NDP foreign policy lining up with U.S.

64 posts / 0 new
Last post
Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

Slumberjack wrote:

Dear Imperialist Dogs?

Running Dogs? Imperialist Lackeys?

Slumberjack

When seen from certain vistas it's sometimes difficult to tell where Harperdom ends and the position of the NDP begins.

contrarianna

Quote:
It looks like the NDP are refusing to be stationary targets for the Rex Murphys and Craig Olivers reporting on colder war newz at 11.

The trouble with the implied playing along with alleged captors (the Harper-endorsing media) is that it amounts to a political version of that described long ago in psychology journals:

Quote:
"Stockholm Syndrome" is an apparently paradoxical psychological phenomenon in which hostages express empathy and have positive feelings towards their captors, sometimes to the point of defending them...the victims[] essentially mistake a lack of abuse from their captors for an act of kindness....
There are more than a few NDPers whose identification with party positions are complete no matter what the alleged reasons.

There is now but a hairs breadth of difference between the NDP foreign policy and by far the most rightwing foreign policy that Canada has ever experienced. The difference is in "emphasis rather than direction" as Paul Dewar put it, (disappointed that the Harper government didn't use the NDP Foreign Policy Critic to lobby for Harper's Security Council seat).

Apologists for NDP foreign policy are essentially apologists for Harper's foreign policy--and that is the real damage to Canadian political culture.

The damage is far more than the Liberal Party could do in its expected opportunism in supporting whatever neoliberalism, neoconservative stances that they think will get them an election boost; the NDP defines, for a large number of Canadians, the most "progressive" end of the political spectrum beyond which is the "far left" and simply beyond the pale.

The result is the "acceptable" range of the political spectrum positions is now reduced to the distance that Harper roles over in his sleep, and that is a tragedy for Canada, and likely not retractable.

Fidel

contrarianna wrote:
The damage is far more than the Liberal Party could do in its expected opportunism in supporting whatever neoliberalism, neoconservative stances that they think will get them an election boost; the NDP defines, for a large number of Canadians, the most "progressive" end of the political spectrum beyond which is the "far left" and simply beyond the pale.

I think the Liberals became a redundant conservative party by 1984. Neoliberalism began under the Liberals with borrowing money and credit at higher interest rates from foreign sources by 1975. The NDP stood up in Parliament and in election campaigns and protested all of it. And if CEOs of corporations ran their companies into massive indebtedness, and if they acquiesced to predatory foreign takeovers of the means of production, energy and raw materials required for their corporations to be profitable, the bad CEO's would surely have been fired off the job long ago.

I think the question is, how badly do we want to a country that resembles any kind of economic and cultural sovereign state separate from influence by a vicious empire and its corporate raiders? Canada has not become a subserviant colony to a greed-driven vicious empire overnight - this has taken place over the last 30 to 35 years or so with the NDP and a host of civil society groups and concerned people sounding alarm bells for a long time.

Democracy is like marriage except with millions of people and other interests. It's about give and take and making compromises in order to achieve goals. And I think that it's obvious we need to get out of this abusive, dysfunctional relationship of the last 30-35 years. Canadian voters are slowly beginning to realize that it is an abusive relationship. And I agree that Canadians really do require counselling for their Stockholm syndrome. Sometimes they need a little encouragement and knowledge that their paternalistic relationship with Ottawa is not normal and that there is a way out.

Unionist

With [url=http://www.ndp.ca/press/ndp-condemns-crackdown-on-foreign-ngos-in-egypt]... shameful statement[/url] by Laverdière - supporting U.S.-funded saboteurs operating in Egypt - still sitting on the NDP web site, it occurs to me that "moving the NDP to the centre" might be a welcome change from its current positioning on foreign affairs at least...

Here is an article from the L.A. Times about the saboteurs:

[url=http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-meisler-prodemocrac... Egypt doesn't trust us: Private pro-democracy groups funded by the U.S. have a troubling history[/url]

Quote:
There is an American smugness that assumes everyone else must benefit from emulating our political system. In fact, advising our friends about their politics demands great sensitivity. Not everyone appreciates our interference. These private though U.S.-government-funded institutes should not be in a country where, as seems to be the case in Egypt, they are not wanted.

Allô, Hélène, avez-vous compris le message?

 

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

On CBC's P&P, Laverdière consistently supports the views of Chris Alexander, the Conservative MP on the foreign policy panel. What's her background, anyway?

Hoodeet

where does she get her political education? 

Unionist

Boom Boom wrote:
On CBC's P&P, Laverdière consistently supports the views of Chris Alexander, the Conservative MP on the foreign policy panel. What's her background, anyway?

Hoodeet wrote:
Where does she get her political education?

She spent many years parroting the line of the Canadian government for a living in foreign countries. That's why she's in love with the U.S. spies in Egypt - she empathizes:

Quote:
Hélène entered Canada’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs in 1992 as an foreign service officer. She was posted to various locations, including Washington, Dakar, Senegal and Santiago, Chile.

Throughout her career, Hélène has received various honours, including numerous scholarships and an award from the Minister of Foreign Affairs for her contribution to Canadian foreign policy.

That proud and heroic account is from the NDP website.

 

M. Spector M. Spector's picture

Independent Jewish Voices wrote:
[T]he positions of leadership candidate Thomas Mulcair stand out as more closely aligned with those of Stephen Harper than with the NDP on the issue of the ongoing crisis in Israel/Palestine.

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

She should be dumped from her critic's position, but I bet that won't happen.

Unionist

M. Spector wrote:

Independent Jewish Voices wrote:
[T]he positions of leadership candidate Thomas Mulcair stand out as more closely aligned with those of Stephen Harper than with the NDP on the issue of the ongoing crisis in Israel/Palestine.

Yeah, I saw that story. My problem is trying to figure out on what point the positions of Mulcair on the "ongoing crisis in Israel / Palestine" differ from those of the NDP. Anyone shed any light on that?

For example, Israel has been [url=http://articles.cnn.com/2012-03-10/middleeast/world_meast_gaza-israel-ai... Gaza for two days now[/url] and has murdered at least 16 Palestinians. Here is the NDP statement:

[url=http://www.nothing.net/]Statement by NDP Foreign Affairs critic on the brutal bombardment of Gaza and civilian casualties[/url]

And Mulcair's:

[url=http://www.puresilence.org/]Thomas Mulcair speaks out on the issue of the ongoing crisis in Israel / Palestine[/url]

Help me find the difference.

 

NDPP

NDP = NO  DIFFERENCE PARTY

Unionist

Just look at the [url=http://ndp.ca]party web site[/url].

[url=http://www.ndp.ca/press/ndp-condemns-crackdown-on-foreign-ngos-in-egypt]NDP condemns crackdown on foreign NGOs in Egypt[/url]

Guess what the foreign NGOs are? The National Democratic Institute and the International Republican Institute (duh, what do those sound like?). For anyone who isn't aware of the origin of these two U.S.-government-funded branches of the National Endowment for Democracy, founded at Reagan's behest, and their pro-U.S. actions around the world, try using Google. But the most obscene part is calling them NGOs - or can it really be wholesale ignorance??

Then there's [url=http://www.ndp.ca/press/statement-by-official-opposition-foreign-affairs... on Syria:

Quote:
We call on the Canadian government to immediately exert diplomatic pressure on China and particularly Russia in order to secure a UN resolution on the crisis.

The good guys vs. the bad guys? Is the Libya experience over and forgotten? Harper should pressure China and Russia in defence of one faction in a civil conflict?

Then, of course, we still have Turmel's statements on the death of Kim Jong Il (how evil he was) and Vaclav Havel (how good he was).

I didn't notice anything about "time to lift the Gaza blockade already" or "how about a Palestinian state". Not sure if they still want the military to invade Attawapiskat...

Are they getting a monthly subsidy or something? Or are they merely the world's first surviving brain donor?

 

 

Pages