Remember the Waffle for an independent socialist Canada..huh

Yesterday I did something I rarely do. I participated in an academic seminar. It was to mark the 40th anniversity of The Waffle, a radical youth movement inside the NDP. Hardly anyone under 50 knows what The Waffle was, unless you have ever tried to organize an opposition in the NDP where it remains a scary ghost. But it was a significant and almost unique formation of the 1960's in Canada. Apparently scholarship on the 1960's is the hottest thing in academe these days. Who knew?

The Waffle was a youthful, radical, left nationalist and socialist formation within the New Democratic Party. Formed in the heady days of 1969, the Waffle Manifesto [2] was incredibly radical when read with today's eyes.

"Our aim as democratic socialists is to build an independent socialist Canada. Our aim as supporters of the New Democratic Party is to make it a truly socialist party.'

Sigh...I wonder when the last time anyone in or around the NDP used the word socialist. It is, of course, a document of its time, referring to "men" as a word covering everyone, ignoring Indigneous people altogether in its formulation of the founding two nations, and without a mention of equality for women, or women's liberation, as we called it in those days.

What was extraordinary about the Waffle was its economic nationalism. Even as a young woman who was attracted to the Waffle because of its strong female leadership, I never agreed with the idea that the main problem was that Canada was economically subordinate to the United States. In those days, the Waffle argued that Canada was basically a branch plant of the US and would only be able to be independent though a democratic socialist society.

I never really understood Canada as a subordinate power. A lesser power, yes, but not really under the thumb of the US. I understood cultural nationalism that sought to promote and protect Canadian culture so that we were not totally overwhelmed by US culture, but economic nationalism never made sense to me. In studying to counter their arguments at the time, I learned about Marxism, which made a lot more sense, and argued that nationalism in an advanced capitalist country was reactionary, while it could be progressive in a developing country.

Yet the Waffle's nationalism was progressive in many ways. Yesterday I finally understood the economic nationalism, listening to both proponents and scholars. I won't go into detail here because a podcast of the event will soon be available. I still don't agree with it, but at least I understand it, and no doubt the left nationalism of the Waffle and others helped the Canadian Left and social movements to respond quickly to free trade when it first reared its ugly head in the Free Trade Agreement with the US.

On the surface, this discussion seems a bit archaic and not of much interest to young people now who are more likely to see Canada as a colonial power itself and an equal partner in global corporate governance. With some of the most important social movements taking on the abuses of Canadian mining companies and the exploitation of Canadian banks, it is hard to imagine anyone accepting the nationalist arguments of the Waffle, however rooted in a radical analysis.

Yet the Waffle was an important factor in the development of these very social movements. It was women in the Waffle who fought for the NDP to accept women's liberation and women in leadership. They uniquely worked both inside and outside the party, creating a model of work that they also brought into the trade union movement. The Waffle women played a critical role in the shaping of the Canadian women's movement. As a result, Canada's women's movement included working class women and Canada has among the most feminist unions and social democratic parties in the world.

As a young woman I was attracted to the powerful women in the Waffle like Jackie Larkin and Varda Burstyn, both of whom remained active on the Left and in the women's movement. Waffle leaders like economist Mel Watkins and political scientist James Laxer continue to be relevant critics of the NDP.

In my view when the NDP expelled the Waffle, calling them a party within a party, they cut out their heart by expelling the youth. It is true that the Waffle was sectarian towards the NDP, as was the culture of the time, and that the remnants of Cold War ideology made a rational response to this highly active opposition difficult, but still, it is hard to look back on the energy and creativity of the Waffle and not conclude that the NDP slit its own throat when they threw them out.

What was interesting about the roundtable was the richness of discussion about the Waffle in the context of the times in which it lived, and the decline of that discussion as soon as we started talking about the future of the Left, and everyone retreated to their usual nostrums.

I am sorry more people didn't attend the event, and I hoping they will listen to at least some of the podcast. If we don't pay attention to our own history, no one else likely will.

Comments

Submitted by autoworker on October 25, 2009 - 1:02am.

I agree with Ms. Rebick that much vitality, and youthful potential, was lost to the internecine squabbling that so preoccupied, and threatened, the established interests in both the party and the labour movement, at the time. It's ironic, and lamentable, that some of those same 'young turks' have now established themselves as the arbiters of what is currently 'correct' within progressive circles. Oh, that the youthful lambs of exuberance should once again challenge the knowledge, and treachery, of experience! Whither "the darling buds of May"? Attending to the sounds of different drums, no doubt.

Submitted by thanks on October 25, 2009 - 8:59am.

talking about different drums, the rabbletv live coverage of the CofC conference Friday evening included a clip of a question from one person in the audience which stood out like a bell.

the minute he started talking about the decline of industrialization in St.John and the need to support and articulate a "progressive agrarian" vision, [must get that quote properly], wherein people in the area, out of necessity, were already focussing on feeding themselves and providing their own energy, you could see others in the room perk up and lean forward.

it was a clear call and rang true. i've heard the same here from thinking rural dwellers and farmers, and from the majority of activist youth. the interest is in learning how to grow food, make shelter, and provide energy. the basics.

there are a few who try to do useful translation of political or ideological terms. but simply tossing the words around as badges of honour or history, that must be clung to as an overriding priority, does not make a lot of sense.

i understand the impulse- the fear is that the history, and thus the meaning, will get tossed out if the word is tossed out. but i'm not sure this would be the result. history is embodied in real people and on-the-ground reality, more than words. i'm thinking that the reality of understandings is most important to articulate- eg. 'what are useful examples of how this looked, looks, or could look, on the ground?'

i still don't know why people insist on using the word 'capitalism'. except that it's a brand name, identifying the user as someone who has read Marx or his predecessors and/or understands what they meant by that term. how many people bother to translate this term, in popular publications, for the majority of people?

ok, Michael Moore. but i gather there's debate on his usage as well. as there always will be.

but i'm not sure people who are artists and writers, even non-academic appreciate the actual time that is involved in tilling, growing, harvesting, processing their own food, let alone cooking, chopping and hauling wood, along with basic caregiving, cleaning, and all the mundane tasks that leave so very little time for reading. then to hear urbanite writers, who have most if not all of their basic needs done by others, go on about their their own work, using their own favourite terms, with their own priorities, absorbing the airwaves and the word forums, when the entire world is caught in a need to downscale at every level, its just counterproductive.

thanks for listening.

Submitted by AxelW on October 26, 2009 - 5:31am.

The Waffle was one of a long line of left oppositions within Canadian social democracy. See also Ginger Group, the NDP Socialist Caucus and the New Politics Initiative. The Waffle also had its own leftist wing the Red Circle, which was composed of Marxists and Trotskyists. There are differing claims about why the leadership of the NDP in Ontario and federally decided to move against the Waffle when it did. Some claim that the prime motivator was a fear that the faction was hurting the party's electoral prospects by miring the NDP in internal disputes and by also making it appear more radical than they wished. Others claim that the Waffle's decision to organize a radical faction within trade unions such as the United Auto Workers and United Steel Workers of America led the leadership of those unions to pressure the NDP leadership to move against the Waffle. Anyways, did you know that the cell phone companies might be gearing up to give credit cards a run for their money, service wise. There's a company called Paymo, that function similar to PayPal, and it's already in 45 countries. It hasn't taken off in the U.S. yet, but they are trying to enter into the market. A user can scan their phone at the counter, or purchase items via text messaging. A deduction is then made from a prepaid account, or added to the phone bill. They've already partnered with the cell phone companies, including AT&T, T Mobile, and Virgin Mobile. It may not replace the credit cards companies completely, but it will certainly boost cell phone application convenience.

Submitted by Geoff OB on October 26, 2009 - 9:02am.

I'm sorry I was unable to attend the seminar. However, I wonder if it would be possible to hold similar, if smaller scale, seminars around the country. Maybe we could encourage a re-imagining of the NDP, including the way it runs its affairs.

I was a delegate in Halifax and, believe me, it was not a model exercise in democracy. Once again, the old line leadership (union and party bureaucrats) staged a carefully choreographed agenda and squashed any attempt to being new ideas to the convention floor.

I think it would be great if more Canadians were reminded of what the Waffle tried to do. We could also benefit from learning what mistakes the movement might have made, so that we could launch a process of party renewal that is more than a top-down PR exercise, designed to stifle real debate.

If we don't do something to breathe new life into the party, I fear we will become the Social Credit of the left - a marginalized, irrelevant club for people who are more comfortable living in the past than facing the future.

Submitted by autoworker on October 26, 2009 - 11:31am.

I hear you, Geoff.

Submitted by JimmyRiddle on October 26, 2009 - 11:58am.

It's easy to pity social conservatives - particularly those of the US-variety - who pine for a return to an 'Ozzie and Harriet' version of the 1950 that never really existed anyway.

But the stolid veterans of the Waffle are no less deserving.

They heap criticism on those who have made the NDP into a more relevant political force than it has been in decades. The only way to go forward they argue is to go backwards.

Like a less watchable version of Groundhog Day, they remain frozen in a warm summer's day in 1972 when the party decided to go one direction and they decided to say behind.

PS: Mel Watkins is hardly a "critic" of the NDP. Mel's voice continues to be respected in the party today precisely because he has been and engaged supporter (and candidate for that matter) not just a hectoring malcontent on the sidelines.

Submitted by Judes on October 27, 2009 - 8:51pm.

I consider Mel a critic because he provides criticism of the party when it needs it. I suppose you are referring to me when you say "hectoring malcontent sitting on the sidelines" Well I've run for President of the provincial party, as a candidate in the provinicial election, for the nomination in a federal riding, have made a regular contribution to the party for many years. donating to lots of candidates, and served on the Ontario Women's Committee for many years. So if that is sitting on the sidelines, I wonder what it takes to be a valued member of the party from your point of view.

This kind of sectarianism is part of the problem with the NDP. It is true that I am now sitting on the sidelines but only because I see not much life left in the Party and I have other priorities.

I agree with thanks that those of us on the left in central canada at least rarely think about the contribution of farmers to our lives and the importance of what their work. The exception are those in the food movement, which is one of the fastest growing movements around so maybe it will change.

Thanks for the comments

Submitted by thanks on November 5, 2009 - 2:52pm.

it means a lot to get that positive feedback Judes, and i appreciate it.

was thinking this morning, coincidentally, as i chop veggies which give me a fair 'income' only through barter, how some on the left have focussed on the French revolution, the Paris commune, etc., when agrarian communities practiced participatory lifestyles on common ground much earlier, along with tiny corners of their own private spaces as well.

but instead of honouring these kinds of traditions, some leftists insist on complete melting pots of an urban flavour.

and what of the voices of elements of nature which do not use language as we know it? undervalued. sometimes i wonder if it would help if media sources intentionally hired at least one actual rural dweller for reporting. the news from most sources is so heavily urban that it's clear the producers rarely hear the rain beating on fallen leaves, or the crickets singing.

how do the 'non-verbal' ever get a word in edgewise?

just rambling here