The Price for Peace: The Way Forward for the Coalition

Given the day’s events it is time the coalition presented in concrete terms the price for peace.  It is is imperative the coalition not be seen to be unwilling to cooperate with the Cons. I would humbly suggest three terms that would allow such cooperation going forward:

1). Resignation of Stephen Harper as PM and head of the conservative party of Canada

2). Environmental tax of 5$ a barrel on all oil produced in Canada with an above average intensity of energy  requirement for production.   Average to be established on the typical energy intensity of light sweet crude production.

3). Full adoption of the Coalition’s stimulus package.

Advertisements

5 thoughts on “The Price for Peace: The Way Forward for the Coalition

  1. here’s the question you’ve been waiting for: how do you see the arguments on the coalition coming out of the far left?

    Soc Project gave it a diss, as did the NSG. IS has no formal statement, but kellogg’s blog is critical. other bloggers from these groups are denouncing the coalition as ‘petit-bourgeois’ obscurantism creating the grounds for a hard right fascism…as if Canada today is like germany in the 30s…a silly view in my opinion.

    how should the socialist left relate?

    how do you read the economic accord signed by the coalition?

  2. Yah well on the petit-bourgeois front I say hot air.

    Let me address what I think is the grain of rationality in the critiques of the coalition. The coalition represents an attempt to stimulate the CDN economy out of a recession while being absolutely silent on the question of the contradictions at the heart of the neoliberal growth model. As such, it offers the promise of false hope but more importantly a further force for centrism which can only sap the strength of the left.

    However if a bourgeois coalition can deliver stimulus in the form of transfers to poor and unemployed Canadians thus stabilizing family incomes I am hard pressed to denounce it as unworthy of limited support.

    You would have to believe that greater hard-ship leads to greater clarity. Mass hard-ship historically has lead more towards fascism than less.

    Anyway none of it matters: the coalition is dead; the Libs are too opportunistic to stick it out.

  3. asdf quoted:

    “denouncing the coalition as ‘petit-bourgeois’ obscurantism ”

    Oy, vey.

    How the devil do they figure that as PB? While I’ve been slowly coming to the conclusion that PB politics and moralizing characterizes Canadian politics as much as bourgeois populism does so south of the border, I can’t see the reasoning.

    What I see as the PB element is one of hatred of open strife (especially class warfare) where no political group must be allowed to gain an advantage over the other (at least for very long) for fear that a party of the big bourgeois will, on the one hand, further reduce the ability of petty bourgeois business to “take its rightful place” and be allowed to grow unhindered by such “unfair competition” as the big bourgeois can provide against it. Meanwhile, they also fear “too large” a degree of socialism as this means they can just as easily lose that social power that makes them bourgeois. “Just enough socialism” saps the big bourgeois enough and helps strengthen petty bourgeois’ ability to compete.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s