Jean-Jacques Rousseau once remarked that “the English people believe itself to be free; it is gravely mistaken; it is free only during the election of members of parliament; as soon as the members are elected, the people is enslaved; it is nothing. In the brief moment of its freedom, the English people makes such a use of that freedom that it deserves to lose it.” The same can be said of the modern Canadian populace except that even when we are “in-between” governments we are still largely a people living in self-deception. Something has been rotting in the State of Canada for a long, long time.

Toronto Burning?

The events in Toronto over the past weekend have illustrated a number of startling facts. To begin with, the Toronto Police arrested over 900 people. The vast majority of those have been and will be let go, without any charges. It has already become clear that what the Police were doing is “fishing.” They rounded up hundreds of innocent people in an effort to find possibly a handful of guilty individuals. This is a clear violation of rights, and the Canadian Civil Liberties Association has already suggested that court challenges will be imminent.

Remember that controversial “five meter rule,” passed in secret in the Ontario Legislature, that allowed Police to search anyone within a five meter radius of the G20 security fence, ask for identification, and arrest anyone who resisted? Well, funny story…no such rule existed. The Police lied. As of this writing, they have just admitted that they lied. But it’s okay; they lied to protect us. Without a shred of exaggeration this is the argument that just about every military junta and dictatorship in history has made when “momentarily suspending democracy.” We are suspending your rights to protect you. Protect you from the insidious dangerous “other.”

In Toronto the “other” was the notorious Black Bloc. The Chief of Police, Bill Blair, has said of the Black Bloc that “they came to destroy our city.” You will notice that in much of the media the argument has been advanced that the Black Bloc are foreigners of some sort or another. Either they are Europeans, professional terrorists or worse still…Quebecois (who were specifically targeted by the Police). No God-fearing, lawful, English-speaking Canadian could possibly engage in the sort of actions we saw in Toronto. We represent God and Country, Law and Order, the Crown and Parliament. They represent chaos, “anarchy” and violence.

Ironically enough, the entire idea behind Black Bloc is not exclusion but inclusion. The masks are worn to say, “we are you.” You need only don the black to join a mass that will protect you, will free you, will fight for you and all of us. Nobody complains about the heavily armed, masked Police. A body that in two days has committed far, far more crimes and more egregious crimes than the humble Black Bloc could ever hope to. Remember friends, when the people resist and put their lives and bodies on the line like they did in Toronto they have no mechanism to rely on other than themselves, their friends, their families, and the bonds of solidarity that exist between these groups. When people go into the streets like they did in Toronto, to confront a cabal of men and women who are actively destroying the lives of billions of people around the world, including our own—we do so with love. Love for our sisters and brothers in Toronto as much as in Mali and Nigeria and Thailand and Burma and Columbia and Argentina.

But Jasmin, you say, this one incident. One, unfortunate, weekend where things got out hand for everyone. No, it is not one weekend; it is a pattern of behaviour.

During the Olympics, the same massive security apparatus that was deployed in Toronto was used in Vancouver. Hundreds of cameras, miles and miles of fencing and a billion dollars worth of Police, military and private security guarding a two-week party for the rich and super-rich. The same violations, the same instances of police brutality were reported once again. Much as they were in Vancouver in 1997 at APAC Summit and in 2001 at the Summit of the Americas in Quebec City. Again and again and again the Police and state, protecting the forces of capital, act with impunity, with violence, brutalizing ordinary citizens, outraged at the fate of their democracies.

Days before the G20, CSIS came out and without any sort of evidence whatsoever (that they were able to produce, at least) accused potentially thousands of ordinary citizens of being spies for foreign governments. When the expected storm of controversy erupted over this claim, CSIS furiously attempted backtrack on this claim. So, to what end would they do this? As in Toronto, as in Vancouver, as in Quebec it is to rule by fear, to rule by decree.

Our Local Lords

In BC an incredibly unpopular tax is being advanced despite the protests of the vast majority of British Columbians. The fact that we, as ordinary people, oppose the HST is irrelevant. Who supports it? The governing BC Liberals, the right-wing Fraser Institute and the corporate establishment they both serve. They rule through decree and the brute force of legislative power. The recall campaign that has been launched against members of this government, while popular amongst ordinary people, will have a difficult time toppling any actual MLAs. The rules for launching a successful recall campaign are so steep as to be functionally impossible. As unpopular as the Liberals have become, our system is as such that they are likely to remain in office until 2013, at least.

And if they do, the odds of them losing an actual election are just as shaky a prospect. Because, we must recall, Canada is one of only a handful of “democracies” in the world which continues to use a First-Past-the-Post (FPP) electoral system, instead of some variation of Proportional Representation (PR). Thus, as it happens regularly in this Province in particular, we allow parties to win perhaps 50% of the popular vote and then translate this into 98% of the actual seats in the Legislature and Parliament. And even when an opposition party wins more than 2% of the seats, like the current incarnation of the NDP, they exercise exactly 0% of the actual power in Victoria.

It doesn’t help that when we had a referendum to attempt to change this atrocious system, the party that had historically made electoral reform part of its platform suddenly said nothing. In fact, in practice, they opposed electoral reform. Why? Because the NDP would rather be the perpetual opposition than allow for challenger to emerge on its Left that might actually force this party to stand on principle and ideology rather than an oft quoted rumour that they are not, in fact, the BC Liberals. They have become party to this same system, merely a Janus face of it.

At least in Ottawa there a multiple parties, you say. Often times, agreements are struck between the parties and this represents a consensus of the governed, yes? To answer this we should merely recall the most common refrain that was heard in the media and amongst many citizens when the Bloc, the NDP and the Liberals attempted to form a coalition government. It was unconstitutional and illegal, they told us. We do not even understand our own system of government. We do not understand just how warped our “democracy” has become. We see little danger in a government repeatedly suspending parliament when they are in danger of losing power. Perhaps, understandably given our history, we see this merely as the latest in a long series of authoritarian practices which have sullied our “democratic” record.

A History of Violence

Say what you will about our imperialist cousins to the South but at least they had the “common sense” to revolt against the monarchy. Canada began as little more than a corporate holding of the Hudson’s Bay Company and the personal domain of the British crown. Little has changed in nearly a 150 years of history. We are now the personal holding of a number of transnational corporations and Parliament still governs, essentially, by decree. We have symbolic votes every few years and in the meantime we sit with our collective thumbs up our collective anal sphincters.

Yet we somehow have this popular conception of Canada as a benevolent, utopian, northern wonderland. This is a country steeped in blood and violence, against both its own citizens and the peoples of far flung nations.

To begin with, there is the obvious extermination and ongoing persecution of the Native Peoples of “Canada.” Many, quite literally, live in Third World conditions on reserves where there is little or no running water, electricity or most any other basic amenities. Meanwhile, the bourgeoisie Canadian establishment is busily attempting to turn their ancestral lands into Golf Courses. And where extermination and exploitation have failed, cooption has been the watchword. Hence, the token Native “themes” during the Olympics, “power-sharing” agreements with certain Nations and the “marketization” of traditional cultures. The veneer of culture is preserved in the form of totem poles and postcards, while every significant feature of their culture is eradicated or banned.

It is no accident of history that the Canadian state attempted to ban the traditional potlatch, in part, because this bizarre habit of sharing things was a clear affront to the capitalist market system which was tightening its grip on the land. Nor is it an accident that the last Residential Schools, an experiment in cultural genocide, remained opened until the late 1980s.

While the Americans openly waged war and genocide against their Native Peoples, Canada did so only marginally more covertly. The effects were largely the same, however.  A similar fate awaited both Chinese and Indo-Canadians, who had been brought over in the thousands to work on the railroads as slave-like labour. The Canadian government actively recruited these people for exploitation and in turn targeted them for discrimination with all manner of racist legislation and policing.

After 9/11 there was a great deal of controversy surrounding Canada’s new anti-terrorism legislation. The controversy was misguided as critics seemed to be under the impression that these impositions on our civil liberties were somehow new. Even a cursory glance at the Canadian approach to civil liberties will demonstrate a history of violations.

The Boer War is generally regarded as Canada’s first “foreign war.” It is also, however, regarded as the first time that an entire nation of peoples, the Boers in this case, had been targeted for internment (i.e. placement in concentration camps). The British Army set up an extensive network of concentration camps, originally “refugee camps,” which resulted in the deaths of thousands of Boer civilians. Predominantly Anglo Canadian soldiers actively participated in these pogroms.

During both World War I and II, the Canadian government set up dozens of internment camps on Canadian soil. Thousands of Austro-Hungarian, German and later Japanese Canadians were interred in these camps, their rights denied, their property confiscated. After the war(s), they were released into a hostile climate, destitute and violated. Apologies and restitutions would not be forthcoming for decades and many are still waiting.

In October of 1970, Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau invoked the War Measures Act to tackle the so-called “October Crisis” in response to the kidnapping of a British trade minister and Quebec cabinet minister by a Quebec sovereignist group calling themselves the “Front de libération du Québec” (FLQ).  During the period in which the Act was invoked, Justice Minister John Turner claimed that 497 people had been arrested, 435 of whom had been released by February of  1971 with no charges, 62 were charged, and 32 had been charged with offenses of a more serious nature. With tanks in the streets of Ottawa, Montreal and Quebec, the Canadian state once again went fishing. Hundreds arrested, thousands harassed to capture a handful of suspected terrorists.

Since then, the modern Canadian approach to anti-terrorism has been marked by the outsourcing of torture, the illegal deportation of citizens to foreign prisons and a generally racist and two-tiered approach Canadian citizenship. Gods help you if you are a Canadian of colour stranded abroad. In the meantime, Canada has actively participated in the toppling of democratic regimes (Haiti) and in numerous imperial occupations (primarily Afghanistan, “merely” a supporting role in Iraq).

Canadian Democracy?

This has been a lengthy piece. Much has been skimmed over, still other topics ignored all together. All of this, however, is to make one very simple point: we do not actually live in a functioning, democratic state. We live in an oligarchic state which engages in a ritualized, symbolic process of electioneering once every few years, giving its citizens the illusions of democratic norms and actual citizen power. In practice, as the current government has shown, we have a very tenuous grip on anything remotely “democratic” in this country.

There is little to be said, I believe, for Canadian democracy. When speaking of Canadian politics it is more proper to speak of a Canadian regime, one that has for over a hundred years been involved in a war against its own citizens, and the citizens of foreign nations, often as a hand-maiden to still more powerful empires.

Events like the ones which took place in Toronto over the past weekend are a far more accurate representation of what people power looks like: necessarily in conflict with the state in capital. We are free only when we oppose, confront and eradicate these institutions and systems. The state and capitalism do not represent us, they do no protect us: they enslave us. And the institution of slavery, as French activist and author Yves Fremion has written, is perhaps unique in history in that it seemingly exists for no other reason than to be abolished.

• July 1, 2010 -- A Better World is Needed: The oh-so ‘Canadian’ style of dissent (8)
• June 26, 2010 -- Protecting the people elected to do the peoples’ work from the people who want them to do their work (3)

While I was watching the Twitter feed of #g20 marches in Toronto and the draconian police response yesterday afternoon, the BC NDP’s leader released two statements on leadership and tourism. They demonstrated why the party is losing credibility among those desperate for a constructive vision for a better future, and those who care about economic reform, the environment and meaningful political participation in the 21st century.

1. Vision: “I believe that leadership is about listening carefully to British Columbians and then making decisions that are in the broad public interest. … That’s the way best decisions are made.”
   1. We actually need leaders who can inspire us with ideas that will truly make a difference with our current ecological, energy and economic challenges like the world has never before seen. In the absence of new ideas we slide towards the opposite: seeing our leaders as cynical or vision-free politicians who can listen to people, then merely make shrewd policy based on what they hear, regardless of principles.
   2. The BC NDP has unanimously endorsed its Sustainable BC plan twice at conventions in 2007 and 2009. Only now, a year after a third electoral loss, is the party starting to implement the vision. It should not be this complicated!
2. Priorities: “I believe that it’s time for a new positive agenda for our province, an agenda that grows our economy, enhances our public services and looks out for our environment.”
   1. Public services are critical to ensure the rapacious profit motive does not suck life out of necessities like healthcare, education and other public goods. That’s good.
   2. But to merely “look out for the environment” is just not good enough considering the scope of how we have threatened our ecological existence for the last 1.5 centuries. The BC NDP’s Sustainable BC plan, in fact, even calls for “a diversified economy that operates within the environmental carrying capacity.” The environment cannot be a subset of the economy, which is how the BC NDP is operating now.
   3. Finally, “economic growth” is simply the wrong paradigm. It still sounds fine for people who haven’t heard of or fully understood the violence to our society from global capitalism and the worship of GDP growth, even with the most recent global economic meltdown. It has cost us trillions to just fix this most recent mess. Anyone who thinks there won’t be a dark, deregulated capitalism sequel cannot read history.
   4. A sad irony is the fact that at the 2009 BC NDP convention there was a workshop on Steady-State Economics put on by the party’s environment committee, the same group that actually came up with Sustainable BC. If you are interested in an economy that can exist within the planet’s environmental carrying capacity, you need to look at Steady-State Economics. Deaf ears, however, exist in the party when we continue to hear about the need for economic growth.
3. Unsustainable Tourism: “Tourism is an essential part of a sustainable B.C. economy. The Approved Destination Status agreement [with China] is an amazing opportunity to grow this critical sector of our economy and build relationships with one of the world’s fastest-growing economies.”
   1. Global tourism is not sustainable. What is the ecological footprint of travelling around the world? It’s too high. Our tourism sector should be focusing on sustainable travel with low footprints, not from tourists from around the planet.
   2. Why is the BC NDP excited about Chinese tourism income? Because they have money and we can “grow this critical sector of our economy.” The Chinese wealth is based on global corporate trade in goods and services combined with massive human rights abuses and environmental devastation, working with horrible retail partners like Walmart, all resulting in China’s growing wealth. There is nothing sustainable about endorsing this economic model or trying to glean some of its wealth. The lure of dollars is flashy when we look to China. Building relationships with that nation, however, makes us further dependent on its economic model of optimized exploitation. That sickens me that we would seek to be a parasite on such a moral criminal.
   3. “New Democrats have taken the lead in having in-depth discussions with community business leaders to figure out the best ways for B.C. to seize the opportunity of our new status with China.” This is simply incompatible with Sustainable BC. In fact, I would expect the BC Liberals to endorse the NDP’s actions here. Further, this approach reflects what kind of listening the BC NDP is doing with British Columbians and what kind of choices and priorities it is making. And when I say that I want a BC NDP that is a beacon of hope, clarity, vision and inspiration to address the dire economic, energy and environmental challenges we have created for ourselves, this is just heading in the wrong direction.
   4. And frankly, it is somewhat galling that the Chinese government, a gang that is profoundly not anyone’s role model, should bestow on us an approved destination status. Actually, it is more a reflection of our sorry state of economic morality. So much for ever trying to tie human rights improvements to continued trade with China when what we really want is for them to like us enough to let us lure their new idle rich to our resorts.
   5. Finally, “New Democrat tourism critic Spencer Chandra Herbert raised concerns about B.C.’s readiness to get the word out that we are open for business“ [my emphasis]. Sadly, we need to rewind to 1984 to see how “open for business” began such an economically despairing quarter century of Canadian economic history: “Canada is open for business again,” said Brian Mulroney. His audience, 1,450 U.S. executives and their guests at an Economic Club of New York dinner in Manhattan’s Hilton Hotel, evidently liked what they heard: they gave Canada’s new Prime Minister two standing ovations. Mulroney, 45, vowed that his government would be “there to assist and not to harass the private sector in creating new wealth and the new jobs that Canada needs.” Honestly? I cannot see how the BC NDP can be a beacon of hope for the 21st century if it is now spouting Mulroney Free Trade rhetoric.

I want the BC NDP to be worthy of support as not just a lite-beer alternative to the BC Liberals. I want the party to be so focused on a sustainable 21st century and beyond that people flock to it.

I’m not seeing it now.

What I am seeing is the party ignoring its Sustainable BC policy for years now. The party has finally started recognizing its membership is in decline despite its polling improvements and success in the legislature, but it is unable to figure out why. That’s just sad.

We need only look to the party’s new Our Province, Our Future consultation process to see what it is blind to: membership engagement. Practically everything I wrote about unions engaging their membership applies to political parties. But when we look at the Our Province, Our Future website discussion forum we see only 14 posts in almost 2 months.

Granted, not all party members are all over the interwebs. Many don’t have email. Many won’t share their email address with the party. But the party does have at least a few thousand member email addresses. But how many members have received an invitation to contribute to the Our Province, Our Future website discussion forum. How many have received an email letting them know the site even exists? Seriously, how hard would it be to at the very least email a few thousand members? Fundraising emails come out without much difficulty. Why not something of more substance if the party values members for more than their financial contributions?

The conclusion I do not want to draw from this is that the party leadership is not really interested in engaging its membership beyond taking their money. But judging from this wholly inadequate explanation for the Our Province, Our Future promotional methods, I have little left to conclude.

I had a dream of Sisyphus and futility. How many times should a voter look to the same political party for signs of hope? A short answer rests in the appalling voter turnout last May, under 50% for the first time ever. Beyond the party’s membership decline, it saw a decline in donations in key ridings, a decline in volunteers, and a decline in its base actually turning out to vote.

Sisyphus was trapped, but BC voters aren’t. If the BC NDP continues to show itself largely bereft of progressive vision, inspiration and policy that can truly address the real challenges of the 21st century, people will go elsewhere.

I can’t help but think about how inspirational it was for the BC NDP to bring Thomas Homer-Dixon to its 2007 convention to speak about resilience and being proactive in the face of paradigm shifting challenges. That was an inspiring time. Sustainable BC was a grand policy statement at that convention that spoke to Homer-Dixon’s issues, all a year and a half before the last election. People were optimistic.

Then it all ended up under the bus.

And now we’re sucking up to China for tourism investment and the party is channeling Brian Mulroney.

• July 2, 2010 -- Yuan Good Turn Deserves Another (3)

Working from the reasonably solid premise that majority governments are inherently tyrannical, I prefer as merely a marginal improvement: minority governments. They’re no ProRep, but at the very least, they force more cooperation, though I use the term loosely. We’re seeing an evolution of expectations in and about Ottawa and now I think we’re going to see it in BC in 2013.

Let’s start with BC Conservative MP James Moore who tweeted this out last week: “All Conservative/Bloc/NDP MPs (& leaders) here for final budget votes. Only half of Lib MPs here, Ignatieff missing. Seems fitting.4:37 PM Jun 17th via UberTwitter”

I found this quite interesting for him to remark on this. His government exists because of the strategic absence of dozens of Liberals on key votes. The Liberals are in a de facto coalition with the Conservatives. Didn’t he get the memo/text/tweet/VM?

The Liberals show up to vote against the budget and other noxious legislation and they feel good about it. But they only send enough so that with the Bloc and NDP votes, they won’t have enough to defeat the government. And since some of those votes are confidence motions where failure means an election, the Liberals ensure enough MPs are at the spa to miss the vote because they’re afraid of an election now.

Now’s an odd time for the Liberals to be afraid of an election since the Conservatives are in a sucking place relative to other times since the last election. Except for the fact that the Liberal leader is not universally tolerated, loved, or followed in caucus. And the party on the ground still calls itself Canada’s natural governing party.

But federal MPs can be forgiven for this lame kind of strategy. All they are thinking about is jockeying for position until the polling shows they are in majority government territory. Not going to happen. Minority governments best reflect the split opinions in regions in the country.

I’m hoping that the crazy dynamics of minority parliaments will help citizens focus on what kind of cooperation it ought to take to get good things done. It will also show us some things we won’t see in majority governments: politicians who only jockey for power and how the Liberals and the Conservatives have the same anti-human, pro-corporate neoliberal economic agenda. Why? Liberal MP Scott Brison attacked opponents to the Colombia Free Trade Agreement even more than the government did and both parties voted for it.

Now everyone gets to see that the Liberals are just like Conservatives on fiscal issues. That’s important to know.

And now we have this United Party of Canada meme/thing/movement/Frankenstein forming, with lots of vague, feel-good, meaningless, substance-free, policy-void babble on the website: “We believe in you!”. Who knows now, but if they get any traction, dig an even deeper hole for majority parliaments.

And in BC we have new dynamics brewing for the 2013 election, just under 3 years away. Some context:

1. Last year, someone went rogue and floated the idea of Vision Vancouver going provincial, a mythical third party [try this and this]. That was killed immediately. Effective trial balloon, though.
2. Last week we heard more about a http://VisionBC.ca domain name. No smoking gun, just more talk, and one crazy reference to the party being centre-left. Isn’t the BC NDP supposed to be centre-left? Sure.
3. Two weeks ago a Liberal cabinet member quits not because believes the HST to be actually bad, but because he fears the recall campaign that will destroy him starting in November. Then the BC Conservative party first calls him a rat, then says that spokesperson went rogue also, then they suggest a place for him.
4. The Greens have and will continue to poll in the mid to high single digits, as will the BC Conservatives; more for them if they can get their messaging clear and pull some “real” federal Conservatives lurking in the BC Liberal party.
5. The right wing coalition in BC for the last thousand years made up of federal Liberals and Conservatives seems increasingly shaky. Some centrist/leftist federal Liberals may not be all that onside with the latest social contract-assassinating government policies.
6. There are federal Liberals in the BC NDP caucus and orbit.

If Vision BC formed, it could peel some NDP MLAs, operatives and wonks. It could pull Blair Lekstrom and Vicki Huntington in. It could pull George Abbott and Carole Taylor and a handful of current BC Liberal MLAs. It could make a run for government by playing to the centre [or centre-"left"] by featuring some kinder, gentler characters from the Campbell decade.

And if it shoots for government in 2013 it would have to start about now. If it misses government, not inconceivable for a new party [except for Vision Vancouver though], we could end up with a minority legislature: one step towards proportional representation.

With a minority legislature, we’d have up to 4 years for the minor parties to assert themselves, build their bases and impede any further majority governments. We’d also see a redefining of posture for the BC NDP and BC Liberals based on who’s left. That will bloody. There are already a number of MLAs who would not surprise me if they were right now sharpening knives.

And I reiterate this one thing about trust. Politicians who only seek power are easier to spot in an era of minority parliaments. How? They don’t do anything of substance while waiting for a chance to get more power. Demand that they act on principle and they go on vacation, hit the spa, tour the region on a kissing babies tour, anything to keep up the persona of manufactured leadership.

We cannot continue to tolerate that kind of nonsense. 308 MPs in Ottawa watching CBC Newsworld on their iPads to see if they’re tweeted about or more hopefully, trying to guide the Commons committee they sit on to do something of substance? 85 BC MLAs laying low in caucus wondering how they can maneuver themselves into something with a bigger office or hopefully something that makes a difference for people?

All I know is that in minority situations, there isn’t as much space under the radar anymore. And that’s good for all of us.

• No Related Posts

Now we have polling to show that once Canadians start thinking outside the box of majority government crutches, we can start imagining what preferable leadership could look like in Canada.

The poll also asked Canadians how they would vote if the Liberals and NDP went to the polls offering Canadians a coalition government, and here things get interesting.

…

If the coalition were to propose Jack Layton as prime minister, according to the Reid poll, it could defeat the Conservatives by 43-37 per cent.

via Prime Minister Layton? – The Globe and Mail.

• No Related Posts

• No Related Posts

This will look bad for the BC NDP unless they become more direct in their opposition to the HST.

While the BC NDP correctly states that it cannot eliminate the HST immediately if they win the May 2013 election because the contract with the federal government extends to 2015, they need to firmly promise that they will get rid of the tax, not wait and see what kind of revenue situation they are in.

Why?

In BC’s March 2 budget, the finance minister admitted the HST will bring in $113 million less in revenues than the HST while Vaughn Palmer estimated the amount to be more like $370 million less.

The HST’s regressive tax shift benefits large corporations at the expense of low and middle income earners. Because of this, and the net revenue decline, the BC NDP needs to immediately insist they will eliminate the HST if they win in 2013 so they do not get painted in the same camp as the suddenly not so progressive Nova Scotia NDP.

• No Related Posts

Great thanks go to all the people talking about the ideas I was running on, particularly the viral champions who were spreading word widely.

140 was almost half as many votes as I would have needed to beat the person who won the 6th spot. But at the same time 140 votes is a great deal higher than 37 or some number that reflects having made only a passing impact on the 600 or so delegates.

There are many things I could have done better on the campaign, from long-term network building beforehand, extensive volunteer recruitment for activism on the floor, to less reliance on a green online campaign since most delegates didn’t embrace that convention goal of virtual paperlessness. To a certain extent, my candidacy was an exploration into what kind of reception these ideas would receive at the governing body of the party: 20-something percent support.

One of many positives in the run was in shining a spotlight on some Think Forward BC NDP ideas about internal democracy, accountability, transparency, following our policies, engaging members and above all, putting the environment, Sustainable BC and embarking on a plan to avert climate breakdown into the forefront of the party’s priorities.

Many other candidates, delegates and speakers carried these messages beyond just me. And while the months that Think Forward BC NDP has been in existence cannot be the sole explanation for all these people talking about the issues, the dialogue process begun certainly has its place in helping facilitate these ideas.

Where to go from here? That is up to members of the party who want to see the party improve, walk its policy talk better, and more effectively engage members and the thousands of progressive people and groups in the province that make up the progressive social movement out for justice and a better world.

Currently the party is doing an adequate job of representing many people, but it could be doing such a better job of the being the electoral wing of this social movement. Internal and external engagement are critical.

So we’ll see where the new leadership will take the party. There is a batch of new senior staff to hire and a new tone to establish. There will be growing pains and sputtering starts, but people who sincerely wish for a vibrant, effective and solid rock of a political alternative will continue working to make sure the party keeps improving.

• No Related Posts

The only order jigging I did was to put my belief at the end, the one about engaging with members and the progressive social movement in BC that I contributed to Think Forward BC NDP.

In describing the category of reasons why people think we lost that dealt with Carole James, among the 5 reasons I included that people were suggesting, one of them was that she is a woman.

Not explicitly writing that I don’t necessarily believe this list of explanations of the electoral loss meant I left some ambiguity about what I do believe.

I don’t believe we lost the election because of any of the first 8 categories of reasons, including that our leader is a woman. I believe we lost because we alienated our members who chose to not fund, volunteer for or vote for a party that no longer reflected what they felt the party should be.  I don’t think it was the gender of the leader.

I think people who don’t think women should be premier wouldn’t vote NDP anyway. I have also talked to party members who were concerned about having a female leader because they feared sexist voters wouldn’t vote for the party. But like I said, I don’t think they’d vote NDP anyway.

The sexist reality of this province is that one’s gender can be an element in their political success or failure. There are also racist elements in the political culture in BC. We don’t talk about either of them too much, though. They are very touchy subjects, understandably.

But we need to talk about race and gender and all sorts of demographic issues that unjustifiably bias the public’s political decision-making.

These are real issues to discuss, not in the context of deciding how to let racism and sexism sway our political existence, but to figure out how to build a progressive society in BC that is beyond this kind of bigotry.

Two days ago, Carole James discussed one example of this bigotry in politics:

“It’s difficult for women because you can be seen as shrill very easily,” Ms. James said. “You can be seen as haranguing in a way that men aren’t. When you take on tough issues I think there’s also a tougher standard for women to find that balance.”

What kind of civilized, enlightened society exists in which a provincial political party leader who happens to be a woman has to moderate her political existence to accommodate troubling perceptions in the population? It turns out, ours. Martin Luther King, Jr. had a few things to say about how we ought to judge people. Decades later, we still have a way to go.

And when we voted for an equity policy at the 2007 convention, there was much debate: uncomfortable and touchy, but necessary.

This weekend we’ll receive the Equity Mandate Report and decide what to do in the future to encourage more diversity in NDP candidacies.

Having had the pleasure of watching the equity policy contribute to a number of successes like Mable Elmore’s election in Vancouver-Kensington, I will encourage continued discussion about the various forms of bigotry that exist in our political culture, with a goal of moving past it.

I voted for the equity policy in 2007 and I will vote for the new Mandate recommendations this weekend.

Dialogue is important.

It isn’t always easy and it is often cumbersome to the point of wondering if it’s worth it. But in a progressive political party, earnest members of good intentions deserve the space and the freedom to discuss controversial subjects in a productive way.

While I don’t think we lost either of the last 2 elections because our leader is a woman, some people still do. And that is worth discussing because if we don’t, the elephant in the room will remain, which is what we’re trying to avoid when we examine equity issues in the first place.

• No Related Posts

When you review the 7 main points in the Think Forward BC NDP consensus document, there is some strong convergence. Read them here, then review some of Mason’s points:

1. Talk about the economy more

2. Pick core economic areas and own them

6. Engage young voters

7. Improve the relationship with working people and unions

10. Engage the disaffected

So in running for BC NDP Vice-President on the Think Forward ideas, I find some comfortable agreement in Mason’s piece.

And what is Think Forward BC NDP all about? Facilitating dialogue to engage members, supporters and the progressive social movement in BC. So, let Think Forward and Mason’s piece be part of the fodder for dialogue.

• No Related Posts

Sean Holman of Public Eye Online, however, is live blogging in real time.

You can read his impressions here.

• No Related Posts

It has been an inspiring morning checking in with developments with the YND convention and the Women’s Caucus meeting.

Delegates are starting to arrive and buzz about while I’m finalizing the ideas for my video message as candidate for Vice-President.

My virtually green campaign for Vice-President has fully moved green now as I’ve submitted my one and only half-page campaign leaflet to party staff for distribution to delegates. All the rest is online: the party will send my candidate statement to delegates’ email addresses shortly with links to me in Twitter, Facebook and, of course, here.

Each hour in the last 6 has brought the excitement of a weekend of change as more and more of the convention puzzle pieces gets assembled.

Chatting with MLAs in the registration line about where we hope to be in 45 hours is motivating for all.

If you would like to chat, I’ll be sitting at the Vancouver-Kensington table and watching my Twitter, Facebook and email for your ideas and questions.

• No Related Posts

During these next hours, I will be at the Bayshore speaking to people about how to mobilize their vision for the party.

I have some ideas I’ve been working through since 8:35 pm on May 12, 2009. Then the Think Forward BC NDP dialogue sprouted from Vancouver-Kensington’s planning to help frame suggestions for reinvigorating the party.

Today our convention starts. This is day one of delegates being able to talk.

Where are we?

How did we get here?

What is working?

What isn’t working?

How do we change to survive and flourish?

And through all this, our dialogue is the process by which we build, or rebuild, relationships with each other and with all the various elements of the party and caucus.

There are rifts that burden us and weaken our synergy. They keep us from having a cohesive, bold vision. They keep us from engaging with the broader progressive social movement in BC consisting of thousands of individuals and groups working to make the bad man stop.

But in the end, regardless of what resolutions we pass or what party processes we improve, we need to stand up at the end of convention, look back and say to each other that we’ve improved the social fabric of our party.

We need to re-engage with each other and include new voices…may of which come from long time members whose ideas haven’t been heard.

We need to talk to all our progressive friends who seem like they should belong to the party, but don’t. We need to actually talk about why that is and include what we learn in our conversations about party reform.

If we truly wish to represent the majority of British Columbians who share our values, we need to engage them. Doing that through the progressive social movement that already exists, though it always needs development, is the way to go.

We can be insular, or we can engage with the people we say to represent.

This process starts with us at convention and it needs to continue on Sunday afternoon until we win the next election.

I’m running for Vice-President of the party to ensure that we guide the party to that new place of meaningful engagement. If you want to come along with me, support my goals by talking to others about how you too can facilitate their vision for the party. Then give me your vote so we can get the party moving.

• No Related Posts

With convention starting tomorrow, we are on the eve of defining a new culture of the BC NDP. Or not.

Lots of people think everything is fine in the party, that people calling for reform are navel gazers who don’t understand that the real enemy is the Liberal party.

Working against the Liberals and improving the synergy within the NDP are not mutually exclusive.

Losing two elections is a reasonable trigger for some useful introspection for the party. I’ve written about many of the crux issues for the party over the last week. Today I want to talk about who we ought to feel like as the NDP in BC.

Let’s use the party’s words, even…the convention tagline and a core campaign slogan:

Communicate. Inspire. Build.

Because everyone matters.

Communication

All conventions are about communication. The communication that must happen this weekend will give space to delegates to express all range of emotions and attitudes about the state of the party. Our core identity is in disarray to a degree. If convention is going to stimulate improvement, we need to get our ideas out on the table. We need to speak our truths to each other.

Inspiration

Inspiration is critical. When organizations are in flux, there are generally two leadership options: entrenching conservatism and expansive reinvigoration. Ever since 8:35pm on May 12, 2009, when I began talking to people about what went wrong in the election, everyone walked down one of those two paths, or alternated depending on their moods.

All through convention there will be crux moments: times when ideas will gel. I used to watch basketball games when I was at SFU. Each game was a series of scoring or defensive streaks. Whichever team could build enough momentum for enough runs would win the game.

At convention, these crux moments will compile over the weekend to define the starting point of the culture and tone of the BC NDP for the next 2 or more likely, many years.

I implore delegates to ignore the timidity inherent in conservatism and embrace the boldness of hope and vision and belief in our capacity to be an organization that lives in integrity. The party can be the electoral wing of the progressive social movement that already exists in BC.

Build

Suitably inspired, we need to leave convention with a goal of building a party that operates in integrity. All the catharsis, debate and re-envisioning that needs to happen cannot happen by the end of the weekend. The first thing to build coming out of convention is a process to continue the dialogue. Several hundred delegates represent all members for constitutional purposes, but they represent only themselves when it comes to rebuilding a party culture that will reverse the tide of alienation that showed up in members defunding the party, not volunteering on the election campaign and in a disturbingly large number of cases not even showing up to vote.

Once we build a process for de-alienation, we need to build some other things:

• a historic policy database on the party website for members and the whole world to see so they know what we stand for and so that we are willing to be held accountable to our policies
• an open communication network with all the people and groups that make up the progressive social movement in BC that is desperate for an electoral wing that sees value in working alongside allied groups
• a new economic vision supporting progressive businesses and business models that makes the economy serve people rather than people serving corporate shareholder wealth, all within the context of averting climate breakdown
• a series of other projects that will require member engagement for them to succeed, see Think Forward BC NDP goals.

Because Everyone Matters

I used to teach high school English. “Kids matter. Teachers care.” This BCTF message always carried weight for me. It’s all about what matters.

The BC NDP positions itself as the party that makes everyone matter. It didn’t quite succeed in that message in the last election because various things happened to alienate its own membership.

The future of the BC NDP hinges on making sure everyone in the party matters. Everyone needs to be included, informed, heard, involved and a part of solutions: from addressing the debt to policy formation, to coalition building on community and province-wide levels, to simply imagining what kind of BC we want our grandchildren to inherit.

Everything that everyone says and does at convention needs to be judged in the context of whether it will enable the party to ensure that every member matters during convention time and starting on November 30 when the party has to take the lessons from convention and rebuild itself.

A political party cannot exist if it alienates its members. For cyincal, neoliberal parties, corporations and the rich are the key constituents. For progressive parties, the constituents are members and supporters.

Our members need to see events at convention as reasons to re-commit to the party because it is worth engaging in.

Our supporters who aren’t members need to see a reason to join.

These will be the tests of the success of convention. If we do it right, we will start a process of defining ourselves as a party that can flourish in the 21st century. When people belong, they will fund the party. They will not financially support an organization that alienates them.

And that is why I will be running hard for Vice-President. All weekend. And if I get elected, I will be pursuing the goals and visions I’ve been writing about for the last week.

• No Related Posts

A core idea in the Think Forward BC NDP dialogue over the last few months has been about enhancing democracy in the party:

2. We must enhance democracy inside the party:

- Progressive politics is about accountability and transparency throughout the party to build trust and commitment between members and the elements of the party: constituencies (executives, MLAs, candidates, members, non-members), the provincial party (convention, party policies defined by convention, provincial council, the provincial executive, the table officers, staff), and caucus (leader, MLAs, staff).

- The Goal: more regular communication as well as formal and informal relationships need to take place from caucus and the executive to provincial councils, constituencies and members to increase transparency and accountability. There must be a clear process laid out and followed for decision-making which takes into account, but does not get hamstrung by communications management.

Democracy means inclusion. And it means pro-active inclusion. The thousands of party members need to be assertively included, not passively included.

What does that mean, though? Let’s look at a representation example. There are 5 levels of activity in the party from the member to the table officers.

All party members belong to riding associations. Those associations have a delegate to provincial council that meets quarterly and is in charge of the party between conventions. The provincial executive also meets quarterly; their meeting minutes go to the provincial council. The table officers meet monthly; their minutes go to the full provincial executive.

There are constitutional structures and relationships in place to ensure members know what is going on. The problem is that these relationships don’t work.

Meeting minutes do not flow smoothly from the table officers to each level down to members. Communication systems in ridings vary in effectiveness across the 85 ridings. There are many reasons for this, but in the end, if the systems in place for communicating party activities do not work, it is incumbent on the party to fix that.

Who is the party that is responsible for fixing that? Everyone. Ridings can’t just ask the provincial office for more resources and the provincial executive can’t just say that ridings have to get their act together. We can solve this kind of problem by getting people from all the levels of the party together, figuring out what communication needs to take place, what is in place now to accomplish that, what is broken, what needs to be fixed and what other solutions are possible. It’s everyone’s responsibility.

Currently, in a sad irony, there are not many ways of facilitating this kind of discussion.

There are other examples of breakdowns in internal party democracy, but many of them can be addressed by creating some structures for dialogue about improving democracy.

Another category of democracy weaknesses in the party is in the relationship between caucus and the party. There is precious little in the party’s constitution that expresses a relationship between these two bodies. In reality, caucus can operate in significant isolation from the party, from members and from convention-sanctioned policies.

Many members I have spoken with before and after the election, as well as many non-member supporters, are under the mistaken impression that there are firm accountability relationships between MLAs and the party structures. Thus, people are seriously confused when caucus acts against party policy or what members believe the NDP does or should stand for.

The choice to oppose the carbon tax and support the Port Mann Bridge rebuild and the Gateway Project reflect such breakdowns. Section 15.03 of the party constitution contains this:

It shall be the responsibility of MLAs, when they consider there are problems in the clarity, applicability or feasibility of existing Party policy, to bring these problems to the attention of the appropriate policy committees or to the chairperson of the Policy Review Committee.

It sounds like this creates a system whereby caucus can dialogue with the party about policy changes. How extensive is this happening? Did it happen with the carbon tax, Port Mann Bridge and Gateway Project? If so, then provincial council should be required to sign off on significant policy amendments or reversals. And if they do, then as the governing body of the party between conventions, they are responsible for the effect of those policy changes.

Those 3 policy reversals alienated droves of members and contributed to us losing the election in May.

Democracy matters. Structures need to be in place to ensure democracy takes place. If the structures are missing or ineffective based on how the party is operating, there is a breakdown in democracy.

This cannot continue. Losing this election is a signal to the party that its internal democracy is quite maimed.

And now it is the job of everyone in the party to pull together to figure out what kind of democracy we want, what it looks like and how we ensure we get there.

So in running for a Vice-President position on the provincial executive, one of my goals is to make sure the party’s democracy improves every month from now to the next election and beyond.

• No Related Posts

1. Carole James – bad leader, woman, not inspiring, lacks vision or passion, been around too long
2. Negative Campaign – smearing Cambell, Maui, COPE 378′s ads, using the Liberals’ tactics of getting elected when they largely point out how much the NDP sucks, relying on the Liberals’ horrible policies to allow the party to phone in a campaign
3. The Platform – unfocused, not clearly promoted as positive alternatives, not communicated to members or the public
4. The Slogan – too many slogans, unclear slogans, slogan-based campaign
5. Party Disorganization – despite knowing when the election was to happen not having enough volunteers, money, key staff when required
6. Policy Reversals – Axe the Tax and supporting the Port Mann Bridge rebuild and Gateway which violated explicit party policy
7. Rogue Leadership – lack of accessibility and accountability through different elements of the party
8. Fear – throwing under the bus anything necessary to avoid/appease criticism
9. Not Developing Constituencies – lack of time, money, and resources to develop robust activists, fundraisers, and networks with progressive groups eager to mobilize members and supporters to stop the Liberals

OK, so #9 is a bit of a plant, as I wrote yesterday. That’s what Think Forward BC NDP speaks to, but it’s not a coincidence. In figuring out what Vancouver-Kensington wants to do for the next 3.5 years, we looked at these very areas that we need to develop further.

#8, Fear: This is a squishy one to explore. Fear of criticism, the past, public perceptions of our weaknesses, our actual weaknesses…all these fears and maybe more are relevant. But how do we combat fear as a political party or element of a social movement? Self-assuredness. And we get that with internal integrity, believing in and following our values, committing to ideals, motivating each other on an inspired path. The party is full of values, ideals and willing activists. We need to harmonize our efforts, but we can only do that if we’re on the same page: our party policy, which is our roadmap for progressive social change. We also get self-assuredness by improving our relationships with other progressive groups. We support them and they support us. We call it solidarity. Ask Gandhi.

#7, Rogue Leadership: throughout the lead-up to the campaign and in the campaign many people spoke of confusion about who was in charge, how decisions were being made, how inadequate resources were being allocated, and a general breakdown in reporting out. The table officers meet monthly; their minutes should go to the entire provincial executive that meets quarterly before provincial council meetings, which gets executive minutes. Provincial council delegates report to riding executives that report out to members. It’s a great system that should work, and it does work. On paper, and maybe in some but surely not all 85 ridings. Every chain in that communication network is maimed or broken so that the vast majority of membership and non-member supporters have no idea what the party leadership is doing. And since no one should reasonably expect all members to attend riding executive meetings, we need effective communication [and accountability and transparency] systems in place that foster increased reporting out, not just indicating on paper that it should exist.

#6, Policy Reversals: The BC NDP has passed convention resolutions supporting carbon taxes and opposing the Port Mann Bridge rebuild and the Gateway project. If this party is to be meaningful to its members and all British Columbians, it must walk its talk. In the future, all elements of the party need to follow policy, or embark on an open process to amend it. If anyone wonders why members are leaving and canceling their donations, it is largely because the party changed into something the members didn’t support anymore. That’s it. In the future, there need to be more accountability and communication connections between caucus and the party and membership. Without that, membership apathy and even disgust will continue to grow and the party will implode. We’ll measure this for 12 months starting in May 2010 when we watch memberships not renew. My goal is to make sure people feel the party is worth paying another $10 next year to belong to.

#5, Party Disorganization: the resources and capabilities of all elements of the party from ridings on up, leading up to a known election date needed to be better organized. In the future, we need to ensure that candidates are in place at least 12 months before the election, not 10 weeks or less. We need to develop fundraising and financing goals and strategies that have approval of all elements of the party so there is no more internal competition for resources. We are all on the same team, so we need to all be at the table to ensure we all agree on resources. Without that, we’ll have continued decay. With that, we will be able to demonstrate to members that investing in the party is an inclusive process.

#4, The Slogan: There were many criticisms of campaign messaging. This isn’t just about consistency in slogans and the superficial symbolism of branding. Slogans are hollow if people’s experience with them is not healthy. Having competing slogans demonstrates confusion and lack of self-identity. When members read a slogan and conclude that their personal experience in the party doesn’t reflect the ideal in the slogan, the party alienates them.

#3, The Platform: I read the platform. It was inspiring. There were so many good ideas in there, but it ended up being a token document. We have to have a platform, but it was not the central focus of the campaign. The platform should be the nexus of ongoing party policy and circumstances leading up to an election. However much it was, it was not the focal point of the party motivating the public to support us. It was buried in other things so that members wanting to campaign on more than how awful Gordon Campbell is [and he's clearly awful] had a hard time quoting party messaging on doorsteps and in lunchrooms.

#2, Negative Campaigning: Criticizing incumbents is valid and not necessarily negative campaign. We must distinguish ourselves from the others to “make the bad man stop.” But the proportion of criticism to constructive alternatives was very far from where it needed to be. Further, members expected the NDP to shine its policy light all over the province. And then members grew disillusioned when the party embraced what ended up appearing to be the same tactics the Liberals used to fuel our 2001 implosion: say as little as possible, then let the incumbent destroy themselves.

#1, Carole James: I have no intention of assessing the validity of criticisms I’ve heard about the leader; convention resolutions and debate are the appropriate venue for that. But of all the criticisms of her that I have heard before and after the election, valid or not, when I think of some hypothetical person who would have been more suitable to the majority of members and voters in BC, I can’t see how we still could have won the election with the other things going wrong with the party systemically. Pulling the goalie or firing the coach are tactics that can bear fruit in the short term, but they do not address underlying problems. Even if Carole James were to step down this week inspiring a robust leadership race, upon getting a new leader we’d still have to go back and address all the other things above that prevented us from winning an eminently winnable election.

So where does this leave us?

It leaves us 3 days out of convention with some serious internal reform to take place. The constitution has some contradictory language left over from the last convention regarding how the leader is chosen. That needs some housekeeping. There also needs to be a process in place to pick and confirm the leader. These things will happen.

But these things are not the meat of what must begin at convention in 3 days. We must acknowledge the problems inside the party and we must begin a process of fixing them. And we need to do it in public so that the media, the Liberals, our members, our non-member supporters and all the other groups in BC’s progressive social movement see that we are turning into the electoral wing we need to be to change the toxic neoliberal direction this province has suffered under for this whole decade.

I have no time for people who refuse to acknowledge anything is broken in the party. That kind of delusion is troubling and shocking.

We will endure intense criticism from the media and the Liberals and from a variety of other fronts. So, what’s new. We absolutely have to boldly embrace our principles, vision and ideals and make sure we structure a party that can enact them. It’s all about integrity. If we can’t muster the fortitude to do that, the party is already over.

• No Related Posts

We failed to win it.

There are a great many explanations for why we failed to win, but I have spent a great deal of time since about 8:30pm on Tuesday, May 12, 2009 talking to dozens of people about what is systemically wrong with the BC NDP so we can think about moving forward. I was angry too, but quickly I stopped the urge to participate in a witch hunt. We didn’t win an election we should have. That was done. It was time to figure out what needs fixing…future focussed.

Here is a short list of many of the most popular explanations for why we aren’t in government right now, in no particular order. Tomorrow I’ll explore how these issues connect to party transformation and why I’m running for BC NDP Vice-President.

1. Carole James – bad leader, woman, not inspiring, lacks vision or passion, been around too long
2. Negative Campaign – smearing Cambell, Maui, COPE 378′s ads, using the Liberals’ tactics of getting elected when they largely point out how much the NDP sucks, relying on the Liberals’ horrible policies to allow the party to phone in a campaign
3. The Platform – unfocused, not clearly promoted as positive alternatives, not communicated to members or the public
4. The Slogan – too many slogans, unclear slogans, slogan-based campaign
5. Party Disorganization – despite knowing when the election was to happen not having enough volunteers, money, key staff when required
6. Policy Reversals – Axe the Tax and supporting the Port Mann Bridge rebuild and Gateway which violated explicit party policy
7. Rogue Leadership – lack of accessibility and accountability through different elements of the party
8. Fear – throwing under the bus anything necessary to avoid/appease criticism
9. Not Developing Constituencies – lack of time, money, and resources to develop robust activists, fundraisers, and networks with progressive groups eager to mobilize members and supporters to stop the Liberals

OK, so #9 is a bit of a plant. That’s what Think Forward BC NDP speaks to and it’s a bit of a hint at what tomorrow’s piece will be all about. But it’s not a coincidence. In figuring out what Vancouver-Kensington wants to do for the next 3.5 years, we looked at these very areas that we need to develop further.

I believe the whole party can benefit from addressing the systemic weaknesses in the party. That’s why I’m running for one of the 6 Vice-President positions.

Tomorrow I’ll explore each of the above areas in the context of transforming the party into the electoral wing of a progressive social movement.

• No Related Posts

The NDP is the naturally governing party of BC, so when the legislature was to open earlier this fall/summer, the NDP MLAs should stroll in there and behave as if we actually represent the poorest 95% of British Columbians, which we do, and we should do our best to represent them.

And truly, the MLAs are taking it to the streets this session, for sure. Being critics, challenging the government on its priorities and process are reflective of the masses who have been suffering for this whole decade.

But we really should embrace a humility and a public service mode to recognize that we represent the values of most citizens and we should act as if we are governing. It’s just that we can’t pass legislation.

This goes along with this idea I have that behaviour in parliament is a joke, with all the “grand traditions” of idiocy and compromises to actual debate that so many people claim to be an unquestionable tradition.

But honestly, I have never seen a school board, NGO or even city council meeting operate like our provincial leaders. But reforming the operation of the Westminster Parliamentary System is on my list of long-term reform goals.

In the short term, we start with the reality that most working people in this province are being abused by the government. Tiny lures of tax cuts are combined with user fee increases.

Token, cynical concessions to the poorest British Columbians are matched by massive service cuts.

In the end, the intentional defunding of the BC government is designed to undermine the progressive tax system, reduce the tax burden of the rich and bilk the middle class.

The NDP is rich in convention-passed resolutions framing our party’s beliefs. They exist to represent working people in the province and do not cater to the richest 5% that the Liberals worship.

I would direct you to BC NDP policy on our website, except that it is only available in the internal section where party activists can log in to view the resolutions passed by conventions over the last 30 years. This policy needs to be on the outside of the website for members, the public, the Liberals, the media…EVERYONE…to see it so that we can say to the world that we follow our policy.

Not doing so reduces our credibility, which we saw in abundance in how we lost the last election. Our members chose to not vote and risked Campbell getting in again to avoid voting for us. It doesn’t really get any worse for a political party than that.

My first goal upon being elected to the provincial executive is to make sure everyone knows what we stand for. I’ve read our policy documents. I read our campaign platform during the last election. But you shouldn’t have to take my word for it that we represent the majority of British Columbians.

But beyond internal party problems, why don’t most citizens vote for us when we actually represent them?

Well, why did millions of poor Americans vote against their economic interest this decade by supporting Bush as he abused them like Campbell is abusing the working classes of BC?

Fear.

The neoliberals have scared the pants off of citizens with the idea that an NDP government would bankrupt everyone.

Since someone in the NDP is still afraid of the phrase “fast ferries,” the party in general has not spent this decade having monthly lunch meetings with the dozens of progressive economists in BC to bone up on economics. It’s not like the CCPA hasn’t been coming up with innovative alternative budgets every year!

We should be able to clean the Liberals’ cobweb logic. What kind of justification in the universe is there to build BC Ferries in Germany while our industry languishes?

And if you get our your mental calculator and zoom into Burrard Inlet on Google Earth, you can make your little camera zoom from where the fast ferries are parked, and glide over the water to the new convention centre and every second you can tick away the dollars. The new convention centre cost overrun basically matches the fast ferries. So what are we afraid of?

There seems to be a rule in politics to never apologize for the past, never to admit mistakes. Maybe because we’re afraid that the other side will point out that we screwed up.

Well we did screw up. The fast ferries don’t fit BC’s geography. And we knew it.

But who knew it? A bunch of people who aren’t in the party right now. I disagreed with the boats back then and I do now. Integrity means admitting mistakes. What do we owe former party leaders who screwed up? We owe ourselves and our children more integrity than we owe loyalty to the past.

Here’s another mistake. As much as the party had some valid criticism of the Liberals’ specific carbon tax legislation, the Axe the Tax campaign failed almost from the beginning, in part because of the awful coincidence that gas prices went through the roof around the time of the introduction of the tax, making a criticism of a 2 cent tax petty.

Oh yes, the NDP has affirmed policies supporting a carbon tax consistently for this whole decade. So the other reason why the campaign failed was because our party actually wants a large and effective carbon tax, despite the feelings of whoever decided on that campaign.

So. Where does this leave us?

We have lots of policy that most citizens would embrace:

• framing the economy to serve human beings and not maximizing offshore corporate shareholder wealth
• investing in human services and not cutting healthcare and education
• reframing all government policy so that it fits a grand regulatory plan to avert climate breakdown, since we only have a few years left to turn our economy around before we’re past the point of no return
• everything else we love about social, human, economic, environmental and political justice and equality…something the Liberals hate as they pander to greed and elitism.

So we need to post our policy and be proud of it.

We need to acknowledge that the fast ferries were a mistake and reflected bad decision-making among people who haven’t been in the party in a decade. We need to throw them under the bus. Right now.

We need to recognize that good policies designed to avert climate breakdown reflect our values and we need to educate people and bring them along to recognize how domestic food security and bioregional economic development are critical to cutting down on carbon usage. Oh yes, and peak oil is either here now or close by so we need to pro-actively get off oil.

Sounds simple.

Apparently it’s pretty hard though, but that’s just not good enough for me.

So, I’m running for one of the 6 Vice-President positions of the BC NDP to do these “simple” things and sift through whatever rationalizations have kept the party from working with integrity.

In the end, whatever explanation exists for why the party has screwed up the carbon tax, fast ferries and a myriad of other problems, none of them hold water. Why? Because they’re justifications for compromises designed for us to win the election.

We haven’t won an election this decade. So with some pretty simple hindsight, our tactics have failed and are continuing to fail.

If we keep the same tactics and expect a different result, we’re mad.

I’m not mad. And clearly, neither are the members who didn’t show up to donate time, money and their vote to getting us in power.

It’s time for the BC NDP to behave according to its principles so we can properly represent the values and interests of the majority of British Columbians who should feel eager to support us.

If they don’t it’s not their fault, it’s ours.

And I’ve had enough of that.

• No Related Posts

That day was also the strategic planning session for the Vancouver-Kensington riding association. About 2 dozen members came together to plan the riding’s goals. As we were wrapping up our day into some really focussed goals, the lightning storm started.

I took that as a good sign.

One of the final ideas we considered was how to build a social movement within the party.

While I’m more of a political economist than a political sociologist, I still have a pretty good sense of social movements. Obama, for instance, didn’t get elected all on his own. It took more than the Democratic Party to do it too. A myriad of groups [social, political, labour, etc.] coordinated with a massive campaign on the ground to mobilize people.

The BC NDP is not doing that. On Monday, I’m going to write about a few of the reasons we failed to win the election, but for today I want to explain how social movement theory should show up in our party.

Let’s take Martin Luther King, Jr. and Nelson Mandala. Both were leaders of organizations pursuing social change. Neither was the leader of a massive network or coalition of groups and individuals, but they were dominant figures. Pursuing civil rights and the end of apartheid are both social movements.

Social movements combine the efforts of individuals, activists, academics, political groups, non-governmental organizations, labour and faith groups and many more elements in society. Often they have a leading personality, but the movement itself is characterized by components acting individually, but in an intentionally or complementarily coordinated fashion.

There is usually a certain degree of drift within organizations in a social movement. While there was significant intersection in the goals of groups closely aligned to Martin Luther King, Jr. and the goals of Malcolm X, there were key difference that reflect those groups’ separation on the pendulum.

So how does this affect the BC NDP?

Right now there are thousands of groups in the province working towards social, economic, political, and environmental justice. They generally gravitate around stopping the BC Liberal party from continuing its anti-social policies.

But what is the electoral focus of such a social movement?

I know the movement against neoliberal globalization advocates against NAFTA, the WTO and similar destructive planning, but in the end, there needs to be an electoral group that could win government at some point and actually cancel NAFTA.

Similarly in BC, there needs to be an electoral wing of a progressive social movement. The BC NDP, right?

I don’t think so.

I’ve watched this party for decades now. I’ve seen little evidence that it really reaches out to the dozens or hundreds of groups in each sector of progressive action. We can easily blame that on a 20th century model of organization, when political parties were the place where people went to be politically active and there were few avenues outside parties to pursue political change.

But in the 21st century, people are doing politics all over the place.

Take the October 24, 2009 Bridge to a Cool Planet event on Cambie Bridge in Vancouver. It formed over several months from the dedication of a few core people, with a broad group contributing much more time leading up to the event. And in some ways it was like a flash mob in slow motion: a coalescence of activity culminating in a day, then dissipating. And while it’s not gone, it had an arc of existence. There may be more actions, but maybe not.

There were NDP MLAs, members, staff and volunteers at that event and a nice NDP presence. That’s nice. But has there been much evidence that the party is really embracing and engaging the thousands of groups working towards the same goals of all the NDP policies?

Not really.

There may be that kind of engagement, but why keep it secret? Why not come right out and hold wide open meetings for each progressive sector and issue an open invitation and let the groups flock to a central place for a Saturday to chat so everyone can get on the same page.

What will we find? That we’re already mostly on the same page. Comparing NDP policy passed at convention with mission statements of groups what show up to such meetings would lead to a pretty easy time building a consensus statement.

Then when it comes time for the election, the NDP is running with thousands of groups endorsing its actions and mobilizing its members to vote for the party that reflects the progressive goals.

This is what it means for the BC NDP to be the electoral wing of a progressive social movement.

And frankly, the 20th century mode of political organizing doesn’t really mix well with this focus. In the last century, there were not so many random groups with a political focus. Now, any party that ignores building networks cannot get elected.

Like the BC NDP.

And while there are lots of reasons we blew off the last election, not effectively networking with like-minded groups was a critical flaw.

And those party members who wish to keep the independence of the party by not engaging in networks and coalitions with progressive groups are dooming the party to irrelevance and mortal insularity.

There are thousands of progressive activists in BC who refuse to join this party because it is not responsive to the broader progressive social movement. The party does not play well with others, or at all in many cases. And in recent months there are many members who are leaving the party because it has shown itself incapable of such engagement.

The membership drift will continue. The party’s debt will continue to expand. The alienation and dwindling policy integrity will continue until the party implodes.

Except we have Convention 2009 next week. This is the time for the party to signal to its members, its non-member supporters, progressive activists, citizens and the range of groups comprising the progressive social movement in BC that the party is open to representing the demands of everyone working for social change.

And I’ve seen indications from caucus that our MLA critics are interested in expanding connections with groups working in each of their sectors. This is great. I hope it continues.

But what about the party? If the party itself doesn’t engage with all the thousands of allied progressive groups in BC, it will spiral into irrelevance.

We cannot let this happen.

So, I’m running for a Vice-President position on the BC NDP Provincial Executive to start this process of turning the BC NDP into the electoral wing of a progressive social movement. The movement is already there. If it can’t use the NDP to get electoral and policy change, the province will continue to suffer.

And, frankly, it’s obvious to us all that we’ve suffered enough already.

• No Related Posts

Since 8:35pm on Tuesday, May 12, 2009, I’ve been thinking hard about the state of the BC NDP.

By that time of evening on election day, it was clear that there were profound problems with the party. So I spent the following months talking to dozens of people about what is broken and how to fix it.

But these last 6 months have been just the most recent part of my adult life inspired by the NDP embracing progressive ideals of community-building and social justice.

It began in Coquitlam 20 years ago when Ian Waddell was my MP. These were years of profound social and political awakening for me as I attended NDP community meetings and saw what the pursuit of social justice meant.

So I embraced community.

I volunteered with the Red Cross running leadership, community involvement, international develop seminars. I became the president of the New Westminster branch of the Red Cross, and while I was studying organizational design at SFU, I was fortunate enough sit on the Strategic Planning committee of the BC-Yukon Division of the Red Cross.

Those volunteer experiences taught me the value of community development, education, the potential of youth, civic responsibility and commitment to healthy organizational change.

Those experiences dovetailed together to inspire me to become a high school English teacher in Coquitlam. I found helping youth communicate better meant empowering them to ask for what they want in society. Or even demand it.

Along the way I found being a BCTF activist to be a complementary activity to my teaching philosophy, supporting the union’s efforts to join the BC Federation of Labour and take a stand against Gordon Campbell.

But the combination of a few events led to a profound transformation in my vocation.

I came across Desmond Tutu’s writing about the word “ubuntu”: a person is a person through other people. It focussed my teaching even more towards social and political justice.

The MAI and WTO threats re-kindled my economics background with a rage against global neoliberalism.

Then Gordon Campbell and Christy Clark tried to destroy what it meant to be a teacher in BC.

I had enough.

So I left teaching, picked up a couple political science degrees and began a career as a CUPE researcher, now assigned to the healthcare sector at our HEU affiliate.

Along the way, the NDP has been at times both an inspiration and a frustration, falling short of my ideals at times and at other times demonstrating bold social and political leadership.

But it was when my inglorious MP David Emerson crossed the floor that I began to fully engage in party politics. I joined the riding executive in Vancouver-Kensington. I supported Don Davies’ campaign for political integrity in Vancouver-Kingsway and I wrote and talked and advocated for an end to Campbell’s new era of misery.

Following the election, Mable Elmore inspired a strategic planning session in our riding during which we started forming an idea that the NDP should build a social movement within itself that would help the party transform itself into something that can be a force for progressive change in the 21st century.

This idea led to Think Forward BC NDP and a dialogue that has spread all across British Columbia during these past months, uncovering challenges and stimulating debate about where our party needs to go.

Over the next few days I’ll be writing about all this: what’s wrong with the party, why we lost the election, how we can fix the party, what it means to be an electoral wing of a progressive social movement, what internal democracy could look like, how we can define ourselves as a party, and why we should be the natural governing party in BC.

Through these daily updates, I will explain why now, after studying our lost election and helping build Think Forward BC NDP, running for Vice-President of the party is a natural place for  me to be. I want to contribute to helping our party through a massive, and necessary, transformation. And I want to see us emerge as a vibrant force for powerful social, economic, political and economic justice.

• No Related Posts

The BC NDP needs to be the electoral wing of a progressive social movement throughout BC.

In the 21st century it’s not politicians and parties that get elected but clear values and active communities.

The BC NDP has been losing more than elections; in recent months, it has been losing core supporters in droves.

Members of the provincial NDP are justifiably alienated. They are quitting and canceling their monthly donations. They didn’t show up to help on campaigns during the election and they didn’t even show up to vote.

The party must stay true to our core values: our party policy. Trying to please everyone has failed our members.

NDP members believe in carbon taxes. We don’t believe in a new Port Mann bridge or the Gateway Project. We know environmental issues are social justice issues. Why should we assume ordinary citizens do not?

People who want to run the party need to see that how we fix the party begins by simply asking our members how to fix the party. There is a tremendous amount of passion, intelligence and wisdom in the party to involve.

We must build a social movement inside the party, empowering and including members as more than donors but the essence of our party as we build relationships and community around the province through meaningful dialogue.

We need to run the party from a place of fearlessness and democracy at every level. On November 27, the BC NDP convention is our opportunity to begin making this shift. So we have to affirm our stance and not let our critics keep us from getting the job done with integrity.

Without this culture of democracy and fearlessness we’ll never even know if we’ve ever truly lost any election.

So, I’m publicly announcing my candidacy for Vice-President of the BC NDP. In the spirit of democracy and fearlessness, I encourage other members thinking of running for the party executive to also go public with their plans so more than just convention delegates will ever find out who wants to lead the party.

We have nothing to lose.

• No Related Posts