Revised Platform of the Socialist Party of Ontario
Sisters & Brothers,
I thought I would post the newly modified platform of the Socialist Party of Ontario as first adopted in Toronto May 28th, 2011 and as modified and added to democratically in Peterborough, November 12th, 2011.
Here is a real call for socialism and an actual alternative to the politics of of today's neo-liberal parties, including the NDP.
There has been a lot of nonsense written about the SPO, which is working now to directly promote these ideas to the public, so this is the chance for you to judge for yourself.
It is possible to actually fight for what you believe in and not a bunch of half measures that are aimed at winning seats.
The Platform of the Socialist Party of Ontario
As originally adopted in Toronto, May 28th 2011 and modified in Peterborough, November 12th, 2011
Our Vision:
The Socialist Party of Ontario believes that the labour power and natural resources of a society should be used in an ecologically compatible, equitable and sustainable manner for the benefit of all, including future generations.
The economy of a truly democratic society should also be cooperative and democratically managed so that citizens can be active in the running of their workplaces as well as planning the direction of economic development.
Such an equitable, cooperative and democratic economy that planned for the future and took full account of the needs of both people and the planet would be less wasteful, more inclusive and would help to solve many of the pressing problems facing the world.
Yet the private accumulation of vast sums of capital, an inevitable result of the capitalist system, prevents equitable distribution of wealth and real democratic participation.
And the capitalist system, which has profit as its only consideration, promotes and relies on unsustainable growth in population, expansion and consumption and does not take the needs of people or the planet into account.
This private accumulation of wealth and power has created a situation where CEOs may make in a few hours what workers make in a year, where global warming advances rapidly, pollution and chemicals poison our air and water, species are becoming extinct and natural habitats are under threat, where it is increasingly difficult to find decent employment and retire at a reasonable age with security and dignity, and where many people suffer needlessly from poverty
The Socialist Party of Ontario will work actively, through government and social movements, for the social ownership of natural resources, large manufacturing, electricity, high-tech, large agro-corporations, and other important industries. Socially owned companies must form the core of the economy, thus enabling planning and democratic management of the economy.
Further, socially owned companies must make the betterment of society and the environment their top priorities and consider these objectives even before profit. Profit made will go towards improving the company, community, working conditions and the environment and will not be used for the enrichment of a small group. These companies will be democratically managed by a board made up of workers, citizens, experts and government.
The Socialist Party of Ontario believes that the socialized sector of the economy, which is to be the largest sector, will work cooperatively with small and medium sized enterprises while encouraging and promoting co-operatives and other social, non-profit organizations.
Our Party
The Socialist Party of Ontario pledges that it will not make decisions based on the anticipated response of the capitalist media and will concentrate instead on the direct approach, explaining the philosophy and benefits of socialism via pamphlets, Internet, door-to-door, and any other available means of communication. At the same time we will present an analysis of the evils of capitalism, with emphasis on the dire consequences, such as increasing climate change, which will inevitably ensue if we fail to eradicate capitalism.
To ensure maximum participation the party will establish an accessible Internet site where all members and others can discuss and be polled on policy.
The Socialist Party of Ontario is not strictly a parliamentary or electoral party but a campaigning party which builds and works in movements in solidarity with socialists and people in struggle locally and across Ontario, Canada and the world.
The Socialist Party supports workers, youths and the oppressed in struggle and works to bring movements together.
The Socialist Party shall include education and popularization of socialist ideas as one of its goals.
Our Socialist Commitment to Ending Poverty and to Social Inclusion.
The Socialist Party of Ontario is committed to living in an Ontario without poverty and is committed to living in a society where all citizens are considered equal.
We are committed to living in a society where there are no barriers to full participation by all people in supportive governance structures as well as the social, economic and cultural development of the province, in particular, those persons who face discrimination on the grounds of their race, ancestry, place of origin, colour, ethnic origin, citizenship, creed, sex, sexual orientation, age, marital status, family status or disability.
We are committed to living in a province where every person can achieve her or his full potential and contribute to the development of a fair and compassionate society according to their abilities and;
The Socialist Party of Ontario is committed to the principles of respect, dignity, inclusion, co-operation, diversity, and the centrality of community.
Therefore a Socialist Party of Ontario government will work to strengthen the Poverty Reduction Act (2009) and establish:
- Specific poverty reduction targets at least every three years;
- Community-based data accounts with comprehensive facts and figures and linked to the government's statistical data base with full public access;
- A permanent, inter-ministerial working group comprised of at least 50% of those living with poverty and historically excluded groups including immigrants, women, single mothers, people with disabilities, aboriginal peoples and racialized groups, 25% members from the voluntary/non-profit sector, 15% government representatives (including civil servants and elected officials) and 10% from the business and academic sectors;
- Annual progress reports that fully disaggregates data;
- Public participation extended beyond biannual consultations to also include a permanent policy network linking communities to the government-based working group;
Be It Resolved That the elimination of poverty and social exclusion will be based on three core goals as determined by the people of Ontario in their petition for a poverty-free society (2008):
- Ensuring liveable incomes that affirm the dignity for all Ontarians- including those unable to work.
- Investing in strong and supportive communities where opportunity and equitable inclusion is a reality for all, through enhanced access to affordable housing, early learning and child care, education and community programs that help people connect and thrive.
- Achieving sustaining employment through a good jobs strategy that assures a living standard above poverty for any adult who works full time throughout the year and that pursues equitable access to work, fair pay and stable working conditions for all Ontarians.
In addition the Socialist Party of Ontario will work co-operatively with all sectors to act immediately and to invest in high priority areas such as food supplements, pharmaceuticals, childcare, transportation, building and restoring affordable housing units, increasing and indexing social income support benefits, and broadening eligibility for social programs and services.
In so doing the Socialist Party of Ontario does not seek to restore or rehabilitate the Keynesian Welfare State, rather it seeks to promote the full integration of all citizens in a manner that reaffirms the party's determination to transform society from the existing neo-liberal, capitalist system that has only profits as its primary consideration to one that privileges social cohesion and is truly democratic, inclusive and poverty free.
On Disability Benefits
People with disabilities are 11 times more likely to be unemployed than other Ontarians.
Yet the Ontario Disability Support Program provides a maximum of $1,054 per month for a single person, which is below the poverty line by almost $7,000 per year.
ODSP reduces that amount by 50 cents for every dollar earned by a person receiving benefits.
A Socialist government in Ontario would implement the recommendations of the "What Stops Us from Working" report sponsored by The Dream Team, Houselink Community Homes, and the Centre for Addiction and Mental Health.
We would increase monthly work-related benefits to $150 from $100, exempt the first $600 per month from 50 per cent earnings clawback for one year, reconcile earnings yearly instead of monthly and streamline treatment of EDSP earnings with programs such as subsidized rent, child care and student loan repayment.
Further we would expand ODSP employment supports to include training and on-the-job support as well as raising asset limits.
A Minimum Living Wage
A Socialist government would create in Ontario a Minimum Living Wage for all Ontarians and would further create an Ontario Living Standards Act that will seek to do for income what the Canada Health Act has done for medical care.
A Socialist Party of Ontario government will work to start to end poverty by implementing a guaranteed annual income of no less than $18,849, with annual adjustments for inflation, for each individual adult plus a child allowance.
As an interim measure, the Socialist Party of Ontario advocates the complete reversal of the Harris era cuts to welfare and will increase social assistance rates by 55% in order to restore them to their 1993 level with adjustments for inflation as well as the full restoration of the Special Diet program.
On the Rights of Workers:
The Socialist Party of Ontario understands that the struggle for true social equity and equality must also include a true commitment to the defense of workers' rights.
Therefore a Socialist government would strictly enforce all labour laws and would expand the numbers of public service workers whose function is to enforce these said laws.
It would further reintroduce anti-scab legislation and ban the use of replacement workers during strikes.
It would also would ban the use of back-to-work legislation and would oppose it in all instances while in opposition.
Finally a Socialist Party government would reverse all legislation designating workers other than police, fire fighters and paramedics as "essential services".
It would further recognize that the right of unions to be certified on the basis of a "card check" system once 50% +1 of a workplace sign a union card will be guaranteed. Victimization of union activists by employers is not permitted and will result in automatic unionization if it occurs during a union drive.
Making EI Fair for Workers Again.
The Employment Insurance programme was originally intended as a benefit to be paid out in times of need to workers who had lost their jobs, and workers supplied the premiums to the system and they were to benefit from it when required.
Instead, due to changes made by Liberal and Tory governments to help subsidize their handouts to their corporate friends through tax cuts and bailouts while still maintaining a balanced budget, the EI fund has become a cash cow for the federal government that pays out less in benefits than it takes in from workers.
Further, the fund especially penalizes Ontario's workers as Ontario pays 38% of all of the fund's premiums but receives only 29% of benefits, only 37% of Ontario's unemployed are even eligible for benefits while the self-employed, the casual worker and many part-time workers are entirely excluded as are the long-term unemployed, and we continue to be regarded as a low unemployment area despite having an unemployment rate higher than the national average.
Therefore a Socialist government would advocate making EI a provincial jurisdiction again, as is the province's right, if the federal government refused to stop financing its corporate agenda with worker's money.
A Socialist government would force or create itself a revenue neutral fund that pays out to workers when they are in need what they have paid into it.
Further, it would expand eligibility and the length of coverage and it would pledge, in times of prosperity, to never use the funds of EI for any other purpose, but rather to sit on any surpluses and the interest they generate so as to maintain the fund when the economy goes through a downturn or slump.
A Socialist Commitment to Remaking Work
A Socialist Government would introduce a legally mandated third week of vacation time for all workers in Ontario and therefore increase the amount paid by employers to employees for vacation time from 4% of their yearly salary to 6% of their yearly salary. In addition an SPO government would make May 1st, International Worker's Day, and March 8th, International Women's Day statuatory holidays.
Further, a Socialist Government in Ontario would introduce in the province of Ontario a 35 hour work week without loss of pay.
A Socialist government in Ontario would create a period of 12 weeks of non-transferable paid paternity leave for all residents of the province of Ontario in addition to the existing maternity leave laws on file. This "paternity" leave would apply to the secondary partner, as decided by the parents, and would exist regardless of the gender or sexual orientation of the parents.
Further the SPO feels that part-time employment does not provide people with enough income to live decent lives and seldom provides benefits. Companies are increasingly seeking part-time employees because they can pay them less, have more flexible staffing hours, and pay less in benefits.
An SPO government will create laws regarding the maximum percentage of part-time employees a company is allowed to employ based on its size and the type of company it is.
Finally, a Socialist Government will introduce an immediate increase of the minimum wage to $15 an hour in Ontario and will have it indexed to increase every year according to the Cost of Living Index.
Our Socialist Commitment to Preserving Jobs and a Social Economy
Right now corporations have the freedom to take their operations and jobs just about anywhere in the world leaving workers at the mercy of corporate decisions. Working people need strategies to deal with job loss as a result of corporate decisions.
The SPO will support worker democratically run enterprises financially and morally and will take steps to assist workers in assuming ownership should their place of employment close or should they initiate new enterprises.
In the end the workers of any factory are the ones who generate the wealth for the company. Despite this in Ontario, as elsewhere, productivity has increased dramatically with almost no increase in worker's pay and there has been a strong trend for profitable corporations to move factories oversees in order to increase their rate of profits, despite the inefficiency, waste and harm to the environment that shipping products oversees creates.
There is a need for a strong industrial base in order to carry out the environmental changes we need as well as produce the goods required by all.
Therefore an SPO government would see that:
A. All closed factories will be reviewed by an association of its former workers and the government. If viable, the factory will be requisitioned by the government, put into public ownership and democratic management and retooled to meet the needs of the environment and the population. The former workforce will be rehired and, when necessary, retrained.
B. Profitable companies moving existing jobs out of Ontario but maintaining a base in Ontario will face penalties, up to and including a public takeover of operations and assets.
Towards Democratic Control of the Public Sector
The SPO believes that public corporations should be both democratic and work in the interest of the province, country and community.
Yet currently existing public corporations are run little differently than private enterprises, complete with corporate elitism, enormous executive salaries and the profit motive as its guiding force.
Therefore an SPO government would ensure that:
A. The Board of Directors of all public corporations be selected through a democratic, non-political process, with 1/3rd of the seats allocated for election by the workers of the company, 1/3rd selected by the public at large, and 1/3rd selected by the government
B. That democratic management processes be implemented that allows for employees to elect and remove supervisors and management level staff as well as allow greater input from employees regarding all levels of work. These measures will increase satisfaction, safety and productivity.
C. Create a mandate that all public corporations must follow which places the betterment of the people and the environment before any consideration of profit.
Ending the Safe Streets Act
The Safe Streets Act has an ambiguous definition of aggressive panhandling and was enacted following cutbacks to programmes for the poor and disenfranchised.
The Socialist Party of Ontario believes that poverty is, at its root, an economic and social problem, not a criminal problem.
Therefore a Socialist Party of Ontario government will repeal the Safe Streets Act in its entirety
A Public Auto Insurance Programme
An SPO government would create a public, no-fault, auto insurance programme in the province of Ontario and this programme would deliver insurance at rates that are set to cover costs only, with any surplus (profit) being used to lower rates and where rates only increase to offset inflation or to cover programme deficits.
A Programme of Public Pharma Care, Dental and Eye Care
With prescription medication playing an increasing role in health care delivery, it no longer makes sense to have universal health care that excludes drug coverage and;
Dental health is also clearly related to overall good health and the costs associated with both it and proper eye care means that many have to do without it.
It is important that all children regardless of economic status have access to dental hygiene, drugs and eye care so they can have the same advantages and opportunities as wealthier children to become successful, prosperous members of society.
Therefore a Democratic Socialist government would introduce basic prescription, basic dental and basic eye care coverage for all. The money would be raised partly through payroll taxes and general taxes. This would expand universal health care to be truly inclusive and ensure that access to such care is available to every citizen of Ontario.
A Socialist Healthcare Platform.
A Socialist Government must work to provide accessible, comprehensive healthcare coverage for all Ontarians.
Since the cuts of the 1995 Federal Budget (and additional cuts by successive provincial governments) Ontarians have seen a reduction in healthcare services covered, while hospital closures and privatizations that have led to increased costs for services.
While we acknowledging the impact that budget cuts have had on the healthcare system, we as socialists must also recognize, that an effective healthcare system must not simply be measured by how much money is spent, but by the actual health and welfare of its population.
For a publicly funded healthcare system to be effective, it must pool it's resources to serve the needs of the population effectively, particularly the working class, visible minorities and with individuals who do not have private, comprehensive healthcare coverage.
Thus a Socialist Government would:
1) End the funding of private "boutique" clinics for MRIs, CT scans, and other services.
2) Establish long-term strategic plans for health-care funding based on population demographic trends.
3) Increase investment in IT to provide electronic health records for all Ontarians.
4) No longer utilize the P3 (Public-Private Partnership) business model for the construction of new hospitals.
5)Ensure full transparency in bidding process where private sector is used in short-term projects.
6)Increase the number of spaces within Medical schools in Ontario to levels adequate to provide satisfaction to the residents of the province.
7)Provide incentives to graduating medical students to work within remote areas of Ontario.
8) Increase the number of chronic care beds to accommodate needs.
9) Maintain nursing staffing at levels adequate for health and safety as recommended by the Socialist Government in consultation with nurses' associations.
10)Increase investment in preventative medicine and chronic disease management.
11) Ensure that where the private sector is utilized for government projects such as construction, consulting or other services, the bidding process must be completely accessible to the public.
12)Ensure that the provincial government implements no policies that violate the Canada Health Act
13) An SPO government would eliminate all parking fees at hospitals in the province.
A Public Pharmaceutical Company
The pharmaceutical industry is one of the largest global capitalist industries with nearly guaranteed profits. Investment and research conducted by them is done primarily for the purpose of profit making while the lives of millions of people depend on life-saving medications which are priced to profit from peoples' illnesses.
Therefore a socialist government in Ontario would establish a public not-for-profit pharmaceutical corporation that would both manufacture and distribute low-cost drugs - including to those suffering in poorer countries, invest in researching cures instead of treatments, and integrate with our public pharmaceutical plan to lower the cost of covering all prescription medications.
In Defence of Reproductive Rights
A Socialist government will provide to Ontarians free contraception as well as free fertility treatments for all who require them.
Further a Socialist government would guarantee women's rights to reproductive choice and guarantee access to free abortion on demand for all women. All hospitals will be required to provide abortion services and free transportation will be available for women living in rural and remote areas who need to travel to obtain abortion services and for women in small cities and municipalities who wish to travel to obtain their abortion services out of town for privacy reasons.
On Cancer Prevention.
We as a society are currently facing an epidemic of cancer and other diseases whose cause is unknown.
A study by McGill University Health Centre has shown that "women living in the areas with the highest levels of [traffic-generated] air pollution were almost twice as likely to develop breast cancer as those living in the least polluted areas".
Such studies are almost unheard of in capitalist society, which is reluctant to investigate areas which might interfere with profit.
The Socialist Party of Ontario, whether in or out of power, will encourage studies which will compare the prevalence of cancer and other diseases which have no identified cause and no cure with exposure to traffic-generated air pollution, radiation, chemicals in food, water and air, proximity to industrial and nuclear plants and other factors, so that the contributing causes of each disease can be identified and eliminated.
A Socialist Environmental Platform.
Climate change is a growing threat to survival on the planet and capitalism provides no viable or sustainable solutions to the present environmental crisis.
In the interests of the planet and future generations a Socialist government will fight global warming through massive public investment in the research, development and implementation of publicly owned clean renewable energy and efficiency technologies to rapidly replace fossil fuels.
We would put Ontario's natural gas utilities under democratic public ownership and end private leasing of nuclear power facilities while phasing out nuclear power within 10 years.
We would invest in a massive program to retrofit large buildings with green roofs, require all future construction of large buildings to include green roofs, and invest in retrofitting homes, office and apartment buildings with energy efficient green technologies, insulation and modifications.
We would invest in a massive expansion of mass transit and intercity rail to provide alternatives to the car. Public transit will be well-funded and democratically controlled.
We would create a publicly owned network of battery change/recharging stations for electric and hybrid cars and create a publicly owned, province wide, car sharing program to provide a cheap, environmentally friendly and accessible alternative to private car ownership.
There must be a massive investment in research and development of better and cleaner technologies for vehicles.
Finally we must ensure that all workers in polluting industries would be guaranteed re-training and new living-wage jobs in socially-useful green production.
Our Commitment to Ending the Power of Agribusiness
An SPO government would work to see that the land belonging to big agribusiness would be taken into democratic public ownership with compensation based on proven need.
These farms would be run to ensure that food be organic, without genetic modification, pesticides, herbicides and fungicides and with the utmost attention paid to health and welfare, including the rights of animals and consumers, while moving away from mono crops.
Where possible big processors would be taken into public ownership and strict guidelines would be implemented to protect the health and welfare of animals and ensure that animals have access to the natural foods they have evolved with and that growth hormones and anti-biotics are strictly regulated and curtailed.
Finally, where possible, big food retailers, would be taken into public ownership to ensure an equitable distribution of food.
On the Creation of Freecycling Days
It is the stated objective of all of our levels of government to encourage the recycling and reuse of manufactured goods.
Yet many municipalities in the province of Ontario make it illegal to both put out household items to be given away for reuse and make it illegal to take items from the "garbage".
As a result many perfectly reusable household items end up in landfill.
In part our culture of destructive and rampant consumerism is fostered by a sense that new is better.
Therefore a Socialist government would enact legislation overriding municipal by-laws and creating quarterly "Freecycling" days where citizens would be allowed to put out reusable household items to be available for others to take, free-of-charge, to be used in any way they see fit and without any threat of fine or other legal punishment.
This will help the environment by both diverting reusable items from landfill and preventing the unnecessary manufacture of items otherwise available.
Regulating the Trucking Industry
Heavy transport trucks are the cause of pollution, extra congestion on roads and damage to roads that were not designed for heavy transport on our crowded highways. An SPO government would institute regulation to ensure that unnecessary container and other heavy transport would be taken off our roads and be moved instead by ship and train.
A Socialist Platform on Public Transprtation in the GTA
Public transportation is vital to the prosperity and well-being of a large, metropolitan area.
The population of the City of Toronto has grown to 2.5 million people, and is expected to grow to 3 million by 2031 while the Greater Toronto Area has a population of over 5 million people.
There are 9 different public transit agencies operating within the Greater Toronto Area and yet no mass transit development, other than the Sheppard Subway has occurred within the Greater Toronto Area within the last 20 years.
Provincial funding for public transportation within the City of Toronto was eliminated in 1995 and additional funding cuts have rendered the current transit plan insufficient for the needs of the Greater Toronto area.
A Socialist government in Ontario will create a provincial agency, known as the Greater Toronto Transit Agency (hereafter, referred to as GTTA) that will replace all public transit services with York, Peel, Halton and Durham Regions and the City of Toronto this new agency be integrated with the existing Greater Toronto Transit Authority.
This GTTA will be responsible for the development and implementation of a mass transit policy within the aforementioned municipalities.
We would ensure that a mass transit policy developed for the Greater Toronto Region would have, as one of its initial objectives, an extension of the Yonge Subway into Richmond Hill, the Bloor Subway into Mississauga, and the addition of a subway line in Downtown Toronto connecting the financial district with the inner suburbs of the City of Toronto.
We would encourage co-operation with municipalities on the borders of the GTA.
This GTTA would be provided with sufficient funding for regular capital investment through public funding all new GTTA development would be accessible and all construction contracts be awarded to union shops.
Further, a Socialist government would put in place sufficient funding to make public transit in Ontario free.
But beyond this, the SPO feel that our concepts of urban planning are fundamentally misguided. Urban planning in Ontario's major cities has been implemented with a lack of foresight and perspective, with too much reliance on private transportation and this has lead to a separation of work, education, community, retail and culture.
Urban planning must change the current "urban sprawl" with cohesive and connected communities that provide work, culture, housing and retail within a reasonable distance.
The SPO is committed to reorganizing existing municipalities on a more human basis around public transportation lines with proper access to educational facilities, health, welfare, retail, work, culture and to seeing that these municipalities be connected to a larger whole on an equitable basis.
A New GTA
It is very clear that a metropolitan government is needed for the Greater Toronto Area (GTA) for area-wide coordination and planning purposes.
In the past local democracy was disregarded by the Conservative government of Mike Harris by the forced amalgamation of Metropolitan Toronto. This created a "one size fits all" approach that is improper in a large and diverse metropolitan area.
An SPO governement would create a two-tier structure of metropolitan government for the GTA. The current City of Toronto and regional municipalities of Halton, Peel, York and Durham would be abolished and replaced by an upper-tier GTA regional government and elected council. The four community council areas would be turned into municipalities, and along with other lower-tier municipalities, be responsible for local matters. The GTA government would be responsible for such services as arterial roads, regional planning, public transportation, regional parks and housing.
A Plan to Build a High Speed Rail Network
In a world in which climate change and peak oil (the point at which global oil production peaks and begins to decline) pose severe threats to humanity and the biosphere, it is essential to plan for a sustainable future and to rebuild our cities, our agricultural system, and our transportation systems to that end. Allowing unregulated free enterprise to cope with the challenges we now confront dooms much of humanity and the life systems of the planet to destruction.
A democratic socialist programme must analyze the threats that confront our world and propose ways to deal with them.
One way, among others, is to begin the reconstruction of the transportation systems in Ontario.
As a result a Socialist Government in Ontario will undertake to construct a high speed train system from Windsor to the Quebec border. The system would include links to the major cities across the south of the province including Ottawa. The high speed train network would be a public works project, to be paid for and owned by the people of Ontario, through the government at Queen's Park. The network would operate on dedicated lines and the trains would be electric powered. A high priority would be given to the use of Canadian technology and Canadian research and development in the conceiving of the line, and in the construction of the line and the trains to be used on it.
Negotiations would be undertaken with the government of Quebec to extend the system into Quebec to Montreal, Quebec City and other regions such as the Ottawa-Montreal corridor and the Eastern Townships. The federal government would be urged to participate in the planning and funding of the system.
The construction of a high speed train system would involve a shift in transportation priorities and spending from highways and airports (in cooperation with the federal government) to rail between cities and within urban areas. This is a long term shift to be fully achieved over the next several decades. The high speed inter-city system is a first step and it can be begun immediately.
A Socialist Housing Platform
We believe that having a home is a right.
Therefore a Socialist government will seek to abolish the housing wait list by building new affordable, publicly owned housing in its first term and these new units will be built to the highest possible environmental standards.
We would upload public housing to the province and restore full funding in order to rehabilitate and expand housing stock. Public housing would also be under democratic control.
A Socialist government would aggressively combat bed bugs and other infestations in public housing and require landlords to do the same in private housing and it would re-implement real rent controls to prevent landlords from raising a unit's rent through eviction.
We would licence landlords in order to ensure that landlords adhere to certain standards and are penalized and lose the right to be landlords if they do not.
Further we would double annual spending on services and shelters for the homeless and ensure that homeless shelters are operated in a humane and compassionate manner.
In addition an SPO government would work to ensure that the term "slum landlord" be properly defined by a committee representing tenants, social movements, unions and elected officials and that the government would transform slum landlord housing units, as so defined, into social housing, through expropriation, with compensation on the basis on proven need. These units would be converted into decent, affordable housing with the implementation of Green technologies to reduce the costs of heating.
An SPO government would implement democratic control in the social housing sector over all issues of repair, public safety, social, recreation, cultural facilities and community gardens on the basis of tenant control with consultation from elected officials and trade unions.
It would see that the elected representatives of tenants are obliged to attend a minimum amount of meetings per annum and sit on tenant committees to actively change and implement housing policy.
Regulation of Payday Loan Agencies.
While not seeking to prevent those who need short term loans from access to them it is clear that the gouging of workers by PayDay loan agencies with interest rates that amount to usury must end.
We would ensure that Payday Loan Agencies be properly regulated and the interest rates that these agencies charge be comparable to that levied by banks on loans to businesses and individuals.
Creating a Public Job Agency
Job placement agencies are predatory and increasingly pervasive and yet there is no effective mechanism to connect unemployed people with work.
Therefore an SPO government would establish a non-profit placement agency that connects people directly to jobs in their communities and in their field of expertise or interest
On the Creation of a Public Banking Sector in Ontario.
Many socialists feel that the banking sector is in urgent need of reform, and some would even go so far as to favour the nationalization of some or all of the Big Banks.
This, however, is a constitutionally federal matter and cannot be done, in part or whole, by a provincial government.
In an effort to offer an alternative to the Big Banks a Socialist government in Ontario would recreate the publicly owned Province of Ontario Savings Office (POSO), which was a government owned savings bank that offered higher interest rates than commercial banks on a variety of savings accounts.
POSO, would also be allowed to advertise, which it was not in the past, and to offer limited, low-risk loans. Further it would be allowed to, as it once did, offer lower interest loans to the government of Ontario itself as its deposits went into Ontario's consolidated revenue fund.
A Socialist Taxation Policy
The increase in incomes of the top 1% of income earners has been the main force driving income inequality in Canada and other advanced capitalist countries.
The Socialist Party of Ontario, therefore, strongly supports increases on the very highest income earners and the creation of new tax brackets. The Socialist Party of Ontario will ensure that the combined federal/provincial income tax rate for incomes between $250,000 and $500,000 shall be 60%, for incomes between $500,000 and $1 million shall be 70%, and for incomes over $1 million shall be 90%.
Further, the Socialist Party of Ontario supports taxing income from capital at the same rate as wages and salaries, and will raise the provincial portion of taxes on capital to match the combined federal/provincial rates on wages and salaries.
A Socialist Programme for Legal Reform.
The legal system in Ontario is great need of reform, especially in administrative areas, and as a province we are grossly underspending with the result that the system is overburdened and in danger of falling apart.
Fixing these problems is of tremendous importance to ensure the proper protection of the rights of those before the courts and to avoid miscarriages of justice, which undermine the system's credibility.
Therefore a Socialist government would:
1) Hire more judges, clerks etc. Courts are currently extremely overburdened, especially in the suburbs. Often in our criminal courts it takes over a year to get a trial date in even the simplest case. Trials are being thrown out because they take so long, and thereby end up violating the rights of the accused. There are equally grave problems in the family courts. This results in many cases of injustice as people take deals that they shouldn't because they can't wait any longer, people spend too long in prison waiting for trial or too long without spousal support, etc.
2) Fund legal aid better: The underfunding in this area is an absolute disgrace. Without access to proper legal representation for all there is only justice for the rich. The very poor alone qualify for legal aid and even then only in certain areas of the law. There is a huge segment of the population, primarily the middle and working classes who can neither get aid nor afford proper legal assistance. This must end.
3) Fund prisons better. Poor conditions in our prisons and jails are neither morally right nor in the interests of prison guards or prisoners.
4) Ensure that the use of chain gangs or forced labour is prohibited.
5) Synchronize court rules. There are different procedures in different courts across the province. This results in delay and extra costs as most lawyers represent clients in many different courts.
6) Abolish conviction quotas.
7) Institute mandatory sensitivity and compassion training for prison guards will be implemented.
8) Ensure that Community Service Orders be returned to their original purpose as an alternative to prison.
On Police Accountability
It is of the greatest importance that the police entrusted by the citizens and government of Ontario to enforce the laws that we democratically enact are meant to serve and protect the citizens who employ them, while also being accountable to them.
All too often these same civil servants work in a culture of entitlement in which they feel that the badge and the gun means that they dictate law and justice as opposed to the citizens who are supposed to govern them.
The historic injustice of the police forces of Ontario against people of colour, the LGBT community and the Native people of the province needs not only redress, but the institution of genuine civilian oversight.
As a result a Socialist Government would enact, in full, all 29 recommendations of the LeSage Report On The Police Complaints System In Ontario as found here:
http://www.scribd.com/doc/53479820/Section-7
A Socialist government, in addition to these recommendations, will also make an officer's willingness to comply with the internal investigations of their department a condition of employment. Failure to comply with civilian oversight will result in termination of employment.
Further a Socialist government would call a civilian, public inquiry will be formed to investigate not only the abuses of the G20 weekend in Toronto, but also the historic abuses of civil rights against our province's many diverse communities by the police that were supposed to protect them and whose salaries they paid. This will be done in the interests of basic justice.
A Socialist government would further enact legislation ensuring that to qualify to serve as a police officer, individuals be required to undergo training in the fields of Social Work, Diversity Training, Women's Studies and Disability Studies, particularly in the area of mental illness, and that such training be included in the police college curriculum.
Our Support of Religious Freedom
The Socialist Party of Ontario supports, without qualification, the freedom of religious beliefs.
While the Government of Quebec and others worldwide have attempted to prohibit access to government services on the basis of religious dress we believe that there is no contradiction between the principles of a secular society and tolerance for religious beliefs.
We pledge that a Socialist government in Ontario will pass no law restricting access to government services due to a citizen's manner of dress and will repeal any such laws put into place.
We further pledge that a Socialist government in Ontario will not deny access to government services to a citizen on the basis of their religious beliefs.
Our Commitment to Proportional Voting.
The present "first-past-the-post" system of electing parliaments in Ontario results in governments that do not actually reflect the will of the voters.
However a list based system of voting would not reflect our traditions of electing individuals to represent us in parliament directly through the use of electoral districts.
Therefore a Socialist government in Ontario will introduce legislation to replace the present "first-past-the-post" system of voting in provincial elections with a system such as the Single Transferable Vote (STV) system existing in Australia providing both proportional representation and ensuring that votes are explicitly cast for individual candidates rather than party lists.
Our Commitment to Democratic Recall
The SPO believes that elected officials should be responsive to the will of the people at all times, not only during election periods.
As we all know MPP's often break their promises and governments, especially majority governments, operate as virtual dictatorships between elections.
An SPO government would introduce to legislation that would ensure that individual MPPs would be recallable by the electorate. A recall referendum for any MPP or provincial government would be initiated by collecting the signatures of 20% of the corresponding electorate. This would result in a by-election in the riding in question.
Towards Real Gender Equality in Parliament
The small proportion of women in the Ontario Legislature reflects the inequality of women in society and political parties have to date been unable to provide a means or mechanism to resolve the gross inequality of representation.
We as Socialists believe that gender balance achieved by having an equal number of men and women would provide greater democracy and lead to policies and laws which would remove barriers to equality of men and women in society.
While proportional representation has the potential to increase the number of women it is no guarantee and it is long past the time when women should have a guarantee of equal representation.
Therefore the Socialist Party of Ontario supports the principle of combining electoral districts in pairs and having two members elected from each, one from a list of women candidates and the other from a list of men.
A Socialist Education Policy
A Socialist Government would introduce an early childhood education system based on the one in France, that would allow parents to receive free full-day education for their children starting from the age of two.
The SPO believes that standardised testing in grades 3, 6, 9 and 10 is an instrument of a neo-liberal agenda to privatise public education.
Standardised testing discriminates against students, communities and schools on the basis of social class, ethnicity, immigration status and disability.
The amount of resources and time allocated to preparing students for the EQAO tests could be used more effectively to provide students with quality education.
This is why a Socialist Party of Ontario government would eliminate EQAO standardised testing in schools and abolish the OSSLT as a requirement for a secondary school diploma.
The Socialist Party of Ontario would cease all public funding of Catholic School Boards and would further cease any public funding of any faith based education.
The arts play an essential role in providing a well rounded and diverse education, in cognitive development, confidence building and imagination. Yet these programmes have been cut to the point that they are a shadow of their former selves.
A Socialist Government in Ontario would expand the curriculum to ensure and require that all students get a full arts education, including the visual, dramatic and musical, starting in elementary school.
The SPO feels that an entire generation benefited from relatively inexpensive university education and then slammed the door on the children of others by continuing to gratify themselves at the expense of those who came next.
We favour a commitment to promote social mobility and equality.
This is why a Socialist Government would immediately reverse all tuition fee increases since the year 1995 while increasing subsidies to universities proportionate to the decrease in tuition. Further it would eliminate these fees entirely by the end of its first mandate.
Further a Socialist government shall provide a living wage to students in order to ensure they have sufficient funds to buy and/or rent books, pay their rent and have a decent quality of life during their studies.
A New and Fairer Lottery for Ontario
The existing lotteries in Ontario offer very poor odds and due to their bi-weekly or instant nature draw people into an addictive and often dangerously expensive habit.
Therefore an SPO government would create a Premium Bond Lottery as exists in the United Kingdom as part of the UK government's National Savings and Investments scheme. As in the UK the government would promise to buy back the bond, on request, for its original price.
The government would pay a competitive rate of interest on the bond but instead of the interest being paid into individual accounts, it would be paid into a prize fund from which a monthly lottery would distribute tax-free prizes, or premiums, to those bond-holders whose numbers are selected randomly. The prizes would range from $25 to the top prize of $1,000,000, and the number of prizes would vary according to interest rates. Citizens would be able to purchase bonds at any time and they would need to be held for a full calendar month after the month of purchase. These bonds are eligible for the draw: their numbers are entered each month, with an equal chance of winning any prize, until the bond is cashed in.
Bonds would be purchased by $1 increments after the first $100, with a value of $1 per bond and a minimum purchase of 100 bonds.
This lottery would replace all other provincially run lotteries.
As adopted in Toronto, May 28th, 2011
As Modified in Peterborough, November 12th, 2011
Please note that this is, and always will be, an evolving document. We NEED your input as this is YOUR party. If you have any resolutions or policy planks or amendments to propose to this platform please email them to info@thegingerproject.org and they will be posted for discussion and debate. As long as properly moved they will be voted on for inclusion at the next Policy Assembly prior to the election.
Please also note that resolutions were tabled for further discussion. These will be discussed at the next Executive meeting and put to the membership at the next General Convention.
"A Socialist government will..."
Do you seriously see yourselves getting elected? In Ontario....????
Well...if you are are laughing at the idea of a socialist government in Ontario, why are you on Babble? There are plenty of pro-capitalist websites that you can mock leftists on.
Can we expect some sort of "post-mortem" on the SPO and the Ontario election (ie: how many candidates ran? how much money was raised? how many volunteers came out? How many VOTES did they get?)
You seriously believe Ontario will go socialist sometime in our lifetime? I don't. But I support progressive causes that show a bit of realism in their outlook.
You seriously believe Ontario will go socialist sometime in our lifetime? I don't. But I support progressive causes that show a bit of realism in their outlook.
That's what they were saying about Cuba in 1958.
If "realism" means giving up on presenting socialist ideas during "our lifetime" then our grandchildren will still be mocking the socialists in fifty years' time, just as you do now.
That's what they were saying about Cuba in 1958.
Somehow I'm having a hard time seeing Dalton McGuinty as Fulgencio Battista!
Not to mention that socialism was popular in 1958 Cuba. While in Ontario...
I see no need to mock a party that wants to present itself as explicitly socialist. However I don't see it as a very effective strategy. I think by any evaluation it would be easier to convince the ONDP to embrace socialism than to convince an Ontario plurality to embrace it.
I'm a software developer. I break up big problems into small ones. Getting Ontario to vote in a socialist goverment is a complex problem to solve. I don't think forming a new party in this day and age as an effective way to solve the problem.
Somehow I'm having a hard time seeing Dalton McGuinty as Fulgencio Battista!
Somehow you have a hard time seeing a lot of things.
If we have learned nothing else in the past year, we should at least have learned from Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, Syria, Wisconsin, and the Occupy movement that popular political consciousness does not always go in a gradual, linear fashion; it can and does go through sudden and unexpected surges, often triggered by seemingly minor events (like the self-immolation of Mohamed Bouazizi). A seemingly defeated and quiescent populace can turn around radically in a very short time.
Most major socio-political changes do not come about through gradual increments of parliamentary reformism, but occur through, or in reaction to, episodes of sharply increased popular consciousness and widespread willingness to fight for change. When that happens, reformist political parties are caught flat-footed (case in point: the NDP totally shunning the Occupy movement -and thereby gaining precisely nothing from it).
Someone has to be ready to step up to the plate when the bases are suddenly loaded. That's why we need the SPO and others like it.
That's what they were saying about Cuba in 1958.
Somehow I'm having a hard time seeing Dalton McGuinty as Fulgencio Battista!
Dalton's party won 18.5% of the eligible vote this year. I think Batista's US-backed mafia regime may have been more legit than that.
Wow, what a bunch of Liberal and anti-socialist nonsense. Do I expect to see a socialist government in Ontario in my lifetime? Well, yes, I do. Why not? Should I rather expect more of the same shit fed to me over-and-over again while everything gets worse? How exactly are you naysayers proposing to deal with climate change, inequality, outsourcing, corporate dominance, poverty, corporate power, etc? You never answer that other than saying we should be "realistic". Well, we have. For thirty years. Didn't turn out well did it? Turns out the realism is the reality that big business wanted.
It is a capitulation to the ideology of the right.
"Can we expect some sort of "post-mortem" on the SPO and the Ontario election (ie: how many candidates ran? how much money was raised? how many volunteers came out? How many VOTES did they get?)"
The SPO did NOT exist until September 13th, 2011. The system is stacked to favour the established parties and we ran candidates to get recognized. We accomplished this, even by the anti-democratic rules of the established parties. But now we are an official party, and that changes everything. See you in three years. I, for one, think a real socialist platform will make a difference. And if does not, at least we won't have fought on a bunch of nonsense that we hope the Toronto Star will endorse.
And to those who don't think doing this matters...well then why did you pretend to support "Occupy", and why do you claim to want to change society? What EXACTLY, no more bullshit, are you proposing to counter corporate power, social inequality, CHILD POVERTY, which we said would end in 2000 but has gotten worse under NDP provincial governments. Tell me now, in your best mocking tone, what you are doing to change any of this. In a real way. With actual policies...not a bunch of rubbish about optimism. Hope and optimism don't feed kids...social policies do. Higher taxes do. Things like free transit, social housing, Pharma and Dental Care do. So let's hear your different ideas for dealing with this.
This is not going to happen through cutting a $50 ambulance fee, through cutting the HST, through "rewarding" small business. And you know it. So tell me, other than by the platform we in the SPO have proposed, how DO YOU propose making real change? Please share your ideas other than your defensive scorn. I doubt that it will happen, because that seems to be all you have anymore.
So, either you care about the REAL issues confronting the people of Ontario, you really care about inequality and child poverty, and you really want to talk about these issues and how you actually intend to confront them directly IN YOUR PROGRAMME, or, instead, you want to win power because it has its perks and it will make you feel good about yourself and because, after all, the Tories are "worse".
You seriously believe Ontario will go socialist sometime in our lifetime? I don't. But I support progressive causes that show a bit of realism in their outlook.
Unfortunately, for too many "progressive" parties, "realism" is code for "We can't actually DO anything 'progressive', for God's sake!"
The line between "realism" and surrender is often very, very thin.
Michael, it's unfortunate the rude welcome you receive here.
If it weren't for people like you the NDP party would have been history. I'm a card carrying NDP member and I'm very disappointed in my allies for crapping on you here. I will still vote NDP for now but it's folks like you that keep me somewhat interested in the democratic process.
Please don't let these "supposed" allies dishearten you. There are plenty of normally silent folk like me, watching things very carefully.
I like M. Spector's analysis of history showing that these things sometimes just need a small spark in the tinderbox.
I am not dumping on the Socialist party of Ontario. In fact I'd like to see them grow and i have a constructive suggestion for how to do that. There is this guy Barry Weisleder who (along with a gaggle of acolytes) is the self-styled head of the NDP's "socialist caucus". These days he and his friends seem VERY unhappy in the NDP. He had his nomination disallowed. He has lost every single solitary internal contest he has run in. Every single policy resolution he has put forward has gone down in flames at convention. On top of all that, Weisleder and his friends have been circulating leaflets at NDP gatherings denouncing all NINE NDP leadership candidates for being rightwing sell-outs etc...so I think someone from the SPO should give Weisleder a call and talk him into leaving the NDP and helping build the SPO. The SPO would double its activist base instantly and everyone would be happy!
You sound like a dude who would have fit in well with the flat earth society.
Thankfully, we have evolved. Keep on pushing folk like me away from the No Difference Party.
I think people should join the party that makes them feel the most at home and whose policies are the best match for their own. IMHO people in the Socialist Caucus of the NDP (all five of them) would be much happier in the Socialist Party of Ontario than they are in the NDP - where they are typically made to feel like turds floating in a punch bowl!. I want these people to be happy people - so out of the goodness of my heart I am giving them constructive advice on what would make them happier people!
Why not start a movement to unite the SPO and the SC and you can all be one big (well maybe not all that big) happy family!
The SPO's detractors in this thread have offered no substantive criticisms of the platform. Not one. Just sneering and insults.
A lot of the ideas seems pretty sensible and not all that "radical" to me, like a guaranteed annual income and universal pharmacare eyecare and dentalcare.
I'm really not looking to mock anyone. I recognize the SPO as allies. And I live in BC so it's academic. I do actively support the Occupy movement.
I'm sure the platform is great. What I'd be more interested in hearing about is the strategy for winning.
If this is a party looking to win seats, how is the issue of FPTP addressed? Will the SPO target NDP seats, where they are most likely to have support? Or will they target Lib and Con seats, which may not be the ideal demographic? If the biggest tangible result is taking votes from the NDP, is that a success? If the biggest tangible result is growing support within the party so that the party can be competitive in a few seats by 2019, is this a project worth pursuing?
One thing I see all the time in newly formed groups (not just politicial parties) is an under-estimation of the benefit provided by having an organizational infrastructure in place. People think, oh that will come as more and more people join. But this kind of thing takes a long time to develop. It is very difficult to win elections. It is not just about the platform. It is about knowing how to do the tasks involved. It is about having organizational intelligence. Look at how many supporters the green party had nationwide at their peak. And yet, it was very, very difficult to win a seat, and they pretty much sacrificed their party to do so.
If there's the desire to address any of this stuff then that's a conversation I'd participate in. The platform looks great--but so what? Who can't come up with a sweet dream platform? The hard part is how we get there.
Maybe the idea is that as society collapses it will just follow that the SPO gains support...but it seems to me that collapse could have a number of different political outcomes.
Basically, I think it would be much, much more difficult for socialists to take over Ontario than to take over the ONDP. If you can't take over the ONDP, what chance do you have at taking over Ontario?
Their platform is okay with me, I just don't think they have a chance in Ontario.
..the global demand for a participitory democracy needs to be addressed. it is not enough to call for more democracy. structures must be changed that ensure the decisions come from the bottom up. and that this happens upon election and not promised to come somewhere down the road. i'm sure this has been discussed so wonder why it isn't part of the list presented. as the spanish occupy proudly shout "none of them represent us".
I think people should join the party that makes them feel the most at home and whose policies are the best match for their own. IMHO people in the Socialist Caucus of the NDP (all five of them) would be much happier in the Socialist Party of Ontario than they are in the NDP - where they are typically made to feel like turds floating in a punch bowl!. I want these people to be happy people - so out of the goodness of my heart I am giving them constructive advice on what would make them happier people!
Why not start a movement to unite the SPO and the SC and you can all be one big (well maybe not all that big) happy family!
The above comment means, if nothing else, that we can rule out Stockholm having anything to do with the NDP, since he is obviously oblivious to some of the most basic dynamics within that party.
For one thing, the Socialist Caucus are some of the most loyal members of the NDP that there are. Not a single group of people have more vehemently opposed the creation of the SPO. The SC's analysis, such as it is, is that only the NDP can be a viable "mass-workers party" as they call it, and the NDP must be reformed internally. No matter how badly they are treated, no matter how much scorn is heaped upon them, they still come back, and defend the NDP against all commers. If the NDP were to ever collapse and disappear as a political party, the SC would be the last people still active.
Their platform is okay with me, I just don't think they have a chance in Ontario.
I agree with you. In the immediate future, the prospects for any kind of electoral victory are slim to none. However, the movement that has started is predicated on a long term strategy. Part of that strategy, is not simply winning elections for their own sake, but shifting public opinion to the left, such that, regardless of who is elected, policies that we support will be enacted.
That someone responded with the comment "they don't have a chance" is a reflection on the totality of the victory of the right in Canada. It's a victory that didn't simply happen by accident. Political trends aren't weather systems that happen out of nowhere andthat we have no control over. There was a very specific, concentrated effort by people on the hard right in Canada, influenced by similar victories in the US, to introduce ideas that, when they were first brought up, were as alien as what is being discussed above.
When Milton Friedman began talking about selling off government services such as the post office in the early 1960s, the word privatization didn't even exist in popular lexicon. He was, of course, regarded as insane. That is the kind of ideological battle that needs to be fought and, right now, I don't see anyone fighting to reintroduce left-wing ideas, at least not from the NDP.
Fighting that kind of battle is the only way that left-wing, socialist, or social democratic (insert your label here) will get reintroduced into the public discourse. Such struggles have to be taken to with a long term view, and cannot be undertaken by people who simply want to win elections for their own sake, or who want the instant gratification that comes with a rock through a window.
The SPO's detractors in this thread have offered no substantive criticisms of the platform. Not one. Just sneering and insults.
A lot of the ideas seems pretty sensible and not all that "radical" to me, like a guaranteed annual income and universal pharmacare eyecare and dentalcare.
Where the money for all of it comes from is an obvious problem. Ontario needs $15 billion a year more revenue just to balance the budget, so even steep increases in taxation create little room at the moment for expanded spending, especially when that taxation is targeted to business activities and people that are mobile. To the extent tax increases cause people and economic activity to move, that reduces the revenue gains. There is some good that can come of increasing taxes in Ontario, but not all this.
Doug it's funny you try to present yourself as the voice of "realism" in terms of the very important question: "How are you going to pay for it?" Too often the Left is guilty of pretending these things can somehow be provided for free or make generic comments of "some really rich people we don't know can pay for all of it." That is dishonest. However the NDP is far more guilty of this in practice - when they one day praise the Swedish model and then engage in anti-tax campaigns that are identical to those of the populist right. Of course the NDP doesn't promise any serious reforms beside little things like getting rid of ambulance fees.
How do you pay for it, is, of course, a legitimate question. One could answer by noting that we did as a society in the past and that others in the world do now. Scandinavia being an obvious example for much of this.
It is a sad comment on the state of North America that the actual planks of the SPO platform, with a couple of exceptions, are seen as radical at all. And a sad comment on the Canadian left.
The tax ideas of the SPO for income are identical to the tax rates that existed under Eisenhower in the USA in the 50's. POSO existed until the mid-1990's. Arts & music programmes for kids in elementary school as well. Canada had a public pharmaceutical company. Mulroney sold it. Toronto in 1965 had one of the best subway systems in the world. It was HUGE for the city that was. We spent more in real terms on kids programmes, many of which were free, and we had a society where income inequality and poverty were in decline, where people often had a single job for life, and where a nascent social contract was evolving. Most of the SPO ideas are not new at all and THEY EXISTED and do elsewhere. It is not a fantasy, it is a reality that we have been cheated of.
The right have won many victories over the last 25 years. Among them is an Orwellian re-writting of the past. The 50's-60's-70's were a time of great social upheaval where the rights of "minorities", women and gays had to fought for. I do not wish to whitewash the period. But, many of the ideas that the SPO advocates EXISTED during this era and worked. Neo-conservatism was created to destroy this consensus. The economic policies of the Bill Davis Tories are well to the left of what the ONDP now advocates.
Further, ideas like ECE for two-year olds exist in France, our vacation and statuatory holiday ideas, if made law, would still rank Ontario BEHIND any country in Western Europe (other than the UK) where 4 week vacations are the norm, paternal leave is hardly a new idea...etc
The most important victory of the right has been its ability to lie not only about our past, about the options that exist elsewhere and about what we can do collectively...it has been to make even the Left think that their narrative is essentially true. It is not.
Their platform is okay with me, I just don't think they have a chance in Ontario.
I agree with you. In the immediate future, the prospects for any kind of electoral victory are slim to none. However, the movement that has started is predicated on a long term strategy. Part of that strategy, is not simply winning elections for their own sake, but shifting public opinion to the left, such that, regardless of who is elected, policies that we support will be enacted.
That someone responded with the comment "they don't have a chance" is a reflection on the totality of the victory of the right in Canada. It's a victory that didn't simply happen by accident. Political trends aren't weather systems that happen out of nowhere andthat we have no control over. There was a very specific, concentrated effort by people on the hard right in Canada, influenced by similar victories in the US, to introduce ideas that, when they were first brought up, were as alien as what is being discussed above.
When Milton Friedman began talking about selling off government services such as the post office in the early 1960s, the word privatization didn't even exist in popular lexicon. He was, of course, regarded as insane. That is the kind of ideological battle that needs to be fought and, right now, I don't see anyone fighting to reintroduce left-wing ideas, at least not from the NDP.
Fighting that kind of battle is the only way that left-wing, socialist, or social democratic (insert your label here) will get reintroduced into the public discourse. Such struggles have to be taken to with a long term view, and cannot be undertaken by people who simply want to win elections for their own sake, or who want the instant gratification that comes with a rock through a window.
Well said. Boom Boom et al. would benefit from checking out David Thompson's rabble feature from a few days ago:
A progressive dialogue: Beating the right at their own game
A big idea is an idea that changes things. It is not an idea that fits in with things as they are.
The Overton Window describes the space on the spectrum of mainstream debate where ideas fit in. The window can be moved to the left or the right. Over the last 30 years, conservatives have successfully moved that window to the right, following Joseph Overton's advice. It's pretty straightforward; here is how it works. Policy ideas that were unthinkable are expressed publicly, making them thinkable and thus merely radical. After sufficient repetition they became commonplace, then acceptable, then popular in the mainstream debate, and then policy. You can see this progression in ideas that conservatives have pushed, ranging from major public spending cuts to aggressive militarization of Canadian foreign policy. Thirty years ago, these things were unthinkable. Now they are policy.
To move the Overton window, ideas need to push the boundaries. If an idea is feasible today, or if politicians are already onside with it, then it's not pushing. An example is the idea of nationalizing the oil and gas industry. Even though many Canadians like the idea, and the vast majority of the oil industry worldwide is nationally owned, the federal NDP recently rejected the idea, out of hand. This is to be expected, and it illustrates the separation between policy and politics -- two very different spheres. Politicians live inside the Overton window; they don't move it. It is the role of progressive policy analysts and activists to move the window.
To pick another example, advocating for a Tobin tax on bank transactions is not really pushing the window. Advocating for the nationalization of banks might be.
Fighting that kind of battle is the only way that left-wing, socialist, or social democratic (insert your label here) will get reintroduced into the public discourse. Such struggles have to be taken to with a long term view, and cannot be undertaken by people who simply want to win elections for their own sake, or who want the instant gratification that comes with a rock through a window.
Quite true. Friedman also talked about how when there was a crisis, how governments etc. responded depended on what ideas were lying around.
In the 1970's, Friedman and the Chicago Boys' ideas were kicking around and fascist Chile became their laboratory.
This past year saw the rise of the Arab Spring and the global "Occupy" movement. In my view, It represents the beginnings of a break from the Friedmanite policies of the last 30+ years that have brought about so much human misery and the environmental disaster.
So I think that it's quite alright for a small group of folks to form a new political party on the left, even if it accomplishes nothing other than to open up a debate on the issues that leftists should be talking about. It's much more interesting to me than a graphic of an orange high heel.
Let's out-socialist the Socialist Party of Ontario!
Fighting that kind of battle is the only way that left-wing, socialist, or social democratic (insert your label here) will get reintroduced into the public discourse. Such struggles have to be taken to with a long term view, and cannot be undertaken by people who simply want to win elections for their own sake, or who want the instant gratification that comes with a rock through a window.
Quite true. Friedman also talked about how when there was a crisis, how governments etc. responded depended on what ideas were lying around.
In the 1970's, Friedman and the Chicago Boys' ideas were kicking around and fascist Chile became their laboratory.
This past year saw the rise of the Arab Spring and the global "Occupy" movement. In my view, It represents the beginnings of a break from the Friedmanite policies of the last 30+ years that have brought about so much human misery and the environmental disaster.
So I think that it's quite alright for a small group of folks to form a new political party on the left, even if it accomplishes nothing other than to open up a debate on the issues that leftists should be talking about. It's much more interesting to me than a graphic of an orange high heel.
Just because these political movements represent a break from Neoliberalism does not mean they are going to the left. Upcoming events in Egypt may, unfortunately, serve to educate us in this regard.
Beyon that I would say that Neoliberalism never really got implemented. The notion of some kind of free-market utopia, unrestrained by evil government is about as real as Marx's classes society. Every time that some segment of the US market went up in smoke, whether S&Ls, Asian currency markets, dot coms, the crashes of 1987 and 2008, the federal reserve had to step in and make sure the money supply didn't dry up. Apparently, the key to the efficient market hypothesis: have lots of government money around in case the market crashes.
I also don't agree with the whole "Disaster Capitalism" theory. I'm only superficially familiar with Friedman's work but, from what I know of it, the disaster model that Klein wrote about only appears fleetingly in his work. Trying to demolish his philosophy based on that one line, is like picking on Marx for the phrase "Dictatorship of the Proletariat". I'm not defending Friedman, obviously, but am simply suggesting that people be criticized for things they actually said and believed.
No kidding, as the US left activist and writer Bill Fletcher Jr. put it when I saw him speak in Toronto: (in Egypt) "the Left got its ass kicked." It's a good lesson for those on the Left who take this purist line that "power corrupts and is too icky."
Doug it's funny you try to present yourself as the voice of "realism" in terms of the very important question: "How are you going to pay for it?" Too often the Left is guilty of pretending these things can somehow be provided for free or make generic comments of "some really rich people we don't know can pay for all of it." That is dishonest.
Yes we should not pretend that any future socialist provincial government in Ontario is going to nationalise everything in sight and pay for Swedish-style social programs by raising a few consumption taxes or printing money with colour laser photo copiers in Toronto. Someone will catch on at some point. And barter and trade with the rest of the COMECON nations doesn't look promising. It looks like communist China is one of the few bright spots for natural resource exports, our legacy economy with which we would be saddled with for years into any kind of transition regardless.
Sweden has strong central government after decades of social democrats in power. Canada, OTOH, has weak central government after decades of right wing parties in power. Sweden is not a loosely affiliated group of right wing provinces with their hands tied by CUSFTA and NAFTA and race to be bottom built-in to a colonial-extractive old world economy in 2011. Big difference.
Sweden taxes most efficiently because they have few other choices. They basically have zero natural resources since capitalists stripped the country bare of timber about a hundred years ago. Canada is not Sweden. Canada is the 3rd or 4th largest country in the world with unparalleled natural resource wealth and relatively tiny population, which our neoliberals can not provide full employment for anyway nor do they desire to. We could bury Sweden economically and move past them on the global economic competitive growth index if we had real leadership steering the ship in Ottawa. Canada has much more potential than tiny Sweden. Let's not be obssessed with the NDP's politicking over a few consumption taxes which by and large are not designed to pay for socialism. Let's tell the truth about that, shall we?
What would our two "starve the beast" Republican-style Liberal and Tory governments here do with increased tax revenues? None of the NDP critics have answered that yet nor will they soon. We've tried teasing answers from them, but they go all quiet and stop talking all of a sudden when queried. And it's not fair this silent treatment. They have the answers we know, but they continue holding out on us.
Would Lib-Tories spend it on social programs? We're nearly laughing. The deux old line parties need more money to finance tax cuts for rich friends of the party and nothing more. Prove to us that this is not what their increasing consumption taxes is for. Just looking at their records in power, that's exactly what it would be used for in all likelihood. And who supports that? Not I. I could not support Tory or Liberal parties raising consumption taxes, because realistically, I know that it would just be a transfer of wealth from poor and the working class to the those in the one percent who dont need it. That's why I can't support consumption taxes raising under old line party management. They can't be trusted to run a lemonade stand without screwing it up.
It's called politicking in a first past the post manner, which is tantamount to electoral fraud anyway. It's not a real electoral system, and the NDP is only playing their game. And the two old line parties insist on playing it. So what else is new under the sun besides nothing?
Doug it's funny you try to present yourself as the voice of "realism" in terms of the very important question: "How are you going to pay for it?" Too often the Left is guilty of pretending these things can somehow be provided for free or make generic comments of "some really rich people we don't know can pay for all of it." That is dishonest.
Yes we should not pretend that any future socialist provincial government in Ontario is going to nationalise everything in sight and pay for Swedish-style social programs by raising a few consumption taxes or printing money with colour laser photo copiers in Toronto. Someone will catch on at some point. And barter and trade with the rest of the COMECON nations doesn't look promising. It looks like communist China is one of the few bright spots for natural resource exports, our legacy economy with which we would be saddled with for years into any kind of transition regardless.
Sweden has strong central government after decades of social democrats in power. Canada, OTOH, has weak central government after decades of right wing parties in power. Sweden is not a loosely affiliated group of right wing provinces with their hands tied by CUSFTA and NAFTA and race to be bottom built-in to a colonial-extractive old world economy in 2011. Big difference.
Sweden taxes most efficiently because they have few other choices. They basically have zero natural resources since capitalists stripped the country bare of timber about a hundred years ago. Canada is not Sweden. Canada is the 3rd or 4th largest country in the world with unparalleled natural resource wealth and relatively tiny population, which our neoliberals can not provide full employment for anyway nor do they desire to. We could bury Sweden economically and move past them on the global economic competitive growth index if we had real leadership steering the ship in Ottawa. Canada has much more potential than tiny Sweden. Let's not be obssessed with the NDP's politicking over a few consumption taxes which by and large are not designed to pay for socialism. Let's tell the truth about that, shall we?
What would our two "starve the beast" Republican-style Liberal and Tory governments here do with increased tax revenues? None of the NDP critics have answered that yet nor will they soon. We've tried teasing answers from them, but they go all quiet and stop talking all of a sudden when queried. And it's not fair this silent treatment. They have the answers we know, but they continue holding out on us.
Would Lib-Tories spend it on social programs? We're nearly laughing. The deux old line parties need more money to finance tax cuts for rich friends of the party and nothing more. Prove to us that this is not what their increasing consumption taxes is for. Just looking at their records in power, that's exactly what it would be used for in all likelihood. And who supports that? Not I. I could not support Tory or Liberal parties raising consumption taxes, because realistically, I know that it would just be a transfer of wealth from poor and the working class to the those in the one percent who dont need it. That's why I can't support consumption taxes raising under old line party management. They can't be trusted to run a lemonade stand without screwing it up.
It's called politicking in a first past the post manner, which is tantamount to electoral fraud anyway. It's not a real electoral system, and the NDP is only playing their game. And the two old line parties insist on playing it. So what else is new under the sun besides nothing?
You mean "three" old line parties, right?
Ontario - province
Sweden - country
Federally orchestrated top-down, neoliberal race to the bottom and very neoliberal "trade" deals forced through by corporate stooges in Ottawa?
That'd be the Liber-Tories, Conservabrals, and vice versa. The federal NDP spoke out against all the neoliberal baloney years ago. Most of the baloney was integrated with the Canadian economy over the last 30-35 years. There is no way that the NDP could undo inside one four-year term in power what has taken the two same-same parties decades to screw-up and neolibealize and emanating from Ottawa in every direction like shards of broken glass and porcupine quills sticking out of Ottawa like the worst bad hair day. So you'll just have to have some patience after not voting NDP all those years during which the two old line parties were selling you and your's, and what used to be your country down the Mississippi. What's the rush? The ONDP prolly won't be making any Pinocchio McGuilty-style election promises over the four-year short term anytime soon. Apparently the ONDP don't believe it's worth lying to the public in order to snag 18.5% of the eligible vote and cozylition government with that other Bay Street party, the Tories. Those two parties can mess things up just fine all by themselves. Voters in Ontario, and more than 4 million non-voters in Ontario, are learning the hard way.
Andrea Horwath: "It's real simple. You create a job, you get a tax cut." That the leader of an ostensibly left-wing political party could make a statement like this shows that the NDP itself, has completely capitulated to the idea of any opposition to the current economic paradigm. And why should she worry? The Fidels and Stockholms of the world will jump to her defence, proudly denouncing those wide-eyed radicals who believe that the state may, actually, have a role in the economy.
And while we're contemplating that, Fidel, you can also explain to me how the Federal NDPs plan to keep the corporate tax rate in Canada lower than that does anything to oppose Neoliberalism. Or, is the NDP's strategy to lull corporate Canada to sleep, and then surprise them, by suddenly implementing all the resolutions that have been tucked away where no one can find them?
What do you mean by 'corporate Canada'? We have 36 key sectors of the economy that are majority foreign-owned and controlled and mostly by uberrich Americans. No rich country allows a third as much foreign ownership and control of its manufacturing sector as what Canada has. Canada's national energy policy is dictated to us from corporate board rooms in America since the little strangler from Shawinigan finished selling the environment to Exxon-Imperial and the fossil fuel industry based in other countries. Our country was sold out from underneath us starting 30 years ago.
So, when did you first become aware that the country was vanishing before your eyes? Is this the mother of all delayed reactions that's only just kicking-in for you now? If you need promises for miracles, then vote for Pinocchio's party. McGuinty and Bay Street will promise you anything you want to hear. Meanwhile that loud sucking sound is your country being siphoned off to the states and Bahamian and Swiss bank accounts. And good luck with your socialism in one hamstrung province in debt up to its eyeballs like no other time in Ontario's history - because you'll need it.
So then your proposal is that we do nothing?
How long do you think it will be before a phony majority of Ontario voters chooses a socialist party promising socialism in one province? They've voted conservative here for 50 years. And today we are dabbling in a Liberal government with 18.5% of the eligible. I don't believe Ontarians are quite ready for socialism in one province. Not yet anyway. Ontario is only on its knees at this point. We have some way to go to the gutter. But we're making progress in that direction. Perhaps then Ontarians who used to be to the right and are now on the fence or avoiding ballot boxes will be ready to elect federal NDP MPs to government in Ottawa where the federal purse strings are and turn things around nationally.
Provincial governments, otoh, are reduced to tweaking taxes and regulating here and there where it doesn't expose them to a NAFTA sue job and avoiding the outcome of a trade dispute panel's decision somewhere in the U.S. And we are reduced to competing for a few jobs and foreign investment with other larger provinces when it comes to tweaking corporate taxes here and there without chasing jobs to other parts of the country and-or out of the country. We would still be better off with a left wing government in Toronto, though, no doubt. Jesus Christ couldn't fix in four years what has taken them decades to break, though. Let's face it, we need as much time as the neoliberal ideologues have enjoyed while ruling the roost. And we must wait in line for our turn. It will come. Good things will be done then. Ontarians won't be wanting pie in the sky liberal capitalism but something doable and feasible. We will do the little things well and work toward the way it should be, and the left will be wildly popular because of it.
Meanwhile the plan of Andrea Horwath's 11 percenters was pathetically inadequate.
Their platform is okay with me, I just don't think they have a chance in Ontario.
When Milton Friedman began talking about selling off government services such as the post office in the early 1960s, the word privatization didn't even exist in popular lexicon. He was, of course, regarded as insane. That is the kind of ideological battle that needs to be fought
It's often a matter of what else is going on at the time and how people are perceiving institutions. Have a look at this National Film Board movie about bureaucracy in 1979 and neoliberalism starts to look like a pretty good idea. You can see why it grabbed hold of the public imagination beyond the people it originated with.
Meanwhile the plan of Andrea Horwath's 11 percenters was pathetically inadequate.
You can't call them lying-liars who lie whenever their lips move, though.
And at some point the voters will come around to the truth about what is realistic and what is not. These Liberals aren't crooking and robbing and crippling the province with unprecedented debt just for the sake of making themselves look bad. There is longer term rhyme to their reasoning as well. I'm afraid it's a bit of the old scorched earth tactics. At some point soon it won't matter which party is elected - because Ontario will be a carbon copy of the three dozen or so bankrupt US states after too many years of neoliberalism.
ETA: I've known conservatives types who vote conservative or have conservative tendencies. Most are basically good people. They work hard, and they tend to try to emulate that pulled themselves up by their bootstraps mythos. They really do believe that everyone can if they try hard enough. Yes, they are simple, good people at heart. Not complex at all. Some have actually been dear friends of mine as odd as that sounds. And I can tell you from personal experience that you can not make false promises to them and then break them. They will never let you forget it. No matter how small your word seems to be, at times it's all there is that connects you. You'd better damn well not break your word if going after the narrow base of voters who vote in old conservative Ontario. Not if you want more than one term in a row in government. That's my bit in this thread.
So Fidel, if the political climate of Ontario is irreversibly Conservative, what is the point of there being any political parties other than the Liberals or Conservatives in the first place?
If Ontario will not be ready for anything other than Neoliberalism, than why does the NDP exist?
If you look closely, you'll notice I didn't say any of that. Most people who do vote Tory or Liberal, or even conservative-Liberal at provincial-federal levels(and vice versa) will look at you funnily if you mention neoliberalism. They will have no idea of what you're talkin aboot.
Federally orchestrated top-down, neoliberal race to the bottom and very neoliberal "trade" deals forced through by corporate stooges in Ottawa?
..forced on the population yes. what is not talked about is the discusions that go on betwen the fed and individual provinces. europe is demanding that the provinces be on board regarding CETA. and i remeber the secrect negotiations that took place re the MAI and when it was exposed by CoC the federal NDP spoke out against it. the cons produced conference call documents with BC, then NDP under clark. there were 12 calls i believe. in any case the provinces are very much a part of the process that governs federally.
eta: it's direct democracy that is needed, not better resentative democracy. socialist governments are just as vulnerable to attacks by corporations and US dominace.
Does Nebraska dictate the agenda in Washington, too?
The sewage from Ottawa flows downhill as a rule.
The sewer runs downhill as a rule.
..i would agree as a rule. depending on the context. can you expand?
Does Nebraska dictate the agenda in Washington, too?
The sewage from Ottawa flows downhill as a rule.
..we've cross posted. no of course they don't. nor is nebraska a just a pawn. when i spoke to my mla regarding CETA he told me that an NDP government would not support it. the recent moves by dix regarding the relationship with the business community is sending messages that is contrary to my mla position.
The sewer runs downhill as a rule.
..i would agree as a rule. depending on the context. can you expand?
The feds have basically shirked their duties on everything from refusing to collect federal tax revenues that should put us in-line with the rest of the G8 countries to signing dumb & dumber federal level free trade deals in 1989 and 1994 that have harmed our economy and thrown provinces to free market wolves, to defunding a range of social programs spending and especially since 1991-95, and downloading and generally being derelict of their federal responsibilities to the provinces and municipalities in general.
They are running Canada like a banana republic with whopping national and provincial debts and deficits and being the main source of a $100 billion dollar infrastructure deficit across the country. If they'd been CEOs of corporations, Mulroney through Harper would all have been fired off the job long before Canadian voters ever had the chance to ditch them in elections.
The provinces combined are spending a lot more money as a percentage of GDP than Ottawa. In real G8 and and G20 countries, the reverse is true - feds in those countries take the lead and tend not to rubberstamp US takeovers of their valuables, like our corrupt stooges in Ottawa have done over the last 25 to 30 years standing idly by while Canada is ransacked by supranational corporations, corporate crooks and rich friends of the party. What they've done to Canada would be like the head of a household telling all family members that they must quit their jobs and live off high interest credit cards with rich friends of the party the main beneficiaries of this bad central plan. It's a dysfunctional family from the top down, epaulo. When the bad parent down the street refuses to put food on the table or send his kids to school, it's not the renter upstairs or the bad parents but the kids they remove from the situation. And our two oldest political parties have been rotten parents federally for a long time. And we as voters owe a duty to all Canadians not to ignore the abuse.
Just because our corrupt stooges in Ottawa are pretending to be invisible and politically impotent doesn't make it so. The corporate raiders and marauding international capital would like you to believe that Canada is a collection of loosely affiliated territories and resource rich colonies from BC to Newfoundland and wide-open for corporate looters to take advantage of. Their political impotence in Ottawa is not a real medical condition, though. IOWs, it's not real laissez-faire. It's all in their heads. They can't delibrately decide to do nothing and have us believe some mysterious invisible force is at work and tied their hands. It takes a great deal of central planning for fat-cats in Ottawa to decide that they will play stoney statues by feigning paralysis. It might appear that the Harpers are completely numb from their arseholes all the way to the void between their ears. The Harpers aren't sick, is what I'm trying to say, epaulo. They are just really bad actors. So don't be sending them get well cards and flowers or anything. Their ongoing charade for lack of performance in general is just a big con job.
So if sewage runs downhil, how was the CCF in Saskatchewan able to get elected, or effect any of the changes that they did?
I have to say that seeing it laid down like that is a refreshing change from those baseless and ephemeral whisperings of socialism we're usually treated with on the national scene.
So if sewage runs downhil, how was the CCF in Saskatchewan able to get elected, or effect any of the changes that they did?
Yes, they were elected. And it was different world then before NAFTA. It was in the middle of a time when Ottawa was creating about a quarter of the money supply, and the CCF were able to nationalise/provincialize utilities without worry of crossing up with federal trade regulations binding them to neoliberal ideology. And over the course of five terms in government, the CCF accomplished very much by what I've read. Saskatchewan still has a significant public sector, and although it's not Tommy's vision for it, Canadians still have medicare. Five terms. It was a different country then.
So if sewage runs downhil, how was the CCF in Saskatchewan able to get elected, or effect any of the changes that they did?
Yes, they were elected. And it was different world then before NAFTA. It was in the middle of a time when Ottawa was creating about a quarter of the money supply, and the CCF were able to nationalise/provincialize utilities without worry of crossing up with federal trade regulations binding them to neoliberal ideology. And over the course of five terms in government, the CCF accomplished very much by what I've read. Saskatchewan still has a significant public sector, and although it's not Tommy's vision for it, Canadians still have medicare. Five terms. It was a different country then.
If changes at the provincial level can't be put into effect due to the state of federal politics, then what is the point of the Ontario NDP existing, since they won't be able to do anything?
The problem, Fidel, is that you are so partisanly pro-NDP, that you are unable to admit that there are not fundamental differences between them and the other political parties. In order to maintain this fantasy, you contruct elaborate excuses to explain away the fact that, even their rhetoric, is not consistent with anything remotely Socially Democratic. The ONDP can't do anything because of the federal government. The Federal NDP can't do anything because of international agreements. Your entire analysis is nothing but a grab bag of excuses to justify supporting the NDP, against all fact and logic. If that's what you want to devote your life to, well, it's a free country, no one's stopping you. There's more to political activism than sitting by passively watching the NDP abandon every principle it once stood for. There was a left before the NDP, there will be a left after the NDP. And if you are in Ontario or Quebec, and want to help create it, there is a place for you.
So what is the plan for socialism in one province other than bashing the NDP? Let's see the goods. Quit stalling.
The real question we're wrestling with, here, is how to make the impossible possible. Which, of course, is the question the Left has wrestled with since 1789.
Perhaps we need a thread on that.
So what is the plan for socialism in one province other than bashing the NDP? Let's see the goods. Quit stalling.
A new political party has already been formed and has official status. If the reason that you won't support it is because it is not popular, then that simply shows that you aren't serious about your political convictions.
So what is the plan for socialism in one province other than bashing the NDP? Let's see the goods. Quit stalling.
A new political party has already been formed and has official status. If the reason that you won't support it is because it is not popular, then that simply shows that you aren't serious about your political convictions.
No, I just want to see the plan is all. This isn't 1959 Cuba or even 1940s Saskatchewan. It's 2011, and the two old line parties have worked diligently to change the political and economic landscape of the country over the last 35 years. Are you aware of what took place in Canada in general between the 1970s and 2000s?
Did the two dirty old line parties make things easier for socialists to create socialism in one province by 2011? Can we still do things exactly the way Tommy Douglas did in the 1950s and 60s?
I am all for socialism in general. The point is that if you promise things and later can not deliver the goods, the propaganda machine will make an example of it and exploit it for decades into the future.
The plan is to run candidates in elections, do outreach in communities and promote left-wing ideas, in much the same way that the right-wing organized in the 1960s and 1970s. That is our plan: to attempt to slowly shift the political discourse to the left through slow, grass roots organizing.
If you think the NDPs plan is better you are welcome to suppor them. However, I fail to see what I described above is less effective than arguing to keeping corporate tax rates below the levels in the US.
The plan is to run candidates in elections, do outreach in communities and promote left-wing ideas, in much the same way that the right-wing organized in the 1960s and 1970s. That is our plan: to attempt to slowly shift the political discourse to the left through slow, grass roots organizing.
If you think the NDPs plan is better you are welcome to suppor them. However, I fail to see what I described above is less effective than arguing to keeping corporate tax rates below the levels in the US.
Well I like the plan and wish you the best of luck. I am all for a competent socialist alternative. Socialists deserve democratic voices in Parliament and prov. legislatures, and that is why I support PR and the NDP. We really do need a united front on the left in order to deal with the right wing-o-rama effectively. We need a modern electoral system in order to take our place in the 21st century.
And not just low corporate taxes. That is not the sum total of the NDP's plan federally if you look at it. Corporate taxes also happen to be low in the Nordic countries where spending on socialism is considerably higher as a percentage of their GDPs than here. We can do social democracy with efficient taxation, too. And we don't even have to do it exactly like Sweden, Norway or Denmark to achieve similar results. Canada has much more elbow room for raising overall federal tax revenues than focussing just on corporate taxes. We can raise tax revs from all kinds of sources you may have not considered. Scandinavians have provided the world with proof positive than it can be done. There is a valid alternative to neoliberal ideology and the race to the bottom.
Gar Alperovitz, professor of political economy at the University of Maryland, foresees an “America beyond capitalism.” In a recent interview, he noted that “130 million Americans are members of some kind of cooperative, and 13 million Americans work in an employee-owned company. He says the United States may be heading toward something very different from both corporate-dominated capitalism and from traditional socialism.” http://citizenactionmonitor.wordpress.com/2011/12/15/i-think-an-america-beyond-capitalism-is-a-real-possibility-gar-alperovitz/
For more information, Alperovitz is a frequent contributor to the New Economic Institute -- http://neweconomicsinstitute.org/
Workers who own the means of production? I like it.
I think that neoliberals in the states are working to transform America into another France. With the de-industrialization happening in North America over the last 30 years, more and more young people in America are coveting public service and employment with governments in general. Uncle Sam is offering more job security than the private sector abandoning American workers for sure. This sell to Americans and invest in China isn't working for them, and the next governments will have to decide whether the expensive corporate welfare programs are worth it. It surely doesn't look that way now. The feds have to stop listening to Wall Street and shut down their revolving door access to Washington.
Financial parasites have convinced Obama's right wing democrats that they are the job creators and must be saved. And i's not true, becauseWall St has been orchestrating the offshoring of US jobs for many years. They are the job killers. There will be no real recovery in the U.S.(or Canada if we continue to tie ourselves to that mess) until they clean up the corruption in Washington and the justice department. Untill then they can only feed off the corpse of American capitalism.
The SPO may have a serious role in electoral politics, or not; that's not for me to say. One thing it may have is an educational role.
Our Commitment to Proportional Voting.
The present "first-past-the-post" system of electing parliaments in Ontario results in governments that do not actually reflect the will of the voters.
However a list based system of voting would not reflect our traditions of electing individuals to represent us in parliament directly through the use of electoral districts.
Therefore a Socialist government in Ontario will introduce legislation to replace the present "first-past-the-post" system of voting in provincial elections with a system such as the Single Transferable Vote (STV) system existing in Australia providing both proportional representation and ensuring that votes are explicitly cast for individual candidates rather than party lists.
I gather you mean the STV system used in Ireland. It is also used in Australian Senate elections. When you say "the STV system existing in Australia" it sounds as though you are confusing STV with the single-member-district preferential ballot, called in the UK the Alternative Vote and in the USA the Instant Runoff Vote. Australia uses this for lower house elections, except in Tasmania and the Australian Capital Territory which do use STV. The Alternative Vote is a non-proportional system, which might be a good way to elect a Mayor, but does nothing for the majority of voters who wish to be represented by their first choice but, in a multi-party society, find themselves represented by their second, third or last choice.
If you want a system providing both proportional representation and ensuring that votes are explicitly cast for individual candidates rather than party lists, such as Irish STV, you might want to be aware of the Bavarian model of the Mixed Member proportional system. In that model the voter has two votes as voters throughout Germany do, but the second or regional vote is cast for a party's regional candidate, not for a list. The advantage of this is to get the best of both worlds: a local representative plus proportionality across a region of perhaps 20 MPs, so that it takes only 5% for a party to elect an MP.
With Irish STV every MP runs in a region, so the region has to be smaller or the number of candidates to be ranked will be unmanageable, but then the size of the district runs into a problem. A five-seater is a bit limited in the range of options likely to be elected, yet is already too large for many regions of Ontario such as the Northwest, and smaller urban centres like Kingston or Peterborough. The six-seater STV model used in Northern Ireland is quite good in terms of giving voters a wide choice and lots of local representation, but that's because they have six MLAs for every hundred thousand people; this would give Ontario over 700 MPPs.
I see a bunch of sour grapes, but where's the corruption? Angry gay men with insecure masculinity and "poverty pimps"? Really?
Yeah, pretty gross. Its the same code as the Scum or Faux News talking about the environmental 'industry,' or using phrases like 'champagne socialists.'
Who is this Percy guy anyway?
Sounds like he is someone who must have once worked for or with the Ontario NDP. Who was fired for some combination of incompetence and insubordination and is now on some libelous vendetta against the party. I guess it shows how much the NDP has grown that it now has the odd poisoned pen disgruntled outsiders. Time used to be that only the Liberals had that problem. Yawn.
It would be quite ironic if this "Wright Percy"/"flipper dipper" character was some far left "socialist" (for want of a better word) dissident - given that the blog is riddled with blatantly racist, homophobic and misogynistic rantings and ravings and seems to be mostly ad hominem personal attacks on people with almost zero substance.
Much as I'm not all that thrilled with the direction of the ONDP these days, this "flipper dipper" blog contains a personal attack against a union staffer that I've known (and respected) for many years. Given that, I don't put a whole lot of stock in it.
In any case, Michael Laxer started this thread by posting the SPO programme. What's wrong with it? What's right with it? That would be a more useful discussion.
For example, the SPO advocates provincializing the EI system. I'm opposed to that. Much as the Liberals and Reformatories have taken an axe to the system and stolen billions of workers dollars, it's still better to have a more or less "national" system with national standards. My understanding is that in the U.S., unemployment benefits are run by the state governments...and you have a patchwork system of benefits...with some state unemployment benefit programmes going broke from time to time.
Sure, a province like Ontario could probably finance a provincially run EI system, but for example...could a province like New Brunswick do this?
It would be quite ironic if this "Wright Percy"/"flipper dipper" character was some far left "socialist" (for want of a better word) dissident - given that the blog is riddled with blatantly racist, homophobic and misogynistic rantings and ravings and seems to be mostly ad hominem personal attacks on people with almost zero substance.
Much more likely, it's a far-right "Tory" sympathizer...someone who probably blames the last minute four-to-six point swing from the ONDP to the Liberals(if the polls showing ONDP support at 30% shortly before election day were at all accurate)for the PC's being denied the majority they were, in his eyes, entitled to.
I don't recall the ONDP ever hitting 30% in any poll. I think one poll had them at 28 and was an obvious outlier. Most poll mid-campaign had them in the 24-26 range and they wound up with 23%, a bit of erosion, but not enough to really materially affect the outcome. The evidence suggests that the ONDP had some last minute losses in Toronto, but given that the Tories lost every single Toronto seat by massive margins, it's unlikely that a 3% NDP to Librral swing would have cost the Tories a single seat.... At most it made the NDP just miss winning York South-Weston and have closer than expected wins in Davenport and TS and that was it.
I think that socialism in one Canadian province in one giant step is probably not doable by our currently fraudulent electoral system. If we read a former Liberal Party member's recent reports on various Canadian economic performances, we see that Canada is below the OECD 34 country average on a number of important measures - per capita spending on education is mediocre - inequality has worsened, the population is aging at above the average OECD rate, and Canada is 21st worst of 34 when it comes to child poverty. And we rate badly when it comes to not delivering on environmental obligations to the rest of the world. Rae's NDP had us on that track, but then a phony majority of voters on Ontario derailed it all by 1995.
Looking at today's FPTP numbers, Ontario still has a tendency to vote to the right of the ONDP. The false majority doing the choosing, or the die-hard voters still voting, may be turned off of the Tories after nearly 50 year's worth of them, but the false majority is now dabbling in Liberal governments to the tune of 18.5% or so of eligible voter support. It's difficult to motivate people to vote after so many decades in a row of Bay Street Government in \Toronto disabusing people of their will to vote. The two old line parties have worked diligently to undermine public trust in democracy across the country.
IOWs, there is much room for improvement without even going so far as to promise socialism in the ideologically driven conservative province within the overall conservative nanny state of Canada. We could improve a lot just in comparison to other rich capitalist countries doing better than Canada in areas of the economy where it counts for people and the future. If we can't handle baby steps under the currently fraudulent electoral system, then what chance does socialism have?
Socialism requires that there is a democracy in place and that the people are actually able to choose it. We don't have that situation. At least not yet, anyway. We must take Marx' suggestion to heart and win the battle for democracy. We won't do it by insisting that the cart comes before the horse. First things first.
If "socialism in one province" isn't "doable", then, Fidel, shouldn't the ONDP just merge with the Ontario Liberals and let it go with that? And if that also applies to the idea of creating a socialist Canada, what, then, would be the point of bothering to try to elect a federal NDP government? It's not as if it would be worth all that effort to just end up having the party of working people and the poor get the chance to impose austerity budgets(and, federally, stay in NATO and cheerfully send MORE Canadian troops off to die in Afghanistan just to look "credible" on defense).
It's not as if there's much reason for the ONDP to even exist if it's going to accept market economics and All-Power-To-Bay Street financial constraints-working within those limits pretty much makes it impossible for the ONDP to do anything that's distinguishable from McGuinty's crowd at all. Saying that the goal of socialism is unattainable is pretty much the same as saying there can't be any meaningful gains for tne non-rich under any NDP government anywhere in the country OR in Ottawa.
You haven't laid out any sort of analysis or strategy that would give the ONDP or the federal NDP the means to break Ontario or Canada as a whole out of the End of History handcuffs.
If "socialism in one province" isn't "doable", then, Fidel, shouldn't the ONDP just merge with the Ontario Liberals and let it go with that?
I think if we compare actual social and economic results in Tory-Liberal Ontario, Tory Alberta, or Liberal B.C. with those of Sweden or socialist Norway after decades of social democratic governments, then it becomes obvious at some point in what is a long list of social and economic dissimilarities.
Refer to my previous answer.
I can't think of one good reason to maintain either the Liberal Party of Pinocchio in power or the very neoliberal Tories. I think we can only progress in a generally downward spiralling fashion with either of those two parties at the helm in Toronto and acquiescing to whatever mess is passed on to them from Ottawa. Debts will continue to soar when they aren't shovelling us out from our bottomless debt holes at the expense of jobs and growth, and unemployment and child poverty will remain "stubborn" with the two Bay Street parties running things. The difference is the money trail leading to and from their campaign war chests. Follow the money in Canadian politics, Ken. And Harper and the Liberals in Ontario are working to make that trail even more obscure and less transparent and not even so obvious to the public. We have oligarchy like you do, Ken, except they manage it with a lot less money than floats around Washington and the states.
The ONDP has actually proposed some fairly progressive changes in Ontario over the last 20-25 years or so. And a phony majority of voters in Ontario turned their backs on them throughout most of it. Care to comment, Ken?
Just because electing a new provincial government won't change the entire global economic system (and it really won't, I don't care if the first thing a new government does is have the Queen's Park statue of Queen Victoria replaced with Lenin) doesn't mean we can't do better than the Liberals and make further change more possible later. Does government provide the same sort of help to develop cooperative enterprise that it does for for-profit business? No, and it wouldn't be too expensive to make a start at changing that. Can we kick off the transition fron welfare to a guaranteed minimum income? On a pilot-project basis, absolutely. Can a new provincial government make labour union organizing easier and more successful? To some extent, yes. Can a new government work to create consensus around new programs so that they survive a future change of government? Yes, and it ought to.
I think the SPO should focus on building principled opposition in the legislature. What do some Cons say about the "socialist" bogeyman? That "socialists" don't get elected much but "socialist" ideas still get implemented?
The creation of two new accounts to comment in this thread not withstanding.
Meh, I'm just a lowly supporter but I remember trouble from these folk earlier last year or two that got shut down.
Much ado about gossip. Ain't twitter great?
Yeah, What the fuck about "poverty pimps" doesn;t deserve to be banned?
Seriously, rabble?
Flag those posts. I will.
As for the Wright Percy blog, the SPO has no connection to it and is not concerned with internal NDP gossip. Looking over it, the fact that the Cornerstone stuff was info the Libs were shopping around before and during the election using various different outlets suggests to me that "Wright Percy" is either Warren Kinsella's Liberal War Room creating a fake "disgruntled NDPer" to spread gossip or make their claims seem more credible or an ex-NDPer who has joined the Liberals or maybe both. The fact that the Toronto Sun, unsuccessfully, tried to make Cornerstone an issue during the campaign and that Kinsella happens to be linked to the Sun (he's a columnist and commentator) screams Liberal War Room to me. The "politics" of the blog, if that word can even be used, is petty and personal and largely devoid of ideology and policy. Frankly, if the SPO's purpose was to "destroy" the NDP and we were the source of the Wright Percy info we would have had a press conference and tried to get some credit and media attention in the process. We're not "anti-NDP" though, we're pro-democratic socialist and our purpose is to promote democratic socialist ideas and alternatives and during the election we focussed on promoting our ideas rather than denigrating other parties.
Frankly, I don't think "destroying" the NDP would serve any tactical purpose for socialists. It would actually be better for us for the NDP to displace the Liberals and form government either on their own or with the Grits since, in the process, the NDP would move more and more rightward and create more space on the left for a broad socialist formation. It would be even better if the NDP moved to the left and re-adopted socialist ideas but I don't see that happening and the fact is various socialists have tried for decades to move the NDP to the left without any success in blunting the party's ever rightward march but as long as the NDP is a third party some on the left will have illusions in it and my view is those illusions will be dispelled once the NDP forms government (alone or in coalition) federally.
I wouldn't put my money down on that. Power is what it seems to be about, and every excuse and illusion will continue to be drafted in the service of acquiring and maintaining power.
Often in such bitter debates both sides make some valid points and observations but end up shooting themselves in the foot with hyperbole and insinuations. The ONDP isn't run very well and this is not an uncommon view among its own activists. The labour situation at provincial office is real. There are individuals within it who have done a lot of damage. That being said, it's not as bad as WrightPercy's blog would claim. I think that WP's blog is the work of more than one person. I also think I know who one of them is but I've only got circumstantial evidence of it. They are however involved in the SPO. While the SPO was created on principle, there was a lot of personal animosity between its founders and the ONDP. So as ill advised as I think creating a whole new socialist party is right now, it doesn't even have the faintest chance because its leadership also has personal feuds and anger at the ONDP.
Michael Laxer is the democratic socialist equivalent of a Stalinist ideologue. Look at his latest post here: http://mlaxer.blogspot.com/2011/12/towards-socialism-on-dangers-of-occupy.html
Attacking the Occupy movement for its weaknesses? Sure it has some weaknesses but it's only months into its existence and it's still the best thing to happen to the left in years. It reminds me of how the Old Left attacked the New Left in the 1960's. Laxer is now the equivalent of the French Communist Party denouncing the workers and students in May 1968. Every little deviation from the sacred democratic socialist programme in Laxer's mind is unacceptalbe and lead to weakness and ideological deviation in the movement. It's like Trotsky's quote about scratch turning to gangrene in the ideological orientation of the 4th International which has been used as an excuse by Trot leaders to expell members that think for themselves.
The NDP needs to be held to account, but this is better accomplished by activism and organizing through mass movements instead of creating a new party. Two things will either happen: the NDP will be pulled left because that's how the public feels or it will be exposed as having forsaken its principles for power. The existence of the SPO is not going to make this happen.
Laxer also attacks entryism. First he makes blanket attacks on entryism. While Trotsky saw it as a short term tactic to enter the SFIO to pull it's left wing members away from it, subsequent Trotskyist organizations actually think it is a long term project to actually turn social-democratic parties into radical socialist ones. Socialist Action and Fightback will be writing "Vote NDP" on the barricades. I'm not sure what's more foolish thinking that you can make the NDP radical or a bunch of disgruntled activists with personal beef with the ONDP bureaucracy think they can rebuild the socialist movement in Ontario by making their own little party.
The in the one area I will give it credit for allows platforms/factions like the European left of social democracy parties do. This is good thing and has helped parties like Die Linke in Germany, United Left Alliance in Ireland and the NPA in France gain activists without succumbing to stupid sectarian splits. However it is legitimizing entryism in a sense. Each platform wants to win the party to its platform. It's just a formalized way to do it. Trots will go into these parties where they exist but where they don't they still go to the main social democratic parties. So Laxer's attack on entryism is a little confused. Laxer also has done a lot of red baiting in the past, yet there is at least one Trotskyist organization that has entered the SPO. Is Laxer unaware of what's even going on in his own party?
If there is a radical alternative to develop in Canada some of it will be drawn from the NDP of course, but there will be other activists involved coming from Occupy or the Workers' Assembly etc. It's just nonsense given the NDP's control over most of the labour movement that you can create your own party and then act as if it is the vanguard of democratic socialism. Given the shifts in Left politics, the SPO isn't going to gain much traction with things like Occupy and other radical democratic movements that have popped up. It's still quite old fashioned and narrow minded even if I agree with 95% of their specific policies. It's a question of organization and strategy.
Right or wrong I still vote NDP for 2 reasons: either it will do the right thing (least likely) or it will speed up its demise as the main party of the left in Canada (more likely) but there is much more to be done in Occupy and other activist movements. There's no real point in engaging in electoral work until the NDP is compromised even more. If the MSM can still act spooked at the NDP being elected, it's premature to be building new left wing electoral parties.
Wow has this thread ever gone off the rails! I guess I should not be surprised, if you have no way to attack the ideas, why not post about vague accusations, an unrelated anti-NDP blog or an article I wrote on my personal blog. (Thanks for reposting it, though. I am rather proud of it and would be happy to debate the ideas in it on my blog, where it is posted, as opposed to here, where it has nothing to do with anything...although I am amused to be a Democratic Socialist Stalinist, who is like the French Communist Party but who is a red-baiter unaware he is surrounded by Trotskyists. I am quite the confused little fellow!)
If you have any ideas or comments related to the actual thread, please post them or feel free to email us from our website, www.socialistpartyofontario.ca, or to attend our Executive meeting in Toronto on the 29th of January. Everyone is welcome to participate, member or not. I think you will find that for Stalinists we are very democratic, we honour the votes of our members and our own constitution and we don't reverse outcomes we are unhappy with.
To clear up some errors here, factual or implied, however:
1) The SPO has nothing to do with the Wright Percy blog, full-stop. We do not endorse it in anyway, and we have, as anyone who has attended any of our meetings can attest, absolutely no interest at all in the internal affairs of the ONDP. I personally was unaware until a few days ago that the blog was back up and could not possibly care less anymore. I think it is office gossip that likely does its cause more harm than good.
2) Enough with vague assertions that this or that unnamed person may or may not be "involved". If you have a direct accusation to make, do so under your own name with proof. Otherwise this is just a bunch of drive-by rumour mongering aimed at making the SPO look bad with nothing to back it up.
3) I am not the leader of the SPO, nor is anyone else. I am one of two Spokespersons. We have a collective leadership structure that is very democratic and vibrant, and is under the full control of our growing membership. I have no more power than anyone else, as our constitution, which you find at our website will attest, and I have lost many votes. To attack the SPO by trying to claim it is somehow synonymous with me and my opinions is a pure smoke screen.
4) The SPO Executive and membership is very diverse and is NOT made up of people with a "grudge" against the ONDP. If that was the goal, slithering off to the Liberals would have been the way to go. We are not interested in "destroying" the NDP, we are interested in working to spread anti-capitalist and pro-socialist ideas through our activist actions and members, our door-to-door and other outreach campaigns and our plan to run as close to a full slate of candidates next time as possible. Our goal is to fight to shift our province's political debate. The ONDP, actually, is largely irrelevant to this. Many of our members were never members of the NDP, and only one member of our Executive was ever on the ONDP Executive (and it was not me, I never was). To try to frame our actions this way is also a smoke screen to avoid real debate.
To those whose actual interest got lost in all this white noise, apologies. I will try to respond to your comments when I can find them. Feel free to post more about the actual platform, or to email us or come to any of our meetings. Your perspective is truly wanted and important in building a new movement, even if you are not yet ready to fully endorse it.
When that happens, reformist political parties are caught flat-footed (case in point: the NDP totally shunning the Occupy movement -and thereby gaining precisely nothing from it).
Peggy Nash acknowledges Occupy a lot. So does Charlie Angus. Brian Masse has, and Cheri DiNovo and Denis Savoie among others.
As a die hard New Democrat I have no problems really with the SPO. I think their platform is great, and the electorate wins when there are more political parties, more voices and choices to choose from.
I also welcome their entry into the Ontario electoral world as surely the ONDP could perhaps adopt some of their policies.
That said, I don't think the ONDP is as bad as the SPO makes it out to be. The ONDP, like the federal party, still champions social justice and is completely opposed to privatization and deregulation. The NDP remains a champion of organized labour and the downtrodden. Certainly some of the ONDP's most recent platform could use some improvement, but on the whole I think it was really, really good.
The reaction of some in this thread to the SPO certainly was sneering and not particularly friendly. However, I've also seen some online angst and vitriol directed towards the NDP from some involved with the SPO. But the SPO also has very friendly and pragmatic people involved within it who not only see some of the faults of the NDP, but also see and acknowledge the NDP's strengths and the good the party does, who aren't full blown obnoxious ideological purists and also support the NDP.
"Acknowledging" the Occupy movement is pretty minimal. Using it as a rhetorical device in speeches is mere tokenism.
While individual New Democrats may have participated in some way in the initial occupations which are now over, the party itself never sought to provide leadership to the movement, speak politically for the causes it identified with, or defend the movement against political repression and eviction. The NDP as a party carries on business as usual, completely unchanged and unaffected by the Occupy movement. To the NDP, it might as well never have happened.
It's easy to be magnanimous and sporting as a "die-hard New Democrat" when a new party on the left comes along, if you are convinced it will never become popular. Your attitude will no doubt change radically when the SPO actually threatens to take significant votes from your party.
Yeah well as a former party president and leading federal leadership candidate, Peggy Nash understands the movement very well as she has a strong history as a social and political activist, and speaks to and acknowledges the movement with the direction of her policies. And she comes from the party establishment, even as a former NPIer, so it's not all gloom and doom.
And no it's not being "magnanimous and sporting" it's called honesty and I have no idea what's in store for the SPO's future. Besides under a proportional voting system, any perceived vote splitting would be moot and I think there would consistent cooperation between the NDP and SPO, as there are with centre-left and left parties in the Nordic model. So please don't tell me how I'm going to think or react, and spare me the judgmental and obnoxious tone as it's not necessary.
The reality of that would be to split the left's narrow base of voter support and guaranteeing at least another four more years of phony majority dictatorial rule on the right in Ontario. In effect it would be working with bay street to guarantee that the neoliberal agenda remains insulated from democracy.
In the past U.S. Republican Party financiers have often funded political campaigns of socialist and other left wing parties in sabotaging the Liberal Democrats FPTP election chances. Too many Americans have yet to realize that their Liberal Democrats are owned by Wall St. and 8000 military contractors, whereas Canada's Liberal Party was discovered to be just another conservative party by May 2011. In neither country have political Liberals talked about a united front on the left by modernizing the electoral system so compatible with two-party dictatorial rule.
Ralph Nader once said that Canadians do have a third option. We need to go after the soft Liberal and Tory vote and those of the jaded non-voters but not work to split our own base of support. The largest hurdle is the obsolete electoral system. Socialists need political allies. It was true of 1930s Spain, and it's true in North America today. We must have a united front on the left if we are to stand a chance of winning the battle for democracy.
The reality of that would be to split the left's narrow base of voter support and guaranteeing at least another four more years of phony majority dictatorial rule on the right in Ontario. In effect it would be working with bay street to guarantee that the neoliberal agenda remains insulated from democracy.
Ah, now that's more like an honest reaction from a "die-hard New Democrat". It even recognizes that we're not going to have a "proportional voting system" in the next few decades.
Thanks, Fidel.
Spector with his crystal ball again. Let's try electing a party other than Lib-Tories for a change, and give them as long as it took the CCF to create a province from nothing over five terms in power.
Ah, now that's more like an honest reaction from a "die-hard New Democrat". It even recognizes that we're not going to have a "proportional voting system" in the next few decades.
Thanks, Fidel.
Pathetic.
What is ironic is that what Mr. Laxer is proposing makes him a Progressive Conservative circa 1972. That the current NDP is more right-wing than this is kind of sad. However, John Tory is going to have to grow his hair again if he wants to get in.
Trotskyist? Those are fighting words. I am no such thing. Some of us are interested in history and have at least tried to understand the Stalinist era and western world anti-democratic forces still at work against Russians and Easterners in general.
But you should understand that undoing all of the cold war propaganda would be an insurmountable task. Ontario voters, the ones who actually vote in elections, are still quite politically conservative in their thinking. Associating ourselves with Stalin in conservative Ontario would be a little like running under the Nazi Party banner in Russia after the war. It's just not happening.
Whenever voters in Ontaro want lawlessness, mass executions of political opponents, starvation, and dictatorship, they will surely vote Stalinist. You can always hold your breath. In the meantime, most of us will interpret 'socialism' as social democracy, which was more or less the state of affairs when I was growing up in the 1970s. That way, we still have the Rule of Law, free political discourse, enough to eat, and free and fair elections.
Whenever voters in Ontaro want lawlessness, mass executions of political opponents, starvation, and dictatorship, they will surely vote Stalinist. You can always hold your breath. In the meantime, most of us will interpret 'socialism' as social democracy, which was more or less the state of affairs when I was growing up in the 1970s. That way, we still have the Rule of Law, free political discourse, enough to eat, and free and fair elections.
And that's a good impression of the typical western world voter thoroughly propagandized by rhe cold war era rhetoric. Good one, U.J.
Now imagine that Russia has our same dysfunctional electoral system invented before electricity, and that Uncle Joe is running for election in Russia today. According to Russian opinion polls of recent years regarding famous Russians of history, father Stalin would stand an excellent chance of winning dictatorial power by first past the post.
While individual New Democrats may have participated in some way in the initial occupations which are now over, the party itself never sought to provide leadership to the movement,
To be fair, the last thing I want is for the NDP to "provide leadership" to any movement I'm involved in.
All hail our fearless leader! Wait a sec...was there like a decree or something?
All hail our fearless leader! Wait a sec...was there like a decree or something?
Personal attack - moderators notified.
...because there clearly isn't a consensus.
You know, one of the more endearing qualities of your average Trotskyist is that they rarely concern themselves with people's status.
It was clearly a self-deprecating personal attack on himself, and I don't know that there is a rule against it.
Heh.
Check genstrike's status, M. Spector. The title is self-conferred. Unless you're objecting to Slumberjack's pretensions to the crown?
Oh..he actually did notify. No pretensions here then, as I wouldn't have a snowball's chance. I was actually complimenting genstrike in the first instance for his lucidity.
What's up with the fucking Trotsky-baiting, anyway? The mods apparently are OK with it?
Generally, no. But I thought Slumberjack was just making a light-hearted jibe between friends. Since he's more-or-less an anarchist (forgive the reifying label, sir), I'm not sure he has much of a pegleg to stand on in the red-baiting department. What would you like the mods (situationists) to do?
(was going to do the "Trotsky-baiting can be a real headache" joke, but thought better of it.)
Wise move, Ken - gotta pick your battles.
I think traditional red-baiting in general could nowadays just about come from the left, the center, or from the right in order to merit such a description. But overall in today's circumstances I would have to see M. Spector as a comrade of sorts, despite and as a result of the whole Makhno affair having been recorded in history from a different time and place. And CF...this bud's for you. ;)
http://bombsite.com/issues/105/articles/3177
Generally, no. But I thought Slumberjack was just making a light-hearted jibe between friends. Since he's more-or-less an anarchist (forgive the reifying label, sir), I'm not sure he has much of a pegleg to stand on in the red-baiting department. What would you like the mods (situationists) to do?
I have no idea why anarchists should be given special licence to cast these kinds of aspersions, given their historical antipathy to Marxists of all stripes.
Trotsky-baiting has a long and ugly history in the NDP. As babble becomes more and more indistinguishable from an NDP website, I would have hoped that at least it could draw the line short of that. But it seems babble moderators, who are otherwise never at a loss for finding ways to police vocabulary, suddenly become very tolerant when the red-baiting epithets start.
But it seems babble moderators, who are otherwise never at a loss for finding ways to police vocabulary, suddenly become very tolerant when the red-baiting epithets start.
Do you really consider "red" a bad thing to be?
At the NDP's founding convention, George Grube was chairing a session when a grizzled old BC delegate began his remarks by saying "Comrade Chairman . . ." and then interrupted himself: "May I call you Comrade?" George replied in his typically modest tone of voice "I would be honoured."
I'm a red. Reds was a fine film. I thought the candid interviews with actual American reds between scenes was wonderful.
That is one of the more incredulous 'what would happen if's. For one thing, in 'first past the post', you get an election every few years. Stalin ran a dictatorship for about 30. If you murdered as many of your political opponents (on right AND left) as Stalin did, do you think he would have been 're-elected'? (Although I admit I am responding to a mental masturbatory 'what would happen if' with another one) For another, they don't normally run dead people in elections. (although various political parties have managed to enumerate voter occupants of cemetaries for their rent-a-homeless-person GOTV operations)
Supporting the memory of bloodthirsty monsters like Stalin does not exactly do wonders for the cause of asking people to vote NDP, whether we are 'brainwashed by cold-war propaganda' or not. In terms of fiscal responsibility, the NDP has a much better track record than so-called 'Conservatives'. In this I think you will get more votes in Canada than through glorification of totalitarian terror.
Actually, I believe that title was conferred upon me by another babbler in some thread several months ago. If someone would like to challenge it, I am more than willing to stand for re-election in babble banter.
That is one of the more incredulous 'what would happen if's. For one thing, in 'first past the post', you get an election every few years. Stalin ran a dictatorship for about 30.
And the two old line parties have ruled in Ottawa for more than twice as long and counting as the Soviets ruled Russia. Western world elections in the English speaking countries are games of chance for the amusement of oligarchs even today.
The Russian assessment of Stalin had to necessarily include his performance during WW II, after which Time Magazine declared Stalin the biggest winner of the last century. And apparently Russians still feel the same. At one point during the contest for greatest Russian, TV stations tried to dissuade Russians from voting for Stalin. He still came in third place.
It would be like requesting that 36% or so of Americans declare condemnation of the doctor and the madman of 1970s Washington. Nixon and Kissinger orchestrated the mass murder of millions of people around the world, propped-up the world's biggest mass murderers since Adolf Hitler in Pol Pot and Suharto, and yet they are still popular among a phony majority of Americans pledging allegiance to the Republican Party.
On second thought.
Which 'millions' did Nixon & Kissinger kill? I will grant GWB killing almost a million in Iraq. No question there. So I am not being sarcastic about Nixon/Kissinger.. it is quite possible, but just not well known. It has been said before every US president since Lincoln was a mass-murderer.
We should agree that the most murdering genocidal force in the least few centuries was government, and the people in charge of government. Whether you call it fascist or socialist or conservative or republican, governments have been doing the killing. Before that, the genocidal maniacs were religious, however government came in the form of marauding empires.
Now in Canada we have a police chief who said that the law is 'whatever we say it is' and police arresting people for criminal libel of police. We have a huge entitlement mentality in police, and they need to be cut down to size.
The government which governs best kills the least.
long thread