[mobglob-discuss] Fw: The Greens are right, right?
Chris Shaw
csshawlab at hotmail.com
Thu Jun 17 15:50:04 PDT 2004
And Jack Layton looks any less conservative than Harris? Guess I missed the
more radical attire he wears between debates.
As for Murray Dobbin's article: Dobbin is certainly entitled to examine any
party on its platform and decipher the parts any way he sees fit. This does
not, however, make his analysis correct or the "cherry picking" of parts to
support his predetermined thesis honest. The present election campaign has
been one almost solely composed of fear mongering, usually mostly by those
afraid of slipping support. The Liberals have taken this route as the
Conservatives have pulled up; now the NDP sees its numbers static if not
dropping, at least in BC, while Greens are going up. The politics of fear
is just that and one reason we keep getting governments that aren't really
representative of the entire population. We seem to be perpetually voting
against something we have been told to fear rather than voting for what we
really want.
Actually, a few days ago when Layton noticed that the Liberals were using
fear of Harper to try to win back those leaning to the NDP, he suggested
that people should vote for what they really believe and want, rather than
voting "strategically" to keep Harper out. Layton was right. Odd,
therefore, that Dobbin would now chose this moment to try to scare
progressive voters away from the Greens. Guess it must be of those "do as I
say, not as I do moments".
Perhaps the best advice was given a century ago by Eugene Debs who said,
"I'd rather vote for what I want and not get it, than vote for what I don't
want and get it". Sorry Murray and Jack, most people who lean to the green
side of the house will likely do just that.
Christopher A. Shaw, Ph.D
Associate Professor
Research Pavilion
828 W. 10th Ave.
Vancouver, British Columbia
Canada, V5Z 1L8
tel: 604-875-4111 (ext. 68375)
Fax: 604-875-4376
e-mail: csshawlab at hotmail.com
>From: "Liz" <yashi at direct.ca>
>Reply-To: MobGlob discussion list <mobglob-discuss at lists.resist.ca>
>To: "MobGlob discussion list" <mobglob-discuss at lists.resist.ca>
>Subject: Re: [mobglob-discuss] Fw: The Greens are right, right?
>Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2004 13:07:33 -0700
>
>It's funny, but the guy, the green leader, even looks conservative, in a
>classical way. So that's good for the NDP in that they will draw some votes
>away from the new, NOT progressive, Conservatives. What erks me is how the
>media is insisting on framing this election as a two way race. Hopefully
>there are enough people out there who don't trust the corporate media any
>more, especially after they got herded into voting Liberal in the last
>provincial election. Also, the movie Corporation should give people pause
>to question the sort of information they are getting from the media. Even
>the CBC is not taking the NDP seriously, yet.
>Liz Thor-Larsen
>For platform info (and some pro ndp cheerleading) see www.ndp.ca
>But, we're definitely against weapons in space; for $15,000/year minimum
>personal tax exemption; and shifting some of the tax burden back to the
>corporations and the wealthy in canadian society.
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Paul Browning
> To: mobglob-discuss at resist.ca ; vancouver-activist at yahoogroups.ca
> Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 2004 11:19 PM
> Subject: [mobglob-discuss] Fw: The Greens are right, right?
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Murray Dobbin" <mdobbin at telus.net>
> To: <mdobbin at telus.net>
> Sent: Wednesday, June 16, 2004 2:19 PM
> Subject: The Greens are right, right?
>
>
> > Globe and Mail
> > Wednesday, Jun 16, 2004
> > The Greens are right, right?
> >
> > By MURRAY DOBBIN Globe and Mail Update
> >
> >
> > It is intriguing to watch the coverage of the Green Party in the
>federal
> > election because the conventional wisdom -- that it will take votes
>from the
> > NDP -- is confounded by the party's actual policies. While the
>analysis is
> > likely correct, a look at Green policies reveals that this party is
>really a
> > Conservative alternative, not a social democratic one. Its fiscal,
>economic
> > and even environmental policies would be a near perfect fit for the
>old
> > Progressive Conservative party.
> >
> > In fact, the Greens are led by a former Tory, Jim Harris, and under
>his
> > direction have become the quintessential small government, pro-market
>party.
> >
> > Their social analysis says virtually nothing about the structural
>causes of
> > poverty, and their solutions borrow from both the former PCs and the
> > Alliance. They talk about how a Green government would "enhance the
>existing
> > network of . . . school nutrition . . . and food-bank programs . . ."
>to
> > eliminate hunger in Canada. Those who study poverty with a view to
>ending it
> > see food banks not as a solution, but as a symbol of everything that
>is
> > wrong with the way governments approach poverty.
> >
> > The party is committed to smaller government in a way that no other
>party
> > is, except the new Conservatives. With respect to the devastated
>federal
> > public service -- characterized by massive downsizing, unprecedented
>stress
> > levels, completely inadequate staffing to carry out department
>mandates and
> > years without real increases in pay -- the Green Party has a single
> > response, and it sounds a lot like Stephen Harper's: "Reform the
>public
> > sector to be more responsive and accountable." This is union busting
>by
> > another name, and seems to promise the continuation of the right-wing
> > assault on government employees. If you want the public service to be
> > "responsive," the logical solution is to return it to functional
>staffing
> > levels.
> >
> > The Greens' fiscal policies are among their most reactionary and
> > problematic. They toe the Bay Street line by promising to "lower taxes
>on
> > income, profit and investment, to promote increased productivity and
>job
> > creation." As for addressing the problem of chronically high
>unemployment,
> > the party takes a page out of Paul Martin's book of maintaining
>extremely
> > low inflation -- Greens will still fight inflation by putting people
>out of
> > work unless unemployment rises above 10 per cent. These policies have
>been
> > notable failures for the past 15 years -- lowering wages, increasing
>the
> > productivity gap with the United States and creating mostly low-wage
>jobs --
> > and certainly have no place in the platform of a party that pitches
>its
> > appeals to social democrats.
> >
> > Any increase in revenue from promised Green taxes on "harmful
>activities"
> > would be neutralized by lowering income taxes, the most progressive
>and fair
> > taxes we have. The Greens also call for an increase in property taxes,
>a
> > regressive tax. They are committed to using surpluses to ". . . reduce
>the
> > national debt." In other words, the party is to the right of all the
>major
> > parties, which are now committing billions for spending on social
>programs
> > that Canadians say they want.
> >
> > One of the most remarkable aspects of the Green platform is the lack
>of any
> > commitment to using government legislation or regulation to accomplish
>core
> > environmental goals.
> >
> > Here are just a few examples: "The Green Party will: Empower
>[bioregional]
> > stewards to seek intervenor status in legal actions that impact the
>health
> > of the ecosystem; . . . work with local environmental groups to reduce
> > pollution levels in the air, water and soil; promote sustainability
>through
> > education; and monitor the diversity of species, the levels of
>pollution and
> > the health of the ecosystem."These are not the actions of a government
> > committed to using its mandated power to actually protect the
>environment.
> > The party also supports the corporate sector's position on
>self-regulation:
> > "The Green Party will assist and encourage Canadian companies to
>attain ISO
> > 14000 certification, the international standard for management." The
>ISO
> > 14000 has been almost universally condemned by the international
> > environmental movement as ineffective and unreliable.
> >
> > Those Canadians thinking of voting Green because they believe it is
> > progressive had better do their homework. There is more to this party
>than
> > the user-friendly name would suggest.
> >
> > Murray Dobbin is author of Paul Martin: CEO for Canada?
>
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> mobglob-discuss mailing list
> mobglob-discuss at lists.resist.ca
> https://lists.resist.ca/mailman/listinfo/mobglob-discuss
>
>_______________________________________________
>mobglob-discuss mailing list
>mobglob-discuss at lists.resist.ca
>https://lists.resist.ca/mailman/listinfo/mobglob-discuss
More information about the mobglob-discuss
mailing list