The NDP is fighting wars from yesteryear, the killing of a perfectly fine RAV line in downtown Vancouver being a prime example; the Green Party has a platform to appease both social liberals and fiscal conservatives. Basically, the NDP's philosophy is, "What's in it for me?" Meanwhile, the Green Party's philosophy is, "what's in it for Canada and the global community at large?"

Why? The same reason the conservatives never did much better. Much of Canada stayed with the status quo content to hold their noses and vote Liberal, even though it was a minority. For example, voting (Reform/Alliance) conservative in Ontario would have meant giving more control to the west, something many easterners feared at the last minute. I think the NDP could have easily gained more seats but due to vote splitting between the Liberals and the NDP ended up only helping the Conservatives while nudging out NDP candidates in many BC ridings. There were also many tight races between the NDP and Liberals. My NDP candidate lost to the conservative candidate by something like only 30-40 votes. If you were to combine the Liberal votes with the NDP votes in my riding, the left leaning votes would have far outnumber the right wing votes. None the less the NDP are not perfect either and need to look at what it will take to become more appealing to Canadians so they can be viewed as a viable alternative to the Black Cats and the White Cats.

NDP did not kill the RAV line. If anyone killed it, it would be Gordon Campbull and his P3 profits without risk. The lower mainland mayors voted it down, not the NDP.

Gordon Campbull's strategy for the next election is to drive the NDP voters into the Green camp by attacking the unions. It would not surprise me if it is true that the Green Party is funded by the same people who donate to the BC Liberals.

Lets remember that the NDP is environmentally greener than the Greens and that the Greens are right wing alternatives to the Liberals. For social justice, the NDP is the party to vote for. For Corporate greed, you now have the alternative of voting Green instead of BC Liberal.

I'd have to say this is a pretty biased piece of work by Mr. McMartin trying to paint the NDP as irrelevant. Don't get me wrong debate provides plenty of room for bias. As is mentioned in the article the NDP have just come of their best showing in many a year. What I think the author is trying to achieve is make them look small after a massive victory in terms of popular support. This is getting to be a pretty shop worn tactic of the right. Take for example the phony debate on whether trade unions remain relevant in todays society. Not even the Fraser Institute is trying to make the lead balloon fly anymore. Last night the NDP nearly knocked out star Liberal candidates like Hedy Fry and David Emerson. We took Bby. rather handily and Bby. is not exactly the downtown eastside where the right says Libby gets elected because blah blah. What happened to the Urban cnservitive/Reformers? I think that would be a facinating debate. No, I think the NDP will remain a very viable political party. I think as well the so called Green Party will have to prove just how green the really are. You can't be called green because thats the colour of your signs. They should be held to account on how you can toady to corporate interests and clean up our environment. Cripes look at the milage the Reformers position on Kyoto which the author of this story might have some influence on in their platform.

It's because the NDP speaks for the working class (or "the poor"), families with children, and peope who want some equality in our society especially in things like HealthCare and Social programs, legal aid, etc. The PROBLEM is a lot of voters don't want to admit that this is exactly where they sit on the financial scale. You have young single parents voting for the Conservatives because they are "all about family values" and people saying "I want my taxes cut back, but I still want health care coverage and no fees, and good schools.". They don't make the connection that THEY ARE a couple cheques away from bankruptcy and that they need a government that will look out for them. Taxes and cost of living needs to be balanced out with fair wages and good services, and it takes time, but it makes for a better Canada for our children! It's CRAZY! It's like all the people complaining about Laytons "Death tax". The NDP platform said it would be on amounts OVER $1 million, this would affect something like 3% of the population who probably wouldn't even notice it, yet everyone screams bloody murder thinking that they may have some long lost cousin who might just bequeath them a couple mil. and if that was to happen, they want the whole lot, screw the rest of Canada! I guess people could argue, that the natural animal instict to want more than the next person comes through, but in the end we all loose . . . except that 3% . . . they're doing well.

hey green guy the green party does not have the support of 96% of British Columbians sooo how are they significant? I would not support them and I am an evironmentalist in that I am very concerned about the future of the planet and the well being of my children Jack Layton addressed my concerns not the greens! Btw folks McMartin is a right winger so what do you expect.

Why they didn't garner support? I thought the answer was obvious to all: a lot of would-be NDPers are voting Liberals to vote out the Conservatives. Ever wonder why you hear the term "strategic voting" so much this election? If this was not a significant amount of people, would Paul Martin have bothered to address those voters REPEATEDLY on air? As to people going "Hey we should vote Green... I mean, just think about the environment..." I say READ THE PLATFORMS. You want people to be more "awake", or "in tune" to what's going on, but you are not! - Like they say, don't judge the party by the name! As to RAV - do we think, maybe, that if we want to figure out what's right for Vancouver in terms of transit efficiency, that we listen to EXPERTS in this field - people like Translink, who has already rejected it despite all the big money that's been thrown at them?

Talk about Green economics - pure voodoo - Green guy. The RAV is a neoliberal con job of the worst kind being shoved by bully-brains Doug (emperor) McCallum of Surrey, and "I'll stuff this debt on you too" Gordon Campbell who'll make the Fast Ferries look like exercise. What part of "there's no ridership in the Cambie corridor" that people dont understand? Transit resources are very tight - and such a line will start to suck resources - and then when ridership isn't there (the studies point to this outcome) - needed bus services from other routes get cut to fill in the budget shortfall. As for the ridiculous assumption that "the Province" would pay for that - who on earth is "the province" - the taxayers. Not the contruction happy corporate tax cut freeloaders on the board of trade and their cronies, who want a development project to skim from.

If there is any high speed rail needed at all it's in the North East corridor, out in Port Moody. That pay for itself. An airport line is high ridiculousness. There's a scam going on behind closed corporate doors (and the "polling" support lobby); the people should get a vote on it - there is no mandate for such a massive venture. There is more proof positve that the GVRD, and large budgetary bodies should be elected.

On the NDP outcome, it basically bodes well in my mind. The NDP party policy supports the moratorium on offshore oil, and I'm personally hoping to see a strong focus on the environment - and International trade. To me, the Environment and GST monies for infrastructure to the cities are core focusses. I think Harper co. is goin' out to citizens coalition policy pasture soon. All the Alliance-Tory barking hounds had pinned the Liberals up the tree with the sponsorship scandal - 'till the biggest loudmouth in the land, his rambleness, (Klein) opened his "foot-locker" in Alberta, along with the Alliance bigots that couldn't contain their rabid views on minority rights indefinitely either. I actually think there's going to be a significant shift to the left....since Martin is so..uh...like the NDP in "values" (cough!).. I do think the NDP ran an excellent campaign. That Jack pulled it off in the hard core Liberal riding is excellent - and the voter percentages wont hurt the NDP financially either. As I mentioned elsewhere, I think Harris might become ("optimally") the "new kind" of "green right" poster boy via the small-c conservative voters (10 percent voted for him in Alberta), and his suit 'n tie backgound as a business author will serve that demographic. Anything "less right" is enormously better than the rabid "western neocons".

If all goes well, there may be a real philosophical and demographic shift toward a progressive environmental, coupled with a socially conscious, triple bottom line - "business model"...which could be very good for us all. For one thing we as a Country have got to get a handle on our part of the debate within the WTO. Jack Layton is very well placed to advance that debate, in addition to the one on our role in foreign affairs, particularly, with American "defense" policy. The Canadian people fared pretty well in this election, I think.

Gerrymandering. That's how the NDP voter base in one contentious neighbourhood, Southern Interior, got diluted. The West Kootenays have almost nothing in common with the Okanagan, so why else stitch these two regions together except to disenfranchize the Selkirks.

"Strategic voting" is just another term for vote splitting. In the past provincial election, the media played up the Green party as a "viable alternative" to voting NDP or Liberal. Not too mention the fact that the Green Party of Canada has no affiliation whatsoever with the worldwide "Green Party" movement, as much of their supporters think they do. This mob is more aligned with the Right Wing Green party in Mexico then anything progressive in Europe. The Sierra Legal Defense and Greenpeace gave the NDP environmental policy a higher grade than the Green Party. As long as people want to remained brainwashed by the mainstream media that there are really only 2 choices in Canada, Conservative or Liberal, the NDP will always be a 3rd place finisher, no matter what great ideas, solutions or policies that the party puts forward. You will never get a fair shake out of the predominantly corporately owned media in Canada if you're centre left or left on the spectrum. Particularly in BC where CanWest Global owns just about every single newspaper and the majority of media outlets. For me personally, I'm happy to see our popular vote on the rise, I'm happy to see more seats for us, and the fact that we can play a vital role in the minority government. And try to mitigate it all he wants, but Gordo can hear the footsteps now. The NDP in BC isn't the same NDP that was here after the last election. And the enthusiasm and energy of last nights results can only carry us further in the upcoming months. By the way, does anyone have any idea what a 3rd place finish for a disgraced former member of the NDP and member of Paul Martin's "Bad Dream" team (along with Shirley Chan) will pay off from Mr. Martin?

It seems that one of the main problems for the NDP party this time around is that they nominated a number of candidates whose personal beliefs put them at odds with the party platform. Specifically I saw at least two NDP candidates interviewed on TV who said that they would abstain from votes on issues such as same sex marriage because their religious beliefs were contrary to the party's position.If I vote for a party because they claim to have a certain stance on an issue I need to be able to trust that those who are elected are in agreement with the party platform and that they will vote accordingly.

It's because 84% of the country doesn't want anything to do with socialism.

Green Guy States: The NDP is fighting wars from yesteryear, the killing of a perfectly fine RAV line in downtown Vancouver being a prime example; the Green Party has a platform to appease both social liberals and fiscal conservatives. Basically, the NDP's philosophy is, "What's in it for me?" Meanwhile, the Green Party's philosophy is, "what's in it for Canada and the global community at large?" No, the Greens are not in it for Canada, if they were they would have dropped out of the race completely and put all their support behind the NDP to try and shut out the Cons wherever possible. We could have seen potential NDP wins in many places if not for the Greens. They will never form a Government in this country, although they would beg to differ. Now they have a whole wack of cash so they will hardly give up their dreams.

What the NDP needs to do is reviltalize its confidence and its values, by looking to its historic successes of the past and modernizing them for the present and future. The CCF made its mark on Canada by applying its practical socialist values and organizing unions, cooperatives, credit unions, and community based businesses and services that aare democratically run by those who work in and benefits from their efforts. These efforts helped turn the prairies around in the midst of the worst depression in history and since then have played a vital role in raising the living standards and expanding the freedom of Canadians. That's what gave it credibility. But in the last 20 years, it seems the NDP has been fighting a rear guard action, trying to simply defend and cherish its past successes, instead of moving ahead by modernizing its agenda. Rear guard actions don't inspire confidence in people, even though a large majority of Canadians do, at some philosophical level, appreciate many NDP values. Instead of just pointing out all of the destruction of corporate capitalism and its many policies (NAFTA, Privatization, centralizing wealth into few hands, economic dictatorship, etc.), the NDP needs to get more pro-active and get into practical ways of organizing against these. economic literacy and innovation, democracy, teaching workers how to run businesses democratically, union control of pensions, mutual respect and equal rights for all are keys to a prosperous and free society of the future. The NDP can be the political force for this innovation if it has the courage to do more than just celebrate its past within its ranks and start doing practical things to once again prove its values If it does this, the only opposition it will find are the usual lies, slander, threats and endless stupid cliches and proclamations that Corporate Canada and its politicians and media use to justify its worthless existence. eg: Jean Binette, 6/29/2004 9:17:47 PM, writes: It's because 84% of the country doesn't want anything to do with socialism.Jean Binette, Stupid and dishonest comments like this are really the only thing corporate capitalists have to defend themselves with.

What must the NDP do? A good question. Another is, what has been done to the NDP? My feeling is that most people work for a business and/or are thinking of running a business. Everyone likes comfort and style, and such things cost money. If that's reasonable, then there's an automatic tendency to affiliate with the business party, which is typically associated with the right wing. It is also reasonable to think that the business party would make efforts to defend its mindshare by pointing out and/or inventing deficiencies in its opponent, in this case the NDP. And so you have the common perception about the NDP (and left aspirations in general) that they are pawns of the unions, that they will ruin the economy, inhibit individual success, and so on. The NDP has to face these image problems/ancient cavils and deal with them in a forthright yet charming manner. Not by denying or counterattacking, but by being exemplars of leftist ideals. The NDP (and all parties) should do good works which illustrate its strengths. If we can say that leftist values include rationalism, diplomacy, fairness, cooperation, and civil liberties, then we should expect the NDP to be constantly doing appropriate deeds while simultaneously acknowledging and respecting other points of view. (Is this earnest enough?)

The Canadian mind re-psychoanalyzed - and the "Ego" (aka - the Liberals) just barely holds on to sanity. The Harper NeoCons - whose whole platform was based on their very honest self-endorsement of "We value your tax dollars" - Canadians concluded that they prefer a government that values them more than their money. These "New" conservatives (as oxymoronic as the thought of them being Progressive) represent the Canadian "Id" - or the primitive "I want, I want - and the heck with the world and our girth" mind. We already knew that the Conservatives valued our money above all else - above the environment, our health, or our sovereignty - and they were willing to invest billions of our valued money on weapons to fly friendly missiles over our heads. The best defense is not to offend (take note America). Canadians realized that punishing the Liberals for balancing the budget but buying some expensive love de francais was not worth punishing ourselves and our identity as Canadians by voting in the Harper Id. We are "liberals" - in the actual sense of the word - our ideals are largely "NDPish" (our Superego representing our conscience)- health care, environmental sustainability, and strengthening our weakest links are our ideals. Frankly - I rather waste billions buying scandalous French love then billions buying arms to breed hate and havoc. But our heartstrings are still attached to our back pocket wallet and many of us think "NDP" with our heart and "Liberal" with our pencils when marking the box. Canadians value our right to breathe fresh air over our right to bear arms - and we can all breathe a sigh of relief that we fended off our own worst enemy - our immature Id - for at least a while. We only need to look south to see the consequence when the Id wins over the Ego and Superego - it ain't pretty and therapy is necessary at this point of mental disease. politics is pyscho and know it's analyzed.

Another no-name brand Tyee Ndp fan speaks out, and Tommy Douglas rolls over in his grave.

The NDP (or any party) will be effective where they have grassroot idea support - and translate that into empowerment for their constuency. The idea of PR is fundamentally about local, personal power - not about percentage accounting. If the NDP gets in touch with a broad local constituency, in terms of benevolent idea creation, including wealth creation, that is of and for, as compared to falsely perceived to be against, "it" will become, as a political constituency. In terms of media, that also speaks to image change.It's not that the NDP needs to change, it needs to demonstrate difference from other parties style and substance, in the grassroots manner of policy making efforts. and this has to happen regularly - and be celebrated. That inherently is its greatest probable strength - it is a group of social individuals in terms of values. The last is really key - the individual must be celebrated, and what creates a happy individual. If the NDP can learn to say and be a party of individuals that support the possiblities of the individual, and of an individual amongst the many, in a socially just capacity, then its strength will naturally become greater - and possibly quite quickly, regardless of pollsters might say and other bean counters might wish.

A good part of this election was fear based, and rightly so. Here in BC we have seen first hand the same kinds of proposals Harper was promoting, already being put in place provincially by G. Campbell, and frankly, it scared the heck out of a lot of us.Enough to scare a lot of potential NDP voters back to the Liberals to keep out Harper.I doubt if the provincial election will go the same direction, with the provincial "Liberals" the equivalent of the Harper "Conservatives". It would appear that about 70% of Canada that actually voted didn`t want anything to do with Harper conservatism,Ms. Binnette,that analysis is at least as valid as yours. Us NDP supporters want social democracy.

The NDP (at least in BC) have never been against the idea of wealth creation, a group of social individuals basking in the Cayman Islands, that is the image.

Apparently you haven't mastered your first coherent sentence, as recommended (though you've "pleaded for status", in the form of an apology, for your bruised ego, from the editor). I've you're going to rebutt to anything, consider substantive commentary (not the above tripe) as elementary courtesy.

Well written word play, if only it were true.

The kind of wealth creation I associate with leftism is not wealth theft, which is not inherent to any side unfortunately, but the kind of happy-face capitalism manifested in VanCity credit union. They gave me a wicked good mortgage rate, they donate a bit of their profit to worthy causes, and yet they are competitive in the marketplace. Another example is "ethical investment" funds. People want to make money. Given a choice between two ways to make money, everyone chooses the way that makes us feel good. So there is plenty of opportunity for the NDP to find new ways of expressing social idealism.

"...the NDP again must find solace in being able to influence others."

About which there is absolutely nothing wrong. Far better, in my view, to be in that position than wind up in the "power position" of Tony Blair's so-called "New Labour"-, much admired from the "Neocon-Liberal right" from whence Mr. McMartin comes, and play the bootlicker role for U.S. imperialism abroad and the corporate ruling elites at home.

Besides, it is actually beginning to look like, if opposition to Tony within his own party and amongst the recent English electorate is any indicator, over Iraq and social policy at home, we will soon be speaking of him in the past tense over there in any case.

No doubt, folks on the left can frequently be found with their heads in the sand or staring off in space, but this rightist McMartin offering us solutions for "left" problems here, has his head in quite another dank place. The overarching reality everywhere throughout the capitalist world (or "democracy" if you're inclined to wishful thinking) is, that the neoconservative "economic plan" since the 80's, to restructure capitalism and render it more lean and mean, and through "trickle down" benefit improve the life of the masses, has been an abyssmal failure. It doesn't work. Their "trickle down" theories have only resulted in making cash flow uphill, into the homes and boardrooms of the already wealthy. It furtherleads to aggressive environmental destruction at home, war abroad, and increasing impoverishment of the people. The "left" choosing to mimic these policies is not going to resolve the "class contradiction" at the heart of the priorities they serve, and at whose expense. It is only going to, as in the case of New Labour in England, make the struggle against them longer, through sowing confusion and beheading the eventual emergence of any real opposition and alternatives to them. Social democratic Labour's becoming just another kinder/gentler capitalist party is ultimately, I would sugggest, indeed already is, part of the problem, though they may here or there enjoy "some" momentary "electoral" success in the confusion about who's who.

Rather than moving right towards New Labour, in fact, which is a bit like Canada moving to integrate itself with the U.S.A. at that historical moment when the warning signs point to the gathering momentum of its decline, what we need be evolving is a clearer and sharper alternaive vision of society and the future. That may cost you some elections over the short run, though not necessarily leaving the "left" without positive influence, as even McMartin concedes, but with careful, yet sufficiently audacious and bold "progressive" planning and action, ultimately make clear to Canadians, or whomever, that there is an alternative to the current downward economic spiral and diminishment of options and alternatives.

The future is nearly always untested. Which is not an argument for irresponsibility. Though, I would suggest, all around us, but especially in that 40% of Canadians who see no point in the voting options available to them, as well as the economy and deterioriating global relations, that there is "some" indication of the evolving future along this, thus far, "rightist-corporatist" dominant view of the highway.

The need of the historical hour is for the evolution of a clear "left-alternative", not further co-optation. When the "left" becomes afraid of radical innovation, and chooses to move instead in the direction of its class opponents, and some perceived "comfort zone" there, begging to be included in its narcisstic, purely "self-interested" view of politics and power, there is not only a diminishment of options available to people and society, but the closing off of the only possible exit out of the confines of "the box".

"Why Didn’t the NDP Catch Fire?" Strategic voting.

Nothing left to burn.

Why didn't the NeoCons catch fire? Nothing there to begin with.

I think the NDP did fairly well considering the circumstances. They did not get the expected votes for the same reasons the New Conservatives didn't. Both the True Conservatives and the NDP voters were so concerned that the ultra-right conservatives would win, they voted strategically. This is good news for the Provincial NDP in the upcoming provincial election. I see the true NDP will vote NDP, obviously. The federal Liberal vote will go to the NDP and the true conservative will probably go to the NDP. The true right will stick religiously with their misguided leader Campbell. There is nothing but good news for the provincial NDP, unless they try to destroy their success with unpopular concepts such as the inheritance tax. This provided no help to Layton or Carol James.

Politics appears to be more about trying to move an elephant in the absense of dominant, emotion filled ideas. Global trade and investment issues coupled with taxation are the number one hot buttons really, regardless if Martins group did a poll and said "Health Care", yeah, that's it. Lets say that. Layton has to really push four issues - aggressively. Our international position as peacemakers and not American golf-bag boys in space, nor on the ground. Next is Canada's position within NAFTA and WTO trade panels (and really getting some action and closure on softwood lumber). Third is environmental regulations (and the offshore drilling moratorium) and green technology incentives to homeowners and Canadian businesses, and real change with regard to tuition and student debt relief. Martin's certainly going to tout "his" idea around GST rebates to cities - that progressives lobbied mightilly for and who's message he appropriated during the campaign. I suppose there can be significant, progressive changes from that front - but the NDP must champion and take the credit for its own vision of that - however hard Martin tries to falsely say "Liberal idea" whenever he can, as he perenially tries to do.

The unfair tax cuts (public purse robbery for the wealthy right) - will hopefully get sober headed re-think; Public taxes are the lifeblood of public infrastructure. And, all yelping opinions earlier to the contrary, I'm sure that the largest per capita number millionnaires in Canada, here in BC (and whatever offshore "Islands" they occupy, tax free)...can eek it out on their "shareholder skimmings" now that Harper's had his chain yanked and told to sit. Layton most certainly is not going to be any Liberal lap poodle - if he does he's absolutely finished - one term. It's now or never for Jack Layton. "New ideas" and words "about" change are pointless without concerted action - and a clear public profile. His reputation from his municipal politics days guarantees real proactivity.

"...their success with unpopular concepts such as the inheritance tax..."

Or aim it more precisely, along with taxation policy, at those extremely wealthy "best able to pay." The object of "left policy" being, yet this side of capitalism, to "mitigate" against inequity and "bend" social policy towards "levelling" glaring "class" discrepancies -, and strengthening worker/consumer power to create additional "demand-pull" on the economy. Relying on the wealthy, examplified in the passing on of "obscene" wealth from one generation of the "obscenely" wealthy to the next, as to be differentiated from passing on "reasonable/helpful opportunity" from one generation of ordinary and/or disadvantaged folks to the succeeding, are quite different matters in intent and outcome.

The former exacerbates social/class inequalities, while the latter works to "help" overcome it. Again, it is a question of, to whose benefit, and with what social result? The "left" always, at least historically, advancing policy to the benefit of the lower levels of society, advancing their interests, and strengthening their "power" positions against the ruling class and its wealth.

If the "left" does not work as a counterweight to the "right", and its class loyalties, but only retreats before it, apologizes for itself, compromises and seeks to ingratiate itself to it, then it truly is already "irrelevant".

And someday the cows will come home. (assuming they don't get eaten by the howling pack of Kiyutes out in the field)

Pass the salt and pepper!

Agreed, Coyote. The key point on fair taxation as you outline is that the "left", currently mis-identified with the "unions" and the NDP, cannot allow itself to be mis-represented as "beneficiary" - which it isn't.

The fact that BC has the highest per capita number of millionaires in this entire country, demonstrates how effective the lie of the Fraser thinkerbelles, plus the Can West media group has been up to now in spinning the vapour of an "overtaxed" BC.The inequity of unfair taxation results in the middle and far less wealthy strata of the population making up for the ripped off taxes by the loophole artists, in terms of budget cuts to schools, hospitals and other provincial services.

Even still, taxation of existing wealth probably will not work. I rather see a taxation strategy that works on giving greater tax benefits to more fair local employers, worker coops, and local businesses, and far heavier taxation to offshore interests. For this to work at all - this has to be coupled with a national voice to address the glaring inequities within International trade panels, that strive to undermine local governance policies. Effective local change can be compounded from within that framework.

The premise of the article is suspect, as one would expect from the author's credentials. The NDP took 19 seats with 15.7% of the popular vote (and a significant chunk of its support scared into voting strategically for the Liberals.) Compare that with the Bloc at 12.4% of the vote and 54 seats. The main thing that sidelines the NDP is the current electoral system. And momentum is building to bring in some form of proportional representation. Full PR would have given the NDP 48 seats in this parliament. As well, strategic voting makes no sense with a PR system. PR would also tend to raise voter participation (as no vote is 'wasted'.) Given that studies show lower voter turnout correlates with more right-wing governments, we can expect higher turnout to bring out more left-wing support. Layton has come out strongly for Proportional Representation. Let's hope he can keep it on the agenda.

"Why Didn't the NDP catch fire?" 1. The Asper family: The influence of the media in deciding an election cannot be overstated. We all noticed that every newspaper in every major city in Canada pretended that the NDP doesn't exist. 2. 'Strategic' voting: We saw very tight races between the NDP and Conservatives(!) in some of the most left leaning ridings in the province. Thanks to all those NDPers who listened to Martin, those ridings now have a Conservative MP. 3. Many people have given up voting for the NDP because they never win. It seems that many people like to vote for winners, whether they agree with their values or not. And so we have a positive feedback loop. So what is needed? 1. Electoral reform, including some degree of proportional representation. 2. Government intervention to break up the corporate media oligopoly. 3. Since 1 and 2 will not likely occur under a Martin government, we need to take it upon ourselves to render the corporate media irrelevant. We have to make good use of the power of the internet to disseminate independent journalism, and organize at the grassroots. Exactly what we're doing here and more of it. The landed gentry are already nervous about our access to free information via the internet. And well they should be. If we use the internet to our advantage we can pull off a surprise landslide victory for the NDP in the next federal election. Then the corporate elite will really be shitting their pants.

Why didn't the NDP catch fire? Some possible reasons: -The small tent phenomenon: The NDP spent far too much time telling voters that the NDP is the only socially progressive party, that voting Green was a wasted vote, etc. When Paul Martin leveled the same charge against the NDP, it made Layton look pretty hypocritical when he was reduced to begging people to vote their consciences rather than voting strategically for the Liberals. -lack of dialogue with and inclusion of other groups (missing the "playing nice with others" lesson in kindergarten?). From anti-war rallys to labour disputes, the NDP feels it has to "own" it all. Not only does this alienate other progressives (and yes, there are many of us out there who are not NDP), it becomes self-selecting: If only NDP supporters feel welcome, then only they come out; if only they come out, then the message only gets heard by those who already believe it. Etc. -Get over it, guys, the Greens are here to stay. Love or hate them, call them every name in the book, misuse left-right labels to your heart's content, but get over it and move on. If half the energy shown in the various Tyee discussions that is now devoted to bad mouthing the Greens was used to promote the NDP, you could have elected a lot more MPs! Those of you who would rather speculate about "secret Liberal and/or corporate funding" to the Greens are free to go this route, but I'd suggest there may be more productive uses of your time. -The NDP is not really a socialist party, at least not anymore. The fact that there could even be discussions around mimicking Tony Blair's Labour party clearly shows this to be true (for those who may have forgotten, this is the same Tony Blair who is Dubya's right hand man in Iraq and Afghanistan, who preaches about the benefits of "free trade" and "economic reform" at every opportunity). Hence, a small "c" capitalist party (the NDP) calling the Greens (and others) "right wing" was sort of absurd and funny at the same time. It certainly made me feel that some NDPers were fairly confused by the true nature of the political spectrum and who's who in it. This problem may highlight a larger one that I will deal with in a future article to the Tyee, i.e., the reliance on left-right definitions as sole determinants of political belief. -The NDP's newest incarnation as a "green" party to attract environmentalists failed with most green voters, pretty much for the same reason that their waffling on NAFTA fails with most who oppose "free" trade agreements and the WTO. If the primary lens you look through is based on the unions, and, in turn, their primary lens is jobs and benefits for union members (and nothing necessarily wrong with either position in context), then environmental issues will always take a back seat regardless of official rhetoric. Ditto opposition to FTA or NAFTA and futher economic integration with the US. -For the above reasons, the NDP tends to look, to all but the converted, like a crazy quilt of political options, most of the pieces already "owned" by other parties. Why vote for a substitute when you can vote for the original? -last, but by no means least: the provincial NDP is a political albatross. Yes, Carol James is ahead of Campbell in the polls, yes the NDP is ahead of the Liberals...But it might be a reasonable suspicion that most of this has more to do with Campbell and company rather than a renaissance of love for NDP policy.

I think the problem with such items as inheritance tax is twofold: 1. in order to buy a house, one must earn income and pay tax on that income for a lifetime then pay off the house. I should not have to pay income tax again on the same money. 2. I bought my shack for $25,000 30 years ago. The shack is worthless but the lot is worth $600,000. Althought the inheritance tax is not directed at the middle class, it will not take long before property values may reach this level.

Chris, I hope to god you discover some formatting soon, honestly. It just magnifies the wall of sound effect of your posts. If your post is an example of the "unified" voice mind-frame you rant about, it's dead in the water from your example. If you looked at the Green policy document (which i'm sure you have), just as a for instance - it is clearly very pro-business - and a largely self-regulating mantra of red-Toryisms, with a prettily rotated primary colour on top. Where is David Orchard, the organic farmer, one might wonder -

Noneof the young beleivers in the Green party I've talked with understand the green platform in full - especially the business angle - it's all totally good, new, and so very left progressive. The people are very nice. And I'll say, the Green executive is currently doing a great sales job. Just about every Green post that come on the Tyee goes on about is how the NDP suck and the Greens are the virgins of the good and the enviromentally and socially correct 24/7. You know what? no one is going to take that lying shit from precious wannabee political stances.

I think that Greens getting money is very good - actually - but it will morph the right wing debate constructively - and the Greens can stop trying to appropriate the work of all progressives under its matra. Harris will get his neo-business soapbox - but once that happens - the social elements of the Green Party will be more in view - for all to see - and it sure as hell wont be argued its "just like the NDP, but different". There's more to life than "green-business" ventures and the trading of environment credits internationally. I also want to see where Harris actually situates his argument with respect to the WTO and multinationals. outside of the real world fray, every single fringe leader will "have all the answers" - and harris is no exception. He does, however have good ideas in certain aspects of Governance - the economy in particualr. Harris is an example of the "evolution" of the pro-business right, "toward" the left - which is a damn sight better than the current business club - but that alone cannot and will not really serve the country, nor the dis-enfranchised workers in the current framework. All one need do is loook at B - and here - where there is enough of a critical mass of social progressives - the progressive voice is the NDP. The greens will not sucessfully retool the business climate from within a dominant conservative/neocon framework - and that is the fundamental error of any progressive who thinks otherwise. The greens can only rise and be progressively effective in Canada, and in BC especially, if there is PR - and/or the is already a centre-left governence structure in place. I firmly belive that anyhitng else will screw the works and serve a hard right constituency that does not want things changed one iota. Your post tries - like all "Green-as-new" posts before it to mock the social values that Gave this country the social policies most people utterly take for granted. In BC, the NDP, as had been stated numerous times, had done enormous work in the environmental movement - and at the expense of the unionised labour force.

The issue of parties and the "new" members within it is they want to deny and dismiss the work - and values - of others where they (supposedly) "came from". It is insular in the extreme to believe that a party, like the NDP cannot be environmentally cutting edge. It is equally insular to omit in arguments that the NDP executive has recently changed at a core level in terms of policy toward the unions on the executive - it's now one person, one vote - not some "secret group" of some union bogeyman with some guaranteed percentage of votes on the NDP executive. That fundmanetal came in with Carol James. It was voted by the membership - so anyone running around playing chicken-little about NDP and "the unions" can cut that b.s. once and for all. There is empathy for unionised people within the party - because anyone can see what a "business knows best" attitude does - it doesn't give a goddam about the environment, or social programs, or public education, or public medical, or about fair taxation - but the constituency adores cheap labour - onshore or off - and their next tax break as the sole raisons d'etre for a wafer of government.

x

The 2004 Federal election has come and gone and if there was one issue that gained hardly any attention it was the "Fear Factor" No longer is Fear Factor just a reality tv show, it is a reality of Canadian federal elections. In the 2004 federal election the fear factor played a significant role in who got elected and by how much. The pecking order of fear went something like this: The Liberal installed fear in to NDP voters to stop the Conservatives The NDP installed fear in the Green voters to stop the Liberals and Conservatives The Conservatives were generally scary to begin with and so did not have to work too hard to scare people The Greens tried to install fear in everyone but never got the chance What a sad statement on Canadian politics when parties use fear tactics to win votes. Strategic voting is also a sad statement of our outdated electoral system. If the fear factor is the motivation then strategic voting gives us the ability to manifest that fear at the polls. We should have the ability to vote as our conscience dictates, not hold our noses and vote for the party that is the least offensive to us.

I'll work on the formatting, I promise. Re my post: I was trying to answer the general query about why the NDP didn't do better. I gave my opinion, which you can accept or reject. Rather than dealing with the points, however, you choose to respond with more attacks on the Greens. Feel free to do so if it makes you feel better about the outcome, but I don't think that blind faith in the NPD as the vanguard of progressives past, present, and future, nor juvenile name calling against Greens will do much for NDP prospects in future elections. Here are two simple questions for you: is the NDP a capitalist or anti-capitalist party? If it came to power would it turf NAFTA or not? If you can't answer "anti" and "not", please don't lecture the list about progressive values from the NDP. The Greens have their pro and anti-capitalist fractions and are working though the issue. Where it goes is anyone's guess. However, they would abrogate NAFTA and that is a definite plus. I'd suggest getting the NDP house in order first before telling the rest of us what to believe.

Well said

But poorly practised. None of the prior three are free of their mockish rants. Their respective soaboxes have their own distinct odour - and not a vision in sight.

I was only referring to Shaw. Visions are useless, unless you can apply current reality.

Thank you for one of the most useful and practical posts ever. If only everyone could bring your effectiveness of purpose into their discussions.

Mostly excellent posts...it occurs to me that the party most successfully able to co-opt and adapt green technology -which in the next decade we may have to scramble for in a hurry- could be the next party to run the canadian government. Many good posts above but shirin's was the best. Chris shaw, you make some good points, but I believe that until the green party holds at least a center left position, it will never hold power and that a good way for the green party AND the ndp to set themselves back ten years is to refuse to cooperate in the next bc election should the support between right and left in this province be closely tied. Would the greens ever recover from being known as the party that gave campbell a second term?

Mostly excellent posts...it occurs to me that the party most successfully able to co-opt and adapt green technology -which in the next decade we may have to scramble for in a hurry- could be the next party to run the canadian government. Many good posts above but shirin's was the best. Chris shaw, you make some good points, but I believe that until the green party holds at least a center left position, it will never hold power and that a good way for the green party AND the ndp to set themselves back ten years is to refuse to cooperate in the next bc election should the support between right and left in this province be closely tied. Would the greens ever recover from being known as the party that gave campbell a second term?

"Politics appears to be more about trying to move an elephant in the absense of dominant, emotion filled ideas." wrote Kit.

Just a brief blurb to Kit. I mayn't have responded to a lot of your stuff, mostly because I find myself "largely" in agreement with of your point of view, (there being a number of others here as well, of course.) That said, I always read everything attached to your moniker.

(Whereas Jean Binette, and one or two other trolls here, are a joke, eh? All the depth and clarity of a muddy saucer of water to this sorry crew. Easily and well worthy of being ignored. :-)

I think the reason the NDP has had a hard time attracting new voters is that they don't stick to their principles. The NDP's biggest issues in this election were proportional representation and the environment. Those are important, but a prominent NDP leader said (just 8 years ago) that a) "environmentalists are the enemy of BC" and b) "Pro-rep is for losers". This hypocrisy doesn't sit well with voters, surprise, surprise.

Kit: Just been reading your early morning post re: " an individual amongst the many, in a socially just capacity." Well said; it's really, in the end, the bottom line of living on this planet and it is a powerful idea - the fullfillment of the individual on an earth that demands we also consider those who live alongside us. A simple truth that appears lost in the grey stew of party politics.

One of the problems with a forum like this is that incorrect information is posted, then people react and respond to it. Pure castles made of sand. Case in point. Someone called Green Guy puts down the NDP over killing the RAV, insinuating that Greens are for RAv. Kit takes the bait and responds that Greens favor voodoo economics because Kit now believes Greens favor RAV and Green Guy is somehow a spokesperson. What is wrong here? Simple. Greens have opposed RAV from the beginning. Adriane Carr calls RAV an affront to democracy, a bad idea; she even has issued and posted press releases to this effect. So, who is Green Guy, Kit's alter ego? His foil? Kit, you should get your facts straight before you bluster on and generate more disinformation. You cant have a true dialogue until you get your facts straight. Until people are ready to discuss real information, not innuendo and misinformation, this forum will remain nothing more than a wind tunnel.

Youblewit - welcome to political platforms where we stand on illusions of delusions - you don't need an open forum for wind tunnels - you need any media with an agenda. Ever play telephone as a kid? This is the "adult" (or at least voting age) version of the same game.

If only "Blogs" were. "heated intelligent debate" that is. Sadly in most cases they are not and serve only to "force-feed" opinion with rhetoric and mountains of unsubstantiated allegation.

Much of the disinfo, invective etc would change if we all had to register to participate using our own real world names which had to be verified by telephone from the Tyee offices. In fact I recommend it.

I second that emotion

Dear me, YES!!! That's what we need!!! More CONTROL!!! More REGULATION!!! Let's keep the anal in banal. The frontier style of discussion is the best way of sussing out what people really think -- misinformation, spelling errors, psychological melt-downs, canine spooks and all. Stop trying to turn the internet into another snapshot of that boring and limited linear hemisphere of your brain. Start exercising another cortex. Maybe you will actually come up with some fresh and exciting new ideas. Something really 'feisty' like this ezine says it strives for. Let your inner fox yip!

yikes

Happy Canada Day.

A very brief bit on this issue of "left unity" in general, arising out of, especially, this frictional relationship between the Greens and the NDP. First, though there are doubtless "left" Greens as individuals, I tend not to see "The Greens" per se, as an organization, as part of "the left", and which seems to be their "official" preference in any case. (As distinct from other elements of the "environmental movement".) Indeed, though the NDP "tends" more to the left, practice ruling over ideology probably just gets their big toe in over the line, with the Liberals having mayhaps a little toe. Otherwise, the NDP and Liberal's main body "squished" onto the narrow centre line, with the latter spilling out more over the right side.

Nonethess, given what "tends" to "pass for" left in this country, I don't think we are at a place where "unity" is probably either possible or, even necessarily desirable. I think we have some ways to go in arriving at that place, if ever. In any case, my personal preference "tends" to be, subject to change, for indeed the currently popular "proportional representation system", a multiplicity of groups, ideas and approaches on the left (Let the "right worry about themselves.), and rather than some kind of "forced" or imposed "Unity", in it's place, a "fluid" kind of "alliance creation" around particular elections, issues, and "perhaps", with the fortunes of the gods so bestowed, "opportunities" to come to formal "power".

For now, that "tends", (I know. I know. Much overused. But it is the most accurate description.) to be the way the left is evolving, in the current period, in any case. And in this time of, hopefully, a rebirth of the "left" being underway, when there is much a need for developing and testing new ideas and approaches, and evolving new tactics and strategy to "break" the current stranglehold of "the right", and open up a new opportunity(ies) for the further "progressive" evolution of society, this is about the best we can hope for or expect in the current period. That said, and I think real life, the "empirical evidence", attests that this is "likely" true, then mayhaps whilst we argue and jockey for positions, we at the same time rather accept where each other is at, about which there is no choice anyway, and more conciously than what we again "tend", maintain "the dialouge", with a view to "future cooperation", and looking for commonalities, the lessons of experimentation and practice, and evolving opportunities for alliances, however short or long lived they might be.

As I say, I think/hope we are in the early stages of a rebirth of the left-, coming from many different directions, social groups and experiences, such as labour, student, environmental, women and poverty groups-, even the breaking up of old political groupings that have failed for one reason or another. Some time is going to have to pass here, where ideas, approaches and forms of organization go through a testing in the laboratory of real life. In the interim, let's keep ourselves open to each other and our collective experiences, and while continuing to argue and debate, always leave the door invitingly ajar, to whomever may choose to walk through-, as in open to communication and evolving new possibilities.

There is indeed something happening here, but what it is, isn't just exactly clear. :-)

Dana, 7/1/2004 7:42:19 AM, writes: Much of the disinfo, invective etc would change if we all had to register to participate using our own real world names which had to be verified by telephone from the Tyee offices. In fact I recommend it. Jean Binette, 7/1/2004 8:31:26 AM, writes: I second that emotion The REAL Barking Mad Fox Channel, 7/1/2004 8:53:26 AM, writes: Dear me, YES!!! That's what we need!!! More CONTROL!!! More REGULATION!!! Let's keep the anal in banal. The frontier style of discussion is the best way of sussing out what people really think -- misinformation, spelling errors, psychological melt-downs, canine spooks and all. Stop trying to turn the internet into another snapshot of that boring and limited linear hemisphere of your brain. Start exercising another cortex. Maybe you will actually come up with some fresh and exciting new ideas. Something really 'feisty' like this ezine says it strives for. Let your inner fox yip! , 7/1/2004 9:03:33 AM, writes: yikes The REAL Barking Mad Fox Channel, 7/1/2004 9:07:21 AM, writes: Happy Canada Day.

I voted Green and volunteer for the party in my constituency because their policies - evolving as they are - are far more balanced than the NDP, a party I used to admire and work for. I know about a gazillion people like me, who trust the NDP about as far as you can chuck a soggy Bill Tiellman rant (i.e. not very far). They see the leadership is and has been very recently dominated by zealotry, cronyism and a mean-spirited myopic boosterism that is more similar to a creekside revival than enlightened politics. The rants against the Greens, at a fever pitch on Tyee from a passel of NDP apologists, are mostly immature, unfounded and reflect heightened insecurity. I'm glad so many Canadians voted for the NDP and the Greens on Monday; I hope they voted out of committment to sound party ideals and not as a result of the fearful protestations conjectured by party leaders aimed at the electorate. When the election was over I heard Jack Layton welcome the Greens to the national stage; too bad none of the zealots posting here were listening.

Who's 'we'? Speak for yourself comma.

" Let's keep the anal in banal. The frontier style of discussion is the best way of sussing out what people really think -- misinformation,", writes Barking Dog. With whom I much agree on this issue of "control". What we don't need, coming out of "overly structured" minds and groups right now. Enjoy the simple freedom of it all, in an otherwise uptight and anal social environment-, while it lasts. Usually it is, in my experience, the control freaks are always trying to force feed us something, and/or lead us somewhere we don't want to go. They want the world made safe for "their ideas" alone.

Let it happen, and see where it all goes of its own accord.

you got that right, don't forget racist

Anonymity allows, if not encourages, thoughtlessness. Witness the Fox above asserting that creativity is predicated upon anonymity and that only *his* style of scattershot diatribe could possibly reveal novelty or nuance.

I've been online since '96 and have left more anonymous fora than I can count due to precisely such as Fox. I'd prefer not to abandon another.

The internet carries promise for political and social engagement or change only insofar as authentic dialogue and discourse is possible. Anonymity is the enemy of authenticity not it's ally.

Anal Talkback begets Anal Talkback

and we fully agree with Dana

Scatter-shot diatribe, hmm? Mostly I've been sitting back and reading -- educating myself about what people think on this forum and learning a great deal actually -- without commenting except to razz binette/comma. I made one point about gerrymandering earlier on because I think it represents the reality of what we have to work with: Constituencies stitched together without sensitivity for cultural, economic, historical or other differences. In Alberta, Klein's government sliced up densely populated Calgary and Edmonton ridings into finger-length strips and merged them with thousands of miles of sparsely populated rural areas to dilute the concentration of urban dissent which tends towards the left. West Kootenays and Southern Okanagan have two very different cultures. To unite them means that the West Kootenays do not receive the representation most suitable for its needs. This does nothing to instil that sense of 'unity' which Coyote mentioned. As for leaving fora, Dana, that's your perogative. I think that binette/comma's remarks reflects his particular political bend perfectly.

Feel free to post your own full name and contact information to this forum, Dana.

In terms of the Green vs. NDP debate, I think that it has served to illustrate the problem of trying to represent everything for all people. In BC, which depends so much on resources, there is a real problem trying to balance economic sustainability with the damage we do to our environment. I know a lot of former NDP supporters who left because of changes in the forestry industry and the position which unions were taking to protect jobs at what seemed to be the expense of the environment and future economy.

My real name, as above, has been all over this forum since I began posting. The Tyee has published an article I submitted on why I voted NDP, also under my own name. My ISP based email address, home address, telephone number is not required for public consumption for the purposes I advocate. They would only be required for the purpose of verification by the webmaster not the other participants.

You cannot join a political party under a pseudonym. You cannot open a bank account under any but your proveable real identity. You can be criminally charged for attempting to pass yourself off for gain as someone you are not. Yet in virtual space it is considered heretical to suggest that real world identities matter. I grant the validity of pseudonyms in gaming and other recreational virtual spaces.

But I reiterate that for the World Wide Web to mature into a legitimate arena for social and political discourse leading to real world effects then participation in spaces attempting to nurture such discourse and effect must begin from the real world identities of the participants. Where you begin determines where you end up. Virtual change for pseudonymous citizens does not address the problems we face in the real world as our real selves. And yes, I have heard the "but this is the real world too" argument. I invite you survive on the food you find online.

A couple of years ago when Klein drove himself over to a homeless shelter and started shouting at the men there, he tried to blame it on his drinking problem. It was the most revealing and definitive moment in his political career. It was the definitive moment for the Conservatives of Alberta, whose policies reflect those moments of Klein's unrestraint. That is who they are. By re-annointing Klein, that is who the people of Alberta reveal themselves to be -- a perfect subliminal snapshot of their political will.

we agree

Following the Coyote's train of thought on a united left and right - I agree with the assessment made. The U.S. is essentially a 2 party nation with Right and the right of Right - so "leftism" is a very relative term as are all adjectives based on direction. Concepts/dogmas/ideologies would be better described as being either "Socially Progressive" (eg like the NDP and Greens attitude towards the environment) or "Socially Regressive" - basically all the form "progressive conservatives" and present new party of the old plus more CRAP stand on with most issues such the definition of what marriage should be or standing up for the Kyoto protocol. The Liberals in this sense can be described as "faculatively socially progressive" - ie) they are socially progressive if it keeps them in power. Which is why they are the most successful in the game of life. As to the forum being regulated - I think the beauty of Tyee is that it is essentially anarchy with total trust in the people who choose to use it. There are plenty of forums out there that have the whole thing mediated and requiring registration if the format of this reflection of society at large is too much to handle. I am thankful for the opportunity to participate in such a fluid stream of consciousness where the only guardian to thoughts is the one in my head - and not someone elses.

For two decades I have voted NDP consistently. Why I didn't vote NDP in 2004: Jack Layton. I am looking to vote for a MP, a party that is run as a democracy not a dictatorship, and for policies I respect. Generally the federal NDP has been too busy playing old-time two-party politics dominated by "leaders." I am also sick and tired of the Green bashing and Red Tory bashing by the NDP supporters on forums like this or indymedia or rabble receive, particularly when for me coalition means democracy; working together means democracy. We do not have democracy in Canada. Under Layton it is the same old hockey game lead by celebrities -- under Blaike I would supported the federal NDP, but then the big unions (Auto in particular) would not have supported the NDP. We need politicians to stand strong and say things like the truth: there was no reason to attack Afghanistan, for example. I admire much of what NDP members in the House have achieved in this respect, but this has often been at the expense of being disciplined by their own party leader. I don't see a career politician like Layton offering much in the way of back bone or even a desire to make his own party truly democratic. Finally regarding the Greens, my hope would be a party grows that is neither traditionally right or left, and that new folk step up to take over from its current leaders and find ways to work politically that don't repeat the mistakes of the NDP, Liberals and Conservatives. This is what the Green Party was in Germany in the 80s. This is the hope so my vote went Green knowing full well I don't support the current leader but that I had the hope of getting the party a $1.75 so that a Green option might grow. You folks going on and on about Greens being this or that and the NDP the only social democratic option are either willing repeating the mistakes of the future or are clueless about what has happened in political history in the west since social democrats first emerged on the parliamentary stage. Stop pretending you have the answer and start demanding a politics of co-operation and an end to Canadian politicians as a celebrity talk show followed by a hockey game.

Some of you are truly wonderful, thoughtful and caring.

Some of you are truly bedbugs however, and the thought that you might get my real name or figure out where I live makes me want to plant a briar patch in the back yard to hide in.

Please oh please don't make me give up my anonymity. If you do, I'll just have to stop talking to you at all.

I'm also not talking about a mediated forum. Nowhere have I said that. I'm simply talking about accountability. Everyone's terribly concerned about accountability - for everyone except themselves. Much safer to duck under a pseud. No one knows who you are or even if you work at the next desk or live next door. Nice and safe. And unaccountable.

Bedbugs and all, this is still usually a refreshing discussion. The problem is not lack of commitment or intelligence by most who post, rather that we seem to be speaking different languages. NDPers and Greens just don't look at the political spectrum the same way or even necessarily see the same spectrum. Example: for me, left and right have become fairly meaningless terms. The problem is one of finding a common language with those who think left and right do mean something. Until we find a way to translate terms and concepts, we will continue to misrepresent each other's positions and speak "past" rather than with each other. Something to think about over the long weekend. Have a good one, all.

Too bad you just don't get it!

there certainly isn’t anything intellingent coming from jean binettt! We need an ignore button like Raging Bull and posted IPs. Chris I am more middle of the road but the right is to extreme the liberals campaign to the left and govern to the right so being fed up with the lies of mulroney harper chretien martin gordo the drunk and the rest of the parasites I now support Layton as he is raising issues I am pissed about. For example the 2006 census software contract being awarded to a u.s. based arms manufacturor, when you factor in the Patriot act in the states I find this very scary and I didn't see any conservatives or liberals raising that issue except to praise it. Layton does not support NAFTA or Free Trade and I like that! He is also concerned about the plight of the homeless and the elderly in our society who are barely making it, we have seniors, veterans who fought for this country living below the

Yup we definately need IPs posted on this page it would put an end to the anonymity of posters like the , or I suspect jean binett! In 2000, the NDP won 1,093,838 votes nationwide; this time the NDP won 2,116,536 nationwide. The increase of over 100% is a victory that cannot be claimed by the Liberals or Conservatives, but it translated into just 5 additional seats (14 in 2000, 19 now)." Got this off David Schrecks strategicthoughts.com

Just back from the celebrations in the local park. There was a stage set up for some performers, and if you didn't care for the blues, all you had to do was wait patiently for an hour or so, until country singer came on, who in turn was followed by a choir, and then a celtic group. The crowd was free to sit where they wanted, or dance, or stroll around. There were the usual stilt-walkers, face-painters and fire-jugglers. Nobody had to sit in specific sections, or stop chatting with their friends, or dance only in the aisles, or stub out their marijuana cigarettes, or stop paddling their feet in the fountain. Even the potty-mouthed nine-year-olds could roam around picking their noses and finding things to giggle over. The nicest thing about the festival was the general sense of anonymity and the absence of police. Will be going back after the thundershower clears to enjoy some more music and maybe stick around for fireworks. It was a perfect Canadian event. Enjoy!

well..what a difference a day makes - Bit like a BC forest fire. Chris - I think your comment on framing common narratives is accurate, and a good point of beginning. I also agree, that a loss of a present frame, and dipping into "past" politics is pretty pointless. And being done here, moi aussi. About the present. Glen Clarker sells signs. He is not some NDP guy. Same for Moe Sahota. There is a ton about the so-called right, and the so-called left that I abhor - but I also recognise that even one character slag "party" point made, in retort - even if (self)perceived to be justified - well, if anyone sees successes of that tack anywhere - it'll probably be a first.

It is actually an enormous challenge to speak personally, on a political matter - one reveals themselves within it, and - one has to address ones own claims to oneself in the private life of the day. There is a great moral and intellectual penalty for a claim made here on a thread, or anywhere in public life - and another practiced, if so. If we can communicate about what we aspire and why - what informs it, we might contribute like peers: there status crumbles , there the new life of ideas may begin.

I happen to think it incumbent on the readership to clean up its own proceedural mess in terms of style and substance of comment. Perish the thought - that an editor has to do that for any persons claiming to be progressive. Best of the holliday, commas and all.

yes, is that a strategic thought?

Clearly this forum is moderated. By removing the abusive poster, what have you accomplished? It renders much of the latter discussion senseless for archival purposes. It erases the 'Klein' moment which reveals a certain mentality for what it is and for all to see. It is like moving through the internet and erasing all signs of the torture and sexual humiliation at Abu Ghairab. Ugly images which prompt ugly responses to be sure, but also real. Part of me would dearly love to erase Ann Coulter and Rush Limbagh from public record with such ease, but without record of their words, how do I know what I stand against? How can I distinguish between what is falsity and what is merely challenging and uncomfortable? This poster hurled his abuse at me as much as others, and it leaves me unscathed; it is less than a mosquito bite to me. There are times when we are challenged to civil disobedience. Do we back down because someone yells and swears at us? How strong are you in the face of someone trying to assert authority over you through their verbal abuse? For pete's sake! (There, that's my moment of verbal abuse).

Yes, this forum is moderated only to ensure that people refrain from posting any material which is vulgar, defamatory, harassing, hateful, threatening, invading of others privacy, sexually oriented, or violates any laws.

I find the image of Rush Limbagh both vulgar and offensive

If you think Limbagh's is vulgar and offensive, wait until you get a load of Coulter's.

While it's true that the sticks and stones cast here by those who disagree don't hurt us, that particular poster wasn't contributing anything to the conversation. Nothing at all. He or she made no argument, offered no alternative view. Just spewed mindless four letter foolishness. It was childish and embarrassing.

If Coulter or Limbaugh posted here, I would expect they would express some ideas, however much I disagree with them, so would not be "moderated" I would hope.

The tidying of the Site Manager seems appropriate, if we might have some assurance that real comment will be safe here, even if unpopular views are given?

We live in very conservative times.Mention the NDP and from most sources you get the same kneejerk "Tax and spend" reaction.The rightwing has been training the public for 20 years now to elicit the same tired Pavlovian response.Granted,you can't blame people for feeling over taxed,because for a number of years the burden has been shifted away from corporations and banks onto the backs of the working class.People need to know that fair progressive taxation is possible and essential if our goal is to build an all inclusive fair society for everyone.Of course given the state of media bias in this country,that aint' gonna be easy...

I offer this comment from Mallick's Globe and Mail column this morning: "...I used to think of awful people as good copy. They made me laugh. Now I wanted them spayed. The American radical right is so vicious and anti-democratic that I had to vaccinate myself against hatred as I read about them." I get sick of having my baggage torn apart at customs, my private papers snooped over by people who think shooting off some rounds of ammo at the local target range is 'real good fun and relaxation', just because I forgot and included a stupid plastic souvenir corkscrew in my carry-on. What do they think I'm going to do with it? DRILL somebody? "Excuse me, Mr. Flight Steward, did you know you have a plastic corkscrew sticking out of your hat?" "Yes, we had a little episode of air-rage. Not to worry. The Marshall has contained it and our flight will be back on schedule once we've dropped the offender off at Guantanamo. Pay no attention to the military jets escorting us." It sickens me that people's knickers get all twisted just because some girl wants to wear a head-scarf and a full-length sack-dress when she goes to school. It seriously pisses me off that most of the people in this world have to live like slaves to keep their families together and kids alive, thanks to companies like Halliburton -- and those are the lucky ones. There are an awful lot of people who just love to tell everyone else how to live their lives. We are 'overtaxed', but not in the sense that most people think, because there's definitely enough money and material goodies around this country. (Of course, that could all be an illusion too. I often wonder how racked up most of those credit cards are, especially as our bankers are all in a lather to hike up the interest rates.) My sense of goodwill is getting stretched mighty thin. I find my resources of time and organizational skills are on overwhelm as I try to juggle career, family, community (which has serious fissures now that our support services have been gutted.) Sometimes I have to blow off some steam with people who seem like-minded in many ways, for which I am very grateful. If the potty-mouthed imbecile who was fooling around in this forum doesn't get his moment to moon us, how is he going to vent? No, I'm not really sorry to see his garbage gone, but I do wonder. Those terrorists aren't born in vacuums.

And doesn't "the order of the day," ie gordon campbell's neoliberal assault on the public good and trust with a manufactured crisis he claimed would enhance social programs, not justify some language, which is really then, not so much reckless as apt, HOWEVER, I propose, with ALL due respect, a new monicker for our illustrious premier, gordon campbell, also known as....gordon campbell aka, THE CHESHIRE RAT, if I might be permitted like jb, to dissociate into my Carrollian, as well as just Swiftian side...gordon campbell aka "THE CHESHIRE RAT," for his ability to DIVE as a moderate, straight up the canwest/global neonews' rabbit hole, and then, vanish up the fraser institute's BUTT, leavin' only that famous chamber o' commerce CHESHIRE RAT GRIN slowly fading out in the twinklin' darkness OF A MORAL BLACK HOLE that is sucking thirty years of social progress up its gaping maw....but I need a way to express this as a six word-catchphrase.....hmmmmm....

I propose we give the Campbell government a roto-rooter style ENEMA next election (tried to configure that into a five-letter anagram utilising the word "MEAN", but there's that extra e.)

Gordon Campbell soup, makes me pOOp!

Thanks for the kindergarten moment, Mr. Swift!

Gordon Campbell is only trying to re-create the conditions as he recalls them from the last time the world felt right to him. The world of 1960 was quite different socially from the one in which we live. To Campbell it feels like the last time all was right with the world as his father was still alive.

Sure it's cheap, meaningless pop psychology. Is there any other kind?

gordo is one sick puppy!

I am NOT the cut and paster, "full colon," and I like your posts, Real barking mad fox channel....if you MUST cut and paste my comments, "," I would prefer you stick with my cheshire rat comment above....thanks...lewis swift

So Lewis is the potty mouth who's been annoying mad dog?

:-) Cheers, Lewis!

Dealing rough and dirty with a complex issue; I think the view of politics and political positioning along a left-right spectrum is a "graphically" accurate representation. (Which is not to say it doesn't have problems. Any attempt to explain anything with language, probably falls short of depicting what naturally exists in real life.)

Politics starts from "the centre"; that which is, the status quo. Moving out to the right from centre are the lesser to more extreme forms of committment to the status quo, and/ or even political movements who prefer a return to "previous" status quo forms, or even to the furthest right, issues of history,class and race perceived connected to the "status quo", its maintenance and "purity". In our time, the status quo class form is capitalism, arriving to us from out of the monarchist systems of feudalism in the 17th-18th centuries. Capitalism being, fundamentally, the result of the victory of the merchant class over the old landed aristocracy-, with whom it made some compromises enroute, reflected in the relic survival, for example, of the English Monarchy. into even our own time.

Moving to the left from centre, there is quite a different reflection of reality, especially a desire, and the movements for "change", for the class and economic transformation of society, of rebellion against the prevailing and privileged ruling class, and for "degrees" of egalitariamism, typically coming out of those social strata and class groups of society which feel/ are grieved by the prevailing status quo.

And n'er the twain shall meet. The further out from centre you go, left and right, the phenomena of "diametrically and irreconcilably opposite" begins to appear, to a point where a reconciliation of the opposites, though they "may" even resort to similar methodologies at times, is impossible. Their goals, and the interests they seek to serve in society are diametrically opposed to each other. Compromise, other than tactically brief and fleeting ones, is impossible between them. The left beyond social democratic from centre, and the fascist/right beyond mere "progressive conservative" are fundamentally, with only the intrusion of the complications of real life, sworn enemies of each other.

To a "leftist" beyond the palest pink, though all of us are probably, at least marginally "racist" to "some" degree, an overt and blatant "racist" from the right, who sees the racial divide as either a ruse or substitute for the issues of "class", or an issue of the "purity" of one's own kind, as was the fascist right of the Nazis, or is the Aryan Brotherhood, or the Ku Klux Klan, is beyond the pale. No compromise is possible between them. The twain will never meet. At least, not readily or willingly.

For all its shortcomings, the left-right spectrum along which politics has been historically viewed and described, in my view, is "sufficiently" scientifically accurate enough to be useful in the understanding of political phenomena, parties, groups and movements.

Though, to complicate matters, the "centre" does shift in either direction from time to time, but short of a major socio-economic revolution (which occurs), not to any great or fundamental degree. Currently, we are living through a shift of the "centre" towards the right, in the direction of the capitalist ruling class and its "privileges", within the context of socio-economic capitalism.

Now, if I don't show up immediately at the supper table, I will experience a woman's "hissy-fit" spectrum. :-)

"Gordon Campbell is only trying to re-create the conditions as he recalls them from the last time the world felt right to him. The world of 1960 was quite different socially from the one in which we live. To Campbell it feels like the last time all was right with the world as his father was still alive." An interesting idea. I've always wondered if Campbell's slavish work on behalf of the poo-bahs of Howe Street over the last 10 years might be his trying to please some adopted father figures? As for the death of his real dad, let's not forget that that wasn't the only thing that would have screwed up our premier's emotional state. His first ten years, when his father was alive, likely did more damage, since he was growing up with an alcoholic parent, and there's a whole literature about what that does to your development -- and it's very persuasive. Campbell's lack of sincerity and lack of empathy for others are two traits common to people of this background. I remember reading an article by Geoff Olson in which Olson recalled how Campbell was criticizing the Clarke government for some (probably non-existent) scandal about 6 years ago, saying it was outrageous, a disservice to the people of BC, how it undermined democracy, etc. But, Olson said, the corners of Gord's mouth kept turning up like he was about to smile, like he didn't really comprehend the gravity of what he was saying. That's a person who's grown up a little twisted, I think, and it reminds me of a review of a book about the Kennedy's, in which the reviewer said that, given Joe Sr.'s fathering skills, none of those kids of his should have been allowed to enter public life. I think the same is true of the Campbell clan, and Gordo, being the oldest, is the most screwed up. Hope none of this sounds too harsh. I'm a sensitive person. Really.

There was a good article in the Globe and Mail about Adult Children of Alchoholics. (shortly after his dui) Scary people with no compassion for anyone but themselves, the perfect tool for the Elite who want to change our society. I have no compassion for gordo what so ever he has hurt to many people and the sick part is the man might get away with it and get re-elected.

The fact is that the NDP is simply irrevelant by promoting 'hardcore' socialism! Clearly the Layton NDP folks put forth a platform that was/is truly scary. Thinks like abolish the senate, make community collectives, kill trade agreements, blowup the military, increase taxes by an enormous amount, and the like just will not work. Unions were also a major negative issue. Until the NDP come in from the far, far left, the party will always be considered fringe.

Not only that! Hardcore NDPers are Closet Silk Lovers as well, Kommie-Kapitists each and every one of them - no doubt about it! (two out of three k's no less, and you don't want to know what the third K is)

"Until the NDP come in from the far, far left, the party will always be considered fringe." writes the sdgreen troll.

Clearly, this fellow doesn't even have a clue what a hard core, "far, far left", as he/she describes it, is even about. If "it" thinks the NDP is anywhere near far, far, "it" still has a rudimentary political education to get.

Though there is no doubt, "the wingnut right" has a current hard-on for Tony Blair's New Labour, because once exposed, it serves to discredit a more seriously described "left". Their "theory" being, that New Labour is an easier strawman to set up and whip, and draw its support off, to the more extreme right, once it is exposed as ineffective and no less hostile to "the people's interest" than is the "right" anyway.

It was no historical coincidence that the Nazis, an extreme "right" manifestation, whose base of support was really the Krupps and their corporate ilk in Germany, nonetheless called themselves National Socialists. The wingnut right are capable of any deception, including deceptive labelling, even of themselves, to sow confusion amongst politically illiterate people-, as they are using racism as scapegoatism for the economic and other crimes of their pragmatically racist/corporatist ilk.

In out time, sensing movement happening here, on the "serious left", they show up here on occassion, to play their mind games and, in wan hope, sow the seeds of division amongst the different elements of "the left". Where all the really achieve is, to expose their own intellectual social/moral inadequacies.

Though, once one understands them and the simple workings of their tactics and strategies, they can be mildly amusing, like The Three Stooges. :-)

Why did the NDP blow it? First of all, the NDP dramatically increased its vote percentage and number of seats. It didn't attain Layton's wet dream numbers of above 43 seats but that's just not going to happen. Second, the Green Party quadrupled its votes, doubled the percentage of vote per candidate (we only ran candidates in 111 ridings in 2000 and a full slate this time). We did this, by the way, not at the expense of the NDP, but by bringing new voters into the process and recruiting some disaffected New Democrats, Conservatives and Liberals. To provide a little fact may distract people from the usual tone of the debate but - the Green Party's votes were greater than the margin of victory in 55 ridings around the country. In those ridings the NDP won 6 (over Liberals), Libs beat Cons in 11, NDP in 8, BQ in 5, Cons beat Libs in 16, NDP in 7 and BQ beat Libs in 2. The Greens came third in one riding in Ontario, where we beat out the NDP. We beat NDP candidates in Quebec a number of times, but the Rhinos used to do that as well, since the NDP are a fringe party in Quebec. People are assuming that the NDP is not a fringe or secondary force in Canadian politics and that someday it will win (a typical fallacy of the left, believing in this attenuated version of Marx' stages of economic development, so that capitalism will inevitably be replaced by socialism... yawn). Well, it is in fact a minor party and will never form government. So, the NDP did just about as well as can be expected and the Greens still have potential for growth - if we do as well as our German cousins we should be able to reach about 10% of the vote federally. As for right-left. We could get into a Karl Marx quoting contest and I could prove my left-wing credentials. The NDP religiously discriminated against me. The NDP called environmentalists "enemies of BC". The NDP called in the troops at Gustafson Lake. The NDP in Saskatchewan supports Uranium mining. We have to put ecological sanity and human rights at the top of our list of priorities. I was pleased that my candidate was one of the young anti-globalization activists at Cancun and Kananaskis. That is the roots of the Green Party - in the new movement, not in the nostagia for the 1960s, or 1930s.

Oh yes, the Greens also came 3rd, beating out the NDP, in four Alberta ridings. But the NDP has basically been irrelevant in Alberta politics since the party was founded. (Have they ever elected an MP from Alberta? ) Venceremos!

I agree with coyote that the demise of left-right polarities has been greatly exagerated, especially by many greens, in a mannetr not unlike the much-vaunted so-called end of history back in the nineties... well, history came back a vengeance with 9-11... I also find very tiresome, tedious and willfully inaccurate the constant comparison of the ndp to marxism, which is ridiculous as the ndp is CENTER-LEFT party. Greens also seem determined to ignore the fact that european greens ARE left of center, and that states with strong socialist policies like germany, holland and many scandinavian countries have both strong social programs and economies...I guess they learned this trick from canwest. The greens as center right corporate apologists will NEVER hold power in canada, their ideas will simply be co-opted by the liberals, who just as they campaign left and govern to the right will campaign green and then produce bad jokes like trading pollution emission credits, where trees already growing somehow become rflections of responsible corporatism...move to the left and form coalitions with the ndp, greens, if you ever hope to wield power and influence...

You know, Sam your argument would be a lot more effective if you actually gave the NDP credit where it is well-deserved such as the creation of Tatashenshi as well as 345 new protected park areas, being the first in North America to reach the UN goal of 12% protected parks and wilderness, moratoriums on grizzly bear hunting and on the expansion of fish farms etc. Our parks are being savaged by understaffing and loss of monitoring under the present government, so it will be interesting to observe the results if one day you do get a chance to govern when the leader of the BC Greens says: "We, unlike other parties trust that business will do the right thing." We, have that very same belief as the foundation of every move the Campbell government makes in this province and look at what that mantra has done to BC. Sorry, but there were many people that walked green on this earth before the prestigious arrival of the Green men, you don't own the franchise rights.

Oooo! A damn fine retort Lynn Smyth.

And that is the point actually, whether one subscribes to an NDP view of the world or not: give credit where it is due. For example, in my view, the Greens raising of the proportional representation issue, for all my other criticisms of their bullshit attempt to stand above left-right "politics" , like virgins giving birth, , or Christ walking on water, may well go down in the future history of politics in this country, as one of the key "democratic reform" proposals of our time. While it is yet far from won, its winning would have the potential of radically transforming democratic "political" practice in this country-, opening up our political institutions to new ideas, political groupings and practices in a way previously inconceivable.

That concept of The Greens, combined with the evolution of new ideas on the way we govern, manage and direct economic institutions and the economy generally, through the creation of an extended and broadened way we have hereto seen "democracy" even having an appropriate place in the economy, the most basic aspect of social life, bar none, we might well be on the way to putting together an extremely powerful and rejuvinating force/ set of ideas in society.

To think, however, that one can stand outside the historical right-left/ class dichotomy in capitalist society, whatever one thinks of "formal" Marxists or not, however, is, I think, to fool oneself about what is "humanly possible" over the long haul. To say nothing about ignoring a key aspect of our kind of society: its division into classes and other social strata. You get away with it now, only because it's a (for this time) new concept that plays opportunistically into a "popular disgust" with politics in general. It may even win you pr points and seats over the short term. In the end, however, sooner or later, you will have to choose which set of interests you serve over whose others. At that moment, revealed in your "progressive conservative" choice of a CEO for a leader, you will be found out-, indeed here, already are being so.

So here, Ill make a wee prediction; that sooner or later you will have to make a choice of where you stand and wish to be seen on the political spectrum. Or mayhaps The Greens already have, and are simply cutely toying with us.

There are some issues and causes about which one cannot be, or feign neutrality, without it being a choice that objectively favours one side or another. As doing nothing is also an "act" with effects.

And from my perspective, the NDP has some ways to go politically and ideologically. And no, I do not belong to ANY particular "faction" within or without the NDP. It's just that in the choices that must be made between competing evils sometimes, as The Greens have made quite another-, and given the way the Greens have recently evolved, to the "right", not hovering in air above us mere mortals :-), as they would have us think, I have, at least temporarily, chosen the NDP as the lesser. Everything being subject to change without notice. :-)

The German greens are hardly your cousins I do not consider the harris version on the green party to be very green or I would have voted for them.

After realizing so many people mistakenly vote Green with the environment in mind, I thought we should get some coverage about this in the papers to let the masses know... Is there anyone knowledgeable about the NDP/Green difference and/or politics in general who can write a letter to any of the major/semimajor publications? (Georgia Straight, WestEnder, Province, Vancouver Sun, The Courier) The first reaction I had was "I should write a letter" but I know far too little solid facts to be able to write one well. Anyone? It's probably good to get the word out before the next election, which might not be too far away, (and before this election debate becomes more irrelevant to readers.) I mean not to preach ANTI-Green, but to let people know what the facts are.

Just so you NDP nitwits know, I'm going to recruit as many Green votes as I can in the next provincial election, just so we Greens can spoil the vote and help Gordon Campbell win! Hahahahahhahhahahahahahahahahahha!!! In your face, NDP! You're going DOWN

"The Spoiler, 7/5/2004 11:09:42 AM, writes: Just so you NDP nitwits know, I'm going to recruit as many Green votes as I can in the next provincial election,"

To be fair to the Greens, I will bet my better judgement, may be anything, most likely a "right wing" troll, but he is not near intelligent, cogent or articulate enough to be a Green. It is fair that we can differ, and even argue, but it is important that we know how to recognize and respect each other. And the Greens, for all my differences with them, I presume to be much better than this brownshirt goon.

A mere "Spoiler" he indeed is. And we should not be fooled into thinking that he is anywhere near a Green.

Ha, ha, ha, spoiler you're going to sell yourself and your children down the river AGAIN for a $200 dollar taxcut and watch as bc hydro is given to the americans for nothing....I guess that'll show the ndp....and I don't think you're a real green either...

wow, lots of comments. couldn't read all of them. got bored when it turned idealogical. ie. ndp vs. liberal vs. greens. Did anyone mention Proportional Rep? its weird, it has killed the NDP in the past, and has given them more seats than pop. vote.

Nope, "Spoiler" is not one of "ours", as far as I know. And thanks, Coyote and Lewis and others, for the relatively kind words. Folks must have had a pretty good holiday as most of the postings since have, with a few lapses, been pretty calm. What I've been thinking about over the weekend is political culture and language and the ways that both influence perspective. The left-right spectrum that I mentioned in my last post is a case in point. It's not that I fail to understand the class basis of the political landscape, it's just that I don't think the conventional left-right thing accurately captures this or any other issue anymore. You can call me an idiot - and you might be right - but it doesn't advance the discussion whether I am or not. This seems to be a major problem with Green-NDP attempts at dialogue: we simply aren't speaking the same language and thus get very frustrated and start in by dragging up old grievances, then launching into insults. Note that no one here seems to be a Harper Conservative, hence the bitterness sometimes seen on this list may reflect a "family" argument amongst those who consider themselves progressives. If this is true, perhaps we can try to begin again by seeing if there is agreement on issues that I (again only my opinion) would consider to be progressive. For example (and in no particular order): 1. Resources and services that belong to the commons, should remain in public hands (energy, transportation, health, education, etc.). 2. FTA and NAFTA are not about free trade but all about the movement of capital and investments and should be abrogated. 3. Shooting at native people who are demanding their legitimate rights is a poor idea (take your pick of Gustoffsen, Ipperwash, Oka...). 4. Working people have a right to organize and bargin for better wages and conditions. 5. There needs to be an economic alternative to capitalism, esp. the form that has arisen since the 1970s. 6. All people deserve the same basic rights (same sex marriage, reproductive rights, etc.). 7. Canada should have no role in wars against the 3rd world, neither in Iraq, Afghanistan, Haiti, or anywhere else. 8. The electoral system in Canada requires reform to allow a greater range of voices and opinions to be expressed. 9. Perserving the natural world is in the best interests of people, society, and the economy. 10. Anti-"terrorist" legislation is an assault on the civil liberties of all Canadians. I may be going out on a limb, but I'd bet that most people who view themselves as progressives would agree with most of the above statements. Insofar as most Greens and most NDP would so agree, then we have two progressive groups sharing many similar values, but differing in their political language, culture and strategy. The similar values may be a Rosetta stone that will serve to allow a common language to emerge regardless of where either group is, or is perceived to be, on the political spectrum.

I quizzed a number of candidates about their environmental views. The Liberals response suggested they intended to spend their way to a cleaner environment (and how, pray tell will this money be raised - by making the economy grow faster of course, not recognizing that that rapid economic growth is a major source of environmental problems in the first place.) The Conservatives preferred not to recognize that we had any real environmental problems. The NDP seemed to want to blame environmental problems 100% on business and address these problems exclusively with tougher laws and regulations. Only the Green Party recognized that consumers as well as producers (that is all of us) are the source of environmental problems and all of us need to exercise self-restraint and learn to understand the concept of suficiency. The Greens also recognized the potential of harnessing the tax system and the market to force change. So I voted Green, and I plan to do so again in the Provincial Election. NDP supporters should take note - the NDP will not win Green voters by abusing them as neo-cons or neo-liberals, nor by offering voters (yes, not even its fabled "ordinary Canadians")a costless ride to a clean environment at the expense of someone else. We made the mess together and we have to clean it up together. Obviously those who consume more (and discard more trash) need to pay more of the clean up costs, but nobody will ultimately be able to "sit out" the whole adjustment process to a more sustainable way of life. I would consider voting NDP if there was some sign its leaders recognized this. By the way too, neither the Harcourt nor the Clark government in BC introduced an Endangered Species Act when they were in power. Even Quebec and New Brunswick have them. I recognize (and appreciate) that they did dramatically increase the area of our provincial parks, why did they not introduce an ESA ? The federal Species at Risk Act is hardly relevant when so much of the provincial land base is owned by the provincial crown and SARA does not normally apply to anything other than federal crown lands. Besides it is hardly "tough" legislation.

I like how "Green" supporters here consistently avoid debating any of the points being made, beyond silly attempts to rebrand the NDP as "big Labour" or "Marxist" or trying to set up false dichotomies about being either for or against NAFTA. Funny for a party that tries to portray itself as "beyond" left and right labels. Thanks to you I'm quite happy now that the Green Party has established itself, as it will become a safe home for Canadians who still believe they can have their cake and eat it too. Bon Apetit! The NDP may have some problems trying to reach more people, but I think this article set up similar false choices. Government spending does not take 45% of our GDP anymore, our social spending is lower now than at any point since the 1930s, thanks to two decades of cost cutting. What most genuine progressives have been protesting all along. And why the "Third Way" is already being rejected around the world. It's just more neo-liberalism hiding behind soft and safe social liberalism. Fine for soccer moms and pops but not much help for single mothers or their children. The NDP is already moderate enough, thank you.

Thanks for your intelligent and responsible post, chris shaw, as you know I support your positon on the olympics -that we should just give them back, which may put me at odds with some ndp supporters. I also liked your lists of rights, and if the federal greens had come out with such alist, I would have considered voting for them. What concerns me about the greens, and I know there are many socially progressive greens, is the apparent shift to the right by the federal green's selection of jim harris, a former mulroney conservative. I am also concerned at the fact that the greens kept jack layton from having the deciding vote in a minority government, assuming that without vote splitting (I know all green votes would not automatically go to the ndp if the greens did not exist. I am also PARTICULIARLY concerned that the greens may allow thre bc liberals a second term should the vote be close, especially as they are so propped up by canwest propaganda. What I really like to see is the greens and ndp cooperate and even merge, both provincially and federally as a center-left party. What also concerns me is that the federal liberals will do what they have done to the ndp: steal all their best ideas and then find ways to both dilute and twist these ideas so that they are nearly useless. Nice to hear from you chris, and I salute no-name-brand for his inteeligence in seeing through third way politics, which basically seem to consist of piously mouthing as many progressive ideals as possible, while turning legislatures and governments into bordellos for the elite -see greg palast's All the Democracy Money Can Buy for documentation of this runaway trend in tony blair's england, palast is a respected, american born, bbc journalist...

I also appreciate your thoughtful remarks, Chris. I was at the G-8 protests in Calgary/Kananaskis, which were more like a festival of alternative thought than an incendiary device on the verge of explosion. One surreal moment was Michael Moore's disembodied voice on a speaker-phone next to the microphone encouraging the protestors. NDPers and Greens marched together that day, and of course, the Southam papers all owned by CanWest made everyone there out to be a freak. So there you go: one-quarter of all Canadians have been officially voted as freaks by CanWest. I had my moment of smug satisfaction two weeks later, watching one of their subscription salesmen trying to give away free copies of "The Calgary Herald" at the C-Train station. People were dodging around and away from the paper as if it had been smeared with a petrie dish full of bubonic plague. One young fellow laughed, "Can't even give the suckers away anymore."

the calgary herald, in this writer's humble opinion, is not fit for a vulture to defecate on...next federal election, let's make ther canwest monopoly an election issue...I do not condone the re-posting of my and other's remarks by "full colon," formerly known as , -the character that appears when the name box for tyee posts is left blank...

The comma. S'okay, lewis. Your remarks obviously come out of a different personality.

Deadly analysis, James. And hardly "harsh" in the generally presumed meaning of the term. It takes genuine sensitivity to see to the core in all cases. I really think your take on G. Campbell - makes a laser look like some kind of a blunt instrument.

Me thinks this author's stripes show a little to much. "Time will tell if New Democrats are willing make the tough but necessary choices if their party is ever to rise above third- or fourth-party status" A very easy ending for those born of mumbo jumbo Capatalist mainstream party. Where divisions are guided more by who leads in the polls more than ideology. WAC Bennett while elected as a Socred was very distanced from Social Credit funny money beliefs. It may come as a surprise to Mr.McMartin but some movements have actually evoloved from sound Political thought and foundation. True from time to time even the NDP loses someone like Mr> Donsanj to the liberals, but that speaks more to the weakness and oportunism of the person. While there is no doubt that any political movement must from time to time evaluate its policies to ensure that they are constant with the times, however such review should be from a perspective of change based on certain principles and growth should stem from there...And while Mr McMarin may wish to suggest the NDP abandon its position on the left, one can take heart that the Federal Liberals seem to do best when they campaign from a left perspective. The unfortunate part being that once elected they quickly retreat to the right side of the road until the next election comes around.

Tom, I wonder if all parties aren't subject to these catastrophic veers of so-called "right and left" directions, depending on party decided (not constituent decided)..circumstances.

I don't suggest that it's "inevitable", but rather an outcome of "exclusive" (first past the post / very top down) - "wake electorate up every four years".. approaches to democracy, rather than a vastly more "participatory" framework. Including budgeting in key areas.

Every party has been shown to veer greatly - Locally /Nationally/ Internationally - from left to right, green - blue - red (in no particular order of direction)..when there is a break from an "ongoing" - and binding public dialogue on critical matters. Giving the keys to the political house to any "collection of individuals" or an individual leader alone - and we're ALL really asking for it. This is the core issue in my opinion, that underpins all the rest.

"...I don't suggest that it's "inevitable", but rather an outcome of "exclusive" (first past the post / very top down) - "wake electorate up every four years".. approaches to democracy, rather than a vastly more "participatory" framework. Including budgeting in key areas." writes kit.

Not much available time of recent. Busy as a kitty covering its poop. But, though I might go a tad further, I fundamentally agree with Kit. I would say only more, that outside the objective constraints and "built in" class" biases and distortions of the prevailing and dominant socio-economic order; capitalism, in the event of confusion-, or more, even flowing from the "limitations" of that "class source", what more than any other element "constrains" and "distorts" the functioning of political democracy is, the absence of any meaningful "economic democracy" to underpin it.

It is the "why" which underlines that constant "pressure" on "left" political groupings to move right, especially at the hour of approaching "formal" political power, of which the Greens right shift is only a most recent example. The NDP has its own history in this regard.

At the end of the day, because of the absence of "economic democracy', which "elites" would resist even more than they historically did "political democracy", all contemplating seriously trying to formally/politically "govern" capitalism, are "forced" by reality to make a peace with that "owning class" and its CEO frontmen, who control "the system's" most fundamental element: it's corporate "sustenance" and "wealth production" plant, and distribution facilities. No one can truly "govern", within the prevailing status quo, whatever arrangement or decision is made with or by the common citizenry electorate in the "political part" of the social order, without making a "bending of the knee" peace/pact with the "economic elites" who control and govern "without democracy" in the "economic base" of society. There, they occupy what is tantamount to a vetoe power position over all aspects of social life, including its "formal" political governance. (A true "patriarchy", by and large, no doubt.)

And it is what corrupts all political movements, sooner or later, which fail to address and face up to it. Even then, there is the problem of knowing what they know about the economy's functioning, and the long experience of their rule, which intimidates peoples and political movements, and can grind them down, and make them long for a corporate "mommy and daddy" , to look after them like children again. Enter a Stalin or Mao.

It is a complex and intimidating historical point to get past.

The vancouver sun, a canwest-global newspaper, published another raft of lies today, an article by don mayo -but that's NOT mayonaise he's spreading- specifically, that the brief burp upward in the bc economy is somehow attributable to gordon liar's policies, and I suppose by extension that attacking the disabled, the sick, the poor, the old, the young, and the dying was SOMEHOW a good idea....In point of fact, any growth in the bc economy as pointed out, by moe sihota AND RIGHTWING PUNDIT NORMAN SPECTOR, is that these improvements, which may not last out the fall, are in fact the result of two factors utterly outside of gordon liar's control: low interest rates fueling a housing boom, those same rates being set by the bank of canada and having NOTHING to do with the bc liberals, AND temporarily high commodity prices for copper, natural gas and other raw, nonrenewable resources. If such articles don't strongly suggest that the canwest media monopoly, which resembles situations in third world countries, needs to be an election issue in the next federal election. To the vast surprise of the the fraser porkstitute attacking the poor and the disabled, inner city school children and dying cancer patients HAS SOMEHOW FAILED TO STIMULATE THE ECONOMY....I propose that the provincial ndp campaign should go something like this: fade in...prision shot of gordon campbell...voice over: Gordon Campbell ran as a moderate saying that the taxcuts he announced before the election would stimulate the economy and pay for social programs, then the day AFTER he was elected, announced a new taxcut that benefitted only the wealthy which he then used as his excuse to attack society's most vulnerable...gordon campbell went on, after promising time and time again not to, to rip up contracts, to sell bc rail, to put public ownership of bc hydro at risk, and to create the worst climate for investment in the province ever (a series of pictures of the exploding homeless population, betrayed hospital workers, roiling coal-fired hydro-generating facility smoke stacks, fade back to the smiling picture of the hawaian drunk) voiceover, "WHAT'S GORDON CAMPBELL'S SECRET AGENDA THIS TIME???"....

Just saw on the news where they are using leashed rats to help clear landmines in africa, bc liberal mlas should be heartened that after they lose their jobs next may, that new, and this time USEFULL employment awaits them in far off romantic climes, I propose gary and gord lead the team....

You wouldn't believe what my disposition was like before I stopped reading the mainstream papers and TV news. My friends tell me it was like living with someone with Tourettes who kept barking out "Crap! Bullshit! Stinking liar!" I don't miss the papers or TV at all. It isn't as if they print anything newsworthy.

The NDP has failed to catch fire in the 3 previous elections, because they adopted Phony Blah's "turd way" Republican American Lite.The NDP needs to steer far to left to truly present Canadians with an alternative to the pro-corporate Grits and Conservatives.Someone must be held accountable for the deaths of the homeless.

"Phony Blah's "turd way" Republican American Lite..." describes John Defalque.

Only the most outstanding example, actually, of what I was speaking of above. Tony Blair, like Dosanjh and Haggard recently of the NDP, are prime examples of those elements in and coming out of the "centre-left" who have chosen to make that "bending of the knee" peace pact with corporate capital. Not becasue they are particularly evil men (or women), I think, but merely because it is "the defining reality" if one's ambition is to govern "within" the status quo, whatever one's "formal" political ideology. Be it Green, social democratic, or whatever. And it is what is wrong with those elements on the left whose single most important focus is on "electoral success".

When you fail to deal with the underlying "power" and "democratic issues which scream out from the economic base of society, you are only ever dealing with the "lesser half" of the problem. And for that reason, will always be a disappointment to the "Great Unwashed", and "come up short" in dealing with the problems of their lives, and those of society and nature in general.

And for so long as this is not 'fessed up to by the left "body politic", confronted and dealt with, "The Left" is doomed to wander like lost souls in the wilderness, searching for an "electoral miracle". Which, even when it does "miraculously" comes to pass, invariably ends in disappointment, and the masses never dealt with unfulfilled hopes, dreams, and material needs. And the condition of the much vaunted "natural environment" continues to deteriorate as well.

Within short order, the "disillusioned left", which never really does get its rocks off, invariably returns back to the wilderness from whence it came, to engage in some further intellectual masturbation. (Such as we? :-) With that minor threat dealt with, diffused, or side-tracked, the Corporate Godfathers go about their quest for portfolio diversification, improvements in the bottom line-, and the perfect game of golf.

Ahh..Accenture yet again - offshore cheque cachiers, boosum schmoozers with the BC Liberals and former Harris Conservatives too, it appears. A bit like parasitic flees on stinking dogs.

Great, very revealing article in the Toronto Star website (as well the "Early Edition" CBC radio 1).. about the antics of Accenture...who apparently couldn't design an updateable computer welfare system that actually pays more to clients.Seems the former provincial Conservative administration didn't actually believe that people on welfare should ever get more resources. (Well.. unless it's Corporate welfare...pardon me...extra tax cuts for, what's that term..."over-achieving"). Now why does that sound familiar out here in BC?

People in need will have to wait for months - and the government (not Accenture - tada!) will have to pay to update the system because of the ineptitudes of Accenture. Isn't Accenture trying to weasel itself into the "Government welfare services" business here in BC? (and cash more Carribbean BC tax shelterd cheques for themselves)? http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer pagename=thestar/Layout/Article_Type1&c=Article&cid=1089151811618&cal l_pageid=968332188492&col=968793972154

http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/ContentServer?pagename=thestar/Rende r&inifile=futuretense.ini&c=Page&cid=968332188492&pubid=968163964505&tacodalogin=no

I wonder if Will McMartin could do a follow up and explain why the new Conservative party didn't catch fire as he and other neo-cons had dreamed so openly of only a few short weeks ago. But then, it's always difficult to criticize your own, isn't it Will?

How about this for a wacky idea: The NDP loses its fear of the 's' word and once again becomes a socialist party in reality, offering voters a real workers/peoples choice amongst the many current small and large "C" capitalist alternatives. The Greens adopt a novel economic model that looks beyond market and/or command economics (dare one say the 'a' word on this list?). As others have noted, such "radical" shifts for any party are not likely to occur given our top-down political system, esp. with a first past the post electoral system. How do we ever get past this? Not by voting for the lesser of evils, that's for sure. Proportional representation -flaws and all -would help us get to a situation where people could really vote their interests and hearts with less of the urgency to vote strategically for the least offensive party or politician. Wouldn't it be nice for once to have the same range of choices that Italians or Israelis do? Not to hold either country up as the epitome of deomcracy, but still a damned sight better than what we have. Imagine an election with real differences beging debated and a realistic possibility that many of the divergent voices would show up in Ottawa or Victoria. Anyway, just dreaming...

I basically agree, chris, and if you could bring the canadian action party in as well, we could have a whole party with a leftwing alberta base as well, wouldn't that fry canwest? Mel hurtig is a pretty bright and socially conscious guy with some resources and a lot of good ideas, who knows, the canadian action party might become more popular and start a bleeding of green votes similiar to the bleeding effect of the greens on the ndp....anyway, you gotta dream sometimes, you can sometimes avoid a lot of nightmares, like stephen harper as prime minister....

Thanks to The Tyee for Will McMartin's analysis of the current NDP. Despite his apparent partisan bias, McMartin provided a reasonably thought-provoking critique. It was not the usual "Punch and Judy Show" political PAP usually provided by the SAME 0LD, STALE IDEOLOGUES from the right and from the left in this province. Keep challenging these right-wing and left-wing fascists in this province and we just might erode the tired old arguments that have been plaguing us here for more than 30 years. I say: "Bring on proportional representation -- the sooner the better."

New Democrats are an urban elite. Nobody seriously takes them as the voice of ordinary Canadians any more. They're better heeled, and the lifestyles they lead make them less worried about taxes or crime. They have more disposable income and live in the better neighbourhoods. This class superiority is cemented by a smug consensus that "we really are better, more virtuous, more compassionate people". And they are tiresome with this arrogance. That's also why they prefer judges to democracy. Can't attract ordinary folks to vote for the NDP? Guess why...

New Democrats are an urban elite. Nobody seriously takes them as the voice of ordinary Canadians any more. They're better heeled, and the lifestyles they lead make them less worried about taxes or crime. They have more disposable income and live in the better neighbourhoods. This class superiority is cemented by a smug consensus that "we really are better, more virtuous, more compassionate people". And they are tiresome with this arrogance. That's also why they prefer judges to democracy. Can't attract ordinary folks to vote for the NDP? Guess why...

Hey union guy, you may not take the NDP seriously but don't you dare think you can speak for "the voice of ordinary Canadians". I come from a small town. A union town full of hard working dedicated labourers and NDP supporters. THis uninformed idea that the NDP members are "better heeled" is ABSOLUTLY WRONG!! The arrogance is not with the NDP it is with the Liberals. "We really are better, more compassionate people" is true, not arrogance. When you compare the social policies of the NDP to those of the Regressive Conservatives or the Liberals(so wrongly named, nothing liberal about them.)you can see that yes indeed the NDP is the better choice. Some might say that the Greens are a better coice. Not according to Greenpeace, the Sierra Club and The David Suzuki Foundation, who all gave the NDP enviromental platform top marks, above ALL other parties. Plus the rest of the Greens platform is not much different than that of the Conservatives. We must endevor to remove the goverments from the back pocket of corporations and the wealthy. Can't do it with those that are payed off(Grits,Tories)and it can't be done with a wannabe- subserviant party(Greens) so the only, and best choice is the NDP.

Everything has moved right with the Liberal party's embrace of neo- conservative beliefs. The NDP has moved right too. Pretty much had to. Used to be the PCs were fiscal conservatives, no ideological underpinning, just kind of up the rich, balance the budget and the hell with everything else. The Liberals were a centerist party, watch the budget, but balance the needs of the workers and the poor with the health of the economy. Good schools, good hospitals, prepare for the future. So the NDP could be a strictly left of center social democratic party, the voice advocating progressive social values with no need to govern.

No more. Now the Conservatives are lunatic fringe wierdos, the Liberals have become bedazzled with American right wing nonsense, leaving nobody to carry the center. And It's the center we most need.

Like it or not, there are lots of different kinds of people, and they all must be represented. They all must have a way to live, and society must somehow strike an average. The productive industrial sector is very important, but they have no clue about social values. The social activists are are very important to remind us of who we really are, but forget trying to get them to understand where this prosperity comes from.

Canada desperately needs a strong center to strike that average, balance the true values of all the different kinds of people, and provide for them. That requires the courage to act on principle, even when the ones you serve are howling at you.

I admire and applaud the NDPs willingness to move into the void left by the Liberal betrayal of their principles. That place must be filled, or we are all heading for deep water. Someone else will just have to fill in on the far left. Maybe Labor?

Dear Bob, I don't pretend to speak for ordinary Canadians, but the point of this string is to get at why people aren't voting NDP. I belong to a trade union. I work for a trade union. I come from a large and poor working class family. That's me. And I live in Toronto. I live in affordable housing and here's my story: about 4 years ago Jack Layton personally led and established an encampment of vagrants in this--let me say it again--affordable housing neighbourhood. And immediately afterwards, the neighbourhood was predictably plagued by prostitution, drug dealers, panhandlers, and petty theft. One of the people in my building actually had to go to tent city to get his stolen bicycle back (he got it). I'm not sure how this grandstanding helps ordinary people (maybe you can explain it), but for me, its a paradigm of the NDP in action. I used to vote NDP, but I can't any more.

hey union guy which trade union and why would you be living in affordable housing if you are working are you scamming, I worked in t.o. 83-88 and none of the trades people I worked with were living in affordable housing. I lived near an affordable housing complex and the local beer store would not give us our booze in the usual clear bags because to many people were being robbed! Who would you vote for as a trade unionist, harris? Me thinks you are full of you know what! The building trades are doing pretty good in ontario right now so I can't believe you should be in affordable housing.

Dear Vick, I live in the St. Lawrence neighbourhood. And I'm referring to "tent city". Maybe you've heard of both of them. It's a mixed community of coops and building designed to make entry ownership affordable. I'm not subsidized by anyone, and I guess, like you, I don't like to see people who don't need it living in coops while the less fortunate are on waiting lists. But maybe you should take that up with Jack Layton, since that's what he did. YOu seem to be making my point. Thanks.

Union Guy wrote "I don't like to see people who don't need it living in coops while the less fortunate are on waiting lists. But maybe you should take that up with Jack Layton, since that's what he did.".... Can you give us more details as to how it happened? How do you establish that statement, I mean, that the people on the waiting list are less fortunate than the ones in co-ops. Also, if the cut-off line for assistance was too high or something, I would only consider it a mistake. It's different from people who have different objectives. If someone (or myself) make a mistake, I'm not going to explode with shame or horror, or abstain from thinking socially out of fear of not succeeding - I'll simply LEARN from my mistakes and do it better next time. There's no need to panic. Also, in regards to the prostitution, drug-dealing and such that took place... What did you expect? That all the homeless would suddenly go - "Oh I don't feel addicted anymore/I don't need to sell myself anymore, now that I have a tent as housing" - ?