Once again, there is agitation among some members of the NDP to consider changing the name of the party. At the party's federal convention in Halifax, August 14-16, delegates will consider dropping the word "new" from the party's moniker to have it renamed the Democratic Party.
Brian Masse, the NDP MP for Windsor West, favours the name change on the ground that the current name is dated. The party is no longer new. "Is it another 50 years that we stay ‘new'? Another 100 years?" Masse said to the CBC in an interview.
With all due respect to Masse and others who favour the name change, the proposal has nothing to do with how old an institution can be before it is no longer "new." The Pont Neuf, completed in 1607, is the oldest standing bridge across the Seine in Paris. Oxford's New College was founded in 1379. Don't expect the bridge or the college to drop the "new" from their names anytime soon. The fact is that everyone is proud of these traditional names.
As always when people suggest changing the name of Canada's social democratic party, there is an underlying political motive. After the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation (CCF) won only eight seats in the federal election of 1958, party leaders decided it was time to found a new social democratic party, a party with a new outlook, organizational structure and a new name. In 1961, following a three year debate about how to remake Canadian social democracy, a founding convention was held in Ottawa. A number of names were considered and New Democratic Party was the one that was chosen.
During the three year debate about establishing the new party, a principal goal of many activists was to broaden the party to take in people who were referred to as "liberally minded." The idea was to move the party toward the liberal centre of the Canadian political spectrum. Some delegates favoured calling the party Democratic while others wanted it to be called the Social Democratic Party. New Democratic Party was a compromise. It avoided the name Democratic which brought to mind the party that was in power south of the border under President John F. Kennedy. In the minds of delegates, while Kennedy's party was to the left of the American Republicans, it was not a social democratic party. And the whole point of establishing the CCF in 1933 and the NDP in 1961 had been to create a social democratic or socialist party that would not simply be an ideological soul mate of the Liberals.
The word "New" in the NDP suggested a new conception of society. The fundamental difference between the societal vision of social democrats or socialists on the one hand and liberals on the other is that the former viewed capitalism as an inherently exploitative social system, while the latter believed that capitalism could be reformed and made more equitable through reforms that made things fairer for all in the footrace of life.
Advertising
The difference between the NDP and the Liberals, even when the two parties have seemed close at times, has always been about the attitude of the two parties to capitalism. Liberals, and American Democrats, are capitalist to the core. They believe that capitalism is the best system ever conceived by human beings. It can be improved upon, they think. But they cannot conceive of transcending it to establish a new and more fundamentally equitable social order. Social Democrats, however centrist they may be, cling to the vision of a new society which make take many decades to realize, but that remains an essential aspiration.
While they are not likely to say it, those who want to rename the NDP the Democratic Party want to abandon the social democratic or socialist dimension in the party's outlook. They want to move the party to the centre to have it compete with the Liberals on their own ideological turf.
From J.S. Woodworth, to Tommy Douglas, David Lewis and Jack Layton, Canadian social democrats have held out the hope of creating a new social order in Canada. In the establishment of medicare, something which Barack Obama's Democrats cannot match because they are too committed to the market system, social democrats have transformed what it means to be Canadian.
We need a social democratic party in Canada. Let's not play games with phony debates about name changes that are really calls to abandon what the NDP stands for.
Well spoken. Dumping the New is advocated by those who'll do anything to get elected. They want to dump the Unions, they want to dump socialism, the want to be Liberals. Why don't they then join the Liberal Party? Because the Libs don't want 'em. They got their own. These folks want to capture the voting block but dump the ideals behind it. Anything to get elected. Anything for a buck. Holy smokes.. it's New Labour!
I appreciate James's views on various subjects. But his view on the NDP name change, expressed here, is, in my view, nonsense. I have my issues with the NDP, but I certainly don't want them to move further to the Right. (I expect that they will continue to move to the Right however.) And I certainly think it's about time they changed that ridiculous name. (I don't think you have to even be partisan to have that view.) That doesn't automatically mean I think they should be called The Democratic Party.
The fact that they need to drop the silly 'new' from their name may necessitate contemplating what the new name should be. Difficulty with the latter challenge doesn't mean that dropping the old name is a bad idea.
For me, The problem is with the Party itself. It's not just 'new', in the old name, that's problematic. What new name will be chosen and will it honestly reflect the essence of the Party? Will it even reflect the desire and hopes for the Party's future that social democrats or socialists have for it?
This latest scrum is about the right in the Party attempting to force their Agenda down the throats of the progressives and social movement activists. I agree with James, this is not only about a name change. It is an attempt to move the Party to the Right and dump socialist and social democratic principles.
Those of us who are not in the right of the Party need to speak up and tell them that this is not acceptable to us and that we will not work for a Party who dumps on social movement work or becomes the next best thing to Obama's breakfast in Canadian Politics.
This is an opportunity for the left to re-assert itself and insist that the Party reflect the founding principles of the CCF and is not sucked into Neo-Liberalism and New Labour mentalities.
Changing names worked rather well for the following parties:
Reform > Alliance > Conservatives
Progressive Conservatives (Saskatchewan) > Saskatchewan Party
Social Credit > BC Liberals
It's time to recognize that NDP is a failed brand.
We should take back the Progressive Party, a brand we for some reason gave up in the 1930s. The Progressive Party won more seats in a smaller Parliament than the CCF / NDP has ever won in successively larger Parliaments.
You are right on James. This is just more of the same from the right wing of the party. We have been fighting this battle for years now.
With the current crisis of capitalism and the threat of climate change this is a time to be bold and reassert the dream of a socialist society. If we must have a discussion about a new name, it should be with the purpose of making the word socialism and/or social democracy front and centre. While I would prefer to see socialism in the name, I think that BleedingHeart has a good point about the Progressive Party.
I would also like to state my objection to the rampant use of the term branding and brand in a number of the articles on Rabble dealing with this issue. The NDP is our party name - it is not a brand. Capitalism has managed to commodify almost every human relationship and I think that part of the socialist project is to resist using their language when we are discussing the qualities of citizenship. Please, stop - it is extremely annoying.