Why DOESN'T the NDP clearly position itself as the peace party?

83 posts / 0 new
Last post
Northern Shoveler Northern Shoveler's picture

Clearly the problem is the people around Jack all believe in the D2P bullshit that is the new justification for war.  Like good boy scouts they think they are doing the right thing.  The people who Ottawa centred seem to be the worst.  The place of Canada in the new world order must permeate the place and dull the senses of even intelligent well intentioned people. 

Dewar has shown that he has a very narrow view of the world where we are the good guys and capable of deciding when it is acceptable to kill people for their own good.  He has lost his way.  He claims to have pacifist roots and that is why he supports intervention.  The first thing any pacifist knows in their heart is that violence is never the answer. Never ever ever.  As my catholic mother used to say the way to hell is paved with good intentions.  I don't doubt Paul's intentions were good but he has agreed to sending hell to the people of Libya and he should know like three quarters of Canadians know in their hearts. Bombing Tripoli is not going to help the people in the short term, medium term or long term.  He needs to climb down from his ivory tower in the nations capital and start paying attention to the Canadians who sent him and his fellow MP's to Ottawa.

The NDP better be careful since its supporters have shown that they don't like status quo parties.  If we did we would have voted liberal.

Northern Shoveler Northern Shoveler's picture

Polunatic2 wrote:
Isn't avenging the deaths of Cdn soldiers who were avenging the deaths of Canadians on 9/11, one of the principle reasons the government gives for maintaining a military role in Afghanistan? Otherwise, they will have "died for nothing"? 

In financial lingo I believe that is called throwing good money after bad. 

Stockholm

JeffWells wrote:

Macleans online poll (June 13):

Do you support the extension of Canada’s military mission in Libya?

 

Yes. It's the kind of mission we should be involved with. 13.36%

Yes, but we need to re-assess our objectives. 16.31%

No. We should get out now. 70.33%

http://www2.macleans.ca/2011/06/13/do-you-support-the-extension-of-canad...

That's not a poll at all. That is a parlour game. These silly games where anyone can click a thousand times are totally unscientific and have no value at all. It may well be that a majority of Canadians think Canada should have no involvement in Libya - but this "thing" means nothing.

Fidel

And I don't believe that foreign policy is as important as some people let on. In every election they rank the issues most important to voters, and although getting out of Afghanistan is considered important by many Canadians, for example, it's not a highest priority issue when choosing who to vote for. Overall the NDP still has the best foreign policies of parties in Ottawa imo.

Todrick of Chat...

Fidel wrote:

Overall the NDP still has the best foreign policies of parties in Ottawa imo.

I believe that Herr Layton and the New Military Party's foreign policy is to be more aggressive than the Conservative and the Liberals parties have been in the last two decades.

I am willing to bet that the NMP will have a motion in the house of commons that we start bombing Syria before the end of the summer.

Fidel

Todrick of Chatsworth wrote:

Fidel wrote:

Overall the NDP still has the best foreign policies of parties in Ottawa imo.

I believe that Herr Layton and the New Military Party's foreign policy is to be more aggressive than the Conservative and the Liberals parties have been in the last two decades.

Apparently you have little idea of the vicious toadying our two old line colonial administrativeship parties have been guilty of.

Toddy wrote:
I am willing to bet that the NMP will have a motion in the house of commons that we start bombing Syria before the end of the summer.

It's possible the NDP won't vote against the toadying. Afterall, the head toadies have a phony-baloney majority and will not be convinced to do anything else but kiss uncle Sam's hiney. 

And the NDP will look pretty good to some phony-baloney majority of voters who will vote by next election. That's the plan, Stan. Wink So the vicious toadies in phony-baloney majority power had better toadie-up while the toadyin's good. What toadying can not go on forever will stop at some point. 2015.

Northern Shoveler Northern Shoveler's picture

Fidel wrote:

And the NDP will look pretty good to some phony-baloney majority of voters who will vote by next election. That's the plan, Stan. Wink 

I love your respect for democracy and the average voter.  The Neo-Democrats strategy is to hoodwink the phoney baloney voters.  Wow 

Laughing

Polunatic2

If the NDP thinks there's a lot of pressure now when they're the "loyal" opposition, imagine the pressure to cowtow to Obama (or worse) if they can figure out how to make it to 24 Sussex Drive in 4 or 5 years. 

laine lowe laine lowe's picture

So I guess collateral damage in exchange for political power is a worthy cause. No wonder people are not voting. I was quick to assume it was lethargy but indeed there is an element of all current political parties standing for nothing other than power.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

laine lowe wrote:

So I guess collateral damage in exchange for political power is a worthy cause. No wonder people are not voting. I was quick to assume it was lethargy but indeed there is an element of all current political parties standing for nothing other than power.

The German SPD thought so in 1914.  They were ok with ten million people(mostly workers) dying for nothing just so that they could look "mainstream".  And, in their minds, getting power-in-name in 1919(even though they did next to nothing that was even mildly social democratic with that power)justified not only that but forming alliances with the Freikorps(the future Nazis)against the German working class.  Rosa Luxemburg and many others died in the name of looking "responsible".  And this led in the end, as it had to, to the right-wing, which otherwise would never have come back to power, putting Hitler in office.  Long live "responsibility" "respectability" and "moderation".

Fidel

We played it clean for decades. 

And they walked all over us. 

The real question is:

Why do we still not have modern democracy in this semi-frozen Puerto Rico where even Polar bears are homeless? 

Worst Past The Post is electoral fraud.

Frmrsldr

Ken Burch wrote:

It's quite likely, for example, that a lot of people in small-towns who are struggling to get by had sons or daughters come home from Kabul in a box.  It's not bloody likely that THOSE people are still cheering for war.

It's hard to say.

The issue is one big mind fuck that has been orchestrated by the government with the cooperation of the Li(e)berals, and (to a lesser extent, perhaps) by the NDP, the military and the Fawning Corporate Media (FCM.)

It is all part of the (pro) war pornography conditioning society has been subjected to.

Every time a government commits itself to a foreign war of aggression and its citizen soldiers are killed, that government and those kids' parents often rationalize that their deaths were justified/not in vain.

There have been parents and relatives who have spoken out and said the deaths of their loved ones were for no good reason and who spoke out against (the) war (or war and intervention in general.)

But what happened to these voices?

It seems they were shut up by the government and the military. The press very quickly dropped coverage of them and upped coverage on other relatives and increased other stories that expressed support for the war and ran more (pro) war pornography.

Ask yourself, after being bombarded with all the war pornography distributed by the FCM, when was the last time you recall a story about the loved ones of a dead soldier condemning the war?

Do you recall all the stories the Canadian FCM has run about families who've lost soldiers who get a taxpayers' expense paid trip to the 'Ghan?

Do you recall the stories the FCM has run about some monument in the 'Ghan about the 'efforts' of Canada's christian crusader soldiers over there who are heroes for destroying the lives and property of innocent Afghans?

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

True...although this does suggest that a new word could be coined:

Warnography.

Frmrsldr

I think war porn has a better ring to it.

Fidel

Northern Shoveler wrote:

Fidel wrote:

And the NDP will look pretty good to some phony-baloney majority of voters who will vote by next election. That's the plan, Stan. Wink 

I love your respect for democracy and the average voter.  The Neo-Democrats strategy is to hoodwink the phoney baloney voters.  Wow 

Laughing

Half of Canadians aren't voting because they were already jaded by the Libranos and Mulroney baloneys before them. That's not the NDP's fault. 

The NDP has voted in support of a three month extension in Libya not 3 years or anything close to handing Uncle Sam a free pass to NAZI it up in Libya. 

And besides, anyone deciding right now on the spot who they will not be voting for in four year's time are most likely not basing that decision on democratic principles. Around here it's the same babblers as usual searching high and low for reasons to  tear up their imaginary NDP membership cards for the 500th time. We see right through them as always. They are the same ones offering no alternatives among the 20 some-odd registered political parties in Canada as usual. And since there is no anti-NDP party representing the views recorded in many threads on this site, it makes us wonder if these people are for real.

 

Northern Shoveler Northern Shoveler's picture

Fidel wrote:

The NDP has voted in support of a three month extension in Libya not 3 years or anything close to handing Uncle Sam a free pass to NAZI it up in Libya. 

And besides, anyone deciding right now on the spot who they will not be voting for in four year's time are most likely not basing that decision on democratic principles. 

Blind faith is a wonder to behold.  I know that in four years wars of aggression will still be as wrong then as they are now.  Our society has lost its moral compass and the Neo-Democratic Party seems quite willing to play along, as long as they get a chance at the brass ring.

Money mouth

Aristotleded24

While we are discussing the NDP's vote on Libya, we are not paying attention to a number of good fights the NDP is currently fighting, such as defending the rights of striking Air Canada and Canada Post employees, fighting against cutbacks to green municipal infrastructure, and reintroducing the Climate Change Accountability Act. We should all be channeling our limited resources to these and other important fights. Instead, this boneheaded move on the part of the party brass is diverting these resources away from fighting the issues to fighting amongst ourselves (or more accurately, banging our heads against a brick wall). Couldn't the time spent writing letters to the NDP criticizing this move have been better spent writing the Labour Minister about the work stoppages, or supporting the NDP's re-introduction of the CCAA? Yet this is what it has come to. Divided we fall. The grassroots left understands this, why not the NDP brass?

Veeravel

Most conservatives I know don't support the Libyan idea as much as one would assume. And if the comments on the National post or Globe and Mail (perhaps not neocon but certainly conservative in their own way) are to be an indication of even a small portion of the conservative voter base, it has to do with r(acist)easons that are completely different from the ones stated here but they are opposition to extension regardless.

Fidel

Northern Shoveler wrote:
Blind faith is a wonder to behold.  I know that in four years wars of aggression will still be as wrong then as they are now.  Our society has lost its moral compass and the Neo-Democratic Party seems quite willing to play along, as long as they get a chance at the brass ring.

Money mouth

 

The thread title in the form of a question could also ask:

Why won't the 140 year-old stoogeaucracy be embarrassed and shamed into acknowledging the need for electoral reform away from this currently fraudulent and mathematically absurd worst-past-the-post system?

Some might even think they would want to legitimize their stoogery by an honest electoral system. 

But, no, they've lost their best friend Michael "I was just another LPC stooge for U.S. power no matter the country or issue" Ignatieff, and now the head stooge is left with his bare face hanging out and having to hide from the NDP for the next four years.

And the answer to that is not so different to the way the doctor and the madman described Chileans of 1973 - Canadians can't be trusted with modern democracy. 

And I'll be right here on the other side of the fence with the NDP for the next four years. Canadians will have to vote strategically for the NDP or be run over by a truck load of bought and paid-for stooges on the right.

Shit Show Harper stooges or the NDP, it's all up to a phony majority of Canadians now.

Frmrsldr

Veeravel wrote:

Most conservatives I know don't support the Libyan idea as much as one would assume. And if the comments on the National post or Globe and Mail (perhaps not neocon but certainly conservative in their own way) are to be an indication of even a small portion of the conservative voter base, it has to do with r(acist)easons that are completely different from the ones stated here but they are opposition to extension regardless.

Neocons support war and foreign intervention in an automatic knee-jerk fashion.

To them the U.S.A. is the world's only superpower. To remain the superpower the American Empire has to interfere (either through overt or covert war) as much as possible throughout the world.

The American Empire has to prevent other countries (often seen as 'not our friends' or 'the enemy') from becoming superpowers (Empires) and frighten friends and allies from becoming superpowers/Empires.

Neocons believe (obviously erroneously based on the current state of the U.S.A.'s economy) that the benefits of being a superpower and spending money on the world's largest military and prosecuting a number of wars at the same time, outweigh the costs.

Traditional conservatives and paleocons are opposed to ballooning or growing size and expense of government.

When it comes to war, they ask two questions:

1. Can we afford it?

2. Do the (hoped for/believed/presumed) benefits outweigh the costs?

If the answer to either question is no, true traditional or paleocons will oppose (the) war.

Here is the distinction:

Herr Harper and his merry band of criminals are neocons.

Some of their supporters are traditional or paleocons.

This split was seen within the Conservative Party of Canada this past weekend at its policy convention where ideological differences between the 'Harperites' and the old Reformist/Alliancers became apparent.

Herr Harper could lose support if he pushes his pro war, pro military spending, pro law and order agenda too hard.

Such an agenda is too expensive, unnecessary and foolhardy, according to the more 'switched on' trad. or paleo cons.

al-Qa'bong

Todrick of Chatsworth wrote:

Fidel wrote:

Overall the NDP still has the best foreign policies of parties in Ottawa imo.

I believe that Herr Layton and the New Military Party's foreign policy is to be more aggressive than the Conservative and the Liberals parties have been in the last two decades.

I am willing to bet that the NMP will have a motion in the house of commons that we start bombing Syria before the end of the summer.

Yeah, they want to show that they are just as tough and forceful as the other two old-line parties, and not some tree-hugging granola-fuelled bunch of peaceniks.

Fidel

al-Qa'bong wrote:

Todrick of Chatsworth wrote:

Fidel wrote:

Overall the NDP still has the best foreign policies of parties in Ottawa imo.

I believe that Herr Layton and the New Military Party's foreign policy is to be more aggressive than the Conservative and the Liberals parties have been in the last two decades.

I am willing to bet that the NMP will have a motion in the house of commons that we start bombing Syria before the end of the summer.

Yeah, they want to show that they are just as tough and forceful as the other two old-line parties, and not some tree-hugging granola-fuelled bunch of peaceniks.

Sorry, Reform Party Retreads, but we understand all too well how the WPTP game works. We've run the replays over and over. 

Fiscal Frankensteins on the right will just have to try and look good on the economy and environment for four years. lol!

Hint: It's busted. And the road to serfdom gang won't be pulling any rabbits out of their hats this time. Harpers will be hated for it like they were Brian Baloney's baggage from two decades ago, or the last time a left-leaning Canada "trusted" them with a phony one.

The NDP will spend the next four years reminding Canadians how 76% of us didn't vote for these stooges. And the resentment will grow and grow and grow into something wonderful by snap election call for short term gain in 2015. Next time the big gamble will cost them.

Ken Burch Ken Burch's picture

Fine.  They don't have to sound LIKE those old parties on things like the wars to be able to do that, though.  It's easy to make the case that staying in the wars will drain all the resources needed to do anything different than the status quo.

The more the NDP tries to blur the differences, the more it does stupid shit like distancing itself from the peaceniks, the more the NDP will make voters distrust it.  Voters are always going to have trouble voting for a party that acts like its core, founding values have to hidden or repented.

The NDP needs to make it clear that there's nothing shameful in challenging the status quo.  Jack doesn't get that and for some reason he's decided to declare war against the left wing of the party.  There's no good reason for him to do this, since the left isn't to blame for any of the NDP's problems and certainly isn't to blame for the party being unable to push all the way to victory this time.  An NDP that had gone fully Blairite wouldn't have done any better this year, nor would an NDP that had already silenced all dissent and suppressed internal democracy.  The voters were not demanding either of those things from the party.

Polunatic2

Quote:
Why do we still not have modern democracy in this semi-frozen Puerto Rico where even Polar bears are homeless?
Too bad none of the provincial NDPs ever made efforts to change the voting system when they were in power. It's easy to blame everyone else but they did have opportunities. Such commitment. Having a couple of provinces using PR would have helped to build some momentum for a move to PR nationally. 

Lord Palmerston

Very well said.

Todrick of Chat...

 

Remember guys, it has been well established by those here on babble that the federal and provincial NDPs are completely separate and different organizations. They are allowed to complain about PR but neither organization is responsible for changing the system at hand. It is a constant catch-22 with them on this issue.

Slumberjack

It's been thoroughly demonstrated over the course of the many post election threads pertaining to the NDP's political alignment, that you can drain the swamp of delusions all you want, and still have people insisting that there's nothing untoward about paddling in the residual muck while going nowhere.

Fidel

Polunatic2 wrote:

Quote:
Why do we still not have modern democracy in this semi-frozen Puerto Rico where even Polar bears are homeless?
Too bad none of the provincial NDPs ever made efforts to change the voting system when they were in power. It's easy to blame everyone else but they did have opportunities. Such commitment. Having a couple of provinces using PR would have helped to build some momentum for a move to PR nationally. 

 

No the Lib-Tories would have been entirely happy to share power proportionally with the NDP in one or two traditionally NDP provinces and nowhere else in Canada. But then once Campbell's Liberals saw the phony majorites flip their way again by the 2000s, they were totally off of STV even. The supermajority barriers to reform were imposed by two Liberal governments in two provinces enjoying phony majority government in both cases.

Higher percentages of NDPers voted for ER in Ontario and BC referenda than did Liberal and Tory voters. There has to be a consensus to support democracy, and right now neither of the two old line parties want anything to do with modern voting systems. They prefer the electoral fraud machine.

But yes, now would be an excellent time for the federal Liberals to really get behind the NDP and support a 21st century electoral system instead of remaining completely silent on the matter as usual. I expect that party will have to take a shellacking in at least one more election for them to realize Canadians neither want nor need another conservative party.

Fidel

You have to have at least two of three mainstream party leaders supportive of and advocating for ER in order that their support base also get behind the idea. Their voters simply will not decide anything out of the ordinary without an official word from head stooges of each of the two old line parties. At least not in significant enough numbers as to make an executive decision to choose electoral reform over this charade of an electoral system we are still saddled with today in June 2011. 

Polunatic2

Bob Rae openly supported MMP in the Ontario referendum. Iggy was hostile to PR. 

Anonymouse

Unionist wrote:

You're barking up the wrong tree, Ken. The NDP has never played that role, ever. Peace politics will come from the movement, and its strength will determine whether any party follows

bump

al-Qa'bong

Quote:

The NDP will spend the next four years reminding Canadians how 76% of us didn't vote for these stooges. And the resentment will grow and grow and grow into something wonderful by snap election call for short term gain in 2015. Next time the big gamble will cost them.

 

Hey, don't Bogart that joint, man.

Pages