You're on Frank

The loser stays off this site for a month. Deal?

Skywalker

Sure, but I'll miss ya.

All I can say

is what took them so long?

I want a leader for my party, not a committee chairperson who plays fast and loose with the rules.

I want CArole to be gone.

I wanted it a long time ago.

Why? Because she doesn't lead; she waffles.

Hands up everyone who actually pays attention when she speaks on the radio or on TV?

That's the real problem.

Equity Policy

TomJoad:

"So, if the 13 get booted does the equity policy kick in? It's my understanding that it does, though I'm not clear on the details of the policy. Can only women replace incumbents, or can it be someone from other recognised categories, as well?"

The so-called equity policy states that in ridings in which an incumbent NDP MLA is not seeking re-election, the riding asociation must nominate a woman. Other equity groups are given a right-of-way for nominations in a certain percentage of non-incumbent ridings. So if Simons, Lalli, Coons, et al are expelled, their riding associations would be obliged to nominate women candidates, whether the local members like it or not.

Needless to say, enforcement of that policy would only fuel increased local resentment against the Party's leadership and diminish the NDP's chances of holding those seats.

By the way, when this policy was adopted in 2007, it was sold as a one-time only boost to female representation in the run-up to the 2009 provincial election. Carole James and her circle reneged on that commitment at last Fall's Party Convention by proposing its extension through the next election. Unfortunately, Convention approved the extension.

Equity Policy

What a bunch of jokers. I can't believe they actually extended that policy to next election. Shows how far removed from reality the NDP are from average BCers, who think this is really anti-democratic.

today's presser with james and supporters

just listened to the entire presser with carole james held today, december 2.
she was surrounded with the caucus members who are standing by her.
perhaps everyone will get to hear it. i hope so.
and maybe some of those that listen to it, will be as disappointed and saddened as i am now.
after 40 plus years of working on campaigns, contributing emotionally and monitarily and never, NEVER voting anything but new democrat...i am seriously wondering if this is my party anymore. i never thought i would ever feel like this.
all i can say is, one person, one vote.

still waiting for a valid convicing reason for the rebellion

If you read the full text of what Carole James said, nothing she said was incorrect:
Basically she said two main things:

1. She has an official mandate from the party to be leader (which she does)

2. It's irresonsible for the party engage in this kind of public infighting at this time (which it is)

So I think her statements today were pretty spot-on.

NOT ONE person has articulated why the revolt:

(A) Is legal from a party constitution point of view.

(B) Makes good political sense in terms of public opinion.

Maybe the rebels just can't articulate themselves very well because I havent heard a single good reason.

"Yes if the troops are all

"Yes if the troops are all robotic soldiers or sheep, but what if they are all thinking, rational people?"

That is the problem. Only 10% are thinking, and only 10% of those are rational.

Thank God someone is taking

Thank God someone is taking a stand and pushing for a new leader. James has had 2 kicks at the cat and is going down for the third time. Head for the light and let go. Time for a new leader with some real direction, ideas and willing to take a stand. hopefully presenting actual solutions or alternate direction s not just a naysayer. Let's regroup , win and actually try to be an open and acountable government including discussion and compassion.
Good for you Ms. Kwan.

alcm

You obviously don't listen to anyone but yourself. You sound just like Schreck did on the CBC today. The point is you can't lead if nobody follows. Oh you can brow beat a few caucus members who now have the best job in opposition they ever had but that does not work for the public. The public have been telling you for years what a few MLA's are doing now.

So the few insiders at Provincial Council voted, so the exec. council says support her, it means nothing if she can't get votes.

oh alcm...i love it...

when you call me, 'irresonsible,' and suggest that those 'rebels,' 'can't articulate themselves.'
just call us the '10 percenters '
i feel a t-shirt coming on

ufff

Every one who thinks Carole James can win next election is living in lala land. Carole James is the best CHOICE for LIBERALS to get 4 terms in Victoria.

Thank You Ms. Kwan to speak for me

Equity Policy

So apparently you could end up with a Sarah Palin, whether you wanted to, or not.

Great policy.

How much screaming would there be if they "had to nominate a man."

Equity is really interesting if you have to nominate an incompetent, just because of their sex. Just because the old parties have been doing the reverse of nominating a stupid man to keep out a woman, does not justify doing the stupid reverse.

Shows that the party is incompetent as it was incapable of learning how badly "affirmative action" backfired in the US. Feminist ideology has taken over the NDP, and it is as bankrupt as communist ideology, republican ideology, and most ideologies.

Ideology is incapable of seeing the forest for the trees, and is often incapable of even seeing the trees.

and you're STILL not convicing anyone

I'm still not getting you. Do you think every party leader in the country is loved by 100% of their caucus?? Absolutely not.

But you shut up, hold talks behind closed doors, and then if you want at your next LEGAL opportunity you can hold a leadership review.

You think every single Tory MP loves Stephen Harper? He's failed to win a majority government twice now. You think every single Liberal MP loves Michael Ignatieff? No way. You think every provincial NDP leader in Canada is adored by every single party member? No.

But you know what? They shut their traps in public and keep the family squabbles to themselves and present a united public front so that they look like a responsible government in waiting, not like a bunch of power-hungry lunatics.

Once again, for the MILLIONTH time, I am waiting for a convincing reason of how this:

(A) Is legal from a party constitution point of view.

(B) Makes good political sense in terms of public opinion.

All you people do is squak and whine without giving reasoned, legitimate arguments of why this makes sense.

One reasoned argument

Kepp her in place. Lose the next election. But oh we adhered to the constitutional requirements. Yup that's a win for everybody. What a load of Bull.

some of us...

are just tired of shutting up.
and doing things behind closed doors is what got us here.

Greens

Carol and Gordan are the best things that have happened to the Green's in years. It seems that they are the only true alternative to the liberals. The rich sociopaths will continue to vote liberal, the union committed NDP'rs will continue to vote NDP. That leaves a HUGE swing vote. If the Greens are smarter then the NDP have been of late, then they will come up with policy and statement that makes them better then the others, and truly gives you someone different to vote for. Unlike the NDP who gloriously missed every opportunity to put the liberals out of our misery, when given the chance.

The liberals are not scrambling to stay alive due to anything the NDP said or did, but due to their own greed and stupidity. Any group who persists in expecting and waiting for the opposition to shoot themselves in the foot, is a useless group. If they are so incompetent and incapable to demolish the enemy when frequently given the opportunity, what makes anyone think that they are competent to lead. Makes one think that a revamped liberals, may not be so bad.

Or maybe time for the Greens to show what they are made of, and get enough MLA's elected to force whoever gets a minority to actually act for the best interests of the public.

wow, intelligent debate in here

Wow, skywalker and editing fool, thanks for those rational, reasonable, well-defined explanations.

You've really made the case why it makes sense to commit political suicide.

You think if Carole resigns and is replaced by a new leader people will magically forget this ridiculous spectacle?

The NDP's credibility is ruined now so they will lose the next election anyway.

Love It...

"some of us...
are just tired of shutting up.
and doing things behind closed doors is what got us here." wrote editing fool.

Hear, hear! We need Wikileaks across the whole of society and all its institutions, including "business", "labour" and in "politics" There should be no, nada, zero secrets from the people. No backroom deals and meetings. Everything should be held out in the open. If you want "them folks" to participate and make informed decisions... then inform them, completely, across the board, about everything that goes on, is said, the financial books. Leave nothing out.

What a day that would be, eh? :-) A major game changer. Love it.

Jerry Munro

Yes!!!!!

I don't WANT to hear about everything

So I guess at home you're probably one of those families that fight with each other in the middle of your front yard then, instead of going inside and shutting the door?

alcm: Family Arguements..

Oh yeah. Everytime my family has a family arguement we go inside and mom always gets all the kids to wear her yellow scarves and dad has no scarf so mom always wins the arguement. Yeah thats what we call "democracy" and "airing our dirty laundry in private". LOL

The Greens

Good choice, an ex-Conservative as leader and 30 years to put together a platform and even with the NDP and Liberals imploding still no one in BC wants to see them in power.

Maybe they can join one of the parties the Dippers will split into.

true, it is quite childlike

I'm glad you mentioned kids, because yes it is a bit like a spoiled child who didn't get their way whining "I don't like mommy anymore, I want a new mommy. I want mommy to leave the house (even though she's my legal guardian). I have no idea who should be my new mommy but all I know is that the old mommy doesnt give me everything I want".

If you don't respect the fact that political parties have Leaders, don't join one. If every decision was made only by committee, each province would have about 20 premiers each. Someone has to be in charge.

synchronicity

Heard Jim Sinclair on TV last night saying that the Sihota stipend wasn't a back room deal. Reminds me of Campbell saying he didn't sell BC Rail, just leased it - for 999 years!

Frank

What a political mess that BC has become, eh? We're the laughing stock of the country out here in Lotusland again.

BTW, ARS will be releasing another opinion poll within the next 7 - 10 days and I'd wager that the results will look something like this (with November results in brackets):

NDP: 42% (47%)
Lib: 32% (27%)
Green/Con/Ind./Other 26%

The current turmoil likely won't register in the opinion polls until January as these things take awhile to filter through.

alcm: I want mommy Carole...

to spank those bad misbehaving kids who don't do as they are told by mommy dearest.

They are bad children not to wear those beautiful yellow scarves that mommy made specially for them. They should all go to bed without any pie.

I'm a Feminist BUT....

I was all for Carole James resigning after the last election, it was the right thing to do. Perhaps I should have said left there.

The NDP is supposed to be a party of the left not the center. The only way the people of BC, of Canada & indeed the whole world are going to change the current broken capitalist system & save ourselves & the planet is by electing governments that care more the flora & fauna (including humans) than profits. If the NDP swings back to it's socialist roots & still can't get elected then we'll just have to work harder to convince the voters.

I still believe with the right leader the NDP can win the next election. Winning will do the people of BC no good if we're just going to continue governing as Campbell-lite.

Luke

You're right about that. Its definitely not what I would have expected to see even 6 months ago.

Oh well, out of chaos sometimes you get something better. Of course chaos sometimes leads to more chaos... (cue Siegfried and agent 86)

I think the NDP might fall more than you're expecting, depending on when ARS was doing their polling.

I wouldn't be surprised to see NDP support fall to around 35%, Liberal support climb to around 35% and the Green/Con/Ind vote go up to the high 20's.

What's good for the goose...

If the BC Liberals are to be applauded for their bold steps at renewal from the departure of Gordon Campbell, why can't there be similar benefits to another political party that is clearly in need of renewal.

I've lived in this province all of my voting life and know as well as anyone that governments are rarely elected around here - they're generally thrown out - but the numbers do not even show enough support for the NDP to make a credible run against the leader-seeking Liberals - read the writing on the wall - get out the knives - and (and here I know I'm in dreamland) make it sure and surgical.

We know how most of the province view Sihota - and we know that we'll be judged by the company we keep. I don't know the present caucus inside out, which is a function of them being the NDP in opposition as much as anything, but I've seen a few of them who seem to have the ability to do the job.
There is no way that a Liberal party, new leader or not, should be under the impression that what has happened in this province in this past decade is appropriate. If it takes the current grandma of the caucus (tee hee) to say it, then so be it.

When I voted for Carole James in the last election I did so unhappy with the failure of a party that I once joined because of their policy - there was little to be said for the party except that they were not Gordo- - sorry, not good enough - you've had a long time to articulate your values - instead I feel as if I've seen a bunch who seek power by negative reflex and following the polls - you blew it - step aside and don't get in the way.

Oldcougar

I understand why you'd want the NDP to be a party of the Left and not the centre, I would have preferred that too.

But the last decade has convinced me that we will never win government, and I don't mean 3 times in 60 years, I mean never, if we remain rigid in our beliefs.

We don't do children or the poor or the aged or anyone else any favours by making ourselves unelectable. I want to see things like a guaranteed annual income and frankly there's more chance that the federal Conservatives will bring that about than the NDP because we refuse to budge and insist that the other 80% of the population will one day wake up and join us.

That isn't going to happen. If we want to help people we need to get elected and if that means compromising with others then that's what we should do.

Frank

Yup. Good point. They will definitely be the beneficiary of alot of vote parking over the coming months.

And if Gordon Wilson and his small "l" Liberals were around right now, they would be looking at landslide territory leaving both the NDP and the Libs in the dust.

Gordon Wilson

Yep, given the problems voters have with the other two parties a middle-of-the-road party led by someone like Wilson could take the next election. And I agree, it would be a landslide.

@tbarnston

You say: "The left can't articulate a vision beyond blame the right."
Who should we blame; it is the right which has been in power for the last ten years both here and in the States. I'd rather have no vision than close my eyes and dream up the nonsense the liberals come up with. We have visions though - common sense visions of health and education and infrastructure. A government bank which will save us literally billions of dollars and get us out of this ridiculous debt trap which people have been complaining of for centuries. Finance local people and companies to keep both the jobs and profits right here in BC where they belong. Invest in technology because the resource boom times won't last forever.
You say:
"The corporatists in power took these demands and structured the deals to ensure the maximum benefit flowed to the top: extract concessions from workers and use taxpayer subsidized capital from the taxpayer to pump the markets up."
No, what they did was pull off a massive fraud and when they got caught with their pants down they conned and blackmailed the Congress to vote them trillion dollar bail outs. Of course they pretty well destroyed the country to do it but what the heck, they got theirs! A real government would have nationalized the companies playing fast and loose with the law, kept all their assets, kicked out the Federal Reserve, and wound up with a democratic and prosperous country! (Read the link. Congress persons voted for the bail out because many of them were invested in the banks. Charges will be forthcoming.) It isn't over yet, my friend, the rich will get out but the economy is toast and no amount of top down thievery will save America from a much lower standard of living. Over 42,000 factories left the US under 'Globalisation', official unemployment is at 17%, real unemployment at 22%, looking more like a 3rd world police state every day. Or more like East Hastings.
We here in BC are blessed by good fortune in having things the whole world needs and which will soon be in short supply. That is the difference between us and a lot of less fortunate countries, and that is exactly what our disgraced leader has given away as much as he could get away with giving - like a spoiled child annoying its parents while mom and dad are trying to negotiate rush hour on the freeway of life. That's part of the plan; it's hard to think clearly when you just got home from a grueling 12 hour day.
You say:
"We need to organize economic institutions that directly invest in the economy that we want to see, instead of handing our money/power over to the psychopaths who currently run the show."
Bravo! Glad to see you agree with my last post about the need for national/provincial banks. BTW, we have a national bank but it does next to nothing to help the economy.

Better now than later

Really it is time for a leadership review...James has taken the party further to the right than ever and it makes me wonder who I will vote for next election...

alcm...what spectacle? i have already forgotten it

just like the public seems to have forgotten all the blunders, bad legislation and brutality of these past 'liberal,' years.
but i do thank you for putting me in the company of skywalker.

Left/right

Someone explain to me why the "centrists" or "Rightists" are the ones in bed with the BC Fed, CUPE, etc. If Jim Sinclair and company are right wingers then someone should tell the business council types who see them as evil left wing commies.

Campbell's Liberals are the most ideologically driven government I have seen in BC, even beyond Billy Bandit and co. WAC used ideology to win elections, then nationalized industries and built a great park system. He kept the NDP out of power for 20 years by stealing their best ideas then using the "Socialist hordes at the Gates" rhetoric at election time.

Campbell destroyed much of WAC's legacy and his government members expressed outright hatred for unions and contempt for wage earners and the law protecting their contracts.

Sigh

This is really disappointing. At a time when the right-wing media is finally examining their uncritical support for all things corporatist, and reasonable people are desperately looking or a place to park their swing vote, the only viable alternative decides it's time to carve each other up and slug each other silly to argue policy points.

A fence post with hair could have led the left to power without making single promise, were an election held two months ago. Then after that electoral success would have been the best time to argue points of policy and governance, leadership principles, and how best to take care of each other. The leadership would have had free reign to examine and rescind or continue any policies or principles that didn't work, and the next convention could have changed anything they wanted.

Nobody needs a cheerleader for a leader. Most of what I read here thinks a cheerleader is the only qualification necessary, along with "one man, one vote" on every possible matter of governance and policy. Paralysis and co-option by powerful elites is the only possible outcome of such stupid efforts, as North Korea and the US are witness. There's a reason we have representative democracy instead of direct democracy, and rules of debate to prevent ambush by side issues.

I regret that I am now resigned to seeing the Fiberals with another four years in power, raping the bank accounts, destroying the land and selling the economic capital of the province, while squandering the resources of the ordinary person by submitting them to years more of unfinanceable debt, and further guaranteeing that poverty will be the constant companion of some of the least among us.

There is now no possibility to catch up. That rough beast that once slouched toward Victoria to consume the Fiberals alive is now turning back onto another well-trod path. Any day now the media will begin to blare its clarion call, and the swing vote will turn, looking for their sexy cheerleader, moueing avaricious promises of greedy wealth and comfort.

Sigh...

ahem

It seems there is a difference between saying that the left cannot articulate a policy other than denying the right vs. the NDP cannot articulate a policy other than denying the Liberals.

Jerry Munro

"Everything should be held out in the open. If you want "them folks" to participate and make informed decisions... then inform them, completely, across the board, about everything that goes on, is said, the financial books. Leave nothing out.

If you really think that would change anything except making peoples' heads explode from information overload and decisionmaking paralysis, you're kidding yourself.

I know you feel this is important in principle, and I venture to say most of us do as well, but if you've never attended even a meeting of MEC or Vancity, you'll see how even a proper cooperative institution doesn't even put everything out in the open at the AGM. If you want to find everything out, you have to do your homework first, volunteer, and take lessons from those who've gone before you so that you understand all the information you're given in a perspective that makes sense.

Your call for "WikiLeaks-style openness" (whatever that is, because even WikiLeaks holds a lot of stuff back until they can gain some perspective) is irresponsible. You wouldn't know how to process most of the information, and I bet most of those who agree with you can't even read a balance sheet or understand the need for notice of motion.

Wanna take a second stab at it?

I counted

the same number of MLAs supporting Carole today as the number of "dissidents". What does that mean?

Zalm... and the reason is...

You say:
"There's a reason we have representative democracy instead of direct democracy,"
Yes, and the real reason is that reprentatives can be controlled - even bought - while in direct democracy (Switzerland) the voter votes for his/her own best interest.

Jack the bear

It's the same old trick the right has used for decades - "Vote for us to keep the scumbag socialists out of power"

I firmly believe the left ought to do that too - "Vote for us to keep the corporate rapists out of power!"

Everyone already knows what the left stands for - our civil society exists today solely on the laurels won by those who fought for rights and privileges that we're too busy taking for granted - five-day work weeks, sick days, holidays, medicare, social support, progressive taxation, land reserves for farming and parks, aboriginal rights - so why give the corporate rapists....re....rightists a chance to write our legislation their way? It can only benefit them at our expense.

driftwood

"Yes, and the real reason is that reprentatives can be controlled - even bought - "

If you really believe that, [OFFENSIVE COMMENT DIRECTED AT ANOTHER COMMENTER REMOVED. -MODERATOR.] you shouldn't be voting in our democracy either because we're all "bought" by something according to your marketplace mentality. And you don't know anything about democracy in Switzerland either. Only a few decisions there come down to individual vote. If you don't know what they are, go look it up.

It's important ones, like whether mosques should be allowed to be built over 30 feet high in Switzerland. And it's not unimportant ones, like the budget, unless raised by special motion.

Switzerland is not your poster child for direct democracy - or human right either. That's marketing

sunshinecoastgirl

That's why I'm sighing in resignation. Those who seem to want a blonde cutie-pie with big tits to lead them appear to be in the ascendancy. And I don't see one on the horizon.

Kudos to Jenny Kwan

Kudos to Jenny Kwan for her courage in speaking out.

A leadership convention is in order. No question.

I and many other life long supporters of the NDP see the party losing its way. As soon as there is a chance of political success, the NDP leadership runs to court the business vote. LIke "Bush Lite", this is the exact same failed strategy of Obama and the Federal Liberals. The NDP was founded as the people's party. Not business. Not the elite. Has anyone in the NDP leadership read the NDP Constitution lately (see below)? Is this reflected in their policy? If not, why not.

Is there a plan to redevelop BC's wealth for its own citizens that will survive the NY bond rating agencies? If we can't figure out how to sidestep the bond agencies with bold policies inspired by Bolivia, Sweden, Denmark and Venezuala, then BC is doomed to remain an exploited outpost, selling its riches to the highest foreign bidder.

Until the NDP rediscovers its roots as a true alternative to BAU (business as usual), it will simply be marginalized as a watered down neoliberal party. Which will always deliver less to big business and will be pummelled repeatedly by the business bullies.

The Constitution of the New Democratic Party of British Columbia

"The New Democratic Party believes that social, economic and political progress in Canada can only be assured by the application of democratic socialist principles to government and the administration of public affairs."

"The principles of democratic socialism can be defined briefly as follows: a) the production and distribution of goods and services shall be directed to meeting the social and individual needs of people and not for profit, b) the modification and control of the operations of monopolistic productive and distributive
organizations through economic and social planning, towards these ends, and c) where necessary, the extension of the principle of social ownership."

"The New Democratic Party holds firm to the belief that the dignity, freedom and equality of the individual is a basic right that must be maintained and extended."

"The New Democratic Party is proud to be associated with the democratic socialist parties of the world and to share in the struggle for peace, international co-operation and the abolition of poverty."

Thanks Jeffrey

That is the first I have seen of any actual "policy" statement - I don't mind it as you quote it.
How this turns into a cat fight is beyond me. As one poster (Franc I think) told me: I lost track years ago.
Yes, Dear, why do you suppose I lost it?

84% support ......

VANCOUVER - The contrast couldn't be more stark: B.C. Premier Gordon Campbell received an 84 per cent approval rating from his own party just as his popularity among the public sank into the single digits.

http://thetyee.ca/CanadianPress/2010/11/04/Campbell-Resignation-5031323/print.html

84% support for Carole James means exactly

this some her popularity is in BC 25%

what she can win? with this 4 time defeat f

Murray Dobbin's blog Nov 25th

http://www.murraydobbin.ca/2010/11/25/carole-james-mission-accomplished/

I thought this was a good column from Nov 25th

the future will unfold

I'd be totally amazed if Ms James requests a leadership convention & cannot imagine how Prov Council or the NDP Executive could make that square with the NDP Constitution so soon after their recent meeting that produced an 85% support.

However, if they ALL drink the Cool-Ade ....

None but the brave deserve the fair..........

We haven't lost anything by Kwan speaking out.

Not a damn thing.

Some of the wafflers here appear to have lost their courage, but that's about all.

How do you think all those rights and privileges we now take for granted were originally won?

They were fought for.

Through an often risky stand taken on strength of principle.

No one said: "We'll stay out of the battle until we win it, then we'll decide how we're going to develop some courage and conviction."

And what was the prime criticism of James mentioned by Kwan? Exactly that. A criticism I have heard echoed by others over the years.

As Jenny stated:

"As well, for too long there has been a clear lack of direction under the leadership of Carole James. Whenever a challenging policy decision arises, often the default position is to avoid taking a stand.

The delay in grappling with difficult but critical public policy choices often results in making the NDP irrelevant in the hearts and minds of British Columbians."

Is that what the left is all about these days? How to best avoid taking a stand?

(One has to wonder if the NDP has been infiltrated by those who would gain great advantage by the NDP becoming a middle muddle of irrelevancy.)

It was refreshing to hear someone speak from the heart and with such genuine and deeply felt principles for a change.

In a highly fraudulent and manipulated world quit discounting the real power and strength in the truly genuine as whiterabb.it noted in his comment above.

Play from that strength....and stop running away from it.

Since the genuine can't be bought, bribed, or stolen, not even in 990 Fiberal years, the BC Liberals will never have a real rider, let alone a real horse, in this race. Ever.

Just a thought.......

Well said Lynn....

Check out the below quote from David Shreck`s latest piece defending Carole James....What the hell is Shreck smoking, he actually called the NDP an effective opposition???HUH...How do you score that Shreck...10 NDP points everytime there is no session, 5 points for every bill the NDP couldn`t stop...BC Rail, BC Ferries, BC Place roof, Gambling, Children, minimum wage, workers rights, seniors care, health and education...And you David Shreck have the nerve to call the NDP an effective opposition which you claim will now get worse...Christ man, get that dimentia checked out, or is Carole James spending weekends with you Shreck....Either way man, take a pill or open your effiinng eyes man!...You Shreck are the problem!

(David Shreck quote from his latest post)
"The next election will see a dramatically reduced and ineffective NDP, unable to finance the kind of campaign a reinvigorated government party will mount"

There's a tremendous

There's a tremendous upheaval ripening all over the world and if the present lords believe that they're about to gain total dictatorial control over humanity, they're going to be very surprised.

The political mess in BC, and in reality all over Canada, are only a small part of this growing discontent and demand for change, everywhere, very typical events in history.

Generally, people still don't know what they really want so they bury themselves in stupid actions, like those idiotic texting and other garbage gadgets, trying to blind themselves from realities, the good old "Pamen et circenses" beginning of the Roman empire's fall, but it won't last forever.

Unfortunately, it will come at a very high price that could be easily avoided with peaceful changes, but the stranglehold of the Lords won't permit it.

At least not now, but miracles always happen and we can only hope.

Ed Deak.

@zalm Who's the idiot here?

I won't stoop to insulting your intelligence but I stand by my comment:

'the real reason we have representative democracy is that representatives can be controlled - even bought - while in a direct democracy the voters invariably vote for their own best interests.'

Look at how many right wing politicians get rich after they leave office. Look no further than Brian Mulroney, or look at who finances the US congress persons election campaigns, or look at the recent law in the States which allows corporations, *even corporations from foreign countries* to donate as much as they like to political campaigns. To bring it home to you zalm, look at who financed Gordon Campbell to get him elected to sell the BC Rail. It was to some large extent a *corporation from a foreign country*, namely CN rail based in Texas, which now owns BC Rail for what is appearing more and more like a favour to the liberal party. Are you sure you want to get into this with all the examples right here in BC to refute your statement zalm? It is a very, very common thing and as I said here earlier, every political representative is subject to it.
Because what we suffer under here is monied media controlled democracy - those with the money buy the vote and those representative who wish to get elected curry favour with those who have the money - common as grass in our system.
Sorry to have burst your bubble on that; let's move on to Switzerland.

Switzerland

"1. Facultative referendum: Any federal law, certain other federal resolutions, and international treaties that are either perpetual and irredeemable, joinings of an international organization, or that change Swiss law may be subject to a facultative referendum if at least 50,000 people or eight cantons have petitioned to do so within 100 days. Within cantons and municipalities, the required number of people is smaller, and there may be additional causes for a facultative referendum, e.g., expenditures that exceed a certain amount of money. The facultative referendum is the most common type of referendum, and it is mostly carried out by political parties or by interest groups."

50,000 people zalm - much less ado than we suffered here already to slow down the regressive HST tax which by its very nature will target poor people harder than anyone else. Who are our representatives representing? Why?

"2. Obligatory referendum: There must be a referendum on any amendments to the constitution and on any joining of a multinational community or organization for collective security. In many municipalities, expenditures that exceed a certain amount of money also are subject to the obligatory referendum. Constitutional amendments are proposed by the parliament or by the cantons or by citizens' initiatives. Citizen's initiatives at the federal level need to collect 100,000 valid signatures within 18 months, and must not contradict international laws or treaties."

Please note the part which says "In many municipalities, expenditures that exceed a certain amount of money also are subject to the obligatory referendum." I would say that loosely speaking the sale of BC Rail would fall into that category and we both know it would have been soundly defeated had the people had a say. It is after all, the reason Gordo lost his first election try. So the important point is that in Switzerland there *must* be a referendum on changes in law and large expenditures (like the giveaway of the fast ferries by the liberals) exactly the opposite of what you were maintaining.
I will leave you with the mosques; it's your baby and you can rock it.

Principles

Lynn, I hear you. I will support your principles. And to go further, I'd like you to run for the leadership, because you can evoke those principles in common speech so that others get it.

But I want you to know what you're in for. Start with gross personal attacks from print and radio media, demonization as a communist and fascist who wants to take away everyone's God-given right to earn a buck at someone else's expense, and require everyone to submit to gross personal intrusions into their private lives.

It's not true - not a stroke of it, but it will be spoken as truth. And you will appear to have no answer, becasue none will be printed or rebutted, no matter how many times you or the left call or write.

Then you will fight an election and lose with about 25% of the vote, because, of the whole population you seek to inspire, only about 25% are sufficiently engaged to look up from texting-sexting, as Ed spoke of, to genuinely evaluate and support the principles you speak of. About 30% of the vote will go to those who believe something other than what you tell them, and the other 45% will remain in their soma.

You will speak of principles, and you will try to awaken a revolution of caring and sharing in people. And you will fail. And fail. And fail as everyone else has before them. Because every single social movement before us has succeeded only when the gross injustices perpetrated by the natural ruling parties before them became too much for even the uncaring majority among us to bear.

Right from the French and American revolutions to Indian suffrage under Gandhi to every countless minor byelection in a town or village anywhere in the world - I cannot point to anyone who succeeded only by espousing principles - I can only point to a success gained by general revulsion toward those who preceded the revolution. Gandhi succeeded only because Nehru stage-managed world opinion against British injustice so effectively. Franklin and the Continental Congress participants stage-managed the American Revolution equally effectively both in Europe and in the American heartland, to great fear in Canada. It's not right, it's not natural and it's not just, but I long ago ceased to believe in a God who will make the world right if only His people will order their lives in a moral way.

So I encourage you to run for office, and provide us with the moral leadership we so desperately need. Because James and the NDP are in ICU right now, and probably won't make it.

But as you do, look around and see who you can enroll to manage the other side of the coin for you.

Because, all by yourself, you will fail abysmally. And thus will we all be condemned.

H.L Mencken

...says it better than I.

"Every normal man must be tempted at times to spit on his hands, hoist the black flag, and begin to slit throats."

driftwood

Yes, yes, we all know what the language says. But how is it used? To purchase a couple of Picasso paintings as Basel did? Or to finance a museum to Jean Tinguely? Or to deny the women the vote nationally again and again until 1971? Or until the 1990s in one particularly patriarchal canton? Please, do tell us about all the great successes of Swiss direct democracy - we're all ears.

Having spent some weeks in Basel-Stadt with friends, I'm well-enough acquainted with that canton, enough to know that most of the socially-minded population ignores the power of the referendum in favour of direct and public lobbying of the powerful drug corporations that litter the Basler landscape. It's generally much more effective to have those corporations put a quiet word into the city fathers than it is to get the requisite number of signatures on a referendum application.

You may point to one singular federal success - the Swiss acceptance of Schengen in 2005, much akin to Canada voting to accept NAFTA. Same arguments, same motivations, same fear of job losses, capital exports, lax labour standards and environmental degradation, same heavy lobbying with millions of dollars in advertising by big industry, because Switzerland has fewer or no restrictions on corporate donations and advertising than does Canada.

I think you're quite wrong - BC Rail would have been sold in Switzerland as soon as it was here in BC - with heavy advertising bought and paid or by political donors. The only reason SBB is still a private corporation owned by the cantons is because it turns a profit every year, not because 90% of all Swiss and tourists ride it.

It's not for nothing that Switzerland is noted as a "conservative" society - and I know they don't mean every woman wears a chador.

Capitalism

Capitalism is the astounding belief that the most wickedest of men will do the most wickedest of things for the greatest good of everyone.
- John Maynard Keynes

My point about Switzerland, zalm,

was that all important treaties, laws and capital expenditures are subjected to a referendum *by law*
I'm glad you enjoyed your vacation there and found the practice of rich people running their government through the agencies of drug companies to be to your satisfaction.
Canada never approved of NAFTA. Show me one poll at any time before it was passed which shows the majority approving it. And if you were honest you would admit that the reason we are saddled with it is because Mulroney got rich on the deal. If he hadn't passed it do you really think he would have received all those directorships from American corporations. It proves my point which was, "the real reason we have representative democracy is that representatives can be controlled - even bought - to do the bidding of those in power."
I think where we differ zalm, is that you think they are some kind of natural leaders and I think they are some kind of natural assholes. I'm talking about the powers behind the throne here. Most MLAs doubtless go to Victoria with the best of intentions on their first few trips, but after a year or two when they see the lie of the harbour :) things change.
Whether BC Rail would have sold in Switzerland is a moot point - it never sold here but was visited on us by lies and stealth and bribes to the illegitimate liberal party. That and Gordo's further arrogance in trying to saddle us with a regressive tax pretty much guaranteed his downfall, proving that here in BC we don't have to be begging like they are in America to initiate change.
As Fiat says above we are on the knife edge of change and I hope it happens here before those bright sparks who know it all impoverish and destroy our way of life even further.

what's really going on...

There seems to be a lot of confusion here. James promotes herself and is largely seen as a "new" model for the party, and a sort of political centrist, while Jenny is portrayed as a leftist dissident. The reality is quite different. James, despite appearing centrist, is tied in with the longstanding old NDP union structure and its apparatchiks (and Moe and his union-paid presidency). Jenny & co. actually represent a break with that structure and an attempt to do something new. The main problem is that the "dissidents" haven't worked together to come up with shared ideas about how to restructure the party and come up with some sort of modern economic theory and plan for BC. Which they better do pretty fast. I agree with what some have said that the next NDP party leader better be able to unite all of these factions. Not impossible but a pretty tall order.

The Times... They Are a'Changing, AGAIN.

'the real reason we have representative democracy is that representatives can be controlled - even bought - while in a direct democracy the voters invariably vote for their own best interests.' Doggone.

What I personally find really encouraging here is, that there are many good folks in the NDP, unlike Frank, who clearly do get it, and understand the major dimensions of the current period rising up before us. (And not only they do, but so do most working class folks with whom I share conversation and listen daily. Which is why the "red baiting" fears of old, held by those with memories that go back to the Cold War period of the Social Democratic State time, such as Zalm clearly remembers so fearfully, will not be to the same effect this time. The ruling class media will work mightily to revive it, or something akin, no doubt. Which is why the need for what Lynn speaks of first, and then to fight more determinedly and doggedly... and to organize differently along a broad, multi-faceted front. Not just along the traditional hierarchical "Party" lines of old.

Courage AND IMAGINATION, will be what is called for. But make no mistake, the mass of the working class by now already, DO understand the mess their society and the capitalist economy is in... over all the official and media attempts to assure them otherwise.

"At least not now, but miracles always happen and we can only hope." Fait Lux, in an excellent wee piece.

And that is, for sure the immediate perspective from which we, the people, are starting out, and all, including NDP progressives need to be aware of that too. Parties want to win elections. I understand that. But this is a struggle shaping up that is not going to be resolved this, or perhaps even the next election... hard to say. The "election" success we all want however, that actually "achieves" something, and is not business as is "ruling class controlled" usual, is something that is going to have to be built and crafted from just about ground zero, by dint of this courage and imagination of which we speak. And... by force of WILL.

" (One has to wonder if the NDP has been infiltrated by those who would gain great advantage by the NDP becoming a middle muddle of irrelevancy.)" from the irrepressible and indomitable Lynn.

I call it the "Dosanjh-Bob Rae Syndrome". That Lynn, or the NDP, along with the trade union movement pretty much, has suffered its own kind of "corruption" at the influence and flattery of the Jimmy Pattison ruling class. Though both scenarios are the more likely.

You folks like Skywalker, Jeffrey and many others here, whom I admire in the NDP, I wish you well... and VICTORY.

I support Jenny!

Because if Carole James really had the support she claims you know she would the first to call a leadership convention to rejuvenate the party. The fact that she won't speaks volumes: Is she so selfish that she will sacrifice the party and the next election to remain the leader of a party which will be a shadow of its former self?

You have to admire Jenny Kwan for coming out publicly and saying what the majority of the NDPers think privately. And you only have to look at the majority opinion on this board or anywhere else to see that Jenny Kwan is right.

James says that the revolt is a threat to the party:
"It's a threat to our party and it's a threat to our ability to be able to govern this province."
But it is she who is the threat - she has had seven years and two kicks and many people have asked her to bow our gracefully but she has dug in her cloven hooves and refuses to budge.
Come on, Carole, do the right thing. Nobody will forgive you this one.

Where is the battle call?

Quote: "I cannot point to anyone who succeeded only by espousing principles - I can only point to a success gained by general revulsion toward those who preceded the revolution."

I agree, zalm, and the NDP need not worry, ;-) I have no leadership aspirations. I also hear what you are saying about the difficulties involved but I would never suggest that just espousing principles will win any battle. Only that first shouldn't we at least be very clear as to what policies and beliefs we share in common? Shouldn't we be afforded the respect of what exactly we will be fighting for?

If there's no visible or audible taking of a stand, no battle call.....where do we begin?

The number of dissidents and the fact they have been painted as traitors because they were willing to stand up within their own party for what is clearly at great risk of being lost is revealing in itself. And Ms James's cavalier dismissal of this brave stand as 'nonsense' tells us a lot about the depth, political and otherwise, of Ms. James.

(My amateurish guess is that both the recent yellow scarves idiocy and much of the hesitancy within the NDP has been engineered by those who wish to neuter the party....to intentionally cause divisiveness and discord within the party - that it isn't necessarily being initiated by James, but that her inability and unwillingness to see this has helped facilitate the subterfuge that has left the NDP adrift from its democratic-socialist roots. Jeffrey J highlights the significance of that drift in a very important post.)

What I hear in the posts of so many here is reflected in Jerry's heartfelt words:

Quote: "Courage AND IMAGINATION, will be what is called for. But make no mistake, the mass of the working class by now already, DO understand the mess their society and the capitalist economy is in... over all the official and media attempts to assure them otherwise."

This is so true.

This is the true meaning of an emerging sea change.

The momentum of a new ground about to break. Terra incognita. The people feel it now and they get it. But that depth of feeling and outrage is not being acknowledged nor expressed by the Opposition.

No echo, not even a boomerang coming back to us.

How long do we have to wait?

lynn and zalm

lynn, you make me cheer; zalm you make me weep ... but thanks to both of you just the same for your bold and true words.

James and her supporters betray the very foundation and fundamental principles of what democracy is all about, especially the kind of democracy that should be touted by the NDP. Get those traitors out of office, and get some folks with heart, guts, and intent to fill those apologist seats.

Driftwood

You've obviously missed the irony along with the point. It doesn't matter - it's a side issue, so back to the topic.

Driftwood

You've obviously missed the irony along with the point. It doesn't matter - it's a side issue, so back to the topic.

somebody...

...had better find the brakes. This bandwagon's picked up a lot of speed in 24 hours. James has been nailed to the front bumper and y'all are heading into the great unknown.

Congratulations, y'all. The old NDP is now toast. Lemme know when you figure out where the hell you're all going, and I'll see if I can help. But so long as you have Lynn saying "Since the genuine can't be bought, bribed, or stolen..." and Driftwood and others insisting that the left has been bought and paid for, I recognize I'll get no sense out of you until you'll finish whatever it is you're up to.

So for now, I'm going to spend the weekend drinking.

Heavily.

The (Dêmos) people/ (Kratos) power Pub

Just the noise of democracy, zalm.

It's the silence we have to worry about.

Cheers.

A side question

What's the role of organized labour in this coup?

I'd kind of thought that the placement of Sihota back at the centre of the party (as president) with the financial backing of Labour was an indication that the union influence on the party - which Carole James had decried and sought to lessen - was growing once again.

Is this true? I take it you might be able to speak to that zalm and I like to hear your thoughts.

Did the provincial council accede to a reinvigoration of labour's role within the party because they thought Sihota was such a great organizer or, were they simply trolling for money that didn't come from the much deleted party coffers - and were happy to take Sihota no matter what baggage came with him?

I've asked Schreck this question and he's pointedly failed to respond. Even so, I think there is something in the Sihota situation which needs to be addressed.

Certainly, Simpson seems to have refused the 'olive branch' allegedly offered by James's representatives because of his 'problem' with Sihota...is it really Sihota who's the problem?

Or, more likely, is the real cleavage between the camps a result of what seems to this observer to have been a rollback on James's part of her commitment to one member one vote.

Has someone convinced Carole James that the party can't win an election without the additional funding and organizational resources of the unions in this province and that that funding and support has come with a price. A price which, I'm beginning to think, includes Moe Sihota....

I'm worried about the silence too Lynn - but I'm REALLY worried about what this place will look like if the BC Liberals are still in power after the next election.

There's a time for everything - and I'm not sure this wasn't a time for a bit more pragmatism and a bit less idealism....

Wondering and worrying, I remain...

Zalm

Baseless ad hominem attacts don't make your point. And I proved my point while you wandered all over the map making snide remarks.

zalm

And please don't put words in my mouth. I never said that 'the left has been bought and paid for.' So far you have called me an idiot, said I shouldn't be able to vote, and put words in my mouth to disparage me.
All because I called you on something you said about how great representative democracy is. The remark which really upset you was:

'the real reason we have representative democracy is that representatives can be controlled - even bought - while in a direct democracy the voters invariably vote for their own best interests.'

And it probably also annoyed you when I proved how it has been used here and in the states to corrupt the media controlled democracy we all suffer under. If you wish to argue the point fine, but supercilious insults are not worth my time.

there's a theme here...

Sigh. I will point it out, why not? It goes something like this: voters are disinterested and don't care about policy and don't educate themselves about issues, consequently we end up with bad governments like the liberals. The problem is, this flies in the face of all the research, which actually shows that interest in politics is trending much higher than ever before. If anyone is interested in seeking out this research, some of it is readily available on Government of Canada websites, and all most all of it can be readily accessed by simple Google searches.

That the electorate is uninterested, by and large, in political parties is undoubtedly true: 2-3% of Canadians belong to a political party. That they are, by and large, disinterested in who leads political parties is also true, although hope springs eternal that one of the candidates might say something interesting. That the internal antics of a party does not interest people who are generally expected to go off each day and actually DO something to earn a living is not surprising.

What is so surprising is that these relatively well-paid politicos cannot figure it out: even a research staff of one could find the relevant research. I really wish that some of you here would stop falling into this trap, too. Effective engagement with voters begins in constituencies seeing first-hand what issues and concerns people are dealing with everyday, and making an attempt to bring these issues to the light of day. This is where the revolution begins.

I will be accused of naivete, no doubt.I just ask you to consider the revolutionary idea of politicians that accomplish small concrete things...

Any party that wished to reinvigorate itself need not look any further.

sorry driftwood

I can only take so much of that kind of thing...
I'd say you've misrepresented what zalm wrote AND the way he said it.

I got exactly the same feeling that zalm expressed when I read your posts.

I can't imagine that a democracy where every tom dick and harry voted 'only' for their own best interests would be any better than the situation where we rely on the naked self-interest which lies at the centre of the argument for free-market capitalism.

Adam Smith had a lot to say about that for the folks who've taken the trouble to read him...and so did George Orwell.

I don't want to be delivered into the hands of the judgement of the great lumpen proletariat any time soon.

The fact of the matter is that a government of everybody for himself would be an anarchic nightmare.

We have organized politics - warts and all - because we don't want rich and powerful elites - or stupid men and women in the street - running things.

Although I'm with Rousseau in arguing that we aren't perfect...I'd rather have a working social contract - even if I disagree with the guys holding the levers a lot of the time - than an anarchic mess of wildly independent thinkers who push little more than their own selfish agenda.

At least with Campbell in power, we know where to point the guns.

Cheers.

Media influenced democracy is nasty - direct democracy would, I believe, be a return to the law of the jungle.

VivianLeaDoubt

"Effective engagement with voters begins in constituencies seeing first-hand what issues and concerns people are dealing with everyday, and making an attempt to bring these issues to the light of day."

Exactly, deal with what people say they need, don't force an agenda and ideology onto them as the price for helping them.

Drfitwood

You're right - I can't leave you in your ignorance.

Your comments about Switzerland are pollyanna - the referendum may be used in all the cases you mentioned, but is in actual fact used only about two or three times in any electoral period - 3 or 4 years - and almost never for any of the cases you mentioned.

Referenda are used to combat law that has been brought to parliament for approval, or used by Parliament to combat legislation submitted by the public and supported through the Parliamentary process. Its use is extremely restrictive, which presents barriers to their effective use in democratic process (although Bern and Zurich are now experimenting with "constructive referenda" which may combine multiple questions and answers in one ballot).

The budget is in practice not subject to referendum, because a rejection on the ballot would mean the government would fall, with all that entails.

Forward-thinking proposals never make it onto the ballot for referendum because they are almost never accepted for discussion at the Parliament, never mind get made into law.

This is why my scarcely rich friends, not to mention the rump of progressive Swiss society (almost an oxymoron, that) has found ways to get progressive legislation enacted without having to charge Bunker Hill in a futile effort to get Parliament to consider any proposal it hasn't already previously agreed with.

If you're in social work or helping refugees or fighting for wage rights or employment rights or safety, best not to go to Council or Parliament - better to find a corporations whose interests line up with your own groups, and lobby them to lobby council or Parliament. A corporate 'sugar daddy'.

That, regrettably, is how the "referendum" works in Switzerland. In other words, not at all, except to entrench the status quo. The birth of anything progressive takes place outside the circles of power.

I think you owe my friends an apology.

But that's all secondary to your main point, which is that those who end up in positions of power afterward have been "bought".

Like Bob Williams? Glen Clark? Dan Miller? don't you get how clueless that sounds?

Mulroney is the worst example you could have chosen - he advertised himself for sale to the corporate right-wing back when he was a young lawyer in Schefferville, and the right wing took him up on it. People voted for him anyway, preferring to believe he was something different than Joe Who, who made the mistake of telling the truth.

NDP Leadership

As someone new to the province, I have to say that Ms. James didn't do anyone any good by her poor campaigning in the last general election. Her resignation is not statesman-like - she comes across as a nasty piece of work. Maybe the mostly rural MLAs who pushed for change have it right -- It's time to stop playing around. There's a desperate need for real change in BC, and some thorough house-cleaning. If the NDP leadership group can spin this the right way, they can show that they are a party that is willing to make BIG CHANGES in their own systems, for the betterment of BC. A platform that emphasizes equity to small communities, and one that promises to get rid of the mare's nest of interlocking bureaucracies that the Liberals built to give jobs to their cronies, would be a good start.

zalm

well, I can't be bothered to labour through your verbiage so I won't be responsing whatever you wrote.