Hey Liberals! Remember "Waiting For Martin"?

I was at a dinner party over the holidays and one of the group reminded me about the film "Waiting For Martin." That was the "Roger and Me" modelled film about a social-justice activist who wanted to talk to Liberal Prime Minister Paul Martin about the discrepancies between his lofty rhetoric and his dismal policies. I saw the movie at the late, lamented "Staircase Theatre" on Dundurn Street in Hamilton and enjoyed it immensely. It was all of a piece with the criticisms of Paul Martin from the people at Paul Martin Time which also showed that Martin was basically full of shit. ("Screw the 'Red-Book'!")

Actually, he wasn't just full of shit. He was a disaster for ordinary Canadians. He's also guilty of the crime of aiding and abetting the overthrow of a democratically-elected government in Haiti (and in helping replace it with something far, far, worse).

Listen Liberal bloggers. I think most of you are fine people. But I feel compelled to say again that you have to face facts. Actually, I think that there are two groups of you. There are the "business" Liberals who actually believe in the legacy of Paul Martin, and there are the "social" Liberals who are often disappointed with the Liberal leadership when they're in power (or, lately, grovelling in opposition to the harpercons) but for whom "politics is the art of the possible" and blah, blah, blah.

1. If you think that Paul Martin's policies of austerity, his destruction of fiscal federalism, his contribution to the financialization of the economy, the rising inequality, the greater job insecurity, the invasion of Afghanistan (and Martin, lacking Chretien's street-smarts, had thought that invading Iraq would have been a good idea!), were good for Canada, then you really need to learn some humility and start to question that neo-liberal dogma that you lapped-up.

2. If you think that the Liberals want to do good, but that there are limits to what they can do, and there are unfortunate economic realities that stand in your way (Hello Bob Rae!) then you have to ask yourself why Liberals like Paul Martin not only presided over increased poverty and job insecurity, but also over tax-cuts for the rich, deregulation of corporations, and all sorts of other benefits to the wealthy and the powerful. What I mean is, if it's really the case that they're trying to help the middle-class and the poor but fail to do so, whereas the wealthy make out like bandits, then maybe the Liberals CAN do things but they seem to focus their energies somewhere other than where you'd like them to. And they do this for systemic reasons.

Look for example at John Manley. He left politics to become the president of the Canadian Council of Chief Executives. In case you don't know, that's the reincarnation of the Business Council on National Issues, who under Tom D'Aquino, had their dirty hands all over the slurry of failed economic and social policies for over two decades. The BCNI became so ubiquitous that it changed its name to the CCCE to try to hide their tracks. What's a former Liberal (who supposedly want all Canadians to succeed, despite what their slashing education, health care, and income support programs might make you think) doing taking over as the head of this group of neo-liberal elitists? Well, Liberal political leaders ARE neo-liberal elitists. Take a look at the "business" Liberal wing and give your heads a shake.

Neo-liberalism means increasing inequality and the removal of any social responsibility from the wealthiest. Check. And global neo-liberalism requires imperialism. Have a look at the invasion of Afghanistan. At Martin, Manley, Ignatieff's enthusiasm for the invasion of Iraq. At Scott Brison's warm-heart for death-squad brutality in Colombia or the bulk of the Liberal leadership's lack of enthusiasm for their own Liberal colleague's efforts to restrain Canada's predatory mining industry.

Now, this post has taken me twenty minutes longer than I'd planned so I'm going to hurry up. I recognize that the NDP are often petty, laughable, hypocritical, and they're just as prone to betraying their supposed values as the Liberals (Hello Bob Rae!). But for you "social" Liberals, I say this: Without the NDP, you would be reduced to the same blasted "progressivism" as progressive Democrats in the USA, where a "public option" for a failed, corrupt, private health care system, is portrayed as a harbinger of Stalinism and is therefore dropped as a policy proposal. (By the way, you smug, deluded "business" Liberals might want to look at the disastrous state of the US economy and maybe rethink your stupid belief that allowing the employer class to drive down the social economy to the lowest standards possible while the government removes all the economic tools that the employee class has to resist!)

The fact of the matter is that the Liberal Party is a lie, and a stupid one at that. Conventional economic wisdom is generally a pile of crap. Conventional wisdom about social programs, unions, free trade, etc., etc., are all generally nonsense. If the Liberals and the NDP are splitting the centre-left vote, then you have to ask yourselves: If these two parties are strong rivals to each other in your neck of the woods, then ditch your "pragmatism" your "art of the possible" delusions and support the candidate who is farther left. Because it is the right-wing, including the "business" Liberals, who have brought us to this sorry state, and it is a left-wing that will promise and deliver on programs that materially benefits the majority that will save our economy, our society, and (if there's still time) our global environment.

Again, Liberal bloggers - my impression is that you're fine, honest people. And intelligent. The delusions about the Liberal Party are perpetuated by vast swaths of academia and media, both sincere and self-interested. It's a swamp and I don't credit my deliverance from it on my brain power but on a number of circumstances. Yes, the NDP is often a joke. But the central point is that they represent a farther left (and therefore, more sane) political stance than does the Liberal Party. At the very least, Liberal bloggers, stop investing time and energy advocating for the disastrous party of your dreams.

You know, the Liberal Party is advancing some EI fund for Canadians to take time off work to care for sick family members. Maybe it's a band-aid for the Liberals' under-funding of public health care or maybe it's genuinely a noble idea. But whenever the Ignatieff Liberals trot something like this out, all I can think of is Paul Martin saying "Screw the 'Red Book'!"