Conservative governments

Conservative governments like Harper and Campbell run never take the environment into consideration when they develop policies. It's all about money and the environment, just like the the citizens they are supposed to represent, gets pushed to the side as if they are of no consequence. Global warming produces extreme weather patterns and disasters. A person would have to have their head squarely up their butt to not see the damage that's being done to the environment around the world. Even then the narrow minded Conservatives refuse to accept the evidence and they sure as hell won't act in a responsible way to do anything about it. This is war. This is a war to save our planet from the ignorant individuals who would destroy it in order to make money. Let's make them the next generation of dinosaurs.

Environment?

Blackie, what went on in "All My Children" today?

Ecological Meltdown and Nuclear War...

are the two paramount troubles we face in this world, with the ever increasing population adding stress.

Until we demand some accountability from ourselves specifically and, in general, from our out-of-control government(s), we will be forced to accept further destruction.

Now can anyone tell me how a governmental system shrouded in secrecy and operated by cliques, which determines itself not subject to the rule of law, and which does nothing substantive to promote democracy, can ever be held to account?

If the political game works against accountability to the people, shouldn't we be concerned on fixing that first? As it stands, you vote for your human MLA, yet a bobble-headed Party doll collects a public servant paycheque for four years.

Can't we see a single problem with this ongoing scenario played out over the last century? I know I never hear an earnest word about it.

The Real Waste of Time, Energy and Resources...

Yes, the fight to win the next election is already begun. Except, I think maybe we are talking about two different electoral processes. Many of you are talking about putting an X on a piece of paper beside one or another Party nominee of more similar than different status quo stripe... in my view a waste of time and energy. It is a process that is corrupt beyond redemption and rigged against "the people". A mirror image of the economy.

The other "voting with one's feet" process offering, in the final analysis, a greater prospect for real change and movement away from and beyond the status quo, is already underway as well. Which starts with withdrawing from this bullshit bourgeois election process many of you are committed to. And right now, as much as it may piss you right and centre-right party supporters off, the vote stands at about 50/50. 50 percvent still believe in the power of their X, the other 50% know its bs, and figure they might as well have a beer or catch a few zzzzs.

No doubt those of us who don't vote have to go the next step too. I concede that. But not easy in the absence of communications twixt, and other legitimate fears and concerns that need to be overcome.

The biggest waste of time, energy and resourcves I can imagine however, is to actually rouse oneself to go out and work for, donate my hard earned cash to, or vote for any one of these parties of capitalism... be they Con (fascist), Liberal or NDP (same, same centre-right) or Green (right and conservative, corporatist serving.), or any other party you care to name. All of these party groupings, to one degree or another, in one form or another, are all contemptuous of working people, and serve or enable the corporatist polluters, destroyers of the planet and the livelihoods and well being of working people.

continued next post...

The Real Waste of Time, Energy and Resources...

continuing from previous post...

From my perspective, I'd really be wasting my time to vote for anyone of them. To my mind and analysis, it would be a kind of criminal act, enabling wealth and privilege against the people and the planet. And all the attempts to rationalize it that I hear here, is just so much lacking in real courage gobbledy-gook.

I think we are in a place and time where more and more people are going to turn away from participation in this status quo election nonsense. As that becomes clear, and it is, even here, what remains is to find the ways, means and courage to "hook up" with each other and get the real show on the road. (And there ain't no real mystery how to do it. It is going on all over the world right now.)

And don't dis me. You guys, across this entire time frame since the 70s, have yet to prove to anybody, that you have it all together yourselves to turn this neocon period around. There isn't a blah, blah, blah here, out of all these parties of capitalism, without exception, that I haven't heard before, and nothing has changed. It keeps getting worse, in fact. And there is no prospect apparent yet that it ever will improve... not out of you guys and all your parties.

coyote

Whether your side's (non-voters) strength grows to 65% or 80% or 90% it will still eventually require more than apathy to change the system.

Because I know I don't care if 90% don't vote, as long as mine counts.

A system created by non-voters should be interesting, no leaders or groupings obviously, no one will vote on anything, discussions will go on endlessly and the use of force will eventually replace politics.

I'm sure the old, the weak and the sick will be better off... somehow.

Good Stuff Raif

It's hard to take seriously a rag that gets its funding from lowlights like "The Tides Foundation", but I must comment on your editorial. You are, of course, very much correct. At the same time, things have changed since your days on NW. On the bright side, no one can entrap you with coffee and sprinkles... but... those very people - or those with their mindset - have entrenched themselves like a parasite to it's host. They have been allowed to bugger around with things (with the help of 'Tides') to the point they have institutionalized their dogma. They've put in place bureaucrats everywhere to "what their backs" and play out the game plan.

Expect them to attack you with all they have. They cannot afford your message to resonate. Rest assured, they will lose. The centre is awake, just not on their radar.

We will stop them all.

The BC Liberal Chameleons

The BC Liberal leadership race will change nothing in this province.

If I were to bet, I would

If I were to bet, I would say an election this spring, if not it will be long before 2013.

HL Mencken, December 1919

The most dangerous man to any government is the man who is able to think things out for himself, without regard to the prevailing superstitions and taboos. Almost inevitably he comes to the conclusion that the government he lives under is dishonest, insane and intolerable, and so, if he is romantic, he tries to change it. And even if he is not romantic personally he is very apt to spread discontent among those who are.

Bafflegab

"The most dangerous man to any government is the man who is able to think things out for himself..." from samuidave.

And then to others, like Frank, anything other than what is, is impossible and represents the end of the world. They remain stuck forever in the unchangeable present... forever, like the NDP, attempting to pass themselves off as actually "progressives".

Oh, I think there will be discussion, decisions and elections Frank. Simply one's that are not a waste of time and bafflegab, designed to hoodwink, from followers who fancy themselves as "leaders", as within this "rigged" in favour of the privileged class system in which you are mired. Like the NDP itself, losing members while increasingly held in contempt by all sides.

Bafflegab, Frank. It is all so much bafflegab.

And yet, a lot of good, well intended people as well, I will grant. It's just that they are wasting their time attempting to prop up a ruling edifice from which increasing working class numbers are walking away from, and many of them beginning to understand that.

So Jerry Munro...

...what are you doing to change things...aside from "walking away" which really changes nothing? Or was what I read just more "bafflegab"?

Agitprop Ain't Bafflegab...

Let's put it this way, Skywalker: I'm doing as much for "change" as NDP members known to me. Though I don't spend as much time in meetings, as tends to occur in "Vanguards". (Even worked with them on Recall.) Though I ain't getting any younger or better connected.... here in the political wilderness.

Mind, I don't equate "working for change", where that is currently actually possible, with helping to administer capitalism or "control labour" for the ruling class. You guys do way more of that than me, at all levels of the status quo system. :-) And I'm pleased to leave it to you.

Oh... and I "agitate" by writing on Tyee. A noble activity in and of itself. LOL 8-D And judging from the emails etc I get, it seems to be having at least a modest effect. (I don't line to brag. :-)

And that ain't no bafflegab. :-)

coyote

Its a simple concept, show me the beef.

You keep claiming that non-voters represent this and that whereas I don't think you know at all what that half of the population thinks and wants because if they were as outside the box as you claim it would be obvious to the economy.

You can't hide 50% of the population under a rug. Also, even though they don't vote provincially or municipally they do show up in bigger numbers during federal elections and generally vote Conservative. Which is the opposite of what you claim they're thinking.

Voter turnout federally in Canada isn't much different than it was a hundred years or more ago. Its had its peaks (1900, 1958 to 1963, 1984 and 1988) when Conservatives were motivated to show up but generally its risen and fallen depending on the choices and the issues.

In the USA voter turnout for Kennedy vs Nixon in 1960 was 63%, last election it was 57%. A 6% decline over 48 years, not exactly a sign of the Apocalypse. Although I'm sure there were those back in 1960 claiming that the 37% that didn't vote were one day going to rise up.

I'm also tempted to ask how the elections carried out by non-voters will be any different than elections carried out now. How will it be any less "rigged"? What are the mechanics? But I know that's for us to learn later.

Look Around....

Actually Frank, in the past, here on Tyee, in a number of those lengthy posts of mine you complain about, both I and samuidave have gone into how a new "working people" friendly democratic system might work... in some depth. You absented yourself from that thread, as best I recall.

Though if folks indicate an interest, and Tyee would tolerate it, I would certainly be prepared to get into it again. The essential element of what I proposed however is, that it would be a community based democratic system of representation, with those reps chosen directly from the community being responsible directly to same, and not beholden to the Party/ Party Whip system that is current, and subject to a Recall System actually designed to work.

But particularly, in the case I proposed, it starts with economic enterprises controlled by workers democratically, from which base organizations candidates would be voted on and advanced to a community/riding election, where other candidates advanced from other community interest groups, such as womens groups, environmental etc would also select candidates to a community/riding election not unlike currently. From which representation would be selected by a universal popular vote.

And it would be this process and base that selected MLAs etc would be responsible and subject to electoral or even Recall discipline, not to Parties.

In any case, this is the rough outline of my suggestion, subject always of course to a much broader input as would be needed in its final creation features.

If you have specific questions, I would be pleased to respond to those.

Outside of that Frank, you and I are certainly not going to agree much on the rest of what you raise. Though I would point out two things: first, that we are not talking about past peaks and valleys in past voting patterns, though they certainly did exist, each particular to its time, and hopes, illusions or dashed optimism as then existed. We are talking about this time. Finally,

continued next post.... :-) just for Frank.

Look Around...

from previous post...

But finally, neither you nor I, as I have indicated to you before on a number of occassions, really know with any defitinitve degree of certainty, who is and is not voting or why. This has been a studiously ignored social research area... though my bet is that the majority of non-voters are likely, many of them young, and many of them working class. They could only be the latter to get such a mass.

You dismiss them with contempt. I choose not to.

Much remains to be done, doubtless. You Party folks are clearly failing to "change" society and organize the people. My side of the equation is not positioned any better, by and large, because in the end, it is "the people", the "working class" that is going to have to move and organize itself. They can be assisted with ideas and analyses by such as myself to some degree, but in the end, it is they that will have to motivate themselves. Which I am convinced they will in good time do.

Sometimes "the people" can seem to be sleeping for a very long time. Then BAM! , all hell breaks loose. Look around the world you are living in.

Woops. My soup is about done here.

coyote

I don't know exactly what non-voters think of course, that's true. Just as I don't know exactly what voters think as there's lots of reasons to vote for somebody or against somebody.

But non-voters have not been ignored, they've been asked, polled and so on and there is data on why they don't vote. That data doesn't show they believe in a different politics. It shows they have busy lives, can't find the time on that particular day to vote, can't find the time in general to follow politics, simply don't care who gets elected or feel that one vote doesn't matter or they were simply sick that day.

That's pretty much it for the majority of them. About 10 of that 50% in Canada vote federally but not provincially and of that 10, most of them vote Conservative.

Around the world you usually see people rise up against authoritarian governments demanding freedom of association so they can have political parties that can contest elections. Something we already have.

As for your democratic model, I think it would be great if we got rid of the party whip system. It was one of the issues I brought up for years on here whenever the subject of STV came up as you may recall.

STV would have created a system where people in the same party had to compete against each other for votes. An NDPer in Kamloops could have had a number of NDP candidates to select from and only one would get his first choice ballot. Right there, you break the party whip system in my opinion because the party can no longer guarantee you're the only member of their party running in a riding.

Which would have turned MLAs once again into people that represent their constituents instead of the party that put them in a seat.

The system can be made better, but people have to vote for it. And although I was disheartened to see electoral reform get voted down in BC, Ontario and PEI I accept that and will wait till we get another chance in 30 or 40 years or whatever.

But remember, it was the people that didn't want change.

Get rid of them all

tonights TV news tells of kids dieing from poverty issues Thats Gordo + gang for you. It is a well known fact poverty causee our health to decline. The cost to health care increases. But we do need someone to bad mouth don't we. There are a couple of countries who have a much healthier population. Gordo and gang I believe are over paid welfare reciepients

The TV also showec the photo copier with the gordo reprints come out the other side HUMMMM

REGARDING ELECTORAL REFORM

Quote "But remember, it was the people that didn't want change."

A majority of people in BC voted for electoral reform in 2005. 58% in fact which I had been under the impression constituted a majority.

However some idiot came up with the bright idea that in this case a majority would have to be 60%.

It wasn't the people who didn't want change it was Gordon "Drunk Driver" Campbell.

BDD63

Well, 42% voted against it the first time around and 61% voted against it the second time. STV could have easily passed if non-voters were interested in electoral change.

More On Bafflegab Mills...

Frank,

Again, I, and most of the folks known by me, remain unimpressed by the "data" bafflegab that "the system" generates to justify itself and discredit the role of the masses, and which its ruling class politicians throw out at us in endless reams to impress those of us in the unwashed masses. You are another centre-right NDPer who, of course, buys into the notion that capitalism and its rigged political system, used as much against yourselves as just about anyone, can be improved upon. No need to throw out the baby with the wash as NDPers have said to me across a long time period. This is the premise that centre-right NDP ideology has been functioning on since it arose out of the old CCF... at least.

In my view, the game is still on, and always has been, though it may have seemed "almost" over for the very brief period of the postwar Social Democratic State of capitalism. (Which period came to a whimpering end, in this country, with Mike Harris, the Kerkhoff Dispute, Solidarity, and Bill Bennett and the first Restraint budgets of the 70s.)

And this new game hand has been card by card being played since then. The game still being in play. The trade union leadership and NDP players have both basically folded their hands, though they are still attempting to look and sound like major players. Pretty much though, by now, all we other players are reading them pretty good. All they've really got is a handful of jokers and fistfuls of slugs.

The NDP, which shares the essential same centre-right position in Canadian politics with the Liberals, carries the like same political line of "saving and reforming capitalism" now as they and the Liberals did throughout the Social Democratic State period. That period is now gone and both these centre-right parties are in serious trouble, bleeding members, influence and credibility.

That said, the full history of this post Social Democratic State period has not yet been written. Indeed, all the ramifications of this reality are only now beginning to be realized by ourselves and the working class public. Hence, the mass uncertainty and only seeming apathy, that is but a false mask, out here amongst us Great Unwashed.

The current events of the Middle East in Tunisia, Yemen, Lebanon and Egypt demonstrate that masses can seem to be in a state of denial, apathy and inaction for a very long time. The capacity to suffer and endure is great amongst the masses. But it is a false appearance. Beneath this appearance of things is being built a pile of kindling just awaiting the right spark to set it bursting into flames.

You see apathy from your vanguard party ivory tower Frank. I see quite something else going on, from my position here on the ground... in the political wilderness.

continued next post...

More On Bafflegab Mills...

continued from previous post...

As to who is right, thee or me? We shall yet have to see. Like I say, I don't buy what is generated as the data bafflegab that is the gist for the centre-right and right wing propaganda mills on the subject. You do.

I have learned to be a very patient fellow :-)... unimpressed with the likes of yourself and your centre-right political school.

Now, I have a full day ahead. :-)

coyote

If supporting the NDP makes me a right-winger to you that's fine. I don't define my politics based on where you are on the spectrum. Of course the Left is going to be a very barren place if the only people that qualify are those that agree with you.

As for your comments on data, I like data and I notice you like it too when you can use it such as how you constantly throw around the size of the non-voting segment. Its only bafflegab when you disagree with it I guess.

Finally, Frank Is Being Honest...

"If supporting the NDP makes me a right-winger to you that's fine" Frank

Now, that wasn't too hard was it, Frank? The NDP is a centre-right wing party. It only passes as a left-wing party for so long as folks don't really know what a real left winger is. (Now, you are in agreement with Ed, whom you derided so much on the same issue... when he says there is no left and right. With which I obviously disagree, as much as I respect, and in many other regards agree with Ed. A fine gent to have in these threads.)

Which is what other NDPers have to finally face up to, and which may determine the political futures of some of them... you are, in fact, in a centre-right NOT left-wing party. (And "the left" once you cross the line from capitalism, is itself broad and diverse. :-), at least as much as the right.)

The NDP only "seems" left, when you really don't have any clue what the fuck that is... and relative to the extreme right, fascism.
The "right" in its sundry degrees supports the status quo, which is capitalism. The "left" stands counterpoised to and advocates the destruction of this status quo, again, which is capitalism.... and FOR a socio-economic reality based on, in my view, a democratic "people" or "working class" power as opposed to "capitalist" power.

"As for your comments on data, I like data and I notice you like it too when you can use it such as how you constantly throw around the size of the non-voting segment. Its only bafflegab when you disagree with it I guess." Frank.

Again, Frank, of course, even while I don't presume the "correctness" of any bourgeois generated data, I certainly will use it, wherever it suits my purpose in its contradictions, against them. Which doesn't mean I selectively use data, but just "their" data.... against THEM.

There is an objective reality. I understand that. Only, I think, it is more difficult to measure, accurately describe and be sure of, when it comes to my class... the working class. That reality is always shifting and nuanced, and not easily and accurately quantified or qualified, because relative to ruling class society, you see, we really are still oppressed in this society. So we hide much. We lie much. And we trust very little.

We think you NDPers, accurately in my view, really are a tad scummy and not to be trusted. You are right wingers afterall, as you have yourself acknowledged. You are really on "their" side. Basically every working class person really knows that. Though now and again, the odd one or more gets fooled, like some of yourselves.

Gotta cook the Mrs her supper. She is still in recovery mode.

coyote

Hate to disappoint but I don't call myself a right-winger. If I'm a right-winger compared to you well then that's fine. Nobody will care. As for us in the NDP facing up to anything, why exactly? Are Liberals and Conservatives suddenly going to declare the NDP is a right-wing party? I didn't think so. We're defined by others as much as ourselves, just like you define me based on where I sit compared to you. And I've always said left and right is relative to who you're being compared with.

Anyway, if you agree with Ed that there is no such thing as left-wing and right-wing then why did you bring it up?

As for every working person knowing the NDP is right-wing, fine. So are working people. They like the NDP, Liberals and Conservatives being about the same as their own beliefs.

Hope your wife is up on her feet again soon.

I'm up to my ankles in analysis here

Frank:

But non-voters have not been ignored, they've been asked, polled and so on and there is data on why they don't vote. That data doesn't show they believe in a different politics. It shows they have busy lives, can't find the time on that particular day to vote, can't find the time in general to follow politics, simply don't care who gets elected or feel that one vote doesn't matter or they were simply sick that day

The data doesn't explain anything, Frank, it is compliations of numbers. Again, ask yourself WHY?

Every single explanation you provide for 'non-voter apathy' -- typically time constraints or lack of interest -- does nothing to reveal 'why' the apathy?

I, and others, have tried to offer some reasons on various occasions 'why' there is apathy (my ideas were structural and systemic), which you've dismissed. In my case you suggest I am "putting words into peoples mouths" in even attempting to understand where things are going off the rails.

OK, so what's your explanation?

And if you're concerned about democracy, if that is fundamentally important to you -- and I by no means suggest it necessarily should be -- how do you propose getting a significantly larger proportion of the people involved?

Frank and His Sorry Ass Left/Right...

"Are Liberals and Conservatives suddenly going to declare the NDP is a right-wing party? I didn't think so. " Frank.

No, of course. Because "comparatively" or "relative to themselves", especially the Conservatives, you ARE left wing. They are attempting to create a harmless "strawman" boogeyman that they know they can beat into submission... (same as CNN) and you NDPers are it . It serves their purpose. Same for the Liberals, even though you are fundamentally, ideologically and and in terms of your aspirations and stance towards capitalism, the same as them.... centre-right. It serves their purposer no less to paint you as a boogeyman... to demonize you. (Everybody, left and right, disrespect and hate you. For being neither fish nor fowl. For being basically chickenshits. I, for esample, respect rightwingers more.)

Besides, all the rightwing parties other than yourselves KNOW, the same as I, that the real deep pockets behind you is the centre-right trade union leadership. Whom, being the deep reactionaries the ruling class are, they don't trust from the last picture show yet... even though this trade union leadership poses no real threat to them, indeed wants to control the working class for them.

These ruling class forces all fear you NDPers, even though there is no real reason for them to do so, you and I know that, simply for reasons of ancient history and... they don't take chances. You are going to have to continue kissing their asses and waffling for a whole lot longer yet... and betraying the working class.

"...how do you propose getting a significantly larger proportion of the people involved?" asked samuidave of Frank.

Frank has made it clear many, many times, his response to this kind of question. He does not give a rat's ass about the non-voting public. They don't count. And he has said it many times here on Tyee. He writes them off.

coyote

There are no "deep pockets" behind the NDP. The union movement is, to use your term, a bogeyman. If unions had deep pockets for the NDP the NDP would have enough money to pay for ads instead of posting them on youtube. And the party wouldn't be millions in debt. And we wouldn't have to rely on volunteers for everything.

The NDP is run on a shoe-string budget. There are no rich sugar-daddies paying our way unlike the BC Liberals and federal Conservatives.

We're the party of the poor and the Liberals are the party of the rich and its reasonable to assume that's why their party is awash in money and we're not.

samuidave

The data doesn't explain anything? But it does. The one response, "too busy to follow politics" IS an explanation for some non-voters. I know for a fact that when your kids are little or you're working two jobs or studying all the time that you don't have time to follow politics closely.

Its a valid reason to me. It also kinda explains why older people show up to vote more than young people, older people have more time.

Being sick is also a valid reason. Same with that some follow politics but on that particular day stuff came up and they just didn't have time to vote. Or they were on vacation. Probability dictates there is always going to be a percentage of people who get sick, or are out of the country or real busy on election day. That's fine.

Then there's those who have the time but are apathetic anyway. I don't expect everyone to care about politics, after all I don't care about a lot of things either such as celebrities, so I see no reason to spend time worrying about those that are apathetic.

I know I've skipped a number of municipal and school board votes myself because I hadn't followed it and didn't know enough about the issues or people running. Again, even apathy is a valid reason for not voting. But its not "fixable" unless someone invents a way to add a lot more hours to the day.

Now as for those who follow politics and have the time to vote yet refuse to vote anyway? Like coyote? Well, many of them say they have no one that represents them. Which is somewhat valid, after all, there's always going to be people who feel unrepresented. But I think they should vote for the small parties or independents rather than boycotting the process. At least that way they would know that others exist with the same beliefs. Where would the Greens be after all if all the Green voters said to hell with it, what's the point? At least they show up and can see there's lots of other Greens out there.

Time is a matter of prioritizing, Frank

it is not an excuse nor explanation. Other matters are deemed more important than voting because 'why', Frank?

Here's why, I believe, in a nutshell: the political paradigm does not serve their needs enough to warrant an hour every four years. That is the democracy you find fit.

I know Jerry Munro put words into your mouth, but they seem completely accurate. I guess he could have added, as well, that 'gaining power is all that matters'. I was just offering you a chance to rethink, or even just restate, your position so there is no misunderstanding.

So what is the objective of the Party then, Frank? Does it want to represent BCers and look out for their short-, mid- and long-term interests? Or is its vision more of a 'lets jiggle policy approaches', or is it a 'day-by-day', 'wait out the cat so the rat can sneak by' sort of thing?

Without vision, without a map, your NDP is wandering around in the wasteland. Perhaps gaining the seat of power every 15 or 20 years is considered victory enough, more than it feels deserving.

What am I missing as a resident of this province, as a branded citizen of this nation, that keeps me thinking something is profoundly wrong about our political direction?

samuidave

"That is the democracy you find fit."

I find? I don't understand what you mean here. It is what it is.

"I know Jerry Munro put words into your mouth"

No, he quoted me. Rat's ass and all.

"So what is the objective of the Party then, Frank?"

Its to act as a political vehicle for people who share its views and to bring those views to the wider public in hopes more people will support it and thus lead to the political power that will allow implementation of policies.

"Without vision, without a map, your NDP is wandering around in the wasteland."

Political power in 2 out of 9 provinces (let's leave Quebec out as its a special case), the official opposition in 2 more. And it gets the third most votes federally. That's not bad.

If it didn't exist the Liberal party would be a lot stronger but a lot of would feel unrepresented.

"What am I missing as a resident of this province, as a branded citizen of this nation, that keeps me thinking something is profoundly wrong about our political direction?"

I really don't know.

I do understand this p.o.v., Frank

But I think they should vote for the small parties or independents rather than boycotting the process. At least that way they would know that others exist with the same beliefs.

... but, of course, voting legitimates the entire process on the other hand. And I think the process is far too gamed to be legitimate.

Yes, I live with it, and I would not claim my life hasn't been great on most accounts. And to have lived the Hobbesian natural life which is "solitary, poor, nasty, brutish, and short" would be most unpleasant.

But I do see built into our political model a theme that inhibits opportunity for most, and does little to support those whom nature shortchanged. It is not just apparent here, but I see its cancerousness abroad in the people residing in countries under Empirical dominance.

Perhaps, as Chomsky claims, the vote is all we have to make things change. Maybe 'voting' at the polls isn't the only thing he has in mind.

Democracy needs more protection than 'it is what it is'

"I find [democracy fit]? I don't understand what you mean here. It is what it is."

Well, not to make this too black-and-white on principle, but what is the NDP doing to advance democracy? Specifically, what has it even tabled to push forward a democracy "of, by and for the people", i.e., in terms of real representation?

Is it not trying to advance democracy (at least its principles), as the new democrat party? If not (and I see nothing of the sort and never really have in any concerted way), then why the 'new democrat' banner? Does 'new' mean 'watered down'? Or is it, as I have suggested before, the false flag of Party, itself?

Democracy must be fought for and strongly protected, or it will fall. I find your 'it is what it is' remark to be far too indicative of the NDP mindset, particularly when it gets into office.

This may be a pretty good reason why the Party has such poor support fiscally. Unlike the pure Lib-cons who bribe everyone needed to gain power (an effective approach in a society worshipping at the alter of money), the NDP does not seem to have much to offer. A lighter version of 'more of the same', perhaps, but certainly nothing that can compel much beyond its historical base.

Not "New" and Cynical

Is it not trying to advance democracy (at least its principles), as the new democrat party? If not (and I see nothing of the sort and never really have in any concerted way), then why the 'new democrat' banner? Does 'new' mean 'watered down'? Or is it, as I have suggested before, the false flag of Party, itself?

Democracy must be fought for and strongly protected, or it will fall. I find your 'it is what it is' remark to be far too indicative of the NDP mindset, particularly when it gets into office." wrote samuidave.

Cutting, relevant questions for Frank, and indeed, the entire "New Democratic Party". Which serve to expose the reality that there is nothing, zip, zero, nada "New" about their approach to democracy. Indeed it is old hat, traditional bourgeois grounded "ruling class dominated" democracy into which they keep trying to shoehorn themselves... as often as not, certainly here in BC, with disastrous to timid result.

They have nothing "New", that would open up and make "democracy" more relevant and egalitarian to we of the lower class order of society. They are just more same old, same old "liberal and Liberal" bafflegab.

But more than that, and more damaging to democracy, the NDP, manifest especially through Frank, have been callously cynical. And dismissive, outside of self-serving platitudes, of the working class mass who, seeing through them, such as they might as well vote Conservative, won't vote for them or give them cash, and are walking away from them.

The idealism of the early CCF, for all its imperfections, is dead in the NDP. It has become old and callous in its beating heart and its ideas. (Like the trade union leadership.) They now are truly just another Party of Capitalism... centre-right to the core. And nobody speaks to that more than Frank, in my view.

(And Frank, I have sat on trade union boards and councils.... and I KNOW... And you know I damn well know. Moe's salary was not the first or last incident of this nature.)

samuidave

Why should the NDP be "advancing democracy"? The NDP didn't create the electoral or parliamentary systems, the people did. The NDP's job is to obey the rules of the existing system. Same with the other parties.

As for why the NDP is always broke, its supporters are not that wealthy.

coyote

If you feel that way about democracy then start protecting it.

As for cynicism, that trophy goes to those who are too cynical to engage with the system and spend their time demanding of others what they don't ask of themselves.

samuidave

Just so there's no misunderstanding, what have you done to "advance democracy"?

The Old Democratic Party...

"Just so there's no misunderstanding, what have you done to "advance democracy"?" Frank.

I don't know Frank, I think I would call the role that samuidave is playing here, and indeed, modestly, myself, "advancing democracy". Not only that, we are here advancing alternative and actually "New" ideas of it. Conversely, yourself is the same old, same old crap I've been hearing from NDPers and Liberals for years.... basically all my life.

You should really be called the Old Democratic Party by now, my friend.

coyote

Well then that's pretty lame. You could at least leave the bounds of the Tyee comments section and start a group that advocates changing the system. Did either of you attend meetings of the Citizens Assembly on Electoral Change? Put forward any presentations?

You don't even vote so I doubt "democracy" is that high on your priority list. Not as high as complaining about what's lacking in others anyway.

Misunderstanding about what, Frank?

Frank asks, samuidave, Just so there's no misunderstanding, what have you done to "advance democracy"?

Misunderstanding about what, Frank?

samuidave

What do you mean jelly bean?