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.
I've got a question that I think relates to this. So, let's say I am a member of the NDP (which I am), and I wanted to contact "the Party Establishment". Who would I be trying to contact? And how could I contact them?
I've got a question that I think relates to this. So, let's say I am a member of the NDP (which I am), and I wanted to contact "the Party Establishment". Who would I be trying to contact? And how could I contact them?
Right. The composition of the Party Establishment is shifting.
On the other hand, it has a compostion that transcends changes in leadership. And there is no one in particular to contact. Its too amorphous for that.
And bearing in mind that the way people used the term "party establishment" during the leadership race was wrong headed from one end to the other. What they really meant was 'the elites with access to the party machinery at the moment'. And that was yesterday.
But the party establishement is not yesterday. It's still pretty much the same. And itt includes those people now leaving their roles with direct and immediate access to the party machinery.
Another aspect of the gradations of change within the NDP since the times of Douglas and Broadbent is the decline in unionization, unionizable jobs ie full time long term employment, and the massive shift to contract employment. As we saw in the elections the ability of any union to"deliver vote" has declined. Many within the NDP establishment began their political histories in union politics. Further often internal decisions were taken "with consultation with" our union allies ie union leadership. I hope that the one member one vote will increase the importance of membership partication from riding associations to municipal, provincial and federal decision making.
This is not an anti union influence posting. I believe that unions are central to the NDP and to fighting finance capital's austerity agenda. However I also believe that highly centralized top down decision making alienates popular participation in all organizations and increases public cynicism about politics.
But they are the Liberals and Tories same old stories who are proven liars, because they told many lies in successive election campaigns. They were proven liars only after power was seized in fraudulent firstpastthepost elections and then failed to realize their election promises once in government. And it really is easy to predict that their election promises will be lies based on their past records in government as accurate references.
The NDP can not therefore be proven to have lied unless they first have a chance to carry through with election promises.
You do realize the NDP has had provincial governments
And territorial.
And the NDP are still the most fiscally responsible party when in government according to the official record.
If you want massive indebtedness, environmental and energy policies dictated to you from corporate board rooms in America, and old world colonial-extractive economies, then by all means don't vote NDP. It's a free country as they say.
Right. The composition of the Party Establishment is shifting.
On the other hand, it has a compostion that transcends changes in leadership. And there is no one in particular to contact. Its too amorphous for that.
And bearing in mind that the way people used the term "party establishment" during the leadership race was wrong headed from one end to the other. What they really meant was 'the elites with access to the party machinery at the moment'. And that was yesterday.
But the party establishement is not yesterday. It's still pretty much the same. And itt includes those people now leaving their roles with direct and immediate access to the party machinery.
I could start naming names. What is the point of that?
You asked who you would call. Even not taken too literally, since this is outside of the formal structure [albeit, while overlapping] it comes down to individual contact. If you know someone, or someone who knows someone, you can call them and express whatever.
If you dont know anyone to call, you can find someone the gold old fashioned way by starting to ask around. But why would you do that? Because there is a formal structure, and while not exactly straightforawrd, it is yours to tap at will. And expressing instead through someone who has links to, or is inside, is at best just a shortcut.
If to make it concrete you are wondering what 'kind' of person could be seen as a member of the establishment- you can toss out names for an opinion. But I dont really know what the point of that would be either.
I'll give you one example that I'm comfortable with which might help illustrate.
Me.
I'm not. And never was, or likely ever will be.
And it isnt because I'm not well known. Lots of unknowns are part of the establishment.
I was an NSNDP insider- in that little happened I didnt know about. And thats a common route to being 'absorbed' into the establishement. But in my case, I'm too blunt. I never went public with anything. I never even spilled the beans within the party on the inner machinations- even tho that was more or less my right. And I always went along and helped implement despite strong disagreements.
But thats not enough. If you are deemed a pain in the ass you can always have people you can call up and talk to if you want. But the minute you step back, unlike members of the establishment, you will never again be voluntarily included. [If you have a thick skin you can insist, but very few bother...]
Okay, I guess what I mean it, people often talk about "the Party Establishment", but it's never clear to me exactly who the'ye talking about. Would, for example, the Federal Council qualify?
There are a number of bona fide establishment members on the Council- though more likely on Exec or a working committee. And coming to Council would not put you in there, or even close.
There are a number of bona fide establishment members on the Council- though more likely on Exec or a working committee. And coming to Council would not put you in there, or even close.
Okay, then how do you become a part of the establishment?
Work hard on elections. [There are paid positions if you have the flexibility away from a job.] Start working at the provincial/federal level.
Its not different than any other voluntary organization. People make themselves useful, share enough of the basic general world view, and stick with it. You get included in more and more.
Bite your tongue after saying your piece when you severely disagree.
I've got a question that I think relates to this. So, let's say I am a member of the NDP (which I am), and I wanted to contact "the Party Establishment". Who would I be trying to contact? And how could I contact them?
Look into a mirror, say "Waffle!" three times and then they will come to you.
Right. The composition of the Party Establishment is shifting.
On the other hand, it has a compostion that transcends changes in leadership. And there is no one in particular to contact. Its too amorphous for that.
And bearing in mind that the way people used the term "party establishment" during the leadership race was wrong headed from one end to the other. What they really meant was 'the elites with access to the party machinery at the moment'. And that was yesterday.
But the party establishement is not yesterday. It's still pretty much the same. And itt includes those people now leaving their roles with direct and immediate access to the party machinery.
And the NDP are still the most fiscally responsible party when in government according to the official record.
If you want massive indebtedness, environmental and energy policies dictated to you from corporate board rooms in America, and old world colonial-extractive economies, then by all means don't vote NDP. It's a free country as they say.
So, you can't really name any names?
I could start naming names. What is the point of that?
You asked who you would call. Even not taken too literally, since this is outside of the formal structure [albeit, while overlapping] it comes down to individual contact. If you know someone, or someone who knows someone, you can call them and express whatever.
If you dont know anyone to call, you can find someone the gold old fashioned way by starting to ask around. But why would you do that? Because there is a formal structure, and while not exactly straightforawrd, it is yours to tap at will. And expressing instead through someone who has links to, or is inside, is at best just a shortcut.
If to make it concrete you are wondering what 'kind' of person could be seen as a member of the establishment- you can toss out names for an opinion. But I dont really know what the point of that would be either.
I'll give you one example that I'm comfortable with which might help illustrate.
Me.
I'm not. And never was, or likely ever will be.
And it isnt because I'm not well known. Lots of unknowns are part of the establishment.
I was an NSNDP insider- in that little happened I didnt know about. And thats a common route to being 'absorbed' into the establishement. But in my case, I'm too blunt. I never went public with anything. I never even spilled the beans within the party on the inner machinations- even tho that was more or less my right. And I always went along and helped implement despite strong disagreements.
But thats not enough. If you are deemed a pain in the ass you can always have people you can call up and talk to if you want. But the minute you step back, unlike members of the establishment, you will never again be voluntarily included. [If you have a thick skin you can insist, but very few bother...]
Okay, I guess what I mean it, people often talk about "the Party Establishment", but it's never clear to me exactly who the'ye talking about. Would, for example, the Federal Council qualify?
Most of them, no.
There are a number of bona fide establishment members on the Council- though more likely on Exec or a working committee. And coming to Council would not put you in there, or even close.
Okay, then how do you become a part of the establishment?
Work hard on elections. [There are paid positions if you have the flexibility away from a job.] Start working at the provincial/federal level.
Its not different than any other voluntary organization. People make themselves useful, share enough of the basic general world view, and stick with it. You get included in more and more.
Bite your tongue after saying your piece when you severely disagree.
Okay, that makes sense, I guess.