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.
A word of thanks
October 30, 2008 - 10:50am
My colleagues and I carefully read discussions on this board in the months leading up to the recent campaign and during it.
Hard to say where good ideas come from, but I'm sure we stole a few from here.
I well understand that there is a wide diversity of political views on this board. But let me say to all who defend our party in these discussions and to all who offer up ideas about how we could do better, that many of us were listening and learning (and still are).
((Like, for example, learning to catch all the nuances in this post!!))
All the best,
Brian Topp
(2006 and 2008 National Campaign Director
Co-chair, Election Planning Committee
The New Democratic Party of Canada)
[ 30 October 2008: Message edited by: Brian Topp ]
Generally those are two different groups, one defending the party and the other offering up ideas [img]wink.gif" border="0[/img]
Sorry, I have to disagree with you there D....I think there are many people who have constructive criticism, yet still support the NDP.
It was really more of a light-hearted joke but during the recent election, while most of us supported the NDP, a few babblers were obviously on a mission to defend the NDP and in these cases I really don't think they were open to criticism. Hell I support the NDP! I'm just not always going to defend it, especially when it needs correcting, not defending. But really, I didn't mean to be slanderous [img]smile.gif" border="0[/img]
But seriously, it is great to see the NDP learning from our babbling along with us, even those of us who aren't always faithful party members.
Any other recommendations for the NDP's feed aggregators?
Take any of my 'come to Alberta' pleas to heart?
[ 30 October 2008: Message edited by: Fidel ]
I am sure this will encourage all babblers who have wondered whether their time here is wasted. Thank you.
I expect a similar message might come from someone in the Green Party. I also expect a few active Liberals and Conservatives are monitoring babble. As well, I am sure involved non-partisans are doing so. During the hearings and deliberations of the Ontario Citisens' Assembly, some members of it were on babble, but I also know some staff were lurking.
So I would again encourage democratic conservatives, Hugh Segal and Janet Ecker Tories, democratic reform Liberals, and all other like-minded Canadians (that's a 1960 homage, Brian) to join in the babbling.
I don't know of any other babblers who were delegates to the NDP founding convention in 1961. Being 18 then, and 66 now, our ranks may be thinning a bit.
Anyway, it appears from Brian that this listening and learning from the babble conversations was very systemic and intentional. Bravo to the NDP campaign team 2008. Michelle was right, overall, it was an excellent campaign.
I was particularly thrilled that the clear goal was to tell people we are an alternative government, not just the conscious of Parliament.
Best of luck on some well earned down time - if anyone will actually get some [img]wink.gif" border="0[/img] and looking forward to what is to come.
Because we all know true social democrats want some form of proportional representation in Canada - and if this were Sweden, then E May would already have her seat in Parliament.
(And by the way - I'm an NDP member).
[ 30 October 2008: Message edited by: LemonThriller ]
Good to see you post in your official capacity.
Some of the capital "D" defenders of the NDP have been spinning this election as a success based on the seat count, but it seems to some of us that this is more spinning of wheels, given the fact that the party did not rise more than a smidgen above its last result, and in fact lost overall votes.
Recently you posted a letter you wrote after you admitted to wanting to "barf" (euphemistically) on one of Canada's only established non-partisan left wing journals because of some commentary critical of present NDP policy positions. You spoke at length about "voting to win" as the key to succesful implimentation of policy, noting past NDP achievements as a result.
So. How is that working out for yah?
You go first and then Brian Topp can respond.
[ 30 October 2008: Message edited by: TCD ]
I dunno TCD, I was on the street protesting the war right when they invaded Afgahnistan. In fact almost the day after GWB made his "with us or against us speech."In fact was a key organizer of many of the intitial demonstrations against the war way back when. I have been interviewed on TV as well. I'll point out that that was 5 years before you deadbeats caught up.
I have been assidiously promoting the case of people such as Omar Khadr and against anti-muslim prejudice in general 5 years before an NDP MP had the courage to stand up in the house and demand that the Harper government demand his return to Canada.
I am glad the NDP finally got on board. So in terms of the extra-parlimentary opposition, and how it goes... I'd say very well. But talking to you, you would think that things like opposing the war, and demanding Khadr's return just occur out of the blue in caucus through some sort of tantric envisioning process.
Now, I guess since you seem to be acting as Mr. Topps agent, perhaps you can get him to respond.
[ 30 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]
It was a Liberal government with phony majority power which handed Omar Khadr over to the American inquisition to be tortured. And then they lied in parliament to the NDP that the vicious empire would not be allowed to violate his basic human rights.
Conclusion:
Arrogant, paternalistic Liberals enjoying the phoniest electoral majority ever at the time couldn't be trusted to tell the truth to Canadians.
But I gotta say, the number of times I found myself cheering what you had to say was a little distressing to me. And possibly to you as well.
[img]wink.gif" border="0[/img]
In the absence of his response let me note: for a person who has been engaged in - let's be frank - unsuccesful political struggle you seem very "results oriented" when it comes to New Democrats. Your glee at the fact that the party that ran on a platform of withdrawl from Afghanistan, exposed the true costs of the war in Afghaistan, and is credited in some quarters with forcing Harper to announce a withdrawl date from Afghanistan, won only seven new seats is confusing at best.
Let's face facts: the war in Afghanistan continues, Khadr (and many many others) are still imprisoned. You think you've done "well". I think, given your lack of success in actually changing anything much at all, you may want to reconsider your assessment. Doing "well" will be getting out of Afghanistan. Doing "very well" will be not going there in the first place. I'm sure your insta-protest filled you with a feeling of self-importance but it likely didn't mean shit to the Afghan family whose home was blown up that night.
I'd like to see the NDP do better but I'm not sure we need a lecture on success from someone who judges it by how quickly he can "hit the streets" before returning to his comfortable home having accomplished nothing other than getting himself on tv.
[ 30 October 2008: Message edited by: TCD ]
You are confused. You alledge that the NDP made the Tories announce a due date on the war in Afghanistan. That is speculation. I know for a fact that the NDP's anti-war stand comes directly from a strong coalition of activists who basically had to force the NDP to take a strong antiwar position.
So on the one hand you want to have the NDP take credit for changing the course of action of the Federal government, and then deny that it was the antiwar activists who dragged the NDP kicking and screaming to that position.
So lets face the facts, either the antiwar movement was effective at drawing attention to the issue, and then succesful at lobbying the NDP to take that stand, which in turn (according to your assertion) forced the Tories to set a withdrawal date, and was effective, or it was not effective.
And what does this out of the blue ad hominem attack upon me have to do with the question I raised, directly relating to the subject, and Topp's previous attack upon This Magazine, and his "play to win" theme?
[ 30 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]
Touche.
I agree that my initial question was not very "nice", but if someone from the NDP is going to come to the board officially representing the NDP, I don't see why a straight question on the apparent lack of success of the NDP, in the light of Mr. Topp's previous statements here, "barfing" (sic) on one of the few established independent lefty magazines in Canada, and enounciating his ideas about "playing to win" is completely justified, I should think, and it was not phrased in a hostile manner.
The real issue of discussion in that article, in This Magazine that Topp wanted to "barf" on was not "playing to win" but the content of NDP policies today, and those of the past.
But that is the arguement in a nutshell, "playing to win" v "policy". I say that simply "playing to win" without reference to "policy" has not proved sufficient to garner the NDP any measurable success.
[ 31 October 2008: Message edited by: Cueball ]