Was communism really that bad??

Hans, how would you define the difference between socialism and social-democracy?

An on a second note, does Adenauer's track record in laying the ground work for much of Germany's present-day social programs make the CDU historically a socialist party?

Who's going to tell Brian Mulroney he was Prime Minister of a socialist country? I think I can feel John Diefenbaker spinning in his grave.

In 1943, the Co-operative Commonwealth Federation formed the opposition in Ottawa. In 1944, Douglas and the CCF won the provincial elections and formed the government in Saskatchewan. And that's as close as Canada ever came to socialism. In 1958, the CCF won only eight seats in Parliament, which meant they would not be represented there as a party. They combined with the Labour Congress and formed the New Democratic Party in 1961. Even the New Democrats aren't socialist by contemporary standards, nevermind the "classic" definition of socialism prevalent in the west in the 1930's. The Liberals quickly saw the threat posed by the CCF. In 1939, the Canadian census determined that fully two thirds of Canadians were subsisting below the poverty level. The Liberals co-opted CCF policies, and brought in old-age pensions, unemployment insurance, family allowances (for you 'Mericans, that's the same as ADC) and medicare (once again, for the 'Mericans, everybody is elligible for medicare in Canukistan, not just the old folk). That is, they brought those programs in and expanded them when they weren't being knocked down by the Tories ( . . . hex-cuse me . . . the Progressive Conservatives), as the two parties rushed to the doorway to get "man of the people" credibility by choosing the "acceptable" parts of the Regina Manifesto.

We've got all of those programs in the New Nited States, 'cept for medicare, which we only give to the ones we're betting won't live much longer. Hardly makes Canadia look very socialist to me.

Never mind them, Hamburger should be able to step out his door, and hear John MacDonald spinning in his grave . . .

Set, if you feel like it and happen to have some time on your hands, could you tell us some more about the history of the CCF?

I gather the CCF was the most leftist of prominent parties Canada's had, but still was not socialist? Did it compare more with LaFollette Progressives then, perhaps? How did they come to have a bulwark in Saskatchewan and did they have other bulwarks - what were its main constituencies? How far back did its history go, and did it maintain any ties with parties in other countries? Can a "CCF line" still be discerned in today's NDP?

See, noone else would I dare ask all these questions all at once ... just with you, I'm gambling you actually enjoy them. If not, safely ignore! ;-)

One review of Tommy Douglas and the CCF click ...

Lots of good stuff at the CBC archives. Interesting radio clips. Tommy Douglas was a dynamic speaker. (one of his Kiefer Sutherland - I think at least some part of his 'presence' comes from Tommy)

cbc archives

The CCF was formed from an amalgam of farmers cooperatives (yes, like the Grange, considered socialist in America at the time of it's inception, but La Follette's programs for Wisconsin would be closer to the mark), trades union associations and actual, real live, doughnut eatin', hockey playin' Canajun socialists. The CCF was formed in 1932 in Regina. The Labour member for a riding in Winnipeg, one Mr. Woodsworth, was chosen as party leader. In the Regina Manifesto (1933), they called for the nationalization of key industries, as well as the social programs i've already mentioned. They pledged to work for a peaceful elimination of capitalism, and shortly after issuing the Manifesto, rejected communism.

Their power in the prairies came from the agricultural and industrial failures in the period known in the United States as the Great Depression. Plutocracy had been in heady ascendency right up until 1929. The government had encouraged large scale agriculture in the praries, and no consideration had been given to the climate and ecology of many of those regions. The Red River valley in Manitoba was a particularly accute example--the entire eco-system collapsed and disasterous cycles of drought and flood succeeded one another in the generation before the Wall Street crash.

Many of the immigrants to the praries had been Germans (lots of charismatic sectarians there) and Ukrainians, and they brought the memory of bloodily oppressed European socialism with them. Cities like Manitoba, Winnipeg and Calgary were in a rush to industrialize--both the United States and Canada profited greatly from what the European world knew of as the Great Depression, from 1875 to 1893. European capitalists with money to invest looked to North America for oppotunities, and liked what they found. The true story of the "wild west" in America and Canada has never been told, and likely will never be, because macro-economics and venture capitalism don't make for good cinematography.
When trades unionists formed associations and farmers started cooperatives, the west was a natural place for success for such organizations. The immigrant and the child of the immigrant were familiar with European socialism and trades unionism. When the hard times hit, they hit hardest in the west. The CCF was a natural, a shoo-in.

But the Liberals and the Tories stood not upon the order of their going, and soon were painting the CCF to be as red as the most scarlet political rhetoric could make them appear. Despite historically and repeatedly rejecting Communism, the CCF finally abandoned the Regina Manifesto in 1956. By then, it was too late.

As for New Democrats, who knows what evil lurks in their hearts and minds, apart, of course, from Lamont Cranston? The Mountie, who has resolutely denied being a New Democrat, or my sweetiepie who never has admitted to being a New Democrat, would best know the answer to that one--neither of them being New Democrats, and all. Neil Young's daddy was a New Democrat, mebbe he could tell ya. Given the hounding which the CCF suffered, with sufficient success to drive them into the parliamentary wilderness (i'm sure i'll be corrected if i am wrong, but i believe a party needs to seat 12 members in Ottawa to have standing), i rather doubt that the New Democrats would ever publicly adhere to anything like the Regina Manifesto.

bookmark

mark twain

(word association, no?)

Alright it was to bold to say Canada is socialist, it is more then most countries but by definition i guess its not. the closer ones i believe are Finland, sweden, Norway and i think the swiss. Also it is true that in technical terms real socialist are communist and dictatorships(totaltitarian). Oh and the NDP had just recently received 19 ridings.





-Hans

Hans, have you been to the Ipsos-Reid site for analysis of the recent Canajun election results - and their perspective on why the polls didn't pan out? Interesting reading.

No i haven't but i'll take a look.





-Hans

Yes, i knew about the NDP, but as tame as they are in comparison to the CCF, i rather think they won't get into any coalition until they can seat as many, or nearly as many, as the PQ.

uhhhh you mean BQ right??

same same Boss . . .

Communist regimes have been brutal to their citizens. Government ownership of production is a bad idea; quality can never be achieved, because there is no motivation to improve. Equality is a bad policy; there is no incentive to do well, work hard, or improve one's standard of living. The economy will eventually collapse.

Mumble mumble.

I have a variety of hats, have been a student, a technologist, an architect, an artist, and have a publisher for my writing if I would ever get in gear. How would I do in various societies? Perhaps not so well in any of them.. There will always be yearning, as very few people on earth get pulses of pleasure from the fruition of their toil, whatever the system. Money surely is some kind of reward, but not ... everything. Freedom to progress creatively and intellectually are important too.

Time to learn and create and the money to do it with... are relatively rare. Maybe the creation is a small farm that doesn't downtrod labor but does grow plants well year after year, and not to just sit in storage. Small farms have had trouble surviving in the US, as I understand it. Which form of government is best for that? And which is enabling for any child, boy or girl, to have opportunity to go all the way in school, no matter the income of the parents?

I think regimes of different sorts have good and bad and inbetween attributes. I wish that in my lifetime the world could come to some sort of general stability in combo with general freedom, and know that to do that would require a mechanism of interplay that would involve nations' self knowledge and communication between them.
Ah, never mind.

Thanks Set, interesting!

So is Bush going to do something about North Korea now??




-Hans