Unite to Stop Harper!

41 posts / 0 new
Last post
Unionist
Unite to Stop Harper!

*

RevolutionPlease RevolutionPlease's picture

That's why I voted for The Grizzly!

Unionist

In the 2011 federal election campaign, Québec solidaire called on people to vote for progressives - whether NDP or BQ - in an effort to unite forces capable of defeating Harper and his attacks on Canada. The Bloc was distinctly unhappy with this call by a self-styled sovereignist party to vote for (potentially) federalist forces. But QS understood, far more clearly than either the NDP (to this day) or the Bloc, where the interests and the tendencies of the people of Québec lay. And they still do:

[url=http://www.ledevoir.com/non-classe/345884/quebec-solidaire-appelle-a-l-u... solidaire calls for unity of the left against Harper[/url]

Quote:
Québec Solidaire called on newly-elected NDP leader Thomas Mulcair to "speak ever louder" against the "dangerous" and "disquieting" ideological trends of the Harper government.

The provincial political party also invited him to "rally" the left forces in Québec to oppose the "dismantlement of democracy" and the recent attacks by the Conservatives against networks of international support.

Françoise David and Amir Khadir said, in their Facebook updates, that QS doesn't get involved in federal politics much, but when it does, it's for a good reason.

So what do you think of this call? And how about the rest of Canada? Or now that the NDP is strong, brave, free, and has a grizzled Leader, can it go it alone and conquer the world?

JeffWells

Very glad to see this. I was actually wondering how QS would respond to Mulcair's victory, and I wasn't expecting it to be this warm. I hope the Grizzly (Gentle Tom?) embraces this.

Arthur Cramer Arthur Cramer's picture

Man you should see what is going on at the Huff Po. All the Libs are saying we in the NDP are "Harperites", and that the Liberals are really now the NDP.

WTF?

To say the least, I think the Libs are pretty nervous.

Buddy Kat

This is exactly why I figured Broadbent was a genious ..he manipulated the media to get the point across that if Mulcair becomes the leader the libs will run to him while at the same time retain the left and all it's values...now of course that makes the Liberals obsolete....and any support for them is strictly as a vote splitting service that benifits the  conservatives...and those liberals are just disgruntled cons anyways so F*&&* them.

Some say this is what harper wants and desires (a solid left vs.  a solid right party) however , what he didn't look at it is a solid right vs a solid left/center which is now the NDP....

New http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zky2bn0Gtyg New

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J-QvXax88J8

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q0eQgUpkJ1Q

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ns8LD5Q8ecc

 

Doug

I don't think that was intentional on Broadbent's part - he was following the script from the Topp campaign to position him as the Anyone-but-Mulcair candidate - but it does have that nice effect that if the Conservatives try to portray Mulcair as a crazed Marxist-Leninist it won't work now.

socialdemocrati...

And that's why Mulcair probably didn't complain too loudly whenever the media claimed he wanted to move the party to the center. At every event, he repeated the "move the center to us" approach. But he stopped well short of complaining to the media or demanding a correction when they said "Mulcair represents the centrist wing of the party".

Regardless of whether you think Mulcair is some sort of right-wing New Democrat (an oxymoron), a solid social democrat, or some kind of trojan horse... the best thing we can ALL do is stay involved from now until 2015. He needs the political cover (or the political pressure) to stay true to key policies. Top of my list is electoral reform, but high on my list is to do *something* about the economic and environmental impact of the tar sands.

mark_alfred

Unionist wrote:

Or now that the NDP is strong, brave, free, and has a grizzled Leader, can it go it alone and conquer the world?

I'm not sure about that, but it does seem to be the path that Mulcair and the NDP have chosen.  The idea now is to "unite progressives under the NDP banner".  Previously the Liberals tried this same tactic with "unite progressives under the big red tent".  There's an interesting article about this on the CBC website entitled Mulcair, Harper allies in plotting Liberals' demise.

josh

Putting the snide remark directed at Dobbin by Gaian, it's really no mystery why Mulcair won despite being on the ideological right end of the party.  Because he was from Quebec.  The number of seats the party has there, plus the claim that if he weren't chosen the party would collapse in Quebec, put him over the top.  And over Topp.  Had Mulcair been from Ontario, his numbers would have been Singh-like.

Gaian

Arthur Cramer wrote:

Man you should see what is going on at the Huff Po. All the Libs are saying we in the NDP are "Harperites", and that the Liberals are really now the NDP.

WTF?

To say the least, I think the Libs are pretty nervous.

Perhaps the Liberal camp is inspired by the continued, bitter pokes at Mulcair from Rabble's defender of the socialist ramparts, Murray Dobbin, writing in the Tyee (which came today):

"There will be lots of soul searching and head scratching going on this week about what happened with the NDP leadership race. The mechanics of the convention, the interesting lack of deal-making, and how the balloting progressed are all fodder for those who enjoy going through the entrails of leadership conventions. Others will be analyzing the various campaigns of the frontrunners, looking for weaknesses to explain how they could collectively have let Thomas Mulcair, the right-wing Liberal, pro-Israel, political bully become head of their party.

Two things shocked me about this race and its final two days. The first is that so many NDPers, part of a tightly-knit, hyper-loyal political culture steeped in progressive values could so casually elect a man who contradicts so many of their principles. Besides the disastrous result for the party and all progressives in the country, the election of Mulcair raises profound questions about the health of the party. There are two possibilities, neither attractive. One is that NDPers, like increasing numbers of Canadians in general, simply don't read as much and that information about Mulcair did not get through to them. To what extent did NDPers devote time and energy to finding out about the candidates? In general, what is the state of member education and engagement in the party?"

None of which appeared in question period today. Could there be a less generous, more creative spinmeister in the Conservative camp?

And now there is someone else taking up the cry about the Great Misled:" NDPers, like increasing numbers of Canadians in general, simply don't read as much and that information about Mulcair did not get through to them. To what extent did NDPers devote time and energy to finding out about the candidates? In general, what is the state of member education and engagement in the party?"

The plot thickens.But I find Murray's claim to progressivist exclusivity to be a bit much, given his own ahistorical tendencies. :)

Gaian

Did you know that Honore Mercier, former Quebec premier and forbear of Tom Mulcair on his mom's side, was a founder of the Parti National, and the "first Quebec political leader to assert that the Quebec government was the national government of Quebe4cers, and is therefore considered a father of Quebec natioinalism,"according to Mel Hurtig's encyclopedia.

Great Gaia how disappointed he would be in Tom, helping undo the work of a century.

Life, the unive...

I am struck by the deep anti-democratic nature and profound elitism of Dobbins comments about Mulcair.  Party members knew what they were voting for, good and bad and decided to hand Mulcair a pretty convincing victory.  They aren't stupid as the elitist snob Dobbin suggests.  Nor has he done anything to warrant the depth of animosity (certainly not as leader) besides being sucessful.  Perhaps this is the real skeleton in Dobbin's closet.  

As for the content of the thread.  I think that is exactly right.  My lifetime political movement has been Liberal-NDP-Green and now NDP again.  At this point in my advancing age I see one thing pretty clearly- defeating Harper is worth a little water in my wine.  I've lived through a lot of political leaders- this is the most dangerous to the health of our county I have seen.  The goal must be defeating Harper, even if the resulting government is not everything I would want.  The risk to not do so is just too great to believe otherwise.  So I think QS is exactly right and on the right track.  By the way examining my heart on this issue was why I was willing, against my intial abhorence, was to vote Cullen as long as I could.

Gaian

As a former Green, LtU, you must be particularly concerned about the blanket climate change denial of the Conservative camp.

Gaian

Ah, the dead dialectic camp gathers.

Life, the unive...

Oh the list of things that concern me about the Conservatives is pretty long, so that's just the start.  One thing I think people have been missing in this left-right "debate" in the leadership is Mulcair's clear committment to sustainability being the cornerstone of policy.  That's an emphasis that is very important, but I guess for these so-called leftists like Dobbin destroying or protecting/saving the environment isn't cool enough to be their issue of the day defining credential.

Gaian

?

mark_alfred

Gaian wrote:

 

 

Murray Dobbin, writing in the Tyee wrote:
There will be lots of soul searching and head scratching going on this week about what happened with the NDP leadership race. The mechanics of the convention, the interesting lack of deal-making, and how the balloting progressed are all fodder for those who enjoy going through the entrails of leadership conventions. Others will be analyzing the various campaigns of the frontrunners, looking for weaknesses to explain how they could collectively have let Thomas Mulcair, the right-wing Liberal, pro-Israel, political bully become head of their party.

Regarding the mechanics of the convention, during the wait for the final ballot, I was sitting with a friend at the Cavan Advertising table (an agency that supplies union-made clothing and articles), since they had left and there were available chairs there.  This was near the office of Topp and his volunteers.  Just over from our table, Topp and a bunch of his staff came out of their office space, and had a meeting at another table across from where we were (away from the volunteers in the office).  I thought to myself that it was likely a meeting about how to respond to the upcoming loss, or some other issue directly related to the campaign.  However, instead it seemed to be about organizing the upcoming NDP celebration party, and getting alcohol for the event.  There was a brief debate over what types of alcohol to order, and the costs involved.  Then Topp delegated some tasks to people, someone called up a supplier and haggled over the price, and the meeting was over.  There was no hint that anyone was upset over the upcoming loss.  It just seemed that they were orchestrating events for the NDP (though possibly they were organizing a private function for their campaign workers/volunteers, but the tone of the meeting did not give me that feel).

6079_Smith_W

If nothing else, Uniting to Stop Harper seems a bit more productive than uniting to complain.

In some ways it seems as if those who support Mulcair and those who despise him take equal glee in the fact he was chosen by the membership.

As for me, I will wait to see what the party is going to do now.

 

 

mark_alfred

I would have preferred uniting for social democracy rather than merely uniting to stop Harper.  It's less inspiring (IE, Mulcair's speech), but yes, it's better than complaining, I suppose. 

6079_Smith_W

Yes mark_alfred. I can get behind that too. But at this point along with some positive struggles there is a very imposing negative one to be resisted. 

Anything is better than just complaining. Someone wants to go join the greens? Fine and god bless.

 

 

Gaian

One should assume that stopping Harper will be difficult enough. :)

mark_alfred

This article talks about an NDP script for an upcoming commercial.  Sounds good. 

Gaian

Yes, contributions have been requested to ensure that we can frame the political situation for Canadians. Tax time is good ONLY because of this ongoing requirement from on high. Jack had the timing, the necessary interval between requests, down pat.

Gaian

"...waffling - if the party has disagreement the same two messages reach the recipient, but it becomes dialectic, and if an elder statesmen and an up and coming are doing it, it is dancing."

Waffle, Dance of the Dialectic (Larry Zolf)... the years just peel away.

Rabble_Incognito

Buddy Kat wrote:

This is exactly why I figured Broadbent was a genious ..he manipulated the media to get the point across that if Mulcair becomes the leader the libs will run to him while at the same time retain the left and all it's values...now of course that makes the Liberals obsolete....and any support for them is strictly as a vote splitting service that benifits the  conservatives...and those liberals are just disgruntled cons anyways so F*&&* them.

Some say this is what harper wants and desires (a solid left vs.  a solid right party) however , what he didn't look at it is a solid right vs a solid left/center which is now the NDP....

New http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zky2bn0Gtyg New

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J-QvXax88J8

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q0eQgUpkJ1Q

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ns8LD5Q8ecc

 

Agreed - if I send out two messages it is deception or waffling - if the party has disagreement the same two messages reach the recipient, but it becomes dialectic, and if an elder statesmen and an up and coming are doing it, it is dancing. Mulcair can now take position without losing the left. I heard him speak a few times today and he didn't flinch when a Tory reporter from some conservative rag was nagging him loudly in his ear during a press scrum today with "you want bigger government" nonsense.

I think it was one of these:

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/story/2012/03/26/pol-house-mulcair.html

The drumming on the 1st vid was great BK - those are informative videos for youth.

Sean in Ottawa

When it comes to the Liberals going it alone is justifiable.

However, QS is a provincial party with a lot of interesting ideas and a perspective worth listening to. I think Mulcair and a couple other NDP representatives should sit down with them and have a nice long chat and see what happens from there.  I understand he ruled out working with Liberals QS are not Liberals and they are not competitors for the NDP I hardly see any reason not to talk with them.

RevolutionPlease RevolutionPlease's picture

Gaian wrote:
Arthur Cramer wrote:

Man you should see what is going on at the Huff Po. All the Libs are saying we in the NDP are "Harperites", and that the Liberals are really now the NDP.

WTF?

To say the least, I think the Libs are pretty nervous.

Perhaps the Liberal camp is inspired by the continued, bitter pokes at Mulcair from Rabble's defender of the socialist ramparts, Murray Dobbin, writing in the Tyee (which came today):

"There will be lots of soul searching and head scratching going on this week about what happened with the NDP leadership race. The mechanics of the convention, the interesting lack of deal-making, and how the balloting progressed are all fodder for those who enjoy going through the entrails of leadership conventions. Others will be analyzing the various campaigns of the frontrunners, looking for weaknesses to explain how they could collectively have let Thomas Mulcair, the right-wing Liberal, pro-Israel, political bully become head of their party.

Two things shocked me about this race and its final two days. The first is that so many NDPers, part of a tightly-knit, hyper-loyal political culture steeped in progressive values could so casually elect a man who contradicts so many of their principles. Besides the disastrous result for the party and all progressives in the country, the election of Mulcair raises profound questions about the health of the party. There are two possibilities, neither attractive. One is that NDPers, like increasing numbers of Canadians in general, simply don't read as much and that information about Mulcair did not get through to them. To what extent did NDPers devote time and energy to finding out about the candidates? In general, what is the state of member education and engagement in the party?"

None of which appeared in question period today. Could there be a less generous, more creative spinmeister in the Conservative camp?

And now there is someone else taking up the cry about the Great Misled:" NDPers, like increasing numbers of Canadians in general, simply don't read as much and that information about Mulcair did not get through to them. To what extent did NDPers devote time and energy to finding out about the candidates? In general, what is the state of member education and engagement in the party?"

The plot thickens.But I find Murray's claim to progressivist exclusivity to be a bit much, given his own ahistorical tendencies. :)

You're ignoring a look in the mirror. Funny that.

RevolutionPlease RevolutionPlease's picture

josh wrote:
Putting the snide remark directed at Dobbin by Gaian, it's really no mystery why Mulcair won despite being on the ideological right end of the party.  Because he was from Quebec.  The number of seats the party has there, plus the claim that if he weren't chosen the party would collapse in Quebec, put him over the top.  And over Topp.  Had Mulcair been from Ontario, his numbers would have been Singh-like.

Yep, and the ONLY reason I voted for him. Your turn, Monsieur Mulcair.

RevolutionPlease RevolutionPlease's picture

Life, the universe, everything wrote:

I am struck by the deep anti-democratic nature and profound elitism of Dobbins comments about Mulcair.  Party members knew what they were voting for, good and bad and decided to hand Mulcair a pretty convincing victory.  They aren't stupid as the elitist snob Dobbin suggests.  Nor has he done anything to warrant the depth of animosity (certainly not as leader) besides being sucessful.  Perhaps this is the real skeleton in Dobbin's closet.  

As for the content of the thread.  I think that is exactly right.  My lifetime political movement has been Liberal-NDP-Green and now NDP again.  At this point in my advancing age I see one thing pretty clearly- defeating Harper is worth a little water in my wine.  I've lived through a lot of political leaders- this is the most dangerous to the health of our county I have seen.  The goal must be defeating Harper, even if the resulting government is not everything I would want.  The risk to not do so is just too great to believe otherwise.  So I think QS is exactly right and on the right track.  By the way examining my heart on this issue was why I was willing, against my intial abhorence, was to vote Cullen as long as I could.

I ignored Cullen, thanks for being here LTUE. This country is very dangerous.

RevolutionPlease RevolutionPlease's picture

Gaian wrote:

"...waffling - if the party has disagreement the same two messages reach the recipient, but it becomes dialectic, and if an elder statesmen and an up and coming are doing it, it is dancing."

Waffle, Dance of the Dialectic (Larry Zolf)... the years just peel away.

Why do you talk in tongues?

Unionist

Life, the universe, everything wrote:

I am struck by the deep anti-democratic nature and profound elitism of Dobbins comments about Mulcair.  Party members knew what they were voting for, good and bad and decided to hand Mulcair a pretty convincing victory.  They aren't stupid as the elitist snob Dobbin suggests.  Nor has he done anything to warrant the depth of animosity (certainly not as leader) besides being sucessful.  Perhaps this is the real skeleton in Dobbin's closet.  

As for the content of the thread.  I think that is exactly right.  My lifetime political movement has been Liberal-NDP-Green and now NDP again.  At this point in my advancing age I see one thing pretty clearly- defeating Harper is worth a little water in my wine.  I've lived through a lot of political leaders- this is the most dangerous to the health of our county I have seen.  The goal must be defeating Harper, even if the resulting government is not everything I would want.  The risk to not do so is just too great to believe otherwise.  So I think QS is exactly right and on the right track.  By the way examining my heart on this issue was why I was willing, against my intial abhorence, was to vote Cullen as long as I could.

Bravo, LTUE! Just thought this whole passage was worth repeating. I hold no brief for Mulcair, Cullen, Topp, Nash, any of them. But a government which comes to power with an express mandate to stop and reverse the worst excesses of Harper is certainly worth watering one's wine and fighting for. People should set aside their microscopes and dust off a telescope. We have a future to win!

 

RevolutionPlease RevolutionPlease's picture

Unionist wrote:

Life, the universe, everything wrote:

I am struck by the deep anti-democratic nature and profound elitism of Dobbins comments about Mulcair.  Party members knew what they were voting for, good and bad and decided to hand Mulcair a pretty convincing victory.  They aren't stupid as the elitist snob Dobbin suggests.  Nor has he done anything to warrant the depth of animosity (certainly not as leader) besides being sucessful.  Perhaps this is the real skeleton in Dobbin's closet.  

As for the content of the thread.  I think that is exactly right.  My lifetime political movement has been Liberal-NDP-Green and now NDP again.  At this point in my advancing age I see one thing pretty clearly- defeating Harper is worth a little water in my wine.  I've lived through a lot of political leaders- this is the most dangerous to the health of our county I have seen.  The goal must be defeating Harper, even if the resulting government is not everything I would want.  The risk to not do so is just too great to believe otherwise.  So I think QS is exactly right and on the right track.  By the way examining my heart on this issue was why I was willing, against my intial abhorence, was to vote Cullen as long as I could.

Bravo, LTUE! Just thought this whole passage was worth repeating. I hold no brief for Mulcair, Cullen, Topp, Nash, any of them. But a government which comes to power with an express mandate to stop and reverse the worst excesses of Harper is certainly worth watering one's wine and fighting for. People should set aside their microscopes and dust off a telescope. We have a future to win!

 

Bravo! We are one sisters & brothers! {insert francais sil vous plait Unionist}

Gaian

RevolutionPlease wrote:
Gaian wrote:

"...waffling - if the party has disagreement the same two messages reach the recipient, but it becomes dialectic, and if an elder statesmen and an up and coming are doing it, it is dancing."

Waffle, Dance of the Dialectic (Larry Zolf)... the years just peel away.

Why do you talk in tongues?

It's the imagery of NDP politics from the early 1970s, RP. There was a deadly serious struggle for the heart of the NDP between the Waffle nationalists and environmentalists, and the Lewis's trade union wing of the party. The unions won out. Meanwhile, this funny, funny fella, Zolf, was cavorting across our TV screens and writing, The Dance of the Dialectic. Hope you can google it up.

Don't mind me, RP. It's just that some questions hereabouts preceded the contratemps born in the Garden of Eden, as Ltu made clear in his reply to my question regarding the depth of his environmental concern:

Ltu: "One thing I think people have been missing in this left-right "debate" in the leadership is Mulcair's clear committment to sustainability being the cornerstone of policy. That's an emphasis that is very important, but I guess for these so-called leftists like Dobbin destroying or protecting/saving the environment isn't cool enough to be their issue of the day defining credential."

Caissa

PUSH= Progressives Uniting to Stop Harper.

Polunatic2

Quote:
People should set aside their microscopes and dust off a telescope. We have a future to win!

@U - Excellent one-liner that I may borrow if that's okay. Cool

Gaian

If the fella who coined that, the one in the white lab coat, is willing to begin looking through the end of the telescope that enlarges already big ideas rather than focusing entirely on single, bitter events to the avoidance of all else, right on.

Brachina

Gaian wrote:
RevolutionPlease wrote:
Gaian wrote:

"...waffling - if the party has disagreement the same two messages reach the recipient, but it becomes dialectic, and if an elder statesmen and an up and coming are doing it, it is dancing."

Waffle, Dance of the Dialectic (Larry Zolf)... the years just peel away.

Why do you talk in tongues?

It's the imagery of NDP politics from the early 1970s, RP. There was a deadly serious struggle for the heart of the NDP between the Waffle nationalists and environmentalists, and the Lewis's trade union wing of the party. The unions won out. Meanwhile, this funny, funny fella, Zolf, was cavorting across our TV screens and writing, The Dance of the Dialectic. Hope you can google it up.

Don't mind me, RP. It's just that some questions hereabouts preceded the contratemps born in the Garden of Eden, as Ltu made clear in his reply to my question regarding the depth of his environmental concern:

Ltu: "One thing I think people have been missing in this left-right "debate" in the leadership is Mulcair's clear committment to sustainability being the cornerstone of policy. That's an emphasis that is very important, but I guess for these so-called leftists like Dobbin destroying or protecting/saving the environment isn't cool enough to be their issue of the day defining credential."

Its not just enviromental sustainablity, its the 3s, Sustainable Economics, Sustainable Social, Sustainable Enviromental. The triple S is what Mulcair ran on, it along with winning is his Mandate.

green-left

I agree unite to stop harper. But it also concerns me a little bit... Does that mean to support everything the party does? Or is this a one off thing to change the system to better represent voter’s choices? 

For example, if all progressives unite to vote for the NDP, would the NDP then legislate Proportional representation? Or do they just want to be the alternative to the CONS? Not all progressives support the NDP. A lot support the Liberals and Green Party.

 

North Star

The surprising and rather warm response by QS to Mulcair, seems to confirm what James Laxer was saying about finally uniting the Quebec left with the left in the ROC.

janfromthebruce

green-left wrote:

I agree unite to stop harper. But it also concerns me a little bit... Does that mean to support everything the party does? Or is this a one off thing to change the system to better represent voter’s choices? 

For example, if all progressives unite to vote for the NDP, would the NDP then legislate Proportional representation? Or do they just want to be the alternative to the CONS? Not all progressives support the NDP. A lot support the Liberals and Green Party.

 

______________________________________________________________________________________ Our kids live together and play together in their communities, let's have them learn together too!

 

I believe strongly and I believe that in the party and on those front benches that PP will be a go. Part of the problem and why we are stuck with a Harper majority is the FPTP, and what happens when we seesaw between various political parties. Mulcair has only one vote.