![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
rfmcdonaldThis CBC article doesn't begin to explore the silliness of the above debate within the social-democratic New Democratic Party.
An earlier CBC article made the point that, frustrated 16 times in its efforts to form a majority government, the NDP was ready to rebrand itself.
That last sentence is somewhat pathetic, no?
I'll make a bold prediction: As a niche party appealing to certain narrow geographical and class constituencies, the New Democratic Party will never form a federal government. It may well be part of a coalition government--a Liberal-NDP coalition with Bloc Québécois support is really the only alternative to the Conservatives at this point--but acquiring that kind of power on its own is impossible.
People are talking about the name change, sure. I doubt that most of them are talking about it with the sort of sympathy or curiosity that would help the NDP.
Federal New Democratic Party members wrapped up their weekend convention in Halifax with no movement on changing the party name.
"It didn't happen today," the CBC's Alison Crawford reported on Sunday.
"The issue's dead for now."
The name change idea was to have been the sixth resolution for discussion in a one-hour time frame on Sunday morning during the annual meeting.
But the 60 minutes ran out before that was possible, and no action was taken.
There had been speculation the renaming issue might move ahead, Crawford said.
"There have been proposals in the past to make name changes but it's never got this high up on the resolution list," she said.
Now, with the name issue on hold, Crawford said party members were looking at other ways to rebrand the NDP.
An earlier CBC article made the point that, frustrated 16 times in its efforts to form a majority government, the NDP was ready to rebrand itself.
The New Democratic Party name first came into existence into 1961 at a convention where Tommy Douglas took the helm. Douglas, who later became known as the father of Medicare, stepped down as Saskatchewan premier under the CCF banner to move to the federal stage.
Its original incarnation was known as the Co-operative Commonwealth Federation, a party founded in 1932 in Calgary.
After the CCF suffered a disastrous blow in the 1958 election, with only eight MPs elected to office, they sought to broaden their appeal by reinventing themselves with a name change.
Nelson Wiseman, a political science professor at the University of Toronto, suggests calling it "social democratic party" would be more consistent with its philosophy.
At the time of its name selection, however, the term socialist was avoided because of the Cold War climate and radical connotations, notes Wiseman.
Putting aside questions of whether the party is still "new" after almost 50 years, Wiseman says the name change proposal has done one thing: "It gives fodder for media and it gives the NDP something to talk about."
That last sentence is somewhat pathetic, no?
I'll make a bold prediction: As a niche party appealing to certain narrow geographical and class constituencies, the New Democratic Party will never form a federal government. It may well be part of a coalition government--a Liberal-NDP coalition with Bloc Québécois support is really the only alternative to the Conservatives at this point--but acquiring that kind of power on its own is impossible.
People are talking about the name change, sure. I doubt that most of them are talking about it with the sort of sympathy or curiosity that would help the NDP.
