Technocratic Party Of Canada.

[ArseCynic]

I am going to be of voting age by next election.
My real values are that of a Resource-Based Economy.
My views are very similar to The Venus Project.
I do not advocate a meritocracy, but I obviously believe it is much better than anything we've got now.

It's obvious that our "democracy" isn't working and voting won't really change anything, I understand this, and I support Revolution, but I do not want to waste any votes which could be used to make a point atleast.

The NDP is obviously too social democrat and has been waffled(how is that even possible? It was already a pile of waffles) and is collapsing.

the Green Party is leaning way too close to the Libertarians and is too disorganized and bourgeois.

I'm not a ML so the two "Communist" parties are off the list.

So far I've only been able to find one party whose policies even remotely reflact my own. Canada's Meritocrat party: The Technocratic Party Of Canada.

while they are meritocratic and will still have a market in their society, based on what I've read on their page I have found them to be the most rational and thus radical party yet.

The party has like less than 5 people in it so obviously it isn't really something I'd vote for to have them win, but I support their policies and that is more important to me than anything else.

I encourage you all to look through their platform, and tell me what you think of it.

http://technocraticparty.ca/issue-by-issue/

Also, I'm not interested in going through the whole explanation of the venus project and debating about it right now.

[Sea]

what I've read on their page
I hope you never happen to read the website of the Canadian Conservative Party, or the website of the North Korean government, or of the British National Party for that matter.

Hate to sound like a cynical arse, but the talking points on the values page are very vague, as well as their intentions (other than to "do good"). The party's theoretical performance in power is hence vague as well.

The blog seems quite boilerplate center-left, too.

[Q]

The blog seems quite boilerplate center-left, too.

This. I don't see anything "technocratic" about them to be honest.

[honest john's firing squad]

voting isn't even mandatory in canada like it is here in australia, so why do you even bother with it?

[shaneo]

I am going to be of voting age by next election.
My real values are that of a Resource-Based Economy.
My views are very similar to The Venus Project.
I do not advocate a meritocracy, but I obviously believe it is much better than anything we've got now.

It's obvious that our "democracy" isn't working and voting won't really change anything, I understand this, and I support Revolution, but I do not want to waste any votes which could be used to make a point atleast.

Unfortunately, the only point you will make by voting is that you support the sham voting system.

It's not a waste to exercise your rights by not supporting bourgeois elections.
If you encourage one of capitalisms tools of control, by taking part, then you give capitalism a mandate. Surely it also removes your right to complain about capitalism if you support it's tools of control?

[Raúl Duke]

They aren't much of a technocratic in that "Technocracy" kind of term.
More like technocratic in its colloquial term.

[hatzel]

while they are meritocratic and will still have a market in their society, based on what I've read on their page I have found them to be the most rational and thus radical party yet.

Well you're easily pleased, aren't you?

[The Intransigent Faction]

voting isn't even mandatory in canada like it is here in australia, so why do you even bother with it?

This. Even if they were worth supporting, our first-past-the-post voting system effectively guarantees that a vote for them (even more than for the Green Party which at least has Elizabeth May elected) would be a pointless waste of time in the next election, short of some massive, sudden and unprecedented turnaround (and if its a Conservative riding they look like they might win, there's always robocalls).

[NewLeft]

This. Even if they were worth supporting, our first-past-the-post voting system effectively guarantees that a vote for them (even more than for the Green Party which at least has Elizabeth May elected) would be a pointless waste of time in the next election, short of some massive, sudden and unprecedented turnaround (and if its a Conservative riding they look like they might win, there's always robocalls).
The first past the post voting system works in our favour.. It really shows how illegitimate the voting system is..

[NewLeft]

The NDP is obviously too social democrat and has been waffled(how is that even possible? It was already a pile of waffles) and is collapsing.
This is false by the way, the NDP is on the upswing, here, in BC, in Canada..


I'm not a ML so the two "Communist" parties are off the list.
Nah, the regular one isn't even Marxist, let alone ML.

[ÑóẊîöʼn]

Reformism is a waste of time.

[Imposter Marxist]

"Resource-based economy" all economies are "Resource based", just most of them (All of them!) are state capitalist

[Q]

"Resource-based economy" all economies are "Resource based", just most of them (All of them!) are state capitalist

With a "resource-based economy" is meant that money is to be abolished. So, it is opposed to a "money-based economy" if one would want to call it that.

The term is coined by Jacque Fresco, head of the Venus Project.

A more traditional term among socialists for it is a planned economy.

[blake 3:17]

With a "resource-based economy" is meant that money is to be abolished.

It's pretty weird to be pushing this particular line in Canada -- historically our economy has been largely dependent on resource extraction and export. Due to a number of issues there's been a substantive decline in manufacturing.

Anyways all makes no sense

Edited to add: Just looked at the Venus Project definition -- completely nuts.

[TheAltruist]

I live in the U.S., and just as a refresher, how many/what major political parties are there? Reformism is a waste, but at least having one more party is better than marching towards a single-party state.

[Q]

Edited to add: Just looked at the Venus Project definition -- completely nuts.

Not that I want to go too much off-topic, but could you explain that?

My view is that the Venus Project are (depoliticized) utopian socialists in that they provide a goal, but not a way to achieve that goal. But their definition of a resource-based economy does make sense and is a lot more sound than what is normally taken for granted on the far left as an alternative economic model.

Here is a page where they explain the point (http://thevenusproject.com/the-venus-project/resource-based-economy).

[RedHal]

being a part of the low turnout rate will make a bigger statement than voting for an obscure party that will win a miniscule amount of votes.

[campesino]

being a part of the low turnout rate will make a bigger statement than voting for an obscure party that will win a miniscule amount of votes.

does it? government doesn't need to reach a thresh-hold of the number of votes to govern.

vote for the radicals act like a radical.

I don't support cults but Bob Avakian would make a good candidate.

[shaneo]

I live in the U.S., and just as a refresher, how many/what major political parties are there? Reformism is a waste, but at least having one more party is better than marching towards a single-party state.

Ok, but if both of the parties in control are effectively the same, which they are, then you already have a one party state.

[shaneo]

being a part of the low turnout rate will make a bigger statement than voting for an obscure party that will win a miniscule amount of votes.

True that! If you vote, then you are encouraging a corrupt political system.

How can we encourage capitalism like this, and then wake up the next day and complain about capitalism?

[shaneo]

does it? government doesn't need to reach a thresh-hold of the number of votes to govern.

vote for the radicals act like a radical.

I don't support cults but Bob Avakian would make a good candidate.

But you have given a mandate to the corrupt voting system. Even if you vote obscure you are still giving support to the system. Even if an obscure party got a majority, the elites and their supporters in the mass media, would just fabricate some crimes committed by the leaders.

[blake 3:17]

Not that I want to go too much off-topic, but could you explain that?

My view is that the Venus Project are (depoliticized) utopian socialists in that they provide a goal, but not a way to achieve that goal. But their definition of a resource-based economy does make sense and is a lot more sound than what is normally taken for granted on the far left as an alternative economic model.

Here is a page where they explain the point (http://thevenusproject.com/the-venus-project/resource-based-economy).

I made a mistake. I thought they were advocating a single resource export model.

I still think it's nuts, but the intentions seem well enough.

[ArseCynic]

This is false by the way, the NDP is on the upswing, here, in BC, in Canada..


Nah, the regular one isn't even Marxist, let alone ML.

I live in BC aswell, I meant more federally. and they are still too moderate for me provincially too, I most likely won't ever vote provincially.

ML isn't really marxist, only by name. I know they aren't even close to marxist, that is what I meant.

[ArseCynic]

I do not see how TVP or a RBE is "nuts".

essentially it is pure-original-marixsm, but with machines replacing labour. that is really the onyl main difference, that and TVP has designs for cities which could solve some of the issues of the classical communist economic model.

I would never call TVP or a RBE socialist. they do not have any hierachy of any kind or any currency or trade of any kind. other than that Q has it quite well.