Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolven
First off, blaming the NDP for the direction of the Liberals is ridiculous. If anything, it is the Conservatives who are drawing the Liberals to the right by having the Cons shift into the ultra-right-wing land of Reform. But really, the Liberals and Conservatives have both been very corporatist parties and I do not think either of them actually care about "left" or "right" as long as their corporate friends are making a lot of money off of us.
Moving on. I am super curious what you guys think "pure labour" or "pro Labour with no extra fluff" means for a party in the Federal Government. How do you have a party that is only about labour? The government does a lot more than just deal with labour.
Looking at Carney's cabinet, a lot of the ministries could fall under the labour: Industry, Public Works, Agriculture, Jobs & Families, etc.
But there are more ministries that are really not about labour at all: Foreign Affairs, National Defense, Immigrations, Housing & Infrastructure, International Trade, Environment and Climate Change, Justice, etc.
If you want to be taken seriously as a political party you cannot be a single-issue party. You need to show up with answers for all of these aspects of society.
|
For me, and maybe it’s just me and doesn’t reflect what the others are referring to, “pure labour” is a party that is first, utmost, and always focused on the working class, and I would define “extra fluff” as anything that cannot be directly connected to supporting, protecting, or advancing the working class.
I believe immigration, climate change, housing, trade, etc can all be approached through this lens.
The Liberals and Cons pander to the working class but I don’t think either put them first outside of needing their votes. A truly labour-focused social party is what is missing.