Seems to be a common thread throughout history … we frequently have great socially minded equitable leaders that are never allowed by the established wealthy elite to come to power.
There isn’t a lack of good leadership
There is an overabundance of rich idiots who do not want good leadership
I watched the debate from 1979. I wish Broadbend could have presented his vision better. He was a too aggressive and I can see why people voted for Joe Clark. Just on behaviour and delivery alone.
The biggest issue at the time was oil production. The NDP proposed nationization while the PCs privatization. The PCs presented the choice between Canadian ownership vs government ownership and Clark stressed that. While Braodbend focused on domestic vs foreign interference. The PCs promising “direct ownership” as opposed to “nebulus government” ownership was delivered better.
I wish the NDP embrace more demsoc principles. This will lead to focusing on distribution of power. Instead of setting up crown corporations with the board of directors being responsible to parliament, they should have proposed elected boards of directors of crown corporations be directly elected by the people on election day (maybe even sit/replace the senate) and also pitch it as alternative public revenue source.
The PCs used the NDP talking point, about domestic ownership/control and direction and flipped it against them by tying it and subverting it into direct private shareholders.
The NDP should do the same but reverse. Tie patriotism/civic duty of one vote per person to the concept of voting and controlling of natural resources through giving votes to each citizen to crown corporations and charging the PCs of removing the concept of one person one, vote. Also use fiscal conservatism against itself. Crown corporations diversify revenues. Charge the PCs of raising taxes due to reduced “income streams” for government. Lastly, tie charity to social welfare as it is the same thing.
Add comment