BC Election: What Stance is Appropriate?

[Monkey Riding Dragon]

I haven't posted here in a while and felt like doing so today. Admittedly, the remainder of this is copied from a two-post commentary I recently made on another message board. (The original version is located here.) The main points I'm trying to make therein are twofold: 1) Canada's need for a real communist party, and 2) more broadly, the need to keep our "eyes on the prize" so to speak; to maintain a specifically revolutionary and communist outlook and orientation. It also serves as a general critique of the electoral processes in play.

POST ONE:

Having taken some time to examine the facts, I thought it important to at least briefly address the upcoming May 12th provincial election in British Columbia, Canada.

Elections politicize people who otherwise wouldn't get involved in wrangling over political matters. In that way, they always provide an opportunity to get into the most important topics. What British Columbians need to understand, in this respect, is that bourgeois electoral processes exist for the purpose of maintaining social stability, not for the purpose of fostering positive change or of reflecting the interests or even the opinions of the masses of people. This is a matter that, especially in this context, needs to be urgently discussed.

Let's dig into some specifics:

The Liberals. The Liberals are, statistically-speaking, the most likely to emerge victorious in the upcoming election. In fact, the results of the upcoming election are likely to produce almost no change in the current composition of the provincial government. That's not because opinion polling data suggests this (although it does) so much as because the nationally-based and especially the multi-national bourgeoisie have more or less determined so, as reflected in the results of stock betting on the election's outcome, among many other factors. It is factors like these that greatly influence public opinion and ultimately, regardless of what public opinion actually is, decide election outcomes and the programs that are implemented, decisions on which are made far outside the arenas of public discourse and debate. What is the program of the Liberals? Well, the last eight years and the latest provincial budget show that quite clearly. Theirs is a program of thrusting the full burden of the current economic and budgetary crises and environmental problems onto the backs of working people. Time and again, they have proven so. The particular form that this takes in the current BC context is that of neoliberalism: a program of systematically redistributing income upward on the social ladder through a whole plethora of means, but which center around such overall policies as tax cuts and subsidies for capitalists accompanied by the imposition of austerity measures for the working population. No socially sympathetic rhetoric that Gorden Campbell or the Liberals more broadly put out should be believed. Their demonstrated record from the last eight years thus far includes such "accomplishments" as the privatization of BC Rail (against their own campaign promises), the closing of 177 schools (which has led to a decrease in functional literacy), the suspension of teachers' collective bargaining rights, an 88 percent increase in the rate of college tuition (which exceeds the national average), the unconstitutional altering of the contractual terms of health care workers (as ruled by the Supreme Court of Canada in 2007), and the imposition of such severe austerity upon the welfare system as to result in the fact that today only 42 percent of the unemployed qualify for unemployment benefits. Likewise, the Liberals have recently put a carbon emissions tax into place. While many think of a carbon emissions tax as a progressive thing, it is not. It replaces progressive income-based taxation (that is, taxation based on one's ability to pay) with taxation based on factors like travel, functioning as a simultaneous tax break for millionaires and billionaires and fresh tax burden for working people. Furthermore, the monies collected via this tax are not at all being directed toward the creation of the promised "green jobs" or any other form of environmental conservation or restoration and are thus are having no environmental impact to speak of anyway. BC's economy, like Canada's generally and the world's more generally, is in recession; a fact which results in decreasing tax revenue intakes, resulting from falling incomes. The product of this phenomena is inevitably escalating provincial debt (which is usually owed to the capitalist class). Mounting debt, in turn, provides the justification for further austerity measures. The Liberal Party's current budget reflects this reality: It calls for the freezing of public sector wages at their current rates and for funding cuts for half of all ministries. Logically enough, accompanying these social austerity measures will be increased funding for police forces and the installing of additional spy cameras in 'high-risk' areas. This is the solution being proposed to the inevitably escalating degree of social instability that results from conditions and policies like these. Gang wars roughly tie economic news for top billing in the headlines in BC these days, for example. New authoritarian measures will certainly be imposed to (attempt to) crush these and more generally keep the increasingly impoverished population "in line" and away from radical thinking.

The "Practical Alternative": The NDP. But no meaningful challenge to this program is even being proposed by the leading "alternative" parties, among which the New Democratic Party is the most prominent in the region, presently forming the Official Opposition in the government. The NDP (and its principle predecessor, the CCF) was once a social-democratic party. Today, it is a centrist and increasingly right-leaning party representing different sections of the bourgeoisie both indirectly (through its traditional support among the trade unions) and increasingly directly (resulting in the trade unions increasingly finding themselves alienated from the NDP). The middle-of-the-road "alternative" proposed by the NDP includes such ideas as the freezing of tuition fees at present astronomical levels, the replacement of the carbon emissions tax with a "cap and trade" system (another form of corporate subsidy), and, perhaps most importantly, a pledge to "spend only what we can afford", which in a context of recession, as explained earlier, can only mean even further austerity measures. The NDP seems to lack the overall support of the bourgeoisie no doubt because its program isn't deemed aggressively neoliberal enough. For example, the NDP still insists on certain minor trade union demands, such as the raising of the provincial minimum wage to $10 an hour from its present level of $8 an hour (with a $6 an hour "training wage"): the lowest in the nation. You see, BC's comparatively low labor standards are no doubt a major factor in its ability to attract capital investment and declining capital investment translates into economic downturn. Thus, an increase in the minimum wage would likely have a negative impact on regional economics. As sadistic as that logic is, that's how the capitalist system works. Likewise, they propose a moratorium on future private run-of-the-river projects, which of course, for the sake of the environment and other factors, would hamper opportunities for capital investment and expansion. These are the sorts of factors that seem to be restricting their ability to win a parliamentary majority. But even taken at face value (as opposed to what would become reality even if they did win the upcoming election), the NDP's proposals are not progressive, but rather seek to simply to end certain Liberal-era policies.

The Right Wing Greens. Canada's Greens are often, and very wrongly, believed to be a left wing party. Neither at the national nor at the provincial level is this true. Instead, they aim to thrust the full burden of environmental problems onto the backs of working people, not unlike the Liberals. The Greens are proposing to increase the current carbon emissions tax five-fold while simultaneously slashing corporate taxation and practicing "fiscally responsible" (that is, austere) government. With respect to their proposal on the carbon emissions tax, they also openly concede that none of the revenues collected by way of the tax will directly go to environmental conservation or restoration projects. Their main policy proposals outside of these areas include the general legalization of marijuana and prostitution for the supposed purposes of 'regulating' them. But this type of social liberalism isn't to be mistaken for progressivism, which insists on positive, active governmental steps to address these sorts of social ills (though of course this needs to be centered around the principle of rehabilitation, not punishment).

Electoral Reform...And Its Purpose. None of these parties are positive options and British Columbians are increasingly coming to recognize that reality. Provincial opinion polls of late suggest a general drop-off in support for and trust in all three of these major parties. To cite just a single statistic, for example, the results of a recent survey suggested that only 18 percent of BC residents "trust" the present head of the government, Gordon Campbell. This echoes the broader trend taking place across Canada which was certainly showcased in the country's most recent federal election. Said election saw the lowest voter turnout in the nation's history and prompted the suggestion by Prime Minister Stephen Harper that voting should be made compulsory. This is an ideological struggle the ruling class is waging to maintain popular belief in the false notion that democracy applies to all in bourgeois society and not simply to its capitalists. Canadians, including British Columbians, are increasingly aware that the electoral arena doesn't offer them any just or even trustworthy options. It is this understanding that has prompted the reappearance of a referendum on electoral reform, which will also appear on BC ballots on May 12th. Electoral reform proposals are an attempt by the ruling class to mitigate apathy vis-a-vis capitalist democracy away from an interest in radical alternatives and into the realm of officially acceptable options that will not change the core essence of the way things work. They are conceived, in other words, to win back lost and still-falling support for the parliamentary system itself.

Phony Communists. Even among the so-called communist parties on the ballot, there are no alternatives to the present order. The Communist Party, for example, calls for a host of economic reforms ranging from doubling the minimum wage to the socialization of several enterprises to withdrawing from TILMA (a free trade agreement between British Columbia and Alberta) to the abolition of college tuition. This platform flows out of their official party program (detailed on their website in the 'Party Program' section), which details the standpoint that the creation of a paternalistic welfare state constitutes a step -- and a necessary one, at that -- in the direction of socialism (a position that, in their case, is an expression of Nikita Krushchev's advocacy of "peaceful transition" processes). But this is a myth. Socialism is a revolutionary transition into communism; it isn't about a "generous" state simply playing Robin Hood, supposedly guaranteeing everyone an "equal chance" to become exploiters themselves by way of "bestowing gifts" upon the population. (See the "American Dream".) Socialism is about the conscious, self-emancipation of humanity from all oppressive and exploitative relations, which the vanguard party serves only to inspire and provide guidance to, while preventing the counterrevolutionary restoration of the old order. This requires a monopoly on political power for the oppressed masses of people under the leadership of their vanguard, the proletariat, and its vanguard, the communist party. This is fundamentally different from notions of "pure democracy", which revolve around the (more or less illusory) sharing of political power with the capitalist class. Accordingly, the first meaningful and positive change in the status quo that can take place is a revolution that sweeps the exploiting classes from power and establishes a people's republic. Where is this in the CP's platform? Moreover, even from a purely tactical standpoint, any call to participate in the bourgeois parliamentary circus can only reinforce the lie that presents these elections as a real choice for the exploited anyway.

We can say the same thing of the People's Front, which is the body organized by the Communist Party of Canada (Marxist-Leninist) for the purpose of fielding political candidates in British Columbia. The CPC (ML) claims to be an anti-revisionist party, yet their party program interestingly makes no mention of revolution. Instead, they simply propose a broader array of more theoretically far-reaching reforms than does the regular CP, encompassing not only economic and electoral reform, but also social reforms. ('Far-reaching', for example, can be seen in the People's Front's advocacy of actually placing a moratorium on the provincial debt, which would, theoretically, liberate provincial revenues from the hands of creditors, enabling the much fuller funding of social betterment programs generally.) But the CPC (ML) cannot escape the reality that this is a merely reformist program flowing out of the fact that it has long since abandoned its Maoist foundations.

What Canada needs is a genuine communist party to present a revolutionary alternative to the whole present order, toward the achievement of a whole new kind of society and world characterized by the complete absence of class distinctions and everything reactionary that goes along with them and by the free association of all people sharing all the world.

POST TWO:

As voting day approaches, I'd like to add a brief commentary on the BC election supplement recently added to the online version of The Socialist Worker (the official newspaper of the Trotskyite International Socialists of Canada).

We are in danger of another four years of a right-wing Liberal government, whose attacks will sharpen with the deepening global recession. This election gives us a chance to fight the Liberals in the ballot box, and in the streets.

On election day that means voting for the one party linked with working class organizations, the NDP. Despite their tacit endorsement of many of the Liberal policies, they are still the party that most working class activists are a part of, and a greater vote will give these activists more confidence to fight back. At the same time the election offers a chance to raise the profile of resistance movements in the streets, schools, and workplaces.

There is an economist, workerist logic in play here: The trade unions endorse the New Democrats and therefore so too should Marxists, right? Doing as the trade unions do and casting a ballot for continued bourgeois rule will raise the sights of the masses to their own ability to change the world without the need of being ruled over, right? There is a complimentary relationship between ballot box results and mobilizations of mass resistance, right? Right?

Elected governments, of any stripe, only defend education, the environment, public services, and our living standards when they are pushed.

Gordon Campbell only pretends to care about the environment to divide opposition to his cuts to education and health care, and the rest of his business friendly policies.

The lowest tuition fees in Canada are in Quebec, where there have been student strikes each time the government tried to raise the fees. The NDP have endorsed the Liberal policy of high tuition fees because student unions in BC have been consumed with fighting over membership in the Canadian Federation of Students, instead of organizing a fight for lower fees.

The minimum wage is an issue in this election because of the campaign by the BC Federation of Labour to make it so.

And so you see, if the NDP fails to deliver a "positive" social-democratic program, that's only your fault for failing to adequately "push" them into doing so. But there is a defensive, "lesser evil" type of thinking here: only bourgeois officials are capable of bringing about positive change in the world and your role is simply to 'pressure' them to do so. Perhaps even more compelling, the whole formulation being presented here is purely economist in its nature. Reading through the remaining three sections of the supplement, one finds this revealed even more clearly. For example...

The environment should be the Greens strongest point.

....

The Greens have the best platform on education...

....

The NDP have a much better position on the environment than the Liberals.

....

Dealing with the recession, the NDP will implement a $10 minimum wage, while the Liberals intend to keep it at the current $8 an hour along with the $6 an hour “training” wage. The NDP also plans infrastructure spending, money for better public transit and a tax holiday for small businesses.

The NDP's weakest area is in post-secondary education.

Mysteriously absent is a radical critique of the electoral system. In its place is the bureaucratic tone of parliamentary maneuvering. This naturally takes on the form of economism: This party supports the highest minimum wage. That party supports the lowest tuition rates. This party supports a public works program. Let's get out a calculator and see what all this adds up to. Socialism is not a math equation! Socialism, again, is not about the creation of a paternalistic welfare state that ostensibly guarantees everyone an "equal opportunity" to become exploiters themselves. This is the trade unionist mentality, not the communist worldview. Socialism is about the emancipation of humanity from all oppressive and exploitative relations through its own empowerment. It follows that The Socialist Worker here provides no mention of matters like capitalism, revolution, socialism, or communism. Wait a minute...maybe we've lost sight of the picture by focusing in on the frame...

To pose a concluding question, now that you've seen what my stance is, what is your stance? What course of action (strategic, principle, or otherwise) do you think is most appropriate here, if any?

[STJ]

Canada is not the only country that needs a real communist party. In America we have the joke that is the American Communist Party.

[LOLseph Stalin]

I'm not liking this election one bit. As a B.C citizen I can say that both the Liberals and NDP have screwed us over in the past, both in different ways. The Liberals just want to privatize everything and their continued support for the Olympics sickens me. The NDP have bankrupted this province in the past(how I don't know, but because of this they have lost the trust of alot of people). The Greens are unusually more right than most green parties. With these factors in mind this really doesn't leave me with much choice. My riding is majority Liberal supporting too. I'm going for the lesser evil and choosing NDP although they're further right than the federal NDP.

[Die Neue Zeit]

The CPC-ML's program is a horribly confused one.

1) Instead of moratoriums on state debt, why not abolish it outright?
2) There are no mentions of labour issues whatsoever, ranging from shorter workweeks to living wages to non-deflationary cost-of-living adjustments for every job.
3) The "democratic renewal" falls far short of the participatory budgeting in Venezuela and Brazil, and worse by not advocating popular vote on taxation (thereby allowing folks to tax the super-rich cappies directly). Also not mentioned is the need for the whole lot of politicians, bureaucrats, etc. to be on nothing more than workers' wages.

[genstrike]

I think the general consensus is that Gordo is going to win again.

I suspect if elected, Carole James will be similar to my useless shit of an NDP premier.

[Salyut]

What Canada needs is a genuine communist party to present a revolutionary alternative to the whole present order,

What would this look like? Violent revolution? I'm down wit' da CPC so I'm a little confused over how revolution > democratic transition in practice. I mean, look at how much the tories had people *****ing about 'OMG THE LIBERALS AND NDP ARE LAUNCHING A COUP ZOMG PRAISE GREAT CAUDILLO HARPER".

With these factors in mind this really doesn't leave me with much choice. My riding is majority Liberal supporting too. I'm going for the lesser evil and choosing NDP although they're further right than the federal NDP.

Even in BC? Whaaaa? Don't tell me they've been going the way of the Saskatchewan NDP...

[Lynx]

What about a middle of the road party whose main objective is the implementation of a direct democratic model within British Columbia?

[autotrophic]

I think the best position right now is to not vote this election. Neither the Liberals or NDP would be a step in the right (or should I say left :P) direction. The Liberals will continue do the shit they've been doing.

The NDP has been an alright critic of the Liberals, but as the article said, they have no real platform so it's hard to trust them. We just don't know what they are going to do. Last time they were in power they've managed to screw things up pretty badly, and if they win this time, I suspect the same thing will happen.

A leftist party would be nice, but what we really need is a larger, more vocal socialist movement in the Lower Mainland.

[LOLseph Stalin]

I think the best position right now is to not vote this election.

If we don't vote, the Liberal voter's votes will count more. That will give Gordo a better chance of getting a third term. He has screwed B.C over enough. I'm not saying that Carole James won't do the same, but I think it's safe to say that she's a better alternative to allowing Campbell back in. As i've said in my first post i'm going with the lesser evil and voting NDP. Besides, some of their policies are decent such as raising minimum wage and freezing tuition fees.

[autotrophic]

If we don't vote, the Liberal voter's votes will count more. That will give Gordo a better chance of getting a third term. He has screwed B.C over enough. I'm not saying that Carole James won't do the same, but I think it's safe to say that she's a better alternative to allowing Campbell back in. As i've said in my first post i'm going with the lesser evil and voting NDP. Besides, some of their policies are decent such as raising minimum wage and freezing tuition fees.

Actually, the NDP screwed up things worse than the Liberals did. They outright lied to get into power, and didn't deliver on their promises. Also, do I need to bring up the 'fast ferries'? Many working people lost their jobs last time they were in power.

If the NDP actually delivers on their promises then I would vote for them in a second as a 'lesser of the two evils'. But as horrible as the Liberals are, they actually are better than the NDP.

[marxistcritic]

I think there should be a revolution in BC. I don't know how its going to happen, so don't ask.

[LOLseph Stalin]

I think there should be a revolution in BC. I don't know how its going to happen, so don't ask.

I fully agree. The Liberals just won a third term. Once again the working class people of B.C are going to be ignored...

[Monkey Riding Dragon]

Preliminary election results suggest a further three-seat gain for both the Liberals and the NDP, with the new theoretical balance resting at 49 seats for the Liberals to 36 for the New Democrats (as compared with the current 46-33 ratio). That is to say that, as I predicted, there will be essentially no change in the province's governing composition.

Preliminary results also suggest a marked drop-off in actual votes for all major parties. With nearly all ballot boxes reporting...

-The Liberals have thus far acquired about 709,500 votes, as compared with more than 807,000 in 2005.

-The NDP has thus far garnered 648,000 votes, as compared with their 2005 total of 731,000.

-The Greens have thus far acquired 125,000, as compared with their 2005 total of nearly 162,000.

The Conservative Party, while still decided a very minor party, nevertheless made significant gains (no doubt the result of their favorable media treatment): about 32,500 votes this time already, compared with their 2005 vote total of just 9,623.

These totals reflect a growing lack of faith in the electoral system and its ability to deliver positive results.