NDP to debate phasing out Canada’s Armed Forces at policy convention

[OldSolduer]

Tax the rich too much and they will flee. Where does that lost revenue come from? Those that are left behind. Those that can’t leave the country.

 

[Good2Golf]

Tax the rich too much and they will flee. Where does that lost revenue come from? Those that are left behind. Those that can’t leave the country.

The Middle Class must be prepared to fill in for the departed rich. It’s only fair not to deny everyone the money that they are entitled to.

 

[Brad Sallows]

So this is not an April Fools prank? It is just the consequence of having a very open policy for accepting proposals?

 

[FJAG]

On the other hand the Liberals have no policy resolutions re defence on their convention agenda at all (just a side comment about the crap the CAF found in long term care homes).

Policy | 2021 Liberal National Convention | Liberal Party of Canada

So there's that.

I tried to find anything in their policy booklets about defence but unfortunately beyond "strong and secure" I could find nothing at all.

 

[Good2Golf]

On the other hand the Liberals have no policy resolutions re defence on their convention agenda at all (just a side comment about the crap the CAF found in long term care homes).

Policy | 2021 Liberal National Convention | Liberal Party of Canada

So there's that.

I tried to find anything in their policy booklets about defence but unfortunately beyond "strong and secure" I could find nothing at all.

The difference between ‘distribute wealth to all’ vs ‘distribute wealth amongst friends.’

 

[CBH99]

So this is not an April Fools prank? It is just the consequence of having a very open policy for accepting proposals?

Even if it was just some crazy person’s ill informed proposal - the fact they they announced it & are actually planning to debate it is jaw dropping to me

Great way for them to have some of their supporters go find someone else to support though (my 0.02)

 

[Weinie]

Even if it was just some crazy person’s ill informed proposal - the fact they they announced it & are actually planning to debate it is jaw dropping to me

Great way for them to have some of their supporters go find someone else to support though (my 0.02)

Yeah, but don't know how many billionaire supporters the NDP have.

 

[daftandbarmy]

Yeah, but don't know how many billionaire Champagne Socialist supporters the NDP have.

There, FTFY

 

[Brad Sallows]

The NDP aren't seriously interested in winning federally, so continue to have the luxury to open the floor to anything. I suppose they continue to be satisfied as long as they can pull the LPC a little to the left.

 

[Eaglelord17]

Honestly I think it is a good thing they debate this. The reason being that every government institution should have to justify its existence on a continual basis. Obviously the military is a very easy one to justify, but the questions should periodically be asked anyways. The only groups that should be afraid of these questions are those who cannot justify their existence and therefore should be out of a job.

 

[Ostrozac]

Honestly I think it is a good thing they debate this. The reason being that every government institution should have to justify its existence on a continual basis. Obviously the military is a very easy one to justify, but the questions should periodically be asked anyways. The only groups that should be afraid of these questions are those who cannot justify their existence and therefore should be out of a job.

Fundamental questions like "What is the military for?" and "Iceland gets the protection of NATO without paying for a military -- how do they get away it?" are indeed perfectly legitimate questions to ask in a democracy. That these questions are often treated as a 'third rail' or 'forbidden subject' says more about Canadian political culture than about actual military reality.

 

[Weinie]

Fundamental questions like "What is the military for?" and "Iceland gets the protection of NATO without paying for a military -- how do they get away it?" are indeed perfectly legitimate questions to ask in a democracy. That these questions are often treated as a 'third rail' or 'forbidden subject' says more about Canadian political culture than about actual military reality.

You are correct. Those are legitimate questions. Third rail feedback results from this:

WHEREAS: WHEREAS the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), and Canadian forces in Afghanistan engaged in propping up a US-puppet government of human rights abusers, drug traffickers and warlords, wasting money and lives to further a western agenda of geo-political power and plunder of resources; BE IT RESOLVED THAT: Therefore, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the NDP actively campaign to get Canada out of NATO, to get NATO out of Afghanistan, to remove the NATO nuclear ring around Russian borders, and to disengage Canadian forces from any support role for the U.S. and its client regimes around the world.

04–42–20 ELIMINATION OF THE CANADIAN ARMED FORCES Spadina-Fort York WHEREAS: militaries and war have devastatingly negative impacts on civilian populations, including needless deaths, bodily injury and the loss of housing. militaries and war are a historic institution with no place in a modern society. in a world with a globalized economy traditional militaries are becoming increasingly unnecessary. other countries such as Costa Rica, Iceland, Samoa and Panama have abolished their armies. BE IT RESOLVED THAT: THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT an NDP government will commit to phasing out the Canadian Armed Forces.

 

[OldSolduer]

You are correct. Those are legitimate questions. Third rail feedback results from this:

WHEREAS: WHEREAS the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), and Canadian forces in Afghanistan engaged in propping up a US-puppet government of human rights abusers, drug traffickers and warlords, wasting money and lives to further a western agenda of geo-political power and plunder of resources; BE IT RESOLVED THAT: Therefore, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the NDP actively campaign to get Canada out of NATO, to get NATO out of Afghanistan, to remove the NATO nuclear ring around Russian borders, and to disengage Canadian forces from any support role for the U.S. and its client regimes around the world.

04–42–20 ELIMINATION OF THE CANADIAN ARMED FORCES Spadina-Fort York WHEREAS: militaries and war have devastatingly negative impacts on civilian populations, including needless deaths, bodily injury and the loss of housing. militaries and war are a historic institution with no place in a modern society. in a world with a globalized economy traditional militaries are becoming increasingly unnecessary. other countries such as Costa Rica, Iceland, Samoa and Panama have abolished their armies. BE IT RESOLVED THAT: THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT an NDP government will commit to phasing out the Canadian Armed Forces.

There in lies the real issue. Anti US sentiment and pro Russian (Communist). Leopards don't change their spots.

I realize this is one constituency proposing this but you have to wonder how many NDP people subscribe to this idiocy.

 

[FJAG]

There in lies the real issue. Anti US sentiment and pro Russian (Communist). Leopards don't change their spots.

I realize this is one constituency proposing this but you have to wonder how many NDP people subscribe to this idiocy.

Interesting question.

Within the CPC each EDA forms a committee to consider resolutions which are then sent to the EDA executive for approval and prioritization. The EDA committee then seeks buy in on their resolutions by at least ten other EDAs before it is submitted nationally and a final decision is made on which resolutions will hit the floor for a vote.

The NDP seem to be more democratic and loose and anyone can submit a resolution to the EDA which simply prioritizes them and sends off (I think) just the top one for consideration by the convention. I know that for the CPC virtual convention each resolution was introduced by the EDA putting it forward in a short video and then three people were randomly allowed to speak for and three against the resolution before the delegates voted.

The NDP will have each delegate rank only ten resolutions in each of the seven policy sections and after that all the resolutions in each section will be ranked in order of priority based on the cumulative scores of the delegates. I'm not sure where the cutoff for how many resolutions in each category are actually adopted.

To me it looks like the NDP will just have delegates vote on the various resolutions virtually without any further debate. All that I see is about one hour-from 4:40 to 5:40 EST, on Saturday allocated to the forty-eight Section 4 resolutions listed. That's a minute apiece and barely enough time to introduce the resolution.

 

[CBH99]

Over the last year and a bit, we have been caught in a negative position because we did not maintain even a baseline capability to manufacture our own PPE. The same applies to vaccine production, etc.

We have all learned the value of maintaining a baseline for self suffiency, which can be ramped up if time of need.

The fact that the NDP are even giving this any sort of merit shows, to me anyway, that they haven't learned some of the basic lessons that we as a nation have been reminded of.

 

[Kilted]

The Middle Class must be prepared to fill in for the departed rich. It’s only fair not to deny everyone the money that they are entitled to.

Well that's the difference between Fascism and Socialism. In Fascism a certain group of people is denied rights, in Socialism, everyone is.

 

[Underway]

I'm seeing little to no issues with anything the NDP want to debate in their national policy. It's no more regressive than some of the stuff the Liberal policy conventions or the Conservative policy conventions come up with. But here's the thing people of course are missing. Policy conventions are entirely for the purpose of floating new ideas AND making money for the party. A government is not beholden to a policy convention. Because you know that thing called politics and parliament get in the way.

 

[Good2Golf]

I'm seeing little to no issues with anything the NDP want to debate in their national policy. It's no more regressive than some of the stuff the Liberal policy conventions or the Conservative policy conventions come up with. But here's the thing people of course are missing. Policy conventions are entirely for the purpose of floating new ideas AND making money for the party. A government is not beholden to a policy convention. Because you know that thing called politics and parliament get in the way.

That may be, but as the Conservatives found voting down acknowledgement of climate change being an issue of import, other parties will use such statements to their own benefit. I think very few Canadians truly want to see the CAF eliminated to make health assistant and tree planting cadres.

 

[Underway]

Exactly, the base will do what the base does. And if that base can be used against the party then it will be. Again, not worried. The parties on either "ends" of the spectrum have a tendency to shoot themselves in the foot. It's not like the NDP was ever getting the military vote, and certainly, the conservatives never get the environmental vote.

 

[Weinie]

Exactly, the base will do what the base does. And if that base can be used against the party then it will be. Again, not worried. The parties on either "ends" of the spectrum have a tendency to shoot themselves in the foot. It's not like the NDP was ever getting the military vote, and certainly, the conservatives never get the environmental vote.

Agreed. And without handing the NDP any strategic guidance here, I wonder if they always consider themselves as a "third" alternative who occasionally become kingmakers in a minority, but are so fractured by the broad base support that they can never present a credible platform to Canadian voters in any other instance.