Is the Revolution in sight?

Is the Revolution in sight?
looks like the barge may be lifting off a sand bar...

October 3, 2008

Edge of the Abyss, By Paul Krugman, NYTimes




October 3, 2008



As recently as three weeks ago it was still possible to argue that the state of the U.S. economy, while clearly not good, wasn’t disastrous — that the financial system, while under stress, wasn’t in full meltdown and that Wall Street’s troubles weren’t having that much impact on Main Street.

But that was then.

The financial and economic news since the middle of last month has been really, really bad. And what’s truly scary is that we’re entering a period of severe crisis with weak, confused leadership.

The wave of bad news began on Sept. 14. Henry Paulson, the Treasury secretary, thought he could get away with letting Lehman Brothers, the investment bank, fail; he was wrong. The plight of investors trapped by Lehman’s collapse — as an article in The Times put it, Lehman became “the Roach Motel of Wall Street: They checked in, but they can’t check out” — created panic in the financial markets, which has only grown worse as the days go by. Indicators of financial stress have soared to the equivalent of a 107-degree fever, and large parts of the financial system have simply shut down.

There’s growing evidence that the financial crunch is spreading to Main Street, with small businesses having trouble raising money and seeing their credit lines cut. And leading indicators for both employment and industrial production have turned sharply worse, suggesting that even before Lehman’s fall, the economy, which has been sagging since last year, was falling off a cliff.

How bad is it? Normally sober people are sounding apocalyptic. On Thursday, the bond trader and blogger John Jansen declared that current conditions are “the financial equivalent of the Reign of Terror during the French Revolution,” while Joel Prakken of Macroeconomic Advisers says that the economy seems to be on “the edge of the abyss.”

And the people who should be steering us away from that abyss are out to lunch.

The House will probably vote on Friday on the latest version of the $700 billion bailout plan — originally the Paulson plan, then the Paulson-Dodd-Frank plan, and now, I guess, the Paulson-Dodd-Frank-Pork plan (it’s been larded up since the House rejected it on Monday). I hope that it passes, simply because we’re in the middle of a financial panic, and another no vote would make the panic even worse. But that’s just another way of saying that the economy is now hostage to the Treasury Department’s blunders.

For the fact is that the plan on offer is a stinker — and inexcusably so. The financial system has been under severe stress for more than a year, and there should have been carefully thought-out contingency plans ready to roll out in case the markets melted down. Obviously, there weren’t: the Paulson plan was clearly drawn up in haste and confusion. And Treasury officials have yet to offer any clear explanation of how the plan is supposed to work, probably because they themselves have no idea what they’re doing.

Despite this, as I said, I hope the plan passes, because otherwise we’ll probably see even worse panic in the markets. But at best, the plan will buy some time to seek a real solution to the crisis.

And that raises the question: Do we have that time?

A solution to our economic woes will have to start with a much better-conceived rescue of the financial system — one that will almost surely involve the U.S. government taking partial, temporary ownership of that system, the way Sweden’s government did in the early 1990s. Yet it’s hard to imagine the Bush administration taking that step.

We also desperately need an economic stimulus plan to push back against the slump in spending and employment. And this time it had better be a serious plan that doesn’t rely on the magic of tax cuts, but instead spends money where it’s needed. (Aid to cash-strapped state and local governments, which are slashing spending at precisely the worst moment, is also a priority.) Yet it’s hard to imagine the Bush administration, in its final months, overseeing the creation of a new Works Progress Administration.

So we probably have to wait for the next administration, which should be much more inclined to do the right thing — although even that’s by no means a sure thing, given the uncertainty of the election outcome. (I’m not a fan of Mr. Paulson’s, but I’d rather have him at the Treasury than, say, Phil “nation of whiners” Gramm.)

And while the election is only 32 days away, it will be almost four months until the next administration takes office. A lot can — and probably will — go wrong in those four months.

One thing’s for sure: The next administration’s economic team had better be ready to hit the ground running, because from day one it will find itself dealing with the worst financial and economic crisis since the Great Depression.

Canadian socialists discuss Election at this link







http://links.org.au/node/663

October 2, 2008

The Budgell Family Chronicles, post 1: An Aussie comes to the Aid of Finance Capitalism

The Budgell Family Chronicles, post 1:
An Aussie comes to the Aid of Finance Capitalism



A very witty and sensitive cyber-mate of mine wrote a new status update on his facebook site that caught me in the throat (arriving as it did in those dark days when America stood alone at the occasion of the first House
Bailout bill. It was then that kindly hearts were so downcast and lips blubbing and tremulous). My friend's status-feed read: "Richard is having a garage sale in aid of Morgan Stanley. All welcome. 11:20pm". This moved me so extra deeply because my comrade lives in Oz yet wanted O so very deeply to muck in and give it the old ANZAC Gallipoli push for the sake of another failing Empire in it's time of need. Aye. Isn't it terribly brave of this people what contend daily with sharks whilst drunk-surfing, nevermind the perils of sawfish and Snake Necked Turtles, so to do?

So my mind went conjuring in sentimental yet emboldened reveries, wondering what my own little family here on the other side of the Anglo-American World might do to give the old heave ho' for Global Capitalism. Rummage Sales were out because of mither's bleedings from her spots and psoriasis lesions, and I can't handle synthetics without 2 veterinary calving gloves on... So anyway, I wrote our Richard, and thanked him for his civic-mindedness and told him I would also do my bit for our System. I said: Isn't that lovely of you Rich, and so on...

Back on the home front in our flat (with bedrooms & bath upstairs), I got to speaking my heart to my Mum and Missus and we came upon our plan very presently! Whilst I finished off a fifth of Rye and what was left of the brasso, the ladies planned out the weaving of a fireman-regulation sized 100% Virgin Scottish wool Harris Tweed Net that we shall personally take to New York City's Wall Street for the benefit of the many anticipated Wall Street Jumpers to make the tragic desperate leap in months to come. My old mum was the one who came up with the idea to crown our offering -- we would drive it down to the Yanks on The May Long Weekend and make a real road-adventure of it. The dear old doll has a heart the size of the late Queen Mum's, bless her....

Then this thought struck me whilst nodding off during the Epilogue on the Recliner after the girls had tidied and gone to their beds: as modern day pilgrims yet travel to Pompeii or to the remains of the Berlin Wall -- so Wall Street's edifices may yet become sites men look on as with a scornful wonder... this made me terribly terribly sad as I mused on the sun setting on yet another Empire, this time it seemed the kingdom of Finance Capital was in a process of dissolution. And then I thought I would gather up my little family up to serve as a kind of Catcher in the Rye for the individuals losing hope in the powers that be, and as I was just going under I started and heard myself say aloud: men won't be turned into pavement-stains if the Budgells' have anything to do with it.

Seems I'd come to consciousness due to my acid-reflux, so I turned off FOX News channel and as I climbed into bed munching my TUMS I pulled the bedclothes onto me and said an Ave. Lights out...

Andrew Reesor-Taylor

October 1, 2008

The "Plan B" Bailout Song




Establishment Chorus:

It's our Democrat-Republican bill,
It's our Corporate-Absolution new bill,
It's our hammered out with compromise,
All-For-One and fits all size,
Capitalist Redemption new bill.

Republican Wild Mens' Chorus:


It's a Socialist give-away bill,
It's a Poison in my District bad bill,
It's a Save their Ass - but don't save Mine,
Make us walk the Thin Red Line,
Recipe for Ruination bill.

Corporate Democrat Wild Mens' Chorus:


It's our "in The Peoples' Interest" Plan B,
It's our give it a chance and you'll see,
It's our you'll get yours and I'll get mine,
Our Democrats will Walk The Line,
Obama Agonistes 'Changed' bill.

The Establishment Chorus reply to all:


It's Our Why Can't you Risk-a-bit bill,
It's our Please be good boys bill,
It's our show the Bourse that all is sound,
Calm the Euro, Help the pound,
Get us off the Ledge new bill!

By Andrew Reesor-Taylor
Oct 1, 2008

Rae sez "Jack Layton thinks he's Obama. What a joke. He's Ralph Nader..."



"Jack Layton thinks he's Obama. What a joke. He's Ralph Nader..."
Share
Thursday, September 11, 2008

by wilfrido

Best line and the give-away of Bob's whole rant contre the NDP: "Jack Layton thinks he's Obama. What a joke. He's Ralph Nader..." (hurumph.. splutter...)

What Fresh Hell is this!? Perhaps Bob now thinks He is Obama, ? -- or even God Forbid, --( let me phrase this possibility cautiously), there is a possibility that the bafflegabber we have known as Robert Keith "Bob" Rae has so evolved in an occult messianic delusion to believe that he is the Messiah come back to judge what The Book of Common Prayer version of the Nicene Creed refers to as "the quick and the dead"???

This would explain his rage that a low-down dude like Layton dare snatch away his Divine Obama mojo -- as well as accounting for his simmering peeve with those ungentlemanly radical Palestinians. Does Bob now wish to smite this nation in His wrath? I begin to see that Bob Rae may fancy himself as a sort of latter-day wannabe General Gordon of Khartoum battling the Mahdi with his satchel filled with arrows of desire and hand-drawn maps of the first Temple.. . O Bob, Watch your head man!, there is sense in caution -- even for those QC's endowed with a grandiloquent sense of entitlement and destiny since childhood.

Why do you think Obama will govern from the left or even the centre-left?


By Wilfrido

Why do you think Obama will govern from the left or even the centre-left?

His history in Chicago Dem politics reveals an ambitious knee-capper (Go Ask Alice Palmer!) and the thrust of his whole campaign is about class collaboration of workers and Bosses, red states and blue states, perhaps even God and the Devil....

In the US of today unionised workers account for no more than 15% of the workforce
giving up on class demands from the labour base seems suicidal in this context,
and in the economic crisis we've entered we can't roll over and accept the demands
of a staggering capitalism in crisis.

Some progressive Canadians hope for great things from Obama. This is irrational
and uninformed by the facts of Obama's bid for the imperial presidency. Without a vigorous labor and anti-war fightback under either Obama or McCain, the US workforce will more and more descend into a de-mechanised, de-unionised low-paying pool of potential grunts for US international military adventures.

Blog's Patron Sinner, Satirist Jonathan Swift: his Epitaph


Jonathan Swift
V. Joánnes Swift
R. Ora pro nobis

1667-1745
'Here is laid the body of
Jonathan Swift, Doctor of Divinity,
Dean of this cathedral Church,
Where fierce indignation can no longer
Rend his heart.
Go, traveller, and imitate if you can
This earnest and dedicated
Champion of Liberty'


Jonathan Swift is buried in St Patrick's Cathedral, Patrick St, Dublin.

September 30, 2008

NDP Socialist Caucus statement on the federal election


NDP Socialist Caucus statement on the federal election
Defeat the Liberals and Conservatives!
Vote NDP on October 14


“The worst Liberal campaign ever.” That was the headline one Toronto Star political columnist employed. And he’s not alone. Former Liberal Party president Stephen LeDrew, writing in the National Post, predicted that his party is “going to take a drubbing in this election, which is exactly what they need...” The recriminations, hand-wringing and gnashing of teeth by elite pundits and Grit partisans is almost audible from coast to coast to coast.

Liberal Leader Stephane Dion is clearly going down, along with his regressive Green Tax-Shift plan. Liberal leadership runners-up Bob Rae and Michael Ignatieff, catapulted onto centre stage, are there ostensibly to save the furniture, but also provide a prelude to the post-election race to replace the feckless Dion. As attack ads supplant policy debate, revving up once again is the all too familiar concomitant of a failed Liberal campaign. It’s the corporate siren song that implores us to ‘unite the left, stop the Stephen Harper Conservatives at all costs!” And it’s as big a fraud as ... the Liberal Party’s environmental policy.

Meanwhile, the labour-based New Democratic Party is waging its strongest campaign in decades, having abandoned the self-limiting slogan of yesteryear “Lend me your vote”, in favour of a fervent fight for government. The party’s TV ads carry an anti-corporate message. (One shows trucks dumping piles of money onto a big company boardroom table.) The ads call for an end to tax subsidies to businesses that export jobs and pollute the environment.

The NDP is poised to dislodge the declining Liberals as the second-largest party in Parliament. Even face to face with an ugly Tory majority in the next Parliament, an NDP-led Opposition would be a step forward for independent working class political action.

This sense is emerging also in Quebec, where Liberal support is collapsing, and the Tories are shunned as war-mongers and culture-haters. Leading members of the new leftist pro-sovereignty party Quebec Solidaire are debating the merits of voting NDP as an alternative to the bourgeois nationalist, neo-liberal Bloc Quebecois, and as a possible bridge to the labour movement in English Canada, despite the latter’s serious weakness on Quebec self-determination.

So, why the desperate appeal for ‘strategic voting’, ‘vote swapping’, ‘coalition government’ and similar disreputable schemes? Indeed, why does a wing of the Canadian establishment so exaggerate its differences with Harper?

Well, they do it for at least two related reasons. One, to keep the Liberal Party viable. And two, to undermine the labour movement and its political arm, the NDP.

But exaggeration doesn’t stand the test of inspection. Recent Liberal federal governments under Jean Chretien and Paul Martin cut social expenditures much more than the Harper Conservatives have done, or threaten to do. While Harper has taken aim at relatively low-budget federal programmes unpopular with his base, like legal aid funds for women to take the government to court, and cultural grants, he has not dismantled what’s left of the welfare state, such as employment insurance. He didn’t need to do that. Chretien already slashed E.I. entitlement, and Martin ploughed the surplus into the coffers of the big banks -- in the name of debt reduction.

Like the Liberals, Harper funds medicare through an eye-dropper, and ignores creeping privatization, refusing to enforce the Canada Health Act.

Dion accuses Harper of squandering the $12 billion budgetary surplus he inherited. But Harper, like his Liberal predecessors, simply used the surplus to make debt payments, reduce taxes for the affluent, and increase federal spending, especially on the military. Lest we forget, it was the Liberals who first sent Canadian troops to Afghanistan, and they voted with Harper to keep them there until at least 2011.

Even the scandals that dog the two parties are eerily similar: the Liberal sponsorship program versus the Conservative election financing scheme.

While the two parties are not the same, what they have in common dwarfs any differences. They are united by their devotion to maintaining the crisis-wracked capitalist system, at the expense of working people and the environment.

Now the Green Party wants to join the corporate rulers’ club. It is a very worthy applicant indeed. Leader Elizabeth May emphasizes the party’s fiscally conservative ideas. Her Green Shift tax plan is even more regressive than the Liberals’. She insists that the Greens would tax small business less than the Conservatives do. The Greens’ pledge to completely eliminate Canada’s $481 billion debt attracted candidates like Adrian Visentin. He is a former Reform Party member and Canadian Alliance candidate now running for the Green Party in Vaughan, north of Toronto. Also alluring to the right are Green promises to cut payroll taxes, slash the E.I. fund, and allow ‘income splitting’ on tax returns.

Because opinion surveys show that the NDP is the overwhelming second choice of Green voters, and potentially vice-versa, NDP Leader Jack Layton feels the Greens nipping at his heels. But his attempt to keep Elizabeth May out of the TV leaders’ debate was self-defeating. Layton’s embarrassing reversal on this issue, compounded by his refusal to apologize for his initial undemocratic stand, undermined the NDP’s credibility as an advocate of electoral reform and proportional representation – to say nothing of its stated opposition to sexism and environmental destruction.

The way to differentiate from the Greens and to unite the left and working people behind the NDP is to offer a leftist, working class agenda. But a ‘cap and trade’ carbon emissions policy (proven ineffective in Europe) won’t cut it. Neither will proposing a mere ‘monitoring agency’ to combat corporate price gouging at the gas pumps. Neither will forswearing deficit spending on the eve of a major worldwide recession, nor talk of “working with our NATO partners” to refashion the imperialist ‘mission’ in Afghanistan.

For the NDP to survive and prosper, it must turn sharply to the left. That means projecting a major tax hike on banks, corporations and the rich (not just a reversal of recent corporate tax concessions). That is needed to pay for a public, universal, quality child care system, a public medical drug plan, expanded training of doctors and nurses, replacement of the country’s decaying infrastructure of roads, bridges and railways, funding a free, mass urban public transportation system, a major expansion of social housing, restitution of lands and rights to aboriginal peoples, abolition of student debt, and the institution of free post-secondary education. It means demanding that Canada get out of NATO, give no support for military interventions abroad, make major cuts to military spending, and a radical re-direction of the Canadian Forces to a domestic rescue and disaster relief role. It means public ownership, under workers’ and community control, of the giant oil and gas companies, of the big banks, of major polluting industries, and the investment of their mega-profits into safe, clean energy alternatives and the development of green, sustainable jobs and manufacturing.

A Workers’ Agenda, comprised of such policies, would be in flagrant contradiction with the interests of the main backers of the Liberals, Greens and the Bloc Quebecois, which have nothing in common with the left or the needs of working people.

But a Workers’ Agenda is fully in line with the needs and aspirations of the broad base of the unions and the NDP electorate, notwithstanding the pro-capitalist views of most NDP and labour leaders.

For that reason, workers and progressive people should vote to elect an NDP federal government, and step up the fight for socialist policies inside and outside the party.

Join the NDP Socialist Caucus
Please visit our web site: www.ndpsocialists.ca

New Democratic Party Socialist Caucus
REGIONAL CONTACTS PAGE

Call the federal NDP Socialist Caucus in Ontario at 416 535-8779, in Nova Scotia at 902 420-1785, or in British Columbia at 604 773-8515


You may also contact the following individuals in your area.

Alberta
Peter Matilainen in Edmonton
780 604-3120

British Columbia
Marcel Hatch in Vancouver
604 874-9048

David Lethbridge in Salmon Arm, B.C.
250 832-6678

Manitoba
Andrew R-Taylor in Winnipeg
204 257 8360

Central Ontario
Sean Cain in Oakville
416 650-2938

Barry Weisleder in Toronto
416 535-8779

Eastern Ontario
Bob MacDiarmid in Kingston
613 544-1055

Quebec
Robbie Mahood in Montreal
514 737-0275

NWT/Yukon/Nunavut

Atlantic Canada
Sarah O'Sullivan
902 431-6822
or Rebecca Rolfe in Halifax
902 420-1785


Contact us by email in these provinces and territories:

British Columbia

Alberta

Saskatchewan

Manitoba

Ontario

Quebec

New Brunswick

Nova Scotia

Prince Edward Island

Newfoundland

Yukon

Northwest Territories

Nunavut


To set up a chapter or become a contact in your area please email us at: ndpsocialists@tfnet.ca or phone one of the numbers above.
telephone: 416 - 535-8779 or 416 - 561-2840 e-mail: barryaw@rogers.com

"The Fight Against Harper" is now used as a Liberal Liquidationist slogan against the NDP


"The Fight Against Harper" is now used as a Liquidationist slogan: against the NDP
The Liberals can go suck lemons...
By wilfrido
Friday, September 12, 2008


I have heard the call to strategic voting each federal election for years. But I still think it is impossible for me. As an NDPr and democratic socialist I have watched The Liberal Party selectively taste sample many of our policies. But The Liberal Party remains after all its years of near unbridled power what it was when I first volunteered to canvass and put up signs for Stephen and David Lewis: an antagonistic miasma of Corporate power and expedient left and right policies. The CCF and then NDP emerged out of struggle -- not a Bay Street or St James Street Club. Some Canadians then wanted a Left Party dedicated to a different cooperative socially-planned economic arrangement of the nation-state, and I want it now.

The NDP and the Liberal Party do not have the same base or programme. I can't kid myself into believing that voting strategically for a Liberal in any way brushes against the grain of corporate Canada's two-party Settlement. Go look up The Gomery Commission testimonies on fat envelopes earmarked for greedy kingpin Liberals in Quebec. As ee cumings said: "There is some shit I will not eat". And the voice of Thomas More who lived in a day of Jackals and Scoundrels speaks volumes on why our two major Corporate-Agenda parties are corrupt. "If honor were profitable, everybody would be honorable".

I Am Changing My Name to Chrysler !

In this time of the hungry demands of Wall Street's jackals and the piggies on the Hill, it is good to remember past occasions when Corporate greed and incompetence were bailed out. Remember "I Am Changing My Name to Chrysler"?


I Am Changing My Name to Chrysler
by Tom Paxton
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=daBx_PBrvSE&feature=related

Oh the price of gold is rising out of sight
And the dollar is in sorry shape tonight
What the dollar used to get us
Now won't buy a head of lettuce
No the economic forecast isn't right
But amidst the clouds I spot a shining ray

I can even glimpse a new and better way
And I've demised a plan of action
Worked it down to the last fraction
And I'm going into action here today

CHORUS:
I am changing my name to Chrysler
I am going down to Washington D.C.
I will tell some power broker
What they did for Iacocca
Will be perfectly acceptable to me
I am changing my name to Chrysler
I am headed for that great receiving line
So when they hand a million grand out
I'll be standing with my hand out
Yes sire I'll get mine

When my creditors are screaming for their dough
I'll be proud to tell them all where they can all go
They won't have to scream and holler
They'll be paid to the last dollar
Where the endless streams of money seem to flow
I'll be glad to tell them what they can do
It's a matter of a simple form or two
It's not just renumeration it's a liberal education
Ain't you kind of glad that I'm in debt to you

CHORUS

Since the first amphibians crawled out of the slime
We've been struggling in an unrelenting climb
We were hardly up and walking before money started talking
And it's sad that failure is an awful crime
Well it's been that way for a millenium or two
But now it seems that there's a different point of view
If you're a corporate titanic and your failure is gigantic
Down to congress there's a safety net for you

CHORUS

©1980 Accabonac Music (ASCAP)

I am from workers, fishermen, swilers

I am from workers, fishermen, swilers

I am from workers, fishermen, swilers --
my grandma's father was "Dawe Gunner"
a sharpshooter he picked off harps
from right or left

with his father's musket.
But born and bred
away
from the gritty seas
those hungry seasons-
like the Dirty Thirties
of my kinsmen
when some ate grass
under the faithless old 'Jack,
I was nursed on their ruin,

dark sweet stories…
And descending through their lines
I saw through their lenses
those eyes of dark or light complected Newfoundlanders
and restless Scots,
of the unmentionable Labrador Wives
(we do not have our Metis history to this day)
of those gentle workmen, oppressed planters and their apprentices,
churchmen bound to heartless merchants,
communists of the heart without theory,
an ancestry stretching
back
into the
guts, the coves, and holes of devon and cornwall,
into argyll's clearances,

the irish ports,
into the dream-time of the new found land's
fiddlers and swilers:
their plankerdown "Times"
the only time they could legally dream;
into the kitchen refrain of the women:
"we either laugh or cry, my son,
yes, we either laugh or cry".

and I didn't yet say
I had a fierce grandma
who solemnly told me:
"we're no
pebble
on a beach,
sure…"

By Andrew W Taylor

“Bob’s yer Uncle” (the pompous one)

“Bob’s yer Uncle”

Thursday, September 11, 2008
“Bob’s yer Uncle”


(See “The trouble with the NDP”
Submitted by Bob Rae on his blog, Wed, 09/10/2008 - 11:43).

It is a notorious fact that Bob Rae sacrificed principles to the quest for power some years ago, (I am told by Practitioners of the Satanic Craft, men in regular touch with our dead Liberal Senators, that this was the happy buzz in the deepest circle of the Inferno when Bob ‘crossed over’). Some savvy political analysts still on this earthly terrestrial realm have also noted that Bob was asked to join the Liberal Party a number of times and always said “no” -- until it looked like he could get the Leadership, Ahhh…but there’s the rub, there is almost nothing the little-piggy Liberals won't do to gain power and cash and stay in power and cash –as was illustrated in the Sponsorship scandals of the Gomery Commission. Power is the Liberal mantra and it is their subterranean secret god: while mere policies and principles alternately shoot to the right and left like dying stars in the Lib windshield- yet now and for ever The Liberal Party always has its hungry snout in the public trough and its broad corporate arse stuck out in the wind.

Watch Bob Rae blame the NDP in a couple months for not mucking in with his "anti-Harperite" coalition and so ruining Bob's chance to resume his comfortable life as a senior Fed. Minister... Yet be not afraid Bob, you will have a greater chance of climbing yet higher on the Corporate-coconut tree when Dion's terrible leadership almost certainly loses him the Election, and leads to another of the infamous Liberal Nights of the Long Knives. (Poor Stephane: “Cruel Necessity”!) Then Bob, a la 'Mack the Knife', you can make a clear run for Numero Uno while blaming the NDP for not joining Canada's natural party of governance and depriving you of the PMO! So you see it is just as P.E.T once quoted: “no doubt the Universe is Unfolding as it should”.
Why Socialist? Why NDP? Part 1: Why NDP? By Michael Laxer
Sunday, September 14, 2008
by Michael Laxer
(this is Michael's post from the NDP Left Blog Site:)

So, why NDP?

In the midst of an election campaign as we are, with the threat of a Harper majority bringing out the calls again for "strategic voting", why should Canadians and leftists, regardless of where they live, vote NDP? In the midst of an invisible leadership contest in Ontario, why should leftists bother and not just move on to greener pastures?

As its critics often point out, and I agree, Layton has led the NDP towards a more parliamentary short-term tactical approach to power than ever before. He has made silly and often appalling compromises to further the party's caucus goals (anyone remember the support for mandatory minimum sentences or the disgraceful pandering around the age-of-consent, playing handmaiden in both cases to stupid and reactionary policies that do nothing towards achieving their stated goals and that further a Toronto Sun style agenda?). Layton's strategists appear to be inept and lacking principle and his many apologists on blogs or Facebook seem to spout glib slogans and boring self-congratulatory nonsense about how hard they are working for Canada and working people by gracing various election races and political forums with their presence. The same criticisms can be leveled at many of the party's provincial wings.

It almost seems fair, as many on the left feel, to say that this is all the party is now about, that a kind of Neo-Blairism has triumphed here too, and that the NDP is a prisoner to forces reeling from the advance of reaction in 90's, unable and unwilling to fight anymore for structural change and confined now to vacant left-Liberal rubbish about helping "working families" in minor ways.

Yet it is not fair, and while many of the criticisms have a certain resonance and an element of truth to them, and while the constant sloganeering of the NDP community, defensive as it so often is, can, indeed, be deeply irritating and out-of-touch, the NDP represents the only true force operating on an organized political level that comes out of a tradition of class-based politics and that has as its aim, even now, the reinvention of Canada in meaningful ways that benefit the working-class and the middle-class. Blairism has not, in fact, taken hold of the NDP...yet!

The Greens, which many turn to now, are a false distraction from the real movement. The NDP came out of the Regina Manifesto, Organized Labour and its struggles, and the British and European Democratic Socialist, Fabian and even Marxian traditions. Its frame of reference remains a desire to modify the very structure of capitalism to make it more equitable. This proud tradition was reflected by the reading of the Manifesto itself, on Parliament Hill on its anniversary, with parliamentarians, all New Democrats, reading an unabashedly Socialist document proudly, a document that called for nothing less than the end of the system we live under.

Lacking this history and tradition the Greens have good environmental platforms, but are either confused, simplistic or reactionary on other issues. They are not a force for fundamental change for the very reason that they are not opposed to the system per-se, they simply oppose certain aspects of it as it impacts their one issue. Some would argue that the needs of the environment will cause a fundamental altering of the capitalist economic system anyway, as the changes to be made are so great the whole thing will have to be overhauled.

This may be true.

The Greens, however, with no sense of the class basis of these problems and of the capitalist economy, will not be able to lead this charge, as on economic distributive issues they are as much an "old-line" party as the rest of them. Indeed, their policies, devoid of class content, take on a disturbingly "life-boat" tone to them as one wonders exactly how they intend to make these vast changes to the way we live our lives without confronting head-on the basic socio-economic order we live under and challenging the continued grip on power held by business and it interests, by the wealthy and by the Bay St. set of super-Capitalists and Speculative Capitalists who have remade the world in their own image of the cold boardroom and the amorality of the Stock Market floor.

The Greens remain a symptom of the problem, not its solution.

Some, even those on the left of the NDP, also turn to the Liberals, fearing, correctly, the impact of a Harper majority on Canada. They feel, sometimes disingenuously, that it is better to hold one's nose and vote Liberal (they are not so bad after all!) than to hand the country to the barbarians who wait at the gate.

This is fine, for what for it is worth, but it is worth very little.

Never mind that the Liberals are, as I described them elsewhere, little more than the "progressive wing" of an increasingly harsh and ugly capitalism; never mind that, when they no longer had a left to fear, they ran in the 90's the single most reactionary and corrupt government the country has seen since the Second World War (with the 1995 budget being a true neo-con wet dream, an outright assault on Canada's social programs and its more interventionist path); never mind that the Liberals will trend to the right anytime the hold a majority for the simple reason that their view of capitalism is not FUNDAMENTALLY different than the Tories...they just prefer capitalism with a "human face" (not too much poverty...that makes us feel bad!).

Never mind all of these things; never mind that they are led by a man who talks tough on the environment yet was an awful Environment Minister, never mind the gutting of transfer payments to the provinces, never mind the outright theft of money paid out by workers themselves into UI being used for every purpose imaginable other than the paying out of benefits to these same workers, never mind the moral abdication on free trade, on Afghanistan, on the Trudeau vision, on the CBC...on so many issues, impossible to count during their 13 years of "stewardship".

The even more significant reason to oppose strategic voting is who it means you would have to vote for. If you adhere to the logic are you really going to cast your ballot for Michael Ignatieff, a man who refuses to live in or even frequent the working class riding he "represents" (preferring instead the high-rollers of his downtown condo address and the sycophantic dinners and parties held in honour of this great intellectual), a man who lived three decades outside of Canada but came back feeling he was immediately qualified to be Prime Minister (and, in a sad statement about the Liberal Party, he nearly became their man for the job), a man who supported the Iraq War and whose "torture-lite" positions are a moral disgrace, a man so deeply out-of-touch with this country that he only a few short years ago used "we" when talking about the positive influence that an American Empire could have in the world (don't deny it Mike, I have the article!)?

Are you really going to vote for the odious Bob Rae whose greatest contribution to the left and progressives in Canada was their defeat and their consignment to the political wilderness for ten years after his government failed famously to keep any of its significant promises to the people of Ontario? Are you really going to vote for members of the Liberal "family caucus" like Jim Karygianis or Dennis Lee who are anti-abortion, opposed to gay rights etc...? Are you really going to vote for the many left over crooks from the Chretian era (and we all know who they are), party hacks who dipped their noses and the noses of their backers deep into the public well, further destroying the faith of Canadians in their government? Are you really going to vote for Mr. "I want us to look to Alberta for inspiration" Gerrard Kennedy over Peggy Nash?

Are you really going to vote for people who supported the 1995 budget? Are you really going to vote for members of a caucus who criticized Harper policies out of parliament only to vote for them in parliament (talk about talking out of the left side of your mouth while governing out of the right!)? Really?

So why vote NDP? Why support and work within the NDP?

Because the NDP is a mass political force, backed by millions of Canadians, that emerged from Canada's great Socialist tradition and remains the only mass socialist party not only in this country, but anywhere north of the Mexican border. Because even at his worst Jack Layton is far more principled than anyone the Liberals have to offer, his program is better and, most importantly, what he represents, historically as well as today, is fundamentally different from what the other parties advance. Because the NDP does not tolerate bigots and crooks in their caucus and would never have the crew of unprincipled hacks that populate much of the Liberal backbench.

But also because, when you hold your nose and vote Liberal you cast your ballot against good people fighting for real changes in your communities and in favour of cynicism and cronyism.

The NDP may be flawed, it may take the wrong stand here-or-there, it may need new leadership, and it desperately needs to make a left turn and reinvigorate itself with a strong, well-thought out Socialist platform that we work to advance both during and between elections, but it remains the one and only hope for true, systemic, Democratic Socialist change in Canada and it members and candidates represent the best that this country has to offer politically. That is why it should be supported and that is why it is worth working within.

To abandon this reality for the false god of strategic voting or for the Greens, or to abandon organized politics altogether in some neo-anarchist, neo-totalitarian dream of somehow creating real change without working within the democratic parliamentary process at all, is to do the best favour that the wealthy, the neo-cons, and the new business elite can ask of you; it is to legitimize the idea that none of it matters anyway and that nothing will ever really change at all, that the future really does only hold minor variations of the same outcome and that history has ended, with the perpetual triumph of the right, if not in name than at least in deed.

That is why I will be voting NDP.

Michael Grant Ignatieff has Iraqi blood on his hands

Michael Grant Ignatieff has Iraqi blood on his hands
Friday, September 12, 2008

See Michael Ignatieff's shameful 'Apologia Pro Vita Sua'
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/05/magazine/05iraq-t.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

Michael Grant Ignatieff, lived in the United States from 2000 to 2005. While there, he was director of Harvard's Carr Center for Human Rights Policy. In the days leading up to the military invasion of Iraq by the USA, Mike, the visitor gifted with internationalist gravitas, beat the gong in favour of the US military invasion. He was an enthusiast.

In an article from 2007, Ignatieff another of the former Liberal leadership hopefuls, talked about his rather too recent for comfort support for the Bush regime's invasion of Iraq:

"The unfolding catastrophe in Iraq has condemned the political judgment of a president," Ignatieff wrote of U.S. President George Bush.

"But it has also condemned the judgment of many others, myself included, who as commentators supported the invasion."

Ignatieff said he started supporting the war after speaking with an Iraqi friend who told him freedom in the country could only come once Saddam Hussein was ousted and his regime came to an end.

"How distant a dream that now seems," he wrote.

So much for Mike's distant dreams, a dream he beat the bushes for in the imperial centre, the USA, in the days leading up to the US preemptive War. Blood is on his hands The people of Etobicoke—Lakeshore should hear and see clips of their bright Wilsonian internationalist Michael Ignatieff on Charlie Rose and other Political Talk Shows, justifying the ways of the US War to those who anxiously awaited such reassurances. Someone gifted to the info arts should select from Michael's most ardent oratorical pieces of tub-beating for the Invasion and string them together...

When will the Liberal Party of Canada, that degraded thieving entity bloated with fools and crooks, regenerate itself and come up with centre-left Leaders with some judgment? It is going to take alot more than an admission of error in an academic-style article to efface all those deaths -- to heal the wound of the American war: " Here's the smell of the blood still: all the perfumes of Arabia will not sweeten this little hand. oh! oh!"

Don't Split the Left Progressive Vote Brother Rae Insists!

Monday, September 22, 2008
Don't split the left-wing vote, Brother Rae insists!

THE LEADER OF THE LEFT IS NOW STEPHANE DION???
OR BOB RAE IS IT THEN? SWEET SAVIOUR!!! THE TWO OF THEM TOGETHER COULDN'T LEAD A LINE OF NUNS TO THE COMMUNION RAILS!

By Andrew W. Taylor


I really feel giddy now after reading of "Liberal star Bob Rae" and his exhortation to the Pratt candidacy Liberal Party comrades of Ottawa West-Nepean. How fools can lie!, and O how it makes one's heart leap up with joy to hear the call to the Barricades out of the mouth of true Heroes of The People like Mr. Rae! You'd think from the little man's sheer gall that we were all standing at Mount Sinai receiving the Law, when actually we are reading/hearing the ravings of a pretentious bourgeois Diplomatic Family brat that screwed his Party by his incompetence, emptying the NDP of its appeal in Ontario for a generation... And then we'll never forget who forsook his Party and fled to the Corporate Trough for a feed-fest when he thought destiny was calling him to be the Leader of the Grit Rat-Pack?

But wait -- he left the NDP for the Grits "on principle" he has said on other occasions. Does Bob Rae think anyone in this country can recall an instance in the history of Confederation when a socialist of the CCF-NDP jumped ship and swam for the Liberal Pirate Ship (perpetually sinking under its plundered booty) all for sacred honour or principle? No tuggings of ambition -- no lustings for power???

According to Reporter Don Butler of The Citizen . Rae says the current division on the political left is "counter-productive. Progressive people have to come together under the Liberal banner." Why were the CCF and then the NDP formed by farmers, trade-unionists and small business people? Was it all for naught, did our political fore-bearers in the Social-Democratic movement in Canada have severe glaucoma or advanced macular degeneration and just plain missed the fact the there was ALREADY a " Left" party in Canada staring them in the face, and advancing their interests -- i.e. The Liberal Party of Canada?

No Bob, there is no Left wing Liberal Party of Canada to flock toward, not even one crafted for the pwogressive simpletons who credit your senatorial orations. There is not even a Santa Claus since William Lyin' Quisling King and Uncle Louis St-Laurent left us, and last but far from least, Stephane Dion is not the Head Elf.

Will the Real Barack Obama please Stand Up ?


Musings

I teach a university course in Religion and Popular Culture in which I use materials and texts that document and illuminate that ambiguous phenomenon called "The American Dream". We trace the course of the messianic impulse in US ideology from Coton Mather's "City Set Upon a Hill" to Ronald Reagan's speeches about the unique sacredness of American expenditures of Blood and Treasure.

This Election Campaign has given the world a great deal of American dreaming. Obama's candidacy both echoes the emancipatory impulse of Dr ML King and relies on the hyper-inflated Ad-Agency verities of the slogan, the gesture, and The Brand. What are Canadian progressives to make of the campaign of The Urgency of "Now", "Hope", and "Change"? I believe a cultural history of Canada indicates that we are easily a less "belieful" people than our neighbours to the south. Even in the babysteps of their meta-narrative, Americans had the enthusiast Puritan dream of a Theocracy on their soil, they have experienced a much stronger and more unnuanced celebration of Boosterism, Babbitry,and The Power of Positive Thinking. In listening to our Vet fathers and grandfathers on the topic of America we were told that Americans "wear their hearts on their sleeves" and that we must try to escape when they begin to tell us how they won WW 1 and II. Canadians, used to a parliamentary system, snicker at Prime Ministers. We know these characters are mere politicians. But Americans have an imperial president who is head of state and one sometimes hear Americans semi-religious claims about "my President". Such claims have driven their republican democracy towards imperialism and war.

I think the Obama candidacy resembles the canadian 67-68 spirit of Trudeaumania. I must confess to disliking Trudeau politics but more than that I disliked the near-hysteria and intellectual capitulation of the canadian chattering class before Trudeau. It was not just his Bill of Rights that further individualized or rather de-collectivized Canada, we were further assimilated by Trudeau's popularization and vain celebration of the cult of the Celebrity-politician. (Tommy Douglas and Robert Stanfield were laughed at as old un-photogenic relics of pre-modernity. )

The positive, redemptive side of The American Dream also exists. Langston Hughes' democratic, socialist soul extolled this dream in his great poems, Martin Kuther King exploited the democratic core of the American vision in his leadership of the Civil Rights Movement. And if one wants to go back to intellectual roots we could all benefit from reading Tom Paine once again. The question to the Obama phenomenon is then: which Hope and what Change does your campaign tilt toward? Are we seeing the rise of a new clustering of left social movements that can push a centre-left President to bring significant internal and international progress to the forefront? Or are we witnessing the collapse of a legitimate rectitude about politicians and the rise of a very ambitious man who has spent his adult life observing, adopting, and co-opting the accents, politics, and aspirations of the oppressed? I am puzzled by Obama, I am sorry to admit I expected his maneuvering on Surveillance, on the Death Penalty, on Israel/Palestine and on Corporate Finance, to be pure Pax Americana vintage Civil Religion. After all people who aspire to become the Imperial President overseeing the 800 foreign bases defending "US national interests" do not aspire to the very different job of becoming leader of the left-movements in and around the Democratic Party.

On American Electoral Politics, The Empire, & the case of Gitmo

By Andrew W Taylor

With regard to American Electoral Politics, I hope there is a conceptual difference in approach between McCain and Obama on "national security", but first I'd like to ask about how US foreign policy has always defined "national security", I think the very term emerges from an ideologically distorted imperialist newspeak where powers deemed to be in any way contrary to US global domination are "threats" or "rogue states". As US history post WW 1 shows us, this has involved scores of coups, invasions, nuclear blackmail, military occupations, and economic destabilizations of sovereign states. This is the tableau, the ideologically corrupted background which McCain and Obama both accept merely by virtue of running for the US presidency. I do think Obama sincerely wants to be more "diplomatic" i.e. a "nice boss" to the World. I believe he wants to re-define some cases of terrorism as criminality rather than as a matter for a State of War. I think this is a preferable way of managing the US Empire. But he will still be the Head of the Imperium -- he will be The Boss and bosses are bullies when the power disparity between them and their subordinates is so vast.

Both McCain and Obama seem to support some Post-Gitmo mechanism for US Captives to challenge their (illegal) incarcaration . Both favour some sort of judicial status discernment process. For McCain, the military would oversee hearings; for Obama, federal judges would be the overseers. This seems to me to be a question where Obama's point is marginally better, but I do not see Obama and McCain as ideologically at opposite vantage points.

The problem is not which politician should ascend to the imperial presidency, the problem is the imperial presidency itself.
Powered By Blogger