Preliminary Statement from the BC Gingers.

107 posts / 0 new
Last post
GingerGoodone
Preliminary Statement from the BC Gingers.

THE GINGER GROUP HAS BEEN FORMED TO:

1.  Address the democratic deficit within the provincial NDP;

The Ginger Group believes that the current leadership of the provincial NDP has lost its sense of direction and vision, along with the confidence of a large number of NDP members and supporters.  It is imperative that the Provincial NDP immediately address the democratic deficit within the Party.

Further, the Group believes that too much power has been concentrated in the hands of the Table Officers.  The ultimate decision making power must be returned to
Provincial Council.

2.  Refocus the Party on the environmental, social, and economic crises, particularly Climate Change, which confront the ordinary citizens of BC, and provide a sense of agency and belonging for the alienated membership of the party.

The Group believes that the leadership of the Party has insulated itself from the membership and appears to be incapable of, or unwilling to, address these crises.
This alienation is destroying the Party.

3.  Return the Party to its democratic Socialist roots.

THE GINGER GROUP HAS THEREFORE GATHERED TOGETHER LIKE-MINDED PROVINCIAL NDP MEMBERS AND SUPPORTERS TO:

A)    Restore to the membership the power to decide policy and to choose our organizational and political leadership.

B)    Restore our Party as a vigorous advocate for, and an agent of, social justice.

C)    Commit our Party to protection of the environment, including the initiation of real actions to deal with Climate Change

D)    Commit our Party to offering a clear and unambiguous socialist economic model to replace the failed capitalist system which is destroying our environment, undermining basic human rights, and robbing our citizens of their share in the common wealth of our province.

THE GINGER GROUP WILL ACCOMPLISH THE GOALS ABOVE THROUGH:

Resolutions at the bi-annual Provincial Convention to further these goals;

Electing Provincial leaders who advance the economic principles of socialism (ie. production for use and not for profit)

Electing leaders at the Constituency level who will work towards these goals.

GingerGoodone

Ginger Group Articles for Change

We, the Ginger Group, believe the following changes are required to make the BC NDP a party of the people prepared to deal with the real issues of our times:

1. An effective Oversight Committee that is nominated from the convention floor and elected by convention delegates.
2. The right of all members in good standing to have access to all official minutes of all meetings except those portions held in-camera.
3.  The establishment of platform items that honour the call by Sustainable BC policy that all future policy be created through the lens of environmental sustainability and that will initiate real action against Climate Change.
4. The decision-making power of the Table Officers shall be restricted to day to day administration of the party and not extend to the development of party policy or direction.
5. Positions on the Provincial Executive shall be limited to terms of six consecutive years, after which they shall not hold any position on the Executive for four years after their term expires.
6. No members of the Provincial Executive or the Table Officers shall be allowed to sit in more than one position consecutively.
7. There will be an automatic leadership review at every convention except when the Party is in power.
8. Platform and policy committees other than Standing Committees shall be elected by the Provincial Council rather than being appointed by the Table Officers. Those elections shall be based on a review of resumes on each area of interest that are submitted by interested members from across the province. Further all committees arising out of the business of the Provincial Council shall exist on an ad hoc basis only, tasked with an assignment by the Council, and upon conclusion of that assignment, each committee shall be dissolved.
9. Standing Committees will report directly to Provincial Council and such reports shall be given priority at Council.
10. All resolutions shall be circulated to each constituency by email, and only those that receive 30 per cent support be brought forward to Council or Convention.
11. Any resolutions not dealt with at convention shall be distributed to all Constituency Associations for presentation to their members in good standing, and those members shall vote on a recommendation to Provincial Council for disposal of the resolution.

GingerGoodone

Some BC NDpers might have already seen these from the last convention, but I thought it might be helpful to others here who might want to know what we're about.   I'll post somemore tomorrow.  Unless another tree decides to come down on us, then all bets are off.  Smile

GingerGoodone

Item two, a majority of Ginger group members have now agreed that: 

ON PARTY POLICY:

A:  The NDP membership (alone) should control the entire resolutions process in the future, rather than relying on the executive to decide the priority and order of debate at annual conventions.

B: Every member should have the right to contribute towards and vote on every resolution on a quarterly basis, via email or mail outs, with an elected committee meeting (regularly) to collate and redistribute all resolutions to each constituency office. (*further details to be worked out later) 

C: The leadership of the party shall be bound to uphold every resolution as a matter of policy, once decided.  (*with some possible discretionary powers allowed, to be decided by the majority of members in coming conventions)

ON ECONOMIC POLICY:

A: The BC NDP should raise income taxes, on the highest income brackets, as well as taxation on property and capital gains, to raise adequate revenues in the future.

B: Raising corporate taxation,  reinstating inheritance taxes on property above X amount, and eliminating (unproductive and unnecessary) tax shelters and loop-holes should also be NDP priorities. 

 

 

 

 

UnionSupporter

This is very interesting. Is there a website where I could see who the members of the Ginger Group are? Is the manifesto signed and by whom? Thanks,

remind remind's picture

Good grief......

Ratbert

The Gingergroupies are all stellar members of the NDP intergalactic caucus. No furthur due diligence is necessary. The Gingergroupies will inform you of your opinion when necessity dictates.

GingerGoodone

*edit*

GingerGoodone

Ratbert wrote:

The Gingergroupies are all stellar members of the NDP intergalactic caucus. No furthur due diligence is necessary. The Gingergroupies will inform you of your opinion when necessity dictates.

Now that's funny.  Laughing      You must be terrifically brave to question the terrible power of us Gingergroupies, who dare to dictate to other NDPers that the majority should have some say over the party's policies and platforms again.  Sounds terribly radical, even democratic, I know, but we Gingergroupies really do know best.  We said so.   Cool

GingerGoodone

UnionSupporter wrote:

This is very interesting. Is there a website where I could see who the members of the Ginger Group are? Is the manifesto signed and by whom? Thanks,

 

Thank you for your interest, although I'm abit surprised that you aren't familiar with this yet as it was widely distributed in pamplet form at the last party convention.  This isn't a "manifesto", but a mission statement of the group's general aims and values, put together and voted upon by all members who came together over their unhappiness with the present leadership and direction.  There is no website as yet.   Most communications up to now have been face to face or via email or phone, but I have no intention of "naming names" anyhow to some anonymous source who might not share the same interests.  There is some fear of retribution among some members, but there is nothing in the party constitution which says it is illegal for groups to confer among themselves.   Rest assured that every proposal shall be put to the full membership democratically.    That is the whole idea of this little venture; to give the average paying member some say over the party's direction again, as laid out in the party constitution by earlier generations of New Democrats.     Unfortunately membership has declined drastically under the present regime, and that should be a cause for concern for everyone in the party.  

keglerdave

Thats great.  Terrific. Just what a party who's already somewhat strategically constipated needs, a harder move to the left.  Up until reading this thread, have never heard of the Ginger Groupies. Mind you 2009 was a busy year personally with me. Plus I was seriously ticked at the provincial NDP at the higher and backroom levels.  So much so, I did the one thing I thought would send the message: I stopped giving them $$$$.  Don't get me wrong, I supported my MLA Dawn Black and still do, but overall like the Ginger Groupies, I'm unhappy with the direction this party has taken.  In 2003, the party elected a leader in Carole James who ran her leadership campaign on a centre left position.  Yet since 2003, she has never ever been allowed to fully implement her ideas or plans for the party.  Nope. Instead, its the political arm of the BCFED.  The Libs are owned by big business and the BCNDP is dictated to by Jim Sinclair.  Sinclair's politics are not my politics, nor are they really the politics of average British Columbians.  Yet at every turn, its "whats the Fed's position on this, or what's the Fed's position on that". 

Out of respect to remind, I'm not going to dredge up policy differences I have with the BCNDP.  But I find that while I support my MLA and several other elected people, I have real concerns with the direction of the party at the provincial council, table officer and higher level. This party does not need to take another turn to the left. It does not need to be the continuing political arm of the BCFED.  It should be a party that works for average people, small business people, union people and even non union people.  Newsflash: not everyone in the labour movement or union member is a left winger.  Most people, union and non union alike, care about their paycheques and getting by day to day.  They are looking for economic security, and ideas to enhance that security.  They want answers, not just crying and hewing from the rafters.  If you criticize, you should offer an alternative.  In the 2009 election, that didn't happen at all.  Instead it was Cut the Carbon Tax.  This party, the BCNDP needs to work on its delivery to the public and how it goes about criticizing the Campbell government. They need to start acting like a government in waiting.  They need to act like that so that the media in this province cannot accuse them of only bitching and whining with offering no alternative.  For that to happen, there needs to be different voices at various levels of the party; particularly at the table officer level.  Mr. Sinclair has enjoyed alot of sunlight and free time and broadcasting on the backs of the BCNDP; to advance his agenda. Its time he took a back seat and let the party grow and adapt to the growing reality in BC, that the battle for votes is at the middle of the spectrum, and the middle doesn't particularly like Jim Sinclair's politics.

I'm a trade unionist, working person, active in the community in various ways, and active in the political realm.  But for BC to work it takes a balanced approach.  You can't have a strong economy without having strong health care, education, social programmes etc. But it works the other way as well.  Why people like Jim Sinclair don't get this baffles me.  For example the minimum wage. Old fight I know, but a balanced alternative was presented by the BCNDP, and when it hit convention in 2007; it had been altered, so that the BCNDP didn't publicly support a small business tax cut along with an increase in the minimum wage.  What's wrong with a balanced policy? It doesn't play well with Mr. Sinclair's beliefs that business is bad.  Even now with the HST, and the way the Libs are kicking sand in the faces of everyone, even some of their most ardent supporters like small business people, you can see where the "leader of organized labour" in BC isn't comfortable in talking about the effects of the tax on business people as well as consumers.

Being a trade unionist, I understand the concept of economic viability. And if businesses aren't successful, then it goes without saying that they won't be hiring people and perhaps laying them off. Then those people aren't consuming goods from other businesses or paying into the tax system.   My question is in short:  While certain big labour unions and big businesses enjoy heavy influence, through the influence they hold at the highest levels of the 2 political parties in power; what about people like average British Columbians who want a voice at the same table?  Sinclair and John Winter's politics are not mine at all.  Conversely, I'm neither a neo con or a hard core socialist.  The BCNDP has a chance yet again to capture support and votes at the centre of the spectrum. All they have to do is come up common sense solutions that are in everyone's best interests, not just Jim Sinclair and some of the big certain sector unions he represents.  Campbell has absolutely abandoned and sold out the centre of the political spectrum.  The BCNDP has an opportunity to make hay yet again.  But I question whether they have the strategy to do so. After the last election and the entire boondoggle that took place, those questions are still there.

 

keglerdave

Sorry one other thing, in this day and age of technology, when addressing the democratic deficits, whats wrong with one member one vote?

Ratbert

GingerGoodone wrote:

Ratbert wrote:

The Gingergroupies are all stellar members of the NDP intergalactic caucus. No furthur due diligence is necessary. The Gingergroupies will inform you of your opinion when necessity dictates.

Now that's funny.  Laughing      You must be terrifically brave to question the terrible power of us Gingergroupies, who dare to dictate to other NDPers that the majority should have some say over the party's policies and platforms again.  Sounds terribly radical, even democratic, I know, but we Gingergroupies really do know best.  We said so.   Cool

I believe you and wish the Gingers the greatest success in prying the levers of party power from the elitist suits and apparatchiks that deny the grassroots any sort of input into the decision-making process.

Ratbert

Keglerdave, awsome post.

remind, the antagonistic labour/industry dynamic of the past 20th century has done nothing but force investment out of the province. Organised labour luddites need new ideas and original thinking to attract capital rather than focusing on pitched battles with government to attempt to control the public spending agenda.

genstrike

Ratbert wrote:

Keglerdave, awsome post.

remind, the antagonistic labour/industry dynamic of the past 20th century has done nothing but force investment out of the province. Organised labour luddites need new ideas and original thinking to attract capital rather than focusing on pitched battles with government to attempt to control the public spending agenda.

So, what exactly is "new ideas and original thinking" a euphemism for?

Cueball Cueball's picture

He means immitating the Liberals. What he is forgetting is that the Liberals steal all their best policies from the NDP. Now that the NDP is aping the Liberals who are aping the NDP, they are two monkeys staring at each other doing nothing.

remind remind's picture

Absolute nonsense stating capital needs to be "attracteded" to BC, ffs, every mining and petroleum company in the world has its fingers in the BC pie, along with energy giants like GE.

 

It is a BS line that the anti-worker living wage people have been shouting for about a decade.

 

The reality is they want BC people's resources for free or as close to it as they can get.

 

Also, am rewording the post to Keglar above as it was worded poorly, needed a nap.

 

 

remind remind's picture

Thanks for that Dave, there really is no need to go into it again.

Understand what you are saying, being a union member and knowing the BCCoC and John Winter perhaps more indepth than anyone on this forum does.

 

However, seeing what corporate business is doing to trade unionists because of soft sided approaches, such as yours, I cannot agree with you.

 

People, perhaps like yourself, who believe corporations/business must be pandered to, have sold out their own union members, across this province by way of; wage and job concessions, voting for land use leasing clawbacks, community planning favouring business etc etc,.

 

Not that it is their, or your fault, it simply means the many do not understand the depth of their (the corporations) complicity, and  that they (the corporations) do not have a right to make outrageous profits through the use of people as human capital and lies to communities at large to get resource extraction for nothing.

genstrike

Okay, my serious comment:

Best of luck, but as a rule I tend to not support these "take back the NDP" initiatives, not because I think they're too left wing or going to hurt the NDP, but because I think they're doomed to failure.  There have been similar initiatives in the past, and they have all been unsuccessful.  I just don't see the NDP as having the intellectual or moral backbone to stand up to neoliberalism, and I think the "return to its socialist roots" shtick is played out and ignoring the history of the NDP.  The Regina Manifesto was a dead letter at least by the time Tommy Douglas got elected, and the NDP hasn't been socialist since maybe the very early days of the CCF.

Honestly, I think what we need to be doing is focusing way more on building strong grassroots movements and radical bases than trying to influence the NDP from within.

Cueball Cueball's picture

Best post on the thread.

N.Beltov N.Beltov's picture

And yet, there is a left and a right (and a centre) in the NDP. I thought that was a permanent condition as well. I agree with genstrike about the evidence of the past; however, I'd support a left candidate or policy in the NDP just as I'd support a left candidate or policy in, say, the US Democratic Party.

remind remind's picture

Yes, there is Nbeltov, just like there is in the greater political world. A micro of the macro.

 

There is no unified "left", never has been.

GingerGoodone

genstrike wrote:

Okay, my serious comment:

Best of luck, but as a rule I tend to not support these "take back the NDP" initiatives, not because I think they're too left wing or going to hurt the NDP, but because I think they're doomed to failure.  There have been similar initiatives in the past, and they have all been unsuccessful.  I just don't see the NDP as having the intellectual or moral backbone to stand up to neoliberalism, and I think the "return to its socialist roots" shtick is played out and ignoring the history of the NDP.  The Regina Manifesto was a dead letter at least by the time Tommy Douglas got elected, and the NDP hasn't been socialist since maybe the very early days of the CCF.

Honestly, I think what we need to be doing is focusing way more on building strong grassroots movements and radical bases than trying to influence the NDP from within.

 

You may be right about the odds, but I'm not aware of any serious movements in the the party since the Waffle was defeated and I don't know of any other options in the present Canadian landscape.   If we were simply looking to revive the old CCF then yes, I'd say the odds for success were practically zero.   But the really serious problems began a long time after the NDP was formed, as leaders like Dave Barrett and Tommy Douglas were reformers worth following, but then again I suppose it would depend on how broadly or narrowly we define words like socialist or reformer.  One of the most successful "reformers" recently was a descendant of Bible Bill Aberhart!   8)    Seriously though, the NDP was always a coalition of democratic socialists and social democrats and other smaller groups, "Fabian" socialism from Britain being one of the main inspirations I believe.   Social Democracy no longer seems to mean much of anything anymore, not after guys like Schroeder and Blair.   So building up from the grassroots again is a necessity I would agree, but without a more responsive party structure that may not get very far either.   

GingerGoodone

remind wrote:

Yes, there is Nbeltov, just like there is in the greater political world. A micro of the macro.

 

There is no unified "left", never has been.

 

Probably not, no, but there used to be at least a few "core values" and common interests we could all agree on once.  Not all that long ago either. 

GingerGoodone

keglerdave wrote:

Thats great.  Terrific. Just what a party who's already somewhat strategically constipated needs, a harder move to the left.  Up until reading this thread, have never heard of the Ginger Groupies. 

Hi again, we part ways right from your third sentence "Kegler Dave".  If the party has become 'constipated' I would submit that it's because the leadership hasn't listened to its members (the majority anyhow) and has been drifting in a decidely centre RIGHT position.  Regardless of the fact that they will never get the support of the programmers at Canwest, Pacific Press or CKNW.   Or the tax cheats in West Van.  Never.  They already have a party devoted to their interests and their interests alone. 

And if bland offend-noone "centrists" like Carole James (or Dosanjh and Miller before her) can't even WIN then there's really no reason for more politically aware members to bother supporting them.   Insisting that "balanced budgets" are a sign of "fiscal prudence" (while schools are closed and children go hungry) and "tax breaks" the only way to "stimulate" the economy are both rightwing concepts, not left.  Mostly rooted in primitive eighteenth century notions of capital re-investment (or so I've been told) with another thirty year record of failure since they were rebranded as "new" again by the likes of Reagan and Mulroney.   (or success perhaps if you were already a billionaire)  That may be another reason the party is rudderless.  They show more blind faith in the supposed neutrality of "markets" than even the guys playing them do now.  They're smart enough to ask for public subsidies and guarantees upfront.    8))

Quote:
 In 2003, the party elected a leader in Carole James who ran her leadership campaign on a centre left position.  Yet since 2003, she has never ever been allowed to fully implement her ideas or plans for the party.  Nope. Instead, its the political arm of the BCFED.  The Libs are owned by big business and the BCNDP is dictated to by Jim Sinclair.  Sinclair's politics are not my politics, nor are they really the politics of average British Columbians.  Yet at every turn, its "whats the Fed's position on this, or what's the Fed's position on that". 

Interesting that you should mention Jim Sinclair.  I would place him as one of the main powers behind the BC NDP throne as well, except I would argue that he is nomore on "the left" than James is.   Wasn't Sinclair the one who sold CUPE down the river, just when they were starting to receive some broad support for a province wide strike?   But like Munro before him, he's actually more interested in preserving his own comfortable if ineffectual position than defending his own members.    

Quote:
 It should be a party that works for average people, small business people, union people and even non union people.  Newsflash: not everyone in the labour movement or union member is a left winger.  Most people, union and non union alike, care about their paycheques and getting by day to day.  They are looking for economic security, and ideas to enhance that security.  They want answers, not just crying and hewing from the rafters.  If you criticize, you should offer an alternative.  ....  Its time he took a back seat and let the party grow and adapt to the growing reality in BC, that the battle for votes is at the middle of the spectrum, and the middle doesn't particularly like Jim Sinclair's politics.

You really should stop listening to so much CKNW and start listening to your neighbours more.  The mantra that we must all battle "for the centre vote" to win is almost dictatorial, in denying any political vehicle or voice to large segments of the public, and IMNSHO ignores one basic fact.  The "centrist" values you describe amount to little more than passive acceptence of the pro-corporate agenda in action.   Corporations which are not in the least bit interested in maintaining any social contract or healthy equilibrium, but in easy profit taking at the expense of others.   Am I paranoid?  Do you remember the eighties and nineties?  They weren't that long ago.  How many workers were "downsized" then and how many of the programs you say you 'support' were cut to the core or "privatized"?   But you centrists will never see it as long as you too insist on looking only to your own immediate "security" or comforts.  The world has changed but it's not changing into a more secure place for anyone but the few.  That's not the fault of the left either, for pointing out the uncomfortable truth that we still live in a society where one job lost oneday will often lead to yours the next.    

Quote:
Being a trade unionist, I understand the concept of economic viability. And if businesses aren't successful, then it goes without saying that they won't be hiring people and perhaps laying them off. 

That's one illusion which you "centrists" should seriously start reexamining, if you really want to maintain your own economic security much longer.   

Theres no need to fear the Ginger "groupies" though, if as you say, most members are on the same page as you.  Our first goal is bringing the democracy back to the NDP.   We can deal about the "new" part after that great day.    ;) 

Ratbert

genstrike wrote:

Ratbert wrote:

Keglerdave, awsome post.

remind, the antagonistic labour/industry dynamic of the past 20th century has done nothing but force investment out of the province. Organised labour luddites need new ideas and original thinking to attract capital rather than focusing on pitched battles with government to attempt to control the public spending agenda.

So, what exactly is "new ideas and original thinking" a euphemism for?

Getting out of the rut of resource extraction by investing in education, research and development and innovative technology to tranform the economy from primary resource extraction to knowledge-based information and technology.

The finger-pointing by the triumvirate of business, labour and government in a blame game of past economic mismanagement does nothing to furthur a better standard of living. Neither do antagonistic demands for 'more'.

Create an environment that allows business to flourish by providing a highly educated, skilled workforce. Achieve this by removing financial barriers to education and providing more access to r+d oportunity.

Ratbert

Cueball wrote:

He means immitating the Liberals. What he is forgetting is that the Liberals steal all their best policies from the NDP. Now that the NDP is aping the Liberals who are aping the NDP, they are two monkeys staring at each other doing nothing.

The "Liberals", federally as well as the BC mutation, do steal their best policies from the NDP because the NDP run like frightened rabbits whenever their well crafted policies meet the usual storm of misinformation from the "Liberal's" cheapsuits.

 Example: the federal NDP's inheritance tax. With a $1 million exemption, it was a balanced tax proposal that would raise revenue without creating hardship but the NDP folded like a cardboard suitcase the moment the opposition started a misinformation campaign.

 Endless complaining about "capitalists" is self-defeating. The division is not between 'capitalists', whatever that means and 'workers'. It is between elitists - including politicians, crown corp execs, business execs and the six figure salaried minions who purport to speak for 'workers' - and the population at large who are continually lied to an misinformed in order to perpetuate the entitlements of the elitists.

Our society has changed whereby the power no longer rests with wealthy individuals and their elected stooges but with a managerial class among goverment, business and labour that values self-entitlement over the welfare of society at large. 

 

 

Polunatic2

Speaking of democracy, what is the Ginger Group's view on reforming BC's electoral system? Does it concur with the party's decision to oppose STV? 

GingerGoodone

I would imagine that electoral reform would be quite popular with most Gingers, but without democratic reform within the party it probably won't get much further.  There have been many good ideas raised already, but it was decided that most are better left until a better decision making process can be achieved.  If you want more of a say in all the fun you'll just have to join up and take part.   :) 

keglerdave

Ginger:

Last time I looked the Manitoba and Saskatchwan NDP either hold or held power for a long time.  And guess how they went about doing it?  See, to effect change, you have to get into power. Now pay attention closely, because school is now in session. The majority of British Columbians and for that fact Canadians are neither hard left or hard right.  In fact, I would go so far to say that the majority of the electorate in this country's views aren't represented in any one particular party, and the same would go for BC.  To attain power, to effect the change that so many on the hard left are clamouring for, you have to, wait for it, WIN AN ELECTION!!!!!!!  To win an election, you have to have broad based appeal across the political spectrum.  This isn't CKNW talking, this is REALITY. It takes a majority of seats in Victoria to hold power and make changes. Contrary to your assertions about me pandering to CKNW and believing everything I hear, sorry, I'm not a mindless twit.  I can and do think for myself.  Guess that's probably one of my biggest problems when it comes to the NDP in BC, I don't drink the bathwater. That goes for the idiotic strategy that they put forward in 2009.

And that also goes for those clamouring to move further left. I talk to a lot of people in the labour movement.  Most rank and filers within the union movement are not HARD lefties. As a matter of fact, alot of them, because of the fact that they are in unions and earn middle to upper middle income, can't relate their politics to what you are subscribing to want to do to the party.  As for your comment about Jim Sinclair, well... let's just use the term self interest and promotion.  Why some people in the party fight so hard not to adapt to winning formulae and strategy, aka the Manitoba and Saskatchewan NDP, and for that fact the Obama campaign. Befuddles me.

Because, in order to change the world or at least the province, you have to win over the electorate or at least a majority of the electorate. And as I said, the majority of the electorate or neither Neo Conservative, Neo Liberal, Communist, Socialist etc.  I would say that the vast majority of people are balanced.  And while that doesn't mesh with the viewpoint you espouse to, whether you like or it not, its reality.  With all the hatred of the Campbell Fiberals, why hasn't the BCNDP's numbers climbed substantially? They've been absolutely stalled at a 12 point lead.  And ohh btw, Dosanjh was not a centrist. He was a backstabbing snake, but a devout marxist as well. I'm not inferring that one has to do with the other, but perhaps you should quit only reading the People's News or whatever the communist organ is called. 

keglerdave

STV = Sexually Transmitted Voting = Dead Issue

genstrike

keglerdave wrote:
And ohh btw, Dosanjh was not a centrist... but a devout marxist

Wow.  Just wow.

Frustrated Mess Frustrated Mess's picture

Smile Therein genstrike lies the problem, eh?

I love these discussions. All this talk about economy. Whose economy? The devout NDPer gives us a clue: "Being a trade unionist, I understand the concept of economic viability. And if businesses aren't successful, then it goes without saying that they won't be hiring people and perhaps laying them off. Then those people aren't consuming goods from other businesses or paying into the tax system."

So this poster is speaking of the status quo. A consumer based capitalist economy premised on off-shoring, resource extraction, strip malls, suburban sprawl, and two SUVs in every driveway. Or, in other words, the growth economy; infinite consumption of a finite world.

But then we are told: "Getting out of the rut of resource extraction by investing in education, research and development and innovative technology to tranform the economy from primary resource extraction to knowledge-based information and technology."

A service economy! But we have a service economy.

When the powers-that-be wish to sell a service economy, they sell the "knowledge economy". But there are two things wrong with that. First, knowledge, to be valuable, must have an application. No one will buy from me Zork's elucidium-into-gold processing formula if no one knows where Zork is or how to get there. A so-called knowledge economy must be in service to some productive process. Second, technological knowledge and expertise represents only a segment of any economy and it is as easily offshored as manufacturing. In many cases, much easier. Further, as technology develops, it requires fewer persons. What is the impact of virtualization on already sparsely staffed data centres?

What the powers-that-be are really selling is a service economy dominated by retail, poor wages, and driven by a conspicuous consumption itself powered by debt. Debt, as has recently been asserted by the CIBC, I believe, has replaced income as the primary source of disposable income for Canadians. I'm no math wiz, so you do the calculations: how long can consumer debt sustain an economy entirely founded upon comsumer spending?

The challenge for the left, including the BC ginger snaps, is to develop and articulate an alternative economic model. The current model benefits only a small minority and is literally costing us our planet. What is the alternative?

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

keglerdave wrote:

And ohh btw, Dosanjh was not a centrist. He was a backstabbing snake, but a devout marxist as well. I'm not inferring that one has to do with the other, but perhaps you should quit only reading the People's News or whatever the communist organ is called. 

LMAO 

That is one of the funniest jokes I have ever read on babble.

Kloch

keglerdave wrote:

Ginger:

Last time I looked the Manitoba and Saskatchwan NDP either hold or held power for a long time.  And guess how they went about doing it?  See, to effect change, you have to get into power. Now pay attention closely, because school is now in session. 

You win elections by moving to the center.  You change society by moving where the center is.

If you want to do the former, keep doing what you're doing.  Your victory will be as meaningful as an elementary school student council election.  School is in session, eh?  Too bad.  You get an "F".

N.Beltov N.Beltov's picture

FM, in regard to your longer contribution: orthodox sociologists take great pains to show how the Canadian economy has moved from manufacturing and resource based industry to the tertiary or service sector. These are also the same people who, while failing to define "globalization" properly, claim globalization is inevitable.

What is not said by such people is that the form that globalization is taking right now is the export of manufacturing jobs to lower wage areas (outside of Canada).

We still need Canadian manufacturing and we have plenty of Canadian resources to do so. What we need is control over the financial institutions and the political will to do so. Call it what you will.

Mean Moe

I wish these folks would just join the Marxist-Leninist Party. It's a better fit for them and will keep them from continuing to scare the general public away from the BC NDP.

 

N.Beltov N.Beltov's picture

Ha ha. Whenever I see "these people" I like to reach for my .... pen. lol. Dead giveaway, Mean Moe. Apparently, you are of the view that the NDP should NOT have a right, centre and left ... despite the casual observation by a supporter in this very thread that that's just the way it is.

Try again. This time, actually make an argument.

Mean Moe

N.Beltov wrote:

Ha ha. Whenever I see "these people" I like to reach for my .... pen. lol. Dead giveaway, Mean Moe. Apparently, you are of the view that the NDP should NOT have a right, centre and left ... despite the casual observation by a supporter in this very thread that that's just the way it is.

Try again. This time, actually make an argument.

 

I never said that at all. All parties have a left, right and centre, even the GOP.  It depends where that centre is located. IMO the ideal for the BC NDP is this configuration; populist right-pragmatic centre- social dem. left.

While the current percieved configuration is; pragmatic right-social dem centre-socialist/marxist left

and it is the vocal members in the left position in this configuration that scares the hell out of non-political no time to think too busy average folk.

When in fact their ideological beliefs and policy ideas have more in common with the Workless Party or the MLP.

N.Beltov N.Beltov's picture

The definition of what's "left" is precisely the matter up for discussion. Some people, including you it seems, wants to define the NDP as the political "centre" around which all "lesser" celestial political bodies orbit. To me, this is practically indistinguishable from the Liberals ... but since I belong to neither party, I'll let the Liberals speak for themselves.

Try letting the Gingers elaborate their own views instead of imposing your own misrepresentations of them on them. They've laid out their principles. Try to elaborate your own beyond "they're scary", bleating about the Marxist-Leninist bogeyman, and so on.

I'm no NDPer. Are you? And, if you are, aren't you on the extreme right of the party, like a few other rabblers here? Help me here. It's hard for me to distinguish such NDPers from ... Liberals.

 

 

 

Kloch

Mean Moe wrote:

I never said that at all. All parties have a left, right and centre, even the GOP.  It depends where that centre is located. IMO the ideal for the BC NDP is this configuration; populist right-pragmatic centre- social dem. left.

While the current percieved configuration is; pragmatic right-social dem centre-socialist/marxist left

and it is the vocal members in the left position in this configuration that scares the hell out of non-political no time to think too busy average folk.

When in fact their ideological beliefs and policy ideas have more in common with the Workless Party or the MLP.

Red Baiting.  Boring.

GingerGoodone

Kloch wrote:

keglerdave wrote:

Ginger:

Last time I looked the Manitoba and Saskatchwan NDP either hold or held power for a long time.  And guess how they went about doing it?  See, to effect change, you have to get into power. Now pay attention closely, because school is now in session. 

You win elections by moving to the center.  You change society by moving where the center is.

If you want to do the former, keep doing what you're doing.  Your victory will be as meaningful as an elementary school student council election.  

 

Thank you Koch.  My thoughts on the subject exactly.

And FYI, Kegler Dave and Moe, being a 'Ginger' doesn't mean you're a 'Red'.  Whatever that's supposed to mean anymore.  Please reread the statements as posted, I'd really like to know what you find so threatening. 

Slumberjack

GingerGoodone wrote:
 I'd really like to know what you find so threatening. 

Ideas?

GingerGoodone

Let's see if they have anything more to add, but I'm starting to think that's what it is.  You'd be amazed at how common this attitude is in the new "big tent" party.  

Mean Moe

GingerGoodone wrote:

THE GINGER GROUP HAS BEEN FORMED TO:

1.  Address the democratic deficit within the provincial NDP;

The Ginger Group believes that the current leadership of the provincial NDP has lost its sense of direction and vision, along with the confidence of a large number of NDP members and supporters.  It is imperative that the Provincial NDP immediately address the democratic deficit within the Party.

Further, the Group believes that too much power has been concentrated in the hands of the Table Officers.  The ultimate decision making power must be returned to
Provincial Council.

The NDP has most democratic party system in the western world. IMO too much and PC is waste of time. PC is mostly made up of the complainers and naysayers with a defeatist attitude.

GingerGoodone wrote:

2.  Refocus the Party on the environmental, social, and economic crises, particularly Climate Change, which confront the ordinary citizens of BC, and provide a sense of agency and belonging for the alienated membership of the party.

The Group believes that the leadership of the Party has insulated itself from the membership and appears to be incapable of, or unwilling to, address these crises.
This alienation is destroying the Party.

Sounds all nice but really have some doable prgmatic ideas, or are you really talking about state ownership and making business hurt.

GingerGoodone wrote:

3.  Return the Party to its democratic Socialist roots.

THE GINGER GROUP HAS THEREFORE GATHERED TOGETHER LIKE-MINDED PROVINCIAL NDP MEMBERS AND SUPPORTERS TO:

A)    Restore to the membership the power to decide policy and to choose our organizational and political leadership.

B)    Restore our Party as a vigorous advocate for, and an agent of, social justice.

C)    Commit our Party to protection of the environment, including the initiation of real actions to deal with Climate Change

D)    Commit our Party to offering a clear and unambiguous socialist economic model to replace the failed capitalist system which is destroying our environment, undermining basic human rights, and robbing our citizens of their share in the common wealth of our province.

Yup  that's exactly what you want to do and never win an election either.

GingerGoodone wrote:

THE GINGER GROUP WILL ACCOMPLISH THE GOALS ABOVE THROUGH:

Resolutions at the bi-annual Provincial Convention to further these goals;

Electing Provincial leaders who advance the economic principles of socialism (ie. production for use and not for profit)

Electing leaders at the Constituency level who will work towards these goals.

These goals have been attempted at every convention, and the membership votes them down. But you call it a democratic deficit. Like I said, if you wish to start a socialist project then do it in one of the socialist parties because the BC NDP isn't one and can't be one, if it ever wants to form government.

Capitalism routinely collapses and socialism tends to eat itself. We need to learn from these lessons and take the best from both systems that allow people to prosper without the negative effects of both systems. To use a Hegelian terms, we need to be party of synthesis , not antithesis.

 

N.Beltov N.Beltov's picture

Capitalism is the "anti". Socialism is the "synthesis". Wake up,, ffs.

Fidel

Socialism in one province? Is it really doable within the top-down neoliberal framework emanating from Ottawa since 35 years ago?

I vote NDP provincially merely to stop the pawning off of public assets for a song to rich friends of the two old line parties. Beyond that I expect provincial governments not to run us into a debt hole, and dregulation and privatizing the moneymakers tends to contribute to that.

What's afta NAFTA?

It's time to challenge international capital as it was in the 1970's when Labour and other governments backed off. There will be a new monetary deal between western world countries within the next ten years, because this one is finished. It's bankrupt kaput finished. There will be no real recovery until a new way is established and agreed to by western world countries. If ever there was a time for socialism, it's now.

Mean Moe

N.Beltov wrote:

Capitalism is the "anti". Socialism is the "synthesis". Wake up,, ffs.

Way to think out of the box. You keep to your dogma since you obviously slept through the last 50 years.

N.Beltov N.Beltov's picture

So, nothing new then? Good job urinating on the Gingers. That'll help.

kropotkin1951 kropotkin1951's picture

Mean Moe wrote:

Way to think out of the box. You keep to your dogma since you obviously slept through the last 50 years.

 

I agree with you Mean Moe that the BC NDP is no place for socialist ideas. I think you should take your passion for this view to the convention floor and get some honesty in your Constitution. You need to repeal the Preamble and other parts of the Constitution that are definitely 50 years behind the BC NDP's current ideology.  My problem is they are not socialist but they still call themselves that.  

It would help win them votes if they denounced socialism and it would make them more honest as a political party.  So start a movement to tell the leadership to change the Cobstitution so the party can stop lying about their principles.

Quote:

PREAMBLE 

The New Democratic Party believes that social, economic and political progress in Canada can only be assured by the 

application of democratic socialist principles to government and the administration of public affairs. 

 

The principles of democratic socialism can be defined briefly as follows: a) the production and distribution of goods 

and services shall be directed to meeting the social and individual needs of people and not for profit, b) the 

modification and control of the operations of monopolistic productive and distributive organizations through economic 

and social planning, towards these ends, and c) where necessary, the extension of the principle of social ownership

 

 

N.Beltov N.Beltov's picture

lol. Yea but then the NDP couldn't do such a good job of sucking in all those socialists for their money, time, effort, and so on. Can't have that.

Pages