definitely a good piece.

but, keep in mind that nobody voted for this. i mean, look at the 2013 convention. the chasm between mulcair and his base is enough to fly an f-35 through, and i think that as soon as he gets a platform to paper you'll start seeing caucus revolts and a mass exodus to the greens.

and, we need to have a talk on the left about this.

it seems to me that the era of mass socialization in production is over. we're in a world where those jobs are done by robots. and, we need to be looking at rebuilding the left along libertarian/anarchist lines.

corbyn strikes me as a fucking hippie. and, while it's nice to get past new labour, the left is just digging sideways if it thinks it's future is in herbal remedies to cure cancer and rallies against vaccines.

the greens have some problems, but, they're already set up. and, they're roughly sitting in the right space of co-operative friendly libertarian socialism that the left needs to build itself on. the way to get them moving in the right direction is to crash and co-opt them and steer them in it.

http://rabble.ca/blogs/bloggers/michael-laxer/2015/09/third-way-politics-suffer-massive-defeat-uk-while-canada-they-t

Alfredo Louro
Actually, the world could do with more politicians who are "fucking hippies".

deathtokoalas
yeah. great. let's all go back to the dark ages. who needs science, when you have magical thinking? after all. the best way to change the world is to change yourself!

Alfredo Louro
You'd be surprised. I have a book recommendation for you:
http://www.amazon.ca/How-Hippies-Saved-Physics-Counterculture/dp/039334231X

deathtokoalas
i want to make a far side cartoon with two bearded hippies in lab coats, standing in front of a table with flasks with coloured liquids and steam rising and whatnot, with one looking at the other and speaking:

"you know what, dexter? sometimes, i find myself wondering if everything is like strawberry fields, after all."

it's all in our minds, man. we just imagine it first, and then it appears. timothy was right.

marx was extremely dismissive about what he called "utopian socialism". now, let's not get caught up in that, sure - no need to trip over that. long time ago. but it remains true that the embrace of bullshit hippie anti-intellectualism is a one-way ticket to becoming a laughingstock - and deserving it.

Mark Ragnar
"seeing caucus revolts and a mass exodus to the greens"

Or, maybe you can hope that they will remember they are in a Westminster parliamentary democracy like the Australian Liberals did, and oust him as leader. However, if he becomes the first to lead a federal NDP government it's hard to see this or a mass exodus occurring.

deathtokoalas
well, the thing is that he's taken steps to throw a lot of people out already. the biggest victory was pushing libby davies out. in some sense, this should have already happened, but he's demonstrated a lot of control in the process...

it really depends on just how far he pushes and how fast. and, see that's the thing: where is tom mulcair on the spectrum? not his party. himself. if it's somewhere maybe just a little to the left of tony blair, and just a little to the right of brian mulroney, it's a very long ways away from a lot of his candidates. and, where is the broadbent institute in this mess? writing papers criticizing the ndp?

i guess it's release is imminent at this point; but i think this is a document that a lot of people are going to find upsetting, and that those people are going to have limited options fighting from within the party. it's not exactly the policy shifts that are going to push people out. it's the disinterest in discussing it.

Arachne646
Libby was my (utterly respected) MP and until I realized how much Mulcair had changed the platform of the Party, I thought she had retired just because of personal reasons, age and so forth. But now I really think that because she either doesn't want to work in a Party under discipline like that, or because she has a conscience, and won't shut up and be under a Party whip, she was forced to retire.

She was not paid off by the Israel lobby, and was, like Elizabeth May, one of the few MP's who spoke up against the massacre in summer 2014 by Israel in Gaza. She was a strong voice for Palestinians in Parliament.

I'll probably be voting Green in Vancouver East. The NDP platform nor the candidate in this riding doth appeal much, and there isn't a safer riding for them, but I think I'll send them a message.

deathtokoalas
it's well understood that she was forced out over comments she made about israel; the conservatives reacted, as one would expect them to, but the difference is that mulcair didn't just agree with them, but went out of his way to demonstrate it.

i tend to avoid falling into the "zionists control the world" narrative, but mulcair does seem to be unwaveringly pro-israel, which is a big difference and something i don't like, either. it's not yet clear to me exactly *why*. i'm getting the impression that a lot of it is a misreading of the public; he seems to see criticism of israel as an electoral liability, and is stamping it out for the simple reason that it makes the party look more electable. i'm not sure that's correct, to begin with. and, history isn't going to be kind to it, either. i mean, there were similar attempts to silence people in the democratic party in the united states about apartheid, and they're roundly condemned nowadays. it's worth pointing out that canada, under trudeau, played an ambiguous role; we seem to have provided more than moral support for the cuban forces in africa. but, whatever the accuracy of it, this calculus seems to be a big driver.

rumour has it that mulcair's riding also has a large jewish minority in it, but it seems to me that it's jumping through some logical hoops to deduce that this minority is supportive of likud.

a third possibility is that it's an attempt to lock into american policy, which is not zionist in the zionist sense - it's a geo-political thing, to ensure a military presence in the oil producing regions. the logic is that coming out as critical of israel would possibly alienate the pentagon and the white house, which is maybe a more important consideration in determining the outcome of the election than any of us really realize.

whatever it is, it's a real and substantial thing. the ndp have pushed out several candidates over this, and it's not likely to reverse course on it.

the reality is that there's not much canada could do anyways - actively or passively. the best hope is in electing a prime minister that is close enough to the president that he can maybe change his or her policies. but, it's pretty clear we're not going to get that from mulcair or the ndp - we're going to get an authoritarian enforcement of the status quo.