Computer challenges have prevented me from posting any tunes lately. Here's Neil playing Dylan. Awesome sideburns, if the music doesn't get you.
Tuesday, June 23, 2009
Comment on comments
In my very first post on this blog I said I welcomed comments and wasn't really interested in moderating them. That said, a few bad apples have forced me to moderate the whole barrel, to mangle a metaphor.
I have no problem at all if commenters disagree with what I say here; the entire point of this blog is to generate debate about the future of progressive politics in BC. That said, comments of a personal or potentially libelous nature aren't going to be posted.
So I've reluctantly enabled the "moderate comments" function, but I commit to posting everything that meets the definition of debate rather than slagging.
Thanks for visiting.
I have no problem at all if commenters disagree with what I say here; the entire point of this blog is to generate debate about the future of progressive politics in BC. That said, comments of a personal or potentially libelous nature aren't going to be posted.
So I've reluctantly enabled the "moderate comments" function, but I commit to posting everything that meets the definition of debate rather than slagging.
Thanks for visiting.
Wednesday, June 17, 2009
Axe me no questions, I'll tell you no lies
My friend and occasional colleague Bill Tieleman is back beating the “Axe the Tax” drum, arguing that the anti-carbon tax campaign was a success for the NDP in the last election because the party won 1 percent more votes in 2009 than 2005. (To be precise, 0.6 percent more votes.)
Uhm, that was the election the NDP just lost, right? And we’re still arguing about a strategy that was front and centre in an election campaign that increased the NDP's vote by less than 1 percent? If that’s how we define success in the NDP today, it’s no wonder we don’t talk about the economy.
Hey! Here’s an idea—not just for Bill, but for everyone who cares about the future of the NDP and BC. When we’re arguing about whether or not the NDP should drop the “axe the tax” campaign, let’s try to remember that 50 per cent of eligible voters stayed home on election day.
By restricting our post mortem analysis to looking only at whether the strategy won or lost votes and ignoring the much more important issue of how political positioning contributes to low voter turnout, we are perpetuating an approach to politics and governing that is fundamentally broken.
Whether you think “axe the tax” was a “brilliant strategy” (as Mark Jaccard called it post-election), a colossal blunder, or somewhere in between, it’s frankly too much inside baseball to only focus on the issue as a vote-winner or -loser. And that’s especially so when both main parties’ approaches to the issue failed to engage new voters.
Public policy developed by focusing on the electoral efficacy of “wedge issue” politics is one of the leading causes of the well-documented decline in voter turnout, and the increase in voter apathy. It may have seemed new and exciting when Republican political consultant Dick Morris brought triangulation to the Clinton White House, but this kind of politics has got to go. Triangulation can be focus-grouped and market-researched to find out the best way to move vote, but it doesn’t make it any less cynical.
Throughout his political career, Gordon Campbell has shown that he doesn’t “get religion” on any issue unless there’s a clear political upside to doing so. His change of tune on climate change is no exception, but frankly you could see the proverbial conversion coming well before he introduced the carbon tax. The New Democrats were caught off guard and never properly regained their footing.
There were three serious flaws in the Axe the Tax strategy.
First, by falling for Campbell’s political bait and switch and attacking an initiative supported by progressives and scientists around the world, the NDP allowed the Liberals to frame the debate as being a choice between their “painful-but-necessary” action to fight climate change (endorsed by Al Gore, back when that still mattered) versus no action and, fatally, no new ideas from the NDP. Many New Democrats were appalled that the axe-the-tax campaign left the NDP sounding more like Bush-era conservatives than Obama-era progressives.
Second, “Axe the Tax” had a significant impact on the NDP’s ability to develop a progressive alternative for the province. The commitment to eliminate the carbon tax was paired with a pledge to retain Campbell’s offsetting personal income tax cuts, effectively blowing a $1.8 billion hole in projected revenues, which could have been deployed in a more ambitious and visionary election platform.
Finally, the purely oppositional approach was not backed up by a clear, positive alternative. To me, this is the most critical flaw: too much emphasis on the negative attacks on the carbon tax and not enough, if any, emphasis on a positive alternative. Sometimes, maybe what people like Mark Jaccard call brilliant political strategy just makes no common sense.
On an issue like climate change, when so many citizens have made themselves informed, it’s fatal to insult their intelligence by making out like only big corporations and the rich will have to make sacrifices. More than ever, in tough times we all need to come together, and the old-school divide and conquer politics that have made half of us observers rather than participants is well past its due date.
Uhm, that was the election the NDP just lost, right? And we’re still arguing about a strategy that was front and centre in an election campaign that increased the NDP's vote by less than 1 percent? If that’s how we define success in the NDP today, it’s no wonder we don’t talk about the economy.
Hey! Here’s an idea—not just for Bill, but for everyone who cares about the future of the NDP and BC. When we’re arguing about whether or not the NDP should drop the “axe the tax” campaign, let’s try to remember that 50 per cent of eligible voters stayed home on election day.
By restricting our post mortem analysis to looking only at whether the strategy won or lost votes and ignoring the much more important issue of how political positioning contributes to low voter turnout, we are perpetuating an approach to politics and governing that is fundamentally broken.
Whether you think “axe the tax” was a “brilliant strategy” (as Mark Jaccard called it post-election), a colossal blunder, or somewhere in between, it’s frankly too much inside baseball to only focus on the issue as a vote-winner or -loser. And that’s especially so when both main parties’ approaches to the issue failed to engage new voters.
Public policy developed by focusing on the electoral efficacy of “wedge issue” politics is one of the leading causes of the well-documented decline in voter turnout, and the increase in voter apathy. It may have seemed new and exciting when Republican political consultant Dick Morris brought triangulation to the Clinton White House, but this kind of politics has got to go. Triangulation can be focus-grouped and market-researched to find out the best way to move vote, but it doesn’t make it any less cynical.
Throughout his political career, Gordon Campbell has shown that he doesn’t “get religion” on any issue unless there’s a clear political upside to doing so. His change of tune on climate change is no exception, but frankly you could see the proverbial conversion coming well before he introduced the carbon tax. The New Democrats were caught off guard and never properly regained their footing.
There were three serious flaws in the Axe the Tax strategy.
First, by falling for Campbell’s political bait and switch and attacking an initiative supported by progressives and scientists around the world, the NDP allowed the Liberals to frame the debate as being a choice between their “painful-but-necessary” action to fight climate change (endorsed by Al Gore, back when that still mattered) versus no action and, fatally, no new ideas from the NDP. Many New Democrats were appalled that the axe-the-tax campaign left the NDP sounding more like Bush-era conservatives than Obama-era progressives.
Second, “Axe the Tax” had a significant impact on the NDP’s ability to develop a progressive alternative for the province. The commitment to eliminate the carbon tax was paired with a pledge to retain Campbell’s offsetting personal income tax cuts, effectively blowing a $1.8 billion hole in projected revenues, which could have been deployed in a more ambitious and visionary election platform.
Finally, the purely oppositional approach was not backed up by a clear, positive alternative. To me, this is the most critical flaw: too much emphasis on the negative attacks on the carbon tax and not enough, if any, emphasis on a positive alternative. Sometimes, maybe what people like Mark Jaccard call brilliant political strategy just makes no common sense.
On an issue like climate change, when so many citizens have made themselves informed, it’s fatal to insult their intelligence by making out like only big corporations and the rich will have to make sacrifices. More than ever, in tough times we all need to come together, and the old-school divide and conquer politics that have made half of us observers rather than participants is well past its due date.
Tuesday, June 9, 2009
Blatant self-promotion
as if a blog is anything else. Please enjoy A-Line Communications's first-ever web ad.
I recommend clicking on full-screen to avoid the YouTube logo covering up the ad text.
I recommend clicking on full-screen to avoid the YouTube logo covering up the ad text.
Monday, June 8, 2009
Swearing in before swearing begins
Congrats to all 85 BC MLAs being sworn in today, regardless of party. It's a tougher job--and a much, much more boring job--than most candidates bargained for, but it's an important one, no matter how much Mike Smyth or Keith Baldrey sneer at backbenchers.
That said, the election of an independent MLA should send a clear signal to Liberal members: if you back terrible policy in your own riding, watch it. Maybe after eight years of relentlessly autocratic rule, Liberal MLAs who watched the Premier lose the bet in Delta South will force him to remember that it's not just the big donors that count. Local issues can matter, no matter what the spin doctors in Victoria say.
But don't hold your breath on that.
Across the aisle, NDP MLAs have a critical role in determining the future of the NDP in BC politics. There must be a strong shift away from reflexive and reactive opposition to a positive and progressive government-in-waiting.
Beyond the work they do in the Legislature and in the constituency, the New Democrat MLAs must reach out to the majority of eligible voters who stayed home on May 12. And they'd be well-advised to read this.
My great-grandfather was a United Church minister, and his eldest daughter, my grandmother, was a church organist for most of her life, so I have (sort of) some authority to say this: If you don't stop preaching to the choir, the pews are going to stay empty.
Congratulations to all 85 new and re-elected MLAs and their families. Don't get caught up in the pomp; you're still the same person you were before you ran. And above all, don't forget that your job is to represent your community in Victoria, not the other way 'round. And good luck with that. You'll need it.
That said, the election of an independent MLA should send a clear signal to Liberal members: if you back terrible policy in your own riding, watch it. Maybe after eight years of relentlessly autocratic rule, Liberal MLAs who watched the Premier lose the bet in Delta South will force him to remember that it's not just the big donors that count. Local issues can matter, no matter what the spin doctors in Victoria say.
But don't hold your breath on that.
Across the aisle, NDP MLAs have a critical role in determining the future of the NDP in BC politics. There must be a strong shift away from reflexive and reactive opposition to a positive and progressive government-in-waiting.
Beyond the work they do in the Legislature and in the constituency, the New Democrat MLAs must reach out to the majority of eligible voters who stayed home on May 12. And they'd be well-advised to read this.
My great-grandfather was a United Church minister, and his eldest daughter, my grandmother, was a church organist for most of her life, so I have (sort of) some authority to say this: If you don't stop preaching to the choir, the pews are going to stay empty.
Congratulations to all 85 new and re-elected MLAs and their families. Don't get caught up in the pomp; you're still the same person you were before you ran. And above all, don't forget that your job is to represent your community in Victoria, not the other way 'round. And good luck with that. You'll need it.
Friday, June 5, 2009
Tuesday, June 2, 2009
Who does the 'creative' for Subway ads?
What's the deal with Subway's ad campaign that features animated monkeys making sandwiches in some bizarre industrial setting? I'd hoped it would die a quick death, but they've kept it on air for more than a year now. They must have paid a lot for the animation.
I want to know: has a single person, anywhere, decided to buy a sandwich on the basis of this campaign?
Two things:
1. I don't really want a sandwich if it's made by -- or with -- a monkey.
2. If I really have to, I would prefer that the monkey that makes my sandwich not smoke a cigar while putting too much lettuce on the turkey, know what I mean?
Seriously, they have focus groups for a reason.
Monday, June 1, 2009
Turndown in turnout needs turning around
Lame alliteration notwithstanding, how can candidates for public office reverse the trend that sees fewer people choosing to vote in election after election?
I live in the provincial riding of Vancouver - Mt. Pleasant, home to what is almost certainly the highest concentration of social issues in BC, and probably the entire country. Arguably, then, and understandably, residents of Mt. Pleasant have the greatest degree of self-interest in the results of the election. Yet turnout here was just over 40 percent, even lower than the pathetic province-wide average of around 50 percent.
The fact that this riding is absolutely rock-solid for the NDP probably has a lot to do with it; there's simply no serious competition for votes in Mt. Pleasant, so what's the point in busting your butt to get to the polls?
So it may be understandable for the election being tuned out in Mt. Pleasant, but it isn't acceptable. And it certainly isn't acceptable to sit back and do nothing about the fact that the decline in turnout is a province-wide trend.
The way we elect our governments is being rejected by voters. Premier Campbell's majority government was elected by just 25 percent (roughly) of eligible voters. That doesn't seem right (and I would say the same thing if the NDP had won.)
I don't know if a new system altogether is the answer (obviously the somewhat bizarre variant that was on offer May 12 was rejected), or even part of the answer, but we need to do something to increase citizen participation in elections.
The BC NDP should push for a massive voter registration drive as part of a larger package of democratic and electoral reform. I'm not saying a political party should be in charge of signing up voters, but why not demand higher funding for Elections BC with the express mandate of increasing voter participation?
There's a start. I've got more to say on this.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)