The late Tommy Douglas would have flipped in his crypt had he heard of the Federal New Democrat's latest lurch to the right. In case you missed it, last week (gasp) the New Democratic Party discussed dropping the term "democratic socialism" from their constitution.
This is heavy stuff, but so is the NDP constitution. For those of you who don't have the relevant section at hand along with the family bible or Grandma's recipe for jellied salad, here it is:
"The principles of democratic socialism can be defined briefly as: That the production and distribution of goods and services shall be directed to meeting the social and individual needs of people within a sustainable environment and economy and not to the making of profit; To modify and control the operations of the monopolistic productive and distributive organizations through economic and social planning. Towards those ends and where necessary the extension of the principle of social ownership."
(The provincial NDP constitution - though not identical in structure - cites and endorses the same principles.)
Although the punctuation is confusing the meaning is not. This stuff is right out of Das Kapital. A strict implementation of those principles to our economy would collapse the Canadian private sector and reduce the value of the Canada Pension Plan as well as RRSP portfolios to zero, if not lower.
When the amendment hit the convention floor the expected happened.
Those in favour of spiking the socialist reference said the party had to be bold and seek new political ground. Those opposed to change held out the socialist legacy of Tommy Douglas with one delegate convinced Douglas would have said, "No, a thousand times no." Another activist reportedly rallied for the current constitution and spoke against "The rich who live in Rosedale [a tony neighbourhood in Toronto] and the crooks and thieves on Bay St."
After the requisite allotment of heated debate, the convention did the right thing and wisely set the question aside for future discussion. No sense in getting rid of a hot issue by arriving at a conclusion.
There are two more underlying issues for New Democrats as the party looks to the future and its meteoric climb to the dizzying heights of becoming Canada's official opposition. In 2008 the NDP elected one member from Quebec. Following our May election the Quebec NDP seat count rose to 59 for a parliamentary total of 103.
NDP leader Jack Layton did well in Quebec because he's a native son, he's left wing, he's likable and he laid a knockout hit on Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff during the leader's debate.
From one seat to 59 is a remarkable shift in voter appeal. But it doesn't take a lot of political experience to suspect a limited attention span on the part of Quebecer voters. A swing of that magnitude could move just as quickly to someone else. It was a case of electoral flitting, or to put it in Quebec political terms, a switch from the Le Bloc Quebecois to Le Bloc De Papillion.
The other problem facing the NDP comes from a recent analysis of polling data.
By way of background, Canadian pollsters who predicted a Conservative minority government - and there were many - got caught with their polls down when the Conservatives formed an unexpected majority government.
On extensive examination, those same pollsters found that respondents who said they were voting Liberal or NDP didn't show up at the polls. While those who said they would vote Conservative did.
Moreover, those Conservative voters were older. Apparently those over 45 who said they would vote Conservative were there. While those under 45 and committed to the NDP or Liberals no-showed. Simply put, there's a sizable generational/credibility gap with the Canadian electorate and it favours the Conservatives.
Meanwhile back in NDP land, it's in the party's best interests to look at its arguably fickle Quebec strengths as well the party constitution. The party has to embrace a gentle move to the middle along with modernization, and paradoxically, grey power.
Forget socialist experiments. Those ideas went the way of the Dodo bird, Marx and Engels and the Berlin wall.
Times have changed. It's clear from the last election that political parties seeking a majority government and reliable electoral support should forget the pursuit of 19th century ideologies and instead look to the strength of our successful market economy.
Don't chase failed ideals; or waste your time badmouthing Bay St. Instead look to improving the Canadian economy and the value of Canadian's Registered Retirement Saving Plans.
As Stephen Harper found out last month, that's where the votes are.
