There is no point dwelling on the obvious other than to simply reiterate it. The election of a Conservative majority government will usher in wrenching change in Canada and we will have to witness the worst that Stephen Harper has to offer. It remains to be seen whether or not Harper actually wants to stay around for another election to win it (and therefore not go too far in a first term), and solidify the dominance of his party as the new "natural governing party." Or whether, as his personality disorder would suggest, he will in a spirit of vengeance against the country he detests, dismantle as much of the post-war social contract he can in four years of virtually absolute power.
The performance of the NDP should be seen for what it is -- a huge victory for progressive values even though the surge did not deliver everywhere they hoped. It is true that party politics can seem perverse -- the NDP was giddy with celebration last night, as if no one had told them that Harper won a majority. But with over 100 MPs, the NDP has changed the face of Canadian politics.
Yes, their surge defeated a lot of Liberals and helped give Harper a majority. But before we mourn the Liberal Party remember who they have been and what they have done: the Chretien and Martin governments savaged the Canadian state and the role of government -- part of a continuum of Conservative and Liberal governments committed to dismantling what two generations built. The true nature of the Liberal Party was ironically revealed by Ignatieff's decision to run a left-wing campaign (which I thought was actually pretty good). Many simply didn't believe him -- and in effect he helped convince people to vote NDP, the real repository of progressive policies, led by someone they trusted. On voting day, right-wing Liberals abandoned Ignatieff and voted Conservative to stop the NDP surge.
The Liberals may well destroy themselves in the next two years, incapable of unity and indulging in a left-right internal battle that will see their members and supporters drift away to the Conservatives or the NDP.
The results in Quebec are truly amazing -- it is the one place in Canada that can be described as genuinely progressive. We should rejoice in the results there. Somehow in Quebec citizens remain connected to their history, their culture and their insistence that government and politicians serve them, not the other way round. When Gilles Duceppe joined in a call for another referendum at a PQ gathering, the whole province turned with stunning speed against him -- essentially saying to the aging sovereignist elite: "don't tell us what we need." Duceppe forgot that people voted for him because of his social democracy. When he seemed to forget that, they booted him out. They trust Layton because he understands and respects their nationalism -- at the root of their progressive values -- without insulting them about another referendum.
While it may be little comfort in the short term, 60 per cent of Canadians still voted against the Harper government. We can hope that many of those who voted Conservative have not clearly anticipated what that will mean -- for the Medicare they cherish, for the democracy they participate in, for the security they hope for in old age, for the notion that government can actually work for them.
But what now for progressives, activists, people engaged in democracy? Over the decades I have heard too many progressives muse along the theme of "the worse the better" -- that is, when things get really bad, people will wake up and fight back and we will see fundamental change. I hope we can avoid that thinking. Actually, history suggests that more often the rule is pretty simple: the worse things get the worse they are. And they were pretty terrible over the past five years and going into this election. It didn't mobilize people. Most have adapted to a new normal.
What was shocking for people throughout the first three weeks of the campaign, before the strange, detached euphoria of the NDP surge, was that so many Canadians -- hovering near 40 per cent -- could support a government that was not only conservative in policy terms but virtually a rogue government in terms of its blatant and unapologetic trashing of democratic institutions and conventions. It did not seem to matter a whit that Harper harboured thugs in his inner circle, was found in contempt of Parliament, and lied without hesitation whenever it suited him.
But despairing over this result is not only pointless and self-defeating, it would be a betrayal of the tradition that says government can be a force for good and at its best is the fullest expression of community. And it would be, for activists and the most politically engaged, a betrayal of the resilience of Canadian values -- suppressed as they seem to be at the moment.
We have known for a long time that creating a better world out of this darkening time would be a long-term struggle. This election result (however its entrails are interpreted) is just the latest chapter of a determined effort by the worst forces of capitalism to neutralize democracy -- a process that was begun in the mid to late 1970s and has moved inexorably every year since.
Progressives need to come to grips with that fact that despite consistent results from surveys suggesting two-thirds of people hold socially progressive values, something profound is cancelling those values out, neutralizing them. We live in society that is increasingly conservative in its behaviour and actions. Forty-five per cent of people in Ontario where a third of Canadians live, voted for Harper.
In the absence of community, in the absence of government that works for people instead of against them, in the absence of strong, robust, imaginative civil society organizations, people will turn to an alternative that seems profoundly, frustratingly irrational on its face: one that will dramatically roll back their quality of life. People will find comfort and meaning somewhere, anywhere, if we don't provide it.
Progressive forces need to do a lot of soul-searching in the next year. There are countless questions to be asked and answered -- or at least addressed. My generation, more than any other, let this happen. As much as we may lead the wailing and despairing over our country's immediate fate, we never took the task of protecting it seriously. The left-wing political class is middle class -- a way too comfortable, too complacent and in my experience too lacking in a sense of urgency. It is as if we think we can stop these powerful, frightening forces by working at it part-time; by doing what we always do; and not giving up any of the perks of our individual success.
If this election result does not shake people out of this self-satisfied stupor then we are really in trouble. Why is it that the Christian right gives till it hurts to destroy democracy while we think we can defend it with a few pennies donated to good causes? Maybe what we need is a Five Per Cent Club -- people serious about social change willing to publicly commit to giving five per cent of their pre-tax income to fight what is coming down the road.
We will need it. This will be a very long-term fight, a generational fight, rooted in a serious and thoughtful collective examination of where we have been, what we did wrong and what we need to do right. It will be very, very hard as we will be trying to build a vision of a better future, one that can truly inspire and engage people, while conditions are getting dramatically worse and many people suffer the consequences of this election. But there is no other way. The silver lining is that rebuilding will be challenging, exciting and invigorating -- in other words, something completely different.
Murray Dobbin is a guest senior contributing editor for rabble.ca, and has been a journalist, broadcaster, author and social activist for 40 years. He writes rabble's bi-weekly State of the Nation column.
i wonder how many of us will unnecessarily die under Harper..how many lives would be ruined?..
Harper won't be too radical too fast. He will conceal what he does, as he controls 99% of the media.
The average voter doesn't know what Harper is really about, they pretty much take it at face value from the TV ads...a steady hand for the economy. Ask people, that is what they think, contrary to all the facts of course.
I cannot understand how not even one of the "leaders" of the center left, can come forward and Unite the center-left into a coalition? If not, Harper will rule Canada like Putin for the rest of his career.
Unite the center-left, or Harper will rule until 2025 http://rabble.ca/babble/canadian-politics/unite-center-left-or-harper-will-rule-until-2025YOU'VE ANSWERED YOUR OWN RHETORICAL QUESTION "WHAT'S LEFT" ANSWER NOT MUCH. it's a hollow victory for the NDP who are now an ineffective opposition to a strong right wing majority government. Heaven help us all!
So what now ?
I too find the NDP response a little disconcerting. They seem oblivious to the fate of the country over the next 4 years. Jack acts like he will have some say in what the government does. Is he that naive? But he never really went after Harper, he always thought the Liberals were the only problem.
I would be willing to donate 5% of my income but who would you give it to? Would others join me in this? I'm committed to doing a lot for the environment but I don't feel like a leader. I feel like an outsider for the most part. I'm sorry but most Canadians don't give a rats a$$ about the environment or their fellow Canadians. Harper's majority demonstrated this big time.
I think Jack Layton is trying to keep a positive spin on things until everybody can figure out what to do about this problem. To show how depressed one is about the apparent futility is not a luxury that a party leader can afford. Besides give us enough time and we will figure out how to solve the Harper problem and the miriad of other problems facing Canadians that haven't been solved yet. For instance, I don't think, that CPC supporters voted for the CPC because they want a parliamentary "criminal" in power. They probably voted for them because they are unaware of Harper as a problem (and, yes, I know that you can tell them the details until you are blue in the face but they still won't believe it is anything but propaganda).
So first problem is getting people to understand what the problem is.
Second problem is to replace the archaic and frustrating First-Past-The-Post electoral system with some sort of Proportional Representation (check Wikipedia).
Another problem is to figure out what democratic tools we still have left to make a difference in our democracy. Some that came to mind while I was talking to my daughter today is protest and soical media. It seems to have worked in Egypt and Tunisia. We should certainly work with the NDP, Liberals and Green parties. We should be able to come up with something ... afterall we are in the "popular vote"-majority (not Harper)
Does anybody else have any other ideas?
/Alan
F@ck the Nazis.
No Peace.
I was at the NDP party last night, and while there was a lot of celebrating that Jack et al got in, there was a sense of discomfort about the whole thing. It very much felt like a win and a loss all at once, that we'd moved ahead only to fall on our faces. All that alcohol and good music and no one was dancing.
Jack has to put on a brave face, because that's what the neophyte NDP voters expect- someone to talk tough and talk about fighting for Canadian values even if he can't do anything.
Is this guy joking? After poking fun at the fact that the Left's idea of activism is giving a few bucks to charity his big idea is to give 5% of your income to some unknown agent who might do the work for you? It blows my mind what passes as progressive these days.
I appreciated Murray's thoughts on these subjects. I think he puts his fingers on the important issues, as did Elizabeth May when she announced her intention to use her position to fight for proportional representation in our electoral system. It stuns me, as it does Murray Dobbin, to see how comfortable folks are with fake democracy and anti-democratic leaders like Stephen Harper.
It stuns me how Murray Dobbin advocated strategic voting and handed Harper his majority on a silver platter. If he would have campaigned as hard for the NDP against the Liberals the NDP might have won.
What we saw last night is the final act of the liberal party of Canada.
It all started under Pierre Trudeau in the late 70's when he introduced the National Energy Program. Since that point the liberal lost the western provinces and even after more than 30 years people from the west still remember this period. Strike one.
Next, was the patriation of the Constitution and introduction of the Charter of rights and freedoms. In Québec, all the members of the National Assembly voted against the patriation of the Constitution. Without the support of the elected members of the National Assembly, Pierre Trudeau proceeded as he saw fit. The liberals had 74 members of parliament from Québec and felt they rightly represented the voice of a majority of Quebecers. This was not the case. Since that period the liberal party of Canada started to lose followers in Québec. Strike two.
Third, remember when Mulroney try very hard to bring back Québec in the Constitution with Meech Lake Accord. His efforts were destroyed by Pierre Trudeau, Jean Chrétien and Clyde Wells when the three rejected the content of Meech Lake. This was another step where the liberal party lost additional followers in Québec. Strike three.
Fourth, when the liberal party of Canada finance the No side of the 1995 referendum by not respecting the financing law of Québec for election or referendum. More people discarded the liberal party in Québec. Strike four.
Final act, was the sponsorship scandal and from that point on the liberal party of Canada lost more followers in Québec. Strike four.
With marginal voters in western Canada and Québec, I strongly believe that the people from these parts of the country will remember for ever what the liberal party did over that period of time (+ 30 years) and therefore will not come back to the party. People are somewhere else now and have experienced something else and are certainly prepared to continue the adventure for a certain period of time.
The liberal party of Canada cannot take back the power with only the support of Ontario and Atlantic Canada, therefore if they want to rebuild themselves, they have some major work to do to change the mindset of the party.
Don't take me wrong here, as I personally voted for this party several times in the past but I certainly think the party as it is, is beyond redemption.
I hope that Mr. Dobbin's pretense at soul-searching will extend to his paternalistic gloating about Duceppe's defeat and Quebec's resistance to the Canadian Right. Activists that didn't manage to keep Harper from a majority government by strategic work with the other Opposition party. shouldn't be throwing rocks.
Very interesting article. Kinda scared about the "religious right - destroy democracy" reference. Can't imagine you'd single out Muslims or Roma people groups like that. Not cool, or very Canadian.
The point was valid however, religious groups (Jewish/Christian/Hindu or Muslim) do give sacrificially. Something that secular progressives could learn from.
all cats now in Mouseland parliament as you will see...
stop playing a fixed game
start working on real power
fuck all pols especially those that pretend to be your friend...
You compare Harper to Hitler? Seriously? I wish some of you could go and live in 'allot' and I mean 'allot' of the world as an actual citizen, I promise you Harper would stop looking so bad to you. You have a right to your expression, and a right not to like Harper even suggest he has done things which where undemocratic, illegal? However, as bad as those things are semantics and context are very important. When you compare Harper to Hitler you look silly, ignorant, and like very very sore losers.
In support of my above comment I will reference you to the second comment on this thread. Observer521 suggests that people don't know the 'real' Harper and if the left cant unite "Harper will rule Canada like Putin for the rest of his career." Observer521 I understand you may viciously hate Harper and thats fine it's your right. However, when multiple journalist start to be murdered in this country I think it will be more appropriate for you to make such a comment.
Harper already had a majority because the Liberals supported him on his right-wing agenda. This is not a bad day but the best day in the history of Canadian Politics! Wake up NDP ers!
The overall analysis in this article is to the point; we do need to re-examine what we're doing and how we're doing it. However, I find the self-flagellation a bit silly. As someone who spent nearly 25 years on the deck of seine boat and went through two bitter strikes trying to defend - but losing - fishermen's right to bargain collectively, I don't "feel way too comfortable, too complacent and ... lacking a sense of urgency". There has been a worldwide attack on the working class going on since at least 1973 when the coup in Chile took place. Most trade unionists I have worked alongside don't write blogs, but in B.C. we have fought back. In 1983, there were Pennyfarthing and Solidarity, just before the turn of the century a long IWA strike, in 2002, the HEU strike against Campbell's privatising their jobs, in addition to the 1989 and 1993 strikes I was involved in. Any attempt to figure out where we go from here has to recognise that we didn't get here because we were asleep. We got here because the ruling class, Liberal and Conservative, using state institutions such as Labour Relations Boards, using funding cuts to women's groups, etc., etc. has been deliberately targetting potential sources of resistance. Blaming the victim, even if the victim is yourself, is counterproductive.
Why did Harper win a majority? We citizens, especially in Ontario, feel that the governments were taking too much money from the people who earn it and giving too much of that money to people who don't. That is the bottom line. We don't mind paying taxes but at least 30% tax on the next dollar earned on income over $50K is too much.
Left wing agendas have one thing in common...they confiscate more money from those who earn it. The ultimate problem is that those who earn it will stop when the after tax amount of the next dollar earned isn't worth the trouble of earning it. This is supply side economics in a nut shell.
Mr.Dobbin's malicious rant borders on the libellous, and is possibly the most hysterical reaction to the Conservative majority so far. Is it only democracy when your side wins, then?
Some of the "resistance" talk and even threats of violence are far more frightening and dangerous to democracy than what is likely to remain a moderate, and democratically elected, government.
@roneill - My sense is that he was talking about allocating that 5% to build up effective movements of resistance - movements that would also require our participation, not just money. That's something quite different from hiring "some unknown agent" to do the work for us. I certainly hope that most of us have realized by now that the professionalization of dissent can only end in disaster.
I grew-up in the Christian Right, and have often wondered where the Left would be if we could muster the same sense of collective sacrifice that evangelical Christians do with their tithing (allocating 10% of their income to the church).
@knownothing - Maybe I'm underestimating the power of Dobbin's suasion, but I somehow doubt that the NDP would have won the election if only Murray had focused on attacking the Liberals.
@mcwarr - When Dobbin referred to the left-wing political class as being middle class, too comfortable, complacent, and lacking in urgency; I don't think he was talking about rank and file workers. I think he's talking (and in a very general way) about people who work in the senior ranks of the NGOs, think tanks, academia, unions, and political parties of the Left. In this regard, I think his comments are spot-on.
Here in Ottawa, grassroots organizing is perpetually stunted by the presence of so many cushy jobs in the institutional Left. The result is that so many would-be organizers come home from their day jobs feeling like they've already done their bit for social justice for that day, leaving it to others - the poor, the students, the working class - to organize the fight on our own. (I'm generalizing here, too. We do have some rock-solid allies within these institutions too, but there are in the minority.)
"The results in Quebec are truly amazing -- it is the one place in Canada that can be described as genuinely progressive."
Does progressive mean high tax on workers? Quebec has the highest combined federal and provincial (therefore the highest provincial) tax rates in Canada. The next dollar earned after $42K is taxed at at least 38% and tops out at over 48%. Is this what you want? What do the talented do? Stay and pay or leave and breathe. The ulitimate problem is under excessive taxation more and more people will choose to leave or stop working. When they leave they contribute nothing. When they stop working their contribution through taxes drops substantially.
Their economy constantly underperforms. Now you know why.
Great piece Murray.
"On voting day, right-wing Liberals abandoned Ignatieff and voted Conservative to stop the NDP surge."
This is something I'm concerned about. Will the NDP make a shift to the right to lure these centre-right-Liberal voters away from the Conservatives? Jack Layton isn't going to win them over by promoting anti-NAFTA, anti-globalization policies. If the NDP ditch those values we will see a US style duopoly. And despite some people insisting that is the way to go and that Canadians want it, Conservatives on the right and NDP taking up new digs in the centre will not help us.
http://kiely-flashpoint.blogspot.com/2011/04/is-surging-ndp-good-thing.html
"We can hope that many of those who voted Conservative have not clearly anticipated what that will mean."
Of course they haven't. Do 40% of Canadians want our jobs going overseas unless we lower our standard of living to compete with developing countries? I don't think so. They've just been duped.
http://kiely-flashpoint.blogspot.com/2011/05/neocon-future.html
I beleive that what we have in Canada now, as ever, is a battle of ideas. The right wing beleives absolutly in a never realised society where most people take care of themselves (ie, no burden on the govt.), are independant and religious.
The left has largly abandoned religion (except for a few social gospel types like myself) but realises that people need a broad base of sevices to help them in an increasingly complex world, more, they realise that it is the right and moral thing to do to have built the existing social ifrustructure, and to protect it. The left knows that, at best, the right wing capitilist economy only benifites the few at the expence of the many. Trying to educate our fellow citizens of these facts is one of our ongoing challenges. we will need to make the point repeatedly that a right wing economy is a bottlenecked economy because the wealthy will hoard wealth rather than keep it working on the econmy. This has always been true of unregulated bussinesses. There are any number of historical proofs of this fact.
The NDP must truly begin to behave as a government in waiting. When the tories propose new law, we counter propose with better legislation. This will be largly for public education and to gather further support behind the progressive forces. The NDP will have to state catigoricly (and mean it) that if the Tories privitize medicare that an NDP Government will re-nationalise it with no compensation to the companies and doctors that rush in to profit from human illness and misery. Wether many of us like it or not Jack Layton is the only legitimate spokesperson for the left right now, in him we will have to espouse our determination to overturn all damage the torries do in the next years, keeping the dream of building a true civilization in Canada, as opposed to a mere econmic system that the Tories would reduce us to.
"The left knows that, at best, the right wing capitilist economy only benifites the few at the expence of the many."
Sorry, please provide the example of the left wing socialist society where the poor are as cared for as in the right wing capitalist society. Let's look at extreme left wing societies. This is where we would expect to find the greatest benefit to the poor. I know the poor are glad that they live in Canada {or the US} compared to Cuba, North Korea, Venezuela, most of Africa, most of South America, Soviet Russia. Socialist countries replace the capitalist with the worker boss and the worker boss is multi times more cruel than the capitalist. The capitalist has an interest in the poor becoming richer to buy the capitalist's product.
Socialist societies benefit fewer at the expense of more. The evidence is ample.