Admiral Beez
Superstar
Stay away from what is perceived as woke, alphabet-issues and virtual signaling. Return the NDP to its roots as a workers party. That is where the future lays.
Last edited:
|
|
|
- Thread starter Richard White
- Start date
Richard White
Senior Member
As a longtime NDP Member I agree.
I joined the party in 2005 when I turned 18 and it was very much a party for the working class person but now it is a party for every activist and cause out there. I liked the fact that the party stood up for me, yes it was socalist but at least it fought for the average person.
Now, I do not know what the NDP stands for other than to complain about everything.
Jack did it right, he fought for the average person but also causes that everyone cared about like the environment. When Mulcair came in, the party drifted towards the centre and lost its heart unfortunately which is why I left.
I recall many arguments I had when I was on the Scarborough Southwest Executive about the direction of the party and its policy.
I get it.. alphabet issues and equality are important but that is not what the party is about.
picard102
Senior Member
Jack was a big supporter of alphabet issues, so not sure how you think he was different.
Unions stood with LGBTQ+ activists and helped the movement, CUPE pushed for same sex partner benefits in the 90's.
It's disingenuous to try and separate the NDP from activists. Human rights, are workers rights.
An NDP that tries to distance itself from activists will lose it's core.
Richard White
Senior Member
You are correct, my apologies as I forgot about how they were a proponent of Same Sex marriages.
I guess my concern is that the NDP has gone too far to the activist side and less on the policy side. Think of it like Greenpeace vs the Green Party. One rams ships to bring change, the other brings change in an open and democratic forum.
Years ago, the NDP moved from meaningful policy and being the party who fought for change to the party that protests everything and has regular "days of action". They need to be more like the party Tommy Douglas founded that fights for things like Universal Healthcare, not the party that protests everything they don't agree with.
The NDP needs to focus on meaningful change in the house, not act as a soapbox for every person with a cause.
Mihairokov
Active Member
What do you consider as woke?
picard102
Senior Member
Have they not done so with dental and pharmacare?
Unions are a protest against capitalism. Every strike is a protest.
Admiral Beez
Superstar
This, for starters.
The NDP leadership is underway — and the party is limiting signatures from 'cis' men
The party did not immediately respond when asked how officials would reasonably verify if members identified as cisgender men.
nationalpost.com
Why not allow anyone, and everyone who is a member sign and and support their leadership choice? It's a dumb move that will continue to push the NDP into the wilderness.
Last edited:
Mihairokov
Active Member
It might shock you to know that the National Post isn't being entirely correct here. There's no limiting - the party is requiring leadership candidates get certain percentages from certain groups:
a. a minimum of fifty (50) signatures must be from members in each of the following five (5) regions: Atlantic, Quebec, Ontario, British Columbia/North, and the Prairies;
b. at least fifty percent (50%) of the total required signatures must be from members who do not identify as a cis man;
c. a minimum of one hundred (100) signatures must be from members of equity-seeking groups, including but not limited to racialized members, Indigenous members, members of the LGBTQIA2S+ community, and persons living with disabilities.
d. At least ten percent (10%) of the total required signatures must come from young New Democrats at the time of signature collection.
PDF: https://www.ndp.ca/sites/default/files/2026-leadershipgoverningrules.pdf
I suppose we can argue over the usefulness of identity politics if we framed it that way but speaking from experience political parties are overwhelmingly dominated by cis men and I don't blame the NDP from wanting to attract support from under-represented groups. I imagine the NDP is the one party where the breakdown would actually lean closer to women more than men, but I can't imagine it nears 50%.
a. a minimum of fifty (50) signatures must be from members in each of the following five (5) regions: Atlantic, Quebec, Ontario, British Columbia/North, and the Prairies;
b. at least fifty percent (50%) of the total required signatures must be from members who do not identify as a cis man;
c. a minimum of one hundred (100) signatures must be from members of equity-seeking groups, including but not limited to racialized members, Indigenous members, members of the LGBTQIA2S+ community, and persons living with disabilities.
d. At least ten percent (10%) of the total required signatures must come from young New Democrats at the time of signature collection.
PDF: https://www.ndp.ca/sites/default/files/2026-leadershipgoverningrules.pdf
I suppose we can argue over the usefulness of identity politics if we framed it that way but speaking from experience political parties are overwhelmingly dominated by cis men and I don't blame the NDP from wanting to attract support from under-represented groups. I imagine the NDP is the one party where the breakdown would actually lean closer to women more than men, but I can't imagine it nears 50%.
picard102
Senior Member
It's so woke to require signatures from across Canada. Why not let only Ontario decide who should run, and stop with these silly ideas that the rest of Canada matters. It's a dumb move that will continue to push the NDP into the wilderness.
UtakataNoAnnex
Senior Member
Putting aside the fact that worker's rights and such is woke...perhaps the NDP should be distancing themselves from those who consider this a bad thing. Non?
Admiral Beez
Superstar
The NDP can appeal to all Canadians regardless of identity politics. Throw that away. The federal Liberals are about to gut the public services that many Canadians rely upon, have no housing strategy and are about to embark on the nation’s largest military expansion since the height of the Cold War. Providing contrary options to such ideas is historically where the NDP has risen in public support. Instead of worrying about the genitalia, gender expression, sexual orientation or race of party members, focus on issues worrying many Canadians of all stripes, in a country where both the CPC and now LPC are right-leaning. This should be the beginning of a golden age for the NDP.
Look at NDP leader Alexa McDonough (1995–2003), who took over after the disastrous 1993 election, when the NDP was reduced to just 9 seats (Singh took them down to 7 seats). McDonough rebuilt the NDP through strong positions defending Medicare during the era of Liberal austerity and healthcare cuts, and her anti-privatization stance, where McDonough opposed Liberal moves toward privatization and deregulation, appealing to voters uneasy with neoliberal trends. And then there's Jack Layton, the NDP's most successful leader, who, like McDonough, defended public Medicare against creeping privatization, but also was ahead of the curve in pushing for green energy and climate action, resonating with younger and urban voters. Doesn't all that sound familiar to the public sentiment of today, presenting a potential path for the new NDP leader to save the party?
Last edited:
UtakataNoAnnex
Senior Member
^...tl,dr, let's throw certain groups and issues under the bus as a sacrifice for better polling numbers.
Personally, I would never support party that does bigotry "light" and thinks they can get away with it....as current affairs is demonstrating that they start to become indistinguishable from the fascists running the show (see: Starmer, Newsom, et al). Because Third Way politicking always wants it's cake and to eat too...that is, it wants to sit at the table and dine with deplorables to negotiate the "middle ground". And is most certainly not a party or person that is fit to govern anyone or anything, IMO.
Personally, I would never support party that does bigotry "light" and thinks they can get away with it....as current affairs is demonstrating that they start to become indistinguishable from the fascists running the show (see: Starmer, Newsom, et al). Because Third Way politicking always wants it's cake and to eat too...that is, it wants to sit at the table and dine with deplorables to negotiate the "middle ground". And is most certainly not a party or person that is fit to govern anyone or anything, IMO.
Admiral Beez
Superstar
By appealing to everyone, you by default can appeal to all groups. No one is sacrificed by casting a wide net.
Rejecting the deplorables, most of whom were once reliable Democrat voters, cost HRC the election and gave us Trump. All successful politicians end up governing from the centre. But that aside, what do you want the NDP's role to be, and do you seem them growing their appeal or narrowing their focus to remain a narrow niche player?
Last edited:
picard102
Senior Member
The phrase is actually "appealing to everyone is appealing to no one".
UtakataNoAnnex
Senior Member
That's not what you where saying though....
That's not how that went about. And you have no evidence to support your assertions otherwise here.
...but it does have me thinking that someone like Zohran must drive you bonkers.