just arrived here a month ago and if he didn't win the PMO he would go back to teaching...
"Ignatieff has had a meteoric rise in his political career. First elected in 2006, he has represented the riding of Etobicoke—Lakeshore, which is part of Toronto, Ontario. He first ran for the party leadership in 2006, but lost. He was recognized as the Parliamentarian of the Year in 2007." (Taken from: http://www.mapleleafweb.com/voter-almanac/michael-ignatieff).

He's been deeply involved in Canadian federal politcs since 2006! and failed once to achieve the leadership. I would assume that if he had only his own career in mind he would have continued being one of the top academics in the world and made his money and reputation that way. As well, he's been involved in the Liberal party before he even had a career, "Although he only entered politics recently, Ignatieff has been actively involved in the Liberal Party for more than 40 years. He campaigned for Lester B. Pearson in 1965 and served as a delegate and national youth coordinator for Pierre Trudeau in 1968."
(Taken from: http://www.mapleleafweb.com/voter-almanac/michael-ignatieff).

Wait...there's more!!

Check out his honourary doctorates...
"Michael Ignatieff as of June 2009 has received 11 Honorary Doctorates (list below is incomplete).

• Bishop's University in Lennoxville, Quebec in 1995
• University of Stirling in Stirling, Scotland (D.Univ) on June 28, 1996[5]
• Queen's University in Kingston, Ontario (LL.D) on October 25, 2001[6]
• University of Western Ontario in London, Ontario (D.Litt) on October 26, 2001[7]
• University of New Brunswick in Fredericton, New Brunswick (D.Litt) in 2001[8]
• McGill University in Montreal, Quebec (D.Litt) on June 17, 2002[9]
• University of Regina in Regina, Saskatchewan (LL.D) om May 28, 2003[10]
• Whitman College in Walla Walla, Washington (LL.D) in 2004[11]
• Niagara University in Lewiston, New York, USA (DHL) May 21, 2006[12]
(Taken from...http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_ignatieff)

11!! FRiGGEN HONOURARY DEGREES! I'm impressed.

On top of all of this, he is a prolific writer...


1. A Just Measure of Pain: Penitentiaries in the Industrial Revolution, 1780-1850 Macmillan, 1978

2.The Wealth and Virtue: The Shaping of Political Economy in the Scottish Enlightenment (editor with Istvan Hont) Cambridge University Press, 1983

3.The Needs of Strangers Chatto & Windus, 1984

4.Nineteen Nineteen (with Hugh Brody) Faber and Faber, 1985

5.The Russian Album Chatto & Windus, 1987

6.Asya Chatto & Windus, 1991

7.Blood and Belonging: Journeys into the New Nationalism BBC Books, 1993

8.Scar Tissue Chatto & Windus, 1993

9.Isaiah Berlin: A Life Chatto & Windus, 1998

10.The Warrior's Honour: Ethnic War and the Modern Conscience Chatto & Windus, 1998

11.The Rights Revolution House of Anansi Press (Canada), 2000

12.Virtual War: Kosovo and Beyond Chatto & Windus, 2000

13.Human Rights as Politics and Idolatry Princeton University Press (US), 2001

14.Charlie Johnson in the Flames: A Novel Chatto & Windus, 2003

15.Empire Lite: Nation Building in Bosnia, Kosovo, Afghanistan Vintage, 2003

16.The Lesser Evil: Political Ethics in an Age of Terror Princeton University Press (US), 2004

17.American Exceptionalism and Human Rights Princeton University Press (US), 2005

18.After Paradise Chatto & Windus, 2007

(Taken from: http://www.contemporarywriters.com/authors/?p=auth141)

And has won many literary awards as well...

1988 Governor General's Literary Award for Non-Fiction (Canada) The Russian Album

1988 Heinemann Award The Russian Album

1993 Booker Prize for Fiction (shortlist) Scar Tissue

1993 MIND Book of the Year/Allen Lane Award Scar Tissue

1993 Whitbread Novel Award (shortlist) Scar Tissue

1999 James Tait Black Memorial Prize (for biography) (shortlist) Isaiah Berlin: A Life

1999 Jewish Quarterly Literary Prize for Non-Fiction (shortlist) Isaiah Berlin: A Life

2001 George Orwell Prize Virtual War: Kosovo and Beyond

(Taken from: http://www.contemporarywriters.com/authors/?p=auth141)

Now, I know very well that other politicians and both Stephan Harper and Jack Layton are university grads, and I beliece Jack Layton hold a Phd in Political Science and taught at Ryerson University, and Stephan Harper has Masters in Economics from the University of Calgary. Clearly, these men all of the capacity and abilities to make it through university and succede in academia and politics. I give them my respect whole heartedly for this. But, Ignatieff trumps them all in academia.

My earlier reasons in a previous blog for voting Liberal this coming election still stand. If Igantieff wasn't the leader they would still stand. However, it is no hard task for me, and with a clear conscience and solid foundation behind me, to vote Liberal with Michael Ignatieff as the hopeful PM.

Thanks for reading! Any corrections are welcome, my apologies if I missed a reference or two. All information can be found via wikipedia or a quick google search.

I found this 2004 lecture by Ignatieff...it's an interesting look at his politics before he was in the Canadian political spotlight...

http://forum-network.org/speaker/michael-ignatieff

Random Student