Babble Coalition!?

It's because political principles melt away as soon as there's a whiff of parliamentary quasi-power. Opportunism is the one bandwagon that social democrats can always hop onto together.

Which "principle" is that? The only "principle" you've mentioned in various posts is that of "independent working class political action" (or words to that effect). I support that principle. I just don't happen to think the NDP embodies it. You see some inherent difference between the NDP (which I would guess you view as some kind of workers' party) and the Bloc (which you call a "capitalist party" - even though the entire labour movement in Québec supports it during federal elections). I admit to not getting it.

So why are babblers being nicer to each other? Because (I think) we have a job to do - help this coalition formulate a platform and help ensure that they stick to it. There has never been such an opportunity in living history on the federal scene. If we fail, we fail. But to think this will drive us all to the right assumes that we were doing pretty damn well until this tragedy came along. I admit to not getting that either.

That's because you equate all provincial NDP governments to being mirror images of the federal party, which has no record of governance in Ottawa. And there are fundamental differences between the two levels of government, as well as fundamental differences in the way the Saskatchewan CCF was able to govern pre-CUSFTA, pre-NAFTA - and was especially true of provincial governments pre-1991, the year in which the neoliberal voodoo really began spilling forth from Ottawa like spokes of an economic and political ideology radiating to the rest of Canada and designed to weaken democratic control of economic and sovereign decision making. Our plutocrats were actually designing trade deals and deregulation with an eye to throwing a fuck into would-be social democrats' plans for controlling Canada's vast energy reserves and raw materials, means of production, labour rights etc. You basically ignore recent political history in Ottawa to lay blame on provincial NDP governments for not having the power to create Swedish style social democracy with only provincial jurisdiction and weakened by bogus trade deals,  as well as by marauding international capital, and multinational corporations with unprecedented ability to influence economies globally. Sir Tony Benn stated that voters and the state at least had some control over state-owned enterprises and domestically owned corporations. That isnt true anymore in Britain, and it's certainly not true in Canada or even Saskatchewan anymore. Things have changed around the world since Tommy Douglas' time in the sun. And now the second-hand ideology is coming home to roost. The somewhat prosperous cold war era economies(a colossal cold war era lie for the other 85% of humanity as well as us) are no more, fini. And so goes old line party dynastic rule of one phony majority after another.

Well, its always good to get together and hammer something out.  I guess the problem is the level of this happening i.e. Up at the MP level vs. at the grassroots or worker's councils/soviets were there would be less excuses to accuse leaders of selling out because one would be very close to, if not the ones making such decisions.

 Babblers are discussing what goes on but have less immediate input to the process (but are a pressure group I am sure). 

I have hope for this coalition-but that's it.  My gut says the coalition  will 1. stop the extreme Harper attacks. 2. make some gains for the workers (not the left in a political sense) 3.  Sell out (concede) on some issues like corporate taxes or other.

I still have hope for a NDP majority in Ottawa to do something just because it's untested.  But I know for sure that NDP provincial governments suck based on my experience.

That line of excuse is along the lines of the epic Marxist debate of need for a permanent revolution vs. socialism in one country.-First NDP in Ottawa, then the world or we will not have control over our destiny.  I think there is a whole lot more than that.  National government can do something as well as provincal, as well as municipal. There are stages not just an all or nothing Big Bang-even the Earth is still changing in steps.

---------------------------------------------------------

why is it that polling booths look like cattle chutes?

Leave it to Spector to ruin the warm and fuzzy feelings.

Yes the difference is, none of the Nordic countries have signed the dumbest free trade deal in world history with neighboring countries negotiating by strong central government. That and the fact that some babblers tend to shy away from comparing provincial NDP governments with those countries where social democrats have been in power federally for long stretches at a time. Canada is a unique country to say the least.

I think it just goes to show how much partisan positions drive the substantive arguements being made at any given point.

That this happens is no surprise, and there is no simple mechanical relationship. Nonetheless, it can be surprising the degree it is true.

And it is no less true for people whose partisan position is not or very little invested in a political party. For the purposes here, 'partisan position' just means having some horse in the race- and such a position is just as discernable for all frequent babblers as it is for those of us who make no bones about being partisan in the standard way.

In fact, that dynamic is just as much in play now. It just happens that the bulk of posters want to see the coalition come forward so they do not have a parisan conflict for the time being.

The typical shrill edge to Babble political discussions is still there- but confined because the dissenters to the love in are few.

For what its worth- I have my reservations about this and fears how it will turn out. And when discussions have come up I've never been in favour of the coalition idea.

But this is what's here, and now we'll find out. Yes, we're all malleable, but it's reductionist to reduce that to the "social democratic lust for power".

But one of the biggest reasons most of us have that malliability is out of a is because we know that you grab at power where the opportunities arise, not wait until the formula tells you its OK to proceed.

And just one of many historical cases: before October 1917 was 1905 and February 1917.

But you can spare us the historical lessons how this is different. I'm familiar with them, and we're not going to agree.

------------------------------------------------------------------

Trotsky was a Menshevik.

And just to add that we are all after power.

Calling the particular strategy/tactics of someone the lust for power might be the hoariest self flagellating foolish rhetorical flourish of the Canadian left.

I am not after power.

Me neither.

I am before power.

Semantic nit picking.

You personally may not be after what you consider 'power' to be.

But playing a role in the public space about politics, or about workplace issues for that matter, is to be engaged in a collective contest over power.

Besides, the point was directed at Spectors use of the old rhetorical flourish.

What's this talk of a babble coalition? I thought we were ruled by an enlightened oligarchy with co-pro-consuls Oldgoat and michelle. Is there any precedence for a Babble coalition? Can the confidence vote be put off? What if M and O prorogue New babble and reinstitute Old Babble?

So many questions... 

Well, it's clearly captured babble's imagination. At time of writing this, 8 of the first 9 threads are related to the coalition in some way. And the ninth one was started by me. Sorry.

 I have to admit, it's a pretty exciting time.

I for one find it fascinating and an eye-opener re: babblers and partisan responses--most are predictable, but a few surprises.  

A distinction can be made on the "lust for power" for either selfish (eg collectively partisan reasons)  or as a means to benefit the country. In the real world of human psychology and politics this "either/or" is necessarily blurred and the stuff of art.

I don't wish to denigrate this possible coalition and I truly hope--for the remnants of Canada's sake-- that this thing happens.

Harper, emboldened by the economic crisis (and I suspect January events will be Canada's economic 9/11) will surely ratchet up his already not-so-hidden agenda for the destruction of Canada's social system, and accelerate Canada's dissolution from a semi-independent state. As opposed to slashing social and infrastructure spending, the many, many billons promised for spending on the Canadian Forces (aka US overseas services) will be less affected under the Harper regime. Any moderation of this agenda by this proposed coalition will be of worthy benefit.

I don't presume all the opponents of the proposed coalition within the NDP all come from the "purist" left wing of that party, consider also strategic dissenters and some on the right wing.

What slays me is the way a Harper spokesman said this is Jack Layton and Duceppe maneuvering for a power grab(yes it is) And then in the next breath, he stated that the NDP is trying to reverse the results of Canada's most recent "democratic election." Goodness, those NDP are an undemocratic bunch by the sounds of things. Someone should have told him him that this is typical of how Bolsheviks operate, because it doesnt appear that the Harpers are ready to do anything about Canada's democracy gap in the meantime.

Could we please stick to the topic of this thread?  There are already umpteen threads where we can be pundits about the coalition government.  If people have nothing to say on the topic of this thread, then please take the political punditry to the other threads, where it is more than welcome.  Thanks!

I thought we were discussing the recent love-in?

Love is all you need.

Give peace a chance, Fidel.

In my life.

Power to the people, right on. (God, I miss those beautiful emoticons from old babble)

You say you want a Revolution.

What's so funny 'bout peace, love & understanding?

Those who want change now are all for this! We all get something out of this deal. I'm a little surprised by how well everyone seems to be getting along, but it does make sense. I'm glad the majority here is for supporting action when it counts.

Those who oppose are largely purists who want nothing more than absolute perfection in their party and can't stand the idea of compromising even one ideal in order to get others implemented. They are fundamentalists.

Brian Topp: Our friends on the blue team seem to mostly focus on sticks, and not so much on carrots. ;)

Now that Parliament has been prorogued I have one question:

Can we return to our regularly scheduled sniping?

After the holidays maybe. Let's savour this spirit a while longer.

Since I go on holidays in two weeks for two weeks, I can try to cope.

Well now, when can we get back to where we once belonged?

Love is good, love can be strong

Just call me angel in the morning.

Do you believe in magic? 

"though some have changed

Some forever, not for better

Some have gone and some remain

All these places had their moments

With lovers and friends

I still can recall"

Reading Topp's book does bring back moments. And missed opportunities.  

Some are dead and some are living,

In my life I've loved them all.

Hold the line, love isn't always on time. Toto, 1978

There are problems in these times, / but--ooh!--none of them are mine!
I'm beginning to see the light.

--The Velvet Underground, 1969