You know, I've really got to say something to you "progressive" Liberal supporters. We might be sliding into an election and you people, even after the pathetic failure of Obama (which is really not a failure but a successful con-job) and the plundering neoliberalism and the hugely hypocritical rhetoric of Chretien and Martin and Manley, you people still get all fired up about your stupid, contemptible party. The NDP would likely sell Canadians out too, but they start from a farther left position, which means that when they sell-out, it will end up selling out ordinary Canadian households LESS than what the neoliberal Liberals will. How can you continue to delude yourselves that voting in an anti-union, pro-war, pro-imperialist crew like Ignatieff, Rae, and company, whose economic views are probably to the right of Barack Obama's to lead Canada's government will not produce a "betrayal" of everything you say you believe in?
An aside from within an earlier post.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
12 comments:
Would you rather we split the vote and give Harper another five years?
Jack Layton is not the answer. You know he cannot form a government.
Just a point, for openers, regarding your "pro-war, pro-imperialist, anti-union" description...I think most Canadians fall into that description these days.
Many like the new more aggressive Canadian military, they like the idea of being more "Americanized", and yes, they're anti-union; all you hear them whine about, every time there is some kind of strike, is usual tea-party talking points, how their tax dollars pay their salary and they have no right to strike.
Canada has never been progressive. In fact, out of the industrial world, after the US, it is the second most conservative and heading even further to the right.
So, the choices are we allow Steve Harper to shove Canada on that final far right turn or we try to prevent it from going even further to the right than it already has.
Would you rather we split the vote and give Harper another five years?
Who is "we" and what is "the" ?
For years, federal Liberals have been telling voters west of the Lakehead to cast their ballots for third- and even fourth-place Liberal candidates, rather than for the New Democrat who actually has a chance of defeating the Conservative.
Here in Western Canada, a Liberal plea from the Glebe that "we" not split "the" progressive vote is, well, rather unpersuasive, both from the point of view of policy and of electoral calculation.
@ James. Do you think giving Harper another five years of "schoolboy" opposition isn't the same as giving him another five years in office? If the LPC can't figure out what they're doing wrong after five years in the desert that's their failure, not the voters' and not the Conservatives. I have never seen such a pathetic, hapless iteration of the Liberal Party than the very one you seem intent on perpetuating. Hell it can't get my vote and I've never voted anything but Liberal. You suck, you party sucks and your ersatz Liberal leader truly sucks. Harper has been a terrible leader, utterly awful, and the best you can do is to trail four or five points behind. That, in case you don't understand the message, is the Canadian electorate telling you "you suck" now piss off.
If Harper does achieve a majority it'll be because the Liberal Party and supporters like you made it all possible.
James,
All I'm asking is that Liberals who are genuinely "progressive" think through their devotion to a sham.
Don't get excited about a lie.
If the Liberals are ahead by a hair in your riding, vote Liberal. If the Liberals are a strong second in your riding, vote Liberal.
But don't get excited about them. Don't try to make other people think that that party is something to believe in.
The NDP used to be "Liberals in a hurry." Think about what that means and then think about the fact that now it's the Conservatives who are "Liberals in a hurry."
BlackRedVixen,
Perhaps. But part of the problem is a political culture where "liberals" or "progressives" delude themselves and others about what is possible.
Progressive Liberal bloggers (so far as I can see it) have the brains to do better, to know what this country really needs. But they waste their time and their energy attempting to make a thoroughly co-opted Liberal Party the vehicle for their aspirations.
Then, like progressive US-Democrats, they wail and gnash their teeth over the inevitable betrayals.
Thhose must be some powerful drugs James is smoking if he actually believes that an Ignatieff Liberal government woulod be significantly different than the current Harper Conservative one.
Or is it just that James is pissed at not being able to stick his snout into the public trough as generations of Liberals before him have done.
As Stepehn points out, when Glebites like James tell folk out my way not to "split the vote," they are actually working to elect Conservative MPs. But then, "strategic" voting was never about defeating Conservatives. It was always about defeating New Democrats.
Stephen and Malcolm,
Strategic voting wasn't really the point of my post, but it's true that cynical, partisan abuse of the idea of "strategic voting" (turning it into "vote for a Liberal") is a symptom of the disease.
If you're just a party hack, it makes sense. But if you're a genuine progressive, and the NDP is the strongest left-of-centre party in your riding, and you promote and vote for a Liberal, there's probably something wrong with you. (There could be particular circumstances, but still, the Liberal Party itself is nothing to get excited about.)
Thank you Thwap, you do us all a public service. I don't even read PB's anymore, because the progressive part seems to be missing.
Voices like yours sounded a little 'radical' to Liberals for a long time, but that's because you have a knack for seeing through all the rah rah B.S.
And you know what? I think it's best if there is an election to stop telling people how to vote, use this strategy blah blah....let the public do their thing, we'll have another Con minority no matter what anyway. Then the chips will fall and we can be rid of Harper, Iggy and yes Layton. Maybe when that happens progressives will stop recycling the same old rah rah B.S.
Anonymous,
Thanks. I tend to enjoy reading Progressive Bloggers. Liberal bloggers are generally smart, decent people.
But the NDP is, to me, the best of a bad lot, and when progressives actually get excited by the red wing of the LibroCon Party, it makes me weep.
I'm as cognizant of the nature of the Canadian electorate as the next person i think. It is depressingly reactionary. But I think part of the blame for that is the mental block that prevents progressives from seeing through the lies of the party of the Canadian Council of Chief Executives.
The worst thing about the "hold your nose and vote with realism" meme is that it is the most self-defeating idea out there. If progressives vote for a party that they know will betray them, and continue to do so in the face of betrayal, then they send a clear message - "I am irrelevant, don't bother to listen to anything I say, because you have my unconditional support."
Personally, yes, I'd rather see right wing parties succeed in the short term than doom my viewpoint to total irrelevance by voting against not only my own interests, but my own publically stated beliefs.
If you actually agree with the conservatives on every economic point, but don't like how religious they pretend to be, then voting liberal is a great choice. Otherwise, you are not only failing to advance your agenda today, but dooming yourself to failure tomorow as well.
This is not a case of the perfect being the enemy of the good, so much as the 'not completely bad' being the enemy of the good.
Groovy J,
Incredibly well said.
Post a Comment