The Straight Goods Report

Uniting the left is possible

But it will take imagination, courage and a rare kind of leadership

Editorial by: Straight Goods Publisher, Ish Theilheimer

  The Future of Social Democracy in Canada conference in Montreal last weekend held out a tantalizing vision of a united left. That vision will take a lot of gutsy leadership to make it a reality.
  There are innumerable strands to unify. Amazingly, most of the 200 selected conference participants found happy cohabitation within the friendly confines of McGill University's Moot Court. Could the broader movements from which they were selected live together so happily when there's real power to divy up and discussions are not moot?
  With Canada's right fragmenting and the Liberals moving more to the right every year, there would appear to be opportunity - and desperate need - for some kind of new left party. The lineup of usually-feuding interests that must find some way to live together, however, reads like the Saturday night WWF lineup. Look at some of the types who worked to find common cause at Broadbent and Morton's house party:

• For starters, who's a social democrat and who isn't? Blairite economics prof John Richards says he's a social democrat because he believes in the welfare state. He just doesn't think much of public sector unions having too much influence, he hates deficits, and he likes workfare. Contrast him with Svend Robinson, who sees The Market as a "bad dog that should be put down" and you see the size of tent needed to accommodate them all.

• Labour vs. labour. Feuding within the House of Labour has been with us since the '30s, but it has reached a fevered pitch in recent years. A dangerous mix of ideology and turf wars has created a poisoned atmosphere in labour and NDP circles. What kind of a restructured party will allow all the kids to play in the sandbox together - from those who represent well-paid autoworkers and preach revolution to those who represent grocery clerks and still support the NDP? Some kind of divine intervention may be needed to heal these wounds.

• "Trots" vs. the practical left. This is an ancient schism closely related to the foregoing feuds. Since dinosaurs roamed the earth, there's been non-stop war between NDP types and a presumed alliance of demi-Liberals and the communist left. On a cold night, just mix, apply a match and watch the fun!

• New left vs old New Left. Many people who used to consider themselves New Left are now mostly old, well-paid farts, at least in the eyes of a frustrated new generation with poorer propsects in most every way than their parents ever faced. They've found getting militant gives them the most bang for their activist buck. What has the discipline and hierarchy of party politics got to offer them?

• Labour vs greens. There's a true cultural divide here. At coalition or NDP events you see it clearly. Union activists are familiar with both workplace and union discipline - which makes them good at politicking. Their style clashses completely with the libertarian/anarchist tendencies of single-interest activists who don't belong to unions, are great at communicating, but not so practiced in solidarity as the unions. And the jobs vs. environment debate is as real as ever, maybe more so with looming environmental crisis.

• Public sector workers vs the NDP. Experience with provincial governments in BC, Saskatchewan and Ontario put a lot of public service noses out of joint in the 90s. Will a harsh dose of neo-con governments be enough to rekindle the flame?

• Bringing back the academics. Since the Waffle days of the 1970s, the university crowd has receded in prominence and influence in the NDP and on the left. Their absence - and the valuing by the NDP of strategy over ideas and of guile over activist passion - may have contributed to the decline of the left.

[ Front Page ] [ Social Democracy Site ]