Monday, April 16, 2012

Canadian Politics Are Unstable? What?

Apparently that's what's being implied by former Prime Minister Jean Chrétien, who appears to be pushing for a merger of the NDP and the Liberals more and more these days, with Warren Kinsella playing sidekick.

Hm. I don't get the feeling that Canadian politics are unstable. In fact, they're relatively calm; what we've seen since May 2011 is the government with a constant lead, the Official Opposition remaining a constant second (except in two or three Nanos polls), and the third party remaining a third party. With a new permanent leader installed, the Official Opposition now seemingly has a strengthened hand. We're on our merry way, I guess.

How is this unstable? Unstable would connote the idea that one or more of the traditional parties are fracturing at the seems, endlessly spouting off newer versions of themselves. Quebec's politics would be a good example of instability. The end of the Mulroney area and the mid-1990's would be an OK example of instability. France would be the best example of utter instability.

No, Canadian politics isn't unstable, Canadian politics is becoming polarized. Polarization actually means there will be less instability, because the choice will become one or the other. See how that works?

Besides, forcing together the Liberals and NDP, as always, does not guarantee we'll somehow win. For all the political instincts of these people, this fact seems to elude them. It's like no one can grasp the idea that, you know, people support the Conservative government most of the time. Simply forming some two-headed monstrosity doesn't mean voters will support it. It would likely take a couple of elections before it won. It may take the same amount of time, or less, to install an NDP government. Either way, we lose.

Why do we lose? Because "ideas" don't win out, contrary to Jean's beliefs. We have little prospects, we're down on our luck, and we're weak as kittens. The NDP have the wind in their sails. They will run over our organization like the Alliance did the PC's. Sure, maybe we'll get a few tidbits here and there like the Tories managed, but be ready to support the NDP's platform, the NDP's ideology, and the NDP's leader in exchange. We'll be little more than a footnote after that.

If you want to do that, go sign your soul over to Thomas Mulcair. That's what he wants, anyways. He doesn't want co-operation, he wants to win with his own laurels. But don't drag the rest of us with you, please. We've got important work to do rebuilding the party.


  1. A Liberal-NDP merger would guarantee "we" would win, because me and many other Liberals would refuse to vote for this bastardized party, and we would hop on over to the Conservatives and give them another Majority.

    1. That is normal. When the Reform and the PC merged, the PC voters went mostly to the Liberals. However, they came back to the CPC over time and now they almost have them all in all regions (maybe not in Quebec).

      That's said, the left of center is a much bigger pie to share in canadian federal politics ( 3 to 2 in my gut feeling). That's why the NDP doesn't need a merger to form government. However, can they form government consistently? I think that's what Harper wanted, a resurgent NDP so that CPC can govern more (not always, just more).