Will It Be Vision Or Political Expedience?

In yesterday's post, I wondered whether Jagmeet Singh and the NDP will embrace a form of radical progressivism as it prepares for the 2019 federal election or instead hew to more mainstream policies that they think will make them more electable. In today's Star, two letter-writers offer some important perspective.

Rose DeShaw, of Kingston, Ont., reminds us of a time when the thirst for power was secondary to New Democrats' agenda:

American politics has changed Canadian politics. What we need is not a populist wave or to win big but to build a solid, basic set of public values that express a new and deep intention to reverse the trend of inequality in society by establishing policies of support for all women, men and children in their lives.

The important thing for the NDP is to once again become the conscience of the Canadian government. The old CCF/NDP was concerned with pressing government to improve the lives of Canadians, not by winning elections but by changing the policies of the larger parties to bring in the baby bonus, a national health act, pensions and social insurance, to name a few.

Ken Sisler, of Newmarket, Ont. reminds us of the the failure of our governments thus far, and the vital need for progressive politics:

Yes, it is time for a Bernie-Sanders-style, left-wing populist movement in Canada. The system has failed poor people and working-class people. We need universal pharmacare, dental care, child care, vision care and a $15 national minimum wage. These are not radical ideas. Many countries already have these programs.

We await with bated breath to see what road leader Jagmeet Singh chooses.

A Leap Of Faith?

Thus far, I have been singularly underwhelmed by the performance of federal NDP leader Jagmeet Singh. First, although a well-established Ontario MPP and deputy leader of the provincial party, he showed an unseemly timidity in refusing to seek a federal byelection seat when he had the opportunity. That decision has obviously kept him out of the House, ensuring that he is a largely unknown commodity to both the country and, to an extent, his own caucus.

I also take exception to the way he cheapened his engagement to Gurkiran Kaur by inviting a photographer from The Canadian Press and a reporter from Toronto Life to document his proposal.

Finally, there was his rush to judgement in suspending NDP MP Erin Weir from the caucus without even knowing anything about the harassment allegations against him. I guess he wanted to show he is no slouch in the #MeToo movement.

But I am willing to cut Singh some slack if he proves not to be just an opportunistic politician angling to become Justin Trudeau 2.0 The definitive test will be how he reacts to a movement that has gathered impressive momentum in both the U.S. and Great Britain: radical progressivism.

Susan Delacourt writes :

For the past two years, the Leap Manifesto has been a disruptive force within New Democratic Party politics. Now, on the eve of the federal NDP convention this month, top organizers for U.S. Democratic Sen. Bernie Sanders and British Labour Leader Jeremy Corbyn are coming to town to lend the Leap movement support.

That leftist movement — led by prominent Canadian activists Naomi Klein and Avi Lewis — will stir things up whether the current NDP leader, Jagmeet Singh, likes it or not.

Supporters of Bernie Saunders in the U.S. and Jeremy Corby in the U.K, along with those from the Momentum U.K. movement believe they have common cause with The Leap Manifesto, in which Naomi Klein and Avi Lewis played pivotal roles.

The Leap Manifesto is a declaration, fewer than 1,500 words in total, calling for some sweeping policies to deal with global problems such as climate change, and income inequality. Among the recommendations are an end to all pipelines and international trade deals, as well as calls for national child care program and studies into a basic, guaranteed income.

Given the popularity of Saunders and Corbyn in their respective countries, the disastrous election of Donald Trump, and the disappointing refusal of Justin Trudeau to keep his promises, organizers are convinced the time is propitious to harness a populist left agenda. Says Sanders adviser Becky Bond:

“It really wasn’t about Bernie,” she says. “It really was about a movement of people that are really ready for big change and being able to tap into all of those people and work together to make the change, whether the politicians have it on the agenda or not.”

The ideas linking Leap, Momentum and the Sanders campaign are large ones: fighting climate change, the power of banks and corporations and income inequality.

“When I was handed the Leap Manifesto I saw that this was also happening in Canada . . . a movement of people organizing themselves, not behind a politician, but behind a set of ideas that we could fight for,” said Bond.

Such radical ideas have not found a happy home within the NDP power structure. The question we are therefore left to ponder is this: Will Jagmeet Singh rise to the occasion as the new leader and embrace this momentum, or will he, like Justin Trudeau 1.0, prove to be yet another politician bent only on securing and maintaining power?

A Reason To Hope?

Canadians want a vision for the future. Canadians know we're not going in the right direction. A lot of Canadians are dismayed at the calamity that has befallen our democracy and the mean-spirited authoritarianism and the divide and conquer politics that have become the benchmark of our federal government.

Give them hope and you will reconnect with those disaffected, disengaged voters. Give them something to believe in, something to aspire to and you won't have to wait until Harper loses an election, you can actually win one on your merits. - The Disaffected Lib

The above is an excerpt from a post The Mound of Sound wrote last evening, a post that calls for re-engagement in and revitalization of our democracy. I offered the following comment on his site:

Your incisive comments are much appreciated, Mound. The question, however, seems to be how we motivate people to start caring about the dangerous departure from traditional values that has taken place in Canada, a departure that started well before the ascension of the Harper regime which, in my view, has only perfected the art of alienating the electorate from the political process.

All of the possible solutions to our dilemma seem to be rooted in having a party that truly cares about democracy in this country and is willing to work assiduously to reengage the public in the process, something I'm not sure the other two major parties really want beyond serving their political goal of wresting power from the Conservatives. I am frankly very dubious of Justin Trudeau who, as far as I can see, differs from Harper only in style, not in substance. If you examine the language of the NDP, they seem, if anything, to be vying for the centrist position on the spectrum, a position once occupied by the Liberals, with nary a word for 'the working class,' which has been largely supplanted by the phrase 'working families,' almost as if the former phrase is an embarrassing reminder of their provenance.

I have said several times on my own blog that Harper is quite happy to push the politics of disaffection and disillusionment to discourage people from participating in the political process, including elections, thereby leaving the field open for the 'true believers' who prevailed in the 2011 election.

People, I think, are hungry for genuine change. I just don't see that it is forthcoming from the other two major parties.

However, perhaps I have been looking at the issue too narrowly, placing too much responsibility on the other two major parties to lead the revitalization charge.

In a very interesting piece today, The Globe and Mail's Lawrence Martin discusses a new initiative by the Broadbent Institute that very well may help in the process. Taking its inspiration from the Manning Centre's success in cultivating the right,

The Broadbent Institute, viewed to date as a New Democratic front, is switching focus to the broader progressive cause, working not from a party point of view, but a policy and organizational one. As an example, in a few weeks, it will begin running training seminars across the country for political activists. They will pay a nominal fee for the type of instruction that young righties have been getting for years.

The problem, Martin observes, is that there is no unified left or, as I prefer, progressive movement. While entities deemed progressive abound in political, labour, environmental and economic spheres, the lack of a common cause or purpose has hampered any real coordination of effort. Nonetheless, these new efforts may ultimately bear fruit. For example, next week the Insitute is

... bringing to Ottawa the head honchos from the mother ship of U.S. progressive institutes, the Center for American Progress. With its $35-million budget, CAP is a huge support system for Democratic policies and political activity.

One awaits the outcome of this new direction with both hope and anticipation.