babble is rabble.ca's discussion board but it's much more than that: it's an online community for folks who just won't shut up. It's a place to tell each other — and the world — what's up with our work and campaigns.
NDP Preamble Missing
October 12, 2011 - 1:36am
I checked the NDP website today and found that the Constitution had recently been restored. It went missing before last June's convention.
But the preamble of the Constitution has been deleted. The Party Executive tried but failed at Convention to replace the preamble, with its reference to democratic socialism and the primacy of human needs over private profit; a watered down version was proposed instead, drawn up by dessicated party insiders.
Since the proposed amendment was never approved--the resolution was tabled--the original preamble remains in force. So where is it and why has it mysteriously disappeared?
Kady O'Malley wonders too.
Disgraceful. What a bunch of cowards.
Here are links to the Constitution in English and French.
Bring back the preamble. It seems like the closer the Party gets to governing, the more of its soul it sells.
The main point to be noted here is that only Convention can amend the Party's Constitution--and by a minimum 2/3 majority. The Executive's efforts to excise the current preamble failed. Ergo, the preamble remains in force. So where the hell is it?
It discloses a breathtaking arrogance on the part of the Federal party's hierarchy to presume to delete those sections of the Constitution that don't suit them. Of course it's possible, though highly improbable, that the deletion was accidental. They may be hamfisted and even ruthless at times, but no one can accuse the higher ups in the party of gross incompetence.
I suggest that members and supporters inundate the Federal Office, and that of their local NDP MP, to demand that this "accidental" omission be rectified without delay.
If there is a case to change the Preamble, let the Executive present their case for it. This hiding game does not do any good. In politics, having a "hidden agenda" is almost always way worse than having an unpopular one.
Maybe someone should ask Brian Topp what happened to the preamble?
Obviously whoever is hiding it does not have the best interests of the party at heart. Brian Topp was clearly involved as he felt the need to involve himself on the floor of the convention and stopping it from even reaching a vote. How can we even think of electing someone for leader of our party that doesn't even care about the identity of the party?
Its not accidental, and its very old news. They use to hide the entire constituion. The source of this is probably the PR department.
I would be careful in assuming the new preamble was destined to fail. I would also be careful in assuming one single man is behind all of this, when there were individuals above this person in prestige and power within the party. I do also believe that this individual was only recently(if not at all) elected to this position at the time.
The reasoning behind this is they probably are afraid the media will drive the impression that they are interested in nationalizing everything that moves. Remember, only until recently under a small bit of pressure did they release who was on the federal council. I do think that future preambles should use different/modern language to stress promotion of a economically viable balance between co-ops/state/etc.
But maybe that's what everyone wants! Could be a good platform to have.
Yeah what's wrong with nationalization? If you have a party of privatization you should have an opposing party of nationalization. It is only natural.
@dacckon Of course, it is not just one person behind the hiding of the preamble but we do know that Brian Topp was involved because he stood up at the convention to stop the discussion.
Also, I don't think the new preamble was destined to fail, I was truly worried it would pass just like I was worried when the Liberal motion failed to pass.
It's been quite obvious for some time that socialism, or having anything to do with socialists, has become a source of embarrassment for the NDP. They're not in to you anymore. Just accept it and move on.
Don't think so
First comes the denial stage...and then the stalking of celebrity NDP MPs by their biggest fans no doubt, shouting 'we love u.'
I am not in denial... it is obvious the NDP is trying to get rid of the socialists and when they succeed the party will be nothing more than the New Liberal Party...not a bad name what do you think?
You do realize that Tony Blair directly put the words "democratic socialist" in the labour party's constitution. The title does not matter, titles mean nothing in the long run of things. Actions and specific upheld promises is what will matter. And most important, the members of the party are what matters, for they are the ones who will ultimately decide what the party is.
The difference between socialist and social democrat is nationalization.
Socialism is a word used by many. Libertarian socialists might not agree with state socialism. There are many different schools of socialism. What about the ideas of syndicalism and all sorts of variants? How can we balance both the ideas of co-ops, state industies, etc?
The modern question now is how do we create a better economic system in an era of globalization? The most interesting example that the world is perhaps still not ready to move forward(as the move from feudalism to capitalism did not take one day) is subsidies. Do you agree that western farmers should be subsidized? Brazil, an emerging country, would incredibly disagree with this approach and for good reason. Perhaps this is my own opinion, but species did not gain a whole set of new traits in one day, they evolved quite slowly.
I'd be somewhat happier if they decided to revert back to mixed market capitalism instead of this neofeudal order that exists now. At least then we could get back to the ol' worker versus parasite confrontations. It's difficult to demand living wages and better working conditions, and hell, just some working conditions in general when the bastards have offshored so much of the means of production. 15 years ago they sent our jobs to Mexico. Today the jobs have gone all the way to China and Asia in general. We don't make so much as a hair pin in Bananada anymore. It's no wonder our corrupt stooges have run up such ginormous national and provincial debts and couldn't balance the books if their lives depended on it. It's almost as if they don't want the country to be able to pay the bills. It's almost as if they want their banker friends and foreign banksters to have more control of Canada than Canadians or any government we might democratically elect in future. It's almost as if they are ensuring that any future democratic decisions are renderered null and void by supranational corporations and the financial elite running the world. Their feigning political impotence is tantamount to invisible hand ideology made new again. The Bay Street and Wall Street Occupiers are not falling for it, though. People seem to be figuring out that the impotence is not real.
Just because Brian Topp moved to refer the preamble (which was the responsible thing to do) does not necessarily mean that he was involved in excising it from the constitution on the web site. You may have noticed he is no longer the Party President. I believe that the new preamble should never have been allowed on the floor in the first place.
The question is how do we create a sustainable and resilient economic system (or economic systems). If you are going to limit your analysis to globalization then I think you will have a flawed solution. Peak Oil will bring an end to the age of globalization in any case. Sometimes evolution occurred very quickly, at least in terms of geologic time. Certalnly extinction can happen quickly.
Well obviously we will never know who was involved in excising it from the constitution on the website or who tried to change it at the convention but if we wait for evidence we wil wait forever. And whoever is doing it will keep screwing us over. Topp was involved. Why else would he stand up at the convention? Are u saying he was against the idea of changing the preamble? Yes it should not have been allowed on the floor. I remember at the session where we tweek the resolutions Brad Lavigne was there keeping an eye on the preceedings. Who knows who did it?
I will work on assumptions until I am proven wrong, they are all I have and may ever have
I believe in Libertarian socialism but I believe we are from from any type of system like that. That will be the result of a perfected State Socialism where the state is properly regulated without a market system.
http://rabble.ca/babble/international-news-and-politics/chomsky-lecture-sept-7th-2011-libertarian-socialism
For now, in Canada, State Socialism is our only option, that or Third Way
Topp and Lavigne went on record before the Convention to make the case for replacing the current preamble with their anemic draft version. Rather than circulating the draft preamble to members ahead of time to solicit their input, or at least issuing a position paper setting out the rationale for a new preamble, the party establishment chose to communicate its message through sound-bytes in the corporate media, knowing full well that their arguments would be covered sympathetically and in a one-sided way. Naturally the media were all in favour of the NDP renouncing democratic socialism and the values with which it is associated, including the primacy of social needs over private profit (as proclaimed in the current preamble).
Deletion of the preamble from the Constitution--i.e., from the version of it now posted on the party website--is no accident. It is indicative of the lengths to which powerful and unaccountable party functionaries are prepared to go these days to advance their own views and interests. In this case, they have shown a brazen disregard for the Constitution itself and for the democratic rules by which the NDP governs itself. When did it become acceptable for party bureaucrats to pick and choose which sections of the Constitution are fit to be published or, worse yet, which sections shall be deemed to be operative?
It's high time to identify and hold accountable those anonymous people at the top who consider the NDP to be their plaything.
Someone needed to stand up at Convention and move to refer it, as we were wasting our time on the floor discussing a preamble that did not deserve to be on the floor, although I felt his remarks were a little condescending. Of course he was in favour of changing the preamble, but he wants overwhelming support, and he knew that even if it passed it would be close. I'm comfortable with changing the preamble, but not to what was proposed, and certainly not without prior consultation. I don't think it would have passed, but it might have been too close for comfort. Had I been thinking I would have tried to move it to the bottom of the list during the preliminary session (and I did ask Lavigne where it had come from and he said it was enabled by a resolution at the Halifax Convention, which I only vaguely remember and would like to see the wording of). I suggest that most if not all of the leadership candidates would like to see the preamble changed, but not neccessarily to remove Democratic Socialism in favour of Social Democracy.
Who is the new President? The new National Director is Chantal Vallerand. They should be asked about this.
oh please! Why don't you ask by sending the party an email instead of doing all this angst and conjecture. Personally I'm tired of this witch hunting by some (or so it appears), instead of first getting the facts first and discussing it. Of course, maybe the real purpose is to do bashing and all of some within the party and services the "real" purpose.
Maybe you don't see how it is important but I do and obviously so do the people trying to hide the preamble
"We must bury our constitutional principles, lest our enemies use them against us!"
Yes you are right we should hide our beliefs in case our enmies use our beliefs against us
In case you didn't notice there are thousands of people on the streets complaining about capitalism