It's very hard to have a discussion when people keep shifting their ground.
I started out by objecting to this statement by It's Me D:
The NDP [b]cannot, and should not[/b] call for this but this is what needs to be done to save the world...[my emphasis - MS]
The "this" he refers to is the kind of radical change necessary to save the world from ecological disaster - i.e., a sort of ecosocialism. I objected because I see no reason why someone who supports such a project, as I do, would oppose having it embraced and put forward before the public by the NDP (or, as it later turned out in the discussion, any electoral political party).
I find it bizarre that people who acknowledge the need for revolutionary action to save the world don't think it should be mentioned in an election campaign by Canada's major party of the left.
Instead of an explanation, I got lectures about the limits of electoralism, as if there were some obvious alternative at this point in time (i.e., on the one hand you have the federal electoral process, and on the other you have....um, [b]nothing, really[/b]).
So it seems to me that talking about the obvious limitations of electoral politics ("the system is rigged", "can't play by old rules", "the solution will not be achieved by voting", etc.) is being used as an excuse for complete political inaction. That's what I mean by "shunning" electoral politics.
It's nothing to do with "priorities" because the higher priority is what? Organizing community food cooperatives and barter exchange systems is an admirable endeavour, but it is not making the revolution either. It's not even political action in any kind of sense that builds mass support for social change.
In my opinion, it's nothing short of criminal for people who supposedly are aware of the magnitude of the problem and the impending crises to argue that the NDP should [b]not[/b] be putting forward what is unarguably the necessary radical program for the planet's survival.
[b]Spector I know you are an admirer of Chavez, I respect him as well, foremost because he is committed to putting the power to save the world in the hands of the masses through a radical transformation of power structures in Venezuela. I do not believe any of our political parties here in Canada have the will to do this, even the NDP; if I'm wrong and the NDP does have this will then they are wise not to make it public as it runs contrary to the entire structure of the arena in which they seek victory.[/b]
There you have it in a nutshell - abject capitulation to reformism, the exact opposite of what Hugo Chavez did in Venezuela. He saw beyond the limitations of the electoral arena and was not afraid to put forward a radical project before the voters of Venezuela that would show them the way to transcend mere electoralism and begin to make real changes in society.