NDP=No Difference Party: NDP Convention Fails Palestine AGAIN

Support for Palestinian Cause at NDP Convention Blocked by Party Establishment Maneuvering|IJV Canada

Quote:

OTTAWA — Independent Jewish Voice Canada is frustrated by anti-democratic steps taken by the NDP establishment to block a strong resolution supporting Palestinian rights from reaching the convention floor for debate. Instead, a much weaker resolution, which reflects the existing position the party has taken on Israel-Palestine, will be debated.

Despite obtaining the official support of 26 riding associations in six provinces–more than any other resolution–the Palestine Resolution was ranked 37th out of 45 foreign policy resolutions by the Party’s undemocratic prioritization committee. By comparison, the top ten resolutions selected in the same category received a combined total of only 17 endorsements.

When the prioritization was challenged at a re-prioritization session on Friday morning, the resolution was voted down by just eleven votes (200-189).

“In what was an extremely tight vote, NDP members have shown our strongest support for Palestinian rights in history,” said NDP member and IJV spokesperson Geneviève Nevin. “The fervor around this resolution shows the clear split between the party’s grassroots–especially its younger members–and the party establishment.”

The resolution was endorsed unanimously at the Young New Democrats convention on Thursday. It was also supported by MP Niki Ashton, former MP Libby Davies and notable figures, including prominent academic Alain Deneault and activist Rabbi David Mivasair.

“It is clear that the party establishment did not want this resolution to pass, so they ranked it near the bottom of the list and stacked the re-prioritization room with party operatives, including members of the caucus who voted against it,” said Nevin.

Besides the Palestine resolution, which called for banning products made in Israel’s illegal settlements in the occupied West Bank from Canada, a total of twelve other resolutions supporting Palestinian rights were passed by riding associations across the country.

“We are disappointed that the party’s commitment to Love and Courage still does not extend to Palestinians,” continued Nevin. “But we will continue to build the momentum we’ve gained from this tremendous national effort. The party establishment may have succeeded in blocking efforts to support Palestinian rights for now, but they will not be able to hold back the tide of justice forever.”

IJV would like to thank all those who participated in this wonderful effort by supporting it at their riding associations, contacting their MPs, and attending the convention.

For more information please contact:

Geneviève Nevin

[email protected]

What a disgrace.

Quote:

our true socialist comrades to the east carrying the torch of socialism anti imperialism is on the job and will succeed where so called fake pro social anti imperial so call political paries have failed miserably out of fear of failure!

At first I thought you must mean China, but they've got the fastest growing middle class in the world, two different stock markets, and their millionaires seem to send their kids to Canadian schools, and invest in everything from rare artworks to Vancouver property.

So which "true socialist comrades" are you referring to?  Cuba would be to the South.  Do you mean DPRK?  They identify as "juche".

NDP delegates protest ‘watered down’ Palestine policy

Quote:

In the waning hours of the NDP policy convention’s second day dozens of delegates stood in silence with hands raised holding posters proclaiming “Free Palestine” as they protested what some called a “watered down” resolution on Israel-Palestine relations during a tense and lengthy stand-off that involved more procedural wrangling than discussion.

It was the only resolution of 22 discussed Saturday during four hours of debate to garner heated objections on either side. Third up in the last session, the resolution that called on the NDP to condemn violations on “both sides in this conflict” took up nearly the whole hour, mainly with points of order and referrals rather than debate on the substance of the issue.

All microphones on the floor were packed with members wanting to speak to the issue, with charges that those opposed were being blocked from getting their chance to debate on the floor. Several times delegates “called the question” or tried to refer to committee, which members complained was undemocratic and a common tactic to avoid debate. About 60 members stood throughout and later protested at the back of the room after the motion passed.

Sam Hersh said he’s been called a “self-hating Jew” for his stance on Palestine, and argued the “watered down” resolution before the floor did “nothing to substantially address Israel’s “human rights violations.”

“Criticizing the Israeli government is not anti-Semitism,” said Mr. Hersh, who said they had been “blocked every step of the way” in trying to debate the issue.

Am I the only one who sees massive progress here:

The NDP’s foreign critic has begun challenging Canada's contribution to Palestinian dispossession. Hélène Laverdière has repeatedly criticized the Trudeau government’s silence on Donald Trump’s decision to move the U.S. Embassy to Jerusalem. In response she tweeted, "a devastating day for those who believe in peace, justice and security in the Middle East. Where is Canada’s voice in protest of Trump’s decision on #Jerusalem? I urge Canada to condemn this decision in the strongest of terms."

Laverdière also asked the federal government to condemn Israel’s detention of 16-year-old Ahed Tamimi and hundredsof other Palestinian children who are usually tortured by Israeli forces. Similarly, she has pressed Ottawa to properly label products from illegal Israeli settlements and submitted a petition to Parliament calling "upon the Government of Canada to demand that Israel immediately and completely cease all settlement activities in the occupied Palestinian territory, including East Jerusalem."

http://rabble.ca/blogs/bloggers/yves-englers-blog/2018/02/burying-canada...

I know it isn't a convention resolution but it seems way better than the NDP position under Mulcair. 

The NDP's position on Palestine can be summed up in two words: "Sunny ways". We're at one with Trudeau Jr.

I was asked in another thread what were some of the things I'd like changed in the NDP:  this procedure that allows the leadership to bury resolutions it's uncomfortable with is one.  There's simply no good reason for it anymore.

It would be one thing if all of this caution were in defence of a clearly socialist or at least clearly social democratic CORE set of values, principles and proposals that were never going to be compromised away, no matter what.

But it's not in defense of a core of ANYTHING.

You get the feeling that a lot of "insiders" in the federal party, so long as the the party won "power" in name and people with a bit of orange accessorizing in their wardrobe got to spend four years being the cabinet, would be fine with a federal replication of what Romanow did in Saskatchewan or with an NDP prime minister lowering him- or herself to imitating Mike Harcourt's despicable attacks on "welfare mothers".  

And would leave corporate efforts to further weaken what remains of the labour movement totally unchallenged.

​And would be perfectly happy to have Canadian troops invading MORE Arab/Muslim countries in more wars for oil.

So long as they got to be part of "the club", it looks as though some of these "insiders" would be just fine with all of that-and with the party's usual tendency to spend more time demonizing the left than it ever does standing up to the neoliberal center-right.

Is there any reason rank-and-file NDP supporters SHOULDN'T harbor such suspicions?

Mr. Magoo wrote:

Quote:

And would be perfectly happy to have Canadian troops invading MORE Arab/Muslim countries in more wars for oil.

In which wars has Canada recently scored free oil?

Strawman.  It's not about "free oil"...it's about the idea that every oil-producing country HAS to be put under control of the West.   Oil(and other extractive-based commodities)were the only real reasons the West militarily intervened in Iraq, Afghanistan, and Libya.  

NDPP, why are you now posting right-wing propaganda pieces about this issue?  It's especially confusing coming from you.

Thought it might be something like that, but wanted to make sure.  Those are scary voices-the one thing that's hopeful is that more and more people in the Diaspora Jewish communities are distancing themselves from what Netanyahu and Co. are doing.  I think it will end up that the last really hard-core defenders of the status quo there are the Christian Zionists-especially the ones who want to jumpstart the Last Days and are heavily into things like rebuilding the Temple-and whose end game is forcing the Jews to choose between conversion or death.

LOL.  Really?  And what other human rights and tenents of international law are they willing to sacrifice in order to do that.

Represent all Canadians?  What does that mean exactly?  By failing to take action against Israeli violation of international law they are, ipso facto, not representing some Canadians.

NDPP wrote:

Convention Provokes Rage Against NDP Machine  -  by Yves Engler

http://yvesengler.com/2018/03/01/convention-provokes-rage-against-ndp-ma...

I'd just like to point out the article also notes that "Niki Ashton was the only MP to support re-prioritizing the Palestine Resolution."

The only one. Good for her - she has the courage of her convictions. Maybe she could lead a breakaway party.

JKR wrote:

Where does it state that the government must represent the interests of all Canadians instead of just the interests of the Canadians that vote for them?

Legally, once elected, the government represents all Canadians. Individuals, including the PM, may or may not have personal biases nevertheless their job is to balance what is best for Canada as a whole. 

Pondering wrote:

JKR wrote:

Where does it state that the government must represent the interests of all Canadians instead of just the interests of the Canadians that vote for them?

Legally, once elected, the government represents all Canadians. Individuals, including the PM, may or may not have personal biases nevertheless their job is to balance what is best for Canada as a whole. 

What law requires the government to balance what is best for Canada as a whole?

Quote:

What law requires the government to balance what is best for Canada as a whole?

"The Law of Re-Election".

I take your point, though.  Certainly the elected government "represents" us in the sense that if they sign something, we live by it, and if they screw up on the world stage, we can't get much traction saying "that doesn't represent me because I didn't vote for them".

But I agree no government has any special duty of care to throw in some sops to appease the other side.

From JKR:

Unfortunately FPTP does not require a majority of voters to support a government's re-election. The Conservative election machine operators have been open in saying that they target approximately just 29% of the electorate because that's all they need in order to win a false FPTP majority government.

​Two questions for you.

​1. Has there ever been a majority government in Canada that had fewer votes than a losing party?

​2. Has their ever been a majority government in Canada that achieved their majority with 29% of the popular vote?

Rev Pesky wrote:

​1. Has there ever been a majority government in Canada that had fewer votes than a losing party?

Quote:

​2. Has their ever been a majority government in Canada that achieved their majority with 29% of the popular vote?

JKR said "29% of the electorate", i.e. including those who stayed home, so Stephen Harper's 2011 majority win, where he took 39% of 61% of the voters, for a total of 24%, qualifies easily.

ETA: Oops. Left this tab open from last night, then delivered the most delayed cross-post ever.