I am not very familiar with the Waffle movement but it seems that something similiar is required for the NDP. I know there is a socialist caucus, isn't there, but that does not seem to have the same clout.
I know mainstreet NDPers probably cringe at the thought, but wasn't the NDP quite popular when the Waffle was around. And if there was a very strong pressure group from the left, it might even help the party gain credibility with the middle-of-the-road voter during elections.
You know, Layton could say look at those crazy lefties, better vote NDP. 
One thing I can say for sure is "Big Daddy" in no way speaks for the average NDPer.
What makes you say that?
I don't don't know what you are inferring however if anyone thinks the NDP can function at all without organized labour they are living in a fantasy world.
There are many radical leftists who are people of colour, immigrants, queers, feminists, etc.
Maysie, I was going to ask you to define "many", but read the rest of the discussion before doing so. I think your point is that those there are (I assume you're based in Toronto) aren't being approached by elements of the NDP there.
KenS, being based somewhere else in the country, and with history in still another part of the country, has a different experience.
I still think there aren't as many "radical leftists" in the country as you think. However if your point is to do with outreach period, that's clearly been a key weakness of the Ontario section of the party for a very long time.
But I also think Ken's other point about the role of a political party is a valid one. Its role IS to get people elected in order to carry on the parts of the struggles that can only take place in the legislatures. Social movement-y folks tend to forget that part sometimes, and it does require a different set of skills and interests.
fiide_castro, you are in error, about where the highest populations are in Canada, just as you are about many things, BC has the second largest FN population, next to Ontario.
http://www.bchousing.org/resources/Programs/AH/BC_2006_Census_Aboriginal...
I see the 4 FN's candiates running for the BCNDP, as a significant step towards engagement, and more who get involved and get elected, means more will do so too.
The fact that we have a Metis party leader, whose married to a full status FN, is even more significant. (not going to go into my belief that rants against her within the BCNDP, are gender and racially biased)
Many many FN's bands and individuals across the province, own businesses, that employ band members and other FN's only, then we have the significant amout of world renowned artisans, and those who are not yet so well known, who are self-employed. Yes, there still is a long way to go, but initiatives in BC which started in the late 90's, are success stories today. There is a FN's bank in BC and several Aboriginal Business Development Centres. Having said that there is still along way to go.
Instead of blaiming the NDP for the Prarie's racism, and oppression of FN's there, perhaps progressive whites in those provinces, should start initiatives to alleviate it. For example what have you done youself?
It is my view that all immigration to Canada, that is stated to be for replacement workers, should be stopped. There are at least 1/3 of a million FN's not able to get jobs because too many employers will hire anybody but a FN's person. Then there is also the issue of bringing in immigrants to settle them on stolen land, when they should not be.
Also, I think that T'Sou-ke Chief Gordon Planes, should be approached by the federal NDP to run as a candidate in EJDF at some point in the future. John Horgan already has a working relaitonship wth him. In fact, Chief Planes could probably knock Dr Martin out, if he was interested in running.
http://johnhorgan.ca/image/sooke-canada-day-2008/cutting-cake-with-tsou-... [82]
In a spectacular marriage of traditional values and state of the art technology, the T'Sou-ke First Nation on Vancouver Island has already become BC's most-solar-powered intensive community. As the first phase of a five-year plan designed to end the community's dependence on fossil fuels, the T'Sou-ke Nation is installing solar panels to pre heat hot water and photovoltaic panels to create clean electricity to power potentially large savings as hydro prices spike. In the process the Nation is creating much-needed skills in a new fast growing industry.
http://www.turtleisland.org/communities/tsoukesolar.html [83]
The deal intends to make those students feel more a part of the system, therefore increasing their potential and getting the best-possible education.
Everyone is seen as a beneficiary of the new policy.
"I'm proud to be a part of it," said T'Sou-ke Chief Gordon Planes on April 7 in the Edward Milne Community School gym which was filled to capacity, "to be a witness... a signatory. I look for a lot of positive things for us in the future with this agreement."
http://www.bclocalnews.com/vancouver_island_south/sookenewsmirror/news/4... [84]
But I also think Ken's other point about the role of a political party is a valid one. Its role IS to get people elected in order to carry on the parts of the struggles that can only take place in the legislatures. Social movement-y folks tend to forget that part sometimes, and it does require a different set of skills and interests.
I don't agree.
Political parties of the left should not exist merely as electoral vehicles. They should be rooted in the struggles and causes of the mass of working people (and not just trade unions), and particularly those of oppressed minority groups and nationalities. The same set of "skills and interests" should be applied towards participating in these movements as in getting people out to vote one day every couple of years.
These skills would include communication and public relations skills; organizational resources and knowhow for holding public meetings, rallies, conferences, demonstrations, and speeches; persuasive writing and advocacy skills; skills in research and accessing knowledge resources; skills in education and training of organizers and activists; skills in fundraising. etc.
"Interests" would include not just getting a handful of people into legislatures, but learning from the experiences of actual activists; forging links with their organizations; providing political leadership that will link the various causes together into a coherent critique of capitalist society and a vision of how society could be different; drawing lessons from political defeats that will help to raise the consciousness of the voters and attract them toward clear alternatives; and opening up the party apparatus and policy-making process to participation by progressive social movements.
The parts of the struggles "that can only take place in the legislatures" are only a minor part of those struggles, and by limiting itself to them, any leftist political party puts itself on the sidelines of movements for social change. There is much more to political leadership than making speeches and asking questions in QP.
Some of those formulations ascribe this objective role to subjective factors. And such formulations can easily be "excessive". So, yea.
It's also worth pointing out that those who take a pathological anti-communist point of view (i.e., like unremitting cold warriors of the extreme right) provide a very useful service in carrying out this objective role. It silences and muzzles less "communistic" elements IN the NDP and shows them what to expect if they "get out of line", i.e. get too "socialistic".
Well, at least somebody did some research on this topic. Please do not patronize me about what I have done with my life, you have no clue as to what I have done with my life, as I have no clue about yours. But I will say this, I was raised on an extremely impoverished reserve in Southern Sask. (Peepeekisis) and then I moved to North Central Regina (voted by Macleans as the worst neighbourhood in Canada) when I was 8 after my father passed when I was 6; both my parents attended residential schools. I now have a B.A. Honours in PSCI and I am presently working an my M.A. thesis in PSCI; some day I hope to do a doctoral thesis on why the NDP is irrelevant to Aboriginal populations (I might be joking though). So I have done something constructive with my time and my life. I know what I am talking about. So please leave your personal shots and attacks inside your head. Sadly, only a First Nations person would ever have to give their credentials in this manner to prove they have knowledge.
The Census numbers are stagnant and represent a one time number that does not move. The census is often filled out by those that are willing to do so. The fact is that many Aboriginal people (Metis and non-status included) in the Prairies do not fill out the Census. How do I know? Because I speak to them. Thus the actual numbers are skewed for the non-status populations, the status pops are registered with the government and these are probably well-known. The numbers of the Census are accurate to those that fill it out. The B.C. Census indicated that the Aboriginal pop is at 5% of the total pop. The projections for Sask., due the youth and reproduction factors, are that the pop. may approach a 50-50% split in the coming decades. Which would by far surpass the pops of B.C. and Ontario. Yes, you are right today B.C. has a few more people that filled the census and declared their status as Aboriginal. But, the Sask. numbers shows that in 2006 out of our 968,000 total pop. a whopping 141,890 (with 90,000 registered) and this is without those in the cities that may not have filled out the census and those on reserves that may not have either.
Sask. Aboriginal % is 15% of the total pop. and rising immensely., Manitoba's Aboriginal per capita is also 15%. B.C. has 196,000 and this is 5% of their total pop. Ontario has 242,000 Aboriginal pop and this represents 2% of their total pop, Alberta is around 6% of total per capita pop.. Yes, in 2006 B.C. & Ontario have the majority of the total pop. but these numbers are extremely fluid (not static) and are changing everyday. So yes, the 2006 census show that B.C. is second in total numbers but not in per capita, not in per capita (I did not make this clear and I am sorry). Per capita shows that Sask. and Manitoba are in a wide leading margin; excluding Nunavut and the NWT because there is no balanced comparison in these areas, they are predominantly Inuit and Dene with very little non-Aboriginal settlements.
The margin is, by most statisticians measures, rising toward 50-50 parity in Sask. Ontario and B.C. will never get a 50-50% parity but Manitoba might. The stats show, due to live birth rates, that the B.C. and Ontario total Aboriginal pops are more than likely to be surpassed by Sask. in the next decades. I have already demonstrated that in 2006 the per capita is decidedly in favour of Sask., not B.C. and not Ontario. Sask. and Manitoba are where the pops. are booming. The fact is that Sask. and Man. may surpass B.C. and Ontario in the next few years based on birth rate stats. You can read in the political significance on your own.
But I also think Ken's other point about the role of a political party is a valid one. Its role IS to get people elected in order to carry on the parts of the struggles that can only take place in the legislatures. Social movement-y folks tend to forget that part sometimes, and it does require a different set of skills and interests.
I don't agree.
Political parties of the left should not exist merely as electoral vehicles. They should be rooted in the struggles and causes of the mass of working people (and not just trade unions), and particularly those of oppressed minority groups and nationalities. The same set of "skills and interests" should be applied towards participating in these movements as in getting people out to vote one day every couple of years.
These skills would include communication and public relations skills; organizational resources and knowhow for holding public meetings, rallies, conferences, demonstrations, and speeches; persuasive writing and advocacy skills; skills in research and accessing knowledge resources; skills in education and training of organizers and activists; skills in fundraising. etc.
"Interests" would include not just getting a handful of people into legislatures, but learning from the experiences of actual activists; forging links with their organizations; providing political leadership that will link the various causes together into a coherent critique of capitalist society and a vision of how society could be different; drawing lessons from political defeats that will help to raise the consciousness of the voters and attract them toward clear alternatives; and opening up the party apparatus and policy-making process to participation by progressive social movements.
The parts of the struggles "that can only take place in the legislatures" are only a minor part of those struggles, and by limiting itself to them, any leftist political party puts itself on the sidelines of movements for social change. There is much more to political leadership than making speeches and asking questions in QP.
Yes, a lot of what you say is right ... and that's a useful correction to my point. But everyone can't do everything well. It seems as though people outside electoral politics don't place much importance on what it takes to do well there as opposed to elsewhere ... and running a national election campaign is a huge undertaking. Plus I find they tend to judge what, for example, the federal NDP caucus is actually doing based on what they read about it in the Toronto Star or Globe and Mail, and see on the CBC.
I know in my community, Paul Dewar is doing all the things you talk about and more. We just never read about it in the Canwest rag that runs this town (who refused the chance to endorse Ed Broadbent when he ran here, fer chrissakes). But if you're out in the community you see him everywhere, working on stuff that really matters.
Fiidel_castro, I did not do any research, I was merely providing links to what was known to me.
and my apologies, if you think I was taking a shot at you. I seriously meant that whites in the prairies who are progressive need to get going on anti-racism initiatives and becoming allies with FN's there. And I had no idea you were FN's, so I was not indicating you need to prove your credentials.
No harm done at all, I am glad you did point out the numbers it clarifies things and we can see the Sask. and Man, are in the per capita majority. I personally believe that the NDP can do something with these provinces in the near future. The waffle 2.0 may come from these provinces and it may be led by young Aboriginal people that are seeking more political and economic involvement. All things are possible when the masses are included. I just hate to see opportunity for advancement go to waste. I have to be critical of the NDP because a great majority of Aboriginal people in the country are leftist (some very extreme) and they are often ignored. The NDP has been in power in Sask. and have been the official opposition for years and still Aboriginal issues are almost never taken-up by the leaders (Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal NDP) until they retire or leave the party. I am optimistic but I am also not stupid.
No one said that parties of the left should only exist as electoral vehicles.
What was said as that they have to exist first of all as electoral vehicles. Have to.
Upthread I said that the people who come in the door of a riding association or campaign expect to work on electing people. They don't expect to win, but they do expect to be working tangibly and concretely to that ultimate end.
Now that may sound like common sense- and to your eyes, cop out common sense. But I found that out the hard way- by working my butt and as creatively as I and others could think to get people involved on a broader basis. The success of even getting people in the door [once] was limited at best, and very poor at keeping them involved.
Even people who have those broader interests tend only to get involved or stay involved to the degree that there is something very directly related to elections or pre-election work. When you think about it that makes sense. One contributing factor being that there is a huge tendency in our culture to compartmentalize.
I never discourage other people from trying the same thing. But I do take umbrage with people who I know have never taken the trouble to acquaint themselves with the messy details of the grunt work of electoral politics.
I'm fine with being told what the NDP does not do on a 'macro' policy or delivery level, but I DO take offense at being lectured about what I/we SHOULD be DOING, by people who THINK they know what its all about.
Yes, I agree the majority of FN's are leftist, and that the NDP can do better, much better in some areas. Indeed, much could be done with such a partnership occuring in greater depth.
In fact, if the segment of white males within the BCNDP keep up their attacks upon James, and try to oust her, they will find out just how little support they will again have. It will be shades of 2000 all over again but with no return.
Great posts, fiidel_castro, thanks for showing up here and sharing!
No harm done at all, I am glad you did point out the numbers it clarifies things and we can see the Sask. and Man, are in the per capita majority. I personally believe that the NDP can do something with these provinces in the near future. The waffle 2.0 may come from these provinces and it may be led by young Aboriginal people that are seeking more political and economic involvement. All things are possible when the masses are included. I just hate to see opportunity for advancement go to waste. I have to be critical of the NDP because a great majority of Aboriginal people in the country are leftist (some very extreme) and they are often ignored. The NDP has been in power in Sask. and have been the official opposition for years and still Aboriginal issues are almost never taken-up by the leaders (Aboriginal and non-Aboriginal NDP) until they retire or leave the party. I am optimistic but I am also not stupid.
Native affairs and Canadian apartheid are federal matters in Canada and always have been. I, too, am not naive.
constitutionally maybe but in practise they have long been "provincialized" with NDP BC leading the way actually.
No, Fidel you are incorrect and the statement is pure ignorance. "Native affairs" are Canadian affairs they are not separate, they have been one and the same since Confederation. Provincial affairs are also Canadian affairs, how are the two separate?. Last time I checked I was a full-citizen of this country but I happen to live in Sask. and my people are from Sask. Last time I checked the NDP was a party that ran on two levels of government: federal and provincial, and the two often inter-weave. By your statement you suggest that "Native Affairs" should only be responsible to the federal and leave the provincial alone and vice-versa. This is blind ignorance. Politics and social movements take on all facets of governance and government and you know this.
Here is a news flash to everyone because you probably did not hear it in any of your schooling including universities: First Nations peoples (full status and non), Metis peoples, and Inuit peoples are no longer 'wards of the state', i.e. the federal government. Aboriginal (meaning First Nation, Metis, and Inuit) peoples are autonomous and so are their communities. Autonomy is the key to erasing apartheid. 'Apartheid' officially ended in 1960 when First Nations people got the right to vote at all levels of government but the effects of apartheid are still prevalent in the day to day matters (schooling, governance, employment, health care, etc.). Therefore apartheid still exists at all levels of governance and society. Thus it is the job of all levels of society to work with Aboriginal groups in erasing the legacy of apartheid.
First Nation "Treaty rights" and treaty issues are federal, indeed but every other political issue in Aboriginal communities can take on three levels of governance and government, i.e.: 1) federal, 2) provincial, and 3) municipal. Treaty issues are not the only issues that Aboriginal peoples are fighting, treaty issues are just the most publicized and recognizable issues that every Canadian hears about. Again (why do I have to repeat this in 2009), what if you are non-status and/or metis, then the federal gov. could care less about you and your issues; they would just tell you to contact your local MLA.
Again, I ask the most important question - how will the federal government, housed in Ottawa, help me and my peoples get a job in Sask. in 2009 and in a capitalist economy that values fierce competition between individualized labour? The answer is that the feds may make some promises but they will leave employment in the hands of the provinces and in private interests (businesses and enterprise). Jobs, schooling, healthcare, are left in the hands of the provincial and municipal. Thus, these two levels of government have to be lobbied the hardest in order to achieve real social justice. If the Charter of Rights can be invoked then there is a case for the feds to be involved but this rarely happens when talking about non-treaty issues. All three levels of government are responsible in 2009, so please get out of 1959 and stay current.
The residential schools. That was federal Liberal and Tory governments not the CCF or NDP,
The theft of native lands had nothing to do with the NDP.
The segregation of whole nations of people on to narrow strips of land along highways and remote parts of Canada had nothing to do with the NDP.
Making human flag poles of Cree people in the North had nothing to do with a provincial NDP government. The federal Liberals were directly responsible for that and so many other wonderful things that happened to native Canadians.
The state sponsored execution of the first native person in Ontario in recent history was Mike Harris' regime nothing to do with the NDP.
The Indian Act had nothing to do with the NDP provincially or federally.
So let's give full credit to the two dirty, rotten old line parties for how they have handled native affairs in this frozen Puerto Rico since forever and a day.
And if native people vote for or associate themselves with either of the two rotten old line parties that have run this country together for twice as long as Soviets ruled the USSR, then they shall reap what they sow.
Hey, trust me I am more critical of the 2 big neo-cons because they withhold power and they always abuse power. But the NDP has a history of 'social justice' and the 2 others simply do not, in fact the 2 other parties perpetrate the abuses and then forget. The NDP has to be involved in all issues not merely the ones they can pick and choose. Social justice should never be racially motivated it should be based on the principles of equality and fairness, across the board. I am a Canadian and the NDP represents Canadian people, especially working class peoples but I am also a resident of Sask. I, along with thousands of others, work and are schooled in Sask. The NDP has been in power in this province and they are the official opposition and yet I still see few areas where they are trying harder to get social justice for the Aboriginal pop.
Where exactly is the conflict between Aboriginal workers rights and non-Aboriginal workers rights? They are one in the same but in different communities. The NDP is not allowed to pick and choose between workers rights but they often do and they do so along racial lines. Social justice is not just about getting more votes and the NDP is as guilty as the other 2 on this point, especially in 2009. Nevertheless I will reiterate what I have already said in this section a dozen times. The NDP can capitalize, socially and politically, on the immense social injustices that urban and rural Aboriginal peoples are currently facing. The NDP can lead a political renaissance and not merely join the race to the bottom.
Well, it's been federal Liberal and Tory governments whove been placing more and more of our economic decision making in the hands of private enterprise and foreign capital since the ideological shift toward US-style neoliberal economies since the 1980s and 90's. If you dont like the way our valuable natural resources and profits have been shovelled out of the country to America and to foreign banks since 1991 or so, then I think you should consider the NDP as an alternative to the "Let's transform Canada into a 51st US state" mentality that says we will benefit by tying our economic fortunes to those of the USA's. That country is run by a bunch of crooks and liars and crooked-liars, and that doesnt say very much for our two old line party leaders past and present whove made Canada more reliant on the US through bad trade deals and weakening foreign ownership rules in this country. Provincial governments dont have the ability to control and expand public sector economies at the provincial level like they did in Tommy Douglas' time - and this is due to federal level CUSFTA and NAFTA trade agreements signed and enacted in 1989 and 1994 by the two oldest political parties in government in Ottawa. Now what we have are federal governments practicing impotence in weak federal government while provinces compete with each other for private sector jobs and foreign investment. Things look good in good times but glaring deffincies with this model become evident when things dont work well, like now. Canada is a weak country with a weak economy in other people's hands because of the recent past and presently planned and enforced impotence of the top-down neoliberal agenda favouring big business, banks, and foreign capital. You didnt vote for them and neither did I.
Vote NDP that's what to do. But be prepared to be punished even moreso by the two old line federal parties for voting the wrong way.
The NDP doesn't need a "waffle", it needs to get angry.
Heh.
We need federal power for the first time in Canadian history in order to make a difference nationally. Until that time, provincial governments of all political stripes will experience reduced federal funding and be told to go with cap in hand to private enterprise and "the market" to finance social programs and essential infrastructure. There's no way I know of that we can simply ignore the elephant in the room that is top-down neoliberal ideology handed down from Ottawa since the 1980s and 90's. We need government-created money and credit to some extent and to buck the influence of foreign capital and Bay Street if we are to pursue any kind of economic or social welfare nationalism in this country. The NDP is the only mainstream party I know of indicating that it's even possible. But we need to break the 140 year-old monopoly on federal power first and foremost if real change is to be on the agenda.
I could understand why the NDP leadership would have been paranoid about the Waffle if, in the early 70's, the party had been in a long-standing "party of government" position, like Labour in the UK. But the party was in third place and had no prospects at that point of getting anywhere higher than that. If you're stuck at 15-18% and 20 to 30 seats, what's the POINT in being obsessed with "playing it safe"? Isn't that sort of like running down the clock in a football came when your six points BEHIND in the fourth quarter?
Really, in those years, with radical ferment sweeping the world, why SHOULDN'T the NDP have gone bold and radical? Why not embrace the times?
I'm not sure what youre asking, Ken. For one thing, the NDP has always been bold and radical compared to the two very similar Liberals and Tories. But keep in mind that there were compromises made by capitalists after laissez-faire fell apart the first time. And workers being martyred by two world wars didnt hurt the cause either. Our's is the party for mixed market economy while the other two are for let's allow the Yanks to siphon off our fossil fuels and raw materials for a song while we feign impotence in Ottawa types. There is still a big difference between mixed markets, which are proven to work fairly well for the working class, and that of leave it to the market ideology - and which in on record now as having failed spectacularly in two major western world experiments spanning 30 years both times. Soviet communism lasted longer before sanctions and cold war pushed it over the edge. Laissez-faire committed suicide twice now, and three times if we count Friedman's personal hobbyhorse in Chile,.
I'm not sure what youre asking, Ken. For one thing, the NDP has always been bold and radical compared to the two very similar Liberals and Tories. But keep in mind that there were compromises made by capitalists after laissez-faire fell apart the first time. And workers being martyred by two world wars didnt hurt the cause either. Our's is the party for mixed market economy while the other two are for let's allow the Yanks to siphon off our fossil fuels and raw materials for a song while we feign impotence in Ottawa types. There is still a big difference between mixed markets, which are proven to work fairly well for the working class, and that of leave it to the market ideology - and which in on record now as having failed spectacularly in two major western world experiments spanning 30 years both times. Soviet communism lasted longer before sanctions and cold war pushed it over the edge. Laissez-faire committed suicide twice now, and three times if we count Friedman's personal hobbyhorse in Chile,.
Of course the NDP was always more radical and "bolder" than the old parties. But it's also always had the pointless social-democratic fixation with "respectability". What I meant was, why didn't they party just say, in the late 60's-early 70's period "these are radical times, so let's be a party of the times". Why didn't they, in short, just go for it and become a "New Left" party in those years?
The New Left ideas had petered out here about the time labour killed the Waffle, and in Britain, the source of social democratic ideas since the late 30s, Maggie was doing a number on labour and the social safety net that was constructed in the first 20 years after the war.
The "radical times" belonged to a resurgent "Right".
But, again, Waffle was mostly a nationalist force depending on left Liberal thinking as much as NDP "radicalism" (the socialist ideas necessary to protect Canadian industry from U.S.incursion). The autoworkers caved.
And it also meant the loss of development of an environmental perspective - the first Earth Day was celebrated in spring 1970. The same reactionary forces branded us "tree huggers", and the tittering among the knuckle-dragging communities died out only a couple of years ago.
Uh, the Waffle was crushed(or at least left out after breakfast to go stale)in 1974. Thatcher didn't take power until 1979. The late 60's and early 70's were times of great radicalism all over the Western world(weirdly enough, right-wing social democrats and Communists fought against the New Left in an inadvertent show of unity-the Communists SAVING the capitalist status quo in France and Italy in '68 and '69 just as the prevented radical socialism from coming back to life in Czechoslovakia at the same time-that was a twisted parody of the Popular Front. It should have been called the Unpopular Back). That's what I meant by "radical times", not the late 70's retrenchment period (a period in which social democrats were absolutely useless at fighting the Right in large measure BECAUSE they had done such a great job of crushing the independent democratic radical New Left.)
And George, for those of us just getting up to speed on this, what do you mean "the autoworkers caved"? Was it the CAW votes that put the anti-Waffle fatwa over the top?
"Uh", Thatcher's coming to power was not an overnight phenom. The folks (some of my relatives over there) were getting restive in the early '70s...told me so when they visited here.
And the Waffle was voted down in '72 as I recall, laid to rest a couple of years later.
And yes, it was (then) UAW votes that ensured the death of Waffle. David Lewis had them in his pocket (or they had him).They also put paid to thoughts of advancing environmental issues, causing me a few years later to be a founding membe of the Green Party of Ontario (silly me, but it seemed necessary. Who knew the Libertarian strength out there).
Revolution and "jobs, jobs, jobs" don't mix worth a damn.
One thing I can say for sure is "Big Daddy" in no way speaks for the average NDPer.
What makes you say that?
I don't don't know what you are inferring however if anyone thinks the NDP can function at all without organized labour they are living in a fantasy world.
Ok I'm about ten steps behind here and drifting far from the topic, but I suppose I should reply that I somehow doubt that "Big Daddy" represents organized labour in the NDP anymore than any of their other traditional concerns, but maybe youve picked that up by now. I've seen a few other "NDP'ers" like him here before but let's leave it at that, my days of troll spotting are pretty much past I hope.
For your information, North, Big Daddy has self identified as a building contractor. This makes him management, not labour.
And I don't think we can assume that the average union member is as chokingly anti-left as Daddy is. I've always wondered what the deal is with him and leftists. Did Svend Robinson kick his dog or something?
Oh, since youre wondering too Ken, I suspect "Big Daddy" is just Big Daggy come to visit us again, minus the good humour, or maybe that Budd Campbell dude who's still going on about the evil leftists who have taken over the NDP last I looked at Public Eye. Long memories, short attention spans.
I hope the NDP do not re-introduce the Waffle. Anything to keep them from gaining more ground than they already have.
What a droll troll.
RightWingA-Hole is gone. For being a right-wing a-hole.
As is this thread. For being too long for our dial-up friends.
Links:
[1] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038218
[2] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038222
[3] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038229
[4] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038234
[5] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038235
[6] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038241
[7] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038245
[8] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038249
[9] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038250
[10] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038287
[11] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038290
[12] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038292
[13] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038303
[14] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038306
[15] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038386
[16] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038389
[17] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038392
[18] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038393
[19] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038409
[20] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038413
[21] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038415
[22] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038449
[23] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038453
[24] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038474
[25] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038481
[26] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038490
[27] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038493
[28] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038509
[29] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038512
[30] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038516
[31] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038518
[32] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038520
[33] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038522
[34] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038524
[35] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038528
[36] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038531
[37] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038534
[38] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038535
[39] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038540
[40] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038558
[41] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038582
[42] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038584
[43] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038588
[44] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038590
[45] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038592
[46] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038602
[47] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038604
[48] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038605
[49] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038611
[50] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038620
[51] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038657
[52] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038667
[53] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038676
[54] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038679
[55] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038689
[56] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038698
[57] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038740
[58] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038741
[59] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038777
[60] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038792
[61] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038793
[62] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038796
[63] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038805
[64] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038813
[65] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038824
[66] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038833
[67] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038834
[68] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038838
[69] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038842
[70] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038847
[71] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038852
[72] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038869
[73] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038887
[74] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038901
[75] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038904
[76] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038908
[77] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038926
[78] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1038978
[79] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1039091
[80] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1039124
[81] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1039133
[82] http://johnhorgan.ca/image/sooke-canada-day-2008/cutting-cake-with-tsou-ke-nation-chief-gordon-planes-and-sooke-mayor-jan
[83] http://www.turtleisland.org/communities/tsoukesolar.html
[84] http://www.bclocalnews.com/vancouver_island_south/sookenewsmirror/news/42704117.html
[85] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1039154
[86] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1039155
[87] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1039161
[88] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1039164
[89] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1039168
[90] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1039173
[91] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1039177
[92] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1039183
[93] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1039200
[94] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1039250
[95] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1039267
[96] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1039274
[97] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1039278
[98] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1039281
[99] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1039283
[100] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1039285
[101] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1039286
[102] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1041304
[103] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1041305
[104] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1041306
[105] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1041315
[106] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1041323
[107] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1041326
[108] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1042446
[109] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1042450
[110] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1042452
[111] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1042456
[112] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1042466
[113] http://rabble.ca/print/babble/canadian-politics/does-ndp-need-revive-waffle#comment-1042472
[114] http://rabble.ca/user
[115] http://rabble.ca/user/register
nope because if jack keeps going the way he is the 21st century waffle will revive all on its own
I thought that is what I said.
Well, it all depends on what your goals are but honestly, I don't see it being that much of a benefit to left movements. Socialist Caucus is getting nowhere fast and the Alan Woods fanboys at Fightback/IMT are an even bigger joke. I think the notion that we can capture the NDP and use it in the stuggle against capitalism is quite frankly absurd.
It's not all bad within the NDP, and realistically politically what alternatives does the left have?
Lavigne, Layton, etc. just need some seriously organized pressure from the left to make the correct political policy choices .
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Waffle
With all due respect, the thread title is a bit flaky. The NDP didn't create the Waffle - so it can't "revive" it. The NDP destroyed the Waffle, because various middle class leaders and trade union bosses felt threatened by its attractive power for (especially) the youth. The crushing of the Waffle was one reason I left the NDP in those days, although I was never a Waffle member, but not the only reason.
Anyway, it makes no sense to have an oppositional formation within a party like the NDP. Its history shows that it will not tolerate organized dissent. Its conventions show that policy isn't made by the members. I still believe people should speak up for what's right, whether from inside or outside, and influence the NDP to do the right thing. But this "caucus" thing is a solid waste of time and an illusion.
Wasn't Ed Broadbent one of the first people to be involved in the waffle and is also credited with having first coined the phrase "waffle"? (outside of the Belgian context)
Lots of former Wafflers also went on to take leadership roles in the party, including in the caucus. I think it was more of a legend in the minds of the academics who started it, and I don't think it ever achieved the kind of mass appeal people think it did, but it did serve a purpose in helping to further democratizing the party. I remember attending a convention in the 1980s when I was handed the authorized list of people to vote for. They sure don't try that anymore.
Ya well, that is why I put the wiki link up, so that people could read up on what it actually was.
The lack of support by the general public of the "waffle" movement, indicates just how marginal far/extreme left thought was back then, and it is even more so in today's world. And BTW, I am not ascribing correctness or wrongness, to people's opinions in the majority, just stating a fact.
The more the NDP continues on its current path of approaching the centre for electoral purposes, obsessing over media hits, and allowing its spin doctors determine policy, the closer we will all come to a waffle 2.0.
As an NDP activist in QC -an oftentimes more radical section of the NDP- I can see firsthand the disappointment and exasperation of its activists.
If the NDP wants to 'replace' the Liberals by being a hair to the left of them, and/or if the NDP continues to crush dissidence in its party, why does the NDP bother to exist? What would Tommy say?
The Waffle proclaimed Québec's right to self-determination - a view that was taboo in the party in those days. They preached against economic and political integration with the U.S. And they used the word "socialism" as if they meant it. It's awfully nice to hear some people refer to these views as "far left" or "extreme left". All I know is that the party youth was inspired by them. It's taken many years and lots of agony to bring those ideas back to the fore, and the party's not there yet.
As a waffle member, I thought of it first as a nationalist movement (of the left wing of the NDP). That is how both Laxer and Watkins thought of it.
Ironically, it is a market fancier by the name of Jeff Rubin whose peak oil thesis bets on a return of industrial activity in this country as it becomes too expensive to fuel the transportation systems that make globalization possible.
So I would think that this would be an excellent time to renew the nationalism of the Waffle group. Should be very popular this time out.
The Waffle proclaimed Québec's right to self-determination - a view that was taboo in the party in those days. They preached against economic and political integration with the U.S. And they used the word "socialism" as if they meant it. It's awfully nice to hear some people refer to these views as "far left" or "extreme left". All I know is that the party youth was inspired by them. It's taken many years and lots of agony to bring those ideas back to the fore, and the party's not there yet.
Why unionist, it was you yourself who stated you were extreme, and I thought; "hmm...okay then, at least we have a benchmark now for who the extreme left are" ;)
BTW, I was one of those NDP youth!
Wish I could afford to go to Halifax next month and help hold their toes to the growing nationalist flame.
I was active in the Saskatchewan Waffle. For an excellent backgrounder on the Waffle in Saskatchewan and efforts to change the NDP, read...
http://www.nextyearcountry.ca/nyclast.all.pdf
I remember attending a convention in the 1980s when I was handed the authorized list of people to vote for. They sure don't try that anymore.
The PARTY handed out that list? Who was considered "unauthorized"?
You are correct unionist, I could have worded the title a bit more accurately such as:
The "Waffle" needs to be revived within the NDP. But what's done is done.
Slates still get handed out at Ontario Provincial Conventions.
I was active in the Saskatchewan Waffle. For an excellent backgrounder on the Waffle in Saskatchewan and efforts to change the NDP, read...
http://www.nextyearcountry.ca/nyclast.all.pdf
Wow, do I ever remember Next Year Country! Thanks for the memories, dtaylor.
The NDP doesn't need a "waffle", it needs to get angry.
That sort of describes the waffle folks back in '72.
Slates still get handed out at Ontario Provincial Conventions.
Sigh. And it's worked so well for them up to now ...
The NDP doesn't need a "waffle", it needs to get angry.
Well the NDP definitely need a name change in Ontario. Nothing personal, but the NDP there is like death boiled over.
Well, maybe if the NDP just started SERVING free waffles. Who wouldn't like a party like that?
If the NDP revives the waffle, would it be possible to revive David Lewis? It sure took guts to stand up to them.
In the first federal election held after the Waffle was "stood up to", the NDP fell from 31 seats to 16. David Lewis lost his own seat.
Right after that, the BC NDP government lost power. Two years later, the same thing happened in Manitoba.
Why do you still think the defeat of the Waffle was a GOOD thing?
Thanks Ken. I didn;t know that and all the more reason to rekindle the "Waffle" flame, but for goodness sake NDPers, get a marketing guru to choice a more palatable name for North American audiences. The socialist causus. WTF
Sure, why not? I voted for Mel Hurtig's National party back in the 90s, because by then the Nude Ems had already abandoned the left-nationalist stance that had made them worth voting for.
In the first federal election held after the Waffle was "stood up to", the NDP fell from 31 seats to 16. David Lewis lost his own seat.
Right after that, the BC NDP government lost power. Two years later, the same thing happened in Manitoba.
Why do you still think the defeat of the Waffle was a GOOD thing?
Actually, you're wrong, the Waffle was expelled early in 1972 and the NDP went on to go from 22 seats to 31. In 1974, the remnants of waffle tried to form a party called Movement for an Independent Socialist Canada (and I thought CCRAP was a bad acronym, whoever heard of a party called MISC?). They got about 500 votes in the whole country and then sank without a trace.
Its probably fair to say that the Waffle was to the NDP like what those crackpots in the Militant Tendency were to the British Labour Party.
Most likely because they chose a bad name for the split party. Nevertheless, it is imperative for workers to form a "political party, distinct from and opposed to all parties of the propertied classes." How about the Socialist Left Party, taking cues from the SP-USA, the PSUV in Venezuela, Die Linke in Germany, the Nouveau Parti Anticapitaliste in France, and the CPGB-PCC in the UK?
Talk about a list of totally failed parties...you'd think "Die Linke" would be having a heyday being the only opposition to a CDU/SPD grand coalition, but they are going no where and can't escape being tarred with being mostly made up of ex-Stasi agents.
Typical Blairite social-liberal banter, as I expected.
All developed countries suffer from lower voter turnouts, due to apathy from among middle-class occupations (like the self-employed), and due to disillusionment and/or lack of self-respect from among workers, seeking the opiates of "consumerism," organized religion, and revolutionary spontaneism (no organization needed for revolutionary change, as if it will come like a religious rapture).
Any genuine socialist party would have to organize the latter class on all lines, from token electoralism to spoilages, from legal political action to civil disobedience (like coordinated bossnappings), from limited cooperative projects to alternative cultures.
I do hear the narrative, repeated again and again, that if the NDP were to become more left wing, there woud me many many people who don't currently vote for the party (or even vote) who would support the NDP. first of all, the Federal NDP is already fairly left wing. But secondly, where is the evidence for this? If being left wing were to attract more voters, then the current Ontario NDP ought to be on the way back to government. I'm not sure who these masses are who are crying out for a more left wing party. Does anyone know who these people are? I don't see masses of people demanding a more left wing party. Besudes, there is already a more left wing party (the Marxist Leninists, the Communists) and they don't get many votes. And, the Mel Hurtig National Party got trounced in the polls (though Al Q'abong apparently voted for them, good to see that you're an NDP loyalist.)
That is because the NDP you speak of is merely an electoral machine that's out to get votes come election time. The failure of many left-wing parties to "cash in" on the crisis globally is because they're set up to be mere electoral machines. What I talked about above is a "total" organizational model that can be seen in the pre-war Sozialdemokratische Partei Deutschlands (and even the short-lived USPD breakaway) to the former Kommunisticheskaya Partiya Sovetskogo Soyuza to the modern Lebanese Hezbollah.
Such "party" would be such in the 19th-century sense or early 20th-century sense: a genuine political party, a way of life, a distinct class culture.
Its probably fair to say that the Waffle was to the NDP like what those crackpots in the Militant Tendency were to the British Labour Party.
Well, after "those crackpots" in the Militant Tendency were expelled from Labour,a process began that led to the party ending up, by the time it did return to power, agreeing with the Tories on every issue that mattered. By you that's an improvement?
Talk about a list of totally failed parties...you'd think "Die Linke" would be having a heyday being the only opposition to a CDU/SPD grand coalition, but they are going no where and can't escape being tarred with being mostly made up of ex-Stasi agents.
Well, "Die Linke" is the only party on the German left that's increased it support at all since Angela Merkel came in. THe Greens have treaded water(and, since they're now in coalition with the Christian Democrats in at least one area, are now on their way away from being left-of-center at all)and the SPD is in massive decline, even though it's just as bland, tame, and moderate as you want all left-of-center parties to be.
The association with the Stasi and the East German past really should be considered extinct in this day and age. Almost no one in Die Linke today was connected in any meaningful way with the SED. Most of those types quit as soon as that party transformed into the Party of Democratic Socialism. Old SED types are much more likely to have joined the Repulibkaner or other hard-right anti-immigrant parties.
Die Linke has its flaws, but a Die Linke government would never have anything in common with the kind of regime Ulbricht and Honecker ran. Stalinism is extinct in Germany.
It's ashame that I will probably live to see August Bebel's political project be buried and animated by another political party, Ken.
In the first federal election held after the Waffle was "stood up to", the NDP fell from 31 seats to 16. David Lewis lost his own seat.
Right after that, the BC NDP government lost power. Two years later, the same thing happened in Manitoba.
Why do you still think the defeat of the Waffle was a GOOD thing?
Actually, you're wrong, the Waffle was expelled early in 1972 and the NDP went on to go from 22 seats to 31. In 1974, the remnants of waffle tried to form a party called Movement for an Independent Socialist Canada (and I thought CCRAP was a bad acronym, whoever heard of a party called MISC?). They got about 500 votes in the whole country and then sank without a trace.
Its probably fair to say that the Waffle was to the NDP like what those crackpots in the Militant Tendency were to the British Labour Party.
Thanks for the link Remind
I think it actually went more like this:
1968 election the NDP only got 22 seats
1969 Waffle was formed
1972 election the NDP rose in support to 31 seats
1974 Waffle disbanded
1974 election the NDP dropped down to only 16 seats
That's right. Even if the Waffle was kicked out in 1972, rather than 1974, the period following that expulsion was a period of general NDP decline. After the NDP kicked them out, the NDP wasn't able to do much of anything with the "balance of power" status they had between 1972 and 1974(there was single-payer, which is eternally to the NDP's credit, but that would have happened at the same time if the Waffle had't been driven out, since NDP support would have been just as strong in '72 if the Waffle was still there). And Trudeau was able to cut heavily into NDP support in 1974 as a result of the post-Waffle NDP not seeming to be very different from the Liberals at all. And if they WEREN'T different, then why NOT just vote Liberal, since the Liberals were going to have a chance to lead a government and the NDP wasn't.
If expelling the Waffle was a surpassingly brilliant political move, wouldn't NDP support have soared across Canada in the 1973 to 1977 period, rather than dropping like a stone?
I think it actually went more like this:
1968 election the NDP only got 22 seats
1969 Waffle was formed
1972 election the NDP rose in support to 31 seats
1974 Waffle disbanded
1974 election the NDP dropped down to only 16 seats
The Waffle made a brief reappearance as the NPI. It was disbanded and driven out of the party after the 2000 election. In 2004 the NDP made significant gains in terms of number of seats and popular vote. This couldn't be a coincidence either, based on your logic.
You are correct unionist, I could have worded the title a bit more accurately such as:
The "Waffle" needs to be revived within the NDP. But what's done is done.
There you go. Better late than never.
So, here's something of a radical suggestion, blending two seemingly disparate ideas together.
There are many radical leftists who are people of colour, immigrants, queers, feminists, etc. For all the issues of the NDP's lack of national diversity, if the leadership were to be turned over to folks who have longstanding activist, and leftist organizing credentials, from either their countries of origin or outside-the-mainstream activism, I think there would be a massive change and surge in population in the NDP, or whatever it wants to call itself.
Thanks for adjusting the thread title Maysie.
That would be a very interestig experiment however I just can't see those who presently control the party giving up power. What is it they say: Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.
But a diversity group could form within the NDP similiar in a sense to the Waffle, and try to do it that way. I read Michelle's comments in the diversity thread, and I have a feeling this issue is going to come back and bite the NDP in the ass.
The thing with power holders who refuse to give up power is not waiting for them to "give it" and to simply take it.
And:
No diversity committees!!! Nooooooooooo!!
I seem to remember hearing about a diversity issue in Toronto a while back, to do with the Board of some organization, was it called Jessie's perhaps, that was operating a residence for women. How did that sort itself out?
You don't just "hand over" the leadership of a party to anyone.
And I would NEVER countenance electing, or promoting for leadership, a whole group of people with no demonstrated commitment to and patience with electoral politics. Electing one particular person like that- maybe even for Leader- fine. But a wholesale changeover to people with no commitment- frankly, not going to consider it.
The hypothetical of turning the NDP into some [very hypothetical] version of an agglomeration of social movement groups is endlessly attractive to people who don't like electoral politics.... who only want to cheer for [ocassionaly] and against aspects of it they don't like.
While issues of power are most definitely central; it is also definitely not as simple as 'being willing to turn over power'.
You're crazy if you think this is new. Its been biting the NDP in the ass for longer than I've been around. This particular issue of the speakers list- if it exists at all in 2 weeks- is a pip in comparison.
Just for the record- I'm more than willing to accept criticism for what the NDP has not done. Where I get dismissive is some of the facile solutions I hear.
This is delusional at core. If the entire leadership of the NDP were to walk away- which is quite a large group actually, entailing many people who are not staff or politicians- and the doors were to be thrown open...
In the first place, I'm not so sure their would be as many takers as you think. Its a lot of work, a lot of bullshit even if you are now in charge, and people have their existing struggles and lives that are their priorities...
But supposing I'm wrong, and people come rushing in the door, there would be an influx of 'good people', but not an overall surge in poulation in the NDP.
Funny thing I learned when I got more invloved with the NDP after 25 years as social movement activist- that vast majority of people at the grassroots who come in the door are most of all interested in electing people. It doesn't have to be about winning, but it does have to be about electing people.
So good luck with that surge in population.
In the first federal election held after the Waffle was "stood up to", the NDP fell from 31 seats to 16. David Lewis lost his own seat.
Right after that, the BC NDP government lost power. Two years later, the same thing happened in Manitoba.
Why do you still think the defeat of the Waffle was a GOOD thing?
Actually, you're wrong, the Waffle was expelled early in 1972 and the NDP went on to go from 22 seats to 31. In 1974, the remnants of waffle tried to form a party called Movement for an Independent Socialist Canada (and I thought CCRAP was a bad acronym, whoever heard of a party called MISC?). They got about 500 votes in the whole country and then sank without a trace.
Its probably fair to say that the Waffle was to the NDP like what those crackpots in the Militant Tendency were to the British Labour Party.
Thanks for the link Remind
I think it actually went more like this:
1968 election the NDP only got 22 seats
1969 Waffle was formed
1972 election the NDP rose in support to 31 seats
1974 Waffle disbanded
1974 election the NDP dropped down to only 16 seats
WTF???????
Never gave you any links so I do not know what you are trying to insinuate!
Um, KenS, there are people out there with years of experience in local and national left-wing politics that the NDP hasn't tapped yet, and has not been particularly interested in tapping into. Maybe because the experience of such people doesn't happen to be in Canada? Such people, as amazing as it may seem, also know what volunteering is, and how to mobilize communities for elections. They sure could teach the NDP a thing or two. But sadly, such ideas are dismissed.
And you wonder why change isn't happening?
In the first federal election held after the Waffle was "stood up to", the NDP fell from 31 seats to 16. David Lewis lost his own seat.
Right after that, the BC NDP government lost power. Two years later, the same thing happened in Manitoba.
Why do you still think the defeat of the Waffle was a GOOD thing?
Actually, you're wrong, the Waffle was expelled early in 1972 and the NDP went on to go from 22 seats to 31. In 1974, the remnants of waffle tried to form a party called Movement for an Independent Socialist Canada (and I thought CCRAP was a bad acronym, whoever heard of a party called MISC?). They got about 500 votes in the whole country and then sank without a trace.
Its probably fair to say that the Waffle was to the NDP like what those crackpots in the Militant Tendency were to the British Labour Party.
Thanks for the link Remind
I think it actually went more like this:
1968 election the NDP only got 22 seats
1969 Waffle was formed
1972 election the NDP rose in support to 31 seats
1974 Waffle disbanded
1974 election the NDP dropped down to only 16 seats
WTF???????
Never gave you any links so I do not know what you are trying to insinuate!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Waffle
Actually remind, I was thanking you for this link which you posted above.
This is delusional at core. If the entire leadership of the NDP were to walk away- which is quite a large group actually, entailing many people who are not staff or politicians- and the doors were to be thrown open...
In the first place, I'm not so sure their would be as many takers as you think. Its a lot of work, a lot of bullshit even if you are now in charge, and people have their existing struggles and lives that are their priorities...
But supposing I'm wrong, and people come rushing in the door, there would be an influx of 'good people', but not an overall surge in poulation in the NDP.
Funny thing I learned when I got more invloved with the NDP after 25 years as social movement activist- that vast majority of people at the grassroots who come in the door are most of all interested in electing people. It doesn't have to be about winning, but it does have to be about electing people.
So good luck with that surge in population.
I call "bullshit" on both of you.
Maysie, who are all these "leftists" with amazing credentials and organizing clout that the NDP should be calling upon. If they had such amazing credentials and were such great organizers and were connected to the larger community, they'd already be a force to be reckoned with. Such people don't wait to be called upon...
Ken, this is the kind of attitude of the current leadership that makes people wish for a new one. People holding on to power because, hey, they're the only ones stepping forward to do the job. Yeah right. It's because they hoard power and positions for their "in group" that there aren't any other people stepping up. You can't actively discourage people from stepping up and then say "Well, I guess we have to continue with our status quo clique because hey, nobody is stepping up...". That's somewhat tautological. And oh, what a tough life it is. All the criticism and the bullshit these people have to put up with (for not producing any tangible results over the past three elections!) Give me a break.
Big Daddy, tone down the rhetoric. You can disagree without "calling bullshit". Stop it.
As for where are all these people I mentioned, well, that question's been asked and answered. See the thread on lack of diversity at the upcoming convention for a hint.
Okay northern, my apologies.
Big Daddy, tone down the rhetoric. You can disagree without "calling bullshit". Stop it.
As for where are all these people I mentioned, well, that question's been asked and answered. See the thread on lack of diversity at the upcoming convention for a hint.
OK, I guess it's better to be called delusional by Ken.
The Waffle Manifesto
You have a point, Big Daddy. That's one of the challenges of moderating. If I call Ken on it, is it because he's disagreed with me? Will my words of warning be taken more seriously b/c I'm a moderator? The easlest thing for me is to let all but the more offensive ones go by.
But in the interests of consistency:
Ken, don't call posters "delusional". You can disagree without being personal.
I think the NDP could do well if it was just like the Liberals were in the 1970s.
Ideologically, the modern Liberals are a bit of a corpse.
I don't think the Waffle reconstruction would be a good idea. There is absolutely no traction for socialist/communist class struggle in North America, except among a tiny minority of diehards. Exposed as the CPC and the CPC-ML are, socialist factions might be able to get 100 votes in a riding in an election.
A lot of people emigrated here to get away from socialism.
The only major socialist power these days is China, which is more like Nazi Germany was than Soviet Russia.
However, capitalism has its excesses, and wealth disparities are a concern. The top 10 people are worth more than the bottom billion. That is a problem.
Someone would do well to demonstrate that the Scandinavian model works well. Where there is less economic inequality, there is more social cohesion. Which is what I think the Liberals were talking about in the 1970s...
The NDP, at best, is a social democratic party. When I write "best" I mean most socialist. Such parties have a lengthy history of silencing their own left elements - for entirely legitimate AND illegitimate reasons - and playing the role of demobilizing and demoralizing those to the left of the party. C'est la vie. It's been that way and it's what they do. Therefore, I would say that the failure of Canadians to build a party to the left of the NDP reflects the wild success of the NDP in forestalling this and ensuring its failure. And this is while being able to attract the very activist and left elements that (later) become demobilized and demoralized. It's paradoxical and, just to be clear, I make these remarks about how the NDP, and parties like it, works when many, many of my personal friends are in the NDP. All these left wing people, activists, failing to demonstrate their political strength in this country reflects the outstanding success of the NDP (and other, more sinister forces) in doing what I've outlined with great success.
One should tip their hat to political rivals that are so successful. So, hats off to the NDP for putting such a smackdown on the left. I hope the left will put a similar smackdown on the NDP in the future. We might stand a chance of a socialist oriented Canada in that case. :)
Anyway, the discussion is interesting. I was never in the Waffle, personally, so in terms of my own experience in politics I don't feel particularly strong about them, one way or the other.
China is socialist in name only. Like the Nazis.
It's not a "problem" ... it's an inherent part of the system. Maybe you should read more about socialism before making your pronouncements about it.
Have a nice day.
I remember a communist telling me about 30 years ago that social democratic parties were the worst as all they wanted to do was "make capitalism work better".
In Scandinavia, there is less wealth disparity than is found in the Anglosphere.
Perhaps there, they have made capitalism "work better".
They are far more politically sophisticated, and they do not sit in the U.S.shadow, which was the fundamental factor creating the Waffle. Even elements of Tweedledee and Tweedledum had moments of nationalist resentment in the postwar period.
Social democracy has been waffling ever since, but to discuss the NDP and Waffle revival without context, without reference to the monsters of economic collapse and radical change in Earth's climate, suggests it's all theoretical smarm and wishful thinking. No goals, just some sort of socialist revival. Wow!
I can tell you this right now. There are thousands, literally thousands, of First Nations and Metis peoples in Sask. Manitoba and Alberta and most of them are totally separated from the party system and the whole electoral process but this does not mean they are apolitical. The truth is that they are fiercely political and they are on the margins of Canadian society. These masses are growing in numbers within the cities and they are feeling extreme disconnection from the democratic process. It is my theory that if say the NDP, or another leftist party, were to actively take up the mantle of Aboriginal issues then these masses could become political allies; I am not talking about political subordinates, I mean real allies as in side-by side.
The problem is that the NDP ignores Aboriginal peoples and cares nothing too much about their issues. But Aboriginal issues are similar to the NDP core issues: housing, healthcare, social welfare system, jobs, education, poverty, etc. So then what is the problem? The problem seems to be within power-sharing. The NDP leadership often talks a great game regarding Aboriginal issues but they rarely perform. The NDP neglects thousands of young and disaffected Aboriginal workers and this is a real shame. If there were to be a new 'waffle' it could very well be led by many Aboriginal young people who are right on the fringes of the urban masses and are housed in ethnic ghettos. This is my two cents and I think it is accurate.
It is my theory that if say the NDP, or another leftist party, were to actively take up the mantle of Aboriginal issues then these masses could become political allies; I am not talking about political subordinates, I mean real allies as in side-by side.
I agree 100%! (I'm also in Saskatchewan.)
I look forward to that day with great hope and anticipation.
But you are rather overlooking the work of New Democrats in the north, methinks. Certainly, to say that the NDP cares nothing about the issues facing Aboriginal peoples is to deny their record in Parliament and every legislative body in the land. I challenge anyone to find a more pro-active political party in that regard (while admitting that New Democrats aren't always the best organizers. Lack spirit and faith in these days of rightwing media control.
I've been inviting feedback on exactly these points for nearly two years of on and off babbling here. But as you know, there are two, very divided camps regarding FN participation in the mainstream of Canadian political life. Hope it's resolved in favour of participation soon.
At one point in my life I would have welcomed a return of the Waffle. Hell, at one point in my time on babble, I would have. I'm not entirely certain I wouldn't, still to this day.
but i do sometimes wonder at the approach. it is clear that the NDP is NOT, culturally, a radical socialist party. The socialist caucus is marginal. When people such as Bev Meslo and others have run for party leadership they have been rejected handily by the party membership, including union caucuses.
there may indeed be room for a radical socialist voice in Canadian politics, but as yet it has not found a home. At one point I thought the Green Party was going to become that voice, but the Liberal hands that guide that party under May have neatly removed that option.
the assumption, to many, has long been that the NDP should be that vehicle. I am no longer a radical socialist, and I cannot speak for them. but i might suggest that history has proven that not to be the case.
regardless, these are all interesting conversations and i do think it is very important the the socialist Left be a vibrant part of our political landscape.
Those sort of mass organizations don't exist anymore in most any other facet of life besides religion (and even there, there's a lot of fracturing). Trying to make a 19th Century model of political organization work in the 21st Century sounds pretty futile to me.
Nothing is ever futile if you can somehow impact the masses. Nothing is futile when people band together. Yes, it sounds like rhetoric but it is true. Social justice and political empowerment are real and they are happening all the time, this site is a testament to that. Nothing is futile even in 2009. Political systems and institutions are in constant flux and change. It is just a matter of the people being ready to impact the change in their favour when flux occurs.
Thank you, fiidel_castro. Yes!
I didn't call you delusional Maysie. Aside from the fact that I have tons of evidence that you are anything but.
I called something in particular you wrote delusional. But to be more precise, its exemplary of delusional thinking the left has about responsibility for obstacles to its success. And here's something from the same well:
This is of a piece with "if the 'leadership' of the NDP would just get out of the way and let the real people be in charge".
Its all of a piece where to be more radical is the natural order of things- if not for all of "the people", then at least for the most oppressed among them.
This is not to dismiss materialist concepts that the NDP and social democratic parties in general play an objective role of deflecting more radical options. Thats something of a truism as far as I'm concerned. Very different from the more excessive formulations that are chronic in the left.
"It is my theory that if say the NDP, or another leftist party, were to actively take up the mantle of Aboriginal issues then these masses could become political allies; I am not talking about political subordinates, I mean real allies as in side-by side."
So what specific Aboriginal policies should the NDP advocate? Its easy to say "take up the mantle of Aboriginal issues". All parties make some pretence to doing that and in fact the federal government already pours tens of billions of dollars a year into INAC and land claims are being negotiated all over the place. So what SPECIFICALLY do you suggest the NDP propose on Aboriginal issues that will be vastly different from what is already on the table?
Those sort of mass organizations don't exist anymore in most any other facet of life besides religion (and even there, there's a lot of fracturing). Trying to make a 19th Century model of political organization work in the 21st Century sounds pretty futile to me.
You overestimate the impact of today's organized religion, even without the fracturing. Today, religious services are like most other consumer products (going to typical services and maybe having a meal, unless the religion is ethnicity-based like Judaism or Hinduism). Anyway, we can debate the applicability of the 19th-century model to the 21st century in another thread, but such a high level of organization is what workers need in order to fulfill Marx's dictum that "the emancipation of the working class is the act of the working class itself."
Any thoughts on Hezbollah, by the way?
In accurate, at least for BC and the Yukon.
First NDP campaign I worked on after becoming old enough to vote was Archie Patrick's, 3 decades ago.
Carole James is Metis and is married to a status First Nations
Jean Crowder is Metis
Troy Sebastian Ktunaxa band member, ran in the south Kootneys for the NDP last provincial election election and hopefully wil run next one too.
Claire Trevena re-elected NDP MLA for North Island was a former Kwakiutl-band chief councillor.
Doug Brown North Thompson Kamloops NDP MLA candidate
BC's Grand Chief endorsed James in the last election.
Then of course there is Tom King
Again wrong. For starters:
Jordan's Principle is an NDP action
NDP got the motion through the HoC to endorse the UN's Declaration on the Right's of Indigenous People's, when Harper refused to sign on.
The NDP forced/pushed Harper to make the apology to FN's for residential school abuses
Worked with FN's students to get funding for their elementary school.
Have introduced a motion for Aboriginal History month
Forced Martin in 2005 to give 300 million for off reserve FN housing needs.
Having said this, they can still do better too. But you are misrepresenting dramatically and have a lack of knowlege when you say they care nothing and ignore FN's, perhaps to the point of fabrication.
"So what specific Aboriginal policies should the NDP advocate? Its easy to say "take up the mantle of Aboriginal issues". All parties make some pretence to doing that and in fact the federal government already pours tens of billions of dollars a year into INAC and land claims are being negotiated all over the place. So what SPECIFICALLY do you suggest the NDP propose on Aboriginal issues that will be vastly different from what is already on the table?"
I already mentioned the issues and if you actually read my post then you would have seen. But because I said Aboriginal workers and criticized the NDP you went on the offensive. If you knew anything then you would know that INAC is a government funded institution that has perpetrated mass racism and sexism in this country through its department and its specific policy legislations, i.e. - the Indian Act.
Here are the Aboriginal issues I already mentioned: housing, employment, educational standards and attainment, health care, political representation. If you want more then do some research. Check out your relevant statistics and you will see that Aboriginal communities are in desperate need and are becoming violent and the violence is spreading. You see 'land claims' and the blinders go up but the media does not report on the paltry education and employment levels for Aboriginal peoples in Canada. Get out of your colonial mindset and talk to the people and they will tell you what is happening. CBC, Global, and CTV glorify land claims as if this is the only issue but you should go out and do your homework and check the stats. Go to these communities and find out what the people want and you will see they are ripe for political representation and the NDP is failing as are all the others. But it just so happens that the NDP has an opportunity to gain real allies.
INAC is not political representation, it is bureaucratic and institutionalized racial control.
And I never said land claims. How is a land claim going to get me a job? Tell me that? Land claims are a totally separate issue and they deal with Treaty abuses and illegal land seizures. But what if you are Metis, or non-status, and you have no land to claim? Get some real info before making a useless argument. The NDP is failing.
Hmm, both sides have a point here I think. The "waffle" is old news and I don't know why some still nurse a grudge over it, when Laxer himself has settled rather comfortably into academic liberalism, but another NPI kind of movement might be useful. One thing I can say for sure is "Big Daddy" in no way speaks for the average NDPer.
In accurate, at least for BC and the Yukon.
Having said this, they can still do better too. But you are misrepresenting dramatically and have a lack of knowlege when you say they care nothing and ignore FN's, perhaps to the point of fabrication.
You just proved my point, you can name all the initiatives and the representatives on your two hands. Most of the initiatives you speak of either 1) have not been ratified or 2) the actual immediate implementation within Aboriginal communities is lacking. As for the representatives you speak of, those few names are not progress they are crumbs compared to the thousands that are in need of actual political representation.
Still I beg the question. How will these initiatives help thousands of young Aboriginal people get a job in the capitalist economy? It seems no that political party wants to answer this question, not even a labour-based party. Contrary to popular stereotype, most Aboriginal people actively seek employment and then get stuffed to the very bottom of the division of labour, if they get hired at all. The "token Indian" is born.
But I have news for the NDP party, if they do not know. The largest populations of Aboriginal people are in Saskatoon, Regina, Winnipeg, Edmonton and other Prairie cities, not in B.C., the Yukon, or Ontario. The Prairies are where the populations are booming and this is where the political action needs to happen, now. The Saskatchewan Aboriginal population, sometime in the next few decades, will reach near parity with the non-Aboriginal populations. This is of immense political importance and it cannot be ignored. Where are these thousands going to go for work, schooling, health needs, etc? And, imagine the amounts of votes that the NDP could attain if they recognized these stats and then actually did something with these communities, today.
Here are some things to consider:
Jordan's Principle applies only to status First Nations people and/or Inuit (under the Indian Act). This leaves out the entire Metis and non-status populations. Thus a huge chunk of the total Aboriginal population is left behind. I have never heard of anyone applying for Jordan's Principle and I live in Regina, we have thousands of First Nations peoples.
No Canadian government has ratified the Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples (DRIP) as of yet. The NDP have never been voted into power. Canada has deep colonial roots and the only countries to directly oppose the DRIP are Canada, Australia, New Zealand, and the US - you can figure out why on your own. The DRIP talks in Canada have stagnated.
The Conservative Party led the apologies to the residential school survivors, which is sadly ironic. The NDP seemed sincere but the fact is that this is 2009. The residential school system started in the late 1800's and was ended in the mid- 1980's. This is a one hundred year historical reality. The NDP have been a political party for many decades, where were the leaders when the abuse was at its height and when it might have contributed to real social justice?
Where exactly is "their" elementary school? There are hundreds of First Nations reserves in Canada, not to mention the booming populations in the urban centres - where the education systems are in need of serious reform. Where is this great school and do they actively teach an Aboriginal-centred curriculum alongside a mainstream one. Is it multilingual, is it immersion?
Where did the 300$ million go? Certainly not to Sask, Manitoba, or Alberta. Come and see the beautiful ramshackle houses in the metropolitan areas and on the majority of the reserves and then follow that money.
My real life is not a fabrication, I can say these things with conviction because I see the problems everyday.