babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


  
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » current events   » canadian politics   » Now that the Right is in Power, How do we Unite the Left?

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: Now that the Right is in Power, How do we Unite the Left?
Matt_Risser
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11800

posted 17 March 2006 10:59 AM      Profile for Matt_Risser     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The right has taken power recently but with a particularly small minority of the vote, despite the fact that the majority of Canadians and Parliamentarians are on the moderate left, so should we and if so how do we get leftwing groups together such as the leftwing Liberals, moderate New Democrats, leftwing Greens, Red Tories and soft seperatist Bloc members together into one 'Progressive' option in order to keep this from happening again and present a REAL moderate leftwing alternative?
From: Lunenburg, NS | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
Briguy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1885

posted 17 March 2006 11:00 AM      Profile for Briguy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Step 1: Stop pretending that there are leftwing Liberals, or at least leftwing Liberals who have any say in policy.
From: No one is arguing that we should run the space program based on Physics 101. | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 17 March 2006 11:01 AM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
What is a "moderate New Democrat"? An example will suffice.
From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
writer
editor emeritus
Babbler # 2513

posted 17 March 2006 11:02 AM      Profile for writer     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Step 2: A pause for reflection. Are you SURE you are the first person to arrive on babble with this brain wave? Perhaps take a moment to discover whether other threads exist, and add your great thoughts to them instead of reinventing a dull wheel.
From: tentative | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
Frustrated Mess
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8312

posted 17 March 2006 11:05 AM      Profile for Frustrated Mess   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Step 3: Recognize the right is not united and the left will never be. What wins elections is coalitions. Why is it the left is unable to build a coalition?
From: doom without the gloom | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
Stockholm
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3138

posted 17 March 2006 11:06 AM      Profile for Stockholm     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
According to all the available research something like 85% of Canadians consider themselves to be "centrists".
From: Toronto | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
Matt_Risser
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11800

posted 17 March 2006 11:06 AM      Profile for Matt_Risser     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
a moderate New Democrat for me would be a Social Democrat and not a Democratic Socialist
From: Lunenburg, NS | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
Matt_Risser
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11800

posted 17 March 2006 11:08 AM      Profile for Matt_Risser     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I agree that there are no leftwing Liberals with say in policy, thats why I think we should try to lure them away from the Liberal party
From: Lunenburg, NS | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 17 March 2006 11:11 AM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Matt_Risser:
a moderate New Democrat for me would be a Social Democrat and not a Democratic Socialist

Thanks, you made my day. Good example. Signing off now.


From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
Matt_Risser
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11800

posted 17 March 2006 11:12 AM      Profile for Matt_Risser     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
how many of those "centrist" canadians would flip if you took away their leftist social programs like healthcare, EI etc.. they believe they are centrist because the centre has moved to the left here
From: Lunenburg, NS | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 17 March 2006 11:16 AM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Matt_Risser:
leftwing Liberals, moderate New Democrats, leftwing Greens, Red Tories and soft seperatist Bloc members

Ok, this should be simple:

Name one of each.

Just so we can be sure we know what we are talking about.


From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
Matt_Risser
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11800

posted 17 March 2006 11:32 AM      Profile for Matt_Risser     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
leftwing Liberal would be Sheila Copps (but there are normal ones too lol), a Moderate New Democrat would be Peter Stoffer, Joan Russow is a leftwing green as is half the party who wants to get rid of Harris, and a soft seperatist does anyone else know?
From: Lunenburg, NS | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
Briguy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1885

posted 17 March 2006 11:32 AM      Profile for Briguy     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Meh. I'm annoyed enough already.

[ 17 March 2006: Message edited by: Briguy ]


From: No one is arguing that we should run the space program based on Physics 101. | Registered: Nov 2001  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 17 March 2006 11:50 AM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Matt_Risser:
leftwing Liberal would be Sheila Copps (but there are normal ones too lol), a Moderate New Democrat would be Peter Stoffer, Joan Russow is a leftwing green as is half the party who wants to get rid of Harris, and a soft seperatist does anyone else know?

Peter Stoffer wants to sever the NDP's ties with the unions.


From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
Frustrated Mess
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8312

posted 17 March 2006 12:00 PM      Profile for Frustrated Mess   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
soft seperatist does anyone else know?

All separatists are soft. Everyone of them. Why, in my day we would have lifted Quebec onto our shoulders and carried it away. Labrador, too. Then what would they have done? No gumption these separatists of today.


From: doom without the gloom | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 17 March 2006 12:07 PM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Yeah, old "Cottonelle" Parizeau was a softie, but he was replaced by Lucien Bouche-Hard. Then there was Burn-Hard Laundry, the water was soft but not him. Finally we're playing with Jean Charades.

Soft separatist!

Hey, here's a good one: "Soft federalist".

I love categories. They're so refreshingly humanizing.

[Moderators: all the above is a pathetic attempt at ironic humour, aimed at denigrating and belittling the attempt to force-fit complex political distinctions into simple-minded slots.]

[ 17 March 2006: Message edited by: unionist ]


From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
Frustrated Mess
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8312

posted 17 March 2006 12:11 PM      Profile for Frustrated Mess   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
all the above

Not all of it. I'm pretty darned serious. If my back wasn't out from trying to carry Alberta away on my own - them damned Western separatists are a buncha lazy, good for nuthin's - I'd still try to carry off Quebec.

**Edited to add: And Labrador too.

[ 17 March 2006: Message edited by: Frustrated Mess ]


From: doom without the gloom | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 17 March 2006 12:17 PM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I have it on good authority that the three-ply stuff separates softly.
From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
Matt_Risser
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11800

posted 17 March 2006 01:30 PM      Profile for Matt_Risser     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Peter Stoffer wants to cut ties to Unions and so do I, unions stifle the potential of the NDP by making it unappealing to other progressive groups, plus union members dont vote NDP anyway, and new electoral finance laws will make them utterly useless in financing the party, so why stay connected to them, they will always support the NDP anyway what other choice do they have
From: Lunenburg, NS | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 17 March 2006 01:34 PM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Matt_Risser:
Peter Stoffer wants to cut ties to Unions and so do I, unions stifle the potential of the NDP by making it unappealing to other progressive groups, plus union members dont vote NDP anyway, and new electoral finance laws will make them utterly useless in financing the party, so why stay connected to them, they will always support the NDP anyway what other choice do they have

Very eloquent. Thanks for letting me know I have no other choice. Now I understand what you mean by "soft separatist". I thought it had to do with Québec.


From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
Frustrated Mess
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8312

posted 17 March 2006 02:03 PM      Profile for Frustrated Mess   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
plus union members dont vote NDP anyway ... they will always support the NDP anyway

Which is it?


From: doom without the gloom | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 17 March 2006 02:06 PM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Frustrated Mess:

Which is it?


Simple. We'll always support them and never vote for them. Google "dialectics".


From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
Frustrated Mess
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8312

posted 17 March 2006 02:12 PM      Profile for Frustrated Mess   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
So union members don't vote NDP? Not even in Sault Ste. Marie or Windsor?
From: doom without the gloom | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
TweakedEnigma
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10847

posted 17 March 2006 02:33 PM      Profile for TweakedEnigma   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I have to agree the Right is still divided and it will blow up in Harper's face sooner or later. He is creating the same atmosphere that gave birth to the Aliance. The real question I think is how do we keep them from stealing the NDP vote this time around?

PS

Matt_Risser read your PM's man

[ 17 March 2006: Message edited by: TweakedEnigma ]


From: Fredericton, NB | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged
West Coast Greeny
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6874

posted 17 March 2006 03:09 PM      Profile for West Coast Greeny     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Matt_Risser:
leftwing Liberal would be Sheila Copps (but there are normal ones too lol), a Moderate New Democrat would be Peter Stoffer, Joan Russow is a leftwing green as is half the party who wants to get rid of Harris, and a soft seperatist does anyone else know?

THAT would be the party to defeat Stephen Harper? *runs screaming from room*

*comes back*

Matt, there is a good reason why there shouldn't be a unitied left in Canada.

The "united left" in the USA.

[ 17 March 2006: Message edited by: West Coast Greeny ]


From: Ewe of eh. | Registered: Sep 2004  |  IP: Logged
arborman
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4372

posted 17 March 2006 03:23 PM      Profile for arborman     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I actually support some changes in the relationship between unions and the NDP. The main reason I say so is because we can continue to work toward common goals, while increasing the internal democratic processes of the NDP (which block voting does not do).

That being said, I am conflicted as a union member and an NDP member.


From: I'm a solipsist - isn't everyone? | Registered: Aug 2003  |  IP: Logged
Vansterdam Kid
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5474

posted 17 March 2006 07:43 PM      Profile for Vansterdam Kid   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by unionist:

Very eloquent. Thanks for letting me know I have no other choice. Now I understand what you mean by "soft separatist". I thought it had to do with Québec.


The right is smarter, they don't have businesses be official members, as affiliated-organizations, of their parties.

[ 17 March 2006: Message edited by: Vansterdam Kid ]


From: bleh.... | Registered: Apr 2004  |  IP: Logged
Matt_Risser
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11800

posted 17 March 2006 10:36 PM      Profile for Matt_Risser     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
honestly grassroots union support might go up as soon as the NDP stops taking their money haha
From: Lunenburg, NS | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
Matt_Risser
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11800

posted 18 March 2006 09:03 PM      Profile for Matt_Risser     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I think the Youth organizations of the parties would be the only way to spawn a united Left what does everyone else say?
From: Lunenburg, NS | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
Frustrated Mess
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8312

posted 18 March 2006 09:26 PM      Profile for Frustrated Mess   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Just because I enjoy repeating mysef: coalitions win elections. A "unite the left" strategy will only result in resources spent that can never be recovered.
From: doom without the gloom | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
Heavy Sharper
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11809

posted 18 March 2006 09:49 PM      Profile for Heavy Sharper        Edit/Delete Post
United left = Liberal Democratic Party led by Bob Rae = any rational progressive jumping ship to the Greens or the BQ.
From: Calgary | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
TheStudent
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11410

posted 18 March 2006 09:51 PM      Profile for TheStudent        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Matt_Risser:
I think the Youth organizations of the parties would be the only way to spawn a united Left what does everyone else say?
How do you see this working? I know for a fact that the young Liberals have been moving increasingly far to the right over the last number of years.

From: Re-instate Audra Now! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
Screaming Lord Byron
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4717

posted 18 March 2006 11:04 PM      Profile for Screaming Lord Byron     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Heavy Sharper:
United left = Liberal Democratic Party led by Bob Rae = any rational progressive jumping ship to the Greens or the BQ.

People proposing this forget this fact. I sure as hell would not vote for that party - which could only ever be dominated by the Liberal Party of Canada. The votes it gains would be counter-balanced by the votes it loses, and we would be left with what would basically be the Liberal Party, but no NDP. I think that's what really is at play here - an attempt by Liberals to get rid of the NDP.


From: Calgary | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Threads
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3415

posted 19 March 2006 12:46 AM      Profile for Threads     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Screaming Lord Byron:

People proposing this forget this fact. I sure as hell would not vote for that party - which could only ever be dominated by the Liberal Party of Canada. The votes it gains would be counter-balanced by the votes it loses, and we would be left with what would basically be the Liberal Party, but no NDP. I think that's what really is at play here - an attempt by Liberals to get rid of the NDP.



Assuming, of course, that the Newer Democratic Party doesn't form following such a merger.

But more seriously, I would probably only vote for this putative party if their candidate in my riding were of especially exceptional quality.


From: where I stand | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
NWOntarian
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9295

posted 19 March 2006 01:31 AM      Profile for NWOntarian   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Screaming Lord Byron:

The votes it gains would be counter-balanced by the votes it loses, and we would be left with what would basically be the Liberal Party, but no NDP.


What a sorry situation that would be. What would the Liberals do without their best policy think tank?

The only way to unite the left is to unite the actual left -- which the Liberals, whatever their pretensions, are not a part of. The NDP needs to undergo some serious internal reformations to make itself more relevant to today's youth -- there's an awful lot of them who don't care about party politics because they don't see what it matters to them. The party should be a facilitator amongst the various social movements and groups that exist today, not another competing voice with them.

Here in London, where there's a huge population of university students, when I went to a nomination meeting a couple years ago the hall was packed with people old enough to be my parents, and less young people than I have fingers on one hand.

I think a lot of it has to do with the way that parties are operating today. They're just trying to sell a product. The Liberals and Conservatives are certainly doing this, and more and more it's what the NDP is doing as well. The message is lost among so much background noise.


From: London, ON | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged
Hephaestion
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4795

posted 19 March 2006 03:09 AM      Profile for Hephaestion   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by NWOntarian:

Here in London, where there's a huge population of university students, when I went to a nomination meeting a couple years ago the hall was packed with people old enough to be my parents, and less young people than I have fingers on one hand.



You want to attract the proverbial "disaffected youth"? Well, it *can* be done, despite what some people might think and say. Howard Dean struck a chord at first in the US, and tapped into that in a BIG way. And it was paying off for him too, which is what scared the shit outta the DLC and all his competitors. So the trick is, try to emulate what Dean was starting to accomplish (but from a Canadian perspective, of course.) Don't jump on me about how the situation is different in the States, and one can't cart strategies across the border willy-nilly, like a parcel. I mean, Straussian/Rovian tactics would never work to get a right-wing ideologue elected up here, for instance, right?

So, how to accomplish what Dean did, or was starting to do? I'm not talking about the donations here, so much (although that would definitely be a side benefit). I'm talking about the energy, the enthusiasm and excitement that infused the Dean campaign in the early days, when everyone just knew he didn't have a chance -- everyone except the "Deaniacs"... It *can* be done, and without building it all on a cult of personality, which is part of what Dean's appeal was based on. It can be done by going back to the lesson in Clair Gillis' story:

quote:
You can lock up a man, and you can lock up a mouse, but you can't lock up an idea.


When's the last time the NDP stood for an idea ?? It does right now, you say? Well, then why do so few people understand what that idea is? Especially the "disaffected youth"? The NDP must not be getting that idea across very clearly. Which leads right up to NW Ontarian's other point,

quote:
I think a lot of it has to do with the way that parties are operating today. They're just trying to sell a product. The Liberals and Conservatives are certainly doing this, and more and more it's what the NDP is doing as well. The message is lost among so much background noise.


You say it so well, NWO... I had this feeling during the last election, but what with all the other crap about Desjarlais and Schreyer and so on, I didn't feel like opening up yet another point of contention... I kept *wishing* that Jack would (figuratively speaking), set his talking points aside, shove the teleprompter away and wave down his strategists, and look straight into the camera and say, "Look, let's cut the bullshit. You know and I know that the Liberals are lying through their teeth and have only ever TALKED a good line about being progressive. Let me tell you what being a REAL progressive means..." and speak from his heart. There were glimpses of this, but just fleeting glimpses. For the most part, the message seemed to be buried under a pile of "massaging" of the message -- it all seemed too crafted, and stage-managed, and Jack came across like he was reading lines all the damn time.

You want "the youth" (and by that, I include even jaded old cynics like myself, who yearn for a reason to feel that thrill of passion and idealism again) to get roused up and passionate and to *believe*... then throw away the cue cards and say what you *believe*, articulate a vision of what you're shooting for, your "New Jerusalem" for the 21st century, your "Just Society". What, the NDP has been saying that? Then why does it all sound so pre-packaged, so focus-group-tested, so stale? "Staying on message" is one thing, but when The Message starts to drown out The Vision, then there's a problem, and (to my mind) that was happening in the last election, and it made Jack come across sounding phony or evasive, such as the complaint that he wouldn't answer direct questions in the debate, for instance.

I am reminded of a clip of Shirley Douglas from the "Ideas" radio program last week, in which she told about her father addressing a group of farmers and blue collar workers at a rally, when he decided to go "off script". Shirley said he started talking about global financing, world capitalism and (as she phrased it) "what we now call today 'globalism', although we didn't have that word at the time." She recalled how her father said, "Don't you let anyone tell you that this is too complex, that you can't understand it, that it's too difficult for you to grasp, because it's NOT!" And then her father gave a speech, where he laid it all bare, off the top of his head. "By the end of it," Shirley said, "people were standing there with tears in their eyes, and one woman called out, 'I get it! I GET IT!', and my father was *so* pleased. That's what it was all about for him, and it was worth all the effort and work, even more than success at the polls, was to reach people so that they 'got it'."

I am paraphrasing Shirley Douglas' comments, but that was the gist of what she said, and it struck me as I was listening to it that even after all these years, just the memory of that speech still fired her up, still enthused her, still "put the gleam of battle in the eye of an old warhorse"... Because of an Idea. And because her father was articulating it.

You wanna know how to wake that slumbering giant, the indifferent, the tuned out, the apathetic? Then shake them up, wake them up... give them an Idea. Do what Tommy did. Do what Dean did (or started to). Do what (and I *never* thought I'd say this) Rev. Al Sharpton is trying to do. Stop talking about The Message and start talking about The Idea. Even the apathetic and the indifferent can sense the difference.

Hell, you might even rehabilitate this old cynic one more time...

[ 19 March 2006: Message edited by: Hephaestion ]


From: goodbye... :-( | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
TweakedEnigma
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10847

posted 19 March 2006 03:27 AM      Profile for TweakedEnigma   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Hephaestion Man have you hit the nail on the head. People will tell us its not that easy but damn it before the election I talked to every person I knew that was or wasnt going to vote. Spoke from the heart about a better country and I turned almost every person I talked to with the exceptions of a few die hard CPC members.
From: Fredericton, NB | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged
Matt_Risser
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11800

posted 19 March 2006 12:29 PM      Profile for Matt_Risser     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The idea for a new party to unite the moderate left doesnt mean a merger between the Libs and NDP or a takeover. It means, to me at least, a coming together of all the progressives in Canada to create a truly progressive party that is not tied to any organization insofar as to have bloc voting, it would be a party with a focus on issues that really matter to Canadians but with a modern and moderate image focusing on all Canadians but recognizing the advantage of creating a party with broad based youth support
(which i think is quite possible because most youth even the Young Liberals are quite leftwing i havent heard anything about them moving to the right),and most importantly of all it would be a coalition capable of forming the federal government.

From: Lunenburg, NS | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 19 March 2006 12:37 PM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Hephaestion:
Stop talking about The Message and start talking about The Idea. Even the apathetic and the indifferent can sense the difference.

Hephaestion, I liked your impassioned post, and I have a question. If someone asked you to sum up "The Idea" in a few lines or paragraphs, could you do it?

[Edited to include "or paragraphs" - my point is not to limit the explanation, but rather to understand it.]

[ 19 March 2006: Message edited by: unionist ]


From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 19 March 2006 12:39 PM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Matt_Risser:
the moderate left

Matt, could you give me an idea of what distinguishes the "moderate left" from the centre or the right or the non-moderate left? Just one or two examples will do, because otherwise I read these words and just get a headache.


From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
Matt_Risser
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11800

posted 19 March 2006 01:13 PM      Profile for Matt_Risser     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
ok i look at like this "the moderate left" are progressives and social democrats, "the far left" are Socialists, "the centre right" are the Liberals (despite what they may say), "the middle-far right" are the Conservatives, my criticisms of the NDP aren't so much policy based I agree on them with most issues, more structural problems that I believe prevent the party from grasping the electoral success it deserves because of the image the public has of it, and I think a new party and a fresh start could give the left a real chance to take government more often and in more areas
From: Lunenburg, NS | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 19 March 2006 01:32 PM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Matt_Risser:
ok i look at like this "the moderate left" are progressives and social democrats, "the far left" are Socialists, "the centre right" are the Liberals (despite what they may say), "the middle-far right" are the Conservatives, my criticisms of the NDP aren't so much policy based I agree on them with most issues, more structural problems that I believe prevent the party from grasping the electoral success it deserves because of the image the public has of it, and I think a new party and a fresh start could give the left a real chance to take government more often and in more areas


I appreciate the (debatable) synonyms. I still want examples of distinguishing issues. How about just one?


From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
Screaming Lord Byron
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4717

posted 19 March 2006 01:36 PM      Profile for Screaming Lord Byron     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Threads:

Assuming, of course, that the Newer Democratic Party doesn't form following such a merger.

Which it probably would. Or I would hope so, at least.


From: Calgary | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
TweakedEnigma
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10847

posted 19 March 2006 01:38 PM      Profile for TweakedEnigma   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Matt_Risser:
ok i look at like this "the moderate left" are progressives and social democrats, "the far left" are Socialists, "the centre right" are the Liberals (despite what they may say), "the middle-far right" are the Conservatives, my criticisms of the NDP aren't so much policy based I agree on them with most issues, more structural problems that I believe prevent the party from grasping the electoral success it deserves because of the image the public has of it, and I think a new party and a fresh start could give the left a real chance to take government more often and in more areas


I would say you got the break down of the groups well enough but I think Hephaestion has got the right Idea making a new party out of old ones hasn't really been a huge force in the past. What hapened in this election was that the Liberals didn't present anything & the cons did, the NDP attempted to but failed. We gotta go back to what brought us to the dance the idea of things being better and telling people how we intend to do and not with talking points but with real heart and showing that we really wanna help all the people of Canada.

It is possible just look here we pulled ahead but during that election we let other people talk over us on the issues. Lets not let that happen againg and let keep pushing forward.


From: Fredericton, NB | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged
Frustrated Mess
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8312

posted 19 March 2006 04:07 PM      Profile for Frustrated Mess   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
If someone asked you to sum up "The Idea" in a few lines or paragraphs, could you do it?

I would be really impressed if he could. This is the vision thing I discussed in another thread. There must be a vision, an ideal, to be sought or what's the point? And it has to be tangible. But the vision must also have broad appeal and that is the challenge.

The lack of a vision speaks to the way campaign messages are developed. If you have a vision you develop a message that speaks to that vision and is based up principles and values and you repeat that same message every election as the vision, principles and values remain the same.

When you lack a vision, principles, and values, then you package a message you think will sell. Right now I agree that the NDP lacks a vision for the country.


From: doom without the gloom | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
Suaros
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10562

posted 19 March 2006 04:12 PM      Profile for Suaros     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The problem with the idea of uniting "leftwing Liberals" with other leftist parties is that they dont exist. There are the Chretien and Martin/Turner wings in the party, and neither of them are really left of middle. Despite what you may think, Chretien was a fiscal conservative (brushing aside Martin, he had Manley chosen). Martin was definately a fiscal conservative -- and in terms of social values, they are indifferent. I don't believe that you are right when you say the majority of Canadians are centre-left, because if they were then the left would have historically held power more. The left has not done well in Canada -- the NDP/CCF are really the only leftist party, and their peak level of support in '88 did nothing for them.
From: Toronto | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged
Frustrated Mess
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8312

posted 19 March 2006 04:37 PM      Profile for Frustrated Mess   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
It's not what Canadians are that matters, it's how they perceive themselves and Canadians perceive themselves as socially left and fiscally conservative. This is what Tommy Douglas tapped into. Douglas was fiscally conservative.

Canada's left has allowed Conservatives to brand themselves as being fiscally responsible and the Liberals as being fiscally loose and the left as being completely irresponsible. This goes almost entirely unchallenged by the media even though it is a construct without foundation. Even the left has bought into the myth without challenging the reality.

The reason Canada's left has not fared well electorally is partly because the left has failed to challenge perceptions and, in a larger part, because the left has failed to offer a vision, or even a consistent message, year after year.

It becomes, for many, a choice between the devil you know and the devil you don't know.

A good example is when polls show the concerns of voters closely match the priorities of the NDP but their party preference is Conservative or Liberal. That underlines the failure of the NDP to resonate with voters.

[ 19 March 2006: Message edited by: Frustrated Mess ]


From: doom without the gloom | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
Hephaestion
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4795

posted 19 March 2006 04:56 PM      Profile for Hephaestion   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by unionist:

If someone asked you to sum up "The Idea" in a few lines or paragraphs, could you do it?



Hell, sure I could. I'm a writer, that's what I do. Could I do it quickly or easily? I doubt it, and if it was to work well, it would require thought, and careful crafting. I'm not Douglas, with a vast amount of public speaking experience, who could set aside a written speech and give an off-the-cuff barn-burner to rally the troops. But I could write it, if I had enough time to think it out, and distill a lot into some clear, concise lines. For instance, I like what Frustrated Mess said here:

quote:
Canada's left has allowed Conservatives to brand themselves as being fiscally responsible and the Liberals as being fiscally loose and the left as being completely irresponsible. This goes almost entirely unchallenged by the media even though it is a construct without foundation. Even the left has bought into the myth without challenging the reality.


But that doesn't resonate -- and stick -- like Douglas' phrase, "I don't think spending more than you've got is particularly socialist, I think it's irresponsible!"

See what I mean? The intent is the same, but Douglas' phrase is easily remembered -- and repeated, just like Dean's well-known, "Hi, my name is Howard Dean, and I'm from the Democratic wing of the Democratic Party." It's a phrase that packs a punch because of not only what is SAYS but what it *stands for*. And everybody "gets it" as soon as they hear it.

I could write that kinda thing, given some time, and a set of clear priorities and principles to base it on, but not right now... I gotta go off to town right away...

[ 19 March 2006: Message edited by: Hephaestion ]


From: goodbye... :-( | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 19 March 2006 06:07 PM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
My headache isn't getting better, but I can probably take this level of pain for a while longer. Is no one able to say what the Left stands for -- the Vision -- or the Idea -- or maybe just a small piece of it?
From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
Matt_Risser
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11800

posted 19 March 2006 06:24 PM      Profile for Matt_Risser     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
ok i just wanna reiterate that i believe that we need a new party in order to have a fresh start, no matter what the "NDP" does to improve its electoral success no matter how right it is, and it is, they can't sell it because it has a specific image that will never change. So my argument here is to build a fresh start for the left by using the NDP as the main engine to bring all the moderate progressive groups together.
From: Lunenburg, NS | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
N.Beltov
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4140

posted 19 March 2006 06:25 PM      Profile for N.Beltov   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
unionist: Is no one able to say what the Left stands for -- the Vision -- or the Idea -- or maybe just a small piece of it?

FFS! Government by us plebes, of course. I call it socialism. You can call it whatever you like just as long as regular, ordinary people take over.


From: Vancouver Island | Registered: May 2003  |  IP: Logged
Hunky_Monkey
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 6081

posted 19 March 2006 06:34 PM      Profile for Hunky_Monkey     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Frustrated Mess:

I would be really impressed if he could. This is the vision thing I discussed in another thread. There must be a vision, an ideal, to be sought or what's the point? And it has to be tangible. But the vision must also have broad appeal and that is the challenge.

The lack of a vision speaks to the way campaign messages are developed. If you have a vision you develop a message that speaks to that vision and is based up principles and values and you repeat that same message every election as the vision, principles and values remain the same.

When you lack a vision, principles, and values, then you package a message you think will sell. Right now I agree that the NDP lacks a vision for the country.


Agreed. No "big ideas" or vision. And often, we're on the defensive.

"You campaign in poetry. You govern in prose." - Mario Cuomo.


From: Halifax | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Adv.poll
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12274

posted 19 March 2006 07:20 PM      Profile for Adv.poll     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The NDP has vision, and good ideas, unfortunatly is not very good at marketing these. Many people i talk to don't know what the NDPstand for. after a breif conversation the light bulb goes on over their heads. It all comes down to how well you can maket your message, and it can't be done effectivly in 28 or 32 days.
From: Toronto | Registered: Mar 2006  |  IP: Logged
Matt_Risser
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11800

posted 19 March 2006 07:29 PM      Profile for Matt_Risser     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I agree completely the problem lies in the medium not the message, the NDP needs to market itself more effectively, it needs to better articulate the vision it already has, and part of this in my opinion would be a new name that actually alludes to the parties stance on issues like Progressive Party.
From: Lunenburg, NS | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
Frustrated Mess
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8312

posted 19 March 2006 07:30 PM      Profile for Frustrated Mess   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
The NDP has vision

What is it?

quote:
it can't be done effectivly in 28 or 32 days

If you developed it last week with an ad agency, you're right. If you deveoped it months ago with an ad agency, maybe you can as Harper has proven. But if it is a vision that you have developed and shaped over years, then certainly it can be done because you are provided the same message and espousing the same purpose everytime you speak including between elections and people know what you represent as soon as they hear your name.

From: doom without the gloom | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
TweakedEnigma
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10847

posted 19 March 2006 07:31 PM      Profile for TweakedEnigma   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Adv.poll:
The NDP has vision, and good ideas, unfortunatly is not very good at marketing these. Many people i talk to don't know what the NDPstand for. after a breif conversation the light bulb goes on over their heads. It all comes down to how well you can maket your message, and it can't be done effectivly in 28 or 32 days.

Thanks to you, I have had the same issue every time I talk about the NDP with normal people. The Idea is simple making people life better. How we get there is better health care, Lower cost for post secondary education, respecting human rights. The things the NDP does and stands for but the party has an issue getting the messege out there.


From: Fredericton, NB | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged
Adv.poll
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12274

posted 19 March 2006 07:50 PM      Profile for Adv.poll     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
We are talking about two things. Changing the perception of some and educating others. This has to somwhat of a planned sustained awearness campaign. not an ad two month before an election
From: Toronto | Registered: Mar 2006  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 19 March 2006 07:58 PM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Adv.poll:
The NDP has vision, and good ideas, unfortunatly is not very good at marketing these. Many people i talk to don't know what the NDPstand for. after a breif conversation the light bulb goes on over their heads.

What do you say to them? Light my bulb please. Serious question.


From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
Adv.poll
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12274

posted 19 March 2006 08:12 PM      Profile for Adv.poll     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
you know, its really nothing prophetic, I talk about, the history of the NDP and how we hae help shape policy while in opposision. our policies and our stance on certain issues. many say they thought that only the libs were progressive, and that NDP was just a party for white working calss people.

note many of the people I have had these disscusion with are newer Canadians or so called visible minorities.


From: Toronto | Registered: Mar 2006  |  IP: Logged
BenM
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12067

posted 19 March 2006 09:01 PM      Profile for BenM     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I've got to agree with Hephaestion. Get rid of the stupid talking points. Everyone that I talked to thought Layton came off as a used car salesman during the debates, constantly using lines like "there is a third option" and "let us borrow your vote"... I dunno, maybe this type of stuff works, but all I know is that it makes it feel like they think they're talking to children.
From: Armstrong | Registered: Feb 2006  |  IP: Logged
Adv.poll
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12274

posted 19 March 2006 09:20 PM      Profile for Adv.poll     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
BenM, you have to keep in mind that people like us are the only ones that follow every movement of the Campaigns. Most voters tune in and tune out. so, many people may hear the lines only once.
From: Toronto | Registered: Mar 2006  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 19 March 2006 09:23 PM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Adv.poll:
you know, its really nothing prophetic, I talk about, the history of the NDP and how we hae help shape policy while in opposision. our policies and our stance on certain issues. many say they thought that only the libs were progressive, and that NDP was just a party for white working calss people.

note many of the people I have had these disscusion with are newer Canadians or so called visible minorities.


Thanks for that -- I wasn't aware of that perception in quite so strong terms as you have obviously encountered it. Here in Québec, most workers I talk to, if they know what the NDP is, consider it an English Canadian party.


From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
Matt_Risser
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11800

posted 19 March 2006 09:33 PM      Profile for Matt_Risser     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
so then how does the NDP articulate its msg better before the next election?
From: Lunenburg, NS | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
Adv.poll
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12274

posted 19 March 2006 09:40 PM      Profile for Adv.poll     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
NDP needs to spend some money and higher a marketing consultant with no political experience, to identify areas for growth, and which of our existing policies ring well. then put together a pre-election "campaign" aronf these area. In the business world you can worry about sales(votes) or marketshare(membership.
From: Toronto | Registered: Mar 2006  |  IP: Logged
donf
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11615

posted 19 March 2006 10:56 PM      Profile for donf     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Lets turn the whole matter of policy and presentation over to a good marketing firm with enough money to spend finding out what can be sold to most voters, then we just tell the voters what they want to hear to get elected?

Sound cynical? Honestly we do know that is in large measure how winning campaigns is done.

There is also the little matter of positioning the party to take advantage of bad press for other parties, and to remove any benefit that other parties might hope to gain from public annoyance.

A marketing firm will tell us:
We do not want to be linked to publicly-owned-only planks, for anything, as it smacks of commie thinking that pretty much died in 1990. Do not want to be seen backing Cuba, and has to be very selective in what strike action we associate ourselves with. Remember that in most cases, the average voter is more inconvenienced than excited about the struggle of the working class in a strike. Keep 'Solidarity forever' for the victory party.

The main point here is that we want to be seen as supporting what Jenny voter really cares about not what we personally think is better for the voters.

When a party is in a mode of building a party from scratch, it has to do a lot of public education to swing the voter to thinking the way we do, but when we start trying to win elections during the campaign period, we have to tell them what they want to hear, we must have done the education part months before. We need to have built party membership way before, and even during the campaign, recruiting new members has to be more important than convincing voters to vote a certain way. The non-member has had no part in the selection of the candidate, so asking that group to vote for instead of participate in the democratic process within the party runs counter to the democratic process.

Don't try to simply win elections, make sure that more and more of the voters are taking part in the internal democratic process as party members.


From: Middlesex Ontario Canada | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
Hephaestion
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4795

posted 19 March 2006 11:53 PM      Profile for Hephaestion   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post
"commie thinking"?

Nice.


From: goodbye... :-( | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
ravijo
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11439

posted 20 March 2006 12:28 AM      Profile for ravijo   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I know this thread is getting long.

The question, as I see, is how to entice the disenfranchised 'centre' to question the validity of the Liberals. Perhaps many would not agree with me, but the worst way to do this is appeal to the 'mushy middle', by being mushy. To hop on the cliché wagon, we must inspire people to vote progressive, and not simply win the 'race to the bottom' in mediocre policies.

I think that the most effective thing that the NDP could do is show some backbone. This is particularly important because I think the best way to attract the centre is take a stance oppositional to the Lib/Cons, and have interesting and new ideas that are well expressed and conveyed. The public will respond to vision and positivity.

The thing is that many unions still embody similar values to the NDP, but not all. I think that the NDP could work better to make policies that include those who agree, and put get some distance from those that don't.

Concurrently it's important to draw ties to other demographics not just 'lefties', or 'centrists', but 'aggies', and 'artists'. Unions still have a role with the NDP, but I think that we must stress the importance of their role with the party, not as the party.


From: Guelph, ON | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
Matt_Risser
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11800

posted 20 March 2006 12:41 AM      Profile for Matt_Risser     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
totally agree about the Union thing its why i wont rejoin the party because the Union connection stifles the importance of other progressive groups who could contribute to a rise in the left
From: Lunenburg, NS | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
Screaming Lord Byron
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4717

posted 20 March 2006 12:46 AM      Profile for Screaming Lord Byron     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
A problem is the language. Our ideas are the right ideas for Canada - that's something we must all believe in order to get them across as such, but those ideas are not getting through to the voters. We have to be better at providing a compelling narrative of what we want to do with Canada - we have to take all those disparate strands and say 'this is how they all come together - this is how all these things affect your life - this is what we're going to do about it.'

In terms of a narrative, we should have something along the lines of the NDP being the party of balance - the party that can balance the needs of society with the needs of the individual against the power of corporations and governments.

[ 20 March 2006: Message edited by: Screaming Lord Byron ]


From: Calgary | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 20 March 2006 12:49 AM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
All this discussion is about packaging and marketing. How to hire someone to tell you how to inspire someone. Good luck.
From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
TweakedEnigma
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10847

posted 20 March 2006 12:52 AM      Profile for TweakedEnigma   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by unionist:
All this discussion is about packaging and marketing. How to hire someone to tell you how to inspire someone. Good luck.

Well I for one think that we do need to get the messege across better, but not just on the higher levels those of us here on babble need to talk to people in the real world I know I do and it can make a difference.


From: Fredericton, NB | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged
Aristotleded24
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9327

posted 20 March 2006 12:54 AM      Profile for Aristotleded24   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by BenM:
I've got to agree with Hephaestion. Get rid of the stupid talking points. Everyone that I talked to thought Layton came off as a used car salesman during the debates, constantly using lines like "there is a third option" and "let us borrow your vote"... I dunno, maybe this type of stuff works, but all I know is that it makes it feel like they think they're talking to children.

I also agree. I remember the campaign in 2004, specifically when Layton said, "Elections should be about ideas" and then listed a few simple ideas to win voters over. I think we should go in a similar line, but having said that, in 2004 we were basically introducing Layton for the first time, so some specifics may not be replicable.


From: Winnipeg | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged
mayakovsky
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 5171

posted 20 March 2006 01:13 AM      Profile for mayakovsky     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
'totally agree about the Union thing its why i wont rejoin the party because the Union connection stifles the importance of other progressive groups who could contribute to a rise in the left'

Actually they won't Matt. They will possibly tell you where to get the best tofu and how to drain it. Of any substance. Like it had any to start with!


From: New Bedford | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
Screaming Lord Byron
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4717

posted 20 March 2006 08:58 AM      Profile for Screaming Lord Byron     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by unionist:
All this discussion is about packaging and marketing. How to hire someone to tell you how to inspire someone. Good luck.


Sure, but if they don't hear your message, it doesn't matter how good it is. We live in a world of advertising, whether we like it or not.


From: Calgary | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 20 March 2006 09:00 AM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Screaming Lord Byron:


Sure, but if they don't hear your message, it doesn't matter how good it is. We live in a world of advertising, whether we like it or not.


What is the message? Figure that out, then figure out how to market it. The short-cut (straight to marketing) is fatal to any progressive movement.


From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
Matt_Risser
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11800

posted 20 March 2006 09:04 AM      Profile for Matt_Risser     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
the message is already known its social democratic principles mostly so its not a jump straight to marketing lol its been forty years and now the marketing jump is ready
From: Lunenburg, NS | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 20 March 2006 09:35 AM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Matt_Risser:
the message is already known its social democratic principles mostly so its not a jump straight to marketing lol its been forty years and now the marketing jump is ready

I think just listing some of those principles would be more difficult than you suggest.


From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
Matt_Risser
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11800

posted 20 March 2006 11:10 AM      Profile for Matt_Risser     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
-progressive tax system
-universal education, health and childcare
-social welfare
-social market economy
-fair and balanced trade
-multilateralism
-secularism
-gay marriage, abortion rights
-industrial regulations

need any more?


From: Lunenburg, NS | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 20 March 2006 11:27 AM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Matt_Risser:
-progressive tax system
-universal education, health and childcare
-social welfare
-social market economy
-fair and balanced trade
-multilateralism
-secularism
-gay marriage, abortion rights
-industrial regulations

need any more?


Besides two which I don't understand ("social market economy" and "multilateralism"), not one of these could distinguish the Left from the Liberals, in the Canadian context. Unless you want to position the Left as being merely the defender of liberal social gains against the neo-con onslaught. That's important, but is it enough?


From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
Matt_Risser
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11800

posted 20 March 2006 11:49 AM      Profile for Matt_Risser     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
well there are differences because we want a more progressive tax system especially in relation to corporations, we don't have universal childcare and all the other ones you have said were results of NDP influence on Liberals lol. Social Market Economics can be roughly described as the economic systems of countries like Nordic states, Germany, and other Western Europeans, and Multilateralism is in relation to foreign policy and involves things like support for the UN and working collectively instead of individually.
From: Lunenburg, NS | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
sacred cowtipper
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12294

posted 20 March 2006 06:22 PM      Profile for sacred cowtipper        Edit/Delete Post
In time Harper will make Mulroney look moderate.

The left can't afford to spend years getting it's act together the way the right did, but judging by the absurd reaction to Buzz Hargrove's "strategic voting" I can't imagine the current NDP will ever suspend it's collective ego for the good of the country and form a coalition with the Lib's or the left leaning Lib's.

It really comes down to doing what's best for the country but (NDP)territory will trump nationalism. . . so get ready for 51st state status coming to a Parliament near you.

Read this
An Open Letter to the NDP and Liberal MPs
I didn't ever see it on the main Rabble page which is too bad. It makes more sense than buying pixels .

[ 20 March 2006: Message edited by: sacred cowtipper ]

[ 20 March 2006: Message edited by: sacred cowtipper ]


From: flyspeck ontario | Registered: Mar 2006  |  IP: Logged
Hephaestion
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4795

posted 20 March 2006 07:05 PM      Profile for Hephaestion   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post


I see that "sacred cowtipper" is our most recent Liberal/hysteric member... Save it, "sacred cowtipper" -- we've heard it all before.

Did you know the reason you can't get new CD jewel cases open? That's the NDP's fault. And the reason you get puddle-splashed by traffic on your way to an important meeting? That's personally Jack Layton's fault...


From: goodbye... :-( | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
'lance
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1064

posted 20 March 2006 07:06 PM      Profile for 'lance     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
... the reason(s) you can't actually tip cows?

All the Liberals' fault.

Well I mean, it was they who brought in milk marketing boards and the like.


From: that enchanted place on the top of the Forest | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Hephaestion
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4795

posted 20 March 2006 07:09 PM      Profile for Hephaestion   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post
But then why *can* you tip chickens, 'lance? (Or even EGGS, hey?)

Well, there goes THAT little theory/blame-casting. No, no, 'lance, the cow-tipping conundrum has been solved. THAT one is all Bill Blaikie's fault.

From: goodbye... :-( | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
TweakedEnigma
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10847

posted 20 March 2006 07:13 PM      Profile for TweakedEnigma   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by sacred cowtipper:
In time Harper will make Mulroney look moderate.

The left can't afford to spend years getting it's act together the way the right did, but judging by the absurd reaction to Buzz Hargrove's "strategic voting" I can't imagine the current NDP will ever suspend it's collective ego for the good of the country and form a coalition with the Lib's or the left leaning Lib's.

It really comes down to doing what's best for the country but (NDP)territory will trump nationalism. . . so get ready for 51st state status coming to a Parliament near you.

Read this
An Open Letter to the NDP and Liberal MPs
I didn't ever see it on the main Rabble page which is too bad. It makes more sense than buying pixels .


Man the Liberals lost the last election by there own hand it had nothing to do with the NDP. The LPC brought nothing to the table and the CPC did and the CPC still only got a minority.

But I do agree with others the a coalition may be in order after the next election if the Liberals make a come back (im hoping a minority) we side with them in exchange for PR. There the CPC can never win after that.


From: Fredericton, NB | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged
obscurantist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 8238

posted 20 March 2006 07:26 PM      Profile for obscurantist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The John Ryan article linked to by S.C. was posted in a Babble discussion some time in the last month or so.

I think this might be the discussion. The link to Ryan's article is toward the end. It sounds like the same article, or perhaps a slightly different version of it published on a different site.

Edit: The article was also referred to in this discussion, and was the topic of this discussion. It was a Rabble article.

[ 20 March 2006: Message edited by: Yossarian ]


From: an unweeded garden | Registered: Feb 2005  |  IP: Logged
Threads
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3415

posted 20 March 2006 07:27 PM      Profile for Threads     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Hephaestion:
But then why *can* you tip chickens, 'lance? (Or even EGGS, hey?)

Well, there goes THAT little theory/blame-casting. No, no, 'lance, the cow-tipping conundrum has been solved. THAT one is all Bill Blaikie's fault.



I wanna blame something on Lorne Nystrom! I wanna I wanna I wanna! What can we blame on Lorne Nystrom?
The unseasonally unseasonal winter weather being observed throughout Canada?
Pleeeeeeeeeeeease?

From: where I stand | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
Hawkins
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3306

posted 20 March 2006 07:55 PM      Profile for Hawkins     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I thought we lived in a democracy, not a popularity contest... actually wait I know we live in a popularity contest and we want a democracy... wait I mean I want a democracy, it seems some don't know what that means.
From: Burlington Ont | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
sacred cowtipper
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12294

posted 20 March 2006 08:22 PM      Profile for sacred cowtipper        Edit/Delete Post
"lance", "Haphaestion" et al: It’s the sacred cows that are easy to tip boys, the four legged variety have solid footing. . . unlike yourselves.

Nice form on the knee jerks. Bemoaning the fact that the NDP is too territorial to actually form a coalition with the Libs to defeat the right wing in the future makes me a Liberal? Gold medal for leap of logic.

Deriding their "reaction" to Hargrove after the fact translates into blaming them for the election result? Another gold.

Hargrove is a pragmatist. He understands compromise. Clearly you’d rather wallow in your ideological trough than hold your nose and live to breathe fresh air another day.

"Enigma": Of course the Lib’s “lost the election by their own hand”, but Layton didn’t seize the day."

Why don’t you actually read the piece I linked above?

I looked for it before I posted. . sorry if it's a repeat but it's still relevant to the theme of the thread.


From: flyspeck ontario | Registered: Mar 2006  |  IP: Logged
'lance
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1064

posted 20 March 2006 08:26 PM      Profile for 'lance     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Bemoaning the fact that the NDP is too territorial to actually form a coalition with the Libs to defeat the right wing in the future makes me a Liberal?

I for one am not calling you a Liberal. I'm just mocking you.


From: that enchanted place on the top of the Forest | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Hephaestion
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 4795

posted 20 March 2006 08:29 PM      Profile for Hephaestion   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post
Look, SC... don't blame anyone else that the Martinite Liberals were a bunch of bungling incompetants who drove all the "old pros" out when they purged the Chretienites. And don't blame us that Paulie Pockets couldn't run a lemonaide stand without help. The Liberals botched this all on their own, and it's not the NDP's job to save their ass.

As I said, we've heard it aaaaaaaaaaall before, complete with tearing of hair, rending of garments, sackcloth, ashes, piteous wailing -- the whole nine yards, including bitter accusations beacuse the NDP didn't just fold up and "let" the Gang That Couldn't Shoot Straight win.

So take your arrogant presumptions and blow, all right?

From: goodbye... :-( | Registered: Dec 2003  |  IP: Logged
Aristotleded24
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9327

posted 20 March 2006 08:31 PM      Profile for Aristotleded24   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by sacred cowtipper:
Why don’t you actually read the piece I linked above?

I have read the piece to which you linked, and I think it's total nonsense. I explained why in 2 of the threads Yossarian linked to, please feel free to read them. I don't wish to repeat myself here.


From: Winnipeg | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 20 March 2006 08:37 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Hephaestion:
I see that "sacred cowtipper" is our most recent Liberal/hysteric member...

Knock off the personal attacks. People are allowed to disagree with you about politics without you turning it into a flamewar.

[ 20 March 2006: Message edited by: Michelle ]


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
TweakedEnigma
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10847

posted 20 March 2006 08:37 PM      Profile for TweakedEnigma   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by sacred cowtipper:

Hargrove is a pragmatist. He understands compromise. Clearly you’d rather wallow in your ideological trough than hold your nose and live to breathe fresh air another day.

"Enigma": Of course the Lib’s “lost the election by their own hand”, but Layton didn’t seize the day."

Why don’t you actually read the piece I linked above?


1st The problem with Hargrove is not the stratagy he came up with it was that he was suporting Liberals in NDP riddings so even he wasnt following the plan.

2nd I thank you for the nod on my comment.

3rd I did read the letter it has been said by many people, but the plan is flawed becuase in the end the NDP would simply die and most of the votes would go to the Greens/Canadian Action.


From: Fredericton, NB | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged
Aristotleded24
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 9327

posted 20 March 2006 08:39 PM      Profile for Aristotleded24   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by TweakedEnigma:
3rd I did read the letter it has been said by many people, but the plan is flawed becuase in the end the NDP would simply die and most of the votes would go to the Greens/Canadian Action.

Count me as part of "most voters." Unless it was a really good candidate, I'd never vote Liberal even if I was denied the option of voting NDP.


From: Winnipeg | Registered: May 2005  |  IP: Logged
unionist
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11323

posted 20 March 2006 09:20 PM      Profile for unionist     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Aristotleded24:

Count me as part of "most voters." Unless it was a really good candidate, I'd never vote Liberal even if I was denied the option of voting NDP.


That's strategic voting, isn't it? Kind of like my voting Bloc to try to stop Jean Lapierre from being re-elected (because I really didn't care much for the Bloc candidate). But the NDP placed a fairly strong 3rd with 18% of the vote, and you know the rest.

So I guess you and I have one thing in common. I have never voted Liberal.


From: Vote QS! | Registered: Dec 2005  |  IP: Logged
BenM
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 12067

posted 21 March 2006 02:19 AM      Profile for BenM     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The thing I fear with 'uniting the left' is that we'll end up with a Canadian democratic party and republican party with hate-filled partisan politics (yes, partisanship is pretty bad here but not as bad as down south) but with little of any new ideas. Everything in American politics seems to be divided into binary opposites: left or right, liberal or conservative, us or them... Well... anyway you look at it, I think some form of proportional representation would bring much of this talk (of uniting the left) to a close while introducing new and varied voices to the house.

Regarding my earlier comments and the responses, yes I do realize that I'm probably much more aware of the campaign then most people who just listen for the few soundclips they hear on the news. Like I said... this stuff (talking points) probably works, but it just doesn't work for me For what it's worth, I have heard Layton speak much more off the cuff, and he sounded intelligent, honest, and passionate; I know he is capable of doing it


From: Armstrong | Registered: Feb 2006  |  IP: Logged
Nopiming
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3422

posted 21 March 2006 03:56 AM      Profile for Nopiming     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
A new "United Left" does not have to mean the takeover of the NDP by the Libs - indeed the LPC should not even be invited to participate in such an undertaking. Rather, what Matt Risser and others here seem to be suggesting is that we resurrect an old idea from the late 50s/ early 60s: that of New Party clubs.

If "United Left" initiative was to be initiated from the top down (i.e. Jack talking to Graham/Rae/Ignatieff/etc in order to mesh out a new party à la Harper-MacKay), we might end up with the U.S. Democratic party. But if a more organic grassroots (and possibly populist) movement like the CCF or the 1920s Progressives was to rise up from church basements, universities, NDP, Green and Liberal riding associations, union halls and NGO offices, we could end up with a vast, inclusive movement that would make the Liberal Party's existence increasingly irrelevant.

John Ralston Saul argued that the battle for the 21st Century will be fought between the "NGOs and God." I am beginning to believe he hit the nail on the head. The nasty right-wing God of the the Conservative party is politicized. It is up to those of us on the Left in the NDP, the Labour, social, international and environmental movements to figure out how we can engage each other to take them on.


From: Courtenay, BC | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
TweakedEnigma
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10847

posted 21 March 2006 07:49 AM      Profile for TweakedEnigma   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by BenM:
I think some form of proportional representation would bring much of this talk (of uniting the left) to a close while introducing new and varied voices to the house.

I think you got it there, the only problem is working out a PR system that going to work for everyone but I got an idea. For the House of commons just straigt PR broken down to a provincial level. then reform the senate so it is elected and broken up into ridings as the house is now. Only trick is I think with the Senate there should be no parties that way people represented there riding and not the party line.


From: Fredericton, NB | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged
Matt_Risser
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11800

posted 21 March 2006 10:27 AM      Profile for Matt_Risser     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:

Originally posted by BenM:
The thing I fear with 'uniting the left' is that we'll end up with a Canadian democratic party and republican party with hate-filled partisan politics (yes, partisanship is pretty bad here but not as bad as down south) but with little of any new ideas.

Thats not the purpose at all in fact we can't devolve into that because we already have with the Conservative Party as the party of bad ideas and the Liberal Pary as the party of no ideas. The purpose of a united left would be to have a 'Progressive Party' with REAL ideas that we can all agree on.


From: Lunenburg, NS | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
TweakedEnigma
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10847

posted 21 March 2006 09:55 PM      Profile for TweakedEnigma   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Matt_Risser:

Thats not the purpose at all in fact we can't devolve into that because we already have with the Conservative Party as the party of bad ideas and the Liberal Pary as the party of no ideas. The purpose of a united left would be to have a 'Progressive Party' with REAL ideas that we can all agree on.


Yes but what BenM seems to be trying to get across is that with the new party the Liberals, NDP & bloc would probly die off, leaving us with a two party system.

As I have said you idea does have some merit but there is also a good chance that it would back fire on all of us.

[ 21 March 2006: Message edited by: TweakedEnigma ]


From: Fredericton, NB | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged
Matt_Risser
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11800

posted 22 March 2006 10:05 AM      Profile for Matt_Risser     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Ok I want to make the point clear that the suggested coalition already exists, all we have to do is unite it so that it can stop being marginalized in every political party its in.
From: Lunenburg, NS | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
TweakedEnigma
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10847

posted 22 March 2006 11:00 AM      Profile for TweakedEnigma   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Matt_Risser:
Ok I want to make the point clear that the suggested coalition already exists, all we have to do is unite it so that it can stop being marginalized in every political party its in.

Yes and those of us that are on the other side are trying to make it clear that there is a very real chance that it will blow up in our face.


From: Fredericton, NB | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged
Matt_Risser
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11800

posted 22 March 2006 11:35 AM      Profile for Matt_Risser     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
but nobody is advocating some kind of move to become centrist here, the Liberal party will remain (hopefully as the third party) and occupy that post, the question is how do we bring together all the groups which fundamentally agree to create a strong left for Canadians
From: Lunenburg, NS | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
TweakedEnigma
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10847

posted 22 March 2006 11:42 AM      Profile for TweakedEnigma   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Matt_Risser:
but nobody is advocating some kind of move to become centrist here, the Liberal party will remain (hopefully as the third party) and occupy that post, the question is how do we bring together all the groups which fundamentally agree to create a strong left for Canadians

The Liberals would no longer be the centre if the left packed up it would be left in the hands of small c's and they would probly turn to the cons or just join the new party you are talking about making.


From: Fredericton, NB | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged
Matt_Risser
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11800

posted 23 March 2006 02:27 AM      Profile for Matt_Risser     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
thats fine as long as the leftwing elements in that party don't get overtaken which they wouldn't because all the rightwing elements of the Liberals would join the Conservatives.
From: Lunenburg, NS | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged
TweakedEnigma
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 10847

posted 23 March 2006 10:00 AM      Profile for TweakedEnigma   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Originally posted by Matt_Risser:
thats fine as long as the leftwing elements in that party don't get overtaken which they wouldn't because all the rightwing elements of the Liberals would join the Conservatives.

Yep but then as its been said this may give way to "a Canadian democratic party and republican party with hate-filled partisan politics" as has already been said. I mean come on man there are some real bad sides to this.


From: Fredericton, NB | Registered: Nov 2005  |  IP: Logged
Matt_Risser
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 11800

posted 23 March 2006 12:04 PM      Profile for Matt_Risser     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
haha i am not saying it would be perfect by there are plenty of reasons to suggest it, i think the number one problem is that people assume the Liberals are on the left when they haven't been since Pierre Trudeau. I think there are some really progressive and disaffected Liberals out there I could agree on a lot with. As far as the whole devolution into a Democratic/Republican political spectrum I don't see how we don't already have that with our Liberal/Conservative political spectrum. I mean lets face it the NDP in a minority government situation has been able to get little more than a few demands met and in a majority they have no power, what I am advocating here is a coalition of the moderate social democratic or "Progressive" left that already exists but is divided among Canada's political parties
From: Lunenburg, NS | Registered: Jan 2006  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca