Will NDP Members Vote for Their Party to Go Right?

As angry as I have been with Jack Layton and his alliance with Stephen Harper, I had great hope for the party.

Packed now with union leaders, activists and bright-eyed youth, I thought they might be able to rouse Parliament with a bit of the prairie fire, ignited by Tommy Douglas.

Or before him, J.S. Woodsworth, who refused to leave the floor until the government was willing to enact prison reform.

But alas, it's just more of the same: "Big oil, big banks, sponsorship scandal. Big oil, big banks, sponsorship scandal". I expect them to break out in song in a remake of the Wizard of Oz. "Lions and tigers and bears, oh, my".

Perhaps that's fitting, as the Wizard of the NDP is acting more and more like the man behind the curtain, or as longtime NDP insider, James Laxer once said of Layton, the man who fakes left, but goes right.

That was written in 2006, when Layton left the Kelowna Accord and a national childcare plan on the table.

In 2008, Laxer again criticized Layton's leadership, feeling that he was causing the party to lose direction, missing an opportunity to build a progressive movement.

He was driven purely by power so joined forces with Stephen Harper to destroy the Liberals, instead of focusing on what this country needed. A strong voice on the left.

This weekend's convention could put the final nail in the coffin, of what men like Tommy Douglas and J.S. Woodsworth tried to build, as Layton is expecting the membership to vote on measures that will clearly move them to the right.

Delegates to this weekend's convention will be asked to eradicate the word "socialist" from the NDP constitution. A proposed new preamble touts the party's "social democratic principles" of economic and social equality, individual freedom and responsibility and democratic rights — replacing the current preamble's dedication to the principles of "democratic socialism," which include "social ownership" and a pox on making a profit.

{Brad] Lavigne says the proposed change is simply part of a "modernization" of the constitution, begun two years ago, getting rid of out-moded phrases that no one uses anymore. For his part, Layton declines to explain the difference between social democratic principles and democratic socialism. "I couldn't give you a quick primer on that. I've offered lengthy courses on the topic over the years," he said earlier this week.

Layton then goes into his usual food on the table, education, medicine and pensions. And yet he is not insisting that Flaherty tell him what 111 things he's going to cut (it's a secret) or demanding that the health minister produce the Canada Health Act. Instead she is getting away with touting the party line "we're increasing transfer payments".

But for all those socialists out there, not to worry: "the NDP resolutions do include some staple big bank- and corporation-bashing".

Again ringing hollow, seeing as how the Libyan "mission" is for "big oil" and "big banks" (Goldman-Sachs already has their foot in the door).

The Liberals gave us our flag, our national anthem, our unique rights culture and our Just Society. And they accomplished that when governing from the centre, taking from both the right and the left.

But much of the success of this nation came from the NDP, making sure that the country stayed on course.

Stephen Harper's political victories came by pretending to be Liberal, or Progressive Conservative, answering the question insider Tom Flanagan once asked: "how do we convince Canadians that we are moving to the left, when we're not"? This has led to a mistrust, since those who know better, are well aware of his far-right ideology.

Now Jack Layton also wants to pretend to be Liberal, so he can take over that base. It won't happen. Right leaning Liberals would go Conservative, because of Layton's anti-corporate posturing, and left-leaning Liberals, would probably go to the Green Party, if either decided to jump ship.

However, I believe most will instead work to rebuild the party, that has given Canada so much. We lost the Progressive Conservatives and we can't afford to lose the Liberals.

I mean who would Jack Layton spend all of his time bashing then, seeing as how he has always given the Conservatives a free ride?

From Shock and Disbelief to Profound Sorrow

"Statesman, yet friend to truth! of soul sincere,
In action faithful, and in honour clear;
Who broke no promise, served no private end,
Who gained no title, and who lost no friend."
J.M. Coldwell of CCF founder J.S. Woodsworth

After last night's election results, most engaged Canadians experienced shock and disbelief. Today that is replaced with profound sorrow.

When strategic voting was abandoned for some illusive big orange wave, it threw the electorate into turmoil. Many left of centre joined the NDP bandwagon, while those in the centre or just right of it, went to the Conservatives.

And all the work done by so many, blew up in our face.

How did this happen? I'm sure we'll be asking ourselves that for many months.

At a time when our very democracy was on the line, and the removal of a tyrant necessary for our survival, Jack Layton chose to once again worry about his seat count, ignoring the impact of his strategy on our country.

He gambled with Canada and lost the hand.

In 2006, when Layton handed Stephen Harper a victory, NDP insider James Laxer wrote: Fake Left, Go Right: An insider’s take on Jack Layton’s game of chance

In it he spoke of the reason why Jack Layton had aligned himself with Stephen Harper. Their shared hatred for the Liberals and the desire to destroy them. Sometimes you have to be careful what you wish for, because the NDP may have destroyed their only allies.

In the Summer of 2008, Laxer again criticized the direction of the NDP under Layton: With its exclusive fixation on winning more seats, the NDP has sacrificed the opportunity to build a truly progressive movement. On the 75th anniversary of the CCF, James Laxer argues that to save the present, we need to remember the past.

The Party was in a celebratory mood last night, but I'm sure in the light of day they are probably no longer basking in the glow of being the opposition with a Harper majority.

Last night they said they were now in a position to hold the government to account. But as Rosemary Barton asked, how can they do that when the Conservatives control Parliament? The NDP are a top dog that's been neutered. They have less power now than they did before, when there were more bodies on their side of the room.

There were some victories last night. Elizabeth May won her seat, and my own riding was held by a Liberal. And of course, while I'll miss their input, we no longer have to be held ransom by the Bloc.

But Jack Layton has a very inexperienced caucus, dominated by Quebec. This could very well shift the real power in the party to Thomas Mulcair. I like Mulcair but we have to remember that when he decided to run for a federal seat, he first considered going to the Conservatives.

And he is perhaps more pro-Israel than Harper himself.

I once hoped that Libby Davies would take over as party leader when Layton stepped down, but that seems less likely now.

So what will this do to the progressive movement, clearly abandoned by the NDP?

What will it mean for climate change, labour groups, healthcare, a national childcare plan, women's rights, a housing strategy, poverty, seniors, veterans?

James Laxer is right. Jack Layton's gamble has erased decades of progress.

The Liberals were the only other party that had the backing of the corporate sector, and now all of that money will flow to one party. Does Layton really believe that he and his ragtag group can stop the Conservatives from doing anything?

Some people ask me what I intend to do now. I am going to continue to expose the Conservatives and fight for a progressive Canada.

Sadly, I now realize that that no longer includes the NDP.

J.S. Woodsworth, Tommy Douglas and David Lewis, are not smiling down on their party today.

The House That Jack Built: Introduction

THE HOUSE THAT JACK BUILT: Will it Hold Up Without its Foundation?

James Shaver Woodsworth (1874-1942) was the founder of the Co-operative Commonwealth Federation (CCF), a democratic socialist party that later became the New Democratic Party (NDP).

Unlike the political traditions of Canada, the Conservatives and the Liberals, the CCF was founded on a social need, not a political one.

According to Woodsworth's daughter, her father was moved by the plight of the new immigrants, who had flocked to our shores, displaced by war and poverty. He had witnessed the slums of London, and feared that we might replicate the same deplorable conditions.

... he could not forget the sights he had seen in London's East End during his years as a student in England. Misery and poverty had made those appalling slums during the very time that England's growing industry and commerce were piling up fabulous wealth in other parts of the city. Expansion and riches had gone hand in hand with degradation and poverty to make the largest metropolis in the world. Now here was Winnipeg, gateway to the West, expanding rapidly and becoming rich. At the same time people were pouring in from all over the world, poor people driven to seek the security in the New World .. What about these people? Did no one care that they were crowding together into Winnipeg's fast-growing slums? Did no one realize that in Winnipeg, in Canada, we were starting down the same road that had led to the slums of London?

"If through indifference or selfishness we protest, 'Am I my brother's keeper?' there comes the inexorable reply, 'The voice of thy brother's blood crieth unto me from the ground.' Someone is responsible! Every unjustly-treated man, every defenceless woman, every neglected child has a neighbour somewhere. Am I that neighbour?"

He decided that he was that neighbour and immediately proceeded to follow the dictates of his conscience. He did not rest until the Church authorities gave him a chance to work in Winnipeg's North End among the crowds of arriving immigrants. (1)

And in 1933, during the Great Depression, Woodsworth united the left wing forces, into a political party that would address the concerns of the disadvantaged.

Tommy Douglas would eventually pick up the reins, followed by others who had a vision of Canada's vast natural resources, going to help all Canadians.

However, many now fear that under Jack Layton, the party has lost its way. Chosen because he was urban and media savvy, his priorities have switched from helping others, to building a successful political machine, at any cost. (2)

And to do this he has joined forces with Stephen Harper, whose ideology is the polar opposite to everything the CCF/NDP once stood for.

What is the endgame here? Does he believe that the Conservatives will once again topple under the weight of their own scandals, and he will be there to replace them.

Sad as it is, corporate Canada will never allow the NDP to govern. It would be Bob Rae all over again, where they wouldn't have a minute's peace?

I think that Layton has sold out his principles for power, and may have done irreparable damage to the party in the process.

Rather than building on the foundation of Woodsworth and Tommy Douglas, Layton is instead attempting to build his own structure. I think it will all come crashing down.

Sources:

1. J.S. Woodsworth: A Man to Remember, By Grace MacInnis, Macmillan Company of Canada Limited, 1953, Pg. 2-3

2. How to rehabilitate the NDP, By James Laxer, This Magazine, August 14, 2009