Showing posts with label Olivia Chow. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Olivia Chow. Show all posts

Saturday, September 5, 2015

Playing the progressive card -- Trudeau's cynical, but clever, "left shift"


Stephen Harper has no plan to grow our economy and no plan to help the middle class, so he's spending your money trying to convince you that I'm not ready. 

Here's what I'm not ready for. 
I’m not ready to stand by as our economy slides into recession. Not ready to watch hard-working Canadians lose their jobs and fall further behind. And I’m certainly not ready to stand by while this government continues to ignore hard-working Canadians, when it should be offering a plan for economic growth. 
I am ready to do what our opponents won’t: Ask the wealthiest 1% of Canadians to pay more tax so our middle class can pay less. And while they propose massive cuts and austerity, I’ll lead our country with a historic investment plan to strengthen the middle class, create jobs and grow our economy.

By now we have all likely heard one variation or another of this pitch being made by federal Liberal leader Justin Trudeau -- a pitch that very directly seeks to outflank NDP leader Tom Mulcair from the "left" in progressive terms. This one was taken directly from a Liberal campaign email.

While Mulcair has made a fundamentally misguided, and likely untenable, balanced budget pledge, Trudeau has invoked the language and rhetoric of Occupy ("the 1%", "tax the rich") and sought to inspire with a plan that is interventionist and aims to create jobs and growth via stimulus -- something I suspect is far more appealing to many progressive voters than is Mulcair's rhetoric of austerity.

It will be made all the easier for Trudeau to portray himself as the "true progressive" now that Mulcair, grotesquely, has chosen to frame deficit stimulus spending as "immoral" -- even though both of the existing NDP provincial governments either have run deficits to maintain services, are running deficits, or in Alberta's case plan to do so also to stimulate the economy.

In Alberta Finance Minister Joe Ceci has announced an upcoming deficit stimulus plan very similar to the one proposed by Trudeau and using very similar fiscal and economic logic -- and this despite the fact that Alberta is starting from an already existing deficit:
Despite a deficit that will be the largest in two decades, and that the government has warned could grow to $6.5-billion, Finance Minister Joe Ceci says the province could borrow more to speed an economic recovery and create jobs. 
“Do we have the money? Yes. I think we would have the capacity to borrow some more for investments in infrastructure,” Mr. Ceci told The Globe and Mail on Friday. “We’re forecasting GDP to be on the growth side in 2016, so an investment in transit and other infrastructure would come at the time when it would bolster a brightening GDP. 

In fact, while there is a long way to go, there are some initial indications that Trudeau's pitch is working among the swing voters who actually matter -- progressive voters outside of Quebec (the NDP appears, for now, to be virtually certain to sweep Quebec again).

As the pollster EKOS put it:
Justin Trudeau has helped himself with his proposed deficit-funded infrastructure spending program. Thomas Mulcair, meanwhile, seems to be hurting himself with his promise of a balanced budget, suggesting that Canadians are leery of focusing on fiscal rectitude – rather than kick-starting the economy – when middle class workers have not seen a real wage increase in years. Furthermore, concerns with fiscal discipline are largely concentrated in the Conservative camp, which is largely unavailable to the NDP. At best, Mr. Mulcair may be making himself mildly less objectionable to those who won’t vote for him and ignoring the preferences of his available constituency. While we understand the importance of signalling fiscal prudence, the NDP may want to consider the potential fall-out more carefully.

The key point here being "concerns with fiscal discipline are largely concentrated in the Conservative camp, which is largely unavailable to the NDP" -- a point that NDP strategists of late simply do not seem to understand.

As Fraser Needham pointed out in a piece about the NDP's bizarre decision to campaign from the right, the party seems to be trying to mimic, in the critical NDP-Liberal battleground of Ontario, the tone of the disastrous ONDP campaign of 2014 that sought to appeal to a largely mythical "Rob Ford" swing voter and that resulted in helping to get the Kathleen Wynne Liberals reelected with a majority government in what unfolded as a strategic vote against the Hudak Conservatives.

That ONDP campaign failed for a reason. It alienated progressive voters by sounding very "populist" and right wing, while, in fact, not appealing to right-wingers who in Ontario (and elsewhere) are simply never going to vote NDP in anything close to meaningful numbers. The "Rob Ford" voter is largely fictional as his constituency was a mixture of actual conservatives and reactionaries and the disaffected who turned to or supported him not at all for his "policies" -- such as they were -- but for his grandiose personality and rhetoric. 

In fact Ford's polices were largely irrelevant to this second group of voters and as a result their voting decisions and directions outside of municipal politics were going to be all over the map. This can be demonstrated by the results in the various heartlands of "Ford Nation". All of Etobicoke, York and Scarborough were swept by the Liberals in the provincial election, and swept despite the very vocal calls by the Ford brothers at the time to toss the Liberals out of office!

Wynne, though she has predictably governed more to the right, campaigned from the left and directly and successfully sought to appeal to NDP-Liberal swing voters (the only swing voters who actually matter to the NDP in vote rich Ontario) while the ONDP tried to appeal to a group of "swing voters" that simply did not exist -- and did so in very reactionary terms.

Trudeau is doing what Wynne did while Mulcair echoes ONDP leader Andrea Horwath. Trudeau is clearly targeting the soft progressive vote that the NDP is either taking for granted or do not think they need.

Is this cynical on Trudeau's part? When he brings out austerity hatchet man Paul Martin, who launched the austerity era in Canadian federal politics, and when he praises Martin's disastrous and reactionary deep cuts to transfer payments in the 90's (while saying that he would not do anything similar) it certainly seems cynical.

But it is also clever. With Mulcair almost inexplicably -- given that it was his principled stance on Bill C-51 that shifted him from third to first place in national polls while Trudeau's pandering stance cost him dearly -- adopting a very cautious and even rhetorically reactionary approach, this was the hand that Trudeau had left to play. The Liberals exist to win, and if portraying Mulcair as a right wing austerity wolf in progressive sheep's clothing is the way to win, that is what they will do.

Trudeau can only take this approach and make this appeal to progressive swing voters, though, as it is at least in part true.

Mulcair and his strategists, and they alone, have made this possible and allowed him to be able to do this by taking a series of positions and adopting a tone that are both right-wing and wrong-headed and that will be perceived as such by the very voters that Mulcair needs and that were swinging his way.

There is still plenty of time for Mulcair and the NDP to avoid the trap they so clearly seem to be walking into. The soft progressive constituency that is willing to go either NDP or Liberal to both stop Harper and get what they hope will be progressive governance is still very much up for grabs.

But if the NDP continues down this track federally, there is a very real probability that the result in Ontario will be what came of the strikingly similar campaign strategies of Andrea Horwath and Olivia Chow that sought bizarrely to appeal to right-wing voters and that both failed miserably.

And without winning in most of the key ridings in Ontario no progressive party, Liberal or New Democrat, stands any chance of becoming government.

Mulcair and his strategists seem to need to be reminded of this.

See also: The follies of the NDP running a right wing populist campaign

See also: Game Over -- Turns out Mulcair is simply wrong about even today's NDP and deficits

Saturday, August 1, 2015

July: Xenophobes, Olivia Chow, Eve Adams, Naheed Nenshi & more -- The month on The Left Chapter in review

July had, with vacations and so on, the least number of posts  for any month so far on The Left Chapter with 25 posts of various types. Despite this, however, it was our strongest month for views.

This month, as did June, had another record setter -- the post on the BC NDP's foreign worker meme had more hits than any other post in The Left Chapter's history and has remanded in the "Popular Posts" column everyday since it was posted on the 12th.


Here, in order, are the top five posts on The Left Chapter for the month of July:


1) BC NDP posts a meme about "foreign" workers -- Xenophobes show up in approval

There is a wing of the left -- and especially within the mainstream "social democratic" party, the NDP -- that thinks that the path to power is in part paved by pandering to what are traditionally right-wing populist narratives.

Read More!

2) Tom Mulcair holds a press conference...and, presto, Olivia Chow is the "official" NDP candidate

So a funny thing happened on the march to the New Jerusalem today.

Tom Mulcair and Olivia Chow held a news conference announcing that Chow was going to be the NDP candidate federally in the new riding of Spadina-Fort York and, guess what, she was, then, the candidate!

Read More!

3) Eve Adams shows that the Trudeau jig is up

One almost has to feel sorry for Eve Adams at the moment of her humiliating and ignominious defeat in her quest for the Liberal nomination in Eglinton-Lawrence -- a defeat that both shows the new weakness of the slowly tanking Liberal leader Trudeau and that would have been unthinkable a few short months ago.

Read More!

4) On Naheed Nenshi and the Importance of Revitalizing Candid Inquiry on the Left

By Carol-Anne Hudson

On 25 October 2010 Naheed Nenshi was elected Mayor of Calgary. His come-from-behind electoral win was, largely, the result of a populist rejection of the front runner and long-time city councillor Ric McIver who was thought to be out-of-touch with the city’s changing demographic landscape and considered by many as an abrasive, torpid, schismatic, and immovable extreme right-wing conservative. Aware of rising ‘Anyone But McInver’ sentiments, especially among young voters, Nenshi shrewdly crafted a public image of himself as an approachable, energetic, cosmopolitan, progressive social unifier and urban modernizer -- a ‘hero of the common people’ -- the antithesis of McIver.

Read More!

5) A brief note on cynicism and Canadian politics

The other day I received an email from Tom Mulcair, leader of the federal NDP.

Now, of course, it was not actually an email from him, but was, rather, one of those countless emails the NDP sends out weekly (and even daily) to those who are on its email contact list.

Read More! 

The number one food post for the month of July was the nostalgic look back at Mme. Benoit looking back nostalgically -- Trout in Corn Husks, Pickled Mushrooms & other 19th Century Recipes from Madame Benoit

Do you have a left point-of-view or opinion, a recipe or a story you want to share?

Send them to The Left Chapter via theleftchapter@outlook.com!

Check out our review for the month of June!: June: Leadnow, Anti-Choice Extremists, the Greens and more -- The month on The Left Chapter in review

Tuesday, July 28, 2015

Tom Mulcair holds a press conference...and, presto, Olivia Chow is the "official" NDP candidate

So a funny thing happened on the march to the New Jerusalem today.

Tom Mulcair and Olivia Chow held a news conference announcing that Chow was going to be the NDP candidate federally in the new riding of Spadina-Fort York and, guess what, she was, then, the candidate!

That is right, Olivia Chow is now -- without any pretense at a democratic nomination process -- the official candidate for the party in the riding.

We know this as she is already listed as such on the party website:


On CBC Radio this was being described as an "official acclimation". 

What it is is an appointment. 

The NDP and its partisans have long prided themselves on their allegedly open and fair nomination process.

This has been, for many years, actually a total joke. The party regularly disallows potential candidates in advance of them even running for a nomination, terminates candidacies like it did with the democratically nominated leader of the Socialist Caucus Barry Weisleder, and then spies on candidates to ensure compliance with party line as they did with the fake Facebook persona Fred Checkers! 

But they at least usually went through the pretense of a nomination meeting.

Not this time.

Likely they want to get on with it quickly. 

Perhaps they saw Trudeau's humiliation a few short days ago with Eve Adams and wanted to make absolutely sure --  though it is very hard to see who could have possibly defeated Chow even in a totally democratic nomination fight.

But now, no worries. There will not be one.

Whether Chow is the best candidate to take on Vaughan or not is not the point -- we can now "officially" put to rest the notion that the NDP always honours the democratic will of the membership and does not appoint candidates. 

Because that is clearly not the case.

Update: After the publication of this piece, on the afternoon of July 30, 2015, the Spadina-Fort York NDP announced a nomination meeting for the riding. The details can be found on their Facebook page. Olivia Chow, of course, remains listed, already, as the official candidate on the party website as stated above! 

Sunday, March 15, 2015

42-2: John Tory, Toronto City Council and the austerity consensus

Remember how, during last year's municipal election in Toronto, supporters of Olivia Chow and progressive activists and organizations warned that John Tory, were he to be elected as Mayor of Toronto, would simply be a more effective version of Rob Ford?

How we were told his agenda would represent the Ford agenda without the antics, drugs and buffoonery?

This position was expressed in many forums, from articles, to blogs, to countless online comments. A good example of it can be found in a newsletter article put out by the Toronto and York District Labour Council entitled  WHAT’S AT STAKE IN OCTOBER 2014. In it they stated:

The challenge this fall is to make sure people identify this election as a referendum on the austerity agenda. The fact is there are two Conservative candidates [Tory and Ford] whose politics line up with Stephen Harper and Tim Hudak. On the other side is the progressive choice of Olivia Chow

After pointing out that much of what prevented Ford from getting his agenda implemented was his inability to work with other members of council, they went on to say:

John Tory, on the other hand, would be able to cobble together the votes to pursue an agenda favoured by Bay Street – including privatization and outsourcing. His endorsers include antilabour heavyweights such as Case Ootes, Ford’s former campaign manager Nick Kouvalis, and a smattering of Liberals among a solid core of Conservatives. If Tory were elected, it would boost the political fortunes of both the provincial and federal Conservatives, and be a real step backward for the people of Toronto.
I think there is a lot of truth to this position (although many of Chow's online partisans frequently would predictably overstate their case) and said as much when interviewed by the Toronto Star during the election in an article in which I said people should reject strategic voting (though not necessarily support Chow).

There is, without any doubt an austerity agenda at work at Toronto City Hall, and Tory's politics embody that agenda.

And yet, when Tory's first budget recently was presented to council, it was passed by a vote of 42-2.

The two dissenting votes on the budget on council were from Rob Ford and Giorgio Mammoliti, who are firmly on the council's far right. The other 42 votes were "cobbled" together, in the end rather easily, from across the alleged political "spectrum", encompassing those seen as on the right like Denzil Minnan-Wong, and those perceived as on the left like Mike Layton.

Every single Councillor endorsed by the very same Labour Council whose newsletter was quoted above, voted for Tory's budget.

Every single Councillor associated with the Liberals or NDP (technically there are no parties in Toronto politics) voted for Tory's budget.

All the electoral rhetoric aside about how catastrophic Tory's agenda would be for the city, its labour movement, workers, those living in poverty and so many others, Tory's budget faced no serious opposition from the left or from "progressive" Councillors.

While the budget (this time) is not as terrible as some might have anticipated, it remains a budget firmly rooted in austerity and right-wing premises. For example, it contains an annual property tax increase on the average Toronto home of only $83,  a figure that is lower than the recent $93 annual TTC Metropass fare increase for transit users, which is a truly telling and shocking fact.

While some Councillors did call for higher tax hikes in the lead up to the budget, opposition to the fundamental premises of Tory's budget would be most kindly described as muted at best and perhaps more accurately described as basically non-existent.

There were no calls to scrap the fundamentals of the austerity, anti-tax, pro-car framework that this budget exists in. No calls for anything like, for example, ending user fees for city programs, for placing surtaxes on the homes of the wealthy or for the implementation of a truly progressive municipal income tax or for any number of other more transformative ideas that leftists once advocated for.

In other words, there was no significant and vocal opposition from what the public would see as a left perspective.

Ralph Miliband, the great British Marxist thinker, once wrote, in a quote I frequently cite, that "one of the most important aspects of the political life of advanced capitalism is precisely that the disagreements between those political leaders who have generally been able to gain high office have very seldom been of the fundamental kind these leaders and other people so often suggest".

This is more true now than when he wrote it in 1973.

This fetishistic desire in Toronto politics (as well as, in different ways, more broadly in Canadian politics) for "consensus" and the idealization of the false god ideal that politicians should somehow "work together" to get "things done"  both ensures that the administration of bourgeois, day-to-day austerity politics will continue as a given and is ultimately self-defeating for the left and progressives especially.

A lack of vocal and consistent opposition to Tory from the start of his term has already begun to cede the ground, again, to Ford positioning himself as the lone voice against the political establishment and as, therefore, the populist representative of the "common people". He was seen as such by many whose class and economic interests he actually actively worked against.

By embracing both the framework and, as I have argued in the past, the language and logic of the austerity consensus, "mainstream" left politicians help to enable this. They are widely perceived, and not without justification, as a part of a political establishment that many people feel is very distant from and unconcerned with their day-to-day struggles and realities. This situation explains why, again as Miliband put it, "large numbers of people among the public at large, despite the political rhetoric to which they are subjected, recognize...‘politicians are all the same’".

This reality of often active collaboration between the mainstream left and the right in the administration of austerity, neo-liberal and bourgeois government, as well as the acceptance of all of the essential elements of capitalism and capitalist "parliamentarianism" as a given and fundamentally unalterable reality, highlights, more than ever, the need to build new and truly anti-capitalist left political forces and parties.

These could include, for example, a Left Front municipally in Toronto, and would, as other movements and parties are doing in Europe and elsewhere, reject the austerity consensus and neo-liberal politics entirely and work actively and vocally in opposition to them both during elections and if elected.