Ben Mulroney doesn’t like me. Should the NDP like that?
On Wednesday the son of the former Conservative party leader ripped into me on his radio program. He began the four-and-a-half-minute discussion by calling me an “agitator extraordinaire, troublemaker, rabble rouser, generally unproductive member of society, antisemite of the highest order.” Ostensibly about my submitting to the NDP vetting on Monday Mulroney then asked, “Would it better for the NDP to welcome him in and fight him over his ideas or keep him out because he’s a toxic and terrible human being.”
The two guests echoed Mulroney with the first guest claiming I add “nothing to Canadian public life.”
Two days later Mulroney followed up this attack with another rant in which he called me a “vile antisemite and a net negative in the world in terms of the toxicity he brings to everything he touches and talks about.” He then says I should be blocked from the NDP leadership race.
How should the NDP brass look at Mulroney’s attack?
On one hand, they should be concerned with how it associates the party with negativity. To protect the NDP ‘brand’ from this type of media backlash, the brass may want to subvert party democracy by denying members the right to decide for themselves on my candidacy.
Another way to look at the backlash to an insurgent campaign is to consider how it would liven up what’s likely to be a sleepy three-way race (Tony McQuail and Tanille Johnson are unlikely to raise the $100,000 required to be on the final ballot). And greater mainstream media attention — even if often critical — would likely boost the fundraising for all the candidates, which benefits the party since they take a quarter of all donations above $100,000 (as well as our $100,000 fee).
There’s also a more significant political positioning question at play. Is some corporate media backlash good for the federal party’s brand? Or to put it slightly differently, does the NDP want to be seen as offside with the establishment?
Part of the federal NDP’s downward spiral is because it’s viewed as too close to the Liberals and the established order. Is there left populist anger out there that could be tapped into? In deciding whether to supress our campaign, the NDP brass should consider this question seriously.
For party activists and the left in general the question is more fundamental. Can you win any significant social change without backlash from the powerful?
To look at the most significant success the NDP ever achieved is illustrative. The dominant media went berserk when the Saskatchewan NDP introduced socialized medicine. As part of the research for The Year We Became Us: A Novel About the Saskatchewan Doctors Strike my father, Gary Engler, examined the Moose Jaw Times Herald’s coverage of the subject. It was unhinged, particularly during the doctors’ 23-day strike to block Medicare and other health reforms that weakened physician’s power over medicine.
In its first edition after the doctors strike began The Moose Jaw Times Herald had a lead editorial with the headline “The Day That Freedom Died In Saskatchewan”. It noted, “the doctors fight for freedom is our fight, every single one of us—and make no mistake about it.” The next day the paper published “Ugly Image of Dictators” then “Neutrality Never Won Any Fight For Freedom” and a little later came “Legal Profession Next to be Socialized.”
Backlash can be horrible but necessary to achieve real, lasting change.
To assist, donate or learn more about my bid to lead the NDP check out yvesforndpleader.ca
You must be logged in to post a comment.