Saturday, June 18, 2011

NDP Convention Question #2

When the heck will you stop bashing the corporations?

Granted, there's a time and a place for going after corporations which are overly greedy to the point where profit overrides their ethical centres concerning wages, safety, and the environment, not to mention the economy at large. However, there's been nary a second when the New Democrats, who are trying to attract new voters by cutting out language in their Constitution (because voters truly base their decisions on a document they'll never read, nevermind the fact that you hid it from them) by removing references to socialism, nationalization, and so on, don't bash the corporations of Canada.

I get that you're a bunch of social democrats who fight for social justice and living wages and social justice and against free trade and against greedy bankers and for social justice and so on - but you have to realize now that you were not elected because of that position, right? Right?....

Maybe not, but rest assured, you weren't. As I pointed out before in a slightly unrelated topic, labour had little to do with the political undercurrents in the 41st election. There were concerns over pensions and such, no doubt about that - but if bank-and-corporate-bashing was really the way to Canadian's hearts, they wouldn't have elected a Conservative majority. Heck, they wouldn't have given 39.6% of their vote to the Conservatives, plus 18.9% to the similarly corporate-friendly Liberals, which constitutes well over 50% of those who cast their vote.

Bashing the banks and corporations, promising to get rid of ATM fees (which, anyone with a brain knows is a gimmick that saves them little), and so on and so forth, is not good policy for the long-term. It gets the usual Dipper blood pumping, sure, but some 2015, you better learn to tone it down or Canadians will give you a real lesson in political realities.


  1. If Air Canada and its customer service and sales staff weren't being asked to take a cut in pension benefits while the company's executives can afford themselves large pay increases, there wouldn't be a reason to point out the inequity.

    If corporations who are getting large tax cuts were using the extra funds to increase investment in technology to shrink the productivity gap of Canadian workers with the US and Germany, it wouldn't be an issue.

  2. Michel,

    All fair and well, but the fact is that a lot of voters don't sympathize with a), and don't understand b).

    What voters understand is that while a lot of private sector workers who are not in unions are taking their cuts and their apple pie and tightening their belts to cope with this situation, over-zealous union members in both the private and even more so in the public sector are screeching over the belt being tightened on their very generous pensions, salaries, and benefits.

    What voters will see is that for all the greed the corporations commit, the union members are just as bad, if not worse - or at least, that is how it will be framed. This is an age where unions are not held in high regard except by those who are in them; meanwhile, corporations have similar egg on their face, but they're the ones providing that person's job, that person's brand-name products, managing that person's and his family's accounts, and keeping it safe as they can (because if they don't, they lose business - easy concept, see?).

    Who will they side with - the union members not providing much for this individual but much for themselves, or the corporate leaders, providing much for themselves but giving return services, jobs, and income to that individual?

    Boil it down to the bottom rung, and it's not hard to see.