What ever happened to plans for a provincial NDP in Quebec?
Comments
I don't see how a Quebec NDP is necessary and I also doubt that it's wanted on the Quebec left. There isn't an obvious constituency for it. If you're on the more activist left you're probably quite happy with QS, if you're a trade unionist perhaps your traditional home in the PQ is a bit uncomfortable from time to time but it's hard to justify leaving.
One thing I think might be considered would be for QS members, particularly Khadir and Gouin, to introduce themselves to the rest of the country. Regardless of whether or not Quebec goes for full sovereignty, Quebec will always be in relationship with the rest of the country, and I think it could be helpful for all around for the rest of Canada to become acquanted with QS on QS' terms, rather than let the English media brand them as "separatists."
If only Quebec Solidaire would simply SHELVE all this waste of time talk about more referendums and separation and focus like a laser beam on social inequality - their support could double overnight!
QS also holds that its view of an independent Quebec is a completely different project than that of the PQ. Rather than working for independence for its own sake, QS works for an internationalist independence - an independence based on principles of social justice. For QS, independence is a means to an end, not an end in itself.
What's so objectionable about that? Isn't that what we would like for the rest of the country as well?
Aristotleded24 wrote:One thing I think might be considered would be for QS members, particularly Khadir and Gouin, to introduce themselves to the rest of the country.Not a bad idea. By the way, I think you mean David. Gouin is her riding.
Shows what happens when people from outside of Quebec go off on things about which they hardly know!
No.
What agreement with the Greens?
No it isn't. In fact, the right has produced an additional party. How that rolls out in the months and years to come is anyone's guess. Right now, I count four (4) parties of the right.
What are you talking about? What attempted merger?
You know something about Quebecers? Since the Quiet Revolution, they don't vote for a particular party any more, whether federally or provincially.
What would a provincial NDP have to offer, even if you had the resources (which seems to be one of the huge criteria in this thread... among non-Quebecers who appear not to have noticed that the NDP won more seats here than they've ever won in the rest of Canada put together, with zero "resources"!)?
Would it look like this: 1. We believe in a united Canada! 2. We will give you good government like Gary Doer or Lorne Calvert or Darrell Dexter or Bob Rae or...
Non, merci.
- I ask since QS was created by UFP and OC... so i don't think its out of the question, even if its unlikely.
- Ok, read above... the Greens and QS agreed not to run in each others leaders ridings. Previous to that the Greens and UFP tried not to run against each other at all. - Your right CAQ is a new party, infact there are 6 parties in the NA... I was referring to the situation happeneing with the ADQ, half their members are "independents" now and i have heard that two of them are looking at CAQ. - I didn't think i was being that unclear... post-may, being the QS could benefit from being associated with the NDP who swept the province in May, could they not try and ride that wave some? I might be off about the merger... but when QS was forming, did they not extend a hand to the greens to join? - I said "If i lived in Quebec" please read what i wrote... And i do know a few things about Quebecers; i have Anglo family in Montreal... they vote Liberal, always, everywhere (I wouldn't but they seem to, i wont generalize like you have about the entire province)... but Quebec since the 80's has been voting en masse for one party, PC, then Liberals, then BQ now the NDP. - In May, we all know it was a perfect storm... so to keep these gains which you seem to be taking for granted you need to build up resources... for me that means Constituency associations, a base of volunteers, connections to labour and community groups, memberships! (glad to hear we are over 5000 members too!). Having 59 MPs is wonderful but they are busy with Parliament and their duties. Resources are those who work the ground during elections (i've personally been a decicated door-knocker/phone canvasser), keep the offices/websites running and active... see what i'm getting at. Being Linked to a bigger family (the Federal and all other provincial wings) can only benefit any NPDQ. I have friends who travel the country working on provincial campaigns, quebec can't benefit from that pool of talented campaigners and organizers. Not saying they need to but who shuns helps when they can get it?Where to start with this???
1. The QS does not have "leaders". They have two spokespersons - Amir Khadir and Françoise David.
2. In the last two elections (one general, one byelection) where Scott McKay (Green leader) ran, there were QS candidates running in the same riding.
3. In the last two elections (general elections of 2007 and 2008) where Amir Khadir ran, there were Green candidates running in the same riding.
4. In the last two elections (general elections of 2007 and 2008) where Françoise David ran, there were Green candidates running in the same riding.
So, to be very clear: What are you talking about???
That's not quite right. There was no agreement of any kind. The Greens said they would "try" not to run against the UFP (it has always been an unfathomable mystery to me how you would go about trying not to nominate a candidate and organize a campaign, but maybe that's just me). Anyway, they didn't always try hard enough. For example, in Gouin (Françoise David's riding), there were both Green and UFP candidates in the 2003 general election and the 2004 byelection. They might have tried again, but the UFP only existed for 4 years or so...
So coalescence of the right is two people? Ok.
How's that? Photos of Jack Layton? Change their program? Re-name themselves "NDP"? Some people in this thread seem to think that Quebecers voted NDP because they have suddenly decided to support federalism. Unless you struggle to understand what is going on in Québec, using phony brand names is not going to fool anyone. Not for very long, anyway.
I think they'd like the PQ to join too! What's the point here? Shouldn't we base our conversation on actual facts, on real information?
Taking for granted? Read my post. I said the best thing NDPers can do right now is to consolidate these gains and try to elect a few people outside Québec. It is entirely possible that NDP standing in 2015 (or whenever) will return from 59 back to 1, or less. There is no unbreakable bond between Québec voters and the NDP. Easy come, easy go.
- I stand corrected, as an outsider i was trying to understand the scene in quebec, somehow this seems to offend you? i did not mean for that. My understanding of QS has come from trying to dig up research online, i do see now that it was an "arrangement that will try but reserve the right to do what they heck they want". I was already aware that QS used spokepeople but my ontarian vernacular is just so used to saying leader... Wiki was my resource for that arragement comment, i know not a great source but it what i had at the time.
- Well the ADQ only had 7 seats, and only have 4 now... two jumping to CAQ, which some polls have as doing quite well when included looks to be a coalesense, a small one but its not the right direction where the ADQ is concerned.
- I think thats part of the point of this thread, is to understand the situation in Quebec, is there room/need for a NPDQ. Quebec from outside, looks to be a personalist scene, so yes QS could run with Amir and Francoise plastered all over the place, seems to work. QS policies aren't that far off from the NDP's with some exceptions... this is why i brought them up and others have as well.
- Facts? it was a question, i did not know if this was the case or not.
- Federally i think thats what the party is doing... we especially need to do that in the west. But all of us here i am sure would love to see a progressive party win in quebec, with no other provincial election coming yup for the next year resources are going to be in the leadership/membership area. I think no one wants to lose those 59 MPS and quebec looks to be the where you would have to work hardest so building up there is important. There are benefits (and downsides) to being linked to a larger family.
Oh that brings me to another question... are municipal parties linked as well? like how COPE in vancouver is generally linked (i think unofficially) to the NDP? so in MTL would ProjectMontreal in some way work with/link to QS or even the NDP?
The OP and post #25 were, to my reading, advocating the creation of such a party, and advocating it for the explicit purpose of trying to wipe out QS. Those were the posts I was responding to there.
I am a Quebecker and I would like to see a provincial NDP again that doesn't get taken over by radicals. And I dispute an argument above that federalism is a right wing cause. What rubbish is that argument based on? Are these arguments of fear being constructed by those who feel threatened that their vanguard is in danger? Most likely. But don't you worry, Duceppe will take care of that issue without any need for the NPD anyways. It should be quite amusing.
Now then, back to the subject at hand. The conditions needed for a Quebec NDP are simple. A form of proportional representation(which this province would accept more than others), which would allow the federalist left to vote in comfort. With that being created, there should be a diverse range of parties upon which the NDP would form a coalition with. Perhaps one like Mitterrand did in France with great results in the end for his party, oh what the heck I'm just having too much fun writing this post arn't I?
The other method would be for a provincial liberal or someone else to jump out and declare themselves a new democrat. This would give us legitmacy instantly and we would have a voice to build on.
The more painful method is to start from scratch. Nothing to fear, It can be done. Don't let them tell you it can't be done!
There has been growth in NDP membership in Quebec and I dare say there are people like Pierre D. who didn't run for us federally this time who could easily run provincially. This is something that can be done for the next election, but it would take alot of effort and time. We could get a full slate I believe, looking at the strength of some of our rural QC mps and our urbanites.
I didn't say that "federalism is a right-wing cause" as an absolute statement. What I said was that those who put federalism FIRST in terms of the list of political priorities in Quebec are mainly corporate Anglo types(with a tiny sliver of francophones, who would also be corporate and antiworker, thrown in)..."defending federalism" isn't the main point for much of anyone who's working-class, especially among the francophone working-class(which is basically almost all the working-class in Quebec, btw, other than those who are allophones). The days in which federalism had any progressive implications in Quebec died when Robert Bourassa took over the PLQ.
There can be common left cause between people who identify at some level as federalists and those who identify at some level as sovereigntists...but not among those who put "preserving federalism" first before everything else and those who put sovereignty before everything else.
The point is to put together a group working for a common left agenda in Quebec, with social justice and workers'rights issues coming before the "national question".
And an NDPQ in which radicals are powerless(which I assume is what you want)is NOT going to be an NDPQ that has any reason to exist. It would end up being just like the PLQ-that's what "moderation" always leads to. Why would you hate radicals anyway? It's not as if non-radical NDP'ers stand for anything. The non-radical kind would cheer on Papandreou in Greece for his surrender to the austerity fetishists and would probably take part in driving Occupy encampments out of their cities if they held power in municipal governnments, like the "moderately progressive" mayor of Vancouver is doing.
Finally, why the hell would you EVER hold up Francois Mitterand as an example for anyone on the left or center-left? You do remember that he's the one who got the French Socialist Party to completely abandon socialism and even watered-down social democracy and surrendered to the propertied classes on all major issues? Mitterrand's time in power was fourteen years of worthlessness. He was only different from the right on a few trivial side issues that never ended up mattering to anyone. And he disgraced himself further by being even more of a Cold Warrior than Reagan was, in a decade in which there was no reason at all to obsess about "The Communist menace", since the Soviet Union posed no menace to anyone in the Eighties.
There can't ever be a reason for the left or center-left to want to take the path of Mitterrand.
I don't hate radicals. NDP-like parties work with marxist parties in Europe all the time.I can point to tons of coalition governments. I just usually attack those who attack my beliefs since its fair game. Infact, I prefer that the left works in consensus all the time. I think that the best way of a common left agenda is to have coalitions with those that are progressive. It makes sense in Quebec, to have parties with similar principles work together. The problem I do have with certain types of radicals, is entryism. I should have been more clear to what I was refering to, since the term radical itself means nothing. Tony Blair once called himself a radical, but was in reality was just a dogmatic fool.
As for corporate anglo types, that has diminished. The West Island is very biligual now, and buisnesses that could not get over the issue of French have moved elsewhere.
Moderation is good for winning elections, but goes to waste if the next governments won do nothing but stay moderate. With that I agree with, and agree that the things like the Manitoba NDP get a kick in the arse and wake up.
But with issues like Greece, let me tell you as a Greek what happened. A large chunk of people in Greece did not pay taxes, ever. If you were to walk into a doctors office, he would not accept credit cards. Why cash? So he could evade taxes. My grandmother, and many people in Greek villages did not ever pay taxes. My father never remembers his family paying taxes in Greece. New Democracy, a conservative party, came into power and spent like crazy on things like the Olympics. But in order to get into the Euro, ND lied to europe about its debt levels. When PASOK came into power, they revealed the debt levels and tried to deal with them. What other choice is there? The Greek people want to stay in the EU, Greece also does not control its currency. The germans will not allow inflation because they are scared of inflation due to a lesson in history. The easiest way to do this is have the crisis resolved is to have Northern Europe leave the Euro, and form their own currency. Would probably be a popular idea amongst Scandinavian countries and a smart idea. Now that being said, I would reject PASOK because of its recent disgusting coalition with the bastards who caused the crisis in the first place and other issues. Anyways, this issue is complicated and it belongs in another thread.
And I was merely pointing out Mitterrand because of his coalition with the french communist party at the time. Which turned out to be a smart move. As the French Socialist Party began conquering the turf of the communist party. I don't think that "moderate progressives" are all like vancouver's mayor as well.
Back on the topic, a Quebec NDP would be very diverse provincial wing. It would attract a majority of Quebeckers in time.
I appreciate the clarification.
Sorry if I ranted a bit...Mitterrand is still a very sore point with me...he crushed the dreams of generation of French leftists and of others who saw the miraculous victory of his coalition in the 1981 as a chance to build an alternative to Thatcherism/Reaganism. In hindsight, I wonder if Mitterrand ever had any "left" values at all.
As to PASOK...why didn't they just make a major effort to collect the back taxes? I'll always wonder why they took the path of surrender rather than do the one thing that might have prevented the nightmare Greece has gone through in the last two years(yes, I know this is thread drift). They should just have left the Euro, since nothing it gave them is worth the misery they've gone through in the past two years. Those cuts won't ever be restored...the pensions won't ever be restored...what was saved that was WORTH saving?
(back to thread subject)as to "entryism"...
1)Is there any real evidence that QS has been infiltrated by Trotskyists?
2)Does Quebec(or Canada, for that matter)even HAVE any Fourth Internationalist types out there to do any entryism?
There is no such thing as a "federalist left" in Québec. No one on the left defines themselves first and foremost by their infatuation with Canada. Anyone who thinks otherwise hasn't stepped outside in a while. This whole conversation is quite condescending. Québec will find its way without the generosity of those who would like to bestow upon us a new non-radical federalist left of centre party that no one is asking for.
And I hope that you'll consider my posts in this thread as support for your views on the matter, Unionist.
Quebec will also find its way should that be bestowed upon it. Bets on whether a Quebec NDP will be rejected? I'll give you a good handicap on that.
Best line on his emminence I have ever seen.
And while we are on the subject of things that have nothing to do with Quebec... the PASOK government could not just snap its fingers and start collecting taxes. The infrastructure for really collecting does not exist. Not that PASOK would have wanted to try... since big chunks of their base and supporters are among the scofflaws.
Of course I do, and I appreciate the respect you've shown in your analysis.
I'm surprised no one brought this up: October 12th
http://www.legermarketing.com/admin/upload/publi_pdf/Provincial_political_Survey_LM-Le_Devoir-The_Gazette_Oct182011.pdf Question 15 - If there were a New Democratic Party at the provincial level in Québec, would you vote for this type of party?DK/Refuse - 46%YES - 34% NO - 20% So there are already a good chuck of those polled who would indeed vote the a NPDQ... and plenty of room to grow in that Don't KNow group. Does this change anyones mind about a NPDQ running? it would mean the death of QS i would expect, and possibly the Soft soverigntist/Labour support within the PQ Whats odd/Hilarious is that 46% (the highest) of ADQist would vote NPDQ? huh?
If their wikipedia article is any indication, QS, unlike the NDP, actually allows and encourages members to form "collectives" which promote their political views within the party. Some of those collectives are explicitly Trotskyist, including Gauche Socialiste, which is the offical Quebec section of the Fourth International.
As for entryism, I actually find it ironic that people like me are constantly told to quit complaining about the NDP and join it and try to push it to the left, yet if I were to do that, people would complain about "entryism"
Really, it's damned if you do, damned if you don't. If you're a radical outside the NDP, you're a sectarian ultraleftist, if you're a radical inside the NDP, you're an uncooperative entryist.
Yup!! That does it for me!!! Where do I sign up?
[doesnt change my mind either. doing anything now is a non-starter. later is later.]
Might as well get used to the feeling. Trust me, it will last a lifetime. Anyway, there are worse things than being damned.
There is a federalist left in Quebec. 59 of them are now sitting as NDP MPs. Its not about anyone defining themselves "first and foremost by their 'infatuation (sic.)' with Canada" - I think many if not most progressives in Quebec would be more than happy to support QS if it stopped being so totally "infatuated with Quebec independence" and simply declared itself agnostic on whether Quebec should be independent or not and declare that it is 100% focused on economic and social issues.
Legeault is doing a great favour to centrist and right of centre Quebecers by letting than cast a vote that is not immediately turned into a proxy for a Yes or NO vote in a referendum...it would be nice if people on the left in Quebec had a similar escape hatch. Oh well i guess there is always the parti vert du Quebec - do they have a stance on secession or are they willing to let sleeping dogs lie?
What a laugh. You appear to have forgotten that even your glorious leader Nycole Turmel was simultaneously a member of Québec solidaire. As for the 59 MPs, you think they took an oath to Canada as part of becoming members, let alone candidates, of the NDP?
Don't be surprised how they'll vote in a future referendum.
Stockholm, I wish you many years of accumulating wisdom about the psychology of the Québec nation. There is no doubt that you have many such years ahead of you.
Nycole Turmel has also always been a FEDERALIST - its a shame that she had to hold her nose and join a separatist party in order to have anyone to support in Quebec provincial politics.
If only Quebec Solidaire would simply SHELVE all this waste of time talk about more referendums and separation and focus like a laser beam on social inequality - their support could double overnight!
I'm still not clear why if someone is a federalist they are dismissed as "having an infatuation with Canada that they put before anything else", while if someone is a sovereignist - we are supposed to assume that it is a low priority for them. If sovereignty is such a low priority for "the left" in Quebec - why does QS insist on decalring itself to be a sovereignist party? Why not just take no position and declare the national question and all constitutional debate to be a "petty bourgeois obsession" that sidetracks the struggle of the proletariat from the real issues!
Just in case some newcomer stumbles onto this thread and hasn't met Stock (whom we love and cherish, but don't always read), let it be pointed out that Stock is just making this stuff up out of whole cloth and thin air, which appear to be stockpiled in abundance in southern Ontario since the manufacturing crisis hit bigtime in recent years. That's why he doesn't provide any ... er ... evidence for his outlandish statements.
You would think that having developed some expertise at holding her nose, she'd now be in a position to transfer her hand to her mouth. No such luck these days, unfortunately - see her comments on Harper's crime bill, the execution of Gaddafi, etc.
The OP and post #25 were, to my reading, advocating the creation of such a party, and advocating it for the explicit purpose of trying to wipe out QS. Those were the posts I was responding to there.
I am not advocating the destruction of QS. There are many advantages to the QS being independent from the federal NDP, as they can be explicitly far more to the left and alter-globalist than the federal NDP could at this moment in time. That being said, the fact they are sovereigntists could hurt the federal NDP vote, both in Quebec, and in English Canada if any association to them is alleged by the media. I do understand that the federal NDP has higher support from French Quebecois than English Quebecers, but this support is not transalating into support for QS, which makes me wonder my Quebecois are more willing to support some unknown entity than a viable alternative in QS?
Another reason I want to see the Quebec NPD back is that we need to ensure our long-term on the ground organization and membership within the province. I have the sense not as many Quebecois care to join a federal party, than might want to join a provincial party. We probably need at least 10,000-15,000 annual members in the province to be able to draw on a base of volunteer and riding association support. We only have about 33-50% of that right now. Ideally, it should be even higher than that because of the number of seats we have and hope to hold there.